PDA

View Full Version : Statistically Speaking


Texanmike02
07-21-2007, 01:17 PM
There has been some debate as to what it takes to finish 8-8. What do you have to do. Specifically what do the Texans have to do?

If you look at Yards allowed only - which is a VERY poor indicator, that will vary from year to year. If however you look a little deeper... say at Completion%, YPC, YPC etc, you can actually get a much clearer picture at what it takes a team to get to .500. I have built a pretty cool little spreadsheet which anyone who wants it is welcome to have. I'll keep improving it and when I get it right I'll see if Hook'em is interested. Basically what it allows you to do is take season stats from www.profootballreference.com and plug them in and see where each team finished in each category. It highlights every catgory in Green if they finished in the top 1/3, Blue in the middle 1/3 and Red in the bottom 1/3.

OK first myth that stuck out,

"The Jets finished at 10/6 w/o finishing in the top 1/3 in any category.

The Jets were in the top 10 in the following:
Completion %
Rushes
Rushing TD FOR
Points Against
Yards Per Pass allowed

They were ranked 21st or lower in:
Passing TD
YPC
Rushing yards against
YPC against

Statistically, they do more things good (top 10) than bad (bottom 12) and they do most things better than average (top 16).

I'm not saying this is absolute by any stretch of the imagination. In fact if you look at the Titans, who also started VERY poorly, almost their entire line is red. If you look at teams like that and our Texans for that matter, They were getting killed when they lost, and barely winning when they won. Statistically however, they are an outlier, or an anomaly. For the most part, the farther down on the chart... the more red you see.

Basically there are several ways the Texans can go 8-8 or better.

The most likely and plausible to me is that things come together quickly, they start the season off with a couple of wins, and are generally better than I, or many of the other "naysayers" think they will early. The problem with counting on this is that there are just too many things you are depending on.I can buy this, hell, I hope it happens. I think however that you are just relying on too many things for this to happen. From Spencer coming back to Stanley figuring out how to angle punts again, you're asking for a lot to make this a reality. The biggest factor in this however, is the OL. The defence will need rest this year, its remarkable how often we lose players on defence on this team. If this is going to happen though we MUST GET TURNOVERS. Looking at this whole spreadsheet there is one number that is very consistent. Turnovers. Every team which won 12 or more games was in the top 8 in turnover difference. Other than the Vikings (10th) no team that won 6 games or fewer finished in the top 1/3 in turnover difference. This stat is the great equalizer. Also there was no team that lost more than 8 games who's Green numbers (top 10) out numbered the blue and red.

We catch a few teams on bad days. Anyone wanna know why we beat Indy last year? They had a bad day. Its always possible we catch a couple of teams on bad days.

So you CAN argue that the you believe the Texans will be next years Titans, statistically bad at everything, but not bad enough to lose more than half of their games. If you want to make that argument... have fun.

This year's Texans are no doubt better than last year's edition. I've said before, I think we will start the season about as well as a 4 win team. I think by the end of the year we will be an 8 win team who only won 6 games, but especially if the Birds don't have Vick, then by my estimation, we are only 1 win away from .500.

I'm gonna come back and read this again and try and post that spreadsheet somewhere if anyone is interested.

Mike

threetoedpete
07-21-2007, 01:40 PM
No mike but, you're using logic and reason to make your point. A very danerous thingy on the message boards. Yards per catch and carry are pretty good indicators. I mean A.J. had a great year. But his yards per compeletion, if the offense was hitting on all eight cylinders should be at 17.5 (or beyound that twnenty something)not at 14 something.

Another one I like to look at is the third down compeltion rate and the green zone score %, TDs vs FGs. Dosen't matter how good you are offensively and defensively between the twenties all that matters is how many green zone oportunities you have per game and what you do with them. Can you keep the other team from scoring and can you score TDs when you get there. The other two of course are turnovers. And how many oportunities your special teams are giving you, both turnovers,TDs and [position], average drive starting position.

Lastly, and the reason why the Texan's are so poor btw, is how many eplosive plays you are averaging per game. And that is how many rushing plays over eight yards and passing plays over fifteen yards your offense is generating and defense is surendering up per game. We sux at that ratio. And I bet if you added 'em all up...we'd rank at the bottom on explosive plays, both offensivly and defensivly. That's also why Mathis hurts so bad . We don't have enough on specail teams to make up those gaps in the games.

Malloy
07-21-2007, 01:44 PM
Interesting read, thank you. It comes as no surprise to me that turnovers are the great equalizer, since it's the 'thing' that reduces the number fo scoring chances for your opponent while increasing yours.

Would it be possible to post a limited (reduced) version of the spread-sheet here on the forum?

