Texans Interested In Leinart?

[painekiller]

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.

[Roy P]

It would be nice if our 'setup' play was still good for averaging 3 positive yards.

[chuck]

Originally Posted by Roy P

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!

[painekiller]

Originally Posted by chuck

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.

[chuck]

Originally Posted by painekiller

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.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by painekiller

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.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by Joshua

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.

[HPF Bob]

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.

[chuck]

Originally Posted by barrett

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.

[Bigtinylittle]

Originally Posted by painekiller

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.

[popanot]

Originally Posted by painekiller

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.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by popanot

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.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by barrett

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.

[Keith]

chron has Leinart's contact details, including a noteworthy bit about Dan Orlovsky agreeing to a paycut.

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

[chuck]

Originally Posted by Keith

chron has Leinart's contact details, including a noteworthy bit about Dan Orlovsky agreeing to a paycut.

Wow. Rick Smith is earning his money.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by Keith

chron has Leinart's contact details, including a noteworthy bit about Dan Orlovsky agreeing to a paycut.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...t/7192079.html

Reading between the lines, it sounds like Orlovsky was given the option of a reduced salary or the highway. Apparently, he concluded the reduced salary was better than anything he could get on the open market in September.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by Joshua

Reading between the lines, it sounds like Orlovsky was given the option of a reduced salary or the highway. Apparently, he concluded the reduced salary was better than anything he could get on the open market in September.

Which begs the question, if the Texans were willing to cut DanO and eat the guaranteed money, why didn't they just do so and retain Booty as their backup ?

[painekiller]

Originally Posted by popanot

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.

[Fonz the Boss]

Originally Posted by popanot

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.