So what?

[painekiller]

Originally Posted by NBT

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by painekiller

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]

Originally Posted by 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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Roy P

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]

Originally Posted by Roy P

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]

Originally Posted by barrett

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]

Originally Posted by painekiller

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]

Originally Posted by barrett

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]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

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]

Originally Posted by Dennis2112

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]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

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]

Originally Posted by Joshua

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.