PDA

View Full Version : Texans Sign Tyrone Poole


TexanAddict
08-14-2007, 03:23 PM
After trying out three free agent defensive backs after Tuesday's morning practice, the Texans have decided to sign Tyrone Poole.

Poole, 35, is older than Shaun Williams and Raymond Walls, but he had the best workout, according to general manager Rick Smith. Derrick Gibson was scheduled to work out with the others, but he was a no-show.

Poole, 5-8, 190, enters his 13th season. He was a first-round pick by Carolina in 1995, the Panthers' expansion season. He played three years with the Colts, one with the Broncos, three with the Patriots and last season with the Raiders.

Link (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/5053199.html)

Matt
08-14-2007, 03:30 PM
I'm not a fan of this. He's an older version of Von Hutchins (i.e. a converted CB).

Errant Hothy
08-14-2007, 03:41 PM
I'd bet money that the deal is for the vet min., and given Smith's and Kubiak's track record with "street" free agents last year I think they deserve a little lee-way with the signing. As for his age, it's a meh to me. If Aaron Glenn is still playing then why not Poole. I'd be surprised if Poole was the opening day starter, at any position.

The thing that is most surprising is that Gibson was a no show.

Marcus
08-14-2007, 03:44 PM
I'm not a fan of this. He's an older version of Von Hutchins (i.e. a converted CB).

When you're scraping the bottom of the barrel, you might not want to be too picky. At this point of training camp, you're not going to find much else.

Besides, Rick Smith hasn't done too bad of a job finding quality street free agents lately, so cut the man a little slack.

real
08-14-2007, 03:50 PM
We can't afford to have too many old back-ups...

If the young guys are getting all the tick during regular downs, are these old guys going to play special teams ?

We gotta find a balance...

TexanAddict
08-14-2007, 03:54 PM
I hadn't seen this before, but this was reported yesterday by Adam Schefter on nfl.com:

While the Chiefs wait on Johnson and Holmes, they continue fielding inquiries for veteran playmaking safety Greg Wesley. The latest came Monday from the Houston Texans, who lost starter Glenn Earl to a season-ending foot injury.

Wesley, a former third-round pick who started 14 games last season, would be an ideal replacement for the Texans. But Houston is looking in other areas as well. Former Giants and Panthers safety Shaun Williams is scheduled to work out for the Texans this week.
Link (http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/10293976)

I wonder if they might still try to make a deal, even with the signing of Poole. My guess is that the Chiefs asked for more than we were willing to give.

Twitch-Houston
08-14-2007, 03:55 PM
Wasn't he pretty good with the Patriots?

Lucky
08-14-2007, 04:11 PM
Wasn't he pretty good with the Patriots?
Yeah, about 4 years ago. Not so good since then. To my knowledge, he's never played safety, only cornerback. Not sure what Smith & Kubiak are thinking here.

Goldensilence
08-14-2007, 04:19 PM
Pretty suprised about the Gibson no show too. I think Gibson would've been a good stop gap solution for us.

I'm alright with the Poole Signing. At least it gives us a veteran presence back there and it's possible he could start for a nice price.I agree with Tru on beingable to finda good balance between getting some of the younger players some experience but at the same time I'm not so sure about some of the younger guys. I at least want options and that's what it looks like Rick Smith is giving Kubiak.

Dallas_Texan
08-14-2007, 04:19 PM
Yeah, about 4 years ago. Not so good since then. To my knowledge, he's never played safety, only cornerback. Not sure what Smith & Kubiak are thinking here.

Are we talking about Wesley or Poole here?

real
08-14-2007, 04:21 PM
Yeah, about 4 years ago. Not so good since then. To my knowledge, he's never played safety, only cornerback. Not sure what Smith & Kubiak are thinking here.

Maybe they picked up an extra veteran corner with experience so they can move D-Rob to safety...

:shrug:

Lucky
08-14-2007, 04:23 PM
Are we talking about Wesley or Poole here?
Poole. Poole played with the Pats a few years ago. Wesley currently is with the Chiefs.

Matt
08-14-2007, 05:07 PM
We can't afford to have too many old back-ups...

