PDA

View Full Version : O-line


Insideop
08-01-2007, 09:11 PM
OK, who do you think will be our starters on the O-line, and who, on the O-line, do you think will make the team or be put on the Practice Squad?

I have not been to any of the practices so here are my choices based on what I've been reading and hearing:

LT Salaam Black

LG Pitts Studdard

C McKinney Flanagan

RG Weary

RT Winston Frye

LS Pittman

PUP Spencer

PS Chris White (Center)
Brisiel (Guard) or Jackson (Guard)

Not sure who gets cut when/if Spencer comes back this season. It's too early to tell. Also, I have not heard much about Frye and how he is doing at camp. Anybody know how he's doing?

As for the Center position, I heard McKinney is doing real well, but it is a battle between him and Flanagan to see who starts. Also heard White has looked really good, but I just don't know if he will make the team unless McKinney or Flanagan "go down" which is a distinct possibility. He will probably end up on the PS for now. JMHO!

real
08-01-2007, 09:38 PM
Maybe my memory is wrong, but didn't we carry Winston on the inactive list for a while last season ? Were we able to do that because he was a draft pick ?

Would we be able to put someone on an incactive list if Spencer comes back ?

*sigh* unfortuantely I do not understand the complexities of roster spots in the NFL....

Runner
08-01-2007, 10:25 PM
Maybe my memory is wrong, but didn't we carry Winston on the inactive list for a while last season ? Were we able to do that because he was a draft pick ?

Would we be able to put someone on an incactive list if Spencer comes back ?

*sigh* unfortuantely I do not understand the complexities of roster spots in the NFL....

He was inactive last year in that he didn't suit up for some games; he still counted against the 53 man roster. Teams dress 46 players plus the emergency QB for a total of 47 each game. Any person on the roster can be inactive.


edit: or 45/46 per Lucky's post. I wasn't sure about the exact numbers.

Lucky
08-01-2007, 10:34 PM
Maybe my memory is wrong, but didn't we carry Winston on the inactive list for a while last season ?
Winston was on the roster all season, but he didn't dress for all 16 games. 53 players are on the roster, but only 45 dress on gameday.

Here's my recollection of how the o-line currently shakes out (though there's some mix and match during practice):

LT - Salaam, Black, Frye (when he was healthy)
LG - Pitts, Studdard, Hodgdon
C - Flanagan, McKinney, White
RG - Weary, Brisiel, Jackson
RT - Winston, Barry, Jackson

McKinney and Black will be the primary backups, as Steve can play all of the interior positions and Black can play both tackle spots. If McKinney beats Flanagan for the starting spot, would Flanagan even make the final roster? The Texans might opt to keep younger and more versatile players like Hodgdon, White, or Jackson (who played center in Tampa and at BYU).

Matt
08-02-2007, 06:40 AM
Hogdgon is awful, though. Not saying they wouldn't want to keep some younger guys, but I don't think Hog is one of them.

maddogmrb
08-02-2007, 07:39 AM
Winston was on the roster all season, but he didn't dress for all 16 games. 53 players are on the roster, but only 45 dress on gameday.

Here's my recollection of how the o-line currently shakes out (though there's some mix and match during practice):

LT - Salaam, Black, Frye (when he was healthy)
LG - Pitts, Studdard, Hodgdon
C - Flanagan, McKinney, White
RG - Weary, Brisiel, Jackson
RT - Winston, Barry, Jackson

McKinney and Black will be the primary backups, as Steve can play all of the interior positions and Black can play both tackle spots. If McKinney beats Flanagan for the starting spot, would Flanagan even make the final roster? The Texans might opt to keep younger and more versatile players like Hodgdon, White, or Jackson (who played center in Tampa and at BYU).

Being essentially the same mediocre (at best) line as last year has really kept me from having alot of optimism about this team. As I posted last year, even Peyton and Brady become very mediocre QB's when the pash rush is on top of them b4 they have time to set up and read the defense. Obviously, they have excellent lines that most of the time provide them with GREAT protection allowing them to set up, read the defense, and then execute. If Schaub is having to execute BEFORE having time to set up and read the defense it is going to be a long year for him. On the brighter side, natural grass is a healthy food supplement and Schaub isn't likely to have constipation problems.

Here's how the progression works for Peyton and Brady:
1001 accept snap and start back.
1002 fall back and read
1003 fall back and read
1004 read/execute
1005 read/execute
1006 execute
1007-1010 watch play develop without ever being touched

Here's how the Texans progression has worked:
10001 accept snap and start back.
10002 avoid 1st rusher
10003 attempt to fall back and avoid 2nd rush
10004 sacked or forced to execute without set and read
10005 either sacked or knocked to ground after execution
10006-1010 eat natural grass and wonder if play made it to LOS or not


Truthfully, our oline improved towards the end of last year but, still has a long ways to go because, as one article expressed, we probably don't have a single lineman who would start on another NFL team. I'm hoping that somehow the youngsters step up their games to become a factor and/or the oldsters somehow generate new abilities that they haven't shown heretofor.

HJam72
08-02-2007, 07:52 AM
Oh, come on.

Pitts, Weary, and probably Winston (now) could start on another team. Besides that, McKinney played like a legitimate starting center when he had the chance late last season. Let's not act like the whole line is nothing but 3rd stringers.

When we make the argument that a bad line can make any QB look bad, we need to remember that David Carr was our QB and it works the other way too. Good QBs can make an O-line look better as well.

The truth is that over the years our line AND our QB AND our receiving corps have been sub-par. It's not any one area, but the line is gradually getting better and the QB is now replaced. You can't just say, "Fix the O-line! Fix the O-line!" The O-line is not one player that you just draft in the 1st round and all is well. It takes 5 starters and several good back-ups. You can't create a stud O-line in just an off-season or two. That's why replacing the QB makes a bigger difference in one off-season (if he is indeed worth the price we paid).

Texans Horror
08-02-2007, 08:31 AM
Here's my angle on the o-line: the Texans have a great supporting cast, but the major pillars are faulty and sub-par. The Texans are finally getting some decent depth on the line, fueled through offseason acquisitions like Black and four draft picks in the last two years. The "supporting cast" on the line - the two guards and the right tackle - are also good and getting better. Winston will improve over the course of the year, though he is going to need a bit more of a learning curve. Pitts is a consistent guard, and Weary is evolving into one. All great. All wonderful, and glad to have it.

Then come those pillars. The anchors. Whatever you want to call them. Left Tackle and Center. The players at these two positions are supposed to be the leadership and the talent on the front line. You want your two best, fastest, strongest, and smartest linemen playing Center and Left Tackle. In Houston, these are the two weakest positions on the line. I don't buy into Salaam being able to hold his position. I don't buy that Salaam or Flanagan can stay healthy for 17 weeks. I don't think any of these guys: Flanagan, McKinney, Black, or Salaam - provide true leadership on the line.

This is why I think the left tackle and center needs to be upgraded, and why I believe that until it is, the line will remain porous and inept.

nunusguy
08-02-2007, 08:57 AM
Also, I have not heard much about Frye and how he is doing at camp. Anybody know how he's doing?


Twisted or sprained an ankle the first couple days of camp and as a result has not been on the field for the last several days. Kubiak specifically mentioned his absense in the last day or 2 in a TC report and said he was anxious to get him back out there so they could get a look-see at what they have in him.

HJam72
08-02-2007, 09:38 AM
Here's my angle on the o-line: the Texans have a great supporting cast, but the major pillars are faulty and sub-par. The Texans are finally getting some decent depth on the line, fueled through offseason acquisitions like Black and four draft picks in the last two years. The "supporting cast" on the line - the two guards and the right tackle - are also good and getting better. Winston will improve over the course of the year, though he is going to need a bit more of a learning curve. Pitts is a consistent guard, and Weary is evolving into one. All great. All wonderful, and glad to have it.

Then come those pillars. The anchors. Whatever you want to call them. Left Tackle and Center. The players at these two positions are supposed to be the leadership and the talent on the front line. You want your two best, fastest, strongest, and smartest linemen playing Center and Left Tackle. In Houston, these are the two weakest positions on the line. I don't buy into Salaam being able to hold his position. I don't buy that Salaam or Flanagan can stay healthy for 17 weeks. I don't think any of these guys: Flanagan, McKinney, Black, or Salaam - provide true leadership on the line.

This is why I think the left tackle and center needs to be upgraded, and why I believe that until it is, the line will remain porous and inept.

That porous and inept line did about average last year. Nobody's saying we're Superbowl ready. What we are saying is that we have reached the point that we should win more than we lose. Salaam won't stay healthy all season (heck he played hurt all last year), Green might very well not, etc., etc., but we got nothing from Green last year because he wasn't even on our team. You can point out our every flaw, but the fact still remains that we won 6 games last year with less than we have this year. Now, I know that you are trying to focus on the O-line here, but it's the same thing. That porous, crappy O-line has always run-blocked well, and they finished the season pass-blocking at about an average level last year.

One other thing is this l-e-a-d-e-r stuff is a bunch of *(&(*&(*&(. Even David Carr's problem wasn't not being a leader--it was all that other crud he was doing wrong. AJ isn't a l-e-a-d-e-r and neither is Ryans. Anybody who says they lead by example apparently thinks everybody in the world who is good at something is a leader. That's bullhockey. If you want a leader, get some loud-mouthed (smart or not) coach to go play LT or center, and see how well he does. We need players. Leaders are for the coaching staff.

gtexan02
08-02-2007, 09:43 AM
Being essentially the same mediocre (at best) line as last year has really kept me from having alot of optimism about this team. As I posted last year, even Peyton and Brady become very mediocre QB's when the pash rush is on top of them b4 they have time to set up and read the defense. Obviously, they have excellent lines that most of the time provide them with GREAT protection allowing them to set up, read the defense, and then execute. If Schaub is having to execute BEFORE having time to set up and read the defense it is going to be a long year for him. On the brighter side, natural grass is a healthy food supplement and Schaub isn't likely to have constipation problems.

Here's how the progression works for Peyton and Brady:
1001 accept snap and start back.
1002 fall back and read
1003 fall back and read
1004 read/execute
1005 read/execute
1006 execute
1007-1010 watch play develop without ever being touched

Here's how the Texans progression has worked:
10001 accept snap and start back.
10002 avoid 1st rusher
10003 attempt to fall back and avoid 2nd rush
10004 sacked or forced to execute without set and read
10005 either sacked or knocked to ground after execution
10006-1010 eat natural grass and wonder if play made it to LOS or not


Truthfully, our oline improved towards the end of last year but, still has a long ways to go because, as one article expressed, we probably don't have a single lineman who would start on another NFL team. I'm hoping that somehow the youngsters step up their games to become a factor and/or the oldsters somehow generate new abilities that they haven't shown heretofor.

The average amount of time an NFL QB has to make a decision is about 3 seconds. Not 7

HJam72
08-02-2007, 09:53 AM
Sorry if I came off like an insulting jerk in that last post of mine. I was trying to make a point or two and sometimes a get a little too worked up, usually not even paying attention to whomever I'm responding too. Don't take it personally or anything.

Texans Horror
08-02-2007, 10:27 AM
That porous and inept line did about average last year.

That average line was anything but. The offense had to work around them. Carr was reducing his steps and zinging passes to keep from being throttled. The running game was atrocious until the backs changed their play to accomodate a porous o-line. The entire offense seemed schemed to make up for a lacking from the offensive linemen.

Nobody's saying we're Superbowl ready. What we are saying is that we have reached the point that we should win more than we lose. Salaam won't stay healthy all season (heck he played hurt all last year), Green might very well not, etc., etc., but we got nothing from Green last year because he wasn't even on our team. You can point out our every flaw, but the fact still remains that we won 6 games last year with less than we have this year. Now, I know that you are trying to focus on the O-line here, but it's the same thing. That porous, crappy O-line has always run-blocked well, and they finished the season pass-blocking at about an average level last year.

They did horrible run-blocking last year. It wasn't until Dayne decided to start shoveling defensive linemen and making his own holes that the run game improved. And they couldn't pass block, either. So the only improvement I saw last year was a step back because the line used to could run-block decently.

I don't see a huge modification to the offensive line between last year and this year. This year, depth has been added. But that still doesn't fix the holes at the key positions of left tackle and center. In a best world, Salaam not only stays healthy, but greatly improves over the quality of play he gave last year, and McKinney/Flanagan bolster their position/stay healthy - depending on who you have starting.

Sorry if I came off like an insulting jerk in that last post of mine. I was trying to make a point or two and sometimes a get a little too worked up, usually not even paying attention to whomever I'm responding too. Don't take it personally or anything.

Take it personally? I don't even know you!:joker: Now, if you wanted to argue some Lovecraft or Robert Howard, that'd be different.... In the meantime, it's all just good football talk!

Goldensilence
08-02-2007, 02:20 PM
I think the woe is our offensive line bit is getting a bit old at this point. No one is saying they'll allow 72 sacks again or we'll allow only 20. They're about Average and this year we'll find out if its the old chicken or egg arguement between the camps. I am Partial to Hjam when speaking about the pieces as a whole weren't up to par offensively period. Despite everything we did win 6 games last year and frankly we should've won at least two of those barring Cook fumbles. That should say something about the coaching staff we have in place.

Say what you want about Salaam but he held up better then most of us thought and had doomsday projections when Spencer went down. Weary and Pitts while not pro bowl caliber guards are solid and that's what we need them to be. Winston came in last year and while on a learning curve showed enough to take over the starting job and has it going into the season. He should be fully healed with a season under his belt from the surgery and i expect him to solidfy the right side of our line along with Weary. I'm pulling fora healthy Flannigan winning the job at center b/c much as i hate to admit it McKinney gives us flexibility as a backup. I think some people also underestimate the benefit of being together for a solid amount of time and allowing cohession as a UNIT.

We need to be careful to shy away from starting anyone past 30 or approaching that bad age around here. That what killed us under the Capers era no veterans around and rushing young players into the fold and expecting them to exceed in complete adverse conditions. We have some cultural myth that everyone being branded by fire makes for better. What we're seeing in the NFL now(at least current successful teams) is a coaching staff that puts guys in the best position to succeed. That's something Billichek is so good at that people don't understand. That's something Mangini did well last year...becasue pre-season if you had told me that team makes the playoffs i would've laughed in your face. Kubiak seems to be following that idea and it'll progress in his second year.

Also wanted to add we've got Leach secured in the fold and this Abbate kid really seems to be impressing the coaching staff. Harp on green all you want about his age and hitting the black ball 30 here. He did well enough last year post major knee surgery behind a wall of rookies in front of him. He can also pick up the blitz and Owen Daniels is a solid enough blocker.

Seriously, henny pennys.

Texans Horror
08-02-2007, 03:02 PM
We need to be careful to shy away from starting anyone past 30 or approaching that bad age around here. That what killed us under the Capers era no veterans around and rushing young players into the fold and expecting them to exceed in complete adverse conditions.

I want to bounce off this because I remember not so long ago when the excuse was that the line was young and had not played together for very long. So I looked up the ages of our o-line.

Salaam - 31
Pitts - 28
Flanagan - 33/McKinney - 31 (both will be one year older before the start of the season)
Weary - 30
Winston - 24

I have no idea how this compares to other lines, but I was surprised with the age of our line. This is not a young rookie line. If these guys are the starting line, they will all have played at least part of the year together last year. Only Winston did not play most of the year at his position.

Also wanted to add we've got Leach secured in the fold and this Abbate kid really seems to be impressing the coaching staff. Harp on green all you want about his age and hitting the black ball 30 here. He did well enough last year post major knee surgery behind a wall of rookies in front of him. He can also pick up the blitz and Owen Daniels is a solid enough blocker.


IIRC, Green is also known for his blocking skills. (At least, he prides himself on his blocking skills.) Hopefully that will help, too.

Runner
08-02-2007, 05:31 PM
That porous, crappy O-line has always run-blocked well, and they finished the season pass-blocking at about an average level last year.


They were almost average pass blocking for a simplistic passing offense that relied on two step drops. They would have been far below average if they had blocked for a normal pro offense that incorporated five and seven step drops. Whether the fault of the simple offense was Carr, the pass protection, or both, it still hid the o-line's problems as much as Carr's.

The Pencil Neck
08-02-2007, 06:56 PM
They were almost average pass blocking for a simplistic passing offense that relied on two step drops. They would have been far below average if they had blocked for a normal pro offense that incorporated five and seven step drops. Whether the fault of the simple offense was Carr, the pass protection, or both, it still hid the o-line's problems as much as Carr's.

You make it sound like we never used 5 and 7 step drops when we did.
And Carr didn't get sacked every time we used them. I don't think he even got sacked most times we used them.

TK_Gamer
08-02-2007, 07:12 PM
I want to bounce off this because I remember not so long ago when the excuse was that the line was young and had not played together for very long. So I looked up the ages of our o-line.

Salaam - 31
Pitts - 28
Flanagan - 33/McKinney - 31 (both will be one year older before the start of the season)
Weary - 30
Winston - 24

I have no idea how this compares to other lines, but I was surprised with the age of our line. This is not a young rookie line. If these guys are the starting line, they will all have played at least part of the year together last year. Only Winston did not play most of the year at his position.




IIRC, Green is also known for his blocking skills. (At least, he prides himself on his blocking skills.) Hopefully that will help, too.

From what I've gathered the average NFL offensive line is around 31 years old, wich according to the present starters, a tad older than our line. Keep in mind though, 1. Spencer is our true starting LT wich would lower our average age quite a bit, and 2. we have never drafted a starter caliber Center. White looks like he may compete for the starting spot some time this season and that would also lower our average age quite a bit. So we basicly still have a young line by league standards, but we have average skill veterans filling holes that we have guys injured , or just plain dont have a true starter. I think the fact that we have guys filling in almost constantly due to injury is holding back the true potential of our line. I think that willl change late in the year, and hopefully next year we start the season with alot more continuity. As far as this year, I think we just do the best we can and see what happens.

Koolaid Time
08-02-2007, 08:04 PM
You make it sound like we never used 5 and 7 step drops when we did.
And Carr didn't get sacked every time we used them. I don't think he even got sacked most times we used them.

Stats wise, how many of Carr's sacks last year were based upon him running out of bounds short of the line of scrimmage?

the wonger need food
08-02-2007, 08:33 PM
Here's how the Texans progression has worked:
10001 accept snap and start back.
10002 avoid 1st rusher
10003 attempt to fall back and avoid 2nd rush
10004 sacked or forced to execute without set and read
10005 either sacked or knocked to ground after execution
10006-1010 eat natural grass and wonder if play made it to LOS or not

In reality it has worked like this:

1001 accept snap from under center because you're not bright enough to take eye off of ball
1002 lock onto primary receiver
1003 look for safety valve receiver if primary receiver is not open
1004 run sideways into defender or toward sideline
1005 run out of bounds or curl into fetal position
1006 get up and throw arms up into the air blaming everyone else for failures

the wonger need food
08-02-2007, 08:44 PM
That average line was anything but. The offense had to work around them. Carr was reducing his steps and zinging passes to keep from being throttled. The running game was atrocious until the backs changed their play to accomodate a porous o-line. The entire offense seemed schemed to make up for a lacking from the offensive linemen.

They did horrible run-blocking last year. It wasn't until Dayne decided to start shoveling defensive linemen and making his own holes that the run game improved. And they couldn't pass block, either. So the only improvement I saw last year was a step back because the line used to could run-block decently.

Wrong, wrong and wrong. The offense was forced to work around Carr's incompetence. The run blocking was horrible because defenses were keeping 8 defenders close to the LOS because Carr could not complete a pass downfield. When defenses don't have to worry about the QB making a play it makes the run very easy to defend. The offensive line adjusted and started overpowering people vs. trying play-action when it was obvious that the QB was completely ineffective.

Runner
08-02-2007, 08:45 PM
You make it sound like we never used 5 and 7 step drops when we did.
And Carr didn't get sacked every time we used them. I don't think he even got sacked most times we used them.

They rarely used them at the end of last season when the line was so "improved". The offense was heavily tilted toward two yard passes to Andre - at least that was what most posters on the board were complaining about at the time.

They did deeper drops in previous years though. In 2004 they used them quite a bit in Palmer's offense. Ironically, the team's best year.

If success for a line is "the quarterback didn't get sacked every time (or even most times) they used a five or seven step drop I guess I agree. The Texans o-line was very successful. I'd like the criteria for success to be a little higher though.

Runner
08-02-2007, 08:57 PM
Wrong, wrong and wrong. The offense was forced to work around Carr's incompetence. The run blocking was horrible because defenses were keeping 8 defenders close to the LOS because Carr could not complete a pass downfield. When defenses don't have to worry about the QB making a play it makes the run very easy to defend. The offensive line adjusted and started overpowering people vs. trying play-action when it was obvious that the QB was completely ineffective.

I agree in part - the running game was severely hindered by the lack of a passing game. I also agree the line can do a good job at run blocking.

I do question the pass protection though, especially at left tackle and center. I'd also like to see more of Weary in a high octane offense, and Winston needs to continue to improve - he looked like the rookie he was last year.

Finally, I would like to see Pitts go beyond being "the best lineman on the team" and find something within himself to make his teammates better. If there is an area where the team needs leadership, it is the o-line.


I can't believe I just seriously used that over-used intangible: Leadership.

tsip
08-02-2007, 09:39 PM
Though we had a rough first part of '06, some of you obviously didn't know the entire team improved the last 10 games except for our qb.

We had 24 sacks the last 10 games vs 17 the first 6. We had 9 tds the first 6 games and a 'whopping' 2 tds passing the last 10. Our rushing #'s/tds were better and our defense was better. We avg about 153 passing yds the last 10 games, a little over 200 the first 6.

But, though the entire team played much better the last 10 games, here are some of you ragging on the OL and not the poor perormance of DC.

The bottom line is that some of you will never acknowledge any improvement by the OL and any 'good' play by our new qb--though, as many of us know already, you will knock Schaub for every little thing you can....use to be sad, now it's just a bad joke...

Insideop
08-02-2007, 10:11 PM
That average line was anything but. The offense had to work around them. Carr was reducing his steps and zinging passes to keep from being throttled. The running game was atrocious until the backs changed their play to accomodate a porous o-line. The entire offense seemed schemed to make up for a lacking from the offensive linemen.



They did horrible run-blocking last year. It wasn't until Dayne decided to start shoveling defensive linemen and making his own holes that the run game improved. And they couldn't pass block, either. So the only improvement I saw last year was a step back because the line used to could run-block decently.


I don't think these 2 paragraphs are very accurate, especially the statements in "bold" letters. I don't think Dayne, or any other back, made their own holes. The one that is getting the most credit, from coaches and others, for the running game improving during the 2nd half of the season is Leach. That's why they matched his free agent offer during the off season. They know how valuable he is to the team.

Also, the sack total dropped from 65 in 2005 to 43 in 2006. That's quite an improvement for a team who lost their starting LT, Center, and RT during the season. Look, I'm not going to sit here and tell you that we have a great O-line, but I do think they will improve this year. And, as Kubes and Smith are able to add more pieces in the coming years, I think you will see a very good line. It just takes time to build an O-line that can come together and play well as a unit. I don't think Indy built theirs overnight! JMHO! :texflag:

Runner
08-02-2007, 10:14 PM
Though we had a rough first part of '06, some of you obviously didn't know the entire team improved the last 10 games except for our qb.
...
But, though the entire team played much better the last 10 games, here are some of you ragging on the OL and not the poor perormance of DC.



Yep - some of us aren't too bright. I actually think there was more than one player who didn't perform well the past few years. I don't know why I have dumb thoughts like that.

Then again, maybe I'm having complex thoughts - I actually evaluate the whole team rather than one guy.

I don't defend Carr; I also don't wear rose colored glasses now that he is gone. There are still legitimate weaknesess on this team. That's right - the Texans aren't perfect, even with Schaub here.

================================================== =

I don't know how to answer the statement that seems to say "rag on Carr and no one else". I thought there was enough of that around here. The thread is titled "O-line" so that's what I was addressing.

================================================== =

I think the Texans will have a strong defense, a reliable to very strong running game, and a suspect passing game.

Runner
08-02-2007, 10:18 PM
And, as Kubes and Smith are able to add more pieces in the coming years, I think you will see a very good line.

More pieces? Like a center and a tackle?

Insideop
08-02-2007, 10:42 PM
More pieces? Like a center and a tackle?

That would be my choices! :shades:

Kaiser Toro
08-02-2007, 10:50 PM
I have always been a "get the Offensive Line more help rather than a get Carr more help" type guy. The Oline will be exposed this year, but in my opinion the system, via the Schaub conduit, will allow our offense to maximize their opportunities. Carr and the passing game yielded no second hand goodness and provided no spark. This line is average on a good day and in this system it has been proven that an average QB, which we did not have in Houston, can perform admirably.

Moving forward it is no secret that we must address Center and LT next year. In the interim you have your head in your arse to think we can get worse in the passing game this year, because you certainly have not been watching Texans games for the last five years.

This ain't your caddy's team, but it sure does smell a lot better. :texflag:

Runner
08-02-2007, 10:50 PM
That would be my choices! :shades:

I thought we got to the same spot through different paths.

Runner
08-02-2007, 11:01 PM
In the interim you have your head in your arse to think we can get worse in the passing game this year, because you certainly have not been watching Texans games for the last five years.


Didn't say they'd have a worse passing game than last year. Said the pass protection is still a problem.

The passing game will improve due to Schaub, Leach, Green, and (expected) improvements from Daniels and Winston.

I also expect the coaches to implement a better o-line scheme that doesn't leave the right end unblocked after a basic stunt. :)

=============================

I just can't believe the Texans are strong at every position on offense, every phase of the game.

The Pencil Neck
08-02-2007, 11:33 PM
They rarely used them at the end of last season when the line was so "improved". The offense was heavily tilted toward two yard passes to Andre - at least that was what most posters on the board were complaining about at the time.

They did deeper drops in previous years though. In 2004 they used them quite a bit in Palmer's offense. Ironically, the team's best year.

If success for a line is "the quarterback didn't get sacked every time (or even most times) they used a five or seven step drop I guess I agree. The Texans o-line was very successful. I'd like the criteria for success to be a little higher though.

I think you're just misremembering.

Now... granted... I only have the last Colts game recorded now, but I went back through that game and I tallied up the different types of drops and here's what I got.

1-2 steps - 2 - 9%
3 steps - 2 - 9%
5 steps - 10 - 43%
7 steps - 5 - 22%
Bootleg - 4 - 17%

I saw two pass plays that didn't end up as sacks but where the offensive line crumbled. One was on a 5 step drop on a screen where Freeney got through untouched and Carr was able to at least get the ball to the ground. And the other was on a 7 step drop where Carr got hit making the throw but it was an 11 yard completion to Walter.

This is not the "2-3 steps and sling it on every pass play before the defense gets to you" offense that you've been describing. This was mostly a 5 step drop team and we went with a 7 step drop more often than we bootlegged or went for a <5 step drop.

From a statistical standpoint, this was a slightly above average game for Carr: 16/23 for 163 yards and 1TD. I don't have the other games to be able to go through and see if the drop distribution is unusual.

Runner
08-03-2007, 04:14 AM
First of all, kudos on the late night effort to dissect the Indy game.

I think you're just misremembering.



Could be, but you are also looking at one game. Coincidentally the one game that the Texans had their most effective running attack - unless I'm misremembering again and they passed the Colts to death.

Too bad we can't go look at the Raiders games or some of the other stellar offensive performances to see just how great the line is. The Patriots game would also be a good one to watch - the o-line put on a veritable clinic in that one. Focusing on the Colts game last year skews the evaluation of the team, IMO. It was probably the team's best game, so no surprise everyone looked pretty good.

This is not the "2-3 steps and sling it on every pass play before the defense gets to you" offense that you've been describing.

Not my words. I said they ran a simple offense predicated on short drops and passes. You have said the Indy games shows this is wrong. So, I have to ask: did the coaches or did they not simplify the passing offense for Carr? I don't see anyone argue when the statement is made the offense was dumbed down for Carr; the o-line played the same offense.

=============================

So let's see how I got involved with all this "picking on the line":

I do question the pass protection though, especially at left tackle and center. I'd also like to see more of Weary in a high octane offense, and Winston needs to continue to improve - he looked like the rookie he was last year.

Finally, I would like to see Pitts go beyond being "the best lineman on the team" and find something within himself to make his teammates better. If there is an area where the team needs leadership, it is the o-line.


Would this be better:


Pass protection is going to be a strength of the team. With another year under his belt Flanagan is even more of a leader at center, and we all know McKinney can do against the pass rush. At left tackle Salaam has had the entire off-sesson to get past his injuries, and he'll be even more wiley this year. He also shares the strength everyone should look for in a left tackle - he can also play right tackle. Weary is a well proven performer at right guard, and I wouldn't change a thing about Winston this year; I hope he plays just like last year.

Finally Pitts. I want him to concentrate on being the best he can be and not get distracted by the shortcomings of the player on either side of him, if they develop any. The coaches better not bench him again to prove some sort of point about his team attitude, either!


Nope - I'll stick with my original thoughts on the o-line.

The Pencil Neck
08-03-2007, 10:37 AM
First of all, kudos on the late night effort to dissect the Indy game.

Could be, but you are also looking at one game. Coincidentally the one game that the Texans had their most effective running attack - unless I'm misremembering again and they passed the Colts to death.

Too bad we can't go look at the Raiders games or some of the other stellar offensive performances to see just how great the line is. The Patriots game would also be a good one to watch - the o-line put on a veritable clinic in that one. Focusing on the Colts game last year skews the evaluation of the team, IMO. It was probably the team's best game, so no surprise everyone looked pretty good.


Yep, I would have preferred to break down more games but that's the only one I have. In terms of yardage for Carr, it was slightly below his average. The running game was really clicking and that might have freed up the passing game more.




Not my words. I said they ran a simple offense predicated on short drops and passes. You have said the Indy games shows this is wrong. So, I have to ask: did the coaches or did they not simplify the passing offense for Carr? I don't see anyone argue when the statement is made the offense was dumbed down for Carr; the o-line played the same offense.

=============================

So let's see how I got involved with all this "picking on the line":


Would this be better:

Nope - I'll stick with my original thoughts on the o-line.

I was referring to this:

"They were almost average pass blocking for a simplistic passing offense that relied on two step drops. They would have been far below average if they had blocked for a normal pro offense that incorporated five and seven step drops. Whether the fault of the simple offense was Carr, the pass protection, or both, it still hid the o-line's problems as much as Carr's."

I don't much care if you think we need a new center and left tackle. I personally think those are things we need to shore up as well. I don't think Salaam has much left in the tank and I don't think Black is good enough. McKinney and Flanagan are on the downside of their careers and I have no idea what we have with White. However, saying that the line we've got only looks slightly below average because all we run is 2 step drops is just not right. He had time on the 5 and 7 step drops in the Colts game but he rarely took advantage of the time he had. I believe he had time in other games as well. I just can't prove it. :) (The NFLN thing showed that he had time and open receivers on one of his disaster plays against the Raiders. Another one on ESPN showed him having time and open receivers against the Giants.)

Was our offense dumbed down? Yes, I think it was simplified for Carr but I think it also appeared dumbed down even further because of Carr. I think he was only reading his primary receiver and then his emergency dump off receiver and not really going through his progressions. And I think that's why the offense appeared so simplified and why Kubiak got on Carr for leaving yards on the field.

Honoring Earl 34
08-03-2007, 10:46 AM
Was our offense dumbed down? Yes, I think it was simplified for Carr but I think it also appeared dumbed down even further because of Carr. I think he was only reading his primary receiver and then his emergency dump off receiver and not really going through his progressions. And I think that's why the offense appeared so simplified and why Kubiak got on Carr for leaving yards on the field.

Another thing Kubiak told Carr , I'm pretty sure it was against the Colts , was you will not have much time ... get rid of the ball .

Think about a batter going against a pitcher throwing 95 mph and the coach says ... you're going to have to get the bat started early ... the batter goes to the plate flat footed and has a hitch in his swing . He gets the bat around about the same time the ball hits the mitt .... the hitter never adjusts and goes 0 for 4 .

threetoedpete
08-03-2007, 11:12 AM
Yep, I would have preferred to break down more games but that's the only one I have. In terms of yardage for Carr, it was slightly below his average. The running game was really clicking and that might have freed up the passing game more.





I was referring to this:

"They were almost average pass blocking for a simplistic passing offense that relied on two step drops. They would have been far below average if they had blocked for a normal pro offense that incorporated five and seven step drops. Whether the fault of the simple offense was Carr, the pass protection, or both, it still hid the o-line's problems as much as Carr's."

I don't much care if you think we need a new center and left tackle. I personally think those are things we need to shore up as well. I don't think Salaam has much left in the tank and I don't think Black is good enough. McKinney and Flanagan are on the downside of their careers and I have no idea what we have with White. However, saying that the line we've got only looks slightly below average because all we run is 2 step drops is just not right. He had time on the 5 and 7 step drops in the Colts game but he rarely took advantage of the time he had. I believe he had time in other games as well. I just can't prove it. :) (The NFLN thing showed that he had time and open receivers on one of his disaster plays against the Raiders. Another one on ESPN showed him having time and open receivers against the Giants.)

Was our offense dumbed down? Yes, I think it was simplified for Carr but I think it also appeared dumbed down even further because of Carr. I think he was only reading his primary receiver and then his emergency dump off receiver and not really going through his progressions. And I think that's why the offense appeared so simplified and why Kubiak got on Carr for leaving yards on the field.


Well we're fixing to find out. I've had my says on this. Once you're colored like this and you have tunnle vision, there's no going back. What we know for a fact is that they are going to war this year with basically the same group. The same thing is happening as far as Mario is concerned and the sour grapes from the '06 draft. Matt Schaub is a first year guy. We are putting a first year guy behind basically the same group as we had last year. So it isn't going to take very long to get an answer to your questions there PN.

DC was not satin. The o-line guys are on record that they do not like the talk. Walk the walk. That's my solution. The DC monster is not here any more. The fingers won't reach all the way to Carolina this season. Just get out of the gate 2-1. That's the bottom line if we're lookin for 9-7. All I know for sure about DC is that even when he got blasted, he always got up. We've yet to see if we've got the same thing with MS. I don't know and you don't know. All he is is a clean lump of clay. There isn't an argument of whether DC was damaged goods. The argument is over whether or not he is/was the only anchor on our little boat that has been draging over the side the last four years. If Epheran stays healthy, you've got a prety safe bet. If he doesn't PN, you're going to have a very long season. We've got a boat load of RT/gaurds and only one LT for opening day. Ahmen better be a deamond at blocking.

threetoedpete
08-03-2007, 11:39 AM
They were almost average pass blocking for a simplistic passing offense that relied on two step drops. They would have been far below average if they had blocked for a normal pro offense that incorporated five and seven step drops. Whether the fault of the simple offense was Carr, the pass protection, or both, it still hid the o-line's problems as much as Carr's.

Yes I agree. But the venom built up for DC will not allow most to except things as they are. DC was satin. Satin is gone. Therfore we will dominate. It doesn't work like that. They, Sherman, did a remarkable job last year for what they had to work with. The fact of the matter is they caught a couple of teams last year with major guys missing from the line up. The tallent level in those games became equal enough for us to have a fair shot. Go back and look at the injury lists the last six games. So I agree we catch folks with the injury bug and everyone does their job with no mistakes...on any given sunday, we're in the game. But elevating MS into the majic bean status is a mistake as far as I'm concerned. He is a rookie. He is a rookie with a sub par o-line. He is a rookie learning. We're going to have to catch a whole lot of luck to make this thing work. I mean Tarik Glen retiring certainly has brought the colts back down to earth. If Okoye is as good as I think he's going to be, the pressure straight up the middle has always been Manning's monster. So we will see. Ugoh is as raw as they come. No question about his athleticism. But everyone had their way with the guy at the senior bowl week. Our De's ought to have that one circled as " payday"on thier calender. Colts games this year will indeed be a very good barometer as to where we are with the o-line. Corey Simon is gone. Monte Reager is gone.


All of this is like the dominoes stacked up. We have no two. There are a boat load of linebackers on the '08 board who could elevate this team into a top five defensive unit....there are once again few OLT canidates. With no second round pick, they'll have to make another choice in the first round for the seventh year in a row. Over evaluating the tallent on this o-line has been a common thread to this frachise's lack of progress. I can stand it as long as you can. Don't know if I got another twenty years left in me. But I pray for the day they start to take the o-line tallent early in the draft.

Honoring Earl 34
08-03-2007, 09:07 PM
Say matching Carrs QB rating from last year against the New Leadership guy QB rating this year. PM me $$$


How about that Schaub will have more TDs and a higher YPA .

Honoring Earl 34
08-03-2007, 10:12 PM
How about fumbles to . I lost the picture , dang it .

Well unless we're going to count preseason ... I'll wait until the week of the 1st game to make bets .

2006 Houston Texans 16 16 442 302 68.3 2767 6.26 53 11 12 41/240 25 3 82.1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyJUxSH2RP8&mode=related&search=

the wonger need food
08-05-2007, 10:40 AM
Gee, just what is that 3rd number after the games numbers? You see the 68.3 eh, could that be completions percentage


Carr lover, you know better because we've been over this thousands of times. Just about any Texas 5A QB would have the same completion percentage if they threw the same passes.

Vinny
08-05-2007, 10:47 AM
Gee, just what is that 3rd number after the games numbers? You see the 68.3 eh, could that be completions percentage
yeah, Carr was awesome...was a master at the hitch pass. He had the best horizontal passing game in the history of the NFL. He completed nearly 3 of every 4 hitch passes at the line of scrimmage..he was so good, nobody wanted him as a starter even though there was no compensation because he was a FA....that's how awesome he was.

tsip
08-05-2007, 10:49 AM
Gee, just what is that 3rd number after the games numbers? You see the 68.3 eh, could that be completions percentage

...only figure that counts is tds...has any other qb in NFL history that started 70+ games over a 5 yr period avg fewer tds than your boy (11)?...even Harrington has more tds and is still starting!!

...yea, a leader in qb fumbles/batted down balls/low ypa/going out of bounds with the ball behind the line of scrimmage/throwing the ball past the line of scrimmage

...and don't forget fewest victories and most games with negative yds or totals less than 50 yds

..inventor of the squat/fetal position

...lowest ypa for any qb completing over 65% of his passes

...OK, your turn

Honoring Earl 34
08-05-2007, 10:47 PM
68.3 [/B]2767 6.26 ]

OK 68% completions ... thats 302 out of 442 and only 11 for a TD . That means he has hit 2.48% of his attempt for tds .

Runner
08-06-2007, 06:17 AM
I find this o-line topic fascinating.

Honoring Earl 34
08-06-2007, 06:42 AM
I find this o-line topic fascinating.

You're right ... the OL should have caught more td passes . :gun:

tsip
08-06-2007, 01:45 PM
Just because he doesn't totally agree's with you just shows he doesn't have his head in his arse. Now just how do you think that Kubes going to let the new guy call plays or not be hand-cuffed like Carr was last year. Schaubie going into the game and do what Kubes wants. There is a better chance that Schaub will not get Carr's numbers on his QB rating. To say nothing about setting any NFL records like Carr did. But in this one case I think that a bet from me on this could be arranged. Say matching Carrs QB rating from last year against the New Leadership guy QB rating this year. PM me $$$

..how about betting on something that meams a 'little' bit--td passes

...and, you probably know it, when Matt left college in '03 with his degree (what's Carr's degree in?), he had the 2nd highest completion rate in Division 1A history--and,no, your boy who has had 1 good year of football in the last 9 is not #1

http://www.carolinahuddle.com/forum/carolina-panthers/55264-my-tc-thoughts-about-our-offense.html

Insideop
08-06-2007, 01:56 PM
I find this o-line topic fascinating.


Yeah, what was I thinking? I should have known when I started this thread a few days ago that it would turn into another Carr thread. Sorry, my bad! :shades:

Double Barrel
08-06-2007, 02:20 PM
:deadhorse :gun:

Runner
08-07-2007, 04:45 PM
It looks like Lance Zierlein thinks the o-line might have some problems independent of QB too. I guess he didn't get the memo.

I think likes McKinney as a run blocker, but knows we don't have a pass protecting center. He shares some of the Green Bay connection concerns with Flanagan too.


2. Mike Flanagan vs. Steve McKinney - One of the most glaring problems with the Texans for much of the year last year was the play of the interior line and Flanagan was one of the guys who struggled the most. He seemed to have problems with the strength and sometimes quickness of guys who lined up over him. McKinney is stronger at the point of attack and the running game looked much better with McKinney playing center at the end of the year. I always point this out because it is part of football but Flanagan has a history with Mike Sherman and you never know if that will factor into the decision about who will start. Hopefully both guys will play well during the preseason and the Texans will have a hard decision on their hands. I just think that if play on the field determines the starting battle, it will be McKinney.

Lucky
08-07-2007, 05:25 PM
From the Z Report (http://blogs.chron.com/fantasyfootball/):

McKinney is stronger at the point of attack and the running game looked much better with McKinney playing center at the end of the year. I always point this out because it is part of football but Flanagan has a history with Mike Sherman and you never know if that will factor into the decision about who will start. Hopefully both guys will play well during the preseason and the Texans will have a hard decision on their hands. I just think that if play on the field determines the starting battle, it will be McKinney.It's not unrealistic to believe that in a close competition (and it is close) Sherman would go with the player he has more history with. It's also not realistic to believe that Sherman would keep a player on the bench who is clearly superior. And after watching McKinney in a Texans uniform for 5 seasons, I'd opine that Steve is clearly superior to few NFL centers.

You never know when familiarity factors in an opinion. But in the spirit of full disclosure, it should be noted that Zierlein and McKinney shared a radio segment for 5 years on SportsRadio 610.

Specnatz
08-07-2007, 05:31 PM
I thought a lot of people said that Center was and is the weakest part of the Texans O-Line. I could be wrong though.

Runner
08-07-2007, 05:35 PM
I thought a lot of people said that Center was and is the weakest part of the Texans O-Line. I could be wrong though.


That would be admitting a weakness remains on the offense. Let's say "least strongest". :)

Texan_Bill
08-07-2007, 05:36 PM
In all fairness to McKinney, he is a natural guard. At A&M and at Indianapolis he played all his games at guard not center. So its another glaring example of what the C&C factory did with respect to the line...

Honoring Earl 34
08-07-2007, 05:38 PM
It looks like Lance Zierlein thinks the o-line might have some problems independent of QB too. I guess he didn't get the memo.

I think likes McKinney as a run blocker, but knows we don't have a pass protecting center. He shares some of the Green Bay connection concerns with Flanagan too.

I don't believe I've read that it was all the QBs fault . What I think I've read was that if your OL is average at best , then your QB better know what the heck he's doing .

If your QB has good mechanics and is quick with his reads he can make up for his OL somewhat . Therefore a good QB can change a team more than any position ... did I mention that the backups have a higher winning % than the old starter .

Runner
08-07-2007, 05:54 PM
I don't believe I've read that it was all the QBs fault . What I think I've read was that if your OL is average at best , then your QB better know what the heck he's doing .


OK, Ok, everyone. I apologize for my sarcasm. However I often offer my opinion that the o-line has problems. That always gets repsonses of either "don't worry, Carr is gone" or "You are making excuses for Carr" (Carr Lover implied, which I most definitely am not).

I'm just reinforcing the point that the line can be evaluated on its own.

Yes, most people know we need some line upgrades. In the end people usually admit we need a new center, a few less want a better LT too. First we have to go round and round about Carr though. I'm not even talking about him!

Honoring Earl 34
08-07-2007, 06:04 PM
We'll know soon enough about the QB .

What I find interesting is we're moving from Denver's running game to a power running game . I thought running a Denver scheme meant you need smaller quicker guys and it takes some time . I welcome the switch .

maddogmrb
08-07-2007, 08:04 PM
The average amount of time an NFL QB has to make a decision is about 3 seconds. Not 7

Perhaps the "average" is but, the great teams with great QB's consistently get more. Watch the films.

Matt
08-07-2007, 08:10 PM
Perhaps the "average" is but, the great teams with great QB's consistently get more. Watch the films.

Yeah... they might get up to 4. Point is, the original thing about anyone having 7 seconds is just flat dumb.

maddogmrb
08-07-2007, 08:10 PM
I don't defend Carr; I also don't wear rose colored glasses now that he is gone. There are still legitimate weaknesess on this team. That's right - the Texans aren't perfect, even with Schaub here.



Thank you!

Bears 20
Texans 10

maddogmrb
08-07-2007, 08:14 PM
Didn't say they'd have a worse passing game than last year. Said the pass protection is still a problem.

The passing game will improve due to Schaub, Leach, Green, and (expected) improvements from Daniels and Winston.

I also expect the coaches to implement a better o-line scheme that doesn't leave the right end unblocked after a basic stunt. :)

=============================

I just can't believe the Texans are strong at every position on offense, every phase of the game.


Agreed. The point is that almost nothing has been done to shore up one of the worst olines in the NFL and for this team to be consistently average (much less a winner) there are weaknesses that need to be addressed. So far, those weaknesses have not been addressed.

the wonger need food
08-07-2007, 08:19 PM
Perhaps the "average" is but, the great teams with great QB's consistently get more. Watch the films.

Wow... you have access to the NFL films??? Can we get a copy???

the wonger need food
08-07-2007, 08:29 PM
Agreed. The point is that almost nothing has been done to shore up one of the worst olines in the NFL and for this team to be consistently average (much less a winner) there are weaknesses that need to be addressed. So far, those weaknesses have not been addressed.

Not true. The weakest link in the offense was sent packing which in turn will make the line better.

ObsiWan
08-08-2007, 04:38 AM
Perhaps the "average" is but, the great teams with great QB's consistently get more. Watch the films.

No, they don't. Four seconds or more is an anomaly. And QBs usually get that extra second by having enough pocket presense to avoid oncoming rushers. Because, by 3 seconds, they're getting close.

"Great QBs" generally know where they're going with the ball before they take the snap. As they step up to the line, they recognize the defensive alignment, know the situational tendancy of the defense, and have calculated where to go with the ball for the best chance of success - all BEFORE the snap.

And if this "great QB" has an equally smart set of WRs, they have also figured out what route will beat the defense they see.

So, after the snap, its just a matter of when to make the throw. That's determined by how long the WR takes to get to where the "hole" in the defense should be.

Normally, that only takes about 2.5 to 3.5 seconds.

Waiting until a guy gets open, recognizing that fact, and then making the throw only works in Madden. ...or against a really lame pass rush.

Texans Horror
08-08-2007, 08:55 AM
The talent level on the o-line has not been improved. All that has been done is the Texans have added lesser-tier players (e.g., Black). Less sacks last year was a result of a steadily improving ground game (and therefore reduction of the passing game) and an anemic passing game.