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

It's the RUNNING BACK, STUPID.

Nighthawk

Nighthawk

Rookie
Jeeze. Ahman Green is not going to get it done. He's a good stopgap. Trade for somebody, anybody, tonight. Give away what needs to be given away. If there is a high potential guy available, take a risk.

We have got to have a running back NOW.

Yeah, I know. Best receiver out, 2nd receiver out, other people out, QB "dinged," blah blah.

Comes down to whether you're willing to pay the price to win. If you are, get on the phone and get a RB in here tomorrow.

If you're not, piddle along.

Winning teams are aggressive on and off the field.
 
Nighthawk said:
Jeeze. Ahman Green is not going to get it done. He's a good stopgap. Trade for somebody, anybody, tonight. Give away what needs to be given away. If there is a high potential guy available, take a risk.

We have got to have a running back NOW.

Yeah, I know. Best receiver out, 2nd receiver out, other people out, QB "dinged," blah blah.

Comes down to whether you're willing to pay the price to win. If you are, get on the phone and get a RB in here tomorrow.

If you're not, piddle along.

Winning teams are aggressive on and off the field.
Click to expand...

I say we go to Costco and pick us up a spare running back. As I said last week, I saw a big muscular guy there who looked pretty fast. You need to pay with cash, check or Amex to shop there, and you also need a membership card.

Tell me your names of all these backs better than Green, and what price you are willing to pay after Game 6 of the season to get a back who hasn't practiced with you.

Personally, I think there are some fundamental issues that the Texans have with their run game other than just the backs. I don't buy the backs, the offensive line, the scheme, or the play calling. I have never been convinced that the Kubiak passing game can work along with the Sherman run game. Show me which regular season game the Texans have had where they work together.
 
Nighthawk said:
Jeeze. Ahman Green is not going to get it done. He's a good stopgap. Trade for somebody, anybody, tonight. Give away what needs to be given away. If there is a high potential guy available, take a risk.

We have got to have a running back NOW.

Yeah, I know. Best receiver out, 2nd receiver out, other people out, QB "dinged," blah blah.

Comes down to whether you're willing to pay the price to win. If you are, get on the phone and get a RB in here tomorrow.

If you're not, piddle along.

Winning teams are aggressive on and off the field.
Click to expand...


You gotta love guys like you. You make no sense what so ever. You want to give up our future for now.....lol. Are you kidding? We are a work in progress and we need to be patient. We are going to win our fair share of games this year but we arent going to the superbowl. Be realistic.
 
Texans_Chick said:
I have never been convinced that the Kubiak passing game can work along with the Sherman run game. Show me which regular season game the Texans have had where they work together.
Click to expand...
Funny...someone emailed me today and asked me what I thought of the team at this juncture and I made an analogy of combining a Chinese buffet with a Mexican restaurant as I mentioned the Sherman man blocking scheme with Kubiak's zone blocking scheme. Two very popular kinds of food but an awful combination.
 
this is the only guy worth dealing for & apparently he's not going anywhere-

General Manager A.J. Smith reiterated yesterday that Michael Turner will remain a Charger through the 2007 season, the same thing he promised when he took Turner off the market in April.

But Smith covets Turner not only for his contributions in situations such as Sunday's blowout victory at Denver, in which Turner ran 10 times for 147 yards and a touchdown, but also for insurance in case Tomlinson were to get hurt.

“The most important thing is this season,” Smith said.

Smith also expects to get a third-round pick as recompense for losing Turner in free agency.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20071009/news_1s9chnotes.html

that would be a compenstory end of 3rd rd. pick-
 
Vinny said:
Funny...someone emailed me today and asked me what I thought of the team at this juncture and I made an analogy of combining a Chinese buffet with a Mexican restaurant as I mentioned the Sherman man blocking scheme with Kubiak's zone blocking scheme. Two very popular kinds of food but an awful combination.
Click to expand...

LOL. This is what I said last May in part:

Mike Sherman as OC: What Does This Mean for the Texans Offense?

