the defense was playing vanilla schemes when cushing and demeco were playing together. i just cant buy this "maybe he defense is too complex for them" excuse becuase i doubt any defense is entirely that clueless and dumb on a pro level. and if that's the case the texans did a HORRIBLE job of putting together a defense with such low football iq.
I remember that during mini camps, Kareem said that Saban's defense at Alabama was more complex. They went into the season vanilla and stayed that way.
false. The pass rush is impossible when a. You instruct your guys to play 10 yards off the WRs and they kill you underneath. b. you instruct your guys to play tight and they constantly fall down or get burned (by the WR running straight forward) and give up the deep ball. These guys are terrible.
Its a mindset. Confident defenses appear more aggressive, hit harder, and are opportunistic. Hesitant defenses miss tackles, get burnt, and never force turnovers. Right now, every single defensive player on the Texans is playing hesitantly. Either they're just not good enough to overcome their mistakes (Jackson, Diles, Okoye, Cody), or they're talented... but seem to get lost in trying to do too much, or are getting effectively targeted/neutralized by other teams (Cushing, Mario). Most of all, it seems they have zero semblance of a game plan from week to week... and that is on the coaching. If you see the way Pittsburgh hits/makes tackles, you will see what I'm talking about. Some of those guys don't possess any more individual talent than what the Texans have... but they have the confidence that as a UNIT, they can stop anybody.
i meant to say secondary rather than safeties, but the opposing qb's are also playing call of duty and taking a nap while in the pocket at other times. the giants secondary is still average now and they were worse last year the only thing different is the giants pass rush is back. we get shredded on 3rd and longs and that's not soley on the secondary. they are part of the blame but the pass rush (something we built the team for) has been soft this year. if our secondary is poor then the d-line has done little to help them out. agreed, tomlin and dick lebeau dont play that ****.
He's been playing poorly all season so far, but for some reason I'm not ready to give up on him quite yet. It's too bad that he's one of the corners we have to rely and depend upon so much, but there's always the possibility, however slim it may seem to some, that he picks things up and improves from this year to the next.
Could be. But Eli said he basically knew what we were doing before we do it. Steve Young said it's a QB dream to play against this Defense. Every week it seems like some player or coach is saying "Well, we had a good idea of what they were going to do..."
I don't know about dumb...how about stubborn? How about unwilling to admit a mistake? I see a few players on this roster where it's clear to me that this franchise has a difficult time admitting big mistakes and moving on. Calling it a sunk cost and playing for the next gain. If Kareem Jackson is the best we have at corner, then that's squarely on Gary. And it sure makes him LOOK dumb....even if he's a Rhodes scholar.
that doesn't help his cause...it hurts it. the SEC is great for college football..but not a lot of pro style offense was being run last year in the SEC.
I would just blitz ...**** it !!! Might as well try to cause a few turnovers since youre gonna give up 350 yds passing anyway........
they don't do anything. seriously. it's as vanilla as it gets. did you hear Steve Young say the other night that he'd love to play the Texans defense, because they run the same thing every play??
Kareem definitely improved his stock at the combine. There were questions about his speed going in but he ran a good 40. As we can see, that 40 time didn't translate to the football field. The questions about his speed were well founded. He has no make up speed. When he gets burned, he gets burned.
I'm not sure, but I'm referring to the second half anyways. I think by game 9 he should have been in there.
I repped your post because I'm so tired of people giving the secondary the "pass rush" excuse. It's like they aren't watching the game. It isn't like the other team's QB is just sitting in the pocket for 10 seconds while his receivers fight to get out from under some blanket coverage and finally get open. It is true the pass rush isn't good, but it would have to be HOF level to cover up for this secondary. Like Casey said, we give big cushions at the line and when we don't it doesn't matter anyway because Kareem Jackson can't turn and run. He stumbles at the snap multiple times every game, and it isn't like he's getting shook by Jerry Rice in his prime. Guys just run at the snap and Jackson falls as he tries to turn to run with them. A good pass rush would help obviously, but it would not make up for this.
Ugh. I can't believe this line has gotten this much play after John McLame put it out there when they drafted him and everyone scratched their head. Tommy Tuberville was on the radio this morning and blasted this line of thinking (unintentionally) He said (paraphrased) that most SEC schools require physicality on defense to be sure, but they don't need to be great cover guys by any means as most SEC schools don't even run 3 wide sets very often. He said that in the Big 12 if you don't have good players in your secondary the wide open offenses will expose you, where in the SEC it's a lot of two back sets, two tight end sets, etc. and it's easier to hide.
Yeah, agreed. There does seem to be a stubbornness to his actions - but I wonder if that's tied to him simply not having a plan B? Maybe Kareem Jackson truly is the best option because options B through D are even worse? This is shaping up to be Kubiak's legacy, I'm afraid: Too much faith in unproven talent - on the field, sidelines and front office. I think he's done a lot of good - I cringe at the thought of this offense being handed to someone else. But teams like the Texans - young and mostly inexperienced teams that are trying to take the next step - have to sprinkle some veterans throughout their organization to ensure buy-in, to provide experience and to augment performance. He did this early on - he had Sherman and Gibbs on his staff, he stocked his roster with experienced guys who knew his system (Salaam, the various RBs, Zgnognia) - but for whatever reason, as the team ascended, he got away from this - and I think it'll likely be his undoing. Or, perhaps he saves his job by firing Bush and promising to bring in a big-name defensive coordinator. That might actually placate some – and… it might actually be a viable solution. I was shocked – SHOCKED - he didn’t consider Mike Nolan for the DC job, given his Denver ties. He would have been a much better, safer hire than rolling the dice with Bush. So maybe he convinces McNair to give him one more chance (which McNair grants because of the extension/labor uncertainty) and Kubiak uses it to flood his staff with experienced coaches who know what they’re doing and have the track record to back it up. It might not sell to a lot of disgruntled fans – but, again: if I’m McNair, I’m *really* hesitant to screw with the offense, which works extremely well.
This is probably true, but who should take the blame for that? It isn't like the other players he was counting on got hurt or he was spurned in FA. He picked the players he has, so if options B through D are worse than the terrible play of option A, that also falls at his feet. I hear what you are saying, but it isn't like this is the most innovative offense of all time, or that he is simply scheming and able to plug in anyone to make it run. His running schemes haven't been anything of note save for Slaton year where he was explosive and now Foster. It isn't like anyone can run for us. And it isn't like he's got a bunch of no-name receivers tearing up the field. I think the offense would be fine with another coach, maybe even better if you got a coach who played to his strengths better than Kubiak does.
I'm more and more warming to the idea that Kubiak, the GM, is a bigger issue than Kubiak, the head coach. Innovation is, frankly, the least of my concerns - it's productive. Week after week. Sometimes he gets in the way of it, yes - but it's been a top offense for two years running now. He's been able to win in the air and now has the ability to win on the ground. It's a *very* good offense. We shouldn't - in our angst and disappointment - gloss over that fact. Think where this offense was in 2006 or, even worse - 2005.
