PDA

View Full Version : What is the Defense Missing?


Texanmike02
08-22-2008, 09:30 PM
OK. I've seen the fire Smith thread. I completely disagree. I think what we saw today, with relatively vanila offense vs relatively vanilla defense, is that we don't have the talent yet. Our DBs were HORRIBLE. Our LBS were slow and our DL was ineffective in the pass rush. In the preseason, that's not the coordinator. That's the players. The fact is we have several HUGE holes on this defense.

First, our CBs. With the exception of a few plays, the whole group looked awful. I know Romo had time to throw, but no one was effectively covered even from the start of several plays. Bennett has potential but I didn't see anyone else that resembled NFL coverage. DC can't do that, oh and you can't really blitz effectively if you can't cover.

Our LBs. Tackling was terrible all the way around. I love Ryans, but he looked flat tonight. Very flat. Diles had a decent game, but other than the interception, he was getting drug around too.

Our DL was decent against the run, but provided NO pass rush at all. Very few times was anyone close to Romo. I'm speaking of the first team because that's really what matters from this game.

This was a bad game all around by our defense but it doesn't lie at the DCs feet. This is the preseason, and this is vanilla vs vanilla. Its quite obvious that physically we can't (or failed to if we can) compete with them physically. If someone was out there dominating physically and we then turn in a horrible season, then you know its on the DC. We really need to find someone to rush the passer opposite MW. He was getting double teamed all night long and if he's doing that, hes done his job. He's occupying 2 blockers so we should have an advantage. I really don't know how you fix this.

Mike

pittbull3
08-22-2008, 09:35 PM
Fire SMITH! This is the 3rd year that we have not seen anything creative fromm the scheme. You cannot rely on 4 guys to always get pressure, especially on a PRO BOWL dominated offensive line! Fire him on Monday!:foottap:

Carr Bombed
08-22-2008, 09:46 PM
what is the defense missing?

balls!

Hervoyel
08-22-2008, 10:16 PM
what is the defense missing?

A sense of purpose? Clear direction? A sense of urgency?

Ryan
08-22-2008, 10:18 PM
They had no fire from the beginning of the game. They played like it was a preseason game. We'll have something to worry about if they play this way against the Steelers on opening day.

Thorn
08-22-2008, 10:19 PM
What is the defense missing? A ****ing coach, that what's they're missing.

eriadoc
08-22-2008, 10:21 PM
Without a pass rush, this secondary will continue to get exposed. The secondary is already not great, so it can ill afford to go without help from the front four. With what the team has invested in the front four, there is ZERO excuse for the pathetic pass rush that we saw tonight.

The LB corps needs work, but the expectations aren't as high, outside of Ryans. The secondary has a 4th round pick that we're all high on, a scrub that the Cowboys let go, and a handful of late round picks and journeymen. The D-Line consists of three 1st round picks, a free agent signing that more was expected of, and role players that have outplayed the starters some of the time.

Ckw
08-22-2008, 10:22 PM
What is the defense missing? A ****ing coach, that what's they're missing.

Could someone direct me to the hire Frank Bush thread?

Lucky
08-22-2008, 10:23 PM
I'd rather see young players like Cochran, Adibi, and Molden out there, instead of vets who just don't have it. I'm tired of waiting for guys like Weaver to live up to their contract. I don't care if the young guys make mistakes. As long as they do it running.

Smith has a couple of games to get this together. I've seen coordinators replaced during the season. Right here in Houston.

markn
08-22-2008, 10:24 PM
Incorrect punctuation in the thread title:

What... is the defense missing?

To which the answer is clearly: yes.


I've felt optimistic all throughout the summer, but after watching all three pre-season games, it looks like we're going nowhere. This defense cannot get us to the play-offs, plain and simple.

J-Russ
08-22-2008, 10:25 PM
A coach that has a clue, and experience is what their missing. Our defense is young, but boy I hope they have short memory, cause I don't want them to remember anything that R.Smith taught them.

Wolf
08-22-2008, 10:27 PM
http://www.peoplejam.com/files/u1811/brass_balls.jpg

ChrisG
08-22-2008, 10:28 PM
http://www.peoplejam.com/files/u1811/brass_balls.jpg

what is this defense missing? some of those ^

and a skilled 2ndary...i am extremely pissed with our def :bat:

New_Texans
08-22-2008, 10:30 PM
A pass rush (other than Williams of course)

and Dunta.

eriadoc
08-22-2008, 10:31 PM
what is this defense missing? some of those ^

and a skilled 2ndary...i am extremely pissed with our def :bat:

With as long as Romo had to throw tonight, I don't think a tandem of Deion and Champ Bailey would have helped much.

I'm probably exaggerating, but damn, I'm frustrated with this complete lack of a pass rush EVERY SINGLE F^%$&* YEAR!

buddyboy
08-22-2008, 10:32 PM
The D-line was getting zero pressure, the D-backs were leaving Terrell-freakin-Owens wide open in the middle of the field, running into each other, etc etc, and the linebackers just seemed slow. Marion Barber got 5+ yards every carry without even trying until finally one of the safeties or dbacks got him. And the tackling was unbelievable. Who saw Bennet get punked by the wide reciever on a run after the catch. And I literally saw one of our DBs miss a tackle on a guy who just got up off the turf.

Sad.

Wolf
08-22-2008, 10:32 PM
thing is if it is "vanilla" versus "vanilla" we should be winning the battles up front, if not this game but the other games we have played

if I am not mistaken, schemes help you hide the weaknesses

eriadoc
08-22-2008, 10:33 PM
The D-line was getting zero pressure, the D-backs were leaving Terrell-freakin-Owens wide open in the middle of the field, running into each other, etc etc, and the linebackers just seemed slow. Marion Barber got 5+ yards every carry without even trying until finally one of the safeties or dbacks got him. And the tackling was unbelievable. Who saw Bennet get punked by the wide reciever on a run after the catch. And I literally saw one of our DBs miss a tackle on a guy who just got up off the turf.

Sad.

Yeah, exactly. Other than that, they played well.

:brickwall:

The1ApplePie
08-22-2008, 10:36 PM
Two words

Rey Maualuga

76Texan
08-22-2008, 10:57 PM
The Cowboys front seven was supposed to be very active and strong?
They brought more to the LOS than us and they didn't get squat done!

Let's keep the expectation down, folks!

Hagar
08-23-2008, 12:01 AM
A great big ol' fat boy right in the middle of the line. Shut down the other teams guards and center. Albert Hainsworth (sp) comes to mind. Our DT are too small.

Big Lou
08-23-2008, 12:03 AM
Mario made some big plays, but where ae the Sacks!!!!!!!!

76Texan
08-23-2008, 12:04 AM
We just need a few live chickens or frogs so the guys can learn to tackle! http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/images/icons/icon10.gif

Norg
08-23-2008, 12:06 AM
A good secondary

Honoring Earl 34
08-23-2008, 12:09 AM
Rabies .

Vinny
08-23-2008, 12:33 AM
I'd rather see young players like Cochran, Adibi, and Molden out there, instead of vets who just don't have it. I'm tired of waiting for guys like Weaver to live up to their contract. I don't care if the young guys make mistakes. As long as they do it running.

Smith has a couple of games to get this together. I've seen coordinators replaced during the season. Right here in Houston.Id like to see Okam mixed in this cocktail. We need some size inside....TJ and Okoye are getting manhandled and pushed around. They are good in pursuit and running to the ball but don't look all that great when run at...and they also struggle at keeping the guards off of DeMeco.

dalemurphy
08-23-2008, 12:57 AM
Id like to see Okam mixed in this cocktail. We need some size inside....TJ and Okoye are getting manhandled and pushed around. They are good in pursuit and running to the ball but don't look all that great when run at...and they also struggle at keeping the guards off of DeMeco.

I agree... also, I think Dejuan Robinson has to make the team. He's actually getting penetration which is something we're not getting anywhere else... My DL keepers now:

Mario
Cochran
Kalu
Okoye
TJ
Maddox
Colvin (maybe he's just doggin' it in the pre-season?)
Robinson
Okam

Texans_Chick
08-23-2008, 01:24 AM
My analysis of the defense.

Overall:

The Texans are missing a lot of players in the primes of their careers because we drafted defense so poorly for so long and gave away draft picks with little in return. This means that a lot of our defensive players who are promising are too young. And there are not that many very talented older accomplished mentors to help them along. We have a lot of really young players, a few ancient players, and few in the middle.

Defensive Line. As Kubiak mentioned at the end of last season, the defensive line is imbalanced. Part of that is because of the transitioning from the 3-4 and dealing with those personnel.

DE: It's Mario on one side and no good options on the other side.
DT: Amobi and TJ play the same position and when they are on the field together they are small. Okam is young but more suitable to play next to Amobi/TJ.

Linebackers. It's DeMeco and a bunch of make-dos and young guys.

Safeties. It has been the weakness of the team since the beginning. We've never seen great safety play. Call it the Matt Stevens curse, if you will.

CBs. They are the most inexperienced group the Texans have ever fielded. That means it would take a miracle for them to be really really good even if they will be some day. I still have a hard time seeing Robinson shaking off rust and coming back full speed this season.

Depth. Lots of players doesn't mean lots of depth. In sum, Richard Justice was being disingenous or perhaps just plain ill-informed (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/justice/texans/5897344.html) when he said,"For the first time, the Texans enter a season without a glaring weakness." I read that and went wha?

The freaking defense has been near the bottom of the league in just about every statistical category for the last three seasons. To move from bottom to even average meant that they needed some big improvement in play and coaching. What were the great acquisitions that meant that the defense was going to be all better?

DBCooper
08-23-2008, 09:22 AM
Bigger, tougher, meaner, faster.

The1ApplePie
08-23-2008, 09:40 AM
Taylor Mays

Can't help it, I'm excited about my Trojans this year.:d:

Hope the Texans keep up.:cowboy1:

Chicagotexan1
08-23-2008, 09:46 AM
What is the Defense Missing? The ability to defend. I am officially concerned.

The1ApplePie
08-23-2008, 09:52 AM
Okam needs to start. We need a big fatass in the middle and TJ is officially a bust.

Weaver is terrible and can't rush the pass or stop the run. Start someone else.

Zach Diles... starting?

Texan JBZ
08-23-2008, 10:06 AM
Taylor Mays

Can't help it, I'm excited about my Trojans this year.:d:

Hope the Texans keep up.:cowboy1:

A 6'4" 225lb Safety with incredible range that can hit like a mac truck? :drool: Wow, I think I'll put one of those on my Texans Christmas List.

As far as what the defense needs, a better DC plain and simple. Most of us want to blame the DBs, but it all starts with the poor scheming of Richard Smith. The Giants won the Super Bowl last year and none of us can name five of their DBs off the top of our head. Hell, the Titans play in our division and I can't name the starters in their secondary! But they have really good defenses because they have really good DC. Jerry Gray, Frank Bush, anybody besides Richard Smith right now. Pull the trigger Kubes:cowboy1:PLEASE GET RID OF RICHARD SMITH!!!

Polo
08-23-2008, 10:14 AM
Just because you can't name the players doesn't mean they aren't good...

76Texan
08-23-2008, 10:21 AM
Just because you can't name the players doesn't mean they aren't good...
TOUCHE! http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/images/icons/icon10.gif

(No offense to any individual!)

WesmanTexanfan
08-23-2008, 10:24 AM
A. the cowgirls O line is very good

B. its preseason, im sure they were told not to strain themselves and remember its practice, im not worried about our D line, or our Lbs, but i am on the fence about or DBs....

Pantherstang84
08-23-2008, 10:30 AM
tackles
PBUs- Play broken up

Texan JBZ
08-23-2008, 10:34 AM
Just because you can't name the players doesn't mean they aren't good...

So am I to believe that the Giants and Titans have players in their secondaries that are that much better than the ones on the Texans? Are Aaron Ross and Courtland Finnegan that much better than Fred Bennett? Are whoever starts at safety for these teams that much better than Demps and Brown? I really don't know. One thing I do know for sure-These teams have good DCs, the Texans don't, period.

Polo
08-23-2008, 10:35 AM
Folks are confused around here...

"The players suck...Our entire secondary is garbage and we only have one LB and one D-lineman that do anything"

"Fire the D-coordinator"



Why? Because he can't make guys who aren't worth a damn shut down one of the best and most talented offenses in the leauge ?

Puhhhlease....

Polo
08-23-2008, 10:40 AM
So am I to believe that the Giants and Titans have players in their secondaries that are that much better than the ones on the Texans? Are Aaron Ross and Courtland Finnegan that much better than Fred Bennett? Are whoever starts at safety for these teams that much better than Demps and Brown? I really don't know. One thing I do know for sure-These teams have good DCs, the Texans don't, period.

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

I'd venture to say that most NFL fans have no idea who our recievers are outside of Andre Johnson....I guess they all must suck too...And sometimes lunch pail, blue collar, play hard all the time guys just don't get the recognition...

There are a lot of obscure players around the NFL that contribute simply because the team knows how to draft/sign players that fit what they do..

And yes...I'd say Aaron Ross and Courtland Finnegan are better than Bennett..Aaron Ross is actually pretty damn good IMHO....

But besides all that...Look at the Titans and Giants Defense overall...look at their Linebackers and D-lines....

I'm pretty sure Richard Smith could do more with those defenses simply because of personnel.

Goldensilence
08-23-2008, 10:45 AM
OK. I've seen the fire Smith thread. I completely disagree. I think what we saw today, with relatively vanila offense vs relatively vanilla defense, is that we don't have the talent yet. Our DBs were HORRIBLE. Our LBS were slow and our DL was ineffective in the pass rush. In the preseason, that's not the coordinator. That's the players. The fact is we have several HUGE holes on this defense.

First, our CBs. With the exception of a few plays, the whole group looked awful. I know Romo had time to throw, but no one was effectively covered even from the start of several plays. Bennett has potential but I didn't see anyone else that resembled NFL coverage. DC can't do that, oh and you can't really blitz effectively if you can't cover.

Our LBs. Tackling was terrible all the way around. I love Ryans, but he looked flat tonight. Very flat. Diles had a decent game, but other than the interception, he was getting drug around too.

Our DL was decent against the run, but provided NO pass rush at all. Very few times was anyone close to Romo. I'm speaking of the first team because that's really what matters from this game.

This was a bad game all around by our defense but it doesn't lie at the DCs feet. This is the preseason, and this is vanilla vs vanilla. Its quite obvious that physically we can't (or failed to if we can) compete with them physically. If someone was out there dominating physically and we then turn in a horrible season, then you know its on the DC. We really need to find someone to rush the passer opposite MW. He was getting double teamed all night long and if he's doing that, hes done his job. He's occupying 2 blockers so we should have an advantage. I really don't know how you fix this.

Mike

Mike my problem is the vanilla pre-season defense you speak of continues over into the regular season.Has for the past two years and based on that I think I can fairly conclude that it'll carry over this year again.

I can handle when it looks like our scheme isn't matching up and we're getting over powered. But our players looked confused and out of place. His third year in Smith SHOULD have a better hold on personnel and what he wants to do. I haven't seen the slightest thing that shows me either.

Just because you can't name the players doesn't mean they aren't good...

You might feel a draft because that's a statement going over your head. That's the point just because you haven't heard of them they aren't good. We don't need(although it'd be nice) two pro bowl corners, two pro bowl DT, a guy opposite mario(saying all of these would be very nice though) and a ball hawking nfl prototypical safety to be EFFECTIVE defensively. There are defenses that work with just about as much maybe a bit more then what we have that are much better as a unit.

3 years in I see a coordinator that doesn't have a handle on what he wants to do personnel wise. Sad because I don't think it's lack of good positional coach support.

Texans_Chick
08-23-2008, 10:52 AM
Folks are confused around here...

"The players suck...Our entire secondary is garbage and we only have one LB and one D-lineman that do anything"

"Fire the D-coordinator"



Why? Because he can't make guys who aren't worth a damn shut down one of the best and most talented offenses in the leauge ?

Puhhhlease....

This isn't just a one game phenomenon.

What in Richard Smith's background convinces you that he can build a defense from scratch? Even if you believe that the players they have are lacking, what makes you believe that he can put together the pieces and parts to a defense that has a coherant philosophy?

Texan JBZ
08-23-2008, 10:53 AM
I'm not sure what you're talking about.

I'd venture to say that most NFL fans have no idea who our recievers are outside of Andre Johnson....I guess they all must suck too...And sometimes lunch pail, blue collar, play hard all the time guys just don't get the recognition...

There are a lot of obscure players around the NFL that contribute simply because the team knows how to draft/sign players that fit what they do..

And yes...I'd say Aaron Ross and Courtland Finnegan are better than Bennett..Aaron Ross is actually pretty damn good IMHO....

But besides all that...Look at the Titans and Giants Defense overall...look at their Linebackers and D-lines....

I'm pretty sure Richard Smith could do more with those defenses simply because of personnel.

You're giving Richard Smith too much credit and not giving Freddie B enough. Switch Swartz and Spagnuola (I probably butchered their names, but they are the DCs for the Titans and Giants, respectively) with Richard Smith right now and I willing to bet any amount of money that makes you nervous that they would get more out of the players the Texans have now than Richard Smith would get out of the players they have. I understand what you are saying about their defenses overall, but coaching plays more into the success of a team than I think your giving credit for.

Polo
08-23-2008, 10:53 AM
You might feel a draft because that's a statement going over your head. That's the point just because you haven't heard of them they aren't good. We don't need(although it'd be nice) two pro bowl corners, two pro bowl DT, a guy opposite mario(saying all of these would be very nice though) and a ball hawking nfl prototypical safety to be EFFECTIVE defensively. There are defenses that work with just about as much maybe a bit more then what we have that are much better as a unit.

Sooooo.....

If we just brought in a new D-coordinator our defense would be measureably better ?

And your last statement is a lie...

I'd venture to say..talent wise...the Texans have one of the worse defenses in the NFL...Sucky Vets...O.k young guys...and more obscure vets...

And two young studs....


LMAO! Yeah folks...It's the D-coordinator....He should have done more last night....

Polo
08-23-2008, 10:58 AM
This isn't just a one game phenomenon.

What in Richard Smith's background convinces you that he can build a defense from scratch? Even if you believe that the players they have are lacking, what makes you believe that he can put together the pieces and parts to a defense that has a coherant philosophy?

There is nothing that leads me to believe he can or cannot be successful.

The man has had TERRIBLE talent on defense since he's gotten here...
Not o.k...not mediocre...not a little off track...

His first yr we were switching schemes....

We don't have the talent in place or the continuity on that side of the ball for me to judge his body of work and say he sucks...

I'm picturing the best defensive co-ordinator....ever....in the same position Smith was in last night and I'm thinking the defense isn't a whole lot better...

Smith can't make Jaque Reeves be physical...he can't make Morlon react quicker..he can't make terrible blitzers becoem good blitzers...

He can Scheme all day but the end results would just be more confusion because we don't have continuity or mature talent on that side of the ball...

ObsiWan
08-23-2008, 10:59 AM
OK. I've seen the fire Smith thread. I completely disagree. I think what we saw today, with relatively vanila offense vs relatively vanilla defense, is that we don't have the talent yet. Our DBs were HORRIBLE. Our LBS were slow and our DL was ineffective in the pass rush. In the preseason, that's not the coordinator. That's the players. The fact is we have several HUGE holes on this defense.

First, our CBs. With the exception of a few plays, the whole group looked awful. I know Romo had time to throw, but no one was effectively covered even from the start of several plays. Bennett has potential but I didn't see anyone else that resembled NFL coverage. DC can't do that, oh and you can't really blitz effectively if you can't cover.

Our LBs. Tackling was terrible all the way around. I love Ryans, but he looked flat tonight. Very flat. Diles had a decent game, but other than the interception, he was getting drug around too.

Our DL was decent against the run, but provided NO pass rush at all. Very few times was anyone close to Romo. I'm speaking of the first team because that's really what matters from this game.

This was a bad game all around by our defense but it doesn't lie at the DCs feet. This is the preseason, and this is vanilla vs vanilla. Its quite obvious that physically we can't (or failed to if we can) compete with them physically. If someone was out there dominating physically and we then turn in a horrible season, then you know its on the DC. We really need to find someone to rush the passer opposite MW. He was getting double teamed all night long and if he's doing that, hes done his job. He's occupying 2 blockers so we should have an advantage. I really don't know how you fix this.

Mike

but all those faults scream that it IS the defensive coordinator.
Vanilla or not, what's our defensive M.O.??
Can you tell me?
How do you know who to draft if you can't identify your defensive philosopy?
How do you know what F/As fit your scheme when there is no scheme?
Are we a beat 'em senseless defense so that you go for size and strength up front or are we a pursue and gang tackle defense so that you get players with speed and quickness?

There are two kinds of successful coaches, IMO.
1) the kind that evaluates who they have and design a scheme to their strengths
and
2) the kind that has a scheme he knows will work and sets about getting people who can execute it and execute it well.

Is Richard Smith either of those?
Not that I can tell.
He needs to go.

We've identified what kind of team we want to be on offense. AND we've brought the players in we thought could thrive (some misses, some hits) in that type of offense.
We need to do the same thing on defense.

Polo
08-23-2008, 11:02 AM
You're giving Richard Smith too much credit and not giving Freddie B enough. Switch Swartz and Spagnuola (I probably butchered their names, but they are the DCs for the Titans and Giants, respectively) with Richard Smith right now and I willing to bet any amount of money that makes you nervous that they would get more out of the players the Texans have now than Richard Smith would get out of the players they have. I understand what you are saying about their defenses overall, but coaching plays more into the success of a team than I think your giving credit for.

I wish we dould do that for real because I'd take that bet....

Look at what the Texans put on the field defensively...

We have one of the most untalented defenses in the leauge...

And when I say talent I'm talking mature talent...Veteran talent...

We have some talented young guys, but most of the vets are piss poor to slightly above piss poor...

Look at what the Giants and Titans and Jags and Patriots and Colts put on the field talent wise...Even some of the less talented teams in the leauge put out a better cast of guys than what we're putting out now...

You guys can buy into the Richard Smith is the Devil if you want, but I'm not biting...

Polo
08-23-2008, 11:03 AM
I guess it's Richard Smith's fault that Demeco had a bad (by his standards) night yesterday too....:rolleyes:

Of course it was the scheme...

Texans_Chick
08-23-2008, 11:03 AM
There is nothing that leads me to believe he can or cannot be successful.

The man has had TERRIBLE talent on defense since he's gotten here...
Not o.k...not mediocre...not a little off track...

His first yr we were switching schemes....

We don't have the talent in place or the continuity on that side of the ball for me to judge his body of work and say he sucks...

I'm picturing the best defensive co-ordinator....ever....in the same position Smith was in last night and I'm thinking the defense isn't a whole lot better...

Smith can't make Jaque Reeves be physical...he can't make Morlon react quicker..he can't make terrible blitzers becoem good blitzers...

He can Scheme all day but the end results would just be more confusion because we don't have continuity or mature talent on that side of the ball...

I think I agree with Obsiwan. If you are building a defense for the future, you need to choosing players for your defensive philosophy that is proven. You know the types of guys other teams are trying to go after because you have a sense of their defense. I'm not sure what the Texans are trying to build on defense, or whether Smith is the guy to develop the defense from scratch.

Yes, the Texans need more talent on the defensive side of the ball. But what makes you believe that Smith is the guy who can develop that talent and put together a scheme that makes the players look better than they are?

Texans_Chick
08-23-2008, 11:06 AM
I guess it's Richard Smith's fault that Demeco had a bad (by his standards) night yesterday too....:rolleyes:

Of course it was the scheme...

It probably doesn't help that the DTs had troubles in the middle. Personally, I didn't think DeMeco had that bad of a game. It did sadden me in a way to see that DeMeco has to take the tackling angles that assume that the DB is going to whiff on the first tackle.

I do worry that DeMeco's knee might not be right. Hopefully I am imagining things.

Goldensilence
08-23-2008, 11:09 AM
Sooooo.....

If we just brought in a new D-coordinator our defense would be measureably better ?

And your last statement is a lie...

I'd venture to say..talent wise...the Texans have one of the worse defenses in the NFL...Sucky Vets...O.k young guys...and more obscure vets...

And two young studs....


LMAO! Yeah folks...It's the D-coordinator....He should have done more last night....

Right away? Possibly but I don't think it could get worse or the players could look more clueless.

I don't lie. The Titans and Giants have been brought up. Hell even a Patrick Kerney-less Seahawks team outside of Trufant. Teams around the NFL do work with about as much talent as we have and have made more from it.

Obsi-wan made a great post.No one is saying walking into the job he wasn't given a bad unit. But 3 years in and I'm seeing marginal improvement and in some places regressive play.

You won't answer what is Richard Smith TRYING to do. If you can you're getting good as guessing.

Polo
08-23-2008, 11:10 AM
I think I agree with Obsiwan. If you are building a defense for the future, you need to choosing players for your defensive philosophy that is proven. You know the types of guys other teams are trying to go after because you have a sense of their defense. I'm not sure what the Texans are trying to build on defense, or whether Smith is the guy to develop the defense from scratch.

Yes, the Texans need more talent on the defensive side of the ball. But what makes you believe that Smith is the guy who can develop that talent and put together a scheme that makes the players look better than they are?


I've never once said Smith is the guy. Several times I've said he's not great and several times I've said he's not the Devil either. The position can be upgraded, but it's just my opinion that by just upgrading that one coaching spot won't make us meausureably better on defense...

Smith hasn't done anything to make believe he is the guy and he hasn't done anything to make me believe it's his fault our defense sucks.

And I'm pretty sure if Smith could choose the guys he wanted to play on his defense he wouldn't have settled on Jaque Reeves, Greenwood, and Weaver...

Something tells me he'd have aimed a bit higher if he had that luxury.

Gary Kubiak is an offensive guy..Not a shock to me that our offense has made drastic improvements while our defense has struggled...

Honestly I think we just need more off-seasons to get better guys over there...Richard Smith for me is an after thought at this point...fire him keep him...whatever....But don't be shocked when we have the same results...

Texans_Chick
08-23-2008, 11:11 AM
Oh and a side issue.

ND Kalu claims that the Texans defense was flat after what happened to Harry Williams. That it took them a while until they learned Williams was moving that they got their heads back into the game. FWIW.

Runner
08-23-2008, 11:11 AM
The man has had TERRIBLE talent on defense since he's gotten here...
Not o.k...not mediocre...not a little off track...



It's a good thing the Texans took DeMeco against Richard Smith's wishes then. Imagine the talent deficit without Ryans at LB if Kubiak hadn't overruled Smith.

And I'm pretty sure if Smith could choose the guys he wanted to play on his defense he wouldn't have settled on Jaque Reeves, Greenwood, and Weaver...

Something tells me he'd have aimed a bit higher if he had that luxury.


I wouldn't bet on it.

alphajoker
08-23-2008, 11:12 AM
Just because you can't name the players doesn't mean they aren't good...

Yep, just ask Freddie Mitchell.

thunderkyss
08-23-2008, 11:13 AM
Okam needs to start. We need a big fatass in the middle and TJ is officially a bust.

Weaver is terrible and can't rush the pass or stop the run. Start someone else.

Zach Diles... starting?

Read TexanChicks post.... TJ is not a bust, he is playing out of position, and has since he entered the NFL. He's not a run stopper, never was. He can do some of that, but he is a pass rushing DT. Just like Okoye.

Something has to be wrong with Okam.... Kubiak(or Smith, or whoever) is putting Cochran, Kalu, & Weaver in at DT, just like he did, two years ago. We're not getting any push in the middle, and the QB has all kinds of room in front of him to step up, or tie his shoe, or what ever he freak'n feels like.

You can blame TJ if you like, But the problem is much deeper than that. I really don't understand why we bring DEs in, left and right, then try to convert them to DTs.... doesn't make sense.

Texan JBZ
08-23-2008, 11:15 AM
I wish we dould do that for real because I'd take that bet....

Look at what the Texans put on the field defensively...

We have one of the most untalented defenses in the leauge...

And when I say talent I'm talking mature talent...Veteran talent...

We have some talented young guys, but most of the vets are piss poor to slightly above piss poor...

Look at what the Giants and Titans and Jags and Patriots and Colts put on the field talent wise...Even some of the less talented teams in the leauge put out a better cast of guys than what we're putting out now...

You guys can buy into the Richard Smith is the Devil if you want, but I'm not biting...

