Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!
Well, lets get it going. I'd liken to start with a recommendation. I think the NFL should adjust their draft positions based solely on the 16 game results. The playoffs are simply another season all together. WC teams have gotten hot in the playoffs and went on to win it all, they should have their draft position penalized b/c of it.
If the #12 team won the SB they'd pick 32 versus 20, that would be a big difference.ummm, the SB winner picks 32nd? If a WC team makes it to the SB, they pick no higher than 31st?
I think he meant 'shouldn't be penlized' so a 9-7 SB winner would still pick 20ish.ummm, the SB winner picks 32nd? If a WC team makes it to the SB, they pick no higher than 31st?
What penalty? In theory you just proved you're the best team in football. Seems a bit ridiculous to then turn around and say "well we're not really that good."It does seem somewhat unfair that a team gets penalised for winning the SB.
I mean its like a reward for proving yourself the best team in football.What penalty? In theory you just proved you're the best team in football. Seems a bit ridiculous to then turn around and say "well we're not really that good."
Injuries to the top teams may have made the mission easier for the #12 WC team.....doesn't mean they would beat the best team if healthy.What penalty? In theory you just proved you're the best team in football. Seems a bit ridiculous to then turn around and say "well we're not really that good."
And they may not. Guess we can put an asterisk in the record book and draft your way in the seasons AP writers decide the best team didn't win.Injuries to the top teams may have made the mission easier for the #12 WC team.....doesn't mean they would beat the best team if healthy.
The current system is fine.And they may not. Guess we can put an asterisk in the record book and draft your way in the seasons AP writers decide the best team didn't win.
Better to keep it purely objective.
ahh, that one little word makes all the differenceI think he meant 'shouldn't be penlized' so a 9-7 SB winner would still pick 20ish.
I think the system is fine as is.
A snake draft?... that has problems of it's own towards competitive balanceIt does seem somewhat unfair that a team gets penalised for winning the SB.
What about moving their second round pick to the top of the second round?
In effect, they would have picks 32 and 33.
Just spitballing here.
Their reward is a trophy that says they're the best.I mean its like a reward for proving yourself the best team in football.
The Texans won't be getting any compensatory picks this year. The signed more free agents than they lost to other teams.I'm ok with the draft order as is. Not so much with how compensatory draft picks are awarded. (Yes, I'm admitedly biased to the Texans and we seem to get shafted often.)
Atleast they participated in FA last yr.The Texans won't be getting any compensatory picks this year. The signed more free agents than they lost to other teams.
Atleast they participated in FA last yr.
Much different than the yr before.
Agreed on the middling type of FA's except when they fit an exact need. Example: WR John Brown is a guy you can use when Fuller goes down again and your offense doesn't miss a beat.Free agency is so damn inefficient that you don't really want to play unless you believe yo are close or just cant fill that position otherwise , it can be cap crippling.
Just look at Colvin last year …. $8.5m for hot garbage that didn't even suit up in the last two games. Not a lot of money for a quality corner but way too much for an average or worse corner.
The only OT's worth their salt who changed teams were Solder and Norwell …. all the rest stayed put for the most part. The quality Corner market was just as thin … that's why they paid Colvin more than he was worth.
If it were up to me , the only guys I'd attempt to sign in free agency are proven high quality players and bargain bin types that if they work out will outperform their contracts. I'm not messing around with the middle types , they just aren't cost efficient.
There might be a few exceptions to that rule but not many ….
Also the timing of the use of free agency is important - you don't want to cripple yourself cap wise when you don't have most of the pieces in place …. the last free agency period is a good example of that. They were lacking talent at OT , OG , CB , TE and S … not a real good idea to handcuff yourself going forward when you have so many needs , especially when those positions lack quality talent in the FA pool - particularly OT and CB.
I think if you're serious about upgrading the Oline this offseason you have to get a vet OT in FA. It's a tall order to ask for 1 rookie tackle to come in and make an impact, let alone 2. Colleges don't coach up these guys how they use to so they take time to adjust in most cases. Smith or Brown is a must for this team IMO.Agreed on the middling type of FA's except when they fit an exact need. Example: WR John Brown is a guy you can use when Fuller goes down again and your offense doesn't miss a beat.
What do you think about signing a middle of the pack FA OT like Donovan Smith or Trent Brown? I like the Idea of signing a vet LT and drafting a young guy that played both LT/RT in college and letting him start out at RT and that way you're covered if your LT gets hurt. Cajuste/Dillard/Scharping come to mind as these types of guys.
At CB Claiborne/Melvin are the only CB that I would consider an upgrade, but there will be some rebuilding teams looking to trade vets for picks and you have to consider doing everything possible to upgrade the CB position, particularly when the Texans are going to be facing the QB's they're going to be facing next yr.
Talented vets are a must if you have rookies and can still offer guidance off the field but you must have one that can stay on the field and be field generals. We have been bitten too many times by injury prone guys. Let's go after durable types - even if they are a little below the top tier guys. Save money too.I think if you're serious about upgrading the Oline this offseason you have to get a vet OT in FA. It's a tall order to ask for 1 rookie tackle to come in and make an impact, let alone 2. Colleges don't coach up these guys how they use to so they take time to adjust in most cases. Smith or Brown is a must for this team IMO.
Same goes with Corner, we need multiple corners this off season and if 2/3 of your top corners are rookies you're in for a long season. Claiborne/Melvin are decent options. Another guy I'd keep my eye on if the money is right is Jason Verett. Easily the most talented corner in FA, he can man up and be a true shut down corner when healthy. But thats the thing can he stay healthy? That's the biggest qualifier with him, which makes him a big risk/reward candidate, but if the money is right it makes it very tempting
I think draft positions should be preassigned on a rotational basis independent of records. I think there should be rough parity every draft, i.e. the team with the 1st pick should choose 32nd in round 2. Then there would be no incentive to tank a season for a once-in-a-lifetime QB prospect, etc.Well, lets get it going. I'd liken to start with a recommendation. I think the NFL should adjust their draft positions based solely on the 16 game results. The playoffs are simply another season all together. WC teams have gotten hot in the playoffs and went on to win it all, they should have their draft position penalized b/c of it.
You can kiss league parity goodbye with a snake draft and how do you establish the order if you are ignoring record?I think draft positions should be preassigned on a rotational basis independent of records. I think there should be rough parity every draft, i.e. the team with the 1st pick should choose 32nd in round 2. Then there would be no incentive to tank a season for a once-in-a-lifetime QB prospect, etc.
The Texans have 2 TE's who can be amazing receiving threats. I want Sokol strictly for blocking purposes. Texans can work on his hands but he's primarily there as a big body blocker.As an MSU fan, pass on Sokol. Stone hands and an above average blocker.
Dropped countless TD's/1st downs. Do not want him anywhere near Watson.
If you want soneone "strictly for blocking purposes" might as well run an OT out there.The Texans have 2 TE's who can be amazing receiving threats. I want Sokol strictly for blocking purposes. Texans can work on his hands but he's primarily there as a big body blocker.
Yeah, using a TE 'strictly for blocking purposes' kinda destroys the value of having a TE on the field. Defense no longer has to guess if he's going out on a route or notIf you want soneone "strictly for blocking purposes" might as well run an OT out there.
And it is a resounding fail if the coaches can't make 280 lb Thomas into a decent blocker.
To loop back to the FB discussion...Yeah, using a TE 'strictly for blocking purposes' kinda destroys the value of having a TE on the field. Defense no longer has to guess if he's going out on a route or not
Probably, but perhaps the moon will turn blue in June and while it's snowing Gaine will sign an UDFA that turns into the next MooseTo loop back to the FB discussion...
A blocking TE is committed to one side and can be schemed against. He's also forward so can't see pressure except right in front of him. A FB can see the entire line and swing to any threat or release as a safety valve.
But that hope is probably pissin' in the wind.
So I'll admit a bit of a Cowboys perspective here. Grew up to Roger Newhouse. Always wanted to see him stand next to Earl because the two of them had the biggest thighs in the NFL. But he was a terror, rushing for 500-930 yds while obliterating people as a blocker. And then Moose came along. He was part of a team that gave up less than 200 sacks in a decade. Both should be HoF.Probably, but perhaps the moon will turn blue in June and while it's snowing Gaine will sign an UDFA that turns into the next Moose
Sokol is 6-6 @ 250 lbs+ and he did make some catches but is primarily viewed as a sound blocker. Griffin is 6-6 @ 250 lbs+ and cannot block and has superb hands of stone...not to mention an uncanny ability to commit drive killing penalties....yet he was OB's primary TE all season long. Hell,Sokol would be a major upgrade if he were competing against Griffin. So drop Griffin and replace him with Sokol. At least if OB's OC wants to run a 2 TE set in the RZ, he should have 2 blocking TE's (Thomas and Sokol) to use as an option.Yeah, using a TE 'strictly for blocking purposes' kinda destroys the value of having a TE on the field. Defense no longer has to guess if he's going out on a route or not
Yeah, but it was Robert, I don't know RogerSo I'll admit a bit of a Cowboys perspective here. Grew up to Roger Newhouse. Always wanted to see him stand next to Earl because the two of them had the biggest thighs in the NFL. But he was a terror, rushing for 500-930 yds while obliterating people as a blocker. And then Moose came along. He was part of a team that gave up less than 200 sacks in a decade. Both should be HoF.
Obviously that's a high bar, but I think it is foolish to eliminate the position.
Using Griffin as a comparison is weak sauce. Besides, you stated that you wanted Sokol 'strictly for blocking purposes' and that would defeat it's own purposes... maybe as a cheap UDFA that perhaps can find a pair of handsSokol is 6-6 @ 250 lbs+ and he did make some catches but is primarily viewed as a sound blocker. Griffin is 6-6 @ 250 lbs+ and cannot block and has superb hands of stone...not to mention an uncanny ability to commit drive killing penalties....yet he was OB's primary TE all season long. Hell,Sokol would be a major upgrade if he were competing against Griffin. So drop Griffin and replace him with Sokol. At least if OB's OC wants to run a 2 TE set in the RZ, he should have 2 blocking TE's (Thomas and Sokol) to use as an option.
Damn, was thinking Staubach era. ThxYeah, but it was Robert, I don't know Roger
Before your time, but Walt Garrison was a great FB for the Cowboys in the 60's and early 70's. Dallas had quite the run on the position.So I'll admit a bit of a Cowboys perspective here. Grew up to Roger Newhouse. Always wanted to see him stand next to Earl because the two of them had the biggest thighs in the NFL. But he was a terror, rushing for 500-930 yds while obliterating people as a blocker. And then Moose came along. He was part of a team that gave up less than 200 sacks in a decade. Both should be HoF.
Obviously that's a high bar, but I think it is foolish to eliminate the position.
Yeah, he was Cowboy before my time to a way. His drawl and Lilly defined. And Landry's fedora.Before your time, but Walt Garrison was a great FB for the Cowboys in the 60's and early 70's. Dallas had quite the run on the position.
Walt Garrison (The Cowboy's cowboy) was my favorite player as a kid, followed by Charlie and Cliff. Walt was also a champion cowbouy on the rodeo circuitBefore your time, but Walt Garrison was a great FB for the Cowboys in the 60's and early 70's. Dallas had quite the run on the position.
I don't think the position is obsolete, 3/4 teams still left have FBs and use them fairly frequently. Especially not obsolete if you want a power run game like OB says he wants. I think our FB was just obsolete, he really did not do anything well at all, he wasn't a very good blocker, he had stone hands, and he was bad on STs. Like all the things you need your FB to be good at, he was bad at.Will the Texans consider a full back at some point in free agency or the draft?
Or is full back an obsolete position now
Charlie credited his picks to Cliff.Walt Garrison (The Cowboy's cowboy) was my favorite player as a kid, followed by Charlie and Cliff. Walt was also a champion cowbouy on the rodeo circuit
Are you older?Before your time, but Walt Garrison was a great FB for the Cowboys in the 60's and early 70's. Dallas had quite the run on the position.
Older than dirt (57).Are you older?
That's my year of birth.Older than dirt (57).
Older than dirt (57).
About to be 52.I'll be 57 this year.....it's going too fast.