PDA

View Full Version : Texans/Cowboys game observations


Kaiser Toro
08-26-2007, 08:49 PM
Dunta was flat out impressive - coverage and against the run. He will be an All-Pro this year if the team can start turning some heads.

We went to a shot gun formation on the offense's second snap and JJ was called for illegal formation. We then abandoned the formation until we went back to it the next possession I believe. The Cowboys blitzed on this play, Winston went left to double team with Weary and allowed Burnet to go untouched on the edge. Schaub sacked, shotgun formation not looking to hot from a results stand point.

Winston again did the same thing when Green got smacked in the backfield. I like Winston, but on the surface these two misses are unacceptable. He is no longer invited to breakfast at my house. :specnatz:

Saw an empty backfield a number of times. It was like Kubiak was bringing his playbook to life like a Fathead Pop-up Book.

Barber was around the ball and showed why he is solid in coverage. He did get flagged on the play, but that foul had nothing to do with making that terrific interception.

CC Brown and J Black make me want to puke.

Simmons hit hard...Fletcher looked good in the nickel...Bennett could not wrap a WR, looked weak...Pitts looked good on the screen...Studdard makes this team...I am worried about LT, I would not mind seeing Pitts get some reps at LT.....A Davis makes this team

Runner
08-26-2007, 09:21 PM
I wonder if the Winston problem on the blitz was Winston or the scheme. The Texsans always seem to have more problems with the blitz than other teams.

The team also needs to figure out the shotgun. Is it that hard?

Jordan Black has looked as bad as I thought he was. He seemed like a waste of money at the time and continues to look the same way to me. I don't like rolling the dice on Salaam's continued health. These coaches have shown no desire to use Pitts at tackle. That is one critical position with little depth.

The Pencil Neck
08-26-2007, 09:22 PM
I just checked the roster after the cuts and I found it interesting that Pitts is suddenly listed as a G/T.

I think they've got the same worry about Mr. Black that I do. If Ephraim goes down, we're in big trouble with Jordan Black out there.

Runner
08-26-2007, 09:26 PM
I still worry about left tackle and center. We may be in for a season of Schaub making the line look good rather than the line being good. That is good enough, but definitely the lesser of the two options. The offense definitely rolled yesterday with Schaub's pocket presence.

tjb
08-26-2007, 09:29 PM
Ahman Green is really good at blitz pickup. He was low yardage last season with GB because he had to stay in so often and help the rookie OLs protect Favre. You are going to like his pass blocking back there.

Hardcore Texan
08-26-2007, 09:58 PM
Dunta was flat out impressive - coverage and against the run. He will be an All-Pro this year if the team can start turning some heads.

We went to a shot gun formation on the offense's second snap and JJ was called for illegal formation. We then abandoned the formation until we went back to it the next possession I believe. The Cowboys blitzed on this play, Winston went left to double team with Weary and allowed Burnet to go untouched on the edge. Schaub sacked, shotgun formation not looking to hot from a results stand point.

Winston again did the same thing when Green got smacked in the backfield. I like Winston, but on the surface these two misses are unacceptable. He is no longer invited to breakfast at my house. :specnatz:

Saw an empty backfield a number of times. It was like Kubiak was bringing his playbook to life like a Fathead Pop-up Book.

Barber was around the ball and showed why he is solid in coverage. He did get flagged on the play, but that foul had nothing to do with making that terrific interception.

CC Brown and J Black make me want to puke.

Simmons hit hard...Fletcher looked good in the nickel...Bennett could not wrap a WR, looked weak...Pitts looked good on the screen...Studdard makes this team...I am worried about LT, I would not mind seeing Pitts get some reps at LT.....A Davis makes this team


Dunat looks freaking awesome that's for sure, I agree we could see him in a pro bowl at the level he is playing.

And JJ is showing to be a very smart draft choice, he will have a great year I think.

Walter looked good to me, made some good grabs, he is solid.

OD is looking real good. Not afraid to make the tough grabs in traffic.

Green looks like he has plenty of gas in the tank to be effective. And I strongly second the comment about his blitz pick up, it is very good.

Schaub is a fiery competitor, did you see those fist pumps after the first TD pass. He is making very good decisions and shows good placement with the ball.

I really liked what I saw on Saturday, Kubiak has the guys playing very hard.


Get ready for a good solid year, I think we finally break through the ole .500 mark with style and go 9-7. :fans:

:texflag:

TexansSB07
08-26-2007, 10:03 PM
Dunta was flat out impressive - coverage and against the run. He will be an All-Pro this year if the team can start turning some heads.

We went to a shot gun formation on the offense's second snap and JJ was called for illegal formation. We then abandoned the formation until we went back to it the next possession I believe. The Cowboys blitzed on this play, Winston went left to double team with Weary and allowed Burnet to go untouched on the edge. Schaub sacked, shotgun formation not looking to hot from a results stand point.

Winston again did the same thing when Green got smacked in the backfield. I like Winston, but on the surface these two misses are unacceptable. He is no longer invited to breakfast at my house. :specnatz:

Saw an empty backfield a number of times. It was like Kubiak was bringing his playbook to life like a Fathead Pop-up Book.

Barber was around the ball and showed why he is solid in coverage. He did get flagged on the play, but that foul had nothing to do with making that terrific interception.

CC Brown and J Black make me want to puke.

Simmons hit hard...Fletcher looked good in the nickel...Bennett could not wrap a WR, looked weak...Pitts looked good on the screen...Studdard makes this team...I am worried about LT, I would not mind seeing Pitts get some reps at LT.....A Davis makes this team

I personally liked hit CC put on TO to make him drop ball, don't seem to remember him doing much

Texans_Chick
08-26-2007, 10:06 PM
I just checked the roster after the cuts and I found it interesting that Pitts is suddenly listed as a G/T.

I think they've got the same worry about Mr. Black that I do. If Ephraim goes down, we're in big trouble with Jordan Black out there.

If you are putting your best five on the field, and Salaam goes down, I think you are better off with Flanagan, McKinney, Pitts than McKinney, Pitts, Black.

Arguably, even with a health Salaam, you might be better with Flanagan, McKinney, Pitts.

Hardcore Texan
08-26-2007, 10:10 PM
I personally liked hit CC put on TO to make him drop ball, don't seem to remember him doing much

Umm, I think that was D-Rob that made that hit.

nero THE zero
08-26-2007, 10:55 PM
Dunta was flat out impressive - coverage and against the run. He will be an All-Pro this year if the team can start turning some heads.

We went to a shot gun formation on the offense's second snap and JJ was called for illegal formation. We then abandoned the formation until we went back to it the next possession I believe. The Cowboys blitzed on this play, Winston went left to double team with Weary and allowed Burnet to go untouched on the edge. Schaub sacked, shotgun formation not looking to hot from a results stand point.

Winston again did the same thing when Green got smacked in the backfield. I like Winston, but on the surface these two misses are unacceptable. He is no longer invited to breakfast at my house. :specnatz:

Saw an empty backfield a number of times. It was like Kubiak was bringing his playbook to life like a Fathead Pop-up Book.

Barber was around the ball and showed why he is solid in coverage. He did get flagged on the play, but that foul had nothing to do with making that terrific interception.

CC Brown and J Black make me want to puke.

Simmons hit hard...Fletcher looked good in the nickel...Bennett could not wrap a WR, looked weak...Pitts looked good on the screen...Studdard makes this team...I am worried about LT, I would not mind seeing Pitts get some reps at LT.....A Davis makes this team

Good posting KT. After reflecting on the game this morning, there wasn't much I could be too picky about. The defensive line was getting good pressure on Romo (especially Okoye and MW, which was good to see.) The offense was moving the ball at will. The line failed to pick up some blitzes occasionally, but Dallas is a fantastic blitzing team and Schaub showed good pocket presence evading the rush with only one sack (one that would have resulted in a fumble had the other #8 been behind center.) The one negative I saw was the lack of turnovers with our first team defense. The line was getting pressure on Romo, making him throw on the run, and this needs to result in turnovers. We can't be a playoff team if we perenially rank in bottom of the league in turnover ratio.

Also, Kubiak's presser comment on Spencer has me terribly concerned. I agree that it might be in our best interest to move Pitts to LT if Salaam goes down. Though I wouldn't be at all opposed to playing a line of Pitts-Studdard-McKinney-Weary-Winston as opposed to Pitts-McKinney-Flanagan-Weary-Winston. I know Flanagan has the veteran advantage, but if last season is any indication of the contribution we'll get from him, I don't see why we can't get the rookie in there and see if he's someone we can count on in the future.