I agree with you that their are teams in this league that field better defensive talent than the Texans. But, when a team comes out and does what the Cowboys did offensively last night, that falls on poor preparation. That falls on coaching. And last night wasn't some rare game when the defense looks unprepared. It seems to happen all the time. That's Richard Smith's fault. Playing bad is one thing, but being out-schemed and out-coached all the time is another.

Polo
08-23-2008, 11:16 AM
Right away? Possibly but I don't think it could get worse or the players could look more clueless.

I don't lie. The Titans and Giants have been brought up. Hell even a Patrick Kerney-less Seahawks team outside of Trufant. Teams around the NFL do work with about as much talent as we have and have made more from it.

Obsi-wan made a great post.No one is saying walking into the job he wasn't given a bad unit. But 3 years in and I'm seeing marginal improvement and in some places regressive play.

You won't answer what is Richard Smith TRYING to do. If you can you're getting good as guessing.


Marginal improvement compared to what ? Or offense ?


Most of the undrafted guys, free agent surprises, and late round talent has gone to offense up until this point..

We've planted some seeds over there, but I'm not really sure where you guys expected our defense to be at this point...especially compared to one of the best offenses in the leauge...playing against a top 3 QB....



And I'm not defending Smith...Honestly I don't think he's all that...

I just don't have the urge to fire him yet. I don't think our defensive problems fall on his shoulders...

Polo
08-23-2008, 11:18 AM
Playing bad is one thing, but being out-schemed and out-coached all the time is another.


It's easy to draw up great schemes with good players.

I'm pretty sure that if we had a roster full of pro-bowlers a lot of people here could draw up some schemes that will work....

J-Russ
08-23-2008, 11:30 AM
I don't get it, are you trying to say R.Smith needs a defense full of pro-bowlers to succeed? That kind of reminds me of the Carr agrument when people said not even Peyton could have success in this offense, and Carr would need a offense like Peyton's to succeed. Well we all know how that turned out....

TexanSam
08-23-2008, 11:35 AM
They're missing

1. A good defensive coordinator
2. A decent #2 corner
3. A pass rush from the defensive line
4. Two more good linebackers

Goldensilence
08-23-2008, 11:36 AM
It's easy to draw up great schemes with good players.

I'm pretty sure that if we had a roster full of pro-bowlers a lot of people here could draw up some schemes that will work....

Again that is the point. You scheme towards strengths and away from weakness. You bring in guys who fit what you are TRYING to do and I'm not seeing this entering Smith's third year in.


Marginal improvement compared to what ? Or offense ?

Most of the undrafted guys, free agent surprises, and late round talent has gone to offense up until this point..

We've planted some seeds over there, but I'm not really sure where you guys expected our defense to be at this point...especially compared to one of the best offenses in the leauge...playing against a top 3 QB....



And I'm not defending Smith...Honestly I don't think he's all that...

I just don't have the urge to fire him yet. I don't think our defensive problems fall on his shoulders...

Marginal improvement compared to what our offense has wanted to do vs trying to do and has achieved over the same time period including two very contrasting offensive philosophies.

I'm not saying it's ALL his fault but we should have SOME clue as to what he wants to do. He also doesn't seem to scout well or make in game adjustments quickly. Can I ask last year against Carolina it took two touchdowns for Smith to realize Dunta should be playing Steve Smith man up?

The problem isn't this preseason game solely. It's a a steady stream of concerns over the past two years flowing into this season. They're starting to get hard to ignore.

J-Russ
08-23-2008, 11:40 AM
They're missing

1. A good defensive coordinator
2. A decent #2 corner
4. Two more good linebackers

Those three could be on this team already, and most likely they'll usurp their respected position by the end of this season.



Or by the bye week. You know, whatever happens along the way.

The Pencil Neck
08-23-2008, 12:29 PM
What in Richard Smith's background convinces you that he can build a defense from scratch?

Richard Smith is no longer building anything from scratch. He was building from scratch 2 years ago.

I think what we have now answers the question about whether Richard Smith can build a defense from scratch because what we have now is what he built from scratch.

And unless this is just pre-season and what we're seeing isn't the defense we're going to see in the regular season, he hasn't built anything worth mentioning.

Polo
08-23-2008, 12:36 PM
The defense lacking talent and not being "built" up as well as offense is more on Kubiak and Rick Smith than it is on Richard Smith.

Watch people take that as a knock on Smithiak...

Honestly I think the team has been built up about as good as it could have been since they've gotten here.

J-Russ
08-23-2008, 12:38 PM
The defense lacking talent and not being "built" up as well as offense has is more on Kubiak and Rick Smith than it is on Richard Smith.

Well that weird since the last three draft for us has been more defensive oriented then offensive.

Polo
08-23-2008, 12:40 PM
Well that weird since the last three draft for us has been more defensive oriented then offensive.

What ?

WesmanTexanfan
08-23-2008, 12:41 PM
http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/51834010.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1939847EC77F5F8D1CEB8CB6346D65EEDE8 A40A659CEC4C8CB6

this guy, big time!!

J-Russ
08-23-2008, 12:54 PM
What ?

what do you mean what?

Since Smith/Kubiak took over, they spent the majority of theirr top picks getting talents for defense.

You can't tell me they focus more on offense then defense, when the top picks in the their first two draft were defensive players.

BSofA04
08-23-2008, 12:58 PM
We're missing a WILL. Greenwood is killing me.

I've always thought this, but if the Texans are going with a "smaller, quicker" personnel on the defensive side of the ball, we're going to get pushed around from time to time. Aside from Mario and Bennett(compared to other CB's)...we're a pretty small team. If we're going against mauling type offenses, like Pittsburgh, we must compensate lack of size with quickness. So far, not so good

CloakNNNdagger
08-23-2008, 01:00 PM
One of the things that was upsetting me with the defense as much as the lack of pass rush was the game of "TAG" that almost all of our players were participating in. I'm not sure, but did we manage to log in 1000 missed tackles in the game??? Some of the players looked as though they were patting the offensive players on the butt as they passed them by. Others looked as though, with their arm outstretched, they were pointing the direction for the offensive player to take. Either way, they must have awakened this morning with some real sore fingers. :mcnugget::gun:

Goldensilence
08-23-2008, 01:06 PM
Marginal improvement compared to what ? Or offense ?


Most of the undrafted guys, free agent surprises, and late round talent has gone to offense up until this point..

We've planted some seeds over there, but I'm not really sure where you guys expected our defense to be at this point...especially compared to one of the best offenses in the leauge...playing against a top 3 QB....



And I'm not defending Smith...Honestly I don't think he's all that...

I just don't have the urge to fire him yet. I don't think our defensive problems fall on his shoulders...

I gave a answer on comparatively where I'd like to see the defense and it making strides as compared to where we are offensively. You point to the talent on defense still without any answer whatsoever we trying to accomplish defensively. Again the problem isn't necessarily the game against Dallas it's a string of concerns the past two seasons coming into the third.

I think you are being a bit self misleading with the bolded statement.Kubiak there is a large reason as to why a bunch of the late round selections and UDFA have been successful in our offense. Can you not attribute that to a HC/OC having a system and scheme in place that puts players in a position to be successful? The thing with Kubiak's side of the ball is from day one you at least saw progression from the offense despite having opposing line philosophies a categorical lack of talent across the board(much like the defense). We've known from day one what Kubiak wants to accomplish with the offense and we've seen a clear progression from year one to two and in year three we added a coach to reinforce his vision(Gibbs) and could see a top ten offense this year.

Can you point out anything in that series of events that Richard Smith has gone about in a similar fashion? I can't.

Polo
08-23-2008, 01:23 PM
I think you are being a bit self misleading with the bolded statement.

I think you're being auto-mislead as well....


Kubiak is an offensive guy...

I'm not surprised at all that the offense has started to take off while the defense has not...

Guess we just had different expectations...

Goldensilence
08-23-2008, 01:33 PM
I think you're being auto-mislead as well....


Kubiak is an offensive guy...

I'm not surprised at all that the offense has started to take off while the defense has not...

Guess we just had different expectations...

So expecting a defensive coordinator in the same amount of time to have a system in place, a defensive goal/mindset and showing progression is expecting too much? :ok:

Perhaps you're in the Richard Smith school of thought. What exactly are your expectations 3 years in?

bollocks
08-23-2008, 01:38 PM
they're missing

1. A good defensive coordinator
2. A decent #2 corner
3. A pass rush from the defensive line
4. Two more good linebackers

ftw.

texanfreak
08-23-2008, 02:05 PM
what is the defence missing:



an attitude

disaacks3
08-23-2008, 02:10 PM
balls!

what is the defense missing?

A sense of purpose? Clear direction? A sense of urgency?

What is the defense missing? A ****ing coach, that what's they're missing.

A pass rush (other than Williams of course)

and Dunta.

They're missing

1. A good defensive coordinator
2. A decent #2 corner
3. A pass rush from the defensive line
4. Two more good linebackers


I submit another element that Jimmy Johnson had right (no matter what you may think of him) S-P-E-E-D - It can't be coached, it's either there or it isn't.

Last night wa a great example of what happens when you have players that (on average) AREN'T the best physical specimens out there and rely on instinct and fail to execute the scheme correctly. The Texans simply can't win a side-to-side running contest against the Cowboys.

Football 102: This is what people talk about when they're discussing 'upside'. These are usually very PHYSICALLY gifted players who need to be 'coached up'.

Silver Oak
08-23-2008, 02:20 PM
what is the defence missing:



an attitude


the announcers were saying in a chat with DeMeco before the game, that he had stated he wants the Texans Defense to have a reputation as being tough and physical. On line with the Ravens and Pittsburgh, etc.

I think he's going to have to wait awhile until he gets either more talent around him, or just the right ones.

kinda depressing as I do not want to see his prime years wasted as we build our D to what his, and I think most of our vision is for our team.

ObsiWan
08-23-2008, 05:13 PM
Marginal improvement compared to what ? Or offense ?

Most of the undrafted guys, free agent surprises, and late round talent has gone to offense up until this point..

We've planted some seeds over there, but I'm not really sure where you guys expected our defense to be at this point...especially compared to one of the best offenses in the leauge...playing against a top 3 QB....

And I'm not defending Smith...Honestly I don't think he's all that...

I just don't have the urge to fire him yet. I don't think our defensive problems fall on his shoulders...

And I don't see how they don't.
Think of it this way:
On offense we wanted to better implement the ZBS to make our running game more effective. We went out and got Alex Gibbs who immediately - IMMEDIATELY - set about getting OLs who were able to execute his scheme and getting rid of those who couldn't. Spencer, McKinney, Weary, all gone because they didn't fit the scheme.

You mentioned the Titans and Giants.
The Titans get guys like Haynesworth and Van den Bosche(sp?) on the line because they want to mug you. Their M.O. is to beat the other team up. Even their DBs are hitters. And those are the kind of guys they go after. Maulers. If you won't hit and hit hard, you don't play for Jeff Fisher.
The Giants and the Colts go after speed and quickness because their defenses depend on the ability of their guys to quickly swarm to the ball or speed rush the passer. If you don't have good hands and feet and the ability to shed blocking you can't play defense for either of those teams.

Again, what's our defensive M.O.?
What does Richard Smith want in a player??

I have no clue. And we've been asking this for at least two years.

Polo
08-23-2008, 05:17 PM
Spencer, McKinney, Weary, all gone because they didn't fit the scheme.

Really ?

That's why they're gone ?



I'm done with the Richard Smith Talk...

I disagree with you guys. No biggie.

ObsiWan
08-23-2008, 05:48 PM
Really ?

That's why they're gone ?



I'm done with the Richard Smith Talk...

I disagree with you guys. No biggie.

You're being sarcastic, right?

Out of all my arguments that's what you picked out to attack?
You're a better debater than that. I've seen it.

One last question:
Who decides whether or not a DB jams the WR at the line or plays 8 yds off the WR to keep the play in front of him?
Hint: It ain't the DB.

HJam72
08-23-2008, 06:12 PM
I know what Smith's MO is:

Small DTs in the backfield trying to pass cover and LBs on the ground, knocked senseless, at the line of scrimmage. We sure spent a lot on TJ, AO, and Weaver for humorous pass coverage.

Joe Texan
08-24-2008, 12:45 AM
The defense needs a real game not PRESEASON

Runner
08-24-2008, 03:28 PM
Whose fault is the performance of the defense?

Think of it this way. If a person has only one bit available, it is like this:

0 - Richard Smith's fault
1 - The players' fault

However, if the person can invest two bits, we have this:

00 - Neither Smith's nor players' faults
01 - Not Smith's fault, players' fault
10 - Smith's fault, not players
11 - Both Smith and players' share fault

Bringing the front office and previous regimes into the discussion, and I very quickly am approaching a byte of information. If the person starts weighting the different amounts of responsibilites, it may run into more storage and thought than many people are willing to commit.

I'd at least start with two bits and think about improving coaching and talent.

danger6
08-24-2008, 04:48 PM
Whose fault is the performance of the defense?

Think of it this way. If a person has only one bit available, it is like this:

0 - Richard Smith's fault
1 - The players' fault

However, if the person can invest two bits, we have this:

00 - Neither Smith's nor players' faults
01 - Not Smith's fault, players' fault
10 - Smith's fault, not players
11 - Both Smith and players' share fault

Bringing the front office and previous regimes into the discussion, and I very quickly am approaching a byte of information. If the person starts weighting the different amounts of responsibilites, it may run into more storage and thought than many people are willing to commit.

I'd at least start with two bits and think about improving coaching and talent.

I love it when you talk assembler language.

Texanmike02
08-24-2008, 10:00 PM
Whose fault is the performance of the defense?

Think of it this way. If a person has only one bit available, it is like this:

0 - Richard Smith's fault
1 - The players' fault

However, if the person can invest two bits, we have this:

00 - Neither Smith's nor players' faults
01 - Not Smith's fault, players' fault
10 - Smith's fault, not players
11 - Both Smith and players' share fault

Bringing the front office and previous regimes into the discussion, and I very quickly am approaching a byte of information. If the person starts weighting the different amounts of responsibilites, it may run into more storage and thought than many people are willing to commit.

I'd at least start with two bits and think about improving coaching and talent.

Perhaps we should do this in FORTRAN or COBOL lol, I wonder which would be better suited.

I agree with your assessment of the situation. My point however, was that what we saw on friday was just evidence that we don't have the talent to compete. I'm not sold on Smith. I don't necissarly like his scheme, I'd like to see more pressure but its pretty simple. When you bring 5 or 6 guys and don't get pressure, it might not be the coach. I know about QB reads and all, but at some point its "hey go hit the guy you're not allowed to hit during practice". What we saw friday, was that even IF Smith were a great coach, we wouldn't know it. Pick your poision. Leave your 35 out there, who can't cover a dead dog with a wet blanket, on an island and rush someone or don't rush and give the other team 5 minutes to throw the ball. I'll say this, if we do have a decent defense this year with Smith in there, he needs an extension because he has a pretty bad group.

Mike

76Texan
08-25-2008, 07:54 AM
Perhaps we should do this in FORTRAN or COBOL lol, I wonder which would be better suited.

I agree with your assessment of the situation. My point however, was that what we saw on friday was just evidence that we don't have the talent to compete. I'm not sold on Smith. I don't necissarly like his scheme, I'd like to see more pressure but its pretty simple. When you bring 5 or 6 guys and don't get pressure, it might not be the coach. I know about QB reads and all, but at some point its "hey go hit the guy you're not allowed to hit during practice". What we saw friday, was that even IF Smith were a great coach, we wouldn't know it. Pick your poision. Leave your 35 out there, who can't cover a dead dog with a wet blanket, on an island and rush someone or don't rush and give the other team 5 minutes to throw the ball. I'll say this, if we do have a decent defense this year with Smith in there, he needs an extension because he has a pretty bad group.

MikeI just finished review the 1st quarter (just the defense).
Actually, our pressure (whether with 4 or 5 guys) was decent.
Not great, but decent.
We were close a few times.
The long incomplete pass to T.O. was hurried by a delayed LB blitz.

Another thing is we already mix a bunch different guys in there from the get go.
The key here is that (like another poster had mentiond - I think it was KT) in the regular season, it should wear our the O-line in the second half.
At least that is what we hope.

I really think that we will see improvement over last year on the D, knock on wood.

Polo
08-25-2008, 08:07 AM
One last question:
Who decides whether or not a DB jams the WR at the line or plays 8 yds off the WR to keep the play in front of him?
Hint: It ain't the DB.

Are you implying that if our DB's played differently they'd be better ?

If so, I disagree.

Joe Texan
08-25-2008, 08:11 AM
Cohesion

Texan_Bill
08-25-2008, 08:16 AM
With the exception of Mario, I saw our D-line get man-handled. With the exception of maybe Fred Bennett, I saw our secondary reach new heights in suckitude.... Bad, BAD combination.

thunderkyss
08-25-2008, 08:28 AM
I really think that we will see improvement over last year on the D, knock on wood.

I'm usually optomistic...... but why??

We've added Jaques Reeves to the secondary, and Rosevelt Colvin to the pass rush....

Maybe these Wily vets are in "preseason" mode, and aren't showing us a whole lot in the preseason that's plausible. But I would imagine our coaches would express a little less concern...

Jaques is supposed to be physical, and very good in run support..... I haven't seen that, and our outside contain is the worse I've seen since Kubiak has taken over.

& I don't even know where to start with Colvin.

I'll admit Okoye looked better against Dallas than he did against New Orleans, but not by much. And other than falling on the Mario Williams forced fumble(:kingkong:), Frank Okam hasn't done much.

DeMarcus Faggins is our best Corner right now.

Think about that.

76Texan
08-25-2008, 08:49 AM
we mix a bunch different guys in there from the get go.
The key here is that in the regular season, it should wear our their O-line in the second half.


And this is in all 3 games we have played thus far.
Add to that the fact our opponents stay with their first string O more than we did our D (overall, but especially on the line.)

76Texan
08-25-2008, 08:59 AM
With the exception of maybe Fred Bennett, I saw our secondary reach new heights in suckitude.... Bad, BAD combination.
You sees Bennett.
TK sees Faggins.

I sees Flecther.

Even though they all make some mistakes here and there.

But that's right, Molden is still a rookie, and Reeves can't make up for his mistakes by enough good plays. But I wouldn't call him terrible (YET).

I agree with Kubiak that the ball is finding Reeves quite a bit so far.
That's why people see more mistakes.
But if we look at it as a percentage, it's not absolute horrible (even though it's not too far from there, LOL!)

On that long Incompletion pass to T.O. for example, it is possible that Reeves was supposed to cover the short zone, and was expecting help from Demps.

Romo did look there first, he even make a pump fake.
That likely means that Reeves had T.O. originally.

It's quite possible that Demps should be quicker to slide over to help.

At any rate, we ran a delayed LB blitz and Romo had to get rid of the ball.

Texans_Chick
08-25-2008, 09:16 AM
Look up the ages of our starting defense. I am guessing that the average is way below the league average for good starting defenses. And that a lot of these guys wouldn't be starters on other teams.

That being said, I think the people who are harsh on Richard Smith are looking at his body of work with the Texans. That a lot of times the team doesn't look well coached--that the pass rush looks mechanical and the secondary looks like a Chinese fire drill. And that you wondering what his defense is supposed to look like and whether he is acquiring the right people for that sort of defense or developing them properly.

Polo
08-25-2008, 09:22 AM
That a lot of times the team doesn't look well coached--that the pass rush looks mechanical and the secondary looks like a Chinese fire drill.

I would say that the team wasn't well coached if we were getting a lot of defensive penalties and generally lacked composure.

I don't see that.

What I see is a bunch of athletes who aren't as talented as the guys they line up against. I think that has a lot to do with the pass rush looking mechanical and the DB's looking confused.

It's not really hard to look at the defense and tell who's not doing their job...It's not hard to tell who's blowing assignments...It's not hard to tell who just isn't physically up to par...

So all this talk of him not fielding a real defensive scheme is confusing to me...

It's plain as day who's getting beat on defense and most of the time we can tell why they're getting beat...

Defense is supposed to "look" a little chaotic....It's supposed to be "organized chaos"...It's just that our guys aren't making plays so it doesn't have that "organized" feel...


And that you wondering what his defense is supposed to look like and whether he is acquiring the right people for that sort of defense or developing them properly.

How much influence does Richard Smith have on who is brought in for his defense ?

I mean...He's not a scout or a talent evaluator..

I figure he has some say, but I'd think a brunt of that load would be on the Head coach and GM ?

Honest question.

Texans_Chick
08-25-2008, 09:33 AM
How much influence does Richard Smith have on who is brought in for his defense ?

I mean...He's not a scout or a talent evaluator..

I figure he has some say, but I'd think a brunt of that load would be on the Head coach and GM ?

Honest question.

This is what I know based on speaking to one of the current coaches and hopefully I didn't misinterpret any of it.

Draft: The draft guys evaluate the players. Then the offensive coaches and the defensive coaches ranks those players for different positions on their team.

They are one of the few teams in the league that then has both the offense and the defenses' coaches get together and discuss their draft board together. I was told that this way takes more time but they like the results of this for the team.

For free agency, I don't know what they do. If they aren't a completely dysfunctional team, the GM is acquiring players that suit particular needs of the scheme with the BPA for the price. Rick Smith isn't a I Know The NFL Better Than You kinda guy.

Tedc
08-25-2008, 09:42 AM
I think what our defense seems to be lacking is found in a sack between MOST men's legs.

Texans_Chick
08-25-2008, 09:52 AM
I would say that the team wasn't well coached if we were getting a lot of defensive penalties and generally lacked composure.

I don't see that.

What I see is a bunch of athletes who aren't as talented as the guys they line up against. I think that has a lot to do with the pass rush looking mechanical and the DB's looking confused.

It's not really hard to look at the defense and tell who's not doing their job...It's not hard to tell who's blowing assignments...It's not hard to tell who just isn't physically up to par...

So all this talk of him not fielding a real defensive scheme is confusing to me...

It's plain as day who's getting beat on defense and most of the time we can tell why they're getting beat...

Defense is supposed to "look" a little chaotic....It's supposed to be "organized chaos"...It's just that our guys aren't making plays so it doesn't have that "organized" feel...


OK. What is the Texans defense SUPPOSED to look like? You can't look to Smith's history to tell because he has never been a solo coordinator before coming here. When he first came to the team, the description of the defense was an aggresive 4-3. Football Outsiders analyzed the defensive snaps between 2006 and 2007 and said this:

"In 2006, the Texans were one of the top 10 teams sending six or more pass rushers; last year, they fell to 22nd."

Kubiak says he wants to have a good pass rush using four up front, but is that Smith's philosophy? Or is that just survival given how bad the payoff has been with their blitzes.

With the exception of Andre Johnson, the Texans do not have the most talented guys on the offensive side of the ball. The coaching on that side of the ball is so good and they know what sorts of players they want, that they have put together a very promising offense. You can see that evolution, how good the coaching is.

Statistically, that offense went from one of the worst in the league to one of the better ones, even with significant injuries to key players. I want to see that sort of progress for the defense.

On the defensive side of the ball, the Texans defense was ranked by football outsiders this way:

2005: 32nd
2006: 31st
2007: 30th

They face two very physical offensive teams in the Jags and the Titans twice a year, and a smart team in the Manning Colts that can get rid of the ball quickly and not allow much of a pass rush.

So facing those teams SIX times a year, we are putting together a smallish light quick defense up front with marginal safeties and inexperience everywhere in the defensive backfield? How is Smith's defense going to out-physical, out-smart these offenses?

HOU-TEX
08-25-2008, 09:59 AM
OK. What is the Texans defense SUPPOSED to look like? You can't look to Smith's history to tell because he has never been a solo coordinator before coming here. When he first came to the team, the description of the defense was an aggresive 4-3. Football Outsiders analyzed the defensive snaps between 2006 and 2007 and said this:

"In 2006, the Texans were one of the top 10 teams sending six or more pass rushers; last year, they fell to 22nd."

Kubiak says he wants to have a good pass rush using four up front, but is that Smith's philosophy? Or is that just survival given how bad the payoff has been with their blitzes.

With the exception of Andre Johnson, the Texans do not have the most talented guys on the offensive side of the ball. The coaching on that side of the ball is so good and they know what sorts of players they want, that they have put together a very promising offense. You can see that evolution, how good the coaching is.

Statistically, that offense went from one of the worst in the league to one of the better ones, even with significant injuries to key players. I want to see that sort of progress for the defense.

On the defensive side of the ball, the Texans defense was ranked by football outsiders this way:

2005: 32nd
2006: 31st
2007: 30th

They face two very physical offensive teams in the Jags and the Titans twice a year, and a smart team in the Manning Colts that can get rid of the ball quickly and not allow much of a pass rush.

So facing those teams SIX times a year, we are putting together a smallish light quick defense up front with marginal safeties and inexperience everywhere in the defensive backfield? How is Smith's defense going to out-physical, out-smart these offenses?

Well, at least we're improving. :rolleyes:

Nice post TC. :)

Polo
08-25-2008, 10:40 AM
OK. What is the Texans defense SUPPOSED to look like?

I don't understand this question. It's supposed to stop people.


You can't look to Smith's history to tell because he has never been a solo coordinator before coming here.

Just because he doesn't have an extensive history doesn't mean he's not capable.



Football Outsiders analyzed the defensive snaps between 2006 and 2007 and said this:

"In 2006, the Texans were one of the top 10 teams sending six or more pass rushers; last year, they fell to 22nd."

From 2006 to 2007 our defense and sack count improved.....albeit very marginally...

Kubiak says he wants to have a good pass rush using four up front, but is that Smith's philosophy? Or is that just survival given how bad the payoff has been with their blitzes.

Kubiak hasn't said "we need to be more creative with what we're doing on defense"...

Generally his angst hasn't been aimed at the schmes or defensive play calling; he moreso talks about specific players

Instead of saying things like "We as coaches have to put them in better situations to be successful" or, "I think we gotta find different ways to get after the passer" he says "We're going to keep searchin for which guys are going to get the job done" and "we don't want to blitz a whole lot".

Kubiak hasn't been shy about fessing up to poor coaching and "putting players in bad situations" so I'm not sure why he'd start beating around the bush now...


With the exception of Andre Johnson, the Texans do not have the most talented guys on the offensive side of the ball.

I disagree...I think our recieving corps is very talented...
I think our QB play is very good and probably going to get better...
I think our backs have some potential...
I think Vontay is really good...
I think we have some good talent up front on the O-line...
I think we have some good depth over there and really the only area of real concern is the RB's/running game...



The coaching on that side of the ball is so good and they know what sorts of players they want, that they have put together a very promising offense. You can see that evolution, how good the coaching is.

Statistically, that offense went from one of the worst in the league to one of the better ones, even with significant injuries to key players. I want to see that sort of progress for the defense.

You won't see that sort of progress with the defense...

Look who you are comparing them to....

The pedigree of the coaches and the continuity on that side of the ball far outweigh that of the defense...

I'm not shocked that a Gary Kubiak coached football team progressed much more rapidly on the offensive side of the ball than the defensive...

I think that some of Free agent pick-ups and draft picks on the offensive side of the ball have been amazing since Smithiak have taken over...

Andre Davis, Kevin Walter, Chris Meyers, Owen Daniels, Rahshard Butler, Jacoby, David Anderson, Vontay, Briesel, Winston, Slaton, Chris Taylor, Matt Schaub, Sage Rosenfels...

These are talented football players...

Defense hasn't hit on nearly the amount of draft picks and Free Agents...

I can't blame that on Richard Smith.


On the defensive side of the ball, the Texans defense was ranked by football outsiders this way:

2005: 32nd
2006: 31st
2007: 30th

So we're getting better....despite our division getting tougher over that time span...


They face two very physical offensive teams in the Jags and the Titans twice a year, and a smart team in the Manning Colts that can get rid of the ball quickly and not allow much of a pass rush.

The Jags and Colts offenses can move the chains on the best of them...


So facing those teams SIX times a year, we are putting together a smallish light quick defense up front with marginal safeties and inexperience everywhere in the defensive backfield? How is Smith's defense going to out-physical, out-smart these offenses?

How is this Smith's fault that our best DT's are smallish...

The Colts won a superbowl with a smallish front four.....Colts were called soft against the run until Bob Sanders came back...

Amazing what talented players can do for a defense...In that case, it was just one...

I'm having a hard time trying to find out what he can do so drastically different in order for our defense to take the gigantic strides forward that you all seek...

Lucky
08-25-2008, 11:01 AM
Kubiak hasn't said "we need to be more creative with what we're doing on defense"...

Instead of saying things like "We as coaches have to put them in better situations to be successful" or, "I think we gotta find different ways to get after the passer" he says "We're going to keep searchin for which guys are going to get the job done" and "we don't want to blitz a whole lot".
You make some good points. I think inevitably, Kubiak is the one who has to bear the burden of defense's failures. If he wants the defense to be more aggressive, or to play certain personnel, all he has to do is tell the defensive coaches. Kubiak has to define what he wants to see from the defense.

When we as fans say we want to fire Richard Smith, what we really want is the defense to play better. It's easier to fire the coach than the players. And no one wants Kubiak canned, the team has improved every season he's been here. I have to assume that Kubiak has ownership over the defensive philosophy and personnel. If he isn't able to communicate that with Richard Smith, or if he doesn't believe Smith can implement Kubiak's ideas, then Smith should be let go. Until then, the onus should be on Kubiak.

Polo
08-25-2008, 11:12 AM
You make some good points. I think inevitably, Kubiak is the one who has to bear the burden of defense's failures. If he wants the defense to be more aggressive, or to play certain personnel, all he has to do is tell the defensive coaches. Kubiak has to define what he wants to see from the defense.

When we as fans say we want to fire Richard Smith, what we really want is the defense to play better. It's easier to fire the coach than the players. And no one wants Kubiak canned, the team has improved every season he's been here. I have to assume that Kubiak has ownership over the defensive philosophy and personnel. If he isn't able to communicate that with Richard Smith, or if he doesn't believe Smith can implement Kubiak's ideas, then Smith should be let go. Until then, the onus should be on Kubiak.

I completely agree.

cuppacoffee
08-25-2008, 11:23 AM
The Cowboys front seven was supposed to be very active and strong?
They brought more to the LOS than us and they didn't get squat done!

Let's keep the expectation down, folks!



Whew! What a relief...it was all just a nightmare.

It all seemed so real while I was dreaming it.

cuppacoffee
08-25-2008, 11:30 AM
I don't understand this question. It's supposed to stop people.




Just because he doesn't have an extensive history doesn't mean he's not capable.





From 2006 to 2007 our defense and sack count improved.....albeit very marginally...



Kubiak hasn't said "we need to be more creative with what we're doing on defense"...

Generally his angst hasn't been aimed at the schmes or defensive play calling; he moreso talks about specific players

Instead of saying things like "We as coaches have to put them in better situations to be successful" or, "I think we gotta find different ways to get after the passer" he says "We're going to keep searchin for which guys are going to get the job done" and "we don't want to blitz a whole lot".

Kubiak hasn't been shy about fessing up to poor coaching and "putting players in bad situations" so I'm not sure why he'd start beating around the bush now...




I disagree...I think our recieving corps is very talented...
I think our QB play is very good and probably going to get better...
I think our backs have some potential...
I think Vontay is really good...
I think we have some good talent up front on the O-line...
I think we have some good depth over there and really the only area of real concern is the RB's/running game...





You won't see that sort of progress with the defense...

Look who you are comparing them to....

The pedigree of the coaches and the continuity on that side of the ball far outweigh that of the defense...

I'm not shocked that a Gary Kubiak coached football team progressed much more rapidly on the offensive side of the ball than the defensive...

I think that some of Free agent pick-ups and draft picks on the offensive side of the ball have been amazing since Smithiak have taken over...

Andre Davis, Kevin Walter, Chris Meyers, Owen Daniels, Rahshard Butler, Jacoby, David Anderson, Vontay, Briesel, Winston, Slaton, Chris Taylor, Matt Schaub, Sage Rosenfels...

These are talented football players...

Defense hasn't hit on nearly the amount of draft picks and Free Agents...

I can't blame that on Richard Smith.




So we're getting better....despite our division getting tougher over that time span...




The Jags and Colts offenses can move the chains on the best of them...




How is this Smith's fault that our best DT's are smallish...

The Colts won a superbowl with a smallish front four.....Colts were called soft against the run until Bob Sanders came back...

Amazing what talented players can do for a defense...In that case, it was just one...

I'm having a hard time trying to find out what he can do so drastically different in order for our defense to take the gigantic strides forward that you all seek...


Just go away....you take all the fun out of complaining. :D

:jk:

Signed..one of the complainers.

:coffee:

76Texan
08-25-2008, 03:05 PM
Nicely done, Polo!

I agree with about 95-96% of what you said!http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif

The 4-5 other percents are not major anyway.

RipTraxx
08-25-2008, 03:07 PM
Fire SMITH! This is the 3rd year that we have not seen anything creative fromm the scheme. You cannot rely on 4 guys to always get pressure, especially on a PRO BOWL dominated offensive line! Fire him on Monday!:foottap:

Amen!

Texans_Chick
08-25-2008, 05:12 PM
I don't understand this question. It's supposed to stop people.

Different defenses have different philosophies. You know what Tampa or the Colts defense is supposed to look like. Or the Eagles. Or the Panthers. Or the Titans. Or the Patriots. Or any number of team's defenses. They draft players to suit their defenses.


Just because he doesn't have an extensive history doesn't mean he's not capable.

And that should make me feel comfortable that he can build a defense from scratch why?

From 2006 to 2007 our defense and sack count improved.....albeit very marginally...

Also from the Pro Football Prospectus: "Although the Texans ranked 23rd in Adjusted Sack Rate [in 2007], they ranked 30th in quarterback hurries per pass."

Ew.

Kubiak hasn't said "we need to be more creative with what we're doing on defense"...

Generally his angst hasn't been aimed at the schmes or defensive play calling; he moreso talks about specific players

Instead of saying things like "We as coaches have to put them in better situations to be successful" or, "I think we gotta find different ways to get after the passer" he says "We're going to keep searchin for which guys are going to get the job done" and "we don't want to blitz a whole lot".

Kubiak hasn't been shy about fessing up to poor coaching and "putting players in bad situations" so I'm not sure why he'd start beating around the bush now...

He isn't going to dump his defensive coordinator in the grease, that's why. He will take responsibility for himself, and he will vaguely talk about coaching in general. I will say after the first three awful games of Smith's tenure, Kubiak said he was going to spend some more time with the coaching staff, which was probably not a great sign.

But yeah, this is on Kubiak. Richard Smith could get him fired if the defense doesn't get better soonishly.

The best thing that an offensive minded head coach can do is the find an awesome defensive coordinator and let him loose. I have little reason to believe that Smith is an awesome defensive coordinator.

I disagree...I think our recieving corps is very talented...
I think our QB play is very good and probably going to get better...
I think our backs have some potential...
I think Vontay is really good...
I think we have some good talent up front on the O-line...
I think we have some good depth over there and really the only area of real concern is the RB's/running game...

* Our receiving group is Andre Johnson and a bunch of guys that no other teams really wanted. Andre Davis almost didn't make the team last year. Kevin Walter hardly got any playing time his first year. Jacoby Jones was the guy that everybody said we picked too high. David Anderson was on the nobody was likely going to draft him list. Those are guys that Kubiak figured would work for his offense, but nobody was beating down the doors to get those guys before we put them in our system. Last year's story was gee, why don't the Texans have a real #2 receiver? After AJ went down and there was only the Dayne train, people were stunned the Texans could still move the ball some.

* As for our quarterbacks, I think there is some promise there, but both of them were backups before they started working with Kubiak.

* Running backs--no one would want any of our running backs with the exception of Slaton. The offense seeks to make the running backs, ala Ron Dayne, better than they are.

* There's plenty of promise on the offensive line, but it's not like those guys are unearthly more athletic than any other line in the league, ala Pace in his prime. I think they are a well-coached unit, but not amazingly talented.

* Overall, I think the offense is well coached, and Kubiak has assembled players who play well in his system. I think a player like an Owen Daniels is succeeding for the Texans when he might not have been developed as well in some other team.

You won't see that sort of progress with the defense...

Look who you are comparing them to....

The pedigree of the coaches and the continuity on that side of the ball far outweigh that of the defense...

Yeah, the coaching on the offensive side of the ball is better than on the defensive side of the ball. That is something that can be fixed.

I'm not shocked that a Gary Kubiak coached football team progressed much more rapidly on the offensive side of the ball than the defensive...

I think that some of Free agent pick-ups and draft picks on the offensive side of the ball have been amazing since Smithiak have taken over...

Andre Davis, Kevin Walter, Chris Meyers, Owen Daniels, Rahshard Butler, Jacoby, David Anderson, Vontay, Briesel, Winston, Slaton, Chris Taylor, Matt Schaub, Sage Rosenfels...

These are talented football players...

Some of those guys are athletic and talented, and some of those guys are just good fits for the system we run.

Defense hasn't hit on nearly the amount of draft picks and Free Agents...

I can't blame that on Richard Smith.

Why can't you blame that on Richard Smith? There are players who have stunk whilst playing for the Texans, but played much better when they got into real defensive systems. Phillip Buchanon comes to mind immediately.

You get a defensive system you believe in, and coaches that believe in it, and you get the players who can excel in that system, and you put them in situations to succeed.

Just because you have an offensive minded head coach, doesn't mean that the defense is going to get short shrift. In fact, the Texans have gone out of their way to spend high draft picks on that side of the ball. I think if Smith said he needed cheeseburger eaters at DT, that's what he would get. Or more physical sizeable linebackers. (though I will say it is my understanding that it was the linebacker coach that begged for DeMeco Ryans even though that wasn't Smith's pick).

Richard Smith is the guy the Texans settled on because there weren't better coordinator candidates available at the time. And probably early season isn't the best time to can Smith. But if the defense continues to be way below average, I don't want to hear the excuse of young players because lots of teams depend on young players. I want a defensive coordinator that we can trust he knows what he is doing.

I understand from the other thread that your mind is made up on the issues involving Richard Smith. Personally, I don't understand that sort of thinking. I hope I'm completely misguided about Smith, and that his defense doesn't continue to be an albatross for this team. I think we discuss these things, not to prove that we are right, but to get us thinking about things we might not have thought of, and to give us stuff to look for on the field.

So we're getting better....despite our division getting tougher over that time span...

If the defense is getting even marginally better, it is because they were so awful in 2005. I am still very traumatized by marginal QBs moving the ball on these Smith coached Texans.

The Jags and Colts offenses can move the chains on the best of them...

So you want to have a defense designed to stop them. Getting taller corners I understand is part of that. I'm not sure what their philosophy is up front other than gee, Mario is going to get double, tripled team, maybe the other guys can do something.

How is this Smith's fault that our best DT's are smallish...

Does he want smallish DTs? I don't know. Before Okam, all the guys were mostly at 285-305. If he wanted a free agent body bigger than that, I think he could get it. Okam was drafted to give some weight to the front four. I don't know if this is a plan, or he was just BPA. Who knows what their plan is on defense.

The Colts won a superbowl with a smallish front four.....Colts were called soft against the run until Bob Sanders came back...

Amazing what talented players can do for a defense...In that case, it was just one...

The Colts have a very defined defensive philosophy that is much more than smallish defensive linemen. And they draft to suit that philosophy. I wonder if a Bob Sanders could succeed with our defense--I don't know.

I'm having a hard time trying to find out what he can do so drastically different in order for our defense to take the gigantic strides forward that you all seek.

Maybe not put Dunta Robinson in man coverage with no safety help in a game the Texans are trying to stop the Titans from scoring quickly.

Or the strange blitz call on the last play of first Vince Young-Texans game.

Or putting Petey Faggins on an island REPEATEDLY when Faggins had already been TD torched in the Bills game.

Or not having a defense that opposing teams call "vanilla" even before the team plays the Texans.

Or not have a defensive rotation that involves the linemen sprinting off the field to "rest." (I think they ended up fixing that, but it is an illustration of some extreme coaching cluelessness.)

A defense in the salary cap era needs to be 1. Easy to learn and execute; 2. Difficult to move the ball against; 3. Have a coach that talented free agents want to play for. I don't see Houston having any of that. The defense has often been confused by what Smith is trying to get them to do.

How long are you willing to see wretched defensive play before you want to see what a defensive coordinator with a track record of success could do with it? I'm not sure who that guy would be, but McNair is willing to spend some coin.

Mr PC
08-25-2008, 05:23 PM
- Pass rushing DE
- Big nasty DT
- game changing safety
- playmaking OLBs


The defense is actually missing a lot more than I orignally thought. Hopefully some of the lesser names on the roster can step up and fill some of these holes. Once D-Rob returns, he and Bennet will make for two solid corners. Until then, somebody else needs to step up as the no. 2 and I dont know who that will be.

Nawzer
08-25-2008, 05:35 PM
The season will come down to these two simple factors: D-line must generate pass rush consistently & we have to run the ball. That's it. If we can't do those two well enough forget about the playoffs. Lot of people are upset with our performance against Dallas, but let's face it the Cowboys are one of the elite teams in the NFL. They are really good and although we're up and coming we're not quite there yet. I think we'll be better defensively when the season opener is here.

dalemurphy
08-25-2008, 05:51 PM
I've gotta believe that conversations have been taking place between Kubiak, Rick Smith, and guys like: FBush, RRhodes, JHolland about the state of the defense.

The Ray Rhodes hiring, combined with the Kubiak's tone recently regarding the defense and the fact that Richard Smith wasn't Kubes' first choice all point to the fact that an in-house change will happen during the season if things don't go well. If the defense looks like it does now once the season gets going Richard won't survive the Bye week, IMO.

Thorn
08-25-2008, 05:58 PM
I've gotta believe that conversations have been taking place between Kubiak, Rick Smith, and guys like: FBush, RRhodes, JHolland about the state of the defense.

The Ray Rhodes hiring, combined with the Kubiak's tone recently regarding the defense and the fact that Richard Smith wasn't Kubes' first choice all point to the fact that an in-house change will happen during the season if things don't go well. If the defense looks like it does now once the season gets going Richard won't survive the Bye week, IMO.

Being firmly in the "get rid of Richard Smith" camp, I'm still all for waiting for the season to start to see how we really play. If there is any truth to this "vanilla schemes" in preseason stuff, maybe when we play Pittsburg we'll see a different defense. I hope so. We might not have the best set of defensive players in the league, but we do have a LOT of talent on the defense.

dalemurphy
08-25-2008, 06:04 PM
Being firmly in the "get rid of Richard Smith" camp, I'm still all for waiting for the season to start to see how we really play. If there is any truth to this "vanilla schemes" in preseason stuff, maybe when we play Pittsburg we'll see a different defense. I hope so. We might not have the best set of defensive players in the league, but we do have a LOT of talent on the defense.

I'm right with you, Thorn.

Polo
08-25-2008, 06:05 PM
Different defenses have different philosophies. You know what Tampa or the Colts defense is supposed to look like. Or the Eagles. Or the Panthers. Or the Titans. Or the Patriots. Or any number of team's defenses. They draft players to suit their defenses.

Those teams have had their defenses in place for years. Any team making a transition into a completely new defensive system is going to normally take a few years to draft guys consistent with their system.

3yrs into those teams' systems I doubt they looked much like they look today..


And that should make me feel comfortable that he can build a defense from scratch why?

Why should it make me feel uncomfortable ?


Also from the Pro Football Prospectus: "Although the Texans ranked 23rd in Adjusted Sack Rate [in 2007], they ranked 30th in quarterback hurries per pass."

Ew.

I'm sure that had nothing to do with the athletes we had on that side of the ball....



The best thing that an offensive minded head coach can do is the find an awesome defensive coordinator and let him loose. I have little reason to believe that Smith is an awesome defensive coordinator.

I'm not saying he's awesome either.

I don't think we need an awesome D-coordinator to win games though.


* Our receiving group is Andre Johnson and a bunch of guys that no other teams really wanted. Andre Davis almost didn't make the team last year. Kevin Walter hardly got any playing time his first year. Jacoby Jones was the guy that everybody said we picked too high. David Anderson was on the nobody was likely going to draft him list. Those are guys that Kubiak figured would work for his offense, but nobody was beating down the doors to get those guys before we put them in our system. Last year's story was gee, why don't the Texans have a real #2 receiver? After AJ went down and there was only the Dayne train, people were stunned the Texans could still move the ball some.

* As for our quarterbacks, I think there is some promise there, but both of them were backups before they started working with Kubiak.

* Running backs--no one would want any of our running backs with the exception of Slaton. The offense seeks to make the running backs, ala Ron Dayne, better than they are.

* There's plenty of promise on the offensive line, but it's not like those guys are unearthly more athletic than any other line in the league, ala Pace in his prime. I think they are a well-coached unit, but not amazingly talented.

* Overall, I think the offense is well coached, and Kubiak has assembled players who play well in his system. I think a player like an Owen Daniels is succeeding for the Texans when he might not have been developed as well in some other team.


This is when it just comes down to opinions....

I think that some guys have definitely flourished because of our system and the opprotunities they've had, but I have a hard time believing that our same set of recievers couldn't be productive with the Saints, Colts, Pats, Eagles, Rams, Bengals, Broncos, or almost any team with a respectable QB....

Yeah, the coaching on the offensive side of the ball is better than on the defensive side of the ball. That is something that can be fixed.

It is something that can be fixed. It's also something that doesn't necessarily need to be.


Some of those guys are athletic and talented, and some of those guys are just good fits for the system we run.

Tomato Tomahto.



There are players who have stunk whilst playing for the Texans, but played much better when they got into real defensive systems.

Rattle them off...

How many defensive players has Richard Smith worked with in the three years he's been a Texan that have gone on to "play much better" in different schemes ?


You get a defensive system you believe in, and coaches that believe in it, and you get the players who can excel in that system, and you put them in situations to succeed.

Sounds good....


Just because you have an offensive minded head coach, doesn't mean that the defense is going to get short shrift. In fact, the Texans have gone out of their way to spend high draft picks on that side of the ball.

And up until last yr. Demeco was the only one doing anything...

Why can Demeco and Mario make plays in this confusing system, but no one else can ?

Why can Amobi come into this philosophy-less system and get 5.5 sacks his rookie yr ?



So you want to have a defense designed to stop them. Getting taller corners I understand is part of that.

And we've done that...

I'm not sure what their philosophy is up front other than gee, Mario is going to get double, tripled team, maybe the other guys can do something.

Probably has something to do with the awkward elephant in the room known as Anthony Weaver...


Does he want smallish DTs? I don't know. Before Okam, all the guys were mostly at 285-305. If he wanted a free agent body bigger than that, I think he could get it. Okam was drafted to give some weight to the front four. I don't know if this is a plan, or he was just BPA. Who knows what their plan is on defense.

This is speculation. Who knows what Smith has asked for...Who knows what Rick Smith has been able to provide...

I just don't see how he can have so much weight on his shoulders for the make-up of the roster....


The Colts have a very defined defensive philosophy that is much more than smallish defensive linemen. And they draft to suit that philosophy. I wonder if a Bob Sanders could succeed with our defense--I don't know.

I think he could.

The Colts defense only has a philosophy because they've had some success...

When the Colts were getting run over and through no one knew what ther philosphy was...

Then they go out and get some better players and all of a sudden their defense has a "very defined philosphy"...

That philosphy is courtesy of Bob Sanders.




Or putting Petey Faggins on an island REPEATEDLY when Faggins had already been TD torched in the Bills game.


To blitz or not to blitz...

Blitz and get burned...He's a hated man...

Don't blitz and get burned...He's a hated man...



How long are you willing to see wretched defensive play before you want to see what a defensive coordinator with a track record of success could do with it? I'm not sure who that guy would be, but McNair is willing to spend some coin.


If that guy is out there...go get him....

Who said I wouldn't be down for an upgrade ?

El cabezon
08-25-2008, 06:06 PM
I think what our defense seems to be lacking is found in a sack between MOST men's legs.

lol.....good one.

Texan JBZ
08-25-2008, 06:07 PM
Polo, you make some valid points, but so do the rest of us that don't like Richard Smith's style of defense. Look at guys like Monte Kiffin, Jim Johnson, Gregg Williams, Dick Labeau, and even Wade Phillips. Yes, they've had good players at certain positions over the years, but not at every position on the field. And sometimes, they've taken average talent and turned them into stars. Take Kendrell Bell for instance. He gets drafted out of Georgia to the Steelers and sets the NFL on fire for a few years. He goes to the Kansas City Chiefs and is never heard from again. Look at guys like Jeremiah Trotter and Micheal Lewis from Philly. They're in the Pro Bowl when Jim Johnson is coaching them. Trotter goes to Washington and Lewis to San Fran and they're not the same players. Simeon Rice is good player for Arizona, goes to Tampa Bay and becomes a great player. Fred Smoot has Pro Bowl-caliber capability with the Skins, goes to the Vikings and is a very average player. More guys who played for these DCs and had productive careers with them: Dhani Jones, Corey Simon, Donnie Edwards, Dexter Jackson, Dwight Smith, Hugh Douglas, Darwin Walker, Jerome McDougle. None of these guys did anything with they're careers once they left these DCs. Gregg Williams took Washington's defense to new heights, now doing the same in J-Ville. The thing they have in common is they fit the talent they have available into an effective defensive philosophy and scheme. They are also very aggressive, risk-taking playcallers. Forget that vanilla crap with these guys. Did you see the Steelers game the other night? OMG, Lebeau blitzed all the time! I don't understand your defense of Richard Smith, but you don't get why I think he should be replaced. I guess that makes us even.:thinking:

Polo
08-25-2008, 06:13 PM
Polo, you make some valid points, but so do the rest of us that don't like Richard Smith's style of defense. Look at guys like Monte Kiffin, Jim Johnson, Gregg Williams, Dick Labeau, and even Wade Phillips.

These guys are outstanding Defensive Co-ordinators.

Richard Smith is not.

Not sure why all of a sudden he has to be the second coming in order for us to field a defense cabable of allowing us to win games...

If we were loaded with talent I'd be right on board....I just think talented players generally make up defenses....

If you guys got someone that can come in and be a defensive guru please get them here...

Texan JBZ
08-25-2008, 06:16 PM
These guys are outstanding Defensive Co-ordinators.

Richard Smith is not.

Not sure why all of a sudden he has to be the second coming in order for us to field a defense cabable of allowing us to win games...

Totally agree. I just think he can do a better job than what he has shown so far.

Texan JBZ
08-25-2008, 06:19 PM
If you guys got someone that can come in and be a defensive guru please get them here...


Jerry Gray. Former Oiler, former DC at Buffalo. I think he is coaching DBs in Washington. I really don't know with the new staff they have there if they retained him though. His defenses always were salty and played tough.

Thorn
08-25-2008, 06:20 PM
Any team with Mario Williams on it outta be getting sacks, even in pre-season. I've been watching a lot of pre-season football other than the Texans, and I see lots of teams getting sacks.

dalemurphy
08-25-2008, 06:21 PM
These guys are outstanding Defensive Co-ordinators.

Richard Smith is not.

Not sure why all of a sudden he has to be the second coming in order for us to field a defense cabable of allowing us to win games...

If we were loaded with talent I'd be right on board....I just think talented players generally make up defenses....

If you guys got someone that can come in and be a defensive guru please get them here...


Let's assume for a minute that our sacks and QB pressures are about where they were last year. That would put us in the bottom quarter of the league.

Do you think that a team with Mario Williams at DE along with two other first round draft picks should rank that low? I would think there are more than a handful of D.C.s that could come in and turn that unite into at least an average one.. let's not forget that we've been poor against the run as well, and that's with Demeco Ryans playing Mike LB every one of the last 32 games.

Goldensilence
08-25-2008, 06:27 PM
First off amazingly great post. There are a few things I'd love to piggy back on


Different defenses have different philosophies. You know what Tampa or the Colts defense is supposed to look like. Or the Eagles. Or the Panthers. Or the Titans. Or the Patriots. Or any number of team's defenses. They draft players to suit their defenses.




And that should make me feel comfortable that he can build a defense from scratch why?



Also from the Pro Football Prospectus: "Although the Texans ranked 23rd in Adjusted Sack Rate , they ranked 30th in quarterback hurries per pass."

Ew.



He isn't going to dump his defensive coordinator in the grease, that's why. He will take responsibility for himself, and he will vaguely talk about coaching in general. I will say after the first three awful games of Smith's tenure, Kubiak said he was going to spend some more time with the coaching staff, which was probably not a great sign.

But yeah, this is on Kubiak. Richard Smith could get him fired if the defense doesn't get better soonishly.

The best thing that an offensive minded head coach can do is the find an awesome defensive coordinator and let him loose. I have little reason to believe that Smith is an awesome defensive coordinator.



* Our receiving group is Andre Johnson and a bunch of guys that no other teams really wanted. Andre Davis almost didn't make the team last year. Kevin Walter hardly got any playing time his first year. Jacoby Jones was the guy that everybody said we picked too high. David Anderson was on the nobody was likely going to draft him list. Those are guys that Kubiak figured would work for his offense, but nobody was beating down the doors to get those guys before we put them in our system. Last year's story was gee, why don't the Texans have a real #2 receiver? After AJ went down and there was only the Dayne train, people were stunned the Texans could still move the ball some.

* As for our quarterbacks, I think there is some promise there, but both of them were backups before they started working with Kubiak.

* Running backs--no one would want any of our running backs with the exception of Slaton. The offense seeks to make the running backs, ala Ron Dayne, better than they are.

* There's plenty of promise on the offensive line, but it's not like those guys are unearthly more athletic than any other line in the league, ala Pace in his prime. I think they are a well-coached unit, but not amazingly talented.

* Overall, I think the offense is well coached, and Kubiak has assembled players who play well in his system. I think a player like an Owen Daniels is succeeding for the Texans when he might not have been developed as well in some other team.

[I]For all Polo has mentioned the larger quantity of guys who were high picks or FA name players. The bulk of those are on the defensive side of the ball. 3 #1s on the line, one at DB prior to injury, 1st pick of the second round on Demeco Ryans and it seems the bigger offseason spending is usually on defense.

Contrasting we spent a 1st on AJ and this year we spent a 1st on Brown. Pitts was a second, rounding out that is Matt Schaub. One way or another a high pick was going to be spent on QB post Carr. Way I see we spent one second for him. The rest of the squad is comprised of guys who work well in a system. Three years in Kubiak's offensive system and it's light years ahead of the defense using less talent.


Yeah, the coaching on the offensive side of the ball is better than on the defensive side of the ball. That is something that can be fixed.



Some of those guys are athletic and talented, and some of those guys are just good fits for the system we run.



Why can't you blame that on Richard Smith? There are players who have stunk whilst playing for the Texans, but played much better when they got into real defensive systems. Phillip Buchanon comes to mind immediately.

You get a defensive system you believe in, and coaches that believe in it, and you get the players who can excel in that system, and you put them in situations to succeed.

Just because you have an offensive minded head coach, doesn't mean that the defense is going to get short shrift. In fact, the Texans have gone out of their way to spend high draft picks on that side of the ball. I think if Smith said he needed cheeseburger eaters at DT, that's what he would get. Or more physical sizeable linebackers. (though I will say it is my understanding that it was the linebacker coach that begged for DeMeco Ryans even though that wasn't Smith's pick).


Richard Smith is the guy the Texans settled on because there weren't better coordinator candidates available at the time. And probably early season isn't the best time to can Smith. But if the defense continues to be way below average, I don't want to hear the excuse of young players because lots of teams depend on young players. I want a defensive coordinator that we can trust he knows what he is doing.

I understand from the other thread that your mind is made up on the issues involving Richard Smith. Personally, I don't understand that sort of thinking. I hope I'm completely misguided about Smith, and that his defense doesn't continue to be an albatross for this team. I think we discuss these things, not to prove that we are right, but to get us thinking about things we might not have thought of, and to give us stuff to look for on the field.



If the defense is getting even marginally better, it is because they were so awful in 2005. I am still very traumatized by marginal QBs moving the ball on these Smith coached Texans.



So you want to have a defense designed to stop them. Getting taller corners I understand is part of that. I'm not sure what their philosophy is up front other than gee, Mario is going to get double, tripled team, maybe the other guys can do something.



Does he want smallish DTs? I don't know. Before Okam, all the guys were mostly at 285-305. If he wanted a free agent body bigger than that, I think he could get it. Okam was drafted to give some weight to the front four. I don't know if this is a plan, or he was just BPA. Who knows what their plan is on defense.

Grady Jackson last year comes to my mind after the Falcons surprisingly cut him. He could've come here for a reasonable price and gave our run defense a big boost. Instead JAX signed him and he helped them out a fair bit.



The Colts have a very defined defensive philosophy that is much more than smallish defensive linemen. And they draft to suit that philosophy. I wonder if a Bob Sanders could succeed with our defense--I don't know.



Maybe not put Dunta Robinson in man coverage with no safety help in a game the Texans are trying to stop the Titans from scoring quickly.

Or the strange blitz call on the last play of first Vince Young-Texans game.

Or putting Petey Faggins on an island REPEATEDLY when Faggins had already been TD torched in the Bills game.

Or not having a defense that opposing teams call "vanilla" even before the team plays the Texans.

Or not have a defensive rotation that involves the linemen sprinting off the field to "rest." (I think they ended up fixing that, but it is an illustration of some extreme coaching cluelessness.)

A defense in the salary cap era needs to be 1. Easy to learn and execute; 2. Difficult to move the ball against; 3. Have a coach that talented free agents want to play for. I don't see Houston having any of that. The defense has often been confused by what Smith is trying to get them to do.

How long are you willing to see wretched defensive play before you want to see what a defensive coordinator with a track record of success could do with it? I'm not sure who that guy would be, but McNair is willing to spend some coin.

Ron Rivera is a guy that comes to mind. I'm not sure Lane Kiffin is still with the Raiders next year and if Al Davis decides his staff needs a complete overhaul We better be on the phone with Rob Ryan and his mullet.Jerry Grey is now a secondary coach for Washington. Mike Singletary is a guy i would make an argument for.

kiwitexansfan
08-25-2008, 06:40 PM
Bringing in a new DC, sets the defense back 3 years in my book.

At the moment the offense of this team is close to being good enough to get the team to the playoffs by itself.

Given this I say roll the dice after the season, make the change, and hope for the best, while the offense keeps us in games. Most of our team is young and will be at their best 3 years from now.

BornOrange
08-25-2008, 08:14 PM
Polo, you make some valid points, but so do the rest of us that don't like Richard Smith's style of defense. Look at guys like Monte Kiffin, Jim Johnson, Gregg Williams, Dick Labeau, and even Wade Phillips. Yes, they've had good players at certain positions over the years, but not at every position on the field. And sometimes, they've taken average talent and turned them into stars. Take Kendrell Bell for instance. He gets drafted out of Georgia to the Steelers and sets the NFL on fire for a few years. He goes to the Kansas City Chiefs and is never heard from again. Look at guys like Jeremiah Trotter and Micheal Lewis from Philly. They're in the Pro Bowl when Jim Johnson is coaching them. Trotter goes to Washington and Lewis to San Fran and they're not the same players. Simeon Rice is good player for Arizona, goes to Tampa Bay and becomes a great player. Fred Smoot has Pro Bowl-caliber capability with the Skins, goes to the Vikings and is a very average player. More guys who played for these DCs and had productive careers with them: Dhani Jones, Corey Simon, Donnie Edwards, Dexter Jackson, Dwight Smith, Hugh Douglas, Darwin Walker, Jerome McDougle. None of these guys did anything with they're careers once they left these DCs. Gregg Williams took Washington's defense to new heights, now doing the same in J-Ville. The thing they have in common is they fit the talent they have available into an effective defensive philosophy and scheme. They are also very aggressive, risk-taking playcallers. Forget that vanilla crap with these guys. Did you see the Steelers game the other night? OMG, Lebeau blitzed all the time! I don't understand your defense of Richard Smith, but you don't get why I think he should be replaced. I guess that makes us even. :thinking:
Something else that all those guys had in common was that when they played on teams with a lot of talent around them, they did well. When they got to teams with less talent, or into a situation that didn't fit their skills, they didn't do well.

Kendrell Bell did well in the Steelers system, at least his rookie year when he had 9 sacks. The next 3 years he plays in a total of 31 games and had 9 sacks. When he goes to KC, which runs a 4-3, of course he isn't going to have the same kind of success because he wasn't the same player he was in his rookie year and he wasn't in the same system with the same kind of talent around him.

Of course Simeon Rice was going to do better in Tampa Bay because he had so much more talent around him than he did in Arizona.

If you are so eager to bring in a coach that does a lot of blitzing, you will probably need to bring in another head coach. Whenever Kubiak addresses the lack of blitzing, he says that it wouldn't be effective with our DB's. It may not be Richard Smith's fault that there aren't more blitzes.

The Pencil Neck
08-25-2008, 08:18 PM
Bringing in a new DC, sets the defense back 3 years in my book.

At the moment the offense of this team is close to being good enough to get the team to the playoffs by itself.

Given this I say roll the dice after the season, make the change, and hope for the best, while the offense keeps us in games. Most of our team is young and will be at their best 3 years from now.

If we get the right DC, it doesn't set us back at all.

If we keep the DC we have and he's the wrong guy for the job, then we'll never get where we want to go. This year is a make or break year for Smith.

Texans_Chick
08-25-2008, 08:19 PM
These guys are outstanding Defensive Co-ordinators.

Richard Smith is not.

Not sure why all of a sudden he has to be the second coming in order for us to field a defense cabable of allowing us to win games...

If we were loaded with talent I'd be right on board....I just think talented players generally make up defenses....

If you guys got someone that can come in and be a defensive guru please get them here...


So in other words, if we can get someone better than Smith, you are okay with him exiting? Me too.

Preferably a 4-3 guy so we don't have to start completely over.

BornOrange
08-25-2008, 08:24 PM
I've gotta believe that conversations have been taking place between Kubiak, Rick Smith, and guys like: FBush, RRhodes, JHolland about the state of the defense.

The Ray Rhodes hiring, combined with the Kubiak's tone recently regarding the defense and the fact that Richard Smith wasn't Kubes' first choice all point to the fact that an in-house change will happen during the season if things don't go well. If the defense looks like it does now once the season gets going Richard won't survive the Bye week, IMO.

I seriously doubt if Ray Rhodes will ever be more than an assistant position coach....not even a full position coach....because of his health concerns. His position on this team is basically as a consultant. The hiring of Rhodes was essentially a classy move to help out a great coach and a great person by giving him a salary without a whole lot of responsibility.

Texan JBZ
08-25-2008, 09:17 PM
If you are so eager to bring in a coach that does a lot of blitzing, you will probably need to bring in another head coach. Whenever Kubiak addresses the lack of blitzing, he says that it wouldn't be effective with our DB's. It may not be Richard Smith's fault that there aren't more blitzes.

But it's Richard Smith's job on the line if the defense doesn't improve. And when you say that Kubes says it wouldn't be effective with our DBs-THAT'S EXACTLY WHY THE PLAY-CALLING HAS TO BE AGGRESSIVE! We are not the NY Giants of last year. We're not the Titans. It's pretty much understood that our front four can't generate enough of a pass rush to cover up for the secondary. That's why RS has to blitz more. It's not a matter of wanting to, he has to. I'll admit, our LBs suck at blitzing. But he still has to try something.

Perfect example: The Girls had the ball in their territory right before halftime last Friday. Instead of going after the QB, the defense sits back in a soft zone and Romo picks them apart. Nobody in his face, all the time in the world to throw. Gets them down the field and into chip-shot field goal position. Made it look easy. And I don't want to hear this, "well, the Texans were playing the Cowboys who have a high-powered offense" line. Look at the schedule: Colts twice, Jags twice, Bengals, & Browns. And that doesn't include the offenses that will look better than they are against us, which always seems to happen. I'm just glad we have an offense that can keep up.

kiwitexansfan
08-25-2008, 09:40 PM
Preferably a 4-3 guy so we don't have to start completely over.

I understand the logic here, but I love me some 3-4 defense.

TEXANRED
08-25-2008, 09:48 PM
The D is missing a SLB, a CB, a FS, and a DE.

Other that not to bad.

TEXANRED
08-25-2008, 09:52 PM
I understand the logic here, but I love me some 3-4 defense.

The screwed up thing is if we went Okam at NT, Williams at DE, Amobi at DE, Ryans and Greewood at ILB, and X.A, and Diles at OLB we would have a pretty kick ass 34.

BornOrange
08-25-2008, 10:17 PM
But it's Richard Smith's job on the line if the defense doesn't improve. And when you say that Kubes says it wouldn't be effective with our DBs-THAT'S EXACTLY WHY THE PLAY-CALLING HAS TO BE AGGRESSIVE! We are not the NY Giants of last year. We're not the Titans. It's pretty much understood that our front four can't generate enough of a pass rush to cover up for the secondary. That's why RS has to blitz more. It's not a matter of wanting to, he has to. I'll admit, our LBs suck at blitzing. But he still has to try something.

Perfect example: The Girls had the ball in their territory right before halftime last Friday. Instead of going after the QB, the defense sits back in a soft zone and Romo picks them apart. Nobody in his face, all the time in the world to throw. Gets them down the field and into chip-shot field goal position. Made it look easy. And I don't want to hear this, "well, the Texans were playing the Cowboys who have a high-powered offense" line. Look at the schedule: Colts twice, Jags twice, Bengals, & Browns. And that doesn't include the offenses that will look better than they are against us, which always seems to happen. I'm just glad we have an offense that can keep up.
But if Kubiak is telling him not to blitz, what is he to do?

dalemurphy
08-25-2008, 11:14 PM
I seriously doubt if Ray Rhodes will ever be more than an assistant position coach....not even a full position coach....because of his health concerns. His position on this team is basically as a consultant. The hiring of Rhodes was essentially a classy move to help out a great coach and a great person by giving him a salary without a whole lot of responsibility.

I agree, but that's my point- that Rhodes will be used as a consultant and thos conversations could lead to a change- I didn't mean that Rhodes would be the one to take over, I would expect it to be Bush if it was during the season.

kiwitexansfan
08-25-2008, 11:35 PM
The screwed up thing is if we went Okam at NT, Williams at DE, Amobi at DE, Ryans and Greewood at ILB, and X.A, and Diles at OLB we would have a pretty kick ass 34.

I think we would have a pretty good 3-4.

The one piece we would be lacking is that killer outside LB in the Ware/Merriman mould, but those guys aren't easy to find.

dalemurphy
08-26-2008, 12:08 AM
I think we would have a pretty good 3-4.

The one piece we would be lacking is that killer outside LB in the Ware/Merriman mould, but those guys aren't easy to find.

Well, we sure the heck don't have the NT!

dalemurphy
08-26-2008, 12:27 AM
I think we would have a pretty good 3-4.

The one piece we would be lacking is that killer outside LB in the Ware/Merriman mould, but those guys aren't easy to find.

oops!

beerlover
08-26-2008, 12:33 AM
does scheme really matter both work for different reasons just depends how well its executed & right now the Texans don't look committed, arm tackles unaware of ball position or flying to the ball just isn't happening :d:

ObsiWan
08-26-2008, 01:07 AM
Are you implying that if our DB's played differently they'd be better ?

If so, I disagree.

My question was posed to illustrate who puts the defense in position to make plays. Does a DB decide individually whether he's going to jam a guy at the line or is that the D.C. call? If the D.C. is telling the CBs to play back off the WRs 5-7 yds, well any quick curls or outs the offense gets is on the D.C. isn't it? That call basically gives the offense a free 5 yds because well timed outs or curls will beat passive coverage like that EVERY TIME. And that call is on Richard Smith.
Maybe they wouldn't "play better" but could they be used smarter?

However, after thinking about your arguments, perhaps you're right; maybe Richard Smith is doing the best with what he has.

We all know that, without Dunta, we don't have anything close to a true shutdown CB let alone a set of two. Nor do we have a ball-hawking safety with great range. So perhaps we should have spent those 1st round picks on pro bowl potential cover guys instead of "stud" linemen. Maybe a DL full of Cochran and Bulman and Maddox types (with a Mario thrown in) could get to the QB if we have stud DBs who can cover for a full 3-4 seconds. Or maybe if we had stud CBs who could go step-for-step with the WRs and take away the hot routes our blitzes would be effective.

Maybe Smith is handicapped by lack of "stud" personnel. OTOH, I don't see any evidence where Smith is demanding guys with certain skill sets to fit his "scheme" either. Gibbs didn't waste anytime getting who he wanted. Richard Smith has been here 3 yrs. Can any of us point to any of our picks and say, "Richard Smith brought so-and-so in for his system"? Perhaps you can. I can't.

So all that to say, I'll partially concede your point; maybe getting more studs on defense is the answer.
I will concede that outside of Fletcher and Dunta, we don't have a single day-one DB. So if we're short of "studs" anywhere its there. gee, what are the odds that our sucky secondary is chock full of 2nd day picks and UDFAs.
Its just that part of me thinks he could be doing better with what he's got or making more of a stink about getting some upgrades.

Edit:
I know what bugs me about the "he needs more studs" argument.
It just sounds waaaay too much like the "If David Carr had a stud O-line, a stud RB, and someone besides Andre to throw, he'd be a better QB" argument.
Three 1st-rounders (5 if you count Dunta and Fletcher), two 2nd rounders (DeMeco, Weaver - 3 if you count Chaun Thompson), and a third rounder (Greenwood) ought to be enough talent to do something with. If Richard Smith can't motivate Weaver, et. al. to get off their duffs or puts them in a system that they can perform well in or won't recognize some of them have nothing left, then, again, that's on him.
...or Kubiak.

thunderkyss
08-26-2008, 07:05 AM
The screwed up thing is if we went Okam at NT, Williams at DE, Amobi at DE, Ryans and Greewood at ILB, and X.A, and Diles at OLB we would have a pretty kick ass 34.

If Okam pans out, he should make a decent NT in a 3/4.

We'd pretty much kill Mario's career, if we made him a DE in a 3/4, and pretty much wasted a #1 overall draft pick.

Don't get me wrong, Mario would be perfect for a 3/4 DE, but a 3/4 DE is not worth a #1 overall draft pick.

Amobi should never see a 3/4. he doesn't fit either position, just like TJ does not fit a 3/4...... at least not my vision of a 3/4. They've got the body to play NT, but the skills to play DE... more quick than strong.

Look at Spears, Canty, Castillo & Olshansky. That's what a 3/4 DE should look like. 6-4 and up, 300lbs or so.

Weaver would make a decent 3/4 DE. We don't expect him to rush the passer anyway. Just create pressure up the middle. Same thing with Cochran(a little smallish) & Tim Bullman.

Mario would have to be an OLB..... he may be athletic enough to pull it off.....

Polo
08-26-2008, 08:19 AM
So in other words, if we can get someone better than Smith, you are okay with him exiting? Me too.

Preferably a 4-3 guy so we don't have to start completely over.

Yes.

If there is someone out there that the organization feels like is an upgrade over Smith....by all means....get the guy...

Why would I be against that ?



That hasn't been my point though.....

My point is that Smith may not necessarily be teh suxxorz as a d-coordinator...

Polo
08-26-2008, 09:47 AM
Let's assume for a minute that our sacks and QB pressures are about where they were last year.

Why ?

Do you think that a team with Mario Williams at DE along with two other first round draft picks should rank that low?

Amobi was a rookie last year.

TJ's hasn't lived up to his draft status.

I guess these things are Smith's fault too.

I would think there are more than a handful of D.C.s that could come in and turn that unite into at least an average one.

If there is a co-ordinator that could have made Amobi play like a seasoned vet last year an make Travis Johnson play like a 1st rd. DT, I'd love to have them on board. If that same D-coordinator could have made Weaver not get hurt I'd be smitten.

let's not forget that we've been poor against the run as well, and that's with Demeco Ryans playing Mike LB every one of the last 32 games.


The talent was so great on our team that people dubbed Frank Okam...a late rd. rookie pick with questions looming about his playing habits...as the immediate answer or atleast partial solution to our run stopping game...

Talk about distorted perceptions...

76Texan
08-26-2008, 11:01 AM
Let's play a game, and name all the players from last year that people thought we shoulda gotten rid of, upgraded, or turned into a backup.

How many legitimate starters we had on D?
How many solid backups did we have?

No scheme can make up for such severe lack of quality in personnel!

dalemurphy
08-26-2008, 11:29 AM
Why ?



Amobi was a rookie last year.

TJ's hasn't lived up to his draft status.

I guess these things are Smith's fault too.



If there is a co-ordinator that could have made Amobi play like a seasoned vet last year an make Travis Johnson play like a 1st rd. DT, I'd love to have them on board. If that same D-coordinator could have made Weaver not get hurt I'd be smitten.




The talent was so great on our team that people dubbed Frank Okam...a late rd. rookie pick with questions looming about his playing habits...as the immediate answer or atleast partial solution to our run stopping game...

Talk about distorted perceptions...


I wasn't saying the talent was tremendous. I'm saying that the talent, money, and picks spent on the defense the past three seasons should show some fruit this year. If we don't turn into a solidly average to above average defense this year the defensive coordinator should be held accountable. I have doubts about him but I don't blame him for last season. I hope my doubts are proven wrong. But, if we stink this year, he's gotta go- even if we stink in September he's gotta go.

Polo
08-26-2008, 11:33 AM
I wasn't saying the talent was tremendous. I'm saying that the talent, money, and picks spent on the defense the past three seasons should show some fruit this year. If we don't turn into a solidly average to above average defense this year the defensive coordinator should be held accountable. I have doubts about him but I don't blame him for last season. I hope my doubts are proven wrong. But, if we stink this year, he's gotta go- even if we stink in September he's gotta go.

I'm just struggling with the perception that our D-coordinator is the worst ever.

If he is, the blame should be on Kubiak for bringing him in and then keeping him for this long.

If they find someone who they feel is a definite upgrade I say go for it.

dalemurphy
08-26-2008, 11:55 AM
I'm just struggling with the perception that our D-coordinator is the worst ever.

If he is, the blame should be on Kubiak for bringing him in and then keeping him for this long.

If they find someone who they feel is a definite upgrade I say go for it.

I don't think he's the worst ever. I'm fearful that he may be below average. And certainly I blame Kubiak, particularly if he doesn't act decisively when and if it becomes apparent that Smith can't do the job well.

Runner
08-26-2008, 05:42 PM
I just think if coaches are primarily evaluated by the talent they have available, Dom and crew would still be here.

GP
08-26-2008, 10:33 PM
I'm just struggling with the perception that our D-coordinator is the worst ever.

If he is, the blame should be on Kubiak for bringing him in and then keeping him for this long.

If they find someone who they feel is a definite upgrade I say go for it.

Bash me for this if you desire, but...

The fault is with Bob McNair. He is the one who pays for coaches, and there's no "cap" for coaches salary. Therefore, McNair went cheap by purchasing a guy nobody else in the NFL was interested in.

You really think Kubiak thought Richard Smith was THE guy for the job? Who the hell did we have to outbid to land Richard Smith? A car lot?

LOL.

Kubiak got stuck with David Carr, and he got stuck with a low-budget d-coordinator because he couldn't pay for a big time guy out there.

I mean, come on GUYS!!!! Richard Smith is THE best guy Kubiak identified and wanted as his d-coordinator? Pffttt....

I'll say it again: "Thank you, Bob, for bringing football back to Houston. But, and it's a very big BUT...we need a home run hitter calling the plays and providing the day-to-day, game-to-game strategy. Please."

I just don't think, at the end of the day, our owner is solidly behind the concept of paying BIG bucks to BIGTIME coaches. He prolly splurged on Kubiak, and yet has a strict ceiling on the other coaches.

I just cannot see Kubiak sitting there licking his chops over the idea that he actually landed such a big time playa' in Richard Smith as d-coordinator. It was probably more of a thing where Kubiak sighed and said, "Well, I can maybe make this work. Just gotta' hold it together and then make my push for a real d-coordinator a few seasons down the road." Kubiak drank Bob's Kool Aid on David Carr, and I bet he chugged down some more of it...just biding his time for the day he could tell Bob that he NEEDS certain things if he's going to stick around. Just can't see Kubiak actually lying to himself and making himself believe that our d-coordinator was, at the time, the only option on the board. I mean, let's get real for a second.

If there isn't a cap on salaries for coaches, then Bob could have bought out any friggin' person he wanted to buy out, to become our d-coordinator.

Hate Jerry Jones all you want, but dadGUM the guy will spend the jack to do whatever he thinks is the best chance to win. I like McNair, but I think he's overly tight with the finances--There's a reason why we're one of the most profitable franchises yet we haven't even made it to the playoffs.

The LA Clippers are ran in a similar fashion: They are profitable, have a good fan base, and yet don't get over the top in terms of producing significant OUTCOMES....such as playoff appearances, playoff wins, stuff like that. Stuff a fan wants to see.

But gosh dern it, we're so nice and respectable! We got THAT going for us...:whip:

(BTW, I am seen as a bastard for having this line of reasoning...and I just am not going to change my mind on it. I love a lot of what McNair has done for us, but this is a huuuuuge blunder to have the DC that we have today. And I think it's more on the owner than on the coach. It's on the guy writing the checks, IMO).

GP
08-26-2008, 10:47 PM
BTW, Joe Marciano has done a pretty solid job with ST.

That blows up this idea that we don't have good enough talent for Richard Smith to succeed. Joe's using a patchwork of offense and defense players that either ARE playing active roles on offense/defense OR are only depth for offense/defense. Still, Joe's using the same old scrubs that our other coaches are using.

If Joe can have HIS squad playing "lights out" ball, other coaches ought to be held to the same standard. Right?

Elite teams have good talent, but they also have talented coaches at every level.

hadaad
08-27-2008, 11:40 AM
I'd agree with you, GP, except that they had Sherman as OC, who couldn't have been very cheap, and they've brought in another former head coach, Ray Rhodes whose salary is probably not minimal, as well as Joe Gibbs. I don't understand the loyalty to Richard Smith (other than the name similarity to the GM) but I don't think it's tight-fistedness.

da Bull
08-27-2008, 01:53 PM
A poor analogy, but, one anyway would be a chess game:

You prepare: Chess - Study the games played by the Masters; Football - Establish techniques and tendencies of the opponent

1. Beginning Game - Positioning: Chess - Get your pieces into position; Football - Same
2. Middle Game - Countering: Chess - Counter the opponent at the same time setting up for the attack; Football - Same
3. End Game - Attacking: Chess - Out maneuvering the opponent to claim victory; Football - Same

I think the defense (Richard Smith) is lacking in the middle game (2). Richard Smith is too slow in countering the opponent, thus making it more difficult to succeed in the end. You can win a chess game with either the attributes of a queen or a pawn; but if you're not very good at countering, the pawn probably isn't going to be around at the end.

That being said, Kubiak needs to recognize the lack of countering ability and utilize other defensive staff members to compensate. Or maybe Richard Smith is the best of the bunch....like Peety was after Dunta went down. That would sure put water in the chili.

GP
08-27-2008, 08:21 PM
I'd agree with you, GP, except that they had Sherman as OC, who couldn't have been very cheap, and they've brought in another former head coach, Ray Rhodes whose salary is probably not minimal, as well as Joe Gibbs. I don't understand the loyalty to Richard Smith (other than the name similarity to the GM) but I don't think it's tight-fistedness.

See, I thought about Sherman, too.

He was only "stopping by" until a HC gig opened up. He needed a break, a year or so of separation until something opened up. I don't think his contract broke the bank. Does anybody have figures on Sherman's contract? I bet it's hard to get ahold of the lesser-recognized coaches salary numbers, though.

It was more or less an "I'll help you, you help me" arrangement with Kubiak-Sherman, IMO.

I think Ray Rhodes was brought in to eventually replace Richard Smith, maybe as soon as this coming off-season. And, it would make sense for McNair (ever the penny pincher) to structure Rhodes' deal so that his salary is low NOW but escalates somehow...the "hook" for Rhodes to come here was not his salary NOW, but rather the tease from Kubiak and McNair that the DC gig is probably headed Rhodes' way in the near future.

Alex Gibbs, IMO, would best fit under the category of "Big" salary. He was coaxed into coming here, and I bet the deal was sweetened with a nice salary figure. Kubiak has this offense running pretty well, and the addition of ZBS guru Alex Gibbs was probably at the top of his list--No more "sucking" at running the ball, in Kubiak's mind. I think Gibbs would be the only really big contract outside of Kubiak's contract. Just me thinking out loud, which is dangerous and sometimes comical. :cowboy1:

This defense is going to finish the same way it has finished every year under Richard Smith: Middle-of-the-road, at best, and maybe less than that by the time the year's done. We've had two years, and I have seen enough. I even think DeMeco is getting tired of it. His body language and pep is a lot different than it was in year 1. I have been watching DeMeco pretty closely, and he regularly has that hands-on-the-hips, pissed off look on his face about three series into each game. He has that same sort of dissatisfied look that D-Rob had when Carr was around. DeMeco is aggressive, and he's playing for a DC who isn't. And it's eating him alive, IMO. I don't like what Richard Smith is doing, and I don't think the key players on our defense do, either.

We need a Buddy Ryan-infused style of d-coordinator...a guy who puts out hits on opposing teams' players, sends the house regularly, and forces offenses to be more timid.

What we have now, is a defense that is always on its heels and consistently relishing the bend-but-don't-break philosophy. That's absolute hogwash in the NFL. Hogwash.

Chance_C
08-28-2008, 02:12 PM
See, I thought about Sherman, too.

He was only "stopping by" until a HC gig opened up. He needed a break, a year or so of separation until something opened up. I don't think his contract broke the bank. Does anybody have figures on Sherman's contract? I bet it's hard to get ahold of the lesser-recognized coaches salary numbers, though.

It was more or less an "I'll help you, you help me" arrangement with Kubiak-Sherman, IMO.

I think Ray Rhodes was brought in to eventually replace Richard Smith, maybe as soon as this coming off-season. And, it would make sense for McNair (ever the penny pincher) to structure Rhodes' deal so that his salary is low NOW but escalates somehow...the "hook" for Rhodes to come here was not his salary NOW, but rather the tease from Kubiak and McNair that the DC gig is probably headed Rhodes' way in the near future.

Alex Gibbs, IMO, would best fit under the category of "Big" salary. He was coaxed into coming here, and I bet the deal was sweetened with a nice salary figure. Kubiak has this offense running pretty well, and the addition of ZBS guru Alex Gibbs was probably at the top of his list--No more "sucking" at running the ball, in Kubiak's mind. I think Gibbs would be the only really big contract outside of Kubiak's contract. Just me thinking out loud, which is dangerous and sometimes comical.

This defense is going to finish the same way it has finished every year under Richard Smith: Middle-of-the-road, at best, and maybe less than that by the time the year's done. We've had two years, and I have seen enough. I even think DeMeco is getting tired of it. His body language and pep is a lot different than it was in year 1. I have been watching DeMeco pretty closely, and he regularly has that hands-on-the-hips, pissed off look on his face about three series into each game. He has that same sort of dissatisfied look that D-Rob had when Carr was around. DeMeco is aggressive, and he's playing for a DC who isn't. And it's eating him alive, IMO. I don't like what Richard Smith is doing, and I don't think the key players on our defense do, either.

We need a Buddy Ryan-infused style of d-coordinator...a guy who puts out hits on opposing teams' players, sends the house regularly, and forces offenses to be more timid.

What we have now, is a defense that is always on its heels and consistently relishing the bend-but-don't-break philosophy. That's absolute hogwash in the NFL. Hogwash.

I think you over analyze things. I definately don't think Bob McNair is cheap, and Gibbs was not coaxed into coming here. Gibbs in fact called Kubiak and told him he wanted to work.

I mean, come on GUYS!!!! Richard Smith is THE best guy Kubiak identified and wanted as his d-coordinator? Pffttt....

No actually he wasn't. I believe it was Jerry Gray (somebody correct me if I'm wrong). Do I think Richard Smith needs to go? You bet I do, but at the same time you have to be able to replace him with someone. Ray Rhodes is a good candidate if you want to play a bend but don't break defense, but isn't that what we play now?

Goldensilence
08-28-2008, 03:27 PM
I think you over analyze things. I definately don't think Bob McNair is cheap, and Gibbs was not coaxed into coming here. Gibbs in fact called Kubiak and told him he wanted to work.



No actually he wasn't. I believe it was Jerry Gray (somebody correct me if I'm wrong). Do I think Richard Smith needs to go? You bet I do, but at the same time you have to be able to replace him with someone. Ray Rhodes is a good candidate if you want to play a bend but don't break defense, but isn't that what we play now?

I heard Gray and Frank Bush whom is now on our staff were front runners. Jerry is a secondary coach now for Washington. Ron Rivera is a LB coach for SD.