Jump to content

Andre Johnson wants out of Houston


Recommended Posts

Cant blame him!!!!! The Texans have the #1 overall pick in the draft, finish with 14 straight losses, and the whole world has known since Mid-September that their biggest off season need is a QB and the best answer their front office comes up with is Tom Savage???!!!! Bill Obrien better be the a offensive guru they think he is because if not what a joke!!!

 

Andre Johnson to Pats for Mallet?? Could get interesting imo........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cant blame him!!!!! The Texans have the #1 overall pick in the draft, finish with 14 straight losses, and the whole world has known since Mid-September that their biggest off season need is a QB and the best answer their front office comes up with is Tom Savage???!!!! Bill Obrien better be the a offensive guru they think he is because if not what a joke!!!

 

Andre Johnson to Pats for Mallet?? Could get interesting imo........

 

Not for a 33 year old WR at the end of his career. That $16M won't help either.

 

The Texans drafted the player they wanted. If Andre is not happy, too bad. He can always retire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only choice he has on the matter is to retire or ask for a trade that Houston will not make. I doubt he will retire. And a future HOF receiver for a decent back-up QB? Seriously? Lol

Oh and FYI. Johnson has not said a word about "wanting out of Houston". Just that he was frustrated and questioning his placement there. Rightfully so.

But this is a team with the same core players that won back-to-back division crowns in 2011 and 2012. And won two playoff games. They did go 2-14 last year but I believe that stemmed from a lack of discipline and respect for Kubiaks system. Which was on Kubiak. So they got rid of him and brought in a guy who demands respect at every level.

Andre will be just fine. He's frustrated and needs some time to think. At the end of the day, he will be in Houston.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only choice he has on the matter is to retire or ask for a trade that Houston will not make. I doubt he will retire. And a future HOF receiver for a decent back-up QB? Seriously? Lol

Oh and FYI. Johnson has not said a word about "wanting out of Houston". Just that he was frustrated and questioning his placement there. Rightfully so.

But this is a team with the same core players that won back-to-back division crowns in 2011 and 2012. And won two playoff games. They did go 2-14 last year but I believe that stemmed from a lack of discipline and respect for Kubiaks system. Which was on Kubiak. So they got rid of him and brought in a guy who demands respect at every level.

Andre will be just fine. He's frustrated and needs some time to think. At the end of the day, he will be in Houston.

 

I agree with alot of what you said. If their def can stay healthy mostly the LB's the Def should be pretty dang good.  The secondary just got 2 times better with the addition of Clowney and NT either Tuit or Nix, don't remember off hand which they picked. The opposing Qb's will not have the time to pick them apart like last season. DJ Swearinger will have a huge season and the Texans will win 12 games. The offense will be just fine if they find another decent free agent RB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with alot of what you said. If their def can stay healthy mostly the LB's the Def should be pretty dang good.  The secondary just got 2 times better with the addition of Clowney and NT either Tuit or Nix, don't remember off hand which they picked. The opposing Qb's will not have the time to pick them apart like last season. DJ Swearinger will have a huge season and the Texans will win 12 games. The offense will be just fine if they find another decent free agent RB.

 

9 - 7 maybe. They need a ton of help on offense. I still think they will get Mallet before it's all said and done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined


  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...