PDA

View Full Version : Did Kubiak just call out Richard Smith?


TheRealJoker
10-19-2008, 10:27 PM
From the Houston Texans postgame review on the official website:

After the game, Kubiak was steamed about the defensive breakdown on the long scoring play.

"We were in quarter-quarter-half (defense)," Kubiak said, "so (Faggins) should be back there in the deep quarter of the field. It's inexcusable. But that's not his fault. That's our fault as coaches. That's our fault as coaches to not get the player to do his job in that situation."

Kubiak doesn't strike me as a HC who meddles in defensive affairs. It looks to me like he just called out Richard Smith for what he is, a below subpar defensive coordinator not even fit to direct a defense on Madden.

b0ng
10-19-2008, 10:33 PM
If so, I hope that means that Kubiak isn't scared of getting rid of this waste during the off season.

Honoring Earl 34
10-19-2008, 10:37 PM
We did alot of those long looping stunts again. It seemed on the 3rd and 17 they converted that Mario ran into a wall on a loop .

ATXtexanfan
10-19-2008, 10:41 PM
hope kubiak remembers to look in the mirror

steelbtexan
10-19-2008, 10:42 PM
Do iy now KUBES

TexansLucky13
10-19-2008, 11:22 PM
Richard Smith is obviously the weakest link here and he has overstayed his visit. I said I would give him a probation period starting with this game, and he is on thin ice. They came off with a win but it was not because of the defense.

I want to see a complete 60 minute defensive effort against the winless Bengals...

1) NO big plays given up
2) CONSISTENT pressure on the QB
3) IMPROVEMENT in the secondary

If I see those three things for the majority of next weeks game, I may back off of Smith for a while... until the next game. This defense has to prove that it can compete.

Texans_Chick
10-20-2008, 01:08 AM
From the Houston Texans postgame review on the official website:

After the game, Kubiak was steamed about the defensive breakdown on the long scoring play.

"We were in quarter-quarter-half (defense)," Kubiak said, "so (Faggins) should be back there in the deep quarter of the field. It's inexcusable. But that's not his fault. That's our fault as coaches. That's our fault as coaches to not get the player to do his job in that situation."

Kubiak doesn't strike me as a HC who meddles in defensive affairs. It looks to me like he just called out Richard Smith for what he is, a below subpar defensive coordinator not even fit to direct a defense on Madden.


He won't crush is players publicly for being who they are. He won't crush his coaches publicly even if they stink. Though it is more satistifying calling out specific players or coaches, in the long run it is counterproductive, especially right after a game.

My discussion of that quote at the Chron blog:

Houston beats Detroit; Texans defense scary in a bad way (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2008/10/houston_beats_detroit_texans_d.html)

I was so hoping to get through a game without seeing something totally weird. That Faggins/Johnson play was totally weird, yet at the same time, totally not weird.

76Texan
10-20-2008, 01:10 AM
I'm calling for Kubiak right now!

The Pencil Neck
10-20-2008, 01:56 AM
To me, that sounds like he's calling out Hoke.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but what he's saying is that in that defense, Faggins shouldn't have been up in press coverage. He should have been playing off in a deep zone. But instead of getting on Faggins for it, he's calling out the coaches for Faggins not knowing what he was supposed to do.

Maybe I'm just reading that wrong.

leebigeztx
10-20-2008, 02:16 AM
I don't care who he called out because Faggins shouldn't even be on the roster. At what point do the ballclub see Faggins is the worse corner in the league. He has no makeup orlong speed. How many times do we have to see it happen. I guess lee evans wasn't enough. Then, we look up and he's on johnson. All johnson ran was a simple 9 route and he got seperation so quick that even if he had safety help, it would hve been too late.

76Texan
10-20-2008, 02:28 AM
Kubiak has a good team this year.
He has done a poor job preparing the players for the games!

ObsiWan
10-20-2008, 02:40 AM
I don't care who he called out because Faggins shouldn't even be on the roster. At what point do the ballclub see Faggins is the worse corner in the league. He has no makeup orlong speed. How many times do we have to see it happen. I guess lee evans wasn't enough. Then, we look up and he's on johnson. All johnson ran was a simple 9 route and he got seperation so quick that even if he had safety help, it would hve been too late.

