Seriously? Try scrolling. Regardless, you continue to hammer a point no one is arguing: The Patriots' defense is better than the Texans' defense. OK? In fact, (insert any of the NFL's other 31 teams here)'s defense is better than the Texans' defense. I was responding to a point made earlier in the thread about the Texans blowing it by drafting Jackson when they could have had McCourty. First point: The Patriots' pass defense is terrible. And any idea that McCourty is an appreciably better player than Jackson is mitigated by the fact 1) he plays in a better scheme; 2) with better coaching; 3) and has faced lesser competition. That's it. If McCourty were a Texan, my guess is he'd be struggling as mightily as Jackson has. And were Jackson a Patriot, he might not look like the same bust he has here.
Brah? I'm curious: What, exactly, do you think my point is, Sam? Please find it and quote in your response. I'm certainly not, in any way, shape or form, defending the Texans' defense.
you don't really have one, you're arguing just to argue and citing the Texans schedule as abnormally difficult in a certain fashion (it's not) or as if it really made a difference (it didn't). It's sort of like when you argued that intangibles don't make a difference, 12 months after saying intangibles were the key. No leg to stand on, but arguing away nonetheless.
Show me a team or a person who can always make the correct pick. The Texans, like all teams, have had some success and some failures, when it comes to the draft. Foster wasn't drafted by any NFL team, so all the teams failed on that one. I don't think the Texans deserve to be criticized for picking Jackson. we needed help in the secondary, and Jackson came from a good program and was supposed to be "ready" to play at the pro level. It's not like Jackson was projected to go in the fifth round, and the Texans decided to take a gamble.
I do, actually. You, on the other hand - who initiated this particular nonsensical, disconnected line of discussion by making irrelevant points and doubling back all over yourself - are doing what, exactly? I think comparing a rookie CB on a terrible pass defense to a multiple Pro Bowler, and then using said comparison as a means to rip the Texans and their rookie CB, is a little disingenuous and merits a discussion of whether McCourty could thrive with the Texans' scheme and coaching. My *point* is that I don't believe he would.
Add Jay Cutler to New England's impressive list of elite QBs utterly neutered. 5/13 58 YDS 0 TD 1 Fumble 52.7 RATING McCourty had an impressive strip fumble returned for a touchdown by Guyton. Ric, you still gonna argue Kareem was the better pick?
They're ranked 31st against the pass, ghettocheeze. Let’s not go all ’85 Bears on them. Yes, they shut down Cutler during a near white-out snowstorm, and look to be coming together as a unit at just the right time. I just think it’s disingenuous to sing the praises of a rookie CB on the 31st-ranked pass defense while tearing apart the rookie CB on the 32nd-ranked pass defense and presuming, if the Texans had McCourty, all would be well. That ignores the 389 other things wrong with the Texans’ defense (which I’ll detail below). WHERE IN THE WORLD (!) did I say, let alone argue, Kareem was a better pick? This is about how horribly coached the Texans are, how terrible their personnel is, how silly and counter-intuitive their scheme is, etc. It's silly to assume McCourty's success in New England would automatically transfer to Houston. Under Bush and Gibbs' tutelage, with Bernard Pollard and Eugene Wilson routinely failing to cover their assignments, the pass rush continually failing to generate any heat and the competition being markedly better, I think McCourty would be experiencing many of the same issues Kareem is; maybe not as many - I don't know. But I have zero doubt he'd be able to overcome the many obstacles the Texans have put in place for themselves. McCourty’s success is tied to going to a better organization/team/staff.
