PDA

View Full Version : Secondary this bad or QBs just that good?


m5kwatts
09-20-2010, 11:31 AM
Two games, two straight 400+ yard passing games, but also two future hall of fame QBs..... I think in yesterday's game the front four other than Mario could've pressured McNabb more but he made some great throws and those receivers didn't let many balls touch the ground.

I think its more the QBs we've faced being hot and on their game. I think we'll find out more when we face the likes of Jason Campbell, Matt Cassell, and Mark Sanchez....

hookinreds
09-20-2010, 12:21 PM
Two games, two straight 400+ yard passing games, but also two future hall of fame QBs..... I think in yesterday's game the front four other than Mario could've pressured McNabb more but he made some great throws and those receivers didn't let many balls touch the ground.

I think its more the QBs we've faced being hot and on their game. I think we'll find out more when we face the likes of Jason Campbell, Matt Cassell, and Mark Sanchez....

I tend to agree with your last comment. Are we saying that Matt had a great day or Washington's DB's suck? I think McNabb only missed on 10 out of 40 passes (or close to it). I kept feeling like McNabb was passing out of his mind accurate while watching the game. Now I also can see where our DB need some work, but McNabb had a lot more to do with it yesterday than our DBs.

Wolf6151
09-20-2010, 12:29 PM
I don't think that our secondary is that bad, I think it's more to do with the coverage being called by the DC. I know that our guys are capable of playing man coverage but we seem to be playing a soft zone instead of man. I think they're just trying to keep the WR in front of them so as not to get burned deep. While that does work it also allows the offense to move up and down the field easily. I don't think our DC trusts our secondary enough to allow them to play tight man coverage yet.

TexCanada
09-20-2010, 12:33 PM
Our secondary unit just needs a whole bunch of game reps together. They need to be able to trust each other more so they can each focus on their own role during each play. It is difficult with such a young secondary, especially one that has barely played with one another. They will continue to improve over the course of the season.

Hopefully our D-Line and our offense will continue to help them out by playing at a very high level.

dream_team
09-20-2010, 12:36 PM
I don't think that our secondary is that bad, I think it's more to do with the coverage being called by the DC. I know that our guys are capable of playing man coverage but we seem to be playing a soft zone instead of man. I think they're just trying to keep the WR in front of them so as not to get burned deep. While that does work it also allows the offense to move up and down the field easily. I don't think our DC trusts our secondary enough to allow them to play tight man coverage yet.

Ditto. I'd like to hear Bush's reasoning for so much zone coverage.

Goldensilence
09-20-2010, 12:45 PM
Hard to say. Our Oline for the life of them couldn't handle Landry coming on the safety blitz.

I saw good coverage on both sides and saw Qbs throwing into small windows. Also Receivers going up for the ball and making plays.

Far as the Texans secondary goes. The staff decided to go into the season with a really young depth chart at CB, I was concerned then and still remain concerned. I saw Jackson do some good things and I saw him blow a few plays. That's what you're going to get with a rookie starting.

I think this secondary gets a lot better when Cushing returns because he covers so much of the middle of the field and is pretty good in pass coverage on TEs. This will allow Pollard to drop back off the TE more and help in the secondary. Our lack of overall speed at LB shows. I like Diles as a solid tackler and diagnosing plays quickly, but his lack of sideline to sideline speed hurts. I think he's better suited to be a MLB, but that's just not going to happen.

Wilson hasn't really impressed me, but I have a feeling he's likely doing what the staff wants him to do and we won't see him replaced barring injury this season.

HOU-TEX
09-20-2010, 04:00 PM
Both of the QB's are very good, but it's no excuse for having TE's, no name WR's and a 50 year year old running wide open. KJax was very bad in coverage yesterday as was Diles and Adibi.

Teams now know our weakness and will continue to test the heck out of them until they can prove they're up to the task.

IMO, all teams run some form of zone coverage, but teams that run it more are the teams who question the ability of their DBs.

CloakNNNdagger
09-20-2010, 04:13 PM
Part of the reason our run D is so effective is that it seems like we're constantly getting our safeties to run up to the line. If no safeties routinely covering deep, soft coverage is going to be necessary unless you think you have 2 lock down CBs............I don't think at this point anyone thinks that. Of course, it leaves us open and vulnerable to the dink and dunk most of the time.

We pull our safeties back deep........then our "feared" run D be affected.

Double Barrel
09-20-2010, 04:15 PM
Secondary this bad or QBs just that good?

I think it's a bit of both. Good QBs know how to tear up an average secondary.

Just wait until we play an average QB, though. Once we have a solid lead and the opponent is forced to pass in order to catch up, I think it will allow our defense to pin their ears back and pressure the QB without fear of the run.

Our secondary is a concern, no doubt about it. But, it's really tough to judge when you're up against two of the best QBs in the NFL.

dtran04
09-21-2010, 05:38 PM
It also seems like the middle zone of the defense is terribly suspect. The LBs always seem to be close but never make a play on the ball. Diles and Demeco whiffed on a handful of balls that went right through their zone. It's really not their strength as they never pick off that many passes.

Cool
09-21-2010, 06:31 PM
It would just be nice if people weren't so wide open when they were thrown too? Or is that just me?

False Start
09-21-2010, 06:37 PM
It would just be nice if people weren't so wide open when they were thrown too? Or is that just me?

Sometimes it seems there aren't any Texans on the TV screen when the opposing receivers catch the ball, and then two seconds later, there they are! :mcnugget:

m5kwatts
09-21-2010, 07:43 PM
I tend to agree with your last comment. Are we saying that Matt had a great day or Washington's DB's suck? I think McNabb only missed on 10 out of 40 passes (or close to it). I kept feeling like McNabb was passing out of his mind accurate while watching the game. Now I also can see where our DB need some work, but McNabb had a lot more to do with it yesterday than our DBs.

I side with the QBs here. Both of them have been outstanding. I think sometimes you just have to write a game or two off because the QBs just dominated the day.

Thats not to say our DBs couldn't have played better games. The Redskins receivers were a step faster than them (specifically Quin and Jackson) and I think thats because those 2 are still swimming. They're going to need more time. I know a lot of fans have expressed concerns about those 2 CBs getting beat deep but I think its more of their reaction time being slow because of their inexperience, especially for Kareem.

I think its way too soon to call this secondary "bad." Its played poorly these 2 games no doubt but I think by the latter part of the season this could be a pretty dangerous secondary.

axman40
09-21-2010, 07:55 PM
Will Romo be a gift to the secondary?
I will say this the 3rd down defense has been good.4-12 for Indy and 2- 10 against the Skins.
:texflag:

Ckw
09-21-2010, 08:19 PM
Double post. Sorry.

Ckw
09-21-2010, 08:20 PM
I am extremely unimpressed with Kareem Jackson. Actually, I don't think that does it justice. He has looked awful.