DGDB&D: a Texans blog.

I woke up Sunday mornin’ with no way to hold my head that didn’t hurt

Dec 24, 2007 2007 Season, Broken Record, Colts Shmolts, Curious Coaching, DeMeco Ryans, Dunta Robinson, God hates ugly, Kris Brown's golden leg, Matt Turk rules, Posts that list too many players, Rosie Rosenfels, Super Mario, The Fred, Travis Johnson, Von

In the spirit of the holiday season, let us start with the good things from yesterday’s game. This will be a short list.

• Mario Williams. Super Mario continued to show that he should not only be on the Pro Bowl roster, but should be a starter, putting up a sack in his sixth straight game and keeping pace as the AFC leader. It’s a bit premature, but I am going to come out and say it now–next year, anything less than 18 sacks will disappoint me. (He did get fooled on the Dallas Clark end around, but, Christ, who didn’t?)
• Earl Cochran. I have no idea how he does it, but Earl gets to the ball more or less unblocked more often than not. Hell, he made a tackle on the RB eight yards downfield at one point. He’s fast, aggressive, and has fluid hips that allow him to turn in space. If we don’t keep him around, it’s a mistake.
• Fred Bennett. I love The Fred. The back-to-back passes to Wayne (second one for a TD) notwithstanding, Fred played his ass off all day. 11 tackles, a forced fumble, two great breaks on balls to break up passes…the fact that he languished on the bench while Petey was out there stinking up the joint is still irritating. The good news, though, is that a Bennett/Dunta Robinson combo would mean we finally had two real CBs.
• DeMeco Ryans. Injured knee nothing. It pretty much doesn’t matter which direction the play goes or where Ryans is lined up pre-snap–if the ball leaves the QBs hand, there is roughly a 74.4% chance that DeMeco will be in on the play that brings the ball carrier down. Amazing. The announcers–who, by the way, sucked–mentioned that over the last two seasons, Ryans has more tackles than ANYONE in football. He’s good like that.
• Andre Johnson. Same as it ever was, AJ is just a monster. He’d have been even better Sunday had Sage not eyeball humped him as he ran his routes (more on that later).
• Andre Davis. The man is a special teams ninja.
• Matt Turk. Never a good sign when his 4 punts for a 44.5 yard average are a highlight.

Now for the bad. These are the little lumps of coal in the stocking of my life.

• The secondary other than Fred Bennett. Will Demps seems to knock the crap out of people on every hit, yet, strangely, he doesn’t really knock people flat on their asses most of the time. I can’t figure it out. Case in point, Kenton Keith took Demps’ hit head on, paused briefly, and then moved forward for additional yards. I like Will and I’m glad he’s been so good for us, but this could be a problem. Even more of a problem is the fact that C.C. Brown only hits people with any sort of authority when they are extended or not looking. When the opposing player could see him coming, Brown was as harmless as a fart on a windy day Sunday. Even more irritating, though, was the way he played his position (or, more accurately, didn’t play his position). He was nowhere to be seen on Joe Addai’s TD run (Charlie Anderson also whiffed on this one, but Brown was noticeably absent behind him), he got juked out of his shorts by Clark in the open field, he nearly airballed when he went to shove Clark out of bounds later, he was late to pick up Wayne in the two-deep coverage after Bennett released him, and he vacated his position on Clark’s second TD catch. But Brown was an All-Pro compared to Von Hutchins, who was used and abused by Wayne until Kubiak adjusted and put Bennett on Reggie. He was absolutely roasted on the 42-yard bomb to Wayne near the end of the first quarter (Why was Demps up at linebacker depth before the snap on that play if he wasn’t blitzing and where was Brown? Or did someone think it was a good idea to see if Hutchins could run with Wayne?). AND Hutchins was so late closing on WRs that caught the ball in front of him that they were twice tackled by a linebacker who had to first turn and then chase them down. Oh, and then there was Jamar Fletcher…
• Sage Rosenfels. I sincerely hope that this game will hush the “Sage is Baby Jesus” talk. Even if you don’t want to say he failed as a starter, the fact is that he has never impressed someone to the point that he was “the guy” other than when he was replacing an injured starter. Sunday, he showed us why. There were at least five balls thrown behind receivers, two of which were picked. He stared down his receivers from the snap and threw directly where he was looking almost every time. He forced throws to Andre Johnson when Walter and/or Daniels were wide open. This guy is a solid backup, but if someone wants to give us value for him, holding on to him is borderline retarded, because he is never going to be anything more than a solid backup.
• Darius Walker. I almost put him in the “good” list because he did look strong early and he ran the ball between the tackles well in the beginning stages of the second half. I put him here, however, because it became incredibly apparent that he is nowhere near fast enough to get the ball to the outside and create something out of nothing. The Colts adjusted to his early runs by keeping the LBs home and letting Walker decide whether to run into them or to take it outside where he was hauled down with minimal effort. Of course, seeing this, Kubiak decided it would be a good idea to pitch the ball to him eight yards behind the line and see what he could do (the answer: nothing). I like the idea of him as a third-down back, but that’s about it.
• Travis Johnson. This gets its own post.
• Kris Brown. You miss your only FG, you go on this list by default. Not a horrible game by the Husker, but he didn’t seem upset at all that he pushed that 49-yarder wide.
• Vonta Leach. Question: What good is a fullback who misses on his lead blocking assignments? Answer: No good at all, regardless of whether the coach and QB try to force passes to him. Leach played like butt. Now, part of this might have been due to Walker’s lack of speed; blocking for someone slower than you are probably takes a different approach. Still…man…never a good day when the FB stands out.

Other notes from the contest:

• Regardless of what the now-banned-commenter “Tom,” thinks, the problem Sunday was not the blitz getting burned. Only one of the TDs came against a blitz, and that was a weird phenomenon where we sent too many blitzers and the lanes got clogged up before we could get there. Otherwise, the problem was the Manning was picking apart our zone and then Reggie Wayne would abuse whomever was on him in man coverage. And that we couldn’t get to Manning whether we sent 4, 5, or 6 rushers. And that we couldn’t move the ball because Sage imploded after the second possession. AND because 3/4 of our secondary was playing like crap.
• Kubiak’s playcalling left a lot to be desired. Outside runs with Walker, sending Kevin Walter on a 6 yard route when you need 8, not going for it on fourth when we should have, using Andre Johnson on a hitch screen from our own 25, etc. Uninspiring at best.
• Owen Daniels continues to run hot and cold. He’ll make some great catches over the middle and get you all excited, only to irritate you when he alligator arms one in the face of a linebacker or fails to catch easy balls.
• Tony Dungy may be the nicest guy in the NFL or in the whole world. He might be a great father, husband, coach, and author. But he looks like a whiny ninny when he stands there and yells “no, no, no!” at the refs after they called one of the most obvious horse-collar tackles you’ll ever see.
• So much for the nine wins. At least we have one more crack at .500. I never thought I’d be so happy to be playing a team with absolutely nothing to play for. (Though you could argue that the Colts didn’t have much to play for, either…)

Dancing With the ‘Tards

Nov 28, 2007 Curious Coaching, Dan The Assassin, Dancing With the 'Tards, DeMeco Ryans, Dunta Robinson, Houston Chronicle, I really dig my readers, McTard, Morlon Greenwood, Secondary issues are primary, The Fred, Von, Weak-ass arguments

It wasn’t all that long ago–four days, actually–that I said, “[a]s of now, unless one of the stories over there mentions me or this blog by name, I will not comment on or link to anything written by paid employees of the Houston Chronicle.” I meant it. However, I realized today that I needed to expand the exception slightly. We all know they are never going to link to me or BRB–we are beneath them, of course. So, I am expanding the exception to read “as of now, unless one of the stories over there mentions me or this blog by name, or is clearly referencing/replying to something I wrote, I will not comment on or link to anything written by paid employees of the Houston Chronicle.”

Which brings me to my actual post. It seems that John McClain’s latest missive attempts to answer the questions “why don’t we blitz” and, tangentially, “why Richard Smith is not a horrid coach.” Hmm. Interesting approach, General. Whatever made you think to approach that issue as answering a question? Because, correct me if I am wrong, but your article kind of reads like an attempt to respond to “how does a person who ignores the basic fundamental tenets of defense–things like ‘increasing QB pressure makes a shaky secondary better’ and ‘blitzing a linebacker will keep your pass-rushing DE from being routinely sodomized by two or three men’–seem less-capable at performing his job than any number of fans walking down the street?” by attacking the underlying assumptions about blitzing. But, then, you would never deign to read something as lowbrow and mindless as a–gasp!–blog written by a fan, would you? Of course not.

