As I type feverishly in an effort to convince myself…
Sep 18, 2007 2006 Season, 2007 Season, Colts Shmolts, Gary Kubiak, Jacoby Jones is slighty less unheralded, Ron Dayne likes pie, Zoolander's snazzy handwear
I left a shorter version of that last post as a comment for Stephanie over at FanHouse. In response, she brought up a good point: when we beat the Colts last Christmas Eve (i.e. the last time they lost to anyone), we did with David Carr and Ron Dayne.
Not only that, we did it with the final iteration of Zoolander the Texan. You know, the one whose progression was “safety valve, run out of bounds, fetal position.” The one whose month of December included things like 3-step drops1, 4 INT game, and a overall rating for the month of 59.9. In that game against the Colts, however, Johnny Whitegloves went 16-26–7 of those to the RBs–for 127 yards (a whopping 4.5 average) and 1 TD. Clearly, this would not be good enough to beat the Colts. Yet, win we did because Ron Dayne chipped in with 153 rushing yards and two TDs, which, along with Kris Brown’s two FGs, allowed us to eke it out.
Now, nine months later, our team appears to be markedly better in nearly every aspect than the one that took the field last December. Most importantly, in place of Carr and Dayne, we’re rolling out there with Schaub and Batman. And, if we can manage to get the Colts to punt–they didn’t punt once in last year’s game–we have Jacoby freakin’ Jones ready to bust off a little somethin’ somethin’.
My point?
Andre Johnson had 4 catches for 48 yards in that game, meaning he wasn’t exactly the reason we won. Hell, he had a holding penalty that negated a TD and forced us to settle for a FG late in the game. We won because Gary Kubiak’s gameplan called for minimizing our weaknesses (i.e. Carr) and exploiting the Colts’ weaknesses (i.e. run defense). There is no reason to think we can’t use the same philosophy this time around. If we do, we can be in this thing until the end.
If, in addition, we cause a couple turnovers and avoid any of our own, we can actually win this game. And I can say with little or no hyperbole that a win Sunday would be the biggest win in the history of the franchise, bar none.
1 Despite this shortened drop and the instruction from the staff to stop trying to read defenses, Sandy was still sacked 12 times in December… behind the EXACT same line that has only allowed 2 sacks of Matt Schaub. Can we please, PLEASE stop pretending that David’s own timidity and lack of poise didn’t lead to most of his sacks?
(click arrow to reply)
September 18th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
As a Texans bandwaggoner (while I wait for my Chiefs to be relevant again, sometime in 2020) can I ask something?
You’ve made the argument.
Carr was the problem, not the o-line.
And even guys that supported Carr when he was down there like me are convinced.
You won the argument.
Focus on the future. You have a legitimate shot to contend for a playoff birth this season. Whitegloves is stuck behind Jake Freaking Delhomme in one of the worst divisions in football. Schaub is legit, Carr is a punk. You’ve punished him enough.
Focus on how freaking awesome the Texans are playing. You’ve got something that a lot of franchises don’t have. A new start, the first up turn in franchise history.
And send good vibes toward Petey. He’s gonna need ‘em.
(click arrow to reply)
September 18th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
In hear what you are saying. In general, though, aside from making fun of his hair/gloves/etc, I haven’t talked much about Carr lately. Well a song parody, sure, but that’s a little different.
I only brought him up here because (a) it was germane to the point–that we can still win despite missing Andre because we were able to win with less last year and (b) because now, two games in, I wanted to reiterate the thing about the line. I know you’ve noticed it, but prior to this last game, I read multiple comments by Panthers fans about how they still don’t think David was the problem.
Point taken, though. I will leave any further mention of Carr primarily limited to jokes about his physical appearance.
As an aside… 2010 for the Chiefs? That’s the same year we are going to snag Derrick Johnson away from you as a free agent.
(click arrow to reply)
September 18th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
As far as Petey, I could bottle all the good vibes that have ever existed up to and including the Marky Mark song “Good Vibrations” and he still would not be able to cover Wayne or Harrison. Some things just are what they are.
(click arrow to reply)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
To be fair, after watching our team get trashed for months by every national sports writer in the country, we deserve at least a week to say:
“we told you so”.
(click arrow to reply)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
That needs to be a t-shirt.
(click arrow to reply)
September 18th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
I am not going to hate on David Carr’s performance in December.
It is quite likely that he received an unreported concussion in that game against the Raiders.(allegedly says the gossip). He kept playing because the Texans had Mr. Nobody on the bench.
Rosenfels was out, and the Texans options behind Carr were a very rusty BVP and Quinton Porter (who by the way is a really nice guy, but had never taken an NFL snap).
Yeah, I don’t think you have convince anyone any more that Carr wasn’t the problem But what is interesting about this season is that it illustrates why Kubiak believe that he could fix Carr.
That Kubiak’s offense required an athletic QB that could follow his system. He just didn’t realize the nickle-head/no leader thing because that is a hard thing to figure out by just watching tape.
And both Casserly and consultant Dan Reeves maintained that Carr wasn’t the problem. Which just shows laziness on their part because at least since Carr’s gone, the flood gates have opened up about how the team liked Dave personally, but that they didn’t think he was up to the job.
Casserly STILL maintains that Carr was not the primary problem. Reeves has crawdaddied some on this issue since, suggesting that well he liked Vince too, but that this was a coaching decision.
Kubiak had the stones to keep Carr despite all the pressure because he thought he could fix him, and the stones to get someone else despite the huge costs of that transaction.
Bygones to me. Though I will admit I was happy to learn the answer of why he was wearing the two gloves because I was just curious. Dude had to watch his former team crush the team he went to so that he could be hooked up with a winner. No need to pile on him any mroe.
(click arrow to reply)
September 19th, 2007 at 6:34 am
If he really did have a concussion, that’s kind of funny, considering the Colts game was the best game (by far!) that he played in the month of December.
(click arrow to reply)
September 19th, 2007 at 8:59 am
“As an aside… 2010 for the Chiefs? That’s the same year we are going to snag Derrick Johnson away from you as a free agent.”
*Slams head into keyboard repeatedly.
(click arrow to reply)
January 30th, 2008 at 2:02 am
edzkxynf…
edzkxynf…