PDA

View Full Version : Tomlinson to sign with Jets


Pages : 1 [2]

HOU-TEX
02-25-2010, 03:33 PM
You know, I'm getting to the point where I wish they'd sign LT just to shut McClain up. LOL

Hehe, I was thinking the same thing. I think it'd take me a week to stop laughing at McTwotonsoffun.

dinkatoid
02-25-2010, 03:39 PM
You know, I'm getting to the point where I wish they'd sign LT just to shut McClain up. LOL

Yeah, I was almost hoping I would hit refresh and the next story up would be "Texans sign LT."

Hervoyel
02-25-2010, 03:54 PM
This is totally Amaan Green. He's just as worked as green was when we brought him in. Was he better than Green? Sure, but that doesn't matter. He's washed up now and he's most likely got a ton of injuries coming in his future. Haven't people learned that this has already hurt the Texans in past?? You guys want us to continue to make the same mistakes?? I mean, if we get another RB right now first, and then go after LT then fine I'm good with that. But if we get LT right now, then you can forget about Kubes doing anything else for the RB situation and we'd be banking on LT for next year and that would be a huge mistake. Learn from your previous mistakes. Don't repeat them like Kubes has already done.


For the record I absolutely agree with you and this doesn't happen often (not that either of us are fools, just we tend to approach many subjects in here from different angles IMO). I have this sick feeling though that there just might be some little flicker of Texans interest in Tomlinson and it scares the bejeebus out of me. It's so completely Ahman Green (with a better set of stats) and I want to say the Texans have learned their lesson but the more I think about it the more I question how much I believe that. Do they still want to prove that the Ahman Green signing was a sound idea that just didn't work out for reasons beyond their ability to predict or control? They stick with bad decisions here so long and try so hard to validate them that I almost wouldn't put it past them to make a run at Ladanian Tomlinson just to be right about signing an older back.

It's not that I really, truly believe the Texans are going to do that. It's more that I believe that they can be just pig headed enough to consider it and when the smartest head coach in the room gets to talking with the smartest general manager in the room you know things can get freaky.

I won't feel totally safe until one of the other desperate teams signs him. If we do I'm never going to stop making fun of the people who want him now. Not until the end of time. Not until the sun burns out.

BigBull17
02-25-2010, 03:58 PM
http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&id=561

Apparently McClain is one of the best beat writers in the business, so there is no way he could be wrong. There is no way we are going after LT, McClain has spoken!

I want them to sign him now so he looks like an *****...even more of an *****.

infantrycak
02-25-2010, 04:05 PM
If we do I'm never going to stop making fun of the people who want him now. Not until the end of time. Not until the sun burns out.

What's the standard for mockery? If he plays 3rd down back and short yardage only getting 300 yds rushing while knocking in 12 TDs is that still mockable?

Chris Brown got paid $1.7 mil this year. Swap them straight out and I have a hard time seeing the grounds for mocking.

Hervoyel
02-25-2010, 04:27 PM
What's the standard for mockery? If he plays 3rd down back and short yardage only getting 300 yds rushing while knocking in 12 TDs is that still mockable?

Chris Brown got paid $1.7 mil this year. Swap them straight out and I have a hard time seeing the grounds for mocking.

Get the same results and I do. I saw nothing that Chris Brown contributed to the team for his $1.7 mil. I'd be mad at having him back for any price and I'll be very disappointed if they choose to bring in another stale, aging, slowing, used-to-be for any reason whatsoever. Sign LT, pay him whatever NFL minimum wage is, and then trot him out to do the things Chris Brown was asked to do and get no better than what you got from Chris Brown and I'd say that the Texans decision (and those who supported it) was infinitely mockable.

What can you get from LT right now that you can't get from Arian Foster? 3.3 yards a carry? 730 whopping yards in 14 games? You can get injuries from LT. You can get disappointment. I'm all over the idea of grabbing the 37 year old center that Denver justt released because I think there's a spot on an NFL roster for an old veteran. RB ain't that spot.

Stop thinking "Jerry Rice" folks. Think "Shaun Alexander". LT doesn't want to sit on the bench and then come in to score a TD on first, second, or third and goal. He wants to play RB and get paid like a starter. Please don't let it be us that gets to do this again. Please?

Double Barrel
02-25-2010, 05:35 PM
The Texans have never sniffed the playoffs...maybe last season, but that was more of the floating aroma of the playoffs around the corner from us...I doubt LT wants to end his career with a team that has yet to even get to the playoffs, though.

Who knows how much tread he has left, but I think some team that he perceives to have more playoff potential than us will end up with him.

infantrycak
02-25-2010, 06:01 PM
He wants to play RB and get paid like a starter. Please don't let it be us that gets to do this again. Please?

Well I've been consistent that if he wants to be the starter and wants to be paid like one them let him walk. All I'm saying is I would talk to him to see if that is the case.

What can you get from LT right now that you can't get from Arian Foster? 3.3 yards a carry? 730 whopping yards in 14 games?

Proven receiving threat, pass protection, goal line/short yardage back and can complete a half back pass. Hopefully Foster will grow into some or all of those roles as well. If someone is expecting him to come in take over as starter and have a rebirth then yes I would agree that is unrealistic.

The Texans have never sniffed the playoffs...maybe last season, but that was more of the floating aroma of the playoffs around the corner from us...I doubt LT wants to end his career with a team that has yet to even get to the playoffs, though.

Who knows how much tread he has left, but I think some team that he perceives to have more playoff potential than us will end up with him.

Well either his perception of the Texans is different or he doesn't care as much as you think since he identified the Texans as a place he would like to go.

TEXANS84
02-25-2010, 06:10 PM
I saw nothing that Chris Brown contributed to the team for his $1.7 mil.

I did. Two L's.

I do think that LT would be way more benificial than Chris Brown though. At least he can get into the endzone, block a blitzing linebacker, and catch a pass out of the backfield.

But that's the TCU in me, so I'm a little biased.

Texecutioner
02-25-2010, 07:04 PM
I don't think it's Green. Like I've said before, Green was brought in to be our feature back. LT won't. LT would be brought in to bring some veteran leadership and for goalline carries.

YOu see I don't believe that for one second. I'll go off of history with Kubiak and history says that LT would be the feature back here until he would get hurt or something. Kubes likes vets to play and he's proven time and time again that he'll play the washed up vet over the young potential players. He did it with Green and he's done it with Brown. He kept Moats and Foster out of the line up all year practically, because he had such a hard on for Brown. And we're talking about LT here. LT likes to get his carries and when he doesn't he bitches about it. LT has never even hardly helped his team in the playoffs either. No question in my mind LT would be the starter here if we signed him.

I don't want to go down that road only unless we sign another back like Lendale White or something. That way we at least have a full committee of guys and it will be harder for LT to separate from the pack. But what we have right now, LT would start over all of these guys.

theanswer000
02-25-2010, 07:44 PM
As long as we draft another running back early to mid round, Ben Tate, Legarrette Blount, etc I think this could be the best move the Texans could make this off-season. LT is a legend he has separated himself from Ahman Green big time. And he would for sure have gotten it in all of the times Chris Brown never did. Hopefully he is in Houston tomorrow. He might not be that young anymore but he has something to prove to the league. And I think that is something this Texans team needs. He knows were going to the playoffs next year. Anyone who kept up with the Texans knows that. Thats why in the media conference he said he wants to go to a team on the rise. I think he was hinting towards the Texans that he is ready.

awtysst
02-25-2010, 08:01 PM
According to Math, LT was the #59 HB in the NFL. That qualifies him as a low #2 back. He will likely get worse next year and drop into the 60s to 70s. That drops him into a #3 back. Yall really want a #3 or at best low #2?

Hervoyel
02-25-2010, 08:21 PM
Well I've been consistent that if he wants to be the starter and wants to be paid like one them let him walk. All I'm saying is I would talk to him to see if that is the case.



Proven receiving threat, pass protection, goal line/short yardage back and can complete a half back pass. Hopefully Foster will grow into some or all of those roles as well. If someone is expecting him to come in take over as starter and have a rebirth then yes I would agree that is unrealistic.

The guy caught 20 passes last year and averaged 7.7 yards a pop. I'd say more than likely he's a former receiving threat. Supposedly Arian Foster can protect his QB too. That was what kept him out of the picture for so long according to Kubiak and if he hadn't been able to earn their confidence he wouldn't have seen the field consistently the last two weeks. As for the half back pass I hope we don't see too many more of those in the near future.

I genuinely don't want to bring someone like LT in to do things that a young, hungry guy already on the roster and making peanuts can do. I understand that he could be veteran leadership and could be a proven goal line back but I don't trust the Texans to leave it at this. Texecutioner is right about LT liking his carries and Gary Kubiak liking a veteran back there. I think in 2010 he'll be even more inclined to rely on an old star like LT if one is available. The Texans might bring LT here to be a role player and LT might come here to be a role player but the carries will get pushed his way by Kubiak just like carries were pushed Brown's way last year.

