PDA

View Full Version : Our offense is way overated.


Pages : [1] 2

gafftop
04-20-2011, 10:12 PM
At the beginning of the game when it still mattered and the other team was interested the Texans were not good in many of the games. My feeling is that the other team got so far ahead that they either lost their intensity or changed their defense. Either that or the Texans were easy to figure out at the beginning during the scripted portion of the game. Whether the team was outmanned at the beginning or out coached it really doesn't matter they were not that good. I think they do need another quality receiver. I don't want to hear that jacoby or dorin are going to step up. You know the more I post the more depressed I get about the coming season. This year in the last game of the season that means absolutely NOTHING lose the damn game and get a better draft choice. Get your head out of your *** and think about the future. Give the backup QB some experience or maybe showcase one of the backups to entice a trade. And the beat goes on.

Ryan
04-20-2011, 10:27 PM
Alrighty then.

El Tejano
04-20-2011, 10:27 PM
At the beginning of the game when it still mattered and the other team was interested the Texans were not good in many of the games. My feeling is that the other team got so far ahead that they either lost their intensity or changed their defense. Either that or the Texans were easy to figure out at the beginning during the scripted portion of the game. Whether the team was outmanned at the beginning or out coached it really doesn't matter they were not that good. I think they do need another quality receiver. I don't want to hear that jacoby or dorin are going to step up. You know the more I post the more depressed I get about the coming season. This year in the last game of the season that means absolutely NOTHING lose the damn game and get a better draft choice. Get your head out of your *** and think about the future. Give the backup QB some experience or maybe showcase one of the backups to entice a trade. And the beat goes on.

Well, your post is one reason why I wouldn't be too shocked if Julio Jones fell to us and we picked him. For pretty much the reasons you suggested. Then when you figure that Andre Johnson has been hurt quite a bit over the last 3 seasons (which you gotta attribute some of the offensive sluggishness to not having him in the lineup) and then our depth is not where it needs to be on the WR corp. Even Kubes is quoted as saying that you are mistaken if you think they feel the offense is where it needs to be.

I do disagree that we are overrated. I believe much of it had to do with us getting our heads out of our butt be it the coaches or the players. Schaub has proven that he can move the ball and when the team is behind he can play well, and he he's done it with very little of a wr corp. If not for OD and Foster our passing game might be worse. What I noticed was a failure to adjust at halftime (San Diego, even Tenn at home) we came out tough and would look like crap in the second half. However, a team with a decent defense makes for a win (like the Tenn game at home showed) in those situations.

ArlingtonTexan
04-20-2011, 10:45 PM
The offense is efficient and effective, but is not tempo dictating often enough. The best offenses in the league don't really have much better stats, but do what they want more than the Texans who tend take what's given. Honestly, not sure, if adding bodies can change the "attitude" of the offense.

Norg
04-20-2011, 10:54 PM
i agree u know the funny thig is in 2009 we started fast but ended slow

-Going up 20+ on the Miami COlts San fran and others only two meltdown in the 3rd and 4th

thus the term jeckle and hyde came upon are team in the indivual games and the records 7-9 8-8 8-8 9-7

but in 2010 in was in reverse we started off slow only to end Fast

but iDKnow if u compare our Offensive to our peers in the AFC south i;d say we are right up there with the colts maybe even better at some thing even

now that we got Foster we are over the top we can Pass and RUN

Big Lou
04-20-2011, 11:16 PM
Yeh they suck.

Matt Schaub: Wet noodle arm, injury prone, ill timed interceptions, only throws for over 4k per year.

Arian Foster: No better than an UFA, any RB with a 4+ YPC can't be any good.

Andre Johnson: Only bright spot, but he's just ah-ite. Too bad the Lions took Charles Rogers, we should have traded up.

Kevin Walters: Probably couldn't make any other teams roster.

Owen Daniels/Joel Dreessen: No wonder we keep drafting TE's every year.

Vonta Leach: couldn't open up a can of Pringles.


Screw drafting D, we desperately need to upgrade this pathetic Offense!!!! The Defense was just underrated last year, the statistics were skewed because of playing in the AFC South.

Sorry to be such a D--k, but even if our O is overrated, we could field the entire AFC Pro Bowl Offense, and we would still be 8 and 8 with the defensive scheme from last year. Lets draft 7 or 8 defenders this year and then lets talk WR in 2012.

Again sorry to be so mean, but I hate reading we should have lost a game for the draft. Besides drafting in the top 5 costs too much.

eriadoc
04-20-2011, 11:24 PM
The defense usually gave up 2+TDs in the first half last year. The offense usually scored 1 or fewer TDs in the first half last year.

Those are both problems. Stats don't overcome either of those facts.

Texanmike02
04-20-2011, 11:39 PM
Just out of idle curiosity, is there any chance that the offense takes a while to get going now because we run the ball? I mean there is something to be said for a team that runs the ball the way we did consistently. In the past we've been on the other end of a lot of games where we seemed to wear down on defense... and that seems like what happened to those other teams. If we had half a decent defense... heck if we finished in the top 22 or so we'd have made the playoffs. I don't know that you can say our offense is overrated so much as our defense is even more overrated than we ever knew. We literally lost a game in which we scored the game winning touch down. Oh, no... wait... there are more than 15 seconds left... yeah... kinda like that.

Mike

Brisco_County
04-20-2011, 11:43 PM
...You know the more I post the more depressed I get about the coming season...

There's a way to fix that you know.

EllisUnit
04-20-2011, 11:46 PM
Just out of idle curiosity, is there any chance that the offense takes a while to get going now because we run the ball? I mean there is something to be said for a team that runs the ball the way we did consistently. In the past we've been on the other end of a lot of games where we seemed to wear down on defense... and that seems like what happened to those other teams. If we had half a decent defense... heck if we finished in the top 22 or so we'd have made the playoffs. I don't know that you can say our offense is overrated so much as our defense is even more overrated than we ever knew. We literally lost a game in which we scored the game winning touch down. Oh, no... wait... there are more than 15 seconds left... yeah... kinda like that.

Mike

:thisbig: Agree.

Norg
04-21-2011, 01:47 AM
i was comparing our WR to the JAGS and titans and we so out class them

Oline RB TE QB in everything

U know whos the QB of the titans right now

Ratliff & Rusty Smith

yup the got rid of Old kerry collins

brakos82
04-21-2011, 01:56 AM
There's a way to fix that you know.

:heh:

SAMURAITEXAN
04-21-2011, 02:02 AM
Just out of idle curiosity, is there any chance that the offense takes a while to get going now because we run the ball? I mean there is something to be said for a team that runs the ball the way we did consistently. In the past we've been on the other end of a lot of games where we seemed to wear down on defense... and that seems like what happened to those other teams. If we had half a decent defense... heck if we finished in the top 22 or so we'd have made the playoffs. I don't know that you can say our offense is overrated so much as our defense is even more overrated than we ever knew. We literally lost a game in which we scored the game winning touch down. Oh, no... wait... there are more than 15 seconds left... yeah... kinda like that.

Mike

Yap, you said it Mike. This is why we need to draft D more so than O.

Go Texans!!!

gafftop
04-21-2011, 06:50 AM
Alrighty then.

lol

HoustonFrog
04-21-2011, 09:34 AM
I'm a little afraid to respond in here because the topic has been broached many times and this feels like slight baiting :)

I agree with OP that the offense was just as much to blame in many games last year because of their slow starts. As far as blaming I don't know if this is Kubiak game planning, being outcoached, being too simple, ouththinking himself OR the players just never coming out ready..which is on the coaches. Either way it was a big problem. As for the last part about losing that last game..that has never been the way they have worked.

My personal opinion is that once they realized the offense got into a better rhythm in the hurry up they should have started games in it. That doesn't mean throwing. That means get in and out of the huddle and still run as you would whether it be out of the shutgun or under center...just pick up the pace. Yet every game started scripted and uninspired...sans Colts first game. At a certain point in the season why not go with a sped up offense? It almost makes me mad because this is the stuff that I think is directly on Gary and how he has to be in control. I think he will never be outside the box and it will continue to hurt him.

gafftop
04-21-2011, 10:26 AM
I'm a little afraid to respond in here because the topic has been broached many times and this feels like slight baiting :)

I agree with OP that the offense was just as much to blame in many games last year because of theirt slow starts. As far as blaming I don't know if this is Kubiak game planning, being outcoached, being too simple, ouththinking himself OR the players just never coming out ready..which is on the coaches. Either way it was a big problem. As for the last part about losing that last game..that has never been the way they have worked.

My personal opinion is that once they realized the offense got into a better rhythm in the hurry up they should have started games in it. That doesn't mean throwing. That means get in and out of the huddle and still run as you would whether it be out of the shutgun or under center...just pick up the pace. Yet every game started scripted and uninspired...sans Colts first game. At a certain point in the season why not go with a sped up offense? It almost makes me mad because this is the stuff that I think is directly on Gary and how he has to be in control. I think he will never be outside the box and it will continue to hurt him.

Frog,

What you say is the root of my/the problem. With the current head coach and FO I really see no hope in significant strides being made next year that will make us a playoff contender. It just feels to me that this will be a wasted season because I do not have any confidence in the coachingstaff/FO of this team. I know Wade is new and that gives me a very slight ray of hope but that is over shadowed by Kubiak and his buds.
C'mon Kubiak make me eat my words.

Double Barrel
04-21-2011, 10:29 AM
Our offense is highly ranked with regards to statistics!

"Stats are for losers. The final score is for winners."
~ Bill Belichick

:toropalm:

Second Honeymoon
04-21-2011, 10:39 AM
The offense isn't the problem. The problem is leadership, enthusiasm/passion, and obviously the defense.

Another problem is this infatuation and obsession with PR and image. You know what helps PR and image more than spin doctors and the 'aww shucks, our kids are doing their best'? Actually trying to compete for championships and winning football games.

Stop acting like you are anything other than a losing football team with arguably the worst coach/GM combo in the league. Nothing we can do about our moron of an owner, but we could use a new coach and GM. Stat.

steelbtexan
04-21-2011, 11:03 AM
Yeh they suck.

Matt Schaub: Wet noodle arm, injury prone, ill timed interceptions, only throws for over 4k per year.

Arian Foster: No better than an UFA, any RB with a 4+ YPC can't be any good.

Andre Johnson: Only bright spot, but he's just ah-ite. Too bad the Lions took Charles Rogers, we should have traded up.

Kevin Walters: Probably couldn't make any other teams roster.

Owen Daniels/Joel Dreessen: No wonder we keep drafting TE's every year.

Vonta Leach: couldn't open up a can of Pringles.


Screw drafting D, we desperately need to upgrade this pathetic Offense!!!! The Defense was just underrated last year, the statistics were skewed because of playing in the AFC South.

Sorry to be such a D--k, but even if our O is overrated, we could field the entire AFC Pro Bowl Offense, and we would still be 8 and 8 with the defensive scheme from last year. Lets draft 7 or 8 defenders this year and then lets talk WR in 2012.

Again sorry to be so mean, but I hate reading we should have lost a game for the draft. Besides drafting in the top 5 costs too much.

The offense is good/not great. I hope they take BPA if that's Jones so be it. Drafting for need the last 5 yrs has resulted in the teams current state.

Top 5 costs too much? BoB would agree.

But the Talent base stinks and adding a top 6 guy in each rd could help rectify this somewhat. Think about the best draft in Texans history (2006) Where were the Texans picking? The best talent is always at the top of each rd.

Really why do fans care how much BoB spends on payroll? I dont get it. If he spends 1 million or 1 billion on payroll I dont care, I just want a winner. It's not my $$$$. If BoB isn't going to sign top tier FA's he should have to spend more on the top players in the draft. But he hasn't had to because Gary has kept winning meaning less games for the last 5 yrs.

I'm sure BoB likes this because it helps keep payroll down. But the net result is the Texans are lacking in talent and the fans are stuck with a 6-10,9-7 type team. Some fans expect more than mediocrity.

BTW, I was rooting for the Texans to win the Jags game. Even though I knew it would hurt their draft position. Because I'm just not wired to lose on purpose for any reason.

infantrycak
04-21-2011, 11:34 AM
Our offense is highly ranked with regards to statistics!

"Stats are for losers. The final score is for winners."
~ Bill Belichick

:toropalm:

Our offense last year was highly regarded for points which as you know produce the score. Our defense was highly regarded for giving up even more.

I'm sure BoB likes this because it helps keep payroll down.

The Texans have been at the top of the league in payroll every year. Spending money isn't the problem, spending it wisely is. That is why people care what McNair spends money on (that and cap ramifications).

Mr teX
04-21-2011, 12:00 PM
The offense isn't the problem. The problem is leadership, enthusiasm/passion, and obviously the defense.

Another problem is this infatuation and obsession with PR and image. You know what helps PR and image more than spin doctors and the 'aww shucks, our kids are doing their best'? Actually trying to compete for championships and winning football games.

Stop acting like you are anything other than a losing football team with arguably the worst coach/GM combo in the league. Nothing we can do about our moron of an owner, but we could use a new coach and GM. Stat.

Lol, you never miss an opportunity...& i'd expect nothing less from ya 2nd.

Bottom line is winning makes everything easier to take & i can't help but wonder how many of these type of threads (criticism of a strength/or solid player) would be popping up if we were winning 10-11 games but having the same issues on offense.

HoustonFrog
04-21-2011, 12:06 PM
Lol, you never miss an opportunity...& i'd expect nothing less from ya 2nd.

Bottom line is winning makes everything easier to take & i can't help but wonder how many of these type of threads (criticism of a strength/or solid player) would be popping up if we were winning 10-11 games but having the same issues on offense.

LMAO. Mr. Tex. That is EXACTLY why these threads keep popping up. If your offense is a strength and the team is improved then why aren't you winning 10-11 games after 5 years under the same regime? You can say defense. Alright, who has been in charge of putting that together? You can say the offense is inconsistent and starts slow...which they have. Who does that fall on? You can say that we don't bring in the right FAs..who does that fall on? Your damn skippy that people wouldn't ***** as much at 10-11 wins because that means the team overcame the obstacles, is being coached up and still wins. But since it doesn't then the issues get parsed. You can't mask that. I have a feeling that the "offense is starting slow" threads would still be here because it is so obvious in games...I just think they would be geared towards trying to figure out how to correct it to get the team farther in the playoffs and to a championship...the goal. Unless you win it all, there is something to improve but the microscope isn't as harsh.

Double Barrel
04-21-2011, 12:16 PM
Our offense last year was highly regarded for points which as you know produce the score. Our defense was highly regarded for giving up even more.

Yep. Which does not contradict my point. It's a team sport.

Our offense had some great stats, but in no way was it a dominant offense.

So by all means, let's celebrate our wonderful offense! It's the only thing this loser team has to be positive about. Like Belichick said, stats are for losers, because we certainly have no scoreboard to celebrate.

infantrycak
04-21-2011, 12:23 PM
Yep. Which does not contradict my point. It's a team sport.

Our offense had some great stats, but in no way was it a dominant offense.

So by all means, let's celebrate our wonderful offense! It's the only thing this loser team has to be positive about. Like Belichick said, stats are for losers, because we certainly have no scoreboard to celebrate.

Except you are losing the last half of Belichick's self-contradictory quote.

"Stats are for losers. The final score is for winners."

The final score is the ultimate stat.

If you see an offense putting up points at the top of the league then sure point out areas for improvement but it earned that rating. No the offense didn't spread the points out evenly over all four quarters to make people happy but at the end of the game if you have 24+ points and lost you might want to take a look at the D and how they suck rather than calling the O overrated. And there is something in between celebrating them being wonderful and being overrated.

HoustonFrog
04-21-2011, 12:38 PM
Except you are losing the last half of Belichick's self-contradictory quote.



The final score is the ultimate stat.

If you see an offense putting up points at the top of the league then sure point out areas for improvement but it earned that rating. No the offense didn't spread the points out evenly over all four quarters to make people happy but at the end of the game if you have 24+ points and lost you might want to take a look at the D and how they suck rather than calling the O overrated. And there is something in between celebrating them being wonderful and being overrated.

I have a real question for you though. And we have discussed this before. The 24+ points at the end looks good. But in any way, shape or form do you think some of it has to do with defenses stepping back after getting big leagues? Not what you'd call trash because you have to fight. But it is only natural. Usually teams feel each other out early or try and execute a gameplan put together by the coaches during the week. It seems like in many instances the other teams defense worked their game plan well and had the Texans in early holes....not 28-21 early holes where the offense was scoring but 21-7 holes. So I don't think it is a matter of spreading it out evenly as much as being consistent in what they do.

As I said earlier if the offense worked more efficiently in a panic, hurry up mode..even mixing run and pass...why not try it for 4 quarters. The defense was a huge issue but it wasn't like the offense was imposing its will early. They have a strong offense but it isn't something that comes out and just dominates. I'm not expecting that, I just am looking at the total picture of "stats." I think it is legitimate to ask why a machine takes a little idling before it actually starts moving.

BigBull17
04-21-2011, 12:46 PM
If our offense started slow and the defense wasn't a complete sieve, you wouldn't even really notice it. If they woke up down 7 and then caught fire they would have killed people. You can say anything you want about the offense, but that defense was the worst thing I have ever seen.

b0ng
04-21-2011, 12:48 PM
Sorry but there are plenty of inept offenses around the league and Houston is not one of them. NFL teams don't just roll over in the second half in almost every game from week 1 to week 16. That is bullshit conjecture that fans who are pissed off about this team have come up with. One score in the second half being chalked up to the opposing defense being lazy and thinking they already have a win? Okay. Letting the Texans tie games, and then go down and score and win (the few times they did it last year) or tie the game up in the 4th quarter with only a few minutes to go? You think they weren't trying when the score was tied or the Texans took a small lead? You don't think they were trying to protect their lead by possibly running the ball as much as possible to run the clock out? Are you insane?

If we picked a player that plays slower than he was timed and has suspect hands (Julio Jones) in the 11 spot when our defense is this bad then we probably deserve to have our shit pushed in on defense over and over again. The fact of the matter is that our coaches could not gameplan a first half to save their lives. Couple years ago it was the opposite and they couldn't do a half-time adjustment to save their lives. The offense has plenty of talent spread around in enough different groups (I am pretty sure our guard/center play isn't going to be nearly as good as it was last year but we will see) to be successful. We average >24 points in a game, which is usually quite enough to win a game if your defense is even half assed. The day our crap defense out performs our offense (Again, I'm not saying it's fantastic or anything, it is above average though) then I'll think we need an O upgrade.

Mr teX
04-21-2011, 12:50 PM
LMAO. Mr. Tex. That is EXACTLY why these threads keep popping up. If your offense is a strength and the team is improved then why aren't you winning 10-11 games after 5 years under the same regime? You can say defense. Alright, who has been in charge of putting that together? You can say the offense is inconsistent and starts slow...which they have. Who does that fall on? You can say that we don't bring in the right FAs..who does that fall on? Your damn skippy that people wouldn't ***** as much at 10-11 wins because that means the team overcame the obstacles, is being coached up and still wins. But since it doesn't then the issues get parsed. You can't mask that. I have a feeling that the "offense is starting slow" threads would still be here because it is so obvious in games...I just think they would be geared towards trying to figure out how to correct it to get the team farther in the playoffs and to a championship...the goal. Unless you win it all, there is something to improve but the microscope isn't as harsh.

You don't have to be "coached up" to be able to overcome these obstacles...there have been plenty of teams over the years that have been able to win despite their HC...your cowboys a few years ago, Minnesota the same year etc.


& 2nd bolded part is my point. These threads still can be directed that way.. But too often people use these threads to Bash kubiak, Smith or the FO..."see this is why kubiak is garbage...etc."....as if there aren't other more obvious reasons they could use..It's makes it hard to have any kind of decent football discussion in here & its getting really old honestly. Plus, Kubiak's not the 1 out there throwing untimely picks or fumbling at the most critical times....that's the players..

Just b/c i won't place the blame for this teams solely on this regime does not mean:

I think kubiak is a great-good HC.

i think kubiak/smith were deserving of all this time they've had to turn this team around.

I thinnk that kubiak/smith have done a good job.


Yet when you take this stance around here or even remotely look at any aspect of this team in a positive light you get flamed...its getting ridiculous with some in here...not you by the way.

DocBar
04-21-2011, 12:59 PM
Sorry but there are plenty of inept offenses around the league and Houston is not one of them. NFL teams don't just roll over in the second half in almost every game from week 1 to week 16. That is bullshit conjecture that fans who are pissed off about this team have come up with. One score in the second half being chalked up to the opposing defense being lazy and thinking they already have a win? Okay. Letting the Texans tie games, and then go down and score and win (the few times they did it last year) or tie the game up in the 4th quarter with only a few minutes to go? You think they weren't trying when the score was tied or the Texans took a small lead? You don't think they were trying to protect their lead by possibly running the ball as much as possible to run the clock out? Are you insane?

If we picked a player that plays slower than he was timed and has suspect hands (Julio Jones) in the 11 spot when our defense is this bad then we probably deserve to have our shit pushed in on defense over and over again. The fact of the matter is that our coaches could not gameplan a first half to save their lives. Couple years ago it was the opposite and they couldn't do a half-time adjustment to save their lives. The offense has plenty of talent spread around in enough different groups (I am pretty sure our guard/center play isn't going to be nearly as good as it was last year but we will see) to be successful. We average >24 points in a game, which is usually quite enough to win a game if your defense is even half assed. The day our crap defense out performs our offense (Again, I'm not saying it's fantastic or anything, it is above average though) then I'll think we need an O upgrade. How many high draft picks have we spent on D and what has been the result? It wouldn't hurt my feelings if we drafted Juio Jones. Kubes seems to get outcoached consistently in all phases of the game.
He reminds me of Dom Capers. A great coordinator but not so good as the head coach.

Second Honeymoon
04-21-2011, 01:03 PM
Defenses loosen up a bit when they have a lead. It's just human nature. It drives DCs crazy league-wide on a weekly basis. Not as if any of this should be news to anyone on this board. We have all watched enough football to know that.

However, Matt did a good, if not great, job last year. Guy should have had at least 5 come from behind victories last year. Arian and AJ played like the best WR/RB in the league. Tough to overrate that.

Double Barrel
04-21-2011, 01:04 PM
Except you are losing the last half of Belichick's self-contradictory quote.


It's not really a self-contradictory quote on Belichick's part. I used it out of the context that he said it.

But, it does serve the purpose that I, as a fan, only care about the end results. And those results are that we have a potentially high powered offense (notice none of my statements are downplaying our O), but since our HC/staff seems unable to field an even competent defense, it doesn't matter in the end.

