PDA

View Full Version : Did he really just say that?


Kimmy
11-22-2010, 09:25 AM
Listening to Matt on 610, discussing the last drive. Kubes says we're gonna run it three times, make them burn time outs and kick the field goal ....

Then he hits us with WE WEREN'T TRYING FOR THE TOUCHDOWN!

Really? OMG ..... They WANTED to force the Jets to go 80 yards, with no timeouts and make a touchdown ....

Wow .....

3rd and Inches
11-22-2010, 09:26 AM
The level of failure gets worse and worse. All I can do is just maniacally laugh. I don't know what else to do.

HTown2ATX
11-22-2010, 09:29 AM
Listening to Matt on 610, discussing the last drive. Kubes says we're gonna run it three times, make them burn time outs and kick the field goal ....

Then he hits us with WE WEREN'T TRYING FOR THE TOUCHDOWN!

Really? OMG ..... They WANTED to force the Jets to go 80 yards, with no timeouts and make a touchdown ....

Wow .....

LOL....just heard that on 610 too....FAIL all the way around.

Jackie Chiles
11-22-2010, 09:31 AM
Don't see how we can blame them for that, I would have been irate if we had thrown an in-completion there. Running three times was the right call. Teams are not supposed to be able to march 70 plus yards for a TD in under 50 seconds.

Thorn
11-22-2010, 09:31 AM
:wadepalm:
:mariopalm:
:kubepalm:
:facepalm:




:lol:

axman40
11-22-2010, 09:33 AM
Is this a surprise to anyone here?
:headhurts:

Kimmy
11-22-2010, 09:36 AM
Don't see how we can blame them for that, I would have been irate if we had thrown an in-completion there. Running three times was the right call. Teams are not supposed to be able to march 70 plus yards for a TD in under 50 seconds.

Against our defense? They could have scored more than a virgin in a whore house!

False Start
11-22-2010, 09:36 AM
Listening to Matt on 610, discussing the last drive. Kubes says we're gonna run it three times, make them burn time outs and kick the field goal ....

Then he hits us with WE WEREN'T TRYING FOR THE TOUCHDOWN!

Really? OMG ..... They WANTED to force the Jets to go 80 yards, with no timeouts and make a touchdown ....

Wow .....

I heard that too.... :ok:

Is it bad that when I hear stuff like this it doesn't surprise me? :smiliepalm:

3rd and Inches
11-22-2010, 09:37 AM
Is it bad that when I hear stuff like this it doesn't surprise me? :smiliepalm:

No, it's self-preservation. It doesn't surprise me either. But, I have to laugh at how the hole keeps gettin' dug deeper.. and deeper..

Jackie Chiles
11-22-2010, 09:40 AM
Against our defense? They could have scored more than a virgin in a whore house!

It was the percentage play. Even if Kubiak were as pessimistic about his defense as he should be it was the right move. There are PLENTY of things to get upset at Kubiak for, I just don't believe this specific instance is one of them. Just because our defense is one of the worst of all time it doesn't we mean we should onside kick everytime we score does it? (actually that sounds like a decent idea..... GAH)

Brisco_County
11-22-2010, 09:44 AM
It was the right call. Removing time from the clock was more valuable than points. It's just that no one knew our secondary would lose it for us, which is still on Gary.

3rd and Inches
11-22-2010, 09:48 AM
It's just that no one knew our secondary would lose it for us, which is still on Gary.

Every one knew but Gary Kubiak. What an oracle ol' Kubes is.

dream_team
11-22-2010, 09:59 AM
Guys, no reason to get angry over this. It's the same thing every coach in the NFL would do. Except maybe Bellicheck? Obviously they preferred a TD over FG. If not, they would have simply kneeled it three times. What Kubiak was simply saying is don't do anything stupid like get out of bounds, turn it over, or thrown an incomplete pass in an effort to try to get a TD. Killing time and timeouts was more valuable than 4 points. I would have been much more angry if they threw an incompletion.

Mr. White
11-22-2010, 10:01 AM
Listening to Matt on 610, discussing the last drive. Kubes says we're gonna run it three times, make them burn time outs and kick the field goal ....


You mean Mark on 610? Matt's on 790.

silvrhand
11-22-2010, 10:04 AM
Coach Kubiak:

Playing not to lose since 2006, come on guys let's not lose this..



:spin::spin::spin:

Kimmy
11-22-2010, 10:05 AM
You mean Mark on 610? Matt's on 790.

Matt Schuab on 610

HOU-TEX
11-22-2010, 10:05 AM
You mean Mark on 610? Matt's on 790.

She's talking about Matt Schaub. He does a show on 610 every Monday morning.

SouthSideTexan
11-22-2010, 10:10 AM
Whyyyyyyyyyyy????????:kubepalm:I'm gonna start drinking heavy again.....I need a Prozac and a Bottle of Crown..:beerfunnel:

RTP2110
11-22-2010, 10:14 AM
I agree with running 3 times, but I still think you try to run fir the TD. You could tell while watching it that the weren't trying for the TD. It actually looked thike they were avoiding the endzone. Sure run and kill the clock, but if you can get in and go up by 8 points, then that's what you do.

I'd rather be up by 8 with 1:30 to go than to be up by 4 with 49 seconds.

Beer and Metal
11-22-2010, 10:18 AM
It was the right call. Removing time from the clock was more valuable than points. It's just that no one knew our secondary would lose it for us, which is still on Gary.

I agree it was the correct call, but did you notice we were snapping the ball with plenty of time on the play clock? On one down, we snapped around 10 seconds.

If someone recorded this, could you add up the left over play clock time? I'm thniking if we would have let the clock run to 1 second each down, the Jets wouldn't have had time to make that play.

mike moffat
11-22-2010, 10:18 AM
Listening to Tony Dungee on Football Night, or whatever that program is, he was exactly right. The Texan secondary should never have let the Jets have the outside lane on that pass. We should have forced them to throw over the middle or at least inside the sideline.

Of course, with our talented group, they would have fallen down and let them waltz into the endzone. Hw many times did they slip, fall or just miss opportunities all day long. Every time I looked up, we were laying on our faces as the Jet ran by.

Really disappointed. Something has to be done with the secondary. I've been saying that for 3 or 4 years now. We shored up the the D-line and our line backers are strong. I think that my local junior college has a better secondary. It's time to do something about it.

silvrhand
11-22-2010, 10:19 AM
I agree it was the correct call, but did you notice we were snapping the ball with plenty of time on the play clock? On one down, we snapped around 10 seconds.

If someone recorded this, could you add up the left over play clock time? I'm thniking if we would have let the clock run to 1 second each down, the Jets wouldn't have had time to make that play.

I had to step away, are you kidding that we didn't run the playclock down to 1-3 seconds on each snap? Surely not.. Surely we aren't that ()*$@ stupid.

eriadoc
11-22-2010, 10:21 AM
It's the correct call for 31 of 32 teams. With as bad as our secondary is, you have to try and get a first down there. Even if you aren't trying for a touchdown, you have to get a first down and run out the clock. If that means calling a pass play, make it a high percentage pass play like a HB or WR screen. Or try a misdirection HB toss or something. You have to do something to get the first down.

eriadoc
11-22-2010, 10:24 AM
I agree it was the correct call, but did you notice we were snapping the ball with plenty of time on the play clock? On one down, we snapped around 10 seconds.

If someone recorded this, could you add up the left over play clock time? I'm thniking if we would have let the clock run to 1 second each down, the Jets wouldn't have had time to make that play.

LOL, that's awesome. This team's clock management is the worst I've ever seen in all my time watching football. I didn't watch the game yesterday, but I recorded it, so I'll pull it up and confirm this evening, with time stamps.

I had to step away, are you kidding that we didn't run the playclock down to 1-3 seconds on each snap? Surely not.. Surely we aren't that ()*$@ stupid.

LOL, what team have you been watching? Of course they're that stupid. They've demonstrated time after time they have no idea how to manage a game clock.

RTP2110
11-22-2010, 10:31 AM
I agree it was the correct call, but did you notice we were snapping the ball with plenty of time on the play clock? On one down, we snapped around 10 seconds.

If someone recorded this, could you add up the left over play clock time? I'm thniking if we would have let the clock run to 1 second each down, the Jets wouldn't have had time to make that play.

Didn't matter. They snapped it at 10 because the Jets called timeout after each play, so the game clock wasn't running anyway.

1st down - run, Jets timeout, clock stopped
2nd down - run, Jets timeout, clock stopped
3rd down - run, Texans timeout with 1 second on play clock
4th down - FG

Everyone calm down, they actually got it right.

eriadoc
11-22-2010, 10:36 AM
Didn't matter. They snapped it at 10 because the Jets called timeout after each play, so the game clock wasn't running anyway.

1st down - run, Jets timeout, clock stopped
2nd down - run, Jets timeout, clock stopped
3rd down - run, Texans timeout with 1 second on play clock
4th down - FG

Everyone calm down, they actually got it right.

LOL, OK then. But doesn't it say something that we considered that behavior perfectly within the reality that has become the Houston Texans coaching?

BigBull17
11-22-2010, 10:39 AM
I like a screen on first down there. Our screen game was rolling, and I would have thrown that high percentage play. However, you can let a team go the length of the field in 45 seconds.

silvrhand
11-22-2010, 10:39 AM
Didn't matter. They snapped it at 10 because the Jets called timeout after each play, so the game clock wasn't running anyway.

1st down - run, Jets timeout, clock stopped
2nd down - run, Jets timeout, clock stopped
3rd down - run, Texans timeout with 1 second on play clock
4th down - FG

Everyone calm down, they actually got it right.

Good, I can't imagine that we would mess that up, that'd be really bad.. thanks for looking it up or remembering! :)

RTP2110
11-22-2010, 10:40 AM
LOL, OK then. But doesn't it say something that we considered that behavior perfectly within the reality that has become the Houston Texans coaching?

Oh absolutely. I actually had to go check the ESPN play by play just to make sure that didn't really happen.

Mr teX
11-22-2010, 10:54 AM
I like a screen on first down there. Our screen game was rolling, and I would have thrown that high percentage play. However, you can let a team go the length of the field in 45 seconds.

Actually our screen game wasn't working. We didn't run many b/c they were all over it. Here are 2 of the 4 i remember:

2nd and 3 at HOU 29 (Shotgun) M.Schaub pass short right to A.Johnson to HST 31 for 2 yards (D.Harris).

2nd and 10 at HOU 16 M.Schaub pass short left to A.Foster pushed ob at HST 11 for -5 yards (B.Scott).

c10x
11-22-2010, 11:07 AM
After reading this thread, I have some good news.

There's no point in coming to this website anymore, because most of you simply don't understand football.

Three runs, forcing them to use the clock was the right call. If we scored a TD great, but we wanted to create a situation where the clock was the enemy. No matter how little faith you have in your defense, you HAVE to be able to trust they can't go 80 yards for a TD with 50 seconds left and no timeouts.

Lots to blame Gary about, but that call isn't one of them.

Wasting the opportunity for points at the end of the half - yep, thats on Gary.
A team who's mentality is that they will find a way to lose - yep, thats on Gary.
Putting yourself in a situation where this is your secondary and you really don't have an opportunity to upgrade it until the offseason - also on Gary.

That series of downs is exactly what any winning coach should have done.

FirstTexansFan
11-22-2010, 11:12 AM
After reading this thread, I have some good news.

There's no point in coming to this website anymore, because most of you simply don't understand football.

Three runs, forcing them to use the clock was the right call. If we scored a TD great, but we wanted to create a situation where the clock was the enemy. No matter how little faith you have in your defense, you HAVE to be able to trust they can't go 80 yards for a TD with 50 seconds left and no timeouts.

Lots to blame Gary about, but that call isn't one of them.

Wasting the opportunity for points at the end of the half - yep, thats on Gary.
A team who's mentality is that they will find a way to lose - yep, thats on Gary.
Putting yourself in a situation where this is your secondary and you really don't have an opportunity to upgrade it until the offseason - also on Gary.

That series of downs is exactly what any winning coach should have done.

Key phrase... :)

Pollardized
11-22-2010, 11:14 AM
After reading this thread, I have some good news.

There's no point in coming to this website anymore, because most of you simply don't understand football.
Three runs, forcing them to use the clock was the right call. If we scored a TD great, but we wanted to create a situation where the clock was the enemy. No matter how little faith you have in your defense, you HAVE to be able to trust they can't go 80 yards for a TD with 50 seconds left and no timeouts.

Lots to blame Gary about, but that call isn't one of them.

Wasting the opportunity for points at the end of the half - yep, thats on Gary.
A team who's mentality is that they will find a way to lose - yep, thats on Gary.
Putting yourself in a situation where this is your secondary and you really don't have an opportunity to upgrade it until the offseason - also on Gary.

That series of downs is exactly what any winning coach should have done.


Well.... bye....

burro
11-22-2010, 11:20 AM
Kubiak's biggest mistake was assuming that our defense wasn't so bad as to give up 80 yards and a TD in 55 seconds. Our defense is that bad and every effort should have been made to keep the Jets offense off of the field.

Thorn
11-22-2010, 11:21 AM
After reading this thread, I have some good news.

There's no point in coming to this website anymore, because most of you simply don't understand football.

Three runs, forcing them to use the clock was the right call. If we scored a TD great, but we wanted to create a situation where the clock was the enemy. No matter how little faith you have in your defense, you HAVE to be able to trust they can't go 80 yards for a TD with 50 seconds left and no timeouts.

Lots to blame Gary about, but that call isn't one of them.

Wasting the opportunity for points at the end of the half - yep, thats on Gary.
A team who's mentality is that they will find a way to lose - yep, thats on Gary.
Putting yourself in a situation where this is your secondary and you really don't have an opportunity to upgrade it until the offseason - also on Gary.

That series of downs is exactly what any winning coach should have done.

We, the Kubiak haters of the world, will not tolerate posts that in any way shape or form say anything nice or even slightly reasonable about Kubiak. It's against our religion.

Blake
11-22-2010, 11:22 AM
After reading this thread, I have some good news.

There's no point in coming to this website anymore, because most of you simply don't understand football.

Three runs, forcing them to use the clock was the right call. If we scored a TD great, but we wanted to create a situation where the clock was the enemy. No matter how little faith you have in your defense, you HAVE to be able to trust they can't go 80 yards for a TD with 50 seconds left and no timeouts.

Lots to blame Gary about, but that call isn't one of them.

Wasting the opportunity for points at the end of the half - yep, thats on Gary.
A team who's mentality is that they will find a way to lose - yep, thats on Gary.
Putting yourself in a situation where this is your secondary and you really don't have an opportunity to upgrade it until the offseason - also on Gary.

