PDA

View Full Version : Can playcalling overcome a manhandled OL?


Marcus
10-21-2007, 07:08 PM
When I watched the game, it was obvious the O line was completely dominated by the Titans D-line. The running game was shutdown. Schaub was getting no time to throw and no protection. Give the Titans D some credit. Their front D is awesome, along with out OL not being very good.

But I see that some are still blaming bad playcalling. So here's the question.

What kinds of plays can be called to offset getting beat in the trenches?

Honoring Earl 34
10-21-2007, 07:10 PM
When I watched the game, it was obvious the O line was completely dominated by the Titans D-line. The running game was shutdown. Schaub was getting no time to throw and no protection. Give the Titans D some credit. Their front D is awesome, along with out OL not being very good.

But I see that some are still blaming bad playcalling. So here's the question.

What kinds of plays can be called to offset getting beat in the trenches?

Quick kicks

Fox
10-21-2007, 07:13 PM
I don't watch the OL close enough beyond the point that I can tell they're getting their butts kicked. Did any of them play well today? Do we have any players worth keeping around for next year on the line?

Andrew6
10-21-2007, 07:14 PM
Quick kicks

sad but true

kiwitexansfan
10-21-2007, 07:51 PM
What kinds of plays can be called to offset getting beat in the trenches?

I refer you to the quick hitch, hooks, slants, flat passes of the glorious Carr era.

Runner
10-21-2007, 07:56 PM
What kinds of plays can be called to offset getting beat in the trenches?

They need to design plays that play to the line's strengths.

The first play would leverage the fact that Salaam can play both left and right tackle at the same mediocre level.

Next they need to have a play where Flanagan's locker room persona can open a hole for the RB.

Finally, when it is 3rd and goal and one yard to go, Salaam and Flanagan need to stand up and announce they formerly played for Kubiak and Sherman on other teams, possibly in lyrical fashion. 6 points, guaranteed.


:sarcasm:

nunusguy
10-21-2007, 08:07 PM
When I watched the game, it was obvious the O line was completely dominated by the Titans D-line. The running game was shutdown. Schaub was getting no time to throw and no protection. Give the Titans D some credit. Their front D is awesome, along with out OL not being very good.

But I see that some are still blaming bad playcalling. So here's the question.

What kinds of plays can be called to offset getting beat in the trenches?

We were ineffective in the red-zone against the Jags, but moved the ball downfield between the 20s in a very effective manner in that game.
In this game we couldn't move the ball at all until the 4th Q. I dunno, but as good as the Titans front 4 might be, I don't think they are that much better than the Jags front 4, if at all.
So why did the Texans OLine perform so much better on the road against the Jags last week than against a vinceless Titans D in Reliant this week ?

PapaL
10-21-2007, 08:24 PM
Use their agressiveness against them with counters, screens and quick passes. However our lack of explosion at RB and a DNP'ing AJ makes those things hard to do.

kiwitexansfan
10-21-2007, 08:33 PM
Use their agressiveness against them with counters, screens and quick passes. However our lack of explosion at RB and a DNP'ing AJ makes those things hard to do.

Is this not the same playcalling that everyone here complained about when Carr was QB and Doom wandered the sidelines?

Can't make chicken salad with chicken ......

Texans Horror
10-21-2007, 08:36 PM
They are what they are, and nothing can change that except coaching and new talent. I expect next year we will see some new talent.

Marcus
10-21-2007, 08:55 PM
So again, to hammer home the point . . .

If the O-line is getting totally dominated, how can you blame the playcalling?

Honoring Earl 34
10-21-2007, 08:59 PM
So again, to hammer home the point . . .

If the O-line is getting totally dominated, how can you blame the playcalling?

I know why we can't run screen passes ... we have matadors for guards .

PapaL
10-21-2007, 09:17 PM
Is this not the same playcalling that everyone here complained about when Carr was QB and Doom wandered the sidelines?

Can't make chicken salad with chicken ......

The difference is different teams have different strengths and weaknesses. In the past we thought we could out "execute" them and run our plays. Same plays over and over. It got us...well high draft picks every year.

I believe we now have enough Offensive minded people to take advantage of the other teams weaknesses and use their strengths against them. Game plans should for the most part change week in and week out.

So I say yes, play calling can help an inconsistent OL.

Mr teX
10-21-2007, 09:40 PM
No.. it might be able to buy a little time as far as staying in a game, but unequivocally no.

Marcus
10-21-2007, 09:51 PM
So I say yes, play calling can help an inconsistent OL.

