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

What happened to needing a dl and ol

How would you build a solid team?

  • Work on offense line and keep Carr

    Votes: 68 58.6%

  • Work on defense line and line backers

    Votes: 4 3.4%

  • Keep Carr and draft Bush

    Votes: 19 16.4%

  • Draft Young keep Carr

    Votes: 11 9.5%

  • Trade Carr for more picks and draft Young and Bush

    Votes: 9 7.8%

  • Draft Young and Bush somehow and trade Bush for picks

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Draft both Young and Bush and trade both for picks

    Votes: 2 1.7%

  • Draft both Young and Bush and trade Young for picks

    Votes: 2 1.7%

  • Work on getting a kicker

    Votes: 1 0.9%
  • Total voters
    116
Zac said:
Carr, Johnson, and Davis are a formidable combination. Davis needs less touches; he can't handle the pounding of a complete season.
Click to expand...

Why the FO hasn't seen this and spelled DD a lot more is beyond my comprehension. We have DD, Wells and Morency (haven't seen Hollings but I'm hearing on this board that he is just dead weight so we won't count him) in our backfield so all the coaching staff have to do is learn how to use these 3 effectively to our advantage...

Now this is the only reason I'm not in the Reggie Bush camp. Sure he may carry the ball 10-15 times and get 5-10 catches a game. But is that really worth the overall #1 pick? Why can't we just add another lower round RB and use the money we would use on Reggie Bush in FA or on O-line and D-line draft picks???
 
J-Storm said:
Why the FO hasn't seen this and spelled DD a lot more is beyond my comprehension. We have DD, Wells and Morency (haven't seen Hollings but I'm hearing on this board that he is just dead weight so we won't count him) in our backfield so all the coaching staff have to do is learn how to use these 3 effectively to our advantage...

Now this is the only reason I'm not in the Reggie Bush camp. Sure he may carry the ball 10-15 times and get 5-10 catches a game. But is that really worth the overall #1 pick? Why can't we just add another lower round RB and use the money we would use on Reggie Bush in FA or on O-line and D-line draft picks???
Click to expand...

Because Houston has gone nuts and Bush and Young are so hyped it's unreal, especially Young in Texas.

Victor Riley said:
What you talking 'bout? We got a good 0-line, punk.
Click to expand...

Steve McKinney said:
Yeah, it's the best in the NFL. :wacko:
Click to expand...

A Moderator said:
Now that's how you bump a thread! :ok:
Click to expand...
 
i think we'll be ok on defense....i mean if we draft vince young he will cast a spell on the other teams offense while he cures cancer...and if we draft reggie i have been told on this board he can bench 400lbs..well hell if he's only gonna carry the ball 15 times, stick him in at LB too..imagine his speed with that bench pressing ability....edge weighs what? 230? bush can just pick him up and throw him down!!!!



trade the pick we have too many holes
 
I just dont see how people still want to draft a Left Tackle in the first round with the job that Pitts did against some of the best pass rushing defensive ends in the league. Before the team moved Pitts back to LT I was all about getting Ferguson in round 1. After watching Pitts basically dominate his competition I feel a lot better about going a different rout with our first pick. Our interior line is what needs the most attention IMO and that can hopefully be addressed in free agency and latter rounds of the draft.
 
Well, with Pitts at LT and wanting to draft an LT, I think the question we need to answer is, 'Was Pitts a better LG or a better LT?'
 
bigTEXan8 said:
Well, with Pitts at LT and wanting to draft an LT, I think the question we need to answer is, 'Was Pitts a better LG or a better LT?'
Click to expand...

good question and honestly, I dont know the answer. I do know that our line functioned much better with Pitts at LT. Pitts recieved more attention when playing at LT which could be a reason why it seemed like he played better there. All truth be told, he probablly did just as solid a job at guard as he did at tackle.
 
bigTEXan8 said:
Well, with Pitts at LT and wanting to draft an LT, I think the question we need to answer is, 'Was Pitts a better LG or a better LT?'
Click to expand...

AND, did he look better at LT, because we ran a 3 step drop offense and that shortend the time he had to hold his guy out? IMO, I suspect he is probably an "OK" Lt and MAYBE could be a very good RT, but who knows. Get a good rookie LT prospect, have him play RT (unless he can outright win the LT job) for the first year and then hopefully he will be ready to play LT and Pitts could be moved to RT. Pitts might wind up staying at LT, who knows.
 
HardKnockTexan said:
good question and honestly, I dont know the answer. I do know that our line functioned much better with Pitts at LT. Pitts recieved more attention when playing at LT which could be a reason why it seemed like he played better there. All truth be told, he probablly did just as solid a job at guard as he did at tackle.
Click to expand...

The coaches did put in schemes to help him out at LT. They started more double teaming the game Pitts took over the tackle position. Note that this does not make Pitts a bad player. Most teams with pro-quality coaches will double team when that is necessary to give their team an advantage - such as double teaming Freeney rather than hanging the LT out to dry. We didn't do any double teaming last year - it was all one-on-one pass blocking with the LT vs. DE.

If the coaches had used the same schemes last year I think many people would have been happy with the LG/LT combination of Pitts/Wand. Including Chester and Seth. It would have improved our pass blocking and they were already our best run blockers.
 
Runner said:
We didn't do any double teaming last year - it was all one-on-one pass blocking with the LT vs. DE.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong though, didn't we give up fewer sacks in 2004 than we did in 2005?
 
bigTEXan8 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong though, didn't we give up fewer sacks in 2004 than we did in 2005?
Click to expand...

Yes. We had 40% more sacks this year in a more restricted offense. As hard as it is for some people to swallow, replacing Wand was a mistake. Remember, last year was his first year starting. He would have been improved this year.

If we had implemented some better schemes on top of of being better last year we probably would have equaled or bettered the totals from two years ago; we had better atheletes at the start of the season. However, the new-at-the-time offensive line coach chose not to implement these schemes.

In my opinion.
 
jmlockett said:
Being involved in exotic animals I would gladly donate the cages for some real offensive line animals
Click to expand...
Gimmesome snarlers! I would love to see some man-eating tackles foaming at the mouth protecting david and intimidating defenses. I want men who need rabies shots. We need Players that will cause defenses to volunteer to carry thier helmets.

Ok Ok you get the point. Mean Mean slobberin beasts.
 
jmerog said:
Gimmesome snarlers! I would love to see some man-eating tackles foaming at the mouth protecting david and intimidating defenses. I want men who need rabies shots. We need Players that will cause defenses to volunteer to carry thier helmets.

Ok Ok you get the point. Mean Mean slobberin beasts.
Click to expand...

Now I LIKE that idea! :ok:
 
jmlockett said:
What would be even better is some defense players that would make the offense snarlers look puny:sumo:
Click to expand...
if we fix the offensive line and get one or two defensive players the defense will be better by just getting more rest the offense will start controlling the clock/ball and allow the defense the time to rest and make adjustments between opponents possessions...this is all in theory i hope it continues to work that way it did for indy this year except for the playoffs.
 
jmlockett said:
pot stirring:stirpot:

Hey mods please help me keep this post on the front page so that we can get a good poll.
Click to expand...
Has anyone talked about getting DL and OL from free agency?
 
The way I see it is all depends on Kubiak and the blocking scheme. If we do the exact Denver scheme then getting a huge LT won't be the answer. Denver uses smaller, quicker guys and usually gets them later in the draft. So you can still take Bush and have 3 picks left in the top 66. Take OL and TE(maybe safety, depending on who is there) in those three picks. Then you still have 3 more picks where you can get some D-lineman or Dbs. You try and fill in the rest with FAs. You give Carr this year to try and prove himself with the new system and go from there.
 
no...no!!......NO!!!!! someone just posted that brick will not fit our scheme...sigh...are you people not tired of passing on the peppers' and DJ's of the world because of scheme? also i believe foster..who was a first round pick i might add..is a giant hog...crazy talk...we have had the same weakness since day 1..the line..let's just fix it once and for all...i keep hearing lets wait and gamble that some undersized guy will be money!!! well what if he's not?? then next year if we draft vince this year everyone will cry about not having a line..again...unless vince is truly magical and vince can vince all over the vince ...but you know a vince in the vince is worth as much as a vince in the vince...the early vince gets the vince...lets take this one vince at a vince...............we need help not vince....i'm not saying take brick..although it would be nice..i like the 2 williams' and hawk...but we have got to get one of these studs..i believe brick WILL protect the blind side for a long...long time
 
Bush is a great athlete, and I know we have those other three picks. However, we could have four more picks out of this deal which would help our team more.
 
geofb said:
I'd be ok with trading the #1 to get multiple picks to strengthen the team.
Click to expand...

Under normal circumstances I think that would be the best plan.

Problem is Casserly would bundle up those extra picks and trade them away for a bag of magic beans (Babin, etc.). So you really get no extra picks.
 
This is a good thread.

I personally agree. I would be estatic to trade back to the 4-6 range and pick up Ferguson or which ever is the best tackle in the draft. Then pick the next best OG or C with the first pick in the 2nd round. Add that to hopefully signing Bentley as a FA and the Line will be set for years to come. :twocents:
 
Erratic Assassin said:
Problem is Casserly would bundle up those extra picks and trade them away for a bag of magic beans (Babin, etc.). So you really get no extra picks.
Click to expand...


I understand how you feel about this, but hopefully with McNair and Reeves there it won't happen. Speaking of Babin, what happens to him if we switch to a 4-3?
 
here's an idea......

Pick up both top picks, and hold them until the draft is done. Now get what ever we can in the draft, being sure that we draft as if we don't care if we have them or not. When the draft is over blow out both picks to the highest bidder for something we need after we see what we were able to get. I am not an expert on the draft. However I think that this might be a crafty way of doing things:stirpot:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top