PDA

View Full Version : So where was all this so-called conservative playcalling?


Marcus
10-09-2011, 09:54 PM
I re-watched the game after seeing these "conservative playcalling" comments.

What the hell are you guys talking about? Seriously?

I mean, I saw a lot of bad plays, like bad passes, passes batted down, dropped balls, the Oline getting beat by the Raiders Dline, which didn't allow Foster to run much. A bunch of poor play execution brought on mostly again by pressure from the Raiders defense.

But conservative playcalling? Where? I didn't see any.

I still got the game taped. Tell me exactly when you saw a conservative play called. And be specific, so I can go back and see what you're talking about.

edo783
10-09-2011, 10:33 PM
I'm with you on this one Marcus. LOTS of crappy play, but not what I would call conservative. Running game not working so we were chucking the ball a boatload of times. Just a bunch of discombobulation on the offense, particularly the O-line. Maybe they believed all the press about being the best O-line in the NFL. Looked a lot more like a 2002 0r 2003 Texans O-line today than it has in the other games.

Surreal McCoy
10-09-2011, 10:35 PM
I re-watched the game after seeing these "conservative playcalling" comments.

What the hell are you guys talking about? Seriously?

I mean, I saw a lot of bad plays, like bad passes, passes batted down, dropped balls, the Oline getting beat by the Raiders Dline, which didn't allow Foster to run much. A bunch of poor play execution brought on mostly again by pressure from the Raiders defense.

But conservative playcalling? Where? I didn't see any.

I still got the game taped. Tell me exactly when you saw a conservative play called. And be specific, so I can go back and see what you're talking about.

Get ready to be flamed. Nonsensically, of course, but flamed nonetheless.

BattleRedToro
10-09-2011, 10:41 PM
I re-watched the game after seeing these "conservative playcalling" comments.

What the hell are you guys talking about? Seriously?

I mean, I saw a lot of bad plays, like bad passes, passes batted down, dropped balls, the Oline getting beat by the Raiders Dline, which didn't allow Foster to run much. A bunch of poor play execution brought on mostly again by pressure from the Raiders defense.

But conservative playcalling? Where? I didn't see any.

I still got the game taped. Tell me exactly when you saw a conservative play called. And be specific, so I can go back and see what you're talking about.

I wouldn't say conservative playcalling. I would say bad playcalling. Running into bad fronts, like when the Raiders had 5 men on the line or stacked the box and the Texans still ran. That's asinine. That's when you use play action or throw a screen pass.

hradhak
10-09-2011, 10:41 PM
I re-watched the game after seeing these "conservative playcalling" comments.

What the hell are you guys talking about? Seriously?

I mean, I saw a lot of bad plays, like bad passes, passes batted down, dropped balls, the Oline getting beat by the Raiders Dline, which didn't allow Foster to run much. A bunch of poor play execution brought on mostly again by pressure from the Raiders defense.

But conservative playcalling? Where? I didn't see any.

I still got the game taped. Tell me exactly when you saw a conservative play called. And be specific, so I can go back and see what you're talking about.

Good post. Repped. I don't think we were conservative, we just laid an egg when it came to execution. Our offensive line looked like the Steelers O line. We even called plays to get the ball into open receivers who could have scored (Vickers) and he drops it. The sloppiness is just killing us.

Surreal McCoy
10-09-2011, 10:45 PM
Good post. Repped. I don't think we were conservative, we just laid an egg when it came to execution. Our offensive line looked like the Steelers O line. We even called plays to get the ball into open receivers who could have scored (Vickers) and he drops it. The sloppiness is just killing us.

What puzzles me is why so many fail to see this? It's mind boggling. Especially some of the criticism of Schaub who was literally running/waddling for his life every passing play. Hard to be very accurate with people in your face the whole game - even Brady and Manning struggle under that kind of duress.

PS - Repped

EllisUnit
10-09-2011, 10:51 PM
I re-watched the game after seeing these "conservative playcalling" comments.

What the hell are you guys talking about? Seriously?

I mean, I saw a lot of bad plays, like bad passes, passes batted down, dropped balls, the Oline getting beat by the Raiders Dline, which didn't allow Foster to run much. A bunch of poor play execution brought on mostly again by pressure from the Raiders defense.

