PDA

View Full Version : Can we talk some football?


JB
12-11-2009, 05:17 PM
It is now Friday evening and I am ready to move on from all the bashing and negativity. The Seahawks are coming to town this week.
They have identical w/l as us, plus they are coming in off two straight wins ( ok they were over STL and SF). They also put a 41-0 beatdown on Jax earlier this year. They are pretty healthy for the first time in a while.

This could be a very tough game for the home team and not a cakewalk at all.

Anyone interested in talking football this week?

disaacks3
12-11-2009, 05:27 PM
It is now Friday evening and I am ready to move on from all the bashing and negativity. The Seahawks are coming to town this week.
They have identical w/l as us, plus they are coming in off two straight wins ( ok they were over STL and SF). They also put a 41-0 beatdown on Jax earlier this year. They are pretty healthy for the first time in a while.

This could be a very tough game for the home team and not a cakewalk at all.

Anyone interested in talking football this week? Boy, those bolded parts really got me all fired up with enthusiasm! :sarcasm: :bubbles:

Texan_Bill
12-11-2009, 05:29 PM
Seattle is sitting on the same record we are. :eek: That's a scary proposition. What happened to this being a "gimme" game several weeks ago?

J_R
12-11-2009, 05:30 PM
Hard for some to get fired up about meaningless football(again). Not myself but..

Can you blame them?

JB
12-11-2009, 05:32 PM
Seattle is sitting on the same record we are. :eek: That's a scary proposition. What happened to this being a "gimme" game several weeks ago?

Exactly! A lot of people have been talking that these next two games are "gimme" games, but I just do not see it. Our team is struggling with its confidence right now and really need to come out of the gate strong Sunday. Do you think they can? Or will?

JB
12-11-2009, 05:33 PM
Hard for some to get fired up about meaningless football(again). Not myself but..

Can you blame them?

Not asking anyone to get fired up; just talking instead of bashing.

Texan_Bill
12-11-2009, 05:34 PM
Exactly! A lot of people have been talking that these next two games are "gimme" games, but I just do not see it. Our team is struggling with its confidence right now and really need to come out of the gate strong Sunday. Do you think they can? Or will?

I believe they "will" this week. I know the team hears the rumbling around town. I'm pretty sure most don't want to hear early boos Sunday. That said, I'm not overly confident either.

LonerATO
12-11-2009, 05:34 PM
Didnt Jacksonville travel to Seattle for that game? I wonder if that whole west coast teams travel east?

DexmanC
12-11-2009, 05:36 PM
The players did resume practice slow and sloppy on Tuesday. The Texans'
confidence is SHOT. Reliant may be half full, and if they start to stink it
up, turn out the lights.

J_R
12-11-2009, 05:41 PM
Not asking anyone to get fired up; just talking instead of bashing.

Talk of meaningless football? I suppose, the season isnt over.

Texan_Bill
12-11-2009, 05:45 PM
Talk of meaningless football? I suppose, the season isnt over.

This is Texas, there's no such thing as meaningless football!! :polevault:

J_R
12-11-2009, 05:47 PM
This is Texas, there's no such thing as meaningless football!! :polevault:

Hah you're right. It's a uphill fight to get back to 8-8.

disaacks3
12-11-2009, 05:52 PM
This is Texas, there's no such thing as meaningless football!! :polevault: Unless there's a "better offer" waiting somewhere...right Bill? :thinking:

LonerATO
12-11-2009, 05:53 PM
The players did resume practice slow and sloppy on Tuesday. The Texans'
confidence is SHOT. Reliant may be half full, and if they start to stink it
up, turn out the lights.

You should work for the Chronicle

Texan_Bill
12-11-2009, 05:56 PM
Unless there's a "better offer" waiting somewhere...right Bill? :thinking:

"Those" places don't open until four on Sundays. I'm good to go.

DexmanC
12-11-2009, 05:59 PM
The players did resume practice slow and sloppy on Tuesday. The Texans'
confidence is SHOT. Reliant may be half full, and if they start to stink it
up, turn out the lights.

You should work for the Chronicle

Those Texans bootlickers would kick me out in a week. :-)

TEXANS84
12-11-2009, 06:01 PM
Cushing > Curry

...and less expensive.

Silver Oak
12-11-2009, 06:42 PM
it's asking alot, but the o-line better step up and protect Schaub and his injured shoulder. they know it, we know it, and you can bet the Seattle rushers know it too.

Thorn
12-11-2009, 07:07 PM
Screw the negativism. GO TEXANS!! :texan:

Double Barrel
12-11-2009, 07:14 PM
I hate to say it, but Schaub is one good hit away from seeing Grossman get extensive action. I have absolutely no confidence in this team getting a win with that joker at QB.

I'd like to see our defense step up and make some plays. People like to bash Capers, but he did put together a good D for a couple of seasons. Remember that Steelers game when the offense could only muster 47 total yards but we won anyway? We have yet to see a Texans defense like that, even though it could be argued that we have more talent now.

I haven't been following the Seahawks much, so I don't know what to expect. If we come out and give up a big hit on our QB for the first play again, I might just go rake some leaves and listen to Vandendork call the game on the radio.

Runner
12-11-2009, 07:29 PM
I posted on another thread that I thought a large part of Seattle's problems this season were due to very poor play by the oline. This is an opportunity for the questionable Houston dline to make some noise. Will they take advantage of it?

texanfan2002114
12-11-2009, 10:55 PM
I hate to say it, but Schaub is one good hit away from seeing Grossman get extensive action. I have absolutely no confidence in this team getting a win with that joker at QB.

I'd like to see our defense step up and make some plays. People like to bash Capers, but he did put together a good D for a couple of seasons. Remember that Steelers game when the offense could only muster 47 total yards but we won anyway? We have yet to see a Texans defense like that, even though it could be argued that we have more talent now.

I haven't been following the Seahawks much, so I don't know what to expect. If we come out and give up a big hit on our QB for the first play again, I might just go rake some leaves and listen to Vandendork call the game on the radio.

I love how a QB that has over 3400 yards passing 22 TD 12 Int a QB rating of 97.2 and completion percentage of 68% is called a joker. He has NOOOOOO running game. Lost BOTH of his starting guards, starting rb and starting PRO BOWL tight end but he is the joker. Oh yea his right tackle whiffed on a block and totally missed the defensive end which caused the backside sack and his dislocated shoulder, but he is the joker.

Schaub won me over last Sunday when he came out of the locker room after they poped his shoulder back into place. He proved to me right then and there that he wants to win. He is not here just for a paycheck. And before anybody says he threw an interception in the game against the Jags, I want people to think who he threw it to. He threw that ball in the middle of the field to David Anderson, which went off his HANDS and then into the DB or LB hands. Just think if his Pro Bowl tight end would have been there! We've all seen OD make tons of catches over the middle and get the snot knocked out of him to hold onto the ball. Schaub isn't the problem here and he sure isn't a joker.

Let's go Texans and win the last 4!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:texflag:

Second Honeymoon
12-11-2009, 11:08 PM
Seattle is sitting on the same record we are. :eek: That's a scary proposition. What happened to this being a "gimme" game several weeks ago?

Divisional failure Kubiak happened

Houston_Fanatic
12-11-2009, 11:42 PM
I love how a QB that has over 3400 yards passing 22 TD 12 Int a QB rating of 97.2 and completion percentage of 68% is called a joker. He has NOOOOOO running game. Lost BOTH of his starting guards, starting rb and starting PRO BOWL tight end but he is the joker. Oh yea his right tackle whiffed on a block and totally missed the defensive end which caused the backside sack and his dislocated shoulder, but he is the joker.

Schaub won me over last Sunday when he came out of the locker room after they poped his shoulder back into place. He proved to me right then and there that he wants to win. He is not here just for a paycheck. And before anybody says he threw an interception in the game against the Jags, I want people to think who he threw it to. He threw that ball in the middle of the field to David Anderson, which went off his HANDS and then into the DB or LB hands. Just think if his Pro Bowl tight end would have been there! We've all seen OD make tons of catches over the middle and get the snot knocked out of him to hold onto the ball. Schaub isn't the problem here and he sure isn't a joker.

