NFL Network will re-air week 14 Texans vs Pats

[Tailgate]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

The way I saw it, the LB had a slow running start; Casey had the power of starting from his crouching stand.

It doesn't matter where they met (even though I expected Casey to meet the LB about at least half a yard deeper forward); what matters was that Casey got jolted backward by the collision.

That prevented Foster to cut outside early; instead, he got stucked behind the block.

Of course it matters. One, when are you honestly expecting James Casey to win that battle vs a LB so quick out of his stance? This is not Leach we are talking about. Not only did the LB blow up Casey, but he made the tackle. Two, even if Casey won the collision, the goal of the defense is to meet the FB on any running play as EARLY AS POSSIBLE. Its football 101. And they did it in our backfield. The matchup was not in our favor on this play.

[Tailgate]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

It's good chatting with ya' Tailgate.
I need a break now though

You too AMIGO. Cig break it is.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by Tailgate

And guys, I would usually agree with you. But NOT vs BB and the Patriots. The way to beat them is to throw the ball and keep them off balance... NOT to play into their strength. "we are going to do what we do" time and time again does not work against that team.

Why wouldn't we play to our strength?

Doesn't make sense to think we'll beat him with Schaub doing his Aaron Rogers impersonation. I think we've pretty much agreed that he is not Brady.

[Tailgate]

Originally Posted by Fiddler

Why wouldn't we play to our strength?

Doesn't make sense to think we'll beat him with Schaub doing his Aaron Rogers impersonation. I think we've pretty much agreed that he is not Brady.

What was wrong with our previous game plan vs Pats? As 76 noted the pass/run ration was 25/13 in the first half. We moved the ball fairly at will throwing the ball the first time. Are you expecting to see us challenge Wilfork and Love more this time around? May work better with Graham in the fold. But no, I am not expecting Rogers to show up for us at QB... but I think throwing the ball in our two TE sets and getting Foster in space is imperative to loosen up the LBs as coverage is not their strength. Stopping the run is.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by Tailgate

What was wrong with our previous game plan vs Pats? As 76 noted the pass/run ration was 25/13 in the first half. We moved the ball fairly at will throwing the ball the first time. Are you expecting to see us challenge Wilfork and Love more this time around? May work better with Graham in the fold. But no, I am not expecting Rogers to show up for us at QB... but I think throwing the ball in our two TE sets and getting Foster in space is imperative to loosen up the LBs as coverage is not their strength. Stopping the run is.

I think the game plan is going to be what it's going to be. I just don't like this, "don't play into their strength" talk. If our strength is running the ball... we need to run the ball.

Play action is a big part of our offense. Works better when we run the ball effectively.

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by Tailgate

Of course it matters. One, when are you honestly expecting James Casey to win that battle vs a LB so quick out of his stance? This is not Leach we are talking about. Not only did the LB blow up Casey, but he made the tackle. Two, even if Casey won the collision, the goal of the defense is to meet the FB on any running play as EARLY AS POSSIBLE. Its football 101. And they did it in our backfield. The matchup was not in our favor on this play.

When I said it doesn't matter, it means that Casey needs to be even.

He's quicker than Leach, he should have been there at least a half hard deeper.
In that scenario, even if he gets blown up just the same, Foster still had a little more room to operate.

He decided to squat where he did, he should be able to sustain the blow instead of getting blown up.
He has got to find the best position so as not to get blown up.
It only ends up worse for Casey himself on the block.

If he needed to squat a little sooner, then that's what he should have done.

Foster then can make a decision when and where to cut.
Don't forget that Foster is supposed to be good because he knows to press the heels of his blocker; but those heels cannot go backward.

[Tailgate]

Originally Posted by Fiddler

I think the game plan is going to be what it's going to be. I just don't like this, "don't play into their strength" talk. If our strength is running the ball... we need to run the ball.

Play action is a big part of our offense. Works better when we run the ball effectively.

With Garrett Graham we certainly have a much better chance at running the ball, as long as we take it to the edges and avoid running up the middle at all costs (the strength of their run D). Not only that with the addition of Graham, it will certainly help in our play action game.

[Tailgate]

Originally Posted by 76Texan

When I said it doesn't matter, it means that Casey needs to be even.

He's quicker than Leach, he should have been there at least a half hard deeper.
In that scenario, even if he gets blown up just the same, Foster still had a little more room to operate.

He decided to squat where he did, he should be able to sustain the blow instead of getting blown up.
He has got to find the best position so as not to get blown up.
It only ends up worse for Casey himself on the block.

If he needed to squat a little sooner, then that's what he should have done.

Foster then can make a decision when and where to cut.
Don't forget that Foster is supposed to be good because he knows to press the heels of his blocker; but those heels cannot go backward.

Fair enough. I am exhausted talking about this play tbh. Taking my above post even further, Graham gives Casey a better chance at getting to the second level block more cleanly.

Graham is a huge addition for us this time around. Very interesting to see what unfolds in the rematch.

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by Tailgate

Fair enough. I am exhausted talking about this play tbh. Taking my above post even further, Graham gives Casey a better chance at getting to the second level block more cleanly.

Graham is a huge addition for us this time around. Very interesting to see what unfolds in the rematch.

That was what I said before that game.
Graham should help.

And I hope we see more of Brooks, at least he and Jones should alternate after every two drives or so. I think he's a better match up with Wilfork and Love.

[Textan]

Why is the NFL network re-airing something I'd rather forget?
I'm sure NE fans are giddy with its re-airing.

[Surreal McCoy]

Originally Posted by Fiddler

I think the game plan is going to be what it's going to be. I just don't like this, "don't play into their strength" talk. If our strength is running the ball... we need to run the ball.

Play action is a big part of our offense. Works better when we run the ball effectively.

I agree with this. It's effectively showing confidence in your guys to go out an execute as normal. Do the things you've been training to do all year. The Pats surely won't come out and try to be a run first team all the sudden.

Of course to win this way requires excellent execution and concentration for 60 minutes, which is admittedly difficult. That said, at least we'll still be able to blame the 'play calling' if the players don't execute.

[76Texan]

Btw, this is a small bit of info I collect.

Not counting a penalty that might be involved (I don't know of a quick way of doing it.)

The Pats and the Texans both had the same number of pass plays called in the first half (325, I think- I'm not at my PC at the moment) including sacks.

Both Brady and Schaub had the same number of runs (scrambles and QB sneaks).

The Pats had a few more runs (8 I think).

I thought that was interesting since it seems like 99.99 per cent of the people think of the Texans as a run first team, and the Pats as a pass first team.