Quote:
Originally Posted by barrett
I think there should not be just one plan. Make a plan for an opening day starter and then make a plan for the next decade's opening day starter at the same time. The low financial cost of young QBs means there is no conflict of interest.
And yes, trying to sign existing unproven players is faking it at QB. You can get a castoff or a street FA, or a project at the other positions, but decent QBs don't hit the market unless health forces them to. So no, signing countless journeymen does not equal a plan. I will give to you that Brock was a sincere attempt even if it was idiotic and against the entire financial structure of the NFL. Somehow the approach got copied this year with Mike Glennon, so there are dumber front offices than us.
|
Well, I suppose Fitz and probably Hoyer (now) fall into the "journeyman" category. But Mallett and Osweiler were both youngish, had limited work when they became Texans and were still unknown as full time starters. Some of us had hope for those two so I'm not quite sweeping along with that generalization....
In 2014, they picked up Savage in the draft while Fitz was mostly the starter that year. 2015, no QB in the draft but they spent (wasted?) the year finding out what they had in Hoyer and Mallett. 2016 was spent finding out what Brock was all about. IMO, Savage was kinda the "groom" guy during this 3 year period. Weeden hops on board towards the end of 2015, sticks around for 2016 and one could make the case that he was a safer bet to keep on the roster than drafting some 3rd round rookie QB.
Yet, during this parade of horrors, the Texans somehow go 9-7 all three years. Man, they could be really good with just an average QB....
So, what were we talking about again? Oh yeah, how the Texans suck at drafting QB's..... Include Schaub's "magical" 2013 and it's been a really painful four years of watching Texan QBs. I'm not sure I'll know how to react to competent QB play if I ever see it again...