Here comes Tatum [to visit]

[Keith]

It wouldn't surprise me if the team wanted to give Slaton a couple weeks of rest for the turf toe. I think they're nervous anyway about having a rookie RB out there in Week 1... part of why I think they've kept Ahman Green.

Tatum 'Tinker' Bell might be a nice addition, at least for the short term. It might mean that Kubiak and Smith might need to cut a 'buddy' though (Studdard for Kubiak, Zgonina for Smith). I'm guessing Robinson might be next though.

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by Keith

It wouldn't surprise me if the team wanted to give Slaton a couple weeks of rest for the turf toe. I think they're nervous anyway about having a rookie RB out there in Week 1... part of why I think they've kept Ahman Green.

Given that turf toe takes approximately 3 weeks of rest to heal for your average Joe, and that Slaton's injury popped up two weeks ago, you'd have to think that he's not fully recovered from it. And, turf toe is something that can nag, so you'd like to think this is something they wouldn't rush him back from.

Couple that with the limited (no) activity Green saw in the preseason and I could see how you might want to sign some insurance. But, for me personally, I'd rather go with a Green/Taylor platoon until Slaton gets back healthy. That way you can see what you're going to get out of Green this season. If he stays upright, gradually increase his carries in week 2, 3, and so on. If he doesn't, gradually work Slaton back in the roster.

That way, you always have someone - Green or Slaton - platooning with Taylor, you can bring Slaton back slowly, but hopefully keep your best back on the field (Green.)

Best case scenario, you have a healthy Slaton, Green, and Taylor sometime around week 4 or 5. But, I can see how you want to bring in a vet with experience in the system in case you have a worst case scenario where Green and Slaton are both injured. And, I can see how a Tatum Bell would be more complimentary to CT in that scenario than someone like Mike Bell who'd be more redundant.

[KJ3]

with green's contract restructuring...aren't they (including ahman) basically implying they don't think he'll make it? slaton looked good and all, i think taylor should show a glimpse or two of why we've kept him around but are we really going to rely on a rookie and a dude with the experience of a rookie when ahman hits his breaking point?

and really....what of darius walker? if he's not getting equal consideration with tatum bell then i just don't know why we are keeping him around.

[Xetuoh1836]

I doubt that the Texans take this clown on (with his and/or anyone elses baggage):

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...0903043/&imw=Y

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by KJ3

with green's contract restructuring...aren't they (including ahman) basically implying they don't think he'll make it?

I don't think so. They could be saying, "we'll pay you... but only if you play."

That doesn't necessarily mean they don't think he'll play.

[HPF Bob]

Bell has second-round talent but a sixth-round head. He does know the one-cut running system, has breakaway speed and, if signed, will clearly be the most talented back on the Texans. But he has a knack for fumbling, blown assignments and thinking too much of himself. Denver traded him because he thought he deserved Clinton Portis money. The Broncos didn't even think Clinton Portis deserved Clinton Portis money.

[kravix]

I agree with Bob.

He is a system back, and not a great sytem back at that. After the "bag" incident his character is a big concern. I doubt he makes the roster after that. No one wants to count their cheerios after every game....

[KJ3]

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

I don't think so. They could be saying, "we'll pay you... but only if you play."

That doesn't necessarily mean they don't think he'll play.

if they thought he was going to play a whole season why are they paying him per game? or why not just keep the original contract?

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by KJ3

if they thought he was going to play a whole season why are they paying him per game? or why not just keep the original contract?

Because they are concerned about his injuries. That's not the same thing as not expecting him to play, though.

I mean, I'm not in the room with them; we don't know for sure what they think. But, it just seems to me that they are covering their own asses with an over-the-hill, oft injured player.

[KJ3]

well....seems to me that you don't "cover your asses on an over-the-hill, oft injured player" unless you expect that he won't make it. of course they expect him to play the games, but we haven't covered any other ass besides ahman who is, generally considered, an over-the-hill, oft injured player...come on don't make me connect dots.

if he makes it he'll end up making more money than the original contract. incentive to stay healthy, you know? though, hopefully not an incentive to shy away from the game...i'm pretty sure they weren't just planning on giving ahman green a raise for his stellar play last year...

i can't wait to see what we actually get out of him this year.