PDA

View Full Version : We passed up Bush, but at this pace....


jparrish
09-25-2006, 01:34 AM
...we'll be able to get Adrian Peterson.

davidghall
09-25-2006, 01:41 AM
Would be nice, but what makes you think they will draft AP if they passed on Bush?

painekiller
09-25-2006, 03:12 AM
The best reason is that Peterson is a workhorse back. You can give him the ball 20+ times a game, Bush will never be that back.

thetexanator
09-25-2006, 10:09 AM
we dont need to draft a rb, anyone can run in kubiacs system, bla bla bla

TheOgre
09-25-2006, 10:24 AM
I think AP fits into our offense better than Bush would have. Can you imagine if we had both of them?

Blake
09-25-2006, 10:27 AM
we dont need to draft a rb, anyone can run in kubiacs system, bla bla bla

Please at least spell his name correctly...

TEXANRED
09-25-2006, 11:04 AM
I hate to bring it up. We don't need a RB.

1500 yards of D and 99 points given up is not going to be solved by drafting a RB. What we need is two OLB, a CB, a pair of safeties, and a DE so Weaver can play inside.

I would love to have AP so don't get me wrong. I am still holding out hopes that DD will be back 100%. DD and Dayne would be a great combo.

Hervoyel
09-25-2006, 11:40 AM
You could look at it that way TEXANRED and I'd be hard pressed to say that your take wasn't right. Another way of approaching the problem would be to draft that big back and feed him a steady diet of "the ball". Long drives keep our bad defense on the bench and if we really are about being a running team then I can't imagine that there wouldn't be a place here for a workhorse back.

Both points of view are valid. They're two different ways to skin the same cat.

Personally I don't think we'll ever see DD on the field again and that saddens me because I think he would have been great in this system. I think that if he had been/stayed healthy he would have been "Terrell Davis great" in this system. He was born for this kind of running game and with his vision and burst through the hole he would have been a machine. Unfortunately he wasn't really healthy when he got here and three years of grinding Capers-ball put him down for good.

If we got Peterson in the draft I'd be a very happy man (I've been wanting a true franchise back for years now. I think it's left over from my Earlers past. To me we're a great team if we have a dominating rusher). I'd then spend the rest of the draft on defense because I think in the long run it's our bigger problem. I just tend to think that if we pick high (and we look like we're going to be picking high again) then we go with offense this year.

The first pick is one where you take that difference maker. If I'd been drafting the past three years for the Texans I wouldn't have made the Babin trade in 2004, I would have taken DJ when he was right there in front of us in 2005, and I would have picked Reggie Bush in 2006. If I'd gotten a bad vibe off the kid then I'd have traded down even if I didn't get equal value to do so. Just another 2 last year would have been huge to have in that deep, deep draft. Even a 3 if necessary would have been better than what I fear happened.

I'm afraid we took the workout warrior. I know it's early and I'm hoping it all comes together as much as anyone but it's something that I worry about when I see "2 tackles, 1 assist".

Dread-Head
09-25-2006, 11:44 AM
In the name of God and all that is holy...PLEASE send us a DEFENSE!

DH

jaayteetx
09-25-2006, 01:14 PM
In the name of God and all that is holy...PLEASE send us a DEFENSE!

DH

I seriously think that any 3rd string qb in this league would light our defense up with the pressure or lack of pressure we put on the oppossing qb. Its just plain pathetic and it better improve quickly or we're going to set records for ineptness.

Vinny
09-25-2006, 01:15 PM
If we don't trade down for multiple picks this year I think I'm gonna jump off a cliff. I can't take another 60 million dollar workout wonder who looks great in shorts has a wonderful workout at the combine but takes 4 years to get up to speed.

JDizzle
09-25-2006, 01:43 PM
Cap implications aside, I don't see how any team without a star back would not want AP on their team. Hopefully we aren't drafting that high, though, but I would probably be screaming trade down with everyone else unless Carr tanks it this year.

Hervoyel
09-25-2006, 02:02 PM
If we don't trade down for multiple picks this year I think I'm gonna jump off a cliff. I can't take another 60 million dollar workout wonder who looks great in shorts has a wonderful workout at the combine but takes 4 years to get up to speed.


I hear you. Like I said above to TEXANRED that would be one approach to it and it would be a good one. Remember the talk we had about Cedric Benson and how a workhorse back would also help the team? I'm kind of like that about Peterson but if we were in the top spot I'd have to entertain offers for the pick too. It would be very hard to pass up the chance to get better in multiple spots IMO.

I truly believe though that this past draft was the place to do that. I was wrong about wanting Reggie Bush then and I admit it. I wanted the HB (no, not half-back. "hype-back") but I think the trade down was the best bet in hindsight. That draft was really very deep. Is this one coming up going to approach that?

LORK 88
09-25-2006, 02:23 PM
Would be nice, but what makes you think they will draft AP if they passed on Bush?
Bush does everything well in that he is a good runner, can catch the ball very well, and also is a flashy kick and punt returner. AD is as pure of a runner as it gets. He relies on vision instead of pure speed like Bush. I really think he would be amazing in our offense, but also realize that we need some serious help on D (aka a Safety like LaRon Landry).

real
09-25-2006, 02:37 PM
Bush does everything well in that he is a good runner, can catch the ball very well, and also is a flashy kick and punt returner. AD is as pure of a runner as it gets. He relies on vision instead of pure speed like Bush. I really think he would be amazing in our offense, but also realize that we need some serious help on D (aka a Safety like LaRon Landry).

Bush isn't just a fast guy...He has vision...

Jerome Mathis is a guy with no vision who relies on "pure speed"...

rmartin65
09-25-2006, 03:19 PM
AP would help, sorta. A running game takes the ball away from the other team. It keeps our D of the field.

TEXANRED
09-25-2006, 03:42 PM
You could look at it that way TEXANRED and I'd be hard pressed to say that your take wasn't right. Another way of approaching the problem would be to draft that big back and feed him a steady diet of "the ball". Long drives keep our bad defense on the bench and if we really are about being a running team then I can't imagine that there wouldn't be a place here for a workhorse back.

Both points of view are valid. They're two different ways to skin the same cat.

If we got Peterson in the draft I'd be a very happy man (I've been wanting a true franchise back for years now. I think it's left over from my Earlers past. To me we're a great team if we have a dominating rusher). I'd then spend the rest of the draft on defense because I think in the long run it's our bigger problem. I just tend to think that if we pick high (and we look like we're going to be picking high again) then we go with offense this year.



I see your point. I guess it would really depend on how deep the draft is. If you look at the draft and its deep at CB's or Safeties and you feel you can get a quality cover guy in later rounds, then go for Peterson. Now if its a week draft and there is only one cover guy in the whole draft I would strongly suggest taking the cover guy.

Then again you would have to see how well you do in free agency. I would love to get Thomas Jones from Chicago. Quick, hard runner, has vision. He is not putting up the numbers he did last year b/c he knows Bensons rise is inevitable so he is probably saving himself for his next team. You get a back like Jones you would have at least two maybe 3 seasons before needing to look again.

Then again Dayne looked good Sunday. He averaged over 4 yards. He runs tough, legs pumping. Yea, he looks like he runs on his tip toes but when he hits you he keeps going. The problem the way I see it is we are up 7-0, I get up to get a beer during the commercial sit back down and we are down 21.

Hervoyel
09-25-2006, 03:47 PM
The one thing we can all agree on is that in some fashion we have to address both problems. We need to get better on defense because almost 500 yards per game and 30+ points isn't going to get it done. We need to get better on offense because 61 yards rushing is unacceptable.

Between free agency and the draft we can get better if we make the right moves.

Nawzer
09-25-2006, 04:12 PM
We don't need Adrian Peterson or Brady Quinn. Those guys can't stop the run the last time I checked. Granted we can use an upgrade at the rb position but the defense is horrible.

Hervoyel
09-25-2006, 04:26 PM
We don't need Adrian Peterson or Brady Quinn. Those guys can't stop the run the last time I checked. Granted we can use an upgrade at the rb position but the defense is horrible.

