PDA

View Full Version : Current left tackles in the NFL


eriadoc
11-29-2005, 12:17 PM
Just for kicks, I decided to go take a look at what other teams do for their left tackle position. As I suspected, they pretty much draft 1st-round left tackles. It seems to take a few years to develop one once you've drafted them, but most of the current LT in the league were top-20 picks (17 of them). Seven more were drafted as guards and not in the 1st round. That leaves 8 left tackles that were drafted lower than the 1st round, and you won't find many marquee players in those ranks.

ARI, Leonard Davis, taken 1.2
ATL, Kevin SHaffer, taken 7.34
BAL, Jonathan Ogden, taken 1.4
BUF, Mike Gandy, taken 3.6 as a guard
CAR, Jordan Gross, taken 1.8
CHI, John Tait, taken 1.14
CIN, Levi Jones, taken 1.10
CLE, LJ Shelton, taken 1.21
DAL, Torrin Tucker, couldn't find, but I think he's subbing for Flozell Adams? Adams was taken 2.8
DEN, Matt Lepsis, couldn't find, pretty sure he was a guard
DET, Jeff Backus, taken 1.18
GB, Chad Clifton, taken 2.13
HOU, Pitts (finally), taken 2.18 as a guard
IND, Tarik Glenn, taken 1.19
JAX, Khalif Barnes, taken 2.20
KC, Willie Roaf, taken 1.8
MIA, Damion McIntosh, taken 3.21
MIN, Bryant McKinnie, taken 1.7
NE, Nick Kaczur, 3.36 as Guard, but backing up injured Matt Light (2.17)
NO, Wayne Gandy, taken 1.15
NYJ, Adrian Jones, taken 4.36
NYG, Luke Petitgout, taken 1.19
OAK, Barry Sims, couldn't find, but team is grooming Gallery, taken 1.2
PHI, Tra Thomas, taken 1.11
PIT, Marvel Smith, taken 2.7
SD, Roman Oben, taken 3.5 as a guard
SEA, Walter Jones, taken 1.6
SF, Adam Snyder, taken 3.30, team also has Kwame Harris, not sure what they're doing, but Harris was taken at 1.26
STL, Orlando Pace, taken 1.1
TEN, Brad Hopkins, taken 1.13
TB, Anthony Davis, couldn't find
WAS, Chris Samuels, taken 1.3

Gambling on getting our future LT in the 2nd or lower round doesn't seem like a great idea unless we have a line coach like Houck or Gibbs, which we don't. A couple of those late-rounders you see were coached by those two.

So the big question is -- Can Pitts take over the LT spot for years to come?

Vinny
11-29-2005, 12:20 PM
Pitts holds up to Freeney much better than Marvel Smith did last night (and Smith was a pro bowler last year). Smith was totally outclassed on several snaps. I think Pitts can handle the job long term myself...but would like to see us draft a top LT if we can get the right trade down package. We have to get better in the line instead of this current patchwork of guys who has proven to be less than stellar.

keyfro
11-29-2005, 12:21 PM
yes leave pitts there and let him develop at the LT position because there is no one else we can get that will play as good as him at that position

eriadoc
11-29-2005, 12:32 PM
Pitts holds up to Freeney much better than Marvel Smith did last night (and Smith was a pro bowler last year). Smith was totally outclassed on several snaps. I think Pitts can handle the job long term myself...but would like to see us draft a top LT if we can get the right trade down package. We have to get better in the line instead of this current patchwork of guys who has proven to be less than stellar.

That's pretty much my take on it as well, though I would definitely rather the team draft a LT in round 1 this year. That way they can keep Pitts at LT for a year or two to develop the rookie at RT and if Pitts just dominates, then you keep the new guy at RT and you have solid bookends for years to come. The right tackle position has been a real sore spot for me this year. Wade seems to do a pretty good job run blocking, but his pass protection is weak. With him out, we get a big dose of Riley, who was easily the worst linemen out there against StL this week.

