One of the best things about writing a Texans blog, aside from getting to write about the greatest team to never post a winning record, is that there just aren't that many other Texans blogs out there. Which means that, any time one of us posts something of interest (or just something really dumb), it doesn't get lost in a crush of other posts from other blogs. Nope, it pretty much stays at the forefront for a day or two, until someone (usually Stephanie) posts something that is actually, you know, appropriate and not inflamatory and devoid of ad hominem attacks. If you are into that sort of thing.

Anyway, I guess I should not have been surprised when Big Blue Shoe caught wind of my reply to his stupidity post about the Texans. (Big thanks to reader Casey, who alerted me to this.) What was surprising was that he only felt the need to respond to one point I made before piling on some more of his own arguments (most of which are SCREAMING for a rebuttal). So, without Freddy Adu...

I'm fighting an ear infection (gross), which explains why I haven't blogged in the last few days. It's nice to be missed though.

I gotta be honest, I was hoping that you would go with the "I'm fighting an ear infection and the antibiotics are why my last post about the Texans was pretty much devoid of substantive argument" angle. Whatever, though.

Payton Menning apparently doesn't like Matt Schaub's smiling mug on our site. Come on now! What's not to love? That's the face of the future for Houston. And speaking of the Texas, it seems Texans fans were none to happy with my assessment of their QB situation as part of the AFC South Roundtable. Not only did Tim at BRB take exception, but so did Matt at Da Good, Da Bad, and DeMarco.

"DeMarco?" Seriously? As to Schaub's face, I'm just going to use that as an excuse to post another link to this picture of David Carr. Never gets old.

DeMarco was the site that offered the most heated response. Matt, the writer there, reminds me a lot of... well, me.

That's low.

Matt attacked my opinion like a wounded lioness protecting her cubs. While I respect his opinion and his passion (and his utter desperation that Schaub please, please, please work out as the starting QB), I take exception to one comment:

A quick primer, Mr. Shoe. The way it works generally is that you make a statement--say "Carr is better than Schaub"--and then you back it up with some supporting evidence. Please note, however, that "supporting evidence" does not include conjecture and some first-hand, hyperbole-riddled "evidence" that is completely unverifiable.

Sorry Matt, but that ain't how it works. I don't have to prove jack-friggin'-squat. Matt Schaub is the one who has to prove something.

Man, wouldn't it be great if you were right? Think of the possibilities if one could make baseless assertions and then stand back and say "I don't have to prove it!" For instance, I could say that Hill Country women are much hotter than women in Indianapolis and I wouldn't even have to mention the androgyny, raw tonnage, or facial hair of the Hoosier broads. The world would be my oyster.

Sadly, however, that's just not the case. At least not to anyone trying to make some sort of coherent argument about anything. YOU said that Carr was better than Schaub, so it's on YOU to prove it. This isn't some taste-test like "Pepsi v. Coke" or "Shoe's Mom v. moldy camembert,¹" where there is no objective way to measure such things. No, no... this is a direct apples-to-apples comparison. So compare. Or just sit back and say "I don't have to and you can't make me." Because that's clearly just as convincing.

Matt Schaub has to prove that he is better than David Carr, that he can do more with the tools given him than the rusty, bent set of junk the Texans dumped on Carr the four years he spent getting sacked there.

In terms of what he needs to do on the field to justify the price paid for him, you are correct. However, if you are relying on what Schaub needs to do going forward to prove that he is worse than David Carr in the past, you really aren't saying much of anything. Think about that--you are saying that things Matt Schaub may or may not do in the future are worse than things David Carr has already done. What kind of comparison is that? "Yeah, the 2015 Giants are WAY better than the 2001 Patriots. Sorry Pats fans... you just need to face this truth right now."

HOWEVER, if you are saying that--right now--Schaub is worse than Carr, then you should be able to point to something (anything!) to support this hypothesis. So which is it? Are you saying that Future Schaub is worse than yesterday's David Carr, in which case we can pretty much ignore your post because you aren't saying anything, or are you saying that Current Schaub is worse than Current Carr (or even last year's Carr), in which case we can pretty much ignore your post because you are offering nothing that would back this claim?

Oh, wait! Maybe you do have some evidence. Let's read on.

Right now, Schaub is started a grand total of ONE GAME, a game in which he lost.

What's that old cliche? "Lesbians can smell fear." No, wait... wrong one. "There's lies, damn lies, and statistics" Yeah, that's the one. First, the lie: Schaubby has started two games--the one you keep trying to beat into the ground and one the year before, against New Orleans. Second, the damn lie: You keep trying to equate this loss with poor performance on Schaub's part. Well, the Boston Globe disagrees. In an article titled "QB Passes A Huge Test," the author tosses out the following nuggets:

But with each completion to his big tight end, Alge Crumpler, and each toss downfield to wide receiver Brian Finneran, it became apparent Schaub was, at the very least, a capable replacement.