I agree with you on Brady Quinn but I think you're wrong about Adrian Peterson. Yesterday we had 61 yards rushing and we held the ball for 21:33 against the Redskins 38:27

The week before that we ran for a whopping 108 yards rushing (this might be the high-water mark of the season) and held the ball for 25:04. The Colts ran for 125 yards and held the rock for 34:56 and Edgerrin James is in Arizona.

A running game and long time consuming drives featuring it would go a long way towards changing that time of possession imbalance.

Plus you need to keep in mind that you don't only get one draft pick. There are 7 rounds plus you can sign people in free agency. Trade down would probably fix more things but passing on another guy the fans want (what would that be now? three years straight? TJ instead of DJ, Mario instead of Reggie, and then next year a bag of magic beans instead of Peterson maybe?) might not be a good idea if the stands are mostly empty by the end of the year.

Starting next year we're going to be seeing blackouts. Starting next year reality catches up to the Texans in a big, big way.

LORK 88
09-25-2006, 04:45 PM
Bush isn't just a fast guy...He has vision...

Jerome Mathis is a guy with no vision who relies on "pure speed"...
Yea, thats why he's averaging 3.4 YPC. Personal opinion says AD has more vision than Bush because I dont call bouncing everything outside great vision.

edo783
09-25-2006, 04:55 PM
I agree with you on Brady Quinn but I think you're wrong about Adrian Peterson. Yesterday we had 61 yards rushing and we held the ball for 21:33 against the Redskins 38:27
.

I understand that a running game will help the TOP a bit, but if you can't get the other team off the field and they are running 12 play 10 min. drives it isn't going to help alot. Right now our defense is that in name only. Perhaps by the end of the year they will start to pull it together, but I have my doubts which bothers me a bit, because I actually thought we would be stout up front. Knew we were weak in the backcourt, but thought we would handle the run and short stuff/pressure much better than we have.

SESupergenius
09-25-2006, 05:16 PM
If we don't trade down for multiple picks this year I think I'm gonna jump off a cliff. I can't take another 60 million dollar workout wonder who looks great in shorts has a wonderful workout at the combine but takes 4 years to get up to speed.

That is sooooo 2006 Draft.

Speedy
09-25-2006, 08:05 PM
AP would help, sorta. A running game takes the ball away from the other team. It keeps our D of the field.Keeping the opposition from coverting 3rd down 68% of the time keeps the D off the field too, but that ain't happening either. This team has a LOT of holes to fill and it won't be a perennial playoff contender until it gets a top ten defense.

Count me in the get extra picks group.

edo783
09-25-2006, 08:43 PM
Count me in the get extra picks group.

That's where I was this year and will be next year. Only problem....need to have someone who wants what you have. These days, most teams really don't want a top 3 maybe even a top 5 pick because of all the risks and cap implications. Makes it hard to trade.

LoneStarState
09-25-2006, 08:50 PM
If we don't trade down for multiple picks this year I think I'm gonna jump off a cliff. I can't take another 60 million dollar workout wonder who looks great in shorts has a wonderful workout at the combine but takes 4 years to get up to speed.

I have never been a fan of trading down for more picks, but seeing how the Texans can't handle drafting a #1 pick, I would rather them start stockpiling picks. With a lot of picks - they should be able to get 1 or 2 right without wasting them.

kastofsna
09-26-2006, 02:05 PM
marshawn lynch is better anyway.

SESupergenius
09-26-2006, 05:10 PM
I have never been a fan of trading down for more picks, but seeing how the Texans can't handle drafting a #1 pick, I would rather them start stockpiling picks. With a lot of picks - they should be able to get 1 or 2 right without wasting them.

Our offseason of 2005 has set us back 2 years. Add to that that we fired all the coaches and GM, you've got to add at least another year to the mix. That's 3 years starting in 2005, so we are on a 2 year mission and this is only year 1. This is why I kept telling people not to get their hopes up too much to early, we've had major changes at almost every aspect of the game and it will take time for it all to come together.

Hulk75
09-27-2006, 11:04 PM
If we don't trade down for multiple picks this year I think I'm gonna jump off a cliff. I can't take another 60 million dollar workout wonder who looks great in shorts has a wonderful workout at the combine but takes 4 years to get up to speed.

For a guy that watches football and studies it so much you sure give up on guys fast.
You allready got his first 4 years of his career laid out.