PDA

View Full Version : Bye bye Richard Smith


TheRealJoker
12-30-2007, 04:20 PM
Hopefully after yet another bend but dont break day our DC will be given his walking papers so we can get a quality DC in here that can let our defense fulfill their potential.

Ron Rivera 08!!!

fikster
12-30-2007, 04:28 PM
we better do it quick, i think Rivera will be a commodity this off season. I am all for Rivera or anyone else. Richard Smith is horrible.

TEXANRED
12-30-2007, 04:28 PM
Hopefully after yet another bend but dont break day our DC will be given his walking papers so we can get a quality DC in here that can let our defense fulfill their potential.

Ron Rivera 08!!!

Marvin Lewis may be available as well.

Wolf
12-30-2007, 04:30 PM
I am like you, I am not impressed with our defensive coordinator.

Don't get me wrong, today I loved the win but found myself thinking how is Gray and Jones tearing us up?

then when we got the 21 point lead, I was thinking "how are we not shutting them down with the big lead"

I guess it is because if our pass defense is like that against Jacksonville.. geeze how would it looked against Indy or N.E.?

I must set the bar too high

Marcus
12-30-2007, 04:34 PM
Before some of you want to throw rocks at Richard Smith, think about what players were on the field.

Check the talent first, then look at the coaching.

fikster
12-30-2007, 04:35 PM
i am just waiting to see what Kubiak thought of Richard Smith's performance as the DC. That is the million dollar ? If we can add something to our secondary and use the players we already have on the front seven to put pressure on the QB and stop the run, we could be awesome.

Thorn
12-30-2007, 04:35 PM
When you donít have good corners and safeties, you have to be very careful about committing to an all out rush. As a result, we donít do that often because we just donít have the folks in the defensive backfield to support it. Itís amazing we got as many sacks as we did considering most of the season all we rushed were the four defensive linemen.

I am not defending Smith, Iím just saying until we get some better corners and safeties we have to play with what we have.

fikster
12-30-2007, 04:37 PM
Before some of you want to throw rocks at Richard Smith, think about what players were on the field.

Check the talent first, then look at the coaching.

with the talent drafted on the front line, a pretty good linebacking core with some coverage faults by Greenwood. bennett looks great at corner as a rook, dunta probably won't be the same ever but still good, our safeties suck. we have plenty of talent on the d side, our scheme just sucks. we don't use our talents appropriately.

adam
12-30-2007, 04:37 PM
Our schemes have been horrible, as has our defense for most of the year. I would settle for just about anyone else other than Richard Smith. I think Rivera would be a good selection. Just about anyone would be an improvement.

Wolf
12-30-2007, 04:40 PM
while I agree with that we lack talent and you coach with what you got.

we seem to not disguise well on blitzes

fikster
12-30-2007, 04:43 PM
the more i think about it the more i believe smith has to go. This defense needs to form an identity. They have spent to much money in the drafts on players to not have that. With Mario, Demeco and Amobi locked up for a while, we have to build on that and make this team a defensive juggernaut.

TheRealJoker
12-30-2007, 04:44 PM
Marvin Lewis may be available as well.

I wouldn't be upset with that either. We just need a quality DC that Kubes trusts to run the defense by himself and leaves him alone. Look at the Colts, Dungy got there and kept his hands off the offense because it wasn't broke. Same thing with the Bucs, Gruden got there and let Monte Kiffin continue running the defense with no interruption.

Look at the AFC South coaches:

Dungy

Fisher

Del Rio

Kubiak

Kubiak right now is last on that list because he isn't nearly as experienced at HC than those guys and his assistants aren't near the level of the other 3 guys. Add a quality DC and that coaching gap narrows...

tulexan
12-30-2007, 04:44 PM
Rivera isn't coming here. Why would he? He wants to be a head coach and if he has to remain a DC, then he is going to want a lot of money or to go to a top team.

Marcus
12-30-2007, 04:45 PM
with the talent drafted on the front line, a pretty good linebacking core with some coverage faults by Greenwood. bennett looks great at corner as a rook, dunta probably won't be the same ever but still good, our safeties suck. we have plenty of talent on the d side, our scheme just sucks. we don't use our talents appropriately.

Let's see . . this comes from the only one that gave Kubiak an F on the poll.

Gotcha.

Marcus
12-30-2007, 04:49 PM
while I agree with that we lack talent and you coach with what you got.

we seem to not disguise well on blitzes

You don't disguise well on blitzes when it's hard to disguise lack of talent. I think I'll wait until we have some better players in the backfield before I make a judgement of Smith. He's not going anywhere anyway.

fikster
12-30-2007, 04:51 PM
Let's see . . this comes from the only one that gave Kubiak an F on the poll.

Gotcha.

yes sir, you did. the reason for the F's were coaching mistakes he admitted to this season that costs us games.

you did get me though. kudos.

Wolf
12-30-2007, 04:54 PM
You don't disguise well on blitzes when it's hard to disguise lack of talent. I think I'll wait until we have some better players in the backfield before I make a judgement of Smith. He's not going anywhere anyway.

I doubt he is going anywhere either, but would like to see an upgrade, we have had 2 seasons with him and I haven't been impressed with the schemes.. granted losing almost all of the secondary hurts a team..

I may be knee jerking because i was very frustrated after the subs were doing so well against us today.

76Texan
12-30-2007, 04:57 PM
while I agree with that we lack talent and you coach with what you got.

we seem to not disguise well on blitzesI agree with this. We can build on this and advance our scheme next year.

Thing is, IMO, they want to stick with the solid foundation of a defense, not giving up the big play.

We are still not set about the front four. Where the players stand, every single one of them, from Mario, to TJ, Okoye, Weaver, etc.
IMO, it was a good year to find out what they can bring. Then we can tailor our scheme around that next year.

Today was pretty much a scrimmage anyway.
And Thorn also makes a good point.

TexansFight
12-30-2007, 05:05 PM
I completely agree. One of the things we need to do to be a playoff team next year is to get an elite DC. With a good off-season and draft addressing our secondary and with an elite DC we should have a very salty defense. In my dream world, I would love to see what Bill Belichick could do with our defense. If we have an aggressive smart DC next year we can have a D that can terrorize the league. That with an above average offense will mean legit playoff contender.

Richard Smith is the weakest link, good bye.

Hagar
12-30-2007, 08:31 PM
Don't be suprised if there is no change at DC. I agree with all of you and would prefer we bring in someone new, but Smith may have gotten a pass this year due to all the injuries to the defense.

AnthonyE
12-30-2007, 08:35 PM
Before some of you want to throw rocks at Richard Smith, think about what players were on the field.

Check the talent first, then look at the coaching.


We have quality talent on defense.

Still 400 offensive yards?

I did see blitzes today, however. :)

BigBull17
12-30-2007, 10:08 PM
they also had TOP due to our 2 returns. That puts us a few drives down and kills no time.

bigbrewster2000
12-30-2007, 10:50 PM
We have quality talent on defense.

Still 400 offensive yards?

I did see blitzes today, however. :)

You are right we do have quality talent on Defense, that is why we are not getting blown out due to the massive holes that we have in the secondary. We have had our 4th string CB starting for a good portion of the season. Richard Smith has done a much better job coaching than most of you guys are giving credit for. The Scheme did not give Matt Jones 150 yds recieving today, Von Hutchins did.

This blame the coaches for everything that goes wrong theme has got to stop it is getting really old and it simply is just not the case. Fikster, just becausea coach admits to making mistakes doesnt make him a bad coach. The good coaches do that. The bad ones stay quiet or blame someone else.

Is Richard Smith a great DC, I dunno, probably not but I think he is better than average at least, and if he can ever get a mostly healthy defense on the field I think we will all see drastic impovements.

Marcus
12-30-2007, 11:10 PM
You are right we do have quality talent on Defense, that is why we are not getting blown out due to the massive holes that we have in the secondary. We have had our 4th string CB starting for a good portion of the season. Richard Smith has done a much better job coaching than most of you guys are giving credit for. The Scheme did not give Matt Jones 150 yds recieving today, Von Hutchins did.

This blame the coaches for everything that goes wrong theme has got to stop it is getting really old and it simply is just not the case. Fikster, just becausea coach admits to making mistakes doesnt make him a bad coach. The good coaches do that. The bad ones stay quiet or blame someone else.

Is Richard Smith a great DC, I dunno, probably not but I think he is better than average at least, and if he can ever get a mostly healthy defense on the field I think we will all see drastic impovements.

Good post! Rep on your way!

This "blame the coaching for everything" schtick is just a convenient way to excuse lack of talent. Especially with the blitzing.

If there were more talent in the secondary, there would be more blitzing.

Ckw
12-30-2007, 11:15 PM
Good post! Rep on your way!

This "blame the coaching for everything" schtick is just a convenient way to excuse lack of talent. Especially with the blitzing.

If there were more talent in the secondary, there would be more blitzing.

Totally agree. I am sick of the "blame the coaching" thing as well, but do you guys honestly believe Smith is the answer? I mean I personally see guys like Jethro Franklin, Frank Bush, Marciano, and Kubiak all making strides. I just don't see the same from Smith, but maybe I am just biased against him. I really am curious of your views. :texflag:

threetoedpete
12-31-2007, 03:26 AM
Before some of you want to throw rocks at Richard Smith, think about what players were on the field.

Check the talent first, then look at the coaching.

Nice try but the herd is on a role. Kubes may upgrade. I'll believe it when I see it. Kubiak's one defining strength so far is that he doesn't play to the herd. Hasn't done it yet. Considering the tallent available, I think Smith deserves a raise myself. Lost his lock down corner when ? Middle LB stud has been on one wheel since when ? Okoye kind diapeared on him...yeah it's all the lack of blitzes. Yeah, that's it. That's the ticket.

Specnatz
12-31-2007, 03:39 AM
Good post! Rep on your way!

This "blame the coaching for everything" schtick is just a convenient way to excuse lack of talent. Especially with the blitzing.

If there were more talent in the secondary, there would be more blitzing.

It is not about blame the coaches for everything, it is about placing blame where it belongs. I know I am not the smartest guy here when it comes to football but if I can see where mistakes take place in coaching and schemes then I can bet the other guy across the field damn well can too.

Now granted it maybe talent that dictates why he does not change his blitz calls and do safety blitzes or corner blitzes but I always thought with less talent you change up what you do so the other side can not figure it out, but hey that is just me.



Marvin Lewis may be available as well.

If Baltimore's Staff gets fired like i think they will then you also have Rex Ryan available.

ya know I had to throw that out there just to :stirpot:

threetoedpete
12-31-2007, 03:44 AM
It is not about blame the coaches for everything, it is about placing blame where it belongs. I know I am not the smartest guy here when it comes to football but if I can see where mistakes take place in coaching and schemes then I can bet the other guy across the field damn well can too.

Now granted it maybe talent that dictates why he does not change his blitz calls and do safety blitzes or corner blitzes but I always thought with less talent you change up what you do so the other side can not figure it out, but hey that is just me.





If Baltimore's Staff gets fired like i think they will then you also have Rex Ryan available.

ya know I had to throw that out there just to :stirpot:


Well if Kubes throws him under the bus, he'll be the first one old hoss. Whip yourself up if ya wanna. I don't think Richard Smith is going anywhere. Unless something changes radically the next three weeks, the only guy they'll be looking for is an o-line coach to coach up the youngsters. The Boy moves to OC... same old same old in '08.

whiskeyrbl
12-31-2007, 05:59 AM
Before some of you want to throw rocks at Richard Smith, think about what players were on the field.

Check the talent first, then look at the coaching.

My problem with this is our CB's hardly ever play closer than 5-7 yrds on the reciever at the line. There is hardly any contact in the first 5 yards allowing the timing patterns to go as planned. We need to make those recivers fight in the first 5. This may be a result of all the backups that were forced to play, but whatever it is it needs to be addressed IMO.

Revolution
12-31-2007, 07:11 AM
Rivera isn't coming here. Why would he? He wants to be a head coach and if he has to remain a DC, then he is going to want a lot of money or to go to a top team.

Remain a DC? He is not a DC right now, so I think he will take whatever job he can get.

Having said that, I don't think Smith is going anywhere.

Marcus
12-31-2007, 09:58 AM
My problem with this is our CB's hardly ever play closer than 5-7 yrds on the reciever at the line. There is hardly any contact in the first 5 yards allowing the timing patterns to go as planned. We need to make those recivers fight in the first 5. This may be a result of all the backups that were forced to play, but whatever it is it needs to be addressed IMO.

Why are you, and others, pissing and moaning about Smith having the CBs play the receivers soft?

Let's break this down individually, OK?

Do you really want to see Faggins play tight, bump and run coverage against a receiver?

Do you really want to see Bennett, a rookie, play tight, bump and run coverage against a receiver?

Do you really want to see Von Hutchins play tight, bump and run coverage against a receiver?

Well, that's exactly what they would be doing on blitz packages, exposing their lack of talent. You cry a river when Smith has the CBs give a cushion, and give up the underneath stuff, allowing them the nickle and dime down the field. But I'll take that over 80 yard bombs against CBs who can't cover, any day of the week.

You give Smith better confidence that his CBs can cover their people, then you'll see him take more risks. I'm frankly amazed that Smith blitzes at all given the players in the secondary that he has to work with.

You just don't make up for lack of talent.

Texans_Chick
12-31-2007, 10:52 AM
Why are you, and others, pissing and moaning about Smith having the CBs play the receivers soft?

Let's break this down individually, OK?

Do you really want to see Faggins play tight, bump and run coverage against a receiver?

Do you really want to see Bennett, a rookie, play tight, bump and run coverage against a receiver?

Do you really want to see Von Hutchins play tight, bump and run coverage against a receiver?

Well, that's exactly what they would be doing on blitz packages, exposing their lack of talent. You cry a river when Smith has the CBs give a cushion, and give up the underneath stuff, allowing them the nickle and dime down the field. But I'll take that over 80 yard bombs against CBs who can't cover, any day of the week.

You give Smith better confidence that his CBs can cover their people, then you'll see him take more risks. I'm frankly amazed that Smith blitzes at all given the players in the secondary that he has to work with.

You just don't make up for lack of talent.


The offense missed key starters for most of the year yet looked semi-respectable to good.

The defense whether it had all its starters or not is at the bottom of the league.

On offense, you know what they are drafting for because they have a defined philosophy.

On defense, you have no idea what they are drafting for because Richard Smith has no track record of what his sort of defense is supposed to look like other than bad.

I am guessing he is going to stay with the team because he has the excuse that his guys were hurt. But I have to say it was pretty sick seeing a team of Jag backups move the ball on the Texans at will.

Yes, the Texans need more help on the defensive side of the ball. But what is their plan? What kind of guys do they need to run whatever Smith's 4-3 is? To this date, all we know about what Smith wants to do is run an aggressive 4-3.

The Texans are not going to be a position to get physical freaks every draft on defense. At some point, you are going to need a DC who can get young players and fill-in free agents to play together quickly. Where your scheme is easy to learn and impliment in an age of player movement and depending on youth. I haven't seen much of the scheme elevating the players.

Marcus
12-31-2007, 11:13 AM
I keep hearing about "scheme" and how Smith is not using a "scheme", or that he's using the wrong "scheme"?

I'd like to hear you opinions as to what exactly "scheme" is.

Remove my suspicions that "scheme" is a just a convenient, although inaccurate, way to slam him.

Lucky
12-31-2007, 11:23 AM
The offense missed key starters for most of the year yet looked semi-respectable to good.
The offense also was next to last in turnovers, often putting the defense in an untenable position. I don't see how they are any less responsible (or deserve less credit) for the Texans 8-8 record. The only unit that gave a playoff caliber performance this season was special teams.

TexansFight
12-31-2007, 11:26 AM
Marcus- you can see his blitzes coming a mile away. I know Baltimore sucked this year but did you watch their game against NE which they should have won. I would love to see one of Buddy Ryan's kids be the DC of this team. In that game, blitzes and coverage schemes were mixed up beautifully and kept the Patriots as off balanced as I have seen them this year.

I just don't get the sense that RS knows how to maximize the considerable talent we have on D even if we didn't have a banged up secondary. His approach and schemes scream to me "bend don't break" rather than agressive.

I also HATE how much Petey played earlier in the season. That alone should be enough to give him his walking papers. The enormous cushion we give receivers kills me.

Marcus
12-31-2007, 12:02 PM
I just wish some of would make up your minds.

You slam Richard Smith for not using the "talent" we have in the secondary the "right" way, or not using correct "scheme" . . .

. . . and then turn around and say we need secondary help in the draft.

Figures. :rolleyes:

The "blame the coaching" bandwagon rolls on.

Lucky
12-31-2007, 12:29 PM
Does Richard Smith get any credit for:

1) Mario Williams' improvement?
2) Morlon Greenwood's improvement?
3) Fred Bennett's emergence?
4) Will Demps' surprising performance?
5) DeMeco Ryan's consistently outstanding play?

Maybe not. Maybe, it's the position coaches who deserve all of the praise. But if the Texans go outside of the team for a defensive coordinator, that guy will want to bring in their own guys as defensive assistants. And coaches like Jethro Franklin and Johnny Holland might not be kept.

Maybe the Texans could promote Frank Bush as defensive coordinator, and keep the bulk of assistants intact. But, does anyone know what kind of DC Bush would be? Or what his schemes might look like? Would the Texans be changing for change's sake?

Eventually, this is about what Kubiak wants to see in this defense. It doesn't really matter who the DC is, Kubiak has to express what he wants out of the defense. If it's more blitzing and man coverage, Kubiak has to make that clear. I think when he reviews the tape, changes will be made. But more in regards to the players and the schemes than the coaching staff itself.

Hervoyel
12-31-2007, 12:34 PM
Come on Marcus, we all know what she's talking about including yourself. I also feel like Richard Smith is possibly in a bit over his head when it comes to how our defense plays. For most of the year we continued to attempt to get pressure with only our front four despite the very real fact that it wasn't working. I would watch DeMeco Ryans do that "pretend he was blitzing" thing four or five times a game every week and never come and think "Who is this fooling?". We've all seen our defensive backs give up huge cushions to literally EVERYBODY like they were all clones of Marvin Harrison and thought "What's up with this?". Maybe if Richard Smith could describe his system (or "scheme") to some of us we might have some idea why we're doing the things we're doing. Maybe he could just go on 610am or something and talk about where we need to get better or what positions we need to upgrade at. All he usually says though is that we're going to be "aggressive". I've heard that over and over again and alone it doesn't mean much to me.

I guess he suffers from some of his history here. We all remember the clown with the army helmet on and when added to some weird decisions I think that makes it hard to think of him as this "wicked-smart" defensive strategist cooking up a can of whoop-ass to spring on Peyton and Vince.

I saw Vic Fangio (Vic-freakin-Fangio) come in here in 2002 and teach his overly complex and confusing system to our expansion draft guys and get a 16 ranking out of them in 2002. I watched Buddy Ryan bring the 46 to Houston and turn Jim Eddy's mess into a well oiled hitting machine in one season. Tony Dungy went to Indianapolis and their defense jumped from 29th to 8th in one year. These guys are all apparently teaching great schemes.

Richard Smith came here and took Fangio's then 31st ranked defense and took it to 24th. This year we look to be finishing around 22nd (Though after we let Jacksonville's reserves kick us around like crazy we're probably going to be back around 24th). We're going in the right direction albeit slowly (and I'm taking the injuries into account, I'm not ignoring that) so he's coming back next year and I'm good with that. I do have concerns though.

pappy
12-31-2007, 12:39 PM
The offense missed key starters for most of the year yet looked semi-respectable to good.

The defense whether it had all its starters or not is at the bottom of the league.

On offense, you know what they are drafting for because they have a defined philosophy.

On defense, you have no idea what they are drafting for because Richard Smith has no track record of what his sort of defense is supposed to look like other than bad.

I am guessing he is going to stay with the team because he has the excuse that his guys were hurt. But I have to say it was pretty sick seeing a team of Jag backups move the ball on the Texans at will.

Yes, the Texans need more help on the defensive side of the ball. But what is their plan? What kind of guys do they need to run whatever Smith's 4-3 is? To this date, all we know about what Smith wants to do is run an aggressive 4-3.

The Texans are not going to be a position to get physical freaks every draft on defense. At some point, you are going to need a DC who can get young players and fill-in free agents to play together quickly. Where your scheme is easy to learn and impliment in an age of player movement and depending on youth. I haven't seen much of the scheme elevating the players.

It seems that Mr. Smith gets a free pass every year because of injuries !

TheRealJoker
12-31-2007, 01:08 PM
It seems that Mr. Smith gets a free pass every year because of injuries !

I find it interesting how the OL can drop its sack numbers drastically despite being injury riddled like the secondary but the defense cant seem to improve drastically in any one area but its all because the secondary has injuries!!!

Can you pro Richard Smith people say that we've improved in any of these areas significantly on defense?

Sacks? Somewhat but outside of Mario its the same old song and dance when it comes to getting sacks.

Takeaways?

Yards allowed?

POINTS ALLOWED?

That's odd, the offense seemed to learn how to put points on the board every so often although they turn the ball over now despite having an injury riddled OL and the starting QB/RB/WR missing significant time. But the defense despite having more high draft picks as well as FA money poured into it cant seem to improve all that much...

Could the scheme have anything to do with this?

Marcus
12-31-2007, 01:12 PM
Come on Marcus, we all know what she's talking about including yourself. I also feel like Richard Smith is possibly in a bit over his head when it comes to how our defense plays. For most of the year we continued to attempt to get pressure with only our front four despite the very real fact that it wasn't working. I would watch DeMeco Ryans do that "pretend he was blitzing" thing four or five times a game every week and never come and think "Who is this fooling?". We've all seen our defensive backs give up huge cushions to literally EVERYBODY like they were all clones of Marvin Harrison and thought "What's up with this?". Maybe if Richard Smith could describe his system (or "scheme") to some of us we might have some idea why we're doing the things we're doing. Maybe he could just go on 610am or something and talk about where we need to get better or what positions we need to upgrade at. All he usually says though is that we're going to be "aggressive". I've heard that over and over again and alone it doesn't mean much to me.

I guess he suffers from some of his history here. We all remember the clown with the army helmet on and when added to some weird decisions I think that makes it hard to think of him as this "wicked-smart" defensive strategist cooking up a can of whoop-ass to spring on Peyton and Vince.

I saw Vic Fangio (Vic-freakin-Fangio) come in here in 2002 and teach his overly complex and confusing system to our expansion draft guys and get a 16 ranking out of them in 2002. I watched Buddy Ryan bring the 46 to Houston and turn Jim Eddy's mess into a well oiled hitting machine in one season. Tony Dungy went to Indianapolis and their defense jumped from 29th to 8th in one year. These guys are all apparently teaching great schemes.

Richard Smith came here and took Fangio's then 31st ranked defense and took it to 24th. This year we look to be finishing around 22nd (Though after we let Jacksonville's reserves kick us around like crazy we're probably going to be back around 24th). We're going in the right direction albeit slowly (and I'm taking the injuries into account, I'm not ignoring that) so he's coming back next year and I'm good with that. I do have concerns though.

With all due respect, you come on Herv.

We all knew, including you and her, that the secondary was a weakness before last year's draft, and for all the reasons discussed ad nausem, remained a weakness after the draft. It was a weakness going into training camp. It was a weakness going into preseason. It was a weakness going into the regular season. And then duriing the regular season, need you be reminded of all the injuries that occurred to make the secondary even weaker?

We have a weak secondary. The secondary sucks.

No amount of "scheming" or "strategy" is going to hide that fact, or somehow make up for it. You think that if they just had the right defensive coordinator, he could take that sow's ear of a secondary and make it a silk purse.

Keep dreaming.

HOU-TEX
12-31-2007, 01:44 PM
The lack of talent in the secondary and OLB need to be addressed this off-season.

Having said that, it's the DC's job to put his players in the best position to succeed. IMO, he did not do his job.

:texflag:

thunderkyss
12-31-2007, 01:54 PM
The lack of talent in the secondary and OLB need to be addressed this off-season.

Having said that, it's the DC's job to put his players in the best position to succeed. IMO, he did not do his job.

:texflag:


I can live with the talent we have in the secondary. Upgrades would be nice of course, but I'd love to get more talent at the LB position. I think that is a bigger problem than the secondary.

Against our team, QBs have no problem hitting the intermediate & underneath routes. Because we don't have any linebackers to make it a challenge for them.

It'd be nice, if we spent some time working with Demps and his ball handling skills.

But Linebacker is our weekest position in pass coverage.

Marcus
12-31-2007, 02:02 PM
Could this be why Michael Boulware was rumored to have been seen working out with the linebackers yesterday? Shift of position maybe?

Second Honeymoon
12-31-2007, 02:41 PM
When you don’t have good corners and safeties, you have to be very careful about committing to an all out rush. As a result, we don’t do that often because we just don’t have the folks in the defensive backfield to support it. It’s amazing we got as many sacks as we did considering most of the season all we rushed were the four defensive linemen.

I am not defending Smith, I’m just saying until we get some better corners and safeties we have to play with what we have.

Actually when your secondary is hurting, you need to put more pressure on the passer. People got this backwards. Sitting in a zone and rushing 3 or 4 people is making backup QBs look like Johnny Unitas. When your secondary is struggling or undermanned, you gotta get after the QB especially if he is a backup or unproven. You can't let a QB get in rhythym and we let QBs get in a rhythym on a weekly basis.

Richard Smith must go and he must go now. Rivera would be a nice hire and a guy who has credibility but there is another possibility for a big splash at DC. Now that Billick has been fired, Rex Ryan is out there but it looks like he is a frontrunner for the Baltimore job. If he doesn't get the job we gotta take a run at him as our DC. It may be a long shot as he is currently at the potential HC candidate level, but if we give him some big $$ he may view it as a good opportunity.

the best year of football i ever witnessed in Houston was when we paid the big money to Buddy Ryan and brought him in so why not try bringing in another Ryan to Houston. I think it would do wonders for us and make us a contender next year for a Wild Card berth.

disaacks3
12-31-2007, 03:14 PM
Why are you, and others, pissing and moaning about Smith having the CBs play the receivers soft?

Let's break this down individually, OK?

Do you really want to see Faggins play tight, bump and run coverage against a receiver?

Do you really want to see Bennett, a rookie, play tight, bump and run coverage against a receiver?

Do you really want to see Von Hutchins play tight, bump and run coverage against a receiver?

Well, that's exactly what they would be doing on blitz packages, exposing their lack of talent. You cry a river when Smith has the CBs give a cushion, and give up the underneath stuff, allowing them the nickle and dime down the field. But I'll take that over 80 yard bombs against CBs who can't cover, any day of the week.

You give Smith better confidence that his CBs can cover their people, then you'll see him take more risks. I'm frankly amazed that Smith blitzes at all given the players in the secondary that he has to work with.

You just don't make up for lack of talent. I understand your point, but it becomes automatically self-defeating on a 3rd & 9 to give a 12-yd cushion.

In direct answer to your question, YES I would like to see Faggins, Bennet, et al. giving a "chuck" at the line. Secondaries just as bad as ours (without as good a front four) do it against the Patriots & Colts, why can't we? To enhance your pass rush, you've got to disrupt timing and force the QB to throw quickly. If every WR on the other side KNOWS he's getting a minimum 7-yd cushion without EVER getting a chuck, then it turns into a game of pitch-and-catch...nothing more.

When you're getting good enough pressure to be a "step short" on your pass rush, then you need to chuck the WRs at the line and make those 3rd and long conversions a lot harder.

You always adjust your 'scheme' according to your competition and your talent. Right now, we're playing VERY soft coverage against mediocre QBs/WRs and praying for a break. We aren't even trying to adjust at times.

Does it raise your chances of getting burned? Possibly.
Are we already getting burned consistently BECAUSE we're playing too soft? Definitely!

Hervoyel
12-31-2007, 03:16 PM
With all due respect, you come on Herv.

We all knew, including you and her, that the secondary was a weakness before last year's draft, and for all the reasons discussed ad nausem, remained a weakness after the draft. It was a weakness going into training camp. It was a weakness going into preseason. It was a weakness going into the regular season. And then duriing the regular season, need you be reminded of all the injuries that occurred to make the secondary even weaker?

We have a weak secondary. The secondary sucks.

No amount of "scheming" or "strategy" is going to hide that fact, or somehow make up for it. You think that if they just had the right defensive coordinator, he could take that sow's ear of a secondary and make it a silk purse.

Keep dreaming.

Yes, we have a weak secondary that got even weaker when Dunta went down. This may come as a shock to you but this wasn't the first time I'd watched a football team with a weak secondary. We're not the only team in football with a few liabilities back there trying to cover wideouts.

If your secondary can't cover you have to get to the QB. If you can't do it with four you bring 5. Sure, you're going to get burned if you lose but if you let that QB sit there and get comfortable then you're dead anyway

Like we were against Atlanta when the legendary Joey Harrington carved us up for 23 out of 29 and a pair of TD's

Like we were against Tennessee when Kerry Collins drove downfield to setup Bironas for the game winner.

Like we were against Jacksonville when Quinn Gray got 300 yards and 4 touchdowns (without Fred Taylor or Maurice Jones-Drew even stepping foot on the field)

In a weird way I'm kind of sad that we didn't have the opportunity to let the ancient Vinny Testaverde get a 3-4 TD day in on us while Richard Smith protected his "weak" secondary by not bothering to put any pressure on him.

You're gonna get picked apart anyway so bring the house, knock the QB's head off (which is twice as effective when you're dealing with a non-starter "journeyman" QB) and get him hearing footsteps and seeing double. Sure you give up a TD, maybe two of them along the way but if you put a lick on the QB everytime he drops back to pass you reduce his effectiveness. We (should) know that better than almost anybody after the first four years of our existence.

I guess pressure isn't part of Richard Smith's "scheme" though unless conditions are perfect (every single guy back there is healthy and headed to the Pro Bowl) or we've reached a point in the season where he doesn't know what else to try (like the last two years where he suddenly started sending blitzes like he just discovered they existed).

You would think an "aggressive" defense kind of guy would be willing to attack an offense instead of just waiting for them to chew his defense up wouldn't you?

TexansFight
12-31-2007, 03:43 PM
Marcus and other Richard Smith apologists:

You have to remember that RS was Kubiak's 4th or 5th choice as DC. RS is not a highly regarded DC like Gregg Williams or Rex Ryan whom you can rightfully give the benefit of the doubt to. After 2 years, I don't think any of us really know what kind of defensive identity that RS would ideally like to employ. With the Tampa 2, 46, Blitzburgh schemes you knew what the overall philosophy was. What the hell is RS trying to do?

Second Honeyoon: I completely agree that the 1993 Oilers were the most fun team that we Houston fans had the pleasure of rooting for (I am too young to remember Luv Ya Blue). I LOVED the 46. That type of defense is how I would like to play. Damn it we should have gone to the Super Bowl with that team. F Joe Montana, Marcus Allen, and Bud Adams.

infantrycak
12-31-2007, 03:45 PM
You have to remember that RS was Kubiak's 4th or 5th choice as DC.

I have no affinity for Smith at all, but where does this assertion come from?--the only person I have heard named as higher on the list was Frank Bush.

Second Honeymoon
12-31-2007, 03:47 PM
Marcus and other Richard Smith apologists:

You have to remember that RS was Kubiak's 4th or 5th choice as DC. RS is not a highly regarded DC like Gregg Williams or Rex Ryan whom you can rightfully give the benefit of the doubt to. After 2 years, I don't think any of us really know what kind of defensive identity that RS would ideally like to employ. With the Tampa 2, 46, Blitzburgh schemes you knew what the overall philosophy was. What the hell is RS trying to do?

Second Honeyoon: I completely agree that the 1993 Oilers were the most fun team that we Houston fans had the pleasure of rooting for (I am too young to remember Luv Ya Blue). I LOVED the 46. That type of defense is how I would like to play. Damn it we should have gone to the Super Bowl with that team. F Joe Montana, Marcus Allen, and Bud Adams.

I was a kid when Luv Ya Blue went down and it was incredible but nothing compared to the Buddy Ryan year. Remember how you would be upset if the other team didn't go three and out. When the other team even got one first down it was like 'Damn, they got a first down'. With the offense just sucking we started 1-3 then won our last 12 games in a row. First divisional playoff home game but we went against Montana and he still had one game of magic left in his tank.

Yeah that pass from Montana to Cash will always be etched in my brain just like 35-3.

Errant Hothy
12-31-2007, 03:51 PM
I have no affinity for Smith at all, but where does this assertion come from?--the only person I have heard named as higher on the list was Frank Bush.

Who is also currently on staff.

Maybe Kubiak isn't a good judge of defensive coaches and thier abilities?

TexansFight
12-31-2007, 03:54 PM
I have no affinity for Smith at all, but where does this assertion come from?--the only person I have heard named as higher on the list was Frank Bush.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2316802

The article mentions Jim Bates was also pursued. If I remember correctly, Jerry Gray was also considered but turned it down.

Marcus
12-31-2007, 05:27 PM
Marcus and other Richard Smith apologists:

Where do you get this "and other Richard Smith apologists" from? I don't see anyone else here taking up for Richard Smith. It's me and ONLY me, so git yer facts straight.;)

And as for "having it backwards", that's a hoot, seeing's how this "Bye Bye Richard Smith" chuckwagon that ya'll are so eager to jump on, is going in reverse.

There are a whole lot of people here who got it backwards . . . but I ain't one of them.:)

Happy New Years everyone! I'm off to Fogo de Chau to play carnivore.

TheRealJoker
12-31-2007, 05:34 PM
For everyone thinking Richard Smith should stay answer me this...

Do you think Smith is capable of coaching a defense to the level that teams like the Bucs, Ravens, Eagles, Bears, and Steelers can consistently field?

Double Barrel
12-31-2007, 05:48 PM
Part of having a good defense is having a well balanced TEAM.

How many bad field positions did our offense and special teams leave our defense protecting? Add up too many stupid turnovers and 3 and outs to count, and our mediocre-at-best defense is going to get beat down.

Some of the best defensive teams have offenses that can keep them off the field so they stay rested through the 4th quarter. If a D is always on it's heels because of bad field position and stupid offensive mistakes that never give them any rest, it's tough for even the best of players to have something in the tank for the last quarter of the game.

I'm not a Smith fan, but I certainly understand the players have to execute the plays that are called at the end of the day. It is an effort that involves coaching calling the plays to set up our players to succeed. It's a dynamic between coordinators and players. One knows the limitations and finds ways to maximize, and the other follows through by actually making the called plays successful.

I'm not all that sure that Richard Smith's playcalling is all that consistent, though. We play a soft zone way too much, letting teams nickel and dime us down the field. The whole "bend but don't break" attitude seems to be Smith's gameplan.

I've not been impressed with his halftime adjustments, either. To be sure, it's tough to tell if we are even making any.

But, having watched way too many other NFL games this season, it seems to me that our defense is very vanilla in the way of schemes. Of course, this goes back to personnel, too, and if they can handle it if Smith has it in him to call.

I think he'll be our DC in 2008, for better or for worse. Not much we can do about it, so I'll just evaluate and analyze. No point in bitching or moaning, because it is what it is.

aj.
12-31-2007, 05:53 PM
N.D. Kalu spoke highly of Smith in his post game comments yesterday. Grain of salt - players hate change and like their comfort zone, yes, but he didn't have to gush over him like he did.

Jim Eddy's mess was ranked 3rd in the NFL (yards) and 9th in fewest points allowed. That's on a team with an offense that didn't exactly grind out clock eating drives. Eddy was the main fall guy for 35-3 but there was plenty of blame to go around on the offensive side of the ball in that fateful second half.

The following year, Buddy's D was #1 against the run, 23rd against the pass and 14th overall (yards). They were 4th in the league in fewest points allowed.

If the Texans fire Smith (I don't think they will) they will also need to replace Bush if they don't name him DC. I'm not high on Smith for the record...

I have a $100 gift cert to Fogo that's burining a hole in my pocket... not tonight...too many drunks on the road.

LonerATO
01-01-2008, 01:11 PM
well we can have a shot at rex ryan now that he is no longer employeed by the ravens. i like rather have im then rivera

Pantherstang84
01-01-2008, 02:01 PM
Before some of you want to throw rocks at Richard Smith, think about what players were on the field.

Check the talent first, then look at the coaching.

I did and I also saw us giving the J-ville receivers 10-15 yard cushions. No wonder Gray looked like a Pro-Bowler. The man runs scared schemes. He is so afraid of getting the defense burnt behind them he forgets the opposing offense is lined up in front of them.

checo446
01-01-2008, 02:20 PM
well we can have a shot at rex ryan now that he is no longer employeed by the ravens. i like rather have im then rivera

I would love to see Rex Ryan as our DC. The guy loves a tough, mean, and aggressive D. we need his mentality for us to be successful in the division.

GP
01-01-2008, 02:55 PM
With all the injuries to our offense, we still managed to work through it and get something done--The reduction in Qb sacks, alone, is proof that a "scheme" and its players can do wonders.

Our defense has had injuries to the dbacks and DeMeco Ryans, as well, which sort of mirrors the injury bug on our oline/QB/Andre Johnson.

The difference, though, is that Richard Smith doesn't seem to know how to overcome the deficit. Each season has been the same: Starts off slow and conservative, then gets aggressive at the end of the season with more risk-taking on blitz packages.

How long is it going to take us to build a defense that is worthy of Richard Smith's expertise? We've been addressing it EARLY in every recent draft (Dunta, Travis Johnson, Mario Williams, DeMeco Ryans, Amobi Okoye). We went after a hard-nosed LB in FA (Clark) to pair up with Ryans, seemed to secure a good DB prospect in Fred Bennett, and acquired Weaver and Kalu to beef up the dline. Will Demps is doing fairly well at safety. So, do we need 1st round, Pro Bowl caliber talent at every position in the defense to allow Richard Smith to do his job better than he has?

Kubiak (an "offense" guy) was generous, IMO, to let his defense get the first pick the past two drafts. Now's the time we go either OL or RB, but then again--Kubiak likes to draft crap at RB really late in the draft because Terrell Davis 100 years ago was able to show that you don't need top-tier talent at RB to succeed...

Texans_Chick
01-01-2008, 05:03 PM
N.D. Kalu spoke highly of Smith in his post game comments yesterday. Grain of salt - players hate change and like their comfort zone, yes, but he didn't have to gush over him like he did.

Jim Eddy's mess was ranked 3rd in the NFL (yards) and 9th in fewest points allowed. That's on a team with an offense that didn't exactly grind out clock eating drives. Eddy was the main fall guy for 35-3 but there was plenty of blame to go around on the offensive side of the ball in that fateful second half.

The following year, Buddy's D was #1 against the run, 23rd against the pass and 14th overall (yards). They were 4th in the league in fewest points allowed.

If the Texans fire Smith (I don't think they will) they will also need to replace Bush if they don't name him DC. I'm not high on Smith for the record...

I have a $100 gift cert to Fogo that's burining a hole in my pocket... not tonight...too many drunks on the road.

Heard that from ND too.

Agree with much of what you say. Esp. re: Bush. I think Smith stays but boy the defensive side of the ball has been difficult to watch.

Yes, Richard Smith had not much to work with.

But, what in Smith's background gives anyone encouragement that things will get better?

b0ng
01-01-2008, 05:54 PM
Heard that from ND too.

Agree with much of what you say. Esp. re: Bush. I think Smith stays but boy the defensive side of the ball has been difficult to watch.

Yes, Richard Smith had not much to work with.

But, what in Smith's background gives anyone encouragement that things will get better?

Nothing at all from the last 2 years is encouraging about the way the Defense has progressed. I find that to be a coaching error. Whomever says the talent isn't there seems kind of silly. Williams has produced the 3rd highest sacks in the NFL this year. Ryans is a pro bowler. Demps is a pretty good FS and pretty much always has been (His injury got him cut from the Giants). A team like Tampa Bay has done more with less for years, and they did it again this year.

Richard Smith's defenses are consistently (So far) in the bottom 1/3 of the league statistically, and the scoreboard also shows it.

I think he might end up on the outset of his job because I don't think Frank Bush is going to hang around forever waiting to get his shot at the job. All this Rex Ryan talk is nice and all, but I wouldn't bank on him coming over here. I think if Smith does leave (Could happen, I don't know why everybody thinks that he's going to be here for another year), Bush will be the new DC. I don't know what to think about that.

Hervoyel
01-01-2008, 06:15 PM
Heard that from ND too.

Agree with much of what you say. Esp. re: Bush. I think Smith stays but boy the defensive side of the ball has been difficult to watch.

Yes, Richard Smith had not much to work with.

But, what in Smith's background gives anyone encouragement that things will get better?


And THAT is what's foremost on my mind. Look (Marcus in particular) I understand that we can look at 2006 and say "First year in the system, not enough pieces in place" and we can look at 2007 and say "Lots of injuries in the secondary". I get that each of the past two years we've had extenuating circumstances.

I did not have much faith in Richard Smith to begin with however because frankly the guys track record is pretty pedestrian. His history is nothing to get excited about and in two years I haven't seen anything to change that. We've gone from 31st to 24th to 24th (defense ypg) and from 32nd to 25th to 22nd (defense ppg). We've improved under Richard Smith but not nearly enough considering the kind of talent we've brought in on that side of the ball (in my opinion). We didn't make much of a second step this year.

When I see something to get me excited about Richard Smith, Defensive Coordinator Guru then I'll get excited about him. Until then he's still the dopey guy in the army helmet who got the job because Gary Kubiak couldn't find anybody better (at least to me) and that doesn't instill me with tons of confidence.

dickieb
01-02-2008, 11:41 AM
Looks like Rob Ryan is headed to the NY Jets. Rex Ryan is still out there though.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3177174

hookinreds
01-03-2008, 12:00 AM
Since we are having fun throwing out names...what about Wade Phillips? Signed a 3yr deal with the Cowboys to be the guy that can get them their first playoff win in a decade. Just supposed the Cowboys lose in the first round, then what? He will have not done what Jones wanted him to do. Package that in with that I believe Jones wants Garrett to take over the roll anyway, do you think he would sack Wade to keep Garrett since rumor has it that Garrett is going to visit with Atlanta and possible others if they become available? He runs a good 3-4 with more slanting, one-gapping and a hellova lot more blitzing than we have now. Anyhow, thougth I would just play along. I'd be interested if that situation presented itself. Be a good PR move as well, and we know our track record on that.

bckey
01-03-2008, 01:07 AM
Since we are having fun throwing out names...what about Wade Phillips? Signed a 3yr deal with the Cowboys to be the guy that can get them their first playoff win in a decade. Just supposed the Cowboys lose in the first round, then what? He will have not done what Jones wanted him to do. Package that in with that I believe Jones wants Garrett to take over the roll anyway, do you think he would sack Wade to keep Garrett since rumor has it that Garrett is going to visit with Atlanta and possible others if they become available? He runs a good 3-4 with more slanting, one-gapping and a hellova lot more blitzing than we have now. Anyhow, thougth I would just play along. I'd be interested if that situation presented itself. Be a good PR move as well, and we know our track record on that.

I like what you are saying here. The problem I see with it is Wade Phillips is a 3-4 guy. I actually like the 3-4 better but seriously doubt we would go but to it so soon especially after drafting Okoye in the 1st round and our lack of talent at lb.

GP
01-03-2008, 09:47 AM
I doubt Wade Phillips is going anywhere.

Cowboys look much more polished and focused with Phillips as opposed to how they looked with Parcells. I think Phillips is staying for awhile.

BTW, what exactly is the allure of Bill Parcells? I know he has won two Super Bowls. And I know he takes bad teams and turns them around. I just think it's funny how much this guy is idolized by the NFL media.

Parcells strikes me as a guy who is going to MICRO-MANAGE the GM and HC in Miami. Whoever gets the GM and HC jobs should be prepared to have a huge thumb pressed onto their backs at all times.

I wouldn't touch the Dolphins job if I were an up-and-coming HC candidate. This has Pat Riley/Stan Van Gundy/Miami Heat written all over it.

Pantherstang84
01-03-2008, 01:51 PM
I like what you are saying here. The problem I see with it is Wade Phillips is a 3-4 guy. I actually like the 3-4 better but seriously doubt we would go but to it so soon especially after drafting Okoye in the 1st round and our lack of talent at lb.

Yeah. The Texans would have to totally retool the defensive roster to move to a 3-4.

hookinreds
01-03-2008, 02:00 PM
Yeah. The Texans would have to totally retool the defensive roster to move to a 3-4.

My brainfart here on this one guys. Reading one thing and thinking one thing another. Obviously we aren't running a 3-4 and we wouldn't want to change schemes yet again. Ok, we wont get him, but I still bet if they lose, Wade is out and Garrett is in as HC if Jones has anything to do about it.

badboy
01-03-2008, 03:36 PM
Two seasons ago, I kept hearing Smith say he had to simplify the defensive package, especially to help Mario. This past season again he stated he had to cut back to basics and some of the players voiced this also. Often this was after a W. My question is why not start with a simple basic D scheme and add to it as season goes along? Also, the tackling looked terrible to me. How do you "simplify" wrapping a runner up?

thunderkyss
01-03-2008, 03:58 PM
Actually when your secondary is hurting, you need to put more pressure on the passer. People got this backwards. Sitting in a zone and rushing 3 or 4 people is making backup QBs look like Johnny Unitas. When your secondary is struggling or undermanned, you gotta get after the QB especially if he is a backup or unproven. You can't let a QB get in rhythym and we let QBs get in a rhythym on a weekly basis.


correct me if I'm wrong, but I think QBs find their rhythm throwing short & intermediate passes... the longer stuff comes after they've found said rhythm.

Which again, points to my assertion, we need to upgrade our LBs.

Second Honeymoon
01-03-2008, 04:39 PM
correct me if I'm wrong, but I think QBs find their rhythm throwing short & intermediate passes... the longer stuff comes after they've found said rhythm.

Which again, points to my assertion, we need to upgrade our LBs.

your not wrong. QBs find their rhythym when they are given enough time to host a tea party in the pocket while our DC has our talent sitting back in a soft zone with half the guys covering NOBODY or themselves. They get the rhythym regardless of whether they are throwing short, intermediate, or long passes. My point is to not let them get in a rhythym. I don't have a problem with Peyton torching our defense but when a preaseason 3rd stringer like Gray looks like Dan Marino against your defense, its time to question the skill and balls of our Defensive Coordinator, Richard Smith.

As for your assertation that we need to upgrade our LBs. Damn straight we do. Greenwood and Clark would be backups on playoff teams. Its time we get some edge LBs that can contribute to the pass rush...but of course with Richard Smith that ability woudl be wasted because the guy doesnt have enough sack to send more than 4 people against even the most noobish quarterback. It just really gets me sick that it is shaping up that we have that loser back as our DC. Just embarassing to the franchise and an indictment of the culture permeated from the owner down to the head coach. Just too niiiiiiiice and too slow to react. They don't try and put a fire out until its already burned down the whole damn house.

Look at the Carr situation for a parallel. It wasn't until his horrible play was so horribly bad and the team was near total mutiny that they took any action at all...and frankly, it was already too late because they had resigned the loser because they were so niiiiiiiice and didn't want David to feel that he didn't have their backing and confidence. What has Richard Smith done to inspire loyalty? Nothing. Just like Carr. Looks like we are destined to be reactive and not proactive...and that means lots of losing and lots of disappointments.....

...but anyways, nice seeing you around TK. Hopefully they will address some of our holes both on the field and in the booth. Just look for it to be a reactive move and not proactive like more committed teams do. God forbid we hurt anyones feelings by firing them for doing a piss poor job.... :(

Pantherstang84
01-03-2008, 07:47 PM
My brainfart here on this one guys. Reading one thing and thinking one thing another. Obviously we aren't running a 3-4 and we wouldn't want to change schemes yet again. Ok, we wont get him, but I still bet if they lose, Wade is out and Garrett is in as HC if Jones has anything to do about it.

Don't get me wrong. I would love for Wade Phillips to come here as DC. However, we will have to change out a bunch of parts on the defensive side of the ball. Therefore, the defense will continue to suck for a while until the parts swap is complete.

joedinkle
01-04-2008, 10:51 AM
Why do you guys think Wade Phillips would leave a HC job in Dallas, the number 1 seed in the NFC, for a DC job here in Houston?

hookinreds
01-04-2008, 10:56 AM
Why do you guys think Wade Phillips would leave a HC job in Dallas, the number 1 seed in the NFC, for a DC job here in Houston?

Not "leave" on his own accord. My belief is that Jerry Jones wants Garrett to be the HC of the Cowboys. He and his father have been with the organization forever and Jones thinks very highly of him. Garrett is looking for the head spot, and is getting looked at by other organizations. If the Cowboys were to lose early in the playoffs and there was a chance that Garrett could get pulled away by another team for a HC position, I have no doubt that Jones would buy out Phillips on the excuse that he was brought in to win it all and he didn't, and give Garrett the shot at HC.

Your exactly right, I wouldn't expect Wade to "leave" for Houston.

76Texan
01-04-2008, 12:33 PM
If we use Football Outsiders DVOA as a guideline, I believe we have the most difficult schedule in the NFL, with the Redskins and Eagles right behind us.

Roughly equal on both sides of the ball.
Add to that the TOs by the offense and ST.
And the fact that we've been playing with a patchwork defensive backfield all season long.
Our LB corp also has their fair share of knicks and dings.
The average age of our starters (including temporary starters) is about 24.5 (team average just under 27), most likely among the youngest in the league, if not the youngest.

I think we can wait until after next year to evaluate Richard Smith.

Wolf
01-04-2008, 01:15 PM
First off I think Smith will still be around this season and with that said

I almost feel if this were a college team in a college division... defensive coordinator (or something would change on the defensive coaching)would be gone with no questions asked


going 1-5 in the division and we are giving up an average of 33 points a game to our divisional foes.

That wouldn't fly with the alumni. when you are getting beat by rivals..

aj.
01-04-2008, 01:29 PM
The Texans were weak at QB and everyone blamed the OL. Turned out it was mostly due to the QB and lack of a quality RB.

The Texans are weak at both OLB spots and 3/4 of the secondary positions and everyone blames the DC. Turned out it was [ TBD ].

Wolf
01-04-2008, 01:32 PM
The Texans were weak at QB and everyone blamed the OL. Turned out it was mostly due to the QB and lack of a quality RB.

The Texans are weak at both OLB spots and 3/4 of the secondary positions and everyone blames the DC. Turned out it was [ TBD ].

lack of a good safety

and lack of a previous rating of talent on FA's by a certain GM and staff :D