I don't care if he's all but done, I want Bob Sanders

What I don't understand is why people are viewing this as an either/or type thing.

No one is arguing that the Texans get *only* Bob Sanders to address the need at Safety. That would be insane, even he came for only $1.99.

But if they do what they need to do --and-- can throw in a cheap, low-risk flier on Sanders, at the cost of a third-stringer going to the practice squad, what in the hell is the big deal about that?

"Oh no, a guy who would run real fast on ST and sit on the bench most of every other game is now on the practice squad! What a waste that will doom our season!!!!"

I just don't get that line of reasoning.

 

When did "Bob Sanders or a joke" become our only options? Isn't that the exact kind of limited, short-term thinking we've often criticized the Texans for having? You'd rather they dump resources into a broken-down relic who was great four years ago than into successfully scouting, developing and coaching talent? Really?

 

When he is healthy he is very, very good.

 

No. We'd like to see them do both. And there is no reason they could not. The two simply aren't mutually exclusive.

 

Uhh, where did I say it was either or?

I'm basing my entire argument that Bob Sanders is worth a shot on just the opposite.

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=5965996&postcount=54

You're the one who seems to be speaking in hardline terms that Sanders is absolutely-in-no-way-possible even worth looking at.

 

Move Jackson or Quinn to FS ...then sign Champ or Aso...or drop dead!!! Problem solved

 

msn, let's not fall into the star-gazing trap. Special teams is a vital component of a successful football team (ask the Chargers) and an area in which the Texans absolutely need to improve. Investing any resources into a myth at the expense of a player that has the potential to contribute on special teams (*and* enough talent to possibly blossom into a bigger contributor in the secondary) is a really poor use of resources.

The problem with Sanders is that he's 100% unreliable. Even if he's a cheap, low-risk signing - he's not going to play special teams (which is something *all* back-ups have to be able to do, and do well). And in the unlikely event he makes it through the summer healthy, and you configure your roster accordingly... you're screwed 2 minutes into your first regular season game when he inevitably gets hurt and suddenly, because you've foolishly invested resources in Bob Sanders, you have an inferior back-up pressed into action, which then robs a likely member of your special teams, and... I can't even believe we're having this discussion in a *Rockets* forum - have none of you heard of Yao Ming???

 

Don't we have enough backup tight ends to fill out a special teams roster 3 or 4 times over?


*edit: speaking of which, can Sanders play TE? If so, I think we may have ourselves another battlefighter here, boys.

 

if they can get a quality starting safety and then manage to get sanders on the super cheap, then fine. I don't think many people haev a problem with that.

The problem is that that scenario is highly unlikely. Because, 1) to get a quality starting player in FA, you will pay a premium which will cause you to be more frugal in spending of other areas. 2) Teams with more cap space, by not getting that starting quality safety the texans signed, will end up offering sanders more and taking that risk. Given 1 & 2, then the third strike would be Sanders not wanting to go to a team that already has an expected starting safety.

 

He hasn't been healthy, or very, very good since 2007. Since the majority of you have apparently misplaced your calendars - that was four years ago.

When you are allocating 1) money; 2) roster space; 3) practice time; 4) playing time; and ultimately 5) roster decisions on a ghost like Bob Sanders (who, btw, isn't likely to settle for some $8.99 contract, another myth being created in this thread), then you are absolutely, positively compromising your investment in other resources.

I'd rather take a chance on a myth than settle for a joke. How else are we supposed to read that?

 

So who is a reasonable alternative to Sanders?

Eric Weddle, Dawan Landry, Tanard Jackson?

Can we reasonably land any of these dudebros?

The one thing Sanders has going for him over all these guys is that he will be looking to sign before the CBA expires (wouldn't it make sense for him?) which might drive his price down, as opposed to these guys, none of whom can sign with anyone until a new CBA is put in place.

 

You're supposed to read it like this.

"If given the choice between standing pat and getting Sanders, I'll take Sanders." or maybe this "Our secondary sucks so bad that Sanders is worth getting even with the risk."

You're not supposed to read it like this.

"Our only options are either getting Sanders or standing pat, therefore I want Sanders."

Like I said before, perhaps this post would put those and future comments in context.

 

It's not. But two years ago, 10 wins was a thousand times better than 9 wins. And if the Texans add some more pieces that make this a 9 win team, having Sanders may push us to 10.

Of course, if you're going on the assumption that the Texans will not improve otherwise, then we can start dismantling the team right now rather than talking about upgrading.

If I had confidence that we can acquire a healthy Bob Sanders... no let me rephrase that. If I'm confident that the Texans can even acquire league average starting safety, I'd say pass on Sanders.

That's how little I think of the Texans front office right now in terms of judging secondary talent. If we had a different front office, say one led by Ted Thompson, I would be 100% in agreement with you.

And if Sanders came with those price tags(although I think Dayne made very little) I'd also agree with you to pass. But you say avoid him regardless of cost. I believe we should attempt to get him with low cost. One year deal filled with incentives is not the same as big multi-year contracts with large bonuses.

 

Yeah he has -but obviously he's had some freak injuries. Part of the injury problem is his own fault for trying to kill everyone he tackles.

 

Special teams, really? That is your reasoning for not wanting Sanders, no matter the cost? I can meet you halfway on the washed-up/injury prone argument, that is absolutely valid and a real concern.

But worried about degrading ST by adding Sanders? I just can't follow that. To me that is like worrying about watering a plant in your garden while the house burns down.

Weren't the majority of the Texans ST problems based around 1) Matt Turk sucking and 2) the Texans defense providing the worst field position in the NFL?

 

Judging by the massive amount of interest Sanders is getting around the league I think the Texans would be lucky to even land him.

 

More news? got a link?

 

i was under the impression that he was offering to play here for free, but ric the gm said no. am i correct?