PDA

View Full Version : Troubling Schaub postgame quotes


TheRealJoker
08-22-2010, 06:10 PM
Lack of urgency is what's been associated with our annual slow starts to the season. We get blown out opening day because we didn't come prepared to play and just get manhandled on both sides of the ball. "It's a 16 game season... no reason to panic", well there is when you came one win away from the playoffs. Maybe if we show up for EVERY game we would win enough to make the playoffs?

Anyways, it just bugs me that it seems we are headed for another complacent slow start that results in losses to start the year because we weren't ready to go full blast.

http://www.houstontexans.com/news/Story.asp?story_id=6300

Quarterback Matt Schaub

(on his thoughts on the game) "I know you'll never tell from the scoreboard, but I felt we moved the ball really well. I was glad to get a lot of reps tonight as we were in there for most of the first half. But the Saints did put a lot of pressure on me and I had to release the ball earlier than I thought. And you saw that one sack."

(on his reaction to the loss) "I don't think we have to panic. We still have two more preseason games to go and I feel we will be ready for the beginning of the season. I know a lot of us here in the locker room feel we could have had more intensity, but I'm not worried. We had a great week of practice. Now all we have to do is make sure we are ready once the real game begins."

gary
08-22-2010, 06:20 PM
The LB's keep going down and Cushing is suspended for the game against Manning this is not good.

Brisco_County
08-22-2010, 06:25 PM
To tell you the truth, I have no problem with this statement. The only problem with Schaub is that he couldn't get the ball to Andre enough, who had a rare drop on the first 3rd down conversion. Even on the naked bootleg, which always gets the ball downfield, he had to check down to Dreessen. But he did move the ball.

So the problem wasn't at quarterback, it was the defense and the two fumbles that were answered with touchdowns. One source of fumbling will be cut, and the other will learn from his mistakes.

What was truly troubling was the defense.

CloakNNNdagger
08-22-2010, 06:44 PM
To tell you the truth, I have no problem with this statement. The only problem with Schaub is that he couldn't get the ball to Andre enough, who had a rare drop on the first 3rd down conversion. Even on the naked bootleg, which always gets the ball downfield, he had to check down to Dreessen. But he did move the ball.

So the problem wasn't at quarterback, it was the defense and the two fumbles that were answered with touchdowns. One source of fumbling will be cut, and the other will learn from his mistakes.

What was truly troubling was the defense.

Our D was so bad that it actually deflects how really bad the O played.

48 total rushing yards??????.............28 of those by Foster on 6 runs (one of the few encouraging performances)

ATXtexanfan
08-22-2010, 06:51 PM
no reason to hit the panic yet, the O looks fine but the D still has to get the qb and stop the run. that fumbled punt shifted momentum. i wouldn't say troubling. the colts are in town game one. they will be ready.

PHAROAH
08-22-2010, 06:54 PM
Defense looked like crap but the offense is ok. I don't like how frank bush manage our defense at all and i never liked the hire as there were other candidates available who were much better.

DexmanC
08-22-2010, 08:00 PM
Our D was so bad that it actually deflects how really bad the O played.

48 total rushing yards??????.............28 of those by Foster on 6 runs (one of the few encouraging performances)

48 rushing yards because the Texans were down by two touchdowns
most of the game. They had to throw A LOT. Our running game will
not steal the show if we're playing from behind all the time (like last year.)

DexmanC
08-22-2010, 08:00 PM
Defense looked like crap but the offense is ok. I don't like how frank bush manage our defense at all and i never liked the hire as there were other candidates available who were much better.

Like Gregg Williams?

Texan_Bill
08-22-2010, 08:04 PM
"We suck again!"


http://buckeyebanter.com/images/football/wesuckagain.jpg

Brisco_County
08-22-2010, 08:28 PM
Our D was so bad that it actually deflects how really bad the O played.

48 total rushing yards??????.............28 of those by Foster on 6 runs (one of the few encouraging performances)

That's good to know. I thought it was 30. I'll sleep much better tonight.

Defense looked like crap but the offense is ok. I don't like how frank bush manage our defense at all and i never liked the hire as there were other candidates available who were much better.

Bush has built up some goodwill with me, so I'm not ready to throw him under the bus yet. For this game, I will blame the players, or maybe this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x28ndoqKGY).

Goatcheese
08-22-2010, 08:32 PM
They were moving the ball well until drops/fumbles killed their drives. Nothing that happened with the 1st team offense really bothered me this week. Some minor preseason hiccups that should be worked out.

Now the defense is a different story. You can fix poor ball handling techniques but there's not a lot you can do to work around getting bullied and stepped on like a snot nosed little kid.

Pollardized
08-22-2010, 09:49 PM
"We suck again!"


http://buckeyebanter.com/images/football/wesuckagain.jpg

Remember the time Bobby Boucher showed up at half time and the Texans won the.....

Oh wait that didn't happen....

TheRealJoker
08-22-2010, 11:02 PM
It doesn't matter how the offense looked or how Schaub performed individually. Schaub is our starting QB and one of the leaders of the team. After a TEAM performance like that he should be disgusted with how the TEAM played. His quotes indicated he was okay with how the game went because things went okay on his part.

He should be upset and ready to light a fire under the team's ass after that performance, not being complacent because he's playing well.

Hardcore Texan
08-22-2010, 11:20 PM
Remember the time Bobby Boucher showed up at half time and the Texans won the.....

Oh wait that didn't happen....

http://buckeyebanter.com/images/football/wesuckagain.jpg

Cut his effin head off!

infantrycak
08-22-2010, 11:27 PM
So you would have preferred if Schaub had said "we need to panic?"

Norg
08-22-2010, 11:44 PM
Its pre season boyz no need to panic

Malloy
08-23-2010, 02:07 AM
Our D was so bad that it actually deflects how really bad the O played.

48 total rushing yards??????.............28 of those by Foster on 6 runs (one of the few encouraging performances)

I'm thinking that time of posession might have something to do with that?

I want to hear Pollard do the post-game talk, I'm sure none of that would be too sugarcoated :)

buddyboy
08-23-2010, 02:17 AM
So you would have preferred if Schaub had said "we need to panic?"

Exactly, what do you expect? "I did my part, the rest of the team needs to really get off their asses and contribute"?

Grid
08-23-2010, 02:27 AM
im actually very happy with his quotes.

he isnt making a big deal of it.. he isnt depressed..he isnt worried..

He has no monkey on his back... he just wants to get back to practice and get better.

JMacaroni
08-23-2010, 03:32 AM
"We suck again!"


http://buckeyebanter.com/images/football/wesuckagain.jpg

That's funny. Momentum, buddies. Shizzle, I hope I'm right.

DexmanC
08-23-2010, 07:10 AM
Schaub is our starting QB and one of the leaders of the team. After a TEAM performance like that he should be disgusted with how the TEAM played.

Peyton Manning was VERY vocal when his team showed efforts like this one.
He'd walk over on the sideline and damn-near start a FIGHT with his own
teammates to prove a point. The Texans have a ho-hum attitude with
piss-poor performances both individually and collectively.

If they make a change at head coach, it does NOT guarantee another four
years of mediocrity. Kubiak is going to force the owner to make a switch,
by way of Reliant booing his ass mercilessly. I was proud of the fans
after the Jets game last year. They all stayed in their seats, and showed
this team how they feel about efforts like Saturday night.

This regime is on watch...

Mr teX
08-23-2010, 07:46 AM
:facepalm: i might just have to sign off on these boards & radio stations until the season is over with the way many fans are jumping off ledges b/c of 1 game...1 game that doesn't even count at that ..

DexmanC
08-23-2010, 08:17 AM
:facepalm: i might just have to sign off on these boards & radio stations until the season is over with the way many fans are jumping off ledges b/c of 1 game...1 game that doesn't even count at that ..

No one's jumping off ledges. This team, a supposed playoff team, should
be PAST turning in BS performances like Saturday. We've seen
games like this for THREE YEARS IN A ROW, and have heard the
SAME excuses for it over and over.

If 2010 is to be any different, it must start NOW. I'm just glad fans
are now burning this team up over it, rather than saying "it's just
preseason." They don't have the track record to use such a phrase.

While it's true wins and losses don't matter in preseason, effort
DOES. You bet Drew Brees gave all he had during his fifteen snaps,
and once his coaches saw it, they took his ass out. If the Texans
players are on the field, they have NO excuses for half-assing.

BuffaloglennTX
08-23-2010, 08:19 AM
Peyton Manning was VERY vocal when his team showed efforts like this one.
He'd walk over on the sideline and damn-near start a FIGHT with his own
teammates to prove a point. The Texans have a ho-hum attitude with
piss-poor performances both individually and collectively.

If they make a change at head coach, it does NOT guarantee another four
years of mediocrity. Kubiak is going to force the owner to make a switch,
by way of Reliant booing his ass mercilessly. I was proud of the fans
after the Jets game last year. They all stayed in their seats, and showed
this team how they feel about efforts like Saturday night.

This regime is on watch...

I have seen Peyton do this as well... In games that count. I don't recall seeing him get in his defense's face in a meaningless preseason game.

It seems that many people expected the Texans to be the bullies against last season's super bowl champs in their first game at home since the super bowl?

GNTLEWOLF
08-23-2010, 08:33 AM
I myself was not bothered by the final outcome of the game against the Cardinals, because our 1's and 2's looked good. This game, however , was a little different in that many on this board were hoping to use this game as a guage by which to measure our team's growth. It may have been a meaningless game in the standings, but it does show areas of concern. If our team was not playing like it mattered, then I'm concerned about their overall team attitude. If they were doing their collective bests, then we are not as far along as we had hoped to be. Excusing the Texans by saying that New Orleans is after all the champs just says that we are happy to be mediocre and it really doesn't bother us that we can't compete against the big boys. It wasn't a close enough game for us to just say,"well it's just pre-season." and act like were were in it all the way. Our 1's and 2's were beaten and made to look like they didn't belong in the same league with the Saints. I'm sorry, I'm not o.k. with that. I'm not about to jump off and tall buildings, nor do I believe the sky is falling, but it should be a big wake-up call to this team.
We are wanting play-offs this year. It has been reported that the team has closed some practices chanting the word"superbowl". Well we've seen what that standard is, and it is high. We are not there yet if we don't get busy. As for it just being pre-season, I remember that last year for this team, pre-season really was an indicater of how we would start the season. I don't want to see that again this year. We should have done better.
Winning and losing should always matter even in pre-season. I'm just saying....By the way, I'm still optimistic about our chances. Thank you all for letting me rant.

DexmanC
08-23-2010, 08:34 AM
I have seen Peyton do this as well... In games that count. I don't recall seeing him get in his defense's face in a meaningless preseason game.

It seems that many people expected the Texans to be the bullies against last season's super bowl champs in their first game at home since the super bowl?

The reason the Texans have a smaller margin for error in the preseason,
with a lot of fans, is because they have NO RECORD of starting a season
better than their preseason efforts. The Colts get the benefit of the doubt,
because they have SHOWN success when the season starts.

The Texans have started THREE CONSECUTIVE SEASONS with a 5-7 record.
Every preseason looks like what happened Saturday. The Texans have
never earned a benefit of the doubt, because they tend to take their
lax attitude in practice and preseason to opening day.

To your quasi-rhetorical question in bold:
We expected the Texans to COMPETE with the Saints.
To SHOW UP. That is where the disappointment lies.

Mr teX
08-23-2010, 08:35 AM
No one's jumping off ledges. This team, a supposed playoff team, should
be PAST turning in BS performances like Saturday. We've seen
games like this for THREE YEARS IN A ROW, and have heard the
SAME excuses for it over and over.

If 2010 is to be any different, it must start NOW. I'm just glad fans
are now burning this team up over it, rather than saying "it's just
preseason." They don't have the track record to use such a phrase.

While it's true wins and losses don't matter in preseason, effort
DOES. You bet Drew Brees gave all he had during his fifteen snaps,
and once his coaches saw it, they took his ass out. If the Texans
players are on the field, they have NO excuses for half-assing.


People are jumping off ledges...Hell, some were doing last week b/c we didn't win that game & b/c we didn't get to see rackers attempt a 50 yd. fg.

Dude, No team is immune from performances like this..no one Yeah, the saints won the superbowl last year & were 13-0 before dallas beat them, but their were multiple games that they should've lost prior to that (washington, miami) b/c the team didn't show up. Hell, even in the playoffs, Minny should've stomped a mudhole in them but, they couldn't get over all their own TO's.

The point is, you're not going to play lights out every weekend, you're just not. So for anyone to be expecting the texans to do that is holding them to an unrealistic standard that really noone in the NFL has been able to sustain.

& I would venture to say that Peyton took Brees out b/c he knows that's he's the most important cog in his system plus he clearly wanted to protect him which is why they ran the ball so much more than they passed while he was in there.

Hervoyel
08-23-2010, 08:54 AM
The thing I see is that against Arizona our 1's and the mix of 1's and 2's that followed pretty much played a perfect game. They rolled over the opposition and then sat down for the rest of the night. We didn't get a chance to see them make many mistakes which is good but a little misleading. They looked perfect but who here truly thinks we have the first "perfect" football team in the history of the sport?

They started out hot and didn't have an opportunity to cool off or get overconfident and make a mistake.

This week they did the exact opposite and stumbled out of the blocks from the start. Sure they did play an entire half but for the most part they didn't get to go in at half-time, make adjustments, and try to come back out in the second half and get back in it. That's not how preseason games work. Instead they had to eventually give way to the backups who inherited a crappy situation and just got some work in as best they could. Nobody on our team looked like they wanted to be there.

Hopefully the starters left New Orleans with a bad taste in their mouths and a desire to not repeat this. Lke Mr teX already said in this thread you're not going to play lights-out every week.

Lets see how they play against Dallas. We've seen them good and we've seen them bad. Now lets see them play into the third quarter as they simulate a real game. I doubt we end up looking as good as we did in Arizona or as bad as we did in New Orleans. I don't see any reason right now to get upset with what I've seen.

Second Honeymoon
08-23-2010, 09:03 AM
There is no reason to panic but there is plenty to be concerned about
the team has no fire aNd it starts up top

kubiak is not a good head coach
nevEr has been and prObably never will

Mr teX
08-23-2010, 10:11 AM
The thing I see is that against Arizona our 1's and the mix of 1's and 2's that followed pretty much played a perfect game. They rolled over the opposition and then sat down for the rest of the night. We didn't get a chance to see them make many mistakes which is good but a little misleading. They looked perfect but who here truly thinks we have the first "perfect" football team in the history of the sport?

They started out hot and didn't have an opportunity to cool off or get overconfident and make a mistake.

This week they did the exact opposite and stumbled out of the blocks from the start. Sure they did play an entire half but for the most part they didn't get to go in at half-time, make adjustments, and try to come back out in the second half and get back in it. That's not how preseason games work. Instead they had to eventually give way to the backups who inherited a crappy situation and just got some work in as best they could. Nobody on our team looked like they wanted to be there.

Hopefully the starters left New Orleans with a bad taste in their mouths and a desire to not repeat this. Lke Mr teX already said in this thread you're not going to play lights-out every week.

Lets see how they play against Dallas. We've seen them good and we've seen them bad. Now lets see them play into the third quarter as they simulate a real game. I doubt we end up looking as good as we did in Arizona or as bad as we did in New Orleans. I don't see any reason right now to get upset with what I've seen.

That's the thing though, we've seen them come out guns ablaze against Dallas & look like they're ready to take the next step..then come out flat in the season opener. You're right, we're somewhere in the middle between the Arizona game & the NO game, but i just think that those looking for something in the preseason to signal that "we've arrived" moment are looking too deep into things no matter what our history suggests. On the one hand you've got Indy who hasn't won squat in the preseason damn near since manning's rookie year & we see what they do, & on the other you've got the preseason champs Detroit who wins them all & still suck.

You don't build a consistent winning attitude in the preseason imo, you build it during the season as you get into the consistent practice-gameplan-game regime. right now,(& you'll never hear a head coach say this) the main thing head coaches want to do during the preseason is get guys in rhythm with the way the team will be run -without getting guys too banged up/hurt. Nothing worse than having your season ended before it even starts.

steelbtexan
08-23-2010, 10:47 AM
Lack of urgency is what's been associated with our annual slow starts to the season. We get blown out opening day because we didn't come prepared to play and just get manhandled on both sides of the ball. "It's a 16 game season... no reason to panic", well there is when you came one win away from the playoffs. Maybe if we show up for EVERY game we would win enough to make the playoffs?

Anyways, it just bugs me that it seems we are headed for another complacent slow start that results in losses to start the year because we weren't ready to go full blast.

http://www.houstontexans.com/news/Story.asp?story_id=6300

Quarterback Matt Schaub

(on his thoughts on the game) "I know you'll never tell from the scoreboard, but I felt we moved the ball really well. I was glad to get a lot of reps tonight as we were in there for most of the first half. But the Saints did put a lot of pressure on me and I had to release the ball earlier than I thought. And you saw that one sack."

(on his reaction to the loss) "I don't think we have to panic. We still have two more preseason games to go and I feel we will be ready for the beginning of the season. I know a lot of us here in the locker room feel we could have had more intensity, but I'm not worried. We had a great week of practice. Now all we have to do is make sure we are ready once the real game begins."

This is SOS/New year.

The good teams always kick the Texans butts when it counts. Hopefully this yr will be different. So far it doesn't look promising.

Rey
08-23-2010, 10:51 AM
I'm not going to make any excuses for why the Texans looked bad. They just did. Before the first snap, it just didn't seem like they were as hype for the game as they were for the one last week. Not sure why that is, but that's just the impression I got.

Mr teX
08-23-2010, 11:12 AM
I'm not going to make any excuses for why the Texans looked bad. They just did. Before the first snap, it just didn't seem like they were as hype for the game as they were for the one last week. Not sure why that is, but that's just the impression I got.

Probably had something to do with the fact that they'd practiced with this team for 2 days prior to the actual game & they were on the road...Kind of the whole "let's hit somebody else" type thing you get when teammates are hitting each other everyday until the 1st preseason game.

steelbtexan
08-23-2010, 11:28 AM
Probably had something to do with the fact that they'd practiced with this team for 2 days prior to the actual game & they were on the road...Kind of the whole "let's hit somebody else" type thing you get when teammates are hitting each other everyday until the 1st preseason game.

Excuse number 1.

The Saints didn't seem to suffer a lapse in intensity.

Maybe the Texans just aren't as good as everybody on this MB thinks they are.

That's what scares me. The thought of another medicore yr stinks.

Mr teX
08-23-2010, 11:51 AM
Excuse number 1.

The Saints didn't seem to suffer a lapse in intensity.

Maybe the Texans just aren't as good as everybody on this MB thinks they are.

That's what scares me. The thought of another medicore yr stinks.

It was their home opener, of course they're gonna be amped... & If you're comparing them to the SB champs, then yes they aren't as good as them....noone is until the saints get beat in the playoffs that is.

Yankee_In_TX
08-23-2010, 11:54 AM
I'm worried about audio from guys like Winston saying 'we were tired and wanted to go home.'

WTF? THAT worries me.

gtexan02
08-23-2010, 11:56 AM
I'm worried about audio from guys like Winston saying 'we were tired and wanted to go home.'

WTF? THAT worries me.

Did he seriously say that?

eriadoc
08-23-2010, 12:29 PM
i might just have to sign off on these boards & radio stations until the season is over with the way many fans are jumping off ledges b/c of 1 game...1 game that doesn't even count at that ..

The game doesn't count. The result doesn't count. The missed tackles count. The lack of effort counts. Those things count because they're indicative of the team's mind set and discipline level. The DL getting manhandled counts, because we have no reason to believe they'll suddenly start manhandling the other team's OL once the games start for real.

Indications count.

badboy
08-23-2010, 12:43 PM
This Oline worries me. No one has stood up and said this is my position, even the tackles. It is like we have a line of "well, I'll play until someone else comes along." Free Agent Smith looks so-so and if he is a back up this season he is over paid for what he is doing. Where were our WRs other than David Andersen? The defensive line was worse than the Oline. I expect a huge improvement next week.

HTown2ATX
08-23-2010, 12:44 PM
OMG! It's the same effing argument about pre-season games... :gun:

I agree with DexmanC on his basis. I'm not jumping off a ledge.....hell...wearing my Texans gear at work as I type right now (and I wish I had the luxury of hearing bad Houston radio over bad Austin radio.....already tired of the Longhorns....jeez). I will say this, last year the "it's just pre-season" camp kept bashing in anyones head who said anything as it was "just pre-season". Remember how Adrian Peterson ran all over us and all the "it's just pre-season" brigade basically told anyone with a different opnion to STFU? Well, that turned out to be a problem all season huh? But hey, let's keep chalking all that up to "it's just pre-season"? What's that definition of insanity?....

Now, I get it that some people act like it's over, it's not and I am not in the "fire everyone now" freak out camp, but I'm damn sure concerned after seeing that last game. I still believe we are going to the playoffs and have talked to much trash to co-workers, friends and family to back off that now anyway, but damn, there is need to be concerned.

No, I didn't expect the Texans to go into N.O. and just beat down the Saints, but I didn't think I'd see them get their lunch money stolen either. It was like their 1st day in prison and they just got thrown in the cell with Bubba.

For goodness sakes, unless I am mistaken, didn't they pull their 1's on offense and we still had our 1's out there on Defense and still got smoked?

We should be expecting to at least HANG with the Saints no matter when we play with the hype around this team. So what is was vanilla defense....they were up against vanilla offense....and still got smashed....fail

Makes me think either;

The Cards are really awful

We just had a typical let down game

or

They melted under pressure.

Again, don't think the season is over, but I am not wearing rose colored glasses either and just chalking it up to "pre-season".

OP: DexmanC
We expected the Texans to COMPETE with the Saints.
To SHOW UP. That is where the disappointment lies.


exactly!

:fans:

The1ApplePie
08-23-2010, 12:58 PM
Like Gregg Williams?

Makes me think:

Did we interview Sean Payton for our head coaching job in 2005 or not?

DexmanC
08-23-2010, 01:06 PM
Makes me think:

Did we interview Sean Payton for our head coaching job in 2005 or not?

All I know is that we did dummy interviews while picking Frank Bush
all along, when Gregg Williams was a free agent DC who made the
Saint's defense actually contribute to the team with takeaways and
scoring, in the same season we passed on him to give Bush his
first job.

Gary Kubiak: "We're good with the guys we got."

Well, it's time to prove it.

Second Honeymoon
08-23-2010, 01:12 PM
The regime didn't want to pay the money Gregg was going to get
and neither were the saints so Payton pays him extra out of his own pocket
now that is a coach that wants to win
with kubiak it's about kids and competing
screw competing....it's time to win

drs23
08-23-2010, 01:15 PM
The regime didn't want to pay the money Gregg was going to get
and neither were the saints so Payton pays him extra out of his own pocket
now that is a coach that wants to win
with kubiak it's about kids and competing
screw competing....it's time to win

What? Never heard that before and it seems as though it would be common knowlege if true. Got any facts to back that statement up. Hell, forget facts, ya got a link of any kind?

DexmanC
08-23-2010, 01:20 PM
What? Never heard that before and it seems as though it would be common knowlege if true. Got any facts to back that statement up. Hell, forget facts, ya got a link of any kind?

It is true. Google the story. It was well publicized last season. Sean Payton made that
deal happen. $250,000 out of his own pocket to win. Here is your link (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/08/payton-reflects-on-decision-to-give-up-250000-for-williams/).

Yankee_In_TX
08-23-2010, 01:25 PM
Did he seriously say that?

Pretty much, they keep playing the sound bite on 610.

drs23
08-23-2010, 01:26 PM
My apologies to SH to the tune of 250K. Didn't know that.

OK then: McNair's cheap, Kubiak sucks, clean house and raise ticket prices :smooch:

Second Honeymoon
08-23-2010, 01:41 PM
My apologies to SH to the tune of 250K. Didn't know that.

OK then: McNair's cheap, Kubiak sucks, clean house and raise ticket prices :smooch:

It was a good investment for Payton
he got bonuses and has set himself up for huge future paydays

it's called being willing to take a risk..look at the onside kick in the superbowl coming out of halftime. Taking risks is not something we have seen much from our Texans.

And I shouldn't call McNair cheap but he hasn't done enough to bring quality players in via free agency. He does a pretty good job in retaining but we need another veteran voice and leadership in our locker room

Texas T
08-23-2010, 02:13 PM
It was a good investment for Payton
he got bonuses and has set himself up for huge future paydays

it's called being willing to take a risk..look at the onside kick in the superbowl coming out of halftime. Taking risks is not something we have seen much from our Texans.
And I shouldn't call McNair cheap but he hasn't done enough to bring quality players in via free agency. He does a pretty good job in retaining but we need another veteran voice and leadership in our locker room

I seem to recall a halfback pass last year...Oh I bet you meant risks that actually work.

infantrycak
08-23-2010, 02:18 PM
The regime didn't want to pay the money Gregg was going to get
and neither were the saints so Payton pays him extra out of his own pocket
now that is a coach that wants to win
with kubiak it's about kids and competing
screw competing....it's time to win

This again? Bush improved the Texans D far more than Williams did the Saints D. But I guess any opportunity to make a cheap comment.

spurstexanstros
08-23-2010, 02:28 PM
So you would have preferred if Schaub had said "we need to panic?"

I agree...I mean cmon between this thread and the "unspoken messages" thread I am begginning to wonder if some of us fans are reading way too much into things or the battle red koolaid's side effects include the ability to mind read. It is preseason the offense looked decent Schaub was 8-10 for 100+ yards. Shoot my 5 yr old cant hit the toilet with that accuracy.

I think the run game looked good,, scored td in red zone... DA, dreesen , Grahm looked good.

Its preseason....leave the mindreading and second guessing till after the colts game.

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 02:40 PM
I myself was not bothered by the final outcome of the game against the Cardinals, because our 1's and 2's looked good. This game, however , was a little different in that many on this board were hoping to use this game as a guage by which to measure our team's growth. It may have been a meaningless game in the standings, but it does show areas of concern. If our team was not playing like it mattered, then I'm concerned about their overall team attitude. If they were doing their collective bests, then we are not as far along as we had hoped to be. Excusing the Texans by saying that New Orleans is after all the champs just says that we are happy to be mediocre and it really doesn't bother us that we can't compete against the big boys. It wasn't a close enough game for us to just say,"well it's just pre-season." and act like were were in it all the way. Our 1's and 2's were beaten and made to look like they didn't belong in the same league with the Saints. I'm sorry, I'm not o.k. with that. I'm not about to jump off and tall buildings, nor do I believe the sky is falling, but it should be a big wake-up call to this team.


I like your post. I understand what you are saying. I just want to remind you, this is the preseason. Winning the game isn't the goal when the team steps on the field. Gary's disappointed how the game turned out, Matt's dissappointed, we're all disappointed.

But I guarantee you had this been a regular season game, things would have played out differently. By both teams, I'm not so naive, to believe the Saints gave us their best.

But this is the preseason, the goal is to get your guys some snaps, and see where you are at. We did that, lost another LB, and a WR... we also found out if Trindon Holliday can't make it, we've got some damn good options.

Even in our worst game of 2009, we stymied what eventually became the #1 rushing attack for 3 Qtrs. We also held the #1 rushing attack at the time to almost nothing. From week 4 on, we were a totally different team than what we saw in the preseason through week 3.

I think the same thing will happen in 2010, except we'll morph in week1.

I know that's a lot of wishing and hoping, But this is the preseason.

datchapin
08-23-2010, 02:43 PM
About his first quote where he finishes. You saw the sack. Correct me if I'm wrong, but he had plenty of time on that sack didn't he? I mean at least 3 secs. I mean, am I crazy in thinking that sack might have been avoidable by getting rid of the ball quicker?

Norg
08-23-2010, 02:45 PM
TBH i would be tired 2 back to back road games in pre season yeah its pre season the starters are not going to go all out they just wanna get sweety before the big dance

i think they will play better at home aganist a team they will see in the RG season alla Cowgirls

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 03:14 PM
The game doesn't count. The result doesn't count. The missed tackles count. The lack of effort counts. Those things count because they're indicative of the team's mind set and discipline level. The DL getting manhandled counts, because we have no reason to believe they'll suddenly start manhandling the other team's OL once the games start for real.

Indications count.

I agree with this, more or less. However I won't go so far as say there was a lack of effort. It takes effort for those guys to do what they do. That's why they are there, & I'm watching them on TV.


But even in the regular season 2009, I would be surprised if we could come up with one game where our DL manhandled anybody. We played the run as a team, the DL doing their thing, and the LBs doing their thing.

Our LBs were not in attack mode Saturday night, they weren't playing downhill. They were on their heels, waiting for something to happen.

I'm not worried about it, because we weren't playing like we had. I'm sure there was a reason for that.

I don't believe we went into the game planning on winning. At least I hope we didn't. We should have been seeing how this formation looked against that package, how this combo looked in that situation, and things like that.

I sure as hell hope we didn't have a game plan for this game, instead, we should have been working on pieces of our game plan for Sept 12.

If we look like this on opening day, then we've got a problem.

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 03:22 PM
Remember how Adrian Peterson ran all over us and all the "it's just pre-season" brigade basically told anyone with a different opnion to STFU? Well, that turned out to be a problem all season huh? But hey, let's keep chalking all that up to "it's just pre-season"? What's that definition of insanity?....

exactly!

:fans:

Wrong,

We did not have a problem agains the run all season long. We were top ten against the run, including those ridiculous first three games.

& Thomas Jones and Leon Washington had like 6 yards rushing at the end of the third Qtr.

CJ was getting his ass handed to him for most of the game, he just broke off a couple of big runs a few times.

We just needed to find a way to play consistently, and the preseason was a poor barometer of where we were against the run.

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 03:27 PM
it's called being willing to take a risk..look at the onside kick in the superbowl coming out of halftime. Taking risks is not something we have seen much from our Texans.


Oh, now Kubiak doesn't take risks?

I think hiring Kid Shanahan was a risk, holding out for Bush was a risk, putting Carr on his back was a risk, and that half-back pass was a risk...

Somethings worked out, somethings didn't, that's the way it goes with risks.

Dwade
08-23-2010, 05:42 PM
Oh, now Kubiak doesn't take risks?

I think hiring Kid Shanahan was a risk, holding out for Bush was a risk, putting Carr on his back was a risk, and that half-back pass was a risk...

Somethings worked out, somethings didn't, that's the way it goes with risks.

True. Payton is just a much better coach, there is no way around that.

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 05:43 PM
I will say this, last year the "it's just pre-season" camp kept bashing in anyones head who said anything as it was "just pre-season".

Remember how Adrian Peterson ran all over us and all the "it's just pre-season" brigade basically told anyone with a different opnion to STFU?

Well, that turned out to be a problem all season huh?

But hey, let's keep chalking all that up to "it's just pre-season"?

What's that definition of insanity?....



Wrong,

We did not have a problem agains the run all season long. We were top ten against the run, including those ridiculous first three games.

& Thomas Jones and Leon Washington had like 6 yards rushing at the end of the third Qtr.

CJ was getting his ass handed to him for most of the game, he just broke off a couple of big runs a few times.

We just needed to find a way to play consistently, and the preseason was a poor barometer of where we were against the run.

To elaborate on what I said earlier. I ran the numbers when I got home, and here is how "bad" we did against the run the first three games, which the consensus believe were our worst.

Jets:
Thomas Jones carried the ball 19 times.
3 were for 0 yards or less (15%)
8 were for 1 yard or less (42%)
15 were for 3 yards or less (79%)

Only 2 carries went for more than 5 yards (38 & 39 yards)

He had a total of 12 yards going into the 4th Qtr.

Leon Washington did have a good game, gaining 60 yards on 15 carries. (56 yards going into the 4th).


Tennessee:
Chris Johnson had 17 carries
7 for 0 or less (41%)
4 plays over 10 yards (57, 16, 11, 91)

Jacksonville:
MJD had 23 carries
6 were for 0 or less (26%)
13 for 3 yards or less (56%)
6 plays of 5+ (26%)
Only 2 went for more than 10 yards, only 1 went for more than 11 yards (61 yards)

We gave up some big plays, but we were playing the run very well, playing on their side of the L.O.S. for much of the games. All we were lacking was consistency, which we picked up as the year went on. This, was after looking very, very bad in the preseason.

So what we saw Saturday, is not indicative of what we will see once the regular season starts. Nothing at all like what we know these guys can do.

What did you think of Demeco, Cushing, or Pollard last night? Did any of those guys look like the guys we saw in the regular season?

I don't think it was a matter of Kubiak not getting them amped up to play, I think it is a matter of it being the preseason.

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 05:51 PM
True. Payton is just a much better coach, there is no way around that.

That's one way to look at it.

With less to work with, and in the same amount of time, Kubiak has built an offense that is just as good as the Saints, & Kubiak has built a defense that is better than the Saints.

& we are younger.

We haven't won as many games, but that's coming.

rmartin65
08-23-2010, 06:07 PM
That's one way to look at it.

With less to work with, and in the same amount of time, Kubiak has built an offense that is just as good as the Saints, & Kubiak has built a defense that is better than the Saints.

& we are younger.

We haven't won as many games, but that's coming.

I like the team enthusiasm, but I am not comfortable saying this yet.

I am not delving into stats here, but I am going to go out on a limb- Payton (&Co.) has assembled a better team than Kubiak (&CO.), in the same amount of time. They won the super bowl. Their offense is better, both through the air and on the ground. Their D forced more turnovers. While the Texans may be on the verge of being better than the Saints, we cannot say that the Texans are better than the Saints.

JB
08-23-2010, 06:08 PM
I like the team enthusiasm, but I am not comfortable saying this yet.

I am not delving into stats here, but I am going to go out on a limb- Payton (&Co.) has assembled a better team than Kubiak (&CO.), in the same amount of time. They won the super bowl. Their offense is better, both through the air and on the ground. Their D forced more turnovers. While the Texans may be on the verge of being better than the Saints, we cannot say that the Texans are better than the Saints.

Agree with this, but will add the stipulation that Payton had a whole lot more to work with when he arrived.

rmartin65
08-23-2010, 06:10 PM
Agree with this, but will add the stipulation that Payton had a whole lot more to work with when he arrived.

I grudgingly accept this. These two teams drafted 1st and 2nd in that draft. One just won the Super Bowl, the other is yet to make the play offs.

JB
08-23-2010, 06:14 PM
I grudgingly accept this. These two teams drafted 1st and 2nd in that draft. One just won the Super Bowl, the other is yet to make the play offs.

Yep. But the Saints had a huge qb problem, (as did we), but a lot of injuries led to their dismal 2005 season. Health and a few additions put them over the top. he Texans were a healthy team in 2005, but not a good one.

infantrycak
08-23-2010, 06:19 PM
Yep. But the Saints had a huge qb problem, (as did we), but a lot of injuries led to their dismal 2005 season. Health and a few additions put them over the top. he Texans were a healthy team in 2005, but not a good one.

They were a team pulling consistent 8-8, 9-7 seasons and then Katrina hit as well so they had to play everything as an away game while trying to rebuild lives. Yes they had the 2nd pick but that was a fluke.

JB
08-23-2010, 06:27 PM
They were a team pulling consistent 8-8, 9-7 seasons and then Katrina hit as well so they had to play everything as an away game while trying to rebuild lives. Yes they had the 2nd pick but that was a fluke.

Yes, they were a much better team than that season showed.

Second Honeymoon
08-23-2010, 06:27 PM
Are we honestly rationalizing New Orleans' ascending the NFL ladder faster than the Texans and using Katrina as an excuse on why NewOrleans has turned things around faster?

Saints turned it around because they made better decisions on the field, in the draft war room, and in targeting and acquiring outside talent via FA and trades

it's that simple
both teams stunk and one team pulled out of it
stop making excuses for Kubiak and their inability to finish

JB
08-23-2010, 06:30 PM
Are we honestly rationalizing New Orleans' ascending the NFL ladder faster than the Texans and using Katrina as an excuse on why NewOrleans has turned things around faster?

Saints turned it around because they made better decisions on the field, in the draft war room, and in targeting and acquiring outside talent via FA and trades

it's that simple
both teams stunk and one team pulled out of it
stop making excuses for Kubiak and their inability to finish

Dude, go back and look at the 2005 Saints roster and compare it to the 2005 Texans. Pull off your hate colored glasses and take a look at reality.

Lucky
08-23-2010, 06:41 PM
Yep. But the Saints had a huge qb problem, (as did we), but a lot of injuries led to their dismal 2005 season. Health and a few additions put them over the top.
The Saints have only one starter (Will Smith) who started for the team in 2005. Just as the Texans only have one starter (Andre Johnson) who started for the team in 2005.

Both teams have been almost totally remade since 2005. One team just has had more success.

Second Honeymoon
08-23-2010, 06:46 PM
The Saints have had massive turnover since 3-13
they were a bad football team and turned it around

we were in similar situations
they were just more aggressive and much much more effective
and they won a super bowl and went to two NFC championship games
while we are rewarding losing records

it's that simple... Stop acting the 05 Saints were the 85 Bears talent-wise

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 06:48 PM
I like the team enthusiasm, but I am not comfortable saying this yet.

I am not delving into stats here, but I am going to go out on a limb- Payton (&Co.) has assembled a better team than Kubiak (&CO.), in the same amount of time. They won the super bowl. Their offense is better, both through the air and on the ground. Their D forced more turnovers. While the Texans may be on the verge of being better than the Saints, we cannot say that the Texans are better than the Saints.

I didn't say the Texans are a better team. I said our offense is just as good, and our defense is better. Both statements are true.

JB
08-23-2010, 06:52 PM
The Saints have only one starter (Will Smith) who started for the team in 2005. Just as the Texans only have one starter (Andre Johnson) who started for the team in 2005.

Both teams have been almost totally remade since 2005. One team just has had more success.

And how does their depth figure into it? How many bench players in 2005 are still with the Saints? How many with the Texans?

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 06:56 PM
Are we honestly rationalizing New Orleans' ascending the NFL ladder faster than the Texans and using Katrina as an excuse on why NewOrleans has turned things around faster?

Saints turned it around because they made better decisions on the field, in the draft war room, and in targeting and acquiring outside talent via FA and trades

it's that simple
both teams stunk and one team pulled out of it
stop making excuses for Kubiak and their inability to finish

Which draft decision was better?
Their 1st round pick in 2006? Reggie over Mario?

Their 2nd round pick in 2006? Harper over Demeco?

Their 3rd round pick in 2006? None vs Eric Winston?

Their 4th round pick in 2006? Jahri Evans over Owen Daniels?

Their 5th round pick in 2006? Rob Ninchovich vs none?

Their 6th round pick in 2006? Haas or Lay vs Wali Lundy?

Their 7th round pick in 2006? Strief/Colston vs David Anderson?



& Which FA would you rather we have picked up? Sharper over Pollard?

c'mon.

rmartin65
08-23-2010, 06:57 PM
I didn't say the Texans are a better team. I said our offense is just as good, and our defense is better. Both statements are true.

I'm sorry, I dont understand. If our offenses were equal, then that side of the ball are equal. If our D is better, then our team is better. Unless you think their special teams are that much better than the Texans?

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 07:06 PM
I'm sorry, I dont understand. If our offenses were equal, then that side of the ball are equal. If our D is better, then our team is better. Unless you think their special teams are that much better than the Texans?

THere are other things that go into a team. Chemistry, Maturity, Leadership, Coaching...

Dwade
08-23-2010, 07:08 PM
I didn't say the Texans are a better team. I said our offense is just as good, and our defense is better. Both statements are true.

Nope on the offense. We weren't even top 10 in scoring last year, Saints were 1st. While we did have a ton of yards, we didn't turn them into points like the Saints did.

Defense - This is close, but the Saints cause a ton of turnovers that help them win games.

I don't like the Saints, but it's the truth.

TEXANRED
08-23-2010, 07:21 PM
"We suck again!"


http://buckeyebanter.com/images/football/wesuckagain.jpg

Again?

rmartin65
08-23-2010, 07:23 PM
THere are other things that go into a team. Chemistry, Maturity, Leadership, Coaching...

Why arent you counting those on each side of the ball? I am. Brees is a great leader, in my opinion better than anyone the Texans have. I think their OL works together better than the Texans'. The things you listed are part of the game, and should be added when thinking who is better than who.

All this said, I think the Texans have a good shot at the playoffs, despite the tough schedule.

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 08:17 PM
Nope on the offense. We weren't even top 10 in scoring last year, Saints were 1st. While we did have a ton of yards, we didn't turn them into points like the Saints did.

Defense - This is close, but the Saints cause a ton of turnovers that help them win games.

I don't like the Saints, but it's the truth.

We were top 10 in scoring.

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 08:20 PM
Why arent you counting those on each side of the ball? I am. Brees is a great leader, in my opinion better than anyone the Texans have. I think their OL works together better than the Texans'. The things you listed are part of the game, and should be added when thinking who is better than who.

All this said, I think the Texans have a good shot at the playoffs, despite the tough schedule.

I'm agreeing with you on everything here. They have those things on both sides of the ball, we don't.

That's why I'm saying they have a better team.

Parts of our team, is as good if not better than parts of their team. As a unit, they got us beat.

Dwade
08-23-2010, 08:23 PM
We were top 10 in scoring.

Actually we were 10. I thought we were 11 or 12, but it's very close.

Source - http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=SCORING&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2009&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go

Still, the Saints scored 7 more points a game than us. That is unacceptable being that we had the 4th most yards per game.

Source - http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=TOTAL_YARDS&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2009&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go

JB
08-23-2010, 08:38 PM
Actually we were 10. I thought we were 11 or 12, but it's very close.

Source - http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=SCORING&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2009&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go

Still, the Saints scored 7 more points a game than us. That is unacceptable being that we had the 4th most yards per game.

Source - http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=TOTAL_YARDS&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2009&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go

If it's unacceptable, don't watch!

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 08:42 PM
Actually we were 10. I thought we were 11 or 12, but it's very close.

Source - http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=SCORING&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2009&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go

Still, the Saints scored 7 more points a game than us. That is unacceptable being that we had the 4th most yards per game.

Source - http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=TOTAL_YARDS&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2009&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go

Well you were right about that, let me pull some other meaningless stat out my ass to argue a point I'm absolutely wrong about.

:kitten:

AT least that's what it sounds like you said.

Mr teX
08-23-2010, 08:49 PM
we were a top 10 team with absolutely no run game & play in a division with a perennially great team in the colts that we have to play twice a year...that's huge considering that they pretty much beat everyone in the league & the saints have a bunch of garbage in division effectively giving them a free run to the division title for the last 3-4 years as there's no one there any good to challenge them.

Not saying they aren't a great team b/c they are, but lets not act like these aren't things that have factored into Payton's ability to turn that franchise around & bring success, especially if we're going to say that Katrina esentially ruined their 2005 season.

RazorOye
08-23-2010, 08:55 PM
This again? Bush improved the Texans D far more than Williams did the Saints D.

just curious what you're basing this on? I don't know much about stats - and if it's based on that, then okay.

But the change that Williams had on the defense cannot be understated. This is a guy whose attitude had impact on offense.

During one of the plays of the year - the Robert Meachem strip and return for a TD which was instrumental in giving us a chance to come back vs the Skins (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9qhEZEN_6s&feature=related) - Meachem credited Williams for the mentality that drove him to make the play.

He said he knew that he was now the defender and he could hear Williams voice in his head after hearing it so often during drills - STRIP STRIP STRIP. So that's what he did - he saw Williams players during practice going after the ball - trying to create turnovers, manufacture luck.

The overall intensity and attitude of the defense was completely changed.

Prior to Williams, Gibbs preached a reach and react system that many of our defensive players apparently expressed some frustration in that scheme. The scheme never changed. It was very vanilla. Scheme was simple. Looks were basic. Little to no pre snap movement. Not nearly the emphasis on working for turnovers. Pace. Intensity. Attitude. Accountability.

Williams had an impact on all of that.

Now - did that make us a better defense statistically? Well, it's complicated.

We gave up a lot of yards in the air.

But we were also decimated at CB - both our top corners lost significant time.

And our CBs are the best unit on the defensive side of the ball. I'd rank Porter and Greer as one of the top tandems in the NFL, but we were pulling guys off the street to play in meaningful games (Chris McAlister, Mike McKenzie) and their absence really showed how limited Sharper could be in coverage.

When Williams came in, he looked at the personnel and worked with what he had - to maximize their talent and try and compensate for our shortcomings. Something Gibbs never did.

And he would alter his game plan according to who was healthy and who we were facing.

If you start looking at two columns and comparing, there's probably an argument there.

But looking at the success the Saints had in terms of pressuring the QB, confusing the QB with different looks, consistent intensity, and working hard to produce turnovers - especially in the playoffs - were a reflection of Williams and was a stark contrast to what we saw under Gibbs.

"far more"?

I dunno... that's pretty high praise.

RazorOye
08-23-2010, 09:03 PM
the saints have a bunch of garbage in division effectively giving them a free run to the division title for the last 3-4 years as there's no one there any good to challenge them.


a bunch of garbage teams? TB is pretty rough - but the rest were .500 or better. 4 conferences could say that last year. And for half the season, teams were beating up on Tennessee.

I'm not going to make the case that the NFC South is a stronger conference than the AFC South - because I don't think that's the case.

But to say that our division is "garbage" is, I think, off the mark. I don't think there's a huge gap between Indy/Houston/Tenn and NO/Atl/Carolina that you can say that the latter is "garbage"

Many pundits don't even have the Saints repeating as division champs this year - picking Atlanta to take the title. Atlanta is a fashionable pick.

Depending on the play of Matt Moore, there are 3 teams in the division that I think could make the playoffs and not surprise me doing so.

And we haven't had a free run at the division title the last 4 years. Tampa Bay and Carolina each took the division once in the last 4 years while Atlanta secured a playoff berth with an 11-5 record in one of those years.

Mr teX
08-23-2010, 09:05 PM
just curious what you're basing this on? I don't know much about stats - and if it's based on that, then okay.

But the change that Williams had on the defense cannot be understated. This is a guy whose attitude had impact on offense.

During one of the plays of the year - the Robert Meachem strip and return for a TD which was instrumental in giving us a chance to come back vs the Skins (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9qhEZEN_6s&feature=related) - Meachem credited Williams for the mentality that drove him to make the play.

He said he knew that he was now the defender and he could hear Williams voice in his head after hearing it so often during drills - STRIP STRIP STRIP. So that's what he did - he saw Williams players during practice going after the ball - trying to create turnovers, manufacture luck.

The overall intensity and attitude of the defense was completely changed.

Prior to Williams, Gibbs preached a reach and react system that many of our defensive players apparently expressed some frustration in that scheme. The scheme never changed. It was very vanilla. Scheme was simple. Looks were basic. Little to no pre snap movement. Not nearly the emphasis on working for turnovers. Pace. Intensity. Attitude. Accountability.

Williams had an impact on all of that.

Now - did that make us a better defense statistically? Well, it's complicated.

We gave up a lot of yards in the air.

But we were also decimated at CB - both our top corners lost significant time.

And our CBs are the best unit on the defensive side of the ball. I'd rank Porter and Greer as one of the top tandems in the NFL, but we were pulling guys off the street to play in meaningful games (Chris McAlister, Mike McKenzie) and their absence really showed how limited Sharper could be in coverage.

When Williams came in, he looked at the personnel and worked with what he had - to maximize their talent and try and compensate for our shortcomings. Something Gibbs never did.

And he would alter his game plan according to who was healthy and who we were facing.

If you start looking at two columns and comparing, there's probably an argument there.

But looking at the success the Saints had in terms of pressuring the QB, confusing the QB with different looks, consistent intensity, and working hard to produce turnovers - especially in the playoffs - were a reflection of Williams and was a stark contrast to what we saw under Gibbs.

"far more"?

I dunno... that's pretty high praise.

I'm sure that he was probably refering to "statistically" but a case can also be made that you guys played so loose & un-afraid to gamble a bit more on defense b/c you had an awesome offense to lean on. We've faced Gregg Williams' defenses before when he was @ jacksonville & a few other places & they weren't nearly as opportunistic as they were last year....

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 09:08 PM
Not saying they aren't a great team b/c they are, but lets not act like these aren't things that have factored into Payton's ability to turn that franchise around & bring success, especially if we're going to say that Katrina esentially ruined their 2005 season.

Jim Haslette turned that pathetic franchise into a respectable franchise.

Payton took that mediocre team, and made it great.

Kubiak took a pathetic franchise, and made them respectable.

thunderkyss
08-23-2010, 09:12 PM
"far more"?

I dunno... that's pretty high praise.

How about "Far more" tangible ways?

RazorOye
08-23-2010, 09:14 PM
I'm sure that he was probably refering to "statistically" but a case can also be made that you guys played so loose & un-afraid to gamble a bit more on defense b/c you had an awesome offense to lean on.

if it's statistically related - that's fine. I don't mind conceding in the face of numbers. And I lack the time and inclination to start crunching numbers - so I'm cool with that.

I just happen to think that there's an unquantifiable aspect when you're talking about "improving a defense" that might not be reflected in total net yards and such.

The difference in attitude was stark. Some of the same players didn't look like the same players. More intensity. More movement. Different looks. Etc

As far as the case you make - I totally agree. I think they did play a bit looser and un-afraid and willing to gamble.

In fact, I'd subsume all of that under "attitudinal change" which reinforces the contrast between the defense under Gibbs and the defense under Williams.

So I agree with you - and would consider it part of my argument.

RazorOye
08-23-2010, 09:18 PM
How about "Far more" tangible ways?

I don't mean to get all semantic - but what do you mean "tangible"?

The legal hit on Warner in the playoff game was "tangible"

The pressure on Warner was "tangible"

The Robert Meachem Meach-Around play was "tangible"

The physicality vs. Favre was "tangible" (a little too tangible on a couple of plays, I concede)

The created turnovers by the Saints defense vs. the Vikes was "tangible"

The Porter pick 6 was "tangible"

The switch in game plan vs. Manning in the Super Bowl was "tangible"

these plays all instrumental and all had tangible results. And all looked very different from the defensive schemes and attitudes and priorities under Gibbs

Now, they aren't reflected in total yards allowed and other such categories, but I'm not sure that makes them less tangible, less clear in their impact

if by tangible you mean stats - some of the Saints stats were pretty rough last year I admit haha

Mr teX
08-23-2010, 09:24 PM
a bunch of garbage teams? TB is pretty rough - but the rest were .500 or better. 4 conferences could say that last year. And for half the season, teams were beating up on Tennessee.

I'm not going to make the case that the NFC South is a stronger conference than the AFC South - because I don't think that's the case.

But to say that our division is "garbage" is, I think, off the mark. I don't think there's a huge gap between Indy/Houston/Tenn and NO/Atl/Carolina that you can say that the latter is "garbage"

Many pundits don't even have the Saints repeating as division champs this year - picking Atlanta to take the title. Atlanta is a fashionable pick.

Depending on the play of Matt Moore, there are 3 teams in the division that I think could make the playoffs and not surprise me doing so.

And we haven't had a free run at the division title the last 4 years. Tampa Bay and Carolina each took the division once in the last 4 years while Atlanta secured a playoff berth with an 11-5 record in one of those years.

noone seriously expected TB & ATL to compete for anything when they won the division in between the times you guys won it. Carolina is the only other, but even with them there was very little belief that they would come out of the NFC. i do know however that you guys rarely have had a team that a good portion of league pundits expect to be superbowl contenders EVERY year like what we have to deal with with manning and the colts EVERY year.

maybe garbage was too strong a word....

Dwade
08-23-2010, 09:29 PM
we were a top 10 team with absolutely no run game & play in a division with a perennially great team in the colts that we have to play twice a year...that's huge considering that they pretty much beat everyone in the league & the saints have a bunch of garbage in division effectively giving them a free run to the division title for the last 3-4 years as there's no one there any good to challenge them.

Not saying they aren't a great team b/c they are, but lets not act like these aren't things that have factored into Payton's ability to turn that franchise around & bring success, especially if we're going to say that Katrina esentially ruined their 2005 season.

The problem last year was the 2 losses to Jacksonville. That killed us.

Mr teX
08-23-2010, 09:37 PM
The problem last year was the 2 losses to Jacksonville. That killed us.

Yeah, The problem with this team is not being able to beat teams that on paper are better than us...but beating those teams that we should beat. Last year, it was the jags games.

RazorOye
08-23-2010, 09:38 PM
noone seriously expected TB & ATL to compete for anything when they won the division in between the times you guys won it.

as a Saints fan, I wholeheartedly endorse the default low-expectations for that franchise from Atlanta :)

(but they didn't win it - they went 11-5 the year the Panthers went 12-4... let's hope this isn't their year either :wink: )

Dwade
08-23-2010, 09:45 PM
Yeah, The problem with this team is not being able to beat teams that on paper are better than us...but beating those teams that we should beat. Last year, it was the jags games.

Yup. We should have won both, but even 1 game would have got us a playoff spot.

But you can't keep looking at the past...this team needs to man up and win the games it should with its talent.

Wolf
08-23-2010, 10:02 PM
one thing that helps is when you have an offense that can light it up for 30 points a game.. It makes the opponents offense become one dimensional when they get behind early.


well caption obvious here LOL

Lucky
08-23-2010, 10:13 PM
And how does their depth figure into it? How many bench players in 2005 are still with the Saints? How many with the Texans?

Dude, go back and look at the 2005 Saints roster and compare it to the 2005 Texans. Pull off your hate colored glasses and take a look at reality.
You suggested to go back to the 2005 Saints roster, right? I thought you would know how many of those players were still with the team.

Will Smith - DE
Jon Stinchcomb - RT
Devery Henderson - WR

Three solid players. Now, would you trade all 3 for one Andre Johnson? I wouldn't, either. So, you can't say that Payton walked into a stacked deck and Kubiak had bare bones. They both have done a tremendous job of rebuilding their respective rosters. Payton has done the better job of coaching. That's really indisputable.

JB
08-23-2010, 10:18 PM
You suggested to go back to the 2005 Saints roster, right? I thought you would know how many of those players were still with the team.

Will Smith - DE
Jon Stinchcomb - RT
Devery Henderson - WR

Three solid players. Now, would you trade all 3 for one Andre Johnson? I wouldn't, either. So, you can't say that Payton walked into a stacked deck and Kubiak had bare bones. They both have done a tremendous job of rebuilding their respective rosters. Payton has done the better job of coaching. That's really indisputable.

I can agree with the bolded

The1ApplePie
08-23-2010, 10:31 PM
Seriously?

Kubes cannot carry Payton's jock at this time.

Payton was built a team that respects him. One that actually buys into him and goes along with it.

Payton learned things from Parcells and established himself as an individual

Kubes seems to still be riding Shanahan/Elway's coat tails

Texan_Bill
08-23-2010, 10:37 PM
Seriously?

Kubes cannot carry Payton's jock at this time.

Payton was built a team that respects him. One that actually buys into him and goes along with it.

Payton learned things from Parcells and established himself as an individual

Kubes seems to still be riding Shanahan/Elway's coat tails

Because you say so.. :rolleyes:

GP
08-23-2010, 10:50 PM
Schaub is methodical.

Brees is a buzzsaw.

And when Brees zaps a defense and gets the Saints ahead by a few scores, it's like the Colts and what they do to other teams: They make the opponent get away from a game plan.

Which is why a mistake such as Trindon Holliday's was a nail in the coffin.

Our guys were not focused to begin with, but when Trin lost the ball and the Saints went up 14-0 you could see that old familiar rain cloud form and hover over the heads of our entire team. It was as plain as day.

I like Schaub, but our offense is either stringing out long drives and eating up clock...or it's 3-and-out and giving the other team chances to score too much.

I really wonder what would have happened if we had landed Drew Brees. Would fate work out differently? These are ideas that you don't let linger too long in your head.

Lucky
08-23-2010, 10:53 PM
I really wonder what would have happened if we had landed Drew Brees.
The Dolphins have to be asking themselves the same question, as they chose Daunte Culpepper over Brees.

JB
08-23-2010, 11:12 PM
Seriously?

Kubes cannot carry Payton's jock at this time.

Payton was built a team that respects him. One that actually buys into him and goes along with it.

Payton learned things from Parcells and established himself as an individual

Kubes seems to still be riding Shanahan/Elway's coat tails

That statement does not jive with what has been said by the players and the people around the team. Nor does it jive with the way the players have responded when his job was in jeopardy. I know that Payton has out coached Kubiak, but to put out the idea that his players don't fight for him is ludicrous.

thunderkyss
08-24-2010, 11:11 AM
You suggested to go back to the 2005 Saints roster, right? I thought you would know how many of those players were still with the team.

Will Smith - DE
Jon Stinchcomb - RT
Devery Henderson - WR

Three solid players. Now, would you trade all 3 for one Andre Johnson? I wouldn't, either. So, you can't say that Payton walked into a stacked deck and Kubiak had bare bones. They both have done a tremendous job of rebuilding their respective rosters. Payton has done the better job of coaching. That's really indisputable.

How different would things have been, had Payton been forced to make one good faith effort with Aaron Brooks?

How different would it have been, if all the veteran leaders were removed from that team before the 2005 season?

How different would it have been if the Saints were in the NFC East, Where the Eagles consistently fielded a Super Bowl contender year in and year out, and the other two teams were built to beat that team, and were getting close? (I don't know that the Eagles were that team, but it's the closest I can think of to the Colts)

I know they look like excuses. But the fact is, the situations are/were totally different.

Despite all that, Kubiak has built a much younger team, that is as good offensively, and stat-wise, better defensively.

Not saying that Gary is a better coach (winning games definitely plays a big part in that). Just saying given the circumstances, Gary has performed in some areas as well as Peyton has.

RazorOye
08-24-2010, 12:18 PM
Despite all that, Kubiak has built a much younger team, that is as good offensively, and stat-wise, better defensively.


I don't know about the "as good as offensively"

I think the Texans offense is too one-dimensional and reliant on the passing game whereas the Saints have a strong running game and the screen game is one that I think we've become one of the best in the league. We've got the OLine with the athleticism and tenacity that enables us to do a lot in the running/screen game.

I think there's a pretty big gap.

If you're using stats to separate the two defensive squads, then I think some consistency is in order for the offensive comparison.

The Saints running game was 6th in the NFL last year while the Texans ranked 30th, with twice as many fumbles.

There's no doubt that the passing attack is in the league's upper echelon. I think that's true of both teams.

I just think that the differences in the running game is too great to argue that they the teams are "as good as each other offensively"

Rey
08-24-2010, 12:23 PM
How different would things have been, had Payton been forced to make one good faith effort with Aaron Brooks?

How different would it have been, if all the veteran leaders were removed from that team before the 2005 season?

How different would it have been if the Saints were in the NFC East, Where the Eagles consistently fielded a Super Bowl contender year in and year out, and the other two teams were built to beat that team, and were getting close? (I don't know that the Eagles were that team, but it's the closest I can think of to the Colts)

I know they look like excuses. But the fact is, the situations are/were totally different.

Despite all that, Kubiak has built a much younger team, that is as good offensively, and stat-wise, better defensively.

Not saying that Gary is a better coach (winning games definitely plays a big part in that). Just saying given the circumstances, Gary has performed in some areas as well as Peyton has.

Must spread rep.

infantrycak
08-24-2010, 12:33 PM
just curious what you're basing this on? I don't know much about stats - and if it's based on that, then okay..

if it's statistically related - that's fine. I don't mind conceding in the face of numbers. And I lack the time and inclination to start crunching numbers - so I'm cool with that.

Basically statistically related. Across the board the Texans improved more spots on D under Bush than the Saints did under Williams with the exception of turnovers. Most of those turnovers came off of Sharper having an aberrant season. That's great but fundamentally Bush improved the Texans D more. Both are high offense teams and it worked out for the Saints and congrats. What I was responding to was the idea that somehow if Williams had been here the Texans would have been soooooo much better and there is nothing but speculation to assert that and the discernible facts point to the contrary.

thunderkyss
08-24-2010, 12:47 PM
I don't know about the "as good as offensively"


RazorOye, you've got good points, you make good posts, but this has nothing to do with you.

The argument isn't really that we are as good as the Saints in any facet of the game, the true issue, is that some people are going on about losing a preseason game as if it were the end of the world.

Start another thread, if you'd like to go back & forth with me about the merits of your team, or about the similarities between the two teams.

I mean you no disrespect, but this is not about the Saints.

I'm using them for examples, and they aren't really very good ones. So far, you are the only one calling them out, and it really doesn't add or subtract from the topic of this discussion.

RazorOye
08-24-2010, 12:47 PM
What I was responding to was the idea that somehow if Williams had been here the Texans would have been soooooo much better and there is nothing but speculation to assert that and the discernible facts point to the contrary.

fair enough - point taken

I would agree - I don't think that Williams worked some sort of miracle that would've made a much bigger difference in Houston. I don't think he'd be a magic wand or anything.

But I did want to point out the considerable contrast in our defense under Gibbs vs under Williams.

As for Sharper's season - it's not a complete aberration.

Rather, it was the product of our starting cornerbacks.

Porter and Greer allowed Sharper to roam centerfield. He was able to do what he does best - read the QB. Mislead the QB and bait him - particularly new/inexperienced QBs.

When Porter and Greer missed time, he had to play more coverage and help out the corners that were in as replacements.

His role changed.

And his age showed.

It was a conscious effort on the part of Williams to redesign the offense to play to strengths. Unfortunately, that strength hinges on the health of Porter and Greer.

And that's also part of the reason the Saints drafted another CB in the first round this year.

I think the prospect of putting Sharper - coming off an injury and another year older, no less - in that same role this year has him wary.

I would be too, considering the difference in Sharper's play last year.

RazorOye
08-24-2010, 01:04 PM
The argument isn't really that we are as good as the Saints in any facet of the game

my mistake then - I thought this:

Despite all that, Kubiak has built a much younger team, that is as good offensively, and stat-wise, better defensively.

was a statement on the issue of how good the Texans are, comparatively speaking, with respect to the Saints.

That's why I chimed in. I can go back to lurking. That's fine.

the true issue, is that some people are going on about losing a preseason game as if it were the end of the world.


fair enough -

And I was just trying to add some context to the references to the Saints to help clarify the picture (e.g. when I talked about the dominance of Evans and Nicks and how that impacted the efficacy of the Texans interior DLine - I thought it would add to the discussion and help ameliorate the doom and gloom a bit)

and it really doesn't add or subtract from the topic of this discussion.

my bad

I thought I was adding something to the topic - but if not, like I said, I don't mind ducking out and going back to lurking.

Peace -

HOU-TEX
08-24-2010, 01:13 PM
my mistake then - I thought this:



was a statement on the issue of how good the Texans are, comparatively speaking, with respect to the Saints.

That's why I chimed in. I can go back to lurking. That's fine.



fair enough -

And I was just trying to add some context to the references to the Saints to help clarify the picture (e.g. when I talked about the dominance of Evans and Nicks and how that impacted the efficacy of the Texans interior DLine - I thought it would add to the discussion and help ameliorate the doom and gloom a bit)



my bad

I thought I was adding something to the topic - but if not, like I said, I don't mind ducking out and going back to lurking.

Peace -

You haven't done anything wrong, Razor. No reason to bail out.

RazorOye
08-24-2010, 01:34 PM
You haven't done anything wrong, Razor. No reason to bail out.

heh thanks - but I didn't take offense or anything to what thunder wrote at all - I just don't want people thinking I was trying to hijack the thread or something with my Saints-related talk

and I've lurked on the boards for a long while now - posting mostly in the NFL Talk and NSZ areas

and I can understand his point - and I certainly don't mind going back to just lurking a bit

it is the Texans board, after all, and not the Saints lol

I don't mind abiding by the hometown's rules :)

JB
08-24-2010, 01:44 PM
heh thanks - but I didn't take offense or anything to what thunder wrote at all - I just don't want people thinking I was trying to hijack the thread or something with my Saints-related talk

and I've lurked on the boards for a long while now - posting mostly in the NFL Talk and NSZ areas

and I can understand his point - and I certainly don't mind going back to just lurking a bit

it is the Texans board, after all, and not the Saints lol

I don't mind abiding by the hometown's rules :)

I for one appreciate your insights about the Saints. You are a member here, and not abusive or too obnoxious...:D

thunderkyss
08-24-2010, 01:46 PM
I don't mind abiding by the hometown's rules :)

It's not that they are the home town rules. Like I said, I'd be more than happy to talk to you about the Saints and your coaches in another thread. Feel free to start one if you'd like.

It just gets frustrating trying to argue two different points, using the context of another unrelated discussion.

DexmanC
08-24-2010, 01:53 PM
heh thanks - but I didn't take offense or anything to what thunder wrote at all - I just don't want people thinking I was trying to hijack the thread or something with my Saints-related talk


Thunder is the largest consumer of Battle Red Kool-Aid on the
planet. Once you realize that, he's quite easy to have a
discussion with.

thunderkyss
08-24-2010, 03:09 PM
Thunder is the largest consumer of Battle Red Kool-Aid on the
planet.

!!!!YES!!!!

:cow:

CloakNNNdagger
08-24-2010, 03:36 PM
Schaub is methodical.

Brees is a buzzsaw.

And when Brees zaps a defense and gets the Saints ahead by a few scores, it's like the Colts and what they do to other teams: They make the opponent get away from a game plan.


It's actually Kubiak that directs the "methodical" approach that Schaub runs. When most of your game, at least half by half, is "scripted," then repeated failures must fall a good part on the shoulder of the author. I don't know that I'll ever feel comfortable with a long "methodical" script approach on any aspect of our game.

thunderkyss
08-24-2010, 04:13 PM
It's actually Kubiak that directs the "methodical" approach that Schaub runs. When most of your game, at least half by half, is "scripted," then repeated failures must fall a good part on the shoulder of the author. I don't know that I'll ever feel comfortable with a long "methodical" script approach on any aspect of our game.

That may be because our definition of "script" is a little too rigid. Kubiak's script is more flexible than the word script implies. It's more of a detailed offensive game plan.

GP
08-24-2010, 06:04 PM
That may be because our definition of "script" is a little too rigid. Kubiak's script is more flexible than the word script implies. It's more of a detailed offensive game plan.

There's an attitude about Kubiak that his guys can beat their guys if our guys line up and do what we know we can do. IMO, Kubiak seriously does not contemplate making huge adjustments in a game as well as from week-to-week.

If you play Kubiak long enough, you know damn well what range of things he's going to try to do. This is why his divisional rival coaches take him to the wood shed each year. Kubiak is not the kind of coach, like Rex Ryan is, who operates as a battlefield sergeant (adapting to the way the battle plays out on the field).

Instead, Kubiak is like the colonel who sits in the rear and has said "This is how it will play out, make it so." And then wonders why nothing is happening on the battlefield to his liking. He can't control the flow of the battlefield. He was so wrapped up in his plans that he forgot that once the battle starts you can throw the plans out the window.

We have a great planner. A great organizer. A great constructor of an offense, and perhaps a pretty good eye for talent. But he's woefully lacking once the battle has ensued. And I think that's why this team's players just cannot grind out consistent performances over long periods of time. They don't have a battlefield sergeant. They have a pencil pusher.

CloakNNNdagger
08-24-2010, 06:14 PM
There's an attitude about Kubiak that his guys can beat their guys if our guys line up and do what we know we can do. IMO, Kubiak seriously does not contemplate making huge adjustments in a game as well as from week-to-week.

If you play Kubiak long enough, you know damn well what range of things he's going to try to do. This is why his divisional rival coaches take him to the wood shed each year. Kubiak is not the kind of coach, like Rex Ryan is, who operates as a battlefield sergeant (adapting to the way the battle plays out on the field).

Instead, Kubiak is like the colonel who sits in the rear and has said "This is how it will play out, make it so." And then wonders why nothing is happening on the battlefield to his liking. He can't control the flow of the battlefield. He was so wrapped up in his plans that he forgot that once the battle starts you can throw the plans out the window.

We have a great planner. A great organizer. A great constructor of an offense, and perhaps a pretty good eye for talent. But he's woefully lacking once the battle has ensued. And I think that's why this team's players just cannot grind out consistent performances over long periods of time. They don't have a battlefield sergeant. They have a pencil pusher.

This is the fear that I have come to feel and tried to express in my post........but you state it in much more detail and eloquence. :tiphat:

DexmanC
08-24-2010, 06:31 PM
If you play Kubiak long enough, you know damn well what range of things he's going to try to do. This is why his divisional rival coaches take him to the wood shed each year.

The one who seems to take the most joy in schooling Kubiak is
Jack Del Rio. Every year, the Texans go to Jacksonville with
more talent, and Del Rio is constantly bashing Kubiak with plays
out of his ASS.

Especially on kickoffs. Just watch the sidelines when we play Jacksonville.
Del Rio knows he can outcoach Kubiak, and proves that no matter HOW BAD
the Jaguars are, they'll beat the Texans. It's pathetic.

houstonspartan
08-24-2010, 06:34 PM
There's an attitude about Kubiak that his guys can beat their guys if our guys line up and do what we know we can do. IMO, Kubiak seriously does not contemplate making huge adjustments in a game as well as from week-to-week.

If you play Kubiak long enough, you know damn well what range of things he's going to try to do. This is why his divisional rival coaches take him to the wood shed each year. Kubiak is not the kind of coach, like Rex Ryan is, who operates as a battlefield sergeant (adapting to the way the battle plays out on the field).

Instead, Kubiak is like the colonel who sits in the rear and has said "This is how it will play out, make it so." And then wonders why nothing is happening on the battlefield to his liking. He can't control the flow of the battlefield. He was so wrapped up in his plans that he forgot that once the battle starts you can throw the plans out the window.

We have a great planner. A great organizer. A great constructor of an offense, and perhaps a pretty good eye for talent. But he's woefully lacking once the battle has ensued. And I think that's why this team's players just cannot grind out consistent performances over long periods of time. They don't have a battlefield sergeant. They have a pencil pusher.

I think I've repped you recently, and don't think I can do it again just yet. Agree.

That's exactly what we have: A brilliant mind, who knows his stuff, but can't execute. And that's fine, a lot of people, in every day life, are great thinkers and very smart, but can't execute their plans. Kubiak is clearly one of those people.

Someone nailed it perfectly in a recent thread. I can't remember who said it, but they said that Kubiak's strategy when things isn't working well is to employ a "try harder" approach instead of trying something new.

Edit to add: The ability to "switch gears" as necessary is an extremely important skill set to have - especially in upper management - regardless of what field you are in.

houstonspartan
08-24-2010, 06:36 PM
The one who seems to take the most joy in schooling Kubiak is
Jack Del Rio. Every year, the Texans go to Jacksonville with
more talent, and Del Rio is constantly bashing Kubiak with plays
out of his ASS.

Especially on kickoffs. Just watch the sidelines when we play Jacksonville.
Del Rio knows he can outcoach Kubiak, and proves that no matter HOW BAD
the Jaguars are, they'll beat the Texans. It's pathetic.

The thing with Del Rio is that he plays old school football. He likes BIG, PHYSICAL lineman. Whenever I'm at Reliant during the Jacksonville game I'm floored at how big their players are. They run right over us.

And, Del Rio seems to always know how to gut out a win when he needs it. Call me crazy, but I think he's still a decent coach.

DexmanC
08-24-2010, 06:42 PM
The thing with Del Rio is that he plays old school football. He likes BIG, PHYSICAL lineman. Whenever I'm at Reliant during the Jacksonville game I'm floored at how big their players are. They run right over us.

And, Del Rio seems to always know how to gut out a win when he needs it. Call me crazy, but I think he's still a decent coach.

Del Rio has less talented players, and no home field advantage, but
his team consistently wins with less than the Texans have. Kubiak needs
a Hall of Fame quarterback (he ain't got it) and some solid leaders
on defense (ain't quite got those either) to be the winner he
wants to be.

The Jags also have a big armed quarterback who can truck you like
a fullback. Somehow, when we go to Jacksonville, I just know the
Texans are gonna get out-physicaled. It was there, on the first play,
Schaub caught a dislocated shoulder.

houstonspartan
08-24-2010, 06:52 PM
Del Rio has less talented players, and no home field advantage, but
his team consistently wins with less than the Texans have. Kubiak needs
a Hall of Fame quarterback (he ain't got it) and some solid leaders
on defense (ain't quite got those either) to be the winner he
wants to be.

The Jags also have a big armed quarterback who can truck you like
a fullback. Somehow, when we go to Jacksonville, I just know the
Texans are gonna get out-physicaled. It was there, on the first play,
Schaub caught a dislocated shoulder.

I agree, for the most part. We have a great "system" and scheme where everything is planned out and plotted and runs well most of the time, but Del Rio looks at us, laughs, and says: "I'm going to punch yall fools in the mouth."

And he does.

Don't quite agree on the QB, though. I still like Matt.

infantrycak
08-24-2010, 07:09 PM
Anybody giving Del Rio credit for out coaching anyone is losing credibility. As a coach he can't sniff Kubiak's bunghole.

JB
08-24-2010, 07:11 PM
Anybody giving Del Rio credit for out coaching anyone is losing credibility. As a coach he can't sniff Kubiak's bunghole.

:clap:

MSR

Brisco_County
08-24-2010, 07:46 PM
There's an attitude about Kubiak that his guys can beat their guys if our guys line up and do what we know we can do. IMO, Kubiak seriously does not contemplate making huge adjustments in a game as well as from week-to-week.

If you play Kubiak long enough, you know damn well what range of things he's going to try to do. This is why his divisional rival coaches take him to the wood shed each year. Kubiak is not the kind of coach, like Rex Ryan is, who operates as a battlefield sergeant (adapting to the way the battle plays out on the field).

Instead, Kubiak is like the colonel who sits in the rear and has said "This is how it will play out, make it so." And then wonders why nothing is happening on the battlefield to his liking. He can't control the flow of the battlefield. He was so wrapped up in his plans that he forgot that once the battle starts you can throw the plans out the window.

We have a great planner. A great organizer. A great constructor of an offense, and perhaps a pretty good eye for talent. But he's woefully lacking once the battle has ensued. And I think that's why this team's players just cannot grind out consistent performances over long periods of time. They don't have a battlefield sergeant. They have a pencil pusher.

I'm a fan of leaders who know how to adapt, but I also can't argue with our offensive stats. If we had a running game, we could impose our plan no matter how rigid it is. We are one left guard away from making that happen.

I say get Mankins in here for one year, and use a #1 or #2 pick on a guard in 2011.

JB
08-24-2010, 07:51 PM
I'm a fan of leaders who know how to adapt, but I also can't argue with our offensive stats. If we had a running game, we could impose our plan no matter how rigid it is. We are one left guard away from making that happen.

I say get Mankins in here for one year, and use a #1 or #2 pick on a guard in 2011.

Why would Mankins want to sign here for 1 year? The dude is one of the top in the league at his position. He wants a Jahri Evans type of deal, or bigger.

thunderkyss
08-24-2010, 08:20 PM
There's an attitude about Kubiak that his guys can beat their guys if our guys line up and do what we know we can do. IMO, Kubiak seriously does not contemplate making huge adjustments in a game as well as from week-to-week.

If you play Kubiak long enough, you know damn well what range of things he's going to try to do. This is why his divisional rival coaches take him to the wood shed each year. Kubiak is not the kind of coach, like Rex Ryan is, who operates as a battlefield sergeant (adapting to the way the battle plays out on the field).

Instead, Kubiak is like the colonel who sits in the rear and has said "This is how it will play out, make it so." And then wonders why nothing is happening on the battlefield to his liking. He can't control the flow of the battlefield. He was so wrapped up in his plans that he forgot that once the battle starts you can throw the plans out the window.

We have a great planner. A great organizer. A great constructor of an offense, and perhaps a pretty good eye for talent. But he's woefully lacking once the battle has ensued. And I think that's why this team's players just cannot grind out consistent performances over long periods of time. They don't have a battlefield sergeant. They have a pencil pusher.

Super Bowl

DexmanC
08-24-2010, 08:25 PM
Anybody giving Del Rio credit for out coaching anyone is losing credibility. As a coach he can't sniff Kubiak's bunghole.

He definitely has Kubiak's number head-to-head, with a less talented squad.
That seems to be the basis of those comments.

devo-x
08-24-2010, 09:40 PM
I want the Texans to sweep the Jags this year - Is that too much to ask?

silvrhand
08-24-2010, 10:41 PM
There's an attitude about Kubiak that his guys can beat their guys if our guys line up and do what we know we can do. IMO, Kubiak seriously does not contemplate making huge adjustments in a game as well as from week-to-week.

If you play Kubiak long enough, you know damn well what range of things he's going to try to do. This is why his divisional rival coaches take him to the wood shed each year. Kubiak is not the kind of coach, like Rex Ryan is, who operates as a battlefield sergeant (adapting to the way the battle plays out on the field).

Instead, Kubiak is like the colonel who sits in the rear and has said "This is how it will play out, make it so." And then wonders why nothing is happening on the battlefield to his liking. He can't control the flow of the battlefield. He was so wrapped up in his plans that he forgot that once the battle starts you can throw the plans out the window.

We have a great planner. A great organizer. A great constructor of an offense, and perhaps a pretty good eye for talent. But he's woefully lacking once the battle has ensued. And I think that's why this team's players just cannot grind out consistent performances over long periods of time. They don't have a battlefield sergeant. They have a pencil pusher.

The TLDR version is in short, Gary sucks.. We need a ()*@()@ firebreather.. Too bad Cowher won't come to Houston.. I'm holding strong with the pink soap..

JB
08-24-2010, 10:43 PM
The TLDR version is in short, Gary sucks.. We need a ()*@()@ firebreather.. Too bad Cowher won't come to Houston.. I'm holding strong with the pink soap..

Hope you enjoy it!

silvrhand
08-24-2010, 10:50 PM
Hope you enjoy it!

ROFL, not in that way, I'd rather have a great coach. I just don't like what Gary has done in the last couple years. We still lack mental toughness, and as an ex player this comes from your coach..

I know this is probably played out, but look at Rex Ryan, he doesn't want to win he wants to kick your ass, if he kicks your ass 9/10 times he's gonna win. That is my type of football, punch you in the face and kick your ass. The entire team has taken on his mantra, and he is rubbing off on that team.

JB
08-24-2010, 10:56 PM
ROFL, not in that way, I'd rather have a great coach. I just don't like what Gary has done in the last couple years. We still lack mental toughness, and as an ex player this comes from your coach..

I know this is probably played out, but look at Rex Ryan, he doesn't want to win he wants to kick your ass, if he kicks your ass 9/10 times he's gonna win. That is my type of football, punch you in the face and kick your ass. The entire team has taken on his mantra, and he is rubbing off on that team.

I can understand that. It helps clarify your postition. I just want them to be a winning franchise. I think they are headed in the right direction. This year will tell us alot. I think that Kubiak can get it done. When he was hired I thought it would take him 5 years to get the team where it needed to be. We will see.

houstonspartan
08-25-2010, 12:47 AM
Anybody giving Del Rio credit for out coaching anyone is losing credibility. As a coach he can't sniff Kubiak's bunghole.

Not sure who was sniffing who'se what last year, but Kubiak had a MUCH more talented squad than Del Rio, yet got stomped by them twice. That's coaching, my friend.

Just saying.

thunderkyss
08-25-2010, 02:21 AM
ROFL, not in that way, I'd rather have a great coach. I just don't like what Gary has done in the last couple years. We still lack mental toughness, and as an ex player this comes from your coach..

I know this is probably played out, but look at Rex Ryan, he doesn't want to win he wants to kick your ass, if he kicks your ass 9/10 times he's gonna win. That is my type of football, punch you in the face and kick your ass. The entire team has taken on his mantra, and he is rubbing off on that team.

Then 7 out of 16 he must not have wanted to kick somebodies ass.

His team had no chance of beating the Colts, had the Colts decided to play.

I don't believe they would have beat a healthy Bengals team either, that one though is pure speculation.

New Orleans blew them out 24-10, Miami swept them, scoring 30 points each time. They lost to Buffalo, they lost to the less talented Jags, they lost to NE, allowing 31 points, and they lost to a disappointing Atlanta team.

He's not a god, he's more of a punk. He isn't special, he's just loud. There is really not much difference between the Job Rex Ryan did, and the job Gary Kubiak did in 2009. He won 9 games, Kubiak won 9 games. He lost 7 games, Kubiak lost 7 games. They lost to New England, Miami and Buffalo, We didn't.

thunderkyss
08-25-2010, 02:24 AM
Not sure who was sniffing who'se what last year, but Kubiak had a MUCH more talented squad than Del Rio, yet got stomped by them twice. That's coaching, my friend.

Just saying.

STomped?

If it weren't for player mistakes, Gary's game plan would have looked golden. We would have dominated both games.

DexmanC
08-25-2010, 06:15 AM
STomped?

If it weren't for player mistakes, Gary's game plan would have looked golden. We would have dominated both games.

TK. The Jets were a team that physically dominated the Texans up one
side of the field, down the other. The "high-powered" offense COULD
NOT SCORE THE BALL!! They got SHUT DOWN, and SHUT OUT.

There is no denying this team folds when they get hit in the mouth. There
will be MANY "Jets Games" this season, just looking at the schedule. The
Saints hit them in the mouth Saturday night, and they FOLDED.

I'm waiting on just ONE indicator of this team having some toughness when
it matters.

thunderkyss
08-25-2010, 02:15 PM
TK. The Jets were a team that physically dominated the Texans up one
side of the field, down the other.

First, try to stay on course. When I posted what you quoted, I was refering to the Jacksonville games.

Second, if you watch the game, or go through the play by play, you'll see we were punching back for 3 QTrs. Remember they eventually became the #1 rushing team in the league, and we held them to 72 yards going into the 4th Qtr. When we broke down, it was only two plays for 77 yards... being too agresive.


The "high-powered" offense COULD
NOT SCORE THE BALL!! They got SHUT DOWN, and SHUT OUT.

Try to remember if anyone on that offense was gimpy... try hard to remember if someone wasn't at 100% because of a previous preseason game. Try to remember how many rollouts, boot legs, or even play action passes were in that game.

Then try to remember the coach saying half the playbook was taken out, because it was his QB playing on a bum ankle, or with a sprung hammy, or something like that.

There is no denying this team folds when they get hit in the mouth. There
will be MANY "Jets Games" this season, just looking at the schedule. The
Saints hit them in the mouth Saturday night, and they FOLDED.

I'm denying it.

I'm waiting on just ONE indicator of this team having some toughness when
it matters.

We beat Miami when it mattered, & we beat NE when it mattered. Stop mitigating all the "ONE" indicators that are out there.

This was a preseason game. Those were regular season games that kept us in play-off contention. Why do you put more weight on the one that doesn't matter?

DexmanC
08-25-2010, 02:25 PM
I'd ask you to back off the Kool-Aid for a minute, to be rational, but
I know you'd never take that Battle Red IV out of your arm for an
instant. LOL

Watch my sig. I'll be updating thru the first twelve games of 2010.
Let's see if they've "turned the corner."

Sometimes I wonder if they've even gotten their driver license yet, much
less turned the corner.

thunderkyss
08-25-2010, 03:23 PM
Sometimes I wonder if they've even gotten their driver license yet, much
less turned the corner.


We beat Miami when it mattered, & we beat NE when it mattered. Stop mitigating all the "ONE" indicators that are out there.

This was a preseason game. Those were regular season games that kept us in play-off contention. Why do you put more weight on the one that doesn't matter?

:cricket: