PDA

View Full Version : Pitts on 610


HoustonFrog
04-27-2006, 04:33 PM
He said right now he is a left guard and Wand at left tackle. Said he is dieting to get lighter because they are learning the pure zone blocking of moving and cutting. Great, now the other teams can call us dirty..:)..McKinney, Weigart on the other side. That is it for now.

pittbull
04-27-2006, 04:38 PM
I feel like a better at the track. I just want my horse to come in!!! Come on Bush, come on!!!

pittbull
04-27-2006, 04:39 PM
Sounds like he also wants reggie running behind him!

TEXANRED
04-27-2006, 04:39 PM
He said right now he is a left guard and Wand at left tackle. Said he is dieting to get lighter because they are learning the pure zone blocking of moving and cutting. Great, now the other teams can call us dirty..:)..McKinney, Weigart on the other side. That is it for now.
You have got to be kidding me. The best our line has looked was years 2 and latter half of year 4. That is with Pitts playing Left Tackle. Freeney makes Wand look like a chump. Wand couldn't even beat out Victor Riley for playing time much less starting.

fball
04-27-2006, 04:44 PM
That because we had an incompetent coaching staff, that why they got fired! :redtowel:

HoustonFrog
04-27-2006, 04:45 PM
You have got to be kidding me. The best our line has looked was years 2 and latter half of year 4. That is with Pitts playing Left Tackle. Freeney makes Wand look like a chump. Wand couldn't even beat out Victor Riley for playing time much less starting.

They asked him straight up if he is a T or G and he said G for right now. He said he just wants to stick somewhere. Maybe I was reading too much into it but he seemed "resigned" or a little down about that question like he preferred T. Of course it is early and this is April. Looks like I'm not the only one who thouight he wasn't happy about being at LG. The guys on the show said you could tell and hear it through the phone.

Runner
04-27-2006, 05:36 PM
He said right now he is a left guard and Wand at left tackle.

Is this a good enough source to confirm the unfounded rumor that the left side isn't "set" with Pitts/McKinney?

They asked him straight up if he is a T or G and he said G for right now. He said he just wants to stick somewhere. Maybe I was reading too much into it but he seemed "resigned" or a little down about that question like he preferred T. Of course it is early and this is April. Looks like I'm not the only one who thouight he wasn't happy about being at LG. The guys on the show said you could tell and hear it through the phone.

He probably isn't happy about it, because tackle, especially left tackle, is more glamorous. If he puts that behind him and plays guard as a team player, this is the best unit we have right now.

Runner
04-27-2006, 05:39 PM
Wand couldn't even beat out Victor Riley for playing time much less starting.

And the line played far worse after that brilliant decision.

Sherman has confidence in this line-up. I trust his judgement, but we'll certainly see how it unfolds.

jacquescas
04-27-2006, 05:40 PM
and once Eric Winston or Marcus McNeill (whomever we take in the 2nd round) comes in and beats the snot out of Wand it will be clear to Pitts that he is a guard.

Ibar_Harry
04-27-2006, 05:42 PM
He probably isn't happy about it, because tackle, especially left tackle, is more glamorous. If he puts that behind him and plays guard as a team player, this is the best unit we have right now.

Yes, and I have felt part of Wand's problems were Pitts playing LG. I have wanted Wiegert to play the LG position. I think that would be an excellent combination. Wiegert is always a team player and seems to take guys under his wing. I have always wanted Pitts at the RT or RG position.

HJam72
04-27-2006, 05:48 PM
Yes, and I have felt part of Wand's problems were Pitts playing LG. I have wanted Wiegert to play the LG position. I think that would be an excellent combination. Wiegert is always a team player and seems to take guys under his wing. I have always wanted Pitts at the RT or RG position.

Thanks a lot. Now I'm really getting confused. :)

I've always thought that what Wand needs is a guy like Flannagan at LG to help him out. We should just put Pitts at center and, oh by the way, lets stick McKinney over at RT. See how that works out. :wacko:

edit: Can't we stick Wade in at MLB? :)

Ibar_Harry
04-27-2006, 05:53 PM
Thanks a lot. Now I'm really getting confused. :)

I've always thought that what Wand needs is a guy like Flannagan at LG to help him out. We should just put Pitts at center and, oh by the way, lets stick McKinney over at RT. See how that works out. :wacko:

edit: Can't we stick Wade in at MLB? :)

Make fun if you like, but the QB relys on left side protection. You need two guys working together. That's the way I feel.

HJam72
04-27-2006, 05:54 PM
Last year, just a few months ago actually, Pitts was our best LT and Wand was coming around at RT. I think we should stick with that unless we draft somebody like Winston. I must admit that I'm confused on this issue some, but I just don't see putting Wand at LT helping this team, even though he will probably be a lot better than he was 2 yrs. ago.

HJam72
04-27-2006, 05:56 PM
Make fun if you like, but the QB relys on left side protection. You need two guys working together. That's the way I feel.

Sorry, I disagree some (I think), but I was really just having fun with ya.

Runner
04-27-2006, 05:56 PM
All Wand needs is some improved footwork and some double team help against Freeney, like 90% of the NFL does (including the Texans last year with Pitts/Brown).

When someone grades Wand only by the 2004 Indy games, they see a first year starter/second year project going one-on-one against a player that anyone short of Orlando Pace gets help with. This is a specific example of bad coaching.



Last year, just a few months ago actually, Pitts was our best LT and Wand was coming around at RT. I think we should stick with that unless we draft somebody like Winston. I must admit that I'm confused on this issue some, but I just don't see putting Wand at LT helping this team, even though he will probably be a lot better than he was 2 yrs. ago.

Pitts was the best LT we had that played any significant time last year. Sherman thinks Wand is the best left tackle on the roster. Remember, he was a three year project that exceeded expectations by starting his second year. Then he was benched. We have some hidden gems on our roster who weren't discovered/used by our old staff.

SESupergenius
04-27-2006, 06:00 PM
This is alarming if true. Another year lf shuffling=another year Carr gets sacks. Wand at LT? Are you kidding me? Where does Mckinney end up?

Ibar_Harry
04-27-2006, 06:02 PM
Sorry, I disagree some (I think), but I was really just having fun with ya.

Hey, that's alright, but I really do not like Pitts at the LG position. I think he has to much interest in the LT position. I think he needs a change of scenery. This is a gut feeling thing. I really feel strongly about Wiegert and his team play. Actually Wiegert played some LT for the Rams I believe. So he too is not unfamilar with the play at that position.

Line play is all about team work. I just feel these two are our best players for the left side at this point in time. After the draft that might be another matter.

Runner
04-27-2006, 06:04 PM
This is alarming if true. Another year lf shuffling=another year Carr gets sacks. Wand at LT? Are you kidding me? Where does Mckinney end up?

The o-line depth chart for the past month has been Wand-Pitts-Flanagan-McKinney-Weigert.

Here's a previous discussion:

http://www.houstontexans.com/fan_zone/messageboards/showthread.php?t=21229

Texans Horror
04-27-2006, 06:15 PM
Part of Pitts' performance last year was the shorter offensive release (Carr took fewer steps, then either dumped the ball off or high-tailed it to the nearest corner). I'm not trying to knock Pitts here, but I think if you are going to compare Pitts and Wands, you need to consider that Wand had to block longer.

Also, as has been mentioned, Wand received less help on the line; switching Pitts and McKinney could help the chemistry out.

Porky
04-27-2006, 06:18 PM
Pitts is a better guard flat out, and Wand fits this scheme, so give him a chance, at least pending what we do this weekend. I have no problem with this move. This isn't a suprise to the people who come here alot. And, there is also a good article on hpf regarding this for those interested.

Vinny
04-27-2006, 06:21 PM
Pitts is a better guard flat out, and Wand fits this scheme, so give him a chance, at least pending what we do this weekend. I have no problem with this move. This isn't a suprise to the people who come here alot. And, there is also a good article on hpf regarding this for those interested.It's probably the ideal configuration if Wand is up to it. McKinney and Pitts would make solid NFL Guards. Flanagan is the best player Pitts or McKinney has ever lined up next to in the middle. All we need to do is draft a young promising Tackle and this looks good to me.

Kaiser Toro
04-27-2006, 06:23 PM
Pitts was extended/re-signed as a Guard. Expectations in my opinion have been set.

I, like some others, feel that Wand could be the biggest diamond in the rough that the former staff stymied.