Double Barrel
07-21-2007, 02:24 PM
Good stuff. But with all the new additions to our team, it is difficult to accurately forecast what our 2007 season stats will be. Changing/upgrading positions such as QB and RB (and hopefully WR) can make such a huge impact on statistics that we can only guess what we'll be like this year.

As threetoedpete alluded to, certain statistics carry more weight than others. Turnover ratios, third down conversion rates, average starting drive location, and RZ scoring opportunities/results are key indicators pertaining to a team's direction, IMO. We've never really been strong in any of these areas, which is par for teams with losing records.

The Pencil Neck
07-21-2007, 02:49 PM
This is really the crux of the discussion:

Basically there are several ways the Texans can go 8-8 or better.

The most likely and plausible to me is that things come together quickly, they start the season off with a couple of wins, and are generally better than I, or many of the other "naysayers" think they will early. The problem with counting on this is that there are just too many things you are depending on.I can buy this, hell, I hope it happens. I think however that you are just relying on too many things for this to happen. From Spencer coming back to Stanley figuring out how to angle punts again, you're asking for a lot to make this a reality

To you and the naysayers, you think that a lot of things have to change from last year for us to get into the playoff hunt. To a lot of the rest of us, we think that a lot of things HAVE changed from last year but even then, we weren't as far away from being in the playoff hunt last year than you make it out.

I'm not relying on Spencer coming back. I think our line from last year was good enough to have gotten us to the 8-9 win mark. We didn't lose a lot of games because of their bad play. And I'm not relying on Stanley or Brown suddenly learning how to kick. I just believe that we're fielding a team that's going to play hard and win more games than we did last yea because it's a better, more talented team than we had last yearr.

What you are saying is that we sucked last year and that we're going to suck again this year. That's all. You can pull up any stats you want (and I'm a big fan of using stats in arguments) but you don't have any stats for this team or the teams we're going to be facing. You believe that as a team we were bad last year, we've made some improvements but we're not going to substantially improve enough areas to be able to even get to 8-8. The operative word there is "believe". You believe we're bad and I believe we're good. We can both throw a bunch of numbers around but ultimately it's all mental masturbation until the season starts and we really see what we have.

threetoedpete
07-21-2007, 03:33 PM
PN you're correct to a point. And I yeild to the fact that a great coach can elevate the play of second teired players. I watched George Allen do it in Washington with a bunch of thirty something guys and very few pick of the NFL litter. And that could happen here this season. But it doesn't matter how gung ho you are or how much you want a second teired guy to over perform. In the end, they've got to do it. And the facts are that the guys we've watched and waited for the last two or three seasons haven't done it yet. The o-line coming togehter, the young Rookies at DT and Wr progressing quickly. A guy who's been the #3 all of his career elevating his game to be a legitamte #2, a free safty emerging out of the bunch....all of things could happen. But at the end of the day because of the cap restrictions....they did the best they could with what they had to work with. It is up to the people, who so far haven't done it, to seise their oportunity.
They all want to succeed. The only question is do they have the tallent to do it.

No one wants to lose their rice bowl. But in the end, it may be a question of they simply do not have the tallent. And no amount of gung ho, is going to change that unless they do.

The Pencil Neck
07-21-2007, 05:53 PM
PN you're correct to a point. And I yeild to the fact that a great coach can elevate the play of second teired players. I watched George Allen do it in Washington with a bunch of thirty something guys and very few pick of the NFL litter. And that could happen here this season. But it doesn't matter how gung ho you are or how much you want a second teired guy to over perform. In the end, they've got to do it. And the facts are that the guys we've watched and waited for the last two or three seasons haven't done it yet. The o-line coming togehter, the young Rookies at DT and Wr progressing quickly. A guy who's been the #3 all of his career elevating his game to be a legitamte #2, a free safty emerging out of the bunch....all of things could happen. But at the end of the day because of the cap restrictions....they did the best they could with what they had to work with. It is up to the people, who so far haven't done it, to seise their oportunity.
They all want to succeed. The only question is do they have the tallent to do it.

No one wants to lose their rice bowl. But in the end, it may be a question of they simply do not have the tallent. And no amount of gung ho, is going to change that unless they do.

Yeah, I remember the Over The Hill gang. I also remember the No Name defense. I also remember the Cardinals making it in and beating the Cowboys. I also remember the Chiefs backing into the playoffs last year. I can remember a lot of teams challenge for playoff spots over the past 30-35 years that weren't extremely talented... and that's my point. Challenging for a playoff spot isn't as hard as you make it out.

We're not talking about whether this team is a power house which is our ultimate goal. We're talking about whether this team is good enough to challenge for a playoff spot. We were 2 games away from doing that last year and we're going to be better this year.

