Texans - Colts

[BSmack]

Point of clarification please.

Has Rump been effective in this thread posting moronic takes or has he been successful in this thread posting moronic takes???

His moronic take to post ratio is a stellar 1-1. That is both effective and successful tarding under any circumstances.

[Shine]

Unless of course he was trolling us this whole time.

[Dinsdale]

A rushing line of 20 for 220 most likely has long runs in it for 30, 50 and 60 yards, so the average is somewhat flawed because of the sporadic nature in the distances of those 20 runs. If you have a rushing line of 45 for 220, chances are you are having moderate success in running the ball and your short and long distances are closer together making the average a true tale of the running game.

And let's see if I got THIS part right...


So just because you broke some off for long gains, this means your short runs are shorter?

Huh?


No, no flaw in that theory.


So, an analogy for this would be: Say for the sake of discussion, Rumple did a bunch of roids and HGH, and bulked up to 350lbs. Does this mean you and the Missus can now let some of the air out of your home's foundation, since the gap between the residents' weight is closer?

Huh?


So, you don't get any long ones. Say for example, one of these shorter-than-average runs is on first down. Followed by another on 2nd. With the star reciever out, chances are goos 3rd and 7 is an incompletion. Guess what? You just put Manning back on the field after a punt... last I checked, punting doesn't put points on the board (See: Last Lesson).


Math isn't one of your strong suits, eh?


Then again, neither is football. The lower the per-carry, the more of a "true tale" it tells of the running game, and the more "effectively" you ran the ball. Alllllrighty, then.


Because busting off runs of 30, 50, and 60 is counterproductive to scoring more points than the other team. Don't quit your day job, bud.

[Dinsdale]

Dear Mr. Kubiak,

As a "longtime" Texans fan, and an ameteur football strategist, I feel it is my duty to inform you of a revelation I've had.

See, we all know that the Colt's offense, Peyton Manning in particular, are a nearly unstoppable force on offense. As you demonstrated last season, the key to beating them isn't in running the ball successfully -- it's all about running the ball EFFECTIVELY. As an NFL head coach, I'm sure you're aware of this.

Of course, you of all people know that you need to limit your yards-per-carry average to be effective in the running game, so we don't need to review this strategy. The purpose of my letter is to discuss my new strategy for your consideration -- taking a knee on kick and punt returns, or possibly running backwards, just inside the 10 yard line.

While on the surface, this goes against the grain of conventional football logic, but hear me out -- the more yards we have to go, field-position-wise, the more 2-4 yard runs we'll be able to execute. And everyone knows that keeping the runs as short as possible eats up clock. I feel though that if you were to implement my proposal, it would give our team a better chance at winning, since the farther we have to go to score, the more likely we'll win the possession battle.


Please give my idea the approprite consideration.


Sin, your Behind-The Scenes Strategist,

Rumple



P.S.: If you need someone really big to fill in on the offensive line, give me a call. She's as big as a fortress, and "offensive" is her specialty.

[dotdotdot]

I thought my insight was pretty $$$.

[RumpleForeskin]

Oh Dins, you are quite the savvy expert on all that is football and well...everything else. Try this, tard, yes of course the Texans score and Peyton gets the ball, but fewer posessions for Manning equate to a higer rate of success against the Colts. Tell me you knew. You cannot ignore the fact that controlling the clock and dominating time of posession usually ends up as a W to the team that controls TOP. I'm not going to look up the research but if an offense holds onto the ball 11 or minutes more than the opposing team, I am quite sure that team wins the game. 'Cus it is about winning, right? You did explain that to me didn't ya?

Go fuck yourself, Dins. Y'all are forming some sort of wytch hunt against me just so I can concede to your novice football knowledge. Fuck you and fuck anything you think is right is taking the opposite stance of what I think is right. I have never dealt with so many tards at one time. I am confident in my knowledge of the game and this game in particular considering I have seen EVERY fucking snap between the Colts and the Texans. Give me a team and I will break it down with unmatched accuracy. Just try me, tards.

[Dinsdale]

Just try me, tards.

We did.

And you offered up something about running for less yards per carry being a strategic key.

What more is there to discuss?


This?

fewer posessions for Manning equate to a higer rate of success against the Colts

So, the opponent having fewer possessions equates to an increased chance at victory?

Wow, let me write that one down in the playbook, Mr Lombardi.


OK, I see your math skills haven't got any sharper in the last few hours. Again, I'll try to help.


Let's see... hmmm... "fewer posessions[sic]."


Uhm, don't know if you noticed this or not with your self-proclaimed football expertise, but in almost every football game played at any level, the number of possessions for each team is within two of each other, barring an onside kick or a TO on a kickoff/muffed punt/etc. Matter of fact, that's the ONLY way the number of possessions can vary by more than 2.

Tell me you knew?


So, there goes your moronic fucking "key to the game," eh? Unless of course the Rumple playbook calls for the deadly tandem of Colt-crushing strategy -- 1) Win the coin toss, and 2) Onside kick every time you score.


Is this really what you're trying to say?

And you have the gall to call anyone else a "tard"?


Since you're completely fucking clueless as to the basics of football math -- it's how many points you score on the possessions you have, dumbass. If you score more on yourt possessions than your opponent does on his, you win, since both teams are going to have... are you sitting down?...

THE SAME NUMBER OF POSSESSIONS, give or take one or two(barring the aforementioned uncommon circumstances).


Sorry, douche -- you may think you're pretty clever with the "keep Manning off the field" bit, but you've not fooled anyone here into thinking your head is anywhere but deep in your ass.


Yes, Manning is very effective at leading his team down the field. That's not in question. What is in question, is your inability to grasp the concept that he's equally effective whether it be on 5 drives or 15. The number of possessions in no way changes the fact that a team has to score with greater efficiency than the opponent(regardless of which teams). If a team is more effective with a ball-control offense, then so be it. Despite your delusional ramblings to the contrary, more time-of-possession means you probably executed well in the running game. It still doesn't change the balance of possessions between the two teams, nor does it alter Manning's ability to lead his team efficiently down the field.


And frankly, I'm not understanding the mental shortcoming that would even lead anyone to believe otherwise. By limiting the opponents' possessions, you are, BY DEFINITON, limiting your own. Either way, whoever executes more efficiently on offense wins the game...period...not open for debate, since the team with the most points on the board wins the game at the end of the 4th quarter.

Unless you really want us to believe you advocate attempting an onside kick at every opportunity(which you've yet to mention, thank goodness). Otherwise, I don't exactly see your math when you talk about "limiting possessions." If your strategy involves getting on your knees and praying that the Colts turn it over on kickoffs and punts, then... well, that's why your team is a laughingstock, much like yourself.


And, just for the sake of continuing the well-deserved Rumple pile-on discussion, let's say you do "limit possessions." Let's couple the limited possessions with the theory of "less rushing yards is more" -- newsflash, idiot... less rushing yards per attempt equals less first downs, which equal less scoring drives, and non-scoring drives end in punts. And take a big guess who takes the field after you punt to Indy?


You aren't limiting shit by rushing for less per carry, you flaming fucking idiot. But props for being the only person here not laughing their balls/ovaries off at your expense.

And feel free to keep tossing "tard" around. It will make for more wonderful long-term humor here, since the superlative stupidity you've espoused here is going to have some SERIOUS legs for a long, long time to come. That's the STONE COLD LEAD PIPE LOCK of the week, right there.

[RumpleForeskin]

Yes, Manning is very effective at leading his team down the field. That's not in question. What is in question, is your inability to grasp the concept that he's equally effective whether it be on 5 drives or 15. The number of possessions in no way changes the fact that a team has to score with greater efficiency than the opponent(regardless of which teams). If a team is more effective with a ball-control offense, then so be it. Despite your delusional ramblings to the contrary, more time-of-possession means you probably executed well in the running game. It still doesn't change the balance of possessions between the two teams, nor does it alter Manning's ability to lead his team efficiently down the field.

This is absolute crap. Look, I know you're from Portland and that thing called "rythm" was lost on you before your father made the fatal mistake of not wrapping up when you were injected into that crack whore you call your mother. Rythm is a key component to an offense which means when Manning cannot get on the field, the offense will struggle to find their stride. An offense works best when on the field more because they have more opportunities to figure out coverages and they can counter with better playcalling. Manning is such an astute student of the game, so he makes adjustments in the game when he is given more opportunities. So, when he only has 5 chances to move the team downfield, the less study material he has to pick apart a defense.

[War Wagon]

...that thing called "rythm" was lost on you before your father made the fatal mistake of not wrapping up when you were injected into that crack whore you call your mother. Rythm is a key...

Mother smack? Now that's just going too far. Just for that...

rhythm

r-h-y-t-h-m

rhythm

Now, lets use it in a sentence.

The rhythm of the beating that Crumpledspellingpapers is taking in this thread is quite constant.

[poptart]

I have never dealt with so many tards at one time

I'll take things that Rodney King might have uttered for $500, Alex.

[Qbert]

Give me a team and I will break it down with unmatched accuracy. Just try me, tards.

I'm your Huckleberry.......UWash vs THEOSU....UDub will WIN 20-0.

Fvck You for Repeatedly DUCKING that....FYI.

props for TROLLING this Thread though....really....

REMEMBER that some of US have an "X"....and can make your posties go P00F!

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Fuck you and fuck anything you think is right is taking the opposite stance of what I think is right.

Breakin out the big smack guns.

[RumpleForeskin]

...that thing called "rythm" was lost on you before your father made the fatal mistake of not wrapping up when you were injected into that crack whore you call your mother. Rythm is a key...

Mother smack? Now that's just going too far. Just for that...

rhythm

r-h-y-t-h-m

rhythm

Now, lets use it in a sentence.

The rhythm of the beating that Crumpledspellingpapers is taking in this thread is quite constant.

Thanks, Wags. I was into about 8 beers and 4 yeager bombs when I posted that.

[RumpleForeskin]

Give me a team and I will break it down with unmatched accuracy. Just try me, tards.

I'm your Huckleberry.......UWash vs THEOSU....UDub will WIN 20-0.

Fvck You for Repeatedly DUCKING that....FYI.

props for TROLLING this Thread though....really....

REMEMBER that some of US have an "X"....and can make your posties go P00F!

Wow, Q. I never did check back in that thread. Props for pointing out my prediction being wrong. I guess you're batting a thousand big boy, huh? You'd be the first.

Thanks for the threat. Guess I should concede as my knees will start quivering when you start sniping my posts. You win for being a giant douche. Congrats.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

I was into about 8 beers and 4 yeager bombs when I posted that.

Gettin' ready to mount Rumplecow?

[Dinsdale]

I was into about 8 beers and 4 yeager bombs when I posted that.

Dude, I would have saved the intoxication excuse for the "rushing for less yards is better" take.

Give me a team and I will break it down with unmatched accuracy. Just try me, tards.

I'm your Huckleberry.......UWash vs THEOSU....UDub will WIN 20-0.

RACK!


Sin,
JON=

[Qbert]

Give me a team and I will break it down with unmatched accuracy. Just try me, tards.

I'm your Huckleberry.......UWash vs THEOSU....UDub will WIN 20-0.

Fvck You for Repeatedly DUCKING that....FYI.

props for TROLLING this Thread though....really....

REMEMBER that some of US have an "X"....and can make your posties go P00F!

Wow, Q. I never did check back in that thread. Props for pointing out my prediction being wrong. I guess you're batting a thousand big boy, huh? You'd be the first.

there might be a "few things" that i don't forget.

Thanks for the threat. Guess I should concede as my knees will start quivering when you start sniping my posts. You win for being a giant douche. Congrats.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
i'll Grant YOU a Pass for not knowing....Felix and I don't MOVE/Snip Anything in here...unless its Blatant Trolling, a direct "page Link" w/pop-ups ('SUP Ken And Jack?), or a mTOOL Ren~Faire FEST.

this GROUP of Posters in this Forum have Roots back to the year 2000.

if something Assinine or st00pid gets Posted--->its left UP for pile~on Value.....so, we'll NEVER SNIP YOUR Posts....saavy?

[RumpleForeskin]

BIGGEST game in Texans history just 57 minutes away. I've got goose bumps.

[RumpleForeskin]

Not having Johnson or Dayne for the game and losing Green early in the second quarter could have spelled disaster, but the Texans hung in there and played the Colts tight. One big turnover deep in Colts territory ended up being the difference of the game. Yeah, I know they lost, but the Texans are for real considering the limited personnel on the offensive side of the ball. Rack Matt Schaub.

[Dinsdale]

Props to the Texans for executing their game plan to perfection...


2.4 yards per carry. Came within seconds of controlling the time-of-possession battle, too.


So, beyond the stats sheet, and on to the stat that really matters at the end of the game...

How'd that work out?

[RumpleForeskin]

Props to the Texans for executing their game plan to perfection...


2.4 yards per carry. Came within seconds of controlling the time-of-possession battle, too.


So, beyond the stats sheet, and on to the stat that really matters at the end of the game...

How'd that work out?

Kubiak said they put 8 in the box the entire first half and that limited their running game. Also, Green went out early in the second quarter with a knee injury leaving only 3 backs (2 FBs and 1 TB) on the depth chart for the remainder of the game. If Kubiak decided to grind it with Gado for the entire second half, then he risked losing his final TB in the game. Kubiak did a decent job of adjusting, he took what the Colts gave him and Schaub got off somewhat. He threw a critical interception deep in the red zone, but a young QB will do that from time to time.