PDA

View Full Version : Would 8-8 still make you happy?


gtexan02
10-01-2007, 10:00 AM
Before the season, the consensus around here was that an 8-8 season would be a sign that the Texans were going in the right direction. With a lot of missing pieces still to fill, it would mean we were close to a contender.

Then we had those first 2 games, and everyone got excited. 10-6 or even better were being thrown out.

Now at 2-2, what record are you expecting?

Yankee_In_TX
10-01-2007, 10:13 AM
I stick by my 8-8 call. Got a little excited after week 2, though.

Errant Hothy
10-01-2007, 10:15 AM
I've been calling 8-8 since the pre-season so yeah I'd still be happy with that, but if the injury situation gets any worse 7-9 could be a distinct posability.

Marcus
10-01-2007, 10:17 AM
I voted that the team is capable of being better . . . but, it should this added to it . . .

. . . barring injuries.

Injuries are never, NEVER taken into account when making W-L predictions. Why, because you can't predict them.

The season is only a quarter of the way done, yet our 2-2 record could easily have been 4-0 if we had the same players as we did playing KC.

I predicted 10-6, barring injuries. Now, I'll be very surprised if we go 8-8.

I'm thinking maybe I'm seeing a lot more where Kubes and Smith are coming from when they say we're still a couple of drafts away from being a good football team. We just don't have the depth to absorb the injuries.

Exithios
10-01-2007, 10:20 AM
We are better than 8-8, period. We went into Atlanta thinking we were going to play conservatively and walk out with an easy win, with that mind set even the likes of the Patriots would have been challenged. Three and out on the first drive without a single pass attempt, give me a break. They have too much faith in Ron Dayne. He isn't the worst RB in the league but he is far from a threat. The fact remains that we should have come out gunning to establish the run and the play action and we failed to establish either. If it wasn't for Schaub's superb play and our receivers playing with so much heart, this game could have really gotten ugly.

I question Richard Smith allowing Atlanta to, once again, expose our secondary. I applaud the decision to finally pull Petey for Fletcher but the fact still remains that we are a weak passing defense and rely on QB pressure to get the D off the field. This was the most sacked QB in the league and again we went in allowing only our front 4 to apply the pressure. Our LB core is solid, probably among the best in the league, but they are average in coverage. Again, I applaud the decision to blitz early on, but it should have gotten more aggressive when we realized that regardless of our coverage we were going to have a hard time stopping the passing game.

What I got from this game is that (A) we really need to bring Darius Walker up from the practice squad and give him a few reps during game time situations just to have him ready in the event that Green can't stay healthy (B) we are not aggressive enough with our defensive play calling. We need to play to our strengths and the D-line along with the line backers could make a name for our pass rush.

I am sticking with my original 10-6 prediction because I think we can chalk the Atlanta game up as a learning experience.

My $0.02

drewmar74
10-01-2007, 10:22 AM
Yeah. I'd be happy with that.


We've had some critical injuries. You just can't lose a starting center, the #1 WR, #3 WR, and your #1 RB and not expect it to show. Especially when some of these injuries are season enders (McKinney) or can linger (Green, Jones).


We knew going into the season that FS and CB2 were weak spots. If we know it, then every OC in the league knows it. We can probably expect to continue to get exploited all season.


We've seen exactly how thin we are at RB. I was initially optimistic about the Green signing but any time you've got an oldish RB with a gimp knee it's not good. Couple that with Ron "Hunger Pain" Dayne and Dr. Gado and we're probably about as bad off for RB's as just about anyone in the league. Man, I wish we had CT back. I know he suffered from fumbleitis but that can be fixed (Ahman Green, Tiki Barber).


We've got a second year HC who is still feeling his way through some of the intricacies of clock management, schemes, and play calling. Maybe the scheme is sound, but I just don't think we have the horses yet to pull some of it off (especially the running game!)


Our schedule is a bear. We've got to play Indianapolis twice, Jax twice, Possum Holler twice (and their defense is pretty solid) which ain't an easy row to hoe. The Raiders and Browns used to look like a pushover but they don't look so easy now and they're on the road. Throw in the Bucs and the Broncos for good measure and our schedule is a cast-iron female dog.


So, if you take all of this into consideration, then I will absolutely positively take 8-8. I'd think that 10-6 might be realistic next season after we give Rick Smith and Kubes another offseason to work - especially given we'll actually have some cap space next year.

maddogmrb
10-01-2007, 10:29 AM
We are better than 8-8, period. We went into Atlanta thinking we were going to play conservatively and walk out with an easy win, with that mind set even the likes of the Patriots would have been challenged. Three and out on the first drive without a single pass attempt, give me a break. They have too much faith in Ron Dayne. He isn't the worst RB in the league but he is far from a threat. The fact remains that we should have come out gunning to establish the run and the play action and we failed to establish either. If it wasn't for Schaub's superb play and our receivers playing with so much heart, this game could have really gotten ugly.

I question Richard Smith allowing Atlanta to, once again, expose our secondary. I applaud the decision to finally pull Petey for Fletcher but the fact still remains that we are a weak passing defense and rely on QB pressure to get the D off the field. This was the most sacked QB in the league and again we went in allowing only our front 4 to apply the pressure. Our LB core is solid, probably among the best in the league, but they are average in coverage. Again, I applaud the decision to blitz early on, but it should have gotten more aggressive when we realized that regardless of our coverage we were going to have a hard time stopping the passing game.

What I got from this game is that (A) we really need to bring Darius Walker up from the practice squad and give him a few reps during game time situations just to have him ready in the event that Green can't stay healthy (B) we are not aggressive enough with our defensive play calling. We need to play to our strengths and the D-line along with the line backers could make a name for our pass rush.

I am sticking with my original 10-6 prediction because I think we can chalk the Atlanta game up as a learning experience.

My $0.02



I can agree with everything except your 10-6 prediction. At this point, if we can go 8-8, we have to call it a successful season. Our oline is STILL a problem. Yes, Schaub makes things better but, he can't block. And we still have question marks in our dline, olb, cb, and safety positions.

Thorn
10-01-2007, 11:30 AM
We can do better than 8-8, but realisticly I'll be happy at 8-8 because that means we are no longer losers.

powerfuldragon
10-01-2007, 11:31 AM
i think i predicted we'd go 7 - 9, so yes, 8 - 8 would be nice.

Texan_Bill
10-01-2007, 11:34 AM
I think I was near 8-8 to 9-7.

The key is getting out of the injury 'prison'!!

real
10-01-2007, 11:35 AM
I think if we go 8-8 we underachieved...

So no...I wouldn't be happy with 8-8

badboy
10-01-2007, 11:47 AM
8-8 would be an improvement based on the injuries we have and it is still early so anything can happen. I was extremely disappointed in Kube's game plan as others have said. We should have blown Atlanta off the field. We have what we have in LT and RB so let's work around these weaknesses. We should have gone more to TEs and Davis (even if to loosen up the D). WHen we went 3 and out first series, I went Oh Oh.

The D line has got to earn its pay to cover deficiencies at DB. Faggins is what he is. One of the penalties looked liked a legal block within 5 yards and I wanted to see a whole lot of that but not with a flag. Bad call imo.

junior
10-01-2007, 11:51 AM
i still say no. we were billed to be better and talent wise we are. at the end of last year we had dayne starting at RB, we had a patch work o-line, we had street FA starting at d-line, no green, no jones, no mathis, and we finished the year 3-2 in our last 5.

the big difference is no AJ, but we have an improved d-line with okoye and improved qb with schaub. so i say you still should be better.

we caught a break with the schedule a down KC, a down Carolina, and a down Falcons team, we should be 3-1 no excuses. we were better than ATL hurt or not.

eriadoc
10-01-2007, 11:59 AM
If we go 8-8. that means we had to have lost too many games against opponents we should be able to beat (see: Falcons). So no, I will not be satisfied with 8-8. If we were playing a tougher schedule, I'd be happy with 8-8, but not with this one. As it stands, we stil have to play the Dolphins, Browns, Raiders, Bucs, Titans x2, and Jags x2. Those teams will most likely not finish the season with a winning record. If this team is really better than last year, they have to start winning against teams like that. The Titans are a good example, actually. They aren't better than anyone, on paper. Yet they continue to play over their heads. This team has better personnel, IMO, and shouldn't need to play over their heads to win against those kinds of teams.

And that is not even getting into teams like the Broncos, Saints, and Chargers, whom everyone thought would be much better than they are at this point.

In order for this team to go 8-8 (or worse), they'll have to play more games like the one against the Falcons. That will never satisfy me. I can nitpick the loss against the Colts, but the Colts simply outman us at this point. The Falcons game was there for the taking. The team blew it. In order for them to do as poorly as 8-8, they'll have to blow more games like that.

nunusguy
10-01-2007, 02:16 PM
I dunno, but it seems every week is the biggest game of the year and this upcoming game with the Dolphins is no exception.
Even with the injuries, this game looks very winnable especially since it's in Reliant. Win it and who knows how we do the following week in Jacksonville, though I'm not so optimistic as to assume we sweep them again. But if we win this week, even with a loss in FLA we'd be 500 when VY & Co. come in 2 weeks from now, and I'd expect us to be at maximine intensity for that game.
Losing this Sunday would truly be a huge setback IMO, and coupled with our offensive guys maybe being out even longer it could doom what started out to be a very promising season.
Win this week we are = or > 500, lose we might be < 500.

real
10-01-2007, 02:22 PM
I hate to say it, but I think subconciously the Texans did see their performance against the Colts as a moral victory.

Leahmic223
10-01-2007, 02:53 PM
I wouldn't be satisfied because look at our schedule...we should go more than 8-8.

I don't know why everyone is down after this one lost, I hope our team isn't thinking the way some of you guys are. Some people came into this game with playoff hopes, now its "Would you be fine with 8-8."

No, I think we can still win 10 games call me a homer but I really do. You look at what we did with Andre and Green in there with Schaub...it is night and day to what happened. Also look at our schedule...who really scares you except the Colts?

No one scares me, I chalked up the Saints as a loss and the Chargers before the season but the Saints are looking like a win now since they are looking so bad unless Reggie actually reaches his potential real quick.

The Chargers still do scare me, they still have tons of talent but their defense isn't doing much and Rivers is looking bad right now and LT is...eh he looks defeated. Now this team can get it together before we play them and that's the point some teams are going to have short losing streaks and some are going win 4 games in a row and then lose the next 3.

I don't know I want 9-7 I think it is realistic looking at our schedule.

V Man
10-01-2007, 03:00 PM
I selected yes, but should have had the choice "yes, only because of the number of injuries we have had."

Texanmike02
10-01-2007, 05:21 PM
I voted that the team is capable of being better . . . but, it should this added to it . . .

. . . barring injuries.

Injuries are never, NEVER taken into account when making W-L predictions. Why, because you can't predict them.

The season is only a quarter of the way done, yet our 2-2 record could easily have been 4-0 if we had the same players as we did playing KC.

I predicted 10-6, barring injuries. Now, I'll be very surprised if we go 8-8.

I'm thinking maybe I'm seeing a lot more where Kubes and Smith are coming from when they say we're still a couple of drafts away from being a good football team. We just don't have the depth to absorb the injuries.

Can't predict them? Maybe not, but you can account for them. DD was a LOCK to not play 16 games. So was Green. You had to know that our O-Line wasn't going to stay together. I saw a stat the other day something like we have never played the same Oline together in more than 4 consecutive games.

The idea that you can't predict injuries just doesn't make sense. They are not as predictable as say "TDs" but there are certainly players you can count on being injured, especially once they develop a history of it.

Mike

4Texans
10-01-2007, 05:25 PM
8-8 would be the best record we've ever had, but I voted No, because this team is capable of a better record.

The Pencil Neck
10-01-2007, 05:38 PM
People are saying we should beat that team or we should beat this team... that's WRONG at this point. You've got to leave your preconceptions behind.

Are we a better team than we were last year? Yes, much.

But there are some tough teams on our schedule. And I'm not talking about the Chargers and Saints. Those teams are probably going to end up being our easiest games of the season. The Browns, Titans, Jags, Raiders, and Buccaneers aren't going to be pushovers like some people think. The Browns are probably looking at an 8-8 season. The Titans and Jags are looking at better than 8-8 (unless we're able to sweep them.) The Buccaneers are probably going to win their division and I wouldn't be surprised if the Raiders are in the hunt for their division, too.

We're going to have to fight tooth and nail just to win the game coming up against the Dolphins. They're 0-4 and they're HONGRY.

We are a good enough team at this point that we can beat anyone. But, despite the wins against the Chiefs and Panthers, we aren't good enough to beat ANYONE without coming in focused and ready to play. We've got to take every single game and every single team seriously.

We've started 2-2 2 other times. Once we finished 5-11 and another time we finished 7-9. I'll be happy with an 8-8 because at least we'll have our first non-losing season. But I think we're capable of much more than that. But we have weaknesses and our coaches have to game plan to protect those weaknesses.

Pearl Trade
10-02-2007, 08:09 AM
8-8 and is progress for the team and thats what we need

Mr. White
10-02-2007, 08:30 AM
I've been sticking with 8-8 since last year's season ended. I'm staying with it now.

We've still got holes at some key positions. Playoff teams usually have depth on their roster and we still don't. I think we'll probably be in the playoff picture until mid-December.

There's been a lot of improvement. We're still in games in the 4th quarter. I'm just enjoying the ride this year.

Historyhorn
10-02-2007, 11:51 AM
8-8 is about where I expected us to be this year. Our 2-0 start got me thinking bigger, but our injuries have brought that crashing back down to reality.

If we finish even for the year, then that is progress. We can put another good draft in the hopper and shore up our secondary and add depth. We'll come back next year ready for a playoff run. I think that run would be a year ahead of schedule.

Go Texans

eriadoc
10-02-2007, 12:01 PM
People are saying we should beat that team or we should beat this team... that's WRONG at this point. You've got to leave your preconceptions behind.

When I say they should beat the Browns, Titans, Raiders, Dolphins, and similar, it's not because of some preconceived notion that those teams suck. It's because for this team to claim to be better, they have to beat that caliber of .500-dwelling teams. If we lose to the Colts, Pats, and similar teams, that's acceptable at this point. We're just outmanned. We have the personnel to stand toe-to-toe with those middle-tier teams and win. And if we don't, it's a failure.

Last season, we were two to three plays away from being 8-8, and we played tougher teams than we play this year. We were a Jameel Cook fumble away from beating a better Giants team than this year's version. We were a fumble away from beating the Tacks (pick one - Carr's or Cook's). We let the Redskins game slip through our grasp, making Brunell look like Joe Montana (or Ryan Fitzpatrick, or Joey Harrington, pick one). We beat the Raiders despite poor play. They're better, but so are we. We beat the Browns. They're better, but so are we.

If we came that close last year, and we're claiming to be better this year, then we have to win those kinds of games. Those are games we are supposed to win - not because they suck, but because we are supposed to outplay them. I have no disrespect for those teams - it's just that this season will be no better than the last if we finish 8-8, and it has everything to do with this team, not those teams.

TexansSB07
10-02-2007, 12:38 PM
8-8 to me says Average, this team is NOT average. We won 2 in a row to start season, and 2 losses we do have. We were in the game until 4th quarter, so 8--8 to me sounds like the quitter mentality we used to have about Houston:fans:

The Pencil Neck
10-02-2007, 01:05 PM
When I say they should beat the Browns, Titans, Raiders, Dolphins, and similar, it's not because of some preconceived notion that those teams suck. It's because for this team to claim to be better, they have to beat that caliber of .500-dwelling teams.

You're contradicting yourself a little bit. You're saying you don't have a preconceived notion that these teams suck and then turn around and assume that they're .500 dwelling teams.

The Browns, Titans, Raiders, and Jags could all conceivably finish with 9-10 wins this year. These guys (including us) could be the Jets/Chiefs from last year. We are good enough that we should beat them... but that's no guarantee.

HuttoKarl
10-02-2007, 01:11 PM
8-8 is better than 7-9 or 6-10.

I'll take 8-8. Sure wouldn't mind 9-7 though.

eriadoc
10-02-2007, 01:19 PM
You're contradicting yourself a little bit. You're saying you don't have a preconceived notion that these teams suck and then turn around and assume that they're .500 dwelling teams.

The Browns, Titans, Raiders, and Jags could all conceivably finish with 9-10 wins this year. These guys (including us) could be the Jets/Chiefs from last year. We are good enough that we should beat them... but that's no guarantee.

I don't have a preconceived notion that they suck. I have a preconceived notion that they are .500 dwellers. If that = "suck" for you, then our team is aspiring to suck.

Hardcore Texan
10-02-2007, 01:50 PM
I stick by my 8-8 call. Got a little excited after week 2, though.

Ditto, exactly what I guessed orginally, how I felt after week 2, and now I am back down to earth and still feel like we can get there.

Double Barrel
10-02-2007, 04:00 PM
Yes, 8-8 is still progress in the right direction!

We are still suffering from the Capers/Casserly debacle, with $30 million in dead cap space this season alone. Winning teams have depth, which is usually built through the later rounds of the drafts. Unfortunately, our first four years left us with very little, save for a handful of players.

2-2 doesn't bother me too much because I figured we might be a .500 team. A little luck going our way could result in 9-7, but I don't see it getting better than that this year.

HJam72
10-02-2007, 04:59 PM
I won't be happy with 8-8, but I can live with it. To actually make me happy, they must win more than they lose, meaning 9-7 or better.

We're in our 6th season, and I'm tired of watching a losing team. Every year we talk about just making progress, but never having a winning season is NOT progress.

By the way, last Sunday was inexcusable. They're going to have to win the next 3 in a row just to make up for that lame excuse for a football game--and yes I know who those games will be against. That's the only reason it makes up for throwing away an easy one.

junior
10-02-2007, 07:52 PM
7-9 is still improvement over last year so will you be happy with that.

we were 6-6 vs. the afc last year, finished 4-4 in the second half last year, 3-2 in the last 5, and 6-7 after the 0-3 start so for me 8-8 is just par for the course.

thats the way i look at it.

HJam72
10-02-2007, 07:55 PM
7-9 is only a one game improvement over last year. That's not good enough. The only way a one game improvement would be good enough is if we were banging on the playoffs door.

I seriously doubt that Kubiak would feel even remotely happy with 7-9 this year, and he shouldn't.

thunderkyss
10-02-2007, 08:09 PM
I'm thinking maybe I'm seeing a lot more where Kubes and Smith are coming from when they say we're still a couple of drafts away from being a good football team. We just don't have the depth to absorb the injuries.

If I were on this team, there's no way I'd be thinking I'd be satisfied at 8-8 when it's all said & done. There's no way, that I'd predict this team to be 8-8, this early in the season.

I'm going out there thiniking we'll win every game, and end up 14-2.

I'll agree we aren't a great team, but there's no reason we can't be better than 8-8. We aren't the only team with problems, injuries or whatever.

Runner
10-02-2007, 08:30 PM
Compare this roster to the 2004 team that went 7-9. Then compare the coaching staffs.

Does that change anyone's opinion about being statisfied with 8-8 with this team? Does it change anyone's opinion of the 2004 team?