January 2010 Approval Poll: Frank Bush
by bigfatdrunk on Jan 19, 2010 10:46 AM CST
in News
Email
Print
via images.chron.com
Kicking off a series of approval polls, possibly an ongoing series where we can benchmark and track how we think certain parts of the team are functioning.
Above is a picture of our defensive coordinator, Frank Bush. For the 2009 season, do you approve or disapprove of the job he is doing as the Houston JUGGERNAUT defensive coordinator?
91 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
How can you disapprove? Compare the last two years then factor in how HORRIBLE the first three games were this year and we STILL blow last year out of the water.
The Texans defensive rankings
in 2008:
17th against the pass
23rd against the run
22nd in total yards allowed
in 2009:
18th against the pass
10th against the run
13th in total yards allowed
There is simply no comparison.
"An open mind is like a fortress with it's gates unbarred and unguarded."
The ROSENFAIL : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAKAKE-uq-8&feature=related
Doesn't mean we couldnt do better
I think one could make an argument that the defense was better simply because we added Cushing and Pollard and GQ. Nothing he has done scheme wise or blitz wise has impressed me in the least. In fact, its been pretty much the opposites. I don’t want change for the sake of change, but if there is someone out there who would be an upgrade I would not mind if Kubes upgraded.
www.manningface.com
You can ALWAYS do better, so that argument is something of a straw man.
Saying we added players so that is why we are better…..well gosh…YA THINK?
I imagine Bush had input as the DC on which players he wanted to go after, especially the Pollard acquisition.
At the very least Bush has earned the right to stay on for another year.
And while you say he has done nothing scheme-wise, the reality is that we blitz more than almost any team in the NFL now. At one point during the season we were the top blitzing team. So he has definitely brought a more aggressive style, even if he hasn’t radically altered the scheme.
And maybe the scheme isn’t the niggest issue. Maybe the players and the lack of aggressiveness was the issue.
Just saying, he deserves to stay.
"An open mind is like a fortress with it's gates unbarred and unguarded."
The ROSENFAIL : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAKAKE-uq-8&feature=related
by TexansForever on Jan 19, 2010 11:07 AM CST up reply actions
ROFL niggest = biggest.
"An open mind is like a fortress with it's gates unbarred and unguarded."
The ROSENFAIL : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAKAKE-uq-8&feature=related
by TexansForever on Jan 19, 2010 11:08 AM CST up reply actions
Fine
We can do ALOT better. I’m saying Bush is kind of like a My First Defensive Coordinator, and I would like to upgrade to a big boys version.
I’m not particularly interested in blitzing the most if it doesn’t actually work most of the time. I’m not saying he HAS to go, and I won’t poop myself out of rage if he is back next year. I will say though his defense did a much better job getting at the QB the last few games of the year, but we still could use more consistent pressure.
Plus you know, I hate zone and he doesn’t seem to feel the same.
www.manningface.com
I agree on the hating zone thing. Everytime we line up in a zone package I think, "Hey another first down!" for the opposing team.
"An open mind is like a fortress with it's gates unbarred and unguarded."
The ROSENFAIL : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAKAKE-uq-8&feature=related
by TexansForever on Jan 19, 2010 11:33 AM CST up reply actions
I wouldn't say the blitz didn't work
Even when we weren’t getting to the QB, we were forcing quicker passes. As poorly as our secondary was in coverage for a large part of the year, imagine the results had the QB had an extra second or two longer in the pocket to find an open reciever. Those 10 yard passes could well have turned into 50+ yard TDs.
His blitzing did work.
In particular, run blitzes, which is how he had to adjust to not having a good run-stopping DT. They were what, tops in the league in plays stuffed for negative yardage or no gain? They were near the top in three-and-outs forced as well.