HardKnockTexan
11-29-2005, 12:46 PM
I'd like to see us keep Pitts at LT. He has shown that he can handle the possition against the NFL's best. By doing this it opens up our draft possibilities. If we get a top 3 pick we can snag Reggie Bush or trade down and get a stud LB or a #2 WR.

Trading down into the middle of the first round would most likley give us an extra second and third to work with. If this senario plays out correctly then we can trade right back up into the 1st round and take the best player available and still have a #2 and #3 in our pocket.

If Reggie Bush is as great as people are speculating then I think we should select him with our first pick and then use our extra third round pick and our second round pick to move up to the middle of the first round and select either a CB, LB, FS or WR. With all of our needs on both sides of the ball trading down from the top spot sounds logical but passing on a talent like Bush could end up being a HUGE mistake. Either way, atleast I'm excited about my Texans again.:texflag:

nunusguy
11-29-2005, 01:42 PM
If we get a top 3 pick we can snag Reggie Bush or trade down and get a stud LB or a #2 WR.

It could change, but right now the buzz is primarily about Bush and Leniert, therefor a teams has got to finish #1 or #2 to be in a strong position to expect other teams to offer them multiple picks to move up and take one
of the USC guys. Trouble is, I don't think we'll be one of the top 2 (or bottom 2, depending on how you look at it). Too many other teams "competing" for the top 2 spots have stronger remaining opponents
and/or weaker SOS, factors that work against our chances to end up with
a worse record or win tiebreakers.

Runner
11-29-2005, 01:56 PM
The right tackle position has been a real sore spot for me this year. Wade seems to do a pretty good job run blocking, but his pass protection is weak. With him out, we get a big dose of Riley, who was easily the worst linemen out there against StL this week.

With a new coach next year we won't have to worry about Riley. Pendry has a better player available on the bench, but he's been in the doghouse all season. Pendry is too stubborn and/or petty to admit Riley was a HUGE mistake and play Wand.

infantrycak
11-29-2005, 01:58 PM
DEN, Matt Lepsis, couldn't find, pretty sure he was a guard
SF, Adam Snyder, taken 3.30, team also has Kwame Harris, not sure what they're doing, but Harris was taken at 1.26
TB, Anthony Davis, couldn't find


Lepsis (from Conroe by the way) and Davis were undrafted free agents. Harris was supposed to have been the starting LT but has been a disappointment. At least so far, 2003 was a banner year for RT's rather than franchise LT's--Jordan Gross, George Foster and Kwame Harris, the 3 1st round tackles are all at RT now.

BigBull17
11-29-2005, 01:59 PM
You blow a lead to a sub par team like St. Louise you are bad enough to lose to Arizona and San Fran. Those are the two games we could win.

TexanFanInCC
11-29-2005, 01:59 PM
dont bother looking for a LT. pitts is the guy...and there are so many other holes to plug in this team, such as a dominant middle linebacker, a RB with breakaway speed, a good 2nd reciever to take pressure off of AJ, safties, perhaps another cover corner...

eriadoc
11-29-2005, 02:04 PM
Lepsis (from Conroe by the way) and Davis were undrafted free agents. Harris was supposed to have been the starting LT but has been a disappointment. At least so far, 2003 was a banner year for RT's rather than franchise LT's--Jordan Gross, George Foster and Kwame Harris, the 3 1st round tackles are all at RT now.

Thanks for the clarification! I am not a line guru by any means, so I was very unclear on a few of these.

As stated above, I really want Pitts to succeed at LT. Even if that is the case, however, I still think we need to draft tackle in the first round. We still need a RT, probably a RG (Wiegert is perpetually injured), and *maybe* a C. I would like to see Hodgdon succeed at Center, but drafting a Guard/Center this season would not be a bad idea in the middle rounds. Weary and Brown should be easily upgraded, IMO. Riley should be gone and Wade should have to compete for the RT spot next season.

Oh well, that's my perfect world, I suppose.

TheOgre
11-29-2005, 02:06 PM
It is strange that you posted this because I did the same research and was going to post it.

SESupergenius
11-29-2005, 02:38 PM
Pitts holds up to Freeney much better than Marvel Smith did last night (and Smith was a pro bowler last year). Smith was totally outclassed on several snaps. I think Pitts can handle the job long term myself...but would like to see us draft a top LT if we can get the right trade down package. We have to get better in the line instead of this current patchwork of guys who has proven to be less than stellar.
FYI Marvel Smith is coming off an injury and subsequently went out of the game due to that injury. Suffice it to say he was not 100% last night.

Vinny
11-29-2005, 02:44 PM
FYI Marvel Smith is coming off an injury and subsequently went out of the game due to that injury. Suffice it to say he was not 100% last night.I'm sure being pounded into the turf on several Freeney bullrushes didn't help his injuries out much.

The Preacher
11-29-2005, 02:55 PM
Indeed the Texans have found a secure player at LT it seems. With another solid lineman in the draft and maybe FA things can happen. That's parody and means the Texans can turn around in a hurry. The loss the other day was excruciating but a couple of things are starting to go in our favor. It's a small silver lining but hopefully this year is rock bottom. If not :hide:

HJam72
11-29-2005, 04:45 PM
Too many other teams "competing" for the top 2 spots have stronger remaining opponents
and/or weaker SOS, factors that work against our chances to end up with
a worse record or win tiebreakers.

You know, it really pisses me off that they made our schedule so easy this year!!!!

:)

utahmark
11-29-2005, 05:16 PM
FYI Marvel Smith is coming off an injury and subsequently went out of the game due to that injury. Suffice it to say he was not 100% last night.

pitts has also played freeney better than jonathan ogdan another probowl left tackle.

ArlingtonTexan
11-29-2005, 05:47 PM
I did this a month or so ago on HPF.com and may have also posted here ...The guys listed with no info were not drafted.

Yeah...LT is the most top heavy position in the draft. I am being a little more cautious @ declaring Pitts as the long term answer, but the early results look like he is at least solid. I don't want the Texans to blindly reach for an OLman either, but until I see the staff that comes into play I not making a final judgement as to what I do really do in the draft.

SESupergenius
11-29-2005, 10:47 PM
I'm sure being pounded into the turf on several Freeney bullrushes didn't help his injuries out much.
i think i'd blame my injuries too after that maulimg

Youngstown Colt
11-30-2005, 12:10 AM
pitts has also played freeney better than jonathan ogdan another probowl left tackle.Didn't Pitts let up a sack, because Ogden didn't.

utahmark
11-30-2005, 06:56 AM
Didn't Pitts let up a sack, because Ogden didn't.

i dont think he did. maybe 1 in the last two games. ogden's has had some very bad games against freeney in the past. and he sure looked bad the last game even if he didnt give up a sack.

MorKnolle
11-30-2005, 09:38 AM
Freeney got one sack on Pitts in two games, and Ogden did not look very good in their game against the Colts even though Freeney did not get a sack. I'm not saying Pitts is better than Ogden because Ogden is one of the premier LT in the last few decades, but Pitts has done an excellent job at LT this year.

bckey
11-30-2005, 10:16 AM
I think it is funny to see so many of the same fans that explained why Pitts was moved to LG now jumping on the Pitts LT bandwagon. The move was questioned by alot of fans on this bb only to be explained away by the "more knowledgeable" fans. The worst thing this team ever did besides trading away multiple draft picks was shuffling the OL after a solid performing season in 2003 and installing the zone blocking scheme. Don't fix it if it aint broke.

Texans Horror
11-30-2005, 10:28 AM
Actually, I still think leaving Wando at LT and Pitts at LG would have done the trick. They are both gifted athletes, but I think Wand has more movement and youth on his side. Moving Wand was the first of many bad decisions made by Pendry. I also still think that we have a bigger need of keeping pressure out of the middle (draft a Center) and need a better run blocker. (What can we do to get Lorenzo Neil/Neal (sp?) from San Diego?) Pitts is decent, but he is no long-term fix.

infantrycak
11-30-2005, 10:28 AM
I am being a little more cautious @ declaring Pitts as the long term answer, but the early results look like he is at least solid. I don't want the Texans to blindly reach for an OLman either, but until I see the staff that comes into play I not making a final judgement as to what I do really do in the draft.

I am cautious as well. My current thought is he might be a fantastic RT eventually. IMO we have to see how he performs with an OL that isn't trying to run a kindergarden offense. He is certainly the best LT on the team right now and has helped tremendously this season, but still don't know his upside as a full-time, full offense LT.

bckey -- I don't recall many, if any, fans bemoaning Pitts being moved from LT after 2003. My recollection is at least half the MB still wanted to draft a LT because Pitts was "just serviceable" and needed to be upgraded with Jordan Gross, a sure thing franchise LT. Don't remember anyone describing him as a potential top half of the league LT at that point. I am a big Pitts fan, but it is funny IMO how people are instantly seeing him as the solution for the future at this point.

Texans Horror
11-30-2005, 10:38 AM
That's it exactly. Our big offseason question is do we go for Bush, or do we turn him into a waterfall of draft picks? That's a hard decision.

bckey
11-30-2005, 10:51 AM
I am a big Pitts fan, but it is funny IMO how people are instantly seeing him as the solution for the future at this point.

I feel the same way.

bckey
11-30-2005, 10:54 AM
That's it exactly. Our big offseason question is do we go for Bush, or do we turn him into a waterfall of draft picks? That's a hard decision.

Not really. We need more picks. More picks would allow us to pick bpa instead of need.

beerlover
11-30-2005, 10:59 AM
I am cautious as well. My current thought is he might be a fantastic RT eventually. IMO we have to see how he performs with an OL that isn't trying to run a kindergarden offense. He is certainly the best LT on the team right now and has helped tremendously this season, but still don't know his upside as a full-time, full offense LT.

bckey -- I don't recall many, if any, fans bemoaning Pitts being moved from LT after 2003. My recollection is at least half the MB still wanted to draft a LT because Pitts was "just serviceable" and needed to be upgraded with Jordan Gross, a sure thing franchise LT. Don't remember anyone describing him as a potential top half of the league LT at that point. I am a big Pitts fan, but it is funny IMO how people are instantly seeing him as the solution for the future at this point.

I'm glad to hear you think Pitts could be our RT of the future & that he is our best option right now as LT. I also like the idea of open competition before awarding players starting positions even 1st rd draft picks or high cost FA's.

AS far as Pitts in 2003 I think alot of fans including myself where new to the process and what it takes to develop an expansion team with raw NFL talent. Yes he was getting beat alot but as some like Vinny pointed out it was part of the learning curve, that most rookie LT's struggle for a couple years before they figure things out (with few exceptions like Pace, Ogdon, Jones). The main problem to me at the time was the holding and false start penaltys, now we know it was because he did not yet understand the proper technique (not keeping his arms inside controlling the tackle/end). After four years of anaylsis we all have a better understanding of the process & learning curve his performance is far more acceptable, hindsight would suggest that more patience should have been exercised.

Texans Horror
11-30-2005, 12:56 PM
Not really. We need more picks. More picks would allow us to pick bpa instead of need.

IMO, Bush is the BPA. He is not a "need," since we have a solid running back. I agree with you, though, that we have a lot of needs on this team (TE, O-line, LB, CB, Safety), and filling those voids must be a priority for the incoming coaching staff. IMHO though, while I would rather we fill voids, I could find no fault with the coaching staff drafting Bush. The guy is that good.

SESupergenius
11-30-2005, 01:02 PM
My problem with Pitts, and most of the oline is that although it seems that Pitts has progressed well, our offense is still terrible. We're being forced to quick routes and dump passes so I can not tell how well they are doing. I will admit that Pitts is doing better this year and I suscribe to the notion that it takes time for a LT to develop, but how can we tell? Until this offense is opened up and every player is a weapon there is no way to gauge how well our offensive line is doing. I wouldn't mind Pitts being a RT either, but then again it will take time for him to develop there as well. Our team seems to be on a short lease right now and fans are pretty impatient. If we gut the coaching staff then we are back to square one and who knows where Pitts will end up.

Runner
11-30-2005, 01:03 PM
AS far as Pitts in 2003 I think alot of fans including myself where new to the process and what it takes to develop an expansion team with raw NFL talent. Yes he was getting beat alot but as some like Vinny pointed out it was part of the learning curve, that most rookie LT's struggle for a couple years before they figure things out (with few exceptions like Pace, Ogdon, Jones).

Too bad Wand wasn't afforded the opportunity to progress through that same learning curve. Then maybe we could pass and run this year. Not next year or the year after. This year.

cred
11-30-2005, 01:08 PM
I like the idea of moving C. Pitts to RT and getting a top notch LT with our #1 pick then using our 2nd and one of our third to trade up to get another 1st round LB, TE, or CB. Bush is an outstanding prospect, but that is just it, a prospect. Just because they look good in college dosn't mean superstar in the NFL. Take a LT in the first because top notch LT's don't come around every year.

cadahnic
11-30-2005, 01:15 PM
I think the best option would be to leave Pitts at LT for next year or at least most of it while developing Eric Winston at RT. Bush is great and if we trade down between 6-10 and he is still there then we can take him, but if not a good RB can be drafted every draft. Winston could also play anywhere else on the line other than center. The kid is perfect for our team and new coach.

eriadoc
11-30-2005, 02:12 PM
I think everyone is a big Pitts fan because he doesn't fold like past LTs. Also, Pitts hasn't exactly gone up against powder puff DEs either. Freeney twice, I think he went up against little, who when he isn't shooting people, a very solid DE. Um...can't think of anyone else off the top of my head though but he has played against good DEs.

Wistrom isn't a slouch for Seattle and Pitts faced Jared Allen versus KC. Allen has 8 sacks on the season, I believe.

Runner
11-30-2005, 02:50 PM
Wistrom isn't a slouch for Seattle and Pitts faced Jared Allen versus KC. Allen has 8 sacks on the season, I believe.


Keep it in perspective. Seattle was Pitts' first game back at LT and therefore he was given a lot of help from Breuner. There were a few plays when Breuner stoned Wistrom himself and Pitts never laid a hand on him.

I admit this double teaming against Seattle wasn't Pitts' choice, and he was actually embarrassed by the amount of help he was getting. As posted on other threads in more detail, he also had significant inside help on Freeney allowing him to "cheat" on Freeney's outside speed rush.

Yes he did a good job with help; no he didn't do a great one-on-one job.

Runner
11-30-2005, 03:11 PM
I thought Pitts took on Freeney mostly by himself. At least that's what I thought other people on this board said.

That is what it looks like watching the game, and on outside moves it was true. However, Pitts was able to overplay that outside move which gave him enough of an advantage to control Freeney. (This outside control was good in itself).

The reason that that Pitts was able to over commit to the outside was that Brown double teamed Freeney on all inside rushes and on all of Freeney's spin moves.

So on tape it looks as if Brown only double teamed a few times. However, his availability to double team the inside move affected every outside rush by Freeney.

It was a nice scheme actually; I wonder what led our coaches to finally do that this year and why they never did it with Wand and Pitts last year.

edo783
11-30-2005, 03:16 PM
It was a nice scheme actually; I wonder what led our coaches to finally do that this year and why they never did it with Wand and Pitts last year.

You have to wonder with our coaches??? Man, they are the villiage mental midgets.

mexican_texan
11-30-2005, 07:03 PM
after all the dissin' he recieved, Pitts seemed to have a chip on his shoulder.




Bur then he ate it.

cred
11-30-2005, 07:10 PM
villiage mental midgets.

off the subject, I know, but that saying was too funny.

Number19
11-30-2005, 07:20 PM
...DAL, Torrin Tucker, couldn't find...
Tucker was an undrafted free agent. I never found out what happened with him, but early on he was thought to maybe have the talent and potential to be a first round pick, ended up with a grade that should have made him a first day pick and finally went undrafted.

utahmark
11-30-2005, 07:57 PM
Wistrom isn't a slouch for Seattle and Pitts faced Jared Allen versus KC. Allen has 8 sacks on the season, I believe.


pitts didnt do to well against winstrom but that was his first game back and since he has looked pretty good.

Erratic Assassin
11-30-2005, 08:44 PM
Just for kicks, I decided to go take a look at what other teams do for their left tackle position. As I suspected, they pretty much draft 1st-round left tackles.

Gambling on getting our future LT in the 2nd or lower round doesn't seem like a great idea

Why can regular guys figure out something that an expert like Casserly can't figure out?

Pitts is okay (for a penalty machine) but he needs LOTS and lots of help. Where is Reggie Bush going to run with the defense in the backfield the moment the ball is snapped?

mancunian
12-01-2005, 03:39 PM
That's pretty much my take on it as well, though I would definitely rather the team draft a LT in round 1 this year. That way they can keep Pitts at LT for a year or two to develop the rookie at RT and if Pitts just dominates, then you keep the new guy at RT and you have solid bookends for years to come. The right tackle position has been a real sore spot for me this year. Wade seems to do a pretty good job run blocking, but his pass protection is weak. With him out, we get a big dose of Riley, who was easily the worst linemen out there against StL this week.

what would you do with Wade - move him inside, Drew as C and McKinney as LG?

eriadoc
12-01-2005, 04:10 PM
what would you do with Wade - move him inside, Drew as C and McKinney as LG?

Have him compete for the RT starting job with evaluation at RG as well. If he doesn't win the job, then you have to decide if he's getting paid too much to be a backup. To me, every position on the line should be an all-out competition. There's merit to what some posters here have said about jobs being handed out and this is by far the worst unit on the field over the 4-year history of the franchise. Pitts, Wade, Wand, and the newly drafted tackle should compete for playing time/starting job, McKinney and Hodgdon should compete at Center, McKinney should be evaluated at LG with Pitts, and Wiegert at RG with competetion from Wand and maybe Wade. RG has me a bit concerned because Wiegert is really not bad there, but he's injured so frequently that you have to plan a contingency. I have stated elsehwere that I'd like to see them draft LT in the first round, but also take a guard in the middle rounds that can compete with Wiegert, McKinney, and Pitts. Milford Brown, Fred Weary, and Victor Riley are all free agents after this season and I don't believe any of them have shown themselves worthy of a starting job. They've seen the field quite a bit, due to injuries, but have not especially distinguished themselves. So I'd say two of those three are probably gone after this season, depending on who is available in the draft and what they decide to do with Wand.

That makes the O-line probably the most analyzed unit in mini-camps, training camp, and pre-season, but with all the turmoil we've had there for the duration of this team's existence, I think it's worth the effort.

thague
12-01-2005, 05:38 PM
Pitts holds up to Freeney much better than Marvel Smith did last night (and Smith was a pro bowler last year). Smith was totally outclassed on several snaps. I think Pitts can handle the job long term myself...but would like to see us draft a top LT if we can get the right trade down package. We have to get better in the line instead of this current patchwork of guys who has proven to be less than stellar.

Pitts has done a very solid job as the left tackle the past few weeks and i believe that he could stick in that slot for years to come... he is a solid player that seems to have found his niche at the left tackle slot... the o-line could use some help, but i think if Houston grabs Bush with the first pick.. then they should focus on a Free Agent linemen... and grab some inside backers for that weak 3-4 with their second round pick... we have to be able to stop the run better... our pass protection, although some may disagree, has improved somewhat over the past 4 weeks... but we are still giving up almost 150 a game on the ground...

edo783
12-01-2005, 09:08 PM
Don't forget our deep need for a TE. Should be our 2nd rounder IMO. A tackle and then a TE would bring some seriouse help to the offense. With a trade down we should/might have another 2nd to snag a LB or if there is a stand out CB available. Then one of the 3s for a LB or CB which ever we don't get in the 2nd and then an O-lineman. Would make a pretty good 1st day IMO.

yaboycm
12-01-2005, 10:43 PM
Just for kicks, I decided to go take a look at what other teams do for their left tackle position. As I suspected, they pretty much draft 1st-round left tackles. It seems to take a few years to develop one once you've drafted them, but most of the current LT in the league were top-20 picks (17 of them). Seven more were drafted as guards and not in the 1st round. That leaves 8 left tackles that were drafted lower than the 1st round, and you won't find many marquee players in those ranks.


So what. Players are made on the field, not the draft. Ever heard of Tom Brady? Ever heard of Ryan Leaf? This has absolutely no signifigance to Pitts' play.

eriadoc
12-02-2005, 01:36 AM
So what. Players are made on the field, not the draft. Ever heard of Tom Brady? Ever heard of Ryan Leaf? This has absolutely no signifigance to Pitts' play.

You're absolutely right! And history proves that you are correct - left tackles (well about 5 or 6 out of 32 - the other 26 are fine with their 1st rounder or not doing well with their current LT) were made on the field, not the draft. That's absolutely incredible! I love those players. They make the NFL the awesome sport it is today.

If you think we're going to "make" one of those minority players here in Houston, you might not want to start playing poker or casino games anytime soon. just a tip.

Pardon me for taking the liberty of formatting your quote so that it's not so incredibly annoying.

Texans Horror
12-02-2005, 08:08 AM
I still like Wand/Pitts on the left side. I think if they are there next year, they will be formidable. My concern has always been the players from Center to RT. DD has a hard time running to the right. But I am in a minority here (:tomato: ) because I think the problem is not the players on the line but the coaching of those players (i.e., Pendry). Under a different (read: and good) coach, they will burgeon as quality linemen. For this reason, I lean towards taking Bush in the first.

Meloy
12-02-2005, 03:31 PM
It could change, but right now the buzz is primarily about Bush and Leniert, therefor a teams has got to finish #1 or #2 to be in a strong position to expect other teams to offer them multiple picks to move up and take one
of the USC guys. Trouble is, I don't think we'll be one of the top 2 (or bottom 2, depending on how you look at it). Too many other teams "competing" for the top 2 spots have stronger remaining opponents
and/or weaker SOS, factors that work against our chances to end up with
a worse record or win tiebreakers.

Oh come on give these guys a chance. At least offer me the hope we can win the "toilet bowl " race.:yahoo:

mexican_texan
12-02-2005, 03:45 PM
I still like Wand/Pitts on the left side. I think if they are there next year, they will be formidable. My concern has always been the players from Center to RT. DD has a hard time running to the right. But I am in a minority here (:tomato: ) because I think the problem is not the players on the line but the coaching of those players (i.e., Pendry). Under a different (read: and good) coach, they will burgeon as quality linemen. For this reason, I lean towards taking Bush in the first.
Wand looked horrible. as for leaning towards bush, I'll lean on the wall so that i don't make him fall.

Texans Horror
12-02-2005, 04:03 PM
I won't go into the stats (they've been thrown around the boards a lot), but IMO, Wand was the best LT next to Pitts, and Pitts was the best LG. I think that if Wand had played this year instead of Riley, we would have been in a much better place. It was also the kid's rookie season (not really, but he had played kicking team the previous year), so I think he would have continued to improve with decent coaching, which is why I think the new coaches should consider the 2004 lineup. I also think that Reggie Bush will make the line look good the way that Vince Young makes his line look good. I'm not trying to bash either USC's or Texas' offensive lines, but I think that their impact players make their respective o-line's job easier.