IntheBullseye.com  

Go Back   IntheBullseye.com > Hot Reads ...In the Bullseye > The Texans
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-08-2009, 03:53 PM
nero THE zero nero THE zero is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Spring
Posts: 366
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by papabear View Post
He makes sense for the D-Line to me...especially if Bush is going to be the next DC. Our line fits a tampa 2 pretty well. The DT's are more of the quick pentrating type, think Sapp, than the big hogs in the middle. I don't think we're going to switch, but Marinelli should be able to work with what we have along the D-line. I don't know if I want Demeco to have to haul but down field on every snap, and we definitely don't have the safeties for it, but I think certain elements of that system could mesh with what we have.

I think it would be a huge hire if it'w the D-Line, and I would be OK with him as DC....as long as he's willing to tailor things to what we have and not be a slave to "his" system. I think that will be a factor with any coach we hire. Kubiak's going to want someone who can work with what we have right now. Not someone who needs to overhaul a lot of things before it could work. In other words, I really think it's going to be Bush at DC.
I think you misunderstood me. I agree that our personnel is a better fit than some may think. What I'm saying is that it doesn't make sense for either us, nor Marinelli, for him to come in and interview for the d-line position.

If Bush was the DC-in-waiting, as you suggest, why wait to announce so until after his position coaches are hired? Do you think we are trying to be deceptive and lure potential position coaches in under the supposition that they have a shot at the DC spot? Also, if Bush is the DC-in-waiting, why even give the notion that Marinelli has the opportunity at the DC spot?

For Marinelli, it makes no sense to come to Houston to interview for a D-line job when he has two teams that he is connected with who have already interviewed him for the same position. Granted, money is a consideration, as is the talent he would have to work with here in Houston. But, you'd have to think that his next tenure at d-line coach (if there is one in his future) will be a short one. So, I think it'd be more advantageous for him to work with his guys and his system to have quick success and to facilitate connections that could blossom into a DC gig faster than a semi-rebuilding job here in Houston.

And, I keep coming back to the sticking point that a team looking for a coordinator generally looks for the coordinator first and then lets him fill in his positional vacancies. To do otherwise would undermine your chances at landing a quality coordinator.

I just don't think it makes sense for us to bring him in for the d-line position.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-08-2009, 04:21 PM
papabear papabear is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nero THE zero View Post
I think you misunderstood me.

I just don't think it makes sense for us to bring him in for the d-line position.

I didn't misunderstand you as much as just got off on a rambling tangent. After looking at the article I don't think the Chronicle knows anything more than he is here. I suspect he's here for the DC, but it could be nothing more than they just asked him to come to town and talk. He has nothing to lose by interviewing for either position or both if for no other reason than leverage.

Garrett interviewed for the Cowboys head coaching name and then was named the OC....not that I want to model things on the way Jerrah does it.
__________________
"Well, at least our players kept their helmets on, so that showed some intelligence"-BobMcNair
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-08-2009, 05:18 PM
Roy P Roy P is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,761
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by papabear View Post
I suspect he's here for the DC, but it could be nothing more than they just asked him to come to town and talk. He has nothing to lose by interviewing for either position.
We have nothing to lose either by interviewing him. Nobody knows what may be gleened from the interview. Perhaps during the course of the interview, the Texans may be persuaded that the Tampa-2 is or is not the best system to utilize for our roster.

I'm imagining one of those HGTV shows where a couple of designers show what they want to do on a project. The family then decides that one of the options is closer to their tastes. It is sometimes easier to determine what you like by seeing what you don't like.

I'm thinking about the Colts and Bucs and trying to contemplate a John Lynch or Bob Sanders on our roster.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-08-2009, 10:26 PM
Roy P Roy P is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,761
Default

Anybody watch what Charlie Strong is doing to Oklahoma? I wonder if he'd like a shot at an NFL Defensive Coordinator position.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-08-2009, 11:01 PM
Nconroe Nconroe is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lake Conroe
Posts: 2,897
Default

The Gators were tough weren't they? I was hoping for Big 12 but ...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-08-2009, 11:48 PM
Keith Keith is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,761
Default

well well well...

the chron has updated their article online to say that Marinelli is in fact interested in being a DL coach again.

Quote:
The Texans interviewed former Detroit Lions coach Rod Marinelli for their vacant defensive line job today.

Marinelli came to Houston from Detroit and spent the day at Reliant Stadium before returning to Michigan.

“It was an excellent interview,” coach Gary Kubiak said. “I have a lot of respect for Rod. He’s as good a defensive line coach as I’ve seen. He’s a tough guy with an aggressive style. He’d bring the kind of toughness to that side of the ball that (assistant head coach) Alex (Gibbs) brought to the offense.”
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/6200476.html

I have no beefs with Marinelli coaching the DL here... I think he might be the man to get the most out of Okoye's skillset. But talking to a DL coach candidate without a DC named is a little strange.

ETA - Looks like Berman tracked Marinelli down at the IAH baggage claim.
Quote:
"It was great," Marinelli said in an interview with FOX 26 Sports at Bush Intercontinental Airport as he prepared to return to Detroit. "It was a great visit."

Marinelli did not disclose when the Texans said they would be getting back to him.

"We'll wait for the next few days and see how things work out," Marinelli said.
http://www.myfoxhouston.com/myfox/pa...Y&pageId=6.1.1
__________________
Support ...IntheBullseye.com and follow us on Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-09-2009, 06:02 AM
nunusguy nunusguy is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy P View Post
Perhaps during the course of the interview, the Texans may be persuaded that the Tampa-2 is or is not the best system to utilize for our roster.
I dunno, what are the implications personnel wise in a conversion to Tampa-2/Cover-2 ? One thing I'm aware of is a team does not require as much man coverage by its corners, so the search for premiere cover CBs is no longer required since they routinely get help from a safety. Of course this may just shift the needs of the Def-Backfield to acquiring more versitale, competant safeties ?
What about the personnel requirements for the front 7 in the Cover-2 , or is that independant of the DB schemes ?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-09-2009, 09:47 AM
gunn gunn is offline
Veteran Depth
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 149
Default

I really hope they, at the very least, bring in McDermott to interview for the job.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-09-2009, 10:24 AM
Mike Mike is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 512
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gunn View Post
I really hope they, at the very least, bring in McDermott to interview for the job.
As long as the Iggles are still playing, then they cannot contact him. Once they are done, then they can request permission to interview him.
__________________
Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for You are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me. PS 23:4
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-09-2009, 11:10 AM
cland cland is offline
Veteran Depth
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 132
Default

My opinion is that there is a whole lot of undercurrent that never shows up in the chronicle. As several have said...there's only 32 head coaches, 32 D-Coordinators, etc. and plenty of opportunity for them to chat. I don't think Kubiak, Smith, and McNair go in to this process with a 'let's just see what happens mentality.'

My guess is that before the firing they had already settled on an itemized DC list, and I would venture to guess that those coaches agents have already been...umm...nudged--regardless of league rules.

I would love to see DC: Sean McDermott along with DL: Ron Marinelli. I just can't imagine a better combination of defensive styles, position focus, and aggressiveness.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-10-2009, 03:18 AM
mussop mussop is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: livingston
Posts: 360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike View Post
As long as the Iggles are still playing, then they cannot contact him. Once they are done, then they can request permission to interview him.
Hopefully he is the main target and that is why talk has been scarce. We are just waiting for him to get eliminated. Cmon Giants kick some ass this week.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-09-2009, 10:46 AM
papabear papabear is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nunusguy View Post
I dunno, what are the implications personnel wise in a conversion to Tampa-2/Cover-2 ? One thing I'm aware of is a team does not require as much man coverage by its corners, so the search for premiere cover CBs is no longer required since they routinely get help from a safety. Of course this may just shift the needs of the Def-Backfield to acquiring more versitale, competant safeties ?
What about the personnel requirements for the front 7 in the Cover-2 , or is that independant of the DB schemes ?

Based on my understanding of the Tampa 2 system, which is probably wrong, our front seven would fit. It emphasizes speed over size, and needs penetrating interior lineman. I think our CB's are better suited to man coverage. Reeves was better here, relatively speaking, than in Dallas where he was asked to play more zone. Robinson is on record saying that he prefers man. I think our corners would be OK in this system, but the safeties is what worry me. I'm also not sure if the Tampa 2 would be the best system for Demeco....everybody has a little different flavor of the scheme, like the "west coast offense", so it's really hard to say. I know Urlacher is often asked to take a deep drop to the middle of the field in the bears scheme. I would like Demeco to have a little freedom though.
__________________
"Well, at least our players kept their helmets on, so that showed some intelligence"-BobMcNair
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-09-2009, 11:41 AM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by papabear View Post
Based on my understanding of the Tampa 2 system, which is probably wrong, our front seven would fit. It emphasizes speed over size, and needs penetrating interior lineman. I think our CB's are better suited to man coverage. Reeves was better here, relatively speaking, than in Dallas where he was asked to play more zone. Robinson is on record saying that he prefers man. I think our corners would be OK in this system, but the safeties is what worry me. I'm also not sure if the Tampa 2 would be the best system for Demeco....everybody has a little different flavor of the scheme, like the "west coast offense", so it's really hard to say. I know Urlacher is often asked to take a deep drop to the middle of the field in the bears scheme. I would like Demeco to have a little freedom though.
For Tampa 2 personell...

The only thing we lack in the front 7 is a speed rushing DE who I hope we aquire regardless of what defense we run next year.

As for the secondary, our CBs fit ok. Dunta is WAY better in zone regardless of what he might have said. Any time he plays man and has to turn and run with a WR he goes from a defensive leader to a liability. He is far better in zone with eyes on the QB. Plus, one of the keys for a cover 2 CB is the ability to close and tackle, and Dunta is as good as any CB in the NFL at that.

The biggest hole in any effort to run a cover 2 system is our safeties. Is anyone comfortable with 2 of our safeties each plyaing half the field and ending up in 1 on 1 battles when a WR goes deep down the sideline? We would need to scrap the hybrid SSs we use for guys with cover skills who play with eyes on the QB. eugene Wilson would not be bad, but starting harrison/brown/earl/etc.. in a cover 2 would be brutal.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-09-2009, 04:01 PM
papabear papabear is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barrett View Post
For Tampa 2 personell...

The only thing we lack in the front 7 is a speed rushing DE who I hope we aquire regardless of what defense we run next year.
Agreed. Although, if we turn our DT's loose to penetrate upfield Okoye and Johnson's effectiveness should go up, slightly lessening the need for a speed rusher. Still a need though.

Quote:
As for the secondary, our CBs fit ok. Dunta is WAY better in zone regardless of what he might have said. Any time he plays man and has to turn and run with a WR he goes from a defensive leader to a liability. He is far better in zone with eyes on the QB. Plus, one of the keys for a cover 2 CB is the ability to close and tackle, and Dunta is as good as any CB in the NFL at that.
I agree with this on Dunta too. The Tampa 2 would let him get on the line and jam the WR. I think he would be more effective than he realizes. He can struggle when he's left alone. Even before the injury, but with the rules these days that's all corners. The key is he actually has to trust the safeties behind him. .

Quote:
The biggest hole in any effort to run a cover 2 system is our safeties. Is anyone comfortable with 2 of our safeties each plyaing half the field and ending up in 1 on 1 battles when a WR goes deep down the sideline? We would need to scrap the hybrid SSs we use for guys with cover skills who play with eyes on the QB. eugene Wilson would not be bad, but starting harrison/brown/earl/etc.. in a cover 2 would be brutal
My fear as well.


My hope is that we end up wth a defense that's comfortable in a lot of different schemes. We have a young defense (team actually) but hopefully our next D-Coordinator+more experience for the players will mean that we can mix things up and be effective doing a lot of different things in the years to come. I think that was Smith's biggest fault. He tried to do a lot of differnt things without getting his guys very good at any of them.
__________________
"Well, at least our players kept their helmets on, so that showed some intelligence"-BobMcNair
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-09-2009, 03:57 PM
Roy P Roy P is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,761
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nunusguy View Post
I dunno, what are the implications personnel wise in a conversion to Tampa-2/Cover-2 ? One thing I'm aware of is a team does not require as much man coverage by its corners, so the search for premiere cover CBs is no longer required since they routinely get help from a safety. Of course this may just shift the needs of the Def-Backfield to acquiring more versitale, competant safeties ?
What about the personnel requirements for the front 7 in the Cover-2 , or is that independant of the DB schemes ?
Well, I will submit that when Sapp was doing his thing, he had the benefit of Booger McFarland. When Tommie Harris was healthy and playing like a Pro-Bowler, he had Tank Johnson beside him. I don't consider Travis Johnson to be either to allow Okoye to become "Baby Sapp" by any stretch of the imagination.

As for our CBs, Fred Bennett and Molden would be ideal in terms of size. However, I'm not convinced that playing zone with them is their strong suit. Generally, Cover-2 CBs are big, slow, and excel in Zone coverage. This year's draft has an ideal candidate in Victor Harris from Va Tech.Bennett, Molden, Robinson, and Reeves were not brought here for that. Could they do it? Possibly, but I'm not thinking that is using your players' strengths.

The FS position is generally a large college CB who is converted to play S. Dunta Robinson might be moved to that position, but he does lack the typical size.

DeMeco running down the middle of the field with Dallas Clark worries me considerably.

Other than that, we'd fit like a hand in a glove running the Tampa-2.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.