PDA

View Full Version : What I'd Like To See


Runner
03-12-2007, 12:14 AM
What I would like to see is all of the football experts here to say, "Hey, enough of David Carr, here is what I think about X", with X being anything about Texans football not David Carr or a thin attempt of disguise and still being about David Carr.

So haters and lovers, do you accept the challenge or will you too curl up into a little ball and regurgitate the same stuff? Can you generate a serious front page of the Bullpen with no Carr posts?

I say you can't. You don't know enough about football.

Reverse psychology? No. I think as a group you are all that limited. Sorry, but you've proved it over the past six months.

powerfuldragon
03-12-2007, 12:18 AM
i like this thread.

gtexan02
03-12-2007, 12:19 AM
Heres the problem

Unless we talk strictly about defense, its impossible for Carr not to come up.
Want to talk about WRs on the Texans? Carr is implied.
Want to talk about the running game? The TEs? The OL?
Want to talk about the salary cap?
Want to talk about Kubiak and Smith?
Want to talk about the x's and o's of games this past year?

The quarterback is so instrumental to the team that no matter what you post on this board, SOMEONE out there will blame Carr or praise Carr regarding it.

This post will self destruct into a Carr thread in t minus 5..

Reddevil63
03-12-2007, 12:22 AM
So your solution is to make another thread that centers around the dicussion David Carr?

TexansSB07
03-12-2007, 12:24 AM
Heres the problem

Unless we talk strictly about defense, its impossible for Carr not to come up.
Want to talk about WRs on the Texans? Carr is implied.
Want to talk about the running game? The TEs? The OL?
Want to talk about the salary cap?
Want to talk about Kubiak and Smith?
Want to talk about the x's and o's of games this past year?

The quarterback is so instrumental to the team that no matter what you post on this board, SOMEONE out there will blame Carr or praise Carr regarding it.

This post will self destruct into a Carr thread in t minus 5..

you just proved him right

powerfuldragon
03-12-2007, 12:25 AM
Sancho Panza by name is my own self, if I was not changed in my cradle.

Runner
03-12-2007, 12:26 AM
So your solution is to make another thread that centers around the dicussion David Carr?

Wow, that showed me.

gtexan02
03-12-2007, 12:26 AM
edit

Runner
03-12-2007, 12:29 AM
Heres the problem

Unless we talk strictly about defense, its impossible for Carr not to come up.
Want to talk about WRs on the Texans? Carr is implied.
Want to talk about the running game? The TEs? The OL?
Want to talk about the salary cap?
Want to talk about Kubiak and Smith?
Want to talk about the x's and o's of games this past year?

The quarterback is so instrumental to the team that no matter what you post on this board, SOMEONE out there will blame Carr or praise Carr regarding it.

This post will self destruct into a Carr thread in t minus 5..

I know you specifically can do better than that. I did a lengthy post on the offense last week, and I added QB at the end just to be complete. I could have left it off with little lost. Why? All the crap about QB has been said; people have made up their minds.

Try it. You'll be surprised.

gtexan02
03-12-2007, 12:30 AM
maybe we could secretley have a contest. Start a thread. The first time the word "Carr" comes up, you check the post #. Person who makes the highest number wins

TexansSB07
03-12-2007, 12:31 AM
What I would like to see is all of the football experts here to say, "Hey, enough of David Carr, here is what I think about X", with X being anything about Texans football not David Carr or a thin attempt of disguise and still being about David Carr.

So haters and lovers, do you accept the challenge or will you too curl up into a little ball and regurgitate the same stuff? Can you generate a serious front page of the Bullpen with no Carr posts?

I say you can't. You don't know enough about football.

Reverse psychology? No. I think as a group you are all that limited. Sorry, but you've proved it over the past six months.

I can do it in 3,000 words or less, I think we should hold steady on draft neither moving up or down. But counting on scouts who found Winston, Spencer, Ryans and those street FA's who came in and helped out in a pinch, I like what Rick Smith brings to table in terms of player evaluation..I also like what Gary Kubiak brings in terms of ACTUAL playing experience and as a coach (who by the way started as a position coach not an OC).

This is a deep draft for QBs, WRs and Defensive players, I think we need to stop pass rushes from opposing defenses and get a pass rush on opposing QBs. I think we need to fill all our holes unless (please forgive me Mr. Royal) Adrian Peterson is there at #8, QB is not a need immediately for us.

I think using a mid-round (2nd day) pick on a QBand ONLY IF he is a steal, otherwise use wisdom of little dutch boy and plug the holes in the lines.

:yahoo:

DocBar
03-12-2007, 12:35 AM
Heres the problem

Unless we talk strictly about defense, its impossible for Carr not to come up.
Want to talk about WRs on the Texans? Carr is implied.
Want to talk about the running game? The TEs? The OL?
Want to talk about the salary cap?
Want to talk about Kubiak and Smith?
Want to talk about the x's and o's of games this past year?

The quarterback is so instrumental to the team that no matter what you post on this board, SOMEONE out there will blame Carr or praise Carr regarding it.

This post will self destruct into a Carr thread in t minus 5.. I can talk for DAYS about how our WR's don't get good seperation, comeback to the ball, make proper hot read. I can talk for DAYS about how our running game needs a RB with better vision, durability or break away speed. I can talk for DAYS about how our TE's/ game plan doesn't exploit TE's stretching the field, exploiting the cover 2 or making the proper, or good, blocks. CC had MUCH more to do with the salary cap than DC...he just signed the contract offered to him. Last time I checked, neither Kubiak or Smith played QB for the Texans( AND they are responsable for much more)nor do X's and O's play only QB. DC is NOT the Texans and the Texans are NOT DC. The QB of ANY team is given WAY to much credit/blame for wins and losses.

Runner
03-12-2007, 12:45 AM
How does Green fit our offense? How is our o-line talent wise? Do Kubiak's actions follow his words? Will Ryans have a sophomore slump? Will last year's street free agent defensive tackles make the team? Will they start? Should we pattern our offense after Denver which has unusual schemes and players in the NFL, or should we build a more standard team first?

Are these too hard to address?

I'd like to hear opinions about many areas, and things I haven't even thought of.

gtexan02
03-12-2007, 12:54 AM
I can talk for DAYS about how our WR's don't get good seperation, comeback to the ball, make proper hot read. I can talk for DAYS about how our running game needs a RB with better vision, durability or break away speed. I can talk for DAYS about how our TE's/ game plan doesn't exploit TE's stretching the field, exploiting the cover 2 or making the proper, or good, blocks. CC had MUCH more to do with the salary cap than DC...he just signed the contract offered to him. Last time I checked, neither Kubiak or Smith played QB for the Texans( AND they are responsable for much more)nor do X's and O's play only QB. DC is NOT the Texans and the Texans are NOT DC. The QB of ANY team is given WAY to much credit/blame for wins and losses.

I know this is lame, and I hate to do this, but:

These are ideas. Im not 100% on any of them
Running game - The reason our running game seems to flutter at times could be because the opposing safeties read run first, cover 2nd. Our gameplan, because of how Kubiak designed it, requires very quick passes. Not a lot of playaction, not a lot of 7 step drops to out routes or deep posts. The safeties can sneak up and play the run because they aren't worried about being beaten over the top.

Our WRs don't get good separation because they don't have time. When your gameplan is to throw the ball before 1.5s, its tough to do much other than get into your routes nad hope the defense is playing a type of D that allows you some space. Thats why we have so many 1 yard hitch routes. Easy separation. I honestly think if the pass blocking was better or if we could drop back for longer, maybe in shotgun, we'd get a better read on our receivers abilities. i refuse to believe that Eric Moulds, a receiver who demonstarted excellent route running in Buffalo, suddenly lost all his ability.

On TEs its the same. There is no way to stretch the field if 90% of your passing game focuses on the short routes. Add to that the fact that our QB seems hesitant to throw over the middle, and you soon realize why our TEs were making catches near the sidelines rather than on the seems down th emiddle of the field like, say, Indy TEs.

I will agree that the amount of Carr information is nauseating. But I also must confess that I think a quarterback change legitimately changes EVERY aspect of your football team. Change in quarterback play can make a perennial loser into a winner. Think back to all the horrible teams that have jumped into the playoffs over the past 5 or so years. What do they all have in common? Quarterback improvement.

