PDA

View Full Version : Why Doesn't Armstrong Play More? (revisited)


Runner
12-05-2005, 06:05 PM
This is not a very satisfying reason, but the rumor rings true to me. I've heard that the reason Armstrong doesn't get more playing time is that he is basically getting the Seth Wand treatment. Pendry doesn't like him (for whatever reason) and is therefore loathe to play him unless he has no other alternative.

Matt Murphy is also a member of this less than exclusive club, and he dresses out for the games mainly because the coaches need a 3rd tight end in case one of the first two get hurt. He got in a little deeper yesterday. Apparently Pendry was so po'd at the false start penalty on Murphy (4th and 2, 7:48 of the 1st quarter) that he jerked him out of the (very few) other sets he was supposed to play and used Rivers instead. This led to some confusion when running the different teams on and off the field. It would have cost the Texans a delay of game or time out once, but time was running out in the quarter and we were "saved by the bell".

The interesting note is that while the refs called 81 for that penalty, Pitts moved first and then Murphy - check the replay. Pendry seems almost irrational with players in his doghouse, but I guess that isn't news.

barzilla
12-05-2005, 06:16 PM
I've never heard this, but it makes sense I guess. Unfortunately, it points to a possible reprieve for Casserly. If the coaches are too stupid to play people that produce then Casserly has a decent argument that he did a passable job assembling talent.

thegr8fan
12-05-2005, 06:36 PM
you are definitely wrong.

Yep, the one and only reason Armstrong doesn't play more is because he can actually catch a pass. And we can't have that sort of thing going on during the game. It would ruin our reputation and possibly mean we win a game or two. And we definitely can't have that happening, especially this late in the season. :rolleyes:

HJam72
12-05-2005, 06:38 PM
Matt Murphy can't block. I don't think his particular problem is unfair treatment, but you might be right about the others.

infantrycak
12-05-2005, 06:41 PM
Matt Murphy can't block. I don't think his particular problem is unfair treatment, but you might be right about the others.

In comparison to who? Neither Murphy or Rivers can block anywhere near as well as Bruener, but Rivers is not a solid blocker and has added several sacks to the total on the season.

Coach C.
12-05-2005, 06:42 PM
Seth Wand is essentially Victor Riley without the gut, maybe a little more athletic but no better of a blocker. He led the team in sacks allowed last year when he started.

HJam72
12-05-2005, 06:43 PM
All I know is Murphy can't block. OK, so maybe Rivers is worse.

Coach C.
12-05-2005, 06:48 PM
Rivers isn't a great blocker either but he is at least in the mold of a pass catching TE. He has some athleticism and has been catching the ball pretty well this year, other than that one dropped pass early in the year.

Runner
12-05-2005, 07:20 PM
He led the team in sacks allowed last year when he started.

Wand had similar stats to Pitts' first year starting. Wand gave up 12 sacks - Riley was on pace for 26 and 2-3 times the penalties as Wand. Wand is much better than Riley, although that is faint praise. But that debate isn't really the point of this post. The point is Pendry does not play people based on something other than skill.

Runner
12-05-2005, 07:41 PM
Matt Murphy can't block. I don't think his particular problem is unfair treatment, but you might be right about the others.

In this particular example, Murphy was removed from the game plan because Pitts moved and the ref misidentified the culprit. I would call that unfair treatment.

Because of this type of thing I can't bring myself to trust any player evaluation made by this coaching staff. That is a main reason I think a change of coaches could do wonders with the talent we have - if we change to a good coaching staff.

profan
12-05-2005, 08:09 PM
Man, i've been looking for armstrong all season long. I'm just ready for some real coaches to come in here, play the best talent, and win some games.

Runner
12-05-2005, 08:11 PM
Man, i've been looking for armstrong all season long. I'm just ready for some real coaches to come in here, play the best talent, and win some games.

That would be refreshing.

Texans Horror
12-05-2005, 08:23 PM
Hindsight being 20/20, dumping Palmer and lifting Pendry to OC was the worst move we could have made. Pendry has shown repeatedly that he can't coach this offense.

TexHorns
12-06-2005, 04:54 AM
Armstrong and Mathis need more playing time. DUMP Bradford NOW PLEASE.

PapaL
12-06-2005, 06:59 AM
"Matt Murphy can't block"

Compared to who? Bruener our all world blocking TE? Riley our great offseason aquisition? Kettle meet the Pot.

Does it really matter if the guy is slightly less of a blocker if can catch the ball better then any of our healthy TE's?

OzzO
12-06-2005, 08:24 AM
Man, I wish I would've heard the answer yesterday on 610. Coach was asked this directly and when he was starting to give his answer why, I hit an area that blocked the signal. Maybe someone else heard the response?

eriadoc
12-06-2005, 08:52 AM
Man, I wish I would've heard the answer yesterday on 610. Coach was asked this directly and when he was starting to give his answer why, I hit an area that blocked the signal. Maybe someone else heard the response?

He was asked a direct question and, as usual, did not directly answer. He basically said that they are very happy with Armstrong, compared him to Gaffney moreso than our other receivers, and said that he's the 3rd WR off the bench now (first WR in 3-receiver sets, if you will). If that is the case, then I have no problem with it, but if he's the #3 WR on the field, they sure don't throw to him as often as they threw to Bradford.

MorKnolle
12-06-2005, 10:00 AM
Armstrong is not especially fast and does not create much separation between himself and his defender, although he does catch anything that comes near him.

MorKnolle
12-06-2005, 10:01 AM
I have always viewed Armstrong as a possesion WR, helping us get first downs and what not. The most important thing for Armstrong would be a solid TE. I think Armstrong will really break out next year, because he, Johnson, and Mathis/Gaffney will be great with a TE taking care of the middle of the field. That's just my feeling.

Armstrong and Gaff are both free agents this offseason so they might not want to come back. Armstrong is a restricted free agent so we could at least sign him to a one-year tender but Gaff is unrestricted and may prefer to leave, but hopefully he'll be back too.

Texans Horror
12-06-2005, 10:03 AM
Armstrong is not especially fast and does not create much separation between himself and his defender, although he does catch anything that comes near him.

Being able to catch is a handy trick on this team. :)

MorKnolle
12-06-2005, 10:28 AM
Being able to catch is a handy trick on this team. :)

Very true, but I think the coaches are a little leery because he doesn't get open real well, but I still don't know why Bradford has been playing over Armstrong or Mathis.