Why Can't the Defense Stop Elite QBs?

[chuck]

I was profoundly depressed watching both of the games yesterday. The Texans are not an organization that demands nor seeks excellence and as a result they will never be able to compete with those that do.

Maybe in 15 years when Cal takes over things will be different. But I doubt it.

[barrett]

McNair is undoubtedly more concerned with running a "classy and respected" organization than with winning superbowls. With that in mind, 12-4 and a playoff win suits his needs just fine.

As for our defense, Baltimore got redzone stops and that was the difference. They got down near the goalline and Baltimore was lined up and ready. Maybe the issues at MLB contributed to our issues getting lined up, maybe Phillips didn't have them prepared, maybe you need a Ray Lewis to play chess with Tom Brady, who knows.

[chuck]

Originally Posted by barrett

With that in mind, 12-4 and a playoff win suits his needs just fine.

6-10 with a full stadium of drunk rednecks 8 times a year seems to suit him just fine, too.

[WMH]

Yeah, you guys are probably right. McNair wants to run this organization into the ground by putting the cheapest product he can on the field, skimp on coaches and front office staff, all the while reaping in the profits by us blindly following a losing organization. He has no desire to continue to try to win, continue to boost fan support thru sales of tickets/merchandise so he can make a quick buck before he heads to the pearly gates.

Yeah, that makes perfect sense.

[Nconroe]

It did seem like Baltimore won both lines of scrimmage yesterday for some reason.

The fast, short pass game of Brady sure worked good on Texans and not on Baltimore yesterday.

Maybe too many Texan ILB were injued to cover with depth.

And perhaps field position contributed to lenght of drives needed due to short punts and interception?

Perhaps Texan secondary had too many injuries to cover with depth.

I don't think cash or scheme had that much of an impact.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by WMH

Yeah, you guys are probably right. McNair wants to run this organization into the ground by putting the cheapest product he can on the field, skimp on coaches and front office staff, all the while reaping in the profits by us blindly following a losing organization. He has no desire to continue to try to win, continue to boost fan support thru sales of tickets/merchandise so he can make a quick buck before he heads to the pearly gates.

Yeah, that makes perfect sense.

I don't think anyone called him cheap (well, maybe, chuck kinda did). I think the complaint is that McNair isn't singularly dedicated to winning a Super Bowl. Instead, he appears to be content with a very good football team made in his image. It's pretty much common knowledge that the Texans take more guys off their board for "character" reasons than most teams and that this directive comes from McNair. McNair also clearly likes Kubiak personally and has given him more rope than virtually any other owner would have.

For right or wrong, McNair appears to want to win his way and if something has to give, it just may be the winning rather than his way.

[Joshua]

And I guess I should add that I don't think McNair is consciously choosing his way over winning. I think he thinks both can be done. Also, I think he lets his personal affection for certain people cloud his judgment and probably leads to him not being as objective as he should.

[chuck]

I never said McNair is cheap nor do I think he is. I just know for a fact that there are certain things more important to him than winning a Super Bowl. One might argue that McNair's is a commendable position to have. I will not make that argument.

[Arky]

McClain did an interview with McNair a few days ago. Read it here.

He sure doesn't sound like Gordon Gekko....

I’d like to see him win more games. Whatever we have to do is what we’ll do because we’re all committed to bringing a championship to Houston.

[cadams]

Originally Posted by Arky

McClain did an interview with McNair a few days ago. Read it here.

He sure doesn't sound like Gordon Gekko....

this is the diamond of the story in my opinion

"He’s not the kind of quarterback to take a mediocre team on his shoulders and carry them all the way."

[barrett]

I saw an article today that lists our defensive performance before and after Cushing. It was night and day. #1 in every conceivable category before his injury and middle of the pack after. Watt's amazing year made it easy to forget just how good Cushing was last year and the first quarter of this year as a MLB.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by barrett

I saw an article today that lists our defensive performance before and after Cushing. It was night and day. #1 in every conceivable category before his injury and middle of the pack after. Watt's amazing year made it easy to forget just how good Cushing was last year and the first quarter of this year as a MLB.

Stats are one thing, but how would you explain 2 of the teams 3 most notable successes in the 2012 season (Baltimore & Chicago) coming after Cushings departure ?

[barrett]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

Stats are one thing, but how would you explain 2 of the teams 3 most notable successes in the 2012 season (Baltimore & Chicago) coming after Cushings departure ?

Our offense played great in Baltimore and our pass rush was also great.

In Chicago we slugged out an ugly win over a non-playoff team in a monsoon.

Either way I wasn't saying we could not win without him. I was pointing out that with him we were an elite defense (like in 2011). Without him we were a sometimes great (when the pass rush was great) and sometimes mediocre defense.