San Diego - worst team in the league. Brees steps up his play, the team is in the playoffs

NO - 2nd worst team in the league. Brees comes aboard, the team is in the playoffs

Pittsburgh - Top 10 draft pick, Roethlisberger comes on board, the team is in the playoffs

I mean, I know its old to hear about DC so often, but if hear me out:
As a Texan fan, I know our team is bad. I know we lose often. I can think two things:
Either 1) Every position on our team needs an upgrade

OR

2) The QB play has been so poor that the offense is totally out of rhythm, thus leaving the defense on the field all game long and leading to misleading results

If option 1 is correct, this team will take 2-5 years to become contenders.

if option 2 is correct, cutting or trading Carr and replacing him with someone better will take the team to where I want it to be in 1-2 years.

Scooter
03-12-2007, 01:06 AM
mario williams' rookie season really impressed me. not because he excelled at his position, but because of his continued improvement and off the charts physical ability. there was not a player infront of him that mario couldnt out-run or simply manhandle once he was able to diagnose the play. and that was on a bum foot as a rookie. mario's only weakness last season was just that, it took him seemingly forever to diagnose the play which meant by the time he picked up what was happening and throw his blocker aside, it was already too late. that will change with experience and coaching. picking up that kind of raw power and raw talent as a very young underclassman was IMO critical to building our new "kubiak" era. mario's going to continue to get stronger and faster as he matures into his body, and all that's lacking football wise is experience. given a healthy full season, jason babin getting legit time from the get-go on the opposite side and last year's experience ... teams who were already afraid to run at mario are also going have to fear him trampling their quarterback.

that will happen quickly, and as the double teams amp up, look out for demeco ... the only thing keeping him from 5+ sacks last year as a rookie was simply being too eager and rookie mistakes (and arguably the scorekeeper also). demeco has an uncanny ability like all great linebackers to be on the ball. all of the talk of "he's too little, he's not strong enough to shed blockers" as i said the moment he was drafted is utter nonsense. ryans has that unteachable football instinct that guys like urlacher and ray lewis and zach thomas are just born with. those two "worst draft ever" picks are going to solidify a top defense. make no mistake, while we complain & moan about "south denver", we're doing what's been successful for the broncos. great coaching, an overabundance of pure physical talent on defense, and as seen from last season, we're building our core ... the trenches. there's plenty to be excited about in the near future. one or two breaks last year and we're .500+. with the loss of cook, the addition of spencer and black, ahman green being much better than any back we had last season, and adding one or two starters in the draft ... we could very well suprise a lot of people.

The Pencil Neck
03-12-2007, 01:16 AM
What I would like to see is all of the football experts here to say, "Hey, enough of David Carr, here is what I think about X", with X being anything about Texans football not David Carr or a thin attempt of disguise and still being about David Carr.

So haters and lovers, do you accept the challenge or will you too curl up into a little ball and regurgitate the same stuff? Can you generate a serious front page of the Bullpen with no Carr posts?

I say you can't. You don't know enough about football.

Reverse psychology? No. I think as a group you are all that limited. Sorry, but you've proved it over the past six months.

I'm not one of the football experts but I've been in the middle (on both sides) of Carr debates so...

Hey, enough of David Carr, here is what I think about: Our Offensive Scheme.

I'm really concerned about the direction our offense is heading. When Kubiak first came here, there was all this talk about how we were going to mimic Denver's system. I'm afraid that Kubiak and Sherman are trying to synthesize a new offensive philosophy by combining Green Bay's power running offense with the Denver ZB running game. It concerns me that the type of line you need for one of those approaches is different than the approach you need for the other.

The power running game really needs big road grader type of linemen while the Denver zone blocking type of system needs smaller, more nimble linemen. And I'm afraid that by trying to mix these two schemes they're going to end up with a mix of linemen that don't function well together as a group.

When we finally ran the bootlegs off the Denver type of running play, it wasn't as much of a surprise because we hadn't been running that same running play (or variations of the same play) over and over again. Defenses saw us doing something unusual and knew to prepare for it.

Surely Kubiak and Sherman realize this. These guys have to be smarter about football strategy than I am but still, it worries me.

Now, if they are able to come up with something that's new and effective... then rock on. Never mind me.

:rant:

And while I'm on a soapbox, I'm tired of hearing how we don't need to spend early round draft choices on a running back. We are not Denver. We don't have Denver's level of talent, yet, and we're not the same offense. Maybe one day we'll be able to get away with that and maybe Lundy and Taylor will surprise us and blossom into great running backs next year, but I don't think we should pass up a great running back in the draft if one falls to us early just because it's early.

:rant:

DocBar
03-12-2007, 01:16 AM
I know this is lame, and I hate to do this, but:

These are ideas. Im not 100% on any of them
Running game - The reason our running game seems to flutter at times could be because the opposing safeties read run first, cover 2nd. Our gameplan, because of how Kubiak designed it, requires very quick passes. Not a lot of playaction, not a lot of 7 step drops to out routes or deep posts. The safeties can sneak up and play the run because they aren't worried about being beaten over the top.

Our WRs don't get good separation because they don't have time. When your gameplan is to throw the ball before 1.5s, its tough to do much other than get into your routes nad hope the defense is playing a type of D that allows you some space. Thats why we have so many 1 yard hitch routes. Easy separation. I honestly think if the pass blocking was better or if we could drop back for longer, maybe in shotgun, we'd get a better read on our receivers abilities. i refuse to believe that Eric Moulds, a receiver who demonstarted excellent route running in Buffalo, suddenly lost all his ability.

On TEs its the same. There is no way to stretch the field if 90% of your passing game focuses on the short routes. Add to that the fact that our QB seems hesitant to throw over the middle, and you soon realize why our TEs were making catches near the sidelines rather than on the seems down th emiddle of the field like, say, Indy TEs.

I will agree that the amount of Carr information is nauseating. But I also must confess that I think a quarterback change legitimately changes EVERY aspect of your football team. Change in quarterback play can make a perennial loser into a winner. Think back to all the horrible teams that have jumped into the playoffs over the past 5 or so years. What do they all have in common? Quarterback improvement.

San Diego - worst team in the league. Brees steps up his play, the team is in the playoffs

NO - 2nd worst team in the league. Brees comes aboard, the team is in the playoffs

Pittsburgh - Top 10 draft pick, Roethlisberger comes on board, the team is in the playoffs
I mean, I know its old to hear about DC so often, but if hear me out:
As a Texan fan, I know our team is bad. I know we lose often. I can think two things:
Either 1) Every position on our team needs an upgrade

OR

2) The QB play has been so poor that the offense is totally out of rhythm, thus leaving the defense on the field all game long and leading to misleading results

If option 1 is correct, this team will take 2-5 years to become contenders.

if option 2 is correct, cutting or trading Carr and replacing him with someone better will take the team to where I want it to be in 1-2 years.
As far as San Diego, I have 2 letters for you: LT
NO? A talented team that has perennially disappointed AND had to deal with Katrina/16 road games.
Pittsburgh? HAHA!!! They've missed the playoffs like 3 times in 15 years. I can't BELIEVE they did it with Big Ben. Boy, he had a GREAT year in '06. I'm not a Carr homer or anything, I just don't see us getting better at the position this year, period. My BIG question is did we start doing all the stupid game planning(short routes/quick reads/throws) because of DC or because of the general ineptness of our O? A case can be made either way. Very good point about our D being on the field too long. That would be different if they could actually stop 3rd and intermediate to long reliably.

Scooter
03-12-2007, 01:44 AM
just to touch on new orleans and san diego. new orleans was a good team to begin with and had been for a few years, all they've needed was a legit quarterback. they landed brees and got insanely lucky by getting colston who almost immediately replaced horn as the #1 receiver. the only suprising thing about new orleans is that they lost bentley without any significant dropoff.

san diego was primed in many ways, and LT had nothing to do with it. LT's big season was during their 4-12 year, and he fell off significantly next year when they went 12-4. what changed is SD started FOUR new offensive linemen and picked up igor olshansky, shawn phillips, & nate kaeding in the draft. antonio gates came into his own that year (his second year) and that combination allowed brees to become the quarterback we know today.

new orleans was already a good team, and san diego in a season in 1/2 was able to build both sides of their lines.

