PDA

View Full Version : New "more agressive" D


Vinny
10-01-2009, 10:16 AM
Not improved mind you...but more agressive.

Like blitzing? Texans lead the way in division

October 1, 2009 11:06 AM

Posted by ESPN.com's Paul Kuharsky

No questions arrive more consistently.

When a defense allows a clutch completion without sending extra defenders after the quarterback, everyone wants to know, why didn't it blitz?

When a defense throws the house at a quarterback, doesn't get there and allows a play, everyone wants to know, why in the world did it blitz?

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/post?id=4018

El Tejano
10-01-2009, 10:19 AM
That's what makes everything so nerve racking. The fact that we are blitzing and we only have one sack. Then you look at these other teams that are blitzing and stopping the run and sacking the QB.

Cjeremy635
10-01-2009, 10:30 AM
That's what makes everything so nerve racking. The fact that we are blitzing and we only have one sack. Then you look at these other teams that are blitzing and stopping the run and sacking the QB.

I think it's a lack of effort form the interior lineman. If the pocket is collapsing from the sides, all the QB is doing is stepping up. We need stronger play from that position for sure. (not to mention a handful of other spots on the D)

Mr. White
10-01-2009, 10:32 AM
This reminds me of something that Sean Pendergast said earlier this week. He actually checked all the press conferences of every new DC that got hired this offseason.

All but one were talking about "attacking, being aggressive, being violent, first to the ball" except for one....Mike Pettine form the Jets.

keyser
10-01-2009, 12:46 PM
One benefit to this defense, that I feel I've seen, is an increase in the number of hits and stops behind the LOS. I'd love to see statistics (anyone know where we'd find this type of thing?), but my impression is that we have quite a bit more of that. Of course, it seems like we've also had a lot more of the "breakthroughs" for long runs...

Mr teX
10-01-2009, 12:51 PM
One benefit to this defense, that I feel I've seen, is an increase in the number of hits and stops behind the LOS. I'd love to see statistics (anyone know where we'd find this type of thing?), but my impression is that we have quite a bit more of that. Of course, it seems like we've also had a lot more of the "breakthroughs" for long runs...

without looking at stats, i kinda get that sense as well. We're getting teams in 3rd and longs more often than any other year i can think of. Now, whether it's b/c of the garbage secondary or pass rush, they are converting them too much.

GP
10-01-2009, 12:52 PM
10-yard cushions by our DBs is the culprit, IMO.

QBs and WRs are just hooking up for those little curls and outs that are always there because our DBs are shuffling our season away.

If your DB is up on the WR, the QB has to get rid of the ball. The WR is in the process of trying to break away from the DB and get around the jam at the line, which means he's slower getting into his route DEEP ENOUGH TO CATCH A PASS THAT GETS A FIRST DOWN.

But our DBs are playing off their men and essentially wasting the blitz we send.

TimeKiller
10-01-2009, 12:57 PM
Blitzing is nice and I think it's probably the reason we've seen more backfield stops and the umm..."no stops"...

...but I think two things are holding the D back. 1. firstly I think somebody has to turn the DT situation around. Both guys can't be sucking like vaccuums. That'll improve every aspect of the D. 2. I think the blitzes they've drawn up are poorly designed. Rex Ryan seemed to send the same amount of guys for pressure but what he did was overload the OL, be it up the middle or the outsides.

Texan_Bill
10-01-2009, 01:10 PM
Yo, New "more agressive" D, I know your blitzing more and I'ma let you finish but you still need to learn how to tackle and cover recievers.

dalemurphy
10-01-2009, 01:13 PM
Yo, New "more agressive" D, I know your blitzing more and I'ma let you finish but you still need to learn how to tackle and cover recievers.

From what I can tell, we haven't been in a lot of 0 coverage, so I'm not really going to blame the blitzing for giving up so many big plays. It's execution by the players that is lacking... though I still blame the coaching staff for their evaluation process that has those guys starting for the team right now.

HoustonFrog
10-01-2009, 01:15 PM
This reminds me of something that Sean Pendergast said earlier this week. He actually checked all the press conferences of every new DC that got hired this offseason.

All but one were talking about "attacking, being aggressive, being violent, first to the ball" except for one....Mike Pettine form the Jets.

I heard that too. He said he talked about scheme and getting guys in the right place, etc and never mentioned attacking, aggressive, etc.

Texan_Bill
10-01-2009, 01:16 PM
From what I can tell, we haven't been in a lot of 0 coverage, so I'm not really going to blame the blitzing for giving up so many big plays. It's execution by the players that is lacking... though I still blame the coaching staff for their evaluation process that has those guys starting for the team right now.

Agree with all points.

I like the blitzing but what I don't like is the coverage of our DB's and we've been very sloppy tackling (save a couple of exceptions).

76Texan
10-01-2009, 01:23 PM
One benefit to this defense, that I feel I've seen, is an increase in the number of hits and stops behind the LOS. I'd love to see statistics (anyone know where we'd find this type of thing?), but my impression is that we have quite a bit more of that. Of course, it seems like we've also had a lot more of the "breakthroughs" for long runs...

When you have 5 or 6 men on the LOS instead of the usual 4, of course you're gonna see more stops for losses.

On the other side of the spectrum, if they burst through that first line, they will hit you hard 'cause you don't have enough men back there.

Simple fact of life.

And then when we dropped back, we really dropped back and played softer than Richard Smith's defense, imagine that!
This shuffle dance is worse than the 10-yd cushion, Ima telling ya'.

HOU-TEX
10-01-2009, 01:28 PM
I can dig the blitzing too, but when you give a WR a 7-10 yard cushion it tends to defeat the purpose of a blitz (see Mr. Bennett).

Kubiak stated in his PC that there were players there on blitzes, they just weren't finishing the QB. Well Coach, it's hard for them to finish off the QB when he only needs 1.5 seconds to get rid of the freakin ball.

The Jets can send 7-8 on a pass rush because they've got Revis, Sheppard, Rhodes and Leonard in the back end. We've got Dunta, Larry, Moe and Curly.

Texan_Bill
10-01-2009, 01:29 PM
I can dig the blitzing too, but when you give a WR a 7-10 yard cushion it tends to defeat the purpose of a blitz (see Mr. Bennett).

Kubiak stated in his PC that there were players there on blitzes, they just weren't finishing the QB. Well Coach, it's hard for them to finish off the QB when he only needs 1.5 seconds to get rid of the freakin ball.

The Jets can send 7-8 on a pass rush because they've got Revis, Sheppard, Rhodes and Leonard in the back end. We've got Dunta, Larry, Moe and Curly.

But Dunta is a top 5 corner. :specnatz:

badboy
10-01-2009, 01:35 PM
Kubes said last night that he was going to have the defensive scheme simplified. Hmm our guys are college grads and Okoye is pretty smart..maybe we should draft a dumb ass that can tackle.

HOU-TEX
10-01-2009, 01:41 PM
But Dunta is a top 5 corner. :specnatz:

:mcnugget: I mentioned Dunta because he's the only one that hasn't been a total catastrophic failure to this point. Other than a couple poor tackle attempts.

HOU-TEX
10-01-2009, 01:42 PM
Kubes said last night that he was going to have the defensive scheme simplified. Hmm our guys are college grads and Okoye is pretty smart..maybe we should draft a dumb ass that can tackle.

:spit: Good point!

Texan_Bill
10-01-2009, 01:43 PM
:mcnugget: I mentioned Dunta because he's the only one that hasn't been a total catastrophic failure to this point. Other than a couple poor tackle attempts.

He aint all that in coverage either. Obviously it's in part because of the 7-10 yard cushion, but still.

HOU-TEX
10-01-2009, 01:45 PM
He aint all that in coverage either. Obviously it's in part because of the 7-10 yard cushion, but still.

True, ok maybe I should've listed our back end as:

Larry, Moe, Curly.....and their Mom?

JB
10-01-2009, 01:46 PM
True, ok maybe I should've listed our back end as:

Larry, Moe, Curly.....and their Mom?

Shemp!

Texan_Bill
10-01-2009, 01:49 PM
True, ok maybe I should've listed our back end as:

Larry, Moe, Curly.....and their Mom?

*EDIT, nevermind JB beat me to it*

WesmanTexanfan
10-01-2009, 01:54 PM
Our DTs could use 50 lbs or so, each....

I've never really baught the light/quick DT theory.

76Texan
10-01-2009, 02:04 PM
I can dig the blitzing too, but when you give a WR a 7-10 yard cushion it tends to defeat the purpose of a blitz (see Mr. Bennett).

Kubiak stated in his PC that there were players there on blitzes, they just weren't finishing the QB. Well Coach, it's hard for them to finish off the QB when he only needs 1.5 seconds to get rid of the freakin ball.

The Jets can send 7-8 on a pass rush because they've got Revis, Sheppard, Rhodes and Leonard in the back end. We've got Dunta, Larry, Moe and Curly.
It doesn't matter who and how many the Jets send on blitzes.
They do it the right and simple way.

They would have guys playing tight on the hot receiver or the one closest in the line of sight of the QB from the blitzing point.

They coach their LBs well in coverage situations.
Our LBs are badly-coached in this area of expertise.
(Ryans, Diles, and Cushing are not the greatest coverage LBs to start with).

HOU-TEX
10-01-2009, 02:11 PM
Our DTs could use 50 lbs or so, each....

I've never really baught the light/quick DT theory.

Here's a few of the top DT's in the NFL in tackles right now

Marcus Stroud - 6'6" 310 - 14 tckles
Kyle Williams - 6'1" 306 - 13 tckles, 1 sck
Tony Brown - 6'3" 290 - 5 tckles, 2 sck, 2 FF
Anthony Adams - 6'0" 310 - 8 tckles, 1 sck

Texans DTs

Cody, Shaun - 6-4 310
Okam, Frank - 6-5 338
Okoye, Amobi - 6-2 296
Robinson, DelJuan - 6-3 320
Zgonina, Jeff - 6-2 290

So DT's needing to always needing to be fatasses is a myth.

Double Barrel
10-01-2009, 02:25 PM
But Dunta is paid like a top 5 corner. :specnatz:

Fixed it for you. :shades:

GP
10-01-2009, 03:21 PM
Kubes said last night that he was going to have the defensive scheme simplified. Hmm our guys are college grads and Okoye is pretty smart..maybe we should draft a dumb ass that can tackle.

LOL.

Possibly the funniest post I have ever read. Rep your way, if it lets me.

TheRealJoker
10-01-2009, 04:11 PM
Here's a few of the top DT's in the NFL in tackles right now

Marcus Stroud - 6'6" 310 - 14 tckles
Kyle Williams - 6'1" 306 - 13 tckles, 1 sck
Tony Brown - 6'3" 290 - 5 tckles, 2 sck, 2 FF
Anthony Adams - 6'0" 310 - 8 tckles, 1 sck

Texans DTs

Cody, Shaun - 6-4 310
Okam, Frank - 6-5 338
Okoye, Amobi - 6-2 296
Robinson, DelJuan - 6-3 320
Zgonina, Jeff - 6-2 290

So DT's needing to always needing to be fatasses is a myth.

I would venture to guess that Kris Jenkins, Haloti Ngata or Pat Williams (who are not listed among the top tacklers for DTs would make a much greater impact than the DTs listed above. And a good reason for that is because they're BIG and STRONG enough to hold the LOS.

76Texan
10-01-2009, 04:24 PM
Kubes said last night that he was going to have the defensive scheme simplified. Hmm our guys are college grads and Okoye is pretty smart..maybe we should draft a dumb ass that can tackle.

After we drafted all these guys that were supposed to be leaders at the head of their classes! :thinking:

TheRealJoker
10-01-2009, 04:54 PM
After we drafted all these guys that were supposed to be leaders at the head of their classes! :thinking:

James Harrison may not be the sharpest tool in the shed...but he can play football!!!

HOU-TEX
10-01-2009, 04:55 PM
I would venture to guess that Kris Jenkins, Haloti Ngata or Pat Williams (who are not listed among the top tacklers for DTs would make a much greater impact than the DTs listed above. And a good reason for that is because they're BIG and STRONG enough to hold the LOS.

Pat Williams is listed as 317 and the other 2 are NTs. I understand there will some bigger DTs that are very good as well. I'm just saying our DTs are within the range of a typical 4-3 defense. Ours just suck.

TheRealJoker
10-01-2009, 05:00 PM
Williams' leg may be 317 LOL.

On our depth chart we have two positions... DT and NT.

I think everyone is fine with the size of our DTs at the 3 technique. Although it would be better if the coaches AT LEAST had DelJuan in mainly on run downs because Amobi is far too much of a liability.We dont have the size at NT other than Okam who one play might look like a beast but the next he may look like Jane...against backups in the preseason.

Who knows what he'd look like on a consistent basis against starting OL?

Texan_Bill
10-01-2009, 05:01 PM
I just looked up Doug Smith from the Oilers. I always thought of him as a huge guy. He's was listed at 6-4; 294 lbs.

Texans#1Fan
10-01-2009, 05:12 PM
Dunta is not going to be playing hard unless he gets his money which is NEVER here cause you have not done anything for this team this year or any year. Smith and Kubiak need to go out and spend some money for the secondary. We could also use some DT for the front line. I can see the aggressiveness. But, where is the dedication? They seem to do well on some plays and then they let the 3rd and long go for a first down. If you ask me I think we should fire kubiak and hire mike shanahan. That would be a very good coach for our team. If kub's can't get the team to focus and stop the teams in 3rd and long then he should be let go after this year.

Norg
10-01-2009, 10:49 PM
This all started when we lost Travis Johnson ... and replaced him with cody ......

Joe Texan
10-01-2009, 10:54 PM
We have improved and we are more agressive in letting the other teams running back run his ass off.

ObsiWan
10-02-2009, 12:06 AM
This all started when we lost Travis Johnson ... and replaced him with cody ......

Speaking of T.Johnson, is he getting any significant P.T. out west? I wanna know if we can expect that pick to be a 6th or 5th rounder....

Mr. White
10-02-2009, 07:36 AM
Speaking of T.Johnson, is he getting any significant P.T. out west? I wanna know if we can expect that pick to be a 6th or 5th rounder....

He's still on the injury report. I doubt he's put on pads yet. At least not football pads.

GP
10-02-2009, 08:19 AM
He's still on the injury report. I doubt he's put on pads yet. At least not football pads.

Bing.

That was a good one. LOL.

J. Sean Wonton
10-02-2009, 09:36 AM
Well, I have to say that all I heard on this board was calls for more blitzing, so let's not flip flop and act like we knew it all along.

Mr teX
10-02-2009, 10:06 AM
He's still on the injury report. I doubt he's put on pads yet. At least not football pads.

I've seen him out there for SD, he's not doing much though... as usual...

HOU-TEX
10-02-2009, 10:52 AM
I've seen him out there for SD, he's not doing much though... as usual...

He hasn't played since the first game of the season. He had two tackles before pulling his groin.

Vinny
10-02-2009, 11:06 AM
Well, I have to say that all I heard on this board was calls for more blitzing, so let's not flip flop and act like we knew it all along.
no flip flopping for me. I was one of the few who warned of giving up more big plays if we play an attacking style defense since we had crap tackles and crap S play. You would think that NFL minds would know that if you are weak inside and weak on the backside that you would get creamed using this style of all or nothing play.

Mr teX
10-02-2009, 11:54 AM
He hasn't played since the first game of the season. He had two tackles before pulling his groin.

yeah i know..the point i was ,making is that he's been out already..

HOU-TEX
10-02-2009, 12:02 PM
yeah i know..the point i was ,making is that he's been out already..

Okay, gotcha. To be honest, I was kinda against the trade at the time. Maybe I was wrong....again. Ha, definitely shouldn't quit my day job.

dalemurphy
10-02-2009, 12:29 PM
no flip flopping for me. I was one of the few who warned of giving up more big plays if we play an attacking style defense since we had crap tackles and crap S play. You would think that NFL minds would know that if you are weak inside and weak on the backside that you would get creamed using this style of all or nothing play.

Vinny, you have definitely been warning about this. The problem is that the Texans didn't know they were weak at safety or DT. That's the real problem I have. My argument for an aggressive defense has been consistent. I'll take us giving up some big plays if we make some as well. However, I didn't envision giving up 70% of 3rd and 10 or more. If we can get that number down into a reasonable range, then a big play or two won't bother me so much.

CloakNNNdagger
10-03-2009, 07:35 AM
Maybe we need to take a page out of the aggressive D (http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_13475118#) techniques of the Raiders........works for me.

Apparently, the NFL doesn't like it when men pull hair.

Oakland Raiders defensive end Richard Seymour was fined $7,500 by the NFL for the unnecessary-roughness penalty he received last Sunday for pulling on the cornrows attached to the head of Broncos left tackle Ryan Clady.

Early in the third quarter of the Broncos' 23-3 win at Oakland, Seymour was unable to bull-rush Clady on a pass play. After Clady was tripped up by a body splayed behind him, Seymour reached down and yanked on the long hair dangling beneath Clady's helmet. Clady has declined comment on Seymour's antic.