Wish to make a one time donation? Make it here.

State of the O-line

Texansballer74

Hall of Fame
Why don't you explain to all of us what the "entire darn picture" is then "joker"? Since you are so much more enlightened than everyone else.

While your at it, explain how a ranking that takes into account literally every play from scrimmage the entire season, is "cherry picking"? I suspect you don't even know what phrase "cherry picking" even means.

Come back with something tangible to support your point. Nobody cares about your eye test, homer.
Already have jive turkey lol.
 

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
This is another example of you taking something out of context.I hate to break it to you, but every team from college to the NFL are running weekly game plan offenses.

It‘s how you teach, implement and adjust the weekly game plan based on the opponent and the talent at your disposal that separates great coaches from mediocre.
Some can learn what's taught them better than others.
 

Corrosion

Idealist
Staff member
Seeing that Shorts played in O'Brien's offense, had 42 catches and 482 yards. He is closer to knowing about O'Brien's offense than any poster on an internet forum. Also, Shorts has always complimented O'Brien. He says O'Brien coaching staff will get you prepared.

Isn't that contradictory to the current discussion ?

Or does it just reinforce what I said in another thread that no one really tells it how it is.
They don't talk negatively about ..... its like reading a fluff piece no matter who said it or who its about.
No one's willing to say "That guy sucks".
 

Earl34

Veteran
Isn't that contradictory to the current discussion ?

Or does it just reinforce what I said in another thread that no one really tells it how it is.
They don't talk negatively about ..... its like reading a fluff piece no matter who said it or who its about.
No one's willing to say "That guy sucks".
I see your point. I didn’t add enough context around that statement.

Shorts said O’Brien is a smart guy and they prepare sometimes to the point that it’s information overload for younger players. Considering we see young players constantly in the doghouse or not getting playing time, I would say there is some truth to the statement.
 

otisbean

Veteran
Contributor's Club
I see your train of thought. However, it is much more difficult to consistently and effectively plan a counter punch from week to week if the QB's tendency is to run off script just as consistently.
That definitely plays a part in some of our issues, but it’s also won us a few games as well. I think the Buffalo game is a perfect example. Honestly, I thought Deshaun played very poorly in the first half and our offense looked completely discombobulated. The second half he looked like a virtuoso making play after play.

I tend to lay more of the blame on OB though. Over the past year and a half I’ve listened to waaay more sports radio then I’d care to admit. I’ve heard multiple former players discuss our offense and how it’s not QB friendly, and it doesn’t give the QB enough outs. Guys like Clint Stoerner, Dan Orlovsky, Chris Simms, Wade Smith, Cecil Shorts, Stanford Routt, James Ihedabo and Seth Payne.

I also know OB has a huge ego, he’s a micro manager, and he thinks he’s always the smartest guy in the room. I have some behind the scenes info on this from someone who used to work for the Texans, but you don’t need inside info to see it. If you watch how he interacts with the media you can see it.

I posted an article awhile back on how Kyle Shanahan‘s system makes the game easy for Garrapolo. That’s what I think all coaches should do for young QBs, try to make the game easy for them. As they learn and mature, you can add complexity. Personally, I think if you overload an athlete they revert back to what they know under pressure
 

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
That definitely plays a part in some of our issues, but it’s also won us a few games as well. I think the Buffalo game is a perfect example. Honestly, I thought Deshaun played very poorly in the first half and our offense looked completely discombobulated. The second half he looked like a virtuoso making play after play.

I tend to lay more of the blame on OB though. Over the past year and a half I’ve listened to waaay more sports radio then I’d care to admit. I’ve heard multiple former players discuss our offense and how it’s not QB friendly, and it doesn’t give the QB enough outs. Guys like Clint Stoerner, Dan Orlovsky, Chris Simms, Wade Smith, Cecil Shorts, Stanford Routt, James Ihedabo and Seth Payne.

I also know OB has a huge ego, he’s a micro manager, and he thinks he’s always the smartest guy in the room. I have some behind the scenes info on this from someone who used to work for the Texans, but you don’t need inside info to see it. If you watch how he interacts with the media you can see it.

I posted an article awhile back on how Kyle Shanahan‘s system makes the game easy for Garrapolo. That’s what I think all coaches should do for young QBs, try to make the game easy for them. As they learn and mature, you can add complexity. Personally, I think if you overload an athlete they revert back to what they know under pressure
I have no problem with Watson being exposed to a "simplified" QB offense. When you point to Shanahan's 'QB friendly" offense, you're talking about needing to have a consistently very successful running game. Shanahan does that with the ZBS.

Oversimplified, five offensive linemen and one tight end run horizontally along the line of scrimmage in unison without crisscrossing. The zone blocking scheme has two types of runs, inside zone runs and outside zone runs. In both play designs, the offensive line stretches one side of the field and cuts the other side, creating a natural gap for the running back to get through.

This style of run protection requires RBs to be able to move the ball laterally, and aggressively cut downhill the second a gap is created. As a result, running backs in this system must have one cut downhill ability. So far, we have not been able to find RBs that has been able to consistently do the job. Without the right RBs, Shanahan's offense would be a flop and the QB would not benefit.

With all the moves we've seen in the recent past, we've tried to develop a consistent blocking TE, build with mostly large but mobile offensive linemen, as well as find a one-cut RB. I can't help but think that these moves are not geared to helping Watson, and that O'Brien turning over play calling to his OC does not precede some offensive scheme change..............I have no doubt, not a strict ZBS like Kubiak's.................but modified mix to fit our present personnel. It should also be clear that Little Shanny is not running the pure ZBS that his dad or Kubiak did.

Finally, the closer you get to the ZBS, as with any system (but especially with the ZBS) the QB is required to be disciplined and play within the script.

Like everyone else, I am anxiously awaiting to see what our new team make up brings.
 
Last edited:

Texansballer74

Hall of Fame
I see your point. I didn’t add enough context around that statement.

Shorts said O’Brien is a smart guy and they prepare sometimes to the point that it’s information overload for younger players. Considering we see young players constantly in the doghouse or not getting playing time, I would say there is some truth to the statement.
Add in the known fact that O’Brien changes the game plan at the last minute. Thus the reason for the very slow and lethargic starts to 90% of the games.
 

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
I see your point. I didn’t add enough context around that statement.

Shorts said O’Brien is a smart guy and they prepare sometimes to the point that it’s information overload for younger players. Considering we see young players constantly in the doghouse or not getting playing time, I would say there is some truth to the statement.
Hopefully in his 1st yr as GM he drafted smarter players.
 

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
That definitely plays a part in some of our issues, but it’s also won us a few games as well. I think the Buffalo game is a perfect example. Honestly, I thought Deshaun played very poorly in the first half and our offense looked completely discombobulated. The second half he looked like a virtuoso making play after play.

I tend to lay more of the blame on OB though. Over the past year and a half I’ve listened to waaay more sports radio then I’d care to admit. I’ve heard multiple former players discuss our offense and how it’s not QB friendly, and it doesn’t give the QB enough outs. Guys like Clint Stoerner, Dan Orlovsky, Chris Simms, Wade Smith, Cecil Shorts, Stanford Routt, James Ihedabo and Seth Payne.

I also know OB has a huge ego, he’s a micro manager, and he thinks he’s always the smartest guy in the room. I have some behind the scenes info on this from someone who used to work for the Texans, but you don’t need inside info to see it. If you watch how he interacts with the media you can see it.

I posted an article awhile back on how Kyle Shanahan‘s system makes the game easy for Garrapolo. That’s what I think all coaches should do for young QBs, try to make the game easy for them. As they learn and mature, you can add complexity. Personally, I think if you overload an athlete they revert back to what they know under pressure
Jimmy G was pretty good in the Pats system.

I agree with you about the ability to learn and the complexity of the system. This is why I want them to run the Ravens system. The reverting back is also true, it's why DW4 can explain a play, but sometimes struggles when the bullets are live.
 

otisbean

Veteran
Contributor's Club
Jimmy G was pretty good in the Pats system.

I agree with you about the ability to learn and the complexity of the system. This is why I want them to run the Ravens system. The reverting back is also true, it's why DW4 can explain a play, but sometimes struggles when the bullets are live.
Agreed on Jimmy G, I just brought him up in relation to the article discussing the ways his head coach helps him with play design, reads ect... That's been one of the knocks of a lot of the former players discussing OB's system. Im not trying to turn this into a WC/ZBS vs EP debate. I would think any system could be modified to make things easier for any young QB

I do think DW can learn to function very well in this system, it might require some adaptions on OBs part and some patience with DW. People don't like hearing this but athlete's learn at different rates and in different ways, and realistically you can't coach every athlete the same way. Some will be successful and others not so much, and that's not a knock on the athlete or the coach
 

otisbean

Veteran
Contributor's Club
I have no problem with Watson being exposed to a "simplified" QB offense. When you point to Shanahan's 'QB friendly" offense, you're talking about needing to have a consistently very successful running game. Shanahan does that with the ZBS.

Oversimplified, five offensive linemen and one tight end run horizontally along the line of scrimmage in unison without crisscrossing. The zone blocking scheme has two types of runs, inside zone runs and outside zone runs. In both play designs, the offensive line stretches one side of the field and cuts the other side, creating a natural gap for the running back to get through.

This style of run protection requires RBs to be able to move the ball laterally, and aggressively cut downhill the second a gap is created. As a result, running backs in this system must have one cut downhill ability. So far, we have not been able to find RBs that has been able to consistently do the job. Without the right RBs, Shanahan's offense would be a flop and the QB would not benefit.

With all the moves we've seen in the recent past, we've tried to develop a consistent blocking TE, build with mostly large but mobile offensive linemen, as well as find a one-cut RB. I can't help but think that these moves are not geared to helping Watson, and that O'Brien turning over play calling to his OC does not precede some offensive scheme change..............I have no doubt, not a strict ZBS like Kubiak's.................but modified to fit our present personnel. It should also be clear that Little Shanny is not running the pure ZBS that his dad or Kubiak did.

Finally, the closer you get to the ZBS, as with any system (but especially with the ZBS) the QB is required to be disciplined and play within the script.

Like everyone else, I am anxiously awaiting to see what our new team make up brings.
I know Shanahan runs the ZBS,and I'm not necessarily advocating for that system per se (though when I think back to Kubiak's offenses with Schaub, I think they'd fit Watson to a T).

I was referring to an article discussing how Shanahan makes the passing game easier for Jimmy G. Here's a quote a I pulled from the article, as well as the article itself

"But it is a narrow window and Garoppolo deserves credit for making a great throw across his body. He just didn’t have to do much thinking during the play thanks to the next-level play design.

These little tweaks are what make Shanahan’s offense so good. He gives the defense a different picture every time but for Garoppolo, it’s the same read over and over again. Here are the 49ers running the same concept repeatedly in the same game, just from a different look each time…"


Also, I hope no-one thinks Im knocking DW when I discuss running a simplified system. I mention simplifying things for 2 reasons:

1) He came from a relatively simple system at Clemson. Expecting him to run a much more complicated system against the best players in the world is a huge ask.

2) He's still a young player with about 2.5 years of starting experience. Things take time. Just because a few have had success very early on doesn't mean everyone can or will

Im not directing these comments at you Doc, just want to be clear on my position
 

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
I know Shanahan runs the ZBS,and I'm not necessarily advocating for that system per se (though when I think back to Kubiak's offenses with Schaub, I think they'd fit Watson to a T).

I was referring to an article discussing how Shanahan makes the passing game easier for Jimmy G. Here's a quote a I pulled from the article, as well as the article itself

"But it is a narrow window and Garoppolo deserves credit for making a great throw across his body. He just didn’t have to do much thinking during the play thanks to the next-level play design.

These little tweaks are what make Shanahan’s offense so good. He gives the defense a different picture every time but for Garoppolo, it’s the same read over and over again. Here are the 49ers running the same concept repeatedly in the same game, just from a different look each time…"


Also, I hope no-one thinks Im knocking DW when I discuss running a simplified system. I mention simplifying things for 2 reasons:

1) He came from a relatively simple system at Clemson. Expecting him to run a much more complicated system against the best players in the world is a huge ask.

2) He's still a young player with about 2.5 years of starting experience. Things take time. Just because a few have had success very early on doesn't mean everyone can or will

Im not directing these comments at you Doc, just want to be clear on my position
I disagree with the article, while the WCO has it's core beliefs, if you're playing say a Tampa2 defense vs a 46 defense the reads aren't the same.
 

Earl34

Veteran
He didn't have that problem with McCarron.

Coincidence?
Do you even consider that in a meaningless week 17 game, there was no need to make last minute changes? Some days, it really seems like you are grasping for straws and just throwing stuff against the wall to troll or unintentionally proving how illogical some of your assumptions are that fuels your "not my QB" opinion.

Also, are you really going to try and make a point about McCarron and a TD in a meaningless week 17 game while intentionally ignoring the first drive of the Chiefs PLAYOFF GAME?

 
Last edited:

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
I know Shanahan runs the ZBS,and I'm not necessarily advocating for that system per se (though when I think back to Kubiak's offenses with Schaub, I think they'd fit Watson to a T).

I was referring to an article discussing how Shanahan makes the passing game easier for Jimmy G. Here's a quote a I pulled from the article, as well as the article itself

"But it is a narrow window and Garoppolo deserves credit for making a great throw across his body. He just didn’t have to do much thinking during the play thanks to the next-level play design.

These little tweaks are what make Shanahan’s offense so good. He gives the defense a different picture every time but for Garoppolo, it’s the same read over and over again. Here are the 49ers running the same concept repeatedly in the same game, just from a different look each time…"


Also, I hope no-one thinks Im knocking DW when I discuss running a simplified system. I mention simplifying things for 2 reasons:

1) He came from a relatively simple system at Clemson. Expecting him to run a much more complicated system against the best players in the world is a huge ask.

2) He's still a young player with about 2.5 years of starting experience. Things take time. Just because a few have had success very early on doesn't mean everyone can or will

Im not directing these comments at you Doc, just want to be clear on my position
The "next level design" in the Shanny offense still requires the QB to read and recognize a window...........not uncommonly one very narrow in time and in space (what made Schaub so successful).........and unhesitantly be willing to throw the ball away when appropriate. If the QB goes off script to any significant extent, the scheme cannot succeed. Again disclipline is one of the main keys.

And no matter what some people may think, the Shanny offense can be significantly negatively affected by defensive formations............and if the QB is not given more options to "adjust" (a concept contradictory to the ZBS), or is given the options and is not able to quickly read and convert them (bringing you back into a multiple read offense), the "simple" scheme and QB will likely not succeed.

One last thing, the Shanny offense like the strict ZBS in general has universally had problems with scoring from the red zone.
As good as the 49ers were, they were # 20 (Houston #9) in red zone scoring last season.
 
Last edited:

OptimisticTexan

Hall of Fame
In no kind of scenario would I trade Watson for Garappolo. Garappolo would have died an immediate death as an NFL QB if he had been in Watson's cleats since 2017. Nothing changes but the QB's....Garappolo is released or traded before the 2019 season.
 

badboy

Hall of Fame
I know Shanahan runs the ZBS,and I'm not necessarily advocating for that system per se (though when I think back to Kubiak's offenses with Schaub, I think they'd fit Watson to a T).

I was referring to an article discussing how Shanahan makes the passing game easier for Jimmy G. Here's a quote a I pulled from the article, as well as the article itself

"But it is a narrow window and Garoppolo deserves credit for making a great throw across his body. He just didn’t have to do much thinking during the play thanks to the next-level play design.

These little tweaks are what make Shanahan’s offense so good. He gives the defense a different picture every time but for Garoppolo, it’s the same read over and over again. Here are the 49ers running the same concept repeatedly in the same game, just from a different look each time…"


Also, I hope no-one thinks Im knocking DW when I discuss running a simplified system. I mention simplifying things for 2 reasons:

1) He came from a relatively simple system at Clemson. Expecting him to run a much more complicated system against the best players in the world is a huge ask.

2) He's still a young player with about 2.5 years of starting experience. Things take time. Just because a few have had success very early on doesn't mean everyone can or will

Im not directing these comments at you Doc, just want to be clear on my position
I am optimistic that with the new receiver corps (as long as they do not become corpses) Warring/Fells and the DJs, Kelly will move to clean up the game day playbook. I think informational overload as stated up stream is a huge factor for more than just Watson. Slim it down and add to it as possible. I prefer oline that knocks opponents back and manhandle them. I think we have that now for most part with exception of Martin. Still, I can picture number 4 with his Mobility and escapability doing well behind a ZBS. Like a guy with a new bride I get excited about what could be the future. Now if I could just forget the past divorces...
 

badboy

Hall of Fame
The "next level design" in the Shanny offense still requires the QB to read and recognize a window...........not uncommonly one very narrow in time and in space (what made Schaub so successful).........and unhesitantly be willing to throw the ball away when appropriate. If the QB goes off script to any significant extent, the scheme cannot succeed. Again disclipline is one of the main keys.

And no matter what some people may think, the Shanny offense can be significantly negatively affected by defensive formations............and if the QB is not given more options to "adjust" (a concept contradictory to the ZBS), or is given the options and is not able to quickly read and convert them (bringing you back into a multiple read offense), the "simple" scheme and QB will likely not succeed.

One last thing, the Shanny offense like the strict ZBS in general has universally had problems with scoring from the red zone.
As good as the 49ers were, they were # 20 (Houston #9) in red zone scoring last season.
I do not want to return to the red zone offense that we had in the years of our past. I want to see linemen creating holes for RBs and occasionally Watson to slip through for six. Fells on one side and Warring on other.
 

Texansballer74

Hall of Fame
Agreed on Jimmy G, I just brought him up in relation to the article discussing the ways his head coach helps him with play design, reads ect... That's been one of the knocks of a lot of the former players discussing OB's system. Im not trying to turn this into a WC/ZBS vs EP debate. I would think any system could be modified to make things easier for any young QB

I do think DW can learn to function very well in this system, it might require some adaptions on OBs part and some patience with DW. People don't like hearing this but athlete's learn at different rates and in different ways, and realistically you can't coach every athlete the same way. Some will be successful and others not so much, and that's not a knock on the athlete or the coach
You’re spot on here, we all learn at a different pace. I used several elite veterans quarterbacks as an example. It took P. Manning 4years, Drew Brees around 6 years and this list goes on and on. My thing is fans need to learn patience. Rome wasn’t built over night.
 
Last edited:

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
You do know the Titans preparation was for Watson and not the backup huh? And you do know since O’Brien been here his teams are notorious for starting off slow? Oh why didn’t McCarron bust them off from 40+? Remember no excuses
Wrong, it was announced way before the game like on Wednesday or Thursday that McCarron was starting,

Nice try at deflection though.
 

KoolAid Sipper

Waterboy
You’re spot on here, we all learn at a different pace. I used several elite veterans quarterbacks as an example. It took P. Manning 4years, Drew Brees around 6 years and this list goes on and on. My thing is fans need to learn patience. Rome isn’t built over night.
Who cares about Rome, Naples is credited as the origin of modern day pizza :spin:.

Most of these listed names won't be recognized but they have significant relationships. The list is not a ranking order but 1 truly would be last if they were ranked.

Randy Cross/Jesse Sapolu
Tom Nalen
Mark Stepnoski
Frank Winters
Nick Martin
Jeff Saturday
LeCharles Bentley/Max Unger/Erik McCoy
Dan Koppen
 

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
The Texans scored only 14 points that game, 10 under their average. Not a good example to use.
This could have something to do with all of the backups playing, I mean Clark was playing LT. LMAO

And they stil scored on their 1st drive, The only time that happened all season. Do you think that's a fluke? Probably IMHO
 

Earl34

Veteran
This could have something to do with all of the backups playing, I mean Clark was playing LT. LMAO

And they stil scored on their 1st drive, The only time that happened all season. Do you think that's a fluke? Probably IMHO
LOL. I already mentioned they scored on the first drive against the Chiefs in the PLAYOFFS.

You trying to make a point out of a meaningless week 17 game is the equivalent of crowing about a TD in the last preseason game. I’m not laughing at you, I’m laughing with you
 
Last edited:

Texansballer74

Hall of Fame
This could have something to do with all of the backups playing, I mean Clark was playing LT. LMAO

And they stil scored on their 1st drive, The only time that happened all season. Do you think that's a fluke? Probably IMHO
Here we come with the excuses. And you were wrong. They waited until the last minute to announce the backup was starting.
 

otisbean

Veteran
Contributor's Club
The "next level design" in the Shanny offense still requires the QB to read and recognize a window...........not uncommonly one very narrow in time and in space (what made Schaub so successful).........and unhesitantly be willing to throw the ball away when appropriate. If the QB goes off script to any significant extent, the scheme cannot succeed. Again disclipline is one of the main keys.

And no matter what some people may think, the Shanny offense can be significantly negatively affected by defensive formations............and if the QB is not given more options to "adjust" (a concept contradictory to the ZBS), or is given the options and is not able to quickly read and convert them (bringing you back into a multiple read offense), the "simple" scheme and QB will likely not succeed.

One last thing, the Shanny offense like the strict ZBS in general has universally had problems with scoring from the red zone.
As good as the 49ers were, they were # 20 (Houston #9) in red zone scoring last season.
I agree with everything your saying, believe me I do. I’m only using Shanahan’s offense as an example of a coach making the game easier for an inexperienced (relatively speaking) QB. I bring it up because multiple former QBs and players have criticized our schemes and concepts, everything from blocking schemes to route combinations. They talk about things being not just complicated but overly complicated. They talk about play designs not giving the QB enough outs on plays. I’ve heard Clint Steorner, just the other day, talk about DW and OB’s offense as a square peg/round hole situation. He was hopeful that TK would take better advantage of DW’s strengths. That’s what I hope as well.
 

Texansballer74

Hall of Fame
I agree with everything your saying, believe me I do. I’m only using Shanahan’s offense as an example of a coach making the game easier for an inexperienced (relatively speaking) QB. I bring it up because multiple former QBs and players have criticized our schemes and concepts, everything from blocking schemes to route combinations. They talk about things being not just complicated but overly complicated. They talk about play designs not giving the QB enough outs on plays. I’ve heard Clint Steorner, just the other day, talk about DW and OB’s offense as a square peg/round hole situation. He was hopeful that TK would take better advantage of DW’s strengths. That’s what I hope as well.
I believe TK mainly because even though it’s a small sample size against a very bad defense, he called the Falcons game. He was able to utilize Watson’s strengths as well as the strengths of his play makers. In this game Fuller had a monster game 14 receptions, 217 yards and 3 touchdowns.
 

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
I agree with everything your saying, believe me I do. I’m only using Shanahan’s offense as an example of a coach making the game easier for an inexperienced (relatively speaking) QB. I bring it up because multiple former QBs and players have criticized our schemes and concepts, everything from blocking schemes to route combinations. They talk about things being not just complicated but overly complicated. They talk about play designs not giving the QB enough outs on plays. I’ve heard Clint Steorner, just the other day, talk about DW and OB’s offense as a square peg/round hole situation. He was hopeful that TK would take better advantage of DW’s strengths. That’s what I hope as well.
It's a little curious though, that they don't have the same criticism about teams that run a ZBS, where the QB essentially is given no or only one option.
 
Last edited:

Earl34

Veteran
I agree with everything your saying, believe me I do. I’m only using Shanahan’s offense as an example of a coach making the game easier for an inexperienced (relatively speaking) QB. I bring it up because multiple former QBs and players have criticized our schemes and concepts, everything from blocking schemes to route combinations. They talk about things being not just complicated but overly complicated. They talk about play designs not giving the QB enough outs on plays. I’ve heard Clint Steorner, just the other day, talk about DW and OB’s offense as a square peg/round hole situation. He was hopeful that TK would take better advantage of DW’s strengths. That’s what I hope as well.
I've heard/read the same discussions and criticisms. Each time we want to have this discussion, it immediately turns into a debate about Watson and not the scheme. The overall point is regardless of QB, they are criticizing the overall scheme, concepts and play design.

As mentioned previously, you can integrate WCO concepts in O'Brien's offense. It's mentioned that Shanahan, McVay, and Kingsbury are constantly "stealing" plays from each other, Andy Reid and other offenses around the league. I don't get that from O'Brien. Instead, I get "this worked with the Patriots and it will work here" vibe. Shoot, even Belichick stole concepts from Chip Kelly's offenses.

By all accounts, O'Brien is a smart coach. When he was hired, I thought the Texans were getting the current Patriots offense. Instead, it feels like we are running the Drew Bledsoe version of the Patriots' offense before they integrated Welker and Edelman into their offense. It doesn't appear to take advantage of the rules in today's NFL. For example, pick plays and combination routes.

Hopefully, Kelly is watching tape on Reid, Shanahan, McVay and Kingsbury's offenses.
 
Last edited:

Earl34

Veteran
It's a little curious though, that they don't say the same thing about teams that run a ZBS, where the QB essentially is given no or only one option.
Whenever ZBS and options or audibles comes up, the HC/OC will say that audibling is minimized because there is always a option/answer for the defense in the play design. The QB just have to find that solution.

Lets assume we can say the same thing about O'Brien's offense. In the ZBS system, on a certain play against a certain defense, Coutee is always going to run a slant and that is the answer for the QB. Now in O'Brien's offense, the slant is still the correct answer, but based on Coutee's read or understanding, he runs a hook?

My guess would be that's why they don't say the same thing about the ZBS. The defined routes and play designs.
 

Texansballer74

Hall of Fame
Whenever ZBS and options or audibles comes up, the HC/OC will say that audibling is minimized because there is always a option/answer for the defense in the play design. The QB just have to find that solution.

Lets assume we can say the same thing about O'Brien's offense. In the ZBS system, on a certain play against a certain defense, Coutee is always going to run a slant and that is the answer for the QB. Now in O'Brien's offense, the slant is still the correct answer, but based on Coutee's read or understanding, he runs a hook?

My guess would be that's why they don't say the same thing about the ZBS. The defined routes and play designs.
Good stuff
 

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
I agree with everything your saying, believe me I do. I’m only using Shanahan’s offense as an example of a coach making the game easier for an inexperienced (relatively speaking) QB. I bring it up because multiple former QBs and players have criticized our schemes and concepts, everything from blocking schemes to route combinations. They talk about things being not just complicated but overly complicated. They talk about play designs not giving the QB enough outs on plays. I’ve heard Clint Steorner, just the other day, talk about DW and OB’s offense as a square peg/round hole situation. He was hopeful that TK would take better advantage of DW’s strengths. That’s what I hope as well.
I've said many times some guys are capable of running a game plan offense, some can't. It is a square peg/ round hole situation.

I'm with you in hoping TK can alleviate these issues.
 
Last edited:

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
This could have something to do with all of the backups playing, I mean Clark was playing LT. LMAO

And they stil scored on their 1st drive, The only time that happened all season. Do you think that's a fluke? Probably IMHO
Earl's not caring too much for facts
 

steelbtexan

King of the W. B. Club
Contributor's Club
LOL. I already mentioned they scored on the first drive against the Chiefs in the PLAYOFFS.

You trying to make a point out of a meaningless week 17 game is the equivalent of crowing about a TD in the last preseason game. I’m not laughing at you, I’m laughing with you
The game wasn't meaningless to the Titans and McCarron did it with a bunch of backups
 

banned1976

Fire Bill O’Brien, maybe?
I am optimistic that with the new receiver corps (as long as they do not become corpses) Warring/Fells and the DJs, Kelly will move to clean up the game day playbook. I think informational overload as stated up stream is a huge factor for more than just Watson. Slim it down and add to it as possible. I prefer oline that knocks opponents back and manhandle them. I think we have that now for most part with exception of Martin. Still, I can picture number 4 with his Mobility and escapability doing well behind a ZBS. Like a guy with a new bride I get excited about what could be the future. Now if I could just forget the past divorces...
Chunk gains of Watson running out of bounds untouched or uncorking it for a big downfield pass. There’s no doubt in my mind that in the right system and behind just a good o-line Watson would be a perennial MVP candidate in the league for years. He’s proven so many times he’s very effective on the run. But he’s been asked to drop back behind a crummy line.
 

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
Whenever ZBS and options or audibles comes up, the HC/OC will say that audibling is minimized because there is always a option/answer for the defense in the play design. The QB just have to find that solution.

Lets assume we can say the same thing about O'Brien's offense. In the ZBS system, on a certain play against a certain defense, Coutee is always going to run a slant and that is the answer for the QB. Now in O'Brien's offense, the slant is still the correct answer, but based on Coutee's read or understanding, he runs a hook?

My guess would be that's why they don't say the same thing about the ZBS. The defined routes and play designs.
That makes no sense. With classic ZBS, the QB has essentially no options to the play called, but to run or pass. Kubiak used to decompensate when his QB opted to do "his own thing" even in light of what would mean a failed play. Before Peyton, Kubiak never allowed his QB to audible. The only potential exception was when his QB was in a hurry up offense.



Kubiak: Schaub couldn’t audible out of “very, very poor play”
September 30, 2013, 5:49 PM EDT

The Texans threw the game away on Sunday when quarterback Matt Schaub threw an awful pass to Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman, which Sherman returned 58 yards for a touchdown late in the fourth quarter. On Monday, Texans coach Gary Kubiak acknowledged that it was a terrible play all around but said Schaub had to run it because that’s the play that was called.

Asked if Schaub had the freedom to audible out of that play, Kubiak answered, “No, once we called it, started the motion, it was game on. So we just had a very, very poor play like I told you.”

That answer is hard to understand: If Schaub saw that the play wasn’t going to work, why didn’t he have the authority to call an audible? And if he didn’t have the authority to call an audible, what about calling timeout? Or taking delay of game and calling a different play after the five-yard penalty? Or if he absolutely had to run the play, why not throw the ball out of bounds, or take a sack, or take a knee? Anything would have been better than a pick-six.

But the fact that Kubiak said he didn’t give Schaub the authority to call an audible suggests that Kubiak doesn’t have a lot of confidence in Schaub’s decision making. Asked about Schaub being on a short leash, Kubiak answered, “How short of a leash is he on? He’s our quarterback. Like I said, we’ve all got to do things a little better.”

One thing the Texans need to do better is figure out how to avoid any more “very, very poor plays.” Those are the plays that lose games.
 

Boris

Veteran
That makes no sense. With classic ZBS, the QB has essentially no options to the play called, but to run or pass. Kubiak used to decompensate when his QB opted to do "his own thing" even in light of what would mean a failed play. Before Peyton, Kubiak never allowed his QB to audible. The only potential exception was when his QB was in a hurry up offense.



Kubiak: Schaub couldn’t audible out of “very, very poor play”
September 30, 2013, 5:49 PM EDT

The Texans threw the game away on Sunday when quarterback Matt Schaub threw an awful pass to Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman, which Sherman returned 58 yards for a touchdown late in the fourth quarter. On Monday, Texans coach Gary Kubiak acknowledged that it was a terrible play all around but said Schaub had to run it because that’s the play that was called.

Asked if Schaub had the freedom to audible out of that play, Kubiak answered, “No, once we called it, started the motion, it was game on. So we just had a very, very poor play like I told you.”

That answer is hard to understand: If Schaub saw that the play wasn’t going to work, why didn’t he have the authority to call an audible? And if he didn’t have the authority to call an audible, what about calling timeout? Or taking delay of game and calling a different play after the five-yard penalty? Or if he absolutely had to run the play, why not throw the ball out of bounds, or take a sack, or take a knee? Anything would have been better than a pick-six.
that drove me crazy

also used to hate the scripted 1st 20 plays thing, especially after a poor first drive*
https://www.battleredblog.com/2011/5/13/2166901/houston-texans-west-coast-offense-gary-kubiak-andre-johnson
Walsh's pursuit of offensive perfection led to him scripting the first 15-25 plays of the game. The offense would practice those plays endlessly to ensure that the timing between quarterback and receiver was flawless, as well as cutting down on mistakes and penalties by repetition. With the plays scripted, an offense could, in theory, control the pace of the game. Another benefit of The Script is noticing the defense’s tendencies on certain routes and situations, which could then be exploited in the second half of a game.



*I understand you can learn a lot from a failed playcall...i used to burn my first 2 tries using one colour per row.
1593449704068.png
:)
 

badboy

Hall of Fame
Chunk gains of Watson running out of bounds untouched or uncorking it for a big downfield pass. There’s no doubt in my mind that in the right system and behind just a good o-line Watson would be a perennial MVP candidate in the league for years. He’s proven so many times he’s very effective on the run. But he’s been asked to drop back behind a crummy line.
From your lips to Watson's ears.
 

badboy

Hall of Fame
that drove me crazy

also used to hate the scripted 1st 20 plays thing, especially after a poor first drive*
https://www.battleredblog.com/2011/5/13/2166901/houston-texans-west-coast-offense-gary-kubiak-andre-johnson
Walsh's pursuit of offensive perfection led to him scripting the first 15-25 plays of the game. The offense would practice those plays endlessly to ensure that the timing between quarterback and receiver was flawless, as well as cutting down on mistakes and penalties by repetition. With the plays scripted, an offense could, in theory, control the pace of the game. Another benefit of The Script is noticing the defense’s tendencies on certain routes and situations, which could then be exploited in the second half of a game.



*I understand you can learn a lot from a failed playcall...i used to burn my first 2 tries using one colour per row.
View attachment 6293
:)
So that's where my M&MS went! :foottap:
 

Earl34

Veteran
That makes no sense. With classic ZBS, the QB has essentially no options to the play called, but to run or pass. Kubiak used to decompensate when his QB opted to do "his own thing" even in light of what would mean a failed play. Before Peyton, Kubiak never allowed his QB to audible. The only potential exception was when his QB was in a hurry up offense.
Here is another take on that situation:

"Kubiak said later that Schaub checked the Texans out of “a lot situations” in which the defensive formation wasn’t conducive to what the Texans wanted to run.

When the Texans are in their hurry-up offense, Schaub calls everything at the line of scrimmage.

Otherwise, Kubiak’s system doesn’t utilize audibles that allow Schaub – or any quarterback – to decide what play to call based on the defense.

Kubiak’s comment doesn’t go to show a lack of trust in Schaub at all. People are reading his comment that way, but it’s not the case.

The Texans have predetermined options that are set by the coaches.

Schaub can call two plays in the huddle based on what the coverage might be. He can check out of one and go with the other at the line of scrimmage.

Common sense should tell you that if it’s third-and-2 and the defense puts 11 players in the box that Schaub will switch to another play.

On the play in question, once the receiver started in motion, it was too late to check off.

On the bootleg, the quarterback has the option to throw to a receiver, throw it away, run or take the sack.

Schaub chose the worst option.


https://blog.chron.com/ultimatetexans/2013/09/lack-of-audible-power-does-not-show-kubiaks-lack-of-trust-in-schaub-its-the-kubiak-system/amp/
 

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
Here is another take on that situation:

"Kubiak said later that Schaub checked the Texans out of “a lot situations” in which the defensive formation wasn’t conducive to what the Texans wanted to run.

When the Texans are in their hurry-up offense, Schaub calls everything at the line of scrimmage.

Otherwise, Kubiak’s system doesn’t utilize audibles that allow Schaub – or any quarterback – to decide what play to call based on the defense.

Kubiak’s comment doesn’t go to show a lack of trust in Schaub at all. People are reading his comment that way, but it’s not the case.

The Texans have predetermined options that are set by the coaches.

Schaub can call two plays in the huddle based on what the coverage might be. He can check out of one and go with the other at the line of scrimmage.

Common sense should tell you that if it’s third-and-2 and the defense puts 11 players in the box that Schaub will switch to another play.

On the play in question, once the receiver started in motion, it was too late to check off.

On the bootleg, the quarterback has the option to throw to a receiver, throw it away, run or take the sack.

Schaub chose the worst option.


https://blog.chron.com/ultimatetexans/2013/09/lack-of-audible-power-does-not-show-kubiaks-lack-of-trust-in-schaub-its-the-kubiak-system/amp/
Unless it was in a hurry up offense, the only two allowed called/audibled plays allowed by Kubiak were essentially "pass" or "run." And of course, once the play was called, he could not change it.
 


Top