PDA

View Full Version : Week 6 trade deadline (TJ)


Cheroqui
10-02-2006, 12:20 AM
Should we try to get TJ Duckett from Washington? I only ask because I think we should have a pounder like him and Washington isn't using him so why not. Other than our D stopping the run, and tightening up on pass defense that's the only missing piece IMO to have a more complete setup and get wins after things fall in place. We can also rotate with Jameel Cook. So once we get a HB to step up and hopefully be able to catch out of the backfield it may help. Good move or why bother?

Mattheus_Rex
10-02-2006, 12:21 AM
But the question is, what do we have that Washington wants. I think they gave up quite a bit to get him.

K.D.
10-02-2006, 12:28 AM
No way, pass on that. Same type back like Dayne, don't need 2 of them. If anybody get LT's back-up.

Scooter
10-02-2006, 12:29 AM
i'd say no. unless i'm mixing players, he's the big load from atlanta, and we've already got a pair of that player in dayne & gado. it's a bit odd that i find myself saying it, given my stance of the past few years, but if anything we'd want a change of pace speedster at this point. we are hurting for a fullback, but that's not duckett's strong suit. if we're going to trade for anyone, it needs to be on the offensive line and in the defensive secondary.

Mattheus_Rex
10-02-2006, 12:32 AM
I think the o line will be fine after they've had some time to work together.

gtexan02
10-02-2006, 12:35 AM
I think the o line will be fine after they've had some time to work together.

No! Not the gel comment :hides:

Mattheus_Rex
10-02-2006, 12:38 AM
No I never said gel. I hate gel. I'm just one of those people who doesn't expect to go from a 2-14 season and an oline that falls down on the snap to a post season spot in one year.

Grid
10-02-2006, 12:51 AM
we need an LT pretty bad. When Salaam went down for a couple plays, it got nasty at LT. That was when Taylor got through and stripped the ball from Carr.

Scooter
10-02-2006, 01:07 AM
we need an LT pretty bad. When Salaam went down for a couple plays, it got nasty at LT. That was when Taylor got through and stripped the ball from Carr.

wand. the ONLY thing wand didnt have was a mean streak ... i'm willing to bet that the prospect of not playing anymore is plenty motivation to bring that out of him. i'll be extremely disappointed if we dont bring him back at this point.

slamdunc
10-02-2006, 06:16 AM
we need an LT pretty bad. When Salaam went down for a couple plays, it got nasty at LT. That was when Taylor got through and stripped the ball from Carr.



I agree Grid...what the heck are they doing without TE help or at least chip with a RB? It's not like Jason Taylor has a history of getting to the QB in this league!

TFL
10-02-2006, 06:17 AM
I say we make no trades for Running backs this year, and hopefullly draft Garrett Wolfe Northern Illinois.

thunderkyss
10-02-2006, 06:29 AM
wand. the ONLY thing wand didnt have was a mean streak ... i'm willing to bet that the prospect of not playing anymore is plenty motivation to bring that out of him. i'll be extremely disappointed if we dont bring him back at this point.

obviously there was something else they didn't like about Wand. I figured after Spencer got hurt, we'd get Wand back in here, but we didn't.

As for Runningback, I say stay put with Gado, Dayne & Lundy. I believe our run game suffered more because of our OLine than our backs...... there just wasn't many holes for them to run through. And Dayne, I think, does a great job of making something out of nothing.

We've seen what he can do when he gets a crease.......

Let's not sell the Miami defense short though..... they've got a few Probowlers who've made a living against the run.

Unless you think Miami should unload RonnieBrown.

Runner
10-02-2006, 07:17 AM
obviously there was something else they didn't like about Wand. I figured after Spencer got hurt, we'd get Wand back in here, but we didn't.


I guess so. Too bad his good play on the field this pre-season doesn't overcome whatever it is the coaches don't like. It isn't like he is a criminal or some other type of troublemaker. Just the opposite, apparently.

Carr was talking about his arm being numb after a couple of his throws because he was getting hit hard even on successful plays. Hopefully the coaches do something to upgrade the o-line where there is an easy, quick solution before Carr gets seriously hurt.

phan1
10-02-2006, 07:50 AM
I wouldn't mind as he does have experience in the scheme. But I also don't want us to sacrifice much to get him. Right now, it looks like the most important thing is finding a guy who is going to find the hole, which is the #1 reason why Dayne's starting. He's just finding openings that the other RBs aren't. The Oline needs to get better.

One of the problems look like the holes just don't open up in the direction of the runner at all. There were some holes today, but looking for them was like looking for a needle in a haystack. Sherman and Kubiak really have their work cut out for them to try to put this thing together.

Texans Horror
10-02-2006, 07:58 AM
Salaam has looked serviceable at best. What I saw of the time he was in there, he was barely able to keep up with Jason Taylor, and sometimes not at all. Bedel looked worse out there.

Carr is paying off this year - he is looking like a great quarterback. I worry that not having Wand in at LT is going to get Carr injured.

On the other hand, at this point I am willing to concede that whatever reason the team has, Wand is out. I am tired of not understanding what the front office doesn't see in him. (I had to reword that last sentence. I had written "I am tired of not understanding what the team doesn't see in him." From everything I've heard, the team sees a lot in him; Kubiak doesn't.)

Being an NIU grad, I think it would be great to see Wolfe running for the Texans. One can only hope!

real
10-02-2006, 08:00 AM
Our O-line definitely has room for improvement....but none of our running backs are anything special....I saw a couple holes yesterday...I saw a couple times where Dayne and Gado just ran into a linemans back....I think we will definitely draft a back next year...I just don't know what round...Im guessing anywhere from 3-6 depending on who's available...

thunderkyss
10-02-2006, 09:35 AM
Our O-line definitely has room for improvement....but none of our running backs are anything special....I saw a couple holes yesterday...I saw a couple times where Dayne and Gado just ran into a linemans back....I think we will definitely draft a back next year...I just don't know what round...Im guessing anywhere from 3-6 depending on who's available...

The season is still young, and there is lots of football left to be played. We've played Play-off calbre Ds for 4 weeks straight..... Our running backs have did as well as their runningbacks the week we faced them. I think the only running back to have a good day against Miami, Washington, Indy, & Philly was TikiBarber in a come from behind victory over Philly. I'm not sure, I haven't looked it up, but off the top of my head, that's the way I see it. I'll do some research, and get back to you.

But Dallas' D coming up..... don't expect a big game, from the running backs.

thunderkyss
10-02-2006, 09:41 AM
Just a quick look.

Washinton is only giving up 79 yards a game, Philly 93 yards a game, Miami 94 yards a game, and Indy is giving up 155.... we only ran for 108 using a three headed attack.

HOU-TEX
10-02-2006, 09:43 AM
Maybe it was just me, but did anyone else notice how many times Hodgdon got beat during a running play? I'm not going to say he was the root of the problem on our o-line play, but I just couldn't help but notice a few times.:twocents:

South Texan
10-02-2006, 10:16 AM
Maybe it was just me, but did anyone else notice how many times Hodgdon got beat during a running play? I'm not going to say he was the root of the problem on our o-line play, but I just couldn't help but notice a few times.:twocents:

Probably why he is the backup. :)

TheOgre
10-02-2006, 10:30 AM
I know this sounds insane, but why not bring Seth Wand back (if he is available) to back up Salaam? He knows the offense and would be better than a backup guard as our LT.

Runner
10-02-2006, 10:39 AM
I know this sounds insane, but why not bring Seth Wand back (if he is available) to back up Salaam? He knows the offense and would be better than a backup guard as our LT.

Why is that insane? He's better than Bedell. He's better than Winston. For that matter, he's a better left tackle than Salaam, even if Salaam is a better swing tackle.

jerek
10-02-2006, 10:44 AM
Why is that insane? He's better than Bedell. He's better than Winston. For that matter, he's a better left tackle than Salaam, even if Salaam is a better swing tackle.

I'm not a Seth Wand fan in terms of his current level of skill, but I don't wonder if he'd be better than Bedell. I'm not convinced he's better than Salaam, but I haven't watched tape of the O-line in either this game or against Washington yet.

DocBar
10-02-2006, 10:45 AM
But the question is, what do we have that Washington wants. I think they gave up quite a bit to get him.

They want 11 more games against us....

HOU-TEX
10-02-2006, 10:50 AM
They want 11 more games against us....

LOL! No kidding! Did we jump start that team or what? They out lasted the Jags in a shootout. They looked pretty good. I think we deserve a thank you from the Skins.:)

JohnGalt
10-02-2006, 12:07 PM
Why is that insane? He's better than Bedell. He's better than Winston. For that matter, he's a better left tackle than Salaam, even if Salaam is a better swing tackle.

It's insane, because if they resign Wand and he performs better (HE WILL!!!), it makes Kubiak look fallible.

IshouldbeGM
10-02-2006, 12:14 PM
I'f i were to trade for any runningback in the league, i'd target michael turner, the backup to ladanian tomlinson in san diego....5'10 237 with speed and power. He's young, doesnt have a lot of tread on the tires, i'd offer a 3rd rd pick.

Chance_C
10-02-2006, 12:18 PM
Forget it, Lets stuff PITTS at LT!!!!!!!

Wonder why they are dead set against doing that?

FILO_girl
10-02-2006, 02:46 PM
I think the o line will be fine after they've had some time to work together.

Dom, is that you? :hunter:

Vinny
10-02-2006, 02:51 PM
Wonder why they are dead set against doing that?
Every year they seem to move Pitts around and I think it has stunted his growth. I think he is the best LT on the team that isn't injured but the Texans want athletes with great feet at the Guard and think that this is a key to the zone blocking scheme. Perhaps letting Chester sit at one spot and learn the nuances is the best long term thing for the line. Afterall, we are looking to compete for the playoffs next year and we are building a base this year. That's my only logical explanation.

HOU-TEX
10-02-2006, 02:58 PM
Every year they seem to move Pitts around and I think it has stunted his growth. I think he is the best LT on the team that isn't injured but the Texans want athletes with great feet at the Guard and think that this is a key to the zone blocking scheme. Perhaps letting Chester sit at one spot and learn the nuances is the best long term thing for the line. Afterall, we are looking to compete for the playoffs next year and we are building a base this year. That's my only logical explanation.

I agree with the coaching staffs decision in keeping Pitts at guard. Other than Hodgdons mediocre run blocking, the guard and center play has been decent. My question is; what are we going to do with our tackle spots? It has been an issue since day one. What is it going to take to get a good RT and Lft tackle in here? Is Spencer going to pan out after this "severe" injury? I guess there's too many questions yet to be sorted out. Time will tell, I guess.:cool:

Runner
10-02-2006, 03:07 PM
My question is; what are we going to do with our tackle spots? It has been an issue since day one. What is it going to take to get a good RT and Lft tackle in here? Is Spencer going to pan out after this "severe" injury? I guess there's too many questions yet to be sorted out.

