Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

Watson’s a top 5 qb. Do you agree?

thunderkyss said:
Its fiction that he was reading the DE before securing the ball.

Its fiction that he tried to pick it up & not try to fall on it.

Both pure figments of what you want to believe.

You can probably smell the fresh cut grass too, huh?

Reality over here, what steelbtexan sees over there.
Click to expand...

He was reading the DE. Go back and look where his eyes were focused when the ball was snapped. After just seeing the highlight he didn't try to pickup the fumble.
 
Last edited:
Texansballer74 said:
Brother he didn’t have time to go throw any progression. The play design call was probably for a pattern pass the sticks.
Click to expand...
That's part of what I'm saying. In that situation, with that play called, Akins should have been his first read.

I understand at times he might have a matchup elsewhere that he's going to exploit. & this might have been one of those times.

But he's in the endzone, his OL had been letting him down all day.

Getting out of the shadow of the goal post should have been job 1. Even/especially on 3rd down.
 
thunderkyss said:
That's part of what I'm saying. In that situation, with that play called, Akins should have been his first read.

I understand at times he might have a matchup elsewhere that he's going to exploit. & this might have been one of those times.

But he's in the endzone, his OL had been letting him down all day.

Getting out of the shadow of the goal post should have been job 1. Even/especially on 3rd down.
Click to expand...

If you're a conservative play caller, that should have been priority #1. Kubiak would have most likely called a draw.

Kelly seemed to have called a more aggressive play (which ended up back firing).

We don't know what the play call was. We don't know what DW's progressions were on that play. Do we even know DW had a passing lane to Akins with the DT rushing the A gap?

All I know is the root cause of the safety was Fulton not handling the stunt properly, or Nick not providing help. And that's what I'm most concerned about.
 
dream_team said:
If you're a conservative play caller, that should have been priority #1. Kubiak would have most likely called a draw.

Kelly seemed to have called a more aggressive play (which ended up back firing).

We don't know what the play call was.
Click to expand...
I'm not talking about changing the play called. Whether he threw it to Akins or slung it out to Cooks or Coutee, it's the same play called.

However, my understanding is after reading the defense preSnap, the QB decides how & where he starts his progression.

If he's looking at cover 1 man, two deep, robber, he approaches his routes one way. If he reads zone 1, 3, 4, etc... he starts it another. Still, if he has Duke split wide covered by a 6' 4" 280lb DE with no safety, he reads his progression starting on Duke.

I'm saying from his own endzone he shouldn't be thinking about getting 11 yards, especially when it was an almost safety the previous play.
 
thunderkyss said:
I'm not talking about changing the play called. Whether he threw it to Akins or slung it out to Cooks or Coutee, it's the same play called.

However, my understanding is after reading the defense preSnap, the QB decides how & where he starts his progression.

If he's looking at cover 1 man, two deep, robber, he approaches his routes one way. If he reads zone 1, 3, 4, etc... he starts it another. Still, if he has Duke split wide covered by a 6' 4" 280lb DE with no safety, he reads his progression starting on Duke.

I'm saying from his own endzone he shouldn't be thinking about getting 11 yards, especially when it was an almost safety the previous play.
Click to expand...

He probably would’ve went there but the middle of the line didn’t do there part. That’s where our energy should be on. Of course he shouldn’t trust his line in that situation. The play caller shouldn’t trust them either correct? That should have been a quick slant, or a quick pass to the Tight end. Or maybe keep your tight ends in to block.
 
steelbtexan said:
It's not second guessing, 0 pts in the 2nd half, Sacked for a safety when he should have gotten rid of the ball. A fumble that DW4 said he should have caught etc ..
Click to expand...

Nawwww....Watson is being a good leader by deflecting the criticism away from Martin. Same way Ol' Chin Hole did after every loss.....hey folks that loss was on me. In reality, yes....the loss is on you for the piss-poor play calling but the other coaches and players can take their share of the blame as well.
 