Anyways, I loved what I saw last night. I was just hoping to see us hang with the aggressive defense Dallas has been throwing out there this preseason and we straight out beat it. Let's hope we keep it up when it counts.

dalemurphy
08-26-2007, 11:16 PM
Studdard looked very good. He does a great job of getting to the second level. His motor is higher than about any OLman I've seen. I'd like to see that kid out there also. Hopefully he won't be needed much this year but I agree that he makes the team and will eventually force playing time.

Texans Horror
08-26-2007, 11:22 PM
I felt the schemes were off, too, for Winston. The coaches need to evaluate those plays closely. Winston hit the body in front of him, but there was clearly nobody anywhere near the guy coming off the line. Whether that becomes Winston's problem or the QB should be reading that and making an adjustment (if he is allowed to make that kind of an adjustment) - I have no idea. But I don't want to immediately fault Winston. I suspect a TE or RB was supposed to be there.

On the other hand, there was at least once or twice where the DE pushed Salaam around like he was nothing. Circumnavigated the guy and spun him like a top. I'm not thrilled with that. That happened too often last year, and I don't expect defenses to forget about it this year.

HOU-TEX
08-27-2007, 11:55 AM
I felt the schemes were off, too, for Winston. The coaches need to evaluate those plays closely. Winston hit the body in front of him, but there was clearly nobody anywhere near the guy coming off the line. Whether that becomes Winston's problem or the QB should be reading that and making an adjustment (if he is allowed to make that kind of an adjustment) - I have no idea. But I don't want to immediately fault Winston. I suspect a TE or RB was supposed to be there.

On the other hand, there was at least once or twice where the DE pushed Salaam around like he was nothing. Circumnavigated the guy and spun him like a top. I'm not thrilled with that. That happened too often last year, and I don't expect defenses to forget about it this year.

I think the pass play in which Winston blocked down instead of picking up the outside pressure was just a missed call. To me it appeared like Winston intentionally blocked down expecting help from the RB to pick up the outside rush. Obviously there was nobody in the backfield to pick him up. Kubiak pionted out that Winston made a couple uncommon mistakes.

Hopefully these missed assignments are worked out by the end of pre-season.:)

nunusguy
08-27-2007, 12:15 PM
I just checked the roster after the cuts and I found it interesting that Pitts is suddenly listed as a G/T.

I think they've got the same worry about Mr. Black that I do. If Ephraim goes down, we're in big trouble with Jordan Black out there.
I to share your concern about a lineup with Black at LT. Dang, its exciting enough to have Salaam in there.
I dunno, but how are the Chiefs a playoff team last year with Black as their LT starter for all but a couple games ?
Good eye to catch that listing of Pitts on the roster as a "G/T". I'm hoping Kubiak elaborates on that first chance he gets, but suspect its linked to his
admission that Spencer almost certainly won't be back atleast this year. And
oh yea, he's probably not feeling any more confidant about Black as Salaams
backup than the rest of us are ?

real
08-27-2007, 12:33 PM
Both of those mistakes were on Winston...

The scheme had nothing ot do with the missed assignments from him....

thunderkyss
08-27-2007, 12:36 PM
I dunno, but how are the Chiefs a playoff team last year with Black as their LT starter for all but a couple games ?

They snuck into the play-offs at 9-7...... & they lost that play-off game (IMHO) mainly due to blacks inabillity to play LT.

Goldensilence
08-27-2007, 12:37 PM
Good observations KT as usual.

I'm really liking what I've seen from Studdard. Guy plays with intesity and fire. That alone is something this line needs and he'll make the team easy IMO.

I am nervous as well about C and LT. I'm wondering if we'll see any of Chris White Thursday. At least seeing Pitts listed as G/T shows that the Coaching staff is just as nervous about the LT spot. I think Black is probably better suited to go to RT if he's needed hell or maybe guard. I hope this inspires the Staff to Keep Brandon Frye and develop him cause there's no way he passes waivers.

I still worry about left tackle and center. We may be in for a season of Schaub making the line look good rather than the line being good. That is good enough, but definitely the lesser of the two options. The offense definitely rolled yesterday with Schaub's pocket presence.

I think we'll have the answer to the question about the O-line or the QB. Right now it ooks like a little of both but a Huge difference what a smart QB can do given a shaky line.

Shaft75
08-27-2007, 12:37 PM
I to share your concern about a lineup with Black at LT. Dang, its exciting enough to have Salaam in there.
I dunno, but how are the Chiefs a playoff team last year with Black as their LT starter for all but a couple games ?
Good eye to catch that listing of Pitts on the roster as a "G/T". I'm hoping Kubiak elaborates on that first chance he gets, but suspect its linked to his
admission that Spencer almost certainly won't be back atleast this year. And
oh yea, he's probably not feeling any more confidant about Black as Salaams
backup than the rest of us are ?

I talked to Spencer before the game while the team was warming up. I asked him when he will be back and he held up seven fingers. He was like yeah I think sooner but it's up to the doctors. Told him that we really needed his big @ss to get back on the field.

Texans_Chick
08-27-2007, 02:01 PM
I would like the Texans to stop the other team from converting on third down. That's a pass rush/coverage thing.

By the way, the Texans are currently #1 in the entire league in scoring offense. After playing both the Bears and the Cowboys, teams known for their defenses. Pretty cool huh.

:texflag:

real
08-27-2007, 02:11 PM
One of the most pleasant things to see as a fan of this team was all the guys celebrating together...The guys really seem to like one another...

That is one of the signs of a winning football team....Guys that like eachother...

I saw everybody congratulating everybody....That was really nice to see...

HotRodsHair
08-27-2007, 02:22 PM
I would like the Texans to stop the other team from converting on third down. That's a pass rush/coverage thing.

By the way, the Texans are currently #1 in the entire league in scoring offense. After playing both the Bears and the Cowboys, teams known for their defenses. Pretty cool huh.

:texflag:

That's what impresses me. Almost as much as the rush D statistics.

Hardcore Texan
08-27-2007, 02:50 PM
I would like the Texans to stop the other team from converting on third down. That's a pass rush/coverage thing.

By the way, the Texans are currently #1 in the entire league in scoring offense. After playing both the Bears and the Cowboys, teams known for their defenses. Pretty cool huh.

:texflag:

Yeah, but it is only pre-season.

signed,
typical cowpie fan

texasguy346
08-27-2007, 03:33 PM
One of the major concerns I have after the Cowboys game is our secondary. I think teams are going to be able to go with 4 or 5 wideouts & exploit our secondary. It makes the need for a consistent & ferocious pass rush all the more important. If we can get in the QBs face our secondary won't have to cover as long & we might force a few turnovers. Definately a big concern heading into the season.

eriadoc
08-27-2007, 03:53 PM
I posted it in another thread, but it bears repeating: The O-line is still not good. I am glad that I am not the only one to notice. They did not form pockets well for most of the game, so when they did, it was definitely noticeable. I like their run blocking, though, and Pitts looks like he was pushing people around very well for someone with a strained back. That was very encouraging. The center (can't recall if it was McK or Flanagan) got pushed into the backfield a couple times on pass pro. It was reminiscent of 2004-era McKinney when he gave up no sacks, but was always in the backfield, disrupting the play. Winston's issues seem to be mental/assignment-type things, which I don't worry too much about. That can be corrected by film study, coaching, and on-field communication.

All in all, I think Runner said it best - we may be in for a year of Schaub making this line look better than they are. Given the alternatives, I have to be OK with that, but I don't get a warm fuzzy about it, that's for sure.

Brando
08-27-2007, 03:59 PM
After watching a little more of the game on the replay. Did anyone notice the block that Salaam laid on Roy Williams on the Green 46 yd run? I loved it.

eriadoc
08-27-2007, 04:01 PM
After watching a little more of the game on the replay. Did anyone notice the block that Salaam laid on Roy Williams? I loved it.

I'm not sure to which one you refer, but after Roy Williams failed to wrap up Ahman Green, resulting in that big run, Salaam and Pitts sandwiched Williams, taking him out of the play. It was must-see TV :)

Double Barrel
08-27-2007, 04:01 PM
I could have sworn that I was told that a good QB cannot make a line look better... :winky:

I thought CP looked good out there. And I'm not jumping to any conclusions about the line. They are still in a learning process to know their QB, and this staff will shake things up and drive these guys to get better....unless, of course, it's a 'coaching problem'.