That series of downs is exactly what any winning coach should have done.

Well.... bye....

2nd. Dont let the door... well you know the rest.

RTP2110
11-22-2010, 11:22 AM
The fact that Bentley returned it to the 10 turned out to be a strike against us. That took the chance for a 1st down off the board. The ideal scenario is that you run the ball, get a first down, and run out the clock. That way the Jets never get the ball. Bently going down at the 15 or 20 would have been a good thing, IMO. Starting with 1st and goal, the only options were to score a TD or run 3 plays and kick a FG. Either way the Jets were going to have the ball back with a chance to win or tie.

TexansSeminole
11-22-2010, 11:26 AM
After reading this thread, I have some good news.

There's no point in coming to this website anymore, because most of you simply don't understand football.

Three runs, forcing them to use the clock was the right call. If we scored a TD great, but we wanted to create a situation where the clock was the enemy. No matter how little faith you have in your defense, you HAVE to be able to trust they can't go 80 yards for a TD with 50 seconds left and no timeouts.

Lots to blame Gary about, but that call isn't one of them.

Wasting the opportunity for points at the end of the half - yep, thats on Gary.
A team who's mentality is that they will find a way to lose - yep, thats on Gary.
Putting yourself in a situation where this is your secondary and you really don't have an opportunity to upgrade it until the offseason - also on Gary.

That series of downs is exactly what any winning coach should have done.

I actually agree with almost everything in this post, except that there is no point in coming to the website anymore.

dream_team
11-22-2010, 11:53 AM
After reading this thread, I have some good news.

There's no point in coming to this website anymore, because most of you simply don't understand football.

Three runs, forcing them to use the clock was the right call. If we scored a TD great, but we wanted to create a situation where the clock was the enemy. No matter how little faith you have in your defense, you HAVE to be able to trust they can't go 80 yards for a TD with 50 seconds left and no timeouts.

Lots to blame Gary about, but that call isn't one of them.

Wasting the opportunity for points at the end of the half - yep, thats on Gary.
A team who's mentality is that they will find a way to lose - yep, thats on Gary.
Putting yourself in a situation where this is your secondary and you really don't have an opportunity to upgrade it until the offseason - also on Gary.

That series of downs is exactly what any winning coach should have done.

100% agree!!! It was the right call on Gary. I want Kubiak gone just like everyone else, but come on... every move he does isn't wrong.

Speedy
11-22-2010, 12:19 PM
There's no point in coming to this website anymore, because most of you simply don't understand football.

Well.... bye....

What do you mean bye? He's right.
Did you see this?

I agree it was the correct call, but did you notice we were snapping the ball with plenty of time on the play clock? On one down, we snapped around 10 seconds.

If someone recorded this, could you add up the left over play clock time? I'm thniking if we would have let the clock run to 1 second each down, the Jets wouldn't have had time to make that play.

There's plenty of other things to complain about. We don't have to start making things up like snapping the ball with time on the play clock after a timeout when the game clock is not running.

Running 3 running plays to burn timeouts and then put 3 points on the board to force the Jets to have to score a TD was the absolute right thing to do.

houstonspartan
11-22-2010, 12:20 PM
Well.... bye....

LOL!

Co-sign.

utahmark
11-22-2010, 12:22 PM
I think we should of tried a naked bootleg.


signed: sage rosenfels

Corrosion
11-22-2010, 12:33 PM
It was the right call. Removing time from the clock was more valuable than points. It's just that no one knew our secondary would lose it for us, which is still on Gary.

I agree it was the right call , burn the clock and their time outs. I also think people are taking that statement out of context.
Had they been able to score the TD .... they would have done so. The fact that they were forced to settle for a FG while NY spent its TO's and time ran down .... was an afterthought , it shouldnt have mattered.


Someone on that damn defense MAKE A PLAY For the love of GOD.

No , its on the secondary .... They were put in position to Make a play , and they didnt do it. That play to Edwards the DL had good pressure on Montana errr Sanchez and he torched the secondary with a near perfect throw.


and the guy who didnt franchise tag Pay me Rick .... Or at least find a veteran corner via FA to help fill the void rather than expecting a rookie to be all world.

fiasco west
11-22-2010, 12:52 PM
The only problem I have is him telling the team that they weren't looking to score...

Running the ball 3 times is perfectly acceptable...telling your team that we are looking for the 3 points instead of 7 is just...Well I think we know what this team is missing is some motivation.

You know before that Jets drive Ryan told his guys with a smile on his face "We've been here before." and Kubiak is telling his "We just want to run out the clock." knowing full well you win this game with a TD. Huddle the guys up and tell them that. Tell em that we are going to run it 3 times and we are going to score.

Don't be a soft *** and tell them that we're looking for 3 points.

Norg
11-22-2010, 12:55 PM
well even if we did get the TD

Im sure the jets would have still scored a TD in 30 seconds and tied it up

spare enough time for us to cough it up and then kick a FG to win da game

No matter what we did im sure we would have lost LOL

Mr teX
11-22-2010, 12:56 PM
The only problem I have is him telling the team that they weren't looking to score...

Running the ball 3 times is perfectly acceptable...telling your team that we are looking for the 3 points instead of 7 is just...Well I think we know what this team is missing is some motivation.

You know before that Jets drive Ryan told his guys with a smile on his face "We've been here before." and Kubiak is telling his "We just want to run out the clock." knowing full well you win this game with a TD. Huddle the guys up and tell them that. Tell em that we are going to run it 3 times and we are going to score.

Don't be a soft *** and tell them that we're looking for 3 points.

we don't win with a TD, we only make the jets have to convert a 2 pt conversion to tie it if they somehow went 80 yards in a minute to score a TD. Given what wound up happening, do you have any doubt that the jets wouldn't have been able to get a measley ol' 2 pt. conversion after marching down the field inside a minute?

dalemurphy
11-22-2010, 01:00 PM
Listening to Matt on 610, discussing the last drive. Kubes says we're gonna run it three times, make them burn time outs and kick the field goal ....

Then he hits us with WE WEREN'T TRYING FOR THE TOUCHDOWN!

Really? OMG ..... They WANTED to force the Jets to go 80 yards, with no timeouts and make a touchdown ....

Wow .....

This is exactly what they should've done. A FG makes it a TD game and a TD also keeps it at a one score game. So, the options were:

up 4 with 40 seconds to go and no timeouts

or

up 4-8 with somewhere between 1:20 - 2:00 with one or two timeouts left...

I was on the phone with Barrett yelling that they need to run it three times, not score a TD before 3rd down, no matter what.

Best laid plans... The reality is that the defense is so bad, there is no way for the offense to account for it.

CloakNNNdagger
11-22-2010, 01:00 PM
Listening to Matt on 610, discussing the last drive. Kubes says we're gonna run it three times, make them burn time outs and kick the field goal ....

Then he hits us with WE WEREN'T TRYING FOR THE TOUCHDOWN!

Really? OMG ..... They WANTED to force the Jets to go 80 yards, with no timeouts and make a touchdown ....

Wow .....

Schaub actually gave that interview after the game. It was covered on the post game show.............that's when I turned 610 off.............couldn't take anymore.:gun:

Hervoyel
11-22-2010, 01:09 PM
It was the right call. Removing time from the clock was more valuable than points. It's just that no one knew our secondary would lose it for us, which is still on Gary.

