IntheBullseye.com  

Go Back   IntheBullseye.com > Hot Reads ...In the Bullseye > The Texans
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 09-07-2010, 11:34 AM
Roy P Roy P is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,761
Default

It would be nice if our 'setup' play was still good for averaging 3 positive yards.
__________________
Originally Posted by chuck
I'm just sitting here thinking (pacing, actually) that whatever my issues with Kubiak he is apparently a goddam genius at tutoring quarterbacks.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-07-2010, 12:02 PM
Bigtinylittle Bigtinylittle is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 262
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by painekiller View Post
You do know that the reverse is not designed to work every time, right? There is another purpose to the play, the play is designed to be on film to make the DE stay at home, and crash the running plays from behind.

Showing a play like this every once in the while makes the defenses aware of it and makes them think. That split second they are having to think maybe all the OL needs to spring the RB for a big a gain on the spread play.

Calling plays in the NFL is like a chess match, you show a certain move early in order to set up another move later.
That's exactly right and it's one of the reasons I almost never criticise an individual play call by any coach.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-07-2010, 02:21 PM
chuck chuck is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy P View Post
It would be nice if our 'setup' play was still good for averaging 3 positive yards.
Right. Hey, I got an idea! Let's run a play that's almost sure to lose 8 yards so we can make the DE stay at home and maybe pick up four later in the game!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-07-2010, 03:23 PM
painekiller painekiller is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Near the Galleria
Posts: 2,852
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck View Post
Right. Hey, I got an idea! Let's run a play that's almost sure to lose 8 yards so we can make the DE stay at home and maybe pick up four later in the game!
It's not about gaining the 4 yds later, it about the play action roll out deep pass to AJ or Jacoby for a TD. The play also makes the Safeties have to stay at home. This is a well crafted offense, even if most of the fans do not understand that.
__________________
There is no failure, only feedback.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-07-2010, 07:30 PM
chuck chuck is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by painekiller View Post
This is a well crafted offense, even if most of the fans do not understand that.
Get back to me on this when the team shows some production in the red zone rather than anemic two-back sets and halfback passes.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-07-2010, 07:40 PM
Joshua Joshua is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by painekiller View Post
It's not about gaining the 4 yds later, it about the play action roll out deep pass to AJ or Jacoby for a TD. The play also makes the Safeties have to stay at home. This is a well crafted offense, even if most of the fans do not understand that.
While I get your point, I took Bob's point to be more about the personnel the Texans use for this play rather than the play itself. Also, I'm certain there must be a play beside an end-around with Kevin Walter that can keep a DE at home.

That said, it is a fairly well designed offense, but let's not go overboard. I think it's a mistake to read some misunderstood genius in every play Kubiak calls. Sometimes, it's just a bad playcall. At the end of the day, this offense is still middle of the pack when it comes to what matters-scoring points.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-07-2010, 08:00 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua View Post
While I get your point, I took Bob's point to be more about the personnel the Texans use for this play rather than the play itself. Also, I'm certain there must be a play beside an end-around with Kevin Walter that can keep a DE at home.

That said, it is a fairly well designed offense, but let's not go overboard. I think it's a mistake to read some misunderstood genius in every play Kubiak calls. Sometimes, it's just a bad playcall. At the end of the day, this offense is still middle of the pack when it comes to what matters-scoring points.
The Texans were 10th in scoring offense last year. That's not the middle of the pack.

As for the reverse to Walter. Walter has averaged 6 ypc in his career (higher the last two years). AJ has averaged 1.2 ypc. JJ 2.3 ypc. And AD 3.6 ypc.

So my guess is that calling that play is a bad play call. We have never run it well and none of our guys have had any success with it. And we already run the bootleg great and that keeps the DE home. And the end around doesn't help the bootleg at all. The end around is a wasted play.

But Bob's crusade against Walter is more about the "white boy" part then about the "reverse" part since Walter has run it better than the rest of our guys.

Last edited by barrett; 09-07-2010 at 08:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-07-2010, 08:40 PM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,149
Default

What makes any bootleg or rollout work is play action, not reverses. If we ran the ball more effectively, the end would have no choice but to respect it.

As for Walter having a higher success rate than the others, I presume it has to do with more opportunities. Besides, when Walter runs it, the defense has to stop laughing long enough to make the tackle.

If Walter is our best blocking receiver, as I hear told, then it makes less sense to have him running the play instead of blocking in front of it.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-07-2010, 09:13 PM
edo783 edo783 is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Tomball
Posts: 313
Default

Back to the topic. Yes, the spin does have issues, but not so much for being catchable or not. If you watch a QBs throw down the sideline more than say 20 yards, you will notice the ball move either towards the sideline or towards the field depending on whether it is the left or right side of the field and whether it is a left or right handed thrower. The rotational spin causes the ball to move sort of like a baseball does when thrown. I have seen it move what looks like a foot or more on longer throws. The spin will also help it stay on track better in crosse winds, depending on what direction they are coming from. However, a tight spiral seems to have as much or even more to do with keeping it on track in wind.
__________________
Old age just comes at a real bad time.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-07-2010, 10:02 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPF Bob View Post
What makes any bootleg or rollout work is play action, not reverses. If we ran the ball more effectively, the end would have no choice but to respect it.

As for Walter having a higher success rate than the others, I presume it has to do with more opportunities. Besides, when Walter runs it, the defense has to stop laughing long enough to make the tackle.

If Walter is our best blocking receiver, as I hear told, then it makes less sense to have him running the play instead of blocking in front of it.
I agree about playaction and bootlegs being key to the run game rather than the reverse.

But say what you want about opportunities (and AJ has had more than KW), say what you want about blocking, the bottom line is that Walter has been better on that play than any WR we have. So complain about the play call and not Walter.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 09-07-2010, 10:59 PM
Nconroe Nconroe is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lake Conroe
Posts: 2,897
Default

Well, a few very successful QB's have been left handed such as Steve Young, Kenny Stabler, Boomer Esiason, to name a few. So, maybe Leinert can get there. But left handed QB are pretty rare in NFL overall.

As I think I understand spin on the ball, spin will cause the ball to change trajectory slightly off the straight line in direction of the spin and thus the drag of ball may cause some drift in that direction, as will wind speed and speed of the ball thrown over a distance, and delivery mechanics of the throw.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-08-2010, 01:43 PM
chuck chuck is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barrett View Post
But Bob's crusade against Walter is more about the "white boy" part then about the "reverse" part since Walter has run it better than the rest of our guys.
Bob dislikes white people. Huh. Who knew?

edo - that's an interesting observation. I'd never thought of that but I can see plainly that a ball could drift due to spin on some longer throws. I've never noticed this when I'm fooling around with a football but then again I can't throw a ball 60 yards either. Not usually.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-08-2010, 03:54 PM
popanot popanot is offline
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by painekiller View Post
Calling plays in the NFL is like a chess match, you show a certain move early in order to set up another move later.
Then please explain the 2-yards and a cloud-of-dust flare to (even slower than a white-boy) Leach they so love to run. Do they run other plays to setup that big gainer, or, do they run that play to setup other big plays? For some reason that play never seems to keep defenses off-balance.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-08-2010, 05:29 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck View Post
Bob dislikes white people. Huh. Who knew?

edo - that's an interesting observation. I'd never thought of that but I can see plainly that a ball could drift due to spin on some longer throws. I've never noticed this when I'm fooling around with a football but then again I can't throw a ball 60 yards either. Not usually.
I bet he likes them just fine.

A failed play with a white guy is just more memorable than all the times that play failed with AJ and JJ.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-08-2010, 05:30 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by popanot View Post
Then please explain the 2-yards and a cloud-of-dust flare to (even slower than a white-boy) Leach they so love to run. Do they run other plays to setup that big gainer, or, do they run that play to setup other big plays? For some reason that play never seems to keep defenses off-balance.
The reverse is bad, but the flare to leach really is a good play. That pass being thrown means Schaub has gone through all of his progressions and has NOBODY else open. No way is Schaub throwing to him by choice. That play is about getting the ball out.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-08-2010, 06:59 PM
painekiller painekiller is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Near the Galleria
Posts: 2,852
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by popanot View Post
Then please explain the 2-yards and a cloud-of-dust flare to (even slower than a white-boy) Leach they so love to run. Do they run other plays to setup that big gainer, or, do they run that play to setup other big plays? For some reason that play never seems to keep defenses off-balance.
Believe it or not that play has to be run a few times a year, to keep defenses honest.

That is straight from a Bill Walsh's mouth. A few years ago they ran great film on Walsh and the WCO. They had clips from the hours of tape the 49ers have of Walsh talking WCO offensive. He talked about the reason you run plays that only get a yard or two. Everything has a purpose.

Kubiak's first order of business when hired by the 49ers to be QB coach way back in the day, was to watch all 200 hours of Walsh's tapes. That is how every 49ers offensive assistant was taught. At least until last season, not sure about the current guys.
__________________
There is no failure, only feedback.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-08-2010, 08:11 PM
Fonz the Boss Fonz the Boss is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 351
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by popanot View Post
Then please explain the 2-yards and a cloud-of-dust flare to (even slower than a white-boy) Leach they so love to run. Do they run other plays to setup that big gainer, or, do they run that play to setup other big plays? For some reason that play never seems to keep defenses off-balance.
Is that the play that came in handy against the Packers a couple years back? It was a big gainer on the game winning drive.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-08-2010, 10:35 PM
Keith Keith is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,761
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barrett View Post
The reverse is bad, but the flare to leach really is a good play. That pass being thrown means Schaub has gone through all of his progressions and has NOBODY else open. No way is Schaub throwing to him by choice. That play is about getting the ball out.
Yeah. That's the hope, and Schaub is good enough to make me believe it.

There are plenty of Checkdown Charlie's in the league though that I doubt go through their progressions enough.... David Carr, Trent Edwards, uhm Matt Leinart, and so on. Eh, I knock the FB checkdown, but it serves a purpose if used sparingly. Hopefully it allows Leach to unload on a CB at least.
__________________
Support ...IntheBullseye.com and follow us on Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-08-2010, 11:07 PM
Keith Keith is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,761
Default

chron has Leinart's contact details, including a noteworthy bit about Dan Orlovsky agreeing to a paycut.
Quote:
Leinart signed a one-year contract for $630,000. He can earn $23,125 for every game he’s designated as the No. 2 quarterback. His contract maxes out at $1 million.

Orlovsky's restructured deal calls for him to make a base salary of $850,000 — a reduction from $2.25 million. He can make up the difference by earning $25,000 for every game he's the No. 2 quarterback.

Orlovsky also can earn $100,000 for every game he's the starting quarterback — a maximum of 10 games and $1 million.

In 2011, Orlovsky was scheduled to earn $2.75 mllion. Instead, he receives a base salary of $1.375 million. He can earn that back if he's No. 2 for one game this season. He will be the No. 2 quarterback for Sunday’s game against Indianapolis, which means he won’t be taking a cut in pay next year.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...t/7192079.html
__________________
Support ...IntheBullseye.com and follow us on Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-09-2010, 12:00 AM
chuck chuck is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,845
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
chron has Leinart's contact details, including a noteworthy bit about Dan Orlovsky agreeing to a paycut.
Wow. Rick Smith is earning his money.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.