"Matt Schaub's much anticipated debut inspired a yawn. Most memorable was watching him missing a wide open Kevin Walters. As we get closer to the regular season I know he is going to get more reps during the games. He obviously needs it. And he will get it. He finished with a 72.9 QB rating.
Sage Rosenfels looked rusty then warmed up. I will be in the minority but I will say it. How do you anoint someone as the starting QB before they have won the job on the field ? There are plenty of better football minds than mine that say Schaub is the Man. I just gotta see it. Still waiting. Rosenfels had a 88.3 QB rating." Early in August Texans Tail Gate here.
"It has not really been mentioned–at least not by me–that Sage has been tried (and failed) as a starter before, when he was in Miami. This is true and it could potentially temper his value in the trade market. If so, then by all means hold on to him." DGDB&D here "one is basically a first time starter while the other has been in the league
since 2001 and has failed as a starter before" DGDB&D here
2002 Threw 3 passes. No completions
2003 Rosenfels rode the bench behind Brian Griese and Jay Fieldler. Had a 131.9 QB Rating (6-4 1 TD. See what you can do with statistics.)
2004 Started 1 game. Finished the year 39 passes 16 completions and a 40 something rating.
2005 Started 1 game. Finished the year with a 81.5 rating.
So the "failed as a starter" tag, although a good line with a nice ring, doesn't tell the complete story. Looking back at the mess that was and is the Miami Dolphins what works best, and still does, is "failed as an organization". Maybe Parcells can change that. Rosenfels was never really the starter at Miami.
I could go with "failed as a starter" if you mean he didn't take the small opportunity he was given and establish himself as "the man". Given his skill set at the time, and the aforementioned mess, that result is not too surprising. Now how much of this Miami history is relevant to his future as a starter ? None of it.
Show Me The W
"Sage Rosenfels stock must be way up. If the team could afford it he would be good for beau coup draft picks. The other side of the equation which negates this fantasy is the need for a strong backup QB. " Also in August Texans Tail Gate here
Schaub has started seven games which resulted in four wins. A case could be made that he has "failed as a starter" also. If you limit your analysis to adding and subtracting with your fingers and toes. And in a more recent and relevant time period, like this year, Rosenfels play has been exceptional. And my last mention of that phrase, or reference to it: This year you can say that Rosenfels with three starts and three victories, has been nothing but a success as a starter.
The Red Zone
The Texans have been in the Red Zone 39 times and have scored 23 of those 39 times. That leaves them with an efficiency rating in the neighborhood of 59 percent. Which really is not that good. Not bad but it will not put your team where you want to be. Think playoffs. New England is 14-0 with a 71 percent efficiency rating.
Schaubs performance in the Red Zone has been a source of concern for fans, coaches, pundits and wanna be bloggers. Twenty five trips to the red zone and leaving with only ten touchdowns is failure in this league. Period.
Rosenfels has taken the Texans to the Red Zone fourteen times and has brought the team a touch down thirteen times. When I started compliling these stats I was surprised at this stat. I knew that Rosenfels was getting the ball in the end zone. But I was actually shocked when I compared these with Schaub's numbers. If you haven't done the math that is an astounding percentage for Rosenfels. 93 percent. 13 out 14 is phenomenal.
Taking Care of the Ball
David Carr was personally responsible for the liable and slander that was directed at the Texans offensive line last year. He did not know what to do with the ball. He couldn't read defenses, the ability to check off receivers escaped him as did the composure to just throw the ball away. Mr. Mittens had mastered the Fetal Position.
I believe that Schaubs 16 sacks and 7 seven fumbles are part of the same syndrome. He has shown a hesitancy and an indecisiveness lately that is getting him into trouble. Schaub has some growing to do, and unlike Carr, has shown flashes of brilliance. I am thinking of the first two games against KC and the Panthers. I do honestly think he has regressed somewhat. He certainly comes across as cerebral and it could be he is just seeing and thinking too much.
Goal to Go
And I want to highlight another aspect of Rosenfels vs Schaub here. Rosenfels gets the ball in the endzone in Goal to Go situations. He is eight for eight.
Schaub is six out of twelve.
Conclusions
1. At the moment Rosenfels is playing better than Schaub.
2. He gets the ball across the goal in the red zone.
3. He gets the ball across the goal at the goal line.
4. He gets rid of the ball faster. Avoiding sacks and injuries.
5. Schaub is not a finished product.
6. Schaub has not established himself as a dominant QB.
At this point in time, as Schaub has not established himself as the dominant QB here, it would be unwise to trade Rosenfels. Schaub hopefully has all the upside people talk about. We have all seen glimpses of this. Until he shows some improvement in some of the crucial elements of the game that these stats represent we need to hedge our bets. As the line in the movie goes, "What if this is as good as it gets ?"
Rosenfels has played the role of a backup well. If the names were reversed here. If it was Schaub that had the better performances I would say trade Rosenfels. But at the moment, with an uncertain future, hedge your bets. Let this play out next year.
The next two games are going to be critical to this debate. If Rosenfels brings two more W's home I might not remember Schaub's name. Getting just one win between these two teams is going to be extremely difficult. So how he carries himself and this team for the next two games will define this debate. I want the QB that wins games.
7 comments:
"Failed as a starter" was an overstatement, I'll grant that. What I meant was that he had been a starter and had been "the future" QB of an organization once before, even if they completely botched his development. Thus his value might be tempered a bit on the open market because teams would remember his name from back then. That's all. Obviously I didn't mean that he had failed like David Carr has failed.
At the same time, I still say that you do Schaub no favors by keeping
Rosenfels. Why keep a possible controversy? All you are doing is creating a scenario where Schaub is looking over his shoulder and a not-small percentage of fans are clamoring for Rosenfels every time Matt stumbles. Find someone serviceable who can manage the occasional game if pressed into action and see what you can get for Sage.
Also, as was said by someone else, the thing to remember is that you
are seeing Matt at the bottom of the learning curve and Sage near the apex, meaning that Matt's upside should be much higher than Rosenfels' (in theory).
Long story short, I did misstate when I said he'd failed, but I still think he's worth more in trade than on the 2008 roster. Why keep a guy that someone would pay for when your biggest hope is that he doesn't even see the field except in mop-up duty?
Good work! Both these guys are good for at least 1 stupid turnover per game, although they're a big improvement over, that other guy. We need to see more about Matt's injury proness, and until we know that for sure, we ought to keep Sage. Matt has a lot to prove yet before we start taking chances trading a known quantity in Sage.
Saying Matt is injury prone after the hits he took is saying that the human race is injury prone. He got annihilated twice.
"Why keep a guy that someone would pay for when your biggest hope is that he doesn't even see the field except in mop-up duty?"
See #2
Back in August I was talking about Rosenfels being excellant trade bait.
Since then, his value hasn't diminished at all, in fact his stock is even higher.
Matt Schaub has at times looked like both Tom Brady and Rex Grossman. And that is what has changed the equation in my mind.
1. I think it would help Schaubs developement to have Rosenfels on the sideline one more year.
2. "What if this is as good as it gets ?" What if we have already seen the best of Matt Schaub ? Rosenfels hedges the bet a little.
Right now Rosenfels is better than Schaub.
3. If Schaub did not have these red zone miscues I would be back on the trade Rosenfels bandwagon.
Now if you're Kubiak and aren't buying 1,2, or 3. the trade would and should happen.
Not sayin he is, sayin lets wait a little longer and find out.
I'm injury prone whenever I use a hammer.
I would not put that tag on Schaub either. He does not seem to have the boxers proverbial glass jaw. I am concerned that his indecisveness with the ball in effect lowers his guard. Exposing him to more hits.
Speaking of indecisiveness, is that just me seeing this, am I on target ?
Because in the first couple of games he seemed to be getting rid of the ball faster.
I think you make a point, he did better earlier on, but maybe his turnovers have caused him to hesitate rather than throw an interception. Remember that first one in the end zone and he told Kubiak after, "Sorry, that'll never happen again." ?
Post a Comment