But conservative playcalling? Where? I didn't see any.

I still got the game taped. Tell me exactly when you saw a conservative play called. And be specific, so I can go back and see what you're talking about.

hmmm lets see, punting on their 37 yard line instead of kicking a FG. Never anything like a fake punt, going for it on 4th down just cause you believe in your players. Not letting B. Johnson play and instead relying on D. Anderson. 2 Screens the whole game, Foster is a monster after catching the ball lets do it if its working, and every time we did it it worked. Always running the same base plays over and over and over. If i know whats coming, you know whats coming and the opponent knows whats coming. i mean i could go on and on and on but whats the point. Sure we were only getting 3.2 yards per carry the game, but i would rather hand the ball off to foster and let him try to score than have schaub run around like a chicken on fire and then running into Gasoline. We all know we were waiting for a big mess up from the O and they didn't disappoint.

All that said i have always liked Kubiak, but you have to step out of your comfort zone every now and then if you want to get the tough wins. Tell me how do you justify punting in on their 37 yard line and then a quarter later attempting a 54 yarder. a little inconsistent don't ya think ? We miswell not have akicker take up a roster spot if you arent gonna use him.

leebigeztx
10-09-2011, 10:53 PM
I re-watched the game after seeing these "conservative playcalling" comments.

What the hell are you guys talking about? Seriously?

I mean, I saw a lot of bad plays, like bad passes, passes batted down, dropped balls, the Oline getting beat by the Raiders Dline, which didn't allow Foster to run much. A bunch of poor play execution brought on mostly again by pressure from the Raiders defense.

But conservative playcalling? Where? I didn't see any.

I still got the game taped. Tell me exactly when you saw a conservative play called. And be specific, so I can go back and see what you're talking about.

Look at the personell. 2 and 3 te sets against a team that can't stop the run or the pass. Why not spread them out with 11 personel and try to run vs a heavy se.

utahmark
10-09-2011, 10:55 PM
I wouldn't say conservative playcalling. I would say bad playcalling. Running into bad fronts, like when the Raiders had 5 men on the line or stacked the box and the Texans still ran. That's asinine. That's when you use play action or throw a screen pass.

It's useless to pick apart every play. Some wanted us to run the ball more some say we ran to much. We tried to run... It did'nt work... We started passing more.... Seems fine to me.

Now if you want to ***** about Kubiak putting together an offensive line that got manhandled today, you might have an argument.

Ckw
10-09-2011, 11:04 PM
BattleRedToro and EllisUnit nailed it.

Perhaps conservative is the wrong word. The playcalling was just plain bad. Also one of my biggest gripes with Kubester, and something that could have helped in a game like this, is Kubiak not really allowing Schaub to audible. I mean when the defense stacks 8 in the box, let him audible out of the play. Change it up. Instead, we were predictable and the defense was able to just pin their ears back and get after Foster and Schaub. And where were the screens?

But I'm sure the apologists will have some sort of rebuttal. For 6 years of Kubiak, you've always had a rebuttal. You'd think they'd get tired of recycling the same old lines but week after week, here they come.

Surreal McCoy
10-09-2011, 11:08 PM
...Kubiak not really allowing Schaub to audible...

I love how these urban myths continue to be perpetuated even though they've been disproven by all and sundry several times over. If you cared to find the truth, you would. Yet, somehow I don't think it fits your agenda.

BattleRedToro
10-09-2011, 11:11 PM
It's useless to pick apart every play. Some wanted us to run the ball more some say we ran to much. We tried to run... It did'nt work... We started passing more.... Seems fine to me.

Now if you want to ***** about Kubiak putting together an offensive line that got manhandled today, you might have an argument.

No utahmark, you're wrong.

I don't care what the fans want the Texans to do anymore than I care what Kubiak wants them to do. It is stupid to try to run against 8 in the box fronts. Everyone knows that. This is basic football. You are playing into your opponents strength when you do that.

If your opponent lines up with 8 in the box you make him pay with your passing game, this includes screen passes, bubble screens, slants, and tight end rollouts.

If your opponent lines up with 6 in the box you punish him with running plays.