You can call that rah-rah if you want but I honestly think we've made a lot of improvement in this offseason. You obviously honestly don't. You think that this team was a 4-12 team that got lucky and won a couple we shouldn't have. And you think we're just as bad this year as we were last year.

Then again, iirc, you thought that DC was a good QB on a bad team and I thought that DC was a bad QB on a mid-level team. So we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this.

DocBar
07-21-2007, 07:36 PM
I've got to go with the optimistic outlook on this. We barely won several games last year. We also barely lost several. We had some pretty good moments and some surprise players. The injury bug also bit us hard and often.
IMHO, our success this season rides on how well MW, MS and KW play and how well the coaches do in implementing schemes and systems that allow us to maximize what ever talent we DO have. I picked those 3 players because they have the highest profile positions. If Schaub provides ANY pocket presecne other than "Stop, Drop and Roll", we have improved. If he has the ability to read the D and make good snap decisions, then we will be GREATLY improved. Mario has a ton of pressure on him to live up to his draft position and do what he was drafted to do-wreak havok on opposing offenses. I picked Walters because Kubes is showing a lot of faith in him to elevate his game and be the #2 reciever we've been needed for, oh about 5 years now. I wanted to put Okoye in here, but DT is a hard position to rate unless you're a spectacular player or really horrible player. I'm hoping for the latter, but he IS a 19 yr. old rookie...
I'm hoping that the team is ready for the entire playbook this year and allow Kubes to fully implement the whole thing. I hear MS knows a lot of it already and we all know how much Ryans gets it on the other side of the ball. All things considered, I think we'll field a very competetive team this year.
:fans: :fans: :fans:

HJam72
07-21-2007, 08:16 PM
Looking at our numbers on that website, I could be over-simplifying, but I think we need 2 things to show real improvement:

1) Yards/pass attempt (Schaub/Car)

2) D Pressure/pass attempt (ie-turnovers--hopefully) (Okoye and healthy Williams)

This won't make us a championship contender, but we're on the right track here. :fans:

Texans_Chick
07-21-2007, 09:40 PM
Interesting post.

It would be cool if you had your spreadsheet hosted somewhere--I'd definitely link to it.

I love stats. Stats are hard to use to say much about the Texans this year because of all the changes. The predictive value of those stats are messed up by so many changes, especially on offense to predict how they will do this year. New QB, RB, new OC, revised line scheme, unknown #2s, etc.

In addition, the Texans offense often did the Texans defense no favors last year.

Game 1 with the Colts. Offense sputtered and coughed up the ball early and often leaving short fields.

Game 2 with the Colts. The defense really didn't stop Manning, because nobody really stops him, but Mario stripped one fumble, and the Texans were able to keep Manning off the field by running all day. Sometimes the best defense is a clock killing offense.

Typically, lots of new parts have growing pains. But you never know, so that's why they play the games instead of doing computer sims of who should win.

Texanmike02
07-21-2007, 09:42 PM
We're not talking about whether this team is a power house which is our ultimate goal. We're talking about whether this team is good enough to challenge for a playoff spot. We were 2 games away from doing that last year and we're going to be better this year.

You can call that rah-rah if you want but I honestly think we've made a lot of improvement in this offseason. You obviously honestly don't. You think that this team was a 4-12 team that got lucky and won a couple we shouldn't have. And you think we're just as bad this year as we were last year.



I think we are a MUCH better team this year than we were last year. Just not the way alot of those who are so positive about last year do. Last year we were basically playing with a bunch of guys who were holdovers from the previous regime. This year we have laid the foundation for this team. Like I've said, it is possible that the foundation sets alot earlier than I think it will. From going back and looking at the record prediction most of those who are positive about THIS season seem to pick us to do better early in the season than those of us who think this is another sub .500 season. Like I alluded to in the reason's thread, if the coaching staff/management thought this was an 8+ win team I don't think KW would be our WR2. I also think we'd have addressed the OLB position and the secondary. I will go out on a limb and say we lose several of the games I have us losing late in the game... with Petey getting burned for a TD. I don't think there is anyone on this board that believes he's a CB2. He's a nickel back or a dime back. If we were looking to win close to 10 this year we wouldn't go into the season with 3/4 of our DB's ranked in the 20's at their position.

Now obviously this depends on the off season, but I think this team ,especially with the money they're going to be able to spend in the off season, could conceivably win 12 games in 08. I am also starting to realize that you and I are squabbling over a meaningless season IMHO. Winning 6 games or 8 doesn't really matter to me. I am more concerned that we get the young guys healthy and have the professionals we have on the team show them how to do it week in and week out.

