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

Texans sign Pollard

DerekLee1 said:
What's the knock on this guy that he was cut weeks ago and still no other team signed him before now?
Click to expand...

I have been trying to see what KC fans said. From what I saw, opinions were split, however, there was a consensus that he was a good special teams player and a good tackler. The knock on him was that he cannot cover.

He can't be any worse than Barber has been and he has a lot more experience.
 
Why was this guy cut? Was he out of PS eligibility because KC didn't put him on their PS? Getting another teams safety who was a 2nd round pick from just a few years ago seems to good to be true....
 
Wait, the knock on him in KC was that he made a lot of tackles but not impact plays. You mean safety's tackle? Jeesh, after watching Barber play, I thought safety's just watched people run into the end zone from 20 yards behind.

I mean he is called the "safety" for a reason. If it's 10 or 20 yards down the field rather than the end zone that sounds a hell of a lot better to me.
 
You can't expect to pick up a Reed, Troy P., or Sanders 3 weeks into the season. Can or Can't cover, if the guy can get our defense out of the bottom of the barrel in rushing yards allowed then it will be a great pick up.
 
Believe it or not, I went back and watched 4 games he played in, along with all the hightlights/lowlights on nfl.com
Against the Pats, the Titans, the Chargers, and the Bucs.
(There's also the game agaisnt us that I will rewatch later on).

If we want an aggressive Defense, this is the type of player we need to get.
A safety who can take on an O-lineman and can put it to a big TE with force.

He was over-aggressive in the Titans game and overran a play and missed a tackle.
A few bad angles/tackles here and there in the other games.

But I really think he will fit in nicely with what we're trying to do here.
I'm gonna say that the fans will love to see all the truckings he brings.
 
Barrett, all I'm saying is having a in the box guy in a division or against the better teams that have a Y-flex te is going to put the defense at a disadvantage. Wilson can coverr those guys, but pollard or none of those other guys can play deep middle or sit on the hash and make plays. Look at Rhodes/Leonhard in NY. Rhodes is a rangy safety that can also cover and the smaller leonhard is similar. What happens with that is the defense is still intact and solid even when teams flex the te out. I g back to week 1 in a crucial point and ferguson was looked on keller. If you really look, keller really worked them all game. I know missing wilson was huge, but not haviing a deep middle kind of guy in the case when wilson has to cover the te is needed. Also the big nickel is used more also when team come out in 1rb,3wr,and a te. In big nickel and in case the team has a power run game, you have the 3 safety look. Those 2 safeties better be able to cover from the hash marks. If wilson drops to cover the te and support the run, neither pollard or busing or any of the other safeties are good enough on the hash. Maybe in pollard they get a guy that can play close to the los, but it puts a real strain on the defense.
 
leebigeztx said:
Barrett, all I'm saying is having a in the box guy in a division or against the better teams that have a Y-flex te is going to put the defense at a disadvantage. Wilson can coverr those guys, but pollard or none of those other guys can play deep middle or sit on the hash and make plays. Look at Rhodes/Leonhard in NY. Rhodes is a rangy safety that can also cover and the smaller leonhard is similar. What happens with that is the defense is still intact and solid even when teams flex the te out. I g back to week 1 in a crucial point and ferguson was looked on keller. If you really look, keller really worked them all game. I know missing wilson was huge, but not haviing a deep middle kind of guy in the case when wilson has to cover the te is needed. Also the big nickel is used more also when team come out in 1rb,3wr,and a te. In big nickel and in case the team has a power run game, you have the 3 safety look. Those 2 safeties better be able to cover from the hash marks. If wilson drops to cover the te and support the run, neither pollard or busing or any of the other safeties are good enough on the hash. Maybe in pollard they get a guy that can play close to the los, but it puts a real strain on the defense.
Click to expand...


You make a very good point. However, we don't have any SS that can cover. So, adding Pollard only helps. I actually think that Busing and Wilson can pair together at safety situationally. It appears that Busing may be an asset in coverage. Maybe Pollard is a two down or situational safety or perhaps we'll just have issues covering TEs... we've had bigger problems than that!
 
Yay! Our beginning of the year S is here!

I think Wilson is the best cover safety we have with Busing in 2nd. Don't know much about Pollard other than he pipelined down from KC...weak, at least Demps was from the Giants and Wilson from the Pats...sorta...How is it the most talented safety we've ever had got cut by Belichick? That stinks.

Chuggachuggachuggachuggachuggachugga...train's pullin' in folks.
 
leebigeztx said:
Barrett, all I'm saying is having a in the box guy in a division or against the better teams that have a Y-flex te is going to put the defense at a disadvantage. Wilson can coverr those guys, but pollard or none of those other guys can play deep middle or sit on the hash and make plays. Look at Rhodes/Leonhard in NY. Rhodes is a rangy safety that can also cover and the smaller leonhard is similar. What happens with that is the defense is still intact and solid even when teams flex the te out. I g back to week 1 in a crucial point and ferguson was looked on keller. If you really look, keller really worked them all game. I know missing wilson was huge, but not haviing a deep middle kind of guy in the case when wilson has to cover the te is needed. Also the big nickel is used more also when team come out in 1rb,3wr,and a te. In big nickel and in case the team has a power run game, you have the 3 safety look. Those 2 safeties better be able to cover from the hash marks. If wilson drops to cover the te and support the run, neither pollard or busing or any of the other safeties are good enough on the hash. Maybe in pollard they get a guy that can play close to the los, but it puts a real strain on the defense.
Click to expand...
With Pollard, I imagine we hardly need to bring Wilson up. He should be playing deep most of the time.

Pollard can handle a lot of things better than our other safeties are capable of.
 
76Texan said:
With Pollard, I imagine we hardly need to bring Wilson up. He should be playing deep most of the time.

Pollard can handle a lot of things better than our other safeties are capable of.
Click to expand...

I hope so.

It would be really nice to have a safety who can come up and help against the run. The only things I've heard about Pollard are that he injured Brady and McFadden.

I'm guessing it was a Pioli decision to get rid of him?
 
hadaad said:
I hope so.

It would be really nice to have a safety who can come up and help against the run. The only things I've heard about Pollard are that he injured Brady and McFadden.

I'm guessing it was a Pioli decision to get rid of him?
Click to expand...

If I'm gonna guess, it's all about the money!

Perhaps Rick Smith, with his Purdue connection, is in a better position to negotiate.

I leave that to the FO.
Just looking forward to see some opponents flying in the air, plenty good enough for me! :kingkong:
 
He might wind up being great or he might suck but I'll give the Texans credit for realizing there's a problem with Ferguson and Barber, who can't see that, and trying to do something about it. On the bad side though it took them too long to come to this realization and once the season starts all the good talent is gone. Anybody know anything about his contract with the Texans, how much and how long?
 
The blogger said Pollard wasn't fast enough or a playmaker.

He may or may not be a playmaker but if he can chase down McFadden he's plenty fast enough.

I'll settle for a S that is a sure tackler at this point.

After watching the likes of Barber and Ferguson the last two weeks.
 
i despise the Pats so it might seem a little prejudiced when i say i am so excited that we brought in the guy that, by himself, showed the league that Belichek is just a schmuck that hides behind a great QB and an easy offensive system.
 
V3rm0nt3r said:
i despise the Pats so it might seem a little prejudiced when i say i am so excited that we brought in the guy that, by himself, showed the league that Belichek is just a schmuck that hides behind a great QB and an easy offensive system.
Click to expand...

Well Bill's back up last year did pretty good. I think the spy gate issue really took the glow off Bill's reputation, but I still think he's the best coach in the league.

The guy gets more out of his players then anyone and I can't remember a game where they aren't prepared and ready to go. Wish I could say the same for our current staff.
 
I guess I would like to see versitility in the safeties. Teams recognize the box guy and isolate him with the te or just open up and run teaser routes in front of him. Look, I think its a good gamble if you plan on having him close to the los, but having him on the hash or deep middle is a stretch. Maybe he can be that blitzer type, but I guess at some point I would like to thank the texans can stop the run without the extra box guy.
 
Look the bottom line is do we need help at safety? Yes. Does Pollard, at least potentially, provide an upgrade at the position? Yes. That's all that matters. You aren't going to find a perfect player at this point.
 
leebigeztx said:
I guess I would like to see versitility in the safeties. Teams recognize the box guy and isolate him with the te or just open up and run teaser routes in front of him. Look, I think its a good gamble if you plan on having him close to the los, but having him on the hash or deep middle is a stretch. Maybe he can be that blitzer type, but I guess at some point I would like to thank the texans can stop the run without the extra box guy.
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying but if we want a guy like that we probably need to spend a premium draft pick on him. Maybe next year is the year. In the meantime guys like Barber/Ferguson aren't doing anything positive against the run or pass anyway so we might as well see if we can't get Pollard to make some impact in the run game. If Busing continues playing the way he has he might not see the field too much anyway.
 
TexansSeminole said:
Look the bottom line is do we need help at safety? Yes. Does Pollard, at least potentially, provide an upgrade at the position? Yes. That's all that matters. You aren't going to find a perfect player at this point.
Click to expand...

Interesting enough they are talking about this Pollard pick up on the Jags board. I'll say the same thing here I said there, and that is if he can tackle a 100 year old woman in a wheel chair it'll be an improvement over what we have now at safety. This is a position of need on this team and we can use all the help we can get, even if it's just a small increment in actual help.
 
Kubiak didn't really sound too excited about Pollard yesterday. Saying "they had a roster spot" with Pitts out. So they basically signed him to fill a roster spot? I'm probably reading too much into it, but by listening to Kubiak, it didn't sound like he's going to be our answer as some around here might think. LOL

(on where they see S Bernard Pollard fitting in) "Well, we basically had a roster spot with Chester. We'll evaluate him over the course of the next two days. (Defensive backs coach) David (Gibbs) is familiar with him from Kansas City so we just need to take a look and we'll see where we're at."
Click to expand...

http://www.houstontexans.com/news/Story.asp?story_id=5609

Video

http://www.houstontexans.com/tv/index.asp?mm_file_id=3449&play_clip=y
 
HOU-TEX said:
Kubiak didn't really sound too excited about Pollard yesterday. Saying "they had a roster spot" with Pitts out. So they basically signed him to fill a roster spot? I'm probably reading too much into it, but by listening to Kubiak, it didn't sound like he's going to be our answer as some around here might think. LOL



http://www.houstontexans.com/news/Story.asp?story_id=5609

Video

http://www.houstontexans.com/tv/index.asp?mm_file_id=3449&play_clip=y
Click to expand...

Even if he is excited, nothing good can be gained by declaring a street free agent is an obvious upgrade over the players you have on the team now. that said, his comments are closer to the truth than not. Pollard while having a better pedigree than Barber or Busing has to learn the Texans defense and show that he is a better player. Now, upgrading the safety may not seem that difficult, but Pollard is guaranteed nothing.
 
ArlingtonTexan said:
Kubiak didn't really sound too excited about Pollard yesterday. Saying "they had a roster spot" with Pitts out. So they basically signed him to fill a roster spot? I'm probably reading too much into it, but by listening to Kubiak, it didn't sound like he's going to be our answer as some around here might think. LOL



http://www.houstontexans.com/news/Story.asp?story_id=5609

Video

http://www.houstontexans.com/tv/index.asp?mm_file_id=3449&play_clip=y
Click to expand...

Even if he is excited, nothing good can be gained by declaring a street free agent is an obvious upgrade over the players you have on the team now. that said, his comments are closer to the truth than not. Pollard while having a better pedigree than Barber or Busing has to learn the Texans defense and show that he is a better player. Now, upgrading the safety may not seem that difficult, but Pollard is guaranteed nothing.
Click to expand...

Maybe we can chalk this up to the Cedric Benson lesson. Give a low risk, medium reward guy a shot at a position of need.
 
For those who were wondering why another team didn't pick him up sooner, appearantly there is some kind of rule that if he wasn't signed again after week 1, teams wouldn't have to pay him a certain amount of money. So Texans waited and got what they wanted a player at their price.

Judging by the conversation with Pollard on HT.com, he really wanted to be here because of his familiarity with his coach Gibbs.
 
He should be getting playing time by the Raiders game at least on special teams. I dont think he'll be activated this week because he might not be in "football shape" at the level that Kubiak would like. But I think having Gibbs here will help speed up his development so all he has to do is learn the terminology and get in game shape then we can work him into some specialty packages to help stop the run.

He'll be a good addition going up against a tough Raiders running game. Plus his familiarity with a former division rival should help in the gameplans for the game between him and Coach Gibbs.
 
TheRealJoker said:
He should be getting playing time by the Raiders game at least on special teams. I dont think he'll be activated this week because he might not be in "football shape" at the level that Kubiak would like. But I think having Gibbs here will help speed up his development so all he has to do is learn the terminology and get in game shape then we can work him into some specialty packages to help stop the run.

He'll be a good addition going up against a tough Raiders running game. Plus his familiarity with a former division rival should help in the gameplans for the game between him and Coach Gibbs.
Click to expand...

Unless he lost his conditioning real quick he should still be "in game" shape. He was cut Sept 5th.

I think being familiar with Gibbs might accelerate the time they'll take in getting him some game time. Like you said probably not this week, but it wouldn't surprise me to see him to see him in action against the Raiders.

I found Kubiak's comments puzzling. His explanantion was well we have a roster spot and we'll see where we're at the next few weeks. Either it was coach speak for not throwing any of the currents guys on the roster under the bus or he's really not excited about the addition as most of us are.

Maybe I'm looking into it too much, but it might also read it was forced on him. Anyone else think there might be a possibility Rick Smith went over Kubiak's head on the signing?
 
Goldensilence said:
Unless he lost his conditioning real quick he should still be "in game" shape. He was cut Sept 5th.

I think being familiar with Gibbs might accelerate the time they'll take in getting him some game time. Like you said probably not this week, but it wouldn't surprise me to see him to see him in action against the Raiders.

I found Kubiak's comments puzzling. His explanantion was well we have a roster spot and we'll see where we're at the next few weeks. Either it was coach speak for not throwing any of the currents guys on the roster under the bus or he's really not excited about the addition as most of us are.

Maybe I'm looking into it too much, but it might also read it was forced on him. Anyone else think there might be a possibility Rick Smith went over Kubiak's head on the signing?
Click to expand...

I agree that he wont be "out of shape" in the traditional since, but its still been a couple weeks since he's had pads on so there may need to be some rust he needs to shake off.

I wouldn't read too much into Kubiak's comments, he comes off as a coach that wont talk up players until he's spent a significant time around them unless of course they are a team we are playing and the player is a bonafide stud like MJD for the Jags.

Plus, you're not going to hear gushing comments from too many coaches in general about the aquisition of a street FA during the season. If Pollard earns his keep i'm sure Kubiak will be very complementary of him in the future.
 
It's possible that we may see Pollard in a certain play of the 46 package.
The Chiefs use them some last year.
 
Before the year is over I hope we see Busing more at safety flat out he's a ball hawk and knows how to read the QB and make plays on the ball. He's been moved around a lot since college.

- he came in to Miami, OH as a WR
- he was moved to LB, played as a small outside LB
- he was moved to safety by Cincy.
- he has now moved to the Texans.

I haven't had a chance to really sit down and go over films of how he's adjusting, I hope we see him start this week so we can get a better understanding of what skills he really has.

I like him for some reason, the constant improvement from pre season to his ability to break on the ball, he should have 2 picks already if he had not dropped the one last game.

And again, I don't care if Pollard is nicknamed "Bone Crusher" if we don't keep OL from free releases to head downfield and block out safeties it's going to be a long year for run defense.
 
Runner said:
Maybe we can chalk this up to the Cedric Benson lesson. Give a low risk, medium reward guy a shot at a position of need.
Click to expand...

Might be something to that and I was on that looks to be the wrong side of that one as Benson is at least servicable in cinci.
 
No one really saw Benson coming. I was convinced watching him in college he would be a bust, I didn't see his Cincy days coming.
 
mexican_texan said:
No one really saw Benson coming. I was convinced watching him in college he would be a bust, I didn't see his Cincy days coming.
Click to expand...

Really? There was a thread on this forum last season where some were arguing that the Texans should sign Benson. There was opposition to that idea though.
 
Runner said:
Really? There was a thread on this forum last season where some were arguing that the Texans should sign Benson. There was opposition to that idea though.
Click to expand...

Not only has Benson had injury problems but he also has had mental and emotional lapses. Couple those things with inconsistent performances since he was a college sophomore and it's easy to understand the Texans not wanting to burn a roster spot on a backup RB. Cincinnati was in desperate need of a RB that could possibly start for them... their situation was different.

Besides, who is to say that Benson could have handled being a backup here anyway.
 
El Tejano said:
For those who were wondering why another team didn't pick him up sooner, appearantly there is some kind of rule that if he wasn't signed again after week 1, teams wouldn't have to pay him a certain amount of money. So Texans waited and got what they wanted a player at their price.

Judging by the conversation with Pollard on HT.com, he really wanted to be here because of his familiarity with his coach Gibbs.
Click to expand...

The rule you may be thinking of is after a given team plays its first game, any player they pick up can be paid on a week-to-week basis. If the team picks up a guy prior to their first game, they are on the hook for the entire year's salary. So if we cut this guy after week 6 we only owe him money for weeks 3-6.
 
Speaking of rules, do the Redskins have to dress Anthony Aldredge with the 45 active players since they snatched him off of our practice squad or is it just enough that he's among the 53? Meaning they can make him "inactive" every week thus giving themselves an extra PS player?
 
ObsiWan said:
Speaking of rules, do the Redskins have to dress Anthony Aldredge with the 45 active players since they snatched him off of our practice squad or is it just enough that he's among the 53? Meaning they can make him "inactive" every week thus giving themselves an extra PS player?
Click to expand...

Yeah, they can keep him deactivated, and how is having him consistently among the 8 non-actives (assuming that he is) any different than the other 31 teams in the league and their non-actives?
 
ObsiWan said:
Speaking of rules, do the Redskins have to dress Anthony Aldredge with the 45 active players since they snatched him off of our practice squad or is it just enough that he's among the 53? Meaning they can make him "inactive" every week thus giving themselves an extra PS player?
Click to expand...

I believe it's only the 53.
 
Well,

Honestly I'm not getting excited yet, as there is a reason this guy was let go and not picked up by other teams. Did we get lucky or is he really that bad in pass coverage?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top