I've been trying to find the logic here too. I guess the plan is to use Salaam and Weigert until their knees fall off, followed by hoping Spencer comes back full speed from his injury and Winston steps right in at the start of next season. The fallback to Salaam and Weigert lasting this season is to hope Bedell improves tremendously before they need him again.


Seriously though, I don't know why they continue to use aging veterans that are playing marignally now and have no long term prospects for the team. That speaks both to their evaluation of Winston and their evaluation of the talent on the free agent market.

They think Salaam, Weigert, and Bedell are the best three players available to them at this time. I guess it is as simple as that.

HOU-TEX
10-02-2006, 03:28 PM
I've been trying to find the logic here too. I guess the plan is to use Salaam and Weigert until their knees fall off, followed by hoping Spencer comes back full speed from his injury and Winston steps right in at the start of next season. The fallback to Salaam and Weigert lasting this season is to hope Bedell improves tremendously before they need him again.


Seriously though, I don't know why they continue to use aging veterans that are playing marignally now and have no long term prospects for the team. That speaks both to their evaluation of Winston and their evaluation of the talent on the free agent market.

They think Salaam, Weigert, and Bedell are the best three players available to them at this time. I guess it is as simple as that.


I just find that hard to swallow. That said, I'll digress and pray to the knee gods for Salaam and Weigert. I will expect personel improvement next year compared to the Capers "time to gel together" method.:shades:

Texans86
10-03-2006, 12:42 PM
];460347']Now it really does not make sense why we cut out pre season starting LT. Bedell > Wand ............ I dont know.


Maybe Wand is Crazy/Loco, that is why we cut him. He prolly made passes at shermans wife. Wand, Damn you!!!

I'm really beginning to wonder what Wand was like off the field to get on the bad side of so many coaches. He didn't seem like a bad person, and there was a reason he was up for starting at LT this year. He was definately better than Bedell, so I don't know why a phone call hasn't been made.

edo783
10-03-2006, 02:58 PM
];460376']I think he has a bad attitude.

I suspect it is more of what he doesn't have in attitude.

mexican_texan
10-03-2006, 03:54 PM
I want Ryan Moats

Hervoyel
10-03-2006, 04:34 PM
It's insane, because if they resign Wand and he performs better (HE WILL!!!), it makes Kubiak look fallible.


The idea that this coaching staff refuses to bring back a player who almost started for them this year (according to their version of events) makes me concerned. When Spencer went down someone on the sideline (Gary Kubiak) should have spoken into his headset to someone upstairs and said "While you're at it see if we still have Seth Wands phone number somewhere".

The fact that this obviously didn't happen makes Gary Kubiak look arrogant to me. It makes me think he's more interested in "his" players than "the" players and that a better player won't necessarily win out if he wasn't one of "Garys guys".

If the Texans were interested in putting the absolutely best line out there that they possibly could at this time and with the resources they have right now then Seth Wand would be on this team and starting at LT.

The future is obviously what they're focused on. I get that. I just don't see how Salaam fits any better into our future than Seth Wand and I don't see how getting David Carr hit/hurried/chased more often from the left side helps them in their stated goal of settling him down.

Lucky
10-03-2006, 04:44 PM
I'm really beginning to wonder what Wand was like off the field to get on the bad side of so many coaches. He didn't seem like a bad person, and there was a reason he was up for starting at LT this year.
Does anyone know for sure that Seth even wants to play? He's been out of the league for a month, and hasn't even got a tryout. Seems to me that if Wand wanted to play football, his agent could get him a tryout somewhere. The NFL is not for everyone.

nunusguy
10-03-2006, 04:57 PM
In spite of Kubiak's reluctance to play Pitts at LT, if Salaam has got even a
semi-serious groin injury, he'll have to put Chester at tackle because groin injurys are very troublesome and can plague a player all season.
And when you consider that Pitts is better than Salaam even when the latter is healthy, and with the emergence of Weary he's got him and McKinney to
play the guards. I look for this move after the Bye week.
Most of all, they got to consider the risk of compromising Carr's new found competance if his butt is protected with anything less than the best player
they can field at LT.

AggieTexanFan
10-03-2006, 05:12 PM
Where is the Caveman in all of this, surely I thought he would step in?

mexican_texan
10-03-2006, 09:58 PM
Where is the Caveman in all of this, surely I thought he would step in?
He is raw enough as a rookie, and then he was moved to RT. He may get some snaps at LT, but not many, I would say.

spek
10-04-2006, 01:33 AM
:twocents: LT should be one of the most important positions on the O-line with a right handed QB, just a thought. So why are we not on a witch hunt (all the rocket scientist please reply).

Scooter
10-04-2006, 02:02 AM
I suspect it is more of what he doesn't have in attitude.

i'm positive that this is wand's problem. his measurables are fantastic, his film and endorsements are solid. the only flaw i find is a lack of mean streak ... he doesnt finish blocks with authority and is quicker to grab than to throw that big paw into someone's chest like spencer.

The fact that this obviously didn't happen makes Gary Kubiak look arrogant to me. It makes me think he's more interested in "his" players than "the" players and that a better player won't necessarily win out if he wasn't one of "Garys guys".

this is the one area of kubiak that worries me. i'm all for getting guys that fit the system, but that doesnt mean we need to move the entire new york knicks over here (sorry rockets fans). pride needs to be removed from personnel decisions ... something that's unfortunately never going to happen. salaam scares me for this reason ... he's not very good and is absolutely not better than wand (bedell is in the wrong profession). homerisms aside, find any tape where salaam has stood up better in either pass or run than wand. hell wand was our best ZBS run blocker during the preseason according to my game reviews. jags fans started laughing at salaam even making the 53.

if kubiak does a show this monday, i hope someone asks him about this decision (someone flag down marcus). we didnt get an answer as to why pendry didnt like him, nor why kubiak doesnt .... i'd really like to know why wand is so bad that he's not worth upgrading our team for.

