PDA

View Full Version : Kubiak's house cleaning!


David's Busted Carr
05-04-2006, 10:03 AM
Goodbye:

Tony Banks QB
Tony Hollings RB
Gary Walker DT
Marcus Coleman S
Milford Brown OL
Jabar Gaffney WR
Corey Bradford WR
Jonathan Wells RB (UFA) - RB drafted he won't be back
Marcellus Rivers TE (UFA) - TE drafted he won't be back
Jerry Deloach DT
Moran Norris FB
Tood Washington OL
Junior Ioane DT
Zeke Moreno LB
Frank Chamberlain LB
Quinn Dorsey LB
Jason Anderson RB
Tupe Peko OL
Hayden Epstein K

That's 19 players! About 1/3 of our roster! And you know what? I won't lose sleep over losing any single one of those players! People get so focused on ONE single player/draft pick that they lose sight of the big picture! With our solid FA aquisions and draft, I think the Texans will get this thing turned around in a hurry.

My only beef with this offseason so far is lack of addressing the secondary, but I'm sure we are saving money for Ed Reed or Roy Williams who are both potentially free agents next off season! :drool:

I'm going to predict our first NON LOSING season this year and going to say we go 8-8. And if we can suprise and go 2-2 our first four games (extremely tough schedule) possibly even 9-7!

:redtowel:

Doom Capers
05-04-2006, 10:32 AM
Wasn't Ioane DT?

El Tejano
05-04-2006, 10:34 AM
I'm not sure if all of the above players were Kubiak's house cleaning. I like to thank he may just not have been in a hurry to sign some of them and they left on their own.

I can't wait til Gaffney shows us how things are so much better when he grabs two catches for 20 yards against us.

El Tejano
05-04-2006, 10:37 AM
Wasn't Ioane DT?
Yes. That was one dude I didn't want to see go. I've always thought he added great depth and when he got an opportunity he played well. I know he made the great tackle against Priest Holmes in KC that lead to the Marcus Coleman pick, he had a real good game up in Buffalo when we won, and he played very well against the Falcons.

However, it seems as though this was a numbers game and his was chosen.

whiskeyrbl
05-04-2006, 11:56 AM
I can't wait til Gaffney shows us how things are so much better when he grabs two catches for 20 yards against us.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, Then DRob lays his *** out and he fumbles twice..lol

El Tejano
05-04-2006, 12:09 PM
I can't wait til Gaffney shows us how things are so much better when he grabs two catches for 20 yards against us.

Yeah, Then DRob lays his *** out and he fumbles twice..lol[/QUOTE]
Ha Ha Ha!!!! I can't wait.

swisher
05-04-2006, 12:29 PM
I can't wait til Gaffney shows us how things are so much better when he grabs two catches for 20 yards against us.


Or, as he crosses the goal line he holds the ball out and drops it resulting in a touchback. Classic.

wenskek
05-04-2006, 02:43 PM
Or, as he crosses the goal line he holds the ball out and drops it resulting in a touchback. Classic.

what a pud he was on that play, by far one of the most bone headed plays to ever go down, i bet it still haunts him!

TwinSisters
05-04-2006, 04:15 PM
Or, as he crosses the goal line he holds the ball out and drops it resulting in a touchback. Classic.

I don't remember this.

**blank scientology stare**

Bobo
05-04-2006, 04:56 PM
I think it was too early to give up on Hollings. He never really had a good shot. They should have kept Gaffney as well. If Carr could have gotten him the ball, he would have been more productive. Wells was very, very productive when Davis was out. Should have kept him as well. I don't think Cook will give you any more than Norris did. The rest of the guys were pretty milquetost, as far as I'm concerned. So that's four out of 19 I disagree with -- all at skill positions for the most part.

Bobo
05-04-2006, 04:59 PM
I can't wait til Gaffney shows us how things are so much better when he grabs two catches for 20 yards against us.

Gaffney might have a better career ahead of him than Moulds does. Moulds is on a downward slide (10 TDs in three years) while Gaffney has his whole career ahead of him. If Gaffney actually gets a shot at catching some balls, he might do very well. Of course, last year, NOBODY got much a chance at catching any balls. Anybody know who led the Texans last year in TD receptions? Hint: It was a guy they cut.

l

Grid
05-04-2006, 05:28 PM
Moulds had 4 TDs last year and 5 TDs in 2004.. it was his partial season in 2003 with 1 TD that gave him the "10 TDs in three years). With Lee Evans on the team, Moulds hasnt been getting the ball as much, but he has still be doing his part.

