PDA

View Full Version : NFL Combine 2013: Texans Gary Kubiak Transcript


CloakNNNdagger
02-21-2013, 09:54 PM
Question about what it will take to overtake the Patriots and elite teams?

"I don't think there is one answer to that next step if that's what you're asking me. I think we have to stay committed as an organization and a football team to get ourselves in that position. You can never go to that championship game or win that Super Bowl unless you continue to put yourself in that position. And obviously, we're going to have to be better once we get there.

"We have a young football team. But we have a lot of guys who have experienced four playoff games.

"That's a good thing. Our quarterbacks have now experienced two playoff games.


"We have to continue to grow from that. We have to stay committed to our program if we do that, keep putting ourselves in that position, than I think we'll find a way to get that done.''

On Andrew Luck:

"I remember standing up here last year and knowing what I knew about him and watching this process, I thought this guy had a chance to be tremendous right off the get go. He was exception. I was very impressed with what he did as well as some other young quarterbacks in the league, but the job he came in here and did and he took this football team over, and the job the coach did as a whole with him leading the way was very exceptional.

On finding a second WR:

"I think that continues to be right now a big focus for us as an organization. We drafted a few young guys last year. I do have a young guy in Lestar Jean that I think a lot of. DeVier Posey was making big, big progress and now we're dealing with a significant injury that is going to take some time

"So I think its important that we continue to strengthen our team in that area. Andre is in year 11 or something like that now so weve got to find some other guys to continue to produce alongside of him.

Question on James Casey…

"I think he was very much involved with what we did. I think he had a 30-plus catch season playing the fullback position for us. If there's one thing that maybe kept that from getting bigger is the fact that (TE) Garrett Graham was such a fine player for us in training camp. We took a risk going with two tight ends going into the season, if you counting James it was three. OD (Owen Daniels) and Garrett played exceptional for us. James did a good job. He played all over the place. He starts at fullback for us. He's grown a lot as a player. He's in a free-agent situation but we think the world of him. He's done a good job."

(On Keyshawn Martin)

"I'm real excited for him to come back. There's another level for this young man to reach. He gained a lot of confidence. He probably had the best training camp of any young player that we had. Was contributing early in the season. I think the season got a little long on him, the rookie wall whatever they want to say. I think he'll come back and be an even better contributor for our football team and has a chance to be an excellent returner.He's small from a stature standpoint. But when he learns to play through the bumps and the holds of this league, which he can do a better job of he'll be more productive.''

(Question about penalties)

"We're a big penalty team in special teams. That's a big concern of ours. If I'm looking for a reason why we fell off a little bit, our inside linebacker situation got very thin when we lost Cush. When you're having problems at linebacker in the NFL, you're probably going to suffer on special teams. We're not going to use that as an excuse. But it's something we have to do better.''

"It was young players for the most part. But that's not an excuse. You're going to play with young players. We've got to do a better job of not having it happen. And if they do, find a way to overcome them. It's just something we have to continue to work on especially when you're at a point in the season when we're not putting the pads on anymore and you can't beat on anymore late in the season, you have to maintain your focus."

(Brooks Reed)

"He's very capable of being a stack player, playing inside in our 3-4. Yes, that could happen. But we'd liked him as a SAM, he's a heck of a SAM player. But you've always have to have some flexibility with one player or two players in various situations when you come across like what we did last year. Depending on what happens with our football team moving forward right now with Connor (Barwin) and some other things we're always looking for some flexibility.''

(Does Matt Schaub need more flexibility audibiling at line)

"He does do a lot for us. We do a lot more than you may think. We do a lot of at the line of scrimmage. Matt probably does as much for me as I've had anybody do in a while. Matt's played a lot of football for us. Yeah, if we keep going I trust him to do a lot of things. We're built a certain way, so we're going to teach our system. But he's very capable of getting us in the best play possible. And I think we're doing that most of the time anyway."

(What gets you better at coming from behind in two minute situations)

"It's about making plays. You look at last year, you look at Jacksonville and Detroit, we were exceptional. We won two shootouts back to back where we had to come from behind, had to throw the ball every time. So theres a lot of good going on there. We got caught in some situations in New England where obviously the first time we were in a really bad situation. Probably not as bad in the playoff game.

"I just think it's experience. It's the experience of the quarterback and the weapons he has around him. Being able to function when everybody around him knows he has to throw.

(Developing the QB depth in draft)

"You're always looking to do that. I have a young player in T.J. (Yates) who I think a lot of. He goes from playing a lot of football, starting a playoff game to basically not doing much of all this year, having maybe 10 snaps, that was tough. I have a young player from the Univ. of Houston in Case Keenum, I think a lot of who came a long way for me last year. I feel good about those guys pushing Matt. And then we did sign McGee here a couple of weeks ago.

In this business, you better be looking for young quarterbacks you think have a chance to be a 10, 12-year guy. This year will be no different."

How important is Glover Quin?

"He's very important. First off, he's not only a heck of a player for us. He's a leader in our locker room. A class act. He played very well for us. It's very important, Rick and I talked about it and as a staff, obviously, we want him to continue to be there for our football team. We have to go through the process. But he's very important to what we're doing.''

(Question about being in favor of eliminating low blocks)

REST OF THE STORY (http://www.cincyjungle.com/nfl-combine-2013/2013/2/21/4015198/nfl-combine-2013-texans-gary-kubiak-transcript)

badboy
02-21-2013, 10:22 PM
Interesting comment about Schaub but I am sure I am reading too much into it.


