so you're saying we punted the ball because our run game failed...... correct??
Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍
Carr's Win
- Thread starter Texan1
- Start date
so you're saying we punted the ball because our run game failed...... correct??
texan279
Hall of Fame
No that's not what I am saying, I am saying our run game failed to get any yards on 1st down which put us into a 2nd and 10. If you're running game can't pick up positive yards on 1st downs it usually makes for a long day for an offense.
Our third possession, against Indy
How about this one?? We are moving the ball against Indy with the run game. We fumble the ball away.
Is this a failure of the run game, or the passing game??
Do you at least agree our run game is at least showing the ability to move the ball??
How about this one?? We are moving the ball against Indy with the run game. We fumble the ball away.
Is this a failure of the run game, or the passing game??
Do you at least agree our run game is at least showing the ability to move the ball??
So since our passing game can't manage 2nd & 10, it's a failure of the passing game??
chuckm
Veteran
TK,
Let me disclose right up front that I haven't read all of this thread (no applause please) but c'mon ..... what point are you trying to make?
That we've been able to move the ball on the ground? Huh? Are you arguing to get your Public Debate merit badge? For exercise?
C'mon man ...... our running game blows .....
HOU-TEX
Ah, Football!
That ain't no lie. 27th in the NFL. Woohoo! That's something to defend.
Team G Att Att/G Yds Avg Yds/G TDs FDs 20+
Houston 4 94 23.5 304 3.2 76.0 1 19 1
http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/stats/teamsort/NFL/OFF-RUSHING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=7
texan279
Hall of Fame
On that drive our pass game gained 13 yards in two plays while our run game gained 24 yards on 7 carries and then Lundy fumbled. So based on your way of thinking from previous posts, our pass game made 6.5 yards per play this drive while our run game made just over 3 yards per run. Either way Lundy fumbled the ball away. If this is the best drive you can pull up to defend our running game it just goes to show how bad our running game is when you post a drive where our back fumbled the ball away while trying to defend our run game.
Uh..... that's what I'm arguing. I know the stats look like our running game sucks, & I know the coach says our running game sucks, but I don't believe our running game sucked, when I rewatch Philly, Indy, & Washington, I don't see our running game sucking, & when I look at the play by play, I don't see our running game sucking.
When we tried to employ our running game, we'd get short gains, & big gains. We didn't always get a first down on 1st & 10, to think we should would be silly. But for some reason the only time we'd run the ball(even before we got way behind on the scoreboard) would be on first down. Those plays got stuffed, and brought down their avgs.... but when we tried to run, we ran.
If we got a problem with our run game, it's because of the playcalling, and the game planning.
I agree that RonDAyne isn't a burner. If thats the kinda running back you wanted, I can understand that.
But if we ever install the ZBS system here in Houston, he's going to be very productive. & that's all I care about. You've seen him in when he catches the ball in the open field, and when he makes it through the LOS, he is hell to bring down. He'll bowl people over, and pick up chunks of 8 yards or more (two runs in the 14-17 yard range has been called back so far because of Penalty). In the past, in limited duty, he's broken off 55 & 65 yard runs. He avg'd 5.1 yards as the third string RB in Denver last year. on 53 carries in 10 games.
I'm not a huge RonDayne fan(I actually hated him when he broke RickyWilliams' NCAA rushing record, and showed up fat in NewYork), & I don't know if he's our long term answer, or if he'll even be here in '07.
But to say he & Gado flat out sucks tells me someone isn't watching the games.
texan279
Hall of Fame
When Kubiak was offensive coordinator in Denver from 1995-2005, the Broncos plugged in an assortment of running backs behind a zone-blocking scheme with a high level of success. Now he's trying to do the same in Houston.
Lundy had extensive action with the first team this week.
"We ran a lot of the zone-blocking scheme at Virginia, so this feels comfortable," he says. "The biggest thing I've had to deal with here is the heat. You get soaked with sweat before practice even begins."
Davis has averaged 1,065 yards rushing in three seasons. But, he says, "Everything I've done before was without the way things are set up now. In this offense, you run with your vision. Make one cut and hit the hole. That's my style. I haven't felt this kind of excitement since high school."
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/texans/2006-08-08-davis-backs_x.htm
No, that's not what I'm doing.
but just for the heck of it, take Lundy's carries out, and Dayne avg'd 4 yards/carry. I'm just saying. It's neither here nor there, doesn't mean a thing.
4th possession
What happened on this drive?? why did we end up having to punt??
This is what is wrong with our running game. On the two 1st & 10s, we run the ball, we picked up some yards, good yards (wouldn't you agree), then we got the penalty, & the incomplete pass, and had to punt.
Every other unsuccessful drive we have from here on out, is the same. try to run on first, incomplet pass, incomplete pass, punt.
There are two more unsuccessful drives, that are pretty much the same.
In this game, Dayne, Gado, & Lundy ran for 98 yards on 20 carries. That's 4.9 yards a carry. Add David's 3 rushes, for 10 yards, and it goes down to 4.3 yards.
texan279
Hall of Fame
Yeah the three of them couldn't even break 100 yards against a defense that allows almost 200 yards a game on the ground. And is this another different drive you just posted? I can't even keep up anymore.
Yes, these are the drives that ended in punts, or loss of possession. 4.9 yards on 20 carries..... & you are upset they couldn't break 100 yards?? give them the ball a league respectable 24 times at least, and they would have gone for 120.
Do you understand how that works??
texan279
Hall of Fame
I don't have to go back to the post. I have seen the games. Our running game sucks, the majority here think it sucks, our coaches think it sucks, and the media thinks it sucks. I have seen Dayne and Gado miss holes that you could drive a truck through and I have seen them run straight into piles of defenders like they didn't see them. Our backs are horrible.
texan279
Hall of Fame
Do you understand against Philly our backs ran the ball 16 times and gained 45 yards, less than 3 yards per carry? Do you understand against Washington our backs carried the ball 15 times for 58 yards, or for 3.8 yards per carry? Do you understand against Miami our backs carried the ball 28 times for 67 yards, or for 2.4 yards per carry? They have one DECENT game against the NFL's 30th ranked run defense who allows 155 yards per game on the ground and you act as if our running game is perfectly fine?
Against Miami, yes. They missed cutback lanes, there weren't many if any holes. in Miami.
But if you click that link, you'll see the play by play for Washington (who has a top 10) run defense.
Looking at the numbers you are giving me, you don't see how they we are not giving the ball to the RBs...... & when we do, it's a bad situation, where he'd be lucky to get a yard.
texan279
Hall of Fame
I don't care about numbers and play by play breakdowns on paper, I have seen the games and our running backs suck.
AreUReady4sumFootball
Practice Squad
Ha i've seen that too, seems so helpless watching from the couch.
jerek
Pro Hobbyist
TKyss, I've never seen any one fight so hard to defend two players who have accomplished so little.
You cite long runs by Dayne that were called back for penalties -- did the penalty occur away from the play (i.e. where it is reasonable to believe that Dayne achieved the run in spite of, rather than aided by, the penalty)?
As one of David Carr's loudest supporters on this board, I understand that one player's performance in football can and does rely on playcalling and teammates performing their responsibilites. I understand why potentially, a lack of production from the running backs does not, in and of itself, mean they are lousy, and that we have to examine the video of the plays to critique their performance.
This is why these play-by-plays you cite aren't helpful.
In my review of tape (and I've watched every one to this point), I have seen both Dayne and Gado, far more often than not, (but especially Dayne) run straight into a pileup, completely oblivious to the hole that the O-line opened up. I've seen Dayne struggle to change direction even slightly or make even the most basic of NFL-caliber cuts in the backfield. While the O-line sometimes does miss an assignment, or a penalty occur, or the defense just make a great play, more often than not Dayne has looked like a middle-aged has-been who either can't see or just flat out lacks the speed and agility to get to the open lane.
That isn't to say he never gets into the next level or will never have a respectable carry for us; it's only to say that, for the most part, he's physically incapable of doing so.
I can't be any more specific without going over the tape, play by play, and I don't have time to do so on this board until perhaps this weekend, but geez, man, sometimes I don't understand how you watch these games and come up with this stuff.
You cite long runs by Dayne that were called back for penalties -- did the penalty occur away from the play (i.e. where it is reasonable to believe that Dayne achieved the run in spite of, rather than aided by, the penalty)?
As one of David Carr's loudest supporters on this board, I understand that one player's performance in football can and does rely on playcalling and teammates performing their responsibilites. I understand why potentially, a lack of production from the running backs does not, in and of itself, mean they are lousy, and that we have to examine the video of the plays to critique their performance.
This is why these play-by-plays you cite aren't helpful.
In my review of tape (and I've watched every one to this point), I have seen both Dayne and Gado, far more often than not, (but especially Dayne) run straight into a pileup, completely oblivious to the hole that the O-line opened up. I've seen Dayne struggle to change direction even slightly or make even the most basic of NFL-caliber cuts in the backfield. While the O-line sometimes does miss an assignment, or a penalty occur, or the defense just make a great play, more often than not Dayne has looked like a middle-aged has-been who either can't see or just flat out lacks the speed and agility to get to the open lane.
That isn't to say he never gets into the next level or will never have a respectable carry for us; it's only to say that, for the most part, he's physically incapable of doing so.
I can't be any more specific without going over the tape, play by play, and I don't have time to do so on this board until perhaps this weekend, but geez, man, sometimes I don't understand how you watch these games and come up with this stuff.
Again, those numbers do not tell the whole story.
For one thing, Philly we were starting WaliLundy........
Lundy had 4 runs for 8 yards in the first possession.
Vernand came in for the second possession, & had 2 carries for -4 yards.
3rd possession, there was only 1 run play.(2nd & 15) Wali Lundy for -1 yard.
4th possession Morency(your boy) gets 2 carries for 5 yards.
5th possession 7 snaps, only one run play.... lundy for -2.
Then we go into half time, down by 4. after the half, Philly scores, and we are down by 11.
6th possession. we run our first 2 running plays back to back. Pick up 5 yards & a 1st down. 3 plays later, Wali picks up a 1st with an 11 yard run on 2nd & 7. then there's an incomplete pass, then a sack, then a punt.
7th possession. pass, sack, incomplete, punt.
8th possession, 12:41 left in the 4th, down by 14. 10 snaps, only 2 runs. we picked up a 2nd&2 with a Lundy 7 yard run, and pick up 4 yards on a 1st&10.
In the second half of the philly game(which we started down by 11), we took 24 snaps, and ran the ball 5 times for 27 yards. 20% of our gameplan is running the ball when we are picking up 5.4 ypc??
1st half...... we couldn't run the ball. Second half...... we run the ball pretty well. but we don't want to.
In Washington, Dayne avg'd 4.1 ypc. In Indy, he avg'd 3.3 ypc. there was one play where he got stopped in the backfield, two no gains, and 2 play he only gained 2 yards. 25 carries, 5 for 2 yards or less. 80% of his runs are for plusses. after being here for only 2 weeks.
I don't know what happened in Miami, but one bad game out of 3 doesn't make him sorry, or mean that he sucks. I understand if he isn't your kind of runner, but you can't honestly say he hasn't produced in proportion to how we've used him. How can you say our running game sucks, when we aren't giving him the ball.
I understand we gave him the ball 22 times in Miami, but how hard would it be for me to find a game where YKW didn't perform well?? & if I were to produce such a game, what would that tell us??
Folks, if you'll just ignore TK for a couple of days, he'll change his mind and agree with the majority and go onto the next topic he can 'go against the grain' posting about--no one on this board 'loves' seeing their posts on the 'screen' more than TK!!
The question is not whether you can or he can ever agree with anything--instead, the question is can you keep from falling into his 'trap.' You see, the wall may indeed be painted green but-for TK-today it's what ever color keeps the thread going...
The question is not whether you can or he can ever agree with anything--instead, the question is can you keep from falling into his 'trap.' You see, the wall may indeed be painted green but-for TK-today it's what ever color keeps the thread going...
jerek
Pro Hobbyist
I guess given that the statistical arguments are somewhat of a push, we are just going to have to wait to see more games.
I look at Dayne, watch tape and see the way he runs, and see 4.1 as an aberration, not as proof of talent. You look at 3.x and see that the exception. Same as when I looked at David Carr and saw elite talent being squandered on Capersball and a horrible supporting cast, and you and others wanted us to draft Vince Young ... so I suppose we'll just have to wait and see, watch a few more games and re-evaluate at that time.
To be fair...... & hopefully get the last word.... I never questioned David's talent. It was his mental fortitude that I questioned/question. I've never seen any play as scared as he was last season(with good reason) bounce back, and act like it never happened.
Either the kids got some major gnads, or Kubiak is part TibetanBudhistMonkGuru
S
SESupergenius
Guest
I think that was a major problem too, but realisticly anyone would not trust the offensive line & protection this year. It will take him a while to shake these jitters, but he is slowly gaining confidence in his teammates, the system and his coach. I for one and happy with the progress and continue to hope that they all become a better unit as the year progresses. And $#@# the Cowboys, we are going to win!
texan279
Hall of Fame
Once again another great post.
Without a doubt, there are a lot of people that are watching tapes of each game--many are breaking the game down into 'microscopic' views of the 'exact' movement of each player...doing this are both coaches and fans. Of course, the teams have almost always done it in one form or another, while fans have started doing it with the 'advent' of new 'play toys' that make it economically possible to do..
IMO, the 'masses' don't have to run out and invest in these 'play toys' so they can keep up with the 'Jones.' Why? I mean, it's great if you juat want something to do but-if you're doing it to get a 'leg up' on everyone else on the 'absolutes' of people playing a game-IMO, you're in for a let down.
Over and over again on just this board, we hear stories of people 'disecting' the play of a particular player, and coming up with different (often vastly) opinions of the 'ins and outs' of that play. Almost on a daily basis, there are posts from the 'tape watchers' that question why they don't see the 'same' thing the team sees? For example, what's the 'deal' with Seth Wand? What's going on with the 'merry go-round' of our RB situation that still leads to so much 'speculation?'
I'm not trying to knock those trying to turn a 'human experience' into an 'exact science' it will never be because it is -afterall- not dealing with 'definitive absolutes' that give 1 answer. When 10 people look at the same play-for example-with their TiVos/Direct Tvs/PVRs,etc.-and have 10 different 'views' of that play, it leaves hope for those of us that just watch football because we like the game.
JMO, but I would be more 'thrilled' if-just once in awhile-Kubiak would 'throw us a bone' and tell us the 'whys' to some of our questions...why not bring Wand back,why not play Lundy,why not play Gado more,etc.etc.
IMO, the 'masses' don't have to run out and invest in these 'play toys' so they can keep up with the 'Jones.' Why? I mean, it's great if you juat want something to do but-if you're doing it to get a 'leg up' on everyone else on the 'absolutes' of people playing a game-IMO, you're in for a let down.
Over and over again on just this board, we hear stories of people 'disecting' the play of a particular player, and coming up with different (often vastly) opinions of the 'ins and outs' of that play. Almost on a daily basis, there are posts from the 'tape watchers' that question why they don't see the 'same' thing the team sees? For example, what's the 'deal' with Seth Wand? What's going on with the 'merry go-round' of our RB situation that still leads to so much 'speculation?'
I'm not trying to knock those trying to turn a 'human experience' into an 'exact science' it will never be because it is -afterall- not dealing with 'definitive absolutes' that give 1 answer. When 10 people look at the same play-for example-with their TiVos/Direct Tvs/PVRs,etc.-and have 10 different 'views' of that play, it leaves hope for those of us that just watch football because we like the game.
JMO, but I would be more 'thrilled' if-just once in awhile-Kubiak would 'throw us a bone' and tell us the 'whys' to some of our questions...why not bring Wand back,why not play Lundy,why not play Gado more,etc.etc.
texan279
Hall of Fame
Without a doubt, there are a lot of people that are watching tapes of each game--many are breaking the game down into 'microscopic' views of the 'exact' movement of each player...doing this are both coaches and fans. Of course, the teams have almost always done it in one form or another, while fans have started doing it with the 'advent' of new 'play toys' that make it economically possible to do..
IMO, the 'masses' don't have to run out and invest in these 'play toys' so they can keep up with the 'Jones.' Why? I mean, it's great if you juat want something to do but-if you're doing it to get a 'leg up' on everyone else on the 'absolutes' of people playing a game-IMO, you're in for a let down.
Over and over again on just this board, we hear stories of people 'disecting' the play of a particular player, and coming up with different (often vastly) opinions of the 'ins and outs' of that play. Almost on a daily basis, there are posts from the 'tape watchers' that question why they don't see the 'same' thing the team sees? For example, what's the 'deal' with Seth Wand? What's going on with the 'merry go-round' of our RB situation that still leads to so much 'speculation?'
I'm not trying to knock those trying to turn a 'human experience' into an 'exact science' it will never be because it is -afterall- not dealing with 'definitive absolutes' that give 1 answer. When 10 people look at the same play-for example-with their TiVos/Direct Tvs/PVRs,etc.-and have 10 different 'views' of that play, it leaves hope for those of us that just watch football because we like the game.
JMO, but I would be more 'thrilled' if-just once in awhile-Kubiak would 'throw us a bone' and tell us the 'whys' to some of our questions...why not bring Wand back,why not play Lundy,why not play Gato more,etc.etc.
I break down film, but I did not invest in any expensive toys, I just use my $49 Wal Mart VCR, and the only reason I do it is because I love the game, I like to watch certain players, and I basically do it for my own enjoyment.
I understand where you are coming from.......... I've been taping games for years, so I'll have something to do in the offseason. & it helps free up my Sundays, so I can do other things. I've only just started "studying" the tape this season, because I'm more interested in what is going on, and why. Before, all I cared about were wins & losses........ now, I want to understand why we are winning or loosing.
I hear you. But on this situation, I'm not denying anything Jerek has said about Daynes run style, or his take on Dayne's athleticism. Far as I can tell, he's spot on. But, the kind of back Jerek would like to have on this team, is not the only type of back that can be successful in the NFL. We don't have a WarrickDunn, or ClintonPortis on this team. I'm okay with that. JamalLewis, JeromeBettis, and EddiGeorge have been pretty good to the NFL, their respective teams, and the NFL fans.
Yes, RonDayne & SamkonGado have left yards on the field. Samkon more so than Dayne. But RonDayne was productive for us against Washington (4.1 yrds), but only tried to run on first downs in the second half. we ran for 98 yards against Indy, then the score killed the run game. In Philly, our first game, starting a rookie, our run game came together in the second half.
Good point again, but it doesn't fit this discussion. No one even wants to talk about any particular play. "We got 8 yards here, picked up the first down there, got good yards on that play" that's been my argument. "But the coach & the guys on ESPN says we can't run the ball" that's been theirs.
JMO, but I would be more 'thrilled' if-just once in awhile-Kubiak would 'throw us a bone' and tell us the 'whys' to some of our questions...why not bring Wand back,why not play Lundy,why not play Gado more,etc.etc.
Yeah, me too.
Try to explain to me how this reply relates to me saying
I understand what the ZBS will do for our team...... I'm wondering why we aren't running it, & haven't really ran it since the StLouis preseason game.
R
real
Guest
I can't speak on it for sure, and say yes they have or haven't been running ZBS...Because I stopped recording the games....and I'm not saying you don't already know this....But Zone blocking isn't just stretch right...or stretch left....You kinda have to know the play to know whether it's being 'zone blocked' or not...Just because the running back runs up the gut doesn't mean that the play isn't being zone blocked....Again not saying you didn't already know this, but if you didn't...just FYI....
I only have this to stay about studying tape. It is very difficult to do if you don't know the various schemes, line calls, reads, repsonsibilities, etc. I have seen plays that look very obvious about what was going on, and most people on this board thought so too. The problem was that when I talked to someone who really did know what was supposed to happen and what did happen in the play - we were wrong.
A recurring theme I've seen is the guy that we blame for something was really doing his job, but the guy next to him messed up. For instance I recall a time the running back looks like he gave up a sack because he went the wrong way, but in in reality the o-lineman picked up the wrong guy and the RB went that same direction, leaving somebody "run right by him". In this case the o-lineman was at fault, but everyone can tell by looking at tape that it was the RB's fault.
So lookng at the replays is fun, and most of the time it is very informative. However, there are other times where the obvious is incorrect. We can believe our eyes, but it's our interpretation that is suspect.
A recurring theme I've seen is the guy that we blame for something was really doing his job, but the guy next to him messed up. For instance I recall a time the running back looks like he gave up a sack because he went the wrong way, but in in reality the o-lineman picked up the wrong guy and the RB went that same direction, leaving somebody "run right by him". In this case the o-lineman was at fault, but everyone can tell by looking at tape that it was the RB's fault.
So lookng at the replays is fun, and most of the time it is very informative. However, there are other times where the obvious is incorrect. We can believe our eyes, but it's our interpretation that is suspect.
R
real
Guest
Something else I'd add to that.....A lot of people break down the OL and sometimes I just find it down right hilarious....IMO, OL is the second hardest position to learn behind QB...and some may disagree, but I don't care.....Blocking schemes are more complex than some people will ever know....
jerek
Pro Hobbyist
Most of our running still utilizes ZBS. Not that we are running it that well right now ... but that is the scheme.
I agree. For instance in the last game a sack came straight up the middle. Hodgdon seemed to engage the guy (I think it was the right tackle) and then turned to help double the left tackle. Pitts had turned the opposite way to double the right end.
Hodgdon was immediately jumped on in the game thread as being the culprit.
But.
We don't know how the game was schemed or what the particular line call was. Hodgdon seemed to think he was supposed to hit the guy and passs him to Pitts and then help Weary or McKinney (I don't remeber who was in). Pitts looked like he thought he was supposed to double the end.
Who made the wrong play, missed the line call, or misread the situation? The replay doesn't show that to us.
jerek
Pro Hobbyist
That is true and it makes evaluating the O-line difficult. It is often difficult to know who missed their assignment.
There are times when fault of the O-line is blatantly obvious but in many cases it's not.
jerek
Pro Hobbyist
Totally agree with that. In some ways I think it's more difficult than QB. And certainly, when you do your job well, the so called "skill positions" get all the credit, but when you screw up, everybody notices. It's an extremely demanding and totally thankless job and even though I dog our O-linemen at times I sincerely admire their enormous contribution to the Team.
May be true, and to go along with alot of the replies regarding the line, To me, it looks more like Man blocking with the occasional doubleteam, and not zoneBlocking...... maybe because they aren't doing a good job of it. Maybe it isn't a pure zoneblocking scheme, I don't know. But it doesn't look like Denver's style.
& for this discussion, it doesn't really matter. We aren't discussing the lines failing to produce lanes, or the RBs failure to reach the whole in time.
My main point/argument, is that our rushing stats look poor, not because of lack of production, which is true in the Miami game, and the first half of the Philly game, but not true against Washington, Indy, and the second half of the Philly game. But because of not going to the run game in the second half of the philly game, which would have kept McNasty off the field, not going to the running game in Washington, which would have kept Clinton Portis off the field, and not going to it in Indy(I can understand Indy, we got way behind too soon)
If Capers were running the show, we'd be talking about how predictable our offense is with all the run on first down stuff we are doing, and getting stuffed. Then passing on 2nd down. That's what we've been doing in the second half, trying to play catch up.
infantrycak
Hall of Fame
Slight edit--Pitts chucked the guy and then released him to the gap between himself and Hodg. Hodg then tried to engage him but didn't get squared up on him. I don't know what was said in the game thread--what I said in the sack thread was we would have to know the assignments to truly place blame but in their absence it looked like a deliberate decision by Pitts and I'd err in favor of the vet.
You and xroyaltx make good points but to a degree it kind of sounds like chuck your hands in the air. We can only judge what is available to us which basically the televised game. There are tons of things shown better on game tape and of course the schemes and calls are important. What y'all are pointing out IMO doesn't make the exercise useless but should be a cautionary tale on taking the analysis as graven in stone.
R
real
Guest
Of course not....I wasn't trying to imply that it was totally useless(may have came off that way)....In fact I appreciate your's and TKyss breakdown of the film....Just sayin that there are a lot of complexities to it and some make it seem as if they 'know' what the line is supposed to be doing, and on that I beg to difer....One play, can be blocked about ten different ways just depending on the front that the defense is in....thats all I'm sayin...
I think we're talking about the same play; maybe not. Didn't it look like Hodgdon released him on purpose rather than tried to engage him and missed? I need to look at it again.
As I said, reviewing tape is usually informative; I wasn't implying it was useless. Your take in the sack thread was basically the same as mine: we can try to assign our own probability to that play, but it isn't certain with the evidence we have.
infantrycak
Hall of Fame
Have to be talking about the same play if it is in the Miami game as there was only one sack involving Hodg at all I think--1st qtr 11:28.
Take another look at it but Pitts chucks the DT while Hodg is disengaged between the two OG--McKinney tied up with the other DT. Hodg looks like he starts looking over to contemplate helping McKinney when Pitts makes a decisive move left to help Salaam. The DT then makes a bee line past Hodg who barely gets an arm on him. Pitts clearly IMO thought Hodg was going to pick up the DT. Now whether that thought was incorrect only the coaches know.
That's the play. I guess I missed the initial Pitts chuck while watching the game live on TV.
You can see Hog clearly wasn't expecting dude to be there...... like you said, the question is should he have??