I can't say I particularly see the Sherman-Green Bay style of power offense as being particularly meshable with the Denver-style zone blocking misdirection offense. The best offenses in my mind have always been those with a very definable direction and philosophy. Sometimes when you take the best of two things, it makes a better whole, but other times it makes a mishmash. You know, the chocolate and peanut butter thing works well together for a Reese's Peanut Butter Cup, but I'm sure though I like single malt scotch and breakfast tacos, I can't say I'd want to mix them.
Click to expand...

Eric Winston in a radio interview said he thought that the linemen for the Texans had a good combination of agility and power to run both power and zone blocking. All lines do some sort of combo blocking, even the Denver line know for its ZBS, but I think that they have more of a philosophical direction on what sort of linemen they want--roadgraders or lighter agile guys. Sometimes if you try to be good at too many things, you are good at nothing.

When Kubiak came to the Texans, the pundits were all high on the Texans running game, thinking it would be an insert back here, gain a ton of yards. And the truth is that much of that came from the blocking scheme they ran, how it meshed with the passing game, the offensive line blocking and the running backs coach. Things that didn't get stole from Denver. (The parts of the offense run by ex-Denver guys are the parts that work the best, esp TE coach).

And what happened instead was that the Denver running game never translated to the Texans because they didn't have the pieces, parts and scheme to run it, but that the Denver passing game got worse because the guy grooming their QBs and helping their wide receivers left to be the Texans head coach.
 
Nighthawk said:
Jeeze. Ahman Green is not going to get it done. He's a good stopgap. Trade for somebody, anybody, tonight. Give away what needs to be given away. If there is a high potential guy available, take a risk.

We have got to have a running back NOW.

Yeah, I know. Best receiver out, 2nd receiver out, other people out, QB "dinged," blah blah.

Comes down to whether you're willing to pay the price to win. If you are, get on the phone and get a RB in here tomorrow.

If you're not, piddle along.

Winning teams are aggressive on and off the field.
Click to expand...

Where was this post between week 2 and 3?
 
Texans_Chick said:
Eric Winston in a radio interview said he thought that the linemen for the Texans had a good combination of agility and power to run both power and zone blocking. All lines do some sort of combo blocking, even the Denver line know for its ZBS, but I think that they have more of a philosophical direction on what sort of linemen they want--roadgraders or lighter agile guys. Sometimes if you try to be good at too many things, you are good at nothing.
Click to expand...
this is some of what I wrote earlier fwiw...

Our backs scare no one, we have a bunch of second grade wr's on the field, the line has a journeyman LT, a washed up Center and a RT that is a better pass blocker than a run blocker at a traditionally run block heavy position. Fred Weary is probably the only player on the line that seems to be winning all his battles....some of this reason I have to pin on their trying to run Denver's blocking scheme but forcing Sherman and his man concepts in...it's like mixing a Mexican restaurant with a Chinese buffet. You may think you are serving more folks what they want, but it's an awful combination. I could be off-base on this but I don't like our hybrid blocking schemes....they need to go with a power man scheme (sherman) or a zone scheme (kubiak)...this hybrid crap where you don't do either well but do a little of everything isn't working. It's like when you buy a all in one device appliance...it gets the job done, but it everything works worse than a stand alone device. I know that most teams use a bit of both concepts...but they tend to make a game plan that uses one more than the other depending on the opponent. We seem to line up in a power set one play and use a zone concept the next....I don't see any rhyme or reason to it...just seems like a clusterblank.
 
Texans_Chick said:
Sometimes if you try to be good at too many things, you are good at nothing.
Click to expand...

Vinny said:
...this hybrid crap where you don't do either well but do a little of everything isn't working. It's like when you buy a all in one device appliance...it gets the job done, but it does everything works worse than a stand alone device.
Click to expand...

I posted similar jack-of-all trades master-of-none sentiments about Kubiak's tendency to like swing players on the line. I don't want a left tackle because he can play right tackle too. I'd like to see a left tackle. Same thing with guys who can play guard and tackle - they are OK for spot dury, but they shouldn't be relied on as long term starters, IMO.

Between the finesse/power blocking and swing players, the o-line probably has an identity crisis.
 
hookinreds said:
Where was this post between week 2 and 3?
Click to expand...
Somewhere between 2-0, and getting your heart ripped out by the champs.
You could see the decline starting in that game. The ball stopped bouncing our way, and the players heads began drifting to another place.
Missed opportunities, miscues, penalties; it all started in game 3 and has continued since. Call me Cptn. Obvious, but it is what it is.
Our team has to find its heart again.

Go Texans
 
Nighthawk said:
Jeeze. Ahman Green is not going to get it done. He's a good stopgap. Trade for somebody, anybody, tonight. Give away what needs to be given away. If there is a high potential guy available, take a risk.

We have got to have a running back NOW.

Yeah, I know. Best receiver out, 2nd receiver out, other people out, QB "dinged," blah blah.

Comes down to whether you're willing to pay the price to win. If you are, get on the phone and get a RB in here tomorrow.

If you're not, piddle along.

Winning teams are aggressive on and off the field.
Click to expand...

Trade deadline has passed...........I think
 
Runner said:
I posted similar jack-of-all trades master-of-none sentiments about Kubiak's tendency to like swing players on the line. I don't want a left tackle because he can play right tackle too. I'd like to see a left tackle. Same thing with guys who can play guard and tackle - they are OK for spot dury, but they shouldn't be relied on as long term starters, IMO.

Between the finesse/power blocking and swing players, the o-line probably has an identity crisis.
Click to expand...

So me, you and Vinny are in agreement.

I'd prefer to be wrong.
 
We run the ZBS. However, because of the personnel we have, or lack thereof, we have to run some sort of power scheme. Not because we want a hybrid offense, but because the team just isn't ready to be fully committed to the ZBS yet. Kubiak still needs to go out and find linemen, since he is for the most part, playing with linemen he inherited, not guys he hand picked.
 
mexican_texan said:
We run the ZBS. However, because of the personnel we have, or lack thereof, we have to run some sort of power scheme. Not because we want a hybrid offense, but because the team just isn't ready to be fully ZBS yet.
Click to expand...
um, no...that's not how it goes to the best of my knowledge. This was the master plan and it's not "plan B". I think he likes the feet of Chester and Weary and likes Winston on the outside. Our Guards are really pretty athletic and not a couple of big powerful stiffs.
 
mexican_texan said:
We run the ZBS. However, because of the personnel we have, or lack thereof, we have to run some sort of power scheme. Not because we want a hybrid offense, but because the team just isn't ready to be fully ZBS yet.
Click to expand...

No, the Texans don't run the ZBS the way that Denver does. Sherman would get pissed last year if anyone suggested that we ran what Denver runs or that the Texans were running pure ZB.

We run a power/ZB blend because that is what Sherman does. We don't have Alex Gibbs or any of the ZBS disciples coaching our Oline. And this year the Texans increased the amount of power blocking that was done compared to last year. If anything, the team is going the direction of less zone blocking.
 
If there is a split I'd favor Kubiak winning out & Sherman gone maybe after the season. in two drafts Kubiak has used four picks on linemen, one late (6th rd. Lundy) on RB. aquiring Green via FA (Sherman) Gado trade (Sherman). yep, I guess its true :cool:
 
Vinny said:
um, no...that's not how it goes to the best of my knowledge. This was the master plan and it's not "plan B". I think he likes the feet of Chester and Weary and likes Winston on the outside. Our Guards are really pretty athletic and not a couple of big powerful stiffs.
Click to expand...
So it was Kubiak's plan to have a hybrid offense the whole way? It had nothing to do with the horrible running game the Texans had the first few games of his tenure? As I remember it, he brought in Vonta Leach so that he could use an extra blocker at fullback, thus bringing in the need for a power scheme to add to the ZBS that was somewhat implemented.
 
Meh, I think Kubs does look for tackles, centers, and guards in his front line guys, but he looks for swing players as back ups. Charles Spencer was drafted to be our LT and that's where he's played. Eric Winston was drafted to be our RT, and although he worked at both tackle positions (mainly RT) in practice last year when he was a back up he is exclusively our RT now. Mike Flanagan and Steve McKinney, both centers although McKinney could play guard if we were in a pinch. Pitts, only guard, same with Weary. It makes sense, we can't afford to bring 10 exclusive 1 position O-Linemen into every game when we only have what, 45 spots on gameday? You bring in 5 guys who can start at their respective positions, and 2 or 3 who are "swing guys" who can fill in at different positions depending on who goes down.
 
Busa_Bill said:
Somewhere between 2-0, and getting your heart ripped out by the champs.
You could see the decline starting in that game. The ball stopped bouncing our way, and the players heads began drifting to another place.
Missed opportunities, miscues, penalties; it all started in game 3 and has continued since. Call me Cptn. Obvious, but it is what it is.
Our team has to find its heart again.

Go Texans
Click to expand...

There was that little thing about half our team getting injured in that game as well. This team is having to reach for production in way to many places. Green was doing exactly what the team needed before he got hurt, combine that with the way AJ was tearing apart the DBs and it was a smooth running machine.
 
mexican_texan said:
So it was Kubiak's plan to have a hybrid offense the whole way? It had nothing to do with the horrible running game the Texans had the first few games of his tenure? As I remember it, he brought in Vonta Leach so that he could use an extra blocker at fullback, thus bringing in the need for a power scheme to add to the ZBS that was somewhat implemented.
Click to expand...
Kubiak hand picked Charles Spencer and he flies in the face of your position that he is forced into using larger players instead of smaller more traditional zone blocking guys...Spencer is a really massive lineman who played a bunch of Guard in College. Explain that one to me if you would.
 
mexican_texan said:
So it was Kubiak's plan to have a hybrid offense the whole way? It had nothing to do with the horrible running game the Texans had the first few games of his tenure? As I remember it, he brought in Vonta Leach so that he could use an extra blocker at fullback, thus bringing in the need for a power scheme to add to the ZBS that was somewhat implemented.
Click to expand...
Here's the only relevant thing I've found so far:

Texans tackle Eric Winston
(on how the zone blocking scheme is going) “It's doing well. I don’t think we are fully over there. I like to think of our offense as a hybrid right now. We are doing a lot of different things. You know, a lot of teams are either power teams or zone teams and I think we got enough skill on this offensive line and we got the right combination of guys where I think we are getting to be a hybrid of both. I think that is going to pose a lot of problems for defenses and it’s exciting for us playing for it.”

(on it this scheme not being one or another) That’s what I’m saying. We can do both. Usually for power teams you have big, strong guys and for zone teams you have smaller, quicker guys. So, with guys like Chester Pitts and Ephraim (Salaam) that have been in the zone blocking scheme before; in college we did both. We got a lot of guys that can do a lot. Fred Weary is a real strong guy but at the same time he can move. It takes those kind of guys to be able to do both. I think we are fortunate to have those kind of guys to where we can do both.”

(on the second year in the system being more comfortable) “Absolutely. I mean, you’re more comfortable with the terminology, what the coaches are expecting, what they’re looking for, what they want to see. That just makes everyone a little bit better. You know what they want and you know what you need to go out there and do to get better and be a starter on this team. So, it’s just a matter of carrying it forward day by day.”
Click to expand...
 
Vinny said:
Kubiak hand picked Charles Spencer and he flies in the face of your position that he is forced into using larger players instead of smaller more traditional zone blocking guys...Spencer is a really massive lineman who played a bunch of Guard in College. Explain that one to me if you would.
Click to expand...
We haven't used Spencer in over a year, but to answer your question, Spencer was drafted because of his footwork. He may be as big as your typical guard, but his footwork makes him a much lighter player out on the field.
 
Didn't SD turn down a first rounder from Titans for Turner? Guys like him are not available for any price...there are so few "quality" backs in the NFL right now, it's silly. No team is dumb enough to do a Matt Schaub-like trade with their running back.

Face it: Our running back is not coming until free agency or the draft. And I'd bet on the draft.

Discussion over.

Sit here and gag with the rest of us for the remainder of the season, please.
 
mexican_texan said:
Here's the only relevant thing I've found so far:
Click to expand...
That's weak MT. You took me on and made a point blank statement about how "we run the ZBS" and that we were "forced" to run a power scheme since these linemen weren't his choice...well, I backed up my position with the fact that he drafted Charles Spencer and he is exactly the kind of lineman you said he wasn't looking for. You cut n paste a quote that backs my argument up more than yours....you can do better than that.

mexican_texan said:
We run the ZBS. However, because of the personnel we have, or lack thereof, we have to run some sort of power scheme. Not because we want a hybrid offense, but because the team just isn't ready to be fully committed to the ZBS yet. Kubiak still needs to go out and find linemen, since he is for the most part, playing with linemen he inherited, not guys he hand picked.
Click to expand...
 
Our running back is coming out of nowhere. Just like Jacoby came out obscurity, so will our running back of the future.
 
Vinny said:
That's weak MT. You took me on and made a point blank statement about how "we run the ZBS" and that we were "forced" to run a power scheme since these linemen weren't his choice...well, I backed up my position with the fact that he drafted Charles Spencer and he is exactly the kind of lineman you said he wasn't looking for. You cut n paste a quote that backs my argument up more than yours....you can do better than that.
Click to expand...
Spencer has the footwork of the prototypical ZBS lineman. Look for my later post.
 
mexican_texan said:
We haven't used Spencer in over a year, but to answer your question, Spencer was drafted because of his footwork. He may be as big as your typical guard, but his footwork makes him a much lighter player out on the field.
Click to expand...
lol, you are gonna have to do better than that...I give you a D+ for trying to spin your way out of the argument all the same.
 
What a change from the beginning of the season. We have QB RB WR DE and CB issues. Whats next PR or KR problems? To many we feel as is this is BS. I hope this team doesn't KO our winning season hopes. By the way I hate the IRS. :whip:



This is a mental game as well. If you don't believe in yourself you will always fail .
 
Fox said:
Meh, I think Kubs does look for tackles, centers, and guards in his front line guys, but he looks for swing players as back ups. Charles Spencer was drafted to be our LT and that's where he's played.
Click to expand...

Charles Spencer played a game and half and he isn't playing this year as we all know. The Texans starting left tackle for the past year and a half is a swing tackle. The person they brought in to challenge for the job this year was valued because he could play guard and tackle. Yes roster spots are limited and mutli-role players are good to have as back-ups, but many teams have real left tackles playing left tackle.

It is a rare player that is elite or even above average at multiple positions. It is even harder for a player on a team that has inferior talent at other positions.
 
Carr Bomb said:
It's not just the running back........our line isn't pushing ANYBODY around.
Click to expand...

This is the perfect post to make a certain point, which I think is being overlooked. Instead of "It's the RUNNING BACK, STUPID" . .

. . it should be "KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID".

I didn't see this "Kubiak/Sherman hybrid scheme" being questioned in the first two games when the offensive line was winning the battle upfront.

Why make it complicated now?

I know this is a very, very unpopular view, but instead of questioning the scheme, which again, worked quite well apparently the first two games, why not recognize how much the loss of McKinney impacted the running game? Combine that loss with the loss of AJ and Green, and it's going to change how opposing defense is going to be set.

I hate to sound like Capers here, but doesn't matter what 'scheme' you use, the lineman still still has to beat the guy across from him.
 
The reasons we have had a poor running game I beleive doesn't soley lye on bad running backs. This past week our running game wasn't that bad it was just we were behind and didn't get a chance to run much. We can't run up the middle because our line doesn't give the push that it should/use to.

We started out running the ball fine early but as soon as we got bad penalitys it put jax up ahead and left us fighting to come back. When you have to fight to come back you abandon the running game and try to get down the field. Our major deal is to control the clock better, better play calling, more upfront movement from the Oline
 
I would not mind putting J. Jones, in the backfield, for a few plays.
Sorta of like a R.Bush style player, that can turn the corners.
Its clear, that the pressure is coming from the middle, where our Center is lofting it on every play.
 
Marcus said:
This is the perfect post to make a certain point, which I think is being overlooked. Instead of "It's the RUNNING BACK, STUPID" . .