Let's go Texans and win the last 4!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:texflag:

He was talking about Grossman being the joker. :clown:

Lucky
12-12-2009, 12:43 AM
Exactly! A lot of people have been talking that these next two games are "gimme" games, but I just do not see it.
They are considered "gimme" games because of how the Texans have fared in the past versus losing teams. Kubiak's Texans are 17-6 versus sub .500 clubs over the past 4 seasons. They beat bad football teams. It's when they meet decent-to-good teams where they run into trouble (10-27 against .500 or better teams).

I will be shocked if the Texans aren't victorious on Sunday. Virtually eliminated from playoff contention and facing a weak team? It's the lock of the week.

imatexan
12-12-2009, 04:30 AM
Finally!

This is the kind of thread that I have been waiting for.

Sunday is football time at Reliant and I can't wait to beat the Seahawks!

They are not in the AFC South so I see a pretty easy win for the Texans, but of course our team could never get an easy win so lets see how this thing plays out!

mussop
12-12-2009, 04:50 AM
They are considered "gimme" games because of how the Texans have fared in the past versus losing teams. Kubiak's Texans are 17-6 versus sub .500 clubs over the past 4 seasons. They beat bad football teams. It's when they meet decent-to-good teams where they run into trouble (10-27 against .500 or better teams).

I will be shocked if the Texans aren't victorious on Sunday. Virtually eliminated from playoff contention and facing a weak team? It's the lock of the week.


Kubiak's Texans are 17-6 versus sub .500 clubs over the past 4 seasons. Now thats what I call good coaching.

10-27 against .500 or better teams. Its the players fault. They need to step up.

Signed Kubiaks cronies.

Norg
12-12-2009, 12:10 PM
I dont know much about the seahawks will TJ be playing


are they still the same spread them out and throw the ball down field type of team everytime i think of the seahawks i think there manily a passing team Most of the time and they lack a running game

iam glad we are playing them at home there 12th man can be brutal seattle loves there hawks but anwayz the pressure is off us texans its dec this is ually when the texans are at there best when there playing for nothing

dc_txtech
12-12-2009, 01:05 PM
I dont know much about the seahawks will TJ be playing


are they still the same spread them out and throw the ball down field type of team everytime i think of the seahawks i think there manily a passing team Most of the time and they lack a running game

iam glad we are playing them at home there 12th man can be brutal seattle loves there hawks but anwayz the pressure is off us texans its dec this is ually when the texans are at there best when there playing for nothing

Watch out for their RB Justin Forsett. He has gone for 5 TD in his last 4 games while cranking out over 100 yards twice and adding 16 catches for 131 yards.

I think he injured his quad before last weeks game though. Not sure what his status will be for the game tomorrow.

Vinny
12-12-2009, 01:08 PM
Seattle is sitting on the same record we are. :eek: That's a scary proposition. What happened to this being a "gimme" game several weeks ago?
can teams that have never had a winning record ever have a "gimmie" game?

BSofA04
12-12-2009, 02:53 PM
How about we lay the freaking BEATDOWN on the Seahawks after embarassing us in 2005 on Saturday Night Football in Seattle the last (and only) time we met. Sure, the only current Texan playing who was at that game is Kris Brown, but I remember us getting blow out early and without any fight. I like us to get some revenge for that crap.

As a matter of fact, that whole season against the AFC West was embarassing. The Fitzpatrick comeback with the Rams, the Reggie Bush Bowl "miss" (wink, wink) against the 49ers...time for some payback!!!!

Scooter
12-12-2009, 03:25 PM
i'm fairly indifferent about seattle, and am certain we're out of any playoff conversation ... but nothing would please me more than dropping 50 on these guys. we are absolutely due for a complete whooping of another team. we're out of must wins, i want to see the texans take that out on someone - and that someone should be the seahawks.

False Start
12-12-2009, 04:03 PM
i'm fairly indifferent about seattle, and am certain we're out of any playoff conversation ... but nothing would please me more than dropping 50 on these guys. we are absolutely due for a complete whooping of another team. we're out of must wins, i want to see the texans take that out on someone - and that someone should be the seahawks.

Yes, it would be nice to see us put a whoopin on the Fleahawks. I'll just hold off on getting too optimistic though. :headhurts: :fans:

treduke
12-12-2009, 04:20 PM
they say winning is the best deodorant and this team reeks!
let's go texans beat the sea chickens:texflag:

JB
12-12-2009, 06:45 PM
How about we lay the freaking BEATDOWN on the Seahawks after embarassing us in 2005 on Saturday Night Football in Seattle the last (and only) time we met. Sure, the only current Texan playing who was at that game is Kris Brown, but I remember us getting blow out early and without any fight. I like us to get some revenge for that crap.

As a matter of fact, that whole season against the AFC West was embarassing. The Fitzpatrick comeback with the Rams, the Reggie Bush Bowl "miss" (wink, wink) against the 49ers...time for some payback!!!!


was'nt #80 & #23 there in '05?

thunderkyss
12-12-2009, 09:40 PM
Kubiak's Texans are 17-6 versus sub .500 clubs over the past 4 seasons. Now thats what I call good coaching.

10-27 against .500 or better teams. Its the players fault. They need to step up.

Signed Kubiaks cronies.

IMHO, that's a sign of a bad team.

A sign of a bad coach, would be if those stats remain unchanged over the course of his tenure.

What was his record against winning teams each year? 2006, 2007, 2008, & 2009.

That would be a good against Kubiak argument. I'm sure his 2009 record is bad. I think our only win against a winning club is Cincinnatti. 2 losses to the Jags, 2 losses to the Colts, & 1 loss to the Cardinals.

Norg
12-13-2009, 01:17 AM
re live the 05 Sunday night prime time Beat down of teh texans LOL

http://www.nfl.com/videos/houston-texans/09000d5d8003b694/Seahawks-42-Texans-10


man i forgot in 05 we started of 0-6 just like tenn LOL



then go on to 2-14 :P

Lucky
12-13-2009, 01:33 AM
A sign of a bad coach, would be if those stats remain unchanged over the course of his tenure.

What was his record against winning teams each year? 2006, 2007, 2008, & 2009.
The Texans record versus .500 or better opponents

2006: 3-8
2007: 3-7
2008: 3-6
2009: 1-6

So, this convinces you that Kubiak is a bad coach?

mussop
12-13-2009, 01:44 AM
The Texans record versus .500 or better opponents

2006: 3-8
2007: 3-7
2008: 3-6
2009: 1-6

So, this convinces you that Kubiak is a bad coach?

It does me! Not that I needed anymore convincing. :whip:

dalemurphy
12-13-2009, 02:01 AM
The Texans record versus .500 or better opponents

2006: 3-8
2007: 3-7
2008: 3-6
2009: 1-6

So, this convinces you that Kubiak is a bad coach?

If Kubiak doesnt' get credit for his record against bad teams but is responsible for the bad record against good teams, aren't you acknowledging that Rick Smith has done a hell of a job with personnel? If so, then we'd better be careful about how we handle the off-season. Because, of course, you don't want a GM that has packed this squad with talent to go anywhere.


There are maybe one dozen head coaches in the NFL that I'd rather have right now. But, when you factor in transition and the fact that a coaching change will likely bring a GM change, that number gets smaller. And, when you talk about bringing in a coach that has been away from coaching for a few years, I get very nervous about his ability to assemble a quality staff for the 2010 season.

Lucky
12-13-2009, 02:20 AM
If Kubiak doesnt' get credit for his record against bad teams...
Who said that? The Texans under Kubiak have thumped weak teams. Kubiak has raised the level of play in Houston from bottom of the barrel to middling mediocre. In only 4 years time. Actually, Kubiak had the Texans at mediocre in year 2. And they've been stuck there ever since.

Later today, the Texans will thump a weak Seattle team. And some fans will see it as a harbinger of a playoff berth. If not now, certainly in 2010. It's all too predictable. Waiting for Kubiak to produce a winning season is akin to hiding in a pumpkin patch, looking for the Great Pumpkin to appear. Somebody make me a Gary Pumpkin avatar!

dalemurphy
12-13-2009, 02:47 AM
Who said that? The Texans under Kubiak have thumped weak teams. Kubiak has raised the level of play in Houston from bottom of the barrel to middling mediocre. In only 4 years time. Actually, Kubiak had the Texans at mediocre in year 2. And they've been stuck there ever since.

Later today, the Texans will thump a weak Seattle team. And some fans will see it as a harbinger of a playoff berth. If not now, certainly in 2010. It's all too predictable. Waiting for Kubiak to produce a winning season is akin to hiding in a pumpkin patch, looking for the Great Pumpkin to appear. Somebody make me a Gary Pumpkin avatar!

Football outsiders believe that the best predictor for good teams is their ability to beat up the bad teams.

I still don't understand how fans can blame Kubiak for the Texans only winning 8 games in '07. Do we really need to go through that roster? I'd love to see your list of coaches that would won more games with an inexperienced QB and/or Sage, Ron Dayne, Ephraim Salaam, Andre Davis as the #1 WR, Faggins and V. Hutchins starting at CB with CCBRown at safety... Morlon Greenwood at WLB and a DL of: TJohnson, AWeaver, MWilliams, and rookie Amobi Okoye.

You guys need to drop the crying about 4 years and realize that this is the first year he has underachieved, based on the roster, as a head coach.

Goldensilence
12-13-2009, 02:56 AM
The Texans record versus .500 or better opponents

2006: 3-8
2007: 3-7
2008: 3-6
2009: 1-6

So, this convinces you that Kubiak is a bad coach?

No. That's on the players.

Signed,

Bob McNair

If Kubiak doesnt' get credit for his record against bad teams but is responsible for the bad record against good teams, aren't you acknowledging that Rick Smith has done a hell of a job with personnel? If so, then we'd better be careful about how we handle the off-season. Because, of course, you don't want a GM that has packed this squad with talent to go anywhere.


There are maybe one dozen head coaches in the NFL that I'd rather have right now. But, when you factor in transition and the fact that a coaching change will likely bring a GM change, that number gets smaller. And, when you talk about bringing in a coach that has been away from coaching for a few years, I get very nervous about his ability to assemble a quality staff for the 2010 season.

I think hell of a job goes too far.I think Rick and Gary have done a decent job on turning the roster into a more competitive one then Capers and Casserly produced.

Again more speculation that if we lose Gary we lose the indomitable Rick Smith. That's to follow up the well if we lose Gary then well we have to implode the roster too argument.

I think good coaches do what Gary Kubiak has been unwilling to do, hire an experienced, talented coaching staff. Under Gary have we even ever had an assistant even courted by another team for a coordinator position?

To be honest Rick's contract runs through 2012 I think, and don't see Bob making a change at both spots. I think Rick has done alright but, when you follow up the job Casserly did, mediocre becomes " A hell of a job".

As for the game itself.... statistically they match up well. Seattle has won two in a row but one of those is the Rams and last week won on a last second field goal. However, they gave up 310 yards passing to Alex Smith. Could be a good day for the passing game.

They have gotten decent pressure on the QB, and DT Brandon Mebane could cause havoc on the interior of the OL. Texans defense should have an opportunity to make plays considering the Seahawks have been struggling this year. Matt H. has a sore shoulder, but the prospect of putting Wallace in makes them more mobile... and well yeah I don't want to see another mobile QB against this defense.

Can Houston win? Sure, but I wouldn't look into it much if they do.

Runner
12-13-2009, 02:59 AM
Football outsiders believe that the best predictor for good teams is their ability to beat up the bad teams.


We should petition the league to change to a BCS type system based on DVOA next year.

