PDA

View Full Version : Bring the House of Pain back to Houston!


trutxn
02-20-2007, 04:18 PM
Mario is our franchise! We need to give him help along the line so he does not receive the same criticisms that Carr has had to endure (#1 pick bust). With additional d-line presence, a second OLB, and another safety we could dominate on defense. We are not going to "out do" Vince and Peyton, lets try to stop them. If we win the division, we make the playoffs.

Texans_Chick
02-20-2007, 05:31 PM
I worry a bit about the defense.

Right now they need to work on average, adequate, non-embarrasing, and consistent.

I don't believe they are currently within the zip code of House of Pain. I would love for the team to have a defense that is feared as opposed to one that is circled on the calendar to have a big stat day against.

Lots of players needed.

And they have a coaching staff without much of a track record of success.

Maybe because I'm so down on the defense I wasn't as freaked as some were about the Mario pick.

Name all the players on the Texans you would want if you had a different NFL team:

Mario, DeMeco, Dunta, Anthony Weaver and....?

meh.

Stros5Texans80
02-20-2007, 05:34 PM
We have all number 1 picks on the line and we still can't get pressure. I think personally we try to get offensive weapons mostly this year. Would be a big help if we can nail Peterson this year.

Double Barrel
02-20-2007, 05:36 PM
We'll need "the pain" before we can bring "the house".

As a fan of dominant defense, I'd love nothing more than a Texans D that ranks in the top 5 of the important categories. I think we've acquired a core group to build upon, but we'll need another playmaker (or two), plus some role players that can step up. Who knows if our staff is up to the challenge (I'm not a big fan of Richard Smith), but adding Bush to the FO will give us a more balanced presence, IMO.

hollywood_texan
02-20-2007, 05:43 PM
A shutdown corner would be the biggest impact for the defense right now. Unfortunately, those guys do not come cheap!

The defensive line is underachieving and needs to improve, but I don't think it is really a talent issue as much as scheme and coaching.

Stros5Texans80
02-20-2007, 05:48 PM
A shutdown corner would be the biggest impact for the defense right now. Unfortunately, those guys do not come cheap!

The defensive line is underachieving and needs to improve, but I don't think it is really a talent issue as much as scheme and coaching.

Completely agree. The balance can work either way for a defense (up to a point). If you have good corners/safeties, then that buys the D-Line some time to get pressure on the QB and vice-versa. :yes:

Texans_Chick
02-20-2007, 05:50 PM
A shutdown corner would be the biggest impact for the defense right now. Unfortunately, those guys do not come cheap!

The defensive line is underachieving and needs to improve, but I don't think it is really a talent issue as much as scheme and coaching.

How do you figure it isn't partially a talent issue??? Coach calls out the first round DT as lazy before camp even gets underway, some of the DEs are undersized 3-4 OLBs, and the DTs that end up playing most of the season are basically rejects from other teams who oft play better than your injured starters did, and your FA acquisition ends up being solid, non-spectacular, and having to move to an undersized DT at times because of lots of DEs not so much DTs.

I will agree that a quality corner would be heaven. Of course, that assumes that the staff can actually identify a corner that fits the system (cough cough Buchanon cough cough--Jon Hoke is still coaching corners).

Ole Miss Texan
02-20-2007, 06:01 PM
I like a lot of the defensive guys that are up there in the 1st rd and 2nd. We can really help out our D with this draft but when I go through and 'do' that I skip our offense which needs a lot of help too.

Depending on who's available at #8, I'd be happy if we pick...
-Gaines Adams, Jamaal Anderson, Amobi Okoye, Alan Branch, Laron Landry, Reggie Nelson, Leon Hall, Darelle Revis

I'd be fine if we selected any of these guys...particularly the first 5. And we'd be guaranteed one of them. If not...then that means someone out of Thomas, Russell, Peterson would be available for us.

hollywood_texan
02-20-2007, 06:58 PM
How do you figure it isn't partially a talent issue??? Coach calls out the first round DT as lazy before camp even gets underway, some of the DEs are undersized 3-4 OLBs, and the DTs that end up playing most of the season are basically rejects from other teams who oft play better than your injured starters did, and your FA acquisition ends up being solid, non-spectacular, and having to move to an undersized DT at times because of lots of DEs not so much DTs.

I will agree that a quality corner would be heaven. Of course, that assumes that the staff can actually identify a corner that fits the system (cough cough Buchanon cough cough--Jon Hoke is still coaching corners).

I don't think someone being lazy is a talent issue. Are you referring to Travis Johnson? As for the undersized issue, you are probably referring to Peek and Babin. Those guys are serviceable if you fit them right in the rotation and scheme. The issue with Babin is cost of ownership (draft picks and contract), but from time to time he has a flash or two.

I agree with your assessment on our DT issue. That is a big question mark.

In my assessment, Williams and Weaver should be able to hold more than their own at the end positions. Then kick Johnson in the rear and get him motivated with more production on the inside. Then you fill out the rest with roles players (examples are Peek and Babin, running something like a little 3-4 or something exotic from time to time to take advantage of their talents because they are not traditional DEs).

I am not saying the Texans have the best talent on the defensive line, but in today's NFL, you are not going to stockpile marquee players at every position. That is where coaching and schemes come into play. Which was really my point.

Putting together talent on an NFL team is like plugging a leaky bucket with 20 holes and all you can use is your fingers to stop the leaks. You can't plug all the holes, so you go after the bigger ones.

Having said that, getting a shut down corner probably would provide the biggest impact on the defensive side of the ball. Is is worth the price? Ummmm, I don't know...

Would I like to upgrade the defensive line more, ABSOLUTELY! But, I would seriously look for that shut down corner first. There is sufficient talent on the defensive line to get more production out of those guys.

hollywood_texan
02-20-2007, 09:02 PM
How do you figure it isn't partially a talent issue??? Coach calls out the first round DT as lazy before camp even gets underway, some of the DEs are undersized 3-4 OLBs, and the DTs that end up playing most of the season are basically rejects from other teams who oft play better than your injured starters did, and your FA acquisition ends up being solid, non-spectacular, and having to move to an undersized DT at times because of lots of DEs not so much DTs.

I will agree that a quality corner would be heaven. Of course, that assumes that the staff can actually identify a corner that fits the system (cough cough Buchanon cough cough--Jon Hoke is still coaching corners).

Actually, I think I can say it a little better.

The Dline is underachieving talent, whereas the secondary is just way in over their heads.

Faggins is not a cover corner, and the safeties probably would have hard time to find work in the NFL if they were cut by the Texans. You can't say that about the Dline. All of those guys are going to get jobs if the Texans released them.

Texans_Chick
02-20-2007, 09:48 PM
Actually, I think I can say it a little better.

The Dline is underachieving talent, whereas the secondary is just way in over their heads.

Faggins is not a cover corner, and the safeties probably would have hard time to find work in the NFL if they were cut by the Texans. You can't say that about the Dline. All of those guys are going to get jobs if the Texans released them.


How can you call Travis Johnson an underachiever if he has never achieved? People want to peg him as lazy, but maybe he was never someone who was worth being picked in the first round. I'm not saying I have the answers on this, but there has been little in his play that makes me think, gee, all our DT problems are over.

Seth Payne was a very good player, but he got a bad injury and is on the oldish side.

And the rest of the DTs are basically either practice squad guys or over the hill guys.

Babin/Peek really aren't great fits for the defense, and Weaver is okay.

I am encouraged with how young Williams is, his potential upside and the attitude he has shown, but really, there is nobody on the rest of the line that makes me think that the Texans will magically develop more of a pass rush no matter what sort of scheme the coaches run.

Yes, a new better corner would be terrific. But geez, the entire defense looks like a list of needs:

1. A consistent pass rushing DE

2. Defensive Tackles.

3. Outside linebackers

4. Safeties

5. Another corner

6. Football smarts mixed with talent

Another corner would be great but unfortunately everybody is looking for that too.

I'm not the biggest fan of our defensive coaches, but you can't make chicken salad out of chicken...beaks. (Well you could, but it wouldn't taste so good.)

2BCF
02-20-2007, 11:24 PM
With Carr you have something close, The House of Vain!

dirty steve
02-20-2007, 11:43 PM
With Carr you have something close, The House of Vain!
amazingly fresh. how long did it take you to come with a disparinging word that rhymes with "pain?" why dont you take this to the other 40 threads on the same subject?

anyway...i have soured on Peek since before last season. he never can stay healthy, and often makes rookie mistakes when he is out there. but he does have that streak of potential that keeps you coming back. if keep him, maybe you get more of the same. if you let him go, he goes double digit sacks in 2007. tough decision for the FO. i think him or babin are gone.

i hope we go into 2007 not having to depend on payne and johnson alone. a depth infusion is really needed in case payne cant come back/is cut, johnson lays an egg, and the street guys play like..street guys in 2007.

branch's value seems to be slipping a bit but might still be a good value if the team is to trade down to the 12-13 area. i think him or okoye are the only DL guys they would take in the 1st round.

i am really hoping at least one DB (CB or safety) can be signed in free agency. i dont want the team to feel like they have to reach for both in draft, although safety and cornerback seem as big of needs as D-Line.

BSofA04
02-21-2007, 12:59 AM
I can't wait until the combine begins. My hope is that the Redskins and Vikings lose intrest in Jamaal Anderson so that we could potentially acquire a pressuring DE. Same goes for DT Branch. I like the fact that he demands a lot of space and can clog the run. Either one of these guys would force teams to become pass-happy. Throw in some key FA's and suddenly the defense ain't that bad. We know the Titans would have fits.

Ole Miss Texan
02-21-2007, 01:40 AM
How can you call Travis Johnson an underachiever if he has never achieved? People want to peg him as lazy, but maybe he was never someone who was worth being picked in the first round. I'm not saying I have the answers on this, but there has been little in his play that makes me think, gee, all our DT problems are over.

Seth Payne was a very good player, but he got a bad injury and is on the oldish side.

And the rest of the DTs are basically either practice squad guys or over the hill guys.

Babin/Peek really aren't great fits for the defense, and Weaver is okay.

I am encouraged with how young Williams is, his potential upside and the attitude he has shown, but really, there is nobody on the rest of the line that makes me think that the Texans will magically develop more of a pass rush no matter what sort of scheme the coaches run.

Yes, a new better corner would be terrific. But geez, the entire defense looks like a list of needs:

1. A consistent pass rushing DE

2. Defensive Tackles.

3. Outside linebackers

4. Safeties

5. Another corner

6. Football smarts mixed with talent

Another corner would be great but unfortunately everybody is looking for that too.

I'm not the biggest fan of our defensive coaches, but you can't make chicken salad out of chicken...beaks. (Well you could, but it wouldn't taste so good.)

IN MY OPINION, THE BEST POST I'VE READ IN THIS THREAD, in quite some time. i'm too flippin lazy to read the same thing over and over.

This is the perfect post to say, whoever we select at the #8 spot is a GREAT pick. (much like Mario was....get over it every one else) Especially if we want to bring back the house of pain.

we are a long way from it. Mario, demeco, and dunta are the start of it. Whoever we select at #8 will be the next piece (if defense! lol) we only have three GREAT starters on defense. and one on offense (andre).

Stros5Texans80
02-21-2007, 02:31 AM
That's the problem though. We have really only one real threat on offense. Moulds can be on sometimes, but most of the teams we played this year didn't take off as much pressure off of AJ that we would have liked. I still think we try to get AP or Lynch, possibly even Quinn. If none of those guys are available, then we draft defense.

Ole Miss Texan
02-21-2007, 02:49 AM
That's the problem though. We have really only one real threat on offense. Moulds can be on sometimes, but most of the teams we played this year didn't take off as much pressure off of AJ that we would have liked. I still think we try to get AP or Lynch, possibly even Quinn. If none of those guys are available, then we draft defense.

You're right we dont have a real threat, thats why I like the pick of peterson. lynch could very well help us....i don't like him...have no good reason...hope we don't draft him. ( if we do and he's great..i'll be the 1st to say damn i'm wron!!)..i do think he'll be a good player but don't want him on the texans....

quinn won't help us next year. maybe in the 2008 season but not next season. if you want immediat results...i'd chose peterson or brown. if not them you go bpa on defense...or maybe even just go secondary.

DocBar
02-21-2007, 07:07 AM
Since Samuels has been tagged, I'd like to see us target Clements for CB then draft DL or SS in the 1st. A top notch strong safety would help us in coverage AND the running game. IMO, TJ was coming along pretty good before he was injured. I think he fell victim to a big payday and some bad influences in the locker room(Walker and Smith comes to mind). Which came first, the dominant secondary or the dominant pass rush? We may have found a couple of diamonds in the rough in Maddox and Killings. They did a good job in a bad situation last year and should be able to provide quality depth at a reasonable price.

nunusguy
02-21-2007, 07:50 AM
We have 4 defenders who would be rated good to excellent: Dlinemen Mario
& Anthony Weaver, LB DeMeco, & CB Dunta. WIL backer Greenwood and SS Earl are mediorce, but acceptable.
Needs that remain unfilled but are not as challenging to meet are an ungrade in FS and SAM backer.
Our most pressing needs on D are a strong pass-rusher (who at the same time is not a liability on rushing defense) to play weakside DE & another corner comparable to Dunta in cover skills.

TEXANRED
02-21-2007, 08:07 AM
(cough cough Buchanon cough cough--Jon Hoke is still coaching corners).

I must admit this part baffles me. Kinda makes you wonder what pictures or compromising evidence he has on the Texan organization. Marcus Coleman and Glen made him look good the first year and the job Glen did with DROb made hoke look spectacular. Since Glen left its been all down hill.

Before we get the "We don't have a pass rush" crowd going, we have never had a pass rush. Posey still holds the record at 8, and that was set in 2002.

TEXANRED
02-21-2007, 08:28 AM
We have 4 defenders who would be rated good to excellent: Dlinemen Mario
& Anthony Weaver, LB DeMeco, & CB Dunta. WIL backer Greenwood and SS Earl are mediorce, but acceptable. Needs that remain unfilled but are not as challenging to meet are an ungrade in FS and SAM backer.
Our most pressing needs on D are a strong pass-rusher (who at the same time is not a liability on rushing defense) to play weakside DE & another corner comparable to Dunta in cover skills.

I must strongly disagree with that statement sir.......Watch Greenwood sometime, he doesn't come up to make a play on the ball carrier, he waits for the carrier to come to him. Greenwood is a solid tackler but lacks play making ability. He is the kinda guy you would want as a solid group of bench players.

I don't get why some people really like Earl. CC Brown is a sub-par below average safety who makes more plays on the ball than Earl. I would keep Brown before I keep Earl. The only think I can figure is there a are a lot of Domers on the board.

Finding an OLB and FS is tough. The Texans had there Safety in Marlon McCree, but for some reason never started him, then cut him, just so he can go anchor the Panthers D to a top five unit and then go to San Diego to do the same. Not to mention when he was a Jag that D was a top five unit as well. I could see the logic though, converting an aging CB to a spot he had never played was the answer. Just like getting PBuc and cutting Glen. We also had the OLB with Foley but let him go too. We let Sharper go..............

Are there any do overs in football?

Does anybody else go "Dee Dee Dee" in your head when you see Cass trying to talk about football on pre game shows?

hollywood_texan
02-21-2007, 11:33 AM
How can you call Travis Johnson an underachiever if he has never achieved? People want to peg him as lazy, but maybe he was never someone who was worth being picked in the first round. I'm not saying I have the answers on this, but there has been little in his play that makes me think, gee, all our DT problems are over.

Seth Payne was a very good player, but he got a bad injury and is on the oldish side.

And the rest of the DTs are basically either practice squad guys or over the hill guys.

Babin/Peek really aren't great fits for the defense, and Weaver is okay.

I am encouraged with how young Williams is, his potential upside and the attitude he has shown, but really, there is nobody on the rest of the line that makes me think that the Texans will magically develop more of a pass rush no matter what sort of scheme the coaches run.

Yes, a new better corner would be terrific. But geez, the entire defense looks like a list of needs:

1. A consistent pass rushing DE

2. Defensive Tackles.

3. Outside linebackers

4. Safeties

5. Another corner

6. Football smarts mixed with talent

Another corner would be great but unfortunately everybody is looking for that too.

I'm not the biggest fan of our defensive coaches, but you can't make chicken salad out of chicken...beaks. (Well you could, but it wouldn't taste so good.)

I believe your a missing my point.

I am not saying that we should definitely stick with the Dline talent as it stands right now. My focus would be first to get safety help and a shut down corner.

However, the talent may not be available or too expensive, and then move on to the Dline.

First, I would try to improve the defensive secondary considering the entire situation of the defensive talent.

Texans_Chick, we are always on opposite sides. Doesn't matter what I say or you say, the other always takes the other side or interpretes the other way. Kind of funny, now that I think about it...

Spled
02-21-2007, 11:37 AM
Gaines would be awful tasty if he dropped. Chasing Peyton around is how you beat him.

TEXANRED
02-21-2007, 12:17 PM
I believe your a missing my point.

I am not saying that we should definitely stick with the Dline talent as it stands right now. My focus would be first to get safety help and a shut down corner.

However, the talent may not be available or too expensive, and then move on to the Dline.

First, I would try to improve the defensive secondary considering the entire situation of the defensive talent.

Texans_Chick, we are always on opposite sides. Doesn't matter what I say or you say, the other always takes the other side or interpretes the other way. Kind of funny, now that I think about it...
I understand what you are saying but I am going to have to disagree.

Look at your division as it stands: You have Indy's O-Line that is one of the best in the league, you have Peyton Manning, who if you give enough time to throw, will pick you apart, despite whatever corners you have in the secondary. You also have his running mate Addie, who is a pretty darn good running back.

We also have the Jaguars with a two headed beast running game in Taylor and Jones-Drew. The QB position is a tad bit up in the air but if Gerrard(spl) starts he is more of a running threat than Gary Coleman. Gary Coleman is not that bad either, a pure pocket passer, and many people discount the fact that one of the best WR's in the league retired before preseason.

The Flaming Meat-heads, Vince Young ran all over our D last year, including a 38 yard game winning scamper into the end zone just so he could run around screaming that this is his house. Travis Henry can kill you. Jury is still out on White, didn't really show much last season but it seemed like all last year he was out of shape.

Stop the run, Get pressure. A D that is able to stop the run is a thousand times more capable of controlling a game that that of one that can stop the pass but can't stop the run. We beat the colts for the pure fact they couldn't stop Dane and Peyton was barely on the field.

If I were in charge my priority in the off-season would be to first, upgrade the D-Line and then get a safety like Doss. A safety that is able to play both run and pass.

fdknuckles
02-21-2007, 03:46 PM
What about Demarcus Tyler in the second? Will he still be there? With he and Williams being team mates at NC State, there could be the kind of chemistry that could boost the D-Line. Tank is a pounder inside and Williams on the outside.....Great D-Line. BUT, will he be there in the 2nd?

I Rep Dat Defense #55
02-21-2007, 07:02 PM
Gaines would be awful tasty if he dropped. Chasing Peyton around is how you beat him.


Gaines might be nice but we need to apply pressure up the middle so Peyton can't step up in the pocket

hollywood_texan
02-21-2007, 07:10 PM
Gaines might be nice but we need to apply pressure up the middle so Peyton can't step up in the pocket

You have to disguise your coverages and you need top tier talent in the secondary to beat Manning consistently.

The pass rush is extremely important, but he can probably still pick apart a defense even if their is a stout pass rush if defensive secondary is subpar or has laxed coverage. A very balanced defense with the right scheme is important to be Manning. Any weakness, and he will probably expose it. Look at the teams that Manning has problems with in the AFC, and those teams generally have very good corners and a strong cover safety.

Which is why I think I think upgrading the secondary is a little more important right now. Further, you get more results with fewer additions.

TwinSisters
02-21-2007, 07:44 PM
Look at the teams that Manning has problems with in the AFC, and those teams generally have very good corners and a strong cover safety.

Jacksonville gave him two or three games with less than 50% passes completed from 2005-06. ( something that is not done very often )

I don't remember if they had a bunch of good backs, but they have some decent DL.

Insideop
02-21-2007, 08:24 PM
How can you call Travis Johnson an underachiever if he has never achieved? People want to peg him as lazy, but maybe he was never someone who was worth being picked in the first round. I'm not saying I have the answers on this, but there has been little in his play that makes me think, gee, all our DT problems are over.
Seth Payne was a very good player, but he got a bad injury and is on the oldish side.

And the rest of the DTs are basically either practice squad guys or over the hill guys.

Babin/Peek really aren't great fits for the defense, and Weaver is okay.

I am encouraged with how young Williams is, his potential upside and the attitude he has shown, but really, there is nobody on the rest of the line that makes me think that the Texans will magically develop more of a pass rush no matter what sort of scheme the coaches run.

Yes, a new better corner would be terrific. But geez, the entire defense looks like a list of needs:

1. A consistent pass rushing DE

2. Defensive Tackles.

3. Outside linebackers

4. Safeties

5. Another corner

6. Football smarts mixed with talent

Another corner would be great but unfortunately everybody is looking for that too.

I'm not the biggest fan of our defensive coaches, but you can't make chicken salad out of chicken...beaks. (Well you could, but it wouldn't taste so good.)

TC, I have one answer. Okoye! I think he'd be a big part of that "chicken salad" we need to make. :chicken: JMHO!

Texans_Chick
02-21-2007, 08:38 PM
TC, I have one answer. Okoye! I think he'd be a big part of that "chicken salad" we need to make. :chicken: JMHO!

