Go Back   Houston Texans Message Board & Forum - TexansTalk.com > The Great Fans of the Houston Texans > Texans Talk
Home Forums Register FAQDonate Automatic Monthly Contribution Members List Mark Forums Read


Texans Talk Football talk only please. Keep it to the game, the players, the coaches and management.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-05-2012   #1
Oz Texan
Rookie
 
Oz Texan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 71
Rep Power: 125 Oz Texan is a quality contributor and well respectedOz Texan is a quality contributor and well respectedOz Texan is a quality contributor and well respectedOz Texan is a quality contributor and well respectedOz Texan is a quality contributor and well respectedOz Texan is a quality contributor and well respectedOz Texan is a quality contributor and well respectedOz Texan is a quality contributor and well respectedOz Texan is a quality contributor and well respectedOz Texan is a quality contributor and well respectedOz Texan is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Are we using Foster correctly?

I only bring this up because I was looking at this years numbers. Ill throw some out there.

This year he has only 12 receptions for a total of 77 yards.
Thats 1.5 rec per game and 9.6 yards per game.

Compare that to:

2011 season totals. 53 receptions for 617 yards. and 2 tds.
Thats 3.3 rpg and 38.5 ypg

2010 season totals. 66 receptions for 604 yards and 2 tds.
Thats 4.1 rpg and 37.7 ypg

I know the reception totals and the yardage totals do not seem that great per game. But what this means is that we are not utilizing him to his fullest. We are normally a great screen team. Foster is a huge threat catching the ball. Teams are not having to game plan for that as we are not throwing him the ball. We have basically lessend our offensive potential this way.

The screen goes along way to allowing our inside run game to flourish which is part of the reason why we have low ypc totals. If we can not make the defense clear the middle sometimes we will continue with the low ypc games. While also continuing to lower the NFL life expectancy of our greatest threat by having him run the ball so many times per game.

Great defenses like the upcomming Bears game are going to plug the middle all night long because thats where most of our runs go. We have seen it this year on numerous occations where we should have run all over a team and just did not do it. Throw the ball more to Foster on the outside or behind the blitz will go along way to improving our ability to run the ball on these teams going forward.

I also thing that we should do more toss sweeps than we do now. The Bills game we had some very positive sweeps. This left me wondering why we do not do more.
Oz Texan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012   #2
NastyNate
I go kerplunk
 
NastyNate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Seabrook
Section: Uranus
Posts: 1,604
Rep Power: 50351 NastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

We have been. If you haven't noticed, Foster has had the dropsies this year. I don't have the exact totals but he's looked plain bad in the passing department when we throw to him on easy dump offs. That definitely hurts Matt Schaub's trust in him. Plus we continually look for the play downfield and defenses sell out to Foster no matter where he lines up.
__________________
I intend to live forever... so far so good.
NastyNate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012   #3
DocBar
Hall of Fame
 
DocBar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: I'm international
Section: Channel 700-ish on NFL Sunday Ticket
Age: 44
Posts: 8,847
Rep Power: 53446 DocBar is a quality contributor and well respectedDocBar is a quality contributor and well respectedDocBar is a quality contributor and well respectedDocBar is a quality contributor and well respectedDocBar is a quality contributor and well respectedDocBar is a quality contributor and well respectedDocBar is a quality contributor and well respectedDocBar is a quality contributor and well respectedDocBar is a quality contributor and well respectedDocBar is a quality contributor and well respectedDocBar is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NastyNate View Post
We have been. If you haven't noticed, Foster has had the dropsies this year. I don't have the exact totals but he's looked plain bad in the passing department when we throw to him on easy dump offs. That definitely hurts Matt Schaub's trust in him. Plus we continually look for the play downfield and defenses sell out to Foster no matter where he lines up.
That about sums it up. Good post.
__________________
“If you take a highly intelligent person and give them the best possible, elite education, then you will most likely wind up with an academic who is completely impervious to reality.” Halton Arp
DocBar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012   #4
EllisUnit
Homerism Champ
 
EllisUnit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Section: 2" from the TV, Screaming.
Age: 29
Posts: 6,081
Rep Power: 70974 EllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NastyNate View Post
We have been. If you haven't noticed, Foster has had the dropsies this year. I don't have the exact totals but he's looked plain bad in the passing department when we throw to him on easy dump offs. That definitely hurts Matt Schaub's trust in him. Plus we continually look for the play downfield and defenses sell out to Foster no matter where he lines up.
see no meat is making his hands weak and shaky
__________________
"Oh, yes, and one more thing, dear Lord — about our enemies? Ignore their heathen prayers and help us blow those little bastards straight to hell. Amen again."
EllisUnit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012   #5
dc_txtech 
Subscribed Contributor
 
dc_txtech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Round Rock
Age: 31
Posts: 2,435
Rep Power: 46441 dc_txtech is a quality contributor and well respecteddc_txtech is a quality contributor and well respecteddc_txtech is a quality contributor and well respecteddc_txtech is a quality contributor and well respecteddc_txtech is a quality contributor and well respecteddc_txtech is a quality contributor and well respecteddc_txtech is a quality contributor and well respecteddc_txtech is a quality contributor and well respecteddc_txtech is a quality contributor and well respecteddc_txtech is a quality contributor and well respecteddc_txtech is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NastyNate View Post
We have been. If you haven't noticed, Foster has had the dropsies this year. I don't have the exact totals but he's looked plain bad in the passing department when we throw to him on easy dump offs. That definitely hurts Matt Schaub's trust in him. Plus we continually look for the play downfield and defenses sell out to Foster no matter where he lines up.
Good post. I would like to know the exact numbers or have tape of each of the screens we've thrown this season. It seems like the few times we have tried it, it's been a drop or the play has been blown up.
__________________
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
dc_txtech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012   #6
HJam72
Hall of Fame
 
HJam72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Over here.
Age: 41
Posts: 11,500
Rep Power: 68813 HJam72 is a quality contributor and well respectedHJam72 is a quality contributor and well respectedHJam72 is a quality contributor and well respectedHJam72 is a quality contributor and well respectedHJam72 is a quality contributor and well respectedHJam72 is a quality contributor and well respectedHJam72 is a quality contributor and well respectedHJam72 is a quality contributor and well respectedHJam72 is a quality contributor and well respectedHJam72 is a quality contributor and well respectedHJam72 is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

My theory is that, because he no longer eats meat, Foster smells different and is easier to pick up in the backfield. It's easier to key on him.

I'm glad to add to this very serious discussion.
__________________

HJam72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012   #7
SCOTTexans
Veteran
 
SCOTTexans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Webster
Age: 26
Posts: 499
Rep Power: 3792 SCOTTexans is a quality contributor and well respectedSCOTTexans is a quality contributor and well respectedSCOTTexans is a quality contributor and well respectedSCOTTexans is a quality contributor and well respectedSCOTTexans is a quality contributor and well respectedSCOTTexans is a quality contributor and well respectedSCOTTexans is a quality contributor and well respectedSCOTTexans is a quality contributor and well respectedSCOTTexans is a quality contributor and well respectedSCOTTexans is a quality contributor and well respectedSCOTTexans is a quality contributor and well respected
Default

If he is still our runningback... then we are still using him correctly...
__________________
.
.
"Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience" Mark Twain
SCOTTexans is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
Old 11-05-2012   #8
EllisUnit
Homerism Champ
 
EllisUnit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Section: 2" from the TV, Screaming.
Age: 29
Posts: 6,081
Rep Power: 70974 EllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respectedEllisUnit is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hjam72 View Post
my theory is that, because he no longer eats meat, foster smells different and is easier to pick up in the backfield. It's easier to key on him.

I'm glad to add to this very serious discussion.
haha ...msr
__________________
"Oh, yes, and one more thing, dear Lord — about our enemies? Ignore their heathen prayers and help us blow those little bastards straight to hell. Amen again."
EllisUnit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012   #9
PapaL
Loose Screw
 
PapaL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Maryland
Age: 34
Posts: 11,229
Rep Power: 104108 PapaL is a quality contributor and well respectedPapaL is a quality contributor and well respectedPapaL is a quality contributor and well respectedPapaL is a quality contributor and well respectedPapaL is a quality contributor and well respectedPapaL is a quality contributor and well respectedPapaL is a quality contributor and well respectedPapaL is a quality contributor and well respectedPapaL is a quality contributor and well respectedPapaL is a quality contributor and well respectedPapaL is a quality contributor and well respected
Default

As long as he's getting the ball we are using him correctly.

If we ask him to start at MLB then I'd be concerned.
__________________


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Bills View Post
I can confidently say im smarter, better looking, and more successful than you will ever be.
PapaL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012   #10
Texan_Bill 
Subscribed Contributor
 
Texan_Bill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Houston. Mediocrity Lives Here!!
Section: Bull Pen!!
Age: 47
Posts: 48,091
Rep Power: 99691 Texan_Bill is a quality contributor and well respectedTexan_Bill is a quality contributor and well respectedTexan_Bill is a quality contributor and well respectedTexan_Bill is a quality contributor and well respectedTexan_Bill is a quality contributor and well respectedTexan_Bill is a quality contributor and well respectedTexan_Bill is a quality contributor and well respectedTexan_Bill is a quality contributor and well respectedTexan_Bill is a quality contributor and well respectedTexan_Bill is a quality contributor and well respectedTexan_Bill is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PapaL View Post
As long as he's getting the ball we are using him correctly.

If we ask him to start at MLB then I'd be concerned.
I might actually be cool with us using him as an ILB!!
__________________
We SUCK AGAIN!
Texan_Bill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012   #11
SAMURAITEXAN 
Subscribed Contributor
 
SAMURAITEXAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 3,424
Rep Power: 19322 SAMURAITEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedSAMURAITEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedSAMURAITEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedSAMURAITEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedSAMURAITEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedSAMURAITEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedSAMURAITEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedSAMURAITEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedSAMURAITEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedSAMURAITEXAN is a quality contributor and well respectedSAMURAITEXAN is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

I don't mean to offend anyone but, are we asking if Kubiak and Dennison using Foster correctly? Since when one of our TTC member became more knowledgeable about Texans' scheme than these two?
SAMURAITEXAN is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012   #12
eriadoc
Texan-American
 
eriadoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18,030
Rep Power: 207979 eriadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respectederiadoc is a quality contributor and well respected
Send a message via ICQ to eriadoc Send a message via Yahoo to eriadoc
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

If by "using correctly", you mean putting him behind a good O-line and watching him befuddle opponents, then no. The coaches made the decision to put Newton/Harris and Caldwell/Jones out there.
__________________
Anyone but Schaub.
eriadoc is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012   #13
chenjy9
Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 254
Rep Power: 4127 chenjy9 is a quality contributor and well respectedchenjy9 is a quality contributor and well respectedchenjy9 is a quality contributor and well respectedchenjy9 is a quality contributor and well respectedchenjy9 is a quality contributor and well respectedchenjy9 is a quality contributor and well respectedchenjy9 is a quality contributor and well respectedchenjy9 is a quality contributor and well respectedchenjy9 is a quality contributor and well respectedchenjy9 is a quality contributor and well respectedchenjy9 is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by eriadoc View Post
If by "using correctly", you mean putting him behind a good O-line and watching him befuddle opponents, then no. The coaches made the decision to put Newton/Harris and Caldwell/Jones out there.
Who else did you want out there instead?
chenjy9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012   #14
ObsiWan
Contributor
 
ObsiWan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: League City, Tx
Age: 62
Posts: 12,649
Rep Power: 166359 ObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NastyNate View Post
We have been. If you haven't noticed, Foster has had the dropsies this year. I don't have the exact totals but he's looked plain bad in the passing department when we throw to him on easy dump offs. That definitely hurts Matt Schaub's trust in him. Plus we continually look for the play downfield and defenses sell out to Foster no matter where he lines up.
This was addressed in another thread. I don't buy into that "dropsies" crap. The guys on 610am, this morning, were discussing the fact that Foster had NO passes thrown in his direction in the Bills game and before that was being targeted, on average, once per game. Their theory is - and I think it has some merit - that with Foster getting 24-25 carries/game AND with Tate basically out of action (and who knows how long before he's back to 100%) they want to limit Foster's total touches each game. How effective do you guys think he'd be come post-season time if we piled 5,6, or 7 catches on top of his 24-25 carries/game??

If Tate recovers soon or if Forsett steps up to be a more effective back, then maybe Foster's carries go down and his catches go back up so that he's getting 15-18 carries/game plus 4-6 catches/game.

Make sense? It does to me.


Edit: Someone with access to ProFootball Focus or some like site can verify the targeting "data" the 610 am guys were spouting this morning.
ObsiWan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012   #15
ChampionTexan
Site Contributor
 
ChampionTexan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,935
Rep Power: 62987 ChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ObsiWan View Post
This was addressed in another thread. I don't buy into that "dropsies" crap. The guys on 610am, this morning, were discussing the fact that Foster had NO passes thrown in his direction in the Bills game and before that was being targeted, on average, once per game. Their theory is - and I think it has some merit - that with Foster getting 24-25 carries/game AND with Tate basically out of action (and who knows how long before he's back to 100%) they want to limit Foster's total touches each game. How effective do you guys think he'd be come post-season time if we piled 5,6, or 7 catches on top of his 24-25 carries/game??

If Tate recovers soon or if Forsett steps up to be a more effective back, then maybe Foster's carries go down and his catches go back up so that he's getting 15-18 carries/game plus 4-6 catches/game.

Make sense? It does to me.


Edit: Someone with access to ProFootball Focus or some like site can verify the targeting "data" the 610 am guys were spouting this morning.
If the 610 guys said once per game on average, they're full of crap, (well, actually they're full of crap regardless, but that would just be an example of it). The fact that after 8 games he has 12 receptions might be the first clue he's being targeted more than once per game. I've noticed myself that there have been a few passes thrown Foster's way that were catchable, but not caught.

According to ESPN, through yesterday's game, Foster had been targeted 26 times this year (or 3.25 times per game). While it is down from prior years (5.4/game for '10 and '11 combined), it's not exactly 1 per game. More importantly is that of those 26 targets, he has 12 receptions or a completion rate of 46.1%. In 2010 and 2011, his completion rate was 78.6 and 73.6 percent respectively.

2012 Stats: (Foster is #218 after this week's game)
LINK

Career Stats:
LINK
__________________
Everyone's an idiot, not just the people with low SAT scores. We're just idiots about different things at different times. No matter how smart you are, you spend much of your day being an idiot.
ChampionTexan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012   #16
ObsiWan
Contributor
 
ObsiWan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: League City, Tx
Age: 62
Posts: 12,649
Rep Power: 166359 ObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChampionTexan View Post
If the 610 guys said once per game on average, they're full of crap, (well, actually they're full of crap regardless, but that would just be an example of it). The fact that after 8 games he has 12 receptions might be the first clue he's being targeted more than once per game. I've noticed myself that there have been a few passes thrown Foster's way that were catchable, but not caught.

According to ESPN, through yesterday's game, Foster had been targeted 26 times this year (or 3.25 times per game). While it's a little bit down from prior years (4.1/game for '10 and '11 combined), it's not exactly 1 per game. More importantly is that of those 26 targets, he has 12 receptions or a completion rate of 46.1%. In 2010 and 2011, his completion rate was 78.6 and 73.6 percent respectively.

2012 Stats: (Foster is #218 after this week's game)
LINK

Career Stats:
LINK

Thanks for double-checking. Had I remembered ESPN keeps those stats I'd have done it myself. I try not to go there any more than I have to.

One thing the ESPN - and nfl.com - stats are missing that ProFootball Focus might have is how many of those non-connections were drops and how many were broken up or Schaub deciding to throw it over Arian's head when he sees that a catch would just get Foster killed.
ObsiWan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012   #17
ChampionTexan
Site Contributor
 
ChampionTexan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,935
Rep Power: 62987 ChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respectedChampionTexan is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ObsiWan View Post
Thanks for double-checking. Had I remembered ESPN keeps those stats I'd have done it myself. I try not to go there any more than I have to.

One thing the ESPN - and nfl.com - stats are missing that ProFootball Focus might have is how many of those non-connections were drops and how many were broken up or Schaub deciding to throw it over Arian's head when he sees that a catch would just get Foster killed.
Yeah, one correction I made after you quoted me was that the targets per game for '10 and '11 was corrected (picked up the wrong column and corrected it later).

I don't have the "catchable vs. non-catchable" stats you mentions, but as I alluded to in my previous post, there's been several times this year where I've seen Arian miss receptions that I felt he should have had, and while anything's possible, there's no reason I know of that the percentage of non-catchable targets should be appreciably different than prior years where his completion rate was in excess of 70%.
__________________
Everyone's an idiot, not just the people with low SAT scores. We're just idiots about different things at different times. No matter how smart you are, you spend much of your day being an idiot.
ChampionTexan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012   #18
ObsiWan
Contributor
 
ObsiWan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: League City, Tx
Age: 62
Posts: 12,649
Rep Power: 166359 ObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respectedObsiWan is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChampionTexan View Post
Yeah, one correction I made after you quoted me was that the targets per game for '10 and '11 was corrected (picked up the wrong column and corrected it later).

I don't have the "catchable vs. non-catchable" stats you mentions, but as I alluded to in my previous post, there's been several times this year where I've seen Arian miss receptions that I felt he should have had, and while anything's possible, there's no reason I know of that the percentage of non-catchable targets should be appreciably different than prior years where his completion rate was in excess of 70%.
Well, even if all 14 disconnections were drops, that's not a lot. That's IF he straightens up and gets his pass catching focus back. I haven't seen all the games so I can't comment. I just recall some impossible catches he made last year and it's hard to believe he lost that ability in a year.

....and please, no vegan jokes.
thank you
ObsiWan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012   #19
NastyNate
I go kerplunk
 
NastyNate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Seabrook
Section: Uranus
Posts: 1,604
Rep Power: 50351 NastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

NFL Game rewind, it's great, check it out and re-watch the first 3 games then you'll see why Foster's targets have declined.
__________________
I intend to live forever... so far so good.
NastyNate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012   #20
NastyNate
I go kerplunk
 
NastyNate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Seabrook
Section: Uranus
Posts: 1,604
Rep Power: 50351 NastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respectedNastyNate is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Are we using Foster correctly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_txtech View Post
Good post. I would like to know the exact numbers or have tape of each of the screens we've thrown this season. It seems like the few times we have tried it, it's been a drop or the play has been blown up.
The only one I can recall is against Tennessee where he snuck out to the left sideline for 8 yards for the first down. Other than that it's the safety or cb coming down to blow up the play or he just drops the ball.
__________________
I intend to live forever... so far so good.
NastyNate is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Houston Texans Message Board & Forum - TexansTalk.com > The Great Fans of the Houston Texans > Texans Talk
Home Forums Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:40 AM.


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