Pollard and is he hurting this D more then helping?

[Errant Hothy]

We all love the big hits that Pollard administers to the opposing team, as a in the box safety he is by far the best we’ve ever seen in Houston; but with all that said his deficiencies in coverage are becoming rather apparent, to both the fans and opposing offensive coordinators.

Could one of the moves needed to help the secondary be to get Pollard off the field on passing downs?

Let us not forgot that Pollard was cut by a bad KC team. A KC team who’s defense has improved since Pollard left. Safety play has always been an issue with the Texans, and outside of Nolan, I’m not convinced that it is any better than it was in the Matt Stevens days.

If I was an opposing QB my first read would to be to see who Pollard is trying to cover or to see if Pollard is supposed to be providing help over the top. Either way I would have no fear throwing in his direction. I fear the re-match with Indy as I see Manning to Clark being a long and unforgiving theme for the Colts.

As much as I think Pollard is hurting the team’s pass D, I don’t think there is anybody who could take the job from him. Barber still seems lost the second he steps on the field, and I’m not sure I would trust him as the 8th defender in the box when needed. Same with Wilson, if he could stay healthy. On the flip-side, if the Texans could stop the run with just the front 7, might a pairing of Nolan and Wilson/Barber provide the coverage help we desperately need? There are teams who’s running games I am certain that our front 7 could contain, and if that is the case are positives that Pollard brings out weighted by his negatives?

Just some thoughts.

[eriadoc]

As long as the coaching staff puts him in position to play to his strengths, he's a plus on the field. If they ask him to do things that he doesn't do well, then we get what we've seen this year. Part of being a good coach is recognizing and playing to your personnel's strengths.

[Errant Hothy]

Originally Posted by eriadoc

As long as the coaching staff puts him in position to play to his strengths, he's a plus on the field. If they ask him to do things that he doesn't do well, then we get what we've seen this year. Part of being a good coach is recognizing and playing to your personnel's strengths.

So we should just play him as a fourth LB every down and ask the 2 CBs and the FS to do all of the coverage work? Dallas tried that with a safety named Roy Williams, it failed miserably for them.

His position is one that reguires him to cover opposing potential pass catchers. There is no "coaching" around this. My question is can he do this well enough to keep him on the field?

From what I've seen this year the answer to that might be no, and if he can't might this team be better served pulling Pollard off the field at times.

[gtexan02]

Pollard is an excellent strong safety. He's not supposed to be a coverage guy, except that we have corners who both play poor coverage.

I think the problems were seeing with Pollard are 2 fold:
1. Poor scheme
2. Poor cornerbacks

He looked great when we had better corner play

[HJam72]

Remember what our run-D was like before we got Pollard. I'm just saying that, going by our current roster, I'd rather have Pollard in there and try to use him right. He's never going to be great against the pass, but he's the only SS we've got who is really good at some phase of the game.

I would have more interest in getting a ball-hawking FS, unless Nolan turns out to be that already. We have a SS that one-dimensional (overstated some), why not given in on the FS thing too?

[HJam72]

Originally Posted by gtexan02

Pollard is an excellent strong safety. He's not supposed to be a coverage guy, except that we have corners who both play poor coverage.

I think the problems were seeing with Pollard are 2 fold:
1. Poor scheme
2. Poor cornerbacks

He looked great when we had better corner play

That's why I was so heard on the CB on that play where Pollard bit inside and gave up a TD. A SS making the mistake of biting inside is one thing, but no other DB on the field should make that mistake so blatantly as the CB did.

[El Tejano]

1. vs. Colts - Pollard helps cause a Collie fumble that prevents another Indy comeback.
2. vs. Washington blocks a potential go ahead FG to help ignite a 17 point come from behind victory.
3. vs. Dallas the whole secondary looked bad.
4. vs. Oakland he puts a hit on the QB that changes the QBs ability to play at a high level and perhaps changes the game.
5. vs. Giants whole secondary looks bad.

3 games he made a play, 3 games we won. 2 games he didn't make a play, 2 games we lost.

I would say he's helping.

I think the real problem is what eriadc said. If we play him to his strengths he will be okay. Only problem is we got a rookie that's getting beat all the time so we are asking him to do more than he should have to.

[Errant Hothy]

Having a SS who cannot cover is just painting a big "Throw it here" sign for a QB. It's a fact of the NFL, any safety has to be able to cover when called on to. Can Pollard do this? Or am I crazy for thinking that an oppposing O-coordinator won't send his TE at Pollard at all during a game?

As for our run D improving with Pollard, the question now becomes has it improved at the expense of the pass D?

Could we not sub Pollard out on the obvious passing downs to improve the pass D, while still mainting a decent run D?

[El Tejano]

Originally Posted by Hoth-Boy

Having a SS who cannot cover is just painting a big "Throw it here" sign for a QB. It's a fact of the NFL, any safety has to be able to cover when called on to. Can Pollard do this? Or am I crazy for thinking that an oppposing O-coordinator won't send his TE at Pollard at all during a game?

As for our run D improving with Pollard, the question now becomes has it improved at the expense of the pass D?
Could we not sub Pollard out on the obvious passing downs to improve the pass D, while still mainting a decent run D?

Last year it didn't. We had a CB that was pretty good against the run though.

[silvrhand]

Originally Posted by gtexan02

Pollard is an excellent strong safety. He's not supposed to be a coverage guy, except that we have corners who both play poor coverage.

I think the problems were seeing with Pollard are 2 fold:
1. Poor scheme
2. Poor cornerbacks

He looked great when we had better corner play

No, he looked great cause hardly anyone was throwing the ball on us. I wish everyone would quit talking about how we looked last year in pass coverage based on our stats. Everyone was running the ball down our throats last year so why would they even begin to throw it?

That worked into Pollard having a great year cause it played to his strength. Now we see why KC may have felt that he needed to go.

[eriadoc]

Originally Posted by Hoth-Boy

So we should just play him as a fourth LB every down and ask the 2 CBs and the FS to do all of the coverage work? Dallas tried that with a safety named Roy Williams, it failed miserably for them.

Pollard covers better than Roy Williams. And plenty of defenses in the past have had a SS like Pollard, but they paired them with strong cover guys. Steve Atwater wasn't known for his cover skills. Sure, he could cover pretty well, but he was the thunder. Remember the picks Pollard got last year? The guy covers well enough to play SS in a scheme where you have a couple decent corners and a rangy FS. Unfortunately, we don't have any of that. That is the problem, not Pollard. Of the 53 guys on the team that are a problem, Pollard ranks near the bottom of the list. I can think of several guys in the secondary (like, every single one of them) that are more an issue than Pollard.

[gtexan02]

Originally Posted by silvrhand

No, he looked great cause hardly anyone was throwing the ball on us. I wish everyone would quit talking about how we looked last year in pass coverage based on our stats. Everyone was running the ball down our throats last year so why would they even begin to throw it?

That worked into Pollard having a great year cause it played to his strength. Now we see why KC may have felt that he needed to go.

What are you even talking about? Did you look at the stats?

We were rushed on 396 times last season. That was 5th fewest in the entire NFL.

For comparison, Oakland was run on 548 times (last).

Running it down our throats all year? Hardly

We were thrown on 548 times. Thats good for 9th most of any team in the NFL.

I wish people would take the time to check the information before jumping to conclusions. Its all available on espn or nfl.com

[gtexan02]

Originally Posted by Hoth-Boy

Having a SS who cannot cover is just painting a big "Throw it here" sign for a QB. It's a fact of the NFL, any safety has to be able to cover when called on to. Can Pollard do this? Or am I crazy for thinking that an oppposing O-coordinator won't send his TE at Pollard at all during a game?

As for our run D improving with Pollard, the question now becomes has it improved at the expense of the pass D?

Could we not sub Pollard out on the obvious passing downs to improve the pass D, while still mainting a decent run D?

First of all, I think Pollard is fine in coverage skills. He's probably about average for strong safeties in the NFL.

Secondly, your SS is rarely covering your TE one on one. Usually we have linebackers trailing TEs if we're doing the man thing, and if we're playing zone, then weve got linebackers in the middle and safeties up top.

[DexmanC]

Last year, we had Dunta Robinson and Jacques Reeves. Dunta was
hardly thrown at, because of his reputation. Neither of our corners
garner any respect, and QB's are merciless in destroying them week
in, and week out.

Our corners are instant touchdowns, and even Eli was tryin' to "get him
some 'o dat" in the 4th quarter, when most teams run the ball in that
situation.

If your DB's don't receive respect (don't get thrown at), then they'd BETTER
COVER.

[buddyboy]

Originally Posted by gtexan02

What are you even talking about? Did you look at the stats?

We were rushed on 396 times last season. That was 5th fewest in the entire NFL.

For comparison, Oakland was run on 548 times (last).

Running it down our throats all year? Hardly

We were thrown on 548 times. Thats good for 9th most of any team in the NFL.

I wish people would take the time to check the information before jumping to conclusions. Its all available on espn or nfl.com

Don't let stats get in the way of his argument. Who do you think you are?!

[scourge]

Originally Posted by eriadoc

Pollard covers better than Roy Williams. And plenty of defenses in the past have had a SS like Pollard, but they paired them with strong cover guys. Steve Atwater wasn't known for his cover skills. Sure, he could cover pretty well, but he was the thunder. Remember the picks Pollard got last year? The guy covers well enough to play SS in a scheme where you have a couple decent corners and a rangy FS. Unfortunately, we don't have any of that. That is the problem, not Pollard. Of the 53 guys on the team that are a problem, Pollard ranks near the bottom of the list. I can think of several guys in the secondary (like, every single one of them) that are more an issue than Pollard.

this.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by Hoth-Boy

If I was an opposing QB my first read would to be to see who Pollard is trying to cover or to see if Pollard is supposed to be providing help over the top. Either way I would have no fear throwing in his direction. I fear the re-match with Indy as I see Manning to Clark being a long and unforgiving theme for the Colts.

On our first defensive series against the Giants, there was a play where Eli threw the ball to their other tightend. I think his name is Prescoe.

Pollard came up & not the snot out of Prescoe's mamma.

After that play, I believe Prescoe went to the huddle & told Eli, "don't ever do that **** again!!!"

I think Pollard needs to stay on the field. Don't forget he got 4 picks last year as well, 2 against the Colts.

[BigBull17]

Originally Posted by thunderkyss

On our first defensive series against the Giants, there was a play where Eli threw the ball to their other tightend. I think his name is Prescoe.

Pollard came up & not the snot out of Prescoe's mamma.

After that play, I believe Prescoe went to the huddle & told Eli, "don't ever do that **** again!!!"

I think Pollard needs to stay on the field. Don't forget he got 4 picks last year as well, 2 against the Colts.

Yep. He is a little suspect in coverage, but who is your replacement? Also, he has a nose for the football, being one of the few people who can cause a ****ing turn over. Agree he needs to stay out there.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by silvrhand

No, he looked great cause hardly anyone was throwing the ball on us. I wish everyone would quit talking about how we looked last year in pass coverage based on our stats. Everyone was running the ball down our throats last year so why would they even begin to throw it?

That worked into Pollard having a great year cause it played to his strength. Now we see why KC may have felt that he needed to go.

It's funny how people rewrite the past to support their argument. Here is a link from NFL.com. on the right side of the page, they'll show who the leading rusher was for the game, & the yardage he gained. If you see one of our players, that means the other team did not run for more yards than that player.

For instance, in week 5 Steve Slaton was the leading rusher, with 39 yards. That means the Arizona Cardinals did not have a rusher that topped 39 yards in that game.

Other than Chris Johnson, nobody ran on us after week 3. Frank Gore & Glen Coffee put up 59 yards against us. Jones-Drew, 76.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by eriadoc

Pollard covers better than Roy Williams. And plenty of defenses in the past have had a SS like Pollard, but they paired them with strong cover guys. Steve Atwater wasn't known for his cover skills. Sure, he could cover pretty well, but he was the thunder. Remember the picks Pollard got last year? The guy covers well enough to play SS in a scheme where you have a couple decent corners and a rangy FS. Unfortunately, we don't have any of that. That is the problem, not Pollard. Of the 53 guys on the team that are a problem, Pollard ranks near the bottom of the list. I can think of several guys in the secondary (like, every single one of them) that are more an issue than Pollard.

This.

The problem with Pollard this year, & I think our defense as a whole, is that they're trying to "have each others back" Instead of doing their Job (staying high in the endzone for Pollard on that particular play) they are trying to make up for everyone else's mistakes (biting down on Cushing's guy)..

Kj is just as guilty, he spends too much time looking in the backfield, trying to sniff out the run. I know that's part of why Smithiak wanted him, but he needs to be worried about the guy in front of him.

& call me crazy, but nobody is "picking on" Quin. He finally gave up a TD Sunday, but he's been playing very well IMHO.