So what?

[painekiller]

We won yesterday and I am like "So What". We are 3-3, and right now we should be 5-1.

This team is going to have to show me it can win against the SF who is playing well, Buffalo is who is not, and Indy before the bye week in order for me to remotely have a chance to buy in to it again.

IMO when you can not stop the run, you a) get your bigger run stopping types into the game. What did the Texans do the first part of the season? Play the smaller two of our DTs. Was Okam even active for Arizona? Have we seen Okam and Deljuan on the field together? I haven't noticed it.

IMO when you have trouble running for 1 yd, you do not give the ball to a 6-3 running back who has been an upright runner for his whole carrier. You get the little OL out of the game and you bring in your jumbo package. (What Jumbo package? Maybe you bring in your swing OT and move Winston to guard, Caldwell is the largest OC you have, and you drive block ahead. Nothing fancy, power football). Better yet you spread the defense out and you do not let anyone know where the ball is going presnap. Everyone in the country knew the Texans where running off guard in those 1 yd running plays that lost the games. You had 2 LBs and 2 safeties converging on the hole at the snap.

I am burned out by .500 football, and stubborn coaching. Sorry you guys are having to read this garbage, so Texans just start winning the ones you are supposed to and the one you are not supposed to.

[Mike]

Wow PK, who urinated on your heart healthy Cheerios this morning?

I understand your points, but you have to enjoy the wins, otherwise you will just lead a miserable existence (I know I've been there).

Putting down my Battle Red Kool-Aid for a few minutes, that was an excellent win yesterday, the offense was excellent, they did not try to pound the run to an excessive basis and had a really good day moving the ball and scoring. The defense pitched a shutout in the second half. That is a good Bengal offense that was stuffed, and looks like we found a stud LB to go with Demeco.

The defense has made strides the past few weeks and had played much more sound football. Should we have two more wins, possibly, one more win, probably. We are what our record says we are, but at this point in the season I'd rather be 3-3 and making improvements with a chance to control our destiny, than getting beat 59-0 with nothing but the draft to look forward to. We've been 2-14, and I don't want to go back. Enjoy the wins.

I myself and looking forward to this weekend, burning some meat in the blue lot, tossing the pigskin and getting all boozed up before heading into the stadium to cheer for our team. The fall sucks without a pro team. Recall those days? Your friend, and fellow fan,

Mike

[barrett]

Forget the "Jumbo" package. Trading out our OL for the guys not good enough to get on the field is not the mysterious answer.

Just stop running the ball in general.

1) We need to stop trying to establish the run. We can't. We come out and try to be balanced and start slow. This past game we came out throwing and moved the ball.

2) We need to stop running in the redzone. We can't do it. We can throw it in tight. Why not throw the screen to AJ on 1st and goal like last week. Why not go to OD or Slaton? I'd take a fade to either AJ or Walter (both are big with great hands) over a run from anyone on our team.

3) We need to stop running in short yardage unless it's close enough for a sneak. This has cost us repeatedly. Our odds of completing a short, medium, or long pass are all greater than our odds of running for a yard on 3rd and 1. Our QB completes a higher % of his throws than we convert running it on 3rd and 1. So have Schaub complete 65% of his throws for first downs on 3rd and 1 rather than running with a 25% conversion rate.

4) We especially need to stop running the ball in an effort to sit on a lead. What runs more clock? A 3 and out with running plays (2 minutes or so without TOs being used), or a few first downs through the air? Obviously the latter. Statistically we use more clock when we pass this year than when we run (due to longer drives and more plays). So why not throw a screen or a hitch or a swing pass on 1st and 10 when we want to hold the ball and eat clock. Especially since our RBs fumble just as often as our QB throws an INT.

There is no need for us to run the ball any more often than is absolutely necessary to protect Schaub. We definitely didn't need 31 carries yesterday. It is almost like Kubiak knows he has to throw the ball to win but he is still going to run it simply because it is the "right" thing to do. Like the drive yesterday where our offense was in the middle of an unstoppable stretch throwing the ball and we came out and went 1 yard run, -1 yard run, incomplete pass, punt. What is the point? I don't think there is a team out there with the secondary talent to match up with the depth of our passing game weapons (AJ, Walter, Daniels, JJ, DA). All of these guys can play. Not to mention Slaton is better as a receiver than a runner. I love Leech as a lead blocker but there is no reason for him to see the field in our current offense.

We could have given that game away by trying to sit on the lead with the running game. And eventually Kubiak is going to run the ball right into getting fired.

[papabear]

Forget the "Jumbo" package. Trading out our OL for the guys not good enough to get on the field is not the mysterious answer.

Just stop running the ball in general.

1) We need to stop trying to establish the run. We can't. We come out and try to be balanced and start slow. This past game we came out throwing and moved the ball.

2) We need to stop running in the redzone. We can't do it. We can throw it in tight. Why not throw the screen to AJ on 1st and goal like last week. Why not go to OD or Slaton? I'd take a fade to either AJ or Walter (both are big with great hands) over a run from anyone on our team.

3) We need to stop running in short yardage unless it's close enough for a sneak. This has cost us repeatedly. Our odds of completing a short, medium, or long pass are all greater than our odds of running for a yard on 3rd and 1. Our QB completes a higher % of his throws than we convert running it on 3rd and 1. So have Schaub complete 65% of his throws for first downs on 3rd and 1 rather than running with a 25% conversion rate.

4) We especially need to stop running the ball in an effort to sit on a lead. What runs more clock? A 3 and out with running plays (2 minutes or so without TOs being used), or a few first downs through the air? Obviously the latter. Statistically we use more clock when we pass this year than when we run (due to longer drives and more plays). So why not throw a screen or a hitch or a swing pass on 1st and 10 when we want to hold the ball and eat clock. Especially since our RBs fumble just as often as our QB throws an INT.

There is no need for us to run the ball any more often than is absolutely necessary to protect Schaub. We definitely didn't need 31 carries yesterday. It is almost like Kubiak knows he has to throw the ball to win but he is still going to run it simply because it is the "right" thing to do. Like the drive yesterday where our offense was in the middle of an unstoppable stretch throwing the ball and we came out and went 1 yard run, -1 yard run, incomplete pass, punt. What is the point? I don't think there is a team out there with the secondary talent to match up with the depth of our passing game weapons (AJ, Walter, Daniels, JJ, DA). All of these guys can play. Not to mention Slaton is better as a receiver than a runner. I love Leech as a lead blocker but there is no reason for him to see the field in our current offense.

We could have given that game away by trying to sit on the lead with the running game. And eventually Kubiak is going to run the ball right into getting fired.

I think that is a huge mistake. I'm not saying that we have to have a 50/50 split run to pass, but you HAVE to rush enough to keep the defense honest. Look at Jacoby's TD yesterday. That play won't happen if you abandon the run completely. They should probably borrow from Andy Reid's playbook a little with Westbrook and find some different ways of getting Slaton the ball too.

1. I have no problem passing to set up the run at all. Either way works, but teams have to respect that your are capable of doing either.

2. Same thing-If teams know you aren't going to run it's going to be even harder to throw in the red zone on a condensed field. If a defense only has 10-15 yards of field to cover and those 7 defenders can get straight into coverage responsibilities there just isn't much space and one on one match ups that you could exploit otherwise aren't there. Go watch some old Oiler games from the Run and Shoot era. Scoring in the red zone was a huge problem for those teams.

3&4. no argument really, other than you have to keep the defense honest.

Arizona, New England, and Philly are teams that have had success without much of a running game. They didn't abandon the idea completely though...at worst they found ways to use the short passing game as a substitute which I'm OK with. In the case of Arizona and New England. They also went out and used high draft picks on RB's (Wells/Maroney) or brought in Free agents to boost their running game (Dillon) because they knew they couldn't survive without the threat of a running game. The Texans shouldn't force the run when it's obviously not working in key situations. I'm not saying your ideas don't have merit, they do, and the Texans are just going to have deal with the fact they are a passing team. That being said I thought one of Kubiak's biggest mistakes his first year or two was abandoning the run game when it didn't work early in a game. That made us predictable and that leads to a lot of big hits on QB's.

[kravix]

The Texans D has been #1 against the run over the last 3 games. I am not sure why that isnt good enough, but I will take it over #32 against the run over the first 3.

As for the O, if we do not establish some type of running game we will not win in the long run. There is no reason our run game should look so bad, and this could possibly be the worst season a Gibbs coached run game has ever had. Complain about Meyers all you want but he is almost 300lbs, and according to Bruce Mathews, Meyers played very very well last year. Which should translate into this year. The entire line, pass protection, passing game, and run game is built off the zone system. Bringing in some big maulers will only jack the whole thing up. You cannot have the best of both worlds, we saw that with Sherman.

Brown rushed for more yards than Slaton at 5YPC, and alot of that came at the end of the game when the Bengals knew we were going to run the ball to kill the clock. There have been plenty of holes and cutback lanes, it just seems that Slaton has either missed them entirely or cut to late to run though. Perhaps it isnt the line but our RB?

[NBT]

Maybe75-25 pass to run would seem about right. And I agree that we have to savor the moment, and yes we could revert to the Dr. Hyde version of the team next week. I just prefer to think we will win. Except for the 17 points in the second quarter, we held Cincinnatti to nada points, and only 44 rushing yards. That must continue for us to be improved. I can't exactly fault PK for his reasoning, but I prefer to think we have finally gotten over that hump. In any case we will start finding out this Sunday.

[painekiller]

Oh I see some good things, don't get me wrong, Bush is finally calling a strong game on defense. We finally have real NFL LBs at each spot. Jacoby Jones seems to finally get it. Owen Daniels is finding the endzone. AJ is and has been the best WR in football. Schaub is the best QB we have had in Houston since Warren Moon.

But I am still saying so what.

Get 3 games over .500 and I will have to notice. Go 1-2 and I say hog wash, same old team. Win out to the break, watch this town go crazy.

And yes Mike I too am glad I am not a Titans fan. But they have been Super Bowl and in my 40 + years of being a fan my team has not.

[Joe Joe]

Definitely need to sub in more screens for runs as both do slow down the pass rush. Schaub threw for nearly 400 yards the last two weeks.

Texans are tied for the last wild card spot even though they would lose tie breaker at the moment. Next week is huge.

[barrett]

I think that is a huge mistake. I'm not saying that we have to have a 50/50 split run to pass, but you HAVE to rush enough to keep the defense honest. Look at Jacoby's TD yesterday. That play won't happen if you abandon the run completely. They should probably borrow from Andy Reid's playbook a little with Westbrook and find some different ways of getting Slaton the ball too.

1. I have no problem passing to set up the run at all. Either way works, but teams have to respect that your are capable of doing either.

2. Same thing-If teams know you aren't going to run it's going to be even harder to throw in the red zone on a condensed field. If a defense only has 10-15 yards of field to cover and those 7 defenders can get straight into coverage responsibilities there just isn't much space and one on one match ups that you could exploit otherwise aren't there. Go watch some old Oiler games from the Run and Shoot era. Scoring in the red zone was a huge problem for those teams.

3&4. no argument really, other than you have to keep the defense honest.

Arizona, New England, and Philly are teams that have had success without much of a running game. They didn't abandon the idea completely though...at worst they found ways to use the short passing game as a substitute which I'm OK with. In the case of Arizona and New England. They also went out and used high draft picks on RB's (Wells/Maroney) or brought in Free agents to boost their running game (Dillon) because they knew they couldn't survive without the threat of a running game. The Texans shouldn't force the run when it's obviously not working in key situations. I'm not saying your ideas don't have merit, they do, and the Texans are just going to have deal with the fact they are a passing team. That being said I thought one of Kubiak's biggest mistakes his first year or two was abandoning the run game when it didn't work early in a game. That made us predictable and that leads to a lot of big hits on QB's.

But watch HOW New England runs the ball. They spread the field and beat you through the air. Then they run at you out of those spread alignments when you are worried about stopping the pass. They run draws and screens to Faulk out of a shotgun formation. They don't needlessly pound it on first down because that's what NFL logic says you do.

We run a bunch of plays in 3/4 WR sets and throw the ball. THEN we get in the I with Leach and try to run it. We do a very poor job of using the pass threat to open up the run game because we don't design for it. We are still more worried about using the run game to set up the play action. But our run game needs the help, not the other way around. There is no reason for us to ever show an I formation with the personell we have. Spread the field, throw the ball to win, and run it only as much as you have to OUT OF THAT SPREAD. I bet we can run it far more effectively with AJ, Walter, OD, and JJ/Anderson all split out and Schaub in the gun with Slaton (or even under center in a trips/trey one back), as opposed to getting in the "I" and running into the back of the center/guard who has been pushed into the backfield.

I just don't understand the stubborness that we have to go I formation and put a fullback on the field for half of our snaps when we are far less effective in that situation.

[Nconroe]

it looks like in the first six games we have had 137 runs and 219 pass attempts on offense which would be 1/3 or 33% run and 2/3 or 66% pass.

So,perhaps they have already switched but we hadn't noticed?

They seem to be overall pretty successful on offense, all but the first week of the season. ok, a few turnover and penalties at just the wrong time mixed in.

both offense and defense seem to be improving as year goes by. players and coaches.

and it is time for a win streak. atleast two or three more in a row would be nice to get above and stay above 500.

[barrett]

Again, it's not about the % of runs. Its the fact that no matter how well we have thrown the ball we haven't opened up the run game. And it's not because teams are stacking the box. It's because we have two separate offensive identities.

One identity recognizes the matchup problems our depth at WR create. It gets in Shotgun/Trips/Trey formations and throws the ball all over the field. Schaub gets to stand in and make quick reads and accurate throws both down the field and short. Screens work great because the formation encourages pass rush from the defense. Slaton is maximized because of the space he has. Daniels and Anderson are at their best because they get favorable matchups underneath due to AJ. Kyle Shanahan has shown great creativity in these sets with misdirection and screens. It should theoretically put the defense in 5 and 6 man fronts which we can actually run against. New England has been doing it for 3 years. Make the Defense bracket AJ and cover your possession guys underneath, and then run the draw for 7 yards. This offense suits our personnel perfectly.

The other identity gets in the "I" with Leach and attempts to run the ball into the teeth of the defense. Slaton, the o-line, and Daniels are all ill-suited for this. The one advantage is that it creates play action passing attempts off of the bootleg (schaub is ill suited for this by the way due to lack of mobility). That means that this formation has lots of drawbacks for our personnel and the one advantage is it helps the passing game (the part of our offense that needs no help).

So why do we insist on doing our running from under center exclusively and in the I most of the time. The only thing I can think is that it's what Kubiak knows best. Did anyone see Ray Rice's go ahead TD yesterday. The same counter play we run, but it came from the shotgun after 350+ yards of passing so all he had to do was beat the safety and then jog to the endzone. If they had gone into the I there like we do for our running plays, then they would have had to block it perfectly to make it work for 4 yards. And we don't block anything perfectly.

We need to take advantage of our personnel. No more I formation. No more Leach (I am a fan but he doesn't fit). No more running on running downs. Start running from passing formations when the Defense is having a nervous breakdown about AJ and JJ bunched on the outside about to run deep routes. Then you are facing 5 in the box with 6 DBs and the safety bracketed over the top. Start using formation to allow the pass game to help the run game, not the other way around.

[kravix]

Many of our big plays come off play action, and completely abandoning the run makes the team one dimensional, which will usually get your QB hit alot more from all out blitzing and pass rushes. It is a integral part of our Off, and I think Schaub does a great job in bootlegs as long as the DL bites and doesnt chase him down. The problem is he cannot scramble for yards from a bootleg when there is good coverage, but when the play works we usually get decent yardage out of it and it keeps our play calling unpredictable.

And that is the key, unpredictable. If you know a team is never going to bootleg, run from the I, pass from the I, run up the middle, screen, etc; then you never have to plan for it. Making it alot easier on def. Just becuase we are not running the ball well from the I does not mean it is not doing what it is intended for: Play Action.

Now I would like to see some more inspirational run calling, out of different formations, and I think we saw a few yesterday. I also think that had Brown gotten the load of carries it is possible he would have had a 100 yard game. Becuase he seems to be hitting the holes and lanes faster and and with more power than Slaton, I just dont ever see him knocking out 30+ yard runs. I would settle for 4-5 YPC all game though over break away runs.

[mussop]

The Texans D has been #1 against the run over the last 3 games. I am not sure why that isnt good enough, but I will take it over #32 against the run over the first 3.

You do realize who we played the last three games and where they ranked in running the ball dont you?

28 Oakland Raiders
31 Arizona Cardinals
14 Cincinnati Bengals

I hope this was just an oversight on youre part. :eek:

[barrett]

Many of our big plays come off play action, and completely abandoning the run makes the team one dimensional, which will usually get your QB hit alot more from all out blitzing and pass rushes. It is a integral part of our Off, and I think Schaub does a great job in bootlegs as long as the DL bites and doesnt chase him down. The problem is he cannot scramble for yards from a bootleg when there is good coverage, but when the play works we usually get decent yardage out of it and it keeps our play calling unpredictable.

And that is the key, unpredictable. If you know a team is never going to bootleg, run from the I, pass from the I, run up the middle, screen, etc; then you never have to plan for it. Making it alot easier on def. Just becuase we are not running the ball well from the I does not mean it is not doing what it is intended for: Play Action.

Now I would like to see some more inspirational run calling, out of different formations, and I think we saw a few yesterday. I also think that had Brown gotten the load of carries it is possible he would have had a 100 yard game. Becuase he seems to be hitting the holes and lanes faster and and with more power than Slaton, I just dont ever see him knocking out 30+ yard runs. I would settle for 4-5 YPC all game though over break away runs.

So we should get in the I so other teams have to plan for our weakest personnel package? Hopefully the Colts will take that advice before we play them and they will decide to run out of the I a bunch to make future opponents prepare for it.

As for Play action, that is my point. We are using our terrible running game to help our great passing game simply because that is what Kubiak knows best. It is our running game that needs help. So instead of calling passes that look like runs (or in addition to), how about we start calling some runs designed to look like passes.

The bottom line is that even if it means a more varied prep, Defensive Coordinators would pay Houston to get in the I and take one of our play makers off the field. They'd also pay us to hand the ball to Chris Brown, because it means AJ, Slaton, Daniels, Walter, JJ, Anderson, and Davis (all better players) are not getting it.

Indisputable facts
1. The I is a weak package for us personnel wise. It takes a good player off the field for one who has little impact.
2. Our OL is fast and blocks screens well. They would likely do well with draws as well since opposing DLs are flying upfield to rush the passer against us. They are undersized and terrible at traditional run blocking.
3. Schaub is at his best going through his progressions and using his accuracy/desicion making. He is average when coming out on the bootleg. The defense does not even honor it and simply tackles the RB first and then goes after schaub if he kept. We could get the same play action benefits without running the boot and without making Schaub turn his back on the defense or throw on the run (not strengths of his).

If Kubiak wanted to be Denver then he should have assembled Denver personnel. But he has struggled to put together a good OL and has never had a tough inside runner. But he has done a great job of finding WRs and a pass catching TE. He needs to play to the team's strengths and use them.

[Big Texas]

Complain about Meyers all you want but he is almost 300lbs, and according to Bruce Mathews, Meyers played very very well last year. Which should translate into this year. The entire line, pass protection, passing game, and run game is built off the zone system. Bringing in some big maulers will only jack the whole thing up. You cannot have the best of both worlds, we saw that with Sherman.

I will definitely complain about Meyers, not because he is a terrible offensive lineman, but because he has consistently been overpowered all season long. I have watched and re-watched these games where the DTs are getting off the ball faster than he is (and he is snapping the ball). They then proceed to push him 1-3 yards into the backfield.

One of the main plays of the ZB scheme is the stretch play. So in order for there to be cutback lanes, our O Line (especially the interior) have to be explosive and quick. This has not been happening.

So we have been demonstrating all season long that we can throw the ball. The point now is to be able to gain, 1-3 yards consistently. We need someone to be able to at least hold the point of attack. Hence the need for a Jumbo package.

Again they should not be replacing our current OLine but rather coming in on specific occasions.

Side note: Caldwell held up really well Sunday. It also helped that Peko and Odom both were injured early on.

[barrett]

I will definitely complain about Meyers, not because he is a terrible offensive lineman, but because he has consistently been overpowered all season long. I have watched and re-watched these games where the DTs are getting off the ball faster than he is (and he is snapping the ball). They then proceed to push him 1-3 yards into the backfield.

One of the main plays of the ZB scheme is the stretch play. So in order for there to be cutback lanes, our O Line (especially the interior) have to be explosive and quick. This has not been happening.

So we have been demonstrating all season long that we can throw the ball. The point now is to be able to gain, 1-3 yards consistently. We need someone to be able to at least hold the point of attack. Hence the need for a Jumbo package.

Again they should not be replacing our current OLine but rather coming in on specific occasions.

Side note: Caldwell held up really well Sunday. It also helped that Peko and Odom both were injured early on.

Bringing in Jumbo lineman will tip the defense of our intention to run and make it even harder to run. I don't know of one NFL team that brings in different OL to run the ball or for short yardage. Not one.

[Roy P]

But watch HOW New England runs the ball. They spread the field and beat you through the air. Then they run at you out of those spread alignments when you are worried about stopping the pass. They run draws and screens to Faulk out of a shotgun formation. They don't needlessly pound it on first down because that's what NFL logic says you do.

We run a bunch of plays in 3/4 WR sets and throw the ball. THEN we get in the I with Leach and try to run it. We do a very poor job of using the pass threat to open up the run game because we don't design for it. We are still more worried about using the run game to set up the play action. But our run game needs the help, not the other way around. There is no reason for us to ever show an I formation with the personell we have. Spread the field, throw the ball to win, and run it only as much as you have to OUT OF THAT SPREAD. I bet we can run it far more effectively with AJ, Walter, OD, and JJ/Anderson all split out and Schaub in the gun with Slaton (or even under center in a trips/trey one back), as opposed to getting in the "I" and running into the back of the center/guard who has been pushed into the backfield.

I just don't understand the stubborness that we have to go I formation and put a fullback on the field for half of our snaps when we are far less effective in that situation.

Wow! I've been preaching this for quite a while in pieces and parts. You did a much better job of saying what I've been trying to convey. I agree with you 100%

The I Formation is killing Slaton's strengths and that of our O-Line.

Did anybody see the WR/RB screens and watch Duane Brown get out and block a Safety? Hell, Studdard was running to the sideline to block a CB. Slaton just trotted into the endzone.

[painekiller]

Bringing in Jumbo lineman will tip the defense of our intention to run and make it even harder to run. I don't know of one NFL team that brings in different OL to run the ball or for short yardage. Not one.

But the Pats do this with LBs at TE, and now KC has done this. You have to throw out of this to make it effective.

Barrett it's like you and Roy both are saying, we are to predictable because of our hybrid offense. Gibbs plays are clearly defined and everyone knows the play. Play assignment football and the defense wins.

Use a spread offense to run? Can you do that? The run and shoot was based on the pass setting up the run. The original WCO was the short pass was used to set up the long pass.

I want what you guys are saying, and it's similar to the old Run and Gun offense of Buffalo and Sam Wyche's Bengals. Multiple sets, motion, mismatched LBs trying to cover RBs with WR skills, TE that could run block or split the seem.

Also, I want to add some of the Wildcat sets. .

Kubiak is finally playing to his players strength, not to some ideal he wants.

[barrett]

But the Pats do this with LBs at TE, and now KC has done this. You have to throw out of this to make it effective.

Barrett it's like you and Roy both are saying, we are to predictable because of our hybrid offense. Gibbs plays are clearly defined and everyone knows the play. Play assignment football and the defense wins.

Use a spread offense to run? Can you do that? The run and shoot was based on the pass setting up the run. The original WCO was the short pass was used to set up the long pass.

I want what you guys are saying, and it's similar to the old Run and Gun offense of Buffalo and Sam Wyche's Bengals. Multiple sets, motion, mismatched LBs trying to cover RBs with WR skills, TE that could run block or split the seem.

Also, I want to add some of the Wildcat sets. .

Kubiak is finally playing to his players strength, not to some ideal he wants.

I totally agree with you. Well almost. I don't think you go wildcat if you can beat a team straight up with your offense. But I don't mind it as an option for when we struggle and need to change the pace.

As for going jumbo, I think it can work and there may be a time for it, but I just think this offense is so good that you are taking a playmaker out no matter who it is.

But bottom line is I think Kubiak knows he has to do this with his current team, but doesn't like it. That's why the foot came off the gas and he went back to what was comfortable in the 4th quarter once we had a lead. If he was coaching the Pats yesterday they would have beaten Tennessee 10-0 instead of 59-0. He needs to view throwing the ball as a giant advantage his team can do in every situation, not as a deal with the devil he has to make this year because we can't run it.

I would be shocked if we don't lose at least one game where we pass for a lead and then try to run it in the 4th and let a team come back to beat us.

[painekiller]

He needs to view throwing the ball as a giant advantage his team can do in every situation, not as a deal with the devil he has to make this year because we can't run it.

I would be shocked if we don't lose at least one game where we pass for a lead and then try to run it in the 4th and let a team come back to beat us.

I will say, that some kind of balance has to be met. In the Oiler days when Kevin Gilbride was calling the plays, there where times you needed to speed the clock up, and running the ball was that tool. 60% passing still stops the clock way to much, and two missed passes in row, and you are looking at handing the ball back to the other team before the defense has had time to rest. BTW Buddy Ryan tried to teach Kevin that lesson with a right cross, total dysfunction, but that's another story.

I agree use the pass to set up the run. Run from the spread and pass from the I formation at times to keep the defense honest. I also admit our play action pass game is one of the best in the NFL, if only Schaub could throw better on the run. Use screens and dump off to slow the rush down. Never take Andre Johnson out of the game near the goal line, and call that WR screen more often, it doesn't matter if it's to AJ or Slaton.

[papabear]

But watch HOW New England runs the ball. They spread the field and beat you through the air. Then they run at you out of those spread alignments when you are worried about stopping the pass. They run draws and screens to Faulk out of a shotgun formation. They don't needlessly pound it on first down because that's what NFL logic says you do.

We run a bunch of plays in 3/4 WR sets and throw the ball. THEN we get in the I with Leach and try to run it. We do a very poor job of using the pass threat to open up the run game because we don't design for it. We are still more worried about using the run game to set up the play action. But our run game needs the help, not the other way around. There is no reason for us to ever show an I formation with the personell we have. Spread the field, throw the ball to win, and run it only as much as you have to OUT OF THAT SPREAD. I bet we can run it far more effectively with AJ, Walter, OD, and JJ/Anderson all split out and Schaub in the gun with Slaton (or even under center in a trips/trey one back), as opposed to getting in the "I" and running into the back of the center/guard who has been pushed into the backfield.

I just don't understand the stubborness that we have to go I formation and put a fullback on the field for half of our snaps when we are far less effective in that situation.

That's fine with me....what got me to respond was your comment,
Just stop running the ball in general

It might to be fair to just cherry pick one comment like that, but that is what got my attention.

I have no problem with running out of more of spread look. I have no problem using screens and dump offs as a quasi running game(though if your going to do that you also need to make sure that your are throwing the ball down field enough). You just can't stop "running the ball in general". Spreading the field doesn't work as well down by the goal line though, when the field is already compressed so much vertically. Every team has some type of power formation for a reason...though I agree with you that we need to play to our strengths and not our weaknesses.

[Joshua]

Agree 100% with everything Barrett is saying. Probably the most cogent explanation of the reason our offense occasionally struggles. My buddies and I sit in section 611 and can routinely call the play pre-snap simply based on the personnel and formation. I suspect that if we can do it in section 611 after about 4 beers, most D coordinators can do it as well.

Finally, I must say I'm perplexed by Kubes somewhat. He has always preached running the ball, but yet he's never done anything to actually improve our ability to do so. Instead, we continually draft receivers and tight ends. I'm not complaining because it has created a pretty potent passing attack for us. I just find it weird that he places such a premium on being a run-first team, then does nothing to actually acquire the players to do it.

[barrett]

Agree 100% with everything Barrett is saying. Probably the most cogent explanation of the reason our offense occasionally struggles. My buddies and I sit in section 611 and can routinely call the play pre-snap simply based on the personnel and formation. I suspect that if we can do it in section 611 after about 4 beers, most D coordinators can do it as well.

Finally, I must say I'm perplexed by Kubes somewhat. He has always preached running the ball, but yet he's never done anything to actually improve our ability to do so. Instead, we continually draft receivers and tight ends. I'm not complaining because it has created a pretty potent passing attack for us. I just find it weird that he places such a premium on being a run-first team, then does nothing to actually acquire the players to do it.

This has been my thought all year. We are doing a good job of picking players individually but we lack a sense of cohesiveness with what we attempt to do on the field and what we attempt to do on the personnel side. We seem to be putting together two different teams at the same time.

[papabear]

Finally, I must say I'm perplexed by Kubes somewhat. He has always preached running the ball, but yet he's never done anything to actually improve our ability to do so. Instead, we continually draft receivers and tight ends. I'm not complaining because it has created a pretty potent passing attack for us. I just find it weird that he places such a premium on being a run-first team, then does nothing to actually acquire the players to do it.

I think it's similar to the D-line. It's not as if they haven't tried, it just hasn't come together the way they planned. Since Kubes has gotten here he has drafted four O-lineman in the 3rd round or higher(one in the first). I consider anything 3rd round or higher to be very valuable, and while these picks were meant to help in pass protection as much as the run game they we're all guys Kubes felt fit with our Zone blocking scheme. He's also made a trade for Veteran Center(with experience in the scheme). He spent a fairly large amount of McNair cash for Ahman Green, and also brought in Chris Brown as a free agent. Of course he also drafted Slaton in the third round. Anthony Hill was also drafted in the fourth primarily as a run blocking TE. He also went out and got the most respected Zone Blocking guru there is out of retirement.

I'll agree that the results haven't been what we want, but I think you can definitely see the effort in that area. Not every problem can be fixed by a first round pick or a top flight free agent.

[chuck]

I have to say that barrett's got it right here, almost down to the syllable. If the Texans effectively abandoned the two-back set and began to run the ball out of a spread formation (in the gun or under center) opposing DCs would have nightmares. Now, in a two-back set the Texans will either run the ball (we all know how that goes) or bootleg. I like Schaub more than most but he is poor to terrible throwing on the run. He is not a guy who can zip the ball all over the field running to his left. Hell, he can't zip the ball anywhere, any time.

With the defense's steady improvement a little self-scouting on the offense could lead to a pretty formidable team, or at the very least a respectable one.

[barrett]

Agreed Chuck. The NFL is a league designed for every team to have 8-8 talent. It doesn't always work that way obviously. A small few are superior. A small few are inferior. And the middle 25 or so are pretty even in talent. This middle wins and loses depending on scheme. Basically can your coach "take his'n and beat your'n, or he could take your'n and beat his'n." It's a very small line between 5-11 and 11-5.

I think if we change the script and stay one back we become nearly impossible to defend. Nobody has secondary depth to deal with Slaton, OD, AJ, Walter, and Anderson/JJ on the field at once. When we put those guys out there we will face a steady diet of dime defenses and deep safeties. Now all of sudden our OL just has to guide an upfield DE out of the play while Slaton runs or catches it in the spot they just vacated. And our OL is good at this because they can move. Duane Brown's block on Slaton's screen was a thing of beauty. So put him in position to do that rather than asking him to push a DE off the ball.

[Big Texas]

Bringing in Jumbo lineman will tip the defense of our intention to run and make it even harder to run. I don't know of one NFL team that brings in different OL to run the ball or for short yardage. Not one.

No other teams are running the wildcat as often as Miami. There has never been this many young head coaches in the league either. Now it has become popular. Also having two (and sometimes three) good backs by committee was not all that common a while back either. Now almost everyone has two good backs (besides us).

All that to say, someone had to start the trend. Who knows we may start the next trend.

So what other teams do or don't do is of little concern to me.

As far as tipping off the other team; for a large majority of the league (outside us), anything less than a yard is almost an automatic run anyway. So we just need to find a way (whatever works for us).

And I am not saying that the entire line needs to be replaced on short yardage. (specifically goal line situations) Maybe our weak links, or areas where the opposing DLineman is "massive".

[Roy P]

I don't think you go wildcat if you can beat a team straight up with your offense. But I don't mind it as an option for when we struggle and need to change the pace.


The Wildcat could be used to sit on a lead and control clock. One of the problems the Colts have is that their defense is on the field for extended periods of time as teams run the ball and keep Peyton on the sidelines. Then the Colts' offense gets on the field and scores a TD in 75 seconds, causing that Defense to go back on the field before they've had a chance to catch their breath.

The question becomes who runs it? We don't have to great RB's like the Dolphins to make a defense respect the hand off. Would we take Schaub off the field or put him as a WR? Is this something Casey or Daniels could pull off to keep the threat of a pass? I don't know exactly

I'm still wanting to see Dreesen, Daniels, and Casey on the field at the same time for multiple pass plays.

[chuck]

Agreed Chuck. The NFL is a league designed for every team to have 8-8 talent. It doesn't always work that way obviously. A small few are superior. A small few are inferior. And the middle 25 or so are pretty even in talent. This middle wins and loses depending on scheme. Basically can your coach "take his'n and beat your'n, or he could take your'n and beat his'n." It's a very small line between 5-11 and 11-5.

I think if we change the script and stay one back we become nearly impossible to defend. Nobody has secondary depth to deal with Slaton, OD, AJ, Walter, and Anderson/JJ on the field at once. When we put those guys out there we will face a steady diet of dime defenses and deep safeties. Now all of sudden our OL just has to guide an upfield DE out of the play while Slaton runs or catches it in the spot they just vacated. And our OL is good at this because they can move. Duane Brown's block on Slaton's screen was a thing of beauty. So put him in position to do that rather than asking him to push a DE off the ball.

If I were the OC my main objective would be to force the defense to play with two LBs - nickel, dime, whatever the package. I would then do everything I could to get the ball to Slaton in space. He is not the fastest guy out there nor is he going to run over anyone, but when he has a little room to work with very seldom does one guy bring him down. If I can get the defense into a two LB set I'll likely end up with one of them covering OD (which is a matchup I like just fine) and I'll also have plenty of space for screens to Slaton. You should also be able to run draw plays out of this formation until the cows come home easily racking up 8 yards a pop.

The team's OL is surprisingly adept at pass protection but what strikes me about them overall is that they are highly athletic. You can forget about their manhandling any DL at the LOS, but if you ask them to block guys on the move I think you'll see much better results.

[Roy P]

Force the defense to play with two LBs - nickel, dime, whatever the package. Get the ball to Slaton in space. I'll likely end up with one of them covering OD (which is a matchup I like just fine) and I'll also have plenty of space for screens to Slaton. You should also be able to run draw plays out of this formation until the cows come home easily racking up 8 yards a pop.

The team's OL is highly athletic. You can forget about their manhandling any DL at the LOS, but if you ask them to block guys on the move I think you'll see much better results.

I think we may have come to a consensus. Getting mismatches that are advantageous to our players makes good sense.

[barrett]

I think we may have come to a consensus. Getting mismatches that are advantageous to our players makes good sense.

And going one step further...the more good players on the field at once the more easier to get a mismatch. Thus the one back sets that spread a defense out and make them deal with all of our playmakers at the same time.

I also agree with you Roy that we don't have a back that could be a Wildcat triggerman. JJ had a few snaps there in the preseason and didn't look good. I'd be fine trying OD or Casey like you mentioned but am not sure they provide a real running threat. I think I'd try AJ back there just to put the ball in his hands more. Heck I'd give him a carry or a screen at RB on occasion if I'm having a hard time throwing it to him. There is nobody on our team (maybe nobody in the league) who is as talented. I don't think we can go wrong going to him in any situation.

[popanot]

Gee, you guys act like that flair-out screen to Leach doesn't send fear into the opposition! I get excited every time I see him rumbling and stumbling in anticipation for the killer big play.

But seriously, there were 4 or 5 plays last week were they sent OD in a tight motion. I was commenting to the guys I was watching the game with that they should just wildcat it and hand the damn ball to him. They ran it once close to our redzone and Schaub ended up passing it to him out in the flat anyway. It looked like it may have been able to pick up more yards had they just handed the ball of to him. It looked like he had a wide open corner and sideline every time they sent him in motion. I wish they'd do it once in awhile.

[Roy P]

I think I'd try AJ back there just to put the ball in his hands more. Heck I'd give him a carry or a screen at RB on occasion if I'm having a hard time throwing it to him. There is nobody on our team (maybe nobody in the league) who is as talented.

That was my original thought. Slaton would take the direct snap and read the DE as AJ came in motion. I'm sure Slaton could remember his W.Va days when he was with Pat White. Would be fun to see in 3rd and 4 situations as first.

[NBT]

The wildcat to Slaton seems to be a hell of an idea to me, but Kubes is so stodgy, I doubt if he would try anything so new.

[NBT]

We won yesterday and I am like "So What". We are 3-3, and right now we should be 5-1.



Dang it is not even Christmas yet, and the Grinch has already stolen yours. Be of good cheer. The Texans are turning it around. The problems you enumerate are at this moment being fixed. Frank Bush has finally gotten the attention of his defensive guys, and they are playing some shutout football part of the last 3 games. If we are 5-3, or even 6-3 in a few weeks you will be feeling a lot better, and you will, Santa told me so!

[mussop]

Dang it is not even Christmas yet, and the Grinch has already stolen yours. Be of good cheer. The Texans are turning it around. The problems you enumerate are at this moment being fixed. Frank Bush has finally gotten the attention of his defensive guys, and they are playing some shutout football part of the last 3 games. If we are 5-3, or even 6-3 in a few weeks you will be feeling a lot better, and you will, Santa told me so!

I bet if we get blown out this Sunday vs SF you wont be singing the same tune. I think that is the point that Painkiller is trying to get across. We need to show some consistancy. After every win people say "we've turned the corner". Its going to take more than 1 win in a row or a .500 record for some of us to jump on that bandwagon.

[NBT]

Jeez, can't you guys see any humor at all? I was just trying to keep a positive attitude on the game. But, now that I think about it, I don't think Crabtree is ready to break out, and I think our run defense has stiffened. And NO, I don't think we will be blown out Sunday or anytime soon from now on!!

[painekiller]

I bet if we get blown out this Sunday vs SF you wont be singing the same tune. I think that is the point that Painkiller is trying to get across. We need to show some consistancy. After every win people say "we've turned the corner". Its going to take more than 1 win in a row or a .500 record for some of us to jump on that bandwagon.

Someone else gets it. For me to get to this state, remember I am the tea drinker here, I have to have been beaten up a long time.

[Arky]

Someone else gets it. For me to get to this state, remember I am the tea drinker here, I have to have been beaten up a long time.

Beaten up? Dang, better go see a doctor or call the cops or something.... :p

I learned a long time ago, I have no control over what the team does. Zip, nada, zilch. Let me repeat: I have no control over what the team does.

Sure, a part of me feels badly when they lose just as a part of me is elated when they win. But as far as helping the team, all I can offer is my support.

With this team, I'm seeing improvement. I'm seeing some things I've never seen in a Texan team before. So this gives me hope that they can make something of this season.

I think it's about expectations. I'm comfortable with .500. Not happy, just comfortable. We all know what the alternative is like....

A winning season would be a good start. Playoffs would be nice. Advancing in the playoffs would be even better. Going to the Super Bowl would be great. Winning the Super Bowl would be super.

Not pointing at you PK, but some people are never happy. Some people won't be happy until the Lombardi trophy is at Reliant and even then they would probably find something to bitch about....

[NBT]

Someone else gets it. For me to get to this state, remember I am the tea drinker here, I have to have been beaten up a long time.

Do you think you are the only one? Again, I was just trying to throw a more positive light on the game and the season.

[painekiller]

Do you think you are the only one? Again, I was just trying to throw a more positive light on the game and the season.

No I am not the only one to be beaten up. But I have been one of the only positive voices in the past, pointing to the growth and strong youth on this team when everyone else wanted Super Bowl or bust.

When I wrote the beaten up line, I did not like the tone of the that sentence but was to lazy to change it. So understand I am not the only one of us "beaten up on", I am not the only one chirped off.

I might be the only one to say so what, but I doubt it, the apathy is growing in this town at a faster rate than the past.

[Roy P]

Many fans focus on Wins and post-season success. I'm currently happy to see a competitive product on the field. I went to my only NFL game last year and spent what I consider to be quite a bit of money for "entertainment" at Reliant. I saw the Ravens completely destroy us. It was really no fun being there.

If the Texans can put a product on the field like I saw last week, I'd be willing to pay to watch it. Granted, I would like to see them win, but playing sound fundamental football is a good start.

[WMH]

Many fans focus on Wins and post-season success. I'm currently happy to see a competitive product on the field. I went to my only NFL game last year and spent what I consider to be quite a bit of money for "entertainment" at Reliant. I saw the Ravens completely destroy us. It was really no fun being there.

If the Texans can put a product on the field like I saw last week, I'd be willing to pay to watch it. Granted, I would like to see them win, but playing sound fundamental football is a good start.

Roy, you make entirely too much sense to be on this board. I agree with you 100%. I have WANTED to watch all 4 quarters for 5 of our 6 games. IMO, that is good football entertainment, and that is all we can ask for.

[NBT]

No I am not the only one to be beaten up. But I have been one of the only positive voices in the past, pointing to the growth and strong youth on this team when everyone else wanted Super Bowl or bust.

When I wrote the beaten up line, I did not like the tone of the that sentence but was to lazy to change it. So understand I am not the only one of us "beaten up on", I am not the only one chirped off.

I might be the only one to say so what, but I doubt it, the apathy is growing in this town at a faster rate than the past.

We have both been "beaten up" in the sense that our Houston teams seem to constantly put us on a roller coaster, then drop us from dizzy heights. I have been through every one of those games and those years with you PK. But I refuse to submit to apathy. The Texans nearly gave me a heart attack in todays SF game, but we did pull it out, so I will continue to be that glass half full fella.

[Fonz the Boss]

I think 9-7 may get us a wild card if all the other teams continue to play inconsistant football like us.

[barrett]

Forget the "Jumbo" package. Trading out our OL for the guys not good enough to get on the field is not the mysterious answer.

Just stop running the ball in general.

1) We need to stop trying to establish the run. We can't. We come out and try to be balanced and start slow. This past game we came out throwing and moved the ball.

2) We need to stop running in the redzone. We can't do it. We can throw it in tight. Why not throw the screen to AJ on 1st and goal like last week. Why not go to OD or Slaton? I'd take a fade to either AJ or Walter (both are big with great hands) over a run from anyone on our team.

3) We need to stop running in short yardage unless it's close enough for a sneak. This has cost us repeatedly. Our odds of completing a short, medium, or long pass are all greater than our odds of running for a yard on 3rd and 1. Our QB completes a higher % of his throws than we convert running it on 3rd and 1. So have Schaub complete 65% of his throws for first downs on 3rd and 1 rather than running with a 25% conversion rate.

4) We especially need to stop running the ball in an effort to sit on a lead. What runs more clock? A 3 and out with running plays (2 minutes or so without TOs being used), or a few first downs through the air? Obviously the latter. Statistically we use more clock when we pass this year than when we run (due to longer drives and more plays). So why not throw a screen or a hitch or a swing pass on 1st and 10 when we want to hold the ball and eat clock. Especially since our RBs fumble just as often as our QB throws an INT.
There is no need for us to run the ball any more often than is absolutely necessary to protect Schaub. We definitely didn't need 31 carries yesterday. It is almost like Kubiak knows he has to throw the ball to win but he is still going to run it simply because it is the "right" thing to do. Like the drive yesterday where our offense was in the middle of an unstoppable stretch throwing the ball and we came out and went 1 yard run, -1 yard run, incomplete pass, punt. What is the point? I don't think there is a team out there with the secondary talent to match up with the depth of our passing game weapons (AJ, Walter, Daniels, JJ, DA). All of these guys can play. Not to mention Slaton is better as a receiver than a runner. I love Leech as a lead blocker but there is no reason for him to see the field in our current offense.

We could have given that game away by trying to sit on the lead with the running game. And eventually Kubiak is going to run the ball right into getting fired.

I hope that Kubiak and company take note of what happened today. We threw the ball to get a big lead and then tried to sit on it. Neither our Defense or Running game are up to the task. We need to keep throwing it and put teams away. Especially with Slaton's tendency to fumble.

[NBT]

I think it (lack of run game) is really due to the weakness of our interior offense, especially Meyers at center. Singletqary decided to blitz two LB's up the middle to exploit that weakness.

[Roy P]

I think it (lack of run game) is really due to the weakness of our interior offense, especially Meyers at center. Singletqary decided to blitz two LB's up the middle to exploit that weakness.

Expect more of the same until we figure out how to stop it. We might have to bring a TE into the FB postion to help out on that.

[barrett]

Or we do a better job of disguising when we are going to run and we keep trying to score points even when we have a lead. We put SF on their heels with the passing game in the 1st half and the blitzing LBs were not that big of a concern. It's part of the reason why OD had such a great day. We simply should have done more of it in the 2nd half.

[Roy P]

Or we do a better job of disguising when we are going to run and we keep trying to score points even when we have a lead. We put SF on their heels with the passing game in the 1st half and the blitzing LBs were not that big of a concern. It's part of the reason why OD had such a great day. We simply should have done more of it in the 2nd half.

It sounds good until Schaub takes one too many sacks or throws an interception. Then we start squawking about how we have got to be able to run the ball to milk time off the clock.

All ideas are great when they work.

Obviously, we were having pretty good success passing the ball to O.D. in the seam and running Patrick Willis away from the line of scrimmage. I think Kubiak or Shannahan start worrying that they might "go to the well" one time too many. Therefore, they try to utilize more formations and run different players on and off the field. The inside runs hopefully set up the outside runs.

I'm not agreeing or arguing here, simply making an observation.

[Big Texas]

It sounds good until Schaub takes one too many sacks or throws an interception. Then we start squawking about how we have got to be able to run the ball to milk time off the clock.

All ideas are great when they work.

Obviously, we were having pretty good success passing the ball to O.D. in the seam and running Patrick Willis away from the line of scrimmage. I think Kubiak or Shannahan start worrying that they might "go to the well" one time too many. Therefore, they try to utilize more formations and run different players on and off the field. The inside runs hopefully set up the outside runs.

I'm not agreeing or arguing here, simply making an observation.

I think we ran one screen for Slaton. If not two. I think in the second half that should have been the staple of the offense. They are just like running the ball,

Yes, Slaton is having fumblitis right now. However he still can wreak havoc off the screen. Screens should definately be a major part of our offense.

Someone said the 3 TE set should be run 10 times a game. I think the screen should be as well. And not always the quick screen split out wide. Mix up the regular screen as well. I tell the screen is the best way to stop a blitzing team. Let me rephrase a SUCCESSFUL screen game is a great way to stop a blitzing team.

[barrett]

It sounds good until Schaub takes one too many sacks or throws an interception. Then we start squawking about how we have got to be able to run the ball to milk time off the clock.

All ideas are great when they work.

Obviously, we were having pretty good success passing the ball to O.D. in the seam and running Patrick Willis away from the line of scrimmage. I think Kubiak or Shannahan start worrying that they might "go to the well" one time too many. Therefore, they try to utilize more formations and run different players on and off the field. The inside runs hopefully set up the outside runs.

I'm not agreeing or arguing here, simply making an observation.

I think all this is true in football theory. But when you have an OL that is good at pass blocking and screen blocking in space but bad in tight...

But when you have great WRs and a pass catching TE...

But when you have a RB who fumbles...

But when you have a RB who is better on screens then on the lead...

But when your defense is shaky and gives up 21 in a half to a guy who hasn't played in two years...

And when it has already worked so well that you are up 21-0...

I know I am preaching to the choir here Roy, but does anyone doubt that we are going to lose a game at some point because we take the foot off the accelerator too soon. And one win could mean playoffs or not.

It's like I said last week, if Gary Kubiak was the coach of the patriots last week they would have gone up 10-0 on Tennessee and stopped throwing in an effort to win 10-0. That's just Kubiak to the core. He is throwing right now to get the lead because he has to. But the second he thinks he is able he goes straight back into the shell.

[painekiller]

It's like I said last week, if Gary Kubiak was the coach of the patriots last week they would have gone up 10-0 on Tennessee and stopped throwing in an effort to win 10-0. That's just Kubiak to the core. He is throwing right now to get the lead because he has to. But the second he thinks he is able he goes straight back into the shell.

That is Mike Shanahan to the core. Throw the ball to get a lead then run the ball to kill the clock. So Gary is just doing it the way he was taught. Unfortunately he did not have Dick Vermeil or Sam Wyche as his mentor.

[barrett]

That is Mike Shanahan to the core. Throw the ball to get a lead then run the ball to kill the clock. So Gary is just doing it the way he was taught. Unfortunately he did not have Dick Vermeil or Sam Wyche as his mentor.

The truth is I agree with Shanahan and Kubiak far more than I do Vermeil or Wyche. I just don't think this team was put together to win that way. We have huge deficiencies to win Kubiak style football games. But we have skill position talent that I would take over anyone in the NFL.

We need to take a page from Ken Wisenhunt who was a Steelers coach under Cowher, calling a steady diet of 3 yards and a cloud of dust. He'd love to run it in Arizona but he is smart enough to recognize what he has (and what he doesn't). And he parlayed it into a superbowl bid with a less talented team than we have.

[nunusguy]

We need to take a page from Ken Wisenhunt who was a Steelers coach under Cowher, calling a steady diet of 3 yards and a cloud of dust. He'd love to run it in Arizona but he is smart enough to recognize what he has (and what he doesn't). And he parlayed it into a superbowl bid with a less talented team than we have.
And Wisenhunt didn't have somebody named Peyton Manning in his division, or even other competition over the last couple years like the Titans or Jags. But you're right about Wisenhunt, he's much more intellectually agile than Kubiak.
How does Kubiak lose tract of and not have his defense prepared for the backup QB who came into the league a few years ago as the #1 overall Draft pick ? As soon as the Texans started jumping offsides I figured there was a different QB cadence in the game. And BTW, why doesn't Kubiak have Schaub take a knee instead of handing off to Slaton with just a few seconds left at the end of the half ?

[Dennis2112]

How does Kubiak lose tract of and not have his defense prepared for the backup QB who came into the league a few years ago as the #1 overall Draft pick ?


Honestly, what team prepares their defense for the backup QB?

I do feel that we did not make the proper adjustments "after" they scored their first TD with Smith @ QB.

[Joshua]

Honestly, what team prepares their defense for the backup QB?



While I can't say for sure, my guess would be virtually all of them. While I doubt it is substantial, I bet most defenses at least go over the backup and a few of his tendencies. This is even more true when the team you're playing has questions at the QB position or a starter who is prone to injury. Shaun Hill is not Peyton Manning. The possibility that he might play bad and get yanked was not terribly far-fetched.

[papabear]

How does Kubiak lose tract of and not have his defense prepared for the backup QB who came into the league a few years ago as the #1 overall Draft pick ?


While I agree there should have been at least a little preparation for Smith, it's doubtful that it would have helped much. He didn't play at all last year, and it has been since week 10 of 2007 since he took a snap. They have new head coach and a new, first time, offensive coordinator. We started playing a lot of zone and the 49'rs adjusted...and figured out they could abuse our LB's with Vernon Davis, which they probably should have been trying all day.

I think way too much is getting made of this. It's not like they went in at halftime and installed a whole new offense at halftime...they just figured out what they had in their playbook that would work, and put in a QB who got hot and played significantly better than he ever had before.

[painekiller]

While I can't say for sure, my guess would be virtually all of them. While I doubt it is substantial, I bet most defenses at least go over the backup and a few of his tendencies. This is even more true when the team you're playing has questions at the QB position or a starter who is prone to injury. Shaun Hill is not Peyton Manning. The possibility that he might play bad and get yanked was not terribly far-fetched.

I would think not many go over the backups unless your playing a team with split QBs like the Texans last year, then you study both Schaub and Sage, but on a Farve team you do not waste your time looking at preseason tape of the backup.

Now I am talking about the players not worrying about the backups. The coaches should have some kind of scouting report on the back up.

[WMH]

IMO blaming the 2nd half struggles on the QB switch is a stretch. I would give him credit for a couple of cadence changes/off-sides penalties, but that is about it. The TE was in the game plan, and that was who was catching the ball, wide open I might add. From what I saw on the DVR, there weren't a lot of folks around him & even someone like....Alex Smith could hit him.

Regardless, SCOREBOARD, we won. :)

[nunusguy]

The TE was in the game plan, and that was who was catching the ball, wide open I might add. From what I saw on the DVR, there weren't a lot of folks around him & even someone like....Alex Smith could hit him.


We were sitting in the Texans EZ (section 115, S row), and I swear it was deja vu all over again and again, three times ! It was the same freakin play to that big TE who was doin his best Owen Daniels immitation and somebody was throwing him strikes so Smith gets some credit. But Smith is mobile, moves well.
Hard to figure how he could be benched that long, given the kind of invesment the 9ers origionally made in him ? And the TE, he's got a new career start himself after that performance.
The only thing that saved the Texans was the clock, because San Fran had taken over the game after the second half started.

[cadams]

i don't think the different qb had much to do with it, other than maybe he was more mobile. i think that bush got worried about giving up the big play and not losing rather than keeping with the formula that had been working perfectly in the first half. i could be wrong, but i don't think they blitzed or used pressed coverage much at all in the second half. that made a huge difference.

[NBT]

All a prevent does is keep you from winning!! :(

[painekiller]

Ok they have won the 2 games they should have won, to be 5-3. Now prove you have turned the corner and go into Indy and win.

A bad showing and the "so what" is still in play.

A solid showing with a lose mean nothing + or -. How you deal with the next four weeks does show me who this team is.

Today we saw the team play an ugly 1st half on offense, and yet they stayed with in themselves and ended up with a nice win.

[NBT]

You are indeed, a hard man to please, but I think we have crossed the rubicon myself. Peyton will be a very tough nut to crack.

[barrett]

That is the first time I have ever seen the Texans play bad, but simply be so much better than the other team that they won anyways. A very solid effort in a game that was very easy to look past.

[nunusguy]

Now prove you have turned the corner and go into Indy and win.

C'mon man, get real and expecting to sweep Indy is not real, especially at this time with the kind of year Peyton is having. If we can split with those guys, that's enough for the time being IMO.

[painekiller]

C'mon man, get real and expecting to sweep Indy is not real, especially at this time with the kind of year Peyton is having. If we can split with those guys, that's enough for the time being IMO.

I don't think I am calling for a sweep of Indy, though I think we can sweep Indy. And I think we should play them tough.

Play like you did in Cincy and you win in Indy, play like you did in the 1st half today and you are in trouble against Indy.

[Nconroe]

I think the so what is that the team is learning to win, to have confidence in themselves as a team. And, it is nice as a fan to see the team actually win, perhaps dominate at times, not just luck out as maybe they had the previous seven years. I hope this continues to build for the team and us fans. A win next week isn't required, but perhaps, people give us a good chance now, both offensively and defensively to compete with Indy and not be surprized if we win or get close.

[painekiller]

I think the so what is that the team is learning to win, to have confidence in themselves as a team.

Learning to win is indeed one of the hardest things to do in the NFL. And being an expansion team with no history makes it doubly tough to learn to win. Kubiak has had his hands full teaching this team to A) be a team, B) believe in it's self, C) Win at home, D) Win anywhere.

Interesting stat, since 11/23 of last year this team is 5-2 on the road.

We are currently 3rd in the AFC in scoring,
We are 8th in pts allowed in the AFC. After the slow start, the team has played itself into a nice place.

If this team wins the next 3 games this town will be going nuts.
If they split with Indy and beat the Titans, then they will start to be noticed by average citizen in Houston.

I am hoping for the 3 big wins against the division rivals, this town will be nuts just like the House of Pain days. NBT and I have been waiting for this team to mature a long time, and they will have matured if they are 8-2. or 7-3.

Think about it, if we win on Sunday at Lucas Oil, what do you think the stands will be like on the Monday Night when VY comes to town? Utter chaos.

[painekiller]

So what? We are 5-4 with a medium sour taste. Small issues still plague this team, but unlike the past, I am seeing a gleamer of hope.

Reason to believe:
We had a chance to tie or beat the Colts even though we had 13 penalties for 103 yds.
" " even though we did not get a 1st down until Indy had 16 of them.
" " even though we barely touched the ball in the 1st half, we out gain the Colts.
Our Defense is becoming a strength of this team.
Frank Bush and staff seem to be making key adjustments at half time.


Reason to not believe:
Schaub makes that pass or two every game that makes you think. "What?"
Our running game has not gelled.
Stupid Turnovers.
Bad coaching decisions

[NBT]

Agreed PK. And to be 10-6, with a shot at a playoff, we have to win 5 of the last 8. It can be done. Like you say we have waited a long time for that to happen. But we can't have anymore of those squirrely momentum reversing plays. We have to be airtight from here on, or it will for sure be, "So What"!

[nunusguy]

Agreed PK. And to be 10-6, with a shot at a playoff, we have to win 5 of the last 8. It can be done.

Check your math NBT, I'm afraid it's 5 of 7 which makes 10 wins more than possible, but unlikely.
I dunno, but really think our fate to miss the playoffs again this year was sealed way back in September when we lost those first 2 home games to the Jets and Jags. Dang, at the very least we should have won one of them, preferably the game against our division opponent, the Jags.
Remember that September schedule this year, unlike the one in 2008, was much more friendly but Kubiak failed to take advantage of it.

[painekiller]

IMO We need to win the games in blue.


Mon. 23 TITANS
Sun. 29 COLTS
Sun. 6 @ Jaguars
Sun. 13 SEAHAWKS
Sun. 20 @ Rams
Sun. 27 @ Dolphins
Sun. 3 PATRIOTS

Colts is a throw away game. No way do we beat the Colts 3 times in a season, so the lose on Sunday did not matter, the next game against the Colts, if we win then we know we can, if we don't win, we might miss the playoffs. 6 teams have fewer loses than we do, and based on wins Pittsburgh/Cincy and San Diego have the inside track to the playoffs.

I agree with nunusguy, if we miss the playoffs, it's due to September lose to the Jags, and the Cards.

[Roy P]

IMO We need to win the games in blue.


Mon. 23 TITANS
Sun. 29 COLTS
Sun. 6 @ Jaguars
Sun. 13 SEAHAWKS
Sun. 20 @ Rams
Sun. 27 @ Dolphins
Sun. 3 PATRIOTS
\playoffs.

due to September lose to the Jags, and the Cards.

I could see us losing to the Dolphins. If we had only beat Jax and Arizona, then we wouldn't be having this converation.

[nunusguy]

IMO the season, if the season/seasons-success is defined as making the playoffs, comes down to winning both of the the next 2 games of which the first one vs the Titans will be more challenging than the second vs the Colts.
If we can accomplish that then we are down to winning 3 of the remaining 5 games which includes the Rams & Seahawks in Reliant. Of course this would all be predicated upon 10 wins getting us qualified into the playoffs.
I have to admit based upon the teams performance to this point in this year I have a different attitude about them than I've ever had and that's based upon our new and improved defense. Led by new Texan starters Antonio Smith, Bernard Pollard, & Brian Cushing we have for the first time ever a respectable verging on a superior defensive unit.

[Nconroe]

I agree the defense seems to have become the strength of our team. With the bye, perhaps a few injuries such as Marios shoulder and Cushings ankle will get a little better.

On offense, somehow Schaub has got to quit throwing those easy picks he seems to have a problem with this year. Maybe they can find something on film to help their running game. And perhaps the middle of OL can heal up some of their wounds.

I think it is a lot more funny watching this team than any of the previous 7 years. And they always have a chance to win. Team is good enough to play with any team now, just need that consistency. I think the team is still +1 in turnovers, which is way different from previous years where we were way - on turnovers.

I don't know what happened this last game with guys lining up offsides and committing late hit penalties, these were not what our team usually does.

I think we'll go 10-6 and that will likely get us into the playoffs, but I'd be quite satisfied with 10-6 anyways.

[TheMatrix31]

We're 7th right now, behind the Chargers who are 5-3. We are 5-4

This is their remaining schedule.

Eagles
@ Broncos
Chiefs
@ Browns
@ Cowboys
Bengals
@ Titans
Redskins

Can they go 4-4? I think they can lose to the Eagles, Broncos, Cowboys, and Bengals but really, those four are games that can easily go SD's way.

We HAVE to beat the teams we can. Beating Indy this past week would have been huge. We could have ****************in' been 6-3 going into the bye. Damn. Can we beat Indy at home?

[NBT]

We can, but no more stupid inexcusable turnovers!!!

[Fonz the Boss]

We could have ****************in' been 6-3 going into the bye. Damn. Can we beat Indy at home?

I think the better question would be... Can we beat the Titans at home? They look like they have their swagger back and they will be looking forward for the Monday Night spotlight. I have a really bad feeling about that game.

[painekiller]

I think the better question would be... Can we beat the Titans at home? They look like they have their swagger back and they will be looking forward for the Monday Night spotlight. I have a really bad feeling about that game.

Our season depends on that one game. We loose that game and IMO kiss the playoff's goodbye. Plus we have to beat VY badly at our house. I am so tired of the VY cronies coming out of the woodwork. Slap their mouths shut.

[TheMatrix31]

Just get it done.

[nunusguy]

Our season depends on that one game. We loose that game and IMO kiss the playoff's goodbye. Plus we have to beat VY badly at our house. I am so tired of the VY cronies coming out of the woodwork. Slap their mouths shut.
Actually of the next 3 games all against division oponents, the last one vs the Jags is the most important because of tie-breaker considerations.
I still think we are unlikely to make the playoffs because of the way we performed (or failed to perform) in those September home-games. The teams and their records competing for the wild-card slots are just too closely bunched for us to get in unless we really come out of our bye-week playing full-tilt and also have some luck.
Honestly we've been relatively fortunate on the injury front - didn't lose OD until after the first half and Schaub and AJ have been healthy all year. And the defense has not had serious injuries. But I hope I'm wrong, I hope we get into the post-season as much as anybody does.

[Nconroe]

8 more days till our next game on Monday night with the Titans. Should be a good one. I think we'll win, mainly gotta stop their RB, Chris Johnson, we seem to be doing good at stopping pretty good RB's last several games. And have OL protect Schaub which should be able to do good enough, maturing every game.

I think Texans have shown they can play with any team now on offense and defense, and could beat any team.

But, Texans need to get and maintain that consistency, maturity, limit the turnovers, keep their concentration, and then they can win plenty. Those are teachable things so perhaps we will be pretty good now and real good in December.

[NBT]

The Titans will not be pusovers now that VY has finally turned the corner. He and Chris Johnson now present a dual running threat that teams have not adjusted to yet. AND VY looks a little better with his passing. So we had better be ready to do battle, because the Tacks will be out for blood.

[WMH]

I am so tired of the VY cronies coming out of the woodwork. Slap their mouths shut.


AMEN to that. I can't even listen to the local radio right now because of these types, and it's Monday! For some strange reason his followers fail to realize that the guy that is "winning" right now is the exact same guy that Jeff Fisher, one of the most respected coaches in the league, hasn't wanted to play since they drafted him (which he didn't want to). The guy is a phenomenal ATHLETE, but he is no NFL QB.

The Titans have won the last 3 because of C Johnson and a Defense that remembered that they have some talent. I think it is going to be a good game, a hard fought game, but unless we self destruct (which as we all know can, and has happened), then they SHOULD not be able to hang with us. We need to get out early, if that is possible, and throw up some numbers to make them throw the ball. If we are able to make the Titans one-dimensional and force them to throw the rock, then Lord VY will come back down to Earth, probably have another panic attack and wander aimlessly thru the woods, shirtless, with a bottle of tequila and a bunch of other dudes.......

[NBT]

For what it's worth PK, I emphatically agree. We have to push VY's nose into the grass to show this is our town, not his anymore.

[painekiller]

VY come's in here and looks like Jim Kelly.

The normally reliable Kris Brown misses 2 FG attempts. That is 1 out of his last 4.

Our team was out coached again.

IMO this teams playoff hopes is done, the AFC is to strong to think 9-7 can make the playoffs.

5-5 again. I am so tired of this.