DocBar
03-12-2007, 02:23 AM
just to touch on new orleans and san diego. new orleans was a good team to begin with and had been for a few years, all they've needed was a legit quarterback. they landed brees and got insanely lucky by getting colston who almost immediately replaced horn as the #1 receiver. the only suprising thing about new orleans is that they lost bentley without any significant dropoff.

san diego was primed in many ways, and LT had nothing to do with it. LT's big season was during their 4-12 year, and he fell off significantly next year when they went 12-4. what changed is SD started FOUR new offensive linemen and picked up igor olshansky, shawn phillips, & nate kaeding in the draft. antonio gates came into his own that year (his second year) and that combination allowed brees to become the quarterback we know today.

new orleans was already a good team, and san diego in a season in 1/2 was able to build both sides of their lines. Did you miss the 31 TD's and 2300 yds of offense LT brought to the table last year??? The dude was a MONSTER!!! Other than that, I agree that '05 was the year they turned it around. Losing in the playoffs was a major surprise and a fluke that seems to happen most years.

Scooter
03-12-2007, 02:40 AM
Did you miss the 31 TD's and 2300 yds of offense LT brought to the table last year??? The dude was a MONSTER!!! Other than that, I agree that '05 was the year they turned it around. Losing in the playoffs was a major surprise and a fluke that seems to happen most years.

i definitely saw that, but i was just illustrating that LT wasnt what made the chargers ... and even during his breakout season couldnt single handedly carry the chargers past 4 wins. offensive line, defensive line ... those are the only real changes to occur during the chargers dramatic change. brees, LT, gates, neal, donnie edwards, jammer ... all of these guys were around for their 4 win year, but they didnt have the trenches needed to utilize any of them. they still dont have receivers, their secondary isnt great. it all begins and ends in the trenches and when the chargers robbed the giants in 04 in the draft to build their defense, along with building their offensive line the year before, they became a powerhouse.

(edited for clarity)

Scooter
03-12-2007, 07:46 AM
How does Green fit our offense? How is our o-line talent wise? Do Kubiak's actions follow his words? Will Ryans have a sophomore slump? Will last year's street free agent defensive tackles make the team? Will they start? Should we pattern our offense after Denver which has unusual schemes and players in the NFL, or should we build a more standard team first?

Are these too hard to address?

I'd like to hear opinions about many areas, and things I haven't even thought of.

instead of just ideas, you should make these seperate topics.

green fits as a sherman product which is what our offense is seemingly based on ... we played more sherman last season than kubiak. green is a more straight line runner and screen threat than our current backs. he's more apt to follow and cut behind the fullback than anyone else we have, which is why dayne worked so well behind leach since dayne IMO is a good blend of kubiak & sherman. based on last year's playcalling, we dont need a one-cut ZBS (follow your linemen, not the hole) runningbacks, we need a back who's used to the basic zbs combined with line trickery and power back sets. green does that and is familiar with the kubiak 101 playbook and everything sherman wants to do. if we focused on kubiak's ZBS, green would struggle and we'd look more towards taylor & lundy, but with sherman back that wont be the case.

our O-line is fairly talented, but poorly utilized. i'm as guilty of shuffling as capers and anyone else on this board but with my research i consider myself more informed, as you are runner so i take your disagreements here to heart. spencer as i've preached is an all time great if he comes back healthy and there is zero basis on moving him from left tackle other than the uninformed (ooh he's 330lbs, play him at guard or right tackle!). winston while improved is still a backup, but he's definitely a tackle ... right now he's our starting right tackle. black who you disapprove of is better than salaam and works for me as a backup swing tackle. pitts is wrong for the left side IMO (as i've said for 3+ years), but that's where he's been so dont mess with what (relatively) works ... we've got our left guard ... pitts' best position is right tackle if you ask me. in my ideal world, pitts starts RT with winston as our swing tackle. weary's pedigree is center, and that's where he's most suited with his first backstep and lateral movement, but i dont expect him to leave right guard. i like flanagan in the ZBS and he worked well with pitts in that scheme. as a power I center, he doesnt have the core strength and is a liability one on one for an extended time (although, he's good at blitz pickup and directing traffic). mckinney as much as i hate to admit is an asset as a part timer. we still need 2-4 players on the line ... in the "my world" mentioned, we need 2 starting guards (black can bandaid one of them, and mckinney the other). spencer - black - weary - mckinney - pitts ... flanagan backup center, winston swing tackle, salaam as a utility. wont happen, but that's what i like.

i have zero reason to doubt anything kubiak says, i'm not sure where your intent is here.

ryans wont have a sophmore slump. if anything, demeco had a freshman slump. with his play, demeco should've had much more significant stats ... at worst he'll play like he did last year. ryans has that natural football instinct and by eliminating his rookie mistakes can only get better. the worst thing that could happen to demeco is he has the same OLB's around him. with any improvement on his flanks and he'll be free'd up to be more agressive in the passing game and we've already seen how he locates the ball carrier and can break pass blocking.

with the release of payne, it's obvious that atleast 2 or 3 of last year's walkons will get significant consideration during preseason. remember though, we lost 7 defensive tackles to IR last season so i expect kubiak to put a little more stock into that competition and open an additional couple of slots on the practice squad for the d-line. malone, cochran, killings, thomas johnson, and dalton will be be working their tails off this offseason. starters as of right now are weaver and travis johnson ... that might change during camp but as long as TJ proves himself, he holds the spot. weaver is NOT a defensive end. he's a tackle who needs to adjust to his gap. babin will be the pass rusher that's expected as long as he doesnt get shafted until mid season yet again (i said before the season that babin would lead our team in sacks, and he did so in 1/2 a season of playing time), and kalu is a strong backup. if peek doesnt get signed, i'd keep him as a backup specialist or i'd honestly consider moving orr forward in a modified 3-4 in passing downs like we did last year.

as for denver ... no. we're not remotely denver's offense. where we're similar is on defense. denver stockpiles brains and uncanny athleticism on defense and that's what we've obviously been doing. we dont have the luxury of being a denver offense but kubiak is working towards that goal. it's always a fun fact that denver developes late round linemen into probowlers ... that's all well and good, but we dont have a 15 year head start and "skill" players to trade in order to fill holes. kubiak knows damn well that if the denver scenario is going to work, it's not going to work for another decade and it's up to him to lay the foundation. his scheme is based on a compilation of sherman, kubiak, shanahan, and the talent available ... that's one hell of a hard task. we'll see with the draft if we're going to be a denver offense. a quarterback in the middle rounds, 2 offensive linemen and a defense heavy draft. proof that we're denver south is when we trade an offensive starter for defensive talent.

as for how we should build, we build around our talent and coaching. both coaches are run oriented. sherman however is a mid range passing, power I, and focuses on screen plays. kubiak is a ZBS (same as sherman to an extent), with more of a WCO one-back mindset with creative screen plays and likes to spread the field horizontally. the common denominator in both playbooks is very agile linemen and flexible tight ends. this has to be our focus on offense ... drafting legs on the offensive line. with pitts, spencer, and winston, we're doing relatively well on that path, but there's a lot of space to be filled. it's going to take time to hit that goal ... but last year's draft gave us a major head start. our biggest targets are completing that offensive line which will both lead to wins and also to offseason moves that both kubiak and smith are used to. take the tatum bell trade, and the clinton portis trades as perfect examples. coaching on offense, talent on defense. both coaches are fully aware that once the trenches are built, the possibilities 5-10 years down the road are endless.

edit: it's WAY past my bedtime and i havent had breakfast so please dont quote me ... some or all of this might be edited.

Reddevil63
03-12-2007, 02:01 PM
Wow, that showed me.Lead by example, I enjoyed your post on the offense. That's why I dont find this one necessary.

Texan_Bill
03-12-2007, 03:01 PM
How does Green fit our offense? How is our o-line talent wise? Do Kubiak's actions follow his words? Will Ryans have a sophomore slump? Will last year's street free agent defensive tackles make the team? Will they start? Should we pattern our offense after Denver which has unusual schemes and players in the NFL, or should we build a more standard team first?

Are these too hard to address?

I'd like to hear opinions about many areas, and things I haven't even thought of.

Runner, I will give it a shot, although I have been baited into some of those "other threads"

1. Green fits because of the system he ran in with Mike Sherman in Green Bay and can provide some veteran leadership - especially if Dayne is gone.

2. Our O-line has a long way to go, BUT, its probably the most talent and depth that we've ever had. Should Spencer make it back, we should be in 'okay' shape.

3. Giving Kubiak the benefit of the doubt (for now) I would say that they do, but again, thats giving him the benefit of the doubt as a rookie HC. His sophomore year should be more telling.