Just for a laugh and because I have nothing to do here at work, let’s examine your response a little more closely and see what, if anything, we can learn from it.

I’ve known defensive coordinator Richard Smith since he entered the NFL as an assistant under Jerry Glanville in 1988.

Congrats. I’m not really sure what that has to do with anything, but whatever.

If a psychiatrist put Smith on his couch and analyzed him, here’s what he would learn: Smith would blitz most of the time if he thought it would work. He’s a Glanville disciple. His nature is to attack, attack and attack some more.

He “would blitz more often if he thought it would work?” He hasn’t blitzed enough with this year’s team to have any idea whether it works. So, if he is just basing his decision on what he thinks of blitzing in general, I’m not sure you can call him aggressive.

So why doesn’t he do that with the Texans? Well, it’s simple. Blitzing for the sake of blitzing is bad coaching.

True, but blitzing for the sake of taking pressure of your young and/or below average secondary is good coaching. You should probably establish that we would be blitzing just for the sake of blitzing before you give your conclusory statements.

Fans who complain the Texans don’t blitz enough must not remember how many times it didn’t work or they got burned.

Ooooooooh, snap! You are talking about me, aren’t you, John? You showed me; after all, the lack of success of Texans teams in previous years certainly has a ton of bearing on whether this current unit would succeed. What’s that? Oh, I just received message from Captain Obvious that, no, it really doesn’t matter how previous Texans teams did. Interesting. You almost had me convinced, though.

Rushing more than four — usually one or two linebackers and sometimes a safety — is foolish if they don’t have the speed to pull it off.

John McClain, bringing the truisms today! Of course, the converse of that, that it is NOT foolish if they DO have the speed, is also true. And when I look at our LB corps, the one thing I see (especially out of DeMeco Ryans and Morlon Greenwood) is speed. Even Danny Clark is fast enough to blitz. You are making it sound like someone needs to run a 4.4 in order to be an effective pass rusher. Also, you conveniently overlook the possibility of working in some zone blitzes, which would allow us to create pressure through confusion while not leaving wide open holes underneath the secondary. In that scheme, the speed issue is negated somewhat (to the extent that it even exists) because you are still only sending four rushers. Now, of course we can’t solely run the zone blitz, but you can’t sit there and pretend that our linebackers are simply too slow and, thus, we have no options when it comes to pass rushing.

The coaches watch film of every game and practice over and over and over. They know what they get and don’t get with a four-man rush. They also know what they get and don’t get when they blitz.

It is good that they are watching game and practice tape. I’d be worried if they didn’t. But, saying they know what they get and don’t get when they blitz is nothing more than bit of sophistry. They don’t blitz enough to know what they get when they blitz. And, on the rare occasion that they do blitz, they have shown some success. DeMeco’s sack and a run stop for a loss against Atlanta came on a blitz. DeMeco’s sack, forced fumble, and first career TD against Tennessee came on a blitz. And, since you were the one who broached the subject of what past season’s blitzes have yielded, all 4 of Dunta’s career sacks came on blitzes. If anything, knowing what they get when they blitz should equate to “man, we’re having a little success when we mix that in.”

Right now, blitzing a safety could be disastrous. Rookie cornerback Fred Bennett has made three career starts. Veteran cornerback Von Hutchins has made three starts at his position. Leaving them in man coverage at this point in their careers is asking for trouble.

I don’t know why we would choose to blitz one of our safeties when we have ample speed/size/strength in the linebacking corps. Still, while your initial premise is fine, your reasoning is obtuse and idiotic. “Leaving them in man coverage…is asking for trouble?” Seriously? Well, then, why the hell do we keep leaving them in man coverage when we aren’t blitzing? It’s not like we are strictly playing zone; there is plenty of man coverage going on. Just look at the repeated immolation of Petey Faggins, especially in the Atlanta game. Most of that has been in man situations. So, I ask you, which is better–to leave them in man coverage for 2.5-3.5 seconds during a blitz or for 3.5-5 seconds without the blitz?

Think about this: Cleveland quarterback Derek Anderson’s strength is throwing down the field. The Texans determined that rushing four and dropping seven, forcing Anderson to throw underneath the coverage, made more sense than blitzing and leaving their defensive backs in man coverage against tight end Kellen Winslow and receiver Braylon Edwards.

What the hell? You did watch that game, right? Winslow had 10 catches for 107 yards and a TD. THAT is your proof that the existing plan is somehow better than forcing the QB to make throws more quickly? And, besides, like I keep screaming about, a zone blitz would not necessitate much of a deviation from the zone coverage that you seem to think is working wonders.

The Texans’ defense played well enough to beat Cleveland. All three Browns touchdowns came after mistakes — two interceptions and a missed field goal.

OK. So, aside from when they messed up, they played well enough to win. Fair enough. But what does that have to do with whether they should also have been blitzing? Nothing. You are simply trying to confuse the issue here. “They played well enough to win” does not equal “there is no need to blitz because this system works just fine.” Some of your sycophant cabana boys might buy into this sort of “logic,” but I don’t. Nor does anyone with half a brain.

Now, if the Texans are going to blitz and leave their corners in man coverage, it makes sense to do it against the Titans because they don’t have receivers like Cleveland’s, right? Oops! They did that in the first game against Tennessee, and Roydell Williams caught a 46-yard pass against Dunta Robinson to set up the winning field goal.

First, I was at that game and saw the play with my own eyes. There was a safety in the area who, for whatever reason, did not roll over the top and help Dunta. This is not pure man coverage you are talking about. Second, Dunta played that route as well as humanly possible, but simply missed when he stuck his hand up, so I am not clear on what this completion “proves” with respect to the blitz. Third, whether you are blitzing, rushing four, or rushing none, that route unfolds exactly the same way; it’s not like Morlon Greenwood covering in the flat would have changed the direction of that ball. Fourth, why do you keep trying to make it sound like the options are only “blitz with man coverage” and “don’t blitz with zone coverage?” Why do you ignore zone blitzing or even sending one linebacker and still playing a two-deep zone? Finally, stop pretending like we are not already leaving these guys in man coverage from time to time and consider whether those situations would be easier for the corners if they were covering for a shorter period of time.

You are making no sense here, John. If the problem is that the secondary is shaky (it is), then blitzing slightly more often is going to alleviate that problem somewhat. Note: no one is suggesting that we need to play like the Eagles and bring some kind of blitz on nearly every play. What we are suggesting is that Richard Smith’s approach to the game suggests that either he is too timid in his play-calling as a matter of course, that he is deathly afraid of getting yelled at if a play fails, or that he simply doesn’t see the flaws in his/your reasoning clearly enough to understand how to fix them. None of those scenarios is an acceptable answer, however. As Stephanie pointed out in her comment:

I cannot think of a single reason why the Texans should keep Richard Smith.

You know, I really try to be fair to people. But really, I can’t think of a reason to keep him. He wasn’t the Texans first choice, and if there are options out there to replace him, I’d like them to do it.

Here’s some additional reasons against:

1. He has no defensive philosophy other than “Don’t do the thing that sucked really bad in last weeks game.”

2. He has no record as a solo defensive coordinator before coming to the Texans.

3. He previously was the co-defensive coordinator of a 3-4. But only in name only because Saban really ran that defense and ran all the meetings.

4. Last year, he put pictures of rocks in the defensive players’ lockers to tell them that they are part of a rock. Yeah, that’s inspiring to the younger generation. Rocks don’t bring much of a pass rush either because well, they are rocks.

5. He’s a yell at the players guy. I don’t like yell at the players guy unless they are the best at what they do. If you yell all the time, and you don’t have the respect of the guys you are coaching because you’ve never accomplished anything, well then, you are just annoying.

6. If the players for the other offense call your defense “vanilla” before you have even played them (Winslow), it means they have no respect for it at all.

7. There is no 7.

8. I am thinking of burning an old 8 jersey as part of an anti-jinx against that number for a Texans QB.

9. It makes me physically ill to see 3rd and longs just wasted by the Texans defense. You know, “Great it’s 3rd and 8.” And then “@#$%, they just completed a pass for 24 yards.”

10. Did you have the thought when watching the Eagles play the Patriots the other night that Smith could have ten years with the Texans, and never bring the sort of stuff on D that the Eagles were doing to the Patriots? I get the same sort of training wheels feeling watching the Texans defense as I did when I watched Pendry’s offense in 2005. Very simple to avoid big mistakes. I know the Texans have a lot of injuries on defense, but it’s hard to watch.

Basically, why should ANYONE have confidence in what Smith is doing? There’s nothing in his background that should convince fans or the players that he knows what the hades he is doing and that it is going to get better.

Funny, John, it seems like everyone who is writing about this issue has a solid understanding of the little things, like “logic” and “reasoning” and “coherent arguments” and “basic tenets of football defense.” Maybe you should give that a shot.

I realize I am being flippant and kind of a jerk here. That is intentional, as it is the same approach John and the others like to take when they are forced to slum it and respond to people who disagree with them. The only difference here is that I also attempted to offer a counter-argument in between jabs at McClain.

(Ironically enough, in the comments to the post about blitzing, Will asked how long it would be before the Chron picked up on the idea and had a story about our lack of blitzing. Apparently, the answer is two days.)

It’s another one, in-the-gutter one

Nov 16, 2007 2007 Season, Demarcus Faggins sucks, Injury bug, Secondary issues are primary, The Fred, Von, Will Demps makes love to the...ladies?

So, lost in the smart-ass posts and fake press conferences of the past few days is the fact that we have a rather interesting and important game this weekend. I would apologize, but I do this for free, so go to hell.

Anyway…yeah. I suppose my thoughts on Reggie Bush are pretty well-documented. (Short version: he’s an overrated, glorified punt returner who will never be anything more than an average RB. Also, I don’t think he was born of the Virgin Mary and became man, as some people at ESPN seem to suggest.) So there’s no need to get into that again.

The one question on every Texans fan’s mind, however, is whether our secondary is going to resemble Onyx’s “Slam” video. Because, on paper, it’s kind of worrisome. You have a cornerback who was deemed expendable and moved to safety in the preseason, a rookie cornerback who was not supposed to be a starter this year, a free safety who was your strong safety until TWO free safeties went down, and a strong safety who was unceremoniously kicked to the curb in NY earlier this year. Stellar.

So, yeah, in a vacuum, it looks like a recipe for disaster. Unless you realize one little thing–none of those descriptions are about Petey Faggins. That alone is worth a couple extra defended passes per game.

In the comments to this post, Stephanie–in addition to accusing me of being the Jinxmaster, which is a kickass title–points out that neither Von Hutchins nor Fred Bennett was able to beat out Faggins in the preseason. This, she reasons, is cause for concern, because if they weren’t better than Faggins then, why would they be better now?

I would agree, except I think the underlying premise is flawed. Severely flawed, actually. Going into camp, Kubiak was pretty clear that Faggins was “the guy” and that he would be starting against Kansas City. Short of Petey getting arrested on a Fred Smoot sex cruise with a 12-year-old boy and three pounds of Peruvian flake hidden up his ass, no one was going to beat him out. Consider:

Player A–3 Games, 6 Tackles, 0 INTs, 0 Pass Def.
Player B–4 Games, 9 Tackles, 1 INT, 1 Pass Def.
Player C–4 Games, 8 Tackles, 1 INT, 1 Pass Def.

Now, if there really was an open competition in the preseason, is there any way that Player A wins it? Of course not. But Player A is (obviously) Petey Faggins, B is Von Hutchins, an C is Fred Bennett.

I am not saying that this cobbled-together defensive backfield is not a cause for concern; it definitely is. What I am saying is that the lack of Petey Faggins makes is LESS of a concern, not more. Both cornerbacks were better than Faggins in the preseason. More importantly, neither of them made opposing QBs’ eyes light up when they stepped on the field and neither of them was so brutally bad in the early going that people were emailing me about how they should be taken out behind the Astrodome and shot.

There are plenty of reasons to worry about the secondary–Bennett is inexperienced, Hutchins might not be fast enough, Will Demps might start hitting on C.C. Brown, etc.–but the fact that neither of the corners could beat Faggins 3 months ago is not one of them.

William Jennings Bryan, Buffalo Bills, and Petey Faggins

Nov 13, 2007 Demarcus Faggins sucks, Dunta Robinson, Injury bug, Secondary issues are primary, Von, Will Demps makes love to the...ladies?

Reader Andy passed along this link which features a blurb about Von Hutchins being moved back to corner from safety due to the injury of one Willie Dunta Robinson. I am going to go ahead and assume that losing one’s starting job thrice in a season ( if you include him being moved on passing downs) means that said loser is unlikely to be in the longterm plans at CB2.

I’m also going to go ahead and consider this the first Christmas gift of the year.

UPDATE: You know what? No. No, I cannot let this story go by with just a little pithy comment. Not after the hundreds upon hundreds of words that I have spent over the last six months on the Suckiness of Petey Faggins.

First, in case anyone failed to notice, Tim predicted (or suggested or whatever) this move as soon as God flipped me off and hurt Dunta. Proving, yet again, that it should not be so goddamned hard to find competent front-office people in the NFL.

Which actully dovetails into the bigger point I wanted to make. Namely, that my dumb ass has been screaming since the inception of this blog about how bad Faggins is (pre-blog, actually, but I have no visual proof of that), yet it took the Texans’ cognoscenti OTAs, training camp, and multiple shitty games–including games where you could pin the majority of the blame for the loss on him–before they could see what we already knew.

How is this possible? How is it that people who, given the chance, would explain to us how they understand football in ways we never will could themselves be so clueless about something so obvious? I understand the desire for them to give him the benefit of the doubt. I even understand not selling him out to the media after the Panthers game. But I do not, cannot, and will not pretend to understand how they could keep rolling out one of the worst starters in the NFL week after week.

And that is exactly what they are admitting with a move like this one with Hutchins. They are saying that Petey is so bad as a starting corner that even a season-ending injury is not enough to move him up the depth chart; that they would rather un-convert a CB-cum-safety than let Petey stink up the joint as a starter. To which I can only say, “duh” and “thank god,” respectively.

I guess what I am looking for is some sort of mea culpa from the front office or even from Kubiak himself. I just want a little “ok, my bad…Faggins is just not capable of doing this and we are sorry we pretended otherwise, but, look, we’re doing something to fix it.” I know I will never get this, though, so I suppose this Hutchins thing will just have to do.

If Faggins is on the opening day roster in 2008, though, I reserve the right to have someone killed.

Tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they’ll never take… OUR FREE SAFETY!

Sep 11, 2007 2007 Season, Free Agency, Ohio State makes baby Jesus cry, Secondary issues are primary, Von

Maybe I am just going overboard with the glass-half-full approach, but it looks like our fuzzy math, addition-by-subtraction method of creating a secondary continues.

We have talked repeatedly about how C.C. Brown is really a Strong Safety forced to play Free either because (if you are a Brown fan) he was slightly better at that position than Glenn Earl or (if you are not a Brown fan) because he was not good enough to beat out Earl for SS. Either way, he was playing out of position.

No longer. It appears, according to a commenter at BRB, that Von Hutchins will take Jason Simmons spot as a starter, but will play Free Safety. I like this move. I like it a lot, actually. I still say Hutchins was the only starting safety candidate who showed a nose for the ball. Plus, being a converted corner, he shouldn’t struggle when asked to cover WRs. (Something that Brown continues to struggle with.) That gives us Hutchins and a free-agent-signing-to-be-named-later on the FS depth chart, along with Brown and Michael Boulware at SS. (According to the link, if Boulware starts, Brown will stay at Free Safety. Odd. I imagine that arrangement would be short-lived if Brown continues to play the pass as poorly as he has.)

Depth, obviously, is a problem. Right now, we have exactly three healthy safeties, all listed above. Current free agent Free Safeties include Indrees Bashir and Jerome Woods. (There are also a couple slightly older CBs who might be able to convert, but I doubt that you want your team with two conversion projects getting serious playing time.) On the practice squad, we have Brandon Mitchell. Of those three, I suppose I would most prefer to bring the Buckeye (*spit*) over, but the other two guys at least have experience as starting FS. That might count for something, especially in the “help Von Hutchins come along” department.

OH… speaking of free agent defensive backs. According to NFL Network, New England Patriot CB Assante Samuel can become an unrestricted free agent if (a) the Pats win 12 games or (b) he plays 60% of the defensive snaps. File that under “intriguing.”

UPDATE: Via tyler, we signed Will Demps. This Will Demps. I guess every team needs a guy who doesn’t like easy, large-breasted women. In this way, he will be our Jeff Garcia or Tony Romo.

Lisfranc? Is that French? We call it "Freedom foot."

Aug 13, 2007 2007 Draft, Injury bug, Ohio State makes baby Jesus cry, Preseason 2007, Secondary issues are primary, Van Crap, Von

By now, you’ve no doubt heard that starting strong safety Glenn Earl is lost for the season (at minimum–Lisfranc injuries can be exceedingly hard to come back from). Now, while the secondary was thin to begin with, I am going to go out on a limb here and say that this injury was a good thing for the team. Addition by subtraction, if you will.

It’s not that Earl was bad. He is passably decent against the run and can deliver a big hit from time to time.¹ Of course, he also got destroyed Saturday night by a truck called Cedric Benson, so he’s not exactly Ronnie Lott.

The real problem is the current tandem of Earl and C.C. Brown gives the Texans no true free safety. Brown is better served in the strong safety position–he’s a hitter, but he bites on way too many play action passes (you saw it Saturday if you were looking for it), and he tackles better than Earl.

Thankfully, it seems most of the early reactions suggest that Brown will slide over to strong safety. So, who takes the free safety role?

The early leader in the race is Von Hutchins. A converted corner, Hutchins had that nice pick off of Brian Greise Saturday night. I suppose, given the options we have on the table right now, he would be my choice. The downside is that he’s a little small (5′9″) and doesn’t have much of a track record, so he’s an unknown quantity at best.

Another possibility is Brandon Harrison, the rookie out of Stanford. Technically, he is a strong safety, which kind of puts us in the position we were with Earl/Brown out there. He’s a big kid, though (6′2″/227), and if he can show a nose for the ball, he’d be an intriguing prospect. My concern with him, as I’ve said before, is that I really don’t see him being a DB for long. He strikes me as a Cato June type–as in he’s going to fill out a little more and be more of a nickel LB when it’s all said and done–and he has a reputation for being afraid of making the big hit.

For a third choice, Scott broke the news that the team was bringing in Shaun Williams for a workout. Unfortunately, as Scott points out, Williams is better against the run than the pass and has been described as “reckless.” Sure, that would be better than, say, bringing in Matt Stevens–of course, I would be better than Matt Stevens–but it’s not necessarily a panacea.

Other possibilities include Dexter McCleon and Brandon Mitchell² [edit: and Jason Simmons.] So, yeah, I guess you could say the position is still up for grabs.

One interesting (if slightly tongue-in-cheek) suggestion floating around the message board was moving Bradlee Van Pelt from QB to FS. He’s big enough (6′2″/220), his father was a linebacker, he has some anger management issues (remember him spiking the ball off the face of a Colorado defender?) that suggest he might have the right temperament for defense, and–best of all–he intercepted his own pass the other night. In fact, he originally enrolled at Michigan State, where they converted him to defensive back. Skills, baby! Clearly, this one isn’t going to happen, but I don’t think it’s a horrible suggestion. The kid is not an NFL QB… why not give him a chance to play somewhere else? It’d be like Rick Ankiel, only without Bradlee ever having shown promise at his original position.

My guess, when all is said and done, is that Hutchins wins the job. And if he plays like has so far in camp and preseason, I am fine with that. I just can’t help wondering if we are not overlooking some better possibilities.

¹ See, e.g., the lick he put on Jeremy Shockey last year. (That’s a great picture.)
² I am still high on the Brandon Mitchell bandwagon, despite my hatred for OSU. I have a sneaking feeling he could be the answer, but I also doubt he will be given a real shot to prove it. So is life, I guess.

Author’s note: Sorry for the somewhat disjointed nature of this post. I wrote it in four or five separate sittings because jerks kept expecting me to actually work. At work. Jerks.