PDA

View Full Version : Play-offs 2010


thunderkyss
12-07-2009, 08:20 PM
Assume we got the head coach of your dreams to replace Gary Kubiak for the 2010 season. Doesn’t really matter who he is, for this poll the only thing that matters, is that we got the guy you wanted.

Do you expect him to get us to the play-offs his first year? Or does he get a pass for the first year?

Jackie Chiles
12-07-2009, 08:25 PM
Do you expect him to get us to the play-offs his first year? Or does he get a pass for the first year?

What exactly is your definition of getting a pass?

TexCanada
12-07-2009, 08:26 PM
Very interesting question. I think we are ready for playoffs and our new coach needs to get us there right away.

m5kwatts
12-07-2009, 08:27 PM
The sole purpose of getting rid of Kubiak would be to get a coach who CAN get us into the playoffs so I'd expect it next year without a doubt

HouSportsWriter
12-07-2009, 08:32 PM
watch kubes stays another year

AnthonyE
12-07-2009, 08:35 PM
Put me down for "After the world ends."

ATXtexanfan
12-07-2009, 08:36 PM
2012, cause the new guy will have to rebuild. Not to mention injuries. Oh yeah, black jesus will be born again, peyton is still here, and jax is still tougher then us.

Silver Oak
12-07-2009, 08:58 PM
if we get a new coach, he has to get us into the playoffs next season, or I:

a) break out the Pink Soap
b) raise funds for a billboard expressing fan unhappiness
c) not renew my tickets
d) write letters vainly to the front office
e) label new coach "flatliner" if he doesn't froth at the mouth at penalties
f) question, rehash, and review each play that doesn't result in a touchdown






*This message is intended only for silliness, and to parody the current environment in these parts.

thunderkyss
12-07-2009, 09:24 PM
What exactly is your definition of getting a pass?

If Gary Kubiak is here next year, & we don't get to the play-offs, it doesn't matter what the reason, we (the fans) will want him gone. Like many here already want him gone.

If we get a new head coach next year, & we don't get into the play-offs, will we want him gone as well?

Corrosion
12-07-2009, 10:12 PM
This guy

http://www.concoxions.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Goofy.gif


Could coach this team to a dozen wins next season.

Norg
12-07-2009, 11:00 PM
who says we are getting a new Coach LOL

DexmanC
12-07-2009, 11:07 PM
'06 3-3
'07 1-5
'08 2-4
'09 1-5

Those are our division records for the last four years. We just can't beat
teams who see our cute offense twice a year. Do you see improvement in
that record?

That's one area the Texans have been consistent in, and while they remain
consistent in that area, they'll NEVER make the playoffs! You can't go
2-4, 1-5 every year in your division, and be a playoff team. It just can't
happen! Losing close ain't progress, folks. Kubiak has had a DIRECT hand
in this team's losing big games. EVERY GAME that "mattered" this season, with
the most talent we've ever had, we've LOST in AMAZING FASHION. Even
Sterling Sharpe gets annoyed when he has to predict a winner in a Texans'
game. This team DOES have promise, but our coaches get cute when being
smart will do! The HB Option was just the last straw that broke Kubiak's
Coming Back to the Texans. Grandpa Bob will be watching how the home
fans react to Gary, so he'd BETTER put on a good show in the next two
home games!

houstonspartan
12-07-2009, 11:13 PM
If Gary Kubiak is here next year, & we don't get to the play-offs, it doesn't matter what the reason, we (the fans) will want him gone. Like many here already want him gone.

If we get a new head coach next year, & we don't get into the play-offs, will we want him gone as well?

Dude, come on. that's ridiculus. Of course we won't get rid of a new coach if he doesn't get us to the playoffs next year.

You want an excuse to say we should keep Kubiak one more year. You seem to forget that Kubak has had four years.

FOUR.

sportfan73
12-07-2009, 11:18 PM
our schedule next year is going to be tougher, potentially 5 play-off teams from the previous season

NFC East (Eagles, Cowboys, Giants, Skins)
AFC West (Chargers, Broncos, Raiders, Chiefs)

thunderkyss
12-07-2009, 11:28 PM
You want an excuse to say we should keep Kubiak one more year. You seem to forget that Kubak has had four years.

FOUR.

I'm not forgetting anything.

It is my contention, that year 5 & 6 of Kubiak will be better than year 1 & 2 of a new regime.

Norg
12-07-2009, 11:29 PM
our schedule next year is going to be tougher, potentially 5 play-off teams from the previous season

NFC East (Eagles, Cowboys, Giants, Skins)
AFC West (Chargers, Broncos, Raiders, Chiefs)

who knows how good or bad these teams will be next year .....

but hell this year the AFC east and NFC west were tough

Dont over look the Hawks and St louis ..San fran tore us up and same with the cards

ArlingtonTexan
12-07-2009, 11:36 PM
watch kubes stays another year

This is closer to truth than many on the board want to deakl with.

Jackie Chiles
12-07-2009, 11:44 PM
This is closer to truth than many on the board want to deakl with.

A lot of people didn't think Richard Smith would finally get the axe either but he did. I have confidence that Kubiak has already sealed his fate.

houstonspartan
12-07-2009, 11:53 PM
This is closer to truth than many on the board want to deakl with.

Nope. I have the ear of several season ticket holders, and we are not playing around this year.

houstonspartan
12-07-2009, 11:55 PM
I'm not forgetting anything.

It is my contention, that year 5 & 6 of Kubiak will be better than year 1 & 2 of a new regime.

Your logic is ridiculus. If we have a better year 3 and 4 from a new regime, it would have WELL been worth it.

Year 5 and 6 of Kubiak will be 8-8 and 8-8.

ArlingtonTexan
12-08-2009, 12:04 AM
Nope. I have the ear of several season ticket holders, and we are not playing around this year.

You guys had better make it known to McNair because all the friend of a freind of friend of a friend stuff I am hearing is that he is looking a reason the he good ole Gary K around. i have no power in that way since my career lead me to jerry world, but without fan pressure or the team totally tanking Bob is more inclined to keep the status quo than not.

Carr Bombed
12-08-2009, 12:38 AM
2012, cause the new guy will have to rebuild. Not to mention injuries. Oh yeah, black jesus will be born again, peyton is still here, and jax is still tougher then us.

Why do people automatically think a new coach will needs years to rebuild for a playoff push? New coaches come in all the time and lead their teams to the playoffs in their very first year with less talent.

A good coach could take this team to the playoffs in year 1.......a good coach would've had this team on the way to the playoffs THIS YEAR.

This isn't a "rebuilding" project regardless of who we hire..... there's already enough pieces here to win with.

leebigeztx
12-08-2009, 12:47 AM
'06 3-3
'07 1-5
'08 2-4
'09 1-5

Those are our division records for the last four years. We just can't beat
teams who see our cute offense twice a year. Do you see improvement in
that record?

That's one area the Texans have been consistent in, and while they remain
consistent in that area, they'll NEVER make the playoffs! You can't go
2-4, 1-5 every year in your division, and be a playoff team. It just can't
happen! Losing close ain't progress, folks. Kubiak has had a DIRECT hand
in this team's losing big games. EVERY GAME that "mattered" this season, with
the most talent we've ever had, we've LOST in AMAZING FASHION. Even
Sterling Sharpe gets annoyed when he has to predict a winner in a Texans'
game. This team DOES have promise, but our coaches get cute when being
smart will do! The HB Option was just the last straw that broke Kubiak's
Coming Back to the Texans. Grandpa Bob will be watching how the home
fans react to Gary, so he'd BETTER put on a good show in the next two
home games!

I've noticed that this record is brought up again, but i don't think it has any real merit. Division games aren't as important as they were before re-alignment. In essence, a team could lose every game in the division and still make the playoffs, but when a team played 8 division games, they carried more weight.

DexmanC
12-08-2009, 12:56 AM
I've noticed that this record is brought up again, but i don't think it has any real merit. Division games aren't as important as they were before re-alignment. In essence, a team could lose every game in the division and still make the playoffs, but when a team played 8 division games, they carried more weight.

Are you kidding me???
What team has EVER gone 0-6 in the division, and made the playoffs at
10-6. You DO realize you'll lose EVERY TIEBREAKER to EACH TEAM in your
division, and most teams in your conference, that finish with the same
record as you do? Show me one team in the AFC that's gone to the playoffs
in the scenario you just described.

Carr Bombed
12-08-2009, 12:59 AM
I've noticed that this record is brought up again, but i don't think it has any real merit. Division games aren't as important as they were before re-alignment. In essence, a team could lose every game in the division and still make the playoffs, but when a team played 8 division games, they carried more weight.

LOL, you can't be serious can you? http://freesmileyface.net/smiley/Surprise/surprised-034.gif (http://freesmileyface.net/Free-Surprise-Smileys.html) Sorry, but that is just a ridiculous statement...

Check out the teams that have positioned themselves for the playoffs this year, and then look at their divisional records...

2009 NFL Standings (http://www.nfl.com/standings?category=conf)

and while you're at it, go ahead and click back a few years and check out the divisional records other playoff teams have had in previous years. Winning within your division is a must if you want to have a good shot at reaching the playoffs.

Jackie Chiles
12-08-2009, 01:05 AM
LOL, you can't be serious can you? http://freesmileyface.net/smiley/Surprise/surprised-034.gif (http://freesmileyface.net/Free-Surprise-Smileys.html) Sorry, but that is just a rediculous statement...

Check out the teams that have positioned themselves for the playoffs this year, and then look at their divisional records...

2009 NFL Standings (http://www.nfl.com/standings?category=conf)

and while your at it, go ahead and click back a few years and check out the divisional records other playoff teams have. Winning within your division is a must if you want to have a good shot at reaching the playoffs.

In a strange way he has a point. Indy pretty much has taken the division and gone into hiding with Osama. Division wins for us or any other AFCS team are no more important than non-division wins. It loses water when you consider you play each of these teams twice and if you want to have any legitimate chance at a WC berth you need to be able to compete better in those 6 games.

Carr Bombed
12-08-2009, 01:13 AM
In a strange way he has a point. Indy pretty much has taken the division and gone into hiding with Osama. Division wins for us or any other AFCS team are no more important than non-division wins. It loses water when you consider you play each of these teams twice and if you want to have any legitimate chance at a WC berth you need to be able to compete better in those 6 games.

Your divisional games count for 6 games of your 16 game schedule, it also accounts for certain tie breakers. You can't just disregard divisional games and then act like you can make them up against other quality opponents outside of the division.

The proof is in that link that I posted above. RARELY does a team make it to the playoffs with a losing divisional record and even if one happens to slip in that year, they have to hope everything falls perfectly into place at the end of the season with other teams regarding tie breakers.....their playoff hopes aren't in their hands at all.

Sorry, but I see no point made with saying you don't have to win within your division. We have to be able to compete with the Colts (at least get splits with them on a regular basis) and beat the other teams we SHOULD beat inside this division. Posting Kubiak's inability to be able to do that here is a very VALID thing to post. For Christ's sake all you have to do is look at THIS year... Houston was 5-3 and very alive in the playoff hunt and then went on a 4 game losing streak ALL AGAINST DIVISIONAL OPPONENTS and now our season is over. It was our inability to compete in the division that knocked us out of the playoff picture once again.

Jackie Chiles
12-08-2009, 02:11 AM
Your divisional games count for 6 games of your 16 game schedule, it also accounts for certain tie breakers. You can't just disregard divisional games and then act like you can make them up against other quality opponents outside of the division.

The proof is in that link that I posted above. RARELY does a team make it to the playoffs with a losing divisional record and even if one happens to slip in that year, they have to hope everything falls perfectly into place at the end of the season with other teams regarding tie breakers.....their playoff hopes aren't in their hands at all.

Sorry, but I see no point made with saying you don't have to win within your division. We have to be able to compete with the Colts (at least get splits with them on a regular basis) and beat the other teams we SHOULD beat inside this division. Posting Kubiak's inability to be able to do that here is a very VALID thing to post. For Christ's sake all you have to do is look at THIS year... Houston was 5-3 and very alive in the playoff hunt and then went on a 4 game losing streak ALL AGAINST DIVISIONAL OPPONENTS and now our season is over. It was our inability to compete in the division that knocked us out of the playoff picture once again.

Ugh, no need to get out the pitchforks, I agree with you for the most part. In the long run division games are extremely important and Kubiak's record in that department alone merits his firing but in a singular season like this one where it becomes painfully obvious almost out of the gate that the only route to the post-season is through the WC division games = other games. They are still important because ALL games are important but since 1/2 of the options for making the playoffs have evaporated (winning the division) all that matters is wins. It was literally a technicality argument.

Thorn
12-08-2009, 07:01 AM
Well, since you asked my opinion, remember the snow last week? That's what it will be doing in Hell when the Texans make the playoffs.

Texecutioner
12-08-2009, 11:03 AM
Assume we got the head coach of your dreams to replace Gary Kubiak for the 2010 season. Doesn’t really matter who he is, for this poll the only thing that matters, is that we got the guy you wanted.

Do you expect him to get us to the play-offs his first year? Or does he get a pass for the first year?

I think it would depend on who that coach is and what he does with the team from the jump as far as players he brings in, players he ships out, what kind of system he runs on offense or defense, what kind of schedule we end up having, and other factors. It's hard to say really without knowing who the coach is and what kind of system he wants to run with what players. I don't think you can really make a decision as to what expectations would be right now until you know who the guy is first.

mussop
12-08-2009, 12:33 PM
I'm not forgetting anything.

It is my contention, that year 5 & 6 of Kubiak will be better than year 1 & 2 of a new regime.

And you would be wrong. A better coach will make all the difference with this team. We have the right ingrediants we just need to get this Commis out of the way and let an Executive Chef to put it all together.

Adding more talent via the draft and FA and giving Kubiak one more year isnt going to make him a better coach. He just isnt cut out for this yet.

SICLICK
12-08-2009, 03:11 PM
Put me down for "After the world ends."


:bravo:

eriadoc
12-08-2009, 03:13 PM
2013 should not be an option in this poll.

Signed,

the Mayan Calendar Cult Club


PS - 2010 or bust. The reason to fire Kubiak is because he's not taking us to the playoffs with our wealth of talent. That means the new guy better be able to.

hollywood_texan
12-08-2009, 04:13 PM
our schedule next year is going to be tougher, potentially 5 play-off teams from the previous season

NFC East (Eagles, Cowboys, Giants, Skins)
AFC West (Chargers, Broncos, Raiders, Chiefs)

You can probably expect Buffalo and Cleveland to be on the list.

AnthonyE
12-08-2009, 04:45 PM
our schedule next year is going to be tougher, potentially 5 play-off teams from the previous season

NFC East (Eagles, Cowboys, Giants, Skins)
AFC West (Chargers, Broncos, Raiders, Chiefs)

Ew.

sportfan73
12-08-2009, 05:46 PM
You can probably expect Buffalo and Cleveland to be on the list.

depends on how we finish the season, but we might as well tank at this point. I've only been a part of one other franchise "tank" in my fan-career, and that was the Robinson-injured Spurs. We all know how that worked out. We go 5-11 and it gives us a better schedule next year and a chance to get an elite CB/Safety/DT in the draft. We do something silly like go 8-8 again and it gives us a reason to bring back Kubiak, be in no mands land in the draft, and pick up another tough opponent.

flame me all ya want for that thinking