Sorry my first post here was hard to follow. I had flag detail this morning and got home and started on that spread sheet. I'm going to see if there's a way to post it here or at the very least throw it onto an ftp server out there. Until I get that done if you want a copy email me @ texansfan4life@gmail.com and I'll get you a copy.

Mike

Texanmike02
07-21-2007, 10:04 PM
Interesting post.

It would be cool if you had your spreadsheet hosted somewhere--I'd definitely link to it.

I love stats. Stats are hard to use to say much about the Texans this year because of all the changes. The predictive value of those stats are messed up by so many changes, especially on offense to predict how they will do this year. New QB, RB, new OC, revised line scheme, unknown #2s, etc.

In addition, the Texans offense often did the Texans defense no favors last year.

Game 1 with the Colts. Offense sputtered and coughed up the ball early and often leaving short fields.

Game 2 with the Colts. The defense really didn't stop Manning, because nobody really stops him, but Mario stripped one fumble, and the Texans were able to keep Manning off the field by running all day. Sometimes the best defense is a clock killing offense.

Typically, lots of new parts have growing pains. But you never know, so that's why they play the games instead of doing computer sims of who should win.

I'm the biggest stat geek you know. My ultimate vision is to get say the last 15 years worth of stats into a database and be able to analyse them to find out exactly what stats do change the game. We've gone by Turnover margin, yards and TOP for as long as I've been a football fan. I'm wondering if there are some better indicators like using WHIP instead of ERA. Now that I've got a template built it shouldn't be that hard to get that kind of data. Then again maybe I'll just reinvent the wheel.

I also agree with your assessments of the Colts games. I feel like there are two fundamentals of football and I doubt you saw it, but I did a big write up on how there were 3 things that boded well for a team, obviously the turnover battle was one of them. Running the ball and stopping the run seemed to be the other. One thing Manning has always had has been a running game. When the Pats had the Colts number, one thing that seemed to happen (I wrote about it on a Colts board like 3 or 4 years ago) was that they would run the ball effectively early and then seem to get away from it after their 2nd or 3rd drive. It doesn't just keep the defence off the field, it kept Manning on the field. I know that's kind of obvious, but it isn't talked about much.

I think that by the end of the year we will be an 8-8 team maybe a 9-7 team. I think however that we will be a 4 or 5 win team early on while things kind of fall into place for us. I have never looked into (and think it would be to hard to find the info) of what teams with new RB/QB combo's do, but just a guess that learning blocking assignments and how the blitz is picked up will be something that is a problem the first couple of games. Throw that in with the fact that the QB, no matter how similar the system is, must learn that plus get a rhythm with his receivers, will make things difficult on offence. I'm sure most of us know about Manning/Harrison's pre game routine. But for those that might not, they spend about 30 mins to an hour before every game running patterns over and over. On top of that, until last year Harrison lined up in the same spot something like 98% of the time. The chemistry between the two has been a large part of their success.

Ok enough rambling...

Mike

The Pencil Neck
07-21-2007, 11:00 PM
I think we are a MUCH better team this year than we were last year. Just not the way alot of those who are so positive about last year do. Last year we were basically playing with a bunch of guys who were holdovers from the previous regime. This year we have laid the foundation for this team. Like I've said, it is possible that the foundation sets alot earlier than I think it will. From going back and looking at the record prediction most of those who are positive about THIS season seem to pick us to do better early in the season than those of us who think this is another sub .500 season. Like I alluded to in the reason's thread, if the coaching staff/management thought this was an 8+ win team I don't think KW would be our WR2. I also think we'd have addressed the OLB position and the secondary. I will go out on a limb and say we lose several of the games I have us losing late in the game... with Petey getting burned for a TD. I don't think there is anyone on this board that believes he's a CB2. He's a nickel back or a dime back. If we were looking to win close to 10 this year we wouldn't go into the season with 3/4 of our DB's ranked in the 20's at their position.

Now obviously this depends on the off season, but I think this team ,especially with the money they're going to be able to spend in the off season, could conceivably win 12 games in 08. I am also starting to realize that you and I are squabbling over a meaningless season IMHO. Winning 6 games or 8 doesn't really matter to me. I am more concerned that we get the young guys healthy and have the professionals we have on the team show them how to do it week in and week out.

Sorry my first post here was hard to follow. I had flag detail this morning and got home and started on that spread sheet. I'm going to see if there's a way to post it here or at the very least throw it onto an ftp server out there. Until I get that done if you want a copy email me @ texansfan4life@gmail.com and I'll get you a copy.

Mike

You've got mail.

Having this discussion between you and me is a bit odd because I'm not one of the people expecting double digit wins this season. I think the real difference between you and I in terms of 6 vs. 8 wins this season comes down to how we feel about the teams early in the season.

