PDA

View Full Version : Completely new approach for Texans 08


badboy
11-08-2007, 01:56 PM
The Houston Rockets have switch philosophies after years as a defensive minded team. This has led to a 4-1 record with another W probable Friday against Bucks. Why should the Texans do the same?

Increases fan excitement and should bring more national attention. I think it builds team morale. What player wants to lose 0-7? 31- 38, yeah still a loss but allows the defense to believe they don't have to pitch a shut out.

1. If they end up with top 10 spot in draft, trade down and pick up a Ryan Clady for LT and pick up a 2nd.
2. Best back available to support Green and maybe Eche or maybe start?
3. Best WR. Andre Davis has looked good but injuries and Mathis as a ? @WR. AJ, Walters, JJ, Davis and 3rd fight it out. Davis maybe as KR if not Mathis.
4. Center, it would be nice if we could cut Flannagan & McKinney. White is a ?
5. Best OT available. Hopefull C.S. will be there but we need line for Schaub and RBs.

Defense may win championships but we have not even smelled 50-50.

We can address CB and maybe FS in off season. Maybe look for another RB if Eche does not work out.

Yankee_In_TX
11-08-2007, 01:59 PM
3rd pick a WR and we only have 5 picks? I'll take some of what you're smoking :)

infantrycak
11-08-2007, 02:03 PM
Why would you pick up two OT's? Winston is locked in at RT. Fine, pick up a LT. Now you have Spencer and Frye as young guys. Why is a 5th round rookie (where you get people like, umm, Brandon Frye) going to be better than either of them?

Kubiak is talking about going to 4 and 5 WR sets when AJ gets back because of all the talent at WR and you add another one of those rather than a DB? Not seeing it.

Hardcore Texan
11-08-2007, 02:08 PM
I want us to go:

OL/RB/DB/LB/DB .....not necessarily in that order either. Maybe fill some of that in FA.

threetoedpete
11-08-2007, 02:09 PM
Before there is a trade there has to be value over and above what is not sliding down the draft board. Now, there will be four or five guys at the top of the board who teams will really covet. But as we saw in the '06 draft, everyone is going to get prety healthy with the first round this year. Everyone who stands pat will hit a need with a high end prospect. So....prety much except the guess that a move down deal for the Texans is a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow in '08. We aren't in all probablity , getting the second back. What we could do is Keep moving back and collecting picks untill the value hits the need. Bill Walsh did it one draft and built the back bone of a Dynasty. In order for that to happen for the Texans, Mr. McNair would have to come out and Give Kubes a high vote of confidence. Meaning, I'm not going to fire you in the next three years. Coach Kubiak is not on a short leash. He needs time. We have a lot of holes. Always easier to fire the seven than the fifty three though.

TexansSeminole
11-08-2007, 02:09 PM
How come everyday I get on the boards you have come up with a new approach?

It would be nice to trade down but it is doubtful. Also, there are no defensive backs at all drafted here. I would be red hot mad if we ended with that scenario.

threetoedpete
11-08-2007, 02:24 PM
Why would you pick up two OT's? Winston is locked in at RT. Fine, pick up a LT. Now you have Spencer and Frye as young guys. Why is a 5th round rookie (where you get people like, umm, Brandon Frye) going to be better than either of them?

Kubiak is talking about going to 4 and 5 WR sets when AJ gets back because of all the talent at WR and you add another one of those rather than a DB? Not seeing it.

Well I'm kinda with him. The o-line dominated Oakland. And they may dominte New Orleans. But then there's Tennesse. And from what I've seen so far the last six years...we aren't going to dominate tennesse's front seven. We aren't going to dominate Indidanpolisis' front seven. And we got embarrssed by the jags. So it may not be functional as you point out. But the guy is making the same point I've been tring to make the last five years. This O line is ok. This o-line will get you to 500. But this o-line is not taking you to the playoffs or past the colts anytime soon. If they spent everypick in the bag on o-lineman to come away with eight who can play, I won't squawk. Fine to take the second day guys and wait for them to devlope...take gambles on aged free agents...but the simple fact is, Tennesee and Indi have already rebult their o-lines twice now and we can't get out of the gate. Something has to change. The price on switching the prodigal QB's is quite high there in case you haven't noticed. Gonna be a hoot this time sitting in the second and watching all the what if guys go by. Just me, something needs to change.

TexansSeminole
11-08-2007, 02:27 PM
Well I'm kinda with him. The o-line dominated Oakland. And they may dominte New Orleans. But then there's Tennesse. And from what I've seen so far the last six years...we aren't going to dominate tennesse's front seven. We aren't going to dominate Indidanpolisis' front seven. And we got embarrssed by the jags. So it may not be functional as you point out. But the guy is making the same point I've been tring to make the last five years. This so line is ok. This o-line will get you to 500. But this o-line is not taking you to the playoffs or past the colts anytime soon. If they spent everypick in the bag on o-lineman to come away with eight who can play, I won't squak. Fine to take the second day guys and wait for them to devlope...take gambles on aged free agents...but the simple fact is, Tennesee and Indi have already rebult their o-lines twice now and we can't get out of the gate. Something has to change. The price on switching the prodigal QB's is quite high there in case you haven't noticed. Gonna be a hoot this time sitting in the second and watching all the what if guys go by. Just me, something needs to change.

But do you see our O-line problem worse or better than our DB situation?

Double Barrel
11-08-2007, 02:35 PM
I think Walter has looked pretty good this year. WR is not one of the areas that I'm concerned about. O-line, RB, and secondary are our most pressing areas, IMO.

bah007
11-08-2007, 02:42 PM
The Houston Rockets have switch philosophies after years as a defensive minded team. This has led to a 4-1 record with another W probable Friday against Bucks. Why should the Texans do the same?

Increases fan excitement and should bring more national attention. I think it builds team morale. What player wants to lose 0-7? 31- 38, yeah still a loss but allows the defense to believe they don't have to pitch a shut out.

1. If they end up with top 10 spot in draft, trade down and pick up a Ryan Clady for LT and pick up a 2nd.
2. Best back available to support Green and maybe Eche or maybe start?
3. Best WR. Andre Davis has looked good but injuries and Mathis as a ? @WR. AJ, Walters, JJ, Davis and 3rd fight it out. Davis maybe as KR if not Mathis.
4. Center, it would be nice if we could cut Flannagan & McKinney. White is a ?
5. Best OT available. Hopefull C.S. will be there but we need line for Schaub and RBs.

Defense may win championships but we have not even smelled 50-50.

We can address CB and maybe FS in off season. Maybe look for another RB if Eche does not work out.

Yea great idea.

Let's just piss off the offense now by showing them that 31 points wont be enough to win.

TexansSeminole
11-08-2007, 02:43 PM
Yea great idea.

Let's just piss off the offense now by showing them that 31 points wont be enough to win.

Lol, rep.

threetoedpete
11-08-2007, 02:43 PM
But do you see our O-line problem worse or better than our DB situation?

Oh of course the DB situation is worse. But then that is my point and has been for four years. It's always something. We always scrap by with the o-line. Yes we gotta have a high end corner. But we also need a high end center. Now most of those C guys will drop one, two, three, by the time our pick comes up in the third. So you have once agian the chioce of the guy from A & M or the guy from Marshall. Both nice guys. Both good prospcets, but both are two years away from bangning with the DTs in our division. See what I mean ? Or spend big bucks on a veteran . Or little bucks on a second-third year guy who can't break the line up on another team...like San Fransico's David Bass. It's always something though. Untill Manning retires or gets hurt the only way your going to consitantly challange the colts for the division crown is keeping the Bastard on the bench or getting to him. And very few d's get to him and that quick release.

alphajoker
11-08-2007, 02:45 PM
3. Best WR. Andre Davis has looked good but injuries and Mathis as a ? @WR. AJ, Walters, JJ, Davis and 3rd fight it out. Davis maybe as KR if not Mathis.


3rd pick a WR and we only have 5 picks? I'll take some of what you're smoking :)

WR has turned into a position of strength as opposed to a question mark at the beginning of the season and yes...I'll take some of what you're smoking too!

nunusguy
11-08-2007, 02:45 PM
But do you see our O-line problem worse or better than our DB situation?

The D Backfield was already one of our biggest areas of need BEFORE the season and maybe multiple-season ending injuries suffered by Dunta Robinson, who was far and away our best DBack, Sunday in Oakland.

infantrycak
11-08-2007, 02:45 PM
This O line is ok. This o-line will get you to 500. But this o-line is not taking you to the playoffs or past the colts anytime soon. If they spent everypick in the bag on o-lineman to come away with eight who can play, I won't squawk.

It's fine to say the OL needs help--that doesn't mean throw all your patches at the OL because there are other holes in the boat.

There is zero point in throwing picks at developmental talent if you aren't going to let that kind of talent develop. It's a numbers game for roster spots. Kick Black to the curb, there's one. 1st round LT, Salaam, Frye, Spencer. OK so you move Spencer to G. You still have three guys at the spot which is what they carry. You've got a rookie to start--what are you going to pick for your backups, two developmental guys and have no vet or keep the vet and one of the developmental guys never gets to develop.

TexansSeminole
11-08-2007, 02:46 PM
Oh of course the DB situation is worse. But then that is my point and has been for four years. It's always something. We always scrap by with the o-line. Yes we gotta have a high end corner. But we also need a high end center. Now most of those C guys will drop one, two, three, by he time our pick comes up in the third. So you have once agian the chioce of the guy from A & M or the guy from Marshall. Both nice guys. Both good prospcets, but both are two years away from bangning with the DTs in our division. See what I mean ? Or spend big bucks on a veteran . Or little bucks on a second-third year guy who can't break the line up on another team...like San Fransico's David Bass. It's always something though. Untill Manning retires or gets hurt the only way your going to consitantly challange the colts for the division crown is keeping the Bastard on the bench or getting to him. And very few d's get to him and that quick release.

I can agree with you, but would you go as far as to not draft a DB in the first 5 rounds...but instead draft 2 OL? I know if you drafted 1 and 1 you can't expect both to be starters, but you atleast have added some youth to the position don't you think. It's also good to grab a guy who may not start this year but can still bring something new to the position and hopefully start in later years.

TexansSeminole
11-08-2007, 02:50 PM
The D Backfield was already one of our biggest areas of need BEFORE the season and maybe multiple-season ending injuries suffered by Dunta Robinson, who was far and away our best DBack, Sunday in Oakland.

So your saying the DB situation is worse? I agree with you if you are.

threetoadpete: you can argue about not being able to match up with Colt's D line with our O-line but look at their receivers. They have two of the best and just spent another 1st on a guy who looks like he is going to take away the "Slot Machine" nickname from Stokley. We can't match up with them at all. When we meet them later this year we will have Bennett on Harrison or Wayne and FAGGINS on Harrison or Wayne. Then we've got VON HUTCHINS on Gonzalez or it could be Wayne or Harrison if they are putting one of those receivers in the slot. Then you've got Dallas Clark. Enough said.

badboy
11-08-2007, 02:54 PM
3rd pick a WR and we only have 5 picks? I'll take some of what you're smoking :)With a trade down and getting a 2 we would have 7 picks. I only went with top 5. Do we need defense? Certainly. The purpose of the thread was to look at five selections to improve the offense, increase scoring and well read the thread. It was a what if to create discussion.

TexansSeminole
11-08-2007, 02:59 PM
With a trade down and getting a 2 we would have 7 picks. I only went with top 5. Do we need defense? Certainly. The purpose of the thread was to look at five selections to improve the offense, increase scoring and well read the thread. It was a what if to create discussion.

Well then it isn't realistic at all. If we need defense and there are no defensive players selected, it can't be in the least realistic.

badboy
11-08-2007, 02:59 PM
Why would you pick up two OT's? Winston is locked in at RT. Fine, pick up a LT. Now you have Spencer and Frye as young guys. Why is a 5th round rookie (where you get people like, umm, Brandon Frye) going to be better than either of them?

