Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Dennison Accepts

Honestly if we look past the Jaws impersonation, the String dance TD celebration (which you didn't see this year because he had NO TDs), and how fun he is in the locker room, he's at best a 4th string WR. He's not likely to ever break to into the top 3 and he isn't anywhere near a threat in the return game.

IMO if you can get a guy that can start on the OL or give us a boost in our struggling running game for a 4th string WR and a late round pick. You make the move.

Hate? I dunno maybe I just can't see the David Anderson fan fare? Maybe I'm missing the valuable part he brings to the offense that is irreplaceable?

Yes, lets look past all the fluff:
2006: 1 catch
2007: 12 catches
2008: 19 catches
2009: 38 catches

Hes a solid possession receiver for us who isn't making much money and is still improving in this offense. If anything Denver should be the team throwing draft picks and players our way for him seeing as the guys that everyone wants from their team don't fit their current offensive philosophy. David Anderson is more valuable to Denver than Kuper. We can get some of those players without giving up DA. Also, with Walter already being an UFA and Davis making too much money how much turnover do you really want at WR? Just because Denver was interested in DA doesn't mean we should gift wrap him and send him to them as a freebie/throw in to get a guy that we could have gotten anyway.
 
IMO, why attempt to make changes in an area that's arguably our strongest? He's got great hands and he's been pretty good at moving the chains on 3rd downs. Save a couple, I don't think anyone's irreplaceable.

When most teams are deep at one position if given a chance to take the later part of their depth and use it to improve another, they take it. If I felt DA was an integral part of this offense or didn't think we could do better for a 4th stringer I wouldn't suggest it.

DA is actually one of my favorite players on the team. It's just after 8 years and no playoff appearences, I'm finally become hardened as a fan and am over any sentimental feelings towards keeping a player because I like him.

I only bring up DA for two reasons: (1) there's the connection with Denver because they offered him a 3 yr $4.5MM contract last year and I think they'd give us a 7th rd draft pick? and (2) His value to OUR team is that he routinely catches the ball and makes short yardage 1st downs. I think we can just as easily find a player to do what he does but also has the big play ability to make the first guy miss and take it to the house.

I also like Slaton a lot. But after his rookie success, I was wondering if he would become Clinton Portis 2.0. Came into Denver as a 2nd round pick, had two successful seasons and then they traded him for Champ Bailey.

I'm just SO ready for this team to become great. Our offense moves the ball well and has great stats. We're very good... but I'm ready for the Offense to become ELITE. That includes getting a solid OL and at least one other playmaker, maybe two. I see a guy like Percy Harvin taking over DA's spot to be one. I also think getting the OL to perform 1st rate is vitally important for our offense and running game. That's when our RB's will really take off, another playmaker at RB would be great. So I see 3 new players for our offense making a huge difference and taking us to the ELITE stage. That can be done (easily) this offseason. OL through FA because they're Game Ready and 2 of the first 3 or 4 picks go to the playmakers on Offense RB/WR.

Exactly. I'm not saying routinely we could offer David Anderson and a late draft pick to every team and expect to possibly land a starter on the OL or a RB that can contribute. It's just that Denver has already openly expressed interest in Anderson.

It's the situation as it lines up with Denver. McDaniels has stated he wants to go in a different direction with larger OLmen. We're still looking at running some form of the ZBS and Kuper would be a good fit. In he case of Kuper If they lowball his offer we might be able to take advantage of it.

Peyton Hillis is now listed as a Fullback and they have another FB on roster. If they are still interested in acquiring DA for a FB that's replaceable (and possibly better suited as a RB) it's not a bad move for both teams. Hillis is under contract, but some people are talking about a power back that can punch through a bad line. Hillis is listed 6'1" and 240. Certainly makes our depth at RB much more interesting. Put him in a trio with Spiller, and Slaton.

Frankly I'm surprised. I've seen people ready to let a much more productive Kevin Walter walk in FA, but are hesitant to trade off a guy whose career numbers don't even match Kevin Walter's first full year as a starter.
 
I totally agree Goldensilence.

Kevin Walter - I think it's important for us to re-sign him. I don't think Jacoby is ready to take over the #2 WR spot outright, but def. should be seeing his number called more. If we don't re-sign KW, I think we have to look at one of the veteran FA's to replace him... or we could be seeing us take one of the early WR's in the draft to replace him.

Denver - Even if Denver goes towards a different blocking scheme, it's going to be a transition. We don't know that Kuper may not fit that scheme too, so I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that he's gone. With that said, his contract is up and they have to decide what kind of longterm value he is to them. Peyton Hillis. Forget drafting an RB if we get him. I'd totally be comfortable with Slaton/Hillis combo and see if Foster can continue improving. PH would also serve as a backup to Leach. I just can't see Denver getting rid of Hillis though. If we could pick up Kuper AND Hillis THAT right there would make my offseason. I hope Dennison can convince Kubiak, Smith & McNair to get it done!! I just think its wishfull thinking of fans who think we'd get Kuper and/or Hillis for free - but I hope I'm wrong.
 
I feel bad harping on some sort of trades. Does anyone think Dennison may bring over any coaches/assistants with him? Do yall see any guys on our staff that may be replaceable?
 
I feel bad harping on some sort of trades. Does anyone think Dennison may bring over any coaches/assistants with him? Do yall see any guys on our staff that may be replaceable?

Unfortunately the RB coach already went to. . . Atlanta I think?
 
I feel bad harping on some sort of trades. Does anyone think Dennison may bring over any coaches/assistants with him? Do yall see any guys on our staff that may be replaceable?

Denver only let their coaches have an interview if it is a promotioal position offer. Like for Dennison O-line coach to OC. But, Washington was denied to have an interview with Dennison due to no promotional position offered. In order for the Texans to bring more coaches from Denver, it has to be a pomotional position. Looking at our current Texans coaching position, we are set. I have hard time seeing us bringing more coaches from Denver. Perhaps, assistant coaches to be somekind of coach position.
 
Just out of curiosity, how much will Dennison be involved with our Oline? I've been wondering about this for the past few days. With Gibbs leaving, will Benton be the primary Oline coach? Will Dennison have the time to spend on coaching up the Oline along with the rest of the OC duties?

We know our Oline must improve in the run game. Will it be by personel? Or coaching?
 
Just out of curiosity, how much will Dennison be involved with our Oline? I've been wondering about this for the past few days. With Gibbs leaving, will Benton be the primary Oline coach? Will Dennison have the time to spend on coaching up the Oline along with the rest of the OC duties?

We know our Oline must improve in the run game. Will it be by personel? Or coaching?

I am pretty sure Dennison will have a hand in the O-line because he was the O-line coach before. I can't imagine an OC who takes a hands-off approach to a unit that he used to coach for a different team. Especially if that unit underperforms at any point.
 
Just out of curiosity, how much will Dennison be involved with our Oline? I've been wondering about this for the past few days. With Gibbs leaving, will Benton be the primary Oline coach? Will Dennison have the time to spend on coaching up the Oline along with the rest of the OC duties?

We know our Oline must improve in the run game. Will it be by personel? Or coaching?

Benton should be the Oline coach. Period.

Dennison may work a little more closely with him and maybe iron some things out. But Dennison should be concentrating on being the OC and getting everything working. He should be trying to convince Smith to draft offensive linemen, running backs, and wide receivers (maybe a QB) and the defense be damned.

I don't want him getting down and dirty and going over techniques with the linemen. That's not his job.
 
Benton should be the Oline coach. Period.

Dennison may work a little more closely with him and maybe iron some things out. But Dennison should be concentrating on being the OC and getting everything working. He should be trying to convince Smith to draft offensive linemen, running backs, and wide receivers (maybe a QB) and the defense be damned.

I don't want him getting down and dirty and going over techniques with the linemen. That's not his job.

I see the OC as the guy who overlooks the entire offense. If one part of that offense isn't working (And lets face it, QB/WR/TE/FB do not need any help really) then the OC needs to find out what isn't working and get it up to snuff. Whether that be the O-line or the RB's is up to him, but I can't see him not giving his input where it might be warranted on the line.
 
Benton should be the Oline coach. Period.

Dennison may work a little more closely with him and maybe iron some things out. But Dennison should be concentrating on being the OC and getting everything working. He should be trying to convince Smith to draft offensive linemen, running backs, and wide receivers (maybe a QB) and the defense be damned.

I don't want him getting down and dirty and going over techniques with the linemen. That's not his job.

Normally I'd agree with this, but is Benton suitable for the job? It's been said Gibbs took a step back in favor of Benton this season and our running game stunk. Yes, we had injuries, but is it possible Benton also had a hand in the problem?
 
I see the OC as the guy who overlooks the entire offense. If one part of that offense isn't working (And lets face it, QB/WR/TE/FB do not need any help really) then the OC needs to find out what isn't working and get it up to snuff. Whether that be the O-line or the RB's is up to him, but I can't see him not giving his input where it might be warranted on the line.

Like I said, I've got no problem with him correcting someone if he sees something wrong. I expect him to sit down with Benton and go over exactly what he expects and if he sees something wrong, I expect him to fix it.

But I don't want him concentrating on fixing the line to the point that he ignores all the other positions and ignores how everything works together. He's the OC, he needs to be the OC.
 
Normally I'd agree with this, but is Benton suitable for the job? It's been said Gibbs took a step back in favor of Benton this season and our running game stunk. Yes, we had injuries, but is it possible Benton also had a hand in the problem?

Now that, my friend, is a totally different question.
 
Normally I'd agree with this, but is Benton suitable for the job? It's been said Gibbs took a step back in favor of Benton this season and our running game stunk. Yes, we had injuries, but is it possible Benton also had a hand in the problem?

I think that's really a hard question to answer. If there was any doubt that the reason the Texans had success in the running game last year was due to the surprising play of Steve Slaton, there shouldn't be now.

I guess the coaching staff and Slaton thought it would be a good idea to put on a little bulk so that his frame could take the beating a bit better. Truth is they should've just drafted someone suitable enough to split the load instead of whatever got into their heads about Chris Brown being that guy. Or not take so long in getting Foster any kind of reps at RB.

To me, success in the running game (or lack of here) has been the result personnel running it. I don't think Gibbs not being so "hands on" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean) or Benton taking more control is important as the guys they've been forced to run with.
 
I think that's really a hard question to answer. If there was any doubt that the reason the Texans had success in the running game last year was due to the surprising play of Steve Slaton, there shouldn't be now.

I guess the coaching staff and Slaton thought it would be a good idea to put on a little bulk so that his frame could take the beating a bit better. Truth is they should've just drafted someone suitable enough to split the load instead of whatever got into their heads about Chris Brown being that guy. Or not take so long in getting Foster any kind of reps at RB.

To me, success in the running game (or lack of here) has been the result personnel running it. I don't think Gibbs not being so "hands on" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean) or Benton taking more control is important as the guys they've been forced to run with.


I think that's a big part of it. But, I also think Alex Gibbs' attitude philosophy about running the same play over and over set them back. I also blame Shanny and Kubiak for not being stronger leaders. Anyway, I feel strongly that teams overplayed the zone runs... essentially, beating the OLmen into the gap right after the snap of the ball. They were able to do this, I believe, because Schaub isn't athletic enough to threaten the opposite edge with the bootleg. The solution, I think, is to run some counters. On a counter run, the OL would take a false step in unison, then change direction and block the overpursuing linemen/LBs. This is different than simply having the RB cut to the backside on a Zone run because the entire blocking scheme and run is set up to punish the defense in overpursuit and thereby create a huge, predetermined running lane. In a zone play, ideally, running room can be created by overpursuit as well but the running back has to see and find the hole and there is very little blocking assistance other than a potential cut block from one of the backside linemen. Anyway, Jeremy Rice from the Chronicle argues quite well that a few designed counter runs would discourage opposing defenses from jumping into the gaps so quickly on our zone runs and therefore allow the OL to make more of the hook and reach blocks so essential in the ZBS. Imagine being the LG on a zone stretch run to the right this season. Often his job is to cross the face of the DT lined up between him and Chris Myers and cut him down. Difficult as that is under normal conditions, imagine if the DT was coached to explode into the front side gap as soon as he sees a step right from the RB, Center, or QB. At that point, the LG's job is almost impossible. I think that was happening a lot last season.

Remember, most of Alex Gibbs' success running this system has been with the following QBs: John Elway, Jake Plummer, Mike Vick. My guess is that NFL DCs reviewing our '08 offense, realized that Schaub was too slow and unathletic to consistently hit the edge on a bootleg. They probably also discovered that he was a better QB in the pocket. As a result, many of these teams simply decided to sell out on our Zone plays since there was no penalty for their overpursuit... other than the end around, which we've not run well either.
 
I think that's a big part of it. But, I also think Alex Gibbs' attitude philosophy about running the same play over and over set them back. I also blame Shanny and Kubiak for not being stronger leaders. Anyway, I feel strongly that teams overplayed the zone runs... essentially, beating the OLmen into the gap right after the snap of the ball. They were able to do this, I believe, because Schaub isn't athletic enough to threaten the opposite edge with the bootleg. The solution, I think, is to run some counters. On a counter run, the OL would take a false step in unison, then change direction and block the overpursuing linemen/LBs. This is different than simply having the RB cut to the backside on a Zone run because the entire blocking scheme and run is set up to punish the defense in overpursuit and thereby create a huge, predetermined running lane. In a zone play, ideally, running room can be created by overpursuit as well but the running back has to see and find the hole and there is very little blocking assistance other than a potential cut block from one of the backside linemen. Anyway, Jeremy Rice from the Chronicle argues quite well that a few designed counter runs would discourage opposing defenses from jumping into the gaps so quickly on our zone runs and therefore allow the OL to make more of the hook and reach blocks so essential in the ZBS. Imagine being the LG on a zone stretch run to the right this season. Often his job is to cross the face of the DT lined up between him and Chris Myers and cut him down. Difficult as that is under normal conditions, imagine if the DT was coached to explode into the front side gap as soon as he sees a step right from the RB, Center, or QB. At that point, the LG's job is almost impossible. I think that was happening a lot last season.

Remember, most of Alex Gibbs' success running this system has been with the following QBs: John Elway, Jake Plummer, Mike Vick. My guess is that NFL DCs reviewing our '08 offense, realized that Schaub was too slow and unathletic to consistently hit the edge on a bootleg. They probably also discovered that he was a better QB in the pocket. As a result, many of these teams simply decided to sell out on our Zone plays since there was no penalty for their overpursuit... other than the end around, which we've not run well either.

Schaub didn't hurt anyone with his legs but he was GOUGING teams with the bootleg through the air. For teams like the Dolphins and Patriots, who had good backside pursuit that wasn't going to fall for the bootleg, we didn't run any bootlegs and Schaub became a dropback passer (and was pretty good at it). But against teams like the Bengals, the Rams, the Seahawks, etc, Shaub was working that bootleg.
 
Schaub didn't hurt anyone with his legs but he was GOUGING teams with the bootleg through the air. For teams like the Dolphins and Patriots, who had good backside pursuit that wasn't going to fall for the bootleg, we didn't run any bootlegs and Schaub became a dropback passer (and was pretty good at it). But against teams like the Bengals, the Rams, the Seahawks, etc, Shaub was working that bootleg.

Yes but I don't think he was good on the bootlegs in '08 and I think that's what teams looked at when they attacked our run this season.

I think running some counters will force teams to play the run more honestly. Otherwise, we can just gash them for 15 yards a pop until they do.
 
Schaub didn't hurt anyone with his legs but he was GOUGING teams with the bootleg through the air. For teams like the Dolphins and Patriots, who had good backside pursuit that wasn't going to fall for the bootleg, we didn't run any bootlegs and Schaub became a dropback passer (and was pretty good at it). But against teams like the Bengals, the Rams, the Seahawks, etc, Shaub was working that bootleg.

That is the one thing that I wonder about having Matt Schaub as our QB.

Very much like a Drew Bledsoe type of QB: No running/agility, but can kill teams if he has time to set his feet and throw the ball.

I had said in the past off-season that I'd welcome Brett Favre here, but I honestly think that the only reason he has had success in Minnesota is because of the stellar RB he hands it off to, which opens a lot of stuff up for Favre. I don't think Brett would have been as effective here, due to our lack of a quality running game.

Would McNabb succeed here, throwing it to AJ and the rest of our guys?

I know that I'd like us to have a QB who can run it when needed. The ability to extend a broken-down passing play can really change the landscape of a few games...and maybe more.

I know Schaub has the stats through the air. No arguing it. I just wish Matt had been blessed with some better running ability.
 
That is the one thing that I wonder about having Matt Schaub as our QB.

Very much like a Drew Bledsoe type of QB: No running/agility, but can kill teams if he has time to set his feet and throw the ball.

I had said in the past off-season that I'd welcome Brett Favre here, but I honestly think that the only reason he has had success in Minnesota is because of the stellar RB he hands it off to, which opens a lot of stuff up for Favre. I don't think Brett would have been as effective here, due to our lack of a quality running game.

Would McNabb succeed here, throwing it to AJ and the rest of our guys?

I know that I'd like us to have a QB who can run it when needed. The ability to extend a broken-down passing play can really change the landscape of a few games...and maybe more.

I know Schaub has the stats through the air. No arguing it. I just wish Matt had been blessed with some better running ability.

No. He's inaccurate. Schaub is one of the more accurate passers in the league. McNabb for all his "abilities" lacks one of the more critical talents... being able to throw the ball accurately to his receivers. He's one of the most frustrating QB's to watch if you ask me. (which you didn't) If you would like an education on the benefits of an accurate passer and are in disbelief about Schaub's abilities go back and watch Brees against the Patriots earlier in the year. It's hands down the best performance by a QB that I can remember seeing in my life. If that's not enough, go watch Warner against the Packers, and if you still don't see it, go back and watch Schaub (especially in the first half of our games for the majority of the season).
 
No. He's inaccurate. Schaub is one of the more accurate passers in the league. McNabb for all his "abilities" lacks one of the more critical talents... being able to throw the ball accurately to his receivers. He's one of the most frustrating QB's to watch if you ask me. (which you didn't) If you would like an education on the benefits of an accurate passer and are in disbelief about Schaub's abilities go back and watch Brees against the Patriots earlier in the year. It's hands down the best performance by a QB that I can remember seeing in my life. If that's not enough, go watch Warner against the Packers, and if you still don't see it, go back and watch Schaub (especially in the first half of our games for the majority of the season).


what he said!!
 
That is the one thing that I wonder about having Matt Schaub as our QB.

Very much like a Drew Bledsoe type of QB: No running/agility, but can kill teams if he has time to set his feet and throw the ball.
<snip>

I know that I'd like us to have a QB who can run it when needed. The ability to extend a broken-down passing play can really change the landscape of a few games...and maybe more.

I know Schaub has the stats through the air. No arguing it. I just wish Matt had been blessed with some better running ability.

But like I was saying, on those rollouts, Schaub picks up a lot of yardage even though it's not with his feet. I actually prefer that.

And he was better this past season about pulling it down when he felt pressure and turning it into positive yardage. Not a lot of positive yardage, but some.

I'm fine with that. It's exciting to watch a guy who can pick up yards on the ground but as long as a guy can move around a little bit (like a Manning or a Brady), that's all I need.
 
Like I said, I've got no problem with him correcting someone if he sees something wrong. I expect him to sit down with Benton and go over exactly what he expects and if he sees something wrong, I expect him to fix it.

But I don't want him concentrating on fixing the line to the point that he ignores all the other positions and ignores how everything works together. He's the OC, he needs to be the OC.


I talked to someone with the staff about offensive coaching and the roles of different coaches. They are VERY collaborative on the offensive side of the ball. Lots of team teaching. One of the things they wanted to do when Kubiak came on board is to break down the barriers between positions on the offense.

They are not that big into what their titles are, and are very big into making sure that the offense works together.

That Dennison has worked with a number of these guys before is going to make communication between groups easier and not harder.
 
I talked to someone with the staff about offensive coaching and the roles of different coaches. They are VERY collaborative on the offensive side of the ball. Lots of team teaching. One of the things they wanted to do when Kubiak came on board is to break down the barriers between positions on the offense.

They are not that big into what their titles are, and are very big into making sure that the offense works together.

That Dennison has worked with a number of these guys before is going to make communication between groups easier and not harder.

So TC, any reason to think this philosophy might have been a bit of a problem for Alex Gibbs given that I've always heard he wanted complete and total control of the running game?
 
And he was better this past season about pulling it down when he felt pressure and turning it into positive yardage. Not a lot of positive yardage, but some.

Not only that, but this season he has also done a much better job of keeping the play alive, when he does get outside the pocket... not just the roll-outs, but the busted plays as well.

That was my biggest gripe with Schaub, before, when he was forced out of the pocket, the play was pretty much over.

I think over the second half of the season, there was at least one play per game, where he "made" something happen, after being flushed from the pocket.

I don't think we'll ever mistake him for Big Ben, but I think it's another aspect of his game that he will need if he's going to be the one to take us where we need to go.
 
Not only that, but this season he has also done a much better job of keeping the play alive, when he does get outside the pocket... not just the roll-outs, but the busted plays as well.

That was my biggest gripe with Schaub, before, when he was forced out of the pocket, the play was pretty much over.

I think over the second half of the season, there was at least one play per game, where he "made" something happen, after being flushed from the pocket.
I don't think we'll ever mistake him for Big Ben, but I think it's another aspect of his game that he will need if he's going to be the one to take us where we need to go.

I was talking to Barrett about this: somewhere around week 10 or 11, Schaub started to display a new level of pocket awareness. It really made a difference in his play, I thought. His development is definitely on schedule for him to be one of the elite 4 or 5 QBs in the NFL over the next 5-8 years. It's pretty exciting!
 
Back
Top