Houston Texans Message Board & Forum - TexansTalk.com

Houston Texans Message Board & Forum - TexansTalk.com (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Texans Talk (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=56)
-   -   Lack of Aggressiveness? (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102857)

Texn4life 11-06-2013 11:42 AM

Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
To me, this is the real problem with this organization. I don't know where it comes from but on Sunday night it just really showed.

We took shots down the field the entire first half with Andre and then stopped? I could never imagine an elite football team in the past doing something like that. For some reason we just lack a killer mentality. Kubiak wasn't there to blame for the 2nd half. My question is how do we change that?

EllisUnit 11-06-2013 11:53 AM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Texn4life (Post 2244037)
To me, this is the real problem with this organization. I don't know where it comes from but on Sunday night it just really showed.

We took shots down the field the entire first half with Andre and then stopped? I could never imagine an elite football team in the past doing something like that. For some reason we just lack a killer mentality. Kubiak wasn't there to blame for the 2nd half. My question is how do we change that?

You would hope they learn from all the comebacks they have allowed even if we didnt lose some of those games they still made it way to close, and yet we never learn.

Uncle Rico 11-06-2013 12:04 PM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
In other news water is wet. Back to you Bob.

76Texan 11-06-2013 12:38 PM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Texn4life (Post 2244037)
To me, this is the real problem with this organization. I don't know where it comes from but on Sunday night it just really showed.

We took shots down the field the entire first half with Andre and then stopped? I could never imagine an elite football team in the past doing something like that. For some reason we just lack a killer mentality. Kubiak wasn't there to blame for the 2nd half. My question is how do we change that?

It's a combination of things.

Keenum did go to Graham for 20, Hopkins for 31, and he just missed Possey long on the right side line in the end zone.

The Colts shut down the Play Action on a few occasions, with the containment stayed closely on Keenum.

On other occasions, through the All-22 view, I can see that either the Colts played deep, or they double-teamed the deep guy(s), or they had the deep receiver(s) well-covered.

Yet on other occasions, the pass rush came, so Keenum didn't have time to wait for the long ball to develop.

Honoring Earl 34 11-06-2013 02:07 PM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by 76Texan (Post 2244075)
It's a combination of things.

Keenum did go to Graham for 20, Hopkins for 31, and he just missed Possey long on the right side line in the end zone.

The Colts shut down the Play Action on a few occasions, with the containment stayed closely on Keenum.

On other occasions, through the All-22 view, I can see that either the Colts played deep, or they double-teamed the deep guy(s), or they had the deep receiver(s) well-covered.

Yet on other occasions, the pass rush came, so Keenum didn't have time to wait for the long ball to develop.

I think they switched Mathis over to Newton's side . Then he basically figged Newton . :smiliepalm:

The Pencil Neck 11-06-2013 02:33 PM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
It's a "lack of aggressiveness" if you lose.

The Colts last drive was three running plays. That gave us an opportunity to tie (or even win) the game. That was the Colts not being aggressive. But because we didn't tie or win the game, then they don't get called on it.

If you go back and look at the second half, we had 5 possessions.

Possession 1: We chewed up 7 minutes of the clock. We came away with a field goal so that was a good possession.
Possession 2: We had a couple of long passes. We ate up about 4.5 minutes. But Bullock missed a FG. Nothing non-aggressive about it, just non-productive.
Possession 3: Keenum tried to take what the defense was giving him and we had a non-productive series. And a bad punt.
Possession 4: We had a 25 yard completion to AJ. But we had an incompletion so the drive stalled. Nothing non-aggressive about it. We just weren't able to keep the ball going.
Possession 5: We got into field goal range with a chance to tie the game. Not non-aggressive.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree because I don't see this lack of aggression you're talking about. I just see a lack of success.

We didn't see any 80 yard touchdowns because they weren't open.

michaelm 11-06-2013 04:09 PM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Honoring Earl 34 (Post 2244131)
I think they switched Mathis over to Newton's side . Then he basically figged Newton . :smiliepalm:

I'm not sure of the specifics, especially regarding how Newton performed, but going by stats the team did an admirable job handling Mathis.
I was expecting him to have multiple sacks, especially if they asked Newton to handle him without help, but IIRC his stat line was something like 1 tackle, 1 assist, and no sacks.

76Texan 11-06-2013 06:30 PM

QB
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by michaelm (Post 2244220)
I'm not sure of the specifics, especially regarding how Newton performed, but going by stats the team did an admirable job handling Mathis.
I was expecting him to have multiple sacks, especially if they asked Newton to handle him without help, but IIRC his stat line was something like 1 tackle, 1 assist, and no sacks.

Thanks to Keenum's mobility.
I counted Luck and Keenum against the same number of pressures (within 3 seconds; anything at 3 seconds or more is on the QB), yet Keenum was sacked only once.

Actually, as the Colts had a few more pass attempts, the percentage of QB Pressure ends up heavier for Keenum.

Texecutioner 11-06-2013 08:27 PM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Texn4life (Post 2244037)
To me, this is the real problem with this organization. I don't know where it comes from but on Sunday night it just really showed.

We took shots down the field the entire first half with Andre and then stopped? I could never imagine an elite football team in the past doing something like that. For some reason we just lack a killer mentality. Kubiak wasn't there to blame for the 2nd half. My question is how do we change that?

Well this has been talked about for 8 years now under Kubiak, and yet fans still want this guy to coach this team. Houston fans are more concerned with having a nice guy HC that they like then having a winner just like our owner unfortunately. Fans here are to nice. What gets me is how stupid people are every off season when they believe in this myth that Gary has learned from his mistakes and previous failures. He has proven that wrong time and time again and said himself that he'll stick to his philosophy of winning through tick and thin.

infantrycak 11-06-2013 08:52 PM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by michaelm (Post 2244220)
I'm not sure of the specifics, especially regarding how Newton performed, but going by stats the team did an admirable job handling Mathis.
I was expecting him to have multiple sacks, especially if they asked Newton to handle him without help, but IIRC his stat line was something like 1 tackle, 1 assist, and no sacks.

Mathis was up against Brown most of the game. The commentators questioned a few times whether they were going to move Mathis because Brown was handling him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texecutioner (Post 2244326)
Well this has been talked about for 8 years now under Kubiak, and yet fans still want this guy to coach this team. Houston fans are more concerned with having a nice guy HC that they like then having a winner just like our owner unfortunately. Fans here are to nice.

Or some fans simply disagree with you. Maybe if you stopped trying to dismissively ascribe group think to everyone who doesn't agree, you would see they have reasons and simply come to a different conclusion.

thunderkyss 11-07-2013 01:36 AM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck (Post 2244162)
It's a "lack of aggressiveness" if you lose.

The Colts last drive was three running plays. That gave us an opportunity to tie (or even win) the game. That was the Colts not being aggressive. But because we didn't tie or win the game, then they don't get called on it.

If you go back and look at the second half, we had 5 possessions.

Possession 1: We chewed up 7 minutes of the clock. We came away with a field goal so that was a good possession.
Possession 2: We had a couple of long passes. We ate up about 4.5 minutes. But Bullock missed a FG. Nothing non-aggressive about it, just non-productive.
Possession 3: Keenum tried to take what the defense was giving him and we had a non-productive series. And a bad punt.
Possession 4: We had a 25 yard completion to AJ. But we had an incompletion so the drive stalled. Nothing non-aggressive about it. We just weren't able to keep the ball going.
Possession 5: We got into field goal range with a chance to tie the game. Not non-aggressive.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree because I don't see this lack of aggression you're talking about. I just see a lack of success.

We didn't see any 80 yard touchdowns because they weren't open.

Along those same lines, I'm wondering why no one questioned Keenum's ability to find Hopkins in the first half.

Texecutioner 11-07-2013 08:52 AM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by infantrycak (Post 2244335)
Mathis was up against Brown most of the game. The commentators questioned a few times whether they were going to move Mathis because Brown was handling him.



Or some fans simply disagree with you. Maybe if you stopped trying to dismissively ascribe group think to everyone who doesn't agree, you would see they have reasons and simply come to a different conclusion.

Dude, you're 8 plus years into these excuses.. That poor leg you've been standing on broke a long time ago regarding your explanations for Kubiak. All your reasoning and justifications have blown up in your face time and time again. Its mind boggling that you are still trying at this point.

Surreal McCoy 11-07-2013 09:05 AM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck (Post 2244162)
It's a "lack of aggressiveness" if you lose.

The Colts last drive was three running plays. That gave us an opportunity to tie (or even win) the game. That was the Colts not being aggressive. But because we didn't tie or win the game, then they don't get called on it.

If you go back and look at the second half, we had 5 possessions.

Possession 1: We chewed up 7 minutes of the clock. We came away with a field goal so that was a good possession.
Possession 2: We had a couple of long passes. We ate up about 4.5 minutes. But Bullock missed a FG. Nothing non-aggressive about it, just non-productive.
Possession 3: Keenum tried to take what the defense was giving him and we had a non-productive series. And a bad punt.
Possession 4: We had a 25 yard completion to AJ. But we had an incompletion so the drive stalled. Nothing non-aggressive about it. We just weren't able to keep the ball going.
Possession 5: We got into field goal range with a chance to tie the game. Not non-aggressive.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree because I don't see this lack of aggression you're talking about. I just see a lack of success.

We didn't see any 80 yard touchdowns because they weren't open.

Why is TPN one of few voices of reason around here?

MSR (again) Please can someone take care of this for me

JCTexan 11-07-2013 09:12 AM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by thunderkyss (Post 2244396)
Along those same lines, I'm wondering why no one questioned Keenum's ability to find Hopkins in the first half.

It probably had to do with Keenum's success finding Andre in the first half. You throw 190+ yards to one receiver in a half it can get hard to share the production. He had no problem finding other receivers in the 2nd half.

JCTexan 11-07-2013 09:13 AM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Surreal McCoy (Post 2244449)
Why is TPN one of few voices of reason around here?

MSR (again) Please can someone take care of this for me

Got him for you..

Honoring Earl 34 11-07-2013 09:19 AM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by infantrycak (Post 2244335)
Mathis was up against Brown most of the game. The commentators questioned a few times whether they were going to move Mathis because Brown was handling him.



Or some fans simply disagree with you. Maybe if you stopped trying to dismissively ascribe group think to everyone who doesn't agree, you would see they have reasons and simply come to a different conclusion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texecutioner (Post 2244447)
Dude, you're 8 plus years into these excuses.. That poor leg you've been standing on broke a long time ago regarding your explanations for Kubiak. All your reasoning and justifications have blown up in your face time and time again. Its mind boggling that you are still trying at this point.

Since I mentioned Mathis switching sides , I looked and found it was 93 Erik Walden and not 98 who was figging Newton .

http://www.texansbullpen.com/13photo...r/DSC_1051.JPG

bhsman 11-07-2013 10:06 AM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck (Post 2244162)
It's a "lack of aggressiveness" if you lose.

The Colts last drive was three running plays. That gave us an opportunity to tie (or even win) the game. That was the Colts not being aggressive. But because we didn't tie or win the game, then they don't get called on it.

If you go back and look at the second half, we had 5 possessions.

Possession 1: We chewed up 7 minutes of the clock. We came away with a field goal so that was a good possession.
Possession 2: We had a couple of long passes. We ate up about 4.5 minutes. But Bullock missed a FG. Nothing non-aggressive about it, just non-productive.
Possession 3: Keenum tried to take what the defense was giving him and we had a non-productive series. And a bad punt.
Possession 4: We had a 25 yard completion to AJ. But we had an incompletion so the drive stalled. Nothing non-aggressive about it. We just weren't able to keep the ball going.
Possession 5: We got into field goal range with a chance to tie the game. Not non-aggressive.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree because I don't see this lack of aggression you're talking about. I just see a lack of success.

We didn't see any 80 yard touchdowns because they weren't open.

All of this, plus the fact that we lost Koobs at halftime, the effect of which we can't really quantify. Even the 2011 Saints lost to the 2011 Bucs (whom the Texans outright destroyed that year) after Sean Payton went out with a freak broken leg.

dream_team 11-07-2013 10:18 AM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck (Post 2244162)
It's a "lack of aggressiveness" if you lose.

The Colts last drive was three running plays. That gave us an opportunity to tie (or even win) the game. That was the Colts not being aggressive. But because we didn't tie or win the game, then they don't get called on it.

If you go back and look at the second half, we had 5 possessions.

Possession 1: We chewed up 7 minutes of the clock. We came away with a field goal so that was a good possession.
Possession 2: We had a couple of long passes. We ate up about 4.5 minutes. But Bullock missed a FG. Nothing non-aggressive about it, just non-productive.
Possession 3: Keenum tried to take what the defense was giving him and we had a non-productive series. And a bad punt.
Possession 4: We had a 25 yard completion to AJ. But we had an incompletion so the drive stalled. Nothing non-aggressive about it. We just weren't able to keep the ball going.
Possession 5: We got into field goal range with a chance to tie the game. Not non-aggressive.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree because I don't see this lack of aggression you're talking about. I just see a lack of success.

We didn't see any 80 yard touchdowns because they weren't open.

MSR!

I don't think we have an aggressiveness problem.

Instead, I think we have an 'adjustments' problem. We are coming out hot in the 1st half of these games. Of course, during halftime, the opponent is going to adjust. If AJ is burning them deep in the 1st half, guess what, they're going to look for that and stop it. So our problem then becomes countering their adjustments. I saw the same thing in the Seahawks and Chiefs game. And the problem is on both sides of the ball, offense and defense. Defense shut down the Colts in the first half. They adjusted in the 2nd half, but our defense did not.

revan 11-07-2013 10:19 AM

Re: Lack of Aggressiveness?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Rico (Post 2244053)
In other news water is wet. Back to you Bob.

http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/It+...39_4196826.jpg


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:03 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Ad Management by RedTyger