PDA

View Full Version : Ryan Moats Has NOT Retired


mexican_texan
05-03-2009, 01:28 AM
In case some of you thought the Dallas incident somehow got him off the team.

It baffles me how Chris Brown is more known around here than Moats. Moats has actually scored for us, I don't think I've seen Brown in Texans colors yet.

Check this for proof:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiDry94SS7A

You can also see Briesel prove we don't have a need at guard.

PapaL
05-03-2009, 01:35 AM
I've been talking about him since the draft. Guy played tough and left it on the field the little he was on the field for us.

Seems like everyone wants a big name yet won't give this kid his chance.

Do your thing Ryan - prove'em wrong.

hot pickle
05-03-2009, 03:14 AM
i've always like ryan moats... i thought for sure him and westbrook would end up splitting carries in philly glad hes on the texans and hope he can make the team again

Allstar
05-03-2009, 03:23 AM
Who the hell thought he retired, or even wasn't on the team?

The Pencil Neck
05-03-2009, 03:30 AM
Who the hell thought he retired, or even wasn't on the team?

Hyperbole.

A few people on here and in the media have been talking like the only backup we had on the team prior to picking up the UDFA's was Chris Brown. Personally, I think Ryan did a very good job as a backup last year and it's going to be very difficult to take the #2 position from him.

Allstar
05-03-2009, 03:39 AM
Well, the little time Moats was on the field, he looked good. His style of play is all heart with a non-stop motor. That being said, I haven't seen nearly enough of him to even consider declaring him our solution to backing up Slaton.

The Pencil Neck
05-03-2009, 03:45 AM
Well, the little time Moats was on the field, he looked good. His style of play is all heart with a non-stop motor. That being said, I haven't seen nearly enough of him to even consider declaring him our solution to backing up Slaton.

I don't think we want a rook as the first backup unless he's unusually quick at learning how to pick up pass pro and read defenses. So, the #2 spot goes to either Brown or Moats.

Brown, I don't trust because of his injury history.

The fact that they pulled Slaton for a couple of series against the Bears because his head wasn't in the game and Moats came in and performed very well to help get us to 2 TDs was enough to put him at #2 until someone can knock him out of the spot. (He also did well in some of his spot performances prior to that.)

Allstar
05-03-2009, 03:57 AM
I don't think we want a rook as the first backup unless he's unusually quick at learning how to pick up pass pro and read defenses. So, the #2 spot goes to either Brown or Moats.

Brown, I don't trust because of his injury history.

The fact that they pulled Slaton for a couple of series against the Bears because his head wasn't in the game and Moats came in and performed very well to help get us to 2 TDs was enough to put him at #2 until someone can knock him out of the spot. (He also did well in some of his spot performances prior to that.)

I agree with what you're saying. If we can consistently get the same production out of Moats that we have seen from him in his limited playing time, then we should be set. The issue is that we haven't really seen to much of him, so there may be holes in his game you don't see in more limited minutes or particular situations.

Malloy
05-03-2009, 04:55 AM
For me Moats is the reason why I didnt want us to panic and draft a RB this year. When he stepped in last season to help carry the load for Slaton, he looked real good.

I have no problem with Slaton, Moats + a couple of rookies going into the season.

ObsiWan
05-03-2009, 07:10 AM
Hyperbole.

A few people on here and in the media have been talking like the only backup we had on the team prior to picking up the UDFA's was Chris Brown. Personally, I think Ryan did a very good job as a backup last year and it's going to be very difficult to take the #2 position from him.

Blame Rick Smith's pre-draft presser for that outlook. You must recall that it was Rick Smith that named Chris Brown - not Ryan Moats - when giving a reason we didn't need to "reach" for a RB during the draft. Moats wasn't mentioned.