Kubiak is talking about going to 4 and 5 WR sets when AJ gets back because of all the talent at WR and you add another one of those rather than a DB? Not seeing it.
You do NOT have Spencer and Frye. You may have Spencer and Frye has not played, We have no idea what he will do. 5th may not be better but let them fight it out. We need to strengthen the Oline and Frye may or may not be better. I want to decrease the risk to Schaub. Folks, this thread was not what I want to do in draft. It was to talk about what if we change philosophy from D to A scoring offense. We have the QB and three good receivers, may be 4.

I think I addressed DB in FA with CB and a FS.

Errant Hothy
11-08-2007, 03:00 PM
It's fine to say the OL needs help--that doesn't mean throw all your patches at the OL because there are other holes in the boat.

There is zero point in throwing picks at developmental talent if you aren't going to let that kind of talent develop. It's a numbers game for roster spots. Kick Black to the curb, there's one. 1st round LT, Salaam, Frye, Spencer. OK so you move Spencer to G. You still have three guys at the spot which is what they carry. You've got a rookie to start--what are you going to pick for your backups, two developmental guys and have no vet or keep the vet and one of the developmental guys never gets to develop.

Don't forget Butler, who's probably got a better shot then Frye.

Errant Hothy
11-08-2007, 03:07 PM
The Houston Rockets have switch philosophies after years as a defensive minded team. This has led to a 4-1 record with another W probable Friday against Bucks. Why should the Texans do the same?

Increases fan excitement and should bring more national attention. I think it builds team morale. What player wants to lose 0-7? 31- 38, yeah still a loss but allows the defense to believe they don't have to pitch a shut out.

1. If they end up with top 10 spot in draft, trade down and pick up a Ryan Clady for LT and pick up a 2nd.
2. Best back available to support Green and maybe Eche or maybe start?
3. Best WR. Andre Davis has looked good but injuries and Mathis as a ? @WR. AJ, Walters, JJ, Davis and 3rd fight it out. Davis maybe as KR if not Mathis.
4. Center, it would be nice if we could cut Flannagan & McKinney. White is a ?
5. Best OT available. Hopefull C.S. will be there but we need line for Schaub and RBs.

Defense may win championships but we have not even smelled 50-50.

We can address CB and maybe FS in off season. Maybe look for another RB if Eche does not work out.

Football is not baskeball. Yes that is a ridiculously simple statement, but I thinkit needed to be said. In basketball you can radically change philisophies without massive changes in personnal and get spectacular results. In football...not so much.

And about loing 0-7 or 38-31, most players view an L as an L.

There are more holes on the D then just CB and FS. In fact I would say that there are more holes on the defense then there are on the offense.

infantrycak
11-08-2007, 03:10 PM
Don't forget Butler, who's probably got a better shot then Frye.

I was just looking at LT, but good point--there is a 3rd round pick wasted by the Panthers because they couldn't figure out his disease. That is now fixed and he should be back on track to that 3rd round potential.

TexansSeminole
11-08-2007, 03:10 PM
Football is not baskeball. Yes that is a ridiculously simple statement, but I thinkit needed to be said. In basketball you can radically change philisophies without massive changes in personnal and get spectacular results. In football...not so much.

And about loing 0-7 or 38-31, most players view an L as an L.

There are more holes on the D then just CB and FS. In fact I would say that there are more holes on the defense then there are on the offense.

You've also got players playing both offense and defense in basketball. One player addition effects both offense and defense, where in football an offensive draft selection does nothing for your defense.

I agree with your below statement that we have more holes on defense than on offense as well.

threetoedpete
11-08-2007, 03:19 PM
You do NOT have Spencer and Frye. You may have Spencer and Frye has not played, We have no idea what he will do. 5th may not be better but let them fight it out. We need to strengthen the Oline and Frye may or may not be better. I want to decrease the risk to Schaub. Folks, this thread was not what I want to do in draft. It was to talk about what if we change philosophy from D to A scoring offense. We have the QB and three good receivers, may be 4.

I think I addressed DB in FA with CB and a FS.

That's what I'm tring to get at. The thing that hurts the franchise the worst is re dos on the prodigal QB. Our QB just happens to be coupled with a HC who MUST have a rushing attack to make the sytem work. And if there is no rushing attack, he gets exposed and beat to death. Five is the line on concusion. Our's has just had his first.

One of these years you just gotta give up on luck and go out and fix it. No matter what the cost.

badboy
11-08-2007, 03:34 PM
Before there is a trade there has to be value over and above what is not sliding down the draft board. Now, there will be four or five guys at the top of the board who teams will really covet. But as we saw in the '06 draft, everyone is going to get prety healthy with the first round this year. Everyone who stands pat will hit a need with a high end prospect. So....prety much except the guess that a move down deal for the Texans is a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow in '08. We aren't in all probablity , getting the second back. What we could do is Keep moving back and collecting picks untill the value hits the need. Bill Walsh did it one draft and built the back bone of a Dynasty. In order for that to happen for the Texans, Mr. McNair would have to come out and Give Kubes a high vote of confidence. Meaning, I'm not going to fire you in the next three years. Coach Kubiak is not on a short leash. He needs time. We have a lot of holes. Always easier to fire the seven than the fifty three though.Are you saying that a trade from say the 7th pick to 16th and get a 2nd probably will not be there? We should trade 7th for a 16th & 4th rounder. Then trade 16th for say 21st and a 5th? Is that a fair example?

Errant Hothy
11-08-2007, 03:40 PM
Are you saying that a trade from say the 7th pick to 16th and get a 2nd probably will not be there? We should trade 7th for a 16th & 4th rounder. Then trade 16th for say 21st and a 5th? Is that a fair example?

But why would we do that? Why not solve one need while at 7, then risk missing completly at 21 and with the extra 4th and the extra 5th?

badboy
11-08-2007, 03:40 PM
How come everyday I get on the boards you have come up with a new approach?

It would be nice to trade down but it is doubtful. Also, there are no defensive backs at all drafted here. I would be red hot mad if we ended with that scenario.Because I and apparantly others like to play out scenarios. Why is that bad? I am not saying every thought I have should be taken as my "plan for the day". It is to create discussion and maybe "Hey, I did not think about that. Thanks for your idea, TS." Seems as if you did not read the entire thread. The first five picks were offensive to create more scoring, I suggested a CB & FS in FA. (If you read my stuff as you indicated, you would know I am interested in Asante Samuel). If we pick 2 DBs in FA, we should not need anything else on D as a "dire need". We have a 6th and 7th for depth choices.

badboy
11-08-2007, 03:54 PM
Well I'm kinda with him. The o-line dominated Oakland. And they may dominte New Orleans. But then there's Tennesse. And from what I've seen so far the last six years...we aren't going to dominate tennesse's front seven. We aren't going to dominate Indidanpolisis' front seven. And we got embarrssed by the jags. So it may not be functional as you point out. But the guy is making the same point I've been tring to make the last five years. This O line is ok. This o-line will get you to 500. But this o-line is not taking you to the playoffs or past the colts anytime soon. If they spent everypick in the bag on o-lineman to come away with eight who can play, I won't squawk. Fine to take the second day guys and wait for them to devlope...take gambles on aged free agents...but the simple fact is, Tennesee and Indi have already rebult their o-lines twice now and we can't get out of the gate. Something has to change. The price on switching the prodigal QB's is quite high there in case you haven't noticed. Gonna be a hoot this time sitting in the second and watching all the what if guys go by. Just me, something needs to change.

To take it one step forward, what if Matt and Sage both get season ending injuries? Could easily happen. We have to better protect our QBs. Solidify the Oline and strengthen the RB. I am actually satisfied with the WRs but under my scenario of going to high powered scoring rather than pushing D, I chose to go after another WR. We have had some injuries at that position or so I've heard.

badboy
11-08-2007, 03:55 PM
Yea great idea.

Let's just piss off the offense now by showing them that 31 points wont be enough to win.Uh, have we scored 31?

badboy
11-08-2007, 04:03 PM
So your saying the DB situation is worse? I agree with you if you are.

threetoadpete: you can argue about not being able to match up with Colt's D line with our O-line but look at their receivers. They have two of the best and just spent another 1st on a guy who looks like he is going to take away the "Slot Machine" nickname from Stokley. We can't match up with them at all. When we meet them later this year we will have Bennett on Harrison or Wayne and FAGGINS on Harrison or Wayne. Then we've got VON HUTCHINS on Gonzalez or it could be Wayne or Harrison if they are putting one of those receivers in the slot. Then you've got Dallas Clark. Enough said.T.S. Please take a minute and read my thread. We pick up Asante in FA and a solid FS. We then have Samuel replacing Dunte (who may or may not recover to be a starter just like Spencer) Bennett starts opposite and Faggins is the Nickle. Our free agent FS starts. That has to be a stronger unit than we have now on D. We could hit a solid OLB in 6th or 7th as we did with Diles @ MLB.

infantrycak
11-08-2007, 04:03 PM
Uh, have we scored 31?

Ummm, let me think--YUP. Did it with the O shut down for the 2nd half against Carolina and also did it against TN.

badboy
11-08-2007, 04:12 PM
But why would we do that? Why not solve one need while at 7, then risk missing completly at 21 and with the extra 4th and the extra 5th?Simply discussing it my man. I tend to believe in keeping your pick and getting the best player that "eliminates" a dire need. Trade down should only be if the result is better than picking the one guy higher. If we can get Ryan Clady say at 16 and get a 2nd, well that may be worth entertaining. It depends on what info you want to believe. Some say Clady is a monster and would be a steal at anything below pick 12. Other are worried about his lower body strength. Someone said in this thread that we will not get a 2nd in a trade down. Like last draft we discussed trading the 8th for two low firsts with pros and cons offered.

TexansSeminole
11-08-2007, 05:36 PM
T.S. Please take a minute and read my thread. We pick up Asante in FA and a solid FS. We then have Samuel replacing Dunte (who may or may not recover to be a starter just like Spencer) Bennett starts opposite and Faggins is the Nickle. Our free agent FS starts. That has to be a stronger unit than we have now on D. We could hit a solid OLB in 6th or 7th as we did with Diles @ MLB.

I've read the thread.

It just seems like alot of far fetched talk. What makes you think Asante will come here if he even decides to leave the Patriots? Your talking about a guy who has been winning superbowls and been on a great winning football team since he has been in the league. Why in the world would the guy come here? It's a stetch to say we can get a guy as highly sought after as Samuel at any position really, and CBs are difficult to find. He will have alot of choices IF he decides to not play for the Patriots again. CB is a position you either get very lucky with through FA or you draft.

What free agent FS are you going to target? Forget signing somebody, who are you targeting? There aren't a whole lot of safeties who are going to be available. Then you have got to find one that fits the defensive scheme you run and capable of playing the position the way you want it played. Safeties are difficult to find in FA as well, however not as difficult as CBs.

Unfortunately, we have needs at OL too, and most of our needs are positions difficult to find in FA. LT are like CBs in the fact that you pretty much must draft them because they are so valuable you would be very lucky to get one in FA.

Also, we should know by now that any plan that has Faggins still getting significant playing time = bad passing defense.

TexansSeminole
11-08-2007, 05:50 PM
That's what I'm tring to get at. The thing that hurts the franchise the worst is re dos on the prodigal QB. Our QB just happens to be coupled with a HC who MUST have a rushing attack to make the sytem work. And if there is no rushing attack, he gets exposed and beat to death. Five is the line on concusion. Our's has just had his first.

One of these years you just gotta give up on luck and go out and fix it. No matter what the cost.

That's a really good point.

infantrycak
11-08-2007, 06:23 PM
What makes you think Asante will come here if he even decides to leave the Patriots? Your talking about a guy who has been winning superbowls and been on a great winning football team since he has been in the league. Why in the world would the guy come here?

It's called money. He already has his rings and may get one more this year. Now it's time for someone to show him the money and the Pats aren't likely to pay Nate Clements money. It's easy to say he will want to go to a winner, but guess what, those teams often have two CB's they are comfortable with already--see Baltimore, Pittsburgh, etc--to justify that kind of expense, it needs to be a serious upgrade on what you have.

The1ApplePie
11-08-2007, 06:30 PM
With all the studs at RB, just take a 1st round RB, the CB/LT prospects are mediocre at best this draft.

Unless we start tanking games, McFadden won't be there, so Stewart or Slaton will be the pick.

Slaton is suposed to be the best Zone Blocking RB in the draft, drawing Clinton Portis comparrisons.

TexansSeminole
11-08-2007, 06:32 PM
It's called money. He already has his rings and may get one more this year. Now it's time for someone to show him the money and the Pats aren't likely to pay Nate Clements money. It's easy to say he will want to go to a winner, but guess what, those teams often have two CB's they are comfortable with already--see Baltimore, Pittsburgh, etc--to justify that kind of expense, it needs to be a serious upgrade on what you have.

There are alot of teams that could use Samuel. What about a team like Jacksonville or New Orleans? Some teams have two pretty good guys but their getting older; teams like: Kansas City, Green Bay, and Tampa Bay.

It's not all about money, he will consider alot of other things when deciding where to go. However I do realize it has alot to do with money.

Anyone have a link to which teams should have the most money to spend?

Dallas_Texan
11-08-2007, 06:52 PM
Are you saying that a trade from say the 7th pick to 16th and get a 2nd probably will not be there? We should trade 7th for a 16th & 4th rounder. Then trade 16th for say 21st and a 5th? Is that a fair example?

I'm sorry, but....we won't have the 7th draft pick. We had 6 wins last year, and what pick did we have? We should have 7 this year at least. We will pick closer to 13th, and realistically...no one is going to want to trade a second rounder, and a later first, for a 13th pick. It's just easier said than done.

Insideop
11-08-2007, 08:09 PM
I was just looking at LT, but good point--there is a 3rd round pick wasted by the Panthers because they couldn't figure out his disease. That is now fixed and he should be back on track to that 3rd round potential.


I'm not completely sold yet on Butler. He seems to have the heart and enough talent, but according to what I've read on the Texans web site, he is only able to manage the disease and keep his weight up. And even at that, he is only listed at 293 lbs. which is kinda light for an OT. Here is what I found on the web site from a November 1st article.


Butler to see action: Second-year tackle Rashad Butler could see playing time against the Raiders on both the right and left side of the offensive line.

I expect Butler to be active this week, Kubiak said. Hes come a long, long way and I think youll see more of that, because these kids, I tell them all the time in practice, Hell, if you do it, Ill find a way to get you up, and I want to be true to my word with this team.

Butler has had trouble keeping on weight due to ulcerative colitis. However, the tackle has been able to manage the disease and has maintained about a 15-pound weight gain.

Hes been able to hold the weight; thats been an issue for him as a player, and now hes holding it, Kubiak said. Hes out here playing extremely well in practice. Our players want him up. They want him up because of the way hes practicing, so hell get his chance this week. Hell be up.


I don't recall him playing against the Raiders. He might have, but I'm just not sold on him being our LT of the future. I guess the bottom line for me is I wouldn't be upset if we drafted a RB or CB in the 1st round, but we still need to draft a Center and LT in 2008. The earlier the round the better! JMHO!

infantrycak
11-09-2007, 10:06 AM
I'm sorry, but....we won't have the 7th draft pick. We had 6 wins last year, and what pick did we have? We should have 7 this year at least. We will pick closer to 13th, and realistically...no one is going to want to trade a second rounder, and a later first, for a 13th pick. It's just easier said than done.

We had the 8th pick. We picked at 10th due to the Schaub trade. Teams 6-8 all had 6 wins but we had the hardest schedule and so picked at 8.

beerlover
11-09-2007, 12:14 PM
We will pick closer to 13th, and realistically...no one is going to want to trade a second rounder, and a later first, for a 13th pick. It's just easier said than done.

