PDA

View Full Version : Any of you think Pitts has a chance at reclaiming LT?


phan1
07-31-2006, 12:24 AM
Cause right now, I'm hard pressed to believe that he couldn't beat out Wand or Spencer at that position. And the last time I checked, LT is a more important position. Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't he been the best LT that we have had throughout our short history? I mean C'mon! I don't see why he keeps getting pushed down to guard. If Spencer and Wand keep getting demolished, shouldn't we start considering Pitts at LT? I think Spencer would be a good LG as people have been saying he's a huge mauler. He was projected as a guard coming into the draft anyway right? It never looked like he was primarily a pass-blocker to begin with.

I know it's too early to hit the panic button, but I think this should be a serious consideration as training camp goes on.

TexanSam
07-31-2006, 12:31 AM
I remember hearing a radio interview a few months back and he was disappointed to be going back to guard. Yeah, that's what he played out of college, but after 4 years of left tackle in the NFL, there's still going to be an adjustment. To answer your question, I think he can go back to LT but I'm hoping he doesn't. If he does, that means that Wand and Spencer both failed to get the job done and we have shuffle the O-line some more.

texan279
07-31-2006, 12:34 AM
IMO right now I would not be surprised at anyone losing a starting job except Davis, Mario, Carr, and AJ.

BigDTexansFan
07-31-2006, 12:37 AM
I got to agree about Pitts going back to LT might be a bad sign, BUT I still think had we left him there all 4 years instead of playing musical tackles. He might be just the man for job had Capers & co left him alone.:twocents:

AFD1717
07-31-2006, 12:42 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't he been the best LT that we have had throughout our short history?
This doesn't say a whole lot.

Is Pitts the best LT in camp TODAY? Maybe. The problem is that he is our best LG, too. The coaches who have been evaluating Spencer (and Winston) since before the draft feel that his athletic ability, which is excellent for a man his size, makes him a great fit at tackle in this system. Moving him to guard is a possibility if that doesn't prove to be true but I don't see that happening. We have to put our best combination of linemen on the field and the fact is we have more potential at tackle with Wand and Spencer battling for time than we do at LG. Pitts is a nice option to have if Wand, Spencer, and maybe Winston all get a shot at LT and fail, but I think somebody develops and pairs with Pitts to give us a dominant left side.

thegr8fan
07-31-2006, 12:48 AM
I mean C'mon! I don't see why he keeps getting pushed down to guard.according to seth Payne he is the perfect size/ speed/ player for a LG. that is why.

is he the best LT to date, yep. But if the current regime thinks that Wand can get the job done, and we have faith in their analysis on other positions, then I can't wait for our left side to be a dominant force with Pitts and Wand/Spencer playing.

nunusguy
07-31-2006, 08:41 AM
You know who suffers the most with these experiments at LT ? He is not an
OL and his initials are DC. The thing is we are getting, on balance, more negative reports than the positve type about the current first team guy, Seth Wand. And Spencer may have tremendous upside, but as a rookie its gonna take some time for that to translate to performance on the field, especially in the NFL. Afterall, he's only played 2 years in college as an OL after moving over from the DL.
The OL didn't start to look like anything that performed in semi-competant fashion until Chester was moved to LT, which was something like the 5th
game of the year ? Maybe for the sake of Carr's physical well being and hope of him having a successful season this year, they better get Chester over to the LT spot by the time we play the Eagles if Wand continues to disappoint ?

gwallaia
07-31-2006, 08:58 AM
Wherever Pitts lines up on the line, he better stop jumping offsides.

infantrycak
07-31-2006, 09:00 AM
I remember hearing a radio interview a few months back and he was disappointed to be going back to guard. Yeah, that's what he played out of college,

Pitts played LT in college as well. The closest he got to guard in college was being projected as one in the NFL.

Coach C.
07-31-2006, 09:07 AM
Pitts is seen more as a natural G. I think if he could play LT without interruption and be trained only at that position he could be a middle of the road pro that could start on a good many teams. Now as far as Pitts taking back the LT position not unless we are having a serious problem. Right now it is Wand and Spencer and if need be Winston. Wand is being pulled for mistakes forcing him to correct them or at least take his head out of his posterior. Spencer is a rookie and just has not got it quite yet, but by mid-season if not earlier he could take over the full time spot.

ArlingtonTexan
07-31-2006, 09:33 AM
Pitts is seen more as a natural G. I think if he could play LT without interruption and be trained only at that position he could be a middle of the road pro that could start on a good many teams. Now as far as Pitts taking back the LT position not unless we are having a serious problem. Right now it is Wand and Spencer and if need be Winston. Wand is being pulled for mistakes forcing him to correct them or at least take his head out of his posterior. Spencer is a rookie and just has not got it quite yet, but by mid-season if not earlier he could take over the full time spot.

Everyone, including several NFL coaches, have continued to say this, but by the play on the field and his on words his best position has been LT. If he were and inch and half taller would he be a "natural guard." I think this a measurable and looking at the body type thing versus watching the skills and production he displays.

Pitts seems to at natural LT stuck in a body associated with a guard.

nunusguy
07-31-2006, 10:02 AM
Pitts seems to at natural LT stuck in a body associated with a guard.
How about this analogy, if a DB is a "natural safety" but with the speed
to play corner, where does he play ? At CB of course, because that position
is more important than safety.
It seems like it should be the same for guards and tackles. Maybe a player is
lacking certain ideal physical measurements for a classic NFL LT, but if he has
the basic athleticism to play the position, well then he should play that position simply because tackles (especailly LTs), are more important than guards. Especailly with a team like the Texans that desperately needs just competance, not brilliance, but competance and consistency at that most important of all OL positons.

infantrycak
07-31-2006, 10:10 AM
Everyone, including several NFL coaches, have continued to say this, but by the play on the field and his on words his best position has been LT. If he were and inch and half taller would he be a "natural guard." I think this a measurable and looking at the body type thing versus watching the skills and production he displays.

Pitts seems to at natural LT stuck in a body associated with a guard.

I keep wanting someone to legitimately beat Pitts out at LT and then have him move to RT but that has never seemed to be even a consideration in the cards--always with the let's get him to G talk.

SESupergenius
07-31-2006, 10:17 AM
Such a refreshing feeling that we have solved our LT problem.....after 5 years.:challenge

nunusguy
07-31-2006, 10:17 AM
I keep wanting someone to legitimately beat Pitts out at LT and then have him move to RT but that has never seemed to be even a consideration in the cards--always with the let's get him to G talk.
Or there's that scenario. Exactly !
Play Chester at LT until Spencer is ready for that positoin (maybe not until the 2007 season), then move Chester to RT.
I don't have a problem with Spencer & Chester at the tackles and Winston as a guard instead of the rookes being the tackles over the long-term.

Marcus
07-31-2006, 10:45 AM
Do I take it from the premise of this thread that Seth Wand is not holding up his end in TC?

And if that's the case, doesn't that validate what last year's coaching staff did in demoting him?

To you TC observers, what exactly is Wand's problem? Is he just getting overmatched physically? . . . Is he just too slow laterally . . . or is he not just mentally cut out for it?

jerek
07-31-2006, 10:57 AM
I've been pushing for Pitts at LT for months. I do not mind Sherman giving these other guys the look but IMO Pitts has been a solid LT and the spot should be his until someone earns it from him. Wand is awful right now and I can only hope that Spencer will exhibit a faster learning curve than is typically allowed most rookies.

As stated in the camp threads, Wand just looks like he's not mentally with it. Physically I'm not sure he is strong enough and he is tall which means he has a higher center of gravity he needs to be compensating for, but far worse is that mentally he looks like he doesn't even want to be there. Body language just says it all; head down, no visible fire, getting frustrated instead of pissed when he gets smoked by Babin of all people, who is improved but still IMO hardly an upper echelon DE. He just isn't exhibiting any pride, fight, or fire. Right now Wand looks like he either doesn't care or doesn't believe in himself; not sure what if anything might be going on either onfield or off of it to contribute to his apparent distraction, but right now he is headed out of the starting lineup.

threetoedpete
07-31-2006, 11:09 AM
This doesn't say a whole lot.

Is Pitts the best LT in camp TODAY? Maybe. The problem is that he is our best LG, too. The coaches who have been evaluating Spencer (and Winston) since before the draft feel that his athletic ability, which is excellent for a man his size, makes him a great fit at tackle in this system. Moving him to guard is a possibility if that doesn't prove to be true but I don't see that happening. We have to put our best combination of linemen on the field and the fact is we have more potential at tackle with Wand and Spencer battling for time than we do at LG. Pitts is a nice option to have if Wand, Spencer, and maybe Winston all get a shot at LT and fail, but I think somebody develops and pairs with Pitts to give us a dominant left side.

Agreed:
If this is the case and Pitts IS our best option at LT this year...you can pretty much push OLT on top of the '07 draft wish list. As dinged as we are at CB right now, no one wants to go through another '05 again.

And to reBuff an earlier point...How do you know that if Pitts wasn't bounced around he wouldn't be an All pro canidate at Left Gaurd ? Coach has already said he ain't moving again. If he dose, we're in serious trouble.

threetoedpete
07-31-2006, 11:20 AM
Do I take it from the premise of this thread that Seth Wand is not holding up his end in TC?

And if that's the case, doesn't that validate what last year's coaching staff did in demoting him?

To you TC observers, what exactly is Wand's problem? Is he just getting overmatched physically? . . . Is he just too slow laterally . . . or is he not just mentally cut out for it?
Personally, I think this is a knee jerk reaction to casual fans seeing camp and seeing the D-line brutalize the o-line. Happens every summer, at every level,on every team. D-line is always ahead of the O-line....early. Big difference in one guy reading his responsiblities and going for broke. And five guys trin' to move in concert with one another. Don't push the panic button. Give it time. Still early.It will come. I've been watchin' o-lines for a very long time. This group looks good. Quick feet, powerful. They're just not...graceful yet. It WILL come.
The best we've ever had. Gonna take some time is all.

Texans_Chick
07-31-2006, 11:20 AM
As stated in the camp threads, Wand just looks like he's not mentally with it. Physically I'm not sure he is strong enough and he is tall which means he has a higher center of gravity he needs to be compensating for, but far worse is that mentally he looks like he doesn't even want to be there. Body language just says it all; head down, no visible fire, getting frustrated instead of pissed when he gets smoked by Babin of all people, who is improved but still IMO hardly an upper echelon DE. He just isn't exhibiting any pride, fight, or fire. Right now Wand looks like he either doesn't care or doesn't believe in himself; not sure what if anything might be going on either onfield or off of it to contribute to his apparent distraction, but right now he is headed out of the starting lineup.

At the end of the day, he might end up out of the starting lineup for various reasons, but what does the Ouija board and tea leaves say about his state of mind? Maybe we should do a tarot reading too.

I really really appreciate the training camp observations that people make but I have to say it kills me to read stuff that makes such large extrapolations based on little information. He's not yelling, losing his temper or getting in fights ergo he doesn't care, is distracted or doesn't believe in himself???? What do you expect him to do?

I give up. (http://www.filmtotaal.nl/images/wallpapers/full/scanners/scanners1_1600.jpg)

Bullfan
07-31-2006, 11:23 AM
Sounds like some of you are "seeing what you want to see", which is for Wand to fail. We are 3 days into training camp, new coaches, new play schemes and Wand finally has coaches who want to teach him and work with him. Give him a chance -- he will surprise you. There is no way he does not want to be a good left tackle, he just hasn't been given the training that Chester has. It was reported that Chester has spent some time on the bench too from making mistakes, give this line of men a chance.

Texans_Chick
07-31-2006, 11:24 AM
Personally, I think this is a knee jerk reaction to casual fans seeing camp and seeing the D-line brutalize the o-line. Happens every summer, at every level,on every team. D-line is always ahead of the O-line....early. Big difference in one guy reading his responsiblities and going for broke. And five guys trin' to move in concert with one another. Don't push the panic button. Give it time. Still early.It will come. I've been watchin' o-lines for a very long time. This group looks good. Quick feet, powerful. They're just not...graceful yet. It WILL come.
The best we've ever had. Gonna take some time is all.

"Best we've ever had" is damning with faint praise but I'm seeing where you are going.

You are right-this is typical. Prolly more so with an all new lineup We have to wait some to see what we got. But we don't want to wait. :redtowel:

real
07-31-2006, 11:29 AM
At the end of the day, he might end up out of the starting lineup for various reasons, but what does the Ouija board and tea leaves say about his state of mind? Maybe we should do a tarot reading too.

I really really appreciate the training camp observations that people make but I have to say it kills me to read stuff that makes such large extrapolations based on little information. He's not yelling, losing his temper or getting in fights ergo he doesn't care, is distracted or doesn't believe in himself???? What do you expect him to do?

I give up. (http://www.filmtotaal.nl/images/wallpapers/full/scanners/scanners1_1600.jpg)

TC you are right, in that you can't neccessarily judge a player by the emotions they show on the practice field...But at the same time you can read players by there demeanor...if he has lost confidence, it will show...if he is getting physically dominated ...it will definitely show...No emotions don't neccessarily correlate to a players ability, but from personal experience, if you are dominating the opposition on a regular basis, when you do make a mistake....your reaction tends to be anger....and I find that when playing football it helps to wear your emotions on your sleeve...it just makes you more aggressive and IMO, aggressiveness is always good when playing football...

Hervoyel
07-31-2006, 11:33 AM
"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Texans_Chick again."

Wand will be fine. Camp is what? Three days old? Pitts is always brought out as our best LT but nobody, and let me stress that in bold nobody, has been given as much time as Pitts at the position. Pitts started as a rookie and played like a rookie LT. Pitts started again in 2003 and played much better. Then Wand played the position in 2004 and didn't look that much different from Pitts in his first season. Lots of mistakes and nothing to get excited about. Did Wand get a chance to come back and show improvement in year two like Pitts did? No he didn't. Joe Pendry decided to screw around and make changes to the line that we played while winning 7 games and moved a bunch of pieces around. He brought in Victor "Where's the Gravy" Riley and handed him the LT spot.

Seth Wand was treated badly by the previous coaching staff. If the current one didn't think there was a good reason for him to be working with the first string then I wouldn't be working with the first string. The moment someone else does it better then Wand will move to the second string. Pitts is however a guard. He's going to be a great one if they'll just leave him there.

jerek
07-31-2006, 11:40 AM
At the end of the day, he might end up out of the starting lineup for various reasons, but what does the Ouija board and tea leaves say about his state of mind? Maybe we should do a tarot reading too.

I really really appreciate the training camp observations that people make but I have to say it kills me to read stuff that makes such large extrapolations based on little information. He's not yelling, losing his temper or getting in fights ergo he doesn't care, is distracted or doesn't believe in himself???? What do you expect him to do?

I give up. (http://www.filmtotaal.nl/images/wallpapers/full/scanners/scanners1_1600.jpg)

I guess you should ask yourself if jerek -- whatever you know about him -- is likely to be right when he makes an observation like this, or not? Or I suppose you should ask yourself if you believe him when he reports that he was getting repeatedly bent over by Jason Babin of all people in 1-on-1 drills -- let alone what Mario was doing to him -- and frequently subbed out of the first team 9-on-9s and 11-on-11s by Sherman. I could provide a ton of quotes from coaching staff and player ops personnel, but given their lack of context and probability in being misinterpreted or blown out of proportion here, I have refrained from offering them.

I can look into a person's eyes (and I was about ten feet away) and pretty accurately gauge their feelings, and through close observation of their neurolinguistics (a process you are grossly oversimplifying). It's a skill I've very deliberately built and sharpened through my comparatively few years, and forgive me if I say I'm pretty good at it. I can be wrong in forming those impressions, but when his play goes on to more or less confirm that initial feeling, then I will feel pretty confident in reporting on what I see.

If you disagree, then by all means, it's your right to do so, but given that it's my understanding you weren't even there -- let alone a debate on why your football or people-reading credentials are superior to mine -- then I'm not sure why you'd get upset with me for calling it like I see it. I played sports through the college level and I've followed them closely since. I don't possess infantrycak's capacity for stats and I may not even possess your skill for writing, but I am pretty confident in my ability to gauge people, and since Wand's demonstrable play certainly isn't refuting my claims, I'd appreciate you at least being open to the possibility that I am right here.

I will say here as I have said elsewhere; we are early into camp and it is way too early to write off most any player. Seth Wand wears a Texans uniform and accordingly I sincerely hope he succeeds. Coach C is better able to analyze the specifics of his technique, but I can merely report on what I am able to discern. I hope that Kubiak and Sherman succeed in bringing Seth Wand along; it's just my opinion that right now, he's not where he needs to be. Time will tell if this is the exception rather than the rule.

bdiddy
07-31-2006, 11:43 AM
I agree with much that has been said throughout this thread. However, when looking as to why Pitts is playing guard rather than tackles it is because he has a better initial burst with his hand punch and plays better in limited spaces. I think Chester could be an average tackle. But, I think he has the potential to be a dominant guard.

