PDA

View Full Version : Chris Palmer is too predictable.


footballguy69
09-13-2004, 08:22 PM
Chris Palmer is too predictable. The play calling is terrible. Only good thing Sunday was we spread the ball around to receivers. Defense should look into the mirror. Terrible pass rush from Deloach, Walker and Smith. More blitzs should be called especially on 3rd down and long. The defenses 3rd down allowance was horrible. We need Gary Kubiak as offensive coordinator and send Palmer somewhere else before he screws up Carr like he did Couch! And....BJ Symons will be the 2nd string QB next year. We need his quick reads and quick release. Ragone will be history!

aj.
09-13-2004, 08:27 PM
The Texans gained 336 yards even though they turned it over 4 times. If they had held on to the ball they would have easily eclipsed 400 yards of offense. What exactly do you want them to do? Playcalling had little to do with the melt down yesterday.

footballguy69
09-13-2004, 08:31 PM
I am not real excited by 336 yards against last years worst defense! I still say our red zone calls are terrible1

aj.
09-13-2004, 08:40 PM
I still say our red zone calls are terrible Ok, so let's break it down play by play:

1st drive, what didn't you like, the Hollings run on 1st down at 12:47 or the two pass incompletions on 2nd and 3rd down that followed?

Last years worst defense (in terms of yards allowed) was Atlanta - followed closely by a team near and dear.

Count the times the Texans gained 336 yards last season, period. I'm guessing it happened once or twice.

Meisterman
09-13-2004, 09:07 PM
Its the timing of the play calls in the game that really hurt. The series in the 4th where the Texans went ...Baxter dump pass for 3, Baxter up the middle for nothing (and I heard alot of boos on that one), then Carr sack. Three and done. This is the Texans 4th quarter trend continuing from last year. That play calling series makes Mac Brown look like an X's and o's genius. JUST TERRIBLE.

Bottom line is...Andre Johnson is our best offensive threat. He had one catch the whole second half. Is that good play calling?

aj.
09-13-2004, 09:16 PM
The series in the 4th where the Texans went ...Baxter dump pass for 3, Baxter up the middle for nothing (and I heard alot of boos on that one), then Carr sack. Three and done. Agree, that was a horrible series. Play calling or execution? The Baxter pass on 1st down wasn't a bad call. The Baxter run on 2nd was. The Carr sack was a downfield attempt but Wade couldn't contain Phillips and Carr was trapped in the pocket.

Andre Johnson is our best offensive threat. He had one catch the whole second half. Is that good play calling?We don't know what plays were called (in terms of Carr's progressions and reads) but I think it's safe to say that if AJ was open, Carr would have found a way to get him the ball. They were rotating a safety over on AJ all day long.

clandestin
09-13-2004, 09:24 PM
Don't know about you guys, but I sure wasn't predicting we'd only punt twice in that game.

BuffSoldier
09-13-2004, 09:59 PM
I wouldnt say he is pedictable, but I will say he has been too conservative going into the second half, yes we did have 336 yards in the game, but less than 100 yards came in the second half. If we can call plays in the second half like we do in the first, I think our offense could have at least 300 yards a game on a regular.

Mistril48
09-13-2004, 10:06 PM
Agree, that was a horrible series. Play calling or execution? The Baxter pass on 1st down wasn't a bad call. The Baxter run on 2nd was...
Capers clarified the 2nd down Baxter call on his radio show. He said that as part of the game plan, they were going to split Davis out. The first two times, the Chargers didn't 'cover' him and the play was successful (although Davis fumbled on one of the two calls). On this 2nd down, they called it for the third time, so Palmer and Capers expected a throw to Davis. When the Chargers rotated the coverage, the Texans had practiced the response of going up the middle with the FB. Of course, it was Baxter instead of Norris.

I agree that it looked like bad play calling and I was livid. I think in fairness, I now understand that they were trying for a more dynamic play and that Carr correctly checked to a run where they had an advantage. Unfortunately, they didn't execute the run.

To answer your question ... it was execution.

aj.
09-13-2004, 10:09 PM
If we can call plays in the second half like we do in the first, I think our offense could have at least 300 yards a game on a regular

Ok then, in the second half yesterday:

Drive 1:
Davis run
Carr pass to Gaffney, 1st down.
Davis run
Carr - interception.

Drive 2: 8 plays 52 yards Touchdown.

No problem so far.....except for the turnover. Unless you see some bad play calls in there.

Drive 3:
Davis run
Carr sacked (pass attempt)
Carr flushed out of pocket - tackled short of 1st down.
Two pass attempts - were they bad calls? Or was the Davis run on 1st down a bad call?

Drive 4:
We covered above

Drive 5:
Davis run
Carr pass to Bradfordf for 1st down
Davis fumble
Bad calls where?

Or is it execution? Or if it doesn't work, is it automatically a "bad call." :thumbup

aj.
09-13-2004, 10:18 PM
They went to the well too many times on that play. Once OK, twice maybe - if the first was a setup. But three times? Bad call - in terms of the fallback option if Davis isn't open - which he shouldn't be if they've already ran that play twice. It was one of the few among the 56 plays they ran that I would consider a bad play call because it didn't appear that the first option would have a high probablility of success.

BuffSoldier
09-13-2004, 10:21 PM
Ok then, in the second half yesterday:

Drive 1:
Davis run
Carr pass to Gaffney, 1st down.
Davis run
Carr - interception.

Drive 2: 8 plays 52 yards Touchdown.

No problem so far.....except for the turnover. Unless you see some bad play calls in there.

Drive 3:
Davis run
Carr sacked (pass attempt)
Carr flushed out of pocket - tackled short of 1st down.
Two pass attempts - were they bad calls? Or was the Davis run on 1st down a bad call?

Drive 4:
We covered above

Drive 5:
Davis run
Carr pass to Bradfordf for 1st down
Davis fumble
Bad calls where?

Or is it execution? Or if it doesn't work, is it automatically a "bad call." :thumbup

I never said "bad calls" I said conservative, and I distinctly remember them calling at least one rushing play to our Fb on a second down which you happened to leave out. Oh and less play action in the second half, why did we stop calling screens that worked so well with DD and Hollings, why did we stop throwing the quick outs to AJ and DD when they can do so much with the ball in their hands not to mention it worked well in the first half besides the fumble after a pretty good gain. What happened to the deep balls, I saw two in the first half. I never said bad calls or execution because we executed well in the second half, besides the turnover, because if you recall we only punted twice. Like I said not bad calls but conservativeness :thumbup

Mistril48
09-13-2004, 10:27 PM
Is that the playcall that got 75,000 people boooing? ...
Yes 4th quarter, Baxter run

Mistril48
09-13-2004, 10:34 PM
They went to the well too many times on that play. Once OK, twice maybe - if the first was a setup. But three times? Bad call - in terms of the fallback option if Davis isn't open - which he shouldn't be if they've already ran that play twice. It was one of the few among the 56 plays they ran that I would consider a bad play call because it didn't appear that the first option would have a high probablility of success.
I can't agree.

If you call a play twice and it is successful, I see nothing wrong with calling it a third time, particularly if they the defense haven't adjusted to it yet. It was a situation where they were dictating to the defense. They shifted Davis, forcing the defense to adjust their interior defense. They felt they had an excellent chance to gain yardage against a soft middle, thereby cutting the yardage to a 3rd and short, if not a 1st down, after 3 yards on 1st down.

I think the logic is fine, just not the execution. The O-line needs to beat on the D-line sometimes ... plus they'd work on it in practice as part of the game plan. If they get some yards on the play and then a 1st down, no one would have noticed the call.

aj.
09-13-2004, 10:36 PM
I distinctly remember them calling at least one rushing play to our Fb on a second down which you happened to leave out Didn't leave it out. It is covered above.

Two of the four failed drives in the second half were cut short because of turnovers. That had as much or more to do with the dearth of yardage in the second half as conservative or bad play calling - or whatever name we want to give it.

Are you on the FB Marshall varsity? If so, let me know your number since I will be in the stands on Thursday night.

If you call a play twice and it is successful, I see nothing wrong with calling it a third time I have no problem with that but it wasn't successful both times. The first time they ran it (on the 1st and 20 in the 1st quarter) it failed miserably.

texasguy346
09-13-2004, 10:41 PM
Oh and less play action in the second half, why did we stop calling screens that worked so well with DD and Hollings, why did we stop throwing the quick outs to AJ and DD when they can do so much with the ball in their hands not to mention it worked well in the first half besides the fumble after a pretty good gain.

I can't speak for the playaction passing, but as far as the DD screens go the reason they were so successful is because Palmer called it when SD was in a full blitz. If you watch the tape you'll notice that the OLineman on the screen have no one to block. They called the two screens at an opurtune time, and SD adjusted accordingly after getting burned twice. I think AJ was SD's focus on defense much like Tomlinson was our focus. I wouldn't have minded seeing more 3 or 4 wideout sets, but the pressure was getting to Carr too quickly and that might be the reason for not using it as much. I felt Gaffney was doing well against them early on, and I thought it was a matchup we could exploit.

BuffSoldier
09-13-2004, 10:45 PM
Are you on the FB Marshall varsity? If so, let me know your number since I will be in the stands on Thursday night.

