Texans sign safety Nick Ferguson

[ArlingtonTexan]

Originally Posted by Polo

Maybe I understood wrong, but I disagree with our defensive scheme being built around our safeties being interchangeable...

Maybe the type of guys they want in those positions is not what most fans envision, but I think our FS and SS have defined roles...

Anything less would be uncivilized.

From everything I understand, they are probably closer to left saftey and right saftey than true SS and FS. That said, offense line-up string to the defenses left side more than its right, our LS will have more SS characteristics than FS. I would have to see coaches tape or concentrate at a live game in order to confirm that the Texans don't do much flipping side with the safeties.

[badboy]

Originally Posted by Polo

Maybe I understood wrong, but I disagree with our defensive scheme being built around our safeties being interchangeable...

Maybe the type of guys they want in those positions is not what most fans envision, but I think our FS and SS have defined roles...

Anything less would be uncivilized.

You might want to look at the guys who are on team for those two positions.

Originally Posted by badboy

You might want to look at the guys who are on team for those two positions.

What does that have to do with their roles ? They could have Travis Johnson back there, but that wouldn't mean that the responsibilities of the position have changed...

[Hardcore Texan]

Originally Posted by Nawzer

This means Jason Simmons is not coming back? I liked J.Simmons, he could play multiple positions.

Boulware's replacement? Or did we really want MB to play OLB, I don't think so.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by Polo

What does that have to do with their roles ? They could have Travis Johnson back there, but that wouldn't mean that the responsibilities of the position have changed...

The difference in a LS and RS system (such as the system Harrison came from at Stanford) is they stay on one side of the field and are expected to play either traditional or SS or FS role on their assigned side of the field depending on how the O lines up instead of flipping sides with the O to keep the SS on the strong side.

Originally Posted by ArlingtonTexan

From everything I understand, they are probably closer to left saftey and right saftey than true SS and FS. That said, offense line-up string to the defenses left side more than its right, our LS will have more SS characteristics than FS. I would have to see coaches tape or concentrate at a live game in order to confirm that the Texans don't do much flipping side with the safeties.

I don't recall too many times CC and demps were in the game together where CC was actually the deep man while Demps came up into the box to play off the TE...

That'd be pretty nutty IMHO...Seems like it'd cause a little confusion on our end not to mention it make it hella-easy for teams to exploit mis-matches...

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by Polo

That'd be pretty nutty IMHO...Seems like it'd cause a little confusion on our end not to mention it make it hella-easy for teams to exploit mis-matches...

Fans say this every year about playing LCB and RCB instead of playing #1 CB on #1 WR, etc. Teams don't always agree with what fans consider nutty or easy to exploit.

Originally Posted by infantrycak

The difference in a LS and RS system (such as the system Harrison came from at Stanford) is they stay on one side of the field and are expected to play either traditional or SS or FS role on their assigned side of the field depending on how the O lines up instead of flipping sides with the O to keep the SS on the strong side.

I understand that...

That makes sense...@least for college and highschool....

But what does the personnel (that the Texans prefer) have to do with the actual responsibilities of the positions? How can you look at "who" is back there and make a determination about responsibilities and roles ?

[HJam72]

If that's how it's going to be, I'd like to see our "hybrid" safeties be a little more like FSs than they have in the past. Hard hits and good run support are fine, but I don't like watching safeties chase WRs from behind.

Just my

Originally Posted by infantrycak

Fans say this every year about playing LCB and RCB instead of playing #1 CB on #1 WR, etc. Teams don't always agree with what fans consider nutty or easy to exploit.

That's why I said IMO..

But SS and FS have two vastly different roles, vs a LCB and RCB...

You don't want a FS (normally a cover guy) playing down in the box all game and you don't want your SS (normally an in the box guy) playing deep all game because of how the offense is lining up...

LCB vs RCB is not really that big of a difference in the responsibilities...both are primarily going to be covereing recievers all game...

I'd prefer to have a corner capable of following a #1, but maybe the Texans just don't feel we have those kind of guys on our roster....Dunta's good, but he's not what I'd consider to be an elite cover guy...

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by Polo

But what does the personnel (that the Texans prefer) have to do with the actual responsibilities of the positions? How can you look at "who" is back there and make a determination about responsibilities and roles ?

Well at least to some degree you can look at the skill sets. Some safeties excel in the box but suck in coverage. You don't see the Texans pursuing those guys so far (caveat here--I am not totally convinced this is their ultimate goal so much as dealing with the personnel they have). At the other end is the almost CB FS who can't hold up in run support. Instead, the Texans keep getting guys with better coverage skills than most SS but not as good as most FS but who can play run support as well.

Originally Posted by infantrycak

Well at least to some degree you can look at the skill sets. Some safeties excel in the box but suck in coverage. You don't see the Texans pursuing those guys so far (caveat here--I am not totally convinced this is their ultimate goal so much as dealing with the personnel they have). At the other end is the almost CB FS who can't hold up in run support. Instead, the Texans keep getting guys with better coverage skills than most SS but not as good as most FS but who can play run support as well.

The same thing can be said for most of the players they aquire...

It's no secret that they like guys who can play multiple roles...Especially...O-line and defensive players...

But what does their choice in personnel have to do with actual player roles within the scheme ?

This same logic could be applied to the O-line...They like guys who can play different positions...ok...

That doesn't mean that on one play our LT is going to play RG and then go back to playing LT the next....it just means that "IF" something happens they like to have guys that can switch around...

[ArlingtonTexan]

Originally Posted by Polo

I don't recall too many times CC and demps were in the game together where CC was actually the deep man while Demps came up into the box to play off the TE...

That'd be pretty nutty IMHO...Seems like it'd cause a little confusion on our end not to mention it make it hella-easy for teams to exploit mis-matches...

Teams that don't flip the safeties are trying minimize having offenses exploit the guy in the box who can't cover and the range guys who can't hit. by having players who in theory do both well enough, a team is supposed to tip its hand less not more.

Someone who sees games live more can confirm (televsion angles are horrible for safety play), but the texans SS does not play often in the box either...i.e. both safeties play somewhat deep. Hince why the Texans have (and target) guys with the similiar skill sets who are pretty interchangeable.

[ArlingtonTexan]

Originally Posted by Polo

The same thing can be said for most of the players they aquire...

It's no secret that they like guys who can play multiple roles...Especially...O-line and defensive players...

But what does their choice in personnel have to do with actual player roles within the scheme ?
This same logic could be applied to the O-line...They like guys who can play different positions...ok...

That doesn't mean that on one play our LT is going to play RG and then go back to playing LT the next....it just means that "IF" something happens they like to have guys that can switch around...

Choice of personnel and how they are used in the scheme have everything to do with each other. Overall, what we are saying is that the Texans don't use SS and FS in the stereotypical way in which you are trying apply the terms.

Originally Posted by ArlingtonTexan

Teams that don't flip the safeties are trying minimize having offenses exploit the guy in the box who can't cover and the range guys who can't hit. by having players who in theory do both well enough, a team is supposed to tip its hand less not more.

Someone who sees games live more can confirm (televsion angles are horrible for safety play), but the texans SS does not play often in the box either...i.e. both safeties play somewhat deep. Hince why the Texans have (and target) guys with the similiar skill sets who are pretty interchangeable.

I understand what everyone is saying about the personnel...

The Texans like guys who can play diff. postions and minimize the chances of explotation...

My point is: That doesn't neccessarily mean that our safeties are actually switching roles during a game.

Someone who sees games live more can confirm (televsion angles are horrible for safety play), but the texans SS does not play often in the box either

I tend to see Demps back deep more, and I tend to see CC up in run support more...But I do agree that watching the games live is the best way to tell

Originally Posted by ArlingtonTexan

Choice of personnel and how they are used in the scheme have everything to do with each other.

Ok, and that's where we disagree...

Overall, what we are saying is that the Texans don't use SS and FS in the stereotypical way in which you are trying apply the terms.

Personally I think they do, but that's a pretty bold statement to make seeing that you just said the only way to tell would be to actually study the scheme...


Also, This is the same organization that has two LDE's on the field IMHO...They wised up towards the end of the year when they started moving Mario over in passing situations...

What can you tell me about their D-Line scheme based on what they put out there ?

IMHO, nothing...Seems like they kinda feel things out as they go...as they should..

My whole point is that you cannot look at the personnel and make determinations about the kind of scheme we're playing...

Another example: Travis Johnson and Amobi

Are you guys telling me that because we have two DT's of the same skill set on the field that these guys are switching between who's playing the 1-gap and whose playing the 3-gap ?

If so I disagree again.

[ArlingtonTexan]

Originally Posted by Polo

Ok, and that's where we disagree...



Personally I think they do, but that's a pretty bold statement to make seeing that you just said the only way to tell would be to actually study the scheme...


Also, This is the same organization that has two LDE's on the field IMHO...They wised up towards the end of the year when they started moving Mario over in passing situations...

What can you tell me about their D-Line scheme based on what they put out there ?

IMHO, nothing...Seems like they kinda feel things out as they go...as they should..

My whole point is that you cannot look at the personnel and make determinations about the kind of scheme we're playing...

I am not just making these determiniation blindly on personnel. There have been quotes from the team and coaching staff that claim that the responsibilites are similar. I want to say this was discussed heavily around time earl and simmons getting hurt last year.

Originally Posted by ArlingtonTexan

I am not just making these determiniation blindly on personnel. There have been quotes from the team and coaching staff that claim that the responsibilites are similar. I want to say this was discussed heavily around time earl and simmons getting hurt last year.

Really...That's strange cuz I don't remember that...

But I'm not even disagreeing with you guys...really I'm not...

I'm just expressing my opinion that the choice of personnel doesn't mean our guys don't have defined roles thus they are somewhat interchanging during the game...I disagree with that assertion...that's all...

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by Polo

Personally I think they do, but that's a pretty bold statement to make seeing that you just said the only way to tell would be to actually study the scheme...

Well, it's not a bold statement since the coaches have been saying this for the past couple of years. One of the Brandons we drafted last year even said that he had been in a similar system in Stanford (two interchangeable safeties) and that was why he expected to fit in quickly even though he had to miss a lot of the training camp because of Stanford's late graduation date.