PDA

View Full Version : Kubiak Supporters: Why should he stay?


Pages : 1 2 [3]

dalemurphy
12-21-2009, 12:06 AM
Just to beat a dead horse:

How about that coaching genius, Mike Tomlin! Well, they won the game and he's won a Superbowl therefore kicking an onside kick up 2 points with 3 minutes left in the game is a good call! After all, you're Pittsburgh and your defense can't be trusted.

By the way... I can only imagine the sh*t that would be said about Kubiak if he'd have done that.

mussop
12-21-2009, 12:45 AM
Just to beat a dead horse:

How about that coaching genius, Mike Tomlin! Well, they won the game and he's won a Superbowl therefore kicking an onside kick up 2 points with 3 minutes left in the game is a good call! After all, you're Pittsburgh and your defense can't be trusted.

By the way... I can only imagine the sh*t that would be said about Kubiak if he'd have done that.

Why do you keep going back to this? Its like your saying "look their coach makes stupid mistakes so its okay if our coach does it too". :gun:

dalemurphy
12-21-2009, 06:37 AM
Why do you keep going back to this? Its like your saying "look their coach makes stupid mistakes so its okay if our coach does it too". :gun:

Because that's almost my point. That's my fear is that we remove Kubiak, which creates disruption to what I think is a pretty good team that is close to winning. And, we replace him, the staff, and probably the GM with a group of guys that aren't really better decision-makers. They just Efff up differently than Kubiak.

Thorn
12-21-2009, 06:45 AM
Because that's almost my point. That's my fear is that we remove Kubiak, which creates disruption to what I think is a pretty good team that is close to winning. And, we replace him, the staff, and probably the GM with a group of guys that aren't really better decision-makers. They just Efff up differently than Kubiak.

This is my problem also. I know Kubiak just has not done the job I wanted him to, but he has, without a doubt, greatly improved the talent level on this team. That's why I've been saying if Kubiak gets replaced, it should be with a proven head coach that's been a winner in the past, not another rookie HC. I will always take another year of Kubiak over another rookie head coach.

Fred
12-21-2009, 06:48 AM
Because that's almost my point. That's my fear is that we remove Kubiak, which creates disruption to what I think is a pretty good team that is close to winning. And, we replace him, the staff, and probably the GM with a group of guys that aren't really better decision-makers. They just Efff up differently than Kubiak.

I'll take a guy who Efffs up occasionally, usually goes to the playoffs, and wins a SuperBowl every three or four years versus a guy who Efffs up constantly and who, with a pretty good team, can't start winning until they have 7 losses.

Generally, 7 losses takes the pressure off because then you can't really make the playoffs even if you aren't mathematically eliminated. I think the Texans are 9-2 the last three years after reaching 7 losses. (14-21 to get to 7 losses.) No playoff pressure, no problem.

dalemurphy
12-21-2009, 07:22 AM
I'll take a guy who Efffs up occasionally, usually goes to the playoffs, and wins a SuperBowl every three or four years versus a guy who Efffs up constantly and who, with a pretty good team, can't start winning until they have 7 losses.

Generally, 7 losses takes the pressure off because then you can't really make the playoffs even if you aren't mathematically eliminated. I think the Texans are 9-2 the last three years after reaching 7 losses. (14-21 to get to 7 losses.) No playoff pressure, no problem.


Well, it's pretty clear that the wins on the back end of the schedule have a lot less to do with pressure and more to do with the competition... Our schedule was pretty weak early and we went 5-3... then it got tough and we lost 4 tough games... it's gotten easy again and we've won two. Last season, we had a brutal openning set of games and started out 0-4 before running into easy stretches of the schedule.

Also, I'm not sure why Kubiak is still getting discredited for the W/L results in '06 and '07. He did a heck of a job to get those misfits to win as many as they did.. This is the first disappointing season in terms of underperforming the talent.

DexmanC
12-21-2009, 07:56 AM
Well, it's pretty clear that the wins on the back end of the schedule have a lot less to do with pressure and more to do with the competition... Our schedule was pretty weak early and we went 5-3... then it got tough and we lost 4 tough games... it's gotten easy again and we've won two. Last season, we had a brutal openning set of games and started out 0-4 before running into easy stretches of the schedule.

Also, I'm not sure why Kubiak is still getting discredited for the W/L results in '06 and '07. He did a heck of a job to get those misfits to win as many as they did.. This is the first disappointing season in terms of underperforming the talent.

Whether or not you want Kubiak replaced is dependent on if you're
comfortable with mediocrity or not. You've just stated the point the
"pink soapers" have been hammering home. We consistently beat the bad teams
on the schedule, and consistently LOSE to the good teams. Only
good teams make the playoffs in the NFL, and only teams who BEAT
good teams get to postseason.

Are you o.k. with more of the same? A talented yet routinely semi-focused
team who consistently beats bad teams and OCCASIONALLY wins against
A good team or two? We've seen four years of this, and frankly, the only
thing that's changed are the excuses.

HoustonFrog
12-21-2009, 08:04 AM
Whether or not you want Kubiak replaced is dependent on if you're
comfortable with mediocrity or not. You've just stated the point the
"pink soapers" have been hammering home. We consistently beat the bad teams
on the schedule, and consistently LOSE to the good teams. Only
good teams make the playoffs in the NFL, and only teams who BEAT
good teams get to postseason.

Are you o.k. with more of the same? A talented yet routinely semi-focused
team who consistently beats bad teams and OCCASIONALLY wins against
A good team or two? We've seen four years of this, and frankly, the only
thing that's changed are the excuses.

Now at 29 wins with only 7 vs winning teams

ArlingtonTexan
12-21-2009, 08:28 AM
Because that's almost my point. That's my fear is that we remove Kubiak, which creates disruption to what I think is a pretty good team that is close to winning. And, we replace him, the staff, and probably the GM with a group of guys that aren't really better decision-makers. They just Efff up differently than Kubiak.

And this is the absolute worst reason to keep a coach. It is like marrying an average girl not because you specifically love her but you think that there may not be a better catch to come along.

The premise of this thread was to list out specific characteristics of Kubiak's performance that says he is an above average coach in the NFL. The most discussed reason in this thread is the fear of not being able to find a coach who is above mediocore. Two essentail problems with this line of thought it is running an organization playing not to lose and not trusting your organization's ability to evaluate performance. Neither is a characteristic that makes me feel comfortable about the long term ability of the organization to put together a consistent winning program.

Any reason to keep Kubiak needs to based on him as a an on-the field coach, leadership ability , talent evaluation etc. not the idea that Kubes does not totally suck so let's keep him around anyway.

Beau Texan
12-21-2009, 08:32 AM
:strangle:Kubiak the "good ole boy" should be fired on his division record alone! Their is absolutly no reason to bring him back. He is an stuborn moron! My left nut has more football sence than him. Why is Andre Johnson not on the field in the redzone? Expecially since you have never in four years been able to run the ball inside the 20's. Kubiak your system is flawed! John Elway isn't walking thru that door.

I have never missed a Texans game but I am about to because this team is GARBAGE! Andre Johnson should go play with Payton Manning or Tom Brady! I wouldn't blame him one bit! They will know how to better use your talents! You are being waisted here in Houston. Andre could easily avg. 150 to 200 yds a game and that's unheard of but this guy could do it in his sleep. If they would only get him the friggin ball. Mario Williams? = GARBAGE! (Should have been V.Y.) Hey Bob what ever happen to Pretty Boy Carr? How'd that work out for you? Hey Kub how many washed up 30 y/o RB will you sign?


Every year this time of year I am laughing at Bob Mcnair and his stupid moves. Bob didn't learn with the first coach he hired. DC's & OC's aren't HC's You don't hire 50 rookie Head Coaches and expect playoffs. Hell my left nut should be the next head coach! My left nut can get you a 9-7 record. I was born and raise in Sunnyside TX, and I am ashamed of the TEXANS!

I said fire Kubiak last year, but noooooo! Well look at you now! And Bob Mcnair is so football stupid he will be in this exact same position next year! Because he loves Kubiak, and he's a nice guy, and he has nice David Carr like hair, and straight white teeth, and part of the Duke Boys network, and he's a Houstonian. V.Y. was a Houstionian to and he's progressing very well as a OILER!

If you think Kubiak should be back next year your an ***** and don't know crap about football! Look at how many times this team was unprepaired for the game. 4 friggin years and still no running game! 8-8 don't excite me! That's 50%, and 50% in school was a big fat F. You "Keep Kubiak People" are morons!

NO EXCUSES!
FIRE KUBIAK NOW!
AND GET A REAL HEAD COACH!

dalemurphy
12-21-2009, 08:33 AM
Whether or not you want Kubiak replaced is dependent on if you're
comfortable with mediocrity or not. You've just stated the point the
"pink soapers" have been hammering home. We consistently beat the bad teams
on the schedule, and consistently LOSE to the good teams. Only
good teams make the playoffs in the NFL, and only teams who BEAT
good teams get to postseason.

Are you o.k. with more of the same? A talented yet routinely semi-focused
team who consistently beats bad teams and OCCASIONALLY wins against
A good team or two? We've seen four years of this, and frankly, the only
thing that's changed are the excuses.

Two years ago, we were an untalented team in transition. Why do you insist on treating 2007 as if the team underachieved. 8 wins with that motley crue was pretty darn good.

IMO, this is the first season when are record hasn't met our talent level. I think we could've had a better season last year but we weren't a playoff caliber roster. So, tell me where I'm wrong, or stick to this year's record win complaining about mediocrity from Kubiak.

Finally, I don't think the Texans are doomed to mediocrity next year if Kubiak stays. I just don't see that he is a worse game manager or that his team is less prepared than coaches with a history of winning. I want Kubiak to stay because I believe that is the most likely scenario for the Texans to win in 2010.

JB
12-21-2009, 08:38 AM
:strangle:Kubiak the "good ole boy" should be fired on his division record alone! Their is absolutly no reason to bring him back. He is an stuborn moron! My left nut has more football sence than him. Why is Andre Johnson not on the field in the redzone? Expecially since you have never in four years been able to run the ball inside the 20's. Kubiak your system is flawed! John Elway isn't walking thru that door.

I have never missed a Texans game but i am about to because this Team is GARBAGE! Andre Johnson should go play with Payton Manning or Tom Brady! They will know how you use his talents!

Every year this time of year I am laughing at Bob Mcnair and his stupid moves. Bob didn't learn with the first coach he hired. DC's & OC's aren't HC's You don't hire 50 rookie Head Coaches and expect playoffs. Hell my left nut should be the next head coach! My left nut can get you a 9-7 record. I was born and raise in Sunnyside TX, and I am ashamed of the TEXANS!

I said fire Kubiak last year, but noooooo! Well look at you now! And Bob Mcnair is so football stupid he will be in this exact same position next year!

If you think Kubiak should be back next year your an ***** and don't know crap about football! Look at how many times this team was unprepaired for the game. 4 friggin years and still no running game! 8-8 don't excite me!

NO EXCUSES!
FIRE KUBIAK NOW!

This may be the most ignorant post I have read.

dalemurphy
12-21-2009, 08:48 AM
And this is the absolute worst reason to keep a coach. It is like marrying an average girl not because you specifically love her but you think that there may not be a better catch to come along.

The premise of this thread was to list out specific characteristics of Kubiak's performance that says he is an above average coach in the NFL. The most discussed reason in this thread is the fear of not being able to find a coach who is above mediocore. Two essentail problems with this line of thought it is running an organization playing not to lose and not trusting your organization's ability to evaluate performance. Neither is a characteristic that makes me feel comfortable about the long term ability of the organization to put together a consistent winning program.

Any reason to keep Kubiak needs to based on him as a an on-the field coach, leadership ability , talent evaluation etc. not the idea that Kubes does not totally suck so let's keep him around anyway.


Seems like I've done this a lot in this thread:

1. Talent evaluation- He's done a remarkable job, in concert with Rick Smith, in turning one of the worst NFL rosters of the decade into a young and very talented squad. You have to agree with this premise if you are going to complain about underperforming to a .500 record.

2. Leadership ability- The team consistently plays hard for him.

3. He's deep in the process of turning a QB with 3 career starts into an elite QB.

4. Even with some talent deficiencies on offense, this team can move the ball up and down the field... largely because of his scheme and preparation, I believe.

5. Coaching staff- I think we are in a great position with Frank Bush and Kyle Shanahan as coordinators.


I'm not afraid of being less than 8-8 next year. You misunderstand. I think this is a championship quality football team next year with what is in place plus a productive off-season. My fear is that a reorganization of the staff and management of the team will retard that movement.

Texan_Bill
12-21-2009, 09:01 AM
This may be the most ignorant post I have read.

Nah... Trust me, there have been worse.

Kaiser Toro
12-21-2009, 09:05 AM
Seems like I've done this a lot in this thread:

1. Talent evaluation- He's done a remarkable job, in concert with Rick Smith, in turning one of the worst NFL rosters of the decade into a young and very talented squad. You have to agree with this premise if you are going to complain about underperforming to a .500 record.

2. Leadership ability- The team consistently plays hard for him.

3. He's deep in the process of turning a QB with 3 career starts into an elite QB.

4. Even with some talent deficiencies on offense, this team can move the ball up and down the field... largely because of his scheme and preparation, I believe.

5. Coaching staff- I think we are in a great position with Frank Bush and Kyle Shanahan as coordinators.


I'm not afraid of being less than 8-8 next year. You misunderstand. I think this is a championship quality football team next year with what is in place plus a productive off-season. My fear is that a reorganization of the staff and management of the team will retard that movement.

#3, really? We gave up two picks for Schaub and he is our most expensive player against the cap.

DexmanC
12-21-2009, 09:08 AM
Two years ago, we were an untalented team in transition. Why do you insist on treating 2007 as if the team underachieved. 8 wins with that motley crue was pretty darn good.

IMO, this is the first season when are record hasn't met our talent level. I think we could've had a better season last year but we weren't a playoff caliber roster. So, tell me where I'm wrong, or stick to this year's record win complaining about mediocrity from Kubiak.

Finally, I don't think the Texans are doomed to mediocrity next year if Kubiak stays. I just don't see that he is a worse game manager or that his team is less prepared than coaches with a history of winning. I want Kubiak to stay because I believe that is the most likely scenario for the Texans to win in 2010.

Two years ago, the Texans finished 1-5 in the AFC South, and dead last
in the division. Guess what?? They are in the SAME positions IN SPITE of
all the improvements made to the team. It's time to get a new captain
to steer this ship. They just don't have the preparation needed to be
the team we expect them to be. How many more 8-8, 9-7, 7-9 years
do we accept from this regime before making a switch?

The 2007 Texans are a less talented version of the 2009 Texans. They
both are 1-5 in the AFC South. Both could finish 3-1 against the NFC.
Both could beat bad teams out of the division. The AFC South accounts
for 60% of your conference record. 7-17 is not acceptable no matter
how much Battle Red Kool-Aid you pour on it. Why expect this team
to make the playoffs under this regime, when the only thing we're changing
every year are the excuses for why we finish 8-8?

HOU-TEX
12-21-2009, 09:08 AM
This may be the most ignorant post I have read.

Yeah, he's been a member for a year and a half, but that gem was his first post.

Sounds like he's got a very smart and talented left nut, so he's got that going for him. :rolleyes:

mussop
12-21-2009, 09:14 AM
Yeah, he's been a member for a year and a half, but that gem was his first post.

Sounds like he's got a very smart and talented left nut, so he's got that going for him. :rolleyes:

You beat me to it! :user:



Wait, that didnt sound right? :mcnugget:

dalemurphy
12-21-2009, 09:15 AM
Two years ago, the Texans finished 1-5 in the AFC South, and dead last
in the division. Guess what?? They are in the SAME positions IN SPITE of
all the improvements made to the team. It's time to get a new captain
to steer this ship. They just don't have the preparation needed to be
the team we expect them to be. How many more 8-8, 9-7, 7-9 years
do we accept from this regime before making a switch?

The 2007 Texans are a less talented version of the 2009 Texans. They
both are 1-5 in the AFC South. Both could finish 3-1 against the NFC.
Both could beat bad teams out of the division. The AFC South accounts
for 60% of your conference record. 7-17 is not acceptable no matter
how much Battle Red Kool-Aid you pour on it. Why expect this team
to make the playoffs under this regime, when the only thing we're changing
every year are the excuses for why we finish 8-8?


You may be right. This team this year has underachieved, IMO, and it's possible that some of the reasons for their failure are a result of fatal flaws by Kubiak. I tend to think not though I don't have convincing evidence nor do I have absolute confidence. That being said, I can't imagine any change of coaching where my confidence would be immediately greater than it is now.

Beau Texan
12-21-2009, 09:28 AM
This may be the most ignorant post I have read.

No this is the most ignorant post I have read you Kubiak nut hugger!

Beau Texan
12-21-2009, 09:31 AM
Seems like I've done this a lot in this thread:

1. Talent evaluation- He's done a remarkable job, in concert with Rick Smith, in turning one of the worst NFL rosters of the decade into a young and very talented squad. You have to agree with this premise if you are going to complain about underperforming to a .500 record.

2. Leadership ability- The team consistently plays hard for him.

3. He's deep in the process of turning a QB with 3 career starts into an elite QB.

4. Even with some talent deficiencies on offense, this team can move the ball up and down the field... largely because of his scheme and preparation, I believe.

5. Coaching staff- I think we are in a great position with Frank Bush and Kyle Shanahan as coordinators.


I'm not afraid of being less than 8-8 next year. You misunderstand. I think this is a championship quality football team next year with what is in place plus a productive off-season. My fear is that a reorganization of the staff and management of the team will retard that movement.

Your obviously smoking crack! They are who I thought they were 8-8!

Texan_Bill
12-21-2009, 09:51 AM
Yeah, he's been a member for a year and a half, but that gem was his first post.

Sounds like he's got a very smart and talented left nut, so he's got that going for him. :rolleyes:

:spit:

mussop
12-21-2009, 09:55 AM
No this is the most ignorant post I have read you Kubiak nut hugger!

You seem to have a fascination with nutts.:peek:

FirstTexansFan
12-21-2009, 09:57 AM
Your obviously smoking crack! They are who I thought they were 8-8!

I can tell by your extensive posting history, you sir are one of our more brilliant and prophetic posters :) Though I disagree with Dale's assessment here, I doubt seriously he's smoking crack, as his history as a poster shows him to be very intelligent on most issues regarding football. Lets not insult the veterans :)

infantrycak
12-21-2009, 10:07 AM
Lets not insult the veterans :)

Or even better, let's not insult anyone. Maybe ease into the MB and see who knows football instead of jumping in with a moron colored paintbrush.

FirstTexansFan
12-21-2009, 10:10 AM
Or even better, let's not insult anyone. Maybe ease into the MB and see who knows football instead of jumping in with a moron colored paintbrush.

And what color is moron? :) And you are correct, the world has enough debate with conflict, we should be able to take whatever stance we please with OUR football team, without fear of being painted with that brush...(still wondering what color that is though) LOL

infantrycak
12-21-2009, 10:12 AM
And what color is moron? :) And you are correct, the world has enough debate with conflict, we should be able to take whatever stance we please with OUR football team, without fear of being painted with that brush...(still wondering what color that is though) LOL

I was imagining kind of a metallic booger green, but what do I know - I don't have a color gene.

Double Barrel
12-21-2009, 11:17 AM
Two years ago, we were an untalented team in transition. Why do you insist on treating 2007 as if the team underachieved. 8 wins with that motley crue was pretty darn good.

So Kubiak did more with less two years ago and less with more two years later? How, exactly, is this an improvement? (No excuses, please.)

No matter how you slice and dice it, .500 football for year four of an unsuccessful head coach is simply mediocre.

You're not doing a good job of putting sprinkles on, man. It's not a brownie and it still smells like dog poo.

We barely beat the worst team in the league yesterday. Yay Texans. :clown: :texflag:

ArlingtonTexan
12-21-2009, 11:24 AM
guys don't help the spammer by quoting his message so that we multiple things to move/delete.

Texan_Bill
12-21-2009, 11:26 AM
guys don't help the spammer by quoting his message so that we multiple things to move/delete.

My bad....

TexansSeminole
12-21-2009, 12:09 PM
So Kubiak did more with less two years ago and less with more two years later? How, exactly, is this an improvement? (No excuses, please.)

No matter how you slice and dice it, .500 football for year four of an unsuccessful head coach is simply mediocre.

You're not doing a good job of putting sprinkles on, man. It's not a brownie and it still smells like dog poo.

We barely beat the worst team in the league yesterday. Yay Texans. :clown: :texflag:

Must spread rep.

I don't get how people can defend Kubiak at this point. We are constantly playing below the level that we should, even against the Rams.

Joe Texan
12-21-2009, 12:31 PM
Yall All know how I feel about the Coach. But I am telling you he is trying as hard as he can to throw my feeling toward him in the trash. 197 yards and no TD, Rookie fumbling on the first set of downs, I did not see the whole game but the final score shows me that either The coach made more blunders than what I saw or that the players we have really suck. Can Andre really get almost 200 and not score. How many times did we get to the red zone and blow it. I will not use the pink soap but I did get a little pissed at the final score.

thunderkyss
12-21-2009, 06:07 PM
Must spread rep.

I don't get how people can defend Kubiak at this point. We are constantly playing below the level that we should, even against the Rams.

Constantly?

I think Dales point, is that we overplayed the level we should have to get to 8-8 in 2006 & 2007. I think he's got a point. With Sage & David taking way too many snaps as our starting QB. Ron Dayne as our feature back for much of that time.

For 2009, we're talking about underachieving, & we may very well finish 9-7. We underachieved our way to losing close games.

I will agree, that we aren't running the ball well.

But our passing game is just as good as it's ever been. Kubiak said we are top 10 in the red zone this year.

Our defense is playing better than it has in the past 6 years at least. We're forcing stops, getting off the field, even after we turned the ball over.

While I don't agree with Dale on all his points... I do believe, like he does, that our chance of success (& were talking 10-11 wins regardless what our schedule looks like) is better with Kubiak, than without for 2010.

He got the offense moving the ball & scoring points. He got the defense getting stops, and getting off the field. We score more times than not when we are in the red-zone. We get defensive stops (Field Goals) inside the red-zone. I think Andre is leading the league for a second year in a row in receiving yards, inspite of having no run game. We're winning on the road.

I remember a time that if the Texans turned the ball over once, they turned it over several times & give up on a game. We're not leading the league or anything, but we're going into week 16 at -2 in turnovers. We finished 2008 at -10. then 2007 at -13..

4 years is a long time. A lot of teams have been able to whatever in 4 years... We aren't those teams. So what if it takes Kubiak 5 years. All the pink soapers are acting like we haven't had any improvement whatsoever on this team. & that's just plain false.


"When do you draw the line? Will you give him 6 years?"

I don't know, ask me at the end of next year.

Texecutioner
12-22-2009, 12:02 AM
:strangle:Kubiak the "good ole boy" should be fired on his division record alone! Their is absolutly no reason to bring him back. He is an stuborn moron! My left nut has more football sence than him. Why is Andre Johnson not on the field in the redzone? Expecially since you have never in four years been able to run the ball inside the 20's. Kubiak your system is flawed! John Elway isn't walking thru that door.

I have never missed a Texans game but I am about to because this team is GARBAGE! Andre Johnson should go play with Payton Manning or Tom Brady! I wouldn't blame him one bit! They will know how to better use your talents! You are being waisted here in Houston. Andre could easily avg. 150 to 200 yds a game and that's unheard of but this guy could do it in his sleep. If they would only get him the friggin ball. Mario Williams? = GARBAGE! (Should have been V.Y.) Hey Bob what ever happen to Pretty Boy Carr? How'd that work out for you? Hey Kub how many washed up 30 y/o RB will you sign?


Every year this time of year I am laughing at Bob Mcnair and his stupid moves. Bob didn't learn with the first coach he hired. DC's & OC's aren't HC's You don't hire 50 rookie Head Coaches and expect playoffs. Hell my left nut should be the next head coach! My left nut can get you a 9-7 record. I was born and raise in Sunnyside TX, and I am ashamed of the TEXANS!

I said fire Kubiak last year, but noooooo! Well look at you now! And Bob Mcnair is so football stupid he will be in this exact same position next year! Because he loves Kubiak, and he's a nice guy, and he has nice David Carr like hair, and straight white teeth, and part of the Duke Boys network, and he's a Houstonian. V.Y. was a Houstionian to and he's progressing very well as a OILER!

