Defending Texans Play Action

[mayoclinic]

I dont think we disgusie coverages any less than we used to. Some of the NFLN and ESPN shows have started to point out these examples as they analyze our D (seems they analyze it a lot more when it does well).
The ameboid is more of a disguising the rush. I'm not sure why we don't do that, but it seems like discipline is a work in progress for our defense, so that may well be why.

I understand what the amoeba is - the term " or even" was used in my earlier post to distinguish it from just disguising pass coverages, but I obviously didn't 't express myself well. My apologies for not being clearer.

Regardless, confusion may be one way to slow down play action - make it harder for Schaub to read the defense, either the coverage or the pass rush.

 

[76Texan]

I would think that when you try to collapse the pocket quicker than the play-action is allowed to develop, this would do the job. In the act of collapsing the pocket, I would think we'd "contain" rush which would allow one of the lineman to quickly shed if the RB gets a ball and tries to exploit a lane.

With the Zone Blocking Scheme with the running flow going one way and the QB roll out the opposite direction, there's no pocket to collapse.

The backside end man (on the side of the roll-out) needs to stay home; otherwise, the Qb has all the time to set up and throw.

But if he stays home, and the offense runs the ball, the D has one fewer defender in pursuit.

Even if the defense plays well, it's taxing because of the built-in element of the scheme.

It can be defended; but just like how Brady is so smooth out of the Pats scheme, the Texans scheme is also difficult to defend due to execution.

If you've seen some Texans games where they show the view from the endzone; it's impossible (or very difficult) for the D to tell whether it's a run play going to the left or a pass play going to the right.

The PA from power blocking doesn't give the same elements.

In the meantime, Schaub's faked hand-off to the RB is superb, almost all of the times.

They show you the end zone view and you can't tell until he pulls the ball out of the RB's belly.

This, combined with the action of the O-line and the different pass patterns make it more difficult for the defense.

Even teams in the same division find it a task to defend.
Just like what the Pats do on the offense is also difficult to defend.

The guys on the field just need to execute.

We're talking about two very good teams here.
The one that shows up will win, unless a prevalent luck supports one side more than the other.

I hope this game becomes a classic that fans from both Sides will remember;
Knowing that the Texans have never won anything, of course!

 

[PP2]

I'm assuming you mean 4-2 nickel, but wouldn't it make sense to have a bigger DB on Daniels if you are going to go man coverage? Is your thinking that Arringtom hurts us the least on someone who is unlikely to get deep?

Yes, you are correct. My mistake.

Right.. Daniels is unlikely to go deep so I imagine they put Arrington on him.

 

[76Texan]

Yes, you are correct. My mistake.

Right.. Daniels is unlikely to go deep so I imagine they put Arrington on him.

Does the Gronk need to go deep to cause damage?

17 to 20 can turn into 30-40 in a hurry.

 

[PP2]

Does the Gronk need to go deep to cause damage?

17 to 20 can turn into 30-40 in a hurry.

Unlikely doesn't mean Daniels can't or won't. My thinking is to assign the DB with a high degree of liability to a player who, compared to, AJ for example, would cause a lesser amount of damage.

 

[PP2]

With the Zone Blocking Scheme with the running flow going one way and the QB roll out the opposite direction, there's no pocket to collapse.

The backside end man (on the side of the roll-out) needs to stay home; otherwise, the Qb has all the time to set up and throw.

But if he stays home, and the offense runs the ball, the D has one fewer defender in pursuit.

Even if the defense plays well, it's taxing because of the built-in element of the scheme.

It can be defended; but just like how Brady is so smooth out of the Pats scheme, the Texans scheme is also difficult to defend due to execution.

If you've seen some Texans games where they show the view from the endzone; it's impossible (or very difficult) for the D to tell whether it's a run play going to the left or a pass play going to the right.

The PA from power blocking doesn't give the same elements.

In the meantime, Schaub's faked hand-off to the RB is superb, almost all of the times.

They show you the end zone view and you can't tell until he pulls the ball out of the RB's belly.

This, combined with the action of the O-line and the different pass patterns make it more difficult for the defense.

Even teams in the same division find it a task to defend.
Just like what the Pats do on the offense is also difficult to defend.

The guys on the field just need to execute.

We're talking about two very good teams here.
The one that shows up will win, unless a prevalent luck supports one side more than the other.

I hope this game becomes a classic that fans from both Sides will remember;
Knowing that the Texans have never won anything, of course!

This is an interesting thing to discuss, and I think it will be a great game too and can't wait to watch it on Monday night. Very exciting.

The problem with the zone blocking scheme is that you block whoever shows up in front of you, not a specific player. My thought on that is Spikes will cause some big headaches with this. If you have seen him, you know he has an uncanny ability to time the snap count. My believe is that in addition to focusing on stopping the run, Spikes will be one-gapping along with one or two more linemen who will try to shoot through the zones.

With the bootleg, as you described it, is not a play-action (at least not to my knowledge). I think the same principle as above would threaten. The concept of "contain" rushing would serve to seal the edge on any bootleg/naked bootleg, and you would still have the one-gapping backer or lineman crashing at an angle to minimize the vertical gain of the bootleg.

 

[76Texan]

Unlikely doesn't mean Daniels can't or won't. My thinking is to assign the DB with a high degree of liability to a player who, compared to, AJ for example, would cause a lesser amount of damage.

I still remember Edelman torching us for 10 catches and more then 100 yards a few years ago when Welker unfortunately went down, you don't take anybody lightly. He made a good impression on me that day.

 

[76Texan]

Unlikely doesn't mean Daniels can't or won't. My thinking is to assign the DB with a high degree of liability to a player who, compared to, AJ for example, would cause a lesser amount of damage.

I still remember Edelman torching us for 10 catches and more than 100 yards a few years ago when Welker unfortunately went down, you don't take anybody lightly. He made a good impression on me that day.

 

[76Texan]

This is an interesting thing to discuss, and I think it will be a great game too and can't wait to watch it on Monday night. Very exciting.

The problem with the zone blocking scheme is that you block whoever shows up in front of you, not a specific player. My thought on that is Spikes will cause some big headaches with this. If you have seen him, you know he has an uncanny ability to time the snap count. My believe is that in addition to focusing on stopping the run, Spikes will be one-gapping along with one or two more linemen who will try to shoot through the zones.

With the bootleg, as you described it, is not a play-action (at least not to my knowledge). I think the same principle as above would threaten. The concept of "contain" rushing would serve to seal the edge on any bootleg/naked bootleg, and you would still have the one-gapping backer or lineman crashing at an angle to minimize the vertical gain of the bootleg.

One thing I've seen that can destroy this scheme is for an interior guy blasting through the hole or decimate a guard at the POA. The guards on the ZBS are light weight. They rely on quickness. If a NT or DT gets a good jump, it's very hard for the second guy in the chain to get into the combo block.

 

[76Texan]

Obviously a LB shooting through the gap would work too, but if they come from the second level, it won't be as effective (too far of a distance).
But if one can blow up our Hybrid FB/Te Casey, it will be hard for us to gain yard as well; and Casey can never be compared to Vonta Leach as a blocking machine.

In fact, this is where our inside zone run becomes ineffective.
And the Pats certainly have the LBs to do that.

 

[PP2]

I still remember Edelman torching us for 10 catches and more than 100 yards a few years ago when Welker unfortunately went down, you don't take anybody lightly. He made a good impression on me that day.

Right, this is not to doubt Daniel's abilities, but that it is a well-known BB axiom that he focuses on taking away your best asset and making you try to beat him another way.

 

[76Texan]

This is an interesting thing to discuss, and I think it will be a great game too and can't wait to watch it on Monday night. Very exciting.

The problem with the zone blocking scheme is that you block whoever shows up in front of you, not a specific player. My thought on that is Spikes will cause some big headaches with this. If you have seen him, you know he has an uncanny ability to time the snap count. My believe is that in addition to focusing on stopping the run, Spikes will be one-gapping along with one or two more linemen who will try to shoot through the zones.

With the bootleg, as you described it, is not a play-action (at least not to my knowledge). I think the same principle as above would threaten. The concept of "contain" rushing would serve to seal the edge on any bootleg/naked bootleg, and you would still have the one-gapping backer or lineman crashing at an angle to minimize the vertical gain of the bootleg.

Most of our bootlegs are from the play action. When the backside DE or OLB tries to contain the bootleg (ie. keying on the QB), he takes himself out of a possible run play.

When The RB cut back to his side, he left a small crease that the RB can work through for a decent-to-good gain.

That is why the scheme is hard to defend.
Shanaban and Kubiak have been making a living out of this for years and years.
Yes, it can be defended, but it has never been easy.

 

[PP2]

Obviously a LB shooting through the gap would work too, but if they come from the second level, it won't be as effective (too far of a distance).
But if one can blow up our Hybrid FB/Te Casey, it will be hard for us to gain yard as well; and Casey can never be compared to Vonta Leach as a blocking machine.

In fact, this is where our inside zone run becomes ineffective.
And the Pats certainly have the LBs to do that.

If you have seen Spikes, you will know that when he one-gaps he is invariably never more than two steps off the LOS, and often plays reduced. Also his excellent timing of the snap just about ensures that he is through his gap before the zone blocking can even get off the ground. I will be watching him closely as I believe he will be the key to any defensive success we may have as far as disrupting the bootleg or play-action.

 

[TexasTradition]

It really is amazing how well we run the play action. I honestly feel you will have to get out to an early lead to limit this part of our game.

 

[everlong]

Chung hasn't been playing in base. He only comes on in nickel as the 3rd safety. That's how far down the depth chart he is.

Yes I know I was more speculating that if he was getting out of the dog house this might be the time if ever.