Lucky
12-13-2009, 03:10 AM
Football outsiders believe that the best predictor for good teams is their ability to beat up the bad teams.
What does the Almighty Football Outsiders have to say about mediocre teams that get thumped by good teams. Like the Texans get thumped by good teams in 27 of 37 games. Seriously, I'm gonna puke the next time someone trots out Football Outsiders. The same all-knowing site that in the preseason had the Saints as the 20th best team in the NFL, and the Rams at number 12. If you "throw up" enough stats, some of them will stick to the wall.

I think the current rational used by the Kubiak fan club is, "Football Outsiders thought the Texans would suck in 2009. So why get upset with Gary Kubiak when they sucked in 2009?". Well, because some of us feel that if he can't get it done in 4 years, why does anyone think he will get it done in 5? Progress has stopped. Ceased. This team is stagnant. It's time to move on.

Lucky
12-13-2009, 09:03 PM
I will be shocked if the Texans aren't victorious on Sunday. Virtually eliminated from playoff contention and facing a weak team? It's the lock of the week.


Later today, the Texans will thump a weak Seattle team.
I hope my fellow Texans fans cashed in on this gimme.

thunderkyss
12-13-2009, 09:17 PM
I think good coaches do what Gary Kubiak has been unwilling to do, hire an experienced, talented coaching staff. Under Gary have we even ever had an assistant even courted by another team for a coordinator position?


Even with the success we've had on both sides of the ball, you've got issues with our Offensive & Deffensive Coordinators?

I can understand if everyone was still bitching about Kubiak keeping Richard Smith for so long... without a doubt a decision Kubiak should get blasted over.

But not bringing in Greg Williams for a look-see? after the way this defense has played? that talk should have died by now.

Norg
12-13-2009, 11:00 PM
we had alot of close games this week iam talking about 1 play Away

The Goline fumble vs jags

THe go line stand vs Arozina

The missed field goal at indy

THe missed field goal vs Tenn


:(

Double Barrel
12-14-2009, 06:31 PM
I love how a QB that has over 3400 yards passing 22 TD 12 Int a QB rating of 97.2 and completion percentage of 68% is called a joker. He has NOOOOOO running game. Lost BOTH of his starting guards, starting rb and starting PRO BOWL tight end but he is the joker. Oh yea his right tackle whiffed on a block and totally missed the defensive end which caused the backside sack and his dislocated shoulder, but he is the joker.


I was talking about Grossman. :loser

dalemurphy
12-14-2009, 06:47 PM
What does the Almighty Football Outsiders have to say about mediocre teams that get thumped by good teams. Like the Texans get thumped by good teams in 27 of 37 games. Seriously, I'm gonna puke the next time someone trots out Football Outsiders. The same all-knowing site that in the preseason had the Saints as the 20th best team in the NFL, and the Rams at number 12. If you "throw up" enough stats, some of them will stick to the wall.

I think the current rational used by the Kubiak fan club is, "Football Outsiders thought the Texans would suck in 2009. So why get upset with Gary Kubiak when they sucked in 2009?". Well, because some of us feel that if he can't get it done in 4 years, why does anyone think he will get it done in 5? Progress has stopped. Ceased. This team is stagnant. It's time to move on.

I don't really subscribe to the DVOA measurement. I think it is interesting and probably has some merit. The reason why I brought it up was beacuse you guys were asking for "empirical evidence to support Kubiak" in the thread titled: Kubiak Supporters... Why Should He Stay?.

Though the record is, I just don't see this team as stagnant. I just feel there are more hurdles in the way to a winning season if we make a head coach change than if we don't. I'll be excited and optimistic about 2010 regardless of whether Kubiak is here or not because of my belief that we have a young and very talented roster in place.

Goldensilence
12-14-2009, 06:49 PM
Even with the success we've had on both sides of the ball, you've got issues with our Offensive & Deffensive Coordinators?

I can understand if everyone was still bitching about Kubiak keeping Richard Smith for so long... without a doubt a decision Kubiak should get blasted over.

But not bringing in Greg Williams for a look-see? after the way this defense has played? that talk should have died by now.

I think the defense has played well enough, but that's nothing new. Even under Dick smith the defenses got better as the year wore on. I guess it's really improved because we've pushed into the top 20 finally!

I think "issues" isn't what I was looking at more of asking about what kind of staff Kubiak has assembled and how good are they really and why is one prominent legend not working out here?

We are the first team that Alex Gibbs has not been able to turn into a top ten rushing team consistently.

Our interior OL isn't really that good and we have terrible depth to boot.

Is Shanahan really an offensive coordinator or Kubiak's puppet?

My other point is during the off-season coaching carousel have any of our coordinators or postion coaches even mentioned for prominent positions?

Bottom line if Gary Kubiak was fired today do you feel confident in picking an interim coach? Would Kyle be in line for being an OC for anyone else but his dad? Would Frank Bush be a legit candidate for DC elsewhere? Holland (whom I do think has done a good job with the Lbers)? David Gibbs? Kollar? any of the OL coaches?

dalemurphy
12-14-2009, 06:49 PM
I hope my fellow Texans fans cashed in on this gimme.

I tried! Hervoyel made a proclaimed that he knew the Texans were going to lose vs. Seattle. I tried to bait him into a bet, but he refused.

DexmanC
12-14-2009, 06:55 PM
Football outsiders believe that the best predictor for good teams is their ability to beat up the bad teams.

I still don't understand how fans can blame Kubiak for the Texans only winning 8 games in '07. Do we really need to go through that roster? I'd love to see your list of coaches that would won more games with an inexperienced QB and/or Sage, Ron Dayne, Ephraim Salaam, Andre Davis as the #1 WR, Faggins and V. Hutchins starting at CB with CCBRown at safety... Morlon Greenwood at WLB and a DL of: TJohnson, AWeaver, MWilliams, and rookie Amobi Okoye.

You guys need to drop the crying about 4 years and realize that this is the first year he has underachieved, based on the roster, as a head coach.

So, how do you explain the marked improvement at dang near EVERY one
of those positions, and only 8 wins or less THIS year? +1 - 1 = 0
That means ZERO improvement. How do you explain the upgrades in
talent at those spots, yet the lack of detail they've displayed in the
second halves of almost every game, INCLUDING against the Seahawks.

Vinny
12-14-2009, 07:06 PM
Football outsiders believe that the best predictor for good teams is their ability to beat up the bad teams. What does the Almighty Football Outsiders have to say about mediocre teams that get thumped by good teams. Like the Texans get thumped by good teams in 27 of 37 games. Seriously, I'm gonna puke the next time someone trots out Football Outsiders. The same all-knowing site that in the preseason had the Saints as the 20th best team in the NFL, and the Rams at number 12. If you "throw up" enough stats, some of them will stick to the wall.

I think the current rational used by the Kubiak fan club is, "Football Outsiders thought the Texans would suck in 2009. So why get upset with Gary Kubiak when they sucked in 2009?". Well, because some of us feel that if he can't get it done in 4 years, why does anyone think he will get it done in 5? Progress has stopped. Ceased. This team is stagnant. It's time to move on. Watch Bill Belichick's presser and you'd get a kick out of it.

Was it a bad effort or just a bad game? Belichick chooses to believe the latter.

"Everybody can't have high stats every week," he told the Web site. "It's impossible. We can always pick out somebody and say, 'What happened to them?'"

The coach made it clear that nobody will ever catch him evaluating his players based on their single-game stats.

"Stats are for losers," Belichick said. "The final score is for winners."

And Belichick has one more thing to say to the Panthers:

"That's a lot of conversation coming from a team that just lost another game."

http://www.nesn.com/2009/12/bill-belichick-stats-are-for-losers.html

Double Barrel
12-14-2009, 07:49 PM
"Stats are for losers," Belichick said. "The final score is for winners."

That is sig-worthy.

axman40
12-14-2009, 07:57 PM
I did not know Joan Rivers reads Texans Talk!
:peek: