Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Texans random thought of the day

Texans' Benardrick McKinney gets helmet device with Brian Cushing out
http://www.chron.com/sports/texans/article/Texans-Benardrick-McKinney-gets-helmet-device-9225653.php

The sprained medial collateral ligament suffered by middle linebacker Brian Cushing impacts more than the Texans' defensive personnel with the subtraction of an experienced veteran contributor.

It also affects the Texans' communication because Cushing was the Texans' designated player with a helmet communication device to communicate with coaches, wearing a helmet with a green dot to connote that status.

Now, Texans inside linebacker Benardrick McKinney will communicate with defensive coordinator Romeo Crennel when he sends in the calls to the defensive huddle.

"I did it a little in the preseason," McKinney said. "I get the call from RAC and pass it on to the defense. It's just getting the call and getting us in whatever personnel they want us in."

At a lean 6-4, 246 pounds with 4.65 speed in the 40-yard dash and a 40 1/2 inch vertical leap, McKinney is one of the most athletic players on the Texans' defense.

And Texans linebackers coach Mike Vrabel expects to see even bigger contributions from the former second-round draft pick from Mississippi State after watching him record 68 tackles, including seven for losses and a sack, as a rookie in 14 games and 11 starts.

"Vrabel is hard on me, I'm taking the coaching every day," McKinney said. "Whenever I mess up, coach and Cush they correct me. As a team, we work together and help each other out and talk to each other and make plays."
Click to expand...
 
He's not exactly wrong about this...

Bill O’Brien: “I Don’t Know Anything About The Catch Rule”
http://houston.cbslocal.com/2016/09/18/bill-obrien-i-dont-know-anything-about-the-catch-rule/

“I don’t know anything about the catch rule,” O’Brien said. “Somebody is going to have to really sit down with me and explain to me the catch rule.”
...
O’Brien continued lamenting about the catch rule, saying a catch to him is like it was when he was a kid playing with his friends, “we all knew he caught that ball.” O’Brien stopped himself before going further, even hinting that he might get fined for his comments on the officiating.
Click to expand...
 
http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/...ng/sort/receivingYards/year/2016/seasontype/2

Maybe it is just me over here in the UK and there is some kind of galactic interwebs malfunction, but does this link show Nuk with ZERO yards of YAC? Literally the only receiver in the Top 40 with no YAC. Other than the fact that he actually does have YAC, especially on that 35-yarder in the game yesterday.

http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/yards-after-the-catch/2016/

This website has him with negative YAC on the season.

What am I missing here? Both websites are updated with yesterday's stats from a catch/yards perspective.

Totally ironic because the knock on him last year was YAC.
 
PapaL said:
He's not exactly wrong about this...

Bill O’Brien: “I Don’t Know Anything About The Catch Rule”
http://houston.cbslocal.com/2016/09/18/bill-obrien-i-dont-know-anything-about-the-catch-rule/
Click to expand...

I don't know.

To me, this is about consistency. Receiver was going to the ground in the act of catching the ball. He didn't maintain control. It's not a catch. Two steps, three steps, it doesn't matter. If they called this a catch, then they might as well get rid of the maintain control through & all that.

One, I already think the rules are heavily in favor of the receivers. This would make it worse.

Second, these guys get paid enough to expect them to hang on to the ball.

I know it sucks for us, that should have been our ball. But I'm fine sucking it up on this one to be consistent with all of the Dez Bryant no catches.
 
thunderkyss said:
I don't know.

To me, this is about consistency. Receiver was going to the ground in the act of catching the ball. He didn't maintain control. It's not a catch. Two steps, three steps, it doesn't matter. If they called this a catch, then they might as well get rid of the maintain control through & all that.

One, I already think the rules are heavily in favor of the receivers. This would make it worse.

Second, these guys get paid enough to expect them to hang on to the ball.

I know it sucks for us, that should have been our ball. But I'm fine sucking it up on this one to be consistent with all of the Dez Bryant no catches.
Click to expand...

Eh, maybe this one was too close to call, but this guy wasn't juggling it, and there was no fighting with a defender for the ball. This was a clean uncontested catch, multiple steps while the receiver tried to put it away, and a defender punched the ball out. Like the Nuk catch in the end zone, I think it should have stayed with the decision made on the field.
 
sandman said:
http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/...ng/sort/receivingYards/year/2016/seasontype/2

Maybe it is just me over here in the UK and there is some kind of galactic interwebs malfunction, but does this link show Nuk with ZERO yards of YAC? Literally the only receiver in the Top 40 with no YAC. Other than the fact that he actually does have YAC, especially on that 35-yarder in the game yesterday.

http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/yards-after-the-catch/2016/

This website has him with negative YAC on the season.

What am I missing here? Both websites are updated with yesterday's stats from a catch/yards perspective.

Totally ironic because the knock on him last year was YAC.
Click to expand...

Sadly, it's right. You're not missing anything.
 
sandman said:
Eh, maybe this one was too close to call, but this guy wasn't juggling it, and there was no fighting with a defender for the ball. This was a clean uncontested catch, multiple steps while the receiver tried to put it away, and a defender punched the ball out. Like the Nuk catch in the end zone, I think it should have stayed with the decision made on the field.
Click to expand...

I am confused as well... this http://www.houstontexans.com/tv-med...rd-catch/150aba21-4c8a-424f-b171-e2796b840883 shows Hopkins catch a ball just before the 50 (Chiefs 48) and run to the Texas 36 approximately. Shouldn't this count as YAC?

Unless I am just overlooking something.
 
14390802_10209467337534666_6280624643365183512_n.jpg
 
sandman said:
It can't be right. As Fuzzy points out, he had a solid 15 yards of YAC just on that one catch.
Click to expand...

Well, they (espn) are showing Josh Doctson with -2, Dez Bryant with -1 and Eddie Royal also with 0...
 
thunderkyss said:
I wish the ref would have explained why that wasn't a catch. Did he think the ball moved after Hop hit the ground or what?
Click to expand...

I suspect that's the problem. In that picture, he doesn't appear to have the ball yet. So he doesn't have control. So it comes down to when does he control the ball, not when his body hit.
 
Is it just me, or was I the only one that thought it was pass interference on the Hopkins play. He was hit from behind before he even made a move to dive for that ball, and that should have been the call regardless of whether it was a catch or not. The defender made contact. I thought that was pass interference.
 
PapaL said:
He's not exactly wrong about this...

Bill O’Brien: “I Don’t Know Anything About The Catch Rule”
http://houston.cbslocal.com/2016/09/18/bill-obrien-i-dont-know-anything-about-the-catch-rule/
Click to expand...

I'm going off a fuzzy memory, but the referee called it something like 'failed to complete the catch after going to the ground'. That shouldn't have applied in this case because the ball was knocked loose BEFORE the receiver hit the ground. It should've been regarded the same way a catch would if the receiver had the ball stripped while running. The chaos of what is and isn't a catch has confused even the referees so far that they're applying procedure to plays that don't need them. The rules for going to the ground did NOT apply in this instance.

And great picture by Red, clearly a catch.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Jayson Braddock ‏@JaysonBraddock 4m4 minutes ago


Here's the % of receiving yards contributed to each team by just two of their targets. ex: Hopkins/Fuller 75.8% of Texans receiving yards

CsvrJy-VIAAitcS.jpg
Click to expand...

Wow! Even beating out teams like NY who have Beckam and Cruz, and GB who has Nelson and Cobb.

Doing this with a new QB in a new system with a first year rookie involved in this.

That's an awesome start despite some of the struggles here and there.
 
ROO said:
Don't know if "beating out" is the right term here. I mean, is this a good thing? Wouldn't we rather be spreading it around more?
Click to expand...

If they are winning I don't mind it at all...
 
  • Like
Reactions: ROO
Top 10 rookies through NFL Week 2
https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-top-10-rookies-through-nfl-week-2/
2. Will Fuller, WR, Texans
Back-to-back 100-yard games is a nice way to start your NFL career. Fuller was one of the top deep threats in college football a season ago, and is already developing into one of the best in the NFL. No one in the league has seen more targets 20+ yards downfield than Fuller’s 10. His 3.1 yards per route is the third-highest rate among all receivers.
Click to expand...
 
thunderkyss said:
Receiver was going to the ground in the act of catching the ball. He didn't maintain control. It's not a catch. Two steps, three steps, it doesn't matter. If they called this a catch, then they might as well get rid of the maintain control through & all that.
Click to expand...

The receiver had control of the ball from the moment it hit his hands to the time the defender punched it out. By my count that was three full strides. What is the defender supposed to do?

The NFL has screwed this rule all up. It really is simple. That dude caught the ball, established himself as a runner (at the point he establishes himself as a runner, the maintaining possession through the ground should be out the window) and had the ball punched out for a fumble.
 
thunderkyss said:
I don't know.

To me, this is about consistency. Receiver was going to the ground in the act of catching the ball. He didn't maintain control. It's not a catch. Two steps, three steps, it doesn't matter. If they called this a catch, then they might as well get rid of the maintain control through & all that.

One, I already think the rules are heavily in favor of the receivers. This would make it worse.

Second, these guys get paid enough to expect them to hang on to the ball.

I know it sucks for us, that should have been our ball. But I'm fine sucking it up on this one to be consistent with all of the Dez Bryant no catches.
Click to expand...
The fact that it was deliberately punched out irks me, but not as much as the blatant PI call they missed on Hopkins in the end zone on the catch that was ruled out of bounds. How does that not get called?
 
PapaL said:
Philly has played the 31st and 32nd ranked teams in the league thus far this year. I'm suspecting his "rookieness" will start to show soon. Steelers should give him something to think about next week.
Click to expand...

That should be a good game.
 
ROO said:
Don't know if "beating out" is the right term here. I mean, is this a good thing? Wouldn't we rather be spreading it around more?
Click to expand...
Not when both of the top 2 options are each going over 100 yards. If the opposition figures out a way to shut down one of them, then they need to come up with one or more additional options (which should be do-able with B. Miller, Strong, and one of the TE's (likely Anderson) available to fill the role(s)). You may even be able to add L. Miller to that list.

As long as Nuk and Fuller are going over 200 yards, and they're winning, I think you force the opposition to stop what's working and adjust to it if and when they do.
 
Last edited:
DocBar said:
The fact that it was deliberately punched out irks me, but not as much as the blatant PI call they missed on Hopkins in the end zone on the catch that was ruled out of bounds. How does that not get called?
Click to expand...
That was total BS. Chiefs fans were complaining about being screwed by the refs. For every complaint they had, we had one of our own.
 
Watching NFL Total access. Their scroll across the bottom has the Texans Logo vs Detroit Logo I week three. But they're scrolling Texans & Patriot stats
 
jcs1311991 said:
I just remember that huge third down screen to Johnathan Grimes, great juke to get the extra yardage. I truly feel that was one of the biggest plays that game.
Click to expand...

Yes it was, I would like to see Grimes get Blue's carries. I would also like to see Blue cut and a K signed that can kick the ball out of the endzone if the ST's keep on giving up KO returns for TD's.

It's time to carry 2 kickers.
 
steelbtexan said:
Yes it was, I would like to see Grimes get Blue's carries. I would also like to see Blue cut and a K signed that can kick the ball out of the endzone if the ST's keep on giving up KO returns for TD's.

It's time to carry 2 kickers.
Click to expand...

When did special teams give up a KO for a TD?

Touchbacks start on the 25 yard line. KC average start on 5 kickoffs (not counting the one KO with penalty) was the 26 yard line (29,24,18,28,31).
 
sandman said:
When did special teams give up a KO for a TD?

Touchbacks start on the 25 yard line. KC average start on 5 kickoffs (not counting the one KO with penalty) was the 26 yard line (29,24,18,28,31).
Click to expand...

They were lucky they didn't blow the game because of bad KO coverage. Removing that part of the game vs watching Blue run into the back of his OL is a net positive. IMHO
 
I disagree with so much in that article. How is Eifert going to the ground in the process of making the catch? I see 2 feet hit the ground with him in possession of the ball. THEN,he gets hit by the defender and goes to the ground. He then makes a football move and crosses the goal line. Then the ball comes out after he has crossed...
 
I've seen plays where a receiver makes a catch while stumbling and stumbles for like 10 yards. How ridiculous would it be if someone knocked the ball out at the end of his stumble? He could have the ball in his possession for 10 YARDS and it STILL be incomplete!
 
Hoptimus Prime said:
I disagree with so much in that article. How is Eifert going to the ground in the process of making the catch? I see 2 feet hit the ground with him in possession of the ball. THEN,he gets hit by the defender and goes to the ground. He then makes a football move and crosses the goal line. Then the ball comes out after he has crossed...
Click to expand...

It's the going to the ground... he didn't complete the catch before he was "going to the ground"
 
Hoptimus Prime said:
I disagree with so much in that article. How is Eifert going to the ground in the process of making the catch? I see 2 feet hit the ground with him in possession of the ball. THEN,he gets hit by the defender and goes to the ground. He then makes a football move and crosses the goal line. Then the ball comes out after he has crossed...
Click to expand...

Now this highlights on of the rule problems. 'Going to the ground' needs to be defined to include 'of his own volition' or 'regardless of defender impact.'
 
JB said:
It's the going to the ground... he didn't complete the catch before he was "going to the ground"
Click to expand...
I addressed that as a question in my previous post. How is he going to the ground? I guess you could argue that the defender hit him before both feet touch, but if you pause the play when his second foot hits, he is still upright.

There's just so many gray areas with the rule, an overcomplicated rule at that. By the eye test, Eifert scored and Tate didn't. It's backwards.
 
infantrycak said:
Now this highlights on of the rule problems. 'Going to the ground' needs to be defined to include 'of his own volition' or 'regardless of defender impact.'
Click to expand...
Yes, that would add clarity to this particular kind of play. Then again, it would add yet another sub point to the catch rule lol.

I'm not saying this is an easy rule to establish, but I feel like it can be better. They get it right most of the time, but most of the time isn't good enough. It's seems like no matter how the rule is enforced, there will be some calls that will ultimately come down to opinion. And opinions always create disagreement. They just need to minimize opinion as much as possible.
 
JB said:
So according to that, the fumble that wasn't a catch was really a catch and fumble and the refs got it clearly wrong
Click to expand...

Nope, just wasn't a catch. He was going to the ground while in the process, and while the ball was punched out, and so hadn't completed the possession.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top