Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!
not a theory. merely an observation that we have had a 2nd rate coaching staff since Kubes got here and an unwillingness to bring in any top guys for top $$. Its not all Bob and Gary's fault that the staff has been below average but this move means they realize that we need better coaching and they are taking steps to address us (obviously I wasn't the only one who thought their coaching staff needed help...Gary, RS, and Bob felt the same way obviously...maybe i wasn't so crazy after all). they still need to upgrade other parts of their coaching staff (new DC anyone?)So much for Second Honeymoon's theory that they won't go after top guys.
I honestly doubt McNair had anything to do with this hiring or any other hiring/signing that has or will take place.not a theory. merely an observation that we have had a 2nd rate coaching staff since Kubes got here and an unwillingness to bring in any top guys for top $$. Its not all Bob and Gary's fault that the staff has been below average but this move means they realize that we need better coaching and they are taking steps to address us (obviously I wasn't the only one who thought their coaching staff needed help...Gary, RS, and Bob felt the same way obviously...maybe i wasn't so crazy after all). they still need to upgrade other parts of their coaching staff (new DC anyone?)
but hiring Gibbs goes a long way towards improving the overall caliber of the staff...
get us a new DC and let Kubes and Shanahan coordinate the offense, and we would have take big steps towards making our coaching staff respectable.
I think McNair is realizing that hiring top coaches is a tool that the more prosperous owners have access to. Hopefully he keeps it up and continues to upgrade what has been a pretty lackluster staff. Now they have proven they can hire, but can they fire? as in Fire Richard Smith. if they do and replace him with a qualified and skilled DC, we could be in for great things in 08.
i dont drink the koolaid and it still seems like my feelings are pretty much in line with the organization though it seems to take the franchise a little longer to get the picture. I just want more proactive moves and less reactive.
Nope you are 100% wrong.I honestly doubt McNair had anything to do with this hiring or any other hiring/signing that has or will take place.
But hey, believe what you want.
funny that seems to be a reoccouring theme.So much for Second Honeymoon's theory that they won't go after top guys.
Spec, I hope you're being sarcastic here.Nope you are 100% wrong.
McNair went to Kubiak and Smith and told them who to hire regardless if it was a good fit for the coaching staff. now luckily it is a good move for the staff butt without McNair telling Smith and kubiak who to hire we would have gone into next season without a coach.
Maybe Kubiak just finished eating a nice, juicy steakMatt at DGDB&D has a commenter who said he works at a restaurant where Kubiak, Gibbs and Smith met. Kubiak had a big smile on his face.
See, now this thread is nearly complete. YouTubes and blog gossip comments.
he may not have had a hand in choosing Gibbs or soliciting him to talk to us, but I would imagine at some point he had to give the move the 'green light'.I honestly doubt McNair had anything to do with this hiring or any other hiring/signing that has or will take place.
But hey, believe what you want.
Hellllooooooo--the assistant head coach/OC left to take another job. Gary, RS and Bob didn't do anything to initiate that.(obviously I wasn't the only one who thought their coaching staff needed help...Gary, RS, and Bob felt the same way obviously...maybe i wasn't so crazy after all).
I have to agree with that statement . At the begining of the season I dont think we expected the OL to play as well as they did . Pass protection was not stellar but wasnt as bad as in previous years (credit Schaub and Rosenfels or the OL ?) But I didnt see much if any progress in run blocking . (Credit the backs ? or the OL with this ?). In fact the numbers say they were worse .I know I'm in the minority but I thought for the first time in Texans history the team, including the offensive line was coached up & played as well as possible given the talent, injurys & experience levels.
Regarding Gibbs if thats who Kubiak wants & it helps improve continuity its a no brainer
but they didnt stay the course, promote from within or delegate. they went out and got some help. Kubes could have wanted to take over the playcalling duties. Who knows. Hiring Gibbs cancels losing Sherm out so we don't take any steps back in regards to coaching. Now if they can improve our defensive coordinator situation, we would be sitting really pretty.Hellllooooooo--the assistant head coach/OC left to take another job. Gary, RS and Bob didn't do anything to initiate that.
Coach Dent 11/27/06Rejoice all ye ZB offensive linemen ! Employment opportunities are coming to
Houston.
I think I can offer up some observations about the zone scheme. I coached for several year on the college level and currently use the zone run game in our system on the high school level in Delaware. We are the only team that blocks zone.
