When I look back at the Pittsburgh game, a smile comes to my face because of the thoroughness of the butt kicking that game was. Ya, I know the 3rd quarter was a little iffy and the nay-sayers may have started jumping off the bandwagon, but the way that they closed that game was as impressive a finish as I've seen this team have in recent memory (the comeback win against New England to finish 9-7 two years ago was also pretty good, but Welker, Moss, and Brady were all out of the game by the 4th quarter, so meh).
Those who know me, and watch football with me, know that I have a passionate, somewhat rational hatred of getting the ball to start the game. It's not that I don't want the ball, it's more that I think that there are huge momentum swing advantages to getting the ball to start the second half. If you score late in the first half, you get the ball right back and can try and add on. If you're down big in the first half, you can start the second half with the ball and try and cut into the lead. There are many other scenarios, but games are usually won or lost in the second half and I want my team to start that half with the ball, pretty much regardless of the situation. Naturally, when the Texans won the toss and elected to receive, I was bummed. However, the 19 play, "115" yard, 10 minute and 55 second drive that followed, not only turned my frown upside down, but also made me feel a little warm and fuzzy inside (and not just because it ended with a touchdown to OD, who I have on two of my fantasy teams...although that was nice). The Texans ran it whenever and wherever they wanted. They threw it whenever and wherever they wanted. They even got into a couple of 3rd and longs just to let Pittsburgh "do what they do best", and they still converted those plays to keep the drive alive. It was a thing of beauty and one of the few cases I've ever seen where getting the ball to start truly seemed to set a tone and make a difference in the game.
Those who know me, and watch football with me, know that I have a passionate, somewhat rational hatred of getting the ball to start the game. It's not that I don't want the ball, it's more that I think that there are huge momentum swing advantages to getting the ball to start the second half. If you score late in the first half, you get the ball right back and can try and add on. If you're down big in the first half, you can start the second half with the ball and try and cut into the lead. There are many other scenarios, but games are usually won or lost in the second half and I want my team to start that half with the ball, pretty much regardless of the situation. Naturally, when the Texans won the toss and elected to receive, I was bummed. However, the 19 play, "115" yard, 10 minute and 55 second drive that followed, not only turned my frown upside down, but also made me feel a little warm and fuzzy inside (and not just because it ended with a touchdown to OD, who I have on two of my fantasy teams...although that was nice). The Texans ran it whenever and wherever they wanted. They threw it whenever and wherever they wanted. They even got into a couple of 3rd and longs just to let Pittsburgh "do what they do best", and they still converted those plays to keep the drive alive. It was a thing of beauty and one of the few cases I've ever seen where getting the ball to start truly seemed to set a tone and make a difference in the game.
While the offense did stall a little bit once Andre was out (man that looked scary when he first went down), they did the important things right. They didn't allow Schaub to get sacked and they continued to run the ball, (how good did Foster look??) even when Polamalu was doing that thing where he stalks the line of scrimmage and seems to know the snap count (look up the play he made on the goal line against Kerry Collins and the Titans last year). The offensive cherry on top though, was Foster's 42 yard touchdown run that ultimately provided the difference in the score. The way he cut back across the entire field, made Polamalu and LaMarr Woodley miss, and then beat a couple of DBs to the goal line was B..E..A..utiful.
On the other side, with the exception of the 3rd quarter drive where the Steelers ran the ball right down the field, the defense looked incredible. They got pressure on Big Ben all day, they limited Mike Wallace's big plays, and they had huge hits on the Steelers all day (you can't dance with a broken back Hines Ward). I do feel bad for Johnathan Joseph though. As a defender, his legitimate chances to score are so few and far between and while he did "score" twice, having both plays called back had to be a little upsetting. I know the team won, so he's not gonna cry, but those two scores would have made the scoreboard beating match the beating that took place on the field. All in all, it was a great game to watch, both as a fan of close football games, and as a Texans' fan. They pretty much pushed Pittsburgh around all day and showed how good they can be in all facets of the game.
Alright, looking "ahead" to Oakland, here are a couple of things I'll be watching:
- Daren McFadden vs Arian Foster: No, these two won't actually be playing against each other, but I'm more concerned with who has the bigger day. The Texans can win if McFadden has a big day, but only if it's an inefficient big day. Meaning, if he gets 150 yards, he better get it on 40 carries. If he has 20 carries for 150 yards, that's trouble for the Texans. For Foster, just keep falling forward, keep moving the chains, and pick up some slack in the pass game that's missing Andre.
- Jason Campbell vs getting sacked: Because they're running a lot and doing it well, the Raiders have been able to keep Campbell upright for the majority of the season (he's only been sacked twice). If he has time to sit in the pocket, one of those speedy receivers is going to get past someone in the Texans secondary, especially if Kareem Jackson is covering him. Get some pressure, put him on the ground, and the pass game should be kept in relative check.
- Texan's passing offense vs "ghost" of Andre Johnson: Andre's not playing, so his 100+ yards and a touchdown need to be distributed elsewhere. Where exactly? I'm not the offensive coordinator, so I don't know, but it just needs to go somewhere (OD would be nice).
This game should be pretty physical. Hopefully everyone comes out clean and the Texans come out with a victory. I'll have my score prediction at the bottom of the post.
To the food.
I'm actually cheating a little bit this week. There was nothing that really screamed Oakland that I wanted to make, so I'm making something from San Francisco. Before you get upset though, SF and Oakland are closer than Dallas and Ft. Worth, so it's not really that much of a stretch. Deal with it.
Created in San Francisco's Mission District, the Mission style burrito features rice, beans, meat, cheese, and other toppings in a large tortilla that's wrapped up tight and is highly portable. Named for the 18th and 19th century Spanish missions that populated the area, the Mission District was an area of high commercial importance in San Fran after the 1906 earthquake and during the rush of European immigrants that followed. During the 1940s, after an influx of Mexican immigrants to the area, the Mission District developed a much more Latin culture that was seen until hipsters moved in around the turn of the century and drove up the cost of living. In 1969, at the tiny Taqueria La Cumbre, the Mission style burrito was born. Looking to create a portable, nutritious meal, the owners of La Cumbre packed whatever ingredients the customer wanted into a large flour tortilla, rolled it up, and wrapped it in foil. So, to honor this fantastic creation, this week's food is:
- Mission style burrito with carne asada
Raiders 17
Texans 27
Happy Football Viewing
-MB
No comments:
Post a Comment