Brando
08-27-2007, 04:03 PM
I'm not sure to which one you refer, but after Roy Williams failed to wrap up Ahman Green, resulting in that big run, Salaam and Pitts sandwiched Williams, taking him out of the play. It was must-see TV :)


That's it.:wild:

real
08-27-2007, 04:15 PM
I posted it in another thread, but it bears repeating: The O-line is still not good. I am glad that I am not the only one to notice. They did not form pockets well for most of the game, so when they did, it was definitely noticeable. I like their run blocking, though, and Pitts looks like he was pushing people around very well for someone with a strained back. That was very encouraging. The center (can't recall if it was McK or Flanagan) got pushed into the backfield a couple times on pass pro. It was reminiscent of 2004-era McKinney when he gave up no sacks, but was always in the backfield, disrupting the play. Winston's issues seem to be mental/assignment-type things, which I don't worry too much about. That can be corrected by film study, coaching, and on-field communication.

All in all, I think Runner said it best - we may be in for a year of Schaub making this line look better than they are. Given the alternatives, I have to be OK with that, but I don't get a warm fuzzy about it, that's for sure.

I think a lot of what you're saying goes under the 'things understood don't need to be explained column'. It's pretty easy to see that there are at least two positions--two key positions--on the line that could use an immediate upgrade. I trust these things will get taken care of though. I have faith in this staff's ability to draft and find ball players. Call me crazy.

mexican_texan
08-27-2007, 04:25 PM
I was watching the game with a lineman in high school and he said Studdard looked like a beast.

badboy
08-27-2007, 04:56 PM
I think we have in the O line just what we expected. Give the QB enough time to get a play off and to have a QB who can make good quick decisions and quick reads past the primary target. Schaub has done this. RBs, TEs and WR are doing what they are supposed to. LTackle is not going to change as for as talent but just needs to tie up the DE a few seconds. When JB is a LT look for us to run away from that side and maybe pull the guard, like Pitts did at least twice. If we can keep the defense off the field a bit and JJ and Mathis can eat some yards and maybe score a few, we will be better than last season. Let's don't get so focused on where we are headed that we completely forget where we were last season. We also can use Breuner to support JB when he is in there. There are not many other choices unless we want to play Salaam into the ground. Does not look as if Spencer will be back.

Runner
08-27-2007, 06:41 PM
I could have sworn that I was told that a good QB cannot make a line look better... :winky:


The key words being "look better" vs. just "better". If McKinney gets blown by and Schaub unloads it before the hit, I don't think the line played better.

real
08-27-2007, 06:43 PM
As long as the scoreboard is tilted in our favor I don't care if the O-line's play is a mirage...

Runner
08-27-2007, 07:09 PM
As long as the scoreboard is tilted in our favor I don't care if the O-line's play is a mirage...

I think good o-line play would lead to more wins than mirage o-line play. The scoreboard isn't independent of the play on the field (over the long run).

I'm probably wrong about that too.

Double Barrel
08-27-2007, 07:12 PM
The key words being "look better" vs. just "better". If McKinney gets blown by and Schaub unloads it before the hit, I don't think the line played better.

Even Tom Brady and Peyton Manning get pressured from time to time.

Runner
08-27-2007, 07:20 PM
Even Tom Brady and Peyton Manning get pressured from time to time.

Therefore the Texans have a great line.

=====================================

OK, I give in everyone. I don't see a single area to criticize on the line. Run blocking, pass blocking, play recognition, schemes: all outstanding. I used to think the Cowboys of the mid 90's had a great line. They had nothing on this unit.

"All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds." - Dr. Pangloss

Kaiser Toro
08-27-2007, 10:45 PM
One of the most pleasant things to see as a fan of this team was all the guys celebrating together...The guys really seem to like one another...

That is one of the signs of a winning football team....Guys that like eachother...

I saw everybody congratulating everybody....That was really nice to see...

Could not agree more. One thing I noticed was when Bennett had the interception he lost the ball, after the play was over, and went to the sideline. Brandon Mitchell wound up getting the ball and was in an enthusiastic, almost frantic state in an apparent attempt to give the first intercepted ball by Bennett to him on the sidelines.

Texan Asylum
08-27-2007, 10:48 PM
Could not agree more. One thing I noticed was when Bennett had the interception he lost the ball, after the play was over, and went to the sideline. Brandon Mitchell wound up getting the ball and was in an enthusiastic, almost frantic state in an apparent attempt to give the first intercepted ball by Bennett to him on the sidelines.

Too cool for words! :texflag:

Kaiser Toro
08-27-2007, 10:58 PM
Too cool for words! :texflag:

You see it happen many times, but I just do not recall it being so animated, as it struck me, especially by a guy who may not make the squad (Mitchell). That is what made me pause and think that there is something going on in that locker room that has not been seen from a Texan team in the past - a hint or whiff that an identity or culture of a team is being formed and felt by players whose time may be short with the Texans, but are wrapped up in it because it is contagious.

I read into things to much at times and attach my own thoughts based on previous experiences in sports, but there is just a feeling about this organization right now that is totally different than the last five years. :texflag:

Double Barrel
08-28-2007, 12:01 PM
Therefore the Texans have a great line.

I never said that.

I just don't think the sky is falling when I see the line play. Ask yourself why we still have three linemen from the 2002 squad, yet so many other positions have experienced turnover. Are the coaches blind to what you think you see as obvious?

Or, could it be somewhere in the middle. Not the greatest, not the worst, but an average line that can still be good enough for a solid RB and QB to work behind? Of course there is room for criticism, like every position on the team.

Imagine compromise. Not everything is black and white.

eriadoc
08-28-2007, 12:23 PM
I never said that.

I just don't think the sky is falling when I see the line play. Ask yourself why we still have three linemen from the 2002 squad, yet so many other positions have experienced turnover. Are the coaches blind to what you think you see as obvious?

Or, could it be somewhere in the middle. Not the greatest, not the worst, but an average line that can still be good enough for a solid RB and QB to work behind? Of course there is room for criticism, like every position on the team.

Imagine compromise. Not everything is black and white.

I have actually said similar to many of my friends. IMO, Pitts would start for most, if not all, teams in the NFL. McKinney would probably start for most. Weary has improved over the past couple of years and might start for quite a few teams now. But none of these guys are great - solid, average guys that would work well in a good system.

The problem is, most good O-lines have one or maybe two stellar linemen that improve the play of those around him. For some teams, that's the left tackle, but for others, it's a different guy. I would argue that it's Saturday for the Colts, as opposed to Tarik Glenn, for example. Regardless, the point is that we don't have that one guy. We have a few average guys that have been asked to learn a new system every year or couple of years.

I don't think this O-line will be average, but I do think Schaub will make them look better than they actually are. And in this particular area, I do not like the mentality of aspiring to mediocrity.

Double Barrel
08-28-2007, 01:19 PM
Good post, eriadoc.

Just curious, though, what measurement(s) would you use to distinguish between a 'mediocre' line and an 'average' line?

If Green has a 1,000-1,200 yard season?

If Schaub is sacked less than 25 times this season?

I ask because many seem to have a logic that the line operates independently from the team.

And I mention this because Runner said "I used to think the Cowboys of the mid 90's had a great line." Would it have been as great of a line with David Carr and Ron Dayne behind it? I think having multiple HoF players at skill positions makes a huge difference, as well. We've only had one true playmaker in AJ, and the rest have been mediocre to downright horrible players.

If Shaub makes the line look better than they actually are, then doesn't this same logic apply to other teams, too?

I'm not sure our staff is "aspiring to mediocrity", but rather working with what we've got at the moment. With the problems Kubiak & Co. inherited (i.e. $30 million in dead cap, craptastic QB, etc.), I think they are addressing the more pressing areas first. Obviously they do not see the o-line as being as sorry as many make it out to be, or they would have moved to upgrade it in the off-season accordingly.

real
08-28-2007, 01:48 PM
I'm not sure our staff is "aspiring to mediocrity", but rather working with what we've got at the moment. With the problems Kubiak & Co. inherited (i.e. $30 million in dead cap, craptastic QB, etc.), I think they are addressing the more pressing areas first. Obviously they do not see the o-line as being as sorry as many make it out to be, or they would have moved to upgrade it in the off-season accordingly.


IMHO, O-lines are pretty generic around the NFL....

People write off our linemen and have already labled them 'mediocre' or 'bad', which I think is crazy because most people maybe average 1 or 2 plays they look at the O-line per game...if that....

Last year we had an injured, fat Ron Dayne in the backfield along with a late round Rookie, and an overweight injured Gado...Yeah, it's the line'ss fault our running game suffered....

I'm not going to even start with the passing game because I think David Carr was terrible and he single handedly has the ability to kill any offense...Especially an offense not filled to the brim with pro-bowlers...

Give the O-line a chance...Most of you guys wanted to hold off judgement on Carr till he got a better line....Why don't you hold off judgement on the line now that David is gone???....Lets see how our line performs with a better RB, in Green, and QB in Schaub....With some offensive explosion in Jacoby....

Of course they still need help, but to act as if they are dragging the team down or are terrible is a stretch IMO....Those guys up front are all ball players...

eriadoc
08-28-2007, 02:33 PM
Good post, eriadoc.

Just curious, though, what measurement(s) would you use to distinguish between a 'mediocre' line and an 'average' line?

If Green has a 1,000-1,200 yard season?

If Schaub is sacked less than 25 times this season?

To me, there aren't really any indicative stats of line play. Our line has always done pretty well in the running game, and I think most linemen prefer run blocking. Going out and smacking someone in the teeth is preferable to sitting back and waiting to get smacked. The pass pro on this team has always been subpar-to-terrible, however. They are two different beasts.

I watch plenty of football games in which the Texans are not involved. I watch to see how the line forms a pocket for the QB. I compare that to how our team does, and I have seen a consistent disparity between what our guys accomplish and what other teams accomplish. And I don't just refer to elite teams. Our guys simply do not pass block very well, irrespective of what the QB or RBs do. Just because the line doesn't pass block well on any given play doesn't mean it's a busted play, nor does the reverse apply. But teams that consistently keep pressure away from the QB more often than not simply do well over a full season. So I am pretty much watching how the line, as a unit, keeps the opposing team's front four at bay (I try to make the distinction on blitzes).

The other two areas that I see problems with in our O-line (again, no stats) are footwork and communication. I am no expert on NFL line play, so you can disregard everything I say, but again, I see the way other teams' line aligns themselves beside each other. The spacing is not as consistent from our guys, and the difference between passing and rushing plays is sometimes so evident from the line's positioning, that you can call rush or pass just as they set. If I'm picking that up as a fan, you can bet opposing coaches and players are picking up on it.

On the communication, I see plays where it's fairly evident that there was a miscommunication (example: Eric Winston vs. Cowboys). That stuff happens to all teams, but with our team trying to build consistency, it does seem to happen to us a fair bit more than most teams. I don't worry too much about this stuff, because it got better as the year progressed last year, and it's a coaching thing. I have a great deal more confidence in this staff than the last, so I don't worry too much about that aspect. But I see it, nonetheless, and it is a measure of where they are as a unit.

Most of my observations have been from the past three seasons, as I really didn't start analyzing line play for the first couple, just buying the stock excuse of a poor O-line. I do think a better line would have, and will in the future, help this team more than any other aspect, but that doesn't mean I blame all the woes on them. It's just one of the most important areas of any NFL team, and largely ignored by most fanbases. So all of this is just based on my observations and opinion and could very well be full of dung. Take it FWIW. But I do not base my opinion on stats, because the O-line is the unit that can least be measured by stats.

I'm not sure our staff is "aspiring to mediocrity", but rather working with what we've got at the moment. With the problems Kubiak & Co. inherited (i.e. $30 million in dead cap, craptastic QB, etc.), I think they are addressing the more pressing areas first. Obviously they do not see the o-line as being as sorry as many make it out to be, or they would have moved to upgrade it in the off-season accordingly.

The same could be said for the secondary. Personally, I think they are just addressing things as they see the opportunity, since it's not like they are just one or two pieces away from a SB. The opportunities haven't really been there for O-line, short of what they've done, so we'll see how it goes. I'm not going all Chicken Little on this; I'm just pointing out what I see.

real
08-28-2007, 02:50 PM
I watch plenty of football games in which the Texans are not involved. I watch to see how the line forms a pocket for the QB. I compare that to how our team does, and I have seen a consistent disparity between what our guys accomplish and what other teams accomplish.

I seriously think folks just need to pay more attention...

Good pass rushing defenses are going to get pressure on just about everybody...otherwise they wouldn't be considered good pass rusing D's...

When you have guys like Jason Taylor and Joey Porter coming off the edge, unless you have Tarik Glen at one tackle and Walter Jones at the other, chances are one of those guys is going to get some heat on your QB...

Just about every team has a good pass rusher...Look around the league...

DE's don't become famous and gain notierity because a majority of teams around the league are "forming great pockets" or what ever it is you said.....

Merriman isn't Merriman if most teams are forming great pockets....


I wonder when this concept of QB's dropping back everytime and sitting in the middle of this crescent shaped fortress came about...Teams are going to get pressure...that's just a fact of life...It's a combination of things that will determine whether or not a team will be successful against that pressure...

Think about it....In order to get pressure, all you have to do is bring one more guy than an offense has blocking...That's not even taking into acount a guy like Jason Taylor flat out beating his guy.....TEAMS WILL GET PRESSURE....


You say you watch other teams...well, I don't believe it...

real
08-28-2007, 02:51 PM
The same could be said for the secondary.

No....it can't.


You don't put your franchise QB behind a line you think will get him killed.

Yankee_In_TX
08-28-2007, 02:55 PM
One of the most pleasant things to see as a fan of this team was all the guys celebrating together...The guys really seem to like one another...

That is one of the signs of a winning football team....Guys that like eachother...

I saw everybody congratulating everybody....That was really nice to see...

I have NEVER seen the swagger this team has now - before, during, and after the game. Kept me in my seat until the final ticks of the clock, even though it was a preseason game!

eriadoc
08-28-2007, 03:09 PM
DE's don't become famous and gain notierity because a majority of teams around the league are "forming great pockets" or what ever it is you said.....

Merriman isn't Merriman if most teams are forming great pockets....


I wonder when this concept of QB's dropping back everytime and sitting in the middle of this crescent shaped fortress came about...Teams are going to get pressure...that's just a fact of life...It's a combination of things that will determine whether or not a team will be successful against that pressure...

No one said teams are always going to get a perfect pocket. Likewise no team is always going to get good pressure. We lose more battles than we win in the trenches, at least for now. And no one said the protection is going to hold up for a great deal of time. Take a look at the Jacoby Jones TD pass in the Cowboys game. Schaub had to scramble out and make a play. That's what good QBs do. The pocket on that play was very good though. That doesn't mean it's going to hold up for long enough that Schaub can have tea and crumpets back there. Go back and compare the pocket that the team formed on that play to most of the rest of the first half and you should see what I'm saying.

Jesus, it seems like when anyone tries to make a point on here, it has to be 100% all the time, in absolutes. Of course defenses get pressure. Of course there are elite defensemen that consistently get pressure. That doesn't mean they get there every play. If the trench play swings definitely in favor of one team, their chances of victory go up. It's not a black and white absolute like you're trying to make it sound.

Think about it....In order to get pressure, all you have to do is bring one more guy than an offense has blocking...That's not even taking into acount a guy like Jason Taylor flat out beating his guy.....TEAMS WILL GET PRESSURE....

And you'll note that I specifically said I try to account for blitzing in my evaluation. Furthermore, if we can force a team to blitz to get pressure, we've already swung the pendulum our way. That leaves the LBs and secondary a bit more vulnerable, which a good QB/WR/RB group will exploit. Things understood shouldn't need to be explained.

You say you watch other teams...well, I don't believe it...


I'm not sure I believe that you watch the O-line with a critical eye, but whatever. I really don't care what you believe. DB asked what my criteria were, and I explained my viewpoint. Believe what you want.

Double Barrel
08-28-2007, 03:15 PM
I watch plenty of football games in which the Texans are not involved. I watch to see how the line forms a pocket for the QB. I compare that to how our team does, and I have seen a consistent disparity between what our guys accomplish and what other teams accomplish. And I don't just refer to elite teams. Our guys simply do not pass block very well, irrespective of what the QB or RBs do. Just because the line doesn't pass block well on any given play doesn't mean it's a busted play, nor does the reverse apply. But teams that consistently keep pressure away from the QB more often than not simply do well over a full season. So I am pretty much watching how the line, as a unit, keeps the opposing team's front four at bay (I try to make the distinction on blitzes).

I watch a lot of NFL, as well, and even more now with NFLN.

I see consistent play from offensive lines that have a solid QB and know what he's going to do on a given play. These guys still get beat, too, which is why even the 'best' lines give up sacks and hurries from time to time.

But it takes time to develop the bond within an offense between the line and skill players. There is an intuition that must be developed through repetition and trust is built from on-field situations.

We have had anything but consistency from our QB the past five seasons, and this has a direct correlation to what our line is about. Over time, I think you will see a line emerge in front of Schaub that will solidify into something dependable.

I'm not blaming YKW for everything, but his inability to be a decent QB does bear some connection to the protection breakdowns. When a QB is unable to read defenses or feel the pressure, linemen have no idea what to expect from such erratic play.

I don't think a QB can make a line look better as much as he can help them be better. But, it is a matter of reaching potential that already existed, IMO.

eriadoc
08-28-2007, 03:26 PM
I watch a lot of NFL, as well, and even more now with NFLN.

I see consistent play from offensive lines that have a solid QB and know what he's going to do on a given play. These guys still get beat, too, which is why even the 'best' lines give up sacks and hurries from time to time.

But it takes time to develop the bond within an offense between the line and skill players. There is an intuition that must be developed through repetition and trust is built from on-field situations.

We have had anything but consistency from our QB the past five seasons, and this has a direct correlation to what our line is about. Over time, I think you will see a line emerge in front of Schaub that will solidify into something dependable.

I'm not blaming YKW for everything, but his inability to be a decent QB does bear some connection to the protection breakdowns. When a QB is unable to read defenses or feel the pressure, linemen have no idea what to expect from such erratic play.

I don't think a QB can make a line look better as much as he can help them be better. But, it is a matter of reaching potential that already existed, IMO.

I don't completely share your optimism, but I don't think we're as far apart as it might sound. A solid QB does make a world of difference. And people tend not to bother watching the line when the offense is functioning. Every team does get beat; I am nowhere close to saying otherwise. I just don't think our line, as a unit, is very good at pass pro. Whether that is something that they can be coached into remains to be seen. I am optimistic about Winston, and I have high hopes for Studdard. I like Pitts and Weary. McKinney and Flanagan, on pass pro, worry me. Salaam has his ups and downs. I think, regardless of the level of coaching or QB play that occurs, we are still at least one good lineman away from being a consistent offense, assuming Winston matures as I expect. At this point, we do not have the consistency in pass pro where it needs to be.

Vinny
08-28-2007, 03:31 PM
I don't think a QB can make a line look better as much as he can help them be better. But, it is a matter of reaching potential that already existed, IMO.sure they can make a line look better. When Weary or Pitts is chipping or pushing a guy left...you don't step left. Linemen don't have eyes in the back of their head so they have to rely on the QB to read the body language. Apparently some QB's can read a d, read the passrush and make a decision about stepping forward, to the side or making the quick hot read. All QB's get pressure...not all of them can handle the pressure. The good ones make their lines look better in small ways. Guys like Carr can make their game work in pristine conditions, but once he has to start making rapid fire decisons with lots of variables down field and right in front of them they take the easy throw or continually put themselves in poor positons.

Double Barrel
08-28-2007, 03:40 PM
sure they can make a line look better. When Weary or Pitts is chipping or pushing a guy left...you don't step left. Linemen don't have eyes in the back of their head so they have to rely on the QB to read the body language. Apparently some QB's can read a d, read the passrush and make a decision about stepping forward, to the side or making the quick hot read. All QB's get pressure...not all of them can handle the pressure. The good ones make their lines look better in small ways. Guys like Carr can make their game work in pristine conditions, but once he has to start making rapid fire decisons with lots of variables down field and right in front of them they take the easy throw or continually put themselves in poor positons.

Maybe I'm just not getting the idea of a QB making the line look better vs. the idea of the QB helping them be better....maybe it's saying the same thing with different words...

For instance, in your above example, CP is pushing the guy left no matter, that's a given. What the QB does in response can be the difference in looking like CP got beat or missed his assignment and looking like he's doing a decent job of pass protection. The QB makes a bad decision and gets sacked, the line gets blamed, regardless of the decision to go the wrong way or inability to react to pressure.

Perhaps 'looking better' is the same as 'being better', because what the QB does in the pocket is the defining difference between success and failure.

And I completely agree with the rest of your post. The consistent QB allows his line to trust him and understand where/how he is likely to respond to a given situation, so they can react accordingly. The cohesiveness and communication between QB and line is something that seems to be forgotten by a lot of folks.

eriadoc
08-28-2007, 03:51 PM
sure they can make a line look better. When Weary or Pitts is chipping or pushing a guy left...you don't step left. Linemen don't have eyes in the back of their head so they have to rely on the QB to read the body language.

I really like this point by Vinny. Most of what I am referring to in my O-line posts is during the inital setup and QB drop. If there's a decently-formed pocket when the QB hits that back foot, then the O-line has done a great job at giving the QB an opportunity to succeed. They're not going to hold up all day, but a decisive QB won't let it get much further eyond that point.

real
08-28-2007, 04:05 PM
Go back and compare the pocket that the team formed on that play to most of the rest of the first half and you should see what I'm saying.

That's the problem. You have no clue what you're talking about nor looking for.

Every pass play doesn't call for a pocket, and every pocket doesn't need to be made at the same depth...As a lineman you need to know how many step drops the QB is going to take on a given given pass play because it changes how you need to set up to defend the angle the pass rusher will be taking...That's why every pocket isn't going to form into that pretty pocket a QB can step up into...Normally those kind of pockets come on 7 step drops...On 5 step drops the pocket will be a little uglier and on three step drops there may be no pocket at all....Not going to go into bootlegs and play actions because that should be self explanatory...And yet at the same time you DO have to REACT to what the defenders do....You can't just form a pocket and hope the defense just perfectly goes man on man...be serious....

The line isn't as bad as you think it is...You should actually pick out an individual lineman and watch them for a couple series...Then move on to the next one...then the next one...and so one...When you finish watching the fifth guy and none of them have played terrible you should ask yourself how is it that they can have good individual performances but (in your mind) perform badly as a whole....The answer is, they can't....

And you can believe that I judge the offensive line with a biased eye if you want....That's your perogative...But at the same time it's no coincidence that most of the same people who thought Carr was a good QB behind a bad line are still the ones complaining about the line...Go figure....

disaacks3
08-28-2007, 04:11 PM
IMHO - The line looks 'marginally' better. Whether that's due to another year of implementing / practicing the current scheme, or the addition of Schaub to not exacerbate the problems that are there (or likely a combination of both) I'm not sure about. I did notice the spacing issue mentioned previously, as I could predict pass/run far easier than I should be able to. This isn't as evident on TV camera angles as it is from an end-zone view...where it was at times just GLARING.

My Dad (Aggie that he is) focused on watching McKinney under center and pointed out him getting man-handled like we've seen before in pass-protection. In run-blocking, we still look vastly better than we do when trying to maintain a pocket...better in fact than the Cowboys themselves did on Saturday.

eriadoc
08-28-2007, 04:17 PM
That's the problem. You have no clue what you're talking about nor looking for.

Every pass play doesn't call for a pocket, and every pocket doesn't need to be made at the same depth...As a lineman you need to know how many step drops the QB is going to take on a given given pass play because it changes how you need to set up to defend the angle the pass rusher will be taking...That's why every pocket isn't going to form into that pretty pocket a QB can step up into...Normally those kind of pockets come on 7 step drops...On 5 step drops the pocket will be a little uglier and on three step drops there may be no pocket at all....Not going to go into bootlegs and play actions because that should be self explanatory....

Well, duh. If you honestly believe that I don't already know all that, then this conversation is not worth having with you.

As for the Carr comment, this conversation has nothing to do with Carr, as far as I'm concerned.

eriadoc
08-28-2007, 04:18 PM
IMHO - The line looks 'marginally' better. Whether that's due to another year of implementing / practicing the current scheme, or the addition of Schaub to not exacerbate the problems that are there (or likely a combination of both) I'm not sure about. I did notice the spacing issue mentioned previously, as I could predict pass/run far easier than I should be able to. This isn't as evident on TV camera angles as it is from an end-zone view... where it was at times just GLARING.

My Dad (Aggie that he is) focused on watching McKinney under center and pointed out him getting man-handled like we've seen before in pass-protection. In run-blocking, we still look vastly better than we do when trying to maintain a pocket...better in fact than the Cowboys themselves did on Saturday.

I guess I'm not the only one that notices these things. Be careful what you say about the O-line - the Carr commentary will start getting slung your way.

Lucky
08-28-2007, 04:25 PM
That's the problem. You have no clue what you're talking about nor looking for.

That's uncalled for. Not to mention incorrect. How are you going to have a decent discussion with other members when you throw out stuff like that?

real
08-28-2007, 04:36 PM
Well, duh. If you honestly believe that I don't already know all that, then this conversation is not worth having with you.

As for the Carr comment, this conversation has nothing to do with Carr, as far as I'm concerned.

Oh o.k...

So you knew that when the QB does a play fake, whether it's a bootlegg or not, some of the linemen may or may not be selling the run...

And That the deeper a QB drops back the more of a pocket he'll have to step in to....

And there will be many plays where defenders are purposely left unblocked...

If you knew that I'm not understanding how you're judging the line based on how the pocket looks...

New england and Indy and some other teams you watch are going to have more 'nice looking pockets' simply because there playbooks and styles of offense call for it...Also with those offenses that have those vertical based passing games the lineman they aquire will reflect that....

I've been on teams that heavily emphasized pass blocking and they were going to make sure that the O-line pass blocking was down to a science...No detail un-turned....That's because we were a heavy passing team....

And then I've been on teams that weren't as tedious with the pass blocking because we were a different kind of offense...We ran different schemes and therefore we needed to be 'perfect' in other areas....

It's not fair to compare Indy's O-line to Pittsburgs O-line because they aren't the same kind of team...You can't compare St. Louis to Denver....

Denver and Indy both have good O-lines IMO yet if you look at their games you will obviously see things that one teams O-line does better than the other and Vice versa...You may see "more nice looking pockets" formed by Indy's line whereas you will see great run blocking from Denver....

We have three young nice O-linemen that are talented enough to be really good to great in this system in Pitts, Weary and Winston....I believe McKinney is a solid Veteran, and I believe Salaam is a solid Veteran....

We have good talent up front...I'm more worried about them playing as a unit and not making mental errors than I am with the talent we have up there at this point....

Schaub has looked good, running Houston's offense with Linemen and weapons that fits Houston's scheme....

The line will be o.k....

real
08-28-2007, 04:40 PM
That's uncalled for. Not to mention incorrect. How are you going to have a decent discussion with other members when you throw out stuff like that?


Ehhh, I've heard worse...

And it wasn't incorrect....atleast not IMO.

texasguy346
08-28-2007, 04:45 PM
Ehhh, I've heard worse...

And it wasn't incorrect....atleast not IMO.

If you can't treat other members with respect then you'll certainly lose any respect that others might have had for you. There are ways to make your point while still treating others with the proper amount of respect.

real
08-28-2007, 04:48 PM
If you can't treat other members with respect then you'll certainly lose any respect that others might have had for you. There are ways to make your point while still treating others with the proper amount of respect.

In the end I am going to be me, whether you or anyone else likes it or not.

But a long the way I will apologize to those whom I offend.

If being myself = loss of respect, then that's just something I'll have to deal with.

texasguy346
08-28-2007, 04:53 PM
In the end I am going to be me, whether you or anyone else likes it or not.

But a long the way I will apologize to those whom I offend.

Just don't be offended when others treat you with the same respect you show them.

real
08-28-2007, 04:56 PM
Just don't be offended when others treat you with the same respect you show them.


Spare me...

texasguy346
08-28-2007, 05:01 PM
I guess it's true what they say. Ignorance really is bliss.

eriadoc
08-28-2007, 05:57 PM
I'm not sure why, but I'll try once more to explain myself. I'm really not saying anything that others haven't noticed as well, but you act as if I am on an island with my observations.

Oh o.k...

So you knew that when the QB does a play fake, whether it's a bootlegg or not, some of the linemen may or may not be selling the run...

In fact, yes. That is part of the play fake.

And That the deeper a QB drops back the more of a pocket he'll have to step in to....

Yes, that (and the number of steps, obviously) is one of the main differences between the 3, 5, and 7-step drops. And the tackles push the DEs wide on the deeper dropsm and the QB can step up into the pocket, yadda yadda yadda.

And there will be many plays where defenders are purposely left unblocked...

Yes. One of the prime running examples of this would be a trap play.

If you knew that I'm not understanding how you're judging the line based on how the pocket looks...

That much is obvious. I am either not communicating well, or you've chosen to take my observations in a different context than some of the other posters' and my replies to them. As I said to DB, we're not as far apart as it might look on the surface in our opinions.

It doesn't take a former lineman to understand how to compare a basic 7-step drop from the Texans vs. one from another team. It doesn't take a former linemen to be able to pause a DVR when the QBs back foot hits on the final step and look at what the line has accomplished. It doesn't take a former lineman to compare plays from the team from week to week. It obviously doesn't take a former lineman to look at footwork/spacing on the setup and predict run/pass. It doesn't take a former lineman to compare plays from the same team from week to week and see progress and regression. Footwork and communication need work on this team. And I have my concerns about certain individuals on the line just getting manhandled more then they should as well. It doesn't take a former lineman to take into account situations that affect the play, such as repeated running to affect play-action, blitzing by the defense, and countermeasures by the offense. It really just takes a halfway intelligent individual with access to Sunday Ticket, a DVR, and some time to watch football. Your insinuations and allegations that I am either ignorant, stupid, or lying are completely out of line. But again, I am not the only one making that observation, either.

The line will be o.k....

In the end, we can agree to disagree on this point. Time will tell. I don't foresee this particular ensemble being very good. Add in a solid LT (perhaps Spencer, but who knows?), have Winston continue maturing, and replace center with someone who doesn't get repeatedly pushed into the pocket on pass pro, and I'd be inclined to agree that the line would be OK then. We'll see.

real
08-28-2007, 06:11 PM
Your insinuations and allegations that I am either ignorant, stupid, or lying are completely out of line. But again, I am not the only one making that observation, either.

I don't think you're stupid or lying. I think you're wrong and a bit ignorant in this regard, but again that's JMO.

Hey....sue me....

Texan_Bill
08-28-2007, 06:19 PM
Oh, the youth of today....

The thing I noticed and have liked about the line this year is the pulling guards. I watched Saturday night's game on the NFLN Sunday morning and it was really refreshing to watch Pitts, pull and hook the guy and with Green's patient running style a really nice hole opened up in the interior....

I don't really recall seeing much, if any of that last year under Kubes and Sherman...

Runner
08-28-2007, 11:27 PM
I never said that.

I just don't think the sky is falling when I see the line play. Ask yourself why we still have three linemen from the 2002 squad, yet so many other positions have experienced turnover. Are the coaches blind to what you think you see as obvious?

Or, could it be somewhere in the middle. Not the greatest, not the worst, but an average line that can still be good enough for a solid RB and QB to work behind? Of course there is room for criticism, like every position on the team.

Imagine compromise. Not everything is black and white.

Imagine compromise? When I say that the QB and o-lineman both had problems, I'm told I'm only half right. I'm black and white?

======================================

I am just tired of the revisionist history. Most posters hated the o-line from 2002 - 2004, with the dawning of a new awareness somewhere in 2005. I know everyone will deny this, since everyone always knew Carr was the only problem (in hindsight).

I defended the linemen vociferously in past years, and there were always a lot of people to tell me how misguided that was. "Look at the sacks, Runner - the line sucks".

======================================

Why are three original lineman still on the team? Because the line isn't that different. They didn't suck then, they don't suck now. Or is it they sucked then, and they suck now?

======================================

Maybe this is just my long, drawn out, I told you so.

In that case, mea culpa. The Texans p'd me off in 2005 with their total corporate stupidity, and I'm still grinding a long forgotten axe. I guess I should be better than that.

======================================

http://www.bearplugs.com/prodimg/ahc-10197.gif

threetoedpete
08-29-2007, 01:46 AM
am just tired of the revisionist history. Most posters hated the o-line from 2002 - 2004, with the dawning of a new awareness somewhere in 2005. I know everyone will deny this, since everyone always knew Carr was the only problem (in hindsight).

I defended the linemen vociferously in past years, and there were always a lot of people to tell me how misguided that was. "Look at the sacks, Runner - the line sucks".


Well the fact of the matter is that this line didn't "mature" untill they brought in Sherman and they threw away the ZBS and went to the power running game. Yes sports fans the only thing that resembles the Texan's offense when compaired to Denver or the 9ers, is pass blocking schemes. There is a direct correlation between the emegence of Vonte Leech and the last six games. So the question must be asked because of your flippant and may I say with all due respect arrogant respose, why was it nessacary to discard all aspects of the WCO and the ZBS with regaurd to the Texan's rushing attack ? They didn't have the tallent to run it. And they still don't.
with out the rush Kubes' offense is a dead duck. A buss load of coaches came together and put together this version of Green Bay's power running game coupled with Kube's vertical pasing attack. You can spin it like you want now....but this group is and has been a house of cards for three years. I hope they suceed. I hope Salaam holds. I hope Vonte Leech stays healthy.
But to stick your nose in the air and say to the board SITYS, our line is ok,
is pretty gulible. Salaam goes down they will fold like a cheap suit. The lot of them. As you point out the same core group has set the modern record for most sacks allowed. It aggorvates me because it's always something in April. Always some reason not to kill the o-line problem once and for all.
always a reason to wait untill the prime atheletes are off the board. Well we're gonna see now. Living color and all of that. Got forty eight million chips pushed into the middle of the table riding on the back of Salaam. If he does go down it's going to be brutal and it's going to get there very quickly. Xt and I have been having the running war for two seasons now. And I believe we're going to find out this season that standing pat for the sake of anything at the expense of the o-line is nothing but fools gold. Let's see if they can make 2-1. After that you can tell me another one runner.

Runner
08-29-2007, 06:52 AM
Well the fact of the matter is that this line didn't "mature" untill they brought in Sherman and they threw away the ZBS and went to the power running game. Yes sports fans the only thing that resembles the Texan's offense when compaired to Denver or the 9ers, is pass blocking schemes. There is a direct correlation between the emegence of Vonte Leech and the last six games. So the question must be asked because of your flippant and may I say with all due respect arrogant respose, why was it nessacary to discard all aspects of the WCO and the ZBS with regaurd to the Texan's rushing attack ? They didn't have the tallent to run it. And they still don't.

After that you can tell me another one runner.

Arrogant? Have you read the rest of this thread? I don't even know where the flippant comes from.

====================================

So you are saying that the line was never talented enough to run the zbs. I've always put more blame on the coaching and schemes than on the talent. Sounds like similar viewpoints to me, whether I agree with that single example or not.

I'm also on record as saying that center and LT are areas of great concern. That isn't as black and white as saying the whole line sucks, but I'm willing to roll with the RT and guards. I can't fault McKinney's run blocking - just his pass blocking, so I'm not even black and white on him as an individual player. I don't think Salaam is very good, and if even he goes down they are in deep trouble. At the risk of being arrogant, I pointed out that Jordan Black wasn't very good the day he was signed; I based that on watching him play rather than the catchy nickname he had on the Chiefs board too.

Go ahead and point out the errors of my ways though.

threetoedpete
08-29-2007, 09:35 AM
Good post, eriadoc.

Just curious, though, what measurement(s) would you use to distinguish between a 'mediocre' line and an 'average' line?

If Green has a 1,000-1,200 yard season?

If Schaub is sacked less than 25 times this season?

I ask because many seem to have a logic that the line operates independently from the team.

And I mention this because Runner said "I used to think the Cowboys of the mid 90's had a great line." Would it have been as great of a line with David Carr and Ron Dayne behind it? I think having multiple HoF players at skill positions makes a huge difference, as well. We've only had one true playmaker in AJ, and the rest have been mediocre to downright horrible players.

If Shaub makes the line look better than they actually are, then doesn't this same logic apply to other teams, too?

I'm not sure our staff is "aspiring to mediocrity", but rather working with what we've got at the moment. With the problems Kubiak & Co. inherited (i.e. $30 million in dead cap, craptastic QB, etc.), I think they are addressing the more pressing areas first. Obviously they do not see the o-line as being as sorry as many make it out to be, or they would have moved to upgrade it in the off-season accordingly.



John McClain via Gary Kubia's own lips set the line this morning. Thirty sacks. I would add moving the team from the cellar on total team stats in regaurds to rushing the ball.

The thiry sacks is saying they're going a few games giving up zero sacks. Since we're locked and loaded on the o-line, as some suggest, and since we now have a top RB, and the great satin responsible for all the sacks is plying his trade now in Carolina, would it be too much to expcect the team to move from the high twenties into a top fifteen unit overall ? A number pronosticaed earlier this spring by XT BTW. We'll see.

I think a lot of this is working with what they have. They were cap straped and had the choice of firing the QB or replacing three o-lineman in one offseason. It was easier and a more practicle PR move, to unload the one than the three. Inspite of what he said back in March, Kubiak has painted himslef into the corner he swore he wouldn't paint himself into. We'll see if the viens in his neck are popping again like they were in New England last year befor the end of the season.

Kaiser Toro
08-29-2007, 09:36 AM
I do not recall many part time full backs emerging on the scene in the last third of the season to have two NFL Head Coches change their entire scheme. However, it is not surprising to see Kubiak and Sherman make a decision to take the ball out of a half a QB's hands the last five games of the season and leverage his second string RB behind a bull of a FB.

For the record, Carr threw the ball for a season high 54 times against the Jets in game 11. In the preceding five games Carr has four out of his five lowest passing attempts per game that season. In game 12, Dayne starts after being a DNP the previous three games, Leach does not. In fact Leach only starts in games 14-16, but we cannot forget that he started games 1 and 6.

Leach is a valued player, but in my opinion it has always been about Carr. In our history, less Carr has always equaled Texans success.

Kaiser Toro
08-29-2007, 09:42 AM
and the great satin responsible for all the sacks is plying his trade now in Carolina

David Carr is not satin nor is he soylent green. He is Satan on the field. Off the field I hear he is a good as they come.

Kaiser Toro
08-29-2007, 09:44 AM
Inspite of what he said back in March, Kubiak has painted himslef into the corner he swore he wouldn't paint himself into. We'll see if the viens in his neck are popping again like they were in New England last year befor the end of the season.

And the NE game was the one anomaly where Carr threw 5 more passes than any in the last five games. It is almost as if Kubiak had a gameplan and Carr had his own.

threetoedpete
08-29-2007, 09:51 AM
Arrogant? Have you read the rest of this thread? I don't even know where the flippant comes from.

====================================

So you are saying that the line was never talented enough to run the zbs. I've always put more blame on the coaching and schemes than on the talent. Sounds like similar viewpoints to me, whether I agree with that single example or not.

I'm also on record as saying that center and LT are areas of great concern. That isn't as black and white as saying the whole line sucks, but I'm willing to roll with the RT and guards. I can't fault McKinney's run blocking - just his pass blocking, so I'm not even black and white on him as an individual player. I don't think Salaam is very good, and if even he goes down they are in deep trouble. At the risk of being arrogant, I pointed out that Jordan Black wasn't very good the day he was signed; I based that on watching him play rather than the catchy nickname he had on the Chiefs board too.

Go ahead and point out the errors of my ways though.




My bad, 1:30 in the morining . and I'm overly sensitive on this subject. McClain can spin what he wants this morning. and inspite of what he said over the phone yesterday about we don't hold nothing back....ah yeah you do. " some secret souces say" it was the great satin's fault. Print it. Yeah John, you do hold stuff back.

Now i don't know who McClain is tring to convince this morning. may be himself ? All I know is that the owner isn't rushing to back his HC's 30 number with an over under for free NFL jerseys instead of a %15 exchange discount at the Texan's Store. And look I really don't care if people want to walk down the yellow brick road. I see what I see and I stand by that. If they do offer the jersey's, my house takes the over. You're gambling that three thirty something's will hold over a sisxteen game NFL season. Yes it can happen. But most people who think that will happen, that it is a lock, have no concept of how much energy is expelled by the human body on one NFL snap in the trenches.

