PDA

View Full Version : Current O-Line Stats Breakdown


TEXANS84
10-11-2005, 07:45 PM
Here are the most current offensive line stats per snap.stats:

*LT Victor Riley-
2 false starts
0 holding penalties
6.50 sacks allowed Stats (http://snap.stats.com/snap/pfw/nfl/playerstats.asp?id=4289&Submit=Go)

*LG Chester Pitts-
0 false starts
0 holding penalties
2.50 sacks allowed Stats (http://snap.stats.com/snap/pfw/nfl/playerstats.asp?id=5936&Submit=Go)

*C Steve McKinney-
0 false starts
0 holding penalties
2.50 sacks allowed Stats (http://snap.stats.com/snap/pfw/nfl/playerstats.asp?id=4325&Submit=Go)

*RG Zach Weigert-
0 false starts
0 holding penalties
.5 sacks allowed
Stats (http://snap.stats.com/snap/pfw/nfl/playerstats.asp?id=3157&Submit=Go)

*RT Todd Wade-
2 false starts
1 holding penalties
5.00 sacks allowed
Stats (http://snap.stats.com/snap/pfw/nfl/playerstats.asp?id=5082&Submit=Go)


Unfortunatley, stats of sacks allowed for runningbacks/fullbacks/and tight ends were not available, but the list does add up to 17.0 sacks for the offensive line. So that leaves a difference of 10 sacks to split between them and David Carr.

Is the offensive line really the problem?

Hervoyel
10-11-2005, 08:00 PM
Well, I think you're asking the wrong question really. You're asking if the offensive line is really the problem which kind of implies that there's "a" problem. That's not really saying it all though. There's more than one problem.

In 4 games the offensive line has given up 14.5 sacks which puts them on a 58 sack pace even if everyone else who's supposed to be blocking (or getting rid of the ball in a reasonable amount of time) is perfect. 58 sacks tells me that yeah, the offensive line is "a" problem.

David Carr and the runningbacks have given up 12.5 which comes out to 50 sacks this year. Even if the line didn't allow a single sack I'm thinking 50 is too high. This is another problem.

Going back and forth over who sucks more, the line or the QB/RB's is pointless. They all suck and right now they almost all suck about the same amount.

Kaiser Toro
10-11-2005, 08:13 PM
Nice work Texans84, appreciate the breakdown.

Hervoyel
10-11-2005, 08:23 PM
Nice work Texans84, appreciate the breakdown.

Ditto. I should have mentioned that as well.

keyfro
10-11-2005, 08:25 PM
think about it this way...any solid playoff calibur team only gives up on average around 25-30 sacks a season and almost doubles that defensively...that's where we are 24 sacks in the negative...that will not win any football games in the NFL

TEXANS84
10-11-2005, 08:32 PM
I'm a tad bit shocked that Weigert is the sack leader of the line at the moment. I am also shocked at the play of McKinney and Pitts.

Kaiser Toro
10-11-2005, 08:35 PM
I'm a tad bit shocked that Weigert is the sack leader of the line at the moment. I am also shocked at the play of McKinney and Pitts.

I am as well. Where did you get the breakdown? What is the methodology, as in how does one get credit for a sack?

Sorry for the directness, just interested.

blockhead83
10-11-2005, 08:42 PM
I think when McKinney decided to double the tackle instead of blocking Bullock's direct path to David Carr, he should be attributed with 1 full sack :)

Runner
10-11-2005, 08:53 PM
I think when McKinney decided to double the tackle instead of blocking Bullock's direct path to David Carr, he should be attributed with 1 full sack :)

This is the danger of us fans "grading tape". We think we know what we see, but we don't know a lot of the nitty-gritty details. I'm not one to defend McKinney, but on that play we don't know what the line calls were, so we don't know who was supposed to do what. It is possible that the line was supposed to move left and that was really Weigert's guy, or maybe there was supposed to be a hot read and Carr was supposed to throw the ball, or maybe it was the running back's guy - we just don't know.

These stats don't show hurries and stuff though, or pressures that result in short runs by Carr or incomplete passes. It doesn't show performance in run blocking either.

I guess the lesson is we fans really need to recognize the limits of our knowledge.

It does appear that our tackles are not playing well at all.

Thanks for posting these stats, I did a short search for something like this but couldn't find them.

powda
10-11-2005, 08:54 PM
alright...lets get more specific.

d-linemen vs blitzers. (lb's, safetys, and corners...)

the line shifts constantly to pick up blitzers. im sure these stats are black and white. rg put a hand on----? blitzing mlb so he gets credit for giving up the sack...

this is not a black and white stat. there is a vast gray area here.

and who calls the blocking assignments? mckinney. thats been one constant since day 1. even if you think he's been much better this year then in previous years his "cerebral responsibilities" deserve some blame. obviously what we're doing isnt working.

anywho---to get back on track...how bout a break down of d-linemen sacks vs other sacks against our line...?

infantrycak
10-11-2005, 08:58 PM
Wiegert has .5 sacks this year and 5.0 sacks last year.

Stats, Inc. generally has an explanation section for how they derive their stats. I believe they attribute sacks to the last player with the responsibility to prevent the sack which often drives stats to the RB's/TE's. These stats are much more useful for comparing team to team and around the league than for individual performance game to game. They naturally pile on the tackles when the center collapses and the QB has no room to step up, the tackle can't ride the DE around the play and gets full credit for the sack. Eyeballs on the tape is still most important to know if that is the problem or as in Houston, if there is pressure in the middle (a center wearing a grass skirt welcoming players to the luau), from the left (a LT who looks like the victim of a mob hit in his cement shoes) and from the right (where the Texans have the only 6' 8" matador in history) and a QB running for his life screaming like a woman.

Wanna guess how hard a team will try to protect a $100 mil QB--Manning has been sacked 1 time this year in 5 games. How about being the only loser on that OL to have given up a sack?

mean mark8
10-11-2005, 09:01 PM
Here are the most current offensive line stats per snap.stats:

*LT Victor Riley-
2 false starts
0 holding penalties
4.50 sacks allowed Stats (http://snap.stats.com/snap/pfw/nfl/playerstats.asp?id=4289&Submit=Go)


Did anyone else click this hyperlink to see that Riley allowed 11 sacks last year playing for New Orleans as a "Right Tackle?" Yeah, he's our answer to play left tackle. :wacko:

Runner
10-11-2005, 09:02 PM
and who calls the blocking assignments? mckinney. thats been one constant since day 1. even if you think he's been much better this year then in previous years his "cerebral responsibilities" deserve some blame. obviously what we're doing isnt working.

This assumes that in the seconds between McKinney's calls and the snap everyone on the line correctly decides what they have to do and then does the right thing.

powda
10-11-2005, 09:13 PM
This assumes that in the seconds between McKinney's calls and the snap everyone on the line correctly decides what they have to do and then does the right thing.


they dont decide. mckinney does.

even a space monkey can be trained to push the red button vs the blue button with the proper prompts. i'd like to hope i can give our line that much credit....

Runner
10-11-2005, 09:21 PM
they dont decide. mckinney does.

even a space monkey can be trained to push the red button vs the blue button with the proper prompts. i'd like to hope i can give our line that much credit....

By "decide" I mean after McKinney makes a call they look and "decide" who they are responsible for given the call and the defensive set.

I'd hope they could do that too, but the defense is also trying to fool them by moving around, showing fake blitzes, disguising blitzes and such.

The line has problems, and I'm trying to point out some (maybe) non-obvious things for discussion. Not all threads have to follow the normal structure of:

Joe sucks.

No Bill sucks.

They both suck.

Fire them all!

Hervoyel
10-11-2005, 09:24 PM
By "decide" I mean after McKinney makes a call they look and "decide" who they are responsible for given the call and the defensive set.

I'd hope they could do that too, but the defense is also trying to fool them by moving around, showing fake blitzes, disguising blitzes and such.

The line has problems, and I'm trying to point out some (maybe) non-obvious things for discussion. Not all threads have to follow the normal structure of:

Joe sucks.

No Bill sucks.

They both suck.

Fire them all!

Dom Sucks!


:heh:

Runner
10-11-2005, 09:25 PM
Well said.

powda
10-11-2005, 09:26 PM
i agree to. we have a consensus.

Runner
10-11-2005, 09:27 PM
Fire them all.

Hervoyel
10-11-2005, 09:30 PM
That wasn't so hard was it? Felt good too.

Kaiser Toro
10-11-2005, 09:30 PM
Harumph!

Runner
10-11-2005, 09:31 PM
That wasn't so hard was it? Felt good too.

Dammn - you guys trapped me!

Vinny
10-11-2005, 11:37 PM
I think its a nice thought...but you cant grade out linemen with stats. There are just too many variables, you lose the physical dynamic, and there are too many factors that go into good lineplay that you cannot see with a list of numbers that may hinge on the play call, the protection call or the lack of help a guy was supposed to get but may not have gotten.

Ibar_Harry
10-11-2005, 11:45 PM
they dont decide. mckinney does.

even a space monkey can be trained to push the red button vs the blue button with the proper prompts. i'd like to hope i can give our line that much credit....

Yea, but McKinney's problem was he thought it was pink and green. No wonder he couldn't get them to push the right buttons.

outofhnd
10-11-2005, 11:54 PM
Id like to hear Dom's response to that play if someone could like post a transcript or the valuable information in a non biased format i would appreciate reading it tomorrow. Robert paulsons in the Fire Capers Club need not apply

TEXANS84
10-12-2005, 06:43 AM
Wiegert has .5 sacks this year and 5.0 sacks last year.


Good catch. I adjusted the stats on the first post to reflect.

O-line is now credited with 10 sacks, instead of 14.5. 17 remain with the runningbacks/fullbacks/tight ends/ and quarterback.

And the main point of this post was to wonder where the remaining 17 sacks are being credited to. Sure, we can beat up Victor Riley all day long, but is Domanick making his neccessary blocks? Did Moran Norris let the blitzing linebacker run right by him? Or is David Carr pretty much sacking himself?

HJam72
10-12-2005, 07:00 AM
I think its a nice thought...but you cant grade out linemen with stats. There are just too many variables, you lose the physical dynamic, and there are too many factors that go into good lineplay that you cannot see with a list of numbers that may hinge on the play call, the protection call or the lack of help a guy was supposed to get but may not have gotten.

I agree. They all suck.

Vinny
10-12-2005, 07:05 AM
And the main point of this post was to wonder where the remaining 17 sacks are being credited to. Sure, we can beat up Victor Riley all day long, but is Domanick making his neccessary blocks? Did Moran Norris let the blitzing linebacker run right by him? Or is David Carr pretty much sacking himself?I think that is good to bring to the table for general purposes...I'm just referring to everyone else making too much out of them in relation to how good X player is or Y player is, and isn't always a good reflection of who is doing a great job and who isn't....hard to use the word great in that sentence though.

TEXANS84
10-12-2005, 07:15 AM
I think when McKinney decided to double the tackle instead of blocking Bullock's direct path to David Carr, he should be attributed with 1 full sack :)

The stats just updated, and I changed them on the very first post.


McKinney is now credited with 2.50 sacks, a jump in two from yesterday.


Riley is still leading the team with 6.50.

Offensive line adds up to 17 combined sacks now, with 10 sacks un-credited.

nunusguy
10-12-2005, 07:15 AM
I'm a tad bit shocked that Weigert is the sack leader of the line at the moment. I am also shocked at the play of McKinney and Pitts.
The brunt of the pressure comes off the edge(s) and the best pass rushers
play on the edge (DE & OLB)., therefor to start with/all other things being = you'd expect the O tackles to have higher sack numbers than guards & center .

infantrycak
10-12-2005, 07:50 AM
Riley is still leading the team with 6.50.


So for what it is worth, it now stands at:

Riley--6.5
Pitts--2.5
McKinney--2.5
Wiegert--.5
Wade--5

Riley is on pace for 26 sacks this year. Obviously he shouldn't stand any competition from someone who gave up 12.5 sacks last year. Amazing that these coaches feel Riley is clearly, undisputably one of the best 5 OLmen.

jagsfanincanada
10-12-2005, 07:56 AM
Here are the most current offensive line stats per snap.stats:

*LT Victor Riley-
2 false starts
0 holding penalties
6.50 sacks allowed Stats (http://snap.stats.com/snap/pfw/nfl/playerstats.asp?id=4289&Submit=Go)

*LG Chester Pitts-
0 false starts
0 holding penalties
2.50 sacks allowed Stats (http://snap.stats.com/snap/pfw/nfl/playerstats.asp?id=5936&Submit=Go)

*C Steve McKinney-
0 false starts
0 holding penalties
2.50 sacks allowed Stats (http://snap.stats.com/snap/pfw/nfl/playerstats.asp?id=4325&Submit=Go)

*RG Zach Weigert-
0 false starts
0 holding penalties
.5 sacks allowed
Stats (http://snap.stats.com/snap/pfw/nfl/playerstats.asp?id=3157&Submit=Go)

*RT Todd Wade-
2 false starts
1 holding penalties
5.00 sacks allowed
Stats (http://snap.stats.com/snap/pfw/nfl/playerstats.asp?id=5082&Submit=Go)


Unfortunatley, stats of sacks allowed for runningbacks/fullbacks/and tight ends were not available, but the list does add up to 17.0 sacks for the offensive line. So that leaves a difference of 10 sacks to split between them and David Carr.

Is the offensive line really the problem?

17 sacks in 4 games is still pretty horrible. That's 68 sacks over the course of a year.

Exascor
10-12-2005, 07:57 AM
A little late but thanks for the post Texans84. Nice job.

Runner
10-12-2005, 08:07 AM
So for what it is worth, it now stands at:

Riley--6.5
Pitts--2.5
McKinney--2.5
Wiegert--.5
Wade--5

Riley is on pace for 26 sacks this year. Obviously he shouldn't stand any competition from someone who gave up 12.5 sacks last year. Amazing that these coaches feel Riley is clearly, undisputably one of the best 5 OLmen.

Projections: Pitts and McKinney - both 10. Wade - 20. Weigert - 2

Thank god for Weigert or this line would look bad!

It'll be interesting to see if Pitts' numbers go up in the harder position of LT.

That 12.5 last year looks pretty good.

the wonger need food
10-12-2005, 08:09 AM
Projections: Pitts and McKinney - both 10. Wade - 20. Weigert - 2

Thank god for Weigert or this line would look bad!

It'll be interesting to see if Pitts' numbers go up in the harder position of LT.

That 12.5 last year looks pretty good.

It's a sad state of affairs when we would be happy with 1 player giving up as many sacks as the entire Colts offense last season.

eriadoc
10-12-2005, 08:09 AM
Well, I think you're asking the wrong question really. You're asking if the offensive line is really the problem which kind of implies that there's "a" problem. That's not really saying it all though. There's more than one problem.

In 4 games the offensive line has given up 14.5 sacks which puts them on a 58 sack pace even if everyone else who's supposed to be blocking (or getting rid of the ball in a reasonable amount of time) is perfect. 58 sacks tells me that yeah, the offensive line is "a" problem.

David Carr and the runningbacks have given up 12.5 which comes out to 50 sacks this year. Even if the line didn't allow a single sack I'm thinking 50 is too high. This is another problem.

Going back and forth over who sucks more, the line or the QB/RB's is pointless. They all suck and right now they almost all suck about the same amount.

I might be misreading something, but it appears to me your calculations are slightly off. Your point remains valid, so it really doesn't matter. 17 sacks at the quarter mark is 68 on the year - entirely too many allowed by the O-line. the 10 remaining is 40 on the year - entirely too many. How many of those 40 are on Carr and how many are on the backs? Another question that I don't know the answer to -- how do they grade out sacks for blitzers when there is no one there to pick it up?

Anyway, it's all just fodder for conversation, because they are all falling down on the job.

TEXANS84
10-12-2005, 08:10 AM
It'll be interesting to see if Pitts' numbers go up in the harder position of LT.


Although Chester had a horrible first year at LT with over 15 sacks credited to him, 2003 was extremely better from that position with only 5.75 surrendered. That's a drop in over 9.25 sacks.

Hopefully he pans out.

infantrycak
10-12-2005, 08:12 AM
Pitts' number is almost undoubtedly higher than it would be if a decent or even semi-decent *cough* 12.5 sack Wand *cough* LT was next to him instead of the human turnstyle. Actually the human turnstyle isn't really accurate for Riley--he can't get spun very fast because his moment of inertia is too high with his big belly and heaving man breasts--swinging door works better for him.

Runner
10-12-2005, 08:16 AM
Pitts' number is almost undoubtedly higher than it would be if a decent or even semi-decent *cough* 12.5 sack Wand *cough* LT was next to him instead of the human turnstyle. Actually the human turnstyle isn't really accurate for Riley--he can't get spun very fast because his moment of inertia is too high with his big belly and heaving man breasts--swinging door works better for him.

"moment of inertia" - Nice!

Although Chester had a horrible first year at LT with over 15 sacks credited to him, 2003 was extremely better from that position with only 5.75 surrendered. That's a drop in over 9.25 sacks.

Hopefully he pans out.

But he is already on pace for 10 this year at the LG position. That is the number I'm afraid will go up.

By the way, that 1st to 2nd year drop is one reason Wand should have been given a chance.

Texans Horror
10-12-2005, 08:21 AM
Projections: Pitts and McKinney - both 10. Wade - 20. Weigert - 2

Thank god for Weigert or this line would look bad!

It'll be interesting to see if Pitts' numbers go up in the harder position of LT.

That 12.5 last year looks pretty good.

Seeing as Wand's 12.5 included 2 games of going one on one against Freeney, I'll take them over what these other guys are doing.

edo783
10-12-2005, 08:25 AM
By the way, that 1st to 2nd year drop is one reason Wand should have been given a chance.

I am very confused on the Wand thing. Something isn't right in rivercity because Riley isn't better and Wand would be in only his second year as a LT and good improvement could be expected.

TEXANS84
10-12-2005, 10:03 AM
From HoustonTexans.com:

For now, Chester Pitts will move from left guard out to left tackle, where he started 32 games for Houston from 2002-03. Center Steve McKinney will also move slightly left to an old position, shifting to left guard, the position he played in Indianapolis from 1998-2001.

Zach Wiegert stays put at right guard, but Victor Riley will shift from left tackle to right tackle, where he had made all of his previous 85 career starts before this season. He’ll share snaps with Todd Wade, who has started at right tackle in all four games this season.

I can't understand our coaching staff. I have no idea what their obsession is with Victor Riley(other than run-blocking). As someone pointed out earlier, Victor Riley last year with the New Orleans Saints at the Right Tackle position gave up 11.00 sacks from that position.

nunusguy
10-12-2005, 10:15 AM
I am very confused on the Wand thing. Something isn't right in rivercity because Riley isn't better and Wand would be in only his second year as a LT and good improvement could be expected.
Me to Edo. And Wand's name is unmentioned in current OL personnel discussions. But he, Riley, and his position was one of the most actively
discussed topics by everyone (including Texans management & coaches),
prior to start of the season. Now with the shakeup, its only logical that
his name should reenter the discussion by the Texans. I think some people are being muzzled. Maybe our local ace reporter J.McClain, scooped by ESPN on the initial OL story this week, can unearth the story because I'm sure there's a story here.

infantrycak
10-12-2005, 10:28 AM
So that leaves a difference of 10 sacks to split between them and David Carr.

Is the offensive line really the problem?

According to the full play by play at NFL.com, Carr has been responsible for 3 of the 10 non-OL sacks this year due to running out of bounds. So that leaves 7 to the RB's and TE's.

TEXANS84
10-12-2005, 10:50 AM
According to the full play by play at NFL.com, Carr has been responsible for 3 of the 10 non-OL sacks this year due to running out of bounds. So that leaves 7 to the RB's and TE's.

Thanks. That was one of the main concerns that I've been wondering.

Vinny
10-12-2005, 10:57 AM
According to the full play by play at NFL.com, Carr has been responsible for 3 of the 10 non-OL sacks this year due to running out of bounds. So that leaves 7 to the RB's and TE's.Who gets the one on the fumble/non-fumble-fumble. That ended up recorded as a sack too I believe.

Vinny
10-12-2005, 10:59 AM
Im sure Wade gets it after thinking about that...but that play was ruled a sack/fumble I think.

jagsfanincanada
10-12-2005, 11:01 AM
Although Chester had a horrible first year at LT with over 15 sacks credited to him, 2003 was extremely better from that position with only 5.75 surrendered. That's a drop in over 9.25 sacks.

Hopefully he pans out.

But overall in 2003 your line didn't play bad. Wasn't Carr sacked on 15 times after 76 in 2002? Then last year they regressed and he was sacked 49 times I believe.

TEXANS84
10-12-2005, 11:03 AM
But overall in 2003 your line didn't play bad. Wasn't Carr sacked on 15 times after 76 in 2002? Then last year they regressed and he was sacked 49 times I believe.


We switched to zone-blocking in 2004, and things changed.

infantrycak
10-12-2005, 11:04 AM
Im sure Wade gets it after thinking about that...but that play was ruled a sack/fumble I think.

That one was on Wade.

I should add, of the three out of bounds sacks, two were credited as zero yards sacks so if you want to give DC benefit of the doubt he may have thought he had made it to the line of scrimmage or from a don't want to give him the benefit of the doubt, a little more effort would have turned it into a positive play rather than a sack. As usual I will sit on the fence and say both are true from my general recollection. I particularly remember him arguing the spot on one and he has had several opportunities as he runs toward the sideline to plant a foot, turn up field and get extra yardage although he will definitely get hit if he does it--on 3rd down, that is still his job IMO.

Runner
10-12-2005, 11:05 AM
But overall in 2003 your line didn't play bad. Wasn't Carr sacked on 15 times after 76 in 2002? Then last year they regressed and he was sacked 49 times I believe.

I can't recall - was that when Carr was hurt for a few games? What were total QB sacks?

TEXANS84
10-12-2005, 11:09 AM
I can't recall - was that when Carr was hurt for a few games? What were total QB sacks?

2002-76 sacks
2003-36 sacks
2004-49 sacks
2005-27+...on pace for 108

2003 had Todd Washington in the lineup at left guard.

infantrycak
10-12-2005, 11:09 AM
I can't recall - was that when Carr wsa hurt for a few games? What were total QB sacks?

Yes. The total sacks for Carr/Banks/Ragone was 36. Other than in the context of the total joke that is now our pass protection I would say that while 36 was a huge improvement that year it did not fully reflect all the pressure on the QB which was still above NFL average and was at a cost of quite a few penalties. Right now it still looks freakin' good. Vinny correctly identified Carr's propensity to run out of bounds in 2002--in 2003 Carr almost entirely corrected that. It has snuck back into his repertoire, but in a lessor fashion--he used to run out 5+ yds behing the line of scrimmage, now it is 0 and 1.

Coach C.
10-12-2005, 11:11 AM
I think when McKinney decided to double the tackle instead of blocking Bullock's direct path to David Carr, he should be attributed with 1 full sack :)

By the way that was not McKinney's block. If you look at the scheme that we were going with on that pass it was Weigert's block. They likely split it in half, which is a little unfair to McKinney.

SESupergenius
10-12-2005, 11:16 AM
I was just going to point out Carr and his sacks, but Infantry beat me to it. I've stated this before but it's no big deal for Carr to get a sack when he runs out of bounds either at or right before the scrimmage line, the result is the same, it's a minimal loss, not like a sack where the defender gets into the pocket. DD needs to step up his pass protection and assignments. If McKinney was supposed to to double with the LG then DD needed to pick up that blitzer.

Dubya
10-12-2005, 11:22 AM
2005-27+...on pace for 108


If our QB gets sacked 108 times this year, we'll have provided material for sportswriters and late-night comedians FOREVER. Pretty soon, there'll be jokes about how the Texans O-Line surrenders faster and easier than the French.

Exascor
10-12-2005, 11:58 AM
If our QB gets sacked 108 times this year, we'll have provided material for sportswriters and late-night comedians FOREVER. Pretty soon, there'll be jokes about how the Texans O-Line surrenders faster and easier than the French.Or ESPN spots that show Carr playing without an o-line. Oh wait! That's already been done!

BigBull17
10-12-2005, 12:03 PM
I think we should switch to a 1 man line. Have a center snap the ball and use 8 WR, DD and Carr. Cant get worse protection than we have already.

TEXANS84
11-02-2005, 04:20 PM
Current updated stats:

LT Chester Pitts:
7 games
0 false starts
2.75 sacks allowed
1 holding

LG Steve McKinney
7 games
1 false starts
4.25 sacks allowed
0 holding

C Drew Hodgdon
3 games (2 GS)
0 false starts
0.50 sacks allowed
2 holding

RG Milford Brown
4 games (3 GS)
2 false starts
2.00 sacks allowed
1 holding

RT Todd Wade
7 games
4 false starts
6.00 sacks allowed
1 holding

***Reserve/Injured***

LT Victor Riley
6 games (4 GS)
2 false starts
6.50 sacks allowed
0 holding

RG Zach Weigert
5 games
0 false starts
0.50 sacks allowed
0 holding

utahmark
11-03-2005, 07:39 PM
by looking at those stats it seems we have 3 guys actually doing there jobs.
hodgdon,pitts,and weigert.

i still say we take 2 or 3 o-lineman in the draft. along with a te. draft after next we can work on defense. i think were beyond one draft fixing this team.

TEXANS84
11-03-2005, 07:45 PM
by looking at those stats it seems we have 3 guys actually doing there jobs.
hodgdon,pitts,and weigert.

i still say we take 2 or 3 o-lineman in the draft. along with a te. draft after next we can work on defense. i think were beyond one draft fixing this team.

Remember, Hodgdon has only played in 3 games, and Weigert has been hurt for 3 but played well at the RG position before the injury.

Pitts is doing rather well.

utahmark
11-03-2005, 07:54 PM
Remember, Hodgdon has only played in 3 games, and Weigert has been hurt for 3 but played well at the RG position before the injury.

Pitts is doing rather well.

3 games but only .5 sacks. over 7 games thats still only a little over 1 sack. to many holding penalties however.

keyfro
11-03-2005, 07:57 PM
i totally agree with markbeth on this...we definitly should spend 2-3 high picks on o-lineman...the way i see it our draft should look something like this

1st. ferguson
2nd. either top o-lineman or top 4-3 DE
3rd. top TE
3rd. top o-lineman or top 4-3 OLB
4th. top o-lineman
5-7th either trade for better players or bpa

our offensive line next year should look different no matter what happens...they need to figure out if mckinney is worth keeping around as a guard as well as Wade...i mean if we drop both mckinney and wade we could see us drafting two tackles in a row in the draft probably being whitworth in the second round giving us two rookies as tackles...not the most comfortable idea but one that could happen...if we keep wade i think we have to restructure his deal because he's not playing up to his pay...and even with drafting ferguson in the 1st round i'd say keep pitts at LT for atleast half the season...letting ferguson play LG til he's ready to take the full load...maybe even letting him play RT for a game or two before taking the full load at LT

SESupergenius
11-03-2005, 07:59 PM
Hodg seems to be doing ok, or that McKinney is better at the LG spot than center. I havnt kept my eye on the center spot too much but I did see Hodge on a running play where he was sealing the lane pretty well and boxing the guys from getting to DD. It's just one play but I was impressed at his technique.

utahmark
11-03-2005, 08:04 PM
Hodg seems to be doing ok, or that McKinney is better at the LG spot than center. I havnt kept my eye on the center spot too much but I did see Hodge on a running play where he was sealing the lane pretty well and boxing the guys from getting to DD. It's just one play but I was impressed at his technique.

ive been watching him pretty close and he run blocks well. in fact im more impressed with his run blocking than i am with pitts'. pitts is a better pass protector however.

utahmark
11-03-2005, 08:06 PM
i totally agree with markbeth on this...we definitly should spend 2-3 high picks on o-lineman...the way i see it our draft should look something like this

1st. ferguson
2nd. either top o-lineman or top 4-3 DE
3rd. top TE
3rd. top o-lineman or top 4-3 OLB
4th. top o-lineman
5-7th either trade for better players or bpa

our offensive line next year should look different no matter what happens...they need to figure out if mckinney is worth keeping around as a guard as well as Wade...i mean if we drop both mckinney and wade we could see us drafting two tackles in a row in the draft probably being whitworth in the second round giving us two rookies as tackles...not the most comfortable idea but one that could happen...if we keep wade i think we have to restructure his deal because he's not playing up to his pay...and even with drafting ferguson in the 1st round i'd say keep pitts at LT for atleast half the season...letting ferguson play LG til he's ready to take the full load...maybe even letting him play RT for a game or two before taking the full load at LT

mckinney is probably gone cause of his play and salary capp. he is gonna cost us about 4 mil to keep and hardly anything to let go(less than a mil). wade will probably stay because of the cap. although his play has not been good, it would cost us a fortune to drop him.

real
11-03-2005, 08:14 PM
i say keep top three o-lineman as starters and spen first two draft picks on two that could come in and start

nunusguy
11-03-2005, 08:40 PM
I'm really anxious to see how the OL does this weekend in FLA against a strong Jags D. But I'm hopeful to with Brown at RG, the rook at Center, McKinney at LG, and Pitts back at LT since they had a few weeks to play together. Be interesting to see who's the odd man out when Weigert returns.
I dunno....with all the criticism of Wade, maybe they'll drop him and put Weigert out at RT and leave the aforementioned foursome in as starters if they are reasonably satisfied with the groups performance.
Weigert has, after all, experience in the NFL at tackle and won the Outland at Nebraska at that position.

keyfro
11-03-2005, 10:13 PM
your right but i think weigert if healthy can be an all-pro RG he'll never be that as a RT in this league

nunusguy
11-04-2005, 07:46 AM
your right but i think weigert if healthy can be an all-pro RG he'll never be that as a RT in this league
An All-pro RG is a luxury for us at this point if he can be a competant tackle.
Afterall, most feel long with CP that Weigert is one of our 2 best OL - shouldn't they both be playing tackle if they have experience there and the
people currently playing tackle aren't effective ?

infantrycak
11-04-2005, 09:33 AM
Don't forget folks, Wiegert was played at RT when he 1st arrived at the Texans. It wasn't anything above mediocre. He is a much better G than T.

Honoring Earl 34
11-04-2005, 10:07 AM
:texflag: If Pitts can handle LT. I'd consider taking Bush with my 1st pick and the next two picks on OL .
If Bush runs the 40 in Mathis's range with more skills ... and AJ came in second as the NFL's fastest man and he's 3rd fastest on the Texans (if you draft Bush ) . All you would need is OK pass blocking and an OC who's willing to open up and they would be scary .

utahmark
11-04-2005, 05:42 PM
:texflag: If Pitts can handle LT. I'd consider taking Bush with my 1st pick and the next two picks on OL .
If Bush runs the 40 in Mathis's range with more skills ... and AJ came in second as the NFL's fastest man and he's 3rd fastest on the Texans (if you draft Bush ) . All you would need is OK pass blocking and an OC who's willing to open up and they would be scary .


i cant understand why anyone would wont to draft a rb. when that has been our best and deepest postion on the team this year. and we have so many other holes to fill.

Coach C.
11-04-2005, 06:00 PM
Markbeth I doubt earl is projecting bush as a runningback. He would be a nice WR in the mold of Steve Smith. you cannot argue with that. He has hands, maybe speed. I am on the fence right now because no one has worked out. I like Winston alot and Bush is just a gamebreaker(you can never have to many). I think we need alot of players and that is likely not going to be solved through one offseason of drafting and freeagency.

infantrycak
11-08-2005, 10:04 AM
It'll be interesting to see if Pitts' numbers go up in the harder position of LT.

That 12.5 last year looks pretty good.

IMO this was an interesting question as well:

Thru 5 games at LG, Pitts gave up 2.5 sacks. Thru 2.5 games at LT and .5 back at LG, Pitts gave up .25 sacks more. He did add one holding call. Watching him at LT, he takes on his man solo the vast majority of the time. That has allowed McKinney to double up with Hodg helping both Hodg and McKinney out. With Riley in, Pitts was having to help Riley out a lot and that left McKinney more exposed.

Clearly having a horrid LT next to him contributed to his sacks at LG, but I really wonder if the next regime shouldn't take a hard look at him as the long term solution at RT. He is as good a run blocker as Wade and is much better able to handle speed rushers like Mathis from Indy.

infantrycak
11-10-2005, 05:12 PM
Just noticed something and wanted to point out how epicly bad the pass protection has been this year. The Texans have currently recorded 43 sacks thru 8 games. Go ahead and throw out 20 sacks as entirely Carr's fault (not a realistic number IMO, but let's be generous to everyone else). That leaves 23 sacks in 8 games. That would still leave us in 24th spot in pass protection and 6 sacks away from even being mediocre on pass protection. That's after throwing out 20 sacks. Wow, that's bad.

Runner
11-10-2005, 05:17 PM
Just noticed something and wanted to point out how epicly bad the pass protection has been this year. The Texans have currently recorded 43 sacks thru 8 games. Go ahead and throw out 20 sacks as entirely Carr's fault (not a realistic number IMO, but let's be generous to everyone else). That leaves 23 sacks in 8 games. That would still leave us in 24th spot in pass protection and 6 sacks away from even being mediocre on pass protection. That's after throwing out 20 sacks. Wow, that's bad.

How many total sacks did we have last year? 48? Same QB and RBs, so probably somewhere near the same ratio being the o-line's fault. Halfway through this season and with 43 we are almost there. Wow.

AND we are running less effectively.

I think the line was better last year.

TEXANS84
11-30-2005, 10:17 AM
Here are some stats I've found interesting about the line progress the past few weeks:

Team/sacks/yards lost

@Buffalo-sacked 5 times-45 yards lost
Pittsburgh-sacked 8 times-59 yards lost
@Cincinnatti-sacked 7 times-46 yards lost
Tennessee-sacked 7 times-35 yards lost
*Wiegert goes down, Riley pulled from LT
@Seattle-sacked 3 times-19 yards lost
Indianapolis-sacked 5 times-42 yards lost
Cleveland-sacked 2 times-18 yards lost
*Hodgdon goes down in Jax, more adjustments
@Jacksonville-sacked 6 times-28 yards lost
@Indianapolis-sacked 3 times-12 yards lost
Kansas City-sacked 1 time-1 yard lost
St. Louis-sacked 3 times-5 yards lost

Now have we found a good key in the offensive line with Pitts at LT? Or has the offense adjusted to get the ball out of David's hands quicker to avoid the sack?

Discuss...

Texans Horror
11-30-2005, 11:36 AM
Riley was a huge mistake at LT, so moving Pitts to LT was a definite upgrade. Carr passing faster also helped. So I would say both. But the latter is no solution.

TSgt.Texan
11-30-2005, 11:44 AM
I don't know if Pitts is the anwser but against the Rams we did have time to go down field. So he was getting some time to look deep, then the second half started and I don't know who made the call but we stop attacking their corners deep.

Texans Horror
11-30-2005, 11:48 AM
The Rams defensive line made our guys in the trenches look good. One of the reason it's a shoulda, coulda, woulda game IMO.

TEXANS84
11-30-2005, 11:57 AM
Team/sacks/yards lost

@Buffalo-sacked 5 times-45 yards lost
Pittsburgh-sacked 8 times-59 yards lost
@Cincinnatti-sacked 7 times-46 yards lost
Tennessee-sacked 7 times-35 yards lost
*Wiegert goes down, Riley pulled from LT
@Seattle-sacked 3 times-19 yards lost
Indianapolis-sacked 5 times-42 yards lost
Cleveland-sacked 2 times-18 yards lost
*Hodgdon goes down in Jax, more adjustments
@Jacksonville-sacked 6 times-28 yards lost
@Indianapolis-sacked 3 times-12 yards lost
Kansas City-sacked 1 time-1 yard lost
St. Louis-sacked 3 times-5 yards lost


There was a drastic improvement once Riley was pulled from LT. At one point in the season, we were tracking for 121 sacks.

Runner
11-30-2005, 12:03 PM
There was a drastic improvement once Riley was pulled from LT. At one point in the season, we were tracking for 121 sacks.

Of course there was drastic improvement. Riley is nothing more than a figment of Pendry's imagination.

The line last year - which was the same as the line at the start of this year except for the replacement of Wand with Riley - gave up around 48 sacks, as opposed to the 121 we were heading for with Riley.

The line last year also played the whole year with an offense not geared 90% to preventing sacks, and without consistent double teaming schemes on any defensive ends. We could also run more effectively last year.

Last year's line was better. We look "good" now only because we were so pathetic at the beginning of the year.

Peldon
11-30-2005, 12:16 PM
When you applaud your line for "only" giving up 49 sacks in their best year it really speaks volumes as to how bad the line really is.

SESupergenius
11-30-2005, 12:32 PM
We still don't have a good running, so don't fool yourself. Our passing woes are only half of the equation. People tend to focus too much on the olines passing inabilities and are blinded by their lack of run blocking capabilites. How many times have we seen this team not make a 3rd and short?

Hervoyel
11-30-2005, 12:37 PM
Actually the offensive lines best year was 2003 when they cut the sacks back to 35. Not great but not horrible either. Coming from 76 sacks the year before it's outstanding.

Then in 2004 the sacks went back up to 50. That was Pendrys first year coaching our offensive line and Seth Wands first season starting at LT.

Runner
11-30-2005, 01:58 PM
Actually the offensive lines best year was 2003 when they cut the sacks back to 35. Not great but not horrible either. Coming from 76 sacks the year before it's outstanding.

Then in 2004 the sacks went back up to 50. That was Pendrys first year coaching our offensive line and Seth Wands first season starting at LT.

Very true.

Say this year Wand starts and cuts his 12 sacks in half to 6 for his second (playing) year improvement (which is less of an improvement than Pitts had his second year, so probably doable) and we're down to 42, and then count on some improvement from the other guys. However, Wand was replaced by a guy who was on pace to give up around 26 sacks by himself at left tackle, and the offense is still coached by a guy who can't make the individual lineman any better.

I give Pendry some credit for finally installing double teaming schemes against Freeney and other ends. I discredit him for not having that acumen last year. Come to think of it, maybe Marshall is the guy responsible for the double teaming.

Last year's line was better at run blocking, and the most successful running was behind the duo of Pitts/Wand. Another year of experience for Wand and the running would have improved this year too.

nunusguy
11-30-2005, 02:05 PM
The "starting Victor Riley at LT" was an incredible error in judgment ranking
right in there with another Texans' classic, trading this years 2nd and 3rd round picks for one Phillip Buchanan. Atleast we can reverse the Riley experiment, but the 2 first day picks are gone forever.

Runner
11-30-2005, 02:09 PM
The "starting Victor Riley at LT" was an incredible error in judgment ranking
right in there with another Texans' classic, trading this years 2nd and 3rd round picks for one Phillip Buchanan. Atleast we can reverse the Riley experiment, but the 2 first day picks are gone forever.

Reversing it will be good, but totally reversing it appears will have to wait until next year since he's still starting. Our o-line will always start to fold in the second half as long as he's playing, because he is visibly huffing and puffing by the third quarter. He's hidden a little more on the inside, but I have an idea that the d-lineman can see what's going on.

nunusguy
11-30-2005, 02:24 PM
I dunno.....the musical chairs situation at LT is all Capers fault, because it now appears that Casserly had made the right player acquisition way back in
2002. Capers and his assistants just failed to develope and play him as they
should have. First Wand in 2004, then a deeper regression this year with Riley. If Capers and his people would have just left Chester where he started
out at, no telling how much difference they may have made in 2004 and this
year. And you gotta give Casserly an atta boy for selecting Chester way back in 2002 - many said that was not worth a second round pick.

El Tejano
11-30-2005, 02:53 PM
Well I think Vinny pointed this out on Tuesday, but when I saw what the Steelers LT did with Freeney and compared that with how CPitts has done with him, I was pretty glad we have Chester.