PDA

View Full Version : Frank Bush named New Texans DC


Texan JBZ
01-13-2009, 12:58 PM
Hot off the presses - Frank Bush will be named new Texans DC. Good for him - NOW BLITZ!

TEXANS84
01-13-2009, 12:59 PM
Got it:

The Texans hired their senior defensive assistant, Frank Bush, as defensive coordinator today.

Bush's promotion wasn't a surprise. He was the leading candidate and the only one interviewed for the defensive coordinator position that became available when Richard Smith was fired after the season.

The Texans asked for permission to interview Washington assistant Jerry Gray, but the Redskins denied him the opportunity last week. Under league rules, teams can deny permission for any assistant under contract unless the interview is for a head-coaching position.

Don't be surprised if David Gibbs, who coached Kansas City's defensive backs for the last three years, is the new secondary coach. Gibbs, the son of assistant head coach/offense Alex Gibbs, interviewed for the job Monday. Gibbs coached Denver's defensive backs for four years. He also was defensive coordinator at Minnesota and Auburn as well as an assistant at Colorado, Oklahoma and Kansas.

When Gary Kubiak was hired as head coach in 2006, Bush was his first choice to become the defensive coordinator, but Arizona wouldn't let him out of his contract. Kubiak promoted Smith, who had been hired to coach linebackers. In 2007, Ken Whisenhunt was hired to coach the Cardinals, and he allowed Bush to leave for the Texans.

Bush has been in the NFL for 24 years as a player, scout and assistant coach. He was drafted by the Oilers in 1985 to play outside linebacker. He was a starter as a rookie, and when a congenital spinal defect forced him to retire, he moved into the scouting department. Bush spent 10 years with the Oilers before moving to Denver, where he coached linebackers, defensive backs and special teams. He was assistant head coach\linebackers when the Texans hired him from Arizona.

Chronicle Article (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6208713.html)

Brando
01-13-2009, 01:00 PM
link (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/6208713.html)

The Texans hired their senior defensive assistant, Frank Bush, as defensive coordinator today.

Bush's promotion wasn't a surprise. He was the leading candidate and the only one interviewed for the defensive coordinator position that became available when Richard Smith was fired after the season.

The Texans asked for permission to interview Washington assistant Jerry Gray, but the Redskins denied him the opportunity last week. Under league rules, teams can deny permission for any assistant under contract unless the interview is for a head-coaching position.

Don't be surprised if David Gibbs, who coached Kansas City's defensive backs for the last three years, is the new secondary coach. Gibbs, the son of assistant head coach/offense Alex Gibbs, interviewed for the job Monday. Gibbs coached Denver's defensive backs for four years. He also was defensive coordinator at Minnesota and Auburn as well as an assistant at Colorado, Oklahoma and Kansas.

Errant Hothy
01-13-2009, 01:02 PM
I guess this means that Gray was the only other serious canidate?

Either way, I'll give Bush some time but I'm not very excited, or depressed, by this.

swtbound07
01-13-2009, 01:03 PM
I am less than awed or inspired.

Thorn
01-13-2009, 01:03 PM
LOL, well I guess that's settled now.

FirstTexansFan
01-13-2009, 01:05 PM
Who knows? I do remember everyone drooling when he was going to be our selection before Richard Smith, up until we were denied the right to talk to him by Arizona. Makes me question why we're all so negative about it now.

Errant Hothy
01-13-2009, 01:07 PM
Who knows? I do remember everyone drooling when he was going to be our selection before Richard Smith, up until we were denied the right to talk to him by Arizona. Makes me question why we're all so negative about it now.

I wouldn't say we're negative, just..."meh"...that's why I said neutral.

False Start
01-13-2009, 01:07 PM
That caught me off guard. :shades:

Well, lets see what he can do. Maybe he will be a great DC.

Hervoyel
01-13-2009, 01:07 PM
I'm kind of "Ok people, lets get behind this" about this decision. This is what Kubiak originally wanted so now he's got it. The Texans will sink or swim with the coaches that Gary wants.

I want to hear some interview material with Bush and find out what he's got to say about where he wants to take the Texans defense. It's time for him to interview with the fanbase so to speak and sell us on his hiring.

gtexan02
01-13-2009, 01:08 PM
This is great, IMO.

We get a guy who we know works well with our players, has ties to Houston, works well with Kubiak, and was his original #1 choice. I'm glad we're not bringing in Williams. Gray would have been nice, but it didn't work out. Time to move on and start signing up positional coaches.

Shaft75
01-13-2009, 01:08 PM
Ahhhh... The power of observation...

From the Gibbs Interview Thread:

I was just watching ABC 13 news and they were showing a segment on the Shriners game in Houston. Why would I bring this up?

Well write in the middle of reading comments in this thread on my iphone, I looked up a the tv and saw some coaches watching the practice today. Good old Kubiak was in the middle with his offensive coordinator, Kyle Shanahan to his left and you guesses it... Frank Bush to his right.

Am I reading to much into it?

Texan_Bill
01-13-2009, 01:11 PM
Ahhhh... The power of observation...

From the Gibbs Interview Thread:

Don't go breakin' your own arm, pattin yourself on the back, now... ;)

76Texan
01-13-2009, 01:14 PM
Ahhhh... The power of observation...

From the Gibbs Interview Thread:
Did Kubiak tell ya' to give us a little warning? LOL!

BigWig
01-13-2009, 01:15 PM
I think its a safe pick, would I like to have had a gamble pick, maybe, it just doesnt do much for me right now. Hopefully Kubes and this guy will make a 1-2 punch type of team, including Shanny jr. and have our D bcak in at leats the top 10.

bckey
01-13-2009, 01:17 PM
Alot of people on here called this one. The Texans were basically going through the motions with Bush as their man all along. John McClain has some positive stuff to say about Bush in his chat for what its worth:

John McClain: I hope Frank Bush gets it. Frank will blitz like crazy and have the linemen shoot the gaps to get after the quarterback and give the defense an identity -- everybody to the ball and hit until the whistle. That's the system he was brought up under.

HOU-TEX
01-13-2009, 01:17 PM
I'm good with it. I agree with Herv. It'd be nice to have a PC with Bush having him throw us a bone about his defensive philosophy. Doubtful, but who knows?

Now, on the the Dline and Secondary coaches. Who do we have out there?

:texflag:

barrett
01-13-2009, 01:19 PM
I am supportive of it but it's hard to understand why we only interviewed 1 guy. The other guy we wanted we couldn't have. Was Bush that much of a sure thing or what? I would have liked to play the field a bit more. But with absolutely no idea what Bush plans to do it's hard to be negative about it.

Texans Pride
01-13-2009, 01:20 PM
I don't like it.

Take the time time to interview SOMEONE else. . . ANYONE.

I'm never a big fan at jumping at the first opportunity. You should always look at all your options on the table.

bckey
01-13-2009, 01:21 PM
It is still a mystery to me with Bush getting the dc gig why Jethro Franklin was axed. They were supposedly great friends unless something changed over time. See this from the video archives on the other board.


http://www.houstontexans.com/tv/index.asp?mm_file_id=1560

Porky
01-13-2009, 01:22 PM
I'm not happy with this hiring. Nor am I upset about it. The guy has no track record calling a defense.

He's a clean slate. If he can turn that defense over and shake it up good and erase the mess left over from Smith, then he will be the the etch a sketch coach.

Of course, if he retraces the same lines as his predecssor, then he will be the unemployed coach.

I'm willing to give him a shot and the proof will be in the pudding.

SheTexan
01-13-2009, 01:23 PM
Hummmm, just wondering. Bush leaves the Cards and they go to the NFC championship game, maybe the SB. Maybe Coach Whisenhunt knows something GK refuses to acknowledge. :headhurts: I don't pretend to know as much as some of you guys know about coaching defenses, etc, but, for some reason, I don't get a warm fuzzy feeling about his promotion. I just wish I could pick the brains of the guys that PLAY on our defense. Wonder how Dunte will react to this? Guess we'll find out soon enough.

TheRealJoker
01-13-2009, 01:23 PM
Bush is the safe pick. He's a guy Kubiak knows isn't going to be a hot candidate for a HC position his lack of a sparkling resume as a DC at this point in his career. But he's got a lot of coaching experience and he knows all the players on defense and more importantly their strengths and weaknesses.

I'm not happy that we have no idea what type of scheme he wants to run like we would've known with Jerry Gray but at the same time if we would've hired a guy at DC who is already interviewing for HC openings and he turns the D into a top 10 unit in 1 season then its very likely he would've been a HC after only 1 season or so with us. With Bush atleast we know we've got him at minimum 3 years unless he lights things up and becomes a top HC candidate or is Richard Smith 2.0 and gets Kubiak fired.

But if Bush is Smith 2.0 then Kubiak SHOULD be fired for hiring him. Kubiak knows this DC is going to get him an extension or get him a pink slip so I trust in his decision making.

76Texan
01-13-2009, 01:23 PM
I'm kind of "Ok people, lets get behind this" about this decision. This is what Kubiak originally wanted so now he's got it. The Texans will sink or swim with the coaches that Gary wants.

I want to hear some interview material with Bush and find out what he's got to say about where he wants to take the Texans defense. It's time for him to interview with the fanbase so to speak and sell us on his hiring.
Well, the continuity will be there.
But Kubiak is now caught lying that he wants a big-time upgrade there!
I never thought that Smith was alone in running the Defense.

Remember back in 06, we started out playing quite agressively, blitzing and so forth... for a few games... getting burned badly... and so they toned it down. We simply don't have the personnel.

With a couple more draft picks next year, we'll be able to get back to what Kubiak has wanted to do all along, playing more agressively on defense!

We'll be fine with Bush. (Knock on wood!)

Shaft75
01-13-2009, 01:28 PM
Don't go breakin' your own arm, pattin yourself on the back, now... ;)

Hey that comment would have never happened if you would just stepped up to the plate and pointed it out!:whip:

barrett
01-13-2009, 01:29 PM
i wonder if they will "introduce" him or if we'll just have to learn what he's going for via Chron's crackpot staff?

Texan JBZ
01-13-2009, 01:29 PM
I'm willing to give Bush a chance to see what he can do. Kubes has had a good history with his hirings. Well..that is besides Smith. But if you look at jus the OCs the Texans have had under Kubes, they've been decent hires. Calhoun, Sherman, now Shanny. He's been able to keep very important coaches like Holland, Marciano, Karm, and Harris on the staff. He was able to upgrade the staff with Rhodes and Gibbs. So, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt on Bush right now. Not to say that I won't change, but I'm good with the hiring for now.

drewmar74
01-13-2009, 01:30 PM
I'm not happy that we have no idea what type of scheme he wants to run....

Per McClain on his chat today:

John McClain: I hope Frank Bush gets it. Frank will blitz like crazy and have the linemen shoot the gaps to get after the quarterback and give the defense an identity -- everybody to the ball and hit until the whistle. That's the system he was brought up under.

http://blogs.chron.com/nfl/2009/01/texans_nfl_chat_0113.html

Sounds decidedly more aggressive than the vanilla wafer defense (plain, flat, and crumbles easily) that RS trotted out.

painekiller
01-13-2009, 01:39 PM
It is still a mystery to me with Bush getting the dc gig why Jethro Franklin was axed. They were supposedly great friends unless something changed over time. See this from the video archives on the other board.


http://www.houstontexans.com/tv/index.asp?mm_file_id=1560

Maybe it has something to do with Frank wanting to shoot gaps and Jethro having his guys read then react. Just because your friend does not mean you think alike.

If Bush turns out the way McClain described him, then I am thrilled. Use the DL properly and get us some better athletes at LB.

Wolf
01-13-2009, 01:41 PM
Maybe it has something to do with Frank wanting to shoot gaps and Jethro having his guys read then react. Just because your friend does not mean you think alike.

If Bush turns out the way McClain described him, then I am thrilled. Use the DL properly and get us some better athletes at LB.

maybe he can utilize Amobi then by shooting the gaps

TheRealJoker
01-13-2009, 01:42 PM
Per McClain on his chat today:

John McClain: I hope Frank Bush gets it. Frank will blitz like crazy and have the linemen shoot the gaps to get after the quarterback and give the defense an identity -- everybody to the ball and hit until the whistle. That's the system he was brought up under.

http://blogs.chron.com/nfl/2009/01/texans_nfl_chat_0113.html

Sounds decidedly more aggressive than the vanilla wafer defense (plain, flat, and crumbles easily) that RS trotted out.

Sounds great if true. If it turns out to be another "aggressive 4-3" however...

On the positive side he did have some strong years as LB coach for Denver and Arizona. Hope he can bring some attitude to the defensive side of the ball!!!

Also, i'm sure he had input on Marinelli getting interviewed. Marinelli runs a DL that is quick and shoots the gaps in a tampa 2. That leads me to believe that's what Bush wants on defense...hopefully he'll use Amobi effectively!!!

kiwitexansfan
01-13-2009, 01:47 PM
John McClain: I hope Frank Bush gets it. Frank will blitz like crazy and have the linemen shoot the gaps to get after the quarterback and give the defense an identity -- everybody to the ball and hit until the whistle. That's the system he was brought up under
[.

This sounds like a system that will suit our DL personnel pretty well, Mario, AO, TJ are all pass rushers who need to play in gaps and go for the jugular.

We'll need some better LB and S play to compensate but hopefully with Demeco fit again, Adibi and Diles better for a years experience and hopefully an infusion of new talent at S via draft and/or FA, we'll gave what it takes to pull it off.

Shaft75
01-13-2009, 01:48 PM
Did McLain say on his chat why they waitd so long in the DC was allready in-house? Still a burning question for me... Spending too much time in the Rivalry forum to look it up.:pirate:

bckey
01-13-2009, 01:50 PM
Maybe it has something to do with Frank wanting to shoot gaps and Jethro having his guys read then react. Just because your friend does not mean you think alike.

If Bush turns out the way McClain described him, then I am thrilled. Use the DL properly and get us some better athletes at LB.

I think we will all be thrilled if Bush turns out that way. I was under the impression Franklin had them read and react because Smith wanted that. If it ws Franklin then I can see why he was let go.

Kaiser Toro
01-13-2009, 01:51 PM
Did McLain say on his chat why they waitd so long in the DC was allready in-house? Still a burning question for me... Spending too much time in the Rivalry forum to look it up.:pirate:

Gray had a meeting with the Redskins yesterday to address their decision not to allow him to visit with the Texans. Perhaps that was what Kubiak was waiting for.

BigBull17
01-13-2009, 01:51 PM
I wouldn't say we're negative, just..."meh"...that's why I said neutral.

I know how you feel. I'm just kinda pissed that we did'nt even talk to one other person. Its not like he was going anywhere. We had him under contract. We could take all the time in the world and have him if we couldnt find someone better. Just lame. This is do or die year. We either get into the play-off's go 12-4 and not make it(could happen) or Kubiak is HC at A&M.

gtexan02
01-13-2009, 01:52 PM
Did McLain say on his chat why they waitd so long in the DC was allready in-house? Still a burning question for me... Spending too much time in the Rivalry forum to look it up.:pirate:

I think they wanted to give Gray a chance at the job in an interview. Once they were denied, they made the annoucement

Errant Hothy
01-13-2009, 01:52 PM
I know how you feel. I'm just kinda pissed that we did'nt even talk to one other person. Its not like he was going anywhere. We had him under contract. We could take all the time in the world and have him if we couldnt find someone better. Just lame. This is do or die year. We either get into the play-off's go 12-4 and not make it(could happen) or Kubiak is HC at A&M.

In their defense we know that asked to interview Gray and were denied. There is nothing for sure stating that they didn't interview anybody else.

Hardcore Texan
01-13-2009, 01:54 PM
If Bush was the one calling the plays towards the last part of the season that led to much better defensive performance than I am really happy about this hiring. If it wasn't him than I am "meh, let's see what happens" about it.

Killer Bee
01-13-2009, 01:55 PM
Hopefully McClain is right about his style but its all speculation until next season. The silver lining in this is that Bush is up to speed on the personal; he knows our strengths and weaknesses. The scheme will be molded around the talent, not the other way around. That should hasten the turnaround.

noxiousdog
01-13-2009, 01:55 PM
I hate this move. If this was the direction they wanted to go, it should have happened no later than week 8 last year.

It shows a serious lack of foresight.

BigBull17
01-13-2009, 01:58 PM
In their defense we know that asked to interview Gray and were denied. There is nothing for sure stating that they didn't interview anybody else.

Yeah, but they could have interviewed a few guys first. There were more out there than Gray and Bush.

drewmar74
01-13-2009, 02:02 PM
I wonder if he's going to put pictures of rocks in the guys' lockers. :thinking:

Errant Hothy
01-13-2009, 02:03 PM
Yeah, but they could have interviewed a few guys first. There were more out there than Gray and Bush.

Who?

Shaft75
01-13-2009, 02:11 PM
I wonder if he's going to put pictures of rocks in the guys' lockers. :thinking:

He should put up a picture of Ed Reed breaking Chris Johnson in half, or a picture of Ray Lewis blowing up Ahmard Hall to let the players know what is expected of them.

drewmar74
01-13-2009, 02:18 PM
He should put up a picture of Ed Reed breaking Chris Johnson in half, or a picture of Ray Lewis blowing up Ahmard Hall to let the players know what is expected of them.

I prefer that to rocks.

:specnatz:

Maybe a picture of Mario violating Bud Adams' mother while pouring sugar in Jeff Fisher's gas tank?

That might fire up the troops.

da Bull
01-13-2009, 02:22 PM
Hopefully The scheme will be molded around the talent, not the other way around.

That's the most salient point.

The one thing about this whole exercise is that Bush has probably demonstrated to Kubiak that he can handle the administrative side of being a coordinator. Which I would think is more encompassing than just being a position coach (i.e. Sean McDermott et. al.)

Nawzer
01-13-2009, 02:30 PM
Congrats to Frank Bush. I'll reserve judgement till we play 8 regular season games next season. I think Bush will do a better job than Richard Smith did. He knows the players, he's seen what works and what our players are capable of. Hopefully now, we can go get him some players who can wreak havok.

TexansFanatic
01-13-2009, 02:35 PM
Is it possible that Bush was already calling the defensive plays and taking a more hands-on role overall before Smith was canned? Is it possible he was already the DC for the second half of the season, with Smith having been reined in?

dalemurphy
01-13-2009, 02:38 PM
It's an exciting day. We have a new defense now. We won't be complaining anymore about the defense playing too conservatively. Apparently, this is the guy the defensive players wanted and it's definitely the guy that Kubes wanted 3 years ago.

I agree with my buddy Barrett that the one concern I have is the lack of interviews. However, I think the Marinelli interview may have been more about DC than was let on. Also, it's possible that their search was a lot more than we know. Besides the reported denial by the Redskins, who knows what else happened behind the scenes the past 2 weeks.

I've been screaming for a year that simply being aggressive on defense and forcing tempo will have wonderful results for this team. Since we have one of the better and more explosive offenses in the NFL, an up tempo game with more posessions is a good thing, even if we do give up a couple more big plays.

In other words, I'd rather give up 24 points, create 3 turnovers, and have our offense get the ball 13 times....

versus,

Give up 20 points, create one turnover, and our offense only gets 10 posessions.

I hope that makes sense. I think teams with good offenses doing themselves a disservice when the defense basically encourages 12-14 play drives. They're shooting themselves in the foot!

Thorn
01-13-2009, 02:44 PM
It is unfortunate that we will not see the results of this for quite some time. I already miss football season and it's technically not over with yet.

GP
01-13-2009, 02:53 PM
Is it possible that Bush was already calling the defensive plays and taking a more hands-on role overall before Smith was canned? Is it possible he was already the DC for the second half of the season, with Smith having been reined in?

That's what a lot of us were theorizing.

We have a recent confirmation that Richard Smith was, at the very least, being told by Kubiak AND Bush that there were some things he could do...some things he could not do.

In essence, Richard Smith had been handcuffed at some point in the season. And it wasn't just Kubiak doing the lock down. Bush told a person that he was involved in the decision and its implementation, as well.

I think it's funny that we wanted Bush when he was with the Cards, but couldn't get him due to contract no-no's. And now we wanted to interview Gray, but couldn't due to contract no-no's. I guess we'll have to wait until Gray is let go in order to get him as our d-coord? LOL [/sarcasm]

dalemurphy
01-13-2009, 02:54 PM
4pm today on houstontexans.com will be a live interview with Kubes and Bush.

Please let McClain and company ask questions that shed some light on the direction and philosophy of our new defense.

JWarren14
01-13-2009, 02:56 PM
Is it possible that Bush was already calling the defensive plays and taking a more hands-on role overall before Smith was canned? Is it possible he was already the DC for the second half of the season, with Smith having been reined in?

I thought that as well late in the season when our defense stepped up.

It may not be the sexiest hiring and it could have been done earlier, but let's reserve judgment until we actually see the product on the field. There are quite a few Head Coaching jobs available and a lot of DCs being interviewed for those positions. If you can't interview coordinators under contract unless its for a head coaching position or the team will let you then the pool is pretty small, I am not sure what DCs are under contract, but I am sure that the top tier DC are locked up for a good number of years. I am excited to see what Bush can do, he should have a great relationship with Mario both being from the Wolfpack and being drafted by Houston franchises. He should be able to help progress our young LBs Meco and Adibi and further them along with his LB experience. The Texans website has already updated his profile (http://www.houstontexans.com/team/coach.asp?coach_id=21).

Whats done is done now lets support our new TEXANS DC!

:fans:

Jackie Chiles
01-13-2009, 02:56 PM
Per McClain on his chat today:

John McClain: I hope Frank Bush gets it. Frank will blitz like crazy and have the linemen shoot the gaps to get after the quarterback and give the defense an identity -- everybody to the ball and hit until the whistle. That's the system he was brought up under.

http://blogs.chron.com/nfl/2009/01/texans_nfl_chat_0113.html

Sounds decidedly more aggressive than the vanilla wafer defense (plain, flat, and crumbles easily) that RS trotted out.

Yeah that sounds good but McClain also said all the time how Richard Smith would "blitz every play if he could" but they don't feel like the secondary can hold up blah blah blah. Until the season starts and we get a few games under our belt all we are going to see on the defense will be fluff pieces about how much has changed on defense for the better that will build up our expectations. I'm a sucker for the Texans so I know I will be reading every one of those and eventually they will turn me into a believer but right now I am not pleased with this move. Bring on the draft I guess.

GP
01-13-2009, 02:56 PM
I think they wanted to give Gray a chance at the job in an interview. Once they were denied, they made the annoucement

OK, but how long did it take for them to know that they couldn't speak to Jerry Gray?

Isn't the general rule that you can't interview for a lateral move...only for a head coaching job? That's correct, is it not?

If so, then that doesn't wash.

I just think they drug their feet, knowing Bush was their guy, and they know they've drug this out long enough. They knew GP and his band of investigators were getting a little too close to the truth! :whip:

Big Lou
01-13-2009, 02:57 PM
If Bush was the one calling the plays towards the last part of the season that led to much better defensive performance than I am really happy about this hiring. If it wasn't him than I am "meh, let's see what happens" about it.


Obviousley pure speculation on my part, but my gut tells me Bush was calling the plays down the stretch. Hopefully not the Oakland game though!!!!!!!

dalemurphy
01-13-2009, 03:00 PM
That's what a lot of us were theorizing.

We have a recent confirmation that Richard Smith was, at the very least, being told by Kubiak AND Bush that there were some things he could do...some things he could not do.

In essence, Richard Smith had been handcuffed at some point in the season. And it wasn't just Kubiak doing the lock down. Bush told a person that he was involved in the decision and its implementation, as well.

I think it's funny that we wanted Bush when he was with the Cards, but couldn't get him due to contract no-no's. And now we wanted to interview Gray, but couldn't due to contract no-no's. I guess we'll have to wait until Gray is let go in order to get him as our d-coord? LOL [/sarcasm]

That was my argument with Texanchick and others who were afraid that the defensive improvement towards the end of the season may save Richard Smith's job. I thought the change in style was immediate and significant enough that it indicated the involvement of someone else. I guess that someone was Bush.

By the way, the most exciting aspect of this change is represented in some quotes in a story in December by Dunta and some unnamed players. Basically, they said that they would leave defensive meetings knowing it just wouldn't work. And, they were itching to be allowed to start attacking more.

Also telling was a story in November about Eugene Wilson. Members of our secondary were astonished that he positioned his body in ways in order to decieve the QB and the offense. Wow! That pretty much says it all about Richard Smith's abilities as a DC. I gotta believe deception might begin to be taught and game planned now. REVOLUTIONARY!!

Wolf
01-13-2009, 03:01 PM
TC weighs in on her blog

http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2009/01/initial_thoughts_on_the_frank.html

gtexan02
01-13-2009, 03:03 PM
OK, but how long did it take for them to know that they couldn't speak to Jerry Gray?

Isn't the general rule that you can't interview for a lateral move...only for a head coaching job? That's correct, is it not?

If so, then that doesn't wash.

I just think they drug their feet, knowing Bush was their guy, and they know they've drug this out long enough. They knew GP and his band of investigators were getting a little too close to the truth! :whip:

The rule is that you can't interview for a non-head coaching position without permission from your contractor. The Redskins pay Gray a lot of money, so they may have been considering a deal where they would let him interview here if he agreed to terminate his contract. I have no idea, but if the team with the employee agrees, they are allowed to interview

dalemurphy
01-13-2009, 03:03 PM
OK, but how long did it take for them to know that they couldn't speak to Jerry Gray?

Isn't the general rule that you can't interview for a lateral move...only for a head coaching job? That's correct, is it not?

If so, then that doesn't wash.

I just think they drug their feet, knowing Bush was their guy, and they know they've drug this out long enough. They knew GP and his band of investigators were getting a little too close to the truth! :whip:

The old rule was that you can interview for a promotion. However, because of loopholes like "assistant head coach", they changed the rule to only "head coach"... Gray is currently a secondary coach... Three years ago, he could have interviewed for a coordinator position, but not now.

gtexan02
01-13-2009, 03:05 PM
I hate this move. If this was the direction they wanted to go, it should have happened no later than week 8 last year.

It shows a serious lack of foresight.

They could have named Bush the interim DC and then interview other people midseason if they had wanted to.

The defense from the midpoint of the season was not so much of a problem. It wouldn't have really changed anything. We were 5-1 over our last 6 games of the year

STEEL BLUE TEXANS
01-13-2009, 03:09 PM
Kubiak better be confident in Frank Bush because he will either sink or swim with him.

Polo
01-13-2009, 03:10 PM
I don't think Bush will be terrible, but if he is this will be the year you see a DC get canned mid-season...

Kaiser Toro
01-13-2009, 03:38 PM
The old rule was that you can interview for a promotion. However, because of loopholes like "assistant head coach", they changed the rule to only "head coach"... Gray is currently a secondary coach... Three years ago, he could have interviewed for a coordinator position, but not now.

Gray had it in his contract that he would interview for coordinator and up, the Skins simply refused to allow him to interview with the Texans.

mattieuk
01-13-2009, 03:38 PM
Well...no real surprise here, can't really say I know enough about him to cast any form of real excitement or disgust on the appointment, so we're just going to have to wait and see how this pans out, and see what kind of talent we're going to be bringing in to booster our defense.

I'm really eager for the draft to see if we can fix up our leaky D, and look at how Bush is going to hold points off the board, and equally importantly, getting the opposition's QB into the turf a few more times.

Wolf
01-13-2009, 03:39 PM
When you try and get a feel for the defensive philosophy a position coach will employ if he gets promoted to Defensive Coordinator, you look to the DC’s he’s worked under in the past. Because Frank Bush has never been a DC, we need to look at the DC’s he’s worked under to get a feel for the kind of coach he’ll probably be.

http://texanstailgate.blogspot.com/2009/01/frank-bush.html

he is getting a little ahead of himself, but interesting
So, I’m now working under the assumption that if Frank Bush gets hired as the Houston Texans Defensive Coordinator, the defense will look a lot like the Denver Broncos defense did under Greg Robinson. So, with that in mind, how does our personnel stack up with what Denver had, particularly during the Broncos 1998 season when they won their second consecutive championship.

Houston Denver
DE: Mario Williams DE: Neil Smith
DE: Anthony Weaver DE: Maa Tanuvasa
DT: Travis Johnson DT: Keith Traylor
DT: Amobi Okoye DT: Trevor Pryce
SLB: Zac Diles SLB: Bill Romanowski
WLB: Xavier Adibi WLB: John Mobley
MLB: DeMeco Ryans MLB: Glenn Cadrez
CB1: Dunta Robinson CB1: Darrien Gordon
CB2: Jacques Reeves CB2: Ray Crockett
FS: Eugene Wilson FS: Steve Atwater
SS: Nick Ferguson SS: Tyrone Braxton
Ok, we’ll just work our way down the list.



Weaver has more interceptions than he does sacks

ouch

TimeKiller
01-13-2009, 03:41 PM
Bush being hired as DC only bothers me because Richard Smith held the title until now. He should've been named when hired, Smith never did anything to keep his job. He should've been promoted after the 0-4 start. He should've been promoted when the defense proved beyond a shadow of a shadow of a doubt that it was inept under Smith midseason. He should've been promoted the last few games when he was the one basically controlling the calls from afar. He should've been promoted immediately after the Bears game. He should've been promoted before they brought in and let Marinelli walk. Why now?

Meh says I.

Wolf
01-13-2009, 03:45 PM
from the link comparing the type of defense robinson did in denver(bush was part of the crew) and what Bush might run

# Strongside Line Backer: This position isn’t even close. Romanowski was one of the best at his position for several years. Diles performed admirably until he injured himself, especially considering he was a 7th round draft pick, but he’s no Romanowski. Part of the problem is that under Richard Smith, there wasn’t any defensive philosophy to speak of, and the two Outside Line Backers were interchangeable. Under Greg Robinson, there was a Strongside Line Backer, and his duties and responsibilities were different than those of the Weakside Line Backer. As a SLB, Romanowski is head and shoulders better than anyone we have. If you were to give Greg Robinson from 1998 our defense to work with, he’d probably be ok until he got to this position. If we’re going to run the same style offense that the Broncos did, this is a position that we need to address, either in the draft (Orakpo) or free agency. Huge edge to Denver. If Chaun Thompson is healthy next year, he would be a sleeper to play this position. He’s got the size/strength to be a SLB, and he was an OLB in Cleveland’s 3-4 defense, so he should have some familiarity with dropping back into coverage, and general linebacking responsibilities.

# Weakside Line Backer: As a rookie in 1996, John Mobley played in all 16 games, and recorded only 61 tackles. In ’97 he recorded 132 and in ’98 he recorded 111. As a rookie, Adibi only played in 7 games, but he had 35 tackles. Adibi showed flashes of brilliance, and if he continues to improve, he could easily be as good as Mobley. Right now, the edge clearly goes to Denver, but Adibi has the skill set and the potential to be a very good WLB in this type of system.

# Middle Line Backer: In 1998, Glenn Cadrez had 74 Tackles in what appears to be his first year starting at MLB, despite having been drafted in 1992 in the sixth round. DeMeco has started since his rookie year, and has been one of the best MLB’s in football. Finally, based on everything, the Texans have a huge advantage at this position.


http://texanstailgate.blogspot.com/2009/01/frank-bush.html

spurstexanstros
01-13-2009, 03:46 PM
Am I the only one excited about this....I mean a new guy who wants to be agressive. I will be more excited once I read or hear the words.......The Houston Texans sever their ties with CB Demarcus "Big Play..er Petey.." Faggins

until then......

gtexan02
01-13-2009, 03:56 PM
Subtraction of a negative = positive

Therefore just by getting rid of Smith, our defense has improved.

If Bush can make them just a tiny bit better, it'll seem light years beyond what we're used to

Texans_Chick
01-13-2009, 03:57 PM
Am I the only one excited about this....I mean a new guy who wants to be agressive. I will be more excited once I read or hear the words.......The Houston Texans sever their ties with CB Demarcus "Big Play..er Petey.." Faggins

until then......

We don't know anything about what the new guy wants to do. McClain says he wants to play an aggressive 4-3, but that is the same dang thing that McClain said about another former Oiler coach, Richard Smith.

Here's a link to an old FanBlog post I wrote (http://blogs.chron.com/fanblogtexans/2006/07/everything_i_think_i_know_abou.html)when I was trying to figure out what Richard Smith was going to be about.

It's worth reading to see if we get the same old vagueness.

I want to know SPECIFICALLY what is going to be different. Less read and react? Actually trying to disguise coverages? What????

DocBar
01-13-2009, 04:01 PM
I'm pretty OK with this signing. I guess the Texans didn't make a mid-season change cuz it's not their style. They tend to be very methodical ( plodding) in personnel changes at times. I wonder what went on with Franklin. We now know what Bush REALLY thought of his coaching.I HATE waiting for the ^&*&^%* draft!!!!

Ryan
01-13-2009, 04:04 PM
This move will be the make or break of Kubiak, without a doubt.

Polo
01-13-2009, 04:08 PM
Kubiak probably didn't demote Smith because he didn't think that it was all his fault...Even after Smith was fired Kubiak apologized for not providing him with all the tools (players) necessary...After reflecting on the season he probably figured that another coach could bring a better gameplan on Sundays though...

texanhead08
01-13-2009, 04:12 PM
I think Bush has paid his dues and its good for him that he is getting a shot. I hope he does well of course, but seeing we wanted him 2yrs ago and weren't allowed to interview him its seems fair to him that he gets the job Kubes wanted him to have to begin with. Now its up to the front office to give him some players to work with.

ArlingtonTexan
01-13-2009, 04:13 PM
At least in the interview Bush had a good presence, but he did use that annoying "kid" thing that Kubiak does. Talk about simplifying the defense and being aggressive at the snap of the ball...moving foward versus sideways.

hookinreds
01-13-2009, 04:17 PM
For some reason, I feel very comfortable with Bush taking over the D.

Killer Bee
01-13-2009, 04:26 PM
So after listening to Bush’s press conference, I’m definitely more encouraged by this hiring. He seems ambitious and enthusiastic for his big chance. He specifically mentioned Buddy Ryan as one of his mentors along with Jerry Glanville, and Greg Robinson. Old school aggressive Houston defense is back. Attacking, violent, and aggression are words Bush used to describe his defensive philosophy. He said he would simplify the thinking when the ball is snapped and just get up the field after the ball, cause turnovers through collisions. When asked what he was going to change. A devious smile came across his face.
NO MORE READ AND REACT. YES!!!

TexansFanatic
01-13-2009, 04:34 PM
so after listening to bush’s press conference, i’m definitely more encouraged by this hiring. He seems ambitious and enthusiastic for his big chance. He specifically mentioned buddy ryan as one of his mentors along with jerry glanville, and greg robinson. Old school aggressive houston defense is back. Attacking, violent, and aggression are words bush used to describe his defensive philosophy. He said he would simplify the thinking when the ball is snapped and just get up the field after the ball, cause turnovers through collisions. When asked what he was going to change. A devious smile came across his face.
No more read and react. Yes!!!

fantastic!!!

RipTraxx
01-13-2009, 04:37 PM
I wonder who's gonna have more of a say now that we have a DC. Does Kubes still dictate whos DL and DB coach or is that all Franks deal?

TexansFanatic
01-13-2009, 04:42 PM
I'm excited about this Frank Bush. I hated Jerry Glanville, but his defenses were disruptive and created a lot of turnovers. They also inflicted a lot of pain in the House of Pain. This is Bush's pedigree. The Texans may be on their way to being a team other teams don't want to play.

IlliniJen
01-13-2009, 04:45 PM
MEH.

I saw this coming, but hoped it wouldn't happen.

I will continue to have hope for next season, but I remain a huge skeptic of the Texans coaching staff and their FO decisions in this regard.

cuppacoffee
01-13-2009, 04:56 PM
Who knows? I do remember everyone drooling when he was going to be our selection before Richard Smith, up until we were denied the right to talk to him by Arizona. Makes me question why we're all so negative about it now.


Guilt by association I suppose.

:coffee:

TexansFanatic
01-13-2009, 05:11 PM
Bush is a distinct improvement. I expect good things from his defense next year.

BattleRedToro
01-13-2009, 05:18 PM
The only thing that doesn't thrill me about this hiring is the timing.

If Kubiak was going to hire Bush, he could have done during last offseason, or if he wasn't certain then, then he could have done it half way through this season.

There was no reason to wait until this offseason to hire someone that was already on this staff.

GP
01-13-2009, 05:21 PM
I'm good with it.

Just picture this: Frank Bush and Gary Kubiak basically had an intervention with Richard Smith this year.

When you-know-who says that Smithiak was awful for letting Riley's contract go un-renewed, I stop and think "Yeah, well they also let those guys finish out the year and keep their jobs and their salaries and their respect, too. They could have canned them all and installed Frank on the spot."

Seems pretty generous and sincere, if you ask me.

All Bush had to say was that he counts Buddy Ryan as a major influence. That's a defense that looks like it still is in place in Philly: Blitzes, attacking, physical, and just consistent in their attitude.

I'm down with this move.

Second Honeymoon
01-13-2009, 05:30 PM
Frank Bush's hiring doesn't do anything for me. Coaching doesn't count against the salary cap, so why are we shopping on the bargain aisle? He may be great and no one knows how we will do but the fact is that he has no experience as DC and has never called the plays before.

That ain't exactly the most qualified candidate out there, is it? If the defense still continues to underperform and prohibit us from taking the next step as a team, Gary and Smith need to be held accountable for this hire and we can't wait 3 years to see if it works out. Based on this hiring, we definitely need to go out and get a leader for our defense. Ray Lewis makes sense and I would love to add him to our coaching staff when he retires.

I just don't see how this is going to change the culture of the defense. He was already on the staff and we saw a flatlining defense almost every week.

This guy better work out or shame on McNair, Kubiak, and Smith for not getting a more qualified and experienced candidate.

thunderkyss
01-13-2009, 05:32 PM
I'm very disappointed. Very, very disappointed.

To me, this is like firing offensive coordinator, and replacing him with Joe Pendry.

What has he done, to deserve a promotion??

What was the Senior Defensive Assistant doing, when we gave up 24 points to Chicago, 27 points to Oakland, 21 to Greenbay, 33 to Indy, 41 to Baltimore, and 28 to Minnesota??

Was he, or was he not assiting the Defensive Coordinator??

GP
01-13-2009, 05:44 PM
I'm very disappointed. Very, very disappointed.

To me, this is like firing offensive coordinator, and replacing him with Joe Pendry.

What has he done, to deserve a promotion??

What was the Senior Defensive Assistant doing, when we gave up 24 points to Chicago, 27 points to Oakland, 21 to Greenbay, 33 to Indy, 41 to Baltimore, and 28 to Minnesota??

Was he, or was he not assiting the Defensive Coordinator??

I'd like to think it was less of being an "assistant," and more of being someone who took notes, tried to give his input when he could, and then had to let the rest of it go.

He was waiting in the wings, and Richard's poor performance opened the doors of opportunity that Kubiak had probably told him would end up happening back when he lured Bush to Houston.

It's like crack: Richard was addicted to a bad philosophy. He tried to kick the habit, via Kubiak and Bush stepping in and handcuffing him...but he fell off that wagon in Oakland.

Thorn
01-13-2009, 05:45 PM
Frank Bush is saying what I want to hear, which is both encouraging and suspicious at the same time. I don’t think we have a lot to go on with the knowledge we have right now. I think the hiring of the rest of the defensive staff, free agent moves and the draft behind us we’ll have a better feel for what all this means.

That's a lot of beer between now and then, and I can only hope I have enough brain cells left to comprehend it when we are there.

HoustonFrog
01-13-2009, 05:49 PM
I am less than awed or inspired.

I'm with you...safe, plain, uninspiring and unimaginative...typical

Fox
01-13-2009, 05:54 PM
It's a boring selection, they didn't create any buzz by going out a plucking up a big name. However, as to whether or not it's a good selection (a completely different concept altogether), there's only one way to find out....

dalemurphy
01-13-2009, 06:04 PM
I'm with you...safe, plain, uninspiring and unimaginative...typical

How is it safe? Greg Williams or Mike Nolan would be safe. This is a risky choice. And, frankly, who cares if it is inspiring to fans as long as he inspires the players.

Fox
01-13-2009, 06:09 PM
How is it safe? Greg Williams or Mike Nolan would be safe. This is a risky choice. And, frankly, who cares if it is inspiring to fans as long as he inspires the players.

I think depending on perspective you could spin just about any candidate to be a risky selection. Hell, this is just a risky juncture in Kubiak's tenure as HC of the Texans. I think Bush is safe because he is familiar. It required very little leg work on the part of the Texans to promote from within.

Double Barrel
01-13-2009, 06:12 PM
I will wait and see the results before feeling anything about Bush as DC. I'll reserve my judgement until we have a body of work to judge. Until then, it's all speculation on our collective parts.

But I hope for the best! What else can I do? :texflag:

ATXtexanfan
01-13-2009, 06:17 PM
when's the draft? hopefully he's sick of the sit back and be picked apart defense we had

Sideline
01-13-2009, 06:24 PM
I like this hiring, the in the house hiring is something that Kubiak seems to like, along with young Shanahan. It was expected and it was vanilla, but I have been given no legitimate reason as yet not to trust the moves made by Smith and Kubiak.

Bush was here for last years Defensive debarcle, which is something that perhaps gives us reason to worry, however because he was here for that he already has the blueprint in front of him of what not to do with our defense, so I believe we can safely say that the product we see on the field next season will be completly different to that which we saw this season.

Just wish we didnt have to wait another 7 months now to see how it all pans out.

indiantexan
01-13-2009, 06:30 PM
I'm very disappointed. Very, very disappointed.

To me, this is like firing offensive coordinator, and replacing him with Joe Pendry.

What has he done, to deserve a promotion??

What was the Senior Defensive Assistant doing, when we gave up 24 points to Chicago, 27 points to Oakland, 21 to Greenbay, 33 to Indy, 41 to Baltimore, and 28 to Minnesota??

Was he, or was he not assiting the Defensive Coordinator??

Perhaps all Bush did was take notes and provide some input whenever asked to. He may not have volunteered to do anything because he may have wanted Capt. Smith of the Fail Boat to fail spectacularly for Kubiak and the FO to see....and offer him the job for 2009.

indiantexan
01-13-2009, 06:32 PM
I'd like to think it was less of being an "assistant," and more of being someone who took notes, tried to give his input when he could, and then had to let the rest of it go.

He was waiting in the wings, and Richard's poor performance opened the doors of opportunity that Kubiak had probably told him would end up happening back when he lured Bush to Houston.

It's like crack: Richard was addicted to a bad philosophy. He tried to kick the habit, via Kubiak and Bush stepping in and handcuffing him...but he fell off that wagon in Oakland.

or what GP said

Lucky
01-13-2009, 06:36 PM
Maybe Coach Whisenhunt knows something GK refuses to acknowledge.
Bush never coached under Whisenhunt. So Whisenhunt can't know more about Bush than Kubiak, who has worked with Bush for 2 years in Houston and 9 seasons in Denver.

I'm willing to give Bush a chance to see what he can do. Kubes has had a good history with his hirings. Well..that is besides Smith.
Considering that Kubiak was running the offense and calling the plays, defensive coordinator was the hire he had to get right. But as you said, we have to give Bush a chance to see if he can turn the defense around.


Also telling was a story in November about Eugene Wilson. Members of our secondary were astonished that he positioned his body in ways in order to decieve the QB and the offense. Wow! That pretty much says it all about Richard Smith's abilities as a DC. I gotta believe deception might begin to be taught and game planned now. REVOLUTIONARY!!
Why couldn't Jon Hoke have taught this positioning? Or Ray Rhodes? Or Bush? Or Kubiak? Why does the fault fall 100% on Smith?

Not trying to defend Smith. Just asking why no one else on the staff gets any blame?

He should've been named when hired, Smith never did anything to keep his job. He should've been promoted after the 0-4 start. He should've been promoted when the defense proved beyond a shadow of a shadow of a doubt that it was inept under Smith midseason.
I agree. If Kubiak was confident in Bush's capabilities, at that point.


To me, this is like firing offensive coordinator, and replacing him with Joe Pendry.

Ouch! That's quite a name to live down to.

WesmanTexanfan
01-13-2009, 06:39 PM
Im alright with this, Im pretty optomistic actually. At least, I dont see how it could get worse....

I think our D line coach might be just as important of a descision...

TexansSeminole
01-13-2009, 06:41 PM
Why couldn't Jon Hoke have taught this positioning? Or Ray Rhodes? Or Bush? Or Kubiak? Why does the fault fall 100% on Smith?

I would think the D-coordinator overrides position coaches when talking about positioning. I always thought that the position coaches taught things like how to play the game, how to play the position, and how to react to plays, and I always thought that the D-coordinator taught the positioning he wanted on defense. If each position coach taught positioning in their own way, wouldn't you have a bunch of guys that weren't exactly on the same page?

imatexan
01-13-2009, 06:42 PM
I wish they would not have done this but lets hope he is better than Smith.

D-ReK
01-13-2009, 06:47 PM
I'd love nothing more than to be excited by this hire, but after letting the news sink in for a bit, I'm left feeling underwhelmed, uninspired, and unimpressed. I feel as if Kubiak didn't perform his due dilligence with this hire, and that it may ultimately cost him his job. I'm not entirely positive of what the role of "Senior Defensive Assistant" entails, but there were no results seen on the field. In 2006 under Smith, we finished 25th in scoring defense. We then hired Bush and our defenses finished 22nd and 27th the following two seasons. In fact, it has been years since Bush was on a staff that produced a good defense. Here are the results of the defenses that have had Bush on their staff this millenium:

2000 Broncos – 23rd
2001 Broncos – 21st
2002 Broncos – 15th
2003 Broncos – 9th
2004 Cardinals – 12th
2005 Cardinals – 26th
2006 Cardinals – 29th
2007 Texans – 22nd
2008 Texans - 27th

It's great that Bush is talking about being aggressive and not playing read and react, but that's the same stuff we've been hearing for years. Capers and Casserly dropped Sharper and Glenn for Greenwood and Buchanon so that the defense would have more speed and be able to be more aggressive. That didn't work. In came Smith who likely would have said the same thing but he hardly ever talked to the press.

Long story short, Bush can claim to want to be aggressive all he wants, but if he doesn't produce results on the field, his buddy Kubiak is out of a job. We as a fan base are obviously going to have to wait and see on this one, but in the meantime, I am very disappointed.

dalemurphy
01-13-2009, 06:52 PM
Why couldn't Jon Hoke have taught this positioning? Or Ray Rhodes? Or Bush? Or Kubiak? Why does the fault fall 100% on Smith?




Well, since Bush was an assistant DL coach it might not have gone over to well. Things like disguise, I believe, are philosophical. I blame Richard Smith because his defensive philosophy seemed disinterested in disguise or camouflage. I think Hoke is being held accountable for the secondary's performance. After all, he was fired also.

HoustonFrog
01-13-2009, 06:53 PM
How is it safe? Greg Williams or Mike Nolan would be safe. This is a risky choice. And, frankly, who cares if it is inspiring to fans as long as he inspires the players.

It's safe because Kubes refused to go outside his comfort zone and to bring in a proven guy.

Here is my quote 2 weeks ago when Smith was fired..in the thread below...what do I win!!!!

http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=57378&page=6


I'd love to see some of these names come in but in the bland, doing things by the book world of the Texans they will stay the course and just hire Bush and go from there. The excuse not to change to a high end coordinator will be.."he knows our personnel and they respect him." Just mark my word now and you will hear this from Kubes.

If he succeeds, I'll happily eat crow but this move could be Kubes career too.

PHAROAH
01-13-2009, 06:53 PM
I really wanted to see Sean Mcdermott get an interview but I guesss he is going to install the same type of defense. I don't like the hire.

dalemurphy
01-13-2009, 07:03 PM
It's safe because Kubes refused to go outside his comfort zone and to bring in a proven guy.

Here is my quote 2 weeks ago when Smith was fired..in the thread below...what do I win!!!!

Originally Posted by HoustonFrog
I'd love to see some of these names come in but in the bland, doing things by the book world of the Texans they will stay the course and just hire Bush and go from there. The excuse not to change to a high end coordinator will be.."he knows our personnel and they respect him." Just mark my word now and you will hear this from Kubes.

http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=57378&page=6




If he succeeds, I'll happily eat crow but this move could be Kubes career too.


I don't think elevating Bush equates to "staying put". There will be a significant change in philosophy and probably a great many other things. Also, I don't think the respect of the players and his understand of the personnel are insignificant. If he has a good handle on those things that is a reason far more than it is an excuse. Regarding the Texans' being bland, that sounds like you're a fan wanting to be entertained in the off-season. And, while I can sympathize with that, I'm not going to criticize the selection just because I didn't get to be excited about the process or the parade of names... It's in Kubes best interest for the defense to be good, so I'm sure he has the guy he thinks will be most successful. That is all I need. Oh, I will need on the field results but we're 8 months away from that.

Second Honeymoon
01-13-2009, 07:09 PM
I don't think elevating Bush equates to "staying put". There will be a significant change in philosophy and probably a great many other things. Also, I don't think the respect of the players and his understand of the personnel are insignificant. If he has a good handle on those things that is a reason far more than it is an excuse. Regarding the Texans' being bland, that sounds like you're a fan wanting to be entertained in the off-season. And, while I can sympathize with that, I'm not going to criticize the selection just because I didn't get to be excited about the process or the parade of names... It's in Kubes best interest for the defense to be good, so I'm sure he has the guy he thinks will be most successful. That is all I need. Oh, I will need on the field results but we're 8 months away from that.

face it, dude. the texans brass could crap in your hand and you would take it as a gesture of kindness and respect. the next time you are critical of the Texans will probably be the first time.

this was a cheapskate move, through and through. bush was not the best and most qualified man for the job. that is for sure. because of that fact, i don't like the move. it's really that simple. i hope he has great success and proves me wrong but it may be wishful thinking based on his experience as a playcaller much less also a DC.

Kaiser Toro
01-13-2009, 07:10 PM
This is a huge hire for Kubiak, all accountability now rests on his shoulders. I like that in an organization.

In the end, I want results from this maligned unit which means better personnel (unfortunately Grier is still around), player and positional development (I am worried given the lack of development across the board, especially at DE, DT, CB and S) and leveraging our current assets (which we really do not know if we have round pegs that will fit in Bush's circles).

Is our defensive staff more experienced, smarter and better communicators with the recent hires and promotions? Who the heck knows, but one thing is for sure Kubiak owns the result of the defensive unit next year and 8-8 will not suffice as a security blanket even if the offense performs.

Heads must roll if mediocrity persists next year, starting with Kubiak.

Htownsportsfan
01-13-2009, 07:14 PM
I love this pick!!!! I know as Texans fans we have all have reasons to be skeptical but I think the doubters will be happy with the results. Bush has coached all aspects of defenses, secondary, LB's and D-line. He was a high draft pick at LB with the Texans and his career was ended early to to injury. I love LB's as coaches they tend to have that killer instinct thats a hold over from their playing days.

This should not have been a surprise, Bush was Kubiaks pick when he got the job here in Houston but AZ would not let him out of his contract. Seems like the previous staff in AZ wanted him pretty bad!

I keep hearing people complain about the new blood, hiring him to be a D-coordinator since he has not done the job before. Look at the 4 playoff teams leftm three have new first time coaches Tomlin, Harbaugh, Whisenhut and Miami had a first time guy and now Denver is going to hire a first time HC. It seems the same old retread candidates are not locks for open jobs anymore!

Kubiak has one year left to get the job done, if after interviewing Bush and seeing his coaching style he has decided to bet his coaching career with the Texans on Bush's success then I gotta believe he thinks he is the best man for the job.

Like I mentioned before I know its hard for us after 6 yhears not to have doubts but you gotta have faith sometimes.

ChampionTexan
01-13-2009, 07:28 PM
I'd love nothing more than to be excited by this hire, but after letting the news sink in for a bit, I'm left feeling underwhelmed, uninspired, and unimpressed. I feel as if Kubiak didn't perform his due dilligence with this hire, and that it may ultimately cost him his job. I'm not entirely positive of what the role of "Senior Defensive Assistant" entails, but there were no results seen on the field. In 2006 under Smith, we finished 25th in scoring defense. We then hired Bush and our defenses finished 22nd and 27th the following two seasons. In fact, it has been years since Bush was on a staff that produced a good defense. Here are the results of the defenses that have had Bush on their staff this millenium:

2000 Broncos – 23rd
2001 Broncos – 21st
2002 Broncos – 15th
2003 Broncos – 9th
2004 Cardinals – 12th
2005 Cardinals – 26th
2006 Cardinals – 29th
2007 Texans – 22nd
2008 Texans - 27th

It's great that Bush is talking about being aggressive and not playing read and react, but that's the same stuff we've been hearing for years. Capers and Casserly dropped Sharper and Glenn for Greenwood and Buchanon so that the defense would have more speed and be able to be more aggressive. That didn't work. In came Smith who likely would have said the same thing but he hardly ever talked to the press.

Long story short, Bush can claim to want to be aggressive all he wants, but if he doesn't produce results on the field, his buddy Kubiak is out of a job. We as a fan base are obviously going to have to wait and see on this one, but in the meantime, I am very disappointed.

I'm lukewarm on the hiring, and I was hoping for a fresh face from the outside, but as I said in another thread, I'm more concerned with how I feel about it midway through next season than how I feel now.

Be that as it may, I'm a little anal, and I can't let the information you posted go unchallenged. First, during the 2001 -2003 seasons, Bush was the Broncos special teams coach, so whether good or bad, the defensive performance in those years isn't really a reflection of Bush. Secondly, the Arizona Cardinal defense was ranked 8th in yards allowed in 2005 and while they were 26th in scoring, 37 turnovers by the offense (5 more than the Texans had in 2008) probably had something to do with that. Finally, in the five years he was a Denver Defensive assistant that you didn't list (1995 - 1999) the defense finished ranked in the top ten for yardage allowed on three occassions, 11th on another, and 15th as the lowest ranking during those years. In scoring Defense, they ranked 14th, 7th, 6th, 8th & 11th.

I don't plan on throwing a party in honor of our new coordinator, but I think there's definitely a few positive things in the guys background.

dalemurphy
01-13-2009, 07:34 PM
face it, dude. the texans brass could crap in your hand and you would take it as a gesture of kindness and respect. the next time you are critical of the Texans will be the first time.

this was a cheapskate move, through and through. bush was not the best and most qualified man for the job. that is for sure. because of that fact, i don't like the move.


You're ridiculous! You are actually arguing that they hired Bush to save money. Wow! Kubiak hired him because he thinks he's the best chance he has to win, improve the defense and keep his job. Perhaps he is wrong. But, we won't know that until at least September. Until then, I see no reason to be pessimistic about it. From early indications, I like where the guy is coming from. By the way, I was calling for Richard Smith's removal after the '07 season.

I am critical of the Texans' plenty. More predictable than my optimism, however, is your pessimism. The fact that you believe this move was about saving a few bucks, shows any reasonable person that you have very little credibility.

GNTLEWOLF
01-13-2009, 07:34 PM
I have to say that I am somewhat disappointed by this move. I know that If my job depended on how well I performed on defense next yera, I would hire a proven guy that would allow me to sleep at night without worrying about who I will have to send resumes to. Kubiak must have a death wish. I'm not saying Bush won't get it done... I'm saying he is an unknown. And almost getting a little better next season will not only get the Texans a new DC but a Whole new coaching staff as well, including a HC.

TexansSeminole
01-13-2009, 07:37 PM
I like what I hear, and have no particular problem with the move. Of course, we won't know how good a move this was until sometime during next season, perhaps not until the season is over.

b0ng
01-13-2009, 07:41 PM
Hopefully in the next few days we'll get to hear what the players think about this.

Kaiser Toro
01-13-2009, 07:43 PM
It will be interesting to catch the player's quotes and see if they are excited about the hire, that is pretty important. Moreover, this is year two for Rhodes, it is time for him to get a voice in what goes on this organization, especially to apply a time sensitive fore arm shiver to the Bush doubters, I mean liberals.

D-ReK
01-13-2009, 07:46 PM
I'm lukewarm on the hiring, and I was hoping for a fresh face from the outside, but as I said in another thread, I'm more concerned with how I feel about it midway through next season than how I feel now.

Be that as it may, I'm a little anal, and I can't let the information you posted go unchallenged. First, during the 2001 -2003 seasons, Bush was the Broncos special teams coach, so whether good or bad, the defensive performance in those years isn't really a reflection of Bush. Secondly, from everything I can tell, the Arizona Cardinal defense was ranked 8th in 2005 - not 26th (big difference there). Finally, in the five years he was a Denver Defensive assistant that you didn't list (1995 - 1999) the defense finished ranked in the top ten on three occassions, 11th on another, and 15th as the lowest ranking during those years.

I don't plan on throwing a party in honor of our new coordinator, but I think there's definitely a few positive things in the guys background.

I overlooked that Bush was the ST coach from 2001-2003, so we can throw those numbers out. The 2005 Arizona Cardinals ranked 26th in the NFL in scoring defense, but ranked 8th in YPG. This means that the Arizona defense may not have given up many yards, but they did give up a bunch of points. That's probably due to their offense or special teams putting the defense on a short field on multiple occasions. I omitted anything Bush did prior to 2000 simply because that was 9 seasons ago, and I'm more of a believer in recent history. Let it be known, though, that Bush was the LB coach on some good defenses back in the mid to late 90's.

Second Honeymoon
01-13-2009, 07:53 PM
You're ridiculous! You are actually arguing that they hired Bush to save money. Wow! Kubiak hired him because he thinks he's the best chance he has to win, improve the defense and keep his job. Perhaps he is wrong. But, we won't know that until at least September. Until then, I see no reason to be pessimistic about it. From early indications, I like where the guy is coming from. By the way, I was calling for Richard Smith's removal after the '07 season.

I am critical of the Texans' plenty. More predictable than my optimism, however, is your pessimism. The fact that you believe this move was about saving a few bucks, shows any reasonable person that you have very little credibility.

i dont think it was only about money, but I don't know if they were willing to spend the top $ it would take to lure the top talent as our DC. Bush could be a great DC and I like that they are giving an African-American coach a chance at the big time, but I just hoped they would have brought someone in from outside of the Denver Alliance.

good luck Frank. the defense needs a heart transplant. hope your the man for the job.

Lucky
01-13-2009, 07:58 PM
I blame Richard Smith because his defensive philosophy seemed disinterested in disguise or camouflage.
If I remember correctly, Smith wanted to give the same look on every snap. Thus, not giving the QB a pre-snap read. But, who really cares? The defense sucked, and he's gone.


this was a cheapskate move, through and through. bush was not the best and most qualified man for the job.
You're assuming that Kubiak could lure any better? He's not a proven winner. He's a coach on the hot seat. He can't offer stability. What "big name" coordinator would have signed on for that?

Marcus
01-13-2009, 08:22 PM
At least in the interview Bush had a good presence, but he did use that annoying "kid" thing that Kubiak does. Talk about simplifying the defense and being aggressive at the snap of the ball...moving foward versus sideways.

Why is that annoying to some? It never bothers me in the least.

GP
01-13-2009, 08:25 PM
Perhaps all Bush did was take notes and provide some input whenever asked to. He may not have volunteered to do anything because he may have wanted Capt. Smith of the Fail Boat to fail spectacularly for Kubiak and the FO to see....and offer him the job for 2009.

LOL. "Captain Smith of the Fail Boat."

Niiiiice!

I actually, literally chuckled out loud on that one. Well done.

STEEL BLUE TEXANS
01-13-2009, 08:27 PM
Same song, different verse. Hopefully I'm wrong.

Fox
01-13-2009, 08:27 PM
You're assuming that Kubiak could lure any better? He's not a proven winner. He's a coach on the hot seat. He can't offer stability. What "big name" coordinator would have signed on for that?

Are Alex Gibbs and Ray Rhodes big names? Not as coordinators, but they didn't seem to mind signing up to work with Kubes. Hell I'll even toss in Mike Sherman. I've always gotten the impression that Kubiak has a good rep around the league and is a guy that successful people want to work with.

GP
01-13-2009, 08:36 PM
Same song, different verse. Hopefully I'm wrong.

It's not. I think some people had expectations way beyond the norm.

Frank Bush was in no way tied to Richard Smith. Just being on the same staff as Richard Smith does not taint or infect Frank Bush.

I wanted McDermott. Maybe the guy wasn't even remotely interested in us. Maybe the money wasn't right. Maybe the Eagles said "No way." Maybe there's something we don't know.

In contrast to my usual "McNair is a tight wad" stance, I don't think THIS hiring was a money problem. I think Kubiak regretted the Richard Smith decision three years ago. He probably regretted it within the first month of the first season.

Kubiak's decision-making seems to be at a glacial pace. Which, can be bad in some ways and good in others. The guy gives people a chance, that's for sure.

Lucky
01-13-2009, 08:39 PM
Are Alex Gibbs and Ray Rhodes big names?
Both had ties to Kubiak. Rhodes was DC in SF when Kubiak was the QB coach. Gibbs & Kubiak worked together in Denver for years.

No one was beating down Ray Rhodes door. And Kubiak was probably the only guy Gibbs would have come out of retirement for. The coordinators on the market weren't FOK (Friends of Kubiak). For all of the reasons I mentioned, there was no good reason to sign on here.

Fox
01-13-2009, 08:44 PM
Both had ties to Kubiak. Rhodes was DC in SF when Kubiak was the QB coach. Gibbs & Kubiak worked together in Denver for years.

No one was beating down Ray Rhodes door. And Kubiak was probably the only guy Gibbs would have come out of retirement for. The coordinators on the market weren't FOK (Friends of Kubiak). For all of the reasons I mentioned, there was no good reason to sign on here.

I'm under the impression that it's a pretty common phenomenon for coaches to hire coordinators and coaches who they've worked with/met before. Not unique to Kubes and Co. I don't think Houston's off the charts in terms of appeal to coordinators, but I don't think our situation is driving anyone away either.

GP
01-13-2009, 09:05 PM
Much complaining, I sense.

Not satisfied, they are.

Kaiser Toro
01-13-2009, 09:22 PM
Much complaining, I sense.

Not satisfied, they are.

That is easy for you to say when your son was just hired to the staff.

The1ApplePie
01-13-2009, 09:34 PM
Kubes is going the Shanahan route and hiring yes men that keep towing the line instead of bringing something new.

Of course we have no talent to run the 3-4, Tampa-2, or the Jim Johnson defense, so getting a coordinator of little quality isn't shocking

Silver Oak
01-13-2009, 09:47 PM
Jeff Fisher was promoted from within Buddy Ryans ranks, as well as many other fine DC's on other teams.

I think alot of people (including myself) are less than excited about the lack of interviews, but maybe after interviewing Bush they realized he is what they wanted.

I'll wait and see the product on the field next September before casting an opinion.

GP
01-13-2009, 09:53 PM
That is easy for you to say when your son was just hired to the staff.

I am completely missing what you're trying to say.

I was just offering a bit of Yoda humor. The board is so deflated at the moment.

It's a sad day when GP is cheering people up.

Speedy
01-13-2009, 09:56 PM
face it, dude. the texans brass could crap in your hand and you would take it as a gesture of kindness and respect. the next time you are critical of the Texans will probably be the first time.

this was a cheapskate move, through and through. bush was not the best and most qualified man for the job. that is for sure. because of that fact, i don't like the move. it's really that simple. i hope he has great success and proves me wrong but it may be wishful thinking based on his experience as a playcaller much less also a DC.

Wow!! I didn't know you personally interviewed all the potential candidates to determine who the most qualified is. And you don't have an NFL job because why?

I'm ok with Bush because it's Kubiak's neck on the line. I'm ok with Bush not having DC experience because every DC that's ever been has called their first play at one time.

I sure as hell am not going to sit here at my computer in mid-January and act like I know who the better man for the job is or make statements that Bush is a horrible choice, BUT qualify it with the classic "I hope I'm proven wrong" tag. What the hell is that?

Kubiak isn't in the business to lose games. He's going to make choices that help him win, thus keeping him in the business. I'm glad there's been a change, which I think should have been made during the season, but oh well, and I don't care who they hire as long as the results on the field are positive.

It can't get much worse than what we had.

So instead of pretending that I know better than everyone and bashing this guy before a single snap has been taken, but making sure I get my "I'll gladly eat crow" qualifier in there to I don't know, make me feel better when/if I'm wrong?, I'll wait to see what happens on the football field.

TexansFanatic
01-13-2009, 10:25 PM
It just occurred to me that there are some parallels between this hire and the Mario Williams pick. Mario wasn't the sexy pick. Mario was seen as a "cheapskate" move by the organization. They could sign him so they took him # 1. Let's face it: a lot of us thought the Mario pick was a disaster.

By the way----the Mario pick was a Kubiak decision. It was a HUGE decision. It was a BOLD decision. It was an unpopular decision.

How did that turn out?

Kaiser Toro
01-13-2009, 10:59 PM
I am completely missing what you're trying to say.

I was just offering a bit of Yoda humor. The board is so deflated at the moment.

It's a sad day when GP is cheering people up.

Have you ever seen Alex Gibbs and Yoda together? I certainly haven't.

painekiller
01-13-2009, 11:07 PM
Jeff Fisher was promoted from within Buddy Ryans ranks, as well as many other fine DC's on other teams.



I remember a lot of upset people when they hired Fisher as the DC and then the HC. Thought they needed a big name/proven coach.

Most people have no clue, myself included. Bush would have made us cheer 2 years ago, and he came into a situation where the defensive playbook was set when he got here. Give him a chance. I think we will be happier this time.

dalemurphy
01-13-2009, 11:13 PM
I remember a lot of upset people when they hired Fisher as the DC and then the HC. Thought they needed a big name/proven coach.

Most people have no clue, myself included. Bush would have made us cheer 2 years ago, and he came into a situation where the defensive playbook was set when he got here. Give him a chance. I think we will be happier this time.


It's safe to say that we're bickering over degrees. Any change was going to make this defense better. That's the good news. The question is, will Bush turn it into a good defense or will we only suck less. We won't know for a while.

Hervoyel
01-13-2009, 11:21 PM
I'm trying to stay optimistic but I'm getting a really weird feeling about this. I watched some of the interview clip on the main site and was less than impressed. We've been told a couple of times now that the Texans asked to interview Gray but were refused and that Marinelli interviewed for the DL position but Bush was in that interview talking like he'd been picked after a lengthy search and several interviews. Seriously, he said that they interviewed "some guys". Excuse me? You mean like Marinelli and "you" are basically "some guys"?

I think it's pretty clear he was the choice all the way and that Marinelli was being pursued to try and be Frank Bush's "elder mentor" ala Alex Gibbs to Kyle Shanahan. Marinelli was going to kind of hold the bike up while Frank got used to riding it without training wheels.

Clearly babysitting our new DC didn't appeal to Marinelli.

Here's the deal. Bush is the guy and he's telling us exactly what we heard from Richard Smith three years ago. It's almost word for word. To make matters worse he's been here for two of Smith's terrible seasons so he's got the stink of Richard Smith on or about his person. Topping it all off he's got an eerily similar resume to Smith with no participation in a truly excellent unit in there but lots of jobs working for lousy to mediocre defenses.

It doesn't look good to me. I'm going to shut up about it for a while because there's nothing we can do about it and there's no point in griping for 6-7 months. I'm going to think positive and hope for the best but man, Bush is going to have zero room for error. We've all already got our complaints memorized because we used them all on his predecessor. He'd better not roll out a lousy defense next year or he'll be torn to pieces by the fans. We're getting better every year but the patience here is long gone. Results are all any of us really care about at this point.

Wolf
01-13-2009, 11:22 PM
I remember a lot of upset people when they hired Fisher as the DC and then the HC. Thought they needed a big name/proven coach.

Most people have no clue, myself included. Bush would have made us cheer 2 years ago, and he came into a situation where the defensive playbook was set when he got here. Give him a chance. I think we will be happier this time.

if memory serves me, fisher became interim HC and I though he did a good job for the rest of the season esp with the turmoil that was going with the Oiler organization about Dud moving? Fisher seemed to keep the team focus' and I thought he did a good job. I do remember about 2 seasons into his term, watching the oilers , I was frustrated with his style of keep it close and try to win late. (as a kid it was nerve racking seeing the close games) but my view of his turning point of his career was when Eddie got injured and they had to finally turn Steve loose and the team did ok and when Eddie came back they had a one two punch and Fisher wasn't so relying on Eddie so much and hence help Fisher turn into the coach he is today .. buy I was young so my memory and point of view might be a little off .. I am not saying Fisher opened his playbook and didn't still use the run so much but seemed he trusted McNair more if the time came he had to go to him

who knows, been a long time ago

Wolf
01-13-2009, 11:25 PM
I'm trying to stay optimistic but I'm getting a really weird feeling about this. I watched some of the interview clip on the main site and was less than impressed. We've been told a couple of times now that the Texans asked to interview Gray but were refused and that Marinelli interviewed for the DL position but Bush was in that interview talking like he'd been picked after a lengthy search and several interviews. Seriously, he said that they interviewed "some guys". Excuse me? You mean like Marinelli and "you" are basically "some guys"?

I think it's pretty clear he was the choice all the way and that Marinelli was being pursued to try and be Frank Bush's "elder mentor" ala Alex Gibbs to Kyle Shanahan. Marinelli was going to kind of hold the bike up while Frank got used to riding it without training wheels.

Clearly babysitting our new DC didn't appeal to Marinelli.

Here's the deal. Bush is the guy and he's telling us exactly what we heard from Richard Smith three years ago. It's almost word for word. To make matters worse he's been here for two of Smith's terrible seasons so he's got the stink of Richard Smith on or about his person. Topping it all off he's got an eerily similar resume to Smith with no participation in a truly excellent unit in there but lots of jobs working for lousy to mediocre defenses.

It doesn't look good to me. I'm going to shut up about it for a while because there's nothing we can do about it and there's no point in griping for 6-7 months. I'm going to think positive and hope for the best but man, Bush is going to have zero room for error. We've all already got our complaints memorized because we used them all on his predecessor. He'd better not roll out a lousy defense next year or he'll be torn to pieces by the fans. We're getting better every year but the patience here is long gone. Results are all any of us really care about at this point.

I agree Herv, proof will be in the pudding ... and maybe you need to see if KT's quote that you have in your sig can be sent to the Texan's and have them put that over the locker room door

dalemurphy
01-13-2009, 11:48 PM
I'm trying to stay optimistic but I'm getting a really weird feeling about this. I watched some of the interview clip on the main site and was less than impressed. We've been told a couple of times now that the Texans asked to interview Gray but were refused and that Marinelli interviewed for the DL position but Bush was in that interview talking like he'd been picked after a lengthy search and several interviews. Seriously, he said that they interviewed "some guys". Excuse me? You mean like Marinelli and "you" are basically "some guys"?

I think it's pretty clear he was the choice all the way and that Marinelli was being pursued to try and be Frank Bush's "elder mentor" ala Alex Gibbs to Kyle Shanahan. Marinelli was going to kind of hold the bike up while Frank got used to riding it without training wheels.

Clearly babysitting our new DC didn't appeal to Marinelli.

Here's the deal. Bush is the guy and he's telling us exactly what we heard from Richard Smith three years ago. It's almost word for word. To make matters worse he's been here for two of Smith's terrible seasons so he's got the stink of Richard Smith on or about his person. Topping it all off he's got an eerily similar resume to Smith with no participation in a truly excellent unit in there but lots of jobs working for lousy to mediocre defenses.

It doesn't look good to me. I'm going to shut up about it for a while because there's nothing we can do about it and there's no point in griping for 6-7 months. I'm going to think positive and hope for the best but man, Bush is going to have zero room for error. We've all already got our complaints memorized because we used them all on his predecessor. He'd better not roll out a lousy defense next year or he'll be torn to pieces by the fans. We're getting better every year but the patience here is long gone. Results are all any of us really care about at this point.



I certainly understand your trepidation. I have some of it too although I general feel optimistic about it- he can't do worse!

However, one thing to note. Not only did Bush not talk about all the holes that needed to be filled, he actually went out of his way to compliment all the talent on the defense. It was clear during the presser that he was trying to criticize Richard Smith without calling him out. However, the one compliment he did give him was the quality of talent that he brought in to the defense. I point this out only to illustrate that these aren't the words of a guy preparing the audience for mediocrity. I think he plans on the defense being good... quick. Perhaps he's naive but I prefer that to a bunch of political double talk.


Also, when asked about his influences, Buddy Ryan was at the top of the list. He repeatedly used words like agressive but also "violent". He said the players will be violent as a means of creating turnovers. Regardless of his scheming abilities, I think we can count on an attitude change on defense and it will be one that as fans we will appreciate and enjoy.

Marcus
01-13-2009, 11:54 PM
Wow!! I didn't know you personally interviewed all the potential candidates to determine who the most qualified is. And you don't have an NFL job because why?

I'm ok with Bush because it's Kubiak's neck on the line. I'm ok with Bush not having DC experience because every DC that's ever been has called their first play at one time.

I sure as hell am not going to sit here at my computer in mid-January and act like I know who the better man for the job is or make statements that Bush is a horrible choice, BUT qualify it with the classic "I hope I'm proven wrong" tag. What the hell is that?

Kubiak isn't in the business to lose games. He's going to make choices that help him win, thus keeping him in the business. I'm glad there's been a change, which I think should have been made during the season, but oh well, and I don't care who they hire as long as the results on the field are positive.

It can't get much worse than what we had.

So instead of pretending that I know better than everyone and bashing this guy before a single snap has been taken, but making sure I get my "I'll gladly eat crow" qualifier in there to I don't know, make me feel better when/if I'm wrong?, I'll wait to see what happens on the football field.

Rep. I was going to give my take, but you expressed it better.

:goodpost:

STEEL BLUE TEXANS
01-13-2009, 11:59 PM
So what exactly was Frank Bush doing here before being promoted to defensive coordinator? Getting paid to sit on his thumb?

Goldensilence
01-14-2009, 12:02 AM
Honestly...I'm pretty underwhelmed by the hire as of now. Looks like it was Bush all along and they took a few stabs at hiring someone outside.

I am going to hope for the best at this point and go into wait and see mode. The other positional coaches will be interesting hires.

dalemurphy
01-14-2009, 12:05 AM
Honestly...I'm pretty underwhelmed by the hire as of now. Looks like it was Bush all along and they took a few stabs at hiring someone outside.

I am going to hope for the best at this point and go into wait and see mode. The other positional coaches will be interesting hires.


1. secondary coach will surely be Gibbs.
2. DL??? who knows

and that will be it I think.

dalemurphy
01-14-2009, 12:07 AM
So what exactly was Frank Bush doing here before being promoted to defensive coordinator? Getting paid to sit on his thumb?

Probably advising Kubiak on the ways he would improve the mess of a defense that Richard Smith was sending out on the field every week. Well, until about week 11 when he starting participating in the game planning (just a guess).

sbalderrama
01-14-2009, 12:15 AM
You arn't going to hire a currently successful defensive coordinator under contract away from another team. That most likely means you either are going to be promoting someone new to the position, or you will be bringing back someone as a DC who is somehow damaged goods... ie, probably been fired before from a DC or HC position because of bad performance. I suspect the track record of success is probably not that much different, but it would be interesting to research.

In any case, Frank Bush has obviously been around a long time and has apparently coached every position in the defense as well as special teams. Sounds like the kind of guy that deserves a shot.

dalemurphy
01-14-2009, 01:06 AM
New story by John McClain on chron.com/sports :

Arizona defensive coordinator Clancy Pendergast was working on his game plan for Sunday’s NFC Championship Game against Philadelphia when he found out Frank Bush had been named the Texans’ defensive coordinator.

Jacksonville defensive coordinator Gregg Williams was at home with his family in Virginia when he learned Bush had been promoted from senior defensive assistant.

Bush was linebackers coach and assistant head coach during his three seasons (2004-06) with the Cardinals. He worked closely with Pendergast, who has been their defensive coordinator the last five years.

“I think it’s a great hire, and I’m so happy for Frank,” said Pendergast, who has done an outstanding job with a Cardinals defense that has helped them come within one step of the Super Bowl for the first time. “I’m so happy he’s finally getting this well-deserved opportunity.

“I think Frank will be an excellent coordinator. He’s very organized. He has a great feel for the game. He knows what buttons to push to motivate his players.”

In developing a philosophy that has been influenced by a lot of great defensive coaches, Bush said one of the many things he learned from Pendergast was how to think outside the box.

In other words, don’t be afraid to experiment and take chances.

Playing safe can be dangerous.

Not afraid of new things
“When Frank was here, we weren’t afraid to try different things — different schemes and personnel groupings,” Pendergast said. “We didn’t want to play it safe.

“Frank helped me a lot. He’s creative. He’s got good ideas, and he knows how to implement them in a way the players understand.”

When Williams followed coach Jack Pardee from the University of Houston to the Oilers in 1990, Bush already had been a player and scout with the Oilers for five years. When Bush left the personnel department to coach linebackers, he worked with Williams under defensive coordinators Jim Eddy, Buddy Ryan and Jeff Fisher.

“Frank and I go way back,” said Williams, who has interviewed for defensive coordinator jobs with New Orleans and Green Bay since the season ended. “I watched him go from scouting to coaching, and I’ve seen him rise through the ranks.

“I’m fired up for him. I know he’s going to do a great job with that defense.”

Williams has been a defensive coordinator with the Titans, Redskins and Jaguars and a head coach with the Bills.

With Jacksonville last season, he saw the Texans twice and watched a lot of tape to prepare for them.

“They’ve got a good thing going there, and I think it was a good move for them to promote him,” Williams said. “Frank knows the players, and they know him. He knows their strengths and weaknesses.

“A new coach coming in would have to learn everything that Frank already knows. That’s definitely an advantage for them.”

Pressure in his blood
Williams is known as one of the most aggressive defensive coaches in the league.

Everything he does is built around pressuring the quarterback.

“I’m excited about the style Frank’s going to play because we both come from a pressure background,” Williams said. “Frank played that way as an outside linebacker (under Jerry Glanville). Then he coached that way as an assistant with the Oilers.”

After spending 10 years with the Oilers, Denver coach Mike Shanahan hired Bush to coach linebackers.

In his nine years with the Broncos, Bush won two Super Bowl rings.

“Frank understands every defensive position as well as special teams,” Williams said. “He’s played and coached in a variety of styles. He’s learned from a lot of outstanding defensive coaches.

“Now it’s Frank’s baby, and he’s going to do great. Let me tell you something: There are a lot of coaches around the NFL that are real happy that he’s getting this opportunity.”

john.mcclain@chron.com

beerlover
01-14-2009, 02:21 AM
Bush is an upgrade because he relates better with people. the Texans remain on course, more focused & accountable. I never really understood how Smith related to his players? did he send & receive messages, give motivational speeches, hammer out game plans on the practice field or film room? seemed aloof, distant, well intentioned but frustrated. I wish him the best.

from the above McClain article Clancy Pendergast said, "“I think Frank will be an excellent coordinator. He’s very organized. He has a great feel for the game. He knows what buttons to push to motivate his players.”

while Gregg Williams added, “They’ve got a good thing going there, and I think it was a good move for them to promote him,” Williams said. “Frank knows the players, and they know him. He knows their strengths and weaknesses. A new coach coming in would have to learn everything that Frank already knows. That’s definitely an advantage for them.”

Specnatz
01-14-2009, 06:27 AM
face it, dude. the texans brass could crap in your hand and you would take it as a gesture of kindness and respect. the next time you are critical of the Texans will probably be the first time.

this was a cheapskate move, through and through. bush was not the best and most qualified man for the job. that is for sure. because of that fact, i don't like the move. it's really that simple. i hope he has great success and proves me wrong but it may be wishful thinking based on his experience as a playcaller much less also a DC.

I sure as hell am not going to sit here at my computer in mid-January and act like I know who the better man for the job is or make statements that Bush is a horrible choice, BUT qualify it with the classic "I hope I'm proven wrong" tag. What the hell is that?

Kubiak isn't in the business to lose games. He's going to make choices that help him win, thus keeping him in the business. I'm glad there's been a change, which I think should have been made during the season, but oh well, and I don't care who they hire as long as the results on the field are positive.

It can't get much worse than what we had.

Speedy that is what SH does. You will only see him here when the team loses or he has an axe to grind. He never talks about the positives on the negatives.

This hiring was not my first choice or even my second. As many have said, including you, it does put everything on Kubiak.

DexmanC
01-14-2009, 07:16 AM
Most successful D-Coordinators, who coach the "attacking" style of
defense coach from THE SIDELINE. Those defenses are successful, because
the players are trying to KNOCK THE HEAD OFF the other team. Jim Johnson
(till he got ill), Jim Schwartz, Steve Spagnuolo, etc ALL coach from the
SIDELINE to MOTIVATE THEIR PLAYERS.

Where did we see Richard Smith? Looking like he had a stomach ache
from the booth. The players CLEARLY had NO RESPECT for him at all.
Just ask Demeco and Dunta about Frank Bush. THEIR answer will tell
you a lot about where this defense is headed. One thing Bush said in
his presser which needed to be address was "We will definitely communicate
better. Everybody will know what everybody else is doing." "We are going to
create turnovers by being VIOLENT." "We are going to ATTACK the other team."
"We will SIMPLIFY the schemes to get FASTER, then the BIG HITS will come
and create TURNOVERS that way." The defense was playing a lot like three
separate corps instead of a single unit.

Another thing he said about the D-Line was "We will be playing more upfield.
We won't be going sideways. (No more Mario dropping back into coverage
on 3rd downs?) A lot of people say, "Well, Bush was Senior Defensive Asst.
He bears a lot of the blame for our vanilla D." That's BULL CORN!! Smith
was the boss of the defense, and it was HIS show. The players and Bush
were on a different page than Smith, and I'm excited to see someone with
his vast SUCCESS in his career (unlike Smith) get a shot to prove his
mettle.

Texan_Lee
01-14-2009, 07:25 AM
This is an interesting pick... I'm not disappointed or upset about it, but at the same time I am not excited about it either... I'm trying to figure out what that means... :thinking:

Grams
01-14-2009, 07:28 AM
Congratulations to Frank Bush. I wish him every success here.

I will not pass judgement till I see a few regular season games and see how the defense actually plays with him as the DC. Until we actually see them play we have no idea how good or bad Bush will be as DC.

We were probably going to have a positional coach as DC anyways as I do not see a DC coming to Houston for the same job he already had on another team. Think most good DC's are interviewing for HC postions and not a lateral move.

I am excited as now we actually have an opportunity to be a much better defense now that Smith is gone. But we have to just wait till next season to find out how good they will be.

DexmanC
01-14-2009, 07:30 AM
There are two thing about this that make me GIDDY about this selection.

#1. This was the choice Kubiak wanted to make ALL ALONG.

#2. EVERYBODY is bitching about #1.

EVERYTIME we've had this 1-2 punch, it has been HIGHLY successful.
Example?? Ray Rhodes. Alex Gibbs. Kyle Shanahan. Mario Williams.

Besides, Bush was just on 610, and one of the things he mentioned was
having Demeco play more downhill to make plays disrupting the backfield.
The guy knows like backers (He was a high draft pick at the position
HIMSELF.) Bush will be fine. Former players as coaches tend to command
players' respect better than non players (Richard Smith, Dom Capers.)
So, I've learned NOT to question Kubiak when he BELIEVES in the guys
he picks. I hope you like K.C. Masterpiece on your crow.

ChampionTexan
01-14-2009, 07:44 AM
Most successful D-Coordinators, who coach the "attacking" style of
defense coach from THE SIDELINE.

There are two thing about this that make me GIDDY about this selection.

#1. This was the choice Kubiak wanted to make ALL ALONG.

#2. EVERYBODY is bitching about #1.


You do realize that Bush said yesterday he was going to coach from the booth? (Not sure which, but it was either on an interview with Pallilo, or with Rich Lord & Matt Jackson).

Kaiser Toro
01-14-2009, 07:56 AM
There are two thing about this that make me GIDDY about this selection.

#1. This was the choice Kubiak wanted to make ALL ALONG.

#2. EVERYBODY is bitching about #1.

EVERYTIME we've had this 1-2 punch, it has been HIGHLY successful.
Example?? Ray Rhodes. Alex Gibbs. Kyle Shanahan. Mario Williams.

Besides, Bush was just on 610, and one of the things he mentioned was
having Demeco play more downhill to make plays disrupting the backfield.
The guy knows like backers (He was a high draft pick at the position
HIMSELF.) Bush will be fine. Former players as coaches tend to command
players' respect better than non players (Richard Smith, Dom Capers.)
So, I've learned NOT to question Kubiak when he BELIEVES in the guys
he picks. I hope you like K.C. Masterpiece on your crow.

#1 is incorrect. #2 is incorrect by default and a bloviation.

b0ng
01-14-2009, 08:25 AM
#1 is incorrect. #2 is incorrect by default and a bloviation.

No, I'm pretty sure Kubiak wanted Bush since he tried to get him away from Arizona 3 years ago.

BigBull17
01-14-2009, 08:33 AM
Is it possible that Bush was already calling the defensive plays and taking a more hands-on role overall before Smith was canned? Is it possible he was already the DC for the second half of the season, with Smith having been reined in?

Thats one of the things I thought during the last 7 games. A change of mentality mid year is wierd.

Who?

I dont have a list off the top pf my head, but to just ask for permission to talk to one guy and then promote an assistant from a bottom third ranked defense without interviewing a single person is lame. Then hire Gibbs son because its Gibbs son is another step in a slippery direction.

Kaiser Toro
01-14-2009, 08:36 AM
No, I'm pretty sure Kubiak wanted Bush since he tried to get him away from Arizona 3 years ago.

I am pretty sure it was not for the full title of Defensive Coordinator IF the member's statement was within the context of Kubiak looking for a DC in 2006. If it was within the context of the hiring process of 2009 then it is incorrect as well.

Mr teX
01-14-2009, 08:48 AM
Well, he's already said everything that i wanted to hear...he's gonna be more aggressive & get these guys "flying around making plays" which is the biggest change i wanted to see from our new D-coordinator- whomever that was gonna be. I think it's a plus that he's either played or coached under Buddy Ryan & Jerry Glanville & if either of those guys' philosophy has rubbed off on him, i think i can take him at his word about being more aggressive on defense.:doot:


he's gonna get a couple more toys to play with in the draft & with a little luck FA, so i'm expecting us to look completely different on defense next year...for the better.:specnatz::whip:

DBCooper
01-14-2009, 09:09 AM
The King is dead, long live the King!

We wanted change. Change is here.


Something changed the second half of the season. I believe it was Bush taking over and we were not informed.

If the defense can play an entire season like they did the second half of this season, we will be on the right track.

Have a system, find the players that fit the system. Be aggressive.

b0ng
01-14-2009, 09:11 AM
I am pretty sure it was not for the full title of Defensive Coordinator

I'm pretty sure it was for the DC spot since when they were denied permission to talk to Frank Bush they went out and hired Smith as the DC.

Kaiser Toro
01-14-2009, 09:15 AM
I'm pretty sure it was for the DC spot since when they were denied permission to talk to Frank Bush they went out and hired Smith as the DC.

Like I had said, my initial reponse was within the context of the 2009 hiring process. But if you want to continue this debate I submit this

The original plan when Kubiak was hired was to bring in Smith and Arizona Cardinals linebackers coach Frank Bush as co-defensive coordinators. But because Bush is under contract, the Cardinals denied permission for Houston officials to meet with him. Bush this week was promoted to assistant head coach.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2316802

The Arizona Cardinals denied permission Thursday for the Texans to interview linebackers coach Frank Bush to become the team's co-defensive coordinator.

http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2006_4050833

steelbtexan
01-14-2009, 09:20 AM
I hope Kubes got it right.

One thing that's for sure Bush & D. Gibbs will work cheap.

This seems to be the common theme among Kubes asst. coach hires.

I'm certain this is a directive that comes from Mr.McNair.

phantom17
01-14-2009, 09:31 AM
quoted deleted insults



SIGH! I kinda sorta agree with SecondH! I was really hoping to get a DC way outside from this organization, who is proven! I'm not all that thrilled with Bush & if next year our D is ranked in the mid to low 20s.....again, I would really be upset. I hope Kaptain Kubes is right & his ship won't sink with this hiring!:foottap:

b0ng
01-14-2009, 09:31 AM
Like I had said, my initial reponse was within the context of the 2009 hiring process. But if you want to continue this debate I submit this



http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2316802




And this the part where I say google : Frank Bush "Kubiak's first choice" and the point to Alan Burge's write up from yesterday or the chron entries a little lower on the first page. I would do all of this for you but I'm on a phone so I can't copy and paste articles as of this moment.

But yes, I'll say that the initial poster is right in saying that Bush was in fact Kubiak's first choice as a DC.

GP
01-14-2009, 09:34 AM
Probably advising Kubiak on the ways he would improve the mess of a defense that Richard Smith was sending out on the field every week. Well, until about week 11 when he starting participating in the game planning (just a guess).

We'll never know, for sure, if Bush was calling the plays--All we have on record, for sure, is that Bush and Kubiak limited RS to things he could and couldn't do. That would be tough for a guy like Richard Smith to be around the players at practice, to be holding the clipboard at games, and basically be a Texans version of Milli Vanilli. How do you let a guy retain his dignity when he's told what he can or can't do? That's a statement all by itself. It seems RS was still calling the game, but with boundaries to what he could/couldn't do. Weird.

I mean, I would be a guy who would just say, "You know what? I can go now. If it's so bad that someone else is calling the plays and I'm a puppet, then I need to be on my way. No hard feelings. I knew what I signed on for."

Of course....it might be different if i was approached and told that I would be forfeiting salary if I left, that they wanted to pay me out and that I needed to finish out my term (for the sake of outward appearances and such).

Still, that was NOT RS's defense at around week 11. Then you have that pesky Oakland game where it definitely looked Smithish. LOL. Who knows...

I just know that I'm glad we have a new direction. I hope Richard Smith all the best, though. Can't be an easy job to coach in the NFL.

HOU-TEX
01-14-2009, 09:51 AM
Congratulations to Frank Bush. I wish him every success here.

I will not pass judgement till I see a few regular season games and see how the defense actually plays with him as the DC. Until we actually see them play we have no idea how good or bad Bush will be as DC.

We were probably going to have a positional coach as DC anyways as I do not see a DC coming to Houston for the same job he already had on another team. Think most good DC's are interviewing for HC postions and not a lateral move.

I am excited as now we actually have an opportunity to be a much better defense now that Smith is gone. But we have to just wait till next season to find out how good they will be.

Right on, Grams! QFT!

I reckon there's a lot of pulled muscles around here from all the knee-jerkin going on. LOL!

Here's to hoping the "aggressive" and "attacking" translates to the field this season rather than just on a piece of paper in SmithEX-DC's office. Cheers!

bckey
01-14-2009, 10:10 AM
I can understand fans saying they are ok with the Bush promotion. Most saw the writing on the wall when nothing was happening to fill the position. But being excited and/or giddy is what I don't get. We didn't interview anyone else for the job.

dtran04
01-14-2009, 10:26 AM
Unfortunately, the media has not ripped this pick yet so it's not quite the Mario situation yet. Let's hope Richard Justice starts ripping this pick. He ripped on Alex Gibbs and look at what happened. :)

Texan JBZ
01-14-2009, 10:39 AM
quoted deleted insults.

Such a glass half empty view! Look, it's not about being a homer. It's about giving the guy at least a chance. You, me, nobody here knows if it was the right choice. I'm at least willing to wait and see how he works out.

And you're wrong about the "every DC had to start somewhere argument" being lame. Where was Jim Schwartz coaching before he became DC of the Titans? What about Leslie Frazier? Or Spagnuolo? Frank Bush at least deserves a chance. And the decision was not about the Texans being cheap. They went after Marinelli as a DL coach. He has more of a personal relationship with Lovie Smith, so he chose the Bears. No biggie! The Texans went after Jerry Gray, but were refused the opportunity to talk to him by the Redskins. I didn't want Gregg Williams. Look at what a DC with experience did for the Jaguars defense last season.

Look, you don't have to be happy with the move. That's you opinion and your right. But the guy has 26 years of NFL experience. He's coached every position on the defensive side of the ball. He's saying all the right things right now about what his philosophy will be. Will it work out for the Texans defense? Nobody knows yet. But you can't sit back and call the rest of us homers just because we don't take the negative view of this hiring like you do. Most of us are just willing to give the guy a chance. You should too!

BigBull17
01-14-2009, 10:44 AM
quoted deleted insults

We did'nt even interview a guy more qualified. Its almost like we did'nt want to because he may be better than what we were hiring. I'm just not very excited to have an assistant from a bottom 3rd ranked defense. Does'nt make me jump for freakin joy.

Texan JBZ
01-14-2009, 10:47 AM
We did'nt even interview a guy more qualified. Its almost like we did'nt want to because he may be better than wh we were hiring. I'm just not very excited to have an assistant from a bottom 3rd ranked defense does'nt make me jump for freakin joy.

In my opinion, it's just like Carl Dukes stated yesterday on his show: "Senior Defensive Assistant was just another name for Defensive Coordinator in waiting." I think that it was between Gray and Bush all along. When the Texans were denied permission to speak with Gray, the most logical pick after that was Bush. Plan and simple.

b0ng
01-14-2009, 10:48 AM
Most of us are just willing to give the guy a chance. You should too!

Second Honeymoon doesn't give out chances. Second Honeymoon gives out sick burns on the Texans franchise cause they ain't no homer!

BigBull17
01-14-2009, 10:52 AM
In my opinion, it's just like Carl Dukes stated yesterday on his show: "Senior Defensive Assistant was just another name for Defensive Coordinator in waiting." I think that it was between Gray and Bush all along. When the Texans were denied permission to speak with Gray, the most logical pick after that was Bush. Plan and simple.

I just don't like such a narrow pool to choose from. There was;nt a rush, take your time and do some homework. The defense was just so bad most of the 2 years Bush was on staff that this situation does'nt sit well with me.

bckey
01-14-2009, 11:02 AM
I'm trying to stay optimistic but I'm getting a really weird feeling about this. I watched some of the interview clip on the main site and was less than impressed. We've been told a couple of times now that the Texans asked to interview Gray but were refused and that Marinelli interviewed for the DL position but Bush was in that interview talking like he'd been picked after a lengthy search and several interviews. Seriously, he said that they interviewed "some guys". Excuse me? You mean like Marinelli and "you" are basically "some guys"?

I think it's pretty clear he was the choice all the way and that Marinelli was being pursued to try and be Frank Bush's "elder mentor" ala Alex Gibbs to Kyle Shanahan. Marinelli was going to kind of hold the bike up while Frank got used to riding it without training wheels.

Clearly babysitting our new DC didn't appeal to Marinelli.

Here's the deal. Bush is the guy and he's telling us exactly what we heard from Richard Smith three years ago. It's almost word for word. To make matters worse he's been here for two of Smith's terrible seasons so he's got the stink of Richard Smith on or about his person. Topping it all off he's got an eerily similar resume to Smith with no participation in a truly excellent unit in there but lots of jobs working for lousy to mediocre defenses.

It doesn't look good to me. I'm going to shut up about it for a while because there's nothing we can do about it and there's no point in griping for 6-7 months. I'm going to think positive and hope for the best but man, Bush is going to have zero room for error. We've all already got our complaints memorized because we used them all on his predecessor. He'd better not roll out a lousy defense next year or he'll be torn to pieces by the fans. We're getting better every year but the patience here is long gone. Results are all any of us really care about at this point.

This pretty much sums up how I feel. I still can't understand why it took 2 weeks and 0 interviews for dc to make this decision. :thinking:

infantrycak
01-14-2009, 11:18 AM
This pretty much sums up how I feel. I still can't understand why it took 2 weeks and 0 interviews for dc to make this decision. :thinking:

Thing is we don't have any idea how much homework and reaching out they did. They may have called Williams and he rebuffed them thinking he is going back to TN. They attempted to talk to Gray and were refused. Marinelli picked the Bears. Who knows, maybe they even talked to McDermott and he doesn't want to leave Philly except for a head coaching gig. Sounds like they initially considered looking at the 3-4 guys and decided they did not want to switch schemes so that eliminated quite a few guys. If they really weren't going to consider anyone else I think they would have just announced Bush from the start.

beerlover
01-14-2009, 11:25 AM
Thing is we don't have any idea how much homework and reaching out they did. They may have called Williams and he rebuffed them thinking he is going back to TN. They attempted to talk to Gray and were refused. Marinelli picked the Bears. Who knows, maybe they even talked to McDermott and he doesn't want to leave Philly except for a head coaching gig. Sounds like they initially considered looking at the 3-4 guys and decided they did not want to switch schemes so that eliminated quite a few guys. If they really weren't going to consider anyone else I think they would have just announced Bush from the start.

excellent recap cak of "rest of story" :thinking:

Specnatz
01-14-2009, 11:28 AM
quoted deleted insults

Why do you hate so much? So of these coaches out there with experience who would you hire that run a 4-3 and not a 3-4, because Kubiak has stated he wants to continue that route. Ii memory serves you wanted Sean McDermott, who has no DC experience. As far as being happy, unless it is the guy you wanted you would never be happy.

Why is it if someone agrees with what has been done or does not share your opinion they are a homer? I am really interested in your answer for that. You throw that out so much, like it is an insult. I mean I thought that is what a fan of the Houston Texans living in Houston is, a homer, cause he likes the home team.

The Pencil Neck
01-14-2009, 12:29 PM
I hope Kubes got it right.

One thing that's for sure Bush & D. Gibbs will work cheap.

This seems to be the common theme among Kubes asst. coach hires.

I'm certain this is a directive that comes from Mr.McNair.

I don't agree with this at all. You've got Rhodes and A. Gibbs and we had Sherman. I don't think those are the cheapest coaches around. I believe at one point (someone correct me on this if I'm wrong), we had more coaches on the team than most teams. That's not the cheapskate route.

I don't think McNair has ever gone the cheap route on anything. I don't think he's pinching pennies. I think he's ready to give Smithiak whatever they think they need and whoever they think they need to be successful.

Now they've just got to do it.

Brando
01-14-2009, 12:31 PM
I can understand fans saying they are ok with the Bush promotion. Most saw the writing on the wall when nothing was happening to fill the position. But being excited and/or giddy is what I don't get. We didn't interview anyone else for the job.

We tried to interview Jerry Gray but was denied by the Redskins.

HoustonFrog
01-14-2009, 01:04 PM
I'm trying to stay optimistic but I'm getting a really weird feeling about this. I watched some of the interview clip on the main site and was less than impressed. We've been told a couple of times now that the Texans asked to interview Gray but were refused and that Marinelli interviewed for the DL position but Bush was in that interview talking like he'd been picked after a lengthy search and several interviews. Seriously, he said that they interviewed "some guys". Excuse me? You mean like Marinelli and "you" are basically "some guys"?

I think it's pretty clear he was the choice all the way and that Marinelli was being pursued to try and be Frank Bush's "elder mentor" ala Alex Gibbs to Kyle Shanahan. Marinelli was going to kind of hold the bike up while Frank got used to riding it without training wheels.

Clearly babysitting our new DC didn't appeal to Marinelli.

Here's the deal. Bush is the guy and he's telling us exactly what we heard from Richard Smith three years ago. It's almost word for word. To make matters worse he's been here for two of Smith's terrible seasons so he's got the stink of Richard Smith on or about his person. Topping it all off he's got an eerily similar resume to Smith with no participation in a truly excellent unit in there but lots of jobs working for lousy to mediocre defenses.

It doesn't look good to me. I'm going to shut up about it for a while because there's nothing we can do about it and there's no point in griping for 6-7 months. I'm going to think positive and hope for the best but man, Bush is going to have zero room for error. We've all already got our complaints memorized because we used them all on his predecessor. He'd better not roll out a lousy defense next year or he'll be torn to pieces by the fans. We're getting better every year but the patience here is long gone. Results are all any of us really care about at this point.

As usual, well said and this whole "interview process" also matches up with my quote, again. I think Bush was never not the candidate and that they decided to keep the incest and no new blood crew going.

http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=57378&page=6

I'd love to see some of these names come in but in the bland, doing things by the book world of the Texans they will stay the course and just hire Bush and go from there. The excuse not to change to a high end coordinator will be.."he knows our personnel and they respect him." Just mark my word now and you will hear this from Kubes.

dtran04
01-14-2009, 01:16 PM
A good piece about hiring coaches and how its no different than hiring execs for companies.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2009/01/how-coaches-are-hired/

Second Honeymoon
01-14-2009, 01:22 PM
bottom line, we hired a DC with no DC experience. call it whatever you want. i say it was a bad move for a team that could turn the corner this year.

as for me saying 'i hope it works out' how is that anything other than me wishing the best for my team? how is that covering my arse in case things work out?

here you go, mensa. how would hiring a DC with NO experience be hiring the most qualified candidate? it is a FACT that we did not hire the most qualified candidate? do you actually believe he is the best candidate? it is a FACT that we promoted from within from a unit that has underperformed and from a coaching tree (denver) that hasn't exactly lit the world on fire in regards to defense historically over a long period of time.

you can keep patting yourself on the back for being a member of the sheeple but the apologist attitude doesn't hold water with me.

I can't believe any fan would be happy with this move. I really can't....but this fanbase is the same fanbase who made excuse after excuse for players and coaches since Day One....so excuse me if it doesn't surprise me in the end.

...oh and the 'every DC had to start somewhere argument' is pretty lame if you ask me. there are plenty of qualified and experienced candidates out there, so what do we do? We chose one with neither the qualifications or the experience. how is that a good thing? but whatever, the Texans made the move so its gotta be a good move. after all, we have such a great track record as a franchise. God forbid someone be critical of such an awesome and successful franchise.

i am a positive person but when the franchise starts looking to Denver personnel for DEFENSE!! that is where I draw the line. It just smacks of cronyism and an unwillingness to go the extra mile and get someone with a proven track record and with some experience.

all i know is if our defense sucks AGAIN, Kubiak and Smith need to go. if all they are going to do is hire their friends, then we are truly doomed. how you can promote someone from within after such a pathetic display of defense is beyond me....but keep championing the move guys...at least your 'real fans'.

INSULT FREE

Hervoyel
01-14-2009, 01:25 PM
We'll never know, for sure, if Bush was calling the plays--All we have on record, for sure, is that Bush and Kubiak limited RS to things he could and couldn't do. That would be tough for a guy like Richard Smith to be around the players at practice, to be holding the clipboard at games, and basically be a Texans version of Milli Vanilli. How do you let a guy retain his dignity when he's told what he can or can't do? That's a statement all by itself. It seems RS was still calling the game, but with boundaries to what he could/couldn't do. Weird.

I mean, I would be a guy who would just say, "You know what? I can go now. If it's so bad that someone else is calling the plays and I'm a puppet, then I need to be on my way. No hard feelings. I knew what I signed on for."

Of course....it might be different if i was approached and told that I would be forfeiting salary if I left, that they wanted to pay me out and that I needed to finish out my term (for the sake of outward appearances and such).

Still, that was NOT RS's defense at around week 11. Then you have that pesky Oakland game where it definitely looked Smithish. LOL. Who knows...

I just know that I'm glad we have a new direction. I hope Richard Smith all the best, though. Can't be an easy job to coach in the NFL.

Here's what I think (which is as valid as anyone elses theory on this since we're never going to know how that worked in all likelyhood). That wasn't Richard Smith's defense returning in Oakland. RIchard Smith's defense never left. Based on the comments attributed to Frank Bush in another thread about how he and Kubiak basically told Smith what he could and couldn't do I'd say we were always looking at Richard Smith's defense even during that stretch of "better" performances. We were just looking at Richard Smith's defense doing sensible things and seeing the players performance increase as they experienced some success on the field.

In Oakland that was the Texans getting punched in the mouth by a team they took lightly and didn't properly prepare for. At that point they started getting pushed around and fell apart. What do you do when things around you fall apart? You fall back on coaching and you play like you practice and these guys have been practicing this crappy scheme for 3 years.

I expect Frank Bush's defense to look a lot better than the best 4 weeks of Richard Smith's lousy defense. I expect it to actually attempt to do all the things he's talking about today. Smith said all this and then his defense always came out playing exactly opposite of what he'd told us he wanted to do. Valid excuses in years 1 and 2 were swept aside when he did the exact same thing in year 3. Bush needs to bring the pain back to our house.

GP
01-14-2009, 01:27 PM
Thing is we don't have any idea how much homework and reaching out they did. They may have called Williams and he rebuffed them thinking he is going back to TN. They attempted to talk to Gray and were refused. Marinelli picked the Bears. Who knows, maybe they even talked to McDermott and he doesn't want to leave Philly except for a head coaching gig. Sounds like they initially considered looking at the 3-4 guys and decided they did not want to switch schemes so that eliminated quite a few guys. If they really weren't going to consider anyone else I think they would have just announced Bush from the start.

Well said. Agree with it all.

I bet Kubiak and Smith told Bush "You're on the list, Frank. We just have to do some legwork and make absolutely sure, OK?"

I mean, it really CAN be as simple as that. LOL. Bush probably knew that he stood a great chance in the first place. He wasn't fired, so he's still drawing his pay...what else is he going to do: Throw a fit and run away?

You guys know how skeptical I am of the moves that are made, especially with coaching. I'm telling ya' this: I think this was the BEST move, and not just because he was "the only one available," as it was with RS 3 yrs. ago.

I have a good feeling about this. I bet the guys are thrilled, too. There will be the sort of attitude on the field that a player WANTS to play with.

Second Honeymoon
01-14-2009, 01:29 PM
Why do you hate so much? So of these coaches out there with experience who would you hire that run a 4-3 and not a 3-4, because Kubiak has stated he wants to continue that route. Ii memory serves you wanted Sean McDermott, who has no DC experience. As far as being happy, unless it is the guy you wanted you would never be happy.

Why is it if someone agrees with what has been done or does not share your opinion they are a homer? I am really interested in your answer for that. You throw that out so much, like it is an insult. I mean I thought that is what a fan of the Houston Texans living in Houston is, a homer, cause he likes the home team.

i have never spoken the word Sean McDermott, ever. I wanted just about ANYONE as long as they weren't already on our staff and preferably not part of the Bronco Cartel.

Williams and Haslett were who I had considered...but that would have been impossible because they wouldn't be cheap and they don't have Bronco ties....so no deal.

the only things I like about Bush are that he played in Houston and that he is an African-American. his experience is nil and he hasn't even called plays much less coordinated a defense....but the Texans selected so he has to be good....after all, the Texans never make bad moves.

GP
01-14-2009, 01:36 PM
Here's what I think (which is as valid as anyone elses theory on this since we're never going to know how that worked in all likelyhood). That wasn't Richard Smith's defense returning in Oakland. RIchard Smith's defense never left. Based on the comments attributed to Frank Bush in another thread about how he and Kubiak basically told Smith what he could and couldn't do I'd say we were always looking at Richard Smith's defense even during that stretch of "better" performances. We were just looking at Richard Smith's defense doing sensible things and seeing the players performance increase as they experienced some success on the field.

In Oakland that was the Texans getting punched in the mouth by a team they took lightly and didn't properly prepare for. At that point they started getting pushed around and fell apart. What do you do when things around you fall apart? You fall back on coaching and you play like you practice and these guys have been practicing this crappy scheme for 3 years.

I expect Frank Bush's defense to look a lot better than the best 4 weeks of Richard Smith's lousy defense. I expect it to actually attempt to do all the things he's talking about today. Smith said all this and then his defense always came out playing exactly opposite of what he'd told us he wanted to do. Valid excuses in years 1 and 2 were swept aside when he did the exact same thing in year 3. Bush needs to bring the pain back to our house.

I just can't buy into that portion of your post, Herv.

Respectfully have to say that I don't think Richard Smith has the ability to make "sensible decisions" as you theorized he began doing all of a sudden.

We did take Oakland too lightly, I agree. But the tone of our defense from the very outset was this 4-man front with LBs basically holding their places at the snap and watching what was happening vs. other games where you see the LBs moving all along the line, faking blitzes or actually coming on a blitz of some kind. Same thing goes for our DBs. The result was that Oakland loaded up the line and ran the ball all day. That's not the sort of effort (in terms of strategy) that we saw the four games before and the game after Oakland.

I guess it's all water under the dam, as Karl Malone said one time in one of his interviews. Doesn't matter. We'll see what Frankie can do, eh?

Specnatz
01-14-2009, 01:48 PM
i have never spoken the word Sean McDermott, ever. I wanted just about ANYONE as long as they weren't already on our staff and preferably not part of the Bronco Cartel.

Williams and Haslett were who I had considered...but that would have been impossible because they wouldn't be cheap and they don't have Bronco ties....so no deal.

the only things I like about Bush are that he played in Houston and that he is an African-American. his experience is nil and he hasn't even called plays much less coordinated a defense....but the Texans selected so he has to be good....after all, the Texans never make bad moves.

Yeah and not everything they do is bad either. Jim Haslett still the interim HC for St. Louis, so why would he take a DC position? That makes a hell of a lot of sense.

TigerV1
01-14-2009, 02:35 PM
Not to change the focus of this thread, but was Frank Bush coaching the LBs in Arizona while Karlos Dansby was there? If so, I wouldn't mind seeing Dansby come play for his old LB coach. I guess it all depends whether or not Arizona lets him walk.

dalemurphy
01-14-2009, 02:38 PM
i have never spoken the word Sean McDermott, ever. I wanted just about ANYONE as long as they weren't already on our staff and preferably not part of the Bronco Cartel.

Williams and Haslett were who I had considered...but that would have been impossible because they wouldn't be cheap and they don't have Bronco ties....so no deal.

the only things I like about Bush are that he played in Houston and that he is an African-American. his experience is nil and he hasn't even called plays much less coordinated a defense....but the Texans selected so he has to be good....after all, the Texans never make bad moves.

If you want to see me criticize the Texan organization, all that would have to happen is for them to hire freakin' Haslett for DC. Thank God that didn't happen!

I don't think anyone is saying that this will definitely be a great move. Instead, we're hopeful. You, however, can't see the difference. Neither you or I have any real ability to know right now if this is a good move or not. You, on one hand, choose to attack the selection. I choose to give the organization the benefit of the doubt and am eager to see if it works out well.
Believe me, I'll turn on the pick with vengeance once there is enough evidence that it's a bad one. I just don't see any reason to anticipate that happening. By the way, I think Kubiak's track record with major decisions for this organization is pretty good. Perhaps he's earned the benefit of the doubt?

you know, I'm sure you spoke out against all of these moves:
1. Mario over Reggie and Vince
2. trading for MSchaub
3. bringing Rick Smith in as GM
4. promoting Shanahan to OC
5. starting DBrown all season
6. Kevin Walter trade and insertion into the starting lineup

Rozelle
01-14-2009, 02:44 PM
What exactly was Bush in charge of the past couple years and what is a senior defensive assistant? Sounds like someone who would assist the DC. With a LB background as both a player and coach, I assume he assisted coach Holland with the backers?

Hopefully the Texans can land David Gibbs for the DB coach.

Yes… Bush was LB coach with Dansby for three years. They both came to Arizona in 2004.

FirstTexansFan
01-14-2009, 04:04 PM
you know, I'm sure you spoke out against all of these moves:
1. Mario over Reggie and Vince
2. trading for MSchaub
3. bringing Rick Smith in as GM
4. promoting Shanahan to OC
5. starting DBrown all season
6. Kevin Walter trade and insertion into the starting lineup

Rep your way Dale, purely because I'm evil that way :)

Fox
01-14-2009, 04:14 PM
I have to admit I rolled my eyes a little when Bush said he wanted our defense to be aggressive and attacking. It'd be far too depressing to go back and look at Richard Smith's first presser, but seems to me he said near the same. To be fair I think those are basically the cookie cutter adjectives used ubiquitously by new DC's to describe their style.

I'm a bit concerned by Bush's naivety in calling plays. We don't have the luxury of a grace period this year. The defense sucks and we drop a couple woulda, shoulda, coulda's while the D works out the kinks and we're gonna miss the playoffs again. We miss the playoffs again and the gigs up. Bush needs to get this D firing on all cylinders from the get go, this staff can't afford any less.

TexansSeminole
01-14-2009, 04:29 PM
I'm a bit concerned by Bush's naivety in calling plays.

I understand the concern with that but alot of the guys that people were putting out here on this board didn't have any experience in calling plays either.

McDermott, if I am not mistaken, has less overall experience than Bush and does not have any experience calling plays either.

bigbrewster2000
01-14-2009, 04:34 PM
bottom line, we hired a DC with no DC experience. call it whatever you want. i say it was a bad move for a team that could turn the corner this year.

as for me saying 'i hope it works out' how is that anything other than me wishing the best for my team? how is that covering my arse in case things work out?

here you go, mensa. how would hiring a DC with NO experience be hiring the most qualified candidate? it is a FACT that we did not hire the most qualified candidate? do you actually believe he is the best candidate? it is a FACT that we promoted from within from a unit that has underperformed and from a coaching tree (denver) that hasn't exactly lit the world on fire in regards to defense historically over a long period of time.

you can keep patting yourself on the back for being a member of the sheeple but the apologist attitude doesn't hold water with me.

I can't believe any fan would be happy with this move. I really can't....but this fanbase is the same fanbase who made excuse after excuse for players and coaches since Day One....so excuse me if it doesn't surprise me in the end.

...oh and the 'every DC had to start somewhere argument' is pretty lame if you ask me. there are plenty of qualified and experienced candidates out there, so what do we do? We chose one with neither the qualifications or the experience. how is that a good thing? but whatever, the Texans made the move so its gotta be a good move. after all, we have such a great track record as a franchise. God forbid someone be critical of such an awesome and successful franchise.

i am a positive person but when the franchise starts looking to Denver personnel for DEFENSE!! that is where I draw the line. It just smacks of cronyism and an unwillingness to go the extra mile and get someone with a proven track record and with some experience.

all i know is if our defense sucks AGAIN, Kubiak and Smith need to go. if all they are going to do is hire their friends, then we are truly doomed. how you can promote someone from within after such a pathetic display of defense is beyond me....but keep championing the move guys...at least your 'real fans'.

INSULT FREE

That jumped out at me a bit. I have been posting here for a pretty long time and it seems like you tend to live in the negative. Just sayin.

Yeah he did coach there but he didnt get his start there. He is a part of the Buddy Ryan tree of coaching. I think most here arent "happy" about it but just want to see the guy actually coach before they say he sucks. I was going to post more but it really isnt worth it anyway. You dont care about any viewpoint but your own.

GNTLEWOLF
01-14-2009, 04:51 PM
I have to admit I rolled my eyes a little when Bush said he wanted our defense to be aggressive and attacking. It'd be far too depressing to go back and look at Richard Smith's first presser, but seems to me he said near the same. To be fair I think those are basically the cookie cutter adjectives used ubiquitously by new DC's to describe their style.

I'm a bit concerned by Bush's naivety in calling plays. We don't have the luxury of a grace period this year. The defense sucks and we drop a couple woulda, shoulda, coulda's while the D works out the kinks and we're gonna miss the playoffs again. We miss the playoffs again and the gigs up. Bush needs to get this D firing on all cylinders from the get go, this staff can't afford any less.

Oh geeze! Reading this the thought just occurred to me that this team can now blow the first half of the schedule next season and have the excuse that they were having to gell as a unit, or that they had to learn a new defense. I'm tired of excuses. But wait and see , If the team crashes the first half, and we don't make the play-offs or have a convincing winning record, someone will be using those excuses. And the thought might be added that they need a couple of years to get used to the new scheme. I can't believe this.... I'm having a waking nightmare.

Hervoyel
01-14-2009, 07:15 PM
I just can't buy into that portion of your post, Herv....


I don't know why not. They didn't implement an entirely different system ("Frank Bush's System"). They edited Smith's system down to the stuff that worked and told him not to deviate from that subset of his defense. In short we saw Richard Smith's defense with all the looney bits removed. What remained was still his and will probably bear some resemblance to whatever Frank Bush implements which is fine. It worked.

They always talk about simplifying things to make them faster and to get players moving instead of standing there trying to work everything out. They pared Smith's defense down to only that (arguably making it so generic it was hardly attributable to anyone) and it worked... at least better than what he'd been doing. Compared to the full package "Richard Smith Simplified" looked like we'd suddenly become the 85' Bears.

Frank Bush's system will have to be a damn sight better than that for him to be considered a successful hire.

Texan JBZ
01-14-2009, 10:40 PM
Williams and Haslett were who I had considered...but that would have been impossible because they wouldn't be cheap and they don't have Bronco ties....so no deal.

Thank God Almighty that you're not making the decisions for the Texans! Williams and Haslett? Are you kidding? Did you even watch the Rams last year or the year before that? There defense was awful, way worse than the Texans. Why would any fan of the Texans consider Jim Haslett an upgrade at the DC position? Oh, I forgot, he has experience...

And Williams (sigh)? Why would you want Gregg Williams either? He did nothing with a pretty talented Jaguars defense last year. If he's so good, then why didn't Zorn keep him as his DC when he got the job? Tomlin kept Lebeau. Chucky kept Kiffin. I'm pretty sure if Andy Reid retired today that the next Eagles coach would keep Johnson. Harbaugh kept Ryan. Why didn't Zorn keep Williams? Hell, why didn't Del Rio keep Williams? Williams is a decent at best DC, but he is by no means spectacular.

The Texans get credit from me because I feel that they went after the two best available defensive coaches on the market. They wanted Marinelli as the d-line coach, and they wanted to interview Jerry Gray for the DC position. Marinelli chose the Bears because of his personal relationship with Lovie Smith. You know, the whole Bucs Cartel thing. The Redskins denied the Texans the chance to interview Gray for the post. End of story. Bush is the new DC. Seemed like the most reasonable choice all things considered.

GP
01-14-2009, 10:58 PM
I don't know why not. They didn't implement an entirely different system ("Frank Bush's System"). They edited Smith's system down to the stuff that worked and told him not to deviate from that subset of his defense. In short we saw Richard Smith's defense with all the looney bits removed. What remained was still his and will probably bear some resemblance to whatever Frank Bush implements which is fine. It worked.

They always talk about simplifying things to make them faster and to get players moving instead of standing there trying to work everything out. They pared Smith's defense down to only that (arguably making it so generic it was hardly attributable to anyone) and it worked... at least better than what he'd been doing. Compared to the full package "Richard Smith Simplified" looked like we'd suddenly become the 85' Bears.

Frank Bush's system will have to be a damn sight better than that for him to be considered a successful hire.

I can't envision a grown man actually allowing someone to hand him a sheet of paper that says "You can do a, b, c but not x, y, z."

That's the lowest of lows. If you're Richard Smith and you get told you can and cannot do certain things, how do you smile and eat that like it's delicious? Heck, if he WAS calling his own defense but with certain boundaries...and he sees the effects of it, wouldn't that be like a major wake-up call of some sorts?

You have to be a special sort of person to keep getting things wrong, being shown how to do something right, and yet still revert to your wrong ways at the end of the day. Maybe it's an overboard issue of pride or something.

I personally could not continue running the show if someone behind the scenes hands me a sheet of paper and says "This is what you do, got it?" (1) I'm wasting my time. (2) I'm wasting other people's time, and (3) There's something else I need to go and do, something I can put my hands to and do an OK job at.

Maybe I won't set the world on fire when I move on to something else, but at least I won't wake up and live a lie. If Richard Smith was running his defense, but couldn't see the faults of certain parts of it nor could he see the successful parts of it and that he needs to do more of the successful things...then I say "Wow, how in the heck did he get a job with the Texans in the first place?"

And if people think the Texans didn't 'try' hard enough by naming Bush d-coord, then all I can say is they must have drawn Richard's name out of a hat during a golf game three years ago or something.

infantrycak
01-14-2009, 11:17 PM
I can't envision a grown man actually allowing someone to hand him a sheet of paper that says "You can do a, b, c but not x, y, z."

That's the lowest of lows. If you're Richard Smith and you get told you can and cannot do certain things, how do you smile and eat that like it's delicious? Heck, if he WAS calling his own defense but with certain boundaries...and he sees the effects of it, wouldn't that be like a major wake-up call of some sorts?

FWIW - the report on the limited play-calling came from a MB member as a direct conversation with Bush.

GP
01-15-2009, 01:24 AM
FWIW - the report on the limited play-calling came from a MB member as a direct conversation with Bush.

Correct. I was aware of that information, but I am trying to say that here's the leader (the defensive coordinator) whose role it is to call the plays and guide the defense...and he's being lorded over by Frank Bush. I suppose he had more authority than I had perceived him having.

Does someone tap Jim Johnson or Rex Ryan on the shoulder and say, "Excuse me, we need to sit down and go over some guidelines..."

No. They handle their business. Nobody has to come up with a cheat sheet for those guys, but yet we have Frank Bush and Gary Kubiak basically holding Richard's hand through a chunk of the season.

I can see why some people are not trusting this hiring. If Frank had THAT much power, to call down a defensive coordinator and order him to do certain things, then why not fire RS on the spot and install Frank as interim d-coord for the rest of the season?

We had a lame duck d-coord, in essence. If RS had been told that there are things he could/couldn't do, throughout the course of a game, what in the wide, wide world of sports is RS doing even showing up at practices and games for? Not only was he permitted to remain, the guy continued to show up and pretend to be d-coord. Yeah, yeah...I know...it was still Richard calling the defense--But it was not him doing what he was itching to do.

The entire point of a person being a d-coord is that they run what they want to run as the game situations come at them. I'd go so far as to ask why Richard Smith even began the season at all.

This organization seems to do things in the strangest manner. What a sad statement that you went three years with a d-coord who essentially wasn't fit to do the job. That's a lot of patience as far as NFL timelines go.

This move should have happened last off-season. Period.

infantrycak
01-15-2009, 08:49 AM
Correct. I was aware of that information, but I am trying to say that here's the leader (the defensive coordinator) whose role it is to call the plays and guide the defense...and he's being lorded over by Frank Bush. I suppose he had more authority than I had perceived him having.

Frank Bush having the authority or having made the decision is not what was reported and is not a necessary part of the story. Kubiak obviously has the authority and may have gone to Bush with a list of his own ideas on how to tweak the D and asked Bush for his input. See, no Bush lording over Smith or having the authority to yank the reins from his hands.

Yes I would have preferred if the move was made last year.

BigBull17
01-15-2009, 12:03 PM
i have never spoken the word Sean McDermott, ever. I wanted just about ANYONE as long as they weren't already on our staff and preferably not part of the Bronco Cartel.

Williams and Haslett were who I had considered...but that would have been impossible because they wouldn't be cheap and they don't have Bronco ties....so no deal.

the only things I like about Bush are that he played in Houston and that he is an African-American. his experience is nil and he hasn't even called plays much less coordinated a defense....but the Texans selected so he has to be good....after all, the Texans never make bad moves.

While I may not agree with your canidates, I do agree that they rushed a decision when they didnt need to. I always hope for the best, but damn. An assistant from a bottom 3rd ranked D, WOOHOO...

The Pencil Neck
01-15-2009, 12:13 PM
Correct. I was aware of that information, but I am trying to say that here's the leader (the defensive coordinator) whose role it is to call the plays and guide the defense...and he's being lorded over by Frank Bush. I suppose he had more authority than I had perceived him having.

That's not the way I understood it. I didn't read it that Bush was dictating anything to Smith. To me (and I could be wrong), it seemed that Kubiak went to Smith and said, "Dude. This isn't working. Here's what we're going to do to fix it." And that's the head coach's job.

Midway through the season, I started hearing people say how the defensive staff would meet and how everyone had input and Smith wasn't telling people what to do but rather that he was taking suggestions, blah, blah. I think that's the point that Kubes came in, gathered everyone together, and said, "This isn't working. Does anyone have any suggestions or ideas?" And that's the point that Smith was effectively fired and became a lame duck. I think that's close to the point where our defense started to improve, as well.

I don't think it was Kubes and Bush restricting Smith's playcalling, I think it was Kubes, Bush, Rhodes, Holland, etc.

bckey
01-15-2009, 01:35 PM
ESPN is reporting that New Orleans has hired Greg Williams to be their dc. Just putting it here because people talked about him even though we didn't interview him as far as we know. It caught my eye that he had top 10 defenses 5 out of 9 years and 3 of those years they were in the top 3.




In five of the last nine years, however, Williams' defenses have ranked in the top 10 in the league -- including three top 3s.

"A lot has gone into this decision, and we targeted Gregg as the coach we'd like to hire after our first interview because he was so impressive and prepared," Payton said. "As an offensive coach, I have game-planned against his defenses in the past, and I know the problems they create. He's an aggressive coach, but his units are always sound fundamentally. We have some pieces in place for him to work with, and I know he's excited to get started."


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3834953

cuppacoffee
01-15-2009, 07:40 PM
If you want to see me criticize the Texan organization, all that would have to happen is for them to hire freakin' Haslett for DC. Thank God that didn't happen!

I don't think anyone is saying that this will definitely be a great move. Instead, we're hopeful. You, however, can't see the difference. Neither you or I have any real ability to know right now if this is a good move or not. You, on one hand, choose to attack the selection. I choose to give the organization the benefit of the doubt and am eager to see if it works out well.
Believe me, I'll turn on the pick with vengeance once there is enough evidence that it's a bad one. I just don't see any reason to anticipate that happening. By the way, I think Kubiak's track record with major decisions for this organization is pretty good. Perhaps he's earned the benefit of the doubt?

you know, I'm sure you spoke out against all of these moves:
1. Mario over Reggie and Vince
2. trading for MSchaub
3. bringing Rick Smith in as GM
4. promoting Shanahan to OC
5. starting DBrown all season
6. Kevin Walter trade and insertion into the starting lineup


Well?....:stirpot:...:D

:coffee:

GP
01-15-2009, 08:39 PM
Frank Bush having the authority or having made the decision is not what was reported and is not a necessary part of the story. Kubiak obviously has the authority and may have gone to Bush with a list of his own ideas on how to tweak the D and asked Bush for his input. See, no Bush lording over Smith or having the authority to yank the reins from his hands.

Yes I would have preferred if the move was made last year.

The person said that both he AND Kubiak did it.

That was what shocked me, was that the guy said Bush threw his name in there during the description of what happened, as if it were not only a joint decision...but also implies Bush had a role in keeping Smith accountable. From reading the story, that's what it looked like to me.

I haven't gone back to the thread, but I am pretty sure the story went the way of Bush throwing his name in there as if it was a tag-team deal. Maybe I'm wrong. Unlikely, but possible....:whistle:

infantrycak
01-15-2009, 10:34 PM
The person said that both he AND Kubiak did it.

Close but other way around:

he did say that "Coach and I" (I assume Kubiak) banned certain plays by Smith

Not that it matters much. Some of this stuff gets ridiculous. If he is included then he must have had authority over Smith. If he is not included then we would be having a discussion about Kubiak not trusting him.

I'm going to sit back and see what happens when Bush designs the D.

Dan B.
01-15-2009, 11:08 PM
I was the guy who talked to Bush. Bush may not have said the word "banned." He may have said something along the lines of "Coach and I took certain plays out of Coach Smith's playbook." Or "Coach and I altered the playbook and let Coach Smith call his own game otherwise." I don't remember the exact phrasing. I do know that he didn't identify the first coach by name. I assumed he was referring to Kubiak because he called Smith "Coach Smith" both when making that statement and throughout the conversation. He also simply referred to Kubiak as "Coach" every time we discussed the head coach. But he may have been saying that he and Coach Smith jointly altered the playbook and that Kubiak had nothing to do with it.

Grams
01-16-2009, 07:09 AM
I reallly don't understand some of you people.

You guys wanted Smith gone. Most of you would have been extremely happy if this had happened in mid-sesaon and Bush named DC then.

Now that it has happened you have to complain or be very negative about the whole thing.

You wanted someone that was an experienced DC. What experienced DC was available to make a lateral move to another DC position? Williams? - Only because he was fired from the Jags. Would you want him seeing what their defense did/did not do this past year?Someone else that was fired? If they were fired they were probably not doing a very good job - just like Smith.

Not I.

All the other DC's out there are looking/interviewing for the Head Coach position.

We would have gotten an unexperienced line/position coach. Isn't that what we got?
At least the one we have knows the players, the scheme, the system, what we need, who does what best, etc. Anybody new coming in would have to learn all that.

There is little point in continuing to complain or be negative till you see this defense actually play in real games. After about 3-4 games you can all start to pat yourselves on the back and make the rest of us eat crow or vice versa.

Specnatz
01-16-2009, 08:20 AM
I reallly don't understand some of you people.

You guys wanted Smith gone. Most of you would have been extremely happy if this had happened in mid-sesaon and Bush named DC then.

Now that it has happened you have to complain or be very negative about the whole thing.

You wanted someone that was an experienced DC. What experienced DC was available to make a lateral move to another DC position? Williams? - Only because he was fired from the Jags. Would you want him seeing what their defense did/did not do this past year?Someone else that was fired? If they were fired they were probably not doing a very good job - just like Smith.

Not I.

All the other DC's out there are looking/interviewing for the Head Coach position.

We would have gotten an unexperienced line/position coach. Isn't that what we got?
At least the one we have knows the players, the scheme, the system, what we need, who does what best, etc. Anybody new coming in would have to learn all that.

There is little point in continuing to complain or be negative till you see this defense actually play in real games. After about 3-4 games you can all start to pat yourselves on the back and make the rest of us eat crow or vice versa.

But Grams that is not what certain people do around here. I mean look at how a lot of people acted right after drafting Mario, hell there is one person who post on this board who said before week #1 of this years season that he still would prefer vy over Mario. Go back and look at how people reacted to D Brown being drafted and calling him a bust, a reach, and our GM and coaches morons for drafting a 4th rounder in the first round (OK they said third, I was exaggerating). Watching, even a preseason game and making a decision is not what a lot of people do around here.

I will be the first person to say I wanted someone else (Sean McDermott). While I am not jumping up and down and saying Woo'freakin'Hoo look who we got I am not going to piss and moan about this because it serves no purpose. If after the third game of the season I see the same back off 10 yards on a 3rd and 5, get me a straight-jacket because I am going to go bonkers. I will wait until then to do so. Now I will sit back and wait to see who our new DL guy is and our S&C coaches are and keep reading and getting ready for the draft (So I can whatch these same folks throw a huge sissy fit all over again).

I always like it when a person stands up and claims himself the smartest person in a room, because then I know who the dumbest one is.

GP
01-16-2009, 08:28 AM
I was the guy who talked to Bush. Bush may not have said the word "banned." He may have said something along the lines of "Coach and I took certain plays out of Coach Smith's playbook." Or "Coach and I altered the playbook and let Coach Smith call his own game otherwise." I don't remember the exact phrasing. I do know that he didn't identify the first coach by name. I assumed he was referring to Kubiak because he called Smith "Coach Smith" both when making that statement and throughout the conversation. He also simply referred to Kubiak as "Coach" every time we discussed the head coach. But he may have been saying that he and Coach Smith jointly altered the playbook and that Kubiak had nothing to do with it.

Thanks for the addition to the conversation, Dan B.

Either way we slice it, it still comes out that Frank Bush played a role in the restriction or alteration of the playbook. Interference by Bush, to me, indicates he had authority over Richard Smith. Which means that somewhere before week 11, Kubiak must have decided to let Richard know that the gig was up and he'd be permitted to stay on and run parts of his defense that jived with what Frank felt would be better for our guys.

Would love to have been a fly on the walls back then.

The Pencil Neck
01-16-2009, 10:43 AM
Thanks for the addition to the conversation, Dan B.

Either way we slice it, it still comes out that Frank Bush played a role in the restriction or alteration of the playbook. Interference by Bush, to me, indicates he had authority over Richard Smith. Which means that somewhere before week 11, Kubiak must have decided to let Richard know that the gig was up and he'd be permitted to stay on and run parts of his defense that jived with what Frank felt would be better for our guys.

Would love to have been a fly on the walls back then.

Yeah, I disagreed with you about Bush having any power over Smith. But after reading that makes me think that maybe you're right.

D-ReK
01-16-2009, 11:21 AM
Yeah, I disagreed with you about Bush having any power over Smith. But after reading that makes me think that maybe you're right.

That brings up a good question (which may have already been asked), but what exactly did Frank Bush do for us before being named DC? His title was "Senior Defensive Assistant", which is a bit cryptic. Upon doing a quick search, I didn't see any other NFL team with someone in this position. Was he a consultant like Dan Reeves, who was able to attend practice, meetings, and games while giving his input to the players and coaches? I'd be interested if anyone could shed some light on this.

I mean I know he worked closely with the DL in 2007, when Mario broke out and Amobi was pretty good, then shifted his focus to the LBs in 2008, but did his position give him power over Smith and the other defensive coaches? Hmm...

Second Honeymoon
01-16-2009, 01:30 PM
1. Mario over Reggie and Vince
2. trading for MSchaub
3. bringing Rick Smith in as GM
4. promoting Shanahan to OC
5. starting DBrown all season
6. Kevin Walter trade and insertion into the starting lineup

1. Vince made the most sense because that would have meant no more Carr and no Carr resigning which has hurt our franchise greatly. Obviously Vince has had problems so I will call a mulligan on that one but I still think things may have been different for him in Houston, as he would have had a better offense and at least one playmaker in AJ. Disagree if you wish, but we would have 2 2nd Round picks and no Carr money on the past 3 years salary cap. Granted, no Mario but I think things would have turned out different for Vince if drafted by Houston and not the cheapskate Titans.
2. I liked the Schaub trade if only for the fact that it meant Carr's sorry act was over but I liked Schaub too. He doesn't take 1/2 the sacks that Carr used to.
3. I liked Rick Smith's signing from Day One. I am a huge proponent of there being more African-Americans in coaching and front office.
4. Shanahan's promotion to OC meant little to me as I knew that Gary was in charge of the Offense still.
5. I thought starting Duane Brown AND drafting Duane Brown were both dubious moves and to be honest, I still do to an extent. The offense made strides but I am not sure Brown is our Franchise LT of the future. I would rather have Kenny Phillips.
6. I liked the Walter signing and I liked the initial Andre Davis signing. I just didn't like the Andre Davis resigning because I felt he may take a step back after getting his huge payday....and I was right.

I am honest and have takes. You don't have to like them or agree with them...I don't just parrot the party line like some people do. I give my heart, soul, weekends, and lots of money to the Texans. I just want them to be committed to winning and building a championship contender. I don't feel they are doing everything it takes to put that together. If you feel they are, that is fine. I disagree. Inexperienced coaching and 3rd Tier free agents haven't worked since Day One, so excuse me if I don't have a lot of faith sticking to the same gameplan. And I am not alone in feeling that way and no amount of badgering me is going to change my opinion or make me a member of the sheeple.

At least some of you admit that you didn't want Bush and that he wasn't the most qualified candidate in your eyes...because anything else would be totally fake and dishonest. Bush may be a good fit and may keep some continuity but after 3 years of pathetic defense, do we really need continuity.

take care everyone and have a great 2008,
SH - a real and honest trueblue fan

The Pencil Neck
01-17-2009, 01:32 PM
I am honest and have takes. You don't have to like them or agree with them...I don't just parrot the party line like some people do.

I don't have a problem with your honesty or the fact that you have opinions.

My problem is how you voice your opinion. I've been on the verge of putting you on my ignore list several times because you don't just state your opinion. You over-react. You get nasty when it's not even close to being acceptable. You go off on things like whatever-it-is just killed your family and raped your girlfriend.

For example, we draft Duane Brown. I could understand saying something about how you think it's a huge mistake and that we reached for a player. I could understand with pointing out all the other guys we could have had and all that. But your reaction to that was totally over the top and fo me, really inappropriate. IIRC, you were acting like it was the worst pick that any team had ever made and was just further verification that every person in our front office should be fired immediately. You were ready to never watch another Texans game again.

If you had just reacted like that on one occasion, I'd be OK with it but it seems to me like you react like this to almost anything the Texans do.

And on the issue of "honesty", sometimes people tell themselves that they're just being honest when they say things that other people don't like. But frequently, they're not really being honest. They may be saying things that are the truth (or are true for them) but they use the camoflage of honesty to be overly brutal and mean. Being honest doesn't mean being obnoxious. And stating your opinion in an over-the-top confrontation manner isn't being honest, that's just being confrontational for confrontation's sake.

At least, that's the way I see it. And I don't necessarily disagree with everything you write but I do frequently disagree with how you communicate how you feel about things.

thunderkyss
01-17-2009, 03:01 PM
1. Vince made the most sense because that would have meant no more Carr and no Carr resigning which has hurt our franchise greatly. Obviously Vince has had problems so I will call a mulligan on that one but I still think things may have been different for him in Houston, as he would have had a better offense and at least one playmaker in AJ. Disagree if you wish, but we would have 2 2nd Round picks and no Carr money on the past 3 years salary cap. Granted, no Mario but I think things would have turned out different for Vince if drafted by Houston and not the cheapskate Titans.

While we can squable about details, SecondH, you(& I ) were right about this one. It wasn't so much a Vince vs Mario, for people like us. It was a David Carr can't cut it in this league, and we need another QB.

It's great, that this organization knew the same thing, yet tried to make it work with Carr from a "it's the right thing to do" perspective.

It's great that we did get Mario, and not overspend on that scat back(which would have been the wrong foot for this regime to start on, and something we never would have lived down).

But the fact is. We were in desperate need of a QB, and the one we spent a lot of money on is a back-up in the league for another team.

2. I liked the Schaub trade if only for the fact that it meant Carr's sorry act was over but I liked Schaub too. He doesn't take 1/2 the sacks that Carr used to.

IMHO, I think we moved too soon on finding Carr's replacement. It was an expensive move, and while Sage isn't in the same league as Schaub, I think we'd have been just fine offensively. Imagine if we used that first 2nd on a Safety, and the other on a Corner.... Or a Right Guard...

This is after Sage played extensively in '06, and we knew what we had there. Not the Franchise, but a stop gap.

3. I liked Rick Smith's signing from Day One. I am a huge proponent of there being more African-Americans in coaching and front office.

With all due respect, let's hope that's not the only reason you liked the hire.

4. Shanahan's promotion to OC meant little to me as I knew that Gary was in charge of the Offense still.
5. I thought starting Duane Brown AND drafting Duane Brown were both dubious moves and to be honest, I still do to an extent. The offense made strides but I am not sure Brown is our Franchise LT of the future. I would rather have Kenny Phillips.

I don't think the evidence supports starting Brown from day one was the right move. He is still spelled often by Salaam.

6. I liked the Walter signing and I liked the initial Andre Davis signing. I just didn't like the Andre Davis resigning because I felt he may take a step back after getting his huge payday....and I was right.

IMHO, I don't think it's because of the payday. How often does AD actually get on the field.

At least some of you admit that you didn't want Bush and that he wasn't the most qualified candidate in your eyes...because anything else would be totally fake and dishonest. Bush may be a good fit and may keep some continuity but after 3 years of pathetic defense, do we really need continuity.


the whole Frank Bush thing baffles me.

Coach Bush was the man Kubiak wanted. He couldn't get him in 2006. We get Bush in 2007....... we give him a title which makes it sound like he'll have a lot of influence on the defense.Senior Defensive assistant But all the blame for our defensive failure, seems to be layed on Richard Smith.

If Coach Bush was the man Kubiak had faith in, why wasn't Smith a figure head, a paper tiger?? Why wasn't he asked to resign?? What kind of experiment were we running?? "Let's see what Richard Smith can really do, with his future replacement handcuffing him"

The move should have been made last year. Would have made more sense. Wouldn't have been fair to Richard Smith, but it would have been more fair to the palyers, and the fans.

Maddict5
01-17-2009, 03:16 PM
While we can squable about details, SecondH, you(& I ) were right about this one. It wasn't so much a Vince vs Mario, for people like us. It was a David Carr can't cut it in this league, and we need another QB.




:rolleyes:

didnt stop you predicting the david carr led texans having a 12-4 (or was that 13-3?) season in 2006 did it?

HoustonFrog
01-17-2009, 03:25 PM
. Perhaps he's earned the benefit of the doubt?

you know, I'm sure you spoke out against all of these moves:
1. Mario over Reggie and Vince
2. trading for MSchaub
3. bringing Rick Smith in as GM
4. promoting Shanahan to OC
5. starting DBrown all season
6. Kevin Walter trade and insertion into the starting lineup

Except these "brilliant moves" have only added up to two 8-8 seasons. So maybe the moves aren't bad but they in no way make up for Ahman Green, Chris Brown and bad game decisions, challenges, and time management. I'm not anti-Kubes but there is another side to the track record and you can make good moves and still do nothing with it. Just saying. I really just wanted some new blood.

dalemurphy
01-17-2009, 03:54 PM
Except these "brilliant moves" have only added up to two 8-8 seasons. So maybe the moves aren't bad but they in no way make up for Ahman Green, Chris Brown and bad game decisions, challenges, and time management. I'm not anti-Kubes but there is another side to the track record and you can make good moves and still do nothing with it. Just saying. I really just wanted some new blood.

Those are decisions that took the worst NFL franchise in football and has turned them into a very young and promising team. I don't recall arguing that he hasn't made mistakes. My point was that he has proven to be a pretty good decision-maker and deserves the benefit of the doubt- Of course he's proven to be fallible. I'm not here to hero worship!

The AGreen and Chris Brown decisions are largely irrelevant and more the result of the previous' regime and the talent and salary cap predicament they put us in. I'd rather have $5 million of dead money from AGreen's contract and a dirt-cheap Chris Brown on the IR along with Mario, MSchaub, and an Alex Gibbs' coached Oline... rather than neither of those RBs and Reggie Bush without Mario or Vince Young without Matt Schuab or Mario. Hey, but that's just me.

I've been fairly outspoken about frustrations with Kubes' game management. However, that's not what I was talking about. And, I think that is just part of a new head coaches' growing pains. I've got a Steeler fan friend that can't stand Tomlin because of "all the bonehead calls".

Maddict5
01-17-2009, 03:59 PM
Except these "brilliant moves" have only added up to two 8-8 seasons. So maybe the moves aren't bad but they in no way make up for Ahman Green, Chris Brown and bad game decisions, challenges, and time management. I'm not anti-Kubes but there is another side to the track record and you can make good moves and still do nothing with it. Just saying. I really just wanted some new blood.

lol chris brown please.... you forgot dexter wynn.. hes not around anymore- another crucisl error in judgement :rolleyes:

hes hit on nearly every big decision hes had to make. weaver being the exception imo. green possibly too- played well when healthy but... (big enough but- not a huge contract though)

Lucky
01-17-2009, 04:43 PM
hes hit on nearly every big decision hes had to make. weaver being the exception imo. green possibly too- played well when healthy but... (big enough but- not a huge contract though)

If Kubiak had "hit" on the defensive coordinator the first time, this thread wouldn't exist. 1st round picks qualify as "big decisions". And it's too early to suggest that Kubiak has gotten it right on the last two.

Here's an interesting quote from Lance Zierlein's Z Report (http://blogs.chron.com/fantasyfootball/), concerning the Bush hiring.

While I'm okay with Kubiak hiring Frank Bush, I am curious as to how many friends around the league Kubiak has. He doesn't seem to reach out to very many coaches who he doesn't have a background with and I don't think he even interviewed any other defensive coordinator candidates other than Bush.


Most coaches network since they have to move from job to job, but Kubiak played and coached in Denver so I don't know about how many coaches around the league who he knows well or even trusts other than his Denver posse.
On the flip side, how many assistant coaches know Kubiak well enough to want to coach under him? Being able to pull together a coaching staff is a very important aspect of being a NFL head coach. Kubiak's decision making in this regard has been dubious, thus far.

Specnatz
01-17-2009, 05:12 PM
While we can squable about details, SecondH, you(& I ) were right about this one. It wasn't so much a Vince vs Mario, for people like us. It was a David Carr can't cut it in this league, and we need another QB.


This makes as much sense as saying you would be ok with Lorena Bobbit because it is anyone other than your current wife.

If vy had not attended UT most of the people would not have wanted him and would have looked closer at his mechanics and the fact Mack Brown had to dummy down his offense for him and also would have looked at his wonderlic score (or lack there of).

Oh and by the way, you can say you were right about Carr but you were dead wrong about vy. So three years later the Texans would again be in the same situation, a crappy QB who can't read defenses and looking for a new one and a new coach and gm as well.

Maddict5
01-17-2009, 05:42 PM
If Kubiak had "hit" on the defensive coordinator the first time, this thread wouldn't exist. 1st round picks qualify as "big decisions". And it's too early to suggest that Kubiak has gotten it right on the last two.



no coach is perfect and gets EVERY decision/hire right. your success depends on the frequency of those wrong decisions. i think kubiak (despite all the bad doing he gets on here sometimes) has a pretty good success rate

we're going to find out if his first-choice D co-ordinator is a hit over the next year or 2.. and its too early to say hes missed too. i think both will come good but thats jmo

thunderkyss
01-17-2009, 07:45 PM
This makes as much sense as saying you would be ok with Lorena Bobbit because it is anyone other than your current wife.

I'd have been fine with a "trade down and get Lienart" movement, or a "trade down and get Cutler" movement, but neither of those presented themselves.

If vy had not attended UT most of the people would not have wanted him and would have looked closer at his mechanics and the fact Mack Brown had to dummy down his offense for him and also would have looked at his wonderlic score (or lack there of).

That may be, but he did win the Rose Bowl, and a National Championship

Oh and by the way, you can say you were right about Carr but you were dead wrong about vy. So three years later the Texans would again be in the same situation, a crappy QB who can't read defenses and looking for a new one and a new coach and gm as well.

More than likely.

If this is a me or Kubiak poll, I'd vote for Kubiak myself.

What's your point.

My point is that SecondHoneymoon had/has cause to be critical of this regime, just like you've got cause to be critical of my opinion.

HoustonFrog
01-17-2009, 10:17 PM
lol chris brown please.... you forgot dexter wynn.. hes not around anymore- another crucisl error in judgement :rolleyes:

hes hit on nearly every big decision hes had to make. weaver being the exception imo. green possibly too- played well when healthy but... (big enough but- not a huge contract though)

Scoff if you will but you fail to explain the biggets moves of all...gametime ones. Again, I like the guy, good man and think he has done well with some personnel but that doesn't mean he can coach or can handle the pressure. You act like the Green move isn't a big deal but they kept sticking with him despite age, salary and the fact that he proved undependable. At times the excuses got deep. But what do I know I just watch people continuously make excuses for each regime despite nothing to show.:)

GP
01-18-2009, 01:25 AM
I just ate some leftover BBQ at 1:20 a.m.

The Pencil Neck
01-18-2009, 02:44 AM
Scoff if you will but you fail to explain the biggets moves of all...gametime ones. Again, I like the guy, good man and think he has done well with some personnel but that doesn't mean he can coach or can handle the pressure.

I think those bad game-time decisions really need to be taken with a grain of salt.

Even the 'great' coaches make decisions that make us arm-chair QB's scratch our heads but sometimes (not every time) they're doing it because of some strategy that they're aware of that we aren't.

Kubiak's approach to 2 minutes drives me crazy. He'll run conservative plays to see if he can get a first down and if he DOES get a first down, then he'll go into aggressive mode. If we're inside our own 30 or so, he doesn't try to get the ball down the field. And to me, that seems like a questionable strategy... but watching other games this year, I noticed a couple of other successful coaches taking the same strategy.

Kubiak has a bad record with challenges. But iirc, coaches as a whole run at less than 50% with their challenges. I think I heard in one of the games at the end of the season that Andy Reid's challenge percentage was similar to Kubiak's (like 1 successful challenge all season or something like that.) So, that doesn't seem like something to castigate a coach over.

The last game-time thing that Kubiak does that has irritated me is calling the time out before a half-ending field goal with too much time left on the clock. He habitually calls his time out at about 10-12 seconds when he should take it down to 3 or 4. At 10 seconds, that means we're going to have to kick off again and that's dangerous and unnecessary. I'm not sure why he does that but it drives me crazy.

BUT... I don't see any of those things as a sign of a "bad" coach... because you see good coaches like Reid and Fisher doing the same things.

dalemurphy
01-18-2009, 08:48 AM
I think those bad game-time decisions really need to be taken with a grain of salt.

Even the 'great' coaches make decisions that make us arm-chair QB's scratch our heads but sometimes (not every time) they're doing it because of some strategy that they're aware of that we aren't.

Kubiak's approach to 2 minutes drives me crazy. He'll run conservative plays to see if he can get a first down and if he DOES get a first down, then he'll go into aggressive mode. If we're inside our own 30 or so, he doesn't try to get the ball down the field. And to me, that seems like a questionable strategy... but watching other games this year, I noticed a couple of other successful coaches taking the same strategy.

Kubiak has a bad record with challenges. But iirc, coaches as a whole run at less than 50% with their challenges. I think I heard in one of the games at the end of the season that Andy Reid's challenge percentage was similar to Kubiak's (like 1 successful challenge all season or something like that.) So, that doesn't seem like something to castigate a coach over.

The last game-time thing that Kubiak does that has irritated me is calling the time out before a half-ending field goal with too much time left on the clock. He habitually calls his time out at about 10-12 seconds when he should take it down to 3 or 4. At 10 seconds, that means we're going to have to kick off again and that's dangerous and unnecessary. I'm not sure why he does that but it drives me crazy.

BUT... I don't see any of those things as a sign of a "bad" coach... because you see good coaches like Reid and Fisher doing the same things.

You guys are right to have some problems with his game management. That being said, complaining about the two minute offense at halftime or in a tie game at the end is nuts. It's a simple risk-reward issue. First, we've been pretty successful in those situations: Green Bay, Miami '08, Miami '07... You have to run clock in a tie game with 2:00 to go if you're inside your own 20. Otherwise, if you throw 3 incompletions and punt, you've positioned the opposing team for a game-winning field goal without even creating difficult decisions or circumstances for them. Look at it this way: "What Would Martz Do?" As a fan, if you find yourself thinking like Mike Martz realize that you have no business criticizing game management decisions.

Texan_Bill
12-31-2009, 09:12 AM
Some funny stuff... :truck: