PDA

View Full Version : Texans have youngest starting lineup in NFL


Texans_Chick
10-14-2009, 04:18 PM
Have the link in my blog--item #3 (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2009/10/houston_texans_are_number_ones.html).

As is discussed in the comments, they are actually younger than what is listed because of Pitts and Ferguson being out.

The Texans have the fewest number of starters over the age of 30. Interestingly, many of the youngest teams are the worst teams (there's some bad old teams too). Check it:

The youngest teams in the league (all in the 26 yo range)

Hou 2-3
Phi 3-1
Jax 2-3
KC 0-5
Buf 1-4
Oak 1-4 (fixed, wrote it down wrong)
Det 1-4
StL 0-5

Non-surprise that the Texans do not play consistent, smart football.

WhoDeyBengals
10-14-2009, 05:30 PM
I know it's difficult to believe, but the Raiders have actually won a game. Just FYI. ;)

Experience counts in this league. We've seen great players take a few years before they can be considered elite, and it's a rare feat when a rookie looks like a Pro Bowler. I can't think of many that have been able to do that, outside of running backs.

Goldensilence
10-14-2009, 05:33 PM
TC,

Great post. Interesting note on Schaubs numbers and interesting to think he might not be 100%.

I'm kind of puzzled by some of the comments left by your guests. Seem to be split like the later years of Dom Capers. Some were willing to wait around because of the Expansion tag and others were pointing out bad drafts, signings and lack of developing in house talent.

Personally I'm seeing something similar. Not that we are bereft of talent like the last year for Capers but, I'm left wondering really how much talent have we developed here and have we made really that much more intelligent FA acquisitions?

I'm also seeing similar comments about goal line situations. If a widespread amount of FANS can recognize we don't have what it takes to punch it in with one yard needed how come our coaches can't?

ObsiWan
10-14-2009, 06:01 PM
If the defense ever gells, we'll be hell on wheels.

Ranger Tom
10-14-2009, 06:14 PM
I get the feeling that when it all comes together, it's going to come together all at once, and we'll come out of nowhere to fight Indy for the division. If the defense solidifies, this team could be perennial playoff contenders.

ATXtexanfan
10-14-2009, 07:07 PM
Looked like it all came together 2nd half of arizona. Heard a caller say we started the zona game like we ended the oakland game. Found that interesting.

TexCanada
10-14-2009, 07:17 PM
I imagine that we will continue to be one of the youngest teams for a while, since it is likely that we will continue to have to put rookies in on defense straight out of the draft.

Leahmic223
10-14-2009, 07:39 PM
Looked like it all came together 2nd half of arizona. Heard a caller say we started the zona game like we ended the oakland game. Found that interesting.

Makes sense.

One of the Giants players said playing Oakland was basically like a scrimmage...

nunusguy
10-14-2009, 07:55 PM
Interestingly, many of the youngest teams are the worst teams (there's some bad old teams too). Check it:


FYI - worst teams ususally want to start over and not surprisingly they often do so with young players - it's called rebuilding.

ArlingtonTexan
10-14-2009, 07:58 PM
I imagine that we will continue to be one of the youngest teams for a while, since it is likely that we will continue to have to put rookies in on defense straight out of the draft.

Not if at some point those players pan out or the team starts to sign low end veteran FAs instead of assuming that guys like Barber will step up without legitimate veteran competition.

TexCanada
10-14-2009, 08:52 PM
Not if at some point those players pan out or the team starts to sign low end veteran FAs instead of assuming that guys like Barber will step up without legitimate veteran competition.

True, i just meant that i think there is a good chance that will see a rookie starting next year at either DT, S, or CB, especially with taking a look at the draft calss.

Texans_Chick
10-14-2009, 08:55 PM
I imagine that we will continue to be one of the youngest teams for a while, since it is likely that we will continue to have to put rookies in on defense straight out of the draft.

If you whiff in your drafts, and treat draft picks like they aren't worth anything, then all sorts of players that you should have developed and should be vets now for this team aren't.

Very few quality players left on this team that the Texans early high draft picks have to show....

Andre Johnson
Dunta Robinson
Chester Pitts (now injured)

There's others that are playing reasonable minutes for other teams....

Jabar Gaffney, uh, not sure who else

Texans_Chick
10-14-2009, 08:59 PM
Not if at some point those players pan out or the team starts to sign low end veteran FAs instead of assuming that guys like Barber will step up without legitimate veteran competition.

Yeah, a while back there was some sort of study done on which team is drafting best by evaluating which teams kept their draftees. I thought that was peculiar.

Sometimes, it is smart teams that are willing to give playing time to vets who know what they are doing over newbies who don't. It takes talent in evaluating low end free agents and how they might fit what you are doing. Not sure the Texans are good at doing this.

