Football Texans fans seem to be falling in love with Pollard. - Page 10

**BossChief** · 01:38 PM

Mods, If this is against the tos please delete.

http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66399

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/pos...ns-improving-d

Saccopoo · 10-30-2009, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Dear God, man. Did you go to the JASONSAUTO School of Reading Comprehension?

NO ONE is saying Pollard is the savior, or anything resembling that.

However, people are saying that it appears the organization made a mistake, as the person they brought in to replace him is worse than what we had - and it's become a trend if you look around the roster.

The point of rebuilding is to UPGRADE talent. Not get worse.

If the organization made a mistake, then 90% of the people around here made the same one when it comes to Pollard.

And the fact of the matter is, he had a horrible pre-season. Horrible. It got progressively worse. At that point, what do you do?

The fact is, Houston's defense is a lot better than the Chiefs at basically every position. And they are operating a 4-3, coached by the guy who was his coach here last season in a system that Pollard is familiar with and is better suited to play. Of course he's going to look better down there than he did up here.

The fact that our ILB/MLB play has been so abysmal means that our safeties are being required to do a heck of a lot more than they should. As well as our #3 cornerback situation is atrocious. Our safeties are being forced to play way beyond what they should be in the course of a game, and they are getting exposed more because of it.

Everybody wants Mays or Berry next year, but I'll tell you this, if the Chiefs don't get better at ILB and at CB, either one of those guys are going to look worse than what you're seeing from McGraw and Brown.

**Skip Towne** · 10-30-2009, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

Foolish to say this statement wont come true.

One man goes to a talented defense and seems to be the catalyst to them lowering their rush defense BY A FULL TWO YARDS PER CARRY AND THATS NOT HAVING A GOOD YEAR??? If that doesnt, what does for you?

He isnt Ed Reed, never will be.

I repeat, the man led his team in tackles as a safety, that is saying that the problem wasnt him and that he was having to do to much. Is that wrong? No, it isnt. It means too many people got past the front seven and into the secondary.

I can see this is going nowhere, so Im gonna stop.

GoChiefs is a reverse bellwether. When he predicts something, go the other way. He has been wrong on Darling, MIke Brown, Pollard, Huard and LJ. He hasn't been right on anyone yet. Hangs around Athan too much.

**Mr. Kotter** · 10-30-2009, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Dear God, man. Did you go to the JASONSAUTO School of Reading Comprehension?

NO ONE is saying Pollard is the savior, or anything resembling that.

However, people are saying that it appears the organization made a mistake, as the person they brought in to replace him is worse than what we had - and it's become a trend if you look around the roster.

The point of rebuilding is to UPGRADE talent. Not get worse.

QFT....even if it ain't popular.

**BossChief** · 10-30-2009, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buster Hymen

You are full of shit, as usual.

You were sucking Herms imaginary penis till the day he was fired, unless you'd care to lie about that too. You also thought that Thigpen should be the starter this year, and the Chiefs wouldn't be bringing in another QB, either through draft or FA. Now you suddenly think Pollard is a world beater, even though theres a ton of proof otherwise. You are football stupid. It may be time for you to stfu and watch and learn for a change.

You still here?

I can post a link to my "I was wrong" thread owning up to my fail on the subject that was after about five or six games last year if you so choose.

Yes, I did say at one point that we were a couple years away from competing and that we should just take our licks with Thigpen this year and spend the draft picks on fixing the oline and getting a young passrusher. This would set us up with one of two things: a top five pick again where we knew he wasnt gonna ever get better and we could select a qb whether it be McCoy, Bradford or whoever was the consensus best fit at the time, or two he ends up improving like he did in college and become a good game manager that is mobile, good enough that they would decide he was good enough to have earned the permanent starters role.

Part of me still thinks that would have had us further along right now because next year when we did select a qb with a high first rounder, the line would be in place to protect him when he was ready the following year.

Not a perfect strategy, but Im sure you prefer trading for a 27 year old with 15 games worth of experience since high school that in a qb friendly system couldnt get half the stats as Tom Brady did the following the year and made it by with the surrounding talent. You realize that by the time we have a team assembled, he will be approaching 30 right? Bradford or Mccoy would be like 25 or 26. That make sense to you?

I had alot of angles I suggested for the draft. This wasnt the only one. It may have not been the worst one either.

I still dont think this team was quite ready to have a qb that would play immediatly, that should be plainly obvious for all to see by now, I was right on that and wasnt alone.

This team is at least two years away from being taken serious and I was disapointed when we traded for a already 27 year old QB with very little experience and decieving production.

If Cassel didnt have Moss and Welker to throw to, he would have looked as lost a he does so far this year.

now listen closely to this

CASSEL GOT 63,000,000 FOR NOT WREKING THE FERRARI, MAINLY BECAUSE HE NEVER EVEN SHIFTED IT INTO SIXTH GEAR BECAUSE HE WAS SCARED TO.

Now moving on to Pollard, anyone here or over at the coalition can tell you Pollard was my boy since his first year when he helped us into the playoffs by blocking that punt and recovering it for a TD against the Jags.

THE GUY IS IN MY ****ING SIG OVER THERE.

Here it is to show so it can kill that right now you lying/exagerating ****!

the cars miss you and want you to come and play....

**BossChief** · 10-30-2009, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buster Hymen

It probably was a mistake cutting him for Brown, but the difference is VERY subtle.

if you think this is true, you should get your player card suspended.

night and day difference. You do watch the games, dont you?

Pollard was good against the run and struggled at times against the pass, playing Brown is like making us play with 10 players on defense at all times.

that doesnt mean Pollard is ever gonna be a all pro, but he could be a solid starter when the rest of the team isnt completely terrible.

He is proving that to be true right now, evidently. He looks like the next Chiefs defender that goes on to a very successful career elsewhere while our defense continues to suck.

**BossChief** · 10-30-2009, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scott free

Pollard, through 4 games with a new team: 23tak 0sck 0force fumble

Brown, through the first 4 games with a new team: 27tak 1sck 0force fumble

Is Brown the same guy that played in Chicago? Outside of leadership ability, is he substantially better than Pollard?... obviously not.

Brown was kept, IMO, because of his experience, because he knows how to prepare like a former All-Pro & the coaches are hoping some of that will rub off on the young guys.

Go ahead & rip my last paragraph, i can see the openings... but the stat sheet says we didnt lose a goddamned thing, why is everyone acting like we just canned Ronnie Lott?

Pleae dont take this the wrong way:

please dont post tackle stats while trying to prove a point to knowledgeable fans again, it is counterproductive to you arguement most of the time. His sack was a delayed and unblocked blitz.

Reason: Tackles are kept by the team and every team marrks them differently and they are the biggest falsified stat in the game, a truly imaginary number alot of the time.

They are so unreliable that "tackles are a accurate stat" was one of the top ten NFL myths on their NFLN myths show.

I am anxious to see if "the great Morgan" will ever hit the field.

**BossChief** · 10-30-2009, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz

I bet Bosschief masturbates with an SOS brillo pad too. Just to teach himself a lesson he'll never forget.

Im not sure if I should laugh or cry...

**Easy 6** · 10-30-2009, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

please dont post tackle stats while trying to prove a point to knowledgeable fans again, it is counterproductive to you arguement most of the time. His sack was a delayed and unblocked blitz.

Reason: Tackles are kept by the team and every team marrks them differently and they are the biggest falsified stat in the game, a truly imaginary number alot of the time.

They are so unreliable that "tackles are a accurate stat" was one of the top ten NFL myths on their NFL myths show.

I am anxious to see if "the great Morgan" will ever hit the field.

Ah, i forgot that all stats are meaningless unless provided by someone other than thyself.

What i find to be 'counterproductive', for me atleast, is putting this much fervent energy into carping about a guy in Texas.

He's gone, i'm moving on... carry on.

**BossChief** · 10-30-2009, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scott free

Ah, i forgot that all stats are meaningless unless provided by someone other than thyself.

What i find to be 'counterproductive', for me atleast, is putting this much fervent energy into carping about a guy in Texas.

He's gone, i'm moving on... carry on.

I tried to warn you, believe me I wsa taught that as well and used to love using them.

Example: Glen Dorsey was larrgly ineffective last year but if you look at his tackles he looks like he was well on his way to the hof.

I wont say this about any other stat.

Ask around to the smarter fans of the board and they will reassure you that defensive tackle stats are completely worthless.

just sayin

**Easy 6** · 10-30-2009, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

I tried to warn you, believe me I wsa taught that as well and used to love using them.

Example: Glen Dorsey was larrgly ineffective last year but if you look at his tackles he looks like he was well on his way to the hof.

I wont say this about any other stat.

Ask around to the smarter fans of the board and they will reassure you that defensive tackle stats are completely worthless.

just sayin

Numbers count for something, or they wouldnt keep track.

Bernard Pollard is working Miracles in Houston, he alone is responsible for a 2 yard turnaround? Their D as a whole wasnt also rounding into mid-season form when he arrived?

At this point, i'll keep my own counsel as to what numbers may or may not mean.

**BossChief** · 10-30-2009, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scott free

Numbers count for something, or they wouldnt keep track.

Bernard Pollard is working Miracles in Houston, he alone is responsible for a 2 yard turnaround? Their D as a whole wasnt also rounding into mid-season form when he arrived?

At this point, i'll keep my own counsel as to what numbers may or may not mean.

I have felt for years now that the NFL should keep the stat.

That way, teams could add incentives for number of tackles into contracts. That would force defenders to learn how to tackle properly to stay in the league and flourish.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 10-31-2009, 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

I have felt for years now that the NFL should keep the stat.

That way, teams could add incentives for number of tackles into contracts. That would force defenders to learn how to tackle properly to stay in the league and flourish.

See now that's not a bad idea.

Hammock Parties · 10-31-2009, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip Towne

GoChiefs is a reverse bellwether. When he predicts something, go the other way. He has been wrong on Darling, MIke Brown, Pollard, Huard and LJ. He hasn't been right on anyone yet. Hangs around Athan too much.

I didn't predict anything in regards to Pollard. I'm not sure how I was "wrong" about Pollard. All I did was point out how awful he was.

And I was right about Huard and LJ. I jumped onto their bandwagons BEFORE they produced. NO ONE thought Huard was going to amount to shit when he went in, but the very WEEK he replaced Green I was on here expecting him to play well, and he did.

**BossChief** · 10-31-2009, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raised On Riots

See now that's not a bad idea.

sanka

Mecca · 10-31-2009, 01:06 AM

I'll be the first to say I'm not a fan of Bernard Pollard and I wouldn't want him on my defense but that has a lot to do with personal preference and what types of secondary players I like.

In todays league I much prefer speed and range over hitting ability, if they have the ability to hit and support the run great but that's just a bonus.

10-30-2009, 11:01 AM
BossChief SuperBowl or bust Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: BF Iowa Casino cash: $-1595912	Texans fans seem to be falling in love with Pollard. Mods, If this is against the tos please delete. http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66399 http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/pos...ns-improving-d Last edited by BossChief; 11-07-2009 at 01:38 PM..
Posts: 47,886

10-31-2009, 01:06 AM	#150
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $-542950	I'll be the first to say I'm not a fan of Bernard Pollard and I wouldn't want him on my defense but that has a lot to do with personal preference and what types of secondary players I like. In todays league I much prefer speed and range over hitting ability, if they have the ability to hit and support the run great but that's just a bonus.
Posts: 115,275