4. Ryans, a sophmore slump? Barring injury (God forbid), I would expect him to pick up, right where he left off and improving beyond that. Of course he has spoiled us, so he automatically will have extremely high expectations on him... I think other aquisitions on the D are Key.

5. I don't think any of the 'street free agents' Smith brough in will start, but I expect that they will make the squad and if nothing else, provide us some needed depth.

6. Since we both run the WCO, people will always draw comparisons between Denver and us, given the personnel ties, from Kubiak, to Dayne, to Putzier - etc. What the Texans need to do is find their own personality within the WCO scheme. People do not confuse Denver with Philly, so until we get our own identity, unfortunately the comparison becomes too easy..

The Pencil Neck
03-12-2007, 05:00 PM
if peek doesnt get signed, i'd keep him as a backup specialist or i'd honestly consider moving orr forward in a modified 3-4 in passing downs like we did last year.

I believe Peek has already signed with Cleveland.

Texan_Bill
03-12-2007, 05:03 PM
I believe Peek has already signed with Cleveland.

Yes he did.. He will be playing LB and wearing #54

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/sports/117300089951580.xml&coll=2

Runner
03-12-2007, 11:00 PM
instead of just ideas, you should make these seperate topics.



I want you guys to make up the threads. I already know what I think.

Runner
03-12-2007, 11:02 PM
Lead by example...

Tried that. Didn't work.

The Pencil Neck
03-12-2007, 11:03 PM
I want you guys to make up the threads. Not me.


How about we just keep all the non-Carr discussion in this thread? :joker:

Ole Miss Texan
03-12-2007, 11:48 PM
Well this is about the upcoming draft so he's not a Texan..but its what i'd like to see and why.

We all know our offensive line problems. Spencer was a great pick and if he can make it back 100% then he's our starting LT. If he can't..maybe he could be a guard. I havn't seen enough of Eric Winston. I would like to think he is our long term answer for RT...has he shown us enough that he should be starting the first game in '07 or is it because of a lack of anybody else. I like Fred Weary and Chester Pitts, I think they are good enough to be our starters for now and don't see any need to draft a G in day 1. Black is the new OG we signed?? What I read about him, I tend to like. It doesn't sound like to me he's going to be starting though...but solid back up for sure, and I do like Ephraim as back up LT. McKinney is back up at best for me...he's a short term answer at C and we know that..he doubles at guard for sure. Flannigan is done. Hogdone has not impressed me enough to warrant a backup at C...maybe 3rd string at best.

So onto my player. Ryan Kalil, the C from USC. This guy will most likely be taken late 1st round or early 2nd round...it's doubtful he will be available at the 7th pick in the 2nd round. As much as I hate trading away draft picks that we need...I would consider giving up a second day pick and our 2nd rd pick to move up for him...either to the top of the 2nd or end of the 1st.

I truly think Kalil would be an important choice for us. He is a perfect fit in the ZBS that Kubiak is using. He's easily the best C in this draft class too.
Good quickness...Moves well and has great range...Is extremely smart with great football instincts and is like a coach along the offensive line...Still has the frame to pack on some additional pounds...Does a nice job in pass protection...Is tough, a hard worker and a leader with top-notch intangibles...Excellent technician...Just a steady, all-around player who has a ton of experience against elite competition.

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/c/ryankalil.html

He had a very good senior bowl and combine. ran a 4.96 40yd dash, while not important for an OLman...it does show his speed...thats fast.

His knocks on him are his size. He is a hair under 300lbs and is said he should bulk up and hit the weight room, because of that he "struggles with massive defensive tackles"...I found it funny that the word 'massive' was used.

I think with good training and bulking up he would be simply amazing. I want us to draft him so we don't have to put one of our guards at C like Weary or McKinney. Kalil would be our long term answer to the C position with Spencer and Winston taking LT and RT respectively. Those three guys would all be extremely young and a GREAT start to an o-line. Just think of the three of them playing together for 3 seasons and tell me we won't have an incredible...still young o-line. We finally would have built an o-line..something we've never had...and C is really the last piece imo....Kalil is a true Center and that's what we need, not a G/C.

EDIT: and it would help Carr out....haha sorry.

infantrycak
03-13-2007, 08:11 AM
Black is the new OG we signed??

Black has played some G in the NFL, but he started all last year at LT and played LT in college.

humbleone
03-13-2007, 08:29 AM
Well this is about the upcoming draft so he's not a Texan..but its what i'd like to see and why.

We all know our offensive line problems. Spencer was a great pick and if he can make it back 100% then he's our starting LT. If he can't..maybe he could be a guard. I havn't seen enough of Eric Winston. I would like to think he is our long term answer for RT...has he shown us enough that he should be starting the first game in '07 or is it because of a lack of anybody else. I like Fred Weary and Chester Pitts, I think they are good enough to be our starters for now and don't see any need to draft a G in day 1. Black is the new OG we signed?? What I read about him, I tend to like. It doesn't sound like to me he's going to be starting though...but solid back up for sure, and I do like Ephraim as back up LT. McKinney is back up at best for me...he's a short term answer at C and we know that..he doubles at guard for sure. Flannigan is done. Hogdone has not impressed me enough to warrant a backup at C...maybe 3rd string at best.

So onto my player. Ryan Kalil, the C from USC. This guy will most likely be taken late 1st round or early 2nd round...it's doubtful he will be available at the 7th pick in the 2nd round. As much as I hate trading away draft picks that we need...I would consider giving up a second day pick and our 2nd rd pick to move up for him...either to the top of the 2nd or end of the 1st.

I truly think Kalil would be an important choice for us. He is a perfect fit in the ZBS that Kubiak is using. He's easily the best C in this draft class too.
Good quickness...Moves well and has great range...Is extremely smart with great football instincts and is like a coach along the offensive line...Still has the frame to pack on some additional pounds...Does a nice job in pass protection...Is tough, a hard worker and a leader with top-notch intangibles...Excellent technician...Just a steady, all-around player who has a ton of experience against elite competition.

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/scoutingreports/c/ryankalil.html

He had a very good senior bowl and combine. ran a 4.96 40yd dash, while not important for an OLman...it does show his speed...thats fast.

His knocks on him are his size. He is a hair under 300lbs and is said he should bulk up and hit the weight room, because of that he "struggles with massive defensive tackles"...I found it funny that the word 'massive' was used.

I think with good training and bulking up he would be simply amazing. I want us to draft him so we don't have to put one of our guards at C like Weary or McKinney. Kalil would be our long term answer to the C position with Spencer and Winston taking LT and RT respectively. Those three guys would all be extremely young and a GREAT start to an o-line. Just think of the three of them playing together for 3 seasons and tell me we won't have an incredible...still young o-line. We finally would have built an o-line..something we've never had...and C is really the last piece imo....Kalil is a true Center and that's what we need, not a G/C.

EDIT: and it would help Carr out....haha sorry.

Nice case for Kalil OT but IMO the difference between him and Satele for example who might still be there in round 3 when we pick is not enough to warrant giving up that much to get him.

Texans Horror
03-13-2007, 09:12 AM
I'm not one of the football experts but I've been in the middle (on both sides) of Carr debates so...

Hey, enough of David Carr, here is what I think about: Our Offensive Scheme.

I'm really concerned about the direction our offense is heading. When Kubiak first came here, there was all this talk about how we were going to mimic Denver's system. I'm afraid that Kubiak and Sherman are trying to synthesize a new offensive philosophy by combining Green Bay's power running offense with the Denver ZB running game. It concerns me that the type of line you need for one of those approaches is different than the approach you need for the other.

The power running game really needs big road grader type of linemen while the Denver zone blocking type of system needs smaller, more nimble linemen. And I'm afraid that by trying to mix these two schemes they're going to end up with a mix of linemen that don't function well together as a group.

When we finally ran the bootlegs off the Denver type of running play, it wasn't as much of a surprise because we hadn't been running that same running play (or variations of the same play) over and over again. Defenses saw us doing something unusual and knew to prepare for it.

Surely Kubiak and Sherman realize this. These guys have to be smarter about football strategy than I am but still, it worries me.

Now, if they are able to come up with something that's new and effective... then rock on. Never mind me.

:rant:

And while I'm on a soapbox, I'm tired of hearing how we don't need to spend early round draft choices on a running back. We are not Denver. We don't have Denver's level of talent, yet, and we're not the same offense. Maybe one day we'll be able to get away with that and maybe Lundy and Taylor will surprise us and blossom into great running backs next year, but I don't think we should pass up a great running back in the draft if one falls to us early just because it's early.