CloakNNNdagger
05-03-2009, 08:34 AM
I believe that Smith alluded to Brown rather that Moats because Brown has proven himself in the past to be able to get those "hard" yards. Moats was to be the "little Brian Westbrook" when he was taken by the Eagles. His 1st year there, 2005, in about 50 carries, he logged in 5 yds/carry (somewhat artificially bolstered by a couple of long runs) as a sub for injured Westbrook. His 2nd year with the Eagles 22 carries for only 3 yds/carry. The Eagles loved his motor, but were concerned with inconsistency. He then broke his leg and missed the entire 2007 season. Last year with the Texans 26 carries for 3.6 yds/carry. He did fairly well when inserted, but not necessarily consistent. Smithiak is not only looking for a "backup" to Slaton, they are interested in that compliment that can consistently help "make" plays calling for short straight ahead yardage, not a back that again has to rely virtually solely on the OL to always "part the Red Sea"...............something that is one of the greater innate disadvantages of Gibbs' zone blocking system.

While Brown is a huge gamble to rely on to even "be there" as a either a backup OR complimentary back to Moats, Moats isn't likely to be that complimentary back, and has not had enough opportunity to prove that he can be the consistent backup.

I like Moats, but he still has alot to prove.

Thorn
05-03-2009, 10:29 AM
For me Moats is the reason why I didnt want us to panic and draft a RB this year. When he stepped in last season to help carry the load for Slaton, he looked real good.

I have no problem with Slaton, Moats + a couple of rookies going into the season.

I'd much rather keep Moats and a few rookies than Brown, Moats and another rookie. I just don't think Brown has much football left in him. Training camp will tell the tale though. If Brown is healthy through out camp though, be prepared for him being the guy they choose to spell Slaton.

dalemurphy
05-03-2009, 11:17 AM
I've been talking about him since the draft. Guy played tough and left it on the field the little he was on the field for us.

Seems like everyone wants a big name yet won't give this kid his chance.

Do your thing Ryan - prove'em wrong.

I disagree. I thought Moats was pretty bad last year. He showed some burst but he doesn't break tackles and was a poor pass blocker. I wouldn't want him higher than 4th on the depth chart. So, I'm fine if he makes the 53 man roster but I don't want him active unless there has been an injury.

Goatcheese
05-03-2009, 04:26 PM
I disagree. I thought Moats was pretty bad last year. He showed some burst but he doesn't break tackles and was a poor pass blocker. I wouldn't want him higher than 4th on the depth chart. So, I'm fine if he makes the 53 man roster but I don't want him active unless there has been an injury.

The guy isn't just miserably bad, but I don't see why everyone is sporting wood here.

Somebody has to take 10+ carries/game for Slaton, and I don't want that to be Moats with his 3.6 ypc. A guy who is going to get more touches than AJ should be more than just "not the worst ever" IMO.

TimeKiller
05-03-2009, 04:50 PM
Ryan Moats has a boatload less to prove than the IR captain Chris Brown.

The Turk has more rushing yards than Chris Brown as a Texan.

gtexan02
05-03-2009, 05:42 PM
Ryan Moats is this years Chris Taylor.

Insideop
05-03-2009, 08:37 PM
In case some of you thought the Dallas incident somehow got him off the team.

It baffles me how Chris Brown is more known around here than Moats. Moats has actually scored for us, I don't think I've seen Brown in Texans colors yet.

Check this for proof:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiDry94SS7A

You can also see Briesel prove we don't have a need at guard.

I hate to burst your bubble, but Brisiel is on the right side of the line. Moats ran over the left side where Pitts and Brown are. It was Pitts, Brown and Leach that opened up that hole. Having said that, I still think Brisiel is better than what a lot of people on this board and in the media say. Kubes and Gibbs like him too. JMHO! :texflag:

The Pencil Neck
05-03-2009, 10:37 PM
Ryan Moats is this years Chris Taylor.

The big difference being that the people, like me, saying that Moats did well last year are only saying that he did well as the #2 back and in that role might be just fine. When people were all over Chris Taylor, they were wanting him for the starting role. That's a BIG difference.

For 5-10 touches a game, I don't think Moats is bad. He had over a 5 ypc average until he went into the Bears game and in that game, the coaching staff chose to go with him over Slaton for two very productive drives. This gave Slaton time to wake up and get his head in the game. Against the Bear, he had some good runs and he had some bad runs but he didn't stink up the joint.

Now, like Texans Seminole brought up in the draft thread, if Slaton goes down, we're in trouble. But the coaches didn't think there was anyone in the draft worth spending a draft pick on to try to solve this problem. I don't think anyone on the roster solves that problem. But let's wait and see what other moves are made during preseason and how this stable of backs look during preseason.

dalemurphy
05-03-2009, 11:44 PM
The big difference being that the people, like me, saying that Moats did well last year are only saying that he did well as the #2 back and in that role might be just fine. When people were all over Chris Taylor, they were wanting him for the starting role. That's a BIG difference.

For 5-10 touches a game, I don't think Moats is bad. He had over a 5 ypc average until he went into the Bears game and in that game, the coaching staff chose to go with him over Slaton for two very productive drives. This gave Slaton time to wake up and get his head in the game. Against the Bear, he had some good runs and he had some bad runs but he didn't stink up the joint.

Now, like Texans Seminole brought up in the draft thread, if Slaton goes down, we're in trouble. But the coaches didn't think there was anyone in the draft worth spending a draft pick on to try to solve this problem. I don't think anyone on the roster solves that problem. But let's wait and see what other moves are made during preseason and how this stable of backs look during preseason.


I disagree. Our offense immediately lost effectiveness when he came in. He is fine as back end of the roster depth but he doesn't add anything to the offense. He has no area of specialization. Essentially, every time he walks on the field, every element of our offense gets worse because he is less effective catching the ball, he's a poor pass blocker, he's less explosive, and he's easier to tackle than Slaton.

IMO, what you want with a complimentary back is for that player to offer something different or better than the other back. For instance, clearly Chris Johnson is a better back than Lendale White:fridge: but Lendale White is more effective in some short yardage situations between the tackles. He also punishes the LBs which benefits Johnson later in the game.

Or, in NO, Pierre Thomas adds something to the NO running game when he spells Reggie Bush... Pierre can actually gain yards on a handoff.:wheel:

mexican_texan
05-03-2009, 11:59 PM
I disagree. Our offense immediately lost effectiveness when he came in. He is fine as back end of the roster depth but he doesn't add anything to the offense. He has no area of specialization. Essentially, every time he walks on the field, every element of our offense gets worse because he is less effective catching the ball, he's a poor pass blocker, he's less explosive, and he's easier to tackle than Slaton.

IMO, what you want with a complimentary back is for that player to offer something different or better than the other back. For instance, clearly Chris Johnson is a better back than Lendale White:fridge: but Lendale White is more effective in some short yardage situations between the tackles. He also punishes the LBs which benefits Johnson later in the game.

Or, in NO, Pierre Thomas adds something to the NO running game when he spells Reggie Bush... Pierre can actually gain yards on a handoff.:wheel:
Doesn't Bush spell Thomas? I thought he became the starter.

ObsiWan
05-04-2009, 12:11 AM
Or, in NO, Pierre Thomas adds something to the NO running game when he spells Reggie Bush... Pierre can actually gain yards on a handoff.:wheel:

you forgot to mention that Pierre Thomas was an UDFA.

:)

Carr Bombed
05-04-2009, 12:40 AM
Ryan Moats is this years Chris Taylor.

EXACTLY!

He's just as unproven as just about every back on the roster not named Slaton. I hope he does well and I root for him, but why the heck do we constantly have all these people that say "but we have Ryan Moats"...or "Ryan Moats can be that guy". He didn't prove anything last season. Seriously, the guy didn't really prove ANYTHING.

This is a guy who (played behind a 3rd round rookie) and only had 26 carries and 94 yards at a very pedestrian 3.4 ypc and only one single TD. Do y'all know how average that is? Actually for a backup running back it's anything, but average, it's more like "meh".

This is a classic case of "lowered expectations".....or maybe Houston fans don't really know what a good backup RB is or looks like, because we've never really had one. 26 carries isn't even close enough to knowing what kind of back Moats is....good or bad, but the fact that he only got 26 carries last year on this team doesn't bode well for him.

Darius Walker got 58 carries as a UDFA, and picked up 258 rushing yards, at a 4.6 ypc clip and a TD and nobody was sad to see him go. Honestly I was higher on him than I am Ryan Moats....I feel he didn't really get his fair shake here, but that's another story and even I recognize that he probably wasn't a longterm backup answer here either.

Chris Taylor put up 123 yards at a 4.4 ypc clip and a score.....and nobody is going to be sad to see him go.

What makes Moats so special to some of y'all?.....I honestly don't see it at all. He's going to have to compete with these UDFA rookies (he isn't a lock for the backup RB spot) and it wouldn't shock me at all if one of them beat him out...and the truth of the matter is, one of those two probably has more talent than Moats. We're talking about a guy who was let go by a team that ran a very similar offensive system and a team that's been deprived of RB depth for years. I hope for the best for Ryan Moats, but I'm not going to act like he did all these great things last year either...because he didn't. He did very very very little last season on a team that was bleeding at the position and had no depth behind Slaton.

AnthonyE
05-04-2009, 01:19 AM
I hate to burst your bubble, but Brisiel is on the right side of the line. Moats ran over the left side where Pitts and Brown are. It was Pitts, Brown and Leach that opened up that hole. Having said that, I still think Brisiel is better than what a lot of people on this board and in the media say. Kubes and Gibbs like him too. JMHO! :texflag:

Brisiel chop blocks a player and makes him do a full flip in the air. Pretty epic block on his part.

Malloy
05-04-2009, 07:04 AM
I'd much rather keep Moats and a few rookies than Brown, Moats and another rookie. I just don't think Brown has much football left in him. Training camp will tell the tale though. If Brown is healthy through out camp though, be prepared for him being the guy they choose to spell Slaton.

Good thing I mentioned Slaton, Moats and rookies, and not Slaton, Brown and rookies then ;)

dalemurphy
05-04-2009, 07:25 AM
you forgot to mention that Pierre Thomas was an UDFA.

:)

I think Thomas was actually a 5th round pick.

Polo
05-04-2009, 09:45 AM
To tell the truth I don't really think about Moats too much...

But at the same time he should be better than he was last year just from being able to play in the system and get used to the timing of things...I look for him and Slaton to be more confident runners...

That said, experience with the team may be about the only advantage that Moats would have over a more talented back. I'd love to have Moats stick around as a #3/reserve guy, but I think eventually we will need someone more capable to be a back-up/co-starter...JMO...

The Pencil Neck
05-04-2009, 09:46 AM
I disagree. Our offense immediately lost effectiveness when he came in.

Let's see.

Against the Bears, the offense wasn't working. Slaton wasn't performing.

Moats comes in and on those two drives, we score.

How did the offense become less effective with Moats in there?

ArlingtonTexan
05-04-2009, 10:39 AM
Moats is the type of player who can get you by for a couple of games, but overall his mediocrity will be exposed the more you use him. Remember guys like wells and dayne managed to have a handful of good games, but most of us wanted no part of them starting every week. Think that is what would happen if we saw bunches of Moats.

dalemurphy
05-04-2009, 10:58 AM
Let's see.

Against the Bears, the offense wasn't working. Slaton wasn't performing.

Moats comes in and on those two drives, we score.

How did the offense become less effective with Moats in there?

When he's in the game, we don't run the ball is well. He's a poorer short yardage back. He's less explosive. He doesn't pick up the blitz. He's not as good in the pass game... those are the factors that make the offense less effective.

I've said that Ryan Moats belongs in the NFL. I'd be perfectly content with him as our 4th RB. So, yes, I would expect that the offense would be able to sometimes score points when he's in the game. That being said, offering two drives as your sample in order to argue Moats' merit is a pretty weak argument. Instead of doing that, why don't you tell me what he offers the team in relief of Slaton- other than the fact that he's not Slaton, which is the only reason he was in the Chicago game for those two drives.

Goldensilence
05-04-2009, 11:20 AM
I think the overall argument is that if you aren't FOR Ryan Moats then you are against him.

I like Moats but not enough to say he's my guy behind Slaton. I'm still not sure that we're done adding people at RB for camp. Either way if Chris Brown is healthy we're going to see a really fun camp for RB with Moats, Brown, Foster and Johnson battling it out. I don't think we NEED a big bruiser to spell or compliment Slaton specifically just someone who can keep our running game efficient and effective.

If it's Brown, Moats, Johnson, Foster or other RB that gets added to the roster before camp that can pickup blitzes and average about 4 yard every pop. I'm good.

The Pencil Neck
05-04-2009, 11:59 AM
When he's in the game, we don't run the ball is well. He's a poorer short yardage back. He's less explosive. He doesn't pick up the blitz. He's not as good in the pass game... those are the factors that make the offense less effective.

Which part of "backup" don't you understand? A backup isn't supposed to run the ball as well. They're not supposed to be as good as the starter. I'm not arguing that Moats is the next Steve Slaton or that he's on the same level as Steve Slaton. I'm arguing that Moats is a backup and when he was in, the offense didn't totally suck.

It would be really nice if we had two running backs of the same or similar caliber. But that's a luxury. We had other more pressing issues to take care of in this draft and the guys our coaching staff wanted weren't available at spots where they (the coaches) were willing to spend picks on them.

Would it be great if Moats was our 4th? Hell, yeah. Because that would mean that we had 2 other, better backs. And I'm all for that.

BUT.

I don't think Chris Brown is better than Moats. And it's going to take a lot for the rookies to take the spot from him this year. Moats has more experience and is probably going to be better than those guys this year.

That's why I say that Moats is #2 until someone takes the job from him.

The Pencil Neck
05-04-2009, 12:03 PM
I think the overall argument is that if you aren't FOR Ryan Moats then you are against him.

I like Moats but not enough to say he's my guy behind Slaton. I'm still not sure that we're done adding people at RB for camp. Either way if Chris Brown is healthy we're going to see a really fun camp for RB with Moats, Brown, Foster and Johnson battling it out. I don't think we NEED a big bruiser to spell or compliment Slaton specifically just someone who can keep our running game efficient and effective.

If it's Brown, Moats, Johnson, Foster or other RB that gets added to the roster before camp that can pickup blitzes and average about 4 yard every pop. I'm good.

I think people are trying to turn it into that but that's BS and an exaggeration of my position. I think it just boils down to some people thinking that Moats was totally trash when he played last season and I think that's wrong.

I think that Moats did fine when he came in as a backup for Slaton last year. I think that since we didn't get a guy in the draft, we're going to pick up some more guys as they come available. I think there's a good possibility Moats isn't our #2 guy going into the season.

However.

Right now, he's our #2. Not Chris Brown. He's our #2 until someone takes the job from him.

And that's all I'm saying.

drewmar74
05-04-2009, 12:13 PM
Moats is the type of player who can get you by for a couple of games, but overall his mediocrity will be exposed the more you use him. Remember guys like wells and dayne managed to have a handful of good games, but most of us wanted no part of them starting every week. Think that is what would happen if we saw bunches of Moats.

Honey, bunches of Moats would be detrimental to the team. It would mean that Speedy is out or nicked!




*No real validity to this post - I just wanted to say "Honey bunches of Moats."

GP
05-04-2009, 12:30 PM
Honey, bunches of Moats would be detrimental to the team. It would mean that Speedy is out or nicked!




*No real validity to this post - I just wanted to say "Honey bunches of Moats."

Oh no you didn't. LOL! :spit:

Honey bunches of Moats.