If you think Kubiak should be back next year your an ***** and don't know crap about football! Look at how many times this team was unprepaired for the game. 4 friggin years and still no running game! 8-8 don't excite me! That's 50%, and 50% in school was a big fat F. You "Keep Kubiak People" are morons!

NO EXCUSES!
FIRE KUBIAK NOW!
AND GET A REAL HEAD COACH!

Well look on the bright side of things. If Kubes does stay, with his history we'll have Clinton Portis and Jamal Lewis in our backfield next year and they're both going to be tearing up the ZBS! Go Texans!

DexmanC
12-22-2009, 12:23 AM
Well look on the bright side of things. If Kubes does stay, with his history we'll have Clinton Portis and Jamal Lewis in our backfield next year and they're both going to be tearing up the ZBS! Go Texans!

And if Toby Gerhardt fumbles, he'll be benched and Jamal "Good Kid" Lewis
will play the rest of the game on one leg. At least he'll be a helluva blocker!

sometexansfan
12-22-2009, 12:26 AM
And if Toby Gerhardt fumbles, he'll be benched and Jamal "Good Kid" Lewis
will play the rest of the game on one leg. At least he'll be a helluva blocker!

Lewis went to jail for setting up a drug deal. At least we don't have to worry about him being in a Texans uniform next year.

ObsiWan
12-22-2009, 10:12 AM
instant offense - i find it extremely difficult to believe many coaches could come in and get as much or more from our players without spending so much that it'd strangle other areas. even with kubiak we need 2 interior offensive linemen, a runningback (gerhart?), an upgrade at starting receiver (shipley?), and without kubiak coaching up orlovsky the next couple of years we'd need to sign or draft another quarterback. is another coach going to get a top 5 offense from this group even if everybody's healthy?

improvement - in every area but the one that matters (wins). talent, defense, and staff have improved each season. the defense has taken a huge step in several areas. many are calling for gibbs to call it quits, and we've got matthews ready to take over. bush in his first year has worked well, and lil shanahan is only going to improve.

youth - every team in the nfl talks about building through the draft, and kubiak's done exactly that. it may get him fired, but texans fans should be greatful our baseline mirrors the steelers or patriots of a decade (or more) ago as opposed to throwing money at possibilities like the redskins. if we're going to build exclusively through the draft and young free agents, we WILL be inconsistant. it beats the heck out of putting all of our eggs in sharper and glenn and coleman and payne and wade and (and and and) hoping to win with a very small window of opportunity.

building from the inside out - sure not all has worked as intended but it isnt for a lack of effort. kubiak's drafted spencer, winston, brown, caldwell, mario, okoye, and barwin as first day picks (missing two seconds in the last 3 seasons). we've also gone after hopeful or focused pieces such as studdard, okam, weaver, smith, robinson, cody, and an excess of walk-ons - many currently playing key roles. by conventional wisdom, kubiak's doing it exactly right and will see those fruits in the near future.

potential - similar to the draft, this is an area that could be the end of kubiak's tenure. many, if not most, of our draft picks and signings are based on what they'll do 2 to 5 years down the road. so many of our players, even the perceived busts, still have so much time to boom before they even mature. altering that progression could be detrimental and possibly disastrous when staying the course with coaches who know these guys is more likely to get better results.

developement - not perfect, but if we're going to expect the youngest starting lineup in the nfl to be in the playoffs, we cant ignore how they got to that position. some progress, some regress, some are going through both (as with all teams), but under kubiak we've seen a lot more of the former. mario, demeco, slaton, schaub, daniels, cushing, and pollard have all had probowl calibre seasons under kubiak with schaub being the old man at 28. with our offensive success, brown will also be mentioned before long.

competitiveness - outside of the jets, there hasnt been a game this season that we werent there to win. we didnt go in unprepared or unmotivated (see steelers), and whether up against indy or down against arizona the texans have given what they have. as with every cliche in football, we've been one break away from having secured a playoff spot at this point. we're SO dang close SO dang often - a couple more players can push us over that hill, a new coaching staff could go either direction.

consistancy - bob mcnair's great flaw. we need time to gel. we need to execute. UGH! yeah i think i'm bleeding out of the ears just writing that but it doesnt take away their truths. our offensive line stayed healthy last season and propelled slaton to what should've been a probowl birth, the runaway #1 receiver in the league, and a top 5 offense. that kind of cohesiveness, especially in a growing organization that is on a forward path (unlike capers' aging and declining path), will continue to build upon itsself. studdard and white and caldwell and barwin and pollard and cushing and quinn and jacoby are getting their first real reps this season - their familiarity next season whether as backups or starters will greatly improve our abilities along with kubiak and his staff's ability to adjust with them.

Excellent points, Scooter [must spread rep, yada, yada...]

Unfortunately, they all fall on deaf ears. See, some of the earlier posters were right; this thread should have ended long ago or never been started. The self-proclaim "Soapers" have their minds made up. No logical discussion brought to the board in good faith will sway them.
The man made excellent arguments and the next response was "...to toss a cup of bullshit juice all over your long post".

Real classy...

Y'all don't want discussion.
Y'all just want to vent.

...disappointing.
Go Texans
:texflag:

Texan_Bill
12-22-2009, 10:20 AM
instant offense - i find it extremely difficult to believe many coaches could come in and get as much or more from our players without spending so much that it'd strangle other areas. even with kubiak we need 2 interior offensive linemen, a runningback (gerhart?), an upgrade at starting receiver (shipley?), and without kubiak coaching up orlovsky the next couple of years we'd need to sign or draft another quarterback. is another coach going to get a top 5 offense from this group even if everybody's healthy?

improvement - in every area but the one that matters (wins). talent, defense, and staff have improved each season. the defense has taken a huge step in several areas. many are calling for gibbs to call it quits, and we've got matthews ready to take over. bush in his first year has worked well, and lil shanahan is only going to improve.

youth - every team in the nfl talks about building through the draft, and kubiak's done exactly that. it may get him fired, but texans fans should be greatful our baseline mirrors the steelers or patriots of a decade (or more) ago as opposed to throwing money at possibilities like the redskins. if we're going to build exclusively through the draft and young free agents, we WILL be inconsistant. it beats the heck out of putting all of our eggs in sharper and glenn and coleman and payne and wade and (and and and) hoping to win with a very small window of opportunity.

building from the inside out - sure not all has worked as intended but it isnt for a lack of effort. kubiak's drafted spencer, winston, brown, caldwell, mario, okoye, and barwin as first day picks (missing two seconds in the last 3 seasons). we've also gone after hopeful or focused pieces such as studdard, okam, weaver, smith, robinson, cody, and an excess of walk-ons - many currently playing key roles. by conventional wisdom, kubiak's doing it exactly right and will see those fruits in the near future.

potential - similar to the draft, this is an area that could be the end of kubiak's tenure. many, if not most, of our draft picks and signings are based on what they'll do 2 to 5 years down the road. so many of our players, even the perceived busts, still have so much time to boom before they even mature. altering that progression could be detrimental and possibly disastrous when staying the course with coaches who know these guys is more likely to get better results.

developement - not perfect, but if we're going to expect the youngest starting lineup in the nfl to be in the playoffs, we cant ignore how they got to that position. some progress, some regress, some are going through both (as with all teams), but under kubiak we've seen a lot more of the former. mario, demeco, slaton, schaub, daniels, cushing, and pollard have all had probowl calibre seasons under kubiak with schaub being the old man at 28. with our offensive success, brown will also be mentioned before long.

competitiveness - outside of the jets, there hasnt been a game this season that we werent there to win. we didnt go in unprepared or unmotivated (see steelers), and whether up against indy or down against arizona the texans have given what they have. as with every cliche in football, we've been one break away from having secured a playoff spot at this point. we're SO dang close SO dang often - a couple more players can push us over that hill, a new coaching staff could go either direction.

consistancy - bob mcnair's great flaw. we need time to gel. we need to execute. UGH! yeah i think i'm bleeding out of the ears just writing that but it doesnt take away their truths. our offensive line stayed healthy last season and propelled slaton to what should've been a probowl birth, the runaway #1 receiver in the league, and a top 5 offense. that kind of cohesiveness, especially in a growing organization that is on a forward path (unlike capers' aging and declining path), will continue to build upon itsself. studdard and white and caldwell and barwin and pollard and cushing and quinn and jacoby are getting their first real reps this season - their familiarity next season whether as backups or starters will greatly improve our abilities along with kubiak and his staff's ability to adjust with them.

Excellent points, Scooter [must spread rep, yada, yada...]

Unfortunately, they all fall on deaf ears. See, some of the earlier posters were right; this thread should have ended long ago or never been started. The self-proclaim "Soapers" have their minds made up. No logical discussion brought to the board in good faith will sway them.
The man made excellent arguments and the next response was "...to toss a cup of bullshit juice all over your long post".

Real classy...

Y'all don't want discussion.
Y'all just want to vent.

...disappointing.
Go Texans
:texflag:

Both good posts... both repped.

houstonspartan
12-22-2009, 10:28 AM
Excellent points, Scooter [must spread rep, yada, yada...]

Unfortunately, they all fall on deaf ears. See, some of the earlier posters were right; this thread should have ended long ago or never been started. The self-proclaim "Soapers" have their minds made up. No logical discussion brought to the board in good faith will sway them.
The man made excellent arguments and the next response was "...to toss a cup of bullshit juice all over your long post".

Real classy...

Y'all don't want discussion.
Y'all just want to vent.

...disappointing.
Go Texans
:texflag:

Oh hell naw.

Are you freaking kidding me? Logic? The people who want Kubiak replaced are talking logic and cold, hard FACTS. Those who want him to stay are talking emotion and hyperbole: "Oh, he'll get better." "Another coach couldn't do what he's done."

And, note that Scooter wrote the following:
"improvement - in every area but the one that matters (wins)."

Are you kidding me? This person writes this long-ass post and say there's been improvement in every area but the one that matters, winning? That is the ONLY thing that matters. If we can't win games, what's the point?

Yes, I tossed a cup of bullshit juice over his post, and I will do it again.

Mr. White
12-22-2009, 10:37 AM
Excellent points, Scooter [must spread rep, yada, yada...]

Unfortunately, they all fall on deaf ears. See, some of the earlier posters were right; this thread should have ended long ago or never been started.

As the guy who started the thread, I can't help but take exception here.

This thread was started to further the discussion. I wanted to hear new aspects of the argument because I got sick of reading the same circular argument.

I wanted specific reasons on why the guy deserves to stay around. For the most part, I haven't seen them. There are a few posts that measured up, but not many.

Of course the thread devolved into the same old BS anyway, but they all do.

houstonspartan
12-22-2009, 10:40 AM
As the guy who started the thread, I can't help but take exception here.

This thread was started to further the discussion. I wanted to hear new aspects of the argument because I got sick of reading the same circular argument.

I wanted specific reasons on why the guy deserves to stay around. For the most part, I haven't seen them. There are a few posts that measured up, but not many.

Of course the thread devolved into the same old BS anyway, but they all do.

The reason you haven't seen them is because it's extremely difficult to argue against 1-5 in the division, and 7-17 in the division over four years. That is simply disgraceful and unacceptable.

HoustonFrog
12-22-2009, 10:54 AM
Excellent points, Scooter [must spread rep, yada, yada...]

Unfortunately, they all fall on deaf ears. See, some of the earlier posters were right; this thread should have ended long ago or never been started. The self-proclaim "Soapers" have their minds made up. No logical discussion brought to the board in good faith will sway them.
The man made excellent arguments and the next response was "...to toss a cup of bullshit juice all over your long post".

Real classy...

Y'all don't want discussion.
Y'all just want to vent.

...disappointing.
Go Texans
:texflag:

What are you talking about. Most of us here who are on the other side of things have laid out point by point FACTS compared to made up future possibilities and yet they get skipped because people only want to see what they want to see.....something good in the future, despite the 4 years. I can post them again just so we can press "end" and you know they are out there.

1) Kubiak is 1-5 in the division. He has never sniffed having a winning division season.

2) Out of Kubiak's 29 wins, only 7 have been against winning teams.

3) Having players that like you doesn't make you a good coach. In fact most coaches that have been successful have been ones who can get the most out of a team while still maintaining the distance and fear they need to get respect..Lombardi, Knoll, Landry, Parcells, Bilechick, Jimmy Johnson, etc. Players don't need a BFF. This point also works against Kubiak. Players have loved the guy for 4 years yet they can't seem to win games for him and they keep making the same mistakes. How has liking him worked out?

4) Losing is losing. You are what your record is. I don't care if you lose by 7 or 30, it is still a loss. It is amazing that people support Kubes and point to more talent, a better offense and a better defense. Yet with all of that, they are at 6-7 after 13 games for the 3rd year straight. That is coaching. (just like I thought the Rams win was pathetic and uninspiring but in the end it was a "W" and 20 years from now you see "W"s and "Ls")

5)Injuries happen. It is why you drafted Casey and have Driessen. Look at the Colts when they played us:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/091201&sportCat=nfl

"With Bob Sanders and Marlin Jackson out for the season, and Dwight Freeney missing the contest with an injury, the Colts' defense started no one drafted higher than the third round. Big plays were made by Colts defensive starters Gary Brackett, Daniel Muir, Melvin Bullitt and Jacob Lacey, all of whom were undrafted free agents. Pierre Garçon, out of Division III Mount Union, caught a touchdown pass. Chad Simpson, undrafted out of Division I-AA Morgan State, scored a touchdown, breaking three tackles when Houston players tried to strip the ball. Robert Mathis, a low draft pick out of Division I-AA Alabama A&M, not only stripped Matt Schaub of the ball to set up the game-icing touchdown, he did so while being held by the Moo Cows' offensive line. I don't know what's in the water in Indiana, but it seems to turn unknowns into football players."

6) People accept mediocre. Their standard of success if deplorable. People hate the Cowboys, yet their standard is playoffs and SB. It is why Wade is on the hot seat. Most NFL teams have that same standard. Even the Jets with a rookie QB and new coach expect success because of their talent. Yet here people think 4 years of looking better and having .500 results is awesome. They act like Kubiak walks on water. Chan Gailey went to the playoffs as a coach. People here need to shoot higher. Bill Maas said he was on the Cheifs when they couldn't get over the hump. He said they were just like the Texans. They then got Marty in he said they learned that there was discipline to things they didn't even know about. That is this situation. Baltimore, Atlanta, Miami all turned it around. Changing coaches doesn't have to equal rebuilding again.

7) As for Scotters arguments...
instant offense - Yes, the offense is improved and the team is still at .500
improvement - Yes, everyone seems to agree that there is improvement yet the team is still at.500
building from the inside out -And where are the sacks?
potential - One of the dirtiest words in sports. Ask any coach.
developement - guys like Amobi and who?Our RBs who have taken a step back.
competitiveness - really?A team that can't win the big ones and still falls short in big games?
consistancy - So losing one week, winning the next and never puitting two good halves together is consistency?

All of the arguments but 1 in #7 above are talking points, not facts. The only one that is substantial and can be proven is the offense being better. The rest are talking points for next year and have been the same for 4 years. That is most of our points....you can add up all his arguments, even if you believe them..and yet they still end at the same road...500. That leads to one person...coach.

With all of this said, I won't comment anymore. I just wanted to show you that these arguments have been out there and they contradict alot of what I'm hearing in the other camp. But to each their own. :)

DexmanC
12-22-2009, 10:57 AM
The Kubiak Supporters are missing ONE HUGE GLARING FLAW in their argument!

This regime has been PERFECTLY CONSISTENT in who they WIN against, AND
who they LOSE to!

Houston Texans 2009 Overall Record: 7-7

Houston Texans record against Teams at .500 or below: 6-1

Houston Texans record against teams with winning records: 1-6

How do you EXPLAIN THIS!!???

Texan_Bill
12-22-2009, 11:18 AM
What are you talking about. Most of us here who are on the other side of things have laid out point by point FACTS compared to made up future possibilities and yet they get skipped because people only want to see what they want to see.....something good in the future, despite the 4 years. I can post them again just so we can press "end" and yuou know they are out there.

1) Kubiak is 1-5 in the division. He has never sniffed having a winning division season.

2) Out of Kubiak's 29 wins, only 7 have been against winning teams.

3) Having players that like you doesn't make you a good coach. In fact most coaches that have been successful have been ones who can get the most out of a team while still maintaining the distance and fear they need to get respect..Lombardi, Knoll, Landry, Parcells, Bilechick, Jimmy Johnson, etc. Players don't need a BFF. This point also works against Kubiak. Players have loved the guy for 4 years yet they can't seem to win games for him and they keep making the same mistakes. How has liking him worked out?

4) Losing is losing. You are what your record is. I don't care if you lose by 7 or 30, it is still a loss. It is amazing that people support Kubes and point to more talent, a better offense and a better defense. Yet with all of that, they are at 6-7 after 13 games for the 3rd year straight. That is coaching.

5)Injuries happen. It is why you drafted Casey and have Driessen. Look at the Colts when they played us:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/091201&sportCat=nfl

"With Bob Sanders and Marlin Jackson out for the season, and Dwight Freeney missing the contest with an injury, the Colts' defense started no one drafted higher than the third round. Big plays were made by Colts defensive starters Gary Brackett, Daniel Muir, Melvin Bullitt and Jacob Lacey, all of whom were undrafted free agents. Pierre Garçon, out of Division III Mount Union, caught a touchdown pass. Chad Simpson, undrafted out of Division I-AA Morgan State, scored a touchdown, breaking three tackles when Houston players tried to strip the ball. Robert Mathis, a low draft pick out of Division I-AA Alabama A&M, not only stripped Matt Schaub of the ball to set up the game-icing touchdown, he did so while being held by the Moo Cows' offensive line. I don't know what's in the water in Indiana, but it seems to turn unknowns into football players."

6) People accept mediocre. Their standard of success if deplorable. People hate the Cowboys, yet their standard is playoffs and SB. It is why Wade is on the hot seat. Most NFL teams have that same standard. Even the Jets with a rookie QB and new coach expect success because of their talent. Yet here people think 4 years of looking better and having .500 results is awesome. They act like Kubiak walks on water. Chan Gailey went to the playoffs as a coach. People here need to shoot higher. Bill Maas said he was on the Cheifs when they couldn't get over the hump. He said they were just like the Texans. They then got Marty in he said they learned that there was discipline to things they didn't even know about. That is this situation.

Frog, you are very level headed and open minded. Surely you know that there has been good arguments in this thread for Kubiak remaining another season. However, if people are wearing blinders or already have their agenda set, of course they won't reasonably discuss the merits of one's argument.

Instead, what they'll do is :thinking:


:user: Oh yeah, "...to toss a cup of bullshit juice".


I can't argue the divisional losses. That's the most relevant argument for the naysayers. Really disappointing when I expected them to be 3-3 or maybe even squeek out a 4-2 record.

All I can do is look at things open mindedly. For example: what's the biggest thing wrong with this team: For me inconsistency. Then I think about what leads to inconsistency. Primarly things like youth and yes coaching to a degree. Mix in a a bad seed or two (ie Dunta and his pay me Rick stunt.)

I also look at other issues, i.e. Red Zone woes. What's the problem with scoring in the red zone this season? 3 things IMO. A) Our O-line B) no running game (although that kinda goes hand in hand with A) and lastly who is our best Red Zone threat. I would like us to go to AJ more often but really it was Owen Daniels for the first half of this season. He was on pace for 10 TD's. Originally I thought that there wouldn't be too big of a drop off, but I was wrong - see Dreessen's drop last weekend.

I don't care who you are, it's hard to be consistent when nearly 40% of your offensive starters from last year are on the IR.

Not sure why you brought up the Colts defense. They're in the bottom half of the league in total defense. They're defense helps them out sometimes, but that team is all about Peyton and the their offense..

houstonspartan
12-22-2009, 11:23 AM
Frog, you are very level headed and open minded. Surely you know that there has been good arguments in this thread for Kubiak remaining another season. However, if people are wearing blinders or already have their agenda set, of course they won't reasonably discuss the merits of one's argument.

Instead, what they'll do is :thinking:


:user: Oh yeah, "...to toss a cup of bullshit juice".


I can't argue the divisional losses. That's the most relevant argument for the naysayers. Really disappointing when I expected them to be 3-3 or maybe even squeek out a 4-2 record.

All I can do is look at things open mindedly. For example: what's the biggest thing wrong with this team: For me inconsistency. Then I think about what leads to inconsistency. Primarly things like youth and yes coaching to a degree. Mix in a a bad seed or two (ie Dunta and his pay me Rick stunt.)

I also look at other issues, i.e. Red Zone woes. What's the problem with scoring in the red zone this season? 3 things IMO. A) Our O-line B) no running game (although that kinda goes hand in hand with A) and lastly who is our best Red Zone threat. I would like us to go to AJ more often but really it was Owen Daniels for the first half of this season. He was on pace for 10 TD's. Originally I thought that there wouldn't be too big of a drop off, but I was wrong - see Dreessen's drop last weekend.

I don't care who you are, it's hard to be consistent when nearly 40% of your offensive starters from last year are on the IR.

Not sure why you brought up the Colts defense. They're in the bottom half of the league in total defense. They're defense helps them out sometimes, but that team is all about Peyton and the their offense..

LOL. Why do you keep bringing up the "bullshit juice" thing? You make it seem as if that was my ONLY response. Me saying that does not negate the rest of my argument, which was based on FACTS. Why is that so hard for you to believe?

You say that the team is inconsistent. I agree 100 percent. But, you know what? I'm tired of hearing "We have to be more consistent" from players and coaches. I'm just TIRED of it. That's ALL they say. Don't talk about it, DO IT, for pete's sake.

Also, we didn't have 40 percent of our offensive starters on IR at the start of this season. We could have easily come out strong, but did not.

Did you see the first half of the second Indy game? We KICKED THEIR ASSES, up and down the field. With 40 percent of our offensive starters on IR? Hmm. That tells me we can turn it on when we want to.

I dont' know, maybe it's just me, but I have a simple mantra about these things: Show me the W's.

Texan_Bill
12-22-2009, 11:36 AM
LOL. Why do you keep bringing up the "bullshit juice" thing? You make it seem as if that was my ONLY response. Me saying that does not negate the rest of my argument, which was based on FACTS. Why is that so hard for you to believe?

You say that the team is inconsistent. I agree 100 percent. But, you know what? I'm tired of hearing "We have to be more consistent" from players and coaches. I'm just TIRED of it. That's ALL they say. Don't talk about it, DO IT, for pete's sake.

Also, we didn't have 40 percent of our offensive starters on IR at the start of this season. We could have easily come out strong, but did not.

I dont' know, maybe it's just me, but I have a simple mantra about these things: Show me the W's.

'Cause I thought it was funny but rude at the same time. It tied in perfectly with the other posters point.

I agree. Next season (because I believe as many do that Kubiak will be back), it's a put up or shut up season.

You're right. Those guys didn't all hit the IR at the same time. However, our record was 5-3 after the game in which OD went down. His first 4 games on IR, the Texans went 0-4 in fairly close games. Just didn't have enough to get over the hump. We may have enough if your pro-bowl tight end was able to contribute. You know the guy that was on pace to have 80+ receptions, 1000+ yards and 10 TD's. You're fairly new here, so I want to let you know that I don't normally look at injuries or referee's calls to make excuses, but in the case with Owen Daniels you're losing a huge amount of production. A huge amount. You witnessed it last week with Dreessen and his drops.

Lastly we can agree. I want the W's also. I want to see more W's than l's on a consistent basis.

houstonspartan
12-22-2009, 11:43 AM
'Cause I thought it was funny but rude at the same time. It tied in perfectly with the other posters point.

I agree. Next season (because I believe as many do that Kubiak will be back), it's a put up or shut up season.

You're right. Those guys didn't all hit the IR at the same time. However, our record was 5-3 after the game in which OD went down. His first 4 games the Texans went 0-4 in fairly close games. Just didn't have enough to get over the hump. We may have enough if your pro-bowl tight end was able to contribute. You know the guy that was on pace to have 80+ receptions, 1000+ yards and 10 TD's. You're fairly new here, so I want to let you know that I don't normally look at injuries or referee's calls to make excuses, but in the case with Owen Daniels you're losing a huge amount of production. A huge amount. You witnessed it last week with Dreessen and his drops.