CloakNNNdagger
10-14-2009, 09:08 PM
We have been hearing "We will build through the draft for how many years now?" Unfortunately, the Texans have taken this premise almost to the ridiculous. Youth is a double edged sword. If you look at the good teams, it's a healthy mix of decent established veterans with promising youngsters. We've missed on "value" choices of veterans. We've misjudge on too many key high draft choices. And the wisdom of the choice of our high cost transaction for the most important position, QB, is to this day still very much in question. This is not even to mention the running of the team with a "rookie" owner, rookie general manager, rookie HC, rookie DC, and an OC that is still looking for his first pubic hair. Rookies in any facet of the game can be expected to make mistakes. Mistakes can be excused, if you choose. No doubt, though, these mistakes lead to inconsistency and losses. The question then becomes, how long are you willing to accept and painfully endure the present "building" theorem? Another year? Another decade? Another................?

steelbtexan
10-14-2009, 09:16 PM
I'm sure the Texans aren't good at evaluating low end FA talent.

Bobby Greir is the director of pro player personel. Enough said

I dont understand why it took Smithiak 2 games to sign Pollard. He should have been signed as soon as he was cut by K.C. It cost the Texans the Jacksonville game.

Oh well signing Pollard after the season started saved McNair money and they didn't have to garuntee Pollard money.

It's decisions like this that are going to keep the Texans around 7-9,8-8,9-7.

Whoever made this decision (Smith, Kubes or Greir) should be fired. On second thought Greir should've already been fired. IMO

Goldensilence
10-14-2009, 09:23 PM
FYI - worst teams ususally want to start over and not surprisingly they often do so with young players - it's called rebuilding.

Right so that leaves us to just...building then?

steelbtexan
10-14-2009, 09:24 PM
We have been hearing "We will build through the draft for how many years now?" Unfortunately, the Texans have taken this premise almost to the ridiculous. Youth is a double edged sword. If you look at the good teams, it's a healthy mix of decent established veterans with promising youngsters. We've missed on "value" choices of veterans. We've misjudge on too many key high draft choices. And the wisdom of the choice of our high cost transaction for the most important position, QB, is to this day still very much in question. This is not even to mention the running of the team with a "rookie" owner, rookie general manager, rookie HC, rookie DC, and an OC that is still looking for his first pubic hair. Rookies in any facet of the game can be expected to make mistakes. Mistakes can be excused, if you choose. No doubt, though, these mistakes lead to inconsistency and losses. The question then becomes, how long are you willing to accept and painfully endure the present "building" theorem? Another year? Another decade? Another................?

Repped

This is what I've been saying.

It all starts with McNair.

You ask good questions. The answer so far is eight years and counting.

Meanwhile Uncle BoB is somewhere in the background counting the fortune he has made off of the GREAT FANS OF THE HOUSTON TEXANS.

Sorry gotta spread the rep

Lucky
10-14-2009, 09:56 PM
Bobby Greir is the director of pro player personel. Enough said

Grier is the Associate Director of Pro Personnel for the Texans. Brian Gardner is the Director of Pro Personnel.

Grier seems to get the lions share of the blame for whatever failings the Texans have in free agency. While Smith and Kubiak get all of the credit when something goes right. Grier may be a worthless talent evaluator. That wouldn't surprise me. But, he can't take the blame for the Texans shortcomings in player acquisitions. That has to fall to the men in charge...Smith and Kubiak.

ArlingtonTexan
10-14-2009, 10:08 PM
We have been hearing "We will build through the draft for how many years now?" Unfortunately, the Texans have taken this premise almost to the ridiculous. Youth is a double edged sword. If you look at the good teams, it's a healthy mix of decent established veterans with promising youngsters. We've missed on "value" choices of veterans. We've misjudge on too many key high draft choices. And the wisdom of the choice of our high cost transaction for the most important position, QB, is to this day still very much in question. This is not even to mention the running of the team with a "rookie" owner, rookie general manager, rookie HC, rookie DC, and an OC that is still looking for his first pubic hair. Rookies in any facet of the game can be expected to make mistakes. Mistakes can be excused, if you choose. No doubt, though, these mistakes lead to inconsistency and losses. The question then becomes, how long are you willing to accept and painfully endure the present "building" theorem? Another year? Another decade? Another................?

I am going use your post as jumping off point.


The problem with purely claiming that you will build through the draft is that an NFL team needs 22 starters. I am going to assume that the first 4 rounds of the draft are guys who are expected starters (probably generous). The texans also seem to sign 1 really high dollar FA per off-season. To get 22 starters, it takes over 4 years w/o any mistakes (top 4 round plus the high end FA signing) for any reason to get a starting line-up.

Of course, that is unrealistic, so as an organization , you have to add players, starters not just depth from other sources: late in the draft, undrafted FAs, street FAs, or low end veteran FAs who provide value/worth beyond their relative low cost. Every real good team has multiple above average starters acquired from low end sources. When we look at the Texans which above average starters come from somthing other than high draft picks(5th round or later) or high dollar FAs? I stop and start with Kevin Walter and there is some question if he is clearly above average.

Goatcheese
10-14-2009, 10:29 PM
I am going use your post as jumping off point.


The problem with purely claiming that you will build through the draft is that an NFL team needs 22 starters. I am going to assume that the first 4 rounds of the draft are guys who are expected starters (probably generous). The texans also seem to sign 1 really high dollar FA per off-season. To get 22 starters, it takes over 4 years w/o any mistakes (top 4 round plus the high end FA signing) for any reason to get a starting line-up.

Of course, that is unrealistic, so as an organization , you have to add players, starters not just depth from other sources: late in the draft, undrafted FAs, street FAs, or low end veteran FAs who provide value/worth beyond their relative low cost. Every real good team has multiple above average starters acquired from low end sources. When we look at the Texans which above average starters come from somthing other than high draft picks(5th round or later) or high dollar FAs? I stop and start with Kevin Walter and there is some question if he is clearly above average.

There's not a lot of guys to choose from.

Diles was a late rounder who has been very good. Quite possibly our best coverage linebacker, and a solid run defender.
Walter was acquired for a late round pick and has had above average production.
Smith was a big FA who has gotten a lot of pressure on the QB(12 pressures so far) but hasn't been what I expected in run defense. I would say he's slightly above average.

I've said it before, hate Asserly as much as you want, but he brought in more Pro bowlers than Smith has quality starters.

steelbtexan
10-14-2009, 11:13 PM
Grier is the Associate Director of Pro Personnel for the Texans. Brian Gardner is the Director of Pro Personnel.

Grier seems to get the lions share of the blame for whatever failings the Texans have in free agency. While Smith and Kubiak get all of the credit when something goes right. Grier may be a worthless talent evaluator. That wouldn't surprise me. But, he can't take the blame for the Texans shortcomings in player acquisitions. That has to fall to the men in charge...Smith and Kubiak.

It really starts at the top. (McNair) How he escapes blame for the mess he created is beyond me.

Smithiak are deservedly getting their fair share of the blame too.

ChampionTexan
10-14-2009, 11:50 PM
I dont understand why it took Smithiak 2 games to sign Pollard. He should have been signed as soon as he was cut by K.C. It cost the Texans the Jacksonville game.

Oh well signing Pollard after the season started saved McNair money and they didn't have to garuntee Pollard money.

It's decisions like this that are going to keep the Texans around 7-9,8-8,9-7.

IMO

I'm not sure why they waited to sign Pollard - I would have liked to see him here earlier too. Whatever it was, it wasn't to save McNair money. The guarantee of a full years salary for those on the week one roster only applies to vested veterans. Vested status is only achieved with four years of service in the NFL. Pollard didn't have four years service prior to signing with the Texans, and therefore wouldn't have had anything guaranteed even if he was on the week one 53-man roster.

Vinny
10-14-2009, 11:57 PM
I'm not sure why they waited to sign Pollard - I would have liked to see him here earlier too. Whatever it was, it wasn't to save McNair money. The guarantee of a full years salary for those on the week one roster only applies to vested veterans. Vested status is only achieved with four years of service in the NFL. Pollard didn't have four years service prior to signing with the Texans, and therefore wouldn't have had anything guaranteed even if he was on the week one 53-man roster.
They couldn't figure out that Harrison wasn't a player last year. Sometimes I don't know about their player evaluation skills.

infantrycak
10-15-2009, 12:19 AM
I've said it before, hate Asserly as much as you want, but he brought in more Pro bowlers than Smith has quality starters.

Putting aside the obvious disparity of 5 seasons compared to 2, really, 1? Smith has brought in no quality starters at all because Casserly only drafted or brought in as a free agent one pro-bowler. Expansion draft is BS for such a comparison.

Kevin Walter, Vonta Leach - that was easy. I'm not saying Smith's the bomb but can we please stop the analogies back to a day that was abysmally worse? Maybe Smith is only mediocre. That is still a huge step up from That Time That Will Not Be Named - TTTWNBN.

steelbtexan
10-15-2009, 12:31 AM
I'm not sure why they waited to sign Pollard - I would have liked to see him here earlier too. Whatever it was, it wasn't to save McNair money. The guarantee of a full years salary for those on the week one roster only applies to vested veterans. Vested status is only achieved with four years of service in the NFL. Pollard didn't have four years service prior to signing with the Texans, and therefore wouldn't have had anything guaranteed even if he was on the week one 53-man roster.

Thanks for the info

Not going ahead and signing Pollard was a big mistake.

If Kubes loses his job he will look back and wish he would've signed Pollard earlier.

Goatcheese
10-15-2009, 12:50 AM
Putting aside the obvious disparity of 5 seasons compared to 2, really, 1? Smith has brought in no quality starters at all because Casserly only drafted or brought in as a free agent one pro-bowler. Expansion draft is BS for such a comparison.

Kevin Walter, Vonta Leach - that was easy. I'm not saying Smith's the bomb but can we please stop the analogies back to a day that was abysmally worse? Maybe Smith is only mediocre. That is still a huge step up from That Time That Will Not Be Named - TTTWNBN.

Johnson, Mathis, Williams, Ryans, and Daniels. I feel like I'm forgetting somebody.

Asserly brought in K-Dub FWI.

So Smith basically gave us Cushing, Okoye, Diles and Leach as quality NFL starters. Maybe Smith.

You can count Schaub, but he was all Kubiak IMO.

infantrycak
10-15-2009, 01:06 AM
Johnson, Mathis, Williams, Ryans, and Daniels. I feel like I'm forgetting somebody.

Asserly brought in K-Dub FWI.

So Smith basically gave us Cushing, Okoye, Diles and Leach as quality NFL starters. Maybe Smith.

You can count Schaub, but he was all Kubiak IMO.

OK, I will give you the flop that became Mathis as a one and done out of the league pro-bowler - whoo hoo. Sorry, but I am not going to credit Williams or Ryans to Casserly. Daniels I will also give you as Kubiak said he let Casserly convince him on that pick - which is also the quote which says Casserly gets no credit for Williams and Ryans as Kubiak ran that show.

Goatcheese
10-15-2009, 01:21 AM
OK, I will give you the flop that became Mathis as a one and done out of the league pro-bowler - whoo hoo. Sorry, but I am not going to credit Williams or Ryans to Casserly. Daniels I will also give you as Kubiak said he let Casserly convince him on that pick - which is also the quote which says Casserly gets no credit for Williams and Ryans as Kubiak ran that show.

Where is the quote that Asserly had no input on Williams and Ryans? I'm sure Kubes made the ultimate dicision, but to say CC didn't scout, and rank the players for Gary to pick from seems far fetched.

The quotes I've heard are that dick smith and CC talked Kubes into taking Williams. Sure, they were from CC and smith, but unless Kubes directly contradicted them I don't have any reason to doubt them.

Either way, even if you don't count Mario and Ryans, 3 probowlers vs 0. When the debate is number of probowlers vs the number of just above average players...

infantrycak
10-15-2009, 09:32 AM
Either way, even if you don't count Mario and Ryans, 3 probowlers vs 0. When the debate is number of probowlers vs the number of just above average players...

I'm sorry but Mathis is an out of the league flop. That simply cannot count as some sort of positive for a GM. Leach is not above average? Walter is not above average? Cushing is not above average? Slaton is not above average?

Oh and by the way, who would Casserly have selected if AJ and Charles Rogers had both been available? We don't know.

Texans_Chick
10-15-2009, 11:25 AM
I'm sorry but Mathis is an out of the league flop. That simply cannot count as some sort of positive for a GM. Leach is not above average? Walter is not above average? Cushing is not above average? Slaton is not above average?

Oh and by the way, who would Casserly have selected if AJ and Charles Rogers had both been available? We don't know.

Allegedly, Casserly has said that Rogers was off the board for the Texans, but that was never said at the time and may be revisionist history. Casserly is all about CYA--"YOU PICK BABIN!!! THAT IS NOT ON ME!!!!"

Because there was good conversation on this point in my blog post, I talk about the player age, what that means relating to injuries and penalties, and some other issues (lots of interesting proprietary stats):

More on the Houston Texans as the youngest team in NFL (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2009/10/more_on_the_houston_texans_as.html)

According to McClain, Rick Smith does a ton of the personnel evaluation/decisions separate from Kubiak. He mentioned that in a recent chat, IIRC.

I think sometimes that the Texans are overly in love with their lower round picks and don't do a good job finding replacement level vets to compete with them.

TheRealJoker
10-15-2009, 12:01 PM
It seems to me that the Texans undervalue REAL veteran leadership a great deal since its inception. Casserly had the "under 30" rule when signing FAs for our first season and it looks like Smithiak are following in the same footsteps with a few rare exceptions (ND Kalu, Ahman Green, Nick Ferguson, Chris Brown). The leaders of this team are all under 30 aside from Kris Brown and Chester Pitts.

AJ: Unquestioned leader... Has enough years to be a veteran leader but imo more of a "leads by example" guy. Nothing wrong with that but this team needs a Ray Lewis type "yell in your face" leader in a bad way.

DeMeco/Mario: Leaders but not true veteran leadership since they've only been in the league for 4 years and are still learning a lot themselves. We cant realistically expect them to make as big of a difference as a 8-10 year vet on a rookie because these guys are too young to know HOW to lead imo. Mario falls into the AJ category of "leads by example".

Schaub: As long as he stays healthy he'll be able to prove he's a leader. He becomes more of a leader every game as long as he keeps playing well

Dunta: Has the years but imo isn't really a leader. Too quick to point out the faults in other parts of the team instead of taking the blame for what he did wrong. The opposite of Coach Kubiak and with a leader we need a mix of both!!!

This team could've really used Brian Dawkins in FA. That guy has been to multiple pro bowls and led one of the best defenses from the last decade. He got signed by the Broncos and all of a sudden their defense (which was just as bad if not worse than our's last season) is one of the best in the league. I think he had a big part in that happening. In FA we need to adopt the New England Patriots strategy of signing older FA role players and older FAs that can actually start for us. Enough spending big bucks on guys who we "predict" to break out after their rookie contract expires. Start signing guys who can still play but may be on the downside of their career and can start in front of the youngsters until they've learned a thing or two.

We need veteran leadership more than anything else on this team.

badboy
10-15-2009, 12:15 PM
I'm sure the Texans aren't good at evaluating low end FA talent.

Bobby Greir is the director of pro player personel. Enough said

I dont understand why it took Smithiak 2 games to sign Pollard. He should have been signed as soon as he was cut by K.C. It cost the Texans the Jacksonville game.

Oh well signing Pollard after the season started saved McNair money and they didn't have to garuntee Pollard money.

It's decisions like this that are going to keep the Texans around 7-9,8-8,9-7.

Whoever made this decision (Smith, Kubes or Greir) should be fired. On second thought Greir should've already been fired. IMOWho else offered Pollard a contract? I did not see that in your post.

nero THE zero
10-15-2009, 12:44 PM
I'm sure the Texans aren't good at evaluating low end FA talent.

Bobby Greir is the director of pro player personel. Enough said

I dont understand why it took Smithiak 2 games to sign Pollard. He should have been signed as soon as he was cut by K.C. It cost the Texans the Jacksonville game.

Oh well signing Pollard after the season started saved McNair money and they didn't have to garuntee Pollard money.

It's decisions like this that are going to keep the Texans around 7-9,8-8,9-7.

Whoever made this decision (Smith, Kubes or Greir) should be fired. On second thought Greir should've already been fired. IMO
I don't know what's more outrageous, the notion that it was McNair who kept the Texans from signing Pollard, the notion that a measly few thousand dollars would have been the basis of such a decision, or that Bernard Pollard is the difference between a .500 record or playoffs.

Ckw
10-15-2009, 12:48 PM
This team could've really used Brian Dawkins in FA. That guy has been to multiple pro bowls and led one of the best defenses from the last decade. He got signed by the Broncos and all of a sudden their defense (which was just as bad if not worse than our's last season) is one of the best in the league. I think he had a big part in that happening. In FA we need to adopt the New England Patriots strategy of signing older FA role players and older FAs that can actually start for us. Enough spending big bucks on guys who we "predict" to break out after their rookie contract expires. Start signing guys who can still play but may be on the downside of their career and can start in front of the youngsters until they've learned a thing or two.

We need veteran leadership more than anything else on this team.

I am really pissed we didn't make a play for Brian Dawkins. That was a really stupid move. The guy has been one of the best safeties in the NFL for years and his experience alone would have meant a ton to a young team like the Texans. :gun:

CloakNNNdagger
10-15-2009, 12:54 PM
It seems to me that the Texans undervalue REAL veteran leadership a great deal since its inception. Casserly had the "under 30" rule when signing FAs for our first season and it looks like Smithiak are following in the same footsteps with a few rare exceptions (ND Kalu, Ahman Green, Nick Ferguson, Chris Brown). The leaders of this team are all under 30 aside from Kris Brown and Chester Pitts.

AJ: Unquestioned leader... Has enough years to be a veteran leader but imo more of a "leads by example" guy. Nothing wrong with that but this team needs a Ray Lewis type "yell in your face" leader in a bad way.

DeMeco/Mario: Leaders but not true veteran leadership since they've only been in the league for 4 years and are still learning a lot themselves. We cant realistically expect them to make as big of a difference as a 8-10 year vet on a rookie because these guys are too young to know HOW to lead imo. Mario falls into the AJ category of "leads by example".

Schaub: As long as he stays healthy he'll be able to prove he's a leader. He becomes more of a leader every game as long as he keeps playing well

Dunta: Has the years but imo isn't really a leader. Too quick to point out the faults in other parts of the team instead of taking the blame for what he did wrong. The opposite of Coach Kubiak and with a leader we need a mix of both!!!

This team could've really used Brian Dawkins in FA. That guy has been to multiple pro bowls and led one of the best defenses from the last decade. He got signed by the Broncos and all of a sudden their defense (which was just as bad if not worse than our's last season) is one of the best in the league. I think he had a big part in that happening. In FA we need to adopt the New England Patriots strategy of signing older FA role players and older FAs that can actually start for us. Enough spending big bucks on guys who we "predict" to break out after their rookie contract expires. Start signing guys who can still play but may be on the downside of their career and can start in front of the youngsters until they've learned a thing or two.

We need veteran leadership more than anything else on this team.

Your post is right on.

One point I'd like to make is when you mostly "go young" you better hit on all your choices (from the top [McNair] on down [players]), or you leave yourself open to using the old excuse "they haven't had enough time to show their real potential." By the time you are willing to admit your poor choices aren't working out, you have the situation we have been and still are looking at.............at best, a mediocre team still talking about "potential.":bubbles:

GuerillaBlack
10-15-2009, 01:43 PM
I am really pissed we didn't make a play for Brian Dawkins. That was a really stupid move. The guy has been one of the best safeties in the NFL for years and his experience alone would have meant a ton to a young team like the Texans. :gun:

For real. Texans' front office is lame. We need to stop being so laid back. Go out and sign the big FAs.

