Hey, could the Run N' Shoot work with David Carr? I was thinking if we were to get Vince (not likely now), yes, but can we use it with David? Asking only because I may not now every detail about it and who you have to place in there for it to work. I say Carr is at least fast as Moon was if not faster when Oilers ran it back when. What do you say?
Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!
Run N' Shoot
- Thread starter Cheroqui
- Start date
Vinny said:
Yeah I know he wasn't but, is it a good offense for a QB that can move a little bit is basically what I was asking. I always thought Run N' Gun was a 4-5 wide set with a HB that will allow a QB to try to pick up the first if all DB's are occupied. Also with that there won't be as many people in pursuit of the QB at the same time. Right or wrong?
Hervoyel
BUENO!
zeplin said:Ah the old Chuck and Duck.
1 second
2 second
3 second
NAH!!!
It didn't work that well the first time around.
9-7
11-5
10-6
12-4
With Warren Moon, he exits and you get
2-14
I'd say it worked just fine. Oh wait, they never reached the Super Bowl so it didn't work out that well the first time around did it. I guess the Colts offense under Manning doesn't work and niether did the Chargers offense under Fouts.
run-david-run
All Pro
Well, it does have some fundametal flaws, see Buffalo game...you can only play one way.
Oilers/Texans
Waterboy
The Run-N-Shoot would work very well with Carr. I'd love to see it installed, but that is not the direction the Texans are wanting to go. And for what it's worth to the above mention to the Bills game, it was not the run-n-shoot at fault in that loss.
Hervoyel said:
He exits along with Mike Munchak, Sean Jones, William Fuller, Curtis Duncan, Lee Williams, and Buddy Ryan (plus sprinkle in the loss of your starting QB - Carlson - for several games due to injury in the first quarter of Week 1 at Indy with no qualified backups other than two bumpkins named Billy Joe and Bucky) not to mention the psychological effects of Buffalo and KC from the prior two seasons and the fact that Bud had said in '93 that if they didn't get it done he would have to blow up the team becuase of that new thing called the salary cap, and you get 2-14.
Hervoyel
BUENO!
aj. said:
Quite correct. I did not want to go into that kind of detail (I'm lazy) but yes, your version is far more accurate.
I'm not personally a critic of the Run and Shoot. It's not what I'd prefer to see my team use but if you have a very talented offense and skill position players who are able to make it work then it can easily be a very successful offense.
As to the Buffalo game I can only say one thing. Regardless of how you score the points 38 of them should be enough to win a football game. If it's not then your problem isn't the offense. It's the defense. I know many disagree with me but that's what I think. 38 points should be more than enough to win a football game.
The defense was as much or more at fault as the offense in both the Buffalo and KC playoff losses.
I thoroughly enjoyed watching the R&S in those years. It was exciting and Moon was spectacular in command. But you need a defense that can handle being on the field 35 minutes a game.
The book has been out for a while on how to defeat a pure R&S so it's no longer effective as a base offense but you still see a lot of derivations of it being run in terms of formations and sets and the QB/WR 'read routes' that are still quite common throughout the league.
I thoroughly enjoyed watching the R&S in those years. It was exciting and Moon was spectacular in command. But you need a defense that can handle being on the field 35 minutes a game.
The book has been out for a while on how to defeat a pure R&S so it's no longer effective as a base offense but you still see a lot of derivations of it being run in terms of formations and sets and the QB/WR 'read routes' that are still quite common throughout the league.
Hervoyel said:
Well I would say so far manning has not been to the superbowl. Fouts didn't win a SB either. Now I think we will agree they were and are all good QB's
When it is all said and done I bet they all wish they won a SB. I am just saying I never saw the Chuck and Duck win the SB. The West Coast Offense on the other hand has won a bunch of them and with different QB's. Montana, Young, Farve, and Elway to name just a few.
LBC_Justin
Rookie
I personally loved the Run N Shoot. I don't care what we run as long as we win. Oh and David Carr is much more suited for the Run N Shoot than Vince Young. You need to be able the throw accurate laser beam passes, mobility is not a important.Cheroqui said:
michaelm
vox nihili
aj. said:
I personally never did the math, but i heard it said one time that after the Oilers got their biggest lead (35-3 I think) if they would have kneeled on the ball every single time from the 3rd qtr until the end of the game, it would have been virtually impossible for Buffalo to score enough points to win the game.
Anyone else ever hear such a claim, and does it hold H2o?
run-david-run
All Pro
Obviously the defense folded in a very Texans-esq way, but scoring 3 points in the second half and not being able to hold on to the ball for an exteneded period of time certanly contributed.Oilers/Texans said:
LoneStarState
Waterboy
Wasn't the defense that cost the Oilers that game? The offense scored more than enough points to win...run-david-run said:
Oilers/Texans said:
Yeah, what I was told, was that the Run N' Shoot did it's job but it was always the teams defense that didn't hold up enough for the team using it. Something like the Colts from last year and back? Putting up points but the D can't hold off the opposition either.
Ask yourselves the obvious question: Why doesn't anyone run a pure run & shoot these days? 
Because it's a one trick pony. You don't have a FB or TE, and defenses learned how to play it by putting 6-7 men in coverage and key on what the RB is doing when the ball snaps. It immediately gives away if the play is a run or pass.
The R&S is unable to control the clock, and that, as much as the defensive meltdown (prevent! BOO!), was what gave up that 32 point lead in Buffalo.
It was fun to watch, and I think it could be a viable package as part of an offense's weapons. But as a pure offensive scheme, I don't think it'll ever reappear in the NFL again.
Two things I hope I never see in Houston again: the R&S and the prevent D.
Because it's a one trick pony. You don't have a FB or TE, and defenses learned how to play it by putting 6-7 men in coverage and key on what the RB is doing when the ball snaps. It immediately gives away if the play is a run or pass.
The R&S is unable to control the clock, and that, as much as the defensive meltdown (prevent! BOO!), was what gave up that 32 point lead in Buffalo.
It was fun to watch, and I think it could be a viable package as part of an offense's weapons. But as a pure offensive scheme, I don't think it'll ever reappear in the NFL again.
Two things I hope I never see in Houston again: the R&S and the prevent D.
Double Barrel said:Ask yourselves the obvious question: Why doesn't anyone run a pure run & shoot these days?
Because it's a one trick pony. You don't have a FB or TE, and defenses learned how to play it by putting 6-7 men in coverage and key on what the RB is doing when the ball snaps. It immediately gives away if the play is a run or pass.
The R&S is unable to control the clock, and that, as much as the defensive meltdown (prevent! BOO!), was what gave up that 32 point lead in Buffalo.
It was fun to watch, and I think it could be a viable package as part of an offense's weapons. But as a pure offensive scheme, I don't think it'll ever reappear in the NFL again.
Two things I hope I never see in Houston again: the R&S and the prevent D.
Well not to be straight all out RNS but incorporated with sets and packages.
Cheroqui said:
yeah, that would be cool. I'm totally down with that.
I just think of the "pure" R&S when I hear someone mention it, mainly due to seeing it for so many years with the Oilers. They didn't even have a FB or TE on the roster!
But as a set, when you need to move the ball or mix it up to catch the opposing defense out of coverage, I think it could be a strong weapon. However, the no. 1 thing you'd have to have is an offensive line that can consistently block for pass protection. Until we can get that installed, we could never consider a high pass percentage offense.
LBC_Justin
Rookie
Actually the Oilers scored 10 points in the second half. (I believe our Defense scored a TD at the beginning of the third quarter.run-david-run said:
A big part of that loss was poor officiating. If you watch NFL Films they constantly replay that game's highlights. They even focus on a few horrible calls that basically lost the games for the Oilers. NFL films rarely mentions the officiating but a few of those plays were so game changing they had to. I can say with 100% certainty that if it wasn't for the poor officiating the Oilers would have won that game, even with the horrendous defensive melt down.
Now the Oilers certainly did below those other playoff games that they lost. I still have nightmares about the Broncos game.
Tale Gator
________
I believe we are going to run with the Third Coast Offense this season.
AustinJB
Rookie
Run-n-Shoot? Is this a serious question?
First of all, even if we WANTED to install this offense (which we don't,) we need about 4 or 5 good receivers. We don't even have a legitimate #2 WR at this point! Don't think so...this would take longer to install than Kubes current offense IMO.
First of all, even if we WANTED to install this offense (which we don't,) we need about 4 or 5 good receivers. We don't even have a legitimate #2 WR at this point! Don't think so...this would take longer to install than Kubes current offense IMO.