He needs to get more creative on QB-blitzes, no doubt. I’d like to see more stunts, too. But our biggest problem is still getting pressure with a four-man rush. Hopefully a healthy Mario and improved Okoye and Barwin will make the difference next year.
by Nashmeister on Jan 20, 2010 12:30 PM CST up reply actions
Subtract
Anthony Weaver and Morlon Greenwood. Add Antonio Smith and Brain Crushing. Mix in about five more blitzes/game. Now you have the Frank Bush era.
Other than blitzing a few more times per game, Bush showed the ability to learn, very slowly, from his mistakes. Richard Smith seemed unable to do this.
However, I have serious problems with Bush as a defensive coordinator.
—He completely failed to spy Vince Young. WTF was up with that?
—He insisted on using zone way too much, even when our zone d was so bad it actually revived the career of one of the biggest draft busts of recent years.
—He started Dunta for every game of the season, when Dunta blew goats for the first fifteen games.
Is Frank Bush better than Richard Smith? Sure. But then again you could replace Richard Smith with bfd after he’s gone on a 24-hour, Zima and Robitussin-fueled binge of pleasuring himself while watching Mr. Rogers reruns and he would be an improvement.
Does that mean that we should think that Bush actually did a good job? I certainly don’t. Put it this way – what if Bush was in charge of last year’s defense, that is, without Cushing and Smith? How much better does anyone think he would have done than Richie Smith? My money is on, “not much.”
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 19, 2010 11:52 AM CST up reply actions 2 recs
What really bothers me about this comment is
Does that mean that we should think that Bush actually did a good job? I certainly don’t. Put it this way – what if Bush was in charge of last year’s defense, that is, without Cushing and Smith? How much better does anyone think he would have done than Richie Smith? My money is on, "not much."
It’s so easy to defend because there is no proof of anything. I could easily turn around and say that while Bush might use a similar scheme to Smith, he would put better players in position to win (As evidenced by the constant changes in personnel in the secondary until something worked) along with making tweaks and changes to get his team up to at least average. See how easy that is, and I just pulled it out my fucking ass.
True
But, unless we can set up parallel universes where we can see the results of different real-life outcomes, this will always be the case. Personally, I’d love to see MDC as a DC.
However, you can make arguments around your case, which I think tGC does for the first few lines of his post.
A Texans fan. Really. No, I'm not kidding.
http://www.battleredblog.com
by bigfatdrunk on Jan 19, 2010 12:19 PM CST up reply actions
Understandable
But in the end, I think it’s not going to really matter. The more longer Bush stays the more we will be able to see just how big of an improvement he is over Smith. I’ll just end by asking did anybody here think the Texans D was going to be above average in terms of YPG and directly medium in terms of PPG? I sure as hell didn’t, we had changed out Travis Johnson for. . . a guy from the Lions and my granddad? We drafted what was thought to be an injury prone 2 down LB and picked up what most saw as an overpaid DE making a payday off of a SB run.
I don’t think Bush could be given ALL the credit for getting Pollard, putting Cushing in a position to win, or making Smith seem passable for the later part of the season, but he is the coordinator and our defense was vastly improved from last year so the coordinator gets the credit in my eyes.
Again
I’m not saying he isn’t an improvement over Smith. I’m just saying that he rode onto a much better team, talent-wise and blitzed a little more. He did show the ability to learn from his mistakes, way too slowly for my tastes.
He’s going to have to do a lot of learning this offseason, imo, if we want our defense to not be heart-attack inducing anymore.
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 19, 2010 12:32 PM CST up reply actions
How did he rode onto a much better team?
We pretty much fired Smith right after the end of 2008, so Bush was given the same toys that Smith had already (Of course he didn’t know if Dunta was coming back immediately). Kubes/Smith gave him a few draft picks to play with (Which Smith was also given a ton of draft picks to play with as well) and either he had input on those picks, or the higher ups told him to take em and love em, my guess is the former happened.
Smith had tons of talent on his defense and was seen as underachieving, now there’s a DC who can at least put SOME of that talent to use and people dock him for it? I don’t get it.
Smith did not have nearly the same amount of talent that Bush had
Starting for Smith:
Weaver/Amobi/Johnson/Mario
Diles/DeMeco/Greenwood
Frenchy/Bennett
Ferguson/Harrisson
Starting for Bush:
Smith/Amobi/Cody/Mario
Diles/DeMeco/Cushing
Robinson/G-Lover
Wilson/Pollard
…or something like that.
I think you can objectively say that the latter defense is much more talented than the former one. I would go so far as to say that, based on talent alone, that defense still underperformed this year.
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 19, 2010 12:53 PM CST up reply actions
Timeline
R. Smith fired – Dec 30th, 2008
F. Bush hired – Jan 13, 2009
We did not make any personnel moves during this time period. Greenwood was cut in Feb, Johnson was traded in August (Or around TC time), Weaver was cut in February. Wilson has started for the Texans in 2008, and Pollard was picked up during the season.
Do we really think that Bush didn’t have a say in any of this going down?
I don't know how that's relevant
I’m arguing that Bush has more talent at his disposal, which camouflages the difference between him and Smith. How the talent was acquired and who acquired it doesn’t have any bearing on whether or not Bush is a better coordinator.
You could make the argument that he is better at evaluating talent and I would agree. But that’s not the argument I’m making.
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 19, 2010 1:05 PM CST up reply actions
But wouldn't
being able to acquire said talent (Which is what I’m saying he did) play a part in giving credit to his turnaround of the defense? It’s like your argument wants to place Bush in a twilight zone from February until May when camps and OTA’s began opening up. I’d have to think that once he was promoted he had just as much if not more input on who he wants than any other coach on this team.
Cutting Greenwood, Weaver and trading TJ would seem like things that he would have to sign off on before they happened, so why is he not given credit with re-shaping the roster to fit what he wanted to do schematically?
Again
I’m not saying he’s a bad d-coord because he may have a decent eye for personnel. I’m saying he’s a bad d-coord because he is basically Richard Smith with five more blitzes per game thrown in.
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 20, 2010 1:50 AM CST up reply actions
One other thing
I’m not docking Bush for using the talent he had. I’m saying that the increase in talent make the difference between Bush and Smith appear larger than it actually was.
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 19, 2010 12:54 PM CST up reply actions
Constant changes in personnel in the secondary
Except for that one guy who truly sucked. That guy somehow started every single game. And many of the changes in the secondary were a direct result of someone getting injured.
Let’s look at it another way: how exactly was Frank Bush different from Richard Smith? How do you account for the improvement in defensive performance? As bfd pointed out, we made significant upgrades at nearly half of our defensive starters. Besides that, what actions by Frank Bush can you point to that showed how he made a difference in improving the d?
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 19, 2010 12:25 PM CST up reply actions
re: cunta
I still think that the cunta playing time was taken out of Bush’s hands. I think McNair and Rick said, “look, if I’ve got to pay this fuck THAT much money, he’s going to be the goat or hero on every possible snap.”
How’d he do??
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
How about lining up Cush
one on one with Dallas Clark, as a sign of his ineptitude.
You are banned from Music City Miracles.
Happy Now Tits?
You are banned from Blogging The Boys.
As horrid as it might sound, I’ll take Cushing on Clark over Cunta one on one with Wayne down the sideline which is basically the trade off we made.
Be judgmental about the actions of the past, be hopeful about the actions of the future. -The Homers Creed
by DaGoaT on Jan 19, 2010 3:52 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Good luck with that, Goat...
These coach-killers taste blood in the water and the only thing that shuts them up is Kubes being the “bad guy” by saying his job is completely safe.
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
How many points did we hold Indy to that game?
You have to make a concession when you play against an offense that talented. Giving up the underneath routes isn’t the worst thing in the world.
Watch that game again; it was the most confused that Manning has ever looked against us, and the defense single-handedly kept us in it.
by Nashmeister on Jan 20, 2010 12:40 PM CST up reply actions
I think that things where alot better and I would keep Bush
On top of that the only guy that is available that I would even consider is Mike Nolen.
You can't fix Dumb or being a VYFB
What is with the constant hating on the 3-4
Everyone here wines about the 3-4 but the only real argument I get from you guys against it is.
We already have the personel for the 4-3.
You can't fix Dumb or being a VYFB
by Texans-Brocos on Jan 19, 2010 11:57 AM CST up reply actions
3-4
We instantly negate the value of two of our three best players in DeMeco and Mario, without even considering the consequences of not having a true NT.
A Texans fan. Really. No, I'm not kidding.
http://www.battleredblog.com
by bigfatdrunk on Jan 19, 2010 12:00 PM CST up reply actions
On the plus side
We find a way to get Adibi on the field.
Yay.
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 19, 2010 12:06 PM CST up reply actions
Wouldn't Barwin be a better fit at the OLB opposite of Mario than Adibi?
I would challenge you to a battle of wits, but you appear to be unarmed.
by The Night Owl on Jan 19, 2010 12:10 PM CST up reply actions
Good point
A Texans fan. Really. No, I'm not kidding.
http://www.battleredblog.com
by bigfatdrunk on Jan 19, 2010 12:16 PM CST up reply actions
I think this is wrong,
Look at what moving to the 3-4 did for Elvis Dumerville in Denver, I think the same would happen for Mario, moving to OLB. We can get a FAT NT, and having Cush, and DeJesus as MLB’s is not that much different than many of our alinements this year that worked so well.
You can't fix Dumb or being a VYFB
by Texans-Brocos on Jan 19, 2010 12:06 PM CST up reply actions
Mario may work as an 3-4 OLB but he could also play 3-4 DE because the Texans do not really have anyone else who could fill that role expect for Antonio Smith. Mario has the size and strength that he could, but then he’d be underutilized. Cushing would become a 3-4 OLB just like Clay Matthews has been in the Packers 3-4. And Barwin may feel more comfortable as a 3-4 OLB. DeMeco and Diles would be good ILBs, but the flaw still comes from no NT. Other than that, the Texans have no depth for a 3-4.
by theaxeeffect4311 on Jan 19, 2010 12:15 PM CST up reply actions
Agreed
That we wouldn’t have depth in the 3-4 but we don’t in the 4-3 in the line either. Although I do thing Bulman could be a good DE in the 3-4 because of his motor. and nomatter how you cut it we would HAVE to get a NT that is 340# and meaner than hell. I could see this line up
NT = new guy
DE = Amobi, Smith, Bulman
OLB = Barwin, and Mario
ILB = DeMeco and Cush
You can't fix Dumb or being a VYFB
by Texans-Brocos on Jan 19, 2010 12:20 PM CST up reply actions
Whoever the DC is by draft day, I think the Texans should select Dan Williams. He’d be great in whatever defense you put him in.
by theaxeeffect4311 on Jan 19, 2010 12:23 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Mario at OLB?
I don’t buy it. I’m no expert on the 3-4, but iirc you need to semi-decent coverage skills to be OLB in that formation – certainly if Barwin is lining up on the other side. Asking Mario to cover is like asking your kicker to punt. Sure, he could do a decent job, but it’s really playing away from his strengths.
Question for people who want to go 4-3: why? Is it just because the flavor-of-the-month coordinator runs a 3-4? Is it because, why the fuck not? Or is it because our personnel are better suited to a 3-4?
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 19, 2010 12:28 PM CST up reply actions
Mario at OLB
The only way that works is if you are running a 3-4 in name only like Wade Phillips and Mario is your Ware who is called a LB but is really just a stand-up DE. Because, otherwise, if you really think you’re going to run a standard 3-4 where either OLB might be in coverage, I’m throwing at Mario’s man until you adjust to stop it, at which point you’ve created a different hole.
You also, as has been mentioned, would negate DeMeco’s biggest asset, using his instincts to make plays sideline to sideline, and would instead be asking him to be Jamie Sharper as teams ran straight up our ass with no NT to speak of and DeMeco responsible for 300 tackles/game (slight overstatement).
