PDA

View Full Version : Wiegert to RT? (McClain Report)


The Dude Abides
04-01-2006, 11:45 PM
Justice & McClain were talking on their audio at the chron.com. McClain says that Wiegert will be the RT, and the staff supposedly likes Weary, and will draft 2 more lineman. The teams wants more toughness and leadership.:redtowel:

TEXANS84
04-02-2006, 12:36 AM
If that is true...bye bye to Todd Wade.

aj.
04-02-2006, 12:47 AM
If that is true...bye bye to Todd Wade.

And hello yet another huge dead money cap hit ($6.7). Add that to Walker's $7.3 and chalk it up as the two worst contracts ever executed by this organization.

TexanSam
04-02-2006, 01:05 AM
I would still rather prefer a lineman who has played RT for the majority of his career. Would have loved if we got Ashworth. Maybe we'll draft a guy with our 2nd or 3rd round pick, but I'm not sure if I would rather have Weigert or a rookie starting. We'll see how training camp and such goes.

Scooter
04-02-2006, 08:02 AM
please no, weigert's even slower than wade. wade's easy enough to beat with a wide speed rush, there wasnt any "beating" weigert though ... they just walked around him.

Coach C.
04-02-2006, 08:05 AM
I have posted on this several times, this is old news. Weigert is solid at RT and he has played it earlier in his career. He is likely our secon best linemen when healthy and having the whole year at the tackle position he will do just fine. Weigert is no slower than George Foster of the Broncos.

Runner
04-02-2006, 08:23 AM
please no, weigert's even slower than wade. wade's easy enough to beat with a wide speed rush, there wasnt any "beating" weigert though ... they just walked around him.

The two fastest lineman during conditioning runs the past couple of weeks, usually by a good margin - Weigert and Wand. Interestingly enough, these are also two of the three lineman (along with Wade) frequently described on this board as "too slow". The runs I'm talking about are 20X110 and 20X40 yard sprints with one minute to rest in between. Note the runs consist of both offensive and defensive lineman.

I know the next statement is usually "speed isn't quickness", but Wiegert and Wand are also quicker in drills and play conditions than they are given credit for, especially Wand.

However, they are slow compared to the receivers, if that is what posters mean. :)

Honoring Earl 34
04-02-2006, 10:20 AM
My question would be ... why has Weary been ignored for all these years . He was the #1 center in 2002 .

Vinny
04-02-2006, 10:30 AM
Weary has had trouble with foot and hand work....dysfunctional coaching didn't help him much. He is very limber and is an excellent athlete for his size (if you watch him warm up he can just about do the splits). On Weigert and Walker, aj called these bad contracts for what they were years ago. Since both look like they will give us a massive amount of dead money he was bulls-eye from the get go on these.

As Runner stated, Weigert is an excellent athlete. His big drawback is poor lateral movement. He is good at the second level (not all linemen are good at blocking smaller guys in space) and probably our best run blocker. He is going to get smoked from time to time on the edge in pass protection.

Scooter
04-02-2006, 11:14 AM
The two fastest lineman during conditioning runs the past couple of weeks, usually by a good margin - Weigert and Wand. Interestingly enough, these are also two of the three lineman (along with Wade) frequently described on this board as "too slow". The runs I'm talking about are 20X110 and 20X40 yard sprints with one minute to rest in between. Note the runs consist of both offensive and defensive lineman.

I know the next statement is usually "speed isn't quickness", but Wiegert and Wand are also quicker in drills and play conditions than they are given credit for, especially Wand.

However, they are slow compared to the receivers, if that is what posters mean. :)

i meant side to side. a tackle has to be able to move laterally to cover a much larger space than guards. weigert may get to the second level quicker than most, but he doesnt move backwards and laterally as well as a right tackle should. a guard running sprints is one thing, a tackle needs to be a lot more agile & able to slide out. that being said, i'm not high on weigert either way, sorry. i'm directing this at the passing game because while it's got a LOT of room for improvement, our run blocking isnt nearly as bad.

dat_boy_yec
04-02-2006, 11:38 AM
I wouldn't believe McClain, I like to hear him talk sometimes because I love the Texans, but I think he's just making assumptions. Ala Young. I think Wand will get a shot at the line-up and Weigart will keep his spot. Even if you were to draft a lineman, why throw him out there before he's ready. Weary I could see him coming in, but still I think Weigart is a better option at guard and Wand at tackle. The two W's on the Weak side sound ok to me. Lol.

TEXANS84
04-02-2006, 11:45 AM
And hello yet another huge dead money cap hit ($6.7). Add that to Walker's $7.3 and chalk it up as the two worst contracts ever executed by this organization.

Was Ferens negotiating on both of those contracts?

Marcus
04-02-2006, 12:34 PM
And hello yet another huge dead money cap hit ($6.7). Add that to Walker's $7.3 and chalk it up as the two worst contracts ever executed by this organization.
Well, with the new staff, they're probably looking at both Wade and Walker as more dead wood than dead money. I'd give them credit for at least facing reality and shucking the dead wood, and getting someone in here who can play.

I'm sure the Texans are not the only team in the league who has dead money issues. Come to think of it, it would be nice to see a ranking of which teams owe the most dead money on the their respective caps.

aj.
04-02-2006, 01:12 PM
I'd give them credit for at least facing reality and shucking the dead wood, and getting someone in here who can play.
.

That's kind of like buying a stock at $50 and patting yourself on the back for selling at $30 as the price is headed toward zero. You don't spend 21 million in signing bonuses on two players and cut them two years later - that is if you want to remain in a competitive financial position. I can say with confidence that there aren't many teams carrying 14 mill of dead money on two guys - if it comes to that.

I would assume Ferens nego'd both Walker's and Wade's. Walker was Capers guy and Dom panicked when he was about to become a FA in '03 or whenever it was. There was a lot of head scratching around the league when they gave him that $11 million bonus. I think they just misplayed the whole Wade deal - and Greenwood to a much lesser extent.

We're starting to see more about how these deals came down in the past. I think McNair has tightened the screws significantly with the amout of guaranteed money he's willing to throw at one player. They gave Weaver $12 mill up front which is a ton - but at least he's young and he's the only one this year. However, McNair spoke publicly how Givens wasn't worth the 5 mill per shortly after he signed with Tenn... that was unusual and different to hear him say those words.

Weigert played some LT at Jax so I was never really opposed to him lining up out there - once I saw he could still do it and that age and the injuries hadn't rendered him incapable.

Runner
04-02-2006, 01:15 PM
Well, with the new staff, they're probably looking at both Wade and Walker as more dead wood than dead money. I'd give them credit for at least facing reality and shucking the dead wood, and getting someone in here who can play.

I'm sure the Texans are not the only team in the league who has dead money issues. Come to think of it, it would be nice to see a ranking of which teams owe the most dead money on the their respective caps.

I heard an interview with the Browns GM about their free agent moves this year. He said last year they took some painful dead money hits, but it set them up nicely for this year. At some point you've got to pay for bad contracts - over their length or a more painful one time hit.

We may have to do the same as the Browns did if, for instance, Wade can't show more of his upside during camp.

Runner
04-02-2006, 01:17 PM
Weigert played some LT at Jax so I was never really opposed to him lining up out there - once I saw he could still do it and that age and the injuries hadn't rendered him incapable.

I think injuries will be Weigert's limiting factor the rest of his career.

edo783
04-02-2006, 01:21 PM
Isn't the dead cap money only for this year and gone by next?

Keldar
04-02-2006, 01:25 PM
That's kind of like buying a stock at $50 and patting yourself on the back for selling at $30 as the price is headed toward zero. You don't spend 21 million in signing bonuses on two players and cut them two years later - that is if you want to remain in a competitive financial position. I can say with confidence that there aren't many teams carrying 14 mill of dead money on two guys - if it comes to that.

I don't think your suggesting to keep bums just because it's gonna be a financial loss. That being said, my two cents are as follows:

Wade = liability - trade him, cut him, dump him, take your medicine for making a careless financial mistake. Do not keep bums just because we are gonna take a cap hit.

nunusguy
04-02-2006, 01:32 PM
Isn't the dead cap money only for this year and gone by next?
Yea, its a one year deal, no amortization over multiple periods. That's why the
cap hit is so potent. But only hurts for a little while.

aj.
04-02-2006, 01:38 PM
Isn't the dead cap money only for this year and gone by next?

In the case of Walker, they could take the entire hit this year but they won't have room, especially if they dump Wade too. The current plan for ridding Walker's dead money as I understand it is to take $1.8 this year and $5.5 in '07. That's 5% of next year's cap spent on Gary Walker.

Sure, sooner or later, every team is faced with challenging financial decisions, e.g., the Titans with McNair, the Colts with Edge ... BUT that's typically a situation you deal with for your star players - not the Todd Wade's or the broken down Gary Walker's of the world.

Marcus
04-02-2006, 01:44 PM
You don't spend 21 million in signing bonuses on two players and cut them two years later - that is if you want to remain in a competitive financial position. I can say with confidence that there aren't many teams carrying 14 mill of dead money on two guys - if it comes to that.
Well, what is it exactly they should be doing once they realize that are not panning out? Just keep them around to ride the pine for even more money?

To use your analogy of the stock, if you bought it at $50, and then you realize it's falling, do you wait till it goes to $0 before you cut bait?

Kaiser Toro
04-02-2006, 01:44 PM
In the case of Walker, they could take the entire hit this year but they won't have room, especially if they dump Wade too. The current plan for ridding Walker's dead money as I understand it is to take $1.8 this year and $5.5 in '07. That's 5% of next year's cap spent on Gary Walker.

Sure, sooner or later, every team is faced with challenging financial decisions, e.g., the Titans with McNair, the Colts with Edge ... BUT that's typically a situation you deal with for your star players - not the Todd Wade's or the broken down Gary Walker's of the world.

The silver lining is that the cap does go up incrementally year over year. We are toast next year in FA if we cut Wade.

aj.
04-02-2006, 01:50 PM
I don't think your suggesting to keep bums just because it's gonna be a financial loss. .

I guess I was suggesting not to give mediocre or once good but declining players gargantuan contracts in the first place. I'm not hindsighting this. Pull some of my rants from '04 and I was off the charts on what I called WWS. I have since softened on Robaire because I think he can at least play 2/3 of his contract at a decent return on investment.

Texas
04-02-2006, 03:31 PM
Neither wade or wiegert should be on our line in my opinion. Of course we will at least keep 1 but I really beleive to improve this team we kick them out and start looking at replacing them

aj.
04-02-2006, 03:42 PM
Well, what is it exactly they should be doing once they realize that are not panning out? Just keep them around to ride the pine for even more money?

To use your analogy of the stock, if you bought it at $50, and then you realize it's falling, do you wait till it goes to $0 before you cut bait?

How about not buying it in the first place, and instead look for something with a much lower P/E ratio?

If we substituted Junior Ioane full time for Gary Walker the last two seasons, would it made that much of a difference? Todd Wade is slightly better than Jimmy Herndon. So let's throw 10 mill guaranteed at him ... yearright ..... These were *****ic moves, in my opinion, and McNair now realizes it. It was an expensive learning curve for him.

I liked the Givens restraint this time around. That's a non move that will pay off in the long run.

keyfro
04-02-2006, 03:48 PM
hey aj i understand about the dead cap hit to the team...but if it's what kubiak feels is best for this team then oh well...i still see us using our 2nd round pick on a lineman...whether that's jonathan scott (who i personally believe is the guy we're targetting) or davin joseph (could very well be the best guard in this draft and could start right away) both players have the ability to help us out a lot this year...scott could also play guard until sherman feels he is ready for the RT position...and don't forget scott does have the physical ability to play LT...he just needs some time to get adjusted to the nfl...IMO

aj.
04-02-2006, 03:55 PM
My point has nothing to do with cutting the player. It has everything to do with signing that player at that price. They've done a much better job this year. Weaver is the only one with huge guaranteed jack and he's young enough - and hopefully good enough - to play 2/3 of his contract like Ro-beast.

I'm looking forward to the new blood and clearing all the dust bunnies from under the head coach's desk. Kind of like the remodeling that goes on when a woman moves into a used home. Gotta get rid of that scent from the previous tenant...

Since you mentioned Scott, if he's there at 65 ... snag him - after Bush and Youboty, and before either DQ or Hodge.