TK_Gamer
10-04-2006, 04:37 AM
I think he had serious effort issues and I wouldnt waste time on a guy that doesnt come to play every game either. the problem is there is not this huge pool of available LTs in the NFL. noone is gonna trade away a solid LT no matter what the price. unfortunately it's only gonna get worse as alot of the starting o-lineman are getting up there in age and close to retiring. look at the chiefs, they have gone from one of, if not the best offensive line in football to below average in a couple years. willie roaf retires this year, will shields will probably retire also in the next year or so and there is just noone to replace them with. they hardly ever make it to the unrestricted free agent status. the ones that do are there for a reason, usually age and health issues. I think they will prolly let wand sweat it out and if noone grabs him at the at the trade deadline they offer him a very restrictive contract. the reason I bring up the trade deadline is when teams know they have no other resource for players they are forced to grab the throw-aways from the FA pool.

Texian
10-04-2006, 01:28 PM
Atlanta let him go because he had difficulty running the zone blocking scheme. TJ has been inactive the last 2 games for Washington. Washington gave up an equivilant of 280 draft value points to get him. Do you want to give up that much to get him???

jmerog
10-04-2006, 01:39 PM
.... if we're going to trade for anyone, it needs to be on the offensive line and in the defensive secondary.


I'm with you on that one. Unfortunatly, it doesn't seem likely anyone will give up a good o-lineman at this time of the year unless injury demands it. losing spencer was bad. Salaam is doing ~ok~, but we need help.

JohnGalt
10-04-2006, 06:01 PM
I suspect that maybe Wand has a bad work ethic. Maybe they feel he doesn't fully commit himself during practices. Of course, this is total speculation on my part.

I'm not buying it. I think there is more to this and some of what I am hearing and observing is disturbing.

1. The only bad things that have been said about Wand in the past few years are "lack of aggressiveness" and "poor technique". Nothing about intelligence, ability, attitude, or effort. He's always been in regular attendance at off-season programs. I think Sherman was fixing the "lack of aggressiveness" and "poor technique" and I felt Wand was going to be a solid player in 2006. It sounds like Sherman thought so too.

2. Wand got a tryout in KC in week 1. I know a guy in my fantasy league that works for the KC Star. He said... "KC would have signed him in a heartbeat if had been March. They felt it was too late for him to catch on to a new offense style and contribute right away." I'm trying to find a source for this...

3. Wand had no signing bonus, so zero cap hit when he was cut. Does anyone remember what Salaam got?

4. This side of Kubiak is disturbing me. OK, he cut a serviceable player (Wand) in favor of one who appeared to be a better back-up (Salaam). Nobody knew that Spencer was going to be hurt, s**t happens to good people. Instead of bringing back the guy who almost was the starter, Kubiak chose to stick with the back-up instead of changing his mind. It's like Kubiak thinks that everyone is going to assume he made a personnel mistake and he could lose credibility. Especially since he over-ruled Sherman.

5. Kubiak is trying to mold Carr into a Pro-Bowler. The hits on his body can't be good for that development. I wonder if Carr opened an Aflac policy, "because if he gets hurt and misses work, ...." Do you think Kubiak is just trying to teach Carr to make fast decisions?

6. Wand has been stewing about the cut for 4 weeks now. I'm sure he's good and p**sed by now. I think "lack of aggressiveness" won't be a problem.

7. I have been told that he drives a pick-up. Not an Escalade, Mercedes, or Beamer. Just a full-size truck. Doesn't that just scream Texan?


LETS WIN NOW!!!! STOPPING WORRYING ABOUT NEXT YEAR UNTIL JAN 2007!!

Runner
10-04-2006, 07:18 PM
Is it possible he doesn't want to resign with the Texans?

Very unlikely.

gtexan02
10-04-2006, 08:05 PM
Few, I thought from the title we had traded T. Johnson

JohnGalt
10-04-2006, 08:12 PM
Is it possible he doesn't want to resign with the Texans?


Let's be realistic about this. He's probably pissed about the cut. I would be.

He doesn't seem to have a bunch of GM's knocking at the door. He needs play well in 06, so he has options for 2007. Houston is his best chance to demonstrate what Sherman has taught him.

Frankly, we need him at LT. We don't need more Den and GB castaways at this point.

This is a WIN-WIN situation.

Ibar_Harry
10-04-2006, 09:30 PM
I lay the Wand problem on Kubiak. Something happened when Wand was released. Kubiak seems to get down on people, for example Morency, and he doesn't let go. I think many thought Morency was better than Lundy and blocking better than Lundy. Morency was let go and had been on Kubiak's xxxt list for whatever reason. The same is true of Wand and I said I didn't think he would be back because of it. That so far has been one of things that I have been very disappointed in with Kubiak.

Goldeagle
10-04-2006, 10:02 PM
Should we try to get TJ Duckett from Washington? I only ask because I think we should have a pounder like him and Washington isn't using him so why not. Other than our D stopping the run, and tightening up on pass defense that's the only missing piece IMO to have a more complete setup and get wins after things fall in place. We can also rotate with Jameel Cook. So once we get a HB to step up and hopefully be able to catch out of the backfield it may help. Good move or why bother?

No, we need to get Morency back. Duckett is the same as Dayne and Gado.

michaelm
10-04-2006, 10:48 PM
The idea that this coaching staff refuses to bring back a player who almost started for them this year (according to their version of events) makes me concerned. When Spencer went down someone on the sideline (Gary Kubiak) should have spoken into his headset to someone upstairs and said "While you're at it see if we still have Seth Wands phone number somewhere".

The fact that this obviously didn't happen makes Gary Kubiak look arrogant to me.

Making a critical judgment like this, most probably without knowing all of the relevant information, might seem arrogant to some.

I lay the Wand problem on Kubiak. Something happened when Wand was released. Kubiak seems to get down on people, for example Morency, and he doesn't let go. I think many thought Morency was better than Lundy and blocking better than Lundy. Morency was let go and had been on Kubiak's xxxt list for whatever reason. The same is true of Wand and I said I didn't think he would be back because of it. That so far has been one of things that I have been very disappointed in with Kubiak.

Or perhaps, lacking evidence to the contrary, you might consider that there may be a reason that a coach of Kubiak's experience and stature felt it necessary to cut ties with these players.

People seem quick to defend players who have been in the league a very short time like Wand and Morency, but can't give a coach who has been in the league for years, and has a good reputation, the benefit of the doubt?

Surely you agree that you don't know the whole story.

I may be wrong, but I'll stack my chips with the HC on these moves.

Honoring Earl 34
10-04-2006, 11:02 PM
Where is Wand playing now ? If you can't start for the worst OL in NFL history ... then maybe the CFL is next .

Runner
10-04-2006, 11:05 PM
If you can't start for the worst OL in NFL history ...

Maybe it is the worst o-line in history because the coaches don't make good personnel decisions and don't put the best players on the field.

mexican_texan
10-04-2006, 11:09 PM
Maybe it is the worst o-line in history because the coaches don't make good personnel decisions and don't put the best players on the field.
...perhaps...or perhaps the linemen sucked.

infantrycak
10-04-2006, 11:16 PM
...perhaps...or perhaps the linemen sucked.

Some of them maybe. But then why couldn't Weary get into serious contention before and now is considered a key backup and probable future guard. Or maybe the linemen sucked due to bad decisions like bringing in Wade for a fat contract, Riley, etc. Or maybe bad decisions like converting a guard to a center who plays much better at guard. Or dancing a player back and forth from guard to tackle. There are definitely talent levels involved but coaching seems like an abyss of talent on this issue.

mexican_texan
10-04-2006, 11:19 PM
I think the root of the problem was keeping McKinney at C. The line played much better when McKinney played G, for those two or three games.

Runner
10-04-2006, 11:29 PM
...perhaps...or perhaps the linemen sucked.

That's what I said. The coaches didn't put the best available players out there.

mexican_texan
10-04-2006, 11:32 PM
That's what I said. The coaches didn't put the best available players out there.
I mean that they never got a C, but yeah, that's basically it.

JohnGalt
10-05-2006, 05:49 AM
Or perhaps, lacking evidence to the contrary, you might consider that there may be a reason that a coach of Kubiak's experience and stature felt it necessary to cut ties with these players.

People seem quick to defend players who have been in the league a very short time like Wand and Morency, but can't give a coach who has been in the league for years, and has a good reputation, the benefit of the doubt?

Surely you agree that you don't know the whole story.

I may be wrong, but I'll stack my chips with the HC on these moves.

I usually tend to agree that the HC knows best, but in the case of Wand and our runningbacks... something doesn't smell right. Maybe I just have baggage left over from Capers. I'm afraid that these questionable personnel moves are going to be the reason we start the "Fire Kubiak Club" in a few years.

JohnGalt
10-05-2006, 06:10 AM
I also read somewhere on this board that they are "quietly" bringing in players to tryout for LT. If this is true, doesn't it seem kinda sneaky?

Runner
10-05-2006, 06:18 AM
I know this sounds insane, but why not bring Seth Wand back (if he is available) to back up Salaam? He knows the offense and would be better than a backup guard as our LT.

];460347']Now it really does not make sense why we cut out pre season starting LT. Bedell > Wand ............ I dont know.


----------------------

];459138']Forget it, Lets stuff PITTS at LT!!!!!!!

That is it! Weary gets Pitt's LG.

Wonder why they are dead set against doing that?

---------------------

Where is the Caveman in all of this, surely I thought he would step in?

He is raw enough as a rookie, and then he was moved to RT. He may get some snaps at LT, but not many, I would say.

---------------------

1) Because the coaches cut Wand and they aren't going to change their minds no matter what.

2) Because the coaches said Pitts is a guard and they aren't going to change their minds no matter what.

3) Because the coaches said Winston is a right tackle and they aren't going to change their minds no matter what.


Or in a word: stubborness. Some people say give the coaches a free pass because they are new and the experts, but they do seem to have a trend developing. That trend has led to Bedell playing at left tackle for us against a very strong pass rusher. The trend isn't just at left tackle but LT is the most obvious.

In addition, their interest in multi-role players and players they've had before seems detrimental to the team. I was very high on these coaches when they came in; I'd like to see them meet expectations too. I think they've done a fine job with Carr and some of the other aspects of the team, but I'd like to see them fix their own performance as they go along and become better coaches and the Texans a better team because of it.

Texans Horror
10-05-2006, 07:46 AM
Kubiak has been interviewed as saying that the bye-week is a time for introspection by the coaches. They look at what has been done right and wrong and where improvement can be made. My only hope is that they turn that magnifying glass back on themselves while honing in on the LT. Trust Sherman. Bring Wand back in and end all this sturm und drang at that position.

real
10-05-2006, 07:51 AM
Trust Sherman. Bring Wand back in and end all this sturm und drang at that position.

If they brought Wand back in...How would that work salary wise ?? I'm not to familar with how the salary rules apply in the NFL....Isn't part of his salary still counting against us ?? and If we brought him back does that salary still count against us, plus his new salary? Does he even get a new salary or do they just pick back up where he left off ?

If Kubiak felt strongly enough to cut his once starting LT I doubt he brings him back anyhow...Would Wand want to come back ? Only to be cut again next year....

JohnGalt
10-05-2006, 08:15 AM
If they brought Wand back in...How would that work salary wise ?? I'm not to familar with how the salary rules apply in the NFL....Isn't part of his salary still counting against us ?? and If we brought him back does that salary still count against us, plus his new salary? Does he even get a new salary or do they just pick back up where he left off ?

If Kubiak felt strongly enough to cut his once starting LT I doubt he brings him back anyhow...Would Wand want to come back ? Only to be cut again next year....

Assuming that Kubiak does the right thing and brings back Wand...

It's likely they will sign him to a 1 year contract. Wand will have a fair to good season at LT. Since Winston and Spencer are the future at tackle, it's doubtful that Wand gets an offer for 2007.

If I were Wand, I wouldn't accept a new contract for 2007 anyway, since we have demonstrated a lack of commitment to him.

infantrycak
10-05-2006, 08:18 AM
If they brought Wand back in...How would that work salary wise ?? I'm not to familar with how the salary rules apply in the NFL....Isn't part of his salary still counting against us ?? and If we brought him back does that salary still count against us, plus his new salary? Does he even get a new salary or do they just pick back up where he left off ?

Wand was on a RFA non-guaranteed contract with no signing bonus. He isn't on the cap at all right now. They could bring him in for league minimum for a 4th year player--I think $540k.

Runner
10-05-2006, 08:22 AM
He was getting the minimum tender when he got cut. 720K or so. If he would re-sign, the four year vet minimum is $450K or so, so he would be cheaper than if he had never been cut.

After that anything could happen. He might fail. He might shock the coaches and impress them and get a good offer from the Texans. Most likely he generates some good game tape and goes to another team because he isn't in the Texans' long term plans.


Edit: My numbers are estimates from memory. I'm in the ballpark, but if someone else has more exact numbers, believe them.

real
10-05-2006, 08:29 AM
Wand was on a RFA non-guaranteed contract with no signing bonus. He isn't on the cap at all right now. They could bring him in for league minimum for a 4th year player--I think $540k.

He was getting the minimum tender when he got cut. 720K or so. If he would re-sign, the four year vet minimum is $450K or so, so he would be cheaper than if he had never been cut.


ehhh....That doesn't sound like a situation where Wand would want to come back to....To go from starting to cut....then to be asked back....I dunno...and then on top of that they would probably offer him less...

I wonder why he hasn't caught on with another team already...

Runner
10-05-2006, 08:34 AM
ehhh....That doesn't sound like a situation where Wand would want to come back to....To go from starting to cut....then to be asked back....I dunno...and then on top of that they would probably offer him less...

I wonder why he hasn't caught on with another team already...

Well, it's make 400-500K this year or start putting his computer degree to work. I'd come back, especially since it will help him make a team next year

I don't want Kubiak's ego to get in the way of doing the right thing. I expect no less of Wand.

srstex
10-05-2006, 09:14 AM
Wand was a bust his first year as starter, and he was a bust last year, and IF resigned he would be a bust again. Have ya'll forgotten that our sack total was cut in half between year one & two with Pitts at LT, then in comes Wand and down goes Carr, then Capers starts Wand in year 4, and Carr's sacks are up, so in comes Riley, then Wand, Then Pitts, Then Wand. Wand is not the answer.

Runner
10-05-2006, 09:25 AM
Wand was a bust his first year as starter, and he was a bust last year, and IF resigned he would be a bust again. Have ya'll forgotten that our sack total was cut in half between year one & two with Pitts at LT, then in comes Wand and down goes Carr, then Capers starts Wand in year 4, and Carr's sacks are up, so in comes Riley, then Wand, Then Pitts, Then Wand. Wand is not the answer.

Interesting events, had they happened that way. They didn't.

Wand played full time in 2004. Our best year. He was about as big a bust his first year starting at LT as Pitts was. Capers should have let Wand show the same improvement that from his 1st to 2nd year starting as Pitts.

Capers fixed the line by benching Wand. The line - run and pass blocking - returned to being as bad as ever and our offensive performance and record followed down the tubes. Wand hasn't been the LT since Riley took over. There was no going back and forth between Riley, Pitts, and Wand.

There were a handful of people who were downright giddy about Wand being cut. I said the team would be weaker without him. Well, we are weak at left tackle right now.

I don't expect any of the fans who were happy about the Wand cut to change their opinion even as the team craters again - they would rather see Bedell get handled by the likes of Jason Taylor than admit they may have been wrong.

I just expect our coaching staff to make a better decision for our team by reviewing all of the options for making this team better.

HOU-TEX
10-05-2006, 09:29 AM
ehhh....That doesn't sound like a situation where Wand would want to come back to....To go from starting to cut....then to be asked back....I dunno...and then on top of that they would probably offer him less...

I wonder why he hasn't caught on with another team already...

That was going through my mind the whole time reading this thread. Look, there's obviously a reason why he was cut as well as still being unemployed at this time. We have yet to employ a good strong LT. It's time to make this position a priority in the offseason. We can't just keep putting bandaids on something that has been a problem since day 1. OK, I'm done with my rant. :)

Runner
10-05-2006, 09:38 AM
That was going through my mind the whole time reading this thread. Look, there's obviously a reason why he was cut as well as still being unemployed at this time. We have yet to employ a good strong LT. It's time to make this position a priority in the offseason. We can't just keep putting bandaids on something that has been a problem since day 1. OK, I'm done with my rant. :)

My feeling exactly. We keep replacing Wand and the replacement keeps failing to work out. It is kind of funny that fixing the o-line revolves around replacing Wand anyway. In 4 years of record setting badness Wand played one.

4 years * 5 positions = 20.
1 year * 1 position = 1.
1/20 = .05

Wand has played 5% of our offensive line total. Good thing for Weigert, McKinney, Pitts, etc. that they don't get put under the same microscope and with responsibility weighted accordingly.

------------------------
Why hasn't he been picked up?

How many teams have made moves at tackle since Wand was cut? Teams like to keep their offensive lines together unless forced to make a move. They don't move around like positions like running back during the season.

----------------------------

Edit to add:

We are on pace to give up 16 sacks from the left tackle spot this year. I expect that to get worse if Bedell remains the hobbled Salaam's back-up. Weigert is on pace to give up 12 from the RT slot.

Wand gave up 12 his first year starting, and he was markedly better this pre-season. Interesting. We need to fix something.

HOU-TEX
10-05-2006, 09:46 AM
------------------------
Why hasn't he been picked up?

How many teams have made moves at tackle since Wand was cut? Teams like to keep their offensive lines together unless forced to make a move. They don't move around like positions like running back during the season.

Except the Texans. LOL!

Wand was cut, he's gone. IMO, he was average at best. We need to make LT a priority decision. I know I sound like a broken record but gee wizz this is getting rediculous (not that it hasn't been for the past 4 years). One of these days DC isn't going to be able to handle one of these blindside sacks and get hurt.

real
10-05-2006, 09:47 AM
That was going through my mind the whole time reading this thread. Look, there's obviously a reason why he was cut as well as still being unemployed at this time. We have yet to employ a good strong LT. It's time to make this position a priority in the offseason. We can't just keep putting bandaids on something that has been a problem since day 1. OK, I'm done with my rant. :)

Well I guess the question you'd have to ask yourself is.....Does Kubiak think that Spencer is our Long term Solution....If Not...I say we grab Joe Thomas and end all of the madness....But I'm of the opionion that Spencer can fill that role, and all we need is depth....

Runner
10-05-2006, 09:54 AM
Well I guess the question you'd have to ask yourself is.....Does Kubiak think that Spencer is our Long term Solution....If Not...I say we grab Joe Thomas and end all of the madness....But I'm of the opionion that Spencer can fill that role, and all we need is depth....

I think Spencer could well be our long term solution. The severity of the injury is the only question in my mind. He has the talent to very good; he has some issues he needs to fix but I think he is fully capable of doing that as his career progresses.

It just comes down to predicting how his injury will turn out.

Yes, we are very thin for depth right now.

HOU-TEX
10-05-2006, 09:54 AM
Well I guess the question you'd have to ask yourself is.....Does Kubiak think that Spencer is our Long term Solution....If Not...I say we grab Joe Thomas and end all of the madness....But I'm of the opionion that Spencer can fill that role, and all we need is depth....

I believe he could as well. It depends how well he responds to this injury he's sustained. Kubiak made it sound like a serious injury. Oh well, what can ya do? Sit back and support who we have now I guess.:crutch:

Runner
10-05-2006, 09:59 AM
and all we need is depth....

Speaking of depth. Salaam has a groin injury - those have a high rate of recurrence without plenty of rest. Weigert generally loses a few games to injury. If we don't make a move soon, we could end up with Bedell and Winston manning the two tackle slots with...Breuner backing them up. Ok - Pitts.

I think we'll be seeing a move.

jerek
10-05-2006, 10:01 AM
Interesting events, had they happened that way. They didn't.

Wand played full time in 2004. Our best year. He was about as big a bust his first year starting at LT as Pitts was. Capers should have let Wand show the same improvement that from his 1st to 2nd year starting as Pitts.

Capers fixed the line by benching Wand. The line - run and pass blocking - returned to being as bad as ever and our offensive performance and record followed down the tubes. Wand hasn't been the LT since Riley took over. There was no going back and forth between Riley, Pitts, and Wand.

There were a handful of people who were downright giddy about Wand being cut. I said the team would be weaker without him. Well, we are weak at left tackle right now.

I don't expect any of the fans who were happy about the Wand cut to change their opinion even as the team craters again - they would rather see Bedell get handled by the likes of Jason Taylor than admit they may have been wrong.

I just expect our coaching staff to make a better decision for our team by reviewing all of the options for making this team better.

I still don't think Wand is that good. Despite his obvious athleticism, his technique is rough, his play is average at best, and I liked Spencer's future with the team over Wand's. You reference his being a starter in 2004 but IMO the success was more "in spite of" rather than "because of." I still agree with the Wand cut at the time it was made insofar as it was decided that Spencer would play above him.

That said, now that Spencer is done for the year, I wouldn't mind bringing Wand back in. I think we should give it a serious look. I don't think he's much worse than Salaam and I think he's better than Bidell. And I would hope that our coaching staff can honestly evaluate his play and, if he is one of our best options available (and short of Winston being ready to go, I suspect he is at this point) go ahead and bring him back in.

Part of the excitement of the NFL is that many times, players not well thought of end up receiving a second chance, and make the most of it. Well, this could be Wand's chance to do just that. Will be interesting to see if he is called back in or in any event, who the coaches look to in replacing Salaam if he can't go.

real
10-05-2006, 10:08 AM
I don't think he's much worse than Salaam and I think he's better than Bidell.

Isn't Bedell a young player ??? Maybe Kubes would rather Bedell gain some experience than bring back Wand who'd probably be gone next year....I could possibly see them bringing Wand back if we were seriously expecting a play-off run...But Maybe Kubes is thinking more along the lines of what's better for our future....

HOU-TEX
10-05-2006, 10:12 AM
Isn't Bedell a young player ??? Maybe Kubes would rather Bedell gain some experience than bring back Wand who'd probably be gone next year....I could possibly see them bringing Wand back if we were seriously expecting a play-off run...But Maybe Kubes is thinking more along the lines of what's better for our future....

IMO, the more we try players out at LT, the more DC's going to get the crap knocked out of him from the blindside.

Man, I'm trying to quit talking about the o-line today.:)

Runner
10-05-2006, 10:15 AM
Isn't Bedell a young player ??? Maybe Kubes would rather Bedell gain some experience than bring back Wand who'd probably be gone next year....I could possibly see them bringing Wand back if we were seriously expecting a play-off run...But Maybe Kubes is thinking more along the lines of what's better for our future....

Bedell is a year or two older than Wand. I don't think he is any more in the long term plans for the team than Wand. I just think we need to fix something right now to make the team better this year.

I think Winston is going to get his shot at RT this year. Other than him, I don't know who we'd play now to prepare for the future anyway. I don't think Wand or Bedell will be with the team next year in any event, unless one of them takes the chance and plays like a pro-bowler. What are the odds?

IMO, the more we try players out at LT, the more DC's going to get the crap knocked out of him from the blindside.


Yep. We need to get the right player in now.

JohnGalt
10-05-2006, 10:16 AM
Wand was a bust his first year as starter, and he was a bust last year, and IF resigned he would be a bust again. Have ya'll forgotten that our sack total was cut in half between year one & two with Pitts at LT, then in comes Wand and down goes Carr, then Capers starts Wand in year 4, and Carr's sacks are up, so in comes Riley, then Wand, Then Pitts, Then Wand. Wand is not the answer.

He was also the second gunman on the grassy knoll. :sarcasm: It's always nice to back up arguments with accurate facts.

Nobody is expecting Wand to be a pro-bowler. But I get the impression that most everyone else agrees that he is the lesser of two evils. Except for Kubiak

We are not going to get a stud LT for 2006, we are going to have to wait until 2007 at best. We have to deal with it.

Salaam and Bedell are backups. Wand is a starter. It's really that simple.

Honestly, I think we have lost Wand. Seeing this side of Kubiak is what bothers me the most.

Runner
10-05-2006, 10:21 AM
Man, I'm trying to quit talking about the o-line today.

What else are you going to talk about:

If 60 yards per game is a good running attack?

If our defense is better than our offense?

Should Dave be happy when he scores a touchdown?

It's kind of pick your poison right now. :cool:

JohnGalt
10-05-2006, 10:26 AM
What else are you going to talk about:

If 60 yards per game is a good running attack?

If our defense is the better than our offense?

Should Dave be happy when he scores a touchdown?

It's kind of pick your poison right now. :cool:

At least no one has mentioned Reggie or Vince yet... oh, oops...

HOU-TEX
10-05-2006, 10:39 AM
What else are you going to talk about:

If 60 yards per game is a good running attack?

If our defense is better than our offense?

Should Dave be happy when he scores a touchdown?

It's kind of pick your poison right now. :cool:

Well, we could talk about Dave's wife. LOL! JK

michaelm
10-05-2006, 10:50 AM
What else are you going to talk about:

If 60 yards per game is a good running attack?

If our defense is better than our offense?

Should Dave be happy when he scores a touchdown?

It's kind of pick your poison right now. :cool:


I tried to discuss the Coriolis effect, but you were the only one who bit on it...

Runner
10-05-2006, 10:52 AM
I tried to discuss the Coriolis effect, but you were the only one who bit on it...

I was disappointed in that too. I even threw in sophism and didn't get any bites.

JohnGalt
10-05-2006, 11:01 AM
I was disappointed in that too. I even threw in sophism and didn't get any bites.

Let's not talk meterology and physics. why don't we keep things nice.

jerek
10-05-2006, 11:07 AM
I was disappointed in that too. I even threw in sophism and didn't get any bites.

Boy, them's some fancy words you's usin'.

Satisfied? :)

I consider myself quite well studied in the language and I had to look up what sophism meant.

texaslifter
10-05-2006, 11:49 AM
I say we make no trades for Running backs this year, and hopefullly draft Garrett Wolfe Northern Illinois.

Hell yes! That kid is sick wid it

Texans Horror
10-05-2006, 12:21 PM
Our system is better suited for backs drafted in the later rounds. Can't you tell?

No running back will succeed without offensive line support. For an example, look to how well the Edge is performing in Arizona.

Meloy
10-05-2006, 01:25 PM
Boy, them's some fancy words you's usin'.

Satisfied? :)

I consider myself quite well studied in the language and I had to look up what sophism meant.I dated a girl named Sophie once. Is that to whom you are refering? Let's face the LT position is crap now. If Spencer is the future, we still need another high quality tackle. Not a guard scootching over & certainly not a "player hoping to get in the way just long enough to get Carr a concussion rather than a casket".