Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

Barber still no #

J

J_R

Veteran
Just an interesting thought/fact to me. Shawn Barber still doesnt have a # but the problem is all the "LB #s" are taken. What number do you think he wears or do you see him wearing? jw
 
TexanFan881 said:
I hope not. If anything cut Wong, Morlon was solid for us last year...
Click to expand...
not for his salary he wasn't. Greenwood is now the 3rd highest paid player at [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]a cap hit of $4,664,000 this year[/FONT]
 
Vinny said:
not for his salary he wasn't. Greenwood is now the 3rd highest paid player at [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]a cap hit of $4,664,000 this year[/FONT]
Click to expand...

you honestly think we'll cut him?
 
Ali4Real said:



Actually, if we use all the numbers from 50-59 than we can use numbers such as 95 (Greg Llyod had that #) or 91,92,or anything as such.


:elmo: :elmo: :elmo:


LHall1.jpg



GET THIS GUY!
Click to expand...

Thanks for the answer.
 
281 said:
you honestly think we'll cut him?
Click to expand...

I don't know why everyone is so high on Morlon...

He was at best insignificant last year....

To be a WLB in a 4-3, playing next to Demeco and Behind Mario he did an absolutely awful job.....Especially considering the money he's making...


Don't cut him now....Cut him RIGHT now....
 
HuttoKarl said:
We're not going to cut Greenwood. He's not spectacular, but he's the second best LB we have.
Click to expand...

yeah... that. though, i could see him cut if we take an LB in the draft, especially the first day. we didn't sign barber and clark for nothing.
 
HuttoKarl said:
No. It was Moulds, Wong and Davis I believe.

Why would we cut one of our two LB's that can tackle?
Click to expand...

I believe it was Payne, Wong and Davis/ Williams that were demanded to restructure.

I agree with some of the other fellas. Greenwood hasn't even been close to performing up to his salary. We've wacked others that were in similar situations. Why would he be any different. If we keep plugging in players that are average at a position, then as a team we'd be the same as the previous 5 years. I'm not sure what I've typed made sense or not. I'm still a little groggy from last night. Whew! :)
 
HOU-TEX said:
I believe it was Payne, Wong and Davis/ Williams that were demanded to restructure.

I agree with some of the other fellas. Greenwood hasn't even been close to performing up to his salary. We've wacked others that were in similar situations. Why would he be any different. If we keep plugging in players that are average at a position, then as a team we'd be the same as the previous 5 years. I'm not sure what I've typed made sense or not. I'm still a little groggy from last night. Whew! :)
Click to expand...

I'm not saying the guy's necessarily earning his keep, but if we rely on DeMeco and three guys who haven't played a whole season in years, that worries me a bit more than starting a subpar guy who's at least healthy and serviceable.

I don't think this is the best year to make that particular cut.

Unless we take Patrick Willis at 10.
 
I seem to remember some LBs wearing numbers in the 70s as well. I guess that's in extreme cases, though.
 
hadaad said:
I seem to remember some LBs wearing numbers in the 70s as well. I guess that's in extreme cases, though.
Click to expand...
Karl Mecklenburg did but they have since changed the numbering rules and I think he was used as an elephant and he was hand down player as well as a stand up linebacker most of the time.
meck_rof.jpg
 
Vinny said:
Karl Mecklenburg did but they have since changed the numbering rules and I think he was used as an elephant and he was hand down player as well as a stand up linebacker most of the time.
meck_rof.jpg
Click to expand...

Similarly, there was Ted Hendricks wearing #83

ted_hendricks_main.jpg



Funny though, his first 5 years with Baltimore and 1 year with Green Bay, he wore more traditional #56

Ted-Hendricks--C10108374.jpeg
 
You are crazy if you think Greenwood is going anywhere.

Is he overpaid? Sure.
Is he cuttable for the Texans? No way. Who would you like to start in his place? Clark and Barber? No way. Barber is a situational guy and Clark is not a long term answer.

I know these are only stats, but lets see which WLB were better than Greenwood last year.

Bullocks - 143 tackles, 2.5 sacks, 1 INT, 2 FF, 1 FR
June - 142 tackles, 1 sack, 3 INTs, 2 FF, 1 FR
Brooking - 136 tackles, 2.5 sacks, 0 INT, 0 FF, 1 FR
Briggs - 130 tackles, 1 sack, 2 INTs, 4 FF, 1 FR
Sims - 124 tackles, .5 sacks, 0 INT, 1 FF, 1 FR
Brooks - 121 tackles, 0 sacks, 3 INTs, 0 FF, 0 FR
Hawk - 119 tackles, 3.5 sacks, 2 INTs, 1 FF, 2 FR
Johnson - 112 tackles, 0.5 sacks, 1 INT, 3 FF, 0 FR
Howard - 110 tackles, 0 sacks, 0 INTs, 0 FF, 0 FR
Greenwood - 109 tackles, 1 sack, 1 INT, 2 FF, 3 FR

So there. Out of ALL the OLBs in the league, thats 2 per team on 32 teams, or 64 TOTAL, Greenwood ranked 10th in total tackles. Not including the 3-4 OLBs (who's stats are inflated bc of sacks) Greenwood was VERY CONSISTENT in terms of sacks, INTs, FF, and FRs. How in the HELL IS HE CUTTABLE? Our LB corp SUCKS except for Demeco. If we get rid of Greenwood, we LOSE all our CHEMISTRY and one of our only CONSISTENT players. We don't need cap room right now. we need a WINNING SEASON. Enough planning for the future. I want to win right now!
 
Yea i think we should keep in another year atleast, we dont want to be too thin unless we get a stud at linebacker in the draft
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top