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 02-12-2009, 10:02 AM
Keith Keith is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,761
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teufelhunden View Post
Surely there was room on that bus for Petey.
As someone with an expiring contract, there is no need to cut Faggins.

That said, I'm not opposed to bringing him back to fight for a spot on the roster. I don't think he's a standout special teams player, which will hurt him, but as long as he has safety help on the deep routes, he can be serviceable at corner.

...I know, I'm in the minority here on this one.
__________________
Support ...IntheBullseye.com and follow us on Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-12-2009, 08:46 PM
papabear papabear is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 838
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
As someone with an expiring contract, there is no need to cut Faggins.

That said, I'm not opposed to bringing him back to fight for a spot on the roster. I don't think he's a standout special teams player, which will hurt him, but as long as he has safety help on the deep routes, he can be serviceable at corner.

...I know, I'm in the minority here on this one.
There's no reason to not let him compete. There's no big cap savings by cutting him. I would hope if he makes the team that Reeves, Bennet, Molden, and Robinson keep him down the depth chart, but you can do a lot worse than Petey for your fith CB....you can also do a lot better than Petey as your #2 or #3 CB though.

I seem to remember him covering kicks...I know he was on the kickoff coverage team, not sure about covering punts.
__________________
"Well, at least our players kept their helmets on, so that showed some intelligence"-BobMcNair
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-13-2009, 03:25 PM
NBT NBT is offline
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: S.E. Texas Coast
Posts: 1,836
Default

It would be fine if Petey could compete. There's just not much chance for a 4.6 CB!
As for Weaver, I look for him to be a June 1st cut.
__________________
NBT - Elder statesman. Wisdom comes with age - Now if i could remember what it was!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-13-2009, 04:16 PM
Keith Keith is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,761
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NBT View Post
As for Weaver, I look for him to be a June 1st cut.
No need for June 1 cuts in the last capped year.

The purpose of the June 1 date was to allow teams to forward future years' dead money into the next year's cap. Since 2010 is currently set to be uncapped, the CBA will not allow for this in 2009.

I've got a little something on my thoughts with Weaver that maybe I'll upload to the front page tonight.

ETA - http://www.inthebullseye.com/archive/2009/20090213.html
__________________
Support ...IntheBullseye.com and follow us on Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-14-2009, 02:39 AM
Arky Arky is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 9,291
Default

Might be a good chance Weaver sticks around. The way I see it, he could be put in a rotation with "the new guy" with the new guy getting the majority of the snaps. Or perhaps Weaver remains the starter while the new guy learns the NFL via OJT as the backup. However, if this new DE is a 1st rounder, I bet he gets thrown into the fire... Weaver would be an awful expensive backup, then. And what do you do about effort guys like Bulman and Cochran? Less snaps for them? Wouldn't hurt to have them on hand in case of injury to one of the front line guys....

I think it's a given that the Texans are going to pick up a new DE in the draft but what round, who knows?...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-14-2009, 09:09 AM
nunusguy nunusguy is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arky View Post
Weaver would be an awful expensive backup, then. And what do you do about effort guys like Bulman and Cochran? Less snaps for them? Wouldn't hurt to have them on hand in case of injury to one of the front line guys....

I think it's a given that the Texans are going to pick up a new DE in the draft but what round, who knows?...
How can we justify keeping Weaver around when we've got other DLineman like Bulman & Cochran (and don't forget DelJuan Robinson) who are comparable talents IMO and yet come much cheaper and are younger ? Re drafting a DE, it's a slam-dunk we get one in one of our first 2 picks.
BTW my wife and I are talking about getting a dog and I like DelJuan for its name. Now how many dogs are named DelJuan ? I like it !
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-14-2009, 12:33 PM
Arky Arky is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 9,291
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nunusguy View Post
How can we justify keeping Weaver around when we've got other DLineman like Bulman & Cochran (and don't forget DelJuan Robinson) who are comparable talents IMO and yet come much cheaper and are younger ? Re drafting a DE, it's a slam-dunk we get one in one of our first 2 picks.
BTW my wife and I are talking about getting a dog and I like DelJuan for its name. Now how many dogs are named DelJuan ? I like it !
I don't know. What I do know is that the coaches don't think like a lot of us and that is probably good most of the time. To me, Weaver is unspectacular - seems like his name is never called. To the coaches, they may think he is "solid".

If you haven't read Keith's article, check it out. He gives Weaver the benefit of the doubt regarding his possibly playing a couple of years while nursing injury....it is a plausible scenario...
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 11:26 AM.


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