Three No. 1s, many millions spent

Anderw,

could you also elaborate on business decisions/roster decisions that impacted their development? After all, Carr played (starting from game 1) behind a famously porous O-line. Russell lacks accountability, quality coaching, and also lacked quality WR in his first two years, at least. And Eli stepped into a more stable situation, yet still required time to adjust. Or am I simply repeating the well-worn theories? Is there something the teams could have done/not done, in terms of O-line, skill positions, or coaching? Thanks.

I don't agree with your assessment of David Carr. I think he's a tier 2 QB like Kerry Collins. He's better then a lot of QBs in the NFL today. I think he'll get picked up next year and we'll see him starting somewhere especially with all the work he's getting this year. He put 16 points on the board with out trying too hard. No mistakes. He's still a bit skittish in the pocket but maybe that would change if it was "his team".

BTW you guys (that doesn't mean you, the media "in general") haven't exactly been complimentary of Eli. But so far he is a winner, gives the Giants the ability to beat any team any day (The Super Bowl victory proves this). I am sure JJ thought all the razmataz would insure a Cowboy victory in the stadium opener.

I agree with Homer. It's pretty tough to suggest that David Carr didn't earn his $40 million. He may not have earned it with victories, but he gutted out five seasons of starting almost every game for a team that never made any effort to protect him. Has any QB EVER been sacked/hit more times per game than David Carr? He has earned every penny of that 40 million just by sheer perseverence.

As an executive/GM type, maybe its difficult for you to accept that the team has to accept some accountability for protecting/maximizing their investment. Don't throw David Carr under the bus just because he is still suffering from a well-earned case of shell shock.

For $40M, you guys, you better get wins. "gutting it out" or some nonsense isn't worth the time it took you to type. That's why Aaron Rodgers needs to improve. But at least he's showing signs of being a QB who could win games, with a viable defense, unlike Carr, who never did anything (go back, you have years of film to watch!) to justify the millions.

And you think he looked a little skittish in the pocket now? That's been his problem all along, even before he had taken enough sacks for shell shock. He never looked like a NFL pocket passer, and for $40M, you expect a guy to be able to do so. The Panthers had just as good of a starting O-line as the Giants when he was there, and he looked panicked there, too, which is why they cut bait after one year.

I agree that the FO is responsible for protecting their investment, which is what I was hoping Andrew would clarify for us. After all, $40M (or more, for Russell or Eli) isn't worth the trouble unless you make moves to build around that QB, and Oakland and Houston never seemed to have the sufficient O-line quality to protect their expensive arms.

No, David Carr started as a rookie, and my recollection is that he was on a positive development track, prior to the awful season where he just got shellacked constantly. That was a case of the Texans not taking the steps to either get the talent or run a system that would protect the QB. It's the football equivalent of Dusty Baker ruining young pitchers by pitching them 200+ innings before their arms or psyche's are prepared for it. I think its ridiculous to suggest that so many first round QB's flame out because teams talent evaluators are completely wrong. Sometimes players (including QB's) flame out because they are placed in a horrible situation that doesn't allow them to develop experience.

Anyway, Andrew's point was that David Carr didn't "earn" his money. Maybe the guy didn't have a great career as a starter at HOU or produce alot of wins. But it isn't like he took his signing bonus and sat on the bench for four years. Nor do I recall any criticisms of his work ethic. He gave it his best shot, took his lumps, and ultimately came up short. That doesn't mean he didn't earn his money.

"He has earned every penny of that 40 million just by sheer perseverence. "

I'm just going to say this, I wouldn't want you anywhere near my business, my friend's business or even owning a business in my city because well, you'd be bad for it....that statement you made is absolutely ludicrous. Scot, you might want to try that whole "think before you speak" concept

Mike;

You know what, if you have some valid, thoughtful criticism or idea to contribute, bring it on. But save your stupid ad hominem "ludicrous" statements for the FOX sports message board.

And what, exactly, is "ludicrous" about the idea that the Texans must accept a share of the blame for the implosion of David Carr. What is "ludicrous" about the idea that David Carr might have earned his money by enduring the sheer torture of being repeatedly pancaked by 300+ pound lineman more times than any QB in the history of the game over a four year span, yet he was rarely if ever missed a game for injury, and gave it his all while he was out there.

You know, its not like that was some fantastic Texans team that was just missing a QB to be good. Their defense was horrible. Their O-line was horrible. Their RB's are generally quick little scat backs that can neither pass block nor sustain offense.

You know what I find ludicrous, Mike. Your belief that a QB is supposed to be some superhuman figure that finds a way to overcome all odds, and somehow pull victories out of his a**, despite the fact that the central tenet of his team's offensive philosophy apparently included getting the QB sacked at historically high levels.

I have to say that Scott is exactly right about Carr. The Texans paid him to go out and play every week to the best of his ability, which he did with surprising perseverence considering (VY probably would have killed himself after week 4 of his rookie season if he'd been in the same position). If the front office elected not to invest in an offensive line that was even below average, as well as being satisfied without any real offensive weapons, I don't see how the TEAM'S failure to win has anything whatsoever to do with the QB. Also, a player's salary is not tied to TEAM wins, it is a reflection of the level of skill possessed by the individual player, AND (just as importantly) it is essentially hazard pay in the event that his career is cut short playing this brutal game. So yes, Carr EARNED every penny of that contract given the punishment he was subjected by his criminally negligent ownership and front office. It's a wonder he's not already disabled like Earl Campbell.

I am not questioning David Carr's heart or determination or perseverance, I, like Andrew, am simply saying that Carr got a lot of money for minimal production/wins. This column is the "Business of Football", should the Texans have drafted a few top tier o-linemen, yeah probably, could they have had a better coaching staff to support him, definitely, but in no way shape or form can you justify paying Carr for the return he gave them on their invest. I don't understand why your such a David Carr apologist, did you watch any Texan games? There were plenty of times when his line was to blame and there were plenty more when he would stand back there, shaking the snow globe, only to take a sack after missing his read or failing to go through his progressions. "Enduring the sheer torture of being repeatedly pancaked by 300+ pound lineman more times than any QB in the history of the game over a four year span" Please man, don't ever talk like that around fireman, or social workers or military personnel because you'd feel ashamed in about, the 3.8 seconds that David Carr didn't use to get rid of the football.

MikeG,
The problem with your premise is that Carr had zero control over the personnel decisions that left the team with no offensive line, no offensive weapons and a defense that wasn't even a speed bump to opponents. The failure to win games in this case is owned solely by the front office and coaching staff who either drafted the wrong QB for their system (along with other draft/FA mistakes) or failed to provide him with the tools necessary for success and that's it. Anyone that thinks drafting a QB with the first overall pick is the beginning and the end of the process of going from a doormat to a contender is a complete moron. The investment of $40M in Carr was a failure because nothing was done to protect that investment, and as important as QBs are they still can't win 16 games all by themselves no matter how good they are. You are probably one of those that thinks Cassel owes all of his success LAST season to the superior players around him as well as the coaching he received. But this season, it is ENTIRELY his fault that the Chiefs are winless. Look at San Francisco. They are virtually the same team they were last season, but SUDDENLY they are winning games and it has nothing to do with any changes at QB. Did Carr lose several winnable games? I'm sure. Was he responsible for losing most of the games in which he played? Not by a long shot. If you're just going to be jealous that you work a lot harder and don't get paid a miniscule fraction of what Carr got in Houston, then just say that. Just don't act like Carr stole money from the Texans because THEY have no clue to build a winner. The way they run their business, Houston may as well just set money on fire in the parking lot. And btw, coaches and GMs are the only team personnel who are exclusively paid for and judged by wins and losses.