This team felt confident that we could perform with Matt Schaub, and I think that we proved that to be true.

White said Schaub is a natural fit for the offense. 'We know whenever he steps in there, nobody loses a beat and we expect him to do the same things that he does every week in practice,' White said after the game. 'He's a different quarterback than Mike' [Author's note: This is a good thing.]

Vick he is not, but yesterday he might have served notice to quarterback-hungry NFL teams that he's ready to lead his own team.

'He's a big player in this league, and when his contract's up, it's going to be interesting to see what happens with that guy,' Finneran said.

Finally, there are the statistics: In this game, Schaub was 18 for 34, with 298 yards and three TDs. He led a 62-yard, game-tying drive in the fourth quarter and capped it with a two-point conversion pass. His rating for that game was 112.1. And, though you said last time that it was a "decimated" Patriots squad, McGinest, Warren, Vrabel, Samuel, Brown, Colvin, and Wilfork all played on the defense. Tom Brady spent his day throwing to two of his top three receivers (Givens and Branch) and both of his favorite TEs (Graham and Watson). He also handed the ball off 23 times to Corey Dillon. So, it sounds to me like "decimated" means "Troy Brown didn't play much" in your book.

And since that is the only "evidence" to Matt has to back up his claim that Schaub is better, it kind of suggests that Matt's inflated opinion of Schaub is based on "conjecture and some first-hand, hyperbole-riddled 'evidence' that is completely unverifiable."

Um, there's nothing conjectural or hyperbolic about 18-34, 3TDs, and 298 yards. That's all pretty much verifiable. See, for instance, here. Thankfully, though, that's not all I am relying upon. When I said he has a faster release and better pocket presence, I was referring to the video from NFL Network I linked to here as well as my own observations (echoed by other bloggers) gleaned from watching the Texans' minicamp. (Note, while the minicamp stuff is first-hand, it is not hyperbole-ridden and it is easily verifiable by reading others' thoughts on it as well as simply by watching the tape. Please don't conflate me saying "I saw it on TV" with your ridiculous statement about watching Carr "several times" and being "amazed" at how well he played. Not the same.)

Which kind of makes Matt a hypocrite.

Hypocrite. n. "A person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives." I am professing a belief and an opinion that Schaub is better than David Carr, which happens to be a belief that I also hold. Sorry to ruin your best attempt at a pithy punchline.

All that said, the sheer ferociousness of Texans fans on the subject of Schaub v. Carr tells me that they are afraid.

OR... it could mean that they are sick of hearing how Carr was getting a bum rap, when anyone with half a brain could see that David Carr was responsible for a large number of the sacks of David Carr. It doesn't really matter how good your line is when you hold the ball forever.

If Carr succeeds in Carolina and Schaub flounders in Houston, it means the problem was always something other than Carr, which means a majority of Texans fans were wrong to bash him.

And if the Queen had balls, she'd be the King. Your point? If Carr rides the pine in Carolina and Schaub makes the Pro Bowl, then we were all right. You can't play the "If" game to justify a claim Carr is better than Schaub. "Car travel is safer than air travel. If a lot of planes crash this year, that will mean the people who bashed cars were wrong."

And no one likes to be wrong.

You certainly seem to enjoy it.

Sorry Texans fans, but this time you are.

Man, after all the evidence and persuasive argument you've offered, you MUST be right.

I don't know if David Carr will succeed with the Panthers, but I certainly will pull for him. In the years I watched him play in Houston, I never saw a whiny Ryan Leaf-like punk or an oft-injured bust ala Tim Couch.

You also apparently didn't see a guy who made little effort to bond with his teammates, was told not to try to read defenses because he wasn't good at it, and allowed his overbearing dad to become a fixture around the facilities. You must've been napping during those parts.

[Author's note: Shoe concludes with some stuff about how David was a gamer and never complained and his line was shitty and he had no receivers and lot of other tired stuff that we've gone over time and time again. At this point, though, I am bored and should probably actually do some work. Suffice it to say that he's wrong over the last few paragraphs, too.]

¹ Best known for its creamy texture and mushroomy aroma.

Labels: David Carr has Post-Concussion Syndrome, Posts that list too many players, Preview, Rebuttals, Teams that aren't the Texans, The Schaub Experiment

Posted by matt on Wednesday, June 27, 2007 at 9:28 AM | Permalink