Official Texans @ Raiders Thread, 12/21/2008

[Big Texas]

Originally Posted by barrett

Slaton is plenty tough to run inside on 1st and 10 but it is unfair to ask him to carry it on 3rd and 1. This should be a priority in the offseason.

On 4th and inches. We couldve fell over the first down marker if the right play were called. But playaction into triple coverage was not the right play.

[Big Texas]

There was triple coverage on Walter and double coverage on AJohnson. So who the hell was on the LOS.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by Big Texas

On 4th and inches. We couldve fell over the first down marker if the right play were called. But playaction into triple coverage was not the right play.

and yet everyone complained about the play call on 3rd and 1 near the goal line in the first half when we gave it to slaton and he got stuffed (without even getting those inches you get for free when you fall down).

You can fault the play calling there, but it doesn't change the fact we don't have a back who can carry it for short yardage.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by chuck

I agree totally, but the team doesn't. They have made it clear that their system demands a one-cut back, and I fully expect them to draft a Slaton clone in the 4th or 5th. If they draft or acquire a short yardage back I will be astonished.

Hopefully the red zone performance this year convinces them otherwise. If not, we'll continue to go for 400 yards and 23 points a game. Running down near the goal line you have to beat people, not misdirect them. Our line is not built for this and that is fine, but you can still have a back who is. Denver always had good power backs who offset the small lineman down near the goal line (davis, anderson, droughns, etc...).

Either way, as suprising as it is to me...we really missed Ahman Green today.

[Big Texas]

Originally Posted by barrett

and yet everyone complained about the play call on 3rd and 1 near the goal line in the first half when we gave it to slaton and he got stuffed (without even getting those inches you get for free when you fall down).

You can fault the play calling there, but it doesn't change the fact we don't have a back who can carry it for short yardage.

I dont contend the fact that we need a short yardage back. My "beef" is the same as that of everyone else. If you cannot convert 4th and inches on the "Raiders"!!! Come on. It shouldnt matter who your back is. "COACH thats what you get paid to do"

[chuck]

Originally Posted by barrett

Hopefully the red zone performance this year convinces them otherwise. If not, we'll continue to go for 400 yards and 23 points a game. Running down near the goal line you have to beat people, not misdirect them. Our line is not built for this and that is fine, but you can still have a back who is. Denver always had good power backs who offset the small lineman down near the goal line (davis, anderson, droughns, etc...).

Either way, as suprising as it is to me...we really missed Ahman Green today.

I really, really hope the team doesn't fall in love with Slaton's numbers (good as they are) and ignore the team's wretched performance in the red zone. They need a bruiser, a guy who can pick up two yards running behind a FB when everyone knows what play you're going to run. Green was great at that role when healthy. I desperately hoped that Chris Taylor would grow into that role.

[Big Texas]

We need to target a bruiser and go and get him. Not settle for anybody and try to turn him into a bruiser.

[nunusguy]

Texans flat and Raiders hungry. But they kept giving us opportunities to get back in the game except Kubiak kept coming up with wierd play calls that makes one wonder if he's really ready for prime-time ?
Anyway, it's hard for our guys to get up for a game that really has no meaning for the rest of the season, especially since we've been doing just that for about 3 or 4 weeks.
The most important things are that nobody got hurt bad and we improved our Draft position for April.

[Big Texas]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

The most important things are that nobody got hurt bad and we improved our Draft position for April.

We been improving our draft position since our inception. When are we gonna start making those draft choices pay off.

[NBT]

We reverted back to the old ho hum defense of the first part of the season. You can't win like that, and I don't really think Kubiak wanted to! So come on with the flames. I have never seen a more uninspired football game.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by chuck

I really, really hope the team doesn't fall in love with Slaton's numbers (good as they are) and ignore the team's wretched performance in the red zone. They need a bruiser, a guy who can pick up two yards running behind a FB when everyone knows what play you're going to run. Green was great at that role when healthy. I desperately hoped that Chris Taylor would grow into that role.

I couldn't agree more. To me Slaton is a better version of what Julius Jones was for the cowboys two years ago. That is not a knock. It is not to say he can't be one of the best RBs in the league. It is just meant to say why ask a guy to do things he doesn't do well.

Slaton clearly is tough enough and physical enough to run between the tackles and to carry it 25+ times a game, but this doesn't mean he is a short yardage back. Short yardage is a unique skill that is less about size than about pad level and how quick and hard a guy hits a hole. Marcus Allen and Emmitt Smith are the two best short yardage guys I've ever seen and neither was big, but they knew how to get low and burrow for the yard. Slaton does a ton of things well (speed, cutbacks, breaks tackles, moves the pile on downfield runs, catches the ball well). But he's just bad on short yardage.

I'd love to see us pick a short yardage runner in the draft (not necessarily a big runner though it could be). I wouldn't spend more than a 2nd or 3rd since we're talking about a part-time back, but I still think it's one of our biggest priorities this offseason (and the biggest on offense). Almost every great running team splits time with two or more GOOD backs. Of the top 7 rushing attacks (minnesota, tennessee, NE, Baltimore, New York Giants) all 7 have a #2 RB that plays an important role in the offense.

[chuck]

Originally Posted by barrett

Slaton clearly is tough enough and physical enough to run between the tackles and to carry it 25+ times a game, but this doesn't mean he is a short yardage back.

Bingo. As I type this I'm watching Brandon Jacobs bull his way up the middle into the end zone when everyone in the stadium knew what they were going to do. Then an effective play-action to a WR who'd slipped the man coverage for an instant. Both of these teams are incredibly effective in the red zone, partially because of their personnel and partially because they have OCs who are not brain dead. Man, this is fun to watch.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by chuck

Bingo. As I type this I'm watching Brandon Jacobs bull his way up the middle into the end zone when everyone in the stadium knew what they were going to do. Then an effective play-action to a WR who'd slipped the man coverage for an instant. Both of these teams are incredibly effective in the red zone, partially because of their personnel and partially because they have OCs who are not brain dead. Man, this is fun to watch.

I agree. Jacobs is awesome. And I'll add that Jacobs would look just as bad if they asked him to be steve slaton as a player in space and a receiver out of the backfield.

Point is don't ask a guy to do what he can't do. Unfortunately right now we have 1 RB. We need another good one in the offseason.

[chuck]

Originally Posted by barrett

We need another good one in the offseason.

Which brings us back to what we were talking about initially. From what I've read and observed they won't specifically look for a bigger back. I am aware that this is a team that kept Ron Dayne on the roster long after his expiration date. We'll see.

[popanot]

I'm certainly not blaming Richard Smith for yeserday's pathetic performance because everyone had a role in that suckitude. However, to me, it just validates that we still need to jettison his ass and hire someone who knows what the hell they're doing. I'm a fraction away from feeling the same way about our HC. The only thing missing yesterday was one of his bonehead challenges.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by popanot

The only thing missing yesterday was one of his bonehead challenges.

Actually Kubiak missed the opportunity to make a valid challenge of that pass that AJ caught just a fraction of an inch above the playing surface that was ruled incomplete.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by chuck

As I type this I'm watching Brandon Jacobs bull his way up the middle into the end zone when everyone in the stadium knew what they were going to do.

It's not just that we don't have Jacobs. We don't have an OLine like the Giants have either. Our OLine, relatively small to include very smallish TEs, is built for ZB which features quickness & finesese/backside & second-level blocking schemes and not power-blocking.

[Big Texas]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

It's not just that we don't have Jacobs. We don't have an OLine like the Giants have either. Our OLine, relatively small to include very smallish TEs, is built for ZB which features quickness & finesese/backside & second-level blocking schemes and not power-blocking.

This is another valid point. Our oline is not in any shape form or fashion bulldozers. It was very simple what oakland did. They said to hell with trying to get penetration on our running plays. (which is what we would have preferred so slaton could do what he does best and cutback on the penetrating lineman.) They didnt even let our Oline get into their zone to block, they just bullrushed our smaller weaker Oline into the backfield while the LB waited for slaton to try and bounce outside. Knowing this, like 11 prior teams, we should have adjusted, call some sweeps or screens (actually to the RB) to take advantage of the DLine that wasnt even looking for the RB, just looking to push the pile backwards.

I dont profess to have all the answers but if you are the HC,OC, or DC halftime is for adjustments not potty breaks.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by popanot

I'm a fraction away from feeling the same way about our HC. The only thing missing yesterday was one of his bonehead challenges.

Was anyone else remembering the first Titans game when Kubiak refused to take fieldgoals which would have put the game in reach? I simply don't understand why he refuses to take the points. Particularly when we're such a terrible short yardage team. Like everyone else has been saying, it would be one thing if we had Brandon Jacobs, but with no go-to short yardage guy, why wouldn't you take the points and get it within 8. This then led to the predictable INT when Schaub pretty much had to force the issue since they were down by 11.

[chuck]

Originally Posted by Joshua

I simply don't understand why he refuses to take the points.

Because he is stubborn and stupid. In my experience this is a dangerous combination.