PDA

View Full Version : So why would we need a roster purge with a new HC?


Goldensilence
12-09-2009, 04:53 PM
I keep hearing if we make a coaching staff change he'll implode the roster and we'll have to rebuild from scratch.

This seems a bit like an oxymoron, considering those saying a reason to keep Kubiak because we have the talent and we're close.It's paramount to saying that since Gary Kubiak assembled this roster he's the only one qualified to work with it.

So where do we start the imploding that you guys are talking about?

Ok "worst" case scenario, Cowher or not, what if we bring in a HC who prefers a power running scheme and to run a 3-4 defense.

Make a case for us having to start over.

nero THE zero
12-09-2009, 05:05 PM
People are saying that because they're working off their experience from the Capers-Kubiak transition. It's a misconception, though.

1. The talent level on this team is light years beyond our 2005 team. There is absolutely no need to blow up the personnel here. If the hypothetical new coach had a significantly different scheme (i.e. 3-4), there would be some changes that need to be made. But nothing that would take years to execute.

2. Even if there were a dearth in talent here (there's not), Miami, Denver, Atlanta, etc. are all examples of teams that went from top 5 picks to playoff teams in one offseason.

That said, Kubiak will be back next year. So, all of this arguing is an exercise in futility.

mussop
12-09-2009, 05:05 PM
As Atwyst and I along with multiple others have pointed out in detail in multiple threads, it wouldnt. No one that dissagrees will give a decent post as to why it would.

Joe Texan
12-09-2009, 05:13 PM
The front office would be redone or maybe the coaches but that would take time and then we got a horrible draft and it is a disaster Kubes will remain and we will win 11 games next year

Vinny
12-09-2009, 05:14 PM
The front office would be redone or maybe the coaches but that would take time and then we got a horrible draft and it is a disaster Kubes will remain and we will win 11 games next year

can someone please get me a decoder? :pirate:

ArlingtonTexan
12-09-2009, 05:15 PM
I want to say saw the figure at 30-35% of all roster turnover every year in the age of FA. The texans have a decent core players who should be able to play any most systems and quite honestly one of the appeals of the job is that a coach should not have overhaul the whole thing. Answering questions about current players and potential turnover is normally a part of the interview process so that an organization should know what it is in for in that regard.

Goldensilence
12-09-2009, 05:24 PM
As Atwyst and I along with multiple others have pointed out in detail in multiple threads, it wouldnt. No one that dissagrees will give a decent post as to why it would.

That's my point. I keep hearing we'll have to change the roster over for X head coach. I just want a person who cites this as a reason for Kubiak to stay make a reasonable argument for why they say this, instead of throwing stuff to the wall and hoping it sticks.

ATXtexanfan
12-09-2009, 05:31 PM
i don't think a new coach would change anything that this current staff will change in the offseason

Yankee_In_TX
12-09-2009, 05:34 PM
As Atwyst and I along with multiple others have pointed out in detail in multiple threads, it wouldnt. No one that dissagrees will give a decent post as to why it would.

The thought being if a coach has to "implemenet his sytem and people" he gets to stay for 4-5 years. If he is supposed to take us to the playoffs with what we have now, he may be fired in 2 years if he doesn't perform.

No one actually thinks the team should be imploded.

MFG16
12-09-2009, 05:45 PM
IMO theres both positives and negatives to "Purging" the roster. So say we get Head Coach X and he wants a power running game and a 3-4 Def. 1. We now have to get a new interior o-line (however thats a weakness now and many agree we need to do it anyways so: positive) 2. we need some new defensive pieces, and here is where it gets scary (atleast for me). by switching to a 3-4 we can basically right off okoye because his not suitable for it. (another bust) Same with Mario. i mean come on Mario isn't a 3-4 dlinemen, and what your gunna move him to linebacker? Don't think so. we also are going to have to get new DB's (again another weakness so:positive). but all in all this is going to take some time, and everyone including myself wants playoffs now..so if we do make a coaching change get someone who runs this system!

Mr. White
12-09-2009, 05:53 PM
A roster purge wouldn't happen for 2 reasons.

1. The roster is probably the main reason that a potential coach would be attracted to the job.

2. The owner wouldn't let him purge the roster.

mussop
12-09-2009, 05:56 PM
As Atwyst and I along with multiple others have pointed out in detail in multiple threads, it wouldnt. No one that dissagrees will give a decent post as to why it would.



The front office would be redone or maybe the coaches but that would take time and then we got a horrible draft and it is a disaster Kubes will remain and we will win 11 games next year

SEE!

The thought being if a coach has to "implemenet his sytem and people" he gets to stay for 4-5 years. If he is supposed to take us to the playoffs with what we have now, he may be fired in 2 years if he doesn't perform.

No one actually thinks the team should be imploded.

AGAIN! I think, this post was kinda confusing.

I think this thread will put this BS excuse to rest.

houstonspartan
12-09-2009, 05:56 PM
A roster purge wouldn't happen for 2 reasons.

1. The roster is probably the main reason that a potential coach would be attracted to the job.

2. The owner wouldn't let him purge the roster.


1) Parts of the roster, yes. For example, no coach would get rid of Andre, Matt and OD. But, they may want big, fat lineman and may need to make some changes.

2) Are you on crack? The owner would let him do whatever he wanted.

TheRealJoker
12-09-2009, 06:01 PM
IMO theres both positives and negatives to "Purging" the roster. So say we get Head Coach X and he wants a power running game and a 3-4 Def. 1. We now have to get a new interior o-line (however thats a weakness now and many agree we need to do it anyways so: positive) 2. we need some new defensive pieces, and here is where it gets scary (atleast for me). by switching to a 3-4 we can basically right off okoye because his not suitable for it. (another bust) Same with Mario. i mean come on Mario isn't a 3-4 dlinemen, and what your gunna move him to linebacker? Don't think so. we also are going to have to get new DB's (again another weakness so:positive). but all in all this is going to take some time, and everyone including myself wants playoffs now..so if we do make a coaching change get someone who runs this system!

What makes you think Okoye is suitable for a 4-3? So far he's been a bust.

Bruce Smith did pretty well as a 3-4 end. I think Mario has the size/strength to hold the POA as a 3-4 end plus we also get the bonus of standing him up as an OLB in situational packages because of his speed. If anything it makes Mario MORE dangerous because of all the different ways we could attack offenses with him.

I want a coach who emphasizes an OL that can get a push at the LOS. Not these small/quick OL that only work well between the 20s. If we can get a coach who would like to overhaul the interior OL this offense becomes truly elite with the skill players we have.

I'd also like to see a coach that would prefer big-body DTs so we can get a push on defense as well. And maybe a coaching staff that places any sort of value on a high-caliber safety. This team has never in their history had a top-tier safety...but the worst part of all is they haven't put forth the effort to acquire one.

Corrosion
12-09-2009, 06:02 PM
I keep hearing if we make a coaching staff change he'll implode the roster and we'll have to rebuild from scratch.

This seems a bit like an oxymoron, considering those saying a reason to keep Kubiak because we have the talent and we're close.It's paramount to saying that since Gary Kubiak assembled this roster he's the only one qualified to work with it.

So where do we start the imploding that you guys are talking about?

Ok "worst" case scenario, Cowher or not, what if we bring in a HC who prefers a power running scheme and to run a 3-4 defense.

Make a case for us having to start over.

It wouldnt take a total makeover but it would require changing some parts - Much like running a 3-4 rather than a 4-3 swapping to a traditional power running game would require a different type of offensive lineman.

To make the transition from this ZBS - I wish we would new coach or not - we would likely need to replace both guard spots and the center position as the players there arent "Blow you off the ball" type blockers , they are finesse players than those who are just gonna move defenders.

In that type of running attack , I dont believe the back makes as much difference as the line - You could get away with a Slaton type or a guy like Willis McGahee , I think either could be effective.

m5kwatts
12-09-2009, 06:05 PM
The Browns, Rams, Lions, Chiefs - those teams need a roster purge

The Texans - not even in the same realm as those teams

The Packers and Broncos didn't have to strip the whole thing down and start over necessarily when going to a 3-4... some players switched positions.. some players stayed in their same positions and it was assumed with different coaching they'd improve

Both of those defenses are top 10 now

Goldensilence
12-09-2009, 06:06 PM
The front office would be redone or maybe the coaches but that would take time and then we got a horrible draft and it is a disaster Kubes will remain and we will win 11 games next year

This isn't about the front office. This is about a new coach coming in and people talking about we'd have to start over because they'd want to bring their players in. I think for better or worse no matter what Rick Smith will likely finish his contract out.

I don't even see how you can assume we'd have a terrible draft, considering we had an up and down draft this year. I still don't think Smith's been real great at the draft. I think he's been good at finding value priced FA to fit holes for short term.

What makes you think we'll win 11 games next year considering: we have the NFC East next year and went 1-5 in the division this year.

IMO theres both positives and negatives to "Purging" the roster. So say we get Head Coach X and he wants a power running game and a 3-4 Def. 1. We now have to get a new interior o-line (however thats a weakness now and many agree we need to do it anyways so: positive) 2. we need some new defensive pieces, and here is where it gets scary (atleast for me). by switching to a 3-4 we can basically right off okoye because his not suitable for it. (another bust) Same with Mario. i mean come on Mario isn't a 3-4 dlinemen, and what your gunna move him to linebacker? Don't think so. we also are going to have to get new DB's (again another weakness so:positive). but all in all this is going to take some time, and everyone including myself wants playoffs now..so if we do make a coaching change get someone who runs this system!

Well at least someone has stepped up even if it wasn't much considering, as you pointed out, we could use aremaking of the interior of the OL anyway. I actually think Okoye might be better off as a 3-4 DE as opposed to a 4-3 DT. We'd have to likely rotate out DEs anyway. I do agree on wasting Mario's talent as a 3-4 DE, but if it pushed us to be a better unit overall I'd take it.

Again no surprise on having to get players in the secondary. We need to do that anyway.

Can't someone with the whole starting over with the roster straw man make a better argument?

A roster purge wouldn't happen for 2 reasons.

1. The roster is probably the main reason that a potential coach would be attracted to the job.

2. The owner wouldn't let him purge the roster.

Again this has been my point. No one arguing that X head coach would have to come in and bring his people and overhaul the roster can make a legit argument.

I hate putting it in terms of "pro" or "anti" Kubiak, but it seems the later keeps throwing things to the wall and hoping it sticks.

mussop
12-09-2009, 06:08 PM
IMO theres both positives and negatives to "Purging" the roster. So say we get Head Coach X and he wants a power running game and a 3-4 Def. 1. We now have to get a new interior o-line (however thats a weakness now and many agree we need to do it anyways so: positive) 2. we need some new defensive pieces, and here is where it gets scary (atleast for me). by switching to a 3-4 we can basically right off okoye because his not suitable for it. (another bust) Same with Mario. i mean come on Mario isn't a 3-4 dlinemen, and what your gunna move him to linebacker? Don't think so. we also are going to have to get new DB's (again another weakness so:positive). but all in all this is going to take some time, and everyone including myself wants playoffs now..so if we do make a coaching change get someone who runs this system!

Ok first you dont not swith to a 3/4 because it makes a bust a useless bust. He's still yound and has potential therfore he has trade value. Second Mario is the prototyopical 3/4 DE. Ideally 3-4 DEs should weigh 285300 pounds and be able to beat double teams by getting a push. Right now Mario is being missused anyway. He's being utilized as a speed rusher which he isnt. The best part of his game (physical) is being wasted trying to run him around opposing OT's which takes him completely out of the play. So that makes both of your negetives positives. Now what?

mussop
12-09-2009, 06:11 PM
The Browns, Rams, Lions, Chiefs - those teams need a roster purge

The Texans - not even in the same realm as those teams

The Packers and Broncos didn't have to strip the whole thing down and start over necessarily when going to a 3-4... some players switched positions.. some players stayed in their same positions and it was assumed with different coaching they'd improve

Both of those defenses are top 10 now

actually they are both top 5.

Vinny
12-09-2009, 06:16 PM
by switching to a 3-4 we can basically right off okoye because his not suitable for it. (another bust) Same with Mario. i mean come on Mario isn't a 3-4 dlinemen, and what your gunna move him to linebacker? Don't think so. 0k0ye isn't even a good 4-3 player...moving to a 3-4 isn't gonna make him a bad player all of a sudden. I'm pretty sure he sucks in both schemes. Mario is pretty much a prototype 3-4 end. Look up Bruce Smith and what kind of defense he played in...yeah, a 3-4. Smith is one of the NFL's all time sack leaders. It's not like Mario is some super quick edge rusher that couldn't play the 3-4 end. Great DE's with size like Richard Seymore and Bruce Smith can play in any system. Mario could too.

mussop
12-09-2009, 06:19 PM
0k0ye isn't even a good 4-3 player...moving to a 3-4 isn't gonna make him a bad player all of a sudden. I'm pretty sure he sucks in both schemes. Mario is pretty much a prototype 3-4 end. Look up Bruce Smith and what kind of defense he played in...yeah, a 3-4. Smith is one of the NFL's all time sack leaders. It's not like Mario is some super quick edge rusher that couldn't play the 3-4 end. Great DE's with size like Richard Seymore and Bruce Smith can play in any system. Mario could too.

