PDA

View Full Version : Why we are not elite


utahmark
10-13-2010, 11:51 AM
offensive line- Our o-line is finesse. Thats the way they were built. There are advantages to having a system and being able to put players that are not elite in that system. The biggest advantage is being able to save first round draft picks for other positions. We only have one first round pick in the bunch and most would say he is not a typical lt tackle. There is a problem with this as well. There are a few defensive fronts that are so much more talented than we are that they just blow up our o-line. You can't use your scheme when your being overpowered and out quicked.

defensive line- Our d-line is composed of the type of talent that I would like our o-line to be made of. Lot's of first rounders. The problem with them is they are one dimensional. Our ends or strong and can overpower weaker or even average strength o-lineman. when they go up against big strong tackle's they seem to have problems. I think our interior line(supposed to be quick) has not developed into what the coaches wanted. They just get taken out by all but the weakest/slowest o-lineman.

The problems with or o-line and d-line hinder what is the strengths of our team. Our skilled players on offense and our linebackers. Without the help up front these guys can't "do their thing".

Now most teams are not good enough up front on defense or strong enough with their offensive line to exploit our weaknesses. There are a couple of average teams the match up well and most of the elite teams have what it takes to really create some match up problems. We only have two more games against teams that should be able to really give our line's trouble(Balt and NY). we should have a chance to win all the rest of our games but i think we might see more of what we saw against Dallas and the Giants against those two teams. Tenn is another team that should really give us problems but maybe being in our division and playing them twice a year helps keep us close against them.

I'm not even close to being an expert but I watch a lot of football and I wanted to throw this our there and see if you guys agree.

wagonhed
10-13-2010, 11:54 AM
We aren't elite because we don't have elite coaches.

HJam72
10-13-2010, 12:12 PM
Our O-line isn't finesse. I know people call it that because they are small-ish, but they are just made more for running, getting blocks in the 2nd level, etc. than pass-blocking.

I don't think our biggest problem is lack of talent. It's getting out-schemed, not calling the right plays on both sides of the ball, and sometimes it's lack of heart and effort.

When you use small-ish linemen, you have to establish the run on offense. You also have to use what you've got on D and find a way to get to the QB. We now pretty much know that we should've blitzed Cushing more and probably dropped Mario back more in this last game. The coaches should've caught onto it DURING the game, but they didn't. You can't use small-ish O-linemen against large lined teams like the Giants and not establish the run. You've got to do it. You can't use small-ish, quick-ish D-linemen and not insist on finding a blitz or something that gets to the QB. You gotta get to him, unless the other teams passing game sux, and our secondary is going through a transition that screws even that up.

It's true, we're not elite talent-wise, mainly because we have a rookie CB and IF we have good FS, he is inexperienced as well (Nolan), but most teams have weaknesses because of the salary cap. Most of our problems fall on the coaches. Get players ready both scheme-wise and emotionally for games and we will do just fine. Still don't see us beating the Ravens or Jets no matter how prepared, but we not really expected a championship just yet. Get to the playoffs. Do it...

Norg
10-13-2010, 12:16 PM
we are built to win a SB over many years

WE beat the colts heck there pretty good have been for years

Has long has we take care of our biznas in the divison and get a few other wins here and there i think we will be fine

HJam72
10-13-2010, 12:16 PM
I remember when this team (under Capers) had large DLs that could out-muscle O-lineman and then chase the QB around....only they were WAY too slow to ever catch the QB. That drove us crazy too. A LB or somebody should've gotten involve and caught him, and that's the answer, but there are answers to make our current talent work as well.

God, we used to wish we had small-ish, quick DLs. It's just been a long time and we've forgotten. Both types of D can work, but you've gotta scheme right.

We should be able to run the ball on O against anybody....at least adequately. If we don't, it's lack of effort (Giants game) or lack of running plays called.

gtexan02
10-13-2010, 12:17 PM
we are built to win a SB over many years

WE beat the colts heck there pretty good have been for years

Has long has we take care of our biznas in the divison and get a few other wins here and there i think we will be fine

So we're built to win a SB but we can't win outside of our own division?

I dont see those two things working out well

HJam72
10-13-2010, 12:19 PM
So we're built to win a SB but we can't win outside of our own division?

I dont see those two things working out well

He did say over many years (and you can't count the Capers regime, which was just a total bust).

J_R
10-13-2010, 12:20 PM
So we're built to win a SB but we can't win outside of our own division?

I dont see those two things working out well

Having a hard time winning in the division

JB
10-13-2010, 12:21 PM
So we're built to win a SB but we can't win outside of our own division?

I dont see those two things working out well

Last year, we were all calling for a team that could win in our own division.

Norg
10-13-2010, 12:23 PM
building a ..... Culture like the steelers takes time

we are building a long term Team ...

last year we used to be good in the NFC ..

i think we are elite we beat the teams we are supposed to beat alla the raiders and prob going to beat the cheifs

who knows giants might be that good prob a SB bound team who knows

HJam72
10-13-2010, 12:34 PM
We're ready to make the playoffs, even if it has to be with a WC. That's where we are.

CretorFrigg
10-13-2010, 01:00 PM
Really, it's not just our o-line and d-line. Our secondary is pretty darn bad too.

utahmark
10-13-2010, 01:08 PM
Really, it's not just our o-line and d-line. Our secondary is pretty darn bad too.

that's true. i do think playing to much zone has hurt them. i blame their poor play more on coaching than i do the line play.

i just think line play is sometimes undervalued. you could win a superbowl with great line play and be ave everywhere else. hard to win against the best teams without talented lines.

badboy
10-13-2010, 03:59 PM
We are scoring points and for the most part shutting down the run. We are giving up too much passing yardage. This is due to the way we set up the DBs to charge the line rather than to play off the receivers and run with them. Our DTs are not meant to get to the QB but stop the run and allow the DEs and LBs to disrupt the QB. This can work against most teams but Mario and Antonio have to step it up. I think Williams' groin may have been more a factor than has been said.

I think Kubes took a huge gamble in selecting Kareem Jackson AND letting Reeves go. It might pay off eventually but we will not know for a while. The good new is we should be 4-2 and have the week before the bye and after to prepare for Colts. D. Brown should be back and Cushing should be snapped in. Nolan should be more prepared to start and Williams, AJ and JJ should all be 100 %. Hopefully OD will be a factor. Schaub should have a good game this week and get over some of the physical and emotional bruises.

I'd rather not have Mario drop back into coverage EVER.

Lucky
10-13-2010, 06:46 PM
I think Kubes took a huge gamble in selecting Kareem Jackson AND letting Reeves go.
How can Kubiak be criticized for letting Reeves go, when none of the 31 remaining teams in the league signed him? You can criticize Kubiak and Smith for not tagging Dunta, or finding another CB in free agency. Or not. But Kubiak has been proven correct in releasing Reeves, a fringe NFL player who is now on the outside looking in.

Texanmike02
10-13-2010, 06:54 PM
How can Kubiak be criticized for letting Reeves go, when none of the 31 remaining teams in the league signed him? You can criticize Kubiak and Smith for not tagging Dunta, or finding another CB in free agency. Or not. But Kubiak has been proven correct in releasing Reeves, a fringe NFL player who is now on the outside looking in.

I think we should have kept reeves for one reason and one reason only. We needed a vet in the secondary. I know we have coaches etc... but with KJ coming in I think a veteran player would have helped immensely in his development. He's seen manning and co several times... Maybe I'm wrong but if Paymah is the best we can do and he's not going to get on the field much a vet counselor would have been nice instead.

Mike

bckey
10-13-2010, 07:11 PM
we are built to win a SB over many years

WE beat the colts heck there pretty good have been for years

Has long has we take care of our biznas in the divison and get a few other wins here and there i think we will be fine


We have NEVER taken care of biznas in our division under Kubiak. The year the Texans get a winning division record will be Kubiaks first. He blows against oponents that know him best.

HJam72
10-13-2010, 08:25 PM
We are scoring points and for the most part shutting down the run. We are giving up too much passing yardage. This is due to the way we set up the DBs to charge the line rather than to play off the receivers and run with them. Our DTs are not meant to get to the QB but stop the run and allow the DEs and LBs to disrupt the QB. This can work against most teams but Mario and Antonio have to step it up. I think Williams' groin may have been more a factor than has been said.

I think Kubes took a huge gamble in selecting Kareem Jackson AND letting Reeves go. It might pay off eventually but we will not know for a while. The good new is we should be 4-2 and have the week before the bye and after to prepare for Colts. D. Brown should be back and Cushing should be snapped in. Nolan should be more prepared to start and Williams, AJ and JJ should all be 100 %. Hopefully OD will be a factor. Schaub should have a good game this week and get over some of the physical and emotional bruises.

I'd rather not have Mario drop back into coverage EVER.

The bolded is true? I thought they WERE supposed to (for DTs anyway) and just weren't getting it done.

thunderkyss
10-13-2010, 09:21 PM
We are scoring points and for the most part shutting down the run. We are giving up too much passing yardage. This is due to the way we set up the DBs to charge the line rather than to play off the receivers and run with them. Our DTs are not meant to get to the QB but stop the run and allow the DEs and LBs to disrupt the QB. This can work against most teams but Mario and Antonio have to step it up. I think Williams' groin may have been more a factor than has been said.

I think Kubes took a huge gamble in selecting Kareem Jackson AND letting Reeves go. It might pay off eventually but we will not know for a while. The good new is we should be 4-2 and have the week before the bye and after to prepare for Colts. D. Brown should be back and Cushing should be snapped in. Nolan should be more prepared to start and Williams, AJ and JJ should all be 100 %. Hopefully OD will be a factor. Schaub should have a good game this week and get over some of the physical and emotional bruises.

I'd rather not have Mario drop back into coverage EVER.


We've shown flashes of being very good. Shutting down Washington in the second half, playing well for all but 13 snaps against Dallas, even some very good series against the Giants.

Our issue isn't a lack of fire, or being unprepared. It's about consistency and focus. We've got Brian back, hopefully we'll start trusting each other to do their job & stop trying to do too much.

& I get what you're saying, but it would be sweet if the big guy gets an INT.... Or better, a Pic-6

Lucky
10-13-2010, 10:23 PM
I think we should have kept reeves for one reason and one reason only. We needed a vet in the secondary. I know we have coaches etc... but with KJ coming in I think a veteran player would have helped immensely in his development.
Jacques Reeves never developed during his 6 year career. Once his physical skills began to erode, he lacked the technique and smarts to fall back on. How could Reeves become an example of how to play, when he couldn't play, either?

Do the Texans need a veteran CB? Yes, I agree 100%. Should that veteran CB be Jacques Reeves? Absolutely not.

Texan_Bill
10-13-2010, 10:34 PM
We're not elite because we are Houston!! It's a curse thang!! Mediocrity lives here!!

JB
10-13-2010, 10:37 PM
We're not elite because we are Houston!! It's a curse thang!! Mediocrity lives here!!

It's that Indian burial ground thing!


Call for the exorcist!!!

gtexan02
10-13-2010, 10:50 PM
Jacques Reeves never developed during his 6 year career. Once his physical skills began to erode, he lacked the technique and smarts to fall back on. How could Reeves become an example of how to play, when he couldn't play, either?

Do the Texans need a veteran CB? Yes, I agree 100%. Should that veteran CB be Jacques Reeves? Absolutely not.

I dont really think anyone believes Jacques Reeves is the best or even a great solution to our CB problem.

I think the point is that KJax was sold to us as an "NFL ready" rookie CB. He's proven to be anything but. Its like when HWNBN was sold to us as NFL ready.

Sometimes rookies develop faster by being thrown into the fire. Sometimes they do better when put into positions to succeed. I think our team would be better with jacques reeves on it than it is without him. It was certainly better last season than it is right now without him. Jackson should not be out there on every snap. He's a liability. Is Reeves a liability? Maybe, but not as severely as Kjax is. Im not ready to give up the season as a "growth year" for our rookies

HJam72
10-14-2010, 05:13 AM
Houston is not getting a good pass rush from its front four and opposing quarterbacks have a 110.1 passer rating against the Texans when they rush four or fewer. That’s 30th in the league for the 31st ranked defense. They are the only team in the league to have given up more than 100 completions and more than 1,000 passing yards in such situations (1,352) to go with eight touchdowns. The Texans probably feel they can’t afford to blitz with the coverage issues they are having. But when they add at least one extra player to chase the quarterback, his passer rating falls to 88.7. Houston’s also seen some good quarterbacks: Both Peyton and Eli Manning (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=5526), Donovan McNabb (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=1753) and Tony Romo (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=5209).

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth

BLITZ CUSHING MORE.

HJam72
10-14-2010, 05:33 AM
Part of John Hallam's Giants vs. Texans preview:

This is a peculiar game to try and figure out. Both teams are very talented but have been rather inconsistent over the past season and a half. The NYGiants started last season 5 -0 but have won only won 5 games since then. Furthermore, the Giants (http://giants.footballblogzone.com/) have only one road win in that 15 game stretch. It is difficult to know why. Last season, injuries at safety had the Giants turning to guys like C.C. Brown (remember him?) and the back end of the defense became an unmitigated disaster. However, one position (that isnít QB) doesnít explain that kind of collapse. Hereís an interesting note about the offense: in the final six games of last season, the offense averaged almost 23 points a gameÖ not bad but not spectacular. Well, in three of the games, the offense scored: 6, 9, 7. In the other three games, it scored: 31, 38, 45 (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nyg/2009.htm). The Giants make the Texans look like the model of consistency.

http://www.texansbullblog.com/

They had a good week and we had a bad one. I don't know how we do it without a healthy go-route threat at WR, but maybe we can turn this around. What I do know is the coaches better prepare their team better.

Lucky
10-14-2010, 06:10 AM
Jackson should not be out there on every snap. He's a liability. Is Reeves a liability? Maybe, but not as severely as Kjax is. Im not ready to give up the season as a "growth year" for our rookies
And I never said Jackson should play every snap. What I responded to is whether Reeves should have been kept, and started. That would not have been the solution. The Texans would still be giving up big chunks of passing yards (and penalties).

Reeves was cut and is still out of a job. If Jackson were to be cut, he would be picked up in a heartbeat. Despite his problems. Does that mean that Jackson >>> Reeves? No, it just means that Reeves sucks, too. And the league thinks he's hopeless.

thunderkyss
10-14-2010, 08:07 AM
Jacques Reeves never developed during his 6 year career. Once his physical skills began to erode, he lacked the technique and smarts to fall back on. How could Reeves become an example of how to play, when he couldn't play, either?

Do the Texans need a veteran CB? Yes, I agree 100%. Should that veteran CB be Jacques Reeves? Absolutely not.

I agree with this, 100%

thunderkyss
10-14-2010, 08:18 AM
I think the point is that KJax was sold to us as an "NFL ready" rookie CB. He's proven to be anything but. Its like when HWNBN was sold to us as NFL ready.

Sometimes rookies develop faster by being thrown into the fire. Sometimes they do better when put into positions to succeed. I think our team would be better with jacques reeves on it than it is without him. It was certainly better last season than it is right now without him. Jackson should not be out there on every snap. He's a liability. Is Reeves a liability? Maybe, but not as severely as Kjax is. Im not ready to give up the season as a "growth year" for our rookies

I think we have different definitions of "NFL ready."

No CB in this league today is completely shut-down. They all allow passes to be caught & they all get "burnt" some with more regularity than others. Cromartie gets targeted & burnt. Revis got burnt by Favre & Moss, Brady & Moss. Namdi got a taste of that against San Diego. Phillip Rivers threw for 431 against the Raiders & Namdi got his share.

The difference between Kj & Cromartie or Dunta or Finegan (who's team gave up 386 yards to Eli Manning, 341 yards to Kyle Orton, & 406 yards to Tony Romo) is that Kj should get better.

Maybe we are screwing up starting him so early. Maybe not. Let's let it play out & see. I personally don't see how swaping Reeves in would help. Hell, swap in Molden or McManis, or McCain.... same difference.

thunderkyss
10-14-2010, 08:32 AM
Houston is not getting a good pass rush from its front four and opposing quarterbacks have a 110.1 passer rating against the Texans when they rush four or fewer. Thatís 30th in the league for the 31st ranked defense. They are the only team in the league to have given up more than 100 completions and more than 1,000 passing yards in such situations (1,352) to go with eight touchdowns. The Texans probably feel they canít afford to blitz with the coverage issues they are having. But when they add at least one extra player to chase the quarterback, his passer rating falls to 88.7. Houstonís also seen some good quarterbacks: Both Peyton and Eli Manning (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=5526), Donovan McNabb (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=1753) and Tony Romo (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=5209).

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth

BLITZ CUSHING MORE.

When I watch the game, it's rare that I say to myself, "damn, he's got all day to throw." I don't believe I say it any more than when I'm watching other games. Even NYGiants, people talk about not getting pressure on Eli since we didn't have any sacks. But I saw Eli scrambling on almost every play.

dalemurphy (or barrett) has a thread, where they show the difference between the first half & the second half of that game. In it, it's obvious the biggest difference isn't that we got any more pressure, but the guy we were sending (Cushing who also happens to be our best cover LB (next to Mario)) was able to keep that pressure on the QB when he was outside the pocket.

My point, is that I still believe, & have for a while, that the biggest problem with our pass rush is our pass coverage. "Of course he's open" I say that much more than "He's got all day"

This year was the first year I saw a genuine coverage sack (I believe we have three of them this year) from this defense.

thunderkyss
10-14-2010, 08:35 AM
Part of John Hallam's Giants vs. Texans preview:

This is a peculiar game to try and figure out. Both teams are very talented but have been rather inconsistent over the past season and a half.

We were also only favored by 3.5 points. Take out the homefield advantage (which was definitely rocking, regardless what anyone says) and we're only favored by half a point.

According to the people outside of Houston, these two teams are more equal than not.