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 05-01-2008, 06:33 PM
Roy P Roy P is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,761
Default

I think the ideal scenario is for Chris Taylor to assume the "feature back" position. This is a guy who is 5' 11" 220lbs (BMI around 30) but has had some issues with injury and fumbling. Obviously, we aren't ready to hand him the reigns. I believe that Green and Brown are our stop-gap solution until Taylor proves himself. Keeping all four RBs on the roster may or may not be feasible (Green could be costly to cut, though). Maybe we go into opening day with all four and see which one gets injured first. I hate projecting a starter by attrition, but it could be the way this plays out.

Anyway, no matter who starts out of Taylor, Brown, and Green; Slaton gives us an added dimension. That's why I can see the reasoning behind not drafting Tashard Choice or Jalen Parmele. You keep this little guy fresh and healthy allowing him to be dynamic when he touches the ball.

A couple of years ago, I was dead set against drafting Reggie Bush to fill this role. A 1st round RB has to be able to consistently carry the ball 15 - 20 times in EVERY game. Considering that we selected Slaton in the 3rd round, he can contribute sparingly and not be considered as a bust.

Two years from now, the Texans may have the NFL equivalent to the Clemson Tigers (James Davis and C.J. Spiller) with Taylor and Slaton. Of course, if Green gets cut and Brown gets hurt this season, we may have to speed up their development.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-01-2008, 10:56 PM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy P View Post
A couple of years ago, I was dead set against drafting Reggie Bush to fill this role. A 1st round RB has to be able to consistently carry the ball 15 - 20 times in EVERY game. Considering that we selected Slaton in the 3rd round, he can contribute sparingly and not be considered as a bust.
That was my point about Bush/Slaton earlier in the thread. Bush is just never going to be a workhorse and he really should be a third down/specialty back whose job is to make plays in space. The thing is, no matter how good a RB is at doing that, it really can't justify first round money - especially top of the first round money. Slaton will probably never have Bush's talent but he can give you 85% of what Bush would give you for third round money. You don't ask a runner like that to hit the pile over and over again. You ask him to catch swing passes, run draws and screens and occasionally line up in the slot and run deep patterns.

Another thing is that defenses couldn't give their full focus to Slaton at West Virginia becuase they had to worry about White. I doubt Slaton would be as successful if defenses didn't have to account for a running quarterback.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-02-2008, 06:56 AM
popanot popanot is offline
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,916
Default

I don't care who gets the majority of the carries just as long as we have someone back there that can hit a homerun from time to time. I'm just sick of these plodding, low-talent RBs we've had over the years. The best case scenario, at least IMO, would be for Chris Taylor to be the workhorse while Slaton provides the flash-and-dash and is used like the Saints use Bush. I'd love to see Taylor at RB with Slaton in the slot and AJ and JJ out wide. That would be some serious speed on the field. Mix in a dash of Owens and that's a pretty potent cocktail, IMO.
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 08:01 PM.


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