PDA

View Full Version : Try Something New


gary
10-12-2009, 12:31 PM
Why run almost the same play four different times? I've thought about many different things to try rather the same run play knowing you've had problems running the football all season and your OL flat out sucks. In any old game no matter who you're playing should you run the same play four times in a row when your WR corps is among the top in the NFL and an RB who catches well out of the backfield you have to try something new sooner or later in the game of football. I hope this changes next Sunday.

gary
10-12-2009, 12:49 PM
Also, when Docket is so good agains the run why continue to run the ball his way? Makes no sence to me.

STEEL BLUE TEXANS
10-12-2009, 12:53 PM
Andre wasn't even on the field the last 3 downs. :gun:

El Tejano
10-12-2009, 12:55 PM
Andre wasn't even on the field the last 3 downs. :gun:

Wow...just...WOW!

Spike
10-12-2009, 01:18 PM
Why run almost the same play four different times? I've thought about many different things to try rather the same run play knowing you've had problems running the football all season and your OL flat out sucks. In any old game no matter who you're playing should you run the same play four times in a row when your WR corps is among the top in the NFL and an RB who catches well out of the backfield you have to try something new sooner or later in the game of football. I hope this changes next Sunday.

Not only the last four plays, it feels like we run the same running play to the same gap on every running down. I understand Kubes argument that you have to stay committed to the run to keep the defense honest, but why not try to run to a different area? Over five games, I don't think we have run for more than two yards running up the middle...and we are probably averaging a negative gain.

How many times do we have to see Myers, Briesel or Studdard blown back?

Mailman
10-12-2009, 01:25 PM
Andre wasn't even on the field the last 3 downs. :gun:

That is what I don't understand. At minimum, why isn't he lined up wide to take two defensive players out of the equation? There's no way he's not doubled in that situation, and if he draws single coverage it's a TD.

gary
10-12-2009, 01:44 PM
Not only the last four plays, it feels like we run the same running play to the same gap on every running down. I understand Kubes argument that you have to stay committed to the run to keep the defense honest, but why not try to run to a different area? Over five games, I don't think we have run for more than two yards running up the middle...and we are probably averaging a negative gain.

How many times do we have to see Myers, Briesel or Studdard blown back?The leadership of Pitts on the OL is widely missed. The OL needs a fix up ASAP I think a huge reason why Steve is not running the football like he was last season it seems as if the OL did a better job of pushing the pile to creat holes for Steve last season. Maybe Gary feels like if they have hard time running to one area it might just be the same in other areas I don't know but I say always try something new because you just never know when something different rather than the play you were exspecting to work may get you over the hump.

silvrhand
10-12-2009, 01:46 PM
Why run almost the same play four different times? I've thought about many different things to try rather the same run play knowing you've had problems running the football all season and your OL flat out sucks. In any old game no matter who you're playing should you run the same play four times in a row when your WR corps is among the top in the NFL and an RB who catches well out of the backfield you have to try something new sooner or later in the game of football. I hope this changes next Sunday.

When we run the ball less than 25 times under Kubiak per game, we haven't won a single instance of any of those games...

Kubiak might be right on this one folks.. he's got the data to back it up, just not the linemen to be effective at it. But he should try spreading the formation out, getting some sweeps, some swing passes out of the backfield. There are alternative ways to run the ball besides the screen..

Texan_Bill
10-12-2009, 01:49 PM
When we run the ball less than 25 times under Kubiak per game, we haven't won a single instance of any of those games...

Kubiak might be right on this one folks.. he's got the data to back it up, just not the linemen to be effective at it. But he should try spreading the formation out, getting some sweeps, some swing passes out of the backfield. There are alternative ways to run the ball besides the screen..

Absolutely he should spread the formation out. I re-watched the NFL.com's highlights. All 11 players were stacked just about between the hash marks. That's a terrible formation for this team.

silvrhand
10-12-2009, 01:52 PM
Absolutely he should spread the formation out. I re-watched the NFL.com's highlights. All 11 players were stacked just about between the hash marks. That's a terrible formation for this team.

Hopefully we'll see that more this week, I think we'll see a big difference.. I still think Matt Schaub isn't the QB we need though but I'll try not to start another one of those wars...

:chef:

gary
10-12-2009, 01:54 PM
There isn't any reason the best WR in the NFL should not have been on the field.

lostboy
10-12-2009, 01:55 PM
Absolutely he should spread the formation out. I re-watched the NFL.com's highlights. All 11 players were stacked just about between the hash marks. That's a terrible formation for this team.

You mean we're actually allowed to run the ball in places other than where the defense is:gun:

Texan_Bill
10-12-2009, 01:58 PM
Hopefully we'll see that more this week, I think we'll see a big difference.. I still think Matt Schaub isn't the QB we need though but I'll try not to start another one of those wars...

:chef:

Oh, I'm still not totally sold on Schaub, however I won't join that trane of thought the Schaub lost the game by himself either. Yeah, we don't have the personnel to go into that type of formation.

The other thing I would like to see is; instead of having the I formation with an "H" back coming across in motion is to have three backs set and then moving forward. Look at that final play again. You see Dreessen (I think it is) moving across the formation just as the ball is snapped. He had no leverage whatsoever.

Hardcore Texan
10-12-2009, 01:59 PM
That is what I don't understand. At minimum, why isn't he lined up wide to take two defensive players out of the equation? There's no way he's not doubled in that situation, and if he draws single coverage it's a TD.

Yep.

Absolutely he should spread the formation out. I re-watched the NFL.com's highlights. All 11 players were stacked just about between the hash marks. That's a terrible formation for this team.

That was driving me crazy. We know we can't punch it in that situation, spread 'em out in a 3 WR/single back set. Run that lil' roll out pass to Daniels, throw the fade at least once to Andre, quick slant, quick pitch to the weak side to Slaton while the OL and everyone goes right, 5 WR set like that sneak he ran in against Miami, something different, anything diffferent. Or at least put a back in there that can go over the top, assuming we have one.

gary
10-12-2009, 02:05 PM
So most of us agree on trying anything. Kyle must not agree.

disaacks3
10-12-2009, 02:09 PM
There isn't any reason the best WR in the NFL should not have been on the field. That's for certain, his decoy power alone might make the opposing D-Coordinator re-think his alignment if nothing else.

IMHO - Play-calling and a couple of mis-reads by Schaub (I still think HE could have run it in behind leach on the bootleg) ultimately cost us the game. Matt had a good game, but he definitely was staring down receivers and wasn't good at all when rolling & on the move to his right. (That was always something that Sage, for all his faults, was far better at).

gary
10-12-2009, 02:16 PM
That's for certain, his decoy power alone might make the opposing D-Coordinator re-think his alignment if nothing else.

IMHO - Play-calling and a couple of mis-reads by Schaub (I still think HE could have run it in behind leach on the bootleg) ultimately cost us the game. Matt had a good game, but he definitely was staring down receivers and wasn't good at all when rolling & on the move to his right. (That was always something that Sage, for all his faults, was far better at).Andre draws double coverge most of the time leaving someone open somewhere. As strong and big as Leach maybe he should have gotten a shot.

badboy
10-12-2009, 02:16 PM
Just wait until we have our big old center Caldwell, our big old TE Anthony Hill and our big old undrafted free agent RB Adrian Foster we will get that TD! Just as soon as they can get on the field.

Big Lou
10-12-2009, 02:23 PM
It seems like the pitches to the outside with Slaton put up some yards. I could easily be wrong but it didn't remember many if any at all until this game. I've been wanting to see them run more of them to exploit Slatons burst. Anyone have any thoughts on outside pitches?

Big Lou
10-12-2009, 02:26 PM
The other thing I think they're missing this year is just having AJ long. I know Matt has hit AJ somewhat deep a couple of times, but everytime they go for it even if they don't get it you can really see the defense get nervous and open up a little. Seems like we can run it after just the threat of a deep ball to AJ.

Of course these are observations by a guy with two kids under the age of 2 and 1/2 so you can imagine how little detail I can extract from a game while hearing daddy, daddy, daddy!!!!

gary
10-12-2009, 02:30 PM
It seems like the pitches to the outside with Slaton put up some yards. I could easily be wrong but it didn't remember many if any at all until this game. I've been wanting to see them run more of them to exploit Slatons burst. Anyone have any thoughts on outside pitches?Outside pitches were working early on so I don't understand why they didn't try at least one outside pitch with the game on the line.

gary
10-12-2009, 02:45 PM
Just wait until we have our big old center Caldwell, our big old TE Anthony Hill and our big old undrafted free agent RB Adrian Foster we will get that TD! Just as soon as they can get on the field.Why not give the rookie TE's more chances in the passing game?

cuppacoffee
10-12-2009, 05:10 PM
Yep.



That was driving me crazy. We know we can't punch it in that situation, spread 'em out in a 3 WR/single back set. Run that lil' roll out pass to Daniels, throw the fade at least once to Andre, quick slant, quick pitch to the weak side to Slaton while the OL and everyone goes right, 5 WR set like that sneak he ran in against Miami, something different, anything diffferent. Or at least put a back in there that can go over the top, assuming we have one.


Several teams in the league have developed plays where someone other than the quarterback takes the direct snap, and has an option to run or pass.
I think Miami started the trend last year.

This seems to confuse many of the defenses, don't ask me why.

Something else they are forced to prepare for. I don't recall seeing New England or Indy running this formation, but we are not them.

Do we not have the personnel to develop this type of offense.

I suppose it requires a running threat first with the option to pass. The person would have to at least have some passing skills.

It seems this is a better option when you are one yard from the endzone, at least for us.

Any on our roster fit the bill.


:coffee:

jppaul
10-12-2009, 11:47 PM
Why not give the rookie TE's more chances in the passing game?

The strength of this Oline is in its mobility not its power, which is why attacking the edge was so effective.

Honestly though, the best inside run we have is the QB sneak, it was effective for one yard earlier, don't see why we don't go to that well two times later.