Lastly we can agree. I want the W's also. I want to see more W's than l's on a consistent basis.

Oh, trust me, I agree 100 percent about OD. When he went down, I told several friends of mine that that is going to hurt us. Both friends said that tight ends are a dime a dozen.

No, they are not. A tight end that fits into your scheme and plays well with your qb is not easy to find. You can't just plug in another tight end and expect he and Schaub to connect like he did with OD.

Well, both friends have separately told me point blank that I was right about OD hurting this team. lol.

About next year. Here is what I'm worried about: Pressure. This team had a lot of expectations placed on it this year, and I think they couldn't handle it. I defintely don't think Gary handles pressure well.

Can you imagine the pressure they're going to be under next year if Kubiak returns? And - good gobbly - with Kris Brown as our kicker? Wow.

TexansSeminole
12-22-2009, 11:44 AM
The point about OD perfectly illustrates what happens when you rely too much on one aspect of your offense. The passing game carries this team, but when it takes a hit (injury) the entire offense suffers tremendously.

My #1 problem with Kubiak regarding the way he has built this team is that we have no running game, and their really hasn't been much of an effort to build one. I am a firm believer in running the football, and I can't see this team making the playoffs or actually winning playoff games until we have some sort of running game. It doesn't have to be fantastic, just something to keep the opposing defense off balance. We have the worst running game in the NFL.

Second Honeymoon
12-22-2009, 11:51 AM
Yall All know how I feel about the Coach. But I am telling you he is trying as hard as he can to throw my feeling toward him in the trash. 197 yards and no TD, Rookie fumbling on the first set of downs, I did not see the whole game but the final score shows me that either The coach made more blunders than what I saw or that the players we have really suck. Can Andre really get almost 200 and not score. How many times did we get to the red zone and blow it. I will not use the pink soap but I did get a little pissed at the final score.

that kool aid must be wearing off. i gotta say i am impressed.

merry christmas joe texan

Texan_Bill
12-22-2009, 11:52 AM
Oh, trust me, I agree 100 percent about OD. When he went down, I told several friends of mine that that is going to hurt us. Both friends said that tight ends are a dime a dozen.

No, they are not. A tight end that fits into your scheme and plays well with your qb is not easy to find. You can't just plug in another tight end and expect he and Schaub to connect like he did with OD.

Well, both friends have separately told me point blank that I was right about OD hurting this team. lol.

About next year. Here is what I'm worried about: Pressure. This team had a lot of expectations placed on it this year, and I think they couldn't handle it. I defintely don't think Gary handles pressure well.

Can you imagine the pressure they're going to be under next year if Kubiak returns? And - good gobbly - with Kris Brown as our kicker? Wow.


I admit that I was wrong about OD going down. I really didn't think there would be too much of a drop off. Plug and play. Well it's abundantly obvious I was woefully wrong.

Oh, there will be a huge amount of pressure. They thought expectations and pressure was tough this year? Just wait. If the Texans get off to a slow start next season with Kubiak at the helm, I will call for his head.

All the other things that are concerns I can attribute to youth and inexperience.Inconsistency - youth. Bad penalties - youth. Buckling under pressure - youth. All of those things get better with experience. That said, in order for it to happen players have to perform and coaches have to coach. Hell think about it, AJ is our oldest team leader at 28. He's never "been there done that."

infantrycak
12-22-2009, 11:54 AM
My #1 problem with Kubiak regarding the way he has built this team is that we have no running game, and their really hasn't been much of an effort to build one.

I don't see how that statement is accurate in a couple different ways. Number 1 we had a running game last year. If we simply had that running game we would be in the playoffs this year. Number 2 he has done quite a bit to build the running game, it just failed this year. He brought in one of the top three OL coaches, drafted 4 OLmen on the first day (what was traditionally first day) plus grabbed another 1st day guy and fixed his medical issue that got him waived, traded for another OLmen plus drafted Slaton on the 1st day.

mussop
12-22-2009, 11:59 AM
Excellent points, Scooter [must spread rep, yada, yada...]

Unfortunately, they all fall on deaf ears. See, some of the earlier posters were right; this thread should have ended long ago or never been started. The self-proclaim "Soapers" have their minds made up. No logical discussion brought to the board in good faith will sway them.
The man made excellent arguments and the next response was "...to toss a cup of bullshit juice all over your long post".

Real classy...

Y'all don't want discussion.
Y'all just want to vent.

...disappointing.
Go Texans
:texflag:

You stopped too soon. Read a few pages more page 15 is where his arguments were put to rest.

HOU-TEX
12-22-2009, 11:59 AM
I admit that I was wrong about OD going down. I really didn't think there would be too much of a drop off. Plug and play. Well it's abundantly obvious I was woefully wrong.

Oh, there will be a huge amount of pressure. They thought expectations and pressure was tough this year? Just wait. If the Texans get off to a slow start next season with Kubiak at the helm, I will call for his head.

All the other things that are concerns I can attribute to youth and inexperience.Inconsistency - youth. Bad penalties - youth. Buckling under pressure - youth. All of those things get better with experience. That said, in order for it to happen players have to perform and coaches have to coach. Hell think about it, AJ is our oldest team leader at 28. He's never "been there done that."

Unfortunately, I thought the same thing for the most part. I knew OD was a beast at TE, but I thought Dreessen and Casey would step up in their own way and fill in admirably. I'm not the coach and don't watch miles of tape, but I thought for sure we'd see a lot more of Casey than we have. He's got the hands to easily fill in for OD, but lately it seems obvious that Kubiak wants everyone to be great at blocking (see Chris Brown).

Texaninlild
12-22-2009, 12:06 PM
I don't see how that statement is accurate in a couple different ways. Number 1 we had a running game last year. Number 2 he has done quite a bit to build the running game, it just failed this year. He brought in one of the top three OL coaches, drafted 4 OLmen on the first day (what was traditionally first day) plus grabbed another 1st day guy and fixed his medical issue that got him waived, traded for another OLmen plus drafted Slaton on the 1st day.

I agree. The running game just went way south this year instead of Denver zone blocking north. If we shore up the middle 3 on our line that will make huge strides in the running game. If Steve remembers he is very fast and led the league in runs over 40 yds just a year ago, and he might also apply to the Tiki ball carrying school we could be ok. I wouldn't mind stealing a Michael Bush or Jonathan Stewart type in the draft or offseason as the #2.

I know we all want a stud safety from Santa this coming year. We can all feel we are on the cusp of being very good and that is why we are so pissed.:fans:

TexansSeminole
12-22-2009, 12:07 PM
I don't see how that statement is accurate in a couple different ways. Number 1 we had a running game last year. Number 2 he has done quite a bit to build the running game, it just failed this year. He brought in one of the top three OL coaches, drafted 4 OLmen on the first day (what was traditionally first day) plus grabbed another 1st day guy and fixed his medical issue that got him waived, traded for another OLmen plus drafted Slaton on the 1st day.

We had a running game last year but it was entirely dependent on one person playing extremely well. That approach did not work this year.

I'll give Kubiak Alex Gibbs. That was the best move he made in trying to improve the running game.

Eric Winston was drafted to be a pass blocker. He wasn't exactly brought in to be a road grader. Caldwell was a nice addition IMO, but has not seen the field enough for me to really see where he is at, especially conditioning wise. Myers was brought in to pass block, there is no doubt about that.

Duane Brown was a good addition both in the passing game and the running game. Good move here.

Is there something I am leaving out?

Look at what we did to improve our RB situation. Wali "kids got a future" Lundy, Ahman "slip and fall" Green, Chris "bonehead" Brown, and now Arian Foster. Slaton is he only real contributor that Kubiak has brought in.

Mr. White
12-22-2009, 12:08 PM
When OD went out, I wasn't expecting another TE to come in and fill his shoes.

I thought that the ball would get spread around the WR's more. Especially Walter. Seems like he used to be the guy to catch those passes down the middle.

mussop
12-22-2009, 12:08 PM
What are you talking about. Most of us here who are on the other side of things have laid out point by point FACTS compared to made up future possibilities and yet they get skipped because people only want to see what they want to see.....something good in the future, despite the 4 years. I can post them again just so we can press "end" and you know they are out there.

1) Kubiak is 1-5 in the division. He has never sniffed having a winning division season.

2) Out of Kubiak's 29 wins, only 7 have been against winning teams.

3) Having players that like you doesn't make you a good coach. In fact most coaches that have been successful have been ones who can get the most out of a team while still maintaining the distance and fear they need to get respect..Lombardi, Knoll, Landry, Parcells, Bilechick, Jimmy Johnson, etc. Players don't need a BFF. This point also works against Kubiak. Players have loved the guy for 4 years yet they can't seem to win games for him and they keep making the same mistakes. How has liking him worked out?

4) Losing is losing. You are what your record is. I don't care if you lose by 7 or 30, it is still a loss. It is amazing that people support Kubes and point to more talent, a better offense and a better defense. Yet with all of that, they are at 6-7 after 13 games for the 3rd year straight. That is coaching. (just like I thought the Rams win was pathetic and uninspiring but in the end it was a "W" and 20 years from now you see "W"s and "Ls")

5)Injuries happen. It is why you drafted Casey and have Driessen. Look at the Colts when they played us:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/091201&sportCat=nfl

"With Bob Sanders and Marlin Jackson out for the season, and Dwight Freeney missing the contest with an injury, the Colts' defense started no one drafted higher than the third round. Big plays were made by Colts defensive starters Gary Brackett, Daniel Muir, Melvin Bullitt and Jacob Lacey, all of whom were undrafted free agents. Pierre Garçon, out of Division III Mount Union, caught a touchdown pass. Chad Simpson, undrafted out of Division I-AA Morgan State, scored a touchdown, breaking three tackles when Houston players tried to strip the ball. Robert Mathis, a low draft pick out of Division I-AA Alabama A&M, not only stripped Matt Schaub of the ball to set up the game-icing touchdown, he did so while being held by the Moo Cows' offensive line. I don't know what's in the water in Indiana, but it seems to turn unknowns into football players."

6) People accept mediocre. Their standard of success if deplorable. People hate the Cowboys, yet their standard is playoffs and SB. It is why Wade is on the hot seat. Most NFL teams have that same standard. Even the Jets with a rookie QB and new coach expect success because of their talent. Yet here people think 4 years of looking better and having .500 results is awesome. They act like Kubiak walks on water. Chan Gailey went to the playoffs as a coach. People here need to shoot higher. Bill Maas said he was on the Cheifs when they couldn't get over the hump. He said they were just like the Texans. They then got Marty in he said they learned that there was discipline to things they didn't even know about. That is this situation. Baltimore, Atlanta, Miami all turned it around. Changing coaches doesn't have to equal rebuilding again.

7) As for Scotters arguments...
instant offense - Yes, the offense is improved and the team is still at .500
improvement - Yes, everyone seems to agree that there is improvement yet the team is still at.500
building from the inside out -And where are the sacks?
potential - One of the dirtiest words in sports. Ask any coach.
developement - guys like Amobi and who?Our RBs who have taken a step back.
competitiveness - really?A team that can't win the big ones and still falls short in big games?
consistancy - So losing one week, winning the next and never puitting two good halves together is consistency?

All of the arguments but 1 in #7 above are talking points, not facts. The only one that is substantial and can be proven is the offense being better. The rest are talking points for next year and have been the same for 4 years. That is most of our points....you can add up all his arguments, even if you believe them..and yet they still end at the same road...500. That leads to one person...coach.

With all of this said, I won't comment anymore. I just wanted to show you that these arguments have been out there and they contradict alot of what I'm hearing in the other camp. But to each their own. :)


Nice job. Rep your way.

DexmanC
12-22-2009, 12:35 PM
What are you talking about. Most of us here who are on the other side of things have laid out point by point FACTS compared to made up future possibilities and yet they get skipped because people only want to see what they want to see.....something good in the future, despite the 4 years. I can post them again just so we can press "end" and you know they are out there.

1) Kubiak is 1-5 in the division. He has never sniffed having a winning division season.

2) Out of Kubiak's 29 wins, only 7 have been against winning teams.

3) Having players that like you doesn't make you a good coach. In fact most coaches that have been successful have been ones who can get the most out of a team while still maintaining the distance and fear they need to get respect..Lombardi, Knoll, Landry, Parcells, Bilechick, Jimmy Johnson, etc. Players don't need a BFF. This point also works against Kubiak. Players have loved the guy for 4 years yet they can't seem to win games for him and they keep making the same mistakes. How has liking him worked out?

4) Losing is losing. You are what your record is. I don't care if you lose by 7 or 30, it is still a loss. It is amazing that people support Kubes and point to more talent, a better offense and a better defense. Yet with all of that, they are at 6-7 after 13 games for the 3rd year straight. That is coaching. (just like I thought the Rams win was pathetic and uninspiring but in the end it was a "W" and 20 years from now you see "W"s and "Ls")

5)Injuries happen. It is why you drafted Casey and have Driessen. Look at the Colts when they played us:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/091201&sportCat=nfl

"With Bob Sanders and Marlin Jackson out for the season, and Dwight Freeney missing the contest with an injury, the Colts' defense started no one drafted higher than the third round. Big plays were made by Colts defensive starters Gary Brackett, Daniel Muir, Melvin Bullitt and Jacob Lacey, all of whom were undrafted free agents. Pierre Garçon, out of Division III Mount Union, caught a touchdown pass. Chad Simpson, undrafted out of Division I-AA Morgan State, scored a touchdown, breaking three tackles when Houston players tried to strip the ball. Robert Mathis, a low draft pick out of Division I-AA Alabama A&M, not only stripped Matt Schaub of the ball to set up the game-icing touchdown, he did so while being held by the Moo Cows' offensive line. I don't know what's in the water in Indiana, but it seems to turn unknowns into football players."

6) People accept mediocre. Their standard of success if deplorable. People hate the Cowboys, yet their standard is playoffs and SB. It is why Wade is on the hot seat. Most NFL teams have that same standard. Even the Jets with a rookie QB and new coach expect success because of their talent. Yet here people think 4 years of looking better and having .500 results is awesome. They act like Kubiak walks on water. Chan Gailey went to the playoffs as a coach. People here need to shoot higher. Bill Maas said he was on the Cheifs when they couldn't get over the hump. He said they were just like the Texans. They then got Marty in he said they learned that there was discipline to things they didn't even know about. That is this situation. Baltimore, Atlanta, Miami all turned it around. Changing coaches doesn't have to equal rebuilding again.

7) As for Scotters arguments...
instant offense - Yes, the offense is improved and the team is still at .500
improvement - Yes, everyone seems to agree that there is improvement yet the team is still at.500
building from the inside out -And where are the sacks?
potential - One of the dirtiest words in sports. Ask any coach.
developement - guys like Amobi and who?Our RBs who have taken a step back.
competitiveness - really?A team that can't win the big ones and still falls short in big games?
consistancy - So losing one week, winning the next and never puitting two good halves together is consistency?

All of the arguments but 1 in #7 above are talking points, not facts. The only one that is substantial and can be proven is the offense being better. The rest are talking points for next year and have been the same for 4 years. That is most of our points....you can add up all his arguments, even if you believe them..and yet they still end at the same road...500. That leads to one person...coach.

With all of this said, I won't comment anymore. I just wanted to show you that these arguments have been out there and they contradict alot of what I'm hearing in the other camp. But to each their own. :)


I notice when people respond to our posts, they continually gloss over
points like the ones I've bolded. These points are VITAL to building a
WINNING franchise, not one that LOOKS GOOD WHILE LOSING!!!

The Texans are 6-1 vs. Teams that have a .500 or lower record. (Jets)
The Texans are 1-6 vs. Teams that have a winning record. (Bengals)

The Texans ARE consistent. They CONSISTENTLY BEAT BAD TEAMS.
They CONSISTENTLY LOSE TO GOOD TEAMS!

Those FACTS can't be argued, but DON'T IGNORE THEM EITHER!!

Texan_Bill
12-22-2009, 12:40 PM
I notice when people respond to our posts, they continually gloss over
points like the ones I've bolded. These points are VITAL to building a
WINNING franchise, not one that LOOKS GOOD WHILE LOSING!!!

The Texans are 6-1 vs. Teams that have a .500 or lower record. (Jets)
The Texans are 1-6 vs. Teams that have a winning record. (Bengals)

The Texans ARE consistent. They CONSISTENTLY BEAT BAD TEAMS.
They CONSISTENTLY LOSE TO GOOD TEAMS!

Those FACTS can't be argued, but DON'T IGNORE THEM EITHER!!

Apparently you don't read. Kind of hard to with blinders on, huh??

HoustonFrog
12-22-2009, 01:09 PM
Frog, you are very level headed and open minded. Surely you know that there has been good arguments in this thread for Kubiak remaining another season. However, if people are wearing blinders or already have their agenda set, of course they won't reasonably discuss the merits of one's argument.

Instead, what they'll do is :thinking:


:user: Oh yeah, "...to toss a cup of bullshit juice".


I can't argue the divisional losses. That's the most relevant argument for the naysayers. Really disappointing when I expected them to be 3-3 or maybe even squeek out a 4-2 record.

All I can do is look at things open mindedly. For example: what's the biggest thing wrong with this team: For me inconsistency. Then I think about what leads to inconsistency. Primarly things like youth and yes coaching to a degree. Mix in a a bad seed or two (ie Dunta and his pay me Rick stunt.)

I also look at other issues, i.e. Red Zone woes. What's the problem with scoring in the red zone this season? 3 things IMO. A) Our O-line B) no running game (although that kinda goes hand in hand with A) and lastly who is our best Red Zone threat. I would like us to go to AJ more often but really it was Owen Daniels for the first half of this season. He was on pace for 10 TD's. Originally I thought that there wouldn't be too big of a drop off, but I was wrong - see Dreessen's drop last weekend.

I don't care who you are, it's hard to be consistent when nearly 40% of your offensive starters from last year are on the IR.

Not sure why you brought up the Colts defense. They're in the bottom half of the league in total defense. They're defense helps them out sometimes, but that team is all about Peyton and the their offense..

I've seen some very good arguments from both sides. I just wanted to respond to Obi because he said no one was listening or pointing out anything worthwhile and that is amounted to complaining vs the people who want to keep him. So I laid out the main arguments

The Colts D is just an example of losing playmakers on one side of the ball....their defense is much better with Sanders..and still being able to patchwork a win. Is Sanders as importanrt to their D as OD is to our O...I think so. Yes Peyton is that team but their defense did enough once they settled in to beat the Texans. They were considered Top 10 until their injuries. You still have to stop teams .I just hate blaming a season or a group of losses on one guy like OD. Teams get hit with this stuff yearly. Shockey was big to the Giants and Boss came in and they won a SB. Stuff happens. As some have said, we have Dreissen, we drafted Casey, we have Walters(who was hurt earlier and who has been underused at times). I don't see the offensive woes because of OD as the thing that is haunting this team. I don't think OD makes 16-13 vs the Rams any better a win since they were passing at will to AJ. The issue becomes being ready to play and who is in charge of that in my book.

Texan_Bill
12-22-2009, 01:19 PM
I've seen some very good arguments from both sides. I just wanted to respond to Obi because he said no one was listening or pointing out anything worthwhile and that is amounted to complaining vs the people who want to keep him.

The Colts D is just an example of losing playmakers on one side of the ball....their defense is much better with Sanders..and still being able to patchwork a win. Yes Peyton is that team but their defense did enough once they settled in to beat the Texans. I just hate blaming a season or a group of losses on one guy like OD. It's lame since teams get hit with this stuff yearly. Shockey was big to the Giants and Boss came in and they won a SB. Stuff happens.

I don't mind discussing or debating with you because you know how it's done. You also know I'm not one to blame refs or injuries and I'm not saying those 4 losses were just because OD was out. However, I do think there is a correlation there.

Problem with using Sanders as an example is that last season he only played in 6 games, this season two. He's effective when he plays, he just doesn't play that often anymore.

2004 - 4 games started
2005 - 14 gs
2006 - 4 gs
2007 - 15 gs
2008 - 6 gs
2009 - 2 gs

Out of 96 possible starts (excluding playoffs), he's only started 45 games.

HoustonFrog
12-22-2009, 01:41 PM
I don't mind discussing or debating with you because you know how it's done. You also know I'm not one to blame refs or injuries and I'm not saying those 4 losses were just because OD was out. However, I do think there is a correlation there.

Problem with using Sanders as an example is that last season he only played in 6 games, this season two. He's effective when he plays, he just doesn't play that often anymore.

2004 - 4 games started
2005 - 14 gs
2006 - 4 gs
2007 - 15 gs
2008 - 6 gs
2009 - 2 gs

Out of 96 possible starts (excluding playoffs), he's only started 45 games.

I know what you are saying. Nice stats on Sanders. I thought he had only 2 years of problems, not that many. OD makes a difference. Just, IMO, not to a point where there is major reason to lose some games that were there for the taking. I know you weren't blaming all woes. I've just seen the argument. And I thought the Shockey comparison could be made.

As for another spin on coaching and OD. Here is another train of thought. So before the year the team decided to wait signing him to an extension. Many thought he was overrated and that this offense was made to plug guys in the same spots and they would succeed. Along those lines, they keep Dreissen and draft Casey. Many took that as a sign as OD would be leaving the next year. So he starts having a Pro Bowl year and goes down. The offense is still very good but not as good. Casey and Dreissen aren't interchangeable parts with OD. So where does the fault lie here?Not that an injury is anyones fault but 1) Was OD undervalued; 2) Were the Texans, despite having Casey and Dreissen, unprepared for such a situation, that it affected the offense THAT much. ; 3) Was Casey coached up right or is he just raw; 4) Why hasn't Walter picked up some of the slack...............................just things that also make me wonder about where Gary's head was in all of this. To me the offense still looks potent. However, teams adjust to them pretty quickly in a game and then it is like they have no other options besides AJ. I have a hard time believing that the middle of the field. flats and other areas OD roamed couldn't be exploited with one of thier other WRS...it is a strong position on the team.

Texan_Bill
12-22-2009, 02:10 PM
I know what you are saying. Nice stats on Sanders. I thought he had only 2 years of problems, not that many. OD makes a difference. Just, IMO, not to a point where there is major reason to lose some games that were there for the taking. I know you weren't blaming all woes. I've just seen the argument. And I thought the Shockey comparison could be made.

As for another spin on coaching and OD. Here is another train of thought. So before the year the team decided to wait signing him to an extension. Many thought he was overrated and that this offense was made to plug guys in the same spots and they would succeed. Along those lines, they keep Dreissen and draft Casey. Many took that as a sign as OD would be leaving the next year. So he starts having a Pro Bowl year and goes down. The offense is still very good but not as good. Casey and Dreissen aren't interchangeable parts with OD. So where does the fault lie here?Not that an injury is anyones fault but 1) Was OD undervalued; 2) Were the Texans, despite having Casey and Dreissen, unprepared for such a situation, that is affected the offense THAT much. ; 3) Was Casey coached up right or is he just raw; 4) Why hasn't Walter picked up some of the slack...............................just things that also make me wonder about where Gary's head was in all of this. To me the offense still looks potent. However, teams adjust to them pretty quickly in a game and then it is like they have no other options besides AJ. I have a hard time believing that the middle of the field. flats and other areas OD roamed couldn't be exploited with one of thier other WRS...it is a strong position on the team.


I think the Texans had and have every intention in retaining OD, although that was interesting perspective or scenario. I think Dreessen is here simply because Bruener or another back-up tight end is not and Casey was drafted because he's an intriguing guy with potential at doing some different things. It's also nice to have a guy as a back-up in the long snap game. I just don't think they've really figured out what to do with the guy, yet. This is one area that I am critical of the coaching staff.

Personally, I would change his number into the 30's and see how effective he can be running the ball. Really, it can't be any worse.

Second Honeymoon
12-22-2009, 06:10 PM
Kubiak sucks. That is all. Thank you and good night.

thunderkyss
12-22-2009, 06:52 PM
As for another spin on coaching and OD. Here is another train of thought. So before the year the team decided to wait signing him to an extension.

I heard on the OD show one day, that they offered to make him a top three (paid) TE in the league, & OD turned it down. He was saying he regrets that.

ObsiWan
12-22-2009, 06:52 PM
I've seen some very good arguments from both sides. I just wanted to respond to Obi because he said no one was listening or pointing out anything worthwhile and that is amounted to complaining vs the people who want to keep him. So I laid out the main arguments

The Colts D is just an example of losing playmakers on one side of the ball....their defense is much better with Sanders..and still being able to patchwork a win. Is Sanders as importanrt to their D as OD is to our O...I think so. Yes Peyton is that team but their defense did enough once they settled in to beat the Texans. They were considered Top 10 until their injuries. You still have to stop teams .I just hate blaming a season or a group of losses on one guy like OD. Teams get hit with this stuff yearly. Shockey was big to the Giants and Boss came in and they won a SB. Stuff happens. As some have said, we have Dreissen, we drafted Casey, we have Walters(who was hurt earlier and who has been underused at times). I don't see the offensive woes because of OD as the thing that is haunting this team. I don't think OD makes 16-13 vs the Rams any better a win since they were passing at will to AJ. The issue becomes being ready to play and who is in charge of that in my book.

And I repped you for your compelling arguments and solid points. Credit where credit is due.

ObsiWan
12-22-2009, 07:24 PM
Oh hell naw.

Are you freaking kidding me? Logic? The people who want Kubiak replaced are talking logic and cold, hard FACTS. Those who want him to stay are talking emotion and hyperbole: "Oh, he'll get better." "Another coach couldn't do what he's done."

And, note that Scooter wrote the following:
"improvement - in every area but the one that matters (wins)."

Are you kidding me? This person writes this long-ass post and say there's been improvement in every area but the one that matters, winning? That is the ONLY thing that matters. If we can't win games, what's the point?

Yes, I tossed a cup of bullshit juice over his post, and I will do it again.

It took me three tries to get past that because I could just imagine your expression - okay, my expression (since I've never actually seen you) - if had I said that. No offense, but it just struck me funny.

Anyway, back to topic.
I have no answer for the "win or you haven't accomplished crap" folks. Life isn't binary like that for me. In my little corner of the universe, grades come A, B, C, D, or F, not just "Win or Get the 'Eff' out".
I don't expect that when I plant a few apple seeds to have bushels of apples the next year.
Some things just take time.

and it's not that we "can't win" we just can't win every time.

ObsiWan
12-22-2009, 07:26 PM
I heard on the OD show one day, that they offered to make him a top three (paid) TE in the league, & OD turned it down. He was saying he regrets that.

Wow. I hadn't heard that. I thought the idiots (yeah, I think of them that way too sometimes) hadn't given him an offer at all.

HoustonFrog
12-22-2009, 08:12 PM
And I repped you for your compelling arguments and solid points. Credit where credit is due.

Thanks. And so you know I wasn't trying to rip you, I just wanted to spell out some of the arguments and leave it at that so you knew that there were arguments to be made. :handshake:

ArlingtonTexan
12-22-2009, 08:31 PM
Wow. I hadn't heard that. I thought the idiots (yeah, I think of them that way too sometimes) hadn't given him an offer at all.

They offered OD, ryans, and Dunta long-term contracts this off-season assuming the reports are all true.

houstonspartan
12-22-2009, 08:57 PM
It took me three tries to get past that because I could just imagine your expression - okay, my expression (since I've never actually seen you) - if had I said that. No offense, but it just struck me funny.

Anyway, back to topic.
I have no answer for the "win or you haven't accomplished crap" folks. Life isn't binary like that for me. In my little corner of the universe, grades come A, B, C, D, or F, not just "Win or Get the 'Eff' out".
I don't expect that when I plant a few apple seeds to have bushels of apples the next year.
Some things take just time.

and it's not that we "can't win" we just can't win every time.

LOL. I was at work when I read that other person's post, and my mouth was literally hanging open and I was squinting my eyes.

Anyway, sorry, man, but your argument STILL doesn't hold water. This is football. It's either win or lose. Yes, I am like you, and I like to look at the complexities of things. That's me. That's who I am as a person.

But sports doesn't work that way. Win or lose. Period.

Gary has had four years to grow a healthy apple tree, to use your analogy. It's quite possible he has planted the wrong seeds.

ObsiWan
12-22-2009, 09:07 PM
I notice when people respond to our posts, they continually gloss over
points like the ones I've bolded. These points are VITAL to building a
WINNING franchise, not one that LOOKS GOOD WHILE LOSING!!!

The Texans are 6-1 vs. Teams that have a .500 or lower record. (Jets)
The Texans are 1-6 vs. Teams that have a winning record. (Bengals)

The Texans ARE consistent. They CONSISTENTLY BEAT BAD TEAMS.
They CONSISTENTLY LOSE TO GOOD TEAMS!

Those FACTS can't be argued, but DON'T IGNORE THEM EITHER!!

The Kubiak Supporters are missing ONE HUGE GLARING FLAW in their argument!

This regime has been PERFECTLY CONSISTENT in who they WIN against, AND
who they LOSE to!

Houston Texans 2009 Overall Record: 7-7

Houston Texans record against Teams at .500 or below: 6-1

Houston Texans record against teams with winning records: 1-6

How do you EXPLAIN THIS!!???

Simple: We AREN'T THAT GOOD.
I've said that before.

We are not yet Elite.
We can beat the teams that aren't as good as us and we can hang with - but not always beat - the teams that are considered Elite (more or less).
I keep trying to remind folks of our preseason discussions. Remember all the pieces we said we lacked to be truly "playoff ready":
- Myers replacement
- Brisiel upgrade
- Run-stuffing, stud DT
- Ball-hawking FS
- Stud pass rusher to bookend Mario
- Quality backup RB for Slaton
- Upgrade for Walter (although the need for this was greatly debated)
- Upgrade for Wilson (no one was convinced Barber was the answer) and Ferguson (ok, we found that)

And we identified those needs in PRESEASON... before the injury bug hit us. We were good but NOT "elite" before the injury bug.
We're worse now.
But even so, we're in every game.
Every game.

Now the question is:
Do we need someone else to make us Elite or can Smithiak do it?
The Soapers don't think they can. We aren't winning enough for them. They've seen enough. They want Change. (didn't I hear that tune last Oct/Nov? - sorry, almost slipped into politics :) )

Given the undeniable level of improvement I've seen under them, I think they will.

houstonspartan
12-22-2009, 09:12 PM
Simple: We AREN'T THAT GOOD.
I've said that before.
...with all the injuries we are not that good.
We are not yet Elite.
We can beat the teams that aren't as good as us and we can hang with - but not beat - the teams that are considered Elite (more or less). I keep trying to remind folks of our preseason discussions... Remember all the pieces we said we lacked:
- Myers replacement
- Brisiel upgrade
- Run-stuffing, stud DT
- Ball-hawking FS
- Stud pass rusher to bookend Mario
- Quality backup RB for Slaton
- Upgrade for Walter (although the need for this was greatly debated)
- Upgrade for Wilson (no one was convinced Barber was the answer) and Ferguson (ok, we found that)

And we identified those needs in PRESEASON... before the injury bug hit us. We were good but "elite" before the injury bug. We're worse now.
But even so, we're in every game.
Every game.

Now the question is:
Do we need someone else to make us Elite or can Smithiak do it?
The Soapers don't think they can. We aren't winning enough for them. They've seen enough. They want Change. (didn't I hear that tune last Oct/Nov? - sorry, almost slipped into politics :) )

Given the undeniable level of improvement I've seen under them, I think they will.

I know what you want. You want to give Kubiak a lifetime contract so he has time to figure things out. Unfortunately, that's not how the NFL works these days. 25 years ago? Yes. Now? No.

The NFL has coaches that have been in their jobs for two years or less and are on the hot seat, yet we are being cruel because we want improvement after FOUR YEARS?

Go sell it someplace else.

GlassHalfFull
12-22-2009, 09:14 PM
I know what you want. You want to give Kubiak a lifetime contract so he has time to figure things out. Unfortunately, that's not how the NFL works these days. 25 years ago? Yes. Now? No.

We have coaches that have been in their jobs for two years or less and are on the hot seat, yet we are being cruel because we want improvement after FOUR YEARS?

Go sell it someplace else.

Obsi put out a rational and unbiased post. Exactly what people have been asking for in this thread. Nowhere did I see him say anything about a lifetime contract.

He can sell me whatever he wants.

houstonspartan
12-22-2009, 09:22 PM
Obsi put out a rational and unbiased post. Exactly what people have been asking for in this thread. Nowhere did I see him say anything about a lifetime contract.

He can sell me whatever he wants.

He's saying that we're being unreasonable by expecting more wins. Ok, so how many wins should we expect by now? How many years should we wait?

No, he didn't say that per se. I was being faceteous (sp?). But my question still stands: How many years should we give Kubiak?

I agree with some of the other points he's made about the improvents this team has made and how we're "in" every game. But, still, it all comes back to W's and L's.

That's how sports works. I didn't make the rules.

ObsiWan
12-22-2009, 09:28 PM
I know what you want. You want to give Kubiak a lifetime contract so he has time to figure things out. Unfortunately, that's not how the NFL works these days. 25 years ago? Yes. Now? No.

The NFL has coaches that have been in their jobs for two years or less and are on the hot seat, yet we are being cruel because we want improvement after FOUR YEARS?

Go sell it someplace else.

Like I said, the Soapers have their minds made up. So I'm not trying to "sell" you guys anything. I'd have a better shot trying to "sell" Obama to Rush Limbaugh (damn, I did the politics slip again... my bad).
I just told you where my head was at on this subject.
It's okay to agree to disagree. Happens all the time.

infantrycak
12-22-2009, 09:35 PM
But my question still stands: How many years should we give Kubiak?

I haven't seen anyone suggest anything other than one more year.

But, still, it all comes back to W's and L's.

Apparently not since now somehow Sparano is a better coach with the same record since their W for beating Buffalo counts for more than our W for beating Buffalo.

Goldensilence
12-22-2009, 09:46 PM
Simple: We AREN'T THAT GOOD.
I've said that before.
...with all the injuries we are not that good.
We are not yet Elite.
We can beat the teams that aren't as good as us and we can hang with - but not beat - the teams that are considered Elite (more or less). I keep trying to remind folks of our preseason discussions... Remember all the pieces we said we lacked:
- Myers replacement
- Brisiel upgrade
- Run-stuffing, stud DT
- Ball-hawking FS
- Stud pass rusher to bookend Mario
- Quality backup RB for Slaton
- Upgrade for Walter (although the need for this was greatly debated)
- Upgrade for Wilson (no one was convinced Barber was the answer) and Ferguson (ok, we found that)

And we identified those needs in PRESEASON... before the injury bug hit us. We were good but "elite" before the injury bug. We're worse now.
But even so, we're in every game.
Every game.

Now the question is:
Do we need someone else to make us Elite or can Smithiak do it?
The Soapers don't think they can. We aren't winning enough for them. They've seen enough. They want Change. (didn't I hear that tune last Oct/Nov? - sorry, almost slipped into politics :) )

Given the undeniable level of improvement I've seen under them, I think they will.

I'm just curious. You say these needs were identified(just by fans nonetheless), but how many of them were approached in the pre-season.

We signed Shaun Cody, when we really should've gone after a bigger DT like a Grady Jackson. Cody hasn't been what we needed.

Myers replacement and Brisiel upgrade. Didn't really address it other then drafting Caldwell and then decided he wasn't ready. I'm just wondering barring the run at injuries on the interior if we would've even seen Caldwell this year.

Ball-hawking FS...well they came into the season with the idea Barber and Ferguson could handle SS and took another late round flyer on a FS in the 7th. There were some good candidates out there and the "old man" Sharper sure has helped solidify the Saints backend, and in the process should get some mention as defensive MVP. Once again wasn't address nearly a high priority as it should have been. Got lucky KC cut Pollard, who probably other then the play of Cushing, has played a big role in the defense turning into something respectable.

Antonio Smith was supposed to be that bookend rusher across from Mario. I think he's been effective and disruptive, but I'm not sure he's what I'd call a stud pass rusher. Got good overall game though. Then drafted Conor Barwin, who is a second year DE project. I personally am still not sold on him being much more then a Jason Babin clone. Just my opinion though.

Part of what could've been done with a quality backup at RB went away when we failed to address it in the draft. Two guys who I had my eye on fell into the second Shonn Greene and LeSean McCoy.

McCoy is getting a lot of snap with Westbrook out. As of now 606 yards with a 4.1 YPC and 4 Tds.

Greene has been getting limited carries because Thomas Jones is really bowling through people lately. However, he's made good with what little time he's gotten 383 yards, 4.8 YPC and 2 TDs.

Both proved they could tote the rock at their perspective schools and both were available in the second when we took Barwin. I don't Kubiak could help himself taking another player in the place of someone who could've been much more immediately productive.

I'm not sure about upgrading KW. To be honest I'm not exactly sure, other then OD taking looks away from him why his numbers have dropped this year. Honestly I would think he would've be a bigger target for the open spaces in the middle of the field like he has in the past. Perhaps he's been a bit of a forgotten guy in the offense. Honestly overall I really like his game and he's a good blocker on the edge. IMO upgrading his presence is going to be an interesting proposition. There's no one on the team behind him who is ready to step into a #2 role. JJ is explosive but inconsistent. I'm still not sold on DA being as good as some of his fanboys make him out to be. Davis will be gone along with his bloated contract. If we don't resign him we're looking at likely a higher draft pick investment or singing someone in FA that can replace his production.

The problem I keep running into Obsi is they had a great chance to really address some critical spots this off-season, but stuck with Kubiak's guys.

I feel like Rick Smith reminds me a lot of the job Kubiak has done, probably because their jobs are so intertwined. There is no doubt they each have done a good job of upgrading the talent on this squad as opposed to the job Capers and Casserly did. However, I'm left wondering if they both just can't get the roster and the team over the hump.

Runner
12-22-2009, 10:16 PM
I haven't seen anyone suggest anything other than one more year.


I'll give you that, but it's been pretty thinly veiled that they also consider people who think this should have been Kubiak's last year unreasonable and closed-minded at best.

=================

Another year at 8-8 wouldn't change anything. It would still be just as "difficult" to find an above average coach, we could still "hope" Kubiak would get it in year six, we'd still have one more draft to fill more holes, and the kids would have one more year to become older.

If it truly is just one more year and they would say they've seen enough, then the line between the soapers and the sunshine club is nothing more than an arbitrary number.

Four years is unrealistic, but five years is "right". That seems baseless, and as closed-minded as the soapers are being portrayed.

I also don't believe five years of mediocrity would be enough for many. There will always be player screw-ups, injuries, and holes in the line up to excuse Kubes.

==========

Of course, Kubiak may finally get it, the kids may become men, and the team goes 11-5 next year. The recent history of the team doesn't really support that, but stranger things have happened. Hope springs eternal, if not constant improvement.

Mr. White
12-22-2009, 10:25 PM
I haven't seen anyone suggest anything other than one more year.

Until next year comes and there'll be some other excuse.

Apparently not since now somehow Sparano is a better coach with the same record since their W for beating Buffalo counts for more than our W for beating Buffalo.

That W against Buffalo doesn't make for a better coach. Taking a team from 1-15 to the playoffs in one season makes for a better coach.

ObsiWan
12-22-2009, 10:28 PM
I'm just curious. You say these needs were identified(just by fans nonetheless), but how many of them were approached in the pre-season.

We signed Shaun Cody, when we really should've gone after a bigger DT like a Grady Jackson. Cody hasn't been what we needed.

Myers replacement and Brisiel upgrade. Didn't really address it other then drafting Caldwell and then decided he wasn't ready. I'm just wondering barring the run at injuries on the interior if we would've even seen Caldwell this year.

Ball-hawking FS...well they came into the season with the idea Barber and Ferguson could handle SS and took another late round flyer on a FS in the 7th. There were some good candidates out there and the "old man" Sharper sure has helped solidify the Saints backend, and in the process should get some mention as defensive MVP. Once again wasn't address nearly a high priority as it should have been. Got lucky KC cut Pollard, who probably other then the play of Cushing, has played a big role in the defense turning into something respectable.

Antonio Smith was supposed to be that bookend rusher across from Mario. I think he's been effective and disruptive, but I'm not sure he's what I'd call a stud pass rusher. Got good overall game though. Then drafted Conor Barwin, who is a second year DE project. I personally am still not sold on him being much more then a Jason Babin clone. Just my opinion though.

Part of what could've been done with a quality backup at RB went away when we failed to address it in the draft. Two guys who I had my eye on fell into the second Shonn Greene and LeSean McCoy.

McCoy is getting a lot of snap with Westbrook out. As of now 606 yards with a 4.1 YPC and 4 Tds.

Greene has been getting limited carries because Thomas Jones is really bowling through people lately. However, he's made good with what little time he's gotten 383 yards, 4.8 YPC and 2 TDs.

Both proved they could tote the rock at their perspective schools and both were available in the second when we took Barwin. I don't Kubiak could help himself taking another player in the place of someone who could've been much more immediately productive.

I'm not sure about upgrading KW. To be honest I'm not exactly sure, other then OD taking looks away from him why his numbers have dropped this year. Honestly I would think he would've be a bigger target for the open spaces in the middle of the field like he has in the past. Perhaps he's been a bit of a forgotten guy in the offense. Honestly overall I really like his game and he's a good blocker on the edge. IMO upgrading his presence is going to be an interesting proposition. There's no one on the team behind him who is ready to step into a #2 role. JJ is explosive but inconsistent. I'm still not sold on DA being as good as some of his fanboys make him out to be. Davis will be gone along with his bloated contract. If we don't resign him we're looking at likely a higher draft pick investment or singing someone in FA that can replace his production.

The problem I keep running into Obsi is they had a great chance to really address some critical spots this off-season, but stuck with Kubiak's guys.

I feel like Rick Smith reminds me a lot of the job Kubiak has done, probably because their jobs are so intertwined. There is no doubt they each have done a good job of upgrading the talent on this squad as opposed to the job Capers and Casserly did. However, I'm left wondering if they both just can't get the roster and the team over the hump.

You're emphasizing the very things we were discussing during the draft and training camp. Basically we made only slight upgrades and other than Pollard and Cushing, there were no immediate "home runs".

That begs the question, was it McNair not wanting to be a Houston-based Daniel Snyder; i.e., not make mega F/A moves
or did Smithiak convince him we could get by with what amounts to tweaks?
OR were they afraid of the approaching uncapped year and all the soon-to-be home-grown Texan F/As they wanted to be able to make attractive offers to - i.e., Ryans, O.D., etc... so their hands were somewhat tied...??

I found this PFW read (http://www.profootballweekly.com/2009/11/25/2010-afc-free-agent-preview) interesting..

Houston Texans

Potential UFAs: RB Chris Brown, ILB Khary Campbell, S Nick Ferguson, QB Rex Grossman, OG Chester Pitts, OG Tutan Reyes, CB Dunta Robinson, OLB Chaun Thompson, P Matt Turk, WR Kevin ­Walter, DT Jeff Zgonina.

Potential RFAs: DT Tim Bulman, S John Busing*, OT Rashad Butler*, TE Owen Daniels*, RB Ryan Moats*, S Bernard Pollard*, ILB DeMeco Ryans*, C Chris White*.

Analysis: The Texans' focus in free agency figures to be on keeping their own. They would like to re-sign DeMeco Ryans, Owen Daniels and Dunta Robinson, but bringing back all three players could prove challenging, considering the financial commitment it would take, as well as the interest all would draw if they hit the market. It would be surprising if the Texans didn't use the franchise tag on one of the three aforementioned players. Ryans is one of the game's top middle linebackers and is a fit in any defense. Daniels was playing as well as any tight end not named Dallas Clark when he suffered a season-ending knee injury in the Nov. 1 victory at Buffalo. If Daniels' recovery is coming along nicely, expect the Texans to try to sign him for the long term, but he is also likely to have other suitors. The same can be said for Robinson; above-average cornerbacks don't hit the market often. He received the franchise tag last offseason and doesn't want it again. Chester Pitts, who has been with the franchise since its inception, could be back if he's sufficiently recovered from a knee injury that ended his season. Ex-Chief Bernard Pollard has done enough in his short stint in Houston to merit being part of the defensive plans next season, but the outlook may be a little murkier for Kevin Walter, who could be supplanted by the speedier Jacoby Jones.

houstonspartan
12-22-2009, 10:38 PM
I'll give you that, but it's been pretty thinly veiled that they also consider people who think this should have been Kubiak's last year unreasonable and closed-minded at best.

=================

Another year at 8-8 wouldn't change anything. It would still be just as "difficult" to find an above average coach, we could still "hope" Kubiak would get it in year six, we'd still have one more draft to fill more holes, and the kids would have one more year to become older.

If it truly is just one more year and they would say they've seen enough, then the line between the soapers and the sunshine club is nothing more than an arbitrary number.

Four years is unrealistic, but five years is "right". That seems baseless, and as closed-minded as the soapers are being portrayed.

I also don't believe five years of mediocrity would be enough for many. There will always be player screw-ups, injuries, and holes in the line up to excuse Kubes.

==========

Of course, Kubiak may finally get it, the kids may become men, and the team goes 11-5 next year. The recent history of the team doesn't really support that, but stranger things have happened. Hope springs eternal, if not constant improvement.

Thank you. That is the point I was trying to make in my smart-alec comment earlier about a lifetime contract. You explained it so much better.

What's the huge difference between four years and five years? And, why is five years "enough" time but four years isn't?

And, as you said, there will surely be bad plays, bad calls by refs, and likely some injuries next year. People who want Kubiak to stay will be using the same excuses then as they are using now.

The reason this argument has become so divided and heated is because people who want Kubes gone are talking about FACTS and people who want him to stay are talking about possibilites and maybes and coulda, shoulda, woulda.

infantrycak
12-22-2009, 10:41 PM
I'll give you that, but it's been pretty thinly veiled that they also consider people who think this should have been Kubiak's last year unreasonable and closed-minded at best.

I am very on the fence about the whole issue. Having said that I think it is fair to say some of the most vocal anti-Kubiak are closed-minded and ham handed insisting anyone who opposing dumping him is insane, unable to reason, whatever. I don't see as much antagonism from the pro-Kubiak crowd. But that seems to be the nature of all get rid of him or keep him discussions over the years.

Four years is unrealistic, but five years is "right". That seems baseless, and as closed-minded as the soapers are being portrayed.

I just don't think that comment is correct. From what I read and contemplate myself it is nothing about an arbitrary number of years, it is a perception of improvement despite the record. I think a lot more people would be anti-Kubiak if you reverse this year and 2007 such that each .500 (to date) team looks worse.

ObsiWan
12-22-2009, 10:55 PM
I haven't seen anyone suggest anything other than one more year.



Apparently not since now somehow Sparano is a better coach with the same record since their W for beating Buffalo counts for more than our W for beating Buffalo.

that's all I'm sayin'
I want to see one more.
Bud stuck with Jeffy thru a 1-6 season, 7-9 season, and three straight 8-8 seasons. He was rewarded with two straight 13-3 seasons.
Damn if I'm less patient than Bud "break-up-the-Oilers-cause-they-missed-the Super Bowl" Adams.

infantrycak
12-22-2009, 11:10 PM
The reason this argument has become so divided and heated is because people who want Kubes gone are talking about FACTS and people who want him to stay are talking about possibilites and maybes and coulda, shoulda, woulda.

Runner, here is what I am talking about. Is this open-minded? No it is a self-congratulatory canard. I have no problem with folks who want to see Kubiak gone, but the rhetoric from the anti camp is much more bombastic.

houstonspartan
12-22-2009, 11:18 PM
Runner, here is what I am talking about. Is this open-minded? No it is a self-congratulatory canard. I have no problem with folks who want to see Kubiak gone, but the rhetoric from the anti camp is much more bombastic.

Bombastic?

What's bombastic in what I said? Facts are facts.

Gary is 1-5 in the division this year, and he is 7-17 in the division overall in his career here.

What's bombastic about that? There is nothing self-congratulatory about anything. You guys want to play victim and accuse us of beating up on you for no apparent reason. We aren't. We are discussing facts.

Why is that so complicated?

Runner
12-22-2009, 11:27 PM
Runner, here is what I am talking about. Is this open-minded? No it is a self-congratulatory canard. I have no problem with folks who want to see Kubiak gone, but the rhetoric from the anti camp is much more bombastic.

Hmmm. Not sure I agree with the rhetoric comment. I know I could find some similar comments from the keep Kubiak side if I looked - there are some less than stellar posts coming from there too. I know I tend to be more of a smart ass than I should be when I start getting patronized by holders of the opposing view, and that happens often enough on this topic.

However, defending the extremists and more poorly spoken isn't what I'm trying to do, so I'll freely and honestly admit sometimes I'd prefer not to get "help" from some of those on "my side". Lopping off the outlying couple of standard deviations of posters from both ends of the curve would help most discussions.

Runner
12-22-2009, 11:34 PM
I just don't think that comment is correct. From what I read and contemplate myself it is nothing about an arbitrary number of years, it is a perception of improvement despite the record. I think a lot more people would be anti-Kubiak if you reverse this year and 2007 such that each .500 (to date) team looks worse.

I think the comment is correct in answer to your original assertation that no one is asking for more than one more year. If so, than those people would be ready to get rid of Kubiak after next season if he goes 8-8 again, regardless of perceived improvement.

However, if people are asking for more than one year if further 8-8 seasons show this perceived improvement, then I wouldn't have talked about an arbitrary number of years. I probably would have addressed the arbitrary nature and value of "perceived improvement" with no significant improvement in the win/loss ratio.

infantrycak
12-22-2009, 11:35 PM
Lopping off the outlying couple of standard deviations of posters from both ends of the curve would help most discussions.

Very true.

I think the comment is correct in answer to your original assertation that no one is asking for more than one more year. If so, than those people would be ready to get rid of Kubiak after next season if he goes 8-8 again, regardless of perceived improvement.

However, if people are asking for more than one year if further 8-8 seasons show this perceived improvement, then I wouldn't have talked about an arbitrary number of years. I probably would have addressed the arbitrary nature of "perceived improvement" with no significant improvement in the win/loss ratio.

I can't think of a single person (and there very well may be one) who has said keep him next year with another 8-8 season with perceived improvement. I have seen a whole bunch of folks say one more year and if the playoffs are missed can him.

Please address my assertion - many more people would be calling for Kubiak's head now if the 2007 and 2009 seasons were reversed. I get the W/L thing but I also think we are capable of more discernment.

houstonspartan
12-22-2009, 11:35 PM
Hmmm. Not sure I agree with the rhetoric comment. I know I could find some similar comments from the keep Kubiak side if I looked - there are some less than stellar posts coming from there too. I know I tend to be more of a smart ass than I should be when I start getting patronized by holders of the opposing view, and that happens often enough on this topic.

However, defending the extremists and more poorly spoken isn't what I'm trying to do, so I'll freely and honestly admit sometimes I'd prefer not to get "help" from some of those on "my side". Lopping off the outlying couple of standard deviations of posters from both ends of the curve would help most discussions.

Well, I personally don't think I'm one of the "poorly spoken" people coming from the anti-Kubiak camp. My opinion of him has been shaped over the last 15 months or so. It was last season that I first started to suspect something, but I gave him this year. I have been rational.

If I'm too smart ass sometimes, it's because, as you pointed out, there are patronizing people on both sides of the fence. Someone called people who didn't want Kubiak back so-called fans.

Me a so-called fan? When I've been a season ticket holder for five year and pay the bills for this team? I don't think so. I don't take kindly to that kind of "rhetoric" and it offends me. So when people offend with rhetoric, I sometimes strike back with rhetoric. It happens.

But even when I strike back with facts (Gary being 1-5 in the division, as an example), they scream and say we're being unreasonable. I don't get it.

houstonspartan
12-23-2009, 12:04 AM
I will also say this: A comment by a pro-kubiak person (couldn't remember if it was on this board or another one) really opened my eyes to something.

This person said that we basically have too many rookies starting, and that's rare for the NFL, but we really don't have any choice, for the most part.

You know, that was the one thing that really made me think. He's right. We do start a lot of rookies, which hinders development as a unit. (though, I haven't looked it up officially) That is a fact. It's not opinion or hyperbole.

That argument I will buy. But I have a hard time with the Tom Landry comparisions.

steelbtexan
12-23-2009, 12:13 AM
I'm in the pink soap crowd because I dont think Kubes can win the city of Houston a championship. I think Kubes will do much better if he gets a second chance with another team. (Belichek)

However I dont want Kubes fired if McNair isn't willing to pay to get the best coach that's available and that list is getting shorter by the day. Holmgren,Shanny Sr.)

Runner
12-23-2009, 12:17 AM
I can't think of a single person (and there very well may be one) who has said keep him next year with another 8-8 season with perceived improvement. I have seen a whole bunch of folks say one more year and if the playoffs are missed can him.


I think there are many that won't commit to "playoffs or can him". I spent an afternoon trying to get a yes or no answer to the following question. (I'd like to see Kubiak supporters answer it now, for that matter. It might clear up this "only one more year" question).

If the 2010 Texans go 8-8 with the same "improvement" as this year, should Kubiak get a new contract?

Only one person attempted to answer, and in several attempts could not say yes or no. The final answer was that it was too complex a situation without seeing the 2010 season because he couldn't picture the improvement or something. What was complex about it in reality was that he was caught in a quandary within the context of that discussion:

If he said no, he wouldn't have been able to answer my obvious follow up question: What makes this year any different? Why should Kubiak be kept as a lame duck coach under the same circimstances of mediocre record but the same perceived improvement?

If he said yes, than he wouldn't have been able to deny that continued mediocrity in the W/L column was acceptable. Claiming improvement was more important than winning.

I think we will again find that most Kubiak supporters won't answer the question.

====================

There are also those posters who claim they'd rather see a "much improved" Texans team with a losing record than a 12-4 team that lucks its way into the winning record and goes to the Super Bowl. Most of that was in last year's off-season though. (However a variation just popped up again today.) I think it was a mechanism to avoid holding the team accountable for this year's performance, even though the same posters were confident in their predictions of playoff glory. I don't know though; they may really believe it.


Please address my assertion - many more people would be calling for Kubiak's head now if the 2007 and 2009 seasons were reversed. I get the W/L thing but I also think we are capable of more discernment.

I don't know; probably. Frankly, it is a "what-if" that I don't think too much about.

Personally, I don't think the team has progessed much this year overall, but others have claimed that it shows great improvement. Perhaps I'm just not capable of the discernment of which you speak, but I see a pattern of futility: some areas have improved significantly, but some have regressed just as significantly while others stayed about the same. The regression must be subtracted from the progression to get a true picture.

I do think there are some die hards that could "prove" that 2007 was better than 2009 if the order was reversed. The argument has reached the point where holding your position is more important than being consistent or making sense.

steelbtexan
12-23-2009, 12:28 AM
I will also say this: A comment by a pro-kubiak person (couldn't remember if it was on this board or another one) really opened my eyes to something.

This person said that we basically have too many rookies starting, and that's rare for the NFL, but we really don't have any choice, for the most part.

You know, that was the one thing that really made me think. He's right. We do start a lot of rookies, which hinders development as a unit. (though, I haven't looked it up officially) That is a fact. It's not opinion or hyperbole.

That argument I will buy. But I have a hard time with the Tom Landry comparisions.

Smithiaks biggest failure is that they have not brought in enough vets that can still play and show the young guys how to win when they face adversity. IMO

I dont know if this was by design or if this philosophy came from upper management. I wonder why McNair didn't tell Kubes you can hire Bush if you want to but I want you to interview other DC candidates and pick their brains about what they woud do to contain the VY's and Mannings of the world.

It never hurts to gain knowlege from other qualified defnsive minds in the NFL. This conversation never occurred among the Texans braintrust. IMO

houstonspartan
12-23-2009, 12:39 AM
Smithiaks biggest failure is that they have not brought in enough vets that can still play and show the young guys how to win when they face adversity. IMO

I dont know if this was by design or if this philosophy came from upper management. I wonder why McNair didn't tell Kubes you can hire Bush if you want to but I want you to interview other DC candidates and pick their brains about what they woud do to contain the VY's and Mannings of the world.

It never hurts to gain knowlege from other qualified defnsive minds in the NFL. This conversation never occurred among the Texans braintrust. IMO

Well, McNair let Kubiak run the team on decisions like that. That's not a bad thing. It's great that we have an owner that doesn't micromanage.

I do agree that we should have looked around for another D cord though.

ObsiWan
12-23-2009, 12:47 AM
Bombastic?

What's bombastic in what I said? Facts are facts.

Gary is 1-5 in the division this year, and he is 7-17 in the division overall in his career here.

What's bombastic about that? There is nothing self-congratulatory about anything. You guys want to play victim and accuse us of beating up on you for no apparent reason. We aren't. We are discussing facts.

Why is that so complicated?

at the risk of restarting when we've (at least I thought) agreed to disagree - this is sorta "bombastic"

I know what you want. You want to give Kubiak a lifetime contract so he has time to figure things out. Unfortunately, that's not how the NFL works these days. 25 years ago? Yes. Now? No.

The NFL has coaches that have been in their jobs for two years or less and are on the hot seat, yet we are being cruel because we want improvement after FOUR YEARS?

Go sell it someplace else.

I never said or implied (I don't think) that Kubiak should be given a "lifetime contract". I don't think anyone said that. Yet, you know that's what I want....
I don't remember reading where anyone said you guys were "being cruel". Well, I know I didn't.

Anyway, that's the kind of stuff I-Cak is referring to.

to borrow a classic line from Broadcast News...
You're mad as hell and you can't take Kubiak any more.
:)
http://blog.broadcastengineering.com/brad/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/howardbealegj5.jpg

I get that.
I'm not there yet, but I get it.

I'm willing to give Smithiak one more year because we're going in the right direction and I think one more draft ought to do it.
You want change now.


The discussion really doesn't have to get any more intense (for lack of a better word) than that.

ObsiWan
12-23-2009, 01:01 AM
Well, I personally don't think I'm one of the "poorly spoken" people coming from the anti-Kubiak camp. My opinion of him has been shaped over the last 15 months or so. It was last season that I first started to suspect something, but I gave him this year. I have been rational.

If I'm too smart ass sometimes, it's because, as you pointed out, there are patronizing people on both sides of the fence. Someone called people who didn't want Kubiak back so-called fans.

Me a so-called fan? When I've been a season ticket holder for five year and pay the bills for this team? I don't think so. I don't take kindly to that kind of "rhetoric" and it offends me. So when people offend with rhetoric, I sometimes strike back with rhetoric. It happens.

But even when I strike back with facts (Gary being 1-5 in the division, as an example), they scream and say we're being unreasonable. I don't get it.

That's not unreasonable.
Hell, I'd like to see us go 6-0 in the division. At the end of preseason, I honestly thought we had a decent shot at 3-3 in the division - no more than that though. I actually thought we had enough firepower to split home-and-home with everyone if our defense played halfway decently.
Nothing unreasonable about that.

steelbtexan
12-23-2009, 01:08 AM
Obsi

What were our needs going into this offseason?
1. CB, LB,RB,S,DT, depth on OL

What are our needs this offseason?

CB,S,RB,OL,DT

Are you starting to see a theme in the Smithiak regime?

ObsiWan
12-23-2009, 01:30 AM
Obsi

What were our needs going into this offseason?
1. CB, LB,RB,S,DT, depth on OL

What are our needs this offseason?

CB,S,RB,OL,DT

Are you starting to see a theme in the Smithiak regime?

First, I'd argue with you about RB still being on that list - unless you've given up on Slaton
and second, I remember that the year before the list was even longer:
CB (remember Petey Faggins),
OLB (Greenwood/Danny Clark),
OL (no solid LT or C),
#1 RB (R.Dayne) & #2 RB (D. Walker),
DE (A.Weaver),
FS & SS (C.C.Brown, Von Hutchins?),
DT (Travis Johnson),

so yeah, I see a theme; the list has gotten shorter every year.
:)

Brisco_County
12-23-2009, 02:23 AM
I wonder how different this conversation would be if we had lost to the Rams.

I'm not sure where I stand yet. I am decided on two things though: Keeping Kubiak depends on who's available, and also that the inexperience of players on a completely rebuilt team is a considerable factor in the decision. On a team like this, you're going to see irregular progression, regression, inconsistency, and learning curves.

I do believe that this is a better team than last year on both sides of the ball, with the exception of run blocking. If McNair decides to keep Kubiak, the man had better draft at least two O-linemen, or get one off the market.

thunderkyss
12-23-2009, 08:52 AM
The Kubiak Supporters are missing ONE HUGE GLARING FLAW in their argument!

This regime has been PERFECTLY CONSISTENT in who they WIN against, AND
who they LOSE to!

Houston Texans 2009 Overall Record: 7-7

Houston Texans record against Teams at .500 or below: 6-1

Houston Texans record against teams with winning records: 1-6

How do you EXPLAIN THIS!!???

Nobody is glossing over this "factual evidence" because it is completely a figure of your imagination. We haven't always been 1-5 in our division, or 1-6 against teams with winning records.

I remember losing to bad Buffalo, NYG, Oakland, & several other bad teams when we played them. We lost to a bad Cowboy team 3 years ago in a game we should have beat their sorry asses in their stadium.

This year, we didn't lose to any bad teams, depending on where you want to put the NYJets.

thunderkyss
12-23-2009, 08:56 AM
2) Out of Kubiak's 29 wins, only 7 have been against winning teams.


29 wins in 3.75 seasons. 62 games, 29 wins. That makes 33 losses.


Were all 33 losses to bad teams?

How many losses to bad teams this year? How many bad teams did we play this year?

All but two of our losses are to teams with winning records this season, & those two are to the Titans who are playing better than their record suggests.

thunderkyss
12-23-2009, 09:01 AM
Did you see the first half of the second Indy game? We KICKED THEIR ASSES, up and down the field. With 40 percent of our offensive starters on IR? Hmm. That tells me we can turn it on when we want to.


To me, that's a testament to the depth that everybody says we don't have.

HoustonFrog
12-23-2009, 09:12 AM
Personally, I don't think the team has progessed much this year overall, but others have claimed that it shows great improvement. Perhaps I'm just not capable of the discernment of which you speak, but I see a pattern of futility: some areas have improved significantly, but some have regressed just as significantly while others stayed about the same. The regression must be subtracted from the progression to get a true picture.

.

One area I keep seeing mentioned...and I find it to be a rather poor argument..is that Kubiak fans are saying that the Texans aren't getting blown out. They aren't pushovers. That they are only losing by 3 points to top teams. Basically "we are no longer an easy out and are sooooooooo close."

I already addressed it in my 7 points a few pages back but to me that may seem like improvement but it is really still a "L" with prettier packaging. Truthfully each season is a separate entity. As TC pointed out in one article, there should be no corrolary between one season and the next. So to think only losing by 3 means you will win those games next year really makes no sense. What if you lose by 1....is that even more improvement?

I think the one answer I've yet to hear, but it may be in what I just said, is how can a team that improves on both sides of the ball every year end up in the same place, .500?

I agree with you. At some point there may be a faction that just thinks refs, injuries, missed kicks, etc are always the excuse to keep going with the plan.

ObsiWan
12-23-2009, 09:21 AM
Git 'em TK! lol
:highfive:

HoustonFrog
12-23-2009, 09:26 AM
29 wins in 3.75 seasons. 62 games, 29 wins. That makes 33 losses.


Were all 33 losses to bad teams?

How many losses to bad teams this year? How many bad teams did we play this year?

All but two of our losses are to teams with winning records this season, & those two are to the Titans who are playing better than their record suggests.

I think you are missing the point completely. The point was that they only beat bad teams. That only 7 of 29 wins was against winning teams. Therefore they were beating bad teams. What you are stating makes my point.....that they can't beat good teams and can't compete with good teams despite their "improvements." I broke down who they beat in this thread and took the time to go through all of his years.

Goldensilence
12-23-2009, 09:26 AM
29 wins in 3.75 seasons. 62 games, 29 wins. That makes 33 losses.


Were all 33 losses to bad teams?

How many losses to bad teams this year? How many bad teams did we play this year?

All but two of our losses are to teams with winning records this season, & those two are to the Titans who are playing better than their record suggests.


TK that's the point. We can sure beat the Rams and Seahawks of the league but, we can't seem to keep up with the Colts, Cards (man that still sounds weird to say), heck even the Jags. Until the Titans started on their run (and if they finish with a better record after starting 0-6 I'm going to be sick) out biggest quality win has been against Cinci (Again weird to say).

Sure we can keep up with them, but until we start to beat teams equal to us or winning teams we've got no chance at the playoffs realistically.

thunderkyss
12-23-2009, 09:33 AM
I don't see how that statement is accurate in a couple different ways. Number 1 we had a running game last year. If we simply had that running game we would be in the playoffs this year. Number 2 he has done quite a bit to build the running game, it just failed this year. He brought in one of the top three OL coaches, drafted 4 OLmen on the first day (what was traditionally first day) plus grabbed another 1st day guy and fixed his medical issue that got him waived, traded for another OLmen plus drafted Slaton on the 1st day.

He came in saying it was going to take 3 years to build this thing. OF our starting OL, he's had Chester Pitts going on 4 years.

He's had Winston going on 4 years.

Myers & Briesel going on 3 years.

Studdard going on 3 years, what, 13 games as a starter?

White has been here 4 years, this is also his first year as a starter.

Duane Brown going on 2 years.

Caldwell going on 1 year.

I honestly think the line this year has improved dramatically since Pitts went down. I don't think we'll see Pitts on the field as a Texan again.

I also think White & Caldwell have been swapping at RG, because one of the two will be our starting Center next year & Kubiak is getting them the experience they need.

thunderkyss
12-23-2009, 09:42 AM
TK that's the point. We can sure beat the Rams and Seahawks of the league but, we can't seem to keep up with the Colts, Cards (man that still sounds weird to say), heck even the Jags.

No, the point is that in the past, we lost to bad teams just as frequently (I think) as we lost to good teams.

We are now, actually better than half the teams in the NFL, when before we were as bad as the worse teams in the NFL.

& we lost to the Cards, we beat the Bengals.

We haven't lost to any team this year, that does not have at least a 7-7 record.

Might not be what you want to hear, and you can jumble the numbers however you want to prove your point, but for my argument, No losses to losing teams is a sign of improvement.

Winning on the road is also a sign, but that's a different story.

Texan_Bill
12-23-2009, 09:51 AM
Kubiak sucks. That is all. Thank you and good night.

That is a lucid, intelligent, well thought-out objection. :rolleyes:


Gary, this is the type of post that Katie was referring to.

thunderkyss
12-23-2009, 09:52 AM
I think you are missing the point completely. The point was that they only beat bad teams. That only 7 of 29 wins was against winning teams. Therefore they were beating bad teams. What you are stating makes my point.....that they can't beat good teams and can't compete with good teams despite their "improvements." I broke down who they beat in this thread and took the time to go through all of his years.

I'm not missing the point, I'm looking from a glass half full perspective.

At the beginning of every season, we go through our schedule, and mark W's by bad teams & L's by good teams. We factor in that we'll win a game or two that we shouldn't (usually a Colts game) & we'll lose a game we shouldn't.

Nobody ever thinks that the other team fans are doing the same thing, & 99% are putting Ws for their team against the Texans. Even the Seattle Seahawks fans & Rams fans & Oakland fans. We've been a "should win" game for every team in the NFL.

This year, we won all the should win games (the Jets were 9-7 last year, & will probably be 9-7 again this year).

I can make an argument for natural progression of things, win some games, win all "easy" games, win all "easy" games & some difficult games....

& it would be pretty easy to point to that, & say, "this is where we were, this is where we are, & this is where we will be if we continue to progress as we have been."

spurstexanstros
12-23-2009, 09:56 AM
I hate to repeat myself...but

Kubiak and Smith have put the team in positions to win it was up to the players to excecute.

Chris Brown's fumble
Matt Schaub's pic 6 to DRC on possible game winning drive.
Kris Brown's missed FGs that could have won or tied three games.
Ryan Moats fumble ( ok Kubiak should have told matt to snap the ball)

Obviously the players did not excecute....and that is what cost the Texans this year.

( I will save the drafting running back I told you so's for another thread)

HoustonFrog
12-23-2009, 09:58 AM
No, the point is that in the past, we lost to bad teams just as frequently (I think) as we lost to good teams.

We are now, actually better than half the teams in the NFL, when before we were as bad as the worse teams in the NFL.

& we lost to the Cards, we beat the Bengals.

We haven't lost to any team this year, that does not have at least a 7-7 record.

Might not be what you want to hear, and you can jumble the numbers however you want to prove your point, but for my argument, No losses to losing teams is a sign of improvement.

Winning on the road is also a sign, but that's a different story.

I find this idea warped in a way. If you end up 8-8 every year and you are losing to good teams and getting by on horrible teams, it means your record is a mirage. You can't compete with the big boys, thus negating the improvement argument. If improvement, to you, is not losing to bad teams...I'm not sure what to say. They ended last season losing to a really bad Raider team. You have to take into context how bad those losing teams were and here is the list of the wins up until this year


2006: 6-10: Dolphins (6-10), Jags (twice) (8-8), Oakland (2-14), Indy (12-4), Cleveland (4-12)....there is 1

2007: 8-8: KC (4-12), Carolina (7-9), Miami (1-15), Oakland (4-12), New Orleans (7-9), Tampa (9-7), Denver (7-9), J'Ville (11-5)....there is 2

2008: 8-8: Miami(11-5), Detroit (0-16), Cincy (4-11-1), Cleveland (4-12), J'Ville (5-11), Green Bay (6-10), Tennessee (13-3), Chicago(9-7)....so there is 3.

So you can take what you want from it and I respect that....I just have nothing to add because I think we have two very different views on what is "improvement" and what a teams standards of excellence should be.

Goldensilence
12-23-2009, 10:01 AM
No, the point is that in the past, we lost to bad teams just as frequently (I think) as we lost to good teams.

We are now, actually better than half the teams in the NFL, when before we were as bad as the worse teams in the NFL.

& we lost to the Cards, we beat the Bengals.

We haven't lost to any team this year, that does not have at least a 7-7 record.

Might not be what you want to hear, and you can jumble the numbers however you want to prove your point, but for my argument, No losses to losing teams is a sign of improvement.

Winning on the road is also a sign, but that's a different story.

Actually since 2007 we've done a fairly good job of beating bad teams, though granted at times it's just been slipping by ex: Rams last week.

Will grant either if we win in Miami for the first time under Kubiak we'll have a winning record on the road. If we lose well I guess .500 is the name of the game overall. I guess getting to .500 on the road is tremendous improvement.

mussop
12-23-2009, 10:06 AM
No, the point is that in the past, we lost to bad teams just as frequently (I think) as we lost to good teams.

We are now, actually better than half the teams in the NFL, when before we were as bad as the worse teams in the NFL.

& we lost to the Cards, we beat the Bengals.

We haven't lost to any team this year, that does not have at least a 7-7 record.

Might not be what you want to hear, and you can jumble the numbers however you want to prove your point, but for my argument, No losses to losing teams is a sign of improvement.

Winning on the road is also a sign, but that's a different story.

Think about what you are saying. Kubiaks 4th season as head coach is a success because we beat crappy teams now. It doesnt matter that we still cant beat good teams? Im sorry but your standards are way to low.

Question for you, Obviously you are ok with where the team is, how do you feel about Kubiaks ability to make in-game adjustments, overall game management and personell decisions as in who gets playing time and when?

Texan_Bill
12-23-2009, 10:07 AM
Yeah, because the Bengals suck. :rolleyes:

ObsiWan
12-23-2009, 10:08 AM
I'm not missing the point, I'm looking from a glass half full perspective.

At the beginning of every season, we go through our schedule, and mark W's by bad teams & L's by good teams. We factor in that we'll win a game or two that we shouldn't (usually a Colts game) & we'll lose a game we shouldn't.

Nobody ever thinks that the other team fans are doing the same thing, & 99% are putting Ws for their team against the Texans. Even the Seattle Seahawks fans & Rams fans & Oakland fans. We've been a "should win" game for every team in the NFL.

This year, we won all the should win games (the Jets were 9-7 last year, & will probably be 9-7 again this year).

I can make an argument for natural progression of things, win some games, win all "easy" games, win all "easy" games & some difficult games....

& it would be pretty easy to point to that, & say, "this is where we were, this is where we are, & this is where we will be if we continue to progress as we have been."

:goodpost:
[must spread rep]
And it's that progress that I see and think will get us where we want to be.

HoustonFrog
12-23-2009, 10:12 AM
:goodpost:
[must spread rep]
And it's that progress that I see and think will get us where we want to be. Why change what seems to be working?

My post right above at the top. Again, respectful but that is a poor standard of excellence. I doubt if you polled every team in the NFL and asked their 4 year goals, the answers would be "to beat the bad teams every year and maybe we can beat the good ones and make the playoffs." Most answer 1) Winning records 2) Win Division 3) Win playoff games 4) Win the big game and they cross them off. And these goals are usually made for each season too.

One area I keep seeing mentioned...and I find it to be a rather poor argument..is that Kubiak fans are saying that the Texans aren't getting blown out. They aren't pushovers. That they are only losing by 3 points to top teams. Basically "we are no longer an easy out and are sooooooooo close."

I already addressed it in my 7 points a few pages back but to me that may seem like improvement but it is really still a "L" with prettier packaging. Truthfully each season is a separate entity. As TC pointed out in one article, there should be no corrolary between one season and the next. So to think only losing by 3 means you will win those games next year really makes no sense. What if you lose by 1....is that even more improvement?

I think the one answer I've yet to hear, but it may be in what I just said, is how can a team that improves on both sides of the ball every year end up in the same place, .500?

I agree with you. At some point there may be a faction that just thinks refs, injuries, missed kicks, etc are always the excuse to keep going with the plan.

thunderkyss
12-23-2009, 10:17 AM
If the 2010 Texans go 8-8 with the same "improvement" as this year, should Kubiak get a new contract?

For me, it isn't about W-L, yet. Next year, if something happens that would have affected The Chin, Jimmy Johnson, or Vince Lombardi himself, I'm not going to hold that against Kubiak.

I've stated in another thread, I expect this team to be playing so well next year, that anything less than 10 wins will be a disappointment, I think they'll be playing that well, a year from now if they continue to progress as they have.

Go back and look at some of Texans Chicks blogs, there were some about "the truth behind the numbers" or something like that. Was the defense really playing that well, or did we just catch the easy part of the schedule.... & stuff like that. We weren't really playing very well last year. Our run game was mostly Steve Slaton, and we all saw that at the beginning of the year. The OL was playing better than they did last year, & he was noticebly slower, his vision appeared impaired, & he did not have that burst.

But there were still improvements that made that 8-8 team better than the team the year before. & there are definite improvements in this team, even if they end up 7-9 that makes them better than last years team.

A lot of the things we wanted to see improvements in this year, we have. The Defense, damn near every aspect is improved over last year. Red Zone, Away Games, Turnovers, etc...

If there is obvious regression.... I want him gone. But as long as he keeps doing the right things, I want him to stay.

Ndevine7
12-23-2009, 10:18 AM
Kubiak has helped this franchise in so many different aspects. He has brought this team from a cellar dweller to a team that is feared around the league and has arguably one of the top offenses in the league when healthy. Bringing in a new coach will slow down this teams development because what are the chances that players that thrive in Kubiaks system will thrive in this new coaches system. If not for the Brown's this year failing in crucial situations this team would be a playoff team no doubt about it. Let Kubiak have one more and if he fails agian then i think it is time to give him the boot.

ObsiWan
12-23-2009, 10:21 AM
I hate to repeat myself...but

Kubiak and Smith have put the team in positions to win it was up to the players to excecute.

Chris Brown's fumble
Matt Schaub's pic 6 to DRC on possible game winning drive.
Kris Brown's missed FGs that could have won or tied three games.
Ryan Moats fumble ( ok Kubiak should have told matt to snap the ball)

Obviously the players did not excecute....and that is what cost the Texans this year.

( I will save the drafting running back I told you so's for another thread)

This has been a key part of my argument too. Yet, some folks want the coach's head and the players get off with a stern finger wag in a message board.

As an example:
Don't you think they practiced that HB pass to death and don't you think that Chris Brown had been nailing that HB pass in practice? As paranoid as Kubiak is about turnovers and reluctant as he is about trick plays (how many do you remember?), don't you think he and young Shanny thought they had that nailed?? But when the time came to do it in the game, Brown screwed the pooch. In my mind that's on Brown, not Shanny or Kubiak.

HoustonFrog
12-23-2009, 10:24 AM
For me, it isn't about W-L, yet. Next year, if something happens that would have affected The Chin, Jimmy Johnson, or Vince Lombardi himself, I'm not going to hold that against Kubiak.

I've stated in another thread, I expect this team to be playing so well next year, that anything less than 10 wins will be a disappointment, I think they'll be playing that well, a year from now if they continue to progress as they have.

Go back and look at some of Texans Chicks blogs, there were some about "the truth behind the numbers" or something like that. Was the defense really playing that well, or did we just catch the easy part of the schedule.... & stuff like that. We weren't really playing very well last year. Our run game was mostly Steve Slaton, and we all saw that at the beginning of the year. The OL was playing better than they did last year, & he was noticebly slower, his vision appeared impaired, & he did not have that burst.

But there were still improvements that made that 8-8 team better than the team the year before. & there are definite improvements in this team, even if they end up 7-9 that makes them better than last years team.

A lot of the things we wanted to see improvements in this year, we have. The Defense, damn near every aspect is improved over last year. Red Zone, Away Games, Turnovers, etc...

If there is obvious regression.... I want him gone. But as long as he keeps doing the right things, I want him to stay.

I really have to ask you..... And again, I'm just trying to understand the mentality...you think this "standard" of judging a coach in todays NFL is normal?You really think just as long as the team looks better, even if they end up 7-9 or 8-8, that it is ok?Because if you are really improving then it should then reflect in the record. Really. That is what the league is about. The Texans aren't in a bubble in a division called AFC Candyland where trying hard, looking good and being diappointed but ok with it is acceptable. I just want to know why this franchise has to set such low standards. No other team does this that I know of. I just want it explained. Why is a perceived improvement despite the same results ok?

And for those here thinking both sides are beating a dead horse....I'm just trying to get an explanation to better understand the argument. Because it isn't my mindset or how I was brought up when watching the Cowboys, etc.

houstonspartan
12-23-2009, 10:24 AM
My post right above at the top. Again, respectful but that is a poor standard of excellence. I doubt if you polled every team in the NFL and asked their 4 year goals, the answers would be "to beat the bad teams every year and maybe we can beat the good ones and make the playoffs." Most answer 1) Winning records 2) Win Division 3) Win playoff games 4) Win the big game and they cross them off. And these goals are usually made for each season too.

Agree with everything Frog has said. It's really sad when people say that W-L's aren't important or that division games aren't important. If you pull back the curtain on Kubiaks 8-8 record for both years, you will find some very, very nasty stats.

Ndevine7
12-23-2009, 10:24 AM
This has been a key part of my argument too. Yet, some folks want the coach's head and the players get off with a stern finger wag in a message board.

As an example:
Don't you think they practiced that HB pass to death and don't you think that Chris Brown had been nailing that HB pass in practice? As paranoid as Kubiak is about turnovers and reluctant as he is about trick plays (how many do you remember?), don't you think he and young Shanny thought they had that nailed?? But when the time came to do it in the game, Brown screwed the pooch. In my mind that's on Brown, not Shanny or Kubiak.

I disagree with you on how that is on Brown and not Shanny or Kubiak. That was just a dumb play to call in the situation they were in at the goal-line in a tight game. They are all in fault but this does not warrent Kubiak to get the boot. Without him this team would be no where close to where it is now.

Goldensilence
12-23-2009, 10:26 AM
This has been a key part of my argument too. Yet, some folks want the coach's head and the players get off with a stern finger wag in a message board.

As an example:
Don't you think they practiced that HB pass to death and don't you think that Chris Brown had been nailing that HB pass in practice? As paranoid as Kubiak is about turnovers and reluctant as he is about trick plays (how many do you remember?), don't you think he and young Shanny thought they had that nailed?? But when the time came to do it in the game, Brown screwed the pooch. In my mind that's on Brown, not Shanny or Kubiak.

Maybe I'm just crazy here or something...but why put the ball in Brown's hands? Why not your 4,000 yard QB or all world WR?

Hell if Shanahan or Gary wanted to be cute in the red zone why not a reverse to AJ?

In my mind it's on Shanny and Kubiak for deciding to put the ball in the hands of someone who has continued to fail to get the job done RUNNING much less THROWING.

HoustonFrog
12-23-2009, 10:37 AM
Maybe I'm just crazy here or something...but why put the ball in Brown's hands? Why not your 4,000 yard QB or all world WR?

Hell if Shanahan or Gary wanted to be cute in the red zone why not a reverse to AJ?

In my mind it's on Shanny and Kubiak for deciding to put the ball in the hands of someone who has continued to fail to get the job done RUNNING much less THROWING.

Not crazy. Coaches put players in the position they are in. Chris Brown shouldn't be your goal line guy...three times....fumble, stopped and pass. You shouldn't let time run out and wait for your kicker to kick a long FG when you can get in extra play and get some more yards, etc, etc. That is all coaching.

mussop
12-23-2009, 10:39 AM
I hate to repeat myself...but

Kubiak and Smith have put the team in positions to win it was up to the players to excecute.

It could actually be said that the talent got the team in positions to win and poor decisions by Kubiak is what led to the misshaps that lost us the games.

Chris Brown's fumble

No one outside our brilliant head coach thought Brown was a goal line or short yardage back.

Matt Schaub's pic 6 to DRC on possible game winning drive.

That was a terrible play call. . Throwing a deep out at that time like that is just asking a good corner to pick it off.

Kris Brown's missed FGs that could have won or tied three games.

Which missed FG could of won a game? The one in Indy to tie the game was set up by a poor decision that left a struggleing kicker a 49 yarder.

Ryan Moats fumble ( ok Kubiak should have told matt to snap the ball)

Refresh me.

How about adding the stagger brown to these as well?

Good coaches know that in crunch time you go to your goto players. You dont put the game in the hands of backups and you deffinatly dont try and force plays through the weakest part of your team.

Obviously the players did not excecute....and that is what cost the Texans this year.

Is it out of the question to think that coach that better prepared his team and made better personell and game decisions would of had better results?

( I will save the drafting running back I told you so's for another thread)

Im not sure what you are saying here????

You could argue that the talent is or isnt here or that the players have or havent executed and you could be right either way. But what you cant argue, what is undeniably a fact is that Kubiak is not a good game manager or good at preparing this team or good at making personell decisions realted to playing time or making in-game adjustments.

Why should Kubiak not be evaluated for handling his responsibilities just like the players? What is it that Kubiak does that makes people think a better more experienced proven coach couldnt do more with this talent?

Texan_Bill
12-23-2009, 10:47 AM
I disagree with you on how that is on Brown and not Shanny or Kubiak. That was just a dumb play to call in the situation they were in at the goal-line in a tight game. They are all in fault but this does not warrent Kubiak to get the boot. Without him this team would be no where close to where it is now.

That play was equally a coach FAIL and a player FAIL. Thus my quoting DB for my sig... It's a symbiosis of suck.

A) The play shouldn't have been called, although it's been very successful for some other teams in that situation.

B) Chris Brown needs to be a football player in that situation. Throw the ball to the 15th row. Run out of bounds. Eat it. Whatever. Do NOT girly throw it. Hell my sister throws a better ball than that.

Double Barrel
12-23-2009, 10:55 AM
I hate to repeat myself...but

Kubiak and Smith have put the team in positions to win it was up to the players to excecute.

Chris Brown's fumble
Matt Schaub's pic 6 to DRC on possible game winning drive.
Kris Brown's missed FGs that could have won or tied three games.
Ryan Moats fumble ( ok Kubiak should have told matt to snap the ball)

Obviously the players did not excecute....and that is what cost the Texans this year.

( I will save the drafting running back I told you so's for another thread)

psssst...little secret, man.... :secret:

Every losing head coach in the history of the NFL can point to the players not executing. I do not believe any given unsuccessful head coach purposefully put their team in a position to lose, so inversely, they all tried to put their teams in position to win. In every case, the players did not execute.

Like mentioned in another thread, Kubiak is the longest tenured head coach that does not have a winning record. There is 1 out of 32 owners that finds a way to accept that glaring mediocrity. But there's no secret to which owner I'm referring to here.

Texan_Bill
12-23-2009, 10:59 AM
psssst...little secret, man.... :secret:

Every losing head coach in the history of the NFL can point to the players not executing. I do not believe any given unsuccessful head coach purposefully put their team in a position to lose, so inversely, they all tried to put their teams in position to win. In every case, the players did not execute.

Like mentioned in another thread, Kubiak is the longest tenured head coach that does not have a winning record. There is 1 out of 32 owners that finds a way to accept that glaring mediocrity. But there's no secret to which owner I'm referring to here.

:secret: Yet the longest tenured coach today didn't have his first winning season until his 5th full season.

DexmanC
12-23-2009, 11:04 AM
That play was equally a coach FAIL and a player FAIL. Thus my quoting DB for my sig... It's a symbiosis of suck.

A) The play shouldn't have been called, although it's been very successful for some other teams in that situation.

B) Chris Brown needs to be a football player in that situation. Throw the ball to the 15th row. Run out of bounds. Eat it. Whatever. Do NOT girly throw it. Hell my sister throws a better ball than that.

Nice try at having it both ways. The COACHING calls the play, AND selects
the PERSONNEL to execute the play. In goal-to-go situations, the coaches
need to get the ball into the hands of the proper PERSONNEL. When you
have Kevin Walter, James Casey, Andre Johnson, Jacoby Jones, Ryan Moats,
Joel Dreesen, etc., you have a myriad of BETTER OPTIONS to go to in that
SITUATION.

The play was dead as soon as it hit the speakers in Matt Schaub's helmet.

That's on the coaching.

P.S. Chris Brown ain't Ronnie Brown, NOR Joseph Addai! Hell, he's a THIRD STRING BACK! who's
constantly being run down everyone's throat by Kubiak. Our coach is HORRIBLE at consistently
selecting the PROPER PERSONNEL for his playcalls!

mussop
12-23-2009, 11:09 AM
Not crazy. Coaches put players in the position they are in. Chris Brown shouldn't be your goal line guy...three times....fumble, stopped and pass. You shouldn't let time run out and wait for your kicker to kick a long FG when you can get in extra play and get some more yards, etc, etc. That is all coaching.

They dont seem to want to acknowledge this.

Double Barrel
12-23-2009, 11:10 AM
:secret: Yet the longest tenured coach today didn't have his first winning season until his 5th full season.

Apples and kumquats, my friend. Four different home stadiums in four seasons might have had something to do with that, too. :tiphat:

Texan_Bill
12-23-2009, 11:12 AM
Apples and kumquats, my friend. Four different home stadiums in four seasons might have had something to do with that, too. :tiphat:

Of course its different, because Fisher actually inherited some talent. :)

Double Barrel
12-23-2009, 11:18 AM
Of course its different, because Fisher actually inherited some talent. :)

Yep, and the team played in four different home stadiums in four seasons.

This is still not a solid argument for Kubiak, though. However, it's a GREAT argument on behalf of Jeff Fisher. :shades:

ObsiWan
12-23-2009, 11:18 AM
It could actually be said that the talent got the team in positions to win and poor decisions by Kubiak is what led to the misshaps that lost us the games.
That logic escapes me. The players committed those "mishaps" yet it's the coach's fault???


No one outside our brilliant head coach thought Brown was a goal line or short yardage back.
Wasn't it Rick Smith who said, "we've got a good second back in this building..." when asked why not draft another RB? Put the blame for Chris Brown where it belongs.



That was a terrible play call. . Throwing a deep out at that time like that is just asking a good corner to pick it off.
That wasn't a deep ball. That was a 10-15 yd out that Schaub threw a second late. It was also an example of where we tried to go to our "best weapon" and got burned.

How about adding the stagger brown to these as well?

Good coaches know that in crunch time we're gonna try and go to your goto players. You dont put the game in the hands of backups and you deffinatly dont try and force plays through the weakest part of your team.

Sooo the other coach is not going to double or triple our best weapon in those situations..?? They get paid to make adjustments too. To assume that we can just throw the ball to A.J. everytime we get in a pinch is a nice dream, but not necessarily reality.

Is it out of the question to think that coach that better prepared his team and made better personell and game decisions would of had better results?
Is it out of the question to think that if the players correctly executed the plays that were called that they would work? Every play is designed to achieve an objective. But to achieve that objective every player has to do his job. If that doesn't happen, if a guy fumbles or there's a missed block or a dropped pass or a missed read or a late/underthrown ball or a missed kick - all things the players have been "prepared" to do properly - then the play will likely fail. That's on the players.

Why should Kubiak not be evaluated for handling his responsibilities just like the players? What is it that Kubiak does that makes people think a better more experienced proven coach couldnt do more with this talent?
Let me flip that on you; what makes you so sure someone else would have done any better?? We both know that there's no way to know if anyone could have gotten more out of the players on this team.

And you're going against the Soapers theme that they only bring facts to the discussion. To say someone, anyone, could have done better is totally unprovable speculation - not "fact". You may be right. But there's no way to prove it.
Lastly, Kubiak SHOULD be evaluated for handling his responsibilities. No question. No one says he shouldn't.

Texan_Bill
12-23-2009, 11:44 AM
Yep, and the team played in four different home stadiums in four seasons.

This is still not a solid argument for Kubiak, though. However, it's a GREAT argument on behalf of Jeff Fisher. :shades:

It's an absolutely credible argument..

Christal Chandelier / Steve McNair > HWSRN
Eddie George > Wali Lundy
Frank Wychek > Owen Daniels (as a rookie)
Bruce Mathews, Brad Hopkins, Mark Stepnoski > any O-line we've ever had
Cris Dishman > Dunta "pay me rick" Robinson
etc. etc.

HoustonFrog
12-23-2009, 11:53 AM
It's an absolutely credible argument..

Christal Chandelier / Steve McNair > HWSRN
Eddie George > Wali Lundy
Frank Wychek > Owen Daniels (as a rookie)
Bruce Mathews, Brad Hopkins, Mark Stepnoski > any O-line we've ever had
Cris Dishman > Dunta "pay me rick" Robinson
etc. etc.

I still think the 4 stadiums in 4 years trumps all of this. This about all fo the talk last year and how the Texans got screwed because of the Katrina (guys weren't sleeping at home, had no permanent place to call home, practices were thrown off, homefield jacked) Then do that 4 years straight where every season was jacked up. To me I think it is even more incredible that he got them to where they were.

thunderkyss
12-23-2009, 11:55 AM
I really have to ask you..... And again, I'm just trying to understand the mentality...you think this "standard" of judging a coach in todays NFL is normal?You really think just as long as the team looks better, even if they end up 7-9 or 8-8, that it is ok?Because if you are really improving then it should then reflect in the record. Really. That is what the league is about. The Texans aren't in a bubble in a division called AFC Candyland where trying hard, looking good and being diappointed but ok with it is acceptable. I just want to know why this franchise has to set such low standards. No other team does this that I know of. I just want it explained. Why is a perceived improvement despite the same results ok?

And for those here thinking both sides are beating a dead horse....I'm just trying to get an explanation to better understand the argument. Because it isn't my mindset or how I was brought up when watching the Cowboys, etc.

For this team, the Arizona Cardinals (until recently), the Detroit Lions, the SF 49ers, the Tampa Bay Bucaneers (Pre-Dungy), and any other team that just can't seem to get it right (The Dallas Cowboys), before they can put too much stock in winning & loosing games, they need to be doing the right things right, & playing good football.

The Cowboys have been up & down ever since Jimmy Johnson left, because (IMHO) the focus isn't on playing good football, the focus is on winning games. If winning & loosing games is all that matters, & you're only worried about what it takes to win or lose, you're going to be swinging from a 6-10 team to a 10-6 team & not be able to explain it.

If you're playing good football, & what Kubiak has done with this team takes that to many different levels. But if you're playing good football, it's only a matter of time that it will show up in the record. The Colts, the Pats, the Steelers, they have a system, they have a formula. When something goes wrong, they can go back & look at what happened, address it, & get back to their winning ways.

We're blocking better, throwing better, catching better, running better routes, tackling better, covering better, penetrating better, everything better. We're playing as a team now, where we weren't before.

We're tied for 5th in sacks allowed... have we ever done that before this late in the season if not ever?

We're second in passing offense, 7th in total offense (with no running game), 8th in Time of Possession, 11th in points per game, 7th in first downs per game. 14th in 3rd down conversions (not that great, but better than 50% of the NFL).

We're 12th in total defense (1st year in this system), 8th in defensive ToP, & we've dramatically improved in every defensive stat as the year progressed.

I think we are playing good football now. Next year's W-L will mean more than it does now. I think we've got enough talent & depth that loosing one or two players won't mean as much as it does now.

I expected all this to happen sooner than it had. I believe we are one year behind where we should be. There are things that happened this year, that explains why we are where we are, & I think they are good reasons/excuses. I am not happy about where we are, but I can accept it. Some of it is squarely on Gary's shoulders. Some of it not.

Double Barrel
12-23-2009, 11:58 AM
It's an absolutely credible argument..

Christal Chandelier / Steve McNair > HWSRN
Eddie George > Wali Lundy
Frank Wychek > Owen Daniels (as a rookie)
Bruce Mathews, Brad Hopkins, Mark Stepnoski > any O-line we've ever had
Cris Dishman > Dunta "pay me rick" Robinson
etc. etc.

Wait a minute, let's re-examine your initial statement:

Of course its different, because Fisher actually inherited some talent. :)

Fisher was hired as HC in November 1994.

He did not inherit Eddie George. Fisher drafted him in 1996.

He did not inherit Frank Wycheck. He picked him up from the Redskins in 1995.

Dishman filed for free agency after the 1996 season and did not play for the Oilers after that point.

And let's not act like ANYONE on the Oilers even compared to Andre Johnson. Seriously, bro', Kubiak - an offensive minded coach - inherited his BEST OFFENSIVE WEAPON.

AJ > entire 1994 Oilers team that Fisher inherited.

And Fisher's team played in four different home stadiums in four seasons. ;)

Texan_Bill
12-23-2009, 12:07 PM
Wait a minute, let's re-examine your initial statement:



Fisher was hired as HC in November 1994.

He did not inherit Eddie George. Fisher drafted him in 1996.

He did not inherit Frank Wycheck. He picked him up from the Redskins in 1995.

Dishman filed for free agency after the 1996 season and did not play for the Oilers after that point.

And let's not act like ANYONE on the Oilers even compared to Andre Johnson. Seriously, bro', Kubiak - an offensive minded coach - inherited his BEST OFFENSIVE WEAPON.

AJ > entire 1994 Oilers team that Fisher inherited.

And Fisher's team played in four different home stadiums in four seasons. ;)


Ooops. My bad. He inherited Lorenzo White and Gary Brown. He inherited Ernest Givens, Webster Slaughter and Haywood Jeffries. He inherited Al Smith, Blaine Bishop, and Lamar Lathon.

AJ alone is not > Ernest Givens, Webster Slaughter and Haywood Jeffries combined.... Individually yes, absolutely. Combined, no.

Silver Oak
12-23-2009, 12:08 PM
uggh. this thread deserved a Dr. Kevorkian pages ago.

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/55/dead_horse.jpg (http://www.threadbombing.com/details.php?image_id=804)

mussop
12-23-2009, 12:09 PM
:secret: Yet the longest tenured coach today didn't have his first winning season until his 5th full season.

Good lord Bill, your still harping of this.

Of course, you are leaving a couple of things out of this coach-comparing analysis. At the 60-game mark, Kubiak's Texans were 5-7, having lost four straight, and had essentially been eliminated from playoff contention.

Jeff Fisher who was working under some very strange conditions when he reached game 60 of his coaching career. Fisher took over the Houston Oilers in midseason, replacing a fired Jack Pardee. Fisher went 1-5 that season. The next year, 1995, the Oilers were 7-9, but the whole uproar over whether the Oilers were getting a new stadium or were departing for Nashville was already well underway. The team went 8-8 under difficult circumstances in 1996 and 8-8 in 1997 as the team practiced in Nashville and played games in Memphis.

The Tennessee Oilers were 3-3 when Fisher hit the 60-game mark in 1998. They would finish that season at 8-8, and the next year, they would go to the Super Bowl. So while it's rather nice of you to provide us with those comparisons, they're not really apt comparisons.

After all, Kubiak's not dealing with the distraction of a franchise moving to another city.

Texan_Bill
12-23-2009, 12:10 PM
I still think the 4 stadiums in 4 years trumps all of this. This about all fo the talk last year and how the Texans got screwed because of the Katrina (guys weren't sleeping at home, had no permanent place to call home, practices were thrown off, homefield jacked) Then do that 4 years straight where every season was jacked up. To me I think it is even more incredible that he got them to where they were.

He had 2 1/2 years at the Dome (or for Mussop 38 games) before the move to Memphis. The Hurricane Ike and the Memphis / Vanderbilt / Adelphia Coloseum comparison is apples and oranges.

Texan_Bill
12-23-2009, 12:13 PM
uggh. this thread deserved a Dr. Kevorkian pages ago.

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/55/dead_horse.jpg (http://www.threadbombing.com/details.php?image_id=804)

How appropriate. Right on, SO!!!

Double Barrel
12-23-2009, 12:15 PM
Ooops. My bad. He inherited Lorenzo White and Gary Brown. He inherited Ernest Givens, Webster Slaughter and Haywood Jeffries. He inherited Al Smith, Blaine Bishop, and Lamar Lathon.

AJ alone is not > Ernest Givens, Webster Slaughter and Haywood Jeffries combined.... Individually yes, absolutely. Combined, no.

Givins was gone after 1994. He played with the Jags in 1995.

Slaughter was gone after 1994, as well. He went on to play for the Chiefs, Jets, and Chargers.

Jeffires last season with the Oilers was 1995. He played for the Saints to end his career.

So yeah, I think a very credible case is made that AJ in his fourth year is > that all of those washed up receivers at the end of their careers. History is what it is.

Al Smith - gone in 1996.

Lamar Lathon - gone in 1994.

Fisher inherited a crappy team, just like Kubiak. There was a reason Adams fired Pardee in the middle of the season. They were 1-9.

Double Barrel
12-23-2009, 12:17 PM
uggh. this thread deserved a Dr. Kevorkian pages ago.


There is a simple solution for you. Don't click the link that says "Kubiak Supporters: Why should he stay?" and you will never be bothered by it. :ok:

Texan_Bill
12-23-2009, 12:20 PM
Givins was gone after 1994. He played with the Jags in 1995.

Slaughter was gone after 1994, as well. He went on to play for the Chiefs, Jets, and Chargers.

Jeffires last season with the Oilers was 1995. He played for the Saints to end his career.

So yeah, I think a very credible case is made that AJ in his fourth year is > that all of those washed up receivers at the end of their careers. History is what it is.

Al Smith - gone in 1996.

Lamar Lathon - gone in 1994.

Fisher inherited a crappy team, just like Kubiak. There was a reason Adams fired Pardee in the middle of the season. They were 1-9.

:gun: Please see Silver Oaks post.

mussop
12-23-2009, 12:20 PM
That logic escapes me. The players committed those "mishaps" yet it's the coach's fault???


Wasn't it Rick Smith who said, "we've got a good second back in this building..." when asked why not draft another RB? Put the blame for Chris Brown where it belongs.




That wasn't a deep ball. That was a 10-15 yd out that Schaub threw a second late. It was also an example of where we tried to go to our "best weapon" and got burned.


Sooo the other coach is not going to double or triple our best weapon in those situations..?? They get paid to make adjustments too. To assume that we can just throw the ball to A.J. everytime we get in a pinch is a nice dream, but not necessarily reality.


Is it out of the question to think that if the players correctly executed the plays that were called that they would work? Every play is designed to achieve an objective. But to achieve that objective every player has to do his job. If that doesn't happen, if a guy fumbles or there's a missed block or a dropped pass or a missed read or a late/underthrown ball or a missed kick - all things the players have been "prepared" to do properly - then the play will likely fail. That's on the players.


Let me flip that on you; what makes you so sure someone else would have done any better?? We both know that there's no way to know if anyone could have gotten more out of the players on this team.

And you're going against the Soapers theme that they only bring facts to the discussion. To say someone, anyone, could have done better is totally unprovable speculation - not "fact". You may be right. But there's no way to prove it.
Lastly, Kubiak SHOULD be evaluated for handling his responsibilities. No question. No one says he shouldn't.

Im done with this subject. Its gone on too long and to much is getting taken out of context. At this point no one is going to change anyone elses mind. It really doesnt matter anymore, everyone has stated their feelings and made their opinions known. You guys have fun.

I have no doubt that if Kubiak does come back he will continue to hold this team back with poor coaching. Time will tell who is right and who is wrong. I actually hope I am wrong because I would like to see Kubiak be the one that turns this thing around. :smooch:

Texan_Bill
12-23-2009, 12:21 PM
There is a simple solution for you. Don't click the link that says "Kubiak Supporters: Why should he stay?" and you will never be bothered by it. :ok:

Done!!!

spurstexanstros
12-23-2009, 12:21 PM
There is a simple solution for you. Don't click the link that says "Kubiak Supporters: Why should he stay?" and you will never be bothered by it. :ok:

I think we can all agree it is alot better than the start sage threads that went on adnauseum.

Double Barrel
12-23-2009, 12:22 PM
:gun: Please see Silver Oaks post.

Pease see my reply to his post. :cowboy1:

His reply would be like one of us entering one of those goofy NSZ political threads that goes on forever just to whine about why is it still going on. Just avoid it and it's problem solved.

p.s. to continue our discussion, I've got the MOTHER LODE:

Kubiak inheriting Bob McNair as owner >>>>>>>> Fisher inheriting Adams as owner. :D

Texan_Bill
12-23-2009, 12:37 PM
Kubiak inheriting Bob McNair as owner >>>>>>>> Fisher inheriting Adams as owner. :D

Game over. /End Thread. :lol:

thunderkyss
12-23-2009, 12:42 PM
psssst...little secret, man.... :secret:

Every losing head coach in the history of the NFL can point to the players not executing. I do not believe any given unsuccessful head coach purposefully put their team in a position to lose, so inversely, they all tried to put their teams in position to win. In every case, the players did not execute.

Players fumble, throw interceptions, don't catch interceptions, miss blocks, miss tackles, etc......

We had a bunch of that in those games against winning teams, & we still could have won those games, or tied. Is that just a talented team that is able to do that?

I watched the Redskins the other night, playing the Giants. That was an embarrasing performance that should go all the way to the coaching level. Not any of the performances we've put on the field, was that bad.

With of course the exception of the Jets game. The Jets game I'll put completely on Kubiak. We acted like we had no idea who Rex Ryan was.

The first Jax game, I think that was the game we took out half the play book, because Schaub was gimpy. I'll put that one on Kubiak as well.

Other than that, I think the play-calling plus the talent on this team kept those games close enough for us to win in the end.

& Kris Brown missed 2 field goals in the second game vs Tenneessee. A game we lost by 3.

HoustonFrog
12-23-2009, 01:42 PM
I think we can all agree it is alot better than the start sage threads that went on adnauseum.

I think if Sage were here we might be over the hump already:stirpot:

steelbtexan
12-23-2009, 03:57 PM
First, I'd argue with you about RB still being on that list - unless you've given up on Slaton
and second, I remember that the year before the list was even longer:
CB (remember Petey Faggins),
OLB (Greenwood/Danny Clark),
OL (no solid LT or C),
#1 RB (R.Dayne) & #2 RB (D. Walker),
DE (A.Weaver),
FS & SS (C.C.Brown, Von Hutchins?),
DT (Travis Johnson),

so yeah, I see a theme; the list has gotten shorter every year.
:)

How has the list gotten shorter?

CB we still need at least 1 or 2
OLB Cushing solved this problem so I'll give you this one
OL I think it's obvious that this problem hasn't been solved
RB Slaton was drafted to be a 3rd down RB with durability ? We still need a RB
DE Adding A.Smith and Barwin has helped but there's still no pass rush
S Wilson is OK, They got lucky with Pollard and if they had traded a 7th rd pick for Pollard in TC Kubes job security probably wouldn't even be a ?
DT Still need a run stuffing DT IMO

Smithiak have only improved 2 positions Cushing and A.Smith (Pollard was pure luck and they didn't sign him early enough. IMO At this rate they should be a consistently winning team in 4/5 years. That means this was a 10/12 year building project. (Ridiculous) IMO

This is not enough progress for my taste. I wonder how much of this is Rick Smiths doing?

Anytime you think Kubes should be retained thnk how you felt when C.Brown threw that HB pass and ask youself who callrd that play? Who has final authority and why did Kubes think it was a good idea to call that play in that situation?

DexmanC
12-23-2009, 04:38 PM
Keep in mind that 5 years is around the AVERAGE CAREER for a player!
We just don't have the time, in the modern NFL, to stick with mediocre
coaching for decades at a time.

The only thing that's changed about Kubiak's regime in FOUR YEARS , are the
excuses for winding up 8-8.

axman40
12-23-2009, 06:25 PM
If you want to kill a thread you have to compare someone to Bud errrr I mean Hitler!
:kitten:

Ndevine7
12-23-2009, 07:41 PM
In Kubiak's four years he has brought this program from the joke of the league to a highly feared team. He has racked up 6 8 8 wins in the last three seasons, and if not for the slow start of the Texans last year in response to the hurricane, this team would've been a potential playoff team. You cant blame poor play by Kris Brown and Chris Brown solely on Kubiak,and he has not let this team stay cold for too long.

Pantherstang84
12-23-2009, 07:44 PM
I'll see your

uggh. this thread deserved a Dr. Kevorkian pages ago.

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/55/dead_horse.jpg (http://www.threadbombing.com/details.php?image_id=804)

and raise you

:deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse

J_R
12-23-2009, 09:23 PM
In Kubiak's four years he has brought this program from the joke of the league to a highly feared team. He has racked up 6 8 8 wins in the last three seasons, and if not for the slow start of the Texans last year in response to the hurricane, this team would've been a potential playoff team. You cant blame poor play by Kris Brown and Chris Brown solely on Kubiak,and he has not let this team stay cold for too long.

I wouldnt say we are a feared team. Maybe by bottom feeder teams like the Bills, Browns, Bucs, Chiefs, Lions, Rams, etc. Not to say we are a joke either, but I dont think we are feared. I'm sure we're not a team that others would hate to face. Slow starts? That's nothing new - whether it be a slow start to the season or slow start to a game - starting slow is not new. And I will partially blame Kubiak for Brown & Brown. He keeps putting them out on the field. Why? Each have blown games and have cost us [to at least tie] games in the past. Same with Dunta. Why? Put your best "foot" forward so to speak. Put your best players on the field who give you the chance to win and leave them there. Don't take your star reciever out in goal line situations, in the red zone, or at the end of games. That's a bit silly if you ask me. As 'Dre has said, sometimes I'm left scratching my head.

ObsiWan
12-23-2009, 10:43 PM
How has the list gotten shorter?

CB we still need at least 1 or 2
So you're saying Reeves and Robinson are just as bad as Robinson and Faggins? We'll have to agree to disagree here. We thought the #2 CB issue was solved when we picked up Reeves and were thinking that Bennett, based on his good rookie year production, would be our #3 - maybe push for Reeve's spot. He regressed his soph year and this year the Quin/McCain combo have played well enough to (maybe) make him expendable. Two years ago we had one quality CB to play with Petey Faggins, Jamar Fletcher (remember him?) and Von Hutchins. Now we have two, maybe three if the one or both two rooks continue to develop and/or Bennett returns to his rookie play level. You can't tell me you believe our secondary is as poor now as it was two years ago. I know you're smarter than that.

OLB Cushing solved this problem so I'll give you this one
Oh no, I claim two upgrades here - BOTH OLBs. Two years ago we had Greenwood and Danny Clark. Now we have Cushing and Diles. Both are playmakers and definite upgrades over what we had. In fact, with Adibi and K. Bentley as the backups, one could argue it's the deepest group on the team.

OL I think it's obvious that this problem hasn't been solved
No one was satisfied with Salaam so we drafted Brown last year and Caldwell this year. We have yet to see how that plays out.

RB Slaton was drafted to be a 3rd down RB with durability ? We still need a RB
Hold up! ...after Slaton posted 1600+ yds and ten TDs his rookie year, everyone pencilled him in as THE starter who " just needed someone to spell him so we don't shorten his career". During this past draft, I don't remember a single soul (there may have been some but *I* don't recall any) that said Slaton needed replacing as the starter "because he's just a 3rd down back". Now that he's had an off year, he's back to 3rd down back status. And think about where we came from. Wali Lundy/Samkon Gado/Ron Dayne/Chris Taylor (remember when we were thinking he'd develop into something special?) to Ahman Green/Ron Dayne/Darius Walker to Steve Slaton/Ryan Moats/Chris Brown (with Chris Henry waiting in the wings). Maybe you'd like to have Samkon Gado and/or Ahman Green back...?? Since there's been no progress, they must have been as good as what we have now. Agreed? No? Didn't think so.

DE Adding A.Smith and Barwin has helped but there's still no pass rush
I kind of actually agree with this assessment. While the Smith/Barwin combo is an definite upgrade over A. Weaver, I agree that there needs to be more production in the pass rush dept. I was hoping for Williams/Smith to be our version of Freeney/Mathis. That hasn't happened. But I do think that (after they finally got their act together) they're currently better against the run than what we had the year before.

S Wilson is OK, They got lucky with Pollard and if they had traded a 7th rd pick for Pollard in TC Kubes job security probably wouldn't even be a ?
I dunno about the trade scenario because I'm unsure if Pollard was even on the trading block when we were in camp. He may have been, I just don't know that. At least they had the good sense to snap him up when they found he was available. And while Wilson is better than Hutchins who was better than C.C.Brown, I'd still like to see us spend a quality (rd 1-3) pick on a real stud at FS; then let Wilson teach him the ropes for a while then turn him loose. Two years ago we needed two safeties. Now we just need one with more speed.

DT Still need a run stuffing DT IMO
No argument here. But you have to admit, real quality at that position is hard to come by. We'd have to trade up into the top 5 get Suh or McCoy to get the quality you want. If we do, good-bye stud RB or quality FS and maybe two 2nd day picks. Suh might be worth it.

Smithiak have only improved 2 positions Cushing and A.Smith (Pollard was pure luck and they didn't sign him early enough. IMO At this rate they should be a consistently winning team in 4/5 years. That means this was a 10/12 year building project. (Ridiculous) IMO
Tell ya what, go here...
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/htx/2007_roster.htm
look at the roster from two years ago, compare it to this year's roster, and tell me who from two years ago you would swap - spot for spot - with who we have now. Tell me who you wish we still had over what we've got now. Looking back at that roster, I'm amazed we won 8 games in 2007.

This is not enough progress for my taste. I wonder how much of this is Rick Smiths doing?
Don't forget the scouting department. I'm actually calling them on the carpet for the misses too. It's their scouting reports that Smithiak uses to make acquisition decisions. Having said that - you'll love this - it's on Smithiak to assess how accurate and truly useful those reports have been. If the scouts have been missing more than hitting, it's time for new scouts.

Anytime you think Kubes should be retained thnk how you felt when C.Brown threw that HB pass and ask youself who callrd that play? Who has final authority and why did Kubes think it was a good idea to call that play in that situation?
I addressed that in another thread. You cannot convince me that if that play had not been working in practice that Shanny or Kubiak would have trotted it out in a game. Hell, Kubiak is so paranoid that if a guy fumbles in practice, he doesn't get to play. Kubiak is too paranoid to 'draw something up in the dirt' then use it in the game. So if Brown hadn't SHOWN he could pull that pass off successfully during practice they would have never called it. Brown screwed the pooch.



so yeah, when I look at past rosters and compare them to the current one, I see progress; the list of obvious holes IS getting shorter.
Can we/should we continue to upgrade.
Hell yes. Forever. You say we need to upgrade the coach now. I say not yet. It's that simple.
But to say we've only upgraded two spots says to me you didn't look close enough.

ObsiWan
12-23-2009, 11:19 PM
I still think the 4 stadiums in 4 years trumps all of this. This about all fo the talk last year and how the Texans got screwed because of the Katrina (guys weren't sleeping at home, had no permanent place to call home, practices were thrown off, homefield jacked) Then do that 4 years straight where every season was jacked up. To me I think it is even more incredible that he got them to where they were.

That's a tad dramatic don'tcha think?
Jeff Fisher took over for Pardee - in Houston - in 1994. They played here in '94 (1-5), '95 (7-9), and '96 (8-8). They moved to Tenn. in '97 where they initially played in Memphis' Liberty Bowl (8-8) then moved to Nashville in '98 (8-8).

So the first three yrs they played here in Houston.

I might agree with the 97 year where they played in Memphis as "jacked up" since everyone knew Memphis was temporary. Nashvillians had to drive to Memphis to see the games and the Memphis folks stayed away in droves because they were pouting at the fact Nashville, not them, got the Oilers.

But in '98, they were home in Nashville (Vandy stadium) with a brand new stadium under construction. But that's still only three stadiums during the "mediocre" years under discussion.

...but, honestly, all this is digression...

beerlover
12-23-2009, 11:22 PM
so yeah, when I look at past rosters and compare them to the current one, I see progress; the list of obvious holes IS getting shorter.
Can we/should we continue to upgrade.
Hell yes. Forever. You say we need to upgrade the coach now. I say not yet. It's that simple.
But to say we've only upgraded two spots says to me you didn't look close enough.

confirmation from me, rep your way :barman:

ObsiWan
12-24-2009, 12:13 AM
Wait a minute, let's re-examine your initial statement:



Fisher was hired as HC in November 1994.

He did not inherit Eddie George. Fisher drafted him in 1996.

He did not inherit Frank Wycheck. He picked him up from the Redskins in 1995.

Dishman filed for free agency after the 1996 season and did not play for the Oilers after that point.

And let's not act like ANYONE on the Oilers even compared to Andre Johnson. Seriously, bro', Kubiak - an offensive minded coach - inherited his BEST OFFENSIVE WEAPON.

AJ > entire 1994 Oilers team that Fisher inherited.

And Fisher's team played in four different home stadiums in four seasons. ;)

Excuse me?
let me get this straight you're saying AJ is better than...
- Ray Childress (5x pro bowl; 1x 1st team All-Pro)
- Bruce Matthews (6x pro bowl; 4x 1st team All-Pro)
- Lorenzo White (1x pro bowl)
- Ernest Givens (2x pro bowl; 2x UPI All-Pro, 1x AP All-Pro)
- Haywood Jeffries (3x pro bowl; 1x AP All-Pro)
- Webster Slaughter (2x pro bowl - just one w/Oilers)
- Al Smith (MLB) (2x pro bowl; 1x AP All-Pro)
- Cris Dishman (1x pro bowl; 1x AP All-Pro)
- Marcus Robertson (1x AP All-Pro)

There were others, Blaine Bishop, Bubba McDowell to name a couple who made the pro bowl or All Pro later so you could say Fisher inherited that level of talent too.
And before you poo-poo the pro bowl selections as the popularity contest it is today, remember only the players and coaches could vote a guy into the pro bowl before '96.

And with all that talent it still took Fisher five years to get over the hump

I love AJ to death but to say he's better than that whole team...
Come ON, Man!

OBTW, compare that list to the squad Kubiak inherited.

You just threw that B/S out to make me research it didn't you.
and it worked too
:o)

steelbtexan
12-24-2009, 12:34 AM
Obsi

1. I would put CB at the top of the list. I hope Quin and McCain dont regress like Bennett but their isn't a no.1 CB on this team and this is the top priority. IMO

2. Getting Cushing did upgrade 2 LB spots. But one Lb spot would have been upgraded last year if Diles had stayed healthy. So I will reluctantly give you this point.
3.OL I think we agree that the OL is one of the weakest positions on this team. Brown is a middle of the road LT and I find it sad that the 3rd rd pick Caldwell cant beat out an undersized White. He would essentially would be running 3rd team if Briesel hadn't gotten hurt.

4. Most people on this board were in agreement that a RB needed to be drafted as a compliment to Slaton. I was on board for using a 3/4th rd pick last year. I feel the same way this year. Although I would try to adress it in FA (Ronnie Brown)
5. We agree

6. Pollard was cut after the Chiefs tried to trade him and couldn't find a taker. Even if this isn't true (not) Smithiak waited till after week two to sign Pollard. The defense was one of the worst in NFL history until Pollard got up to speed and played in week four. This bad decision helped contribute to the Jax defeat. IMO
7. Agreed I would try to sign Hampton or Seymour in FA or trade for Rodgers. This is due to my lack of faith in Smithiak being able to draft a competent run stuffer DT.
8. I didn't say that they haven't upgraded the roster at all but they aren't this super talented team. In fact I would say their roster is average and the holes are still there. Smithiak have been average in the war room. Look at this year draft how many impact players are in it ? If you're going to build through the draft you need to draft 3 impact players and 2 starters each year.

9. Agreed Who hired the scouting department? (Smithiak) Why does Bobby Greir still have a job?

10. That was a stupid call that cant be defended. (C.Brown Really) It showed o lack of confidence in Schaub and Johnson. IMO

Thanks for the reply I really like hearing other peoples thoughts.

mussop
12-24-2009, 01:12 AM
That's a tad dramatic don'tcha think?
Jeff Fisher took over for Pardee - in Houston - in 1994. They played here in '94 (1-5), '95 (7-9), and '96 (8-8). They moved to Tenn. in '97 where they initially played in Memphis' Liberty Bowl (8-8) then moved to Nashville in '98 (8-8).

So the first three yrs they played here in Houston.

I might agree with the 97 year where they played in Memphis as "jacked up" since everyone knew Memphis was temporary. Nashvillians had to drive to Memphis to see the games and the Memphis folks stayed away in droves because they were pouting at the fact Nashville, not them, got the Oilers.

But in '98, they were home in Nashville (Vandy stadium) with a brand new stadium under construction. But that's still only three stadiums during the "mediocre" years under discussion.

...but, honestly, all this is digression...

If you were around those years you know that Fisher did a great job of keeping that team playing hard despite the fact that in 95 and 96 they knew they werent going to be here any longer. There is no comaparison to the coaching job Fisher did in those years and what Kubiak has done here. Kubiak is a below average coach and Fisher is one of the brightest and soundest coaches out there. To even mention them in the same breath as HC's is a joke.

Fisher = member of the competition commitee
Kubiak = turns his back on important plays because he cant handle the pressure.

How is Kubiak sopposed to handle the pressure of being on the hot seat coming out of the gate next year when he cant even handle watching important plays?

Thats what scares me the most about him coming back next year. If we get off to ANOTHER slow start our season will be over before we even have a chance to enjoy it.

houstonspartan
12-24-2009, 02:58 AM
If you were around those years you know that Fisher did a great job of keeping that team playing hard despite the fact that in 95 and 96 they knew they werent going to be here any longer. There is no comaparison to the coaching job Fisher did in those years and what Kubiak has done here. Kubiak is a below average coach and Fisher is one of the brightest and soundest coaches out there. To even mention them in the same breath as HC's is a joke.

Fisher = member of the competition commitee
Kubiak = turns his back on important plays because he cant handle the pressure.

How is Kubiak sopposed to handle the pressure of being on the hot seat coming out of the gate next year when he cant even handle watching important plays?

Thats what scares me the most about him coming back next year. If we get off to ANOTHER slow start our season will be over before we even have a chance to enjoy it.

Gary turning his back during kicks is kind of weird and quirky and - in my opinion - wimpy and weak. But it shouldn't be a judge of whether or not he's a good coach.

I do think, however, that it is possible - and fair - to judge a coach's ability to handle pressure based on how his team responds to pressure situations. I agree 100 percent with the rest of your point. I've been saying it for weeks: If Kubiak can't handle the hot seat now, how will he respond next year when the seat gets 100 times hotter?

I almost feel sorry for the guy. If he returns next year, his life will be a living hell.

beerlover
12-24-2009, 03:56 AM
1. I would put CB at the top of the list. I hope Quin and McCain dont regress like Bennett but their isn't a no.1 CB on this team and this is the top priority. IMO

yeah that sure would be nice spend it on another #10 overall draft pick (which we won't have this year) then when his contract expires wants 80 mil. seriously, I'll probably have to wait until the combine to see if there is a CB worthy of a 1st rd. grade for Texans who fits their style. Haden is going to be long gone I feel, after him I just don't know I think the Texans would be reaching & we don't want anymore reaching. It's easy to say we need a lock down corner every team needs/wants one so they're expensive & hard to get.

2. Getting Cushing did upgrade 2 LB spots. But one Lb spot would have been upgraded last year if Diles had stayed healthy. So I will reluctantly give you this point.

I'm confussed by Adibis regression, since I don't know the particulars I will not speculate suffice to say a 7th rounder beats out a 4th hey it happens, but the Adibi I know is explosive & can cover space alot quicker than Diles.

3.OL I think we agree that the OL is one of the weakest positions on this team. Brown is a middle of the road LT and I find it sad that the 3rd rd pick Caldwell cant beat out an undersized White. He would essentially would be running 3rd team if Briesel hadn't gotten hurt.

It's been weak since the franchise inception, it takes both investment & time to develop the rawer talents who otherwise have the make-up they look for. Brown is not a middle of the road LT he is a legitimate NFL starting LT last I knew at best there are only 32 in existance & I would argue some other teams don't have one but not Brown. Caldwell they are being careful to bring up slowly, so not to miss key fundemental changes in his technique they see as required to move forward, just remember everyone has a different timetable, not everyone can come out & be Brian Cushing.

4. Most people on this board were in agreement that a RB needed to be drafted as a compliment to Slaton. I was on board for using a 3/4th rd pick last year. I feel the same way this year. Although I would try to adress it in FA (Ronnie Brown)

I'm jaded (huge Steve Slaton fan). I really love this guy & hope he returns to form in 2010. Having said that yeah I thought a 3rd/4th a done deal. It's important to keep pecking away before a weakness becomes expoused like it has this season. I would add the priority just went up to a 2nd possibly a 1st given some excellent talent avaialble (Ryan Mathews, Fresno just declared he is coming out early, if he is there in 2nd I would jump on it).

6. Pollard was cut after the Chiefs tried to trade him and couldn't find a taker. Even if this isn't true (not) Smithiak waited till after week two to sign Pollard. The defense was one of the worst in NFL history until Pollard got up to speed and played in week four. This bad decision helped contribute to the Jax defeat. IMO

that's hindsight isn't it? I mean nobody is biting, the Texans are the ones who end up signing him & they're at fault? I can almost imagine David in there pleading his case on Pollards behalf & I'm sure Smith had to get the clearnence from Bob McNair himself with rampant rumors of character issues, that's been a turnoff for this organization since the beginning. I would think they should get props for taking a chance on him & his aggressive personality.

7. Agreed I would try to sign Hampton or Seymour in FA or trade for Rodgers. This is due to my lack of faith in Smithiak being able to draft a competent run stuffer DT.

your setting sights a little high, but hey that would be cool. Unless you want to burn another first on a DT it is safer to go the experienced route.

8. I didn't say that they haven't upgraded the roster at all but they aren't this super talented team. In fact I would say their roster is average and the holes are still there. Smithiak have been average in the war room. Look at this year draft how many impact players are in it ? If you're going to build through the draft you need to draft 3 impact players and 2 starters each year.

With a healthy roster the Texans are above average & I believe with Kubiak their record would reflect that despite the turnovers.

9. Agreed Who hired the scouting department? (Smithiak) Why does Bobby Greir still have a job?

where do I apply? Bobby Beerlover Greir

10. That was a stupid call that cant be defended. (C.Brown Really) It showed o lack of confidence in Schaub and Johnson. IMO

The reason it worked in practice & not the game is that Chris Brown is a choke, its as simple as that. (I like the Golf analogy where if I could just take my pratice range swing to the course I could be dangerous) It was a brilliant call but a blunder to put the ball (game) in his hands with that play. Your right the coaching staff has to do a better job getting the ball in key situations to their playmakers. Not sure how you simulate practice to compare with actual game situations (maybe keep a tigher schedule, timing plays etc...) but the game plan doesn't transfer enough from practice to Sunday, there is a serious disconnect which has to be addressed.

thunderkyss
12-24-2009, 03:57 AM
Gary turning his back during kicks is kind of weird and quirky and - in my opinion - wimpy and weak. But it shouldn't be a judge of whether or not he's a good coach.

I do think, however, that it is possible - and fair - to judge a coach's ability to handle pressure based on how his team responds to pressure situations. I agree 100 percent with the rest of your point. I've been saying it for weeks: If Kubiak can't handle the hot seat now, how will he respond next year when the seat gets 100 times hotter?

I almost feel sorry for the guy. If he returns next year, his life will be a living hell.

If Kubiak couldn't handle the pressure, he would have been blaming the players a long time ago, or Shanahan, or stopped taking questions from the media a long time ago. Instead he looks them in the eye & says, "it's on me!" & U guys think he can't handle the pressure?

I do agree it's a quirk. Bit maybe that's his way of staying calm & rational.

Thorn
12-24-2009, 06:05 AM
If the Texans go 9-7, Kukiak is a lock for next year, and that's probably true at 8-8 also. The only way Kubiak is not back next year is we drop the last two games, and I just don't see that happening. The players want Kubiak back, and they'll take one of these two games, if not both.

Kubiak has improved this team immensely, so he's got that going for him. However after four years, he hasn't installed a total winning attitude yet, so that's a pretty heavy knock on him. I think he's back for another year, and I think most of us all agree with that even if some of us don't like it.

However, I'm getting sick of the phrase "next year". I think those two words should be banned, and instead we all use NxY instead. Kind of like HWNSNBM. Because we all have a heavy bowl full of NxY to eat as there ain't nothing else being served at this table.

ObsiWan
12-24-2009, 06:58 AM
I have a question for the "Soapers"...

why pink?

if you're really pissed, and some of you are really, truly, inconsolably pissed, then why not something tougher like Brillo or better yet, Lava
http://adsoftheworld.com/files/images/LAVAbarfight.preview.jpg (http://adsoftheworld.com/media/print/lava_soap_bar_fight?size=_original)

....I'm just sayin'...
:D

Thorn
12-24-2009, 07:10 AM
The Sarge ain't so soaper. The Sarge don't need soap. :howdy:


:D

mussop
12-24-2009, 07:19 AM
I have a question for the "Soapers"...

why pink?

if you're really pissed, and some of you are really, truly, inconsolably pissed, then why not something tougher like Brillo or better yet, Lava
http://adsoftheworld.com/files/images/LAVAbarfight.preview.jpg (http://adsoftheworld.com/media/print/lava_soap_bar_fight?size=_original)

....I'm just sayin'...
:D

Thanks I like it! :)

Lucky
12-24-2009, 07:29 AM
Excuse me?
let me get this straight you're saying AJ is better than...
- Ray Childress (5x pro bowl; 1x 1st team All-Pro)
- Bruce Matthews (6x pro bowl; 4x 1st team All-Pro)
- Lorenzo White (1x pro bowl)
- Ernest Givens (2x pro bowl; 2x UPI All-Pro, 1x AP All-Pro)
- Haywood Jeffries (3x pro bowl; 1x AP All-Pro)
- Webster Slaughter (2x pro bowl - just one w/Oilers)
- Al Smith (MLB) (2x pro bowl; 1x AP All-Pro)
- Cris Dishman (1x pro bowl; 1x AP All-Pro)
- Marcus Robertson (1x AP All-Pro)

There were others, Blaine Bishop, Bubba McDowell to name a couple who made the pro bowl or All Pro later so
Most of the guys you listed were over the hill by the time Fisher took over and never contributed to his teams. Matthews and Bishop being major exceptions.

The constant comparisons of Kubiak to other coaches is lopsided. Why not mention Kubiak with coaches who never found success over 4 seasons, like David Shula or Bruce Coslet? Kubiak has a lot more in common with these guys.

El Tejano
12-24-2009, 07:39 AM
Because I remember the days when getting a first down was a hope that the team has turned the page. Since Kubiak has been here, our offense has been in the top 5 offenses in the league. People say he can't get us in the endzone but at some point you have to look at the players. Our OL isn't what it was a year ago and neither are our RBs.

You look at our rival Tenn. and they stuck with their coach after two 8-8 seasons. He now has the longest tenure of amongst active coaches. Even if we fall short of the playoffs, the mere fact that we are still in discussion for the playoffs with only two games left in the season is a sign of improvement. People want to throw Kubiak away because we are 7-7 but 5 other teams in the hunt for playoffs are 7-7 and we are only one game out of owning a wildcard spot. That is improvement among the AFC.

Looking at the QB position. We are one of very few teams who can say we have a QB who has grasped the system after only 38 starts or so. If we start over, Matt has to start over and we possibly begin a search all over again for the most important position on the field. Right now Schaub and Johnson have a real good chemistry. Any coach who comes in and we start showing a sign of rebuilding and/or declining on offense - Andre Johnson is gone.

Say what you want, but Kubiak has even helped the defense get better. In 3 years of football for the Texans he has brought his team up to the 12th ranked defense. I say Kubiak is responsible for that because he's wanted Frank Bush all along and only settled for Richard Smith when Bush was held back by Arizona.

In three years of drafting, he's had more hits than misses in the 1st round - Mario and Cushing. Amobi is a miss but he does stuff sometimes that makes you say - one more year.

The team loves Kubiak and plays for him. That's very hard to find in this league of over paid millinaires.

Please understand that I was in the fire Kubiak group only a week ago. After sitting back and thinking about how it could potentially mess up our offense, I'm thinking I will stick with Kubiak for one more year because after that he will have had 4 years and Schaub 4 years. If there are no playoffs at that point it's time to look around and go in a different direction altogether.

axman40
12-24-2009, 07:44 AM
The Sarge ain't so soaper. The Sarge don't need soap. :howdy:


:D
The Sarge reeks?
:peek:

Thorn
12-24-2009, 07:49 AM
The Sarge reeks?
:peek:

The Sarge bathes in the blood of his enemys. This weekend, it's Dolphin steaks. LOL

HJam72
12-24-2009, 07:55 AM
Well....somebody needs 2 be fired. :whip:

...so...let's talk about our starting center and D-Robbing-our-cap-space...

...oh, and anyone named *ris Brown.

thunderkyss
12-24-2009, 08:08 AM
However, I'm getting sick of the phrase "next year". I think those two words should be banned, and instead we all use NxY instead. Kind of like HWNSNBM. Because we all have a heavy bowl full of NxY to eat as there ain't nothing else being served at this table.

I agree. This year started with a lot of "play-offs or bust" talk, & I always thought that was a bit pre-mature. Not that I thought we weren't capable of getting to the play-offs, but there are just so many things going on, that a play-off spot can be won or lost depending on so many variables.

Last year, The Patriots couldn't get in at 11-5. This year, as of know, it is possible to have two 9-7 teams in the AFC play-offs.

Next year, based on what I've seen this year, I think play-offs is reasonable, because I think the division is reasonable.

thunderkyss
12-24-2009, 08:11 AM
I have a question for the "Soapers"...

why pink?

if you're really pissed, and some of you are really, truly, inconsolably pissed, then why not something tougher like Brillo or better yet, Lava
http://adsoftheworld.com/files/images/LAVAbarfight.preview.jpg (http://adsoftheworld.com/media/print/lava_soap_bar_fight?size=_original)

....I'm just sayin'...
:D

You know the pink soaper thing is a spin off of the movie "Fight Club" I don't think anybody gave a thought to the color of the soap.

http://www.commeaucinema.com/images/pressenews/Fight_club.jpg

ObsiWan
12-24-2009, 09:06 AM
Most of the guys you listed were over the hill by the time Fisher took over and never contributed to his teams. Matthews and Bishop being major exceptions.

The constant comparisons of Kubiak to other coaches is lopsided. Why not mention Kubiak with coaches who never found success over 4 seasons, like David Shula or Bruce Coslet? Kubiak has a lot more in common with these guys.

Okay, you're on.... In both cases, we're talking the Cincinnati Bengals. And I'll throw in Coslet's successor, Dick LeBeau.

Shula, came to the 3-13 team left by Sam Wyche. Still had Boomer Esiason @ QB. And quite frankly, I thought he got the job largely on his daddy's name.
Year 1: 5-11
Year 2: 3-11
Year 3: 3-11
Year 4: 7-9
Year 5: 1-6 (was fired @ that point)
19-48; 0.286 pct.

Coslet, followed Shula.
Year 1: 7-2 (looks promising; brought them from 1-6 to finish 8-8)
Year 2: 7-9 (uh oh, slight regression)
Year 3: 3-13 (oh snap! major regression)
Year 4: 4-14
Year 5: 0-3... (see ya!)
21-41; 0.339 pct.

Dick LeBeau took over for Coslet
Year 1: 4-9
Year 2: 6-10 (some improvement)
Year 3: 2-14 (oh snap!!)
Year 4: N/A, replaced by Marvin Lewis
12-33; 0.267 pct.

They sucked @ head coaching. None of these guys produced a .500 year and even they were given a fifth year to fix things - albeit they were on a short leash.

Kubiak, came to a 2-14 team:
Year 1: 6-12
Year 2: 8-8
Year 3: 8-8
Year 4: 7-7 (to date)
29-33; 0.468 pct.

The takeaway, for me, looking at these guys plus Jeff Fisher's and Tom Landry's starts (he didn't even make it to .500 until year 6), is: sometimes it takes that fifth year to see exactly what the coach has built.

Sometimes you miss, sometimes you hit. There are no sure bets. Not even Cowher.
:D

ObsiWan
12-24-2009, 09:46 AM
Most of the guys you listed were over the hill by the time Fisher took over and never contributed to his teams. Matthews and Bishop being major exceptions.


yeah, I'll kinda give you that point.

Ray Childress was at the end of his career when Jeff took over but he still had 6 sacks during Jeff's first year. I wish Capers had left us a perennial pro bowler or two so we could have had something to build on in the trenches.

Not to mention the basis of a decent, no, solid secondary in Dishman, Daryll Lewis, Bishop, and Marcus Robertson. Those two safeties were fixtures for years. He got three good years out of Dishman before replacing him.

Double Barrel
12-24-2009, 12:29 PM
Excuse me?

You're excused. :tiphat:


- Ray Childress (5x pro bowl; 1x 1st team All-Pro)


Great player...in his prime. He was with the Oilers to 1995, then for the Cowboys for 1996.


- Lorenzo White (1x pro bowl)


1994 was his last season with the Oilers, which is the year Fisher took the job.

- Ernest Givens (2x pro bowl; 2x UPI All-Pro, 1x AP All-Pro)


Givins was gone after 1994. He played with the Jags in 1995.

- Haywood Jeffries (3x pro bowl; 1x AP All-Pro)

Jeffires last season with the Oilers was 1995. He played for the Saints to end his career.

- Webster Slaughter (2x pro bowl - just one w/Oilers)

Slaughter was gone after 1994, as well. He went on to play for the Chiefs, Jets, and Chargers.

- Al Smith (MLB) (2x pro bowl; 1x AP All-Pro)


Al Smith - gone in 1996.

- Cris Dishman (1x pro bowl; 1x AP All-Pro)


Dishman gone after 1996.

Bubba McDowell

Bubba McDowell was gone after the 1994 season.

And with all that talent it still took Fisher five years to get over the hump

"All that talent" was washed up for the most part, and he still had to deal with a lame duck season, as well as moving the team to different home stadiums.

You're bending yourself into a pretzel trying to make the comparison with Kubiak and Fisher.

I love AJ to death but to say he's better than that whole team...
Come ON, Man!

Reading comprehension is FUNdamental.

"Kubiak - an offensive minded coach - inherited his BEST OFFENSIVE WEAPON."

Do you think Kubiak would have preferred Bruce Matthews and Blaine Bishop over Andre Johnson for his offense? These are the only two players you mentioned that were still in their prime when Fisher got them over the hump after much adversity.

OBTW, compare that list to the squad Kubiak inherited.

You just threw that B/S out to make me research it didn't you.
and it worked too
:o)

Perhaps you should have conducted a bit deeper research to learn that the overwhelming majority of players inherited by Fisher were either gone and/or over the hill.

Most of the guys you listed were over the hill by the time Fisher took over and never contributed to his teams. Matthews and Bishop being major exceptions.

Exactly. You said in two sentences what I had to counter and research. :thumbup

The constant comparisons of Kubiak to other coaches is lopsided. Why not mention Kubiak with coaches who never found success over 4 seasons, like David Shula or Bruce Coslet? Kubiak has a lot more in common with these guys.

Or Dick Jauron.

infantrycak
12-24-2009, 02:06 PM
Or Dick Jauron.

In Buffalo? Why is that a more appropriate comparison than Fisher? His 4th and last year the team was worse. He also had three losing seasons prior to his 4th season. I guess if we lose the next two games the comparison would be more apt.

Doesn't really matter. I don't think any of the comparisons have any predictive capacity.

ObsiWan
12-24-2009, 03:05 PM
You're excused. :tiphat:
Thank you

"All that talent" was washed up for the most part, and he still had to deal with a lame duck season, as well as moving the team to different home stadiums.

You're bending yourself into a pretzel trying to make the comparison with Kubiak and Fisher.

Reading comprehension is FUNdamental.

"Kubiak - an offensive minded coach - inherited his BEST OFFENSIVE WEAPON."

Do you think Kubiak would have preferred Bruce Matthews and Blaine Bishop over Andre Johnson for his offense? These are the only two players you mentioned that were still in their prime when Fisher got them over the hump after much adversity.

Perhaps you should have conducted a bit deeper research to learn that the overwhelming majority of players inherited by Fisher were either gone and/or over the hill.

Exactly. You said in two sentences what I had to counter and research. :thumbup



I've already conceded your and Lucky's point - partially anyway.
If you had read down one or two more posts, "Mr. Reading comprehension is FUNdamental", you'd have seen that.
:D
note:

yeah, I'll kinda give you that point.

Ray Childress was at the end of his career when Jeff took over but he still had 6 sacks during Jeff's first year. I wish Capers had left us a perennial pro bowler or two so we could have had something to build on in the trenches.

Not to mention the basis of a decent, no, solid secondary in Dishman, Daryll Lewis, Bishop, and Marcus Robertson. Those two safeties were fixtures for years. He got three good years out of Dishman before replacing him.


Yeah, perhaps some of them were on the downhill side of their careers but "washed up"? Naah. Hell, Childress was good for six sacks Fisher's first year. A 32-yr old Ray Childress is still >> Travis Johnson + Anthony Maddox + Anthony Weaver.

And this is the remark in your post that I challenged...

AJ > entire 1994 Oilers team that Fisher inherited

As good as A.J. is - and no doubt he's the best WR on the planet - he's not effective without sommmebody to reliably get the ball to him.

thunderkyss
12-24-2009, 03:21 PM
woooo


saaaaah


wooo saaah

ObsiWan
12-24-2009, 04:24 PM
In Buffalo? Why is that a more appropriate comparison than Fisher? His 4th and last year the team was worse. He also had three losing seasons prior to his 4th season. I guess if we lose the next two games the comparison would be more apt.

Doesn't really matter. I don't think any of the comparisons have any predictive capacity.

truth be told, neither do we.

steelbtexan
12-24-2009, 05:09 PM
yeah that sure would be nice spend it on another #10 overall draft pick (which we won't have this year) then when his contract expires wants 80 mil. seriously, I'll probably have to wait until the combine to see if there is a CB worthy of a 1st rd. grade for Texans who fits their style. Haden is going to be long gone I feel, after him I just don't know I think the Texans would be reaching & we don't want anymore reaching. It's easy to say we need a lock down corner every team needs/wants one so they're expensive & hard to get.



I'm confussed by Adibis regression, since I don't know the particulars I will not speculate suffice to say a 7th rounder beats out a 4th hey it happens, but the Adibi I know is explosive & can cover space alot quicker than Diles.



It's been weak since the franchise inception, it takes both investment & time to develop the rawer talents who otherwise have the make-up they look for. Brown is not a middle of the road LT he is a legitimate NFL starting LT last I knew at best there are only 32 in existance & I would argue some other teams don't have one but not Brown. Caldwell they are being careful to bring up slowly, so not to miss key fundemental changes in his technique they see as required to move forward, just remember everyone has a different timetable, not everyone can come out & be Brian Cushing.



I'm jaded (huge Steve Slaton fan). I really love this guy & hope he returns to form in 2010. Having said that yeah I thought a 3rd/4th a done deal. It's important to keep pecking away before a weakness becomes expoused like it has this season. I would add the priority just went up to a 2nd possibly a 1st given some excellent talent avaialble (Ryan Mathews, Fresno just declared he is coming out early, if he is there in 2nd I would jump on it).



that's hindsight isn't it? I mean nobody is biting, the Texans are the ones who end up signing him & they're at fault? I can almost imagine David in there pleading his case on Pollards behalf & I'm sure Smith had to get the clearnence from Bob McNair himself with rampant rumors of character issues, that's been a turnoff for this organization since the beginning. I would think they should get props for taking a chance on him & his aggressive personality.



your setting sights a little high, but hey that would be cool. Unless you want to burn another first on a DT it is safer to go the experienced route.



With a healthy roster the Texans are above average & I believe with Kubiak their record would reflect that despite the turnovers.



where do I apply? Bobby Beerlover Greir



The reason it worked in practice & not the game is that Chris Brown is a choke, its as simple as that. (I like the Golf analogy where if I could just take my pratice range swing to the course I could be dangerous) It was a brilliant call but a blunder to put the ball (game) in his hands with that play. Your right the coaching staff has to do a better job getting the ball in key situations to their playmakers. Not sure how you simulate practice to compare with actual game situations (maybe keep a tigher schedule, timing plays etc...) but the game plan doesn't transfer enough from practice to Sunday, there is a serious disconnect which has to be addressed.

BL

1. Agreed Apick shouldn't be forced. I think Haden is the only CB that merits a high 1st rd grade and he will probably be gone when the Texans pick. In the 2nd rd Ghee(my favorite),Lindley and Dowling are quality CB's that should be available in the 2nd rd. or Wilson in the 3rd can replace Duntas production at a fraction of the cost. Freeing up FA money to go out and sign Hampton or R.Brown.

2. Agreed Dont know what happened to Adibi either his intincts are poor,lacks intelligence (I didn't see this in college) or he got a case of the big head after his rookie season.

3. Disagee Brown is in the range of 12-20 starting LT's which is in the upper middle of the pack of LT's. Good news is Brown has the talent to improve on this ranking. Because he's new to the position and has a good work ethic.
I hope Kubes stops playing his LT on ST. The OL still needs to be fixed 8 yrs in and counting. This should be anther top priority in the draft and FA. Ihope they sign a veteran OL in FA to help with leadership and an upgrade in talent.

4. Agreed I love Slaton too but he doesn't have the size to be a 300 carry RB. He can still be a feature RB but he needs help. Kubes admitted that it was a mistake not signing Benson. They are paying for this mistake. BTW I was against signing Benson. Shows what I know.

5. I called for signing Pollard after he was cut at the end of preseason. I dont know why they waited 2 weeks into the season to sign him. it shouldn't take that long to do a background check especially with Gibbs as his DB coach in K.C. If that was the reason for the delay in signing the Texans organization is screwed up.

6. The Texans are going to be well under the cap espcially if they dont sign Dunta. They have plenty of room to sign 2 impact FA's my choice is R.Brown and Hampton. Yes I set my sights high, I want a winner. The Texans a 6th in rvenue in the NFL and have enough cap space to make it happen. The fans have done their part now it's time for McNair and Co. to step up the plate.
If you dont set your sights hgh medocrity will be the order of the day. Like the last 3 yrs.

7. It's unrealistic to ask a team to remin healthy for an entire season. Planning for the unexpected should be part of the job. Smithiak have failed in this respect. IMO

8. You and many others on this MB could do a better job identifying talent than Greir.

9. I wouldn't let C.Brown take out my trash. (He'd probably fumble it and make a mess that he would leave for me to clean up) Much less let him be a part of a play that had to be sucessful or miss the playoffs. That's on Kubes.

10. Part of the failure this year has been Kubes undying faith in the Browns. (Chris and Kris) If Kubes loses his job he can look at those two decisions as the main reason for his unemployment.

11. I want a new HC only if they can find somebody better. (Dont think McNair is going to pay for a top tier coach like Cowher/Gruden.(They wont be walking through the door at Reliant anytime soon. IMO) If this is the case they might as well let Kubes coach next year.