Kubiak and team are doing their best to put a the best lineup on the field. Pitts at guard will greatly strengthen the running game. Wand's weakness at left tackle will be greatly neutralized by a solid running/play action game and increased roll-outs to get Carr out of the pocket. You cannot consider this in a vaccum but must consider why the coaching staff is doing this. Trust me if they did not think he was capable of being a really good guard they never would have moved McKinney to RIGHT guard, a position he has never played. Lets have a little faith and let the battle rage throughout camp.

Texans Horror
07-31-2006, 11:43 AM
How fired up is the rest of the line? I'm not trying to denounce a post. I'm just curious because I haven't been able to go to the camps. Are they pumped up? Are they jumping up and down after every play? From what I have seen in the pics and what I have heard on the boards (which is all I have to go on), I can't make a decision as to the player's emotional state.

So I'm going to wait for the coaches to do their job. As I've said before, Mario, Demeco, Moulds, and Flanagan are nothing compared to the changes in the front three - Kubiak, Sherman, and Smith. This will be the big change this year, whoever is running the ball.

Along these lines, how is the offensive coaching staff looking? I have heard little of Benton (O-line coach) and Calhoun (OC). Is Sherman working with the line, or has it been relegated to Benton? Would either give the line the Pendry stamp of approval (berating, yelling, etc.). Just curious. Thanks.

Runner
07-31-2006, 11:52 AM
I really tried to stay out of this thread, but here is my $0.02.

Most of the very negative Wand reports are coming from the same posters who over time said:

a) he'll be cut before OTAs
b) they are just experimenting with him at LT, he won't be first string when OTAs start
c) he'll never make it through OTAs at first string
d) he won't be first string when training camp starts because he got owned at OTAs

While I find these posters may have some good insights in other areas, they aren't very credible to me when it comes to Wand. I'll wait for the coaches to make their decision.

Nothing personal guys - just calling it as I see it. I hope we can still work and play well together.

Kaiser Toro
07-31-2006, 11:55 AM
I do not like the fact that people are having a consistent take on what they are seeing from Wand. And I am alarmed. However, as some are implying here how do Kubiak/Sherman measure Wand? And is he below or above the expectation by Day 4 of training camp? That is what really counts here.

We have spoken about certain players having a year or a half season to show results. I would say that Wand most likely has to the end of training camp. I hope the staff knows what makes this guy tick by now.

How is Hodgdon looking?

jerek
07-31-2006, 11:59 AM
At the end of the day, he might end up out of the starting lineup for various reasons, but what does the Ouija board and tea leaves say about his state of mind? Maybe we should do a tarot reading too.

I really really appreciate the training camp observations that people make but I have to say it kills me to read stuff that makes such large extrapolations based on little information. He's not yelling, losing his temper or getting in fights ergo he doesn't care, is distracted or doesn't believe in himself???? What do you expect him to do?

I give up. (http://www.filmtotaal.nl/images/wallpapers/full/scanners/scanners1_1600.jpg)

On a general basis, I understand your frustration with comments regarding a player's observed disposition. I remember reading a truckload of anti-Carr statements that were based on a similar (however IMO grossly inaccurate) kind of thing: the whole, Carr doesn't curse a blue streak and doesn't jump up and down on the field when someone drops a pass and doesn't kick puppies and goes to church, etc. and therefore is a crappy football player. So I understand that you want something of substance and want to avoid the speculation that arises out of aspects such as posture.

Trouble is, I can observe things like that (and not just in one moment; throughout a series of practices) and predict with substantial accuracy how that is, does, and will affect his play. Bottom line, TC, I just tell you (and everyone else) what I see. Allow my post history to speak for itself, and feel free to exercise that ignore key if you want to. If you think I'm full of crap or not likely to be accurate, then I guess I would just ask you to take it FWIW. Just expect me to respond if you want to question my credibility, and if my response still isn't adequate for you or anyone else, so be it, fine with me.

Texans_Chick
07-31-2006, 12:05 PM
I guess you should ask yourself if jerek -- whatever you know about him -- is likely to be right when he makes an observation like this, or not? Or I suppose you should ask yourself if you believe him when he reports that he was getting repeatedly bent over by Jason Babin of all people in 1-on-1 drills -- let alone what Mario was doing to him -- and frequently subbed out of the first team 9-on-9s and 11-on-11s by Sherman. I could provide a ton of quotes from coaching staff and player ops personnel, but given their lack of context and probability in being misinterpreted or blown out of proportion here, I have refrained from offering them.

I can look into a person's eyes (and I was about ten feet away) and pretty accurately gauge their feelings, and through close observation of their neurolinguistics. It's a skill I've very deliberately built and sharpened through my comparatively few years, and forgive me if I say I'm pretty good at it. I can be wrong in forming those impressions, but when his play goes on to more or less confirm that initial feeling, then I will feel pretty confident in reporting on what I see.



I was not intending to impugn your credibility. You are like any number of us, MB posters who used to play sports or still play sports and live vicariously through professionals playing same.

I certainly didn't realize that you pride yourself on an elevated level of neurolinguistic observation.

Me personally, I am not so much of a touchy feely sort--I'm a Just The Facts Ma'am. I love when people make observations of what they have been seeing--who is getting first team reps. Who is looking good in the reps. Who is not looking good.

But it is like what someone said earlier in the thread--it is hard not to take observations of body language and not see what you want to see from them. Not because you are not credible, but because you are human, and as you said, could be wrong about what you are observing.

I was not at this particular training camp session, but I've seen practices up close before, and it just seems like it would be difficult to accurately assess player's mental states from doing drills.

I'm am not dogging you in particular for this, it is an observation I've made in the past about reporters too. Inferring things that do not necessarily have one explanation. The entire first part of the ESPN cover article on Mario Williams is that way.

jerek
07-31-2006, 12:09 PM
I really tried to stay out of this thread, but here is my $0.02.

Most of the very negative Wand reports are coming from the same posters who over time said:

a) he'll be cut before OTAs
b) they are just experimenting with him at LT, he won't be first string when OTAs start
c) he'll never make it through OTAs at first string
d) he won't be first string when training camp starts because he got owned at OTAs

While I find these posters may have some good insights in other areas, they aren't very credible to me when it comes to Wand. I'll wait for the coaches to make their decision.

Nothing personal guys - just calling it as I see it. I hope we can still work and play well together.



The question burning on my mind is, what in this wide world indicates to the Wand-or-bust crowd that he will or should be our LT? IIRC he gave up 12 sacks in 16 games in 2004. I know that all bets are off in regards to gauging a player's ability because Capers' staff did or didn't play them, but why the strong support for Wand playing the position?

I guess I am asking, what particularly do you guys and gals really like about him?

Kaiser Toro
07-31-2006, 12:12 PM
Did you look for or notice Hodgdon?

real
07-31-2006, 12:15 PM
I guess I am asking, what particularly do you guys and gals really like about him?

I don't think some people have even actually watched him...What average fan actually watches the O-line??? I think it's more along the lines of some supporting Coach Kubiak's judgement and defending his ideas as if they were there own...I agree that Coach K. is IMO, making all the right moves, but he is human...

Texans_Chick
07-31-2006, 12:16 PM
The question burning on my mind is, what in this wide world indicates to the Wand-or-bust crowd that he will or should be our LT? IIRC he gave up 12 sacks in 16 games in 2004. I know that all bets are off in regards to gauging a player's ability because Capers' staff did or didn't play them, but why the strong support for Wand playing the position?

I guess I am asking, what particularly do you guys and gals really like about him?

I don't really care one way or another--I just want the best guys in the best positions.

As I understand it, the things people like is:

1. He has the measurable mobility to play the position in a zone blocking offense.

2. When he was a rookie, he played pretty well given his overall inexperience.

3. The coaching staff thinks he can play that position. They've looked at tape and have worked with him in person, and given their years of experience working with Olines, that should count for something. It is still early. They might change their mind or might not. One way or another, and nobody wants to hear it, but it does take time for an oline to work together.

4. Pitt could be a GREAT guard but maybe not a great left tackle.

Others could probably answer this better.

jerek
07-31-2006, 12:17 PM
I was not intending to impugn your credibility. You are like any number of us, MB posters who used to play sports or still play sports and live vicariously through professional playing same.

I certainly didn't realize that you pride yourself on an elevated level of neurolinguistic observation.

Me personally, I am not so much of a touchy feely sort--I'm a Just The Facts Ma'am. I love when people make observations of what they have been seeing--who is getting first team reps. Who is looking good in the reps. Who is not looking good.

But it is like what someone said earlier in the thread--it is hard not to take observations of body language and not see what you want to see from them. Not because you are not credible, but because you are human, and as you said, could be wrong about what you are observing.

I was not at this particular training camp session, but I've seen practices up close before, and it just seems like it would be difficult to accurately assess player's mental states from doing drills.

I'm am not dogging you in particular for this, it is an observation I've made in the past about reporters too. Inferring things that do not necessarily have one explanation. The entire first part of the ESPN cover article on Mario Williams is that way.

I can understand that on a general basis. And I understand that eyewitness reporting on first-team vs. second-team placement and actual plays made or missed does and probably should carry a lot more weight than "I think so and so is going to get booted because he just didn't look like he was with it." And rest assured I'll try to provide that in as much detail and accuracy as I can, when I'm present.

Like I say, I'll just call it like I see it. If you're so inclined, it's up to you to generally observe how often I am right or wrong and to thus judge my words accordingly. Call me out on it, even, if I am wrong; I don't mind the accountability. And I don't mind you or anyone else asking questions or wanting additional detail. Just that, in my opinion -- given his observable work thus far and even admitting that we are early into camp and there is a lot of work yet to be done, combined with the things that contribute to my "gut instinct" -- Wand's starting job is in serious jeopardy, and potentially even his future with the team if he doesn't pick it up. That doesn't mean he will never see the field again; it's just what and where he is now. I clearly stated in my TC threads that we are very early into camp and nothing is set in stone yet.

As far as analyzing the fine points of his technique, there are things I can and did observe, but Coach C is a much better analyst in that regard. I'll try to get him to post more detail on Wand and any of the other OL later today or this week.

jerek
07-31-2006, 12:25 PM
I don't really care one way or another--I just want the best guys in the best positions.

As I understand it, the things people like is:

1. He has the measurable mobility to play the position in a zone blocking offense.

2. When he was a rookie, he played pretty well given his overall inexperience.

3. The coaching staff thinks he can play that position. They've looked at tape and have worked with him in person, and given their years of experience working with Olines, that should count for something. It is still early. They might change their mind or might not. One way or another, and nobody wants to hear it, but it does take time for an oline to work together.

4. Pitt could be a GREAT guard but maybe not a great left tackle.

Others could probably answer this better.

Like I say, I'll leave the analysis of foot/handwork to Coach C, but IMO he has a knock or two against him. (A) He is tall and not particularly strong/heavy. In watching his drills he had very poor leverage; he was initiating contact at a high center of gravity and not getting low enough to compensate for the defender. He is relatively mobile for a T, but all of that is moot if he is getting bullrushed on every play. (B) I don't know what his weightroom measurables are, but he looked outmatched strengthwise as well. These are obviously correctable with coaching and physical training, to a certain extent, but IMO it is (c) more mental for Wand than anything else, at this point. Again take that FWIW to you.

jerek
07-31-2006, 12:28 PM
Did you look for or notice Hodgdon?

Negative on both counts. IIRC he was practicing primarily with the second team, and I was watching first team in the drills.

As good as my view was, I would kill to sit in one of the towers and have a birdseye of the whole field. As I was standing on the LOS, players lining up on the opposite side of the field tend to get lost in my field of vision.

thunderkyss
07-31-2006, 12:46 PM
On a general basis, I understand your frustration with comments regarding a player's observed disposition. I remember reading a truckload of anti-Carr statements that were based on a similar (however IMO grossly inaccurate) kind of thing:
Not to be picky, but is it grossly overstated when you are the one extrapolating emotions, feelings, and inner workings of our players, or is it possible for someone who doesn't share your opinion to be just as accurate as you are??


Don't take this the wrong way, I'm just asking.

Personally, I think it's normal human behavior... we all do it.. and as long as you preface your statement, with IMO, or "From What I saw/see"(which you did) then it should be all fine and dandy......

But I do find it comical how you totally dismiss the inferences drawn by others...



The question burning on my mind is, what in this wide world indicates to the Wand-or-bust crowd that he will or should be our LT? IIRC he gave up 12 sacks in 16 games in 2004. I know that all bets are off in regards to gauging a player's ability because Capers' staff did or didn't play them, but why the strong support for Wand playing the position?

I guess I am asking, what particularly do you guys and gals really like about him?

Personally, I haven't been watching TC....... so I can't say what's going on, or how they look now...... But giving up 12 sacks with Carr in the backfield...... to me isn't a big deal....... like giving up 12 sacks with Drew Bledsoe behind you...... 4 of those may actually be your fault...... who knows.......

But I like the idea of Pitts playing Gaurd..... I too think he can be an avg LT, but a dominant Gaurd...... I don't care to put a rookie at LT...... to me it makes since to start Wand, and give the rookies a good bit of playing time. Wand can earn the spot as we go......... or Spencer can..... whichever.

We should build our line from the inside out.... Pitts & McKinney I think are a strong pair. if Flanagan can hold is own, our run game will really demand some attention....... DE's are going to have to worry about overrunning the play....

Honoring Earl 34
07-31-2006, 12:48 PM
I don't want to slaughter Wand , but how much of a disadvantage does he have coming from a small school . If there is a learning curve should'nt he be much better now than when he was drafted ? Why did he go to such a small school anyway ?

I know a lot of good players come from small schools . I think for lineman going up against big schools who line somebody acrooss from you with NFL aspirations weekend and weekout helps a lot .

jerek
07-31-2006, 12:55 PM
Not to be picky, but is it grossly overstated when you are the one extrapolating emotions, feelings, and inner workings of our players, or is it possible for someone who doesn't share your opinion to be just as accurate as you are??

Don't take this the wrong way, I'm just asking.

Personally, I think it's normal human behavior... we all do it.. and as long as you preface your statement, with IMO, or "From What I saw/see"(which you did) then it should be all fine and dandy......

But I do find it comical how you totally dismiss the inferences drawn by others...

Personally, I haven't been watching TC....... so I can't say what's going on, or how they look now...... But giving up 12 sacks with Carr in the backfield...... to me isn't a big deal....... like giving up 12 sacks with Drew Bledsoe behind you...... 4 of those may actually be your fault...... who knows.......

IIRC, giving up 12 sacks means the 12 sacks attributed to Wand are distinctly Wand's fault. Sacks credited to an OL are sacks in which there was clearly a blown assignment or error on that player's part. Sacks for which the blame isn't clear or might be shared aren't attributed to any particular player. E.g. if David Carr is running around in the backfield for seven seconds and Wand's man eventually beats him, there is no sack credited to Wand.

And I was agreeing that, generally speaking, I can understand a poster's frustration in reading of opinions formed because another poster was inferring things about a player. Obviously yes, we all do it, it's just a question of who's more accurate and who's less accurate. Up to you to decide.

I tend to dismiss inferences drawn by others when they are totally contrary to the inferences I draw myself. This process is made that much easier when the poster in question (a) has a history of supporting Vince Young as the solution to world hunger, (b) can't spell, or (c) explicitly states that because David Carr goes to church, he isn't a good quarterback.

Credibility of all posters naturally falls on a continuum; I'll not force you to read, respect, or agree with anything I post. It's all up to you.

jerek
07-31-2006, 12:58 PM
I don't want to slaughter Wand , but how much of a disadvantage does he have coming from a small school . If there is a learning curve should'nt he be much better now than when he was drafted ? Why did he go to such a small school anyway ?

I know a lot of good players come from small schools . I think for lineman going up against big schools who line somebody acrooss from you with NFL aspirations weekend and weekout helps a lot .

Totally depends on the individual in question. In general, the better athletes go to the bigger schools and the bigger schools have better coaching, more money devoted to the programs, etc. All of these can and typically do factor in to a player's preparedness, but there are numerous exceptions. IMO, Wand going to a smaller school might only indicate that he will face a larger gap to jump in adjusting to the pro athletes, need a little extra coaching. OTOH it doesn't necessarily make any difference whatsoever.