Yes I am on the Thurgood Marshall varsity team, but I would rather not give you my # since I am a junior and will not be getting much PT(senior will be startin) lol. If I make a big play or two, I will post my # just to show off though. :hehe: Are you a Marshall fan or a Clear Brook fan?

aj.
09-13-2004, 10:51 PM
I follow Brook and will be making the trip over. Don't worry about the lack of pt, I'm sure your day will come. It looks like you guys have a pretty good passing game. I know you took care of Dulles. Looking forward to watching the game.

Meisterman
09-13-2004, 11:37 PM
In Regard to Baxter..this is the second string FB..coming off a season of rehab....who earlier in the game dropped a touchdown pass. The mere fact that he is doing anything more than blocking during crunch time in the 4th quarter is poor play selection "period".

BuffSoldier
09-13-2004, 11:39 PM
I follow Brook and will be making the trip over. Don't worry about the lack of pt, I'm sure your day will come. It looks like you guys have a pretty good passing game. I know you took care of Dulles. Looking forward to watching the game.

Oh yeah, our passing game is really good, and alot of the players where kind of dissapointed that we didnt blow out Dulles by more, we could have played alot better , our running backs are good too but our zone o-line scheme is a liitle complicated and is confusing our linemen, we changed that to a different type of zone, we should run more effectively now. Our D didnt play up to their capabilities, but that is being fixed, hope you guys are ready because we have one heck of a squad here.

Mistril48
09-14-2004, 12:18 AM
I have no problem with that but it wasn't successful both times. The first time they ran it (on the 1st and 20 in the 1st quarter) it failed miserably.
I believe they ran the play the first time on the 2nd play of the game (2-3). Carr passed to Davis (LB racing to cover him on the sideline) and it was completed for 8 yards and a 1st down.

You are referring to the the play after Miller's hold, I believe. This play looks like the same play to me, but there must be something different. Maybe Davis is motioning out of the backfield instead off lining up on the sideline? On the second play of the game, Davis is lined up as a WR and you can see a LB sprinting out of the middle of the defense (late) to cover him.

I had not looked at the tape prior to the post, I was just passing on what Capers said during his radio show and he said they ran it successfully twice, although Davis fumbled the second time.

The play you mentioned, Carr did give it to Baxter, but I didn't notice much of a LB shift out of the middle (like Capers mentioned).

99FirehawkTA
09-14-2004, 12:37 AM
Don't know about you guys, but I sure wasn't predicting we'd only punt twice in that game.

This is a very, very good point. turn overs, turn overs, Carr and especialy Davis had a bad day. Its not even close to being a indicator of how the rest of the season will go.

The team is gonna work through it.

aj.
09-14-2004, 07:25 AM
You are referring to the the play after Miller's hold, I believe. This play looks like the same play to me, but there must be something different. Maybe Davis is motioning out of the backfield instead off lining up on the sideline? Yes I was referring to the play after the Miller hold. The LB didn't follow Davis out left -- he stayed inside and killed Baxter - they must have rolled a safety over to help with DD because they didn't flinch when DD went outside.

CaptainPatriot
09-14-2004, 09:24 AM
I thought that was the best play calling Palmer has called to date! Need more screens and passes to DD out in the flat!!

Chris Palmer is too predictable. The play calling is terrible. Only good thing Sunday was we spread the ball around to receivers. Defense should look into the mirror. Terrible pass rush from Deloach, Walker and Smith. More blitzs should be called especially on 3rd down and long. The defenses 3rd down allowance was horrible. We need Gary Kubiak as offensive coordinator and send Palmer somewhere else before he screws up Carr like he did Couch! And....BJ Symons will be the 2nd string QB next year. We need his quick reads and quick release. Ragone will be history!

Chance_C
09-14-2004, 12:15 PM
Where was Armstrong? This guy looks to be a player, and I believe he can help take some pressure off of AJ as far as double teams go. True or no?

TexansTrueFan
09-14-2004, 01:02 PM
In Regard to Baxter..this is the second string FB..coming off a season of rehab....who earlier in the game dropped a touchdown pass. The mere fact that he is doing anything more than blocking during crunch time in the 4th quarter is poor play selection "period".

He was passing it to M. Breuner but baxter got in his was instead. Mark was wide open in the back of the endzone.

Porky
09-14-2004, 01:17 PM
Where was Armstrong? This guy looks to be a player, and I believe he can help take some pressure off of AJ as far as double teams go. True or no?

He must have been with Antwaan Peek, because both were MIA. Peek can't play the run, but on those third and longs, where was he??? And, I don't remember a 4 wide package at all. Why not? Beats me.

As to Palmer, the second half was just not as good, for the aforementioned reasons. If the checkoff from the pass to DD is a dive play to Jarod Baxter, someone needs to be shot for that. I don't EVER want to see an aubible to Jarod Baxter. That is just pathetic game planning imo. Baxter? YOu have to be kidding me. You are tellimg me our only options are DD or a dive play to Baxter? What a joke.

And if I see Baxter going out for a pass play into the end zone again, someone call a doctor, because their might be a murder. :hehe:

Lucky
09-14-2004, 01:24 PM
Where was Armstrong? This guy looks to be a player, and I believe he can help take some pressure off of AJ as far as double teams go. True or no?
I agree. Why the Texans were passing to Baxter and leaving Armstrong on the bench is puzzling. Sometimes you can outsmart yourself.

Still, I think the Texans will utilize Armstrong this season. Maybe this week. The Chargers best CB is out, let's find out what their #5 CB can do by going 4 WRs. I like Armstrong's chances against the rookie Keith Smith.

JDizzle
09-14-2004, 01:31 PM
I am not real excited by 336 yards against last years worst defense! I still say our red zone calls are terrible1

Actually, Atlanta was the worst defense last year, and we were right ahead of them. San Diego ranked around 27th. If you want to go off last year's numbers, then 336 yards of total offense (with four turnovers) with last year's next to worst offense isn't bad.

Hervoyel
09-14-2004, 01:42 PM
What's predictable in my opinion is how Chris Palmer gets the heat no matter how the Texans lose. 4 turnovers and hardly any 3rd down stops from the D is the whole freakin story here.

They got 14 points off of those two turnovers. Take 14 points away from the Chargers and it's a 20-13 Texans win. That doesn't even take into account what the Texans might have done with any of those four drives if they hadn't turned it over. Obviously the Texans weren't going to score four TD's on those posessions but if they'd got a FG on one and a TD on another then it's a 30-13 game.

Small things like giving away the football are the difference between

"Chargers over the Texans 27-20, Chris Palmer HAS TO GO!!!!!" and..
"Texans crush Chargers in the opener 30-13, WE'RE GOING TO THE SUPER BOWL!!!!"


And yes, I understand that changing the outcome of particular drives changes the game from that point forward and that this was a gross oversimplification. The point remains the same however.

Execution was the only thing that stood between the Texans and a win last Sunday. It's the only thing that will stand between them and a win next Sunday.

TheOgre
09-14-2004, 02:09 PM
Personally I thought we did well on the play-calling. We were eating them alive on most possessions. I wasn't happy with the Baxter run but Booing the team is uncalled for. The primary reason we lost this game was turnovers. That has nothing to do with offensive play-calling. Look no further than DD and, to a lesser extent, Carr. Blame the bend and break defense. Just don't blame the play-calling. That was not the issue in this game.

I personally am tired of the "Fire Palmer" threads. It is as if every loss MUST be pinned on someone and he is the easy mark. It becomes more apparent with each passing day which of the Texan fans know WTF they are talking about, and which ones are reacting emotionally and without thought.

Porky
09-14-2004, 02:27 PM
Herv and Ogre are correct, but that doesn't mean one cannot analyse the coaching staff. I can be objective and critisize when I feel it's needed, and praise when that is called for. I don't see it as simply an either or proposition. The turnovers are done. There is nothing there to really analyse. Those are physical issues, much like Robinson falling down on the touchdown. What can be changed is the game plans, and in game plays and desicions. If those are not open to debate, then what is this forum for? A bunch of brown nosers running around nominating Capers for coach of the year? I call them like I see them, and I will continue to do so. (and I realize this may have been directed to others, just stating MO)

TheOgre
09-14-2004, 02:34 PM
I'm not talking about homerism. I'm just saying broad statements like "Fire Palmer" and "the calls are too conservative" are inadequate. If you are going to question the coaches, players, GM, etc. bring some ammunition. I just see too many vague statements that sound like whining and finger pointing. I want to see details instead of bandwagon complaints. Hey but that is just my want. People are going to do whatever the hell they want.

rhc564
09-14-2004, 03:14 PM
We lost 4/5 games last year in the fourth quarter, most on the last
possession. We lose to San Diego the same way. Why? Does this just
happen?

There is a turning point when a team goes from loser to winner and vice
versa. Making excuses prolongs this process. The Texans play and are
coached under a '5 yr umbrella.' All of a sudden- somehow - the Texans
are going to begin doing the things necessary to win, as they approach
the end of the 5 years? I don't think so. Why? There has to be a start-
ing point early in the process that continues to build, a process that is
filled with 'playing to win.' Sure, a new team loses but it learns about the
kind of effort and team work it takes to win. That team steps up for each
game, eventually becoming a winner. The Texans do not play to win.
And, most important, the team has not established a starting point.

Finally, the Texans are entering the "what if" period.
...what if we blitzed more
...what if we turned Carr loose
...what if, what if, etc.
It's going to be a long season if the Texans only take what the other
team gives them, while other teams strive to dictate the agenda.

aj.
09-14-2004, 06:48 PM
If a person is not analyzing x with relevant data or facts, it's not analysis, it's called uninformed opinion, speculation, chasing red herring, or maybe even wild a$s conjecture. There's so much we don't know in terms of the input to the process (the play call - the cover assignments, whatever) that it's difficult in most cases to make an accurate assessment of the output (the result of the play) except for what we see of course. And we all know there's much more going on than what we see.

We don't know Carr's reads and progressions, we didn't know that Parker was not the responsibility of Aaron Glenn until the next day, we don't know when Carr checks off that it was really supposed to be a screen but instead it was a dive up the middle. John Granato gave an example this morning about a game last year where Peek made a tackle behind the line of scrimmage. Granato mentioned Peek's "great" play to the coaching staff after the game and he was told sternly that Peek missed his real assignment on that play and lucked into a tackle for a loss.

Minus 4 in turnovers, long yardage plays given up to Gates and Caldwell, 40 yard pass interference penalties, and lack of crucial 3rd down stops I can deal with. Play calling sometimes gets into the subjective, because what we see is not always what was intended. That's true for "good" plays and "bad" plays.

There was a guy who called in today and was beyatching about the Texans not throwing more "timing routes." What the hell does that mean? There was another guy who called in on Vandermeer's show and I can't remember the topic but it set Vandermeer off because he was obviously tired of hearing the left field analysis. Sure we have the right to criticize and we should. Many here and on the radio bring fair criticisms. But sometimes the herd mentality on certain things goes way beyond what's sensible imo, and it reflects poorly on us all.

Porky
09-14-2004, 07:01 PM
Good stuff AJ. You are correct in that we don't always know the ins and outs. However, the mere fact that the audible on that play was a checkoff to a dive play to Baxter brings into question the whole scheme. We have playmakers all over the field, and the checkoff is to Baxter? Now, that cannot be disputed, as Carr confirmed this himself. That play was simply pathetic. The coaches job is to put the players into the best posisition to win. The best chance to win on that play was not a dive play up the gut by Baxter.

aj.
09-14-2004, 07:04 PM
Can't argue with you at all on that particular play. I said that somewhere else too, I don't know if it was in this thread or not. I'm not saying we can't be critical of play calls, I'm just saying certain broad brush criticisms on particular subjects aren't always well thought out.

sprtsfanatic
09-14-2004, 07:51 PM
The Texans do not play to win. It's going to be a long season if the Texans only take what the other team gives them, while other teams strive to dictate the agenda.


You make a very good point. I was wondering if I was the only one to see it this way. Maybe its just me (and you), but it seems to me like we play our hearts out and most of the time have a lead going in to the fourth quarter...but then all of a sudden our mind set changes and we no longer play to win , but instead play to not lose. And yes there is a difference.

We are no longer the aggressive team that looks to drive down the field and put points on the board...we some how turn into a squad that looks to kill the clock and waste as much time as possible and just hope that we dont give the other team enough time to overcome our lead.

Grant it after this game I know that the turnovers killed us. I mean anytime you fumble the ball on your own goal line....thats gonna hurt you. Especially if they come right back down and score on you...your talking about a 14pt turn around in this case (the 7 we didnt score because of it and the 7 they ended up scoring). Turnover kill your drives and all of your momentum, but again our team has yet to show us that they have that killer instinct that it takes to close out a game or to put it out of reach in the final quarter.

But thats just my assessment....anybody else agree??? even slightly???

sprtsfanatic
09-14-2004, 07:57 PM
And Im with everyone else on the Baxter dive up the middle...I dont know what the hell that was all about, but I assure you that it was not our best option. And if it was....and you had to check off to that...call a freaking time out and get another play cause we all know that wasnt going to cut it....not on 2nd and long atleast.

TheOgre
09-14-2004, 08:05 PM
Is that (the Baxter) the only bad play you saw called? If so I think one play, out of however many we ran, is not indicative of "bad play calling". If you think we lost the game because Carr checked off to Baxter on that play, then I will have to disagree. If you come up with some other plays that were "conservative" or "bad", I might agree with your take. One play in the entire game isn't sufficient evidence to back it up IMO.

AJ, you did a much better job of summing up what I was trying to say.

JEB2ATX
09-14-2004, 09:13 PM
I agree the play calling is too predictable but the guys did produce against the Chargers despite that. However if a play is run correctly and executed properly no one can stop it.

The fourth quarter playcalling is horrible always though i do agree with that. We always come out firing on all cylinders but come the 4th its obvious Palmer loses that edge.

sprtsfanatic
09-16-2004, 09:44 AM
You make a very good point. I was wondering if I was the only one to see it this way. Maybe its just me (and you), but it seems to me like we play our hearts out and most of the time have a lead going in to the fourth quarter...but then all of a sudden our mind set changes and we no longer play to win , but instead play to not lose. And yes there is a difference.

We are no longer the aggressive team that looks to drive down the field and put points on the board...we some how turn into a squad that looks to kill the clock and waste as much time as possible and just hope that we dont give the other team enough time to overcome our lead.

Grant it after this game I know that the turnovers killed us. I mean anytime you fumble the ball on your own goal line....thats gonna hurt you. Especially if they come right back down and score on you...your talking about a 14pt turn around in this case (the 7 we didnt score because of it and the 7 they ended up scoring). Turnover kill your drives and all of your momentum, but again our team has yet to show us that they have that killer instinct that it takes to close out a game or to put it out of reach in the final quarter.

But thats just my assessment....anybody else agree??? even slightly???

I guess I am the only one that feels that way.....

nunusguy
09-16-2004, 09:47 AM
If we don't have 4 turnovers, we win the game. End of story.

TheOgre
09-16-2004, 10:51 AM
Three words sum up the problem with this game:

EXECUTION, EXECUTION, and EXECUTION.

The four turnovers were a product of one of these three words. Take you pick which one applies.

Porky
09-16-2004, 12:12 PM
You can't excecute if you are undiciplined. Safeties out of position, WR running wrong routes in the red zone, WR bunching up, QBs throwing on one foot, TE holding, RB not tucking etc....


Isn't that the same as Execution? idonno:

infantrycak
09-16-2004, 12:32 PM
Isn't that the same as Execution? idonno:

Nahhhh--I am sure it is Palmer's way to play call conservatively by telling the WR's to run wrong routes in the red zone, WR's to bunch up, QBs to throw on one foot, TE's to hold, and RB's not to tuck, etc.
:rolleyes:

Vinny
09-16-2004, 12:32 PM
Here are the teams that ran the ball more than we did last week. I guess they are too conservative also. Green Bay, Seattle, Indianapolis, and Tennessee have some of the most dynamic teams in the NFL offensively. They led the league in rushing attempts last week.

Green Bay 47
Seattle 43
Indianapolis 42
Washington 39
Tennessee 36
Buffalo 36
Denver 35
New York (A) 34
Pittsburgh 33
San Diego 32
Chicago 32
Detroit 30
St. Louis 30

Lucky
09-16-2004, 02:06 PM
If you look at run/pass ratio, the Texans were barely in the top half of the league at 52%/48% run to pass. The record of the teams in the top half of the run/pass ratio was 12 wins - 4 losses. Of course teams with a lead are more likely to run and use clock than teams that are behind. Saying an offense is too predictable, too conservative, too whatever is just too difficult to determine with cursory looks at run/pass ratio. Field position, down & distance, score, the defense the opponent is in, etc., are all factors into what play was called when & why. If someone wants to take a real crack at critiquing Palmer's playcalling taking in all of those factors, great. Otherwise, this thread just becomes another "He said, she said" argument.

But, there is a prevailing attitude among the "pro-Palmer" posters that the coaching staff is blameless regarding this loss. They didn't fumble or throw picks, did they? That's baloney. The coaches are as responsible for execution as the players. These are the plays they designed, these are the plays they taught the players, these are the plays they determined to have the best chance of succeeding in each circumstance. Their fingerprints are all over this loss. No one is immune from criticism. Everyone in the organization has to take their medicine on this one.

Porky
09-16-2004, 03:20 PM
Good post Lucky. I agree with all of that. Sure, GB ran the ball 50 times. They were also ahead virtually the whole game, and their defense was actually able to stop the opposition on 3rd downs. I doubt they would be running a play up the gut to the FB in the 4th qtr when they were behind, but hey, what do I know. I'm just a lowly fan. :hehe:

Jwwillis
09-16-2004, 09:41 PM
Pfft Arm Chair QB's. Its simple if the play works Palmer is a hero if it fails he is a zero. Nobody was expecting the FB.. maybe he was trying to catch them of guard. I really thought Palmer mixed it up well. Now that he has the tools to work with he is able to open up more of the playbook. Now unless Palmer can go in and guard the defensive left or right end there is very little he can do about the amount of time Carr has to throw. Carr has been running for his life for 2yrs. That doesnt lend itself to a wide open passing game.

NoBullTexan
09-16-2004, 10:06 PM
Palmer game plans the way Capers tells him to. If you want blame, blame Dom Capers.

Jwwillis
09-18-2004, 03:14 AM
Carlton Thompson's article

Will Texans open up the offense?

Q: Carlton, do you foresee Chris Palmer opening up the offense this season?
John in Seagoville

A: John, I believe he will. Sunday’s game was a good example. The Texans spread the ball very well and moved up and down the field at will against the Chargers. They only punted twice. Other than hitting a few big plays in the passing game - and obviously the four turnovers - I thought the Texans had the right approach offensively. Believe me, John, no one wants to get the ball down the field more than Chris Palmer.

END

As for no killer instint in the 4th Quarter. I saw the Texans Offense bounce back from 3 turnovers and drive the ball to the end zone to score the tieing run. But a FUMBLE killed the drive. Now you see why fumbles are SO critical. Everybody forgets all the good that happened before a fumble on a drive and the fans begin to feel as If they are "playing not to lose" and dont have a "winning attitude". Personally I think its all a bunch of bunk.

aj.
09-18-2004, 07:44 AM
Its simple if the play works Palmer is a hero if it fails he is a zero Agree with your general intent but I'll add that if the play works, Palmer is rarely or never a hero - it's taken for granted - the player(s) get the credit - and in many cases the play is forgotten by Monday morning. If ANY play fails, especially running plays for less than a 4 yard gain (which comprise about 50% of all rushing plays for all teams on any given Sunday - and god forbid you run two in a row), then it's forever etched into memory - Palmer/Capers gets the blame for being conservative, unimaginitive, and keeping the playbook closed - and he/they should be fired.

RunninRaven
09-18-2004, 08:38 AM
I understand that people get tired of harping on the same things over and over. That's one of the downsides of football. With a week of time between games, you generally have run out of things to discuss by Saturday morning. But it just seems entirely pointless to me to focuss much on the coaching staff when, as others have pointed out, there is so very much we don't know. The Baxter run was one of the few playcalls where I think even the average fan can look at it and say "WTF, WHY?" and not be considered to be overreacting. No matter how you look at it, that play didn't make much sense. But in the entire football game, that is really the only legitimate playcall I have seen anyone in here bring up. That's pretty indicative of how difficult it is to pin fault on the coaching staff. We just don't know.

But on the other hand, in terms of the turnovers, we DO know. It's pretty matter-of-fact. Dominick doesn't have the ball. Dominick is handed the ball (or thrown), Dominick has the ball, runs, and then doesn't have the ball. Not many people to blaim there outside of Davis. I doubt we see a repeat. Same with Carr, but to a lesser degree. His situation didn't bother me as much. One INT was on a pass he was trying to force a bit with the time running out and the team trying to get into good FG range, if not a all out TD. The other was on a deflection at the LOS that just happened to launch into freaking orbit and enable the defense to get underneath it easily. That's some bad luck. But hey, it happens.

I feel I'm rambling here so I'll wrap it up. The long and short of it is, the only real, non-muddled, clear target for criticism in most cases (from the perspective of the fans) is the players and their execution. It doesn't seem fair, but it seems to be the way it is. I wish it was possible to sign up for some kind of cable package where you could listen in to the conversations the coaches and players have over their headsets. How awesome would THAT be?

Also, I seem to recall Davis having a couple huge runs being called back because of silly penalities. I hope the team cuts down on those tomorrow as well.

Jwwillis
09-18-2004, 12:26 PM
Palmer game plans the way Capers tells him to. If you want blame, blame Dom Capers.

I am sure Capers and Palmer go over the game plan in general before the game but Im pretty sure Capers himself said Palmer has complete control over the play calling at game time. They script the first few plays and Palmer takes it from there based on the Texans situation.

Jwwillis
09-18-2004, 12:31 PM
Agree with your general intent but I'll add that if the play works, Palmer is rarely or never a hero - it's taken for granted - the player(s) get the credit - and in many cases the play is forgotten by Monday morning. If ANY play fails, especially running plays for less than a 4 yard gain (which comprise about 50% of all rushing plays for all teams on any given Sunday - and god forbid you run two in a row), then it's forever etched into memory - Palmer/Capers gets the blame for being conservative, unimaginitive, and keeping the playbook closed - and he/they should be fired.

LOL...good point A.J. I give some fans too much credit I guess. I know the coaches know better and hopefully the owner too. I was impressed with the 2 screen play calls that happened to come during an all out blitz from the Boltz. I wonder If Palmer picked up on something that tipped him off.

eriadoc
09-18-2004, 01:11 PM
Regardless of who is in there to execute it, the practiced response to coverage on that play was ludicrous for the 4th Q with the game on the line. Any point in the game where we are ahead, sure, run it. If the play was supposed to be DD split out and you think that's a good call in the 4th Quarter, down by 7, then fine (I do, FWIW). However, you always have to consider plan B. If plan B is a FB dive at that point in the game, maybe a professional offensive coordinator should think about these things.

Overall, I agree that he did a fine job in the first half, but the Texans play "not to lose" far too often in the second half than they should. Play to win, guys. Perhaps if Palmer didn't already have a history of calling 3rd-and-long draw plays with the game on the line, the fans would be a tad more forgiving.

eriadoc
09-18-2004, 01:16 PM
Its simple if the play works Palmer is a hero if it fails he is a zero

That's true of every OC in the NFL. However, I think you'll find that the number of times a FB dive "works" on 2nd-11 in the 4th Q with the game on the line is very negligible ... no matter which OC is calling it.

As for the turnovers, yes, they lost the game for us, for sure. However, at that point in the game, we were down by 7 with about seven minutes left to play. The turnovers had already been committed and we still had a very legitimate chance to win that game IN SPITE OF the turnovers. That series (the Baxter series) sent the message that the Texans were resigned to losing, whether they intended that message or not.

Vinny
09-18-2004, 01:18 PM
It was second and 7 and not 2nd and 11. Also, it was a pass play that Carr checked out of to begin with. Tons of teams have run the ball on a 2nd and seven around mid-field over the years with more than half of the 4th quarter left. It's not unusual. I find it amazing the obsession over this.

eriadoc
09-18-2004, 01:21 PM
If it was 2nd-7, then a run is not a ludicrous call, but please hand it to DD, not Baxter. As for where I am getting 2nd-11, that's what was displayed on the scoreboard in Reliant. I was sitting in section 137, end zone. The scoreboard reflected a loss of 1 on the pass in the flat to Baxter. I did TiVo the game, so I'll go back and verify.

Was the scoreboard incorrect? I guess with the glitches going on that day, I wouldn't be too surprised, hehe.

Vinny
09-18-2004, 01:25 PM
If it was 2nd-7, then a run is not a ludicrous call, but please hand it to DD, not Baxter. As for where I am getting 2nd-11, that's what was displayed on the scoreboard in Reliant. I was sitting in section 137, end zone. The scoreboard reflected a loss of 1 on the pass in the flat to Baxter. I did TiVo the game, so I'll go back and verify.

Was the scoreboard incorrect? I guess with the glitches going on that day, I wouldn't be too surprised, hehe.You can't hand the ball off to Davis when he is split out wide in a WIDE OPEN offensive set. The play call wasn't a conservative formation so blaming Palmer for being too conservative here is silly (just a comment in general and not directed at you eriadoc). I'm not in-love with the call either but this is all gotten to the absurd level when we break down one play over and over for a week and try to hang Palmer for this. Palmer called a pass and Carr checked down to a run. Carr could have stayed with the pass call. Carr figured it would work. That's good enough for me. The bottom line on this drive is we called 3 pass plays and we got 3 yards out of them when it was all said and done.

Houston Texans at 8:34, (1st play from scrimmage 8:28)
1-10-HST 40 (8:28) 8-D.Carr pass to 47-J.Baxter to HST 43 for 3 yards (51-B.Leber).
2-7-HST 43 (7:57) 47-J.Baxter to HST 43 for no gain (99-I.Olshansky; 58-R.Godfrey).
Penalty on HST, Illegal Procedure, declined.
3-7-HST 43 (7:36) (Shotgun) 8-D.Carr sacked at HST 43 for 0 yards (95-S.Phillips).
4-7-HST 43 (6:51) 7-C.Stanley punts 53 yards to SD 4, Center-48-B.Pittman. 88-E.Parker to SD 17 for 13 yards (51-D.Polk, 32-J.Wells). (Punt hang time 4.9 seconds.)

powda
09-18-2004, 11:02 PM
why are u trying to crucify palmer? our offense had 4 turnovers and the deffense couldnt shut down tomlinson...how many defenses can? in regard to the turnovers...1 int---batted ball. palmers fault? no. 2nd int---carr had a lineman roll up his ankle. palmers fault? no. davis's fumbles...palmers fault? ummmm no. the turnovers were based on individual performances and not scheme flaws. needless to say the defenses' inabilities are not palmers fault.

without those turnovers the offense puts up great yardage. i dont blame palemer in any way. did he make questionable calls? yes. every coach calls questionable calls. but for the most part our offense did enough to win the game. u need to question fangio more then u do palmer.

i will say im discouraged by the ingame adjustments...the lack of a deep threat offense (u take what the defense gives u------not palmer's fault) and a lack of execution (capers fault?)

what i did like seeing was davis in the slot out wide outside the box.......seperate him from the linebackers and make a cb tackle him. i expect that to keep working and infact i give palmer props for those kind of calls as well as the ocassional supply of screens. carr did a nice job of utilizing more recievers as well.

i am NOT concerned about the offense. if u want to start criticing somebody it needs to be fangio or capers.........the defense will be our weak link this year.