PDA

View Full Version : Kubes on the hotseat????


Pages : [1] 2 3

jshabang
05-04-2009, 02:52 PM
http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/101533-texans-owner-puts-kubiak-on-hot-seat

well the line has been drawn in the sand now........I absolutely knew this was coming....a little later than I thought but what i thought none the less...

Even a classy owner like mcnair has a breakin point.......and I love it...hold him accountable........kubes is toast if the texans come out with another brain fart start like last season....:whip:

m5kwatts
05-04-2009, 03:00 PM
I would be very disappointed if Kubiak were to be fired and I don't think that is in the Texans' best interest. He's brought this team a long ways already and I think McNair knows that. He expects to make the playoffs as most owners would with the roster and staff we have. I hope if this team gets off to a fast start that Kubiak gets an extension ASAP because he is the best coach for this team.

HJam72
05-04-2009, 03:04 PM
A win in Tennessee will keep the pink soap away.

Carr Bombed
05-04-2009, 03:04 PM
The link is not working for me ???

Wolf
05-04-2009, 03:05 PM
Here is more about what McNair has said.

http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60913&highlight=McNair

Ready for tough choices

Rick Smith, with input from head coach Gary Kubiak, is the point man on personnel decisions.

“Your future is depending upon these young people coming in, so those decisions are vital,” he said. “I don’t hesitate to let them know what I think, and when something isn’t done right, I demand that they justify why they made that decision.”

McNair wouldn’t say he is a different person than he was in 2002, just more knowledgeable, which makes him tougher on draft-day decisions.

“As you gain more experience, it’s easier to determine if your people are on the right track,” he said.

The true measure of the right track is on-the-field results. Today’s results are almost as important.

“It’s an exciting process —very dynamic — and you really have to be well prepared,” McNair said. “You make one decision, take one action, and it ripples through the whole board.

“We don’t know what the other 14 teams ahead of us are going to do, so we have to do a lot of what-if scenarios. But I think we’ll have a good draft. We better.”

Or else somebody will have some explaining to do. To an owner who knows a lot more than he used to.

ChrisG
05-04-2009, 03:05 PM
it doesnt say he is in the hotseat at all...it says the owner expects a playoff appearance. Kub has improved this team so much, our biggest problem was of Def cor.


Texans owner Bob McNair raised the bar, saying that after all of the offseason moves geared toward improving the defense, he expects a playoff appearance. McNair also pointed to a favorable start, as Houston opens with three of four games at home. That won't make fourth-year coach Gary Kubiak sleep any easier. One of the Texans' biggest problems has been in AFC South play; Kubiak is 2-10 over the last three years against the Colts and Titans.

^ thats the whole article...where does it say he is in the hot seat? do you expect the owner to say he expects a losing season? use your brain

i hate ppl starting rumors with no basis of fact

gtexan02
05-04-2009, 03:05 PM
Only way he gets fired is we lose more than 10-12 games. Another 8-8 year and he'll stick around. Always something to blame it on (injuries, hold outs, etc)

midgetonadonkey
05-04-2009, 03:05 PM
Bring in Shanahan!!

I tease. I think it's good to light a fire under his ass but he has done an excellent job with the talent he has. He is a good coach. Hopefully he is around for a while.

michaelm
05-04-2009, 03:06 PM
In my mind, the team would have to have a regression for Kubiak to be on the hot seat.
The only scenario that gets Kubiak fired, IMO, is if the team takes a noticeable step backwards, and Bill Cower becomes available to replace Kubes.

El Tejano
05-04-2009, 03:09 PM
Well, they took those comments out of text. I remember him saying this in a Chronicel article. He basically said that he feels the team has improved in the talent department and he believes the playoffs are obtainable. Nothing about people being on hot seats or anything. That's pure speculation.

HJam72
05-04-2009, 03:10 PM
Bill Cowher would start an enormous rebuilding campaign. We'd be starting from scratch for the third time. He himself is also a testament to sticking with your HC as long as he doesn't pull a 2-14 out of his stupid butt.

HJam72
05-04-2009, 03:11 PM
I still think the real problem has been Richard Smith as DC and a Defense that just needs to mature together and gel.

m5kwatts
05-04-2009, 03:17 PM
I still think the real problem has been Richard Smith as DC and a Defense that just needs to mature together and gel.

Agree completely although I would add a lack of talent in the past has been an issue with the defense but that has been upgraded significantly recently in a short period of time

gtexan02
05-04-2009, 03:23 PM
I still think the real problem has been Richard Smith as DC and a Defense that just needs to mature together and gel.

Don't say the "g" word. Last time we used that one, we ended up going 2-14

HJam72
05-04-2009, 03:25 PM
Don't say the "g" word. Last time we used that one, we ended up going 2-14

Ug. :cool:

Texans_Chick
05-04-2009, 03:34 PM
http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/101533-texans-owner-puts-kubiak-on-hot-seat

well the line has been drawn in the sand now........I absolutely knew this was coming....a little later than I thought but what i thought none the less...

Even a classy owner like mcnair has a breakin point.......and I love it...hold him accountable........kubes is toast if the texans come out with another brain fart start like last season....:whip:

I think that "McNair wants playoffs = Kubiak is on hotseat" is a stupid position, and clearly not written by anyone who pays attention to McNair's decision making.

I think McClain's position in his recent article on this is accurate based on what I know--that McNair very much respects what Kubiak is doing and barring a catastrophic collapse, Kubiak is as safe as any other NFL coach.

Thorn
05-04-2009, 03:46 PM
Unless we have very serious injury problems, or folks not reporting to camp for some reason, I don't see this team going backwards, or even staying the same.

They will be a better team this year and have a winning season baring those unforseen bad circumstances. I don't see where Kubiac should be worrying about his job. However, he should be worrying about how much the defense improves.

Vinny
05-04-2009, 03:54 PM
the seat gets hot if you never win...so far he has never won. Gotta be this year or the seat will be red hot. Another mediocre season and I'd say that he'll have one more season to pull it out. If two Head coaches can't bring this team to win more games than they lose in our first decade of football, I'm all for trying a third.

Thorn
05-04-2009, 03:56 PM
the seat gets hot if you never win...so far he has never won. Gotta be this year or the seat will be red hot. Another mediocre season and I'd say that he'll have one more season to pull it out. If two Head coaches can't bring this team to win more games than they lose in our first decade of football, I'm all for trying a third.


If there are no good reasons (injuries, hold outs, things like that) and we have another 8-8 season with all the talent in place, then yeah, Kubiac's seat is gonna get a tad toasty. LOL

Ole Miss Texan
05-04-2009, 04:20 PM
I would be very disappointed if Kubiak were to be fired and I don't think that is in the Texans' best interest. He's brought this team a long ways already and I think McNair knows that. He expects to make the playoffs as most owners would with the roster and staff we have. I hope if this team gets off to a fast start that Kubiak gets an extension ASAP because he is the best coach for this team.

What he said. "must spread rep"

SAMURAITEXAN
05-04-2009, 04:35 PM
I think that "McNair wants playoffs = Kubiak is on hotseat" is a stupid position, and clearly not written by anyone who pays attention to McNair's decision making.

I think McClain's position in his recent article on this is accurate based on what I know--that McNair very much respects what Kubiak is doing and barring a catastrophic collapse, Kubiak is as safe as any other NFL coach.

I agree with you TC. I don't understand this thread. Are we getting spoiled from gettig better as a team? We never had .500 record before Kubiak and I hate to admit but we were an awful team. Since Kubiak arrival, we'd seen TEXANS getting better each year(may not show on record) with a little talent we had. Last year, our offense was among top tier team. Have you guys ever imagined this kind of production during Capers' era? This year, we are in position to talk about our first winning season.

McNair is very successful and smart business man. A successful business man makes many right calls. I am certain that McNair has eyes for a successful person when he sees one.

GO TEXANS!!!

Texans_Chick
05-04-2009, 04:53 PM
the seat gets hot if you never win...so far he has never won. Gotta be this year or the seat will be red hot. Another mediocre season and I'd say that he'll have one more season to pull it out. If two Head coaches can't bring this team to win more games than they lose in our first decade of football, I'm all for trying a third.

What I find interesting about this is the timing. Let's assume another average season...with all the same sorts of excuses/explanations...young players, new defensive scheme, some random bad luck, injuries whatever blah blah blah.

With all the labor uncertainty that is possibly coming next year, do you really want to switch coaches/GMs after this season unless you are really forced to?

I'd want as much stability as I could get.

Ole Miss Texan
05-04-2009, 05:03 PM
I'll add that when Kubiak began in 2006, he was in complete rebuilding mode. Obviously the NFL is a "what have you done for me lately" kind of mentality and coaches/players are expected to produce immediately. Maybe I went into the "new era" of the Texans with a different mindset than most fans. I figured the first few years Kubiak would be installing his system, getting players he wanted, etc. Last year there were high expectations and Kubiak even said right before the season, something to the effect of "this team still has a ways to go". I remember fans blasting him for that but the truth was, the Texans were still evolving. This is the first offseason that I truly feel comfortable about our depth (exception could be RB).

My mentality is that 3 years should be about enough time for Kubiak to get most of the players he wants and have them trained to do what he wants. In that aspect, you could assume that year 4 starts the "hot seat". I think its just the next step. The team is pretty much where it needs to be at from a player personnel standpoint. We've gotten some new coaches but the foundation is pretty much set. Now is the time to produce (in my opinion). you could argue it should have been Game 1 in 2006 but realistically now is the time the team is finally together (and should be). I think the whole W/L idea starts now. If he has a bad season, I don't see him getting fired though. I think this season he'll be expected to produce and if he doesn't, the 2010 season he's on the hot seat. If that season goes just as bad or worse then the '09 season, then a decision will be made and his contract is up.

A 5 year contract is a good length for building the team and producing. I think McNair gives him the 5 years, to be fair. The 2010 season is Kubiak's "contract" year, so to speak. And if he doesn't have an extension by then, that year will be make or break for him. I'm a big Kubiak fan so I hope we see winning seasons starting this year and going forward. This really is the first year I can say I EXPECT the Texans to make the playoffs. But it's not like it's going to be a cake walk.

GP
05-04-2009, 05:13 PM
What I find interesting about this is the timing. Let's assume another average season...with all the same sorts of excuses/explanations...young players, new defensive scheme, some random bad luck, injuries whatever blah blah blah.

With all the labor uncertainty that is possibly coming next year, do you really want to switch coaches/GMs after this season unless you are really forced to?

I'd want as much stability as I could get.

Exactly.

The tag line for that website that we were linked to, for the story, is "Truth and Rumors." Well, I think this little article falls into the "rumors" bin.

IMO, Kubiak has a litmus test season this year. With probably the best overall talent this team has ever possessed, and with a favorable schedule (especially to start the season!) he will prove if he's got the stuff or not.

If we stay healthy, yet still fall victim to the same problems--No defense, bad clock management/challenge decisions/game-planning before the game and after halftime, failing to dominate teams from start-to-finish, and getting away from what we're good at--I have no problem starting over.

But if we have significant injuries to several key players, or if we lose a few games in ways that are not really any fault other than a lucky bounce here and there for the other team(s), then why in the heck would anybody want to scrap it and go coach hunting?

I understand the urgency. It's very real. But I think people are already projecting failure, and that sucks to see that at this early juncture. It's sucking all the fuuuuuuun out of it.

My motto for the rain cloud crowd is this: Don't be a fun sucker. :BananaWav

Double Barrel
05-04-2009, 05:15 PM
What I find interesting about this is the timing. Let's assume another average season...with all the same sorts of excuses/explanations...young players, new defensive scheme, some random bad luck, injuries whatever blah blah blah.

With all the labor uncertainty that is possibly coming next year, do you really want to switch coaches/GMs after this season unless you are really forced to?

I'd want as much stability as I could get.

I'd be willing to bet that there will be at least one team - and probably more - that will fire their HC after this season. Sometimes you have to risk instability to take the chance to improve.

We Texans fans are conditioned to accept mediocrity as long as it comes in a nice, well spoken package. ;)

I'm not saying Kubiak is/is not on the hot seat. My guess is that he's not save a catastrophic season. But our owner and fanbase has a helluva' lot more patience about these things than other cities.

But I feel that we will improve to at least 9-7 this season, and if it is 8-8 again, then we will probably lose a bunch of really close games. We will hopefully be a better road team and go .500 in our division, so those small steps will be visible.

Vinny
05-04-2009, 05:31 PM
I agree with you TC. I don't understand this thread. Are we getting spoiled from gettig better as a team? We never had .500 record before Kubiak and I hate to admit but we were an awful team. Since Kubiak arrival, we'd seen TEXANS getting better each year(may not show on record) with a little talent we had. Last year, our offense was among top tier team. Have you guys ever imagined this kind of production during Capers' era? This year, we are in position to talk about our first winning season.

McNair is very successful and smart business man. A successful business man makes many right calls. I am certain that McNair has eyes for a successful person when he sees one.

GO TEXANS!!!You mean like David Carr, Charley Casserly and Dom Capers? :gun:

I get your point though. Let's say we fired Kubiak after a mediocre season. I'd bet there would be tons of teams with rotten offenses lining up to hire him. He'd be fresh off his training wheels. We have him for at least two more years imo.

hollywood_texan
05-04-2009, 06:00 PM
I think that "McNair wants playoffs = Kubiak is on hotseat" is a stupid position, and clearly not written by anyone who pays attention to McNair's decision making.


Stupid position?

The Texans still have trouble winning games and have their jocks handed to them by division opponents on a regular basis.

Kubiak's as head coach is a legit discussion if the Texans don't make the playoffs this year.

SAMURAITEXAN
05-04-2009, 06:02 PM
You mean like David Carr, Charley Casserly and Dom Capers? :gun:

I get your point though. Let's say we fired Kubiak after a mediocre season. I'd bet there would be tons of teams with rotten offenses lining up to hire him. He'd be fresh off his training wheels. We have him for at least two more years imo.

That was his freshman year! You don't expect McNair to be aware of everything in his first try would you? With this past experience, he now has Kubiak and Smith which is much improved IMO. I like our FO. How about you Vinny?

GO TEXANS!!!

Wolf
05-04-2009, 06:09 PM
You mean like David Carr, Charley Casserly and Dom Capers? :gun:

I get your point though. Let's say we fired Kubiak after a mediocre season. I'd bet there would be tons of teams with rotten offenses lining up to hire him. He'd be fresh off his training wheels. We have him for at least two more years imo.

i agree with you ..2 more years.

unless this team dropped into the tank then he could be gone this year,but there has been a lot of progress made. Granted it isn't like some of the other teams but it isn't because the offense is stalling, it is the defense hasn't found it's nitch.. It has to show some life this year because the offense is there (minus the red zone efficiency ).. Kubiac/shannahan have to find a way to get the red zone improved and hopefully with who/what we drafted this year, there will be improvement

MORE TD's!
LESS FG's!

Texans_Chick
05-04-2009, 06:17 PM
Stupid position?

The Texans still have trouble winning games and have their jocks handed to them by division opponents on a regular basis.

Kubiak's as head coach is a legit discussion if the Texans don't make the playoffs this year.

It can be a legit discussion for sure. No doubt.

But reading Bob McNair's comments as an indication that Bob McNair believes that Kubiak's job is in particular hotseat jeopardy is a stupid position. It doesn't follow from his comments.

thunderkyss
05-04-2009, 06:33 PM
I'll add that when Kubiak began in 2006, he was in complete rebuilding mode.

Correction. Complete rebuilding, minus one position.

& that's QB.

If the rumors are true, and HWSNBN's position on the 2006 team was a result of a "favor" or at the personal request of Bob McNair, add one year to what ever timetable Kubiak is/was on.

Now, one of the articles quoted on the first page referenced Bob saying that he's gained experience, that he's learning a lot more........ that he "get's it"

If that's true, then I trust he can see that this team is headed in the right direction, with/without a play-off appearance.

I also believe his new knowledge may be due to the time he's spent with Smithiak....... if so, add another year or two.

It may just be me, but for some reason I feel this organization is more "family oriented". They act more like a family. I think getting rid of Kubiak is going to be one of those things that Bob will not want to do, no matter what, and whatever reason there may be in the future, it's going to be a good one.

And no one is going to see it coming.

Kinda like Walsh in SF, and Shanahan in Denver.

IlliniJen
05-04-2009, 08:14 PM
If we have another mediocre season and Kubiak hasn't displayed that he has learned how to prepare the team and call a game, then he absolutely should be gone after next year. I thought he should have been gone this year because of his lack of evolution as a head coach and some bone-headed game-time decisions. I think you absolutely have to expect that this team should be winning, and perhaps we would have won a couple more games last year had Kubiak made intelligent, high-percentage playcalling decisions and had done something about the defensive coaching.

Frank Bush is a decision that I think Kubiak will have to stand behind, come success or more bottom half of the league defensive play. He will also have to get his team ready to play on Sundays, both mentally and emotionally. There hasn't been an identity on either front that I can say "that's the Texans...that's Coach Kubiak affecting their attitude and readiness."

Being a nice, likable family guy has nothing to do with being a winning NFL coach, and if McNair sticks too long with another loser, he will have a apathetic fan base on his hands.

Ole Miss Texan
05-04-2009, 09:53 PM
Being a nice, likable family guy has nothing to do with being a winning NFL coach, and if McNair sticks too long with another loser, he will have a apathetic fan base on his hands.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but at the same time, if McNair keeps going through coaches after every 3-4 years I think it would be even more detrimental to the team and to the fanbase.

Look at the Raiders. Let's get past the fact that Al Davis is the craziest owner in the league and does his own thing with the team. But how many coaches have they gone through since the Texans have been in existence? The answer is 5. 5 Head Coaches since 2002. Now you can make plenty of arguements about why the Raiders suck but #1 on my list is the turnover at the Head Coaching position. How can you establish a winning team when you're consistently replacing the head guy every year or two? It's ridiculous. The players/coaches will never be able to get on the same page. The offensive and defensive schemes may change... it's just hard to work in that kind of environment. Bring this home and look at your job- how much trouble would you have at your work if you had to answer to a new boss every so often.

The thing about most businesses (and I'm including Football Team as one) requires long term planning. You make long term decisions and sometimes have to pass up short term benefit. If a coach is worried about his job, he's less likely to make the best decision for the Team.

IlliniJen
05-04-2009, 10:20 PM
I'm not disagreeing with you, but at the same time, if McNair keeps going through coaches after every 3-4 years I think it would be even more detrimental to the team and to the fanbase.

Look at the Raiders. Let's get past the fact that Al Davis is the craziest owner in the league and does his own thing with the team. But how many coaches have they gone through since the Texans have been in existence? The answer is 5. 5 Head Coaches since 2002. Now you can make plenty of arguements about why the Raiders suck but #1 on my list is the turnover at the Head Coaching position. How can you establish a winning team when you're consistently replacing the head guy every year or two? It's ridiculous. The players/coaches will never be able to get on the same page. The offensive and defensive schemes may change... it's just hard to work in that kind of environment. Bring this home and look at your job- how much trouble would you have at your work if you had to answer to a new boss every so often.

The thing about most businesses (and I'm including Football Team as one) requires long term planning. You make long term decisions and sometimes have to pass up short term benefit. If a coach is worried about his job, he's less likely to make the best decision for the Team.

I have to disagree with your example of the Raiders. They are an aberration of a football team. Everything that's wrong with that team comes from one person: Al Davis. The coaches on that team are figureheads that do his bidding, and his constant string of bad decisions has set them back a decade or two. Hear me now and believe me later.

Long-term planning is great and all, but I don't accept a long-term plan of 8-8, 7-9 or 9-7 records. A long term plan has to include tangible improvement, which I do believe we have seen on the offensive side of the ball, save for one huge, glaring issue: red zone conversion. The play calling just wasn't effective. The team seemed to move the ball well except inside the 20, then they clenched up. And a couple TDs were left on the field (and wins) with perplexing 2nd/3rd and inches calls.

The other thing that I've felt has been lacking is a toughness or nastiness on this team that translates to me as a fan as a desire to win and an attitude to get there. Maybe the players will pick up this fumble and make the team their own, but it's not coming from the top down, IMHO.

Here's what I expect to see this year that may prove me wrong in my "fire Kubes!" stance:

1. Lil' Shanny fully taking over the reigns on offensive play calling. As I recall the last game or two last year, he was going solo and there was a tangible difference in the red zone. The team seemed to flow better and the calls weren't so conservative.

2. A more aggressive defense. We have the athletes to hopefully generate a pass rush and I would love to see more blitzing. If you're scared of the secondary getting burned by blitzing, as Smith seemed to be, then you're going to get burned regardless.

3. A favorable schedule. I've looked at the schedule and I think 10 wins is not only doable, but I expect more. It is NOT a tough schedule and we're going to see two different Colts and Titans teams this year. I think the loss of Dungy and Hanesworth (respectively) is huge.

Some dings that keep me on the "Fire Kubes" bandwagon (and there's plenty of room, only a couple of us are here, sitting grumpily with our arms crossed):

1. Team personality/attitude. If someone asked me to define the Texans, I couldn't easily do it. If I see Schaub get another cheap shot and those O linemen don't retaliate, I will got bat**** crazy. As should Kubes/Oline coach.

2. Preparation. There are times when the team comes out flat after wins against teams they are better than. Remember the Raiders game last year? That was like watching an old person with no teeth eat a piece of dry toast.

3. In game decision making. I keep harping on this, but Kubes hasn't shown he's advancing through that learning curve. Giving Lil' Shanny the reigns may cloak his weakness in this area.

4. His RB albatross. For the life of me, this guy loves "rode hard, put up wet" over the hill, injury-prone cast off RBs. I'm hoping one of the FAs we picked up after the draft pan out (and that they just didn't see the talent there this year to waste a pick on), but the "plug in Running Back X into ZBS" hasn't worked. We got a gem in Slaton and I love the little spark plug, but we need some legitimate "bake" to Slaton's "shake."

By no means take my "Kubes isn't doing a great job yet" stance as me wanting the team to not win in order to prove me right. I want this team to win, as my five Texans jerseys and worn-out Texans ballcap will atest. I want them to win, and I honestly think they can if Kubes improves in a couple key areas. And there's enough talent on this team to succeed in spite of him now. I'm just not sold on the "he's a good guy, we need to give him a chance" philosophy that keeps us stuck in neutral for a good year or two more than we need. Not every coaching change is a "wipe the slate clean and rebuild" situation, and turnarounds come quicker now than ever before.

Just win, baby.

Lucky
05-04-2009, 11:09 PM
I think that "McNair wants playoffs = Kubiak is on hotseat" is a stupid position, and clearly not written by anyone who pays attention to McNair's decision making.

The actual author of the blog, Mike Reiss of the Boston Globe, never used the word "hotseat" in his byline (http://www.boston.com/sports/football/articles/2009/05/03/no_sideline_job_for_crennel/?page=4).

Texan expectin' big things
Texans owner Bob McNair raised the bar, saying that after all of the offseason moves geared toward improving the defense, he expects a playoff appearance. McNair also pointed to a favorable start, as Houston opens with three of four games at home. That won't make fourth-year coach Gary Kubiak sleep any easier. One of the Texans' biggest problems has been in AFC South play; Kubiak is 2-10 over the last three years against the Colts and Titans.
At the risk of sounding stupid, I pretty much agree with Reiss. Bob McNair has made it known that he expects "big things" such as seeing his team in the playoffs. He's also correct that Kubiak's teams have struggled in the division. Where I might disagree is the assumption that Kubiak is just now feeling pressure due to McNair's comments. Kubiak knew that he had to clean house...er, reorganize this offseason. He went after mature players in the draft, rather than long term projects. Gary Kubiak was very well aware that the 2009 season will be a crossroads. Both for the franchise and himself.

thunderkyss
05-04-2009, 11:50 PM
Being a nice, likable family guy has nothing to do with being a winning NFL coach, and if McNair sticks too long with another loser, he will have a apathetic fan base on his hands.

To clarify, I never said Kubiak should get a pass, if he delivers an 8-8 season. My point, is that we can have a successful season, and still miss the play-offs. We can very easily go 11-5, or 12-4....... we can have a top ten defense, and a top 5 offense, and still miss the play-offs.

In the event, that we go 7-9, I think McNair will look at the situation, and decide what, if any, move should be made.

If we end up relying on Orlavsky, Arian Foster, and Rashad Butler for our offense, I doubt Kubiak is going anywhere, I doubt his job would be the topic of any discussion Mcnair would have with him.

IlliniJen
05-04-2009, 11:56 PM
To clarify, I never said Kubiak should get a pass, if he delivers an 8-8 season. My point, is that we can have a successful season, and still miss the play-offs. We can very easily go 11-5, or 12-4....... we can have a top ten defense, and a top 5 offense, and still miss the play-offs.

In the event, that we go 7-9, I think McNair will look at the situation, and decide what, if any, move should be made.

If we end up relying on Orlavsky, Arian Foster, and Rashad Butler for our offense, I doubt Kubiak is going anywhere, I doubt his job would be the topic of any discussion Mcnair would have with him.

I agree that having a winning record and missing the playoffs is a realistic situation and I don't think making the playoffs is the threshold by which Kubes is judged. But another 8-8 or even 9-7 season is a sign of issues with coaching. McNair would be crazy not to re-assess if we didn't have a winning season with all indicators pointing to a pretty successful season for this team.

I don't blame McNair for saying he expects the playoffs this year because as the owner I expect him to raise the bar. I'm encouraged by him saying this, but he's proven in the past that he has more patience than perhaps a coaching staff deserves.

Grid
05-05-2009, 01:39 AM
The only people saying Kubes is on the hot seat are the ones hoping they can hire him next season.

Kubiak isnt going anywhere. Even if we went 6-10 I doubt Kubes would be going anywhere. We have invested alot in this team to make it work like Kubiak is building it to work... and to fire him now would be catastrophic in the long term. McNair is not going to let Kubiak go because he knows that if he does, its the beginning of another rebuilding era...and NO ONE wants to see that.

McNair will remain loyal to Kubiak for at least a couple more seasons.

Vinny
05-05-2009, 10:39 AM
That was his freshman year! You don't expect McNair to be aware of everything in his first try would you? With this past experience, he now has Kubiak and Smith which is much improved IMO. I like our FO. How about you Vinny?

GO TEXANS!!!well, McNair couldn't even see the utter disaster in David Carr after 3 full years. They even extended his contract, so I haven't bought into McNair being a great decision maker when it comes to the NFL on the field game itself. I also think that he moves way too slow in a league of super quick changes. I do think the current team is better although Kubiak hasn't really gotten our record much better than Capers got it, with far less talent. I'm expecting playoffs this year though. I think the team is finally talented enough to compete for a playoff spot. Not just hoping...but expecting.

If we have another mediocre season and Kubiak hasn't displayed that he has learned how to prepare the team and call a game, then he absolutely should be gone after next year. I thought he should have been gone this year because of his lack of evolution as a head coach and some bone-headed game-time decisions. I think you absolutely have to expect that this team should be winning, and perhaps we would have won a couple more games last year had Kubiak made intelligent, high-percentage playcalling decisions and had done something about the defensive coaching.
My problem with Kubiak is that he calls his games like an overzealous offensive coordinator. Kubiak has been a poor strategist and puts the team in bad situations, over and over. Hopefully having someone else call the plays will help him see the bigger picture more readily.


McNair is not going to let Kubiak go because he knows that if he does, its the beginning of another rebuilding era...and NO ONE wants to see that.

McNair will remain loyal to Kubiak for at least a couple more seasons. This current team doesn't need "rebuilding" even if we get a new coach. There is enough talent to be a playoff team if the team stays healthy and the Coach doesn't continue to make poor strategic decisions. The talent across the league is so even games are often won and lost on strategy and gameplanning in the NFL. I think those have been Kubiaks weak spots. He can design a great offense, but I'm not a fan of his strategic decision making or some of his game plans.

Ole Miss Texan
05-05-2009, 10:59 AM
I have to disagree with your example of the Raiders. They are an aberration of a football team. Everything that's wrong with that team comes from one person: Al Davis. The coaches on that team are figureheads that do his bidding, and his constant string of bad decisions has set them back a decade or two. Hear me now and believe me later.
LOL, I conceded the fact that Al Davis makes insane people look normal. I just can't understand the guy. I think he is the main problem for the team but I was just saying one of his decisions is the Head Coach and he goes through them like a baby does diapers. Sure there are a ton of other issues here but the HC turnover is a very big problem.

Long-term planning is great and all, but I don't accept a long-term plan of 8-8, 7-9 or 9-7 records. A long term plan has to include tangible improvement, which I do believe we have seen on the offensive side of the ball, save for one huge, glaring issue: red zone conversion.
Totally agree here too. But in actuality, while I think they've been making long term decisions that are best for the team Kubiak still knows he has to produce each year. I think the longterm plan is consistently winning the division and being in the playoffs. On the short side, we have had 3 of the 4 best seasons in our short history. 6-10, 8-8, 8-8.


I like what you wrote the rest of the way and see those as very important. I think a 22-26 record is "acceptable" for the first three years even though it's not necessarily ideal. This season the expectations are sky high and for good reason. I just can't see it as Kubiak's last. I think it will be either (a) we make the playoffs and Kubiak gets an extension or (b) we don't and the general concensus is He better get us there in 2010 or else.

Hardcore Texan
05-05-2009, 11:23 AM
Those commenters on the aritcle are pretty funny, they don't really even seem to know much about the Texans, just skewed perception of what they have heard. I noticed a couple of our posters stepping in and straightening out some of the facts.

I agree with the other posters here, I don't think Kubiak is in the hotseat, I think McNair and Kubiak both expect playoffs or why else are they in this business? If the Texans finish 8-8 or less, than he will be on the hot seat next year. Even then you can't just pull the plug on the way he has turned things around, he will be given at least next season to try and rebound if this season is a bust.

Personally, I think we finish around 10-6 hopefully maybe even 11-5, whether that's good enough for the playoffs remains to be seen, but if we put up that record and still miss the playoffs, most of us will be happy with the improvement including the owner.

Mr. White
05-05-2009, 11:27 AM
Playoffs or bust.

The only exception should be if we win 10-12 games and miss the playoffs by some odd circumstance.

I'm of the opinion that if we don't at least show improvement every year, then the coach should be on the hotseat. And a 2nd straight 8-8 season wasn't an improvement.

GP
05-05-2009, 11:37 AM
...My problem with Kubiak is that he calls his games like an overzealous offensive coordinator. Kubiak has been a poor strategist and puts the team in bad situations, over and over. Hopefully having someone else call the plays will help him see the bigger picture more readily.

This current team doesn't need "rebuilding" even if we get a new coach. There is enough talent to be a playoff team if the team stays healthy and the Coach doesn't continue to make poor strategic decisions. The talent across the league is so even games are often won and lost on strategy and gameplanning in the NFL. I think those have been Kubiaks weak spots. He can design a great offense, but I'm not a fan of his strategic decision making or some of his game plans.

I think that's a very accurate portrayal of things. A few others, IMO, have really socked it to Kubiak without mentioning that he has designed a really good offense. It's as if he's being made out to be a total *****. I think your evaluation is fair.

I keep trying to steer people back to the end of last season when it was reported that an intervention was staged with Kubiak...and the result was that Kubiak was able to see that he needed to take his hands of the playcalling and let Jr. do the job. I think this energized our offense, and it probably pleased our defensive players, too.

Regarding Mr. McNair, in terms of his football acumen: McNair is only as smart as the people he surrounds himself with, IMO. He hired what I feel was a completely washed-up coaching staff when we first kicked this franchise off. Capers is a great coordinator, but he's not HC material. IMO, Kubiak is a better HC than Capers ever was...at least for the Texans. This is where I'll get Capers' miracle Jaguars team thrown at me. LOL!

Another of Kubiak's faults is that he is stubborn. I don't know if that's a Texas A&M thing...because you go there, and let's face it: You better do what the heck you're told, or you're disowned. But his stubborness is a strength yet also a weakness. It's been said that our strengths, carried out to their extremes, become our weaknesses. While it has helped the guy stay at the job in the NFL and push through a lot of adversity that would make most people crumble, he doesn't adjust to in-game situations very well. I see virtually no half-time adjustments that try to exploit what the opponent was doing to us (or allowing) in the first half.

Going back to my previous statement: Maybe--just mayyyybe--he will entrust his coordinators on game day, and focus on the game's nuances a bit more.

And I still maintain that Rick Smith is the real key to this whole puzzle. His structuring of contracts, as well as who he has helped Kubiak to bring in, is leaps and bounds ahead of Casserly and Capers. To me, Casserly gave Capers too much leash. If that wasn't the case, then Casserly really is a horrible GM. I'd like to think that there's a small shred of sanity in his skull, so I'll go ahead and say that Casserly gave Capers too much leash on a lot of player acquisitions and contract structuring. He trusted too much. Hopefully.

I think this is the season where it becomes pretty clear what we have, in terms of seeing the finished product after years of rebuilding.

I better go inside, I see some rain clouds headed this way.

GP
05-05-2009, 11:47 AM
I'm going to throw something out there, and I've been thinking about it for a few weeks now...so here goes:

Don't be surprised if Frank Bush gets canned after one year of being d-coord here. If our defense does not produce, and the stagnation remains, I can easily see Kubiak and Smith firing Bush and petitioning to McNair that we spend some major coin on a more high-profile d-coord out there.

I know you think it's crazy, especially since 99% of people here are saying that the failure of Bush will be the undoing of Kubiak's job. But I simply think that won't be the case. I think Kubiak and Smith were trying to identify other d-coords out there, which is why the Bush announcement took so long, and I wouldn't be surprised if Smithiak went to McNair and they brokered some sort of escape clause that gave them immunity in regards to staying with an inside hire for d-coord.

I'm not trying to just be outlandish here and be a goofball. I really think the Bush hire has more strings attached to it than we are aware of, and it's a last-ditch effort before trying to go out and grab a more expensive d-coord that's established and would need to be lured here with big $$$$. Smithiak knows that the way to McNair's heart is through his checkbook...and hiring Bush was a move engineered by economics, yet with the chance that his style just might work out in the end.

I think Kubiak and Rick Smith are pretty firmly enthroned right now. That won't stop McNair from putting on the face of "We need to make the playoffs. Now." That's part of the game, honestly. It's going to take a lot for McNair to disassemble Smithiak. McNair looks pretty smart right now, because he made a decent decision the second time around when identifying and hiring the right HC and GM. No way does he want to gamble again anytime soon.

CloakNNNdagger
05-05-2009, 11:51 AM
I think that one of the things that bothers me the most is that at this point in time it seems that everyone is on their tiptoes trying to dance around the word "playoffs." The coaches don't want to introduce it, the players don't want to introduce it, most of the fans want to ignore it as a measure of minimum success. And the owner can only come out, after all this time, with a relatively limp statement of "expectation." I'm beginning to get strong signals that this almost universal acceptance of mediocrity (a term that I believe Vinny used in the past) is a result of people being unable to motivate themselves. Lesser teams have set their goals high........some have made them........others have not. They have exuded confidence which have given them all that one little additional advantage toward reaching their goals. The Texans are not an "F" student looking for an unlikely/unreasonable "A." They are a "C" student looking for at least a "B"............with any acceptance of a "C+" reflective solely of their own sad self-imposed limitations.

TimeKiller
05-05-2009, 11:59 AM
Another fire Kubiak thread? What the hell?

If you look at last year's record as the only measurement of the team, I pity you and the newspaper you write for. And I pity the hole you live in, because it's tired of you. 8-8 last year was an accomplishment because of circumstances beyond anyone's control. We we're not the f'n steelers or patriots either, even now we're still considered the "lowly Texans". Fair is fair, winning would help that image and I think 8-8 this year will be a step back, though the record stays the same.

Double Barrel
05-05-2009, 12:10 PM
Kubiak is 2-10 over the last three years against the Colts and Titans.

That's gotta' change if Kubiak wants to keep his job. That's really just a pathetic indication of how far this team still has to go, back-to-back 8-8 records and all.

jshabang
05-05-2009, 12:13 PM
Playoffs or bust.

The only exception should be if we win 10-12 games and miss the playoffs by some odd circumstance.

I'm of the opinion that if we don't at least show improvement every year, then the coach should be on the hotseat. And a 2nd straight 8-8 season wasn't an improvement.



:goodpost:


point on.........I said the same thing........we went 8-8 twice.....first time was understandable from a injuries excuse/standpoint....but we had realtively good health last season and didnt inprove not even one game....

not only that....we came into the season looking like a unprepapred team....thats the main point....I can accept losses.....as long as the team shows fight and determination........coming out to the tune of a 0-3 or 0-4 with the team lookin lost shows me that the coach of the team obviously didnt have his squad ready to go mentally


and like cloak said........the level of mediocrity is very alarming to hear to say the least

its not reading between the lines to say that mcnair clearly stated his expectation level is for the team is to reach the playoffs....not only that but he also eluded that he is not gonna be happy with another slow start to the season with a unprepared team..........thats not speculation.....he layed out what he expects from his head coach and team this season ....:bat::aggressive:

GP
05-05-2009, 01:23 PM
I think that one of the things that bothers me the most is that at this point in time it seems that everyone is on their tiptoes trying to dance around the word "playoffs." The coaches don't want to introduce it, the players don't want to introduce it, most of the fans want to ignore it as a measure of minimum success. And the owner can only come out, after all this time, with a relatively limp statement of "expectation." I'm beginning to get strong signals that this almost universal acceptance of mediocrity (a term that I believe Vinny used in the past) is a result of people being unable to motivate themselves. Lesser teams have set their goals high........some have made them........others have not. They have exuded confidence which have given them all that one little additional advantage toward reaching their goals. The Texans are not an "F" student looking for an unlikely/unreasonable "A." They are a "C" student looking for at least a "B"............with any acceptance of a "C+" reflective solely of their own sad self-imposed limitations.

I follow what you're putting out there, but I don't agree with it. Every team throws out the obligatory "We want to dominate and win the SB!" card. No team (well, maybe the Lions are the exception) goes about things acting like they are just glad to be around for another day.

For every Detroit Lions'esque team who would be thrilled to reach .500 two seasons in a row, there is a Dallas Cowboys'esque team who is controlled by an owner/GM who can't get out of the first round of the playoffs.

The problem with being an NFL fan is that anything less than the Super Bowl trophy and you're a loser. A big loser. In fact, you could pull a Buffalo Bills and have 4 or 5 appearances in a decade, and you're seen as a pathetic loser. This exists for the NBA and MLB, as well, in sports leagues where there is only one real trophy to win each season. But it's magnified in the NFL, and I think that has to do with the physicality of the game. Only a real man can climb that mountain and plant that flag. Only a beast of a man could end up as the Super Bowl champion. A famous car racer once said "If you're not first, you're last!"

So what does it matter if we're in the playoffs and lose in the first or second round? Because I have seen teams repeatedly fail to win the Super Bowl, making it deep into the playoffs on a consistent basis and choking in some way or another, and yet THOSE teams are still regarded as being "good" teams: Philly, for example.

I think this whole freaking conversation is a joke. To say "he should be fired if we don't make the playoffs" is such a wrong way of evaluating anything because a good team isn't measured by conquest, at least it isn't to me--I judge it on some pretty simplistic things:

1. Are we drafting in the top 5 every season? If so, there's a serious issue going on in the deep recesses of the team's facilities.

2. Are we able to put ourselves into position to win a game, and if we are, what's the talent level of that opposing team we are in position to beat? If we're out of games by the start of the 2nd quarter, then there's some serious issues going on with the coaching and planning, etc.

3. Are we scoring points, or are we squeaking by on lucky bounces and blown coverages and getting points in garbage time?

And applying the "mediocrity" tag on THIS team, when it really was only applicable to the Capers' era of Texans teams, is well...it's fairly inaccurate IMO. I still think Marcus might be right when he says this team's problem is primarily a "talent" problem. You get enough talent, and stay the hell out of their way, and they can do some amazing things. I wonder if the Cavs are doing so well because of their coach, or because LeBron is a whole team unto himself? Or maybe it's a combination of coaching, stars, and support players? Looking back on the Capers team, I don't see ANYBODY who could play with the Texans team we have today--If we could put those two teams together, I know which team would win. And it wouldn't even be close.

I honestly think some of you guys are so on edge about the chances of us making the playoffs that you've now gone and hocked your wedding ring to add another few hundred to the poker pot you've put yourself into. :poker:

It isn't an acceptance of mediocrity to be pleased with 8-8 for two seasons. 2-14 was an embarassment, and THAT was the height of mediocrity. Kubiak has faults. Maybe he'll get over them this year. I don't desire a change until this season has played out and we see what he and Rick Smith have been putting together.

Isn't this the first year that we even have e-x-p-e-c-t-a-t-i-o-n-s for our defense? I mean, it was always a lost cause from the get-go every time this year. The biggest fault of Kubiak was allowing Richard Smith to stay more than 1 1/2 seasons. He has 1 1/2 seasons too late, but at least he's showing that he's not going to go all crazy all of a sudden. Nobody thrives in that sort of environment.

The Raiders, the Cowboys, the Redskins, and a few other teams are teams that make a lot of noise and don't produce a damn thing. Everybody else is just hoping that they do the best they can do, and that the bounces fall their way, and it all ends in a destiny-driven march to the title. I mean, it's 32 teams in a 16-game season! Only a few even make it to the playoffs, and then only 1 of those teams can survive the process.

No other major professional sports league (NHL, NBA, MLB) has a one-and-you're-done playoff structure. In the NFL, you have no second chances...and that's brutally unforgiving if your team just has an off day.

If the pulse of this board is already at this rate...in early May...I can't imagine what it'll be like in training camp and preseason. We might have to take a collection and provide professional counseling if things don't go perfectly for us. :wheel:

Texan4Ever
05-05-2009, 01:57 PM
I think it would be stupid for us to fire Kubes unless if we have a record worse then 8-8 with a healthy team. Remnds me of the Chargers firing Marty who I'm sure they wouldv'e loved to keep instead of Turner.

Dapper
05-05-2009, 02:05 PM
It's funny to my how many armchair coaches there are out there who probably have never even coached a youth soccer team.
if you think that making "game time decisions" is easy, you are either an idot or just plain ignorant.

There is no other way to get that "training" than under fire and on the job. I can gaurantee that there is not a coach alive or dead that has not made mistakes in the heat of battle. I'm talking about game deciding calls. Now I'm not saying that Kubes is the greatest coach out there but he is young and is gaining experience every week. Just like a young qb who needs experience for the game to ""slow down" for his skills to be displayed, the coaching staff has those same needs. If it was that easy, anyone could do it. Does any of you old timers remember Jeff Fischer's first year? He was not without flaws and has coached the longest with same team, i think. If my memory is correct, he made a boneheaded move last year against our Texans too.

If you doubt what i'm saying, just give coaching a try and count your mistakes for the first week. You might just bite your tounge a little the next time a pro coach makes a bad decision.
That being said, I doubt very seriously that Kubes or Smith or on the hot seat. They are going to be around a while like it or not.:texflag:

GP
05-05-2009, 02:10 PM
I think it would be stupid for us to fire Kubes unless if we have a record worse then 8-8 with a healthy team. Remnds me of the Chargers firing Marty who I'm sure they wouldv'e loved to keep instead of Turner.

Yet Marty's name is consistently mentioned as a possible choice for the Texans. He's done nothing but get teams to the playoffs only to lose once there.

This is just a product of our own expectations.

I was once a dark little cloud, myself, back before we began our win streak and pulled off 8-8. I know what it's like to demand Kubiak to "do this, or else." Well, he pulled off 8-8 when we probably could have just as easily have been 4-12.

I thought our opening games were a joke from the moment the schedule was released last off-season, and who really thought we stood a chance in the first half of the season? The Colts slowly regressed over the course of last season, and the Titans have lost their main man on defense who commanded double teams on every play. The Jags, IMO, finally bit the dust last season. Boy, that Jags team looks eerily like the 2-14 Texans: Some leftovers on defense, and a QB who can't do anything but tuck it and run OR dump off to the short routes. And a HC who stands there watching it all fall apart in front of his eyes.

We're going to win the AFC South, or at the very least have a W-L tie with either the Titans or the Colts with tie-breakers determining the outcome. And even if we don't win the South, in case the Titans or Colts regain their footing and win the division, we still are a viable Wild Card team.

Kubiak would have to do some amazingly stupid things, over the course of the whole season, in order to ruin this. Which, knowing human nature, is a possibility I guess.

Polo
05-05-2009, 02:11 PM
I'm of the opinion that if we don't at least show improvement every year, then the coach should be on the hotseat.

You're right...

Belichick should have totally been on the hotseat after failing to live up to 16-0 again...

I mean...Dude won a whole 5 games less AND missed the play-offs...Screw a hot seat...fire his ass...

Second Honeymoon
05-05-2009, 02:29 PM
You're right...

Belichick should have totally been on the hotseat after failing to live up to 16-0 again...

I mean...Dude won a whole 5 games less AND missed the play-offs...Screw a hot seat...fire his ass...

he didn't say playoffs, he said improvement. you are right in saying that improving doesn't necessarily mean playoffs, but that wasn't his point.

The team has to have a 9-7 record next year for Kubiak to be worthy of re-signing to a new contract. If the Texans finish 8-8 or worse, why should Kubiak be rewarded with a new contract? At the end of the season if Kubiak doesn't get to 9-7 he will have a losing record over 4 seasons without one season of being a winning football team. Why not see if someone out there could be an upgrade over Kubiak. Cowher, Schottenheimer, Holmgren, Pete Carroll, and even Herm Edwards would all be potential replacements. I am ommitting Shanahan because there is no way he takes Gary's job. No way.

All I am saying is if they fail to become a winner, we need to see if we can improve the team and one of the easiest ways to improve a team's performance is to improve the coaching. It will take a high salary but we can get one of the top coaches to come here. We have to stop being such a carebear organization and get committed to winning over everything else.

Ole Miss Texan
05-05-2009, 02:44 PM
You're right...

Belichick should have totally been on the hotseat after failing to live up to 16-0 again...

I mean...Dude won a whole 5 games less AND missed the play-offs...Screw a hot seat...fire his ass...

Pretty interesting comparison there, Polo.

Bill Belichick's first three years as a Head Coach produced records of 6-10, 7-9, 7-9. His 4th year he made the playoffs (lost in 1st round) with an 11-5 record and then his 5th and final year in CLE had a 5-11 record.

Polo
05-05-2009, 02:46 PM
he didn't say playoffs, he said improvement. you are right in saying that improving doesn't necessarily mean playoffs, but that wasn't his point.

No, I think you missed my point...

Record is a nice gauge for the fans as far as where the team is headed.

Yes the team went 8-8 last year, but IMHO, we still fielded an improved product.

Polo
05-05-2009, 02:48 PM
I think your evaluation is fair

I don't...


Lots of coaches make "poor strategic decisions"....I can't think of a single coach that I've ever watched and not question some things they did...

Considering that Kubes was a first time head coach trying to pull a team up off its ass after a 2-14 total collapse of a season and has steadily built this team up to the point where we are considered a legit contender is a helluva accomplishment...For him to take us to the superbowl would be storybook...

Lets also not forget that early on and recently Kubes has been doing most of the play calling and he himsef acknowledged that him being so involved in play calling left him a little bit over extended...

Hopefully this year he'll losen up the reins on Shanny and get to actually coaching the game.

GP
05-05-2009, 03:03 PM
he didn't say playoffs, he said improvement. you are right in saying that improving doesn't necessarily mean playoffs, but that wasn't his point.

The team has to have a 9-7 record next year for Kubiak to be worthy of re-signing to a new contract. If the Texans finish 8-8 or worse, why should Kubiak be rewarded with a new contract? At the end of the season if Kubiak doesn't get to 9-7 he will have a losing record over 4 seasons without one season of being a winning football team. Why not see if someone out there could be an upgrade over Kubiak. Cowher, Schottenheimer, Holmgren, Pete Carroll, and even Herm Edwards would all be potential replacements. I am ommitting Shanahan because there is no way he takes Gary's job. No way.

All I am saying is if they fail to become a winner, we need to see if we can improve the team and one of the easiest ways to improve a team's performance is to improve the coaching. It will take a high salary but we can get one of the top coaches to come here. We have to stop being such a carebear organization and get committed to winning over everything else.

I think Rick Smith isn't running a carebear organization. He hasn't thrown out some lame contracts to unworthy players. Weaver might be the last person to have benefitted from the previous regime's carebear attitude.

I used to like the idea of grabbing a big-name head coach, especially a guy like Cowher if he's available and willing. But I've seen enough of those guys. It's sort of like a merry-go-round, if you ask me. Holmgren is done. Schotty is done. Cowher, as much as I like him, just is not going to go about things with the same attitude he did with the Steelers. It's the Jimmy Johnson effect, if you will. You're never as good the second time around as you were in the build-up to your run of excellence. I mean, you've hit the top...you spent every ounce of sweat and blood...and sacrificed family time with your wife and kids along the way...and the grind of the job, upon your return, is too much. You eventually stop and recognize there's no more to prove here. You've done it all. Why do it again?

Shanahan, IMO, is the only one who is wired the right way to attempt a comeback of any kind. That guy is crazy consumed with the game if you ask me. I mean, I wouldn't doubt if the guy's skin has those little bumps on it like a football has.

Something I have realized over the past year or two: What I want and what I get are usually not the same thing. And as soon as I start obsessing with what I want (a playoff team, a Super Bowl, or a dynasty) I begin looking at this thing called "being a fan" way too seriously. The Patriots did what until the past 6 or 7 years? Not a dadgum thing. This thing is always cyclical. We've only been in existence for a few years...what pain does a Lions fan hold in their many years of suffering?

That's why I don't throw stones at those fans. They are die-hard, and we should be thankful for every year of "at least .500 football" that we can get. And if we get over the top some day? That's icing on the cake.

No team remains dominant, or even as a legitimate contender, for long stretches of time. Look at the Colts and Jags for proof of that. It always begins at some point, and ends at another point. And the time in-between is usually a fairly long wait. The Steelers have won how many Super Bowls and yet they have been in the league for how long? Statistically-speaking, shouldn't they have had twice as many titles to their credit by now? I won't crunch the numbers, but my gut (and it's a big one) tells me that even winning 1 or 2 or 3 titles over a period of a few decades is pretty good in the NFL.

I want Kubiak to pull out all the stops this year. I want aggressiveness from top to bottom, a refusal to leave anything on the field. No "protectionist" attitude. Go for it on 4th down when a punt would only put the ball a few more yards down the field. Risk a little, in the right spots. Be smart with challenges because time outs in the NFL are like an oasis in the desert.

Kubiak should have this team so ready on opening day, that we destroy the opponent's natural love for the game. We are, according to the tea leaves, ready to dominate our divisional foes...even at Lucas Oil Stadium. Texas invented oil, so we should beat a team that plays at a field named after it.

But if a few players go rogue on us, at the wrong time, and blow things at all the wrong moments in pivotal games--I'm talking stupid penalties and such--then I can't assess that loss on a head coach if he coached his ass off in that game. Yes, the head coach holds that player responsible, but there is a certain degree of a loss of control once the ball is kicked off each game.

Look, we all want the best. I just don't want this to turn into a "fan, not a real fan" debate. Everybody expects the playoffs, though we might disagree on the course of action if we don't make the playoffs.

CloakNNNdagger
05-05-2009, 04:11 PM
I'm sorry but I can't buy into this threshold of 9-7. If we go 9-7 this year, how have we improved at all? It is pretty well-established that most here and in the press are admitting that the rest of our division is expected to be significantly weaker than last year. How does winning 1 more game this year than last year demonstrate that WE have improved one iota as opposed to OUR COMPETITION being markedly lessened? More accurately, it could easily be argued that 9-7 is not only NOT an improvement, but an unacceptable move backward.

dalemurphy
05-05-2009, 04:22 PM
he didn't say playoffs, he said improvement. you are right in saying that improving doesn't necessarily mean playoffs, but that wasn't his point.

The team has to have a 9-7 record next year for Kubiak to be worthy of re-signing to a new contract. If the Texans finish 8-8 or worse, why should Kubiak be rewarded with a new contract? At the end of the season if Kubiak doesn't get to 9-7 he will have a losing record over 4 seasons without one season of being a winning football team. Why not see if someone out there could be an upgrade over Kubiak. Cowher, Schottenheimer, Holmgren, Pete Carroll, and even Herm Edwards would all be potential replacements. I am ommitting Shanahan because there is no way he takes Gary's job. No way.

All I am saying is if they fail to become a winner, we need to see if we can improve the team and one of the easiest ways to improve a team's performance is to improve the coaching. It will take a high salary but we can get one of the top coaches to come here. We have to stop being such a carebear organization and get committed to winning over everything else.


I just threw up in my mouth!

RipTraxx
05-05-2009, 04:38 PM
Taking a basically HS team to the 3rd best offense in the league in 3 YEARS?

He's got tenure in my book.

GP
05-05-2009, 05:05 PM
Taking a basically HS team to the 3rd best offense in the league in 3 YEARS?

He's got tenure in my book.

And I think it's obvious that the guy spent those three years focusing only on the offense, and the defense was neglected--It was left to rot. Maybe letting it rot was the best thing to do at the time.

Which on one hand, a fan can be angry about that. But on the other hand, it's actually the only way to do things. I mean...seriously, there is no way a man can change everything all at once. And Kubiak, IMO, did what he does best: Offense.

Now he's shifting his focus to the defense. He got rid of the dead wood: Richard Smith, Weaver, Cochran. He and Rick Smith are not allowing Dunta to complicate things. They eased DeMeco back into the fold, which was the right person to be focusing on (out of the two players). He has gone defense in Round 1 with Mario, Okoye, and Cushing. DeMeco was a 2nd rounder. Barwin was a second rounder. And he's allowed Bush to bring in an ex-Cardinal (Antonio Smith) because Bush tihnks he will fit that style of aggressiveness and gap-shooting.

Throw in the FACT that Smithiak is not giving one inch to Justice, and only a smidge of crumbs to McClain, and I like what we got going on so far.

I'm still of the opinion that Rosencopter is what snapped everything into place. THAT was the day our team realized that they could compete and WIN if they just focused and played a full game. Capers' teams would have cried and hung their heads. By the end of the season, we beat the Packers at Lambeau in a picture-perfect manner in terms of the weather and playing that team in their house, we beat the Titans who think we always roll over for them, let our guard down vs. Oak, but then we wore out the Bears when they needed to beat us, and demoralized the Jags to the point of their defense just letting Slaton walk into the end zone at the end of the game.

In the past, we did good just to win the last game. And we thought it meant something for the the next season. Last season, we went a streak that I think got us over that obstacle that had always stood in the path of the Texans. Consistent wins.

I still don't know what has happened between our last regular season game, and now, that has made so many people so distraught and gloomy. Maybe it's reverse psychology? If we trash out the coach, and throw out threats, he'll magically get the job done? I did that crap back in the middle part of the season, continuing through the Cincy and Detroit games (go look at my posts back then) and almost every freaking person on this board was telling me that I was a doom-n-gloomer, depressing to listen to, that I was just so negative about the prospects of beating the teams we would face after the Bengals and Lions. My rep points dropped, people left messages telling me I needed to shut up and just enjoy the wins over those two teams. I guess it's en vogue to be a rain cloud right now. I have the worst timing, I guess. LOL.

So after my rants on why Kubiak can't do anything right, and that Schaub was never going to be anything more than a bench warmer with injury problems, I'll be darned if those guys didn't go out there and string together all those wins, to salvage practically the entire second half of the season. Not just a single game at the end of the year. Almost half the season. I took the advice of those people who criticized my behavior, and so I'm dispensing a little of that medicine right now.

Keep your chins up (for those who have double-chins). :pirate:

drewmar74
05-05-2009, 05:08 PM
I just threw up in my mouth!

QFT.

I'm so not down with any of the names on that list. I'd just assume have Gary, thanks.

Mr. White
05-05-2009, 05:19 PM
Playoffs or bust.

The only exception should be if we win 10-12 games and miss the playoffs by some odd circumstance.

I'm of the opinion that if we don't at least show improvement every year, then the coach should be on the hotseat. And a 2nd straight 8-8 season wasn't an improvement.

You're right...

Belichick should have totally been on the hotseat after failing to live up to 16-0 again...

I mean...Dude won a whole 5 games less AND missed the play-offs...Screw a hot seat...fire his ass...

One sentence (the bolded one) taken out of context sure makes for a good strawman argument.

If you would have quoted the rest of the post, then you would have been agreeing with it. Belichick qualifies as the exception.

Specnatz
05-05-2009, 05:24 PM
And I think it's obvious that the guy spent those three years focusing only on the offense, and the defense was neglected--It was left to rot. Maybe letting it rot was the best thing to do at the time.

Which on one hand, a fan can be angry about that. But on the other hand, it's actually the only way to do things. I mean...seriously, there is no way a man can change everything all at once. And Kubiak, IMO, did what he does best: Offense.

Every since Gary became the head coach he has drafted Defense in the first round. So maybe I am not understand how obvious it is that he left the defense to rot or how he is just now shifting his attention to that side of the ball. Maybe you could explain that to me so I am in the obvious crowd.

Thorn
05-05-2009, 05:26 PM
Unless for no apparent reason whatsoever, the Texans take a horrible turn for the worse this year, I don't think Kubes is on the hot seat this year. Next year might be different though. Except for Rosencopter we might well have been 9-7 last year. Baring the unforseen, I don't think expecting 10-6 this year is unreasonable. Even so, I think Kubiac is safe for this season and starting the next one.

The Texans are a much better team under Kubiac, I just don't see where anyone can argue that particular fact.

Ole Miss Texan
05-05-2009, 05:31 PM
Every since Gary became the head coach he has drafted Defense in the first round. So maybe I am not understand how obvious it is that he left the defense to rot or how he is just now shifting his attention to that side of the ball. Maybe you could explain that to me so I am in the obvious crowd.

My view is that Kubiak focused on what he does best and that's offense. Like you said, since he was here 3 of our 4 1st round picks has gone defense and 2 2nd rounders have gone to the defense and the other 2 were traded for a franchise-capable quarterback. So I think he spent a lot of the early picks on Defense b/c they were (a) rated higher than other players (b) they were considered needs and (c) the earlier 'D' players are typically better than those drafted later.

This suposedly allowed Kubiak to focus his attention on the Offense, teaching them, getting no names like Rosenfels, Walter, Brisiel, etc. and working on that. Early draft capital and some "big" free agent signings went to the D to "tide" over some of the gap in talent... and allow those coaches on that side more resources to make the D work... that didn't transpire. I don't think I explained my thoughts too well so you'll have to read my mind for the rest. Maybe Kubiak wanted to throw the 'D' some bones so he could spend most of his time on offense?:)

TimeKiller
05-05-2009, 05:40 PM
Well, if you can make a potent offense out of mid rounders why not spend your big time upgrade on defense defense defense?

danger6
05-05-2009, 05:42 PM
I don't think I explained my thoughts too well so you'll have to read my mind for the rest.

Got chicken on the mind? Thanks for the free lunch . . . I just found your post on the Inside The Loop section. (No Sports Talk Allowed) rep.

Second Honeymoon
05-05-2009, 07:51 PM
I just threw up in my mouth!

herm edwards has done more in his career than Kubiak, but that doesnt matter because its all about being mr.homer and acting like Kubiak is some golden god who is beyond reproach. hell, why not build a statue of the guy outside the stadium. after all 8-8 is the litmus test for the Sunshine Crowd.

whatever, the Houston fanbase is embarassing at times. the most myopic clueless, carebear, bandwagonning fans in existence....building statues of losers and running winners out of town....same as it ever was

dale, why dont you go read some of the posts you wrote making excuse after bleeping excuse for YKW. if you do that you will realize that your ability to be objective about your own team is seriously lacking...but call us charlatans for being realistic and demanding results. God forbid we field a winning team.

Joe Texan
05-05-2009, 07:59 PM
jshabang

Dude Kubes seat is cooler than yours

thunderkyss
05-05-2009, 08:08 PM
I think we've kinda got off track here.

I doubt there are any fans here, that aren't expecting a play-off appearance. I'm not surprised to hear that McNair expects play-offs, and I'd be very disappointed, if Gary Kubiak, and the team he fields aren't expecting a SuperBowl win.

So for all the guys disappointed with the mediocre expectations of some of us fans..... I think you're way off base.

Now, to say that Kubiak should be fired, if we don't make the play-offs, or if we don't finish better than 8-8...... doesn't make a lot of sense. We should be looking at our team, and determining if we are improving, or not. & Wins & Losses are not always a good guage to go by.

For example, the New Orleans Saints. In 2006, they went to the NFC Championship game. But they aren't a better team today, than they were then. Streaky Offense, and blah defense.

I think we are.

We win games at home... period. We move the ball. We are zone blocking. We've got an offensive system. We've got three bona-fide pro-bowlers from the 2006 draft.

those are things we can look at, and guage if we are better/worse than we were in 2006.

Someone mentioned we were 2-10 against the Colts & Titans in the last 3 years. That's an area we need to improve. Someone else mentioned that we need to win on the road. We need to improve our redzone performance on both sides of the ball. We need to cut down on turn-overs.

I want to win the SuperBowl. I think this team is capable of doing it. But if we don't, I would be happy with this team, if we were able to do all those other things. There are a thousand things that could happen, that would throw us off course..... a hurricane can ruin Reliant, and we'll have to play all our home games in Oklahoma.

who knows.

Now, someone else mentioned Kubiak and his gaffes....... I think IlliniJen is pretty vocal about them. To me, all that shows is that Kubiak wasn't ready to be a head coach in 2006. & there's nothing wrong with that. We should've known. He was the OC, and that's apparent, because of what has done here in Houston. But Shanahan managed the games in Denver, down to calling the plays and what not.

Those are the things that Kubiak needs to work on. Just like Belichick. We could fire him, and let him move on to a division rival (Tennessee perhaps) and let him utilize what he learned against us. I think it is totally possible for a Sean Peyton, or Mike Smith to take this team, and win right away. But they couldn't have done that 3 years ago.......

TEXANRED
05-05-2009, 08:57 PM
Unless for no apparent reason whatsoever, the Texans take a horrible turn for the worse this year, I don't think Kubes is on the hot seat this year. Next year might be different though. Except for Rosencopter we might well have been 9-7 last year. Baring the unforseen, I don't think expecting 10-6 this year is unreasonable. Even so, I think Kubiac is safe for this season and starting the next one.

The Texans are a much better team under Kubiac, I just don't see where anyone can argue that particular fact.

I wouldn't say stuff like that seeing how this is practically the same schedule that we went 2-14 on when expecting to go to the playoffs. (trade out the AFC North for the AFC East)

And would you look at that, another over achieving run first throw second QB will be coming out in the draft.

PhilpW
05-05-2009, 09:20 PM
He's not on the hotseat now, but .500 or less going into December he'll feel the heat. There are no excuses this year, we have a potent offense, (must improve in the red zone), and an aggressive defensive coordinator. The players are there, it's up to the coaches to get them in position to win and that's the head coaches responsibility. I don't want to see a coaching carousel, but the time has come to succeed.

Specnatz
05-05-2009, 09:54 PM
herm edwards has done more in his career than Kubiak, but that doesnt matter because its all about being mr.homer and acting like Kubiak is some golden god who is beyond reproach. hell, why not build a statue of the guy outside the stadium. after all 8-8 is the litmus test for the Sunshine Crowd.

whatever, the Houston fanbase is embarassing at times. the most myopic clueless, carebear, bandwagonning fans in existence....building statues of losers and running winners out of town....same as it ever was

dale, why dont you go read some of the posts you wrote making excuse after bleeping excuse for YKW. if you do that you will realize that your ability to be objective about your own team is seriously lacking...but call us charlatans for being realistic and demanding results. God forbid we field a winning team.

Coming from a person who at the beginning of last season was still blowing vy's horn and saying you would still take him over Mario and midway through Kubiaks second season you wanted him run out on a rail after being tar and feathered i will take Dale's view over hate any day.

As far as Herm goes he got worse at both stops he was at not better. Just because a guy has a winning season does not mean he is a great coach. Barry Switzer won a Super Bowl.

SH you saying anyone can not be objective is :potkettle: Oh and bringing up YKW is well, flat out pathetic. A lot of people were wrong about that, just because you got it right is no reason to keep bring it up. Just remember you were more wrong about Mario versus vy than most.

Football is not black&white in terms of improving versus wins and losses. I would rather take things in the context of how they happened versus saying if we do not make playoffs fire everyone.

GP
05-06-2009, 12:27 AM
Every since Gary became the head coach he has drafted Defense in the first round. So maybe I am not understand how obvious it is that he left the defense to rot or how he is just now shifting his attention to that side of the ball. Maybe you could explain that to me so I am in the obvious crowd.

I meant that Kubiak didn't micro-manage the defense. He let Richard Smith have the run of the place, let him do his thang.

I don't think Kubiak was blind to the poor play of our defense--which some are saying should be one of the reasons why Kubiak is a dunce. I think he put his own personal energy and time and focus upon getting the offense rocking and rolling. And he was waiting for better timing to get the defense on the same level as the offense.

The draft picks used on defense was Gary's way of doing what he could, to stack up some ammo, for this very moment--The moment when he could move in the d-coord that he had wanted (or had at least liked a lot) all along.

Specnatz
05-06-2009, 09:50 AM
I meant that Kubiak didn't micro-manage the defense. He let Richard Smith have the run of the place, let him do his thang.

I don't think Kubiak was blind to the poor play of our defense--which some are saying should be one of the reasons why Kubiak is a dunce. I think he put his own personal energy and time and focus upon getting the offense rocking and rolling. And he was waiting for better timing to get the defense on the same level as the offense.

The draft picks used on defense was Gary's way of doing what he could, to stack up some ammo, for this very moment--The moment when he could move in the d-coord that he had wanted (or had at least liked a lot) all along.

Of course he is not going to micro manage the defense, it is not his thing. The only coach I know of that was brought up on one side of the ball who can micro manage both is Bill Belichick. This year they, New England, does not even have an Offensive Coordinator. Belichick was brought on the defensive side of the ball and when the defense has struggled he has gotten involved. No other coach I can think of has done this. Hopefully Coach Kubiak lets Jr take over more of the play calling this year so he can be more of a team manager than trying to do that and call plays. which i know a lot of folks on here has been very critical of, and I think it would help the team. Just from me recall of coaches in the past who have said they became better HC when they let the OC do their job and they could pay attention to the whole team.

As far as Kubiak being blind to the poor play of the defense, of course not. But I think at first he thought it was because of the poor play of the players C&C had brought in versus coaching. As he got more and more of his own players in and the defense still sucks he realize that not only was it the players but the coaching as well. Hence the limiting of Richards ability to call certain plays at the end of last season. Then during the offseason he got rid of DC, DL, and second coaches and with the jettisoning of Greenwood, Green, and Weaver with a total of $9 million in dead money. I think it is more about learning as a HC about defenses, than waiting or ignoring the defense.

Battle Red Flash
05-06-2009, 10:01 AM
http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/101533-texans-owner-puts-kubiak-on-hot-seat
Even a classy owner like mcnair has a breakin point.......and I love it...hold him accountable........kubes is toast if the texans come out with another brain fart start like last season....:whip:

While I do think Kubes is on a warm seat if they don't make the playoffs, the team could go 10-6, and not make it. Don't think they'd fire him then.

-- Also, I don't like making excuses for anyone, BUT..... if any coach has an excuse for a bad start last year, it's Kubes. I do not agree it was a brain fart. Playing very good teams, and mentally fighting the hurricane would sap any team.

TEXANRED
05-06-2009, 12:59 PM
I want Kubiak to be a winner here in Houston. I really do. I think it makes a great hometown boy does good story. A man in the shadow of the Luv Ya Blu era comes back home and transforms a last place team into a champion. Thats what I want. Badly.

But the reality is we are going into year 4. In his first 3 years he has gone from 6-10 to two consecutive 8-8 seasons. He has mantained a losing record in the AFC South going 2-10 against the Colts and Titans. He has also proven that he was no better in year 3 than he was in year 1 with clock management, challenges, or decision making.

This is the most talent that this team has ever had. He has assembled a star studded cast of coachs with Ray Rhodes, Alex Gibbs, and now Bruce Matthews.

I wrote in another thread that this is the year of no excusses b/c there are none. To steal a line from Rick Flair, If you wanna be the man then you gotta beat the man.

Its playoffs or bust.

TheRealJoker
05-06-2009, 01:03 PM
Everyone expects playoffs. Kubes wont necessarily be on the hot seat if we dont make the playoffs as long as its a situation where we win 10 or 11 games and dont get in. I think the point is that just being competitive isn't gonna cut it anymore. We've gotta be winners, if we aren't winners then we've gotta find someone who will make us winners.

Right now Frank Bush is gonna decide whether Kubes gets fired or gets an extension. We had the opportunity to make a run at some solid DC candidates but Kubes chose "his guy". The ability to make that decision means Mcnair has confidence in Kubes, now its up to Kubes to make sure that confidence wasn't misplaced.

Second Honeymoon
05-06-2009, 01:22 PM
Everyone expects playoffs. Kubes wont necessarily be on the hot seat if we dont make the playoffs as long as its a situation where we win 10 or 11 games and dont get in. I think the point is that just being competitive isn't gonna cut it anymore. We've gotta be winners, if we aren't winners then we've gotta find someone who will make us winners.

Right now Frank Bush is gonna decide whether Kubes gets fired or gets an extension. We had the opportunity to make a run at some solid DC candidates but Kubes chose "his guy". The ability to make that decision means Mcnair has confidence in Kubes, now its up to Kubes to make sure that confidence wasn't misplaced.

TRJ, great post. The emboldened text couldn't be more accurate. If Bush pretty much sucks like RS did, then Kubiak must be held accountable for not looking outside his circle of friends/Denver network at someone with more credential, experience, and established scheme.

As for the record, I personally think 9-7 is good enough all things considered. Not great, but probably enough to merit another year, playoffs or no playoffs. Now if they are 8-8 or worse, we have to seriously look at other HC situations or we reward losing with a new contract OR have a lame duck coach in 2010. Both scenarios would be pretty bad for the club. With the amount of proven HC talent out there currently without a job, the timing would be pretty good. The thing is that most of the top HC talent would necessitate firing Kubiak and Rick Smith because they would want to bring in their own guy or be the GM themselves.

I like Kubiak. He is a bit too much of a flatliner for my tastes, but he has done adequate during his time here and unlike the previous regime, we have seen players improve with coaching. His failures have been tied to keeping people around that suck (greenwood, carr, richard smith and pretty much every defensive coach, weaver)

Texecutioner
05-06-2009, 01:35 PM
I f the Texans don't make the playoffs and Kubiak is fired then I'll be totally fine with that. There have been plenty of teams that were in the cellar when we got Kubiak and that have been in the cellar even after that and rebounded very quickly and made it to the post season. I don't have a problem with any team firing a coach if he has been there for 4 seasons and not had one post season appearance.

Now if the Texans go 10-6 and don't get it, then I won't have a problem with Kubes getting ONE more season to make it to the post season since 10-6 is a good enough record to get you in the post season in plenty of seasons, but I wouldn't grant him any more than a one year extension off of that and in that next season it's playoffs or bust.

The Pencil Neck
05-06-2009, 01:49 PM
There's really a wide range of possibilities here.

If we finish between 0-16 to 6-10, then I think Kubiak is gone.

If we finish 7-9, I think Kubiak is probably gone but if we really had a lot of injuries to star players, he might get another year.

If we finish 8-8, I think it's possible for Kubiak to be gone. But the team has to look like it hasn't made any progress and/or there was no rash of major injuries to major players. If we finish 8-8 and we make the playoffs, then Kubiak stays.

If we finish 9-7, I expect Kubiak to stay unless the team looks really bad down the stretch. If we make the playoffs, Kubiak stays.

If we finish 10-6, Kubiak stays unless possibly if we started 10-0 and then lost the final 6 in spectacularly horrible fashion. The playoffs don't matter. If we make it in or not is irrelevant if we win 10+ games.

At least, that's the way I see it. I think there's a very good chance that Kubiak stays.

Polo
05-06-2009, 01:56 PM
There's really a wide range of possibilities here.

If we finish between 0-16 to 6-10, then I think Kubiak is gone.

If we finish 7-9, I think Kubiak is probably gone but if we really had a lot of injuries to star players, he might get another year.

If we finish 8-8, I think it's possible for Kubiak to be gone. But the team has to look like it hasn't made any progress and/or there was no rash of major injuries to major players. If we finish 8-8 and we make the playoffs, then Kubiak stays.

If we finish 9-7, I expect Kubiak to stay unless the team looks really bad down the stretch. If we make the playoffs, Kubiak stays.

If we finish 10-6, Kubiak stays unless possibly if we started 10-0 and then lost the final 6 in spectacularly horrible fashion. The playoffs don't matter. If we make it in or not is irrelevant if we win 10+ games.

At least, that's the way I see it. I think there's a very good chance that Kubiak stays.

Basically it depends on how the team plays.

Polo
05-06-2009, 02:10 PM
One sentence (the bolded one) taken out of context sure makes for a good strawman argument.

If you would have quoted the rest of the post, then you would have been agreeing with it. Belichick qualifies as the exception.

You are the one speaking in generalities. And Belichick is no exception and I'm not even sure how you can logically say that...

All coaches will eventually have a season where they win less games than the year before.

My point was that the record should have less to do with it than the way the team played. There are more variables than just the record. You say that the second str8 8-8 season wasn't an improvement and I disagree...I think that the way we played was improved even though the record didn't reflect it.

El Tejano
05-06-2009, 02:13 PM
Kubes is on the hot seat but now it's cooling down.

Specnatz
05-06-2009, 02:56 PM
TRJ, great post. The emboldened text couldn't be more accurate. If Bush pretty much sucks like RS did, then Kubiak must be held accountable for not looking outside his circle of friends/Denver network at someone with more credential, experience, and established scheme.

As for the record, I personally think 9-7 is good enough all things considered. Not great, but probably enough to merit another year, playoffs or no playoffs. Now if they are 8-8 or worse, we have to seriously look at other HC situations or we reward losing with a new contract OR have a lame duck coach in 2010. Both scenarios would be pretty bad for the club. With the amount of proven HC talent out there currently without a job, the timing would be pretty good. The thing is that most of the top HC talent would necessitate firing Kubiak and Rick Smith because they would want to bring in their own guy or be the GM themselves.

I like Kubiak. He is a bit too much of a flatliner for my tastes, but he has done adequate during his time here and unlike the previous regime, we have seen players improve with coaching. His failures have been tied to keeping people around that suck (greenwood, carr, richard smith and pretty much every defensive coach, weaver)

This is the first I can recall you say you like Kubiak. I know you preferr firery guys versus even keel guys.

As far as keeping certain players like Weaver and Greenwood, it is not like he had much of a choice. Cutting the players prior to this year would have caused a lot of cap issues. Blame C&C for Greenwood and I will also blame Weaver's high contract on Casserly and RS since Kubiak got a guy both said would help the defense. Yes Kubiak is the HC so it falls to him but a GM is supposed to know what the market value is for a player. Geen is squarely on Kubiak and Sherman, Kubiak is the HC so he takes the blame for that deal.

Kubiak on offense has been leaps and bounds above anything we had previous, now he needs to let Jr call the plays so he can concentrate on game management. While he has improved in each of his 3 years he still needs to get far better.

GP
05-06-2009, 04:27 PM
So it all comes down to a "he's gotta' do this," or "he's gotta' do that."

I've seen a lot of variations on what Gary Kubiak has to do in order to remain the HC of the Texans.

I will once again say that you guys are projecting your own anxiousness upon the future of Gary Kubiak. We're supposed to make the playoffs, and so if we don't...then his ass needs to get fired.

I just think that's silliness. I mean, let's all step away from our pet point of view for a second, re-scan this thread, and try to hold a straight face as we re-read all the different criteria that's been proposed. IMO, some of you have stated what you WANT or EXPECT and you're hell-bent on backing it up against the criticisms of others until the cows come home (such is life on a message board, I suppose).

I think McNair is a Pat Bowlen type of owner. He wants the club to remain profitable, keep a level of dignity with its players and coaches, be a good face to the city it plays in, and maintain a level of sanity that isn't found on other teams.

He wants to create a family, a long-term tenure for a guy he feels isn't screwing things up too badly. There have been some other coaches who have higher profiles than Kubiak, and they have royally sucked and screwed things up in a hurry. There's a sense of wisdom in saying "I'm not going to fire my head coach for not making the playoffs when I like the direction he has taken this team."

The only solid theory I have seen is Vinny's theory. McNair will trust, and will trust sometimes beyond the normal limits (see HWMNBN for an example).

I think Gary Kubiak, like his QB (Schaub), finds a way to get over the top this year. I think it's going to be an even better year than we could even imagine. Just a hunch.

thunderkyss
05-06-2009, 06:38 PM
The draft picks used on defense was Gary's way of doing what he could, to stack up some ammo, for this very moment--The moment when he could move in the d-coord that he had wanted (or had at least liked a lot) all along.

I think that was pretty much saying Richard, we've given you the talent, you can't use that excuse anymore.

thunderkyss
05-06-2009, 06:43 PM
There have been plenty of teams that were in the cellar when we got Kubiak and that have been in the cellar even after that and rebounded very quickly and made it to the post season.

Who?

mattieuk
05-06-2009, 06:53 PM
I don't think this is, or should be a make or break season for Kubiak.

He came into a poor football team, and has changed us. We have one of the most potent passing games in the NFL. Our ZBS has become effective, big play creating and and great weapon to have. Our drafting has been pretty darned good, and we've picked up some steals in the later rounds.

All we need is Gary to get us a defense and we're rocking and rolling. Playoff or no playoffs.

TEXANRED
05-06-2009, 08:27 PM
So it all comes down to a "he's gotta' do this," or "he's gotta' do that."

I've seen a lot of variations on what Gary Kubiak has to do in order to remain the HC of the Texans.

I will once again say that you guys are projecting your own anxiousness upon the future of Gary Kubiak. We're supposed to make the playoffs, and so if we don't...then his ass needs to get fired.

I just think that's silliness. I mean, let's all step away from our pet point of view for a second, re-scan this thread, and try to hold a straight face as we re-read all the different criteria that's been proposed. IMO, some of you have stated what you WANT or EXPECT and you're hell-bent on backing it up against the criticisms of others until the cows come home (such is life on a message board, I suppose).

I think McNair is a Pat Bowlen type of owner. He wants the club to remain profitable, keep a level of dignity with its players and coaches, be a good face to the city it plays in, and maintain a level of sanity that isn't found on other teams.

He wants to create a family, a long-term tenure for a guy he feels isn't screwing things up too badly. There have been some other coaches who have higher profiles than Kubiak, and they have royally sucked and screwed things up in a hurry. There's a sense of wisdom in saying "I'm not going to fire my head coach for not making the playoffs when I like the direction he has taken this team."

The only solid theory I have seen is Vinny's theory. McNair will trust, and will trust sometimes beyond the normal limits (see HWMNBN for an example).

I think Gary Kubiak, like his QB (Schaub), finds a way to get over the top this year. I think it's going to be an even better year than we could even imagine. Just a hunch.

OK, so here is a fair question. If it were left up to you, how long would you give him and under what circumstances would you give him the boot?

TheRealJoker
05-06-2009, 08:27 PM
I don't think this is, or should be a make or break season for Kubiak.

He came into a poor football team, and has changed us. We have one of the most potent passing games in the NFL. Our ZBS has become effective, big play creating and and great weapon to have. Our drafting has been pretty darned good, and we've picked up some steals in the later rounds.

All we need is Gary to get us a defense and we're rocking and rolling. Playoff or no playoffs.

That's why Frank Bush is the key. We could've had a guy like Sean Mcdermott or maybe even Greg Williams. One guy is projected to be a good DC with his Jim Johnson lineage while the other had a track record of success.

But Kubiak chose HIS guy and he's gonna take credit for that decision whether its good or bad in the form of receiving his contract extension or pink slip.

TEXANRED
05-06-2009, 08:29 PM
I don't think this is, or should be a make or break season for Kubiak.

He came into a poor football team, and has changed us. We have one of the most potent passing games in the NFL. Our ZBS has become effective, big play creating and and great weapon to have. Our drafting has been pretty darned good, and we've picked up some steals in the later rounds.

All we need is Gary to get us a defense and we're rocking and rolling. Playoff or no playoffs.

Gary Kubiak is fantastic at scouting and evaluation. I think he would make a damn good GM.

His coaching however............eh.

Lucky
05-06-2009, 08:30 PM
There have been plenty of teams that were in the cellar when we got Kubiak and that have been in the cellar even after that and rebounded very quickly and made it to the post season.

Who?
The 7 other "reigning" division cellar dwellers when Kubiak took the job were:

AFC East: Jets
AFC North: Ravens
AFC West: Raiders
NFC East: Eagles
NFC North: Packers
NFC South: Saints
NFC West: Cardinals

The only 2005 cellar dwellers not to make the playoffs over the past 3 seasons are the Raiders and the Texans.

Runner
05-06-2009, 08:57 PM
The 7 other "reigning" division cellar dwellers when Kubiak took the job were:

AFC East: Jets
AFC North: Ravens
AFC West: Raiders
NFC East: Eagles
NFC North: Packers
NFC South: Saints
NFC West: Cardinals

The only 2005 cellar dwellers not to make the playoffs over the past 3 seasons are the Raiders and the Texans.

Beyond that there are teams like Atlanta and Miami that made great turnarounds in less time. In the case of these two in just the last year.

Specnatz
05-06-2009, 09:00 PM
The 7 other "reigning" division cellar dwellers when Kubiak took the job were:

AFC East: Jets
AFC North: Ravens
AFC West: Raiders
NFC East: Eagles
NFC North: Packers
NFC South: Saints
NFC West: Cardinals

The only 2005 cellar dwellers not to make the playoffs over the past 3 seasons are the Raiders and the Texans.

Beyond that there are teams like Atlanta and Miami that made great turnarounds in less time. In the case of these two in just the last year.

Then you have the saints and Packers who went up and then went back down and in the case of the saints they are not looking at recovering (IMO) one year wonders.

Oh and of the teams listed who were in the playoffs with-in the previous two years before Kubiak took over?

Lucky
05-06-2009, 09:06 PM
I knew better than braking the Sunshine Club's 5th Commandment. My bad.

ChampionTexan
05-06-2009, 09:10 PM
The 7 other "reigning" division cellar dwellers when Kubiak took the job were:

AFC East: Jets
AFC North: Ravens
AFC West: Raiders
NFC East: Eagles
NFC North: Packers
NFC South: Saints
NFC West: Cardinals

The only 2005 cellar dwellers not to make the playoffs over the past 3 seasons are the Raiders and the Texans.

Actually, in '05 the 49ers finished a game behind the Cardinals (4-12 for them vs. 5-11 for the Cards), and the Browns were tied for last with the Ravens at 6-10. So there's two more "Cellar dwellers" not to make the playoffs, and the Cards don't qualify for that title anymore. Additionally, the Pack and the Jets were only one year removed from playoff appearances with the Jets going 10-6 in 2004 to gain a wildcard, and the Pack doing the same to win the NFC North.

This stuff is kind of interesting, but it doesn't tell you much. Anything can be skewed to make a point.

NitroGSXR
05-06-2009, 09:29 PM
The 7 other "reigning" division cellar dwellers when Kubiak took the job were:

AFC East: Jets
AFC North: Ravens
AFC West: Raiders
NFC East: Eagles
NFC North: Packers
NFC South: Saints
NFC West: Cardinals

The only 2005 cellar dwellers not to make the playoffs over the past 3 seasons are the Raiders and the Texans.
Wow.

Information is power and you just gave me a lot of information right here. I privately scoffed at every post/paper/link saying it's do-or-die time for Kubiak until this post.

I think I need to think about Kubiak's measureables that matter some more. Maybe there's some merit to this thread after all. This thread has taken a life of its own unsupported by the article in the first post.

Runner
05-06-2009, 09:34 PM
I knew better than braking the Sunshine Club's 5th Commandment. My bad.

Me too. No team has ever been as bad as the Texans. No team has faced the challenges the Texans have had to face. Ever.

The "right way" seems to be to move slow in a fast paced league. If so, two 8-8 seasons in a row is nice and slow - success!

Runner
05-06-2009, 09:40 PM
Then you have the saints and Packers who went up and then went back down ...

Additionally, the Pack and the Jets were only one year removed from playoff appearances with the Jets going 10-6 in 2004 to gain a wildcard, and the Pack doing the same to win the NFC North.


And the Texans were 7-9 one year removed from their collapse. Three years of Kubiak has gained a win? It seems like taking that team and replacing David Carr would have sent them to the heights of 8-8 too.

I know, I know - that's different somehow.

Lucky
05-06-2009, 09:40 PM
Actually, in '05 the 49ers finished a game behind the Cardinals (4-12 for them vs. 5-11 for the Cards), and the Browns were tied for last with the Ravens at 6-10. So there's two more "Cellar dwellers" not to make the playoffs, and the Cards don't qualify for that title anymore.

This stuff is kind of interesting, but it doesn't tell you much. Anything can be skewed to make a point.
You're right. The Cards finished last in the NFC West in '06, not '05. Then, Arizona replaced their head coach in 2007, and went to the Super Bowl in 2008.

As you said, anything can be skewed to make a point.

Since Gary Kubiak has taken over as head coach, 24 NFL teams have made playoff appearances. 8 have not.

The list, please:

Buffalo Bills
Cincinnati Bengals
Cleveland Browns
Oakland Raiders
Detroit Lions
St. Louis Rams
San Francisco 49ers
And (drum roll please).....
Your Houston Texans texanpride

TheRealJoker
05-06-2009, 09:43 PM
You're right. The Cards finished last in the NFC West in '06, not '05. Then, Arizona replaced their head coach in 2007, and went to the Super Bowl in 2008.

As you said, anything can be skewed to make a point.

Since Gary Kubiak has taken over as head coach, 24 NFL teams have made playoff appearances. 8 have not.

The list, please:

Buffalo Bills
Cincinnati Bengals
Cleveland Browns
Oakland Raiders
Detroit Lions
St. Louis Rams
San Francisco 49ers
And (drum roll please).....
Your Houston Texans texanpride

Dick Jauron has had 3 consecutive 7-9 seasons. Wonder how Bills fans feel about that?

thunderkyss
05-06-2009, 11:33 PM
The 7 other "reigning" division cellar dwellers when Kubiak took the job were:

AFC East: Jets

10-6, 4-12,9-7 23-25 over 3 years. Mangini is gone. He will do a better job in Cleveland, than he did in NY, guaranteed. That team is older, and less talented now, than it was when he took over.

AFC North: Ravens

11-5, 5-11, 13-3 29-19 over 3 years. Arguably the best defense over the last decade. you can if you want, but I can't compare our team to theirs.

AFC West: Raiders

pass

NFC East: Eagles

Again, this was a pretty solid team on both sides of the ball, for a decade. They had one bad year........ not really comparable.

NFC North: Packers

6-10, 13-3, 8-8 27-21 over 3 years. This team has been building for what, 6 years now? They were just waiting for their QB to move on, so they can move on. Hey, didn't their coach for 2006 get fired?

NFC South: Saints

10-6, 8-8, 7-9 25-23 over 3 years. It may be just my opinion, but I think this team is worse than it was in 2006. They benefited from playing in the NFC, and in the NFC South.

NFC West: Cardinals

5-11, 8-8, 9-7 22-26 over 3 years. Matt Lienart...... bust. Levi Brown..... 1st round right tackle...... Cromartie........ I like him. But for the most part, they got to the Superbowl because of the guys who were already on that team in 2005. They got to the Superbowl, by winning their division at 9-7. I don't think that team is much better than the 2005 team.

The only 2005 cellar dwellers not to make the playoffs over the past 3 seasons are the Raiders and the Texans.

Arizona won't get to the play-offs in 2009. Neither will the Saints, or the Jets. I think we will. & I think we'll be going to the play-offs for the next 10 years, as division champs. But if that don't happen this year, I'm confident it will next year, with Kubiak. We're a better team than we were 3 years ago, and if we stay the course, we will be a better team 3 years from now.

ObsiWan
05-07-2009, 12:32 AM
Actually, in '05 the 49ers finished a game behind the Cardinals (4-12 for them vs. 5-11 for the Cards), and the Browns were tied for last with the Ravens at 6-10. So there's two more "Cellar dwellers" not to make the playoffs, and the Cards don't qualify for that title anymore. Additionally, the Pack and the Jets were only one year removed from playoff appearances with the Jets going 10-6 in 2004 to gain a wildcard, and the Pack doing the same to win the NFC North.

This stuff is kind of interesting, but it doesn't tell you much. Anything can be skewed to make a point.

I was about to post the same thing.
...it's not like Lucky to miss that badly.

Polo
05-07-2009, 08:11 AM
10-6, 4-12,9-7 23-25 over 3 years. Mangini is gone. He will do a better job in Cleveland, than he did in NY, guaranteed. That team is older, and less talented now, than it was when he took over.

11-5, 5-11, 13-3 29-19 over 3 years. Arguably the best defense over the last decade. you can if you want, but I can't compare our team to theirs.

pass

Again, this was a pretty solid team on both sides of the ball, for a decade. They had one bad year........ not really comparable.

6-10, 13-3, 8-8 27-21 over 3 years. This team has been building for what, 6 years now? They were just waiting for their QB to move on, so they can move on. Hey, didn't their coach for 2006 get fired?

10-6, 8-8, 7-9 25-23 over 3 years. It may be just my opinion, but I think this team is worse than it was in 2006. They benefited from playing in the NFC, and in the NFC South.

5-11, 8-8, 9-7 22-26 over 3 years. Matt Lienart...... bust. Levi Brown..... 1st round right tackle...... Cromartie........ I like him. But for the most part, they got to the Superbowl because of the guys who were already on that team in 2005. They got to the Superbowl, by winning their division at 9-7. I don't think that team is much better than the 2005 team.


Arizona won't get to the play-offs in 2009. Neither will the Saints, or the Jets. I think we will. & I think we'll be going to the play-offs for the next 10 years, as division champs. But if that don't happen this year, I'm confident it will next year, with Kubiak. We're a better team than we were 3 years ago, and if we stay the course, we will be a better team 3 years from now.

Excellent post yo...

BigBull17
05-07-2009, 08:21 AM
If Bush pretty much sucks like RS did, then Kubiak must be held accountable for not looking outside his circle of friends/Denver network at someone with more credential, experience, and established scheme.

Agreed.


As for the record, I personally think 9-7 is good enough all things considered. Not great, but probably enough to merit another year, playoffs or no playoffs.

Anything above .500 is golden. Anything below you have to evaluate his job.

His failures have been tied to keeping people around that suck (greenwood, carr, richard smith and pretty much every defensive coach, weaver)

Not a whole lot you can do. It cost too much to cut them. Carr is the exception and the big blunder, but that was the only way he could get his job, so can't fault the man for that.

GP
05-07-2009, 08:40 AM
OK, so here is a fair question. If it were left up to you, how long would you give him and under what circumstances would you give him the boot?

On your question of "How long would you give him"...How about this: There's no equation that you can calculate in regards to how long a coach is going to stay as your HC. Variables, in the NFL, change pretty dynamically in regards to things like hurricanes, injuries to your key players, the schedule giving you a raw deal every now and then, etc.

On your question of "Under what circumstances would you give him the boot"...I'd like to think that it's a really simplistic way of evaluating the team:


1. Are we drafting in the top 5 every season? If so, there's a serious issue going on in the deep recesses of the team's facilities.

2. Are we able to put ourselves into position to win a game, and if we are, what's the talent level of that opposing team we are in position to beat? If we're out of games by the start of the 2nd quarter, then there's some serious issues going on with the coaching and planning, etc.

3. Are we scoring points, or are we squeaking by on lucky bounces and blown coverages and getting points in garbage time?

That's not the whole list, but it's a glance at what I think are some of the things that indicate the HC is steady and reliable, or out of touch with the surrounding environment.

Gary Kubiak is far from the best coach in the league, so I will not sit here and act like he's a god or anything. In fact, I was right there with SH and IlliniJen before the Lions game and the Bengals game...seething with anger about the condition of our team. But I can say, genuinely, that I was wrong. I should have had more patience with Kubiak, and with Schaub.

The tendency of message board arguments is that people take up a position, and they hold it like they're defending the Alamo. So it shall be.

I just think there's a lot of anxiousness and nervous energy going on right now, and it's causing people to use the "His butt is gone if x, or y, or z happens" card. Maybe that's over-analyzing it, but I can't think of any other reason as to why the mob has turned so violently against the guy all of a sudden. The off-season moves, IMO, were spot-on with no outrageous contracts given to questionably-talented players (like Weaver or Wade). The draft is not being panned by the people who spend their lives studying college players. Our schedule is favorable. Life is good. Or so I thought...

It's not "caving" to be happy with 8-8, btw. Give me 8-8 over 2-14 any day.

I don't see this team regressing. The hurricane, and getting smacked around until the last half of the season, is what made this team hardened enough to take advantage of the breaks they caught with this year's schedule.

Ole Miss Texan
05-07-2009, 09:23 AM
If Bush pretty much sucks like RS did, then Kubiak must be held accountable for not looking outside his circle of friends/Denver network at someone with more credential, experience, and established scheme.
I'm not calling you out or anything, I just genuinely want to know. I keep hearing Kubiak must be accountable for Bush. My question is why? Do we know that Frank Bush was the #1 guy on the list? Do we know Kubiak fought for this guy over getting any other defensive coordinator? I know it was the general concensus that Bush was going to step forward, but what about the other coaches out there we looked at for the DC position?

I'm just saying it wouldn't be right to hold Bush over Kubiak's head if the Texans did their due diligence and talked to a lot of people. What if Kubiak/Smith/McNair wanted a couple other guys to come in but those guys didn't agree so they then went with Bush?

Runner
05-07-2009, 09:24 AM
Arizona won't get to the play-offs in 2009. Neither will the Saints, or the Jets. I think we will. & I think we'll be going to the play-offs for the next 10 years, as division champs. But if that don't happen this year, I'm confident it will next year, with Kubiak. We're a better team than we were 3 years ago, and if we stay the course, we will be a better team 3 years from now.

So let's see. Going to the Super Bowl one year and not making the play-offs (maybe!) the next is not as good as not making the play-offs one year and making them (maybe) the next.

Does anyone question the assumption that building slowly guarantees long term success?

CloakNNNdagger
05-07-2009, 09:25 AM
Dick Jauron has had 3 consecutive 7-9 seasons. Wonder how Bills fans feel about that?

They're hoping against all hopes for their high expectations to be met this year....................."7-9 or bust.":gun:

Vinny
05-07-2009, 09:27 AM
Dick Jauron has had 3 consecutive 7-9 seasons. Wonder how Bills fans feel about that?

lots of their fans are mad about it. Jauron hasn't been able to get any of his teams over the hump, so many in their fan base aren't happy.

GP
05-07-2009, 09:35 AM
I'm not calling you out or anything, I just genuinely want to know. I keep hearing Kubiak must be accountable for Bush. My question is why? Do we know that Frank Bush was the #1 guy on the list? Do we know Kubiak fought for this guy over getting any other defensive coordinator? I know it was the general concensus that Bush was going to step forward, but what about the other coaches out there we looked at for the DC position?

I'm just saying it wouldn't be right to hold Bush over Kubiak's head if the Texans did their due diligence and talked to a lot of people. What if Kubiak/Smith/McNair wanted a couple other guys to come in but those guys didn't agree so they then went with Bush?

Some good questions in that post, Ole Miss.

Specnatz
05-07-2009, 10:16 AM
So let's see. Going to the Super Bowl one year and not making the play-offs (maybe!) the next is not as good as not making the play-offs one year and making them (maybe) the next.

Does anyone question the assumption that building slowly guarantees long term success?

Generally speaking, I would think so. I just do not think that it always mannefest itself that way.

For examble: The Colts .. They had two seasons of 9-7 with a drop to 3-13 (Got Manning and new coach Mora) another 3-13 season ( Edgerrin James [trade of Faulk]). 13-3, 10-6, and then 6-10 (New Coach Dungy and Dwight Freeney) they have been winning ever since.

A lot may say it was a fast rise but not really if you consider that they were up and down a lot before the years I mentioned.

Over the last 24 hours a lot has been posted about what other teams have done. I would rather look at the we had and where we were in regards to players and cap status when Kubiak and then Smith took. Honestly, I think we may have had at the start of 2006 only 3 players on our roster that could start for another team (AJ D-Rob and Pitts). Of course I did not count punter or kicker but I guess I could say we had 4 with with Brown but not our punter. Hell I think the Detroit Lions of last year have twice that and they did not win a single game.

Like I said before it is not a black and white thing in regards to playoffs or bust for Gary Kubiak, they is some gray area. I just want to see the team improving and going in the right direction.

Runner
05-07-2009, 10:27 AM
So if the team goes 14-2 this year I'd consider that a great success. Would the slow rollers consider it a harbinger of collapse next year? I would guess not, and a fast turnaround would become fashionable.

Texans_Chick
05-07-2009, 10:47 AM
My view is here:

Gary Kubiak on the hotseat? No, I don't think so. (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2009/05/gary_kubiak_on_the_hotseat_nop.html)

Sunshine or schleprock? I know some people are either-or. I also think most people's egocentric view of things is that they are the realist and everyone else who disagrees with them is a pessimist or an optimist. I made an attempt at being real, for better or worse.

GP
05-07-2009, 11:22 AM
Generally speaking, I would think so. I just do not think that it always mannefest itself that way.

For examble: The Colts .. They had two seasons of 9-7 with a drop to 3-13 (Got Manning and new coach Mora) another 3-13 season ( Edgerrin James [trade of Faulk]). 13-3, 10-6, and then 6-10 (New Coach Dungy and Dwight Freeney) they have been winning ever since.

A lot may say it was a fast rise but not really if you consider that they were up and down a lot before the years I mentioned.

Over the last 24 hours a lot has been posted about what other teams have done. I would rather look at the we had and where we were in regards to players and cap status when Kubiak and then Smith took. Honestly, I think we may have had at the start of 2006 only 3 players on our roster that could start for another team (AJ D-Rob and Pitts). Of course I did not count punter or kicker but I guess I could say we had 4 with with Brown but not our punter. Hell I think the Detroit Lions of last year have twice that and they did not win a single game.

Like I said before it is not a black and white thing in regards to playoffs or bust for Gary Kubiak, they is some gray area. I just want to see the team improving and going in the right direction.

Good post, at least in terms of it matching up with what I think about this topic.

If we suited up the best Capers Texans team and played it against last year's Kubiak Texans team, and factored in all other variables...I think the Kubiak team runs circles around the Capers team.

If that doesn't help give some perspective to what we had and what we have, then I don't know what will. Kubiak's worse day is equal to Capers' best day, IMO. I know there's some issues with our access to talent, as an expansion team, but still...

Mr. White
05-07-2009, 11:33 AM
You are the one speaking in generalities. And Belichick is no exception and I'm not even sure how you can logically say that...

All coaches will eventually have a season where they win less games than the year before.

My point was that the record should have less to do with it than the way the team played. There are more variables than just the record. You say that the second str8 8-8 season wasn't an improvement and I disagree...I think that the way we played was improved even though the record didn't reflect it.

Belichick comparisons aside, I guess I just look at the bottom line. While I'm sure there are plenty of reasons to think the team is better now, the record doesn't reflect it.

If there's a better indicator than wins and losses as to a head coach's effectiveness, I don't know what it is.

The fact of the matter is that Kubiak is still an unknown commodity as a head coach. I guess 8-8 seasons will do that for a guy. Looks like some of us think he should get a longer rope as a result. I'm just not one of 'em.

Polo
05-07-2009, 11:49 AM
If there's a better indicator than wins and losses as to a head coach's effectiveness, I don't know what it is.

We're talking about a two year time span. Two consecutive seasons of 8-8...

Not a whole career...

Sure wins and loses are a great gauge if you have enough data to compile.

Folks said Belichick sucked too when he started off...Now he's considered a genius...

I do understand your position of "look at the bottom line", but I to me that is kind of lazy analysis...

Let me ask you this question...

Do you think that Kubiak still has his job because he's getting the benefit of the doubt even though his team didn't get any better last year

or

Do you think that he still has his job and the owners confidence because despite the record the organization feels like the team has taken strides forward?

Honestly, I feel like it's option two.

TheRealJoker
05-07-2009, 11:56 AM
We're talking about a two year time span. Two consecutive seasons of 8-8...

Not a whole career...

Sure wins and loses are a great gauge if you have enough data to compile.

Folks said Belichick sucked too when he started off...Now he's considered a genius...

I do understand your position of "look at the bottom line", but I to me that is kind of lazy analysis...

Let me ask you this question...

Do you think that Kubiak still has his job because he's getting the benefit of the doubt even though his team didn't get any better last year

or

Do you think that he still has his job and the owners confidence because despite the record the organization feels like the team has taken strides forward?

Honestly, I feel like it's option two.

I would say its option two because of the extenuating circumstances with Hurricane Ike that played a large part in our rough start along with the fact he's proven that he can develop players on at least one side of the ball.

That's doesn't mean that he's not on the hot seat if he doesn't get us to the playoffs or a 10 win season next year. Improvement is nice, but if you aint improving in the W/L column then you aint really improving at all.

GP
05-07-2009, 11:58 AM
My view is here:

Gary Kubiak on the hotseat? No, I don't think so. (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2009/05/gary_kubiak_on_the_hotseat_nop.html)

Sunshine or schleprock? I know some people are either-or. I also think most people's egocentric view of things is that they are the realist and everyone else who disagrees with them is a pessimist or an optimist. I made an attempt at being real, for better or worse.

Good blog entry, Steph.

I haven't clicked on the Spanish Inquisition link (youtube video) but I have a good idea I know it is. LOL.

:whip: :king: :club: :slap:

TEXANRED
05-07-2009, 12:57 PM
On your question of "How long would you give him"...How about this: There's no equation that you can calculate in regards to how long a coach is going to stay as your HC. Variables, in the NFL, change pretty dynamically in regards to things like hurricanes, injuries to your key players, the schedule giving you a raw deal every now and then, etc.

On your question of "Under what circumstances would you give him the boot"...I'd like to think that it's a really simplistic way of evaluating the team:


1. Are we drafting in the top 5 every season? If so, there's a serious issue going on in the deep recesses of the team's facilities.

2. Are we able to put ourselves into position to win a game, and if we are, what's the talent level of that opposing team we are in position to beat? If we're out of games by the start of the 2nd quarter, then there's some serious issues going on with the coaching and planning, etc.

3. Are we scoring points, or are we squeaking by on lucky bounces and blown coverages and getting points in garbage time?



My POV is that all of those that you listed are just excusses for failure.

Lets say my job was as a box cutter and my responsibilites included to not only cut the boxes but also to stack them neatly in the corner and I had to cut at least 11 boxes a day.

Unfortunately I was only able to cut 8 boxes a day. My blade was dull or it broke. I couldn't stack them neatly in the corner cus the trash was full. Maybe I didn't even have 11 boxes to cut.

But, at the end of the day I was unable to perform my job. I failed. Everything I listed was an excuse as to why I would not of been able to do my job.

Broken blade? Get a new one. Dull blade? Get a new one. Trash full? Empty it. I don't have enough boxes? Find more.

The excuse button is broken and out of order.

Ole Miss Texan
05-07-2009, 02:13 PM
My POV is that all of those that you listed are just excusses for failure.

Lets say my job was as a box cutter and my responsibilites included to not only cut the boxes but also to stack them neatly in the corner and I had to cut at least 11 boxes a day.

Unfortunately I was only able to cut 8 boxes a day. My blade was dull or it broke. I couldn't stack them neatly in the corner cus the trash was full. Maybe I didn't even have 11 boxes to cut.

But, at the end of the day I was unable to perform my job. I failed. Everything I listed was an excuse as to why I would not of been able to do my job.

Broken blade? Get a new one. Dull blade? Get a new one. Trash full? Empty it. I don't have enough boxes? Find more.

The excuse button is broken and out of order.

Except that there are 31 other "people" trying to cut boxes too.

GP
05-07-2009, 02:48 PM
My POV is that all of those that you listed are just excusses for failure.

Lets say my job was as a box cutter and my responsibilites included to not only cut the boxes but also to stack them neatly in the corner and I had to cut at least 11 boxes a day.

Unfortunately I was only able to cut 8 boxes a day. My blade was dull or it broke. I couldn't stack them neatly in the corner cus the trash was full. Maybe I didn't even have 11 boxes to cut.

But, at the end of the day I was unable to perform my job. I failed. Everything I listed was an excuse as to why I would not of been able to do my job.

Broken blade? Get a new one. Dull blade? Get a new one. Trash full? Empty it. I don't have enough boxes? Find more.

The excuse button is broken and out of order.

Oh, I didn't know we were looking for perfection here. My bad.

I mean, seriously...no person bats 1.000..........do they?

You're living in a fantasy land if you view it in that sense of extremism. This t-e-a-m has progressed, and I think we can all agree upon that. Nothing I said, in my three points, makes excuses or allowances for things that CAN go wrong with any team at any time. And those broader points are better benchmarks than something as narrow as "You have to get x-amount of wins," or "You have to make the playoffs."

That sort of expectation is so beyond the normal reasoning skills of someone who has to employ a head coach for a professional sports organization. Once you find a guy who doesn't annually do those things I listed, you would be smart to hang onto him.

The opposite way of handling things is to do what Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder do, and you'll never see anything of real value come of it. Sure, it's a lot of noise and excitement with all the moves and deals they make...but what does it earn you to blow millions of dollars on players, ask fans to help pay for that, then take a freaking dart and hit the wall where all the owner's good ideas are located? Because I have to assert that lustful owners who try to buy an NFL championship every year could do a better job if they WOULD just throw a dart at the wall of great ideas.

No, I'm sorry. I can't accept this tripe that we have to stand, with pitchforks and torches at the ready, in case Gary Kubiak's team doesn't do x, y, or z. I once ragged on McNair AND Kubiak AND Schaub. I mean, I was the chief witch hunter around here. But after the way I saw the whole team sort of rally around each other and function like we had expected them to from the get-go, I realized that the first half of the season was a cruel joke that the league's scheduling office and mother nature dealt us. Hell, we might have challenged for a wild card bid if those two things were a little less obstructive.

This team is stable and poised for a run. The experts picked the Cardinals for like 4 straight years as the sleeper pick to win it all. Each year they got a little better. The columnists I read are saying those same things about us, which began last off-season.

I've come full circle on this deal. I was still a skeptic of the Kubiak and Schaub plan even after the wins vs. the Lions and the Bengals. I said "Let me see them do this to the rest of the teams on the schedule, then I'll believe."

Maybe I'm from Missouri after all? Or, I'm related to Thomas.

JB
05-07-2009, 02:53 PM
Oh, I didn't know we were looking for perfection here. My bad.

I mean, seriously...no person bats 1.000..........do they?

You're living in a fantasy land if you view it in that sense of extremism. This t-e-a-m has progressed, and I think we can all agree upon that. Nothing I said, in my three points, makes excuses or allowances for things that CAN go wrong with any team at any time. And those broader points are better benchmarks than something as narrow as "You have to get x-amount of wins," or "You have to make the playoffs."

That sort of expectation is so beyond the normal reasoning skills of someone who has to employ a head coach for a professional sports organization. Once you find a guy who doesn't annually do those things I listed, you would be smart to hang onto him.

The opposite way of handling things is to do what Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder do, and you'll never see anything of real value come of it. Sure, it's a lot of noise and excitement with all the moves and deals they make...but what does it earn you to blow millions of dollars on players, ask fans to help pay for that, then take a freaking dart and hit the wall where all the owner's good ideas are located? Because I have to assert that lustful owners who try to buy an NFL championship every year could do a better job if they WOULD just throw a dart at the wall of great ideas.

No, I'm sorry. I can't accept this tripe that we have to stand, with pitchforks and torches at the ready, in case Gary Kubiak's team doesn't do x, y, or z. I once ragged on McNair AND Kubiak AND Schaub. I mean, I was the chief witch hunter around here. But after the way I saw the whole team sort of rally around each other and function like we had expected them to from the get-go, I realized that the first half of the season was a cruel joke that the league's scheduling office and mother nature dealt us. Hell, we might have challenged for a wild card bid if those two things were a little less obstructive.

This team is stable and poised for a run. The experts picked the Cardinals for like 4 straight years as the sleeper pick to win it all. Each year they got a little better. The columnists I read are saying those same things about us, which began last off-season.

I've come full circle on this deal. I was still a skeptic of the Kubiak and Schaub plan even after the wins vs. the Lions and the Bengals. I said "Let me see them do this to the rest of the teams on the schedule, then I'll believe."

Maybe I'm from Missouri after all? Or, I'm related to Thomas.


Great Post! rep to ya!

Runner
05-07-2009, 03:11 PM
I don't think Kubiak should be fired unless there is a pretty big collapse. I also don't think he should be crowned a great coach. He's earned neither yet.

GP
05-07-2009, 03:38 PM
I don't think Kubiak should be fired unless there is a pretty big collapse. I also don't think he should be crowned a great coach. He's earned neither yet.

Exactly. I've prefaced my posts with a heavy dose of "The guy is not god, and he has some deficiencies to correct."

A collapse of firing proportions would be easily noticed. It's not like there would be any doubts. We've seen it before; we know its DNA.

I just don't see any of those same "markers" that I saw in the Capers' era. While I had looked forward to the seasons under Capers, since it was our new team and all, I also knew what those seasons held for us. That 2-14 season didn't sneak up on any of the more knowledgeable fans.

Second Honeymoon
05-07-2009, 03:42 PM
Then you have the saints and Packers who went up and then went back down and in the case of the saints they are not looking at recovering (IMO) one year wonders.

Oh and of the teams listed who were in the playoffs with-in the previous two years before Kubiak took over?

please dont be so anti-saints biased spec. i know thats the cause du jour around here to bash Bush and the Saints but you do realize that they were arguably one of the top offenses in the NFL amid a slew of injuries. This offseason they have made it a priority to upgrade their defense, specifically the secondary.

don't act like the Saints suck so you can feel better about the Texans currently being a losing franchise. that aint the Saints fault. that is on mcnair, casserley, carr, and to some extent smithiak.

stop making excuses for Kubiak and accept the facts. dude has been a losing football coach over a 3 year span. he has done some good for the offense but his inability to attract quality defensive coaches makes me worry. is that wrong to worry and question his ability to attract good coaching specifically8 on the defensive side. There is no way in hell Bush deserved to be promoted. Period. But Kubiak had no one else to go to because he has serious inadequacies on hte defensive side.

spec, we all want the same thing. a winner. some of us just arent as patient as others and there is nothing wrong with that. we all know what patience got us with Capers and Carr. it got us half a decade of embarassing football and pathetic performances. sorry if i dont want to sit around and wait for another crew to have a decade to try and build a winner....

Double Barrel
05-07-2009, 03:44 PM
I don't think Kubiak should be fired unless there is a pretty big collapse. I also don't think he should be crowned a great coach. He's earned neither yet.

You will never earn your Sunshine Club patch with that kind of objective perspective.

Good take, though, and pretty much how I see it. I think Kubiak has at least two more years - minimum - unless there is a catastrophic meltdown with the team.

Specnatz
05-07-2009, 04:27 PM
please dont be so anti-saints biased spec. i know thats the cause du jour around here to bash Bush and the Saints but you do realize that they were arguably one of the top offenses in the NFL amid a slew of injuries. This offseason they have made it a priority to upgrade their defense, specifically the secondary.

don't act like the Saints suck so you can feel better about the Texans currently being a losing franchise. that aint the Saints fault. that is on mcnair, casserley, carr, and to some extent smithiak.

stop making excuses for Kubiak and accept the facts. dude has been a losing football coach over a 3 year span. he has done some good for the offense but his inability to attract quality defensive coaches makes me worry. is that wrong to worry and question his ability to attract good coaching specifically8 on the defensive side. There is no way in hell Bush deserved to be promoted. Period. But Kubiak had no one else to go to because he has serious inadequacies on hte defensive side.

spec, we all want the same thing. a winner. some of us just arent as patient as others and there is nothing wrong with that. we all know what patience got us with Capers and Carr. it got us half a decade of embarassing football and pathetic performances. sorry if i dont want to sit around and wait for another crew to have a decade to try and build a winner....

In the last two years what have the saints actually won? You say they have a great offense and bad D ... sounds just like another team you say you root for but love dogging. Payton has done some good for the offense but his defense sucks and it has gotten worse under his tenure. The same things you are giving a pass to the saints for your blasting the Texans for, so please tell me again which team it is you are for? The saints were mediocre when Payton took over and they won one year and went back down and a lot of folks are saying Payton is this great coach and is beyond reproach. Sorry but only one winning season followed by two losing ones does not make a great coach.

I never once mentioned Bush, not once. He is not worth talking about and neither is the back-up QB for the giants. I was referring to their record. Where did I say sit around for a decade? I said we have to see improvement and that I am not a black&white guy who says playoffs or bust.

Second Honeymoon
05-07-2009, 06:29 PM
In the last two years what have the saints actually won? You say they have a great offense and bad D ... sounds just like another team you say you root for but love dogging. Payton has done some good for the offense but his defense sucks and it has gotten worse under his tenure. The same things you are giving a pass to the saints for your blasting the Texans for, so please tell me again which team it is you are for? The saints were mediocre when Payton took over and they won one year and went back down and a lot of folks are saying Payton is this great coach and is beyond reproach. Sorry but only one winning season followed by two losing ones does not make a great coach.

I never once mentioned Bush, not once. He is not worth talking about and neither is the back-up QB for the giants. I was referring to their record. Where did I say sit around for a decade? I said we have to see improvement and that I am not a black&white guy who says playoffs or bust.

making the NFC championship game is far more than your boy Kubiak has ever done...so please taste some reality. as for your claim that I am not a Texans fan, I have four endzone field level seats + PSL licenses that speak otherwise. My name is etched in glass at the stadium in thanks for helping build Reliant and you act like you are a better fan than me because you are a homer and I am just honest? give me a break. So while you are watching the game at your boyfriends house or at the local sports bar, I will be at the game, truly supporting my Texans both vocally, financially, and emotionally. Does that make me a better or more true fan than you? No...but it is proof positive of my fandom and my love for my team and of that there is no question. I just don't reward failure and champion losing football with praise and blind loyalty like you. we are different fans. you are a casual fan, while I am a hardcore fan. diffrent strokes for diffrent folks.

I never said the Saints were great or that Payton was a great coach. I just stated that you were poo-pooing what the Saints have done and that just shows how you struggle with being objective. Bottom line, the Saints have been more successful as a team. Not only have they made the playoffs but they also won a playoff game....until we can even approach such feats its really dishonest and biased for you to badmouth the Saints while acting like the Texans are so damn successful.

and for the record, i am not 'dogging' the Texans. i am just calling a spade a spade and calling it like i sees it. I am also not alone in my thoughts. In fact, most of the more knowledgeable and objective fans share my opinion that Kubiak needs to start winning or he will be on the 'hot seat'. What is so wrong with wanting a winner and not pining for a new contract for a losing head coach...which is what you are doing.

I love my Texans and I love my NFL. I just can't stand losers and I definitely can't stand people who make excuse after excuse for said losers. Haven't we learned anything from the Texans past? it's quite obvious that some of us have learned nothing.

lets have the Texans win one meaningful game before we start throwing stones at other franchises...just one. please.

thunderkyss
05-07-2009, 06:49 PM
I never said the Saints were great or that Payton was a great coach. I just stated that you were poo-pooing what the Saints have done and that just shows how you struggle with being objective. Bottom line, the Saints have been more successful as a team. Not only have they made the playoffs but they also won a playoff game....until we can even approach such feats its really dishonest and biased for you to badmouth the Saints while acting like the Texans are so damn successful.


So, are you saying Kubiak was the wrong guy, that we should have hired a coach more like Sean Payton, gone to the AFC championship game, then have two loosing seasons, and you would be happier with that, than with what we've done so far?

I'm just not that way.

Specnatz
05-07-2009, 07:09 PM
I never said the Saints were great or that Payton was a great coach. I just stated that you were poo-pooing what the Saints have done and that just shows how you struggle with being objective. Bottom line, the Saints have been more successful as a team. Not only have they made the playoffs but they also won a playoff game....until we can even approach such feats its really dishonest and biased for you to badmouth the Saints while acting like the Texans are so damn successful.

and for the record, i am not 'dogging' the Texans. i am just calling a spade a spade and calling it like i sees it. I am also not alone in my thoughts. In fact, most of the more knowledgeable and objective fans share my opinion that Kubiak needs to start winning or he will be on the 'hot seat'. What is so wrong with wanting a winner and not pining for a new contract for a losing head coach...which is what you are doing.

I love my Texans and I love my NFL. I just can't stand losers and I definitely can't stand people who make excuse after excuse for said losers. Haven't we learned anything from the Texans past? it's quite obvious that some of us have learned nothing.

lets have the Texans win one meaningful game before we start throwing stones at other franchises...just one. please.

I will not go with a personal attack like you do but do you freaking read what I wrote and what I expect from Kubiak and the team?

As far as making excuses for losers you have made plenty for vy but since he went to UT that is different I suppose. As far as learning, what is wrong with wanting to do it like the Steelers and have consistancy and not have knee jerk reactions. As long as the team is improving (which I have stated over and over but you have failed to read that) and not regressing why change the HC. The Steelers do not change HC every 3 or 4 years because they realize steady improvement is better than being a one year wonder like I see the saints as.

Why is it dishonest or biassed of me to offer up my opinion of how I see the saints but you can offer up what ever freakin opinion you have about the Texans and it should be etched in stone? I said they won in 2006 but have not done crap since then. That is fact not opinion by the way ( http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nor/ ) as seen here.

lets have the Texans win one meaningful game before we start throwing stones at other franchises...just one. please. HUGH? so because the Texans have not had a winning season I am not entitled to an opinion about any other team? :spit:

Seriously SH get some help.

Second Honeymoon
05-07-2009, 07:19 PM
So, are you saying Kubiak was the wrong guy, that we should have hired a coach more like Sean Payton, gone to the AFC championship game, then have two loosing seasons, and you would be happier with that, than with what we've done so far?

I'm just not that way.

i would have rather had an AFC championship game (2 playoff wins), and two losing seasons of 7-9 than 7-9, 8-8, 8-8. like that is something to debate.

of course i would rather go to the playoffs and win than not go and never win. so you don't think losing one more game a year would be worth one year where you win around 14 games and are one quarter away from the super bowl? cmon thunder. your smarter than that.

Runner
05-07-2009, 07:23 PM
So, are you saying Kubiak was the wrong guy, that we should have hired a coach more like Sean Payton, gone to the AFC championship game, then have two loosing seasons, and you would be happier with that, than with what we've done so far?

I'm just not that way.


Put me down for preferring an AFC Championship game followed by two losing seasons over a losing season followed by two more non-winning seasons.

I'll take success followed by disappointment over mediocrity spun as great success any time.

Second Honeymoon
05-07-2009, 07:23 PM
I will not go with a personal attack like you do but do you freaking read what I wrote and what I expect from Kubiak and the team?

As far as making excuses for losers you have made plenty for vy but since he went to UT that is different I suppose. As far as learning, what is wrong with wanting to do it like the Steelers and have consistancy and not have knee jerk reactions. As long as the team is improving (which I have stated over and over but you have failed to read that) and not regressing why change the HC. The Steelers do not change HC every 3 or 4 years because they realize steady improvement is better than being a one year wonder like I see the saints as.

Why is it dishonest or biassed of me to offer up my opinion of how I see the saints but you can offer up what ever freakin opinion you have about the Texans and it should be etched in stone? I said they won in 2006 but have not done crap since then. That is fact not opinion by the way ( http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nor/ ) as seen here.

lets have the Texans win one meaningful game before we start throwing stones at other franchises...just one. please. HUGH? so because the Texans have not had a winning season I am not entitled to an opinion about any other team? :spit:

Seriously SH get some help.

i have been very critical of VY and dude deserves it. he has really screwed the pooch as a Titan.

how is 7-9, 8-8, then 8-8 improving. it is maintaining but hardly improving. yes, the offense has greatly improved but the defense has gotten worse and he still failed to get a proven DC in the position.

the saints won in 2006 and were one game from Super Bowl and havent won crap since. the texans have never won crap. period. Advantage Saints and that isn't open for debate. it's fact. I will say that both teams look to have equal hopes in 2009 but based on history, any non-biased person would say the Saints have had more success than a team that has never had a winning season and never won a meaningful game...in fact, they get blown out in most meaningful games with possible playoff implications (ravens and browns blow outs come to mind)

anywho, may the Texans kick some ass this year and may we end all this debate by dominating in 2009 and finally fielding a balanced, well run, and winning team. I think all of us fans deserve it. You. Me. All of us. We have been through enough already.

Second Honeymoon
05-07-2009, 07:24 PM
Put me down for preferring an AFC Championship game followed by two losing seasons over a losing season followed by two more non-winning seasons.

I'll take success followed by disappointment over mediocrity spun as great success any time.

of course you would Runner. any sane individual would. those Luv Ya Blue Oilers only got to the AFC Championship game, but I guess our Texans have done better for their fans than old school Oilers did when you use that kinda logic.

TheRealJoker
05-07-2009, 07:26 PM
i have been very critical of VY and dude deserves it. he has really screwed the pooch as a Titan. how is 7-9, 8-8, then 8-8 improving. it is maintaining but hardly improving. yes, the offense has greatly improved but the defense has gotten worse and he still failed to get a proven DC in the position.

the saints won in 2006 and one game from Super Bowl and havent won crap since. the texans have never won crap. Advantage Saints and that isn't open for debate. it's fact. I will say that both teams look to have equal hopes in 2009 but based on history, any non-biased person would say the Saints have had more success than a team that has never had a winning season and never won a meaningful game...in fact, they get blown out in most meaningful games with possible playoff implications (ravens and browns blow outs come to mind)

I seem to recall you saying you would have rather taken VY over Mario knowing what we know today because you feel he would've been a success in Houston. That there thingy is called making an excuse for a loser.

Specnatz
05-07-2009, 07:45 PM
Put me down for preferring an AFC Championship game followed by two losing seasons over a losing season followed by two more non-winning seasons.

I'll take success followed by disappointment over mediocrity spun as great success any time.

of course you would Runner. any sane individual would. those Luv Ya Blue Oilers only got to the AFC Championship game, but I guess our Texans have done better for their fans than old school Oilers did when you use that kinda logic.

The saints have two (2000, 2006) playoff wins in their entire time in the league. Yeah put me down for that is the way I want my team modeled after. :sarcasm:

Runner
05-07-2009, 07:57 PM
The saints have two (2000, 2006) playoff wins in their entire time in the league. Yeah put me down for that is the way I want my team modeled after. :sarcasm:

That wasn't the question, so your sarcasm is a little lame.

I believe my answer was complete in that it contained a rephrasing of the question. Nowhere does it reference the Saints or modeling the Texans after anyone. It does indicate a preference for real success over hyped up mediocrity.

Lucky
05-07-2009, 08:27 PM
I keep hearing Kubiak must be accountable for Bush. My question is why?
Who would be, if not Kubiak? Gary Kubiak hired Frank Bush, just as he hired Richard Smith previously. These are Kubiak's choices. They have not been foisted upon him. Shouldn't people who make decisions ultimately be accountable for their decisions?

Except that there are 31 other "people" trying to cut boxes too.

I want one of the best box cutters cutting boxes for me. And if the guy I have isn't getting the boxes cut, I need to find a box cutter who can. It's really that simple.

From TexansChick's blog (link above):

Bob McNair has found a coach who doesn't just wants to win but wants to win for Houston. Out of all the coaches in the league, Gary Kubiak is probably one of the few who would see the Texans job as his dream situation. McNair wants him to succeed, and I truly think that he stays as long as their isn't a complete regression and collapse...unless McNair has no choice.No one questions whether Gary Kubiak wants to win. Or that Bob McNair not only wants the team to win, but wants a man like Gary Kubiak to lead them. The question remains, is Gary Kubiak capable of turning the Houston Texans into a winner? Because no matter how much he's loved and loves back, or how well he speaks...Gary Kubiak has to win to keep his job.

There are differing opinions on whether Kubiak can win with the Texans. But, everyone is pretty much in agreement that they want Gary Kubiak to win with the Texans. That much should be understood. And I don't think Kubiak's biggest supporters believe Kubiak should keep his job because he's a great guy and a good speaker. They see Kubiak as the man to take the Texans to the Promised Land.

I'm certain Bob McNair feels the same way. As much as he admires Kubiak, he won't keep him on as head coach just for the sake of stability. McNair has to believe in Kubiak. As long as he does, Kubiak is the Texans head coach.

But it's the assumption that McNair will continue to believe (a total collapse withstanding), is what baffles me. I see McNair has somewhat misjudged. Just because he doesn't act like a spoiled brat (Daniel Snyder) or a micromanager (Jerry Jones) doesn't mean that Bob isn't growing a little impatient. I doubt he foresaw 7 years without a winning season after that opening win versus the Cowboys. He has to be tired of losing. Until his team is in the playoffs, his pride and joy will be labeled a loser. And if the Texans miss the playoffs once again this season, McNair will have to ask himself this question:

"If Gary Kubiak can't win in 2009, why do I believe he will win in 2010?"

Ole Miss Texan
05-07-2009, 09:03 PM
Who would be, if not Kubiak? Gary Kubiak hired Frank Bush, just as he hired Richard Smith previously. These are Kubiak's choices. They have not been foisted upon him. Shouldn't people who make decisions ultimately be accountable for their decisions?
I was more or less wondering about the process in which Frank Bush got hired. It would be one thing if Kubiak came out and said how he didn't want to interview ANY other person for the job and wouldn't even listen, that Bush was his guy, period the end. It would be another thing if they legitimately brought in a few DC candidates, especially if Kubiak & Co. liked those guys and offered them the job. If those guys didn't want it and then they regressed to their fall back plan with Frank Bush, how can you blame Kubiak?

I havn't read anywhere that really discusses that process. I don't think too much would be public so it's one of those "we'll never know" sorta deals.

Lucky
05-07-2009, 09:21 PM
It would be another thing if they legitimately brought in a few DC candidates, especially if Kubiak & Co. liked those guys and offered them the job. If those guys didn't want it and then they regressed to their fall back plan with Frank Bush, how can you blame Kubiak?
A NFL head coach's job requirements are multifaceted. One extremely important aspect is building a good staff. If Kubiak can't bring in good defensive coaches to complement his offensive staff, that's a failure on his part.

Gary Kubiak is the head coach of the Houston Texans. Not the head coach of the Houston Texan's offense. He's already received one defensive do-over. The buck has to stop at Gary Kubiak.

Second Honeymoon
05-07-2009, 09:23 PM
a nfl head coach's job requirements are multifaceted. One extremely important aspect is building a good staff. If kubiak can't bring in good defensive coaches to complement his offensive staff, that's a failure on his part.

Gary kubiak is the head coach of the houston texans. Not the head coach of the houston texan's offense. He's already received one defensive do-over. The buck has to stop at gary kubiak.

qft

Ole Miss Texan
05-07-2009, 09:31 PM
A NFL head coach's job requirements are multifaceted. One extremely important aspect is building a good staff. If Kubiak can't bring in good defensive coaches to complement his offensive staff, that's a failure on his part.

Gary Kubiak is the head coach of the Houston Texans. Not the head coach of the Houston Texan's offense. He's already received one defensive do-over. The buck has to stop at Gary Kubiak.

I partially agree, don't get me wrong. But there's other circumstances too. What if this candidate got a better offer from a defense like the Eagles or Giants, just for example and McNair didn't want to pony up. Isn't Rick Smith involved in some of those decisions or is the GM more responsible for the players?

I just think there's so much to it that I'm not comfortable talking in absolutes about things I don't know.

Lucky
05-07-2009, 09:47 PM
I just think there's so much to it that I'm not comfortable talking in absolutes about things I don't know.
Frankly, I think you are just making up scenarios that don't exist nor have ever been suggested. I'm sure that there is a number that McNair wouldn't meet on an assistant coach. I doubt he would go as high as Gary Kubiak's $2 million salary, for instance. But has there ever been a documented example of McNair not willing to spend money when asked? There's no logical reason to consider that a possibility.

Nor that Rick Smith would veto a candidate for the defensive coordinator position. Or that Rick Smith has the power to do so. I realize that you are uncomfortable with absolutes. Just trying to understand why you're so willing to fling wildass hypotheticals?

IlliniJen
05-07-2009, 09:49 PM
My view is here:

Gary Kubiak on the hotseat? No, I don't think so. (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2009/05/gary_kubiak_on_the_hotseat_nop.html)

Sunshine or schleprock? I know some people are either-or. I also think most people's egocentric view of things is that they are the realist and everyone else who disagrees with them is a pessimist or an optimist. I made an attempt at being real, for better or worse.

Nah, I think most people here on this thread have been objective and put forth some good information and ideas. This has been a valuable discussion from both sides.

Ole Miss Texan
05-07-2009, 10:12 PM
Frankly, I think you are just making up scenarios that don't exist nor have ever been suggested. I'm sure that there is a number that McNair wouldn't meet on an assistant coach. I doubt he would go as high as Gary Kubiak's $2 million salary, for instance. But has there ever been a documented example of McNair not willing to spend money when asked? There's no logical reason to consider that a possibility.

Nor that Rick Smith would veto a candidate for the defensive coordinator position. Or that Rick Smith has the power to do so. I realize that you are uncomfortable with absolutes. Just trying to understand why you're so willing to fling wildass hypotheticals?
I was just giving some hypothetical suggestions from two opposite ends of the spectrum soley to point out that we really don't know the specifics of Bush's hire. Unless anyone is aware of some articles written, I havn't read them.

The McNair example is just one of those 'what ifs'. I've never been one to say McNair has been cheap or didn't want to pay (free agents for example). I'm just throwing that out there. I think there is a logical reason to consider it a possibility like you said earlier, the candidate could want the same as Kubiak's salary. Unlikely yes, of course, but not impossible.

I don't know what you mean about Rick Smith vetoing a candidate... and he is probably just one cog to the wheel.

The wildass hypotheticals are just two examples using people at the top of the organization that has some say in the things that go on with the organization. We could come up with hundreds scenarios... I'm not trying to predict exactly what happened, i'm strictly just pointing out that there are other scenarios that could have happened besides the only one being talked about: This was Kubiak's hire so he should get canned because of it, if it fails.

I'm not sitting here trying to say Kubiak deserves a free pass or he shouldn't get any blame if Bush fails. I'm more or less just playing devil's advocate and saying there's a lot of pieces to the puzzle. Of course he bears more responsibility than just about anybody because he IS the head coach. My uncomfortableness is the same feeling when someone blames the QB for an interception because he saw it on the box score. It could have been a perfectly thrown ball but the WR tipped it up causing an INT. I'm just saying I didn't watch that game so It's hard for me to go ahead and blame the QB. eh!? :cool:

CloakNNNdagger
05-07-2009, 10:59 PM
Who would be, if not Kubiak? Gary Kubiak hired Frank Bush, just as he hired Richard Smith previously. These are Kubiak's choices. They have not been foisted upon him. Shouldn't people who make decisions ultimately be accountable for their decisions?



I want one of the best box cutters cutting boxes for me. And if the guy I have isn't getting the boxes cut, I need to find a box cutter who can. It's really that simple.

From TexansChick's blog (link above):

No one questions whether Gary Kubiak wants to win. Or that Bob McNair not only wants the team to win, but wants a man like Gary Kubiak to lead them. The question remains, is Gary Kubiak capable of turning the Houston Texans into a winner? Because no matter how much he's loved and loves back, or how well he speaks...Gary Kubiak has to win to keep his job.

There are differing opinions on whether Kubiak can win with the Texans. But, everyone is pretty much in agreement that they want Gary Kubiak to win with the Texans. That much should be understood. And I don't think Kubiak's biggest supporters believe Kubiak should keep his job because he's a great guy and a good speaker. They see Kubiak as the man to take the Texans to the Promised Land.

I'm certain Bob McNair feels the same way. As much as he admires Kubiak, he won't keep him on as head coach just for the sake of stability. McNair has to believe in Kubiak. As long as he does, Kubiak is the Texans head coach.

But it's the assumption that McNair will continue to believe (a total collapse withstanding), is what baffles me. I see McNair has somewhat misjudged. Just because he doesn't act like a spoiled brat (Daniel Snyder) or a micromanager (Jerry Jones) doesn't mean that Bob isn't growing a little impatient. I doubt he foresaw 7 years without a winning season after that opening win versus the Cowboys. He has to be tired of losing. Until his team is in the playoffs, his pride and joy will be labeled a loser. And if the Texans miss the playoffs once again this season, McNair will have to ask himself this question:

"If Gary Kubiak can't win in 2009, why do I believe he will win in 2010?"


Must spread the rep.:tiphat:

TheRealJoker
05-07-2009, 10:59 PM
I was more or less wondering about the process in which Frank Bush got hired. It would be one thing if Kubiak came out and said how he didn't want to interview ANY other person for the job and wouldn't even listen, that Bush was his guy, period the end. It would be another thing if they legitimately brought in a few DC candidates, especially if Kubiak & Co. liked those guys and offered them the job. If those guys didn't want it and then they regressed to their fall back plan with Frank Bush, how can you blame Kubiak?

I havn't read anywhere that really discusses that process. I don't think too much would be public so it's one of those "we'll never know" sorta deals.

What's been reported was that the Texans requested permission to interview Jerry Gray (Redskins secondary coach/former Oiler). When the Redskins denied us permission we hired Bush.

Runner
05-08-2009, 12:02 AM
So, are you saying Kubiak was the wrong guy, that we should have hired a coach more like Sean Payton, gone to the AFC championship game, then have two loosing seasons, and you would be happier with that, than with what we've done so far?

I'm just not that way.

Put me down for preferring an AFC Championship game followed by two losing seasons over a losing season followed by two more non-winning seasons.

I'll take success followed by disappointment over mediocrity spun as great success any time.

Perhaps Tennyson said it best:


'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

ObsiWan
05-08-2009, 05:32 AM
Perhaps Tennyson said it best:

Originally Posted by Alfred Lord Tennyson
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.




I'll bet Tennyson wasn't Saints or Bills fan.

Hardcore Texan
05-08-2009, 08:26 AM
Put me down for preferring an AFC Championship game followed by two losing seasons over a losing season followed by two more non-winning seasons.

I'll take success followed by disappointment over mediocrity spun as great success any time.

Who is spinning it as great success? Most posts I have read here are very realistic and agree it's mediocre....it is what it is. Two back to back seasons of 8-8, no better no worse. I don't see it as great success nor do I see it as complete failure, I see it as a step in the right direction. To be perpetually mediocre would suck no doubt, but we have been a bad team that has just now got to mediocre. I think we are a team on the rise and the past two season are just part of the process, these things take time and hopefully this year we take a big step forward. I hope I am right.

thunderkyss
05-08-2009, 08:47 AM
i would have rather had an AFC championship game (2 playoff wins), and two losing seasons of 7-9 than 7-9, 8-8, 8-8. like that is something to debate.

of course i would rather go to the playoffs and win than not go and never win. so you don't think losing one more game a year would be worth one year where you win around 14 games and are one quarter away from the super bowl? cmon thunder. your smarter than that.

No, obviously I'm not smarter than that. If we're using your reasoning, and the W-L column as our guage for success, then you've got 2006, the year they went to the NFC Championship game as a year they got much better than their previous year...... what did they win, 4 games in 2005, the year Katrina ripped through New Orleans, and then two steady years of decline.

Why would I want a year of unexplained improvement, followed by two years of no improvement.

My question, "is the team getting better"? You are using W-L to help you determine that. I'm saying watch the games, is the team getting better, or worse. In our case, we are getting better. In the Saints case, they are getting worse.

You say you prefer the team W-L record showing the team getting worse,

I'm saying I prefer the team W-L record that shows us getting marginally better than the one showing them getting worse.

thunderkyss
05-08-2009, 08:55 AM
Put me down for preferring an AFC Championship game followed by two losing seasons over a losing season followed by two more non-winning seasons.

I'll take success followed by disappointment over mediocrity spun as great success any time.

Teams like the Saints, Jets, Rams, Falcons, Miami usually sign big name FA to get that quick turn around in the W-L column. If they could follow that up with solid draft picks, and real coaching (not game management, but player development) then they'll continue to have success.

I'd have preferred to do the FA thing, and the draft thing, but Smithiak chose to do it on the draft alone. As such, you're going to get "mediocrity spun as success" I'm not saying we are where I want us to be, I'm just saying I understand it takes time to build real success through the draft.

And it doesn't make sense to me, to fire the chief architect four years after breaking ground, when the foundation is clearly in place, and sound.

Polo
05-08-2009, 08:56 AM
Head coaches get too much blame and take too much credit.

/endthread

HOU-TEX
05-08-2009, 09:12 AM
Put me down for preferring an AFC Championship game followed by two losing seasons over a losing season followed by two more non-winning seasons.

I'll take success followed by disappointment over mediocrity spun as great success any time.

I'd probably feel the same. BUT, if those two mediocre season's end up being the foundation of an organization that can win consistantly year in, year out, I'd take it.

I know, hindsight, yada, yada. :cool:

Head coaches get too much blame and take too much credit.
/endthread

That'd be the QB, IMO. The W/L's should fall on the coach's shoulders. I think the GM and the coach should be held accountable.

Runner
05-08-2009, 10:02 AM
Man, I thought my Tennyson post was hilarious, but it isn't getting any airtime.

At least I got to laugh at my own joke. :)

Runner
05-08-2009, 10:06 AM
I'd probably feel the same. BUT, if those two mediocre season's end up being the foundation of an organization that can win consistantly year in, year out, I'd take it.

I know, hindsight, yada, yada.


I just can't get my eyes to go out of focus with a beatific look on my my face and "know" that building the team slowly guarantees years of success for the Texans.

HOU-TEX
05-08-2009, 10:13 AM
I just can't get my eyes to go out of focus with a beatific look on my my face and "know" that building the team slowly guarantees years of success for the Texans.

Yeah, I know. I was just pointing out another infamous "what if" scenario. :)

Hardcore Texan
05-08-2009, 10:26 AM
Man, I thought my Tennyson post was hilarious, but it isn't getting any airtime.

At least I got to laugh at my own joke. :)

You're a legend in your own mind.

:jk:

Double Barrel
05-08-2009, 06:27 PM
Head coaches get too much blame and take too much credit.

/endthread

Mike Smith and Tony Sparano disagree with you. ;)

GNTLEWOLF
05-11-2009, 06:52 AM
I’ve been reading the discussions on this topic for quite some time. From all that I have read it is clear to me that we as fans all hope Kubiak and the Texans under him progress to the next level and finally turn in a convincing winning season and maybe the play-offs. It has been pointed out before that this is his 4rth year and he has yet to produce a single winning season. Not one. His game management has been iffy at best, and he tends to choose assistants from his circle of friends rather than interview people outside his circle. I have to say if this team does not show a significant improvement in the won/loss record this season then Kubiak had better be on a hot seat. For me, 9-7 won’t cut it. I’m looking at 10-6 and a noticeable improvement in the defensive side of the football before I say extend his contract. For those of you who give the team stability argument, let’s look at the record of another popular coach who was hired to turn an organization around and has been with his job since 2003 and is still about breaking even. Marvin Lewis has hovered around 500 since being in Cincinnati. Oh, he has had up and down years, like in 2005 with an 11-5 record and last season with a 4-11-1 record, but usually about 500 ball. For the sake of “Stability” the Bengals have opted to keep him around and seem to be satisfied with 500 ball. How sad for an organization that has been to two Super Bowls. No, If Kubiak can’t get past the 500 mark and I still consider 9-7 at that mark, his job should be in jeopardy. I believe he has two more years, 2009 and 2010 or he is gone.

GP
05-11-2009, 08:39 AM
Iíve been reading the discussions on this topic for quite some time. From all that I have read it is clear to me that we as fans all hope Kubiak and the Texans under him progress to the next level and finally turn in a convincing winning season and maybe the play-offs. It has been pointed out before that this is his 4rth year and he has yet to produce a single winning season. Not one. His game management has been iffy at best, and he tends to choose assistants from his circle of friends rather than interview people outside his circle. I have to say if this team does not show a significant improvement in the won/loss record this season then Kubiak had better be on a hot seat. For me, 9-7 wonít cut it. Iím looking at 10-6 and a noticeable improvement in the defensive side of the football before I say extend his contract. For those of you who give the team stability argument, letís look at the record of another popular coach who was hired to turn an organization around and has been with his job since 2003 and is still about breaking even. Marvin Lewis has hovered around 500 since being in Cincinnati. Oh, he has had up and down years, like in 2005 with an 11-5 record and last season with a 4-11-1 record, but usually about 500 ball. For the sake of ďStabilityĒ the Bengals have opted to keep him around and seem to be satisfied with 500 ball. How sad for an organization that has been to two Super Bowls. No, If Kubiak canít get past the 500 mark and I still consider 9-7 at that mark, his job should be in jeopardy. I believe he has two more years, 2009 and 2010 or he is gone.

The only problem I see with throwing out Marvin Lewis' name is that he destroyed that team by acquiring too many trouble-makers and law-breakers. Any temporary success he had was lost as things started to crumble with countless arrests, suspensions, and overall distractions. Throw in Chad Johnson into that equation, as well as a pitiful running game that sees Cedric Benson as the solution to its woes....and well, I don't think Marvin's team compares to this team.

We're building the right way, but some people are freaking out and laying down all these ultimatums.

Maybe Kubiak is a stop-gap (a bandage on the wound caused by Capers/Casserly) and maybe he's not the guy to get it done. We have to be open to that. But I think he's done a great job, and I'd hate to see it scrapped so we can go buy a bag of magic beans.

I guess some people are already preparing for a bad year.

GP
05-11-2009, 08:43 AM
Mike Smith and Tony Sparano disagree with you. ;)

The Falcons were in a weak division. I give credit to their run game, and to the new QB who stabilized that position. Out of the two teams you mentioned, the Falcons are easily the better team. But their division existed of pretty weak teams, can't we agree on that? No comparison to the other divisions.

And the Dolphins' schedule was a joke. They caught a Brady-less Patriots team, as well as what I deem to be a lot of sub-par teams last season. They couldn't beat us, so that says something.

GNTLEWOLF
05-11-2009, 09:56 AM
The only problem I see with throwing out Marvin Lewis' name is that he destroyed that team by acquiring too many trouble-makers and law-breakers. Any temporary success he had was lost as things started to crumble with countless arrests, suspensions, and overall distractions. Throw in Chad Johnson into that equation, as well as a pitiful running game that sees Cedric Benson as the solution to its woes....and well, I don't think Marvin's team compares to this team.

We're building the right way, but some people are freaking out and laying down all these ultimatums.

Maybe Kubiak is a stop-gap (a bandage on the wound caused by Capers/Casserly) and maybe he's not the guy to get it done. We have to be open to that. But I think he's done a great job, and I'd hate to see it scrapped so we can go buy a bag of magic beans.

I guess some people are already preparing for a bad year.

There may indeed be some who are preparing for a bad year. I am not one of them. I have actually been more optimistic this year than any other year since the Texans inception. It looks like a good draft so far from this side. I still wish we could find a really good CB and a really good Rb to spell Slaton, But I like what I've seen so far. To me all that optimism , and a decent draft are all the more reason to feel That Kubiak and the Texans should show significant progress and possibly play-offs this year. We expect that. Another 500 season will not cut it. And I really don't have any reason to believe the Texans won't improve significantly. But really, if it is another 8-8or 9-7, or 7-9 season is it realistic to think that Kubiak will not be on the hot seat?:thinking:

Mr. White
05-11-2009, 11:38 AM
I guess some people are already preparing for a bad year.

I think that they're just demanding accountability. If he can get it done this year, then we keep him. If he can't, then it's time to start exploring other options. That's the way that the rest of the NFL does business.

The main problem that I have with the organization is that it doesn't know when to cut bait on a guy. I don't really care where he's from, how good of a speaker he is, where he went to school...if he can't field a winner, then I'd rather get someone who can.

While I'm sure that part of being a good fan is believing that your head coach will take you to the promised land, the fact of the matter is that it doesn't work that way.

GP
05-11-2009, 01:24 PM
I think that they're just demanding accountability. If he can get it done this year, then we keep him. If he can't, then it's time to start exploring other options. That's the way that the rest of the NFL does business.

The main problem that I have with the organization is that it doesn't know when to cut bait on a guy. I don't really care where he's from, how good of a speaker he is, where he went to school...if he can't field a winner, then I'd rather get someone who can.

While I'm sure that part of being a good fan is believing that your head coach will take you to the promised land, the fact of the matter is that it doesn't work that way.

So you're willing to play Head Coach Lotto?

Scribble in a head coach, see if it works out, and cut bait if it doesn't. Scribble in a head coach, see if it works out, and cut bait if it doesn't. I sort of like what's going on here, myself. The last half of the season was what I had originally envisioned when we hired Gary Kubiak. I expect some years to be great years, some years to be good years, and a season every now and then where you think "Gee, he had a bad year" but it gets followed up by a good year or a great year. Up until Kubiak, the years were all bad years. Fluke moments got us some wins. Period.

We could arrive at 8-8 or 7-9 a lot of different ways, especially through key injuries or just plain old bad luck on some plays that bounced the other ways. Factor in a dumb Texans penalty that might advance the other team into game-winning field goal range, or the refs calling a horrific game that just keeps us on the outside looking in during the whole game. There's no end to the reasons as to why we might lose some games that we shold've won.

I think we're at the point where the playing field, on whose fault it is for losses, is being leveled. In the old days, we'd haggle over whether the coaches or the players were the main culprit. With the talent that we have acquired, don't we have to expect that the coaches do their jobs...but that the players also answer for some of what they do or don't do on the field? The old adage "We don't have enough quality players to blame this on what happens on the field" is over. It's accountability time for everyone.

If this is the year of no excuses for the coaches, then same goes for basically the whole freaking defense. Oh, and by the way: Kubiak built what became the 3rd-ranked offense. And he took it over when it was just a few pieces of molded bread, marbles, and silly putty. I'll trust that over the past few seasons, he has seen our defense and knows that this adjustment ought to get it done.

I've read lots of pissin' and moanin' about Kubiak choosing Frank Bush. People here don't think it was smart, and therefore they are already biased in seeing to it that it fails--Or at least that's what I was told by the fans here when I said I didn't think Schaub could make it. I think an old friend of mine on here said something to the effect of: You've shown that you have a vested interest in seeing to it that Schaub fails, so in essence you're rooting for it to fail so you can prove your point. Wouldn't it be easier to root for him to succeed?

That stuff cuts both ways. Now we have a section of the message board who is already envisioning this magical hot seat for Gary Kubiak. LOL. At some point, message board posters can become obsessed with sticking to their pet point until they see it materialize before them. I got it wrong on Carr, and cut bait halfway through his last year here. Along the same line, I also think I got it wrong on Schaub and Kubiak, based on what I saw in the last half of the season.

I know a little bit about being wrong. I can spot it a mile away. I'm a wrongologist. Which doesn't pay very well. [/sarcasm]

You guys can now go back to deciding on what formula and criteria it will take for the head coach to be on the hot seat for a bad season that hasn't happened yet. By the way, Texans_Chick's blog entry on this topic was very good and is worth a read by everyone scanning this thread.

Texecutioner
05-11-2009, 01:59 PM
So you're willing to play Head Coach Lotto?

Scribble in a head coach, see if it works out, and cut bait if it doesn't. Scribble in a head coach, see if it works out, and cut bait if it doesn't. I sort of like what's going on here, myself. The last half of the season was what I had originally envisioned when we hired Gary Kubiak. I expect some years to be great years, some years to be good years, and a season every now and then where you think "Gee, he had a bad year" but it gets followed up by a good year or a great year. Up until Kubiak, the years were all bad years. Fluke moments got us some wins. Period.

We could arrive at 8-8 or 7-9 a lot of different ways, especially through key injuries or just plain old bad luck on some plays that bounced the other ways. Factor in a dumb Texans penalty that might advance the other team into game-winning field goal range, or the refs calling a horrific game that just keeps us on the outside looking in during the whole game. There's no end to the reasons as to why we might lose some games that we shold've won.

I think we're at the point where the playing field, on whose fault it is for losses, is being leveled. In the old days, we'd haggle over whether the coaches or the players were the main culprit. With the talent that we have acquired, don't we have to expect that the coaches do their jobs...but that the players also answer for some of what they do or don't do on the field? The old adage "We don't have enough quality players to blame this on what happens on the field" is over. It's accountability time for everyone.

If this is the year of no excuses for the coaches, then same goes for basically the whole freaking defense. Oh, and by the way: Kubiak built what became the 3rd-ranked offense. And he took it over when it was just a few pieces of molded bread, marbles, and silly putty. I'll trust that over the past few seasons, he has seen our defense and knows that this adjustment ought to get it done.

I've read lots of pissin' and moanin' about Kubiak choosing Frank Bush. People here don't think it was smart, and therefore they are already biased in seeing to it that it fails--Or at least that's what I was told by the fans here when I said I didn't think Schaub could make it. I think an old friend of mine on here said something to the effect of: You've shown that you have a vested interest in seeing to it that Schaub fails, so in essence you're rooting for it to fail so you can prove your point. Wouldn't it be easier to root for him to succeed?

That stuff cuts both ways. Now we have a section of the message board who is already envisioning this magical hot seat for Gary Kubiak. LOL. At some point, message board posters can become obsessed with sticking to their pet point until they see it materialize before them. I got it wrong on Carr, and cut bait halfway through his last year here. Along the same line, I also think I got it wrong on Schaub and Kubiak, based on what I saw in the last half of the season.

I know a little bit about being wrong. I can spot it a mile away. I'm a wrongologist. Which doesn't pay very well. [/sarcasm]

You guys can now go back to deciding on what formula and criteria it will take for the head coach to be on the hot seat for a bad season that hasn't happened yet. By the way, Texans_Chick's blog entry on this topic was very good and is worth a read by everyone scanning this thread.

I think that you're being to harsh on people that believe Kubes is on the hot seat or close to it. Kubes will be in his 4th season this year and if the Texans can't do 10-6 or better, then what is the point really? He's had his 3 years to get this team ready mentally and physically, and so now it's time to turn that corner. Other coaches have done it within this amount of time already, so it's time for Kubiak to show the fans that he can field a winning team that looks like it might stick around as a winner for quite a few years.

Sorry, but those are expectations. They are what they are, and anything less would be paying a guy just to be a coach and not a winning coach.

I haven't been an advocate of Kubiak since year 1 was over personally, and I'm not going to go into why right now in this thread, but at the same time I think I've been quite fair. I hope that he shows that he is the right guy for the job for many years and that all of my negative suspicions I had about him here and there are washed away. However though, I'll judge him this year according to what my reasonable expectations are for this team this season. I think that 10-6 should be minimum expectations at this point. I don't want to hear about injuries really either, because every team has injuries and great coaches and teams find ways to work around that, and if certain injuries happen to fall on a guy like Schaub whom Kubes has basically put all his chips and confidence in, then there will be no excuse because that was who Kubes wanted and who the team has put their chances in. Kubes knew what he was doing when he put all of his chips in on Schaub who was unproven when we got him, and so it's highly likely that Kubes just might live and die by what Schaub does just like just about every other HC does.

GP
05-11-2009, 02:58 PM
I think that you're being to harsh on people that believe Kubes is on the hot seat or close to it. Kubes will be in his 4th season this year and if the Texans can't do 10-6 or better, then what is the point really? He's had his 3 years to get this team ready mentally and physically, and so now it's time to turn that corner. Other coaches have done it within this amount of time already, so it's time for Kubiak to show the fans that he can field a winning team that looks like it might stick around as a winner for quite a few years.

Sorry, but those are expectations. They are what they are, and anything less would be paying a guy just to be a coach and not a winning coach.

I haven't been an advocate of Kubiak since year 1 was over personally, and I'm not going to go into why right now in this thread, but at the same time I think I've been quite fair. I hope that he shows that he is the right guy for the job for many years and that all of my negative suspicions I had about him here and there are washed away. However though, I'll judge him this year according to what my reasonable expectations are for this team this season. I think that 10-6 should be minimum expectations at this point. I don't want to hear about injuries really either, because every team has injuries and great coaches and teams find ways to work around that, and if certain injuries happen to fall on a guy like Schaub whom Kubes has basically put all his chips and confidence in, then there will be no excuse because that was who Kubes wanted and who the team has put their chances in. Kubes knew what he was doing when he put all of his chips in on Schaub who was unproven when we got him, and so it's highly likely that Kubes just might live and die by what Schaub does just like just about every other HC does.

I actually see Matt Schaub as being on more of a hot seat than Kubiak is, if we're talking turkey here.

I think this offense is QB-friendly, especially with what Sage was able to do (this is where the jokes come flying in...copter-style). So I see Matt Schaub's situation as this: He's sort of like a car that you spent two years paying off, you're free and clear of it, and if he doesn't work out...you go out and get another car and start making payments again. You might even find a better car

That'll rub people the wrong way to think of it in such terms, but listen: We paid our 2 2nd rounders for what was, at the time, the only viable QB that Smithiak identified as being able to come in and start--he wasn't a rookie right out of college like most new franchise QBs are; he'd held the clip board and had played a few games already.

If Matt can't last (injuries or whatever) we either go QB high in next year's draft, or trade Matt away to a team that wants to gamble on the guy. There was a market for Rosencopter...so there would be a market for a Schaub unless he is on a motorized scooter.

If the oline continues to play better, which it should, and Schaub plays the way he played those last few games, which he could, then I expect 10-6 is easily attainable. But if we fall a few wins short of that, due to circumstances outside a coach's control, then I can't see us hitting the panic button on the coach. Maybe on a player or two, but not the coach. Now if the whole team doesn't show up? Yeah, that's a coach problem.

Sorry if I was too harsh. A little sleepy and irritable right now.

Polo
05-11-2009, 02:59 PM
When the team begins to regress Kubiak will be on the hotseat.

Mr. White
05-11-2009, 04:37 PM
I can't help but think if that seat wasn't getting warm, then we'd be seeing Richard Smith and Co. back as our defensive staff.

Bronco Texan
05-11-2009, 06:22 PM
I can't help but think if that seat wasn't getting warm, then we'd be seeing Richard Smith and Co. back as our defensive staff.

I see it as a proactive move by Kubes. His name wasn't even close to being on the hotseat when he made that move. I think that Kubes knew if he had another failure of a season with Dick Smith as his DC then he would be on the Hot Seat. Now with Smith gone and Bush in charge if the D doesn't get up to par he can blame it on a rebuilding year, even though there wont be much rebuilding. He his seat would be getting warm, but not as warm as it would be if Smith were still around.

I think the Bush move gives him atleast two more year. If he goes 8-8 again with a mediocore D, he can say "well I finally got my guy, lets give him time to pan out."

Lucky
05-11-2009, 06:52 PM
The Falcons were in a weak division. I give credit to their run game, and to the new QB who stabilized that position. Out of the two teams you mentioned, the Falcons are easily the better team. But their division existed of pretty weak teams, can't we agree on that? No comparison to the other divisions.

2008 NFC South Standings
Carolina Panthers 12-4
Atlanta Falcons 11-5
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 9-7
New Orleans Saints 8-8

34-18 (.653) outside of division (Best in the NFL)
11-5 (.688) Non-conference (Tied for best in the NFL)

We can agree that the NFC South was not comparable to other divisions. That's about all I can agree with.

Why must the Sunshine Club continue to discount the success of other teams in order to inflate the success of the Texans? The Atlanta Falcons were a better team than the Houston Texans were in 2008. They weren't more talented. They didn't play in a cupcake division. They didn't have more time to "gel". They just played better, smarter football.

Kaiser Toro
05-11-2009, 07:00 PM
2008 NFC South Standings
Carolina Panthers 12-4
Atlanta Falcons 11-5
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 9-7
New Orleans Saints 8-8

34-18 (.653) outside of division (Best in the NFL)
11-5 (.688) Non-conference (Tied for best in the NFL)

We can agree that the NFC South was not comparable to other divisions. That's about all I can agree with.

Why must the Sunshine Club continue to discount the success of other teams in order to inflate the success of the Texans? The Atlanta Falcons were a better team than the Houston Texans were in 2008. They weren't more talented. They didn't play in a cupcake division. They didn't have more time to "gel". They just played better, smarter football.

Why do you hate sunshine and cupcakes? :devilpig:

thunderkyss
05-11-2009, 08:08 PM
I think that 10-6 should be minimum expectations at this point.

As it stands right now, with our schedule looking the way it does, then I'll agree.... based on last years standings, we have a fairly easy schedule. But if the AFC East ends up having 3 teams that finish better than 10-6, and the NFC West turns out the same way, our schedule would in fact turn out to be one of the toughest. 10-6 may not turn out to be so reasonable after all.

What if Kubiak comes down with pneumonia, and is out for 3 weeks, should we blame him for not going 10-6?

All I'm saying, is that anything can happen. We'd be better off to look back at the end of the season, and determine if our expectations were reasonable, then make our decision from there.

I don't care, if we go 4-12...... if we improve significantly on every single stat, except red zone efficiency, then I'll be happy, because I know the wins will be coming.

Second Honeymoon
05-11-2009, 08:15 PM
2008 NFC South Standings
Carolina Panthers 12-4
Atlanta Falcons 11-5
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 9-7
New Orleans Saints 8-8

34-18 (.653) outside of division (Best in the NFL)
11-5 (.688) Non-conference (Tied for best in the NFL)

We can agree that the NFC South was not comparable to other divisions. That's about all I can agree with.

Why must the Sunshine Club continue to discount the success of other teams in order to inflate the success of the Texans? The Atlanta Falcons were a better team than the Houston Texans were in 2008. They weren't more talented. They didn't play in a cupcake division. They didn't have more time to "gel". They just played better, smarter football.

because some fans struggle with objectivity. They will try to spin any honest and valid criticism into some pie-in-the-sky land of excuses and retarded logic.

there is a lot to be happy about in Texans fanland. we have arguably the best WR in the league. we have one of the better young DL in the league. we had a rookie show great promise and productivity in 2009. we have managed to develop decent depth on our OL. and with Schaub we have a guy who can burn the defense.

that doesnt mean that Texans fanland is a wistful land of unicorns and rainbows. there are some ugly truths and some less than desirable trends. our defense was horrible and we have a rookie DC who was partially responsible for the defensive product put on the field the last 2 years. our offense had trouble on 3rd and short and in the red zone.

Kubiak has done a less than adequate job of getting the team prepared and motivated on a week-to-week basis...and don't give me that mularkey that they should motivate themselves because they are pro or getting paid...give me a break. Outside of the QB position, there is no greater factor in NFL success than your head coach.

We owe it ourselves to consider replacing Kubiak if the team doesn't improve both in record and in performance. It's a results based league and with proper motivation and game management (a kubiak weakness) you can turn things around a helluva lot faster than 4 years...and if Kubiak can't do it in 4 years then he needs to send his resume to Shanahan.

Lets hope Kubiak can lead the Texans and improve as a HC because that would mean we had success but if we dont have success, Gary has got to go.

thunderkyss
05-11-2009, 08:27 PM
2008 NFC South Standings
Carolina Panthers 12-4
Atlanta Falcons 11-5
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 9-7
New Orleans Saints 8-8

34-18 (.653) outside of division (Best in the NFL)
11-5 (.688) Non-conference (Tied for best in the NFL)
2007 NFC South
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 9-7
Carolina Panthers 7-9
New Orleans Saints 7-9
Atlanta Falcons 4-12

They played the NFC North, the worst teams from the NFC West(St Louis) and the worst team from the NFC East (Philadelphia), and the AFC West( Oakland, San Diego, Kansas City, Denver) Not to mention their own sorry division.

IMHO, their record, their record outside their division, and their record outside their conference... is a bit skewed.

Lucky
05-11-2009, 08:39 PM
What if Kubiak comes down with pneumonia, and is out for 3 weeks...?
At least he didn't say swine flu...:devilpig:

You guys win. I can't top that. I don't want someone to breakout the "What if aliens attack Reliant Stadium?" card. I won't use Kubiak in a sentence until the season starts.

Not to mention their own sorry division.

But, um...nevermind.

thunderkyss
05-11-2009, 08:45 PM
We owe it ourselves to consider replacing Kubiak if the team doesn't improve both in record and in performance.

Imagine you're a Cleveland Brown fan..... that dang Belichick wasn't getting it done, so you fire him, and you bring in Romeo Crennel. You watch your team take baby steps, but nothing's getting done, so you fire him, and you bring in Mangini.

All the while, Belichick is enjoying success in New England, developing players, resurrecting careers, winning Super Bowls.

Bob McNair's mind, should be focused on building a successful franchise, not winning a few games. As long as we're doing the right things, the success will follow. Don't focus on the results, focus on the goal.

Now, I'll agree that if it doesn't look like Kubiak is learning from his bone headed mistakes..... his play calling, his game management, his stubborness..... then McNair needs to have a serious talk'n to him. But the man is doing so many things right, why not give him a chance to get this right. He's definitely learning how to be a head coach. I believe one day he will be. I'd hate for him to be that great head coach, for the Titans, the Jaguars, the Colts, the Cowboys, San Diego, or any other team.

Lucky
05-11-2009, 08:53 PM
Imagine you're a Cleveland Brown fan..... that dang Belichick wasn't getting it done, so you fire him, and you bring in Romeo Crennel.
http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=8&pictureid=79

Kaiser Toro
05-11-2009, 09:06 PM
http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=8&pictureid=79

Are you saying that if Kubiak weighs as much as a duck, then he is a Belichick?

Runner
05-12-2009, 04:28 AM
2008 NFC South Standings
Carolina Panthers 12-4
Atlanta Falcons 11-5
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 9-7
New Orleans Saints 8-8

34-18 (.653) outside of division (Best in the NFL)
11-5 (.688) Non-conference (Tied for best in the NFL)

We can agree that the NFC South was not comparable to other divisions. That's about all I can agree with.

Why must the Sunshine Club continue to discount the success of other teams in order to inflate the success of the Texans? The Atlanta Falcons were a better team than the Houston Texans were in 2008. They weren't more talented. They didn't play in a cupcake division. They didn't have more time to "gel". They just played better, smarter football.

2007 NFC South
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 9-7
Carolina Panthers 7-9
New Orleans Saints 7-9
Atlanta Falcons 4-12

They played the NFC North, the worst teams from the NFC West(St Louis) and the worst team from the NFC East (Philadelphia), and the AFC West( Oakland, San Diego, Kansas City, Denver) Not to mention their own sorry division.

IMHO, their record, their record outside their division, and their record outside their conference... is a bit skewed.


So two teams got significantly better, one a game better, and one stayed the same. Why is it again that as Texans fans we would spin it that the team that maintained the same mediocre record did the best? Is it because Tampa is "doing things right"?

Specnatz
05-12-2009, 07:43 AM
Why is it if you think Kubiak is doing a good job and is not on the Hot Seat we are in a sunshine club and like sprinkles and rainbows?

I know there were several who wanted Kubiak gone after last season, regardless of improvements the team has made, hell there is even one who wanted him fired 5 games into his second season.

Reminds of being called a homer because I disagreed with certain folks.

Are some so used to losing that they can not see for the life of them bright spots and all they see is the negative and so they project that into how they think Kubiak will do this year, so automatically they have this black and white image and it is set in stone if the record is this no matter what fire him, if the record is this no matter what keep him. How about actually looking if we improved in areas that we need to improve on (Most noticeably the Defense) and judge then.

I get the feeling (I could be wrong) that some use the term sunshine club because idiots the singular version is not allowed.

GP
05-12-2009, 08:45 AM
Why is it if you think Kubiak is doing a good job and is not on the Hot Seat we are in a sunshine club and like sprinkles and rainbows?

I know there were several who wanted Kubiak gone after last season, regardless of improvements the team has made, hell there is even one who wanted him fired 5 games into his second season.

Reminds of being called a homer because I disagreed with certain folks.

Are some so used to losing that they can not see for the life of them bright spots and all they see is the negative and so they project that into how they think Kubiak will do this year, so automatically they have this black and white image and it is set in stone if the record is this no matter what fire him, if the record is this no matter what keep him. How about actually looking if we improved in areas that we need to improve on (Most noticeably the Defense) and judge then.

I get the feeling (I could be wrong) that some use the term sunshine club because idiots the singular version is not allowed.

That's a big part of it. Look at all the little "poor pitiful us" threads we see every off-season where posters are griping about how somebody's power rankings has us listed at 17 instead of 15, or some analyst on TV dares to say we will not be a good team this year, etc. etc. There's been a chilling effect on Texans fans, which I think has led us to this idea that Gary Kubiak has to do x, or y, or z in order to not be on the hot seat.

There's an attitude of ultimatums and zero-tolerance about what the Texans are to accomplish. Ole Miss did a good job of making a post where he asked a bunch of questions, and it was glossed over by the rain cloud club.

You're right: Anybody who wants to be positive and talk about the good things that has happened since 2-14, as well as talk about how much BETTER things are probably going to get, is a dolt and someone who embraces mediocrity.

Let's fire Gary Kubiak and play Head Coach Lotto. You only have to go through 4 or 5 head coaches before you stumble upon a good one, so it's only about a decade or so until we find Mr. Right. We'll switch between the 3-4 and the 4-3 several times, screwing up several years' worth of drafts and free agent acquisitions, and then there's the constant tinkering with the offense because the WCO isn't the new HC's cup of tea.

I think Denver is trying that philosophy out. Kyle Orton and the Spread Offense should be the answer Pat Bowlen was looking for.

Spec, I normally don't jive with your lines of reasoning...but I am with you on this one.

GP
05-12-2009, 08:55 AM
I wonder how well Belichick's Patriots team would have done if Drew Bledsoe hadn't been injured, and he went on to play the remainder of that season and playoffs, as well as maybe one more year? They wouldn't have won.

Sometimes goofy things happen, on the field, that impact the team. The Pats were definitely a good team on defense, but with a shaky QB at the controls...they wouldn't have won so quickly.

If the position of QB is just as essential as the head coach (as someone has said), then Matt Schaub should be on a hot seat moreso than the guy who took over 2-14 and quietly built up a 3rd ranked offense. But that's just me.

A head coach gives his coordinators and assistants time to prove whether they can get it done or not, and Kubiak did that with Sherman (gone) and Richard Smith (gone). He does the same with players, such as Carr (gone) and Weaver (gone). A good head coach evaluates staff and players over time, and then tries to replace the parts that he thinks needs replacing. Kubiak has shown the same sort of patience that Bob McNair has shown, and I think there's a synergy there between owner and HC...so much so that I bet Kubiak's not on the same hot seat (nor will he be) that some fans are projecting him to be on.

IMO, Gary has gotten it right a lot more times than he has gotten it wrong.

Polo
05-12-2009, 09:01 AM
Kubes isn't on the hot seat until I say he is :)

Polo
05-12-2009, 09:10 AM
Seriously though...

If I'm McNair I'll give Kubiak a lot of chain to work with...two non losing seasons back to back is a step in the right direction...If he goes 8-8 this year then some things would have had to gone really wrong..

If you look at last year we were a Sage Rosenfels meltdown and a huge defensive/team letdown against Oakland away from being 10-6. Honestly I really think all of this is moot because I don't see us winning anything less than 9 games this year...

You can compare us to Atlanta, Saints, Panthers...whoever....

Doesn't matter....Kubiak isn't working with a core group of guys that have experienced tons of success in the NFL...For the most part he's working with a bunch of young guys who have never experienced a winning season....The other teams you guys name had key vets that had experienced winning on big stages...

I think the difference between the opposing sides of this argument is the outlook...Some see Kubes past failures and allude to him potentially failing in the future because he hasn't quite stacked up to what some of his peers have done W/L wise....

Then you have others that choose to view the situation positively. I'm not sure why we have to get classified as the sunshine and lolipop crowd just because we see a team that has consistently gotten stronger despite the one year where we repeated our 8-8 record from the year previous.

None of this is set in stone, and time will tell who was imagining lolipops and sunshine and who was briniging doom and gloom..

Runner
05-12-2009, 09:50 AM
If you really want to know why I think of a sunshine club, read on.

Personnaly I started considering some small set (not all) of the optimists to be in some sort of "sunshine club" last year in a conversation in a lenghty thread. It was shortly after the three game win streak that included wins over two very bad teams. I didn't appreciate being talked down to because I "couldn't see the rightness" of the team finishing with eleven, maybe even twelve wins. I was struck that a select group of posters seemed to believe with a religious fervor and just wanted to enlighten my poor, ignorant soul. As now, I was told I was encumbered by opinions based on past Texans performance. If I could just believe in someone else's vision I too could be right.

I was even given proof by way of a list of the remaining schedule with little Ws by most of the team names! Somehow I still doubted.

Some optimists can make persuasive, factual arguments. The sunshine club to me are those that know the Texans are on the upswing because they are the hometown team, and as such every action can, and must be, spun as being right and further proof the Texans have multiple Super Bowl wins lined up in the near future.

The sunshine club frequently use arguments that boil down to circular logic: the Texans are building the right way; it is the right way because that is how the Texans are building.

My sunshine club has just a handful of members - a lot of the people complaining about the term aren't even on my list. I don't mind seeing opinions contrary to mine - usually :) Sometimes they may even change my mind. Implying I'm wrong because I haven't seen the light isn't a big winner with me though.

=====

More succinctly, I consider the sunshine club those who can't distinguish between their own beliefs and knowledge, and therefore consider opposing ideas ignorance.

HJam72
05-12-2009, 09:56 AM
If you really want to know why I think of a sunshine club, read on.

Personnaly I started considering some small set (not all) of the optimists to be in some sort of "sunshine club" last year in a conversation in a lenghty thread. It was shortly after the three game win streak that included wins over two very bad teams. I didn't appreciate being talked down to because I "couldn't see the rightness" of the team finishing with eleven, maybe even twelve wins. I was struck that a select group of posters seemed to believe with a religious fervor and just wanted to enlighten my poor, ignorant soul. As now, I was told I was encumbered by opinions based on past Texans performance. If I could just believe in someone else's vision I too could be right.

I was even given proof by way of a list of the remaining schedule with little Ws by most of the team names! Somehow I still doubted.

Some optimists can make persuasive, factual arguments. The sunshine club to me are those that know the Texans are on the upswing because they are the hometown team, and as such every action can, and must be, spun as being right and further proof the Texans have multiple Super Bowl wins lined up in the near future.

The sunshine club frequently use arguments that boil down to circular logic: the Texans are building the right way; it is the right way because that is how the Texans are building.

My sunshine club has just a handful of members - a lot of the people complaining about the term aren't even on my list. I don't mind seeing opinions contrary to mine - usually :) Sometimes they may even change mind. Implying I'm wrong because I haven't seen the light isn't a big winner with me though.

=====

More succinctly, I consider the sunshine club those who can't distinguish between their own beliefs and knowledge, and therefore consider opposing ideas ignorance.

That is just so stupid. :jk:

Runner
05-12-2009, 10:23 AM
That is just so stupid. :jk:


Exactly!

HOU-TEX
05-12-2009, 11:29 AM
If you really want to know why I think of a sunshine club, read on.

Personnaly I started considering some small set (not all) of the optimists to be in some sort of "sunshine club" last year in a conversation in a lenghty thread. It was shortly after the three game win streak that included wins over two very bad teams. I didn't appreciate being talked down to because I "couldn't see the rightness" of the team finishing with eleven, maybe even twelve wins. I was struck that a select group of posters seemed to believe with a religious fervor and just wanted to enlighten my poor, ignorant soul. As now, I was told I was encumbered by opinions based on past Texans performance. If I could just believe in someone else's vision I too could be right.

I was even given proof by way of a list of the remaining schedule with little Ws by most of the team names! Somehow I still doubted.

Some optimists can make persuasive, factual arguments. The sunshine club to me are those that know the Texans are on the upswing because they are the hometown team, and as such every action can, and must be, spun as being right and further proof the Texans have multiple Super Bowl wins lined up in the near future.

The sunshine club frequently use arguments that boil down to circular logic: the Texans are building the right way; it is the right way because that is how the Texans are building.

My sunshine club has just a handful of members - a lot of the people complaining about the term aren't even on my list. I don't mind seeing opinions contrary to mine - usually :) Sometimes they may even change mind. Implying I'm wrong because I haven't seen the light isn't a big winner with me though.

=====

More succinctly, I consider the sunshine club those who can't distinguish between their own beliefs and knowledge, and therefore consider opposing ideas ignorance.

I can think of two right of the bat that could be the President and Vice President of the Sunshine Club.

thunderkyss
05-12-2009, 05:56 PM
So two teams got significantly better, one a game better, and one stayed the same. Why is it again that as Texans fans we would spin it that the team that maintained the same mediocre record did the best? Is it because Tampa is "doing things right"?

My point is that you can't tell if they got significantly better or worse, going by their W-L record. All you can say is that they won more/less games. But that doesn't make them a better team.

Remember all those easy schedules that Jacksonville had, and we were saying they were over rated? They kept saying they were almost as good as the Colts... But when they finally played a good team, it wasn't even a contest.

Is our passing game better or worse than it was in '07?
Is our running game better or worse than it was in '07?
Is our OLine better or worse than it was in '07?
Do we have more or less talent on the offensive side of the ball?
Do we have more or less talent on the defensive side of the ball?

Does having the same record as '07 change any of that?

This year, we have an easier schedule, than we've had in some time. If we go 14-2, but finish the year with less total yards, less sacks, less TDs, more turn-overs, then we are not a better team, regardless what our W-L record shows. If this is the case, and we are one and done in the play-offs, then Gary Kubiak should be on the hot-seat.

Blake
05-12-2009, 06:04 PM
Kubiak is on the hot seat to the superbowl!!!

Kubiak aint going anywhere even with a losing record.

Kaiser Toro
05-12-2009, 06:15 PM
Kubiak is on the hot seat to the superbowl!!!


That borders comic genius and sunshine. "There's such a fine line between clever and stupid." :)

thunderkyss
05-12-2009, 06:43 PM
This thread going 10 pages is ridiculous. Kubiak is not on the hot seat. This team is clearly improving.

Yeah, whatever.

I like your avatar.....

Kaiser Toro
05-12-2009, 06:45 PM
Yeah, whatever.

I like your avatar.....

Some would call it a hot seat.

ObsiWan
05-12-2009, 06:59 PM
Some would call it a hot seat.

what he said!

Second Honeymoon
05-12-2009, 07:11 PM
At least he didn't say swine flu...:devilpig:

You guys win. I can't top that. I don't want someone to breakout the "What if aliens attack Reliant Stadium?" card. I won't use Kubiak in a sentence until the season starts.


But, um...nevermind.

good stuff lucky

Second Honeymoon
05-12-2009, 07:25 PM
Kubiak is on the hot seat to the superbowl!!!

Kubiak aint going anywhere even with a losing record.

Hooray for you!! Kubiak hasn't even produced a winning season yet he is destined for the Super Bowl....whatever.

It's good to see that in the same post you talk about Gary going to the Super Bowl you then point out that even if he loses, he is keeping his job.

I really don't know what Kubiak has done to earn such blind loyalty even amidst a losing canvas of work. I just don't see it. If he wasn't from Houston would you be saying the same thing?

And as for Spec pointing out that I wanted Kubiak run after 5 games last year, damn straight I did. And you act like 8-8 with a bunch of wins vs. bad teams and teams with nothing to play for somehow validates your fanaticism of god King Gary Kubiak? Give me a break, dude.

The dude hasn't exactly invented cold fusion and he isn't proven so why the blind loyalty? In most games that are big or have any sort of implications towards success, they fall FLAT on their face. have you not watched the same games as me? Do you have a reality filter installed on your television? cmon now.

There have been embarassing losses in just about any meaningful game yet Kubiak somehow has this inate divine right towards greatness. some of the arguments are just so sad and pathetic. All some of us fans are asking for is some objectivity and reality. How about having it be a head coach's responsibility for putting together a quality defensive staff. How about we make that a prerequisite. I don't think that is asking too much. The dude hired from within!! cmon Gary. That was just stupid and is inviting disaster and is the reason he is on the HOT SEAT.

I hope we are wrong but if your an offensive head coach and you can't find a quality defensive coach to lead your defense, you probably aren't going to be a head coach long...unless your team is owned by one of the Sunshine Club. hopefully McNair revoked his membership after the Care Bear Coddle-Fest that was going on during our franchises' infancy.

Sorry about the rant, I just can't believe how some people are so damn carebear...

Runner
05-12-2009, 07:51 PM
My point is that you can't tell if they got significantly better or worse, going by their W-L record. All you can say is that they won more/less games...

They should get rid of those misleading won/loss records and name teams into the playoffs. I'd rather watch the great 4-12 teams than the bad 12-4 teams. I'm not even going to mention the powerful 8-8 team that gets overlooked every year. Well, two years anyway.

They could call the system the Better Championship System* and take into account strength of schedule and stuff. It would legitimize the Super Bowl.

*BCS for short.

Polo
05-12-2009, 07:52 PM
If you really want to know why I think of a sunshine club, read on.

Personnaly I started considering some small set (not all) of the optimists to be in some sort of "sunshine club" last year in a conversation in a lenghty thread. It was shortly after the three game win streak that included wins over two very bad teams. I didn't appreciate being talked down to because I "couldn't see the rightness" of the team finishing with eleven, maybe even twelve wins. I was struck that a select group of posters seemed to believe with a religious fervor and just wanted to enlighten my poor, ignorant soul. As now, I was told I was encumbered by opinions based on past Texans performance. If I could just believe in someone else's vision I too could be right.

I was even given proof by way of a list of the remaining schedule with little Ws by most of the team names! Somehow I still doubted.

Some optimists can make persuasive, factual arguments. The sunshine club to me are those that know the Texans are on the upswing because they are the hometown team, and as such every action can, and must be, spun as being right and further proof the Texans have multiple Super Bowl wins lined up in the near future.

The sunshine club frequently use arguments that boil down to circular logic: the Texans are building the right way; it is the right way because that is how the Texans are building.

My sunshine club has just a handful of members - a lot of the people complaining about the term aren't even on my list. I don't mind seeing opinions contrary to mine - usually :) Sometimes they may even change my mind. Implying I'm wrong because I haven't seen the light isn't a big winner with me though.

=====

More succinctly, I consider the sunshine club those who can't distinguish between their own beliefs and knowledge, and therefore consider opposing ideas ignorance.


Point taken.

Runner
05-12-2009, 07:58 PM
Point taken.


I really don't have a list. It is more a type of post than type of poster. That being said, there are a few posters that consistently take that type of stance...

Maybe I do have a list, albeit informal. :)

Kaiser Toro
05-12-2009, 11:47 PM
I really don't have a list. It is more a type of post than type of poster. That being said, there are a few posters that consistently take that type of stance...

Maybe I do have a list, albeit informal. :)

Lighten up, Francis.

Runner
05-13-2009, 07:29 AM
Lighten up, Francis.

I am light. And I've seen the light. After their fifth straight and finest 8-8 season, the Texans make the playoffs as a wild card and win the Super Bowl in 2012. Other teams see the rightness of it and start throwing games at the end of the year to achieve a harmonious 8-8 record.


I'd like to teach the world to sing
In perfect harmony
I'd like to hold it in my arms
And keep it company.
...

Kaiser Toro
05-13-2009, 07:35 AM
I'd like to teach the world to sing
In perfect harmony
I'd like to hold it in my arms
And keep it company.
...

Have a Coke and a smile.

GP
05-13-2009, 09:20 AM
If you really want to know why I think of a sunshine club, read on.

Personnaly I started considering some small set (not all) of the optimists to be in some sort of "sunshine club" last year in a conversation in a lenghty thread. It was shortly after the three game win streak that included wins over two very bad teams. I didn't appreciate being talked down to because I "couldn't see the rightness" of the team finishing with eleven, maybe even twelve wins. I was struck that a select group of posters seemed to believe with a religious fervor and just wanted to enlighten my poor, ignorant soul. As now, I was told I was encumbered by opinions based on past Texans performance. If I could just believe in someone else's vision I too could be right.

I was even given proof by way of a list of the remaining schedule with little Ws by most of the team names! Somehow I still doubted.

Some optimists can make persuasive, factual arguments. The sunshine club to me are those that know the Texans are on the upswing because they are the hometown team, and as such every action can, and must be, spun as being right and further proof the Texans have multiple Super Bowl wins lined up in the near future.

The sunshine club frequently use arguments that boil down to circular logic: the Texans are building the right way; it is the right way because that is how the Texans are building.

My sunshine club has just a handful of members - a lot of the people complaining about the term aren't even on my list. I don't mind seeing opinions contrary to mine - usually :) Sometimes they may even change my mind. Implying I'm wrong because I haven't seen the light isn't a big winner with me though.

=====

More succinctly, I consider the sunshine club those who can't distinguish between their own beliefs and knowledge, and therefore consider opposing ideas ignorance.

Man, I liked you better when you'd post brief, cryptic messages on here that I'd spend half-a-day looking up the meaning of words and the little cultural nuances that you used to make yor points. I am glad you took the time to write out specifically what you feel, which leads me to this:

Nobody has to convince you of anything. Likewise, you don't have to convince anybody of anything. I think you've taken things a bit personally or maybe way too seriously, as if you're being attacked or not being understood better. Nobody can take anything from you or force you to see things their way.

Timeline of my thinking on Kubiak and the team: I personally started off thinking the hiring of Kubiak was going to mean fast success. When it slowed down to a crawl, at the first of last season, I was tired of the slow pace he had established. Even during the wins vs. Cincy and Detroit (check my posts) I was grumpy and virtually impossible to please--Those two wins did nothing for me. Nada. But the second half of the season is being written off by the rain cloud club. Those wins were, IMO, a shift in this team's persona.

I loved the off-season even more, basically because they didn't reach for the next Todd Wade or Ahman Green and then shove it down our throats like it was the biggest and bestest signing of all time and would cure our ills forever and ever. This off-season, and the draft, was very strategic and very disciplined. There is a sense of real momentum, for a change. Not the trivial, pseduo-momentum we are accustomed to: A win in the last game of a season.

But it makes no difference to you guys. I've personally gone from being too trustworthy too soon, to thinking Kubiak was going down with the ship, to now having what I feel is a more balanced view of where things are. I think a lot of you guys have not come out of your funk, and there's one guy in particular who can only gripe and scream that the sky is falling all the time.

And I don't think it's a balanced view for a lot of you to sit here and piss and moan about bad things that haven't happened yet. You do it under the disguise of being "the concerned fan" who just "wants what's best for the team," but you rain cloud guys are trying just as hard to ram your own point(s) down people's throats. It's a give-and-take relationship on opposing views, isn't it? Like I said before: Message boarders tend to pick a stance and they defend it like it's the Alamo all over again.

This is a place for the expression of ideas, and people can pick those ideas up and examine them and comment on them, or they can leave them on the floor and refuse to pick them up.

At the end of the day, makes no matter what any of us "think"...because their are wealthy, powerful people in the Texans office who make decisions with a decidedly different approach than probably any of us would employ ourselves.

We're just here to talk about things. I stated way back earlier in this thread that I feared this would turn into the dreaded "fan, not a fan" debate. Looks like I get some things right some of the times.

I enjoy your posts, and you've helped me several times to better express what I was thinking. I think this board has quality posters all the way around, even if I don't get along with some of them. Momma always said "Son, you're gonna' have to face the fact that you can't make everybody like you. Some people are gonna' dislike you just because they want to dislike you." Of course, my mom was Eva Braun, so what do I know? :tiphat:

There ARE signs that this defense is going to improve: Our dline, especially TJ and Okoye, are going to be less reactionary and more up-the-field and shooting gaps like they should have been all along. And, we now see that Reeves says the 10-yard cushion by DBs will not be the norm anymore. Whether that fleshes itself out on the field or not, is yet to be seen, but you can see the commitment is there to NOT do what we had been doing under RS.

Off-topic: Love the movie quotes, Kaiser!

Runner
05-13-2009, 10:39 AM
Hey - somebody asked and I answered.

However, after getting chided by Kaiser and GP I'll make a change. While not abnegating long posts, I will try to return to my crypto-socio quips.

GP
05-13-2009, 11:57 AM
Hey - somebody asked and I answered.

However, after getting chided by Kaiser and GP I'll make a change. While not abnegating long posts, I will try to return to my crypto-socio quips.

LOL. Crypto-socio. That's a clever moniker.

Socio-economic.

Geo-political.

Crypto-socio.

Specnatz
05-14-2009, 07:28 AM
I am light. And I've seen the light. After their fifth straight and finest 8-8 season, the Texans make the playoffs as a wild card and win the Super Bowl in 2012. Other teams see the rightness of it and start throwing games at the end of the year to achieve a harmonious 8-8 record.


I'd like to teach the world to sing
In perfect harmony
I'd like to hold it in my arms
And keep it company.
...

So you think there is no way for the Texans to have a winning season? I guess I am a member of the sunshine club because I am always optimistic this time of the year for my Texans.

I'm a cynic, not a pessimist.

Runner
05-14-2009, 07:45 AM
So you think there is no way for the Texans to have a winning season? I guess I am a member of the sunshine club because I am always optimistic this time of the year for my Texans.

I'm a cynic, not a pessimist.

I thought it was clear that post was a joke - "I've seen the light"; "harmonious 8-8 record"; the Coke song, etc.

In fact, this is the first year of the Kubiak Experience that I expect a winning season. The easier schedule alone, with no increase in the level of play, should make them 9-7. I consider anything less than 10-6 a disappointment.

Of course, I was a pessimist the last two years because I didn't tout a winning record...

Thorn
05-14-2009, 07:49 AM
Kubiac and Smith are on the right track with the Texans. They can't fill all the holes every year, and every year presents new problems in terms of players, injuries, schedules, contracts, ect. ect.

I think this will be a good year for the Texans, their fans, and Kubiac and his staff. :)

Dean 74
05-14-2009, 08:06 AM
man, its been a long offseason...
-74

HOU-TEX
05-14-2009, 08:32 AM
man, its been a long offseason...
-74

It ain't close to over yet and we've just began the worst part of the off-season. We still have about 2 1/2 months until Camp begins.

Mr. White
05-14-2009, 11:25 AM
This thread's taken an interesting turn.

I've noticed that some are pretty quick to jump on the ones that question Kubiak or Smith (I'll never call them Smithiak.) There's a perception that if you say anything negative about the organization, that you aren't a good fan.

I guess a lot of people have agendas. Mine is to get to the playoffs. I don't care who starts, sits, gets fired or gets hired to make that happen.

Until that happens, it's open season on anyone.

Texecutioner
05-14-2009, 11:35 AM
It ain't close to over yet and we've just began the worst part of the off-season. We still have about 2 1/2 months until Camp begins.

Geez, I didn't realize that it was that far away. :cool:

GP
05-14-2009, 11:52 AM
This thread's taken an interesting turn.

I've noticed that some are pretty quick to jump on the ones that question Kubiak or Smith (I'll never call them Smithiak.) There's a perception that if you say anything negative about the organization, that you aren't a good fan.

I guess a lot of people have agendas. Mine is to get to the playoffs. I don't care who starts, sits, gets fired or gets hired to make that happen.

Until that happens, it's open season on anyone.

I think the sticking point, for me at least, is that the team is not even in training camp yet...and we're already calculating what has to be done in order for a coach to stay the coach when this season hasn't even been played yet. I realize it's all just message board chatter, and more people should realize that too.

Just seems a bit premature, as well as anxiety-driven: We all want the playoffs, but realistically are we even realllllly a team built and ready to go deep through the playoffs yet?

I expect playoffs. 9-7 is the lowest this team should go, under all the situations and circumstances we see before us.

badboy
05-14-2009, 12:01 PM
To me it is amazing how many folks assume a "winner's mantle" if their fave team is winning. This is what I call being on a band wagon. The end score does not always reflect the efforts of the teams and as another posted, I'd rather watch a well played loss than a sloppy win. A player, coach or owner (are you listening Mark Cuban?) is open to fair criticism and the person doing the evaluation should not be attacked, but are then opening themselves to fair criticism. Another odd thing is how valued and important our individual opinion becomes when we buy a ticket or jersey or just sit at home and watch. I love to listen to radio personalities dog a player, coach or owner and then when that person is on the telephone with the radio personality; the latter takes a much softer approach.

Mr. White
05-14-2009, 12:06 PM
I think the sticking point, for me at least, is that the team is not even in training camp yet...and we're already calculating what has to be done in order for a coach to stay the coach when this season hasn't even been played yet. I realize it's all just message board chatter, and more people should realize that too.

Just seems a bit premature, as well as anxiety-driven: We all want the playoffs, but realistically are we even realllllly a team built and ready to go deep through the playoffs yet?

I expect playoffs. 9-7 is the lowest this team should go, under all the situations and circumstances we see before us.

I guess the reason why I ever chimed in on this thread is because I don't think it's an unreasonable question. If Marty Schottenheimer can get fired after going 14-2, then why shouldn't our guy be held to a tough standard?

I don't expect a run deep into the playoffs by any means. I just want them to get there. 4 years is long enough by any owner's standards.

If I think the 3rd-string deep snapper is an obstacle, then I'll call him out too.

.......there goes lunchtime......back to work now.

infantrycak
05-14-2009, 12:32 PM
If Marty Schottenheimer can get fired after going 14-2, then why shouldn't our guy be held to a tough standard?

Bad example - firing Schottenheimer was dumb.

BigBull17
05-14-2009, 01:05 PM
Bad example - firing Schottenheimer was dumb.

What? Norv Turner rocks.....! BEST. COACH. EVER......!:wild:

Ole Miss Texan
05-14-2009, 02:05 PM
Seriously... Kubiak hasn't been fired yet!? Let's get it over with already... this guy's a lame duck.



/endsarcasm

Mr. White
05-14-2009, 02:39 PM
Bad example - firing Schottenheimer was dumb.

Okay then pick any coach that ever made the playoffs and got fired the same season.

The point is that most other NFL organizations give a lot less rope than we do for guys that don't progress. But I guess that means we're doing things the "right way".

HoustonFrog
05-14-2009, 02:43 PM
Okay then pick any coach that ever made the playoffs and got fired the same season.

The point is that most other NFL organizations give a lot less rope than we do for guys that don't progress. But I guess that means we're doing things the "right way".

I haven't responded in here but I agree with you up to a point. I think the Texans have made a habit of being the good guys and sticking with a gameplan to a fault sometimes....see DC. I'm not saying Kubes should be fired. I like the guy. But if this season is another mediocre season and he shows that he still has some problems with managing the game, then I think he is definitely on the hotseat. I don't think just firing guys makes you a better franchise but I think at some point there is a sheet or get off the pot menatality that has to hit you. I think with the parity and meteoric rise and fall of teams these days that it makes it hard to watch a team just plug along year after year and try and do things in a very slug like progressive manner.

FirstTexansFan
05-14-2009, 03:12 PM
Well, we could always get the Bud Adams syndrome, for most of his NFL tenure, he went through a crapload of coaches. He also fired a very popular Bum Phillips with an 11-5 record after Bum made it to the playoffs a third consecutive time.

But Wait! Hasn't Bud been somewhat successful sticking with the same coach now for many years? Even BUD ADAMS can learn...Keep Hope Alive! ;)

Polo
05-14-2009, 03:14 PM
The point is that most other NFL organizations give a lot less rope than we do for guys that don't progress. But I guess that means we're doing things the "right way".

You're right...

Pittsburg should have fired The Chin way before he had a chance to retire after winning the superbowl...Fisher....Don't even get me started...Dude is just a complete failure....

I don't think that you can point to other teams firing their coaches and use it as a guiding light. What other teams do really has no bearing...Plenty of teams have fired coaches only to get worse...But I guess since other teams are doing it, it makes it right?

Fire a coach when a team is clearly regressing and is no longer responding to him...

All of this record stuff is really meaningless at the end of the day...


How much blame should Kubiak take for Sage completely melting down and giving away a game? If we win that game we are 9-7

Was that one possible win really the difference between Kubes being on the hotseat and him not being on the hot seat..

Lets say we win that game and don't sleep walk against Oakland (a team that I think we are clearly better than)....that'd put us a 10-6

I'm not sure how you look at the win/loss record and definitively say a coach is on the hotseat...

If that were the case, Kubes should have already been fired...Dudes had multiple chances to crack .500 and has yet to do so...

I mean...If the record is the only thing we're looking at and other circumstances don't matter, why shouldn't kubes have been on the hotseat after going 6-10 his first year here?

HoustonFrog
05-14-2009, 03:19 PM
You're right...

Pittsburg should have fired The Chin way before he had a chance to retire after winning the superbowl...Fisher....Don't even get me started...Dude is just a complete failure....

I don't think that you can point to other teams firing their coaches and use it as a guiding light. What other teams do really has no bearing...

Fire a coach when a team is clearly regressing and is no longer responding to him...

All of this record stuff is really meaningless at the end of the day...


How much blame should Kubiak take for Sage completely melting down and giving away a game? If we win that game we are 9-7

Was that one possible win really the difference between Kubes being on the hotseat and him not being on the hot seat..

Lets say we win that game and don't sleep walk against Oakland (a team that I think we are clearly better than)....that'd put us a 10-6I'm not sure how you look at the win/loss record and definitively say a coach is on the hotseat...

If that were the case, Kubes should have already been fired...Dudes had multiple chances to crack .500 and has yet to do so...

I mean...If the record is the only thing we're looking at and other circumstances don't matter, why shouldn't kubes have been on the hotseat after going 6-10 his first year here?


But all of these what ifs are what gets coaches fired. You can't say "what if" because many people think that the "luck" or plays you pointed out happen on the positive side due to coaching and preparation. Under some people's theory a coach should just be allowed to stick around as long as he wants if a play here and there makes them .500 yearly and if he is a good guy and because some teams have had success in the history of the league not firing guys. Overall if other teams keep passing you, then you have to look at how you are doing business. Again, just playing devils advocate. I'd expect a good year this year.

awtysst
05-14-2009, 03:22 PM
The point is that most other NFL organizations give a lot less rope than we do for guys that don't progress. But I guess that means we're doing things the "right way".

The 2-14 Texans were a HORRIBLE team. They were quite frankly lucky to have won those 2 games. When Kubes came here he knew that he had a major mess to cleanup. We all did. But do you really get how bad the team was. Let me ask you this: without looking it up, how many players are still here that were here under the previous regime?

The answer is 4. Andre Johnson, Chester Pitts, Kris Brown, and Dunta Robinson are it. Starting a team with a stud WR, solid Guard, good kicker, and solid CB is not exactly having a lot.

So, in a typical 53 man roster scenario Kubes kept 1 wr, 1 OG, 1 CB, and 1 K. Thats it. 93% of the roster is completely different. Think about that number for a moment. 93%. Also remember that Kubes was left with giant contracts for poor players as well, so he couldn't go crazy in FA. Quite frankly it is remarkable how good our team looks in such a short amount of time.

Polo
05-14-2009, 03:26 PM
But all of these what ifs are what gets coaches fired. You can't say "what if" because many people think that the "luck" or plays you pointed out happen on the positive side due to coaching and preparation. Under some people's theory a coach should just be allowed to stick around as long as he wants if a play here and there makes them .500 yearly and if he is a good guy and because some teams have had success in the history of the league not firing guys. Overall if other teams keep passing you, then you have to look at how you are doing business. Again, just playing devils advocate. I'd expect a good year this year.

Which leads directly into the last part of my post you quoted.

If we are not going to take into account the "what ifs", then shouldn't Kubiak have been fired after his first season for going 6-10, or atleast his second season after going 7-9 ?

If we are going to act like drones with computers for brains and just take the wins at face value and not take into account other factors, shouldn't Kubes have been gone a long time ago?

I mean, dude has yet to break .500 or field a defense that ranks in the top half of the leauge....Dude is medium garbage according to the raw numbers...

Ole Miss Texan
05-14-2009, 03:32 PM
The 2-14 Texans were a HORRIBLE team. They were quite frankly lucky to have won those 2 games. When Kubes came here he knew that he had a major mess to cleanup. We all did. But do you really get how bad the team was. Let me ask you this: without looking it up, how many players are still here that were here under the previous regime?

The answer is 4. Andre Johnson, Chester Pitts, Kris Brown, and Dunta Robinson are it. Starting a team with a stud WR, solid Guard, good kicker, and solid CB is not exactly having a lot.

So, in a typical 53 man roster scenario Kubes kept 1 wr, 1 OG, 1 CB, and 1 K. Thats it. 93% of the roster is completely different. Think about that number for a moment. 93%. Also remember that Kubes was left with giant contracts for poor players as well, so he couldn't go crazy in FA. Quite frankly it is remarkable how good our team looks in such a short amount of time.
Not to detract from your point because its a great one... but don't forget about Travis Johnson!! That's 5!

Goldensilence
05-14-2009, 03:32 PM
The 2-14 Texans were a HORRIBLE team. They were quite frankly lucky to have won those 2 games. When Kubes came here he knew that he had a major mess to cleanup. We all did. But do you really get how bad the team was. Let me ask you this: without looking it up, how many players are still here that were here under the previous regime?

The answer is 4. Andre Johnson, Chester Pitts, Kris Brown, and Dunta Robinson are it. Starting a team with a stud WR, solid Guard, good kicker, and solid CB is not exactly having a lot.

So, in a typical 53 man roster scenario Kubes kept 1 wr, 1 OG, 1 CB, and 1 K. Thats it. 93% of the roster is completely different. Think about that number for a moment. 93%. Also remember that Kubes was left with giant contracts for poor players as well, so he couldn't go crazy in FA. Quite frankly it is remarkable how good our team looks in such a short amount of time.

Add that on to how many who weren't at the point of retirement, are starting somewhere in the NFL, much less still in the league at all. I don't think Kubiak is on the hot seat and won't get fired unless this team regresses badly. I do know that there are now expectations for the team and staff now.

HoustonFrog
05-14-2009, 03:41 PM
Which leads directly into the last part of my post you quoted.

If we are not going to take into account the "what ifs", then shouldn't Kubiak have been fired after his first season for going 6-10, or atleast his second season after going 7-9 ?

If we are going to act like drones with computers for brains and just take the wins at face value and not take into account other factors, shouldn't Kubes have been gone a long time ago?

I mean, dude has yet to break .500 or field a defense that ranks in the top half of the leauge....Dude is medium garbage according to the raw numbers...

But that isn't what people are doing. They aren't being drones to the record. They are actually taking into account that every year since the team was garbage they have seen some improvement. Last years 8-8 was definitely more competitive than the year befores 8-8. At Year 4 there should now be expectations. Playoffs. I'm not saying he should get canned if they fail but at some point it becomes a DC like moment and you have to start thinking...."is it the next year..." "well what about this next year." You can't keep thinking like that. There has to be a moment where you think you arrived. .500 yearly with some "what ifs" isn't it. All I was saying above was that Mr. White had some points and that the Texans shouldn't fall into the trap of acting like an expansion team that has more time to get over the hump. The hump is now.

Polo
05-14-2009, 03:59 PM
But that isn't what people are doing. They aren't being drones to the record. They are actually taking into account that every year since the team was garbage they have seen some improvement.

No in this thread...

All I keep seeing is talk about two str8 8-8 seasons with little regard as to how those identical records were achieved. I've seen it pretty much stated several times that the record is basically the bottom line.

Last years 8-8 was definitely more competitive than the year befores 8-8.

Agreed.

At Year 4 there should now be expectations. Playoffs. I'm not saying he should get canned if they fail but at some point it becomes a DC like moment and you have to start thinking...."is it the next year..." "well what about this next year." You can't keep thinking like that. There has to be a moment where you think you arrived. .500 yearly with some "what ifs" isn't it. All I was saying above was that Mr. White had some points and that the Texans shouldn't fall into the trap of acting like an expansion team that has more time to get over the hump. The hump is now.

Agreed again. Except I don't think that is what Mr. White or others are saying at all.

My point is that W/L record shouldn't be the only determining factor, and it seems like we're in agreeance on that front.

TexansSeminole
05-14-2009, 04:05 PM
My point is that W/L record shouldn't be the only determining factor, and it seems like we're in agreeance on that front.

I think most people would agree on that.

I think Kubiak will be on the hotseat if we don't make the playoffs next year, even if we go 8-8 or 9-7 and don't make them. I don't see him getting fired after this next year unless we are alot worse than last year which I don't see happening unless we suffer serious injuries.

badboy
05-14-2009, 04:20 PM
I haven't responded in here but I agree with you up to a point. I think the Texans have made a habit of being the good guys and sticking with a gameplan to a fault sometimes....see DC. I'm not saying Kubes should be fired. I like the guy. But if this season is another mediocre season and he shows that he still has some problems with managing the game, then I think he is definitely on the hotseat. I don't think just firing guys makes you a better franchise but I think at some point there is a sheet or get off the pot menatality that has to hit you. I think with the parity and meteoric rise and fall of teams these days that it makes it hard to watch a team just plug along year after year and try and do things in a very slug like progressive manner.See, i think it is a matter of definition. I do not see last two seasons as mediocre.

Runner
05-14-2009, 04:23 PM
See, i think it is a matter of definition. I do not see last two seasons as mediocre.

How do you define mediocre?

Runner
05-14-2009, 04:40 PM
And I think some people are discounting the record too much.

Say there is a scenario where the Texans had X amount of improvement between the the two 8-8 and years. Say they have the same improvement each of the next two and go 9-7, 9-7. This scenario is in line with the comments of those who say record is overrated.

Should any changes be made? At that rate of improvement the team would have several pro-bowlers, a running game, a passing game, and a defense. What is missing? I see the following options:

1) The fans are over estimating the amount of improvement being made.
2) The coaching is holding the team back.
3) Various spins - the schedule is too hard; no one could predict Schaub will keep getting hurt, refs, etc.
4) There is nothing wrong - well coached, very talented teams are sometimes mediocre year after year.


To me that record is saying that something in the talent level of the team or coaching is being overrated.

GNTLEWOLF
05-14-2009, 07:56 PM
And I think some people are discounting the record too much.

Say there is a scenario where the Texans had X amount of improvement between the the two 8-8 and years. Say they have the same improvement each of the next two and go 9-7, 9-7. This scenario is in line with the comments of those who say record is overrated.

Should any changes be made? At that rate of improvement the team would have several pro-bowlers, a running game, a passing game, and a defense. What is missing? I see the following options:

1) The fans are over estimating the amount of improvement being made.
2) The coaching is holding the team back.
3) Various spins - the schedule is too hard; no one could predict Schaub will keep getting hurt, refs, etc.
4) There is nothing wrong - well coached, very talented teams are sometimes mediocre year after year.


To me that record is saying that something in the talent level of the team or coaching is being overrated.

Not to mention, with this scenerio, it would be 10 years before we were at 13-3, 12 years to pass 14-2, 14 years to get past 15-1, then at years 15 and 16 we could be undefeated....given the players weren't too old and we regressed at some point in time with the same ratio as we improved.
I hope nobody here would be willing to wait another decade to see 13-3 and beyond.

thunderkyss
05-14-2009, 08:14 PM
And I think some people are discounting the record too much.


All I'm saying, is that the record shouldn't be the end all be all. If we went 8-8 in Capers final year, but it was obvious that the players quit on him in the last 2 or three games of the year.... He should be fired. If that was the case last year, Kubiak should be fired.

If we start off this season, looking as unprepared as we did to start the '08 season, then Kubiak should be on the hotseat, regardless if we're 4-1, or 1-4.

GP
05-14-2009, 10:22 PM
I just decided that since we have a sunshine club, and a rain cloud club, that we are marginalizing a sector of fans here...so without further delay, it is my pleasure to announce that we are now accepting enrollment into the partly cloudy club.

Benefits of being a member of the partly cloudy club:

1. There's a slight chance of rain...

2. But there's also a chance for sunshine, so you'll eventually be right somehow.

3. You get to look at the cloud shapes and decide what each cloud looks like.

I think I'm joining the partly cloudy club.

GNTLEWOLF
05-15-2009, 12:01 AM
I just decided that since we have a sunshine club, and a rain cloud club, that we are marginalizing a sector of fans here...so without further delay, it is my pleasure to announce that we are now accepting enrollment into the partly cloudy club.

Benefits of being a member of the partly cloudy club:

1. There's a slight chance of rain...

2. But there's also a chance for sunshine, so you'll eventually be right somehow.

3. You get to look at the cloud shapes and decide what each cloud looks like.

I think I'm joining the partly cloudy club.

From a partly cloudy fan...rep.

Grams
05-15-2009, 06:07 AM
I just decided that since we have a sunshine club, and a rain cloud club, that we are marginalizing a sector of fans here...so without further delay, it is my pleasure to announce that we are now accepting enrollment into the partly cloudy club.

Benefits of being a member of the partly cloudy club:

1. There's a slight chance of rain...

2. But there's also a chance for sunshine, so you'll eventually be right somehow.

3. You get to look at the cloud shapes and decide what each cloud looks like.

I think I'm joining the partly cloudy club.

I am going for the partly sunny club myself.

Thorn
05-15-2009, 06:53 AM
I just decided that since we have a sunshine club, and a rain cloud club, that we are marginalizing a sector of fans here...so without further delay, it is my pleasure to announce that we are now accepting enrollment into the partly cloudy club.

Benefits of being a member of the partly cloudy club:

1. There's a slight chance of rain...

2. But there's also a chance for sunshine, so you'll eventually be right somehow.

3. You get to look at the cloud shapes and decide what each cloud looks like.

I think I'm joining the partly cloudy club.

LOL. I may have to change my party affiliation.

edit: damn, and I can't give GP any more rep right now.

FirstTexansFan
05-15-2009, 10:16 AM
I just decided that since we have a sunshine club, and a rain cloud club, that we are marginalizing a sector of fans here...so without further delay, it is my pleasure to announce that we are now accepting enrollment into the partly cloudy club.

Benefits of being a member of the partly cloudy club:

1. There's a slight chance of rain...

2. But there's also a chance for sunshine, so you'll eventually be right somehow.

3. You get to look at the cloud shapes and decide what each cloud looks like.

I think I'm joining the partly cloudy club.

Whatever drugs you're taking, share please. I must admit, I spit my coffee on this one, thanks :) <sorry, couldn't rep ya, ya know the dumb rules!>

Double Barrel
05-15-2009, 10:20 AM
Head coaches get too much blame and take too much credit.

/endthread

Mike Smith and Tony Sparano disagree with you. ;)

The Falcons were in a weak division. I give credit to their run game, and to the new QB who stabilized that position. Out of the two teams you mentioned, the Falcons are easily the better team. But their division existed of pretty weak teams, can't we agree on that? No comparison to the other divisions.

And the Dolphins' schedule was a joke. They caught a Brady-less Patriots team, as well as what I deem to be a lot of sub-par teams last season. They couldn't beat us, so that says something.

I think you missed my point. HCs should deserve credit for taking bad teams and turning them around to be playoff teams within a year. Regardless of the circumstances, the point of it all is SCOREBOARD.

Saying that we beat Miami last year so they are not a good team is weak. We also beat the Panthers and took the Patriots to OT the year that they both went to the Super Bowl. What does that mean? Jack squat. We ended with 7-9 and they went to the big game. Any given Sunday, but at the end of the day it comes down to SCOREBOARD for the season.

Polo
05-15-2009, 10:23 AM
I think you missed my point. HCs should deserve credit for taking bad teams and turning them around to be playoff teams within a year. Regardless of the circumstances, the point of it all is SCOREBOARD.

Saying that we beat Miami last year so they are not a good team is weak. We also beat the Panthers and took the Patriots to OT the year that they both went to the Super Bowl. What does that mean? Jack squat. We ended with 7-9 and they went to the big game. Any given Sunday, but at the end of the day it comes down to SCOREBOARD for the season.

If the scoreboard is all that matters Kubes should have been gone after the 7-9 season. Two consecutive seasons of losing football...4 consecutive non-winning seasons...

Obviously there are other factors that need to be taken into account besides the W/L column...

Why not fire Kubes after going 6-10 his first season here? Im pretty sure everyone could come up with a list of reasons...Some could even spin that 6-10 record into something marvelous...

Of course at some point the excuses should become less, but the pittsburg Steelers didn't build a perennial challenger by coach hoping...I'm much more interested in how the team plays vs. what the final score is, because I know that if the team is playing well and they look disciplined the wins will come...

If we are using gimmicks to win games, and win despite looking terrible, I would still question Kubiak as a coach...

infantrycak
05-15-2009, 10:29 AM
And I think some people are discounting the record too much.

Say there is a scenario where the Texans had X amount of improvement between the the two 8-8 and years. Say they have the same improvement each of the next two and go 9-7, 9-7. This scenario is in line with the comments of those who say record is overrated.

Should any changes be made? At that rate of improvement the team would have several pro-bowlers, a running game, a passing game, and a defense. What is missing? I see the following options:

1) The fans are over estimating the amount of improvement being made.
2) The coaching is holding the team back.
3) Various spins - the schedule is too hard; no one could predict Schaub will keep getting hurt, refs, etc.
4) There is nothing wrong - well coached, very talented teams are sometimes mediocre year after year.

To me that record is saying that something in the talent level of the team or coaching is being overrated.

Yes ultimately the record has to be factored in significantly, but at the same time so does how you get there. Start off the season 7-1 clicking on all cylinders with a team clearly possessing the talent to win and all the sudden go into the ditch on a series of coaching mistakes and a team that appears to quit to finish 9-7 and maybe you don't give the coach another chance at all. Lose AJ for 4 weeks at the beginning of the season along with Mario for an overlapping 6 - start the season 2-6 and then come out 9-7 and I doubt a hotseat is even involved in McNair's mind.

If the scoreboard is all that matters Kubes should have been gone after the 7-9 season. Two consecutive seasons of losing football...4 consecutive non-winning seasons.....

The Texans never went 7-9 under Kubiak. 1st year (coming off Capers' 2-14) 6-10, 2nd year 8-8, 3rd year 8-8.

Polo
05-15-2009, 10:36 AM
The Texans never went 7-9 under Kubiak. 1st year (coming off Capers' 2-14) 6-10, 2nd year 8-8, 3rd year 8-8.


I don't know why I keep imagining we had a 7-9 year and that Kubes has been here four years...

Double Barrel
05-15-2009, 10:52 AM
If the scoreboard is all that matters Kubes should have been gone after the 7-9 season. Two consecutive seasons of losing football...4 consecutive non-winning seasons...

Obviously there are other factors that need to be taken into account besides the W/L column...

Why not fire Kubes after going 6-10 his first season here? Im pretty sure everyone could come up with a list of reasons...Some could even spin that 6-10 record into something marvelous...

Of course at some point the excuses should become less, but the pittsburg Steelers didn't build a perennial challenger by coach hoping...I'm much more interested in how the team plays vs. what the final score is, because I know that if the team is playing well and they look disciplined the wins will come...

If we are using gimmicks to win games, and win despite looking terrible, I would still question Kubiak as a coach...

Huh? Talking about spinning wildly out of control! :mcnugget:

I was just messing with you that coaches should get some credit when they turn around crappy franchises for the playoffs within a year. They shouldn't get all of the credit, but they should get what's due (all things considered).

The rest of my take you quoted was directed at GP, who seems to be making excuses for the winning seasons that teams experienced. I'm not sure how that related to Kubiak, though.

The point of the NFL is to win games. That is the measure that owners, fans, and the media uses for all head coaches. The myriad intangibles not withstanding, it's about winning at the end of the day. Lose enough, and get a pink slip. Win enough, and get a contract extension. The win/loss column determines that course of events, not where your offense or defense was ranked or how happy you made your smile.

btw, I'm not advocating firing Kubiak. I think that judgement should be reserved until after this next season. He's got a lot riding on 2009, so in that regard, I would say there is some heat under his seat.