For sentimental reasons, I like Faggins. He's homegrown. He tries really, really hard. And as a coach I can see where you want to reward hard work. But there comes a time to realize that no matter how hard Petey works there are guys who have more upside.

Petey, bless his heart, may be "maxed out". Most likely he'll never be any faster or get any taller or be able to cover any better. And after 6 full years in the league (some of them behind two of the best CBs in Aaron Glenn & Marcus Coleman), you'd think he'd seen & learned how the position should be played.

Apparently not.

So perhaps its time to develop the younger guys like Bennett and Molden who still have upside. Put them in before they start "learning" from Petey.

This game was way more "exciting" than it should have been. And there will come a time where our "8-to-80" connection isn't clicking ....when the running game isn't effective... ...when we'll need the defense to win it for us.

Heaven help us.
:texflag:

HJam72
10-20-2008, 02:45 AM
Nah, if 8-80 isn't working, it's because OD and KW are open. :texflag:

Texans Horror
10-20-2008, 05:49 AM
To me, it sounds like Kubiak is trying not to call out Faggins, so he deflected the blow-out to coaching. He didn't call out any one coach. He just said what he has said in games past - that coaches are not putting players in the position to win. I think he's put himself in that same corner, too.

It's easy to blast Faggins. Once Moden/Bennett/Reeves/whoever gets worked out, Faggins is gone. So why give everybody more ammunition?

CloakNNNdagger
10-20-2008, 08:28 AM
For sentimental reasons, I like Faggins. He's homegrown. He tries really, really hard. And as a coach I can see where you want to reward hard work. But there comes a time to realize that no matter how hard Petey works there are guys who have more upside.

Petey, bless his heart, may be "maxed out". Most likely he'll never be any faster or get any taller or be able to cover any better. And after 6 full years in the league (some of them behind two of the best CBs in Aaron Glenn & Marcus Coleman), you'd think he'd seen & learned how the position should be played.

Apparently not.

So perhaps its time to develop the younger guys like Bennett and Molden who still have upside. Put them in before they start "learning" from Petey.

This game was way more "exciting" than it should have been. And there will come a time where our "8-to-80" connection isn't clicking ....when the running game isn't effective... ...when we'll need the defense to win it for us.

Heaven help us.
:texflag:

This is what was meant by the thread "Manufactured Excitement" that I started after the Fins game. Some blasted me as they saw it as introducing this concept in the face of our 1st win. However, if those same people do not look at the situation as it really is, they will enjoy short-term celebration followed by long-term disappointed.........if some very important weaknesses (in players as well as coaching) aren't seriously addressed.

Mr teX
10-20-2008, 08:42 AM
Faggins sucks point blank...no surprise as far as what happened to him...it was just a matter of time. I'm just glad that Kubes/Smith had the wherewithall (sp?) to get him out of the game from then on. The lions tried the same thing closer to the endzone later against bennett & he knocked it down.

I also got a chance to see the whole field since i attended the game & willie demps was being picked on all day...at some point their gonna have to do something with him too.

As far as Dunta...he looked good to me, obviously he's missing some of that burst but this game was more about just getting back used to being out there in game situations....he even said that. It's encouraging that they sent him after the qb a couple of times, but other than that i'm just glad he's back. i don't know what some expected the guy hadn't played in almost a year.

OzzO
10-20-2008, 09:05 AM
Ah, I think he was just calling out the coaching in general (including himself) looking at the entire post game quotes (http://www.houstontexans.com/news/Story.asp?story_id=4770). Funny how Faggins wasn't asked (or printed anyway) about the 96 yard pass. Apparently Kubiak got onto Schaub for his fumble as well.

Overall, looks like quite a few are saying the same thing the fans are, especially about letting up in the 2nd half.

Texan_Bill
10-20-2008, 09:16 AM
hope kubiak remembers to look in the mirror

That's our fault as coaches

Sounds all inclusive to me....

GP
10-20-2008, 09:30 AM
Kubiak was just glad that we was able to blame others, instead of doing his "aww shucks..." routine after all the bad head coaching jobs he's done at the start of the year.

Was fun to see the Lions coach doing his version of Kubiak's "challenge flag meltdown" whereby you pray and hope that you are given a gift from the refs because you're not getting it done on the field. If y ou laughed at the Liona coach for doing that...just remember that THAT was Kubiak for the first three games.

The offense is finally an NFL-caliber offense (if they continue to use the TE as they have been doing)...the defense needs a Chicago Bears-esque remodeling in the draft and free agency for the next two years: Just load it up on the d-side of the ball, and watch what happens.

Our DC is weak, but I am beginning to buy into some of the posters' ideas here (like Marcus) who say that the talent level is the real key here. Good players can make coaches look like geniuses.

Texans_Chick
10-20-2008, 09:49 AM
Our DC is weak, but I am beginning to buy into some of the posters' ideas here (like Marcus) who say that the talent level is the real key here. Good players can make coaches look like geniuses.

Certainly the talent level on the defense needs to improve.

But what in Richard Smith's background makes you think that he would be good at choosing that talent and developing it?

It's not like the offensive side of the ball has a ton of probowlers on it. Or any more first round picks than the defense. The wide receivers/tight ends are Andre Johnson and a bunch of guys that nobody else wanted. Owen Daniels is currently the most productive TE in the league--4th round pick.

Teams need to incorporate young players and free agents quickly into what they are doing on the field--having easily teachable schemes is crucial in the modern salary cap era.

There is no amount of time that the offense can keep the ball, and it doesn't matter how good the field position is. If you can't stop Detroit from scoring, your defense can't stop anyone.

You get situations where every body tries too hard because they can't trust that normal football play will result in normal football results.

dalemurphy
10-20-2008, 10:53 AM
Certainly the talent level on the defense needs to improve.

But what in Richard Smith's background makes you think that he would be good at choosing that talent and developing it?

It's not like the offensive side of the ball has a ton of probowlers on it. Or any more first round picks than the defense. The wide receivers/tight ends are Andre Johnson and a bunch of guys that nobody else wanted. Owen Daniels is currently the most productive TE in the league--4th round pick.

Teams need to incorporate young players and free agents quickly into what they are doing on the field--having easily teachable schemes is crucial in the modern salary cap era.

There is no amount of time that the offense can keep the ball, and it doesn't matter how good the field position is. If you can't stop Detroit from scoring, your defense can't stop anyone.

You get situations where every body tries too hard because they can't trust that normal football play will result in normal football results.

I tried to give Smith the benefit of the doubt after seeing improvement in the defense the past 3 weeks. And, I'm still encouraged by some of what I see on the defense.

However, any D.C. that leaves Petey Faggins one on one on Calvin Johnson, the only playmaker on that team, up 18 points in the 4th quarter needs to be replaced!!

GP
10-20-2008, 11:02 AM
Certainly the talent level on the defense needs to improve.

But what in Richard Smith's background makes you think that he would be good at choosing that talent and developing it?

It's not like the offensive side of the ball has a ton of probowlers on it. Or any more first round picks than the defense. The wide receivers/tight ends are Andre Johnson and a bunch of guys that nobody else wanted. Owen Daniels is currently the most productive TE in the league--4th round pick.

Teams need to incorporate young players and free agents quickly into what they are doing on the field--having easily teachable schemes is crucial in the modern salary cap era.

There is no amount of time that the offense can keep the ball, and it doesn't matter how good the field position is. If you can't stop Detroit from scoring, your defense can't stop anyone.

You get situations where every body tries too hard because they can't trust that normal football play will result in normal football results.

Oh, trust me...it did occur to me that we have real issues if we can't stop the juggernaut known as Orlovsky. But I have been wondering if Richard Smith and his coaches reverted back to the bend-but-don't-break style at the half, going back to a semi-prevent defense of some sorts. We were giving up chunks and chunks of yards, and it's not like the Lions made any huge adjustments at half.

Or, did the Lions just start hitting their stride in the second half? That's something that I shared yesterday: We might have caught the Lions in the best possible moment--Still reeling from Kitna and Roy Williams situations. I think the Lions are going to be better in their next game, and we caught them in their low spot.

Regardless, I am not saying that Richard Smith is in the clear. But...Dunta is just now back. It seems they finally admitted that Weaver is not working out, so Bulman is deservedly getting those reps that were once Weaver's. Faggins is NOT a cover corner for an offense's WR1 or even its WR2, for that matter.

There's just some funky stuff going on, on the defense, with coaches AND players. I used to not buy into the "we don't enough talent, so quit banging on the d-coord..." bit. But I do have to say that the players on the field, minus Mario, DeMeco, and Diles (and maybe Dunta) are not exactly world beaters. That's three players on an 11-man defense that you can confidently say are doing a pretty good job game-in and game-out. And I know you had said that the defensive coaching/teaching sessions are way too complicated, as if the players are being asked to overthink and overprocess, etc., instead of just getting in there and playing football (for lack of a better description)...but I can see how not having enough talent is part of the problem. It's half of it, I think that's a rational assessment.

We have 8 defensive guys that are just average. And "just average" is not good enough, even against a winless team like Detroit. Or Cincy, for that matter. We have no "gimmee" games at all. And that's due to our defense. No lead is safe with our current defense.

Plus, I'm still unclear on whether it was the Dcoaches, or Faggins, at fault on the long bomb to CJ. Some are saying that Faggins didn't play what was called or that there was supposed to be help from elsewhere or that Petey misunderstood and was supposed to be the help from elsewhere, others are saying that Richard Smith had him on an island with CJ. I just don't know that we can parse Kubiak's quote on this. It could be that the coaches DID call the right coverage but that it got garbles somehow when it was called into the huddle, or some such thing.

I just don't see a really clear picture on this, which might be one of those things that Kubiak would prefer for opposing teams to not know about.

I just know that I thought we were headed to a clear-cut blowout, and once again the opposing team is within striking distance of stealing the game.

Hooston Texan
10-20-2008, 11:08 AM
Was fun to see the Lions coach doing his version of Kubiak's "challenge flag meltdown" whereby you pray and hope that you are given a gift from the refs because you're not getting it done on the field. If y ou laughed at the Liona coach for doing that...just remember that THAT was Kubiak for the first three games.


Off the topic of this thread, but GP's snippet interested me:
I thought the Lions got screwed out of a timeout on that challenge. The replay ruled (don't ask me how) that the ball needed to be respotted. To me, that is a successful challenge--it corrected the original spot--so the timeout should not have been charged. Now, the new spot still resulted in a first down, but that is extraneous to the call that was challenged. Of course, maybe the ***** Lion coach phrased his challenge in terms of "was it a first down" rather than "did you spot it correctly". If that is the difference, coaches need to know they need to be extremely careful in how they phrase their challenges. That Lions really needed that lost timeout on our final quasi-drive.

Back on topic:
I'm not one to call for canning anyone easily (bad karma), but if ever a situation justified a hot seat for a coach, it would be when:
(a) Your team is leading 28-10
(b) Your punter just pinned the opponent inside their 5
(c) About 12 minutes left in the game
(d) The opposing offense has one, ONE legitimate downfield threat
(e) Opposite that player, you line up the sorriest of your sorry CBs, who, among other things, gives up at least 6 inches to said deep threat
(f) . . . while giving said cornerback no discernible safety help
(g) and you watch what happens.

disaacks3
10-20-2008, 11:13 AM
However, any D.C. that leaves Petey Faggins one on one on Calvin Johnson, the only playmaker on that team, up 18 points in the 4th quarter needs to be replaced!! I expected 1-2 HUGE plays by the Detroit Offense in my final score prediction, but Faggins mano-a-mano w/ Calvin Johnson is a mismatch of EPIC proportions. Petey is still fine as a nickel/dime coverage guy, he is NOT (never was/will be) a #1 or #2 CB. Expecting him to be and putting him in those kind of situations is outright silly.

To be honest, I've got no problem w/ using a PRESS coverage, but you usually leave a safety over the top. The time to press is when you bring pressure...that play still took some time to develop and the "front seven" never got to the QB.

beerlover
10-20-2008, 11:31 AM
Richard Smith & every other DC rolls the dice weighting risk vs reward ratio. Marinelli has been so damn conservative in his playcalling & use of Calvin Johnson so this time he caught coverage with its pants down. hey it happens, but still only two catches in a game for Calvin Johnson, I can live with, having time to throw the deep ball thats another when you press the box.

The Texans lack, have lacked & always lacked since inception speed W/coverage skills over the top with their safeties which should directly point the curser @ the biggest hole on this team, FS. blame Smith all day & his coaching staff but until Rick Smith can address this position with some speed in the draft plays like this will happen unless Texans use cover 2 or soft zone prevent & nobody wants that do they?

Double Barrel
10-20-2008, 11:41 AM
It was yet another failure in a Richard Smith defense to let Faggins get burned deep. It's not like we haven't see it before, and I'm afraid that we will see it again as long as RS is our DC.

Polo
10-20-2008, 11:44 AM
It was yet another failure in a Richard Smith defense to let Faggins get burned deep. It's not like we haven't see it before, and I'm afraid that we will see it again as long as RS is our DC.

I'm pretty sure we'll see Petey getting burned deep as long as he's a starting corner regardless who the co-ordiantor is...

Double Barrel
10-20-2008, 11:49 AM
I'm pretty sure we'll see Petey getting burned deep as long as he's a starting corner regardless who the co-ordiantor is...

You're probably right, but maybe it's a Richard Smith thing to have Faggins as our starting CB. ;)

dtran04
10-20-2008, 11:52 AM
I wonder what happens at practice. How in the world do they stop the offense besides from Mario getting pressure. Schaub probably has a field day w/ the LB's and DB's trying to cover. LOL

Mr teX
10-20-2008, 12:03 PM
The Faggins 97 yd TD just brings to light another problem with Smith's scheme: your best CB should be on the opposition's best WR wherever he's at. In his scheme, the CB's play their side of the field & that's it. I have to believe that Orlovsky only throws that ball b/c he (or the coaching staff) saw that mismatch from jump & finally caught us with no safety help over the top.

Sure, Reeves isn't much better but he's usually in position & at least makes it a bit tougher on Johnson to catch the ball & makes Orlovsky question whether he wants to throw it...With Faggins, both of those questions were considerably easier to answer when your toasted by 5 yards from the LOS.

Second Honeymoon
10-20-2008, 12:06 PM
that play wasn't all petey's fault. to not have any safety help against CJ is asking for trouble. smith just fails week after week to not give up big plays. when you watch a smith coordinated defense, watch how many times players are covering the same area and covering no one at all. then watch a competent coach's defense. its just so obvious sometimes.

Spike
10-20-2008, 12:07 PM
A lot of good points on this thread. I don't know whether it was Faggins failure, but even if he did make a mistake - he should have never been out there alone.

It is not just about one play - it is about understanding the team and the situation in the game. Start of the fourth quarter and coming off a touchdown - we didn't need to get a sack in the endzone, we needed to just keep them in front of us and make them march 95 plus yards and score on us. The 1 thing the coaching staff had to prevent was allowing them to make a quick score - and they completely failed.

BigBull17
10-20-2008, 12:16 PM
However, any D.C. that leaves Petey Faggins on the field needs to be replaced!!

There, fixed it for you.

Texans_Chick
10-20-2008, 12:25 PM
Oh, trust me...it did occur to me that we have real issues if we can't stop the juggernaut known as Orlovsky. But I have been wondering if Richard Smith and his coaches reverted back to the bend-but-don't-break style at the half, going back to a semi-prevent defense of some sorts. We were giving up chunks and chunks of yards, and it's not like the Lions made any huge adjustments at half.

Or, did the Lions just start hitting their stride in the second half? That's something that I shared yesterday: We might have caught the Lions in the best possible moment--Still reeling from Kitna and Roy Williams situations. I think the Lions are going to be better in their next game, and we caught them in their low spot.




The Lions have had very slow offensive starts to a number of their games and have gotten in big holes.

The Lions saw something that they liked in coverage and exploited it. Don't have a link but here's the quote from Marinelli:

(on if it is discussed at halftime to get WR Calvin Johnson the football more) Not necessarily. We knew we wanted to take advantage of some looks; that touchdown was one of them. Its much bigger than CJ (WR Calvin Johnson). Its the team. Were trying to do things to help us win, but I need to do a better job of getting him (WR Calvin Johnson) the ball.

Mr. White
10-20-2008, 12:25 PM
The defense came out flat after playing on fire in the first half. That's on the coaches.

Since Kubiak and Smith have been here, the personnel on defense has (almost) totally turned over and the guys that are there were brought in by Kubiak and Smith.

After 3 years, there's no excuse for their guys not to be productive after they had all this time to pick and develop them.

I was under the impression that Richard Smith was a stop-gap until someone better came along anyway. By now, better coaches have come along and some are even on his staff.

The bottom line is that the guy hasn't produced.

Polo
10-20-2008, 12:27 PM
Every offense exploits things that defenses give them....

Too bad they didn't throw CJ the ball more, because we covered him one on one quite often...

Guess their coaches were too dumb to take full advantage of our dumb coaches...

TexansFight
10-20-2008, 12:37 PM
Seriously, why hasn't Kubiak fired or demoted Richard Smith yet? Its not as if we do not have capable replacements who can take his place. Frank Bush is on the staff and was his first choice to be DC for God's sake. Not to mention, Ray Rhodes who has tons of experience and was a successful DC for years in the league is on the staff as well.

Our long, looping blitzes suck ass. I am not at all enamored with this coaching staff. If we could get Cowher or Schottenheimer in here next year we shouldn't blink for one second. Kubiak has shown me nothing that would lead me to believe that he is or will be a top flight coach in this league. If I were to rank NFL coaches in this league, he would be in my bottom third no doubt.

Main areas of responsibility for a head coach, clock management and challenges, he absolutely sucks at. We have looked uprepared several times and have come out flat and that is squarely on coaching. His mistakes in judgment personnel wise with first Carr then overpaying for Schaub are fire worthy offenses in their own right. He needs to feel some heat and make a change that can be done right now. FIRE RICHARD SMITH!!!

Hooston Texan
10-20-2008, 12:37 PM
Richard Smith & every other DC rolls the dice weighting risk vs reward ratio. Marinelli has been so damn conservative in his playcalling & use of Calvin Johnson so this time he caught coverage with its pants down. hey it happens, but still only two catches in a game for Calvin Johnson, I can live with, having time to throw the deep ball thats another when you press the box.


When you are up by 18 points with 12 minutes to go and you have the opponent pinned inside their 5, I see only risk in that type of coverage. The only way you lose a game like that is by allowing quick scores (be they big plays by the opposing offense or via turnovers).

Worst case is you force Orlovsky to engineer a long drive while trading yards for time off the clock. Heck, to that point, Orlovsky had yet to show he could lead such a march--the previous TD drive was 3 plays featuring two long runs (I'm not counting the throw-away drive with the meaningless hail mary as a sustained drive). Instead, we gave the Lions a huge play, momentum and eight points off the lead at the cost of only the amount of time it took Johnson to sprint 96 basically-uncontested yards.

I know "prevent" and "bend but don't break" are not popular terms for fans, but there was absolutely no reason at that moment to put Petey on an island against the one and only big-play threat the Lions had. That's a high-risk, low-reward endeavor.

GP
10-20-2008, 12:39 PM
that play wasn't all petey's fault. to not have any safety help against CJ is asking for trouble. smith just fails week after week to not give up big plays. when you watch a smith coordinated defense, watch how many times players are covering the same area and covering no one at all. then watch a competent coach's defense. its just so obvious sometimes.

Or dropping Bulman back into coverage and he's 20 yards from the nearest Lions WR...and he's going to cover one of them? I hate this playcall the most. It makes NO sense because the only benefit it could serve is if a WR or RB is cutting right into that area and the ball is traveling right into Bulman/Weaver's face. Cuz there's no way Bulman or Weaver will be staying on top of a RB/WR/TE who can make a simple cut and cause Bulman or Weaver to fall down like a fool.

I also noticed a lot of zone in both the LB and DBs, where the WRs/RBs/TEs are just running to open areas of the field and catching everything thrown their way.

Shouldn't a defense be usingt the zone in such a way as that it's used after showing blitz, or actually blitzing...to lull the QB into thinking he can get the ball past the blitzing defenders, yet they've dropped back into the open areas that the QB expected?

We seemed to be running a zone a lot in the second half, which was my comment earlier in this thread about it appearing that we had a bend-but-not-break defense out there in the second half.

GNTLEWOLF
10-20-2008, 09:59 PM
Richard Smith & every other DC rolls the dice weighting risk vs reward ratio. Marinelli has been so damn conservative in his playcalling & use of Calvin Johnson so this time he caught coverage with its pants down. hey it happens, but still only two catches in a game for Calvin Johnson, I can live with, having time to throw the deep ball thats another when you press the box.

The Texans lack, have lacked & always lacked since inception speed W/coverage skills over the top with their safeties which should directly point the curser @ the biggest hole on this team, FS. blame Smith all day & his coaching staff but until Rick Smith can address this position with some speed in the draft plays like this will happen unless Texans use cover 2 or soft zone prevent & nobody wants that do they?

Am I the only person who believes that Smith, as DC,must have some input into the drafting process. And, I'm sure that he also, must be getting talent evaluation from scouts. So, If there is a lack of talent on this team, can that not also be traced back in part to Smith also? I know Kubiak and Smith the GM are the primary people who pick the players in the draft and free agency, but there is no way that anyone camn make me believe that the DC does not have at least some influence on those decisions.

HJam72
10-20-2008, 10:23 PM
My understanding is that we have interchangeable safeties, and that's why we don't use a true FS. What I want to know is: Is this just a Rickard Smith thing, or is it also a Kubiak thing? If it's just a Smith thing, that's all the more reason to see him gone. I'm don't like the way this team handles the safety positions, and I'd LOVE to spend a high pick on a true FS. I wouldn't even mind following it with another CB, although that MAY not be necessary.

This interchangeable stuff does NOT work. It just lets the offense know that they're best wide-out can outrun coverage on BOTH sides. :cool:

CloakNNNdagger
10-20-2008, 10:34 PM
It was yet another failure in a Richard Smith defense to let Faggins get burned deep. It's not like we haven't see it before, and I'm afraid that we will see it again as long as RS is our DC.


NEWS FLASH: Almost bankrupt General Motors, in order to save their company, is feverishly working in conjunction with Smith in developing a secret weapon to save his job. They aren't sure if they can produce enough to fit out all the D before Smith is fired.

http://www.fotosearch.com/bthumb/IMZ/IMZ004/pgi0273.jpg

The Pencil Neck
10-20-2008, 11:14 PM
My understanding is that we have interchangeable safeties, and that's why we don't use a true FS. What I want to know is: Is this just a Rickard Smith thing, or is it also a Kubiak thing? If it's just a Smith thing, that's all the more reason to see him gone. I'm don't like the way this team handles the safety positions, and I'd LOVE to spend a high pick on a true FS. I wouldn't even mind following it with another CB, although that MAY not be necessary.

This interchangeable stuff does NOT work. It just lets the offense know that they're best wide-out can outrun coverage on BOTH sides. :cool:

I don't know but apparently the Broncos run the same CB to a side thing.

cuppacoffee
10-21-2008, 12:29 PM
A lot of good points on this thread. I don't know whether it was Faggins failure, but even if he did make a mistake - he should have never been out there alone.

It is not just about one play - it is about understanding the team and the situation in the game. Start of the fourth quarter and coming off a touchdown - we didn't need to get a sack in the endzone, we needed to just keep them in front of us and make them march 95 plus yards and score on us. The 1 thing the coaching staff had to prevent was allowing them to make a quick score - and they completely failed.


That pretty well sums it up.

:coffee:

El Tejano
10-21-2008, 12:47 PM
My understanding is that we have interchangeable safeties, and that's why we don't use a true FS. What I want to know is: Is this just a Rickard Smith thing, or is it also a Kubiak thing? If it's just a Smith thing, that's all the more reason to see him gone. I'm don't like the way this team handles the safety positions, and I'd LOVE to spend a high pick on a true FS. I wouldn't even mind following it with another CB, although that MAY not be necessary.

This interchangeable stuff does NOT work. It just lets the offense know that they're best wide-out can outrun coverage on BOTH sides. :cool:

Check out Emmanuel Cook from South Carolina.

DocBar
10-21-2008, 08:35 PM
Did anyone else notice a number of DL stunts that put 3 & 4 guys trying to blast thru the same gap? I like the "overload one side" idea, but these guys just ran into each other AND the Lions OL. We never seem to stunt from unexpected directions at unexpected times and usually get picked up anyways. Is this a talent or scheme problem?

CloakNNNdagger
10-21-2008, 09:41 PM
Did anyone else notice a number of DL stunts that put 3 & 4 guys trying to blast thru the same gap? I like the "overload one side" idea, but these guys just ran into each other AND the Lions OL. We never seem to stunt from unexpected directions at unexpected times and usually get picked up anyways. Is this a talent or scheme problem?


You could make the case that it's "the blind leading the blind.":hides:

CloakNNNdagger
10-21-2008, 10:10 PM
The Bengals self destructed in the 4th quarter of the 38-10 loss to Pittsburgh last Sunday when both their offense and defense collapsed, missing tackles, blowing coverages and dropping passes (resulting in 3 Steelers TDs).....................remind any of you of a familiar pattern? I hope not, but if we aren't careful, this upcoming game could turn into who puts out the greatest effort to lose the game in the 4th quarter..........."hot potato" at its best.:gun:

mussop
10-22-2008, 04:16 PM
Richard Smith & every other DC rolls the dice weighting risk vs reward ratio. Marinelli has been so damn conservative in his playcalling & use of Calvin Johnson so this time he caught coverage with its pants down. hey it happens, but still only two catches in a game for Calvin Johnson, I can live with, having time to throw the deep ball thats another when you press the box.

The Texans lack, have lacked & always lacked since inception speed W/coverage skills over the top with their safeties which should directly point the curser @ the biggest hole on this team, FS. blame Smith all day & his coaching staff but until Rick Smith can address this position with some speed in the draft plays like this will happen unless Texans use cover 2 or soft zone prevent & nobody wants that do they?

Lack of talent doesnt excuse poor play calling! You cannot under any circumstances expect that paticular defense to work in that situation. No matter who is playing FS.

4Texans
10-23-2008, 12:25 PM
On 97.5 the other day, Megan Manfel(?) of the chronicle, said the coach's were taking full responsibility for that play. The personnel were in the defensive formation that was called, and it put the Faggins in a bad position to cover that play.

ObsiWan
10-23-2008, 01:38 PM
NEWS FLASH: Almost bankrupt General Motors, in order to save their company, is feverishly working in conjunction with Smith in developing a secret weapon to save his job. They aren't sure if they can produce enough to fit out all the D before Smith is fired.

http://www.fotosearch.com/bthumb/IMZ/IMZ004/pgi0273.jpg

I hope that's an imported motor
:)

Wolf6151
10-23-2008, 02:13 PM
On 97.5 the other day, Megan Manfel(?) of the chronicle, said the coach's were taking full responsibility for that play. The personnel were in the defensive formation that was called, and it put the Faggins in a bad position to cover that play.

Good, we should let Smith take the responsibility for that play and let him suffer the consequences. Get rid of him already, what good does it do the team to wait til the end of the year? If you hire a new DC now then the players get a head start for next year and for the draft.

4Texans
10-23-2008, 04:38 PM
Good, we should let Smith take the responsibility for that play and let him suffer the consequences. Get rid of him already, what good does it do the team to wait til the end of the year? If you hire a new DC now then the players get a head start for next year and for the draft.

I've got no problem with that. I do think it's a little early to fire him when you're going for your 3rd win in a row. If we get to the last quarter of the season and the Defense is a weak link, then he's been here long enough....:tiphat:

CloakNNNdagger
10-23-2008, 06:21 PM
I've got no problem with that. I do think it's a little early to fire him when you're going for your 3rd win in a row. If we get to the last quarter of the season and the Defense is a weak link, then he's been here long enough....:tiphat:

That would be like waiting to shoot a person until after he's already dead.

CloakNNNdagger
10-26-2008, 01:56 PM
Phil Buchanon is all over the field looking like a Probowler against the Girls today........our coaches couldn't even make him look like a decent water boy.

Corrosion
10-26-2008, 02:42 PM
I've got no problem with that. I do think it's a little early to fire him when you're going for your 3rd win in a row. If we get to the last quarter of the season and the Defense is a weak link, then he's been here long enough....:tiphat:

yep , and it was the defense that put them in position to win the previous two huh ? .... 96 yard pass play from a no talent QB to a solid WR .... blown assignment.


Simth has to go and should have been gone yesterday.