If he is worth 8, that works for me. I don't know. I've haven't seen all his games, and maybe if I had, I am mostly unqualified to form an opinion on that. In other words, I am not pretending to have an informed opinion on who the Texans should draft at 8.

(I'm aware of who is out there likely to go at 8, but I'm not someone to advocate a particular guy over another).

As a general observation, and not specific to you, I find that most internet amateur Melly K's are basing their opinions on stuff they have read, and not stuff they have seen. Stats and measurables can only go far in player evaluating. Reading the cut and pasted (oft inaccurate) online draft reports can make for some over the top opining on players who have never played in the league.

I find that most (not all) amateurs drafniks over promote what a drafted player can do, and then completely denigrate players who have been playing for a while. Why??? Because they've seen what the good points and bad points of an NFL player are against NFL competition, and haven't seen the same with the college guys.

Personally, I think there are so many needs on both sides of the ball that I'm just looking for the BPA.

I have slightly more optimism on the offensive side of the ball because I have a sense of where they are trying to go with it from a coaching standpoint--the blueprint. I don't know what to think of the future of the defense because I am not quite sure of where Smith/Bush are going with it--basically DeMeco gives me the greatest hope on defense because he is a young, smart, impact linebacker--and those oft can key a turnaround of a defense.

TEXANRED
02-21-2007, 09:06 PM
As a general observation, and not specific to you, I find that most internet amateur Melly K's are basing their opinions on stuff they have read, and not stuff they have seen. Stats and measurables can only go far in player evaluating. Reading the cut and pasted (oft inaccurate) online draft reports can make for some over the top opining on players who have never played in the league.


I agree with this whole statement. I have very limited knowledge of college athletes, I just don't have the time. My wife lets me watch all Sunday and Monday night, I am not going to push Saturdays too.

When we drafted Ryans I had no idea who this guy was and looked up the scouting report, his actual report had him an average LB with sub par speed and did not have the athleticism to be a game changer. Wow.

Of course there are some players who are intriguing, like Okaye. He is 19 years old, big and only getting bigger. I watched Leek out of Florida a few times and I feel he will be a big surprise. He seems to rise to the occasion in big games and gets the job done. I also had the opportunity to watch Quinn and I must say from what I saw he stinks. He, unlike Leek, can't win the big games and even saw him throw a fit on the sideline during the Michigan game.

In the end you just have to trust your team is going to make the right decision cus there is no sure thing in this league. Every draft pick is a crap shoot.

hollywood_texan
02-21-2007, 09:34 PM
Jacksonville gave him two or three games with less than 50% passes completed from 2005-06. ( something that is not done very often )

I don't remember if they had a bunch of good backs, but they have some decent DL.


Rashean Mathis, cornerback for Jacksonville, made the Pro Bowl this year.

The line is important, I am not discounting that. But, just upgrading the defensive line and expecting a marginal defensive secondary to pull the weight is asking a bit bunch.

That is all I am saying.

I am not saying any of you guys are wrong. Just trying to point out the priority if it works within the cap. Let's upgrade the secondary first if we can.

yourfavoritetexan42
02-22-2007, 09:08 AM
This might sound ridiculous...but Bringing in peterson would be the biggest help to our defense.

Why?

We have never had a consistent running game...if we do...our defense plays well. Look at the Colts game. Our defense needs to create more turnovers and get off the field a little faster, other than that we have a decent defense. I think a good running game keeping our defense off the field would make our defense a lot better. Demeco Ryans is a good player don't get me wrong...but it is easy to make a lot of tackles when you are always on the field.

trutxn
02-22-2007, 10:12 AM
We have all number 1 picks on the line and we still can't get pressure. I think personally we try to get offensive weapons mostly this year. Would be a big help if we can nail Peterson this year.

Just because they are 1st round picks does not mean they will be successful. Who cares when they were drafted, if they don't produce, replace them.

trutxn
02-22-2007, 10:13 AM
This might sound ridiculous...but Bringing in peterson would be the biggest help to our defense.

Very true, but get Peterson out of your head, he will not be available at 8.

trutxn
02-22-2007, 10:14 AM
Rashean Mathis, cornerback for Jacksonville, made the Pro Bowl this year.

The line is important, I am not discounting that. But, just upgrading the defensive line and expecting a marginal defensive secondary to pull the weight is asking a bit bunch.

That is all I am saying.

I am not saying any of you guys are wrong. Just trying to point out the priority if it works within the cap. Let's upgrade the secondary first if we can.

You don't stop at just the line, we need LB and DB help as well. But getting pressure on the QB with just the d-line will make everyone on D better.

trutxn
02-22-2007, 10:26 AM
Having said that, getting a shut down corner probably would provide the biggest impact on the defensive side of the ball. Is is worth the price? Ummmm, I don't know...

First of all the Texans are not stockpiled at any position. CB is not our most glaring need, even though it would help greatly. If a QB has 10 seconds to throw the ball it doesn't matter who is covering the WR, not even Champ Baily could pull that off. If the QB has only 3-4 seconds to throw, due to d-line pressure the DBs are not on an "island" any longer.

Who would you rather have had in their prime, Reggie White or Deion Sanders? Deion brought excitement, but Reggie brought stability.

There are not any shutdown corners in this draft.

HJam72
02-22-2007, 10:31 AM
First of all the Texans are not stockpiled at any position. CB is not our most glaring need, even though it would help greatly. If a QB has 10 seconds to throw the ball it doesn't matter who is covering the WR, not even Champ Baily could pull that off. If the QB has only 3-4 seconds to throw, due to d-line pressure the DBs are not on an "island" any longer.

Who would you rather have had in their prime, Reggie White or Deion Sanders? Deion brought excitement, but Reggie brought stability.

There are not any shutdown corners in this draft.

Deion Sanders. The definition of stability is a corner who shuts his guy down on every play, without any help at all. The definition of excitement is what the rest of the D does to the O's QB and RB as a result of the definition of stability.

I'm not so sure that CB isn't our greatest need, either. I doubt it, but it just might be.

Don't get me wrong, because Deion is a jerk, but so are a lot of the best athletes.

TexansTrueFan
02-22-2007, 10:44 AM
How do you figure it isn't partially a talent issue??? Coach calls out the first round DT as lazy before camp even gets underway, some of the DEs are undersized 3-4 OLBs, and the DTs that end up playing most of the season are basically rejects from other teams who oft play better than your injured starters did, and your FA acquisition ends up being solid, non-spectacular, and having to move to an undersized DT at times because of lots of DEs not so much DTs.

I will agree that a quality corner would be heaven. Of course, that assumes that the staff can actually identify a corner that fits the system (cough cough Buchanon cough cough--Jon Hoke is still coaching corners).

Come on now we all saw potential in Buchanon, and we thought D. Rob could help him if we brought him here, boy were we wrong. Faggins is ok but not a starting CB. The fact of the matter is i dont care how good of a corner you get if the DL cant get pressure on the QB than or CBs will get burned all the time, you can only hang with a reciever so long.

El Amigo Invisible
02-22-2007, 11:02 AM
Can we hire Buddy Ryan as an Defensive Expert/Analyst/Coach ??

hollywood_texan
02-22-2007, 11:10 AM
First of all the Texans are not stockpiled at any position. CB is not our most glaring need, even though it would help greatly. If a QB has 10 seconds to throw the ball it doesn't matter who is covering the WR, not even Champ Baily could pull that off. If the QB has only 3-4 seconds to throw, due to d-line pressure the DBs are not on an "island" any longer.

Who would you rather have had in their prime, Reggie White or Deion Sanders? Deion brought excitement, but Reggie brought stability.

There are not any shutdown corners in this draft.

I agree with you that the Texans have so many needs, and on both sides of the ball.

As to your question, no one in the NFL today is going to have the decision between either Reggie White or Deion Sanders. So, really your question isn't of any relevance to the situation.

Again, I am not arguing that any of you guys are wrong. As you mentioned, LBs are also a need for the Texans as well, I agree with you there as well.

So, with all you guys, I think our disagreement is where to start improving talent.

I like Faggins and I think he is important to the Texans, but expecting him to be an every down corner and just upgrade the defensive line and expect to beat the Colts regularly is a bit much.

What is brought up over and over is beating the Colts. A balanced defense with the right scheme will frustrate Manning and ensure higher odds in beating the Colts. It's not the only way, but just the easiest way.

In my opinion, the issue with the defensive line should be addressed by the coaching staff by using the current talent in the best way possible and kicking any guys in the butt that don't get it in gear. The defensive secondary has guys in that probably wouldn't be picked up by another team if they were cut by the Texans (I am talking about the safeties).

trutxn
02-22-2007, 11:21 AM
Deion Sanders. The definition of stability is a corner who shuts his guy down on every play, without any help at all. The definition of excitement is what the rest of the D does to the O's QB and RB as a result of the definition of stability.

I'm not so sure that CB isn't our greatest need, either. I doubt it, but it just might be.

Don't get me wrong, because Deion is a jerk, but so are a lot of the best athletes.

You should get a better dictionary. A guy can only shut down someone for so long. If a QB has time in the pocket he would eat a world class secondary up, bottom line.

hollywood_texan
02-22-2007, 11:25 AM
You should get a better dictionary. A guy can only shut down someone for so long. If a QB has time in the pocket he would eat a world class secondary up, bottom line.

You are correct, but you are taking it to an extreme that rarely happens when you have a shut down corner.

Which is why those guys make $8 million plus a year.

DocBar
02-22-2007, 11:32 AM
Can we hire Buddy Ryan as an Defensive Expert/Analyst/Coach ??

Then we can post on all the " I went to a fight and a football game broke out threads".

trutxn
02-22-2007, 11:35 AM
As to your question, no one in the NFL today is going to have the decision between either Reggie White or Deion Sanders. So, really your question isn't of any relevance to the situation.



Ok, lets not use names, a dominate d-lineman or a shut down corner. The risk at corner is much higher, especially in this years draft.

DocBar
02-22-2007, 11:39 AM
You are correct, but you are taking it to an extreme that rarely happens when you have a shut down corner.

Which is why those guys make $8 million plus a year.

A shutdown corner can only cover 1 guy or one part of the field. When you're as weak in the secondary as we are, you need all the passrush you can get.
Say we got a shutdown corner in the draft, teams will eat us up with the TE's(like THAT hasn't happened yet) and/or crossing routes(see TE's). We would have to stunt just about every play with the scheme and players we have now. That just increases the chance of a big play. I would rather see a dominant 4 man rush over a dominant secondary. A bada** DL stops both the run and the pass. A dominant secondary "just" stops the pass. I know they DO support the run but that isn't their primary job.

hollywood_texan
02-22-2007, 11:47 AM
Ok, lets not use names, a dominate d-lineman or a shut down corner. The risk at corner is much higher, especially in this years draft.

Risk is a part of living. But, I think understand what you are saying.

I would look at a safety and a corner first before Dline.

My point isn't to lock into any one position, but a preference if you can make the numbers work from a financial and cap perspective.

hollywood_texan
02-22-2007, 11:52 AM
A shutdown corner can only cover 1 guy or one part of the field. When you're as weak in the secondary as we are, you need all the passrush you can get.
Say we got a shutdown corner in the draft, teams will eat us up with the TE's(like THAT hasn't happened yet) and/or crossing routes(see TE's). We would have to stunt just about every play with the scheme and players we have now. That just increases the chance of a big play. I would rather see a dominant 4 man rush over a dominant secondary. A bada** DL stops both the run and the pass. A dominant secondary "just" stops the pass. I know they DO support the run but that isn't their primary job.


A shut down corner taking away one part of the field is very helpful in running mulitple deceptive schemes and providing more players for other coverages on the field.

I want to see a balanced defense. There is the law of diminishing returns. At some point, the secondary is going to have to be upgraded. The best defensive line isn't going to be able to overcompensate for the lack of talent.

TexansTrueFan
02-22-2007, 11:54 AM
Risk is a part of living. But, I think understand what you are saying.

I would look at a safety and a corner first before Dline.

My point isn't to lock into any one position, but a preference if you can make the numbers work from a financial and cap perspective.

I would look at Dline before i looked at safety or corner, its hard to complete any pass from your back. Or while scrambling to get away from a DL guy.

DocBar
02-22-2007, 12:02 PM
A shut down corner taking away one part of the field is very helpful in running mulitple deceptive schemes and providing more players for other coverages on the field.

I want to see a balanced defense. There is the law of diminishing returns. At some point, the secondary is going to have to be upgraded. The best defensive line isn't going to be able to overcompensate for the lack of talent.

I agree 100%. My biggest worry is the talent level at the various positions in this draft. I don't think there is a GREAT CB in it. Some good ones, yes. Safety and DL are much deeper than CB.

Call me crazy, but our "multiple, deceptive schemes" usually end in a TD. As has been posted on this thread, we don't have the talent in the secondary at 3 of the 4 (MAYBE all 4) to realistically run "multiple, deceptive schemes" because our DL just can't consistently pressure QB's. Just look at the Redskins and the day Bruenell had here. Noway should he have had a career day. We threw the kitchen sink at the dude and his OL kept him upright for the most part and he ate our lunch.

hollywood_texan
02-22-2007, 12:23 PM
I agree 100%. My biggest worry is the talent level at the various positions in this draft. I don't think there is a GREAT CB in it. Some good ones, yes. Safety and DL are much deeper than CB.

Call me crazy, but our "multiple, deceptive schemes" usually end in a TD. As has been posted on this thread, we don't have the talent in the secondary at 3 of the 4 (MAYBE all 4) to realistically run "multiple, deceptive schemes" because our DL just can't consistently pressure QB's. Just look at the Redskins and the day Bruenell had here. Noway should he have had a career day. We threw the kitchen sink at the dude and his OL kept him upright for the most part and he ate our lunch.

Totally understand where you are coming from and agree with you on the problem. But, I it seems like we can get better pressure if we cover better. Just how I see it. I don't know if we have to draft, maybe a free agent splash? Probably too expensive but worth exploring.

I think the last Super Bowl is a great example. Chicago had the talent to match up and play in the secondary, but they decided to let Manning have certain throws generally uncontested. In other words, their coverage was lax. The Bears coverage schemes basically made their pass rush ineffective in my opinion.

Like I said, I agree with you guys regarding the issues on the Dline and the overall problems with the defense. I would try and tackle those issues from a different perspective.

DocBar
02-22-2007, 12:31 PM
Totally understand where you are coming from and agree with you on the problem. But, I it seems like we can get better pressure if we cover better. Just how I see it. I don't know if we have to draft, maybe a free agent splash? Probably too expensive but worth exploring.

I think the last Super Bowl is a great example. Chicago had the talent to match up and play in the secondary, but they decided to let Manning have certain throws generally uncontested. In other words, their coverage was lax. The Bears coverage schemes basically made their pass rush ineffective in my opinion.

Like I said, I agree with you guys regarding the issues on the Dline and the overall problems with the defense. I would try and tackle those issues from a different perspective.
That's what makes these MB's so much fun. I've learned a great deal from reading different perspectives of the same problem and different ways to solve those problems. i agree that Chicago had a poor scheme for the SB. All the talent in the world can't overcome horrible/bad coaching. See also DC.
:stirpot:

Meloy
02-22-2007, 01:12 PM
How about $ 8million to Nate Clemment to solve CB hole? Faggins back to nickle strengthen that position. Safeties and dline are then automatically better. $4m left under cap not including 2007 bump on cap and any renegotiation of existing contracts (Payne, Wong, Moulds, Carr). AP, Tony Ugoh (OT), Michael Johnson (S);a LB in 4th; best WR in 5th.

trutxn
02-22-2007, 01:17 PM
That's what makes these MB's so much fun. I've learned a great deal from reading different perspectives of the same problem and different ways to solve those problems. i agree that Chicago had a poor scheme for the SB. All the talent in the world can't overcome horrible/bad coaching. See also DC.
:stirpot:

No matter who we get, I have faith in Kubes and Smity to lead us in the right direction. They know this team better than all of us.

trutxn
02-22-2007, 01:19 PM
How about $ 8million to Nate Clemment to solve CB hole? Faggins back to nickle strengthen that position. Safeties and dline are then automatically better. $4m left under cap not including 2007 bump on cap and any renegotiation of existing contracts (Payne, Wong, Moulds, Carr). AP, Tony Ugoh (OT), Michael Johnson (S);a LB in 4th; best WR in 5th.

DBs still will not help our d-line get pressure on the QB. We really only have one solid d-lineman, and thats Mario. We have to help him along the line. The DBs will have to cover all day long if we don't upgrade the d-line. Its very true that both positions are needed, but you need to develop from the inside out.

hollywood_texan
02-22-2007, 01:48 PM
DBs still will not help our d-line get pressure on the QB. We really only have one solid d-lineman, and thats Mario. We have to help him along the line. The DBs will have to cover all day long if we don't upgrade the d-line. Its very true that both positions are needed, but you need to develop from the inside out.

Manning is a good example, if you don't confuse the coverage and take away his hot receiver, he is probably going to expose and molest your blitz. I don't think we have the secondary talent to do that consistently and all the pass rush in the world isn't going to mitigate that issue.

A more balanced defensive approach seems more prudent and will yield better results, both in the short and long terms. At some point, the secondary has to be upgraded, and it needs it badly. I don't see any real benefit in waiting unless the talent or financial numbers don't work.

El Amigo Invisible
02-22-2007, 01:53 PM
Troy Vincent was just released!

trutxn
02-22-2007, 02:00 PM
Manning is a good example, if you don't confuse the coverage and take away his hot receiver, he is probably going to expose and molest your blitz. I don't think we have the secondary talent to do that consistently and all the pass rush in the world isn't going to mitigate that issue.

A more balanced defensive approach seems more prudent and will yield better results, both in the short and long terms. At some point, the secondary has to be upgraded, and it needs it badly. I don't see any real benefit in waiting unless the talent or financial numbers don't work.

Using Manning as the example, if our front four got pressure on him without having to send a linebacker, we would have extra people in coverage to cover the hot routes. Thus making our coverage better. Right now we have to blitz a backer every play just to get the QB to move around, taking away from the # of coverage personnel.

Don't get me wrong, balance is what every team needs to succeed and we will have to upgrade both our d-line and DBs to become balanced. But for quicker results pressure on the ball is important.

trutxn
02-22-2007, 02:02 PM
Manning is a good example, if you don't confuse the coverage and take away his hot receiver, he is probably going to expose and molest your blitz. I don't think we have the secondary talent to do that consistently and all the pass rush in the world isn't going to mitigate that issue.

A more balanced defensive approach seems more prudent and will yield better results, both in the short and long terms. At some point, the secondary has to be upgraded, and it needs it badly. I don't see any real benefit in waiting unless the talent or financial numbers don't work.

There is no team in the NFL that has a secondary that can stop Peyton. Peyton has bad games when he is pressured, give him time and the worlds best corner has no chance.

edo783
02-22-2007, 02:02 PM
"Stink" (Mark Schleareth , sp) probably said it best last night on NFL Live, "Until the Texans fix their core, O-line and defensive front 7, they will continue to struggle". Couldn't have said it better and fully agree.

DocBar
02-22-2007, 02:04 PM
Manning is a good example, if you don't confuse the coverage and take away his hot receiver, he is probably going to expose and molest your blitz. I don't think we have the secondary talent to do that consistently and all the pass rush in the world isn't going to mitigate that issue.

A more balanced defensive approach seems more prudent and will yield better results, both in the short and long terms. At some point, the secondary has to be upgraded, and it needs it badly. I don't see any real benefit in waiting unless the talent or financial numbers don't work.

Mixing up and disguising coverages are great, provided you have A. Corners and safeties that CAN cover and B. consistent pressure on the QB. You don't have to have impressive sack numbers, just someone in a QB's face to throw off the timing of the play. Corners can do this, also with godd chucks at the LOS. IMO, our D bit on too many of the O's disguises and the O's absolutely abused our D, DESPITE all the aggressive and exotic packages. I'm not sure what a "balanced" D is. To me, it would be one equally adept at stopping the run and the pass. I'm much more in favor of a consistent D. The great D's in the league don't do a lot of mixing up over the course of a season. They rely on doing the basics consistently good. Like the commercial said:" Amatuers do it until they get it right; professionals do it until they can't get it wrong."
Better tackling and discipline in containment and assignments would do wonders for our D. I'm not sure of what I think of Our D Coordinator yet. I like the aggressiveness, but I wonder at some of the plays called and overall coaching ability that he brings to the table.

hollywood_texan
02-22-2007, 02:13 PM
There is no team in the NFL that has a secondary that can stop Peyton. Peyton has bad games when he is pressured, give him time and the worlds best corner has no chance.

True, Manning is starting to have his way, which he didn't in the past.

But, there are few teams that consistently give him trouble regardless, which are the Chargers, Patriots, Ravens, and well maybe the Broncos.

All of those teams have pretty good secondaries.

I need to look this up, but I think Manning has way with the NFC because they don't imploy the schemes to confuse him. They just don't play him enough to sniff out his tendacies. That is where the Bears screwed up. In my opinion, they had the talent to give Manning all lot of problems, but they played a plain vanila defense and got burned.

DocBar
02-22-2007, 02:19 PM
True, Manning is starting to have his way, which he didn't in the past.

But, there are few teams that consistently give him trouble regardless, which are the Chargers, Patriots, Ravens, and well maybe the Broncos.

All of those teams have pretty good secondaries.

I need to look this up, but I think Manning has way with the NFC because they don't imploy the schemes to confuse him. They just don't play him enough to sniff out his tendacies. That is where the Bears screwed up. In my opinion, they had the talent to give Manning all lot of problems, but they played a plain vanila defense and got burned.

I think the Bears were trying the Pats method of dealing with Manning....slobberknocking the stuffing out of him AND his receivers. It just didn't work. That's why they kept using soft coverages...let'em catch it, then hit hard and get a turnover.When Manning has people in his face and/or gets knocked around some, he becomes merely mortal pretty quickly. Almost...dare I say?....David Carrish in the flinching and happy feet dept. Getting the crap pounded out of you has that effect.JMHO
:bubble:

trutxn
02-22-2007, 04:22 PM
But, there are few teams that consistently give him trouble regardless, which are the Chargers, Patriots, Ravens, and well maybe the Broncos.

All of those teams have pretty good secondaries.

These teams give him trouble because of the pressure they put on him, not because they shut down his receivers. They make him uncomfortable in the pocket, thus messing up his timing with his receivers.

Texans_Chick
02-22-2007, 06:40 PM
True, Manning is starting to have his way, which he didn't in the past.

But, there are few teams that consistently give him trouble regardless, which are the Chargers, Patriots, Ravens, and well maybe the Broncos.
All of those teams have pretty good secondaries.

I need to look this up, but I think Manning has way with the NFC because they don't imploy the schemes to confuse him. They just don't play him enough to sniff out his tendacies. That is where the Bears screwed up. In my opinion, they had the talent to give Manning all lot of problems, but they played a plain vanila defense and got burned.


The best way to play the Colts is to control the football on your own offensive side.

Those teams can run the football and eat clock.

Bears can't run, and can't rely on their QB, well then, they lose.

Hervoyel
02-22-2007, 07:11 PM
I went to a few games over the last five years and to be perfectly honest I think that in many ways you could call Reliant Stadium the "House of Pain".

Granted it's not usually painful to visiting teams or their fans but there's definitely some pain going down in Reliant. I felt it.

hollywood_texan
02-22-2007, 07:40 PM
The best way to play the Colts is to control the football on your own offensive side.

Those teams can run the football and eat clock.

Bears can't run, and can't rely on their QB, well then, they lose.

The Bears could run the football in 2006. Unfortunately, Cedric Benson got hurt early in the game and the Bears lost their 1-2 punch Benson and Jones.

Look, I keep repeating myself over and over and provide backup.

Some guy said earlier that defensive backs weren't important in playing the Colts and cited Jacksonville as an example. My response, a cornerback for Jacksonville played in the Pro Bowl this year. Jacksonville has a better secondary than the Texans. The Texans probably have the worst secondary in the NFL.

You are right TC, clock managment and keeping the ball way from Manning is a good tool, but it isn't the be all end all and Manning is too good to just be stopped by that. Manning is going to get the same amount of opportunities to mount drives unless a team does onside kicks and gets recovers the ball.

As I have said over and over, a balanced team will beat the Colts. All of you are right in the areas that are important.

But, if you have the weakest secondary in the NFL, your chances of beating Manning consisently will be tough, I don't care what your running game is like or how stout your pass rush is. Manning is too good of a QB to not expose a glaring weaknesses in talent or gameplan, which the secondary for the Texans is a glaring weakness.

I keep repeating myself, so if you guys respond, you will have the last word.

Also, TC, the Bears couldn't stop Manning's passing game. That's why they lost! You'll blame Grossman but won't blame Carr, go figure? You state the Bears lose because of the offense, implying that the defensive side was unimportant. In my opinion, the game was lost before it was played because the Bears defensive gameplan was crap. Maybe that's why their defensive coordinator is now the linebacker's coach for the Chargers.

Thanks for the convo, I enjoyed it. I really mean that, but at some point things run their course.

TwinSisters
02-22-2007, 07:59 PM
I just need to say that this 'Bring Back' the "House of Pain" talk is bad medicine.

Do you really want Jerry Glanville back in Houston?

1989 Dec 17th 61-7

at least Dungy has been christian enough to ease off a little after putting up 40 points. With that evil little toad back on the sideline, I doubt everybody would be so forgiving and sportsmanlike.

whiskeyrbl
02-23-2007, 06:32 AM
Troy Vincent was just released!

Yeah but he's 35 years old.

DocBar
02-23-2007, 06:50 AM
I just need to say that this 'Bring Back' the "House of Pain" talk is bad medicine.

Do you really want Jerry Glanville back in Houston?

1989 Dec 17th 61-7

at least Dungy has been christian enough to ease off a little after putting up 40 points. With that evil little toad back on the sideline, I doubt everybody would be so forgiving and sportsmanlike.
Does Glanville have trademark rights on the phrase? I wouldn't mind bringing that defensive intensity back to Houston. Glanvilles freakshow can stay on the road or wherever he is today.

Texans_Chick
02-23-2007, 08:05 AM
The Bears could run the football in 2006. Unfortunately, Cedric Benson got hurt early in the game and the Bears lost their 1-2 punch Benson and Jones.

Look, I keep repeating myself over and over and provide backup.

Some guy said earlier that defensive backs weren't important in playing the Colts and cited Jacksonville as an example. My response, a cornerback for Jacksonville played in the Pro Bowl this year. Jacksonville has a better secondary than the Texans. The Texans probably have the worst secondary in the NFL.

You are right TC, clock managment and keeping the ball way from Manning is a good tool, but it isn't the be all end all and Manning is too good to just be stopped by that. Manning is going to get the same amount of opportunities to mount drives unless a team does onside kicks and gets recovers the ball.

As I have said over and over, a balanced team will beat the Colts. All of you are right in the areas that are important.

But, if you have the weakest secondary in the NFL, your chances of beating Manning consisently will be tough, I don't care what your running game is like or how stout your pass rush is. Manning is too good of a QB to not expose a glaring weaknesses in talent or gameplan, which the secondary for the Texans is a glaring weakness.

I keep repeating myself, so if you guys respond, you will have the last word.

Also, TC, the Bears couldn't stop Manning's passing game. That's why they lost! You'll blame Grossman but won't blame Carr, go figure? You state the Bears lose because of the offense, implying that the defensive side was unimportant. In my opinion, the game was lost before it was played because the Bears defensive gameplan was crap. Maybe that's why their defensive coordinator is now the linebacker's coach for the Chargers.

Thanks for the convo, I enjoyed it. I really mean that, but at some point things run their course.

Okay, so you want to improve the Texans secondary. Who doesn't? Of course, all the teams want to improve their secondaries.

And you think the rest of the defense needs to be improved too. Well yeah.

Few teams can beat the Colts offensive straight up, especially now that the enforce the contact rules in the secondary. The Bears defense actually got some key turnovers but had to keep defending short fields because the Bears offense was looking anemic.

The Bears didn't lose just because they couldn't stop Manning. They couldn't stop the run either. And they couldn't keep their offense on the field.

aj.
02-23-2007, 12:12 PM
Does Glanville have trademark rights on the phrase? I wouldn't mind bringing that defensive intensity back to Houston. Glanvilles freakshow can stay on the road or wherever he is today.

Robert Lyles coined the phrase iirc while Glanville was leaving tickets for Elvis and pissing off Chuck Noll.

Richard Smith had almost as much to do with the freakshow as Glanville with his 'Hit the Beach' crapola.

Texan_Bill
02-23-2007, 12:24 PM
Does Glanville have trademark rights on the phrase? I wouldn't mind bringing that defensive intensity back to Houston. Glanvilles freakshow can stay on the road or wherever he is today.

I beleive he's at U of H.... No, not that U of H, the one in Hawaii with June Jones - another local coaching hero.... :rolleyes:

spurstexanstros
02-23-2007, 12:27 PM
Well to to be the true "house of pain" again they need to keep the roof closed so it can get as loud as the dome. and a defense that doesnt give up an overtime qb scramble

Texan_Bill
02-23-2007, 12:27 PM
Robert Lyles coined the phrase iirc while Glanville was leaving tickets for Elvis and pissing off Chuck Noll.

Richard Smith had almost as much to do with the freakshow as Glanville with his 'Hit the Beach' crapola.

You are correct sir,
http://www.houstonprofootball.com/archives/house.html About the 3rd paragraph down.

And for reminders of some of Glanville's et al's actions did:
http://www.houstonprofootball.com/log/log12.html

DocBar
02-23-2007, 12:32 PM
Robert Lyles coined the phrase iirc while Glanville was leaving tickets for Elvis and pissing off Chuck Noll.

Richard Smith had almost as much to do with the freakshow as Glanville with his 'Hit the Beach' crapola.
I know that...I just wish we didn't have to link a cool nickname to such an unmitigated jackass like Glanville. I have no problem at all with an intense, hard-hitting, intimidating defense. I actually thought the Elvis tickets were funny and who cares if a %*&*(*&^^% Steelers coach gets pissed? I know that wsn't the maain point of your post, but I HATE ALL THINGS STEELERS!!!!
Luv Ya Blue, Bum, Earl and all that...

Texan_Bill
02-23-2007, 12:37 PM
The only positive thing about the "house of pain" era and Glanville's antics is that it was during a time when the Oilers sorely needed an identitiy and to break free from being the league (self-edit), at that time...

trutxn
02-23-2007, 03:58 PM
The Bears could run the football in 2006. Unfortunately, Cedric Benson got hurt early in the game and the Bears lost their 1-2 punch Benson and Jones.

Look, I keep repeating myself over and over and provide backup.

Some guy said earlier that defensive backs weren't important in playing the Colts and cited Jacksonville as an example. My response, a cornerback for Jacksonville played in the Pro Bowl this year. Jacksonville has a better secondary than the Texans. The Texans probably have the worst secondary in the NFL.

You are right TC, clock managment and keeping the ball way from Manning is a good tool, but it isn't the be all end all and Manning is too good to just be stopped by that. Manning is going to get the same amount of opportunities to mount drives unless a team does onside kicks and gets recovers the ball.

As I have said over and over, a balanced team will beat the Colts. All of you are right in the areas that are important.

But, if you have the weakest secondary in the NFL, your chances of beating Manning consisently will be tough, I don't care what your running game is like or how stout your pass rush is. Manning is too good of a QB to not expose a glaring weaknesses in talent or gameplan, which the secondary for the Texans is a glaring weakness.

I keep repeating myself, so if you guys respond, you will have the last word.

Also, TC, the Bears couldn't stop Manning's passing game. That's why they lost! You'll blame Grossman but won't blame Carr, go figure? You state the Bears lose because of the offense, implying that the defensive side was unimportant. In my opinion, the game was lost before it was played because the Bears defensive gameplan was crap. Maybe that's why their defensive coordinator is now the linebacker's coach for the Chargers.

Thanks for the convo, I enjoyed it. I really mean that, but at some point things run their course.


Hollywood, we don't disagree with you at all, not only is balance and consistency important in football, it is important in life. But since we are talking football, teams should be built from the inside out. This is hard for me to say because I have always been a WR and DB, but if you control the trenches on both sides of the ball, you are more likely to win.

If the o-line pushes the defense 5 yds off the ball every play, it doesn't matter who the RB or QB is, we will move the ball methodically down the field 5 yds at a time. Although, it would make it much easier and more entertaining if we had talent at the skill positions.

If the d-line got into the backfield every play the opposing offenses would have difficulty running and throwing no matter who was in coverage. Consistent d-line pressure could cover up flaws in our coverage, because teams would not be able to run and would not have time to throw deep. On the other hand if the d-line got no pressure and the QB had all day, the DBs are not going to cover the d-line's flaws as easily because eventually the WRs will get open.

We all would love to have a true shut down corner on our team, but they are very rare. There has only been a handful in league history that could shut down half the field. In this years draft there are not any corners with the potential of being a shut down corner immediately, but their are a few d-lineman with the potential to make an instant impact.

For entertainment value I would love our offense to score 40 pts a game, I'm sure we would win a few games as well. But for the purpose of building a championship team we need to be able to at least slow down the opposing teams. We are not going to out do Vince and Peyton offensively, so we need to be consistent on offense and dominant on defense. Vince and Peyton aren't everything, but if we win the division every yr, we make the playoffs every yr.

trutxn
02-23-2007, 04:00 PM
The only positive thing about the "house of pain" era and Glanville's antics is that it was during a time when the Oilers sorely needed an identitiy and to break free from being the league (self-edit), at that time...

We want a Texan House of Pain! The Oilers are gone with Vince.

Texan_Bill
02-23-2007, 04:02 PM
We want a Texan House of Pain! The Oilers are gone with Vince.

Most definitely.... I should have wrote more in the past tense. My bad!!

trutxn
02-23-2007, 04:04 PM
Many of you seem to be fair weather fans, show some support and stop being so damn negative. Give Kubes and Smity a chance, ya'll will be kissing their a.... in a couple yrs when the House of Pain is back in Houston. Many of the pieces are already in place, not to mention that a few members of our current coaching staff were a part of it.

Texan_Bill
02-23-2007, 04:07 PM
Many of you seem to be fair weather fans, show some support and stop being so damn negative. Give Kubes and Smity a chance, ya'll will be kissing their a.... in a couple yrs when the House of Pain is back in Houston.

I really hope that isn't directed at me... Fair weathered fan is something I can never be accused of, and I am far from negative.. I see a bright future, in the not so far off time spectrum. As far as the Texans House of Pain, we had it for one night in September of 2002. That night will never be forgotten and may we have many more just like it.....

trutxn
02-23-2007, 04:25 PM
I really hope that isn't directed at me... Fair weathered fan is something I can never be accused of, and I am far from negative.. I see a bright future, in the not so far off time spectrum. As far as the Texans House of Pain, we had it for one night in September of 2002. That night will never be forgotten and may we have many more just like it.....

Not directed towards any one individual, all everyone can talk about is losing. Some fans seem to have grown accustomed to it, but we can still be hopeful and support our teams decisions. Fans should be the same every game, not only for the Cowboys or when we win.

Texan_Bill
02-24-2007, 12:05 PM
Not directed towards any one individual, all everyone can talk about is losing. Yeah, so we have grown accustomed to it, but we can still be hopeful and support our teams decisions. The fans should be the same every game, not only for the Cowboys.

AGREED!!! Thats why I sit in the Bull Pen.

And, we should never get accustomed to losing.

trutxn
02-24-2007, 12:10 PM
AGREED!!! Thats why I sit in the Bull Pen.

And, we should never get accustomed to losing.

I will never get used to it, others have. The Texans will build a dynasty.