PDA

View Full Version : Who starts at LG?


V Man
05-18-2004, 01:42 PM
I heard and read that Washington wants the Center position (in fact he is listed as a center on the players page). Who starts at left guard? I would like to see them move Fred Weary over from the right side. He started two games on the right side for injured Wieqert. Plus that would give us two solid young lineman on the left side for years to come. I see the starters as followed.

LT- Pitts
LG- Weary
C- McKinney
RG- Wieqert
RT- Wade

What do you think?

OzzO
05-18-2004, 01:54 PM
Wasn't guard originally McKinney's position but he moved to center with the Texans?

vtech9
05-18-2004, 01:54 PM
I heard and read that Washington wants the Center position (in fact he is listed as a center on the players page). Who starts at left guard? I would like to see them move Fred Weary over from the right side. He started two games on the right side for injured Wieqert. Plus that would give us two solid young lineman on the left side for years to come. I see the starters as followed.

LT- Pitts
LG- Weary
C- McKinney
RG- Wieqert
RT- Wade

What do you think?
In all likelyness, Milford Brown will be the starting guard on the left side. He was the starter last year until he became injured. So he should be the starter again this year.

MojoMan
05-18-2004, 01:59 PM
How about:

LT- Wand
LG- Weary
C- Washington
RG- Wieqert
RT- Wade

V Man
05-18-2004, 02:01 PM
How about:

LT-Wand
LG-Weary
C-Washington
RG-Wieqert
RT-[INDENT]Wade

Got a thing for "W" don't you. Can be called the Wide Wall. :bag:

Blake
05-18-2004, 02:16 PM
Wasn't guard originally McKinney's position but he moved to center with the Texans?

We had 2 McKinneys. One a center, and one at guard. We dumped the guard.

Lucky
05-18-2004, 02:57 PM
I guess the competition for the LG spot has been flushed out. Washington, Brown, & Weary. Although he was a positive step up from the guys on the year 1 line, Washington never impressed me as anything but a stopgap player. I thought Brown had an excellent training camp, but stumbled late in preseason and in the Saint game. Of course he may have been playing hurt in that game. Weary still has the stigma of being benched on the year 1 line. This has to be his best (and last?) chance at getting back to the starting lineup.

If the coaching staff determines that Wand is one of the top 5 O-linemen, could he move to guard? I remember when Joe Pendry was brought in as the interior OL coach, it was said that the Texans were changing to a zone or area type blocking scheme (can't find link). I would think the player who adapts best to this new scheme (however that plays out) would win the LG job.

We've never seen the Texans version of an area blocking scheme, but the Broncos employ this type and it may resemble theirs. I mentioned as Wand possibly being in the mix at LG because his mobility seems to fit into the area blocking scheme. Maybe move Wand to LG for a season and flip flop with Pitts at LT in '05? Or just stay with Pitts at LT and make Wand into a LG? Because of his athleticism, I expect Wand to make his way into the lineup somewhere in the near future.

infantrycak
05-18-2004, 03:08 PM
Steve McKinney did come to the Texans as a guard...

From the Texans profile of him:

successfully made the transition from guard to center his first season in Houston…

done88
05-18-2004, 03:14 PM
How about:

LT- Wand
LG- Weary
C- Washington
RG- Wieqert
RT- Wade
if anything it will be
LT- Wand
LG- Pitts
C- Mckinney
RG- Wieqert
RT- Wade
Pitts was drafted to be a guard and may be the best lineman on the team right now. When Wand is ready he will move to left guard.
:mag:

Blake
05-18-2004, 03:34 PM
All W's. Kinda funny.

Fiddy
05-18-2004, 04:22 PM
I wouldnt mind Wand at guard, but I think Milford Brown wins the spots. Brown isnt at practice because of a death in the family.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/sports/fb/texansfront/2575552

aj.
05-18-2004, 05:49 PM
Milford Brown will probably start at LG with Todd Washington pushing him hard for time.