You call that performance today by our OL "inconsistent"?

Well, IMO, using "inconsistent" to describe the OL's play today, is just looking for an excuse to lay the blame somewhere else.

Leahmic223
10-21-2007, 10:04 PM
I think literally one guy is safe to keep and put stock into on that line.

Eric Winston. That is it. That is the only guy that I hardly ever see beat and I think he will hold down that sopt for a long time to come.

Now Salaam...he has to go. Maybe he can be a leader, but he can do it on the bench or the inactive list, hell Kalu seems to do it. He is hurting this team and he's going to get Schaub killed out there. Pitts is alright, he isn't horrible but he isn't nothing to get excited about, same can be said with Weary but IMO a little bit better than Pitts. Flanagan falls in the same line as Salaam.

So yeah, one guy I feel for sure that can start for us next year and that is Winston. I agree that the playcalling isn't as bad as some make it seem. We can't run the ball so Kubiak is being limited because on running plays our Oline is getting handled.

Runner
10-21-2007, 10:07 PM
You call that performance today by our OL "inconsistent"?



Oh. I thought he said "incontinent".

PapaL
10-21-2007, 10:09 PM
You call that performance today by our OL "inconsistent"?

Well, IMO, using "inconsistent" to describe the OL's play today, is just looking for an excuse to lay the blame somewhere else.

Did that say OUR offensive line?

Truth of the matter is they have been Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.

Do tell where do you think the blame should be placed?

kiwitexansfan
10-21-2007, 10:18 PM
I really thought Pitts, Weary and Winston where the answer for us long term.

This years run game makes me quetion this. Or is A.Green that over done??

Leahmic223
10-21-2007, 10:22 PM
I really thought Pitts, Weary and Winston where the answer for us long term.

This years run game makes me quetion this. Or is A.Green that over done??

IMO I would keep Weary and Pitts for the next year, C and LT are bigger needs than them. As for Winston he is playing good right now, I wouldn't mess with him.

As for Green, he's alright. He's not a RB that can break a tackle in the backfield or otherwise make a negative play positive. Those are guys like LT, Peterson, even Lynch. Otherwise he's not a RB that can make the Oline look good, not any more IMO. He seems to be on his last legs.

Honoring Earl 34
10-21-2007, 10:25 PM
I really thought Pitts, Weary and Winston where the answer for us long term.

This years run game makes me quetion this. Or is A.Green that over done??

They can still be the answer ... you just have to change the question .

Marcus
10-21-2007, 10:28 PM
Truth of the matter is they have been Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.

Do tell where do you think the blame should be placed?

You want to use the Jekyll and Hyde analogy, fine, let's run with it. First two games where they won, McKinney was at center, A.J. was playing, and Green was playing, and the running game was working, I didn't see too many complaints about play calling.

Oh, but now that we're losing, McKinney's out for season, and now Flannery is now the center, A.J. is out, the running game is non-existant . . .

. . so it's the 'play calling' now, huh? :rolleyes:

Honoring Earl 34
10-21-2007, 10:34 PM
Is the OL just not physical enough ?

Is it a talent issue ?

Is Kubiak and Sherman trying to mix to much of the Bronco zone and Packer power styles together ?

Are Kubiak and Sherman way to loyal to guys at the end of their careers ?

Is it all the above ?

If we have a weanie OL ... does that affect our young DL ?

Runner
10-21-2007, 10:43 PM
Finally, when it is 3rd and goal and one yard to go, Salaam and Flanagan need to stand up and announce they formerly played for Kubiak and Sherman on other teams, possibly in lyrical fashion. 6 points, guaranteed.



Haiku!

I played for Sherman
When younger, stronger, and fast;
Kubiak for me

threetoedpete
10-21-2007, 10:47 PM
You call that performance today by our OL "inconsistent"?

Well, IMO, using "inconsistent" to describe the OL's play today, is just looking for an excuse to lay the blame somewhere else.

After three quarters they were at 132 yards of total offense. there is no way to put lipstick on this pig. Spin it if you wish. They got beaten like the red headed no tallent step children that they are. The Wizzard's curtain has been pulled and you should know by now exactly what they are. There was some good news...there was a Putzier sighting today. He's back from whatever dog house Sherman has had him in. David Anderson...made a great play...droped a floater...made a great play. You're going to have to kill the guy before he quits. Even the #1 corner can be beat. Great throw, great catch, no one could of stoped that play. Time to let the rookie get toasted and learn. Everybody in the league's got the Petey Faggin's primer. Can Chris White snap the GD ball ? Cut Flanagan monday and scoop up anything that is breathing for a back up off the street. And if Sherman don't like it he can follow him out the door . Enough is enough. Empty the benches and let see what we got. We're not learning anything getting our brains beat out doing the same thing every week.

Texans Horror
10-21-2007, 10:59 PM
I think literally one guy is safe to keep and put stock into on that line.

Eric Winston. That is it. That is the only guy that I hardly ever see beat and I think he will hold down that sopt for a long time to come.

Now Salaam...he has to go. Maybe he can be a leader, but he can do it on the bench or the inactive list, hell Kalu seems to do it. He is hurting this team and he's going to get Schaub killed out there. Pitts is alright, he isn't horrible but he isn't nothing to get excited about, same can be said with Weary but IMO a little bit better than Pitts. Flanagan falls in the same line as Salaam.

So yeah, one guy I feel for sure that can start for us next year and that is Winston. I agree that the playcalling isn't as bad as some make it seem. We can't run the ball so Kubiak is being limited because on running plays our Oline is getting handled.

Interestingly enough, Salaam was removed from the jacksonville jaguars lineup for this same reason.

I really thought Pitts, Weary and Winston where the answer for us long term.

This years run game makes me quetion this. Or is A.Green that over done??

The problem with the o-line is as much A. Green's as it is the quarterbacks' or the wide receivers'. We have second-stringers playing at the two most crucial spots on the line. What else could be expected? Until LT and Center are fixed, they will continue to have these problems.

GP
10-21-2007, 11:01 PM
When I watched the game, it was obvious the O line was completely dominated by the Titans D-line. The running game was shutdown. Schaub was getting no time to throw and no protection. Give the Titans D some credit. Their front D is awesome, along with out OL not being very good.

But I see that some are still blaming bad playcalling. So here's the question.

What kinds of plays can be called to offset getting beat in the trenches?

Getting the ball out of his hand needs to be the QB's high priority.

Schaub was holding the ball too long and scanning the field, looking for plays to develop...rather than bobbing forward into the pocket, therefore he was getting eaten by the dlinemen rushing the edge(s) and collapsing the pocket.

Sage was doing the same thing, too, until a light went off in someone's head (Kubiak? Sage? Who?) and BINGO! we return to first-game form where it was bop-bop-bop, ball out.

Result? Completions.

And when Sage DID make a deep drop, he was bobbing forward away from the pressure and stepping into his throws, completing passes.

I don't know what it was (playcalling, players, or both), but there has been something going on with someone--And I think it was the QB--since week 3.

Because it was night and day from quarters 1-3 and then into the 4th quarter where we looked like the Texans that performed well in weeks 1 and 2.

Hate on me all you want, but since you asked what the problem is/was...I'll step off the "bad playcalling" soap box, since the playcalling was better today than it had been the past 3 weeks, and I'll step up and say that Sage might have stumbled upon something when he began getting into a rhythm and getting rid of the ball no matter what.

Schaub has recently looked slow getting away from center, IMO, and the fact that Flanagan is in place of McKinney is...well...not good for us.

It's just a whole lot of things coming together: AJ out, Green out for so long, Mathis and JJ in-and-out and unpredictable, Shaky QB decision-making, some weird playcalling for the past few weeks, and then BAM! we get jolted to life out of nowhere.

Maybe this is the end of the slide. I dunno...

But today was the most bizarre day I have seen in a long time.

To almost win that game, IMO, was a miracle all by itself. I wish we would have won, but I am actually glad that we at least showed heart and didn't lay down and quit like a Capers team would have.

That counts for something.

eriadoc
10-21-2007, 11:25 PM
Getting the ball out of his hand needs to be the QB's high priority.

Oh, oh! I know this one! Three-step drops, quick hitches, and WR screens, right?

This O-line couldn't protect on a 5-step drop and they aren't doing much better this year. Same line from last year, indeed.

Runner
10-21-2007, 11:26 PM
a) Is the OL just not physical enough ?

b) Is it a talent issue ?

c) Is Kubiak and Sherman trying to mix to much of the Bronco zone and Packer power styles together ?

d) Are Kubiak and Sherman way to loyal to guys at the end of their careers ?

e) Is it all the above ?

f) If we have a weanie OL ... does that affect our young DL ?

a) If it is a requirement that an o-line just blows people off the ball, then no they aren't. However, some of the other questions may answer why they can't perform as a finesse line.

b) Most assuredly. The problem is, this coaching staff has not addressed the talent issue very well.

Exhibit A. They paid Jordan Black $1M to sign on the dotted line. Fans were ecstatic - he started for a play-off team last year! Then the coaches saw him in camp and the fans saw him in the pre-season. Isn't he even an option to take over the starting role with Salaam playing so badly? Bad personnel move.

Exhibit B. Spencer went down last year after 1.5 games and they inserted their 3rd best LT from training camp, Salaam, into the starting role. They then picked up Brad Bedell to back him up because he could play guard too. The 15 minutes he played last year he gave up a sack or two, and he never saw the field again. A limping, well under 100% Salaam was preferable to the back-up they signed for no apparent on-field reason.

c) That seems to be the case; there has certainly been a lot of discussion about it.

d) Yes, but only if they played for them in Denver or Green Bay. Flanagan is so bad they need to move White in. If he is too bad to play* then move Weary to center and put in someone else at guard (Black? - he's supposed to play multiple positions). For a team that builds its roster with swing players, they do little moving around when the line if failing.

*If White is too bad to play in front of Flanagan, then make him Exhibit C in b) above.

e) I guess so, but maybe not a) if they were a talented finesse line.

f) I don't know.

Texans Horror
10-21-2007, 11:26 PM
Getting the ball out of his hand needs to be the QB's high priority.

Schaub was holding the ball too long and scanning the field, looking for plays to develop...rather than bobbing forward into the pocket, therefore he was getting eaten by the dlinemen rushing the edge(s) and collapsing the pocket.

Sage was doing the same thing, too, until a light went off in someone's head (Kubiak? Sage? Who?) and BINGO! we return to first-game form where it was bop-bop-bop, ball out.

Result? Completions.

And when Sage DID make a deep drop, he was bobbing forward away from the pressure and stepping into his throws, completing passes.

I don't know what it was (playcalling, players, or both), but there has been something going on with someone--And I think it was the QB--since week 3.

Because it was night and day from quarters 1-3 and then into the 4th quarter where we looked like the Texans that performed well in weeks 1 and 2.

Hate on me all you want, but since you asked what the problem is/was...I'll step off the "bad playcalling" soap box, since the playcalling was better today than it had been the past 3 weeks, and I'll step up and say that Sage might have stumbled upon something when he began getting into a rhythm and getting rid of the ball no matter what.

Schaub has recently looked slow getting away from center, IMO, and the fact that Flanagan is in place of McKinney is...well...not good for us.

It's just a whole lot of things coming together: AJ out, Green out for so long, Mathis and JJ in-and-out and unpredictable, Shaky QB decision-making, some weird playcalling for the past few weeks, and then BAM! we get jolted to life out of nowhere.

Maybe this is the end of the slide. I dunno...

But today was the most bizarre day I have seen in a long time.

To almost win that game, IMO, was a miracle all by itself. I wish we would have won, but I am actually glad that we at least showed heart and didn't lay down and quit like a Capers team would have.

That counts for something.

Interesting observations about the quarterback - holding the ball too long last year was what was blamed for all those sacks. Certainly not the line.

And in the first few weeks of the 2007 season, the Texans offense did very well with a lightning-release from a much-improved quarterback. He did struggle when he took anything more than his speedy attack.

I've had this insane idea that maybe if the line was better, the quarterback would have more time than is needed in a lightning-release attack. He could have the kind of time Joey Harrington and Mark Brunell have had when their respective teams played the Texans. He might not be taken out of the game. But this is probably crazy talk, blaming the line for these problems...

So I agree with you completely, as long as everything is done to circumvent the line (e.g., asking the quarterback to finish his end of the job before the defensive linemen can take three steps), the Texans will excel. But in games where the quarterback takes a more "normal" time, it will be very hard to win.

GP
10-21-2007, 11:47 PM
Interesting observations about the quarterback - holding the ball too long last year was what was blamed for all those sacks. Certainly not the line.

And in the first few weeks of the 2007 season, the Texans offense did very well with a lightning-release from a much-improved quarterback. He did struggle when he took anything more than his speedy attack.

I've had this insane idea that maybe if the line was better, the quarterback would have more time than is needed in a lightning-release attack. He could have the kind of time Joey Harrington and Mark Brunell have had when their respective teams played the Texans. He might not be taken out of the game. But this is probably crazy talk, blaming the line for these problems...

So I agree with you completely, as long as everything is done to circumvent the line (e.g., asking the quarterback to finish his end of the job before the defensive linemen can take three steps), the Texans will excel. But in games where the quarterback takes a more "normal" time, it will be very hard to win.

Well, let's just go down to O Lines R Us and get us some good linemen OK?

Oh wait...we can't do that. We'll have to just wait and address it after the season.

Afraid we won't address it after this season? That's actually a logical fear to have, I admit it as much.

But here's the deal: Due to a complete and utter lack of management by the previous HC and GM...we had too many holes to fill in too short a time.

We HAD to get the d line shored up, and we have. I doubt we see a 1st day pick on d line in 2008.

We HAD a pretty good LT named Charles Spencer until he went down. IIRC, we drafted o line back-to-back in the third round to get Spencer and Winston. Winston is doing OK, IMO. Spencer in there would help a little.

Other teams are locking up their good o linemen, which is smart. We didn't sell the farm to get Orlando Pace...aren't you glad? He's sitting on a couch and costing HIS team a lot of cap space, not ours.

Perhaps we can pull a 49ers and spend big on o line the same way they spent big on Nate Clements.

Until then, the best we can do is do what got us the win in weeks 1 and 2: Get the ball into our WRs hands--3 and 4 WR sets, and get it into their hands so they can make the plays.

If that's MY fault for seeing that THAT'S the only thing that's getting us anywhere, then continue to bash me.

Everybody wants to know what we can do? We can do what we can do. And what we can do, right now, is to have Kubiak stop pretending that this offense is going to turn a corner and become some powerhouse team that can do whatever it wants as long as we "wish and hope and believe enough in it."

My ability to say "Hey! Get rid of the ball, it's been working when you DO it.." is not also a statement by me that says I think we should stop scrutinizing the o line.

I'm not THAT blind or ignorant.

But if you want to stop the bleeding, if you want to see us stop getting steamrolled early and often in games...well, maybe we should play to our strengths and then attempt to address this fractured oline when we CAN.

Crying about the oline is not going to make the coaches and the GM go "OH! Let's cut 'em all and go find us some good olinemen! They might be near the aisle where RBs and DCs are located..."

Free agency is dead. The draft is where you have to build your team at every position, and then you LOCK UP those guys and keep them like Indy does.

We've had two years, and I think Kubiak/Rick Smith have done all they can do in terms of what you can do in two drafts and virtually no free money to wave at free agents.

Until 2008, we gotta' get rid of the ball and play hide-and-go-seek if we want to NOT get slaughtered.

Sorry if this peeves people off, but the other solution is to (A) pretend we can do what other teams do on gameday, which we cannot...or (B) go out and get us some big name free agents, which we cannot until we get the free'd up cap space.

GP
10-21-2007, 11:54 PM
One last thing:

They showed an on-screen graphic of Okoye and Mario, two guys who are 20 and 22.

That means we potentially have two guys on the d line who will be there for 10 years if they stay healthy.

I have been doubting that the Mario pick was the right pick...but today, it DID bring me some sort of hope in this thought--We can afford to let Mario and Okoye mature at whatever rate it's going to take them, and we can hopefully therefore spend draft picks and fre agency money upon o linemen.

You have to start somewhere, and we chose to start at D when Kubiak took over. You gotta pick ONE, and we picked D.

Maybe they're smart enough to stick with a plan and hopefully target oline for the next 2-3 years. Maybe.

michaelm
10-22-2007, 12:02 AM
You call that performance today by our OL "inconsistent"?

Well, IMO, using "inconsistent" to describe the OL's play today, is just looking for an excuse to lay the blame somewhere else.


It was absolutely inconsistent... for most of the game, they were horrible, and every once in a while they slipped up and made a decent play... if they can just eliminate the odd decent play, they will be consistently horrible...

RamRod
10-22-2007, 02:03 AM
on the first drive the play calling definitley sucked. something like 3 consecutive plays to jacoby? i know our running game sucks with mckinney out,but with jj starting i had a good feeling where the ball was going.we all know that G.K.scripts out the first 15-20 plays. i dont like the line of scrimmage sideline toss three times in a row! especially to a guy that hasnt played a whole lot recently.i mean what were we gonna do Catch them Off guard with our PLAYMAKER.

Ckw
10-22-2007, 02:20 AM
I just skimmed the thread so hopefully this has not been asked but what is everyone's take on moving Winston back to LT? He played there in college and we have never found one. He has looked good out there and I love his fire. When Schaub got nailed, he was all in the defender's face getting mad and letting him have it I guess for what he thought was a dirty hit. So he's got a nice mean streak and has done a solid job. Then again, do we change him when he's been doing so well at RT?

PapaL
10-22-2007, 06:26 AM
You want to use the Jekyll and Hyde analogy, fine, let's run with it. First two games where they won, McKinney was at center, A.J. was playing, and Green was playing, and the running game was working, I didn't see too many complaints about play calling.

Oh, but now that we're losing, McKinney's out for season, and now Flannery is now the center, A.J. is out, the running game is non-existant . . .

. . so it's the 'play calling' now, huh? :rolleyes:

I see your trying to egg me on by twisting what I'm saying. You asked if play calling could overcome being mishandled. I said Yes. You neither asked if that was our case nor did I say it would help us.

We have issues all over the field. Is play calling going to overcome our weaknesses? A little bit. At the and of the day we just don't have talent all over the field and great play calling like the big boys do.

ArlingtonTexan
10-22-2007, 07:27 AM
Without looking in detail at the rest of the thread, the answer is no. Superior talent and execution always trumps playcalling. The attitude of fans is an oversimplified notion that this play did not work, so just calling another one will be better. More often than not, it is not just true.

Malloy
10-22-2007, 07:41 AM
You want to use the Jekyll and Hyde analogy, fine, let's run with it. First two games where they won, McKinney was at center, A.J. was playing, and Green was playing, and the running game was working, I didn't see too many complaints about play calling.

Oh, but now that we're losing, McKinney's out for season, and now Flannery is now the center, A.J. is out, the running game is non-existant . . .

. . so it's the 'play calling' now, huh? :rolleyes:

Hm.. I would say that 'playcalling' is the coaches inability to change the gameplan and the plays called because of our injury-related shortcomings.
The situation changes, respond and redesign our offense so it fits the actual players on the field.

We suffer in having no real running threat (OL, RB, calls... whatever), but why is it that when we put our minds to it, we can grind out alot of yards in the passing game, even when defenses expect it?

I want us to come out shooting since it seems to be the only part of our offense that works good. Keep shooting until we have an honest defense, and then mix a bit of rushing in there. One thing we know is that despite AJ being out, we're NOT short on qualified hands all wanting to catch the ball. That is an advantage, utilize that advantage through playcalling.

Thorn
10-22-2007, 08:42 AM
Here we are in our 6th year and we are still bitching about the offensive line. Well, you know something, we should, because it isn't very good. Neither is the running back position or the obvious holes in our secondary. And despite all the talent on the defensive line, they seldom do anything heroic.

This is not a playoff team. We are still saddled with a lot of crap players that couldn't make the practice squad of another NFL team.

But, hey, at least we aren't Miami or St. Louis. Things could be worse, you know.

dskillz
10-22-2007, 08:45 AM
Use their agressiveness against them with counters, screens and quick passes. However our lack of explosion at RB and a DNP'ing AJ makes those things hard to do.



Perfect answer. I think the RB problem is the main culprit though. Ahman doesn't trust that knee, so those explosions and sweet cuts he made in the first 2 games are not there anymore.

Texans Horror
10-22-2007, 09:11 AM
Well, let's just go down to O Lines R Us and get us some good linemen OK?

Oh wait...we can't do that. We'll have to just wait and address it after the season.

Afraid we won't address it after this season? That's actually a logical fear to have, I admit it as much.

But here's the deal: Due to a complete and utter lack of management by the previous HC and GM...we had too many holes to fill in too short a time.

We HAD to get the d line shored up, and we have. I doubt we see a 1st day pick on d line in 2008.

We HAD a pretty good LT named Charles Spencer until he went down. IIRC, we drafted o line back-to-back in the third round to get Spencer and Winston. Winston is doing OK, IMO. Spencer in there would help a little.

Other teams are locking up their good o linemen, which is smart. We didn't sell the farm to get Orlando Pace...aren't you glad? He's sitting on a couch and costing HIS team a lot of cap space, not ours.

Perhaps we can pull a 49ers and spend big on o line the same way they spent big on Nate Clements.

Until then, the best we can do is do what got us the win in weeks 1 and 2: Get the ball into our WRs hands--3 and 4 WR sets, and get it into their hands so they can make the plays.

If that's MY fault for seeing that THAT'S the only thing that's getting us anywhere, then continue to bash me.

Everybody wants to know what we can do? We can do what we can do. And what we can do, right now, is to have Kubiak stop pretending that this offense is going to turn a corner and become some powerhouse team that can do whatever it wants as long as we "wish and hope and believe enough in it."

My ability to say "Hey! Get rid of the ball, it's been working when you DO it.." is not also a statement by me that says I think we should stop scrutinizing the o line.

I'm not THAT blind or ignorant.

But if you want to stop the bleeding, if you want to see us stop getting steamrolled early and often in games...well, maybe we should play to our strengths and then attempt to address this fractured oline when we CAN.

Crying about the oline is not going to make the coaches and the GM go "OH! Let's cut 'em all and go find us some good olinemen! They might be near the aisle where RBs and DCs are located..."

Free agency is dead. The draft is where you have to build your team at every position, and then you LOCK UP those guys and keep them like Indy does.

We've had two years, and I think Kubiak/Rick Smith have done all they can do in terms of what you can do in two drafts and virtually no free money to wave at free agents.

Until 2008, we gotta' get rid of the ball and play hide-and-go-seek if we want to NOT get slaughtered.

Sorry if this peeves people off, but the other solution is to (A) pretend we can do what other teams do on gameday, which we cannot...or (B) go out and get us some big name free agents, which we cannot until we get the free'd up cap space.

Several times in the history of the Texans, they have tried to fix line problems by buying a player off the open market (e.g., Victor Riley). It hasn't worked yet. So I am in complete agreement with you. They need to draft their line and not buy the line. In the meantime, they will have to make due with what they've got. And if they can't get the ball out of there fast enough, they'll suffer for it.

I hope I'm not the one you see as bashing you. I agree with you and wanted to add to what you said as part of the discussion.

Mr teX
10-22-2007, 09:36 AM
Several times in the history of the Texans, they have tried to fix line problems by buying a player off the open market (e.g., Victor Riley). It hasn't worked yet. So I am in complete agreement with you. They need to draft their line and not buy the line. In the meantime, they will have to make due with what they've got. And if they can't get the ball out of there fast enough, they'll suffer for it.

I hope I'm not the one you see as bashing you. I agree with you and wanted to add to what you said as part of the discussion.

What both of you guys fail to realize is that the whole "getting the ball out fast enough" thing was said about DC last year. & since we all agree that Schaub is light years ahead of DC in terms of QBing, I think we can rule out schaub as the problem. He's just got the same affliction as DC had last year........... bad Olineitis.

eriadoc
10-22-2007, 10:27 AM
Well, let's just go down to O Lines R Us and get us some good linemen OK

Oh wait...we can't do that. We'll have to just wait and address it after the season.

Some of us on these boards have been begging for the team to do just that - since we knew Boselli wasn't coming back. Aside from Pitts, we haven't drafted a lineman higher than the 3rd round. Approximately 75% of the starting left tackles in the NFL have been drafted before halfway into the 2nd round. If this team continues to gamble that they are going to strike gold in the 3rd round and later, they are going to continue getting what they've gotten. More to the point, we fans are going to continue getting what we have supported.

Afraid we won't address it after this season? That's actually a logical fear to have, I admit it as much.

If history is any indication, we have every reason to be concerned.

But here's the deal: Due to a complete and utter lack of management by the previous HC and GM...we had too many holes to fill in too short a time.

We HAD to get the d line shored up, and we have. I doubt we see a 1st day pick on d line in 2008.

I am a Mario supporter, and I like Okoye, but to say we had to get the D-Line shored up over the offensive line is incorrect - it was a decision they made, as both lines needed help. Given that this team has never had a good left tackle, that need, in my mind, would have trumped D-Line.

We HAD a pretty good LT named Charles Spencer until he went down.

We had a guy who showed some promise, and only played about 5 quarters of football. To label him "good" is a bit misleading. To rely on him to return is foolhardy, IMO.

As for the whole "same offensive line as last year" garbage that floats around - first of all, it's mostly the same line that was in place for about the final quarter of the season. Second, it's not at all comparable to some of the offensive lines that have plagued this team in years past. As much as I complain about the left tackle, Ephraim Salaam is not terrible, like Riley was. He's not as bad as Todd Wade was. But he has problems in pass pro, and he's not the answer at that position. It will be some time coming, but how long will it be before this line (or future variants, given the same lack of dedication to fixing it) ruins Matt Schaub?

Mr teX
10-22-2007, 10:40 AM
Some of us on these boards have been begging for the team to do just that - since we knew Boselli wasn't coming back. Aside from Pitts, we haven't drafted a lineman higher than the 3rd round. Approximately 75% of the starting left tackles in the NFL have been drafted before halfway into the 2nd round. If this team continues to gamble that they are going to strike gold in the 3rd round and later, they are going to continue getting what they've gotten. More to the point, we fans are going to continue getting what we have supported.



If history is any indication, we have every reason to be concerned.



I am a Mario supporter, and I like Okoye, but to say we had to get the D-Line shored up over the offensive line is incorrect - it was a decision they made, as both lines needed help. Given that this team has never had a good left tackle, that need, in my mind, would have trumped D-Line.



We had a guy who showed some promise, and only played about 5 quarters of football. To label him "good" is a bit misleading. To rely on him to return is foolhardy, IMO.

As for the whole "same offensive line as last year" garbage that floats around - first of all, it's mostly the same line that was in place for about the final quarter of the season. Second, it's not at all comparable to some of the offensive lines that have plagued this team in years past. As much as I complain about the left tackle, Ephraim Salaam is not terrible, like Riley was. He's not as bad as Todd Wade was. But he has problems in pass pro, and he's not the answer at that position. It will be some time coming, but how long will it be before this line (or future variants, given the same lack of dedication to fixing it) ruins Matt Schaub?

If they don't address it soon (like by the end of the season) that will be the question to be answered indeed. We'll be like a dog chasing its tail.

eriadoc
10-22-2007, 10:57 AM
b) Most assuredly. The problem is, this coaching staff has not addressed the talent issue very well.

Exhibit A. They paid Jordan Black $1M to sign on the dotted line. Fans were ecstatic - he started for a play-off team last year! Then the coaches saw him in camp and the fans saw him in the pre-season. Isn't he even an option to take over the starting role with Salaam playing so badly? Bad personnel move.

Exhibit B. Spencer went down last year after 1.5 games and they inserted their 3rd best LT from training camp, Salaam, into the starting role. They then picked up Brad Bedell to back him up because he could play guard too. The 15 minutes he played last year he gave up a sack or two, and he never saw the field again. A limping, well under 100% Salaam was preferable to the back-up they signed for no apparent on-field reason.

Exhibit C (not related to O-Line, but further illustrates what Runnner is saying): Samkon Gado makes the team over Wali Lundy and Darius Walker (and probably would have made it over Chris Taylor, if I had to bet, just based on the way the staff has conducted themselves). With Ron Dayne inactive, Ahman Green gets injured. After handing the ball to Gado a couple times in the first half, the team starts using the backup FB, Cook, as a tailback. Isn't the 3rd string tailback always preferable to a FB playing the position (unless you're the Broncos, I guess)?

Texans Horror
10-22-2007, 11:33 AM
What both of you guys fail to realize is that the whole "getting the ball out fast enough" thing was said about DC last year. & since we all agree that Schaub is light years ahead of DC in terms of QBing, I think we can rule out schaub as the problem. He's just got the same affliction as DC had last year........... bad Olineitis.

No, as I've said already a couple times on this thread and argued over the past few months, I think it's the o-line:

Interesting observations about the quarterback - holding the ball too long last year was what was blamed for all those sacks. Certainly not the line.

The problem with the o-line is as much A. Green's as it is the quarterbacks' or the wide receivers'. We have second-stringers playing at the two most crucial spots on the line. What else could be expected? Until LT and Center are fixed, they will continue to have these problems.

Mr teX
10-22-2007, 11:36 AM
No, as I've said already a couple times on this thread and argued over the past few months, I think it's the o-line:

My bad...

Runner
10-22-2007, 11:36 PM
I was listening to some of Kubiak's show on 610 today. He didn't seem very enthused about making changes to the o-line. Maybe he's just blowing smoke, but I think he won't be making any chages.

I just don't get it. It isn't like the line could play a lot worse, and they might play better if they make some changes. At worst they could revert back to who they are playing now if the new players do poorly.

They could try Black at tackle; they could try White at center; they could use some of their vaunted swing players and move Black to guard and Weary to center or Pitts to tackle and Black to guard, etc............

Do something!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



If none of the roster plays are capable (why are they on the roster? But I digress...), maybe they could give Rick Smith a short list and see if any free agents meet these requirements. He did pretty good with street free agents for the d-line last year.

Tackle:
Better pass blocker than Salaam
Better run blocker than Salaam
Younger and healthier than Salaam
Cheap
Need only play left tackle
Bonus: familiarity with the Texans system

Center:
Better pass blocker than Flanagan
Better run blocker than Flanagan
Younger and healthier than Flanagan
Cheap
Bonus: familiarity with the Texans system

It should be a pretty quick search. Maybe they could find a player to fill at least one of the positions.