Official Texans @ Patriots Playoff Game Thread, 1/14/2017

[Arky]

So glad (relieved?) Dallas is not coming here for the Super Bowl. (yes, you were wrong, John McClain).

------------------------------------------------------

In other news, Brock said in his press conference that no one is going to work harder in the off-season than he is to get better. So, it looks like we're going to be in good shape for next year! :thumbs up:

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by Arky

So glad (relieved?) Dallas is not coming here for the Super Bowl. (yes, you were wrong, John McClain).

Seeing where Jerry Jones is trying to rationalize the loss while denying there's no such thing as a morale victory when you know he's saying yesterdays game was a moral victory for his team.
Hey Jerry you are one and done, end of story. Get over it.
And you know how they always show you Jerry yucking it up with his pals in his suite at the stadium on TV after his team scores, but I so wanted to see him after the Packers made that winning FG. That's the Jerry Jones scene I want to see on the tube.

[Arky]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

Seeing where Jerry Jones is trying to rationalize the loss while denying there's no such thing as a morale victory when you know he's saying yesterdays game was a moral victory for his team.
Hey Jerry you are one and done, end of story. Get over it.
And you know how they always show you Jerry yucking it up with his pals in his suite at the stadium on TV after his team scores, but I so wanted to see him after the Packers made that winning FG. That's the Jerry Jones scene I want to see on the tube.

Eheh. Yeah, they won't show that.....

I do kinda like the replays where they show the reaction of the head coach/sideline of the winning team on a game winning FG and then show the reaction of the losing sideline....

Sometimes they kinda overdo it though, IMO. Like when a player does something bone-headed and the cameras will focus in own his face so close you can count the pores on his skin... Poor guy probably wants to crawl under a rock yet, he gets excess seconds of face time...

[Keith]

Classic thread is classic.

Ya know, all of the Texans' woes can be summed up in one word: quarterback. It's a damn shame you need one to be successful in the league now.

Actually, everyone knows this. Everyone but the Texans.

The long-term answer to the problem most likely comes from a high pick in the draft. O'Brien and Smith must ignore this no longer.

The Texans have drafted seven QBs in franchise history.

2002 - 1st round - David Carr
2003 - 3rd round - Dave Ragone
2003 - 6th round - Drew Henson
2004 - 7th round - B.J. Symons
2008 - 7th round - Alex Brink
2011 - 5th round - T.J. Yates
2014 - 4th round - Tom Savage

Here's another word to sum up this list: Yikes.

Want to win a Super Bowl? Finally invest an important draft pick in the most important position, and we can maybe then move on from calling each other rednecks every postseason.

[HPF Bob]

Drayton McLane signed two high-priced free agent pitchers (Doug Drabek and Greg Swindell) which led him to conclude high-priced free agent pitchers were to be avoided at all costs. Season after season of watching his starting pitching fail to win in the postseason finally convinced him to try again in 2004 with the signings of Andy Pettitte and Roger Clemens.

I suspect Bob McNair learned from the David Carr fiasco that you can't succeed with a first-round QB instead of learning that rookie QBs need offensive lines to be successful. For years we took DL's because "we have to get to Peyton Manning" now we draft WRs because "we have to open up the offense".

This is not a good year to reach for a QB in the draft. I don't even like the ones projected to go in the top of the draft with the possible exception of Deshaun Watson. IMO, we need offensive linemen and I would start with Utah OT Garrett Bolles if he checks out at the combine from where the draft experts put him. He's lean and raw and can start out at RT or LG while being developed to replace Duane Brown.

Hopefully, Nick Martin makes a full recovery and we will be able to plug him into the line. We can't develop a young QB without blockers and whether we're doomed to another year of Osweiler or not, we can be building the line that protects the next QB as Dallas has done.

[chuck]

I don't know what to make of any of these quarterbacks, either. I want to like Mahomes but I don't trust guys coming out of a system like that. And the mocks I've seen have the various quarterbacks all over the place. We'll get some clarity after the combine but as always if the team has someone they like I'd be happy to see them draft someone high.

OL is obviously an area of need although in theory if some guys return healthy that should help a lot. I'm always reluctant to draft OL in the first round because I feel like a good OL operates as a unit and what you need are guys that are smart and work well within a system rather than an all-world Joe Thomas type necessarily. The Patriots have a first round LT and then a motley assortment of thirds, fours, fives and an UDFA. And this reminds me of a point that I meant to make earlier - when we saw Pats receivers running wide ass open all over the field a lot of that was the fact that their quarterback often had thirty seconds to stand in a perfect pocket completely unmolested and wait for a corner to get tired of chasing one of their little sand fleas all over the field.

The Utah guy seems to be about the only OL that people are saying is worth a first. And he might be there when the Texans pick. So who knows.

But I'm officially on the cut Osweiler draft a QB high bandwagon. BO is obviously not going to be a Texan in 2018 so why dick around with him next year when you could be grooming someone who will be with the team in 2018 and beyond?

I would also be perfectly happy with a multi-year rental of a Rivers or a Brees but I consider that so unlikely as not to even merit discussion.

Oh, and if they do draft a quarterback high I certainly hope he's left handed.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by HPF Bob

IMO, we need offensive linemen and I would start with Utah OT Garrett Bolles if he checks out at the combine from where the draft experts put him. He's lean and raw and can start out at RT or LG while being developed to replace Duane Brown.

No doubt we need Olinmen and specifically OTs more than any other position except of course the all imporatajnt QB position.
I don't know much about this Bolles kid in terms of his abilities but I see he's another Mormon boy who starts with a couple strikes against him.
Because of his missionary sabbatical he would come in as an "old" rookie as he'd be 25 at the start of the 2017 season. Also according to info on him he played 2 years of JuCo ball before going to Utah which means he didn't play but one year of major league college ball. And he didn't play offensive tackle until college.
So this kid may be potentially a tremendous talent but sure sounds like a real project who we'd have to wait for to develop and we need help quicker than that right now from an offensive tackle.

[chuck]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

No doubt we need Olinmen and specifically OTs more than any other position except of course the all imporatajnt QB position.
I don't know much about this Bolles kid in terms of his abilities but I see he's another Mormon boy who starts with a couple strikes against him.
Because of his missionary sabbatical he would come in as an "old" rookie as he'd be 25 at the start of the 2017 season. Also according to info on him he played 2 years of JuCo ball before going to Utah which means he didn't play but one year of major league college ball. And he didn't play offensive tackle until college.
So this kid may be potentially a tremendous talent but sure sounds like a real project who we'd have to wait for to develop and we need help quicker than that right now from an offensive tackle.

Good intel, nice work. Mormon = no thanks. We already have one Mormon OL and he sucks. Get those stiffs off the field and put them back to work looking for the lost Nephite city of Zarahemla.

QB it is, then. Righty-o.