PDA

View Full Version : Economical O-Line Projection


bdiddy
02-16-2006, 09:40 PM
Weary was resigned to build depth and eventually replace Weigart at right gaurd.

The lineup will look like this next year:

Pitts - McKinney - Eslinger (Draft) - Weigart - Wand

The Texans are likely to draft a LT prospect with the second round pick (likely Colledge - who could see action). However, I envision them gritting their teeth an living with McKinney's contract for one more year w/ Colledge ridng the bench. Eventually, Colledge will be moved to tackle and Pitts will either switch to RT or move in at LG. If all goes as planned, Weary will replace Weigart in 1-3 years.

Eslinger will likely be available in the 3rd or 4th round. He is an undersized center (290lbs), who played in a very good zone blocking scheme at Minnesota. He is an ideal center candidat that, while not nearly at the level of a FA like LeCharles Bentley, will become a very good Tom Nalen-esque player.

We will work to sign an FA tight end, MLB (which Richard Smith places a premium on), and DE.

Kaiser Toro
02-16-2006, 09:43 PM
So is this fact, Eslinger will be starting at Center next year? Usually you preface your takes are based on speculation, but something is afoul here. ;)

bdiddy
02-16-2006, 09:45 PM
So is this fact, Eslinger will be starting at Center next year? Usually you preface your takes are based on speculation, but something is afoul here. ;)

No, this is merely my opinion.

I must preface with pure speculation when discussing areas from a couple of sources close to the team b/c the moderators seems to think if you do not include speculation within the message you are committing mortal sin.

This is my opinion based on observation and some things I have heard, but nothing certain.

HardKnockTexan
02-17-2006, 12:49 AM
i really do not like that line you just named

is more like this

LT LG C RG RT
ferguson McKinney Hodgdon Weigert Wade

:ok:


Where's Pitts?? you left off our best lineman...

mancunian
02-17-2006, 02:11 AM
Weary was resigned to build depth and eventually replace Weigart at right gaurd.

The lineup will look like this next year:

Pitts - McKinney - Eslinger (Draft) - Weigart - Wand

The Texans are likely to draft a LT prospect with the second round pick (likely Colledge - who could see action). However, I envision them gritting their teeth an living with McKinney's contract for one more year w/ Colledge ridng the bench. Eventually, Colledge will be moved to tackle and Pitts will either switch to RT or move in at LG. If all goes as planned, Weary will replace Weigart in 1-3 years.

Eslinger will likely be available in the 3rd or 4th round. He is an undersized center (290lbs), who played in a very good zone blocking scheme at Minnesota. He is an ideal center candidat that, while not nearly at the level of a FA like LeCharles Bentley, will become a very good Tom Nalen-esque player.

We will work to sign an FA tight end, MLB (which Richard Smith places a premium on), and DE.

Left side I'd agree with. NOt sure about Wand at RT. I'd go with Weigert and maybe try Wade at RG instead. Hodgdon at C.

As an experiment do you think Wade could play at C?

texman8
02-17-2006, 02:56 AM
Seriously doubt Wade could play Center...........you don't see many 6-7 centers.......you need to have quickness once ball is snapped.

mancunian
02-17-2006, 07:03 AM
Seriously doubt Wade could play Center...........you don't see many 6-7 centers.......you need to have quickness once ball is snapped.

ummm , just a thought....more about his size in going up against DT's the size of Stroud and Henderson.

Coach C.
02-17-2006, 09:32 AM
Bdiddy I cannot really see that line. I mean I am optomistic on the quest for Bentley, but we will be competing with winning teams or teams he values, so that may be a losing effort. Jeff Brackus will be more expensive than what I want to deal with or he would make an interesting grab. McKinney will have to restructure his deal or he will be looking for a new team since we gain a good bit from cutting him. Weigert's deal is mangeable for one year, but if he is willing to restructure for another 3 years he can retire a Texan. I see us with a line more like this if we are talking economical.

Pitts LT- Mangold LG- Hogdon C-Weigert RG- Wade or Winston RT. Pure speculation and hope of course. Lilkely will look like
Pitts, Weary, Hogdon/FA, Weigert, Wand.

JohnGalt
02-17-2006, 11:30 AM
I think Sherman is going to work over Wand this spring.

The new line will be
Wand - Pitts - McKinney - Weigert - (FA)

HJam72
02-17-2006, 01:57 PM
Wand, Pitts, McKinney...? Just kill me now. Wand may show improvement at LT, but he won't be better than Pitts there anytime soon and, more importantly, I don't want to ever see McKinney at center again. He doesn't belong there. :twocents:

Vinny
02-17-2006, 02:00 PM
Seriously doubt Wade could play Center...........you don't see many 6-7 centers.......you need to have quickness once ball is snapped.It would be like having Herman Munster at Center

LORK 88
02-17-2006, 02:06 PM
Ferguson - Pitts - Hodgdon - Weary - FA/Wand/Wade

This is what Im hoping at least. My question is, do you think Pitts could work out as our RT?

adrianshrev
02-17-2006, 03:35 PM
Ferguson - Pitts - Hodgdon - Weary - FA/Wand/Wade

This is what Im hoping at least. My question is, do you think Pitts could work out as our RT?
i think i would prefer

ferguson-hodgdon-mangold-weary-pitts

it would tie up r early picks but would solidify our line for the next five years:yahoo:

Runner
02-17-2006, 03:56 PM
It would be like having Herman Munster at Center

Or like Mark Eaton at center.

Wait - that was the Jazz and basketball. Never mind.

bdiddy
02-17-2006, 04:48 PM
I don't mean to disrespect anyone, but I am not sure why so many people are jumping on the Hogdon bandwagon.

I am not saying is a bad player, to the contrary he may turn out to be a very good interior lineman. However, the guy played less than 10 quarters in the NFL. I think it is a little quick to be anointing him our starting center. I think he should be in the mix to compete for the job, but he is very inexperienced. I personally would like him better at guard in the zone blocking scheme.

I think Eslinger would be better than Hogdon at center if we are looking to go with a strong youth movement.

dat_boy_yec
02-17-2006, 05:32 PM
I don't mean to disrespect anyone, but I am not sure why so many people are jumping on the Hogdon bandwagon.

I am not saying is a bad player, to the contrary he may turn out to be a very good interior lineman. However, the guy played less than 10 quarters in the NFL. I think it is a little quick to be anointing him our starting center. I think he should be in the mix to compete for the job, but he is very inexperienced. I personally would like him better at guard in the zone blocking scheme.

I think Eslinger would be better than Hogdon at center if we are looking to go with a strong youth movement.

Last yr. was his rookie campaign, he came in and outperformed McKinney. You don't expect that and even though he was hurt he showed he could handle the position. Now at the moment Hodgdon should be the starting center because he is familiar with the zone blocking scheme the Texans will run and better equipped to handle it than McKinney. Sure, as the season progresses Enslinger if we get him might get the spot. However to start a rookie like that would be foolish. Also there is no guarantee we get Mangold or Enslayer, and at the moment the oldest/weakest position on the line is guard. So plugging in a rookie at center you weaken 2 spots instead of strengthening the one that needs to be strenghthened.

BuffSoldier
02-18-2006, 12:16 PM
IMO Wand is nothing more than a backup at this point. This is what I want.

Ferguson..Wade...Hogdon...Wiegert...Pitts

HJam72
02-18-2006, 12:21 PM
OK, I'll throw one out there:

Pitts....McKinney....Hodgedon....Wiegert....Fergus on

(Ferguson would switch with Pitts eventually, but not this year.)

threetoedpete
02-18-2006, 02:51 PM
Wand, Pitts, McKinney...? Just kill me now. Wand may show improvement at LT, but he won't be better than Pitts there anytime soon and, more importantly, I don't want to ever see McKinney at center again. He doesn't belong there. :twocents:

Agreed, LOL kill me too. Wand is a grass killer at this point. I stand to be corrected, but his negative coming out was upper body strength. I assume that hasn't changed. I.E. he can't play anything on the right side no matter what scheme you stick him in or who the line coach guru is. You call that here thing a bust. There is nothing on this football team's roster at gaurd that keeps the D coordinators up at nights. You could flush the lot of them , re-draft and still be ahead of the game. JMHO. The drafting of another center day one after you've already taken one the year befor gets you on the old Bengals road. Awefull ,with no prospect of digging out of this hole. This o line stinks, has stunk for four years and needs to be fixed, now. The only gaurd on the roster with any value at all is Washington. Low cap, effecient when he plays. JMHO. I'm fed up with this.

threetoedpete
02-18-2006, 03:06 PM
I don't mean to disrespect anyone, but I am not sure why so many people are jumping on the Hogdon bandwagon.

I am not saying is a bad player, to the contrary he may turn out to be a very good interior lineman. However, the guy played less than 10 quarters in the NFL. I think it is a little quick to be anointing him our starting center. I think he should be in the mix to compete for the job, but he is very inexperienced. I personally would like him better at guard in the zone blocking scheme.

I think Eslinger would be better than Hogdon at center if we are looking to go with a strong youth movement.

Well , one thing about him, he made a matched set of players who ended up
in the texan's infirmary. TBS you pray like heck he's not down with Japporu sickness and you ride it out. You don't re-draft positions year after year. Give Hogdon his props for a good rookie year and go get a Joppru replacement day two. JMHO.

bdiddy
02-18-2006, 07:30 PM
Seriously, Hodgdon played in 4 games (really two and a half).

I am not saying he is a bad player, but do we really know that he should be in our starting lineup. He outplayed McKinney at center (at least that is what several of you think) because he had McKinney at guard. McKinney is an average center who had two underperforming guards on either side of him. This was what made him look so bad.

For all intensive purposes Hodgdon is still a rookie with little experience. To all the Wand bashers, he started the majority of games at LT a year ago - our best year as an offense. After that season using the logic you use to annoint Hodgdon a penciled in starter he should have gone to the Pro Bowl this past year.

I want to improve the line, perhaps Hodgdon will help, but he is not the clear cut be all answer at center.

ArlingtonTexan
02-18-2006, 07:47 PM
Seriously, Hodgdon played in 4 games (really two and a half).

I am not saying he is a bad player, but do we really know that he should be in our starting lineup. He outplayed McKinney at center (at least that is what several of you think) because he had McKinney at guard. McKinney is an average center who had two underperforming guards on either side of him. This was what made him look so bad.

For all intensive purposes Hodgdon is still a rookie with little experience. To all the Wand bashers, he started the majority of games at LT a year ago - our best year as an offense. After that season using the logic you use to annoint Hodgdon a penciled in starter he should have gone to the Pro Bowl this past year.

I want to improve the line, perhaps Hodgdon will help, but he is not the clear cut be all answer at center.

You do realize that you just started a post where you annoited the same center position to a potential rookie that the Texans have in theory no better than a 1/32 chance of getting?

ccdude730
02-18-2006, 10:41 PM
OK, I'll throw one out there:

Pitts....McKinney....Hodgedon....Wiegert....Fergus on

(Ferguson would switch with Pitts eventually, but not this year.)
i think right now that is the most accurate one for next season. as for the future - we might be looking at

dbrick-pitts-hodgdon-(unknown)-wand

at least thats something i think can be effective. but for now we are stuck with wade. we need some sort of return on that investment IMO so he might be shoved into the lineup this next season. there is also mckinney and weigert who MIGHT be released. weigert is useful but his salary is high for someone older and more fragile. mckinney is not even an average center or guard. outside of hodgdon (since i havent seen him much) the future line im predicting would be pretty athletic so far

phan1
02-19-2006, 12:30 AM
Dude, I'm looking for an UPGRADE at Oline. F this economical crap!

Anyway, I hope we get a good RT as our 2nd round pick. Pitts was looking very solid at LT for us, and I want him to stay there, unless a guy can clearly outperform him (something I don't see anyone doing, even after the draft).

ArlingtonTexan
02-19-2006, 05:02 PM
man i like this

D'Brick-Mckinney-Bentley-Hogdon-Weigert

i think it would be real big for bentley to come in and fix this OLine

imagine how he would feel if this line is better he will get a HUGE bonus

and yes we have been economical for 4 years with this line i think is time to start spending money

the opposite is true. The Texans have spent heavily on the OL with poor results. Wade, McKinney, Weigert were all FA signing for above average money for thier positions. I believe in terms of pure dollars spent the Texans have one the top 10 OLs.

AustinJB
02-19-2006, 05:04 PM
man i like this

D'Brick-Mckinney-Bentley-Hogdon-Weigert

i think it would be real big for bentley to come in and fix this OLine

imagine how he would feel if this line is better he will get a HUGE bonus

and yes we have been economical for 4 years with this line i think is time to start spending money

Just assuming that we do pick D'Brick, I'd have to say I'd prefer this line:

D'Brick-McKinney-Bentley-Weigert/Hodgdon-Pitts

<OR> (considering that the coaching staff seems high on Weary)

D'Brick-Weary-Bentley-Weigert/Hodgdon-Pitts

ArlingtonTexan
02-19-2006, 05:32 PM
but weigert has been the only good one

but im saying look at teams like the 49ers no body wanted to sign with them after their horrible season what makes you think they will wnat to sign with us

that is why we should trade to Jets and get abraham with D'Brick
and make a relly strong push at Bentley


The easy thing say is go after the highest profile Olmen in the draft and FA. the reality is that most good offensive lines are mostly built with a bunch of guys named Joe many of whom are from Nowhere State.

Throwing dollars at the OL may or may not help, but the real answer is better scouting of talent, coaching and schemes.

sangien
02-20-2006, 05:10 PM
I for one think the discussion should be do we go O-Line or d-Line.
I think Chester is the answer at one of the tackle positions he just need a buddy on the opposite side. A gaurd or center in the second would also make a lot of sense. We would be set for years!:drool:

Mr Shush
02-22-2006, 08:38 AM
I think Denver and New England are two classic cases in point of how it is possible to build an excellent O-line with comparatively little expenditure provided you have good coaching. We didn't. We hope that we now do. Whoever ends up with Bentley is going to be paying a very good interior lineman Hall of Fame money. That sort of approach is a good way to make very sure you never win a championship.

dat_boy_yec
02-22-2006, 06:43 PM
I for one think the discussion should be do we go O-Line or d-Line.
I think Chester is the answer at one of the tackle positions he just need a buddy on the opposite side. A gaurd or center in the second would also make a lot of sense. We would be set for years!:drool:

Second what, I hope you're not talking about the second round. I could understand guard or center in the third, but the only position on the o-line I see them even considering in the second is tackle. There would still be great line prospects for the interior in the third and later on.