This is one thread I really do hope becomes much ado about nothing.

NitroGSXR
02-25-2010, 09:21 PM
Texcutioner really said something that I can buy with Kubiak liking to stick with the vet. The thing about Green... he was slated to be our feature back but he got hurt from the get go. He really didn't make the field enough to be a successful feature back. He'd be easing his way in before limping off on the first drive. He was never healthy for the Houston Texans. Period.

LaDainian I think is a bit different.

infantrycak
02-26-2010, 10:44 AM
He did it with Green and he's done it with Brown. He kept Moats and Foster out of the line up all year practically, because he had such a hard on for Brown.

That is not correct with respect to Brown. Slaton was the starter until getting pulled. Did Brown start the next game? - no it was Moats. Then to Brown? - nope back to Slaton. Then Brown for three games officially as starter but Moats getting the rushing by a large margin (12 for Brown v. 35 for Moats plus Foster getting 15 carries) and on to Foster for the last two which would have been the last three but for Foster walking onto the field for his first start and immediately fumbling the ball.

Mike Kerns
02-26-2010, 12:36 PM
Texans Twitter:

Rick Smith: entertaining idea and thought process of adding Tomlinson

Yankee_In_TX
02-26-2010, 01:14 PM
Texans Twitter:

You beat me. Can someone call 610 next time McClain is on and ask him about this?

Yankee_In_TX
02-26-2010, 01:18 PM
Can someone post the link that went to LT's player page (don't remember what site) and has a snippet from McClain?

infantrycak
02-26-2010, 01:20 PM
Can someone post the link that went to LT's player page (don't remember what site) and has a snippet from McClain?

Here you go:

The Houston Chronicle's John McClain emphatically reiterated that the Texans have no interest in free agent LaDainian Tomlinson.
"I keep telling writers Texans have no interest in L.T.," tweeted McClain. "Some don't believe me cause they keep hearing it [elsewhere]." We believe him. McClain is one of the best beat writers in the business, and he's stated consistently that the Texans have no interest in a runner on the backside of his career.

Link (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=nfl&id=561)

Yankee_In_TX
02-26-2010, 01:24 PM
Here you go:



Link (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=nfl&id=561)

Must spread rep (my wife is not McClains biggest fan, this all will amuse her).

Blake
02-26-2010, 02:40 PM
What kind of contract is LT looking for from teams?

Mike Kerns
02-26-2010, 02:46 PM
What kind of contract is LT looking for from teams?

First he said he wanted to go to a team with a chance at a title. Then he changed it to a "team on the rise" and that he wants a large role. Schefter said L.T. still expects to get paid well.

If he was signing for peanuts, I think we'd be all over him. But I don't see us giving him an Ahman Green-like contract.

infantrycak
02-26-2010, 02:54 PM
What kind of contract is LT looking for from teams?

Nobody has a clue.

Ole Miss Texan
02-26-2010, 03:22 PM
I'd love to have him for a reasonable contract. Not our feature back but a complimentary back that can help out the three young guys (Slaton, Foster and Rookie).

Is he on the decline? Yes. But he has a nose for the endzone. He's scored 10+ TD's in all of his 9 seasons. Again, on the decline? Sure, but he had 12 rushing TD's to his name last year... the entire Texans RB stable had 13.

Bring the Texas-native home again, sign him to a decent 3 year contract, use him primarily has our goalline back to pick up those TD's. Slaton probably won't play much, may need to heal from surgery. Foster will be our starter, Rookie will get decent carries. After a year or two, we'll know what we have in our 3 young RB's and if need be we could release LT prior to his 3rd year where his salary will most likely escalate. (I suspect he'll want a majority of his contact guaranteed though)

Texecutioner
02-26-2010, 03:23 PM
That is not correct with respect to Brown. Slaton was the starter until getting pulled. Did Brown start the next game? - no it was Moats. Then to Brown? - nope back to Slaton. Then Brown for three games officially as starter but Moats getting the rushing by a large margin (12 for Brown v. 35 for Moats plus Foster getting 15 carries) and on to Foster for the last two which would have been the last three but for Foster walking onto the field for his first start and immediately fumbling the ball.

You are incorrect. Brown and Green were both the guys before Slaton ever got going the year before. Slaton ended up kicking both of their asses once he got his opportunities two years ago, but Kubes did not intend on Slaton being anything more than a 3rd down back. Kubes had Brown and Green in front of him, and Slaton also got a little lucky because neither one of them could stay healthy that season. Who knows what would have happened had one or both of them stayed healthy.

Now this year, yeah Slaton was the guy early on, but Chris Brown had already gotten this GL back role that he never earned or deserved. Kubes gave it to him because he had size despite his lack of being able to push the pile or to get those extra yards that short yardage backs are supposed to be able to fight for. And no matter how bad or poorly Brown played over and over, Kubes stuck with the guy. It was insane. I mean, even with Moats way out played Brown, Brown was still getting more carries than Moats. It made absolutely no sense at all. Brown ruined games for us early on in the season, and still had his way with Kubes. I would not put anything past Kubes when it comes to the running game. He'll go with the old vet no matter what it seems regardless of how ineffective they are.

Texecutioner
02-26-2010, 03:29 PM
I genuinely don't want to bring someone like LT in to do things that a young, hungry guy already on the roster and making peanuts can do. I understand that he could be veteran leadership and could be a proven goal line back but I don't trust the Texans to leave it at this. Texecutioner is right about LT liking his carries and Gary Kubiak liking a veteran back there. I think in 2010 he'll be even more inclined to rely on an old star like LT if one is available. The Texans might bring LT here to be a role player and LT might come here to be a role player but the carries will get pushed his way by Kubiak just like carries were pushed Brown's way last year.

This is one thread I really do hope becomes much ado about nothing.

Herv, you clearly have paid attention the last few seasons. We both know that if LT gets on this team, it doesn't matter what label he has or what role they're calling it. He's going to end up being the main guy and the feature back. Even if it's a committee, LT will be the guy that gets the important carries and he'll be the "go to guy" when it's all said and done. LT has a major ego as well, and when he doesn't get his playing time he bitches up a storm and he'll do it through the media as well. He's not a team cancer or anything, but he'll gladly vocalize what he thinks he can offer if he isn't getting to offer what he wants. He's a strong polarizing figure, and I could easily see Kubes giving him his way and getting the bulk of the carries even if we've got Foster or some other young RB looking really good.

Could LT end up having a great season somewhere? yeah, that's possible. But it's a lot more likely that he ends up on and off the injury list and is playing hurt for most of the season where it's slowing him down and he's not able to make the cuts that he'd like to make. That was the case with him all year last season. I don't see how this year would be any different either. And whomever does get LT is going to over pay him as well. We know that. They're going to be paying for all of those great seasons he had years ago. Not for what he's able to bring "right now."

El Tejano
02-26-2010, 04:03 PM
Herv, you clearly have paid attention the last few seasons. We both know that if LT gets on this team, it doesn't matter what label he has or what role they're calling it. He's going to end up being the main guy and the feature back. Even if it's a committee, LT will be the guy that gets the important carries and he'll be the "go to guy" when it's all said and done. LT has a major ego as well, and when he doesn't get his playing time he bitches up a storm and he'll do it through the media as well. He's not a team cancer or anything, but he'll gladly vocalize what he thinks he can offer if he isn't getting to offer what he wants. He's a strong polarizing figure, and I could easily see Kubes giving him his way and getting the bulk of the carries even if we've got Foster or some other young RB looking really good.

Could LT end up having a great season somewhere? yeah, that's possible. But it's a lot more likely that he ends up on and off the injury list and is playing hurt for most of the season where it's slowing him down and he's not able to make the cuts that he'd like to make. That was the case with him all year last season. I don't see how this year would be any different either. And whomever does get LT is going to over pay him as well. We know that. They're going to be paying for all of those great seasons he had years ago. Not for what he's able to bring "right now."

This is exactly how I feel. Almost verbatim. I posted this in another thread about Mike Bell not being tendered by New Orleans. Yes, LT will whine if he doesn't get his carries. I can just see him being the starter and getting his job took by Foster and then LT crying to the media about it. When his contract wasn't right last year, he did the same thing.

If anything....he sells more nachos and beer at games.

HOU-TEX
02-26-2010, 04:17 PM
I reckon the Chargers will be revamping their entire backfield.

In the same week the Chargers decided to release running back LaDainian Tomlinson, they also opted not to tender running back Darren Sproles, freeing him to leave the team in free agency without any compensation, said a source close to the situation.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4949186

Texecutioner
02-26-2010, 04:27 PM
I'd rather have Sproles than LT in a heart beat. I'd be more than happy to bring in Sproles as a scat back and I'd want to utilize him in the passing game more than anything. I'd line him up all over the place. That still wouldn't solve our Short Yardage back situation though and we'd still have to get someone else for that, but I like Sproles a lot.

El Tejano
02-26-2010, 04:32 PM
I'd rather have Sproles than LT in a heart beat. I'd be more than happy to bring in Sproles as a scat back and I'd want to utilize him in the passing game more than anything. I'd line him up all over the place. That still wouldn't solve our Short Yardage back situation though and we'd still have to get someone else for that, but I like Sproles a lot.

Do you remember Adrian Griffin from OU who got drafted by Denver? He had some good success in that system. Can you imagine what Sproles could do. I'm not even going to talk about what he could do for our special teams. Aside from provide a threat to take it back everytime, you also allow Jacoby to focus on being the WR we need/want him to be.

TEXANS84
02-26-2010, 04:50 PM
I'm sure the Chargers are thrilled they still have Michael Turner on their roster..... :sarcasm:

El Tejano
02-26-2010, 04:52 PM
I'm sure the Chargers are thrilled they still have Michael Turner on their roster.....

Doh....Ouch!!!!

HOU-TEX
02-26-2010, 05:02 PM
I'm sure the Chargers are thrilled they still have Michael Turner on their roster..... :sarcasm:

I don't think the Chargers are worried, they still have Michael Bennett on their roster.

mussop
02-27-2010, 09:16 PM
If this has already been posted lock it up.

It was reported on NFL channel that we are interseted in LT. So much for us learning our lesson on old has been backs.

GP
02-27-2010, 09:32 PM
But...but...

But McClain ruled it out. He said we wouldn't!!!

(I got this one right, btw).

False Start
02-27-2010, 09:34 PM
I hear McClain also said he was gonna lay off the donuts..... :thinking:

HoustonFrog
02-27-2010, 09:37 PM
Enjoy your 15 pages mussop. Get a drink

http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=69410

Mike Kerns
02-27-2010, 11:03 PM
But...but...

But McClain ruled it out. He said we wouldn't!!!

(I got this one right, btw).

The Texans have no interest in L.T. and if you don't believe me, let's put something on it for charity.
about 12 hours ago via web

I'm going to say this once and for all: The Texans have no interest in L.T. no matter what you read, see or hear.
about 12 hours ago via web

John McClain's twitter

At this point, I would almost LIKE to see it just to spite McClain.

Wolf6151
02-27-2010, 11:21 PM
I don't think that just because a team looks at a player and considers acquiring them means they're serious about the player. It's a GM's job to look at and consider every FA player. Just like a private company takes applications and interviews many people for a single job opening. They must always consider all options but that doesn't mean the Texans will be signing him.

GP
02-28-2010, 12:19 AM
I don't think that just because a team looks at a player and considers acquiring them means they're serious about the player. It's a GM's job to look at and consider every FA player. Just like a private company takes applications and interviews many people for a single job opening. They must always consider all options but that doesn't mean the Texans will be signing him.

For me, it's the way McClain tried to make a statement of such absoluteness.

He took what was said, and combined with LT being cut, and made it equal "Texans not interested in LT."

I don't care what level of interest the Texans have in LT. I don't even care if we never even talk to him.

To say we have NO interest--to say that LT is ruled out--was just laughable. I guess it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, but it was funny because (just like clockwork) reports are coming out that we have some level of interest in LT. LOL.

Napa Auto Parts
02-28-2010, 12:29 AM
I hope not!!!! if we are going to go for a RB over 30 may be it should at least be thomas jones.

m5kwatts
02-28-2010, 01:08 AM
We can all ridicule McClain but there's not a single person on this board who wouldn't be shocked if we signed him

theanswer000
02-28-2010, 02:02 AM
About 90% sure we are going to.

That is going to be funny to hear mcclain defend himself.

Lucky
02-28-2010, 09:56 AM
We can all ridicule McClain but there's not a single person on this board who wouldn't be shocked if we signed him
I wouldn't be shocked. But, I still think Drew Brees finds a way to convince the Saints brass that inking LT would be a wise move.

GP
02-28-2010, 10:25 AM
I wouldn't be shocked. But, I still think Drew Brees finds a way to convince the Saints brass that inking LT would be a wise move.

Yep. I can see that scenario playing out.

I think LT has got to find an inner anger if he's going to keep playing.

I am not knocking him for crying at his press conference. But the emotion was like a "I can't believe I'm not a Charger anymore" rather than a "I'm going to be a force somewhere next year" kind of emotion.

If he is playing just to play? Uggh.

He needs to prove something? He can be good again.

I just wonder if somewhere along the way his give-a-sh!tter got broken.

Trail.Blazr
02-28-2010, 10:30 AM
If this has already been posted lock it up.

It was reported on NFL channel that we are interseted in LT. So much for us learning our lesson on old has been backs.

I hear that, but unlike my doubts when Green was signed, I think LT would be a timely addition with a likely better ROI. LT was/is? a blue chip player, better than Green was.

My only real concern about LT: Is/was he out of gas?

He'd likely have a huge chip on his shoulders. A rested, capable and angry LT, combining with our existing backs could easily change the draft approach in a way that could make the 2010 season a statement year.

I certainly am glad Houston is interested. Hope they can really learn from the Green experience and properly measure LT.

m5kwatts
02-28-2010, 03:25 PM
I wouldn't be shocked. But, I still think Drew Brees finds a way to convince the Saints brass that inking LT would be a wise move.

Ahman Green is why I would be shocked. I don't think we'll repeat that mistake again.

ChampionTexan
02-28-2010, 03:31 PM
Ahman Green is why I would be shocked. I don't think we'll repeat that mistake again.

I agree 1000% - there is no way the Texans sign Ahman Green a second time.
:specnatz:

Texans_Chick
02-28-2010, 03:49 PM
I think the Texans will be looking for a rookie running back and an experienced running back. Typically, if you have looked at old Bronco/Texans rosters, going into camp there is usually an experienced back on the roster with a bunch of fresh legs. Even when they've had high draft pick RBs with the Broncos, they let an experienced back get more reps until they broke down.

I don't think they will spend big bank on a back, but if they can work out a deal with an experienced back, whether LT or otherwise, who makes them comfortable, I'm guessing they'd do it.

Brisco_County
02-28-2010, 07:01 PM
I don't think they will spend big bank on a back, but if they can work out a deal with an experienced back, whether LT or otherwise, who makes them comfortable, I'm guessing they'd do it.

Stephanie, I'm in a debate with a friend of mine. If CJ Spiller is on the board at 20, do we take him? There's a lot of value in that pick.

I say no, based on other needs, but man... CJ Spiller, that's hard to pass up.

SAMURAITEXAN
03-01-2010, 05:01 AM
May be we are looking at LT to replace Chris Brown spot(exprienced running back spot). Hope, LT got some left in his tank. If he does, this will be a good addition for us.

Go Texans!!!

TexanBacker93
03-01-2010, 06:57 AM
Bringing LT onto this team is different than the Ahman Green signing. They brought Green in to be THE guy. LT would be coming in to complement the other backs on our roster. If they do sign LT that would be a sign (hopefully) that they are indeed planning on drafting a RB with one of the 1st 2 picks. You can't go into next year with an aged LT, an injured Slaton, and Foster as your backs. Well, you can, but I think that might be asking for problems.

I don't mind picking up LT. He'd be a valuable addition provided they don't try to make him a 200 carry back. As long as we aren't putting too much money towards a deal it shouldn't hurt the team.

Second Honeymoon
03-01-2010, 09:22 AM
It's a bit risky, but even just last year's LT is better than any back we currently have on our roster. LT had a pretty good year to be honest.

i think my biggest potential problem with the move is if LT is a good fit in Kubiak's gimmick blocking scheme and/or having the Texans try and force the running game with LT when its painfully obvious that passing the ball is our best option to win football games.

BIG TORO
03-01-2010, 09:43 AM
I think if we bring LT in and draft someone like CJ Spiller as our main guy we would be ok, but I would worry if we brought LT as our main guy.

GP
03-01-2010, 10:18 AM
I think if we bring LT in and draft someone like CJ Spiller as our main guy we would be ok, but I would worry if we brought LT as our main guy.

I am not a draft expert, but from the hype and publicity that Spiller is receiving...he won't be there when we pick at number 20.

The worst bet a person could make? Betting that the Texans would draft a running back in the first round. At least not at the slot we'd be picking a RB at in the 1st round. And also based on prior drafting history.

I see us going for either an OL, DB of some sort, or DT.

In terms of first round material, we're not going to draft the following: QB, RB, WR (unless a guy like Dez Bryant falls that far), TE, LB, K, P.

We seem to like TEs in the middle rounds (Owen Daniels wasn't a first rounder, and we took two TEs in the 4th round last year IIRC). We're set at WR, at least to the point that it's not a first round need. I can't see us taking another LB in round 1 after nailing the Cushing pick last year and having Ryans beside him. We're not drafting a QB in round 1. Same goes for kicker, punter, and obviously not a RB because all the teams ahead of us are going to scoop up any 1st round talent at the RB position.

That leaves the three areas that still need to be upgraded. You know that there will be a whole slew of teams ahead of us who will be gunning for offensive power with ideas of drafting a QB, or RB, or WR. Some team ahead of us will pull the trigger on a TE they think is the next Shockey or Gates. There will be teams ahead of us that go with one or two of the top LBs on the board.

And that leaves a few teams who will go the route of OL, DL, or DB. There are 19 teams ahead of us, who are mostly going to draft positions that we are not interested in, and I see us having a FANTASTIC shot at getting a high-quality OL, or DL, or DB with our pick.

If we trade down, I will be very angry. We need to sit at 20 and use our spot where it's at. I don't care about extra picks. I have confidence that we took the best defensive player (Cushing) with pick 15 last year, and we can take another great player with pick 20 this year.

I want ZERO "cute moves" by Smithiak, unless it's to move UP and as long as it's moving up for the right guy (not a project player like Barwin or Babin).

I don't want to see Kubiak and Smith trying to be the smartest guys in the room. I want to see them target a player and go get him. And I want that player to be a Brian Cushing sort of football freak who eats pigskin and craps footballs.

BullNation4Life
03-01-2010, 10:21 AM
It's a bit risky, but even just last year's LT is better than any back we currently have on our roster. LT had a pretty good year to be honest.

i think my biggest potential problem with the move is if LT is a good fit in Kubiak's gimmick blocking scheme and/or having the Texans try and force the running game with LT when its painfully obvious that passing the ball is our best option to win football games.



Gimmick blocking scheme? That's funny. Nothing gimmicky about a system that wins multiple Super Bowls....

Now if you wanna talk about the Wild Cat as a gimmick, by all means...

Texecutioner
03-01-2010, 11:44 AM
Stephanie, I'm in a debate with a friend of mine. If CJ Spiller is on the board at 20, do we take him? There's a lot of value in that pick.

I say no, based on other needs, but man... CJ Spiller, that's hard to pass up.

There is absolutely no way the Texans would spend their #1 draft pick on a RB. They passed on Mendenhall two seasons ago when we desperately needed a RB and he was everything we needed and then some. We need to continue stacking the defense though with our first pick any way, so I'm okay with that. We need to get a safety or a stud DT if one is available.

Texecutioner
03-01-2010, 11:45 AM
Do you remember Adrian Griffin from OU who got drafted by Denver? He had some good success in that system. Can you imagine what Sproles could do. I'm not even going to talk about what he could do for our special teams. Aside from provide a threat to take it back everytime, you also allow Jacoby to focus on being the WR we need/want him to be.


This right here. ^^^

infantrycak
03-01-2010, 12:08 PM
There is absolutely no way the Texans would spend their #1 draft pick on a RB.

Yeah that must be why they tried to trade what became DeMeco and OD for DeAngelo Williams. Gotta love internet myths.

Texecutioner
03-01-2010, 12:11 PM
Yeah that must be why they tried to trade what became DeMeco and OD for DeAngelo Williams. Gotta love internet myths.

Holler at me when they draft a RB in the first round. Kubes will never do it.

And what is your source that says that we offered Demeco and OD for Williams? If they had done that, boy we'd look like the dumbest team in the entire league.

BullNation4Life
03-01-2010, 12:16 PM
Holler at me when they draft a RB in the first round. Kubes will never do it.

And what is your source that says that we offered Demeco and OD for Williams? If they had done that, boy we'd look like the dumbest team in the entire league.

??? Why would the Texans have been the dumbest in the league if they made that trade? At that point in time, did you know exactly what you were going to get from Demeco and OD? You already knew what kind of RB Williams was...

Hindsight is a biyatch huh?

Texecutioner
03-01-2010, 12:26 PM
??? Why would the Texans have been the dumbest in the league if they made that trade? At that point in time, did you know exactly what you were going to get from Demeco and OD? You already knew what kind of RB Williams was...

Hindsight is a biyatch huh?

Trading a top tier TE and a great LB for a great RB? Sorry, but RB's are much easier to find than talents at TE and LB as long as you have a decent O line.

The Pencil Neck
03-01-2010, 12:35 PM
Trading a top tier TE and a great LB for a great RB? Sorry, but RB's are much easier to find than talents at TE and LB as long as you have a decent O line.

That's not what the point was.

Do you trade the first pick of the 2nd round and a 4th to move up into the 1st to pick up a great running back?

At the time that the trade was considered, it wasn't a top tier TE and a great LB. It wasn't Demeco Ryans and Owen Daniels. They were just draft picks that hadn't been made, yet.

In hindsight, that 2nd and that 4th were really more valuable than that 1st probably would have been.

infantrycak
03-01-2010, 12:49 PM
Holler at me when they draft a RB in the first round. Kubes will never do it.

And what is your source that says that we offered Demeco and OD for Williams? If they had done that, boy we'd look like the dumbest team in the entire league.

They offered their 2nd and 4th round picks for the 26th pick in the draft. Those picks became DeMeco and OD. Buffalo offered their 2nd and 3rd and got the 26th pick to take John McCargo. DeAngelo was taken with the 27th pick. It was widely reported at the time.

Texecutioner
03-01-2010, 12:51 PM
That's not what the point was.

Do you trade the first pick of the 2nd round and a 4th to move up into the 1st to pick up a great running back?

At the time that the trade was considered, it wasn't a top tier TE and a great LB. It wasn't Demeco Ryans and Owen Daniels. They were just draft picks that hadn't been made, yet.

In hindsight, that 2nd and that 4th were really more valuable than that 1st probably would have been.

Kubes won't ever use the first pick on the draft on a RB. That's my point. As far as this year is concerned I don't care either. We have to many needs on defense still.

infantrycak
03-01-2010, 12:53 PM
Kubes won't ever use the first pick on the draft on a RB. That's my point. As far as this year is concerned I don't care either. We have to many needs on defense still.

And your point is flat out wrong since one of his first actions as a head coach was to try to use a first round pick on a RB. This year who knows.

Texecutioner
03-01-2010, 12:58 PM
And your point is flat out wrong since one of his first actions as a head coach was to try to use a first round pick on a RB. This year who knows.

He didn't use it though, so my point stands at what it is. He picked up Mario Williams. He's going to pick up a defensive player, and that's fine by me as long as it fills a major need on the defensive side of the ball and we don't pass on Earl Thomas. If he doesn't pick up a defensive player, then we'll be going with an O lineman.

infantrycak
03-01-2010, 01:06 PM
He didn't use it though, so my point stands at what it is. He picked up Mario Williams. He's going to pick up a defensive player, and that's fine by me as long as it fills a major need on the defensive side of the ball and we don't pass on Earl Thomas. If he doesn't pick up a defensive player, then we'll be going with an O lineman.

Yeah your point remains as one that is wrong. Maybe they pick a defensive player and I am not advocating a RB in the 1st although I do like Ryan Mathews a lot. But your categorical statement that Kubiak will not take a RB in the 1st is demonstrably wrong. They tried. Whether that attempt was successful or not is irrelevant. The mere attempt demonstrates the willingness.

Ole Miss Texan
03-01-2010, 01:07 PM
And your point is flat out wrong since one of his first actions as a head coach was to try to use a first round pick on a RB. This year who knows.

He didn't use it though, so my point stands at what it is. He picked up Mario Williams.
I think the point they're trying to make is with Kubiak's intentions. Your point is that he hasn't/didn't pick a RB in the 1st. Their point is that he tried to. Tried to trade up to get a RB in the 1st but got outbid. You're both right: No he didn't, but yes he wanted to (ie he would select a RB in the 1st).

I agree that we're most definitely going to go Defense in the 1st again, but I've come to the conclusion that if he sees a RB that he thinks will be elite, I don't think he passes on him unless there is other elite talent there. I've been a pretty big proponent of NOT going Rb in the first but if Chris Johnson/Adrian Peterson 2.0 is there and the other positions of need are pretty deep (ie 2nd, 3rd round starters) then we'd be lookin like a fool with our pants on da ground to pass.

Texans_Chick
03-01-2010, 01:23 PM
Stephanie, I'm in a debate with a friend of mine. If CJ Spiller is on the board at 20, do we take him? There's a lot of value in that pick.

I say no, based on other needs, but man... CJ Spiller, that's hard to pass up.

I think they take best player available on their board as long as it isn't a position where there isn't any space on their roster for that position.

Their board may be very different than what ESPN et al says should be on their board. Their evaluations have sometimes been a little contrarian, but a number of those contrarian picks have worked out for them.

Running back is going to be a priority for them. They are already developing young players at key positions, so this might be the year that they stop making-do at the running back position. You never know.

I do not think that they are opposed to taking running back high. One of this staff's favorite players, Clinton Portis, was taken in the second round.

BullNation4Life
03-01-2010, 02:27 PM
Trading a top tier TE and a great LB for a great RB? Sorry, but RB's are much easier to find than talents at TE and LB as long as you have a decent O line.

Um, what? :facepalm:

Texecutioner
03-01-2010, 02:37 PM
Um, what? :facepalm:

Did you have something to say or did you just want to be included in this thread? Or are you suggesting that Daniels and Demeco should have been traded??

b0ng
03-01-2010, 03:00 PM
Did you have something to say or did you just want to be included in this thread? Or are you suggesting that Daniels and Demeco should have been traded??

You mad bro?

El Tejano
03-01-2010, 03:01 PM
Did you have something to say or did you just want to be included in this thread? Or are you suggesting that Daniels and Demeco should have been traded??

It wasn't Daniels and Demeco that were going to be traded. In the 2006 draft, we already selected Mario Williams with the no. 1 overall pick. Chicago's GM and even Carolina's GM have stated that when Chicago was going to pick, Houston made an offer of their 2nd round pick and 4th round pick to try and get in the first round to select Deangelo Williams. Kubiak even said that's who he was going to select with that pick.

Now, I'm agreeing the you and everyone else who says he will select a RB. WIth that attempt in 06 to Deangelo Williams, Kubiak did display that if a RB is listed as the best player available on their board and they feel he will not last by they time they pick again, he will make the moves to do so.

On the other hand, and this is where I agree with you Texecutioner, noone is mentioning the difference maker in the 06 draft vs. 07-09 drafts and that is Charlie Casserly. Charlie may have been the one that was ready to make such a trade. That being Kubiaks first year as head coach, who knows if he really wanted the trade or not? Who knows how much say he had that day? With Rick Smith, we have a GM that has been through the scouting process and warrooms before with Denver. He may be the one that doesn't agree with getting a RB in round 1.

BTW, Texecutioner, I really hope we bring Sproles in.

Ole Miss Texan
03-01-2010, 03:02 PM
Regarding the potential trade in 2006.

This is why teams are generally so hesitant to trade away draft picks, you never know who might be available at your picks or how they will turn out.

We didn't know Demeco Ryans and Owen Daniels were going to be available at their respective selections. In hindsight, that would have been an awful trade (unless Deangelo Williams was the second coming of Earl Campbell on our team).

If we would have selected LB Rocky McIntosh in the 2nd and RB Michael Robinson in the 4th.... in hindsight we would most likely be slapping ourselves silly that trade didn't go through.

And if you really want to go with hindsight, if we HAD to come away with a RB that early... I'd rather just take Maurice Jones-Drew with our 2nd round pick and keep our 4th instead of trading our 2nd and 4th for Deangelo Williams. We just don't have the luxury of knowing how players will turn out or where they're going to get drafted!

steelbtexan
03-01-2010, 03:13 PM
Who has final say over the draft?

I'm guessing Kubes.

Texecutioner
03-01-2010, 03:14 PM
It wasn't Daniels and Demeco that were going to be traded. In the 2006 draft, we already selected Mario Williams with the no. 1 overall pick. Chicago's GM and even Carolina's GM have stated that when Chicago was going to pick, Houston made an offer of their 2nd round pick and 4th round pick to try and get in the first round to select Deangelo Williams. Kubiak even said that's who he was going to select with that pick.

Now, I'm agreeing the you and everyone else who says he will select a RB. WIth that attempt in 06 to Deangelo Williams, Kubiak did display that if a RB is listed as the best player available on their board and they feel he will not last by they time they pick again, he will make the moves to do so.

On the other hand, and this is where I agree with you Texecutioner, noone is mentioning the difference maker in the 06 draft vs. 07-09 drafts and that is Charlie Casserly. Charlie may have been the one that was ready to make such a trade. That being Kubiaks first year as head coach, who knows if he really wanted the trade or not? Who knows how much say he had that day? With Rick Smith, we have a GM that has been through the scouting process and warrooms before with Denver. He may be the one that doesn't agree with getting a RB in round 1.

BTW, Texecutioner, I really hope we bring Sproles in.

I would have been fine taking a RB in the first round a few years ago when our offense was terrible and when Kubes wanted to run, run, run all of the time and we had guys like Lundi and Green as our main guys. Right now though, our offense is one of the best offenses in the league and while RB may be a need continuing to stack up our defense is a much bigger need all together when our secondary is atrocious and we still need some DT's. Two of them actually. Even if we did nothing at RB, I'd still want to put a stronger focus on the defensive side of the ball. There are plenty of options in free agency at RB though where we could get some help or we could still use like a 3rd round pick to get a RB or maybe even a 2nd rounder. Safety and DT should be our main concern though as our biggest needs. If we went with offense with our first pick, I'd rather take an O lineman than a RB. You can't run the ball if you can't block well and our O line wasn't opening up holes hardly last season either. Who knows how well Pitts will return from injury.

I'd love to have Sproles, but I don't think we would go after Sproles or pay the money that he'd probably ask for honestly. That's more of a wet dream for guys like us.

El Tejano
03-01-2010, 03:37 PM
I would have been fine taking a RB in the first round a few years ago when our offense was terrible and when Kubes wanted to run, run, run all of the time and we had guys like Lundi and Green as our main guys. Right now though, our offense is one of the best offenses in the league and while RB may be a need continuing to stack up our defense is a much bigger need all together when our secondary is atrocious and we still need some DT's. Two of them actually. Even if we did nothing at RB, I'd still want to put a stronger focus on the defensive side of the ball. There are plenty of options in free agency at RB though where we could get some help or we could still use like a 3rd round pick to get a RB or maybe even a 2nd rounder. Safety and DT should be our main concern though as our biggest needs. If we went with offense with our first pick, I'd rather take an O lineman than a RB. You can't run the ball if you can't block well and our O line wasn't opening up holes hardly last season either. Who knows how well Pitts will return from injury.


I'd love to have Sproles, but I don't think we would go after Sproles or pay the money that he'd probably ask for honestly. That's more of a wet dream for guys like us.

I agree with you exactly. I even agree as to why we shouldn't bring in LT. I wont get mad if we did for the right reasons but I still think he will not come here.

BullNation4Life
03-01-2010, 05:50 PM
Did you have something to say or did you just want to be included in this thread? Or are you suggesting that Daniels and Demeco should have been traded??

No I am just amazed you actually thought that and didn't realize the other poster was talking about the draft picks in 06, not the players themselves...

carry on young squire...

HJam72
03-02-2010, 01:03 PM
Just so you know: :includeme:

:)

JB
03-02-2010, 02:44 PM
http://i807.photobucket.com/albums/yy358/sanjacal/th_flag-1.jpg http://i807.photobucket.com/albums/yy358/sanjacal/th_argue.gif

TEXANS84
03-02-2010, 02:45 PM
moving on to someone more interesting....

Sounds like a good suggestion.

HOU-TEX
03-02-2010, 03:10 PM
:popcorn:

JB
03-02-2010, 03:14 PM
:popcorn:


:popcorn: :popcorn:

HOU-TEX
03-02-2010, 03:15 PM
:popcorn: :popcorn:

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

JB
03-02-2010, 03:18 PM
:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

http://i807.photobucket.com/albums/yy358/sanjacal/th_energizer-bunny.jpg

BullNation4Life
03-02-2010, 03:20 PM
:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

lol::bowdown:

Texecutioner
03-02-2010, 03:22 PM
Wow, ass, troll? Man how much did you pay for your glass house? Is it stone proof?:facepalm:

so what part of trading a 2nd and a 4th to move up and taking D Williams, which if you re-read is what I said due to you didn't know what you were getting at that point in time with DeMeco and OD, was a GOOOOOOD idea, did you not understand....

I made my point very clear, you are the one who didn't get it and had to have it explained, not by just me either.....

Now I'm moving on, although it will be hard without you, dear, I'll manage...:jogger:

I thought you were moving on a while back and weren't trying to look like a tough guy? :spit:

The Texans had a 1st round pick that season and who did they pick? Mario Williams. Trading a 2nd and a 4th isn't the same thing as using their original 1st round pick. It's using their 2nd and their 4th pick to acquire a player. Maybe you should pay attention to what I've said in this thread. As I stated before Kubes will never use his 1st round pick on a RB. He's had the mentality since he came here that productive RB's can be found in later rounds. He's been that way since he was in Denver and they had success that way so that's pretty much been his philosophy since he came here and he said that multiple times when he was criticized for not taking Bush when we first got Mario and were blasted for it even though it was the right pick. When we were dying for a RB, we even passed on Mendenhall in the first round and picked Slaton in the 3rd. If Kubes goes offense in the first round, he'll go with an O lineman, but I'd bet my bottom dollar that he realizes that this defense still needs a few pieces and he'll go with a defensive player.

infantrycak
03-02-2010, 03:32 PM
The Texans had a 1st round pick that season and who did they pick? Mario Williams. Trading a 2nd and a 4th isn't the same thing as using their original 1st round pick. It's using their 2nd and their 4th pick to acquire a player. Maybe you should pay attention to what I've said in this thread. As I stated before Kubes will never use his 1st round pick on a RB. He's had the mentality since he came here that productive RB's can be found in later rounds.

No he hasn't as demonstrated by his trying to get DeAngelo in the 1st. And yes that would have been using a 1st round pick on a RB however that pick was acquired. If it had happened the commissioner wouldn't have said "with the 50th and 150th picks of the draft the Houston Texans select" he would have said "with the 26th pick of the 1st round the Houston Texans select." You're just wrong on this one.

Texecutioner
03-02-2010, 03:36 PM
No he hasn't as demonstrated by his trying to get DeAngelo in the 1st. And yes that would have been using a 1st round pick on a RB however that pick was acquired. If it had happened the commissioner wouldn't have said "with the 50th and 150th picks of the draft the Houston Texans select" he would have said "with the 26th pick of the 1st round the Houston Texans select." You're just wrong on this one.

Did the Texans use their original first round pick on a RB that year? No they did not. You haven't understood this the entire time Cak and that's been my main point. He's said time and time again that he thinks he can find RB's that can become productive deep into the draft.

BullNation4Life
03-02-2010, 03:36 PM
No he hasn't as demonstrated by his trying to get DeAngelo in the 1st. And yes that would have been using a 1st round pick on a RB however that pick was acquired. If it had happened the commissioner wouldn't have said "with the 50th and 150th picks of the draft the Houston Texans select" he would have said "with the 26th pick of the 1st round the Houston Texans select." You're just wrong on this one.

He is not gonna understand that, as much as it is explained to him. He still thinks it was trading DeMeco and OD....

steelbtexan
03-02-2010, 03:36 PM
Button

Tex and I disagree on trading for DeAngelo Williams.

The differece is I respect Tex enough not to get in a name calling game. Even though he's wrong. LOL

This name calling BS needs to stop.

Make your point and agree to disagree.

Steel B

infantrycak
03-02-2010, 03:45 PM
Did the Texans use their original first round pick on a RB that year? No they did not. You haven't understood this the entire time Cak and that's been my main point. He's said time and time again that he thinks he can find RB's that can become productive deep into the draft.

Who cares if it was their original 1st round pick that makes no difference at all. Once you trade for a pick it is your pick. He was willing to use a 1st round pick on a RB. That disproves your assertion that they will never use a 1st round pick on a RB. Heck they even entered into contract negotiations with Reggie Bush at one point about their original 1st round pick.

This is just another internet myth. Same goes for claiming Denver/Alex Gibbs won't take RBs or OLmen high in the draft. Well guess what his last draft in Denver was? - OT Foster in the 1st followed by Portis in the 2nd. Who was the first guy we drafted when Gibbs got here? - OT Brown.

dalemurphy
03-02-2010, 03:57 PM
YOu're not capable of understanding what's been written and said obviously and you aren't capable of a rationale discussion. You take what you want to hear and run with it. They did not use their original first round pick, but I'll let you continue with the smilies and the insults and carry on like your 4 year old son. And as I said before Kubes won't use his 1st round pick on a RB.

How many pages into this argument were you when you first added the word "orginal"?

Do you really believe that Kubiak makes some sort of important distinction between an original first round pick and a trade in the first round that required multiple picks to get there? Obviously, the Texans are less likely to take a RB with the 1st overall pick than with the 26th overall pick. But, what on earth makes you believe it has to do with whether it was original or not?

(Admitting you are wrong can actually elevate others' perceptions of you. Just so you know.)

Texecutioner
03-02-2010, 04:02 PM
Who cares if it was their original 1st round pick that makes no difference at all. Once you trade for a pick it is your pick. He was willing to use a 1st round pick on a RB. That disproves your assertion that they will never use a 1st round pick on a RB. Heck they even entered into contract negotiations with Reggie Bush at one point about their original 1st round pick.

Because he's said that in articles and reports when he first got here. You don't remember when everyone was all ga ga over Bush? I was one of them and I'll admit that. He said plenty of times that he'd like to build the team first and that he thought with the system he didn't have to have some stud in there that was the highest rated star at the the time or whatever. And just because he negotiated with Bush doesn't mean much really. We didn't pick him. We picked Mario. I don't think you understand what I'm saying here. Trading those picks is still your value of a 2nd and a 4th even if it became a late 1st. Kubes still didn't use his "original" first round pick. Maybe I should have stressed his original first round pick when we first started discussing this, but I figured you would have understood that part and I wasn't expecting to have insults flung my way for it to where the thread would get derailed into a black hole where rationale discussion couldn't take place. But the key point being that Kubes has never wanted to go RB in the 1st round because he's had a philosophy that the ZBS doesn't need the quickest and fastest stud of all studs to have a RB that can be successful.

This is just another internet myth. Same goes for claiming Denver/Alex Gibbs won't take RBs or OLmen high in the draft. Well guess what his last draft in Denver was? - OT Foster in the 1st followed by Portis in the 2nd. Whose the first guy we drafted when? - OT Brown.

I don't know about any myth with the O line. I was talking about RB's and that came from a lot of his comments that came through the chronicle and other articles where he spoke about his draft strategy. Kubes wanted to build this D line up before anything to get a pass rush

BullNation4Life
03-02-2010, 04:04 PM
How many pages into this argument were you when you first added the word "orginal"?

Do you really believe that Kubiak makes some sort of important distinction between an original first round pick and a trade in the first round that required multiple picks to get there? Obviously, the Texans are less likely to take a RB with the 1st overall pick than with the 26th overall pick. But, what on earth makes you believe it has to do with whether it was orginal or not?

(Admitting you are wrong can actually elevate others' perceptions of you. Just so you know.)

pg 16, goes from using a first round draft pick to using the first round draft pick....

BullNation4Life
03-02-2010, 04:15 PM
Because he's said that in articles and reports when he first got here. You don't remember when everyone was all ga ga over Bush? I was one of them and I'll admit that. He said plenty of times that he'd like to build the team first and that he thought with the system he didn't have to have some stud in there that was the highest rated star at the the time or whatever. And just because he negotiated with Bush doesn't mean much really. We didn't pick him. We picked Mario. I don't think you understand what I'm saying here. Trading those picks is still your value of a 2nd and a 4th even if it became a late 1st. Kubes still didn't use his "original" first round pick. Maybe I should have stressed his original first round pick when we first started discussing this, but I figured you would have understood that part and I wasn't expecting to have insults flung my way for it to where the thread would get derailed into a black hole where rationale discussion couldn't take place. But the key point being that Kubes has never wanted to go RB in the 1st round because he's had a philosophy that the ZBS doesn't need the quickest and fastest stud of all studs to have a RB that can be successful.


I don't know about any myth with the O line. I was talking about RB's and that came from a lot of his comments that came through the chronicle and other articles where he spoke about his draft strategy. Kubes wanted to build this D line up before anything to get a pass rush

In BOLD: and that is where the philosophy dies because he did try and trade back into the first for D Williams but was not successful, so Kubiak didn't even believe his own philosophy. now as far as THE first pick, who would he have taken that fit the system he wanted? Most of the backs that do are from smaller schools that go in the 3rd-7th round. Portis and Tatum Bell have been the only 2 backs taken in the 2nd and Portis couldn't pass block, this got shipped off to Washington and Bell was reduced to stealing luggage...

Kaiser Toro
03-02-2010, 04:16 PM
I have deleted most of the back and forth. Let's stay on topic and stay off of each other and our respective sons.

El Tejano
03-08-2010, 11:27 AM
Sorry to keep this thread alive but I didn't want to start a new one. Looks like The Raiders are interested in LT. Out of us and Oakland, who do you think he would pick? Oakland just got rid of Fargas but still have Bush and McFadden. If Oakland were to want to give up Bush or McFadden because they got LT, would you do it? Do you think they will want to do that?

infantrycak
03-08-2010, 11:35 AM
Sorry to keep this thread alive but I didn't want to start a new one. Looks like The Raiders are interested in LT. Out of us and Oakland, who do you think he would pick? Oakland just got rid of Fargas but still have Bush and McFadden. If Oakland were to want to give up Bush or McFadden because they got LT, would you do it? Do you think they will want to do that?

I think LT would pick Houston over Oakland for the same money. If Oakland were to sign him and shop another player then the Texans should talk to them but we might not ever hear about it.

Second Honeymoon
03-08-2010, 11:41 AM
i may be in the minority but i think LT to Houston makes a lot of sense. its obvious he isn't going to command that big of a salary and he would get a chance to be a starter. he also protects the ball well, something our RB corps had a big problem with last year.

we could use him just like the Chargers used him. He was a productive back last year and had a good nose for the end zone. he doesn't break tackles as well as he used to, but he does hit the hole well, protects the ball, catches the ball out of the backfield well, and is used to winning and being successful.

i know he is old and it is a bit risky, but were talking about LT. I know Ahman Green makes a lot of us wary, but LT > Ahman Green. No doubt.

Plus the guy is from Texas. He may have a big old chip on his shoulder too. I am sure he would want to stick it to the Chargers big time. I believe we match up with the AFC West this year, so he would get his chance. We shall see.

infantrycak
03-08-2010, 11:53 AM
i may be in the minority but i think LT to Houston makes a lot of sense. its obvious he isn't going to command that big of a salary and he would get a chance to be a starter. he also protects the ball well, something our RB corps had a big problem with last year.

Hey we agree on something. Screw the Ahman Green comparisons, he is an upgrade even in decline over Chris Brown in every category. Better nose for the endzone, better passer, better pass protector, better receiver. The price and the duration of the contract need to be reasonable but signing LT would improve the team.

Brisco_County
03-08-2010, 12:28 PM
Hey we agree on something. Screw the Ahman Green comparisons, he is an upgrade even in decline over Chris Brown in every category. Better nose for the endzone, better passer, better pass protector, better receiver. The price and the duration of the contract need to be reasonable but signing LT would improve the team.

This is all true, but people are also underestimating how much of an impact he will have in the locker room. This guy is not looking for a team to accommodate his sunset years. He is looking for a team that wants to win a championship. He'll have a natural chemistry with a high character team like this one.

keyser
03-08-2010, 12:42 PM
Hey we agree on something. Screw the Ahman Green comparisons, he is an upgrade even in decline over Chris Brown in every category. Better nose for the endzone, better passer, better pass protector, better receiver. The price and the duration of the contract need to be reasonable but signing LT would improve the team.

:lol:

It's funny because it's true...

CloakNNNdagger
03-08-2010, 02:53 PM
Put me in the camp that would still see him in Houston.

And BTW, his PASSING stats (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TomlLa00.htm)are no joke, in fact, pretty impressive.

infantrycak
03-08-2010, 02:58 PM
Put me in the camp that would still see him in Houston.

And BTW, his PASSING stats (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TomlLa00.htm)are no joke, in fact, pretty impressive.

ESPN said he had the 2nd most TDs passing by a RB in NFL history. Walter Payton has one more.

CloakNNNdagger
03-08-2010, 04:48 PM
ESPN said he had the 2nd most TDs passing by a RB in NFL history. Walter Payton has one more.

With 3 extra years to produce that extra one.

El Tejano
03-08-2010, 07:27 PM
With 3 extra years to produce that extra one.

And plenty of division games on the line to do it in.

Texan_Bill
03-08-2010, 09:09 PM
:lol:

It's funny because it's true...

:heh:

While that was funny on the one hand, OTOH :bat:

El Tejano
03-09-2010, 11:44 AM
Vikings | Talking with Tomlinson
Comment (0)
Tue, 09 Mar 2010 07:32:59 -0800

Updating a previous item, Adam Schefter, of ESPN, reports via Twitter that free-agent RB LaDainian Tomlinson (Chargers) is talking with the Minnesota Vikings; however, he is talking to other teams and no deal is imminent.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Vikings | Interested in Tomlinson?
Comment (0)
Tue, 09 Mar 2010 07:20:52 -0800

Judd Zulgad, of the Minneapolis Star Tribune, reports although nothing is imminent, the Minnesota Vikings appear to have a genuine interest in free-agent RB LaDainian Tomlinson (Chargers). He would be a possible replacement for RB Chester Taylor, who signed with the Chicago Bears. Tomlinson would be expected to replace Taylor as the third-down back, although his blocking skills aren't believed to be on par with Taylor's.



Read more: http://www.kffl.com/hotw/nfl#ixzz0hhNHaiXR

just a friendly update.

GuerillaBlack
03-09-2010, 12:09 PM
Damn. Hope the Vikings don't get him.

Yankee_In_TX
03-09-2010, 12:16 PM
Why drop Chester and get LT? Must be a $$$ thing.

El Tejano
03-09-2010, 12:24 PM
Damn. Hope the Vikings don't get him.

I don't know if I really care. On one hand LT can really help us but on the other hand I wonder if on OUR team he can help us more than a draft pick running back.

I believe the Vikings make the perfect fit for him. A team that is dedicated to the run, he doesn't have to run a whole lot, they are on the cusp of getting to the Super Bowl, and the possibility of playing with Adrian Peterson and Brett Favre. To me Brett Favre is what makes the difference. He won't go there if Sage is the starting QB.

El Tejano
03-09-2010, 12:25 PM
Why drop Chester and get LT? Must be a $$$ thing.

Well it was probably both a money thing and opportunity for Chester to to be the starter in Chicago.

Brisco_County
03-09-2010, 12:27 PM
The factor that would keep him from going to Minnesota is Adrian Peterson. LT would get more carries on a team like Houston because he fits our system better. That's considering the price stays the same.

Second Honeymoon
03-09-2010, 01:01 PM
Well it was probably both a money thing and opportunity for Chester to to be the starter in Chicago.

Chester is the backup behind Forte. i think he just wanted to stick it to the Vikings and no one else paid him more than Bears offered early.

We really need LT so we at least fill one hole through FA. I would be willing to roll into 2010 with Moats, Slaton and LT. No doubt.

El Tejano
03-09-2010, 01:05 PM
Chester is the backup behind Forte. i think he just wanted to stick it to the Vikings and no one else paid him more than Bears offered early.

We really need LT so we at least fill one hole through FA. I would be willing to roll into 2010 with Moats, Slaton and LT. No doubt.

Your signature gets me confused with you and Texecutioner. I was about to remind you how you said you hated him before until I saw you weren't Texecutioner.

Also another reason why Minn. is a good fit for LT is because of the amount of fullback utilization they have in their offense, and they got some good fullbacks there. LT behind a fullback is a pretty good running back (Marty Ball). However I think Leach and LT would be pretty awesome too.

theanswer000
03-09-2010, 02:13 PM
The Texans need to bring him in for a visit.

BigBull17
03-09-2010, 02:32 PM
I agree.

Malloy
03-09-2010, 02:44 PM
He's been a FA for a while now, I wonder if anyone will scoop him up...?

ArlingtonTexan
03-09-2010, 05:26 PM
Damn. Hope the Vikings don't get him.

Minnesota's "apparent" interest in LaDainian Tomlinson is very real; SI's Jim Trotter reports that Tomlinson will visit the Vikings Thursday.

The week since Tomlinson was released has probably been humbling for the former Chargers running back. He's had to wait in line while Chester Taylor got a big deal. Even Justin Fargas has received more interest.

Minnesota is a perfect fit worth waiting for. Tomlinson could chase his ring alongside another classy person at quarterback without taking a pounding.

Trotter writes that LT2 has no problem "sharing the backfield" but he wouldn't really be sharing in Minnesota. He would be a clear backup that can help on passing downs.

Just making the visit to Minnesota is a good sign that Tomlinson understands what his role would be.

per profootballtalk.com

Brisco_County
03-09-2010, 07:13 PM
Looks like we need to win on price, which we're not likely to do. The odds are not in our favor, unless he has an impressive workout in Houston and forces Smith's hand.

El Tejano
03-10-2010, 10:03 AM
Looks like we need to win on price, which we're not likely to do. The odds are not in our favor, unless he has an impressive workout in Houston and forces Smith's hand.

Well the good news is that he can find out what kind of price they are willing to give. If it's too much, then we can pass. I would understand not wanting to pay high dollar for him as we don't want to invest on an aging back. However if we feel we can compete, we need to get him over here.

That being said, as another poster put it - our odds are not good if we have to out bid someone.

Brisco_County
03-11-2010, 03:00 AM
More signs (http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/10693/tomlinson-has-heard-what-i-like-to-hear) that he'll be a Viking.

NitroGSXR
03-11-2010, 03:16 AM
More signs (http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/10693/tomlinson-has-heard-what-i-like-to-hear) that he'll be a Viking.

He also says he has a visit with an undisclosed team planned...

Brisco_County
03-11-2010, 11:26 AM
He also says he has a visit with an undisclosed team planned...

It's the Jets.

If he hasn't visited Houston already, then there's no deal on the table. He'll be a Viking.

NitroGSXR
03-11-2010, 11:55 AM
It's the Jets.

If he hasn't visited Houston already, then there's no deal on the table. He'll be a Viking.

Can I get a link saying that it's the Jets?

Grams
03-11-2010, 11:58 AM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/11/if-no-deal-gets-done-in-minnesota-lt-will-head-to-nyc/

NitroGSXR
03-11-2010, 12:02 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/11/if-no-deal-gets-done-in-minnesota-lt-will-head-to-nyc/

Welp... there it is...

*sigh*

Blake
03-11-2010, 12:08 PM
i may be in the minority but i think LT to Houston makes a lot of sense. its obvious he isn't going to command that big of a salary and he would get a chance to be a starter. he also protects the ball well, something our RB corps had a big problem with last year.

we could use him just like the Chargers used him. He was a productive back last year and had a good nose for the end zone. he doesn't break tackles as well as he used to, but he does hit the hole well, protects the ball, catches the ball out of the backfield well, and is used to winning and being successful.

i know he is old and it is a bit risky, but were talking about LT. I know Ahman Green makes a lot of us wary, but LT > Ahman Green. No doubt.

Plus the guy is from Texas. He may have a big old chip on his shoulder too. I am sure he would want to stick it to the Chargers big time. I believe we match up with the AFC West this year, so he would get his chance. We shall see.

He is risky. And he does make me worry. Do we have an idea if he is looking for Ahman Green money, Chester Taylor money, or Thomas Jones money?

FACT: The dude has 2880 carrer carries.

FACT: His carries, yards, and YPC have been going down for the past 2 years.

I will sign him up right now for somewhere between Thomas Jones money and Chester Taylor money, but even that is a little risky.

Brisco_County
03-11-2010, 06:24 PM
LT "may" visit Eagles and Saints after he leaves New York.

Link (http://www.theredzone.org/BlogDescription/tabid/61/EntryId/4222/Tomlinson-may-visit-Eagles-and-Saints/Default.aspx)

El Tejano
03-12-2010, 09:04 AM
He won't fit with The Donagles. I can see them arguing with each other through the media. He would be welcomed with The Saints though.

gary
03-13-2010, 04:33 PM
I see him playing with Brees once again.

CloakNNNdagger
03-14-2010, 10:20 AM
It looks like the Vikings and the Jets have not responded to LT's visits. Maybe because they are no longer interested or LT is unrealistic about his value. As his options are running out and the Draft right around the corner, teams not in significant need of his services may put lesser enthusiasm into signing him. Could be, if the Texans are interested at all, LT could be a perfect inexpensive fill for a position of need.......that savvy vet, reliable, short-yardage back.

ArlingtonTexan
03-14-2010, 10:45 AM
It looks like the Vikings and the Jets have not responded to LT's visits. Maybe because they are no longer interested or LT is unrealistic about his value. As his options are running out and the Draft right around the corner, teams not in significant need of his services may put lesser enthusiasm into signing him. Could be, if the Texans are interested at all, LT could be a perfect inexpensive fill for a position of need.......that savvy vet, reliable, short-yardage back.

Everthing that I have read suggests that they both offered contracts and are waiting on LT to make up his decision. The only way for the Texans to enter the picture is the show more "love" or "respect" than those two.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Tomlinson-decision-expected-to-take-a-few-days.html

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/13/lt-heads-back-to-sd/

Brisco_County
03-14-2010, 01:48 PM
He's a Jet. (http://www.theredzone.org/BlogDescription/tabid/61/EntryId/4314/Report--LT-appears-to-be-heading-to-New-York/Default.aspx)

That sucks. I hate the Jets.

CloakNNNdagger
03-14-2010, 04:25 PM
He's a Jet. (http://www.theredzone.org/BlogDescription/tabid/61/EntryId/4314/Report--LT-appears-to-be-heading-to-New-York/Default.aspx)

That sucks. I hate the Jets.

Evidently, NOT YET DECIDED (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/14/report-tomlinson-hasnt-made-up-his-mind/)

CloakNNNdagger
03-14-2010, 06:26 PM
Finally. (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/14/tomlinson-picks-the-jets/)

LaDainian Tomlinson has made his decision. He's going to be a New York Jet.

Adam Schefter of ESPN is reporting that Tomlinson and the Jets reached an agreement today on a two-year contract.

ArlingtonTexan
03-14-2010, 06:27 PM
I guess it is now agreed upon


http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/14/tomlinson-picks-the-jets/

bckey
03-14-2010, 10:31 PM
What is the point of dumping Thomas Jones and signing Tomlinson. Did they save money? One old back replaced by another one with more miles on the tires than the previous one and also had a much worse season. This is a head scratcher to me.

ChampionTexan
03-14-2010, 10:45 PM
What is the point of dumping Thomas Jones and signing Tomlinson. Did they save money? One old back replaced by another one with more miles on the tires than the previous one and also had a much worse season. This is a head scratcher to me.

Thomas Jones had a $4 Million bonus coming up that the Jets didn't want to pay, and that was probably the biggest thing that went into letting him go.

One other thing that didn't generate much discussion (at least that I saw) was that one of the reasons that Shonn Greene was the #1 RB for the Jets in the playoffs was that Jones was dealing with a knee injury. Jones still played, and carried about 15 times each game, but he wasn't even able to average 3 ypc (compared to 4.2 for the regular season). Maybe the knee bothered the Jets - especially combined with the bonus that was coming up. At 31 years old, you've got to at least think about it (Doesn't go far to explain LT as the replacement though).

gary
03-14-2010, 11:23 PM
Thomas Jones had a $4 Million bonus coming up that the Jets didn't want to pay, and that was probably the biggest thing that went into letting him go.

One other thing that didn't generate much discussion (at least that I saw) was that one of the reasons that Shonn Greene was the #1 RB for the Jets in the playoffs was that Jones was dealing with a knee injury. Jones still played, and carried about 15 times each game, but he wasn't even able to average 3 ypc (compared to 4.2 for the regular season). Maybe the knee bothered the Jets - especially combined with the bonus that was coming up. At 31 years old, you've got to at least think about it (Doesn't go far to explain LT as the replacement though).
I don't think the Jets lose or gain much by replacing Jones with LT. I mean they both have a lot of miles on them. Both are old by NFL standards but the best O line and an fullback may help LT doubt it but you never know. Besides, its only a two year contract and I know I'll be watching LT to see how he does with his new team. Good luck LT you are one of my favorites in the NFL.

Nawzer
03-15-2010, 01:05 PM
I like this signing if I'm a Jets fan. I think not only can you use LT out of the backfield, but he can be a slot receiver. He gives Mark Sanchez another option to throw to. The Jets need more pass catching playmakers besides Braylon Edwards, and LT gives them another option. LT is not what he used to be, but the man can still score touchdowns and that in and of itself has tremendous value in this league.

gary
03-15-2010, 02:04 PM
LT, Green, Washington you have to like the sound of that if you are a Jets fan.

ArlingtonTexan
03-23-2010, 03:35 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/23/ryan-tomlinson-slated-for-15-carries-a-game/

for those who thought LT was going to a situation where he be "cool" taking 8 carries a game.

Rex Ryan's vision of the 2010 Jets backfield will be music to LaDainian Tomlinson's ears, and should be nails on a chalkboard for Jets fans. And Leon Washington's agent.

"What we should do with [Washington], in my opinion, is put him back to his role which he had initially, which is third-down back, a change-of-pace type back, and a Pro Bowl returner. And there's nothing wrong with that," Ryan said to Bob Glauber of Newsday Tuesday.

It makes sense to work Washington into the mix slowly, but he should be a huge part of the offense again when healthy. At least Tomlinson will be the clear backup to Shonn Greene, right?

"Hypothetically, we'd see [Tomlinson] carry the ball 15 times a game," Ryan said. "We're just going to ground and pound away. I'm sure some games he'll have more rushing attempts than Shonn Greene, and I think Shonn will have more than L.T. in other games."

I don't even need go to the stats to explain why Greene should be getting a lot more touches than Tomlinson. Go back and watch the Jets-Chargers playoff game.

Handing Tomlinson 15 carries a game at the expense of his younger teammates will be doing Jets opponents a favor.

Ryan
03-23-2010, 03:41 PM
I think this gives LT a perfect chance to flourish on a very strong, contending team.

NitroGSXR
03-23-2010, 03:41 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/23/ryan-tomlinson-slated-for-15-carries-a-game/

for those who thought LT was going to a situation where he be "cool" taking 8 carries a game.

Me thinks they want to keep Greene and Washington fresh for the playoffs. I bet the Jets want LT to be the one to take a pounding early in the season.

BigBull17
03-25-2010, 03:23 PM
I don't think the Jets lose or gain much by replacing Jones with LT. I mean they both have a lot of miles on them. Both are old by NFL standards but the best O line and an fullback may help LT doubt it but you never know. Besides, its only a two year contract and I know I'll be watching LT to see how he does with his new team. Good luck LT you are one of my favorites in the NFL.

I think they lose alot. Jones is one of the best backs in football over the last two years, while LT is wearing down and not nearly as effective as befor. I would take TJ 10 times out of 10 now.

gary
03-27-2010, 05:38 PM
I think they lose alot. Jones is one of the best backs in football over the last two years, while LT is wearing down and not nearly as effective as befor. I would take TJ 10 times out of 10 now.Right, I just think Jones within the next few years is going to drop off just like LT has done. Also, the Jets O line had a lot to do with his great running. Why not move Jones before he gets older but he still might want the starting job? That might end up being a problem in the long run. Maybe I am wrong JMO.

gary
03-27-2010, 05:57 PM
Jones did have a drop off in YPC last season I am just saying.