Are you mocking me? :)

MFG16
12-09-2009, 06:44 PM
What makes you think Okoye is suitable for a 4-3? So far he's been a bust.

Bruce Smith did pretty well as a 3-4 end. I think Mario has the size/strength to hold the POA as a 3-4 end plus we also get the bonus of standing him up as an OLB in situational packages because of his speed. If anything it makes Mario MORE dangerous because of all the different ways we could attack offenses with him.

I want a coach who emphasizes an OL that can get a push at the LOS. Not these small/quick OL that only work well between the 20s. If we can get a coach who would like to overhaul the interior OL this offense becomes truly elite with the skill players we have.

I'd also like to see a coach that would prefer big-body DTs so we can get a push on defense as well. And maybe a coaching staff that places any sort of value on a high-caliber safety. This team has never in their history had a top-tier safety...but the worst part of all is they haven't put forth the effort to acquire one.

first off I do want a bigger stronger oline, and thats what i said in my first reply (getting a new coach would do that). And its not that i think Mario can't do it i just think it be a tuff transition for him. And i wasnt trying to say Okoye is the answer or a stud i was trying to say that DT is another piece that we would have to go get in FA or the draft, and its just to much replacing for one offseason.

Also...ERIC BERRY!

MFG16
12-09-2009, 06:54 PM
Ok first you dont not swith to a 3/4 because it makes a bust a useless bust. He's still yound and has potential therfore he has trade value. Second Mario is the prototyopical 3/4 DE. Ideally 3-4 DEs should weigh 285300 pounds and be able to beat double teams by getting a push. Right now Mario is being missused anyway. He's being utilized as a speed rusher which he isnt. The best part of his game (physical) is being wasted trying to run him around opposing OT's which takes him completely out of the play. So that makes both of your negetives positives. Now what?

yeah and Glenn Dorsey the DT out of KC, who was a a top 5 pick!, has trade value too. But on Mario i do agree with you, he is being missused and maybe a switch would do some justice. He is injured though, and maybe thats all he can do right now?

mussop
12-09-2009, 07:19 PM
first off I do want a bigger stronger oline, and thats what i said in my first reply (getting a new coach would do that). And its not that i think Mario can't do it i just think it be a tuff transition for him. And i wasnt trying to say Okoye is the answer or a stud i was trying to say that DT is another piece that we would have to go get in FA or the draft, and its just to much replacing for one offseason.

Also...ERIC BERRY!

Please explain what exactly would be to much replacing for one off season.

m5kwatts
12-09-2009, 07:23 PM
actually they are both top 5.

Thank you yes, and the Texans could be top 5 in defense if they underwent the same cosmetic surgery those defenses did

Norg
12-09-2009, 07:27 PM
look what happend 2

Tampa

lions

st louis

Seahawks

etc etc etc
all new coaches and visions

MFG16
12-09-2009, 07:44 PM
Please explain what exactly would be to much replacing for one off season.

New: C, LG, RG, DT, LB* (if we switch to a 3-4 well need another linebacker to put on the field but we could easily go with adibi here so not a big problem) S, CB(s). Off course we already need a lot of those things anyway but it would be improbable to get those positions filled in one offseason. Best case scenario we draft a S 1st round sign wilfork and trade for antonio cromartie. i know..... im dreaming. Even if that would happen we still have to resign a ton of people (keep those positions filled) and go get an oline.

mussop
12-09-2009, 08:17 PM
New: C, LG, RG, DT, LB* (if we switch to a 3-4 well need another linebacker to put on the field but we could easily go with adibi here so not a big problem) S, CB(s). Off course we already need a lot of those things anyway but it would be improbable to get those positions filled in one offseason. Best case scenario we draft a S 1st round sign wilfork and trade for antonio cromartie. i know..... im dreaming. Even if that would happen we still have to resign a ton of people (keep those positions filled) and go get an oline.

Conner Barwin was considered a top 3/4 OLB in last years draft. He is ideal for that position. Every other position you named needs upgraded anyway so how does that support your stance?

MFG16
12-09-2009, 08:45 PM
Conner Barwin was considered a top 3/4 OLB in last years draft. He is ideal for that position. Every other position you named needs upgraded anyway so how does that support your stance?

Honestly my stance right now is up in the air. one moment i want to fire kubes and the next i want to give him one more year. But im just trying to point out all the things we need to get done with or without kubes. That a coaching change might not solve all our problems but only cause more.

mussop
12-09-2009, 09:36 PM
Honestly my stance right now is up in the air. one moment i want to fire kubes and the next i want to give him one more year. But im just trying to point out all the things we need to get done with or without kubes. That a coaching change might not solve all our problems but only cause more.

And i'm just trying to point out that there is no reason to think that a coaching change will cause problems. There is not one concrete argument to that effect. If you have one I would really love to hear it.

m5kwatts
12-09-2009, 09:53 PM
Conner Barwin was considered a top 3/4 OLB in last years draft. He is ideal for that position. Every other position you named needs upgraded anyway so how does that support your stance?

He plays 3-4 linebacker in special packages currently with the Texans... I've seen him both rush and drop back in coverage from a 3-4 ROLB position... he lined up in a 3 technique (DT, right side) and dropped into coverage last week in fact as well.

LonerATO
12-09-2009, 10:24 PM
actually they are both top 5.

It also does help that both of those teams have two of the top 3-4 coaches in the league. Green Bay drafted Clay to play OLB and BJ to be a NT and NT would be a thing this team lacks right now. I love how just a year or two ago people were all about the 4-3 after the team switched from the 3-4. All of this 3-4 hype is coming from peoples belief in getting Cowher.

mussop
12-09-2009, 10:44 PM
It also does help that both of those teams have two of the top 3-4 coaches in the league. Green Bay drafted Clay to play OLB and BJ to be a NT and NT would be a thing this team lacks right now. I love how just a year or two ago people were all about the 4-3 after the team switched from the 3-4. All of this 3-4 hype is coming from peoples belief in getting Cowher.

Argggg,,,,,,,,,,,,, once again Connar Barwin is perfectly suited to play OLB in a 3/4 and that means DT is really the only position that we dont currently have on this roster to make the transition. And what 3/4 hype are you refering to? There is a (one sided) disscussion going on wheter there would be problem switching to a 3/4 with the current roster IF there were a switch of head coaches. Currently there hasnt been one well thought out reply as to why it would be a hard or long transformation.

LonerATO
12-09-2009, 10:59 PM
Argggg,,,,,,,,,,,,, once again Connar Barwin is perfectly suited to play OLB in a 3/4 and that means DT is really the only position that we dont currently have on this roster to make the transition. And what 3/4 hype are you refering to? There is a (one sided) disscussion going on wheter there would be problem switching to a 3/4 with the current roster IF there were a switch of head coaches. Currently there hasnt been one well thought out reply as to why it would be a hard or long transformation.

I never said it would it would be hard and you keep using teams that got great 3-4 DC's this year. Who would the Texans get? I think the coaching helps with the lack of players and I never once mentioned Barwin at all. I said Green Bay helped themselves by picking two 1st round guys who are 3-4 players.

awtysst
12-09-2009, 11:08 PM
As Atwyst and I along with multiple others have pointed out in detail in multiple threads, it wouldnt. No one that dissagrees will give a decent post as to why it would.

I have been referenced in a post!
I RULE!

Texanmike02
12-10-2009, 02:02 AM
I will try to explain why I'm not a fan of that move. Other than the OL, which I like 3/5 of right now... it is the change in philosophies that worries me. I know its crazy, but players will start thinking and not reacting again. You look at them now, once we got a safety who could recognize the difference between a power sweep and a counter, our defense shored up real quick. everyone else on the field, save Cushing, knew what we were doing.This defense looks damn good 85% of the time. In fact, at the beginning of the year, we looked like a cohesive unit on all but a handful of (HUGE) plays.


Ask yourself why coaches like Cowher and Fisher had such successful runs. Part of it was the fact that you draft players in a system, they grow up in the SAME system and by the time most of your players are starting/getting regular minutes, they have been in the exact same system for 2 or 3 years. We have that opportunity now. Bush is much more aggressive but his philosophy is not that different (almost identical on who has responsibility in a base package). The scary thing about this team, if you ask me.. is this defense is 1 DT and another serviceable CB away from being VERY dominant. I mean carry the team kind of dominant. There is a word, synergy, which is very appropriate. Sure another coach can come in and probably 80% of our defense will be able to play in his system... but that 80% is starting over.

If you are that adamant that Kubiak absolutely HAS to go... bring in Mike and let him keep the seat warm for his son. He'll probably keep Bush and the offense in shape.

Honestly, the only thing I can see that someone can point to as a reason to get rid of Kubiak is his in game coaching decisions. Nobody can knock his offense, it is productive too much of the time (even without a dominant running back) to be considered in need of an overhaul. On defense, they have honestly been a top 10 defense since Pollard go there.

Rushing yards against 90.2 5TH EFFING 5TH!!!
Passing Yards against 208.5 would be 11th
Raw PPG 20 14th
Adjusted PPG 18.4 (7th)
(this is problematic because my data is not consistent, the texans are all pts against... the league is points vs defense only that I can remember off of the top of my head we've had 3 pick sixes... which lowers our PPG to 18.4 which is using the same criteria that the other teams are being held to.

The problem isn't the system on offense either. We don't need to go there I hope...

The problem with Kubiak, if you really look at it, has been in game, boneheaded decisions and too much faith in his players. If your reason for getting rid of him is his in game decisions, but his team is putting up remarkable numbers... which I think they are... then you have to look at Shanahan (I'm not advocating that, just making the logical connection)

Mike

houstonspartan
12-10-2009, 02:10 AM
I will try to explain why I'm not a fan of that move. Other than the OL, which I like 3/5 of right now... it is the change in philosophies that worries me. I know its crazy, but players will start thinking and not reacting again. You look at them now, once we got a safety who could recognize the difference between a power sweep and a counter, our defense shored up real quick. everyone else on the field, save Cushing, knew what we were doing.This defense looks damn good 85% of the time. In fact, at the beginning of the year, we looked like a cohesive unit on all but a handful of (HUGE) plays.


Ask yourself why coaches like Cowher and Fisher had such successful runs. Part of it was the fact that you draft players in a system, they grow up in the SAME system and by the time most of your players are starting/getting regular minutes, they have been in the exact same system for 2 or 3 years. We have that opportunity now. Bush is much more aggressive but his philosophy is not that different (almost identical on who has responsibility in a base package). The scary thing about this team, if you ask me.. is this defense is 1 DT and another serviceable CB away from being VERY dominant. I mean carry the team kind of dominant. There is a word, synergy, which is very appropriate. Sure another coach can come in and probably 80% of our defense will be able to play in his system... but that 80% is starting over.

If you are that adamant that Kubiak absolutely HAS to go... bring in Mike and let him keep the seat warm for his son. He'll probably keep Bush and the offense in shape.

Honestly, the only thing I can see that someone can point to as a reason to get rid of Kubiak is his in game coaching decisions. Nobody can knock his offense, it is productive too much of the time (even without a dominant running back) to be considered in need of an overhaul. On defense, they have honestly been a top 10 defense since Pollard go there.

Rushing yards against 90.2 5TH EFFING 5TH!!!
Passing Yards against 208.5 would be 11th
Raw PPG 20 14th
Adjusted PPG 18.4 (7th)
(this is problematic because my data is not consistent, the texans are all pts against... the league is points vs defense only that I can remember off of the top of my head we've had 3 pick sixes... which lowers our PPG to 18.4 which is using the same criteria that the other teams are being held to.

The problem isn't the system on offense either. We don't need to go there I hope...

The problem with Kubiak, if you really look at it, has been in game, boneheaded decisions and too much faith in his players. If your reason for getting rid of him is his in game decisions, but his team is putting up remarkable numbers... which I think they are... then you have to look at Shanahan (I'm not advocating that, just making the logical connection)

Mike

Dude, you're so far off base it's not even funny. Kubiak actually places very LITTLE faith in his players, which is why Matt can't audible, and why we get horrible calls like the one on Sunday.

You say the only reason not to bring back Kubes is because of his coaching decisions? Uh, no. You're missing the point. Try looking at his w's and l's. Those numbers are terrible BECAUSE of his coaching decisions. Unfortunately for him, those are the only numbers that matter.

You bring up stats. Stat's are fun. I've spent most of this season bragging on Matt's stats to fans of other teams. But I've stopped doing it. Why? Because Matt is NOT WINNING GAMES. That is all that matters. I would love for the country to finally see what a great QB Matt Schaub is. But we keep blowing games, and our players don't get the profile they deserve.

Yankee_In_TX
12-10-2009, 10:07 AM
SEE!



AGAIN! I think, this post was kinda confusing.

I think this thread will put this BS excuse to rest.

Sorry - that wasn't clear.

I mean no one thinks the team needs to be or should be imploded, but a new HC may say that it needs to be to buy himself more time on the job.

Texanmike02
12-10-2009, 11:20 AM
Dude, you're so far off base it's not even funny. Kubiak actually places very LITTLE faith in his players, which is why Matt can't audible, and why we get horrible calls like the one on Sunday.

Umm.. he has faith in his players, not their decision making. You give me Matt, I'll give you Chris Brown, Kris Brown and Steve Slaton. Too many chances given. He has too much faith in them. Not to make decisions (like when to audible) but to do things like hold onto the ball.

You say the only reason not to bring back Kubes is because of his coaching decisions? Uh, no. You're missing the point. Try looking at his w's and l's. Those numbers are terrible BECAUSE of his coaching decisions. Unfortunately for him, those are the only numbers that matter.


Man, I do get it. I am a data analyst, statistics are what I do FOR A LIVING. The kind of stats you're looking at, combined with the types of losses we have, tell me that the SYSTEMs are not the problem. If the system is not the problem you look at two things, execution and in game decisions. I do however apologize for bring up statistics in a meaningful way and backing up my argument that way. Here let me do it the other way.

Coach Kubiak is amazing. I just have a good feeling about next year. He's from Houston.

There, perhaps you will have an argumet that actually speaks to MY point.

Mike

Runner
12-10-2009, 11:33 AM
I understand the fear of change. I read Toffler's "Future Shock" in high school.

houstonspartan
12-10-2009, 11:51 AM
Man, I do get it. I am a data analyst, statistics are what I do FOR A LIVING. The kind of stats you're looking at, combined with the types of losses we have, tell me that the SYSTEMs are not the problem. If the system is not the problem you look at two things, execution and in game decisions. I do however apologize for bring up statistics in a meaningful way and backing up my argument that way. Here let me do it the other way.

Coach Kubiak is amazing. I just have a good feeling about next year. He's from Houston.

There, perhaps you will have an argumet that actually speaks to MY point.

Mike


Ok, that's great that you're a data analyist.

My profession isn't in data analysis, but I am a Texans season ticket holder. Let me give you some stats to back up where I'M coming from: Nearly $10,000 out of my pocket and into McNair's pocket over the last five years. You read that right: THEN THOUSAND DOLLARS. Hundreds of hours spent stuck in traffic whlie I struggled to get to my seat in time. Seven hours spent stuck at Chicago O'Hare Airport during a snow storm while waiting for my flight to Wisconsin for the Green Bay game. About 25 Texans souvener cups from Reliant sitting in my kitchen cabinets (those cups cost $8 a pop. Do the math).

BigBull17
12-10-2009, 12:02 PM
I keep hearing if we make a coaching staff change he'll implode the roster and we'll have to rebuild from scratch.

This seems a bit like an oxymoron, considering those saying a reason to keep Kubiak because we have the talent and we're close.It's paramount to saying that since Gary Kubiak assembled this roster he's the only one qualified to work with it.

So where do we start the imploding that you guys are talking about?

Ok "worst" case scenario, Cowher or not, what if we bring in a HC who prefers a power running scheme and to run a 3-4 defense.

Make a case for us having to start over.

The oline needs upgrades either way, so this isn't as big a deal as the 3-4.

Goldensilence
12-10-2009, 02:14 PM
The oline needs upgrades either way, so this isn't as big a deal as the 3-4.

That's half the point of the tread.

So the other half of that is, as you pointed out, name the "big" changes we'd have to go through for a 3-4.

beerlover
12-10-2009, 03:02 PM
I expect lots of changes regardless. Remember the NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement is scheduled to expire March 2010. What this means is a player in his 4th/5th season (DeMeco/Daniels) who would normally become an unrestricted free agent will become restricted, I've been thinking all along this was a prime consideration in contract negoiations. Free Agents to be I would like to keep in addition to Owen & DeMeco are Tim Bulman, Bernard Pollard, Ryan Moats, Kevin Walter, Chris White & Chester Pitts. List of players on the bubble would be -
John Busing
Chris Brown
Rashad Butler
Rex Grossman
Nick Ferguson
Dunta Robinson
Khary Campbell
Chaun Thompson
Matt Turk
Jeff Zgonina
Tutan Reyes

LonerATO
12-10-2009, 03:11 PM
I expect lots of changes regardless. Remember the NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement is scheduled to expire March 2010. What this means is a player in his 4th/5th season (DeMeco/Daniels) who would normally become an unrestricted free agent will become restricted, I've been thinking all along this was a prime consideration in contract negoiations. Free Agents to be I would like to keep in addition to Owen & DeMeco are Tim Bulman, Bernard Pollard, Ryan Moats, Kevin Walter, Chris White & Chester Pitts. List of players on the bubble would be -
John Busing
Chris Brown
Rashad Butler
Rex Grossman
Nick Ferguson
Dunta Robinson
Khary Campbell
Chaun Thompson
Matt Turk
Jeff Zgonina
Tutan Reyes

I think Zgonina will be let go again at the end of the season

Texanmike02
12-11-2009, 08:20 AM
Ok, that's great that you're a data analyist.

My profession isn't in data analysis, but I am a Texans season ticket holder. Let me give you some stats to back up where I'M coming from: Nearly $10,000 out of my pocket and into McNair's pocket over the last five years. You read that right: THEN THOUSAND DOLLARS. Hundreds of hours spent stuck in traffic whlie I struggled to get to my seat in time. Seven hours spent stuck at Chicago O'Hare Airport during a snow storm while waiting for my flight to Wisconsin for the Green Bay game. About 25 Texans souvener cups from Reliant sitting in my kitchen cabinets (those cups cost $8 a pop. Do the math).


Ok. Then your response is emotional. I get it.

Mike

BigBull17
12-11-2009, 09:22 AM
I expect lots of changes regardless. Remember the NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement is scheduled to expire March 2010. What this means is a player in his 4th/5th season (DeMeco/Daniels) who would normally become an unrestricted free agent will become restricted, I've been thinking all along this was a prime consideration in contract negoiations. Free Agents to be I would like to keep in addition to Owen & DeMeco are Tim Bulman, Bernard Pollard, Ryan Moats, Kevin Walter, Chris White & Chester Pitts. List of players on the bubble would be -
John Busing
Chris Brown
Rashad Butler
Rex Grossman
Nick Ferguson
Dunta Robinson
Khary Campbell
Chaun Thompson
Matt Turk
Jeff Zgonina
Tutan Reyes

What bubble is Chris Brown on? That should have popped long ago. No way Dunta is a Texan next year. Such a bad year he had.

Kaiser Toro
12-11-2009, 09:52 AM
There is no need for a roster purge for a new HC. There is a need to continue the talent acquisition regardless of coach - notably the interior OL, DT, FS & RB. I find myself typing those needs every year. :kitten:

El Tejano
12-11-2009, 11:50 AM
Wouldn't the LBs all have to be good in coverage? Right now Cushing is the only one I see that is great in coverage.

If going to a power running game, wouldn't we have to replace the entire OL almost? We've all seen how long it can take for an OL to gel, and Matt Schaub needs one that will be able to protect him.

Brisco_County
12-11-2009, 01:55 PM
I posted a thread discussing the case against Cowher coming here, and since then I've warmed up to the idea because I think the current personnel is well suited for the 3-4.

All we're really missing is a powerful body like BJ Raji that gets double teamed and pushes the middle. Mario is an ideal 3-4 DE, and I think Smith is better suited for it than what he's doing now.

Behind them, Cushing would feast on QB's as a 3-4 OLB, Conner Barwin is big, fast, and aggressive enough to be perfect for it, and Diles/Adibi are competent enough to adapt to ILB.

So the only questions are NT and one ILB.

I told my Green Bay friends that they should expect to have one mediocre year to rebuild their new 3-4 with the right personnel. The team made good enough draft selections to where they wouldn't have to wait long for results. The same results could definitely happen here.

One question I have though is if Frank Bush would be kept. He's a solid DC and it'd be nice to get another year out of him before he made a name for himself somewhere else.

New_Texans
12-11-2009, 02:27 PM
the only possible reason i'd want kubiak back for another year is purely because i want to see what happens with this defense under frank bush for a second season. perhaps...just perhaps if we draft a power running back and some better interior linemen we could have a better chance at winning the close games we lose...our team depends too heavily on the pass. i want kubiak gone but i won't jump off a bridge if he is here for another season--if he continues with the losing trend, hes likely to get fired mid season anyway.