I think our schedule is good for us because there are a lot of teams I think are very beatable: Chiefs*, Panthers, Dolphins, Titans (2x), Browns, Raiders, Jaguars (2x), Buccs.

(I expect the Chiefs to be bad this year. I think they're going to push Brodie Croyle into the starting line up and I don't think he's going to do well. I think they have serious offensive line problems and I think that LJ is toast this year because he got too many carries last year. I also don't think they're defense is any good.)

Like you, I believe that we're really building and looking at this as a transitional year. But I think that Kubiak is planning on winning. If he wasn't planning on winning this year, I don't think he pulls the trigger on Carr for Schaub. If he's just wanting this year to train some guys and doesn't care about the W/L's, I think he keeps Carr along with the two 2nd round picks and then drafts someone like Quinn, Beck, or Kolb and grooms them this year for next year. I think he sees a franchise QB in Schaub that he didn't see in this year's draft. I think he's wanting to make a playoff push this year just to get our younger guys the experience and then next year is when we break out.

But that's just how I read it.

brakos82
07-21-2007, 11:03 PM
Ok enough rambling...

:doot:

Texans_Chick
07-21-2007, 11:05 PM
I'm the biggest stat geek you know. My ultimate vision is to get say the last 15 years worth of stats into a database and be able to analyse them to find out exactly what stats do change the game. We've gone by Turnover margin, yards and TOP for as long as I've been a football fan. I'm wondering if there are some better indicators like using WHIP instead of ERA. Now that I've got a template built it shouldn't be that hard to get that kind of data. Then again maybe I'll just reinvent the wheel.

I also agree with your assessments of the Colts games. I feel like there are two fundamentals of football and I doubt you saw it, but I did a big write up on how there were 3 things that boded well for a team, obviously the turnover battle was one of them. Running the ball and stopping the run seemed to be the other. One thing Manning has always had has been a running game. When the Pats had the Colts number, one thing that seemed to happen (I wrote about it on a Colts board like 3 or 4 years ago) was that they would run the ball effectively early and then seem to get away from it after their 2nd or 3rd drive. It doesn't just keep the defence off the field, it kept Manning on the field. I know that's kind of obvious, but it isn't talked about much.

I think that by the end of the year we will be an 8-8 team maybe a 9-7 team. I think however that we will be a 4 or 5 win team early on while things kind of fall into place for us. I have never looked into (and think it would be to hard to find the info) of what teams with new RB/QB combo's do, but just a guess that learning blocking assignments and how the blitz is picked up will be something that is a problem the first couple of games. Throw that in with the fact that the QB, no matter how similar the system is, must learn that plus get a rhythm with his receivers, will make things difficult on offence. I'm sure most of us know about Manning/Harrison's pre game routine. But for those that might not, they spend about 30 mins to an hour before every game running patterns over and over. On top of that, until last year Harrison lined up in the same spot something like 98% of the time. The chemistry between the two has been a large part of their success.

Ok enough rambling...

Mike

Do you ever email Doug Drinen at pro-football-reference? He's moving a lot of his FF oriented stuff over to Footballguys.com but I adore his blog. I know in the past he has looked at when WRs go from one team to a new team and that their stats usually go down at first. Have you tried asking him any of these questions?

He actually was cool and looked up for me whether the Texans had the worst defense of all times after the first three games of last season. I had to ask because the yards gained against the Texans were just amazingly high, and well extremely painful to watch. Here's the entry on that: The Texans Do Not Have the Worst Defense in the History of the NFL (http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/category/texans/2006/09/27/the-texans-do-not-have-the-worst-defense-in-the-history-of-the-n/)

Texanmike02
07-22-2007, 12:41 AM
You've got mail.

Having this discussion between you and me is a bit odd because I'm not one of the people expecting double digit wins this season. I think the real difference between you and I in terms of 6 vs. 8 wins this season comes down to how we feel about the teams early in the season.

I think our schedule is good for us because there are a lot of teams I think are very beatable: Chiefs*, Panthers, Dolphins, Titans (2x), Browns, Raiders, Jaguars (2x), Buccs.

(I expect the Chiefs to be bad this year. I think they're going to push Brodie Croyle into the starting line up and I don't think he's going to do well. I think they have serious offensive line problems and I think that LJ is toast this year because he got too many carries last year. I also don't think they're defense is any good.)

Like you, I believe that we're really building and looking at this as a transitional year. But I think that Kubiak is planning on winning. If he wasn't planning on winning this year, I don't think he pulls the trigger on Carr for Schaub. If he's just wanting this year to train some guys and doesn't care about the W/L's, I think he keeps Carr along with the two 2nd round picks and then drafts someone like Quinn, Beck, or Kolb and grooms them this year for next year. I think he sees a franchise QB in Schaub that he didn't see in this year's draft. I think he's wanting to make a playoff push this year just to get our younger guys the experience and then next year is when we break out.

But that's just how I read it.

I read the Schaub deal almost the opposite. I think it signaled a near future run, but not this year. If we had gotten one of the afore mentioned and kept Carr we would be under his contract next year even if we moved him. You figure one of those guys holds the board for a year, comes in next year and starts but makes a ton of mistakes and we're at 09 before we're ready to get the bull running. (couldn't make the bus reference). Instead we took Schaub, who while he's never started... he's certainly through holding the board which means he puts us on schedule for 08.

I do agree with the rest of what you say about us disagreeing lol... I don't know what kind of year KC will hae... but I think it will be a bad game for us. I don't think at that point certainly, that our defense will be up to the task of stopping LJ. I know about KC's line and all... I just think we will be in a bit of disarray on both offense and defense the first game of the year. We have alot of pieces to put together on both sides of the ball.

Mike

The Pencil Neck
07-22-2007, 12:53 AM
I read the Schaub deal almost the opposite. I think it signaled a near future run, but not this year. If we had gotten one of the afore mentioned and kept Carr we would be under his contract next year even if we moved him. You figure one of those guys holds the board for a year, comes in next year and starts but makes a ton of mistakes and we're at 09 before we're ready to get the bull running. (couldn't make the bus reference). Instead we took Schaub, who while he's never started... he's certainly through holding the board which means he puts us on schedule for 08.


I think this part is just a slight difference between us. I think we're saying basically the same thing and that's that we'll be IN the playoffs in 08. I just think that he expects us to get to 8-8 and scare some people this year and you don't.

I can't wait for the games to start. :)

The Pencil Neck
07-22-2007, 01:05 AM
I do agree with the rest of what you say about us disagreeing lol... I don't know what kind of year KC will hae... but I think it will be a bad game for us. I don't think at that point certainly, that our defense will be up to the task of stopping LJ. I know about KC's line and all... I just think we will be in a bit of disarray on both offense and defense the first game of the year. We have alot of pieces to put together on both sides of the ball.


Two of their starters from their OL last year are gone. Obviously, their LT, Jordan Black, is with us. And their all-pro, Will Shields, has retired. So I think their o-line is going to have problems.

On their d-line, Jared Allen, their starting RE, will be serving a 2 game suspension. Tamba Hali is good on the LE. Their DB's are getting old (Ty Law, Surtain) and I don't see Sammy Knight on their roster or even in the list of players on NFL.com, so I think he retired or something. They drafted a couple of DT's.

So... I don't think they're going to be playing very well.

Texanmike02
07-22-2007, 01:56 AM
ok you should be able to pick that stat sheet up here:

ftp://66.171.235.147

if you have problems let me know

Mike

maddogmrb
07-22-2007, 08:58 AM
I just think we will be in a bit of disarray on both offense and defense the first game of the year. We have alot of pieces to put together on both sides of the ball.

Mike

I totally agree.

Schaub is the starter but, he really has no history of excellence in the league and it will take time for him to meld his game into his new team with so many other unsettled positions around him. So, even if he is the 2nd coming of Favre, it may take awhile for it all to rise to the surface.

Green has had an excellent career but, he is probably on the back side of it now and with a totally unproven OL in front may have a tuff time getting off to a good start.

Walters has never done anything in his career and, maybe he will become an excellent WR2 and maybe not. If he is going to be good, it probably will take some time melding with a new QB and unsettled OL.

Okay, can anybody tell me for sure who our 5 starters are going to be across our OL? No you can't because the coaches don't even know. In fact, I don't believe anyone can tell us with certainty who even ONE starter will be on the OL. The consensus APPEARS to be that Winston will start at RT but, there are those who say he may be at LT or RG. And that is the most confident we can speak of any position on the OL. With so much unsettled it will take time for the OL to meld together and be an effective bunch. And, in the ZB scheme, don't they really need to MELD together as a unit more so than most other schemes?

Other than MW, by default and not performance, can anybody tell me for sure who the other 3 starters will be on the DL? No, you can't and so both our lines are in a state of flux with no continuity and no chemistry. It will take time for them to meld together and become effective as units. And MW is playing a new position this year, too.

Other than Ryans, can anybody tell me who are starting LB's are? No, you can't because it is way up in the air. The OLB's have been a big weakness on this team for at least 2 years and the team did little to shore them up other than bring in over-the-hill vets who were let go by other teams. Another position in a state of flux.

Other than Dunta, who can tell me for sure who will be the other 3 starters in our secondary, and since the team did almost nothing to improve the secondary, will it matter? Another position of questionable talent and in a state of flux.

There are just WAY TOO MANY uncertanties on this team to think they will have a winning record or challenge for the playoffs this year. Oh, I forgot to mention our "near the bottom of the league" special teams.

Now, the 2nd half of the season when these positions start to meld together and the chemistry starts to develop, I can see this team being very competitive. I believe it is wishful thinking to believe we will be very competitive early in the year. I hope I'm wrong but, I'm trying to manage my expectations so I'm not disappointed.

HJam72
07-22-2007, 09:21 AM
OFFENSE

AJ WR#1, Pitts LG, Weary RG, Winston RT, Schaub QB, Leach FB, Green RB

That's 7 out of 11, and, yes, Winston will start (although there's an off chance it could be at LT--not RG).

DEFENSE

Weaver LDE (Babin is for obvious passing situations), Maddux DT, Williams RDE, Greenwood OLB, Ryans MLB, D-Rob CB #1, Earl SS.

That also is 7 out of 11. It would be 8, if I just gave Okoye a little credit.

I really don't see a lot of the confusion that you're talking about. Yes, we have positions that are definitely in need of someone stepping up, but I think it's more than just 2 or 3 guys on each side of the ball who are at least mediocre.

Take Maddux for instance. The guy can stuff the run. He's a DT. Unless you're looking for a future super star (like Akoye), what more can you ask? The guy does his job and stuffs the run. He's a starter. Greenwood is another one. OK, he's not worth the money we pay him; but, it's not like he's chickenfeed out there. He does alright. We can't expect to have a star at every position. Earl and CC are both good SSs. Earl is the more experienced and probably the better of the two at that one position. I think most agree with that assessment. OK, Earl's not a star SS; but, he is starter material. Not only that, but he is better than CC, who is also starter material; but, not at freaking FS (I can't say this enough). Who is our FS? Who is our #2 corner? Well, those are some of the ones that we really don't have a definite answer for, but they are not the whole team.

TK_Gamer
07-22-2007, 03:37 PM
In my oppinion our secondary is the worst by far talent wise, I would rate all but D-Rob as 2nd tier talent, why? they lack the consistent strong fundamentals to perform at the pro-level, either they can't tackle or they get beat repeatedly in coverage, and no I'm not gonna blame most of that on lack of pressure by the front seven. the front seven has it's own problems but when you are one on one and get beat over 50% of the time, its your fault. I do think a better pass rush will help produce turnovers, but under all the stats the DB's dont really get better, they just capitalize on chaos. I'll take that any day, but when it's all said and done our guys will only be as good as they are. I cant say anything about the new guys......cuz there new. I have high hopes though

Texanmike02
07-22-2007, 05:37 PM
We can't expect to have a star at every position. Earl and CC are both good SSs. Earl is the more experienced and probably the better of the two at that one position. I think most agree with that assessment. OK, Earl's not a star SS; but, he is starter material. Not only that, but he is better than CC, who is also starter material; but, not at freaking FS (I can't say this enough). Who is our FS? Who is our #2 corner? Well, those are some of the ones that we really don't have a definite answer for, but they are not the whole team.

I think you're suffering from Matt Stevensitis still man. I wanted Earl and CC to be good players. CC's story is especially compelling. They aren't. Who in the league do they start over?

Questions:
LT
WR2
WR3
C
LG
LDE
LDT
LOLB
CB2
FS
SS

we're either not sure of who's starting, or the quality of who's penciled in at any of those positions.

Mike

HJam72
07-22-2007, 07:10 PM
Questions:
LT--OK
WR2--OK
WR3--This position doesn't even count as a starter to me.
C--OK, but McKinney didn't exactly stink late last year.
LG--Chester Pitts? You don't think Chester Pitts is starter material?
LDE--Weaver is sure to take this. He may not be Freeney, but he's a starter.
LDT--OK. I believe this is Okoye's position. Rick smith spent a #10 on him.
LOLB--Greenwood? I'll give you this, because I expected ROLB, which IS a ?
CB2--OK
FS--OK
SS--We have two of them. Which ever one plays FS always makes the other look bad. We don't need any more SSs; but, yeah, FS is a huge ?

I'm sorry, but I just don't think things are as bad as all that. I think we've reached mediocrity....or maybe a little better.