GP
05-04-2009, 12:35 PM
I think people are trying to turn it into that but that's BS and an exaggeration of my position. I think it just boils down to some people thinking that Moats was totally trash when he played last season and I think that's wrong.

I think that Moats did fine when he came in as a backup for Slaton last year. I think that since we didn't get a guy in the draft, we're going to pick up some more guys as they come available. I think there's a good possibility Moats isn't our #2 guy going into the season.

However.

Right now, he's our #2. Not Chris Brown. He's our #2 until someone takes the job from him.

And that's all I'm saying.

I like Moats better than anything else that's behind Slaton. He's small, shifty, and has experience. And he's not a headache on or off the field.

I will wager $5 that Chris Brown will retire at some point between now and September. I mean, there's just nothing there that points toward the guy being able to hack it.

The more Kubiak talks up a RB (in pressers, interviews, etc.) the worse chance that RB has. It's the "Wali Lundy effect." Remember how much Kubiak talked up Lundy?

I'm only half-joking, obviously.

But I wonder if there IS some sort of correlation there?

Porky
05-04-2009, 12:49 PM
I'm with Dale Murphy. I don't see it. I thought Moats was well under average when he did get carries last year. I mean the difference was like day and night from Slaton to Moats. To me he is a borderline guy to make the team. I mean what does he offer on special teams? You want your last guy to be a ST guy right, at least if he is too be active. Might be an inactive guy I reckon.

I think Brown is ideally suited to be the primary backup to Slaton, but doggone it, the odds of him staying healthy all year and getting those 5-10 carries a week is about as much as me marrying Jessica Alba in the next year.

So, that means we need a plan B and C when the inevitable hangnail occurs. . Is that Moats? Maybe. Is it Johnson or Foster? Perhaps, assuming they can protect the QB. Is it someone not yet on the roster? A Denver castoff? Who knows. I think this will all come out in the wash, but let's face it if Slaton goes down for an extended time and Brown gets his hangnail, we are likely in trouble at RB no matter who we turn too.

dalemurphy
05-04-2009, 02:08 PM
Which part of "backup" don't you understand? A backup isn't supposed to run the ball as well. They're not supposed to be as good as the starter. I'm not arguing that Moats is the next Steve Slaton or that he's on the same level as Steve Slaton. I'm arguing that Moats is a backup and when he was in, the offense didn't totally suck.

It would be really nice if we had two running backs of the same or similar caliber. But that's a luxury. We had other more pressing issues to take care of in this draft and the guys our coaching staff wanted weren't available at spots where they (the coaches) were willing to spend picks on them.

Would it be great if Moats was our 4th? Hell, yeah. Because that would mean that we had 2 other, better backs. And I'm all for that.

BUT.

I don't think Chris Brown is better than Moats. And it's going to take a lot for the rookies to take the spot from him this year. Moats has more experience and is probably going to be better than those guys this year.

That's why I say that Moats is #2 until someone takes the job from him.


You've ignored my original argument. Chris Johnson is clearly a better back than Lendale White. However, White does some things better than Johnson. That's my point. Whomever we use to compliment Slaton should have a usefulness beyond giving Slaton some rest. Moats provides nothing for the offense that Slaton doesn't provide better.

76Texan
05-04-2009, 02:45 PM
You've ignored my original argument. Chris Johnson is clearly a better back than Lendale White. However, White does some things better than Johnson. That's my point. Whomever we use to compliment Slaton should have a usefulness beyond giving Slaton some rest. Moats provides nothing for the offense that Slaton doesn't provide better.

I think you guys are talking about different things.
Moats is a very good back up to Slaton. That's what I think PN want to say.
Dale is correct to say the Moats is not a compliment back to Slaton.

Can we find a better back up to Moats in Jeremiah?
I don't know. Right now, as much as I like about him being a playmaker (Jeremiah), Moats had proved that when he is good with ball security, he's a very good backup.
(Running/blocking/receiving).

badboy
05-04-2009, 02:46 PM
Our new JJ at 5'9" will be the guy. I understand he uses a great "stiff arm" to the tackler. Unfortunately, it usually catches the other guy in the jewels but does increase yards per carry.

The Pencil Neck
05-04-2009, 03:47 PM
You've ignored my original argument. Chris Johnson is clearly a better back than Lendale White. However, White does some things better than Johnson. That's my point. Whomever we use to compliment Slaton should have a usefulness beyond giving Slaton some rest. Moats provides nothing for the offense that Slaton doesn't provide better.

And you're ignoring that I said that's a luxury that we can't afford until we improve other areas of our team. AND that our coaching staff didn't see anyone in the draft in a place where we could draft them where they would provide us value. We would have had to have taken a RB in the first or second round to get that guy. They obviously didn't like anyone in the draft so they didn't take anyone.

It would be great to have a RB behind Slaton that was better than Slaton at some things or where there wasn't as much of a drop off, but at least according to the coaches, there was no one in the draft this year (in a position where we could take them) that fit that bill.

So, at least until we bring someone else in or someone steps up, Moats is our #2.

dalemurphy
05-04-2009, 03:53 PM
And you're ignoring that I said that's a luxury that we can't afford until we improve other areas of our team. AND that our coaching staff didn't see anyone in the draft in a place where we could draft them where they would provide us value. We would have had to have taken a RB in the first or second round to get that guy. They obviously didn't like anyone in the draft so they didn't take anyone.

It would be great to have a RB behind Slaton that was better than Slaton at some things or where there wasn't as much of a drop off, but at least according to the coaches, there was no one in the draft this year (in a position where we could take them) that fit that bill.

So, at least until we bring someone else in or someone steps up, Moats is our #2.


I am absolutely not complaining about the draft. I am simply saying that if Moats is our primary backup RB, it is an area of serious weakness. I believe more moves will be made as we get closer to the season. I'd like to see a trade for someone like Torrain (Hillis won't be available) and I'd like to see Chris Brown and Ryan Moats on the roster along with Slaton and Torrain?. However, I don't want Brown on the 53 man roster unless we have 1 guy on the practice squad, maybe even two that the coaches would feel pretty good about seeing action in some games this season.

The Pencil Neck
05-04-2009, 04:04 PM
I am absolutely not complaining about the draft. I am simply saying that if Moats is our primary backup RB, it is an area of serious weakness. I believe more moves will be made as we get closer to the season. I'd like to see a trade for someone like Torrain (Hillis won't be available) and I'd like to see Chris Brown and Ryan Moats on the roster along with Slaton and Torrain?. However, I don't want Brown on the 53 man roster unless we have 1 guy on the practice squad, maybe even two that the coaches would feel pretty good about seeing action in some games this season.

I don't really disagree with any of that. My only disagreement is with "serious weakness" vs. "weakness." I think that our RB depth is a weakness right now and I expect moves to be made to address it. But I don't think we're going to see it permanently addressed until next year's draft.

I expect us to pick up one or two of the cast-off Broncos but I don't expect us to trade for them.

jlam
05-06-2009, 03:49 PM
I think Thomas was actually a 5th round pick.

Nope, he was an UFA out of Illinois. We actually drafted Antonio Pittman in the 4th (?) in that draft, but Thomas beat him out during training camp and preseason. Pittman has done ok in St. Louis, but he looked like crap that preseason. It was a good decision.

I'll refrain from comment on Moats since I'd admittedly have a difficult time remaining objective. I'm rooting for him though.

ObsiWan
05-06-2009, 06:15 PM
I think Thomas was actually a 5th round pick.

Nope.
From the official Saints website (http://www.neworleanssaints.com/Team/Roster/People/Pierre%20Thomas.aspx)...

CAREER TRANSACTIONS – Signed a three-year contract 4/30/07 as an undrafted rookie free agent.


this one I looked up before I posted it
:texflag: