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

WK1: Colts at Texan Gameday & Discussion

maverick512000 said:
I don’t claim to be an expert on body language but the impression I got was more “Why are these idiots asking me stupid questions?” I’m sure some do wish they had gone for it, you’ll never find anything all 50+ guys agree on, but fact is it wasn’t their call and honestly with this team of rookies and career backups I’m not sure any of them are qualified to make the call.
Click to expand...
I still totally agree with the punt on fourth down. This was a coaching chess match on both teams to coach through momentum changes. Texans got the lead by scoring off of take-aways, taking advantage of the momentum swing. The Colts countered with the Mills sack and fumble. Those swings take on a life of their own because they become mental. The Texans were in two down mode on third and one but that two yard loss was just too much at that point in the game. The Texans stopped the Colts offensive momentum in OT which is what you want to see, but the Colts D did same. I don’t think you play five quarters to give it up in the end. If the Texans went for it on fourth down and got stuffed at that point on the field where is the moral victory? The decision to punt had a known outcome, to go for it didn’t and had the odds stacked against it. Yeah it sucks but I think Lovie can build on that tie this week by him taking that decision to punt on himself then stressing execution and finishing plays and not blowing assignments that ruin momentum. Perfect examples in this game for him to show why he stresses takeaways on D and not giving the ball up on O. IMO that is not old fashion football, it is good football and I for one (the only one?) am happy to see this team coached that way.
 
Toro Bravo said:
I agree with the decision to punt. The defense wasn't stopping the Colts and the offense couldn't get 3 yards for a first down (couldn't get 1 yard on third down), much less another 12 yards to get into field goal range. Lovie preaches situational football and the situation calls for a punt - not to lose. There are 15 teams starting the season with an L and we are not one of them.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Momentum, factoring in series leading up to situation, it was a veteran move. Absolutely no problem with his judgement.

Think problem is, after taking the big lead, Texans (Pep) got to conservative with his play calling. Lost momentum and seemed like they curled up in the fetal position. How to maintain their aggressiveness will be key to avoiding these situations.
 
leebigeztx said:
I wouldn't sign anyone until I was close. There are tons of fast playmaking lbs in the draft. They just need to stop with the rehashes and rebuild with young players. The Lions found a lb in the 5th rd and is starting knocking heads off. He's smallish, but a hawk.
Click to expand...
It's not like the Texans are focusing on the rehashes. They're doing both. They're leaving no rock unturned. Kirksey & KGH are the bar, low... sure, but that's the bar. They drafted Wallow & Harris (a 5th & a 3rd). They've brought in guys like Cashman & Jake Hansen.

It's not this way, or that. They're doing both.
 
beerlover said:
Think problem is, after taking the big lead, Texans (Pep) got to conservative with his play calling.
Click to expand...
Initially I thought the same thing.

But... did the offense ever really play well? The defense was giving us gift after gift & we cashed them in, but the offense was off, the whole game & especially in the 2nd half when the Colts settled down & got their heads out
 
Speedy said:
I heard the player interviews and yeah, they said they agreed, but the body language I took from several players didn't vibe with what was coming out of their mouths. To me some of those players seemed to feel like it was a loss. And what else are they going to say? Call coach out and your snaps decrease next week.
Click to expand...
maverick512000 said:
I don’t claim to be an expert on body language but the impression I got was more “Why are these idiots asking me stupid questions?” I’m sure some do wish they had gone for it, you’ll never find anything all 50+ guys agree on, but fact is it wasn’t their call and honestly with this team of rookies and career backups I’m not sure any of them are qualified to make the call.
Click to expand...
I would love to hear Lovies locker room talk after that game. His explanation to the players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB
thunderkyss said:
I've never ascribed to the "everybody gets a ribbon" mentallity.

They had 4 qtrs plus to instill confidence in their coach & they didn't. He told them what he thought of them & we'll see how they respond.
Click to expand...

And yet it still only takes one play from that same team who built a 20-3 lead, to go try and win the game.
 
The main problem was coaching thinking they can milk the clock with Burkhead. The Colts was stacking the box and we still tried to force feed both running backs in the second half. They completely went away from the things that got them the lead. The dink and donk game was working. I recall one play that hurt us as well. They were killing the Colts with the short game and then on third and three. They decided to take a shot down the fields to Cooks down the sidelines. He was blanketed and Mills threw a terrible ball. Terrible play call by Pep.
 
TheRealJoker said:
You would expect your coaching staff not to make a call that would be called a “stupid move”. Running Burkhead right at Buckner/Stewart on 3rd and 1 was right up there with Wattfork and the Chris Brown pass on dumbest play calls in team history imo.
Click to expand...

It is my opinion that if Burkhead just makes it back to the LOS on that 3rd & 1 call, Lovie probably goes ahead with going for it there. The thing that changed his tune was the fact that the 3d & 1 call lost 2 additional yards, making the conversion infinitely more tougher.

So while i can see where you're coming from a little bit with disliking that particular call, a, it was a 3rd & 1....b, that call was 1 of very few that presented less risk of something much worse happening. To me it didn't matter that Burkhead was the guy that got the call there either, the penetration was so quick, NOONE who got the ball would've had a shot. The right side of the line is open for the back to bounce it...but look at the stills here. Burkhead has just barely gotten the ball & only has time for a jump cut to his right try to make it around to that right side.....but Buckner's already back there in his face. I show all this to show that it wasn't necessarily a bad call, just bad execution...particularly by Britt who got swam over by Buckner too damn fast...

1663083048147.png 1663083196424.png

What this comes down to is whether you believe there was a better call to be made..& its my opinion that i don't think so........ given how the game was going for the offense at that point.

Earlier in the game we'd gone with Driskel on some zone reads that we wound up converting a few 3rd and shorts to extend drives...Indy likely would've been ready for that if we'd gone to it a 3rd time....dropping back or taking a snap out of shotgun for a short pass also wouldn't have been a much better option imo...If Mills gets sacked, throws a pick or worse, that certainly wouldn't have been ideal...

the only call that i believe Pep could've made that would've been better than the Burkhead call was a qb sneak...b/c at a minimum Mills would've at least gotten back to the LOS & its now 4th & 1 instead of 4th & 3.
 
Last edited:
Texansballer74 said:
The main problem was coaching thinking they can milk the clock with Burkhead. The Colts was stacking the box and we still tried to force feed both running backs in the second half. They completely went away from the things that got them the lead. The dink and donk game was working. I recall one play that hurt us as well. They were killing the Colts with the short game and then on third and three. They decided to take a shot down the fields to Cooks down the sidelines. He was blanketed and Mills threw a terrible ball. Terrible play call by Pep.
Click to expand...

OK, so, on that play, there were five receivers running routes. It was Mills' decision to throw to Cooks, who had one on one coverage and he threw it out of bounds because Cooks wasn't open. Looking at the coach's tape, it doesn't look like anyone was really open. The best option would have probably been to throw to OJ Howard who was sitting down at around the line to gain, but he had a couple of Colts close to him and it would have been a tight throw. I'm not sure who to blame: Pepe for the play call, Pep for the play design, or Mills for the decision.

That was 3rd and 3.

And then it was 4th and 3 and we took a delay of game.

To me, THAT was the mistake. You're up 20-3 with 14:56 to go in the game and you're at the 36 yard line. Why not have Fairbairn kick a FG there? Yeah, it's a long FG and if he misses it, you give them good field position, but if he hits, you're up by 20.

This is the defensive mind-set that we've got to expect from Lovie. He's going to try to play field position and minimizing risks. It's who he is.
 
Texansballer74 said:
The main problem was coaching thinking they can milk the clock with Burkhead. The Colts was stacking the box and we still tried to force feed both running backs in the second half. They completely went away from the things that got them the lead. The dink and donk game was working. I recall one play that hurt us as well. They were killing the Colts with the short game and then on third and three. They decided to take a shot down the fields to Cooks down the sidelines. He was blanketed and Mills threw a terrible ball. Terrible play call by Pep.
Click to expand...

Burkhead is immaterial. If it had been Pierce who have gotten the ball late, it would've been the same result. That old school super conservative mentality of shutting the offense down & trying to milk the clock is what lost this game.
 
Mr teX said:
It is my opinion that if Burkhead just makes it back to the LOS on that 3rd & 1 call, Lovie probably goes ahead with going for it there. The thing that changed his tune was the fact that the 3d & 1 call lost 2 additional yards, making the conversion infinitely more tougher.

So while i can see where you're coming from a little bit with disliking that particular call, a, it was a 3rd & 1....b, that call was 1 of very few that presented less risk of something much worse happening. To me it didn't matter that Burkhead was the guy that got the call there either, the penetration was so quick, NOONE who got the ball would've had a shot. The right side of the line is open for the back to bounce it...but look at the stills here. Burkhead has just barely gotten the ball & only has time for a jump cut to his right try to make it around to that right side.....but Buckner's already back there in his face. I show all this to show that it wasn't necessarily a bad call, just bad execution...particularly by Britt who got swam over by Buckner too damn fast...

View attachment 10649 View attachment 10650

What this comes down to is whether you believe there was a better call to be made..& its my opinion that i don't think so........ given how the game was going for the offense at that point.

Earlier in the game we'd gone with Driskel on some zone reads that we wound up converting a few 3rd and shorts to extend drives...Indy likely would've been ready for that if we'd gone to it a 3rd time....dropping back or taking a snap out of shotgun for a short pass also wouldn't have been a much better option imo...If Mills gets sacked, throws a pick or worse, that certainly wouldn't have been ideal...

the only call that i believe Pep could've made that would've been better than the Burkhead call was a qb sneak...b/c at a minimum Mills would've at least gotten back to the LOS & its now 4th & 1 instead of 4th & 3.
Click to expand...
Since it had already worked twice I would have liked to have seen Driskell in the game in that situation. If you wanted to fool the Colts run a RPO and let Driskell throw the ball if it's there and you can't run for a 1st down. If it's not there throw the ball away.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
OK, so, on that play, there were five receivers running routes. It was Mills' decision to throw to Cooks, who had one on one coverage and he threw it out of bounds because Cooks wasn't open. Looking at the coach's tape, it doesn't look like anyone was really open. The best option would have probably been to throw to OJ Howard who was sitting down at around the line to gain, but he had a couple of Colts close to him and it would have been a tight throw. I'm not sure who to blame: Pepe for the play call, Pep for the play design, or Mills for the decision.

That was 3rd and 3.

And then it was 4th and 3 and we took a delay of game.

To me, THAT was the mistake. You're up 20-3 with 14:56 to go in the game and you're at the 36 yard line. Why not have Fairbairn kick a FG there? Yeah, it's a long FG and if he misses it, you give them good field position, but if he hits, you're up by 20.

This is the defensive mind-set that we've got to expect from Lovie. He's going to try to play field position and minimizing risks. It's who he is.
Click to expand...
You got coaches tape? I used to watch the all 22, but they discontinued it
 
steelbtexan said:
Since it had already worked twice I would have liked to have seen Driskell in the game in that situation. If you wanted to fool the Colts run a RPO and let Driskell throw the ball if it's there and you can't run for a 1st down. If it's not there throw the ball away.
Click to expand...

Thats the hindsight talking. You got people in here now upset that Burkhead got that 3rd and 1 call instead of Pierce. could you imagine the fall out here if in the biggest point of the game Driskell screws that up and throws a pick and/or takes a bad sack? Aside from that, getting too cute in a short yardage situation is 1 of a few things that cost the Colts earlier in that game when they tried to zone read with Hynes & Taylor at the goal line.

how many passes in the regular season has Driskel even thrown lol
 
Last edited:
Mr teX said:
Thats the hindsight talking. You got people in here now upset that Burkhead got that 3rd and 1 call instead of Pierce. could you imagine the fall out here if in the biggest point of the game Driskell screws that up and throws a pick and/or takes a bad sack? Aside from that, getting too cute in a short yardage situation is 1 of a few things that cost the Colts earlier in that game when they tried to zone read with Hynes & Taylor at the goal line.

how many passes in the regular season has Driskel even thrown lol
Click to expand...
We’re going to always play the hindsight is 50/50 thingy. That’s what we fans do. On the flip side what if they put him in and we got the first down. We’re be on here praising them for a gutsy call, especially if it led to a game winning FG.
 
Texansballer74 said:
We’re going to always play the hindsight is 50/50 thingy. That’s what we fans do. On the flip side what if they put him in and we got the first down. We’re be on here praising them for a gutsy call, especially if it led to a game winning FG.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, i just don't think putting the ball in the hands of your back up in the most important part of the game would've been the move.
 
Mr teX said:
Thats the hindsight talking. You got people in here now upset that Burkhead got that 3rd and 1 call instead of Pierce. could you imagine the fall out here if in the biggest point of the game Driskell screws that up and throws a pick and/or takes a bad sack? Aside from that, getting too cute in a short yardage situation is 1 of a few things that cost the Colts earlier in that game when they tried to zone read with Hynes & Taylor at the goal line.

how many passes in the regular season has Driskel even thrown lol
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, often times I am, but they’re keeping Driscoll on this roster as emergency QB (3rd) and wildcat option. Being a little creative, switch Mills out before other team can adjust (least make them call timeout) Driscoll looks for open lane, if not pitches it out to Pierce (not risk taking, yet, on 4th down) talking about 3rd down instead of going Burkhead.
 
Mr teX said:
Thats the hindsight talking. You got people in here now upset that Burkhead got that 3rd and 1 call instead of Pierce. could you imagine the fall out here if in the biggest point of the game Driskell screws that up and throws a pick and/or takes a bad sack? Aside from that, getting too cute in a short yardage situation is 1 of a few things that cost the Colts earlier in that game when they tried to zone read with Hynes & Taylor at the goal line.

how many passes in the regular season has Driskel even thrown lol
Click to expand...
Then why even have Driskell on the roster and for the record I wondered why they weren't doing this at the time. Of course I don't really care what others think. A sack wouldn't have hurt them at all. It's the same as Burkhead losing 2 yds on 3rd and 1.
 
beerlover said:
I could be wrong, often times I am, but they’re keeping Driscoll on this roster as emergency QB (3rd) and wildcat option. Being a little creative, switch Mills out before other team can adjust (least make them call timeout) Driscoll looks for open lane, if not pitches it out to Pierce (not risk taking, yet, on 4th down) talking about 3rd down instead of going Burkhead.
Click to expand...

There's obviously alot of plays that maybe could've worked............. i just don't think many here are really taking into account the flow of the game up to that point....The Texans were for all intents and purposes REELING offensively and defensively; Hell the play before the 3rd & 1, Mills running for his life appeared to just heave 1 up for grabs that Moore luckily plucked out of the air for him. They couldn't protect him & that 3rd & 1 call was very much reflective of that. Maybe if they'd have been playing a bit better on either side of the ball you take a little bit more of a chance with a little riskier playcall, but imo....in that situation with how the game was utterly collapsing at the feet of the Texans, i just don't think you try to get cute there.
 
Mr teX said:
the only call that i believe Pep could've made that would've been better than the Burkhead call was a qb sneak...b/c at a minimum Mills would've at least gotten back to the LOS & its now 4th & 1 instead of 4th & 3.
Click to expand...
I agree with all you said, but my issue with the call was Burkhead to the right side. The call should have been to the left behind Green... probably moot point though since Britt got beat so bad
 
I support Lovie's decision to punt in Ot. The colts were 10-15 yards away from field goal range with 25 seconds left and 2 time outs (or 1 ?)

The offense became a dumpster fire in the previous handful of possessions, and the defense proved the same. They were gassed.

You know what's more deflating then not going for it on 4th down with an inept offense? A loss in the home opener in overtime after a 17 point lead. We didn't lose. We tied.

If you want to be critical of anything, note the change in defense around the 8-9 minute possession in the 4q. They started playing a soft zone to work the clock. That was the losers mentality. They needed more points or another possession before doing that.

All in all, most of the folks here criticizing the punt are weekend warriors with nothing to lose. Football is not your career. Your an accountant or an uber driver. The choice you should critique was well before ot.

Lovie preserved the non loss as he should have in ot.

It's gonna be a long season.
 
Last edited:
Mr teX said:
There's obviously alot of plays that maybe could've worked............. i just don't think many here are really taking into account the flow of the game up to that point....The Texans were for all intents and purposes REELING offensively and defensively; Hell the play before the 3rd & 1, Mills running for his life appeared to just heave 1 up for grabs that Moore luckily plucked out of the air for him. They couldn't protect him & that 3rd & 1 call was very much reflective of that. Maybe if they'd have been playing a bit better on either side of the ball you take a little bit more of a chance with a little riskier playcall, but imo....in that situation with how the game was utterly collapsing at the feet of the Texans, i just don't think you try to get cute there.
Click to expand...
Agreed, they were falling apart and that has to be taken into consideration. I just don't understand why they didn't go to a play that had already worked twice before. Or better yet let Mills run the RPO once in that situation if you really wanted to fool them.

Bottom line is the coaching late in games has to get better.
 
steelbtexan said:
Then why even have Driskell on the roster and for the record I wondered why they weren't doing this at the time. Of course I don't really care what others think. A sack wouldn't have hurt them at all. It's the same as Burkhead losing 2 yds on 3rd and 1.
Click to expand...

Lol, Steve Kerr might've been the better 3 pt shooter, but in crunch time, you not giving him the final 3 pt shot to win it, you giving it to MJ. A sack in that scenario is even more disasterous. At least in the scenario that played out there's at least the thought of possibly going for it, a sack to make it 4th & 5 or more, there's no question you punt it.
 
Mr teX said:
Lol, Steve Kerr might've been the better 3 pt shooter, but in crunch time, you not giving him the final 3 pt shot to win it, you giving it to MJ. A sack in that scenario is even more disasterous. At least in the scenario that played out there's at least the thought of possibly going for it, a sack to make it 4th & 5 or more, there's no question you punt it.
Click to expand...
Funny that you bring up Kerr, you realize that Kerr hit a shot that won the Bulls a championship off of a pass from MJ?

What difference does 4th&3 or 4th& 5 make?
 
steelbtexan said:
Agreed, they were falling apart and that has to be taken into consideration. I just don't understand why they didn't go to a play that had already worked twice before. Or better yet let Mills run the RPO once in that situation if you really wanted to fool them.

Bottom line is the coaching late in games has to get better.
Click to expand...

That RPO play we ran earlier with Driskel was a set up play. We'd ran it twice and gotten away with it......barely. I have to believe that if Indy see's that formation again, they are absolutely ready for it...whatever happens. That then puts the onus on Driskel........... a career back up to make the correct decision with his read. If he doesn't do that, that RPO is likely a disaster...even moreso than the Burkhead call...b/c at least Burkhead's been playing. Driskel, you just don't know what you'd get from him in that situation.
 
steelbtexan said:
Funny that you bring up Kerr, you realize that Kerr hit a shot that won the Bulls a championship off of a pass from MJ?

What difference does 4th&3 or 4th& 5 make?
Click to expand...


It was MJ’s preference to defer to him tho..jackson didnt call the play for Kerr..big difference. What youre saying is youd have called that play for kerr when you talk about putting Driskel in that situation.

what was the difference in 4th and 1 and 4th and 3? It was obviously huge for us & enough to sway Lovie.
 
Mr teX said:
That RPO play we ran earlier with Driskel was a set up play. We'd ran it twice and gotten away with it......barely. I have to believe that if Indy see's that formation again, they are absolutely ready for it...whatever happens. That then puts the onus on Driskel........... a career back up to make the correct decision with his read. If he doesn't do that, that RPO is likely a disaster...even moreso than the Burkhead call...b/c at least Burkhead's been playing. Driskel, you just don't know what you'd get from him in that situation.
Click to expand...
I prefer to use plays that have worked before. Otherwise there's no reason to have Driskell on the roster. So you have a choice, run Burkhead off right guard or run Driskell on a play that has already worked twice. We're going to have to agree to disagree. Do you agree that they're going to have to get better in late game situations? They got in trouble with play calling on both sides of the ball long before the 3rd and 1 call.
 
Mr teX said:
It was MJ’s preference to defer to him tho..jackson didnt call the play for Kerr..big difference. What youre saying is youd have called that play for kerr when you talk about putting Driskel in that situation.

what was the difference in 4th and 1 and 4th and 3? It was obviously huge for us & enough to sway Lovie.
Click to expand...
It's about calling the right plays and sometimes stars have to defer to others in order to win championships.
 
steelbtexan said:
So you have a choice, run Burkhead off right guard or run Driskell on a play that has already worked twice.
Click to expand...
Why did they have to run Burkhead off right guard? Why did they have McCray in there whiffing on whoever he was supposed to block? Why wasn't Hairston in there? You have a FB to help with the tough yards, you drafted a dominant run blocking LG in the first round to get those tough yards. Pep started the game calling a masterful game, but in the second half he went full conservative dumba$$
 
steelbtexan said:
I prefer to use plays that have worked before. Otherwise there's no reason to have Driskell on the roster. So you have a choice, run Burkhead off right guard or run Driskell on a play that has already worked twice. We're going to have to agree to disagree. Do you agree that they're going to have to get better in late game situations? They got in trouble with play calling on both sides of the ball long before the 3rd and 1 call.
Click to expand...

given how the game was going, it was highly probable that play we ran earlier that worked, was not going to at that point.

the bottom part of your post i agree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB
powda said:
I support Lovie's decision to punt in Ot. The colts were 10-15 yards away from field goal range with 25 seconds left and 2 time outs (or 1 ?)

The offense became a dumpster fire in the previous handful of possessions, and the defense proved the same. They were gassed.

You know what's more deflating then not going for it on 4th down with an inept offense? A loss in the home opener in overtime after a 17 point lead. We didn't lose. We tied.

If you want to be critical of anything, note the change in defense around the 8-9 minute possession in the 4q. They started playing a soft zone to work the clock. That was the losers mentality. They needed more points or another possession before doing that.

All in all, most of the folks here criticizing the punt are weekend warriors with nothing to lose. Football is not your career. Your an accountant or an uber driver. The choice you should critique was well before ot.

Lovie preserved the non loss as he should have in ot.

It's gonna be a long season.
Click to expand...
More or less I agree. But I don't know if "I support Lovie's decision..." is the right way to say it.

I agree, as well, with the guys who are upset. It's gutless. But I don't think he should be making bad decisions because the "good decision" is gutless.

I hope beyond anything that the OL, especially Britt takes this for what it is. "Our coach don't believe in us. We need to step it up."


Show up, show out.
 
JB said:
And if they would only been stuffed for no gain on 3rd down, I think he may have gone for it. But the two yard loss on top of the terrible play call made the decision for him
Click to expand...

That’s also on him for not having the right personnel on the field. Not a great debut as the Texans head man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB
steelbtexan said:
Since it had already worked twice I would have liked to have seen Driskell in the game in that situation. If you wanted to fool the Colts run a RPO and let Driskell throw the ball if it's there and you can't run for a 1st down. If it's not there throw the ball away.
Click to expand...
I like that we have special plays and situations for Driskell. He was the king of the 4th quarter in preseason.
 
powda said:
I support Lovie's decision to punt in Ot. The colts were 10-15 yards away from field goal range with 25 seconds left and 2 time outs (or 1 ?)

The offense became a dumpster fire in the previous handful of possessions, and the defense proved the same. They were gassed.

You know what's more deflating then not going for it on 4th down with an inept offense? A loss in the home opener in overtime after a 17 point lead. We didn't lose. We tied.

If you want to be critical of anything, note the change in defense around the 8-9 minute possession in the 4q. They started playing a soft zone to work the clock. That was the losers mentality. They needed more points or another possession before doing that.

All in all, most of the folks here criticizing the punt are weekend warriors with nothing to lose. Football is not your career. Your an accountant or an uber driver. The choice you should critique was well before ot.

Lovie preserved the non loss as he should have in ot.

It's gonna be a long season.
Click to expand...
I caught Michael Irvin on 610 today and he made similar comments to your post. He said that coming from Miami where they lost 3 games in 3 years to his first two years with the Cowboys when they went 3-13 and 1-15, he understands what the Texans' locker room has gone through the last couple of years. You get close and you lose. You vow that the next time you will be in that situation, you will win and you have that situation and you lose. Fans are saying you suck. You hate going to the grocery store. After losing so much, you start expecting to lose and you can't wait for games to be over. The constant losing affects the locker room and your attitude.

From that perspective, he agreed with Lovie's decision. He said everyone outside that locker room expected the Texans to lose and they had a 17 point lead on the Colts. Why after they played so hard and did so many good things, take a chance to lose and still end up with another loss? So, in his opinion, Lovie did that for the locker room. They didn't lose their home opener. They can take the things that got them that 17 point lead and build on it.

So, you are correct. Lovie preserved that non-loss for his players. Watching game film of a tie is way better than watching film of a loss. Now that I have quoted Michael Irvin and agreed with a Dallas Cowboy, I have to go take a shower.
 
Last edited:
Quick overview of the game stats.

Offense
Passing | 23/37 240 yards 62% | 2 TDs | 0 Int | Passer Rating 98.9 | Sacks: 3 - 18 yards
Rushing | 28 attempts | 77 yards | 2.8 YPA
Total Plays 68 | Third Downs: 5/15 33% | Avg Yards Per Play: 4.4 | Total Net Yards: 299

Defense:
Sacks: 2 - 12 yards | Int: 1 | Fumbles: 1 | TFL: 6 | Avg Yards Allowed Per Play: 5.7 | Total Yards Allowed: 517

Penalties: 6 - 40 yards
 
Earl34 said:
I caught Michael Irvin on 610 today and he made similar comments to your post. He said that coming from Miami where they lost 3 games in 3 years to his first two years with the Cowboys when they went 3-13 and 1-15, he understands what the Texans' locker room has gone through the last couple of years. You get close and you lose. You vow that the next time you will be in that situation, you will win and you have that situation and you lose. Fans are saying you suck. You hate going to the grocery store. After losing so much, you start expecting to lose and you can't wait for games to be over. The constant losing affects the locker room and your attitude.

From that perspective, he agreed with Lovie's decision. He said everyone outside that locker room expected the Texans to lose and they had a 17 point lead on the Colts. Why after they played so hard and did so many good things, take a chance to lose and still end up with another lose? So, in his opinion, Lovie did that for the locker room. They didn't lose their home opener. They can take the things that got them that 17 point lead and build on it.

So, you are correct. Lovie preserved that non-loss for his players. Watching game film of a tie is way better than watching film of a loss. Now that I have quoted Michael Irvin and agreed with a Dallas Cowboy, I have to go take a shower.
Click to expand...

Seems to be a lot of emphasis on "lose" and not much on "win". Everyone expecting us to "lose". We punted so we wouldn't "lose".

There was still an opportunity to "win" and they chose not to take it. If the score is 21-20 Indy, they're certainly going for it, and they might still "lose". But because of that "tie" safety net where they be assured not to "lose", they essentially give up on trying to "win". I don't think that's the message I want permeating the locker room.

Lovie seems to have more confidence in a kicker who just got cut winning it for the Colts, than he did for his own team to make a play on 4th and 3 at midfield with 26 seconds left, or his defense making 1 play, getting a TO, something. Hell, the Colts could have had a bad center exchange like they already had done twice before.

Don't squander opportunities and settle for shit. You play to "win" the game.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top