Back to Mario for a second. He’s fast as hell for a DE, but that != fast in a vacuum. (Yes, I’m assuming he wouldn’t clock in at 4.66 if you had him run a 40 today in pads.) So, again, you have to play him at the line to utilize his speed at maximum efficiency.
Has Barwin shown much of anything to suggest he wouldn’t be a liability in coverage? Because, if he did, I must have been taking a dump during that play, ’cause I missed it.
Did I mention we don’t have a NT?
Amobi as a 3-4 DE would really by the only upside to the shift, IMO. But, then again, Amobi-Deljuan-Smith doesn’t exactly strike fear in the hearts of opposing running backs. And considering the Broncos under Nolan were 26th in the NFL in rush defense/game (the Texans were 11th), I think that could be an issue.
Cushing at MLB in this formation = more coverage assignments against TEs. Yeah, we saw how that worked.
In my mind, even if you get the massive NT that I dream of nightly, you’ve created a situation where Mario and DeMeco are no longer at their highest, best use (which would be a net loss, obviously); your underneath coverage is even worse than it was last year because you are asking Mario or Barwin to cover with some frequency; you still have not addressed your secondary holes and are now asking your SS (who, at the moment, happens to be your best DB) to cheat up to help hide the underneath holes; and you are insanely susceptible to screen and swing passes into the flat and are hoping either that Mario/Barwin figure out how to cover those or that your CBs can recover quickly enough to come up and make a tackle. If you DON’T get a true 3-4 NT, then add “your rushing defense is certainly worse than it was last year” to the list.
I honestly don’t understand the fascination with switching to a 3-4.
All that said, MIXING IN a 3-4 front from time to time to throw off the opposition is something I’ve been screaming for for years. Just because we run a 4-3 doesn’t mean we have to run the most boring 4-3 ever in the history of football, which is exactly what Richard Smith did and, to a large degree, is what Frank Bush does. Bush has about two formations that he uses in any given situation. This utter lack of creativity is why I would be in favor of getting someone else.
I always assumed "You're The Reason God Made Oklahoma" would be some sort of country music diss track. Live and learn, I guess.
It makes me giddy
Seriously, imagine if it’s second down and all of the sudden we ARE in a 3-4. Your playcall was almost certainly based on a 4-3 alignment. Or we line up in the 4-3 Under, with Barwin in the SLB slot, then roll into the 3-4 pre-snap. Then, next time you face 2d and long, we’re in a base 4-3 that shades to the under. Hell, you can even hide the zone coverage a little this way, if you lined up in a 4-3 and showed man coverage, then you adjust into a zone as the front changes its alignment. Next time, you stay in man. Etc.
I also wish we’d be more creative with substitutions. There were a few plays early in the year when we came out with Cushing-DeMeco-Barwin at LBs, with Barwin as the SLB, which instantly made it harder to guess which OLB was likely to blitz. I’d like to see Amobi as a DE opposite Mario occasionally on third down.
I always assumed "You're The Reason God Made Oklahoma" would be some sort of country music diss track. Live and learn, I guess.
A more creative play calling.
That what I want to see. Like what you said, moving our personnel around and confusing the offense would go a long way and might even result in a more successful blitz.
I like how Bush was willing to experiment with the personnel he has and that’s the reason why I voted unsure. But if a more capable replacement is available, I wouldn’t even think twice. An experienced DC can fully utilize the talent of Mario and DeMeco.
Im tired of the vanilla 4-3 under that we keep trotting around. Im tired of the dull blitz packages that causes pressure but doesn’t result in a sack. Im tired of the zone defense that does the opposite of what it should. If Bush can change all of that, i’ll be happy to support him.
What I like about the 4-3
is that scheme can hide the flaws in the personnel. Look at the Eagles this season. They were riddled with problems in the LBs, yet they still ranked as one of the top defenses. If you look at the players on their defense, while there are some underrated players, they do not scare you with their personnel. In a 3-4, you have to have the right players to make it work.
by theaxeeffect4311 on Jan 19, 2010 12:09 PM CST up reply actions
Crap that didn't take long
You can't fix Dumb or being a VYFB
by Texans-Brocos on Jan 19, 2010 12:33 PM CST up reply actions
Wow
I expected to be in the minority by voting disapprove, but I didn’t expect this kind of blowout. So here’s my rationale (and most, if not all of these, are touched on above, so credit where it’s due).
- To me, the scheme was nothing more than Richard Smith turned up to 11. Sure, we blitzed more often, but they were poorly disguised and regularly failed to work or create additional pressure, allowing QBs to pick apart our secondary.
- The increased pressure led to five additional sacks, or one for every three games. In other words, for every 15 to 20 additional blitzes, we got one sack. How many exploitations of our secondary did this lead to?
- Cushing replacing Diles. Diles replacing Greenwood. Pollard replacing Nick Ferguson. Antonio Smith replacing The Corpse Formerly Known as Anthony Weaver. Shaun Cody and Jeff Zgonina replacing Blessed Travis Johnson. That is a tremendous increase of talent at five (5!!!) positions.
- For every play Busing was out there (before all the injuries), Durga killed a masturbating kitten.
- In fact, I had a huge problem with holding tryouts at SS the first couple of regular season games.
- VY
- CJ
- Alex Smith
- Dunta Robinson
- Dallas Clark
- Finally, that effing zone, which boils my blood even thinking about it now. Not only are you negating your best cover guy (Reeves) with the zone, but you’re relying on Dunta to make tackles.
I’m not even sure if there was an upgrade from Smith based on scheme. The upgrades were based on talent. If you want to give Bush credit for drafting Cushing (I don’t), then he deserves blame for not addressing SS in the draft. To me, it was a louder version of Richard Smith but largely as ineffective.
A Texans fan. Really. No, I'm not kidding.
http://www.battleredblog.com
by bigfatdrunk on Jan 19, 2010 12:15 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
Thanks BFD
For starting the 3-4 engine once again.
I voted unsure.
It’s his first year as a DC. He did a mediocre/okay job but im willing to give him another year if we can’t find an upgrade over him.
The only quibble I have with this
Is the Clark thing (at least in the first Indy game). I think covering Clark with Cushing was a good idea because it allowed us to roll help onto Dunta the whole game.
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 19, 2010 12:33 PM CST up reply actions
My return quibble
is that Cushing was allowing Clark to free-release all game except for the first play, which was weird. I was actually hopeful that first play.
A Texans fan. Really. No, I'm not kidding.
http://www.battleredblog.com
by bigfatdrunk on Jan 19, 2010 12:36 PM CST up reply actions
when clark lined up as a true TE, of course
A Texans fan. Really. No, I'm not kidding.
http://www.battleredblog.com
by bigfatdrunk on Jan 19, 2010 12:36 PM CST up reply actions
Probably wanted to keep Clark in front of him
So that he could limit the ypc. I guess.
And it’s not like covering Dallas Clark is easy or anything.
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 19, 2010 1:07 PM CST up reply actions
that first half was just bizarre
We let them pass for a billion yards yet held them to only 13 points? I didn’t like watching it, but it did seem to work.
www.manningface.com
Exactly
If you are the SLB in a 4-3 Under playing up at the line over the TE, especially a TE who is faster than you are by a decent amount, with a QB who relies so much on timing, you might want to get your hands up and jam him, at least until he proves that doing so is a bad idea. It wasn’t totally that Cushing was covering Clark that was a bad idea (though it was); it was that, even with a week of practice, he wasn’t jamming, which is either evidence that he’s a moron (unlikely) or that Frank Bush told him not to (more likely). If it’s the latter, Bush is a retard.
I always assumed "You're The Reason God Made Oklahoma" would be some sort of country music diss track. Live and learn, I guess.
Agreed.
Frank Bush has the numbers on his side, but so may have Richard Smith if given FA signings (Antonio Smith & Shaun Cody), and 3 of the first 4 picks in the draft, and Bernard Pollard.
Anyway, Kubiak is going to do what the Hell he wants to…whether we like it or not.
Yeah man, I totally agree with this entire rant.
by MadMartygan on Jan 19, 2010 7:01 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
One question
is how crucial Bush was in the talent upgrades. In particular, I’m thinking about Pollard: he was signed off the street, and turned out to be great (or, at least, much, much better than what came before). This means that no other defensive coordinator thought he was worth signing, but we did, and it worked out well. Some of the other talent upgrades probably doesn’t deserve to be credited to Bush, but unless our defensive backs coach really pushed for Pollard, the credit should probably go to Bush on that. Of course, it did take a few games to reach that point, and Pollard was released a couple of weeks before we signed him …
no idea, tbh
I would think Smith and Kubiak had the final say over the decision, regardless. Whether Bush lobbied for him and how much influence this had, especially after the first BE-SFs game, I have no idea.
A Texans fan. Really. No, I'm not kidding.
http://www.battleredblog.com
or
after pollard was cut and badmouthed we were the only team desperate enough to take the risk, or we had an inside track with Gibbs being his coach last year.
www.manningface.com
Doubtful.
Look at the situation… He was a STARTER and got cut. Not demoted or asked to change positions, but outright cut. I think it’s extremely understandable, if not expected, that he’s going to talk shit on the organization that did it to him. Hell, I’d be worried if he DIDN’T say anything bad about them. At least it showed that he wanted to be there…. and we’re talking about KC!
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
wat
I think you misunderstood me, Pollard was the one being badmouthed, not the one badmouthing.
www.manningface.com
Ah... In that case, I did misunderstand.
Yeah, that sucks that they were trying to black ball him.
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
they really were trying to get an early headstart
on letting people know that they really do plan on being NE west, douchebaggery and all.
www.manningface.com
Pollard started in week four, of course.
Can you imagine what our defensive stats (and consequently win/loss record) would have looked like if we had Pollard for those first three games? I can point to several plays where our strong-safety was almost single-handedly responsible for a 50+ yard run. As for the SS try-outs—Barber blew just as hard as Busing until the last couple weeks of the season. There just wasn’t an answer on the roster at that point; hence the Pollard signing.
And for the record, Cody/Zgonina is not a tremendous upgrade over Travis Johnson.
by Nashmeister on Jan 20, 2010 12:51 PM CST up reply actions
The reason I vote for him
Was he did work out alot of the personel issues, and tried packages till something worked. The D got better the whole year long! And he seemed to learn from his mistakes,(though a bit slowly as was mentioned above), but all in all this was the first year he was a DC in the NFL and his unit did a more than OK job. For a rookie I give him a solid C but I see potential for an A in years to come!
You can't fix Dumb or being a VYFB
There was improvement
I’m not sure if it was because of him or the talent.
Ditch the zone. As I did the Dunta post, I saw that ALL of our DBs did better in man-to-man. Every. Single. DB.
We can’t cover the TE with Ryans or Cushing, so we do need to figure something out there…
A massive NT should help his blitz packages. A big body will provide the push up the middle to force the QB out of the pocket. The NT can take on 2 lineman putting 1 on 1 match ups for Williams, Okoye, and Barwin/Smith while shielding the LBs.
Credit to Bush though for one thing: Blitzing Bernard Pollard as the season wore down.
The guy has been here 1 year and the defense was noticeably better. I think its a no brainer you see what he does in year 2. Its not like hes been here for 4 years.
Be judgmental about the actions of the past, be hopeful about the actions of the future. -The Homers Creed
Obviously he's coming back
I would be massively surprised if he didn’t.
I just hope he spends the entire offseason learning how to run a zone or deciding to make the radical move of never zoning.
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 19, 2010 1:06 PM CST up reply actions
Zone is a necessary evil...
I’d settle for him learning how to disguise the blitzers.
Bacon tastes good... Pork chops taste good.
Yup
The zone is a pain in the ass, but we don’t have the talent to run pure man. But try to hide the zone a little by rolling into it late and, for the love of god, realize that you can blitz off the edge as well as up the middle.
I always assumed "You're The Reason God Made Oklahoma" would be some sort of country music diss track. Live and learn, I guess.
Cushing – Mario – Amobi – Dan Williams – Barwin – Bonecrusher
It’s overkill, but that makes me drool a little bit.
Hell
line up in press coverage with Frenchy on the blindside and let him use his speed on a corner blitz. I guarantee you that works the first time because it would be as unexpected as aliens landing on the field and probing DelJuan Robinson’s ass at halftime.
I always assumed "You're The Reason God Made Oklahoma" would be some sort of country music diss track. Live and learn, I guess.
As I was typing up my response from your above comment.
I was thinking about the same thing.
Talking about utilizing Frenchy’s speed, not aliens probing Deljuan Robinson.
i would like an option for
moderately approve
(on a scale of
approve
moderately approve
moderately disapprove
disapprove
no opinion)
I voted unsure.
I am sure that he didn’t do as great a job as the majority of you think. But I think he did show a willingness to change as the year progressed unlike Dick Smith. It has been well documented in the prior comments that he does a poor job disguising blitzes when he brings them. Refusing to spy VY was a huge mistake, as well as lining Cush up to cover Dallas Clark in the open field play after play. I say give him one more year and see what he does with an even better defensive squad talent-wise next season.
You are banned from Music City Miracles.
Happy Now Tits?
You are banned from Blogging The Boys.
by CFHTim on Jan 19, 2010 1:52 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
I Voted Unsure
While it’s fair to say that Bush benefitted from the addition of Cushing and Pollard, I seem to remember reading somewhere shortly after the draft that Bush was the driving force behind the Texans taking Cushing. Bush desperately wanted Cushing and went to bat for him with Smithiak. One year in, that’s looking like a tremendous call.
Most of the pro-con arguments have been touched on above, so I won’t repeat them here. I will repeat, however, that scheme-wise, I hate the zone with the fire of a thousand suns and cannot understand why we ran it as much as we did. To me, that’s the biggest indictment of Bush’s first year. If he’s still featuring the red carpet zone in ‘10, I’ll lose my mind.
Looking forward to a day when being a Texans fan doesn't mean that April is the highlight of my season...
Dang it, I voted approve
…now you can throw it back in my face when I say I don’t approve next season!
I suppose if all of the stars, moons and planets align it could be possible, but what are the chances of that?
continuity.
pretty much everyone at the starting skill positions should be back. i would love to see what another year will do for this group. we have really good talent at every position (for the most part) and if we can add a few more pieces, a (NT and FS come to mind) no reason with the chemistry that we have, we can’t be a top 5 defense. i look at t he guy’s body language after the games in interviews, and to a man, they love bush, HATED smith.
"Oh, I recognize this boy. He been ducking me so far, but I’mma have his ACL on my wall one of these days." - Bernard "Pat Killa" Pollard
http://www.twitter.com/doobieman21
by chrisd21 on Jan 19, 2010 7:44 PM CST via mobile reply actions
What man doesn't love bush?
Besides beefy, I mean.
The Texans.
by tehGrindCrusher on Jan 20, 2010 1:55 AM CST up reply actions
and jordann!
"Oh, I recognize this boy. He been ducking me so far, but I’mma have his ACL on my wall one of these days." - Bernard "Pat Killa" Pollard
http://www.twitter.com/doobieman21
by chrisd21 on Jan 20, 2010 8:11 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Video: Tim Tebow asked to Military Ball by Louisiana Airwoman
- We’ll see how Brandon Jacobs’ football skills translate to the squared circle
- Bill Belichick wore a hoodie to a golf tournament
- Eagles reportedly will franchise DeSean Jackson, but should they?
- Wife of Chargers tackle Tommie Harris dies at 29
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
