Bye bye Richard Smith

[Marcus]

Originally Posted by Hervoyel

Come on Marcus, we all know what she's talking about including yourself. I also feel like Richard Smith is possibly in a bit over his head when it comes to how our defense plays. For most of the year we continued to attempt to get pressure with only our front four despite the very real fact that it wasn't working. I would watch DeMeco Ryans do that "pretend he was blitzing" thing four or five times a game every week and never come and think "Who is this fooling?". We've all seen our defensive backs give up huge cushions to literally EVERYBODY like they were all clones of Marvin Harrison and thought "What's up with this?". Maybe if Richard Smith could describe his system (or "scheme") to some of us we might have some idea why we're doing the things we're doing. Maybe he could just go on 610am or something and talk about where we need to get better or what positions we need to upgrade at. All he usually says though is that we're going to be "aggressive". I've heard that over and over again and alone it doesn't mean much to me.

I guess he suffers from some of his history here. We all remember the clown with the army helmet on and when added to some weird decisions I think that makes it hard to think of him as this "wicked-smart" defensive strategist cooking up a can of whoop-ass to spring on Peyton and Vince.

I saw Vic Fangio (Vic-freakin-Fangio) come in here in 2002 and teach his overly complex and confusing system to our expansion draft guys and get a 16 ranking out of them in 2002. I watched Buddy Ryan bring the 46 to Houston and turn Jim Eddy's mess into a well oiled hitting machine in one season. Tony Dungy went to Indianapolis and their defense jumped from 29th to 8th in one year. These guys are all apparently teaching great schemes.

Richard Smith came here and took Fangio's then 31st ranked defense and took it to 24th. This year we look to be finishing around 22nd (Though after we let Jacksonville's reserves kick us around like crazy we're probably going to be back around 24th). We're going in the right direction albeit slowly (and I'm taking the injuries into account, I'm not ignoring that) so he's coming back next year and I'm good with that. I do have concerns though.

With all due respect, you come on Herv.

We all knew, including you and her, that the secondary was a weakness before last year's draft, and for all the reasons discussed ad nausem, remained a weakness after the draft. It was a weakness going into training camp. It was a weakness going into preseason. It was a weakness going into the regular season. And then duriing the regular season, need you be reminded of all the injuries that occurred to make the secondary even weaker?

We have a weak secondary. The secondary sucks.

No amount of "scheming" or "strategy" is going to hide that fact, or somehow make up for it. You think that if they just had the right defensive coordinator, he could take that sow's ear of a secondary and make it a silk purse.

Keep dreaming.

[HOU-TEX]

The lack of talent in the secondary and OLB need to be addressed this off-season.

Having said that, it's the DC's job to put his players in the best position to succeed. IMO, he did not do his job.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by HOU-TEX

The lack of talent in the secondary and OLB need to be addressed this off-season.

Having said that, it's the DC's job to put his players in the best position to succeed. IMO, he did not do his job.

I can live with the talent we have in the secondary. Upgrades would be nice of course, but I'd love to get more talent at the LB position. I think that is a bigger problem than the secondary.

Against our team, QBs have no problem hitting the intermediate & underneath routes. Because we don't have any linebackers to make it a challenge for them.

It'd be nice, if we spent some time working with Demps and his ball handling skills.

But Linebacker is our weekest position in pass coverage.

[Marcus]

Could this be why Michael Boulware was rumored to have been seen working out with the linebackers yesterday? Shift of position maybe?

[Second Honeymoon]

Originally Posted by Thorn

When you don’t have good corners and safeties, you have to be very careful about committing to an all out rush. As a result, we don’t do that often because we just don’t have the folks in the defensive backfield to support it. It’s amazing we got as many sacks as we did considering most of the season all we rushed were the four defensive linemen.

I am not defending Smith, I’m just saying until we get some better corners and safeties we have to play with what we have.

Actually when your secondary is hurting, you need to put more pressure on the passer. People got this backwards. Sitting in a zone and rushing 3 or 4 people is making backup QBs look like Johnny Unitas. When your secondary is struggling or undermanned, you gotta get after the QB especially if he is a backup or unproven. You can't let a QB get in rhythym and we let QBs get in a rhythym on a weekly basis.

Richard Smith must go and he must go now. Rivera would be a nice hire and a guy who has credibility but there is another possibility for a big splash at DC. Now that Billick has been fired, Rex Ryan is out there but it looks like he is a frontrunner for the Baltimore job. If he doesn't get the job we gotta take a run at him as our DC. It may be a long shot as he is currently at the potential HC candidate level, but if we give him some big $$ he may view it as a good opportunity.

the best year of football i ever witnessed in Houston was when we paid the big money to Buddy Ryan and brought him in so why not try bringing in another Ryan to Houston. I think it would do wonders for us and make us a contender next year for a Wild Card berth.

[disaacks3]

Originally Posted by Marcus

Why are you, and others, pissing and moaning about Smith having the CBs play the receivers soft?

Let's break this down individually, OK?

Do you really want to see Faggins play tight, bump and run coverage against a receiver?

Do you really want to see Bennett, a rookie, play tight, bump and run coverage against a receiver?

Do you really want to see Von Hutchins play tight, bump and run coverage against a receiver?

Well, that's exactly what they would be doing on blitz packages, exposing their lack of talent. You cry a river when Smith has the CBs give a cushion, and give up the underneath stuff, allowing them the nickle and dime down the field. But I'll take that over 80 yard bombs against CBs who can't cover, any day of the week.

You give Smith better confidence that his CBs can cover their people, then you'll see him take more risks. I'm frankly amazed that Smith blitzes at all given the players in the secondary that he has to work with.

You just don't make up for lack of talent.

I understand your point, but it becomes automatically self-defeating on a 3rd & 9 to give a 12-yd cushion.

In direct answer to your question, YES I would like to see Faggins, Bennet, et al. giving a "chuck" at the line. Secondaries just as bad as ours (without as good a front four) do it against the Patriots & Colts, why can't we? To enhance your pass rush, you've got to disrupt timing and force the QB to throw quickly. If every WR on the other side KNOWS he's getting a minimum 7-yd cushion without EVER getting a chuck, then it turns into a game of pitch-and-catch...nothing more.

When you're getting good enough pressure to be a "step short" on your pass rush, then you need to chuck the WRs at the line and make those 3rd and long conversions a lot harder.

You always adjust your 'scheme' according to your competition and your talent. Right now, we're playing VERY soft coverage against mediocre QBs/WRs and praying for a break. We aren't even trying to adjust at times.

Does it raise your chances of getting burned? Possibly.
Are we already getting burned consistently BECAUSE we're playing too soft? Definitely!

[Hervoyel]

Originally Posted by Marcus

With all due respect, you come on Herv.

We all knew, including you and her, that the secondary was a weakness before last year's draft, and for all the reasons discussed ad nausem, remained a weakness after the draft. It was a weakness going into training camp. It was a weakness going into preseason. It was a weakness going into the regular season. And then duriing the regular season, need you be reminded of all the injuries that occurred to make the secondary even weaker?

We have a weak secondary. The secondary sucks.

No amount of "scheming" or "strategy" is going to hide that fact, or somehow make up for it. You think that if they just had the right defensive coordinator, he could take that sow's ear of a secondary and make it a silk purse.

Keep dreaming.

Yes, we have a weak secondary that got even weaker when Dunta went down. This may come as a shock to you but this wasn't the first time I'd watched a football team with a weak secondary. We're not the only team in football with a few liabilities back there trying to cover wideouts.

If your secondary can't cover you have to get to the QB. If you can't do it with four you bring 5. Sure, you're going to get burned if you lose but if you let that QB sit there and get comfortable then you're dead anyway

Like we were against Atlanta when the legendary Joey Harrington carved us up for 23 out of 29 and a pair of TD's

Like we were against Tennessee when Kerry Collins drove downfield to setup Bironas for the game winner.

Like we were against Jacksonville when Quinn Gray got 300 yards and 4 touchdowns (without Fred Taylor or Maurice Jones-Drew even stepping foot on the field)

In a weird way I'm kind of sad that we didn't have the opportunity to let the ancient Vinny Testaverde get a 3-4 TD day in on us while Richard Smith protected his "weak" secondary by not bothering to put any pressure on him.

You're gonna get picked apart anyway so bring the house, knock the QB's head off (which is twice as effective when you're dealing with a non-starter "journeyman" QB) and get him hearing footsteps and seeing double. Sure you give up a TD, maybe two of them along the way but if you put a lick on the QB everytime he drops back to pass you reduce his effectiveness. We (should) know that better than almost anybody after the first four years of our existence.

I guess pressure isn't part of Richard Smith's "scheme" though unless conditions are perfect (every single guy back there is healthy and headed to the Pro Bowl) or we've reached a point in the season where he doesn't know what else to try (like the last two years where he suddenly started sending blitzes like he just discovered they existed).

You would think an "aggressive" defense kind of guy would be willing to attack an offense instead of just waiting for them to chew his defense up wouldn't you?

[TexansFight]

Marcus and other Richard Smith apologists:

You have to remember that RS was Kubiak's 4th or 5th choice as DC. RS is not a highly regarded DC like Gregg Williams or Rex Ryan whom you can rightfully give the benefit of the doubt to. After 2 years, I don't think any of us really know what kind of defensive identity that RS would ideally like to employ. With the Tampa 2, 46, Blitzburgh schemes you knew what the overall philosophy was. What the hell is RS trying to do?

Second Honeyoon: I completely agree that the 1993 Oilers were the most fun team that we Houston fans had the pleasure of rooting for (I am too young to remember Luv Ya Blue). I LOVED the 46. That type of defense is how I would like to play. Damn it we should have gone to the Super Bowl with that team. F Joe Montana, Marcus Allen, and Bud Adams.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by TexansFight

You have to remember that RS was Kubiak's 4th or 5th choice as DC.

I have no affinity for Smith at all, but where does this assertion come from?--the only person I have heard named as higher on the list was Frank Bush.

[Second Honeymoon]

Originally Posted by TexansFight

Marcus and other Richard Smith apologists:

You have to remember that RS was Kubiak's 4th or 5th choice as DC. RS is not a highly regarded DC like Gregg Williams or Rex Ryan whom you can rightfully give the benefit of the doubt to. After 2 years, I don't think any of us really know what kind of defensive identity that RS would ideally like to employ. With the Tampa 2, 46, Blitzburgh schemes you knew what the overall philosophy was. What the hell is RS trying to do?

Second Honeyoon: I completely agree that the 1993 Oilers were the most fun team that we Houston fans had the pleasure of rooting for (I am too young to remember Luv Ya Blue). I LOVED the 46. That type of defense is how I would like to play. Damn it we should have gone to the Super Bowl with that team. F Joe Montana, Marcus Allen, and Bud Adams.

I was a kid when Luv Ya Blue went down and it was incredible but nothing compared to the Buddy Ryan year. Remember how you would be upset if the other team didn't go three and out. When the other team even got one first down it was like 'Damn, they got a first down'. With the offense just sucking we started 1-3 then won our last 12 games in a row. First divisional playoff home game but we went against Montana and he still had one game of magic left in his tank.

Yeah that pass from Montana to Cash will always be etched in my brain just like 35-3.

[Errant Hothy]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

I have no affinity for Smith at all, but where does this assertion come from?--the only person I have heard named as higher on the list was Frank Bush.

Who is also currently on staff.

Maybe Kubiak isn't a good judge of defensive coaches and thier abilities?

[TexansFight]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

I have no affinity for Smith at all, but where does this assertion come from?--the only person I have heard named as higher on the list was Frank Bush.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2316802

The article mentions Jim Bates was also pursued. If I remember correctly, Jerry Gray was also considered but turned it down.

[Marcus]

Marcus and other Richard Smith apologists:

Where do you get this "and other Richard Smith apologists" from? I don't see anyone else here taking up for Richard Smith. It's me and ONLY me, so git yer facts straight.

And as for "having it backwards", that's a hoot, seeing's how this "Bye Bye Richard Smith" chuckwagon that ya'll are so eager to jump on, is going in reverse.

There are a whole lot of people here who got it backwards . . . but I ain't one of them.

Happy New Years everyone! I'm off to Fogo de Chau to play carnivore.

[TheRealJoker]

For everyone thinking Richard Smith should stay answer me this...

Do you think Smith is capable of coaching a defense to the level that teams like the Bucs, Ravens, Eagles, Bears, and Steelers can consistently field?

[Double Barrel]

Part of having a good defense is having a well balanced TEAM.

How many bad field positions did our offense and special teams leave our defense protecting? Add up too many stupid turnovers and 3 and outs to count, and our mediocre-at-best defense is going to get beat down.

Some of the best defensive teams have offenses that can keep them off the field so they stay rested through the 4th quarter. If a D is always on it's heels because of bad field position and stupid offensive mistakes that never give them any rest, it's tough for even the best of players to have something in the tank for the last quarter of the game.

I'm not a Smith fan, but I certainly understand the players have to execute the plays that are called at the end of the day. It is an effort that involves coaching calling the plays to set up our players to succeed. It's a dynamic between coordinators and players. One knows the limitations and finds ways to maximize, and the other follows through by actually making the called plays successful.

I'm not all that sure that Richard Smith's playcalling is all that consistent, though. We play a soft zone way too much, letting teams nickel and dime us down the field. The whole "bend but don't break" attitude seems to be Smith's gameplan.

I've not been impressed with his halftime adjustments, either. To be sure, it's tough to tell if we are even making any.

But, having watched way too many other NFL games this season, it seems to me that our defense is very vanilla in the way of schemes. Of course, this goes back to personnel, too, and if they can handle it if Smith has it in him to call.

I think he'll be our DC in 2008, for better or for worse. Not much we can do about it, so I'll just evaluate and analyze. No point in bitching or moaning, because it is what it is.

[aj.]

N.D. Kalu spoke highly of Smith in his post game comments yesterday. Grain of salt - players hate change and like their comfort zone, yes, but he didn't have to gush over him like he did.

Jim Eddy's mess was ranked 3rd in the NFL (yards) and 9th in fewest points allowed. That's on a team with an offense that didn't exactly grind out clock eating drives. Eddy was the main fall guy for 35-3 but there was plenty of blame to go around on the offensive side of the ball in that fateful second half.

The following year, Buddy's D was #1 against the run, 23rd against the pass and 14th overall (yards). They were 4th in the league in fewest points allowed.

If the Texans fire Smith (I don't think they will) they will also need to replace Bush if they don't name him DC. I'm not high on Smith for the record...

I have a $100 gift cert to Fogo that's burining a hole in my pocket... not tonight...too many drunks on the road.

[LonerATO]

well we can have a shot at rex ryan now that he is no longer employeed by the ravens. i like rather have im then rivera

[Pantherstang84]

Originally Posted by Marcus

Before some of you want to throw rocks at Richard Smith, think about what players were on the field.

Check the talent first, then look at the coaching.

I did and I also saw us giving the J-ville receivers 10-15 yard cushions. No wonder Gray looked like a Pro-Bowler. The man runs scared schemes. He is so afraid of getting the defense burnt behind them he forgets the opposing offense is lined up in front of them.

[checo446]

Originally Posted by LonerATO

well we can have a shot at rex ryan now that he is no longer employeed by the ravens. i like rather have im then rivera

I would love to see Rex Ryan as our DC. The guy loves a tough, mean, and aggressive D. we need his mentality for us to be successful in the division.

[GP]

With all the injuries to our offense, we still managed to work through it and get something done--The reduction in Qb sacks, alone, is proof that a "scheme" and its players can do wonders.

Our defense has had injuries to the dbacks and DeMeco Ryans, as well, which sort of mirrors the injury bug on our oline/QB/Andre Johnson.

The difference, though, is that Richard Smith doesn't seem to know how to overcome the deficit. Each season has been the same: Starts off slow and conservative, then gets aggressive at the end of the season with more risk-taking on blitz packages.

How long is it going to take us to build a defense that is worthy of Richard Smith's expertise? We've been addressing it EARLY in every recent draft (Dunta, Travis Johnson, Mario Williams, DeMeco Ryans, Amobi Okoye). We went after a hard-nosed LB in FA (Clark) to pair up with Ryans, seemed to secure a good DB prospect in Fred Bennett, and acquired Weaver and Kalu to beef up the dline. Will Demps is doing fairly well at safety. So, do we need 1st round, Pro Bowl caliber talent at every position in the defense to allow Richard Smith to do his job better than he has?

Kubiak (an "offense" guy) was generous, IMO, to let his defense get the first pick the past two drafts. Now's the time we go either OL or RB, but then again--Kubiak likes to draft crap at RB really late in the draft because Terrell Davis 100 years ago was able to show that you don't need top-tier talent at RB to succeed...