PDA

View Full Version : 3-4 defense


beerlover
11-14-2004, 02:39 PM
ITS NOT WORKING. Decimated against the Colts, first Walker (sprained ankle) Payne (agrravated knee???) then Robaire Smith. Coaching has to adjust to their players strength, we need to shift to a 4-3. If they continue to run this formation without the BIG 3 the results will be the same. This being stated it means the Texans will be forced to draft a DT with the first pick next year, hopefully they will make the WRIGHT choice.

Vinny
11-14-2004, 02:41 PM
Pittsburgh, San Diego, and New England seem to do well with it. It's not the 3-4 scheme. We are just a .500 team and most of you guys don't see it.

TexSon
11-14-2004, 02:46 PM
That's got nothing to do with the scheme.

ArlingtonTexan
11-14-2004, 02:47 PM
ITS NOT WORKING. Decimated against the Colts, first Walker (sprained ankle) Payne (agrravated knee???) then Robaire Smith. Coaching has to adjust to their players strength, we need to shift to a 4-3. If they continue to run this formation without the BIG 3 the results will be the same. This being stated it means the Texans will be forced to draft a DT with the first pick next year, hopefully they will make the WRIGHT choice.

Manning is shreading everyone this year, but the chargers, Steelers, and Patriots all run the 3-4..pretty good teams...the scheme is not the problem and Roderick Wright is not that good

beerlover
11-14-2004, 02:48 PM
Pittsburgh, San Diego, and New England seem to do well with it. It's not the 3-4 scheme. We are just a .500 team and most of you guys don't see it.


you missed the point (I'm sure your just as pissed as the rest of us). With the injurys to the BIG 3 Cappers has to adjust his defense accordingly. The 3-4 is only successful if you have the personel to run it!

The Wal-Mart
11-14-2004, 02:51 PM
I agree with beerlover. We don't have the talent to play a 3-4. Pittsburgh and New England do. It hasn't worked for 3 years.

Vinny
11-14-2004, 02:54 PM
I agree with beerlover. We don't have the talent to play a 3-4. Pittsburgh and New England do. It hasn't worked for 3 years.We have been an expansion team for three years. Perhaps you missed that little point.

It's not the scheme. We just don't have as much talent or are too young in some positions. We are starting three rookies on defense. Remember what our offense looked like when we started that many rookies?

The Wal-Mart
11-14-2004, 03:01 PM
It doesn't matter that we have been an expansion team. That excuse is getting old. It is the scheme. Our 3 man d-line and blitzers rarely breaks the o-line and how many times have the linebackers been burned when covering WRs and TEs, this season alone.

beerlover
11-14-2004, 03:03 PM
We have been an expansion team for three years. Perhaps you missed that little point.

It's not the scheme. We just don't have as much talent or are too young in some positions. We are starting three rookies on defense. Remember what our offense looked like when we started that many rookies?


none....none of those THREE STARTING ROOKIES are defensive lineman. The little point is for the 3-4 to be successful is that the Defensive Tackles engage greater number of lineman, thus freeing the rest of the defense to make the plays. Sorry but its not happening without the pressure.

ArlingtonTexan
11-14-2004, 03:04 PM
It doesn't matter that we have been an expansion team. That excuse is getting old. It is the scheme. Our 3 man d-line and blitzers rarely breaks the o-line and how many times have the linebackers been burned when covering WRs and TEs, this season alone.

So the scheme missed all those tackles...brilliant

Vinny
11-14-2004, 03:05 PM
none....none of those THREE STARTING ROOKIES are defensive lineman. The little point is for the 3-4 to be successful if that the Defensive Tackles engage greater number of lineman, thus freeing the rest of the defense to make the plays. Sorry but its not happening without the pressure. We have three rookies starting and a below average ILB in Foreman. We have more pressing needs than Payne, Walker and Smith if you ask me.

Vinny
11-14-2004, 03:06 PM
It doesn't matter that we have been an expansion team. That excuse is getting old. It is the scheme. Our 3 man d-line and blitzers rarely breaks the o-line and how many times have the linebackers been burned when covering WRs and TEs, this season alone. Yes it does. We built a team from scratch. This stuff takes time. We drafted for Offense the first two years. You just have to build a team over a number of years. You just can't clap your hands and poof, playoff team.

beerlover
11-14-2004, 03:07 PM
OK I'm asking YOU. What do you think are the more pressing needs for a 3-4 defense to be successful?

Vinny
11-14-2004, 03:15 PM
We need the rookies to mature and we also need to upgrade our linebackers. I doubt a rookie nose tackle can beat out Payne but I'd look at one too, but we have solid starting down linemen. The Texans just need to upgrade a couple of positions and get some experience.

You were the guy who argued with me last year about drafting a linebacker. You had at least 20 posts in that one thread telling me there is NO way we take one...and we moved up in the first round and took one.

beerlover
11-14-2004, 03:29 PM
We need the rookies to mature and we also need to upgrade our linebackers. I doubt a rookie nose tackle can beat out Payne but I'd look at one too, but we have solid starting down linemen. The Texans just need to upgrade a couple of positions and get some experience.

You were the guy who argued with me last year about drafting a linebacker. You had at least 20 posts in that one thread telling me there is NO way we take one...and we moved up in the first round and took one.

exactly, most of us wanted a stud defensive tackle like Wilfork. I'll stand by that fact (despite that you where correct that the Texans would take a linebacker) I must have forgotten that you pegged Babin and that the Texans would trade up (2nd, 3rd & 4th round picks) :rofl:

Vinny, the point is the coaching staff seems incapable of adjusting to what transpires during the game, I mean you lose all three of your starting tackles (none whom are rookies) and you do not adjust your scheme?

Oh yeah Dominack Davis scores thanks to Aaron Glen's interception.

Vinny
11-14-2004, 03:31 PM
We still need another starting linebacker before we take a reserve DL. It's hard to make too many adjustments when you are the thinnest team in the league talent wise. Our starters can compete with the rest of the league, but our reserves are still expansion thin.

beerlover
11-14-2004, 04:00 PM
The best OLB in the draft for the Texans in the 3-4 is Pollack out of Georgia. The best MLB in the draft is Derrick Johnson Texas. I'll admit that I would not be crushed if either fell to the Texans. What I've been resoning would be the premier pick however (not a defensive tackle) is the Strong Safety from Georgia Thomas Davis, move Earl to FS and Coleman back to CB. But I digress. Based upon the last two games performance & Cappers insistance on the 3-4 that the Texans select the top DT in the draft (of course he has to declare first) is Rodrique Wright (that was a pun in the first post just in case you missed the little thing).

This topic will be surely revisited as the season continues. I just hope & pray that Gary Walker, Seth Payne & Robarie Smith will bounce back.

Vinny
11-14-2004, 04:02 PM
Yeah, we can agree on much of that and I will also agree that we need a youngster to groom for the DL. Building units from scratch is a tough task and takes time in this league. 22 starters and 22 quality reserves just don't happen in a couple of years.

SESupergenius
11-14-2004, 04:57 PM
So a switch the 4-3 is supposed to cure our "attitude" ??? What happens if one of your linebackers in the 4-3 get injured, do we switch to a 3-3-5? Oh this is laughable. Going to Indy with the one of the highest rated QB's in NFL history is one thing is a tough thing. If you want to blame someone or something, then blame the players for having no heart in this game, and blame the coaches for not using enough blitzing schemes. Then there is the offensive line and blah blah blah. It aint all the 3-4.

beerlover
11-14-2004, 05:08 PM
So a switch the 4-3 is supposed to cure our "attitude" ??? What happens if one of your linebackers in the 4-3 get injured, do we switch to a 3-3-5? Oh this is laughable. Going to Indy with the one of the highest rated QB's in NFL history is one thing is a tough thing sonny. If you want to blame someone or something, then blame the players for having no heart in this game, and blame the coaches for not using enough blitzing schemes. Then there is the offensive line and blah blah blah. It aint all the 3-4.

All we are talking about here is the 3-4 so whats your point. Its equally laughable to blame the Texans for "having no heart" or "blame the coaches for not using enough blitzing schemes".

We are not addressing the offensive line or any other aspect of the Texans game planning only the effectivness of the 3-4 defense given the BIG 3 up front hurt or playing hurt against the "highest rated QB's in NFL history". Try to keep focused to subject the 3-4 defense.

SESupergenius
11-14-2004, 06:41 PM
ok, watch some more football. Rant and rave all you want about the 3-4 (which is what you are *****ing about in the 1st place), but you can't deny the success of the scheme in the last few years. Care to explain why the Patriots use it? If it's the personnel you are questioniing then question them, not the scheme. So we put 1 man on the front line with Deloach and take out Foreman, wow, yea, that makes all the difference. My point is that you have no idea what your are talking about, especially going through 8-9 threads now of your reaching for excuses. Why don't you thow in the kitchen sink, that seems to be the problem with our team too. Guys just aren't getting the needed water from the kitchen sink.

Number19
11-14-2004, 07:39 PM
On the post game show, it was mentioned that Walker is no where close to being the player he was 2 yrs ago. It was also said that Paine and Smith are not highly regarded as pass rushers; their strength is in stopping the run.

The 34 demands that the DL put pressure on the QB from up the middle. Our first round pick next year should address this area of weakness.

I agree with Vinny that we need to address our LB's. Use our second round pick to address this need, but it all starts up front.

Vinny
11-14-2004, 07:41 PM
Your pass rush is supposed to come from the Linebackers in this scheme. As an example, Gary Walker went to the probowl with 6 sacks in this very same 3-4 defense.

3-4 linemen are supposed to create push up the middle and take up blockers.

3-4 linemen are all 2-gap players. 2-gap players don't get many sacks.

BornOrange
11-14-2004, 08:01 PM
Your pass rush is supposed to come from the Linebackers in this scheme. As an example, Gary Walker went to the probowl with 6 sacks in this very same 3-4 defense.

3-4 linemen are supposed to create push up the middle and take up blockers.

3-4 linemen are all 2-gap players. 2-gap players don't get many sacks.
Actually, the linemen need to collapse the pocket and bring some heat up the middle for the 3-4 defense to work. The LB's get the big sack numbers, but that is at least partly due to the QB getting flushed out of the pocket by the DL's and the LB's finishing him off.

Back to the original theme of this thread, it would be incredibly stupid to try to switch to a 4-3 in the middle of the season. The Texans have the personnel for a 3-4 and it would take at least one offseason full of change (and probably more) to successfully switch to a 4-3. Then expect a full season of players adjusting to a new role and to playing with new teammates.

It hasn't been the scheme, it has been the execution of the scheme. Playing against the Colts today was a bad time to have poor execution, because Manning can carve up a defense like few other QB's in the history of the game. In fact, Manning is probably playing better right now than any QB has ever played. By comparison, playing next week against Favre might be like a walk in the park after playing against Manning. I certainly hope so.

Lastly, Rod Wright will not be declaring for the draft. He has been hampered by a bad ankle all year and has not had a chance to show just how good he can be. Also, Longhorns don't leave early.

georgewashington
11-14-2004, 08:29 PM
here comes my two cents for the day on the linebackers. Foreman got smoked in coverage quite a bit today. Babin played pretty well, and had a good play on the tightend on that out route and tackled him for no gain. Sharper is fine. Wong may have been a little off of his usual, but he did alright. Peek came in and played well, he kept contain and made a tackle at the line on james' cut back inside the 10, he had a couple good coverages, and he made a great pick in coverage. I think that he has shown that he could play more than the 4th quarter. i think something, especially in games like today where the offense stunk, capers and teh coaches need to learn from other teams and rotate players. Maybe our LB's get burnt cuz we do not rotate them at all during the game. Complain all you want that the LBs arent doing well or whatever, especially all the people who are peek critics on stopping the run (which he did today, and in his pass rush he closed the pocket without being up field), but maybe we have some talent that is being hindered by lack of playing time, and lack of breaks for the starters. Our linebackers are gonna get burnt sometime if they are playing every down and dropping into coverage so much against these passing teams.

beerlover
11-14-2004, 11:46 PM
ok, watch some more football. Rant and rave all you want about the 3-4 (which is what you are *****ing about in the 1st place), but you can't deny the success of the scheme in the last few years. Care to explain why the Patriots use it? If it's the personnel you are questioniing then question them, not the scheme. So we put 1 man on the front line with Deloach and take out Foreman, wow, yea, that makes all the difference. My point is that you have no idea what your are talking about, especially going through 8-9 threads now of your reaching for excuses. Why don't you thow in the kitchen sink, that seems to be the problem with our team too. Guys just aren't getting the needed water from the kitchen sink.

I mean whats up with Why don't you thow in the kitchen sink, that seems to be the problem with our team too. Guys just aren't getting the needed water from the kitchen sink :hmmm:

In reponse to other intelligent posts (thankyou) it would be silly to change in mid season to the 4-3 you are absolutley correct. Nor am I advocating abandonment of the 3-4 just the re-tooling. But while the Texans re-tool why not adjust to the hand thats been dealt. Move to the 4-3 with Babin on the line & Peek as the OLB. Use all the tools available to try and win games. Thats all I'm saying.

The point about Wright is well taken Born. I don't doubt at all what you said is the truth, what seems apparent though is the ineffectivness of the current personel (coaching, schemes, injurys etc....) to stop opposing offenses. Maybe Indy is a juggernaut but the Broncos? Oh yeah I think this is called venting :listening

SESupergenius
11-15-2004, 12:33 AM
First you say Posted Coaching has to adjust to their players strength, we need to shift to a 4-3.

Then you say

Nor am I advocating abandonment of the 3-4 just the re-tooling. But while the Texans re-tool why not adjust to the hand thats been dealt. Move to the 4-3 with Babin on the line & Peek as the OLB. Use all the tools available to try and win games. Thats all I'm saying.

That is the best impersonation of John Kerry I have ever seen. Classic.

So lets say you fix all of this, can we still beat the Colts by only scoring 14 points?? Is it just me or are you grasping at anything that moves.

wolf123
11-15-2004, 12:58 AM
We have the tools to have a dominate 3-4 defense all we need is a few more playmakers.
DL- a young stud dt that can stop the run and get after the passer.
NT- a big run stuffer who is also quick enough to be effective on passing downs.
Middle linebacker- Jamie sharper deserves to play with someone as fast and good as him, such as a ahmad brooks or derrick johnson.

With the new people on the d-line it will make it alot easier for the olb to show how good they really are.

rhc564
11-15-2004, 01:17 AM
If our linemen are not pressuring the QB and our line backers are
having to drop back in pass coverage, where is the pressure on the QB
going to come from? Also, how is it every team we play can pressure our
QB SO MUCH but we can't return the same?,,,just wondering :hmmm:

SESupergenius
11-15-2004, 01:26 AM
In this game in particular we just were not blitzing on 3rd down. I have no reason for that but it seems that in several games when we don't have a good blitzing scheme on 3rd down the other team converts them. And those 3rd down conversions were killer for us today.

Vinny
11-15-2004, 01:27 AM
Different linebackers drop into coverage depending on the call. In the 3-4 opposing teams don't know where the 4th pass rusher is coming from, as contrasted to a 4-3 where you have all 4 down lineman coming on each play.

georgewashington
11-15-2004, 09:47 AM
exactly, the scheme is fine, its just how the team played. The DBs werent covering anyone so they couldnt blitz, we had to drop LBs back into coverage a lot. Honestly, i think they did pretty well in coverage and many times you would see them chasing down the wideouts that burned the DBs all the way to the endzone. Wheres the safetys and CBs?

beerlover
11-15-2004, 10:01 AM
The Texans are too predictable, thats why the game planning agaisnt us has been so successful, I'm not sure why its become so obvious (could be all the injurys on the line) but you have to admit they are taking full advantage of it each week.

Porky
11-15-2004, 10:43 AM
I'm not a big fan of running the 3-4 fulltime. NE runs all kinds of formations. They are not a 3-4 only team. I prefer a 4-3, and not all of my preference is based on stuff happening on the field, or the scheme itself. It just seems to me you have to make too many "projections" in the college draft. Some guys can't make the convversion. The 3-4 is also a more complicated scheme. LEt's face it, most of these guys aren't brain surgeons. I think there are maybe 1-2 colleges employing the 3-4, so you end up churning draft picks looking for one Kevin Greene. I would rather us move to a 4-3. Peek could be a pass rush specialst in the mold of Freeney. And Babin is good enough to hold up as an every down lineman. Take away the coverage responsibilties from these guys, and let them rush the passer.

Having said all that, it really doesn't matter what scheme they are running if people aren't hustling ala Deloach..

TheOgre
11-15-2004, 10:44 AM
Lets switch to the 1-2-8 defense. We can spend our first four picks on DB's and go from there.

V Man
11-15-2004, 11:02 AM
I also don't think it is the scheme, but the personal. Maybe it is time to look at Wong on the inside, and try Peek (this should make GWashington happy, or Anderson at the outside). I know Peek struggled against the run in preseason, but maybe with more PT, he'll learn to step up. I know Wong is having a pretty good year on the right side, but several people have said they thought he would be a step up for Foreman on the inside. Let's find out before the season ends, then we'll know more about what we have and what we need at LB for next years draft. :twocents:

beerlover
11-15-2004, 11:47 AM
I'm not a big fan of running the 3-4 fulltime. NE runs all kinds of formations. They are not a 3-4 only team. I prefer a 4-3, and not all of my preference is based on stuff happening on the field, or the scheme itself. It just seems to me you have to make too many "projections" in the college draft. Some guys can't make the convversion. The 3-4 is also a more complicated scheme. LEt's face it, most of these guys aren't brain surgeons. I think there are maybe 1-2 colleges employing the 3-4, so you end up churning draft picks looking for one Kevin Greene. I would rather us move to a 4-3. Peek could be a pass rush specialst in the mold of Freeney. And Babin is good enough to hold up as an every down lineman. Take away the coverage responsibilties from these guys, and let them rush the passer.

Having said all that, it really doesn't matter what scheme they are running if people aren't hustling ala Deloach..

well said Porky!

"NE runs all kinds of formations" that was my point. The fact the Texans are thin when ever the Big 3 are out (at one point in yesterdays game all of them where hurting, lucky they all returned but I'm not sure they had a choice or how effective they were) screams for making adjustments, meaning maybe abandoning the 3-4 UNTIL the players who can run it return.

georgewashington
11-15-2004, 11:58 AM
I also don't think it is the scheme, but the personal. Maybe it is time to look at Wong on the inside, and try Peek (this should make GWashington happy, or Anderson at the outside). I know Peek struggled against the run in preseason, but maybe with more PT, he'll learn to step up. I know Wong is having a pretty good year on the right side, but several people have said they thought he would be a step up for Foreman on the inside. Let's find out before the season ends, then we'll know more about what we have and what we need at LB for next years draft. :twocents:

that would make me happy, i would be happy if they at least did that one or two series a game. There isnt a need for a drastic switch of everything right away, but i think peek showed yesterday he has gotten better at the run and in the pass. Wong was a good MLB at minn. so why not use it to at least get some fresh legs out there. Plus the need for this team is not LBs if we could get wong backin teh middle. And does anyone else notice that our Dline seems to have one person get hurt every series?

SESupergenius
11-15-2004, 12:14 PM
There hasn't been a 4-3 or 3-4 yet that has stopped the Colts offense. It's very myopic to think that it's just the Texans' 3-4 scheme that is the problem. No 4-3 scheme has limited that offense to less than 24 points. Sure we gave up 35 points their offense, but so did KC, Oakland, and Greenbay. You don't see those teams complaining about the 4-3. This is just unreal. People graping at straws, creating utter mayhem and calling for complete changes midstream. Must be the same people that expected us in the playoffs this year.

Vinny
11-15-2004, 12:14 PM
well said Porky!

"NE runs all kinds of formations" that was my point. The fact the Texans are thin when ever the Big 3 are out (at one point in yesterdays game all of them where hurting, lucky they all returned but I'm not sure they had a choice or how effective they were) screams for making adjustments, meaning maybe abandoning the 3-4 UNTIL the players who can run it return.We were in 4-3 looks in many times in the game. We ran out of the 3-3-5 for most of it to be honest. It's not the flippin alignment, its the players and the execution (coaching). If you look at the game again you will see us in multiple formations. You just have to look.

beerlover
11-15-2004, 12:27 PM
We were in 4-3 looks in many times in the game. We ran out of the 3-3-5 for most of it to be honest. It's not the flippin alignment, its the players and the execution (coaching). If you look at the game again you will see us in multiple formations. You just have to look.

point well taken. Can you explain why after the last two weeks the defense has looked so, for lack of better verbage ineffective? Seemed like the Texans defense was pretty good against Jacksonville & 1st half of the season. Did the personel change? Are there significant injurys? What changed?

what changed in my opinion is that teams have figured out how to take advantage of our defensive schemes. Opening the secondary like a can of Cambells soup. Yes I did notice the 4-3 look as you stated but there was still no pass rush, even when Payton stayed in late in the 4th quarter because they had to drop back into coverage, the Colts killed us with their tightends, just as Denver did last week. If its not the flippen alignment its the players & exectuion its because its out of balance not centered.

Vinny
11-15-2004, 12:39 PM
I donno BL. We put way too many 250 pound linebackers in iso coverage. I find it amazing that I rewind the game and I find Foreman isolated on Stokley and Harrison on different plays. I find it amazing that when I look at the game again I see simple square out patterns on isolated LB's ripping us to shreds. We run way, way, way too much linebacker isolation coverages and are caught in mismatches over and over.

beerlover
11-15-2004, 01:06 PM
I agree with that Vinny. So is it personel or the scheme?

In beer layman's terms is the glass half full or half empty? I agree that the Texans need to draft a playmaker on defense in the 1st round to make the 3-4 work. What I was hoping for (as it seems you where as well) was a lb/ss/cb but after viewing the Texans inability to even lay a hand on Manning a stud DT is #1 priorty. I'm just not sold on any of them however, which begs the question do they take the best defensive playmaker in the draft that fits the 3-4 or go in another direction?

ArlingtonTexan
11-15-2004, 01:13 PM
I agree with that Vinny. So is it personel or the scheme?

In beer layman's terms is the glass half full or half empty? I agree that the Texans need to draft a playmaker on defense in the 1st round to make the 3-4 work. What I was hoping for (as it seems you where as well) was a lb/ss/cb but after viewing the Texans inability to even lay a hand on Manning a stud DT is #1 priorty. I'm just not sold on any of them however, which begs the question do they take the best defensive playmaker in the draft that fits the 3-4 or go in another direction?

If the past has been any indication, the priority will de on defensive play makers, but if there is a offensive guy that is a better player that is who the Texans will draft. Think the team has 8 picks, assuming that there are no trades I expect 5 or 6 defensive players out of that mix. Remember though this maybe the first year that the first round pick does not immediately walk into a starting job with the Texans.

Vinny
11-15-2004, 01:14 PM
What we need is someone teams have to scheme around. We need an Andre Johnson type of difference maker on defense. A guy teams have to adjust to right off the bat. Right now we just don't have that guy. Our 3 down linemen do well, but we have weak reserves behind them and most of them are decent players but nothing special. Sharper is all over but gets little to no help from Foreman, so that almost negates Sharper. Wong has had good games but he isn't Willie McGinnest. Speaking of Pats, Babin looks like Mike Vrabel. Solid, developing player, but not a superstar. We need one impact player. We just don't have it. People want to point fingers and blame the coaches or the scheme, but our rookies will play like rookies for the rest of the year and we don't have a true superstar that can take another team out of what they do well.

nunusguy
11-15-2004, 01:35 PM
Think the team has 8 picks, assuming that there are no trades I expect 5 or 6 defensive players out of that mix.
And that is a huge and risky assumption with Casserly at the controls. With
his wheeler-dealer mentality, he may do something real stupid like use the
2, 3, & 4 pick on some yocal from someplace like West Central Montana State A&M or some similar place. Wish he would have used a couple of those
picks in the last draft on a couple interior linemen. They would have come in real handy yesterday. No, I'm sure if O line wasn't a high priority in the 2005
draft, it became that in the last 2 weeks.

edo783
11-15-2004, 01:39 PM
Correct on all of that Vinny, but we also need to turn up the intensity level. We seem to passive. More a react to what is hapenning defense rather than a, make it happen defense. That may just be a function of the quality of players we are fielding, but I suspect it is more a function of the coaching. Our coaching staff is a very passive "student of the game" type of staff and it seems to be reflected in the intensity level of the players. A lot of skill defenciency can be covered over by a higher level of intensity of play. In the games we have lost most people have refered to us as being "Flat" and I see that as a function of the coaching staffs prep of the team.

Vinny
11-15-2004, 01:47 PM
Correct on all of that Vinny, but we also need to turn up the intensity level. We seem to passive. More a react to what is hapenning defense rather than a, make it happen defense. That was Fangio's knock at Indy. The scheme was so complex that it made the players look passive. Too much thinking, not enough seek and destroy.

georgewashington
11-15-2004, 02:12 PM
i agree with the not enough seek and destroy, maybe it is a few players missing here or there, but there are some athletes taht need to be unleashed onto the opponents. Where is the 7 or 8 man blitz that would surely get quick pressure on the qb, which would allow the dbs to not have to cover for 6 secs. on one play. Where are more blitzes from duanta who has definately gotten into the back field on almost all of his blitzes this year. but once again i think that all goes somewhat back to the personel on the field. What happened to the experiment in preseason where wong moves to the middle with peek and babin on the outsides. Thats a pass rush that could be scary, thats three lineman going up the middle with the possibility of any of the four LBs coming as well. it would be rememiscent of the days of Clevelands UFO defense where they were all over and didnt know who was comiing or going. THe defense needs something original that hasnt been seen from the texans yet. they need to use what they have.

ArlingtonTexan
11-15-2004, 03:34 PM
That was Fangio's knock at Indy. The scheme was so complex that it made the players look passive. Too much thinking, not enough seek and destroy.

I know early in the year i though Babin was really thinking a lot. I have not focused on him as much latley, but he has yet to display explosiveness, so he may still be. Possibiliy is this keeping Peek of the field. That said, Dunta did not seem to have to advst as much.

My big coaching staff issue on defense is that the team does seem to play better when blitzing a ton or forcing issues.

SESupergenius
11-15-2004, 04:02 PM
I will always compare and contrast the Steelers 3-4 to ours. When you look at the Steelers 3-4 they have at least 3 guys in the linebacker corps with high motors. Too much in one to get himself kicked out, but at least he has fire. Peek reminds me so much of Porter that next year I seem in starting at the ROLB spot. He just needs a little more seasoning and Wong can move to the Buc spot. I think our line is better than theirs but we are just not calling the right mix of blitzes. I don't think I say 1 corner blitz yesterday. The mentality of lets bend don't break on several of these games leaves me to believe that in those cases our defense was more on it heals in a read and react mode more than taking over a game. There is plenty of share to go around. I pin this more on the offense than the defense. Because if you look at it, in all of the Colts losses the other team had to score more than 24 points. We only got 14. From the get go both sides of the ball came out without any fire. I saw a glimse of it from the offense when we were moving the ball until the interception intended for AJ.

SDBoltz
11-15-2004, 05:42 PM
Pittsburgh, San Diego, and New England seem to do well with it. It's not the 3-4 scheme. We are just a .500 team and most of you guys don't see it.


:coolb: exactly don't you guys wish you had steve foley now that he has 6 sacks and has been a terror on defense for us with several big hits. I'd like to personally thank the texans GM for letting steve foley go so we could sign him. :banana: :heh:

You guys need to focus on bringing in guys that want to play smashmouth football. Not neccesarily big names just good football players like foley randall godfrey etc..... It's working for the Chargers it has worked for the patriots and even last years bengals improved because of it they just have carson palmer slowing them down this year

nunusguy
11-15-2004, 05:50 PM
:coolb: exactly don't you guys wish you had steve foley now that he has 6 sacks and has been a terror on defense for us with several big hits. I'd like to personally thank the texans GM for letting steve foley go so we could sign him. :banana: :heh:

It's deja vu/Jeff Possey all over again. If the Texans can't identitfy the best players on their team (or formerly on their team), no wonder they are struggling so with some of their assessments of college talent as potential draft picks.

Errant Hothy
11-15-2004, 06:02 PM
SInce we're discussing defence's and all that; is it my imagination (deleted teh Tivo copy of the game, so I can't check this for sure) that the few blitzes we run are very simple blitzes and not the complex ones that give teh opposing O-line fits (see teh Sharper/Babin? crossing blitz against the Raiders). Nad I don't think blitzing a CB is all that comple these days.

SDBoltz
11-15-2004, 06:13 PM
the 3-4 gives you great options in the blitz game. For us in the beginning of the year our blitz schemes were simple because it is our first year in the system. Now we are mixing it up and really disguising our blitzes well

georgewashington
11-15-2004, 08:02 PM
steve foley was released because of the other two young OLB's the texans have. The real shame was that the bengals released him after he was a starter, and now they dont ahve any linebackers healthy. And i agree peek may be starting next year with wong having to move one more time to ILB, but if the season doesnt turn around soon i would make the move soon. And corner back blitzes. Dunta has had a few of them and i believe he has applied a lot of pressure on them if not getting a sack, he is a gamer and he has the speed and power to do it, so let him loose three times a game. the beauty of the scheme is that with the others rushing they wouldnt see the cb blitz coming so it works. and i agree with the comment about hte lack of mixing up the blitz. Shoot i would almost have all the linebackers off the line and have them blitz in all different directions instead of straight up. like i said in another post, if they did that it would be hard to know whos doing what and the oline wouldnt be able to make as easy reads on whos blocking who, just like the old UFO defense the browns ran for a year.

beerlover
11-15-2004, 09:31 PM
this has been an informative post (for me at least) searching for answears to the demise of what seemed at seasons mid point to at least be an capable defense. Also this thread was started during the game I believe still in the 3rd quater so I was obviously upset & some of it may have been just venting. I apologise to anyone I may have offended (supergenius).

I've been terrible @ predicting scores, not even close on a single game (losing the easy ones, winning the difficult ones-forget about the last two) I really thought the Texans defense would improve as the season wore on as the rookies matured and the players already in place would master the 3-4. This is not an excuse because there is none. Its planely obvious I don't understand how the 3-4 works because it sure seems we do have the personel to run it.

the consensous from all your posts seems to be one of lack of exacution & not the scheme itself. Fine, maybe we are getting somewhere now why are the Texans suddenly not exacuting the 3-4? I can understand its a five year plan and the Texans are a couple playmakers short on the defensive side but still I expect them to compete and hang in the games & not totally get blown out week after week.

georgewashington
11-15-2004, 09:46 PM
of course its not the scheme, it works for many teams. i have started to come around and blame the use of the scheme by the coaches a little bit more though. I think that the players we have can be used in other ways that would make this defense much more effective. I think that they need to open things up with blitzes, and stop dropping everyone back (the LBs) into coverage so much. say what we want about the pass rush but sending four guys isnt going to get much done against an oline that is decent. if other teams only sent four guys against us, we would expect carr to never get a grass stain on him (but not necessarily with our oline). We need to get the players in situations where they can make more happen. I think earl will provide more excitement with a few more games of actually playing, duanta is doing well, sharper is going to always produce if he gets a little help, and i still want to see the LB set up sometime with wong in the middle for foreman and peek and babin on the outside.

SESupergenius
11-16-2004, 12:21 AM
Trust me we were all shocked yesterday at the play of the whole team. And I still like Beer ;) I've just watched the game again and I saw several instances of us dropping LB's that shouldn't be dropped that far. As Vinny has noted, Foreman dropping back into coverage is insane. Did you see his coverage on that TD?? It was like oops there's the ball. They totally exploited us on many plays that involved Foreman playing 5-10 yards back. I saw Sharper apply pressure up the middle and flush out Manning, but it seem to have been too few times his number was called to do so. The defensive plan was just waaaaaay to timid and not aggressive. I'd rather lose by trying to create plays on defense than be passive as Manning can pick and choose his targets. Like I said before, I think this game rests on the shoulders of many and all. Even Kris Brown!!!!

bckey
11-16-2004, 01:42 PM
We still need another starting linebacker before we take a reserve DL. It's hard to make too many adjustments when you are the thinnest team in the league talent wise. Our starters can compete with the rest of the league, but our reserves are still expansion thin.



In this day and age of free agency it doesn't take 5 years to aquire depth. If this was the 70's or 80's yes. Capers didn't do a great job in the expansion draft. He also signed some questionable free agents for big money that haven't produced like they should. The draft has been our only saving grace.
I still want someone to tell me what our measuring stick is for our 5 year plan. You can't just get to the end of 5 years and then decide whether or not its working without ever evaluating the plan along the way. That's bad business. The Texans played better last year with a lot more injuries. They don't have the same passion. The only good team we have beaten this year is Jacksonville. Last year we played alot of great teams to the wire with less talent on the field.

TheOgre
11-16-2004, 02:08 PM
The team played a lot more conservatively last year. Davis also ran better. This season the running game is gone and we have gotten a little too pass happy. We need to run the ball more to shorten the game and help cover the deficiencies of our defense. The longer the defense is on the field, the more likely our opponents can exploit their plethora of weaknesses.

Vinny
11-16-2004, 02:32 PM
In this day and age of free agency it doesn't take 5 years to aquire depth. If this was the 70's or 80's yes. Capers didn't do a great job in the expansion draft. He also signed some questionable free agents for big money that haven't produced like they should. The draft has been our only saving grace.
I still want someone to tell me what our measuring stick is for our 5 year plan. You can't just get to the end of 5 years and then decide whether or not its working without ever evaluating the plan along the way. That's bad business. The Texans played better last year with a lot more injuries. They don't have the same passion. The only good team we have beaten this year is Jacksonville. Last year we played alot of great teams to the wire with less talent on the field.Casserly did great in the expansion draft. You can't name anyone worth much of anything from the Browns expansion draft. The only players on those lists were insane salary guys, old guys and bottom of the roster players. To find as many real players and create a core team with an expansion draft is something that isn't easy to do.

The Texans have signed solid players and they have singned a few guys that are not going to do much. Just like any other team, and yes, it takes several years to build a team from air. You cannot fill a team with a deep and talented roster in two years.

Lucky
11-16-2004, 03:04 PM
I still want someone to tell me what our measuring stick is for our 5 year plan. You can't just get to the end of 5 years and then decide whether or not its working without ever evaluating the plan along the way. That's bad business. The Texans played better last year with a lot more injuries. They don't have the same passion. The only good team we have beaten this year is Jacksonville. Last year we played alot of great teams to the wire with less talent on the field.
First, I'm not going to comment on the thread topic. I feel it's been thoroughly debunked.

FWIW, Casserly is on record as saying that there is no 5 year plan. I think everyone has their own benchmark in determining the team's progress. Bob McNair's measurement is the one that counts.

Regarding the "passion" displayed by the team, I think a lot of it has to do with expectations. Nothing was expected from the injury riddled team of '03 except effort. And effort was enough to play some close games with some good teams. Now, the players, coaches, & fans expect more. And with those expectations comes a certain amount of pressure. That's just human nature. As the younger players mature and the overall talent level rises, the team will learn to play up to those expectations.

Losing to Denver & Indy on the road does not surprise me. They have better teams and they were better prepared to win. Those losses shouldn't keep the Texans from handling their business at home and picking up a couple of road wins. That was the toughest part of the schedule, now the team has the opportunity to learn from those games and apply those lessons to the rest of the season. The Texans are a better team than they've shown the past 2 weeks and I still think that finishing the season at a 5-2 clip would not be shocking.

nunusguy
11-16-2004, 04:19 PM
The Texans played better last year with a lot more injuries. They don't have the same passion. The only good team we have beaten this year is Jacksonville. Last year we played alot of great teams to the wire with less talent on the field.
I think it was a big accomplishment(s) for us to beat KC & Tennessee @ their
stadiums, but aside from that, I gotta agree our efforts & passion were more
intense last year. That's troubling, but we "let up" (I won't use the Q word),
well before the Denver & Indy games ended."

DominatorDavis
11-18-2004, 08:56 AM
As I said in the preseason - the problem is not the backers on this defense. It is the defensive line and the secondary. Where is Robier Smith?

TEXANS84
11-18-2004, 09:03 PM
Here is an interesting fact I came across on packerchatters.com:

It will be interesting to see how the Packers’ offense (4th in yards) attacks the Texans’ scheme. The strength of the Packers’ offensive line will be tested but they will have to show the ability to quickly adjust to the speed of the blitzing linebackers. The last time the Packers faced a 3-4 scheme was against the Atlanta Falcons in their only home playoff loss in team history back in 2002.

Packerchatters.com (http://www.packerchatters.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=5434)

wags
11-18-2004, 10:44 PM
Here is an interesting fact I came across on packerchatters.com:



Packerchatters.com (http://www.packerchatters.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=5434)

Good little summary they have on that site. One disturbing part was that they said our defense was 32nd in the league in sacks. :bag:

beerlover
11-18-2004, 11:18 PM
32nd in the league in sacks.

begs the question are sacks even necassary in a 3-4 scheme? is this just a underperforming 3-4 scheme? what scheme leads the league in sacks?

wags
11-19-2004, 05:07 PM
32nd in the league in sacks.

begs the question are sacks even necassary in a 3-4 scheme? is this just a underperforming 3-4 scheme? what scheme leads the league in sacks?

I dunno who leads in sacks, but Baltimore, New England, and Pittsburgh all have twice as many sacks as us. BTW Oakland and San Diego also have more sacks than us. Of teams that run the 3-4 we are last in sacks. :loser

Just looked it up and Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Philly all lead with 28 sacks. 2 of the three run 3-4.

TEXANS84
11-19-2004, 05:22 PM
BTW Oakland and San Diego also have more sacks than us.

Steve Foley is having a hell of a year over in San Diego. I think he has around 5 sacks.

beerlover
11-20-2004, 02:24 PM
wags, one might surmise then that for a 3-4 defense to be successful it is absolutely imperative to sack the QB on a consistant basis. This is not happening, hence the 3-4 is not working. one could argue the Texans don't have the tools, a playmaker short of making the scheme effective.

after reviewing all these posts for the past week since the Colts game the problem stems from the game planning & predictabilty of the coaching staff also on the shoulders of the personel & their reads in the 3-4 scheme. The opposition is doing a better job preparing offenses to exploit holes in the Texans defense. The defensive coaches must find a way to stay aggressive & in this weeks match-up focus on shutting Farve down, The Texans Must Sack Farve to be effective.

its going to have to start with the CB's more in isolation man to man coverage. At least one (Babin) if not two (Peek) need to be unleshed on Farve from the LB's. The Big three MUST engage 1 & 1/2 per. thus freeing Babin & Peek plus sometime bringing in Sharper & his speed to pursue Farve when he breaks containment.

obviously everyone in the Texans organiaztion needs to be passionate & efforting 110% a total team effort will be required to beat the Farve & the Pack. Until the offenese gets untracked the defense needs to show up this week and not allow Farve free movement in & out of the pocket it will be the job of the 3-4 scheme, its players and coaching staff.

TEXANS84
11-20-2004, 02:34 PM
I just saw an interesting fact. The top three teams in pass protection are: Denver, Indianapolis, and Green Bay.

Oddly enough, those are our last three opponents. I think Brett Favre has only been sacked 5 times this year so far.

Lucky
11-20-2004, 03:17 PM
wags, one might surmise then that for a 3-4 defense to be successful it is absolutely imperative to sack the QB on a consistant basis. This is not happening, hence the 3-4 is not working...
Isn't it just as "absolutely imperative" for a 43 defense to sack the QB in order to be successful? The Texan defense isn't working, but I haven't seen evidence presented that the failures are formation related.

There are varying reasons as to why the Pats, Ravens, and Steelers get more pressure on the QB than the Texans do. The Pats get a better push up front from their D-line. Their linemen have 8.5 sacks compared to 3.5 from Payne, Smith, & Walker. The Ravens take more chances with the blitz. The Baltimore secondary has 8.5 sacks this year, compared to 1 by Houston's Kenny Wright. The Steelers get more pressure from different places. Steelers' ILB's have 6 sacks between them. DE Aaron Smith has 6 sacks (a big number for a 34 D-lineman). CB Deshea Townsend has 4 sacks (unbelievable for a corner).

It's not like the Pats, Ravens, and Steelers don't have excellent OLB pass rushers (McGinest, Suggs, & Porter respectively). Their common thread is that none of these teams rely solely on their OLB's to get to QB. Like these teams have, the Texans must find other means to get pressure.

beerlover
11-20-2004, 03:26 PM
here are the head to head match-ups, notice the Texans are defiecient to the Packer's in every category except punting-

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/headToHeadTeamResults?statsId1=9&statsId2=34&

that being said, we need Babin & Peek to sack Farve or a better bull rush from the Big 3 in the middle to be successful. We need our best covers doing exactly that blanketing the talented GB WR's not in some kind of zone that the Pakers can assimilate into swiss cheese.

Jagsbch
11-21-2004, 11:28 AM
In order to have a successful defense using the 3-4 you have to be able to merge into the 4-3 when your personnel are not making the grade. The 3-4 is a high octane defense, it requires high octane players and coaches to manage it. If pone piece is missing in this defense it collapses faster tan any other.

It is very difficult to maintain the 3-4 for an entire season due to injuries. The 3-4 is the best defense in the league IMO, but a DC has to know when to use it and when to lose it. The 3-4 is best under perfect conditions, when the conditions are not, you have to go to the 4-3. Ok I wanted to get that off my chest before I started reading this thread.

Lucky
11-21-2004, 11:39 AM
The 3-4 is a high octane defense, it requires high octane players and coaches to manage it. If pone piece is missing in this defense it collapses faster tan any other.
Would you mind elaborating as to why the 34 defense requires better players & coaches than the 43 defense? Why does it collapse faster than the 43 due to injuries? It may seem obvious to you, but it's not apparent to me.