It reminds me of all the great things said about the Oilers run-and-shoot offense back in the day. Breaking all kinds of records, even posting winning seasons and going to the playoffs, but at the end, the scoreboard was always for the other team.

We can celebrate our statistically great half-a-team until we are blue in the face, but ultimately, we are losing the big picture point.

The final score is the ultimate stat.

Exactly. Which is why I think over-analyzing half of the team that is actually good is irrelevant. If the wonderful offense can't win games for us, then they are just as much of losers as our historically bad defense.

If you see an offense putting up points at the top of the league then sure point out areas for improvement but it earned that rating. No the offense didn't spread the points out evenly over all four quarters to make people happy but at the end of the game if you have 24+ points and lost you might want to take a look at the D and how they suck rather than calling the O overrated. And there is something in between celebrating them being wonderful and being overrated.

Well, I never said the O was overrated. I don't see the merit of that premise. I just find it hard to celebrate statistics for a losing team, which is the point of bringing Belichick's quote up.

But, this is a typical off-season thread. :nolisten:

HOU-TEX
04-21-2011, 01:18 PM
Defenses loosen up a bit when they have a lead. It's just human nature. It drives DCs crazy league-wide on a weekly basis. Not as if any of this should be news to anyone on this board. We have all watched enough football to know that.

However, Matt did a good, if not great, job last year. Guy should have had at least 5 come from behind victories last year. Arian and AJ played like the best WR/RB in the league. Tough to overrate that.

Agreed. Only to see the defense lose it for him/them. Sickening!

Texecutioner
04-21-2011, 01:25 PM
Our offense is highly ranked with regards to statistics!

"Stats are for losers. The final score is for winners."
~ Bill Belichick

:toropalm:

Bingo! I've been saying for the last two years that are offense is overrated in here any way. I don't think the rest of the league or the fans around the country feel that this offense is anywhere near as good as people on this particular site do. I've heard things like "the Texans scare the hell out of other teams" and stuff like that and there isn't one team in the league that the Texans actually scare. People seem to be in denial in here that the Texans are looked at just like the Detroit Lions, Bengals and the Bills are looked at.

b0ng
04-21-2011, 01:26 PM
How many high draft picks have we spent on D and what has been the result? It wouldn't hurt my feelings if we drafted Juio Jones. Kubes seems to get outcoached consistently in all phases of the game.
He reminds me of Dom Capers. A great coordinator but not so good as the head coach.

I don't know what our previous drafting has to do with the validity of a Julio Jones pick but okay? I mean it's good that you don't see any problems throwing away a high draft pick in a draft full of defensive talent on a luxury WR2 pick. I mean I guess it's good? I don't know, doesn't sound all that good now that I typed it out.

Bingo! I've been saying for the last two years that are offense is overrated in here any way. I don't think the rest of the league or the fans around the country feel that this offense is anywhere near as good as people on this particular site do. I've heard things like "the Texans scare the hell out of other teams" and stuff like that and there isn't one team in the league that the Texans actually scare. People seem to be in denial in here that the Texans are looked at just like the Detroit Lions, Bengals and the Bills are looked at.

As far as my interactions with football fans of other teams the bolded part is pretty wrong. Houston is viewed as an offensive powerhouse that has a defense so bad it doesn't matter because even Mark Sanchez could lead a come-from-behind-game-winning-TD-drive on us. This board is mostly full of hot air that is upset that the home team isn't winning everything they have a trophy for (Which, outside of the Rockets almost 20 years ago, is pretty much par for the course of Houston sports), and that we are going to nitpick and bullshit about every little thing we see wrong with our team because we are much more familiar with them. This is also par for the course for almost every sports team as the boards designed to promote chatter of just a certain team is always going to contain more extreme views about said team. We refer to these people here as Soapers and the Sunshine Crew, but there are many different names for both sects of fans. Go on to phinheaven.com and ask what they think of the Texans, or you could try silverandblack.com and see what they think of the Texans offense. Even the guys over at jaguars.com and coltfreaks.com respect the offensive firepower we have but both laugh at the terrible defenses we have fielded for the past 10 years.

Just because it sounds good in your head doesn't make it true.

Double Barrel
04-21-2011, 02:04 PM
As far as my interactions with football fans of other teams the bolded part is pretty wrong. Houston is viewed as an offensive powerhouse...

I speak with folks all over this great country on a daily basis in my business, and I have constantly taken a lot of ridicule as a Texans fan. Such is life.

But, our team is marked as a "W" on the season calendar by other teams' fans. I am constantly razzed by my agents, vendors, and customers for being a Texans fan and have to hear them verbally beat down our team on a regular basis. Sucks, but what can I say? I just tell them I'm a homer and our ship will come into port some day.

So my own interaction with fans of other cities supports what Tex was saying. Yeah, they might somewhat respect our offense, but they certainly are not fearful of it. Good offense yes, but powerhouse perception not so much.

Texecutioner
04-21-2011, 02:11 PM
As far as my interactions with football fans of other teams the bolded part is pretty wrong. Houston is viewed as an offensive powerhouse that has a defense so bad it doesn't matter because even Mark Sanchez could lead a come-from-behind-game-winning-TD-drive on us. This board is mostly full of hot air that is upset that the home team isn't winning everything they have a trophy for (Which, outside of the Rockets almost 20 years ago, is pretty much par for the course of Houston sports), and that we are going to nitpick and bullshit about every little thing we see wrong with our team because we are much more familiar with them. This is also par for the course for almost every sports team as the boards designed to promote chatter of just a certain team is always going to contain more extreme views about said team. We refer to these people here as Soapers and the Sunshine Crew, but there are many different names for both sects of fans. Go on to phinheaven.com and ask what they think of the Texans, or you could try silverandblack.com and see what they think of the Texans offense. Even the guys over at jaguars.com and coltfreaks.com respect the offensive firepower we have but both laugh at the terrible defenses we have fielded for the past 10 years.

Just because it sounds good in your head doesn't make it true.

I'm not sure what fans you've been talking to, but I interact with fans from everywhere practically and the majority of fans I talk to continually ask me why the hell Kubiak is still coaching here? They tell me that they feel sorry for Andre Johnson a lot as well and that they'd love to see what he could do with another team. That's the main things I've been asked over the last two seasons.

I never said we didn't have a good offense though or that other fans didn't think we had a good offense. I stated that many fans in here overrate this offense a lot and that other teams and fans are not "fearful" of our offense like many attempt to claim. Our offense is not nearly consistent enough for 4 quarters for teams to fear this offense nor does it finish teams off enough in close games when it's a make or break situation. With that being said, we're a respected offense that people feel is a pretty good one, but certainly not a dominant offense that any fans feel that they need to fear. Most of the time they mark a "W" on their calender just like they do with other historical losing teams.

Mr teX
04-21-2011, 02:16 PM
I speak with folks all over this great country on a daily basis in my business, and I have constantly taken a lot of ridicule as a Texans fan. Such is life.

But, our team is marked as a "W" on the season calendar by other teams' fans. I am constantly razzed by my agents, vendors, and customers for being a Texans fan and have to hear them verbally beat down our team on a regular basis. Sucks, but what can I say? I just tell them I'm a homer and our ship will come into port some day.

So my own interaction with fans of other cities supports what Tex was saying. Yeah, they might somewhat respect our offense, but they certainly are not fearful of it. Good offense yes, but powerhouse perception not so much.

Yeah, but thats our team not our offense & my interactions with other level-headed teams' fans about ours are much like bongs. Sure they laugh & do pencil us in as W's but they acknowledge that our offense is pretty potent. It mainly stems from having AJ & looking at what schaub has done over the last couple of years. I also peruse other teams messageboards during the season after games & they say basically the same things.

steelbtexan
04-21-2011, 02:21 PM
Who cares about cap ramifications, the good teams seem to find ways to pay FA's they want. Why cant BoB?

BTW Mr. Tex iif you dont blame the Texans current problems on Rick and Gary who do you blame them on?

BoB?

infantrycak
04-21-2011, 02:24 PM
I have a real question for you though. And we have discussed this before. The 24+ points at the end looks good. But in any way, shape or form do you think some of it has to do with defenses stepping back after getting big leagues? Not what you'd call trash because you have to fight. But it is only natural.

Very little. First off we sat at the top of the league with basically only offensive production while other teams had substantial contributions from special teams and defense. But putting that aside we did it too many times for teams to keep ignoring. I think we came from behind by 14+ points 10 times last season to at least tie the game. Guarantee you Baltimore wasn't playing soft when they allowed back to back 99 and 95 yard drives. I am sure some of the teams rolled even more coverage to AJ to make sure we didn't get a quick strike but overall I don't believe teams played soft against us in 2nd halves. We hung extra points on every top 10 D by points we played last year, two of them by big margins.

Who cares about cap ramifications, the good teams seem to find ways to pay FA's they want. Why cant BoB?

Analytical fans should care about cap ramifications. If signing Aso means losing AJ and Mario after a year it makes a difference and should be considered. You mean good teams like Indy, New England and Pittsburgh who are known for not paying for big free agents?

Double Barrel
04-21-2011, 02:37 PM
Yeah, but thats our team not our offense & my interactions with other level-headed teams' fans about ours are much like bongs. Sure they laugh & do pencil us in as W's but they acknowledge that our offense is pretty potent. It mainly stems from having AJ & looking at what schaub has done over the last couple of years. I also peruse other teams messageboards during the season after games & they say basically the same things.

I don't doubt that our offense could be considered potent, but I have to stop short of calling it a powerhouse.

If the offense could come out in games consistently putting points on the board at the beginning, as well as carry some games and close them out, then I might be able to grasp the powerhouse term.

No doubt that it's a potent offense and potentially capable of scoring points. But, they do not seem to be able to impose their will on defenses all the time. That, to me, is what powerhouse offenses can do (i.e. Manning/Colts).

Let's be honest here, a lot of our offensive stats are from the end of games when the opposing defense is playing prevent and have let their guard down from carrying a lead the whole game.

DocBar
04-21-2011, 02:38 PM
I don't know what our previous drafting has to do with the validity of a Julio Jones pick but okay? I mean it's good that you don't see any problems throwing away a high draft pick in a draft full of defensive talent on a luxury WR2 pick. I mean I guess it's good? I don't know, doesn't sound all that good now that I typed it out.
I was pointing out the obvious fact that we've wasted a LOT of high draft picks on D and we still have the crappiest D (or damn close to it) in the league. Drafting DE in the upper half of the 1st is a gamble. Lots and lots of them were busts in the last 10 years. There's no way we end up with Miller/Peterson/Akemenura, so I would I wouldn't mind seeing us draft JJ at 11 if he's there. i like the kid and think he could be a great receiver, especially if AJ takes him under his wing and Jacoby Jones doesn't influence him too much. :cowboy1:

infantrycak
04-21-2011, 02:55 PM
I don't doubt that our offense could be considered potent, but I have to stop short of calling it a powerhouse.

I wouldn't call it powerhouse either. They can't score at will. I would say it is scary to DC's because a game can look great and then the O klicks and hangs 21 on you.

Let's be honest here, a lot of our offensive stats are from the end of games when the opposing defense is playing prevent and have let their guard down from carrying a lead the whole game.

I really don't agree with that. We've caught up with too many teams for the league to be ignorant and I didn't see that kind of loose coverage.

Mr teX
04-21-2011, 02:55 PM
Who cares about cap ramifications, the good teams seem to find ways to pay FA's they want. Why cant BoB?

BTW Mr. Tex iif you dont blame the Texans current problems on Rick and Gary who do you blame them on?

BoB?

I didn't say i didn't blame them on them..I said i don't blame them solely on them. big difference. Everyone's got a piece of the blame which is what i don't think people on this site fully acknowledge enough.

As i said, that ain't kubiak out there bobbling passes into the defenders hands for an int. (AJ). That wasn't rick smith out there throwing ducks & inaccurate throws..(schaub). That wasn't bob mcnair out there shanking 10 yd punts (Turk). Of course the coaches take some responsibilites b/c they brought them here, but no one is seriously clamoring for us to get rid of AJ & schaub.......& they've been here just as long as Smithiak. The players play & deserve some of the blame, the good ones & the bad ones. P

when analyst reference "strong lockerrooms", they're rarely talking about the coaches, they're mostly talking about the 1-3 players that drive their teams to perfection & infuse an infectious winning attitude throughout the whole team. Sure some of that comes from the top down but it's the players that really drive it home.

b0ng
04-21-2011, 03:05 PM
I'm not sure what fans you've been talking to, but I interact with fans from everywhere practically and the majority of fans I talk to continually ask me why the hell Kubiak is still coaching here? They tell me that they feel sorry for Andre Johnson a lot as well and that they'd love to see what he could do with another team. That's the main things I've been asked over the last two seasons.

And none of that has any relevance to what they think of the offense.

I never said we didn't have a good offense though or that other fans didn't think we had a good offense. I stated that many fans in here overrate this offense a lot and that other teams and fans are not "fearful" of our offense like many attempt to claim. Our offense is not nearly consistent enough for 4 quarters for teams to fear this offense nor does it finish teams off enough in close games when it's a make or break situation. With that being said, we're a respected offense that people feel is a pretty good one, but certainly not a dominant offense that any fans feel that they need to fear. Most of the time they mark a "W" on their calender just like they do with other historical losing teams.

Bingo! I've been saying for the last two years that are offense is overrated in here any way.

Sorry Texecutioner but you are overrated as a poster. No I'm not saying you are specifically BAD but just overrated. Do you see how that works? Usually when you are saying that a team or something isn't as good as normal public perception, then they are probably not "good". The fact is, most other fans fear the offense but laugh at the defense. Almost every write-up I read last year coming from opposing fan bases involved "The offense is potent, Arian Foster, Andre Johnson and Matt Schaub are all high level players, you must watch out as they will inevitably score a ton of points at some time in the game. The defense is so bad that this isn't an issue."

I mean, golf clap for you guys who have the foresight to forego any logical reasoning or evidence in order to get the jump on saying that the offense is overrated. I'm just not buying it now, nor have I ever bvought that line of reasoning no matter when it was presented last season. No offense truly dominates for all 4 quarters of an NFL game unless the mis-match is gigantic (Think Seahawks or Rams games from 2009, or the Titans game from '10). But the fact of the matter is, nobody has said that the offense was the best in the league or the most consistent, and I think most people here would agree that our offense is probably ~10th best in the league give or take who you are putting above and what sort of changes they might have to go through if there is an offseason. I'm trying to think of teams that have better offenses overall and outside of the Pats, Packers, Colts, Atlanta (I guess?), Chargers (Maybe?), Saints (Maybe?). Most teams don't have pro bowl caliber players at QB, RB, and WR, and most teams don't average 24 - 25 points a game. Plus, out of those teams, most of them have a defense that will actually give the team good field position within a game at least once.

Like I said, around the league the general feeling is that the offense is pretty much in place and can compete with almost any defense in this league but the defense is so shitty and terrible that it really doesn't matter because even the Jets can win a shoot out if you're really going to be dumb with your D.

DocBar
04-21-2011, 03:07 PM
I didn't say i didn't blame them on them..I said i don't blame them solely on them. big difference. Everyone's got a piece of the blame which is what i don't think people on this site fully acknowledge enough.

As i said, that ain't kubiak out there bobbling passes into the defenders hands for an int. (AJ). That wasn't rick smith out there throwing ducks & inaccurate throws..(schaub). That wasn't bob mcnair out there shanking 10 yd punts (Turk). Of course the coaches take some responsibilites b/c they brought them here, but no one is seriously clamoring for us to get rid of AJ & schaub.......& they've been here just as long as Smithiak. The players play & deserve some of the blame, the good ones & the bad ones. P

when analyst reference "strong lockerrooms", they're rarely talking about the coaches, they're mostly talking about the 1-3 players that drive their teams to perfection & infuse an infectious winning attitude throughout the whole team. Sure some of that comes from the top down but it's the players that really drive it home.

Maybe the Texans should hire Biggio and Bagwell to hang out in the lockerroom. Those two know how it's done.

b0ng
04-21-2011, 03:09 PM
I was pointing out the obvious fact that we've wasted a LOT of high draft picks on D and we still have the crappiest D (or damn close to it) in the league. Drafting DE in the upper half of the 1st is a gamble. Lots and lots of them were busts in the last 10 years. There's no way we end up with Miller/Peterson/Akemenura, so I would I wouldn't mind seeing us draft JJ at 11 if he's there. i like the kid and think he could be a great receiver, especially if AJ takes him under his wing and Jacoby Jones doesn't influence him too much. :cowboy1:

But, as with most of the picks, they were generally considered good picks because we absolutely needed players at those positions at the time they were picked. We needed a solid DT when we picked Okoye (sucks he hasn't done anything but get worse since his rookie season), we needed an LB when we picked Cush, we needed a CB when we picked Ice Kareem. We don't need a WR2 so badly that we need to spend an 11 on him. We do absolutely need D-line, LB, and secondary help in such a bad way that spending an 11 on almost any player of those positions would be seen as mostly logical and at least trying to get better in places where we need improvement. And don't be so sure that Akumara is going to be gone for good by the time the 11 rolls around. I would be highly upset that we are going to spend the portion of our draft where we have access to elite defensive talent on a guy who gets beat up in the college levels and overall doesn't seem nearly as sure of a thing as the WR above him. I'd much rather look for AJ's sidekick on the 2nd or 3rd days of the draft, I'd be ****ing fuming if we did that on day one.

Mr teX
04-21-2011, 03:16 PM
Let's be honest here, a lot of our offensive stats are from the end of games when the opposing defense is playing prevent and have let their guard down from carrying a lead the whole game.

I don't agree with that. You might be able to say that about the Giants & the 2nd Colts games b/c we were thouroughly dominated in those games & had very little chance of coming back. The rest of our games however, we were very much in at half time on into the 4th quarters despite only scoring 3-7 pts in the 1st half in many of those games. Even the cowboys game; the final score looks pretty bad but we were only down 7 at the half despite only scoring 3 pts.

Plus as I-cak says, we did it to many times for any competent coach to want to rest by playing prevent.

DocBar
04-21-2011, 03:29 PM
But, as with most of the picks, they were generally considered good picks because we absolutely needed players at those positions at the time they were picked. We needed a solid DT when we picked Okoye (sucks he hasn't done anything but get worse since his rookie season), we needed an LB when we picked Cush, we needed a CB when we picked Ice Kareem. We don't need a WR2 so badly that we need to spend an 11 on him. We do absolutely need D-line, LB, and secondary help in such a bad way that spending an 11 on almost any player of those positions would be seen as mostly logical and at least trying to get better in places where we need improvement. And don't be so sure that Akumara is going to be gone for good by the time the 11 rolls around. I would be highly upset that we are going to spend the portion of our draft where we have access to elite defensive talent on a guy who gets beat up in the college levels and overall doesn't seem nearly as sure of a thing as the WR above him. I'd much rather look for AJ's sidekick on the 2nd or 3rd days of the draft, I'd be ****ing fuming if we did that on day one.I see that as drafting for need as opposed to drafting BPA. Sometimes you get lucky when you draft for need. Most times, you don't. I still don't know what to think of Okoye. I can STILL see potential, but I'm not sure his heart is in it. The jury is still out on Cush. The whole PED suspension and sub par sophomore season makes one wonder.
As for Prince ( I hate trying to spell his last name. lol), I'm not sold on him. Good receivers burned him pretty good.
We could also get a very good CB in the 2nd or trade up into the late 1st and get one on a par with Prince. Jimmy Smith or Brandon Harris should be around then. I want to see us pick the most talented player on the board at 11, unless he's a P, PK or return specialist. I'll leave those picks to Da Raiduhs.

DocBar
04-21-2011, 03:30 PM
I don't agree with that. You might be able to say that about the Giants, Cowboys & the 2nd Colts games b/c we were thouroughly dominated in those games & had very little chance of coming back. The rest of our games however, we were very much in at half time on into the 4th quarters despite only scoring 3-7 pts in the 1st half in many of those games. Even the cowboys game; the final score looks pretty bad but we were only down 7 at the half despite only scoring 3 pts.

Plus as I-cak says, we did it to many times for any competent coach to want to rest by playing prevent.Fixed it for ya!! :worldpeace:

b0ng
04-21-2011, 03:39 PM
I see that as drafting for need as opposed to drafting BPA. Sometimes you get lucky when you draft for need. Most times, you don't. I still don't know what to think of Okoye. I can STILL see potential, but I'm not sure his heart is in it. The jury is still out on Cush. The whole PED suspension and sub par sophomore season makes one wonder.

Right, but I can't possibly see the Texans having Jones as BPA over players like Bowers, Quinn, Watt, Jordan, or one of the other myriad of D-line players that are highly rated for this draft. I am of the mind that an approach to BPA on defense is our best bet. If AJ Green is there then yeah, pick his ass because he looks legit. Not as sold on Jones and I don't think we should take a position like that when our D was so so so bad.

As for Prince ( I hate trying to spell his last name. lol), I'm not sold on him. Good receivers burned him pretty good.
We could also get a very good CB in the 2nd or trade up into the late 1st and get one on a par with Prince. Jimmy Smith or Brandon Harris should be around then. I want to see us pick the most talented player on the board at 11, unless he's a P, PK or return specialist. I'll leave those picks to Da Raiduhs.

This is why I think that Akumara will be around at 11. He's got a lot of flags about his game and there's a couple other trenders like Jimmy Smith or even that CB out of Miami that could be just as good of players I think. I mean if we were really going to take an offensive player in the first round I'd hope that we can trade back some and pick up one of the top rated G/C players, which I think wouldn't be too bad if we didn't need help on the defense so badly.

DocBar
04-21-2011, 03:50 PM
Right, but I can't possibly see the Texans having Jones as BPA over players like Bowers, Quinn, Watt, Jordan, or one of the other myriad of D-line players that are highly rated for this draft. I am of the mind that an approach to BPA on defense is our best bet. If AJ Green is there then yeah, pick his ass because he looks legit. Not as sold on Jones and I don't think we should take a position like that when our D was so so so bad.. If they draft the BPA, with no regard for need, I'll be happy. That player can't help but improve your team.



[/QUOTE]This is why I think that Akumara will be around at 11. He's got a lot of flags about his game and there's a couple other trenders like Jimmy Smith or even that CB out of Miami that could be just as good of players I think. I mean if we were really going to take an offensive player in the first round I'd hope that we can trade back some and pick up one of the top rated G/C players, which I think wouldn't be too bad if we didn't need help on the defense so badly.[/QUOTE] I think that kid from Miami (Brandon Harris) is at least as good as Akumara. Smith too, for that matter.
All of that aside, we still need a true threat next to AJ. My personal prefernce is to get Steve Breaston from Arizona. That guy is proven and would be a beast next to AJ. I'm not saying I hope Julio Jones is our pick at 11, I'm just saying he might be the better option. We'll know for sure in a couple of years. :)

Mr teX
04-21-2011, 03:52 PM
If they draft the BPA, with no regard for need, I'll be happy. That player can't help but improve your team.



This is why I think that Akumara will be around at 11. He's got a lot of flags about his game and there's a couple other trenders like Jimmy Smith or even that CB out of Miami that could be just as good of players I think. I mean if we were really going to take an offensive player in the first round I'd hope that we can trade back some and pick up one of the top rated G/C players, which I think wouldn't be too bad if we didn't need help on the defense so badly.[/QUOTE] I think that kid from Miami (Brandon Harris) is at least as good as Akumara. Smith too, for that matter.
All of that aside, we still need a true threat next to AJ. My personal prefernce is to get Steve Breaston from Arizona. That guy is proven and would be a beast next to AJ. I'm not saying I hope Julio Jones is our pick at 11, I'm just saying he might be the better option. We'll know for sure in a couple of years. :)[/QUOTE]


It'll be impossible to not draft for need when your defense was as historically as bad as we were. We could literally go a number of different ways & still be drafting for a need......:toropalm:

Norg
04-21-2011, 03:55 PM
This is WADES draft thats all im saying

DocBar
04-21-2011, 03:58 PM
This is why I think that Akumara will be around at 11. He's got a lot of flags about his game and there's a couple other trenders like Jimmy Smith or even that CB out of Miami that could be just as good of players I think. I mean if we were really going to take an offensive player in the first round I'd hope that we can trade back some and pick up one of the top rated G/C players, which I think wouldn't be too bad if we didn't need help on the defense so badly. I think that kid from Miami (Brandon Harris) is at least as good as Akumara. Smith too, for that matter.
All of that aside, we still need a true threat next to AJ. My personal prefernce is to get Steve Breaston from Arizona. That guy is proven and would be a beast next to AJ. I'm not saying I hope Julio Jones is our pick at 11, I'm just saying he might be the better option. We'll know for sure in a couple of years. :)[/QUOTE][/B]


It'll be impossible to not draft for need when your defense was as historically as bad as we were. We could literally go a number of different ways & still be drafting for a need......:toropalm:[/QUOTE]It's ALWAYS possible not to draft for need. It just takes the stones to pull the trigger and risk the criticism. Very much like the Texans did in '06 when we took MW over VY and RBUST.

Thorn
04-21-2011, 03:58 PM
The offense is good enough as it is right now, with last years players, to get us into the playoffs.

The defense isn't. That's the problem folks, not the offense.

This isn't to say we have an offense that scares a lot of DCs, because they know for the most part our offense plays in spurts and our defensive will only show up once a month or so. The Texans have proved consistently week in and week out that no matter what the offense does, the defense will give it right back up.

Mr teX
04-21-2011, 04:04 PM
No i don't think you understand what i meant by that Doc....we have so many holes on defense that if we pick a defensive player, Amukamara, Jordan or whomever, that player will be a player drafted for need but could also still be the bpa as well.

DocBar
04-21-2011, 04:07 PM
No i don't think you understand what i meant by that....we have so many holes on defense that if we pick a defensive player, Amukamara, Jordan or whomever, that player will be a player drafted for need but could also still be the bpa as well.I understood, I just think the two can overlap. If a position of need is the BPA, it's a win-win situation. The important part is draft the BPA, regardless, too a degree, of position. :)

Norg
04-21-2011, 04:10 PM
i think Prince is the best player on the board if he falls to us if 3 Teams pick up a QB below us then there will prob be 2 or 3 really good players that fall to us

Second Honeymoon
04-21-2011, 04:10 PM
This is why I think that Akumara will be around at 11. He's got a lot of flags about his game and there's a couple other trenders like Jimmy Smith or even that CB out of Miami that could be just as good of players I think. I mean if we were really going to take an offensive player in the first round I'd hope that we can trade back some and pick up one of the top rated G/C players, which I think wouldn't be too bad if we didn't need help on the defense so badly. I think that kid from Miami (Brandon Harris) is at least as good as Akumara. Smith too, for that matter.
All of that aside, we still need a true threat next to AJ. My personal prefernce is to get Steve Breaston from Arizona. That guy is proven and would be a beast next to AJ. I'm not saying I hope Julio Jones is our pick at 11, I'm just saying he might be the better option. We'll know for sure in a couple of years. :)[/QUOTE][/B]


It'll be impossible to not draft for need when your defense was as historically as bad as we were. We could literally go a number of different ways & still be drafting for a need......:toropalm:[/QUOTE]

I like the idea of adding Breaston. He has gotten better every year and he can contribute on Special Teams.

DocBar
04-21-2011, 04:24 PM
i think Prince is the best player on the board if he falls to us if 3 Teams pick up a QB below us then there will prob be 2 or 3 really good players that fall to usPrince got toasted by good receivers last season. IMHO, he peaked in college and has a low upside in the NFL. You also have to consider all the hype and misinformation when considering draft choices. Teams might be pumping up Prince hoping another team ( HOUSTON??) snags him so their guy will fall to them. Just think of what SF did to Aaron Rodgers. They virtually garaunteed they would pick him, then they picked Alex Smith instead. Green Bay couldn't be happier. Brandon Harris or Jummy Smith would be a better choice.

Rey
04-21-2011, 04:40 PM
If you see an offense putting up points at the top of the league then sure point out areas for improvement but it earned that rating. No the offense didn't spread the points out evenly over all four quarters to make people happy but at the end of the game if you have 24+ points and lost you might want to take a look at the D and how they suck rather than calling the O overrated.

C'mon Cak...

No one is defending the defense. They were putrid. But if your offense sucks for a whole half then it makes it even harder on that putrid defense.

Going three and out is not just bad for the offense. It's bad for the defense. Turnovers are bad for the defense. Bad Punting is bad for the defense. Giving up special team scores is bad for the defense.

There is no way to slice it. If the offense sucks for a majority of the first half (or in some cases the entire first half), it puts a strain on the rest of the team.

And the point that you and others seem to be missing is that in order to make a comeback, we had to have made some stops. No one is giving the defense any credit for playing two good quarters or however long it took to make the comeback, so why is the offense essentially getting a pass?

Both of them were absolutely horrible at times...It's just that the offense has the ability to put up stats and make their game look more impressive than it actually was whereas when the defense sucks their stats stick with them.

Example: the defense can give up one rushing play for 99 yards. Even if they play excellent defense the rest of the game, their ypa will look bad.

Now on the other hand, Matt Schaub can throw for 300+ yards and 3 scores, but if he throws 2 picks and one of them happens to be be a game winning INT for the other team then he had a good game?

No...Not IMO.

The offense and defense are connected. Lets not pretend that the offense came out and consistently drove the ball and dictated what other defenses were doing. That's not the case. The offense put our defense in bad spots. Special teams put our offense and defense in bad spots. The defense screwed themselves and everyone that saw a Texans game.

Rey
04-21-2011, 04:44 PM
I wouldn't call it powerhouse either. They can't score at will. I would say it is scary to DC's because a game can look great and then the O klicks and hangs 21 on you.

So does that mean that teams are scared of our defense because they all of a sudden start getting stops and making plays that allow us to make those comebacks?

And please stop with the scary offense stuff...

Just about every offense in the leauge has explosive playmakers...Just about any team in the leauge can make 21 point comebacks if their defense starts getting stops...

You are really making it seem like the offense can make large comebacks all by themselves...Hello...The defense has to get stops for the offense to make comebacks.....

DocBar
04-21-2011, 04:45 PM
C'mon Cak...

No one is defending the defense. They were putrid. But if your offense sucks for a whole half then it makes it even harder on that putrid defense.

Going three and out is not just bad for the offense. It's bad for the defense. Turnovers are bad for the defense. Bad Punting is bad for the defense. Giving up special team scores is bad for the defense.

There is no way to slice it. If the offense sucks for a majority of the first half (or in some cases the entire first half), it puts a strain on the rest of the team.

And the point that you and others seem to be missing is that in order to make a comeback, we had to have made some stops. No one is giving the defense any credit for playing two good quarters or however long it took to make the comeback, so why is the offense essentially getting a pass?

Both of them were absolutely horrible at times...It's just that the offense has the ability to put up stats and make their game look more impressive than it actually was whereas when the defense sucks their stats stick with them.

Example: the defense can give up one rushing play for 99 yards. Even if they play excellent defense the rest of the game, their ypa will look bad.

Now on the other hand, Matt Schaub can throw for 300+ yards and 3 scores, but if he throws 2 picks and one of them happens to be be a game winning INT for the other team then he had a good game?

No...Not IMO.

The offense and defense are connected. Lets not pretend that the offense came out and consistently drove the ball and dictated what other defenses were doing. That's not the case. The offense put our defense in bad spots. Special teams put our offense and defense in bad spots. The defense screwed themselves and everyone that saw a Texans game.You failed to take into consideration that the putrid D had to have an effect on the O playcalling. With such a putrid D, the O couldn't take as many shots as they might normally take. They had to be conservative to try to limit the D's exposure. They ARE connected, but not necessarily as you posit.

DocBar
04-21-2011, 04:48 PM
So does that mean that teams are scared of our defense because they all of a sudden start getting stops and making plays that allow us to make those comebacks?

And please stop with the scary offense stuff...

Just about every offense in the leauge has explosive playmakers...Just about any team in the leauge can make 21 point comebacks if their defense starts getting stops...

You are really making it seem like the offense can make large comebacks all by themselves...Hello...The defense has to get stops for the offense to make comebacks.....Just about any team can make 21 point comebacks. Very few teams can do it as regularly as the Texans did. I'm not saying our O is the cats ass, but it's nowhere near the league average. We have a very good O and a crappy D.

ThaShark316
04-21-2011, 04:53 PM
Dissing the offense comes with hidden agendas...lets keep it real.

DocBar
04-21-2011, 05:05 PM
.Rey, you made 3k+ posts in a year? Either you are a crazy Texans fan or you have autism!!! That's a crazy number of posts!!! Not dissing...admiring while enjoying a life. :)

Rey
04-21-2011, 05:14 PM
You failed to take into consideration that the putrid D had to have an effect on the O playcalling. With such a putrid D, the O couldn't take as many shots as they might normally take. They had to be conservative to try to limit the D's exposure. They ARE connected, but not necessarily as you posit.


Not even sure what you are trying to say here. How is that an excuse for sucking for an entire half?

If that's the case, how did they not see a correlation between being more aggressive on offense and the defense all of a sudden making stops (to allow the comeback in the first place) ?

DocBar
04-21-2011, 05:19 PM
Not even sure what you are trying to say here. How is that an excuse for sucking for an entire half?

If that's the case, how did they not see a correlation between being more aggressive on offense and the defense all of a sudden making stops (to allow the comeback in the first place) ?It's not a case for an aggressive O. It's a case for being a bit nore conservative on O to try and protect a suspect D. In other words, the Texans would go a little more consrvative on O, causing lack of scoring and othe productive stats, in order to preotect the D from having to play more downs. I'm not saying it worked. I'm saying that seems like a logical solution to the Texans D problems last year and it fits Kubiaks MO.

Texecutioner
04-21-2011, 05:19 PM
Dissing the offense comes with hidden agendas...lets keep it real.

And what might that be? Lol!

An agenda to state that the coaching doesn't have the offense as good as what some believe it is??

That's hardly a hidden perspective if it's an agenda at all.

infantrycak
04-21-2011, 05:19 PM
C'mon Cak...

How about c'mon look at the thread title. I didn't assert we were the best O or underrated. The topic was the assertion our O was "way overrated" and that is BS.

Going three and out is not just bad for the offense.

Which is cute as a truism but didn't apply to the Texans last year. Not getting points or only a few points is not the same thing as 3 and outs.

Turnovers are bad for the defense.

Another great truism except we were 27th on fumbles and 25th on INT's.

Bad Punting is bad for the defense. Giving up special team scores is bad for the defense.

And the point that you and others seem to be missing is that in order to make a comeback, we had to have made some stops. No one is giving the defense any credit for playing two good quarters or however long it took to make the comeback, so why is the offense essentially getting a pass?

Was the thread topic the D or special teams?

It's just that the offense has the ability to put up stats and make their game look more impressive than it actually was whereas when the defense sucks their stats stick with them.

No it is that the O has the ability to put up points and the D can't prevent the other team from putting up more points.

And please stop with the scary offense stuff...

Just about every offense in the leauge has explosive playmakers...Just about any team in the leauge can make 21 point comebacks if their defense starts getting stops...

That must be why the rest of the league just set a new record for coming from behind. Gotcha 21 point comebacks are easy. Good call. 21 points a game puts you top half of the league much less being 21 points behind when you already have 14 points.

Did the D makes some critical stops, sure. Did they suck goat gonads overall and give away games in the last second and allow even more points than a top 10 O could score, why yes they did.

And please start reading. Scary as in the guy you know who can be perfectly calm and then snap and get all violent. DC's know at any time the Texans O could snap and score fast.

Rey
04-21-2011, 05:21 PM
Just about any team can make 21 point comebacks. Very few teams can do it as regularly as the Texans did. I'm not saying our O is the cats ass, but it's nowhere near the league average. We have a very good O and a crappy D.

Actually, our offense is "near" the leauge avg...Well actually it depends what you define as near...

The Texans were #9 in scoring this past year scoring 24 pts per game while the Cincinati Bengals, who were in the bottom ten, scored 20 pts per game.


About 3/4 of the leauge scores over twenty ppg. Last year we scored more per game than GB, but I think their offense is more "feared" than ours...Mainly because of the guy they have playing QB...

DocBar
04-21-2011, 05:35 PM
Actually, our offense is "near" the leauge avg...Well actually it depends what you define as near...

The Texans were #9 in scoring this past year scoring 24 pts per game while the Cincinati Bengals, who were in the bottom ten, scored 20 pts per game.


About 3/4 of the leauge scores over twenty ppg. Last year we scored more per game than GB, but I think their offense is more "feared" than ours...Mainly because of the guy they have playing QB...I would say it's because the D was able to make a stand at the right time more than Rodgers. I love him as a QB, but he ran for his life way too much in '10.
The D gort some timely stops that we didn't. The Texans could've been a 10-11 game winner last year with some key stops.

b0ng
04-21-2011, 05:45 PM
Actually, our offense is "near" the leauge avg...Well actually it depends what you define as near...

The Texans were #9 in scoring this past year scoring 24 pts per game while the Cincinati Bengals, who were in the bottom ten, scored 20 pts per game.


About 3/4 of the leauge scores over twenty ppg. Last year we scored more per game than GB, but I think their offense is more "feared" than ours...Mainly because of the guy they have playing QB... and the massive amount of talent catching the ball

I added to your comment to make it more real. As much as you are poo-pooing it, 4 points is as big of a difference as you can get. That's more than what a FG is worth. If you are 4 points down on your last possession you need a TD. That's pretty huge.

It doesn't really matter what your opinion or my opinion of the offense is really because I'm sure they will be somewhere around the 24ppg mark again next year, it's just trying to field a defense that can hold a team to 3 scores on a consistent basis. To field a defense that was just good enough to let the offense win games, we would've had to have had the 23rd best defense in terms of PPG allowed or better. Which one should we concentrate on improving?

Rey
04-21-2011, 06:02 PM
How about c'mon look at the thread title. I didn't assert we were the best O or underrated. The topic was the assertion our O was "way overrated" and that is BS.


All I did was refute what you typed. Not sure what the thread title has do do with me responding to what you are typing. Please...You are better than that.


Which is cute as a truism but didn't apply to the Texans last year. Not getting points or only a few points is not the same thing as 3 and outs.

Sorry I didn't speak more accurately, but 6 and outs or 8 and outs don't help the defense either Cak.

Another great truism except we were 27th on fumbles and 25th on INT's.

We were one of the most aggressive teams in the leauge in going for it on fourth down (by the way if you look at those teams they all were pretty poor offensively (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?seasonType=REG&offensiveStatisticCategory=GAME_STATS&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=DOWN_4TH_ATTEMPTED&tabSeq=2&season=2010&role=TM&Submit=Go&archive=false&conference=null&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&qualified=true)) and we were in the bottom half at converting them...So by my math you have to add about ten more turnovers to your fancy INT and Fumble stats...

Was the thread topic the D or special teams?

That's pretty weak bro. Who cares. We are discussing the effectiveness of the offense...My bad for bringing in information that pertains to that topic.


No it is that the O has the ability to put up points and the D can't prevent the other team from putting up more points.

Like in the Ravens game right?

That must be why the rest of the league just set a new record for coming from behind. Gotcha 21 point comebacks are easy. Good call. 21 points a game puts you top half of the league much less being 21 points behind when you already have 14 points.

The Texans didn't complete many of the comebacks themselves, so not sure what you are talking about. I don't know how many teams came back and almost won, but I do know that many teams in just about every sport come back and make the game interesting after being down.

Did the D makes some critical stops, sure. Did they suck goat gonads overall and give away games in the last second and allow even more points than a top 10 O could score, why yes they did.

And please start reading. Scary as in the guy you know who can be perfectly calm and then snap and get all violent. DC's know at any time the Texans O could snap and score fast.

The bottom line is that in order to make big comebacks both the offense and defense had to have sucked gonads at one point, and both of them had to have made some really good plays at one point.

I'm not saying that the defense didn't suck as bad as we think. They did.

All I'm saying is that the offense is not as great as some are making them out to be. In a great majority of our games they sucked ass for entire halves. Sorry, but that is awful no matter how you slice it.

Rey
04-21-2011, 06:25 PM
I added to your comment to make it more real. As much as you are poo-pooing it, 4 points is as big of a difference as you can get. That's more than what a FG is worth. If you are 4 points down on your last possession you need a TD. That's pretty huge.



The top team in the leauge scored 32 ppg. The three teams below them scored 3 pts pg more than we did. So I guess we are worlds away from being a top of the leauge offense since that difference is so huge.



It doesn't really matter what your opinion or my opinion of the offense is really because I'm sure they will be somewhere around the 24ppg mark again next year, it's just trying to field a defense that can hold a team to 3 scores on a consistent basis. To field a defense that was just good enough to let the offense win games, we would've had to have had the 23rd best defense in terms of PPG allowed or better. Which one should we concentrate on improving?

Sorry, but I completely disagree with the bolded. If our offense sucks for entire halves next year, we will not be good. We may win a few more games, but we will proabably still miss the play-offs.

And games are not played on a stat line. If we had a good defense, there is no question in my mind that we win more games, but I also believe that some of our offensive production may not be as good.

Despite what some say, I do believe that a lot of our points were due to the fact that we were so far behind. It's human nature that when you are slaughtering an opponent you lose your edge, nd when you are the one getting slaughtered you start playing lose and free....That goes for co-ordinators and players on the field.

Just about in any competition or any aporting event when you se a team get far ahead, the other team usually makes some kind of run to get back into the game.

b0ng
04-21-2011, 06:34 PM
The top team in the leauge scored 32 ppg. The three teams below them scored 3 pts pg more than we did. So I guess we are worlds away from being a top of the leauge offense since that difference is so huge.

Sorry, but I completely disagree with the bolded. If our offense sucks for entire halves next year, we will not be good. We may win a few more games, but we will proabably still miss the play-offs.

And games are not played on a stat line. If we had a good defense, there is no question in my mind that we win more games, but I also believe that some of our offensive production may not be as good.

Despite what some say, I do believe that a lot of our points were due to the fact that we were so far behind. It's human nature that when you are slaughtering an opponent you lose your edge...That goes for co-ordinators and players on the field.

Just about in any competition or any aporting event when you se a team get far ahead, the other team usually makes some kind of run to get back into the game.

You're completely over betting on this whole "sucking halves" thing. This offense has sucked entire halves ever since Kubiak has gotten here, it's only lately that they didn't get as many points in first half than they did the second. They have been pretty high scoring for the last 4 years, and every year they have been pretty terrible at keeping opponents out of the end zone. The fact is you can't really seperate offenses and defenses as much because bad play on one side makes it extremely difficult on the other. The defense regularly put the offense in a 14 point hole by the second quarter. That changes gameplans up and that causes the offense to have to take bigger chances (which result in more turnovers) in order to score quickly enough to get back into games. The talent on the roster is fairly set in a lot of very crucial positions (RB1, QB1, LT, WR1) for the offense and the offensive line and Foster gelled up very nicely right off the bat.

If your argument is that you think people are saying the offense is "GREAT!", while you believe it to be more "above average" then yes, I would agree with you. But if you're trying to argue that they are average or worse you're obviously going to run into a lot of friction because that's b.s.

Rey
04-21-2011, 06:38 PM
I would say it's because the D was able to make a stand at the right time more than Rodgers. I love him as a QB, but he ran for his life way too much in '10.
The D gort some timely stops that we didn't. The Texans could've been a 10-11 game winner last year with some key stops.

I'm not here to defend the defense. They were awful. Period the end.

We'd have won more games if our defense was better. But I do not believe we would be an 11 win team with an offense that doesn't show up for entire halves....Unless our defense made a dramatic improvement...

infantrycak
04-21-2011, 06:57 PM
All I did was refute what you typed. Not sure what the thread title has do do with me responding to what you are typing. Please...You are better than that.

LOL if you think you refuted what I said the main point of which the O was not way overrated as in the thread title.

Sorry I didn't speak more accurately, but 6 and outs or 8 and outs don't help the defense either Cak.

Ummm, yeah the O being on the field for 8 minutes instead of 2 helps. The O moving 30 yards down the field so the opposing team starts on their 20 instead of the 50 helps.

We were one of the most aggressive teams in the leauge in going for it on fourth down (by the way if you look at those teams they all were pretty poor offensively and we were in the bottom half at converting them...So by my math you have to add about ten more turnovers to your fancy INT and Fumble stats...

Geez talk about a stretch to attempt a creative save for a losing argument. 4th downs aren't turnovers which is what you said. 15th is not bottom half of the league and attempting to equate every missed attempt as a turnover when no team makes 100% just demonstrates an agenda.

But whatever. A team that scores more points than every top 10 D they faced allows on average is not a way overrated offense IMO.

Rey
04-21-2011, 07:19 PM
You're completely over betting on this whole "sucking halves" thing. This offense has sucked entire halves ever since Kubiak has gotten here, it's only lately that they didn't get as many points in first half than they did the second. They have been pretty high scoring for the last 4 years

What the?