First of all, there are different factions of zone and different followers of concepts within the zone run game. The Texans violate some of my basic premises for zone. I am not alone in this thinking either.
Namely, the Texans do not run true zone. Zone coaches are split as to the use of the fullback, but most...and especially in the NFL... do not believe that you can truly run zone using a fullback. Why?
#1 - Zone is a concept where you are trying to get the defense to run. More specifically, you are trying to get linebackers to run. They overrun or underpersue a hole and the running back "punches it" into the hole. When you introduce the fullback, it no longer becomes a zone, it becomes an ISO play where the fullback leads up onto a linebacker at the Point Of Attack (POA). This declares where you are running the ball and destroys cutbacks and removes the mystery as to where you are hitting the hole.
#2 - The NFL produces extremely violent collisions. The result is, you don't see too many fullbacks surviving a full year in the NFL or being very effective. With the fullback at 3-4 yards and the linebacker at 3-4 yards, you are looking at two Mack trucks colliding at full speed. MOST times, the defense wins. With us not having a Mack truck and instead, a Suzuki Sidekick, you can imagine the collisions are definitely not to our liking. As a result, many teams in the NFL employ an H back or a tight end who moves along the line. Because he is at the line of scrimmage, he can get to the linebacker sooner and the collision is not as traumatic.
#3 - With the H back, you have the ability to create a double team at the point of attack, especially on the outside; which is what many people were expressing frustration over. Zone blocking is all about creating a double team at the POA. Over the seven years I have been coaching at the smallest school in the best conference in the state, we have had a grand total of 4 zone plays that have gone for negative yards. The problem with a fullback is that he is a single block for the linebacker, but it also creates a single block for the tight end or the tackle to the side he is going to. So now Daniels is singled up on a superior athletic defensive end and he can't handle it.
Watch a bunch of NFL games this weekend and watch when teams run the stretch play. The number one penalty called on that play is holding on the tight end or the tackle to the playside. It is a difficult block and when the tackle or tight end is singled up, you can basically write it down as a no gain play or a hold.
- - - - - - - -
The coaches who I deal with on the college and pro level believe in a three tiered zone concept scheme. That is, that you MUST run ALL THREE phases of the zone to be successful. The Texans do not. They run outside zone (which again, is not outside zone in my opinion with the FB). They also run what is referred to as Middle Zone that hits in between the guard and tackle. They do not run the inside zone. They actually tried to run a version of it for the first time all year on the play where Cook went left and the running back went right. The RB then cut it back to the left (inside zone is essentially a designed cutback play). Cook missed the block on the backside and the play went for nada.
The zone play creates the SAME look for the offensive line and running backs every week against every team. It is the entire offensive line working in unison along with the RB. They step the same way with what is called a weight adjustment step. When they take this step, and you stop the film, and the team runs all three phases of the zone...then you cannot tell if the ball is going to be stretch and go outside to the tackle area and bounce, or to the guard tackle area, or to the backside cutback. The linebackers MUST stay and slow read the play. This means the linemen can keep their shoulders square to the line of scrimmage and double team at the point of attack.
The object for the linemen is twofold. One create a wall of humanity and no runthrough lanes for the linebackers. The second is to take their double teams right into the laps of the linebackers. We call it, securing the first level and then going for gold on the second level. By running it the same way and threatening the entire front, the Raven linebackers will be in the same place as the Raider linebackers. If the linebackers get frisky and try to runthrough, they are always wrong and create a running lane for the back.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Those of you still with me.....
The problem with the Texan backs is that their zone steps are horrific. They do not take effective zone steps and they define the hole they are going to run to too quickly. Our backs are told to STAY ON TRACK for three steps. They are on railroad tracks, pushing thier aiming point. This sets up the blocks and secures the double teams. If the guard and center are doubleteaming up to the linebacker and the running back just starts turning his shoulders and running to the sidelines, then the linebacker will fly across and the guard will not be able to get up for the double team. This means the backer is unblocked. In the Texan scheme, this problem is further complicated by their "man concept" in the zone. Presnap, the Texan linemen are defining who they are going to block. What happens now, is the guard will not help the center and will immediately go up for the backer. When he does, he has made a number of mistakes. First, he has left the double team and the center has a nearly impossible block to make on the DT. The DT runs the line and kills cutbacks. Secondly, the guard has created a break in the line which encourages runthroughs by the backside linebacker who is taught to flow to the ball and, if he can, run underneath the blockers and behind the play and chase it down. Both of which happen all too frequently with the Texans.
- - - - - - - -
You do not need to have "small, quick linemen" to run zone. As a matter of fact, it works better when you have some beef upfront because you are moving the defensive line two and three yards forward and gaining positive yards. The smaller quicker linemen in Denver also called for the need for the backside cutblocks that so many defensive linemen scream about to the league. Oddly enough, I do not recall any linemen for the Texans cutting anyone on the backside ala Denver. I haven't necessarily been looking, but I haven't seen it. Done correctly, there is nothing cheap about it. But one of the reasons the Denver linemen did it is because they couldn't block the defender with their strength, so they would submarine them on the backside and cut their legs out. Generally this happens at the knee and sometimes (in Denver's case) it happens behind the knee. Some coaches actually refer to the technique as "break his knee". We refer to it as "driving your shoulder pad through his thigh board". But ultimately, it is the same concept.
By knocking down the backside, you create cutback lanes.
-- - - - - - - -
LASTLY!! And believe me, I could talk about zone all night long! And have at clincs!
There needs to be a CWM principle in place. This is "Check with Me". When my QBs go to the line, they are taught where we need to run the ball for each zone play. For instance, when we run middle zone, we run it to the 1 technique. This is the defensive linemen who is shaded to the inside shoulder of either guard. We run the ball to this technique because it creates a double team with the guard and center and it is an easy block right at the point of attack. We have NEVER lost yards on Middle zone!
The Texan PROBLEM with thier zone is that they do NOT use a CWM system. They espouse to the system of running zone to either side regardless of technique. This, in my opinion, is flat out wrong. Using the example above. If you run middle zone AWAY from the 1 technique, then that means you are running it TO a 3 technique. This means that the center is working with the other guard on a double team to the linebacker. But this NEVER happens because the guard will ALWAYS stay with the DT and the center will ALWAYS go to the linbebacker. Neither has help. You are running the football now to a side with two single blocks at the point of attack. Not zone in my book.
I think the Texans have moved away from the CWM principle during the season. Because they most certainly used it in preseason. I was extremely excited when I saw them against KC in the opening preseason game. Carr got them into the right run play and they ran the zone to perfection. Then as we got closer to and enventually into the season that went away.
Feel free to email me with any questions. Thanks for reading and hope this cleared up some questions folks were having!
__________________
The World IS a better place, now that Vonta Leach has permanently taken Jamel Cook's place!
Reply With Quote
I would love to get one of the Ryan twins. All four of those guys love to have th qb tasting the dirt. I was and still am hoping that they interview one of them. Great job on hiring Gibbs, I truly can't wait for next year.Now get one of the Ryan brothers, Gregg Williams, or Rivera and I would be blown away. That would be a top staff. With Marciano, it would be a very highly regarded staff across the top of the board.
in a word yes. Unless they are switching defenes again the only thing Smith needs is a little more umph from the tallent. Ain't got it. Go get it. Dansby would help. Cover corner would help. Better rush DE would help. I think he got the best the guys he had had to offer. Waiting for kubes to throw him under the bus like you said he would two weeks ago.but they didnt stay the course, promote from within or delegate. they went out and got some help. Kubes could have wanted to take over the playcalling duties. Who knows. Hiring Gibbs cancels losing Sherm out so we don't take any steps back in regards to coaching. Now if they can improve our defensive coordinator situation, we would be sitting really pretty.
icak, do you think having Richard Smith as our DC gives us our best chance at winning in 2008?
Compared to whom that we can realistically hire?icak, do you think having Richard Smith as our DC gives us our best chance at winning in 2008?
Oooh! Not yet! Only 244 days left!I'm Giddy in anticipation. Is it next year yet?
All I have done for years now is preach O-line. An Alex Gibbs hire would make me the happiest with the Texans that I have been since 19-10.
how many NFL teams have two solid CBs? very few, some don't even have one solid CB. that just doesnt hold water. if your DBs are having trouble covering their men, you have to be aggressive and force the QB to get rid of it before the DBs get worked over. The guy just isn't getting it done and there are guys out there that I feel we could get if we just do it and stop pussyfooting around. Does anyone think that Richard Smith is going to lead our defense to a championship level? Isn't that what you aim for? If he isn't that guy then get a guy who could be.Compared to whom that we can realistically hire?
Frankly I don't know about Smith. I think he doesn't believe he has the personnel to be as aggressive as he wants. If we had two solid CB's I think you would see a lot more aggressive defensive play calling. Signing a more athletic SLB like Karlos Dansby would also allow more aggressive play calling.
I am talking about solid in the sense that they are closer to being able to start for multiple teams in the league than they are to their couch. We had a rookie and a bunch of guys who are lucky to be playing.how many NFL teams have two solid CBs? very few, some don't even have one solid CB. that just doesnt hold water.
ok, i get what you are saying then. i just feel if your secondary is suspect, you have to take chances and disrupt the QBs rhythym. its a difference in philosophy and we know his way isn't working so why not try being aggressive?I am talking about solid in the sense that they are closer to being able to start for multiple teams in the league than they are to their couch. We had a rookie and a bunch of guys who are lucky to be playing.
Not only that, but running backs too.One of the things I like about this is that I think it's going to make some offensive linemen want to come here to play.
I'm so psyched.
I believe the Golphers of U Minnesota was running a version of ZBS during his days, but they also employed man at times.Interesting that we brought Eslinger in at the end of the season, a former Bronco C who has experience in the ZBS.
We will have the off-season to exchange ideas about this as well as many other subjects.I have to agree with that statement . At the begining of the season I dont think we expected the OL to play as well as they did . Pass protection was not stellar but wasnt as bad as in previous years (credit Schaub and Rosenfels or the OL ?) But I didnt see much if any progress in run blocking . (Credit the backs ? or the OL with this ?). In fact the numbers say they were worse .
They gave up a total of 22 sacks this season , A lot of that improvement I have to attribute to the guy's playing the QB position . They didnt sack themselves and in general got the ball out quickly (who woulda thunk it?!) Last season they had 43 sacks ..... thats almost a 50% reduction .
As for the running game . In 06 they had a total of 1,687 rushing yards . An avg of 3.9 per carry and 105.4 yards per game . In 07 1,586 rushing yards . An avg of 3.8 and 99.1 yards per game . (Blame it on the loss of Ahman Green if you like but he didnt produce any better than the other backs on the roster, just go check the game logs and compare his carries to those of Dayne and Co.)
Hiring Gibbs will be a good move , no doubt . But the fact is that this team lacks TALENT along the OL and until they get better here we will likely see the same results no matter who is coaching them . Talent is the one thing you cant teach .
One of quite a few references I've read today that I'd like to bookmark and come back to during the off-season.Pete, that was one hell of a post last page. I played TE and a little bit of H-back in a ZBS in HS for 4 years and I never got it explained like that. Yeah, we had clinics and film sessions, but to break it down like that is remarkable. We also called it "rail blocking". All of the linemen and TE would power step or rail block left or right depending on the call. We ran a CWM offense as well, and the call was made at the line.
For example, when we were running middle zone left, rail left...the line would step hard left with a DT usually lined up in the 1 technique as he said. We were actually told to widen our gaps to encourage a DT to shoot a particular hole. Anyways, the LG would rail block left into the RDT in the 1 technique. His objective was to turn the DT's shoulders and allow for the C to take over the double team as the RB was about to hit the hole while the LG would continue on his "rail" to the left, engaging with a LB attempting to either fill the hole or flow to the ball. If the block was made at the second level, it created an easy and obvious cutback lane for the RB. It was like an easy 12 yards. If the LB was able to shed the LG block before the RB passed, it was still a 5 yard gain. Sure, the play in theory failed, but it was still a 5 yard run on a "failed" play. That is the beauty of a true ZBS. I as well could talk about principles and assignments for hours.
My money is on Akili Smith or Todd Marinovich.Sooooooo........
Who coaches the QB's now?
PeteCoach Dent 11/27/06
Pete was quoting another poster. Unfortunately, Coach Dent has not been around the forum since April 2007. He might not have made the move to TexansTalk or perhaps did not realize the change-over.Pete, that was one hell of a post last page.
yes, me too, we neeeeeeeed a great O line coach, that would be sweeeeeeeeeet if we land himThat's interesting and I'd love for it to happen!
I have read his posts before, on those occasions I visited the main board.Pete was quoting another poster. Unfortunately, Coach Dent has not been around the forum since April 2007. He might not have made the move to TexansTalk or perhaps did not realize the change-over.