Looking at the parts: good QB, elite WR1, very good RB, good depth at the rest of the skill positions. OL knows the ZBS. This team has the talent base for an above average offense. Top 5 to top 10, just looking at the parts. Looking at the performance: - last year, we were an elite passing unit, perhaps out of necessity as we couldnt run the ball. - This year, our running game is strong. However, we do not put up numbers in the first half, but run up massive numbers in the 2nd half. What does this tell us? Frankly I don't know. Does anyone have any data or analysis to tell us what this means? My working theory is this: 1. In the first half: - teams are running their normal defensive game plan. Attacking when called for, blitzing when they normally do. - Defenses get more aggressive against the Texans as they build early leads. IMO, Defensive coordinators dial up more aggressive playcalling in the first half because they're ahead and have strong prospects of creating an insurmountable lead. - There's a lethargy and negativity that spreads from the Defensive stench to the offense. Failure of the Defense begets failure by the offense. It's a vibe. It's a reek. It's an intangible that creates an obstacle that must be overcome. The Offense then presses and tries too hard. - Theory: Our failures in the first half are significant because we're running against normal defensive strategy, at least at the outset. In short, our offense isn't as good as perhaps the overall stats say, or as folks might think. 2. In the second half: - DC's are now playing the clock because of the huge leads. They dial back the pressure to start the 3rd quarter. In Q4, the prevent defense continues but late in the game, we see some situational blitzing. - The defenses relax, lose aggression, and human nature sets in. - IMO, it's now easier to score because the Texans have a sense of urgency and the Defenses, for all these reasons, are poised to let the Texans score at the expense of eating clock. - It still takes talent, ability and execution to score in the second half, but I'd argue that it's a distorted measure of offensive efficiency, and boosts our stats artificially. ----------------------------- In evaluating this team, it's clear that the Defensive scheme and personnel require major overhaul and improvement. There's no downside to scrapping what we have and building from the ground up. As to the offense, this is cited most frequently as the reason to keep Kubiak. I think it's overstated because the offense is overrated by those who think it's "elite" or "explosive". And because in comparison to the putrid defense, anything that's above average looks great. I don't think the offenes is elite. I don't think it is outperforming its talent base. The offense has plus talent and is above average over all. Not dominant. Not effective when the opposing defenses are attacking. ------------------------------- Does anyone have informatio to share about the disparity in offensive performance in the two halves, and what it means about the overall quality of the offense.