ClemsonTexan said:
Aaron Rodgers is clearly not cut out to be a Texan QB. I want a QB who understands his feet are in the end zone. I want a QB who realizes the pressure is on and makes the smart decision to throw the ball away. Not the dumb decision to take a sack. Totally inexcusable.

Click to expand...

You know what is so obvious in that play? Rodgers had time to find a receiver. Next he held the ball anticipating someone was going to break loose. Absolutely no defender had a unobstructed bee-line to Rodgers. The 4 DL simply pushed the pocket in and around Rodgers, he held onto the ball too long, and boom his arse got sacked for a safety. Yes, even the future HoF'er ducking makes a mes in the end zone on occassions.

That one play in some of the minds on this board pretty much summed up Watson's day whereas I look at the plays Watson made on Sunday that had the Texans in a position to tie the game or take the lead with less than 2 minutes on the clock. So let's chuck every good play made by Watson on Sunday to the curb and hold him solely responsible for a 2 pt touchback that had zero bearing on the game. That's using the old not-not machine between the ears.
 
OptimisticTexan said:
You know what is so obvious in that play? Rodgers had time to find a receiver. Next he held the ball anticipating someone was going to break loose. Absolutely no defender had a unobstructed bee-line to Rodgers. The 4 DL simply pushed the pocket in and around Rodgers, he held onto the ball too long, and boom his arse got sacked for a safety. Yes, even the future HoF'er ducking makes a mes in the end zone on occassions.

That one play in some of the minds on this board pretty much summed up Watson's day whereas I look at the plays Watson made on Sunday that had the Texans in a position to tie the game or take the lead with less than 2 minutes on the clock. So let's chuck every good play made by Watson on Sunday to the curb and hold him solely responsible for a 2 pt touchback that had zero bearing on the game. That's using the old not-not machine between the ears.
Click to expand...

Bro none of them still haven’t addressed his good plays or that drive in which he ran in for a touchdown. I would love to see 10 pages of that. Lol
 
thunderkyss said:
That's part of what I'm saying. In that situation, with that play called, Akins should have been his first read.
Click to expand...

Why don't you think Akins was his first read? I also don't see why you think know more than an NFL QB.

The Texans are lined up in 11 personnel. It appears to be a simple vertical concept with Akins dragging underneath. When Watson's head shifts to the left immediately after the snap, I don't see any reason to think Akins is not where he wants to go with the football since you can see his eyes track him across the field. Watson is not so stupid, as you suggest, to think that he can wait for a route to open 20 yards downfield while he sits in the end zone for a full 3 seconds.

At any rate, this is again the very definition of being an armchair QB. You are saying what should have been Watson's first read, what Watson should have done, etc. without even being in the film room. For all we know, the offense has already broken down the film together and Kelly said "Watson, 100% totally not your fault. Fulton, this is 1000% on you." We don't know. The only established facts here are 1) the formation, 2) the down and distance, 3) the number of steps on Watson's drop, 4) Akins comes open over the middle; 5) a stunt was not picked up by the offensive line and 6) Watson was sacked. Anything beyond that is speculation. And it's speculation coming from posters who aren't exactly the Dan Orlovskys or Samuel Gold's of the world.
thunderkyss said:
But he's in the endzone, his OL had been letting him down all day.
Click to expand...

Should a punter also account for a blown blocking assignment when he's kicking the ball out of the end zone?
 
OptimisticTexan said:
So let's chuck every good play made by Watson on Sunday to the curb and hold him solely responsible for a 2 pt touchback that had zero bearing on the game. That's using the old not-not machine between the ears.
Click to expand...
That's the way you see it. I'm willing to talk about any & every play that's brought up.

This just happens to be the one we (including you until you bring up another) want to talk about.

I think Watson had an excellent game despite my thoughts on this one. I started talking about this one as, "The only issue I had was his approach to the game when he was backed up into his own endzone."

I didn't see a sense of urgency to get out of the endzone & I believe when he got in trouble his 1st instinct was to run out of it instead of throw out of it.

That followed by people trying to explain to me how they saw it differently.

& we're stuck on it.

I'm not a Watson hater. Most of what I say about him is good. He doesn't play the way I believe he should. But I do like the way he plays.
 
OptimisticTexan said:
That one play in some of the minds on this board pretty much summed up Watson's day whereas I look at the plays Watson made on Sunday that had the Texans in a position to tie the game or take the lead with less than 2 minutes on the clock. So let's chuck every good play made by Watson on Sunday to the curb and hold him solely responsible for a 2 pt touchback that had zero bearing on the game. That's using the old not-not machine between the ears.
Click to expand...


I'm not going to get into the comparisons to other players angle .... they all have a few WTF plays.
Watson pretty much has to play a flawless game for this team to have a chance to win - the talent just isn't there otherwise.

And again , I'm not blaming Watson for that Safety or that play for anything other than the example of a guy running free underneath. If he takes that throw , they probably punt anyway and the 2 points was all but irrelevant to anything but the spread.

The idea of pass catchers running free underneath and passing on them because you want a deeper shot is the example. That's something we see on a routine basis - Sometimes it works , sometimes it ends in a net zero , others its a negative play.

If he picks his spots better and turns one or two of those negative or net zero plays into a positive gain , it can change the entire course of a game , one first down extends a drive .... maybe that only leads to a change in field position , maybe it leads to a score .... its little things that add up.

He simply cannot afford those negative / net zero plays on this team , particularly against quality opponents.

That's not really knocking Watson but the team around him.
 
ClemsonTexan said:
And you say it hasn't improved based on what? Your own expert assessment after analyzing several plays?
Click to expand...

Based on his not being able to speed up his progressions and/or not taking the underneath stuff instead of always looking for the big play. He hasn' improved in this area because this is the way he's played all his life. Until this changes I dont expect things to change down on Kirby.

Exhibit 1: The safety, although there were another good 8-10 plays if you look back through the replay you can see them. You can say well it's only 8-10 plays, say you run 70 plays in a game, that's 1/7th of the game and yes this matters.
 
steelbtexan said:
Based on his not being able to speed up his progressions and/or not taking the underneath stuff instead of always looking for the big play. He hasn' improved in this area because this is the way he's played all his life. Until this changes I dont expect things to change down on Kirby.

Exhibit 1: The safety, although there were another good 8-10 plays if you look back through the replay you can see them. You can say well it's only 8-10 plays, say you run 70 plays in a game, that's 1/7th of the game and yes this matters.
Click to expand...
He's only one of the top QBs in efficiency with the underneath throws, but ok....you may need to get your eyes checked.

And BTW, didn't you not watch the entire first half on Sunday? You shouldn't even be commenting
 
Yep - I'll admit it, I am an armchair quarterback, I am too chubby, slow, and old to be anything else.

I'm also an armchair RB, OL, DL, LB, GM, Coach, etc. - because I'm on a football forum.

Would be a really uninteresting place if we weren't armchair something...

Poster 1: "Good game, sucks we lost"
Poster 2: "We'll get 'em next time"
Poster 1: "OK then, see you next week"
Poster 2: "I'll be here"

Of course, all QB's mess up... of course, we aren't in the film room - so?

We can discuss good play breakdowns - I'm sure even Martin made a good block at some point yesterday. As far as it being 10 pages of 'this' what were there maybe 5 posts of someone discussing this play and Watson? Followed by 9 pages of "haters gonna hate" and people trying to defend they don't hate Watson but on that play MAYBE there could have been a different outcome.

I'm going back in silent mode and let you guys continue your war with SteelB - it's all you're really interested in.
 
Last edited:
ClemsonTexan said:
What is the result of a passing play--irrespective of field position--when the offensive line fails to block for any QB?
Click to expand...
Sometimes the QB completes a short pass. Sometimes the QB throws it away. Sometimes the QB gets sacked. Sometimes the QB escapes the pocket & runs for a gain. Sometimes the QB throws interceptions. Sometimes the defense gets called for offsides unimpeded to the QB. Sometimes they get a roughing the passer penalty.

