PDA

View Full Version : So..... keep Chris Palmer, the coaches, the team...


OzzO
12-26-2004, 04:41 PM
Those that called for particular heads in the recent past - has your frame of mind changed?

Granted, this was just one game... and to sweep ANOTHER division rival while shutting them out.. but just wondering if there's a change of heart now.

I saw more various play calling (probably because quite a few of them worked this time)... so is that Palmer and the players now stepping up? Granted, I still think the O-line can be improved as far as protection is concerned... the run block looked good today.

Defense WHUPPED... so nothing to say there - got some pressure, some sacks, some ints...

Personally, I was not one to call for a particular person (group) to be removed.. but still feel we could use some improvement on the line.

Grid
12-26-2004, 04:43 PM
Ive called for Palmers head this year, and I think im starting to come around to him. Now that ive learned to respect what they are trying to do with the Texans, instead of trying to say what I think they should do.. I appreciate his playcalling more.

We need to fix our Oline... and we could do with an improved pass rush, mostly we need a playmaker in our front 7 that we can depend on to come in EVERY WEEK and generate some kind of pass rush for us.

Other than that.. im happy with everything :)

Rovator
12-26-2004, 04:47 PM
Defense has played great the past 2 weeks, but there's still lots of room for improvement on offense.

Hervoyel
12-26-2004, 04:50 PM
Fix the Oline and it will come together. The players I think are there, they are at times executing now on the run blocking but their pass blocking is still abysmal. Carr almost never gets the time he needs to get the job done.

Priority number one IMO is get a real center. Wade will get it together, Weigert will return, Pitts will continue to improve, and you've got a whole season already spent developing Wand who I think will also continue to improve. McKinney will never, ever be any better than he is right now and that's lousy.

jr0ck
12-26-2004, 04:59 PM
Now that ive learned to respect what they are trying to do with the Texans, instead of trying to say what I think they should do.. I appreciate his playcalling more.

glad to see the number of positive texan fans is growing everyday ;)

and you've got a whole season already spent developing Wand who I think will also continue to improve. McKinney will never, ever be any better than he is right now and that's lousy.

agreed, i saw wand getting to the second and third levels on a beautiful double team with pitts on DD's 44 yarder. nice to see the big guy with a lisp look aggressive and execute, lets hope he's finding some fire in his gentle giant demeanor. now onto steve, ive been watching him in the last few games specifically, and after today im officially for looking forward to a replacement at the heart of our line. overall mckinney played well enough for us to win but on one of the 4 sacks he just let stroud run right around him to drop carr. but on a lighter note...............


:bguitar: FIRST SHUTOUT EVER, SWEEPING THE JAGS, AND BEATING OUR BIGGEST DIVISION "RIVAL" ALL IN ONE DAY!! :bguitar:

OzzO
12-26-2004, 05:12 PM
You can just feel the group hugs... but I agree on points made. I'm thinking center, and some TE's this offseason for an offensive wish list.

Harry Biped
12-26-2004, 05:16 PM
Today's win was great, but it was a result of the Texans best defensive effort in franchise history. Offense did their part, for the most part, but their performance still leaves something to be desired. One game does not make a franchise and the Texans have to build a much more cohesive offensive philosophy before the team will experience any true degree of success. The problems with the O-line are in large part, a failure of the philosophy(bad schemes), not necessarily the personnel. They are also still making too many elementary mistakes. They were just lucky that the Jags did not do a great job capitalizing on them today. IMHO, Palmer still needs to be sent packing. Any average OC would have been able to produce the offensive results that the Texans had today, because the talent is there. Taking a look at the big picture, the coaching is still a detriment, even if it wasn't today.

edo783
12-26-2004, 05:16 PM
O-line was just barely fair today. OK running, but less than OK on pass.
Defense was STRONG. Amazing what a little presure can do isn't it?
Play calling for the most part was very predictable and pedestrian. Very lttle play action and DD was ripping them so they would have bit. Should have been a no brainer, particularly on 1st down in the second half.

TexansCanes
12-26-2004, 06:40 PM
Play calling for the most part was very predictable and pedestrian. Very lttle play action and DD was ripping them so they would have bit. Should have been a no brainer, particularly on 1st down in the second half.

i agree, i knew what play was coming. on the two downs before the andre td (need to do that more in the red zone) we were on the 11 and on two straight plays we were in a goal line formation. it seems that some times we are just glad to get into the red zone. i left the espn zone after a few minutes in the second half so i can't comment on the play calling really, but i bet is was much like that of the Green Bay, but this time our defense played a great game, maybe someone can tell me.

Wolf
12-26-2004, 08:11 PM
Today's win was great, but it was a result of the Texans best defensive effort in franchise history. Offense did their part, for the most part, but their performance still leaves something to be desired. One game does not make a franchise and the Texans have to build a much more cohesive offensive philosophy before the team will experience any true degree of success. The problems with the O-line are in large part, a failure of the philosophy(bad schemes), not necessarily the personnel. They are also still making too many elementary mistakes. They were just lucky that the Jags did not do a great job capitalizing on them today. IMHO, Palmer still needs to be sent packing. Any average OC would have been able to produce the offensive results that the Texans had today, because the talent is there. Taking a look at the big picture, the coaching is still a detriment, even if it wasn't today.

you could substitute the defense with the offense in that quote..and Fangio with the Palmer

The Texans, meanwhile, moved the ball with ease. They finished with 333 yards, much of it thanks to Davis. His previous career high was 129 yards, set last season against the New York Jets and tied last month against Tennessee.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/recap;_ylc=X3oDMTBpZ2NvMjltBF9TAzk1ODYxMDU5BHNlYwN 0aA--?gid=20041226030&prov=ap

