Time to look at changes?

[painekiller]

Originally Posted by KJ3

if you recognize that here then

recognize it here too. the defense looked better because the titans sat down on their lead. this defense is a mess and every time i see it i know more and more it's richard smith's doing. dropping the only pass rusher we have worth a damn because it makes the defense "predictable" if they don't. what the hell is predictable about this defense? that you can throw and run on it at will? the only people confused by it seem to be the guys trying to run it. whenever a play is made it seems to be in spite of the rest of the defense, not because of it.

We have two young defensive linemen that are very capable of penetrating on every play, instead they appear to be coached to hold the point of attack and shed. This is not what got Okoy into the 1st round. Shooting gaps and disrupting the backfield is what got him here. Now have him play to his strength.


And I agree the Titans sat on their lead, but it worked.

[NBT]

Well, I'm finally back on after 8 days without power.

I agree that the Tacks sat on it(no pun intended!), because Jeff Fisher has Kubiak's number, not only on offense, but defense too. I also agree that Kubiak is pig headed stubborn about not benching Schaub and playing Sage. Granted that Schaub started out the season with two (should have been 3), of the toughest defenses in the NFL. Schaub may yet turn out to be a decent starting QB, but he is starting to lose his confidence, ala another QB we used to have.

On defense there is no excuse for being outplayed badly in Pgh., and in Tackville (at least in the first half), but the comeback in the second half wasn't so much Richard Smith's wonderful coaching (ha!), as it was for DeMeco taking a leadership position and verbally kicking some butt.

I am extremely dissapointed with Kubiak to this point.

[KJ3]

Originally Posted by painekiller

We have two young defensive linemen that are very capable of penetrating on every play, instead they appear to be coached to hold the point of attack and shed. This is not what got Okoy into the 1st round. Shooting gaps and disrupting the backfield is what got him here. Now have him play to his strength.


And I agree the Titans sat on their lead, but it worked.

to go along with what you said, coverage isn't what got mario picked #1 overall. the next time mario is in coverage it needs to be because the texans were up by a couple with :05 on the clock and the D drops 9 for a max endzone protect against a hail mary-in which case they should sub a couple WR in for dline guys anyway ala randy moss.

of course it worked. they have, and thoroughly believe in, a defense that comes to play every game i've seen them in. 7 now? 7 straight losses?

[coloradodude]

Originally Posted by painekiller

We have two young defensive linemen that are very capable of penetrating on every play, instead they appear to be coached to hold the point of attack and shed. This is not what got Okoy into the 1st round. Shooting gaps and disrupting the backfield is what got him here. Now have him play to his strength.


And I agree the Titans sat on their lead, but it worked.

The coaches might have seen that they needed to force the RB's to the outside so the LB's could have a better advantage. I don't know this I'm just saying the coaches might have game planned for a reason.

[Arky]

Originally Posted by painekiller

And I agree the Titans sat on their lead, but it worked.

Whatever. Did they not want more points? Were they happy with their 9-12 point lead?

In the second half, they passed less and went to the run. We stopped the run. We contained Lendale White and Chris Johnson pretty good in the run. They had a lot of 3 and outs. The word coming from the Texans postgame was "the defense gave them a chance to win" in the second half - the offense just couldn't get it done.... If y'all want to call it "Tennesse sat on the lead" - fine..... I think the defense had something to do with it, though....

[mussop]

Originally Posted by Arky

Whatever. Did they not want more points? Were they happy with their 9-12 point lead?

In the second half, they passed less and went to the run. We stopped the run. We contained Lendale White and Chris Johnson pretty good in the run. They had a lot of 3 and outs. The word coming from the Texans postgame was "the defense gave them a chance to win" in the second half - the offense just couldn't get it done.... If y'all want to call it "Tennesse sat on the lead" - fine..... I think the defense had something to do with it, though....

Check out the play-by-play.

On the Titans' first series of the third quarter, they went run, pass, pass, run, run, pass, run, pass. That's eight plays and four passes. That's not backing off.

On the Titans' second series of the third quarter, they went pass, run, pass, pass and kicked a field goal. That's not backing off.

On their third series of the third quarter, they started at their 9 and went run, run, run and punt.

On their fourth series of the third quarter, they went run, run, pass, pass, punt.

Anyway, that should clear up those of you who claim the Titans backed off in the third quarter.

[painekiller]

Heard Eric Winston on the radio this afternoon and he made some really good points that we need to pay attention to. Prior to our game with them the Titans had averaged holding their opponent to around 60 yds/game. The Texans where able to gain 146 yds against a one of the best run defenses in the league.

We found a back who runs hard every play, and can score from any point on the field.

The OL realizes that they are close to getting the ZBS down, and when they do, they will be able to run on anyone.

Now Eric was not offering the stats as excuses, but he was saying the other teams they have been playing are really top tier type teams at least on defense . And yes the players understand the urgency of the next two games.

IMO if you take away a few play calls from Kubiak, blown assignments and dropped passes, this team almost won a road game against a team that has it's number.

[KJ3]

Originally Posted by mussop

Anyway, that should clear up those of you who claim the Titans backed off in the third quarter.

how many yards did they get compared to the first half? how many of those passes were dumpoffs or screens? i'm just curious.

[cadams]

I am pretty sure that Slayton was over 100 yards in the first half, of course 51 of those were on one play.

[painekiller]

Originally Posted by cadams

I am pretty sure that Slayton was over 100 yards in the first half, of course 51 of those were on one play.

True, but the run offense is designed for the big play. If the OL is doing it's job then we should have more than a couple plays a game of over 20 yds. All the 1 yard plays will get tiresome but then a huge hole is there and with a back like Slaton, the other team pays.

[mussop]

Originally Posted by KJ3

how many yards did they get compared to the first half? how many of those passes were dumpoffs or screens? i'm just curious.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playby...&override=true

This should help. It has a recap, box score, play-by-play and drive chart. Its pretty cool.

[KJ3]

Originally Posted by mussop

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playby...&override=true

This should help. It has a recap, box score, play-by-play and drive chart. Its pretty cool.

very cool indeed, thank you.

so here is my count:
1st half totals 20 handoffs, 12 dumpoffs, 5 real pass attempts
2nd half totals 16 handoffs, 6 dumpoffs, 3 real pass attempts

while the defense did limit their drives with better 2nd half play, fisher helped out by not calling as many passes/dumpoffs. those dumpoffs really killed us in the 1st half but i think where the D actually put a foot in the ground is defending the run which was evident in the individual gains of their runs. of the 20 1st half handoffs 9 were for 5+ yard. the 2nd half defense only allowed 2. 7 of the 12 1st half dumpoffs were for 9+ yards to go with the 2nd half's 1 for 9 or more. i classified anything that was listed as "short right/middle/left" as a dumpoff pass if anyone was wondering.