BigBull17
10-15-2009, 02:11 PM
Agreed. A huge position of need, check. Passionate leader for a team with none, check. Better than every safety we have ever had, check. Also could have gone after Darren Sharper. He just knows where the ball is and what to do when he gets his paws on it. But, we did have Barber, so who needs a safety...:gun:

Goatcheese
10-15-2009, 02:20 PM
I'm sorry but Mathis is an out of the league flop. That simply cannot count as some sort of positive for a GM.

He had injury and off the field problems. When healthy he was a monster on kickoff returns. You can't blame the GM for unforeseeable things like injuries and developing a big head after a rookie pro bowl trip. He picked a successful talent.

Leach is not above average? Walter is not above average? Cushing is not above average? Slaton is not above average?



Johnson, Mathis, Williams, Ryans, and Daniels. I feel like I'm forgetting somebody.

Asserly brought in K-Dub FWI.

So Smith basically gave us Cushing, Okoye, Diles and Leach as quality NFL starters. Maybe Smith.

You can count Schaub, but he was all Kubiak IMO.

And no, so far this year Slaton has not been above average. He's been downright horrible.

steelbtexan
10-15-2009, 03:50 PM
Who else offered Pollard a contract? I did not see that in your post.

Nobody offered him a contract.

My point is for whatever reason management decided not to sign Pollard until after game 2.

Bad SS play cost the Texans the jacksonville game, IMO

steelbtexan
10-15-2009, 03:54 PM
I don't know what's more outrageous, the notion that it was McNair who kept the Texans from signing Pollard, the notion that a measly few thousand dollars would have been the basis of such a decision, or that Bernard Pollard is the difference between a .500 record or playoffs.

Someone in the FO screwed up by not signing a capable SS for the first 2 games of the season.

If the Texans miss the playoffs by one game (Jacksonville) then yes it's concievable that not signing Pollard earlier cost the Texans a playoff spot.

76Texan
10-15-2009, 03:54 PM
Nobody offered him a contract.

My point is for whatever reason management decided not to sign Pollard until after game 2.

Bad SS play cost the Texans the jacksonville game, IMO

Maybe his agent was discussing money with a few different teams?

Marcus
10-15-2009, 04:40 PM
Oh and by the way, who would Casserly have selected if AJ and Charles Rogers had both been available? We don't know.

Oh and by the way, are you going by what you knew back then before that draft, or are you going by what you know now?

Texans_Chick
10-15-2009, 04:49 PM
Oh and by the way, are you going by what you knew back then before that draft, or are you going by what you know now?

Casserly says now that he was off the board then because of character concerns that they knew then. FWIW.

Lucky
10-15-2009, 06:24 PM
Casserly says now that he was off the board then because of character concerns that they knew then. FWIW.
After popping positive on his combine urine test, Rogers entered the NFL drug testing program as soon as he signed his contract. No way the squeaky clean Texans would have touched him. They didn't have to, with a equally good prospect available in Andre Johnson.

The Texans were very lucky the Lions didn't get cold feet on Rogers and take AJ. The #2 prospect on the Texans draft board? DT Dwayne Robertson (now out of the league).

Lucky
10-15-2009, 06:26 PM
Someone in the FO screwed up by not signing a capable SS for the first 2 games of the season.
How about someone (someone?) in the front office screwed up by not signing a capable SS during the entire offseason?

Marcus
10-15-2009, 07:00 PM
The Texans were very lucky the Lions didn't get cold feet on Rogers and take AJ. The #2 prospect on the Texans draft board? DT Dwayne Robertson (now out of the league).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Dwayne Robertson the first of about 5 DTs taken in the top 15?

Goatcheese
10-15-2009, 07:26 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Dwayne Robertson the first of about 5 DTs taken in the top 15?

#4 NY Jets Dewayne Robertson DT
#6 NO Saints John Sullivan DT
#9 Min Vikings Kevin Williams DT
#12 SL Rams Jimmy Kennedy DT

.
.
.
#26 NY Giants Williams Joseph DT

3-4 DE/DT hybrids
#13 NE Patriots Ty Warren DE
#16 Pit Steelers Jerome McDougle DE

Texans_Chick
10-16-2009, 09:37 AM
How about someone (someone?) in the front office screwed up by not signing a capable SS during the entire offseason?

Who do you think would have been a good get?

wags
10-16-2009, 10:47 AM
Who do you think would have been a good get?

This past offseason? Brian Dawkins could play SS, Sean Jones, Mike Brown, Renaldo Hill, Jim Leonhard.

mussop
10-16-2009, 12:56 PM
The coaches and GM should recognize lack of player leadership and make adjustments. Therefore this is not an excuse. Just another mis step by the whole group in charge of running this team IMO. A They either chose to ignore it thinking THEY could overcome it, or B they werent smart enough to recognize it. Either way the fault lies witht them.

Goldensilence
10-16-2009, 01:14 PM
Other thing I was thinking earlier how many of the players on the team have seen a winning season that included post season play?

So Far:

Antonio Smith - Fresh off Super Bowl run
Eugene Wilson - Played for the Pats
Reeves - Playoffs with Cowboys
Jeff Zgonina - won a title with the Rams in 2000
Kevin Walter - was on the Bengals 2005 team that made the playoffs
Chris Myers - 2005 Broncos made the playoffs

badboy
10-16-2009, 01:21 PM
The coaches and GM should recognize lack of player leadership and make adjustments. Therefore this is not an excuse. Just another mis step by the whole group in charge of running this team IMO. A They either chose to ignore it thinking THEY could overcome it, or B they werent smart enough to recognize it. Either way the fault lies witht them.I think it was a combo of Reeves and DR being back improving the CB position (also Quinn's selection), the improvement of LBs with Cush and Diles being healthy and the expected resurgence of Ryans (which is happening) and hopeful DLine improvement with Smith opposite Mario (selection of Barwin as a disrupter) that safety was not a huge issue. Pollard coming aboard and his outstanding play re-enforces this.

Goldensilence
10-16-2009, 01:32 PM
I think it was a combo of Reeves and DR being back improving the CB position (also Quinn's selection), the improvement of LBs with Cush and Diles being healthy and the expected resurgence of Ryans (which is happening) and hopeful DLine improvement with Smith opposite Mario (selection of Barwin as a disrupter) that safety was not a huge issue. Pollard coming aboard and his outstanding play re-enforces this.

What post are you responding to? I'll give you that having Dunta and Reeves back at CB has helped the secondary look better. But, neither are what I would describe as leaders.

I think Cushing's play on the field and his intensity will lend him to becoming a future leader of the defense, but not yet.

Safety play was not a huge issue? Seriously? We went into the season with Dominique Barber as a starter. The best the staff dredged up behind him was Busing. Wilson is a capable starter, but not all world and his depth Nick Ferguson didn't look so hot to start the season. What freaking safeties were you looking at to not think it was a problem?!

Let's face it we got lucky that KC was dumb enough to cut their leading tackler from last season.

mussop
10-16-2009, 01:53 PM
I think it was a combo of Reeves and DR being back improving the CB position (also Quinn's selection), the improvement of LBs with Cush and Diles being healthy and the expected resurgence of Ryans (which is happening) and hopeful DLine improvement with Smith opposite Mario (selection of Barwin as a disrupter) that safety was not a huge issue. Pollard coming aboard and his outstanding play re-enforces this.

:thinking: .......HUH????????

Mr teX
10-16-2009, 02:20 PM
This past offseason? Brian Dawkins could play SS, Sean Jones, Mike Brown, Renaldo Hill, Jim Leonhard.

Dawkins is the only real upgrade on this list & even with him their was some question of whether he was over the hill or not.

Everyone else on this list isn't an upgrade over what we currently have.

Sean Jones - who?

Mike Brown - can't stay healthy & we don't need another brown on the team with that problem.

Reynaldo Hill- titan fans complained about this dude for years before fisher & co. finally got rid of him.

Jim Leonhard - was pretty much unproven & we stood virtually no chance of getting him anyway b/c he already knew ryan's system & ryan wanted him as a starter..there was no guarantee of him becoming a starter here.

badboy
10-16-2009, 02:43 PM
What post are you responding to? I'll give you that having Dunta and Reeves back at CB has helped the secondary look better. But, neither are what I would describe as leaders.

I think Cushing's play on the field and his intensity will lend him to becoming a future leader of the defense, but not yet.

Safety play was not a huge issue? Seriously? We went into the season with Dominique Barber as a starter. The best the staff dredged up behind him was Busing. Wilson is a capable starter, but not all world and his depth Nick Ferguson didn't look so hot to start the season. What freaking safeties were you looking at to not think it was a problem?!

Let's face it we got lucky that KC was dumb enough to cut their leading tackler from last season.GS you know by my umpteen posts that DT, FS and RB are huge needs on my board. I campaigned for Raji and his sidekick that went in 2nd round and then for Malcom Jenkins as he continued to fall to us. I agree that FS is a weakness but my post was to address why Smith did not agree. Safety has never been an issue since he arrived.

badboy
10-16-2009, 02:54 PM
What post are you responding to? I'll give you that having Dunta and Reeves back at CB has helped the secondary look better. But, neither are what I would describe as leaders.

I think Cushing's play on the field and his intensity will lend him to becoming a future leader of the defense, but not yet.

Safety play was not a huge issue? Seriously? We went into the season with Dominique Barber as a starter. The best the staff dredged up behind him was Busing. Wilson is a capable starter, but not all world and his depth Nick Ferguson didn't look so hot to start the season. What freaking safeties were you looking at to not think it was a problem?!

Let's face it we got lucky that KC was dumb enough to cut their leading tackler from last season.After reading Someone in the FO screwed up by not signing a capable SS for the first 2 games of the season.

If the Texans miss the playoffs by one game (Jacksonville) then yes it's concievable that not signing Pollard earlier cost the Texans a playoff spot

I responded to Mussop's comment on veteran leadership with my post. I think SMith thought the veterans on defense made up for not signing a veteran FS until Pollard. My post also indicated I believe management thought the improvements I noted would be enough. They were proven wrong and signed Pollard. I did not mean to indicate I agreed with that position.

CloakNNNdagger
10-16-2009, 08:09 PM
I'm not sure why they waited to sign Pollard - I would have liked to see him here earlier too. Whatever it was, it wasn't to save McNair money. The guarantee of a full years salary for those on the week one roster only applies to vested veterans. Vested status is only achieved with four years of service in the NFL. Pollard didn't have four years service prior to signing with the Texans, and therefore wouldn't have had anything guaranteed even if he was on the week one 53-man roster.

This comment buried in a Bengals vs Texans Analysis (http://www.seattlepi.com/scorecard/nflnews.asp?articleID=140199)(worth reading in total) could be the explanation of why Pollard was not picked up sooner:


Safety Bernard Pollard (13 tackles) has played the last two games after missing the first three because of injury, while Eugene Wilson (10 tackles, 1 INT) returned to his safety position last week after missing the Oakland game. Dominique Barber (16 tackles) and John Busing (15 tackles, 1 INT) have appeared in every game this season for the Texans.


Re-inforced by the chronology listed below:

2009-09-24 11:13:02
Kent Babb, of The Kansas City Star, reports the Houston Texans have signed unrestricted free-agent SS Bernard Pollard (Chiefs). Terms of the contract were not disclosed.
Source: KFFL.com

2009-09-05 23:43:02
Free-agent S Bernard Pollard's (Chiefs) agent, Jeff Chilcoat, told KFFL.com that Pollard is healthy and ready to go. 'His ankle issue has healed and his release from the Chiefs is bitter sweet. He enjoyed his time there, but is looking forward to a new opportunity,' Chilcoat said. [DO YOU TRUST AN AGENT?]

Source: KFFL.com

2009-09-02 18:13:02
Kansas City Chiefs SS Bernard Pollard (ankle) has a minor tweak of his ankle and will not play in the team's final preseason game Thursday, Sept. 3, so he can get healthy for the start of the regular season.
Source: KFFL.com

2009-08-19 11:53:02
CBSSports.com reports Kansas City Chiefs SS Bernard Pollard (ankle, foot) left practice Wednesday, Aug. 19, to join the rehab team on another practice field.
Source: KFFL.com

Lucky
10-16-2009, 10:03 PM
Who do you think would have been a good get?

This past offseason? Brian Dawkins could play SS, Sean Jones, Mike Brown, Renaldo Hill, Jim Leonhard.

And James Butler. Somebody. At least make an effort.

I didn't say much about not picking up a safety during free agency because I thought, "Smith and Kubiak must like some safeties in this draft." But, they didn't take a safety until the 7th round. An afterthought. Basically how they've treated the position over their 4 seasons.

ArlingtonTexan
10-17-2009, 12:10 AM
And James Butler. Somebody. At least make an effort.

I didn't say much about not picking up a safety during free agency because I thought, "Smith and Kubiak must like some safeties in this draft." But, they didn't take a safety until the 7th round. An afterthought. Basically how they've treated the position over their 4 seasons.

My issue is not so much with the draft, but after the draft evaluating what you were not really able to address. Arguments can be made that until the 4th round the Texans did not take a position that was not a pure need : LBer with size, pure pass rushing DE and an at least bigger, if not better solution at C, back-up interior line. All of those were clear needs.

The problem is that they didn't bring in many veterans for those positions that they really did not address in the draft. There are only so many draft picks/opportunity to trade down and a team is never going to address everything that they should. There is no reason that the Texans should not have forced players with little experience to have to outplay the equals of Reyes and Pollard instead of assuming that the flashes they have seen is enough.

Hell, they did this correct at QB, where an unproven player got challenged by a guy who while flawed at least had done something (not even a lot really) in the league. Cato June (despite injury) was a good signing for the same reason. What had Adibi and Diles done that they should be handed a job w/o beating out a veteran? why they did not do this at safety, OL depth and TE is not clear to me.

dalemurphy
10-17-2009, 01:04 AM
Dawkins is the only real upgrade on this list & even with him their was some question of whether he was over the hill or not.

Everyone else on this list isn't an upgrade over what we currently have.

Sean Jones - who?

Mike Brown - can't stay healthy & we don't need another brown on the team with that problem.

Reynaldo Hill- titan fans complained about this dude for years before fisher & co. finally got rid of him.

Jim Leonhard - was pretty much unproven & we stood virtually no chance of getting him anyway b/c he already knew ryan's system & ryan wanted him as a starter..there was no guarantee of him becoming a starter here.


If you don't know who Sean Jones is then you probably shouldn't represent yourself as if you know what you're talking about.