In 2006 the Texans were downright embarrasing offensively.

In 2007 they were better, but they weren't all that.

In 2008 they were a little bit better but still not a top offensive team.

In 2009 they were ranked 10th and in 2010 they were ranked 9th.

They have been pretty high scoring for the last two years.


and every year they have been pretty terrible at keeping opponents out of the end zone.

Actually in 2009 they werent terrible and we still didn't make the play-offs. We squeaked our way into 9 wins.

The fact is you can't really seperate offenses and defenses as much because bad play on one side makes it extremely difficult on the other. The defense regularly put the offense in a 14 point hole by the second quarter.

How you are seeing that statement as a two way street is mind boggling to me.


If your argument is that you think people are saying the offense is "GREAT!", while you believe it to be more "above average" then yes, I would agree with you. But if you're trying to argue that they are average or worse you're obviously going to run into a lot of friction because that's b.s.

The offense is good.

Rey
04-21-2011, 07:22 PM
Geez talk about a stretch to attempt a creative save for a losing argument. 4th downs aren't turnovers which is what you said. 15th is not bottom half of the league and attempting to equate every missed attempt as a turnover when no team makes 100% just demonstrates an agenda.

Are you high?

Not converting on 4th down is a turnover.

It's a big momentum shift...In fact, I'd rather throw a long INT on 4th down than to just go for it and not get it....which is what we did about 10 times....

Seems you are too busy looking at the stat lines to remember that games were actually played and you fail to look at the entire picture. The Texans offense is good. There is no denying that. But I watched the games...Some in person...some at home...

They got ***** slapped far too often for me to say that they are "feared" like you are claiming. LOL @ that...No defensive co-ordinator is shaking in fear because they Texans are coming to town...yeah right...

Lucky
04-21-2011, 07:40 PM
I think we came from behind by 14+ points 10 times last season to at least tie the game.
More like six:
@Washington - down 27-10, comeback to win 30-27
Kansas City - down 21-7, comeback to win 35-31
@ Jacksonville - down 17-3, comeback to tie at 24-24, lose 31-24
@ NY Jets - down 23-7, comeback to lead at 27-23, lose 30-27
@ Philadelphia - down 17-3, comeback to lead at 24-20, lose 34-24
Baltimore - down 28-7, comeback to tie at 28-28, lose 34-28

I hope you can appreciate how painful that was to recount. The Texans have the top WR in football. A consistant 4000 yard passer. And the leagues leading rusher. The question isn't whether these guys are overrated. It's how did they only win 6 games. It took special performances by the defensive players and the entire coaching staff to make that happen.

The 2007-2009 Texan offense was overrated. They were turnover prone and unbalanced. No so in 2010. And they still found ways to lose. And the architects of these teams come back for an encore. That's one "comeback" I could have done without.


Spending money isn't the problem, spending it wisely is. That is why people care what McNair spends money on (that and cap ramifications).

That's also why people care about whom McNair hires to spend the money.

Dissing the offense comes with hidden agendas...lets keep it real.
Proping the offense comes with not-so hidden agendas. Like only Gary Kubiak could put together a good offense with AJ, Schaub, & Foster? Please. Good WCO coordinators are available everywhere. Good head coaches are hard to come by. Apparently.

infantrycak
04-21-2011, 07:42 PM
Are you high?

Not converting on 4th down is a turnover.

No, it is a change of possession. That's why it doesn't go into turnover differential or when they list turnovers on games.

Seems you are too busy looking at the stat lines to remember that games were actually played and you fail to look at the entire picture. The Texans offense is good. There is no denying that. But I watched the games...Some in person...some at home...

Don't go down that path.

They got ***** slapped far too often for me to say that they are "feared" like you are claiming. LOL @ that...No defensive co-ordinator is shaking in fear because they Texans are coming to town...yeah right...

Get a grip. I said they were scary because they can all the sudden put up points and they can. DC's are not sitting there feeling safe with a 14 point lead.

Texan_Bill
04-21-2011, 07:42 PM
There's a way to fix that you know.

Wish for the lockout to continue until January?? :runaway:

infantrycak
04-21-2011, 07:46 PM
More like six:

Hmmm. I was going off what someone on NFLNetwork said.

That's also why people care about whom McNair hires to spend the money.

Absolutely which is why I wanted Rick Smith fired.

drs23
04-22-2011, 12:58 PM
I like the idea of adding Breaston. He has gotten better every year and he can contribute on Special Teams.

IS Breaston a FA or are we just wishing we had someone we can't get??

Big Lou
04-22-2011, 03:09 PM
The offense is good/not great. I hope they take BPA if that's Jones so be it. Drafting for need the last 5 yrs has resulted in the teams current state.

Top 5 costs too much? BoB would agree.

But the Talent base stinks and adding a top 6 guy in each rd could help rectify this somewhat. Think about the best draft in Texans history (2006) Where were the Texans picking? The best talent is always at the top of each rd.

Really why do fans care how much BoB spends on payroll? I dont get it. If he spends 1 million or 1 billion on payroll I dont care, I just want a winner. It's not my $$$$. If BoB isn't going to sign top tier FA's he should have to spend more on the top players in the draft. But he hasn't had to because Gary has kept winning meaning less games for the last 5 yrs.

I'm sure BoB likes this because it helps keep payroll down. But the net result is the Texans are lacking in talent and the fans are stuck with a 6-10,9-7 type team. Some fans expect more than mediocrity.

BTW, I was rooting for the Texans to win the Jags game. Even though I knew it would hurt their draft position. Because I'm just not wired to lose on purpose for any reason.

I don't care how much Bob $pends, but I do care how much Rick spends. I think managing the cap is the most important job the GM has even ahead of drafting, although the two aren't mutually exclusive.

Our Offense is probably better statistically than they are, but they are damn good. I think the biggest complaint is the Jekyl and Hide deal, but I think that they are extremely explosive. With a reall Defense this team would be a playoff contender easily regardless of coaching issues. Not saying that our Texans would be sporting SB Rings, but perhaps we could get back to going to the playoffs consistently like we did during the Moon years.

Thorn
04-22-2011, 03:56 PM
I don't care how much Bob $pends, but I do care how much Rick spends. I think managing the cap is the most important job the GM has even ahead of drafting, although the two aren't mutually exclusive.

Our Offense is probably better statistically than they are, but they are damn good. I think the biggest complaint is the Jekyl and Hide deal, but I think that they are extremely explosive. With a reall Defense this team would be a playoff contender easily regardless of coaching issues. Not saying that our Texans would be sporting SB Rings, but perhaps we could get back to going to the playoffs consistently like we did during the Moon years.

I agree. With a decent (not even a top 10) defense, this team would have what it takes to get a wild card spot in the playoffs. But, until we get a defense, it's all just talk talk talk.

brakos82
04-22-2011, 04:36 PM
I agree. With a decent (not even a top 10) defense, this team would have what it takes to get a wild card spot in the playoffs. But, until we get a defense, it's all just talk talk talk.

And "Kiss my ass!" from you.

DocBar
04-22-2011, 05:17 PM
IS Breaston a FA or are we just wishing we had someone we can't get??I believe he is and it might not take monster $$$ to get him. We have a lot more upside than Arizona has.2011 will be his 5th year in the league.

Thorn
04-22-2011, 06:31 PM
And "Kiss my ass!" from you.

I think I being trolled. :lol:

drs23
04-22-2011, 07:05 PM
I believe he is and it might not take monster $$$ to get him. We have a lot more upside than Arizona has.2011 will be his 5th year in the league.

Just Wiki'd him, big time returner and can catch and run guy. Sounds like a good addition. Damn good for a 5th rounder.

And yeah, 5th year, sounds like a FA to me too. He sounds like a good piece. What makes it "not take monster $$$ to get him."?

Texan_Bill
04-22-2011, 09:03 PM
I think I being trolled. :lol:

Well...... You being a stranger and all, KISS MY Arse!!!!

Big Lou
04-23-2011, 12:41 AM
On the subject of Breaston (Trying to act my age here, but I love the guys name!!!), he would be a great pick up. In fact I never realized how strong this WR FA's are this year. There is a ton of talent, which means maybe we can get someone on the cheap (Which might get Jacoby to put up or go packing) and we don't need to draft a WR this year. I say pick up a solid FA, then lets focus on D in the draft and then maybe, just maybe next year we can start to target some folks to groom for WR, QB, etc. Hell maybe we'll even draft a Safety next year if the TE draft pool is shallow!!!!


:kingkong:

Lucky
04-23-2011, 08:42 AM
I like the idea of adding Breaston. He has gotten better every year and he can contribute on Special Teams.
Breaston has regressed over the past two seasons from his breakout 1000 yard season in 2008. That may be a function of the QB situation in Arizona. But, I don't see a big bump by Breaston from Walter & Jones. And Breaston hasn't made an impact as a returner since his rookie season.

infantrycak
04-23-2011, 09:03 AM
Breaston has regressed over the past two seasons from his breakout 1000 yard season in 2008. That may be a function of the QB situation in Arizona. But, I don't see a big bump by Breaston from Walter & Jones. And Breaston hasn't made an impact as a returner since his rookie season.

Agreed. We need exactly what Jacoby is supposed to be, the Alvin Harper across from the improved Irvin. The guy who is a danger at any moment to go all the way. Walter is nails for 1st downs so until you find someone definitively better he should start.

gafftop
04-23-2011, 12:30 PM
I would be fine with a solid free agent at WR. I do think they need a receiver that can get separation to open up AJ some. Must resign Leach. Problem is probably Leach wants a long term contract. It may be more of a coaching problem than personnel in reference to offense. I just think we don't have the sharpest knives in the drawer when it comes to coaches.

DocBar
04-23-2011, 01:59 PM
Breaston has regressed over the past two seasons from his breakout 1000 yard season in 2008. That may be a function of the QB situation in Arizona. But, I don't see a big bump by Breaston from Walter & Jones. And Breaston hasn't made an impact as a returner since his rookie season.Breaston has a reputation for being a hard worker and good route runner with good hands. I would think that the QB situation has more to do with any regression than anything. I agree that we need a WR that Jones is capable of being, but not really one that is what Jones has turned out to be. I'd take Breaston in a minute over Jones.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/players/playerpage/407024/steve-breaston
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/players/playerpage/1220258/jacoby-jones

Lucky
04-23-2011, 05:16 PM
I'd take Breaston in a minute over Jones.

If we're talking about spending FA money (since both may be FAs after the CBA), I'm not sure I want either. I think the Texans could do better.

If you're throwing $$$ around, the Packers James Jones is on the market. Braylon Edwards will be available. As well as his teammate Santonio Holmes. And why not give Terrell Owens a one year contract? He proved in 2010 that he still has game. And the Texans are grown ups, now. They should be able to handle a TO in the locker room. If they're winning.

I just noticed that your location changed to Nigeria. That's wild. When did that happen?

DocBar
04-23-2011, 05:31 PM
If we're talking about spending FA money (since both may be FAs after the CBA), I'm not sure I want either. I think the Texans could do better.

If you're throwing $$$ around, the Packers James Jones is on the market. Braylon Edwards will be available. As well as his teammate Santonio Holmes. And why not give Terrell Owens a one year contract? He proved in 2010 that he still has game. And the Texans are grown ups, now. They should be able to handle a TO in the locker room. If they're winning.

I just noticed that your location changed to Nigeria. That's wild. When did that happen?I don't see where those guys are significant improvements over Breaston, except for Edwards. I'd rather pass on T.O. than pass to him. He's just a pain in the ass.
I've been in Nigeria since mid February. I get to come home for 2 weeks on May 16th. I can't effing wait.

Lucky
04-23-2011, 05:37 PM
I'd rather pass on T.O. than pass to him. He's just a pain in the ass.
Owens hasn't really been a problem since he left Dallas. Maybe he's mellowed with age? :) A bad year for TO is a career year from these other guys.

b0ng
04-24-2011, 12:08 AM
Owens hasn't really been a problem since he left Dallas. Maybe he's mellowed with age? :) A bad year for TO is a career year from these other guys.

2009 Buffalo Bills 16 16 55 829 15.1 98T 5
2008 Houston Texans 16 16 60 899 15.0 61 8

If I had my druthers, I'd rather have Holmes over Edwards, TO, and Breaston but I think the Jets keep him. I don't forsee the Texans trying to sign a guy to a larger contract than what Walters has for a WR spot, which I am okay with. More than likely they'll be taking a late round flyer on a guy who can also do returns (or will start out as a return man).

DocBar
04-24-2011, 02:36 AM
IIRC, Edwards has always had a case of the dropsies, usually at big points in the game. He has also been about the only target on his teams at WR, so that will keep his stats elevated. Do you guys think he's overcome that or would be less likely to drop passes if he played second fiddle to AJ?

leebigeztx
04-26-2011, 10:16 AM
I agree with the op and its not without merit. My college coach always said that stats are for suckers. Well, the texans offensive stats have a bag full of them. There are some relative stats i guess,but some are in the sucker category.

Over 70% of the texans throws were for 7 yds are less. That means they're not pushing the ball downfield.

The texans were also one of the top teams in 3 and out early in games. This contributed to putting a pourous defense back on the field.

I think they have some really good componets when healthy, but Schaub is like JR Smith of qb's. He's a volume passer.If they gave him 20 pass atts because the running game is working, he'll be around 55% passer. If the team gave him 35 pass atts because they're behind, he'll be at 65% and 300 yds. The mark of a good qb is consistency despite the gameplan.

Early in games, teams play multiple coverages and force tighter windows. We all know schaub's arm is just solid,nothing special. He cants keyhole certain throws and to be honest, all his throws are in the middle of the field. Defenses know this and really press the inside of the field and dare Schuab to throw outside. We've seen just about all his out route turn into pick 6. Thats a huge factor when defending the texans early.

Double Barrel
04-26-2011, 11:25 AM
I really don't agree with that. We've caught up with too many teams for the league to be ignorant and I didn't see that kind of loose coverage.

It's Football 101 to soften coverage to protect a 2+ score lead. I didn't mean to imply that teams were using the actual Prevent Defense, but more the mode of playing less aggressive which gives up the short passes and runs. More of a prevent mentality.

History tends to support the notion that teams that habitually get behind and find themselves catching up in the second half are playing a softer defense that has an attitude of protecting the lead and not giving up big plays.

I don't agree with that. You might be able to say that about the Giants & the 2nd Colts games b/c we were thouroughly dominated in those games & had very little chance of coming back. The rest of our games however, we were very much in at half time on into the 4th quarters despite only scoring 3-7 pts in the 1st half in many of those games. Even the cowboys game; the final score looks pretty bad but we were only down 7 at the half despite only scoring 3 pts.

Plus as I-cak says, we did it to many times for any competent coach to want to rest by playing prevent.

Based on what you're saying, our offense should have been able to win more games based upon games being this close in the second half. Sure, our defense was terrible, but we were still in most games according to your post. So while our offense is certainly potentially powerful, perhaps overrated is not that far off when they hardly ever sealed the deal. Watching them catch up only to shoot themselves in the foot is indicative of a good, but not elite, offense.

Really, though, the term "overrated" depends on the perspective that an individual is choosing to perceive. Saying it is one of the best offenses in the league is probably overrating it, simply because "the best" implies a powerhouse ability to impose it's will when it really matters the most. It is a great offense, without a doubt, but as mentioned above, it still needs to be consistent and able to carry the team to victory to be among the elite.

Second Honeymoon
04-26-2011, 11:41 AM
the stats are overrated, but you can't overrate having AJ and Foster. Matt is a more than capable QB and although his arm strength is lacking, he throws a great deep ball and can throw it over the middle of the field. he just struggles with throwing to the sideline.

to be honest, being able to throw it over the middle is better than being able to throw out to the sideline. matt's height, mechanics, and release point open up the middle of the field which then forces opposing safeties to make a read. wrong read and AJ is heading to the endzone. remember how bad Carr was at throwing over the middle? Matt doesn't rely on passing windows or rolling out to throw over the middle. I'll take mechanics and accuracy over arm strength any day.

it would be nice to have RoboQB and he could do everything, but what we got is pretty damn good. remember life as a Texans fan, Pre-Mat. Same amount of playoff appearances but the product is vastly superior re:QB play and in my opinion, is good enough to get us the playoffs and maybe even a Super Bowl under the right regime. Sadly, this regime has already jumped the shark. I am just hoping we dont totally tank this year because if Kubiak didn't lose his team last year, he is just a loss or two away from it happening this year.

SteveSlaton20
04-26-2011, 11:32 PM
Yeah, our offense didn't show up till the 2nd quarter or even the 2nd half in most games, and we couldn't comeback to win the game cuz our defense blows.

I wanted to slap Bob McNair in the face when he said the offense wasn't the problem this year(after he decided to keep Kubiak).

gafftop
04-29-2011, 10:04 PM
Posted the following under "Will Wade get it done" thread. Probably needs to be here instead.
The offense will be no better if they don't get another good wr. AJ great but no help therefore he can be semi shut down. KW no real threat. Good hands not good after the catch, no break away threat. Anderson not shifty enough before/after catch, no threat. Jones is unreliable and mental. DD are you serious. Unless they pu a 1b veteran wr in fa the improvement in defense will show just how poor our offense is. Part will be the players , most wil be coaching. Just when Texans thought they had their running game in order after Slaton's first year and it blew up on them the next year. I think we will see the same in the offense this year. Don't get me wrong I think they are very close offensively, but they will do nothing substantial to improve the offense. The coaching staff is too quick to think they are good in an area and stand pat. In reality they look good on the offense only because they are so BAD on defense. Kinda of like if you have a broken wrist but then have your other arm ripped off you forget about the broken wrist.

infantrycak
04-29-2011, 10:15 PM
In reality they look good on the offense only because they are so BAD on defense.

No they look good on offense because they hung a bunch more points on every to 10 D they faced last year than those teams were used to giving up.

gafftop
05-01-2011, 10:02 AM
I am very concerned that the Texans think everything is good on the offensive side of the ball. I hope they have plans in FA to do something. Just like they thought they were good in the running game after Slaton had his one good year I see the same thing happening this year. I hope they prove me wrong.

b0ng
05-01-2011, 10:15 AM
I am very concerned that the Texans think everything is good on the offensive side of the ball. I hope they have plans in FA to do something. Just like they thought they were good in the running game after Slaton had his one good year I see the same thing happening this year. I hope they prove me wrong.

I think the effected units from 2009 have actual depth at the positions this year. Foster, Tate, Ward, and Slaton mixed with the depth we have in the interior now probably means that if we do regress (more than likely, I doubt Foster will lead the league in rushing again) it probably won't be all the way back down to 30th in the league. I imagine they might try to sign some more cast-off depth along the line (Since Wade Smith was a hit last year) and they might pick up some competition for the WR4/5 slots but nothing expensive at all.

Major FA acquisitions (if there are any) will probably be on the defensive side of the ball and more than likely in the secondary.

DocBar
05-01-2011, 10:16 AM
We did pretty good last season. Check out the stats. While looking at them, consider that the opponents were facing the one of worst defenses in NFL history.

LINK (http://www.houstontexans.com/team/statistics.html)

LikeMike
05-01-2011, 10:23 AM
Iīd like some more O-Line depth and a new WR... other than that this offense looks really good. Overrated? Maybe. It ain`t one of the top3 offenses in the league. Top10? Definetly.

Still, it was the right decision to use the first 5 picks on defense. Because while our offense might have been slightly overrated, our defense really was that bad - plus we are changing to a 3-4, and thus we need new personell.

DocBar
05-01-2011, 10:26 AM
Iīd like some more O-Line depth and a new WR... other than that this offense looks really good. Overrated? Maybe. It ain`t one of the top3 offenses in the league. Top10? Definetly.

Still, it was the right decision to use the first 5 picks on defense. Because while our offense might have been slightly overrated, our defense really was that bad - plus we are changing to a 3-4, and thus we need new personell.If you can get top 10 on one side of the ball and at least average on the other, you probably have the playoffs in your future. I'll try to do some research on that.

VTexan
05-01-2011, 11:07 AM
Vincent Jackson

Sidney Rice

Santonio Holmes

Braylon Edwards

Malcom Floyd

Steve Smith

Terrell Owens

Randy Moss

Mike Williams

James Jones

Steve Breaston

The list of top FA wide outs. I would really like to see us try to sign Breaston as he would be cheaper than most of all the other options. He would provide some flash and spark and is a solid no 2 receiver (can also field punts).

DocBar
05-01-2011, 11:11 AM
I really like Breaston. I wouldn't mind Moss for a year or two.

gafftop
05-01-2011, 11:14 AM
Vincent Jackson

Sidney Rice

Santonio Holmes

Braylon Edwards

Malcom Floyd

Steve Smith

Terrell Owens

Randy Moss

Mike Williams

James Jones

Steve Breaston

The list of top FA wide outs. I would really like to see us try to sign Breaston as he would be cheaper than most of all the other options. He would provide some flash and spark and is a solid no 2 receiver (can also field punts).

This is what I am talking about. Another quality wr and maybe a wes welker type in fa. We really need to give AJ help. I think aonther break away threat would help a lot. I know JJ is supposed to be that person but i don't think we can assume he will ever mature.

VTexan
05-01-2011, 11:54 AM
I wonder what the price of Sidney Rice will be after coming off that injury. He intrigues me very much, but I do not seeing us breaking the bank for a WR as I want that money spent on a veteran corner back.

DocBar
05-01-2011, 12:03 PM
Only 1 FA DB is worth breaking the bank over. We all know who that is. If they don't get him, I hope they make a strong effort to get Taylor w/o breaking the bank.
We can get by with the O we have.

rmartin65
05-01-2011, 12:08 PM
Only 1 FA DB is worth breaking the bank over. We all know who that is. If they don't get him, I hope they make a strong effort to get Taylor w/o breaking the bank.
We can get by with the O we have.

Agreed. Aso is worth a boatload of money. Put him on the revamped D, and I think the Texans are playoff bound.

Brandon420tx
05-01-2011, 01:24 PM
There are 3 safety FA's I want too
Weddle obviously
Huff (to pair back with the CB who we all hope for)
Sensenbauh (Knows Wades system already)

CloakNNNdagger
05-01-2011, 01:45 PM
AJ needs a reliable speedster opposite him to truly spread the offense and take the double teams away. Whether you want to admit it or not, constant double teaming eventually wears a WR down both emotionally and, most importantly, physically.........even when you are an AJ.

Brandon420tx
05-01-2011, 02:46 PM
AJ needs a reliable speedster opposite him to truly spread the offense and take the double teams away. Whether you want to admit it or not, constant double teaming eventually wears a WR down both emotionally and, most importantly, physically.........even when you are an AJ.

