PDA

View Full Version : All hail the death of the 10 yard CB cushion


Texans_Chick
05-12-2009, 09:18 PM
Jacques Reeves claims the CBs won't be doing 10 yard cushions any more (http://www.houstontexans.com/news/Story.asp?story_id=5280).

My thoughts (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2009/05/we_interrupt_the_rockets_playo.html).

And a dance or five.

:smiliedance::whip::specnatz::splits::mario3:

And a hail. Like hail yeah.

DiehardChris
05-12-2009, 09:36 PM
No more read and react. No more ten-yard cushions.

Hallelujah.

(Oh, and this should have been done last off-season)

CloakNNNdagger
05-12-2009, 09:55 PM
Reeves is gonna leave hickees all over the wideouts. See him going after that nippee?

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/08ee40I65NctR/610x.jpg

Nawzer
05-12-2009, 10:03 PM
Hail yeah!!!

spurstexanstros
05-12-2009, 10:17 PM
"So is that why I am no longer a Texan?" -Petey "Big Play" Faggins

edo783
05-12-2009, 10:27 PM
In related news, they are working with Reeves on his technique. If the kid can get better at his technique (like getting his head around to look for the ball) he could be one heck of a CB.

Jackie Chiles
05-12-2009, 10:27 PM
Sounds good to me but I'll believe it when I see it.

mexican_texan
05-12-2009, 10:53 PM
Good. I'm sick of that 10 yard cushion between Brandon Harrison and the guy he's covering.

JCTexan
05-12-2009, 11:48 PM
Sounds good to me but I'll believe it when I see it.

What's not to believe? When you change defensive coordinators you usually change schemes... I like the way the defense is 'sounding' so far. Aggressive, no more read-and-react, and now no more 10 yard cushions for the corners.

superdave532
05-13-2009, 04:04 AM
Reeves is gonna leave hickees all over the wideouts. See him going after that nippee?

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/08ee40I65NctR/610x.jpg

This is the kind of scenario where, if it were to happen in Madden, you would throw your remote at the TV screaming "That's ****ing b*******!!!1! That would Never happen!" Still can't believe Wayne came down with the ball, Reeves had amazing coverage on that.

Andrew6
05-13-2009, 04:46 AM
This is the kind of scenario where, if it were to happen in Madden, you would throw your remote at the TV screaming "That's ****ing b*******!!!1! That would Never happen!" Still can't believe Wayne came down with the ball, Reeves had amazing coverage on that.

reminds me of the movie "the replacements" when they put all that stick-um on the guys gloves.

TimeKiller
05-13-2009, 08:25 AM
At least he's aware that cornerback doesn't mean all the QB sees in the corner is Reeves' back.

How did the 10 yard cushion idea ever get through to any team ever, ever?

CloakNNNdagger
05-13-2009, 09:01 AM
At least he's aware that cornerback doesn't mean all the QB sees in the corner is Reeves' back.

How did the 10 yard cushion idea ever get through to any team ever, ever?


I was custom designed with teams having far-sighted CBs wearing non-flexible neck braces.

bah007
05-13-2009, 09:09 AM
At least he's aware that cornerback doesn't mean all the QB sees in the corner is Reeves' back.

How did the 10 yard cushion idea ever get through to any team ever, ever?

Slow footed CB's letting slant routes go for 50 yd TD's.

As with all defensive schemes, you have to build on your strengths and try to circumvent your weaknesses.

In some situations, it is appropriate for the CB to give some cushion. But 3rd and 2 is not that situation. I honestly could not believe how many times our CB's were lined up 10 yds deep in 3rd and short situations last year.

GP
05-13-2009, 09:28 AM
This defense appears to have someone leading it who knows what to do.

Now it's just gotta' become a genuine reality on the playing field.

infantrycak
05-13-2009, 09:39 AM
Just talking or does this imply Hoke was not a technique guy?

“(Gibbs) is a technique freak, and that’s what I need,” Reeves said. “I need to get a whole lot better with my technique, and I think he is going to challenge me at that.”

Pretty hard to point to any DB's getting better under Hoke. Interesting to see how Reeves and Bennett perform this year.

CloakNNNdagger
05-13-2009, 09:45 AM
Slow footed CB's letting slant routes go for 50 yd TD's.

As with all defensive schemes, you have to build on your strengths and try to circumvent your weaknesses.

In some situations, it is appropriate for the CB to give some cushion. But 3rd and 2 is not that situation. I honestly could not believe how many times our CB's were lined up 10 yds deep in 3rd and short situations last year.

More times than not.

beerlover
05-13-2009, 10:30 AM
y'all do realize David had the KC Chiefs secondary ranked 5th in the league for pass defense? If he can do that for the Chiefs just imagine what he can do for the Texans :texflag:

HOU-TEX
05-13-2009, 10:37 AM
y'all do realize David had the KC Chiefs secondary ranked 5th in the league for pass defense? If he can do that for the Chiefs just imagine what he can do for the Texans :texflag:

In what catagory?

Their defense as a unit was horrible against the pass and the run.

DiehardChris
05-13-2009, 10:46 AM
Er, they were actually fifth WORST in the league in pass defense last year in terms of yards allowed per game.

Runner
05-13-2009, 10:52 AM
I am looking forward to seeing a legitimate NFL defense rather than the Han van Meegeren-esque product that was rolled out under Richard Smith.

BigBull17
05-13-2009, 11:21 AM
Just talking or does this imply Hoke was not a technique guy?



Pretty hard to point to any DB's getting better under Hoke. Interesting to see how Reeves and Bennett perform this year.

And a few of them did the face guarding crap. It seems that Hoke had a small part in it. We'll see.

badboy
05-13-2009, 11:41 AM
I don't want our corners looking for the ball. I want them to read the body and eyes of the WR face to face not from several feet away when they finally catch up. I think this was part of Philip B. problem when he was here. He was constantly trying to catch up to receiver. Our present crew is physical enough to jam the WR then stride for stride down field. Me likey!

TheRealJoker
05-13-2009, 11:48 AM
We've got 3 tall physical CBs who can run in Reeves, Bennett, and Molden. IMO given the personnel we have in the secondary we should be able to run a bump and run man coverage defense like the Packers have employed with success using Charles Woodson and Al Harris.

Sure, there will be the occasional big play against us. But there will also be the big play made by us and the 3 and out drives forced by us. Add in a healthy Dunta (if he stops screwing around about his contract) and some nice nickel candidates in Quinn and McCain I think Gibbs will be able to do some nice work with this crop.

TimeKiller
05-13-2009, 11:58 AM
Slow footed CB's letting slant routes go for 50 yd TD's.

As with all defensive schemes, you have to build on your strengths and try to circumvent your weaknesses.

In some situations, it is appropriate for the CB to give some cushion. But 3rd and 2 is not that situation. I honestly could not believe how many times our CB's were lined up 10 yds deep in 3rd and short situations last year.

I get your point about trying to hide weakness but when weakness is abundant and strengths are very few....eventually don't you stop trying to compensate and just play some real football? I actually can't remember the corners ever jamming a WR and I've been to almost every game in the last 2 years. I guess it's just me but after however long of that I would just say, "f it, try to do what Asomugha/Bailey does and if you get burned well, I guess you won't get the same contract they get."

beerlover
05-13-2009, 12:23 PM
In what catagory?

Their defense as a unit was horrible against the pass and the run.

clarification - 2007 5 Kansas City Chiefs 188.9

in 08 they had to go with a pair of rookie late rd. CB's also lost Jared Allen so I that stat has some exceptional factors that taint the #'s. hardly David's fault actually reflects his ability to develop talent (08 draft- 2nd rd. Brandon Flowers, 3rd. DaJuan Morgan, 5th rd. Brandon Carr).

moving forward to the Texans with Dunta Robinson, Jacques Reeves, Fred Bennett & Antwaun Molden already in the mix they added two more db's in the late rounds to develop (4th rd, Gover Quin, 6th rd. Brice McCain) that David Gibbs secondary rivals or surpasses 5th in the league yards allowed in 09 IMO :cool:

Polo
05-13-2009, 12:25 PM
I don't want our corners looking for the ball.

Yes you do.

bah007
05-13-2009, 12:45 PM
I get your point about trying to hide weakness but when weakness is abundant and strengths are very few....eventually don't you stop trying to compensate and just play some real football? I actually can't remember the corners ever jamming a WR and I've been to almost every game in the last 2 years. I guess it's just me but after however long of that I would just say, "f it, try to do what Asomugha/Bailey does and if you get burned well, I guess you won't get the same contract they get."

If you do what your coaches tell you to do and you get burned, it's not completely your fault.

If they tell you to sit back and you jam instead and get burned, you're fired.

Last year our coaches would rather give up 8 yards on every single play than risk giving up a 60 yd TD. I disagree with that strategy. But the fact remains that, as a player, if you don't do what your coaches tell you to (even if they are wrong) it won't end well for you.

badboy
05-13-2009, 01:07 PM
Yes you do.No. I do not.

Polo
05-13-2009, 01:11 PM
No. I do not.

It's called pass interference when they do not locate the ball and strictly play the reciever.

Yes, look at the recievers body language, but at some point they still need to find the ball. I don't even see how thats debatable. Especially since veteran recievers will display false body language to fool inexperienced CB's.

Also, I'm not sure how you expect them to ever get interceptions not looking for the football.

CloakNNNdagger
05-13-2009, 01:34 PM
I get your point about trying to hide weakness but when weakness is abundant and strengths are very few....eventually don't you stop trying to compensate and just play some real football? I actually can't remember the corners ever jamming a WR and I've been to almost every game in the last 2 years. I guess it's just me but after however long of that I would just say, "f it, try to do what Asomugha/Bailey does and if you get burned well, I guess you won't get the same contract they get."

If you do what your coaches tell you to do and you get burned, it's not completely your fault.

If they tell you to sit back and you jam instead and get burned, you're fired.

Last year our coaches would rather give up 8 yards on every single play than risk giving up a 60 yd TD. I disagree with that strategy. But the fact remains that, as a player, if you don't do what your coaches tell you to (even if they are wrong) it won't end well for you.

And hidden in all of this is the question, if the HC was watching the same games for the past 2 years that we were, why were these tactics not adjusted? The routine explanation always is "lack of talent." The "cushions" totalled up in yards allowed consistent plodding of the Os toward our goal line, apparently more than the big play "burns," and virtually eliminated the oportunity for big D plays. "Lack of talent" could easily been a more convincing argument against the "cushion."

HOU-TEX
05-13-2009, 01:53 PM
No. I do not.

It's called pass interference when they do not locate the ball and strictly play the reciever.

Yes, look at the recievers body language, but at some point they still need to find the ball. I don't even see how thats debatable. Especially since veteran recievers will display false body language to fool inexperienced CB's.

Also, I'm not sure how you expect them to ever get interceptions not looking for the football.

If you play the WR instead of the ball you will end up like Steff

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ecXzac-ljd4/SRJZXcxyx-I/AAAAAAAABSo/s2eei1totKA/s400/6.jpg

TimeKiller
05-13-2009, 01:54 PM
Especially since veteran recievers will display false body language to fool inexperienced CB's.

Also, I'm not sure how you expect them to ever get interceptions not looking for the football.

I read an article from some CB's viewpoint on how you can't watch Randy Moss' eyes because they are docile until the ball is in his hands already. When you're as good of a reciever as he is AND you can play with such small, miniscule things as eyelid openness....damn.

Hey, Reeves got a few int's last year...so it's possible to have no clue where the ball is until it hits you in the chest hahaha....:cool:

If you do what your coaches tell you to do and you get burned, it's not completely your fault.

If they tell you to sit back and you jam instead and get burned, you're fired.

Last year our coaches would rather give up 8 yards on every single play than risk giving up a 60 yd TD. I disagree with that strategy. But the fact remains that, as a player, if you don't do what your coaches tell you to (even if they are wrong) it won't end well for you.
Yeah, you're probably right. I guess I'd rather find out if I'm good enough to make a play than if my mouth is wide enough to swallow everything the offense is sticking out there.

Really my point is you just have to go out there and do it. No excuses, no compensating, just ball. If you look bad, at least you won't look bad while trying to compensate for how bad you are.

And hidden in all of this is the question, if the HC was watching the same games for the past 2 years that we were, why were these tactics not adjusted? The routine explanation always is "lack of talent." The "cushions" totalled up in yards allowed consistent plodding of the Os toward our goal line, apparently more than the big play "burns," and virtually eliminated the oportunity for big D plays. "Lack of talent" could easily been a more convincing argument against the "cushion."
Very well said.

BuffaloglennTX
05-13-2009, 02:13 PM
Good. I'm sick of that 10 yard cushion between Brandon Harrison and the guy he's covering.

I think you meant "I'm sick of that 10 yard cushion between Brandon Harrison and the guy he's CHASING." :gun:

BigBull17
05-13-2009, 02:18 PM
It's called pass interference when they do not locate the ball and strictly play the reciever.

Yes, look at the recievers body language, but at some point they still need to find the ball. I don't even see how thats debatable. Especially since veteran recievers will display false body language to fool inexperienced CB's.

Also, I'm not sure how you expect them to ever get interceptions not looking for the football.

Yeah, they didn't ever look up this last season, and its painful to watch. If they turn their head ever, we may have doubled our INT's. Thats not alot, but its a start.

Polo
05-13-2009, 02:20 PM
Yeah, they didn't ever look up this last season, and its painful to watch. If they turn their head ever, we may have doubled our INT's. Thats not alot, but its a start.

Yeah...Besides his total lack of physicality locating the ball is another one Jaque's weaknesses..

Speaking of playing bump and run, I do not see that as a good strategy for Jaque Reeves, becuause as I mentioned, dude lacks physicality in every respect...

BigBull17
05-13-2009, 02:25 PM
Yeah...Besides his total lack of physicality locating the ball is another one Jaque's weaknesses..

Speaking of playing bump and run, I do not see that as a good strategy for Jaque Reeves, becuause as I mentioned, dude lacks physicality in every respect...

Yep. He's a burner. He can run with almost anyone. He'll be good to have when we play Lee Eves this year, thought I have no clue what we do to T.O. He is to physical. Hope Bennett is up to the challenge.

badboy
05-13-2009, 03:28 PM
It's called pass interference when they do not locate the ball and strictly play the reciever.

Yes, look at the recievers body language, but at some point they still need to find the ball. I don't even see how thats debatable. Especially since veteran recievers will display false body language to fool inexperienced CB's.

Also, I'm not sure how you expect them to ever get interceptions not looking for the football.Here's my thoughts Polo, a quick look back by a CB is all it takes for a stumble or misstep (see Reeves). Again, Buchannon had this problem. My understanding is it is only interference if the CB blocks the view of the WR or does not allow him access to catch the ball. More interference flags are thrown for the receiver getting there late and having to hit receiver to stop a score. And you are right my focus is not on INTs but breaking up the pass. While INTs are great, we've all seen a CB (Dunta for example) go for an INT only to miss and the WR go for yards. I am NOT saying never try, but I'd rather see a pass successfully defended than bye bye TD.

I also doubt we will have any inexperienced CB getting much time with game on the line this season. Even Moldin will have gone against our WRs and that is pretty valuable training. I believe that playing CB is very instinctive and the player just knows when the ball will be there most of the time. We have seen this over the years with many NFL greats. Just my two cents.

infantrycak
05-13-2009, 03:38 PM
While INTs are great, we've all seen a CB (Dunta for example) go for an INT only to miss and the WR go for yards. I am NOT saying never try, but I'd rather see a pass successfully defended than bye bye TD.. We have seen this over the years with many NFL greats. Just my two cents.

We've also seen (Dunta for example) not look back and adjust his arm an inch over to the ball to deflect it so it becomes a completion putting the other team in game winning field goal range. This isn't an either or equation. Knowing where the ball is helps on passes defensed, not just INT's. At the same time, yes the DB should not be getting out of position by concentrating too much on the ball.

HOU-TEX
05-13-2009, 03:38 PM
Here's my thoughts Polo, a quick look back by a CB is all it takes for a stumble or misstep (see Reeves). Again, Buchannon had this problem. My understanding is it is only interference if the CB blocks the view of the WR or does not allow him access to catch the ball. More interference flags are thrown for the receiver getting there late and having to hit receiver to stop a score. And you are right my focus is not on INTs but breaking up the pass. While INTs are great, we've all seen a CB (Dunta for example) go for an INT only to miss and the WR go for yards. I am NOT saying never try, but I'd rather see a pass successfully defended than bye bye TD.

I also doubt we will have any inexperienced CB getting much time with game on the line this season. Even Moldin will have gone against our WRs and that is pretty valuable training. I believe that playing CB is very instinctive and the player just knows when the ball will be there most of the time. We have seen this over the years with many NFL greats. Just my two cents.

Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to:

(a) Contact by a defender who is not playing the ball and such contact restricts the receiverís opportunity to make the catch.

(b) Playing through the back of a receiver in an attempt to make a play on the ball.

(c) Grabbing a receiverís arm(s) in such a manner that restricts his opportunity to catch a pass.

(d) Extending an arm across the body of a receiver thus restricting his ability to catch a pass, regardless of whether the defender is playing the ball.

(e) Cutting off the path of a receiver by making contact with him without playing the ball.

(f) Hooking a receiver in an attempt to get to the ball in such a manner that it causes the receiverís body to turn prior to the ball arriving.

http://www.footballscrimmage.com/nfl/pass-interference.shtml

Texan4Ever
05-13-2009, 03:43 PM
Why did we even use a 10-Yard cushion? Our CBs ain't no Pro Bowlers that they can read and react within a split second and disrupt the passing play. We should just stick to the old and proven technique of man-on-man, works for me in NCAA Football 09 (at that, we should also try some CB blitzes!)

:gun: ~ What I'm doing during the offseason...

Polo
05-13-2009, 03:44 PM
Here's my thoughts Polo, a quick look back by a CB is all it takes for a stumble or misstep (see Reeves). Again, Buchannon had this problem. My understanding is it is only interference if the CB blocks the view of the WR or does not allow him access to catch the ball. More interference flags are thrown for the receiver getting there late and having to hit receiver to stop a score.

If I'm not mistaken a CB can make incedental contact with a reciever as long as he clearly turns to locate the ball when it is in the air. Like if you accidentally bump the reciever as you are turning to find the ball as it is getting there Pass int. wont be called...But if you make contact with him as the ball is arriving without turning to find the ball they will let the hankie fly...


And you are right my focus is not on INTs but breaking up the pass. While INTs are great, we've all seen a CB (Dunta for example) go for an INT only to miss and the WR go for yards. I am NOT saying never try, but I'd rather see a pass successfully defended than bye bye TD.

How many times did we see Jaque Reeves covering a guy like glue only to let a ball zip right by his helmet because he didn't turn to locate the ball?

When you are trying to make plays and are being aggressive you are going to occasionally give up big plays...It's the risk reward aspect and this conversation really leads into the defense we will be playing next year...If you don't like seeing defenders being aggressive and going for turnonvers and big plays then I think you will not like the Texans next year...

The days of playing it close to the cuff are over. The only way this defense works is if guys are jumping routes and reading the QB's eyes and locating the football when its in the air.

It does no good to blitz the QB only to have him float it up and the reciever grab it even though the DB was right with him but failed to locate the ball. That is what I'm tired of seeing. If you are a DB and cannot locate the football in the air then you are no good.


I also doubt we will have any inexperienced CB getting much time with game on the line this season. Even Moldin will have gone against our WRs and that is pretty valuable training. I believe that playing CB is very instinctive and the player just knows when the ball will be there most of the time. We have seen this over the years with many NFL greats. Just my two cents.

Ok, this I agree with. But when you get that instincual feel that the ball is in the air, you still have to be able to turn and locate it....The only time I don't want DB's turning to locate the ball is if they are getting beat really bad...At that point their concern needs to be just on catching up to the reciever...

badboy
05-13-2009, 04:10 PM
If I'm not mistaken a CB can make incedental contact with a reciever as long as he clearly turns to locate the ball when it is in the air. Like if you accidentally bump the reciever as you are turning to find the ball as it is getting there Pass int. wont be called...But if you make contact with him as the ball is arriving without turning to find the ball they will let the hankie fly... you are correct on incidental contact, but what we often see is the WR slowing up and the CB running into WR while CB tries to locate the ball.




How many times did we see Jaque Reeves covering a guy like glue only to let a ball zip right by his helmet because he didn't turn to locate the ball? Reeves is usually not stuck like glue due to prior defensive strategy. he is rushing to catch up and ball goes by him as he is too far off.

When you are trying to make plays and are being aggressive you are going to occasionally give up big plays...It's the risk reward aspect and this conversation really leads into the defense we will be playing next year...If you don't like seeing defenders being aggressive and going for turnonvers and big plays then I think you will not like the Texans next year... there are times at beginning of game or if you are way ahead (that is not our history) or way behind to take chances on INTs. An INT due to aggressiveness is cool. Not so coll to miss and lose points.

The days of playing it close to the cuff are over. The only way this defense works is if guys are jumping routes and reading the QB's eyes and locating the football when its in the air.

It does no good to blitz the QB only to have him float it up and the reciever grab it even though the DB was right with him but failed to locate the ball. That is what I'm tired of seeing. If you are a DB and cannot locate the football in the air then you are no good. Our defense will put a safety with the CB more and that is where I expect INTs to come from




Ok, this I agree with. But when you get that instincual feel that the ball is in the air, you still have to be able to turn and locate it....The only time I don't want DB's turning to locate the ball is if they are getting beat really bad...At that point their concern needs to be just on catching up to the reciever...

Good debate and I enjoyed the discussion. I'm headed home. You guys be cool. Steve

Texsker
05-13-2009, 04:17 PM
Ok, this I agree with. But when you get that instincual feel that the ball is in the air, you still have to be able to turn and locate it....The only time I don't want DB's turning to locate the ball is if they are getting beat really bad...At that point their concern needs to be just on catching up to the reciever...

I'm not disputing that some veteran DBs have an internal clock that gives them a strong feeling about when the ball may be in the air, but most DBs aren't just relying on "instinctual feel" to let them know when to turn for the ball. The one thing that will get a DB in serious trouble is looking back for the ball too early. It allows the receiver to get immediate separation, and often results in a big play.

Most DBs are following a receiver's eyes and body language, or have teammates and coaches yelling to them from the sideline that the ball is in flight.

I'm aware that some veteran receivers are good at disguising their facial cues when the ball is arriving, but there's also body language involved, which is harder to disguise.

It's also not pass interference to simply fail to turn around for the football, as long as no contact with the receiver is made past five yards. There is no such thing as "face guarding" in football.

Most DB coaches teach that you only look back for the ball in two cases:

1) When the DB is running stride for stride with the receiver in an interposed position between the quarterback and the receiver. For example, if he's covering a wideout on a post pattern and the WR makes his break toward the middle of the field, if the DB has inside position and is running stride for stride with the WR, it would be acceptable to look back for the ball at that point.

2) When the DB has a specific reason to believe the football is in the air and on the verge of arriving, based on an assessment of the receiver's eyes and body language, or a cue from sideline personnel that the ball is arriving.

Polo
05-13-2009, 04:26 PM
I'm not disputing that some veteran DBs have an internal clock that gives them a strong feeling about when the ball may be in the air, but most DBs aren't just relying on "instinctual feel" to let them know when to turn for the ball. The one thing that will get a DB in serious trouble is looking back for the ball too early. It allows the receiver to get immediate separation, and often results in a big play.

Most DBs are following a receiver's eyes and body language, or have teammates and coaches yelling to them from the sideline that the ball is in flight.

I'm aware that some veteran receivers are good at disguising their facial cues when the ball is arriving, but there's also body language involved, which is harder to disguise.

It's also not pass interference to simply fail to turn around for the football, as long as no contact with the receiver is made past five yards. There is no such thing as "face guarding" in football.

Most DB coaches teach that you only look back for the ball in two cases:

1) When the DB is running stride for stride with the receiver in an interposed position between the quarterback and the receiver. For example, if he's covering a wideout on a post pattern and the WR makes his break toward the middle of the field, if the DB has inside position and is running stride for stride with the WR, it would be acceptable to look back for the ball at that point.

2) When the DB has a specific reason to believe the football is in the air and on the verge of arriving, based on an assessment of the receiver's eyes and body language, or a cue from sideline personnel that the ball is arriving.

Badboy mentioned instincts, and I was just commenting on his remark...

I'm not sure what you're debating or if you're debating... I don't really disagree with much you wrote...Good post...

Side note: The scenarios you listed pretty much apply to every route except a nine.

I don't see many scenarios when a CB can't turn to locate the ball besides a 9 or if they're getting
beat badly...


And no it's not pass interference to simply not locate the ball....Thats not what I said or meant...

Texsker
05-13-2009, 04:47 PM
Badboy mentioned instincts, and I was just commenting on his remark...

I'm not sure what you're debating or if you're debating... I don't really disagree with much you wrote...Good post...

And no it's not pass interference to simply not locate the ball....Thats not what I said or meant...

Maybe I misinterpreted what you said. I was referring to your earlier post:

It's called pass interference when they do not locate the ball and strictly play the reciever.

Ole Miss Texan
05-13-2009, 04:58 PM
I hope we see our DL and our DBs getting their hands up a lot more than they have in the pass. A pass deflection at the line or by the WR is great and those can often lead to interceptions by another player. Maybe Shane Battier can give them some instructions and use his coverage against Kobe as an example. If you get your hand in their face it's hard to see the ball!

CloakNNNdagger
05-13-2009, 05:01 PM
It wouldn't hurt if some of our CBs at least learned the concept of flailing their arms in the face of the WRs.

Here's a candid picture of David Gibbs' CB training exercises taken of one of his Kansas City Chiefs defenders, teaching this very technique.:

http://restorationrevivalcenter.com/db3/00243/restorationrevivalcenter.com/_uimages/Sledding_SnowAngel_Michelle.jpg

Goldensilence
05-13-2009, 05:02 PM
Just talking or does this imply Hoke was not a technique guy?



Pretty hard to point to any DB's getting better under Hoke. Interesting to see how Reeves and Bennett perform this year.

Did i just see Hoke and technique in the same sentence? Honestly I can't name one DB that got better or one of the young guys that developed under Hoke.

What has impressed me the most about seeing Reeves quotes in the offseason so far is that he seems very willing to put in time and is willing to be coached. I think those two will translate well going into this year.

I really wish we could've seen Molden in game time last year before he broke his ankle. I know he's got the measurables to be elite, and I'm fairly confident that Gibbs can coach him up. If we can get Bennett back on track, which I think we can, even if Dunta holds out we could possibly be 3 deep at CB.

kiwitexansfan
05-13-2009, 05:12 PM
I really wish we could've seen Molden in game time last year before he broke his ankle. I know he's got the measurables to be elite, and I'm fairly confident that Gibbs can coach him up. If we can get Bennett back on track, which I think we can, even if Dunta holds out we could possibly be 3 deep at CB.

I'm really excited about the depth of talent we have at CB, sure the production hasn't been great but with Molden, Bennet and Reeves we have some great size/speed athletes, throw in Dunta and Quinn's toughness and aggresion and McCain's insane speed and you have a lot of guys who could be impact defenders.

Hopefully Gibbs and the new scheme turn some of this talent into results.

I want some takeaways!

Texans_Chick
05-13-2009, 06:08 PM
The Texans have only had one secondary coach in their entire existence. Jon Hoke. (though they did get an experienced helper dude last year with Ray Rhodes).

Jon Hoke never had an NFL job prior to working for the Texans.

His best corner was someone that was developed by another team and came to the team as pretty much a finished product--Aaron Glenn. He was a first round pick for the Jets, and had 8 years with them before coming to Houston.

I will be very interested in seeing what a fresh set of eyes does with this group. David Gibbs has been with a couple of NFL teams, including working with Herm Edwards with the Chiefs. Whatever you think of Edwards, he was pretty good at working with DBs.

GP
05-13-2009, 06:11 PM
I am looking forward to seeing a legitimate NFL defense rather than the Han van Meegeren-esque product that was rolled out under Richard Smith.

"There's only two things I can't stand in this world. Those who are intolerant of other people's cultures. And, the Dutch." -- Nigel Powers

(I had to cut-n-paste that name to even know who Han van Meegeren is).

Now THAT is classic crypto-socio. Nicely done.

Wolf
05-14-2009, 12:35 AM
It wouldn't hurt if some of our CBs at least learned the concept of flailing their arms in the face of the WRs.

Here's a candid picture of David Gibbs' CB training exercises taken of one of his Kansas City Chiefs defenders, teaching this very technique.:

http://restorationrevivalcenter.com/db3/00243/restorationrevivalcenter.com/_uimages/Sledding_SnowAngel_Michelle.jpg

here is the advanced level
http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1099492&postcount=111

whiskeyrbl
05-14-2009, 07:40 AM
I like the idea of playing tight on the recievers. If our pass rush is improved like we all hope with the new scheme, the bump and run or jamming of the recievers could make all the difference in the world. In the case of Reeves(by no stretch of the imagination am I a football guru on CB's) I think he would be better suited playing on the outside shoulder of his reciever. We all know about him not turning and looking for the ball, but wouldn't this make it easier for him to see the ball in flight? More of a natural movement to look back for the ball. He has the speed to close on a slant or a 7-9 in route. Plus there should be help in the middle of the field.

Polo
05-14-2009, 08:33 AM
Reeves may not be that physical, but I will say that he isn't afraid to take his licks...

Seen him get his neck run through a couple times, but I never saw him avoid contact...At least he's willing....

HOU-TEX
05-14-2009, 08:44 AM
The Texans have only had one secondary coach in their entire existence. Jon Hoke. (though they did get an experienced helper dude last year with Ray Rhodes).

Jon Hoke never had an NFL job prior to working for the Texans.

His best corner was someone that was developed by another team and came to the team as pretty much a finished product--Aaron Glenn. He was a first round pick for the Jets, and had 8 years with them before coming to Houston.

I will be very interested in seeing what a fresh set of eyes does with this group. David Gibbs has been with a couple of NFL teams, including working with Herm Edwards with the Chiefs. Whatever you think of Edwards, he was pretty good at working with DBs.

And does anybody know exactly what it is that Rhodes does? I don't. I don't think our DB's got any better since his arrival.

Every practice I attended (every one allowed), Rhodes never really looked to be doing much. Admittingly, It was just this past season where I made it a point to find him and watch what he did. It wasn't much. Maybe he contributes in the classroom? Maybe I'm off base?

Texans_Chick
05-14-2009, 08:49 AM
And does anybody know exactly what it is that Rhodes does? I don't. I don't think our DB's got any better since his arrival.

Every practice I attended (every one allowed), Rhodes never really looked to be doing much. Admittingly, It was just this past season where I made it a point to find him and watch what he did. It wasn't much. Maybe he contributes in the classroom? Maybe I'm off base?

When Rhodes was first ill and coming back, he did mostly behind the scenes stuff so as not to get too worked up. I'm also thinking his role is different being an assistant versus the guy in charge of the secondary.

Runner
05-14-2009, 08:56 AM
(I had to cut-n-paste that name to even know who Han van Meegeren is).

Now THAT is classic crypto-socio. Nicely done.

I put the dash in to make it clear where to end the selection before cutting.

infantrycak
05-14-2009, 09:09 AM
And does anybody know exactly what it is that Rhodes does? I don't. I don't think our DB's got any better since his arrival.

Every practice I attended (every one allowed), Rhodes never really looked to be doing much. Admittingly, It was just this past season where I made it a point to find him and watch what he did. It wasn't much. Maybe he contributes in the classroom? Maybe I'm off base?

There was some sort of cryptic comment last year about Hoke handling the CB's and Rhodes working with the safeties.

HOU-TEX
05-14-2009, 09:14 AM
There was some sort of cryptic comment last year about Hoke handling the CB's and Rhodes working with the safeties.

Either way, has there been a noticable impact anywhere in our secondary? Other than two veteran safety's coming in, I don't think so.

I'm not trying to discredit Rhodes. I'm just curious as to what he does.

infantrycak
05-14-2009, 09:18 AM
Either way, has there been a noticable impact anywhere in our secondary? Other than two veteran safety's coming in, I don't think so.

I'm not trying to discredit Rhodes. I'm just curious as to what he does.

Don't know. Given the safeties comment, I am curious what role he played in Demps being benched and Wilson starting, etc. I suspect he also helps analyze upcoming teams but we aren't going to see that.

beerlover
05-14-2009, 10:37 AM
Ray Rhodes was promoted to Senior Defensive Assistant with Texans Jan. 28, 2009, after serving as Texans' assistant defensive backs coach in 2008.

TimeKiller
05-14-2009, 06:13 PM
Either way, has there been a noticable impact anywhere in our secondary? Other than two veteran safety's coming in, I don't think so.

I'm not trying to discredit Rhodes. I'm just curious as to what he does.
Ha, not trying to but you did a decent job of it anyway. I'm just as curious as anyone. He and Kubiak like Barber right? Okay, so what they liked Harrison too. Mitchell too before they just cut him. Earl. C.C. Brown. Demps came in and was okay and it was a godsend. Now Wilson who I think won't fall off like Demps did but at the same time I see him as a stop-gap player. Best FS on the roster right now? Dunta Robinson. Yup. Put the pressure on son-Gibbs and the young CBs we have to make a good unit out of themselves, they certainly have the potential between Bennett/Molden/Reeves and Quinn the 4th rounder. Make Dunta the deal he wants but play him where he needs to be, no crying about it either.

drewmar74
05-15-2009, 08:45 AM
Best FS on the roster right now? Dunta Robinson.

He's awfully light in the britches to play FS.

I'm not saying, I'm just saying......

badboy
05-15-2009, 09:21 AM
I'm not disputing that some veteran DBs have an internal clock that gives them a strong feeling about when the ball may be in the air, but most DBs aren't just relying on "instinctual feel" to let them know when to turn for the ball. The one thing that will get a DB in serious trouble is looking back for the ball too early. It allows the receiver to get immediate separation, and often results in a big play.

Most DBs are following a receiver's eyes and body language, or have teammates and coaches yelling to them from the sideline that the ball is in flight.

I'm aware that some veteran receivers are good at disguising their facial cues when the ball is arriving, but there's also body language involved, which is harder to disguise.

It's also not pass interference to simply fail to turn around for the football, as long as no contact with the receiver is made past five yards. There is no such thing as "face guarding" in football.

Most DB coaches teach that you only look back for the ball in two cases:

1) When the DB is running stride for stride with the receiver in an interposed position between the quarterback and the receiver. For example, if he's covering a wideout on a post pattern and the WR makes his break toward the middle of the field, if the DB has inside position and is running stride for stride with the WR, it would be acceptable to look back for the ball at that point.

2) When the DB has a specific reason to believe the football is in the air and on the verge of arriving, based on an assessment of the receiver's eyes and body language, or a cue from sideline personnel that the ball is arriving. Thanks for the assist as this is what I was trying to say. I think the new defense will benefit our corners who have the size and speed to cover well and not arrive too late.

badboy
05-15-2009, 09:26 AM
I hope we see our DL and our DBs getting their hands up a lot more than they have in the pass. A pass deflection at the line or by the WR is great and those can often lead to interceptions by another player. Maybe Shane Battier can give them some instructions and use his coverage against Kobe as an example. If you get your hand in their face it's hard to see the ball!I am hoping that our DEs will force QB to drop straight back and get rid of ball quicker and the Dline will deflect more passes. Maybe TJ will do better this season at least I hope so.

badboy
05-15-2009, 09:53 AM
The Texans have only had one secondary coach in their entire existence. Jon Hoke. (though they did get an experienced helper dude last year with Ray Rhodes).

Jon Hoke never had an NFL job prior to working for the Texans.

His best corner was someone that was developed by another team and came to the team as pretty much a finished product--Aaron Glenn. He was a first round pick for the Jets, and had 8 years with them before coming to Houston.

I will be very interested in seeing what a fresh set of eyes does with this group. David Gibbs has been with a couple of NFL teams, including working with Herm Edwards with the Chiefs. Whatever you think of Edwards, he was pretty good at working with DBs.Can you imagine what this team will be like if the D line progresses as it should, Cushing and the new FAs strengthen the LB corps and our corners turn into what they can be? Heck, we might not even need to worry about our safeties? :thisbig:

badboy
05-15-2009, 12:05 PM
Ha, not trying to but you did a decent job of it anyway. I'm just as curious as anyone. He and Kubiak like Barber right? Okay, so what they liked Harrison too. Mitchell too before they just cut him. Earl. C.C. Brown. Demps came in and was okay and it was a godsend. Now Wilson who I think won't fall off like Demps did but at the same time I see him as a stop-gap player. Best FS on the roster right now? Dunta Robinson. Yup. Put the pressure on son-Gibbs and the young CBs we have to make a good unit out of themselves, they certainly have the potential between Bennett/Molden/Reeves and Quinn the 4th rounder. Make Dunta the deal he wants but play him where he needs to be, no crying about it either.Do FSafeties get $40 million contract like corners?

TimeKiller
05-15-2009, 08:51 PM
He's awfully light in the britches to play FS.

I'm not saying, I'm just saying......

At most 5'10'', 180...I'd say he's small to play anywhere but that certainly hasn't stopped him from "bringing the wood likes he does". With the added run stopping potential Cushing brings next to Ryans he shouldn't be making many tackles anyway. I guess I'm still just in the boat that wants to see his speed back to what it was and figure the move to FS might highlight his strengths (highlight hits, ball skills) and cover his weakness (agility if not speed. He looked stiff) while giving a chance to younger guys to step in at CB.

Do FSafeties get $40 million contract like corners? No, but what's the highest FS contract right now? Anyone know?

EDIT:I don't know if it's Bob Sanders of the Colts or not but he got a 5 year, 37.5mil with 20 mil guaranteed. Isn't that close to what Dunta was offered?

CloakNNNdagger
05-15-2009, 09:12 PM
At most 5'10'', 180...I'd say he's small to play anywhere but that certainly hasn't stopped him from "bringing the wood likes he does". With the added run stopping potential Cushing brings next to Ryans he shouldn't be making many tackles anyway. I guess I'm still just in the boat that wants to see his speed back to what it was and figure the move to FS might highlight his strengths (highlight hits, ball skills) and cover his weakness (agility if not speed. He looked stiff) while giving a chance to younger guys to step in at CB.

No, but what's the highest FS contract right now? Anyone know?

EDIT:I don't know if it's Bob Sanders of the Colts or not but he got a 5 year, 37.5mil with 20 mil guaranteed. Isn't that close to what Dunta was offered?

It was Sanders. I don't remember if they mentioned the length of contract or total $$$$, but it is alleged that Dunta turned down 23 million dollars guaranteed.

CloakNNNdagger
05-15-2009, 09:48 PM
When comparing Sanders and Robinson...............can you say PRO BOWL.........Sanders x 2, Robinson x goose egg.

kiwitexansfan
05-15-2009, 11:17 PM
When comparing Sanders and Robinson...............can you say PRO BOWL.........Sanders x 2, Robinson x goose egg.

The only comparison these two have is that they both get injured.

Sanders is a game changer, a player that took that defense to a Superbowl.

Robinson is not a game changer, a player that hasn't taken the defense past BLAH.

TimeKiller
05-17-2009, 01:26 PM
The only comparison these two have is that they both get injured.

Sanders is a game changer, a player that took that defense to a Superbowl.

Robinson is not a game changer, a player that hasn't taken the defense past BLAH.

I think that's an unfair comparison, Dunta was a warrior before getting rolled on. Bob Sanders just gets nicked up a lot. Dunta also came back sooner than expected

Accurate about player status though.

Thing is I think Dunta would be most effective at safety, maybe not quite Bob Sanders because he wouldn't be the whole defense but similar. Maybe he would be happy with being the highest paid safety?

Spled
05-17-2009, 02:48 PM
Now if only they'd bring stickum back.

badboy
05-18-2009, 03:27 PM
Now if only they'd bring stickum back.Uh, our receivers vote NO!

76Texan
05-20-2009, 03:47 PM
Jacques Reeves claims the CBs won't be doing 10 yard cushions any more (http://www.houstontexans.com/news/Story.asp?story_id=5280).

My thoughts (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2009/05/we_interrupt_the_rockets_playo.html).

And a dance or five.

:smiliedance::whip::specnatz::splits::mario3:

And a hail. Like hail yeah.
The Texans hardly gave the opponent a 10 yd cushion.
In fact, they played tighter press coverage than their opponents overall/on the average.

76Texan
05-20-2009, 03:47 PM
Slow footed CB's letting slant routes go for 50 yd TD's.

As with all defensive schemes, you have to build on your strengths and try to circumvent your weaknesses.

In some situations, it is appropriate for the CB to give some cushion. But 3rd and 2 is not that situation. I honestly could not believe how many times our CB's were lined up 10 yds deep in 3rd and short situations last year.
How many times?

CloakNNNdagger
05-20-2009, 03:50 PM
How many times?

Too often!

76Texan
05-20-2009, 03:50 PM
If you do what your coaches tell you to do and you get burned, it's not completely your fault.

If they tell you to sit back and you jam instead and get burned, you're fired.

Last year our coaches would rather give up 8 yards on every single play than risk giving up a 60 yd TD. I disagree with that strategy. But the fact remains that, as a player, if you don't do what your coaches tell you to (even if they are wrong) it won't end well for you.I did not see that!

76Texan
05-20-2009, 03:51 PM
Too often!
Name a few.

76Texan
05-20-2009, 03:55 PM
When the Texans did give the customary 5 to 7 yd cushions, mostly these would be the scenarios:

- They loaded up the box to defend the run, so they wanted their DBs played back a little.
- They blitzed or showed blitz. With 5 or 6 men at the LOS.
- They wanted to lay a trap.
- They stayed ready for the quick short pass and either try to lay wood or jump the routes.

infantrycak
05-20-2009, 03:56 PM
The Texans hardly gave the opponent a 10 yd cushion.
In fact, they played tighter press coverage than their opponents overall/on the average.

How many times?

There are too many folks, myself included, who have observed and commented on it during Smith's tenure for this to be a debate. We have even had multiple threads discussing who was calling the coverage that way Smith or Hoke and that it was obviously a coaching decision or Hoke when have been chewing out DB's as they came back to the sidelines - which did not happen.

CloakNNNdagger
05-20-2009, 04:03 PM
When the Texans did give the customary 5 to 7 yd cushions, mostly these would be the scenarios:

- They loaded up the box to defend the run, so they wanted their DBs played back a little.
- They blitzed or showed blitz. With 5 or 6 men at the LOS.
- They wanted to lay a trap.
- They stayed ready for the quick short pass and either try to lay wood or jump the routes.

First of all, I'm not not a walking DVR. But the 10 yd cushion was not very exceptional with O short yardage need. The scenarios you mentioned still do not justify a giving 1st and 10 in 2-3 yd situations. And BTW, our CBs not uncommonly gave up 5 to 9 yd gains on 1st and 10.........setting up opposing O short yardage situations.

76Texan
05-20-2009, 04:37 PM
First of all, I'm not not a walking DVR. But the 10 yd cushion was not very exceptional with O short yardage need. The scenarios you mentioned still do not justify a giving 1st and 10 in 2-3 yd situations. And BTW, our CBs not uncommonly gave up 5 to 9 yd gains on 1st and 10.........setting up opposing O short yardage situations.
How often were the Texans in short yardage situations where the opponents need 3 yd or less? And how often did the DBs allow a ten yard cushion? I'm pretty sure that you will have a hard time looking for those few situations.

Giving up 5 and 9 yd on 1st and 10? Sure! Too many to count.
But again, they hardly lined up 10 yd off the LOS.
They didn't play 5-7 yd off the LOS as often as the opponents did either.

I only want to dispell the myth that the Texans did or didn't do certain things.
Nothing personal to/with anybody. http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/images/icons/icon6.gif

76Texan
05-20-2009, 07:13 PM
There are too many folks, myself included, who have observed and commented on it during Smith's tenure for this to be a debate. We have even had multiple threads discussing who was calling the coverage that way Smith or Hoke and that it was obviously a coaching decision or Hoke when have been chewing out DB's as they came back to the sidelines - which did not happen.

Sorry, I missed your post!

I'm afraid I do not understand your point, if you don't mind clarify it, thanks.

Are we talking about the 10 yd cushion last year, the last two years?
(I will assume that we forego the first year, what with the change-over in coaching and the 3-4).

I can go back two years and the Texans still played more press man coverage than the opponents overall.

It would take a lot of time for me to break down each play.
But I believe I had spent a lot of times watching the tapes.
All I'm interested in is the facts.

infantrycak
05-21-2009, 07:05 AM
Are we talking about the 10 yd cushion last year, the last two years?
(I will assume that we forego the first year, what with the change-over in coaching and the 3-4).

I can go back two years and the Texans still played more press man coverage than the opponents overall.

It would take a lot of time for me to break down each play.
But I believe I had spent a lot of times watching the tapes.
All I'm interested in is the facts.

Over the last three, or two if you prefer, seasons the coverage has often lined up on or 2-3 yards past the 1st down marker. The WR's have commonly driven off the line with our guys starting there followed by back pedaling only to watch the WR turn just over the line and catch a 1st down reception with no prior contact. Now maybe you are equating Indy lining up 5 yards off the line of scrimmage on 3rd and 7 with our lining up 10 yards off on 3rd and 7 as neither being press coverage, but they simply aren't the same in terms of the stupidity of what we have been doing. There is a whole lot of room for different ways not to press the WR at the line. Our method has sucked even if you are correct and we have pressed more than division rivals as well.

76Texan
05-21-2009, 12:28 PM
Over the last three, or two if you prefer, seasons the coverage has often lined up on or 2-3 yards past the 1st down marker. The WR's have commonly driven off the line with our guys starting there followed by back pedaling only to watch the WR turn just over the line and catch a 1st down reception with no prior contact. Now maybe you are equating Indy lining up 5 yards off the line of scrimmage on 3rd and 7 with our lining up 10 yards off on 3rd and 7 as neither being press coverage, but they simply aren't the same in terms of the stupidity of what we have been doing. There is a whole lot of room for different ways not to press the WR at the line. Our method has sucked even if you are correct and we have pressed more than division rivals as well.
Let me try to go over the short situations in one of the games.
It just happens to be the season opener at Pittsburgh.

1st half

TEXANS ball
3-3 @ HOU 50
Texans in 3 wides. Walter on far left.
The RDB was 8.5 yd off the LOS.
Walter had a big cushion and could have had an easy comebacker for a first down.
Too bad, Schaub connected with Anderson underneath one yard shy.

STEELERS ball
3-3 @ HOU 22
Steelers in 3 wides.
Reeves was 2 yd off the LOS, Bennett was one yd off.
Bennett gave a chuck to the receiver.
Reeves tried to, but didn't get contact as Holmes made a little hesitant move.
Holmes caught the ball for a first down on a quick inside slant.
Reeves was right there though. There was no intentional cushion.
There wasn't any cushion, really.

Texans ball.
3-2 @ HOU 28
Texans in 2 wides.
Steelers' DBs were at least 6 yd behind LOS, and back pedaling.
The RCB gave Walter a 9 yd cushion before he turned to face the ball.
The LCB gave about the same cushion to AJ, then missed the tackle.
The LB Woodley had to come over to push AJ out of bound after the first down gain.

STEELERS ball.
3-2 @ PIT 39
Steelesr in diamond formation (3 receivers in the left slot).
A second TE just behind and outside the strong side TE on the right.
Texans had Reeves one yd off LOS right next to Mario at RDE,
Diles 2.5 yd off on the outside right to check another receiver.
Demps 3 yd off on the left side to check on the outside TE,
and Bennett moved back 5 yd to check on the inside TE.
Both Reeves and Diles bumped the receivers as they came off the line.
Mario got a sack.
Again, where was this mythical 10 yd cushion?

2nd half.

STEELERS ball
2-1 @ PIT 50
Steelers with a lone receiver on the far right (#85 Washington.)
Bennett was right on top off him (inches from the LOS) and got on him right off the bat.
Again, where was this mythical untouched receiver?

Different series, STEELERS ball
3-2 @ PIT 28
Steelers with lone receiver on the left side.
Reeves was right on top of him, one yd off LOS, and stayed stride on stride with him.

TEXANS ball
2-3 @ PIT 19
Texans in 3 wides.
The 2 Steelers' DBs on either far side were at least 8 yd behind the LOS, and backpedaling.
The one on AJ was at least 10 yd off the LOS when he turned.
AJ was wide open.
Too bad A. Davis was called for a false start.

It sure looks like the wrong DC was being targeted here, JMHO.

TimeKiller
05-21-2009, 01:15 PM
Try the Colts game.

BigBull17
05-21-2009, 01:26 PM
There were way to many times I would be screaming at the TV because they needed 4 yards and we would be 7+ yards off the recievers.

76Texan
05-21-2009, 01:38 PM
Try the Colts game.

http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60462&page=3
Start with post #46

76Texan
05-21-2009, 01:41 PM
There were way to many times I would be screaming at the TV because they needed 4 yards and we would be 7+ yards off the recievers.

There were more than way too many times when I saw our receivers, especially AJ given big cushion for easy gains.

Sure, some teams did try to play AJ close at times.

Sometimes they got away with it because of a penalty or a mistaske by the O-line or our QB.

A lot of times they got beat.

BigBull17
05-21-2009, 02:10 PM
There were more than way too many times when I saw our receivers, especially AJ given big cushion for easy gains.

Sure, some teams did try to play AJ close at times.

Sometimes they got away with it because of a penalty or a mistaske by the O-line or our QB.

A lot of times they got beat.

But, we did it to almost everybody. J-Ville's shit stain recievers got huge cushions.

RipTraxx
05-21-2009, 02:15 PM
But, we did it to almost everybody. J-Ville's shit stain recievers got hue cushions.

With the exception of the Cards and the Bengals (more like ocho cinco). Im comfortable with us doing press coverage the entire season. IMO.

BigBull17
05-21-2009, 02:19 PM
With the exception of the Cards and the Bengals (more like ocho cinco). Im comfortable with us doing press coverage the entire season. IMO.

Me too. Lee Evans is another. Bolden is more of a YAC guy, so disrupt his timing. More than not, I don't want a free release.

76Texan
05-21-2009, 02:52 PM
But, we did it to almost everybody. J-Ville's shit stain recievers got huge cushions.

Do you care to do a recap of that game to tell us what kind of cushion we gave the Jags?

How about the Colts, in the same game up there?
Is this a big enough cushion for you?


1st half

Texans ball
3-2 @ IND 37
Texans in 2 wides.
Colts' RCB played back at least 9 yd and back pedaling.
He didn't stop until he got to his own 18-19 yd line.
That's almost a 20 yd cushion.
The LCB played back about 6-7 yd and backpedaling.
Somehow, AJ still got past him by about 3 steps for a 19 yd gain.

76Texan
05-21-2009, 02:53 PM
With the exception of the Cards and the Bengals (more like ocho cinco). Im comfortable with us doing press coverage the entire season. IMO.

I don't know about the Bengals with Palmer in there.
But last year, we played up to the LOS all the way 'til the end.
Even with a big lead.

76Texan
05-21-2009, 03:05 PM
But, we did it to almost everybody. J-Ville's shit stain recievers got huge cushions.

How about the first play of the game the Jags came to town?
On 1st and 10 at our 3, the RCB plaed 7 yd off the LOS and back pedaling.
He was never to be found until long after the play was blown dead.
He didn't stop until he had given a 16 yd cushion thereabout, and that was only because AJ stopped for an easy first down.
If AJ had continued on, he would probably run all the way through the tunnel.

Actually, he did keep going, switching to Walter who slipped through his defender.

Rosenfels had to roll to his left.
If he was left-handed, that would have been a simple TD to Walter instead of the easy first down to AJ.

76Texan
05-21-2009, 03:09 PM
How about the same series, when the same guy #27 R. Mathis gave a big cushion to AJ and kept running toward his own endzone, allowing the 31 yd TD to Andre?

Now, that is a cushion!

BigBull17
05-22-2009, 07:35 AM
How about the first play of the game the Jags came to town?
On 1st and 10 at our 3, the RCB plaed 7 yd off the LOS and back pedaling.
He was never to be found until long after the play was blown dead.
He didn't stop until he had given a 16 yd cushion thereabout, and that was only because AJ stopped for an easy first down.
If AJ had continued on, he would probably run all the way through the tunnel.

Actually, he did keep going, switching to Walter who slipped through his defender.

Rosenfels had to roll to his left.
If he was left-handed, that would have been a simple TD to Walter instead of the easy first down to AJ.

Yeah, but AJ is one of the guys you can give a huge cushion to, not Matt Jones and Reggie Williams. Our recievers made enough plays to justify the cushion, we gave one to everybody and their retarded step brother.

76Texan
05-22-2009, 02:42 PM
Yeah, but AJ is one of the guys you can give a huge cushion to, not Matt Jones and Reggie Williams. Our recievers made enough plays to justify the cushion, we gave one to everybody and their retarded step brother.
But we didn't quite give them much cushion!

The first game.
First half.
We gave them some cushion on 2-19 and 3-13 and force a punt.

How about this:
Check the 2nd qtr around 12:50 on 3-8
Here's what the announcer said, while circling the pairs of players on the field (4 circles):
"Now here's the coverage... Where you're gonna go? You can't go there. Can't go there.
That's covered. That's covered. I mean he (Garrard) has no option.
Wonderful job by the defense right there by the Houston Texans."

It was tight coverage all around on the play that almost resulted in a sack.
As it was, we forced a punt.

With a little more than 3 mins to go, we played one DB up (1 yd), one back a little (about 6 yd.)
But we brought 8 in the box to stop the run.
The announcer numbered them in red for all to see.

With a little more than 2 mins to go, we did the same thing again, loading the box.
I can see that Reeves blew this one. (But he was only 6 yd off the LOS).
He ran with the receiver, and shoulda stay either side by side or a little in front or behind,
since he had help over the top from the lone safety CC Brown.
(Still, Reeves didn't give a big cushion like you thought.)
By the look of his reaction, he knows he made a mistake. He shoulda gotten himself ready to jump that route.

Only when we lead by 4 at the end of the 4th that we gave them some 5-7 yd cushion.
All the while looking to lay a trap.
Greenwood shoulda had that pick with just over 2 mins to play.
That would have most likely end the game right there.
But the Jags scored on Garrard's legs, and not his arms.

And then in OT, we lost because:
1. Reeves couldnít stay with the receiver.
(He didn't give Jones any cushion there, just got beat, are you happy? LOL!)
2. Greenwood missed a tackle on the other side line.

Again, when we got beat, it was with their receivers beating our defenders.
Not because we gave them much cushion.

On the other hand, it was the Jags who gave ALL our receivers more cushions,
at times for no reason but the respect for our passing game.

Some of you guys keep asking me to check game after game.
But really, why dontcha go back and check out the games yourself :):(