Every one knew but Gary Kubiak. What an oracle ol' Kubes is.

This from 3rd and Inches is true for me. I was certain of the outcome the moment Rackers came out to kick the FG. It's like I could see exactly how this was going to play out and I was right.

utahmark
11-22-2010, 01:15 PM
You know ive never seen a team drive down the field with no time outs and 50sec left and score a td. I've seen fluke plays at the end of games that end up scoring td's but they actually had a real drive down the field. Hell, they left 10 sec on the clock. they had time for 2 more plays. The one play over the middle where they had to come up and kill the clock, they killed the clock in about half the time it usually takes us.

kiwitexansfan
11-22-2010, 01:26 PM
Don't you have to trust your defense at some point? As a coach you have to show a belief in your players.

Playing to kill the clock and then trust your defense is doing just that.

Mr teX
11-22-2010, 01:28 PM
Don't you have to trust your defense at some point? As a coach you have to show a belief in your players.

Playing to kill the clock and then trust your defense is doing just that.

That's the thing....he would've had to trust them no matter if we scored a fg or a TD. & at this point, is there any doubt the defense would've failed?

OzzO
11-22-2010, 01:30 PM
I think Schaub has bought out of Kubiak's leadership - if not fully, pretty close. Just from recent remarks from him and it seems he kinda nudges the coach in front of the bus on occasions.

I was even wondering when we went on that tear late in the game to come back from 16 down if Schaub "turned off" his helmet so the coach couldn't call in the plays to the field.

kiwitexansfan
11-22-2010, 01:36 PM
That's the thing....he would've had to trust them no matter if we scored a fg or a TD. & at this point, is there any doubt the defense would've failed?

The defense was playing solidly yesterday till the epic disaster.

GP
11-22-2010, 01:41 PM
This from 3rd and Inches is true for me. I was certain of the outcome the moment Rackers came out to kick the FG. It's like I could see exactly how this was going to play out and I was right.

Yeah, I knew it too.

I knew we would have a four-man rush, maybe a 3-man rush on the QB. I knew we'd leave a LB or two out there. And I knew the DBs would royally blow their assignments in grand fashion.

I'v ehad that same feeling when I knew we'd end up winning, such as the Redskins game this year. I just knew that once we sent it to overtime, that Rackers would end up nailing a FG for a win.

That feeling is awesome when you end up winning. And it's gut-wrenching when you end up losing. I am sure some Redskins fans yesterday were laughing at us when they saw how we lost the game.

That's how this thing called NFL goes.

chicagotexan2
11-22-2010, 01:46 PM
I watched Full Metal Jacket and this guy looks just like Shaub. It's only fitting. The Texans keep getting on their knees and 'choking themselves'.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_tbbBo5gDRlg/SxUHFEDpJ6I/AAAAAAAAAuo/VAQWO-ZBv9k/s1600/fmji9.jpeg

http://www.blogcdn.com/backporch.fanhouse.com/media/2010/11/matt-schaub-scary-face-bp.jpg

fiasco west
11-22-2010, 02:59 PM
we don't win with a TD, we only make the jets have to convert a 2 pt conversion to tie it if they somehow went 80 yards in a minute to score a TD. Given what wound up happening, do you have any doubt that the jets wouldn't have been able to get a measley ol' 2 pt. conversion after marching down the field inside a minute?

I'm actually considering that if they get a TD, they also go for the 2 pts. At that point you are completely committed to winning the game on that drive.

It's still lame that he's telling his offensive unit that settling for the 3 points is all we need. This is the point of the game where you say something motivational. I know I know everyone always says "These guys should already be motivated." but it's odd how Santonio talks about how Rex said to them with a smile on his face "We've been here before."

I think this is the area Kubiak fails, just my opinion. He doesn't have his guys mentally prepared to play full games.

Hervoyel
11-22-2010, 03:03 PM
I'm actually considering that if they get a TD, they also go for the 2 pts. At that point you are completely committed to winning the game on that drive.


But in 8 years of football the only thing the Texans have ever been "completely commiteed" to doing is making sure that everyone attending todays game has "The most family-friendly fun-tastic gameday experience in forever! (TM)!"

Completely Committed is a term that does not appear in the Texans Fan Dictionary to date. It might get in there someday but until we see an example of it actually happening in a Texans uniform it doesn't belong in there.

Fico
11-22-2010, 03:05 PM
Causing the Jets to burn the TOs was the right call. 90% of the time the team in our situation wins that game. We fall into the 10% because or players don't know how to win. Winners make players, loser's don't. Simple as that.

Hervoyel
11-22-2010, 03:09 PM
Causing the Jets to burn the TOs was the right call. 90% of the time the team in our situation wins that game. We fall into the 10% because or players don't know how to win. Winners make players, loser's don't. Simple as that.

90% of the time the team in our situation isn't sporting the worst secondary in NFL history.

90% of the time we seem to do the thing that works "90% of the time" and it turns around and bites us in the ass. What's wrong with Kubiak calling his offense to the sideline and telling them "Here's where we put these bastards down. We're going to score on this drive and then get the two point conversion and win this game right here!"?

If it doesn't work I'd sure as hell rather hear him say "Well I tried to win it outright on that drive" than hear him tell us how he was trying to eat clock (this from the man who can't manage a clock to save his life) and kick a FG, then rely on the worst defense in football (still yet to be determined, I hear we're on a upswing.... again).

keyser
11-22-2010, 03:12 PM
The problem was not with the three runs - I think they handled that just fine You needed them to burn their timeouts. Maybe they could have passed on the 3rd down play, but even there, you want to be sure to protect the ball (a 4 point lead is much better than a 1 point lead). Plus, I think I would take the additional 30 seconds they got from running on the final play, rather than a probably 1-in-3 chance at 4 extra points.

To drive the length of the field in 50 seconds with no timeouts is incredibly difficult, assuming the other team won't let you get long pass plays that go out of bounds. Of course, the Texans did exactly that - basically the one type of play that could kill them is exactly what they allowed. Had that 40 yard or whatever play stayed in bounds, or had we forced them to run 4-6 short plays to get that 40 yards, chances are very low that they could convert the TD.

Kaiser Toro
11-22-2010, 03:14 PM
90% of the time the team in our situation isn't sporting the worst secondary in NFL history.

90% of the time we seem to do the thing that works "90% of the time" and it turns around and bites us in the ass. What's wrong with Kubiak calling his offense to the sideline and telling them "Here's where we put these bastards down. We're going to score on this drive and then get the two point conversion and win this game right here!"?


This has the feel of Sex Panther by Odeon. A formidable scent, stings the nostrils.

Pantherstang84
11-22-2010, 03:20 PM
This has the feel of Sex Panther by Odeon. A formidable scent, stings the nostrils.

I should rep you for the Ron Burgundy reference.

Hervoyel
11-22-2010, 03:24 PM
This has the feel of Sex Panther by Odeon. A formidable scent, stings the nostrils.

I swear I didn't think about it at the time but when I just re-read it I could only hear it Ron Burgandy's voice. Nicely done sir.

run-david-run
11-22-2010, 03:42 PM
It was the right call. Removing time from the clock was more valuable than points. It's just that no one knew our secondary would lose it for us, which is still on Gary.

That is in no way the right call. It's the conventional wisdom, which is fine, if you have a conventional team. We have the worst defense in the NFL and arguably the worst secondary in the history of the league. We also happen to have an offense that has scored 17 points in the second half and has the Jets off balance.
Honestly, the thing that annoys me most is that we don't learn from our mistakes. I bet if the same situation comes up next week, we'll play for the field goal again and looked shocked when the defense caves yet again.
At some point, you have to accept the D isn't stopping anyone, in any situation of any importance, and start playing offense and special teams accordingly (ie, scoring at least 30 in every game, because we haven't won a game this season when we don't reach 30.)

Fico
11-22-2010, 03:43 PM
90/10 odds are still to good to pass up even with our horrible secondary. Hell if Mario or Antonio make either one of the sacks in which they had hands on Sanchez the game is over. If Wilson is 2 steps quicker the game is over. That's 3 plays out of 5 that could have ended the game where guys had legit opportunities and didn't make it happen.

The calls at the end of the game put us in the best position to win, the fact is the players at still have to make the play. 2 deep man under is the safest coverage we could be playing, and is designed to defend against throws just like the one that was completed to Braylon.

Winners make plays, losers don't. Wilson needs to be sat, I would rather Nolan screw up due to inexperience than watch our experienced safety be two steps to slow to help stop a play that will cost us the game.

run-david-run
11-22-2010, 03:44 PM
The problem was not with the three runs - I think they handled that just fine You needed them to burn their timeouts. Maybe they could have passed on the 3rd down play, but even there, you want to be sure to protect the ball (a 4 point lead is much better than a 1 point lead). Plus, I think I would take the additional 30 seconds they got from running on the final play, rather than a probably 1-in-3 chance at 4 extra points.

To drive the length of the field in 50 seconds with no timeouts is incredibly difficult, assuming the other team won't let you get long pass plays that go out of bounds. Of course, the Texans did exactly that - basically the one type of play that could kill them is exactly what they allowed. Had that 40 yard or whatever play stayed in bounds, or had we forced them to run 4-6 short plays to get that 40 yards, chances are very low that they could convert the TD.

You do realize this defense just came off a 2-play, 64 yard TD, 8-second drive to lose a game last week, right? Once you accomplish that, 70 yards in 45 seconds (and the Jets only needed 35) is nothing.

CloakNNNdagger
11-22-2010, 03:46 PM
If it doesn't work I'd sure as hell rather hear him say "Well I tried to win it outright on that drive" than hear him tell us how he was trying to eat clock (this from the man who can't manage a clock to save his life) and kick a FG, then rely on the worst defense in football (still yet to be determined, I hear we're on a upswing.... again).


"I can't believe the fans can't see the improvement"
------------------Mr. McNair and Kubiak
http://broadhollow.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Emperors-New-Clothes.jpg

Thorn
11-22-2010, 03:47 PM
You do realize this defense just came off a 2-play, 64 yard TD, 8-second drive to lose a game last week, right? Once you accomplish that, 70 yards in 45 seconds (and the Jets only needed 35) is nothing.

And to think, some of us wanted the return of The House of Pain.

What we got is The House of Shame.

run-david-run
11-22-2010, 03:48 PM
After reading this thread, I have some good news.

There's no point in coming to this website anymore, because most of you simply don't understand football.

Three runs, forcing them to use the clock was the right call. If we scored a TD great, but we wanted to create a situation where the clock was the enemy. No matter how little faith you have in your defense, you HAVE to be able to trust they can't go 80 yards for a TD with 50 seconds left and no timeouts.

Lots to blame Gary about, but that call isn't one of them.

Wasting the opportunity for points at the end of the half - yep, thats on Gary.
A team who's mentality is that they will find a way to lose - yep, thats on Gary.
Putting yourself in a situation where this is your secondary and you really don't have an opportunity to upgrade it until the offseason - also on Gary.

That series of downs is exactly what any winning coach should have done.

I completely disagree. A winning coach puts his team in the best position to win. For this team, that means don't put the game on the D's shoulders, because they can't handle it. You play to your strengths (anyone remember the Jags going for it on 4th and 1 inside their half last week in a tie game because they knew we couldn't stop them and they couldn't stop us?) That's what a coach should do, play to his team strengths.

Fico
11-22-2010, 03:49 PM
You do realize this defense just came off a 2-play, 64 yard TD, 8-second drive to lose a game last week, right? Once you accomplish that, 70 yards in 45 seconds (and the Jets only needed 35) is nothing.


The odds of us stopping them were better than the odds of us scoring a TD. Plus the cost of us not scoring a TD and having the clock stop, with an incomplete pass, or even worse a TO would have made our chances of defending against the last TD even more difficult.

You have to play the odds and even with our craptastic defense the odds were in our favor. Additionally, our defense had been playing very well in the 4th, and they were two finger nails away from sacking Sanchez twice on the last drive. Making those plays is the difference between winning and losing, not the calls in this situation.

No More 8-8's
11-22-2010, 03:51 PM
And to think, some of us wanted the return of The House of Pain.

What we got is The House of Shame.
Well to be fair, we never identified who would be receiving the pain.

run-david-run
11-22-2010, 03:52 PM
That's the thing....he would've had to trust them no matter if we scored a fg or a TD. & at this point, is there any doubt the defense would've failed?

I would honestly have gone for a 2 pt conversion if we scored a TD that last drive. Of course, I would be going for it on most 4th downs and onside kicking at least once a game. At some point, you have to embrace it's going to be a shootout and decide to outscore the other team.

Thorn
11-22-2010, 03:53 PM
Well to be fair, we never identified who would be receiving the pain.

I hate it when that happens. :lol:

run-david-run
11-22-2010, 03:55 PM
The odds of us stopping them were better than the odds of us scoring a TD. Plus the cost of us not scoring a TD and having the clock stop, with an incomplete pass, or even worse a TO would have made our chances of defending against the last TD even more difficult.

You have to play the odds and even with our craptastic defense the odds were in our favor. Additionally, our defense had been playing very well in the 4th, and they were two finger nails away from sacking Sanchez twice on the last drive. Making those plays is the difference between winning and losing, not the calls in this situation.

Well, as it turns out, the odds of us stopping them were 0, and honestly, is anyone genuinely surprised they scored?
I understand why they called it the way they did, and with any other team, I would do the same thing. But how many times can you get burned until you stop sticking your hand in the fire?
If our season is on the line, would you rather it come down to Andre Johnson or Glover Quinn making a play?

Fico
11-22-2010, 04:07 PM
Well, as it turns out, the odds of us stopping them were 0, and honestly, is anyone genuinely surprised they scored?
I understand why they called it the way they did, and with any other team, I would do the same thing. But how many times can you get burned until you stop sticking your hand in the fire?
If our season is on the line, would you rather it come down to Andre Johnson or Glover Quinn making a play?

The first part of this statement doesn't make sense so I will not address it.

Secondly, its not an AJ versus GQ play making debate. If we throw in the redzone, against a top5 defense mind you, we have to score, which is a difficult task in and of itself against a top D with the game on the line. Then we still have to stop the Jets, who would have a TO as well as more time on the clock. So it would actually make their job of scoring a TD easier than it was, the only added difficulty on their part would be having to go for two to tie.

If we don't score a TD and throw an incomplete pass, they have at least 1 maybe 2 TOs left and the clock stops.

The fact is we made their job as difficult as we could and our players could not make a routine play when it counted, in 5 opportunities.

