PDA

View Full Version : Recurrence of Hard Question to swallow.......


CloakNNNdagger
01-25-2010, 07:23 PM
..........................but could it be true? Are Texans fans just destined to justify, explain away, and accept mediocrity?

I came across this HOUSTON PRESS piece. As a Texans fan, it was tough to read. Ugly yes. But is it far from an ugly truth? Decide for yourself.


Texans Could Learn Something From The Saints
Jan. 25 2010 @ 8:01AM

​When the Houston Oilers split for Nashville, I found myself searching for a NFL team to adopt. As a native Houstonian, there was just no way that I could make myself a Dallas Cowboys fan. Especially if I wanted to keep my self-respect.

I adopted the New Orleans Saints. The team had a lot of similarities to the Oilers. Both had never really accomplished anything in their existence. They had had some really talented players come through and waste their careers on bad teams. And at the least the Saints didn't have the history of the Oilers when it came about to choking away big playoff leads.

So needless to say, I'm happy about the Saints winning yesterday -- though not quite as happy as the people of New Orleans are. But I did wager some money in Vegas on the Saints back before the season, and I picked them to win the Super Bowl, so let's just say I'm hoping the Saints can handle the Colts in two weeks.

I've got another reason for pulling for the Saints. After all, just several years ago, the Saints were a team like the Houston Texans. They were awful, coming off of 3-13 season in which they were overturning the entire roster while bringing in a new coach and a new quarterback. This was the same off season when the Texans were making massive changes under the guidance of brand new head coach Gary Kubiak

But while the Texans have continued to flail around in mediocrity, the Saints are playing for the title.
But at least the Texans have a bunch of players heading to the Pro Bowl next week. I don't really see where that's something worth being pleased about. Then again, I'm not a PR flack for the Texans.

And who knows, maybe next season, while the Texans are still unable to defeat the teams in the AFC South and thus miss the playoffs, they can again brag about the number of players in the Pro Bowl. I'm sure, however, if you ask the Saints fans, they'll take a Super Bowl over a Pro Bowl any day.

And let's hear it for the Saints. They didn't accept losing. They weren't happy with mediocrity -- unlike the people running for, or cheering for, the Texans. They've put together a true high-powered offense that does more than just put up big stat numbers. The Saints can actually score points on good defenses and within the red zone. The defense is also one of the better ones in the NFL; it is run by Gregg Williams, a former head coach who is known for his aggressive defenses -- he never worked for the Denver Broncos, However, and he is a known and proven commodity, which is undoubtedly the reason he could have never worked for the Texans or Gary Kubiak.

I'm thrilled for the Saints, and their fans. I hope the Texans fans will take a good look at the Saints. There's no reason the Texans couldn't be in the position the Saints are in right now. These two teams were at the same point four years ago. But the Saints chose to win. The Texans chose mediocrity. And there's nothing to indicate that that situation is going to be changing anytime soon.

dtran04
01-25-2010, 07:30 PM
Funny that they chose a franchise that took 20 years before a winning season and over 40 to reach a Super Bowl. If Bob McNair chooses to be like the Saints, we are screwed.

I love how the Texans "chose" to be mediocre. I guess it's that easy. Next year, they will "choose" to be winners. Problem solved. Gee why didn't they think of that? :)

Scooter
01-25-2010, 07:39 PM
lol that's just silly. :truck:

ATXtexanfan
01-25-2010, 07:50 PM
So what he's saying is in two weeks the saints will know how we feel twice a year?

Grams
01-25-2010, 07:53 PM
Sounds like it was written by one of the posters on this board.

m5kwatts
01-25-2010, 07:54 PM
Didn't the Texans beat the Saints last year?

Why didn't the genius Saints "choose" to win that game?

Furthermore why did they wait until 2010 to "choose" to not be mediocre?

And can I "choose" the grade on my research paper I have to turn in tomorrow?

DexmanC
01-25-2010, 09:34 PM
Didn't the Texans beat the Saints last year?

Why didn't the genius Saints "choose" to win that game?

Furthermore why did they wait until 2010 to "choose" to not be mediocre?

And can I "choose" the grade on my research paper I have to turn in tomorrow?

Well, the Saint's DID make 2 NFC Championship games, winning one of them.
They changed 37 out of 51 players win the new coach came in.
Sean Payton's short coaching career blows away Gary Kubiak's.

I believe that was the OP's point.

m5kwatts
01-25-2010, 09:47 PM
Well, the Saint's DID make 2 NFC Championship games, winning one of them.
They changed 37 out of 51 players win the new coach came in.
Sean Payton's short coaching career blows away Gary Kubiak's.

I believe that was the OP's point.

I think we all get that but for whatever idiotic reason the article seems to imply that NFL teams can control their own destiny by "choosing" to win or lose, as exemplified by one of the last lines of the article.

But the Saints chose to win. The Texans chose mediocrity.

Although you'd make a better editor than the one this dope has.

Joe Texan
01-25-2010, 09:56 PM
More Chron BS the paper is begging to fail

Texan_Bill
01-25-2010, 10:22 PM
[QAUOTE=Joe Texan;1355358]More Chron BS the paper is begging to fail [/QUOTE]

Joe, I have no opipion.. I'm still trying to heal that wound over my eye (from AC/DC).... It still bleeds, believe it or not...

Wolf
01-25-2010, 10:22 PM
I don't know the contract details, but seems the saints get more bang for the buck on their FA acquisitions compared to the Texans
:rake:

keyser
01-25-2010, 10:35 PM
And who knows, maybe next season, while the Texans are still unable to defeat the teams in the AFC South and thus miss the playoffs, they can again brag about the number of players in the Pro Bowl. I'm sure, however, if you ask the Saints fans, they'll take a Super Bowl over a Pro Bowl any day.


Here's another stupid quote from the article. You can talk about the Texans being "unable to defeat the teams in the AFC South", but last time the Saints played the AFC South (2007) they were 1-3. Meanwhile, the Texans were 3-1 against the NFC South. I'll agree that the Texans haven't had the success the Saints have had this year, but let's not pretend that playing in the NFC South is as tough as playing in the AFC South. I'll wait until the Saints manage to beat just one team from the NFC South this year (they'll have a chance in a couple of weeks) before I am convinced that they've made all the right choices, while the Texans made foolish ones.

Norg
01-25-2010, 10:46 PM
Pff yeah right SOme saints fan wore bags over there heads with the word Aints on it ... to me thats accepting mediocrity thats telling me and the whole world that seen it "Yeah our teams sucks and even we know it "

not me when our texans went 2-14 i wore my texans hat proudly U win some u lose some thats apart of the game even if we are 16-0 one season iam still going to point out the flaws in our team becasue well i just love the texans to much not 2

thunderkyss
01-25-2010, 11:10 PM
..........................

I'm thrilled for the Saints, and their fans. I hope the Texans fans will take a good look at the Saints. There's no reason the Texans couldn't be in the position the Saints are in right now. These two teams were at the same point four years ago. But the Saints chose to win. The Texans chose mediocrity. And there's nothing to indicate that that situation is going to be changing anytime soon.

I don't know if this guy really believe we as fans can do anything about what happened or what will happen. Whether I applaud Mediocrity or not has nothing to do with Kubiak & his future in Houston. I'm just a squirrel Earl.

Did the fans really have anything to do with The Saints getting Sean Peyton? I mean Benson's been looking for a coach longer than McNair has. I can think of 3 coaches in my lifetime. Mora, Hasslett, Payton.

I'm not going to take anything away from Sean Payton, I think he's a great young coach. I'm not going to belittle any of the wins he got. But I will say, I don't know that GK would have done much worse if any, had he gone to New Orleans, & I seriously doubt Payton would have done much better than Kubiak had he come to Houston.

I think they have more in common than not. The progress of the teams are pretty close as well, other than the wins..... the only thing that count.

But as good as Payton is, and as many wins as he got for that franchise, if you look deeper, things get kind of screwy.

I've got to say they hit more times than not in FA than Kubiak has. Not one of their LBs were drafted by the Saints. Sedric Ellis is the only first round pick they've made since 2006 that starts on that team.

Jahri Evans looks good. & they may have drafted him thinking he will start.

But Marques Colston? I know Payton didn't think Colston was going to be his go to receiver when they drafted him. Surely they expected Meechum to be starting by now. Surely Mechum should be further along than Jacoby Jones. Surely Reggie Bush was supposed to be their work horse. I love Brees, don't get me wrong, but C'mon... He got lucky there as well.

He's done a great job making the most of his talent.

Again, not trying to make the Saints & their acheivements look smaller than they are. Payton has done an amazing job there.

GP
01-25-2010, 11:21 PM
Drew Brees is Matt Schaub, but with mobility and zip.

He's to the Saints what Manning is to the Colts. He makes his team very fluid.

And, they found a way to turn their defense around. I don't think Manning can handle the Saints defense. They got to Favre and they blasted him. I don't see the Colts defense being able to stop the weapons Brees has at his disposal.

I'm calling it now: Saints win, and it won't be the neck-and-neck game everyone thinks it will be.

And I hope it creates one more step to the Colts eventual decline. I've had enough of that team dominating our division. This crap can't go on forever, or I'm going to become a Bills fan if it does. :devilpig:

houstonspartan
01-26-2010, 12:46 AM
I didn't learn until this morning that this was the SECOND Championship Game they've been to in the last four years.

So, Sean Payton was hired four years ago, and have taken them to two championship games and the Super Bowl.

That is astonishing. Not only has Peyton earned a contract extension, but he's earned a loooong, lucrative, healthy contract extension.

houstonspartan
01-26-2010, 12:51 AM
I don't know if this guy really believe we as fans can do anything about what happened or what will happen. Whether I applaud Mediocrity or not has nothing to do with Kubiak & his future in Houston. I'm just a squirrel Earl.

Did the fans really have anything to do with The Saints getting Sean Peyton? I mean Benson's been looking for a coach longer than McNair has. I can think of 3 coaches in my lifetime. Mora, Hasslett, Payton.

I'm not going to take anything away from Sean Payton, I think he's a great young coach. I'm not going to belittle any of the wins he got. But I will say, I don't know that GK would have done much worse if any, had he gone to New Orleans, & I seriously doubt Payton would have done much better than Kubiak had he come to Houston.

I think they have more in common than not. The progress of the teams are pretty close as well, other than the wins..... the only thing that count.

But as good as Payton is, and as many wins as he got for that franchise, if you look deeper, things get kind of screwy.

I've got to say they hit more times than not in FA than Kubiak has. Not one of their LBs were drafted by the Saints. Sedric Ellis is the only first round pick they've made since 2006 that starts on that team.

Jahri Evans looks good. & they may have drafted him thinking he will start.

But Marques Colston? I know Payton didn't think Colston was going to be his go to receiver when they drafted him. Surely they expected Meechum to be starting by now. Surely Mechum should be further along than Jacoby Jones. Surely Reggie Bush was supposed to be their work horse. I love Brees, don't get me wrong, but C'mon... He got lucky there as well.

He's done a great job making the most of his talent.

Again, not trying to make the Saints & their acheivements look smaller than they are. Payton has done an amazing job there.

Thunder, come on. Your entire post is filled with, "I'm not going to take anything away from Sean Payton, but..."

Yes, you are basically denigrating what he's done in four years. You say, for example, that Peyton got "lucky" with Drew Brees. Actually, they actively went after drew. They were aggressive. That's something this team is not.

And, if you look at it that way, you could argue that Gary got "lucky" by inheriting Andre Johnson, and that he got "lucky" by bringing in Bernard Pollard and he got "lucky" that Brian Cushing was still on the board when he was.

Look, we can go around and around with this issue, but at the end of the day, in four years, Sean Payton has gotten them two championship games and one Super Bowl.

Sean Peyton is an outstanding coach. Period.

DexmanC
01-26-2010, 01:43 AM
Sean Payton had the balls to cut John Carney, longtime Saints kicker who
fell into a slump, and brought in some kid who kicks CLUTCH thru those
uprights.

Kris Brown is still an "Original Texan?"

whiskeyrbl
01-26-2010, 04:12 AM
Funny that they chose a franchise that took 20 years before a winning season and over 40 to reach a Super Bowl. If Bob McNair chooses to be like the Saints, we are screwed.

I love how the Texans "chose" to be mediocre. I guess it's that easy. Next year, they will "choose" to be winners. Problem solved. Gee why didn't they think of that? :)

Yeah it's also funny how these writers forget the Cap hell that C & C left this team in. That night have played a role in how the Texans rebuilt. It's mainly thru the draft not FA. People like that who wrote this article should jump ship and root for another team if that is the way they feel IMO.:slapfight:

playa465
01-26-2010, 04:58 AM
Last year it was the Cardinals, this year its the Saints...if we don't make it to the Super Bowl next year I wonder who we will be compared to :rolleyes:

D-ReK
01-26-2010, 05:16 AM
More Chron BS the paper is begging to fail

It's clearly stated in the initial post that this is a Houston Press piece.

Aside from the whole "choosing to win" thing, this article is pretty dead on. Something that no one seems to mention is that we could have easily had Brees. He got $20M guaranteed over 6 years at the same time we were stupidly extending Carr. On top of that, the Saints took Colston one freaking pick after we took Anderson. Just a couple of mistakes that we (and in the case of Colston, every other team) made that would have turned this franchise around more quickly.

Thorn
01-26-2010, 07:41 AM
blah blah blah blah if ands and butts, woulda coulda shoulda. I'm getting tired of reading the same old shit all the time.

The Texans havent' improved enough to compete in their division, we know that. Kubiak isn't magic, and we seem to be mired in 8-8 or similiar seasons, we know that also. We also know that other teams are improving while we seem to be running in place. And the spawn of Satan Smithiak will be back next year to further derail our team.

Did I miss anything?

We need something new to argue about around here. This same old stuff every day is getting boring, and we haven't even gotten past the Super Bowl yet.

BigBull17
01-26-2010, 08:04 AM
It's clearly stated in the initial post that this is a Houston Press piece.

Aside from the whole "choosing to win" thing, this article is pretty dead on. Something that no one seems to mention is that we could have easily had Brees. He got $20M guaranteed over 6 years at the same time we were stupidly extending Carr. On top of that, the Saints took Colston one freaking pick after we took Anderson. Just a couple of mistakes that we (and in the case of Colston, every other team) made that would have turned this franchise around more quickly.

Damn, it sure looks like a Richard Justice piece. Why does almost all of the press in Houston suck such big donkey balls?

thunderkyss
01-26-2010, 08:14 AM
I'll wait until the Saints manage to beat just one team from the NFC South this year (they'll have a chance in a couple of weeks) before I am convinced that they've made all the right choices, while the Texans made foolish ones.

I totally agree with this post. I said in another post, that I doubt Kubiak's success in the NFC South would be much different than Payton's if they were to have swapped teams back in 2006. I also don't know that Payton's success would have been much better, if any at all had he been here in 2006.

But if the Saints beat the Colts in the Super Bowl... that will blow that argument out of the water all together.

DeMarCushPoll
01-26-2010, 08:26 AM
Drew Brees is Matt Schaub, but with mobility and zip.

He's to the Saints what Manning is to the Colts. He makes his team very fluid.

And, they found a way to turn their defense around. I don't think Manning can handle the Saints defense. They got to Favre and they blasted him. I don't see the Colts defense being able to stop the weapons Brees has at his disposal.

I'm calling it now: Saints win, and it won't be the neck-and-neck game everyone thinks it will be.

And I hope it creates one more step to the Colts eventual decline. I've had enough of that team dominating our division. This crap can't go on forever, or I'm going to become a Bills fan if it does. :devilpig:


I like your enthusiasm about the Saints and I want you to know that I'm pulling for them as well, but I think you might be a little unrealistic with your prediction that they will win handily and that Manning can't handle the Saints D. He did a pretty good job handling the No.1 ranked defense in the NFL last week. In reality the Saints are going to have to rely on the offense to hopefully outscore the Colts IMO. I wouldn't put that much stock in a defense that was ranked 25th and just gave up almost 500 yrds to the Viks last week. And I wouldn't count on Manning & Co. turning the ball over the way the Viks did. Like I said, I hope they win but they will have their hands full.

HuttoKarl
01-26-2010, 08:29 AM
Drew Brees is Matt Schaub, but with mobility and zip.

He's to the Saints what Manning is to the Colts. He makes his team very fluid.

And, they found a way to turn their defense around. I don't think Manning can handle the Saints defense. They got to Favre and they blasted him. I don't see the Colts defense being able to stop the weapons Brees has at his disposal.

I'm calling it now: Saints win, and it won't be the neck-and-neck game everyone thinks it will be.

And I hope it creates one more step to the Colts eventual decline. I've had enough of that team dominating our division. This crap can't go on forever, or I'm going to become a Bills fan if it does. :devilpig:

The Saints won because the Vikings were very careless with the ball and made idiotic mistakes. I'm trying to think of the last time Manning made a stupid pass like the one Favre did...and I can't think of any. You're in for a rude awakening if you think that the Colts are going to choke the ball away 5 times. The Colts defense held the #1 rushing team in the playoffs to 80 some yards and gave up two big plays...it was a shutout after that. They held the Ravens to 3 points. The Saints are better than both of those teams, but they're not world-beaters like you're hyping them up to be.

The Saints have been good for how many years total? Three? Maybe four???

There's a lot of annointing of that franchise as a great one considering the FACT that they've been extremely lackluster for as long as I've been alive.

HuttoKarl
01-26-2010, 08:32 AM
It's clearly stated in the initial post that this is a Houston Press piece.

Aside from the whole "choosing to win" thing, this article is pretty dead on. Something that no one seems to mention is that we could have easily had Brees. He got $20M guaranteed over 6 years at the same time we were stupidly extending Carr. On top of that, the Saints took Colston one freaking pick after we took Anderson. Just a couple of mistakes that we (and in the case of Colston, every other team) made that would have turned this franchise around more quickly.

Even the Saints passed on him 6 times. He was a shot in the dark and it hit the target. Sun shine. Dog's ass...you know the rest.

HOU-TEX
01-26-2010, 08:40 AM
Sean Payton had the balls to cut John Carney, longtime Saints kicker who
fell into a slump, and brought in some kid who kicks CLUTCH thru those
uprights.

Kris Brown is still an "Original Texan?"

I'm no fan of kickers, but I reckon we might want to find competition for KB before we just whack him.

Hartley was NOT clutch and Carney was only with the Saints 5-6 years. But heck, don't let facts get in the way of your argument.

Hartley appeared to be the answer to reliability problems plaguing the Saints' kicking game since Carney's release after the 2006 season. The Saints went through four kickers in the last two seasons, including Olindo Mare, Martin Gramatica and Taylor Mehlhaff before settling on Hartley for the final eight games of 2008. Hartley made all 13 of his field goal attempts.

Carney, who kicked for New Orleans from 2001-06, became a free agent after spending last season with the New York Giants, allowing the Saints to bring him back.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp09/news/story?id=4402342

DeMarCushPoll
01-26-2010, 08:41 AM
It's clearly stated in the initial post that this is a Houston Press piece.

Aside from the whole "choosing to win" thing, this article is pretty dead on. Something that no one seems to mention is that we could have easily had Brees. He got $20M guaranteed over 6 years at the same time we were stupidly extending Carr. On top of that, the Saints took Colston one freaking pick after we took Anderson. Just a couple of mistakes that we (and in the case of Colston, every other team) made that would have turned this franchise around more quickly.

Are you saying you'd rather have Brees than Schaub? I wouldn't. I like the way things are developing. This team is being built the right way and we as fans will reap the benifits for manny years to come. One thing we can say, it didn't take us 21 years to have our 1st winning season.

DeMarCushPoll
01-26-2010, 08:53 AM
Overall I'm happy for the Saints and the city of NO but writing articles that make them out to be some model franchise is a little much for me. For nearly all of the last 40+ years that franchise has been an example of what not to do. I remember one year they started the season 7-0 and wound up going 8-8 and missing the playoffs, so lets not get ahead of ourselves they still havn't proved anything yet.

GNTLEWOLF
01-26-2010, 09:03 AM
Look...bottom line is...whatever arguments to the contrary...the Saints made the right personnel decisions to get their team to TWO NFC championship games and now one Super Bowl in the same time that Smithiak have been "building the team the right way".

thunderkyss
01-26-2010, 09:19 AM
Thunder, come on. Your entire post is filled with, "I'm not going to take anything away from Sean Payton, but..."

I understand exactly what you're saying, & I agree. It's hard to make my point, and not come across as belittling what Payton & the Saints have done.

Our offenses are comparable. Both teams started with ho-hum offenses, and made them the strengths of their team.

Our deffenses are comparable. Both among the worst in the league in 2006, now among the better.

Payton has been able to translate that to wins more than Kubiak. I'm not denying that.

It's possible that Payton is a better coach than Kubiak, but his record against the AFC South isn't any better than Kubiak's on a percentage basis. And that's where we live.

It's like comparing the SEC to the Mountain West Conferance. Maybe not so drastic, but you get my point.


Yes, you are basically denigrating what he's done in four years. You say, for example, that Peyton got "lucky" with Drew Brees. Actually, they actively went after drew. They were aggressive. That's something this team is not.

Only because there were real issues when Brees was a free agent. Miami passed on him & went with Culpepper. We can say that was a stupid decision... but there was serious concerns about Brees' throwing shoulder (I think).

Colston... a 7 th round tight end became their go to WR..... that's luck, no way you can tell me Payton saw that coming.

Look, we can go around and around with this issue, but at the end of the day, in four years, Sean Payton has gotten them two championship games and one Super Bowl.

Sean Peyton is an outstanding coach. Period.

Sean Payton (with an a) has done an outstanding job. He's an outstanding coach. My intention is not to diminish anything he has done. I'm just pointing out the differences & similarities between the circumstances of the two franchises.

thunderkyss
01-26-2010, 09:40 AM
Last year it was the Cardinals, this year its the Saints...if we don't make it to the Super Bowl next year I wonder who we will be compared to :rolleyes:

The Cardinals is another team that I think has many good similarities to the Texans. Denny Green built that team, and taught them to play good football. Not to take anything away from Wisenhunt, he did an outstanding job with what he had.

I doubt he would have been more successful than Green, had he taken over that team in 2004. In 22 years, that franchise had one winning season.

From 1992 to 2001, he took the Vikings to the play offs 8 times. He finished less than 9-7 twice, how you going to say he was a bad coach.

If you go back and watch his team in 2004, and then watch it again in 2006, there was no question they were a better team. You can tell they started to do things the right way.

In year 4, they go 9-7...

Same as us, we've got 3 years of Kubiak before we get our first 9-7 season. There is a big difference with the level of play from the team we fielded in 2006. We missed the play-offs by one game, either a win by us, or a loss by the Jets. The Cardinals could have won the NFC West again this year, with a 9-7 record.

I personally don't believe the Cardinals are playing much better, if at all from Greens last season with them.

Same thing here. I have no doubt that we will be next year's Cinderella. We're going to make our big jump next year, regardless who our coach will be. But I believe our chances for success beyond next year is better with Gary Kubiak.

Yeah, we could fire Kubiak this year, & we might have landed Cowher.... that would have been fine with me.

But what if we fired him, and ended up with Chan Gailey? Nothing against Chan Gailey, but who knows how this team would look beyond next year with Gailey? or Gruden? or Martz? or whoever?

DeMarCushPoll
01-26-2010, 10:04 AM
Look...bottom line is...whatever arguments to the contrary...the Saints made the right personnel decisions to get their team to TWO NFC championship games and now one Super Bowl in the same time that Smithiak have been "building the team the right way".

Are you saying that the Texans haven't made the right personnel decisions? Just because the Saints made it there before the Texans doesn't mean that the Texans aren't going to make it. I think Peyton had a little more to work with than Kub did. Peyton has 14 players still on the roster form 2005 and Kub has 3.

infantrycak
01-26-2010, 10:07 AM
You say, for example, that Peyton got "lucky" with Drew Brees. Actually, they actively went after drew. They were aggressive. That's something this team is not.

Really, the Texans didn't aggressively go after Schaub?

El Tejano
01-26-2010, 10:25 AM
First of all this article fails to make a complete apples to apples comparison because it leaves out NFC vs. AFC and AFC South vs. NFC South. Lets take a look.....


2006 - Saints 10-6 win NFC South lose NFC championship,

rest of the division - 8-8 Carolina, 7-9 Atl, 4-12 TB

Colts 12-4 win AFC South and Super Bowl
rest of the division - 8-8 Tenn&Jville, 6-10 Houston

Saints don't win the division much less get to the playoffs.

[B]2007[B] Saints 7-9, tied for second in their division, Carolina wins division at 9-7
AFC South - Colts win division 13-3, Jville 11-5, 10-6 Tenn, and 8-8 Houston.
Saints would be last in our division, meanwhile 3 of our teams went to the playoffs. Texans also had a better record.

2008 Saints 8-8, last in their division.
Rest of NFC South - 12-4 Carolina, 11-5 ATL, 9-7 Tampa Bay
AFC South - Tenn wins division 13-3 , Colts 12-4, Houston 8-8, Jville 5-11
Once again, Saints wouldn't smell the playoffs because they would be tied with us.

2009 Saints - 13-3 trip to the Super Bowl
Rest of NFC South - 9-7 ATL, 8-8 Carolina, 3-13 TB
AFC South - Indy goes to Super Bowl with best record in the league 14-2, 9-7 Houston, 8-8 Tenn who started 0-6, and 7-9 Jville.
Because of Indy and San Diego's record there could be a strong chance that New Orleans probably doesn't get past the divisional round of the playoffs.

My point is this. The NFC has put two teams in the Super Bowl who went 8-8 for the season in 2005 and 2008. Those teams don't even sniff the playoffs in the AFC. San Diego did but a case can be made that their record should've been 9-7 but the blown call by Ed Hocules caused the 8-8 record. You have to think The Texans could get in the playoffs if in the NFC.

Since 2006, the Saints wouldn't even win our division even with their best record ever at 13-3. You look at the rest of their division over that time and The Texans are right in there.

I'm not taking anything away from New Orleans but you can't compare us to them honestly without looking at their circumstances vs. ours. Sure, the Texans can change their own circumstances but until I see the rest of the league put it to the Colts on a consistent basis, I'm going to go with the FACT that our division is alot tougher to win in.

HuttoKarl
01-26-2010, 11:06 AM
Really, the Texans didn't aggressively go after Schaub?

Apparently sending two second rounders isn't aggressive enough. I remember a LOT of whining about how much those two second rounders were worth and how the Schaub asking price was way too steep.

We were too aggressive for most at that point.

GNTLEWOLF
01-26-2010, 12:41 PM
Are you saying that the Texans haven't made the right personnel decisions? Just because the Saints made it there before the Texans doesn't mean that the Texans aren't going to make it. I think Peyton had a little more to work with than Kub did. Peyton has 14 players still on the roster form 2005 and Kub has 3.

What I'm saying is, "Look...bottom line is...whatever arguments to the contrary...the Saints made the right personnel decisions to get their team to TWO NFC championship games and now one Super Bowl in the same time that Smithiak have been "building the team the right way".

Hervoyel
01-26-2010, 12:42 PM
This is going to be the back and forth from now until next season starts and I'm entirely depressed by that proposition. Gary's 9-7 did not satisfy many of us but it keeps the lynch mob at bay for another year. I find the Kubiak-Peyton comparision unpleasant because we aren't on the end of it that's going to a Super Bowl much like I find the Kubiak-Ryan comparison unpleasant because they went to the playoffs and we sat home and polished our 9-7 "Not Losers!" trophy while crying that the Colts didn't beat the Jets and let us in the party.

If we come out next season and beat ass all the way to the playoffs then all of this will be forgotten and everything will be forgiven. If we stumble around for the first 6-8 weeks of the season and then "surge" to a barely over .500 record again then Texans fans will be knee-deep in civil war. I think we all agree that it's time for results. We maybe disagree on the relative merits of 9-7 but is there anyone here who really can sit back and say "Hey, if we finish 9-7 in 2010 (playoffs or not) then I think Gary should stay"?

I couldn't say that. I barely could bring myself to accept the 9-7 he bumbled his way to this year. The Saints got lucky with Sean Payton. They hired a young coordinator and hit gold. I think if we'd hit gold with Gary then we'd know it by now. The very fact that we're still bickering over him says tons about his quality.

steelbtexan
01-26-2010, 01:30 PM
You cant compare the Saints and Texans and you aren't going to convinc the Sunshine Club/Koolaid drinkers that the Saints did their rebuilding job better/faster than the Texans. There will always be excuses, tougher division,confrence, injuries, hurricanes or whatever.

Facts are 3-13 and 2-14 are about the same.

In the 4 yrs since the Saints have gone to a NFC confrence championship game and a Super Bowl. Meanwhile the Texans have gone 6-10, 8-8, 8-8, 9-7these are the facts and the Sunshine Club (of whichI'm a former member) can spin it anyway they want but they cant get around those little facts.

All of this really doesn't matter because the coming year is judgement day for the Smithiak regime. Make the playoffs and get a contract extention or dont make the playoffs and get fired. It's really that simple.

Playoffs and no excuses

El Tejano
01-26-2010, 02:15 PM
Well, I said I'm not taking anything away from the Saints, but the proof shows that they wouldn't even win our division if they were in the AFC South and in most seasons since 06 would be at the bottom of our division. Like I said, taking nothing away from them. Just saying you can't compare us to them or them to us because the two teams are entirely different situations.

Double Barrel
01-26-2010, 03:16 PM
Sean Payton had the balls to cut John Carney, longtime Saints kicker who
fell into a slump, and brought in some kid who kicks CLUTCH thru those
uprights.

Kris Brown is still an "Original Texan?"

I'm no fan of kickers, but I reckon we might want to find competition for KB before we just whack him.

Hartley was NOT clutch and Carney was only with the Saints 5-6 years. But heck, don't let facts get in the way of your argument.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp09/news/story?id=4402342

Kris Brown missed 11 FGs this season, one of the worst in the NFL. He missed an extra freakin' point! Any other team would have either brought in competition or fired him. But not the milktoast Texans, where a player's favorite charity and happy face has as much to do with keeping him on the roster than his on-field performance. Sorry, perhaps that was a bit much, but....

Seriously, man, if you cannot hold your kicker accountable, how the heck are the real football players supposed to perceive the leadership?

Oh, here (http://blogs.chron.com/jeromesolomon/2010/01/kickers.html) it is:

At the end of the season, in an interview with Sports Radio 610 AM's Barry Warner, Brown said he has a mechanical issue that he'll fix over the offseason.

Mechanical issue???? Seriously? Just nut up and say you missed, whatever. Can you imagine any other position coming up with a golf/baseball excuse in the NFL?!

And then there's the Pollyanna reply from a reader:

What was amazing and, I must say touching, was the scene on the field immediately after the last game against the Pats. Brown had one of his very worst games of a very bad season and yet there he was in big hug with owner Bob McNair.

It was a great picture and said a lot about both Brown and McNair. McNair obviously recognizes what a great player Brown has been since the first days of the Texans. And, despite this terrible season, McNair appreciates that.

And really, this is what it comes down to at the end of the day. Lots of issues that are not directly related to on-field performance. Just another chapter in the meandering mediocrity (also behind why they offered HWSNBN an extension) that continues to this day with keeping players like Brown on the roster.

Hervoyel
01-26-2010, 03:35 PM
Well, I said I'm not taking anything away from the Saints, but the proof shows that they wouldn't even win our division if they were in the AFC South and in most seasons since 06 would be at the bottom of our division. Like I said, taking nothing away from them. Just saying you can't compare us to them or them to us because the two teams are entirely different situations.

The divisions are different but come on, it's not "entirely different". They're both NFL teams and they both compete against NFL talent. The idea that the Saints somehow would not even be able to finish outside the basement in the AFC South most years is laughable. It's particularly laughable when you realize that the AFC South contains the Houston Texans who hold a death-grip on the basement finishing 4th half the years we've existed, 3rd the rest before this season.

Since 2006 the Saints would have been last in our division only one time (2007 at 7-9) and they'd have been fighting it out at the bottom of the standings with our own Houston Texans (at 8-8).

I'm not all that confident that if the Jags and Saints were to switch places we'd be better off.

HOU-TEX
01-26-2010, 04:19 PM
Kris Brown missed 11 FGs this season, one of the worst in the NFL. He missed an extra freakin' point! Any other team would have either brought in competition or fired him. But not the milktoast Texans, where a player's favorite charity and happy face has as much to do with keeping him on the roster than his on-field performance. Sorry, perhaps that was a bit much, but....

Seriously, man, if you cannot hold your kicker accountable, how the heck are the real football players supposed to perceive the leadership?

Oh, here (http://blogs.chron.com/jeromesolomon/2010/01/kickers.html) it is:



Mechanical issue???? Seriously? Just nut up and say you missed, whatever. Can you imagine any other position coming up with a golf/baseball excuse in the NFL?!

And then there's the Pollyanna reply from a reader:



And really, this is what it comes down to at the end of the day. Lots of issues that are not directly related to on-field performance. Just another chapter in the meandering mediocrity (also behind why they offered HWSNBN an extension) that continues to this day with keeping players like Brown on the roster.

I'm not sure if you were reaming me out? Or just adding your thoughts to ours.

As I previously mentioned, I don't care much for kickers. That said, I'd rather we bring in competition over the off-season and find a suitable kicker before whacking KB. Otherwise, we'd be faced with the possibility of having to find a kicker by trial and error heading into the season.

Double Barrel
01-26-2010, 04:36 PM
I'm not sure if you were reaming me out? Or just adding your thoughts to ours.

As I previously mentioned, I don't care much for kickers. That said, I'd rather we bring in competition over the off-season and find a suitable kicker before whacking KB. Otherwise, we'd be faced with the possibility of having to find a kicker by trial and error heading into the season.

Nah, no reaming, just adding my thoughts to the kicker conversation. :)

I can understand the perspective of bringing in competition, and I hope we see it. But, isn't there at least a small part of you that would not be surprised if they didn't?

houstonspartan
01-26-2010, 04:43 PM
I'm not sure if you were reaming me out? Or just adding your thoughts to ours.

As I previously mentioned, I don't care much for kickers. That said, I'd rather we bring in competition over the off-season and find a suitable kicker before whacking KB. Otherwise, we'd be faced with the possibility of having to find a kicker by trial and error heading into the season.

I see your point, but, that's the "We can't make any changes becuase we don't know what else is out there" argument. It's not that hard to find a decent kicker. And, we have training camp and pre-season games BECAUSE it's all about trial and error. That's when you're testing your players.

My concern is that they really want Kris Brown back because they like him. Even if they bring in competition I think it'll be a sham, and that Kris Brown will get the job, regardless of performance. And yes, I'm serious when I say that.

I think flat out cutting him is the best move going forward.

houstonspartan
01-26-2010, 04:44 PM
Nah, no reaming, just adding my thoughts to the kicker conversation. :)

I can understand the perspective of bringing in competition, and I hope we see it. But, isn't there at least a small part of you that would not be surprised if they didn't?

Sadly, you are correct. Deep down, it wouldn't shock me if they just handed Kris the job.

JWarren14
01-26-2010, 04:45 PM
This is nauseating.

Effff Da Saints and Effff the Colts

IM A TEXAN!

HOU-TEX
01-26-2010, 04:57 PM
Nah, no reaming, just adding my thoughts to the kicker conversation. :)

I can understand the perspective of bringing in competition, and I hope we see it. But, isn't there at least a small part of you that would not be surprised if they didn't?

You're right, I would not be surprised if they didn't. Although, after his performance this season it'd be hard not to no matter how much of a "good guy" he is. I'd actually be rip-snortin pissed off if they remain status quo at the position.

I see your point, but, that's the "We can't make any changes becuase we don't know what else is out there" argument. It's not that hard to find a decent kicker. And, we have training camp and pre-season games BECAUSE it's all about trial and error. That's when you're testing your players.

My concern is that they really want Kris Brown back because they like him. Even if they bring in competition I think it'll be a sham, and that Kris Brown will get the job, regardless of performance. And yes, I'm serious when I say that.

I think flat out cutting him is the best move going forward.

Training camp and pre-season games are a part of the off-season, IMO. That's why I mentioned having them compete during off-season and find the better option before whacking the old one.

dalemurphy
01-26-2010, 05:34 PM
Well, the Saint's DID make 2 NFC Championship games, winning one of them.
They changed 37 out of 51 players win the new coach came in.
Sean Payton's short coaching career blows away Gary Kubiak's.

I believe that was the OP's point.

I'm not worried about the "short career". I'm more interested in a 10-15 year window. Congratulations, though, to Sean Payton for leading a team in the NFC South to two winning records in four years. Playing six games every year against teams like TB, Carolina, and Atlanta is a sobering thought to a Texan fan! Yikes!

The NFC has produced some pretty horrific Champions the past few years: Arizona Cardinals, Chicago Bears, Carolina Panthers, Seattle Seahawks.. Hopefully for Saints fans, it won't be more of the same.

dalemurphy
01-26-2010, 05:38 PM
The divisions are different but come on, it's not "entirely different". They're both NFL teams and they both compete against NFL talent. The idea that the Saints somehow would not even be able to finish outside the basement in the AFC South most years is laughable. It's particularly laughable when you realize that the AFC South contains the Houston Texans who hold a death-grip on the basement finishing 4th half the years we've existed, 3rd the rest before this season.

Since 2006 the Saints would have been last in our division only one time (2007 at 7-9) and they'd have been fighting it out at the bottom of the standings with our own Houston Texans (at 8-8).

I'm not all that confident that if the Jags and Saints were to switch places we'd be better off.


It's also laughable to simply transpose the Saints record in previous seasons as evidence to how high they'd finish in the AFC south. I wonder where the Texans would finish in the AFC South if they played two games versus Atlanta, Carolina, TB, not to mention the reward of playing someone from the NFC West every year and playing the entirety of the NFC West every 3rd year.

Norg
01-26-2010, 05:52 PM
Iam pulling for the Colts to win They will get the 32nd draft pick :P

thunderkyss
01-26-2010, 05:59 PM
You cant compare the Saints and Texans and you aren't going to convinc the Sunshine Club/Koolaid drinkers that the Saints did their rebuilding job better/faster than the Texans. There will always be excuses, tougher division,confrence, injuries, hurricanes or whatever.


Are you telling me that Sean Payton is a better coach than Mike Ditka?

If not, can you explain to me why Payton's rebuild was much more successful & faster than Ditka's?

thunderkyss
01-26-2010, 06:07 PM
Seriously, man, if you cannot hold your kicker accountable, how the heck are the real football players supposed to perceive the leadership?

I'm asking, because I don't know. Where you work, is that the only way to hold someone accountable?

Is turnover pretty high?

And really, this is what it comes down to at the end of the day. Lots of issues that are not directly related to on-field performance. Just another chapter in the meandering mediocrity (also behind why they offered HWSNBN an extension) that continues to this day with keeping players like Brown on the roster.

You know what? I hope Chris Brown is makes the team another year, just for you soapers.

Double Barrel
01-26-2010, 06:25 PM
I'm asking, because I don't know. Where you work, is that the only way to hold someone accountable?

Is turnover pretty high?

Two different industries.

But yeah, if you were to equate Brown's 2009 performance to that kind of FUBAR in my industry, you would certainly lose your job. In a heartbeat.

You know what? I hope Chris Brown is makes the team another year, just for you soapers.

I was never a soaper for Kubiak, but you like to assume these things so it doesn't surprise me, Mr. Sunshine.

And you want to keep an over-the-hill and fumble-prone RB out of some misguided sense of spite? Yeah, that makes a lot of sense...

:thinking: ...or not

DexmanC
01-27-2010, 12:00 AM
Are you telling me that Sean Payton is a better coach than Mike Ditka?
Compare Payton to someone coaching in THIS era, like Gary Kubiak.


If not, can you explain to me why Payton's rebuild was much more successful & faster than Ditka's?
Ditka's coaching career began before 2006. John Harbaugh, Rex Ryan,
Tony Sparano, Mike Smith, and Sean Payton seem to be doing quite well. Who has
Kubiak coached better than in THIS era? Let it go, dude. He ain't
Tom Landry.

DexmanC
01-27-2010, 12:09 AM
I'm not worried about the "short career". I'm more interested in a 10-15 year window. Congratulations, though, to Sean Payton for leading a team in the NFC South to two winning records in four years. Playing six games every year against teams like TB, Carolina, and Atlanta is a sobering thought to a Texan fan! Yikes!
It's gonna take 10-15 years for Kubiak to build a champion? Four
years in, and no postseason yet. The Saints flushed 37 out of 51 players
in 2006 ALONE! They've rebuilt quite well, wouldn't you say? We're still
making excuses and hugging our kickers for having a crappy season. The
Saints CUT their longtime fan-favorite kicker, in John Carney, and his
replacement has been nothing less than CLUTCH. They didn't hesitate,
and "hope" he would get better next season. They knew they couldn't
win with him THIS year. There's no guarantee how things are gonna look
"next year." You should be held accountable for winning NOW. The good
teams can rebuild AND win!


The NFC has produced some pretty horrific Champions the past few years: Arizona Cardinals, Chicago Bears, Carolina Panthers, Seattle Seahawks.. Hopefully for Saints fans, it won't be more of the same.

It has JACK to do with the Texans. When YOU have underachieved,
it's easy to become a HATER. Hatin' on the NFC doesn't improve the
Texans annual futility in the AFC South. When Parcells and Sparano
went to the Dolphins, they didn't let the fact they were 1-15 in the
previous season convince them they couldn't beat the best in the
division. They are 3-1 against them in the last two seasons (since
they've been in Miami.) No team bitches about being OWNED by their
division champion more than the Texans. The Colts and Titans have
better records against us, than they do against ANY TEAM IN THE NFL.
Don't hate on other teams who are successful, don't whine about how
"tough" the division leaders are. COMPETE with them for the division title!

dalemurphy
01-27-2010, 04:08 AM
It's gonna take 10-15 years for Kubiak to build a champion? Four
years in, and no postseason yet. The Saints flushed 37 out of 51 players
in 2006 ALONE! They've rebuilt quite well, wouldn't you say? We're still
making excuses and hugging our kickers for having a crappy season. The
Saints CUT their longtime fan-favorite kicker, in John Carney, and his
replacement has been nothing less than CLUTCH. They didn't hesitate,
and "hope" he would get better next season. They knew they couldn't
win with him THIS year. There's no guarantee how things are gonna look
"next year." You should be held accountable for winning NOW. The good
teams can rebuild AND win!



It has JACK to do with the Texans. When YOU have underachieved,
it's easy to become a HATER. Hatin' on the NFC doesn't improve the
Texans annual futility in the AFC South. When Parcells and Sparano
went to the Dolphins, they didn't let the fact they were 1-15 in the
previous season convince them they couldn't beat the best in the
division. They are 3-1 against them in the last two seasons (since
they've been in Miami.) No team bitches about being OWNED by their
division champion more than the Texans. The Colts and Titans have
better records against us, than they do against ANY TEAM IN THE NFL.
Don't hate on other teams who are successful, don't whine about how
"tough" the division leaders are. COMPETE with them for the division title!

a few things:

1. Garrett Hartley was the Saints kicker going into the season. He was suspended for four games and they had to pickup Carney again. Hartley came back and was unreliable. They kept both until finally releasing Carney in December, I think. If Kris Brown had been suspended in the preseason then we would have had an opportunity to choose between two kickers as well.

What do you think about Dallas' decision with their struggling kicker? After Nick Folk struggled, they cut him and picked up Suisham, who was cut by Washington for struggling. Against Minnesota, Folk missed two first half field goals that cost Dallas severely in the game and allowed the Vikings to build a 14 point halftime lead, despite being outgained.

2. I don't hate the NFC or the Saints. And, I agree with you that it is up to the Texans do compete and win in their division, regardless of how tough it is. But, that doesn't change the fact that the Saints play in a much weaker division and still have only had better seasons in 2 of the 4 respective years. The Saints also gambled and won when they risked signing Brees, who had a serious shoulder surgery that Dr. Andrews repaired but didn't know if he'd be able to come back from. Good for them! I'm not going to tear the Texan organization up for not signing a QB with a bad shoulder to a $50 million contract.

3. I'm not making excuses. It is you and those like you that compare/contrast teams from different conferences and attempt to measure the Texans' failure accordingly. I've not seen you list the teams the Texans have passed up in the past few years. Instead, you look for a single season outlier like the Saints this year, or the Dolphins last year, and try and hold Kubiak to that standard when even those coaches fail/will fail to hold up to that standard... see Miami this year (7-9) and Atlanta this year (9-7) or the Saints in '07 and '08 (15-17).

4. Texans finished 2nd in the AFC South to the AFC Superbowl representatives. How is that futility? Is it as futile as finishing in the bottom half of the NFC South like your friends from Louisiana did in '07 and '08? How about the Great Rex Ryan, who took a 9-7 team coached by Mangini and led them to... 9-7 again. Oh yeah, but they won the important games.... like the one that was handed to them vs. Indy, or how about their 2-4 record in division, including losing to.....(wait for it) BUFFALO!

The reality is that the Texans played football on par with all but about 1/2 dozen teams this season. Unfortunately, they didn't get the breaks they needed to make the playoffs. Of course, if they would've played just a little better, they would've been in the playoffs even without those breaks but they weren't quite good enough to do that. I'm expecting that to change next year and you can watch while teams like New Orleans, NYJets, Cincinnati, Arizona, Minnesota take a step back because they'll get fewer breaks than they did this year.

DexmanC
01-27-2010, 04:55 AM
The reality is that the Texans played football on par with all but about 1/2 dozen teams this season. Unfortunately, they didn't get the breaks they needed to make the playoffs. Of course, if they would've played just a little better, they would've been in the playoffs even without those breaks but they weren't quite good enough to do that. I'm expecting that to change next year and you can watch while teams like New Orleans, NYJets, Cincinnati, Arizona, Minnesota take a step back because they'll get fewer breaks than they did this year.

I agree the Texans have played "better" than they have in previous years.
However, must we continue to hate on teams who DON'T have coaches
that went FOUR FULL SEASONS without a playoff berth? Why should we
hope OTHER teams fall back? Shouldn't the Texans STEP UP??

None of those other coaches had to put their faith in other teams to
step into the playoffs. They PLAYED THE GAMES, and WON them to get
in. Must we hate on the Jets? They didn't prepare for the Colts to pull
starters. They didn't prepare for the Bengals to pull theirs, either. They
PLAYED THE GAMES and WON them to get in.

We've seen the Colts, Titans and Jags 24 times since 2006. SEVEN WINS.
That's it! It's an ugly stat to look at, but why hate on other squads?
Addressing this issue ALONE will solve 99% of the Texans' problems, and
we all KNOW it.

Put the Hatorade down, and address the problem. NO team should have
to step BACK for this team to make postseason. They need to STEP UP!


4. Texans finished 2nd in the AFC South to the AFC Superbowl representatives. How is that futility? Is it as futile as finishing in the bottom half of the NFC South like your friends from Louisiana did in '07 and '08? How about the Great Rex Ryan, who took a 9-7 team coached by Mangini and led them to... 9-7 again. Oh yeah, but they won the important games.... like the one that was handed to them vs. Indy, or how about their 2-4 record in division, including losing to.....(wait for it) BUFFALO!


We padded our record with the Rams, Raiders, Seahawks and Bills to TECHNICALLY finish second
in the division. We beat the Jags on a Kerry Collins fumble, got SWEPT by the woefully average
Jaguars, and got SWEPT by the Colts while leading in BOTH games. We have LESS of an excuse
to lose to ANY of those teams, because we see them twice a year. The Titans went 13-3 two
years ago, by TAKING the AFC South Title from the Colts. They didn't excuse losses because
it's against the greatest QB of all time. Finishing second this year was technical, but the "futility"
I speak of has to do with SEVEN WINS in TWENTY FOUR GAMES against those same teams.

CloakNNNdagger
01-27-2010, 07:05 AM
Unfortunately, the Texans (owner and HC) have repeatedly made personel decisions more based on sentimental ideology, pure emotion, wishful thinking, blind faith and waves of nostalgia past.............rather than performance............a recipe for mediocrity if not failure.

El Tejano
01-27-2010, 07:30 AM
The divisions are different but come on, it's not "entirely different". They're both NFL teams and they both compete against NFL talent. The idea that the Saints somehow would not even be able to finish outside the basement in the AFC South most years is laughable. It's particularly laughable when you realize that the AFC South contains the Houston Texans who hold a death-grip on the basement finishing 4th half the years we've existed, 3rd the rest before this season.

Since 2006 the Saints would have been last in our division only one time (2007 at 7-9) and they'd have been fighting it out at the bottom of the standings with our own Houston Texans (at 8-8).

I'm not all that confident that if the Jags and Saints were to switch places we'd be better off.

I'm not saying to switch Jville with the Saints. I'm saying switch Houston and the Saints. I think Houston would've enjoyed more success since 06 if we were in their division. I'm not saying they would've enjoyed the basement in our division either. They just would've never won our division and that is based on records since 06 between them and The Colts. Since 06 the Colts have won our division all but one time so it's not just us - it's the Colts being that darned good. If you want to compare the two teams you have to compare the circumstances. You can't ignore the fact that there is one team consistently being better than us.

El Tejano
01-27-2010, 07:31 AM
Nah, no reaming, just adding my thoughts to the kicker conversation. :)

I can understand the perspective of bringing in competition, and I hope we see it. But, isn't there at least a small part of you that would not be surprised if they didn't?

Yes. Kind of like there is a small part of me that says they aren't bringing in another RB in either the draft of FA.

dalemurphy
01-27-2010, 08:09 AM
I agree the Texans have played "better" than they have in previous years.
However, must we continue to hate on teams who DON'T have coaches
that went FOUR FULL SEASONS without a playoff berth? Why should we
hope OTHER teams fall back? Shouldn't the Texans STEP UP??

None of those other coaches had to put their faith in other teams to
step into the playoffs. They PLAYED THE GAMES, and WON them to get
in. Must we hate on the Jets? They didn't prepare for the Colts to pull
starters. They didn't prepare for the Bengals to pull theirs, either. They
PLAYED THE GAMES and WON them to get in.

We've seen the Colts, Titans and Jags 24 times since 2006. SEVEN WINS.
That's it! It's an ugly stat to look at, but why hate on other squads?
Addressing this issue ALONE will solve 99% of the Texans' problems, and
we all KNOW it.

Put the Hatorade down, and address the problem. NO team should have
to step BACK for this team to make postseason. They need to STEP UP!



We padded our record with the Rams, Raiders, Seahawks and Bills to TECHNICALLY finish second
in the division. We beat the Jags on a Kerry Collins fumble, got SWEPT by the woefully average
Jaguars, and got SWEPT by the Colts while leading in BOTH games. We have LESS of an excuse
to lose to ANY of those teams, because we see them twice a year. The Titans went 13-3 two
years ago, by TAKING the AFC South Title from the Colts. They didn't excuse losses because
it's against the greatest QB of all time. Finishing second this year was technical, but the "futility"
I speak of has to do with SEVEN WINS in TWENTY FOUR GAMES against those same teams.


Most teams with winning records beat the bad teams to "pad their record".

We were no more "lucky" to beat the Titans because of the Collins fumble than we were unlucky to lose to the Jags, Tennessee at home, or at Indy.

I'm not hating on other teams or counting on them to fail. My point is that those most of those teams aren't truly great, but had good seasons partially a result of good fortune, and the evidence of that fact will be when they slip backwards in W/L next season.... Something I'm confident the Texans won't do. Miami and Atlanta are two examples of pretty good teams that had fortunate seasons in '08... and, this season they received less good fortune and took a step back in W/L record. I'm not saying anything revolutionary here. That's the way of the league.

You're right. We need to win those divisional games next year. I fully expect to.

DexmanC
01-27-2010, 10:03 AM
I'm not hating on other teams or counting on them to fail. My point is that those most of those teams aren't truly great, but had good seasons partially a result of good fortune, and the evidence of that fact will be when they slip backwards in W/L next season.... Something I'm confident the Texans won't do. Miami and Atlanta are two examples of pretty good teams that had fortunate seasons in '08... and, this season they received less good fortune and took a step back in W/L record. I'm not saying anything revolutionary here. That's the way of the league.


Yes, they lost their BEST PLAYERS (THEIR "Andre Johnson") to season-ending
injuries. Hit shappens. Why do we care IF their season records take a hit?
Do the Colts worry about their opponents' records, or their own? Do the
Patriots worry about their opponents' records, or their own?

You ARE who you compare yourself to. Should we be giddy for being better
than the Seahawks, Rams or Raiders? Do we consider ourselves peers
with the AFC South? The Jags, and Titans compete very well with the
Colts year in and year out. WE seem to only have ONE win against them
ALL TIME!!

Who are the Texans' peers? Their record against the AFC South speaks
volumes to the answer. Hint: It ain't the Jags, Titans, or Colts.

Nobody hopes this team steps up in 2010 more than me, but I'm no longer
blind to the facts. THIS TEAM needs to step into becoming a division championship
contender.

El Tejano
01-27-2010, 10:38 AM
Yes, they lost their BEST PLAYERS (THEIR "Andre Johnson") to season-ending
injuries. Hit shappens. Why do we care IF their season records take a hit?
Do the Colts worry about their opponents' records, or their own? Do the
Patriots worry about their opponents' records, or their own?

You ARE who you compare yourself to. Should we be giddy for being better
than the Seahawks, Rams or Raiders? Do we consider ourselves peers
with the AFC South? The Jags, and Titans compete very well with the
Colts year in and year out. WE seem to only have ONE win against them
ALL TIME!!

Who are the Texans' peers? Their record against the AFC South speaks
volumes to the answer. Hint: It ain't the Jags, Titans, or Colts.

Nobody hopes this team steps up in 2010 more than me, but I'm no longer
blind to the facts. THIS TEAM needs to step into becoming a division championship
contender.

For the record, I'm agreeing with you. The article is comparing The Saints to the Texans though. It's comparing the two teams because of the coaching changes and draft picks that took place in 2006. The argument I'm making is that the two teams have been in different circumstances over the course of that period. The biggest being, the division. Have we been horrible in the division? Yes. But given the numbers, do you think the Saints would've favored a whole lot better than us? In the end I feel they would still be a team not winning the division.

I'm not worried about the saints by no means, and I highly doubt that The Texans are either. I'm just saying that arguing the Texans should take the direction of the saints is not an argument to make because the two teams have very two different situations going on.

DexmanC
01-27-2010, 11:48 AM
For the record, I'm agreeing with you. The article is comparing The Saints to the Texans though. It's comparing the two teams because of the coaching changes and draft picks that took place in 2006. The argument I'm making is that the two teams have been in different circumstances over the course of that period. The biggest being, the division. Have we been horrible in the division? Yes. But given the numbers, do you think the Saints would've favored a whole lot better than us? In the end I feel they would still be a team not winning the division.

I'm not worried about the saints by no means, and I highly doubt that The Texans are either. I'm just saying that arguing the Texans should take the direction of the saints is not an argument to make because the two teams have very two different situations going on.

The Saints wouldn't have to sweep the Colts to have a winning division
record. They'd have to play even with them and beat up on the Titans
and Jags. Each team in the AFC South, with the exception of the
Colts, has a head coach that's a "difference maker" on gameday.
We can say that about Sean Payton. We haven't been able to say
the same about Kubiak. I think it's a fair point to say Kubiak has
never been accused of "outcoaching" his opponent.

Payton beat his mentor in the playoffs, largely because he outschemed
Parcells due to his intimate knowledge of what Bill likes to do. Payton
took a chunk of his OWN PAYCHECK to bring a difference maker as a
defensive coordinator. The Saints made it to the Superbowl not by
having superior talent, but by forcing and scoring off of, a TON of turnovers.

It's no mystery, that in order to sell Kubiak as a Texans stalwart, one must
tear down the achievements of another coach or coaches. That speaks
volumes on where the truth REALLY lies.

Ole Miss Texan
01-27-2010, 12:38 PM
Since the coaching changes (2006)

The Texans are 9-7 against NFC opponents, 3-1 against the NFC South and 1-0 against the Saints.

2006: 0-4 (NFC East)
2007: 3-1 (NFC South)
2008: 3-1 (NFC North)
2009: 3-1 (NFC West)


The Saints are 9-7 against AFC opponents, 1-3 against the AFC South and 0-1 against the Texans.

2006: 1-3 (AFC North)
2007: 1-3 (AFC South)
2008: 3-1 (AFC West)
2009: 4-0 (AFC North)

I reason to believe the Texans would have much better success if we were in the NFC South rather than the AFC South, and we would have made the playoffs at least once. I think overall, the Saints ARE a better team than we are but they would have a much harder time making the playoffs if we switched divisions.

DexmanC
01-27-2010, 01:23 PM
Since the coaching changes (2006)

The Texans are 9-7 against NFC opponents, 3-1 against the NFC South and 1-0 against the Saints.

2006: 0-4 (NFC East)
2007: 3-1 (NFC South)
2008: 3-1 (NFC North)
2009: 3-1 (NFC West)


The Saints are 9-7 against AFC opponents, 1-3 against the AFC South and 0-1 against the Texans.

2006: 1-3 (AFC North)
2007: 1-3 (AFC South)
2008: 3-1 (AFC West)
2009: 4-0 (AFC North)

I reason to believe the Texans would have much better success if we were in the NFC South rather than the AFC South, and we would have made the playoffs at least once. I think overall, the Saints ARE a better team than we are but they would have a much harder time making the playoffs if we switched divisions.

I'm sorry. I thought the Texans have played 24 games against the AFC
South, and have only won SEVEN of them. Kubiak has been hard to figure
out the FIRST time he plays a team. However, the teams that see
him the most kick his ass on the regular. THAT is the crux of why this
team hasn't moved forward. Those NFC squads have faced Gary Kubiak
only ONE time. Thus, it's when he makes his biggest impact. Let's not
forget he went 3-3 in the divison, also beating the Colts, ONCE. It was his
first season as head coach of the Texans.

He needs to step into the league of the coaches he's faced 24 times. Quit
avoiding THAT issue.

dalemurphy
01-27-2010, 01:37 PM
I'm sorry. I thought the Texans have played 24 games against the AFC
South, and have only won SEVEN of them. Kubiak has been hard to figure
out the FIRST time he plays a team. However, the teams that see
him the most kick his ass on the regular. THAT is the crux of why this
team hasn't moved forward. Those NFC squads have faced Gary Kubiak
only ONE time. Thus, it's when he makes his biggest impact. Let's not
forget he went 3-3 in the divison, also beating the Colts, ONCE. It was his
first season as head coach of the Texans.

He needs to step into the league of the coaches he's faced 24 times. Quit
avoiding THAT issue.


2-2 versus Tennessee the past two seasons- Tennessee 20-8 vs. rest of NFL over that span

3-0 versus Miami the past 3 years.

Nobody is avoiding the issue. This was the title of the article that this thread was created about:

Texans Could Learn Something From The Saints

Ole Miss Texan
01-27-2010, 01:52 PM
I'm sorry. I thought the Texans have played 24 games against the AFC
South, and have only won SEVEN of them. Kubiak has been hard to figure
out the FIRST time he plays a team. However, the teams that see
him the most kick his ass on the regular. THAT is the crux of why this
team hasn't moved forward. Those NFC squads have faced Gary Kubiak
only ONE time. Thus, it's when he makes his biggest impact. Let's not
forget he went 3-3 in the divison, also beating the Colts, ONCE. It was his
first season as head coach of the Texans.

He needs to step into the league of the coaches he's faced 24 times. Quit
avoiding THAT issue.
I'm in total agreement we HAVE to do better against our division. We're not going to be a consistent playoff threat until we can consistently beat the teams in our division. Here's our record against the AFC South under Kubiak's tenure:

2006: 3-3 [losses were by 6(in OT), 6 and 19 pts]
2007: 1-5 [losses were by 2, 6, 8, 20, 23 pts]
2008: 2-4 [losses were by 3(in OT), 4, 6, 19 pts]
2009: 1-5 [losses were by 3, 3, 3, 5, 7 pts]

I'm NOT saying that is satisfactory or trying to make excuses but I think you're exaggerating a bit when arguing that Kubiak is hard to figure out the first time but then they kick our ass after that 1st meeting. I think there is some merit to what you bring up but not to the extent you're making it out to be.

13 of our 17 losses to our division rivals have been within 1 possession. 4 of the losses have been by double digits.

8 of our 9 losses over the last two years have been by a touchdown or less. All have come down to the final plays of the game. 4 have been by a FG. That's not exactly "Kicking our ass because they've figured us out." If anything, our play against our division has improved the last 2 years compared to the first 2 years.

Don't take this as an arguement saying this is acceptable and that this is where the team needs to be. Just that this team is progressing, not regressing.

Ole Miss Texan
01-27-2010, 02:34 PM
Look, back to the original post and the article. The Saints took care of their business plain and simple. They made the right personnel moves to get them where they are and they can't control outside agents (like their schedule).

All that I'm saying is that the circumstances WEREN'T the same. The Texans turnaround would have been much different if we were facing Carolina twice a season instead of Indianapolis. If we were facing Atlanta twice instead of Tennessee. And if we were facing Tampa Bay twice instead of Jacksonville. I don't think we go 7-17 in that scenario.

Carolina, Atlanta and Tampa Bay have made the playoffs only ONCE in the last 4 years. That's compared to Indianapolis making the playoffs FOUR times, Tennessee making it TWICE and Jacksonville making it ONCE.

Texans AFC South Opponents' Playoff Appearances: 7
Saints NFC South Opponents' Playoff Appearances: 3

Of the TWO times the Saints have made the playoffs, their division opponents have had a winning record ONCE. That was Atlanta this year at 9-7.

infantrycak
01-27-2010, 02:48 PM
Texans AFC South Opponents' Playoff Appearances: 7
Saints NFC South Opponents' Playoff Appearances: 3

And to put a little finer point on that, those 3 appearances by NFC South members resulted in 0 playoff wins while the 7 appearances by AFC South teams have resulted in 7 wins so far with one being a SB victory.

El Tejano
01-27-2010, 02:49 PM
Look, back to the original post and the article. The Saints took care of their business plain and simple. They made the right personnel moves to get them where they are and they can't control outside agents (like their schedule).

All that I'm saying is that the circumstances WEREN'T the same. The Texans turnaround would have been much different if we were facing Carolina twice a season instead of Indianapolis. If we were facing Atlanta twice instead of Tennessee. And if we were facing Tampa Bay twice instead of Jacksonville. I don't think we go 7-17 in that scenario.

Carolina, Atlanta and Tampa Bay have made the playoffs only ONCE in the last 4 years. That's compared to Indianapolis making the playoffs FOUR times, Tennessee making it TWICE and Jacksonville making it ONCE.

Texans AFC South Opponents' Playoff Appearances: 7
Saints NFC South Opponents' Playoff Appearances: 3

Of the TWO times the Saints have made the playoffs, their division opponents have had a winning record ONCE. That was Atlanta this year at 9-7.

My point exactly. I've even brought up the fact that Houston was being compared to New Orleans around all the Cowboy fans I work with and the first thing they say is "but yall have Peyton Manning in your division..." That's not even looking at the numbers.

My other thought is this: Can we see any similarities that New Orleans had since 06 of AFC teams that went to The Super Bowl during that time? I know winning the division is one of them but.......what else?

thunderkyss
01-27-2010, 02:58 PM
Yes, they lost their BEST PLAYERS (THEIR "Andre Johnson") to season-ending
injuries. Hit shappens. Why do we care IF their season records take a hit?
Do the Colts worry about their opponents' records, or their own? Do the
Patriots worry about their opponents' records, or their own?

You ARE who you compare yourself to. Should we be giddy for being better
than the Seahawks, Rams or Raiders? Do we consider ourselves peers
with the AFC South? The Jags, and Titans compete very well with the
Colts year in and year out. WE seem to only have ONE win against them
ALL TIME!!

Who are the Texans' peers? Their record against the AFC South speaks
volumes to the answer. Hint: It ain't the Jags, Titans, or Colts.

Nobody hopes this team steps up in 2010 more than me, but I'm no longer
blind to the facts. THIS TEAM needs to step into becoming a division championship
contender.

You're making stuff up & going out to nowhere with your argument.

Nobody said we should care about Miami's record. Dale made a good point about Miami's success, and the breaks they got last year, but did not get this year.

Nobody is comparing us to the Rams, or Seahawks, or Raiders.

Nobody is saying anything other than the Texans need to grow up & take care of their own business.

thunderkyss
01-27-2010, 03:05 PM
He needs to step into the league of the coaches he's faced 24 times. Quit
avoiding THAT issue.

We understand that issue. Nobody is avoiding that. As a team, we're saying we weren't good enough to do that. But we believe we'll be good enough next year.

We're saying as a coach, Kubiak wasn't good enough to get it done this year, but we believe he will be next year.

To a T... everyone of us is saying if he doesn't get it done next year, he needs to go.

What we're trying to get you to understand, is that the AFC South is a tough division. Our team, would be like Texas A&M, the AFC South would be like the SEC. How long would it take for the best coach to build that team into a winner in that conference?

Let's put A&M in the Mountain West Conference. How long would it take a coach to build that team into a winner in that conference?

If you believe it doesn't matter which conference the team plays in, then you've got blinders on, simple as that.

None of this makes us happy, or giddy that the Texans haven't been competitive in the AFC, or the AFC South in 8 years.

But we all see evidence to make us believe the Texans will be much better than the avg NFL team next year and beyound. We will be the team the Titans & Jags chase. We'll be the team the Broncos, Jets and Bengals will be chasing to get into the play-offs.

You don't see it..... we get that too.

HoustonFrog
01-27-2010, 03:05 PM
1. Garrett Hartley was the Saints kicker going into the season. He was suspended for four games and they had to pickup Carney again. Hartley came back and was unreliable. They kept both until finally releasing Carney in December, I think. If Kris Brown had been suspended in the preseason then we would have had an opportunity to choose between two kickers as well.

What do you think about Dallas' decision with their struggling kicker? After Nick Folk struggled, they cut him and picked up Suisham, who was cut by Washington for struggling. Against Minnesota, Folk missed two first half field goals that cost Dallas severely in the game and allowed the Vikings to build a 14 point halftime lead, despite being outgained.



I'm staying out of the usual b.s. but since I addressed this multiple times I thought I'd do it again. Please stop using the Dallas decision as a fail. Nick Folk had lost games for them..and some chances to tie games. When their season was on the line vs the Saints he missed FGs, one from extra point range that almost allowed the Saints to tie the game and ruin any chance at the playoffs. Suisam had only missed 3 kicks all year...granted important ones. Your point doesn't make sense because Folk was not guaranteed to make the kicks in Minnesota. Suisam shouldn't even have been kicking them. Up until that game he had kicked effectively and they won. Their goal was to not let Folk tank their season...which Brown almost did single handedly did for the Texans. As I told Silver Oak, you get a feel from being at the game. From being there, Suisam's misses didn't affect the flow of the game. What affected the game was not going for that 4th down and not scoring a TD in the first 3 possessions. What affected it was a horrible O-line and suspect playcalling. His FGs weren't affecting that crowd. They were just trying to get more consisitency than Folk and until the Minny game they had.

Carry on regarding the other endless stuff

JCTexan
01-27-2010, 03:27 PM
We understand that issue. Nobody is avoiding that. As a team, we're saying we weren't good enough to do that. But we believe we'll be good enough next year.

We're saying as a coach, Kubiak wasn't good enough to get it done this year, but we believe he will be next year.

To a T... everyone of us is saying if he doesn't get it done next year, he needs to go.

What we're trying to get you to understand, is that the AFC South is a tough division. Our team, would be like Texas A&M, the AFC South would be like the SEC. How long would it take for the best coach to build that team into a winner in that conference?

Let's put A&M in the Mountain West Conference. How long would it take a coach to build that team into a winner in that conference?

If you believe it doesn't matter which conference the team plays in, then you've got blinders on, simple as that.

None of this makes us happy, or giddy that the Texans haven't been competitive in the AFC, or the AFC South in 8 years.

But we all see evidence to make us believe the Texans will be much better than the avg NFL team next year and beyound. We will be the team the Titans & Jags chase. We'll be the team the Broncos, Jets and Bengals will be chasing to get into the play-offs.

You don't see it..... we get that too.

Are you telling me Kubiak is going to kick field goals this year, or pound the ball in from the one? Houston lost the Titans game on a missed field goal, one of the Colts games because of a missed field goal and the Jacksonville game because they couldn't pound it in from the one. The only way Kubiak is going to be good enough, is if his players step it up in those situations.

Ole Miss Texan
01-27-2010, 03:46 PM
And to put a little finer point on that, those 3 appearances by NFC South members resulted in 0 playoff wins while the 7 appearances by AFC South teams have resulted in 7 wins so far with one being a SB victory.
Wow, that's incredible... I didn't even look at that.

To give New Orleans credit where credit is due, the two times they HAVE made the playoffs, they've advanced to the NFC Championship game. Obviously this year winning it and going to the Super Bowl. In 2006 the Saints beat the Eagles and lost to the Bears. In 2009, they beat the Cardinals and the Vikings.

I hope that when the Texans do make the playoffs, we'll be able to have that kind of momentum. We seem to always start the season off slow and really pick it up at then end. Using this season as an example, if we would have snuck in through the backdoor I really think we would have had a GREAT shot of advancing through each round.

thunderkyss
01-27-2010, 05:18 PM
Are you telling me Kubiak is going to kick field goals this year, or pound the ball in from the one? Houston lost the Titans game on a missed field goal, one of the Colts games because of a missed field goal and the Jacksonville game because they couldn't pound it in from the one. The only way Kubiak is going to be good enough, is if his players step it up in those situations.

I'm not blaming the players entirely. I believe there is plenty of blame to go around.

There are things the players could have done better.

There are things Kubiak could have done better.

There are things Rick Smith could have done better.

There are things Bob McNair could have done better.

dalemurphy
01-27-2010, 05:54 PM
I'm staying out of the usual b.s. but since I addressed this multiple times I thought I'd do it again. Please stop using the Dallas decision as a fail. Nick Folk had lost games for them..and some chances to tie games. When their season was on the line vs the Saints he missed FGs, one from extra point range that almost allowed the Saints to tie the game and ruin any chance at the playoffs. Suisam had only missed 3 kicks all year...granted important ones. Your point doesn't make sense because Folk was not guaranteed to make the kicks in Minnesota. Suisam shouldn't even have been kicking them. Up until that game he had kicked effectively and they won. Their goal was to not let Folk tank their season...which Brown almost did single handedly did for the Texans. As I told Silver Oak, you get a feel from being at the game. From being there, Suisam's misses didn't affect the flow of the game. What affected the game was not going for that 4th down and not scoring a TD in the first 3 possessions. What affected it was a horrible O-line and suspect playcalling. His FGs weren't affecting that crowd. They were just trying to get more consisitency than Folk and until the Minny game they had.

Carry on regarding the other endless stuff


Sometimes, when it's November or December and you have issues at a position, there just isn't anything available that is better. Who did you want the Texans to get to kick for them? Clearly, they liked the odds of Kris Brown recovering over improving the situation by picking up a kicker that 31 other teams have already passed on.

Some of you fans wanted him cut out of some sense of vengeance. That's a ridiculous way to run a football team. And, while I may have had visions of that dancing through my head from time to time, I'm certainly not going to complain that the Texan organization doesn't stoop to that level. I think the message they send to the team by sticking with players who struggle during the season is a greater message than the message some of you want them to send.

There is accountability on the Texans:
Slaton- benched
AGreen- waived
D. Carr- cut
Jacoby Jones- inactive after missing a meeting
Anthony Weaver- cut
Jason Babin- traded away
Travis Johnson- traded away
Busing- benched
D. Barber- benched
Adibi- benched
Fred Bennett- benched

plus many, many more.

HoustonFrog
01-27-2010, 07:39 PM
Sometimes, when it's November or December and you have issues at a position, there just isn't anything available that is better. Who did you want the Texans to get to kick for them? Clearly, they liked the odds of Kris Brown recovering over improving the situation by picking up a kicker that 31 other teams have already passed on.

Some of you fans wanted him cut out of some sense of vengeance. That's a ridiculous way to run a football team. And, while I may have had visions of that dancing through my head from time to time, I'm certainly not going to complain that the Texan organization doesn't stoop to that level. I think the message they send to the team by sticking with players who struggle during the season is a greater message than the message some of you want them to send.

There is accountability on the Texans:
Slaton- benched
AGreen- waived
D. Carr- cut
Jacoby Jones- inactive after missing a meeting
Anthony Weaver- cut
Jason Babin- traded away
Travis Johnson- traded away
Busing- benched
D. Barber- benched
Adibi- benched
Fred Bennett- benched

plus many, many more.

There is nothing to say to this except there was zero vengeance on Kris Brown. It is completely performance based. I think you would be singing a different tune if the 9-7 team was 8-8 and the playoff thrill ride didn't happen because of that last game. They overcame his incompetence. Plain and simple. You really need to wake up to the reality of the NFL. You live in dreamland.

thunderkyss
01-27-2010, 07:46 PM
There is nothing to say to this except there was zero vengeance on Kris Brown. It is completely performance based. I think you would be singing a different tune if the 9-7 team was 8-8 and the playoff thrill ride didn't happen because of that last game. They overcame his incompetence. Plain and simple. You really need to wake up to the reality of the NFL. You live in dreamland.

I believe the point is bringing in another kicker is no surer way of "fixing" our problem, than giving Kris Brown a stern talking to.

I wouldn't have had a problem cutting Kris Brown. I have absolutely no emotional attachment to him.

Nick Folk was cut this season from another team. It did not fix his problem, or the Cowboys problem.

HoustonFrog
01-27-2010, 08:41 PM
I believe the point is bringing in another kicker is no surer way of "fixing" our problem, than giving Kris Brown a stern talking to.

I wouldn't have had a problem cutting Kris Brown. I have absolutely no emotional attachment to him.

Nick Folk was cut this season from another team. It did not fix his problem, or the Cowboys problem.

We don't know though....he might fix his issues because he got cut. And after they cut him they still won games. They needed to send a message and it happened. He wasn't the answer at the time and Suisam filled in. They weren't winning in Minny. They can still get someone new this offseason and the message was sent.

It sends a message. It tells people that your performance is worth something. The Texans can't be pack rats and just keep taking in these guys. Do you remember Curvin Richards?1992 season finale against the Chicago Bears. The Cowboys had their seeding and bye set. 2 fumbles later, Curvin was cut. They had no backup for Smith but it sent a message. If that was here, Curvin would have lasted 3 more years and been a prized, fumbling backup that needed fixing...Chris Brown. Guys like Cushing are gym rats who work their tail off to make a difference. No matter how nice Kris is, his misses piss guys like that off and they won't trust him game time.

Not pointed at what you said TK, I just think a kicker can be a good message cut, especially with his respectability.

houstonspartan
01-27-2010, 10:52 PM
Sometimes, when it's November or December and you have issues at a position, there just isn't anything available that is better. Who did you want the Texans to get to kick for them? Clearly, they liked the odds of Kris Brown recovering over improving the situation by picking up a kicker that 31 other teams have already passed on.

Some of you fans wanted him cut out of some sense of vengeance. That's a ridiculous way to run a football team. And, while I may have had visions of that dancing through my head from time to time, I'm certainly not going to complain that the Texan organization doesn't stoop to that level. I think the message they send to the team by sticking with players who struggle during the season is a greater message than the message some of you want them to send.

There is accountability on the Texans:
Slaton- benched
AGreen- waived
D. Carr- cut
Jacoby Jones- inactive after missing a meeting
Anthony Weaver- cut
Jason Babin- traded away
Travis Johnson- traded away
Busing- benched
D. Barber- benched
Adibi- benched
Fred Bennett- benched

plus many, many more.

I didn't want him cut out of vengance. I wanted him cut because he wasn't doing his job.

dalemurphy
01-27-2010, 11:56 PM
I didn't want him cut out of vengance. I wanted him cut because he wasn't doing his job.

Once again. Who did you want picked up in his place? Why do you think the chances were better that a November street FA would outperform a 32 year old veteran that was in a slump? Show me some names!

The Pencil Neck
01-28-2010, 12:27 AM
I didn't want him cut out of vengance. I wanted him cut because he wasn't doing his job.

So you want to hire someone worse? You want worse performance from that position?

You don't improve the performance of the kicker position by cutting the guy in late November and bringing someone in off the street.

houstonspartan
01-28-2010, 01:28 AM
So you want to hire someone worse? You want worse performance from that position?

You don't improve the performance of the kicker position by cutting the guy in late November and bringing someone in off the street.

Wow. Dallas cut their kicker in November and went to the playoffs.

New Orleans cut their KICKER in December, and are in the Super Bowl (thanks to the new kicker).

Just...wow. I almost have no words for your response.

Never mind.

houstonspartan
01-28-2010, 01:29 AM
Once again. Who did you want picked up in his place? Why do you think the chances were better that a November street FA would outperform a 32 year old veteran that was in a slump? Show me some names!

Once again, getting a halfway decent kicker is not that hard. How was it SO easy for New Orleans and Dallas to do it late in the season, but impossible for Houston?

Was there a reason we couldn't pick up Garrett Hartley in November, yet New Orleans picked him up in DECEMBER?

Jesus, people. Come on.

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 07:13 AM
Once again, getting a halfway decent kicker is not that hard. How was it SO easy for New Orleans and Dallas to do it late in the season, but impossible for Houston?

Was there a reason we couldn't pick up Garrett Hartley in November, yet New Orleans picked him up in DECEMBER?

Jesus, people. Come on.

As I said in the other thread where you mentioned this: you don't know what you're talking about.

Hartley was the N.O. kicker going into the season. He was suspended by the league and NO had to re-sign Carney in order to have an active kicker. Once Hartley was reactivated, they kept both kickers until very late in the season. You are so quick to criticize the Texans and credit another team that you don't even bother with the truth.

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 07:16 AM
Wow. Dallas cut their kicker in November and went to the playoffs.

New Orleans cut their KICKER in December, and are in the Super Bowl (thanks to the new kicker).
Just...wow. I almost have no words for your response.

Never mind.

from Wikipedia:

Hartley was signed by the New Orleans Saints on October 29, 2008 to replace the recently released Taylor Mehlhaff. He played in his first game on November 9, 2008 against the Atlanta Falcons. Hartley came out strong, booting 13 for 13 field goal attempts for the 2008 season. He was expected to be the Saints starting kicker for the 2009 season. However, Hartley was given a 4-game suspension after testing positive for a banned stimulant.[1] Hartley says he was unaware that the stimulant was on the NFLís list of banned substances. He says he obtained Adderall prescription pills from a former college friend and used them to help himself stay awake while driving from Dallas to New Orleans for an offseason workout. The Saints signed John Carney to a one-year contract to take his place. Despite Hartley being available for the October 18 game against the New York Giants, Carney continued to handle placekicking duties. Hartley remained inactive until the Saints' twelfth game of the season, against the Washington Redskins. Hartley then kicked four field goals, including the game winning kick in overtime that allowed the Saints to preserve their undefeated record.[2] On January 24, 2010 he made a 40-yard field goal in overtime against the Minnesota Vikings in the NFC Championship game to send the New Orleans Saints to their first Super Bowl. [3]

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 07:20 AM
Wow. Dallas cut their kicker in November and went to the playoffs.


The new kicker went 2-3 with Dallas in the regular season before missing two big kicks in the first half of the playoff game versus Minnesota. Do you really think the kicking change had a positive impact on the Cowboys' season?

DexmanC
01-28-2010, 07:32 AM
The new kicker went 2-3 with Dallas in the regular season before missing two big kicks in the first half of the playoff game versus Minnesota. Do you really think the kicking change had a positive impact on the Cowboys' season?

Wow. Championship teams don't take risks? They make DAMN SURE the
moves they make are GUARANTEED TO WORK!!??

Wow. I'm stunned.

:spin::spin::spin::spin:

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 07:51 AM
Wow. Championship teams don't take risks? They make DAMN SURE the
moves they make are GUARANTEED TO WORK!!??

Wow. I'm stunned.

:spin::spin::spin::spin:

They aren't reactionary. They don't take risks that don't make sense. You do realize the Texans won their last 4 games, don't you? How quickly would you have cut Kris Brown? Unless you cut him after the game at Indy, I'm not sure why any of you think it could possibly have led to more wins. The only other game he cost us was the Tennessee game. Are you really suggesting we cut him that quick?

He missed 5 FGs and 1 Xtra point after the Tennessee loss, but we won all 4 of those games. He was 2 for 2 vs. Indy and 1 for 1 vs. Jacksonville, immediately following the Tennessee game.

So, I fail to see how cutting Brown would've improved our season. thoughts?

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 08:04 AM
Once again. Who did you want picked up in his place? Why do you think the chances were better that a November street FA would outperform a 32 year old veteran that was in a slump? Show me some names!

So you want to hire someone worse? You want worse performance from that position?

You don't improve the performance of the kicker position by cutting the guy in late November and bringing someone in off the street.

Someone worse?Someone worse than a guy missing extra points and FGs in key games...th elast game of the season? Suisam did better in the regular season. There are guy on couches who could miss just as badly. Heck, Folk was better than Brown and was on a couch after being cut. You guys think he needed to be kept, pick him up. Your explanations make no sense and it is a loser mentality.

The new kicker went 2-3 with Dallas in the regular season before missing two big kicks in the first half of the playoff game versus Minnesota. Do you really think the kicking change had a positive impact on the Cowboys' season?

Again, please read what I wrote last page. Your theory not only doesn't hold water in this situation but is a desperate example. It had an impact because players and coaches were not happy and Folk single handeldy almost lost their season and playoff hopes. I have family that works for them. I hear the news. Check my example of Curvin above. They made a move that all thought was needed. It worked out until Minny and even then he didn't lose the game. Teams do this every season.

What if I was a guy sitting at my office here, screwing up all the pretrial reviews for the year. Yet I was kept around because of what I did 2 years ago and people liked me. If you were another attorney who needed me to make the case successful, you would resent that I still was around. I would be putting your job in jeopardy. It is the same in football. The team doesn't brush off his misses because he is a good guy. As the season went on there were reports of players even being disgusted in practice with it. When a guy like that is kept around they aren't sure what direction the team is headed.

Backing out again...............

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 09:07 AM
Someone worse?Someone worse than a guy missing extra points and FGs in key games...th elast game of the season? Suisam did better in the regular season. There are guy on couches who could miss just as badly. Heck, Folk was better than Brown and was on a couch after being cut. You guys think he needed to be kept, pick him up. Your explanations make no sense and it is a loser mentality.



Again, please read what I wrote last page. Your theory not only doesn't hold water in this situation but is a desperate example. It had an impact because players and coaches were not happy and Folk single handeldy almost lost their season and playoff hopes. I have family that works for them. I hear the news. Check my example of Curvin above. They made a move that all thought was needed. It worked out until Minny and even then he didn't lose the game. Teams do this every season.

What if I was a guy sitting at my office here, screwing up all the pretrial reviews for the year. Yet I was kept around because of what I did 2 years ago and people liked me. If you were another attorney who needed me to make the case successful, you would resent that I still was around. I would be putting your job in jeopardy. It is the same in football. The team doesn't brush off his misses because he is a good guy. As the season went on there were reports of players even being disgusted in practice with it. When a guy like that is kept around they aren't sure what direction the team is headed.

Backing out again...............


Fine. That's the Cowboy lockerroom. What do your sources say about the Texan lockerroom. Did Texan players want Brown outta there? Perhaps players actively lobbied on Brown's behalf. He's been fairly popular among the other players from what I've seen. And, I'm just not seeing how KBrown's firing influences Rex Grossman not to play like Rex Grossman versus Jacksonville, or Matt Schaub not to dislocate his shoulder versus Jacksonville... That's the only game after the Tennessee game that the Texans lost and KBrown didn't miss a field goal in that one. I watched the game and I didn't notice anything to indicate that the retention of Kris Brown led to uninspired play by the Texans.

The Pencil Neck
01-28-2010, 09:18 AM
Wow. Dallas cut their kicker in November and went to the playoffs.

New Orleans cut their KICKER in December, and are in the Super Bowl (thanks to the new kicker).

Just...wow. I almost have no words for your response.

Never mind.

New Orleans cut their BACKUP Kicker in December. The kicker they have now was on their roster from the beginning.

Dallas cut their kicker and then the kicker they signed missed several kicks and killed them.

The Pencil Neck
01-28-2010, 09:27 AM
Someone worse?Someone worse than a guy missing extra points and FGs in key games...th elast game of the season? Suisam did better in the regular season. There are guy on couches who could miss just as badly. Heck, Folk was better than Brown and was on a couch after being cut. You guys think he needed to be kept, pick him up. Your explanations make no sense and it is a loser mentality.


Suisham had 3 attempts in the regular season and only hit 2 of them. Say what you want, Suisham wasn't an upgrade of that position and it showed in the playoffs. The Cowboys made a reactive move and brought in a guy who killed their momentum in the playoffs. There was no way that was a good move.

Folk was about the same as Brown, not better. And Folk didn't have as much history with the Cowboys as Brown has with the Texans.

The Pencil Neck
01-28-2010, 09:28 AM
Wow. Championship teams don't take risks? They make DAMN SURE the
moves they make are GUARANTEED TO WORK!!??

Wow. I'm stunned.

:spin::spin::spin::spin:

The Cowboys won a Championship?

Ole Miss Texan
01-28-2010, 09:36 AM
Sorry dalemurphy... I have to spread some rep around before I can rep about 6 of your posts. :)

HuttoKarl
01-28-2010, 09:55 AM
Suisham had 3 attempts in the regular season and only hit 2 of them. Say what you want, Suisham wasn't an upgrade of that position and it showed in the playoffs. The Cowboys made a reactive move and brought in a guy who killed their momentum in the playoffs. There was no way that was a good move.

Folk was about the same as Brown, not better. And Folk didn't have as much history with the Cowboys as Brown has with the Texans.

In the last two weeks, Kris Brown had 4 attempts and only hit two. What's better?

It's amazing that there are so many people who want to ignore the FACT that our kicker was the worst in the league last season. He hit 2 of 6 from 40-49 yards, which are kicks that teams really need made.

I doubt the management does anything to remedy the situation and while you're cheering in your Kris Brown jersey while he flubs kick after kick, I'll be shaking my head and praying for a TD on the next drive rather than giving the other team great field position with nothing to show on the scoreboard for it.

HuttoKarl
01-28-2010, 09:56 AM
Fine. That's the Cowboy lockerroom. What do your sources say about the Texan lockerroom. Did Texan players want Brown outta there? Perhaps players actively lobbied on Brown's behalf. He's been fairly popular among the other players from what I've seen. And, I'm just not seeing how KBrown's firing influences Rex Grossman not to play like Rex Grossman versus Jacksonville, or Matt Schaub not to dislocate his shoulder versus Jacksonville... That's the only game after the Tennessee game that the Texans lost and KBrown didn't miss a field goal in that one. I watched the game and I didn't notice anything to indicate that the retention of Kris Brown led to uninspired play by the Texans.

How'd KB do in that loss? Oh yeah...missed two. We lost by how many?

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 10:16 AM
Fine. That's the Cowboy lockerroom. What do your sources say about the Texan lockerroom. Did Texan players want Brown outta there? Perhaps players actively lobbied on Brown's behalf. He's been fairly popular among the other players from what I've seen. And, I'm just not seeing how KBrown's firing influences Rex Grossman not to play like Rex Grossman versus Jacksonville, or Matt Schaub not to dislocate his shoulder versus Jacksonville... That's the only game after the Tennessee game that the Texans lost and KBrown didn't miss a field goal in that one. I watched the game and I didn't notice anything to indicate that the retention of Kris Brown led to uninspired play by the Texans.

Take it for what its worth but from the John McClain and Justice I heard that players were peeved because he as missing in practice too because it is a deal where you keep doing it until you get it right. On the radio they talked about teammates being pissed.

DeMarCushPoll
01-28-2010, 10:17 AM
Once again, getting a halfway decent kicker is not that hard. How was it SO easy for New Orleans and Dallas to do it late in the season, but impossible for Houston?

Was there a reason we couldn't pick up Garrett Hartley in November, yet New Orleans picked him up in DECEMBER?

Jesus, people. Come on.


It could be that the Texans looked around and didn't find any kickers that they thought would be any better than Brown?

I think the NO kicker was already on the roster and I don't think Dallas changing kickers mid season helped thier situation any.

From what I hear, Brown will have to compete for his job this off season. Hopefully he will get things turned around.

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 10:19 AM
Suisham had 3 attempts in the regular season and only hit 2 of them. Say what you want, Suisham wasn't an upgrade of that position and it showed in the playoffs. The Cowboys made a reactive move and brought in a guy who killed their momentum in the playoffs. There was no way that was a good move.

Folk was about the same as Brown, not better. And Folk didn't have as much history with the Cowboys as Brown has with the Texans.

What are you talking about? After they signed him they shutout Washington and killed Philly twice. He did nothing with their momentum. They went on a roll with him. That is just made up. In the NO game..where they had to win to stay alive...they showed Folk shanking them in warmups. He then missed 2 kicks..one from extra point distance that would have sealed the game...and this was their season. The Minnesota game, they needed TDs. Again, the FG miss wasn't the turning point. Suisam told the coaches pregame that 45 was his range and they sent him out anyways.

Who cares about history when alot of it is average and bad. Folk was a Pro Bowler who who made 83% and 90% of his kicks his first 2 years.

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 10:21 AM
How'd KB do in that loss? Oh yeah...missed two. We lost by how many?

Yes. He cost us that football game vs. Tennessee. Largely. My point is that it would've been WAYYY premature to have cut and replaced him before that game. I don't recall a lot of people screaming to cut Brown after that first INDY game. After the Tennessee game, he did not cost us any Wins. Therefore, it seems silly to argue that doing what the Cowboys did would've made the difference in our season. HOW? He made both field goals vs. Indy and then made his only attempt versus Jacksonville. He was atrocious during the last month, missing 5 FGs and an extra point. However, we won all those games. So, someone explain to me how the handling, by the coaches, of the kicking position, kept us out of the playoffs?

Regarding Brown, I don't expect him to make the roster next season. I don't know how he can be trusted next season not to have another meltdown when it matters. If Brown is retained and fails in a similar manner next year, I will be quick to attack Kubiak and company for horrible decision-making.

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 10:26 AM
He told the coaches pregame that 45 was his range and they sent him out anyways.

and you want Kubiak to emulate how the Cowboy coaches handle the kicking position?

Wade- "it's 4th and short and we're moving the ball. However, I'd like to kick a field goal. Suisham, can you make this 49 yard kick?"

Suisham- "no, I could hit it if we were about 5 yards closer"

Wade- "okay. go in there and kick it anyway."

Suisham- "yes sir!"

Wade- "AHHH Man! I can't believe he didn't make that kick!"

steelbtexan
01-28-2010, 10:30 AM
Once again. Who did you want picked up in his place? Why do you think the chances were better that a November street FA would outperform a 32 year old veteran that was in a slump? Show me some names!

K's picked up during the season that had a better 2nd half than K.Brown.

1.Stover
2.Carney
3.Cundiff
4.Cano

K.Browns missed FG against Arizona in the 1st half changed how the Texans played in that game. Score tied 21-21 when it could have been 24-21. Texans had to try to move the ball for another K.Brown FG attempt. Schaub throws an INT. and well you know the rest of story.

I dont know that they would have won the Arizona game but I do know that K.Brown along with C.Brown didn' get the job done.

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 10:32 AM
and you want Kubiak to emulate how the Cowboy coaches handle the kicking position?

Wade- "it's 4th and short and we're moving the ball. However, I'd like to kick a field goal. Suisham, can you make this 49 yard kick?"

Suisham- "no, I could hit it if we were about 5 yards closer"

Wade- "okay. go in there and kick it anyway."

Suisham- "yes sir!"

Wade- "AHHH Man! I can't believe he didn't make that kick!"

I didn't say that. Every kicker and team in the league gauges in pregame how a kicker is hitting. Suisam was consistent from 45 in. Jerry knew it and talked about it later, the coaches knew it and talked about it later, etc. It has nothing to do with leg strength, just comfort level. You are in the playoffs playing in one of the loudest stadiums out there. You are moving the ball and the option is a 49yarder or going for it on 4th and inches. It's that simple. You are making this much harder than it is. Even when he missed the crowd wasn't going nuts. From our level, it was ho-hum. They moved the ball 3 possessions and no TDs was going to kill them. Once Minnesota got a big play and a TD it wasn't because of the missed FG that hurt them. It was because they didn't keep the pressure on and stick with the gameplan when they had their shot. It wasn't like he missed 2 in the 4th with a chance to tie the game or make it a FG game.

Again, you are spinning in circles about a kicker who was losing games. And you think it is ok to just accept these things based on him as a person. The Cowboy situation doesn't affect the total Fail that that Brown was.

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 10:38 AM
I didn't say that. Every kicker and team gages in pregame how a kicker is hitting. Suisam was consistent from 45 in. Jerry knew it, etc. You are in the playoffs playing in one of the loudest stadiums out there. You are moving the ball and the option is a 49 yarder or going for it on 4th and inches. It's that simple. You are making this much harder than it is. Even when he missed the crowd wasn't going nuts. From our level, it was ho-hum. They moved the ball 3 possessions and no TDs was going to kill them. Once Minnesota got a big play and a TD it wasn't because of the missed FG that hurt them. It was because they didn't keep the pressure on and stick with the gameplan when they had their shot.

Again, you are spinning in circles about a kicker who was losing games. And you think it is ok to just accept these things based on him as a person. The Cowboy situation doesn't affect the total Fail that that Brown was.


You miss the point. You guys are arguing that the Texans should make better decisions and are using the Cowboys as an example of better decision-making. Then, in your defense of the Cowboys' kicker, assert that Wade sent the kicker out twice for two kicks that he was told was out of his range. The first, was 4 yards outside his range and was on a 4th and 1. The clear decision in that scenario was to go for the first down. He sent out the kicker, the field goal was missed, and Minnesota breathed a sigh of relief and took over the ball at the 40 yard line.

Sorry, I'll take Kubiak's decision-making over Wade Phillips any day!

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 10:46 AM
You miss the point. You guys are arguing that the Texans should make better decisions and are using the Cowboys as an example of better decision-making. Then, in your defense of the Cowboys' kicker, assert that Wade sent the kicker out twice for two kicks that he was told was out of his range. The first, was 4 yards outside his range and was on a 4th and 1. The clear decision in that scenario was to go for the first down. He sent out the kicker, the field goal was missed, and Minnesota breathed a sigh of relief and took over the ball at the 40 yard line.

Sorry, I'll take Kubiak's decision-making over Wade Phillips any day!

That is a whole different subject matter not even on topic. Stop spinning other directions. People are not just comparing the Cowboys. They compared the losing Redskins. The Saints. The Colts. Everyone that either had to pick up kickers or decided to. The argument being..there are guys out there. The argument being, keeping Kris Brown sends the wrong message. Despite what Wade did, the Cowboys made the right move after the NO game. The team was tired of it and they were trying to get somewhere. Wade was a fool for sending him out...the media has torched him for it. But that has nothing to do with keeping Kris Brown. It also has nothing to do with how Wade or Kubes handled the team during the full season. I won't go there but Wade did pretty darn well this year as coach/D Coordinator.

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 10:56 AM
That is a whole different subject matter not even on topic. Stop spinning other directions. People are not just comparing the Cowboys. They compared the losing Redskins. The Saints. The Colts. Everyone that either had to pick up kickers or decided to. The argument being..there are guys out there. The argument being, keeping Kris Brown sends the wrong message. Despite what Wade did, the Cowboys made the right move after the NO game. The team was tired of it and they were trying to get somewhere. Wade was a fool for sending him out...the media has torched him for it. But that has nothing to do with keeping Kris Brown. It also has nothing to do with how Wade or Kubes handled the team during the full season. I won't go there but Wade did pretty darn well this year as coach/D Coordinator.

The Texans finished the season with a 4 game winning streak... including wins at Miami and vs. New England. I'm not sure what message the Texan players got just before they went on their most impressive winning streak in the organization's history?

houstonspartan
01-28-2010, 10:56 AM
That is a whole different subject matter not even on topic. Stop spinning other directions. People are not just comparing the Cowboys. They compared the losing Redskins. The Saints. The Colts. Everyone that either had to pick up kickers or decided to. The argument being..there are guys out there. The argument being, keeping Kris Brown sends the wrong message. Despite what Wade did, the Cowboys made the right move after the NO game. The team was tired of it and they were trying to get somewhere. Wade was a fool for sending him out...the media has torched him for it. But that has nothing to do with keeping Kris Brown. It also has nothing to do with how Wade or Kubes handled the team during the full season. I won't go there but Wade did pretty darn well this year as coach/D Coordinator.

Shoot, Frog, I can't rep you becuase I already did. lol.

Great post, and that's exactly how I feel. I reject the argument that there were no better kickers out there than Kris Brown.

Sadly, I fully expect him to be on the team next year. They like him.

HOU-TEX
01-28-2010, 11:08 AM
:popcorn:

This much discussion concerning kickers is odd......yet amusing at the same time.

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 11:09 AM
The Texans finished the season with a 4 game winning streak... including wins at Miami and vs. New England. I'm not sure what message the Texan players got just before they went on their most impressive winning streak in the organization's history?

Are you kidding? It is impossible to talk sense to someone who can spin like this.

Kris Brown put that streak in jeopardy and almost single handedly lost the Pats game. They had to overcome that. They had to go on a 4 game streak partly due to him missing kicks in earlier games.

If you refuse to get the basics of all of this, then I give up trying to talk any logical football to you. You'll figure out a way to make it prove that the team MVP is actually Brown for forcing them to have to win at the end.

:popcorn:

This much discussion concerning kickers is odd......yet amusing at the same time.

Agree. It is odd in that 35 years of watching football this is my first real debate over a kicker that is average and who was part of why the team failed overall this year. I didn't know Kris Brown was so special. We have to keep him out of the hands of enemies. He is about to cure cancer. I think certain charities get $20,000 for every miss. :) If he wore white gloves this would be perfect.

HOU-TEX
01-28-2010, 11:38 AM
Agree. It is odd in that 35 years of watching football this is my first real debate over a kicker that is average and who was part of why the team failed overall this year. I didn't know Kris Brown was so special. We have to keep him out of the hands of enemies. He is about to cure cancer. I think certain charities get $20,000 for every miss. :) If he wore white gloves this would be perfect.

Eh, I've already commented on KB. Honestly, I don't care how it's done, but the position has to be upgraded. Whether it's whacking him now and finding someone else or bring a competition to the position that has been sorely missing.

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 11:45 AM
Are you kidding? It is impossible to talk sense to someone who can spin like this.

Kris Brown put that streak in jeopardy and almost single handedly lost the Pats game. They had to overcome that. They had to go on a 4 game streak partly due to him missing kicks in earlier games.

If you refuse to get the basics of all of this, then I give up trying to talk any logical football to you. You'll figure out a way to make it prove that the team MVP is actually Brown for forcing them to have to win at the end.



Agree. It is odd in that 35 years of watching football this is my first real debate over a kicker that is average and who was part of why the team failed overall this year. I didn't know Kris Brown was so special. We have to keep him out of the hands of enemies. He is about to cure cancer. I think certain charities get $20,000 for every miss. :) If he wore white gloves this would be perfect.

Your comprehension skills must be poor. I've not once even attempted to defend Kris Brown's season, nor do I want to see him on the team next year. I'm defending the coaches decision not to cut him during the season. You have argued that he should've been cut (even without a good replacement) in order to send a message to the team. My response to that is the team didn't seem to need that message- They won the last 4 games of the season, even with his atrocious kicking.

The two examples I've seen used to argue that he should've been cut are:
New Orleans
and
Dallas.

Well, NO had 2 kickers on the roster all season, as I have discussed previously. Dallas replaced their kicker with another kicker who hit 2 of 3 kicks for them and then missed two first half kicks in the Minnesota playoff game. You argued that the value of replacing Folk wasn't in improving the kicking position but in the message sent to the rest of the team. I say, fine. But, again, the Texans won their last 4 games. What message did they need that they did not get?

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 11:46 AM
Eh, I've already commented on KB. Honestly, I don't care how it's done, but the position has to be upgraded. Whether it's whacking him now and finding someone else or bring a competition to the position that has been sorely missing.

Totally agree.

The Pencil Neck
01-28-2010, 11:57 AM
In the last two weeks, Kris Brown had 4 attempts and only hit two. What's better?

It's amazing that there are so many people who want to ignore the FACT that our kicker was the worst in the league last season. He hit 2 of 6 from 40-49 yards, which are kicks that teams really need made.

I doubt the management does anything to remedy the situation and while you're cheering in your Kris Brown jersey while he flubs kick after kick, I'll be shaking my head and praying for a TD on the next drive rather than giving the other team great field position with nothing to show on the scoreboard for it.

I don't want Kris Brown as our kicker next year. That's not part of this discussion. I want us to bring in a better kicker and upgrade that position.

No, the argument is whether you can cut your kicker the last few weeks of the season and find someone on the street who you're sure is going to be better. My point is that you don't cut someone unless you've got someone better to take his place. That's just shooting yourself in the head. The Cowboys replaced a kicker who had kicked 64% in the regular season with a guy that kicked 67% in the regular season and then 60% in the postseason.

What's the point of cutting Kris Brown in early December if you're just going to bring in a guy who kicks about the same if not worse?

My bottom line is just about upgrading the position. If we can upgrade a position, any position, then we should do that. I just think it's very rare to do that in late November or December.

Double Barrel
01-28-2010, 12:02 PM
Sorry, I'll take Kubiak's decision-making over Wade Phillips any day!

This doesn't surprise me. Philips has had ONE losing season as a head coach, but far be it from me to cloud your bright rays of sunshine. :)

:popcorn:

This much discussion concerning kickers is odd......yet amusing at the same time.

This much passion in defense if a freakin' mediocre kicker is odd, IMO.

But yeah, definitely amusing, as well.

HOU-TEX
01-28-2010, 12:03 PM
This doesn't surprise me. Philips has had ONE losing season as a head coach, but far be it from me to cloud your bright rays of sunshine. :)



This much passion in defense if a freakin' mediocre kicker is odd, IMO.

But yeah, definitely amusing, as well.

Wonder if we can keep it rolling until draft time. Ha

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 12:07 PM
Your comprehension skills must be poor. I've not once even attempted to defend Kris Brown's season, nor do I want to see him on the team next year. I'm defending the coaches decision not to cut him during the season. You have argued that he should've been cut (even without a good replacement) in order to send a message to the team. My response to that is the team didn't seem to need that message- They won the last 4 games of the season, even with his atrocious kicking.

The two examples I've seen used to argue that he should've been cut are:
New Orleans
and
Dallas.

Well, NO had 2 kickers on the roster all season, as I have discussed previously. Dallas replaced their kicker with another kicker who hit 2 of 3 kicks for them and then missed two first half kicks in the Minnesota playoff game. You argued that the value of replacing Folk wasn't in improving the kicking position but in the message sent to the rest of the team. I say, fine. But, again, the Texans won their last 4 games. What message did they need that they did not get?

I comprehend fine. It is just hard to follow alleged logic that goes from "Kris Brown is a good guy/kicker that just needs to be fixed" to "there was no one else to replace him"(although other teams found replacements just as good as him) to "Kubiak is better than Wade" to "he needs to go." I'm not sure how I missed such sound reasoning...lol.

Just like players in every sport, changes of scenery helps.

I don't want Kris Brown as our kicker next year. That's not part of this discussion. I want us to bring in a better kicker and upgrade that position.

No, the argument is whether you can cut your kicker the last few weeks of the season and find someone on the street who you're sure is going to be better. My point is that you don't cut someone unless you've got someone better to take his place. That's just shooting yourself in the head. The Cowboys replaced a kicker who had kicked 64% in the regular season with a guy that kicked 67% in the regular season and then 60% in the postseason.

What's the point of cutting Kris Brown in early December if you're just going to bring in a guy who kicks about the same if not worse?

My bottom line is just about upgrading the position. If we can upgrade a position, any position, then we should do that. I just think it's very rare to do that in late November or December.

Stop missing things like facts. The Cowboys picked up a guy who was a 85.7% kicker for the season before he was cut. He had only missed 3 FGs with the Skins. One of them just happen to lose the NO game for them. He also had been with the Cowboys in 2006 so they had familiarity with him. Also, the Skins picked up a guy named Graham Gano who had been kicking in the Las Vegas Locomotives of the UFL. He went 4 for 4. So it isn't hard to find guys.

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 12:13 PM
This doesn't surprise me. Philips has had ONE losing season as a head coach, but far be it from me to cloud your bright rays of sunshine. :)



This much passion in defense if a freakin' mediocre kicker is odd, IMO.

But yeah, definitely amusing, as well.


DB, Would you really rather have Wade Phillips as your head coach right now?
I just don't see it. Honestly!

But, that's me. You know me, I think the world of Kubiak and he has a career losing record. So, a silly little thing like Wade Phillips career winning percentage being close to .600 doesn't impress! I'm not so easily swayed by insignificant statistics like Wins and Losses. Other things are more important. I'll try and get you a list of them when I can. :thinking:

gotta go. I've got some thinking to do!

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 12:16 PM
I comprehend fine. It is just hard to follow alleged logic that goes from "Kris Brown is a good guy/kicker that just needs to be fixed" to "there was no one else to replace him"(although other teams found replacements just as good as him) to "Kubiak is better than Wade" to "he needs to go." I'm not sure how I missed such sound reasoning...lol.

Just like players in every sport, changes of scenery helps.



Stop missing things like facts. The Cowboys picked up a guy who was a 85.7% kicker for the season before he was cut. He had only missed 3 FGs. One of them just happen to lose the NO game for them.

He went 2 of 3 for the Cowboys and then missed two 1st half kicks in the playoff game. How was this a good move for them, again?

You keep switching your argument. You are rotating two independent arguments:
1. The Cowboys improved their FG kicking with the change to Suisham.

2. It's not about production, it sent the team a message and the FGs made or missed weren't relavent to the outcome of the final 4 or 5 football games.

Please show me the post where I argued that Kris Brown should be kept because he is a good guy?

infantrycak
01-28-2010, 12:22 PM
I don't want Kris Brown as our kicker next year. That's not part of this discussion. I want us to bring in a better kicker and upgrade that position.

No, the argument is whether you can cut your kicker the last few weeks of the season and find someone on the street who you're sure is going to be better. My point is that you don't cut someone unless you've got someone better to take his place. That's just shooting yourself in the head. The Cowboys replaced a kicker who had kicked 64% in the regular season with a guy that kicked 67% in the regular season and then 60% in the postseason.

What's the point of cutting Kris Brown in early December if you're just going to bring in a guy who kicks about the same if not worse?

My bottom line is just about upgrading the position. If we can upgrade a position, any position, then we should do that. I just think it's very rare to do that in late November or December.

What he said. And there really is a difference between defending Kris Brown (which really can't be done for last season) and doubting the wisdom of criticizing the coaching decision to ride him through the season. Actually it is two totally separate issues.

This doesn't surprise me. Philips has had ONE losing season as a head coach, but far be it from me to cloud your bright rays of sunshine. :)

Ummm, Kubiak has ONE losing season as a head coach. :kitten:

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 12:26 PM
He went 2 of 3 for the Cowboys and then missed two 1st half kicks in the playoff game. How was this a good move for them, again?

Please show me the post where I argued that Kris Brown should be kept because he is a good guy?

Again, how is this not evident. Let me give you some pointers. When you look at arguments you can't just focus in on one thing. You have to look at what options there were from start to finish. Its not in a vacuum.

Nick Folk was their first option. He missed 10 FGs. He missed kicks that almost ended their season 3 weeks before the playoffs. He was horrible, including his last miss...a 23 yarder that would have sealed the game.

Shaun Suisham had kicked for the Cowboys before. He was hitting at 85.7% when they picked him up and tried him out. He then helped them...2 of 3 when they went on a winning streak. The players and coaches had seen enough of Folk for the year. He also went 2 for 2 with a 48 yarder in the first playoff game...something you skip. So he was doing well for them. Just like Kaeding or many others this post season he had a bad Minny game. I have explained that game ad nauseum from personal experience.

What you seem to miss is that with the way Folk was kicking there is no guarantee that he hits any of the kicks in any of the remaining games. That is the other side you ignore. They made a run with a different guy. He didn't lose the game for them. So with the way Folk kicked precut they made a) a temporary upgrade and b) sent a message.

They can still try out guys this off-season and they still got their point across..performance matters. Heck they can try out Folk again, Suisham and whomever else they chose. Nothing lost.

WWJD
01-28-2010, 12:33 PM
Jimmy Johnson said on the Fox pregame show that Folk should have and would have been cut many games before if he were still the coach...he said you get rid of kickers that lose their touch and move on.

I agree.

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 12:34 PM
Jimmy Johnson said on the Fox pregame show that Folk should have and would have been cut many games before if he were still the coach...he said you get rid of kickers that lose their touch and move on.

I agree.

Exactly...like he did Curvin. They lose their mojo and changes of scenery help. For a year it even worked wonders for Brad Lidge as a pitcher.

Back then they had Hoffman as their kicking coach. As I wrote in another thread before, they changed kickers before SB seasons and had no trouble finding rookies or other guys to coach up.

http://www.kcchiefs.com/coach/steve_hoffman/

Hoffman enjoyed a 16-year tenure with Dallas (’89-04) as that club’s kicking coach. In addition to his duties with the specialists, he spent seven seasons as the club’s offensive/defensive quality control coach (’89-95). He coached the club’s kickers and served as offensive quality control coach (’96-01), before finishing his tenure with Dallas as kicking coach/defensive quality control coach (2002-04).

During his tenure in Dallas, Hoffman successfully tutored a number of rookie or first-year specialists, including P John Jett (’93), K Chris Boniol (’94), K Richie Cunningham (’97) and P Toby Gowin (’97). In total, Hoffman’s specialists established 15 separate club records during his tenure in Dallas.

WWJD
01-28-2010, 12:44 PM
Exactly...like he did Curvin. They lose their mojo and changes of scenery help. For a year it even worked wonders for Brad Lidge as a pitcher.

Back then they had Hoffman as their kicking coach. As I wrote in another thread before, they changed kickers before SB seasons and had no trouble finding rookies or other guys to coach up.

http://www.kcchiefs.com/coach/steve_hoffman/

It was many weeks ago of course but one of the other guys asked Jimmy about Folk and he just said that he would have been gone a long time ago if he were coaching and that he had cut their SB kicker (sorry forget the name) for losing it and that was his guy.

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 12:45 PM
Again, how is this not evident. Let me give you some pointers. When you look at arguments you can't just focus in on one thing. You have to look at what options there were from start to finish. Its not in a vacuum.

Nick Folk was their first option. He missed 10 FGs. He missed kicks that almost ended their season 3 weeks before the playoffs. He was horrible, including his last miss...a 23 yarder that would have sealed the game.

Shaun Suisham had kicked for the Cowboys before. He was hitting at 85.7% when they picked him up and tried him out. He then helped them...2 of 3 when they went on a winning streak. The players and coaches had seen enough of Folk for the year. He also went 2 for 2 with a 48 yarder in the first playoff game...something you skip. So he was doing well for them. Just like Kaeding or many others this post season he had a bad Minny game. I have explained that game ad nauseum from personal experience.

What you seem to miss is that with the way Folk was kicking there is no guarantee that he hits any of the kicks in any of the remaining games. That is the other side you ignore. They made a run with a different guy. He didn't lose the game for them. So with the way Folk kicked precut they made a) a temporary upgrade and b) sent a message.

They can still try out guys this off-season and they still got their point across..performance matters. Heck they can try out Folk again, Suisham and whomever else they chose. Nothing lost.


So, Suisham went 5 of 8 for the Cowboys (all less than 50yards).. and that's an improvement?

Folk was 18 of 28 = 64% (50+ yd attempts included. 1 of 2) (6 of 7 < 40)
Suisham was 5 of 8= 62.5%

Suisham missed two FGs in week 11 against Dallas, including a 39 yd Fg. Cost Washington the football game. Two weeks later, he misses a game-clinching 23 yd field goal versus NO... This is when he was cut. The Cowboys picked him up, and he finished 5 of 8, including misses on back to back 48 yd FGs in the first half of a tight playoff game, indoors, on artificial turf.

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 12:51 PM
So, Suisham went 5 of 8 for the Cowboys (all less than 50yards).. and that's an improvement?

Folk was 18 of 28 = 64% (50+ yd attempts included. 1 of 2) (6 of 7 < 40)
Suisham was 5 of 8= 62.5%

Suisham missed two FGs in week 11 against Dallas, including a 39 yd Fg. Cost Washington the football game. Two weeks later, he misses a game-clinching 23 yd field goal versus NO... This is when he was cut. The Cowboys picked him up, and he finished 5 of 8, including misses on back to back 48 yd FGs in the first half of a tight playoff game, indoors, on artificial turf.

At the time it was an improvement considering what Folk had been doing. Again, pull your head out of the vacuum and look at the when and why things happened. You can sit in hindsight all you want but at the time it worked. The team was winning and until the Minny game. The guy had one miss. Again, he had that bad game. He probably won't be back. But he didn't personally lose that game and Folk had been on borrowed time for weeks. Most, as WWJD pointed out, thought he would be gone weeks earlier.

Again, it is hard to have a legitimate, real, football debate with someone who keeps taking stats and plays and seasons and then narrowly takes events in a vacuum instead of looking at the context of when moves were done and why they were done.

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 12:53 PM
Jimmy Johnson said on the Fox pregame show that Folk should have and would have been cut many games before if he were still the coach...he said you get rid of kickers that lose their touch and move on.

I agree.

As a former avid Cowboy fan in the 80s and through the Jimmy regime, I absolutely love that B*st*rd! He was a great head coach and probably the best gameday manager of any coach I've ever watched.

However, Kubiak, even if he becomes a great coach, won't do so by emulating Jimmy Johnson. It isn't his style and I don't think that methodology is the only way to be successful in the NFL. If I'm wrong about that then you guys are right and this team will likely be myred in mediocrity until a new coach is brought in.

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 12:56 PM
So, Suisham went 5 of 8 for the Cowboys (all less than 50yards).. and that's an improvement?

Folk was 18 of 28 = 64% (50+ yd attempts included. 1 of 2) (6 of 7 < 40)
Suisham was 5 of 8= 62.5%

Suisham missed two FGs in week 11 against Dallas, including a 39 yd Fg. Cost Washington the football game. Two weeks later, he misses a game-clinching 23 yd field goal versus NO... This is when he was cut. The Cowboys picked him up, and he finished 5 of 8, including misses on back to back 48 yd FGs in the first half of a tight playoff game, indoors, on artificial turf.

At the time it was an improvement considering what Folk had been doing. You can sit in hindsight all you want but at the time it worked. The team was winning and until the Minny game the guy had one miss. Again, he had that bad game. He probably won't be back. But he didn't personally lose that game and Folk had been on borrowed time for weeks.

Again, it is hard to have a legitimate, real, football debate with someone who keeps taking stats and plays in a vacuum instead of looking at the context of when moves were done and why they were done. I don't know but let me guess...you liked Carr and Sage too.

WWJD
01-28-2010, 12:57 PM
Jimmy was a great coach.

That was all he cared about. I'll never forget seeing his son being interviewed and saying his father was never around for birthdays or their school stuff and they were lucky to see him on Xmas.

Thank goodness Jimmy changed and repaired all those relationships.

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 01:00 PM
At the time it was an improvement considering what Folk had been doing. Again, pull your head out of the vacuum and look at the when and why things happened. You can sit in hindsight all you want but at the time it worked. The team was winning and until the Minny game the guy had one miss. Again, he had that bad game. He probably won't be back. But he didn't personally lose that game and Folk had been on borrowed time for weeks.

Again, it is hard to have a legitimate, real, football debate with someone who keeps taking stats and plays and season and who narrowly takes events in a vacuum instead of looking at the context of when moves were done and why they were done.


Suisham did cost the Redskins two of their previous three games. That's why he was cut. How surprising was it when he missed two big kicks in Minnesota?

WWJD
01-28-2010, 01:02 PM
Suisham did cost the Redskins two of their previous three games. That's why he was cut. How surprising was it when he missed two big kicks in Minnesota?

The Cowboys had no choice but to cut Folk..as it was Wade hung on to him too long. He was having a hard time making extra points even. I still think it was because of his hip surgery. Suisham was stop gap. That's all he was. The best of the worst. And they knew him; he'd been there before.

dalemurphy
01-28-2010, 01:05 PM
The Cowboys had no choice but to cut Folk..as it was Wade hung on to him too long. He was having a hard time making extra points even. I still think it was because of his hip surgery. Suisham was stop gap. That's all he was. The best of the worst. And they knew him; he'd been there before.

I'm not trying to criticize the Cowboys' move. I'm just trying to illustrate that upgrading a kicker at that point in the season isn't as easy or plausible as some make it seem.

Ole Miss Texan
01-28-2010, 01:06 PM
I'll tell you what is pathetic though. It's when your team is playing at home in a tight game in the final game of the season with playoff hopes still alive and the fans are booing the kicker before he even kicks. Every time Brown went on the field against NE, he was boo'd by fans.

I just didn't get it but I thought it was disgusting. Sure you want him cut, gone... he cost you games before. But that is NOT the time to voice your disapproval. If you're going to boo him... do it after he kicks (whether he makes it or not). Don't boo him as he's preparing to kick a FG in a tight game to keep your team's playoffs hopes alive. That's just DUMB.

Sometimes I'd rather cut most Texans fans than Kris Brown.

In related news: So what round will Leigh Tiffen get selected? And may it be by us?

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 01:10 PM
Suisham did cost the Redskins two of their previous three games. That's why he was cut. How surprising was it when he missed two big kicks in Minnesota?

All kickers have missed kicks. Again, time and place. Kris Brown may be a better kicker elsewhere. Folk may regain his form elsewhere. Suisham did well enough. As I said the Minnesota game wasn't his best but it didn't cost them the game and up until then he did what they asked of him. They knew he was a chance but that is what you do. Are you supposed to be scared that Kris Brown will haunt you later and not tryout other guys?Because of their stubborness he cost them playoff chances and almost single handedly put them at .500 again. Cutting him sends the message. If you think you can fix him you invite him back. Again, there shouldn't be this much debate about a mediocre kicker and an easy move that a team should have made. If Hartley misses 2 kicks in the SB did the Saints make the wrong decision activating him weeks after the suspension instead of letting Carney keep kicking?

I'm not trying to criticize the Cowboys' move. I'm just trying to illustrate that upgrading a kicker at that point in the season isn't as easy or plausible as some make it seem.

If that is your point then we might as well stop this because we agree. It isn't easy but I think it should be done as a message. Therein lies our difference.

DexmanC
01-28-2010, 01:18 PM
The Texans finished the season with a 4 game winning streak... including wins at Miami and vs. New England. I'm not sure what message the Texan players got just before they went on their most impressive winning streak in the organization's history?

I don't think even Barry Sanders has a spin move as good as this one.

What made the win streak so impressive? Was it the four game LOSING
STREAK that preceded it?

JCTexan
01-28-2010, 01:18 PM
If that is your point then we might as well stop this because we agree. It isn't easy but I think it should be done as a message. Therein lies our difference.

I agree with Dale. The Texans didn't need a message sent to them since they won their final 4 games of the season.

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 01:22 PM
I agree with Dale. The Texans didn't need a message sent to them since they won their final 4 games of the season.

I don't get this point. The message isn't sent to fire up the team. The message is an organizational message. It is a coaching message. You perform or you are in jeopardy of losing your job. A wake up call to those who might dog it down the road and expect to be safe. Just because they beat NE doesn't excuse the fact that he was on the field with their playoff hopes in the balance and he missed FGs and XPs.

HOU-TEX
01-28-2010, 01:25 PM
I think we can all agree that an upgrade is needed at the position, right? All the mumbo jumbo on whether he should've been cut during the season is moot at this point.

Now, can we move on to a more important issue? Who the heck are we going to have deep snap?!?

:runaway:

playa465
01-28-2010, 01:29 PM
Sometimes I'd rather cut most Texans fans than Kris Brown.


+1 :clap:

DexmanC
01-28-2010, 01:36 PM
I'll tell you what is pathetic though. It's when your team is playing at home in a tight game in the final game of the season with playoff hopes still alive and the fans are booing the kicker before he even kicks. Every time Brown went on the field against NE, he was boo'd by fans.

I just didn't get it but I thought it was disgusting. Sure you want him cut, gone... he cost you games before. But that is NOT the time to voice your disapproval. If you're going to boo him... do it after he kicks (whether he makes it or not). Don't boo him as he's preparing to kick a FG in a tight game to keep your team's playoffs hopes alive. That's just DUMB.

Sometimes I'd rather cut most Texans fans than Kris Brown.

In related news: So what round will Leigh Tiffen get selected? And may it be by us?


The fans did cheer like mad when he made a kick. I thought it was hilarious,
honestly. Even when he lined up for XP's, the fans let him have it. When
he made it, they cheered him like he was an MVP. If they'd cut him, LIKE
THEY SHOULD HAVE, this wouldn't even be an issue. Sometimes, the
fans know what the coaches do, but fail to acknowledge. Even David Carr
had the shit booed out of him in his final start. I swear this organization rides
the "short bus" sometimes.

El Tejano
01-28-2010, 01:38 PM
Kris Brown has purchased waaaaaaaayyy too much stock in The Texans. For this reason he hasn't been cut and for this reason he was high five'n/huggin' Bob Mcnair when they went 9-7. There I said it.

DeMarCushPoll
01-28-2010, 01:50 PM
I don't get this point. The message isn't sent to fire up the team. The message is an organizational message. It is a coaching message. You perform or you are in jeopardy of losing your job. A wake up call to those who might dog it down the road and expect to be safe. Just because they beat NE doesn't excuse the fact that he was on the field with their playoff hopes in the balance and he missed FGs and XPs.



I don't think he missed those field goals because he was doggin it.

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 02:01 PM
I don't think he missed those field goals because he was doggin it.

I said dogging it down the road....as in, they haven't played well and think they are safe because there is no consequence for performance.:kitten:

Just a term used when you set up a certain culture. He didn't literally dog it because all he does is kick.... but he failed with no consequences.

DeMarCushPoll
01-28-2010, 02:20 PM
I said dogging it down the road....as in, they haven't played well and think they are safe because there is no consequence for performance.:kitten:

Just the look on the man's face after he missed everyone of those FGs tells me at least he doesn't think that. I'm sure he'd like to have everyone of those back.

I'm not arguing whether Brown should or should not be back next year becasue I feel that if they can find a better kicker then that would be great and could also help with some of my heartburn issues. However, given everything that went on last season I do believe there is accountability on this team. I remember people coming out of the wood work complaining when Kub told JJ to stay home after missing a meeting. That is a good example of a coach holding his players accountable for their actions.

Ole Miss Texan
01-28-2010, 03:15 PM
I don't get this point. The message isn't sent to fire up the team. The message is an organizational message. It is a coaching message. You perform or you are in jeopardy of losing your job. A wake up call to those who might dog it down the road and expect to be safe. Just because they beat NE doesn't excuse the fact that he was on the field with their playoff hopes in the balance and he missed FGs and XPs.

I agree with you to an extent. People have to be accountable for their actions. There is a "what have you done for me lately" mentality in the league on both the coaching and player levels.

With that said, you run the risk of this decision backfiring. Here's a guy that has performed so well for you since the inception of your team. A person that is a captain of your team, very involved in the community and well liked by his teammates and had performed well during the first half of the season.

So at what point do you cut the guy?
Is it after the first game where he screws up?
Is it after the second consecutive game, you give up all confidence?

What message would that send your team if you gave up on this guy after one or two performances?

Not yet? okay lets' move on. The next 2 games he performs flawlessly going 3-3 in FG's and 4-4 at XP's. Now do you cut him? We lost both of those games.... would a new kicker have made a difference? Is 100% not good enough?

Then we go into the Seattle game where we blow them out but he has two misses. Cut him after we still win 34-7?

What about after the Win at St. Louis? He had a miss going 3-4 but you could argue he was a huge part of our 16-13 victory scoring 9 of those points with a FG with 3 minutes left in the game. Can't cut him after that game can you?

Then he goes 2-2 in the win against Miami... no reason to cut him.

Now your going into the last game of the season with a chance at your franchise's first winning record, a chance to get in the playoffs for the first time in history. Do you cut him before the game and bring in a street FA that you can't exactly trust and don't have a history with?

If you want to go by the REAL circumstances as they were with THIS team, the only legitimate time you could have cut him was immediately after the Indy or Tennessee game. You definitely send a message to your team but is it a good message? After 7 years of good performance you have one or two bad games in the middle of the season and your going to be cut? I think that might cause more harm than good, personally. Not to mention it doesn't fit in with the history of M.O., or what were the FA kickers on the market were like or the fact we just signed him to a 4 year $10MM contract 5 months earlier.

I'm not saying we don't try and find a better kicker this offseason... that he doesn't get replaced. I just don't see how you would do it in the middle of this season... it doesn't add up in our favor.

Double Barrel
01-28-2010, 04:20 PM
DB, Would you really rather have Wade Phillips as your head coach right now?
I just don't see it. Honestly!

But, that's me. You know me, I think the world of Kubiak and he has a career losing record. So, a silly little thing like Wade Phillips career winning percentage being close to .600 doesn't impress! I'm not so easily swayed by insignificant statistics like Wins and Losses. Other things are more important. I'll try and get you a list of them when I can. :thinking:

gotta go. I've got some thinking to do!

Well, Dale, I'm not going to castigate you, because your opinion as a fan is just as valid as any other fan's perspective.

I never said that I wanted Wade as a HC. You just questioned his decision making abilities in a rather myopic attempt to elevate Kubiak's. I'm not a big fan of either coach, but I'm not going to diminish Phillips in order to justify Kubiak.

I'm not sure if your second paragraph was sarcasm...I want to take it that way, but you gave no indication that this was your intent...but, be that as it may, scoreboard is the reason why they play these games (obviously). Wins and losses are the standard by which we measure head coaches, so we can just agree to disagree if you were serious.

Surely you would have to agree that every fan has at least one gripe about the team. If they don't, then they haven't been paying attention. :)

Ummm, Kubiak has ONE losing season as a head coach. :kitten:

Well, you can certainly be cheeky about it, but it was obvious what my point was. I guess you're right, though, Kubiak has had one losing season and that's so wonderful we should give him a lifetime achievement award and immediately sign him to a 10 year deal with lots of options. :truck:

With stats like that, what the heck is Bob waiting for???

As a former avid Cowboy fan in the 80s and through the Jimmy regime, I absolutely love that B*st*rd! He was a great head coach and probably the best gameday manager of any coach I've ever watched.

However, Kubiak, even if he becomes a great coach, won't do so by emulating Jimmy Johnson. It isn't his style and I don't think that methodology is the only way to be successful in the NFL. If I'm wrong about that then you guys are right and this team will likely be myred in mediocrity until a new coach is brought in.

I hope we are wrong about Kubiak and you are 100% right. That would be great for the team and this city.

I tend to think that coaches like Kubiak are akin to Tony Dungy. They need a player-leader that is the identity of the team. Dungy did not have that with Tampa, but he did at Indy with Manning. We do not have that at this point, so Kubiak's awe shucks milktoast personae is what the team emulates. For a HC with Kubiak's demeanor, we need a player-leader that personifies what this team needs to be about. Maybe Cushing will eventually fulfill that roll like Ray Lewis has done for years with Baltimore.

Sometimes I'd rather cut most Texans fans than Kris Brown.

Say buh-bye to your hometown team without the fan support.

The Pencil Neck
01-28-2010, 09:25 PM
What are you talking about? After they signed him they shutout Washington and killed Philly twice. He did nothing with their momentum. They went on a roll with him. That is just made up. In the NO game..where they had to win to stay alive...they showed Folk shanking them in warmups. He then missed 2 kicks..one from extra point distance that would have sealed the game...and this was their season. The Minnesota game, they needed TDs. Again, the FG miss wasn't the turning point. Suisam told the coaches pregame that 45 was his range and they sent him out anyways.

Who cares about history when alot of it is average and bad. Folk was a Pro Bowler who who made 83% and 90% of his kicks his first 2 years.

The Cowboys were on a roll but it had nothing to do with Suisham. They didn't need field goals the last two games. They beat the Saints with Folk. So they were already on their roll with Folk.

For me, Suisham missing the field goal against the Vikings was the turning point. He hits that and the Vikings start from deeper in their territory and maybe with the momentum, the Dallas D holds up like they did the first drive.

And, come on, the kicker told the team that his range that day was 45 yards? Please. If a guy only has a 45 yard range then he shouldn't have been hired in the first place.

The Cowboys ditching Folk and picking up Suisham is not the example of a team making a good move.

HoustonFrog
01-28-2010, 10:33 PM
The Cowboys were on a roll but it had nothing to do with Suisham. They didn't need field goals the last two games. They beat the Saints with Folk. So they were already on their roll with Folk.

For me, Suisham missing the field goal against the Vikings was the turning point. He hits that and the Vikings start from deeper in their territory and maybe with the momentum, the Dallas D holds up like they did the first drive.

And, come on, the kicker told the team that his range that day was 45 yards? Please. If a guy only has a 45 yard range then he shouldn't have been hired in the first place.

The Cowboys ditching Folk and picking up Suisham is not the example of a team making a good move.

Sorry to continue this but what you are saying is just basucally untrue.

Folk wasn't part of their roll. He had lost games for them up until the Saints game. They already considered cutting him and had lost 2 straight December games. They got out quick and he hit one. With one final drive to ice the game and to get their chance at the playoffs he missed a 23 yarder...an extra point length kick. They luckily won. What didn't help was NFL Network showing him in warmups missing every kick by 10 yards.

He didn't tell them...."I can't kick past 45 so don't try." They watched him kick pregame and talked pregame and decided his consistent range was 45. He had hit farther in other games. Not sure why that conclusion was made except pregame. Also, his kick didn't screw momentum. 1) They should have gone for it 2) there were other elements that got the crowd going and the Vikes going that won that game. The Cowboys weren't winning that game with FGs. Again, it was depressing to be there and see.

It is a good example because Folk already was losing games and up until Minny Suiham had done his job. Under your scrutiny guys like Hartley are a fail if they miss kicks in the SB. Guys like Kaeding are bad kickers because he has failed in playoff situations for years despite being a regular season stud. You are taking an isolated game without looking at their run and what he did until then. You even fudged his percentage at 67% when he was 85.7%. Overall they can still bring in whomever they want, including the cut guys and they sent their message. The Texans did nothing and gained nothing for it.

I feel like there is no reading here because I'm repeating the same answers to the dame queestions from 4 pages back. Sorry. As others have siadm the key now is getting competition. If he does well then you decide if he needs a change of scenery or if someone else gets the job done.

The Pencil Neck
01-29-2010, 12:43 AM
Sorry to continue this but what you are saying is just basucally untrue.

Folk wasn't part of their roll. He had lost games for them up until the Saints game. They already considered cutting him and had lost 2 straight December games. They got out quick and he hit one. With one final drive to ice the game and to get their chance at the playoffs he missed a 23 yarder...an extra point length kick. They luckily won. What didn't help was NFL Network showing him in warmups missing every kick by 10 yards.


Folk was the kicker for the Saints game. You gave Suisham credit for being part of the Cowboys "roll" simply because he was there. He never had to kick anything under pressure (and still missed) during those games so giving him credit for the roll was a lie. And you're using a double standard if you don't give Folk the same credit for the game he was in during that roll.

I'm not saying that Folk didn't suck. I'm just saying that Suisham wasn't an upgrade.


He didn't tell them...."I can't kick past 45 so don't try." They watched him kick pregame and talked pregame and decided his consistent range was 45. He had hit farther in other games. Not sure why that conclusion was made except pregame. Also, his kick didn't screw momentum. 1) They should have gone for it 2) there were other elements that got the crowd going and the Vikes going that won that game. The Cowboys weren't winning that game with FGs. Again, it was depressing to be there and see.


The Cowboys especially weren't going to win that game with FGs if they couldn't hit them.


It is a good example because Folk already was losing games and up until Minny Suiham had done his job. Under your scrutiny guys like Hartley are a fail if they miss kicks in the SB. Guys like Kaeding are bad kickers because he has failed in playoff situations for years despite being a regular season stud. You are taking an isolated game without looking at their run and what he did until then. You even fudged his percentage at 67% when he was 85.7%. Overall they can still bring in whomever they want, including the cut guys and they sent their message. The Texans did nothing and gained nothing for it.

I feel like there is no reading here because I'm repeating the same answers to the dame queestions from 4 pages back. Sorry. As others have siadm the key now is getting competition. If he does well then you decide if he needs a change of scenery or if someone else gets the job done.

According to NFL.com's stats, Suisham was 67% in the regular season and 60% in the post season. If you've got a problem with those stats, then talk to NFL.com, not me.

Suisham or Folk, it was a wash. No improvement. They cut a guy. Great. So what. They sent a message? What message was that? Did any body get it? When it came down to it, they didn't improve their kicking game. Their team didn't rise to any occasions because they cut their kicker. They won a game (in the playoffs) against a team they'd already owned in the regular season.

HoustonFrog
01-29-2010, 06:43 AM
Folk was the kicker for the Saints game. You gave Suisham credit for being part of the Cowboys "roll" simply because he was there. He never had to kick anything under pressure (and still missed) during those games so giving him credit for the roll was a lie. And you're using a double standard if you don't give Folk the same credit for the game he was in during that roll.

I'm not saying that Folk didn't suck. I'm just saying that Suisham wasn't an upgrade.

The Cowboys especially weren't going to win that game with FGs if they couldn't hit them.

According to NFL.com's stats, Suisham was 67% in the regular season and 60% in the post season. If you've got a problem with those stats, then talk to NFL.com, not me.

Suisham or Folk, it was a wash. No improvement. They cut a guy. Great. So what. They sent a message? What message was that? Did any body get it? When it came down to it, they didn't improve their kicking game. Their team didn't rise to any occasions because they cut their kicker. They won a game (in the playoffs) against a team they'd already owned in the regular season.

I give up because you obviously have different ideas about getting rid of someone who isn't performing. Teams do it all the time...winning teams. Go back and read the last 3-4 pages on what Jimmy Johnson said, about what the players were saying, etc. Go look at detail at nfl.com. When they picked up Suisham, he was 85.7% kicking for Washington. Folk had missed 7 of his past 11 kicks. They Cowboys had switched holders and had competition with their kickoff specialist. That is what they went on...and the fact that he had kicked for them 3 years earlier. You insist on the debate with no details. You say he never had to kick under pressure but he kicked in the Philly playoff game and kicked when the game was still close and they needed points. Also, a roll is a continous group of games. Folk was in NO and hit one FG but wasn't part of the roll because he almost lost the game that started the roll...thus getting cut. He was almost the roll killer. No one is arguing that Suisham is an overall better kicker but outside the vacuum and in the place and time, they needed to make a move and they did. It worked all the way until the last game...a game they weren't going to win with their line, etc. Overall Folk was doing worse to that point of the season so they took the shot. If this was brought up pre-Minny game then you would say it worked. And that is how it is looked at...circumstances of why and when they picked him up and what happened moving forward. No matter how you argue it, it was the right thing to do and did make a statement. With all that said they can still go after who they want, including Folk if they want to work with him...something the Texans could have done with Brown.

BTW, both SB teams have kicker pickups. One team had a guy, lost him to suspension and then cut the guy they used all season, for the original guy. The Colts picked up a guy after their kicker went down hurt. If either misses multiple FGs in the SB and they lose did keeping Hartley and not Carney backfire? Would it show Stover wasn't the guy they should have picked up, despite a good season?That is what you are saying with the Cowboys because their pickup was 4 of 5 up until the Minny game.

Watch the video

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8152a0ad&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

Folk leads the NFL with 10 missed field-goal attempts, going 18 of 28 and missing seven of his past 11

Suisham is 85 of 107 (79.4 percent) on field-goal attempts in his NFL career. He originally signed with the Pittsburgh Steelers out of Bowling Green in 2005, went to the Cowboys' practice squad and was signed to the active roster on Oct. 24. Suisham played in three games and was 3 of 4 before being released.


Dallas tried several remedies while Folk piled up a six-game streak of at least one miss.

First, the Cowboys switched holders, replacing Mat McBriar with Tony Romo even though their quarterback is haunted by a critical flub late in a playoff loss at Seattle three years ago. Then they tried an in-house competition with kickoff specialist David Buehler, who proved unreliable on field goals.

Concerns eased when Folk nailed a 44-yarder just before halftime against the Saints, but it didn't take them long to come back.

"It's a mystery to us," Phillips said before Folk was cut. "We have tried to work it out a lot of different ways. Now it's come to this point."

Adding to the mystery, Folk had missed just 10 kicks in his 2½-year career before slumping. Television footage during Saturday night's game showed Folk's pregame kicks flying all over the place in the controlled atmosphere of the Superdome.

And another good read on what the mood was after his NO miss

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/football/cowboys/stories/122109dnspotaylor.2ea4f9e.html

IRVING – As his teammates wildly celebrated in the moments after the Dallas Cowboys' scintillating upset win over New Orleans, Nick Folk didn't join them. ...

The players and coaches used to feel confident every time he walked onto the field.

Now, they cringe. He's left them no choice.

The biggest issue is that now his inconsistency in the last three weeks has compromised the Cowboys' ability to win games.

He missed a 42-yarder against the Giants that would've pulled Dallas within 21-20 early in the fourth quarter two weeks ago. Last week, he missed a 42-yarder against San Diego with 45 seconds left in the first half that would've pulled Dallas within 10-6.

The Cowboys lost by a field goal.

And Folk's miss against the Saints on Saturday put New Orleans in position to pull out a miracle

That sounds like the Cowboys will have a new kicker when they walk onto the practice field today. Before you get all giddy, understand every kicker the Cowboys will consider is flawed.

Every single one of them, so don't expect a savior.

Maybe, Shaun Suisham will be the guy. Or Jason Elam. Or some guy you've never heard of until he signs. Hey, one of my colleagues bumped into Martin Gramatica in the French Quarter on Saturday morning, so we know he's available.

Frankly, all you can expect right now is to sign a kicker who will make the kicks that he's supposed to make, which is virtually all of his attempts inside 45 yards and every one of them inside 40 yards.

WWJD
01-29-2010, 09:26 AM
The Cowboys will probably have a new kicker next year and his name won't be Folk or Suisham. Just a guess.

They had no choice but to cut Folk. None. He was becoming a liability they could not afford. Wade held on to him too long as it was. The guy had the yips and a bad hip.

Not a good combo.

The Pencil Neck
01-29-2010, 10:10 AM
I give up because you obviously have different ideas about getting rid of someone who isn't performing.


And you seem to be missing my point. It's dumb to cut a player that isn't performing if you're not going to bring in someone who's better. Teams do it all the time and frequently pay the price. It's a bad strategy.


BTW, both SB teams have kicker pickups. One team had a guy, lost him to suspension and then cut the guy they used all season, for the original guy. The Colts picked up a guy after their kicker went down hurt. If either misses multiple FGs in the SB and they lose did keeping Hartley and not Carney backfire? Would it show Stover wasn't the guy they should have picked up, despite a good season?That is what you are saying with the Cowboys because their pickup was 4 of 5 up until the Minny game.


Again, you're missing my point.

The Saints picked up 2 guys at the beginning of the season... when they still had the ability to choose the best guys. They were able to work with both guys throughout the season and when they reached a point where they felt better about Hartley than Carney, they let Carney go. They didn't pull some guy off the street that some other team had let go because he wasn't good enough. If Hartley goes Neil Rackers on them, then, yeah, they made the wrong decision but that wasn't the point. They made the decision when they had a choice in the matter. They went about it the right way.

The Colts had no choice. If you've got no choice, you do what you have to do. You bring in a bunch of the kickers that are on the street and you pick the one that kicks the best. But at least they had the choice early in the season and they were able to bring in a good guy to replace Vinatieri who went down.

Neither of those are examples of what I'm talking about. Prior to the first Colts game, Kris was kicking at an 81% clip. Then he had the two bad games against the Colts and Titans. If you fire him there, it looks desperate and like you're making the kicker the scapegoat. But in retrospect, that would have been the time to get rid of him. Over the next two games, he went 100% and looked like he'd kicked his way through it. Then he missed one in the Seattle game and a couple in the Rams game. To me, that's the point where I would have said, "OK. This isn't working. He's not kicking his way out of this. We need to find a replacement for this guy." But at that point, with 2 games to go in the season, it's too late to find a good replacement who's an upgrade.

The best kicker available (that I'm aware of) would have been Carney. Who, iirc, doesn't have Kris' range and had been kicking at about a 70% clip in the month prior to his being cut.

Ole Miss Texan
01-29-2010, 10:13 AM
So at what point do you cut the guy?

I give up because you obviously have different ideas about getting rid of someone who isn't performing. Teams do it all the time...winning teams.
I know this wasn't directed at me but my views on getting rid of someone is a little different as well. You've brought up some good examples of teams doing it this season, but the real issue here is how it is related to THIS team.

I'd love to read your input on when we should have cut Kris Brown. I've kind of made an outline of KB's performance this season (quoted post above links to the full post).

I'll tell you I'm all in favor for getting rid of guys who aren't performing. Shoot, I'll go one step further and say even if the guy's performance is acceptable we could still upgrade him given certain conditions. I'm all for making this team into an elite franchise. Although I'm really disappointed in KB's performance this year, if I was running the team I would not have cut him mid-season.

HoustonFrog
01-29-2010, 10:25 AM
I know this wasn't directed at me but my views on getting rid of someone is a little different as well. You've brought up some good examples of teams doing it this season, but the real issue here is how it is related to THIS team.

I'd love to read your input on when we should have cut Kris Brown. I've kind of made an outline of KB's performance this season (quoted post above links to the full post).

I'll tell you I'm all in favor for getting rid of guys who aren't performing. Shoot, I'll go one step further and say even if the guy's performance is acceptable we could still upgrade him given certain conditions. I'm all for making this team into an elite franchise. Although I'm really disappointed in KB's performance this year, if I was running the team I would not have cut him mid-season.

Hey Ole Miss...thanks for the post..sorry, didn't mean to skip it. Under your outline of the season I would have cut him after the Seattle game. He had already blown chances at wins in 2 huge games earlier in the season. Taking my view that you can't look at this in hindsight and you have to look at it from the perspective of where you were in the season, this is my theory:

--Blew the Indy and Tenn games already
--At that moment in time the playoff chances were a very, very huge longshot
--He misses 2 in a game that was a blowout...still failed, meaning he lost his confidence and mojo. Something is wrong
--Rams are next, a game that should have been a win and one where you can bring in a guy who shouldn't have immediate pressure

That is my thinking. You can't look at Suisham's stats at the end and go "see." You have to look at this as a point in time...which is why I posted the articles and stats at the time. Same here. My issue.... By not cutting him earlier you left that Miami game in his hands, knowing his daily issues. As I said earlier, people reported players were tiring of it, even in practice.

That is how I see it. Would it make a difference?You never know but I think the willingness to cut a guy like that sends a message. It also would allow you to try and work with him in the off season if not picked up and still out there. I also think there are plenty of guys that didn't have to be world beaters but that could have done well enough....at least not missing XPs and 30 yarders vs the Pats

HuttoKarl
01-29-2010, 10:25 AM
Hey everyone...

One question...

What do you all think of Kris Brown?


:doot:

dalemurphy
01-29-2010, 10:46 AM
Hey Ole Miss...thanks for the post..sorry, didn't mean to skip it. Under your outline of the season I would have cut him after the Seattle game. He had already blown chances at wins in 2 huge games earlier in the season. Taking my view that you can't look at this in hindsight and you have to look at it from the perspective of where you were in the season, this is my theory:

--Blew the Indy and Tenn games already
--At that moment in time the playoff chances were a very, very huge longshot
--He misses 2 in a game that was a blowout...still failed, meaning he lost his confidence and mojo. Something is wrong
--Rams are next, a game that should have been a win and one where you can bring in a guy who shouldn't have immediate pressure

That is my thinking. You can't look at Suisham's stats at the end and go "see." You have to look at this as a point in time...which is why I posted the articles and stats at the time. Same here. My issue.... By not cutting him earlier you left that Miami game in his hands, knowing his daily issues. As I said earlier, people reported players were tiring of it, even in practice.

That is how I see it. Would it make a difference?You never know but I think the willingness to cut a guy like that sends a message. It also would allow you to try and work with him in the off season if not picked up and still out there. I also think there are plenty of guys that didn't have to be world beaters but that could have done well enough....at least not missing XPs and 30 yarders vs the Pats


But we won all those games. So, what difference does it make. We won out. Obviously, it didn't negatively affect the rest of the roster. They won out and played very well. Any message of importance regarding earning a roster sport can be addressed in the off-season or in training camp.

HoustonFrog
01-29-2010, 10:51 AM
But we won all those games. So, what difference does it make. We won out. Obviously, it didn't negatively affect the rest of the roster. They won out and played very well. Any message of importance regarding earning a roster sport can be addressed in the off-season or in training camp.

I feel like I'm in the twilight zone. I just answered that at the top of the page. It sets a tone! Your conclusion just completely ignores the fact that the kickers mishaps had to be overcome in the last game. It really isn't that hard and is the same thing discussed when Jimmy Johnson came up.

I don't get this point. The message isn't sent to fire up the team. The message is an organizational message. It is a coaching message. You perform or you are in jeopardy of losing your job. A wake up call to those who might dog it down the road and expect to be safe. Just because they beat NE doesn't excuse the fact that he was on the field with their playoff hopes in the balance and he missed FGs and XPs.

dalemurphy
01-29-2010, 10:52 AM
I feel like I'm in the twilight zone. I just answered that at the top of the page. It sets a tone! Your conclusion just completely ignores the fact that the kickers mishaps had to be overcome in the last game. It really isn't that hard and is the same thing discussed when Jimmy Johnson came up.

If you win four games in a row to finish a season, I fail to see what different tone should've been set. The other 52 players on the team were playing their best football of the season. Therefore, whatever messages they were receiving, I think were fine, apparently.

DexmanC
01-29-2010, 10:56 AM
Hey Ole Miss...thanks for the post..sorry, didn't mean to skip it. Under your outline of the season I would have cut him after the Seattle game. He had already blown chances at wins in 2 huge games earlier in the season. Taking my view that you can't look at this in hindsight and you have to look at it from the perspective of where you were in the season, this is my theory:

--Blew the Indy and Tenn games already
--At that moment in time the playoff chances were a very, very huge longshot
--He misses 2 in a game that was a blowout...still failed, meaning he lost his confidence and mojo. Something is wrong
--Rams are next, a game that should have been a win and one where you can bring in a guy who shouldn't have immediate pressure

That is my thinking. You can't look at Suisham's stats at the end and go "see." You have to look at this as a point in time...which is why I posted the articles and stats at the time. Same here. My issue.... By not cutting him earlier you left that Miami game in his hands, knowing his daily issues. As I said earlier, people reported players were tiring of it, even in practice.

That is how I see it. Would it make a difference?You never know but I think the willingness to cut a guy like that sends a message. It also would allow you to try and work with him in the off season if not picked up and still out there. I also think there are plenty of guys that didn't have to be world beaters but that could have done well enough....at least not missing XPs and 30 yarders vs the Pats

If I could look at events with that perspective, I'd be a billionaire. It's
exactly what Dale and Thunder do when posed with scenarios such as
the one you've layed out. I know they see the flaw in their logic by
answering questions in this manner, but why won't they just come
out and address the question?

You can't throw up the Minnesota playoff game as Exhibit A for keeping
Nick Folk. You can't throw up the 4-game winning streak as a reason
for keeping Kris Brown.

dalemurphy
01-29-2010, 11:00 AM
If I could look at events with that perspective, I'd be a billionaire. It's
exactly what Dale and Thunder do when posed with scenarios such as
the one you've layed out. I know they see the flaw in their logic by
answering questions in this manner, but why won't they just come
out and address the question?

You can't throw up the Minnesota playoff game as Exhibit A for keeping
Nick Folk. You can't throw up the 4-game winning streak as a reason
for keeping Kris Brown.

But you can use the 4 game winning streak as evidence that perhaps the coaching staff does have a better idea of the team than some cynical fan does. For a fan to argue that Brown should've been cut in December, even if they didn't like their options for a replacement, because it "sends a message", seems silly to me when the team played very well and won out-essentially saving the coach's job.

I never argued that Folk shouldn't have been cut. I only pointed out that his replacement wasn't much, if any, more productive. Houstonfrog said he has a source close to the team that said it was a message to the rest of the team that was needed. I accept that. Good for them. I just don't see, based on results, that the same message was needed in Houston.

Ole Miss Texan
01-29-2010, 11:11 AM
Hey Ole Miss...thanks for the post..sorry, didn't mean to skip it. Under your outline of the season I would have cut him after the Seattle game. He had already blown chances at wins in 2 huge games earlier in the season. Taking my view that you can't look at this in hindsight and you have to look at it from the perspective of where you were in the season, this is my theory:
Fair enough. I totally agree that you have to analyze the situation "at that point in time" and you don't have the luxury of knowing what happens the rest of the season.

My counter would be that KB was 75% going into the the huge losses that started in the Week 9 mtg against Indy. Of the 3 misses, two were blocked (still could be put on him, low kicks). Then we have the Wk 9 / wk 11 "game losers". This is when the tension was really high. We follow those up with 2 losses to Ind/JAX. KB went 3/3 FG and 4/4 XP in those games combined. We were up 20-7 at half against Indy. Peyton makes his comeback, Schaub throws a Pick-6 in the 4th qtr. In the loss to JAX, KB makes a FG late in the 3rd to bring us to within 11 and keep us in the game. Coincedentally, we score a TD to be down by 5 but miss the 2pt conversion. So those are 2 games where we think KB may have his mojo back, did what we needed him to do and if anything kept us alive in the game(s). In the Seattle game he goes 2/4 FG and 4/4 XP. Has a FG blocked late in the 1st half and missed a 48 yarder going into halftime with a 24-7 lead. 2nd half makes a 31 yarder and an XP. I can see at this point where there could be some un-easiness and at this point we have a 6-7 W/L record.

In all fairness I think we need to bring up some huge moments KB had to help us win this season up to that point (albeit it was early in the season). In Wk 2, we were tied @ Ten 31-31 with 4 minutes left in the game. KB nailed the FG to put us ahead, defense made the stop after that and we won. In Wk 7, we were up by 7 against SF with 5 minutes left in the game. KB nailed a 50 yarder to put us up by 10 pts to virtually secure the W or at least give us some needed breathing room.

At the end of the day, I'm perfectly happy sitting here debating over this and not being the one forced to make that decision. Although we disagree in what should have been done... it doesn't mean either of us are right or wrong and I respect your opinion. This is part of what makes being a fan and wanting to win so bad is all about.

What I do know is that our Kicker next season is KB or some other guy... we're all going to be rooting for the same thing. Good kicking, good play and our first trip to the playoffs (hopefully advancing and winning the SB)!!

HoustonFrog
01-29-2010, 11:17 AM
If you win four games in a row to finish a season, I fail to see what different tone should've been set. The other 52 players on the team were playing their best football of the season. Therefore, whatever messages they were receiving, I think were fine, apparently.

I definitely think a different tone needed to be set. As I said, it is for the organization. Not just this year but for coming years. The same tone that needed to be set when Dunta wrote on his shoes and questioned management. The same one that happens when a guys game goes south and he costs you ballgames. They had to overcome Kris Brown to win down the stretch. You really think they enjoyed that?Under your thinking a guy can totally FAIL at his one job but be kept around if the team overcomes him and wins. To me it is soft. Jimmy Johnson stated that it is dumb for teams to put their season on the line for kickers gone bad. I doubt Parcells, Belichick and others run teams this way too. "Winning games doesn't excuse not doing your job" is the message, ala Curvin Richards.


At the end of the day, I'm perfectly happy sitting here debating over this and not being the one forced to make that decision. Although we disagree in what should have been done... it doesn't mean either of us are right or wrong and I respect your opinion. This is part of what makes being a fan and wanting to win so bad is all about.

What I do know is that our Kicker next season is KB or some other guy... we're all going to be rooting for the same thing. Good kicking, good play and our first trip to the playoffs (hopefully advancing and winning the SB)!!

You are right!!It's the offseason. I enjoy this. I know I'm not changing Dale or many other people's mind but I'm just trying to explain how I see it and how I have heard others seeing it. No one is getting nasty. In the long run his job is in jeopardy and they must address it.

DexmanC
01-29-2010, 11:26 AM
I definitely think a different tone needed to be set. As I said, it is for the organization. Not just this year but for coming years. The same tone that needed to be set when Dunta wrote on his shoes and questioned management. The same one that happens when a guys game goes south and he costs you ballgames. They had to overcome Kris Brown to win down the stretch. You really think they enjoyed that?Under your thinking a guy can totally FAIL at his one job but be kept around if the team overcomes him and wins. To me it is soft. Jimmy Johnson stated that it is dumb for teams to put their season on the line for kickers gone bad. I doubt Parcells, Belichick and others run teams this way too. "Winning games doesn't excuse not doing your job" is the message, ala Curvin Richards.



You are right!!It's the offseason. I enjoy this. I know I'm not changing Dale or many other people's mind but I'm just trying to explain how I see it and how I have heard others seeing it. No one is getting nasty. In the long run his job is in jeopardy and they must address it.

I've never seen such an incident go unanswered in a winning organization.
There are people who STILL think we don't have a "Club Med" atmosphere
on Kirby? How often must we hear the "Youngest Team in The NFL" excuse?
Who's fault is it we have NO clear on-field leader? Is it Mario, who continues
to take games off? Is it Dre, who says NOTHING to his teammates to keep
their heads in the game? Is it Demeco, who the players seem to tune out?

Who's gonna step up in 2010? Kubiak? Cushing? Demeco? Dre? Schaub?
If this regime fails again to make post season, it may be Mcnair's credibility
that takes a hit.

Get ready for a loud, and highly-argued offseason.

infantrycak
01-29-2010, 11:29 AM
Who's fault is it we have NO clear on-field leader? Is it Mario, who continues
to take games off? Is it Dre, who says NOTHING to his teammates to keep
their heads in the game? Is it Demeco, who the players seem to tune out?

Nobodys fault because it is a non-existent problem. Schaub is the leader on O with Leach, Brown and Winston as enforcers. You just pulled the Demeco comment straight out of a sphincter. DeMeco, Pollard, Cushing and Smith are all leaders on D.

Ole Miss Texan
01-29-2010, 11:30 AM
Who's fault is it we have NO clear on-field leader?

Brian Cushing, Demeco Ryans, Bernard Pollard, Andre Johnson and Matt Schaub may disagree.

dalemurphy
01-29-2010, 11:34 AM
Nobodys fault because it is a non-existent problem. Schaub is the leader on O with Leach, Brown and Winston as enforcers. You just pulled the Demeco comment straight out of a sphincter. DeMeco, Pollard, Cushing and Smith are all leaders on D.

Cushing, Pollard, Demeco are the clear leaders on D.

And, Schaub really took over leadership in the second half of the season. I really noticed a new level of command. He was grabbing facemasks, yelling at coaches, audibling, and gesticulating wildly at the LOS a few times.

DexmanC
01-29-2010, 01:28 PM
Cushing, Pollard, Demeco are the clear leaders on D.

And, Schaub really took over leadership in the second half of the season. I really noticed a new level of command. He was grabbing facemasks, yelling at coaches, audibling, and gesticulating wildly at the LOS a few times.

If he's allowed to do ANY of this during the MEAT of the season, I'll be
ecstatic. Seems Kubes turned him aloose after the 4-game losing streak.

dalemurphy
01-29-2010, 01:42 PM
If he's allowed to do ANY of this during the MEAT of the season, I'll be
ecstatic. Seems Kubes turned him aloose after the 4-game losing streak.

Perhaps. My impression was that he just took another step in his evolution/development. It was the manner in which he carried himself more than the things he was doing, IMO. But, being a Sunshiner, I look for those things... and, if you stare and something long enough, you can sometimes begin seeing stuff that isn't there.

houstonspartan
01-29-2010, 01:48 PM
Perhaps. My impression was that he just took another step in his evolution/development. It was the manner in which he carried himself more than the things he was doing, IMO. But, being a Sunshiner, I look for those things... and, if you stare and something long enough, you can sometimes begin seeing stuff that isn't there.

Well, Dale, I'm not a "sunshiner" and I agree with you 100 percent.

Schaub defintely stepped up this season as a leader. It's one of the reasons I'm so high on him now. We were all doubting him going into this season. I know I was. And Matt stepped up, and basically told all of us: "F--k all yall. This is my team."

houstonspartan
01-29-2010, 01:52 PM
I definitely think a different tone needed to be set. As I said, it is for the organization. Not just this year but for coming years. The same tone that needed to be set when Dunta wrote on his shoes and questioned management. The same one that happens when a guys game goes south and he costs you ballgames. They had to overcome Kris Brown to win down the stretch. You really think they enjoyed that?Under your thinking a guy can totally FAIL at his one job but be kept around if the team overcomes him and wins. To me it is soft. Jimmy Johnson stated that it is dumb for teams to put their season on the line for kickers gone bad. I doubt Parcells, Belichick and others run teams this way too. "Winning games doesn't excuse not doing your job" is the message, ala Curvin Richards.



You are right!!It's the offseason. I enjoy this. I know I'm not changing Dale or many other people's mind but I'm just trying to explain how I see it and how I have heard others seeing it. No one is getting nasty. In the long run his job is in jeopardy and they must address it.


This is a valid point. Even Richard Justice - not that we care what he thinks - has said that, every now and then, Kubiak needs to cut someone who is screwing up just to set a tone. It's important.

I definitely think the Dunta "pay me rick" episode sent a really, really bad message that the inmates were in charge. Sure, they fined him, but, that's not that big of a deal.

thunderkyss
01-29-2010, 02:16 PM
Well, you can certainly be cheeky about it, but it was obvious what my point was. I guess you're right, though, Kubiak has had one losing season and that's so wonderful we should give him a lifetime achievement award and immediately sign him to a 10 year deal with lots of options. :truck:


I think one of the reasons this "debate" get's so heated, is that there are people who believe this is what the Kubiak supporters are saying, and nothing could be farther from the truth.

Most of the supporters are fine with Kubiak getting to coach the final year of his contract without an extension.

There are a few, who believe Kubiak should get an extension. However if he doesn't meet certain expectations, he's gone, & replaced for 2011.

No one, that I can remember, has stated they believe Kubiak should be our head coach beyond 2010 if he or the team under perform.

thunderkyss
01-29-2010, 02:34 PM
Suisham or Folk, it was a wash. No improvement. They cut a guy. Great. So what. They sent a message? What message was that? Did any body get it? When it came down to it, they didn't improve their kicking game. Their team didn't rise to any occasions because they cut their kicker. They won a game (in the playoffs) against a team they'd already owned in the regular season.

& more importantly, Suisham was just cut from Washington, because he missed kicks. His game didn't get any better.

I give up because you obviously have different ideas about getting rid of someone who isn't performing.

I think the point he is trying to make, is that if the goal is to have the best kicker on the field possible, then getting rid of Brown, and picking up Suisham, wouldn't have helped us.

Sounds like your argument is that you cut Brown so the rest of the team knows there are consequences for poor performance.

The Pencil Neck returns that our team won their last 4 games, so whatever locker room problem the Cowboys had wasn't a concern for us.

I'll add, that the Cowboys tried to make it work with Folk. Switching holders, and all that. They also had familiarity with Suisham, so they felt comfortable bringing him in. Had they not had that relationship, it's possible they never would have made the switch.

Then with New Orleans & Indy, if they weren't forced to pick up kickers, they most likely wouldn't have. I don't believe either was a performance issue, so I don't really understand the relevance to this discussion.

dalemurphy
01-29-2010, 02:36 PM
I think one of the reasons this "debate" get's so heated, is that there are people who believe this is what the Kubiak supporters are saying, and nothing could be farther from the truth.

Most of the supporters are fine with Kubiak getting to coach the final year of his contract without an extension.

There are a few, who believe Kubiak should get an extension. However if he doesn't meet certain expectations, he's gone, & replaced for 2011.

No one, that I can remember, has stated they believe Kubiak should be our head coach beyond 2010 if he or the team under perform.

Not yet, but I can make no promises about next off-season. I jumped off the Kubiak wagon for about 18 hours this season, from the moment Chris Brown threw a pass until I work the next morning. If the team wins 9-10 games (that would be underperforming my expectations for sure), I'm not sure how I will react... cause I really, really like Kubiak. That being said, regardless of my position on Kubiak at that point, I will totally understand fans wanting him gone!

DexmanC
01-29-2010, 04:10 PM
Not yet, but I can make no promises about next off-season. I jumped off the Kubiak wagon for about 18 hours this season, from the moment Chris Brown threw a pass until I work the next morning. If the team wins 9-10 games (that would be underperforming my expectations for sure), I'm not sure how I will react... cause I really, really like Kubiak. That being said, regardless of my position on Kubiak at that point, I will totally understand fans wanting him gone!

We all like Kubiak, and that's part of the problem so far. If he busts
of 12 or 13 wins next year, this whole town will explode, and he'll
enjoy a long contract extension. If we're 5-7 thru twelve
games for the 3rd year in a row, the fans will give him the same
business they gave to David Carr and Kris Brown.

God bless the fans at Reliant. STAY ON THIS TEAM'S ASS!!!

steelbtexan
01-29-2010, 04:33 PM
Brian Cushing, Demeco Ryans, Bernard Pollard, Andre Johnson and Matt Schaub may disagree.

I basically agree with you but do you think if Tom Moore had sent in the HB pass play in that situation Mannind would've just laughed and said can you believe that Moore called that play then audibled out the play.

That's Leadership Schaub hasn't exhibited that kind of leadership yet but I have hope that he will gain leadership like that.

dalemurphy
01-29-2010, 04:48 PM
I basically agree with you but do you think if Tom Moore had sent in the HB pass play in that situation Mannind would've just laughed and said can you believe that Moore called that play then audibled out the play.
That's Leadership Schaub hasn't exhibited that kind of leadership yet but I have hope that he will gain leadership like that.

Well, he sent in the Reggie Wayne pass in the late third quarter of a close game against us... not only did Manning not audible out of it, but Pollard picked it off!

Doesn't mean I still don't think it was a HORRID playcall!

DexmanC
01-29-2010, 04:53 PM
Well, he sent in the Reggie Wayne pass in the late third quarter of a close game against us... not only did Manning not audible out of it, but Pollard picked it off!

Doesn't mean I still don't think it was a HORRID playcall!

If I remember correctly, Wayne's pass happened between the 40's and
not on the goalline while they were down 2 scores to start the 4th quarter.
Not exactly the same situation, but I get your point. However, the
situation DOES factor in, when determining whether a call was "good" or
"bad."

Ole Miss Texan
01-29-2010, 05:17 PM
I basically agree with you but do you think if Tom Moore had sent in the HB pass play in that situation Mannind would've just laughed and said can you believe that Moore called that play then audibled out the play.

That's Leadership Schaub hasn't exhibited that kind of leadership yet but I have hope that he will gain leadership like that.

Well you see, my opinion on that playcall differs vastly from about 99.9% of texans fans. I completely understand and support yalls opinion that I could be certifiably insane for supporting that call.

The issue in speculating about that play is that we don't know what was said from the sidelines or in the huddle. I do not disagree one bit with all the fans that say that was a dumb playcall, you should have the ball in your best player's hands, etc etc. I don't disagree.

However, it was 1st and goal from the 5 yard line. I love gutsy playcalls like this that catch the other team off guard. Everyone assumes its going to be a quick slant to AJ or KW... or that we're going to pound it up the middle three times and then attempt a FG ;) I want to assume Schaub said something like this in the huddle, "Okay its 1st down guys. Chris is going to get the handoff running right. If there's a hole he's going to run it in, if its clogged then he'll pass it in the back of the endzone to Dreessen. Chris... it's 1st down so if you don't have a clear throw, then throw it out of the back of the EZ and we'll still have 3 shots to get it in."

I'm almost 100% that was the intention (could have been a designed pass from the getgo). Dreessen was wide open for an easy TD but Brown just put no juice on it.. it was the worst thing he could have done. Yea sure, ultimately Kubiak could be blamed because of that or Schaub for maybe not audibleing. It would have worked Brown didn't have TERRIBLE execution on that play. Then theres the crowd that thinks Kubiak should be gone because Chris Brown was even on the team so I know I'm HUGELY in the minority! :choke:

Double Barrel
01-29-2010, 05:23 PM
I think one of the reasons this "debate" get's so heated, is that there are people who believe this is what the Kubiak supporters are saying, and nothing could be farther from the truth.

Most of the supporters are fine with Kubiak getting to coach the final year of his contract without an extension.

There are a few, who believe Kubiak should get an extension. However if he doesn't meet certain expectations, he's gone, & replaced for 2011.

No one, that I can remember, has stated they believe Kubiak should be our head coach beyond 2010 if he or the team under perform.

Well, I believe what people are saying based upon what they are saying.

One of Kubiak's biggest detractors, Lucky, made the best case for giving Kubiak an extension if they are going to let him HC in 2010.

My reply to Infantrycak was tongue-in-cheek and he knows it. We yank each other's chains from time to time but we both know it's just for fun. I think the idea of a lifetime achievement award and 10 year extension is pretty self-evident in it's silliness.

thunderkyss
01-29-2010, 06:04 PM
Houstonfrog said he has a source close to the team that said it was a message to the rest of the team that was needed. I accept that. Good for them. I just don't see, based on results, that the same message was needed in Houston.

You've obviously got a reading comprehension problem.

Let me say it slowly for you.

The message.

Was not for the team.

The message.

Is for the fans.
So they will understand that winning is important to Bob McNair, Rick Smith, Gary Kubiak, Matt Schaub, etc... etc...

JB
01-29-2010, 06:10 PM
Well you see, my opinion on that playcall differs vastly from about 99.9% of texans fans. I completely understand and support yalls opinion that I could be certifiably insane for supporting that call.

The issue in speculating about that play is that we don't know what was said from the sidelines or in the huddle. I do not disagree one bit with all the fans that say that was a dumb playcall, you should have the ball in your best player's hands, etc etc. I don't disagree.

However, it was 1st and goal from the 5 yard line. I love gutsy playcalls like this that catch the other team off guard. Everyone assumes its going to be a quick slant to AJ or KW... or that we're going to pound it up the middle three times and then attempt a FG ;) I want to assume Schaub said something like this in the huddle, "Okay its 1st down guys. Chris is going to get the handoff running right. If there's a hole he's going to run it in, if its clogged then he'll pass it in the back of the endzone to Dreessen. Chris... it's 1st down so if you don't have a clear throw, then throw it out of the back of the EZ and we'll still have 3 shots to get it in."

I'm almost 100% that was the intention (could have been a designed pass from the getgo). Dreessen was wide open for an easy TD but Brown just put no juice on it.. it was the worst thing he could have done. Yea sure, ultimately Kubiak could be blamed because of that or Schaub for maybe not audibleing. It would have worked Brown didn't have TERRIBLE execution on that play. Then theres the crowd that thinks Kubiak should be gone because Chris Brown was even on the team so I know I'm HUGELY in the minority! :choke:

After I recovered from my Rage attack, I saw it the same way. If Brown would have done anything other than what he did people would be talking about the great playcall.

Lucky
01-29-2010, 06:51 PM
If Brown would have done anything other than what he did people would be talking about the great playcall.
It is a great call. If you're playing Madden. In the actual NFL, where every play in a 16 game season counts, that call was galactically stupid.

Ole Miss Texan
01-29-2010, 06:52 PM
After I recovered from my Rage attack, I saw it the same way. If Brown would have done anything other than what he did people would be talking about the great playcall.
It is a great call. If you're playing Madden. In the actual NFL, where every play in a 16 game season counts, that call was galactically stupid.
To bring this full circle back on topic... "Texans should take note of Saints", Payton seems to be the kind of coach to take chances and be innovative. He brings excitement to the offense and the fans enjoy it.

If anything you could argue Kubiak did take note and called the same play!! After all, Chris Brown and Reggie Bush are both 0-1 passing with 1 interception for their career!!!

Carr Bombed
01-29-2010, 06:56 PM
It is a great call. If you're playing Madden. In the actual NFL, where every play in a 16 game season counts, that call was galactically stupid.

I remember just LMAO as soon as that play unfolded, it's all I could do. It was either laugh hysterically or start crying. It went something like this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5BKX3QCjk0

:)

steelbtexan
01-29-2010, 10:51 PM
It is a great call. If you're playing Madden. In the actual NFL, where every play in a 16 game season counts, that call was galactically stupid.

LOL

Madden ?

Texans are MADDENING.................... Yeah

thunderkyss
01-30-2010, 06:07 AM
It is a great call. If you're playing Madden. In the actual NFL, where every play in a 16 game season counts, that call was galactically stupid.

How was our red zone performance up to this point?

I get the impression, the consensus around here was not satisfied with our performance in the red zone. Even though Gary called conventional plays, and put the ball in the hands of our best players.

IF you were satisfied..... I can understand your anger, and the reasoning, "We should put the ball in the hands of our Pro Bowl Quarterback."

IF you weren't, if you were tired of seeing us not able to connect on the slant, or run it up the middle & punch it into the endzone....... I don't understand the anger.

Grams
01-30-2010, 06:50 AM
The anger is because it is used as a reason to fire Kubiak.

The TE was so WIDE open in the endzone, I could have thrown him the ball. (and I am over 60 and a girl). But either Leach or Myers missed their block and the defender got to Brown and Brown goofed up. This one is all on the players. If it worked, everyone would be estactic.

Lucky
01-30-2010, 08:59 AM
The anger is because it is used as a reason to fire Kubiak.
The "anger" is a response to what was a stupid, stupid, play. Kubiak called an option by a player who had never thrown a pass in a NFL game. At a critical juncture in the game and the season.

Look, I realize Kubiak is never wrong. It is only the players who fail. The players he drafts, signs, and coaches. He always puts the team into a position to win, because he's the smartest kid in the room. Of course the play was wide open. All the Texans needed to do was be able to block the play. Having never seen Chris Brown throw a decent pass, who really knows where the ball might have landed? Doesn't matter, Kubiak did his job. Everyone else is a big fail.

infantrycak
01-30-2010, 09:55 AM
The "anger" is a response to what was a stupid, stupid, play. Kubiak called an option by a player who had never thrown a pass in a NFL game. At a critical juncture in the game and the season.

Look, I realize Kubiak is never wrong. It is only the players who fail. The players he drafts, signs, and coaches. He always puts the team into a position to win, because he's the smartest kid in the room. Of course the play was wide open. All the Texans needed to do was be able to block the play. Having never seen Chris Brown throw a decent pass, who really knows where the ball might have landed? Doesn't matter, Kubiak did his job. Everyone else is a big fail.

Which is cute and all but it totally overlooks practice. They had seen him attempt that play. Evidently he had done well enough for them to feel comfortable attempting it. TE was wide open. The play design worked. CB f'd it up.

More importantly if he hits that pass the only threads about that play are how brilliant it was instead of how stupid it was.

dalemurphy
01-30-2010, 11:20 AM
The "anger" is a response to what was a stupid, stupid, play. Kubiak called an option by a player who had never thrown a pass in a NFL game. At a critical juncture in the game and the season.

Look, I realize Kubiak is never wrong. It is only the players who fail. The players he drafts, signs, and coaches. He always puts the team into a position to win, because he's the smartest kid in the room. Of course the play was wide open. All the Texans needed to do was be able to block the play. Having never seen Chris Brown throw a decent pass, who really knows where the ball might have landed? Doesn't matter, Kubiak did his job. Everyone else is a big fail.

It was a hideous and pathetic call. The thing I think fans miss though, is that almost every NFL coach occasionally make these kinds of bonehead calls. I'm not trying to justify it... I purchased my pink soap right after that play and held on to it for a day before regrouping.

I have Steeler fan friends that were screaming about what a bonehead Mike Tomlin was until they won the Superbowl last season. If the Texans don't blow the game at Indy, Colts fans would've been up in arms over the Reggie Wayne intercepted pass.

There are close to 2000 plays in a season and many more decisions than that made by the head coach. When analyzing the coach of the team you watch more closely than any other, I think it's important to look at the larger picture and not hyperfocus on one or two errors. When I look at the big picture, I see a coach that puts his players in position to succeed most of the time, that the players love to play for, and a coach that is will/able to learn from his mistakes and grow as a coach. Combine that with the team's growth and development and I am confident that next season and those coming after that are going to be very rewarding for Texan fans.

playa465
01-30-2010, 02:16 PM
More importantly if he hits that pass the only threads about that play are how brilliant it was instead of how stupid it was.

Exactly...everyone would be talking about how the play was a great call to catch the defense off guard...funny how we fans know so much after observing the failure of something.

steelbtexan
01-30-2010, 02:26 PM
It was a hideous and pathetic call. The thing I think fans miss though, is that almost every NFL coach occasionally make these kinds of bonehead calls. I'm not trying to justify it... I purchased my pink soap right after that play and held on to it for a day before regrouping.

I have Steeler fan friends that were screaming about what a bonehead Mike Tomlin was until they won the Superbowl last season. If the Texans don't blow the game at Indy, Colts fans would've been up in arms over the Reggie Wayne intercepted pass.

There are close to 2000 plays in a season and many more decisions than that made by the head coach. When analyzing the coach of the team you watch more closely than any other, I think it's important to look at the larger picture and not hyperfocus on one or two errors. When I look at the big picture, I see a coach that puts his players in position to succeed most of the time, that the players love to play for, and a coach that is will/able to learn from his mistakes and grow as a coach. Combine that with the team's growth and development and I am confident that next season and those coming after that are going to be very rewarding for Texan fans.

How many more years until Kubes is all grown up as a HC?

How many more years of missing the playoffs until you admit Kubes is not the right man for the job?

dalemurphy
01-30-2010, 02:43 PM
How many more years until Kubes is all grown up as a HC?

How many more years of missing the playoffs until you admit Kubes is not the right man for the job?

Probably 1.

Lucky
01-31-2010, 02:42 AM
There are close to 2000 plays in a season and many more decisions than that made by the head coach. When analyzing the coach of the team you watch more closely than any other, I think it's important to look at the larger picture and not hyperfocus on one or two errors. When I look at the big picture, I see a coach that puts his players in position to succeed most of the time...
I think too much has been made of this one play. However, there were more than just one or two coaching errors over the course of the season. There were more than one or two additional coaching errors in that particular game. Get one or two of the many errors made by this staff corrected, and this very well might have been a playoff team. Some see that as a positive. I see it as a lost opportunity.

Some seem very certain of what the future holds for the Texans. Myself, I don't really know what will happen in 2010. I thought that the Texans would spit the bit and race to the playoffs in 2009. That never happened, and I'm thinking that they'll never cross the finish line in 1st under this jockey. I hope I'm proven wrong.

DexmanC
01-31-2010, 07:45 AM
Probably 1.

Or "probably" 10.

Way to go out on a ledge there, Dale.

:) :fans::fans:

steelbtexan
01-31-2010, 12:56 PM
Well you see, my opinion on that playcall differs vastly from about 99.9% of texans fans. I completely understand and support yalls opinion that I could be certifiably insane for supporting that call.

The issue in speculating about that play is that we don't know what was said from the sidelines or in the huddle. I do not disagree one bit with all the fans that say that was a dumb playcall, you should have the ball in your best player's hands, etc etc. I don't disagree.

However, it was 1st and goal from the 5 yard line. I love gutsy playcalls like this that catch the other team off guard. Everyone assumes its going to be a quick slant to AJ or KW... or that we're going to pound it up the middle three times and then attempt a FG ;) I want to assume Schaub said something like this in the huddle, "Okay its 1st down guys. Chris is going to get the handoff running right. If there's a hole he's going to run it in, if its clogged then he'll pass it in the back of the endzone to Dreessen. Chris... it's 1st down so if you don't have a clear throw, then throw it out of the back of the EZ and we'll still have 3 shots to get it in."

I'm almost 100% that was the intention (could have been a designed pass from the getgo). Dreessen was wide open for an easy TD but Brown just put no juice on it.. it was the worst thing he could have done. Yea sure, ultimately Kubiak could be blamed because of that or Schaub for maybe not audibleing. It would have worked Brown didn't have TERRIBLE execution on that play. Then theres the crowd that thinks Kubiak should be gone because Chris Brown was even on the team so I know I'm HUGELY in the minority! :choke:

Good post

No problem with the play call

The problem is the player that Kubes chose to execute the play.

What positive had C.Brown done to make Kubes think that Brown wouldn't screw the play up. At that point in the season it was a crap shoot at best that the play would be executed properly. Unfortunately for the Texans and Kubes the POS that is C.Brown caused the team to crap out.

The Pencil Neck
01-31-2010, 08:06 PM
I basically agree with you but do you think if Tom Moore had sent in the HB pass play in that situation Mannind would've just laughed and said can you believe that Moore called that play then audibled out the play.

That's Leadership Schaub hasn't exhibited that kind of leadership yet but I have hope that he will gain leadership like that.

Just a point, but the Colts have had Addai run that HB pass a few times over the years. And sometimes it's been almost as complete a shambles as ours was and sometimes it's worked. I don't think Manning audibles out of that play in that situation.

steelbtexan
01-31-2010, 10:10 PM
Just a point, but the Colts have had Addai run that HB pass a few times over the years. And sometimes it's been almost as complete a shambles as ours was and sometimes it's worked. I don't think Manning audibles out of that play in that situation.

Agreed

Atleast Addai played QB in HS

C.Brown I'm glad he wont be back next year. I think we can all agree on that.

Double Barrel
02-01-2010, 05:09 PM
Which is cute and all but it totally overlooks practice. They had seen him attempt that play. Evidently he had done well enough for them to feel comfortable attempting it. TE was wide open. The play design worked. CB f'd it up.

More importantly if he hits that pass the only threads about that play are how brilliant it was instead of how stupid it was.

You are usually not one to prop up shallow optimism with "the big if".

It did not work and it clearly failed. That's all that matters. We can play The If Game with the entire season and end up in the Super Bowl. But, as you know, that's not how this works.

It's a percentage game, and the Texans, the team with the 8 year running fragile ego and inability to close games out, are not a trick play kind of team. We just aren't, and the fundamentals of making a statement that we have a first down near the goal line should be the point. Sheer determination that we are going to earn that TD, not through trickery, but with our strengths, is where we needed to be at.

But not the Smartest Man In The Room (TM), because over-thinking is what he does best.

This is just a weak defense of Kubiak, man. If you meant it that way or not, I find it disingenuous to put sprinkles on his failures can call them tasty brownies. That play call was a turd, and even more so because it was destined for failure before the snap. The 2009 Texans were not the team that the play was suited for. Period. (We can go to Pollyanna Land to make it work, but then a rift in the space/time continuum opens and all hell breaks loose.)

I don't think we should fire the guy over that one play, but rather it is one play out of many that he has clearly been out coached on a rather consistent basis. Hopefully 2010 is the year that Gary finally grows up into a consistent NFL head coach.

infantrycak
02-01-2010, 05:24 PM
You are usually not one to prop up shallow optimism with "the big if".

It did not work and it clearly failed. That's all that matters. We can play The If Game with the entire season and end up in the Super Bowl. But, as you know, that's not how this works.

It's a percentage game, and the Texans, the team with the 8 year running fragile ego and inability to close games out, are not a trick play kind of team. We just aren't, and the fundamentals of making a statement that we have a first down near the goal line should be the point. Sheer determination that we are going to earn that TD, not through trickery, but with our strengths, is where we needed to be at.

But not the Smartest Man In The Room (TM), because over-thinking is what he does best.

This is just a weak defense of Kubiak, man. If you meant it that way or not, I find it disingenuous to put sprinkles on his failures can call them tasty brownies. That play call was a turd, and even more so because it was destined for failure before the snap. The 2009 Texans were not the team that the play was suited for. Period. (We can go to Pollyanna Land to make it work, but then a rift in the space/time continuum opens and all hell breaks loose.)

I don't think we should fire the guy over that one play, but rather it is one play out of many that he has clearly been out coached on a rather consistent basis. Hopefully 2010 is the year that Gary finally grows up into a consistent NFL head coach.

Well I just disagree. The team was failing at running particularly in short yardage. Seems to me a coach should take that and adapt to what is happening which is what he did. The design of the play worked but the execution failed. Frankly this is a no win play. Try to ram it up the gut on sheer determination and Kubiak would be called a poor coach for trying something he knows is failing. But bottom line the play failed and at the end of the day that is all that counts.

dalemurphy
02-01-2010, 05:30 PM
It's a percentage game, and the Texans, the team with the 8 year running fragile ego and inability to close games out, are not a trick play kind of team. We just aren't, and the fundamentals of making a statement that we have a first down near the goal line should be the point. Sheer determination that we are going to earn that TD, not through trickery, but with our strengths, is where we needed to be at.


While I certainly disagree with your position on Kubiak, I totally agree with this statement. It is a cheap bailout to call for trickery at that point and in that position. Why would you not trust AJ, KW, Schaub and company with a 1st down in a big spot on the 6 yard line? Right there, against a mediocre football team, you tell your leaders to do their job and get in the endzone.

thunderkyss
02-01-2010, 07:02 PM
It's a percentage game, and the Texans, the team with the 8 year running fragile ego and inability to close games out, are not a trick play kind of team. We just aren't, and the fundamentals of making a statement that we have a first down near the goal line should be the point. Sheer determination that we are going to earn that TD, not through trickery, but with our strengths, is where we needed to be at.

But not the Smartest Man In The Room (TM), because over-thinking is what he does best.

This is just a weak defense of Kubiak, man.

That play call was a turd, and even more so because it was destined for failure before the snap. The 2009 Texans were not the team that the play was suited for. Period. (We can go to Pollyanna Land to make it work, but then a rift in the space/time continuum opens and all hell breaks loose.)




I honestly felt better about the HB Pass call than I did about this series of plays just before half time in the final game of 2009.


# 2-2-NE 2 (5:43) 37-A.Foster right tackle to NE 1 for 1 yard (53-D.Burgess, 51-J.Mayo).
# 3-1-NE 1 (4:57) 8-M.Schaub pass incomplete short right to 44-V.Leach.
# Timeout #2 by NE at 04:50.
# 4-1-NE 1 (4:49) 8-M.Schaub pass incomplete short right to 80-A.Johnson.


This is what we've been doing since 2008.

GP
02-01-2010, 08:51 PM
Well I just disagree. The team was failing at running particularly in short yardage. Seems to me a coach should take that and adapt to what is happening which is what he did. The design of the play worked but the execution failed. Frankly this is a no win play. Try to ram it up the gut on sheer determination and Kubiak would be called a poor coach for trying something he knows is failing. But bottom line the play failed and at the end of the day that is all that counts.

But this play happened on first down.

Seems to me that a HB Pass is not your first choice on first down.

This team, when it gets near the end zone, should be spreading the field with at least a 3 or 4 WR set. Examples:

AJ, Walter, Anderson and a FB and RB. Motion the RB out to a receiver spot, leaving the FB in there. Or motion the FB out to create some "huh?" moments for the defense.

Or...

AJ, Walter, Jacoby, Anderson and a RB.

Or...

AJ, Walter, Jacoby, Dreesen and a RB.

Spread the field, and make the DBs stay honest by having to respect the slant, or crossing routes, or curl route, or WR screen, or RB screen, etc.

From those formations, you can do a shovel pass or a RB draw, or counter mis-direction plays, etc.

There are so many more options for three straight downs near the goal line than a HB Pass on first down. That was just the epic WTH? moment for me. And it had to be for the whole offense, Chris Brown included, if those guys would be honest for a second.

Was it practiced? I suppose so. Should it have been used? I can't see why it should have been used. Maybe with a two TD lead. Maybe to morally defeat them and drive the final nail into that coffin. But I don't recall having a 14-point lead when that play was called.

Ole Miss Texan
02-01-2010, 10:01 PM
We have an undersized OL with starting interiors of Studdard, Myers and White. Good luck with pounding it in from the 5. I agree we have to get to the point where we're able to tell the other team what we're going to do and be able to execute better and score. We weren't there yet.

I don't have a problem with the call because of how it should have been run. The worst thing that should have happen was throwing it out of the back of the endzone. Move on to 2nd down and run Foster up the middle or a slant to AJ or KW, etc.

Good post thunderkyss. That's the standard operating procedure and defenses can stop it. Sometimes the highest percentage chances aren't there because defenses are onto that and try to defend those plays meaning other options may have a better chance of succeeding!

I just have a real sneaking suspicion if the call went the other way. If Schaub threw a quick slant to AJ that usually works for the 1st down or TD. But this time the defense was ready for it because they knew that's what we go to. When a CB jumps THAT route its an easy pick 6. This board would have lit up that Kubiak needs to venture outside his normal play calls and do something new. That he's too predictable and needs to be more like Sean Payton. That he keeps doing the same plays and he needs to be fired!

DexmanC
02-02-2010, 06:42 AM
Schaub and Dre had all the momentum before that call came in. Take
the HB Option in the context of the game, it was COLOSSALLY STUPID!
Have Schaub line up in the shotgun with 4 wides and a single back, and
those odds are a helluva lot better than that play with your 3RD STRING
RUNNINGBACK!

dalemurphy
02-02-2010, 07:12 AM
Schaub and Dre had all the momentum before that call came in. Take
the HB Option in the context of the game, it was COLOSSALLY STUPID!
Have Schaub line up in the shotgun with 4 wides and a single back, and
those odds are a helluva lot better than that play with your 3RD STRING
RUNNINGBACK!

If they would've ran that play during Sexy Rexy's time in the game, I'd have no complaints!

HOU-TEX
02-02-2010, 08:35 AM
Leave the ball in the hands of your play-makers. Heck, if we would've failed tossing 3 straight balls to AJ, I wouldn't have felt as bad. At least that would've told me they basically did the best they could without having a running game.

I've yet to understand why they don't give Leach more opportunities in goal line situations. Hmm, Brown or Leach at the 1.....hmm, that's a tough one. :rolleyes:

Ole Miss Texan
02-02-2010, 10:24 AM
I've yet to understand why they don't give Leach more opportunities in goal line situations. Hmm, Brown or Leach at the 1.....hmm, that's a tough one. :rolleyes:
I totally agree. It seems we used Leach a lot more towards the goal line during the '08 season than during '09. He has at least historically been more successful than Chris Brown!

Actually, I think Chris "Goal Line Stand" Brown is genius and working closely with Chris Olsen. You see, the plan is to artificially inflate the opposing Defense's stats. Brown intentionally gets "defeated" at the goal line which causes the opposing front offices to applaud their defensive line who subsequently get contract extensions and bonuses for their success. Soon, the other teams will be in financial woes because of our proactive strategy and the Texans will reap the benifits in short order. I've seen this 1,000x :bravo:

b0ng
02-02-2010, 10:33 AM
Pretty much any comparisons to other coaches will disappear if Kubiak has a successful 2010 campaign.

barrett
02-03-2010, 01:26 AM
How many more years until Kubes is all grown up as a HC?

How many more years of missing the playoffs until you admit Kubes is not the right man for the job?

Probably 1.

What if we go 11-5 and miss?

Is that the "probably"?