Dont get me wrong.. Moulds is on the down side of his career and probably isnt going to be a "force" for us or anything..but he is still a solid WR and he will still demand attention from the defense..and help keep the double team off Andre ALOT better than Bradford did.

EF55
05-04-2006, 05:51 PM
Moulds had 4 TDs last year and 5 TDs in 2004.. it was his partial season in 2003 with 1 TD that gave him the "10 TDs in three years). With Lee Evans on the team, Moulds hasnt been getting the ball as much, but he has still be doing his part.

Dont get me wrong.. Moulds is on the down side of his career and probably isnt going to be a "force" for us or anything..but he is still a solid WR and he will still demand attention from the defense..and help keep the double team off Andre ALOT better than Bradford did.

If you just look at this upcoming season. Moulds is still a receiver that we (the eagles) had targeted as well, whether he is on the downside or not he's still better than most # 2 receivers. You guys did a good job in bringing him in. I look at him with the Texans as a transitional talent, he's still got enough left in the tank to help you get from where you are to where you want to be. On the flip side I think Gaffney is a good pick up for the eagles because of the scheme we run but having moulds will benefit the Texans more than gaffney will benefit the Eagles.

SESupergenius
05-04-2006, 05:56 PM
I'd expect a few more coming in June. At 2-14, no player is safe. But please people, keep in mind that this is a whole new offense and defense and you may have to cut them a little slack at the beginning of the season. I tell you what though, if we have a winning preseason I'm going to get my hopes up.

Bobo
05-04-2006, 05:59 PM
Moulds had 4 TDs last year and 5 TDs in 2004.. it was his partial season in 2003 with 1 TD that gave him the "10 TDs in three years). With Lee Evans on the team, Moulds hasnt been getting the ball as much, but he has still be doing his part.

Dont get me wrong.. Moulds is on the down side of his career and probably isnt going to be a "force" for us or anything..but he is still a solid WR and he will still demand attention from the defense..and help keep the double team off Andre ALOT better than Bradford did.

I won't defend Bradford. I had high hopes for him when the Texans took him for their first season. I knew he could get open for the long ball. But he never could catch them! He blew a game last year because he dropped one inside the five near the end of the contest. But the jury on Moulds is out. The fact that Lee Evans has supplanted him shows that he isn't the great receiver he once was. I don't know how much attention he will get from the defenses as his TD rate shows -- four and five TDs aren't very good and it just goes to show that he's never rebounded from that "partial" season. I think he will be singled covered -- successfully -- at times during the season. Is he a decent #2 guy? Maybe, but no better than Gaffney. Gaffney did well when AJ was out with injuries and could have done better if Carr was able to get the ball to him.

Bobo
05-04-2006, 06:03 PM
If you just look at this upcoming season. Moulds is still a receiver that we (the eagles) had targeted as well whether he is on the downside or not he's still better than most # 2 receivers. You guys did a good job in bringing him in. I look at him with the Texans as a transitional talent, he's still got enough left in the tank to help you get from where you are to where you want to be. On the flip side I think Gaffney is a good pick up for the eagles because of the scheme we run but having moulds will benefit the Texans more than gaffney will benefit the Eagles.

A.) Moulds is better than some #2 receivers because there are some pretty bad QBs in the league who can't even get the ball to the primary receiver. But better than most? Off hand, I would say the Lions, Indy, Arizona, Cincy, and Denver have better #2s than Moulds, and that's just speaking off the top of my head. B.) Gaffney will benefit whomever can get him the ball.

HJam72
05-04-2006, 06:23 PM
Bobo, you really don't like change. :)

Bobo
05-04-2006, 06:33 PM
Bobo, you really don't like change. :)

Only good change. Change simply to "stir the pot" doesn't always bring results. :stirpot:

Errant Hothy
05-04-2006, 09:11 PM
Bobo, there is more to determing the value of a WR then the number of TDs he scores.

If Moulds can put up the same number of receptions and yards that he as averaged over the last two years, I'd a) be quite happy and b) be amazed if Gaffeny matched him.

Marcus
05-04-2006, 10:17 PM
My only beef with this offseason so far is lack of addressing the secondary . . .

Actually, the secondary has been addressed more than you think.

You show me a bad secondary. . . I'll show you a front 7 that can't get pressure on the quarterback.

Let's see now. We've hired new defensive coaches, gone to a 4-3, signed Weaver, and then took Mario Williams with the top pick.

Well see how 'lousy' our secondary is this year.

WhyIsItAlwaysNextYear
05-04-2006, 11:30 PM
Moulds actually was the leading receiver in most catagories for the Bills last year including YPG, Receptions, and total yards. Thats not bad considering Lee Evans was on the field and in nine games they had Losman at QB. The only time during the season Losman looked like he had any idea what was going on was against our weak Defense. Moulds will make a solid addition to the offense and it makes it obvious watching the tape of the Buffalo game the changes needed on out D!

Bobo
05-04-2006, 11:44 PM
Moulds actually was the leading receiver in most catagories for the Bills last year including YPG, Receptions, and total yards. Thats not bad considering Lee Evans was on the field and in nine games they had Losman at QB. The only time during the season Losman looked like he had any idea what was going on was against our weak Defense. Moulds will make a solid addition to the offense and it makes it obvious watching the tape of the Buffalo game the changes needed on out D!

Moulds is on the backside of his career and there is a reason why his TD production has declined so dramatically. You are looking at the Moulds that was; I am looking at the Moulds that is. Gaffney is a lot younger than Moulds and will only get better -- especially if the OL gives him enough time to complete his routes.

Bobo
05-04-2006, 11:48 PM
Bobo, there is more to determing the value of a WR then the number of TDs he scores.

If Moulds can put up the same number of receptions and yards that he as averaged over the last two years, I'd a) be quite happy and b) be amazed if Gaffeny matched him.

His reception #s, yards per catch, and TD catches have been steadily declining. The general trend is downward. If he has the same situation that Gaffney experienced last year, his #s will continue to decline and I doubt that he'd top Bradford's TD receptions.

phan1
05-05-2006, 01:38 AM
I really liked having Tony Banks as our backup. He's much better than any of our other back-ups IMO. Hopefully Ragone can become a good QB. Not sold on Rosenfauls as all.

WhyIsItAlwaysNextYear
05-05-2006, 08:57 AM
I am not saying he is not long in the tooth but what you are saying about his production is inaccurate. In his career Mould has only averaged 4.8 TD per season and except for the 2002 season he really has not had big TD numbers. Plenty of players with lots of so called upside have been run out fo this league. The same logic that applies to Gaffney needs a good O'line and a quarterback can also be applied to Moulds. If you look back at the last 4 years the Bills had Bledose behind a crappy O'line with terrible numbers, Alex Van Pelt, Shane Mattews, J.P. Losman trying to deliver the ball. During those years they ranked at the bottom of the league in offense. Gaffney seems to have all of the skills a player needs but has been unable to bring it together on the field, Moulds has at least done it in the past, whereas Gaffney still never has. Potential had gotten many a coach and GM run out of the league!


| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| 1996 buf | 16 | 12 44 3.7 0 | 20 279 13.9 2 |
| 1997 buf | 16 | 4 59 14.8 0 | 29 294 10.1 0 |
| 1998 buf | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 67 1368 20.4 9 |
| 1999 buf | 14 | 1 1 1.0 0 | 65 994 15.3 7 |
| 2000 buf | 16 | 2 24 12.0 0 | 94 1326 14.1 5 |
| 2001 buf | 16 | 3 3 1.0 0 | 67 904 13.5 5 |
| 2002 buf | 16 | 1 7 7.0 0 | 100 1287 12.9 10 |
| 2003 buf | 13 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 64 780 12.2 1 |
| 2004 buf | 16 | 5 19 3.8 0 | 88 1043 11.9 5 |
| 2005 buf | 15 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 81 816 10.1 4

Bobo
05-05-2006, 09:17 AM
I am not saying he is not long in the tooth but what you are saying about his production is inaccurate. In his career Mould has only averaged 4.8 TD per season and except for the 2002 season he really has not had big TD numbers. Plenty of players with lots of so called upside have been run out fo this league. The same logic that applies to Gaffney needs a good O'line and a quarterback can also be applied to Moulds. If you look back at the last 4 years the Bills had Bledose behind a crappy O'line with terrible numbers, Alex Van Pelt, Shane Mattews, J.P. Losman trying to deliver the ball. During those years they ranked at the bottom of the league in offense. Gaffney seems to have all of the skills a player needs but has been unable to bring it together on the field, Moulds has at least done it in the past, whereas Gaffney still never has. Potential had gotten many a coach and GM run out of the league!


| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |
+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
| 1996 buf | 16 | 12 44 3.7 0 | 20 279 13.9 2 |
| 1997 buf | 16 | 4 59 14.8 0 | 29 294 10.1 0 |
| 1998 buf | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 67 1368 20.4 9 |
| 1999 buf | 14 | 1 1 1.0 0 | 65 994 15.3 7 |
| 2000 buf | 16 | 2 24 12.0 0 | 94 1326 14.1 5 |
| 2001 buf | 16 | 3 3 1.0 0 | 67 904 13.5 5 |
| 2002 buf | 16 | 1 7 7.0 0 | 100 1287 12.9 10 |
| 2003 buf | 13 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 64 780 12.2 1 |
| 2004 buf | 16 | 5 19 3.8 0 | 88 1043 11.9 5 |
| 2005 buf | 15 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 81 816 10.1 4

No, it's you who are inaccurate, and your numbers tell the story. Look at his yards per reception. Steady decline. He had a year where he scored 9 TDs, then 10, but ever since 2002, his TD #s have been going down. and as far as his receptions, he had 100 in 2002. Now he's down to 81. Then you simply prove my point by saying Moulds' numbers decline because of poor offensive lines and bad QBs. First of all, that isn't entirely true. Bledsoe took his team to within the cusp of a playoff season at 9-7 in 2004. He wasn't bad, neither was his line. Still, Moulds could only muster 5 TDs and had his yards per catch continued to decline. Gaffney couldn't bring it together on the field only because he didn't have the chance to even catch the ball! When AJ was out, Gaffney did pretty well. Moulds got it done because he was in situations where he had the opportunity to catch the ball. Gaffney has really never had that opportunity. If Moulds faces the same situation, he won't do much better than Gaffney -- and Moulds will continue to decline while Gaffney will continue to get better. Moulds has done it in the past -- when he was on some pretty good teams by the way. But then again, Jerry Rice has done it in the past, too. But the past is past. Gaffney has never been in the position Moulds has been where he had the chance to catch passes. They gave up on Gaffney much, much too early. They may regret it in the end if Gaffney gets in a situation where he gets a decent chance to make some plays.

WhyIsItAlwaysNextYear
05-05-2006, 11:24 AM
I will concede to you that the Bills were 9-7 and on the edge of the playoffs, I cant argue with that. But Beldsoe was so hot that year he ranked below even David Carr in QB rating! But we all know those dont count after all he threw 4 more TD's than Carr, however he also threw two more interceptions than Carr. Lee Evans was the only WR on their team to catch a TD and he only had 7. Gaffney may in fact inprove in a better situation, it could also be said that Moulds might have his best year in Kubiaks system with AJ drawing the double team. Who knows! Its only my opinion, and its worth exactly what you paid for it to many, but I would rather have a guy who has show proven ability who might improve in a new town than a guy with loads of potential who has yet to break out.

El Tejano
05-05-2006, 12:38 PM
81 receptions last year is still far more than any of our #2s ever had. I think what happens with the decline in TDs is exactly what Johnson faces now. More people checking Eric Moulds than any of his other WRs. Peerless Price was pretty darn good at one time and now he barely sees the field with the Cowboys.

Could Gaffney ever stretch the field? No, don't think so. Moulds is your 3rd down converter and he is still a deep threat.

As for giving up on Gaffney? He gave up on us. I believe he signed elsewhere and really didn't give us a chance to sign him back. Let's put it this way though. Will Gaffney be missed if the all known - well appreciated Armstrong has another solid year.? No. Simply put no. Armstrong has proven more worth than Gaffney and many of you were asking for Armstrong to replace Gaffney last year.

bigTEXan8
05-05-2006, 01:38 PM
If Moulds could be half as consistent as he was last year, then that alone will help AJ and the rest of the offense in itself. Walter, who I believe is one of the best additions this offseason, will also be a presence. I'm just anxious for the season to start. DD will also stay healthier now that he doesn't have to catch the ball as much as he used to, plus Kubiak won't pound him as much as Capers did, and will frequently switch DD out with Morency and Wali, and whoever we add as a big-back. I'm going to go hibernate till September, someone wake we up when the season starts.

EF55
05-05-2006, 03:53 PM
A.) Moulds is better than some #2 receivers because there are some pretty bad QBs in the league who can't even get the ball to the primary receiver. But better than most? Off hand, I would say the Lions, Indy, Arizona, Cincy, and Denver have better #2s than Moulds, and that's just speaking off the top of my head. B.) Gaffney will benefit whomever can get him the ball.


Very subjective particularly if you look at # of receptions and yards. Not sure about all teams but the ones of the top of your head are as follows for the combined last 2 years.
Recpt yards
Ariz: larry Fitzgerald 161 2189
Indy: R wayne 160 2265
Cincy: Houshmanwhatever 151 1934
Denver: Javon Walker 93 1409 (missed most of 2005)

Erice Moulds 169 1859


Moulds clearly snags more passes than probably all of the # 2 receivers not just the ones you mention, granted he doesn't produce the same yardage and he may get less passes thrown his way in Houston. But you cannot argue that based on his production that he wouldn,t be better than most # 2's, He's actually in the upper half of all receivers over the last 2 seasons, if he doesn't excel as # 2 in Houston it won't be because of him.

Bobo
05-05-2006, 05:27 PM
Very subjective particularly if you look at # of receptions and yards. Not sure about all teams but the ones of the top of your head are as follows for the combined last 2 years.
Recpt yards
Ariz: larry Fitzgerald 161 2189
Indy: R wayne 160 2265
Cincy: Houshmanwhatever 151 1934
Denver: Javon Walker 93 1409 (missed most of 2005)

Erice Moulds 169 1859


Moulds clearly snags more passes than probably all of the # 2 receivers not just the ones you mention, granted he doesn't produce the same yardage and he may get less passes thrown his way in Houston. But you cannot argue that based on his production that he wouldn,t be better than most # 2's, He's actually in the upper half of all receivers over the last 2 seasons, if he doesn't excel as # 2 in Houston it won't be because of him.

I think it's pretty clear that Moulds is declining in production and that he probably wouldn't do all that much better than Gaffney did if he faced the same situation. All the stats are declining on Moulds. His best days are behind him and you can expect a bigger drop in #s in 2006 due to his change in teams, a new QB and his increased age. I'd rather have the younger guy who's career is just beginning than the older guy who's numbers are falling due to his age and cost the team a heckuva lot more than Gaffney did. I think most fans are vastly overrating Moulds in regards to his production potential. It ain't the 1990s anymore, folks. There's a reason the Texans got him for a fifth rounder. It seems to me that the Texans organization has no patience whatsoever. They get rid of Gaffney, Hollings, Capers et. al. without having any patience with them at all and bring in old guys whose careers are on the downslide (I expect to see Emmitt Smith and Jerry Rice at any moment) and rookies we've never heard of. I am sure that this same organization would have fired Cowher when he went from 13-3 to 6-10 in just two years and also would have given the heave-ho to Holmgren after his team plunged to 6-10. You have to give guys a chance to bloom and come back from anamolies. No wonder cookie dough is such a popular dessert around here.

Bobo
05-05-2006, 05:34 PM
If Moulds could be half as consistent as he was last year, then that alone will help AJ and the rest of the offense in itself. Walter, who I believe is one of the best additions this offseason, will also be a presence. I'm just anxious for the season to start. DD will also stay healthier now that he doesn't have to catch the ball as much as he used to, plus Kubiak won't pound him as much as Capers did, and will frequently switch DD out with Morency and Wali, and whoever we add as a big-back. I'm going to go hibernate till September, someone wake we up when the season starts.

Yes, perhaps you do need some rest when you say that Walter will be a presence when he hasn't even appeared during his three-year career. As for Moulds, I wouldn't expect nearly the #s this year for reasons I have already cited. It isn't the 1990s anymore and Moulds will be working with a new QB -- a situation that requires time to work out.

bigtex77
05-05-2006, 05:35 PM
He poses enough of a threat to take pressure off of 'Dre, thats good enough for me.

Bobo
05-05-2006, 05:52 PM
He poses enough of a threat to take pressure off of 'Dre, thats good enough for me.

This isn't the 1990s, nor is it 2004. The abilities of Andre Johnson after his injury may be somewhat doubted. Teams may want to know if AJ can even get it done anymore following his injury. After all, when he did come back, he was pretty much of a non-factor. Heck, last year they didn't have to worry about the passing game at all. So I wouldn't be concerned about "taking pressure off Dre." I'd be worried about taking pressure off Carr.

clandestin
05-05-2006, 06:22 PM
So to summarize Bobo's last three posts:

Moulds: should have gone with a younger guy who is just starting his career.
Walters: should have gone with an older more proven guy cause he's just starting his career.
Andre: may not be the same after that "career threatening" calf muscle tear.

<no comment necessary>

ps. how's that pacman jones guy working out?

Texansbacker
05-06-2006, 12:53 PM
So to summarize Bobo's last three posts:

Moulds: should have gone with a younger guy who is just starting his career.
Walters: should have gone with an older more proven guy cause he's just starting his career.
Andre: may not be the same after that "career threatening" calf muscle tear.

<no comment necessary>

ps. how's that pacman jones guy working out?


Bobo is a clown.

Bobo
05-06-2006, 01:26 PM
So to summarize Bobo's last three posts:

Moulds: should have gone with a younger guy who is just starting his career.
Walters: should have gone with an older more proven guy cause he's just starting his career.
Andre: may not be the same after that "career threatening" calf muscle tear.

<no comment necessary>

ps. how's that pacman jones guy working out?

Let me straighten you out here on things I said and things I didn't. A.) I said the younger Gaffney obviously would have been better than Moulds due to the situation and the lack of patience shown by the coaching staff overall. B.) I criticized Walter for his lack of production, not his age. I see no potential there, only a wasted transaction. C.) Where did I say that AJ's injury was "career threatening?" I did say that he didn't come back from it last year and wonder just when he will come back from it. D.) Your misquotes don't get you anywhere except a step back in your credibility rating.

Bobo
05-06-2006, 01:27 PM
Bobo is a clown.

According to the rules of this board, we might not be seeing much from you anymore. The Titans board is available, though!

Texans_Chick
05-06-2006, 01:35 PM
The abilities of Andre Johnson after his injury may be somewhat doubted. Teams may want to know if AJ can even get it done anymore following his injury. After all, when he did come back, he was pretty much of a non-factor.

Some posts deserve a cigar.

And some posts deserve a big:

http://www.tmyers.com/clown/7340.gif

Unless you know that he is still hurt or that this is likely going to be a reoccuring injury, you are just making stuff up.

whiskeyrbl
05-06-2006, 01:35 PM
I think if everyone looks at the moves made Kubes has brought in a "MIX" of players that bring something different to the table. As far as Moulds you get a proven reciever with good hands,that demands attention from AJ.With Walters you have a guy with good size and great hands. Can't help that Cincy already had 2 excellent recievers.Oh by the way they are shopping their #3 reciever.Putzier good size decent blocker great hands. And any way I don't care if any of them score TD's as long as the Texans score TD's.

Bobo
05-06-2006, 02:37 PM
I think if everyone looks at the moves made Kubes has brought in a "MIX" of players that bring something different to the table. As far as Moulds you get a proven reciever with good hands,that demands attention from AJ.With Walters you have a guy with good size and great hands. Can't help that Cincy already had 2 excellent recievers.Oh by the way they are shopping their #3 reciever.Putzier good size decent blocker great hands. And any way I don't care if any of them score TD's as long as the Texans score TD's.

I see a "mix" of players who ultimately won't add much to said mix. Moulds was good -- past tense -- and his skills are on the decline. Now he's coming to a team with a 2-14 record and has to get used to a new QB on top of that -- and for some reason the Texans are paying him a boatload of money. And where do you get the idea that Walter has "great hands" when he's only caught 30 passes in three years? In addition, the Texans certainly didn't need a pass catching TE when their offensive line has been a sieve. Yeah, that's smart -- pull off part of the protection from an already weak offensive line so you can put in a pass catching TE who won't be catching many balls to begin with since the QB will be experiencing even more pressure due to the even weaker line due to the decrease in manpower. This doesn't sound like a recipe for success to me.

thunderkyss
05-06-2006, 02:51 PM
I see a "mix" of players who ultimately won't add much to said mix. Moulds was good -- past tense -- and his skills are on the decline. Now he's coming to a team with a 2-14 record and has to get used to a new QB on top of that -- and for some reason the Texans are paying him a boatload of money. And where do you get the idea that Walter has "great hands" when he's only caught 30 passes in three years? In addition, the Texans certainly didn't need a pass catching TE when their offensive line has been a sieve. Yeah, that's smart -- pull off part of the protection from an already weak offensive line so you can put in a pass catching TE who won't be catching many balls to begin with since the QB will be experiencing even more pressure due to the even weaker line due to the decrease in manpower. This doesn't sound like a recipe for success to me.

Man......... why aren't you coaching somewhere??

Bobo
05-06-2006, 03:02 PM
Man......... why aren't you coaching somewhere??

Because I couldn't afford the cut in pay.

Trapped
05-06-2006, 03:04 PM
I see a "mix" of players who ultimately won't add much to said mix. Moulds was good -- past tense -- and his skills are on the decline. Now he's coming to a team with a 2-14 record and has to get used to a new QB on top of that -- and for some reason the Texans are paying him a boatload of money. And where do you get the idea that Walter has "great hands" when he's only caught 30 passes in three years? In addition, the Texans certainly didn't need a pass catching TE when their offensive line has been a sieve. Yeah, that's smart -- pull off part of the protection from an already weak offensive line so you can put in a pass catching TE who won't be catching many balls to begin with since the QB will be experiencing even more pressure due to the even weaker line due to the decrease in manpower. This doesn't sound like a recipe for success to me.


U just pulled this sentence out of ur *** huh? lmao. If ur talking about Victor Riley and Todd Wade as a loss in "manpower" then i can agree, cuz they look like they can bench press, but in terms of blocking Riley shouldn't even be competing for an oline job. Maybe a bouncer.

Bobo
05-06-2006, 03:14 PM
U just pulled this sentence out of ur *** huh? lmao. If ur talking about Victor Riley and Todd Wade as a loss in "manpower" then i can agree, cuz they look like they can bench press, but in terms of blocking Riley shouldn't even be competing for an oline job. Maybe a bouncer.

Um, I was referring to pulling the TE out of pass protection and sending him out on futile pass routes.

newbiefan
05-06-2006, 03:26 PM
Because I couldn't afford the cut in pay.

yea... junior league doesn't pay very much cuz that's the only place that'd hire you

Bobo
05-06-2006, 03:28 PM
yea... junior league doesn't pay very much cuz that's the only place that'd hire you

:rolleyes:

Texansbacker
05-06-2006, 04:03 PM
According to the rules of this board, we might not be seeing much from you anymore. The Titans board is available, though!

No offense intended, just trying to point out the obvious.

1. Bobo is a clown. www.bobotheclown.com

2. Eric Moulds is a former Pro Bowler and even in decline he caught 81 passes last year from a QB and team that was horrible. Jabbar Gaffney will never become a Pro Bowl caliber receiver.

3. One can question the abilities of our other Pro Bowler, Andre Johnson (even after his injury), but few would believe such a line of questioning. AJ is a stud, period.

4. Kevin Walter is a player who has shown great hands when thrown the ball. You can't say a guy does not have good hands if you are not throwing him the ball! Walter showed good ability during the limited playing time when he was given the chance in the crowded Cincinatti receiver corps. Therefore his opportunity with the Texans to be the number 3 wideout. He could be Kubiak's Ed McCaffery.

So let's see how training camp goes before writing off the new player's skills, exaggerating the departed player's skills, and not question the coaches personnel decisions for his offense at least until you see the team perform.

Why put the buggy before the horse; only to then say the horse is too weak, too slow and doesn't do a good job pushing the buggy?!?

To me, the line-up of Andre Johnson, Eric Moulds and Kevin Walter in comparison to last years line-up of Andre Johnson, Jabar Gaffney and Corey Bradford, is really no comparison. Judging from the passing game's production last year, it would seem to help corroborate that opinion, as we have nowhere to go but up.