I'm guessing the starters on opening day will be:

LT Pitts
LG Brown
C McKinney
RG Wiegert
RT Wade

Wand will back up both T positions
Washington will back up LG and C
Weary will back up RG and C

LG will be the biggest battle and Washington will also push McKinney at C. I see Steve keeping his job this season although he's anything but a dominating center. Wand isn't ready to take over LT full time - yet.

Coach Pendry's new zone blocking scheme may be a factor when all is said and done.

The good news: We have a lot of depth and flexibility at the interior line positions.

The bad news: We have little depth and flexibility at the tackle positions.

Wand at Guard? I'm down... While we're at it, how about Pitts at Tight End and McKinney at Tackle... Then we can re-sign Jimmy Herndon and trade that 3rd rounder we got for Henson to San Diego to get DeMingo Graham back just in case.

edo783
05-18-2004, 05:51 PM
Looks about right AJ.

Porky
05-18-2004, 06:28 PM
I think LG will come down to Weary or Brown. I would give Brown an advantage in general, but in a zone blocking scheme, quickness is favored over size as a general rule. I think Weary is much quicker than Brown and may excel in a scheme like this. Time will tell.

I think Wand backs up both tackle spots this year, but will push hard for a spot at LT in 2005. I personally do not see Wand at Guard. First, we are much deeper there than at tackle. Second, he has a classic LT's feet and size. Pitts could swing inside to LG in 2005. That would mean we need another good solid tackle prospect before they make that switch, and with the depth inside, he may never move inside.

The rest of the starters seem like sure things, and for depth, we have Wand, Weary/Brown, Washington, or maybe a wild card guy not on the radar.

I'm not as high on Wahsington as some, but from what I have seen he is a better center than guard.

vtech9
05-19-2004, 12:22 AM
I think you are forgetting about an OT aj. Garrick Jones is still on the team, and I seem to remember that the Texans were pretty high on him when they signed him from the CFL last season.

Lucky
05-19-2004, 12:51 AM
Wand at Guard? I'm down... While we're at it, how about Pitts at Tight End and McKinney at Tackle... Then we can re-sign Jimmy Herndon and trade that 3rd rounder we got for Henson to San Diego to get DeMingo Graham back just in case.
Huh? The idea of Wand at LG is as absurd as the rest of these notions? O-K.

Did you know that the Ravens All-Pro LT Jonathan Ogden began his career at LG? Why? So he could get experience without risking the health of the starting QB. He moved to LT after that and the rest is history. Again, if Wand is one of the top 5 O-linemen on the team, why not put him at guard? How would that preclude Wand from backing up at the tackle spots and moving over in case Pitts or Wade went down? I must be missing some stunningly logical explanation as to why Wand couldn't play at LG. Please, enlighten me.

aj.
05-19-2004, 07:09 AM
I had forgotten about Ogden. You are right. But we're talking about Seth Wand, not the first player selected in the draft. Hey, who knows, maybe Seth can play guard. But why? Is he really one of our 5 best o-lineman at any position? Or is he a potentially very good OT in waiting? We are loaded at G and have little quality depth at T. Wand has a prototypical tackle body, good length/leverage necessary to play outside, good feet, but from what little I've seen of him on the field, it doesn't seem like he can get low and wide enough to keep the much lower cg and stronger interior D-linemen from getting to his chest and blowing him backwards. Remember, when they had him in there last year in the jumbo sets, he played outside of the T and was lined up against LBs. Wand needs to get a LOT stronger than he was last season. Hopefully the off season weight program has helped in that regard. Some players benefit from being moved inside (Zach Wiegert is a prime example) but with Wand, I guess I just don't see it. All things considered, yes, the whole notion of playing him at G just struck me as absurd.


think you are forgetting about an OT aj. Garrick Jones is still on the team I didn't forget about him or Elliot Silvers or Curry Dawson. I don't know anything about Jones other than he came from the CFL and was signed by the Chiefs and later released. He was on the Texans practice squad before being signed to the 53 in October but he was inactive for every game. Let's hope that he's one of those surprises that goes from being a relative unknown to a solid backup.

pittbull
05-19-2004, 08:25 AM
If you fans think there is going to be major reconstruction on the o-line, you've lost it. This team came togehter late in the year, and that is what a line needs, chemistry. Pitts will be the starting left tackle, as he has gotten 100x better. Brown will be penciled back in at left guard, and the only other change will be Wade at RT to solidify a nasty presence on the line. This unit will be as good as any in the league, if we don't play musical lineman!

Lucky
05-19-2004, 10:32 AM
I don't think Dom Capers is afraid of moving guys around to field the best possible team. Wong from LOLB to ROLB. Coleman from RCB to FS. Hey, maybe Washington does beat out McKinney at center and McKinney moves to LG?

I don't know if Wand will emerge as one of the top 5 lineman or not. I thought that is was possible that if Wand came out of the offseason program much stronger, his agility would lend itself to prosper in a zone blocking scheme. That's a big if. But if so, I don't think the Texans would hesitate in finding him a place on the line. I believe the Texans will try any combination that will give them the best chance to win. I have not seen any evidence from them to suggest otherwise.

BTW, would completely altering your blocking scheme be considered "major reconstruction"?

TheOgre
05-19-2004, 10:56 AM
Is Steve McKinney signed through the end of this season or 2005?

I see our line in 2004 as:
LT Pitts
LG Brown
C McKinney
RG Wiegert
RT Wade

I see our "projected" line in 2005 as:
LT Wand
LG Pitts
C McKinney
RG Wiegert
RT Wade

McKinney hasn't played all that well for the money we are paying him. I would not be surprised to see him gone next year even if he is still under contract. We could have Weary, Brown, and Washington compete at C. I think all 3 have played C in either the pros or college. This all hinges on Wand. If he isn't ready to go then Pitts will stay at LT and Brown at LG.

infantrycak
05-19-2004, 11:43 AM
Is Steve McKinney signed through the end of this season or 2005?


According to this from ESPN, he is signed through 2006:

March 6, 2002--Signed free agent guard Steve McKinney to a five-year contract.

aj.
05-19-2004, 12:43 PM
McKinney's cap numbers:

2004 - $3,050,000
2005 - $3,850,000
2006 - $4,600,000

700k annual proration of signing bonus

DominatorDavis
05-19-2004, 12:51 PM
the offensive line up, barring no injuries or surprise FA acquisitions, will be as follows:

LT Chester Pitts
LG Milford Brown
C Steve McKinney
RG Zach Weigert
RT Todd Wade

I would like to see Wand in there as well but he is still just too raw. In the time that he was on the playing field last year he looked lost and confused. I hope he develops.

edo783
05-19-2004, 12:55 PM
Is it just me, or do those numbers seem pretty high for what I would catagorise as an "Average" center at best? Now, he may be an above average gaurd, but that isn't where he is playing (should he?). By the way, thanks AJ for keeping us all straight on the numbers.

Vinny
05-19-2004, 01:25 PM
I can see them restructuring McKinney before next year (if possible), or going another direction.

I just cannot see Wand as one of the best Guards on the team this season. AJ made a good case why not. I think he would get bull-rushed to death (as well as Carr would be). We have too many Hendersons, Hainsworths, and Strouds in the AFC Central for a weaker, lanky, 3 year Tackle project to hold up the Guard slot well enough to keep Carr upright. I am just fine with Wand playing in situational packages and special teams this year.

Everyone wants to move all our projects right into the line-up ASAP. Heck, most of this mb had zero patience with Hollings last year when he was in the last stage of rehab. Tons of people were down on this guy because he didn't produce like Priest Homes in flashes. Heck Priest Holmes did not produce like Priest Holmes early in his career. With that said, Wand may surprise. Players have done it before. I would consider Wand at LG a low-odds situation.

V Man
05-19-2004, 01:33 PM
Where does this Wand at LG come from? He has always been list or considered a LT prospect, and nothing else. I have heard many a time that the Texans would love to move Pitts back to LG where he was when he was drafted, and put Wand at LT when he is ready. But that is probably still two seasons away.

TheOgre
05-19-2004, 02:01 PM
McKinney's cap numbers:

2004 - $3,050,000
2005 - $3,850,000
2006 - $4,600,000

700k annual proration of signing bonus

Okay so if we cut him next offseason, he still would count 1.4 million against the cap for his signing bonus. AJ, do you happen to know if he has any guaranteed money tied into his 2005 or 2006 salaries? If he has no guaranteed moneys, we could save about $7 million in cap space and start someone that is as good or better than him.

I hope that the switch to the zone blocking scheme will help him perform better.

keyfro
05-19-2004, 05:40 PM
actually if you look at our player roster we're loaded at tackle and not gaurd...offensive tackles: bachman, dawson, jones, lekkerkerker, pitts, silvers, wade, wand, and wiergert(still listed as a tackle)

gaurds and centers: weary, washington, powell, mckinney, martin, evans, and brown

most of those guys are also centers not gaurds...still would like to see us add one more veteran gaurd to the mix...overall though the depth is much improved than the first two years...and the quality is there...wand at LG would be interesting given the zone scheme this year but i still don't see it...look for brown to be the starter

aj.
05-19-2004, 09:16 PM
offensive tackles: bachman, dawson, jones, lekkerkerker, ... silvers Yeah, that's some depth all right. I was talking about guys with at least a smidgen of experience, guys who have at least played in an NFL game and not street free agents, NFLE allocations, and practice squad developmental types.

We're nearly two-deep at the interior line positions with proven players; Washington, McKinney, Wiegert (he's at home at G), Weary, and even Milford who has only a couple games experience but he proved he could play before his injury. At tackle, we have Pitts and Wade as our only two experienced tackles and an inexperienced Wand backing up both positions. Wiegert is an emergency tackle but he wasn't performing well at tackle at Jax in '02 before he was injured.

Lucky
05-19-2004, 10:45 PM
I would like to see Wand in there as well but he is still just too raw. In the time that he was on the playing field last year he looked lost and confused. I hope he develops.
I don't want to come off as jocking Wand, but he does have as much experience in NFL games as Milford Brown does. I'm not sure how Brown became such a savvy vet after 2 games. And I'm not sure if Seth would look any more lost and confused than Milford did in the Saints game. If Wand is too raw to play LG, the Texans should find another tackle, as well. Because Wand is just a Pitts injury away from protecting Carr's blindside.

Going back to my original point, no one has firmly established himself as the player to beat at LG. If there is a favorite, it would have to be Todd Washington who started 14 games in '03 and re-signed for a $500K bonus. But who really knows who will come to the forefront through mini camps, training camp, & the preseason games? To my knowledge, no one posting here has seen the Texans run even skeleton drills with the new blocking scheme. Anyone who states that Brown or any one else will be the LG is just speculating (I'm certainly not suggesting anything else). The Texans have a cadre of potential LGs, but none may be the answer. If they're loaded at anything at LG, it's with question marks.

vtech9
05-20-2004, 12:27 AM
I don't want to come off as jocking Wand, but he does have as much experience in NFL games as Milford Brown does. I'm not sure how Brown became such a savvy vet after 2 games. And I'm not sure if Seth would look any more lost and confused than Milford did in the Saints game. If Wand is too raw to play LG, the Texans should find another tackle, as well. Because Wand is just a Pitts injury away from protecting Carr's blindside.

Going back to my original point, no one has firmly established himself as the player to beat at LG. If there is a favorite, it would have to be Todd Washington who started 14 games in '03 and re-signed for a $500K bonus. But who really knows who will come to the forefront through mini camps, training camp, & the preseason games? To my knowledge, no one posting here has seen the Texans run even skeleton drills with the new blocking scheme. Anyone who states that Brown or any one else will be the LG is just speculating (I'm certainly not suggesting anything else). The Texans have a cadre of potential LGs, but none may be the answer. If they're loaded at anything at LG, it's with question marks.

Just curious Lucky, but do you have a copy of the Saints game to watch? I don't, but I do remember that Brown was doing a pretty good job until he blew his knee out. His replacement did look a little lost if I remember correctly, and it was either Weary or Washington that replaced him. I think Brown went out pretty early, so I think you are mistaking one of the others for him.

Vinny
05-20-2004, 05:47 AM
Originally Posted by DominatorDavis
I would like to see Wand in there as well but he is still just too raw. In the time that he was on the playing field last year he looked lost and confused. I hope he develops. You aren't watching the same games I am watching. He was a surprisingly solid run blocker when I saw him play and didn't strike me as a player who looked "lost and confused". I don't want to come off as jocking Wand, but he does have as much If Wand is too raw to play LG, the Texans should find another tackle, as well. Because Wand is just a Pitts injury away from protecting Carr's blindside. I don't understand what you can't see. Wand's strength is not what I would consider at "Guards" strength. Guards take on the bull-rushers. This is the weakest area of Wands game, and I'm sure you are aware of this. Surely you don't think the Guard and Tackle spots are just interchangeable do you? With Guards just being lesser Tackles? They have different skill sets, and Wand is clearly better suited at taking on a quicker edge guy than a stronger bull-rusher from what I have seen. I'm not sure I am following your logic.Going back to my original point, no one has firmly established himself as the player to beat at LG. If there is a favorite, it would have to be Todd Washington who started 14 games in '03 and re-signed for a $500K bonus. Todd Washington is the LAST guy I want to see as our starting Guard. He was terrible in pass protection and when he had to move. He was great as long as he has a guy right in front of him, but if he needed to step to anyone he would whiff. If Washington is starting we have serious problems with Brown. Brown looked good to me last year. He was a powerful run blocker and his feet weren't stuck in cement like Washintons were.

Lucky
05-20-2004, 10:45 AM
I don't, but I do remember that Brown was doing a pretty good job until he blew his knee out.I believe Brown went out in the 4th when the game was pretty much in hand for the Saints. In fact, I thought at the time he had been pulled in favor of Washington. I didn't even realize he was injured until after the game. I don't think dominated is too strong a word for what happened to Brown against Grady Jackson. No push in the running game, allowing penetration that forced Carr out of the pocket, holding penalty, missing Whitehead on an inside stunt. It was a horrible game ended by a knee injury. Not that Brown was alone in his ineptness, as the entire Texan O-line was just shredded that day in New Orleans. And that's after one of their greatest performances (Brown included) in the Dolphin game. I am not saying that Brown cannot become a very good guard for the Texans. What I am saying is that we don't really know enough off of 2 games (one good, one not) to state that as fact.

My postulations on Wand at LG were predicated on a) Wand getting stronger in the offseason & b) Wand getting more knowledgeable of NFL line play in the offseason. No, Wand 1.0 could not have effectively played guard or tackle on a regular basis. He did a good job as an extra blocking TE, but he did make some mistakes (the sack that took Carr out of the Colt game for one). Wand is certainly capable of getting stronger and that may be happening now. Like the rest of his teammates, he's learning a new blocking scheme. How all of that translates to the field remains to be seen, I'm just not going to dismiss Wand making that big jump this offseason. If he does get stronger & "smarter", what Wand would then lack is experience. It is not so uncommon that players drafted at tackle begin their careers at guard, Luke Petitgout of the Giants is another example. It allows a guy to get some action under fire without getting a QB killed by an edge rusher. Wand is probably the lineman with the most "upside" on the Texans, is it so unlikely that he may earn a spot on the line that I shouldn't even bring up the possibility?

A Texan
05-20-2004, 12:27 PM
Since Wand has a documented learning disability, I wouldn't slow down his development by moving him to guard. He's a long term project that will probably pay dividends at the tackle spot (right or left) eventually.

Porky
05-20-2004, 12:55 PM
Which "documented learning disability" are your referring to?

infantrycak
05-20-2004, 12:59 PM
Link (http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/wand_seth)

Doesn't specify.

Vinny
05-20-2004, 12:59 PM
Wand is probably the lineman with the most "upside" on the Texans, is it so unlikely that he may earn a spot on the line that I shouldn't even bring up the possibility?
No, but I (speaking only for me) wasn't following your logic too well. I understand that part of it, but just because a guy may be a solid Tackle, doesn't make him a good Guard by default. A Guard has to deal with a different dynamic than a Tackle does.

Mike Munchack may have been the best lineman I have ever seen play in Houston, but he wasn't the best Tackle on many Oiler teams. Guys like Harvey Salem or even Bruce Matthews were better on the edge than Munchack would have been but neither of them could play Guard like Munchack could (you could make a case for Bruce, but he is a hall-of-Fame lineman also...and I would take Munch over Bruce at their prime for one game at G). Just because someone is a great Tackle (or even a good Tackle) it doesn't automatically mean that they can play Guard as well.

Porky
05-20-2004, 01:16 PM
Link (http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/wand_seth)

Doesn't specify.

Ok, thanks for the link. I had not heard of that before concerning Wand. All I know is Boselli said last summer that Wand was picking things up very quickly, so I will take that opinion at this point until I hear differently.

edo783
05-20-2004, 01:21 PM
I believe that Wand has Dyslexia (transposes words, numbers or sees them kind of backwards). Don't know how bad it affects him, but most people with it learn to work with it pretty well.

done88
05-20-2004, 05:32 PM
Surely you don't think the Guard and Tackle spots are just interchangeable do you? With Guards just being lesser Tackles? They have different skill sets, and Wand is clearly better suited at taking on a quicker edge guy than a stronger bull-rusher from what I have seen.
I wish someone would tell Mckinney this. Just because he is a great Guard does not mean he is a great Center. The best lineup for next year would be:
Pitts
Mckinney
Washington
Wiegert
Wade
:idea:

DominatorDavis
05-23-2004, 04:32 PM
I would like to see Wand in there as well but he is still just too raw. In the time that he was on the playing field last year he looked lost and confused. I hope he develops.


You aren't watching the same games I am watching. He was a surprisingly solid run blocker when I saw him play and didn't strike me as a player who looked "lost and confused".

OK, Wand did have some successful run blocks in the time that he was in there - and his upside is very good. But as far a starting right now I dont think that he has the pass play protection down yet. If he did - why didnt Capers and Palmer put him in there? It is his first year, going into his second - He is raw despite what you saw. He certainly didnt dominate the game and let me clairify by saying that he looked lost and confused on pass protection assignments. And that is typical of a rookie offensive tackle. I am not knocking the guy - he's a hoss and I like him. And I want him to dominate the NFL, but he is not ready. Unless there is something that I missed? I guess that that is my point - I should have explained myself better.

Vinny
05-23-2004, 04:38 PM
I agree he isn't ready. I have been calling him a 3 year project since the start of last year. We actually agree as far as that goes. I just took issue with the lost and confused part.

I think we see eye-to-eye on this one for the most part.

Texansbacker
05-23-2004, 07:42 PM
You guys all make good points. I am just glad that we have a little depth and nobody is talking about Jimmy Herndon. :)

keyfro
05-23-2004, 07:52 PM
well your right about that...no one is talking about herndon thank god...but i wouldn't say this is a good spot for us to be in with LG...we're trying to figure out who would be better to play a spot and our choices are a journeyman center/gaurd(washington), two second string young and raw guys(wand, weary), and brown who is coming off of an injuried season where he really only played one complete game for us...not a lot of experience...would really like to see us pick up a veteran gaurd once the june 1st cuts happen...as far as mckinney moving to gaurd...i agree i think he would be much better at it...but i really don't want washington starting center for us...the center as to make all the calls and personally would rather mckinney do that