There's not much blazing speed available in FA that combines with good hands. Brad Smith has the speed, his hands are questionable (although he'd be a great KR for us). James Jones, and Lance Moore have decent speed, with Moore having good hands, and Jones having consistency issues. Santana Moss is speedy and fairly reliable, but getting old and around the age when he'll start slowing down. Not much stands out from both a super speedy + reliable hands standpoint, but there are a few decent possession/slot FA's out there (although we seem to have that under control)

DocBar
05-01-2011, 03:22 PM
There's not much blazing speed available in FA that combines with good hands. Brad Smith has the speed, his hands are questionable (although he'd be a great KR for us). James Jones, and Lance Moore have decent speed, with Moore having good hands, and Jones having consistency issues. Santana Moss is speedy and fairly reliable, but getting old and around the age when he'll start slowing down. Not much stands out from both a super speedy + reliable hands standpoint, but there are a few decent possession/slot FA's out there (although we seem to have that under control) I still say Breaston. He runs a 4.4 and has reliable hands and is much more dedicated than Jacoby Jones. Sometimes too much emphasis is put on speed.

rmartin65
05-01-2011, 03:25 PM
I still say Breaston. He runs a 4.4 and has reliable hands and is much more dedicated than Jacoby Jones. Sometimes too much emphasis is put on speed.

Dang, I agree with you again! Breaston has legit speed and hands. He will cost a fair amount, but he is the primary offensive target I want.

DocBar
05-01-2011, 03:29 PM
Dang, I agree with you again! Breaston has legit speed and hands. He will cost a fair amount, but he is the primary offensive target I want.If we sign Aso and Breaston, it's Super Bowl bound, baby!!! :cowboy1:
I've got the :koolaid: hooked up to an I.V. right now.

rmartin65
05-01-2011, 03:30 PM
If we sign Aso and Breaston, it's Super Bowl bound, baby!!! :cowboy1:
I've got the :koolaid: hooked up to an I.V. right now.

I'll take a hit of that stuff!

ChampionTexan
05-01-2011, 03:38 PM
In reality they look good on the offense only because they are so BAD on defense.

No they look good on offense because they hung a bunch more points on every to 10 D they faced last year than those teams were used to giving up.

Just to see if there's really some sort of inverse relationship between the stats of your defense, and those of your offense, I looked at the rankings of the other teams in the bottom 10 in the NFL in yards allowed, and points allowed. There were 12 other teams in the bottom 10 in at least one of those two categories. Here's how the rankings ended up for last years regular season:

Houston 30 29 3 9
Denver 32 32 13 19
Washington 31 21 18 25
Arizona 29 30 31 26
Jacksonville 28 27 15 18
Seattle 27 25 28 23
Tennessee 26 15 27 17
New England 25 8 8 1
Buffalo 24 28 25 25
Dallas 23 31 7 7
Carolina 18 26 32 32
Cincinnatti 15 24 20 22
Indianapolis 20 23 4 4

The numbers immediately after the team indicate the 2010 regular season ranking for (in order) Defensive yards allowed, Points allowed, Offensive yards, Points scored

I could understand where there could be a logical reason for some sort of relationship between points allowed and points scored (after all, the more you give up, the more wide open your offense has to be, and perhaps, the more lee-way the Defense gives you). It didn't work out that way. If you'll glance through the rankings above, you'll note that only 3 of the other 9 teams in the bottom 10 on points allowed were also in the top 10 in scoring offense, while 5 of those 9 were actually in the bottom 10. If you look at all 12 teams who joined the Texans in the bottom 10 of at least one of those categories, only 5 of made the top half of the league in either offensive category.

Certainly, this doesn't demonstrate any sort of link whatsoever - and that's kind of the point. There's absolutely nothing to indicate that those who say that the good offense was primarily a result of the bad defense have anything solid to base that on.

drs23
05-01-2011, 04:10 PM
Just to see if there's really some sort of inverse relationship between the stats of your defense, and those of your offense, I looked at the rankings of the other teams in the bottom 10 in the NFL in yards allowed, and points allowed. There were 12 other teams in the bottom 10 in at least one of those two categories. Here's how the rankings ended up for last years regular season:

Houston 30 29 3 9
Denver 32 32 13 19
Washington 31 21 18 25
Arizona 29 30 31 26
Jacksonville 28 27 15 18
Seattle 27 25 28 23
Tennessee 26 15 27 17
New England 25 8 8 1
Buffalo 24 28 25 25
Dallas 23 31 7 7
Carolina 18 26 32 32
Cincinnatti 15 24 20 22
Indianapolis 20 23 4 4

The numbers immediately after the team indicate the 2010 regular season ranking for (in order) Defensive yards allowed, Points allowed, Offensive yards, Points scored

I could understand where there could be a logical reason for some sort of relationship between points allowed and points scored (after all, the more you give up, the more wide open your offense has to be, and perhaps, the more lee-way the Defense gives you). It didn't work out that way. If you'll glance through the rankings above, you'll note that only 2 of the other 9 teams in the bottom 10 on points allowed were also in the top 10 in scoring offense, while 5 of those 9 were actually in the bottom 10. If you look at all 12 teams who joined the Texans in the bottom 10 of at least one of those categories, only 5 of made the top half of the league in either offensive category.

Certainly, this doesn't demonstrate any sort of link whatsoever - and that's kind of the point. There's absolutely nothing to indicate that those who say that the good offense was primarily a result of the bad defense have anything solid to base that on.

Solid research. :goodpost:

MSR

gafftop
05-01-2011, 08:30 PM
AJ needs a reliable speedster opposite him to truly spread the offense and take the double teams away. Whether you want to admit it or not, constant double teaming eventually wears a WR down both emotionally and, most importantly, physically.........even when you are an AJ.

This is what I have been trying to say. I agree 100%. We have done nothing substantial for a couple of years if reference to our WR. Don't tell me we drafted DD. AJ will not be here forever. To utilize him effectively he needs help. Our defense as it sits now will be somewhat better but if we get to middle of the road i think that would be a miracle. It would help the defense a lot if we could keep from getting in a hole and control the ball in the beginning. In 16 games last year we scored 7 or fewer points 9 times in the first half. We have talent on the offensive side on the field but our talent in coaching is the pits. I want enough talent on the field that it will overshadow the lack in offensive coaching. Why do we have to put up with Kubiak's buds

Texans offensive coordinator Rick Dennison opens his mouth and says something dumb
ďIíve known the Broncos forever. If it is (an advantage), thatís great, Iíll use that to the best of my abilities. Iím orange and blue all the way through. I just work in Houston now.ĒóTexans offensive coordinator Rick Dennison in an interview with the Denver Post on Tuesday.

At least someone besides owner Bob McNair is sticking his foot in his mouth. Maybe Dennisonís infatuation with Denver is why the Texans averaged just over a field goal in the first quarter and just over a touchdown in the first half this season. He was standing around day dreaming about Denver when he should have been tending to business.

Why should we think this guy is going to do anything for the Texans offense.
Just one other reason that Kubiak is a POOR head coach. He picks poor cordinators. I would guess he was forced into taking Phillips. Just frustrated now. I'm out. How did McNair even consider keeping this guy. At least use a check and balance and get an independent competent experienced GM.

Again this club is run by beginners.

DocBar
05-02-2011, 02:25 AM
This is what I have been trying to say. I agree 100%. We have done nothing substantial for a couple of years if reference to our WR. Don't tell me we drafted DD. AJ will not be here forever. To utilize him effectively he needs help. Our defense as it sits now will be somewhat better but if we get to middle of the road i think that would be a miracle. It would help the defense a lot if we could keep from getting in a hole and control the ball in the beginning. In 16 games last year we scored 7 or fewer points 9 times in the first half. We have talent on the offensive side on the field but our talent in coaching is the pits. I want enough talent on the field that it will overshadow the lack in offensive coaching. Why do we have to put up with Kubiak's buds

Texans offensive coordinator Rick Dennison opens his mouth and says something dumb
“I’ve known the Broncos forever. If it is (an advantage), that’s great, I’ll use that to the best of my abilities. I’m orange and blue all the way through. I just work in Houston now.”—Texans offensive coordinator Rick Dennison in an interview with the Denver Post on Tuesday.He was interviewing for the Bronco's HC position. Poor choice of words, but WTH, he was trying to sell himself.
At least someone besides owner Bob McNair is sticking his foot in his mouth. Maybe Dennison’s infatuation with Denver is why the Texans averaged just over a field goal in the first quarter and just over a touchdown in the first half this season. He was standing around day dreaming about Denver when he should have been tending to business.

Why should we think this guy is going to do anything for the Texans offense.Just one other reason that Kubiak is a POOR head coach. He picks poor cordinators. I would guess he was forced into taking Phillips. Just frustrated now. I'm out. How did McNair even consider keeping this guy. At least use a check and balance and get an independent competent experienced GM. Dennison will do what's best for the Texans offense, because he's clearly ambitious enough to want to become a HC someday. He would be doing himself no favors by not doing his best here in Houston. Again this club is run by beginners.

I'm still on a :koolaid: high.

gafftop
05-02-2011, 07:35 AM
DocBar,

Just keep posting. I am hoping some of your optimism begins to rub off on me.

DocBar
05-02-2011, 01:31 PM
DocBar,

Just keep posting. I am hoping some of your optimism begins to rub off on me.HAHA!!! I've been on a real low after the season but I tend to be an optimist. Hell, I thought the Oilers were going to the Super Bowl every year in the early eighties.
On that note, I realize the O has holes in it (pun intended) but after stewing on it a while, I think the addition of Phillips is going to free up Kubiak to help with offensive game planning and hopefully let him manage games better. If Phillips can get us to an average D this year, maybe that will let Kubiak be a little bolder on O.

gafftop
05-11-2011, 07:12 AM
AJ needs a reliable speedster opposite him to truly spread the offense and take the double teams away. Whether you want to admit it or not, constant double teaming eventually wears a WR down both emotionally and, most importantly, physically.........even when you are an AJ.

The Texans did absolutely nothing that will help on the offensive side of the ball in the draft. The Texans were 6-10 last year. FACT If they have visions of the playoffs this year they need to improve on offensive side of the ball and special teams not just the defense. They MUST do something in FA. Our offense needs to be dominating not just above average. I obviously agree with the above post.

DocBar
05-11-2011, 07:23 AM
The Texans did absolutely nothing that will help on the offensive side of the ball in the draft. The Texans were 6-10 last year. FACT If they have visions of the playoffs this year they need to improve on offensive side of the ball and special teams not just the defense. They MUST do something in FA. Our offense needs to be dominating not just above average. I obviously agree with the above post. Signing some of our own FA's would be the best thing we could do. Sign Leach; sign Butler. I reallyreallyreally hope we can get Steve Breaston in FA. I don't see much else we need to target.

Thorn
05-11-2011, 05:13 PM
It was the defense that stunk up the place last year. Let's get that fixed first. Our offensive is good enough to get into the playoffs. If we had a defense that could actually stop a high school team once in a while we'd be a lot better off. And besides, I don't trust this organization to do more than one thing at a time. Their brains would explode if they got to much on their plate.

DocBar
05-11-2011, 05:21 PM
It was the defense that stunk up the place last year. Let's get that fixed first. Our offensive is good enough to get into the playoffs. If we had a defense that could actually stop a high school team once in a while we'd be a lot better off. And besides, I don't trust this organization to do more than one thing at a time. Their brains would explode if they got to much on their plate.Our offense is good enough to WIN in the playoofs. To hell with just getting to them. We need the identity that I believe Phillips will give the D to reach the playoffs. Average D, we make the playoff with current offense. Better than average D, we challenge for a spot in the the Super Bowl. That's how good our offense is. If all the cards fall right for us, we're the suprise team of '11.

Rey
05-11-2011, 06:53 PM
The offense and defense were bad last year IMO.

Both tended to only play a half of football.

If the defense gives up 3 TD's and 200 yards in the first half they cannot take those stats back. They have already been put up. Even if they pitch a shut out in the second half, they have had a bad game.

If the offense comes out and hardly does anything in the first half but goes for 350+ yards in the second half, they've pretty much erased the fact that they had a terrible first half.

NEWSFLASH: In order for us to make the comebacks we did, defense had to have played well. They had to have gotten some turnovers during that time...they had to have made some stops. Also, in order for us to fall behind like we did both units had to have played bad at one point.

Both units played at a poor level last year IMO, but our defense was much worse.

Any team/unit that comes out and consistently only plays one good half of football is not elite. JMGDMFO.

b0ng
05-12-2011, 09:02 AM
The offense and defense were bad last year IMO.





The offense is good.


Okay so. . . which is it?

Rey
05-12-2011, 09:12 AM
Okay so. . . which is it?

You seriously dont see a difference between the offense being good but having played poorly last year?

And I like how you look at that little sentence and don't respond to the actual topic of the post. Jeezus, did you really search back through the thread for that?

badboy
05-12-2011, 09:13 AM
Okay so. . . which is it?Well, one half of me says bad, the other half says good and the other half of me is not sure.:dancer:

b0ng
05-12-2011, 09:42 AM
You seriously dont see a difference between the offense being good but having played poorly last year?

And I like how you look at that little sentence and don't respond to the actual topic of the post. Jeezus, did you really search back through the thread for that?

I honestly don't see how you can call the offense "poor" or say they "played poorly" last year. I've read every argument that the "offense is overrated" camp has presented and I'm not convinced. They were flawed, and they had some problems, but they were anything but poor.

The offense shouldn't have to score 35 points or more for you people to think it's "about right" because NFL defenses aren't going to allow that to happen. I'll put my name on it right here right now.

The 2010 Houston Texans were easily a top 10 offense. EASILY. IDGAF if people are upset that they didn't come go into every half time up 21 - 14 or whatever, they still produced at a high enough level to keep our defense from making our whole team look like a laughing stock (and conversely kept us out of the running for Dareus, Peterson or Miller). We kept up with the best of the NFL in terms of passing and rushing.

I honestly think that the reason you see threads like this pop up is because nobody here remembers what it is actually like having a terrible offense that produces nothing all the time. People see Schaub have another great season and poo poo it because the wins aren't racking up. AJ still beasts out this season and nobody cares because he's done it so many times before. Arian foster leads the league in rushing, TD's and anything else you can think of. And what is our offense? It's poor.

I just don't get it.

Rey
05-12-2011, 10:36 AM
The reason threads like this pop up is because some folks forget that not performing in key situations is not something mutually exclusive to the defense.

I'm glad the offensive end result is good. Well really I don't care. They have to be competitive from start to finish. Kubiak has been with this team for too long for the offensive unit to play so poorly so often. You cannot consistently won games playing one good half of football. That goes for every unit.

Thorn
05-12-2011, 11:48 AM
I've watched a lot of football in my time, and there are NO teams that play good all four quarters every single game on both offense and defense. Either their offense or their defense is having a quiet period while the other makes up for it. The end result of the game is the score, no matter how you get there.

The offense put up enough points to win a lot more games than we did, it was the defense that screwed us WAY more often than the offense.

infantrycak
05-12-2011, 12:19 PM
I've watched a lot of football in my time, and there are NO teams that play good all four quarters every single game on both offense and defense. Either their offense or their defense is having a quiet period while the other makes up for it. The end result of the game is the score, no matter how you get there.

The offense put up enough points to win a lot more games than we did, it was the defense that screwed us WAY more often than the offense.

Bingo. And I'll say it again. Every time the Texans had only one good half against a playoff team like the Ravens, Jets, Colts, etc. that means those playoff teams had a bad half against the Texans.

Texecutioner
05-12-2011, 12:23 PM
Bingo. And I'll say it again. Every time the Texans had only one good half against a playoff team like the Ravens, Jets, Colts, etc. that means those playoff teams had a bad half against the Texans.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda is always what seems to be the case with the Kubiak coached Texans no matter how great you think this offense is. It aint great in crucial moments when it needs to be. It always seems to be great when it seems like the game is lost. Their last few seasons crazy losses indicate that and I'm pretty sure that we'll see a lot of the same this year as well with Kubiak calling the shots. The Jets game that they had in the bag that they just blew away. The Ravens game that was already lost and they made a comeback to be able to clinch it, but threw it away to the other team. The Colts game where Foster was no longer wanted on the field in the 2nd half. You can point out problems those other teams have had against us all you want, but they still beat us and those teams still had very good winning records while we continue to fail with this alleged great offense.

gafftop
05-12-2011, 08:17 PM
Woulda, coulda, shoulda is always what seems to be the case with the Kubiak coached Texans no matter how great you think this offense is. It aint great in crucial moments when it needs to be. It always seems to be great when it seems like the game is lost. Their last few seasons crazy losses indicate that and I'm pretty sure that we'll see a lot of the same this year as well with Kubiak calling the shots. The Jets game that they had in the bag that they just blew away. The Ravens game that was already lost and they made a comeback to be able to clinch it, but threw it away to the other team. The Colts game where Foster was no longer wanted on the field in the 2nd half. You can point out problems those other teams have had against us all you want, but they still beat us and those teams still had very good winning records while we continue to fail with this alleged great offense.

I agree. Some teams over achieve and some under achieve. I think Kubiak coached teams will always under achieve. I would guess 80% of the coaches would have gotten the Texans to the playoffs in 2009. Kubiak/Smith just don't get it.
I begged for a RB in 3/09. The Texans did nothing and Slaton disappeared as i thought may happen. We did not make the playoffs because of this and of course Gary's coaching.
I am begging for a WR this year and I am afraid the Texans have their head in LA LA land and think everything is great on the offensive side of the ball.
With Kubiak as a coach our players need to be better because we will get outcoached. I know I am in a bad mood because I see where we are headed. I HOPE Kubiak/Phillips make me eat my words.
Now I want a FA WR

Thorn
05-12-2011, 08:38 PM
Woulda, coulda, shoulda is always what seems to be the case with the Kubiak coached Texans no matter how great you think this offense is. It aint great in crucial moments when it needs to be. It always seems to be great when it seems like the game is lost. Their last few seasons crazy losses indicate that and I'm pretty sure that we'll see a lot of the same this year as well with Kubiak calling the shots. The Jets game that they had in the bag that they just blew away. The Ravens game that was already lost and they made a comeback to be able to clinch it, but threw it away to the other team. The Colts game where Foster was no longer wanted on the field in the 2nd half. You can point out problems those other teams have had against us all you want, but they still beat us and those teams still had very good winning records while we continue to fail with this alleged great offense.

More often than not, the offense was playing catch up because the defense couldn't stop a sleeping troup of girl scouts. Could the offense improve? Yes, and it probably will if Tate and Owen Daniels return healthy and up to form.

And I do agree with you that Kubiak just isn't head coach material, nor is Rick Smith GM material. My fear is Phillips will save their jobs and kubiak will mistakenly look like a head coach, which he isn't. But, you know, I'll take the playoffs anyway no matter who is the head coach. It's just going to take a lot more than just sneaking into the playoffs to save Smithiack in my eyes however.

DocBar
05-13-2011, 01:39 AM
The reason threads like this pop up is because some folks forget that not performing in key situations is not something mutually exclusive to the defense.

I'm glad the offensive end result is good. Well really I don't care. They have to be competitive from start to finish. Kubiak has been with this team for too long for the offensive unit to play so poorly so often. You cannot consistently won games playing one good half of football. That goes for every unit.It would be nice if the offense was competitive from start to finish, but I would be much more impressed with just being ahed at the end of the 4th quarter a lot more often. How we get there rates less than actually getting there.

I forgot to hit send on this 15 hrs ago....

b0ng
05-13-2011, 02:28 AM
The reason threads like this pop up is because some folks forget that not performing in key situations is not something mutually exclusive to the defense.



That's pretty wrong view of the situation though if you don't think the defense had a hand in putting the offense in terrible situations. Is the offense having to go down on final drives to win the effing game if we aren't giving Mark Sanchez a 300+yard game with 3 TD's? How about we not let David Garrard do the same thing the week before? You don't get put in as many key situations when you aren't pressured to score on every single damn possession you have in a game.

Rey
05-13-2011, 03:28 AM
That's pretty wrong view of the situation though if you don't think the defense had a hand in putting the offense in terrible situations. Is the offense having to go down on final drives to win the effing game if we aren't giving Mark Sanchez a 300+yard game with 3 TD's? How about we not let David Garrard do the same thing the week before? You don't get put in as many key situations when you aren't pressured to score on every single damn possession you have in a game.

Listen, games aren't played in a vacuum. Offensive slow starts affect the defense too.

But that said this is a kubiak coached team. The offense is supposed to be potent right? Well, potent offenses set the tone for their teams. A great offense can overcome bad defense and help them look better much like a bad offense can be made to look better by a great defense.

We can just agree to disagree but really I think you are wrong as hell. Our offense failed towards the end of games almost as much as the defense did. They failed to start playing football until other teams got out to a big lead just like the defense did. They played a part in making comebacks just like the defense did.

If you guys want to put stock in those comebacks go ahead. I think it's fools gold though. Texans didn't really put any teams away for good (except a rusty smith led tits team) and texans rarely got put away for good. Such is the nature of competition. But the one characteristic that has remained constant is poor starts and for the most part folding when the pressure is on. That sir isn't just a defensive characteristic.

Not sure why you guys are willing to excuse away poor halves by the offense. It's like you are ok if the offense doesn't play a complete game but you expect the defense to.

If the end result is all that matters then the end result is our defense was good enough to let us make comebacks. Neither unit was good enough to seal the deal most times. That's called a team trait.

b0ng
05-13-2011, 06:38 AM
Listen, games aren't played in a vacuum. Offensive slow starts affect the defense too.

But that said this is a kubiak coached team. The offense is supposed to be potent right? Well, potent offenses set the tone for their teams. A great offense can overcome bad defense and help them look better much like a bad offense can be made to look better by a great defense.

We can just agree to disagree but really I think you are wrong as hell. Our offense failed towards the end of games almost as much as the defense did. They failed to start playing football until other teams got out to a big lead just like the defense did. They played a part in making comebacks just like the defense did.

If you guys want to put stock in those comebacks go ahead. I think it's fools gold though. Texans didn't really put any teams away for good (except a rusty smith led tits team) and texans rarely got put away for good. Such is the nature of competition. But the one characteristic that has remained constant is poor starts and for the most part folding when the pressure is on. That sir isn't just a defensive characteristic.

Not sure why you guys are willing to excuse away poor halves by the offense. It's like you are ok if the offense doesn't play a complete game but you expect the defense to.

If the end result is all that matters then the end result is our defense was good enough to let us make comebacks. Neither unit was good enough to seal the deal most times. That's called a team trait.

I think you overestimate just how great an offense has to be to pull one of the historically worst secondaries through the NFL kicking and screaming to a winning record. I mean, if it was so easy, everybody would do it right?

EDIT: I'd like to know what offenses are better than the Texans from you guys. Lets hear it, give us a top 16, if you can give me 16 teams with better offenses than the Texans then I will totally agree that they are overrated because that wouldn't even be the top half of the league and I think they are much better than that.

thunderkyss
05-13-2011, 06:58 AM
I honestly think that the reason you see threads like this pop up is because nobody here remembers what it is actually like having a terrible offense that produces nothing all the time. People see Schaub have another great season and poo poo it because the wins aren't racking up. AJ still beasts out this season and nobody cares because he's done it so many times before. Arian foster leads the league in rushing, TD's and anything else you can think of. And what is our offense? It's poor.

I just don't get it.

I honestly think the reason you see so many arguments in favor of our 2010 offense, is because people forget back in the day when the Colts, the Broncos, & the Rams offenses would pressure the opponents offense by scoring fast & early.

Before the defense even steps on the field, the offense has taken the running game out of the opponents game plan. That is what a dominant offense is supposed to do. With rules favoring the passing game this offense should be able to put up 14+ points in the first half, especially since we did improve our red zone performance.

I'm not blaming the offense for our poor season. But there were plenty of games where our defense did a good enough job that our offense could have built an early lead to make the opponents one dimensional. Only the Giants game comes to mind where the defense failed miserably in the first half.

thunderkyss
05-13-2011, 07:47 AM
The reason threads like this pop up is because some folks forget that not performing in key situations is not something mutually exclusive to the defense.

I'm glad the offensive end result is good. Well really I don't care. They have to be competitive from start to finish. Kubiak has been with this team for too long for the offensive unit to play so poorly so often. You cannot consistently won games playing one good half of football. That goes for every unit.

If the defense did not give up 30 pts per game, would the offense have scored close to 30 pts per game?

I don't think so & it shouldn't be a question.

b0ng
05-13-2011, 10:47 AM
I honestly think the reason you see so many arguments in favor of our 2010 offense, is because people forget back in the day when the Colts, the Broncos, & the Rams offenses would pressure the opponents offense by scoring fast & early.

Before the defense even steps on the field, the offense has taken the running game out of the opponents game plan. That is what a dominant offense is supposed to do. With rules favoring the passing game this offense should be able to put up 14+ points in the first half, especially since we did improve our red zone performance.

I'm not blaming the offense for our poor season. But there were plenty of games where our defense did a good enough job that our offense could have built an early lead to make the opponents one dimensional. Only the Giants game comes to mind where the defense failed miserably in the first half.

Those Rams, Broncos, and Colts teams, in all their glory, still had to rely on defenses that weren't absolute crap in order to maintain leads like that. It is pretty much all for a naught if your offense has to score on almost every single possession because the defense is going to surrender a passing TD to almost any QB that they play against.

Mr teX
05-13-2011, 11:07 AM
Listen, games aren't played in a vacuum. Offensive slow starts affect the defense too.

But that said this is a kubiak coached team. The offense is supposed to be potent right? Well, potent offenses set the tone for their teams. A great offense can overcome bad defense and help them look better much like a bad offense can be made to look better by a great defense.

We can just agree to disagree but really I think you are wrong as hell. Our offense failed towards the end of games almost as much as the defense did. They failed to start playing football until other teams got out to a big lead just like the defense did. They played a part in making comebacks just like the defense did.

If you guys want to put stock in those comebacks go ahead. I think it's fools gold though. Texans didn't really put any teams away for good (except a rusty smith led tits team) and texans rarely got put away for good. Such is the nature of competition. But the one characteristic that has remained constant is poor starts and for the most part folding when the pressure is on. That sir isn't just a defensive characteristic.

Not sure why you guys are willing to excuse away poor halves by the offense. It's like you are ok if the offense doesn't play a complete game but you expect the defense to.

If the end result is all that matters then the end result is our defense was good enough to let us make comebacks. Neither unit was good enough to seal the deal most times. That's called a team trait.

you're right, slow starts do affect the defense, but not nearly as much an atrocious defense affects an offense...which is what we were faced with last year. Historically, There's a reason defenses more so than offenses have been able to carry their respective teams to SB championships...It's b/c defense is the dominant side of the ball b/c not only can it stop its opponents, but it can score points...The only thing an offense truly can do is score. Sure there are ways an offense can apply pressure, but more often than not, that ability is reserved for the elite of the elite offenses...98 vikings, 07' pats. How many great offenses have we seen stymied by a great defense over the years again?

& lets not forget ST in this whole equation. The texans were near the bottom in avg KR at a little under 20 ypg, didn't score a single TD on either KR or PR. They were for all intents & purposes, non existent & did next to nothing to help the offense with field position.

It's not that we're excusing poor halves, we just recognize that the offense more often than not was put in bad situations by the defense & ST than the other way around. As Thorn said, No offense or defense is going to play lights out for 4 complete quarters......but how many times can you realistically expect an offense to drive 80 + yards for a TD to keep pace? You have to give your opponent credit for a good game plan / adjusting & just flat out making plays at times.

Rey
05-13-2011, 01:31 PM
you're right, slow starts do affect the defense, but not nearly as much an atrocious defense affects an offense...which is what we were faced with last year. Historically, There's a reason defenses more so than offenses have been able to carry their respective teams to SB championships...It's b/c defense is the dominant side of the ball b/c not only can it stop its opponents, but it can score points...The only thing an offense truly can do is score. Sure there are ways an offense can apply pressure, but more often than not, that ability is reserved for the elite of the elite offenses...98 vikings, 07' pats. How many great offenses have we seen stymied by a great defense over the years again?

& lets not forget ST in this whole equation. The texans were near the bottom in avg KR at a little under 20 ypg, didn't score a single TD on either KR or PR. They were for all intents & purposes, non existent & did next to nothing to help the offense with field position.

It's not that we're excusing poor halves, we just recognize that the offense more often than not was put in bad situations by the defense & ST than the other way around. As Thorn said, No offense or defense is going to play lights out for 4 complete quarters......but how many times can you realistically expect an offense to drive 80 + yards for a TD to keep pace? You have to give your opponent credit for a good game plan / adjusting & just flat out making plays at times.

I really don't agree with what you're saying.

Especially when offense is supposed to be this teams strong point. You have an offensive minded head coach. The offense is supposed to be the catalyst.

Look at the Colts. Great offense. Though they have been held back by a weak defense in some years, they have always been contenders because of their offense.

What you guys are failing to understand is that all units reflect the leadership. All of the units pretty much played the same all year long. Both units by and large fold under pressure. Both units come out weak from the start in most games.

This is not something new and has been going on for a few years now. Sure the defense has been a lot worse off than the offense, but the offense is not this juggernaut like some of ya'll would like to believe.

They can be very good...They can be potent at times. But they are not nearly consistent enough and they do not dictate games often enough. These are things that dominant offenses do.

Rey
05-13-2011, 01:35 PM
If the defense did not give up 30 pts per game, would the offense have scored close to 30 pts per game?

I don't think so & it shouldn't be a question.


In my mind it's not defense VS offense.

The defense was bad all on their own. Check that...they were terrible....

What I'm saying is that both units played the same.

Both units either played one good half of football, or both units sucked throughout the game.

There are maybe 1 or 2 exceptions to that.

But overall, they both played pretty much the same. Only difference is that offenses have the ability to erase bad halves whereas defenses don't. All a defense can do is stop the bleeding.

And nobody's defense gave up 30 pts/gm.

thunderkyss
05-13-2011, 01:59 PM
Those Rams, Broncos, and Colts teams, in all their glory, still had to rely on defenses that weren't absolute crap in order to maintain leads like that. It is pretty much all for a naught if your offense has to score on almost every single possession because the defense is going to surrender a passing TD to almost any QB that they play against.

The Colts D pretty much sucked for an eternity. They couldn't win the big one, because they had no defense. When they got to the play-offs, they got exposed.

The Rams were pretty much the same, though their defense wasn't nearly so bad.

The Broncos defense was only slightly better than avg.



If we could make a team one dimensional, that changes everything. We never got to that point in any game this season, except Week 1.

Rey
05-13-2011, 02:01 PM
I think you overestimate just how great an offense has to be to pull one of the historically worst secondaries through the NFL kicking and screaming to a winning record. I mean, if it was so easy, everybody would do it right?


The Jaguars finished 8-8 last year. Their defense only surrendered .5 pts less than our last year. Is their offense as good as ours? or as "potent"?

The Colts defense surrendered 2 pts less than ours. They made the play-offs and finished 10-6. Is our offense as potent as theirs?

The Eagles are another team that allowed about 24 pts/gm. And yet they are another team that finished with a much better record than we did.

So those are three teams right there who had bad defenses but finished with 2 or more wins than we had. The Jaguars offense probably isn't as good as ours either and their defense was about as bad. If I actually go look I'm sure I can find more.

DocBar
05-13-2011, 02:18 PM
The Jaguars finished 8-8 last year. Their defense only surrendered .5 pts less than our last year. Is their offense as good as ours? or as "potent"?

The Colts defense surrendered 2 pts less than ours. They made the play-offs and finished 10-6. Is our offense as potent as theirs?

The Eagles are another team that allowed about 24 pts/gm. And yet they are another team that finished with a much better record than we did.

So those are three teams right there who had bad defenses but finished with 2 or more wins than we had. The Jaguars offense probably isn't as good as ours either and their defense was about as bad. If I actually go look I'm sure I can find more.How many Super Bowls between the Eagles and tht Colts in the last 10 years? Uno. 1. Ein. That goes to the Colts, who will quite likely go down in history as having the greatest offense of the decade and the greatest QB of all time. Yes, that's one more Super Bowl than the Texans have playoff appearances, but that's beside the point. Teams need at least one side of the ball to be great and the other to be at least average.
Is the goal of this franchise to get into the playoffs or win Super Bowls? I know you have to get into the playoffs first, but that's just a means to an end. The Pats were absolutely on fire earlier this decade, but what have they won since their D took a turn for the worse? I bet they wished they had Seymour back last year.

infantrycak
05-13-2011, 02:53 PM
In my mind it's not defense VS offense.

The defense was bad all on their own. Check that...they were terrible....

What I'm saying is that both units played the same.

Both units either played one good half of football, or both units sucked throughout the game.

There are maybe 1 or 2 exceptions to that.

But overall, they both played pretty much the same. Only difference is that offenses have the ability to erase bad halves whereas defenses don't. All a defense can do is stop the bleeding.

And nobody's defense gave up 30 pts/gm.

Which is cool. Everyone gets an opinion. Mine is if the offense consistently gets more points than the opposing D gives up to the league and the defense consistently gives up more points than the opposing O gets against the league then the D is the BIGGER issue. Doesn't mean the O isn't an issue. Just not an equal one.

I really can't see how anyone would say both units played the same.

ChampionTexan
05-13-2011, 03:20 PM
The Jaguars finished 8-8 last year. Their defense only surrendered .5 pts less than our last year. Is their offense as good as ours? or as "potent"?

The Colts defense surrendered 2 pts less than ours. They made the play-offs and finished 10-6. Is our offense as potent as theirs?

The Eagles are another team that allowed about 24 pts/gm. And yet they are another team that finished with a much better record than we did.

So those are three teams right there who had bad defenses but finished with 2 or more wins than we had. The Jaguars offense probably isn't as good as ours either and their defense was about as bad. If I actually go look I'm sure I can find more.

While I'm not going to attempt to quantify them, I think there's a couple of more things that go into this that aren't related to the offense. Those are turnovers and special teams play - most specifically field position.

The Texans didn't score a single defensive or special teams point this year (other than FG's and XP's). Not one. There were only two other teams in the NFL that can say that - The Giants and the Rams. Additionally, while I don't have the exact stat, I believe the Texans finished 32nd in the NFL in average starting field position. I do know that their kick return average was 27th in the NFL and their punt return average was 29th.

These things aren't directly related to the offensive performance in terms of most statistical measurements, but they certainly have the ability to impact the results in a significant way. And while it could actually skew the yardage numbers to the positive because they so often had a long field to traverse, it also could indicate that even the top ten ranking The Texans achieved in points scored and interceptions thrown may be understating the performance of the offense..

Rey
05-13-2011, 03:44 PM
Which is cool. Everyone gets an opinion. Mine is if the offense consistently gets more points than the opposing D gives up to the league and the defense consistently gives up more points than the opposing O gets against the league then the D is the BIGGER issue. Doesn't mean the O isn't an issue. Just not an equal one.

I really can't see how anyone would say both units played the same.

I really can't see how anyone can say our offense is feared, but acuna ma tata and all that jazz....

And again, not sure why you need to keep pointing out that the D is the "BIGGER" issue. Everyone knows that.

And I named the ways in which the units played the same. I gave the common characteristics that have defined this kubiak coached team. I didn't say that they were EXACTLY the same...

And while I am happy that the offense was able to score points, I honestly believe that if the games were closer throughout the numbers wouldn't have been as high. We'd have passed the ball less and I think it's human nature to relax a bit when you are up big on an opponent. While you may look at the coverage and it may appear to be the same, I don't think those players over there are playing exactly the same way. I don't think the d-coordinator calls plays the same way. I don't think opposing offenses play the same way.


The offense needs to improve. Not as much as the defense does, but the offense needs a lot of work.

Rey
05-13-2011, 03:45 PM
While I'm not going to attempt to quantify them, I think there's a couple of more things that go into this that aren't related to the offense. Those are turnovers and special teams play - most specifically field position.

The Texans didn't score a single defensive or special teams point this year (other than FG's and XP's). Not one. There were only two other teams in the NFL that can say that - The Giants and the Rams. Additionally, while I don't have the exact stat, I believe the Texans finished 32nd in the NFL in average starting field position. I do know that their kick return average was 27th in the NFL and their punt return average was 29th.

These things aren't directly related to the offensive performance in terms of most statistical measurements, but they certainly have the ability to impact the results in a significant way. And while it could actually skew the yardage numbers to the positive because they so often had a long field to traverse, it also could indicate that even the top ten ranking The Texans achieved in points scored and interceptions thrown may be understating the performance of the offense..


I responded directly to a post that was correlating defensive/offensive success.

I know everything you just typed.

DocBar
05-13-2011, 03:52 PM
I responded directly to a post that was correlating defensive/offensive success.

I know everything you just typed.Then why did you type what you typed?

Rey
05-13-2011, 03:52 PM
How many Super Bowls between the Eagles and tht Colts in the last 10 years? Uno. 1. Ein. That goes to the Colts, who will quite likely go down in history as having the greatest offense of the decade and the greatest QB of all time. Yes, that's one more Super Bowl than the Texans have playoff appearances, but that's beside the point. Teams need at least one side of the ball to be great and the other to be at least average.
Is the goal of this franchise to get into the playoffs or win Super Bowls? I know you have to get into the playoffs first, but that's just a means to an end. The Pats were absolutely on fire earlier this decade, but what have they won since their D took a turn for the worse? I bet they wished they had Seymour back last year.

Exactly.

Problem is that our offense isn't great and our defense has been awful.

Not really sure what the point is with the rest of your post. You have to get into the play-offs to win the superbowl. If you can't get into the play-offs you can't win the superbowl.

I'd take the Eagles, Colts, Pats and just about anyone else's success over ours. Our crowning achievement is two non losing seasons back to back and a lone 9-7 record.

Rey
05-13-2011, 03:53 PM
Then why did you type what you typed?


Because I was responding to a post that was correlating offensive and defensive success?

DocBar
05-13-2011, 03:56 PM
Because I was responding to a post that was correlating offensive and defensive success?

But it was all wrong.

Rey
05-13-2011, 04:02 PM
But it was all wrong.


None of it was wrong.

You may not agree that those stats accurately affect the game outcome, but there wasn't anything factually wrong with what I posted.

DocBar
05-13-2011, 04:10 PM
None of it was wrong.

You may not agree that those stats accurately affect the game outcome, but there wasn't anything factually wrong with what I posted.I have no idea what acuna matata is. Our offense is feared because we have one helluva running game. a damned good QB, the games BEST receiver and a whole lot of good TE's. We also have pretty good blocking in all phases cuz the other side doesn't know where to defend. We have a very feared offense. Our problem is that teams KNOW that if we put up 35, they can put put up 36 and barely break a sweat. Our offensive inconsitencies are a rsult of our defensive defensencies, not the other way around. Teams KNOW they can score on us and outlast any offensive surges we have.

infantrycak
05-13-2011, 06:12 PM
I have no idea what acuna matata is.

It is a Lion King reference for "no worries" - Hakunah Matata (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejEVczA8PLU)

Our offense is feared because we have one helluva running game. a damned good QB, the games BEST receiver and a whole lot of good TE's. We also have pretty good blocking in all phases cuz the other side doesn't know where to defend. We have a very feared offense.

And because we can hang points on people quickly even the best defenses in the league. It boggles my mind that people think DC's aren't worried about an offense that scored on five straight drives on the Ravens including drives of 99 and 95 yards.

Rey
05-13-2011, 08:36 PM
It is a Lion King reference for "no worries" - Hakunah Matata (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejEVczA8PLU)



And because we can hang points on people quickly even the best defenses in the league. It boggles my mind that people think DC's aren't worried about an offense that scored on five straight drives on the Ravens including drives of 99 and 95 yards.

Not many offenses in the league that d coordinators aren't worried about.

b0ng
05-13-2011, 11:58 PM
Not many offenses in the league that d coordinators aren't worried about.

While this is true, that does nothing to discount how good the offense for the Texans is. And I doubt coordinators playing against the AFCS are going to be as worried about the Jags or Titans offense as they are the Texans.

Rey
05-14-2011, 12:10 AM
While this is true, that does nothing to discount how good the offense for the Texans is. And I doubt coordinators playing against the AFCS are going to be as worried about the Jags or Titans offense as they are the Texans.

Jaguars scored the same amount of pts/gm than we did last year. The Titans scored 5 pts less than we did with a lot of bad things happening to their offense.

Both of those teams have good RB's capable of carving you up. Garrard can move the ball down the field, and Mercedes Lewis has stepped his game up.

Texans offense is good, but I seriously don't think we are at the point where we can turn our nose up at middle of the road offenses.

b0ng
05-14-2011, 12:55 AM
Jaguars scored the same amount of pts/gm than we did last year. The Titans scored 5 pts less than we did with a lot of bad things happening to their offense.

The Jaguars benefit in their PPG amount by getting to play the Texans twice in one season! Also much more talent on the Texans roster at the skill positions. Our OL play was much better than either team last year.

Both of those teams have good RB's capable of carving you up. Garrard can move the ball down the field, and Mercedes Lewis has stepped his game up.

Texans offense is good, but I seriously don't think we are at the point where we can turn our nose up at middle of the road offenses.

Garrard isn't even the garunteed starter on his team anymore calm down. He's still an average QB who doesn't throw for many yards or TD's (Sometimes, he doesn't throw a lot of picks either, but this is not always the case). MJD is good and Lewis is good but they still lack anything resembling a true #1 WR.

Last year we had 3 guys playing at an all-star level and an OL that was going out of it's mind run blocking. Our QB and WR play is so far ahead of both of the other AFCS teams in question I don't think it's really reasonable to get so offended when the point is brought up. The RB play was all pretty much even (since all of a sudden we shouldn't turn our noses up divisional rivals individual units that are obviously inferior) so it's not like we can't do just as good what they do best.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 01:31 AM
Jaguars scored the same amount of pts/gm than we did last year. The Titans scored 5 pts less than we did with a lot of bad things happening to their offense.

Both of those teams have good RB's capable of carving you up. Garrard can move the ball down the field, and Mercedes Lewis has stepped his game up.

Texans offense is good, but I seriously don't think we are at the point where we can turn our nose up at middle of the road offenses.

We can't look past any team because our D, as of last season, was capable of letting any offense hang however many points they needed to win. Our offense has proven it can run with the big dawgs. Our D isn't even weaned yet and needs to be dewormed.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 01:35 AM
It is a Lion King reference for "no worries" - Hakunah Matata (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejEVczA8PLU)



And because we can hang points on people quickly even the best defenses in the league. It boggles my mind that people think DC's aren't worried about an offense that scored on five straight drives on the Ravens including drives of 99 and 95 yards.

I agree 100%. Pick your poison with this offense. Do you want to give up
200+ rushing or 400+ passing? The Texans O is capable of that any Sunday.

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 05:34 AM
Doesn't mean the O isn't an issue. Just not an equal one.

I really can't see how anyone would say both units played the same.

I don't know if anyone is really saying the offense is as bad as the D. What I think the gist of this thread is (or at least the way I took it) is that we aren't a top 5 offense, regardless what the stats say.

In truth, the team has invested most of its talent purchases on the defensive side of the ball & Gary has done a commendable job with what he had to work with.

Sooner or later that philosophy is going to bite us in the butt.

I know we haven't ignored the offense... Dwayne Brown, Ben Tate..... but they need to jump up in spades in 2011 if we aren't going to infuse any talent into the offense through FA.

Par for the course, with this regime. We'll fix the defense & the offense will fall apart.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 06:11 AM
I don't know if anyone is really saying the offense is as bad as the D. What I think the gist of this thread is (or at least the way I took it) is that we aren't a top 5 offense, regardless what the stats say.

In truth, the team has invested most of its talent purchases on the defensive side of the ball & Gary has done a commendable job with what he had to work with.

Sooner or later that philosophy is going to bite us in the butt.

I know we haven't ignored the offense... Dwayne Brown, Ben Tate..... but they need to jump up in spades in 2011 if we aren't going to infuse any talent into the offense through FA.

Par for the course, with this regime. We'll fix the defense & the offense will fall apart.Wow. I disagree with just about everything in this post.
The biggest problem our offense has is the lack of a trustworthy defense. The talent is there and on display. We could use upgrades at #2-3WR and OT. If we resign Leach, FB isn't an issue.
How much does that awful defense affect Kubiak/Dennison's play calling? I would say quite a bit. Kubiak isn't the gambler that Sean Payton is and that's the biggest difference between those two teams. Certainly not talent. New Orleans went from awful to good to champions in step with their DEFENSIVE improvements.

How do you address a top 10(humoring you. I say we're DEF top 5) offense when you have a bottom 3 defense to fix? Again. Hiring Phillips is, on paper, the biggest fix we could get. Maybe next year we can look for OT and WR help with a top 16 defense.

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 07:11 AM
How do you address a top 10(humoring you. I say we're DEF top 5) offense when you have a bottom 3 defense to fix? Again. Hiring Phillips is, on paper, the biggest fix we could get. Maybe next year we can look for OT and WR help with a top 16 defense.

If we lose Schaub, do you think our running game can carry the offense?

I don't think so.

If we lose AJ, can we depend on JJ or Walter to keep defenses honest? Maybe David Anderson?

Is OD going to be able to play at 100% all season long? That's another Question mark on our offense.

We were throwing the ball all over the field last year & scoring points playing catch up. If we are a top 10 offense, we would lead, not follow. How many times has the Texans gone up by more than a touchdown?

DocBar
05-14-2011, 07:23 AM
If we lose Schaub, do you think our running game can carry the offense?

I don't think so.

If we lose AJ, can we depend on JJ or Walter to keep defenses honest? Maybe David Anderson?

Is OD going to be able to play at 100% all season long? That's another Question mark on our offense.

We were throwing the ball all over the field last year & scoring points playing catch up. If we are a top 10 offense, we would lead, not follow. How many times has the Texans gone up by more than a touchdown?If your aunt had balls, she'd be your uncle. You can if this to death.
We played catch up in so many games because of...wait for it...BAD DEFENSE
Losing Schaub or AJ would be the biggest blow. I very much want us to get Steve Breaston in FA and would be happy with Steve Smith. If Schaub goes down, we're screwed. Most teams in the NFL are, though.
Do I think our running game can carry us? Yep. We ran over several teams last season that couldn't stop us even when they knew we were gonna run the ball down their throat. This should get even better if Tate is healthy and lives up to his billing.
I hope OD is 100%, but I have a ton of faith in Dreeson if he isn't.

Texecutioner
05-14-2011, 08:28 AM
If your aunt had balls, she'd be your uncle. You can if this to death.
We played catch up in so many games because of...wait for it...BAD DEFENSE


Oh yeah us playing catch up had nothing to do with the offense doing absolutely nothing in the first half of several games. That's what Rey and many others have pointed out like 100 times already here. A great offense doesn't consistently have trouble getting started in games when it's to late. They bring a lot more consistency for several quarters instead of always having to resort into panic mode when they're down by several TD's. A great offense also can usually clinch games when they're close at the end. The Texans offense has been more of a choker by far than they have as a clincher in close games when it comes down to the last possession or two. Those aren't characteristics about an offense that scare other team's coaches. That may make them feel like the Texans offense can be "dangerous" and "volatile", but they aren't putting fear into other coaches. The Texans have never been a team that teams fear.

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 08:37 AM
Oh yeah us playing catch up had nothing to do with the offense doing absolutely nothing in the first half of several games. That's what Rey and many others have pointed out like 100 times already here. A great offense doesn't consistently have trouble getting started in games when it's too late. They bring a lot more consistency for several quarters instead of always having to resort into panic mode when they're down by several TD's. A great offense also can usually clinch games when they're close at the end. The Texans offense has been more of a choker by far than they have as a clincher in close games when it comes down to the last possession or two. Those aren't characteristics about an offense that scare other team's coaches. That may make them feel like the Texans offense can be "dangerous" and "volatile", but they aren't putting fear into other coaches. The Texans have never been a team that teams fear.

Exactly. If we had a top 5 offense, we could control games. We didn't. We play to someone else's tempo. They dictate when our offense is on the field & when our defense is on the field.

If I coached a top 5 offense in the NFL, my defense (their offense) would barely see the field.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 08:49 AM
As has been pointed out several times on here, ALL offenses struggle at some point in the game. The fact that ours struggled isn't anywhere near as important, IMHO, as the fact that they can light up the scoreboard in a hurry against any team out there. We did it all season. There's a reason we were top 5 in rushing and passing. Because we're a top 5 offense.

b0ng
05-14-2011, 10:46 AM
If we lose Schaub, do you think our running game can carry the offense?

I don't think so.

If we lose AJ, can we depend on JJ or Walter to keep defenses honest? Maybe David Anderson?

Is OD going to be able to play at 100% all season long? That's another Question mark on our offense.

We were throwing the ball all over the field last year & scoring points playing catch up. If we are a top 10 offense, we would lead, not follow. How many times has the Texans gone up by more than a touchdown?

Injuries are something that effect almost every team in the NFL (goddamn kansas city chiefs) and you can easily point to most teams with decent qb's and logically say that they would suffer if QB1 or WR1 went down.

And that last paragraph is actually from 2009 not 2010, as our offense was much more balanced. Like it has been preached before in this thread when your defense is giving up 14 and 21 points regularly before half time it puts the offense in a bind. They either have to score on 3/4ths of their possessions or go into half-time with a deficit to make up. How many times did we see the score be X - 21 or X - 17 going into half time?

One point that nobody seems to want to make, and is one that I couldn't really argue with at all:

"The Script" that we ran last year at the beginning of each game was all ****ed up. That shit made us look terrible almost every game for the first possession or two no matter who we were playing. The adjustments after the script? They were like fantastic, which is a complete 180 from 2006 - 2009. Most of the time we came out in the 3rd and 4th quarters and looked like a bunch of monkeys trying to **** a football, but in 2010 we did our best work after the half. It's not as if you can point to our opponents we did that to and say they were terrible defensively.

I will say this, I don't think the offense is going to be as good as it was last year. Arian Foster and the OL will have to put on one hell of a second act to top that sort of production. I have faith that the passing game will remain at a similar level as it has been the last 2 or 3 years. The run game looked much more "solid" last year than it did in 2008 and I think the RB depth is way better, I'm just not sure the line will hold up.

But in no way do I think the offense is overrated and I have never seen anybody here describe it as a top or top 3 offense. Top 10 yeah.

Thorn
05-14-2011, 11:21 AM
As has been pointed out several times on here, ALL offenses struggle at some point in the game. The fact that ours struggled isn't anywhere near as important, IMHO, as the fact that they can light up the scoreboard in a hurry against any team out there. We did it all season. There's a reason we were top 5 in rushing and passing. Because we're a top 5 offense.

2010 stats for the offense

Total yards - 3rd in NFL
rushing yards - 7th in NFL
passing yards - 4th in NFL
total points scored - 9th in NFL

Don't know about top 5 offense, but it's a top 10 offense for sure. I'm sure there is room for improvement, most especially play/game planning. But the problem with the Texans IS NOT THE OFFENSE. It's the damn defense and to a certain extent the special teams.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 11:37 AM
2010 stats for the offense

Total yards - 3rd in NFL
rushing yards - 7th in NFL
passing yards - 4th in NFL
total points scored - 9th in NFL

Don't know about top 5 offense, but it's a top 10 offense for sure. I'm sure there is room for improvement, most especially play/game planning. But the problem with the Texans IS NOT THE OFFENSE. It's the damn defense and to a certain extent the special teams.That averages out to 5.75...just sayin...

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 12:38 PM
Injuries are something that effect almost every team in the NFL (goddamn kansas city chiefs) and you can easily point to most teams with decent qb's and logically say that they would suffer if QB1 or WR1 went down.

And that last paragraph is actually from 2009 not 2010, as our offense was much more balanced. Like it has been preached before in this thread when your defense is giving up 14 and 21 points regularly before half time it puts the offense in a bind. They either have to score on 3/4ths of their possessions or go into half-time with a deficit to make up. How many times did we see the score be X - 21 or X - 17 going into half time?

One point that nobody seems to want to make, and is one that I couldn't really argue with at all:

"The Script" that we ran last year at the beginning of each game was all ****ed up. That shit made us look terrible almost every game for the first possession or two no matter who we were playing. The adjustments after the script? They were like fantastic, which is a complete 180 from 2006 - 2009. Most of the time we came out in the 3rd and 4th quarters and looked like a bunch of monkeys trying to **** a football, but in 2010 we did our best work after the half. It's not as if you can point to our opponents we did that to and say they were terrible defensively.

I will say this, I don't think the offense is going to be as good as it was last year. Arian Foster and the OL will have to put on one hell of a second act to top that sort of production. I have faith that the passing game will remain at a similar level as it has been the last 2 or 3 years. The run game looked much more "solid" last year than it did in 2008 and I think the RB depth is way better, I'm just not sure the line will hold up.

But in no way do I think the offense is overrated and I have never seen anybody here describe it as a top or top 3 offense. Top 10 yeah.

Yes Emperor, I love your new clothes.... you look so potent.

Rey
05-14-2011, 03:20 PM
Oh yeah us playing catch up had nothing to do with the offense doing absolutely nothing in the first half of several games. That's what Rey and many others have pointed out like 100 times already here. A great offense doesn't consistently have trouble getting started in games when it's to late. They bring a lot more consistency for several quarters instead of always having to resort into panic mode when they're down by several TD's. A great offense also can usually clinch games when they're close at the end. The Texans offense has been more of a choker by far than they have as a clincher in close games when it comes down to the last possession or two. Those aren't characteristics about an offense that scare other team's coaches. That may make them feel like the Texans offense can be "dangerous" and "volatile", but they aren't putting fear into other coaches. The Texans have never been a team that teams fear.


This. Couldn't agree more.

Texans have gotten a bunch of passing yards in the couple past seasons but they have also thrown the ball a whole lot. They've thrown the ball so much because of poor game planning which leads to big deficits that we have to try to overcome.

Norg
05-14-2011, 03:27 PM
Looking back there were alot of times last year were our offensive were playing lights out aganist elite defense teams last year

Ravens and the jets

Hopefully that can continue next year and maybe we can eve get better

DocBar
05-14-2011, 04:14 PM
This. Couldn't agree more.

Texans have gotten a bunch of passing yards in the couple past seasons but they have also thrown the ball a whole lot. They've thrown the ball so much because of poor game planning which leads to big deficits that we have to try to overcome.What games were you watching last year or in '08?In '09, Slaton stunk it up and we were forced to throw just to get some production. Kubiak still stuck with the run, even though it wasn't very effective. Kubiak is a run first coach when he can. We threw when the D had us down 2+ TD's.
I really don't think anyone is arguing that the O could be more consistent, but you really can't b*tch about overall production. I was as frustrated as anyone because the O only seemed to produce 1 half at a time. Having said that, they did produce when it counted, only to be undone by a porous defense that couldn't stop anything resembling an NFL offense.

Thorn
05-14-2011, 04:21 PM
What games were you watching last year or in '08?In '09, Slaton stunk it up and we were forced to throw just to get some production. Kubiak still stuck with the run, even though it wasn't very effective. Kubiak is a run first coach when he can. We threw when the D had us down 2+ TD's.
I really don't think anyone is arguing that the O could be more consistent, but you really can't b*tch about overall production. I was as frustrated as anyone because the O only seemed to produce 1 half at a time. Having said that, they did produce when it counted, only to be undone by a porous defense that couldn't stop anything resembling an NFL offense.

This.

I don't even know why this is still being debated, I can't believe this thread has gone on as long as it has. People, open your eyes. Our offense can get us into the playoffs, it's that good and sometime it's even better. It's not the greatest offense in the world, and yes, it's inconsistent. But the problem with the Texans winning games isn't the offense and hasn't been for several years now.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 04:29 PM
This.

I don't even know why this is still being debated, I can't believe this thread has gone on as long as it has. People, open your eyes. Our offense can get us into the playoffs, it's that good and sometime it's even better. It's not the greatest offense in the world, and yes, it's inconsistent. But the problem with the Texans winning games isn't the offense and hasn't been for several years now.Maybe Rey or TK is married to Smith's or whoever ran the D in '10's daughter. I can't remember his name for some reason...oh yeah...he sucked ball sacks and is unemployed. That's why I can't remember.

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 04:55 PM
This.

I don't even know why this is still being debated, I can't believe this thread has gone on as long as it has. People, open your eyes. Our offense can get us into the playoffs, it's that good and sometime it's even better. It's not the greatest offense in the world, and yes, it's inconsistent. But the problem with the Texans winning games isn't the offense and hasn't been for several years now.

It's a situational offense. If they have to score 30 pts to lose by 2, they will. If they have to score 14 to lose by 3, they will.

If they were a good offense, they would score whatever, whenever.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 04:57 PM
It's a situational offense. If they have to score 30 pts to lose by 2, they will. If they have to score 14 to lose by 3, they will.

If they were a good offense, they would score whatever, whenever.

That's too asinine to respond to. You're better than that, TK.

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 04:58 PM
That's too asinine to respond to. You're better than that, TK.

^^This.. is too asinine to respond to.

Thorn
05-14-2011, 05:05 PM
It's a situational offense. If they have to score 30 pts to lose by 2, they will. If they have to score 14 to lose by 3, they will.

If they were a good offense, they would score whatever, whenever.

Wow.

Nevermind. Sorry I disturbed you.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 05:05 PM
^^This.. is too asinine to respond to.LOL. Copout if I ever saw one. How many times did we lose last season on last minute drives, freak plays? 3-4 by my count. If it wasn't for a kick ass offense, we could've gotten Miller or Peterson #1 overall. You and Rey are barking up the wrong tree with your arguments. Our offense does need to add some consistency, but the talent is in place. Of course we can upgrade a couple of positions, but find me an NFL offense that needs no upgrades. A better D will help the O by giving it flexibilty in play calling. You're drinking the wrong flavor of kool aid. You must have grape. Grape sux. It's sour. You need cherry or strawberry. Much better tasting.

Texecutioner
05-14-2011, 05:18 PM
LOL. Copout if I ever saw one. How many times did we lose last season on last minute drives, freak plays? 3-4 by my count.

Which completely contradicts your point earlier where you stated

Having said that, they did produce when it counted

in every argument that you've made throughout this entire thread you've completely ignored the fact that the Texans have been chokers on offense in crucial moments when games were on the line when the offense had opportunities to clinch games instead of choke them away. In one post you claim that they've produced when it counted and then just two posts later you bring up all of these failures where they blew games away. Which one is it then? And this wasn't just last season either. It's been the last 3 seasons where this has been the case with freakish chaotic face palm failure plays that were just humiliating to lose in the way they did. You see that happen once or twice in one season, that's one thing, but when that becomes a pattern over 3 seasons then it's not a fluke and it's poor offensive coaching where players are undisciplined. Great offensive teams that put fear in other coaches don't have that about them especially for 3 straight seasons consistently. That makes other coaches feel confident about facing the Texans offense a hell of a lot more than it would make them fear them and expect the offense to fail at some point, because that's all they've mainly seen in the past.

CloakNNNdagger
05-14-2011, 05:28 PM
It would be nice to see a "hurry up" offense at a time other than when the Titanic looks like its almost under water. In virtually all games we built up our deficits trudging along behind one of the poorest and slowest game plans I've ever seen. Then all of a sudden it seemed like someone on the sideline took the corn cob out of their butt, and the relief was so great that a full game was played in the constrained time period of one quarter. I would strongly suggest that someone hide that corn cob before the season begins.:texflag:

DocBar
05-14-2011, 05:29 PM
Which completely contradicts your point earlier where you stated



in every argument that you've made throughout this entire thread you've completely ignored the fact that the Texans have been chokers on offense in crucial moments when games were on the line when the offense had opportunities to clinch games instead of choke them away. And this wasn't just last season either. It's been the last 3 seasons where this has been the case with freakish chaotic face palm failure plays that were just humiliating to lose in the way they did. You see that happen once or twice in one season, that's one thing, but when that becomes a pattern over 3 seasons then it's not a fluke and it's poor offensive coaching where players are undisciplined. Great offensive teams that put fear in other coaches don't have that about them especially for 3 straight seasons consistently. That makes other coaches laugh and expect the offense to fail at some point, because that's all they've mainly seen in the past.Your goat smelling ass, Texecutioner. You've blatantly and conveniently forgotten every game the Texans O has either kept us in games or gave ius leads that the D surrendered. The O has been the only true bright spot over the last three years, and that includes the year Slaton completely hamstrung the O with his 3.4 YPC in '09. Maybe the O wasn't always a combination of Manning and Brady, but it has failed us far, far fewer times than the D in the last three years. You seem to have a hard on for Kubes, and that;s OK. I'm not saying he's a good HC. I AM saying that the O hasn't been the problem. The D has. That falls on Kubiak because the DC's were his call and controversial ones at that. The ONLY reason I'm glad Kubes is still HC is because of the O. It's the only thing we have to count on right now and it was a top 5.75 O last year. That's the average ranking from last year. What was the D's average ranking last year? 40th?

DocBar
05-14-2011, 05:30 PM
Tex, Gus would pistol whip you like a sassy bartender for your comments in this thread. Change your avatar to some soap.

Thorn
05-14-2011, 05:31 PM
Which completely contradicts your point earlier where you stated



in every argument that you've made throughout this entire thread you've completely ignored the fact that the Texans have been chokers on offense in crucial moments when games were on the line when the offense had opportunities to clinch games instead of choke them away. In one post you claim that they've produced when it counted and then just two posts later you bring up all of these failures where they blew games away. Which one is it then? And this wasn't just last season either. It's been the last 3 seasons where this has been the case with freakish chaotic face palm failure plays that were just humiliating to lose in the way they did. You see that happen once or twice in one season, that's one thing, but when that becomes a pattern over 3 seasons then it's not a fluke and it's poor offensive coaching where players are undisciplined. Great offensive teams that put fear in other coaches don't have that about them especially for 3 straight seasons consistently. That makes other coaches feel confident about facing the Texans offense a hell of a lot more than it would make them fear them and expect the offense to fail at some point, because that's all they've mainly seen in the past.

Out of all the things to ***** about concerning the Texans, I find it difficult to believe folks want to ***** about the offense. It's one of the few things about this team that actually works sometimes.

Ownership sucks, coaching sucks, defense sucks, and the one thing about the Texans that actually works, which is the offense, folks gotta ***** about that. This makes no sense to me at all.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 05:34 PM
Out of all the things to ***** about concerning the Texans, I find it difficult to believe folks want to ***** about the offense. It's one of the few things about this team that actually works sometimes.

Ownership sucks, coaching sucks, defense sucks, and the one thing about the Texans that actually works, which is the offense, folks gotta ***** about that. This makes no sense to me at all.Frankly, it's embarrassing. Rey and TK just won't let it go. I don;t know Rey, but TK should know better. I think he ate some Kubiak viagra or something.

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 05:35 PM
Our offense does need to add some consistency, but the talent is in place. Of course we can upgrade a couple of positions.....


We've got the #1 RB in the league.

We've got the #1 WR in the league.

We've got a QB that can throw for 4700 yards with no support for the running game.

But we can't score 14 on Dallas when they looked like the worse team in the NFL?

Couldn't move the ball against the Giants or the Cowboys.

There were many, many years when the Colts or the Rams offense carried their teams. Their offenses kept the defense on the sideline. Their offenses made their opponents abandon the running game.



We can't Keep MJD off the field by eating up clock?

DocBar
05-14-2011, 05:38 PM
We've got the #1 RB in the league.

We've got the #1 WR in the league.

We've got a QB that can throw for 4700 yards with no support for the running game.

But we can't score 14 on Dallas when they looked like the worse team in the NFL?

Couldn't move the ball against the Giants or the Cowboys.

There were many, many years when the Colts or the Rams offense carried their teams. Their offenses kept the defense on the sideline. Their offenses made their opponents abandon the running game.



We can't Keep MJD off the field?That's your argument? Seriously? TK, I respect the hell out of you, but you're embarrassing yourself. Pleas, just let it go. We're not talking one game or years and years of Colts games.

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 05:44 PM
Out of all the things to ***** about concerning the Texans, I find it difficult to believe folks want to ***** about the offense. It's one of the few things about this team that actually works sometimes.


It's kinda like bitching about the running game the same year Slaton ran for 1300 yards.

Fools gold.

It's like bitching about Jon Kitna as your starting QB even though he threw for 4000 in the three previous seasons.

Only looks good on paper, won't (& doesn't) win games.

We burn our entire draft on defense & a project QB. FA better bring something for the offense.

That's all I'm saying.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 05:51 PM
It's kinda like bitching about the running game the same year Slaton ran for 1300 yards.

Fools gold.

It's like bitching about Jon Kitna as your starting QB even though he threw for 4000 in the three previous seasons.

Only looks good on paper, won't (& doesn't) win games.

We burn our entire draft on defense & a project QB. FA better bring something for the offense.

That's all I'm saying.

Huh? I bitched about Slaton's 1300 yd season cuz he would have 20 rushes for 60 yds and bust 1 big one to get him close to 100 for the game. THAT is luck. What Foster did last season wasn't luck. He had very few negative plays. Slaton had many in '09. Jon Kitna isn't our starting QB or our backup. I couldn't care less what Kitna does. You're showing yourself to be a complete football *****, and I know that you're not. You're hung up on this and wanting to be proven correct on something you're dead wrong on. Quit digging,man. The hole is just getting deeper.

Texecutioner
05-14-2011, 05:51 PM
Your goat smelling ass, Texecutioner. You've blatantly and conveniently forgotten every game the Texans O has either kept us in games or gave ius leads that the D surrendered. The O has been the only true bright spot over the last three years, and that includes the year Slaton completely hamstrung the O with his 3.4 YPC in '09. Maybe the O wasn't always a combination of Manning and Brady, but it has failed us far, far fewer times than the D in the last three years. You seem to have a hard on for Kubes, and that;s OK. I'm not saying he's a good HC. I AM saying that the O hasn't been the problem. The D has. That falls on Kubiak because the DC's were his call and controversial ones at that. The ONLY reason I'm glad Kubes is still HC is because of the O. It's the only thing we have to count on right now and it was a top 5.75 O last year. That's the average ranking from last year. What was the D's average ranking last year? 40th?

You can ignore everything that I just pointed out all that you want, but it's not going to make it magically go away. You contradicted yourself several times already in this thread and I even had to point it out for you hoping that you could see where the flaws are in some of your arguments and why some of the criticisms were valid. I listed examples earlier as to what were huge obstacles that got in the way of this team winning games that were directly correlated with the offense. I'm not going to keep repeating things that you can't understand or want to somehow pretend didn't exist by trying to use ridiculous examples like Slaton's YPC when Chris Brown killed like 3 games all by himself that season. Those were clear offensive blunders where this alleged fearful offense choked instead of doing what real top notch offenses do in those situations which is to clinch and close out a game. I've brought this up several times already and so has Rey, and it's very obvious at this point that you want to ignore it.

And the fact that you're saying that you're glad that Gary Kubiak is still the coach of this team tells me that you'd be arguing on behalf of his offense every off season. You certainly did in prior seasons and with faith in Gary's brilliance and how'd that work out? If you still think this guy is the man who will make this team a SB winner after this long, nothing will change your mind about him.

Thorn
05-14-2011, 05:53 PM
It's kinda like bitching about the running game the same year Slaton ran for 1300 yards.

Fools gold.

It's like bitching about Jon Kitna as your starting QB even though he threw for 4000 in the three previous seasons.

Only looks good on paper, won't (& doesn't) win games.

We burn our entire draft on defense & a project QB. FA better bring something for the offense.

That's all I'm saying.

Last year the Texans offense was 9th in the league in scoring points, yet we won only six games. Our defense gave up more points than 27 other teams.

Facts are what they are.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 05:55 PM
You can ignore everything that I just pointed out all that you want, but it's not going to make it magically go away. You contradicted yourself several times already in this thread and I even had to point it out for you hoping that you could see where the flaws are in some of your arguments and why some of the criticisms were valid. I listed examples earlier as to what were huge obstacles that got in the way of this team winning games that were directly correlated with the offense. I'm not going to keep repeating things that you can't understand or want to somehow pretend didn't exist by trying to use ridiculous examples like Slaton's YPC when Chris Brown killed like 3 games all by himself that season. Those were clear offensive blunders where this alleged fearful offense choked instead of doing what real top notch offenses do in those situations which is to clinch and close out a game. I've brought this up several times already and so has Rey, and it's very obvious at this point that you want to ignore it.

And the fact that you're saying that you're glad that Gary Kubiak is still the coach of this team tells me that you'd be arguing on behalf of his offense every off season. You certainly did in prior seasons and with faith in Gary's brilliance and how'd that work out? If you still think this guy is the man who will make this team a SB winner after this long, nothing will change your mind about him.Does this mean you will quit posting nonsense about our O? I hope so. Direct some of that football knowledge towards the real problem.

Texecutioner
05-14-2011, 05:59 PM
Tex, Gus would pistol whip you like a sassy bartender for your comments in this thread. Change your avatar to some soap.

I think that Gus would more than likely be telling me that a woman would have better luck making an honest man out of Jake Spoon than trying to talk sense into fans that still think Gary Kubiak is some offensive genius after a 6-10 record. Then he'd probably bluff his ass off like he did in card games to Bob Mcnair about how his team was on "the right track" like the rest of the owners did when the Texans great offense blew another almost but not quite close enough come back to the Ravens with an INT for a TD in one of those crucial moments that you stated they were so great at producing in. :spit:

Lucky
05-14-2011, 06:00 PM
The Texans scored 134 1st half points in 2010. Compared with 256 points during the 3th and 4th quarters. That's a big difference.

256 2nd half points is great. That's 16 points in a half. But, 8.4 points in the 1st half is not good. The Texans offense can and must perform better in the 1st half of games in order to take pressure off a young defense that has to come together in a new scheme.

We can talk about scripting plays. Or opening up the offense. But it doesn't really matter how the Texans offense improves in the 1st half of games. Only that they improve in the 1st half of games. The talent is there. The scheme is proven. The coaches need to find a way turn that into points. Sooner is better.

Texecutioner
05-14-2011, 06:03 PM
Does this mean you will quit posting nonsense about our O? I hope so. Direct some of that football knowledge towards the real problem.

No, I won't stop posting facts despite how much you want to ignore them. They sure can be pesky little things.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 06:03 PM
The Texans scored 134 1st half points in 2010. Compared with 256 points during the 3th and 4th quarters. That's a big difference.

256 2nd half points is great. That's 16 points in a half. But, 8.4 points in the 1st half is not good. The Texans offense can and must perform better in the 1st half of games in order to take pressure off a young defense that has to come together in a new scheme.

We can talk about scripting plays. Or opening up the offense. But it doesn't really matter how the Texans offense improves in the 1st half of games. Only that they improve in the 1st half of games. The talent is there. The scheme is proven. The coaches need to find a way turn that into points. Sooner is better.The ONLY thing that matters is points after 4 quarters. If you have more after four, you win. Who really gives a shit what quarter you score them in?

Thorn
05-14-2011, 06:05 PM
No, I won't stop posting facts despite how much you want to ignore them. They sure can be pesky little things.

Couldn't agree more. 2010 facts:

Texans offense 9th in league in scoring points

Texans defense 29th in league in giving up points.

Texecutioner
05-14-2011, 06:09 PM
Couldn't agree more. 2010 facts:

Texans offense 9th in league in scoring points

Texans defense 29th in league in giving up points.

Now are those the only facts that you want to cherry pick and focus on or are you even in the least bit interested in some of the facts that Lucky just posted about the offense in the first half of games which helped to cause large deficits to come back from? You seem to only want to review "certain" facts that look good on paper, but want to ignore others that tell another part of the picture.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 06:10 PM
If the Texans scored 21 points in the 1st 3 seconds of the game and lost 22-21, would you be any happier? I'd much rather see an O that can be down a score or two and come back and win than a team that shoots its wad in the 1st half and has to hold on to win. Kubes is far, far from a good HC, but this thread isn't about Kubes. It's about the O. The O isn't the problem on this team. It's poor defensive play and questionable play calling on O. That is an entirely different thread that TK and Rey should think of starting.

Lucky
05-14-2011, 06:11 PM
The ONLY thing that matters is points after 4 quarters. If you have more after four, you win. Who really gives a shit what quarter you score them in?
I'm not trying to get between the spat you have with a couple of other posters. But if you don't think it matters if you take an early lead, or fall behind, you are mistaken. Get an early lead, and you can make the opposition one dimensional. And that can make it easier for your defense to defend.

Thorn
05-14-2011, 06:16 PM
Now are those the only facts that you want to cherry pick and focus on or are you even in the least bit interested in some of the facts that Lucky just posted about the offense in the first half of games which helped to cause large deficits to come back from? You seem to only want to review "certain" facts that look good on paper, but want to ignore others that tell another part of the picture.

1st half points or 2nd half points? Does it really matter? All that matters is the points at the end of the game.

And if we had anything resembling a defense, perhaps we wouldn't be so far behind in the 2nd half. All offenses in the NFL are hot and cold. We've held Manning and Colts scoreless for a half before. Does that mean Manning and the Colts are worthy of this beating the Texans offense is taking in this thread?

It takes two to tango in this league, offense and defense. And if you've only got one, you ain't making it to the big dance. Right now, the Texans only got one. And it sure as hell ain't the defense.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 06:17 PM
Now are those the only facts that you want to cherry pick and focus on or are you even in the least bit interested in some of the facts that Lucky just posted about the offense in the first half of games which helped to cause large deficits to come back from? You seem to only want to review "certain" facts that look good on paper, but want to ignore others that tell another part of the picture.Talk about cherry picking stats? How are these?
2010 stats for the offense

Total yards - 3rd in NFL
rushing yards - 7th in NFL
passing yards - 4th in NFL
total points scored - 9th in NFL
Those are our 2010 stats against the league. They average out at 5.75. That's a top 5 offense in just about anyone's book. Tota'ls are what counts. That' why they have four quarters. If you're too dense to understand that, it just proves the evils of plug and play technology. Maybe you need to up the dosage of whatever medication you're on. Put the mouse down and step away from the computer.

Texecutioner
05-14-2011, 06:20 PM
I'm not trying to get between the spat you have with a couple of other posters. But if you don't think it matters if you take an early lead, or fall behind, you are mistaken. Get an early lead, and you can make the opposition one dimensional. And that can make it easier for your defense to defend.

Not to mention things like field position when you're going 3 and out or not getting the ball down the field where your defense is already in a bad spot. Or like how that can effect the way your offense is able to play in the 2nd half when it's not down by a huge deficit where the other team knows that they're mainly going to pass and sets their defense up to stop that kind of attack. It amazes me that people don't seem to grasp things like this and how they effect how a team operates to do things like work the clock in the 4th quarter, run the play action because teams are expecting the run since you're milking the clock with a lead, blitz the other team's defense because they have to pass, and you're not expecting your QB to perform miracles every game with come from behind victories when the other team knows you're trying to pass. So many things that get effected like that in a game.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 06:24 PM
Not to mention things like field position when you're going 3 and out or not getting the ball down the field where your defense is already in a bad spot. Or like how that can effect the way your offense is able to play in the 2nd half when it's not down by a huge deficit where the other team knows that they're mainly going to pass and sets their defense up to stop that kind of attack. It amazes me that people don't seem to grasp things like this and how they effect how a team operates to do things like work the clock in the 4th quarter, run the play action because teams are expecting the run since you're milking the clock with a lead, blitz the other team's defense because they have to pass, and you're not expecting your QB to perform miracles every game with come from behind victories when the other team knows you're trying to pass. So many things that get effected like that in a game.

You keep talking and it keeps coming out of your ass. Every single thing you bring up reverts back to the D not being able to hold a score to shoot for, much less one to come back from. Admit you hate Kubiak and won't be happy til he's replaced.

nytexan
05-14-2011, 06:26 PM
I'm not trying to get between the spat you have with a couple of other posters. But if you don't think it matters if you take an early lead, or fall behind, you are mistaken. Get an early lead, and you can make the opposition one dimensional. And that can make it easier for your defense to defend.

Don't mean to question your sanity but making the opposition think it had to pass to win last year would have been to our extreme detriment. We couldn't stop Tebow for goodness sake (thought of another word but I figured this was a family board) :vincepalm: Couldn't stop him either.

Thorn
05-14-2011, 06:27 PM
Admit you hate Kubiak and won't be happy til he's replaced.


I'll admit to that and I'm on your side here. :lol:

DocBar
05-14-2011, 06:29 PM
I'll admit to that and I'm on your side here. :lol:LOL. I'm not his biggest fan by a long shot. I just don;t think our O is what we should be bitching about.

CloakNNNdagger
05-14-2011, 06:31 PM
I'm not trying to get between the spat you have with a couple of other posters. But if you don't think it matters if you take an early lead, or fall behind, you are mistaken. Get an early lead, and you can make the opposition one dimensional. And that can make it easier for your defense to defend.

Exactly. And if you don't, you pile even more stress on an already poor or questionable defense. In fact, you put more stress on even a good defense.

Texecutioner
05-14-2011, 06:33 PM
Talk about cherry picking stats? How are these?
2010 stats for the offense

Total yards - 3rd in NFL
rushing yards - 7th in NFL
passing yards - 4th in NFL
total points scored - 9th in NFL
Those are our 2010 stats against the league. They average out at 5.75. That's a top 5 offense in just about anyone's book. Tota'ls are what counts. That' why they have four quarters. If you're too dense to understand that, it just proves the evils of plug and play technology. Maybe you need to up the dosage of whatever medication you're on. Put the mouse down and step away from the computer.

You seem to be getting very testy in this thread and might want to calm down.

You've gargled this same stuff up before every season for the Texans under this regime and find yourself arguing the same poor logic the next year again and again thinking that this offense is somehow going to be so great that it will overcome other failures on the team? What's the definition of insanity again? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting the same result.


Total yards - 3rd in NFL
rushing yards - 7th in NFL
passing yards - 4th in NFL
total points scored - 9th in NFL

And if you can't look at those stats and figure it out that the offensive coaching is a huge problem when they can only win 6 games with those stats, then you're blinded by optimism instead of looking at things logically. If you can be that high up in all of those categories, but fail every time your great offense has a chance to put teams away and finish them, then I can't make someone understand something they don't want to understand. You seem to think that people are saying that this offense sucks or something, when no one has made any such claim. What we're saying is that there are some problems there that have been there and several of us used many examples that are factual to make this a little more clear for you, but it's against your principal as a fan who is optimistic before every season regardless of what the circumstances are or what history has shown us last season and the season before that caused us to lose games where the offense didn't play for 4 quarters or had epic TO's that ruined an "almost comeback."

Thorn
05-14-2011, 06:34 PM
LOL. I'm not his biggest fan by a long shot. I just don;t think our O is what we should be bitching about.

Yep. I'm about to give this one up for today. To much beer and I've got a movie to watch.

In all, our offense is damn good enough to make it to the playoffs. is the offense good enough to win a Super Bowl? Well, lesser offensives have. We have an offense that a lot of teams in the NFL would love to have. We have a defense that no one in their right minds would want. To me this is pretty simple.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 06:35 PM
Exactly. And if you don't, you pile even more stress on an already poor or questionable defense. In fact, you put more stress on even a good defense.With the Texans, that is a patently false statement. Get up on a team and force them to pass against the 30th ranked pass defense in the league? Talk about added pressure. WTF are you thinking?

DocBar
05-14-2011, 06:39 PM
You seem to be getting very testy in this thread and might want to calm down.

You've gargled this same stuff up before every season for the Texans under this regime and find yourself arguing the same poor logic the next year again and again thinking that this offense is somehow going to be so great that it will overcome other failures on the team? What's the definition of insanity again? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting the same result.




And if you can't look at those stats and figure it out that the offensive coaching is a huge problem when they can only win 6 games with those stats, then you're blinded by optimism instead of looking at things logically. If you can be that high up in all of those categories, but fail every time your great offense has a chance to put teams away and finish them, then I can't make someone understand something they don't want to understand. You seem to think that people are saying that this offense sucks or something, when no one has made any such claim. What we're saying is that there are some problems there that have been there and several of us used many examples that are factual to make this a little more clear for you, but it's against your principal as a fan who is optimistic before every season regardless of what the circumstances are or what history has shown us last season and the season before that caused us to lose games where the offense didn't play for 4 quarters or had epic TO's that ruined an "almost comeback."

I'm not testy in the least. Why should I be? I'm not the one one arguing an absurd position.

Lucky
05-14-2011, 06:41 PM
We couldn't stop Tebow for goodness sake (thought of another word but I figured this was a family board)
Tim Tebow appreiciates your discretion.

No, that didn't always work. The Texans lost two games after jumping out to early leads (SD & @ DEN). I'm just stating the obvious, which is that it is better to get a lead than fall behind. The Texans offense has room for improvement, and that's getting points on the board sooner.

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 06:47 PM
If the Texans scored 21 points in the 1st 3 seconds of the game and lost 22-21, would you be any happier? I'd much rather see an O that can be down a score or two and come back and win than a team that shoots its wad in the 1st half and has to hold on to win. Kubes is far, far from a good HC, but this thread isn't about Kubes. It's about the O. The O isn't the problem on this team. It's poor defensive play and questionable play calling on O. That is an entirely different thread that TK and Rey should think of starting.

I don't think anyone is questioning how bad the defense was.

Look, all the stat posting is very similar to all the David Carr stat posting trying to prove he was at least a decent QB. But it was more about his performance in situations that mattered. Like Carr, the Texans offense didn't get it done when they needed to.

I'll admit, I'm first in line when the Texans are passing out the Kool-aide, but not this time. The Texans offense was better than the Texans defense. & the offensive stats are useful when arguing other points. But the title of this thread says overrated. In light of those stats, I agree.

The defense was worse than the offense.

The defense was worse than the offense.

The offense was better than the defense.

Still, the offense is over rated.

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 06:49 PM
I'm not trying to get between the spat you have with a couple of other posters. But if you don't think it matters if you take an early lead, or fall behind, you are mistaken. Get an early lead, and you can make the opposition one dimensional. And that can make it easier for your defense to defend.

Do you mind expounding on that thought?

It's a very interesting concept.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 06:49 PM
Tim Tebow appreiciates your discretion.

No, that didn't always work. The Texans lost two games after jumping out to early leads (SD & @ DEN). I'm just stating the obvious, which is that it is better to get a lead than fall behind. The Texans offense has room for improvement, and that's getting points on the board sooner.
My internet is too slow, but how many ganes did the Texans come from behind and have a chance to tie or win? I bet it's a lot more than two. Getting points on the baord sooner has little, if nothing to do with the final score. Getting more points before the end of the 4th quarter is the only way to win a game. When you get those points is secondary,

Texecutioner
05-14-2011, 06:58 PM
I'm not testy in the least. Why should I be? I'm not the one one arguing an absurd position.

No, you're just not listening to anything or responding or forming any rebuttals that have gone against many of your claims that you have stated in this thread regarding this great offense that you're so proud of. I've taken what you've said and responded to it with several facts that you won't even address for some reason to only to come back stomping your feet and using insults to ellaborate with. You make this debate pretty easy actually with all these contradictions to previous statements that you've made. I've yet to hear you address why it's not a problem for an offense to always start out slowly. Your only response to that is that the defense is horrible which no one has denied, but somehow still blamed the defense on the offense struggling for an entire half. You've also ignored every statement about how this offense would continue to fail when it was in position to clinch several games and blew it. Every time you've somehow blamed the defense and not even responded to the fact that the offense either had a TO instead of scoring or some other epic face palm moment where they failed to clinch the game. Every time you've had the floor to try to explain why that isn't a problem somehow you blame the defense on that to. You only want to scream, and don't want to hear what anyone else is saying that illustrates clear flaws in your argument.

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 06:59 PM
And if we had anything resembling a defense, perhaps we wouldn't be so far behind in the 2nd half. All offenses in the NFL are hot and cold. We've held Manning and Colts scoreless for a half before. Does that mean Manning and the Colts are worthy of this beating the Texans offense is taking in this thread?
.

Does that mean the Texans defense is any good?

Is it possible for stats (like the Texans 2009 defense) to make fans think they have a good defense, then a few injuries & a few suspensions blow that all to shit?

This should be the end of this conversation.

texanchris
05-14-2011, 07:00 PM
Our offense is a bit overrated but no offense is perfect and can score on every drive. Footballs a team game and the offense has brought the texans back in many games to watch the defense lose it in the final seconds. The offense is good but they they are only 1 part of the football team. Special team and defense need to step up next year because they are the reason we lost all those close games. There are only a few offenses in the league that i would choose over the Texans.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 07:02 PM
No, you're just not listening to anything or responding or forming any rebuttals that have gone against many of your claims that you have stated in this thread regarding this great offense that you're so proud of. I've taken what you've said and responded to it with several facts that you won't even address for some reason to only to come back stomping your feet and using insults to ellaborate with. You make this debate pretty easy actually with all these contradictions to previous statements that you've made. I've yet to hear you address why it's not a problem for an offense to always start out slowly. Your only response to that is that the defense is horrible which no one has denied, but somehow still blamed the defense on the offense struggling for an entire half. You've also ignored every statement about how this offense would continue to fail when it was in position to clinch several games and blew it. Every time you've somehow blamed the defense and not even responded to the fact that the offense either had a TO instead of scoring or some other epic face palm moment where they failed to clinch the game. Every time you've had the floor to try to explain why that isn't a problem somehow you blame the defense on that to.Just no point in arguing a point.
A fool convinced is still a fool.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 07:03 PM
Does that mean the Texans defense is any good?

Is it possible for stats (like the Texans 2009 defense) to make fans think they have a good defense, then a few injuries & a few suspensions blow that all to shit?

This should be the end of this conversation.

Quit being a jackass, TK. You know our D sucked ball sacks last year. You're just being disagreeable.

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 07:04 PM
LOL. I'm not his biggest fan by a long shot. I just don;t think our O is what we should be bitching about.

Why not? We can ***** about both.

We're all equal opportunity bitters around here.

Texecutioner
05-14-2011, 07:07 PM
Just no point in arguing a point.
A fool convinced is still a fool.

Still can't answer to the questions that were previously asked or address any of the facts that have gone against your claims. Just more insults instead. Lol!

Surrender noted.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 07:08 PM
Why not? We can ***** about both.

We're all equal opportunity bitters around here.

True enough, but one side of the ball is much more deserving than the other. You're way too observant to be arguing what you're arguing. I have to wonder why. Are you THAT bored this offseason?

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 07:12 PM
Our offense is a bit overrated but no offense is perfect and can score on every drive. Footballs a team game and the offense has brought the texans back in many games to watch the defense lose it in the final seconds. The offense is good but they they are only 1 part of the football team. Special team and defense need to step up next year because they are the reason we lost all those close games. There are only a few offenses in the league that i would choose over the Texans.

An offense cannot come back without defensive stops.

The offense can score 21 points & and erase three qtrs of putrid football. The defense.... not so much.

CloakNNNdagger
05-14-2011, 07:12 PM
With the Texans, that is a patently false statement. Get up on a team and force them to pass against the 30th ranked pass defense in the league? Talk about added pressure. WTF are you thinking?

I'm thinking that the Texans were 13th in run defense last year, and if the run threat is minimized because of the need for the opposing offense to put lots of points on the board quickly, they'll need to pass. As bad as our pass D was, if the O thus becomes one dimensional like Lucky stated, our D may have the luxury of concentrating on only bolstering the pass D.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 07:13 PM
Still can't answer to the questions that were previously asked or address any of the facts that have gone against your claims. Just more insults instead. Lol!

Surrender noted.If you ever post anything worth commenting on,I'll be sure to reply. So far, you just post garbage that I find mildly amusing and a bit aggravating. All hat, no cattle.

thunderkyss
05-14-2011, 07:14 PM
True enough, but one side of the ball is much more deserving than the other. You're way too observant to be arguing what you're arguing. I have to wonder why. Are you THAT bored this offseason?

Check my stats.

I've been bitching about the offense since game 1.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 07:16 PM
Check my stats.

I've been bitching about the offense since game 1. We're not talking since game 1. We're talking the last 3 years. Especially the last two years. There's room for improvement, but every single team in the country can say that, regardless of level.

DocBar
05-14-2011, 07:23 PM
I'm thinking that the Texans were 13th in run defense last year, and if the run threat is minimized because of the need for the opposing offense to put lots of points on the board quickly, they'll need to pass. As bad as our pass D was, if the O thus becomes one dimensional like Lucky stated, our D may have the luxury of concentrating on only bolstering the pass D.

What exactly will they boster it with? 2nd year players and rookies? Yeehaw.I'm putting a thousand on the Texans to make the Toilet Bowl. Of course the odd are 1:32.

Texecutioner
05-14-2011, 07:25 PM
If you ever post anything worth commenting on,I'll be sure to reply. So far, you just post garbage that I find mildly amusing and a bit aggravating. All hat, no cattle.

I thought you were done insulting me since you couldn't answer the same questions I've tried to get an answer to for several pages now. Lol! Can you not see the multiple contradictions you continue to make in this thread when you're cornered?

Earlier you wrote.

Kubes seems to get outcoached consistently in all phases of the game.

Now, that seems to be an admission from you that offensive coaching was a problem last season since you stated "all phases of the game." Now several of us have brought up problems with the offense that had to do with coaching in more than one season with the offense, yet you keep throwing this temper tantrum for stating what you already had previously in this thread but we actually got more specific with it with examples even and since it went against your argument here and you couldn't properly spin it, you've just resorted to insults. You should have stopped digging this hole a while back, because I could list several other statements from you in this very thread that have gone against this current tirade of statements of yours.