Bullfan
07-31-2006, 01:13 PM
No offense, Jerek, but do your personally know Wand? You could have a PHd behind your name, but, unless you have a personel relationship with a person ,you CAN NOT read their face or mannerisms and know what is going on in their head. Even if you iknow them you can't always know what is going on in their head. I've got a gut feeling that anyone who actually knows some of these players personally and read the statements made about them on this board get a good laugh at all of us.

Maybe Wand will get replaced, but, maybe he won't. Let the coaches do their jobs.

real
07-31-2006, 01:17 PM
B]you CAN NOT read their face or mannerisms and know what is going on in their head.[/B]


Most of communication is non-verbal...however you are correct...You will never "know" what is going on in someone's head, but body language is THE best indicator of what a person is feeling or thinking, sometimes being more accurate than what a person says out of their own mouth...and thats a fact jack...:shades:I think instead of jumping down Jereks throat we should thank him for his insight...we recognize that these are HIS observations and how Wands demeanor struck him...

aj.
07-31-2006, 01:18 PM
Wand and Spencer split time at LT during 11 on 11 this morning. I'm guessing it's only a matter of time before Spencer is our LT. I'm also guessing Pitts stays at G although he could move over one spot left if we get in a pinch...BUT... Salaam is also an experienced T that would probably line up at LT before Pitts. Mango Salsa is Weigert's understudy and will be waiting in the wings. Salaam can play both Tackle positions. Wand isn't having a bang-up camp so far from everything I've seen and heard. Sherman is challenging the heck out of Wand and Spencer, but Spencer has a bit more leeway being the rookie.

thunderkyss
07-31-2006, 01:18 PM
IIRC, giving up 12 sacks means the 12 sacks attributed to Wand are distinctly Wand's fault. Sacks credited to an OL are sacks in which there was clearly a blown assignment or error on that player's part. Sacks for which the blame isn't clear or might be shared aren't attributed to any particular player. E.g. if David Carr is running around in the backfield for seven seconds and Wand's man eventually beats him, there is no sack credited to Wand.


Yeah........ Okay. you go with that.


I tend to dismiss inferences drawn by others when they are totally contrary to the inferences I draw myself. This process is made that much easier when the poster in question (a) has a history of supporting Vince Young as the solution to world hunger, (b) can't spell, or (c) explicitly states that because David Carr goes to church, he isn't a good quarterback.


Then I guess you can understand people dismissing the opinion of someone who defends Carr with the same types of arguments that the poster in question says is worthless, unless it is he that is making the argument??



Credibility of all posters naturally falls on a continuum; I'll not force you to read, respect, or agree with anything I post. It's all up to you.

OK

Honoring Earl 34
07-31-2006, 01:19 PM
Totally depends on the individual in question. In general, the better athletes go to the bigger schools and the bigger schools have better coaching, more money devoted to the programs, etc. All of these can and typically do factor in to a player's preparedness, but there are numerous exceptions. IMO, Wand going to a smaller school might only indicate that he will face a larger gap to jump in adjusting to the pro athletes, need a little extra coaching. OTOH it doesn't necessarily make any difference whatsoever.
I was leaning in the direction that maybe what you see is what you get . That he has some measurables and plays well in non contact drills .

TransplantTexan1
07-31-2006, 01:19 PM
Wherever Pitts lines up on the line, he better stop jumping offsides.

Chester seemed to improve upon this quite a bit in 2006, especially over the last eight or nine games. Hope it's a sign of things to come.

jerek
07-31-2006, 01:25 PM
No offense, Jerek, but do your personally know Wand? You could have a PHd behind your name, but, unless you have a personel relationship with a person ,you CAN NOT read their face or mannerisms and know what is going on in their head. Even if you iknow them you can't always know what is going on in their head. I've got a gut feeling that anyone who actually knows some of these players personally and read the statements made about them on this board get a good laugh at all of us.

Maybe Wand will get replaced, but, maybe he won't. Let the coaches do their jobs.

No offense taken, and same for you if I say I don't think you have any idea what you are talking about.

I don't know Wand and I don't know his life story and I can't get either simply by observing him in practice, but I think I can perceive with reasonable accuracy when a player is generally out of it and I think I know when he is taking a ferocious beatdown.

If you want to think I am full of it, no one's stopping you, but the fact that you imply that I or anyone can't reasonably, generally discern his attitude and lack of correct play through basic observation is cause enough for me to ignore your opinions at this point.

nunusguy
07-31-2006, 01:28 PM
he has some measurables and plays well in non contact drills .
And therein may lie the problem, because the last time I checked football, beginning on Sundays in September in the NFL, is a contact sport. And you either like contact or you don't. If you're a CB like P-Burnt, who doesn't seem too fond of contact, you can get by without that mean streak but its a definite disadvantage. But for a lineman, for defensive or offensive, it could be a fatal omission for real success in the NFL.

jerek
07-31-2006, 01:29 PM
Yeah........ Okay. you go with that.

What am I going with? Either it's the way the stat is measured or it's not. Unless you are telling me that I'm incorrect?

Then I guess you can understand people dismissing the opinion of someone who defends Carr with the same types of arguments that the poster in question says is worthless, unless it is he that is making the argument??

It's whatever. I'll offer my reasons for believing things and anyone else can offer theirs. Most of the time I'll let an argument go if I think the other person is too inept to grasp what I am talking about. All I'm saying is judge me on how often my "predictions" come true. So far I'm batting a pretty high percentage. I'll be one point better if Wand washes out (as a starter, though I do think it's entirely possible he won't) before the end of camp. Still another if Carr shows substantial progress toward redeeming himself this year.

Runner
07-31-2006, 01:30 PM
The question burning on my mind is, what in this wide world indicates to the Wand-or-bust crowd that he will or should be our LT? IIRC he gave up 12 sacks in 16 games in 2004. I know that all bets are off in regards to gauging a player's ability because Capers' staff did or didn't play them, but why the strong support for Wand playing the position?

I guess I am asking, what particularly do you guys and gals really like about him?

The answer to the bolded question has the same answer that you give if you replace Wand with Carr and LT with QB. Wand had one year of playing time, Carr has had four and not put up very good numbers. Observation of Carr's play in the last 4 years could lead to the conclusion that he shouldn't have been kept. You however think he should have been kept, as do I.

Why is coaching and scheme a better reason (note: not excuse) to think Carr will improve, but not a good reason for Wand? Coming from a small school, Wand needed good coaching more than Carr did and he didn't get it either.

As KT pointed out - it is the 4th day of camp. Is everyone not up to speed right now a failure for the year? Improvement will come in the next few weeks all across the line. He was our LT during our best year - he wasn't a part of that debacle last year - DNP CD. He should get the chance to improve, just as Carr, Babin, P-Buc and everyone else on the roster.

It isn't Wand or bust anyway - those are your words. I don't like to see him dismissed out of hand though. I think Spencer is going to be an excellent player in this league. It isn't a zero sum game - wouldn't it be cool if Wand and Spencer were both good? Is that allowable?

jerek
07-31-2006, 01:40 PM
The answer to the bolded question has the same answer that you give if you replace Wand with Carr and LT with QB. Wand had one year of playing time, Carr has had four and not put up very good numbers. Observation of Carr's play in the last 4 years could lead to the conclusion that he shouldn't have been kept. You however think he should have been kept, as do I.

Why is coaching and scheme a better reason (note: not excuse) to think Carr will improve, but not a good reason for Wand? Coming from a small school, Wand needed good coaching more than Carr did and he didn't get it either.

As KT pointed out - it is the 4th day of camp. Is everyone not up to speed right now a failure for the year? Improvement will come in the next few weeks all across the line. He was our LT during our best year - he wasn't a part of that debacle last year - DNP CD. He should get the chance to improve, just as Carr, Babin, P-Buc and everyone else on the the roster.

It isn't Wand or bust anyway - those are your words. I don't like to see him dismissed out of hand though. I think Spencer is going to be an excellent player in this league. It isn't a zero sum game - wouldn't it be cool if Wand and Spencer were both good? Is that allowable?

I feel ya. My thing is that I have noticed Carr making a lot of plays, and I think he has great athleticism. My personal interaction with him -- limited as it has been -- have convinced me that he has a lot of heart and possesses the mental faculties to get the job done at the pro level. I haven't had the same level of personal interaction or observation of Wand. I've only really seen him in two days of camp to this point, which have left a very strong negative impression, however admittedly not the entire scope of Seth Wand and hopefully an exception rather than the rule. For pete's sake, I was reporting on what I had observed in detail in camp, and then later adding to that a very general impression I've held of him over time.

Totally agree that we are early into camp (I've said it myself previously) and almost nothing is set in stone yet. And yes, I would love nothing more than to see Wand and Spencer as two legitimate LTs that are duking it out for PT going into the preseason. As I say, I desire that anyone who puts on a Texans uniform succeed, in my book. There is plenty of time yet; for the last time, I've only reported on what I've observed to this point.

Hervoyel
07-31-2006, 01:42 PM
(A) He is tall and not particularly strong/heavy. In watching his drills he had very poor leverage; he was initiating contact at a high center of gravity and not getting low enough to compensate for the defender. He is relatively mobile for a T, but all of that is moot if he is getting bullrushed on every play.

He's 6'7" and 327 pounds (listed somewhere so of course our mileage may vary) while Tony Boselli was 6'7" and 322. I don't think his size is a problem. I do understand that he lacked strength when he came here because he had apparently attended a school with no weight program to speak of. He is however starting his fourth year with Dan Riley working on him and I think that it's safe to say that if Seth was understrength at this point he wouldn't be out there.

(B) I don't know what his weightroom measurables are, but he looked outmatched strengthwise as well. These are obviously correctable with coaching and physical training, to a certain extent, but IMO it is (c) more mental for Wand than anything else, at this point. Again take that FWIW to you.

I am of a mind that if Wand is getting pushed around out there it's mental and not physical and so I tend to agree with you on that. He needed to start at LT last season. If he had we might not have an answer at LT but we'd at least know that it wasn't Seth Wand. As things stand right now I'm 100% behind whoever the coaches decide needs to be at the LT spot and right now I'm happy to see Wand still in the mix. I don't think he was given a fair shot at the job myself. Projected as a 3 year project they started him in his second season and then punished him for not being ready by sitting him back down instead of developing him.

That right there is my biggest problem with the previous coaching staff. Did they "develop" anyone? Did one single player get better while they worked with him? I honestly can't name a single guy who got coached up while he was here. Maybe Petey Faggins but that's one guy. Who's to say he wasn't going to keep progressing because he's the kind of guy who works hard and keeps pushing?

Coach C.
07-31-2006, 01:44 PM
Wow, this thread is a bit heated.
First I will comment on Wand's good aspects.
1. He is athletic and has good footwork
2. He is prototype size
3. He is smart
4. He is eager to learn the position
His bad aspects
1. Does not get good leverage (not enough sand in his lower body for those who know what that means)
2. His punch and overall strength is only average
3. Gets down on himself quickly
4. Lets his stance be broken by moves
5. his hand placement gets sketchy at times
6. He seems to not have lost confidence from his stint with the old regime.

I am not a Wand fan, but I know that he is trying to get better. Would I start him? Hell No. Would he play though yes. I think he provides good depth, but Sherman believes in the kid and that is good enough for me. The one thing about Wand that I do admire is he is trying to become better, when he does not get down on himself and gets after it he can be quite effective. Right now his main problem is his mental state with mistakes and technique flaws. It is hard for me to say because I figured he would be gone after OTAs the way he was going, but the kid is fighting, so I will eat crow on that one. Can he hold of Spencer that remains to be seen and if he does not as Sherman said "Get your head out of your ass and make the play you know you can make!!" He will not.

P.S. He Spencer ran with the first team for a good bit of today's practices.

Runner
07-31-2006, 01:45 PM
That right there is my biggest problem with the previous coaching staff. Did they "develop" anyone? Did one single player get better while they worked with him? I honestly can't name a single guy who got coached up while he was here. Maybe Petey Faggins but that's one guy. Who's to say he wasn't going to keep progressing because he's the kind of guy who works hard and keeps pushing?

Please. I'm trying to forget.

Coach C.
07-31-2006, 01:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hervoyel
That right there is my biggest problem with the previous coaching staff. Did they "develop" anyone? Did one single player get better while they worked with him? I honestly can't name a single guy who got coached up while he was here. Maybe Petey Faggins but that's one guy. Who's to say he wasn't going to keep progressing because he's the kind of guy who works hard and keeps pushing?

The RBs and the CBs did progress and get coached up pretty well in the old regime. Past that though not really. Our old LB coach was terrible and dont get me started on Pendry.

jerek
07-31-2006, 01:53 PM
but Sherman believes in the kid and that is good enough for me.

If anyone cares to entertain any more of my "speculation," I would say this is very true; evidenced by the fact that Sherman and Kubiak continue to get into him at practice. Coach said it in another thread and it's very true; the coaching staff only bothers with players they see potential in. Judging by the amount of yelling they are doing, they still want and very much believe in Wand.

Then again, what the hell do I know? :)

infantrycak
07-31-2006, 02:09 PM
Yeah........ Okay. you go with that.

Don't know what you are going with other than a blind desire to see some things/players consistantly negatively and others consistantly positively. Sacks numbers are determined by review of film and assignment of responsibility in as little as one quarter sack increments. They are only maintained on OLmen and it is clear the reviewers do not attempt to assign all sacks as the responsibility of the OL as the numbers for an OL together will not add up to the total for the team--the difference is the sacks assigned to the TE's, RB's and QB's.

threetoedpete
07-31-2006, 02:13 PM
I'm hoping Wand pans out. I trust Jerick's thoughts. If I ruffled any feathers I appologise. I saw him getting waxed Friday also. Just not ready to give up on anyone at this time. Well maybe one. But I've banned myself from posting it again. I think Wand has a chance. If he makes it, it makes us better. We don't HAVE to start a rookie on opening day. I'm just saying lets give the guy some reps is all. If Sherman gives up on him, guess that settles it.

thunderkyss
07-31-2006, 02:15 PM
The answer to the bolded question has the same answer that you give if you replace Wand with Carr and LT with QB. Wand had one year of playing time, Carr has had four and not put up very good numbers. Observation of Carr's play in the last 4 years could lead to the conclusion that he shouldn't have been kept. You however think he should have been kept, as do I.



Wow......... someone gets it...........

Hervoyel
07-31-2006, 03:02 PM
The RBs and the CBs did progress and get coached up pretty well in the old regime. Past that though not really. Our old LB coach was terrible and dont get me started on Pendry.

I just don't believe that. Our first cornerbacks were Aaron Glenn and Marcus Coleman and those two could have stepped in and started with no coaching staff in place. Then we drafted Dunta Robinson who had a great rookie season and a less than great second year. Buchanon didn't get any better coming here to my knowledge either. That really leaves Faggins and one guy doesn't make a trend.

As for the RB's I think Domanick was going to be good no matter where he went. Wells is out of football at the moment and he was basically the same runner the entire time he was here. Sure he looked better running behind the better line and he definitely improved his attitude once he grew up a little. Morency they only had one year with so I'm hoping they had little to no effect on him.

I think they old staff accomplished little to nothing where player development was concerned. I think those players who did get better almost did so in spite of the coaches. Just my opinion though.

Coach C.
07-31-2006, 03:09 PM
Herv I see what you are saying, but to contend. Aaron Glenn spoke volumes about Hoke and how he showed him things that he had not thought about. Dunta was a rookie and without coaching he would not have been as good as he was or is now. Buchanon eventhouhg was horrid last year, was better than he was better technique wise than he was with the Raiders.

Domanick was a 4throunder that likely on most teams would not seen the light of day other than special teams and needed the coaching to understand how to hit the hole. Got to agree on Wells, really cant argue fact, and Morency showed gradual improvement over the year.

Did they accomplish alot no, did Harris and Hoke accomplish more than our others, yes. I see though you are saying it is not neccessarily better to be the prettiest pig in the muck. A little Texas reference I got from someone in East Texas.

El Tejano
07-31-2006, 03:28 PM
I think Salaam or Spencer get the nod before we go with Pitts at LT.

I would like to see Spencer at guard and Pitts at LT just to see what we got. However I think that was the mentality of the previous staff.

Meloy
07-31-2006, 04:16 PM
Most of communication is non-verbal...however you are correct...You will never "know" what is going on in someone's head, but body language is THE best indicator of what a person is feeling or thinking, sometimes being more accurate than what a person says out of their own mouth...and thats a fact jack...:shades:I think instead of jumping down Jereks throat we should thank him for his insight...we recognize that these are HIS observations and how Wands demeanor struck him...
If what I understand from some of the posts on MB about Wand is correct, the "body language" that sticks out to me the most would be as I think AJ said on another thread "knocked on his a_ _" by the DE. If this is happening regularly, Carr may be starting to get that "here we go again feeling." Maybe we could use 4 OTs at once? I think Carr should petition NFL to allow a special waver allowing 15 Offensive players until we have a solid LT.:hides:

Texans Horror
07-31-2006, 05:03 PM
Didn't we already go over this sort of observational study during OTAs when it was pointed out that one player was standing one way, so it was obvious they were a much better player, and Babin was a loser for not standing properly?

Kaiser Toro
07-31-2006, 05:04 PM
Didn't we already go over this sort of observational study during OTAs when it was pointed out that one player was standing one way, so it was obvious they were a much better player, and Babin was a loser for not standing properly?

Stand down Oso, you are talking loco. :)

jerek
07-31-2006, 05:06 PM
Didn't we already go over this sort of observational study during OTAs when it was pointed out that one player was standing one way, so it was obvious they were a much better player, and Babin was a loser for not standing properly?

Don't remember it, and in any event, it wasn't me any one was questioning. I addressed what was directed toward/at me and that's that.

Runner
07-31-2006, 05:07 PM
Didn't we already go over this sort of observational study during OTAs when it was pointed out that one player was standing one way, so it was obvious they were a much better player, and Babin was a loser for not standing properly?

You better put a smiley on that.

I think it was a still picture where Babin had the opposite knee on the ground from the rest of the d-lineman during a break. Final conclusion: not a team player. :)

real
07-31-2006, 05:14 PM
My goodness...why are we attacking the people who are posting notes about practice?!?!?!? C'mon man...we're talking about prac-tice....not the game...Practice....

But on a serious note...Jerek please don't let some peoples comments stop you from posting YOUR interpretation of whats happening out there...

Hervoyel
07-31-2006, 05:20 PM
My goodness...why are we attacking the people who are posting notes about practice?!?!?!? C'mon man...we're talking about prac-tice....not the game...Practice....

But on a serious note...Jerek please don't let some peoples comments stop you from posting YOUR interpretation of whats happening out there...

I think I'm going to have to attack you for that ;)

Now we're attacking people for encouraging other people to continue to report what they see in practice and for pointing out that we're attacking them for posting it!

I'll attack anyone who attacks me for this attack!

Signed- "The Attacker"

real
07-31-2006, 05:21 PM
I think I'm going to have to attack you for that ;)

Now we're attacking people for encouraging other people to continue to report what they see in practice and for pointing out that we're attacking them for posting it!

I'll attack anyone who attacks me for this attack!

Signed- "The Attacker":shoot:

Hervoyel
07-31-2006, 05:30 PM
:shoot:


Exactly.

South Texan
07-31-2006, 05:47 PM
I am thinking that the coaching staff has seen something about Wand that makes them think he has the ability to do the job at LT. I think they are going to need a few more days at least to see if he has the desire to do the job. If he gets pulled from LT before they have a chance to work with him and know for sure if he is the best man for the spot, I think we are shooting ourselves in the foot. (I wonder how many bullet holes the old coaching staff has in their shoes.)

Texans_Chick
07-31-2006, 06:12 PM
I think I'm going to have to attack you for that ;)

Now we're attacking people for encouraging other people to continue to report what they see in practice and for pointing out that we're attacking them for posting it!

I'll attack anyone who attacks me for this attack!

Signed- "The Attacker"


There are attacks in this thread???????

I don't care for Tacks myself. Ravens and Tacks have just about the ugliest logos and unis in the league.

Signed,
Emily Litella (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Litella)

painekiller
07-31-2006, 06:37 PM
Early on in this thread someone referred to a radio interview with Pitts. In that interview he was asked about moving to guard and the new players brought in. He had glowing things to say about Flanagan, how he was a leader and fighter.

Also in that interview they asked him about Wand. Pitts answered around the subject. Implying that Wand did not seem to have the fire, and the desire to be a LT in the league.

Pitts change in the way he handled the two question was very obvious, his praise for Flanagan was real. That really made his handling of the Wand question that much more obvious, he (Pitts) does not feel that Wand has what it takes to be an NFL starter at LT, and these guys have to believe in each other. The play of the line demands it.

On another subject, didn't most teams bring in new lineman and start them as guards to learn the NFL game. After they had the game down, then they were moved out to tackles. Has this changed?

I agree I would like to see someone beat Pitts out for LT, I would like to see Spencer start at guard and work his way up to LT. Same with Winston on the other side. Is this so wrong?

infantrycak
07-31-2006, 06:43 PM
EThat really made his handling of the Wand question that much more obvious, he (Pitts) does not feel that Wand has what it takes to be an NFL starter at LT, and these guys have to believe in each other.

Or Pitts simply feels he is a better LT and as that is the premier OL spot wants to be there instead. The problem with that scenario is Pitts makes a better OG than Wand does, possibly by a much wider margin than Pitts is better than Wand at LT. Time will tell if Wand has what it takes.

On another subject, didn't most teams bring in new lineman and start them as guards to learn the NFL game. After they had the game down, then they were moved out to tackles. Has this changed?

A lot of teams start future LT's at RT for a while like Jordan Gross in Carolina (who is now back at RT) and Robert Gallery in Oakland.

Vinny
07-31-2006, 08:53 PM
All I'm saying is judge me on how often my "predictions" come true. So far I'm batting a pretty high percentage.
seems debatabe enough :ok: donno, but you were kinda off on your Carr is gonna have a great year thing last year weren't you?

MorKnolle
07-31-2006, 10:06 PM
Cause right now, I'm hard pressed to believe that he couldn't beat out Wand or Spencer at that position. And the last time I checked, LT is a more important position. Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't he been the best LT that we have had throughout our short history? I mean C'mon! I don't see why he keeps getting pushed down to guard. If Spencer and Wand keep getting demolished, shouldn't we start considering Pitts at LT? I think Spencer would be a good LG as people have been saying he's a huge mauler. He was projected as a guard coming into the draft anyway right? It never looked like he was primarily a pass-blocker to begin with.

I know it's too early to hit the panic button, but I think this should be a serious consideration as training camp goes on.

I wouldn't mind seeing it, but I think the staff really likes Pitts as a LG and think he can excel there, and they don't want to keep switching player's positions around like Capers/Pendry did last year, so I think he'll stay. We meed tp start developing some consistency and chemistry on the OLine, and switching positions around won't help that. Wand has indeed looked pretty poor so far but I think Spencer will be ready to start at some point this year and will take over. I personally think Pitts was a solid LT and would be a career solid LT, nothing special, but good. I think he could be exceptional as a RT or an OG, which is why I think they have moved him back inside to OG. He is also built more like an OG than an OT. In a traditional scheme Spencer would have been more of a mauling OG, but our blocking scheme doesn't fit the huge maulers, it features more athletic OGs that can get out and move, which Spencer can do as well. Spencer has lost a lot of weight since the draft (nowhere near 352 anymore) but still has room to lose a little more and definitely needs some technique work, but he is getting there.

Do I take it from the premise of this thread that Seth Wand is not holding up his end in TC?

And if that's the case, doesn't that validate what last year's coaching staff did in demoting him?

To you TC observers, what exactly is Wand's problem? Is he just getting overmatched physically? . . . Is he just too slow laterally . . . or is he not just mentally cut out for it?

He is terribly overmatched thusfar. He is getting beat on speed, he's being overpowered in pass protection, and he's being neutralized and even dominated in run blocking. He's jumped to false starts more than anyone else on the OLine, and he's easily been the weak link on the starting OLine thusfar. He has also been consistently dominated in 1 on 1 drills, Mario has taken him to school, and Peek and Babin are dominating him too, and usually by just bull rushing him, which shouldn't be a strength of Babin and Peek. They aren't even having to use their superior athleticism to get around him. Wand is physically pretty athletic, he just doesn't use it well, doesn't seem very strong, and does not seem tough/strong-willed.

Sounds like some of you are "seeing what you want to see", which is for Wand to fail. We are 3 days into training camp, new coaches, new play schemes and Wand finally has coaches who want to teach him and work with him. Give him a chance -- he will surprise you. There is no way he does not want to be a good left tackle, he just hasn't been given the training that Chester has. It was reported that Chester has spent some time on the bench too from making mistakes, give this line of men a chance.

Wand has been getting dominated, I wish we could get ahold of tapes from the practice to show to everyone that still thinks he's playing well. He has clearly been the worst among the 1st team OLinemen, and I'd say Spencer and Winston are right there with him despite making a decent amount of rookie mistakes, and even Fred Weary has looked better thusfar. To this point Wand has looked pretty bad and has also received more yelling/criticism from the coaching staff, which shows that they care enough to point him in the right direction, but he really has a long way to go if he's going to be our starter this year.

How fired up is the rest of the line? I'm not trying to denounce a post. I'm just curious because I haven't been able to go to the camps. Are they pumped up? Are they jumping up and down after every play? From what I have seen in the pics and what I have heard on the boards (which is all I have to go on), I can't make a decision as to the player's emotional state.

So I'm going to wait for the coaches to do their job. As I've said before, Mario, Demeco, Moulds, and Flanagan are nothing compared to the changes in the front three - Kubiak, Sherman, and Smith. This will be the big change this year, whoever is running the ball.

Along these lines, how is the offensive coaching staff looking? I have heard little of Benton (O-line coach) and Calhoun (OC). Is Sherman working with the line, or has it been relegated to Benton? Would either give the line the Pendry stamp of approval (berating, yelling, etc.). Just curious. Thanks.

The defense has definitely been fired up after every play, the offense not so much. Sherman has spent a ton of time with the OLine, and they are definitely working hard to improve them individually, and I suspect they will look a lot better as they play together and the rest of our scheme is implemented and we see the full array of formations/plays/protection schemes.

I do not like the fact that people are having a consistent take on what they are seeing from Wand. And I am alarmed. However, as some are implying here how do Kubiak/Sherman measure Wand? And is he below or above the expectation by Day 4 of training camp? That is what really counts here.

We have spoken about certain players having a year or a half season to show results. I would say that Wand most likely has to the end of training camp. I hope the staff knows what makes this guy tick by now.

How is Hodgdon looking?

Hodgdon hasn't looked real good either in 1 on 1s. Weaver, Robaire, Payne, and obviously Mario have been tossing him around with ease. He really needs to gain some strength to stand up to the DTs in this league. He has fairly solid techniques and fundamentals, just can't hang with our defensive talent as of this point.

wags
07-31-2006, 10:20 PM
seems debatabe enough :ok: donno, but you were kinda off on your Carr is gonna have a great year thing last year weren't you?

Who wrote this?

I see a pretty substantial year coming up.

3800-4000 yards 18-20 TD's and 11-15 INT's

Are you really gonna bust him on that? :rolleyes:

Having a little hope for your QB never hurt anyone.

Vinny
07-31-2006, 10:41 PM
I didn't comment on my stuff, but then again, I wasn't bragging either. I have a good track record and good eye for the game year-in, year-out, unless you want to imply otherwise....but then again you bust my chops every year. So I'm used to it.

The Pencil Neck
07-31-2006, 10:42 PM
I'll attack anyone who attacks me for this attack!

Signed- "The Attacker"

You are so worng that I won't even bother to respond to your so-called points.

Besides the point on the top of your head.

And, yes, I spelled wrong incorrectly in an attempt to underline the extent of your wrongness.

To everyone else who is not so wrong as "The Attacker", please, everyone, keep posting any thoughts you have regarding the practices. I, for one, am soaking up every word.

wags
07-31-2006, 10:48 PM
I didn't comment on my stuff, but then again, I wasn't bragging either. I have a good track record and good eye for the game year-in, year-out, unless you want to imply otherwise....but then again you bust my chops every year. So I'm used to it.

Ok. No joking around with you. If you want a good laugh I suggest digging up my predictions.

In any event I don't think anyone can fault you, or anyone else, for having a little faith in Carr before kickoff last year.

All in good fun, but I guess that doesn't translate well over the net.

Vinny
07-31-2006, 10:54 PM
ok...wiped my post since I'm being too hard on Jerek...he doesn't deserve a conk on the head.

socalfan
08-01-2006, 01:22 AM
Appreciate all the banter, but how do some of the potential back-ups look? Salaam, Bedell, Loverne,Hodgdon et all. Obviously starters are key but these other guys are imperative.

TwinSisters
08-01-2006, 01:57 AM
You are so worng that I won't even bother to respond to your so-called points.

Besides the point on the top of your head.

And, yes, I spelled wrong incorrectly in an attempt to underline the extent of your wrongness.

To everyone else who is not so wrong as "The Attacker", please, everyone, keep posting any thoughts you have regarding the practices. I, for one, am soaking up every word.

Ah, the Laughing Gnome and Sponge Bob Square Pants bundled up into one neat package.

TwinSisters
08-01-2006, 02:35 AM
Cause right now, I'm hard pressed to believe that he couldn't beat out Wand or Spencer at that position. And the last time I checked, LT is a more important position. Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't he been the best LT that we have had throughout our short history? I mean C'mon! I don't see why he keeps getting pushed down to guard. If Spencer and Wand keep getting demolished, shouldn't we start considering Pitts at LT? I think Spencer would be a good LG as people have been saying he's a huge mauler. He was projected as a guard coming into the draft anyway right? It never looked like he was primarily a pass-blocker to begin with.

I know it's too early to hit the panic button, but I think this should be a serious consideration as training camp goes on.

LT is the most important postion in a drop-back passing pocket offense. The reason for it is because the guy often has to work on his "own island", without much help from a guard or TE, to protect the QB's backside. This is also where a defense will put it's speed rusher ( Freeney, Peppers, etc ). The defense will overload the leftside to get the speed rusher one on one with the LT.

It is not as important in a double TE set or an offense that uses a QB that is moving around. One, he has help in the formation ( TE ). Two, he is going to see what is coming if he is booting naked. Three, he is going to moving away from the speed rusher if he is booting strong ( or rightside ).

That said.

The ZBS line is supposed to take a lot of time to gel between the same players blocking in zones ( as units, in concert ) and not man up ( single or pairs ). Looking at it from that point of view, you should be expecting to see the weakest players on the ends and not starters not shifting around that much.

The trendy thing right now is to attack the trendy Cover 2 with two TEs, see Cowboys. If our offense was going to be more drop-back based then I would expect to see the stronger player Pitts moved out to tackle.

Oddly enough, I haven't seen a lot of talk about cutback blocking yet. Supposedly one of the Pendry hotbutton issues with the enlightened fans.
--

And while on the topic of fans... everyone has their favourite Rudy underdog. Wand is certainly in that category.

Coach C.
08-01-2006, 08:16 AM
Just an FYI Twin Sisters Peppers does not line up on the LT, but on the RT. Mike Rucker lines up on the LT. You could go with Simien Rice or another guy, but the uniqueness of Peppers, White, and Strahan(part of his career) is that they accumulate sacks and stats from lining up on the strong side.

Most of our Double TE sets one of the TE does not even chip block, but comes accross on a drag or dig route. Not sure if what you are trying to say with cutback blocking, because they are getting to the second level and opening cutback lanes, they are not cut blocking which we will do to get guys on the ground in the second level, because well you want to spare your own guys.

TwinSisters
08-01-2006, 09:40 AM
Just an FYI Twin Sisters Peppers does not line up on the LT, but on the RT. Mike Rucker lines up on the LT. You could go with Simien Rice or another guy, but the uniqueness of Peppers, White, and Strahan(part of his career) is that they accumulate sacks and stats from lining up on the strong side.

Most of our Double TE sets one of the TE does not even chip block, but comes accross on a drag or dig route. Not sure if what you are trying to say with cutback blocking, because they are getting to the second level and opening cutback lanes, they are not cut blocking which we will do to get guys on the ground in the second level, because well you want to spare your own guys.

yeah I was just thinking of a speed guy match up against the lone ranger T. The idea of having a strong left tackle is centered around those high dollar fellas like Ogden, Pace, Jones. I don't think that's what we are trying to get out of Wand and what Palmer was trying to get from Boselli, Wade, Pitts, and Wand. ( and whoever else we were thinking of throwing into that slot )

That's what I thought phan1 was worried about. Like this guy Wand is not looking like a Pace/Jones kinda person. I don't think he really has to play up to that level, if the QB is going to be moving around and the tackle has some help. Making him not as important.

HOWEVER if we are planning on using him without help... then phan1, I share your concerns.
---

The cut blocking! Not cutback. Wrong words used. Pendry would not use cut blocking in his ZBS and was criticised for it. I don't think Sherman taught it either. I think it was Football Outsiders that broke a story on it.
---

right on with the Peppers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FMd_RLuZKU
( with batman music! too )

White was a different animal all together in my book. It just seemed like he had so much "bull" in him, that it didn't matter how fast he was.