PDA

View Full Version : How fast to get us to back to respectable? Not Long IMO (and the other poster)


Wolf
01-31-2006, 07:41 PM
http://www.texanstalk.com/cgi-bin/forums/YaBB.pl?num=1138171382

I hope it is ok to repost this from the link.

Take a look at last year's schedule. The last column is assuming Kubiak's new offense would have gotten us only a single extra touchdown per game:

Date Opponent Actual score +7 points

Sep 11 @Buffalo Lost 7-22 Lost 17-22
Sep 18 Pittsburgh Lost 7-27 Lost 17-27
Week 3 BYE
Oct 2 @Cincinnati Lost 10-16 WON 17-16
Oct 9 Tennessee Lost 20-34 Lost 27-34
Oct 16 @Seattle Lost 10-42 Lost 17-42
Oct 23 Indianapolis Lost 20-38 Lost 27-38
Oct 30 Cleveland Won 19-16 Won 26-16
Nov 6 @Jacksonville Lost 14-21 TIE 21-21
Nov 13 @Indianapolis Lost 17-31 Lost 24-31
Nov 20 Kansas City Lost 17-45 Lost 24-45
Nov 27 St. Louis Lost 27-33 WON 34-33
Dec 4 @Baltimore Lost 15-16 WON 22-16
Dec 11 @Tennessee Lost 10-13 WON 17-13
Dec 18 Arizona Won 30-19 WON 37-19
Dec 24 Jacksonville Lost 20-38 Lost 27-38
Jan 1 @San Francisco Lost 17-20 WON 24-20


That's a 7-8-1 record with essentially the same personnel. Tack on an improved defense, and the fact that a touchdown FOR US can also be a touchdown FROM the other side (i.e., a 14-point turnaround), and we'd be looking at possible playoff contention. An 8-8 or a winning record in Kube's first year is NOT an unreasonable expectation.


This is interesting on the thought pattern here. Some are saying we are doomed for a few years... But I wonder.. with discipline and maybe (like the post above) a touchdown more a game under Kubiak's guidance.. with less dumb penalties we could be respectable..

Granted ALL teams are expecting to get better with personell throught the drat and FA..

:stirpot:

Makes me wonder more about the draft.. would Bush given our OL status help us get an extra TD a game (remember with that we AGAIN don't help in the trenches for pass protection and that is our weakness) .... or trade down.. gain a few picks and get maybe with the extra PICK or two get DL or TE (I have a feeling OL is going to be one of our 1st 2 picks ..if we pick Bush #1 ..we work to get OL on 2nd pick..might have to trade up and might not)

Runner
01-31-2006, 07:48 PM
It has been my contention all along that fresh coaching alone would get us closer to the 7-9 team than this 2-14 team. Our coaching staff peaked two seasons ago, and the increasing influence of Pendry precipitated a major drop in offensive production. Add a couple of players and we will be competitive next year - maybe not playoff bound, but competitive.

Just my prediction.

Wolf
01-31-2006, 07:50 PM
I looked at the next posters response.. and yes we are playing the NFC East next season, so we should expect 4 tough games.. Cowboys,Redskins,Giants and Eagles


*edit*
7-9 might be a little tough though.. esp, with one offseason and with new coaching, but I expect us to be competitive (like 2002) except it should be offensively and not defensively (opposite of 2002)

AustinJB
01-31-2006, 09:21 PM
I'm shooting for a 6-10 record. I think that is a realistic expectation from a 2-14 team, new coaching strategies, new young players (hopefully), etc.

By season two of Kubes system and coaching, I'll be expecting at least 8-8 with hopes of making playoffs....but I can't see us being 7-9 or 8-8 THIS year.

Double Barrel
01-31-2006, 09:35 PM
Good thread, Wolf. :thumbup It's an interesting observation about adding a touchdown in production to each game last year. It does give me pause to think about it, as I'd assume that Kubiak will definitely be more aggressive about scoring.

If we acquire some talent in key areas via FA and the draft, we could be surprised with the results. I'm still sticking to a very cautious 6-10 season at this point, but it's really early in the game. So many things will change between now and September that all we can do is speculate.

But I've thought the major failure with the team was coaching and leadership, too. It started showing midway through the 2004 season, and manifested itself with the disaster of last year. I do feel optimistic that Coach Kubiak will turn things around, though. Good times ahead.

michaelm
02-01-2006, 03:31 AM
Another possible contributing factor is the comparitive belief the players have in Kubiak's system vesus the old one.
By that I mean, suppose that they lost faith in the old system. Valid assumption IMO.
Now assume that they buy into the new system completely.
How much is that factor alone worth? I'm not saying that they were dogging it, but you tend to fight harder for what you believe in. If you hit the field believing that your system is a failure, how can you be successful?
I think just this factor alone could account for a couple of victories next season.
Just as it could've account for a few last year...

Carr Bombed
02-01-2006, 04:14 AM
I don't want to sound negative, but how can this thread be called "back to respectable, we've never been respectable.

bigtex77
02-01-2006, 06:52 AM
I don't want to sound negative, but how can this thread be called "back to respectable, we've never been respectable.

I would say that 7-9 in your third year from scratch is respectable.

Jack Bauer
02-01-2006, 07:52 AM
I would say that 7-9 in your third year from scratch is respectable.

Agreed. We were even respected in our first year because you could tell the players gave everything they had...

I am so glad Kubiak is here... :yahoo: :redtowel: :yahoo:

Kaiser Toro
02-01-2006, 08:13 AM
I like the exercise Wolf, but I come back to Carr. For the last four years he has been hit and coached to play a certain way. Even in his glory when he called the plays against the Cardinals in the first half it was all hitches. He showed no confidence and imagination against a defeated defense at that point in time. This is what concerns me about the job Kubiak has, which is a total reclamation project. Every one our offensive unit must improve in order to compensate for the 50/50, in my opinion, shot of Carr getting back to Fresno State confidence, it is another question whether or not Carr's confidence will transfer to success in the NFL.

Jack Bauer
02-01-2006, 08:34 AM
Even in his glory when he called the plays against the Cardinals in the first half it was all hitches. He showed no confidence and imagination against a defeated defense at that point in time.

I don't care what an offense does, if they score 24 points in a quarter, I don't see any reason to complain. How many other teams scored 24 points in a quarter this year?

Kaiser Toro
02-01-2006, 08:41 AM
I don't care what an offense does, if they score 24 points in a quarter, I don't see any reason to complain. How many other teams scored 24 points in a quarter this year?

I agree, but we do not need to pay one someone 8 million dollars to throw hitches.

Jack Bauer
02-01-2006, 08:52 AM
I agree, but we do not need to pay one someone 8 million dollars to throw hitches.

I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt. He was able to lead the team to 24 points within the confines of that pathetic offensive scheme. That makes the accomplishment even more amazing to me...I would agree with you if he had other plays they had to call or had practiced. He actually threw the ball deep a few times. At the time, I was amazed that Pendry had "opened" up the offense so much. We now know that was NOT the case, of course.

whiskeyrbl
02-01-2006, 09:01 AM
I agree totaly with this post,in alot of cases we were only 2-3 plays away from a victory.I also believe that if we play our D personnel in their natural positions and build around their strengths and not try to force them into a certain type of role,i think our D can be really tough with a DE and MLB added this year.

Double Barrel
02-01-2006, 09:47 AM
I agree, but we do not need to pay one someone 8 million dollars to throw hitches.

There's the rub, IMO. In 2004 Carr was an above average QB on a below average team. He showed signs of improving and maturing beyond certain tendencies. It is quite feasible that DC can be good enough to lead us to a winning season, and possibly the playoffs. But he'll be making a paycheck that should be reserved for QBs that you already know can do it, as opposed to thinking (and hoping) he can.

But maybe, just maybe, Coach Kubiak's new attitude and offense turns this thing around and provides all the tools Carr needs to rise above people's perceptions of him. Of course I hope so, for so many reasons.

HoustonFrog
02-01-2006, 10:05 AM
There's the rub, IMO. In 2004 Carr was an above average QB on a below average team. He showed signs of improving and maturing beyond certain tendencies. It is quite feasible that DC can be good enough to lead us to a winning season, and possibly the playoffs. But he'll be making a paycheck that should be reserved for QBs that you already know can do it, as opposed to thinking (and hoping) he can.

But maybe, just maybe, Coach Kubiak's new attitude and offense turns this thing around and provides all the tools Carr needs to rise above people's perceptions of him. Of course I hope so, for so many reasons.

I like this post and think it is reasonable. I'm not a big Carr fan but don't think he is just a plain horrible QB. My problem is paying Franchise QB money for a guy who may just be what we have seen..flashes of really good and in the middle of the pack for the rest. IMHO that is as risky as blowing this top pick. Hope it all works out.

bckey
02-01-2006, 10:59 AM
Here is a post by Hollywood_Texan from texanstalk that was interesting on this very subject.





There has been a lot of discussion regarding the 1st pick of the draft and expectations for next year. So, I did a little research of two points.

1. What is the average record of a team that won 5 games or less in the previous season (looking back over 10 years)?
2. Once a team reaches the Super Bowl, what does their regular season record look like for the Super Bowl year and two years back (starting from the 2000 Super Bowl)?

My conclusion is we could reach the Super Bowl in 3 years (that’s if we are of New England or Carolina type) but it is probably along the norm of 4 to 5 years like a regular building of a team in the NFL.

Here is my backup, on average a team wins 3 more games than the previous year when they won 5 games on less. There are a few (and I do mean a few) teams that have blown that out, and even fewer have regressed, but it is really consistent over the last 5 years.

As for reaching the Super Bowl, it really looks like a team needs 8 to 10 wins for two years before the Super Bowl run and then bam, make that big push for the Super Bowl.

Expectations are as follows:

2006 - 5 to 7 wins
2007 - 8 to 10 wins
2008 - 9 to 11 wins, playoff spot
2009 - Maybe the Super Bowl

Keeping Carr and drafting Bush, thinking we are going to make a Super Bowl push in two years is not realistic. Not to say it won’t happen, but it doesn’t seem reasonable, especially with a new head coach doing his first head coaching gig in the NFL. Not to mention our first four drafts have been mediocre and free-agent splashes aren’t really anything to talk about.

Meanwhile over the next four years, Vince Young could be at Tennessee (Tennessee is staring at the same level as us, they had 4 wins in 2005) and could be coming into his own at the same time we are starting our Super Bowl push in 2009. Also, keep in mind Tennessee has a coach that has been there, I think Floyd Reese is a good GM (someone is probably going to roast me on this one, but he is probably a lot better than Casserly), and they have Norm Chow as the offensive coordinator.

Bottom line, with Carr/without Carr, Bush/without Bush, Young/without Young, we are 3 to 4 years away from making a Super Bowl push, if we are lucky. The current state of the organization is more long-term than short-term, unless you plan on breaking the norm in reaching the Super Bowl.


http://www.texanstalk.com/cgi-bin/forums/YaBB.pl?num=1138171382

tulexan
02-01-2006, 11:20 AM
Carolina went from 1-15 to the Super Bowl in 2 years.

San Diego went from the worst team in the league to 12-4 in one year.

bckey
02-01-2006, 11:41 AM
Carolina went from 1-15 to the Super Bowl in 2 years.

San Diego went from the worst team in the league to 12-4 in one year.

Did you click the link and read the whole thread? Also look at the last line of his post. "The current state of the organization is more long-term than short-term, unless you plan on breaking the norm in reaching the Super Bowl."

Double Barrel
02-01-2006, 11:44 AM
Carolina went from 1-15 to the Super Bowl in 2 years.

San Diego went from the worst team in the league to 12-4 in one year.

I like these kind of stats! They give us hope! :texflag:

I'm just hoping we can have our first winning season within the next two years. Once we get over that little hump, other things like playoffs and division titles will follow.

pv1999
02-01-2006, 11:51 AM
Kubiak can stay as long as he likes, take as much time as he needs to develop etc.....if we beat the Cowboys. We have to maintain our regular season (when it counts) stranglehold on the "other" texans.

bigTEXan8
02-01-2006, 11:58 AM
Kubiak can stay as long as he likes, take as much time as he needs to develop etc.....if we beat the Cowboys. We have to maintain our regular season (when it counts) stranglehold on the "other" texans.

I agree. As long as we beat the 'boys, then Kubiak can tweek and change whatever he wants.

jerek
02-01-2006, 12:03 PM
I don't think that I agree that we are "long term" vs. "short term." Coaching staff/leadership can make a big difference and we do after all have this number one draft pick and a whole offseason in which to manipulate our personnel. San Diego and Carolina are just two of a good number of teams who have made big strides in just one offseason (most recently the Bears are a great example, and they did it with a joke of a QB, no matter what you think of Carr.)

I firmly believe our players are better than we played this year, and Kubes and Co. are here to win now, and I think you will be surprised to see what good playcalling and leadership will do for us this year. We are still in a very tough division and we still have house cleaning to do, but there is nothing saying we can't finish 8-8 in 06.

Kaiser Toro
02-01-2006, 12:07 PM
I don't think that I agree that we are "long term" vs. "short term." Coaching staff/leadership can make a big difference and we do after all have this number one draft pick and a whole offseason in which to manipulate our personnel. San Diego and Carolina are just two of a good number of teams who have made big strides in just one offseason (most recently the Bears are a great example, and they did it with a joke of a QB, no matter what you think of Carr.)

How about mid term? And in the NFL that is about two and half years, in my opinion. The NFL is set up for parity with the salary cap, not losing four consecutive losing seasons or five or six.

AustinJB
02-01-2006, 01:27 PM
San Diego and Carolina are just two of a good number of teams who have made big strides in just one offseason (most recently the Bears are a great example, and they did it with a joke of a QB, no matter what you think of Carr.)

I firmly believe our players are better than we played this year, and Kubes and Co. are here to win now, and I think you will be surprised to see what good playcalling and leadership will do for us this year. We are still in a very tough division and we still have house cleaning to do, but there is nothing saying we can't finish 8-8 in 06.

:challenge Nothing saying we can't finish 8-8 in '06? Yeah, except for our lack of talent. I'm not trying to be negative, but if you think we're heading for an 8-8 record a year removed from 2-14, IMO you are seriously setting yourself up for disappointment.

San Diego and Carolina did turn their team around pretty quickly w/ FA and the draft. They (mainly Carolina) have great DL and OL that they have built w/ time. The Chicago Bears is NOT a great example for you to use. While their record turned around in one year, they have a GREAT defense and they have been building their team for years through the draft. My point is...it takes time for your team to improve if you do it right.

Consider the STARTERS this past year that the Bears built through the draft:

2000.....LB Urlacher, S M.Brown
2001....(nothing to mention, not too impressive draft)
2002.....DE A.Brown, G T.Metcalf
2003.....WR J.Gage, DT I.Scott, QB Grossman, CB C.Tillman, OLB Briggs
2004.....DT T.Harris, CB N.Vasher
2005.....S C.Harris (not to mention RB C.Benson & QB Orton who have yet to prove themselves)

I count NINE of their eleven 2005 defensive starters that they've built through the draft (VERY impressive if you look at the rounds that they picked many of these players from) It took time for these players to develop and learn the system and play as a team (the only rookie to contribute significantly was SS C.Harris.) They didn't turn it all around w/ ONE offseason. It just finally all came together.

The Texans have some young talent, but we still need to add more and THEN give it a year or so to develop before we can expect to see significant improvement IMO.:twocents:

Meloy
02-01-2006, 01:51 PM
If there is no trade of first pick, I can see Htown selecting 3 maybe four starters thru round three. The fourth and fifth selections should add quality depth. A repeat of this in the following draft should give us a very competive team for 2007. It is nice to anticipate Super Bowls, but I will eagerly accept a few years @ 11-5 12-4. I know defense wins championships; but I need some offense to cheer for.

jerek
02-01-2006, 02:07 PM
:challenge Nothing saying we can't finish 8-8 in '06? Yeah, except for our lack of talent. I'm not trying to be negative, but if you think we're heading for an 8-8 record a year removed from 2-14, IMO you are seriously setting yourself up for disappointment.

San Diego and Carolina did turn their team around pretty quickly w/ FA and the draft. They (mainly Carolina) have great DL and OL that they have built w/ time. The Chicago Bears is NOT a great example for you to use. While their record turned around in one year, they have a GREAT defense and they have been building their team for years through the draft. My point is...it takes time for your team to improve if you do it right.

Consider the STARTERS this past year that the Bears built through the draft:

2000.....LB Urlacher, S M.Brown
2001....(nothing to mention, not too impressive draft)
2002.....DE A.Brown, G T.Metcalf
2003.....WR J.Gage, DT I.Scott, QB Grossman, CB C.Tillman, OLB Briggs
2004.....DT T.Harris, CB N.Vasher
2005.....S C.Harris (not to mention RB C.Benson & QB Orton who have yet to prove themselves)

I count NINE of their eleven 2005 defensive starters that they've built through the draft (VERY impressive if you look at the rounds that they picked many of these players from) It took time for these players to develop and learn the system and play as a team (the only rookie to contribute significantly was SS C.Harris.) They didn't turn it all around w/ ONE offseason. It just finally all came together.

The Texans have some young talent, but we still need to add more and THEN give it a year or so to develop before we can expect to see significant improvement IMO.:twocents:

I guess it just depends on your take as to where our talent currently stands.

I believe Kubiak has the tools to take this team to the next level and beyond. To be sure, we have personnel needs to address, but I don't think our players are nearly as bad as we looked throughout most of this season. We have a relatively talented core to build around on both sides of the ball and I expect we will only add to that as Kubiak/Cass/Reeves approach this offseason's draft/free agency.

There is too much ground to cover this offseason in terms of draft/FA personnel moves before I start making bold and fearless predictions, but I honestly believe a lot of this year's 2-14 record was bad coaching, pure and simple. I lost track of the number of absolutely boneheaded plays Fangio ran on key third downs, the amount of stupid hitch and out routes Pendry repetitively initiated the whole way down the field, etc. etc. etc. I believe that, among other lesser ailments, our "prevent" coaching was an absolute cancer this last season, and we've just cut the cancer out, now let's see how the body reacts. I am not saying we will go 8-8, only that it is all too possible that, with the right coach and right system to build around, that our chances aren't as bad as a lot of people are making them out to be.

Lovie Smith resurrected the perennially awful Bears in two seasons. Fox did the same in Carolina. Even Romeo Crennel coaxed the ridiculously abysmal Cleveland Browns to six wins this season in another very tough division, and I expect him to improve upon that in 06. I am not calling us automatic playoff contenders, only saying that we have a chance to witness a dramatic turnaround this season.

Texans_Chick
02-02-2006, 04:39 PM
Kubiak can stay as long as he likes, take as much time as he needs to develop etc.....if we beat the Cowboys. We have to maintain our regular season (when it counts) stranglehold on the "other" texans.


I hope we play the Cryboys late in the season. And that our early season schedule is not brutally hard like last year. (Depending on what you looked at, our first half schedule was either the hardest or second hardest in the league--just for comparison purposes, the Colts had the easiest first half schedule). As an aside, this schedule difference makes evaluating our team difficult. Everybody talks about how the team improved near the end of the season but was that really improvement or was it that we were playing easier teams.

I don't care who the coach is, it is hard to learn a new system and get new young players playing together as a team and believing they can win. It would be nice for the team to get their feet under them some before getting to the harder parts of their schedule..

And as an aside, I sure hope that AJ, Mathis, DD stay relatively healthy next year. All teams get injuries, but you don't want your playmakers hurt. I don't care who your QB or coach is, it is hard to win that way.

Bronco Texan
02-02-2006, 05:26 PM
I looked at the next posters response.. and yes we are playing the NFC East next season, so we should expect 4 tough games.. Cowboys,Redskins,Giants and Eagles

Good new about this though is that Denver played these teams this year so these teams all should be fresh in Koobs mind. I'm sure it doesn't mean much alot can change from year to year but atleast these teams will still have their core players, which should help alittle with game planning.

Texans_Chick
02-02-2006, 07:03 PM
I have no idea how we are going to do next year, especially without knowing who are players are gonna be. But here goes:

Pluses:

-Hard to get a worse record. (I am hoping I didn't just jinx us by saying that).
-Many of our losses last season we could have won--it was buzzard's luck or perhaps we were just destined to get the first pick. A lot of close games.
-Better coaching, esp getting rid of the training wheels offense.
-Special Teams are already a strength of the team, even without all the pieces and parts in place.
-Top pick in the draft.
-Hopefully playmakers won't be injured like they were in 2005.
-More experience for our young players. Our draft classes should be getting into the prime of their careers.
-A new expectation of winning and new fresh messages. Of not just keeping it close until the 4th quarter, and an expectation of really working hard and having close relationships between coaches and players (some of the statements re: Kubiak and Carr).
-New excitement of the fans and the players.


Minuses:

-Players learning a new system. Even if it is the best system in the world, there is usually a learning curve. It would be helpful if our early season schedule was a little easier this year.
-Likely could be a hard schedule--may depend on timing of the schedule some.
-Not having the players to run what we want to run. (An experienced good TE and 3-4 guys transitioning into a predominently 4-3 maybe sorta whatever the new DC says).
-Many of our best players/leaders are getting too old/injured--Weigart, Payne, Walker, Wong.
-Need lots of players for quality depth. Oline, at this point and time, still looks kinda scary. And we have too many players starting that would be backups on other teams.
-Uncertain how the new coaching staff will mesh together.
-Hard to attract quality FAs to play on a rebuilding team with little tradition.
-It is easy to blame the old coaching staff for all the previous failures, but it is possible that part of it is our players. Maybe the training wheels were on the offense because we just didn't have the players to do better. And they seemed to be playing hard all last year, but not terribly smart. I'm am not saying that it is all on the players and not on the old coaches, but I don't know for sure of the proportionate fault because I'm not omniscient and stuff.


Did I leave anything key out? (And no, this is not an invitation for the sorry old insulting jokes or slams of certain players).


:texflag:

footballguy69
02-02-2006, 07:34 PM
You are pretty much right on. I think coaching was the major factor and our talent base was not very strong.

From the coaching standpoint:
1) No one has offered Fangio a job so that tells you something.
2) Capers in four years never really made good adjustments at half time leading to many losses.
3) Chick Harris, Jon Hoke and Joe Marciano are the exact only coaches I would have held over from the Capers regime. So...it must be glaringly apparent that they are worthy. All of their respective areas were our team strength.
4) I was never pleased with Kippy Brown (receivers). Playing Bradford and not Armstrong never sat well with me. Plus, we ran horrible routes especially when Carr had to scramble.

However, we must have a good draft and get immediate impact from early choices. Travis Johnson was a first year disappointment but I am not giving up on him. We all need to back Kubiak and let him make the decisions. I think getting him late hurt us somewhat but only time will tell. John McClain of the chronicle stated we are going to find out that last years Texans had some of the worst coaching ever. He is pretty much dead on, regarding a lot of his opinions.

Having the stadium full again will make a big difference and perhaps give us a home field advantage again!:redtowel: