PDA

View Full Version : Texans All Access


BigBull17
05-28-2009, 09:30 AM
Anyone get any good tidbits from last nights Texans All Access?

Lucky
05-28-2009, 08:30 PM
I saw parts of the interviews Rich Lord did with Joe Marciano and Frank Bush, and all of the Kyle Shanahan interview. Here's some of what I remember.

Coach Joe
It will be a big adjustment to go from the 3 or 4 man wedge on kickoff returns to the league mandated 2 man maximum wedge. The Texans will consider not using any type of wedge.

James Casey will be looked at as a long snapper.

Jacoby Jones is an "all world" talent, but he must mature as a player or his job is in jeopardy.

Brantley still has too many "moving parts" in his punting form. Turk has eliminated those during his long career.

To make a team as a special teamer only, a player has to be special. John Henry Mills and Eugene Seales were 2 examples.

Frank Bush (caught only the last 5 minutes)
The starting safeties right now are Wilson and Ferguson.

Dunta is expected to return and be an important part of the defense. Bush likes the toughness he brings to the unit.

Mario is only 70% of the player he will become.

Kyle Shanahan (saw Texans Chick representing in the front row)
Has challenged all of the offensive players to make improvements. Says that if they aren't getting better, they're getting worse.

Realizes the Texans must improve in the red zone. Like Bruce Matthews, Shanahan thinks it is about attitude.

Orlovsky brings a similar skill set as Schaub, just a little bigger, stronger, and faster than Matt. Excited to work with him.

Slaton may have gotten too big in the offseason. Needs to become a better blocker in pass pretection. Wants to utilize Slaton more as a receiver, but needs another back to carry some of the load.

A healthy Chris Brown is the perfect compliment to Slaton. Went into the 2008 training camp thinking either Green or Brown would step up as the #1 RB, with Slaton the #2. When Green and Brown flopped (my words), Slaton really stepped up.

Likes Arian Foster's intellegence. Expects Foster to make noise in training camp. Also expects the Texans to carry 4 RBs, 1 FB.

Thinks a lighter, quicker Duane Brown bodes well.

Andre Davis is the fastest player on offense.

David Anderson could be the next Wes Welker. Is partly responsible for Anderson getting cut as a rookie. Anderson has worked hard to improve and can immediatly convert coaching instruction to execution in practice.

James Casey will need to learn multiple positions (including FB) in order to dress on Sundays. At the same time, Shanahan doesn't want to throw too much at him and hinder his development as a TE.

You either practice the zone and get good at it, or practice the wildcat and get good at it. There's not enough practice time to get good at both. Don't expect a lot of wildcat if Shanahan has a say.

Getting behind early forced the Texans into turnovers. Believes that if the Texans grab leads early, the turnovers will decrease.

Chris Simms is now healthy and will win the Broncos starting QB job.

My takes on the interviews:
Casey as a long snapper would be a waste. Casey as a holder on kicks makes sense. He has great hands, and can turn a bad snap into a good play with his feet and arm.

David Anderson will never be Wes Welker. Welker has much more exposiveness and that's why he can uncover so quickly.

The "getting behind early" excuse for the high amount of turnovers is a copout. The Texans actually had the lead against Indy before going Rosencopter. Take some responsibility and say we made some real poor choices in playcalling.

Kyle Shanahan is not ready to be a head coach. But he will be one soon, if the Texans start winning. Kyle has "it". And NFL owners love "it".

steelbtexan
05-28-2009, 10:25 PM
Great recap

Thanks

CloakNNNdagger
05-28-2009, 10:38 PM
Thanks, Lucky.........lots of good info.

Re. Orlovsky, do you interpret "stronger" as in ARM, as I would?

Texans_Chick
05-29-2009, 12:36 AM
My takes on the interviews:
Casey as a long snapper would be a waste. Casey as a holder on kicks makes sense. He has great hands, and can turn a bad snap into a good play with his feet and arm.

David Anderson will never be Wes Welker. Welker has much more exposiveness and that's why he can uncover so quickly.

The "getting behind early" excuse for the high amount of turnovers is a copout. The Texans actually had the lead against Indy before going Rosencopter. Take some responsibility and say we made some real poor choices in playcalling.

Kyle Shanahan is not ready to be a head coach. But he will be one soon, if the Texans start winning. Kyle has "it". And NFL owners love "it".

Hey I was front row for Marciano too. He signed my son's jersey and gave him the silver marker too.

I think Casey as longsnapper comes from Turk likely making the team and continuing as holder because he's done it for so long. They want Casey to try longsnapping so they don't have to carry a TE who just longsnaps and has no other value.

Last year at this time, we wondered if DA could make the team. But he kept making plays in camp and in preseason. It's hard to say what DA is because he really didn't get that many opportunities. Lots of targets on offense, and DA ranks not high on the list.

I think one reason why Rosencopter went Rosencopter is that nobody in the stadium trusted the defense to hold the Colts. Nobody nobody nobody. The best defense the Texans had last year was offensive time of possession. A defense that is not on the field can't screw up. Punting for the Texans was death. You can call it a cop out but that was the reality. You have even a marginally better defense, and the team doesn't have to take as many chances. Certainly, the Texans didn't playcall Rosenfels going Elway.

eriadoc
05-29-2009, 12:52 AM
I think one reason why Rosencopter went Rosencopter is that nobody in the stadium trusted the defense to hold the Colts. Nobody nobody nobody. The best defense the Texans had last year was offensive time of possession. A defense that is not on the field can't screw up. Punting for the Texans was death. You can call it a cop out but that was the reality. You have even a marginally better defense, and the team doesn't have to take as many chances. Certainly, the Texans didn't playcall Rosenfels going Elway.

Winner! That is my thought exactly. I still don't see how a bootleg in that situation was a bad call. It afforded the Texans the possibility of getting a first down and absolutely nailing the coffin shut, while also providing the safety of a simple slide if nothing was there. We all know where the point of failure was. With a better defense, maybe you call a simple run up the gut, watch it get stuffed, and punt. With the crappy defense we had, the staff took a calculated risk in going for the first down with very little downside if Rosencopter just slides. That way we at least had a chance to keep the game in the hands of the better unit. No one expected him to go diving with the ball unprotected like it was.

There is ZERO way I blame the coaches on that one, and have not seen a convincing argument otherwise. You have to play to win, and you have to put your foot on their throats when you have the chance. The coaches tried, and were betrayed by a single player.

Lucky
05-29-2009, 07:48 AM
I think one reason why Rosencopter went Rosencopter is that nobody in the stadium trusted the defense to hold the Colts. Nobody nobody nobody.
The defense was bad last year. And several years prior. But, not in this Colts game. They had held Manning in check since the 2nd quarter. I'm sorry, but that was totally on the play calls and the QB. 3 turnovers in the last 3 minutes handed that game to Indy on a silver platter. The defense did not lose that game. That was on Kub...the Texans head coach and his backup QB.

Which is what bothers me. Take some responsibility for what you do wrong. 30+ turnovers in each of the past 2 seasons indicate flaws in the scheme, the coaching, the execution, or all of the above. Forcing a poor defense to deal with that many turnovers was and will be a recipe for disaster. The defense didn't force the naked boot play call. The defense didn't force an injured Schaub to stay in the Viking game and throw a pick off his back leg. I would like to see a little accountability. That's all.

nunusguy
05-29-2009, 09:34 AM
I think the main reason Rosencopter went airborne was his desire to emulate Elways famous SB play and elevate his opportunities in his upcoming FA offseason by being a highlight playmaker, but it backfired on him. No QB really ought to consciously take those kinds of chances with the ball in the fourth quarter when his teams ahead, even with the Texans D.
Re Dan O, with his mobility he's clearly more of a WC kinda QB than Schaub and with a stronger arm, if he can improve his accuracy he'll simply be a better QB than Schaub.

whiskeyrbl
05-29-2009, 09:56 AM
Hey I was front row for Marciano too. He signed my son's jersey and gave him the silver marker too.

I think Casey as longsnapper comes from Turk likely making the team and continuing as holder because he's done it for so long. They want Casey to try longsnapping so they don't have to carry a TE who just longsnaps and has no other value.

Last year at this time, we wondered if DA could make the team. But he kept making plays in camp and in preseason. It's hard to say what DA is because he really didn't get that many opportunities. Lots of targets on offense, and DA ranks not high on the list.

I think one reason why Rosencopter went Rosencopter is that nobody in the stadium trusted the defense to hold the Colts. Nobody nobody nobody. The best defense the Texans had last year was offensive time of possession. A defense that is not on the field can't screw up. Punting for the Texans was death. You can call it a cop out but that was the reality. You have even a marginally better defense, and the team doesn't have to take as many chances. Certainly, the Texans didn't playcall Rosenfels going Elway.

I disagree on the punting being death in that situation. You are up 27-17, IF Rosenfels slides at the end of that play instead of the "Elway improv" you send the punting team out run the clock to 1 sec. and leave the Colts a long field with less than 3 minutes and having to score twice. I believe we would have held. The D had really playe good all day. The disaster lies squarely on our former backup.

BigBull17
05-29-2009, 10:18 AM
I disagree on the punting being death in that situation. You are up 27-17, IF Rosenfels slides at the end of that play instead of the "Elway improv" you send the punting team out run the clock to 1 sec. and leave the Colts a long field with less than 3 minutes and having to score twice. I believe we would have held. The D had really playe good all day. The disaster lies squarely on our former backup.

In that situation, punting wasn't death, but normally it was last year. We were fine until Sage tried to force Kubiak to make him the starter. That game was Sage and Sage alone.

Texans_Chick
05-29-2009, 11:26 AM
I disagree on the punting being death in that situation. You are up 27-17, IF Rosenfels slides at the end of that play instead of the "Elway improv" you send the punting team out run the clock to 1 sec. and leave the Colts a long field with less than 3 minutes and having to score twice. I believe we would have held. The D had really playe good all day. The disaster lies squarely on our former backup.

I'm not saying it was a smart, rational or sensible thing to do.

I'm saying it is a human thing to do.

Punting isn't really death, but over the course of the season, the offense needed to remind itself of that. To trust the defense to hold after a punt, trust that in some cases was misguided.

The story of the Colts game was not that the defense was amazingly great (though certainly better than they have done in some other outings given Manning and the offensive lines' rust). It was that the Texans were able to get some decent time of possession, including IIRC, a really huge drive in the third quarter. They were playing the typical keep the ball away from Manning game that is easy to say but hard to do. Rosenchopper was taking that philosophy to the extreme.

Pantherstang84
05-29-2009, 11:36 AM
I disagree on the punting being death in that situation. You are up 27-17, IF Rosenfels slides at the end of that play instead of the "Elway improv" you send the punting team out run the clock to 1 sec. and leave the Colts a long field with less than 3 minutes and having to score twice. I believe we would have held. The D had really playe good all day. The disaster lies squarely on our former backup.

Actually. I believe if he had done the Elway slide, he probably would have gotten the first down. It was that close. Oh well. The Rosencopter show is now in the frozen tundra and will probably be backing up Favre. Look for an encore some time this season.

76Texan
05-29-2009, 12:44 PM
Thanks for the recap, Lucky!

The thing about Duane being better at a lighter weight was my contention all along.

Orlovsky, I see the guy having quite a bit of potential.
Soon as he learns the true essence of the WCO, getting the ball off quicker, he should have a better career than Rosenfels (IMO).

Casey, as I watched the Rice/Texas game, is not fast enough to be really effective in the wildcat, except for some yardage situation, or to pull some surprise (which I don't think will happen with most the NFL players ready for the scheme.)
Also, it was my thought that we don't have time to practice the wildcat yet, if ever.

David Anderson may not be as explosive as Welker, but the guy is shifty enough to be effective. We have enough weapons.
BTW, the young receivers (Bell, Jones, Jenkins) have good potential, one may break out and become a contributor, hopefully.

I also expect Foster to gather some attention during TC.

badboy
05-29-2009, 01:55 PM
Rosencopter was the 2nd mistake by Sage that game. AFter the 1st, one of the offensive coaches should have grabbed his face mask and eye to eye said no more boo boos. I don't know if he was trying to make himself look better or just help the team. He should have just tucked the ball and slid. "Protect the ball" comes before anything else. If that is demanded from Jacoby and the running backs, it should have been demanded from Sage.

I like Vontae but if we can move a TE into his spot at FB and keep another player, why not? Maybe Dreesen or Anthony Hill could get some reps at FB? I just don't see anyone beating him out.

If AD is fastest O. player all he needs to do is haul it downfield in the open and Schaub will get it to him eventually. A WR that keeps getting open will get the QB's eye.

Running backs? We will see. A whole lotta maybe going on here.

False Start
05-29-2009, 02:37 PM
Sounds like it was good times. The video on TT.com was pretty lame, it didn't show much.

ObsiWan
05-30-2009, 11:13 AM
I disagree on the punting being death in that situation. You are up 27-17, IF Rosenfels slides at the end of that play instead of the "Elway improv" you send the punting team out run the clock to 1 sec. and leave the Colts a long field with less than 3 minutes and having to score twice. I believe we would have held. The D had really playe good all day. The disaster lies squarely on our former backup.

From NFL.com game center ---
3rd & 8-IND 39: (3:54) 18-S.Rosenfels left end to IND 32 for 7 yards (79-R.Brock, 28-M.Jackson). FUMBLES (79-R.Brock), RECOVERED by IND-58-G.Brackett at IND 32. 58-G.Brackett for 68 yards, TOUCHDOWN. Penalty on HOU-69-C.Pitts, Offensive Holding, declined.

I with you Whiskey... Even if he hadn't made the 1st dn, he would have ended up inside the 35 yd line. That's Kris Brown range. If Rosencopter slides, the odds are good that we put 3 more pts on the board - I don't see where a punt would have even come into play.

Wolf
05-30-2009, 05:54 PM
TC's take
http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2009/05/seen_and_heard_at_houston_texa.html

also I am wondering on the video link.. Schaubs shirt.. I am wondering if "or be square" is on the back of it :smiliedance:

Texans_Chick
06-02-2009, 09:09 AM
TC's take
http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2009/05/seen_and_heard_at_houston_texa.html

also I am wondering on the video link.. Schaubs shirt.. I am wondering if "or be square" is on the back of it :smiliedance:

Take 2 + you are being watched like Geico money:

Commentary and Video of Kyle Shanahan (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2009/06/best_wide_receiver_on_planet_a.html)

barrett
06-02-2009, 04:11 PM
Kyle Shanahan

Slaton may have gotten too big in the offseason. Interesting. I haven't heard this to date. It certainly makes sense to my brain. I would argue that physically he was pretty ideal based on his production down the stretch. I recognize that he didn't start a full 16 but as far as how he was playing when he was playing it wasn't broke'. Mentally
improving his pass pro is a really exciting thought. I wish I could site the instance but there was a play where he's in pass pro on one side and he literally dives across the pocket to get a nick on somebody to buy just enough time to get the play off. I think he's got the right makeup to be a terrific all around back. Never quit, break a big one, team player, smart player good player.

Wants to utilize Slaton more as a receiver. this excites me. One of his first big plays was that touchdown catch along the sideline. I hope to / expect to see more of this in '09.

Is partly responsible for Anderson getting cut as a rookie. Anderson has worked hard to improve and can immediatly convert coaching instruction to execution in practice.

Are you saying Kyle was responsible for Anderson getting cut? If so, can you explain how?


You either practice the zone and get good at it, or practice the wildcat and get good at it. There's not enough practice time to get good at both. Don't expect a lot of wildcat if Shanahan has a say. First, let me say that I love that he's not into running that cheese ball nonsense. Second, love the team philosophy that is founded in Gibbs' style of teaching: Run 4 plays perfectly instead of running 12 pretty well. Wasn't there some other coach who used to share that concept. He won some NFL championships with the power sweep. Vince somebody... he has a statue or a trophy or something.... I forget. Anyway, I think this is the right guy to have on board with Kubiak's concepts.


My takes on the interviews:
Casey as a long snapper would be a waste. I am torn on this. More later...

Kyle Shanahan is not ready to be a head coach. But he will be one soon, if the Texans start winning. Kyle has "it". And NFL owners love "it".

I hate to think that he's gone in the next year or two. I know it's a pipe dream to expect to maintain some coaching stability in this NFL but I sure wouldn't mind it at all! As I said earlier I feel like he brings some kind of rational thinking to Kubiak's mad scientist gut level thinking. I like the combination of these two guys heads together. ALOT.


I think Casey as longsnapper comes from Turk likely making the team and continuing as holder because he's done it for so long. They want Casey to try longsnapping so they don't have to carry a TE who just longsnaps and has no other value.I love the idea of opening up a roster spot but I don't like the idea of Casey not getting down field quickly. If he's on the outside somewhere, it seems like he would have a better chance of being a real threat downfield on the punt coverage. If he's long snapping I don't see him being as much of a factor.


I think one reason why Rosencopter went Rosencopter is that nobody in the stadium trusted the defense to hold the Colts. Nobody nobody nobody. The best defense the Texans had last year was offensive time of possession. A defense that is not on the field can't screw up. Punting for the Texans was death. You can call it a cop out but that was the reality. You have even a marginally better defense, and the team doesn't have to take as many chances. Certainly, the Texans didn't playcall Rosenfels going Elway. I agree. I can't side with Lucky's argument that it was bad coaching. My issue with this game the whole time was the next turnover. Again we're rolling out to avoid pressure and give Sage time to make a safe decision but he's got the ball down by his hip and looking down field. I would argue that in both instances, the coaching, being a rollout are actually GOOD decisions because it is designed to isolate him from the pressure and allow him time to make the correct decision. If anything, on the second turnover in our end, I fault the OLine for not being able to hold up pass pro EVEN ON A ROLLOUT. You can argue that if Eric Winston even half way blocks Mathis he doesn't make it ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE FIELD FROM THE LDE POSITION TO SWAT THE BALL AWAY! I just don't see how those decisions from a coaching stand point are bad ones. Hell, the 2nd and 8 call is a pick that puts slaton in position for a 1st down or at least a 3rd and 1 or 2 but Sage panics from emmense pressure and throws it at Slaton's feet. The Coaches would be the last to blame for that loss.
The young receivers (Bell, Jones, Jenkins) have good potential, one may break out and become a contributor, hopefully. I certainly would hate to be a 6th or 7th string WR on this roster. Unless it's purely from an educational perspective.

I like Vontae but if we can move a TE into his spot at FB and keep another player, why not? Maybe Dreesen or Anthony Hill could get some reps at FB? I just don't see anyone beating him out. I think it's a huge mistake to overlook Leach's value to this team. Shannahan even mentions that he's playing in a style that doesn't suit him ideally. And yet he absolutely excels at it.

Vinny
06-02-2009, 04:30 PM
I'm with Lucky on the bad coaching thing. Football is a strategy game and sometimes Kubiak likes to call the game like an overzealous offensive coordinator instead of a head coach (tempering both sides of the ball), putting the defense in unwinnable situations on far too many occassions.

barrett
06-02-2009, 04:35 PM
I just don't see how you can say that. I don't see how a rollout is overzealous. I would think that you (coach) expect your right tackle to be able to block the LDE at least well enough to keep him from getting a flat out sprint to the QB who is on the complete other side of the field at the yard marker. go back and watch it. It's not bad coaching, it's bad play.

Vinny
06-02-2009, 04:37 PM
I just don't see how you can say that. I don't see how a rollout is overzealous. I would think that you (coach) expect your right tackle to be able to block the LDE at least well enough to keep him from getting a flat out sprint to the QB who is on the complete other side of the field at the yard marker. go back and watch it. It's not bad coaching, it's bad play.It was a NAKED bootleg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3_hi7gOjE0) and everyone was blocked.....Rosencopter didn't get hit till he passed the los. idiotic call to run a naked with the lead, field position, and the clock on your side. We had a 10 point lead with 3:43 left on the clock...AND we were in FG range.

barrett
06-02-2009, 04:54 PM
ohh I think we're talking about two different plays. You're talking about the Rosencopter play. I'm talking about that next turnover where Mathis swats the ball out of his hand on our 20. Even still, I would argue that a naked bootleg is a safe call. The debate is was it bad coaching. I argue that the players made the mistakes on both instances. Sage should have slid. Winston should have blocked. The bootlegs, much like in the Miami game, are designed to give the QB a chance to make the read out in space. It's a good call.

I think you can site the coaches in the Viks game because Schaub should have been out of the game by that point. Of course, we're still in it later when Sage throws it to a gaggle at the endzone. That was operator error as well. Schaub's pick was coaching though. He's way too injured to be in the game throwing off his back foot.

fun link by the way.

Lucky
06-02-2009, 08:51 PM
Are you saying Kyle was responsible for Anderson getting cut? If so, can you explain how?
Shanahan (the WR coach at the time) didn't think Anderson was good enough as a rookie. He didn't think Anderson had the talent to make it in the league. But it was Anderson's ability to add to his game, and turn the coaching from the meeting rooms into results on the practice field, that changed Shanahan's opinion.

I would argue that in both instances, the coaching, being a rollout are actually GOOD decisions because it is designed to isolate him from the pressure and allow him time to make the correct decision. If anything, on the second turnover in our end, I fault the OLine for not being able to hold up pass pro EVEN ON A ROLLOUT. ...The Coaches would be the last to blame for that loss.

With your rationale, any call the coach makes is a good call. It's on the players to execute. What I call Dom Capers logic.

The 1st call was bad. Maybe if he had told Rosenfels to slide if he was under pressure, and Sage had a brainfart. I never heard that the coach had given that directive, though.

The turnover on the 2nd rollout was completely on the head coach. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...won't get fooled again. That was inexcusable. Just as was not throwing the challenge flag in Nashville. Not calling timeout on the fake punt in Jacksonville. Not pulling a limping Schaub in Minneapolis. I could go on...but that's old news.

Still, it's this type of pretzel logic that always finds excuses for the head coach that drives me batty. And it forces the part of my mind that seeks balance in the universe to respond. The Texans head coach is not infallable. He has made mistakes. Mistakes that have turned possible wins into losses. Yes, he deserves credit for the wins this team has achieved over the past 3 seasons. I'm not trying to say that the Texans head coach is the worst to ever walk a NFL sideline. Is he good enough to turn this team into a winner? That's my question.

barrett
06-02-2009, 10:35 PM
Shanahan (the WR coach at the time) didn't think Anderson was good enough as a rookie. He didn't think Anderson had the talent to make it in the league. But it was Anderson's ability to add to his game, and turn the coaching from the meeting rooms into results on the practice field, that changed Shanahan's opinion.
Thank you. I wasn't sure if it was something less obvious.


With your rationale, any call the coach makes is a good call. It's on the players to execute. What I call Dom Capers logic.

I wouldn't think that is my rationale. I don't see how that statement and my statement suggest that line of thinking. I think that the rollout was a good call. That says nothing to the numerous bad decisions that you point out. It speaks specifically to that play call in that instance under those circumstances. As does the second rollout.
The 1st call was bad. Maybe if he had told Rosenfels to slide if he was under pressure, and Sage had a brainfart. I never heard that the coach had given that directive, though.


by your "pretzel logic" the players are infallable. You can't expect the coach to radio in during the 15 seconds before the head set mic shuts off and "coach" his player on exactly what to do. You call the play. In practice you teach scenarios and specifically for the QB you have to trust on some level that he is smart enough to assess the game situation and know what is worth risking and what is not.

I'm going to take Kubiak's defense a step further and say that his starting QB went to the hospital 24 hours before the game with food poisoning. It is possible that there wasn't enough time for him to go over EVERY SINGLE SCENARIO with his 2nd choice QB.

The turnover on the 2nd rollout was completely on the head coach. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...won't get fooled again. That was inexcusable. I don't understand what you're basing your argument on. What facts do you have to support your theory? Is it the fumbles? Was Andre Johnson's fumble bad coaching? Why didn't Kubiak inform Johnson that there could potentially be persuit from the backside on that particular play as he was 15 feet from the endzone? What about those bootlegs was bad coaching?