The upcoming Steelers game, 10/2/2011
 

The (2-1) Texans will take on the (2-1) Pittsburgh Steelers this Sunday at home. The Texans are coming off a tough road loss to the New Orleans Saints losing 40-33 while the Steelers squeaked out a road win against the Indianapolis Colts, 23-20 on Sunday Night Football. Pittsburgh got embarrassed in their season opener losing 35-7 at Baltimore but rebounded nicely shutting out Seattle 24-0 at home in week 2. This will be the 3rd road game for Pittburgh in the first 4 weeks of the season.

TV = CBS (channel 11 local), noon CST

Announcers = Greg Gumbel, Dan Dierdorf

This will make 3 out of 4 weeks for the Gumbel/Dierdorf team doing the Texan broadcast. Most of America will be watching.

Favorite = (currently) Texans by 4

Texans waived Steve Slaton today and promoted Chris Ogbannaya according to NFL.com. Hard to argue with the move. Opens up a PS position.

We gotta get ready for the next big challenge and get back on winning side of things.

Should be a very close game.

Hopefully we figure out the red zone scoring and deep pass defence by Sunday.

Wade Phillips says the empty backfield in the fourth quarter of the Saints game did the defense in. Then he said they had practiced against it the whole week? wtf.

We still have problems in the secondary. Playing too far off the ball by the CB's when defending our own goal. It seemd that Jacson and Quin had the most problem.

Schaub had a 103. something QB rating, but that doesn't tell the tale of bad redzone play.

Would it have been any better if Foster had been able to play?

You can bet Pgh will be looking at that video and licking their lips

I think we should be doing better with our adjustments in the 4th quarter.

We better freakin' win. If we're gonna have Arian back, if we're gonna be going up against the awful Steelers OL, if we're gonna be at home....we have to win.

Here's what concerns me about teams spreading us out and going 4 or 5 wide. Why have a LB on the field in those sets? Do you really think Cushing or DeMeco can stick with a RB or TE/WR on a designated passing play? Why not go with 4 DL, 4 CBs (Joseph, Jackson (I guess), Allen, and McCain/McMannis), and 3 safetys (Manning, Quinn, and Nolan)? Why put Cushing in a position where he has to guard a Sproles or Graham when you know the Saints are going to throw the ball?

Seriously? You came away from that game thinking we need to figure out how to get more of our CBs on the field. We don't have 2 guys I feel comfortable with and you want 4?

Sproles did not have much 4th quarter impact. I remember him catching 1 out route for 10 yards or so. And Graham was victimizing Glover Quinn on his TD. The problem was never our LBs in coverage in this game. It was no pressure on Brees up front and no coverage on any of their WRs in the backend.

Agreed. Just to simplify, we're not very good at coverage. Period. Whether you want to talk about LBs, CBs, Ss, we're just not terribly good in coverage. No matter who we leave out there, they will likely get burned when facing a potent offense with a lot of weapons and a good QB if we aren't able to muster a pass rush.

i was really surprised that they didn't have more outside blitzes in the second half once it was apparent that the inside blitzes weren't working. surprised and disappointed. i realize that wade was probably worried about getting burned for the big play, but when breese took less than three minutes total to get two touchdowns on very long yardage drives, call me crazy, but maybe you should try something different.

Agreed. Our secondary needs to growup in a hurry if we hoope to challenge the good teams.

Ingram seemed to have worn us down by the fourth quarter. When they were in the redzone he seemed to be unstoppable.

As an adjustment to when teams spread us out, yes, I think we need to have more CBs than LBs on the field. See this breakdown of the 93-yard drive to put them ahead by Brian Baldinger. We need more speed on the field when team's spread us out. Now whether they'll make a play or break up a pass - that's a different argument. I'm just talking about from a scheme perspective.

But Cushing was not the issue. It may be great theory to get a cb on the field, but it is bad reality to look for reasons to get mcmannis on the field.

Ingram absolutely did not wear us down and I don't know what you watched to come up with that. He had 9 carries all day and that includes 3 consecutive for 4 yards after the final turnover on downs. That means he had 6 carries in the first 59 minutes. It is ridiculous to say he wore us down.

On the Saints 3 TD drives in the 4th quarter they passed 17 times and ran twice. That is not being worn down by Mark Ingram. That is being carved up by Drew Brees.

Looking at those numbers the worst thing I see is that we put no pressure on them when they passed on 17 out of 19 downs where we knew they were going to pass it. That is almost as terrible as lining up 9 yards off the ball.

We won't see another offense like that all year long. While we did not fare well for the final 10 minutes against one of the best offenses in the league, I think we will be OK in the long run.

If we would have had a middle of the pack D last year......
IMO - that's all we need. We are going to have ups and downs in year 1 of the new D, spurts of greatness, and monumental lapses. It happens.

The Steerlers are not the Saints. They have 1 legitimate WR in Wallace, and a couple of others that are of the Jacoby Jones variety. Ward is more of the Kevin Walter arena. Thier O-Line is in shambles, and they can't run the ball.

These are not your daddy's Steelers, these aren't even the Steelers of last year. The whole mantra of them has got people seeing things that aren't there. They got blasted by the Ravens, they were a turnover away from losing to the Colts.

Kool-Aid says we will win by double digits.

I guess we'll agree to disagree. My take is that if a team (on film) is picking on a certain player in coverage (Sproles v. Cushing and Graham v. Cushing) it might be time to make them look elsewhere. Same is true when the teams start locking in on who Kareem lines up against.

Again, if McMannis can't cover, get someone in who can who allows you to match up when teams try to spread you out. IMO, that's a personnel/talent issue, not a strategy issue.

When did they ever pick on Cushing? Graham picked on our safeties. Moore picked on our safeties and slit corners. Sproles had almost no impact in the 4th quarter. Not to mention a dime defense still has a LB. Unless you want 7 of our bad DBs on the field.

The problem with putting 7 DBs on the field is that any RBs just need to get past the front wall to get a big gain. And wasn't stopping runs up the gut already a problem for us?

The problem was that our defense didn't stop their no huddle offense. It's not just a problem with our defense but a problem for every defense in the league. If you can operate a no huddle offense like New England, SD, NO, GB etc then you're pretty much unstoppable. The only way to stop it is to bend but dont break and make them settle for a FG. After 3 or 4 plays of no huddle offense there is almost no pass rush anymore because guys are already gassed.

Did you watch the clip I posted? They went after Cushing twice on that 93-yard drive. Once against Sproles and once against Graham (the deep pass that Manning got the 15-yard penalty on for hitting a defenseless receiver).

If the team goes 5 wides, I don't think they'll have a RB in the backfield.

If a team goes 5 wide then there is no rb either. And in a 5 wr set where we are nickel or dime Cushing will not be manned up with a wr. On the Graham catch, Cushing is playing under him and there are two safeties over who are late.

Cushing is clearly our best LB in Coverage. I don't know of a 7 db defense or a defense with no LB. And I would be looking at our safeties and cbs as culprits in coverage. As I said, Graham beat them worse and more often so I am not understanding how you are fixating on the non existent 7 db defense as the answer for a team with terrible secondary depth.