Offensive Analysis

Discussion in 'Texans Talk' started by coachdent, Jan 2, 2007.

  1. coachdent

    coachdent Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Messages:
    443
    Likes Received:
    85
    Location:
    Media, PA
    Houston's offensive coordinator Troy Calhoun took the head coaching job at Air Force. Mike Sherman also seems destined to leave for a head coaching vacancy. Both of these things will hopefully help the Texans.

    The offense had a major indentity crisis this year. It was without direction or flow. It was sickingly pedestrian at times with little or no motion and formationally stagnant.

    We went through "phases" during the season in what seemed like a "hey let's try this" phase. There was the empty sets against the Giants that went away. There was the ONE time Carr was in the gun and ran for TWELVE YARDS! That never came back and was never seen from since.

    The pass game was frighteningly inept. Backs were not kept in to max protect, nor were tight ends. At the time during the season when sacks were causing us major problems, we were continuing to release five into routes. Those routes were mostly underneath and stationary. True West Coast is all about getting the ball into receivers' hands in space and then racking up yards after the catch. This year, our YAC was pathetic. One reason is that most of the routes that we throw to are routes where the receiver has his back upfield. He is stationary. Go through a mental note on how many times our backs caught balls at 3 & 4 yards and turned around for 5 or 6 yard gains.

    The pass game was predicated on running the football and throwing off the playaction. However, this becomes a problem when you can't run the ball. Additionally, Houston ran less and less bootleg as the season went along. Instead, they ran play action passes where Carr would fake and then set up deeper.

    We did not move the pocket and vary Carr's launching points. We put a guy with legs in the same place every throw. We went through another phase where all's we threw were one step drops. This was also in conjunction with the "balls being knocked down" phase. Funny how that happens huh?

    We need an explosive player on the offensive side of the ball. Adrian Peterson will hopefully be that guy. The thing about the Texan West Coast that is difficult is that it is a ball control, plodding offense that requires 10,12 and 15 play drives to score. This becomes a problem when you get behind and it becomes a major problem with injuires and lack of talent. It is a tall task to score in the NFL on 10,12 and 15 play drives. That's almost 60 plays to score 28 points....it doesn't happen. The idea of ball control in the NFL will only win you so many games. You have to be explosive. If you look back to the Dom Capers' era, you will see that the Texans were constantly in close games. That will get you to close to .500, but it won't make you a playoff team. The other thing it does is forces you into 3 point games with subpar teams. Cleveland is a perfect example. You should whip that team.

    The NFL is geared for the pass. Plain and simple. The rules are made for the pass game. The Texans need to get out of the dark ages and throw the football.

    With Calhoun leaving and Sherman leaving, hopefully we will bring in a personality that will throw the football. I have never cared for having a coordinator in name only and then having the coach call the plays. The Eagles are moving away from Reid calling games and they have been very successful doing it. I don't like the way Kubes has managed games. I think it is difficult to be a head coach, an offensive cordinator & play caller and be a quarterback coach. You wear different hats and talk to your quarterback differently in each of those roles...

    When Kubes rips into the QB for bad reads or performances as the head coach that is fine. The head coach needs results. But in other situations, that QB would go over to the phone and talk to his QB coach who would talk more about his technique and read progression. Carr doesn't have that in Kubiak. Kubes has to worry about the rest of the team. The QB coach is concerned with what the QB does next and what he as a coach can do to help make sure that he doesn't make that mistake again. A coordinator makes sure that you don't put the QB in that situation again. If the QB is having problems throwing a certain route, you don't call that route. For instance, Carr had a propensity to throw the go route to AJ, regardless of whether he was open or not or if there was double coverage or not. An OC doesn't call that route so Carr doesn't throw that ball.

    Carr does not fit this system. I question the decision to extend his contract without any reason before the start of the season. Kubes made that decision and essentially handcuffed us big time. Carr becomes difficult to move, if not impossible. A new coordinator employing more spread formations and concepts within the framework of the West Coast would definitely help our offense. Frankly, there are already components of the spread in our offense that we use already, so it is not like rewriting the playbook.

    Ultimately, a coordinator takes his offense and adapts it to his players and their strengths. Carr is a spread offense quarterback. He needs to be in the shotgun and learn to throw out of it. Don't give me this BS that he "can't" and that he "isn't comfotable". You make him comfortable and you make him realize that this will improve our offense and prolong his career.

    I'll be sending my resume down this week!
     
  2. Malloy

    Malloy Site Contributor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,684
    Likes Received:
    227
    Location:
    CPH
    Good read as usual, and on the whole I agree too.

    Thanks! :)
     
  3. prostock101

    prostock101 Mr. Big

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    35
    Nice post Coach. The only thing I disagree with is drafting an RB like Peterson. With Davis coming back, Dayne having a breakout year, and with Taylor or Lundy (I like Taylor better) it seems we have a decent core of RB's. And with so many other needs on this team like the OL and DL and secondary, it would seem a waste to get another RB. Any thoughts?
     
  4. powerfuldragon

    powerfuldragon g'mornin to you

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    17,141
    Likes Received:
    1,117
    Location:
    your lady's sexdreams.
    another one of coachdent's great reads. rep headed your way.
     
  5. coachdent

    coachdent Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Messages:
    443
    Likes Received:
    85
    Location:
    Media, PA
    I was going to mention DD, but I haven't heard what his status was. If he can go full tilt and be the explosive back he once was, then I'm ok addressing other needs in the secondary. But I was led to believe he was ok last year before the draft too. That obviously wasn't the case.

    The group of backs we have now are not gamebreakers or game changers. I keep Dayne because I think he earned it and is a very good option in short yardage. He is also a nice pounding, physical back. But he is not a feature back. The flashes from Taylor have been nice, but they are flashes. Tough to hitch your horse to that wagon and say ok. Lundy has not impressed me much and again is not a breaker.

    Sitting where we are in the draft, offensive line does not look like a viable pick unless you trade down. Joe Thomas will be gone in the top three or four picks. From there, only the tackles from Penn State is ranked near the top 10 draft picks overall. Then there is Blalock from Texas, but again he is projected to come in betwen the 20th or 25th pick.

    I think you use top ten picks to make immediate impacts and we need a game changer immediately. If Calvin Johnson is there, I would be happy. But I don't think Kubes would see the value in going with another dynamic receiver. He would say that AJ is fine and Moulds is a good compliment. I would say that we don't have enough wide receivers on the roster and need to get into more three and four receiver sets. Moulds as a number 3 would be sick. He is past being a viable #2. He is limited and not a burner.
     
  6. prostock101

    prostock101 Mr. Big

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    35
    DD states he's near 100% and wants to play next year. My concern is will his knee holdup and that's a big "if". I too like Dayne as a short yardage/relief guy. My other thought is Kubiak will try to get Mathis more in the mix as a receiver. Kub has stated he wants the KR and PR to do double duty. Mathis has the speed but not sure about his receiving abilities.
     
  7. HOU-TEX

    HOU-TEX Ah, Football!

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    16,245
    Likes Received:
    1,129
    Location:
    P-land
    Here is a quote from Kubiak that I think he should stick with. If DD/DW and Spencer are questionable come draft/FA, he should plan accordingly.

    http://www.houstontexans.com/news/detail.php?PRKey=3271&section=N Latest News
     
  8. TheOgre

    TheOgre Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    3,739
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Back in the cellar again

    I think you need to start calling him "DW" or come up with a new nickname.
     


  9. prostock101

    prostock101 Mr. Big

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    35
    "DW" it is............
     
  10. coachdent

    coachdent Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Messages:
    443
    Likes Received:
    85
    Location:
    Media, PA
    DD has been "near" 100% for sometime now.

    In terms of the Kubes' quote, I would tend to look at that as a backhanded admission of missing on Rggie Bush. Had it been clear that DD was not going to have a prayer at playing a down this year, I think Bush would have been a Texan. It is difficult to argue why he wouldn't have been one.

    Water under the bridge to be sure and I think Mario is going to have a fine career. But what it does tell me is that the selection of Adrian Peterson becomes that much more likely. Because banking on DD returning 100% does seem to be a crapshoot at best right now.
     
  11. prostock101

    prostock101 Mr. Big

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    35
    Taking Peterson wouldn't be a bad thing but do you think he'll still be on the board with the 8th pick?
     
  12. Homer

    Homer Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Round Rock
    If some teams do like we did last year....
     
  13. The Pencil Neck

    The Pencil Neck Subscribed Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2006
    Messages:
    21,499
    Likes Received:
    1,675
    Location:
    Moraira, Spain
    There's a lot of time between now and then. A lot of things could happen. AP could fall to us and we could decide not to take him because of something that shows up in a physical or during the combine. Stranger things have happened.

    That's why I'm hesitant to start saying who we should and shouldn't take this far away from April. Last year at this time, I wouldn't have believed that Demeco Ryans was going to fall out of the first 15 picks let alone to the 2nd round.
     
  14. eric138

    eric138 Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Messages:
    305
    Likes Received:
    18
    umm D dub or D dubyah
     
  15. coachdent

    coachdent Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Messages:
    443
    Likes Received:
    85
    Location:
    Media, PA

    Oakland - Quinn
    Detroit - Already have Jones (Joe Thomas?)
    Cleveland - Looking at major DLine needs. (Branch DT from Mich.?)
    Tampa - Have a Caddy (Adams from Clemson? or Calvin Johnson)
    Arizona - James..no way. Need CB help..Cason from Arizona
    Washington - RB not a need here either
    Minnesota - OL, QB and WR.

    I could definitely see him dropping to us. Nice too because he would not cost us as much if we were up there at 3 or 4.
     
  16. shansmacker

    shansmacker Rookie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    I love A.P.at 8 if he's there.I think he is a much better pro prospect than R.B.In fact i think he'll be the class of the dreft.
     
  17. edo783

    edo783 Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    7,716
    Likes Received:
    311
    Location:
    Houston, again.
    Peterson at 8 would be a huge value pick. Lynch at 8 would be about proper value for the spot IMO. Both would/could be playmakers on the offense.

    Coach, what do you think of Lynch at our spot?
     
  18. WillyP

    WillyP Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    3
    That doesn't seem like too much of a stretch, IMO. It's certainly possible that Peterson could slip to eight if Cleveland elects to draft for defense and stick with Reuben Droughns.

    Oakland has to take a QB. Detroit will probably draft Joe Thomas or a DE. Tampa Bay, Arizona, and Washington are all set at running back. Minnesota signed Chester Taylor last year and he excelled behind their behemoth offensive line.

    If he gets that far, he's there for the Texans to take.
     
  19. coachdent

    coachdent Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Messages:
    443
    Likes Received:
    85
    Location:
    Media, PA
    I like Lynch a lot. He would also be another great pick. Had he declared yet?

    Lynch is quicker than Peterson, but not as fast. Reminds me a bit of Tomlinson. In some ways, he may be a better pro than Peterson because of the durability issues.
     
  20. ArlingtonTexan

    ArlingtonTexan Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,163
    Likes Received:
    465

Share This Page