no they don't. There jobs are still on the line.

This, and if they are really gone for sure, they are coaching for a job elsewhere. You think a team is going to want you if you try and lose games for the team your coming from?

---

That doesn't mean he tanks on the team and tries to lose games...

 

Seriously, this is beyond stupid.

 

He's not telling his team "hey look guys, I'm fired anyway, so have fun!". I'm saying he was probably instructed to play Case Keenum by the higher ups. Best case scenario, he's their man. Worst case scenario, first overall pick. It became clear he wasn't their man, so they ended up with option B. 

---

This, and if they are really gone for sure, they are coaching for a job elsewhere. You think a team is going to want you if you try and lose games for the team your coming from?

 

Who said it was Kubiak's decision to play Keenum? 

---

Agree to disagree. There was simply no reasonable explanation to continue to play Case Keenum when you have an average starter (and team captain) on the bench. He makes Chad Henne look good by comparison. 

 

this

 

He's not telling his team "hey look guys, I'm fired anyway, so have fun!". I'm saying he was probably instructed to play Case Keenum by the higher ups. Best case scenario, he's their man. Worst case scenario, first overall pick. It became clear he wasn't their man, so they ended up with option B. 

 

and this

---

Who said it was Kubiak's decision to play Keenum? 

 

Exactly, it was clearly McNair's orders. 

---

Even if it was McNair's orders, how in the hell is playing Keenum tanking?

 

It was evident Schaub's time in Houston was done, there was no reason at all to play the guy. Keenum might not have been the answer, but there was no reason not to play the young guy and see what he has, even if he obviously wasn't the answer. There was no point to not make sure, even though it was evident.

 

That is not tanking in the least bit, when your out of contention and you have a guy that is gone after the season, you generally want to get a look at the young guy behind him and make sure what he is.

---

Even if it was McNair's orders, how in the hell is playing Keenum tanking?

 

 

 

Because after a handful of games, it was clear he not only wasn't the answer, but was arguably on par or worse than even Gabbert. 

 

With neither of Houston's QB being the long term answer, if the Texans were truly trying to win games, Schaub would have been re-inserted into the starting lineup by the week following the Texans/ Jags game - at the latest. 

---

Even if it was McNair's orders, how in the hell is playing Keenum tanking?

 

It was evident Schaub's time in Houston was done, there was no reason at all to play the guy. Keenum might not have been the answer, but there was no reason not to play the young guy and see what he has, even if he obviously wasn't the answer. There was no point to not make sure, even though it was evident.

 

That is not tanking in the least bit, when your out of contention and you have a guy that is gone after the season, you generally want to get a look at the young guy behind him and make sure what he is.

 

Because Keenum proved to be garbage and was costing them games? Just because there's a method to the madness doesn't mean it wasn't largely a tank move. 

---

Because Keenum proved to be garbage and was costing them games? Just because there's a method to the madness doesn't mean it wasn't largely a tank move. 

 

 

Because after a handful of games, it was clear he not only wasn't the answer, but was arguably on par or worse than even Gabbert. 

 

With neither of Houston's QB being the long term answer, if the Texans were truly trying to win games, Schaub would have been re-inserted into the starting lineup by the week following the Texans/ Jags game - at the latest. 

 

There is no reason when your season is lost to play the vet that you plan to cut/trade at seasons end and had played like absolute [BAD WORD REMOVED] all year as well. There is no reason not to play the young guy, because both qb's costed them multiple games over the course of the year. I really don't see how playing Schaub means they aren't tanking with the way he played, but playing Keenum (who might have played worse, but is actually still on the team right now) is. That makes no sense to me at all.

---

Because Keenum proved to be garbage and was costing them games? Just because there's a method to the madness doesn't mean it wasn't largely a tank move. 

 

If I didn't know better I'd think C Dub was a Texans fan defending the team's policies to the jury the way he's defending their tanking moves. 

 

McNair clearly tanked those 2nd half games. Its obvious. For the reasoning we are giving, 

---

There is no reason when your season is lost to play the vet that you plan to cut/trade at seasons end and had played like absolute [BAD WORD REMOVED] all year as well. There is no reason not to play the young guy, because both qb's costed them multiple games over the course of the year. 

 

You're not really even disagreeing with me. I said that Kubiak was likely given orders to play Keenum because best case, he's their future, and worst case, they end up tanking.

 

He sucked, and they continued to play him anyway. It ended up being a tank move. 

 

There was no reason NOT to play him until he proved to be worse than Blaine Gabbert. Then Schaub should have re-entered the lineup. 

---

You're not really even disagreeing with me. I said that Kubiak was likely given orders to play Keenum because best case, he's their future, and worst case, they end up tanking.

 

He sucked, and they continued to play him anyway. It ended up being a tank move. 

 

There was no reason NOT to play him until he proved to be worse than Blaine Gabbert. Then Schaub should have re-entered the lineup. 

 

Yup, this. 

---

If I didn't know better I'd think C Dub was a Texans fan defending the team's policies to the jury the way he's defending their tanking moves. 

 

McNair clearly tanked those 2nd half games. Its obvious. For the reasoning we are giving, 

 



 

Because I'm defending that teams don't tank, which they don't, that means I'm a Texans fan? That's out of left field...

 

Are you trying to make me the target here so you don't get called a Eagles fan anymore? I would certainly understand it if that's what you're trying to do here...

---

You're not really even disagreeing with me. I said that Kubiak was likely given orders to play Keenum because best case, he's their future, and worst case, they end up tanking.

 

He sucked, and they continued to play him anyway. It ended up being a tank move. 

 

There was no reason NOT to play him until he proved to be worse than Blaine Gabbert. Then Schaub should have re-entered the lineup. 

 

Just have to disagree on the whole Schaub should have re-entered the lineup thing, he had a huge part in why the Texans were as bad as they were last year. He wouldn't have improved their shot at winning in the least bit.

 

Didn't he start their last 2 games though? So i'm a bit confused here.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/...att-schaub

---

 

Because I'm defending that teams don't tank, which they don't, that means I'm a Texans fan? That's out of left field...

 

Are you trying to make me the target here so you don't get called a Eagles fan anymore? I would certainly understand it if that's what you're trying to do here...

 

 

I just think its odd the effort you are putting into defending the Texans playing of a clearly garbage QB down the stretch last season, when they had a better option to at least give them a chance to win some games, and they continued with the garbage. Intentionally. 

---

C-dub your wasting your time. You can't fix stupid.

---

Just have to disagree on the whole Schaub should have re-entered the lineup thing, he had a huge part in why the Texans were as bad as they were last year. He wouldn't have improved their shot at winning in the least bit.

 

Didn't he start their last 2 games though? So i'm a bit confused here.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/...att-schaub

 

Yes, he did. I stand partially corrected. Keenum still shouldn't have played as long as he did. 

---

Just have to disagree on the whole Schaub should have re-entered the lineup thing, he had a huge part in why the Texans were as bad as they were last year. He wouldn't have improved their shot at winning in the least bit.

 

Didn't he start their last 2 games though? So i'm a bit confused here.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/...att-schaub

 

Was that after the Jags couldn't catch them for the higher pick? 

 

,,,kinda like how Indy all of a sudden played lights out effort and won 2 games after an 0-13 start because they knew they had a cushion between themselves and the next threat for the top overall pick at that point.... :whistling: 

---

Just have to disagree on the whole Schaub should have re-entered the lineup thing, he had a huge part in why the Texans were as bad as they were last year. He wouldn't have improved their shot at winning in the least bit.


Didn't he start their last 2 games though? So i'm a bit confused here.

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/5615/matt-schaub'>http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/5615/matt-schaub</a>

I'm sure they'll have some way to spin those last two games just watch? Maybe Shaub was on the bench because he was actually hurt.

---

Was that after the Jags couldn't catch them for the higher pick? 

 

That's actually a good point. At that time we had 4 wins to their 2, and held the head-to-head tiebreaker over them. 

 

Could other teams have caught them should they have won the last two? 

---