If the young guys are getting all the tick during regular downs, are these old guys going to play special teams ?

We gotta find a balance...

Exactly. I realize that Smithak have had a pretty good track record with the guy off the street, but this is just pointless. This guy is an older, less mobile version of Von Hutchins. We have young safeties in Mitchell/Harrison that could get some burn at FS with Simmons if need be.

Errant Hothy
08-14-2007, 05:22 PM
Exactly. I realize that Smithak have had a pretty good track record with the guy off the street, but this is just pointless. This guy is an older, less mobile version of Von Hutchins. We have young safeties in Mitchell/Harrison that could get some burn at FS with Simmons if need be.

If Mitchell and Harrison are good enough to see the feild as starters during the regular season, then they shold have no problems beating out an old geezer like Poole. Untill then I'll assume a late round pick and an UDFA are jsut not ready yet.

Yankee_In_TX
08-14-2007, 05:25 PM
If Mitchell and Harrison are good enough to see the feild as starters during the regular season, then they shold have no problems beating out an old geezer like Poole. Untill then I'll assume a late round pick and an UDFA are jsut not ready yet.

It pains my Scarlett and grey blood, but I doubt Mitchell makes the team.

DBCooper
08-14-2007, 05:35 PM
Maybe they picked up an extra veteran corner with experience so they can move D-Rob to safety...

Don't give them any ideas.

Matt
08-14-2007, 05:59 PM
If Mitchell and Harrison are good enough to see the feild as starters during the regular season, then they shold have no problems beating out an old geezer like Poole. Untill then I'll assume a late round pick and an UDFA are jsut not ready yet.

Harrison was a fourth round pick. That's not exactly "late" round.

Besides, the problem teams fall into when they sign guys like Poole is the circular reasoning of "we need an established player, let's sign this guy because he's played before, because he's played before he must be better than this rookie, no need to give the rookie a real shot because we have an established veteran at the position."

Errant Hothy
08-14-2007, 07:02 PM
Besides, the problem teams fall into when they sign guys like Poole is the circular reasoning of "we need an established player, let's sign this guy because he's played before, because he's played before he must be better than this rookie, no need to give the rookie a real shot because we have an established veteran at the position."

I agree that this type of thinking goes in the NFL, but not always. There is also the train of thought that "putting a rookie out there, just becasue he's a rookie and we need to know what he can do, even though we know that what he's hown is in camp and practice is that he is not ready to start, but he should play anyways cause he's a rookie and we need to know what he's got" is just as faulty.

You play rookies when there play inpractice shows you that they are ready, not before and I don't think ever because they are just a rookie.

ObsiWan
08-14-2007, 07:13 PM
Harrison was a fourth round pick. That's not exactly "late" round.

Besides, the problem teams fall into when they sign guys like Poole is the circular reasoning of "we need an established player, let's sign this guy because he's played before, because he's played before he must be better than this rookie, no need to give the rookie a real shot because we have an established veteran at the position."

I'd say Kubiak's thinking is this: We need an established player who has proven he can do the job. If these rookies or F/As want to break thru and win a starter job, they see they have to step it up and beat out a guy who's shown he knows how to play.

You wouldn't want them to bring in some guy that is obvious "camp fodder" would you? Its all about keeping the competition level elevated.

And the pickings at FS and CB at this late date are really pretty slim.

CloakNNNdagger
08-14-2007, 07:39 PM
All I can say about Poole is that his stats for last year are pretty funky:

In 12 games, he had 15 total tackles (14 solo, 1 assist) with 1 interception, sack, and 3 pass defenses.

Glenn and Brown had similar interception, sack and pass defense numbers. But both had about 5 times the number of tackles that Poole managed.

Matt
08-14-2007, 07:41 PM
I'd say Kubiak's thinking is this: We need an established player who has proven he can do the job. If these rookies or F/As want to break thru and win a starter job, they see they have to step it up and beat out a guy who's shown he knows how to play.

You wouldn't want them to bring in some guy that is obvious "camp fodder" would you? Its all about keeping the competition level elevated.

And the pickings at FS and CB at this late date are really pretty slim.

I agree that would be ideal. I still worry that, all things being equal, a washed-up has been like Poole will come in higher on the depth chart than some more deserving guy (and, thus, get the better reps). Now, granted Kubiak has not shown a reluctance to shake up the depth chart based on real performance, so maybe my worries are overblown.

The1ApplePie
08-14-2007, 07:57 PM
We sign all these vets, but have we taken a shot at Arrington yet?

jdog
08-14-2007, 08:00 PM
I think the practice quotes for today said that they were thinking of Poole as a nickle back. It makes me think that they are happy with Simmons and Brown at safety and just want to replace the depth we lost in the secondary with Earl's injury and Simmons' promotion. Poole also brings the same things that McCardell brings to the receiver group.

ObsiWan
08-14-2007, 08:19 PM
We sign all these vets, but have we taken a shot at Arrington yet?

This Arrington?

On June 18, 2007, Arrington was involved in a serious motorcycle accident in suburban Maryland. He was on the Route 50 offramp to the Capital Beltway. Arrington was rushed to Prince George's Medical Center, he is in serious but stable condition.[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaVar_Arrington#_note-6) Arrington sustained a broken right forearm, broken lower vertebrae, and deep cuts to his leg.
Arrington was issued two citations, one for failure to control speed to avoid a collision, the other for operating a vehicle without a class license that contributed to a crash.


...oh I get it. That was sarcasm, right?

Joe Texan
08-14-2007, 09:10 PM
we havn't had very good luck with former Raiders, I hope this guy is no Primetime

JohnsonFan
08-14-2007, 09:23 PM
this was a good signing for us, he is a good veteran who knows what he is doing and can do it well

quicksilver
08-14-2007, 11:38 PM
I think the practice quotes for today said that they were thinking of Poole as a nickle back.

I zeroed in on that statement, too, jdog. What I wonder about it, though, is what is Kubiak saying about Fletcher and Bennett? I realize Bennett didn't do too well in his first preseason game, but I think you give the guy some more time to develop this far from the regular season. As for Fletcher--who I understand to actually be our nickle right now--he seemed to do just fine.

treygar
08-15-2007, 11:31 AM
signing Poole is competition for Fletcher and Bennett sure, but at the same time sends a negative message to the two.

Smith/Kubiak likes to overload it seems on players - and I have a good feeling he will release the ones he should have kept once this season is over with because of their ability to 'swing'.

What I'm saying basically is Poole is no upgrade over Fletcher and Bennett IMO and was more Smith/Kubiak overreacting to losing a starting safety by signing a cornerback? It seems if we have a player so much as get a papercut the organization brings in four players to look at the next day. This is where your ticket money is going to people.

Vinny
08-15-2007, 02:24 PM
signing Poole is competition for Fletcher and Bennett sure, but at the same time sends a negative message to the two.

I don't think that Bennett is ready for the nickel position and this is probably a bad sign for Fletcher...Kubiak seems really concerned with the nick

Lucky
08-15-2007, 02:39 PM
What I'm saying basically is Poole is no upgrade over Fletcher and Bennett IMO and was more Smith/Kubiak overreacting to losing a starting safety by signing a cornerback?
The Texans also lost Jason Horton, Saturday night. Horton was very much in the mix for the 5th CB spot. Poole should help the depth there. His signing has squat to do with the safety spot.

real
08-15-2007, 02:41 PM
Horton was going to get cut...

His play was horrific last saturday...

Errant Hothy
08-15-2007, 02:50 PM
I don't think that Bennett is ready for the nickel position and this is probably a bad sign for Fletcher...Kubiak seems really concerned with the nick

I don't get this, I thought Fletcher looked ok against the Bears; and we all knew that while he may not be the best CB ever he does have a history of making plays which is why we signed him or so I thought.

Vinny
08-15-2007, 02:53 PM
I don't get this, I thought Fletcher looked ok against the Bears; and we all knew that while he may not be the best CB ever he does have a history of making plays which is why we signed him or so I thought.It's hard for us fans to tell if the db's were taking care of their assignments...there may be more there than we can see

threetoedpete
08-15-2007, 04:50 PM
We sign all these vets, but have we taken a shot at Arrington yet?