Harry Biped
12-26-2004, 11:00 PM
All I can say is that after almost 3 full seasons, we're still waiting on the Texans offense to be productive for an entire game. They haven't done that once in their 3 years under Palmer and they scored only twice today. The defense put up half as many points as the offense did. That is truly pathetic. The offense also put the defense in some tough spots today, but fortunately they were able to work thru it. The defense has come thru many many times over the past 3 seasons and today's win belongs to the defense. The offense did just enough to give the defense some room to work, but it wasn't because of the play calling that's for darn sure. Talent is the only thing that the Texans offense has going for it and until they dump Palmer, that will likely always be the case. As I stated early, any average OC can generate that much scoring with the talent that the Texans offense puts on the field. We need an above average coaching staff if we expect to win. We certainly don't have that right now on offense, instead we have the below average Chris Palmer running our team into the ground. I'm starting to think that Wolf must be either related to Chris Palmer or is Chris Palmer himself, because even after 3 pathetic offensive seasons he still defends him for no logical reason.

thetexanator
12-26-2004, 11:14 PM
im still calling for the guys head. this was a great win, but this wasnt a remedy for the year hes called. i still dont agree with not mixing in the pass in the second half. the guy has no confidence in his pass attack. we won looking good, but does anyone else think the jags werent right today? they had no fred taylor and after leftwitch got robaired he wasnt the same player. lots of things went the texans way this game, his playcalling is still bad, its just that today the run game made him look good.

Grid
12-26-2004, 11:57 PM
Dont expect us to ever NOT be predictable. If you have ever watched a Steelers or Dolphins game.. they ARE predictable. it has nothing to do with the intelligence of the O coordinator.. it is just the way they play the game. I dont think anyone can deny it has been successful for them.

Personally I like it.. we dont DEPEND on being tricky or having finesse.. it is smashmouth football, focused on wearing down the defense, and performing your basic bread and butter plays to perfection.

When we get it running right, we could be really really good.. especially with our QB and WR corps. If we get a running game to go with it.. look out.

Marcus
12-27-2004, 11:50 AM
Dont expect us to ever NOT be predictable. If you have ever watched a Steelers or Dolphins game.. they ARE predictable. it has nothing to do with the intelligence of the O coordinator.. it is just the way they play the game. I dont think anyone can deny it has been successful for them.

There will be some who don't like smashmouth football. They think that type of football is boring, along with being predictable. Running the football down the other teams' throats, backed up by a shutdown defense is Capers style. He strongly believes in it, and it's been proven that it works. Yesterday's game against the Jags, along with the Steelers successful season, vindicates his philosophy. He knows that it is sound. If Capers has a fault, it could be that he needs to do a better job of selling it to the fans, and asking them for more patience while constructing a team that fits that philosophy.

But I think I know who Capers is rooting for to win the Super Bowl in January.

I dont think anyone can deny it has been successful for them.

Successful or not, there are some fans that simply don't want their hometown football team to be run that way, even though it will be hard for them to publicly admit it.

edo783
12-27-2004, 01:03 PM
It is a successfull plan. However, it may not fit the team you have to work with very well. Just don't seem to be playing to the strengths of the personell, but are trying to play to a CONCEPT. As personell change it will work better, but in the mean time, play to your strengths.

Harry Biped
12-27-2004, 01:26 PM
The simple fact of the matter is that teams that don't have an effective balanced offensive attack don't win championships in the NFL these days. The Texans are a long way from that and that is why we are still losing at least half of our games every year. The coaching is a detriment and has been from day one in that regard. Yes we need to be able to play smash-mouth football to control the game, but in the NFL you also have to be able to play from behind to win and you can't do that with smash-mouth football.

Vinny
12-27-2004, 01:29 PM
The coaching is fine. Everyone wants an overnight contender. We are on the right course.

Harry Biped
12-27-2004, 01:41 PM
It's been 3 years and the Texans haven't had to deal with salary cap issues. They have more than enough talent to get them to the playoffs THIS YEAR. They didn't get there BECAUSE of coaching. From day one, this organization has decided that it is better to look good than to be good, and we season ticket holders who have invested thousands of dollars in this team are left with hardly anything to show for our investment. A good team can be built in 3 seasons, just not with bad coaching. Pittsburgh, San Diego, and the Jets are 3 teams that have a comparable level of talent and better coaching, and that is why they are winning and we are not.

infantrycak
12-27-2004, 01:46 PM
They didn't get there BECAUSE of coaching.

That is one possible explanation. Another is that they went 0-2 to begin the season due to 7 turnovers having nothing to do with the coaching.

Porky
12-27-2004, 02:11 PM
What we saw yesterday is Capers perfect blueprint. Heck, he said it himself - "What we saw out there was certainly what I envision our football team being, being able to run the football and play great defense. I believe in it, and I know that it works." - Dom Capers

Now, it can certainly be argued that the personell is not really suited for that style of play as of yet. It can be argued that it is a bit boring and predicatable at times too. But, the Steelers are proving it CAN be a winning formula if everything falls into place.

Having said that, I just don't agree with trying to jam round pegs into square holes. A win is a win is a win, and yesterday was great. But is this philosphy going to take us to the promised land? The jury is still way out on that one. :hmmm:

Vinny
12-27-2004, 02:33 PM
From day one, this organization has decided that it is better to look good than to be good, and we season ticket holders who have invested thousands of dollars in this team are left with hardly anything to show for our investment. A good team can be built in 3 seasons, just not with bad coaching. Pittsburgh, San Diego, and the Jets are 3 teams that have a comparable level of talent and better coaching, and that is why they are winning and we are not.First of all, calling the team superficial is silly. This is a serious orgainzation that has a desire to win long-term and it's fairly obvious to me.

We have the 4th best expansion record ever. Starting a team from scratch is not like rebuilding an existing team. You can turn around an existing team in 2-3 years but to 'expect' a playoff run after two years of an expansion build is not realistic.

Finally, a season ticket is not an 'investment' just like buying a Car isn't an investment.

BradK10
12-27-2004, 03:09 PM
While I'm not a smashmouth football basher, it's like with this team we're trying to fit a round peg into a square hole. This is not a "smashmouth"-control-the-clock talent base we have on offense. Why draft Carr and Andre if all Capers wants to do is his RB's get 30+ carries a game?

To me this offense is like going out, buying a Corvette, and never breaking 35mph.

infantrycak
12-27-2004, 03:18 PM
Why draft Carr and Andre if all Capers wants to do is his RB's get 30+ carries a game?

To me this offense is like going out, buying a Corvette, and never breaking 35mph.

For the same reasons the Steelers drafted Bradshaw/Swan/Stallworth (Swan and Stallworth with 23 years of playing time had 3 years with over 1000 yds by the way)and Roethlisberger/Ward/Burress and the Cowboys drafted Aikman/Irvin.

And what is wrong with wanting to run 30 times a game?--he wants to pass 35 times a game as well.

Marcus
12-27-2004, 03:30 PM
I don't get that "season ticket is an investment" thing, either. The last time I checked, a season ticket allows you to view a football game inside a football stadium.

And building a team from scratch takes longer than 3 years. It might even take as long as 5, like Capers and Casserly have stated, repeatedly. Revamping established teams like the Jets take less time.

There should be fine print on the back of those season tickets that read,

The Houston Texans reserve the right to revoke the privileges of any season ticket holder that displays acts of unnecessary and unjustified impatience. :rolleyes:

Harry Biped
12-27-2004, 06:46 PM
Anytime that you spend money for services or products, it is an investment. I'm sorry that many of you are not able or willing to see that, but it is still the case. And for the guy who said that buying a car is not an investment, then what is it. Do you not use it to go to work and get groceries and the like? Do you not get substantial value out of it? Of coarse a car is an investment just like season tix or a steak dinner or even a hair cut. If the services that were rendered to you were of insufficient quality you have a right to request satisfaction. That's how things work in a free market. My position is no different. I just want all of the games to be entertaining and have some meaning late in the season and to win key games when it counts. If you think that my statement about the organization caring more about appearances than wins was out of line, then tell me this, what have the Texans organization done anything outside of the draft to improve this team over 3 losing season? Significant coaching changes? No! Significant free agent signings? No! Any changes to philosophy? No! Any improvement of any kind in that manner? No! Raise ticket prices for an inferior product? YES! All I want is for them to improve the team, by whatever means is necessary. Talent only goes so far. The coaching is what guides the talent, especially young talent. Coaching has not lived up to it's responsibility and the philosophy, for the most part, has not worked. If the game against the Jags was Dom Caper's system working like it was blueprinted to work, then we are in big trouble, because the Jags were in the game until very late, and they played a terrible game with key players out. If a few things had gone differently yesterday, everyone on these boards would be in a bad mood because it could have been another disappointing loss. But when the Texans win, everybody forgets that they still have big issues with the offense, and like it or not those problems don't go away just because you won one game basically only with the defense.

infantrycak
12-27-2004, 07:02 PM
what have the Texans organization done anything outside of the draft to improve this team over 3 losing season? Significant coaching changes? No! Significant free agent signings? No!

There have been coaching changes--you of course built in your own escape valve with your subjective "significant." And yes I would consider Weigert, Bruener, Wade and Smith to be significant FA acquisitions. Name a better RT and DT that were available last year and what it would have cost to get them.

Any changes to philosophy? No!

Only a short yellow school bus rider would expect a change of philosophy within the 1st 3-4 years. They have to build the team 1st.

Any improvement of any kind in that manner? No!

4-12 2002 to 7-9 minimum, possibly 8-8 and 32nd offense to 15th. Seems like some remedial math classes are in order.

Vinny
12-27-2004, 07:29 PM
Anytime that you spend money for services or products, it is an investment. I'm sorry that many of you are not able or willing to see that, but it is still the case. And for the guy who said that buying a car is not an investment, then what is it. Do you not use it to go to work and get groceries and the like? Do you not get substantial value out of it?An investment is something you expect to make a profit on. A car is a depreciating asset. I can see using the term loosely because you equate getting a 'return' out of money spent in the form of entertainment. Fair enough, and not worth debating.
If you think that my statement about the organization caring more about appearances than wins was out of line, then tell me this, what have the Texans organization done anything outside of the draft to improve this team over 3 losing season? Significant coaching changes? No! Significant free agent signings? No!Nearly half of the guys in the trenches were inked in the last off-season. They signed 4 starting linemen in Wade, Smith Breunner (TE) and Walker (resign). This fits the mold of how the Patriots sign FA's. I guess you would feel better if Dan Snyder ran this joint. They sign all kinds of big-name FA's, and go thru coaches every year or two.

Harry Biped
12-27-2004, 07:30 PM
A significant change would be a star player that can change a team. TO or Kearse for example. Or bring in a new Offensive Coordinator. One that has a proven record, not a record of failure. Replacing ineffective offensive linemen with equally ineffective offensive linemen is no improvement. Not to mention that the Texans make so many elementary mistakes. Fundamentals is the primary responsibility of the coaching staff on any level and that is supposed to be the main focus of the Capers system. But yet they fail miserably at it. The improvement in the Texans record this season only reflects the impact of the draft, nothing further. For you to imply that there is something wrong with my attitude of change it now because you will have to change it at some point anyway, is very unintelligent. Keep in mind, outside of the Jags, what good teams did we beat this season? None, and the Jags are still in doubt. They can still finish without a winning record. There is no real improvement to show after three seasons. Improvement is the playoffs. Anything less at this point is failure. It's time to make real changes. Three years is more than enough time to see that the system doesn't work.

Lucky
12-27-2004, 07:45 PM
...But when the Texans win, everybody forgets that they still have big issues with the offense, and like it or not those problems don't go away just because you won one game basically only with the defense.
I don't think everyone just forgets that the Texans are having problems on offense. And I'm not Chris Palmer's biggest fan. But, I can't fault him for the 2nd half playcalling that led to zero offensive points. Carr threw seven 2nd half passes, was sacked 3 times, and ran after being forced to by the pass rush 4 times. So for every pass Carr got off in the 2nd half, he was either sacked or forced to run. I'm very happy that Palmer didn't call additional pass plays with that kind of ratio.

The Texans have problems in pass protection. They're 25th in sacks allowed with 43 (All Carr). Only Michael Vick has been sacked more times with 44. This has to be addressed in the offseason, but for now I'd like to get through this last game with Carr intact. I'm hoping Palmer sticks with the run oriented attack against Cleveland and let the defense win another one.

infantrycak
12-27-2004, 08:04 PM
A significant change would be a star player that can change a team. TO or Kearse for example.

Well let's see they drafted AJ, a faster TO and aggressively (too much so for some folks) moved up in the draft to get a guy they hope will be Kevin Greene--seems to fit the bill for what you are asking for since Kearse would be an OLB for the Texans, plus they went out and got the top DT available in FA.

Why am I responding?--you proved yourself completely unrealistic with this definition of improvement in year 3:

Improvement is the playoffs. Anything less at this point is failure.

They told you before you their 1st draft and before you made your investment that they were building for long term success not flash in the pan--guess you missed that--so it is your fault for buying the tickets in the 1st place.

And yes you have the right to criticize the team but running around acting like a hyperbolic chicken little is just silly.

HJam72
12-27-2004, 08:25 PM
I don't think everyone just forgets that the Texans are having problems on offense. And I'm not Chris Palmer's biggest fan. But, I can't fault him for the 2nd half playcalling that led to zero offensive points. Carr threw seven 2nd half passes, was sacked 3 times, and ran after being forced to by the pass rush 4 times. So for every pass Carr got off in the 2nd half, he was either sacked or forced to run. I'm very happy that Palmer didn't call additional pass plays with that kind of ratio.

The Texans have problems in pass protection. They're 25th in sacks allowed with 43 (All Carr). Only Michael Vick has been sacked more times with 44. This has to be addressed in the offseason, but for now I'd like to get through this last game with Carr intact. I'm hoping Palmer sticks with the run oriented attack against Cleveland and let the defense win another one.

I agree that more pass attempts would have been a mistake because of the lack of protection. Let's also remember that the Texans were eating up the clock like crazy in the 4th quarter. I kept watching the clock and thinking it was unrealistic how fast they were burning it off. They took the ball in the middle of the 4th and burned over 6 minutes off the clock on one drive by using the run, run, pass method before having a kick blocked and giving the ball back with less than 3 minutes left and a 2 touchdown lead. That is how you hold a lead. If you can run it down their throats, do it. Yes, it's predictable as can be and I would hate that kind of playcalling if we were down by a touchdown, but we weren't. Besides, like everyone is saying, we have no real pass protection.

Wolf
12-28-2004, 12:36 AM
makes me wonder why Harry Buys a computer. His "investment" is outdated within a couple of years.

in all reality doesit matter if a team makes the playoffs?? Only one thing matters and that is a superbowl ring... whoever gets the ring is the winner.. all others can be considered losers and didn't get a good return in their "investment".


It iritates me that people have a chance to get season tickets and then gripe about things.. I don't live in Houston, I don't get that chance. and on top of that , there are people that can't afford season tickets, but we have people griping about a team that didn't make the playoffs, but have steadily improved year after year .

OzzO
12-28-2004, 09:31 AM
Just a few people, Wolf. There's nothing wrong with expecting improvement - but I think some will always see the glass half empty unless it is filled immediately.

J-Man
12-28-2004, 11:21 AM
To all...good thread, solid arguments with a noticable lack of "flame posts".

Ok, on to my 2 cents. I don't have a problem with the approach of strong D and solid running as the formula to win games, but I think that Capers and Palmer might have more in mind that just that. I do think that we would see more of a spread/play-action oriented offense if the O-line would consistently show up. Any offensive system is predicated on having the time to allow the plays to develop, either runs or passes. For every 10 or 15 yard burst that DD has in a game he has 2-3 negative runs because someone is making contact with him behind the line.

If you look at our offensive system it is not all that different than the Colts (lot of single back, and 3 wide sets...most big plays coming off play-action). The obviously Manning is a huge factor in their offense since he calls most of his own plays, but the system is not that different than what Palmer runs. You can make a good case that if you swapped the starting 5 O-lineman for our team with the colts we might have added a 2-3 wins and the Colts might have dropped 1-2 more. I think with the correct personnel, ie. better collective O-line, that our system will be fine. I am not a big Palmer fan and in fact I think if things are noticably improved next season he should probably go. That being said you are limited in your play calling by your personnel...I think he is in the position of sometimes calling play packages that will "hurt us the least" instead of "hurt them the most". Let's try and go a couple top O-line guys in the draft and free agency to bolster the offense then make a judgment on the playcalling.

Quickie on the defensive side of the ball...I read the recent articles on the 3-4 and why it works for some teams and not others as well as all the discussions on this board. I am a big fan of the 3-4 but the biggest issue with it is the significant committment to the type of personnel you need to have to make it work. I think we need no kidding scary guy in the front 7 that the other teams must account for week in and week out. I don't see anyone in the line up that is that guy or could even develop in to that guy. I think that Babin will be a quality player but hoping he turns into Kevin Greene is a big hope, I would actually like to see us pick up a high quality OLB in FA or the draft...not just try to find a good 'tweener guy. If Derrick Johnson falls to us in the draft (fat chance) we need to be all over him...if we insist on another 'tweener then Dan Cody is looking like a much better prospect than Babin was last year.

Chance_C
12-28-2004, 11:22 AM
Harry Biped = Ibar Harry

Smashmouth football. I love it. Here we go guys, we are gonna run the ball down your throat, and they still can't stop it. What's not to like about that. What I can't believe is people (the two Harry's, Ibar and Biped) ask the question, "why draft people like David Carr and AJ, if all we're gonna do is run the ball?" Please get a clue, and hopefully it won't be to big of an investment...

TexansTrueFan
12-28-2004, 12:13 PM
Harry Bi maybe you should just not talk anymore, all you do is talk down on this team, and half of what you say makes no sence and the other half is just dummb ! i dont see how ya can be a fan with all the complaints you have ......

Vinny
12-28-2004, 03:27 PM
not just try to find a good 'tweener guy. If Derrick Johnson falls to us in the draft (fat chance) we need to be all over him...if we insist on another 'tweener then Dan Cody is looking like a much better prospect than Babin was last year."Tweeners" are our OLB's. You have to be at around 250 to hold up to Offensive Guards and Tackles. Smaller (230 pound guys and the like) have a hard time sheding blocks and 3-4 OLB's take on linemen much more than 4-3 OLB's do because they have two tackles and two ends covering the linemen. We just have 3 Tackle-types covering 5 guys so you have to have more size in your OLB's in this system. We will probably draft one 'tweener' every single year just like the Steelers do. DJ would be an inside linebacker in our system.

Harry Biped
12-28-2004, 05:55 PM
Lets be realistic here. I made observations that were based in reality and truth and expressed them honestly and without casting insults. The rest of you are the ones who have resorted to that and chosen to dance around the real issues that the team has. I have every right to express my opinions and the truth, regardless of whether you like it or not. It is a losers mentality to EVER accept failure and that is what the Texans have presented us with so far. Does that mean that I don't like or support the Texans? No. It means that I care about them enough to rock the boat and speak the truth. The worst kind of fan is one that accepts an inferior product and does nothing about it. Look at the LA Clippers. That teams makes plenty of money and never wins, so the owner has no motivation to improve the team, so he doesn't. Since the fans still show up at the games, they get what they deserve. Continuing to support failure only leads to more failure. Those of you who believe that the Texans are on the right track will be disappointed in a year or two and probably jump ship, just like you did with the Oilers.

For Wolf, consider this, I don't live in Houston either. For the first 2 seasons I lived in San Antonio and made the trip in both the regular season and the preseason every time but 3 games. For the past season I have been unemployed and bought my season tickets before I lost my job. I still live out of town and it costs me money to go, but I have not missed one game. From my perspective I have more than lived up to my obligations to the team or any of its fans including any nitwit on this board who believes that they have the right to tell when and what I should post. I operate within the rules of the board, so I have every bit as much right to post here as you guys do. The difference is that so many of you obviously know little to nothing about the actual GAME of football and are more interested in the cosmetic side of it. If the Texans win one game then everyone is far too happy to forget that the little success of the team has had, does not come close to matching the talent level of the Texans. This team has not played near the level of what it is capable of playing and win or lose this week, it is not out of place to suggest that things should change. Especially in a thread that is specifically created to ask that very question.

Chance_C
12-28-2004, 06:17 PM
It is a losers mentality to EVER accept failure and that is what the Texans have presented us with so far.

I agree with that statement in general, just not with the Texans and their organization. Do you consider the Texans a failure because they are not in the playoffs? I'm sorry that I disagree with that, but I do. I respect the organization for the course that they are on. I respect the coaches for staying that course, and I respect the players for the effort they give. OK, now let's look at the 2004 Texans. They are currently 7-8, with a good chance of finishing the season at 8-8. I think most of us would have taken 7-9 or 8-8 from the start. In fact that's exactly what I predicted. Sure with a break here or there we could have even a better record, or with a bad bounce here or there we could have a worse record. You can throw that all out the window because it can be said for any NFL team after any NFL season. Our offense has improved, and with better o-line play the sky's the limit. Our D has really stepped it up. We have 2 rookies on the defensive side of the ball that will be playmakers for years to come. We have a second year receiver selected to the pro bowl, with many more to follow I'm sure. We have a QB that will turn out to be a very good one in the years to come. We have a very good running back. We have a class owner, class coaches, and class players. I'm sorry, but I happen to like Dom Capers' style of football and given the pieces of the puzzle that it takes to complete Capers' style I think we will be a force to be reckoned with. I guarantee you that if I had the time and money for season tickets, I would feel like I have definately gotten my money's worth.

Harry Biped
12-28-2004, 06:33 PM
The crux of my issue, and the subject of this thread, is with Palmer not Capers, although Capers has to be the one to see what is not working and make a change. And yes, a season that is not a winning season is a failure. The job of the players and coaches is to win, not to just compete and look good doing so. That is the mentaily that seperates teams like the Yankees from the rest. I want my team to expect to be the best every year, be it their 3rd or 30th seaon in exsistance, and for them to be upset enough to fix problems when they are not the best. That is not out of line or unreasonable.

Porky
12-28-2004, 07:02 PM
Harry Biped - "The difference is that so many of you obviously know little to nothing about the actual GAME of football and are more interested in the cosmetic side of it."

You mean like maybe not knowing how to spell Holmgren?

As to your last post, the problem is that the Texans are not in some vacuum. Things do not magically happen just because we want them too or we don't except failure. It takes time to build a team from scratch. They compete for talent with 31 other franchises. When building a house, you don't skimp on the foundation. If you do, your house will go up quickly, and look beautiful for a couple of years, then collapse. The foundation must be strong. Then the house is around for generations. This year they will finish higher than roughly half of the teams, some who have been in existence for decades. Since you seem to have all the answers, what in your estimation would make the Texans a SB winner next year?

El Tejano
12-28-2004, 07:53 PM
Hey, dude has took us from 4 to 5 to at very least 7 wins. At that rate, we could have 10 wins next season. I will stay with Capers for now. However if we go lower than 7 wins next year, he's gotta go.

infantrycak
12-28-2004, 08:02 PM
Here is the kind of coaching addition/change I wouldn't mind seeing--from ESPN Insider/Mortenson, so can't be linked:

For instance, I'm told that two of their most-valued assistants offensive coordinator Cam Cameron and offensive line coach Hudson Houck both have contracts that expire at the end of this season. They'll be free agents.

Houck arguably might be a greater asset. A line coach is often the backbone of an effective offense, the guy who molds the least athletically talented unit of a team to the point that the most-gifted players such as the quarterback, running back and receivers can put the ball in the end zone.

Houck may have produced more Pro Bowl linemen in his 21-year-history than any other position coach in the NFL, but his work this season with basically a bunch of no-names and no Pro Bowl blockers may be his best yet. It has brought adulation around the league from his peers and front office executives.

The guy has taken a line with only one returning guy from last year, added two vet yeoman players and a 3rd round center and 7th round RT and come up with an OL that has only given up 19 sacks.

infantrycak
12-28-2004, 08:09 PM
The job of the players and coaches is to win, not to just compete and look good doing so. That is the mentaily that seperates teams like the Yankees from the rest. I want my team to expect to be the best every year, be it their 3rd or 30th seaon in exsistance, and for them to be upset enough to fix problems when they are not the best. That is not out of line or unreasonable.

No, having 100+ years of history in the largest market and unlimited money is what separates the Yankees.

Capers said it very well this week--change every two or three years and never give the coaches time to implement their system and you get the Cleveland Browns,i.e. perenial top 10 draft picks.

And yes, acting like a 3rd year team and 30th year team are exactly the same or that the Texans aren't doing anything to improve are both out of line and unreasonable.

Harry Biped
12-28-2004, 08:29 PM
Harry Biped - "The difference is that so many of you obviously know little to nothing about the actual GAME of football and are more interested in the cosmetic side of it."

You mean like maybe not knowing how to spell Holmgren?

As to your last post, the problem is that the Texans are not in some vacuum. Things do not magically happen just because we want them too or we don't except failure. It takes time to build a team from scratch. They compete for talent with 31 other franchises. When building a house, you don't skimp on the foundation. If you do, your house will go up quickly, and look beautiful for a couple of years, then collapse. The foundation must be strong. Then the house is around for generations. This year they will finish higher than roughly half of the teams, some who have been in existence for decades. Since you seem to have all the answers, what in your estimation would make the Texans a SB winner next year?

First of all it, poor message board etiquette to point out spelling mistakes because the point of the process is to convey the idea or message and not to worry about the specifics of the syntax or spelling. One could spend his entire day picking out mistakes on here if he wanted to.

Secondly, you are absolutely right about needing to build a foundation before building the house. The problem is that the Texans coaching ignores the foundation. In football terms foundation refers to fundamentals. Doing the little things right so that they don't hurt the overall success of the team. But guess what, that is the thing we do the worst. the little things, especially on offense. Way, way too many penalties in key situations. Too many holding calls and false starts. Too many bad or wrong pass routes in key situations. Not a clue how to counteract a blitz and protect the QB. Carr does not handle pressure well because he does not play fundamentally sound at the QB position. He makes bad decisions under pressure, because that is what he is coached to do. When he is in the pocket and under pressure, he does not keep his feet moving and that is partially why he gets sacked so much. The other side is that the O-line runs lousy and completely ineffective blocking schemes. It is Palmer's job, and Capers to an extent, to recognize and fix all of that, but they haven't. Offense is supposed to be the easy part because you know what you are doing and the defense doesn't. That is unless they are playing a team as predicable and ineffective as Palmer's offense.

I understand that no team will likely win a Superbowl in it's 2nd or 3rd season, but we should still have high expectations. The Texans had a huge advantage over most expansion teams primarily because they were the only expansion team that year and many teams had salary cap problems and had to let good players go to the Texans at that time. The Texans have done a good job with the draft and put enough talent on the field for them to be a good playoff team, right now. They are nothing more than a mediocre team right now because of poor coaching, not the talent or lack of talent. They are being built by Casserly to be able to compete for many years, but it won't matter if the coaching can't make them into a competitive team, which they're not right now. That is unless you count beating teams with non-winning records(except possibly Jacksonville who could go 9-7). To be satisfied with knocking others, especially other bad to mediocre teams, out of the playoffs is a pretty weak way to create momentum. The team, the coaches and the fans should be nothing short of very disappointed with anything less than a playoff appearance this season. Moral victories are reserved for losers, because winners don't need them.

Now for all of you who feel that I'm out of line, I challenge you to present a case that this team has improved significantly on offense because of the coaching from last year to this. Exclude the fact that we have one of the best young WRs in the game, a good 2nd year RB and a talented QB. Remember, when Davis was hurt, the running game was lousy. Now that he has healed, it's better. Subtract what the talent brings and make a real, educated case. If all you can offer is the "love the Texans because they're ours and they are getting a little better each year" argument, then you will have failed the challenge.

infantrycak
12-28-2004, 10:44 PM
Now for all of you who feel that I'm out of line, I challenge you to present a case that this team has improved significantly on offense because of the coaching from last year to this. Exclude the fact that we have one of the best young WRs in the game, a good 2nd year RB and a talented QB. Remember, when Davis was hurt, the running game was lousy. Now that he has healed, it's better. Subtract what the talent brings and make a real, educated case. If all you can offer is the "love the Texans because they're ours and they are getting a little better each year" argument, then you will have failed the challenge.

See now the way I look at it AJ had one of the best rookie seasons ever by a WR and is in the pro-bowl this year partly because the coaching has helped him run routes well (a weakness out of college and one of those fundamentals you talked about) because of coaching. Pitts made a huge improvement year one to two, along with the rest of the OL that almost set an NFL record for sack production at least in part because of coaching. Wand became a starter in year two from being a small school 3rd round pick at least in part because of coaching. David Carr is upping his completion rate and improving his TD's to Int's and being given more responsibility in part due to coaching.

How about the defensive side as well? You seriously going to argue that Dunta who was not nearly as well regarded as Hall has done so well without any influence from Hoke. Do you really want to argue the 2003 D didn't completely fall apart with all those injuries due to the talent of the street free agents that were signed rather than the creative schemes such as no down linemen and 6 LB's that Capers/Fangio installed.

There's a simple off-the-cuff explanation, I could go on. But since you are into challenges, seems to me you have said the coaches need to go and made a lot of generalizations but really haven't "presented a case" that the offense hasn't improved due to coaching. Why don't you belly up to the bar and pick a coach or coaches and point out particular mistakes?

Oh and FYI on penalties:
Wand 2004--3
Pitts 2003--17, 2004--12
McKinney 2003--3, 2004--0
Weigert 2003--7, 2004--3
Wade 2003 (Miami)--3, 2004--3

Pitts is the only guy with a penalty problem and even he has improved--I know, they all come in key situations though and that has to be the coachs' fault not the players'.

Harry Biped
12-29-2004, 01:10 AM
It's a nice try, but no. Johnson was a great player, from day one. He came from an environment that was conducive for him to succeed fast in the NFL. He improved the system, the system didn't really improve him much. What about all of the other receivers who run bad routes and can't catch the ball when it is right in their hands? Are their fundamentals just being ignored by Palmer? To make any reference to the O-line at any position is ridiculous. They have been awful this season. Pitts makes the same stupid mistakes he has always made and at nearly the same rate. Of coarse he and all of them will improve some from experience, but the schemes are still not working very well. Every time Carr tries a pass he gets killed. The only running back that has produced is a healthy Davis with little thanks to the line. I'll admit that the O-line is not quite as bad as they were in the 2002 season, but there is no real improvement over last year. In fact, the line was better last season. All of the ineffectiveness and inconsistency points to one thing. Coaching! Right back where we started.

As for defense, if you read my previous post you would notice that the challenge referred to the offense. I'll say this once more, this tread is about Palmer's failures. I'm not so ready to dump Capers just yet, but if he keeps his wagon hitched to Palmer, he and the rest of the staff will be Audi 5000(old reference and I apologize for it) .

Vinny
12-29-2004, 01:19 AM
Pittsburg averages 328 yards per game on 942 plays. We average 326 yards per game on 944 plays. Should Pittsburgh fire their offensive coordinator?

infantrycak
12-29-2004, 01:32 AM
It's a nice try, but no. Johnson was a great player, from day one. He came from an environment that was conducive for him to succeed fast in the NFL. He improved the system, the system didn't really improve him much.

Yes he was a great player and regardless of whether you want to accept it he had room for improvement part of which has been realized under the coaching he has received. 10 drops last year, 4 this year and much better route running this year--both of which were noted weaknesses coming out of college.

What about all of the other receivers who run bad routes and can't catch the ball when it is right in their hands? Are their fundamentals just being ignored by Palmer?

Really? Other than your perfect when he got here AJ with the miscommunication problem on the hokey intentional grounding call, which WR are you going to say runs bad routes?--give us some examples how about? As for hands are you refering to the corrected under this coaching AJ. Or is it Bradford with 1 last year and 2 this year. Or maybe Gaffney with 1 last year and 1 this year. Armstrong with 2 this year. Sorry but 1-2 drops is fantastic rather than an indication of a problem due to poor coaching.

Every time Carr tries a pass he gets killed.

3400+ yds (instead of 2600) and counting to the contrary, best ypa of his career up from 5.8 to 7.7, completion percentage up from 52 to 61.3, rating up from 62 to 83, 47 passes over 20 yds, 6 over 40 yds instead of 31 and 5 and 15 TD's rather than 9--all on two less passing attempts--yeah no improvement, no passing game.

The only running back that has produced is a healthy Davis with little thanks to the line.

Wells got one start and gained over 100 yds. IMO the OL coming together and improving is the single biggest need for next season. As I posted in another thread, I would be thrilled if the Texans would pick up the Chargers' OL coach, but with the exception of an upgrade for McKinney, I think the personnel are there.

All of the ineffectiveness and inconsistency points to one thing. Coaching! Right back where we started.

Well not really--you have provided a lot of easily disprovable assertions and nothing specific on what the coaches are doing wrong, what they need to do to have the team improve. Whoops, never mind, that is right back where we started.

Harry Biped
12-29-2004, 02:17 AM
Pittsburgh averages 328 yards per game on 942 plays. We average 326 yards per game on 944 plays. Should Pittsburgh fire their offensive coordinator?
Pittsburgh has only lost 1 game the Texans have lost 8 so far. What counts is wins and losses and to that end we are not yet a good team. What those stats really reflect is how bad the play selection is in the Red Zone. Sure we can get there, but we don't score frequently enough, especially TDs, when we do get there. You can't win if you don't score. Pittsburgh has obviously done a better job of mixing offensive scoring with defensive performance. That's something that Palmer has shown that he has no clue how to do.

For infantrycak, all of your arguments are very pedestrian. If you don't see the receivers running bad route and dropping passes, then you are apparently not watching the games because it happens a lot in every game. Of coarse Carr is improving, he is a 3rd year player who has been the starter from day one. Compare him to Big Ben in his 1st year at Pittsburgh, Carr is certainly no less talented, but he is clearly less effective. Why? It's that darn coaching thing again. You can talk in circles about this or that, but the fact is that the level of improvement that has taken place in terms of coaching up the offense is not enough to reflect positive offensive success. And you certainly haven't proven that Palmer has improved the team, basically because you can't. He hasn't done it, even though that is his job. The only offensive constancy that the Texans have had since their inception, is being ineffective, especially when it counts. Score points and win games. That is success, not score a few points and lose at least half of your games a year. Be in the playoff hunt in the last week or 2 of the season, for real, not just thru complicated math, and have a real chance to get there. At least show significant growth from one season to the next. None of that has been done as of yet. Rid our selves of the problem, Chris Palmer and replace him with a decent OC, doesn't have to be a big name, and we'll all be happy in the end because we will start to win. I know that the defense is not the best, but it is good enough to be competitive in the playoffs, the offense is no where near that. With a good offense, the defensive stats will improve as well.

J-Man
12-29-2004, 07:55 AM
"Tweeners" are our OLB's. You have to be at around 250 to hold up to Offensive Guards and Tackles. Smaller (230 pound guys and the like) have a hard time sheding blocks and 3-4 OLB's take on linemen much more than 4-3 OLB's do because they have two tackles and two ends covering the linemen. We just have 3 Tackle-types covering 5 guys so you have to have more size in your OLB's in this system. We will probably draft one 'tweener' every single year just like the Steelers do. DJ would be an inside linebacker in our system.

Vinny...I'm tracking with you. I probably should have not been as specific as saying OLB since most have smaller body types. My point was that it is easier to draft a 240lb LB that already knows how to cover the pass, play in a 2pt stance, and has some pass rush skills. Not to mention the fact that it's not out of the realm of possibility to bulk a guy up by 10-15lbs if raw size becomes an issue. I believe Ray Lewis came out of Miami at just over 230 and he consistently plays at 240+. I just think that we should at least consider that if the right athlete is available while we are on the clock (I am thinking someone like Ahmad Brooks from Virginia).

OzzO
12-29-2004, 09:25 AM
Harrry B - your entitled to your opnion (hence the message board) but I don't think your view is going to be swayed just like the numerous posters on this thread. You've asked how Palmer has improved the offense but then limit that a response cannot include players.

Infantrycak and Vinny have given numerous examples (interesting as I was gonna go a fact-finding mission myself) as to how we have improved, but you don't like their responses or then aim for a different rebuttal. If you feel Palmer has not improved the offense, then might I suggest you give specific season examples - not just game examples as teams can have bad games and also not just sweeping generalizations such as Carr getting killed on every play and Davis is making the runs with little thanks to the O-line.

I beleive Porky noted, inform the class on what you feel will take us to the superbowl next season as that's what appears will make you feel we have succeeded. By the way, I'm glad you have a different view... makes the board interesting.

infantrycak
12-29-2004, 09:51 AM
For infantrycak, all of your arguments are very pedestrian. If you don't see the receivers running bad route and dropping passes, then you are apparently not watching the games because it happens a lot in every game.

Well it only takes a pedestrian argument to beat a demonstrably wrong assertion. And wouldn't you admit that was a pretty pedestrian attempt at being condescending?

Good job of proving you have no perspective on watching the games--turns out the Texans WR's may have the lowest % of drops in the NFL.

% of incompletions due to drops:

David Carr 8.8%

Drew Bledsoe 15%
Tom Brady 9.0%
Drew Brees 11.6%
Kerry Collins 13.5%
Marc Bulger 11%
Daunte Culpepper 10.5%
Jake Delhomme 15.7%
Brett Favre 13.2%
Trent Green 21%
Joey Harrington 17.6%
Matt Hasselback 18%
Byron Leftwich 21.1%
Peyton Manning 10.6%
Donovan McNabb 16.6%
Carson Palmer 17.2%
Chad Pennington 20.4%
Jake Plummer 16.1%
Ben Roethlisberger 11.1%
Vinny Testeverdi 11.0%
Michael Vick 10.8%
Billy Volek 13.4%

I guess my perception of the number of drops from watching every game is more accurate in comparison to the league than yours. Sorry, I can't make that argument more exciting for you, so I will just stick with accurate.

Porky
12-29-2004, 11:19 AM
The steelers have 343 points, and we have 295 points. So, I think a case can be made that they have made better use of the yards they have gained. Whether that is coaching, players, or some combination thereof can be debated.

But, the big difference between the Steelers and Texans is on defense, where they have given up 227 points to our 317 (and that is after our giving up 5 points the last two weeks)

So they have scored 50 more, but given up 90 less, yet I haven't heard Mr. Biped call for the head of Fangio. I find that a bit interesting. :hmmm: