My Lessons for next year

jaimeg · #1 04-29-2009, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by painekiller

.

Lesson #2 - RB will be drafted every draft. Wait throw out that lesson, we can get by by with an UDFA or two.

Lesson #4 Gibbs does know what he is doing

5

Kubiaks (like Denvers' Shannahan-Gibbs system) downfall is never drafting a running back early (1st or 2nd round)

These systems rely on being lucky with picks (Slaton- Terrell Davis).

If the system is so good wouldn't it be reasonable to expect a talented, good vision 1st or 2nd rounder to get 2000 yards.

nero THE zero · #2 04-29-2009, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaimeg

Kubiaks (like Denvers' Shannahan-Gibbs system) downfall is never drafting a running back early (1st or 2nd round)

These systems rely on being lucky with picks (Slaton- Terrell Davis).

If the system is so good wouldn't it be reasonable to expect a talented, good vision 1st or 2nd rounder to get 2000 yards.

If that's true, explain Kubiak's attempt to trade into the first round in 2006 for DeAngelo Williams.

Roy P · #3 04-29-2009, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

If that's true, explain Kubiak's attempt to trade into the first round in 2006 for DeAngelo Williams.

If I recall, Clinton Portis was drafted in the 2nd round, after William Green and T.J. Duckett were selected in the 1st round. A 2nd round pick isn't exactly waiting until the 2nd day of the draft and calling UDFAs. Also, it would appear that it was a 2nd round pick well spent and not the "downfall" of the Denver system. It is more a product of finding the right player for the system.

barrett · #4 04-29-2009, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaimeg

Kubiaks (like Denvers' Shannahan-Gibbs system) downfall is never drafting a running back early (1st or 2nd round)

These systems rely on being lucky with picks (Slaton- Terrell Davis).

If the system is so good wouldn't it be reasonable to expect a talented, good vision 1st or 2nd rounder to get 2000 yards.

Can you explain how that is the downfall of these teams. With Denver it seems to have worked very well. And with the Texans it resulted in Slaton. You can call it lucky, but if you do, how about an explanation for how this is the "downfall" of a team that ran the ball as well as anyone for over a decade.

jaimeg · #5 04-30-2009, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrett

Can you explain how that is the downfall of these teams. With Denver it seems to have worked very well. And with the Texans it resulted in Slaton. You can call it lucky, but if you do, how about an explanation for how this is the "downfall" of a team that ran the ball as well as anyone for over a decade.

By downfall, I mean where is Shanahan now (out of work)?. Could he have won more than 2 championships? Isn't that the ultimate goal?

Ran the ball "well", but couldn't it have been even better?

barrett · #6 04-30-2009, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaimeg

By downfall, I mean where is Shanahan now (out of work)?. Could he have won more than 2 championships? Isn't that the ultimate goal?

Ran the ball "well", but couldn't it have been even better?

Are you serious? They were the top offense and top running team over his tenure in Denver that included 2 superbowl wins. And you are going to sit with a straight face and say that their system is a failure because Shanahan only lasted 3 times as long as the average NFL coach. And only won 2 superbowls (which is 2nd best in the NFL over his tenure I believe). Genius.

I for one would love for the Texans to have the kind of "downfall" that results in a decade of high powered offense, winning, and multiple superbowls.

jaimeg · #7 04-30-2009, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrett

Are you serious? They were the top offense and top running team over his tenure in Denver that included 2 superbowl wins. And you are going to sit with a straight face and say that their system is a failure because Shanahan only lasted 3 times as long as the average NFL coach. And only won 2 superbowls (which is 2nd best in the NFL over his tenure I believe). Genius.

I for one would love for the Texans to have the kind of "downfall" that results in a decade of high powered offense, winning, and multiple superbowls.

I'm not saying their system is a failure, I am just saying it could have been better. Yes they won two superbowls but Schaub is not Elway. I just believe that we're basically a turf toe away (Slaton) from being a 6-10 team.

Roy P · #8 04-30-2009, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaimeg

I just believe that we're basically a turf toe away (Slaton) from being a 6-10 team.

I am also concerned about Slaton's durability. Last season was a pleasant surprise, and perhaps I'm just a cynic, but I can envision a scenario where we overuse Slaton and expose him to possible injury. Ideally, I'd like to see Slaton getting about 15 touches per game. However, I'm not very confident that the other RBs on the roster can take on the other rushing attempts and have the offense not miss a beat. There is some hope about Foster and Johnson to make the roster and we may still be able to get another RB as a FA or in a trade. On a positive note, perhaps the additions of Caldwell and Hill will help keep the big powerful tacklers off of Slaton allowing him to take less impactful hits.

nero THE zero · #9 04-30-2009, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaimeg

I'm not saying their system is a failure, I am just saying it could have been better. Yes they won two superbowls but Schaub is not Elway. I just believe that we're basically a turf toe away (Slaton) from being a 6-10 team.

Your whole premise is flawed anyway. Kubiak has shown he is willing to draft RB in the high(est) rounds. Why don't you address that?

barrett · #10 04-30-2009, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaimeg

I'm not saying their system is a failure, I am just saying it could have been better. Yes they won two superbowls but Schaub is not Elway. I just believe that we're basically a turf toe away (Slaton) from being a 6-10 team.

Your logic is terrible though. You say they might have been better which is unrealisitic considering the success they achieved. But even if they could have done better, it wasn't RB that was holding them back. They were the top rushing team in the NFL during Shanahan's tenure.

By attempting to piggyback your legitimate concern over the Texans RB situation to the Broncos, you have ruined what could have been a valid point (we need help at RB). And I just don't understand what could have possessed you to put our running game issues at the feet of the two best running game coaches of modern NFL football (shanahan and gibbs).

With all of that said I too am concerned we don't have more at RB. I wish we'd drafted one (though not in the first two rounds). But it is the one position where it is still possible to easily upgrade. RBs are constantly cut and become available more often than any other position. Edgerin James just hit the market and has size and great durability. If not him, then I am confident we will find someone who can be a backup RB and carry the ball 10 times a game.

Roy P · #11 04-30-2009, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrett

RBs are constantly cut and become available more often than any other position. Edgerin James just hit the market and has size and great durability. If not him, then I am confident we will find someone who can be a backup RB and carry the ball 10 times a game.

Does anybody believe that Selvin Young could carry the ball 10 times a game? He was pretty effective in Denver a couple of years ago and he's only 25 years old.

NBT · #12 07-27-2009, 05:14 PM

Maybe Barwin is somewhat of a project, but then isn't Casey?

Roy P · #13 07-27-2009, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NBT

Maybe Barwin is somewhat of a project, but then isn't Casey?

I don't think so. Barwin is an immediate pass-rusher to come in on 3rd downs because Antonio Smith is the 1st and 2nd down DE. So, Barwin is more of a specialist. Now, if they tinker a little and try him at the SAM and put Cushing at the WILL, then that would be a project.

Nconroe · #14 07-29-2009, 02:45 PM

Just wondering has Cushing ever played Mike?

NBT · #15 08-11-2009, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roy P

I don't think so. Barwin is an immediate pass-rusher to come in on 3rd downs because Antonio Smith is the 1st and 2nd down DE. So, Barwin is more of a specialist. Now, if they tinker a little and try him at the SAM and put Cushing at the WILL, then that would be a project.

I think I said that about Barwin because a couple of guys on the main board were comparing Barwin to Peek and Babin. Maybe it was just the coaching but they never achieved their potential.

Doesn't Barwin backup Mario and not Smith?