They don't have the cap for Arrington. Secondly, Arrington would be the first head case they've brought on board.

threetoedpete
08-15-2007, 04:53 PM
I think the practice quotes for today said that they were thinking of Poole as a nickle back. It makes me think that they are happy with Simmons and Brown at safety and just want to replace the depth we lost in the secondary with Earl's injury and Simmons' promotion. Poole also brings the same things that McCardell brings to the receiver group.

And just what would that be, mold and geritol ? Whatever their plan was pre draft, if C.C. Brown is thier best option now at FS, they got caught with their hands in the cookie jar. Wahtever they were hoping for didn't work out. And we gotta live with it.

jdog
08-15-2007, 06:51 PM
And just what would that be, mold and geritol ? Whatever their plan was pre draft, if C.C. Brown is thier best option now at FS, they got caught with their hands in the cookie jar. Wahtever they were hoping for didn't work out. And we gotta live with it.

I think the plan involved not being able to fix everything in one draft. Get the pass rushing linemen who needs some time to acclimate...hopefully he helps us get pressure from the front four which helps our current safeties be better until we can maybe pick up a free safety next year. Plus, they brought in some rookie safeties, but of course, no one expected Glenn Earl to go down in preseason when the rookies (late round picks) are not ready to go just yet. We have some guys there to battle for spots and possibly step up. I'm not seeing a mistake on the part of the coaches or the end of the world here.

...and Poole brings mold, Geritol, and the great teacher...wisdom.

281
08-15-2007, 06:55 PM
signing Poole is competition for Fletcher and Bennett sure, but at the same time sends a negative message to the two.

Smith/Kubiak likes to overload it seems on players - and I have a good feeling he will release the ones he should have kept once this season is over with because of their ability to 'swing'.

What I'm saying basically is Poole is no upgrade over Fletcher and Bennett IMO and was more Smith/Kubiak overreacting to losing a starting safety by signing a cornerback? It seems if we have a player so much as get a papercut the organization brings in four players to look at the next day. This is where your ticket money is going to people.

are you kidding me? i have absolutely no problem with the GM bringing in more competition... it can only make the team better.

Spike
08-15-2007, 10:53 PM
It may not translate on the fied, but I listened to Poole's interview on the houstontexans.com today and I was impressed. I think we have a very young group at DB and this guy will be a nice addition for the younger guys.

We couldn't fill all of our needs this off-season and injuries are part of the game. I think the front office has done a nice job of getting young, athletic guys with long term potential and veteran players who are good in the locker room who can fill the void while the younger guys get up to speed.

aj.
08-15-2007, 10:58 PM
Jacoby made Poole look pretty bad tonight on a deep ball. Of course going from the couch to trying to run with JJ is a little bit of a tall order. Jacoby is quickly becoming a fan favorite.

Bennett has a long way to go. Bradley made him look like he was back at SC on that TD drive Saturday night.

Fletcher is fine as long as he doesn't have to cover past 15-20 yards. He still has some quicks.

McCardell and Poole are a combined 72 years old or something close. There's times when I hate to see the younger guys lose their jobs to those who will only be here a year.

HOU-TEX
08-16-2007, 10:38 AM
Jacoby made Poole look pretty bad tonight on a deep ball. Of course going from the couch to trying to run with JJ is a little bit of a tall order. Jacoby is quickly becoming a fan favorite.

Bennett has a long way to go. Bradley made him look like he was back at SC on that TD drive Saturday night.

Fletcher is fine as long as he doesn't have to cover past 15-20 yards. He still has some quicks.

McCardell and Poole are a combined 72 years old or something close. There's times when I hate to see the younger guys lose their jobs to those who will only be here a year.

Poole did get beat quite often last night. I don't think he was going 100% though. It appeared to me that he was just getting his feet wet. I wouldn't expect him to come out and blow somebody up on his first day. Personally, I hope he never sees the field in the regular season. If he does then it obviously means the injury bug has zapped us again.

:texflag: