PDA

View Full Version : Changes ahead


alphajoker
10-01-2009, 07:21 AM
Looks like McCain and Pollard are starting this Sunday.

Kubiak is ready to make some lineup changes. He'd hoped to have Jacques Reeves back for Fred Bennett at cornerback, but Reeves didn't even get through Wednesday's warm-ups before suffering a finger injury.

It now appears Brice McCain will start for Bennett at corner and that Bernard Pollard will replace John Busing at safety. Kubiak is also evaluating practice-squad defensive linemen to see if changes can be made there.


http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/fb/texansfront/6646117.html

TimeKiller
10-01-2009, 07:25 AM
I'm glad Bennett isn't starting. The message is you CAN'T play that bad and continue to see the field. Kubiak WILL start a rookie over you.

Maybe Kubiak can keep that train rollin' with Deljuan starting over Okoye?

Mr. White
10-01-2009, 07:32 AM
Another scrap heap safety and a 6th round rookie..... :fans:

TEXANS84
10-01-2009, 07:42 AM
This saftey problem has been an ongoing issue since Kubiak took office.
For crying out loud, get someone decent in the draft or make a dang trade.

mariowillshine15
10-01-2009, 07:51 AM
Pollard could make a good impact. Everybody was surprised when he was cut, he wont be a pro bowler or anything but i like his potential. Better than Busing and Barber anyway.

About time Bennett hit the bench. My grandma could run a slant pattern and take it to the house on that guy.

Mr. White
10-01-2009, 07:56 AM
I really don't get it with Bennett. How does a guy regress that much from his rookie year?

My only guess is that he misses Will Demps, because as soon as he came out of the lineup, then Bennett started slipping....I know it's farfetched, but it's all I got.

Bubbajwp
10-01-2009, 07:56 AM
This saftey problem has been an ongoing issue since Kubiak took office.
For crying out loud, get someone decent in the draft or make a dang trade.

Since Kubiak took office? I was thinking more like since the expansion draft.

Buffi2
10-01-2009, 08:21 AM
Forgetting the part about how we should have worried about this secondary situation many years ago - certainly before now - maybe a little shakeup is just what this team needs. I would prefer the shakeup to include someone who isn't a rookie at corner but I guess you can't have everything.

At least doing something is better than just tapping a podium or using the "e" word.

TEXANS84
10-01-2009, 08:44 AM
Since Kubiak took office? I was thinking more like since the expansion draft.

Fair enough, with the likes of Matt Stevens and Corey Bradford moving to FS.
But it should have been adressed with the new coaching staff. Yet we draft a boatload of TE's (when we don't even need them) this year and just ignore the S position.

Good teams like the Ravens and Steelers have dominant safteys and always ranked in the top five in defenses.

V Man
10-01-2009, 09:07 AM
Fair enough, with the likes of Matt Stevens and Corey Bradford moving to FS.
.

Bradford? or did you mean Marcus Coleman.

Texan_Bill
10-01-2009, 09:12 AM
Bradford? or did you mean Marcus Coleman.

Marcus Coleman was the best safety this team ever had... and that was after converting him from corner on the very downside of his career. :thinking:

dalemurphy
10-01-2009, 09:15 AM
I really don't get it with Bennett. How does a guy regress that much from his rookie year?

My only guess is that he misses Will Demps, because as soon as he came out of the lineup, then Bennett started slipping....I know it's farfetched, but it's all I got.

While he has certainly regressed some, I was always very skeptical of him his rookie year. Other than good ball skills, I didn't see much that I liked. I know a lot of people really liked his aggressiveness and tackling but he always seemed to lack body control and try and make tackles while facing the ground. Regarding his tackling now, it looks to me like someone tried to correct his form and he has turned into a "clutch and grab" guy as a result. I think it comes down to the fact that the guy isn't very coachable. I don't think he's unwilling to be coached but I think he simply doesn't make changes and adjustments well.

HOU-TEX
10-01-2009, 09:19 AM
I watched and read all the interviews and what not from yesterday. Kubiak said he expected them to get more time, but he never mentioned anything about starting. Maybe he told McFlubber off camera or something?

Bennett should be absolutely ashamed of himself. Simply pathetic!

Silver Oak
10-01-2009, 09:22 AM
I watched and read all the interviews and what not from yesterday. Kubiak said he expected them to get more time, but he never mentioned anything about starting. Maybe he told McFlubber off camera or something?

Bennett should be absolutely ashamed of himself. Simply pathetic!

just my observation, but after Fatty McFat said Kubiak's Texans were "an abomination", the only thing Kubes told McFatty off camera was probably "go ******* yourself".

HOU-TEX
10-01-2009, 09:31 AM
just my observation, but after Fatty McFat said Kubiak's Texans were "an abomination", the only thing Kubes told McFatty off camera was probably "go ******* yourself".

:spit: I would pay to see/hear that. That guy's really starting to get under my skin. Fat Bastard!

infantrycak
10-01-2009, 09:51 AM
Marcus Coleman was the best safety this team ever had... and that was after converting him from corner on the very downside of his career. :thinking:

I'd say Marlon McCree was. Big Marcus Coleman turned into a ballerina as a safety.

TEXANS84
10-01-2009, 09:58 AM
Bradford? or did you mean Marcus Coleman.

Good lord, I need some coffee this morning.
Thanks V Man, Coleman.

Hervoyel
10-01-2009, 10:43 AM
I think the idea of throwing a rookie out there in place of Bennett has merit. Sometimes it's suicide but we're already getting killed anyway so that shouldnt' be a concern. He can't do any worse than Bennett has. Also we've seen some rookie CB's play well for us at times. Sure they turn into turnstiles the next season but I think sometimes a rookie doesn't understand enought to be afraid of what he's facing. Sometimes they just go out there and play to the best of their ability and something good happens.

I wouldn't be too terribly surprised to see improvement with this change (alongside the switch to Pollard). Maybe not season long, destiny changing improvement but I'm desperate for something positive so it will do.

Grid
10-01-2009, 10:53 AM
call me crazy... but a finger injury for reeves?

Personally...id rather they strapped up and braced that finger and sent him out to play. If he cant catch the ball...fine.. we will just have to make do with defensed passes.

nero THE zero
10-01-2009, 10:54 AM
I think the biggest improvement might be from getting Pollard in there.

From what I've seen, he's more of an in-the-box guy, but that's what we've been missing. As they say, when you load 10 guys on the line, you better not let that RB get passed the first line of defense. So, Pollard being extremely effective in that role might lend itself to our defense. The fact that he can't cover might be marginalized given our scheme.

If these assumptions hold true, I think he will have an immediate and considerable impact on our defense.

Now, if only we could get Amobi on the bench...

Texan_Bill
10-01-2009, 11:06 AM
I'd say Marlon McCree was. Big Marcus Coleman turned into a ballerina as a safety.

I'll give you McCree except that his second year here (and last) he only started 1 game.

Ballerina or not, Coleman had 40+ tackles both seasons at safety and a 102 yard interception return for a TD.

Hervoyel
10-01-2009, 11:24 AM
I'll give you McCree except that his second year here (and last) he only started 1 game.

Ballerina or not, Coleman had 40+ tackles both seasons at safety and a 102 yard interception return for a TD.

I don't think the previous coaching regime thought much of McCree and I consider that to be an outstanding indicator of why their dumb asses were all kicked to the curb. He's still in the league and back in a Jaguars uniform. Say what you will about him but he was sitting on the opposite sideline last Sunday watching us take another ass kicking and starting another safety that he could play circles around.

He wasn't great but he was better than every single player we've trotted out in his place since we waived him.

Now that I think about it you might even be able to say that about Aaron Glenn. He was with New Orleans up until last season.

infantrycak
10-01-2009, 11:43 AM
I'll give you McCree except that his second year here (and last) he only started 1 game.

Ballerina or not, Coleman had 40+ tackles both seasons at safety and a 102 yard interception return for a TD.

Coleman could ball hawk some, but even there he declined when moved to safety. Went from 7 INT's his last year at CB to 3 over the next two years. McCree had 51 tackles in 11 starts so he could do that as well and then he left here and started on a 11-5 Panthers D and 12-4 Chargers D. And don't forget his 95 yard INT TD. I agree with Herv - he pissed someone off in the organization.

JDizzle
10-01-2009, 11:57 AM
I'll give you McCree except that his second year here (and last) he only started 1 game.

Ballerina or not, Coleman had 40+ tackles both seasons at safety and a 102 yard interception return for a TD.

McCree also had a pick 6 against the Titans IIRC, and that may have been the game where Coleman flopped and gave up the game winning TD, but I dunno for sure.

Coleman's presence over the middle wasn't something anybody was afraid of because he was pretty soft when it came to putting his hat on someone. McCree wasn't though, which is why I always liked the guy and wondered wtf we got rid of him.

Second Honeymoon
10-01-2009, 12:10 PM
I'd say Marlon McCree was. Big Marcus Coleman turned into a ballerina as a safety.

Yup. Marlon McRee was our best safety and then we didn't resign him in our infinite wisdom. And what happened next? 2-14 happened and our defense has sucked ever since.

Thanks Casserley. Glenn Earl sucks and was not worth losing McRee over.

Wolf6151
10-01-2009, 12:22 PM
Somebody ask Bennett, how bad do you suck when a 6th round rookie takes your job from you?

beerlover
10-01-2009, 12:25 PM
Bennett was covered up by decent play calling & some talent around him like a 100% healthy Dunta Robinson as a rookie. The past two seasons he's been exposed by lack of coverage skill, back peddle speed, change of direction footwork & poor fundamental tackling/angles.

McCain is probably in because of his ability to stay glued to his man in long coverage since the Raiders like to throw it long. still there is better than 50% chance he gets burned without safety help over the top. One thing that's really stood out to me with the defensive calls is how the safetys been crashing the line of scrimmage & biting on play action. Gibbs needs to keep the secondary in more of a prevent style to deny big play capability.

Pollard is known as more of a physcial player than a cover guy. So the secondary needs to do a better job of recongition & holding zones of responsiblity, playing conservative high percentage risk reward sceneros. Reeves/Molden are really hurting their teammates with their inability to contribute, c'mon guys do you even want to play? very frustrating for Gibbs to be forced to go to plan D (desperation).

Texan_Bill
10-01-2009, 12:26 PM
Coleman could ball hawk some, but even there he declined when moved to safety. Went from 7 INT's his last year at CB to 3 over the next two years. McCree had 51 tackles in 11 starts so he could do that as well and then he left here and started on a 11-5 Panthers D and 12-4 Chargers D. And don't forget his 95 yard INT TD. I agree with Herv - he pissed someone off in the organization.

I would thank my lucky stars for either one of them, considering...

Second Honeymoon
10-01-2009, 12:29 PM
Coleman could ball hawk some, but even there he declined when moved to safety. Went from 7 INT's his last year at CB to 3 over the next two years. McCree had 51 tackles in 11 starts so he could do that as well and then he left here and started on a 11-5 Panthers D and 12-4 Chargers D. And don't forget his 95 yard INT TD. I agree with Herv - he pissed someone off in the organization.

I think it was the fact that McRee wasn't a Casserley pick. Casserley thought Glenn Earl was Jesus in cleats. He may have pissed someone off, I don't know, but I think it was more about Casserley's ego.

If I saw Casserley on the street, I would tell him to go **** himself. Not joking either. Double rods in his face.

Brando
10-01-2009, 12:33 PM
This saftey problem has been an ongoing issue since Kubiak took office.
For crying out loud, get someone decent in the draft or make a dang trade.

The safety problem has been an issue since 2002*. :)

*With the exception of McCree. I never understood why they let him go, terrible move.

badboy
10-01-2009, 12:54 PM
I think the philosphy on defense has been the front 7 and the CBs should stop the progression of the ball and safeties are there to "mop up". This is where the interchangeable player at SS and FS developed. If your Dline and backers can shut down the short passes over the middle and the flats, control the wide receivers and the running back, your safety guys can be average. This philosphy is why the focus has been on Dline and more recently the linebackers with our higher picks and those wonderful free agent signings. IMO there is no reason to expect this line of reasoning to stop in future drafts.

barrett
10-01-2009, 12:57 PM
I like Bush's scheme quite a bit. I'm confused as to why our blitzing LB's don't get to the QB quicker. I suppose it's because none of them are particularly fast. Cushing is a 4.5 guy I believe though. It's not like he's on a flat sprint. Doesn't it seem like when we blitz those guys it's like 59 or 54 goes in at the snap and then 56 does like a delayed sort of thing? I suppose it's the nature of where he's positioned over the top of the offense but we're very close with those guys but not close enough to create havoc.

That's not at all why I'm writing this though, it was just a thought.

A big concern to me is that this scheme seems to rely really heavily on the LB's and SS to be gap integral. A smarter SS seems like it would be more helpful than a physically talented one. If he's filling a gap, unless he's getting run over, should be more effective than a crazy strong or crazy fast guy who's all over the place. Seems like someone like Ferguson who has the years to play smarter would fit in that spot better but physically when he's put out in coverage he can't keep up. But someone that is a more heady player maybe is what we need here.

I guess we'll wait and see if Pollard is that guy.

GP
10-01-2009, 12:58 PM
I think it was the fact that McRee wasn't a Casserley pick. Casserley thought Glenn Earl was Jesus in cleats. He may have pissed someone off, I don't know, but I think it was more about Casserley's ego.

If I saw Casserley on the street, I would tell him to go **** himself. Not joking either. Double rods in his face.

Kinda' how I feel about David Gibbs right now.

Malloy
10-01-2009, 01:08 PM
Considering how awful our D has been the first 3 games, ANY change is for the better. It sure as hell aint getting any worse :)

Thorn
10-01-2009, 01:10 PM
Considering how awful our D has been the first 3 games, ANY change is for the better. It sure as hell aint getting any worse :)

Well, that offensive powerhouse known as the Raiders are coming to town, so it could very well get worse. LOL

HOU-TEX
10-01-2009, 01:19 PM
Considering how awful our D has been the first 3 games, ANY change is for the better. It sure as hell aint getting any worse :)

Easy there, our passing D is still #17 and has plenty of room to get worse. But, when a team can hang 200 on you running the ball.....why pass. :gun:

Malloy
10-01-2009, 01:21 PM
Ok sorry, in theory it CAN get worse, but honestly it wont matter, I cant feel any worse about the D than I do right now.

Damn, need a beer now :I

El Tejano
10-01-2009, 01:25 PM
I'll give you McCree except that his second year here (and last) he only started 1 game.

Ballerina or not, Coleman had 40+ tackles both seasons at safety and a 102 yard interception return for a TD.

Marlon Mcree had a 95 yard return against Tennessee.

badboy
10-01-2009, 01:29 PM
I like Bush's scheme quite a bit. I'm confused as to why our blitzing LB's don't get to the QB quicker. I suppose it's because none of them are particularly fast. Cushing is a 4.5 guy I believe though. It's not like he's on a flat sprint. Doesn't it seem like when we blitz those guys it's like 59 or 54 goes in at the snap and then 56 does like a delayed sort of thing? I suppose it's the nature of where he's positioned over the top of the offense but we're very close with those guys but not close enough to create havoc.

That's not at all why I'm writing this though, it was just a thought.

A big concern to me is that this scheme seems to rely really heavily on the LB's and SS to be gap integral. A smarter SS seems like it would be more helpful than a physically talented one. If he's filling a gap, unless he's getting run over, should be more effective than a crazy strong or crazy fast guy who's all over the place. Seems like someone like Ferguson who has the years to play smarter would fit in that spot better but physically when he's put out in coverage he can't keep up. But someone that is a more heady player maybe is what we need here.

I guess we'll wait and see if Pollard is that guy.If our Dline did it's job stopping the run our safeties would not appear to be so bad and that is what Kubes keeps hoping.

badboy
10-01-2009, 01:30 PM
Well, that offensive powerhouse known as the Raiders are coming to town, so it could very well get worse. LOLWIth our luck their first round WR will go nuts on us. He does have speed.

HOU-TEX
10-01-2009, 01:38 PM
Ok sorry, in theory it CAN get worse, but honestly it wont matter, I cant feel any worse about the D than I do right now.

Damn, need a beer now :I

Now that, my friend, is true. Horrible isn't it? I almost feel sorry for the guys on offense.

wags
10-01-2009, 01:57 PM
I'm absolutely positive this is the change that will make a difference. No question about it.

:shots:

76Texan
10-01-2009, 02:12 PM
I can actually see many instances from the games we played where Pollard could be more useful than the guys we currently have.

Mind you, he can still miss a tackle here and there just the same.
But let say on the Busing miss-tackle near the end zone because of improper wrapping, at least Pollard would put a much bigger hit on the WR #85 Wilford with a very good chance of jarring the ball loose.

Or the Barber's hit on Garrard, unblocked.
I'll trade Pollard with Barber on that play and see if Garrard doesn't get rattled a bit.

barrett
10-01-2009, 02:15 PM
Or Barber standing in the defensive backfield on the goal line watching MJD trot into the enzone. What the hell is he doing standing behind the DT and DE there?

TheRealJoker
10-01-2009, 04:09 PM
If Pollard comes in and makes any type of positive difference for the D that's an indictment of the coaching staff/FO. If we had all offseason to decide what we were going to do at safety and the guys that we picked are outperformed by a street FA who has been on the team for a week that doesn't speak very well towards their evaluation of the safety position.

Not that it'll be anything we didn't already know...

Texecutioner
10-01-2009, 04:12 PM
I really don't get it with Bennett. How does a guy regress that much from his rookie year?

My only guess is that he misses Will Demps, because as soon as he came out of the lineup, then Bennett started slipping....I know it's farfetched, but it's all I got.

Ask Okoye. He could probably explain it to you.

jshabang
10-01-2009, 05:03 PM
we are giving up about 400 plus yards a game on defense = check
we have had three weeks in a row of 100 plus yard backs = check
we cant tackle on defense to save our lives = check
we have given up mutiple big plays of 40 or more yards in every game=check
our current safties and corners cant hold a gap assignment=check

which in turn has made up the absolute worse defense in the league and most sports people would say worst defense they ever seen period( I know i have never in my meager 35 years on earth seen anything worse with all the bigplays game after game not even my cousins little league squad was this bad) so what in the heck would we lose by puttin mccain and pollard in.

we are the worse, the bottom, dead last, where can we possibly go but up???????????????? You cant for further than the bottom. we already there.

the worse thing they could do is miss a tackle....over pursue and leave a gap and let the running back go for 60 plus on a TD carry:goodluck:

mussop
10-01-2009, 05:32 PM
Good teams like the Ravens and Steelers have dominant safteys and always ranked in the top five in defenses.

They also have better cornerbacks, defensive tackles and they have LB's and DE's that can get to the QB.

leebigeztx
10-01-2009, 08:28 PM
I said it before, with ken lucas and mcallister or the street, they shouldve had at least 1 on the roster. Especially when reeves went down and robinson holding out, it wouldve been nice to have a vet that can play in the secondary vs bennett that has gone backward s and 2 lower level rookies. It would be nice to see the big corner just relased from minny or det mccauley brought in forr a look.

steelbtexan
10-01-2009, 08:51 PM
I said it before, with ken lucas and mcallister or the street, they shouldve had at least 1 on the roster. Especially when reeves went down and robinson holding out, it wouldve been nice to have a vet that can play in the secondary vs bennett that has gone backward s and 2 lower level rookies. It would be nice to see the big corner just relased from minny or det mccauley brought in forr a look.

Agreed

I dont like McCauley though.

The biggest changes I would like to see in the Texans is the Texans defense holding a team under 20 pts a game and under 200 yds rushing a game.

Is that to much to ask?

ATXtexanfan
10-01-2009, 09:34 PM
this is good news. things can't get worse. might as well get the youngters looks. hope pollard plays decent.

tribestros
10-01-2009, 10:36 PM
No we need something to freshen up our defense. Seriously.

leebigeztx
10-01-2009, 10:45 PM
What's odd is in kubes first 8 games it kinda looked like this, but then they signed dalton off the street and the defense was stopping the run. Part of the reason for the low sack numbers is u have to earn the right to rush the passer by stopping the run. I think they should make a trade for rodgers in cleveland and put he and okam on the inside to 2 gap. In pass downs bring in okoye and whoever to rush the passer.Its a lot easier to get 2 big 2gappers than to get that sapp like 3 techique.

ObsiWan
10-01-2009, 11:06 PM
Coleman could ball hawk some, but even there he declined when moved to safety. Went from 7 INT's his last year at CB to 3 over the next two years. McCree had 51 tackles in 11 starts so he could do that as well and then he left here and started on a 11-5 Panthers D and 12-4 Chargers D. And don't forget his 95 yard INT TD. I agree with Herv - he pissed someone off in the organization.

Meaning someone "in the organization" was more about flexing their little ego muscles than making the team a winner.
fascinating.

ObsiWan
10-01-2009, 11:25 PM
I like Bush's scheme quite a bit. I'm confused as to why our blitzing LB's don't get to the QB quicker. I suppose it's because none of them are particularly fast. Cushing is a 4.5 guy I believe though. It's not like he's on a flat sprint. Doesn't it seem like when we blitz those guys it's like 59 or 54 goes in at the snap and then 56 does like a delayed sort of thing? I suppose it's the nature of where he's positioned over the top of the offense but we're very close with those guys but not close enough to create havoc.

It didn't help that 2 out of the 3 QBs we've faced are very mobile. Sanchez operates very well on the move and Garrard makes as many plays with his legs as with his arm.
It's probably no surprise that our only sack came against Collins.

TexansSeminole
10-02-2009, 01:21 AM
I like Bush's scheme quite a bit. I'm confused as to why our blitzing LB's don't get to the QB quicker. I suppose it's because none of them are particularly fast. Cushing is a 4.5 guy I believe though. It's not like he's on a flat sprint. Doesn't it seem like when we blitz those guys it's like 59 or 54 goes in at the snap and then 56 does like a delayed sort of thing? I suppose it's the nature of where he's positioned over the top of the offense but we're very close with those guys but not close enough to create havoc.

I don't think that's the reason. I think our Dline is having problems winning 1 on 1 battles and our secondary isn't covering long enough to allow it. Its hard to get to the QB when a blitzing LB is picked up and a DL can't win a 1 on 1 battle or the coverage breaks down.