Texans Horror
08-29-2007, 09:52 AM
Things that I'd like to see that would define a good offensive line:

I'd like to see more lanes (a la last preseason) and less seams (a la last season). I'd like to see well-formed pockets. I'd like to see the quarterback do more than a three-step drop or a roll-out away from the defensive linemen. Also, seeing defensive linemen going backwards would be good. So would be seeing a linemen make a tackle to give a running back that extra couple yards. What I want can't be measured in sacks or penalties. The running back and the quarterback will not influence it. Only five 300-pound ugly dudes* can make me change my opinion of the line.


* - No offense to our linemen, but I'm kinda quoting Flanagan here, who said of McKinney and himself "Steve's a hell of a player, and he sure as hell didn't last 10 years because he's pretty. And neither have I for that matter."

Kaiser Toro
08-29-2007, 09:59 AM
Things that I'd like to see that would define a good offensive line:

I'd like to see more lanes (a la last preseason) and less seams (a la last season). I'd like to see well-formed pockets. I'd like to see the quarterback do more than a three-step drop or a roll-out away from the defensive linemen. Also, seeing defensive linemen going backwards would be good. So would be seeing a linemen make a tackle to give a running back that extra couple yards. What I want can't be measured in sacks or penalties. The running back and the quarterback will not influence it. Only five 300-pound ugly dudes* can make me change my opinion of the line.


* - No offense to our linemen, but I'm kinda quoting Flanagan here, who said of McKinney and himself "Steve's a hell of a player, and he sure as hell didn't last 10 years because he's pretty. And neither have I for that matter."

I think every fan, coach, GM, etc., would love to see what you are saying as it would be aesthetically pleasing. As with most teams they attempt to do with what they have. We need to get a Center and a LT next year, but in the interim one Schaub (as did Banks and Rosenfels) will cover up the pimples and warts that Carr could not.

threetoedpete
08-29-2007, 10:07 AM
I do not recall many part time full backs emerging on the scene in the last third of the season to have two NFL Head Coches change their entire scheme. However, it is not surprising to see Kubiak and Sherman make a decision to take the ball out of a half a QB's hands the last five games of the season and leverage his second string RB behind a bull of a FB.

For the record, Carr threw the ball for a season high 54 times against the Jets in game 11. In the preceding five games Carr has four out of his five lowest passing attempts per game that season. In game 12, Dayne starts after being a DNP the previous three games, Leach does not. In fact Leach only starts in games 14-16, but we cannot forget that he started games 1 and 6.

Leach is a valued player, but in my opinion it has always been about Carr. In our history, less Carr has always equaled Texans success.


I'm not going to get into it another DC thread hijacking. And yes I think you could set a clock by the philosophical change. The last game you saw them attempt the strech play. The first game they brought in the banger, Leech verses the pass catching FB on third and five. There are still aspects of the WCO in the passing game. The rushing attack however, outside of the lead draw, all aspects of WCO are in file thirteen. It's working. They put up 2-1 out the gate, I'm ok with it. But the point was there is a reason the HAD to do this. Up to you to figure out what that reason was. Believe it was all DC, fine by me.

The Pencil Neck
08-29-2007, 11:09 AM
I'd like to see the quarterback do more than a three-step drop or a roll-out away from the defensive linemen.

The only regular season game I've looked at is the last Colts game and it might not be representative but over half our passes were 5 and 7 step drops. People talk about all the quick release throws, the roll outs, and the 3 step drops we had to run because our line was so bad... but we didn't do that as often as people think we did.

I also looked at the drops that we ran against the Bears in the first pre-season game, and the percentages were similar to the Colts game.

I'll look at the Cowboy game later tonight.

Kaiser Toro
08-29-2007, 11:19 AM
Up to you to figure out what that reason was.

Maybe it was all that satin that Carr was draped in.

Shaft75
08-29-2007, 11:28 AM
Our gameplanning is going to be way different this year.

No more run, run, pass. I am sure that with Schaub they can open up the playbook more. Which in turn means that the defenses cannot pin their ears back on our offensive line on passing downs. Although, I don't think our team will convert many 3rd and longs. Our o-line isn't built to hold their blocks that long. We should see many deep dropbacks, IMO.

Nawzer
08-29-2007, 11:43 AM
I am so happy to have a QB who can stand in the pocket, read the defense, and deliver a catchable pass to the receiver. After watching years and years of David Carr it's a nice change to have a real quarterback on the team.

Texans Horror
08-29-2007, 11:53 AM
The only regular season game I've looked at is the last Colts game and it might not be representative but over half our passes were 5 and 7 step drops. People talk about all the quick release throws, the roll outs, and the 3 step drops we had to run because our line was so bad... but we didn't do that as often as people think we did.

I also looked at the drops that we ran against the Bears in the first pre-season game, and the percentages were similar to the Colts game.

I'll look at the Cowboy game later tonight.

You know, it seemed to me Schaub was not dropping back and firing far downfield. Do let me know if you find something different. In a casual review of game logs, I only found two "deep" completions, both in the AZ game. I know it is a bad correlation between steps-back and deep balls, but I would assume you at least need more time to step back and launch that ball downfield. Maybe not.

Shaft75
08-29-2007, 01:42 PM
I wish the Cowboys would get a little better...

Then we could have a Texas Super Bowl this year!

:cowboy1:
texanpride

The Pencil Neck
08-30-2007, 01:46 AM
You know, it seemed to me Schaub was not dropping back and firing far downfield. Do let me know if you find something different. In a casual review of game logs, I only found two "deep" completions, both in the AZ game. I know it is a bad correlation between steps-back and deep balls, but I would assume you at least need more time to step back and launch that ball downfield. Maybe not.

Just going through the Cowboys game, I came up with 8 types of drops used:

1 Step - 2 - 6% - This was used on the TD to Andre.
3 Step - 7 - 21% - We did use this more against the Cowboys
3+2 Step - 2 - 6% - This was used on the TD to DA. 3 steps, pump, then 2 more steps and throw. Not a classic 5 step.
5 Step - 11 - 33% - Our bread and butter.
5+2 Step - 1 - 3% - We used this on a TE screen. 5 Steps back, pause, 2 steps to invite the rush, then throw.
7 Step - 5 - 15% - We even went 7 steps with an empty backfield.
Rollout - 2 - 6% - We didn't run this as often as normal. TTP might be right. :)
Shotgun+3 - 3 - 9% - Lined up in the shotgun, three steps and throw. The sack was actually on one of these. We also had a procedure call on one of these.

I counted even plays that were nullified because of penalties.

We used the 3 step more this game than against the Colts last year.

If I get some time, I'll try to go through and do this with the AZ game.

Texans Horror
08-30-2007, 10:02 AM
Just going through the Cowboys game, I came up with 8 types of drops used:

1 Step - 2 - 6% - This was used on the TD to Andre.
3 Step - 7 - 21% - We did use this more against the Cowboys
3+2 Step - 2 - 6% - This was used on the TD to DA. 3 steps, pump, then 2 more steps and throw. Not a classic 5 step.
5 Step - 11 - 33% - Our bread and butter.
5+2 Step - 1 - 3% - We used this on a TE screen. 5 Steps back, pause, 2 steps to invite the rush, then throw.
7 Step - 5 - 15% - We even went 7 steps with an empty backfield.
Rollout - 2 - 6% - We didn't run this as often as normal. TTP might be right. :)
Shotgun+3 - 3 - 9% - Lined up in the shotgun, three steps and throw. The sack was actually on one of these. We also had a procedure call on one of these.

I counted even plays that were nullified because of penalties.

We used the 3 step more this game than against the Colts last year.

If I get some time, I'll try to go through and do this with the AZ game.

Thanks. Good info. IIUC, over 30% of the passes were three-step or less or roll-outs. The five-step was over 40%, and the remainder were shotguns and the great seven-stepper. But less than half these passes were made by Schaub and the first team. I suspect the numbers will shift when looking only at Matt's performance. Thanks again for collecting the info.

The Pencil Neck
08-30-2007, 11:02 AM
Thanks. Good info. IIUC, over 30% of the passes were three-step or less or roll-outs. The five-step was over 40%, and the remainder were shotguns and the great seven-stepper. But less than half these passes were made by Schaub and the first team. I suspect the numbers will shift when looking only at Matt's performance. Thanks again for collecting the info.

I've got it set up so I can break it down by Schaub vs. Rosenfels.

BUt a little over half of these throws were Schaub; Schaub had 16 attempts to Sage's 13 (my numbers slightly higher).