If your opponent lines up with 7 in the box you have the flexibility to run or pass.

Of course, down and distance are going to play into this as well, but if it is 1st and 10 and they have 8 in the box and you don't make them pay with a pass, or they have 6 in the box and you don't gash them with the run then you should expect to lose the game.

Texecutioner
10-09-2011, 11:15 PM
I love how these urban myths continue to be perpetuated even though they've been disproven by all and sundry several times over. If you cared to find the truth, you would. Yet, somehow I don't think it fits your agenda.

For the record he isn't some guy with some agenda and fire in his eyes. He has actually argued on the behalf of Kubes in the past against me, so that isn't exactly true. He's frustrated after a tough loss when we're in year 6 of a failed regime, so you sort of have to expect that. How would you call it an urban myth about Schaub not being able to audible though? Have you seen or read anything that contradicts that? Feel free to show me that, because I'd like to see it and I can guarantee you that others would as well. This game wasn't all on Kubes. Not at all. However, we're seeing a lot of the same trends we've seen in other seasons though. The good side of that is that we're 3-2 right now at least.

Ckw
10-09-2011, 11:22 PM
I love how these urban myths continue to be perpetuated even though they've been disproven by all and sundry several times over. If you cared to find the truth, you would. Yet, somehow I don't think it fits your agenda.

I don't have an agenda. From what I've watched from my seats at the stadium as well as from my couch in front of my HDTV, I have hardly ever seen Schaub audible out of a play. I haven't missed watching a game either at the stadium or on tv in 5 years. Find me some video evidence showing Schaub actually change up the play at the LOS. And not just one isolated event. Prove that I'm wrong and that Schaub really does have full control of the game and the freedom to change up the play if need be. If he does, then Schaub is the one with the problem because the very definition of stupidity is to continue doing the same things expecting different results aka running the ball when the defense stacks the box and expecting a big play.

I think it's you with the agenda trying to find anything you can to continue on with your sunshine parade.

Ckw
10-09-2011, 11:24 PM
For the record he isn't some guy with some agenda and fire in his eyes. He has actually argued on the behalf of Kubes in the past against me, so that isn't exactly true. He's frustrated after a tough loss when we're in year 6 of a failed regime, so you sort of have to expect that. How would you call it an urban myth about Schaub not being able to audible though? Have you seen or read anything that contradicts that? Feel free to show me that, because I'd like to see it and I can guarantee you that others would as well. This game wasn't all on Kubes. Not at all. However, we're seeing a lot of the same trends we've seen in other seasons though. The good side of that is that we're 3-2 right now at least.

Thanks Tex and great post as well.

I've been on both sides of the argument but after 6 years of watching the same thing and seeing us have the same problems with totally new players, it has become pretty difficult to not blame Kubiak.

EllisUnit
10-09-2011, 11:24 PM
I don't have an agenda. From what I've watched from my seats at the stadium as well as from my couch in front of my HDTV, I have hardly ever seen Schaub audible out of a play. I haven't missed watching a game either at the stadium or on tv in 5 years. Find me some video evidence showing Schaub actually change up the play at the LOS. And not just one isolated event. Prove that I'm wrong and that Schaub really does have full control of the game and the freedom to change up the play if need be. If he does, then Schaub is the one with the problem because the very definition of stupidity is to continue doing the same things expecting different results aka running the ball when the defense stacks the box and expecting a big play.

I think it's you with the agenda trying to find anything you can to continue on with your sunshine parade.

i have seen it maybe 5 times since he's played with us. And hell for all i know he was telling them he wanted T bone steak after he throws a pick to end the game. Who knows none of us know what they are saying/doing out there, but i do know Schaub does need to audible more. He needs to be able to read a defense and adjust the play. And i have yet to see him do that

Marcus
10-09-2011, 11:47 PM
I ask you guys to explain all of these "conservative playcalling" comments, and what do I get . . .

"Well uh .... We didn't really mean conservative playcalling, we really meant bad playcalling instead"???

That's about as lame as you can possible get.

Scapegoatism at its very shallowest, is really what it is.

EllisUnit
10-09-2011, 11:51 PM
hmmm lets see, punting on their 37 yard line instead of kicking a FG. Never anything like a fake punt, going for it on 4th down just cause you believe in your players. Not letting B. Johnson play and instead relying on D. Anderson. 2 Screens the whole game, Foster is a monster after catching the ball lets do it if its working, and every time we did it it worked. Always running the same base plays over and over and over. If i know whats coming, you know whats coming and the opponent knows whats coming. i mean i could go on and on and on but whats the point. Sure we were only getting 3.2 yards per carry the game, but i would rather hand the ball off to foster and let him try to score than have schaub run around like a chicken on fire and then running into Gasoline. We all know we were waiting for a big mess up from the O and they didn't disappoint.

All that said i have always liked Kubiak, but you have to step out of your comfort zone every now and then if you want to get the tough wins. Tell me how do you justify punting in on their 37 yard line and then a quarter later attempting a 54 yarder. a little inconsistent don't ya think ? We miswell not have akicker take up a roster spot if you arent gonna use him.

most of mine are conservative play calling examples. towards the bottom half you will see where i mention some bad play calling as well.

Ckw
10-09-2011, 11:56 PM
I ask you guys to explain all of these "conservative playcalling" comments, and what do I get . . .

"Well uh .... We didn't really mean conservative playcalling, we really meant bad playcalling instead"???

That's about as lame as you can possible get.

Scapegoatism at its very shallowest, is really what it is.

If for one second you could get your mouth off Kubiak's... ah nevermind.

GP
10-10-2011, 12:05 AM
I saw a Raiders game plan that was pretty simple, and very smart:

1. Get into field goal range. Doesn't matter how, just GET THERE.

2. Let The Janitor take a swipe at a FG.

3. Collect your three points, and try it again when you get the ball after watching the Texans try to run against an 8-man front.

4. Watch the Texans beat the Texans, like they will do if you will just be patient and not screw up before they do. Just wait them out. They're the Texans. The only team that can stop them is themselves.

Gary, on the other hand....

Well, it's no use in trying to dissect the guy. He's got a podium to tap, so let's not be too hard on him.

The offense really eff'd the defense today. They did our defense no favors. I'd be pissed if I played for Wade Phillips today, because Gary's Kids didn't play like champions.

The whole game was just weird. Freaking Raiders. Dammit. :rake:

Marcus
10-10-2011, 12:19 AM
If for one second you could get your mouth off Kubiak's... ah nevermind.

:rolleyes:

Let's try it again, shall we?

Where's all this conservative playcalling? There wasn't any, and you know it. You're just playing the 20/20 hindsight game to try to justify your anti-Kubiak crusade.

There was not a damn thing wrong with the playcalling. It was poor execution, and that's all it was.

BattleRedToro
10-10-2011, 06:04 AM
I ask you guys to explain all of these "conservative playcalling" comments, and what do I get . . .

"Well uh .... We didn't really mean conservative playcalling, we really meant bad playcalling instead"???

That's about as lame as you can possible get.

Scapegoatism at its very shallowest, is really what it is.

I'll tell you what lame is. Lame is attributing some poster's opinion to another poster.

I never made a post claiming the calls were conservative. I standby my previous post stating that it was a case of bad playcalling. If you can't read that is your problem. I challenge you to present a post here in which I claimed anywhere on Texanstalk that the playcalling was conservative. You won't find one because it doesn't exist.

Straw man argument at it's very worst, is really what this is.

BattleRedToro
10-10-2011, 06:20 AM
:rolleyes:

Let's try it again, shall we?

Where's all this conservative playcalling? There wasn't any, and you know it. You're just playing the 20/20 hindsight game to try to justify your anti-Kubiak crusade.

There was not a damn thing wrong with the playcalling. It was poor execution, and that's all it was.

You are beyond help if you think running against 8 in the box is good playcalling.

Dishman
10-10-2011, 07:23 AM
I ask you guys to explain all of these "conservative playcalling" comments, and what do I get . . .

"Well uh .... We didn't really mean conservative playcalling, we really meant bad playcalling instead"???

That's about as lame as you can possible get.

Scapegoatism at its very shallowest, is really what it is.

If what we saw on Sunday was not bad play calling, then how would you define it?

Unfortunate play calling?
We'll get 'em next time play calling?

There is no doubt Kubiak has been full of both conservative and bad play calling, sometimes the two being interchangeable depending on how much sunshine juice is left in your batteries.

TexanBacker93
10-10-2011, 11:36 AM
I'm not sure conservative is the right word. I questioned some of the calls, but I'll be the first to admit that I'm a much better armchair coach than a real one. If I were as good as Kubiak or anyone else I'd probably be doing that instead.

I don't like running wide on 3rd and 2. I know the holes weren't there between the tackles, but I hate starting 5 yards behind the line of scrimmage on a sweep when you only need 2. You have to be able to pound it or do a quick pass that we have done other times. I get that it worked out because we pinned them and then got the INT and TD right after, but I just don't like going backwards.

I didn't agree with punting from Oakland's 37. You later kicked a FG from the 36. Is that 1 yard really the difference? Rackers can hit a 54 yarder. Either kick the FG or go for it. We put them at the 14 and then held, but the way the defense had played up until then I think you go for it and know that the defense was going to stop them and you'd get it back.

I didn't like the challenge either. They showed the replay on the big screen before Kubiak threw the red flag. You have to know the refs and know they won't overturn something that just wasn't clear. If they ruled it a catch and Oakland challenged I think it would have stayed a catch. You couldn't tell. Especially considering you were still in FG range at the time. The TO is more important in a close game.

Along those same lines I think we wasted our 2nd TO in the 2nd half after an incomplete pass. It's 3rd and 10 from your own 20. If we had a TO to call after the pass to Dreessen we would have been able to run 3 plays provided Matt didn't throw an INT.

infantrycak
10-10-2011, 11:57 AM
I don't think the play calling was particularly conservative or bad. I think the Oline got their asses handed to them.

Man one dropped pass by Vickers for a sure fire TD and this MB would be entirely different.

Surreal McCoy
10-10-2011, 12:11 PM
You are beyond help if you think running against 8 in the box is good playcalling.

Except that you would be the very first on here moaning, "RUN THE DAMN BALL STUPIDAK!! YOU'VE GOT THE LEAGUE'S LEADING RUSHER!!!!! DON'T OUTSMART YOURSELF STUPIDAK, JUST RUN IT!!!!"

Ring a bell?

Marcus
10-10-2011, 01:36 PM
I don't think the play calling was particularly conservative or bad. I think the Oline got their asses handed to them.

Man one dropped pass by Vickers for a sure fire TD and this MB would be entirely different.

Now, THAT is what I saw. If you get beat in the trenches, nothing else is going to work, no matter what plays that are called.

Just way too much Madden. :dontknowa

BattleRedToro
10-10-2011, 09:26 PM
Except that you would be the very first on here moaning, "RUN THE DAMN BALL STUPIDAK!! YOU'VE GOT THE LEAGUE'S LEADING RUSHER!!!!! DON'T OUTSMART YOURSELF STUPIDAK, JUST RUN IT!!!!"

Ring a bell?

I'll try and type this post slowly so you can understand it.

I'm not saying they shouldn't run the ball. I'm saying they shouldn't run the ball against 8 in the box.

I hope that was slow enough for you.

:good:

Texan_Bill
10-10-2011, 09:32 PM
:rolleyes:

Let's try it again, shall we?

Where's all this conservative playcalling? There wasn't any, and you know it. You're just playing the 20/20 hindsight game to try to justify your anti-Kubiak crusade.

There was not a damn thing wrong with the playcalling. It was poor execution, and that's all it was.

JUP!!!!


416 passing yards would suggest anything but a "conservative play call"!!! In fact an argument could be made that the playcalling wasn't conservative enough!! Just sayin'!!!

All BS aside, plays in the NFL come down to the players that make (or not) the plays called!!!


PS..... I'm looking at you Jacoby Jones!! When Andre sees a play breaking down, he shoots for an open spot... You continue to run your route.., or at least try.... FAIL!

thunderkyss
10-11-2011, 12:40 AM
I wouldn't say conservative playcalling. I would say bad playcalling. Running into bad fronts, like when the Raiders had 5 men on the line or stacked the box and the Texans still ran. That's asinine. That's when you use play action or throw a screen pass.


We can beat that. We've done it before. It's not asinine.


To try it against this particular five man front after we've seen that it wasn't working very well... that's asinine.

But if I didn't see it for myself, I'd have a hard time believing any front can stop our run game 3 times in a row.... I'd make them do it at least twice before I start to go away from it. I might even try it a third time later in the game, just to make sure.

Asinine, I know.... but that's the way I role.

& it's not like they were stopping us for no gain all three times... we'd gain 5 or 6, then 2, then 2. Playing the odds (pre game odds that is) I wouldn't bet on that repeating again & again & again... & again.

thunderkyss
10-11-2011, 12:54 AM
:rolleyes:

Let's try it again, shall we?

Where's all this conservative playcalling? There wasn't any, and you know it. You're just playing the 20/20 hindsight game to try to justify your anti-Kubiak crusade.

There was not a damn thing wrong with the playcalling. It was poor execution, and that's all it was.

After watching this game a second time, I think this is probably one of the best games of the year (so far). If you want to see "conservative" plays.. imo, look at the whole game.

Then look at the last 4 minutes. If you don't see a difference in the play calling, then you've got an agenda.

I'll go over them one by one if I get time, but to actually watch this game a third time this week is probably not a reality for me (I've got a bunch of games on the DVR I need to get to before Thursday).

The first 56 minutes.... conservative.

The last 4.... open.

bo orlando
10-11-2011, 01:05 AM
I re-watched the game after seeing these "conservative playcalling" comments.

What the hell are you guys talking about? Seriously?

I mean, I saw a lot of bad plays, like bad passes, passes batted down, dropped balls, the Oline getting beat by the Raiders Dline, which didn't allow Foster to run much. A bunch of poor play execution brought on mostly again by pressure from the Raiders defense.

But conservative playcalling? Where? I didn't see any.

I still got the game taped. Tell me exactly when you saw a conservative play called. And be specific, so I can go back and see what you're talking about.


Don't you get it? The plays that are "conservative" are the ones that didn't work. Same goes for the "bad" plays.

HJam72
10-11-2011, 08:43 AM
After watching this game a second time, I think this is probably one of the best games of the year (so far). If you want to see "conservative" plays.. imo, look at the whole game.

Then look at the last 4 minutes. If you don't see a difference in the play calling, then you've got an agenda.

I'll go over them one by one if I get time, but to actually watch this game a third time this week is probably not a reality for me (I've got a bunch of games on the DVR I need to get to before Thursday).

The first 56 minutes.... conservative.

The last 4.... open.

You want us to run the 2-Minute offense all game and have them promise to use a prevent D all game? Is that it?

Texan_Bill
10-11-2011, 08:48 AM
I don't think the play calling was particularly conservative or bad. I think the Oline got their asses handed to them.

Man one dropped pass by Vickers for a sure fire TD and this MB would be entirely different.

Chris, you know better. It's just the "***** du jour"!

thunderkyss
10-11-2011, 10:01 AM
You want us to run the 2-Minute offense all game and have them promise to use a prevent D all game? Is that it?

First, I apologize, I was "talking" about this game before actually watching it. I've got a completely different view than I had when I posted that statement.

I associate the 2 minute drill with hurrying to the line, no huddles, pass, on all available downs.

I'm talking about the way we stretched the defense in the last 2 minutes of the game. That pass to Walter to get out of the endzone.. why do we pull that out when our back's against the wall? Three deep passes to Jacoby, all in the final three minutes.

I don't think the play calling was particularly conservative or bad. I think the Oline got their asses handed to them.


In reality, this is where I ended up after watching the game on TV. I had no idea the OL was that bad.

Schaub's a warrior & deserves more credit than he's been given.

Kimmy
10-11-2011, 10:20 AM
:rolleyes:

Let's try it again, shall we?

Where's all this conservative playcalling? There wasn't any, and you know it. You're just playing the 20/20 hindsight game to try to justify your anti-Kubiak crusade.

There was not a damn thing wrong with the playcalling. It was poor execution, and that's all it was.

I saw this on FB and knew I'd have a reason to use it here :)

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/299486_256886704354223_131437750232453_728370_8386 50205_n.jpg