. . it should be "KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID".

I didn't see this "Kubiak/Sherman hybrid scheme" being questioned in the first two games when the offensive line was winning the battle upfront.

Why make it complicated now?

I know this is a very, very unpopular view, but instead of questioning the scheme, which again, worked quite well apparently the first two games, why not recognize how much the loss of McKinney impacted the running game? Combine that loss with the loss of AJ and Green, and it's going to change how opposing defense is going to be set.

I hate to sound like Capers here, but doesn't matter what 'scheme' you use, the lineman still still has to beat the guy across from him.
Click to expand...
Marcus, this may be a tough concept to grasp, but the more games that are played, the more conclusions you start to draw as you observe the league...that's how it works for me at least.
 
Texans_Chick said:
I say we go to Costco and pick us up a spare running back. As I said last week, I saw a big muscular guy there who looked pretty fast. You need to pay with cash, check or Amex to shop there, and you also need a membership card.

Tell me your names of all these backs better than Green, and what price you are willing to pay after Game 6 of the season to get a back who hasn't practiced with you.

Personally, I think there are some fundamental issues that the Texans have with their run game other than just the backs. I don't buy the backs, the offensive line, the scheme, or the play calling. I have never been convinced that the Kubiak passing game can work along with the Sherman run game. Show me which regular season game the Texans have had where they work together.
Click to expand...

I think this is really a crux of the problem that does get passed over by some people. There should be some headcoaching positions Sherman will be considered for again possibly. I quietly wouldn't mind him taking up another spot. Just really think too many cooks in the kitchen.

On Edit: Isn't Corey Dillion still available?
 
Runner said:
Charles Spencer played a game and half and he isn't playing this year as we all know. The Texans starting left tackle for the past year and a half is a swing tackle. The person they brought in to challenge for the job this year was valued because he could play guard and tackle. Yes roster spots are limited and mutli-role players are good to have as back-ups, but many teams have real left tackles playing left tackle.

It is a rare player that is elite or even above average at multiple positions. It is even harder for a player on a team that has inferior talent at other positions.
Click to expand...

1 of our 5 starting linemen would best be described as a "swing player" and it's because the incumbent starter blew out his knee last season. Almost every one of our back ups can play multiple positions and I agree with that philosophy for the above mentioned reasons. I agree with you that we need a true LT and I was for drafting Levi Brown for that very reason regardless of Spencer's health status. I just think it's a stretch to criticize Kubes for going after swing players, I think he only brings in swing players in a back up capacity which is an intelligent philosophy, IMO. Salaam is a starter because injury made it a necessity.
 
Hmmm what about trying to get Chester Taylor as our running back for the remainder of the season, at the right price.
 
The alternative, one AJ is back... is to pass to set up the run. Its unorthadox but we need to get MS outside the pocket more. One of the things I've noticed is that he can throw the ball outside of the pocket. If you move him around and move the launch point around, you can spread the defense and have more success running the ball up the middle.

We kind of did that early in the game this week. We actually averaged 4.25 yards a carry in the first half and like 2.8 in the second. This isn't including qb scrambles or that reverse we used to set up the PA later in the game. Its just rb's running the ball.

Mike
 
Well, I'm afraid it will be another tough test for the offense. How will we account for their 2 DEs & Haynesworth?

Moving MS outside the pocket?
That sounds a bit scary.
 
Texans_Chick said:
Tell me your names of all these backs better than Green, and what price you are willing to pay after Game 6 of the season to get a back who hasn't practiced with you.
Click to expand...

I don't know the names. Maybe you do. Tatum Bell, people say, would be available for a 5th or 6th round choice. If that's so, it's a steal. Maybe he's not great but he's better than what we got, though maybe Green's just as good, only not as fresh. But Green's going to get hurt again in a game or two and we'll be back to Dayne and Gado. YOu think that's a good idea?

I mean, you're the hero writer, you probably know a half-dozen backs available for a fairly low price. I'm not saying give up a first day pick (unless, of course, we could get Turner), I'm saying get somebody, anybody, with a little speed and some possibility of spelling Green effectively.

Why is this controversial?
 
Texans_Chick said:
No, the Texans don't run the ZBS the way that Denver does. Sherman would get pissed last year if anyone suggested that we ran what Denver runs or that the Texans were running pure ZB.

We run a power/ZB blend because that is what Sherman does. We don't have Alex Gibbs or any of the ZBS disciples coaching our Oline. And this year the Texans increased the amount of power blocking that was done compared to last year. If anything, the team is going the direction of less zone blocking.
Click to expand...

I am probably wrong on this, but. There are two schools of thought on ZBS. There is the old school Jimmy Johnson Dallas Cowboy version, the Power Zone. In it you use big guys that block and area, it has been around a long time. (BTW TC knows this but many do not, ZBS only refers to the run blocking). The big guys are also usually good pass blockers due to there size. This is the type blocking system Sherman employs.

Along comes Alex Gibbs and he makes an adjustment to the run game. Go smaller quicker guys, use misdirection, and chop blocking to create backside lanes. The problem with the smaller linemen is they are not as good at pass blocking in the traditional way. Their offense needs play action and role outs to keep the QB alive. Denver is not a good come from behind team, and that is not only because of the lose of Elway.

Kubiak was trained to get an early lead by using play action and role outs to get that 1st half lead, and then going into run the ball to shorten the game mode. The Denver air helps with the wearing down of opponents, BTW Atlanta is the second highest elevation in the league at 1050. The smaller, adjusted to the elevation guys are able to establish the 2nd half running game, and wear the other team out.

IMO you can run both types of running games with the correct guys. Flanagan is not able to run black anymore, and the OC does not want to tell his former college player that. When McKinney was in there (and this kills me to admit) the running game looked good. Without him... Also when did the run game start to click last year? When McKinney took over the center position. He along with Weary and Pitts are an athletic middle with size and strength, that can run both types of ZBS systems.
 
Nighthawk said:
Why is this controversial?
Click to expand...

What's controversial, is that you seem to think that there is someone out there that's better, that's not already playing for another team.

Why is that so difficult for you to comprehend?
 
Nighthawk said:
I don't know the names. Maybe you do. Tatum Bell, people say, would be available for a 5th or 6th round choice. If that's so, it's a steal. Maybe he's not great but he's better than what we got, though maybe Green's just as good, only not as fresh. But Green's going to get hurt again in a game or two and we'll be back to Dayne and Gado. YOu think that's a good idea?
Click to expand...

Bell is not the answer. Though quick as he may be; fumbles are his best friend.

It seems we have two major issues - an OL that now can't run block (the one thing we had been able to do in years past) and RB's that are either starting the twilight of their career (Green) and/or just plain horrible (Dayne).

IMO finding a decent, not spectacular, RB would seem to be easier than getting the OL issues, personnel and scheme, straightened out.
 
Fox said:
Salaam is a starter because injury made it a necessity.
Click to expand...

There were other options available immediately when Spencer went down. It was not a necessity that swing tackle Salaam be the starter for a year going on two.
 
The problem with our running game is simple. It doesn't matter if we are zone blocking, power blocking or girl scout blocking, it all comes down to execution on Sunday.

If the eleven guys on the field do not execute their assignments as practiced to perfection, then it doesn't work. Simple.

If they can execute the play in practice, they should be able to do it on Sunday. In the running game, they are not.

Now, let the dogpile commence.........

"Genius since 1952"
 
Nighthawk said:
I mean, you're the hero writer, you probably know a half-dozen backs available for a fairly low price. I'm not saying give up a first day pick (unless, of course, we could get Turner), I'm saying get somebody, anybody, with a little speed and some possibility of spelling Green effectively.

Why is this controversial?
Click to expand...

A hero writer? Yeah, my superpower is BS detecting.

I'm just a fan. There's no running backs out there that I think are worth giving up much for. But then again, I am open minded and willing to persuaded. So that's why I asked you who this running back savior would be in week 7.

But if you are bringing in a back this late, one who hasn't practiced with the team, it's hard to think of them making much of an impact, especially with the Texans run blocking and scheme.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top