PDA

View Full Version : Texans_Chick: Texans are not a “run first team”


Playoffs
07-08-2013, 11:50 AM
Steph with an in depth look at the Texans' offense balances run/pass, dispelling some common myths. Great read! :texflag:

Texans mythbusters: The Texans are not a “run first team” (http://blog.chron.com/texanschick/2013/07/texans-mythbusters-the-texans-are-not-a-run-first-team/)

I read a lot of Texans content. And on of the most repeated things I read about the Texans that I think is WRONG WRONG WRONG is the statement that the Texans are a “run first team.”
But when Dennison came to the team, he wanted the Texans offensive line to be dominant in the redzone, to be able to impose their will in the redzone by running the ball whenever they want to. And that was the beginning of Arian Foster vulturing a lot of redzone TDs. Why risk a interception when a lot of times Foster can just pick his way through the blocks and walk into the endzone? (Not as flashy as a passing TD, but I got to tell you I very much enjoy the Foster untouched, saunter-in TDs. Namaste y’all.)
Now probably the best recent description of the Texans offensive strategy comes from a Mike Silver article (link) last year after the dismantling of the Ravens. Why do you know it is spot on? Because it heavily quotes former Texans QB Sage Rosenfels, and isn’t some random national writer dude who saw the Texans play a few nationally televised games the last few years or focuses on fantasy football stats or slept at a Holiday Inn Express one night and then tries to state his definitive opinion about the Texans...
Do you know which team threw the ball the most in the first half of games on first down? Throwing on first down is typically seen as a more aggressive offensive play.
...
Do you know what teams ran the ball the most on first down in the second half of games in 2012?
...
According to the Pro Football Reference Game Play Finder...

eriadoc
07-08-2013, 12:13 PM
There are no run first teams in the NFL. Insofar as there are running teams, the Texans are probably top 5 or so.

thunderkyss
07-08-2013, 12:33 PM
Great read as always. I followed the link to Sage Rosenfel's explanation (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nfl--morning-rush--texans-laying-down-the--law--while-taking-upper-hand-in-afc.html) of the offense..... good stuff

"They're so successful because their run and pass plays, both formationally and the way they're taught, are so identical," Rosenfels said. "They only have so many actual concepts, but he does a ton of formations. He might run the same play that they've seen on film, but the defense can't figure it out, because he'll have Owen Daniels running Andre Johnson's route, or Kevin Walter running Owen's – they've switched places.

"If you think about it, there's not a lot of play-changing at the line, or declaring [which player is] the Mike linebacker, or holding the ball because no one's open and trying to make something happen. It's less playmaking than straight execution. You go through your reads and there's somewhere to go with the ball. And as somebody said to me the other day, 'Nobody gets people more wide open than Gary Kubiak.' "


Some good stuff from TCs article

LT Duane Brown 12/19/12 quote: (on how important it is for the Texans to run the ball effectively) “It means a lot. When you’re not one-dimensional, teams can’t really get a read on what you’re trying to do. For us, it all starts with the run game. We’re able to run the ball well, get teams keying on that, and it opens up a whole lot for our offense; and if you’re able to do both, stay balanced throughout the whole game, it opens up our whole playbook.”

WR Andre Johnson 12/19/12 quote: (on the balance of the Texans’ offense and using the play-action) “When we’re able to run the ball well, it just opens up everything else. It’s always been like that since (Head) Coach (Gary) Kubiak has been here. When they brought in this style of offense, whenever the run game is going, it just opens up everything else. Sometimes you may run the ball and you may not hit those big runs like you want to at first, but you may hit a few passes and you see the run game open up and then everything else becomes kind of easy. I think that’s the biggest thing for us is just getting our run game going. When we do that, we tend to win a lot of games and it just opens everything else up.”

disaacks3
07-08-2013, 12:57 PM
"If you think about it, there's not a lot of play-changing at the line, or declaring [which player is] the Mike linebacker, or holding the ball because no one's open and trying to make something happen. It's less playmaking than straight execution. You go through your reads and there's somewhere to go with the ball." That's the part that's hard (conceptually) as a fan when we don't see an audible. They simply aren't desinged for it as much.

The Pencil Neck
07-08-2013, 02:17 PM
That's the part that's hard (conceptually) as a fan when we don't see an audible. They simply aren't desinged for it as much.

Yeah.

In Soviet Kubiak. Play Changes Self!

ObsiWan
07-09-2013, 03:53 AM
That's the part that's hard (conceptually) as a fan when we don't see an audible. They simply aren't desinged for it as much.

Soooo... when a play doesn't work that means someone didn't see the open guy or didn't pick the right cutback lane...right?

I mean, if we've called a run and the defense brings nine guys up, I just don't see the advantage of not checking into a quick slant to A.J. or O.D....

the mind boggles
:mcnugget:

disaacks3
07-09-2013, 09:32 AM
Soooo... when a play doesn't work that means someone didn't see the open guy or didn't pick the right cutback lane...right?

I mean, if we've called a run and the defense brings nine guys up, I just don't see the advantage of not checking into a quick slant to A.J. or O.D....

the mind boggles
:mcnugget: You're assuming that isn't a potential option on the play...without yelling out signals. :kitten:

The Pencil Neck
07-09-2013, 11:41 AM
Soooo... when a play doesn't work that means someone didn't see the open guy or didn't pick the right cutback lane...right?

I mean, if we've called a run and the defense brings nine guys up, I just don't see the advantage of not checking into a quick slant to A.J. or O.D....

the mind boggles
:mcnugget:

You're making a huge assumption that just because the base play is a run that the reads can't morph the play into a pass. From what they've said about the system, that's part of the play design. Of course, they've also said that when there's a lead and the other team is loading up the box, they believe they can run on those fronts AND that's when they can pop long ones.

But back to the original point... Remember a few years ago against the Seahawks when AJ scored on that great pass on the 2nd or 3rd play of the game? IIRC, that was a called run BUT when they read man-to-man on AJ, they shifted the entire play to a pass. That was part of their game-plan for that game, whenever the Seahawks go man-to-man on AJ, make them pay.

The whole thing is that it doesn't have to be a big production to shift from one play to the other.

paycheck71
07-09-2013, 11:53 AM
You're making a huge assumption that just because the base play is a run that the reads can't morph the play into a pass. From what they've said about the system, that's part of the play design. Of course, they've also said that when there's a lead and the other team is loading up the box, they believe they can run on those fronts AND that's when they can pop long ones.

But back to the original point... Remember a few years ago against the Seahawks when AJ scored on that great pass on the 2nd or 3rd play of the game? IIRC, that was a called run BUT when they read man-to-man on AJ, they shifted the entire play to a pass. That was part of their game-plan for that game, whenever the Seahawks go man-to-man on AJ, make them pay.

The whole thing is that it doesn't have to be a big production to shift from one play to the other.

Peyton Manning takes offense to this. :) But I honestly do wonder how many times he doesn't even change the play after all that pre-snap action.

The Pencil Neck
07-09-2013, 12:03 PM
Peyton Manning takes offense to this. :) But I honestly do wonder how many times he doesn't even change the play after all that pre-snap action.

I think a lot of it is just for show, trying to get into the defender's heads and make them change their defense to something less aggressive or to make them overthink what they're reads are.

steelbtexan
07-09-2013, 07:41 PM
Arian Foster carried the ball 351 times last yr, but the Texans aren't a running team. LOL

On a side note Gary will be starting his 8th yr as HC. How many more yrs does he get if his team doesn't improve in the playoffs? !0-20 yrs?

The Pencil Neck
07-09-2013, 07:54 PM
Arian Foster carried the ball 351 times last yr, but the Texans aren't a running team. LOL

On a side note Gary will be starting his 8th yr as HC. How many more yrs does he get if his team doesn't improve in the playoffs? !0-20 yrs?

As far as I'm concerned, as long as he's putting a good team on the field, he's getting a chance. He can even have a few off years here and there.

I hate the swinging door, no-patience FO approach to coaches.

thunderkyss
07-09-2013, 08:25 PM
Arian Foster carried the ball 351 times last yr, but the Texans aren't a running team. LOL


Matt Schaub threw the ball 544 times.


LOL


On a side note Gary will be starting his 8th yr as HC. How many more yrs does he get if his team doesn't improve in the playoffs? !0-20 yrs?

If we get trounced by the Patriots again, even in the regular season, he should be gone.

As a matter of fact, Bob McNair should have had a long talk with Kubiak on that plane ride home ("talk" being a euphemism).

Speedy
07-09-2013, 09:33 PM
Arian Foster carried the ball 351 times last yr, but the Texans aren't a running team. LOL



Matt Schaub threw the ball 544 times.


LOL

The Texans had the 4th most rushing attempts last season and 18th most pass attempts.

steelbtexan
07-09-2013, 09:37 PM
As far as I'm concerned, as long as he's putting a good team on the field, he's getting a chance. He can even have a few off years here and there.

I hate the swinging door, no-patience FO approach to coaches.

8 yrs is hardly a swinging door approach.

Seems as though you may be a Kubiak HC for life kida guy.

thunderkyss
07-09-2013, 09:39 PM
The Texans had the 4th most rushing attempts last season and 18th most pass attempts.

& the 7th rank offense.

infantrycak
07-09-2013, 09:47 PM
The Texans had the 4th most rushing attempts last season and 18th most pass attempts.

And all four of those teams went to the playoffs.

8 yrs is hardly a swinging door approach.

Seems as though you may be a Kubiak HC for life kida guy.

The list of HCs who have been fired after 3 straight playoff seasons (your scenario) is very short. Even Shottenheimer doesn't qualify. Maybe you can supply some names where doing so has worked out well for a team.

Texan_Bill
07-09-2013, 09:58 PM
Whoa!! WHOA!!!

Are we suggesting that the Texans DON'T run the ball first? (Although I will concede that on occasions, they have to go the other way)....

The Texans feature their running game to exploit the passing game, irrespective of what the stats are in comparison..


It's a passing league, no?

Most defenses are set up to stop the pass, yes? Those teams are suspect for the Texans running attack.

There are some defenses built to stop the run.... That's when 'Dre and hopefully "dre jr (aka DeAndre Hopkins) and OD run wild on they asses!!!



BOTTOM LINE... Run first team!

thunderkyss
07-09-2013, 10:15 PM
The Texans feature their running game to exploit the passing game, irrespective of what the stats are in comparison..


I've never seen it that way. Points come out of the passing game, we score a lot of points. We have a back-up QB as a head coach, back up QBs like to throw the ball....

We throw the ball to get the lead & run the ball to keep it.

infantrycak
07-09-2013, 10:28 PM
BOTTOM LINE... Run first team!

Bottom line Houston is a balanced attack team. Here are the top 4 rushing teams last season.

Seattle Seahawks - 405 passing attempts, 536 rushing attempts - 43% passing.
Washington Redskins - 442 passing attempts, 519 rushing attempts - 46% passing.

Contrast:
Houston Texans - 554 passing attempts, 504 rushing attempts - 53% passing.
New England Patriots - 641 passing attempts, 523 rushing attempts - 55% passing.

Run first teams don't put up over 4000 yds passing year in and year out.

thunderkyss
07-09-2013, 10:38 PM
Run first teams don't put up over 4000 yds passing year in and year out.

I'm not saying that's elite, I'm just saying. Year in & year out??? That sounds like elite.

But I'm not saying it.

The Pencil Neck
07-10-2013, 01:09 AM
8 yrs is hardly a swinging door approach.

Seems as though you may be a Kubiak HC for life kida guy.

I'm a stability kinda guy, a Tom Landry, Chuck Noll kinda guy who believes that as long as the coach can stay relevant and produce a winning team, you keep him.

I'm not a fire Bum Phillips after six years and three consecutive trips to the playoffs kinda guy.

infantrycak
07-10-2013, 01:28 AM
I'm not a fire Bum Phillips after six years and three consecutive trips to the playoffs kinda guy.

Exactly and how well did that work out? - six years and twenty three wins after three trips to the playoffs and the latter was with Moon and Campbell. 32 wins in 3 years v. 26 wins in 6. Get rid of the bum because he didn't make it all the way even if he was going up against the AFC team of the decade.

ArTex
07-10-2013, 02:59 AM
Didnt Texans lead the league in rushing attempts in 2011?

There are basically no run-first teams anymore. ( At least not in the classic sense of RBs getting carries, now more QBs are running the ball themselves)

Texans are a run-HEAVY team for sure.

They're run-first in image because of Kubiak's "vanilla" style not deviating from his gameplan in a way thats attributed to conservative run oriented coaches. But it doesnt necessarily mean its "3 yards & cloud of dust" on field

The Pencil Neck
07-10-2013, 12:34 PM
Didnt Texans lead the league in rushing attempts in 2011?

Tied for 1st with the Tebow-led Broncos in 2011. We were 4th in 2012 behind Seattle, New England, and Washington. We were 19th and 20th in 2010 and 2011, btw.

eriadoc
07-10-2013, 12:53 PM
Considering that the teams ahead of the Texans in rushing attempts all have QBs that run, I think it's safe to say the Texans utilize their running back position as much or more than any other team. The Seahawks and Redskins had 32 and 15 more carries than the Texans respectively. I bet Wilson and RGIII ran the ball more than 32 and 15 times last year. Schaub ran it .... what? Once? Badly?

infantrycak
07-10-2013, 01:08 PM
Considering that the teams ahead of the Texans in rushing attempts all have QBs that run, I think it's safe to say the Texans utilize their running back position as much or more than any other team. The Seahawks and Redskins had 32 and 15 more carries than the Texans respectively. I bet Wilson and RGIII ran the ball more than 32 and 15 times last year. Schaub ran it .... what? Once? Badly?

Given that "all" includes Tom Brady, no.

And so what? Is the thread title "RB first team" so you get to exclude teams designed to have their QB run? That makes no sense. They're still rushing plays.

paycheck71
07-10-2013, 01:08 PM
Considering that the teams ahead of the Texans in rushing attempts all have QBs that run, I think it's safe to say the Texans utilize their running back position as much or more than any other team. The Seahawks and Redskins had 32 and 15 more carries than the Texans respectively. I bet Wilson and RGIII ran the ball more than 32 and 15 times last year. Schaub ran it .... what? Once? Badly?

That Tom Brady option offense is awesome. :kitten:

Double Barrel
07-10-2013, 01:13 PM
I've heard Kubiak himself say they need to establish the run to set up the play-action. I remember this specific question to Kubiak on the radio, and he gave the typical sort of bland answers, but he said they are not a "pass first" team, as well.

And I've heard too many other Texans players make statements that the running game is extremely important aspect of their offense so the play-action and bootlegs are effective. If teams are not biting on the run, then their designed passing plays get less dimensional.

They might not be a so-called "run first" team, but they certainly need to establish a run game to make the rest of the offense balance out.

It's a fine line in definition, and one that I do not think really matters in the end. This offense cannot survive on one aspect (i.e. run vs. pass) alone to be consistently successful week in/week out.

eriadoc
07-10-2013, 01:16 PM
Given that "all" includes Tom Brady, no.

Forgot about Brady, but he did have 23 carries and 4 TDs last year. My main point is I am not interested in factoring in QB rushes to determine how much of a running team one is. Some may be, and that's cool, but I don't consider it a valid comparison. The Texans are one of the heaviest run oriented teams in the NFL. That said, I posted early in the thread to say that there are no run first NFL teams anymore, so this is all relative.

EDIT - just for the sake of completion, I looked at Schaub. He had 21 carries last year. Who knew? The result was a grand total of -9 yards and zero TDs, so I'm not sure he was running. I think when Carr "ran" like that, they counted them as sacks. :D

infantrycak
07-10-2013, 01:28 PM
I've heard Kubiak himself say they need to establish the run to set up the play-action. I remember this specific question to Kubiak on the radio, and he gave the typical sort of bland answers, but he said they are not a "pass first" team, as well.

And I've heard too many other Texans players make statements that the running game is extremely important aspect of their offense so the play-action and bootlegs are effective. If teams are not biting on the run, then their designed passing plays get less dimensional.

They might not be a so-called "run first" team, but they certainly need to establish a run game to make the rest of the offense balance out.

It's a fine line in definition, and one that I do not think really matters in the end. This offense cannot survive on one aspect (i.e. run vs. pass) alone to be consistently successful week in/week out.

Bland answer would be exactly what it was. Fact is the Texans led the league in passing with a prolific play action passing game in which if memory serves Schaub put up 4770 yds while having the 30th ranked rushing O. Schaub gets away with it because despite being a sloth he sells the play fake as well as anyone and sells every play. Watch how many QBs actually bother to bootleg out after handing the ball off - it is very few.

That said, I posted early in the thread to say that there are no run first NFL teams anymore, so this is all relative.

That I agree with. There are no true run first teams anymore.

EDIT - just for the sake of completion, I looked at Schaub. He had 21 carries last year. Who knew? The result was a grand total of -9 yards and zero TDs, so I'm not sure he was running. I think when Carr "ran" like that, they counted them as sacks. :D

I saw that as well and don't understand the stats there.

Double Barrel
07-10-2013, 03:05 PM
Bland answer would be exactly what it was. Fact is the Texans led the league in passing with a prolific play action passing game in which if memory serves Schaub put up 4770 yds while having the 30th ranked rushing O. Schaub gets away with it because despite being a sloth he sells the play fake as well as anyone and sells every play. Watch how many QBs actually bother to bootleg out after handing the ball off - it is very few.


Understood and agree.

The Texans are neither a "pass first" nor a "run first" team. I think there is an inherent logic flaw for fans to demand that they be either/or. This offense is about balance and different aspects complement each other.

The Pencil Neck
07-10-2013, 03:16 PM
Forgot about Brady, but he did have 23 carries and 4 TDs last year. My main point is I am not interested in factoring in QB rushes to determine how much of a running team one is. Some may be, and that's cool, but I don't consider it a valid comparison. The Texans are one of the heaviest run oriented teams in the NFL. That said, I posted early in the thread to say that there are no run first NFL teams anymore, so this is all relative.

EDIT - just for the sake of completion, I looked at Schaub. He had 21 carries last year. Who knew? The result was a grand total of -9 yards and zero TDs, so I'm not sure he was running. I think when Carr "ran" like that, they counted them as sacks. :D

They count kneel downs as rushing attempts in the stats.

ObsiWan
07-10-2013, 09:35 PM
EDIT - just for the sake of completion, I looked at Schaub. He had 21 carries last year. Who knew? The result was a grand total of -9 yards and zero TDs, so I'm not sure he was running. I think when Carr "ran" like that, they counted them as sacks. :D

When the QB takes a knee to end the half or the game, those are rushing attempts per the stat masters.

Wolf
07-10-2013, 11:42 PM
I wonder how many of the rushes were 2nd and long or 3rd and long draw plays that we know so well

:kitten:

:joker:

steelbtexan
07-10-2013, 11:46 PM
The Texans pass the ball to get ahead and run the ball to kill the clock/put the game away.

The Pencil Neck
07-11-2013, 12:53 AM
I wonder how many of the rushes were 2nd and long or 3rd and long draw plays that we know so well

:kitten:

:joker:

I was planning on taking a look at that and never got around to it.

Surreal McCoy
07-11-2013, 06:44 AM
I'm a stability kinda guy, a Tom Landry, Chuck Noll kinda guy who believes that as long as the coach can stay relevant and produce a winning team, you keep him.

I'm not a fire Bum Phillips after six years and three consecutive trips to the playoffs kinda guy.

MSR

steelbtexan
07-11-2013, 09:35 AM
I'm a stability kinda guy, a Tom Landry, Chuck Noll kinda guy who believes that as long as the coach can stay relevant and produce a winning team, you keep him.

I'm not a fire Bum Phillips after six years and three consecutive trips to the playoffs kinda guy.

This is where we differ, I want a HC that has the abilty to win a Lombardi. If a HC hasn't won a SB in a decade, when the avg HC lifespan is 4-5 yrs odds of that HC ever winning a SB are slim. It would be time to change HC. IMHO

Gary is considered to be a QB guru, the QB's has won championships with are Montana/Young and Elway. Walsh developed Montana, Walsh/Shanahan developed Young and Shanahan developed Elway. In todays game Shanny is in the procees of Developing RG3. Who has Gary developed?

BTW, the Bum vs Landry/Noll etc, how many championships did Bum win? Blasphemy? LOL

I get what you are saying, you like a comfort factor in your HC's. I'm a risk taker who's only goal is to win and by win I mean win it all. These are 2 distinctively different personality types. BoB appears to have your type of personality and that is all that really matters.

I want you to know that I respect your position on this subject, but after almost a decade you should know what you've got in Gary and it's almost time to move on. He's got 2 more yrs to get it done or he's gone if I were BoB, depending on how he does this yr.

paycheck71
07-11-2013, 10:09 AM
The Texans pass the ball to get ahead and run the ball to kill the clock/put the game away.

Seems fairly obvious, yet we're on page 2 of this thread, and IIRC there was a 10+ page thread last summer on the same subject.

ObsiWan
07-11-2013, 10:37 AM
This is where we differ, I want a HC that has the abilty to win a Lombardi. If a HC hasn't won a SB in a decade, when the avg HC lifespan is 4-5 yrs odds of that HC ever winning a SB are slim. It would be time to change HC. IMHO

Gary is considered to be a QB guru, the QB's has won championships with are Montana/Young and Elway. Walsh developed Montana, Walsh/Shanahan developed Young and Shanahan developed Elway. In todays game Shanny is in the procees of Developing RG3. Who has Gary developed?

BTW, the Bum vs Landry/Noll etc, how many championships did Bum win? Blasphemy? LOL

I get what you are saying, you like a comfort factor in your HC's. I'm a risk taker who's only goal is to win and by win I mean win it all. These are 2 distinctively different personality types. BoB appears to have your type of personality and that is all that really matters.

I want you to know that I respect your position on this subject, but after almost a decade you should know what you've got in Gary and it's almost time to move on. He's got 2 more yrs to get it done or he's gone if I were BoB, depending on how he does this yr.

Okay, I'm beginning to understand where you're coming from SteelB. I'm more in the camp of TPN because I like stability. In my experience stability bears more consistent fruit than impatience.

And if winning the Lombardi is your primary pass/fail criteria then Cowher is a Fail since it took him 15 years to finally win one.

The Pencil Neck
07-11-2013, 12:32 PM
This is where we differ, I want a HC that has the abilty to win a Lombardi. If a HC hasn't won a SB in a decade, when the avg HC lifespan is 4-5 yrs odds of that HC ever winning a SB are slim. It would be time to change HC. IMHO

Gary is considered to be a QB guru, the QB's has won championships with are Montana/Young and Elway. Walsh developed Montana, Walsh/Shanahan developed Young and Shanahan developed Elway. In todays game Shanny is in the procees of Developing RG3. Who has Gary developed?

BTW, the Bum vs Landry/Noll etc, how many championships did Bum win? Blasphemy? LOL

I get what you are saying, you like a comfort factor in your HC's. I'm a risk taker who's only goal is to win and by win I mean win it all. These are 2 distinctively different personality types. BoB appears to have your type of personality and that is all that really matters.

I want you to know that I respect your position on this subject, but after almost a decade you should know what you've got in Gary and it's almost time to move on. He's got 2 more yrs to get it done or he's gone if I were BoB, depending on how he does this yr.

We BOTH have the same goal. We both believe what we believe because we think it's the best and quickest way to start winning SBs. I'm not backing Kubiak because of a comfort factor, I'm backing him because I think he gives us the best chance to win a lot of SBs.

This is where we're always going to differ. Most of the owners in this league are risk-takers like you and almost all of those owners have failed to win a SB because they pull the trigger too quickly.

Bum Phillips never won a SB because he wasn't given enough of a chance. If he'd been able to stay here a few more years, he might have brought one home. But the owner got impatient and canned him. They could be hoisting SB trophies in Cleveland right now but they ditched Belichik too quickly.

And say what you want about Kubiak as a QB guru but he has developed a potent offense. Many times, coordinator gurus are brought in as HCs and then their side of the ball never really develops. Billick, an offensive "genius" from the Greene Minnesota days, goes to Baltimore and never really can get the offense in gear. Gruden goes to Tampa Bay and never does get the offense going like he had it in Oakland. Dungy never developed a defense in Indy anywhere close to what he had in Tampa Bay. And those guys WON SBs.

I think we have a good chance of winning a SB with this team and with this coaching staff and I know that you don't and never have.

eriadoc
07-11-2013, 02:22 PM
Gary is considered to be a QB guru, the QB's has won championships with are Montana/Young and Elway. Walsh developed Montana, Walsh/Shanahan developed Young and Shanahan developed Elway. In todays game Shanny is in the procees of Developing RG3. Who has Gary developed?

I am no Kubiak apologist, as most of the Kool-Aid drinkers will tell you. I've been a critic of his since the second 6-10 season. However, I always bring this up when someone says what you've said here. It never seems to sink it, but it's no less true.

Kubiak is known as a QB guru because of what he's accomplished with QBs. Yes, Steve Young was a great QB before Kubiak came along. But Young had his best season ever under Kubiak's tutelage, won his only Super Bowl, and posted a record QB rating that stood for a while. Yes, Elway was a great QB before Kubiak came along, and went to the Super Bowl a few times. But he had his best years under Kubiak and won two Super Bowls. Then you have the crappy QBs that played under Kubiak and had their best years - Jake Plummer and Brian Griese. Jake Plummer played way over his head under Kubiak and so did Griese. Hell, Griese was even named to the Pro Bowl under Kubiak. Even the disaster that was David Carr was reigned in and improved under Kubiak, and that was a pretty hopeless project by the time Kubiak got hold of him.

I do think that as a result, Kubiak thinks he can win with lesser QBs now. I'd rather see a supremely talented QB paired with Kubiak, but I cannot deny the man his due.

HOU-TEX
07-11-2013, 02:24 PM
http://memez.s3.amazonaws.com/gallery/image/goddamn-middle-seat-3774

:includeme:

leebigeztx
07-11-2013, 02:30 PM
They were beat down 3 times last yr and every time that happened,the other team stopped the run 1st.Once they sztopped the run,it took away playaction and took them off schedule and the team couldn't respond.If they were not a run 1st team,getting their run game stopped wouldn't mean much. I hate to do this,but schaubs inability to make downfield throws inside the pocket without playaction restricts them. In those 3 beadowns,that's what happen and it will continue to happen until martin,posey,hopkins,or jean can show they can beat coverage badly. If its close,schaub will not throw guys open.

thunderkyss
07-11-2013, 02:44 PM
If a HC hasn't won a SB in a decade, when the avg HC lifespan is 4-5 yrs odds of that HC ever winning a SB are slim. It would be time to change HC. IMHO

Gary has 3 more seasons then. Let's see what happens.

Say, how long did it take Cowher to win his Super Bowl?

steelbtexan
07-11-2013, 11:19 PM
Okay, I'm beginning to understand where you're coming from SteelB. I'm more in the camp of TPN because I like stability. In my experience stability bears more consistent fruit than impatience.

And if winning the Lombardi is your primary pass/fail criteria then Cowher is a Fail since it took him 15 years to finally win one.

Impatience? going on 8 yrs?

Gary is probably the 2nd most tenured HC in the NFL, behind Coughlin and Coughlin was in jeopardy of being fired 2 yrs after winning a SB.

Texans fans have been quite patient. IMHO

Lets see how this yr plays out. I'm ready for some football.

drs23
07-12-2013, 12:47 PM
Impatience? going on 8 yrs?

Gary is probably the 2nd most tenured HC in the NFL, behind Coughlin and Coughlin was in jeopardy of being fired 2 yrs after winning a SB.

Texans fans have been quite patient. IMHO

Lets see how this yr plays out. I'm ready for some football.

You and I both steelb. Come on July 26th. I've got the football jones really bad!

hollywood_texan
07-14-2013, 12:25 AM
They were beat down 3 times last yr and every time that happened,the other team stopped the run 1st.Once they sztopped the run,it took away playaction and took them off schedule and the team couldn't respond.If they were not a run 1st team,getting their run game stopped wouldn't mean much. I hate to do this,but schaubs inability to make downfield throws inside the pocket without playaction restricts them. In those 3 beadowns,that's what happen and it will continue to happen until martin,posey,hopkins,or jean can show they can beat coverage badly. If its close,schaub will not throw guys open.

I believe you are referring to the losses against the Packers and the Patriots. Those losses clearly demonstrate a trend of offensive failures to get things started early against teams that have premier QBs who get hot early. From my perspective, that issue has very little to do with Schaub or the running game, but Kubiak's generally unimaginative and predictable play calling.

Repeatedly, I see that the Texans offense incapable of scoring TDs when it matters the most, such as early in the game before things get out of hand, or closing out a tough game against a top tier team. I lay this on Kubiak's coaching of the offense.

Statistics can be highly deceptive and completely misleading. Simply put, to win big football games at any level, scoring TDs when your opponent can least afford giving up those points is the key to success. I am not sure how to capture that in a statistic. But, that means the offense is successful at the most critical moments during the game.

I do not have the time to break all this down with an in dept analysis, but from my view point, meaning, from just watching of Texans games live, and that is it, the Texans offense struggles mightily when success is needed the most. The three games you mention clearly demonstrate that.

Having said all that, I don't know if McNair should get rid of Kubiak because he has a lot of strengths. I am probably going to surprise a lot people with this statement, but if Kubiak innovates his offensive coaching style and becomes more robust in his play calling, the Texans have the roster to win the Super Bowl.

Hopefully in McNair's review of Kubiak, he discusses that with Kubiak. Bottom line, the Houston Texans are very close to a championship.

thunderkyss
07-14-2013, 07:55 AM
I believe you are referring to the losses against the Packers and the Patriots. Those losses clearly demonstrate a trend of offensive failures to get things started early against teams that have premier QBs who get hot early. From my perspective, that issue has very little to do with Schaub or the running game, but Kubiak's generally unimaginative and predictable play calling.



I think I agree with most of what you said in the first paragraph, but think about it in a different way. The Packers & Patriots are highly efficient scoring teams. We're not. I would bet they score more per possession than just about any other team. We score a lot of points too, but we go about it a different way. Teams like that & the Peyton Manning led Colts pressure other teams to score on every possession, because you "know" if you don't, they will.

They pretty much make you one dimensional before the game even starts. Other teams will try to slow the game down, but it usually ends up in a shooting match that they win 8 out of 10 times. Those are the step on your neck teams, because they don't have a defense that can "make up" for not scoring on offense.

We got behind against those teams & couldn't slow the game down enough to get the win. & you don't want to give them extra possessions. Which we did.


Repeatedly, I see that the Texans offense incapable of scoring TDs when it matters the most, such as early in the game before things get out of hand, or closing out a tough game against a top tier team. I lay this on Kubiak's coaching of the offense.


But we won 12 games last year. One of those after we gave up a safety & trailed for a little more than a quarter. That was against the Peyton Manning Broncos... & we stomped a hole in their butts. Against Detroit & Jacksonville, trailing most of the game, we came from behind & won.

So I wouldn't say it's unimaginative on Kubiak's part. We just ran up against teams that played/coached better than we did that day. It happens. It happened to the Patriots & the Packers 4 times in 2012, same as us. That's football.

infantrycak
07-14-2013, 08:36 AM
but Kubiak's generally unimaginative and predictable play calling.

I see unimaginative thrown around. Would some of the folks who espouse this please be more specific? Spare everyone the 3rd and long draw play. Other than that, what is unimaginative about either his plays or play calling?

Frankly on predictable I just think people are FOS. There are certain fans for every team who claim they can predict the plays. Saying to yourself "he is going to run" isn't something pat yourself on the back about when it is 2nd and 2. There are about 10 plays a game where conventional football wisdom (which doesn't always dictate one outcome) gets pushed aside. I want to see the "predictable play call" squad get on line and call these predicable plays before they happen on game day.

PS - in case you haven't been watching or listening, the entire design of Kubiak's offense is to look unimaginative and predictable and then dare you to stop it or it will pull off a crud load of plays out of the same formation. Name me another unimaginative and predictable offense where slow white guys are running around wide open in back fields?

Goldensilence
07-14-2013, 11:59 AM
I guess when I am looking at the idea of a run first I'm not just looking at play calling ratio. This team looks to establish the running game early and often. The passing game under Gary is highly dependent on the run.

I think a lot of the vanilla accusations come from most mismatches on this offense are based on athletes creating them physically as more formation based.

I'd really like to see this offense with a elite QB running it. It's probably be devastating to deal with from a defensive standpoint.

thunderkyss
07-14-2013, 12:56 PM
I guess when I am looking at the idea of a run first I'm not just looking at play calling ratio. This team looks to establish the running game early and often. The passing game under Gary is highly dependent on the run.


Before Rick Dennison showed up, Gary would abandon the run quicker than most of us here cared for. It was listed as one of his flaws back in the day.

hollywood_texan
07-14-2013, 05:10 PM
I see unimaginative thrown around. Would some of the folks who espouse this please be more specific? Spare everyone the 3rd and long draw play. Other than that, what is unimaginative about either his plays or play calling?

Frankly on predictable I just think people are FOS. There are certain fans for every team who claim they can predict the plays. Saying to yourself "he is going to run" isn't something pat yourself on the back about when it is 2nd and 2. There are about 10 plays a game where conventional football wisdom (which doesn't always dictate one outcome) gets pushed aside. I want to see the "predictable play call" squad get on line and call these predicable plays before they happen on game day.

PS - in case you haven't been watching or listening, the entire design of Kubiak's offense is to look unimaginative and predictable and then dare you to stop it or it will pull off a crud load of plays out of the same formation. Name me another unimaginative and predictable offense where slow white guys are running around wide open in back fields?

When the Texans get in third and long, and sometimes even in second long, the screen and draw plays seem to be the norm. Very rarely in these situations do I see the Texans offense go aggressively for the yards to move the chains. This is just what I see while watching them live. I love the Texans and talking to you guys about this stuff, but I am occupied with other stuff to get down into the dirty details.

Like I said, from my perspective, the Texans' offense struggles repeatedly when it matters the most. I don't think any statistic is going to represent that, just as calling run and pass plays 50/50 over the course of a game will ensure victory.

The Texans have proven they can win football games and make it to the playoffs. But, if they want get past the divisional round, their improvements must be more innovative and not tracked statistically, except, of course, for W's and the Lombardi Trophy.

hollywood_texan
07-14-2013, 05:14 PM
We just ran up against teams that played/coached better than we did that day. It happens. It happened to the Patriots & the Packers 4 times in 2012, same as us. That's football.

The difference between the Texans and the Patriots/Packers, those teams have won a Super Bowl and are repeatedly serious contenders deep into the playoffs.

Why is that? Like you said, some of it is coaching. Kubiak has some improvements to make in order for the Texans to win a championship, and it has nothing to do with statistics or a discussion of the Texans being a run first team or not.

ChampionTexan
07-14-2013, 05:18 PM
Spare everyone the 3rd and long draw play. Other than that, what is unimaginative about either his plays or play calling?


When the Texans get in third and long, and sometimes even in second long, the screen and draw plays seem to be the norm. Very rarely in these situations do I see the Texans offense go aggressively for the yards to move the chains.
:mcnugget:

thunderkyss
07-14-2013, 06:02 PM
The difference between the Texans and the Patriots/Packers, those teams have won a Super Bowl and are repeatedly serious contenders deep into the playoffs.

Why is that?

The Packers didn't get any farther than we did in 2012. The Patriots got one game closer.

If we had 30 some years of history like they do, then we can talk about not going deep into the play offs or how many Super Bowls they have. But the point is, those "bad ass" teams lost 4 games, same as us. No one is calling them unimaginative, or predictable. They had off days, period.

hollywood_texan
07-14-2013, 06:35 PM
The Packers didn't get any farther than we did in 2012. The Patriots got one game closer.

If we had 30 some years of history like they do, then we can talk about not going deep into the play offs or how many Super Bowls they have. But the point is, those "bad ass" teams lost 4 games, same as us. No one is calling them unimaginative, or predictable. They had off days, period.

Agreed, but those teams have proven they can win the big game to get to the Super Bowl and win it in recent history. The Texans haven't. That is my point.

Once Kubiak gets to or wins a Super Bowl, the day off argument will hold some water in comparing the Texans 12 win season to the Packers and the Patriots.

hollywood_texan
07-14-2013, 06:38 PM
:mcnugget:

It is interesting that in my original post, I did not mention the draw or screen pass, and infantrycak threw it out there in his response. I didn't go there, he did.

My point is that the when the Texans offense gets in a long situation, Kubiak seems to resign himself in his play calling that ends up with a punt on fourth down. Maybe, I should have just said that in my original post?

The Pencil Neck
07-14-2013, 07:36 PM
It is interesting that in my original post, I did not mention the draw or screen pass, and infantrycak threw it out there in his response. I didn't go there, he did.

My point is that the when the Texans offense gets in a long situation, Kubiak seems to resign himself in his play calling that ends up with a punt on fourth down. Maybe, I should have just said that in my original post?

In most instances, I'm OK with that. If we've got a lead or if it's close, I'm fine with that. It's called trusting your defense. There was a time when we didn't have the luxury of doing that.

And I've seen lots of screen passes and draws to Arian on 3rd and long turn into first downs... just not as many last year as in previous years.

thunderkyss
07-14-2013, 08:44 PM
Agreed, but those teams have proven they can win the big game to get to the Super Bowl and win it in recent history. The Texans haven't. That is my point.

Once Kubiak gets to or wins a Super Bowl, the day off argument will hold some water in comparing the Texans 12 win season to the Packers and the Patriots.

I don't know. If a great coach can allow a great team to have an off-day, wouldn't we expect a sub-par coach with a sub-par team to have even more off days?

Winning a Super Bowl isn't easy, not for the Super Teams with their Super QBs, & their Super coaches.

Why do we expect more from Kubiak & Schaub? That doesn't make sense.

thunderkyss
07-14-2013, 08:48 PM
My point is that the when the Texans offense gets in a long situation, Kubiak seems to resign himself in his play calling that ends up with a punt on fourth down. Maybe, I should have just said that in my original post?

I really believe that's more Schaub than Kubiak... Kubiak said as much after one of the games. Can't remember which one, but we threw the ball in one of those situations trying to pick up the first down & Barry Warner asked Kubiak why he doesn't call plays like that more often in those situations.

Gary answered he does, but Matt checks them to that run, or draw. Matt's on the field, he sees something he didn't like, chose not to risk it & we won 12 games because of it....

It's in one of the podcasts if you care to dig through them.

steelbtexan
07-14-2013, 09:21 PM
Agreed, but those teams have proven they can win the big game to get to the Super Bowl and win it in recent history. The Texans haven't. That is my point.

Once Kubiak gets to or wins a Super Bowl, the day off argument will hold some water in comparing the Texans 12 win season to the Packers and the Patriots.

MSR

The difference between McCarthy/Belichick and Kubiak is when they get a team down they put their throats on the other teams necks. Gary plays the odds game. Both ways are successful, but I'm a more foot on the throat kinda guy.

Of course they've got Brady/Rodgers HOF'ers at QB and Gary has Schaub and his messed up foot. This is why I hope Gary played things so close to the vest last yr. I've got my doubts.

Round1
07-14-2013, 10:38 PM
They were beat down 3 times last yr and every time that happened,the other team stopped the run 1st.Once they sztopped the run,it took away playaction and took them off schedule and the team couldn't respond.If they were not a run 1st team,getting their run game stopped wouldn't mean much. I hate to do this,but schaubs inability to make downfield throws inside the pocket without playaction restricts them. In those 3 beadowns,that's what happen and it will continue to happen until martin,posey,hopkins,or jean can show they can beat coverage badly. If its close,schaub will not throw guys open.

If Schaub is too reliant on dbs biting on play action then it won't matter how much separation guys get. Idk about "throwing guys open", but he needs to get the ball out on time and if the receivers are doing their job, then the plays will be there to be made, play action or not.

thunderkyss
07-15-2013, 08:52 AM
If Schaub is too reliant on dbs biting on play action then it won't matter how much separation guys get. Idk about "throwing guys open", but he needs to get the ball out on time and if the receivers are doing their job, then the plays will be there to be made, play action or not.

He's thrown for, or has been on track to throw for, 4000 yards per season.

We talk about play action a lot here, but we're not anymore dependent on it than the Patriots, or whatever team Peyton Manning is throwing for.

Look, I'll be the first to say that Schaub is not my kind of QB. If I were picking & choosing, Schaub wouldn't make my cut. But he's a talented QB, a starter in this league & enough for Kubiak to work with.

It's a shame that we're so late into his career before he was "really" able to test his mettle, playing against the best of the best when something is on the line. But it is what it is. We're "stuck" with a pretty good QB.

Rey
07-15-2013, 09:54 AM
We talk about play action a lot here, but we're not anymore dependent on it than the Patriots, or whatever team Peyton Manning is throwing for.


Yes we are.

There's a reason why most QB's have looked better in our system than they have in some other places.

There's a reason we were able to trade Sage for a mid round pick. There's a reason why Kubiak himself harps on why running the ball effectively is so important for this offense.

There's a reason why a 5th round rookie came in towards the end of the year and did some good things and helped us win games.

We are very dependent on the play action to help our QB's out. Same thing in Washington with RG3.

And you can throw out stats about the percentage of times we run PA vs other teams and none of that matters. When we do play action teams HAVE to respect that because if it's a real hand off and they don't, we'll gash them. So they have to play honestly and can't cheat. Red Skins are even more dangerous because of RG3. When you have a notorious run game your play action is a more viable weapon.

When you are on defense and you see the Texans go to hand the ball off, you're more worried about that than when you see Tom Brady go to hand off. You WANT Brady handing the ball off. You WANT Peyton handing it off. You WANT Rodgers handing the ball off. Not that Schaub is a complete scrub or some loser QB, but that's just how it is. If I'm on defense against the Texans I'd rather shut the run down and take my chances against Schaub.

Rey
07-15-2013, 10:23 AM
Re: the thread topic...

I don't know about run first or whatever, but in comparison to the rest of the rest of the league, we are considered a team that is very dependent on the run game. We didn't run the ball all that well last year and Tate was in the dog house/injured so I think our attempts were down some. It's much easier to run the ball on 3rd and 2 as opposed to 3rd and 4.

I don't know what the 4,000 yard stuff means either. That number puts you closer to the middle of the pack than it does to the top. 10 QB's threw for more yards than Schaub last year.

ObsiWan
07-15-2013, 10:47 AM
It is interesting that in my original post, I did not mention the draw or screen pass, and infantrycak threw it out there in his response. I didn't go there, he did.

My point is that the when the Texans offense gets in a long situation, Kubiak seems to resign himself in his play calling that ends up with a punt on fourth down. Maybe, I should have just said that in my original post?

Since every play is designed to be successful if every man does his job properly, are you sure it's the play calling or the execution that results in having to punt?

HJam72
07-15-2013, 10:49 AM
Texans are not a pound it down your throat no matter what kind of offense. I think whether we run more or pass more is dependent mostly on the type of defense we go against. But, the play action is extremely important to us, and it's not just the fake by Schaub or even the running ability of Foster--it's the line play starting out the same every time regardless of whether we run or pass. It's all three combined that make DBs hesitate and LBs freeze in their tracks.

I believe Schaub led the league in passing yards in 09 (when we had no running game and passed a lot). He has also had portions of seasons since then where he looked REALLY good (like early last year--remember the Denver game), but has not had a full season like that since. There's always that possibility that Schaub could have a look-at-me-mofo season, or playoff season, like the dude in Baltimore, but he's (like the guy in Baltimore) just not a top 5 guy consistently at all. Top 5 guys are not easy to get. Indy threw out a whole season to try and get another one. :toropalm:

drs23
07-15-2013, 10:59 AM
Yes we are.

There's a reason why most QB's have looked better in our system than they have in some other places.

There's a reason we were able to trade Sage for a mid round pick. There's a reason why Kubiak himself harps on why running the ball effectively is so important for this offense.

There's a reason why a 5th round rookie came in towards the end of the year and did some good things and helped us win games.

We are very dependent on the play action to help our QB's out. Same thing in Washington with RG3.

And you can throw out stats about the percentage of times we run PA vs other teams and none of that matters. When we do play action teams HAVE to respect that because if it's a real hand off and they don't, we'll gash them. So they have to play honestly and can't cheat. Red Skins are even more dangerous because of RG3. When you have a notorious run game your play action is a more viable weapon.

When you are on defense and you see the Texans go to hand the ball off, you're more worried about that than when you see Tom Brady go to hand off. You WANT Brady handing the ball off. You WANT Peyton handing it off. You WANT Rodgers handing the ball off. Not that Schaub is a complete scrub or some loser QB, but that's just how it is. If I'm on defense against the Texans I'd rather shut the run down and take my chances against Schaub.

Exactly. How many times have we watched the opposing team stack the box to invade the backfield thus shutting down the running lanes? This disrupts the timing and by that time Matt doesn't have time to find a receiver. That's what concerns me about the continuity of our 0-line this year with the rooks that haven't gelled as a unit yet. I hope they can get it together quickly this season so we don't see a repeat of last year's performance.

thunderkyss
07-15-2013, 11:39 AM
I don't know what the 4,000 yard stuff means either. That number puts you closer to the middle of the pack than it does to the top. 10 QB's threw for more yards than Schaub last year.

Just curious, how many have done it three or more times in the last 5 or 6 years.

Same thing with 1000 yards for a running back, it's seems to be the norm now. But year in & year out it's only a few guys who can do it multiple years, fewer still who can do it in back to back years.

Rey
07-15-2013, 12:03 PM
Just curious, how many have done it three or more times in the last 5 or 6 years.

Same thing with 1000 yards for a running back, it's seems to be the norm now. But year in & year out it's only a few guys who can do it multiple years, fewer still who can do it in back to back years.

This isn't a career accomplishment deal. When Schaub is done then we can look back and appreciate his total career and the fact that he was consistently good and gave us a chance to win.

But on a year to year basis, I'm not sure that is super impressive.

Just like the 1,000 yard back. Do it for multiple years in a row and that is great and all, but for a season I'm not really wowed by that. It's good though.

Texans_Chick
07-15-2013, 12:21 PM
I just wrote this post because nationally I kept seeing references to "run first" team without putting into game context (like holding leads) or forgetting the balance of the offense.

I just don't think it is accurate. And it isn't like there's tons to write about now.

ArlingtonTexan
07-15-2013, 12:31 PM
Since every play is designed to be successful if every man does his job properly, are you sure it's the play calling or the execution that results in having to punt?

NFL defenses and individual players are fooled by play calling way less than we talk about on message boards and talk radio. they spend hours and entire careers studying keys based on formations and down and distance, etc. Way more important to have great execution than great play calling. A team does hope to do something the defense is not expecting, just only truly happens a handful of times a game.

deucetx
07-15-2013, 12:38 PM
Just curious, how many have done it three or more times in the last 5 or 6 years.

Same thing with 1000 yards for a running back, it's seems to be the norm now. But year in & year out it's only a few guys who can do it multiple years, fewer still who can do it in back to back years.

Wish I noticed the 5 or 6 years before I started this, heh. Last ten years of 4000+ is like this:

Peyton Manning 8
Drew Brees 7
Tom Brady 5
Tony Romo 4
Aaron Rodgers 4
Phillips Rivers 4
Eli Manning 3
Carson Palmer 3
Matt Schaub 3
Brett Favre 3
Matthew Stafford 2
Ben Roelisberger 2
Jon Kitna 2
Trent Green 2
Matt Ryan 2
Andrew Luck, Josh Freeman, Kurt Warner, Jay Cutler, Marc Bulger, Daunte Culpepper and Jake Plummer all with 1.

thunderkyss
07-15-2013, 12:40 PM
Just curious, how many have done it three or more times in the last 5 or 6 years.

Same thing with 1000 yards for a running back, it's seems to be the norm now. But year in & year out it's only a few guys who can do it multiple years, fewer still who can do it in back to back years.

To answer my own question, 8 QBs have thrown for more than 4000 yards 3 or more times in the last 5 years. Romo, Eli, Schaub, Rodgers, & Brady have done it 3 times. For Schaub, Rodgers, & Brady they did it in 3 of the last 4 years.

Phillip Rivers & Peyton Manning have done it in 4 of the last 5 years. Drew Brees has done it for the last 5 years, he led the league in Passing 3 times in the last 5 years.

Shaub led one year, Rivers led the other.

Both Matt Ryan & Matthew Stafford have thrown for 4000 yards in each of the last two seasons.

Passer rating (NFL.com's passer rating) QBs with a 92 or better (250 attempts) in the last 5 years,

Rodgers 5 of 5 He's a machine

Schaub 4 of the last 5 years 2012 he had a passer rating of 90

Brees 4 of the last 5 90.9 in 2010

Brady 4 of 5 2008 83.7 on 11 att

Manning 3 of 5 91.9 in 2010 & he missed the entire 2011 season.

Ryan 2 of 5 Last 2 years

Kaepernick 1 of 5 Only 218 att

Smith 1 of 5 Only 218 att

Wilson 1 of 5

RG3 1 of 5




That's pretty good company once you get past all the haterade.

ObsiWan
07-15-2013, 12:54 PM
NFL defenses and individual players are fooled by play calling way less than we talk about on message boards and talk radio. they spend hours and entire careers studying keys based on formations and down and distance, etc. Way more important to have great execution than great play calling. A team does hope to do something the defense is not expecting, just only truly happens a handful of times a game.

What does Belichick and nearly every other coach in the league preach over and over and over...?
Do.
Your.
Job.

That's the key to winning. Execution. Do your job; beat the guy you're supposed to beat. Make the blocks you're supposed to make. See the open guy and make a good throw. When the throw comes, make the damned catch (I'm still looking at YOU Casey), get what yards you can, and don't put the ball on the ground.
Rinse. Repeat.

ObsiWan
07-15-2013, 01:06 PM
Edit...
never mind about the other stuff; I can't get over this Matt Suave look...
http://s3.amazonaws.com/smgphotogallery/bigleadsports/mu/matt-schaubs-ex-cheerleader-wife-laurie/700/matt-schaub-wife-laurie-schaub.jpg

Dayum... Laurie must be giving Matt "Cool" lessons.
And, amazingly enough, his body isn't rejecting them...

hollywood_texan
07-15-2013, 07:46 PM
Edit...
never mind about the other stuff; I can't get over this Matt Suave look...
http://s3.amazonaws.com/smgphotogallery/bigleadsports/mu/matt-schaubs-ex-cheerleader-wife-laurie/700/matt-schaub-wife-laurie-schaub.jpg

Dayum... Laurie must be giving Matt "Cool" lessons.
And, amazingly enough, his body isn't rejecting them...

I like the duds. Very cool pic!!!

ObsiWan
07-15-2013, 08:44 PM
I like the duds. Very cool pic!!!

Yeah, me too.

I mean his wife MUST have dressed him.

:bubbles:

76Texan
07-16-2013, 12:36 AM
In the first half of all 16 games in the regular season,
they attempted 325 passes as opposed to 222 rushes.
That's 59.4% pass and 40.6% rush.

Just go to Profootball reference to use the play finder feature and look it up for yourself (I've mentioned this a few times before.)

The rest of the league attempted 9,062 passes vs 6,506 rushes.
That's 58.2% pass vs 41.8 % rush.

Of the 12 teams that made the play-offs, only 4 had more passing attempts as a percentage of total plays in the first half.

One of them was the Broncos, with 331 pass attempts vs 214 rushes.

The other three teams are the Packers, the Falcons, and the Saints.

I certainly don't see any indication that the Texans were a run-first team, do you?

thunderkyss
07-16-2013, 07:41 AM
In the first half of all 16 games in the regular season,
they attempted 325 passes as opposed to 222 rushes.
That's 59.4% pass and 40.6% rush.

The rest of the league attempted 9,062 passes vs 6,506 rushes.
That's 58.2% pass vs 41.8 % rush.

Of the 12 teams that made the play-offs, only 4 had more passing attempts as a percentage of total plays in the first half.

One of them was the Broncos, with 331 pass attempts vs 214 rushes.

The other three teams are the Packers, the Falcons, and the Saints.

I certainly don't see any indication that the Texans were a run-first team, do you?

The only thing that makes us a "run-first" team, is that we talk about it more than most teams & as fans, we pay too much attention to what the team talks about. Gary Kubiak = ZBS, even though he probably considers himself more of a WCO guy.

Minor correction, the Saints didn't make the play-offs in 2012