In 05 the Texans had the 13th pick then traded down w/Saints to the 16th spot (selected Travis Johnson) & got their 3rd rd. pick in 06 (which turned into Eric Winston). If elite prospects from the Junior class come out early the Texans can stay put & still draft one (RB, CB/FS, LT) @ #13. plenty of teams would want one of these players too offering their 2nd + 1st to move up & get him :devilpig:

badboy
11-09-2007, 01:04 PM
I'm sorry, but....we won't have the 7th draft pick. We had 6 wins last year, and what pick did we have? We should have 7 this year at least. We will pick closer to 13th, and realistically...no one is going to want to trade a second rounder, and a later first, for a 13th pick. It's just easier said than done.Our record is 4 wins and 5 losses. It is quite possible we may not win another. Whether we like that or not, we should be open to everything. As for no one trading a second for a 13, I said the same on another thread and it was pointed out that several teams have done just that. In fact, one team gave two firsts to move up, if I remember the post correctly.

dalemurphy
11-09-2007, 01:17 PM
I think I'll respond to this thread like I do all others like it:

How about we take the best player available in each round, regardless of position... Rick Smith will use free agency to fill gaping holes. The draft is for building greatness and for the future. You can't hamstring your team by chosing what position you take before you know who's there.

leebigeztx
11-09-2007, 01:36 PM
I hate losing Robinson, but i think getting Johnson and schaub back will make this team better. Thats not to diminish his contributions and they would be better with him, but i think the offense will make the defense play better. Why? Johnson and schaub back the coverage will change thus making the running game better , which will keep the defense off the field. I think they will win games by their offense alone just like Cleveland has been doing. The 1st victim will be the saints. mark it down.

badboy
11-09-2007, 03:17 PM
I hate losing Robinson, but i think getting Johnson and schaub back will make this team better. Thats not to diminish his contributions and they would be better with him, but i think the offense will make the defense play better. Why? Johnson and schaub back the coverage will change thus making the running game better , which will keep the defense off the field. I think they will win games by their offense alone just like Cleveland has been doing. The 1st victim will be the saints. mark it down.plus about this time last season, the defense seemed to get better. Let's hope that happens again. If our offensive scoring picks up some and defense can maintain as before loss of Dunte, maybe we can squeak past 1-3 teams.

badboy
11-09-2007, 03:23 PM
I think I'll respond to this thread like I do all others like it:

How about we take the best player available in each round, regardless of position... Rick Smith will use free agency to fill gaping holes. The draft is for building greatness and for the future. You can't hamstring your team by chosing what position you take before you know who's there.The problem that I have with your approach is two fold. 1. There is virtually no one in free agency to fill our glaring holes. There are two pretty good CBs and one avg CB. You will over pay for all three. Our needs at FS, LT,RB and Center (maybe one FA possibility) will not be addressed by a significant addition. #2. If the best college player available is a DT, WR, QB, MLB or SS in the first four picks, you would draft him. I would draft a dire need even if quality is a little off. This was discussed at length on another thread.

Errant Hothy
11-10-2007, 11:45 AM
The problem that I have with your approach is two fold. 1. There is virtually no one in free agency to fill our glaring holes. There are two pretty good CBs and one avg CB. You will over pay for all three. Our needs at FS, LT,RB and Center (maybe one FA possibility) will not be addressed by a significant addition. #2. If the best college player available is a DT, WR, QB, MLB or SS in the first four picks, you would draft him. I would draft a dire need even if quality is a little off. This was discussed at length on another thread.


That should have a huge "as of now" placed in it somewhere, as there are always several players cut at the start of FA each year. You cannot judge the NFL FA class till the signing period starts.

I hate the bye week.

TEXANRED
11-11-2007, 01:02 PM
Why would you pick up two OT's? Winston is locked in at RT.

B/C we also resign Ron Dayne and he breaks the new guys leg too.

adam
11-11-2007, 05:55 PM
I can't say that I agree with your way of thinking. If we had a solid secondary, we would have locked up that game against the Titans...after having coming back under what was a fairly mediocre line-up in light of all of our injuries. A good defense makes things easier for your offense, if only because the offense make much happen when they spend so much time on the side-line as a result of our inability to stop offenses on third down.

I would say that our first round pick should be spent on a shiny new CB. We need depth, as well as yet another reason to dump Faggins. My suggestions would be DeJuan Tribble (Boston College) or Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie (Tennesee State). We need another dynamic player in our secondary. Bennett looks like he will pan out well, but with Faggins and seemingly everyone at the safety positions playing poorly and the future of Dunta Robinson uncertain...it would only make sense to build on what is the weakest link in our football team.