:rant:

Great post. I've had the same questions about the "Gulf Coast Offense." It seems to be power-running up the center of the line with lots of roll-outs by the quarterback, and the mesh of line schemes is not mixing well. Lighter power blockers doesn't work. I hope that during the offseason Kubes and Sherman take a good look at the offense they've started and work out strategy.

As far as the running back position goes, it is en mode right now to rotate two - to - three running backs constantly. The Texans picking up Green tells me they want a multiple back system. It is something that would help Green out (due to wear and tear and age). Taking an early-round running back would only improve things for the Texans. I imagine AP and Green taking the ball in the backfield, with Lundy or Dayne taking snaps, too. That would give the Texans a strong running game, which they rely on.

infantrycak
03-13-2007, 09:34 AM
Lighter power blockers doesn't work.

The Texans could hardly be accused of having lighter OLmen right now.

Spencer--340 + lbs
Pitts--320 lbs
Flanagan--301 lbs
Weary--308 lbs
Winston--310 lbs

Texans Horror
03-13-2007, 10:17 AM
The Texans could hardly be accused of having lighter OLmen right now.

Spencer--340 + lbs
Pitts--320 lbs
Flanagan--301 lbs
Weary--308 lbs
Winston--310 lbs

My understanding was that Kubes wanted his players to lower their weight to ~300. At least one cut lineman was concerned because he was "no longer of playing weight" after having been in the Texans organization.

So even though the weights are reported higher, my understanding is that they are all closer to 300, except Spencer. Depending on who you ask, he is either in good shape or not at all. Personally, I have no idea.

threetoedpete
03-13-2007, 10:36 AM
How about we just keep all the non-Carr discussion in this thread? :joker:

Or...we keep the DC talk ( i'm refraining from throwing another snide remark on the thread at the moment) to one thread ? That would certainly be something completly different.

So which is it a good tallented o-line not properly "utilized"
our O-line is fairly talented, but poorly utilized. I'm as guilty of shuffling as capers and anyone else on this board but with my research i consider myself more informed

or:

2. Our O-line has a long way to go, BUT, its probably the most talent and depth that we've ever had. Should Spencer make it back, we should be in 'okay' shape.

The last "Spencer line" that I saw last was January where someone posted that the guy was doing some lite running...by a "freind". Imediatly followed by someone else who some him standing on the side line some where" with a noticable limp. So which is it ?

The next two things I saw is Kubiak beating the "Spencer will be back at 100%" stuff like a man taking a two by four to a rat in the kitchen. Hard and frantic.

Spencer was a great pick and if he can make it back 100% then he's our starting LT. If he can't..maybe he could be a guard.

Old Miss I luv ya and all big guy, but if the cartlidge isn't going to get well ,it's not going to get well. There's no "IF" with Spencer's leg. Either he's going to get better or he's not. Agree with you if the leg is mending they could stick him at RT and protect the post leg...But...as far as I KNOW, no one has said this is a lock. The coach is going out of his way saying it's not.

Just saw the Megan Manfull article...I guess she must know something the rest of us don't ? She just put all of her chips on that leg for '07. Shrewd.

Spin the wheel there Montey, let's see what the Texans have won in '07.

Lucky
03-13-2007, 11:44 AM
So haters and lovers, do you accept the challenge or will you too curl up into a little ball and regurgitate the same stuff?

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/414/1256/320/curled-up-kitten.jpg

Black has played some G in the NFL, but he started all last year at LT and played LT in college.

Which means he's perfect for the guard spot.

Sincerely,
Joe Pendry

Second Honeymoon
03-13-2007, 11:59 AM
Carr sucks.

*sorry Runner, couldnt resist*

My Hero
03-13-2007, 12:03 PM
Carr sucks.

*sorry Runner, couldnt resist*

Ok,but he's still going to make $4,968,000 more than you this year.

TexansSeminole
03-13-2007, 12:09 PM
My understanding was that Kubes wanted his players to lower their weight to ~300. At least one cut lineman was concerned because he was "no longer of playing weight" after having been in the Texans organization.

So even though the weights are reported higher, my understanding is that they are all closer to 300, except Spencer. Depending on who you ask, he is either in good shape or not at all. Personally, I have no idea.

I don't think it really matters how heavy the lineman are as long as they can get moving past the offensive lineman to the linebackers with the quickness. If our OL can do that at weights of 330 that is fine....as long as they can do that....the only reason people say lighter offensive lineman are because traditionally they are the ones who have the best mobility.

Texans Horror
03-13-2007, 12:40 PM
If our OL can do that at weights of 330 that is fine....as long as they can do that....the only reason people say lighter offensive lineman are because traditionally they are the ones who have the best mobility.

Agreed. If the guy is 350 but fast as Deion Sanders, weight doesn't matter. But in general a lineman who loses weight will be faster and quicker than a lineman who does not. That's what the coaches were going for. They wanted strong linemen, but they also wanted lighter linemen, so they had them diet. My question is that by losing bulk do they lose power to dominate the line. I suppose in theory this is where the cut-block comes in. But this is where it gets weird to me.

The Pencil Neck
03-13-2007, 01:08 PM
Or...we keep the DC talk ( i'm refraining from throwing another snide remark on the thread at the moment) to one thread ? That would certainly be something completly different.

So which is it a good tallented o-line not properly "utilized"


or:



The last "Spencer line" that I saw last was January where someone posted that the guy was doing some lite running...by a "freind". Imediatly followed by someone else who some him standing on the side line some where" with a noticable limp. So which is it ?

The next two things I saw is Kubiak beating the "Spencer will be back at 100%" stuff like a man taking a two by four to a rat in the kitchen. Hard and frantic.



Old Miss I luv ya and all big guy, but if the cartlidge isn't going to get well ,it's not going to get well. There's no "IF" with Spencer's leg. Either he's going to get better or he's not. Agree with you if the leg is mending they could stick him at RT and protect the post leg...But...as far as I KNOW, no one has said this is a lock. The coach is going out of his way saying it's not.

Just saw the Megan Manfull article...I guess she must know something the rest of us don't ? She just put all of her chips on that leg for '07. Shrewd.

Spin the wheel there Montey, let's see what the Texans have won in '07.

Pete, I wish you'd be a little more careful with how you cut and paste things. You shouldn't cut information from multiple poster's messages without putting in the ascription showing which poster made which statement. I know this was unintentional but by replying to my post and leaving my name in and then grabbing pieces of other people's posts and not putting thier names in, it makes it look like you were responding just to me and that I had made those statements about the linemen... when I hadn't.

Also, by clipping Scooter's comment, you kinda changed it's meaning a little bit.

And by taking a statement from Scooter and a statement from Texan Bill and then saying "So which one is it", it looks like you're saying that the same person was contradicting themselves in the same post.

So... please... be a little more careful with that in the future.

TexansSeminole
03-13-2007, 01:11 PM
Agreed. If the guy is 350 but fast as Deion Sanders, weight doesn't matter. But in general a lineman who loses weight will be faster and quicker than a lineman who does not. That's what the coaches were going for. They wanted strong linemen, but they also wanted lighter linemen, so they had them diet. My question is that by losing bulk do they lose power to dominate the line. I suppose in theory this is where the cut-block comes in. But this is where it gets weird to me.

I'd bet that teams that are successful with lighter offensive lineman have the best Dieticians. Our Dietician is Roberta Anding. I know nothing about her haha.

swtbound07
03-13-2007, 01:13 PM
Ok,but he's still going to make $4,968,000 more than you this year.

and yet, same amount of production for the team

My Hero
03-13-2007, 01:20 PM
and yet, same amount of production for the team

Some things never change.

swtbound07
03-13-2007, 01:27 PM
Some things never change.

agreed...like people from Cali worshipping Carr....how is Clovis this time of year?

HOU-TEX
03-13-2007, 01:34 PM
Some things never change.

I find it quite peculiar someone would call themselves a Carr Homer after enduring 5 years of subpar to mediocre play. That would mean you're one of these three; 1) Not very knowledgeable on football. 2) A Carr relative or 3) a Carr stalker.:)

DontTreadOnMe
03-13-2007, 01:41 PM
runner.. you sound very full of yourself... i do not see the point of this thread... next!

HOU-TEX
03-13-2007, 01:45 PM
runner.. you sound very full of yourself... i do not see the point of this thread... next!

This was initially good thread. It started with a well thought post. Why don't you go back and read it. Take note while doing so.:victory:

freedoggy77
03-13-2007, 02:52 PM
I accept your challenge. What we need is a DOMINATING DEFENSE, as we know our offense isn't going anywhere with Carr...oops I jsut said it. oh well, we should draft LANDRY

threetoedpete
03-13-2007, 03:14 PM
Okie dokie, saw Jordan Black projected as a starter in '07 and I lost it.

Texans Horror
03-13-2007, 03:47 PM
Here's a question for someone to answer.

You get one shot. One pick. Any offensive lineman playing today or any 2007 draft pick to add to the Texans line. Who do you pick and, more importantly, why?

I'll start: Tom Nalen of the Denver Broncos. Knows the ZBS, has done about as well as anyone can in the ZBS. Fills a major hole for the Texans.

threetoedpete
03-13-2007, 04:03 PM
Here's a question for someone to answer.

You get one shot. One pick. Any offensive lineman playing today or any 2007 draft pick to add to the Texans line. Who do you pick and, more importantly, why?

I'll start: Tom Nalen of the Denver Broncos. Knows the ZBS, has done about as well as anyone can in the ZBS. Fills a major hole for the Texans.

Anyone ? With out the reprocussions of losing a couple of high picks, Joe Thomas. Unfortunatly, it would cost us the farm to do it. What I don't understand why some consider the franchise back to be more important than the OLT lock ?


Why , he's young. He's quick and has a very nasty mean streak and tends to maul people to the ground when he locks on. I.E. He enjoys it. No one currently playing in the league will get around the guy. Best prospect I've seen since Mathews. Gonna pay eight million to somebody, pay it to the OLT gaurding the QB. He's so good tallent wise, you could go cheap at a couple of the other line spots and still have a shot at a top ten offense.

I'm really glad they won the last two of '06. When they did I knew Thomas was probably not going to be there for us. I'd hoped that the leg injury would knock him down a bit but it's not. Peterson or Quinn are more likly to be there at the eight than JT.

Runner
03-13-2007, 04:37 PM
runner.. you sound very full of yourself... i do not see the point of this thread... next!

Thanks for helping to keep it at the top of the front page.

Texans Horror
03-13-2007, 07:33 PM
Anyone ? With out the reprocussions of losing a couple of high picks, Joe Thomas. Unfortunatly, it would cost us the farm to do it. What I don't understand why some consider the franchise back to be more important than the OLT lock ?


Why , he's young. He's quick and has a very nasty mean streak and tends to maul people to the ground when he locks on. I.E. He enjoys it. No one currently playing in the league will get around the guy. Best prospect I've seen since Mathews. Gonna pay eight million to somebody, pay it to the OLT gaurding the QB. He's so good tallent wise, you could go cheap at a couple of the other line spots and still have a shot at a top ten offense.

I'm really glad they won the last two of '06. When they did I knew Thomas was probably not going to be there for us. I'd hoped that the leg injury would knock him down a bit but it's not. Peterson or Quinn are more likly to be there at the eight than JT.


No repercussions. I'm just curious to hear what people would put here. One pick to fix the o-line.

Joe Thomas is a great one. If there was a player I would trade up for, it's him. I've already said elsewhere that the Lions have a chance to really fix things by drafting 1/2 Thomas/Kalil. That will be a very dominant line for years to come.

TwinSisters
03-13-2007, 10:50 PM
Here's a question for someone to answer.

You get one shot. One pick. Any offensive lineman playing today or any 2007 draft pick to add to the Texans line. Who do you pick and, more importantly, why?

I'll start: Tom Nalen of the Denver Broncos. Knows the ZBS, has done about as well as anyone can in the ZBS. Fills a major hole for the Texans.

Tom Nalen? He's a thug. Going down on someone's knees in the final minutes of a losing game. 25k fine to boot.

Texan_Bill
03-14-2007, 09:05 AM
What I'd Like To See.............

Is for this thread to stay on the front page for a while...

hadaad
03-14-2007, 10:20 AM
I'd love to see Joe Thomas in a Texans uniform next year. Even if it meant trading way up.

Such an overlooked position of need for so long. GET ME A FREAKING FRANCHISE TACKLE. It's not like there haven't been any for the taking since we started out.

Yeah, so Joe Thomas is the lineman I would want to fix the O-Line. Both because he's good and because he's young. I'd love us to do what the Jets did last year and go LT and C with our first two picks. After that, I don't care. But we're not going to do that because the Front Office will be too smart to make a move like that.

Ugg!

Vinny
03-14-2007, 10:26 AM
I'd love to see Joe Thomas in a Texans uniform next year. Even if it meant trading way up.

Such an overlooked position of need for so long. GET ME A FREAKING FRANCHISE TACKLE. It's not like there haven't been any for the taking since we started out.

Yeah, so Joe Thomas is the lineman I would want to fix the O-Line. Both because he's good and because he's young. I'd love us to do what the Jets did last year and go LT and C with our first two picks. After that, I don't care. But we're not going to do that because the Front Office will be too smart to make a move like that.

Ugg!The Rams have sucked for the last few years and have given up a ton of sacks with a "Franchise Tackle" in Orlando Pace. Just getting a good tackle doesn't mean something is resolved. You can have a bad team with a franchise LT....you can have a playoff team with a "servicable" LT as well.

hadaad
03-14-2007, 10:35 AM
The Rams have sucked for the last few years and have given up a ton of sacks with a "Franchise Tackle" in Orlando Pace. Just getting a good tackle doesn't mean something is resolved. You can have a bad team with a franchise LT....you can have a playoff team with a "servicable" LT as well.

Hasn't Pace been injured more than a little bit? Not that I'm arguing with your point. You can give up a ton of sacks with a franchise left tackle. You can also cut down on sacks with a serviceable tackle and a running game that keeps the line from pinning their ears back. I think we were close to that in the 7-9 year but then we had to fix things.

And now we really need to fix things. And a franchise LT would suit me very well this year.

infantrycak
03-14-2007, 10:40 AM
It would be lunacy to give up what it would take to get into position to take Thomas. We need 3 or 4 starters from this draft, not just one.

Vinny
03-14-2007, 10:50 AM
Hasn't Pace been injured more than a little bit? Not that I'm arguing with your point. You can give up a ton of sacks with a franchise left tackle. You can also cut down on sacks with a serviceable tackle and a running game that keeps the line from pinning their ears back. I think we were close to that in the 7-9 year but then we had to fix things.

And now we really need to fix things. And a franchise LT would suit me very well this year.The line was coming together last year, even with our injuries. I'd say the line was in the best shape it has ever been now that Spencer, Winston, Salam, and Black are here at the tackle spot. Pitts and Weary are good starting and McKinney backing up both G spots is perfect (since he was a mediocre starter for years)....we just need a center now.

hadaad
03-14-2007, 11:17 AM
The line was coming together last year, even with our injuries. I'd say the line was in the best shape it has ever been now that Spencer, Winston, Salam, and Black are here at the tackle spot. Pitts and Weary are good starting and McKinney backing up both G spots is perfect (since he was a mediocre starter for years)....we just need a center now.

I, for one, don't like Salaam. Sure, he's a willing guy, he's just not very good. Spencer - if he comes back - might be the guy on the left side. If he is, good. From what I heard about last year, he was having a hard time surpassing Seth Wand. Granted, that was as a rookie. I like the Black signing, if he hasn't been signed to be our starting LT (see Victor "Crash" Riley). Ideally, Spencer will come back healthy and be a respectable/good LT and then you'd be right. We'd just need a centre. I'm not so confident about either Spencer's ability or his health right now. Hopefully he's good to go in both aspects so we can pick up BPA at #8. I would like to see us draft a FS because CC Brown seriously made me angry last year. If Landry's the best there, and he's good value at #8, I hope we get him. But as the question was asked, I decided to answer it with Joe Thomas.

Texan_Bill
03-14-2007, 11:26 AM
It would be lunacy to give up what it would take to get into position to take Thomas. We need 3 or 4 starters from this draft, not just one.

Agreed!! I would rather stock pile some picks, not give them away with God only knows what else in order to get him. Don't get me wrong, I would love to get him but no way at that cost(s)....

thunderkyss
03-14-2007, 11:48 AM
It would be lunacy to give up what it would take to get into position to take Thomas. We need 3 or 4 starters from this draft, not just one.

Just because I don't recall you stating them anywhere, I'd love to hear/see at which positions you think we need 3 or 4 starters.

hadaad
03-14-2007, 11:49 AM
Just because I don't recall you stating them anywhere, I'd love to hear/see at which positions you think we need 3 or 4 starters.

For me: Ideally, LT, DT, FS, CB if they're upgrades. Maybe SLB.

Edit: C, P could also use upgrading.

Vinny
03-14-2007, 12:21 PM
I, for one, don't like Salaam. Sure, he's a willing guy, he's just not very good. Spencer - if he comes back - might be the guy on the left side. If he is, good. From what I heard about last year, he was having a hard time surpassing Seth Wand..
I'd like to here where you "heard" this since it isn't true.

hadaad
03-14-2007, 12:23 PM
I'd like to here where you "heard" this since it isn't true.

I'm pretty sure I read it here. If it's wrong, as you say, then it's wrong. I put some stock into what you say (aside from when you said the Titans had the worst defense in the league last year) and you actually get to watch the games and probably a large portion of preseason/traning camp, so if you say Spencer's good quality, I'll accept that.

thunderkyss
03-14-2007, 12:26 PM
I'm pretty sure I read it here. If it's wrong, as you say, then it's wrong. I put some stock into what you say (aside from when you said the Titans had the worst defense in the league last year) and you actually get to watch the games and probably a large portion of preseason/traning camp, so if you say Spencer's good quality, I'll accept that.


I think he's saying Spencer had no problem passing Salaam on the depth chart, since Salaam was Spencer's back up before the injury. Had Spencer not been injured, Salaam would most likely never started at LT, and Wand was cut from the team.

AFAIK, I'm one of the few who believed Wand was playing better than Spencer before Wand was cut.

ib4texans
03-14-2007, 12:26 PM
The line was coming together last year, even with our injuries. I'd say the line was in the best shape it has ever been now that Spencer, Winston, Salam, and Black are here at the tackle spot. Pitts and Weary are good starting and McKinney backing up both G spots is perfect (since he was a mediocre starter for years)....we just need a center now.



I have to admit that this coming season has the promise of being our best O-Line. I just hope everything comes together and stays together.

hadaad
03-14-2007, 12:32 PM
I think he's saying Spencer had no problem passing Salaam on the depth chart, since Salaam was Spencer's back up before the injury. Had Spencer not been injured, Salaam would most likely never started at LT, and Wand was cut from the team.

AFAIK, I'm one of the few who believed Wand was playing better than Spencer before Wand was cut.

I was pretty sure he was talking about the Spencer v. Wand thing since I didn't say anything about Spencer v. Salaam.

I knew I heard it here.

For what it's worth, I don't have any insider knowledge of anything, I don't even have a pair of eyes to see what's going on in Houston. I live in Edmonton, and the biggest insider knowledge I had was that the Eskimos were releasing Signor Mobley and Donnie Brady. I rely on what I read here for player evaluations in the offseason/preseason and what I hear on Texans radio for the in-season stuff.

Vinny
03-14-2007, 12:52 PM
I'm pretty sure I read it here. If it's wrong, as you say, then it's wrong. Everyone in the coaching staff was raving about Spencer being a 10 year LT and they cut Wand. Do the math on that one.

I put some stock into what you say (aside from when you said the Titans had the worst defense in the league last year) .Only two teams gave up 400 points last year and the Titans were one of them.....also, check out the team on the bottom pards... http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/DEF-TOTAL/2006/regular?sort_col_1=4

Total Defense - Total Yards/Game
Team G Plys Yds/G Y/P FD/G 3rd Md 3rd Att 3rd % 4th Md 4th Att 4th % Pen PenYds TOP TF L
Baltimore 16 936 264.1 4.5 14.8 60 208 28.8 9 23 39.1 79 580 27:12 24 12
Jacksonville 16 978 283.6 4.6 16.2 83 227 36.6 4 14 28.6 80 684 27:49 12 4
Oakland 16 986 284.8 4.6 16.7 79 221 35.7 10 19 52.6 85 665 31:46 16 5
Miami 16 1005 289.1 4.6 16.7 89 234 38.0 9 16 56.2 91 720 29:59 35 19
Chicago 16 1023 294.1 4.6 16.1 74 239 31.0 10 16 62.5 132 1084 29:26 32 20
New England 16 950 294.4 5.0 16.5 75 209 35.9 3 11 27.3 102 918 28:25 24 13
Carolina 16 990 296.1 4.8 16.7 70 222 31.5 11 14 78.6 89 735 29:48 22 8
Minnesota 16 977 300.2 4.9 17.0 74 215 34.4 7 13 53.8 112 899 28:23 25 15
Pittsburgh 16 976 300.3 4.9 16.8 86 219 39.3 6 12 50.0 104 862 28:47 16 9
San Diego 16 985 301.6 4.9 17.8 78 213 36.6 6 17 35.3 87 751 28:21 28 12
New Orleans 16 930 307.3 5.3 16.4 69 199 34.7 6 13 46.2 89 674 28:07 22 8
Green Bay 16 1002 320.9 5.1 18.2 70 215 32.6 13 21 61.9 97 710 29:15 29 10
Dallas 16 974 322.8 5.3 18.4 93 212 43.9 8 16 50.0 93 895 28:58 26 13
Denver 16 1020 326.4 5.1 18.2 81 221 36.7 5 14 35.7 97 785 30:10 28 13
Philadelphia 16 1054 328.1 5.0 19.6 83 222 37.4 10 21 47.6 96 807 31:22 25 10
Kansas City 16 999 328.9 5.3 18.6 83 212 39.2 8 13 61.5 85 709 29:54 29 15
Tampa Bay 16 1015 329.4 5.2 18.8 82 217 37.8 5 12 41.7 83 658 31:54 25 9
Buffalo 16 1029 329.6 5.1 18.6 79 216 36.6 11 17 64.7 90 709 31:56 28 11
Seattle 16 986 330.3 5.4 17.3 80 219 36.5 6 12 50.0 118 950 30:12 34 14
New York (A) 16 1020 331.6 5.2 19.5 76 208 36.5 12 23 52.2 105 843 28:57 17 9
Indianapolis 16 959 332.2 5.5 20.3 90 191 47.1 11 14 78.6 86 667 30:28 28 11
Atlanta 16 994 332.8 5.4 19.6 87 207 42.0 4 10 40.0 99 799 30:12 25 14
St. Louis 16 962 335.1 5.6 19.6 93 205 45.4 2 6 33.3 92 835 28:53 24 15
Houston 16 978 337.5 5.5 19.5 88 198 44.4 5 11 45.5 96 792 30:46 16 11
New York (N) 16 1057 342.4 5.2 19.6 97 226 42.9 9 24 37.5 97 771 30:25 23 11
San Francisco 16 1025 344.2 5.4 20.4 96 216 44.4 7 14 50.0 87 703 31:23 23 13
Cleveland 16 1041 344.8 5.3 18.9 100 228 43.9 4 10 40.0 84 678 30:39 13 9
Detroit 16 1033 345.6 5.4 19.9 90 207 43.5 4 5 80.0 102 869 32:19 29 18
Arizona 16 1018 349.4 5.5 20.7 83 201 41.3 7 15 46.7 95 815 30:01 29 17
Cincinnati 16 1038 355.1 5.5 21.1 88 211 41.7 11 21 52.4 97 836 31:26 24 12
Washington 16 997 355.5 5.7 18.8 97 222 43.7 6 9 66.7 94 856 30:01 15 6
Tennessee 16 1062 369.7 5.6 20.6 90 221 40.7 10 17 58.8 102 906 32:43 19 11

infantrycak
03-14-2007, 02:10 PM
Just because I don't recall you stating them anywhere, I'd love to hear/see at which positions you think we need 3 or 4 starters.

For draft purposes I will set aside QB since I don't want a rookie starting immediately. With that caveat, #2 WR, FS, CB, SLB, C. 3 or 4 starters from those five positions and I will be happy. Maybe Clark can be the SLB--we'll see.

real
03-14-2007, 02:17 PM
For draft purposes I will set aside QB since I don't want a rookie starting immediately. With that caveat, #2 WR, FS, CB, SLB, C. 3 or 4 starters from those five positions and I will be happy. Maybe Clark can be the SLB--we'll see.

I think Greenwood may be our weakest LB. Orr isn't anything special, but to be on the weakside Greenwood should have caused more havoc.

HOU-TEX
03-14-2007, 02:19 PM
For draft purposes I will set aside QB since I don't want a rookie starting immediately. With that caveat, #2 WR, FS, CB, SLB, C. 3 or 4 starters from those five positions and I will be happy. Maybe Clark can be the SLB--we'll see.

I can agree with that. Is this assuming Spencer will be back? I'd be willing to hold off on the SLB in order to grab another Olineman or Dlineman.:redtowel:

infantrycak
03-14-2007, 03:13 PM
Is this assuming Spencer will be back?

That's assuming the Texans believe Spencer will be back or that until he is he can be covered by Salaam or Black.

Texans Horror
03-14-2007, 07:40 PM
Interesting. I was hoping to see more opinions for starting linemen from other teams, maybe even some from ZBS teams. Or maybe people asserting that we have the linemen or lost the linemen.

old football fan
03-14-2007, 08:17 PM
This is really pretty simple. This is a team sport and as a team all members of that team need to simply do there jobs on every down. Sounds simply enough but for 5 years the Texans have not been able to put it all together. I think that we have led the NFL in injuries for two of the past five years and I like what the FO did this past season in filling in with street FA's. I would also like to see Dayne resigned, but not as a RB, but as a FB. I think Cook should be let go as he coat us two games last year. The last draft provided us with some very talented players and so far the FA signings this offseason will provide some much needed backups that may even start. With another good draft this year and some cap room moves for next year this team will be well on it's way to it's first winning season and a lasting place in all our hearts for our Texans.

Runner
03-19-2007, 08:51 PM
Congratulations!


I just checked the front page of the Bullpen. Of the 20 threads 17 of them were ostensibly about a variety of topics. Furthermore, 17 of the top 18 were on these other topics.

QB75
03-19-2007, 08:58 PM
What I would like to see is all of the football experts here to say, "Hey, enough of David Carr, here is what I think about X", with X being anything about Texans football not David Carr or a thin attempt of disguise and still being about David Carr.

So haters and lovers, do you accept the challenge or will you too curl up into a little ball and regurgitate the same stuff? Can you generate a serious front page of the Bullpen with no Carr posts?

I say you can't. You don't know enough about football.

Reverse psychology? No. I think as a group you are all that limited. Sorry, but you've proved it over the past six months.

How profound.

HJam72
03-19-2007, 09:08 PM
Hey, enough of David Carr, here is what I think about X:

I think it would be cool to have a player with 2 Xs on the back of their jersey instead of a number. Maybe Mario. He could do Dosecci (spelling) commercials. Better yet, we could put the two Xs on the back of a receiver's jersey and David might see them downfield for a change.

Doh!!! :brickwall I couldn't do it. :cry2:


At least I didn't say "Carr".

DocBar
03-19-2007, 09:13 PM
Hey, enough of David Carr, here is what I think about X:

I think it would be cool to have a player with 2 Xs on the back of their jersey instead of a number. Maybe Mario. He could do Dosecci (spelling) commercials. Better yet, we could put the two Xs on the back of a receiver's jersey and David might see them downfield for a change.

Doh!!! :brickwall I couldn't do it. :cry2:


At least I didn't say "Carr". That's so ridiculous it might actually work...

grahamcracker977
03-19-2007, 09:15 PM
Thinking out loud here but said this in another thread. Someone just mentioned we needed a center...anyway to trade down and nab Ryan Kalil? Put on ten more pounds for the combine. Great footwork and hands. Only saying this because Flannagan was hurt and is getting up in age.

HJam72
03-19-2007, 09:19 PM
Here is the problem with trading down:

It sounds like a great idea doesn't it? That's what EVERYBODY thinks. Everybody on almost every team wants to trade down and get more picks, so the advantage we think we can get by trading down is completely nullified when the bargaining actually begins, because NOBODY really wants to trade up very badly.

So....if we can just locate NOBODY, we'll be in good shape. :superman:

I do like the idea of getting Kalil though.

PS-This is why we couldn't trade down last year when we had the #1 pick with Mario, VY, Bush, Leinart, etc. just waiting to be picked. Not likely we'll get a good deal now after that.

grahamcracker977
03-19-2007, 09:22 PM
HJam72 I'm all for shoring up the Oline. If I recall Denver went with undersized but fast linemen...wondering if Kubiak would follow suit. Too bad Kalil won't fall into our laps in the second round.

thunderkyss
03-19-2007, 09:27 PM
Thinking out loud here but said this in another thread. Someone just mentioned we needed a center...anyway to trade down and nab Ryan Kalil? Put on ten more pounds for the combine. Great footwork and hands. Only saying this because Flannagan was hurt and is getting up in age.

I don't have a problem with Kalil being a Texan.

But I don't think we need a 1st round Center. Flanagan is getting old.... But, he's serviceable... McKinny can also play... I'd love to get another Hogdon, and prepare him for next year, or 2008. I wouldn't have a problem with Hogdon being that guy.

grahamcracker977
03-19-2007, 09:29 PM
Actually Thunder...I was hoping to get the likes of a defensive player (safety) or a rb in the first round. Was hoping to trade down to get a high second round...thus Kalil...saw some drafts which had him in the low first round but now see him in high second round. Again, I'm dreaming here!

Wolf
03-19-2007, 09:34 PM
I'd like to see a center i the later rounds(if available).. McKinney is getting a lot of money to have weary beat him out and Flannigan is getting long in the tooth

TXurias
03-19-2007, 09:58 PM
I really think Landry would be a great compliment to Super Mario and the Rookie. Mayabe even go after another LB in 2nd or 3rd rounds. I would also like us try and get Kolb somehow.

Arky
03-20-2007, 12:47 AM
I don't have a problem with Kalil being a Texan.

But I don't think we need a 1st round Center. Flanagan is getting old.... But, he's serviceable... McKinny can also play... I'd love to get another Hogdon, and prepare him for next year, or 2008. I wouldn't have a problem with Hogdon being that guy.

I thought McKinney was better than both those two at center, especially the last two games. The running game was clicking pretty good those last two games....

I would not be surprised if Flanagan or Hogdon (or both) aren't on the opening day roster....

NATHANHALE
03-20-2007, 03:51 AM
I thought McKinney was better than both those two at center, especially the last two games. The running game was clicking pretty good those last two games....

I would not be surprised if Flanagan or Hogdon (or both) aren't on the opening day roster....

This board absolutely 'dogged' McKinney in '05, blaming him for everything bad that happened on the OL--is it because 'what a difference a year makes,' or is it 'all' the new posters that have recently signed on?...just curious.

Arky
03-20-2007, 04:55 AM
This board absolutely 'dogged' McKinney in '05, blaming him for everything bad that happened on the OL--is it because 'what a difference a year makes,' or is it 'all' the new posters that have recently signed on?...just curious.

Say, are you also "tsip"? Just wondering cause you two spew just alike. Both of you insist that the Texans are losingest franchise in NFL history (not true) and both of you like to say something stupid and then follow it up with "nottttttttttttttt!". Hmmmmm?

Malloy
03-20-2007, 05:57 AM
So....if we can just locate NOBODY, we'll be in good shape. :superman:



This is the Houston Texans fan forum, plenty of nobody's around here ;)

NATHANHALE
03-20-2007, 07:12 AM
...never mind

texans83
03-20-2007, 09:16 AM
I can do it in 3,000 words or less, I think we should hold steady on draft neither moving up or down. But counting on scouts who found Winston, Spencer, Ryans and those street FA's who came in and helped out in a pinch, I like what Rick Smith brings to table in terms of player evaluation..I also like what Gary Kubiak brings in terms of ACTUAL playing experience and as a coach (who by the way started as a position coach not an OC).

This is a deep draft for QBs, WRs and Defensive players, I think we need to stop pass rushes from opposing defenses and get a pass rush on opposing QBs. I think we need to fill all our holes unless (please forgive me Mr. Royal) Adrian Peterson is there at #8, QB is not a need immediately for us.

I think using a mid-round (2nd day) pick on a QBand ONLY IF he is a steal, otherwise use wisdom of little dutch boy and plug the holes in the lines.

:yahoo:

You think this is a deep class of QB??? What qb are you talking about. I seriously dont think this is a good class of QB IMO. Other than the top 2 who else is there really? And dont say KK bc he is not a elite qb, the man has been in the same system for 8yrs. Hell I would be pretty darn good. He strugled in the senior bowl bc he had to learn the system and it was his first time to really do that, so what does that tell you?