Two missed sacks, and an old slow safety.

keyser
11-22-2010, 04:50 PM
I completely disagree. A winning coach puts his team in the best position to win. For this team, that means don't put the game on the D's shoulders, because they can't handle it. You play to your strengths (anyone remember the Jags going for it on 4th and 1 inside their half last week in a tie game because they knew we couldn't stop them and they couldn't stop us?) That's what a coach should do, play to his team strengths.

On the three previous drives, our defense:
- Forced a fumble
- Made them punt after 16 yards.
- Got an interception
In other words, the defense was actually playing well in the 4th quarter, though obviously they fell apart on the last drive. Your anger should be focused on that final defensive collapse, not on the previous series.

Really - if you have so little confidence in the defense, then why would you have wanted to try to pass for a TD? If the defense can't stop a team with 50 seconds and no timeouts from getting a TD, then why do you think they'd have done better at stopping them from getting a TD and 2-point conversion (to tie) if we'd given them even more time, and left them some time outs? Or, are you trying to argue that we were better off playing to win the coin toss?

Good defense or bad, we made the right call in running in that situation. There are plenty of places to direct anger at this loss - those calls aren't it.

TheMatrix31
11-22-2010, 05:04 PM
What would you guys have said if we didn't get the touchdown, then the Jets came back and only had to go 65 yards to get into FG range so we lose on a game-winning kick?

Ole Miss Texan
11-22-2010, 05:07 PM
What would you guys have said if we didn't get the touchdown, then the Jets came back and only had to go 65 yards to get into FG range so we lose on a game-winning kick?

That likely would have happened and everyone would be calling for Kubiak's head for making a dumba$$ call going for it.

utahmark
11-22-2010, 05:09 PM
You do realize this defense just came off a 2-play, 64 yard TD, 8-second drive to lose a game last week, right? Once you accomplish that, 70 yards in 45 seconds (and the Jets only needed 35) is nothing.

that was a fluke play. what happened this week was totally diff.

devo-x
11-22-2010, 05:10 PM
Why can't our Defense score any TDs? It would have made it easier it Bentley ran it into the end zone, kicked the extra point, recovered onside kick and killed the remaining time off the clock

TexansSeminole
11-22-2010, 05:15 PM
What would you guys have said if we didn't get the touchdown, then the Jets came back and only had to go 65 yards to get into FG range so we lose on a game-winning kick?

I would have lost it. That's why it's the right move to run the clock down and try to get in the end-zone by running the football.

Ole Miss Texan
11-22-2010, 05:18 PM
Why can't our Defense score any TDs? It would have made it easier it Bentley ran it into the end zone, kicked the extra point, recovered onside kick and killed the remaining time off the clock

A lady caller into the radio show this morning was blaming Bentley for returning it and running it out of bounds. She said how dumb the Texans are because he should have just caught it and kneeled it so the clock kept running.

:clap: Thank you for the humor texans fans, these are the people calling our texans crap :clap:

TexansSeminole
11-22-2010, 05:24 PM
A lady caller into the radio show this morning was blaming Bentley for returning it and running it out of bounds. She said how dumb the Texans are because he should have just caught it and kneeled it so the clock kept running.

:clap: Thank you for the humor texans fans, these are the people calling our texans crap :clap:

It's amazing. Everyday I read similar posts on this very board.

ChampionTexan
11-22-2010, 05:29 PM
A lady caller into the radio show this morning was blaming Bentley for returning it and running it out of bounds. She said how dumb the Texans are because he should have just caught it and kneeled it so the clock kept running.

:clap: Thank you for the humor texans fans, these are the people calling our texans crap :clap:

Maybe what she really wanted him to do was just run around the field with the Jets offensive players chasing him until the time ran out. Think of the opening to Benny Hill - complete with the music playing over the New Meadowlands PA system.

thunderkyss
11-22-2010, 05:42 PM
Listening to Matt on 610, discussing the last drive. Kubes says we're gonna run it three times, make them burn time outs and kick the field goal ....

Then he hits us with WE WEREN'T TRYING FOR THE TOUCHDOWN!

Really? OMG ..... They WANTED to force the Jets to go 80 yards, with no timeouts and make a touchdown ....

Wow .....

If anyone gets a chance to watch those plays again, please take a look at Eric Winston & let me know what you think.

thunderkyss
11-22-2010, 05:46 PM
Don't see how we can blame them for that, I would have been irate if we had thrown an in-completion there. Running three times was the right call. Teams are not supposed to be able to march 70 plus yards for a TD in under 50 seconds.

Today, the problem is that we gave the ball to Arian Foster 3 times in a row in the red zone.

This is what "we've" been asking him to do for weeks.

It didn't work, it was obviously a bad decision by Kubiak to tell Foster to just run around, eat up clock, & stay out of the end zone.


please try to keep up.

thunderkyss
11-22-2010, 05:48 PM
It was the percentage play. Even if Kubiak were as pessimistic about his defense as he should be it was the right move. There are PLENTY of things to get upset at Kubiak for, I just don't believe this specific instance is one of them. Just because our defense is one of the worst of all time it doesn't we mean we should onside kick everytime we score does it? (actually that sounds like a decent idea..... GAH)

Don't forget that defense made it possible for us to get the lead, then to extend that lead. They were playing pretty good there.

TheMatrix31
11-22-2010, 06:04 PM
Today, the problem is that we gave the problem to Arian Foster 3 times in a row in the red zone.

This is what "we've" been asking him to do for weeks.

It didn't work, it was obviously a bad decision by Kubiak to tell Foster to just run around, eat up clock, & stay out of the end zone.


please try to keep up.

Some people will never be happy.

mridge01
11-22-2010, 06:20 PM
So I also saw this retread from ol Kube's in today's Chron.com article.
"we got to get this fixed." Ahhh, you've been saying that for 12 weeks now, and it's getting a little too late to matter.

CloakNNNdagger
11-22-2010, 06:21 PM
A lady caller into the radio show this morning was blaming Bentley for returning it and running it out of bounds. She said how dumb the Texans are because he should have just caught it and kneeled it so the clock kept running.

:clap: Thank you for the humor texans fans, these are the people calling our texans crap :clap:


I believe the clock stops at the end of a turnover play, whether it ends in bounds or out of bounds.

Dishman
11-22-2010, 06:23 PM
So I also saw this retread from ol Kube's in today's Chron.com article.
"we got to get this fixed." Ahhh, you've been saying that for 12 weeks now, and it's getting a little too late to matter.


12 weeks my ass. Try 4 1/2 seasons.

Jackie Chiles
11-22-2010, 06:32 PM
Don't forget that defense made it possible for us to get the lead, then to extend that lead. They were playing pretty good there.

I agree, against that offense our front 7 pretty much played out of their mind most of the day. Made the defense watchable to me for a change. If we could just bottle that intensity and combine it with some new personnel and coaching in the secondary I could get back on their bandwagon pretty quick. I've been thinking a lot about that lately and I think its steering my preference for the future coach to be a defensive 4-3 guy. Bring on Perry Fewell!

fiasco west
11-22-2010, 08:16 PM
What would you guys have said if we didn't get the touchdown, then the Jets came back and only had to go 65 yards to get into FG range so we lose on a game-winning kick?

I'm not arguing about what he should have done. He did the right thing, run the ball 3 times and go for the FG if you can't score on 3 runs.

The problem I have is what he told the team before the drive supposedly.

PapaL
11-22-2010, 08:25 PM
Why is the fg the right thing to do in this case?

I much rather would have gone for it on 4th.
Worst case we don't convert and they have to drive the same amount of yards they ended up driving to kick a game winning FG.
Best case - God forbid we actually score a damn TD.

I'm tired of always being a damn FG contest.

Wolf
11-22-2010, 08:27 PM
I'm not arguing about what he should have done. He did the right thing, run the ball 3 times and go for the FG if you can't score on 3 runs.

The problem I have is what he told the team before the drive supposedly.

I have a problem with that part also guess the Texans wanted to be nice and didn't want to put them away

at least we do have some killer instinct :sarcasm:
http://www.trafficgenerationcafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/funny_killer_dog.jpg

run-david-run
11-22-2010, 09:34 PM
On the three previous drives, our defense:
- Forced a fumble
- Made them punt after 16 yards.
- Got an interception
In other words, the defense was actually playing well in the 4th quarter, though obviously they fell apart on the last drive. Your anger should be focused on that final defensive collapse, not on the previous series.

Really - if you have so little confidence in the defense, then why would you have wanted to try to pass for a TD? If the defense can't stop a team with 50 seconds and no timeouts from getting a TD, then why do you think they'd have done better at stopping them from getting a TD and 2-point conversion (to tie) if we'd given them even more time, and left them some time outs? Or, are you trying to argue that we were better off playing to win the coin toss?

Good defense or bad, we made the right call in running in that situation. There are plenty of places to direct anger at this loss - those calls aren't it.

Look, I'm not arguing from a conventional wisdom, even rational perspective, because this team defies both. We have a terrible, abominable defense. Can we agree on this?
Yes? Good.
Now I'm making the radical suggestion that we actually consider that in our decision making. Assume you're going to give up a touchdown on the next series, and play offense accordingly.
Had we actually stopped the Jets and only given up 23 points, that would, amazingly have been our season low, and been the only time this year we would have won a game while scoring less than 30 points.
Just because we almost stopped them, just because we had previously stopped them, doesn't mean this defense can be trusted, and it amazes me that Kubiak is willing to throw away his job on a group that continually fails him instead of trying to get 10 yards.

run-david-run
11-22-2010, 09:39 PM
What would you guys have said if we didn't get the touchdown, then the Jets came back and only had to go 65 yards to get into FG range so we lose on a game-winning kick?

"Going for the TD" just means running your offense instead of 3 dives. You could do that and still get a FG if you don't score. I would have gone with a roll out to the right on 1st down and looked for AJ or Dreessen. If it's not there, Matt can get whatever he can and get down, which would have actually taken more time than three runs up the gut, even if it fails.

run-david-run
11-22-2010, 09:41 PM
I agree, against that offense our front 7 pretty much played out of their mind most of the day. Made the defense watchable to me for a change. If we could just bottle that intensity and combine it with some new personnel and coaching in the secondary I could get back on their bandwagon pretty quick. I've been thinking a lot about that lately and I think its steering my preference for the future coach to be a defensive 4-3 guy. Bring on Perry Fewell!

The thing is, we tend to really struggle in 2 minute drill situations because the pass rushers get tired, and that leaves it up to the secondary to actually hold up for a second or two. We know how that goes.

TheMatrix31
11-22-2010, 09:41 PM
"Going for the TD" just means running your offense instead of 3 dives. You could do that and still get a FG if you don't score. I would have gone with a roll out to the right on 1st down and looked for AJ or Dreessen. If it's not there, Matt can get whatever he can and get down, which would have actually taken more time than three runs up the gut, even if it fails.


And what if Matt did one of his patented "Shitty-Throws-Of-The-Game" and throws a pick?

He was already horribly inaccurate all game.

kiwitexansfan
11-22-2010, 09:42 PM
I believe the clock stops at the end of a turnover play, whether it ends in bounds or out of bounds.

I think Ole Miss was mocking the caller for knowing little about the actual rules of football yet thinking enough of themselves to call a show to criticize people who do this for a living.

run-david-run
11-22-2010, 09:43 PM
And what if Matt did one of his patented "Shitty-Throws-Of-The-Game" and throws a pick?

He was already horribly inaccurate all game.

This is true, and definitely a risk, but Arizona last year aside, he's generally nails in the last couple of minutes. Also why I'd go for a roll out, which cuts down the reads/options and makes for a pretty simple play, which the Jets had struggled defending all day.
I'm not saying it's not risky, but look at how the "safe" option ended up.

Jackie Chiles
11-22-2010, 10:17 PM
This is true, and definitely a risk, but Arizona last year aside, he's generally nails in the last couple of minutes. Also why I'd go for a roll out, which cuts down the reads/options and makes for a pretty simple play, which the Jets had struggled defending all day.
I'm not saying it's not risky, but look at how the "safe" option ended up.

Just because the call didn't work out doesn't mean it was the wrong call. We are a bad team so good percentage plays become less effective, but poor percentage plays, like the ones you are calling for, also take a hit. Its a lose lose situation but Kubiak was in the right in this instance. When we get a more capable head coach he will make this call and no one is going to bat an eyelash.

thunderkyss
11-22-2010, 10:26 PM
Even if you aren't trying for a touchdown, you have to get a first down and run out the clock. If that means calling a pass play, make it a high percentage pass play like a HB or WR screen. Or try a misdirection HB toss or something. You have to do something to get the first down.

This is the only sensible post I've read regarding that series.

Wolf
11-22-2010, 10:32 PM
if only we had Chris brown to throw a pass :sarcasm:


if we got a first down, it would have been on the goal line so might as well punched it in

thunderkyss
11-22-2010, 10:35 PM
I also think people are taking that statement out of context.



and the guy who didnt franchise tag Pay me Rick .... Or at least find a veteran corner via FA to help fill the void rather than expecting a rookie to be all world.

I'm watching Champ Bailey & the Denver secondary getting eaten alive.

The rookie doesn't have to be all world.

RTP2110
11-22-2010, 10:37 PM
This is the only sensible post I've read regarding that series.

The touchdown wasn't what was important, getting the first down, killing the clock, ending the game. That's what was important, that's what we failed to do, that's what our coaches failed to see.

Not sure if srs...

Getting a 1st down was not an option. It was 1st and goal from the 10. We either had to score a TD or run 3 plays and try a FG. Either way the Jets were getting the ball again.

DerekLee1
11-22-2010, 10:38 PM
Maybe what she really wanted him to do was just run around the field with the Jets offensive players chasing him until the time ran out. Think of the opening to Benny Hill - complete with the music playing over the New Meadowlands PA system.

With hot women in lingerie!!

Speedy
11-22-2010, 10:40 PM
Originally Posted by eriadoc
Even if you aren't trying for a touchdown, you have to get a first down and run out the clock. If that means calling a pass play, make it a high percentage pass play like a HB or WR screen. Or try a misdirection HB toss or something. You have to do something to get the first down.This is the only sensible post I've read regarding that series.

The touchdown wasn't what was important, getting the first down, killing the clock, ending the game. That's what was important, that's what we failed to do, that's what our coaches failed to see.

It was GOAL TO GO!! Do you people even watch the game?

You run 3 times and make the Jets burn their timeouts. The Jets know you're going to run 3 times because that's what you are supposed to do. And they have a pretty good run defense. I don't think they weren't "trying" to score a TD it's just that the Jets stopped them.

And don't start with the all the more reason to pull out the bag of tricks BS. They did what they were supposed to do. If the defense does what they're supposed to do, nobody is talking about these 3 running plays.

thunderkyss
11-22-2010, 10:48 PM
It was GOAL TO GO!! Do you people even watch the game?


Yeah, I realized that after I had replied..... I didn't get to watch the game, heard it on the radio.

My fault for trusting a fellow poster.

RTP2110
11-22-2010, 10:48 PM
It was GOAL TO GO!! Do you people even watch the game?

You run 3 times and make the Jets burn their timeouts. The Jets know you're going to run 3 times because that's what you are supposed to do. And they have a pretty good run defense. I don't think they weren't "trying" to score a TD it's just that the Jets stopped them.

And don't start with the all the more reason to pull out the bag of tricks BS. They did what they were supposed to do. If the defense does what they're supposed to do, nobody is talking about these 3 running plays.

Apparently, that's exactly what Kubiak said to Schaub.

thunderkyss
11-22-2010, 10:50 PM
What we should have done, was go for it on 4th down, hand the ball off to Arian, and let him run the wrong way for 45 seconds, then throw the ball out of bounds.

Speedy
11-22-2010, 10:56 PM
Apparently, that's exactly what Kubiak said to Schaub.

It should have read "I don't think they were trying NOT to score a TD".

My bad.

thegr8fan
11-22-2010, 11:02 PM
(on people saying he didn’t even want to score a touchdown following the interception and that’s why they continued to run the ball) “We want to score a touchdown every time we run a play. We ran our three best four minute, two-tight plays, where we tighten down the formations. We’re trying to make sure we stay in bounds. The goal was to make them use their timeouts. The other goal, obviously, is if we can score, we want to score. I think we did everything we possibly wanted to do there other than the fact we didn’t score a touchdown. We made them use their timeouts. We gave them the ball back with 49 seconds. We’re up by four. We should win that game.”Kubiaks, remarks on his press conference with the media.

so who do we think is telling the whole truth here. According to Kubiak we WERE going for a TD. According to Schaub, Kubiak said we were just wasting the clock and taking a FG.

Perhaps the idea that Kubiak has 'lost' Schaub's confidence, and Schaub is throwing his coach under the bus, so to speak, holds some merit?

Wolf
11-22-2010, 11:05 PM
:thinking: so.. we have a finesse team and we are going to run it against the rush defense of the jets in a "big" formation.

I like the call of running it, but short field 10 yards to go, why not spread that defense out and run it? Hell they knew we were going to run it

(I still have what Matt said on the brain)

Speedy
11-22-2010, 11:10 PM
:thinking: so.. we have a finesse team and we are going to run it against the rush defense of the jets in a "big" formation.

I like the call of running it, but short field 10 yards to go, why not spread that defense out and run it? Hell they knew we were going to run it

(I still have what Matt said on the brain)

Just because you think they're a finesse team doesn't mean they are.

Kimmy
11-22-2010, 11:13 PM
Kubiaks, remarks on his press conference with the media.

so who do we think is telling the whole truth here. According to Kubiak we WERE going for a TD. According to Schaub, Kubiak said we were just wasting the clock and taking a FG.

Perhaps the idea that Kubiak has 'lost' Schaub's confidence, and Schaub is throwing his coach under the bus, so to speak, holds some merit?

You know, I thought about Matt throwing him under the bus. I listened again, and he clearly says that is not what was coming through to him (on taking a shot)

It's such a cluster, I don't know what to think anymore.

Here's the link, start listening at the 4 minute mark.

http://kilt.cbslocal.com/2010/11/22/matt-schaub-with-marc-and-john-112210/

BattleRedToro
11-22-2010, 11:19 PM
Guys, no reason to get angry over this. It's the same thing every coach in the NFL would do. Except maybe Bellicheck? Obviously they preferred a TD over FG. If not, they would have simply kneeled it three times. What Kubiak was simply saying is don't do anything stupid like get out of bounds, turn it over, or thrown an incomplete pass in an effort to try to get a TD. Killing time and timeouts was more valuable than 4 points. I would have been much more angry if they threw an incompletion.

It may be the percentage play, but killing time isn't worth more than a TD plus a 2 Pt Conversion there. If the Texans do that then the Jets would have had to score a TD and a FG to win.

Speedy
11-22-2010, 11:25 PM
It may be the percentage play, but killing time isn't worth more than a TD plus a 2 Pt Conversion there. If the Texans do that then the Jets would have had to score a TD and a FG to win.

LMFAO!!! I give up.

RTP2110
11-22-2010, 11:32 PM
It may be the percentage play, but killing time isn't worth more than a TD plus a 2 Pt Conversion there. If the Texans do that then the Jets would have had to score a TD and a FG to win.


I agree if they were to go for 2 and get it to go up by 9. But, I don't think they woulda went for 2 after a TD there.

Dishman
11-22-2010, 11:47 PM
What we should have done, was go for it on 4th down, hand the ball off to Arian, and let him run the wrong way for 45 seconds, then throw the ball out of bounds.

LOL! I think maybe you nailed this one.

run-david-run
11-24-2010, 02:11 PM
Just because the call didn't work out doesn't mean it was the wrong call. We are a bad team so good percentage plays become less effective, but poor percentage plays, like the ones you are calling for, also take a hit. Its a lose lose situation but Kubiak was in the right in this instance. When we get a more capable head coach he will make this call and no one is going to bat an eyelash.

No, we're a very good offense with a very, very bad defense. This is my whole point. If you're great at one thing and terrible at another, live and die with your strength instead of your weakness.

HJam72
11-24-2010, 02:59 PM
This is one of those situations where most coaches would have done the same thing, and it's still the WRONG choice.

Surreal McCoy
11-24-2010, 03:30 PM
This is one of those situations where most coaches would have done the same thing, and it's still the WRONG choice.

Hindsight is 20/20 eh?

HJam72
11-24-2010, 03:45 PM
Hindsight is 20/20 eh?

Yes! :)


Seriously, look at our O and look at our D. Besides that, the league is just geared toward scoring, especially late in games. Ya gotta know that they're gonna score when they get the ball back. Happens every time.

Surreal McCoy
11-24-2010, 03:58 PM
Happens every time.

With our D, yes. But you still have to take the high percentage option and trust the D to come through for once. They did the right thing, there's just no compensating for how insanely stupid our players can be.

HJam72
11-24-2010, 04:07 PM
I think we should:

Do the onside kick every time.

Use the 2 minute offense all of every game.

Blitz as many it takes to get to the QB, because that's the only thing that works for Ds.

Pay the refs (and make sure we pay them more than the other team does...).

vupac1
11-26-2010, 03:28 PM
Kubiaks, remarks on his press conference with the media.

so who do we think is telling the whole truth here. According to Kubiak we WERE going for a TD. According to Schaub, Kubiak said we were just wasting the clock and taking a FG.

Perhaps the idea that Kubiak has 'lost' Schaub's confidence, and Schaub is throwing his coach under the bus, so to speak, holds some merit?

I think Kub's best case scenario was to run into the line on 1st and 2nd down burning clock but hoping to score a TD on 3rd down. (I'm hoping that's what he was envisiong at least)

That's why I thought 1st and 2nd down went great, but I would have called a more spread 3 WR spread out offense and let Arian run a draw on 3rd and goal.. but hey, what do I know