But that has nothing to do with what happened here. The OL didn't hold up their block, but it's not like it was a straight free run at the QB. Houston ran a stunt, starting left, then looping around to his right.
 
thunderkyss said:
Sometimes the QB completes a short pass. Sometimes the QB throws it away. Sometimes the QB gets sacked. Sometimes the QB escapes the pocket & runs for a gain. Sometimes the QB throws interceptions. Sometimes the defense gets called for offsides unimpeded to the QB. Sometimes they get a roughing the passer penalty.

But that has nothing to do with what happened here. The OL didn't hold up their block, but it's not like it was a straight free run at the QB. Houston ran a stunt, starting left, then looping around to his right.
Click to expand...
It appears Watson didn't see him. Is Watson not allowed to have one play that isn't perfect? Is the bar set so high that we need to over-analyze his play on every opportunity? I bumped the GM and HC thread but no one seems to care. They just keep debating our greatest player
 
amazing80 said:
It appears Watson didn't see him. Is Watson not allowed to have one play that isn't perfect? Is the bar set so high that we need to over-analyze his play on every opportunity? I bumped the GM and HC thread but no one seems to care. They just keep debating our greatest player
Click to expand...
I don't expect him to be perfect. I believe he is one of the best in the league right now. It's the other guys who have a problem with Watson having one play where he wasn't perfect.
 
thunderkyss said:
I don't expect him to be perfect. I believe he is one of the best in the league right now. It's the other guys who have a problem with Watson having one play where he wasn't perfect.
Click to expand...
Guys have a problem with the play you picked to illustrate your point. The near INT in the end zone was a much better play to disect. Not one where Martin messed up and the OC called a 5 step drop in the end zone.
 
FuzzyLogic said:
Yep - I'll admit it, I am an armchair quarterback, I am too chubby, slow, and old to be anything else.

I'm also an armchair RB, OL, DL, LB, GM, Coach, etc. - because I'm on a football forum.

Would be a really uninteresting place if we weren't armchair something...

Poster 1: "Good game, sucks we lost"
Poster 2: "We'll get 'em next time"
Poster 1: "OK then, see you next week"
Poster 2: "I'll be here"

Of course, all QB's mess up... of course, we aren't in the film room - so?

We can discuss good play breakdowns - I'm sure even Martin made a good block at some point yesterday. As far as it being 10 pages of 'this' what were their maybe 5 posts of someone discussing this play and Watson? Followed by 9 pages of "haters gonna hate" and people trying to defend they don't hate Watson but on that play MAYBE there could have been a different outcome.

I'm going back in silent mode and let you guys continue your war with SteelB - it's all you're really interested in.
Click to expand...

Well said! There is no discussion here any longer, it's just 'you're criticising Watson on gthat play so you're a hater' and on and on and on
 
steelbtexan said:
Based on his not being able to speed up his progressions and/or not taking the underneath stuff instead of always looking for the big play. He hasn' improved in this area because this is the way he's played all his life. Until this changes I dont expect things to change down on Kirby.
Click to expand...

Sorry, your personal eye test is not "evidence." And you simply saying that it hasn't improved is not real analysis. Your contention is that Watson's processing speed has not improved in 4 years. Mark Schofield says exactly the opposite.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1320841644556623878

Until you start providing schematics detailing the play call and design as well as the defense in those situations, and explaining the progression the QB should be going through on each individual play, no one here is inclined to accord any weight to anything you say.

You made the claim. Now back it up.
 
ClemsonTexan said:
Sorry, your personal eye test is not "evidence." And you simply saying that it hasn't improved is not real analysis. Your contention is that Watson's processing speed has not improved in 4 years. Mark Schofield says exactly the opposite.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1320841644556623878

Until you start providing schematics detailing the play call and design as well as the defense in those situations, and explaining the progression the QB should be going through on each individual play, no one here is inclined to accord any weight to anything you say.

You made the claim. Now back it up.
Click to expand...

Man, you've fallen down the rabbit hole HARD!
 
thunderkyss said:
Sometimes the QB completes a short pass. Sometimes the QB throws it away. Sometimes the QB gets sacked. Sometimes the QB escapes the pocket & runs for a gain. Sometimes the QB throws interceptions. Sometimes the defense gets called for offsides unimpeded to the QB. Sometimes they get a roughing the passer penalty.
Click to expand...

Very rarely will a QB get rid of the ball with a completely unchecked rusher coming at him, especially if his head is not even turned in that direction. Why would he? The QB is supposed to trust his protection and keep his eyes downfield.

thunderkyss said:
But that has nothing to do with what happened here. The OL didn't hold up their block, but it's not like it was a straight free run at the QB. Houston ran a stunt, starting left, then looping around to his right.
Click to expand...

It was a free run at the QB. He wasn't touched. A free run doesn't mean a pass rusher has to go in a perfectly straight line to the QB. It means he wasn't blocked when he was in fact supposed to be blocked.
 
FuzzyLogic said:
Yep - I'll admit it, I am an armchair quarterback, I am too chubby, slow, and old to be anything else.

I'm also an armchair RB, OL, DL, LB, GM, Coach, etc. - because I'm on a football forum.

Would be a really uninteresting place if we weren't armchair something...
Click to expand...

Not really. You can offer a semi-educated opinion that is supported by relevant facts/data. Or you could proclaim yourself an expert and pull random observations out of your you know where.

For example, if you are going to argue that Watson's processing speed has not improved in 4 years, the very least one could do is post some type of article or video providing an analysis showing that Watson possesses the same processing speed today as he did on Day One. But we don't have that. Instead we have a complete rando saying "Watson has not improved his processing speed" when he could not tell you the first thing about playing QB at the Pop Warner level much less the highest level in the world. Battle Red Blog seems to have some knowledgeable writers who can really dig deep into plays and explain the protection, routes, reads, etc., but that's not what we're getting here. We're getting an uninformed, unqualified opinion that's attempting to be passed off as fact.

Chris Cooley, the former Redskins TE, used to do a breakdown of almost every single snap offensive snap for the Skins. Is there anyone similar for the Texans?
 
Chris Cooley used to provide these kinds of breakdowns for Skins games.

“It’s an easy cover-2 look. That means the hitches are dead on the outside. That means it’s a two-man read on the inside: DeSean (the red circle) is running a seam, Niles (the purple circle) is a running a stick route. Two-man read. Two-man show. He’s looking at the hitch on the [far left] side of the field. I’m like, what?
Click to expand...

“It’s four vertical routes, trips to one side,” Cooley said. “It’s single-high coverage. Robert chooses to work the middle two vertical routes. If you’re going to work the middle two vertical routes, you work the inside interior receiver (Andre Roberts, in red) who’s running across the field vertically, and then you would look to see if the safety chooses the crosser (again, Roberts). If he goes with him, then you would throw the vertical route running up the numbers, which is DeSean Jackson (in purple). “He works the middle vertical route (Roberts). DeSean Jackson is screaming open. I mean, this is DeSean Jackson. You’ve just created an entire lane to throw the football. And you continue to [look at Roberts], to where now you’re getting sacked. This was amazing. You actually start to throw [to Roberts], which would have been a pick. Hands down, a pick….
Click to expand...

Is this the type of detailed film study we're getting from the "Watson hasn't improved" crowd?
 
ClemsonTexan said:
Not really. You can offer a semi-educated opinion that is supported by relevant facts/data. Or you could proclaim yourself an expert and pull random observations out of your you know where.

For example, if you are going to argue that Watson's processing speed has not improved in 4 years, the very least one could do is post some type of article or video providing an analysis showing that Watson possesses the same processing speed today as he did on Day One. But we don't have that. Instead we have a complete rando saying "Watson has not improved his processing speed" when he could not tell you the first thing about playing QB at the Pop Warner level much less the highest level in the world. Battle Red Blog seems to have some knowledgeable writers who can really dig deep into plays and explain the protection, routes, reads, etc., but that's not what we're getting here. We're getting an uninformed, unqualified opinion that's attempting to be passed off as fact.

Chris Cooley, the former Redskins TE, used to do a breakdown of almost every single snap offensive snap for the Skins. Is there anyone similar for the Texans?
Click to expand...

Not going to respond to most of this, since it has absolutely nothing to do with me...

For the bolded, I don't believe so, you have random media people who will get a play every now and then and do a breakdown - several of the posters on here are good at finding them and posting when they are out there. But I'm not aware of anyone doing all or most plays of any Texans position.

You're stuck with us non-expert armchair fella's.
 
amazing80 said:
It appears Watson didn't see him. Is Watson not allowed to have one play that isn't perfect? Is the bar set so high that we need to over-analyze his play on every opportunity? I bumped the GM and HC thread but no one seems to care. They just keep debating our greatest player
Click to expand...

You might want to read the GM/HC thread, there's been quite a bit of discussion this morning.
 
amazing80 said:
Guys have a problem with the play you picked to illustrate your point. The near INT in the end zone was a much better play to disect. Not one where Martin messed up and the OC called a 5 step drop in the end zone.
Click to expand...

then you’re totally ignoring what my point was all along. Football is football. Nothing is ever perfect. I have no problem with the way Watson chose to play yesterday except how he played from the end zone.

Even if the line blocked it well I’d have been screaming at the TV, “What are you doing!! Get rid of it!!”

Had he thrown an 18 yard post that Cooks takes for a TD I’d have been concerned about his demeanor.

Sometimes you’ve got to trust your line, don’t rush, don’t force it. Standing in your own end zone is not one of those times.
 
amazing80 said:
Guys have a problem with the play you picked to illustrate your point. The near INT in the end zone was a much better play to disect. Not one where Martin messed up and the OC called a 5 step drop in the end zone.
Click to expand...

An even better play to dissect would have been the pass where the corner sank underneath the route and deflected the ball to Hansen. It's really hard to tell if that was an outright bad decision that he got away with, a not so bad decision but he lacked the velocity on the throw to get it there in time, or some combination of the two. I'm leaning toward "some combination of the two." The play ultimately resulted in a long completion so everyone has forgotten about it. But that goes to my point that a few inches here or a fraction of a second there is the difference between "Awesome play!" and "You idiot!"

Trying to make the point with the end zone example is beyond silly. When a lineman whiffs a block in the end zone on a passing play, the expectation is a safety. When a lineman whiffs a block on a punt from the end zone, the expectation is a safety. I wouldn't expect a punter to speed up his kicking motion because the line didn't do its job any more than I would expect a QB to speed up his throwing motion because the line didn't do its job. Both have to rely on the line providing sufficient time to do what they need to do.
 
Last edited:
thunderkyss said:
then you’re totally ignoring what my point was all along. Football is football. Nothing is ever perfect. I have no problem with the way Watson chose to play yesterday except how he played from the end zone.

Even if the line blocked it well I’d have been screaming at the TV, “What are you doing!! Get rid of it!!”

Had he thrown an 18 yard post that Cooks takes for a TD I’d have been concerned about his demeanor.

Sometimes you’ve got to trust your line, don’t rush, don’t force it. Standing in your own end zone is not one of those times.
Click to expand...

There is the rub. How do you know he wouldn't have unloaded the rock if the runner wasn't coming at him up the middle?
 
ClemsonTexan said:
I do think that if there is one QB who definitely would have won the game for the Texans yesterday, it was Jacoby Brissett. One of the finest football minds once said that he is better than Deshaun Watson.
Click to expand...

Well I can see we have either Uncle Rico back. Or the admitted WOF that posted in the DW4 draft thread back.

Welcome back
 
FuzzyLogic said:
Yep - I'll admit it, I am an armchair quarterback, I am too chubby, slow, and old to be anything else.

I'm also an armchair RB, OL, DL, LB, GM, Coach, etc. - because I'm on a football forum.

Would be a really uninteresting place if we weren't armchair something...

Poster 1: "Good game, sucks we lost"
Poster 2: "We'll get 'em next time"
Poster 1: "OK then, see you next week"
Poster 2: "I'll be here"

Of course, all QB's mess up... of course, we aren't in the film room - so?

We can discuss good play breakdowns - I'm sure even Martin made a good block at some point yesterday. As far as it being 10 pages of 'this' what were there maybe 5 posts of someone discussing this play and Watson? Followed by 9 pages of "haters gonna hate" and people trying to defend they don't hate Watson but on that play MAYBE there could have been a different outcome.

I'm going back in silent mode and let you guys continue your war with SteelB - it's all you're really interested in.
Click to expand...

So why aren’t we talking about Fairbairn ? Or what about Mercilus for 10 straight pages.
 
Watched the game and just sat back and marveled at how many times Watson dropped back and seen his OL caving in around his pocket almost instantly. Watson has gotten better with his pocket presence, escapability, and throwing the ball with authority while off-balance. These are not the skills I wanted see him perfecting but when strapped with an OL this bad.....there just isn't another option.

How many times did the Texans OT's get pushed into the pocket at an angle towards Watson? The Colts on the other hand had many plays where their OT's rode Watt to the outside perimeter of the pocket which gave Rivers the opportunity of that extra second in the pocket and ability to set his feet before the throw. If River's had been playing behind the Texans OL....Colts defense might've set a single game sack total. Watson's escapability saved this OL all day.
 
Last edited:
OptimisticTexan said:
Watched the game and just sat back and marveled at how many times Watson dropped back and seen his OL caving in around his pocket almost instantly. Watson has gotten better with his pocket presence, escapability, and throwing the ball with authority while off-balance. These are not the skills I wanted see him perfecting but when strapped with an OL this bad.....there just isn't an option.

How many times did the Texans OT's get pushed into the pocket at an angle towards Watson? The Colts on the other hand had many plays where their OT's rode Watt to the outside perimeter of the pocket which gave Rivers the opportunity of that extra second in the pocket and ability to set his feet before the throw. If River's had been playing behind the Texans OL....Colts defense might've set a single game sack total. Watson's escapability saved this OL all day.
Click to expand...

Not in the second half Watt would push tha tackle into the lap of the quarterback almost on every drop back. Rivers were sacked at least 3 times in the second half. I couldn’t believe that was our defense out there. Where the H E double hockey sticks have they been. If they played with that type of intensity all season we’re talking playoffs easily.
 
Texansballer74 said:
So why aren’t we talking about Fairbairn ? Or what about Mercilus for 10 straight pages.
Click to expand...

I think I already explained my reasons...

1) that isn't what was posted and/or what I responded too...
2) It isn't interesting to talk about Mercilus or Martin etc. like I said earlier, I would prefer they were backups on a different team next year

If we want to discuss the kicker or somebody else, start that discussion - I was fine posting my thoughts about what was already going on, you guys took issue with it.

Not everything that's posted discussing/criticizing a play is a negative vote on DW's ability - same scenarios happen to other QB's - I would prefer we take it as a look of 'this happened in the last game, what if anything could ANY QB have done to get a different outcome?'.

Something I suggest everyone gets used to - DW has the ball more than any other player on the team, he is the leader of the team, the undisputed face of the franchise, and the only reason we are competitive this year in many of the games - he will be the most discussed person.

Anyway, that play and it's discussion doesn't have to be limited to Watson - could as easily discuss Martin (but why?) or Kelly (also why? It would be sad if he is the OC next year), why call that play there? We know why it wasn't a run (which also would have been a safety in all likelihood) but why not a three-step drop? etc. etc.

But I guess that isn't where we are, you can't discuss much on here without someone taking offense to it.
 
Here's a still of when DW was at the top of his drop and he possibly notices #50 coming free. Do you think he has a passing lane to Akins? To me, it doesn't look like it. He could have possibly lobbed one over #50 & #96, but then there's a DB sitting (you can kind of see him at the bottom-left of pic) that could have picked that type of pass off.

Another thing to notice is there were no sideline routes. If there was, he could have just chucked it out of bounds around the vicinity of the receiver.

DW's first instinct is to escape to the right, but then notices two Colts got that plugged up. That's pretty much when he realizes... protect the ball and take the sack.

3e7e031f51.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top