PDA

View Full Version : Wand moves to right guard


LoNghoRn-TeXaN
08-17-2005, 02:34 AM
Victor Riley, an eight-year veteran signed as a free agent in the offseason, has won the starting job at left tackle.

Moving to right guard means that Wand, a third-round pick in 2003, has now played or practiced at every position in the line other than center.

According to the Houston Chronicle:

Wand moves to right guard (http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/sports/3314016)

ATX
08-17-2005, 02:39 AM
Looks like we've changed the Oline around alot. The question is whether Wand permanantly replaces Weigert at RG. Maybe he's a better guard than tackle and this may be his shot to prove it. guess we'll have to wait and see.

Ibar_Harry
08-17-2005, 04:20 AM
Remember, Wiegert has also played LT. This is an interesting development. Wiegert's injury has been diagnoised as an ankle sprain and not a high ankle sprain. He's been having problems with that in TC, and it appears, reinjured it in the game. Wiegert is one of our best linement and hopefully they can rest him and get his ankle healed. I for one like the fact that their finally trying some people and moving them around. I still would love to see Pitts given a try at center. Again McKinney played guard at Indy, not center.

beerlover
08-17-2005, 04:30 AM
this is unfreaking believable :rolleyes: as the days pass so do the offensive lineman. if anyone had doubts about which area of the team was most uncertain all one has to look at is this Texans offensive line. It makes me uncomfortable to even think about it, I sure hope they know what they're doing. Personally I think its a big mistake to move Wand from the LT position & Riley would be the better replacement for Weigert since he has RT experience. Where is David Baas when you need him :brickwall

TexHorns
08-17-2005, 05:23 AM
What you dont see is that it takes your eyes a few years to gel before you can consistently see that we have no solution to the o-line problem! :brickwall Other than that, it's fine.

RTP2110
08-17-2005, 08:21 AM
I thought the whole reason the Texans didn't draft or sign any free agents on the o-line, was to let the guys we have on the line gel for once instead of switching everyone around. Kinda hard for them to gel when there is still not a consistant line. McKinney has practiced at C & RG, Wand at LT, LG, RG, Pitts at LT & LG. Seems kinda hard to develop any chemistry like this.

rittenhouserobz
08-17-2005, 08:30 AM
This is a temporary stop. Next year is "the year of the OL". I believe we will draft our LT next year. I personally think Wans will eventually become our all around OL backup. Every team needs that type of player. So I would say that Wand is not a wasted pick. As far as the OL is concerned, next year should be more interesting IMHO.

nunusguy
08-17-2005, 08:36 AM
Personally I think its a big mistake to move Wand from the LT position & Riley would be the better replacement for Weigert since he has RT experience. Where is David Baas when you need him :brickwall
I'm still campaigning to move Chester back to LT - its the most important OL
position, he's played it better than anyone so far and he's got 2 years of experience there as the starter, and he's a good bet to stay in the lineup as he is one of our most injury free players (knock on wood!). We still really don't
know how Riley is gonna hold up when DC takes a deep drop for one of the wideouts to run a fly pattern - I'm gonna be holding my breath when's got to
handle the edge rusher in that scenario. But let them experiment all they want
to now because you don't want to have to do it in the reg season when a
OL starter goes down. As far as not picking up Bass or someone like him in this years draft - that's Cass call, he obviously thought PB was more important than retaining that 2 & 3 - something else we'll about when the
reg season unfolds.

TheOgre
08-17-2005, 08:58 AM
Riley played LT in college.

Runner
08-17-2005, 09:42 AM
Personally I think its a big mistake to move Wand from the LT position & Riley would be the better replacement for Weigert since he has RT experience.

Agreed, although I'm sure this is a temporary fix. Weigert will start when he's back. Wand is a better back-up at the tackle and guard positions then we've had before, so that is something. He's also a better left tackle than Riley, which I think will be proven when Riley starts playing significant time in the upcoming pre-season games. I don't think he'll be able to handle a speed rusher on a consistent basis as well as Wand.

Marcus
08-17-2005, 09:44 AM
All of you act as if they are not going to have any more injuries on the offensive line. They will. One will probably go down in the Oakland game for some reason or another. Then, in the Dallas game after that, and so on. And guess what, it happen during the regular season, too.

The focus is to get the best 5 linemen on the field at the same time, so what's wrong with getting different linemen some experience at different positions. The coaching staff is trying to prepare for those eventual injury situations that are going to crop up. Don't blame them if ya'll are not prepared for it.

And what makes ya'll think that all is going to go right in the world if they draft that 'premiere' LT next year? Another unproven rookie injected into the lineup that knows zip about zone-blocking. I can hardly wait. :rolleyes:

And besides, from the games I watched last season, with the exception of Freeney, the push came up the middle, not from the edge. So be positive, Wand might be an upgrade.

blockhead83
08-17-2005, 09:50 AM
I'm excited about the prospect of Wand at RG, I think he may fit in well there as a backup for Weigert. It disappoints me that Riley is going to be our starting LT though. I was really hoping that Wand would win the job and show further progress this year, instead of inserting a journeyman in his place. If after four seasons we still haven't fixed the O-line to where they can atleast perform at a satisfactory level, we damn well better address it in full during next year's draft/offseason.

Runner
08-17-2005, 09:51 AM
So be positive, Wand might be an upgrade.

I didn't want to say that - I'm sure people are tired of hearing me harp on Wand.

In my opinion, he's taken a lot of unfair grief for whatever reason, but I think talent and physical skills will tell in the end. The coaches are hard on him to help him reach his potential, and the fans take this to mean he can't play. It's just the opposite; they expect a lot from him and want him to get there NOW. Going up against Peek all camp with the second string had to be great preparation for this league's speed rushers, for example.

geofb
08-17-2005, 10:25 AM
What you dont see is that it takes your eyes a few years to gel before you can consistently see that we have no solution to the o-line problem! :brickwall Other than that, it's fine.

Too funny. So much for the "give it time to gel" argument. Wand was probably just starting to transform from the liquid to solid state at LT and now this. He's back to the fully liquid state in a new position now.

Battle Red Flash
08-17-2005, 10:34 AM
Hmmm.... This gives the O-line coach another excuse. "We had guys at different positions." Doesn't every team? In 2003, we cut way down on sacks with Pitts at LT. Why did that stop?

nunusguy
08-17-2005, 10:52 AM
Gaurd will be good for him.
Wand's long suite is not strength which is very important to effectivey go up against the big 4-3 tackles he'll be facing as a gaurd.

Vinny
08-17-2005, 10:55 AM
Wand is actually a pretty solid run blocker. It's his feet that are in question. He drive blocks well. Being tall he may have some leverage issues against shorter stockier inside technique guys though.

Vinny
08-17-2005, 10:56 AM
Too funny. So much for the "give it time to gel" argument. Wand was probably just starting to transform from the liquid to solid state at LT and now this. He's back to the fully liquid state in a new position now.now, that's kinda funny.
:cool:

BradK10
08-17-2005, 11:21 AM
yeah, he was playing RG last night on the televised practice on NFL Network, and got absolutely OWNED by Gary Walker.

Runner
08-17-2005, 11:48 AM
yeah, he was playing RG last night on the televised practice on NFL Network, and got absolutely OWNED by Gary Walker.

On the first play of team drills when Walker got under him it looked pretty bad. The first play at a new position is enough for evaluation and "ownership" around here, even though Wand adjusted and absolutely stopped on Walker the very next play.

Porky
08-17-2005, 12:13 PM
Breaking News:

An ABP and Amber Alert has just been issued for Fred Weary. If you see the man depicted below actually blocking someone, take no immediate action as he may be being held hostage by his own unfullfilled potential. Rather, please immediately call Joe Pendry as he hasn't seen Weary on his offensive line all year long.

http://i.cnn.net/si/images/football/nfl/players/5952.jpg

rafterticket
08-17-2005, 12:47 PM
this is unfreaking believable :rolleyes: as the days pass so do the offensive lineman. if anyone had doubts about which area of the team was most uncertain all one has to look at is this Texans offensive line. It makes me uncomfortable to even think about it, I sure hope they know what they're doing. Personally I think its a big mistake to move Wand from the LT position & Riley would be the better replacement for Weigert since he has RT experience. Where is David Baas when you need him

I don't think we need to be so negative about this. They think Riley's the better tackle, and with Wiegert down, we had a quality lineman to insert. That is a GOOD THING.

beerlover
08-17-2005, 12:48 PM
the only and I mean the ONLY way this is acceptable to beerlover (third person, now thats funny :rolleyes:) ) is that this becomes Rileys audition only at LT & then this whole idea is put to rest. Either he's had some kind of transformation or metamorphosis into an NFL LT that I can't see or the coaches have completly lost their minds :wacko:

besides getting beat by the DE their are other factors to consider, yes one is injury's :tomato: another is false starts & penaltys Riley has a proven track record as a leader in both. while Wand as a rookie did a very solid job & after the first few games settled in nicely, very few handle Dwight Freeney. Also its all about matchups, each team has different strengths Buffalo (the season opener) has a dedicated core of LB'ers including former Texan Jeff Posey, all pro Takeo Spikes & London Fletcher. expect them to blitz alot :texans:

rafterticket
08-17-2005, 12:59 PM
After all, we only got to see them work for what - 7 plays - the other night?

We can continue this prognosistic (is that really a word?) conversation beginning Sunday. I am trying to be optimistic and believe the coaches know what they're doing. You KNOW David Carr does, too.

aj.
08-17-2005, 01:05 PM
I think the Texans coaching staff has grown weary of Fred.

Rightnow
08-17-2005, 01:20 PM
aj. that is classic


At this point I'd be happy with an average O-line. Just be average guys!

southtexan
08-17-2005, 02:31 PM
yeah, he was playing RG last night on the televised practice on NFL Network, and got absolutely OWNED by Gary Walker.
Just about any defensive player in the NFL can beat any offensive player. The fact that Wand got beat just shows that Walker is a professional, I can assure you that Wand has had the upper hand on a few occasions.

Hervoyel
08-17-2005, 05:54 PM
I consider this to be "not good news" no matter how it's spun. I don't have much to say about it right now though. I completely expected Seth Wand to improve this year and I'm now trying to decide how to feel about what I can only say looks like a 180 from the Texans. I don't think the best way to groom a LT is to play him at LG & RG.

So Wand isn't going to be given a second year like Chester got to improve. Do the Texans not think he's going to get better the way Pitts did? If that's so then when exactly were they talking out of their posteriors? Last year when he was lookin' good enough to toss into the mix or this year when he's losing his job to Riley but still one of our "best 5"?

If Victor Riley can walk into the Texans training camp and be one of the best 5 we have then I'm pretty concerned with what passes for a starting quality lineman on this team. That speaks volumes. It's not that I completely think we've been lied to because I don't. What I think is that we're speaking a different language than the guys putting this line together.

SESupergenius
08-17-2005, 05:56 PM
Can I just go ahead and say "the sky is falling" now or wait until the homers are knee deep in their search for answers when we are 2-6? Weary has been a slug from the get-go. It's No surpise he isn't working out. Wand is just what he is...potential, far from saying a great prospect. All we heard was that he is a "project", not a great prospect.

Hervoyel
08-17-2005, 05:59 PM
Can I just go ahead and say "the sky is falling" now or wait until the homers are knee deep in their search for answers when we are 2-6?


Nah, you go right ahead and say it now. I don't think of myself as a full-on "homer" but I do consider myself generally optimistic. I don't like the way this feels at all though.

You go ahead and speak your piece about that sky falling. Something's definitely falling here. It might not be the sky that's falling but something's coming down.

Runner
08-17-2005, 06:23 PM
I consider this to be "not good news" no matter how it's spun. I don't have much to say about it right now though. I completely expected Seth Wand to improve this year and I'm now trying to decide how to feel about what I can only say looks like a 180 from the Texans. I don't think the best way to groom a LT is to play him at LG & RG.

So Wand isn't going to be given a second year like Chester got to improve. Do the Texans not think he's going to get better the way Pitts did? If that's so then when exactly were they talking out of their posteriors? Last year when he was lookin' good enough to toss into the mix or this year when he's losing his job to Riley but still one of our "best 5"?

If Victor Riley can walk into the Texans training camp and be one of the best 5 we have then I'm pretty concerned with what passes for a starting quality lineman on this team. That speaks volumes. It's not that I completely think we've been lied to because I don't. What I think is that we're speaking a different language than the guys putting this line together.

I agree with you that Wand should be at LT because Riley isn't the answer. Starting Riley is an indication of a problem somewhere. If he had been doing as many reps against Peek as Wand has that would be obvious to everyone. Riley doesn't have the lateral speed required for LT.

Wand makes the highlights when a rusher runs him over; the times I've seen Riley get beat he frequently just whiffs - that's how to get a QB hurt, but it doesn't make an interesting replay for the news. The O-line coach has made Wand his whipping boy for some reason. Everyone from the media on down has picked up on that. Maybe it's just the only way the coach knows how to try to get Wand to improve.

I still think Riley getting more reps in the upcoming pre-season games will result in better evaluations and Wand starts at LT in Buffalo. Heck, maybe the coaches already plan this and we just don't know it.

aj.
08-17-2005, 08:33 PM
I agree with you that Wand should be at LT because Riley isn't the answer. Starting Riley is an indication of a problem somewhere

Starting Riley may be an indication that he's better than Wand.

southtexan
08-17-2005, 08:40 PM
Can I just go ahead and say "the sky is falling" now or wait until the homers are knee deep in their search for answers when we are 2-6? Weary has been a slug from the get-go. It's No surpise he isn't working out. Wand is just what he is...potential, far from saying a great prospect. All we heard was that he is a "project", not a great prospect.
Well, I'm not what you call a homer, am just an optimist. If the Texans don't win a game this season there's always next season and the season after that. I'm used to bad teams, I used to follow the Oilers religiously especially during the bad years, it took them years to became a good team.

NoBullTexan
08-17-2005, 08:45 PM
Wand's problem has been, and still is INEXPERIENCE! It is not about, does he have the strength, or the legs, it is all about learning to play on the big stage. The NFL is a very long way from SW Missouri State! Now he will have had experience at every line position except OC. Not a bad thing. He will eventually get the experience thing down and become an accomplished Olineman. Maybe even at OLT.

Porky
08-17-2005, 09:38 PM
Can I just go ahead and say "the sky is falling" now or wait until the homers are knee deep in their search for answers when we are 2-6? Weary has been a slug from the get-go. It's No surpise he isn't working out. Wand is just what he is...potential, far from saying a great prospect. All we heard was that he is a "project", not a great prospect.

I'm not in "sky is falling" mode. I will wait to see the final product. But, it's becoming increasingly clear that Wand was yet another 2nd-3rd round reach by CC and company. There is not much doubt that both he and Ragone could have been had later. The 1st rd picks have been exceptional, and the 4th and later has been well above average too. But, in 4 years of drafting, we have exactly ONE player from the 2nd or 3rd round that is a quality starter. That is an absymal record. Even the lowly Browns made the playoffs in year four, without nearly as good a start. If we fail to make it this year, look no further than the stat above as the reason why. Charles Hill anyone? :goodnight

Wolf
08-17-2005, 09:44 PM
I'm not in "sky is falling" mode. I will wait to see the final product. But, it's becoming increasingly clear that Wand was yet another 2nd-3rd round reach by CC and company. There is not much doubt that both he and Ragone could have been had later. The 1st rd picks have been exceptional, and the 4th and later has been well above average too. But, in 4 years of drafting, we have exactly ONE player from the 2nd or 3rd round that is a quality starter. That is an absymal record. Even the lowly Browns made the playoffs in year four, without nearly as good a start. If we fail to make it this year, look no further than the stat above as the reason why. Charles Hill anyone? :goodnight

I agree our choices in 2nd and 3rd haven't been spectacular. Maybe that is why we went ahead and traded for P-Buch for a 2nd and 3rd :heh:

V Man
08-17-2005, 09:50 PM
This is a temporary stop. Next year is "the year of the OL". I believe we will draft our LT next year.

I think you could see the Texans take as many as 3 linemen next year, if certain players fall in the right spots. I can see a LT, a G (RG probably since Weigert is been around a while), and a C if the rook doesn't develop as they hope.

eriadoc
08-18-2005, 01:00 AM
I am not sure I've ever seen an explanation or whatnot, but why does the team insist on keeping Pitts away from the LT position?

TEXANS84
08-18-2005, 01:08 AM
If you watch the NFL Network training camp report, Capers was impressed with Riley's play against the Broncos. Supposedly he was barelling the defensive linemen over, and was "very aggressive" in a play which caused the d-lineman to fall on Wiegert's ankle.

aj.
08-18-2005, 07:04 AM
There's no question whether Riley is a good run blocker. He's massive and pushes a pile with the best of them.

The Preacher
08-18-2005, 09:25 AM
They're either geniuses or halfway to the asylum. I just don't know which one. :texflag:

texasguy346
08-18-2005, 09:28 AM
I am not sure I've ever seen an explanation or whatnot, but why does the team insist on keeping Pitts away from the LT position?
I don't recall hearing anyone from the organization going really in-depth into it, but I do remember hearing that they believe Pitts will be a Pro Bowl quality LG and don't want to move him around anymore. I think they realize that if they moved Pitts to LT it would make the interior of the line that much weaker.

TheOgre
08-18-2005, 10:29 AM
I still think they are just trying to patch the LT position until this next draft. I don't think it really mattered if it was Wand or Riley. I think they knew this would likely continue to be a problem area. The only real option they have had to fix that in this offseason was Pace, and we all know how that went. They weren't able to address the position, so they have to "make do" until 2006.

I expect our offense to be basically the same as last year with a bit more seasoning. I think our defense will improve, though, and that will be the difference in a 7-9 and a 9-7 record.

infantrycak
08-18-2005, 10:53 AM
I am not sure I've ever seen an explanation or whatnot, but why does the team insist on keeping Pitts away from the LT position?

People are letting time heal all wounds on Pitts at LT. Yes he was much better than in 2002 but realistically the bar was really low. Part of his improvement in 2003 came because he decided he would rather have penalties than sacks (he openly said he held on purpose to avoid sacks in an interview) and racked up 17 penalties (8 false starts & 7 holds included) along the way. Bottom line, at the end of 2003 there was no one around here thinking Pitts was the long term answer at LT. He can be an average LT, but Riley and Wand can be that, so why move him from LG where he may be a pro-bowl type player?

Runner
08-18-2005, 10:59 AM
I still think they are just trying to patch the LT position until this next draft. I don't think it really mattered if it was Wand or Riley. I think they knew this would likely continue to be a problem area. The only real option they have had to fix that in this offseason was Pace, and we all know how that went. They weren't able to address the position, so they have to "make do" until 2006.

I expect our offense to be basically the same as last year with a bit more seasoning. I think our defense will improve, though, and that will be the difference in a 7-9 and a 9-7 record.

They'll have to "patch it" for more than 1 year. Even if they get their franchise LT of choice in the draft, it is unlikely he would be an upgrade his first year. One of the more recent players touted as a franchise LT, Robert Gallery, will be playing for the Raiders at right tackle. It took him a while to crack the line-up, and then on the right side. It's hard to impact an NFL O-line your first year.

Marcus
08-18-2005, 11:11 AM
They'll have to "patch it" for more than 1 year. Even if they get their franchise LT of choice in the draft, it is unlikely he would be an upgrade his first year. One of the more recent players touted as a franchise LT, Robert Gallery, will be playing for the Raiders at right tackle. It took him a while to crack the line-up, and then on the right side. It's hard to impact an NFL O-line your first year.

That's what I've been trying to tell everybody. He'll be another rookie trying to learn the zone blocking scheme. Is that an upgrade? I think not.

nunusguy
08-18-2005, 11:40 AM
Bottom line, at the end of 2003 there was no one around here thinking Pitts was the long term answer at LT. He can be an average LT, but Riley and Wand can be that, so why move him from LG where he may be a pro-bowl type player?
I just can't buy that because I still remember how well Chester played against
Jason Taylor in the season opener in '03 - Chester was competitive and then some and his effort was a contributing factor for what may still be our biggest road win. Now Wand vs. Feeney last year, that wasn't competition that was embarrasing and there was some plays where I don't think Wand could have touched him, let alone blocked him. Chester is our best LT (no matter where they got him lining up), but for whaterver reason(s) doesn't
look like they are gonna move him out there.

Lucky
08-18-2005, 12:04 PM
So ummmm we draft rookies in the "year of the O-line" and place them in the starting role and expect the texans to make a run at the superbowl...
In '01, rookie LT Matt Light started 15 games for New England, including their Super Bowl victory over the Rams. Not as far-fetched as it seems. Of the 18 NFL starting LTs who were 1st round picks, 9 started at LT as rookies. It happens.

Corrosion
08-18-2005, 12:08 PM
CC and Dom on the O-line ...

CC: "Only 49 sacks last season ..... Its not that bad .

Dom: yeah , its better than the 72 we had in our first season and we have a tough QB .

CC: No need to upgrade the O-line this season , maybe we'll get someone in the second or third round in next years draft .

Dom: Yeah , sounds like a good idea lets go watch the grass grow .... errrr play some golf .


As much as i like what Travis Johnson brings to the Texans D i Really think the team would have been better served by taking Jammal Brown @ 13 instead . The Texans have been searching for a true LT since day one and its well beyond time they solidify the position because until they do the offense is not gonna reach its potential . Forget about play-offs until the O-line gets upgraded. :goodnight

threetoedpete
08-18-2005, 12:08 PM
People are letting time heal all wounds on Pitts at LT. Yes he was much better than in 2002 but realistically the bar was really low. Part of his improvement in 2003 came because he decided he would rather have penalties than sacks (he openly said he held on purpose to avoid sacks in an interview) and racked up 17 penalties (8 false starts & 7 holds included) along the way. Bottom line, at the end of 2003 there was no one around here thinking Pitts was the long term answer at LT. He can be an average LT, but Riley and Wand can be that, so why move him from LG where he may be a pro-bowl type player?

Great thread all:
My two cents worth is mearly the thought that the panick button was pushed shortly after our fab five was stuffed like grannies thanksgiving turkey against a good but not great Denver D line.
You'd figgure with four shots the blind hog would find the acorn. The waggle was open no doubt. Carr could of boot legged it in. The coaches wanted to know and they found out. With four shots at it, this group of O-lineman couldn't get it done. This is the point in time when you find out about guys. Somebody has to step up. This is a very bad 3-4 we are facing this week. They have guys outta postion and the just traded their best two players from last year. It will make a very good gauge as to where we are. Do the Texan s have that one guy they can hang there hats on in a short yardage situation ? And again I don't want to be a spoil sport, but those of you that have us sweeping Jacksonville again and splitting with the rest of the division are looking at it through rose colored glasses.In my heart I hope that happens. My head says if Buffallo's front seven rips us the first game, its's going to be a long time untill April. Buffalo has one of the better D line schemes in the league. The next worse thing is going to be if Riley stinks up the house at LT and we're back to square one. Wand goes back. There is a price to be paid when you go cheap on the O-line and things don't work out. If the second day guys come through you're a genius. If they don't, your redrafting a franchise QB. With a pool so deep next year there are a bunch of us who hope the franchise finally gets wet. Carr's wife & Moma sure would appreciate it. JMHO.

threetoedpete
08-18-2005, 12:37 PM
Wand is actually a pretty solid run blocker. It's his feet that are in question. He drive blocks well. Being tall he may have some leverage issues against shorter stockier inside technique guys though.

Not picking a fight here Vinny, and I stand to be corrected, but I thought one of the things that held Wand out of the first round was his lack of upper body strength ? Now he's had a couple of years in an NFL weight room I agree. But there is a different type of cat awaiting Mr. Wand on the inside verses the outside. I aggree with your statement. But the matrix has shifted. He's a great run blocker ..... at LT. Just as Babin is a great run defender at LB. Again I don't know for sure. The pudding will be out of the oven saturday night. Only hope Wand is not in it. We'll see. If we can't block Oakland's front seven, the season is in peril. Tennessee and Jacksonville has animals on the inside and they're hooooungry. JMHO.

Lucky
08-18-2005, 01:06 PM
...If we can't block Oakland's front seven, the season is in peril. Tennessee and Jacksonville has animals on the inside and they're hooooungry. JMHO.
Wiegert is out for a few games. Maybe the preseason plus opening day in Buffalo. I don't think the season is in peril.

Exascor
08-18-2005, 01:08 PM
that the panick button was pushed shortly after.....With four shots at it, this group of O-lineman couldn't get it done.Very poor example IMO. First off...I've seen quite a few awesome offenses get stuffed on 4 straight running plays at the goalline.

We'd been practicing against the Broncos all week. We ALWAYS ran when Smith was brought in to the offense. Weigart was injured. Carr said they only had 2 goal lines plays. They ran those 2 plays 4 times against a defense that knew what was coming. Odds are against you in that instance.

I see no reason to push the panic button after that series or any of the preseason for that matter.

infantrycak
08-18-2005, 01:35 PM
As much as i like what Travis Johnson brings to the Texans D i Really think the team would have been better served by taking Jammal Brown @ 13 instead . The Texans have been searching for a true LT since day one and its well beyond time they solidify the position because until they do the offense is not gonna reach its potential . Forget about play-offs until the O-line gets upgraded. :goodnight

So the solution to getting a true LT is to draft a guy scouts almost unanimously think will be a RT? Sounds like a plan--not a good one, but it's a plan.

threetoedpete
08-18-2005, 01:38 PM
Wiegert is out for a few games. Maybe the preseason plus opening day in Buffalo. I don't think the season is in peril.

The operative word is "high". Anyone who has had one KNOWS, Wiegert will be plaing hurt in All the games in '05. It will not heal untill March. He'll do it. But the more he plays on it the worse it will get. JFYI. Your back ups are now Fred Weary, the new guy and Wand. IMHO the season is in peril.

threetoedpete
08-18-2005, 01:48 PM
So the solution to getting a true LT is to draft a guy scouts almost unanimously think will be a RT? Sounds like a plan--not a good one, but it's a plan.

Agreed. We have not been in a position to draft a credible procpect at LT the last two drafts. To get one we would have had to sacrifice a lot of depeth. You'll see a good proscpect this weekend. Robert Gallery is supposed to be the next generation of NFL super left tackels. Guys will just have to step up this year. The '06 tallent pool is loaded. We should get well in a hurry. The team has addressed it's depth problems. They are only a couple of peices away, IMHO.

Malloy
08-18-2005, 02:14 PM
They're either geniuses or halfway to the asylum. I just don't know which one. :texflag:

I'm hoping geniuses :)

Lucky
08-18-2005, 03:16 PM
The operative word is "high". Anyone who has had one KNOWS, Wiegert will be plaing hurt in All the games in '05. It will not heal untill March...
Thanks, Doc.

Todd Wade had a high ankle sprain in '04, missing about 2 1/2 games. FYI.

TheOgre
08-18-2005, 03:28 PM
They'll have to "patch it" for more than 1 year. Even if they get their franchise LT of choice in the draft, it is unlikely he would be an upgrade his first year. One of the more recent players touted as a franchise LT, Robert Gallery, will be playing for the Raiders at right tackle. It took him a while to crack the line-up, and then on the right side. It's hard to impact an NFL O-line your first year.

That could possibly be the case, but there is no telling. This team might make the playoffs, but we probably won't make it far without at least an above average LT. I don't see that guy on our current roster. You have to way overpay for guys on the free agent market at LT. So where do we get this guy? In the draft.

Keep in mind that we didn't know how fast AJ, Dunte, or Carr would contribute either. Wide receiver is one of the hardest positions to learn in the NFL, yet AJ contributed almost immediately. Robinson struggled the early part of his rookie year, but came on to perform at Pro Bowl levels down the stretch. Carr struggled his first two years and just really started to show some skills last year. So which one will Bull LeftTackle end up being? Who knows? I'd rather see us take a calculated risk on one of those than to wait indefinitely for Wand to live up to his p-curseword.

SESupergenius
08-18-2005, 04:19 PM
We still don't have the LT position solidified, we still don't have a true #2 reciever, we still don't have an all- around TE. All that equals no trip to the playoffs. An d don't get me started on the changes to the defense.

TheOgre
08-18-2005, 05:04 PM
We still don't have the LT position solidified, we still don't have a true #2 reciever, we still don't have an all- around TE.

I agree with that assessment. I'd at least like to see us get our LT and TE in next year's draft. We at least of some potential #2 WR's on the roster, and at the very least a variety of #3 quality guys.

Defensively I have questions about Peek, Greenwood, and Buchanon, especially Peek. ROLB is a key position in the 3-4. If Peek can't get it done, who else can step in any time soon?

geofb
08-18-2005, 05:23 PM
That's what I've been trying to tell everybody. He'll be another rookie trying to learn the zone blocking scheme. Is that an upgrade? I think not.

So you are suggesting we bypass drafting an offensive lineman again next year?

rmartin65
08-18-2005, 05:36 PM
Defensively I have questions about Peek, Greenwood, and Buchanon, especially Peek. ROLB is a key position in the 3-4. If Peek can't get it done, who else can step in any time soon?

there is charlie anderson, there is kenneth pettway, and a couple others

SESupergenius
08-18-2005, 05:52 PM
I'll even add that when our scrubs are in there we never seem to beat their scrubs. What does that mean? No depth. If we have and injury we will miss a beat. Every positions is a pretty big drop off if someone gets hurt.

Marcus
08-18-2005, 06:01 PM
So you are suggesting we bypass drafting an offensive lineman again next year?

No, not at all. Go ahead and draft that stud lineman. If he pans out, then that position will be set for the next 10 years or so. But just don't count on him making a difference next year.

TheOgre
08-18-2005, 06:37 PM
No, not at all. Go ahead and draft that stud lineman. If he pans out, then that position will be set for the next 10 years or so. But just don't count on him making a difference next year.

That is fair. This "5-year plan" seems to be less and less likely. It might even turn into a 10-year plan with a new coach, GM, and QB by the time it is all said and done.

TexansTrueFan
08-18-2005, 09:16 PM
i dont think its a good thing when a player has played at all spots on the OL, kinda like players who jump team to team.

ATX
08-18-2005, 09:33 PM
Tony Boselli was part of the 5 year plan, but that didn't pan out. When they drafted Wand in the 3rd round, there was a chance Boselli would be back the next season, but it didn't happen. You can't really blame Casserly on this one. He picked the right guy, but the injury just never healed. We're all hoping the LTs available next year will end up being good choices, because there really haven't been any guys worth taking with out first round picks through the previous drafts. We could have had any OL last year, but chose not to and that should mean something like they weren't all that great and it would have been a stretch to take them where we had been on the draft board.

wrestler4life
08-18-2005, 10:35 PM
The minute we knew that Boselli was a no-go, we should have been working the phones. We waited way too long on this one!

ATX
08-18-2005, 11:46 PM
The minute we knew that Boselli was a no-go, we should have been working the phones. We waited way too long on this one!

That probably would have been a good idea.

beerlover
08-19-2005, 04:21 AM
It also could have been a stroke of genius

http://home.pages.at/plummer/Tony%20Boselli.jpg

ccdude730
08-19-2005, 05:27 AM
so that texan symbol looks pretty sweet ey? nice and shiny and such


.....yeah

TheOgre
08-19-2005, 10:43 AM
i dont think its a good thing when a player has played at all spots on the OL, kinda like players who jump team to team.

Yeah that didn't work to well for Bruce Matthews. :rolleyes: