PDA

View Full Version : Uncoordinated Offense


Flash
01-17-2005, 09:11 AM
Am I the only one who noticed every sportscaster on TV commenting on Houston's bad play selection?

Marcus
01-17-2005, 09:15 AM
Give examples, please. I watched every single playoff game this weekend, and I didn't hear anything of the kind.

El Tejano
01-17-2005, 11:26 AM
Really I heard alot of them saying Capers is doing good things with our team and you certainly can see the improvement.

bckey
01-17-2005, 03:56 PM
Give examples, please. I watched every single playoff game this weekend, and I didn't hear anything of the kind.

I think he was talking about our regular season games.

THE_HONKEY_TONK_KID
01-18-2005, 09:42 PM
Yeah, Houston has no regotion to be talked about during a playoff game.........

But I remember the Colts game when we played them in Houston and we kept them close, but never tried to throw a deep ball even once. To me, that is the worst play calling I have ever seen out of Chris Palmer.

I think our play calling is to conservative, not that its bad. I mean we have a lot of great playmakers, I don't understand why we don't role the dice every so often. I mean take examples from Mike Leach. He is never comfortable with a lead and during the Cal game was still trying to score with 20 seconds left of the 1st half with a 10 point lead. Thats being aggresvie. I also remember us running it every play in the 4th quater when we have a lead, even with 10 minutes left, and we lose because we weren't aggresive. That kind of play will lose us ball games most of the time, and it has.

infantrycak
01-18-2005, 10:13 PM
[B][COLOR=Blue][FONT=Comic Sans MS]Yeah, Houston has no regotion to be talked about during a playoff game.........

Regotion??? Huh?

But I remember the Colts game when we played them in Houston and we kept them close, but never tried to throw a deep ball even once. To me, that is the worst play calling I have ever seen out of Chris Palmer.

Going deep is macho and all but not the best way to beat the Colts.

Signed, Charlie Weiss & Tom Brady--20-3, 144 yds passing.

Fiddy
01-18-2005, 10:23 PM
Going deep is macho and all but not the best way to beat the Colts.

Signed, Charlie Weiss & Tom Brady--20-3, 144 yds passing.Thats because they have the stud that is Corey Dillion. When Corey Dillion (Ronnie Brown has been compared to Dillion :D) lines up in our backfield, I wont complain when we dont go deep...

infantrycak
01-18-2005, 10:40 PM
Thats because they have the stud that is Corey Dillion. When Corey Dillion (Ronnie Brown has been compared to Dillion :D) lines up in our backfield, I wont complain when we dont go deep...

Well DD did his part in the last Indy game--128 yds rushing, 5.6 ypc, 1 TD--6 rec. 73 yds. And before you say the stud was used better and didn't soak up balls that should have gone to other players like DD did--Dillon had 5 rec. for a whopping 17 yds. DD did his job--look elsewhere for why the Texans lost to the Colts.

Fiddy
01-18-2005, 11:08 PM
Well DD did his part in the last Indy game--128 yds rushing, 5.6 ypc, 1 TD--6 rec. 73 yds. And before you say the stud was used better and didn't soak up balls that should have gone to other players like DD did--Dillon had 5 rec. for a whopping 17 yds. DD did his job--look elsewhere for why the Texans lost to the Colts.I wasnt blaming the loss on Davis. Davis did get his yards, but Dillon got his in big chunks. Davis' long run was 19 yards (not shabby), Dillion long was 42. Dillon also got 20 more yards on the same number of attempts, he had bigger plays. That was one difference.

In the Colts 3 reg. season losses :
@NE - no catches for RBs
vs. Jags - Taylor 3 catches for 31 yards, Toefield 6 catches for 34 yards out of 318 passing yards
@ KC - Holmes 3 catches, 82 yards but long of 52 (Blaylock - 2 catches, 19 yards) out of 389 yards passing

The teams to beat the Colts during the regular season didnt do a great job of incorporating their RBs into the passing game. Yes, the Jags did have 9 passes go to RBs, but that only consisted of 20% of the passing offense. KC really didnt do it either, but it is escalated because Holmes broke one of those short passes into a 52 yard gain. So minus that 52 yarder from the KC game and they only had 39 passing yards go to RBs. Davis accouted for 44% of the passing offense that day. Recieving yards from your RB dont really matter against the Colts because they play the Cover 2 which will allow you to get the ball to the RB in the flat. The Colts would be happy to give Davis 44% of the passing offense if Davis doesnt break their back on a big play, which (as good as Davis catches the ball) Davis really has never had a big passing play minus that setup screen in the Chargers game...

BornOrange
01-19-2005, 02:38 AM
But I remember the Colts game when we played them in Houston and we kept them close, but never tried to throw a deep ball even once. To me, that is the worst play calling I have ever seen out of Chris Palmer.
Yeah, throw it deep against Indy.

That is easy to say when you are not the QB that has to drop back behind the Texans' offensive line. They didn't give Carr enough time to throw it deep. You can't criticize Palmer for not going deep when you take into consideration the pathetic line play against Freeney and Mathis and the fact that Indy was sitting back in a cover 2 just waiting for a deep throw to be rushed. If Carr had better protection, then he would have been able (or at least would have had a chance) to go deep and take advantage of Indy's CB's.

Without protection from the offensive line, it would have been stupid and irresponsible to throw it deep against Indy.

infantrycak
01-19-2005, 08:45 AM
I wasnt blaming the loss on Davis. Davis did get his yards, but Dillon got his in big chunks. Davis' long run was 19 yards (not shabby), Dillion long was 42. Dillon also got 20 more yards on the same number of attempts, he had bigger plays. That was one difference.

Well I guess my question to you would be why you would be looking for differences solely between DD and Dillon other than to carry on a personal campaign against DD? DD obviously did his job against Indy in the 2nd game. One long run (which also accounted for the 20 yds more gained on the day) where the game plan for both teams is long grind it out drives that keep the other team off the field isn't a significant difference between the two and certainly isn't the difference between the Texans losing 23-14 v. the Patriots winning 20-3.

In the Colts 3 reg. season losses :
@NE - no catches for RBs
vs. Jags - Taylor 3 catches for 31 yards, Toefield 6 catches for 34 yards out of 318 passing yards
@ KC - Holmes 3 catches, 82 yards but long of 52 (Blaylock - 2 catches, 19 yards) out of 389 yards passing

The teams to beat the Colts during the regular season didnt do a great job of incorporating their RBs into the passing game. Yes, the Jags did have 9 passes go to RBs, but that only consisted of 20% of the passing offense. KC really didnt do it either, but it is escalated because Holmes broke one of those short passes into a 52 yard gain.

Well nice switch of subjects from Dillon v. DD in their latest games against the Colts, but lets look at that. Receptions by RB's in Indy losses 0, 9, 5, 5. Receptions by DD against Indy 7, 6. Really don't see how you conclude that is out of line with the winning teams. Using the yards produced is silly IMO--the game plan is reflected in the play calling--the execution is reflected by the result of the play. To put a point on it, are you really arguing the Patriots were more successful because Dillon did less with his 5 passes (5 rec. 17 yds 3.4 ypc) than DD did with his 6 passes (6 rec. 72 yds, 12.2 ypc). "Way to go Dillon, way to go down early and make sure you weren't too high a % of the passing yds"--taken from a scene in the Patriots locker room after the game. Mmm, doubtful.

Recieving yards from your RB dont really matter against the Colts because they play the Cover 2 which will allow you to get the ball to the RB in the flat. The Colts would be happy to give Davis 44% of the passing offense if Davis doesnt break their back on a big play, which (as good as Davis catches the ball) Davis really has never had a big passing play minus that setup screen in the Chargers game...

The Cover 2 is designed not to give up long plays, but according to you yds on short plays don't really matter, or is that just receiving yds to RB's don't matter? Uhh, right. I am sure Dungy is over on the sidelines going well that 12.2 yard reception to DD didn't count and the 1st down doesn't matter because it was to the RB--now if it had been to a TE or WR I would be really worried. Check back one more time at the Patriots win. Brady didn't have a completion over 17 yds on the day (for the you have to throw deep crowd) and averaged only about 8 yards per completion (for the short passes to the flat don't count crowd). Big back breaking plays weren't what won the day--it was long drives eating the clock by getting 1st downs.

SESupergenius
01-19-2005, 10:04 AM
The Pats defense had way more to do with the victory than what the offense did.

rhc564
01-19-2005, 10:05 AM
Well I guess my question to you would be why you would be looking for differences solely between DD and Dillon other than to carry on a personal campaign against DD? DD obviously did his job against Indy in the 2nd game. One long run (which also accounted for the 20 yds more gained on the day) where the game plan for both teams is long grind it out drives that keep the other team off the field isn't a significant difference between the two and certainly isn't the difference between the Texans losing 23-14 v. the Patriots winning 20-3.



Well nice switch of subjects from Dillon v. DD in their latest games against the Colts, but lets look at that. Receptions by RB's in Indy losses 0, 9, 5, 5. Receptions by DD against Indy 7, 6. Really don't see how you conclude that is out of line with the winning teams. Using the yards produced is silly IMO--the game plan is reflected in the play calling--the execution is reflected by the result of the play. To put a point on it, are you really arguing the Patriots were more successful because Dillon did less with his 5 passes (5 rec. 17 yds 3.4 ypc) than DD did with his 6 passes (6 rec. 72 yds, 12.2 ypc). "Way to go Dillon, way to go down early and make sure you weren't too high a % of the passing yds"--taken from a scene in the Patriots locker room after the game. Mmm, doubtful.



The Cover 2 is designed not to give up long plays, but according to you yds on short plays don't really matter, or is that just receiving yds to RB's don't matter? Uhh, right. I am sure Dungy is over on the sidelines going well that 12.2 yard reception to DD didn't count and the 1st down doesn't matter because it was to the RB--now if it had been to a TE or WR I would be really worried. Check back one more time at the Patriots win. Brady didn't have a completion over 17 yds on the day (for the you have to throw deep crowd) and averaged only about 8 yards per completion (for the short passes to the flat don't count crowd). Big back breaking plays weren't what won the day--it was long drives eating the clock by getting 1st downs.
...sure is obvious some of you like to see your self in print!!! The key to the
Patriots success is 'game planning.' Each game is planned for in and by itself,
with the goal to do whatever it takes to win. The game plan against the
Colts was brilliant-- on offense, play keep away and use up the clock, but
also to score on those long drives-- on defense, take Manning out of his
game, which thrives on consistency and timing. Manning saw defensive
formations he'd never seen before, like the 'all line backer' defensive line.
Brilliant! New England plays to win...period. No excuses. They don't have
to establish this or that or can't to that because of this...and the play level
they get from their players is second to none...they are a TEAM. :patriot

infantrycak
01-19-2005, 10:50 AM
...sure is obvious some of you like to see your self in print!!!

Or gee, maybe it is that some people on a football MB want to discuss things a little more in depth than in James Carville slogans--"It is the game planning stupid."

The key to the Patriots success is 'game planning.' Each game is planned for in and by itself, with the goal to do whatever it takes to win. The game plan against the Colts was brilliant-- on offense, play keep away and use up the clock, but also to score on those long drives-- on defense, take Manning out of his game, which thrives on consistency and timing. ... They don't have
to establish this or that or can't to that because of this.

Yup, brilliant--exactly the same game plan Capers had for the Indy game. Your completely right the Patriots are so complete they don't have to establish "this" or "that." Darn Capers and he was so over emphasizing "this" and "that."

Manning saw defensive formations he'd never seen before, like the 'all line backer' defensive line. Brilliant!

Yeah that sure was something no one had seen before--oops other than the Patriots last year against the Texans. Wow, how about those 2 DL formations also--who'd a thunk it? Well, err, except every team that played the Texans D this year.

TexansTrueFan
01-19-2005, 02:26 PM
haha i love how some of you guys blame Davis for everything, Carr could throw a int and yall would blame it on Davis ! Oh and i agree with EVERYTHING infantrycak has said !

rhc564
01-19-2005, 03:39 PM
...thanks, I won the bet! :banana:

Blake
01-19-2005, 03:58 PM
Defenses win championships.

It wasnt DD. It was the defense giving up 40+ points. 3 ints by Carr, and 1 fumble. 5 sacks.

Tom Brady didnt turn the ball over, and had good success with the run. The defense played them well, like we did on Dec 12th.

Fiddy
01-19-2005, 04:58 PM
Well I guess my question to you would be why you would be looking for differences solely between DD and Dillon other than to carry on a personal campaign against DD? DD obviously did his job against Indy in the 2nd game. One long run (which also accounted for the 20 yds more gained on the day) where the game plan for both teams is long grind it out drives that keep the other team off the field isn't a significant difference between the two and certainly isn't the difference between the Texans losing 23-14 v. the Patriots winning 20-3.

Well nice switch of subjects from Dillon v. DD in their latest games against the Colts, but lets look at that. Receptions by RB's in Indy losses 0, 9, 5, 5. Receptions by DD against Indy 7, 6. Really don't see how you conclude that is out of line with the winning teams. Using the yards produced is silly IMO--the game plan is reflected in the play calling--the execution is reflected by the result of the play. To put a point on it, are you really arguing the Patriots were more successful because Dillon did less with his 5 passes (5 rec. 17 yds 3.4 ypc) than DD did with his 6 passes (6 rec. 72 yds, 12.2 ypc). "Way to go Dillon, way to go down early and make sure you weren't too high a % of the passing yds"--taken from a scene in the Patriots locker room after the game. Mmm, doubtful.

The Cover 2 is designed not to give up long plays, but according to you yds on short plays don't really matter, or is that just receiving yds to RB's don't matter? Uhh, right. I am sure Dungy is over on the sidelines going well that 12.2 yard reception to DD didn't count and the 1st down doesn't matter because it was to the RB--now if it had been to a TE or WR I would be really worried. Check back one more time at the Patriots win. Brady didn't have a completion over 17 yds on the day (for the you have to throw deep crowd) and averaged only about 8 yards per completion (for the short passes to the flat don't count crowd). Big back breaking plays weren't what won the day--it was long drives eating the clock by getting 1st downs.I wasnt blaming anything on Davis. Before I reply, my feeling is Dillon > Davis.

You said that a short passing game was the way to beat the Colts. I was merely saying that the Pats could use a short passing game to beat the Colts because their strength is running the ball. When Dillon plays, they are 16-1 with the one loss coming because Brady self-destructed. Our strength is the downfield passing game so when we play them, we can't do what other teams do. We should do what is our strength, passing the ball. It wasnt Davis' fault that we got down quick but it was Carr fault for using him too much in the passing game. Now it was also the O-lines fault for not giving time. And it wasnt the receptions, as much as the percentage of yards I was pointing out. Against NE, RBs contributed 0% to the passing game. Against the Jags, RBs contributed for about 20%. Against KC, RBs contributed to about 20% again (minus the 50 yard catch and run). Against us, our RB contributed for about 45% of the passing game offense. Our strength is the passing game, get the balls to the WR not to the RB. The Pats strength is pounding the ball, so give a big load to Dillon and use the short passing game...

infantrycak
01-19-2005, 05:09 PM
You said that a short passing game was the way to beat the Colts. I was merely saying that the Pats could use a short passing game to beat the Colts because their strength is running the ball. When Dillon plays, they are 16-1 with the one loss coming because Brady self-destructed.

The Patriots finished 14-2 this year with Dillon. Last year with absolutely inferior to Dillon/DD RB's they finished...14-2. If I had to pick one I would pick Dillon over DD as well, but that wasn't the point. Dillon isn't what makes the Patriots win against Indy and I know you know that since Manning is what 1-7 against the Bellichick Patriots. As for the %'s you cite again, they remain meaningless because in effect by arguing results (% yds) vs. attempts you are arguing DD is worse for the team because he is more effective than Dillon when given a RB pass. C'mon admit it Weiss/Bellichick would be happier and Dungy would be more worried if RB passes to Dillon went 12.2 ypc instead of 3.4.

Fiddy
01-19-2005, 05:31 PM
The Patriots finished 14-2 this year with Dillon. Last year with absolutely inferior to Dillon/DD RB's they finished...14-2. If I had to pick one I would pick Dillon over DD as well, but that wasn't the point. Dillon isn't what makes the Patriots win against Indy and I know you know that since Manning is what 1-7 against the Bellichick Patriots. As for the %'s you cite again, they remain meaningless because in effect by arguing results (% yds) vs. attempts you are arguing DD is worse for the team because he is more effective than Dillon when given a RB pass. C'mon admit it Weiss/Bellichick would be happier and Dungy would be more worried if RB passes to Dillon went 12.2 ypc instead of 3.4.Yes, the Pats have the same record but their offense this year is better than their offense last year.
Going deep is macho and all but not the best way to beat the Colts.

Signed, Charlie Weiss & Tom Brady--20-3, 144 yds passing.That is what you said, what I am saying is that they can do that and win because they have Dillion. Last year, Brady had 237 yards and the Pats won (4 INTs by the defense helped, though). The Pats gameplan to do what they do best. What we do best is get the ball deep to our WRs but we dont gameplan that against the Colts...

I would of had a problem if Wells/Hollings/Norris/or any RB we put on the field had as many yards and catches then Davis in that game against the Colts. As much as first downs are great, TDs are better. If a RB has to catch as much as Davis does against the Colts, then that means that downfield coverage is working or Carr is being too quick so AJ/Gaff/Bradford is not having time to catch the ball. I think Dungy would rather give up the underneath stuff knowing that even great teams have trouble sastaining 12-14 plays drives without shooting themselves in the foot then giving up long bombs to AJ/Gaff/Bradford. You have to give up something: Long bombs to WRs or underneath stuff to RBs. Davis did nothing wrong by catching those balls, the offense did something wrong by incorporting him so much into the passing game that he almost contributed for half of it...

THE_HONKEY_TONK_KID
01-19-2005, 09:54 PM
Lord do yall blow little things up for nothing. :rofl: My whole point was that we are not aggresive enough on offense, not just in the Indy game.

When the Colts went into New England, there were several things that caused them to lose that ball game. The Patriots defense, I don't know what to say about it other than its good and they use so many schemes, its unreal, and maybe the most important is that the players beleive in the schemes. Not only do the Pats run that crazy no down lineman defense (and yes it has been used before, just ask John Madden when he saw it down in Miami in the second to last Monday Night game and just went crazy over it) but they mix up their coverages to where Peyton Manning doesn't know whats coming. They just don't play the Cover 2 on every third down or something like that. (And yes the Cover 2 does give up Big Plays in the seams. We don't know how to beat it) And New England's offense was its defense, the controlled the ball on offense in the 4th quater for like 10 minutes or somethin like that.

Lets put it this way. The Pats held the Colts to 3 points, and when we played them in Houston we held them to 24. Thats the differnce.

fresno8
01-21-2005, 12:43 AM
I also remember us running it every play in the 4th quater when we have a lead, even with 10 minutes left, and we lose because we weren't aggresive. That kind of play will lose us ball games most of the time, and it has. [/FONT] [/COLOR] [/B]
Agreed, they play not to lose when we have a lead. That's inexcusable. Also we need to every now and then just fling it deep. Sometimes though Carr would just take a sack instead of chuck'n it deep, that's on him. Just another thing that will come w/ experience. However we are to conservative in our play calling, but a lot of that has to do w/ Capers and our O-line. Hopefully if we fix our o-line things will open up. And hopefully we'll go for the kill in the 4th quarter of games next year.

TexansTrueFan
01-21-2005, 09:32 AM
haha its the same old stuff just a different day, i have seen carr have all day back there, and still dump it off to D.D. Blame who you'd like but it is carr not capers who doesnt throw it deep. He dont trust the line enough, and why should he !!!

Wolf
01-22-2005, 08:42 AM
Agreed, they play not to lose when we have a lead. That's inexcusable. Also we need to every now and then just fling it deep. Sometimes though Carr would just take a sack instead of chuck'n it deep, that's on him. Just another thing that will come w/ experience. However we are to conservative in our play calling, but a lot of that has to do w/ Capers and our O-line. Hopefully if we fix our o-line things will open up. And hopefully we'll go for the kill in the 4th quarter of games next year.

and I have seen the opposite. Oilers blow a 35-3 lead running their offense ...and if I am not mistaked we had a top 3 defense to back that offense with Buddy Ryan at QB...Bottom line is that we are not a good team. Good teams know when the game is at hand, you can run the ball down the opponents throats even if the opponent knows what is coming..No one has complained to Jeff Fisher when the Titans were winning and they ran Eddie George down opponents throats to seal a game by keeping the clock moving and keeping the opponents offense off the field.

Marcus
01-22-2005, 10:45 AM
Yeah, throw it deep against Indy.

That is easy to say when you are not the QB that has to drop back behind the Texans' offensive line. They didn't give Carr enough time to throw it deep. You can't criticize Palmer for not going deep when you take into consideration the pathetic line play against Freeney and Mathis and the fact that Indy was sitting back in a cover 2 just waiting for a deep throw to be rushed. If Carr had better protection, then he would have been able (or at least would have had a chance) to go deep and take advantage of Indy's CB's.

Without protection from the offensive line, it would have been stupid and irresponsible to throw it deep against Indy.

Yup. What amazes me though . . . what really amazes me . . . is how many people have such a hard time comprehending that. Infantry is right . . . it has to be one of those 'playcalling' things.

When watching these playoff games, it is really fun to watch how ALL of the teams' offensive lines, even on the teams that have so been eliminated, like the Vikings, Rams, Seahawks, and Chargers . . . ALL of them had O lines that could contain a 4 man rush with having to use max-protect.

Isn't there anyone here who has noticed that besides me?

Ibar_Harry
01-22-2005, 02:52 PM
Yup. What amazes me though . . . what really amazes me . . . is how many people have such a hard time comprehending that. Infantry is right . . . it has to be one of those 'playcalling' things.

When watching these playoff games, it is really fun to watch how ALL of the teams' offensive lines, even on the teams that have so been eliminated, like the Vikings, Rams, Seahawks, and Chargers . . . ALL of them had O lines that could contain a 4 man rush with having to use max-protect.

Isn't there anyone here who has noticed that besides me?

That's Why Casserly says we have to draft defensively this year....

Tongue in cheek..........................