Texans_Chick
04-27-2006, 07:33 PM
Was there any more information that came out from the interview??? I really haven't heard much about what the Oline is doing.

HoustonFrog
04-27-2006, 08:10 PM
Was there any more information that came out from the interview??? I really haven't heard much about what the Oline is doing.

Just what I put above. He said he was eating egg whites and yogurt to slim down so he could be fresh in the 4th quarter with the new blocking scheme. He also was asked to compare the two regimes. He said Capers was all about boot camp discipline and doing everything a million times in the same order, etc. He said Kubiak is a little more laid back and believes that guys shouldn't "over" practice to wear themselves out during the week...injuries, etc. He seemed really happy with this because he said that it is like studying for a test, sometimes if you overthink and practice/study 5 hours you can wear out. He said they are trying to stay fresh. Made me think that Capers ways wore on them and just kept them at it day and night.

Runner
04-27-2006, 08:46 PM
Just what I put above. He said he was eating egg whites and yogurt to slim down so he could be fresh in the 4th quarter with the new blocking scheme. He also was asked to compare the two regimes. He said Capers was all about boot camp discipline and doing everything a million times in the same order, etc. He said Kubiak is a little more laid back and believes that guys shouldn't "over" practice to wear themselves out during the week...injuries, etc. He seemed really happy with this because he said that it is like studying for a test, sometimes if you overthink and practice/study 5 hours you can wear out. He said they are trying to stay fresh. Made me think that Capers ways wore on them and just kept them at it day and night.

I think it is a common belief among those close to the team that the extreme practices led to late season fatigue and injuires (even pre-2005).

CoastalTexan
04-27-2006, 08:49 PM
I can tell you from experience, Boot camp is not fun. I would imagine if you were a PRO athlete it would blow even more to be in any kind of environment like that.

keyfro
04-27-2006, 09:01 PM
hey part of the problem with this offensive line was that they had no consistant coaching...with mike sherman in along with flanagan at center that will change...wand not starting last year i think was a huge mistake...you start the kid when he wasn't ready but the next year you bench him...why?...for victor riley who was so slow dwight freeney could have walked around him to sack carr...as long as we get either winston or scott in round two i think we'll have a young LT to groom and challenge seth wand

aj.
04-27-2006, 09:25 PM
Was there any more information that came out from the interview??? I really haven't heard much about what the Oline is doing.

Chester confirmed earlier reports that Flanagan is a great guy to have around...

Kaiser Toro
04-27-2006, 09:43 PM
I think it is a common belief among those close to the team that the extreme practices led to late season fatigue and injuires (even pre-2005).

Which may explain the offenisve droughts in the 2nd and 4th quarters through our short history.

Hervoyel
04-28-2006, 12:13 AM
You have got to be kidding me. The best our line has looked was years 2 and latter half of year 4. That is with Pitts playing Left Tackle. Freeney makes Wand look like a chump. Wand couldn't even beat out Victor Riley for playing time much less starting.


In the year Wand started he wasn't all that much worse than Pitts was in his first year starting at LT at this level. Pitts had his best year at LT in his second season playing it. Wand never got a second season to show improvement. Pendry sent him to the dog house and Wand was the missing man for all of 2005.

The people who put Victor Riley in over Seth Wand lost their jobs. That pretty much covers it for me. From the day he was drafted all I ever heard anyone say was that Pitts projected to be a dominant Guard. Nobody said he couldn't play LT, just that he could be a Pro-Bowl Guard. Kubiak seems to agree with that initial assessment.

Ibar_Harry
04-28-2006, 02:15 AM
I think it is a common belief among those close to the team that the extreme practices led to late season fatigue and injuires (even pre-2005).


Is this why we had all of the 2nd year injuries. We've talked about that at great length before. I firmly believe the 2nd year injuries destroyed whatever plan they had. If you recall, Glenn never fully recovered while playing for Capers. He always had hamstring problems after the 2nd year.

So everyone saying it wasn't so were wrong. Capers and company were responsible for that problem too. Is it possible that's why are QB was running out of gas at the end of the season and the 4th qtrs? Anyway they are gone and I'm very happy that they are.

Erratic Assassin
04-28-2006, 02:31 AM
He said right now he is a left guard and Wand at left tackle.

Great idea! Let's keep trying the same things and hoping we get different results. Oh well, at least we'll get another #1 pick again next year. Maybe THAT's the plan. We'll have 75% of our salary cap tied up in 5 players.

David Carr- former #1 overall pick
Reggie Bush- 2006 #1 overall pick
?- 2007 #1 overall pick
?- 2008- #1 overall pick
?- 2009- #1 overall pick

How long before we give up on Wand at LT?

ledzeppelin229
04-28-2006, 02:38 AM
Great idea! Let's keep trying the same things and hoping we get different results. Oh well, at least we'll get another #1 pick again next year. Maybe THAT's the plan. We'll have 75% of our salary cap tied up in 5 players.

David Carr- former #1 overall pick
Reggie Bush- 2006 #1 overall pick
?- 2007 #1 overall pick
?- 2008- #1 overall pick
?- 2009- #1 overall pick

How long before we give up on Wand at LT?

Wand didn't play LT last season...so I don't see how it's trying the same thing over again.

Texans Horror
04-28-2006, 08:35 AM
The Texans coaches didn't know a football player from a futbol player. That's how it got so FUBAR. On the plus side, I agree with most people that we are an average team when we have decent coaching. With the upgrades we have received, we should be competitive over the next few years.

BigBull17
04-28-2006, 08:40 AM
Which may explain the offenisve droughts in the 2nd and 4th quarters through our short history.

It also explains alot of the stupid penalties(sp). When you get tired you do things sloppy. Your hand slips down, you try to guess the snap to get that extra step instead of reacting to the ball. You just play sloppy when your that tired.

HJam72
04-28-2006, 08:42 AM
I don't think having Wand at LT would be so bad with the new staff, I just don't know if I agree that it's the best thing. We'll just have to see how much he improves.

HoustonFrog
04-28-2006, 09:02 AM
It also explains alot of the stupid penalties(sp). When you get tired you do things sloppy. Your hand slips down, you try to guess the snap to get that extra step instead of reacting to the ball. You just play sloppy when your that tired.

Well as I said above, he made a reference to 5 hour practices/sessions where they are drilling things into your head. That is a drain. I completely agree with you. He said it is now get in, get your work done, get out.


And Casserly said they might try Matt Murphy at Tackle if he moves up the depth chart.

Hervoyel
04-28-2006, 10:33 AM
Great idea! Let's keep trying the same things and hoping we get different results. Oh well, at least we'll get another #1 pick again next year. Maybe THAT's the plan. We'll have 75% of our salary cap tied up in 5 players.

David Carr- former #1 overall pick
Reggie Bush- 2006 #1 overall pick
?- 2007 #1 overall pick
?- 2008- #1 overall pick
?- 2009- #1 overall pick

How long before we give up on Wand at LT?

I don't see how you can look at the line bringing in all new coaches and being asked to run a completely different system qualifies as "trying the same things and hoping to get different results".

The guys who were calling the shots previously were fired. Dan Reeves was brought in to look at everything and state his opinion which turned out to be "There's nothing all that wrong with the talent" so the coaches and their system were sent packing.

If we accept that Reeves was right then why doesn't this make sense to you?

Texans_Chick
04-28-2006, 11:38 AM
I don't see how you can look at the line bringing in all new coaches and being asked to run a completely different system qualifies as "trying the same things and hoping to get different results".

The guys who were calling the shots previously were fired. Dan Reeves was brought in to look at everything and state his opinion which turned out to be "There's nothing all that wrong with the talent" so the coaches and their system were sent packing.

If we accept that Reeves was right then why doesn't this make sense to you?

I think Reeves' point of view is a little more complicated than saying that the talent was all good.

See e.g.:

Reeves/Dan Patrick interview thread (http://www.houstontexans.com/fan_zone/messageboards/showthread.php?t=21689&highlight=reeves)

DP - What's most pressing need?
Reeves - Awful lot of them, offensive line, did a good job against the run, need to do better in pass rush.

DP - Does it make sense to get Bush?
Reeves - It's debateable, but Bush is a great guy, makes the other guys better.

DP - If you had to choose, who would you take?
Reeves - Bush. With the committment to Carr, they need Bush in a skill position.


I am guessing that Reeves' was underwhelmed with the coaching, but still thinks there some issues with the talent.

Texas
04-28-2006, 11:42 AM
Things will change 3-4 more times before the season starts...We will definetly somewhere in the draft take a O-Line player and so we will try different things out. You are all acting like tomorrow is our first game and this is how were going to start players...Give it time...Time will tell!

Mr. White
04-28-2006, 11:49 AM
Pitts is getting moved to Guard is a sure sign that we're drafting Brick Ferguson.










:pigfly: I wish.

Runner
04-28-2006, 11:50 AM
I am guessing that Reeves' was underwhelmed with the coaching, but still thinks there some issues with the talent.

I agree. I think it is educational to look at where they made the free agent talent changes too. That and the draft gives some insight where the decisions were we needed an infusion of players.

DP - What's most pressing need?
Reeves - Awful lot of them, offensive line, did a good job against the run, need to do better in pass rush.

By most pressing need he says o-line - but didn't he say o-line players. Maybe he evaluated Pendry as a bad coach - would that be a surprise? It's possible the best solution to the pressing needs of the o-line was determined to be: good coaching, a solid center, and some young depth. That seems to be the path we are on.

We have possibly the strongest middlle of the line we've ever had, and better coaching for everyone. Wand has the ability, he needs the technique. There is reason for optimism.

HoustonFrog
04-28-2006, 12:09 PM
I agree. I think it is educational to look at where they made the free agent talent changes too. That and the draft gives some insight where the decisions were we needed an infusion of players.



By most pressing need he says o-line - but didn't he say o-line players. Maybe he evaluated Pendry as a bad coach - would that be a surprise? It's possible the best solution to the pressing needs of the o-line was determined to be: good coaching, a solid center, and some young depth. That seems to be the path we are on.

We have possibly the strongest middlle of the line we've ever had, and better coaching for everyone. Wand has the ability, he needs the technique. There is reason for optimism.

My question on Reeves...and this isn't because of the discussion on 610..is why he is on the outside now?I know he was only temporary and was not a candidate for perm. I just thought he was staying through the draft. Just isn't sounding positive. Not a VY thing...more towards FA and direction.

SESupergenius
04-28-2006, 12:23 PM
Sorry people I just can't see us having Wand at LT. We will draft a lineman hopefully by the 3rd round and that player has got to replace someone on this team. We can't go through another year with these quality of players as our oline just so someone can say Carr sucks.

Kaiser Toro
04-28-2006, 12:31 PM
We can't go through another year with these quality of players as our oline just so someone can say Carr sucks.

Or another year where he cannot elevate his game. ROI and TCO on this cat is ridiculous.

bigbrewster2000
04-28-2006, 01:05 PM
This is alarming if true. Another year lf shuffling=another year Carr gets sacks. Wand at LT? Are you kidding me? Where does Mckinney end up?

There is nothing wrong with shuffling because the same core group of guys are on the line together. They have been able to bond over the last few years and will likely play better with the better coaching they will get from Sherman

throwANDREtheBALL
04-28-2006, 01:52 PM
They'd better use a couple of draft picks on O-lineman, cuz this line STILL looks pathetic.

I think its even worse than last year, going into the draft....and all they did last year was use a 5th rounder on O-line. They'd better use 2 picks on the O-line before the 5th round this year, so the bleeding can eventually stop when these guys hit their prime in a couple years.

Runner
04-28-2006, 01:53 PM
My question on Reeves...and this isn't because of the discussion on 610..is why he is on the outside now?I know he was only temporary and was not a candidate for perm. I just thought he was staying through the draft. Just isn't sounding positive. Not a VY thing...more towards FA and direction.

I think that is simply the answer. His temporary contract never extended to the draft - at least I don't think so. He was a hired gun - get in, get done, and get out.

SESupergenius
04-28-2006, 03:52 PM
There is nothing wrong with shuffling because the same core group of guys are on the line together. They have been able to bond over the last few years and will likely play better with the better coaching they will get from Sherman
Keep fooling yourself that this line is good. They've made one good change so far.

Kaiser Toro
04-28-2006, 04:32 PM
Keep fooling yourself that this line is good. They've made one good change so far.

I cannot disagree with that from a personnel standpoint, but ther is a multiplier with the additon of Kubiak, Sherman, Lould, Putzier, Cook and hopefully a regenerated Carr, Johnson and Davis.