PDA

View Full Version : what if ????


baba ganoush
03-19-2006, 12:25 PM
The Texans mainly need an offensive line. So would the Texans even think about taking two Offensive Lineman with their first two pics? If so, I think they would take D'Brickashaw Ferguson who would end up being our franchise left tackle, and Jonathan Scott and move him over to the right side. Or instead of Scott take a guard or center? And then use the rest of the picks on the defensive side of the ball.

LT - Ferguson
LG - Pitts
C - Hodgdon
RG - McKinney
RT - Weigert/Wade

MorKnolle
03-19-2006, 12:48 PM
The Texans mainly need an offensive line. So would the Texans even think about taking two Offensive Lineman with their first two pics? If so, I think they would take D'Brickashaw Ferguson who would end up being our franchise left tackle, and Jonathan Scott and move him over to the right side. Or instead of Scott take a guard or center? And then use the rest of the picks on the defensive side of the ball.

LT - Ferguson
LG - Pitts
C - Hodgdon
RG - McKinney
RT - Weigert/Wade

No, they wouldn't take Scott in that case. If they did want to go OLine with their first two picks and took Ferguson, that would bump Chester Pitts to RT and they'd look for an interior guy in the 2nd like Nick Mangold, and if he wasn't around I don't think any other interior OLinemen would be worth that high of a pick for us and we'd wait and get another one later (i.e. Setterstrom, Eslinger, or Chris Chester who I really hope they get in the 4th or even 3rd round).

PokerStar
03-19-2006, 12:53 PM
Man I have noticed just going over the boards alot of people really want Ferguson, do most people not realize that we have Pitts and Kubiak and Sherman think highly of him. He is a better fit at LT than Lepsis. THe word in Denver is that Lepsis while solid leaves alot to be desired in passprotection. I watched Pitts get moved back to his natural tackle position and after handling Freeney, make Suggs switch sides, and take care of most any passrusher they faced later on why would you want Ferguson. I am new here, but it seems like Bush or Mario would be the best bet. If I was GM i would likely go Mario just because fast RBs come along often, but freak passrushers do not.

MorKnolle
03-19-2006, 12:58 PM
Man I have noticed just going over the boards alot of people really want Ferguson, do most people not realize that we have Pitts and Kubiak and Sherman think highly of him. He is a better fit at LT than Lepsis. THe word in Denver is that Lepsis while solid leaves alot to be desired in passprotection. I watched Pitts get moved back to his natural tackle position and after handling Freeney, make Suggs switch sides, and take care of most any passrusher they faced later on why would you want Ferguson. I am new here, but it seems like Bush or Mario would be the best bet. If I was GM i would likely go Mario just because fast RBs come along often, but freak passrushers do not.

I agree with you. Good post.

Trap_Star
03-19-2006, 01:27 PM
Man I have noticed just going over the boards alot of people really want Ferguson, do most people not realize that we have Pitts and Kubiak and Sherman think highly of him. He is a better fit at LT than Lepsis. THe word in Denver is that Lepsis while solid leaves alot to be desired in passprotection. I watched Pitts get moved back to his natural tackle position and after handling Freeney, make Suggs switch sides, and take care of most any passrusher they faced later on why would you want Ferguson. I am new here, but it seems like Bush or Mario would be the best bet. If I was GM i would likely go Mario just because fast RBs come along often, but freak passrushers do not.

If im not mistaken, we drafted Pitts to be our Left-Guard. The only reason he played tackle was because Boselli never made it to the field. At this point it does'nt seem to me that D'brick will be a TEXAN.:brickwall It will be BUSH or MARIO. Im leaning towards Mario, but im going to wait for the USC pro-day. I can still wish for D'BRICK, right????......:crying:

Peldon
03-19-2006, 01:34 PM
I think a lot of people feel that even though he played well against the likes of Freeny and Suggs, it was in an offensive scheme that left a lot to be desired. All we saw out of him is how well he protected on 1 and 3 step drops, not really a good way to measure his ability. He might be able to handle the position but I think he would be better suited as a right tackle.

Also, with the way our line played last year, there is no question we need to upgrade some positions. If we get a franchise left tackle that would free up Pitts to move to right tackle or guard and make the line just that much stronger. Personally I would rather have Mario Williams but I think D'brik is next on my list. I wouldn't be upset if we waited until the second to pick up a tackle or Mangold or the third for a guard, but I think we need to draft a lineman on the first day.

PokerStar
03-19-2006, 01:40 PM
Peldon, honestly you make a good point, but watch him against Freeney and he held up well on longer drops. He is not a G and did not even play G in college, not sure what Capers was thinking on that one He should have been our LT/RT from the start and people would know that we have a stud, but we do have a starting LT getting paid like a G right now so at least the FO was smart on that one. The one thing I noticed about our line is that Weigert at RT and healthy is a player and a younger guy that he can mentor (maybe College or Chester) would do well here. Also, our interior is just terrible, moving McKinney to LG will help, but Weary and Hogdon do not inspire my confidence. Once again a Mangold would help that cause, but not sure if I pick him over Jonathan Joseph if the both fall. I think Joseph is this year's D-rob. Chris Chester, Daryn Colledge, Nick Mangold, and Andrew Whitworth would be nice picks in the second or third. Chester is likely a 4 or 5th rounder though. He is very intriguing seeing that he can play anywhere on the line, and if the Strength and Conditioning guys can make him a good bit stronger we are likely looking at our starting RT or RG of the future.