Texanmike02
07-22-2007, 07:30 PM
Questions:
LT--OK
WR2--OK
WR3--This position doesn't even count as a starter to me.
OK I'll give you that scratch that from the list.
C--OK, but McKinney didn't exactly stink late last year.
Mckinney is a solid guard but I hate watching him at center
LG--Chester Pitts? You don't think Chester Pitts is starter material?
I love Pitts as a starter at LG, problem is he may wind up back at LT.
LDE--Weaver is sure to take this. He may not be Freeney, but he's a starter.
You're right, I actually do like Weaver. This should probably be RDT instead. The reality is we have questions about half of our DL.
LDT--OK. I believe this is Okoye's position. Rick smith spent a #10 on him.
You don't have questions about his abilities in his first season?
LOLB--Greenwood? I'll give you this, because I expected ROLB, which IS a ?
You're right it should be ROLB
CB2--OK
FS--OK
SS--We have two of them. Which ever one plays FS always makes the other look bad. We don't need any more SSs; but, yeah, FS is a huge ?

I'm sorry, but I just don't think things are as bad as all that. I think we've reached mediocrity....or maybe a little better.
I agree. I think some of the questions will be answered. In the NFC mediocre teams can go 9-7. In the AFC they tend to go for 6 to 7 or maybe 8 wins.
Mike

HJam72
07-22-2007, 07:42 PM
I suppose McKinney at Center could be a problem, and Flanagan was dissapointing last year. I'm hoping that the way McKinney looked late last year is a sign of the future; but, I do have to admit that I said many times in the past that I never wanted to see McKinney at Center again. I was really surprised when he replaced Flanagan late last year and did well, but maybe he's still getting better at it. Wonder if Leach had anything to do with that.

HJam72
07-22-2007, 07:45 PM
Oh....on Okoye, yeah I do have some questions on him starting as a 20 year old rookie. That's one of my "OK"s, but I do have faith in Smith's talent evaluation, at least as far as Okoye being great some day.

The Pencil Neck
07-22-2007, 08:55 PM
I think you're suffering from Matt Stevensitis still man. I wanted Earl and CC to be good players. CC's story is especially compelling. They aren't. Who in the league do they start over?

Questions:
LT
WR2
WR3
C
LG
LDE
LDT
LOLB
CB2
FS
SS

we're either not sure of who's starting, or the quality of who's penciled in at any of those positions.


I think we're definitely set for WR3.

At the C, the question is the durability of the players.

Why do we have a question at LG?

LDE is Weaver. The DT opposite Amobi is going to be Maddox.

Don't know who the LOLB is going to be but whoever ends up there is going to be better than who we had.

CB2 is going to be open to competition and the competition is going to be fiercer than last year. I think we start off with Pete and then end the season with Bennett.

I think we are all kinds of set at SS.

Texanmike02
07-23-2007, 12:17 AM
I think we're definitely set for WR3.

At the C, the question is the durability of the players.

Why do we have a question at LG?

LDE is Weaver. The DT opposite Amobi is going to be Maddox.

Don't know who the LOLB is going to be but whoever ends up there is going to be better than who we had.

CB2 is going to be open to competition and the competition is going to be fiercer than last year. I think we start off with Pete and then end the season with Bennett.

I think we are all kinds of set at SS.
I question LG because I have this sneaking suspicion that when Spencer isn't ready we wind up with Pitts at LT which opens LG.

Is Maddox really a starting quality DT?

If Pete wins CB2 then how is it better competition than it was last year. I mean maybe Bennett is better competition to him, but apparently it the competition hasn't done anything to the overall quality of the position.

Well I guess set at SS depends on your definition. When your starting SS "wins his job" because he's the worst of the two at FS I don't know that's what I call set.

Mike

The Pencil Neck
07-23-2007, 12:53 AM
I question LG because I have this sneaking suspicion that when Spencer isn't ready we wind up with Pitts at LT which opens LG.

Is Maddox really a starting quality DT?

If Pete wins CB2 then how is it better competition than it was last year. I mean maybe Bennett is better competition to him, but apparently it the competition hasn't done anything to the overall quality of the position.

Well I guess set at SS depends on your definition. When your starting SS "wins his job" because he's the worst of the two at FS I don't know that's what I call set.

Mike

LG -> Don't burn the bridge until we get there. It's not a problem until it's a problem and it's not a problem, yet.

DT -> I didn't think he played poorly. He got better as the season went on. I don't have a problem with him at DT.

CB2 -> Petey gets dogged a lot and I'd even prefer that we have someone better over there and have Petey play nickel but... I think there's a good chance he loses his job this year either to Fletcher or to Bennet. Either way, he's going to get pushed more from this group more than he did from P-Buch last year.

SS -> I don't know. You look at it that we've got two free safeties and the worst of those plays strong safety. I look at it like we've got two decent strong safeties and the worst of those plays free safety. I don't have a problem with Glenn Earl at strong safety. Now, FS, THAT I have problem with and really expected more to be done to fix that this offseason.

DocBar
07-23-2007, 08:51 AM
Statistically speaking, the Texans are UNDEFEATED when leading after 4 quarters!!! :cool: