PDA

View Full Version : No Offensive Line Changes


Runner
10-05-2005, 06:12 AM
Apparently the coaches are not going to change anything on the O-line this week, unless they change their minds in the next couple of days.

It is hard to believe that the tackles giving up the edge play after play is acceptable, especially to a coaching staff that preaches technique so much. The rushers got past the outside shoulders of our tackles often, and that is the type of thing film study points out. Losing the edge is a poor play even if Carr gets the pass off before the rusher can press his advantage or if an inside rusher gets the sack before the outside rusher gets there.

At some point all of the units on this team need to be held accountable for their play and the coaches need to quit the CYA on past decisions. If some players aren't getting the job done they need to try alternatives - as they've done at cornerback and linebacker.

bckey
10-05-2005, 06:24 AM
Remember, as many have pointed out on this bb that these guys just need time to gel. :rolleyes:

Runner
10-05-2005, 06:26 AM
I think we are just waiting to play a bad enough team so we can say "only 3 sacks, what an improvement!"

Vinny
10-05-2005, 06:28 AM
The time to change is in the off-season. Other than signing another scrub or abducting a decent lineman from a NFL team we are what we are at this point.

Texans Horror
10-05-2005, 06:30 AM
I think we are just waiting to play a bad enough team so we can say "only 3 sacks, what an improvement!"

That would be this week against Tennessee at Reliant...

TheOgre
10-05-2005, 06:37 AM
Signing Ross Verba could help immediately, but I think we could do far better long-term addressing the issue in the offseason. There are several top-notch LT's that we will be able to draft even if we rip off some wins.

I still think we are going to end up with more of a mediocre record, rather than a horrible one though. Remember we still have Tennessee twice, San Francisco, Cleveland, Arizona, and the Rams on our schedule. We have beaten the Jags at least once every year, and we have seven home games left.

Runner
10-05-2005, 06:44 AM
I don't know about Verba. The Chiefs and Patriots (and I think one other team) have already lost their starting LTs with serious injuries, and Verba is still unemployed. It may be that many teams know something about him that keep him on in the unemployment line. Probably his cost/performance ratio. The Patriots rookie back-up has looked pretty bad too, so you'd think they'd be looking at alternatives.

Bongo59
10-05-2005, 06:47 AM
That would be this week against Tennessee at Reliant................Considering we have the leading sacker in the league..........Doubtful..........I think Carr is in for another long day............with alot of blitzing as well..............

Coach C.
10-05-2005, 06:52 AM
First Carr is second in sacks to Culpepper with 21. Next Verba mouth has led to the one thing he did not want and that was for people to study film on him. He is nothing more than a smaller Wade who for the most part can be a decent starter in this league and not nearly worth the money he wants except for a lower rung team that will overpay him. We have the players to make a decent line, but we have them in the wrong spots. Riley is not a LT and we are kidding ourselves thinking he is. He is a RG or RT mauler type of blocker that cannot sustain blocks. Weigert would be better suited at LG due to his ability to pick up on blitz-schemes. Pitts is our best option at LT due to his speed and athleticism, but he cannot seem to keep focus all game.
Pitts, Weigert, McKinney, Riley, Wade. Would provide a line that is adequate instead of abismal. We would still need a legitimate LT, but we put guys in a position to succeed.

MorKnolle
10-05-2005, 06:59 AM
Verba is a decent lineman but he is wanting too much money. As some of you have pointed out, there is a reason that he is still unemployed with so many teams needing linemen to fill in for injured players. Anyone that is still unemployed four weeks into the season is unemployed for a reason. I agree with Coach C. that we should shift our guys around a little and give them a better chance to succeed.

Vinny
10-05-2005, 07:03 AM
.............Considering we have the leading sacker in the league..........Doubtful..........I think Carr is in for another long day............with alot of blitzing as well..............I wonder if Texans84 is still laughing about you guys signing Kyle Vanden Bosch? Doesn't look so humorus now does it 84?

Texans Horror
10-05-2005, 08:00 AM
.............Considering we have the leading sacker in the league..........Doubtful..........I think Carr is in for another long day............with alot of blitzing as well..............

I'm just stating that we have a better chance playing Tennessee at home than we ever did playing the buffs, steelers, or bengals. And looking at our schedule, it might be one of our best chances to win this season.

Exascor
10-05-2005, 08:04 AM
First Carr is second in sacks to Culpepper with 21.First: Carr is first in the league in sacks per game with 6.67 per game. Culpepper is 2nd with 5.25. That's a sack and a half more per game. No need to sugar coat it.
Second: I doubt you knew that Bongo is a Titans fan. You probably thought he was a Texans fan and was refering to Carr instead of Vanden Bosch. Not really a big deal though. :hmmm:

Mr Shush
10-05-2005, 08:12 AM
I'm not sure that the Titans will represent an easier prospect than the Bengals in terms of protecting Carr. The Bengals had been poor in terms of sack rate before they played us, so unless you think the reduction in coverage sacks will balance out the increase in other varieties I would expect matters to get worse, not better, in that department. Our defense, on the other hand, should have a rather easier time of it than in the first three games.

Texans Horror
10-05-2005, 08:33 AM
Good points.

Meloy
10-05-2005, 08:46 AM
Seth Wand is looking better & better to me especially as we have no other choice. Let me see if I have this right, we can use a left tackle, tight end and full back basically to protect Carr from the other teams right end. Oh man, we suck!

Coach C.
10-05-2005, 08:48 AM
Seth Wand would be a nice G or RT he is just not fluid enough to play LT. Unfortunately we have alot of money wrapped up in WAde and Weigert, even though Weigert would make a better LG. Our tightends hurt us because they are not a threat at all. Plus our fullback is nothing more than a good leadblocker and shortyardage threat.

OzzO
10-05-2005, 10:00 AM
.............Considering we have the leading sacker in the league..........Doubtful..........I think Carr is in for another long day............with alot of blitzing as well..............


No...... actually...... you... don't (http://www.nfl.com/stats/leaders/NFL/SCKS/2005/regular)

SF is beating ya by one sack. :) Just busting ya rocks, Bongo - don't sweat it.

beerlover
10-05-2005, 10:15 AM
the coaches specifily Pendry I'm sure are focused on who deserves to start at each position on this line. if Carr can gain some confidence that the pocket will be pushed to the backside he should be able to use his footwork to move up in the pocket out of harms way keeping focus downfield. to solve the middle blitz packages, Norris should become more of a feature in the offensive set along with DD.

HardKnockTexan
10-05-2005, 10:27 AM
Seth Wand would be a nice G or RT he is just not fluid enough to play LT. Unfortunately we have alot of money wrapped up in WAde and Weigert, even though Weigert would make a better LG. Our tightends hurt us because they are not a threat at all. Plus our fullback is nothing more than a good leadblocker and shortyardage threat.

Moran Norris is a decent reciever too. He did score our only touchdown last week, even though it was short yardage. He did leap over a linebacker to get into the endzone though. We rarley seem to pass when we have a fulback in the game.

Runner
10-05-2005, 10:28 AM
the coaches specifily Pendry I'm sure are focused on who deserves to start at each position on this line.

I'm sure Palmer was also focused on an offense that would score enough points to win. Sadly, he failed. Just as sadly, such failure is being accepted for the o-line now. There are players playing bad enough that they deserve to be benched. Coaches can have tunnel vision, blind spots, and favorites just like other human beings.

When coaches grade OTs, it is a bad mark when a rusher gets around their outside shoulder or "takes their edge". That was happening very frequently last game. Even if it doesn't lead to a negative play each time it happens, it does lead to pressure, hurries, and can limit your play calling options. For instance, if your tackle is being beaten on the edge on most plays, you certainly shouldn't call a roll out or a reverse back to his side - odds are the ball carrier will be splattered all over the field for a big loss if you do.

HardKnockTexan
10-05-2005, 10:30 AM
I'm sure Palmer was also focused on an offense that would score enough points to win. Sadly, he failed. Just as sadly, such failure is being accepted for the o-line now. There are players playing bad enough that they deserve to be benched. Coaches can have tunnel vision, blind spots, and favorites just like other human beings.I agree that a lot of our offensive linemen are playing bad enough to be benched... but who would replace them?? If these are the best we have to play with, imagine how bad our second string players would perform... :brickwall

Texans Horror
10-05-2005, 10:35 AM
I know this is hard to understand from a business perspective, but just because you are paying big bucks to somebody doesn't mean you have to play them. The line as it exists is ineffective. It can be fixed by adding Wand to left or right tackle (i don't care which) and shifting the other linemen. Personally, I would rather McKinney get bumped and the others shifted, but I think that Wand was a much better LT when he was learning the position than Riley is now.

HardKnockTexan
10-05-2005, 10:40 AM
Our team gave up the fewest amount of sacks in year 2 when Pitts was playing left tackle. I dont understand why we dont give him a shot at the tackle spot again. :brickwall
We could move Pitts to left tackle, Weigert to Left guard, Todd Wade to right guard and Victor Riley over to right tackle. Giving us Pitts, Weigert, McKinney, Wade, Riley.
This lineup cant do any worse.

Runner
10-05-2005, 10:42 AM
I agree that a lot of our offensive linemen are playing bad enough to be benched... but who would replace them?? If these are the best we have to play with, imagine how bad our second string players would perform... :brickwall

We won't know until we play them. "On paper" Buchanon and Babin would still be playing. These O-lineman should fear being benched. They shouldn't assume they play because they show up.

IMO, Wand is better than Riley. Wand's stats from last year bear this out when compared with Riley's projected stats for this year. (yes, I know they are only projections, but it is what we have to work with). They didn't line the TE up next to Wand last year as much as they do for Riley, either.

Texans Horror
10-05-2005, 10:42 AM
Our team gave up the fewest amount of sacks in year 2 when Pitts was playing left tackle. I dont understand why we dont give him a shot at the tackle spot again. :brickwall
We could move Pitts to left tackle, Weigert to Left guard, Todd Wade to right guard and Victor Riley over to right tackle. Giving us Pitts, Weigert, McKinney, Wade, Riley.
This lineup cant do any worse.

I agree with you in that the way things are has got to change. That has to be the top priority with the coaches, but unfortunately, everything is status quo right now.

Runner
10-05-2005, 10:48 AM
Our team gave up the fewest amount of sacks in year 2 when Pitts was playing left tackle. I dont understand why we dont give him a shot at the tackle spot again. :brickwall
We could move Pitts to left tackle, Weigert to Left guard, Todd Wade to right guard and Victor Riley over to right tackle. Giving us Pitts, Weigert, McKinney, Wade, Riley.
This lineup cant do any worse.

But why do the same 5 starters have to start? Why are they ordained as "The Five Who Play".

As an aside, Wade is probably too tall for guard - the shorter, heavier interior lineman types would get under his pads to easily. He's built to be a tackle, as is Wand.

HardKnockTexan
10-05-2005, 10:55 AM
Here's a list of our offensive linemen:
Victor Riley, Seth Wand, Steve McKinney, Todd Washington, Drew Hogdon, Chester Pitts, Fred Weary, Zack Wiegert, Milford Brown and Todd Wade.

Sadley enough, our starting 5 are the best that we have to work with. Todd Washington is decent. Todd Wade has proven nothing to me. I havent seen Drew Hogdon play. Fred Weary and Milford Brown are at best practice squad players for any other team.

Texans Horror
10-05-2005, 11:11 AM
All I know is what I have seen during the games, and as I have always said, I have yet to see a reason for the Texans to replace Wand. He got burned by one guy last season. If the rest of the team had that kind of stat, then we would be in the AFC championship.

Runner
10-05-2005, 11:15 AM
Here's a list of our offensive linemen:
Victor Riley, Seth Wand, Steve McKinney, Todd Washington, Drew Hogdon, Chester Pitts, Fred Weary, Zack Wiegert, Milford Brown and Todd Wade.

Sadley enough, our starting 5 are the best that we have to work with. Todd Washington is decent. Todd Wade has proven nothing to me. I havent seen Drew Hogdon play. Fred Weary and Milford Brown are at best practice squad players for any other team.

Riley is on pace to give up (slightly) more sacks and have 4 times the penalties as Wand last year. I believe we are rushing for fewer yards per carry to the left this year too, but that may have changed last game. Our starting 5 are not the best we have to work with.

It appears we'll have to agree to disagree on this one or post ad nauseum, so please take the opportunity to have last word and then I'm going to move on.

Cheers.