Yeah, if we keep going I trust him to do a lot of things

tru80texan
02-21-2013, 10:52 PM
Kubiak's answer concerning Schaub & audibles was ho hum imo. He didn't explain what Schaub is allowed to do as far audibles, only that he does a lot for him w/ out specifying. A vague answer, imo, that really doesn't explain much other then kubiak trying to convince others that they do more then meets the eye & he trusts Schaub. Obviously some don't believe that or else he wouldn't be questioned amongst the fans & media. When the Texans line up against stacked fronts & still run the ball for minimal gain or a lose tells me Schaub doesn't have as much latitude as Kubiak wants us to believe. Scenarios like that slim to never happen against the likes of P.Manning, Brees, or Brady. Why....because their coaches trust them to get out of doomed plays.

I know some will believe Kubiak is this master offensive mind that now has had added undetectable audibles to his arsenal, but I have my doubts & others do to it seems by the article.

I am glad that he is finally acknowledging that #2 WR needs to be addressed instead trying to fill us w/ the same ole BS of how Walter is a great asset that does more then we believe & that he is an adequate #2. It's a shame that the owner had to guide him, yet again, on what needs to be done, but whatever it takes I suppose.

Playoffs
02-21-2013, 11:17 PM
I felt that way about KeyMart, he kinda disappeared.

Sounds like he had trouble navigating we he wasn't clean. I hope he figures it out & comes back stronger next year. How hard he hits the weights will be telling on whether he's going to be a football player or not, imo.

Brisco_County
02-22-2013, 12:54 AM
(Brooks Reed)

"He's very capable of being a stack player, playing inside in our 3-4. Yes, that could happen. But we'd liked him as a SAM, he's a heck of a SAM player. But you've always have to have some flexibility with one player or two players in various situations when you come across like what we did last year. Depending on what happens with our football team moving forward right now with Connor (Barwin) and some other things we're always looking for some flexibility.''

This tells me that if Brooks ends up playing inside, it means that he is not being used optimally or how Wade prefers, which means that the defensive unit has taken a step back.


(Should there be a total ban?)

"Me? No. I think you know that answer. That's part of what we do. It's part of football. We teach it the right way.

"Hopefully that part stays with us. But I do understand the issues going on as far as going back towards your particular goal line.''

This emphasizes something that gets under my skin. Fans and media of other teams describe cut blocking as dirty and dangerous, therefore Cushing received the Texans' own medicine. I have to question how many opposing players have ever been injured by a Texans cut block. I've never seen it.

thunderkyss
02-22-2013, 01:01 AM
This tells me that if Brooks ends up playing inside, it means that he is not being used optimally or how Wade prefers, which means that the defensive unit has taken a step back.



This tells me if we resign Barwin, we've got three high round draft picks tied up in two spots. Brooks' flexibility would give him the opportunity to stay on the field on some 3rd downs, whether he's dropping in coverage, or rotating in as an outside rusher.

infantrycak
02-22-2013, 02:02 AM
Kubiak's answer concerning Schaub & audibles was ho hum imo. He didn't explain what Schaub is allowed to do as far audibles, only that he does a lot for him w/ out specifying. A vague answer, imo, that really doesn't explain much other then kubiak trying to convince others that they do more then meets the eye & he trusts Schaub.

Name all the HC interviews (especially at the combine, but go ahead and open it up) where they discuss in any detail their audible system.

tru80texan
02-22-2013, 02:12 AM
Name all the HC interviews (especially at the combine, but go ahead and open it up) where they discuss in any detail their audible system.

They don't discuss them, but please tell me how many other HC's are questioned throughout the season & in the offseason on why they don't allow or seem to allow their QB to audible more. There aren't that many. Walking straight up to line scrimmage, glancing around & still running a play that seemed doomed from the beginning is hardly an "audible system". I don't nor do most others need Kubiak to discuss a system that to most seems very limited & thus comes under fire. If it walks like a duck....

thunderkyss
02-22-2013, 05:52 AM
They don't discuss them, but please tell me how many other HC's are questioned throughout the season & in the offseason on why they don't allow or seem to allow their QB to audible more. There aren't that many. Walking straight up to line scrimmage, glancing around & still running a play that seemed doomed from the beginning is hardly an "audible system". I don't nor do most others need Kubiak to discuss a system that to most seems very limited & thus comes under fire. If it walks like a duck....

Except we still have a top 10 offense, in yards, & points. Our RB leads the league in rushing TDs.

I know they're just stats, but shouldn't a limited offense quack like a duck?

tru80texan
02-22-2013, 07:52 AM
Except we still have a top 10 offense, in yards, & points. Our RB leads the league in rushing TDs.

I know they're just stats, but shouldn't a limited offense quack like a duck?

Lol! It should, but we aren't talking about the offense as a whole now are we? We are talking about Schaub & the so-called "audible system"...or lack thereof. That's an aspect of the offense that some believe is lacking & exactly why kubiak is questioned, which is hardly a surprise to most.

I normally stand by stats as they do normally tell the tale, but isn't that why the Texans were referred to as "frauds". They looked good on paper w/ the pretty record & stats, but when it came down to crunch time...they folded & many weren't surprised despite all of those wonderful things you listed.

Brisco_County
02-22-2013, 09:16 AM
Cushing expresses his support of tightening up the rules on low blocks, and gives his opinion of Slauson's play. Wait for media to imply hyprocrisy because he plays for the Texans.

"I'm happy they're taking the initiative to look at this," Cushing said. "To me, it's an acknowledgement that defensive players have to be protected, too. I wasn't the first guy to go down like this; there have been similar injuries. What happened, that's a play that can be eliminated. You look at the play, it doesn't need to be done. So for them to go back and really acknowledge that guys need to be protected, that's moving in the right direction."

"I can understand if you're 180 pounds and trying to block a 300-pound guy, and you know you have no chance," Cushing said. "But I'm not looking, we're behind the ball, and it's low. And he specifically, with a purpose, went for the knee. There was nothing clean about it. There's no debate on whether it was clean. The league fined him $10,000, so they had a problem with it; they felt there needed to be a fine, which means they agreed it wasn't a clean play."

Asked about having heard from Slauson, Cushing quickly responded, "No. But I didn't expect that. It's how he wanted to go about that. I don't have a relationship with him, nor am I looking for one. It doesn't bother me. It wasn't gonna help me come back, and I don't really care what he thinks."

"I'm not the first; a lot of people have spoken up," he said. "If it saves other guys from things like this and prevents future injury because we spoke up about it, that's great. If that means football is safer going forward, and more people feel comfortable playing, even better."

Link (http://www.theredzone.org/BlogDescription/tabid/61/EntryId/33040/Brian-Cushing-hopes-injury-brings-more-protection-for-defenders/Default.aspx).

deucetx
02-22-2013, 09:56 AM
Except we still have a top 10 offense, in yards, & points. Our RB leads the league in rushing TDs.

I know they're just stats, but shouldn't a limited offense quack like a duck?

Except we still have a top 10 offense, in yards, & points. Our RB leads the league in rushing TDs.

I know they're just stats, but shouldn't a limited offense quack like a duck?

Our RB may have led the league in rushing touchdowns but does it matter who gets in the endzone as long as someone does? We didn't lead the league in rushing touchdowns in other words. We were fourth. Ironically the Patriots led in rushing touchdowns and their backs hit the endzone more than ours.

Plus let's be honest...we can grab the end of the year stats all we want but down the stretch this was limited. Just like we were top 10 in scoring. Yeah, but it breaks down like this:

First 7 games

216 points = 30.9 avg. per game

21 Offensive Touchdowns

Last 9 games

200 points = 22.2 avg. per game
*77 of those 200 points came in two games vs Jaguars/Lions for 39% of the complete total

20 Offensive Touchdowns

Sorry, that is an unimpressive way to finish the second half of your season and speaks of some issues. Can't count on always having Jaguars and Lions defenses in the playoffs, heh. It was like we reversed it. First 7 games we scored our most TD's on the Broncs and Ravens. Last 9 we scored our most on Jags and Lions. So from top caliber teams to only scoring on the bottom barrel. We couldn't even score on the Colts/Vikes...playoff teams but medicore defenses.

Can we get yards? Yes. But prolific offenses get touchdowns which down the stretch we seemed foreign to. We scored SIX freaking points against the medicore defense of the Viqueens. No one scored that low against them. At home no less.

Let's look even more so...there was a stretch during the end of the year we didn't score an offensive toucdown for 9 freaking quarters. And we weren't playing some elite teams...we were playing the darn Colts and Vikings. So we take this into the playoffs and once again we're gaining yards and no touchdowns against the Bengals though at least they are a good defense and the Patriots...well...we all remember that TKO from every facet of the game except (ironically) special teams.

So yeah, this offense was limited. They need to develop a way to get the ball in the endzone. We were 18th in passing touchdowns despite Schaub's 4k yards so again...yards and seldom touchdowns.

Another point of limitation is the deep game. Can't remember precisely as I put it in another thread but of the quarterbacks going in the postseason we threw 20+ the least other than Kap (who was right behind Schaub with far less games so he'd surpass him), Ponder and RG3.

So yeah...limited. This baby is quacking lol.

GP
02-22-2013, 10:09 AM
(Does Matt Schaub need more flexibility audibiling at line)

"He does do a lot for us. We do a lot more than you may think. We do a lot of at the line of scrimmage. Matt probably does as much for me as I've had anybody do in a while. Matt's played a lot of football for us. Yeah, if we keep going I trust him to do a lot of things. We're built a certain way, so we're going to teach our system. But he's very capable of getting us in the best play possible. And I think we're doing that most of the time anyway."

"We're built a certain way, so we're going to teach our system."

Your "system," Gary, is inferior vs. better defenses. They know what you're doing in various scenarios, and they know how to nullify your best-made plans.

Maybe focus more on adaptability and formation/style uniqueness instead of just sharpening your beloved system. Because you're screwing this team right out of the gate when we face better defenses.

GROW.

Double Barrel
02-22-2013, 11:38 AM
Kubiak is channeling his inner Belichick of saying a whole lotta' words while saying a whole lotta' nothing.

(Does Matt Schaub need more flexibility audibiling at line)

"He does do a lot for us. We do a lot more than you may think. We do a lot of at the line of scrimmage. Matt probably does as much for me as I've had anybody do in a while. Matt's played a lot of football for us. Yeah, if we keep going I trust him to do a lot of things. We're built a certain way, so we're going to teach our system. But he's very capable of getting us in the best play possible. And I think we're doing that most of the time anyway."

Kubiak and Schaub have both admitted on their radio shows that the QB gets three options at the LOS, but none of them offer the flexibility that we see with QBs like P. Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers. I believe this is what the question was about, but Kubiak avoided a real answer.

And what does this mean? "if we keep going I trust him to do a lot of things"

IF? What does he mean "if"? There is no "if". Schaub is our QB for at least two more seasons and I honestly doubt that the position is open to competition.

(What gets you better at coming from behind in two minute situations)

"It's about making plays. You look at last year, you look at Jacksonville and Detroit, we were exceptional. We won two shootouts back to back where we had to come from behind, had to throw the ball every time. So theres a lot of good going on there. We got caught in some situations in New England where obviously the first time we were in a really bad situation. Probably not as bad in the playoff game.

"I just think it's experience. It's the experience of the quarterback and the weapons he has around him. Being able to function when everybody around him knows he has to throw.

I'm sorry, those two games, while certainly exciting to watch, were indicative of a team that struggled to beat two teams with a combined 6 win record for the season. These teams are cellar dwellers in 2012, so let's not delude ourselves that these performances are indicative of a team on the cusp of winning a Super Bowl.

And the two New England games? You mean the team that beat the Texans twice with a combined score of 83-42? Did the Texans ever have a lead in either of those games? Oh wait, we did lead 3-0 at the beginning of the second game, so we've got that to be proud of, I guess.

thunderkyss
02-22-2013, 12:16 PM
Lol! It should, but we aren't talking about the offense as a whole now are we? We are talking about Schaub & the so-called "audible system"...or lack thereof. That's an aspect of the offense that some believe is lacking & exactly why kubiak is questioned, which is hardly a surprise to most.

I normally stand by stats as they do normally tell the tale, but isn't that why the Texans were referred to as "frauds". They looked good on paper w/ the pretty record & stats, but when it came down to crunch time...they folded & many weren't surprised despite all of those wonderful things you listed.

I'm just thinking if our lack of audibling (if that is true) is limiting our offense, shouldn't our offense look limited on the stat sheet. If we're consistently in situations where the called play is doomed.. we shouldn't be in the top 10 of as many offensive stats as we are.

I'm just wondering if our stats show that we were hardly stopped as often as other teams (because the stats, if nothing else, show a relative position) then maybe Schaub is doing more than we're giving him credit for, or Kubiak is more creative & keeping defenses off balance than we're giving him credit for.

I'm not saying either is the case, just saying that the "limited offense due to lack of audibles" argument isn't supported by the production we do get on offense.

thunderkyss
02-22-2013, 12:26 PM
Our RB may have led the league in rushing touchdowns but does it matter who gets in the endzone as long as someone does? We didn't lead the league in rushing touchdowns in other words. We were fourth. Ironically the Patriots led in rushing touchdowns and their backs hit the endzone more than ours.


Yeah, where I come from, 4th is still pretty good.


Last 9 games

So yeah...limited. This baby is quacking lol.

I agree we have limitations, none of you stats show we are limited because of our audible system. Which is what we're discussing at the moment.

badboy
02-22-2013, 01:51 PM
I'm just thinking if our lack of audibling (if that is true) is limiting our offense, shouldn't our offense look limited on the stat sheet. If we're consistently in situations where the called play is doomed.. we shouldn't be in the top 10 of as many offensive stats as we are.

I'm just wondering if our stats show that we were hardly stopped as often as other teams (because the stats, if nothing else, show a relative position) then maybe Schaub is doing more than we're giving him credit for, or Kubiak is more creative & keeping defenses off balance than we're giving him credit for.

I'm not saying either is the case, just saying that the "limited offense due to lack of audibles" argument isn't supported by the production we do get on offense.You can fall into the deep end of pool and look good climbing out or you can learn to swim and do a butterfly stroke to shallow end and bow to the oohs by the pretty girls.

thunderkyss
02-22-2013, 03:26 PM
You can fall into the deep end of pool and look good climbing out or you can learn to swim and do a butterfly stroke to shallow end and bow to the oohs by the pretty girls.

Since we had the lead in most of part until week 10 or so...... I think we were doing the back stroke where the pretty girls are. At least until Newton got hurt. From there we struggled.

The two games we played without Newton, we were playing without the guy we planned to start the season with at RT, or the guy who beat him out of the job. We were down to our third option, a street FA. When Newton got back, he struggled. With that & Ben Jones's struggle with bigger DTs & defenses blitzing him..... we went to quick passes & never bought us any room.

steelbtexan
02-22-2013, 04:40 PM
Since we had the lead in most of part until week 10 or so...... I think we were doing the back stroke where the pretty girls are. At least until Newton got hurt. From there we struggled.

The two games we played without Newton, we were playing without the guy we planned to start the season with at RT, or the guy who beat him out of the job. We were down to our third option, a street FA. When Newton got back, he struggled. With that & Ben Jones's struggle with bigger DTs & defenses blitzing him..... we went to quick passes & never bought us any room.

If this is the case for the offensive ineptitude then my vote goes to Newton for MVP.

badboy
02-22-2013, 05:05 PM
I think where we disagree is you seem to focus on saying how good we were and I am focusing on how much better we could have been.

HJam72
02-22-2013, 05:17 PM
What Kubiak was thinking while answering the question about Schaub and audibles:

"You don't know it and I can't say it, but the prick calls an audible on every freaking play all year long! I'd fire his butt, but I can't find anybody else." :hairpull:

It makes no sense, but I just had to say it, LOL.

dream_team
02-22-2013, 06:17 PM
"We're built a certain way, so we're going to teach our system."

Your "system," Gary, is inferior vs. better defenses. They know what you're doing in various scenarios, and they know how to nullify your best-made plans.

Maybe focus more on adaptability and formation/style uniqueness instead of just sharpening your beloved system. Because you're screwing this team right out of the gate when we face better defenses.

GROW.

Can you please tell me about these better defenses we seem to struggle against? I don't seem to recall getting shut down by an elite defense last season. Unless you're talking about that mighty Vikings D!?

In fact, the best defense we faced all last season was the Broncos, and we dropped 31 points on them. No other offense scored more on their defense last season.

dc_txtech
02-22-2013, 06:43 PM
Can you please tell me about these better defenses we seem to struggle against? I don't seem to recall getting shut down by an elite defense last season. Unless you're talking about that mighty Vikings D!?

In fact, the best defense we faced all last season was the Broncos, and we dropped 31 points on them. No other offense scored more on their defense last season.

The Chicago Bears would beg to differ.

http://www.chicagobears.com/gameday/game/2012/regular10/

corytx8
02-22-2013, 07:00 PM
The Chicago Bears would beg to differ.

http://www.chicagobears.com/gameday/game/2012/regular10/

Lol, I think we would have dropped more points on them if it wasn't got the field conditions. Both teams offense struggled that game because of it....

dream_team
02-22-2013, 07:43 PM
The Chicago Bears would beg to differ.

http://www.chicagobears.com/gameday/game/2012/regular10/

I understand the term "best defense" is subjective... but I guess I should have stated I'm basing the rankings upon yards allowed.

dc_txtech
02-22-2013, 10:59 PM
I understand the term "best defense" is subjective... but I guess I should have stated I'm basing the rankings upon yards allowed.

Yeah, I get that but that is a horrible measure of the "best" defense. To say Denver's defense was better than Chicago's last year is laughable.

Playing by your rules though (yards allowed), we faced 4 of the top 8 defenses last season and we scored, 31, 23,19, and 13. Not exactly lighting up the scoreboard. Also GB would be the 11th ranked defense in yards allowed and our offense put up 17 against them. Doesn't sound like the stats support your argument no matter what stats you use.

Texn4life
02-23-2013, 12:31 AM
There is a simple explanation for our problems that Kubiak didn't address. We lack speed in the skill position areas. While Andre isn't as fast as he once was and he's our fastest receiver. Arian has never been known for his speed, Tate was banged up most of the year, and Forsett is quick but not really fast. None of our tight ends really threaten teams with their separation ability. Even on defense we're probably considered somewhat below average speed wise on the outside and in the secondary.

Now while this isn't the be all-end of to solving our problems I think it would help to have better athletes out on the field. Keo for one scares the crap out of me whenever he's on defense. A lot of talk has been made of us getting more dynamic at receiver, but I think there are more areas on the team where the same needs to happen. We looked old and slow some games and with us being one of the youngest teams in the league that shouldn't have been the case.

dream_team
02-23-2013, 02:57 AM
Yeah, I get that but that is a horrible measure of the "best" defense. To say Denver's defense was better than Chicago's last year is laughable.

Playing by your rules though (yards allowed), we faced 4 of the top 8 defenses last season and we scored, 31, 23,19, and 13. Not exactly lighting up the scoreboard. Also GB would be the 11th ranked defense in yards allowed and our offense put up 17 against them. Doesn't sound like the stats support your argument no matter what stats you use.

I was simply responding to GP's statement that Kubiak's offense is inferior against the better defenses. First of all, that's quite an odd statement. What offenses are superior against good defenses? When an offense is going up against an elite defense, it's only natural that you won't perform as well as you usually do.

But like you said, we played 4 of the top 8 defenses last season. Guess what, we won all 4 of those games. In the Broncos, Jets, and Bengals games, we had no problems moving the ball on their defense. That Bears game was a mess due to weather, so I don't think that's a good measuring stick.

Now I'm not saying we dominate against good defenses... but I simply don't get the statement that we're inferior against good defenses.

On a side note... while I agree with you that I'd prefer the Bears defense, I don't think the Broncos were that far away. I don't think it is "laughable" to say the Broncos D was better.

GP
02-23-2013, 10:58 AM
Can you please tell me about these better defenses we seem to struggle against? I don't seem to recall getting shut down by an elite defense last season. Unless you're talking about that mighty Vikings D!?

In fact, the best defense we faced all last season was the Broncos, and we dropped 31 points on them. No other offense scored more on their defense last season.

Did you even have your eyes open last season?

Gary and Matt looked completely lost against the Packers and Patriots. Was that just a freak occurrence??? No, it was because outside of those two teams...no other opponent really had a backbone against us.

Packers and Patriots are top tier in terms of how their entire team operates on the field. They made us look silly.

This doesn't even mention the two OT games versus a bad Lions and Jaguars team. Even in what should seem to be fairly easy games, Gary's system wasn't dominating defenses.

After the Broncos game, things looked shaky for Gary with the exception of the Ravens blowout game that occurred after we had been destroyed by the Packers. I think most of it was on Matt, frankly. But it's Gary's team. At the end of the day it's on him.

He doesn't get it done in crunch time when it counts.

Vinny
02-23-2013, 10:59 AM
I was simply responding to GP's statement that Kubiak's offense is inferior against the better defenses. First of all, that's quite an odd statement. What offenses are superior against good defenses? When an offense is going up against an elite defense, it's only natural that you won't perform as well as you usually do.

We all saw really good defenses give up 30 points + left and right to the better offenses the last few years. Hell, just look at how the best defenses in the league were shredded in this last playoff season. Your statement belongs in the last decade...not the current one.

Honoring Earl 34
02-23-2013, 11:03 AM
We all saw really good defenses give up 30 points + left and right to the better offenses the last few years. Hell, just look at how the best defenses in the league were shredded in this last playoff season. Your statement belongs in the last decade...not the current one.

Yep ... ask some of the old school WRs what they would do today . Great defenses are becoming yield signs not stop signs .

Honoring Earl 34
02-23-2013, 11:06 AM
Did you even have your eyes open last season?

Gary and Matt looked completely lost against the Packers and Patriots. Was that just a freak occurrence??? No, it was because outside of those two teams...no other opponent really had a backbone against us.

Packers and Patriots are top tier in terms of how their entire team operates on the field. They made us look silly.

This doesn't even mention the two OT games versus a bad Lions and Jaguars team. Even in what should seem to be fairly easy games, Gary's system wasn't dominating defenses.

After the Broncos game, things looked shaky for Gary with the exception of the Ravens blowout game that occurred after we had been destroyed by the Packers. I think most of it was on Matt, frankly. But it's Gary's team. At the end of the day it's on him.

He doesn't get it done in crunch time when it counts.

To me what happened is they jumped on the Texans and that made the Denny's menu outdated . Can't dump off on 3rd and 9 for 3 yards and win the game .

dream_team
02-23-2013, 11:52 AM
Did you even have your eyes open last season?

Gary and Matt looked completely lost against the Packers and Patriots. Was that just a freak occurrence??? No, it was because outside of those two teams...no other opponent really had a backbone against us.

Packers and Patriots are top tier in terms of how their entire team operates on the field. They made us look silly.

This doesn't even mention the two OT games versus a bad Lions and Jaguars team. Even in what should seem to be fairly easy games, Gary's system wasn't dominating defenses.

After the Broncos game, things looked shaky for Gary with the exception of the Ravens blowout game that occurred after we had been destroyed by the Packers. I think most of it was on Matt, frankly. But it's Gary's team. At the end of the day it's on him.

He doesn't get it done in crunch time when it counts.

GP, I was commenting on your statement:

"Your "system," Gary, is inferior vs. better defenses. They know what you're doing in various scenarios, and they know how to nullify your best-made plans.

Maybe focus more on adaptability and formation/style uniqueness instead of just sharpening your beloved system. Because you're screwing this team right out of the gate when we face better defenses.".

I guess I need to know what you mean by "better defenses"? I would not consider the Packers, Patriots, Lions and Jaguars to be better defenses in the league.

And come on... you know it was the defense that let us down in those Lions & Jags games, not the offense. We had over 600 yards of offense against the Jags, and over 500 yards against the Lions. I'd say Gary's offensive system did quite well on those game... wish I could say the same about the defense.

dream_team
02-23-2013, 11:55 AM
We all saw really good defenses give up 30 points + left and right to the better offenses the last few years. Hell, just look at how the best defenses in the league were shredded in this last playoff season. Your statement belongs in the last decade...not the current one.

That's a valid statement. But I'm still going to stand by my statement that our offense isn't going to play as well against better defenses (in comparison to lesser defenses). That's only natural.

steelbtexan
02-23-2013, 05:20 PM
The NFL is becoming the 1st team to score 30 wins.

Garys offense is lacking the weapons to keep up.

They've got to upgrade the OL/WR's/TE if they're going to win a SB. Or Schaub needs to have holy water/healing hands laid upon his foot. LOL

GP
02-24-2013, 10:30 AM
If Gary's system is truly elite, then we'd be in shoot-outs in the game vs Packers, and the two games vs Patriots.

Remove Wade's defense from the equation. Wade's defense isn't calling plays for Matt on 3rd and 15 from our own 9-yard-line (a regular occurrence for the Texans in 2012, by the way). Wade's defense isn't throwing the ball into the dirt, to escape pressure, when there's time to hold on one more second and find an open man.

Wade's defense was gutted in the LB position, and a few of our DBs were missing here and there, too. Gary's offense is only capable of running a marathon if he's got a stacked defense (like we had in 2011). Take Wade's defense away, which happened in 2012 via injuries to LBs and DBs, and we see what happens: The offense can't produce; Gary wilts and so does his QB.

Wolf
02-24-2013, 11:57 AM
And when Wade's defense gives up 21 points in the 1st quarter it narrows down the denny's menu too making the team one dimensional.

Gary's offense is a grind the clock type finesse offense. I hope we draft well on that side of the ball were we can get a little more tempo on that side of the ball

thunderkyss
02-24-2013, 02:54 PM
And when Wade's defense gives up 21 points in the 1st quarter it narrows down the denny's menu too making the team one dimensional.

Gary's offense is a grind the clock type finesse offense. I hope we draft well on that side of the ball were we can get a little more tempo on that side of the ball

This wasn't always the truth. Even when teams knew we were going to throw the ball, we could throw the ball, up, down, all over the field. Even when teams knew we were going to run the ball, we ran it between the tackles, we ran it around the edge, & we cut it back & ran it up their a55.

In 2012, for whatever reason that did not appear to be the case. We've all got our theories as to why that was, but prevalent among most is that it didn't appear that we tried. I understand the whole not force it & we scored a lot of points & we moved the ball without forcing it, playing it safe..... but if we don't have the lead, our defense is not the defense we think it is.

So, in my mind, anytime we are playing without the lead, we need to act like we want it. If that means we need to take chances & spread the field which seems to work for every other team, then we need to take chances. Because it appears we're going to lose anyway, if we don't have the lead.

GP
02-24-2013, 07:00 PM
This wasn't always the truth. Even when teams knew we were going to throw the ball, we could throw the ball, up, down, all over the field. Even when teams knew we were going to run the ball, we ran it between the tackles, we ran it around the edge, & we cut it back & ran it up their a55.

In 2012, for whatever reason that did not appear to be the case. We've all got our theories as to why that was, but prevalent among most is that it didn't appear that we tried. I understand the whole not force it & we scored a lot of points & we moved the ball without forcing it, playing it safe..... but if we don't have the lead, our defense is not the defense we think it is.

So, in my mind, anytime we are playing without the lead, we need to act like we want it. If that means we need to take chances & spread the field which seems to work for every other team, then we need to take chances. Because it appears we're going to lose anyway, if we don't have the lead.

In 2011, we were the same team on offense that we became in 2012...an offense that beats up on weaker defenses but runs into problems when they face (a) teams who don't buckle under the pressure, or (b) crucial over-the-hump games...such as getting past the divisional round.

For me, that situation involves two people: The head coach and the QB. No other two people have as much influence over the snap-by-snap flow of a game than the HC and the QB. Look no further than practically every team who ended up playing in a Conference Championship...they have a HC/QB duo who lived to fight another day.

Matt Ryan...he willed that team to win the divisional round game vs. Seahawks when all of us on that thread were saying "Wow, the Falcons just lost! First round bye doesn't matter! Home field doesn't matter!" Oops. Matt Ryan didn't get the memo. He spent 2012 being lampooned for his previous year's playoff failures, "Kings of the regular season" they were called. Well, Matt Ryan found a way to get his team into FG position and they won the game.

Colin Kaepernick...was deemed as maybe a Cinderella story and the clock was going to strike midnight. All he did was advance his team to the Super Bowl and almost found a way, with help from his HC, to win the Super Bowl.

Patriots and Ravens have two QBs who are, arguably, the two QBs with the most playoff wins, combined, in AFC history. I don't have the numbers to prove it, but I do know that Brady alone is up there...and Flacco has more wins, especially ROAD wins, in the playoffs than people would first think. Both of those teams have QB/HC duos who just find ways to get it done on a consistent basis.

That brings us to the Texans. I think everyone's expectations will be tempered when we have those first few games in 2013. We've seen this before, the same people doing the same things...so how does the script change during the playoffs for the Texans??? What has to happen for the Texans to go from being wildcard darlings to a conference game big-man-on-campus?

Head Coach and Quarterback is the key. It just is, and not only for our team. Look at teams who play in conference championship games, and what you see is that they've got head coaches and QBs who get it done. Tom Coughlin/Eli Manning got there twice, Bill and Tom get there practically every year for the past decade, Ravens seem to be in the mix consistently, etc.

I warned back when the Texans hired Wade Phillips, and we began to see Wade radically tune the defense up to a higher notch of performance in his free agency and draft pick moves, that the only danger I could foresee was that the defense would be dominant and that it could strain the team's chemistry if the defense became so dominant that the offense failed to capitalize on the opportunities. At some point, partly due to LB injuries among other things, the warning has become reality.

steelbtexan
02-24-2013, 07:56 PM
I'm just glad Gary found time in his schedule to make it to the combine this yr.

Texan_Bill
02-24-2013, 08:02 PM
:facepalm: Members of TexansTalk!!!

It's gonna be a long 6 months! :pinned:

Honoring Earl 34
02-24-2013, 08:05 PM
:facepalm: Members of TexansTalk!!!

It's gonna be a long 6 months! :pinned:

What's long and hard on Bill ?

..................
......................
.............................
...................................

The off season . :faildetector:

thunderkyss
02-24-2013, 09:18 PM
In 2011, we were the same team on offense that we became in 2012...an offense that beats up on weaker defenses but runs into problems when they face (a) teams who don't buckle under the pressure, or (b) crucial over-the-hump games...such as getting past the divisional round.


There was definitely a transition in our offense last season where Matt didn't have to carry the games. Foster did. Whether it was the one-two Foster/Tate punch, or Arian making big plays in the passing game.

Then when Matt got hurt, we leaned even more on Foster.


Head Coach and Quarterback is the key. It just is, and not only for our team. Look at teams who play in conference championship games, and what you see is that they've got head coaches and QBs who get it done. Tom Coughlin/Eli Manning got there twice, Bill and Tom get there practically every year for the past decade, Ravens seem to be in the mix consistently, etc.

I warned back when the Texans hired Wade Phillips, and we began to see Wade radically tune the defense up to a higher notch of performance in his free agency and draft pick moves, that the only danger I could foresee was that the defense would be dominant and that it could strain the team's chemistry if the defense became so dominant that the offense failed to capitalize on the opportunities. At some point, partly due to LB injuries among other things, the warning has become reality.

eh.... I think our playmakers let us down just as much as Schaub did. Andre, Arian, & OD need to step it up in the play-offs just as much as Matt does. Duane Brown, Chris Myers, James Casey, & Garrett Graham too.

I take that back, Arian had two pretty good games. But it wasn't just Tom Brady that beat us. It was Wes Welker, Aaron Hernandez, Steven Riddley, & Shane Vareen. Matt Ryan wasn't doing anything without Anthony Gonzales, Julio Jones, Roddy White, & Jacquizz Rogers. Many people thought Jacoby Jones was the MVP or co-MVP of the Super Bowl.

I agree with you 100%, it starts with the QB & the HC. Matt needs to play a lot better than what he did & Kubiak needs to do a better job as well.

Lurvinator11
02-27-2013, 02:28 AM
:facepalm: Members of TexansTalk!!!

It's gonna be a long 6 months! :pinned:

Right? I thought last year was long! Oh man. It already feels like the season should be starting, but FA hasn't even got here yet!

GP
02-27-2013, 12:16 PM
I agree with you 100%, it starts with the QB & the HC. Matt needs to play a lot better than what he did & Kubiak needs to do a better job as well.

OK, so you're with me in terms of how it starts with the QB & HC.

Now let's say we draft like rock stars in the 2013 draft...we land a stud WR, a stud TE, and even some option at RB or another WR to fill it out. Let's just say that this happens. Now my next question is: How does that end up really improving us IF the QB & HC (who have been here for multiple seasons already) do not grow and expand their respective games in 2013?

The Matt Schaub I saw in the final month of the regular season looked like he couldn't play QB even if it was with a controller and an XBox 360 in front of him. His coach seemingly lost the will to live, as well. What is going to happen between now and the post-season that gets this QB & HC to raise their game even if we somehow added viable weapons to that side of the ball???

I just think we've seen their ceiling. It's not an atrociously bad ceiling, either. It's commendable. It's respectful. We went to the playoffs two years straight, we have a viable team over and over again. But that next step; that next level, it's a whole different thing. I am not optimistic that those two guys can get us there, even if we add more octane to the offense.

If anything, the OL will be the key to 2013. Jones and Newton must make a huge leap in their maturation in 2013. Between Gary & Matt, and Jones & Newton, they have to find a way to lead this team to the next level. I'm even getting to the point of considering the idea of bringing Winston back, though that's not viable on many levels I presume. Still, it's creeping into my mind.

GNTLEWOLF
02-27-2013, 12:52 PM
OK, so you're with me in terms of how it starts with the QB & HC.

Now let's say we draft like rock stars in the 2013 draft...we land a stud WR, a stud TE, and even some option at RB or another WR to fill it out. Let's just say that this happens. Now my next question is: How does that end up really improving us IF the QB & HC (who have been here for multiple seasons already) do not grow and expand their respective games in 2013?

The Matt Schaub I saw in the final month of the regular season looked like he couldn't play QB even if it was with a controller and an XBox 360 in front of him. His coach seemingly lost the will to live, as well. What is going to happen between now and the post-season that gets this QB & HC to raise their game even if we somehow added viable weapons to that side of the ball???

I just think we've seen their ceiling. It's not an atrociously bad ceiling, either. It's commendable. It's respectful. We went to the playoffs two years straight, we have a viable team over and over again. But that next step; that next level, it's a whole different thing. I am not optimistic that those two guys can get us there, even if we add more octane to the offense.

If anything, the OL will be the key to 2013. Jones and Newton must make a huge leap in their maturation in 2013. Between Gary & Matt, and Jones & Newton, they have to find a way to lead this team to the next level. I'm even getting to the point of considering the idea of bringing Winston back, though that's not viable on many levels I presume. Still, it's creeping into my mind.

I agree that the OL has to step up big time if we are to take the next step. That is exactly what is necessary for Schaub to have a good to stellar season running Gary's Micromanaged offense. The problem here is that all 31 other teams in the NFL also know that is the need here as well. Those dc's are going to have there pass rushers with there ears pinned back gunning for Schaub. And if they can get to him and rattle him, it will only be luck and the grace of God that will pull out a Texans victory.

thunderkyss
02-27-2013, 01:54 PM
How does that end up really improving us IF the QB & HC (who have been here for multiple seasons already) do not grow and expand their respective games in 2013?


I've already said Matt & Gary have to get better.


The Matt Schaub I saw in the final month of the regular season looked like he couldn't play QB even if it was with a controller and an XBox 360 in front of him. His coach seemingly lost the will to live, as well. What is going to happen between now and the post-season that gets this QB & HC to raise their game even if we somehow added viable weapons to that side of the ball???

I just think we've seen their ceiling.


I'm not sold that we've seen that ceiling. I saw a lot of things that didn't work out for Matt & Gary in that final month.

Before going into that game against the Patriots, we all said the OL, Arian, & the defense are going to have to step up their games for us to win. That didn't happen. Derek Newton spent most of his time in Matt's lap, Arian had two good runs & was outplayed by Steven Riddley. & our defense couldn't get critical stops.

A lot went wrong from Schaub & Gary's perspective as well, I'm not saying either were playing/coaching at the level we needed for them to win. It starts with them, but winning is a team accomplishment.

Brady & Belichick didn't win the AFCCG. The biggest difference, in my mind, is that Welker, Riddley, Vareen, & the defense didn't show up.


If anything, the OL will be the key to 2013. Jones and Newton must make a huge leap in their maturation in 2013. Between Gary & Matt, and Jones & Newton, they have to find a way to lead this team to the next level. I'm even getting to the point of considering the idea of bringing Winston back, though that's not viable on many levels I presume. Still, it's creeping into my mind.

Exactly. If we can consistently run the ball on first & second down, it changes the game for Matt & Gary.