QB vs. System?

So Weeden. leads the Texans to win today after only a few weeks in the system but neither him nor cassel can help our team to win at all?? Does that make our problem bad backup quarterbacks or bad system??

Overrated defense, though it's improved (for obvious reasons) since Weeden was benched.

If you're just comparing individual performances, Weeden didn't do anything there he didn't do here. Threw for less yards per attempt and contributed to less points/ half than he did in one of his three starts (Atl). Overall, it was about the same as his performance in one of the other starts (NO). You'd be hard pressed to prove that their system made him more efficient or effective than he was here against Atl or NO, and that's coming from someone who's not exactly in love with the offense we've run here. The only difference is they won the game, but this isn't boxing or tennis. Those other 21 starters get paid for a reason.

How good he is or whether he would have been the better choice as a backup is a separate issue. Pretty much a settled issue at this point since Cassel performed so poorly. If you're looking for something to indict the coaching staff with, then you can argue they should have just stuck with him or should have gone back to him after Romo's second injury but that's a separate issue from the OP (ftr, I supported benching him after the NE start).
 
Last edited:
Weeden came in at the end of the first half and the Texans has zero points. He also has been with the team for barely a month. Pull the other lever.

Weeden passed for only 105 yards and he needed 18 attempts to reach that modest total. Avg per attempt = 5.8 (BW's 2015 avg/attt in 5 games as a Cowboy = 7.3).

The Texans won because their D completely shut down Indy (190 total yds) and took the ball away twice in the final 3 minutes.
 
Weeden passed for only 105 yards and he needed 18 attempts to reach that modest total. Avg per attempt = 5.8 (BW's 2015 avg/attt in 5 games as a Cowboy = 7.3).

The Texans won because their D completely shut down Indy (190 total yds) and took the ball away twice in the final 3 minutes.

How long has Weeden been in Houston again? I can't remember.

The Cowboys lost to the Bucs, Jets and Seahawks while only allowing an average of 14 points in the three losses. How many points did The Texans score in just over a half with Weeden not throwing the ball to the other team 3 times? I can't remember.

Pull the other lever.
 
How long has Weeden been in Houston again? I can't remember.

The Cowboys lost to the Bucs, Jets and Seahawks while only allowing an average of 14 points in the three losses. How many points did The Texans score in just over a half with Weeden not throwing the ball to the other team 3 times? I can't remember.

Pull the other lever.

We lost to the Bucs, Jets and Seahawks (and the Falcons, Saints, Giants and Eagles) because our defense couldn't get a stop in the closing moments of the game. The Texans D did.
 
Last edited:
We lost to the Bucs, Jets and Seahawks because our defense couldn't get a stop in the closing moments of the game. The Texans D did.

lol, no they didn't. You could say that about the 51-48 game a few years ago maybe. 10 and 12 points are not enough to win games, just stop.
 
lol, no they didn't. You could say that about the 51-48 game a few years ago maybe. 10 and 12 points are not enough to win games, just stop.

We have seven losses this season in which we had the lead or were tied in the 4th qtr or OT.

Start points for the game winning drives in the games in question:

Bucs: own 44.
Jets: own 20
Hawks: own 15

Want more?
Falcs: own 11
Saints: own 20
Eagles: own 20

Add to that a kickoff return for a td by the Giants that put them ahead for good.

The Texans, otoh, took the ball away deep in Indy territory to set up the go ahead fg w/around 3:00 to go, and then sealed the deal with an interception of Hasselbeck.

If our D had made a stop in even one or two of those losses we would still be in the mix in the NFC East. As it is we're reduced to playing out the string.
 
Do people really suffer from selective memory? Weeden didn't start that game. He was the backup then Yates got hurt midgame and Weeden came in and the texans won. Hmmm now why does that sound eerily familiar to our first game against the eagles? Ohh yeah that's right because that's exactly what happened to us. Romo got hurt Weeden came in and we won the game. Now what exactly happened the next 4 games when Weeden was the starter? Ohh yeah that's right 0-4. How about we revisit this next Sunday if he has actually started and won a game? Smh.
That's the one thing I notice about Weeden when coming off the bench for the injured starting QB in this case Romo, and Yates he does fairly well as he did for Romo in that first Eagles game in which he hit TWill for a 45yd TD, and what happens the next week he comes back down to earth hard and the Texans are about to find out the hard way the guy can't read an NFL defense.
 
A major indictment of the Cowboys coaching IMHO.

Oh... So basically what I have been eluding to for the last several weeks. It's sad that it takes a Weeden winning a game elsewhere or a CMike putting in yeoman's ground work elsewhere in yet another win to make us (including Jerry) see how dispicable the coaching staff actually is...

Ridiculous

20 years strong...
 
So Weeden. leads the Texans to win today after only a few weeks in the system but neither him nor cassel can help our team to win at all?? Does that make our problem bad backup quarterbacks or bad system??

It's the playbook/scheme. Been saying it since Garrett arrived. Boring, predictive, conservative, outdated, etc. innovative it's NOT.
 
Bottom line is the Toxins Defense is built to win DESPITE the QB and our defense is built to win predicating our QB controlling the ball/game. That's my opinion. And I'm completely miserable in Houston right now.

Going back to lurking again.
 
Overrated defense, though it's improved (for obvious reasons) since Weeden was benched.

If you're just comparing individual performances, Weeden didn't do anything there he didn't do here. Threw for less yards per attempt and contributed to less points/ half than he did in one of his three starts (Atl). Overall, it was about the same as his performance in one of the other starts (NO). You'd be hard pressed to prove that their system made him more efficient or effective than he was here against Atl or NO, and that's coming from someone who's not exactly in love with the offense we've run here. The only difference is they won the game, but this isn't boxing or tennis. Those other 21 starters get paid for a reason.

How good he is or whether he would have been the better choice as a backup is a separate issue. Pretty much a settled issue at this point since Cassel performed so poorly. If you're looking for something to indict the coaching staff with, then you can argue they should have just stuck with him or should have gone back to him after Romo's second injury but that's a separate issue from the OP (ftr, I supported benching him after the NE start).

Yeah that was my point... Weeden didn't do any better with them than he did with us but the receivers were in a position to do more with it
 
It's the playbook/scheme. Been saying it since Garrett arrived. Boring, predictive, conservative, outdated, etc. innovative it's NOT.

I agree. Its not that weeden or Castle are world beaters or anything but we certainly didn't do them any favors with our vanilla offense
 

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
474,012
Messages
14,506,491
Members
24,207
Latest member
TomGiantsfan
Back
Top