PDA

View Full Version : Put the pink soap away for good: Kubiak extended until 2012


Pages : 1 [2] 3

steelbtexan
02-03-2010, 06:41 PM
Well, it's not exactly an appointment to the federal judiciary. Why do you care that he got an extension when it won't affect the salary cap? This is good for the team NEXT YEAR. If they regress without cause, Kubes is probably gone anyway, so the extension is not that big of a deal.

Because if McNair has to pay 2 coaches (Kubes and the new guy) he's going to pass those costs on to the season ticket holders.

The timing of the season ticket increase and the unearned Kubes extention stinks.

What is your definition of mediocrity? Kubes record is mediocore. The last time I check the NFL is based on W/L's.

Using your standards when is it it long enough to say the Texans should have made the playoffs.

To know that I'm an ***** who's done well in life makes me feel great about myself. I just want to say thanks you made my day. LOL

nytexan
02-03-2010, 06:42 PM
Super Bowl winning Brian Bilick (SP)

I dont know who will be available after next season. I wasn't against bringing Kubes back next season. I was against the extention. He has done nothing to earn an extention. If you are fine with 8-8,8-8,9-7 mediocrity then he doesn't deserve an extention. I'm not in this group. I exellence, that may be too much to expect from a McNair run organization.

I just don't get the exuberance of the anti-Kubiak crowd. He's done nothing to deserve an extension??????? Really, nothing??????

You don't think the team is heading in the right direction from where they started 4 years ago????? You don't think they are light years ahead of where Casserly left them after his first 4 years in charge???? You don't think the talent level has been increased every year for the past 4 years?????? Every single draft he's had since he's been here has been better than the totality of the entire drafts classes that were taken in the first 4 years of the teams existence.

We have 3 (if you count Pitts) players on this team from the entire 4 years of drafts that Casserly had and you don't think its been a detriment to getting this team over the hump. When he first got hired Kubiak said he was going to build the team thru the draft. Has he done that?????

Has he made some mistakes, sure but the downright hate for this guy is just unbelievable to me. If we were 6-10 this year I can understand it but not with an obvious betterment of the team we've seen. Impatience I can understand but your vehement attitude that he doesn't deserve anything is ludicrous.

steelbtexan
02-03-2010, 06:51 PM
I just recieved my invoice. :bat:

Me too

Dont you think McNair is sitting back somewhere laughing his butt off?

Second Honeymoon
02-03-2010, 07:21 PM
Don't ask that! They don't like that question!

I love that question.

Cowher. Gruden. Schottenheimer.

All 3 are proven winners and all 3 would be instant upgrades from Kubiak.

Bottom line is that McNair is too cheap to pay for Cowher and probably too cheap to pay for Gruden or Schottenheimer and the high quality assistants that would follow any 3 of those coaches.

Kubiak has proved that he is a .500 coach. That is a fact. But we sure can beat up the bottom feeders like the Rams, Seahawks, and Raiders. Hoo-freaking-ray.

thunderkyss
02-03-2010, 07:38 PM
The Texans on the other hand didn't address their problems during the offseason. Pollard got cut in the preseason. The Texans elected to wait unti after game 1 to sign him. Pollard wasn't ready to play with the Texans until game 4.

Does anyone remember how Barber lost his job?

What was the last straw??

dalemurphy
02-03-2010, 08:00 PM
I love that question.

Cowher. Gruden. Schottenheimer.

All 3 are proven winners and all 3 would be instant upgrades from Kubiak.

Bottom line is that McNair is too cheap to pay for Cowher and probably too cheap to pay for Gruden or Schottenheimer and the high quality assistants that would follow any 3 of those coaches.

Kubiak has proved that he is a .500 coach. That is a fact. But we sure can beat up the bottom feeders like the Rams, Seahawks, and Raiders. Hoo-freaking-ray.

Schottenheimer said he is not interested in coaching anymore.
Cowher isn't going to coach until at least 2011.
Gruden is committed to ESPN until 2011.


I'm not a Cowher guy like everyone else on the planet, but I would love to have Schottenheimer. But, like I said, he publicly stated that he is done with his career as a coach.

dalemurphy
02-03-2010, 08:05 PM
Super Bowl winning Brian Bilick (SP) Jim Harbaugh, Rob Ryan,Zimmer to name a few .

Man, I stand corrected. I did not realize how little respect you people have for Kubiak to list some of these bums!

Harbaugh is interesting if you are starting over. I think he could be a good coach but I wouldn't want to wait for all the on-the-job training that would be neccessary... not with a team that's ready to win, like ours.

dalemurphy
02-03-2010, 08:07 PM
Does anyone remember how Barber lost his job?

What was the last straw??

No. He was awful early in the year. But, after the Wilson injury, he played well at FS next to Pollard before he tore his hamstring.

Texan_Bill
02-03-2010, 08:07 PM
Me too

Dont you think McNair is sitting back somewhere laughing his butt off?

I'm not sure but perhaps ticket prices wouldn't have to be raised if the Texans watched some of their operating costs. What I'm talking about is that I recieved another invoice today (yes, back to back days two identical invoice packages). I don't imagine that fancy stationary and fancy promo ads are cheap....
:gun:

......Just sayin'. And this coming from a person that disagrees with you on Kubes AND generally defends the Texans organization and McNair.

Second Honeymoon
02-03-2010, 08:17 PM
Schottenheimer said he is not interested in coaching anymore.
Cowher isn't going to coach until at least 2011.
Gruden is committed to ESPN until 2011.


I'm not a Cowher guy like everyone else on the planet, but I would love to have Schottenheimer. But, like I said, he publicly stated that he is done with his career as a coach.

I hadn't heard that from Marty. Cowher would have coached for the Texans if Kubiak would have been fired and McNair would be willing to spend some money on coaching. Gruden could easily be lured out of ESPN. The contract isn't keeping him from coaching. He would come here if the money and situation was right. No doubt.

I respect your opinion though especially if you think Marty would be a good fit, which he would be. That sucks to hear that he isn't interested. He is getting a bit old but at least he would bring his son and if things work out you would have a built in family successory. nepotism ftw.

Cowher would come back and I think he was secrety hoping for the Texans job only to see the Texans do just enough to save Kubiak's job.

thunderkyss
02-03-2010, 08:21 PM
The Texans job would have been the most appealing job in all of the NFL actually.


Really?

Is that just you saying that, or do you believe that was/is the predominate opinion around the country?

bckey
02-03-2010, 08:26 PM
The Kubiak supporters keep saying the team has improved every year. Well they had a cream puff schedule this year and blew it. They improved by one game over the previous two 8-8 seasons and imho Bush had as much to do with that or maybe even more than anybody.

Next year will be really tough. Not saying it can't be done but it will not be as easy as this year and we still face the same division opponents next year that Kubiak just can't seem to beat. I think that the division record Kubiak has accumulated over 4 years ranks up there as one of his biggest faults the anti Kubiak crowd sees.

I hope Kubiak gets this team to playoffs as much as anyone but what if he doesn't? We wasted a year sticking with him and drafting more players to fit in his scheme that may not fit in someone elses. What will be the mood around here if the Texans go 7-9 or 8-8 and Kubiak gets fired? What if he doesn't get fired for it? It could be real ugly next season or it could be really fantastic. Who knows at this point. Lets just drop the coaching debate and move on to draft talk and building a better team. No matter what Kubiak is here for another year. We can pick up the debate during next season with a lot more knowlege of how things are proving out instead of all of us speculating.

I'll tell you what I am excited about. Frank Bush. I think that adding a few more correct pieces to the puzzle and the Texans will have themselves one heck of a defense. One that can turn games around and win them. One that can create havac in the backfield. One that can stop opposing offenses on 3rd and short. One that confuses qb's.

Texan_Bill
02-03-2010, 08:28 PM
I hadn't heard that from Marty. Cowher would have coached for the Texans if Kubiak would have been fired and McNair would be willing to spend some money on coaching. John Gruden could easily be lured out of ESPN. The contract isn't keeping him from coaching. He would come here if the money and situation was right. No doubt.

I respect your opinion though especially if you think Marty would be a good fit, which he would be. That sucks to hear that he isn't interested. He is getting a bit old but at least he would bring his son and if things work out you would have a built in family successory. nepotism ftw.

Cowher would come back and I think he was secrety hoping for the Texans job only to see the Texans do just enough to save Kubiak's job.

First bolded = example of someone stating an opinion and trying to pass it as an empirical fact.

Second bolded = that tingly feeling that Chris Mathews had down his leg when talking about a then President-elect Obama speech.

steelbtexan
02-03-2010, 08:52 PM
I'm not sure but perhaps ticket prices wouldn't have to be raised if the Texans watched some of their operating costs. What I'm talking about is that I recieved another invoice today (yes, back to back days two identical invoice packages). I don't imagine that fancy stationary and fancy promo ads are cheap....
:gun:

......Just sayin'. And this coming from a person that disagrees with you on Kubes AND generally defends the Texans organization and McNair.

They will pass on the cost of any scrrew ups on to the season ticket holders. Because they can.


I dont expect people to agree with me but I make them think.

That's fun LOL

ChampionTexan
02-03-2010, 09:09 PM
First bolded = example of someone stating an opinion and trying to pass it as an empirical fact.

Second bolded = that tingly feeling that Chris Mathews had down his leg when talking about a then President-elect Obama speech.

Yep, those saying categorically he'd have come here, and those saying categorically wouldn't are pretty funny - neither knows, both act certain, and both scream bloody murder when the other side tells us what they "know" he would have (or wouldn't have) done.

Texan_Bill
02-03-2010, 09:14 PM
Yep, those saying categorically he'd have come here, and those saying categorically wouldn't are pretty funny - neither knows, both act certain, and both scream bloody murder when the other side tells us what they "know" he would have (or wouldn't have) done.

The only fact I know is that if Cowhler would've come here is this: A lot of saliva would be flying.....

just sayin'

GP
02-03-2010, 09:17 PM
Tigers love cinnamon

No they don't.

They love pepper.

And your avatar STILL disturbs me. I don't even want to know how that happened.

GP
02-03-2010, 09:19 PM
I got rep from Thunderkyss, but the rep link took me to a post by Wolf.

Odd.

Free rep! Hee-hee....:peek:

Texan_Bill
02-03-2010, 09:22 PM
I got rep from Thunderkyss, but the rep link took me to a post by Wolf.

Odd.

Free rep! Hee-hee....:peek:

I could neg. rep you to even it back out.. :worm:

:jk:

Second Honeymoon
02-03-2010, 09:27 PM
First bolded = example of someone stating an opinion and trying to pass it as an empirical fact.

Second bolded = that tingly feeling that Chris Mathews had down his leg when talking about a then President-elect Obama speech.

i got a fact for you. we just rewarded a HC with a .500 record a 3 year extension.

what kind of message does that send to the fans that want a winner?

but he is a 'local legend' so lets just keeping making excuse after excuse. i cant wait to see next years 'excuse du jour'. people are already going to the 'tough schedule card' before the season even begins. pathetic imho.

this is a 'wait till next year' franchise and until we start thinking about today we will never get where we want to go tomorrow. and now they send me an invoice for my tickets, the same freaking week as he is re-signed? screw McNair and his cheapskating ways.

Joe Texan
02-03-2010, 09:34 PM
i got a fact for you. we just rewarded a HC with a .500 record a 3 year extension.

what kind of message does that send to the fans that want a winner?

but he is a 'local legend' so lets just keeping making excuse after excuse. i cant wait to see next years 'excuse du jour'. people are already going to the 'tough schedule card' before the season even begins. pathetic imho.

this is a 'wait till next year' franchise and until we start thinking about today we will never get where we want to go tomorrow. and now they send me an invoice for my tickets, the same freaking week as he is re-signed? screw McNair and his cheapskating ways.

Dude shut the whining up already. Gary Kubiak is the Coach and he is the coach that will get us deep in the playoffs next year, probably Dallas so shut the little kid whining up and reach down Grab the eggs and man up and tell us what this coach your so not fond of is needing to do to be the coach you want.

The constant Whining is annoying, Try the Whiner Line.

Texan_Bill
02-03-2010, 09:51 PM
i got a fact for you. we just rewarded a HC with a .500 record a 3 year extension.
what kind of message does that send to the fans that want a winner?

but he is a 'local legend' so lets just keeping making excuse after excuse. i cant wait to see next years 'excuse du jour'. people are already going to the 'tough schedule card' before the season even begins. pathetic imho.

this is a 'wait till next year' franchise and until we start thinking about today we will never get where we want to go tomorrow. and now they send me an invoice for my tickets, the same freaking week as he is re-signed? screw McNair and his cheapskating ways.

WOW, are you describing Jeff Fisher?? I know, I know....that's different. :gun: Blow me!! :rolleyes:

He's not a "local legend".. A "local legend" is your bromance with Vincent "sausage boi" Young, so let's make excuses for his piss poor Pro-Bowll QBR of 25..... awesome!! :rolleyes:


GET over yourself... BECAUSE you say it, doesn't remotely make it true....


And if your opinion is true, here is my truth:

Think about it:
Bill Cowher sucks! He's a low level, trailer trash, piece of shit that was handed a a truck load of talent from Knoll, and only managed one ring in 16 years.

The thing that won him that ring was the Rooney's who stuck with people that they believed in.... Isn't retarded that you stroke a guy who was the beneficierary of an ownership that stuck with stability and yet you don't beleive in stability?

WTF? :mcnugget:

HoustonFrog
02-03-2010, 10:14 PM
WOW, are you describing Jeff Fisher?? I know, I know....that's different. :gun: Blow me!! :rolleyes:

He's not a "local legend".. A "local legend" is your bromance with Vincent "sausage boi" Young, so let's make excuses for his piss poor Pro-Bowll QBR of 25..... awesome!! :rolleyes:


GET over yourself... BECAUSE you say it, doesn't remotely make it true....


And if your opinion is true, here is my truth:

Think about it:
Bill Cowher sucks! He's a low level, trailer trash, piece of shit that was handed a a truck load of talent from Knoll, and only managed one ring in 16 years.

The thing that won him that ring was the Rooney's who stuck with people that they believed in.... Isn't retarded that you stroke a guy who was the beneficierary of an ownership that stuck with stability and yet you don't beleive in stability?

WTF? :mcnugget:

TB, we agree on alot but come on. What got Bill continuous support is that in 15 years he only had 3 losing seasons...4 if you include .500. Even after Knoll he successfully continued to reload. In fact Knoll was 7-9 the year before Cowher went 11-5. He may have only won one SB but... To make this easy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Cowher

In Cowher’s 15 seasons, the Steelers captured eight division titles, earned ten postseason playoff berths, played in 21 playoff games, advanced to six AFC Championship games and made two Super Bowl appearances. He is one of only six coaches in NFL history to claim at least seven division titles

Seems pretty nice to me. Just giving credit where it is due.

Grams
02-03-2010, 10:23 PM
:popcorn::popcorn:

steelbtexan
02-03-2010, 10:33 PM
I just don't get the exuberance of the anti-Kubiak crowd. He's done nothing to deserve an extension??????? Really, nothing??????

You don't think the team is heading in the right direction from where they started 4 years ago????? You don't think they are light years ahead of where Casserly left them after his first 4 years in charge???? You don't think the talent level has been increased every year for the past 4 years?????? Every single draft he's had since he's been here has been better than the totality of the entire drafts classes that were taken in the first 4 years of the teams existence.

We have 3 (if you count Pitts) players on this team from the entire 4 years of drafts that Casserly had and you don't think its been a detriment to getting this team over the hump. When he first got hired Kubiak said he was going to build the team thru the draft. Has he done that?????

Has he made some mistakes, sure but the downright hate for this guy is just unbelievable to me. If we were 6-10 this year I can understand it but not with an obvious betterment of the team we've seen. Impatience I can understand but your vehement attitude that he doesn't deserve anything is ludicrous.

Vehement: Hardly

Kubes deserved to come back for this year. That's even debateable.

Sure he's added talent. It wouldn't take much to add talent to what was here when he was hired. Casserly was a joke. (That's McNairs hiring) Smithiak have done a credible job in the draft.

Where McNair and you disagree with me is that in 4 yrs with the schedule they had last year they should have made the playoffs. After 4 yrs of Kubes how many more years do you think it will take to make the playoffs. How many more years will be acceptable?

I could care less what Bob McNair does with his team but I dont think that ? his management style is beyond repproach.

Having a NFL team in Houston is good enough for some people. That's OK but I dont condemn people who expected more from this franchise than what has been produced in the 8 yrs and running of the Texan organization.

Just because I disagree with the Sunshine Krowd doesn't mean that I dont respect their opinions. I has made for thoughtful bantering.

I take exception to using the word vehement to describe my thoughts.

Now if you want to to use Joe Texan as an example of vehement you might be more on track.

Texan_Bill
02-03-2010, 10:36 PM
TB, we agree on alot but come on. What got Bill continuous support is that in 15 years he only had 3 losing seasons...4 if you include .500. Even after Knoll he successfully continued to reload. In fact Knoll was 7-9 the year before Cowher went 11-5. He may have only won one SB but... To make this easy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Cowher



Seems pretty nice to me. Just giving credit where it is due.

Yes, Knoll went 7-9 in his final season.... but The chin was handed a helluva lot better roster than kubes was, no? The Texans existance is half of Cowher's tenure... To argue this point is disingenouis.

Thank you for reinforcing my, Mailman and others point on stability...EXACTLY

Texan_Bill
02-03-2010, 10:39 PM
BTW, Frog you are one of the good guys..........




Even though, you're an all ****ed up cowgurls fan!!!

:P

HoustonFrog
02-03-2010, 10:41 PM
Yes, Knoll went 7-9 in his final season.... but The chin was handed a helluva lot better roster than kubes was, no? The Texans existance is half of Cowher's tenure... To argue this point is disingenouis.

Thank you for reinforcing my, Mailman and others point on stability...EXACTLY

Just to clarify, I wasn't making a Kubes point...just justifying the Steelers in their decision. He had more talent to start and ran with it.

BTW, Frog you are one of the good guys..........




Even though, you're an all ****ed up cowgurls fan!!!

:P

I try despite my deficiencies :toast2:

Texan_Bill
02-03-2010, 10:46 PM
Just to clarify, I wasn't making a Kubes point...just justifying the Steelers in their decision. He had more talent to start and ran with it.

AGREED...........

I think? :thinking:

*I've had an adult beverage or 9*

Second Honeymoon
02-04-2010, 08:48 AM
WOW, are you describing Jeff Fisher?? I know, I know....that's different. :gun: Blow me!! :rolleyes:

He's not a "local legend".. A "local legend" is your bromance with Vincent "sausage boi" Young, so let's make excuses for his piss poor Pro-Bowll QBR of 25..... awesome!! :rolleyes:


GET over yourself... BECAUSE you say it, doesn't remotely make it true....


And if your opinion is true, here is my truth:

Think about it:
Bill Cowher sucks! He's a low level, trailer trash, piece of shit that was handed a a truck load of talent from Knoll, and only managed one ring in 16 years.

The thing that won him that ring was the Rooney's who stuck with people that they believed in.... Isn't retarded that you stroke a guy who was the beneficierary of an ownership that stuck with stability and yet you don't beleive in stability?

WTF? :mcnugget:

Fact: Fisher isn't a .500 coach. Fisher has gone to a Super Bowl. Fisher has gone to the playoffs.

Fact: Your hatred of VY consumes you. Your counterpoint to every argument about anything football-related is 'VY sucks'. Very progressive and intelligent.

Fact: Cowher has been to 2 Super Bowls and kept the Steelers competitive even amidst total garbage at QB. Once he got a decent QB, he won.

Fact: Any time someone gives you an argument against Kubiak, you just deflect the facts and go for hyperbole and utter BS. If you have an argument in favor of Kubiak, present it. Talking about things that have nothing to do with Kubiak or trying to compare proven winning coaches to Kubiak, just shows that you have nothing to say except BS.

Fact: If you spent more time being objective about your own team and less team trying to demean people from other team's, maybe you wouldn't have such a narrow view of your own team.

Once again, how is a .500 record worth of a 3 year extension? That's right. It's not.

So go ahead and make a very fresh joke about VY and sausage or about how the Cowboys suck and hurt your peepee.

cmon Bill, you are better than that. Just because I don't want my team rewarding mediocrity, isn't a reason to try and change the subject because you have nothing to stand on.

Bottom line is that the Texans have embraced a coach who gave them a .500 record.

dalemurphy
02-04-2010, 09:36 AM
Fact: Fisher isn't a .500 coach. Fisher has gone to a Super Bowl. Fisher has gone to the playoffs.

Fact: Your hatred of VY consumes you. Your counterpoint to every argument about anything football-related is 'VY sucks'. Very progressive and intelligent.

Fact: Cowher has been to 2 Super Bowls and kept the Steelers competitive even amidst total garbage at QB. Once he got a decent QB, he won.

Fact: Any time someone gives you an argument against Kubiak, you just deflect the facts and go for hyperbole and utter BS. If you have an argument in favor of Kubiak, present it. Talking about things that have nothing to do with Kubiak or trying to compare proven winning coaches to Kubiak, just shows that you have nothing to say except BS.

Fact: If you spent more time being objective about your own team and less team trying to demean people from other team's, maybe you wouldn't have such a narrow view of your own team.

Once again, how is a .500 record worth of a 3 year extension? That's right. It's not.

So go ahead and make a very fresh joke about VY and sausage or about how the Cowboys suck and hurt your peepee.

cmon Bill, you are better than that. Just because I don't want my team rewarding mediocrity, isn't a reason to try and change the subject because you have nothing to stand on.

Bottom line is that the Texans have embraced a coach who gave them a .500 record.


The contract extension doesn't have anything to do with whether it was earned or not. That would be a horrible way to do business. Instead, it's about what is best for the Texans. Bob McNair may fully believe that Kubiak underperformed in 2008 and/or 2009. But, perhaps he looked at the team, his options if he lets Kubiak go, the growth and direction of the team, the supporting staff including the GM, and decided that retaining Kubiak with an extension is the thing most likely to lead this team to success the next couple years.


Regarding the Fisher comparison: It is my belief that Gary Kubiak will have taken his team to at least one superbowl, will have a better than .500 record, and have gone to the playoff multiple times if he coaches the Texans for 15 years.

Let's see if you can honestly answer direct questions. Here are a few:

Who was the better coach in 2009 only?:

Fisher or Kubiak
Sparano or Kubiak
Tomlin or Kubiak
M.Smith or Kubiak
Del Rio or Kubiak
Coughlin or Kubiak
Fox or Kubiak

Since everything comes down to W/L records, it would have to be Kubiak in almost every case. I'll acknowledge that Coughlin was better in '07, but while Kubiak hired Bush to fix his defense, Coughlin hired Sheridan to destroy his. Tomlin was cleary better in '08. However, this season his team laid eggs against KC, Oakland, and Cleveland with the division/playoffs on the line. Jeff Fisher took a 13 win team (whom he coached really well in '08) to 7-9, i think.

See, I believe talent, scheduling, luck, veteran leadership all play a big part in the success/failure of a team. However, when these things are mentioned to support Kubiak in the face of his record, you scoff. You argue that Wins and playoffs are the only measuring stick. Then, you hold up guys like Mike Smith and Tony Sparano as examples of superior coaching. Okay. Fine. Perhaps they were in '08. But, what about now? And remember, circumstances like the talent one has to work with can't be a factor, according to you.

By the way, don't forget how long it took Fisher to get his teams to the playoffs. Again, circumstances are irrelevant, remember?

How does Tomlin take a championship team and in one season turn them into a mediocre squad that loses 3 games to the worst franchises in the NFL? Either he is a bad coach now or there are other factors that mitigate the season he had.

silvrhand
02-04-2010, 10:05 AM
The contract extension doesn't have anything to do with whether it was earned or not. That would be a horrible way to do business. Instead, it's about what is best for the Texans. Bob McNair may fully believe that Kubiak underperformed in 2008 and/or 2009. But, perhaps he looked at the team, his options if he lets Kubiak go, the growth and direction of the team, the supporting staff including the GM, and decided that retaining Kubiak with an extension is the thing most likely to lead this team to success the next couple years.



Agreed, hopefully these people get to see the other side of Gary that we don't get to see that concerns me. At times he looks lost, his post game comments are always fluff and bs. His playcalling or whoever is calling plays at time is suspect offensively and make me wonder. IMHO, he's too much of a players coach for me instead of an ass kicker.

I'd much rather have Cowher than Kubiak but that doesn't seem to happen, the only other person I seen that was available that I'd like to see here was Holmgren.

BIG TORO
02-04-2010, 10:21 AM
And the soapers continue, :gun:

Second Honeymoon
02-04-2010, 10:37 AM
Who was the better coach in 2009 only?:

Fisher or Kubiak
Sparano or Kubiak
Tomlin or Kubiak
M.Smith or Kubiak
Del Rio or Kubiak
Coughlin or Kubiak
Fox or Kubiak

Since everything comes down to W/L records, it would have to be Kubiak in almost every case.

This is about a 4 year body of work, not just 2009.

With that being the case, each one of those coaches has done better than Kubiak during Kubiak's reign of mediocrity.

Most importantly, all of those coaches have shown they can get to the playoffs and in some cases, that they can get to the Super Bowl. They have proven they can win. Kubiak has not. That is a fact.

How about we expect more than a .500 record.

I will say that Kubiak did a better job coaching in 2009 than Coughlin, Smith, and perhaps Fox, but over the 4 year span all of those guys have done a better job. They have won. They have made playoffs or even won championships. To compare Kubiak to those guys is a disservice to those guys. Kubiak is what he is. A .500 coach who hasn't won dick.

I appreciate your point though and I am not saying Kubiak sucks as a coach, I am just saying he hasn't done enough to merit a new contract.

Texecutioner
02-04-2010, 10:37 AM
Pat Kirwin, whom I respect, usually does not make overreaching statements. He has insisted that Bill Cowher was not going to coach in 2010. Furthermore, he said he knows this because he has inside information and is friends with him. Of course I don't know with absolute certainty.

Then why in the hell was he assembling a freaking staff to coach somewhere at the end of the season?? Like Frog said, you make these blanket statements all of the time and you don't even seem to be aware of what you're talking about here. No coach goes out there and starts talking to guys about being assistants if he's not interested in coaching. That's common sense, and I don't care what Pat Kirwan said "after" Cowher had realized that the HC jobs that he would have wanted weren't going to open up.

It's also rather naive to argue that a coach who goes to speak with ownership neccessarily has interest in the job. That kind of misdirection is done all the time for a multitude of reasons... perhaps simply as a favor to Ralph Wilson.

This is a baseless assumption if I ever heard one and it's not even a realistic one either. Oh yeah, Bill Cowher was going to hop on a plane and do all of this talking and negotiating with the owner of the Bills as a favor to Ralph Wilson who is known as being one of the cheapest penny pinching owners in the entire league that's rumored to be possibly moving the team at some point. There were several reports about Cowher and the Bills and they changed day to day as well. Cowher talked very heavily actually and most people thought he was crazy to even consider Buffalo. The fact that he did go out there and entertain the idea shows that he had a very strong interest in coaching and again, more common sense there. The Bills job is one of the worst ones in the NFL right now and Cowher's the most sought after coach. Why would he go out to talk to BUffalo of all places if he didn't have a strong interest in coaching again? He clearly did since he had some negotiations and started assembling a staff. People don't just do that for fun or for favors.


By the way, how do you know Bob McNair didn't speak privately with Cowher about coaching the Texans? Perhaps McNair was willing to let Kubiak go if he had the right replacement? Do you have direct knowledge that this wasn't the case?

More assumptions here with nothing to base it off of. There isn't one thing out there that would suggest that this took place or would have taken place. Mcnair never showed any desire what so ever to look or search for a possible replacement at HC. He just freaking gave Kubes an extension for heaven's sake. Why in the world would I think for one second that Mcnair had some secret meetings with Cowher to find out if he would coach the Texans?

Joe Texan
02-04-2010, 11:20 AM
As the soapsters Turn

threetoedpete
02-04-2010, 12:23 PM
:popcorn::popcorn:

Well you couldn'd stand it could you ? Had to have another Hewhoshouldnotbenamed thread for the off season ?

First off I don't personally like John Lopez. He's a bomb thrower. He was a bomb throw at the chronicle. And he'll always be a bomb thrower.
Just judging by the lofty goals of the new monkey at 610, a five rating in the market, I pretty much have a good guess where the Brain Baldinger spot came from. But, saying that you, Lopez and the little Dutchman, didn't know which way Bladinger was going with his thoughts, is not only disingenuous, it's despicable and cowardly. Which is exactly what I expect from Lopez.
Baldy has been banging the Texans continuously for six years. Believing that you were suddenly deceived by old Baldy is pretty thick. 610 has staked out it's ground and wanted it "out there".

Basically what he said was that Robert C. McNair is comfortable with mediocrity. Therefore, the new contract.

I just think it's pretty ridiculous to have a head coach under a contract
two years short of the assistant coaches. Of course I like Kubiak, just like I liked hewhoshouldnotbenamed. So I guess that shoots down my cred.

But by all means, if it keeps you out of the bars and away from the under aged gurls carry on.

:strangle:


.

infantrycak
02-04-2010, 01:56 PM
They improved by one game over the previous two 8-8 seasons and imho Bush had as much to do with that or maybe even more than anybody.

Thing is a lot of folks were pissed about Bush being promoted from within - funny many of the same folks complaining about Kubiak being extended. It demonstrated Kubiak and McNair being cheap nepotists with poor judgment and it was going to show how bad Kubiak was as a HC when Bush failed. Well if Kubiak was going to take the blame then he gets some credit as well. Can't have it both ways.

Second Honeymoon
02-04-2010, 03:23 PM
Thing is a lot of folks were pissed about Bush being promoted from within - funny many of the same folks complaining about Kubiak being extended. It demonstrated Kubiak and McNair being cheap nepotists with poor judgment and it was going to show how bad Kubiak was as a HC when Bush failed. Well if Kubiak was going to take the blame then he gets some credit as well. Can't have it both ways.

icak, you act like Bush lit the world on fire. The defense was OK and anyone could see he was an improvement over Richard Smith, but to act like Bush was the best candidate available is mularkey. Gregg Williams was out there but I don't even think we interviewed him. He goes to Saints and turns their defense completely around. Oh yeah, and they are in the Super Bowl. But he cost too much money, even too much for the Saints owner...so what happened. Payton paid money out of his own pocket to get the most qualified candidate. we promoted from within on a horrible unit. worked out a little better than expected but still another mediocre season of losing all important games and beating bottom feeders or teams playing out the regular season (i.e. patriots)

You know the Super Bowl. That game that you get to when your team gets to the playoffs and wins enough...never mind. We are happy enough around here being .500.

Build the guy a freaking statue and build one for Bush while you are at it. Hoo-freaking-ray, we beat the Seahawks, Rams, Dolphins, and a depleted and MASH unit-Patriots team with little to nothing to play for. Big freaking deal. We all saw how Bush's defense did against Manning. We all saw how Bush's defense did against the Titans on MNF. Embarassing.

but whatever, build the guy a freaking statue, icak. I swear we have some of the most petty and clueless fans in this city. You aren't one of those fans, icak. trust me, but to act like the Bush hiring is validated based on a 9-7 record and a defense that still has the propencity (sic) to give up the big play is pie-in-the-sky thinking.

I appreciate the job Kubiak has done, but he has run his course imho. Obviously I am not the owner but if I was that guy would be in the unemployment line and we would have Cowher as our head coach....and contrary to the current homering posture, all of you fans would be going crazy with Cowher-mania. Most of the people here like Kubiak because he is local. period.

I could give a crap whether he is from Zimbabwe. The dude wins and he could instill the killer instinct that this team is missing. Cushing helped bring some of that instinct to the team and look how much it helped. Too bad our coach is too busy being a scaredy cat and a carebear to instill some fire and passion.

when we are at the halfway point of the season at 2-6, don't come to me complaining. You made your bed you lie in it. Then we get a 2011 season of no-football. hoo-freaking-ray.

The Pencil Neck
02-04-2010, 03:24 PM
Fact: Fisher isn't a .500 coach. Fisher has gone to a Super Bowl. Fisher has gone to the playoffs.


Over his entire career, Fischer's W/L percentage is .553. That's not much better than a .500 coach.

His first 5 years (not full) of being the coach, he went:
1-5
7-9
8-8
8-8
8-8

If he had been our coach with that record, you'd have been screaming for him to be fired.

Out of 15 full seasons, he's had 6 winning seasons. That's 9 seasons where he's been at .500 or less (and that's not counting the 1-5 season). He had a 2 year stretch where he went 5-11 and 4-12.

Out of 15 full seasons, he's been to the SB one time and he lost.

So, for almost 2/3's of his seasons, he's been at best mediocre.

As badly as you rag on Kubiak, you should be ragging on this guy.

infantrycak
02-04-2010, 03:30 PM
icak, you act like Bush lit the world on fire. The defense was OK and anyone could see he was an improvement over Richard Smith, but to act like Bush was the best candidate available is mularkey. Gregg Williams was out there but I don't even think we interviewed him.

Learn to read. I typed nothing about the job Bush did. I responded to someone saying the biggest improvement on the team was due to Bush not Kubiak. Well folks like you were going to blame Kubiak for picking Bush so he gets credit for Bush if it works out.

Gregg Williams declined to interview with the Texans.

The Pencil Neck
02-04-2010, 03:34 PM
I appreciate the job Kubiak has done, but he has run his course imho. Obviously I am not the owner but if I was that guy would be in the unemployment line and we would have Cowher as our head coach....and contrary to the current homering posture, all of you fans would be going crazy with Cowher-mania. Most of the people here like Kubiak because he is local. period.

First off, all this "local" stuff is bs. I don't care where a coach is from as long as he's good. And I think that Kubiak is good. I think he's built a very strong offense that's still improving and a defense that's starting to work as well.

I like Cowher. I loved him for the Steelers. But I would not want Cowher as my head coach.

Why?

Because I want to win a Super Bowl some day. No coach who has won a Super Bowl with a team has come back and won a Super Bowl with another team. Lots of them have tried but none of them have done it. And I don't think that Cowher would be the first. (And besides, it took him 14 years to win his first one. I don't want to wait 14 years for our first Super Bowl.) That's also why I don't want Gruden.

Guys I'd like to see here are guys like Fox in Carolina, Schottenheimer, guys like that.

But I think that Kubiak has as good a chance of winning a SB with us as anyone we could bring in. I like our team. A lot.

Goatcheese
02-04-2010, 03:39 PM
Gregg Williams declined to interview with the Texans.

Not to mention his defense finished ranked 25th in the league, vs Frank Bush's 13th. :challenge

Joe Texan
02-04-2010, 03:42 PM
SecondHoneymoon is a sad BABY, Crying all day long even though the milk is gone.

Dude STFU. The deal is done and we are now into planning for next year. You cannot do anything from your Couch and I assure you with your attitude you ain't getting anywhere close to an NFL front office. So grab a beer and sit on the couch and turn on American Idol ReRuns if you want to, we on the other hand have some good discussions of football to get to.

infantrycak
02-04-2010, 03:57 PM
Gregg Williams was out there but I don't even think we interviewed him. He goes to Saints and turns their defense completely around. Oh yeah, and they are in the Super Bowl. But he cost too much money, even too much for the Saints owner...so what happened. Payton paid money out of his own pocket to get the most qualified candidate. we promoted from within on a horrible unit. worked out a little better than expected but still another mediocre season of losing all important games and beating bottom feeders or teams playing out the regular season (i.e. patriots)

Well let's take a little look at who improved their team more, Bush or Williams.

2008 rank/2009 rank

Williams
Total D 23rd/25th - 2 worse
Passing D 23rd/26th - 3 worse
Rushing D 17th/21st - 4 worse
Scoring D 26th/20th - 6 better

Bush
Total D 22nd/13th - 9 better
Passing D 17th/18th - 1 worse
Rushing D 23rd/10th - 13 better
Scoring D 27th/17th - 10 better

Our D's started very similarly situated last year and the Texans made much bigger strides forward.

And just for giggles the Texans D ranking for the last 13 games:
Total D 3rd
Passing D 15th
Rushing D 2nd
Scoring D 8th

Ole Miss Texan
02-04-2010, 04:31 PM
Big freaking deal. We all saw how Bush's defense did against Manning. We all saw how Bush's defense did against the Titans on MNF. Embarassing.
Interesting you suggested those 3 games.

Indy Game 1:
*Manning went 318 yds for 1 TD and 1 INT
*Colts Offense held to 20 points (13 in the 1st half, 7 in the 2nd half)
*To put that in perspective, out of 16 reg season and post season games this season, they scored less than 20 only 3 times (excluding week 16 and 17 layups against NYJ and BUF, the "meaningless" games).
*Our Defense had 2 sacks, a fumble and an interception during the 2nd half.
*Colts Offensive posessions in the 2nd half resulted in 2 punts, an interception and a 2yd rushing TD.
*All in all, I'd say that was "respectable" against Peyton Manning.

Indy Game 2:
Manning went 244 yds for 3 TDs and 2 INTs
Colts Offense "held" to 28 points.
Texans up 20-7 in the 1st half, the 2nd half consisted of the following series:
Indy (TD)
HOU (INT)
Indy (Sack, Punt)
HOU (Punt)
Indy (stopped inside Red Zone, missed FG)
HOU (Punt)
Indy (TD)
HOU (INT returned for Indy TD)
HOU (Sack, fumble lost at our 37 yd line)
IND (4 rushes, TD)

You can HARDLY blame the defense for that loss. It was all on our Offense in the 2nd half.


Now onto the Monday Night Game against Tennessee!
Vince Young held to 116 yds with 1 TD and 0 INT
And here was Tennessee's offensive series for the game:
1-Punt
2-Punt
3-TD
4-Punt
5-Rush TD
- half -
6-Fumble
7-50 yd FG
8-Missed 49 yd FG
9-Punt
10-53 yd FG (this was also the series where Busing was called for that BS horsecaller.

Not exactly "embarrassing" performances by our Defense.

thunderkyss
02-04-2010, 04:45 PM
i got a fact for you. we just rewarded a HC with a .500 record a 3 year extension.

I understand your position. I'm not questioning that.

Do you think Gary Kubiak has done anything good at all since he's been here?

this is a 'wait till next year' franchise and until we start thinking about today we will never get where we want to go tomorrow.

If you were to take over the Detroit Lions, with their current situation, could you get them to the play-offs in 4 years?

I'm going to assume that you answered yes to that question. So if you said yes, why hasn't anyone else been able to do it?

Dutchrudder
02-04-2010, 04:53 PM
I'm going to assume that you answered yes to that question. So if you said yes, why hasn't anyone else been able to do it?

Cause they didn't get John Gruden! :D

HOU-TEX
02-04-2010, 05:03 PM
I reckon the odds of y'all talkin any sense into SH are less than teaching a newborn trigonometry. :lol:

FirstTexansFan
02-04-2010, 05:06 PM
I reckon the odds of y'all talkin any sense into SH are less than teaching a newborn trigonometry. :lol:

You apparently have missed the new Burger King commercials ;)

Texecutioner
02-04-2010, 05:12 PM
I understand your position. I'm not questioning that.

Do you think Gary Kubiak has done anything good at all since he's been here?


If you were to take over the Detroit Lions, with their current situation, could you get them to the play-offs in 4 years?

I'm going to assume that you answered yes to that question. So if you said yes, why hasn't anyone else been able to do it?

Well there was a 1-15 Dolphins team where a new HC got them into the playoffs in the very next season. It's not impossible.

Texan_Bill
02-04-2010, 05:13 PM
I reckon the odds of y'all talkin any sense into SH are less than teaching a newborn trigonometry. :lol:

What's trigonometry? :worm:

Ole Miss Texan
02-04-2010, 05:13 PM
If you were to take over the Detroit Lions, with their current situation, could you get them to the play-offs in 4 years?
I think this is actually going to be really interesting to watch. They're situation is pretty similar to the Texans in '06. 1st time Head Coaches coming with a legit #1 WR to work with and having the #1 pick in the Draft. They're the Division doormats. Rodgers is the real deal (not quite as good as Peyton, but he's really good). Chicago is lots of questions like Jacksonville. Favre is soon to be done and the Vikings have a Defense like the Titans did.

I will say the Lions roster/depth chart is not as bad as you might think. Go take a look at it if you don't believe me! Schwartz really has every opportunity to turn that team around. I will say if I was a Free Agent, Houston sounds like a better landing spot than Detroit.

Kubiak started with Petey Faggins AND Philip Buchanon on his team. And by gawd.... Jim Schwartz started with Petey Faggins AND Philip Buchanon on his team!!!

Texan_Bill
02-04-2010, 05:22 PM
Well there was a 1-15 Dolphins team where a new HC got them into the playoffs in the very next season. It's not impossible.

The Cam Cameron 1-15 team started T. Green / Cleo Lemon

The Sparano 11-5 team started Chad Pennington

Texecutioner
02-04-2010, 05:29 PM
The Cam Cameron 1-15 team started T. Green / Cleo Lemon

The Sparano 11-5 team started Chad Pennington

So they got a new QB. I don't really see what the point is other than stating that it's an upgrade. No one was considering Chad Pennington some world beater or elite QB at that time period and no one expected that team to improve anywhere close to the way that they did last season. Pennington barely even got there in time for the season and was very late into pre season because of how late the Jets got that deal done with Favre. Pennington barely had any time with that team before the season started. The WR's were terrible as well and were again this season for the Dolphins. They won games by running the ball well and not turning the ball over much and playing pretty consistent defense. Sparano didn't make many coaching mistakes either. Their over all roster wasn't that great though. Sparano went in there and over achieved and got them into the playoffs after being a doormat in one season. The Falcons had a similar turn around as well last year.

thunderkyss
02-04-2010, 05:30 PM
That's common sense, and I don't care what Pat Kirwan said "after" Cowher had realized that the HC jobs that he would have wanted weren't going to open up.


& what exactly was the right situation for Cowher?

He didn't want to go to the Bills.. why not?

The rumor, was that he wanted to go somewhere with an established QB. Personally, if that is true, I'll have to lower the pedestal I've got Cowher on. I know he had some issues trying to find one in the past... but c'mon is he a head coach or not?

dalemurphy
02-04-2010, 05:38 PM
Well there was a 1-15 Dolphins team where a new HC got them into the playoffs in the very next season. It's not impossible.

Fine. Kubiak, as a coach, has underperformed Sparano's one remarkable season. I can live with that. Kubiak does not hold the record for the most amazing one year turnaround. Perhaps we should stone him, and every other coach who takes over a team, and only triples the win total of the previous season.

Texecutioner
02-04-2010, 05:40 PM
& what exactly was the right situation for Cowher?

He didn't want to go to the Bills.. why not?

The rumor, was that he wanted to go somewhere with an established QB. Personally, if that is true, I'll have to lower the pedestal I've got Cowher on. I know he had some issues trying to find one in the past... but c'mon is he a head coach or not?

What HC wouldn't want to go to a team with an established QB?? I'd call that common sense to if you're in a spot to "cherry pick" the right place to go. Hell, a lack of a QB is what kills tons of coach's chances in the NFL. Washington and Detroit have been perfect examples of that for years. Don't be surprised to see Mike Singletary out of a job in two years if they don't find a QB over there soon either. Most coaches looking for work aren't in that position though and they'll go wherever they can find work especially if it's a HC job.

And that wasn't the rumor in the first place either, nor does it make any sense. If it was because of a QB situation that the Bills didn't have then why would Cowher have ever gone over there and gone through negotiations in the first place?? He already knew what the Bills QB situation was. It was reported that Wilson was willing to pay Cowher a high salary that was acceptable, but Cowher couldn't get enough commitment from Wilson that he would be aggressive in spending money in free agency and on personal and that's a very big concern that any coach should have especially if we're talking about a penny pinching cheap ass like Ralph Wilson who is known for being one of the cheapest owners in the league.

Buffalo is a terrible destination for any coach to go into right now. Add to the fact that it's cold as hell, the owner is cheap, and there has been talks about the team possibly moving in the next few years, well Cowher would have been really foolish to take that job when he's as sought after as he is around the league. Cowher obviously wasn't that stupid and neither was Shanahan. The Bills have had a very hard time trying to find a HC. No one wants to work for Ralph Wilson and I can't blame them.


"But Logan has an intriguing new nugget, posting Wednesday night on Twitter. He writes that Cowher is "OK" with the Bills' salary offer, but that Cowher wants a "commitment" from Russ Brandon regarding the money that would be available to sign players."

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/07/bills-could-still-be-chasing-cowher/

Texecutioner
02-04-2010, 05:44 PM
Fine. Kubiak, as a coach, has underperformed Sparano's one remarkable season. I can live with that. Kubiak does not hold the record for the most amazing one year turnaround. Perhaps we should stone him, and every other coach who takes over a team, and only triples the win total of the previous season.

What is this??? I bring up a fact to what Thunderkiss mentioned with the Lions and once again you come roaring back in to defend Kubiak behind it. If you think the guy is that great of a HC, then why act so paranoid about things like you have to prove something here? If he's as going to be as great as you think he'll be in the future than you should just let the results speak for themselves. Whether this is a discussion about Kubes or Capers or whomever, what Sparano did in his first season there was pretty remarkable and that can't be denied and it proves that turn arounds in the NFL can happen a lot faster than some of you are willing to believe.

Texan_Bill
02-04-2010, 05:46 PM
& what exactly was the right situation for Cowher?

He didn't want to go to the Bills.. why not?

The rumor, was that he wanted to go somewhere with an established QB. Personally, if that is true, I'll have to lower the pedestal I've got Cowher on. I know he had some issues trying to find one in the past... but c'mon is he a head coach or not?

Good point!!

A coach looking for the "right" situation sounds like a coach that doesn't have the 'fire in the belly' and looking to skate. A coach with the fire in the belly would just want a) a challenge and b) really just want to compete.

Fine. Kubiak, as a coach, has underperformed Sparano's one remarkable season. I can live with that. Kubiak does not hold the record for the most amazing one year turnaround. Perhaps we should stone him, and every other coach who takes over a team, and only triples the win total of the previous season.


LMAO!!!

Texan_Bill
02-04-2010, 05:50 PM
So they got a new QB. I don't really see what the point is other than stating that it's an upgrade. No one was considering Chad Pennington some world beater or elite QB at that time period and no one expected that team to improve anywhere close to the way that they did last season. Pennington barely even got there in time for the season and was very late into pre season because of how late the Jets got that deal done with Favre. Pennington barely had any time with that team before the season started. The WR's were terrible as well and were again this season for the Dolphins. They won games by running the ball well and not turning the ball over much and playing pretty consistent defense. Sparano didn't make many coaching mistakes either. Their over all roster wasn't that great though. Sparano went in there and over achieved and got them into the playoffs after being a doormat in one season. The Falcons had a similar turn around as well last year.

Ronnie Brown started 7 games for Cameron.

Ronnie Brown started all 16 Sparano's first season.


[In my best Dr. Cogslotter voice] NEXT?

Texecutioner
02-04-2010, 06:03 PM
Ronnie Brown started 7 games for Cameron.

Ronnie Brown started all 16 Sparano's first season.


[In my best Dr. Cogslotter voice] NEXT?

So you think Ronnie Brown made the difference in that entire season? That 916 yards and 10 TD's was what did it all to you ha? Ronnie Brown was actually having a much better season by far under Cameron than he was in Sparano's first season as HC. He put up 602 yards and 4 TD's rushing and 389 yards receiving and 1 TD. That's 991 all purpose yards 5 TD's in only 7 games that year.


Your attempt at discrediting Sparano was a fail. NEXT!

infantrycak
02-04-2010, 06:07 PM
So you think Ronnie Brown made the difference in that entire season? That 916 yards and 10 TD's was what did it all to you ha? Ronnie Brown was actually having a much better season by far under Cameron than he was in Sparano's first season as HC. He put up 602 yards and 4 TD's rushing and 389 yards receiving and 1 TD. That's 991 all purpose yards 5 TD's in only 7 games that year.


Your attempt at discrediting Sparano was a fail. NEXT!

At least do apples to apples. It's 1170 all purpose yards to compare to 991 all purpose yards.

Then add Ricky Williams being back/getting back into shape going from 15 yds to 878 yds with 5 TDs.

You want to discount Brown and Pennington but what happened when they went down? 4 game regression with no playoffs.

Texan_Bill
02-04-2010, 06:15 PM
Gary Kubiak v. Tony Sparano?

Kubes in the lead 2-0 :lol:

*EDIT*

Dalemurphy, you may want to hold off on stoning Kubiak.. :spit:

Texecutioner
02-04-2010, 06:20 PM
At least do apples to apples. It's 1170 all purpose yards to compare to 991 all purpose yards.

Then add Ricky Williams being back/getting back into shape going from 15 yds to 878 yds with 5 TDs.

He tried acting like Ronnie Brown was the big difference maker without even looking at his stats to see what the difference was from both seasons at how he was producing. He didn't mention Ricky Williams and I don't even think he was aware of Ricky's production either or he would have mentioned it. I showed him the difference at how Ronnie had been producing in both of those seasons since he thought it had some bearing which was the apple right with the seed.

Are you going to chime in now to discredit Sparano to now Icak? Boy, you guys sure are reaching now aren't you? Discrediting a new HC that went to a 1-15 team and got them into the post season winning the division over the 16-0 Patriots over one year was a very big achievement no matter how you want to spin it. What's funny is you guys talk go on and on about baby steps and small improvements each year with Kubes and how comforting that is, but yet you guys try to pull out every punch to discredit a coach who took a 1-15 team to the playoffs in one season. It's funny really and it's a double standard and that's why I don't think any of this really matters at "what man" we're talking about with some of you. It's all about the logo and who coaches for whom. If Sparano was here right now and he did for the Texans what he did for the Dolphins, and Kubes was pulling off 8-8's every year with the Dolphins, you guys would be cracking jokes on Kubes probably and this discussion would be all about how Sparano was better than guys like Cowher, Holmgren, and Bill Billicheck for what he did last season and in the end it would be simply because he's the coach of the Houston Texans and wears battle red. Even If capers was our coach I think this discussion would be exactly the same.

Texecutioner
02-04-2010, 06:21 PM
Gary Kubiak v. Tony Sparano?

Kubes in the lead 2-0 :lol:

*EDIT*

Dalemurphy, you may want to hold off on stoning Kubiak.. :spit:

What is he leading in? More seasons of not making the playoffs? The actual score is

Sparano 1/2

Kubes 0/4


But don't let me stop you from :turtle:

Kaiser Toro
02-04-2010, 06:26 PM
Judge Smails: It's easy to grin / When your ship comes in / And you've got the stock market beat. / But the man worthwhile, / Is the man who can smile, / When his shorts are too tight in the seat.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080487/quotes

Texan_Bill
02-04-2010, 06:30 PM
What is he leading in? More seasons of not making the playoffs? The actual score is

Sparano 1/2

Kubes 0/4


But don't let me stop you from :turtle:

:rolleyes:

Yes Ronnie Brown missing 9 games is huge. See Cak's detailed post.

Sparanos so great that he plays a 1-15 schedule, has Bill Parcells get him Chad Pennington, has a healthy entire 16 game season Brown and Williams and yet he can't beat pathetic, incompetent Kubiak?? Really??

Your argument doesn't hold water so it's quite obvious you're arguing just to see yourself argue...

You win!! :clap:

/not

I'm done....

*EDIT*

Lastly, I did look at his stats, so don't try that bullshit!!

Now I'm done!!

thunderkyss
02-04-2010, 06:33 PM
Well there was a 1-15 Dolphins team where a new HC got them into the playoffs in the very next season. It's not impossible.

Different team... different situation... stay with me, we're talking about the Lions.

I think this is actually going to be really interesting to watch. They're situation is pretty similar to the Texans in '06.

I agree, very similar situation. 4 years ago, no one was comparing the Texans to the Dolphins, Falcons, Jets, or even Saints. Not in 2006 they weren't.

We were being compared to the Cardinals in 2006. Some even argued we were in a worse situation than the Lions.

But my point, is every team, every situation is different. That team, & that situation changes from year to year.

No question about it. This team underperformed in 2009. But, IMHO, only 2009. Good 2006. Good 2007. OK 2008. WTF 2009..... to me, that doesn't mean fire your head coach.

I totally understand the guys pissed about the 3 year extension. I personally don't think it was the right move. But y'know.

bckey
02-04-2010, 06:35 PM
Thing is a lot of folks were pissed about Bush being promoted from within - funny many of the same folks complaining about Kubiak being extended. It demonstrated Kubiak and McNair being cheap nepotists with poor judgment and it was going to show how bad Kubiak was as a HC when Bush failed. Well if Kubiak was going to take the blame then he gets some credit as well. Can't have it both ways.

You are right Cak. I give Kubiak credit for wanting Bush when many of us (including myself) wanted him to at least interview some other candidates before making a decision. Kubiak wanted Bush in the very beginning but got snubbed by Arizona. It turns out that Kubiak was right that Bush was going to be something special if given the chance to be in control of the defense. No complaints here on that decision.

thunderkyss
02-04-2010, 06:43 PM
He tried acting like Ronnie Brown was the big difference maker without even looking at his stats

Can we use stats in our arguments now?

Thorn
02-04-2010, 06:44 PM
I'm to the point now where I'm reading about every forth post. They are all starting to look the same in this thread.

You can throw every stat you want to at us, you can argue about Coach This or Coach That of the Whatever Team did something or the other, and its all going in one ear and out the other. Or in one eye and out the other eye since this is the internet.

Offseason really sucks, and this one apppears to have a really grandiose suckatude about it. I can't wait for free agency and our first signing so we at least have something new to fight over. LOL

Texecutioner
02-04-2010, 06:46 PM
:rolleyes:

Yes Ronnie Brown missing 9 games is huge. See Cak's detailed post.

Sparanos so great that he plays a 1-15 schedule, has Bill Parcells get him Chad Pennington, has a healthy entire 16 game season Brown and Williams and yet he can't beat pathetic, incompetent Kubiak?? Really??

Your argument doesn't hold water so it's quite obvious you're arguing just to see yourself argue...

You win!! :clap:

/not

I'm done....

I haven't seen you even put an argument together yet. I'm still waiting. ICak at least brought something to the table that was meaningful. He at least knew that Ricky Williams was a part of that offense unlike you. The only thing you tried is to throw out was some Ronnie Brown argument without even realizing that he was performing better the year before.

I haven't even dumped on Kubes in this thread actually. It's been more of a defense for Sparano since their seems to be some double standard here as to how coaches are being judged or criticized, but I don't think you even realize how backwards you sound when one minute you're acting like Kubes is this next up and comer for minimal improvements each season and Sparano is just a phony for a huge improvement in one season.

But carry on with the jokes and the smilies. I'll wait for the insults and personal attacks to come next when you can't come up with anything else to use as a factual counter point to a civil discussion.

Texecutioner
02-04-2010, 07:00 PM
Different team... different situation... stay with me, we're talking about the Lions.



So the Lions can't be compared to a team that was 1-15??? To answer your question, I think it's going to be a tough situation to turn around man. The Lions still have a lot of big needs. A lot of it will ultimately depend on Mathew Stafford and how he ends up playing for them in the next two years though. I figured that the Dolphins situation would be a much tougher situation to turn around to though and never would have expected the results that Sparano and Parcells achieved. So, it's a lot more possible than what you and I both think. The Falcons had a monumental turn around as well in one season under a rookie QB, so that was another example of a team turning things around much faster than what people would have expected, but they also had a great off season that year.

And for the record Thunder, I don't necessarily think that Sparano is this world beater as a coach. He got off to a great start though and over achieved. The Dolphins team over all is really not that great to me. It's good in some places, but not so good in others. They're balanced and they know their identity, but they still have quite a few missing pieces and there future will depend a lot on how their young QB develops as well and if they can get him some play makers to throw to. Their running game is solid though. The great thing with the Texans now is that we've got Schaub and seems to be the real deal, so we've got the most important piece.

Kaiser Toro
02-04-2010, 07:07 PM
I would love to see Joe Texan lead a cheer called, "Put the Pink Soap Away," to the cadence of "Pants on the Ground." That would be friggin comedy, but I am not sure if that is what he does. :texflag:

Texan_Bill
02-04-2010, 07:15 PM
I would love to see Joe Texan lead a cheer called, "Put the Pink Soap Away," to the cadence of "Pants on the Ground." That would be friggin comedy, but I am not sure if that is what he does. :texflag:

:spit: That would be hilarious!!!

Texecutioner
02-04-2010, 07:15 PM
I would love to see Joe Texan lead a cheer called, "Put the Pink Soap Away," to the cadence of "Pants on the Ground." That would be friggin comedy, but I am not sure if that is what he does. :texflag:

:bravo: Must spread the rep. Nice one.

I think that we can all agree on that much.

dalemurphy
02-04-2010, 07:30 PM
What is this??? I bring up a fact to what Thunderkiss mentioned with the Lions and once again you come roaring back in to defend Kubiak behind it. If you think the guy is that great of a HC, then why act so paranoid about things like you have to prove something here? If he's as going to be as great as you think he'll be in the future than you should just let the results speak for themselves. Whether this is a discussion about Kubes or Capers or whomever, what Sparano did in his first season there was pretty remarkable and that can't be denied and it proves that turn arounds in the NFL can happen a lot faster than some of you are willing to believe.

You don't get it! In one sentence you call what he did "remarkable" and then you try and use it as a measuring stick for others' performance. It's "remarkable"! You can't set expectation level there. That would be literally insane.

dalemurphy
02-04-2010, 07:35 PM
I'm to the point now where I'm reading about every forth post. They are all starting to look the same in this thread.

You can throw every stat you want to at us, you can argue about Coach This or Coach That of the Whatever Team did something or the other, and its all going in one ear and out the other. Or in one eye and out the other eye since this is the internet.

Offseason really sucks, and this one apppears to have a really grandiose suckatude about it. I can't wait for free agency and our first signing so we at least have something new to fight over. LOL

Wait until next off-season. Which might extend 18 months or more if there's a work stoppage. Imagine arguing about theset things for 1 1/2 years! Holy Crap!

thunderkyss
02-04-2010, 07:35 PM
To answer your question, I think it's going to be a tough situation to turn around man. The Lions still have a lot of big needs. A lot of it will ultimately depend on Mathew Stafford and how he ends up playing for them in the next two years though.

Is it reasonable to believe that team could be in the play-offs 4 years from now? If it takes 5 instead of 4, is that unacceptable?

I figured that the Dolphins situation would be a much tougher situation to turn around to though and never would have expected the results that Sparano and Parcells achieved. So, it's a lot more possible than what you and I both think.

If you say so. But that Dolphins team had the #4 total defense the year before the 1-15 season. The #5 scoring D... The Lions (like the Texans in 2006) have nothing.

The Falcons had a monumental turn around as well in one season under a rookie QB, so that was another example of a team turning things around much faster than what people would have expected, but they also had a great off season that year.

Even the 2007 Saints had a great turnaround. But to compare the 2006 Saints to the Texans.... the 2006 Dolphins (2004, they had the #4 total D, #5 scoring D)to the 2006 Texans, the 2006 Falcons (2004 NFC Championship game)...

I don't understand how we can't draw parallels to coaches who had been successful....

But it's okay to expect the Texans to achieve like NFL Franchises that have been successful to some extent in "recent" history.




And for the record Thunder, I don't necessarily think that Sparano is this world beater as a coach. He got off to a great start though and over achieved. The Dolphins team over all is really not that great to me.

Gee..... I thought they had a solid but aging defense... 2 talented running backs.. & a gimmick laden ball control offense.

b0ng
02-04-2010, 07:38 PM
At this point in the argument you can write off Steve Spagnulo as a good coach and Jim Schwartz as well since they didn't go to the playoffs their first year.

The Pencil Neck
02-04-2010, 08:27 PM
Well there was a 1-15 Dolphins team where a new HC got them into the playoffs in the very next season. It's not impossible.

It's just really, really rare.

That's like... the ONLY time that's happened in the Super Bowl Era, iirc.

And after going 11-5, they turned around and went 7-9 and the team looked like they quit on their coach down the stretch. Granted, they had some injuries but that's what depth and coaches are for, right?

gary
02-04-2010, 08:40 PM
Tex, and TB I bet you won't hit each other, lol.

Silver Oak
02-04-2010, 08:41 PM
"Judge Smails: It's easy to grin / When your ship comes in / And you've got the stock market beat. / But the man worthwhile, / Is the man who can smile, / When his shorts are too tight in the seat."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGpQej3o9eo

Texan_Bill
02-04-2010, 08:50 PM
Tex, and TB I bet you won't hit each other, lol.

Of course not. We actually met each other at YOUR cook-off and he was cool. Tex can just be inexorable sometimes...

gary
02-04-2010, 08:54 PM
Of course not. We actually met each other at YOUR cook-off and he was cool. Tex can just be inexorable sometimes...I am only kidding bro. I like the two of you and am just poking fun that's all.

DexmanC
02-04-2010, 09:07 PM
It's just really, really rare.

That's like... the ONLY time that's happened in the Super Bowl Era, iirc.

And after going 11-5, they turned around and went 7-9 and the team looked like they quit on their coach down the stretch. Granted, they had some injuries but that's what depth and coaches are for, right?

It also happened the season after the Atlanta Falcon's star QB got
locked up in Ft. Levenworth, their head coach screamed "SOOOEEEYYY!!"
after quitting on the team, and their entire organization was in disarray.

Please. We need to quit implying this team is "Kubiak-or-Suck." There are
options out there, it just seems too much of the fanbase has no faith in our
front office to make the proper selection. Who can blame them?

They'd rather have 7-9 to 9-7 seasons time and time again, than entrust
the selection of a new head coach to the group that brought us Tony
Boselli, Charley Casserly, Dom Capers, and David Carr. Fair enough.

Fear rules the Texans.

LonerATO
02-04-2010, 09:19 PM
"Judge Smails: It's easy to grin / When your ship comes in / And you've got the stock market beat. / But the man worthwhile, / Is the man who can smile, / When his shorts are too tight in the seat."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGpQej3o9eo

best movie ever

Joe Texan
02-04-2010, 09:55 PM
I would love to see Joe Texan lead a cheer called, "Put the Pink Soap Away," to the cadence of "Pants on the Ground." That would be friggin comedy, but I am not sure if that is what he does. :texflag:

Well Maybe it is

infantrycak
02-05-2010, 12:37 AM
So we beat the Dolphins this year. That's a fact. Now nobody qualifies that as a quality win because they went 7-9 on the season. Didn't beat any quality teams, blah, blah, etc. Hmmm, so why was that? Was it poor coaching, was it key players going down, multiple injuries, etc.? Are those excuses for the Dolphins?

If Sparano is such a good coach why did they regress 4 games without any reference to anything ever rejected as an excuse for the Texans.

PS - Brady isn't an excuse since without Brady they were out at 11-5, a game better than won the division this year.

Mailman
02-05-2010, 01:46 AM
The contract extension doesn't have anything to do with whether it was earned or not. That would be a horrible way to do business. Instead, it's about what is best for the Texans. Bob McNair may fully believe that Kubiak underperformed in 2008 and/or 2009. But, perhaps he looked at the team, his options if he lets Kubiak go, the growth and direction of the team, the supporting staff including the GM, and decided that retaining Kubiak with an extension is the thing most likely to lead this team to success the next couple years.


Regarding the Fisher comparison: It is my belief that Gary Kubiak will have taken his team to at least one superbowl, will have a better than .500 record, and have gone to the playoff multiple times if he coaches the Texans for 15 years.

Let's see if you can honestly answer direct questions. Here are a few:

Who was the better coach in 2009 only?:

Fisher or Kubiak
Sparano or Kubiak
Tomlin or Kubiak
M.Smith or Kubiak
Del Rio or Kubiak
Coughlin or Kubiak
Fox or Kubiak

Since everything comes down to W/L records, it would have to be Kubiak in almost every case. I'll acknowledge that Coughlin was better in '07, but while Kubiak hired Bush to fix his defense, Coughlin hired Sheridan to destroy his. Tomlin was cleary better in '08. However, this season his team laid eggs against KC, Oakland, and Cleveland with the division/playoffs on the line. Jeff Fisher took a 13 win team (whom he coached really well in '08) to 7-9, i think.

See, I believe talent, scheduling, luck, veteran leadership all play a big part in the success/failure of a team. However, when these things are mentioned to support Kubiak in the face of his record, you scoff. You argue that Wins and playoffs are the only measuring stick. Then, you hold up guys like Mike Smith and Tony Sparano as examples of superior coaching. Okay. Fine. Perhaps they were in '08. But, what about now? And remember, circumstances like the talent one has to work with can't be a factor, according to you.

By the way, don't forget how long it took Fisher to get his teams to the playoffs. Again, circumstances are irrelevant, remember?

How does Tomlin take a championship team and in one season turn them into a mediocre squad that loses 3 games to the worst franchises in the NFL? Either he is a bad coach now or there are other factors that mitigate the season he had.

Dalemurphy for the muff'n win!

This is an excellent, nuanced, analytical post that the bottom-liners would be advised to read carefully and let it sink in.

Silver Oak
02-05-2010, 07:55 AM
It also happened the season after the Atlanta Falcon's star QB got
locked up in Ft. Levenworth, their head coach screamed "SOOOEEEYYY!!"
after quitting on the team, and their entire organization was in disarray.

Please. We need to quit implying this team is "Kubiak-or-Suck." There are
options out there, it just seems too much of the fanbase has no faith in our
front office to make the proper selection. Who can blame them?

They'd rather have 7-9 to 9-7 seasons time and time again, than entrust
the selection of a new head coach to the group that brought us Tony
Boselli, Charley Casserly, Dom Capers, and David Carr. Fair enough.

Fear rules the Texans.

if you're going to use the Falcons as an example, did they not show regression from '08 when they went to the playoffs, but missed them this year? using your logic, they should have won the conference and been in the SB this year.

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 08:08 AM
if you're going to use the Falcons as an example, did they not show regression from '08 when they went to the playoffs, but missed them this year? using your logic, they should have won the conference and been in the SB this year.

Falcons had the first back to back winning seasons in franchise history after the mess they were in. They still finished 9-7, same as the Texans after losing their QB for games, their top RB and many other players. I heard Ryan interviewed yesterday. He said they weren't happy about it all and that the injuries were no excuse...that they expected more. I like that. As he said, many teams had injuries and it is something you have to deal with every year. The Texans should take that mindset.

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 08:10 AM
Please. We need to quit implying this team is "Kubiak-or-Suck." There are
options out there, it just seems too much of the fanbase has no faith in our
front office to make the proper selection. Who can blame them?

They'd rather have 7-9 to 9-7 seasons time and time again, than entrust
the selection of a new head coach to the group that brought us Tony
Boselli, Charley Casserly, Dom Capers, and David Carr. Fair enough.

Fear rules the Texans.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing.

:kitten:

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 08:11 AM
if you're going to use the Falcons as an example, did they not show regression from '08 when they went to the playoffs, but missed them this year? using your logic, they should have won the conference and been in the SB this year.

Falcons had the first back to back winning seasons in franchise history after the mess they were in. They still finished 9-7, same as the Texans after losing their QB, their top RB and many other players. I heard Ryan interviewed yesterday. He said they weren't happy about it all and that the injuries were no excuse...that they expected more. I like that. I think they get brought up because people seem to think the Texans are the only ones to come from a black hole. The Falcons were a certifiable mess and their coach and rookie QB have the team winning games. But I think we discussed this on page 105 or in another thread...it all runs together now :)

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 08:16 AM
Falcons had the first back to back winning seasons in franchise history after the mess they were in. They still finished 9-7, same as the Texans after losing their QB, their top RB and many other players. I heard Ryan interviewed yesterday. He said they weren't happy about it all and that the injuries were no excuse...that they expected more. I like that. I think they get brought up because people seem to think the Texans are the only ones to come from a black hole. The Falcons were a certifiable mess and their coach and rookie QB have the team winning games. But I think we discussed this on page 105 or in another thread...it all runs together now :)

The Texans finished 8-8 in 2007 and 2008 despite losing their starting CB and their starting QB for much of the time.

So, the Texans will have their first back to back winning seasons, one year after the Atlanta Falcons accomplished that feat... And, you are holding the Falcons up as an example!!! Wow! They've been in the league, what, 40 years?

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 08:25 AM
The Texans finished 8-8 in 2007 and 2008 despite losing their starting CB and their starting QB for much of the time.

So, the Texans will have their first back to back winning seasons, one year after the Atlanta Falcons accomplished that feat... And, you are holding the Falcons up as an example!!! Wow! They've been in the league, what, 40 years?

You do know you are making my point right...floundering franchise, hopeless when it came to winning games for decades, top attraction goes down in a scandal of epic proportions and a rookie QB and a rookie coach with no NFL head coaching experience takes them to the playoffs and another winning record in their first 2 years. Kind of makes 4 years and almost there with all that talent seem insignificant huh?Thanks. Carry on.

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 08:39 AM
. I heard Ryan interviewed yesterday. He said they weren't happy about it all and that the injuries were no excuse...that they expected more. I like that. As he said, many teams had injuries and it is something you have to deal with every year. The Texans should take that mindset.

No one from our organization has said any different.


Not saying you said they had..... but some people around here think the Texans F.O. & team are "Giddy" that they finished 9-7.

Everyone from the towel boy to the Owner has said they expected better, and are not satisfied with the 9-7 finish. Everyone has said they should have finished better than 9-7. Everyone of them said we should have been in the play-offs, and everyone of them said the goal is Super-Bowl, not 9-7, not play-offs.

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 08:45 AM
... a rookie QB and a rookie coach with no NFL head coaching experience takes them to the playoffs and another winning record in their first 2 years. Kind of makes 4 years and almost there with all that talent seem insignificant huh?Thanks. Carry on.

Well yeah, if you want to negate the whole 40+ year history vs 8 years of history thing.

It's not like either coach removed 53 players from their roster, and added 53 players to their roster.

The Falcons had been to the NFC Championship game, and led the league in rushing less than 5 years before Smith got their. Some of the players, some of the infrastructure, and some of the "atmosphere" was still there when Smith got there. He started from a better perspective than Kubiak did.

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 08:47 AM
You do know you are making my point right...floundering franchise, hopeless when it came to winning games for decades, top attraction goes down in a scandal of epic proportions and a rookie QB and a rookie coach with no NFL head coaching experience takes them to the playoffs and another winning record in their first 2 years. Kind of makes 4 years and almost there with all that talent seem insignificant huh?Thanks. Carry on.

Perhaps one of the reasons why some of these franchises flounder is because the owner listens to crazy fans talk about "all the talent" on a team like the 2007-2008 Houston Texans.

QB: mix between Sage Rosenfels and a QB with almost no starts
RB: Ron Dayne to a 3rd round rookie
WR: AJ and low level FAs and a 7th round trade
TE: 50yr old Bruener and a young 4th round QB convert
OL: E.Salaam, hasbeens and never will be's at C, young RT, UDFA RG
DE: Mario and nothing
DT: rookie 20yr old DT, TJ
CB: V.Hutchins, D.Faggins, rookie FBennett, etc...
S: N.Ferguson, C.Brown, and eventually E. Wilson
LB: DRyans, Greenwood, and a 7th round rookie playing out of position.

Yeah, I can't figure out how Kubiak only got 8 wins a season out of this roster! :gun:


Too much upheaval and unrealistic expectations plays a role in the failure of a lot of franchises.

JB
02-05-2010, 08:49 AM
http://i807.photobucket.com/albums/yy358/sanjacal/energizer-bunny.jpg?t=1265381253

Second Honeymoon
02-05-2010, 09:35 AM
Is it reasonable to believe that team could be in the play-offs 4 years from now? If it takes 5 instead of 4, is that unacceptable?

If you say so. But that Dolphins team had the #4 total defense the year before the 1-15 season. The #5 scoring D... The Lions (like the Texans in 2006) have nothing.

Even the 2007 Saints had a great turnaround. But to compare the 2006 Saints to the Texans.... the 2006 Dolphins (2004, they had the #4 total D, #5 scoring D)to the 2006 Texans, the 2006 Falcons (2004 NFC Championship game)...

I don't understand how we can't draw parallels to coaches who had been successful....

But it's okay to expect the Texans to achieve like NFL Franchises that have been successful to some extent in "recent" history.




Gee..... I thought they had a solid but aging defense... 2 talented running backs.. & a gimmick laden ball control offense.



to sum TK's post up.

1. Excuse #1
2. Excuse #2
3. Excuse #3
4. Rationalization #1
5. Rationalization #2
6. Rationalization #3

all we need now is the excuses for next year and I am set.

no matter how you slice it, Kubiak has underperformed and failed to get things to where they need to be. Other coaches have come in with worse talent and less to work with and turned things around. They just happen to be good head coaches, something that Kubiak is not.

but whatever, keep the excuses coming sheeple. i can't wait for next year's crop.

JB
02-05-2010, 09:58 AM
to sum TK's post up.

1. Excuse #1
2. Excuse #2
3. Excuse #3
4. Rationalization #1
5. Rationalization #2
6. Rationalization #3

all we need now is the excuses for next year and I am set.

no matter how you slice it, Kubiak has underperformed and failed to get things to where they need to be. Other coaches have come in with worse talent and less to work with and turned things around. They just happen to be good head coaches, something that Kubiak is not.

but whatever, keep the excuses coming sheeple. i can't wait for next year's crop.

Who?

Second Honeymoon
02-05-2010, 11:33 AM
Who?

Sporano, Smith, Payton, Whisenhunt, and Ryan all turned things around and in some cases first year.

Other coaches had more to work with but have also gotten their teams on the right path like Harbaugh, Caldwell, and Tomlin.

Half this fanbase is more interested in coming up with new and improved excuses for their team's failures rather than being realistic and objective about where the problem lies with this team. If you are happy beating up the bottom half of the league and getting embarassed by the top teams in the league, so be it. That ain't enough for me. Keep being losers for all I care.

The only new coaches that Kubiak has outperformed over his 4 year span imho are Kiffin, Cable, and Morningwheg. So hoo-freaking-ray, Kubiak did better than the Raiders and Lions coaches!!! build the guy a freaking statue outside the stadium. its obvious you don't have to win to be a legend or get a statue built for you in this town. purely pathetic.

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 11:40 AM
Sporano, Smith, Payton, Whisenhunt, and Ryan all turned things around and in some cases first year.

Other coaches had more to work with but have also gotten their teams on the right path like Harbaugh, Caldwell, and Tomlin.

Half this fanbase is more interested in coming up with new and improved excuses for their team's failures rather than being realistic and objective about where the problem lies with this team. If you are happy beating up the bottom half of the league and getting embarassed by the top teams in the league, so be it. That ain't enough for me. Keep being losers for all I care.

The only new coaches that Kubiak has outperformed over his 4 year span imho are Kiffin, Cable, and Morningwheg. So hoo-freaking-ray, Kubiak did better than the Raiders and Lions coaches!!! build the guy a freaking statue outside the stadium. its obvious you don't have to win to be a legend or get a statue built for you in this town. purely pathetic.


what about:
Mike Singletary
Jim Schwartz
Spagnola
Cam Cameron
that A*hole from Louisville that left Atlanta
Mike Nolan
Jim Zorn
Eric Mangini
Romeo Crennel
Todd Haley
Raheem Morris
Denny Green
Josh McDaniels
Herm Edwards
Nick Saban

to name a few.

JB
02-05-2010, 11:48 AM
Sporano, Smith, Payton, Whisenhunt, and Ryan all turned things around and in some cases first year.Other coaches had more to work with but have also gotten their teams on the right path like Harbaugh, Caldwell, and Tomlin.

Half this fanbase is more interested in coming up with new and improved excuses for their team's failures rather than being realistic and objective about where the problem lies with this team. If you are happy beating up the bottom half of the league and getting embarassed by the top teams in the league, so be it. That ain't enough for me. Keep being losers for all I care.

The only new coaches that Kubiak has outperformed over his 4 year span imho are Kiffin, Cable, and Morningwheg. So hoo-freaking-ray, Kubiak did better than the Raiders and Lions coaches!!! build the guy a freaking statue outside the stadium. its obvious you don't have to win to be a legend or get a statue built for you in this town. purely pathetic.

I agree all these did well. To say that they started with no more than what Kubiak did is ludicrous.

Mailman
02-05-2010, 12:13 PM
Sporano, Smith, Payton, Whisenhunt, and Ryan all turned things around and in some cases first year.

Other coaches had more to work with but have also gotten their teams on the right path like Harbaugh, Caldwell, and Tomlin.

In each instance, there are obvious reasons that explain why these coaches have a playoff appearance and Kubiak doesn't. Kubiak is in a select group of coaches who have won at least 8 games the last three seasons, but he's also the only one not to earn a postseason berth. Whisenhunt got to the SB with a 9-7 team. Does he do that in the AFC South? Hell no! Does that make him a better coach than Kubiak? Sparano's team regressed significantly after a breakout season in his first year. Does that make him better or worse than Kubiak? Mike Smith's team made the playoffs last year and then won two fewer games this season despite playing in one of the easiest divisions in the NFL. Does that make him a better coach than Kubiak? Ryan's Jets team went 9-7 (the same as Kubiak) and backed into the playoffs with the help of Cincy and Indy rolling over in weeks 16 and 17, so that makes him clearly a better coach than Kubiak? It doesn't.



Half this fanbase is more interested in coming up with new and improved excuses for their team's failures rather than being realistic and objective about where the problem lies with this team. If you are happy beating up the bottom half of the league and getting embarassed by the top teams in the league, so be it. That ain't enough for me. Keep being losers for all I care.

Stfu with this b.s. We all want the same thing. We all want to win. I can respect the case against Kubiak because the team has failed in those important divisional games, but using this line of attack pisses me off greatly. When you Kubiak wailers say this, it makes me so angry that I want to type words that might get me suspended or banned.

JB
02-05-2010, 12:16 PM
^^^^^ qft!!!

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 12:20 PM
In each instance, there are obvious reasons that explain why these coaches have a playoff appearance and Kubiak doesn't. Kubiak is in a select group of coaches who have won at least 8 games the last three seasons, but he's also the only one not to earn a postseason berth. Whisenhunt got to the SB with a 9-7 team. Does he do that in the AFC South? Hell no! Does that make him a better coach than Kubiak? Sparano's team regressed significantly after a breakout season in his first year. Does that make him better or worse than Kubiak? Mike Smith's team made the playoffs last year and then won two fewer games this season despite playing in one of the easiest divisions in the NFL. Does that make him a better coach than Kubiak? Ryan's Jets team went 9-7 (the same as Kubiak) and backed into the playoffs with the help of Cincy and Indy rolling over in weeks 16 and 17, so that makes him clearly a better coach than Kubiak? It doesn't.




Stfu with this b.s. We all want the same thing. We all want to win. I can respect the case against Kubiak because the team has failed in those important divisional games, but using this line of attack pisses me off greatly. When you Kubiak wailers say this, it makes me so angry that I want to type words that might get me suspended or banned.


After the NE game, Barrett and I sat at the bar in Papasito's and watched the late games and then the dreaded Sunday night game. I was't sure how we were going to afford it but Barrett and I were orchestrating a plan to take a roadtrip to Cincinnati and watch the first Texan playoff game in history. It's hard to express how exciting that thought was/is. The idea that SH would suggest I'm content to be a "loser" or root for a "loser" is unbelievable. To an unhealthy degree, I want this team to win. I'm desperate for it. It also angers me that these guys can't just accept a difference of opinion. Why is it so difficult for some of them to understand that we can believe Kubiak is the right man for the job? Not sure. I can certainly understand their concerns with him. I share some of them.

stingray
02-05-2010, 12:35 PM
In each instance, there are obvious reasons that explain why these coaches have a playoff appearance and Kubiak doesn't. Kubiak is in a select group of coaches who have won at least 8 games the last three seasons, but he's also the only one not to earn a postseason berth. Whisenhunt got to the SB with a 9-7 team. Does he do that in the AFC South? Hell no! Does that make him a better coach than Kubiak? Sparano's team regressed significantly after a breakout season in his first year. Does that make him better or worse than Kubiak? Mike Smith's team made the playoffs last year and then won two fewer games this season despite playing in one of the easiest divisions in the NFL. Does that make him a better coach than Kubiak? Ryan's Jets team went 9-7 (the same as Kubiak) and backed into the playoffs with the help of Cincy and Indy rolling over in weeks 16 and 17, so that makes him clearly a better coach than Kubiak? It doesn't.




Stfu with this b.s. We all want the same thing. We all want to win. I can respect the case against Kubiak because the team has failed in those important divisional games, but using this line of attack pisses me off greatly. When you Kubiak wailers say this, it makes me so angry that I want to type words that might get me suspended or banned.

Great Post.. Must spread Rep...

Grams
02-05-2010, 12:45 PM
In each instance, there are obvious reasons that explain why these coaches have a playoff appearance and Kubiak doesn't. Kubiak is in a select group of coaches who have won at least 8 games the last three seasons, but he's also the only one not to earn a postseason berth. Whisenhunt got to the SB with a 9-7 team. Does he do that in the AFC South? Hell no! Does that make him a better coach than Kubiak? Sparano's team regressed significantly after a breakout season in his first year. Does that make him better or worse than Kubiak? Mike Smith's team made the playoffs last year and then won two fewer games this season despite playing in one of the easiest divisions in the NFL. Does that make him a better coach than Kubiak? Ryan's Jets team went 9-7 (the same as Kubiak) and backed into the playoffs with the help of Cincy and Indy rolling over in weeks 16 and 17, so that makes him clearly a better coach than Kubiak? It doesn't.




Stfu with this b.s. We all want the same thing. We all want to win. I can respect the case against Kubiak because the team has failed in those important divisional games, but using this line of attack pisses me off greatly. When you Kubiak wailers say this, it makes me so angry that I want to type words that might get me suspended or banned.

:goodpost:

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 01:20 PM
Sporano, Smith, Payton, Whisenhunt, and Ryan all turned things around and in some cases first year.

I'm going to spare you the excuses... but in the case of Ryans, can you explain to me how going 9-7 is turning things around when they went 9-7 last year, and should have been no better than 8-8 in 2009?

I'm just asking.

Half this fanbase is more interested in coming up with new and improved excuses

I thought I was using the same old excuses?

for their team's failures rather than being realistic and objective about where the problem lies with this team. If you are happy beating up the bottom half of the league and getting embarassed by the top teams in the league, so be it. That ain't enough for me. Keep being losers for all I care.

I thought I was clear that I'm upset with Kubiak too. Just not to the extent that you are. I'm not blaming him for "eeeevvvvveerrrything"

The only new coaches that Kubiak has outperformed over his 4 year span imho are Kiffin, Cable, and Morningwheg.

depends on how you want to define perform. I think Kubiak has performed better than most coaches in this league, as far as teacing (coaching) young men how to play at this level.


And another point I wanted to make. To say that Wisenhunt(sp) has outperformed Kubiak is to negate everything Denny Green had done the three years prior.

True or False:

Denny Green did a better job of building a team than Dom Capers.

Texecutioner
02-05-2010, 03:04 PM
Tex, and TB I bet you won't hit each other, lol.

We might! :slapfight:




Only kidding. If I saw Bill again somewhere I'd probably buy him a beer and we'd laugh about these arguments in here and make fun of one another. I don't think anyone should take any of these disagreements seriously to that kind of level. It's just a message board where opinions are discussed, and I don't have any ill will or anguish towards anyone in here. I would hope that everyone else feels the same way. :worldpeace:

Thorn
02-05-2010, 03:13 PM
We might! :slapfight:




Only kidding. If I saw Bill again somewhere I'd probably buy him a beer and we'd laugh about these arguments in here and make fun of one another. I don't think anyone should take any of these disagreements seriously to that kind of level. It's just a message board where opinions are discussed, and I don't have any ill will or anguish towards anyone in here. I would hope that everyone else feels the same way. :worldpeace:

Ha! I hate you for what you've said. :tease:

The Pencil Neck
02-05-2010, 03:22 PM
We might! :slapfight:




Only kidding. If I saw Bill again somewhere I'd probably buy him a beer and we'd laugh about these arguments in here and make fun of one another. I don't think anyone should take any of these disagreements seriously to that kind of level. It's just a message board where opinions are discussed, and I don't have any ill will or anguish towards anyone in here. I would hope that everyone else feels the same way. :worldpeace:

Hey. I don't hate you cause you're wrong. I hate you cause U R STOOOOPID!

:slapfight:



:jk:

Texecutioner
02-05-2010, 03:38 PM
Ha! I hate you for what you've said. :tease:

Thorn if I ever saw you, you're dead!!!:bat:

b0ng
02-06-2010, 02:10 AM
Falcons had the first back to back winning seasons in franchise history after the mess they were in. They still finished 9-7, same as the Texans after losing their QB for games, their top RB and many other players. I heard Ryan interviewed yesterday. He said they weren't happy about it all and that the injuries were no excuse...that they expected more. I like that. As he said, many teams had injuries and it is something you have to deal with every year. The Texans should take that mindset.

I have not heard a Texans player say anything but "There's no excuse we should've won those games and been in the playoffs" in every interview that I can get my hands on. Why are people blindly assuming the players are pleased with themselves and are planning on standing pat?

Silver Oak
02-06-2010, 07:35 AM
I have not heard a Texans player say anything but "There's no excuse we should've won those games and been in the playoffs" in every interview that I can get my hands on. Why are people blindly assuming the players are pleased with themselves and are planning on standing pat?

it somehow validates their side of this endless debate to fabricate a massive lie.

Grams
02-06-2010, 08:07 AM
Summary of endless pages and threads -

Pro-Kubiak:

OK with the extension/contract, shows continuity and easier to get coaches and FA to come here. (No one likes to come and work for a "dead man walking" coach.
See the improvement the team has made each year.
Offense and Defense have both made vast improvements since he has been here.
Sees there are still holes on both sides of the ball that still need to be addressed.
Glad with the winning season but knows the playoffs were within our grasp but because of various circumstances we screwed the pooch.
Knows that Kubiak is not perfect and still has some learning to do.

Anti-Kubiak:

Does not like the coach in any way possible. Thinks he is horrible and incapable of learning anything more.
Should have been fired after this year and another coach and new staff should have been hired.
The W-L record is the only measuring stick to be used for the Texans.
If we don't make the playoffs we are mediocre.
Any other coach could have been brought in here (in place of Kubiak) and taken us to the playoff by now.
If Cowher were hired this year we would be in the playoffs next year. (even if he changes the defense to a 3-4 and changes the offense from a West Coast style to one similar to the Steelers.) Because he is a god amoung football coaches.


This is getting old and boring. Everyone knows who is who in this zoo.

Can we move on to more interesting topics?

The draft and FA is coming up.


:texflag:

DexmanC
02-06-2010, 08:24 AM
Whisenhunt got to the SB with a 9-7 team. Does he do that in the AFC South? Hell no!


That excuse doesn't hold water. Even if you CONCEDE both games to the
Colts, you still wind up playing two teams just as good as you are. The
Cardinals played the AFC South this year, and they beat the snot out
of the team that SWEPT the Texans 31-17, lost a close game to the
to the Titans 20-17, and BEAT the Texans 28-21.

To say the Cardinals would suffer the same futility in the AFC South the
Texans have, is just flat out stupid. The Jags and Titans find ways to compete
in the division, yet we make EXCUSE AFTER EXCUSE for our annual
suckage.

GP
02-06-2010, 08:34 AM
Summary of endless pages and threads -

Pro-Kubiak:

OK with the extension/contract, shows continuity and easier to get coaches and FA to come here. (No one likes to come and work for a "dead man walking" coach.
See the improvement the team has made each year.
Offense and Defense have both made vast improvements since he has been here.
Sees there are still holes on both sides of the ball that still need to be addressed.
Glad with the winning season but knows the playoffs were within our grasp but because of various circumstances we screwed the pooch.
Knows that Kubiak is not perfect and still has some learning to do.

Anti-Kubiak:

Does not like the coach in any way possible. Thinks he is horrible and incapable of learning anything more.
Should have been fired after this year and another coach and new staff should have been hired.
The W-L record is the only measuring stick to be used for the Texans.
If we don't make the playoffs we are mediocre.
Any other coach could have been brought in here (in place of Kubiak) and taken us to the playoff by now.
If Cowher were hired this year we would be in the playoffs next year. (even if he changes the defense to a 3-4 and changes the offense from a West Coast style to one similar to the Steelers.) Because he is a god amoung football coaches.


This is getting old and boring. Everyone knows who is who in this zoo.

Can we move on to more interesting topics?

The draft and FA is coming up.


:texflag:

You must not be paying close attention.

I like some of what he's done, just not enough to stay with the guy. He gets credit for rebuilding and making us competent. Beyond that? I'm left wanting more.

infantrycak
02-06-2010, 08:51 AM
I have not heard a Texans player say anything but "There's no excuse we should've won those games and been in the playoffs" in every interview that I can get my hands on. Why are people blindly assuming the players are pleased with themselves and are planning on standing pat?

To add to that - I have not heard a Texans player who does not want Kubiak back enthusiastically. This isn't Capers with Dunta saying there need to be changes and Walker making references to the coaches. Instead you get interviews like Jacoby's where the players feel like they let their coach down and are glad he got an extension.

DexmanC
02-06-2010, 08:52 AM
what about:
Mike Singletary -- Rookie Headcoach who finished 5-1 in his Division
Jim Schwartz -- Rookie Headcoach / Too soon to tell
Spagnola -- Rookie Headcoach / Too soon to tell
Cam Cameron -- Rookie Headcoach / Parcells brought in his own bunch
that A*hole from Louisville that left Atlanta -- Not a coach. Doesn't count.
Mike Nolan -- Had a few years to show he's a bottom-half coach

Jim Zorn -- Had a few years to show he's a bottom-half coach

Eric Mangini -- Made the postseason, had a QB forced on him in NY, made
the Browns respectable. Has less tenure as a headcoach than Kubiak.

Romeo Crennel -- Rookie headcoach of a team whose organization is beyond pathetic. Nice job, Kubiak.

Todd Haley -- Rookie headcoach. / Too soon to tell.

Raheem Morris -- Rookie headcoach / Too soon to tell.

Denny Green -- Turned around a historically bad franchise, who
made the superbowl when they FIRED him.

Josh McDaniels -- Rookie headcoach / Too soon to tell

Herm Edwards -- He made postseason during his tenure. Has Kubiak?

Nick Saban -- Rookie headcoach who went back to the college game.

to name a few.

So, he's smashed a ton of rookie headcoaches, and has been
out-coached by quite a few others. Hell, even the "Loser who quit
on the Falcons" had JOEY FREAKING HARRINGTON light Kubiak's squad up.

Back up, and see the forest.

DexmanC
02-06-2010, 08:59 AM
To add to that - I have not heard a Texans player who does not want Kubiak back enthusiastically. This isn't Capers with Dunta saying there need to be changes and Walker making references to the coaches. Instead you get interviews like Jacoby's where the players feel like they let their coach down and are glad he got an extension.


Playing devil's advocate, maybe they know that when Kubiak's around, they'll
continue to be happy, paid, "fresh" for gameday. They also know that winning
isn't PRIORITY NUMBER ONE, which is most likely behind a different regime.
3-3, 1-5, 2-4, 1-5 in the AFC South merits an extension with the squad.

Dunta Robinson had the balls to write on his sneakers, knowing how milquetoast his
leadership is. As he stated: "That's what we're here for, is to get paid."

Status quo is comfortable. Why change it?

b0ng
02-06-2010, 09:12 AM
Playing devil's advocate, maybe they know that when Kubiak's around, they'll
continue to be happy, paid, "fresh" for gameday. They also know that winning
isn't PRIORITY NUMBER ONE, which is most likely behind a different regime.
3-3, 1-5, 2-4, 1-5 in the AFC South merits an extension with the squad.

Dunta Robinson had the balls to write on his sneakers, knowing how milquetoast his
leadership is. As he stated: "That's what we're here for, is to get paid."

Status quo is comfortable. Why change it?

Does this hypothetical situation you've created in your head make you angry at Kubiak?

infantrycak
02-06-2010, 09:30 AM
Playing devil's advocate, maybe they know that when Kubiak's around, they'll
continue to be happy, paid, "fresh" for gameday. They also know that winning
isn't PRIORITY NUMBER ONE, which is most likely behind a different regime.
3-3, 1-5, 2-4, 1-5 in the AFC South merits an extension with the squad.

Dunta Robinson had the balls to write on his sneakers, knowing how milquetoast his
leadership is. As he stated: "That's what we're here for, is to get paid."

Status quo is comfortable. Why change it?

All guesswork on your part to fit your agenda. What we know is the players like Kubiak and McNair considered that. We also know the players quit on Capers and started saying things about it.

Vinny
02-06-2010, 09:53 AM
All guesswork on your part to fit your agenda. What we know is the players like Kubiak and McNair considered that. We also know the players quit on Capers and started saying things about it.

What do you read into the comments Mario had about how he wished he played harder this year?

dalemurphy
02-06-2010, 10:50 AM
What do you read into the comments Mario had about how he wished he played harder this year?

So do I!

dalemurphy
02-06-2010, 10:59 AM
So, he's smashed a ton of rookie headcoaches, and has been
out-coached by quite a few others. Hell, even the "Loser who quit
on the Falcons" had JOEY FREAKING HARRINGTON light Kubiak's squad up.

Back up, and see the forest.


If you were consistent, that would help. You give Denny Green credit for turning around a historically bad franchise? Okay, what did Kubiak do? How many winning seasons did he have? Singletary took over a team middle of last year... what was their record? Do you really value divisional record over overall record? By the way, the Texans went 3-1 vs. that division as well, including a win vs. SF. It's not okay to comare Kubiak's head to head record versus Miami but it's okay to bring up a single win that Atlanta had over Houston in '07? Come on!

My post was in response to someone saying that, "there are only three coaches that have been as bad as Kubiak over his time in Houston"... That was ridiculous! My point is that many/most coaches that take over teams fail worse than Kubiak has to this point. I wasn't even arguing whether it may be time for him to go. As a fan, can't you even acknowledge that he has done a pretty good thing for this organization in his four years? Seems like you are being disingenuous instead of having honest dialogue.

I like Singletary and think he has a chance to turn that organization around. But, he hasn't done it yet. And, you guys are all about instant results or proof of success with the W/L record. I have to say that it's not impressive to finish with a losing record in the NFC west. Kubiak was a .500 coach at this point in his career while playing in the AFC south.

dalemurphy
02-06-2010, 11:01 AM
So, he's smashed a ton of rookie headcoaches, and has been
out-coached by quite a few others. Hell, even the "Loser who quit
on the Falcons" had JOEY FREAKING HARRINGTON light Kubiak's squad up.

Back up, and see the forest.

Who would you rather have coach the Texans in 2010, Gary Kubiak or Herm Edwards?

If you actually answer Herm Edwards then there is clearly no point in conversing anymore.

DexmanC
02-06-2010, 11:28 AM
Who would you rather have coach the Texans in 2010, Gary Kubiak or Herm Edwards?

If you actually answer Herm Edwards then there is clearly no point in conversing anymore.


I choose the option "C," which was written in invisible ink.

NEITHER.

You already knew that, though.

DexmanC
02-06-2010, 11:37 AM
You give Denny Green credit for turning around a historically bad franchise? Okay, what did Kubiak do?

Green got the Cardinals to "o.k." with his drafts, but the franchise knew
they NEEDED to change the coaching regime to take the NEXT STEP.

Why is our defense for the horrible division record "Well, our division teams
are better than THEIR division teams. If we woulda-coulda-shoulda played
in THEIR division, we'd be...."

If that's the standard we hold our coaching staff to, no wonder we struggle
to make the playoffs. Should we be aiming for 10-6 (0-6 divisional) to make
the playoffs?

Bob Mcnair just told us such a low standard is good enough. Well, it ain't
enough for some of us here. If Kubiak turns into the gameday tactician this
team needs in 2010, no one will be happier than me. I just wish I had
some evidence to convince me such an occurrence is likely next season.
So what if we have a bunch of pro bowlers. We still need the chessmaster
to get those pieces to dominate the board.

Is Gary Kubiak that Chessmaster? At this point in time, NO.
TK himself started a thread awhile back saying "Kubiak wasn't ready!"

How long must we wait? No other coach in the league has gotten as
much rope as Kubiak to turn a team around, and if the first and last
home games of 2010 are any indication, the fans at Reliant are tightening
up the noose on Kubiak much like they did David Carr.

It's good to see, too.

dalemurphy
02-06-2010, 11:51 AM
Green got the Cardinals to "o.k." with his drafts, but the franchise knew
they NEEDED to change the coaching regime to take the NEXT STEP.

Why is our defense for the horrible division record "Well, our division teams
are better than THEIR division teams. If we woulda-coulda-shoulda played
in THEIR division, we'd be...."

If that's the standard we hold our coaching staff to, no wonder we struggle
to make the playoffs. Should we be aiming for 10-6 (0-6 divisional) to make
the playoffs?

Bob Mcnair just told us such a low standard is good enough. Well, it ain't
enough for some of us here. If Kubiak turns into the gameday tactician this
team needs in 2010, no one will be happier than me. I just wish I had
some evidence to convince me such an occurrence is likely next season.
So what if we have a bunch of pro bowlers. We still need the chessmaster
to get those pieces to dominate the board.

Is Gary Kubiak that Chessmaster? At this point in time, NO.
TK himself started a thread awhile back saying "Kubiak wasn't ready!"

How long must we wait? No other coach in the league has gotten as
much rope as Kubiak to turn a team around, and if the first and last
home games of 2010 are any indication, the fans at Reliant are tightening
up the noose on Kubiak much like they did David Carr.

It's good to see, too.

I totally understand your concern with Kubiak. He's been coaching for 4 years and hasn't got the team in the playoffs. And, last year, he certainly had enough talent. And, we've seen instances of teams no more talented than the '08 squad make the playoffs. I get it. I also get that most owners aren't as patient as McNair has been. However, I'm hopeful that the patience is going to pay off. Mainly, I don't want to lose sight of the fact that Kubiak has done a very good job turning this organization around. That's all I was trying to say. When I'm comparing divisions, it is just to make the point that the job in Houston is more difficult than many of the others. It's not an excuse. I agree. We need to win the division. But, I think it would be ashame for McNair not to take into account the quality of the division we play in. If he made a decision by simply looking at Arizona's success and thinking, "they did it, why can't we?"... that would be troubling. It's a bigger job here. You could argue that means it requires an even better coach... I get that. I just don't agree. At least not yet.

thunderkyss
02-06-2010, 02:51 PM
This is getting old and boring. Everyone knows who is who in this zoo.

Can we move on to more interesting topics?


:texflag:

From any of the main forums. Click on the "New Thread" button. You can start a thread about anything you like. If there are other like minded individuals, your thread will take off, or there will be a bunch of new "more interesting" threads popping up.

thunderkyss
02-06-2010, 03:10 PM
If he made a decision by simply looking at Arizona's success and thinking, "they did it, why can't we?"... that would be troubling.

No one can look at Arizona, & think their success started when Wisenhunt took that job. Any rational person would understand the turnaround started 5 years before their play-off appearance with Denny Green.

DexC says they fired Green because they "knew" he couldn't take that next step... which I think is bull. IMHO, Green was becoming unstable, and lost his ability to handle pressure.... maybe that's saying the same thing, I don't know. But I believe he could have had the same success in Arizona that he had in Minnesota.

If Arizona is the yardstick, I think we're right on schedule.

Super Bowl next year BABY :fans:

infantrycak
02-06-2010, 04:00 PM
What do you read into the comments Mario had about how he wished he played harder this year?

I didn't see them so can you provide a link?

TexansBull
02-06-2010, 05:49 PM
I have been reading this thread for a few days and haven't seen this brought up but maybe it has.

Do yall think is it possible that McNair actually made the safest decison in extending Kubiaks
contract? Let me explain. With the strike coming up let's just say we could lose a season or atleast not get a normal one.
So infact maybe the extension is only for two years and not the three? Perfect example are the Cowboys.
Wade didn't deserve his extension either. Getting the Cowboys out of the first round was not an
accomplishment for them but just a hump for them to get over. Jerry wants to win every year, and if
its not within breathing room of the SB its probably a bad year to him. Making it to the playoffs every
year is average to him, but doesn't want to change course when there is uncertainty looming.

Maybe McNair saw this and said even though my team didn't make the playoffs, we still got past
a roadblock and changing coaches with a strike coming may do more harm than good. Maybe McNair
took a small victory, took the safest decision, and extended Kubiak while the price is cheap, and essentially
bought insurance knowing that Kubiak won't screw up the team. Kubiak is going to keep building a solid team, there
is an agreement he has done that well, and still can leave it in good shape for some else to come in
if needed. Imagine if another coach did come in. Wouldn't there be the exscuse to keep him longer of the strike?
I will give McNair the benefit of the doubt on this one that he knows what was best because you don't
get that kind of money by making stupid management decisions.

And if there is a strike, does Kubiak still get paid? If he doesn't, then it will be cheaper to keep him,
remove the pressure of the contract year, and then fire him at a cheaper costif he doesn't
Make the playoffs? And then gets another year following, probably easy schedule to do it. The guy needs to
make the playoffs next year, is going to have a year cut short the following, and then the players
will come back the following in better shape the previous one cut short. If the players are on strike,
are they going to be in playing condition? Well, there is an exscuse there too then.

The point I am making is there is reason not to give Kubiak the extension, and there is reason to keep
him. Sometimes there isn't a cookie cutter approach to solving a problem and you can't say look at
them - they did what we are trying to do. This is a special situation with many dynamics that makes
this complicated to solve. So everyone is right. There. Move on to a new topic. I need more reading
material.

thunderkyss
02-06-2010, 06:02 PM
I have been reading this thread for a few days and haven't seen this brought up but maybe it has.

Do yall think is it possible that McNair actually made the safest decison in extending Kubiaks
contract? Let me explain. With the strike coming up let's just say we could lose a season or atleast not get a normal one.

It's also possible that Kubiak wanted Fox. After realizing that wasn't going to happen, he figured it would be better to just keep Kubiak.

As much as Cowher's name has been tossed around here, McNair may have no intention of ever bringing "The Chin" to Houston. For whatever reason.

TexansBull
02-07-2010, 08:01 AM
It's also possible that Kubiak wanted Fox. After realizing that wasn't going to happen, he figured it would be better to just keep Kubiak.

As much as Cowher's name has been tossed around here, McNair may have no intention of ever bringing "The Chin" to Houston. For whatever reason.

Its because of what Cowher said on national TV.

True, there is a love affair with Cowher. Its the image everyone loves and the respect he brings. Personally, I don't think he would have made it that long with steelers for so many years in todays media and fans' message boards. How many years did it take to win the big one and whatever happened to Kordell Stewart?

False Start
02-07-2010, 09:53 AM
Who would you rather have coach the Texans in 2010, Gary Kubiak or Herm Edwards?


:hide:

GP
02-07-2010, 12:16 PM
No one can look at Arizona, & think their success started when Wisenhunt took that job. Any rational person would understand the turnaround started 5 years before their play-off appearance with Denny Green.

DexC says they fired Green because they "knew" he couldn't take that next step... which I think is bull. IMHO, Green was becoming unstable, and lost his ability to handle pressure.... maybe that's saying the same thing, I don't know. But I believe he could have had the same success in Arizona that he had in Minnesota.

If Arizona is the yardstick, I think we're right on schedule.

Super Bowl next year BABY :fans:

It's not inconceivable to think that the Cardinals felt Dennis Green was hitting a ceiling. At that point, you risk losing your players to the devouring beast of mediocrity.

The Cardinals became competent again, under Dennis Green.

I see Mangini as essentially doing the same thing with the Jets, then going full tilt and getting canned for his freakness that he had going on.

Which then ushered in Rex Ryan. Seems, for now, like it was a positive step in a direction that was better than Mangini.

Speaking of Mangini: I suspect Holmgren knows Mangini is destined for suckitude in 2010, and so Holmgren can swoop in and become a head coach after having one season to assemble a draft class that he had some input upon. Pretty smart, if you ask me. Ain't no way Holgren comes in and genuinely believes that Mangini deserves to be back for 2010. NO way.

thunderkyss
02-07-2010, 12:58 PM
It's not inconceivable to think that the Cardinals felt Dennis Green was hitting a ceiling. At that point, you risk losing your players to the devouring beast of mediocrity.

The Cardinals became competent again, under Dennis Green.

Fair enough... I don't believe he could have handled the pressure.. but I believe he could still do the job of evaluating talent, and getting them prepared to play at a high level.

I see Mangini as essentially doing the same thing with the Jets, then going full tilt and getting canned for his freakness that he had going on.

Which then ushered in Rex Ryan. Seems, for now, like it was a positive step in a direction that was better than Mangini.

For all the bottom liners.... explain to me how Rex Ryan's 9-7 is better than Mangini's 9-7?

Lucky
02-07-2010, 01:15 PM
For all the bottom liners.... explain to me how Rex Ryan's 9-7 is better than Mangini's 9-7?
Mangini had a HOFer at QB. Ryan did it with a rookie QB.

GP
02-07-2010, 01:40 PM
For all the bottom liners.... explain to me how Rex Ryan's 9-7 is better than Mangini's 9-7?

You Sunshiners really have no ability to see intangibles, do you?

I mean, there was a time for Sunshining. I Sunshined all off-season, but my time in the sun came to an end when we hit "divisional skid row" and our head coach failed to address the Brown & Brown duo who effectively killed our playoff hopes with the Suck Power they contain in Chris' hand and Kris' foot.

At that point, records be damned! What one team did with a 9-7 record and what we did with OUR 9-7 record is very important.

LOL.

It's as if we made the Imaginary Playoffs because we had a 9-7 record, too.

If this is what we're dealing with--An inability to admit that a team of similar record SEIZED their opportunities, while we blew ours (going 1-5 in our own division)--then I am done with this nonsense, TK.

It's getting to the point of futility, for both sides.

GP
02-07-2010, 01:46 PM
Mangini had a HOFer at QB. Ryan did it with a rookie QB.

Rex Ryan is not scared. That's Buddy Ryan DNA if I ever saw it.

Rex also handled a mid-season slide and turned it around. When the chips were down, they could have folded. But they didn't want to be like the Texans. They chose to seize the opportunities in front of them.

Buddy Ryan punched Gilbride for a reason: Softness and stupidity. Buddy Ryan is a soaper if there ever was one.

I don't doubt for one second that Rex heard his father rant and rave, for years upon years afterwards, how softness and stupidity will kill an NFL every time.

There's just a basic, underlying, fundamental approach that Gary Kubiak seems to embody that's hitting a ceiling. I see lots of bumps on the noggin for many people in 2010.

WWJD
02-07-2010, 02:00 PM
You Sunshiners really have no ability to see intangibles, do you?

I mean, there was a time for Sunshining. I Sunshined all off-season, but my time in the sun came to an end when we hit "divisional skid row" and our head coach failed to address the Brown & Brown duo who effectively killed our playoff hopes with the Suck Power they contain in Chris' hand and Kris' foot.

At that point, records be damned! What one team did with a 9-7 record and what we did with OUR 9-7 record is very important.

LOL.

It's as if we made the Imaginary Playoffs because we had a 9-7 record, too.

If this is what we're dealing with--An inability to admit that a team of similar record SEIZED their opportunities, while we blew ours (going 1-5 in our own division)--then I am done with this nonsense, TK.

It's getting to the point of futility, for both sides.

You really make a ton of sense. Good old common sense.

WWJD
02-07-2010, 02:03 PM
Rex Ryan is not scared. That's Buddy Ryan DNA if I ever saw it.

Rex also handled a mid-season slide and turned it around. When the chips were down, they could have folded. But they didn't want to be like the Texans. They chose to seize the opportunities in front of them.

Buddy Ryan punched Gilbride for a reason: Softness and stupidity. Buddy Ryan is a soaper if there ever was one.

I don't doubt for one second that Rex heard his father rant and rave, for years upon years afterwards, how softness and stupidity will kill an NFL every time.

There's just a basic, underlying, fundamental approach that Gary Kubiak seems to embody that's hitting a ceiling. I see lots of bumps on the noggin for many people in 2010.

I can't stand Buddy Ryan but you're right about Rex..he is just like his fat little old daddy.

Just a taller fatter version.

GP
02-07-2010, 02:19 PM
I can't stand Buddy Ryan but you're right about Rex..he is just like his fat little old daddy.

Just a taller fatter version.

LOL.

Yeah, when Rex Ryan flipped off the hecklers at the Strikeforce MMA event in Florida recently, I was like "Yep, that's Buddy Ryan's kid!"

They tend to respond to acts of aggression with their own brand of aggression.

WWJD
02-07-2010, 02:53 PM
LOL.

Yeah, when Rex Ryan flipped off the hecklers at the Strikeforce MMA event in Florida recently, I was like "Yep, that's Buddy Ryan's kid!"

They tend to respond to acts of aggression with their own brand of aggression.

Buddy was always one of those that talked alot of noise but he'd run at the first sign of stuff coming his way.

I'm thinking Rex would probably take it. He certainly has NO problem saying what he means.

Or showing what he means.

Funny how much Rex is like Buddy...and then you have Wade and Bum who would never act that way.

Wade is alot like his daddy too in alot of ways.

Texecutioner
02-07-2010, 02:55 PM
Who would you rather have coach the Texans in 2010, Gary Kubiak or Herm Edwards?

If you actually answer Herm Edwards then there is clearly no point in conversing anymore.

It couldn't be argued that between Kubes and Edwards?? Really?? Lol!

I don't think there is if you're involved where any Texans player or coach is being discussed, because it's nothing but excuses and spins with you. You constantly call Kubes a better coach than other coaches who have achieved more and down grade them while putting Kubes on a Pedastool for smaller achievements if you could even call them achievements at all. To say that there is no point to even having a discussion regarding Herm Edwards, is well very silly considering Herm has still had more success than Gary has. He's been to a playoffs and been part of a team that has gone further than the Texans have, so to act like it wouldn't be up for discussion when Herm's actually gone further makes that comment look just uninformed and silly. If Herm Edwards was the coach of the Texans you'd be acting like he learned all of this stuff in NY and in KC and is now ready to be a long time great HC and you'd be comparing him to Billicheck since BB struggled in Cleveland and you'd probably say that it's what Herm needed the same way you make these silly comparisons of Kubes to Fisher and Tom Landry when they're not comparable at all. If the player or coach is currently a Texan, you have a multitude of optimism no matter the situation or circumstances. If you argued for David Carr of all people, now come on. You tried chastising me a few months back for saying Frank Okam wasn't going to do squat as well when he had been showing nothing. You might as well just come out and say that every Texans player is better than every other player in the league and Kubes is going to be the best coach in the NFL.

dalemurphy
02-07-2010, 03:06 PM
[QUOTE=Texecutioner;1361788] You tried chastising me a few months back for saying Frank Okam wasn't going to do squat as well QUOTE]

Not true. I chastised you for jumping into a preseason thread a couple people started because they were encouraged that Okam may take a step forward. I actually didn't think he would. But, I wondered why you are so determined to throw water on every hint of optimism. Nobody on that thread was arguing Okam was going to be good... They just thought he might improve based on some preseason games.

I believe you responded to someone saying, "I know it's just preseason, but I'm encouraged by Okam's play anyway."

then, you responded by saying "it's only preseason. Don't get excited."

My point is that he knew it was only preseason and that he's entitled to get excited if he wants to. Why do you have a problem with that?

Texecutioner
02-07-2010, 03:16 PM
[QUOTE=Texecutioner;1361788] You tried chastising me a few months back for saying Frank Okam wasn't going to do squat as well QUOTE]

Not true. I chastised you for jumping into a preseason thread a couple people started because they were encouraged that Okam may take a step forward. I actually didn't think he would. But, I wondered why you are so determined to throw water on every hint of optimism. Nobody on that thread was arguing Okam was going to be good... They just thought he might improve based on some preseason games.

I believe you responded to someone saying, "I know it's just preseason, but I'm encouraged by Okam's play anyway."

then, you responded by saying "it's only preseason. Don't get excited."

My point is that he knew it was only preseason and that he's entitled to get excited if he wants to. Why do you have a problem with that?


No, that's not exactly what happened. Okam's shown nothing and was incredibly overrated in college. I ellaborated and explained exactly why I had not one reason to feel optimistic about Okam and it went all the way back to his days in college and what a ton of scouts had said about the guy and his work ethic and what his attitude was like. I explained that he had a soft attitude as well. And Okam looked like garbage ever since that thread. It's one thing to share a different opinion. When I gave mine where I showed that I was pretty well informed on the guy and his history you acted like it was just crazy not to be giddy about Okam's high potential for the up coming season. The guy was one of the most overrated players in college over this last decade. And yeah, Okam having a few nice plays against some other back ups in a pre season game wasn't going to change that realistic view one bit.

thunderkyss
02-07-2010, 03:39 PM
You Sunshiners really have no ability to see intangibles, do you?

I have no problem with seeing intangibles. You have no problem seeing them on other teams, but can't seem to see them on your own team.

The Jets went 9-7 two years in a row, but you have no problem seeing the 2009 team as a better team. If that same question was asked of me, I would tell you the difference is their defense. Stats are for losers, but if you look at those stats, defensively they are quantifiably better this year, than they were last year.

At that point, records be damned! What one team did with a 9-7 record and what we did with OUR 9-7 record is very important.

what did they do differently from that point in the season?

LOL.

It's as if we made the Imaginary Playoffs because we had a 9-7 record, too.

don't put words in my mouth.

If this is what we're dealing with--An inability to admit that a team of similar record SEIZED their opportunities, while we blew ours (going 1-5 in our own division)--then I am done with this nonsense, TK.

What opportunity did they seize?

that Baltimore lost week 16, and that's the only reason they are in the play-offs? How is that any different than us needing them to lose week 16 for us to get into the play-offs?

they finished 2-4 in their division, one game better, so it's not like they killed in their division.


I'm just asking why there is such a double standard.

9-7= Ryans is a football God
9-7= Kubiak is football Scum

2-4 in the division= Ryans is a football God
1-5 in the division= Kubiak is football scum

#1 over-all defense #20 offense= Ryans is a football God
#13 over-all defense #4 offense= Kubiak is football Scum

5-3 over the last half of the season= Turned things around for Ryans
4-4 over the last half of the season= F@#4'd it all to hell for Kubiak

Don't forget that Indy gave them a game, otherwise they would have gone 4-4 same as us, it's not that Rex Ryan outsmarted, or out coached anybody week 16. He was beat & outmatched that game, he had no chance of winning.

Either Kubiak is making this team better, or Rex Ryan is not making that team better. I don't see how anyone can see it any other way.

thunderkyss
02-07-2010, 03:49 PM
It couldn't be argued that between Kubes and Edwards?? Really?? Lol!

I don't think there is if you're involved where any Texans player or coach is being discussed, because it's nothing but excuses and spins with you. You constantly call Kubes a better coach than other coaches who have achieved more and down grade them while putting Kubes on a Pedastool for smaller achievements if you could even call them achievements at all. To say that there is no point to even having a discussion regarding Herm Edwards, is well very silly considering Herm has still had more success than Gary has. He's been to a playoffs and been part of a team that has gone further than the Texans have, so to act like it wouldn't be up for discussion when Herm's actually gone further makes that comment look just uninformed and silly.

Do you believe either team, the NYJets or the KC Chiefs were better because of Herman Edwards? I don't see where he added sufficient talent to either team to make them winners, or taught them to play better than they had before he got there.

I'm with Dale on this one, I would have to see what he did with the teams he was given, I would have to understand why he left NYJ, before I would consider bringing him to Houston. What I know right now, his name doesn't even enter the discussion, but I admit I need to do more research.... getting one of his teams to the play-offs doesn't automatically do it for me.

dalemurphy
02-07-2010, 03:56 PM
Do you believe either team, the NYJets or the KC Chiefs were better because of Herman Edwards? I don't see where he added sufficient talent to either team to make them winners, or taught them to play better than they had before he got there.

I'm with Dale on this one, I would have to see what he did with the teams he was given, I would have to understand why he left NYJ, before I would consider bringing him to Houston. What I know right now, his name doesn't even enter the discussion, but I admit I need to do more research.... getting one of his teams to the play-offs doesn't automatically do it for me.

He spent the morning of the first day of KC Chiefs training camp coloring posters! Give me a freakin' break!

GP
02-07-2010, 04:15 PM
Here's how the Jets 9-7 is different than our 9-7:

The Jets still beat the Bengals and the Chargers in the playoffs. Those two playoff games were not "lay down" games by the Bengals and Chargers. It involved two Jets opponents who were fighting for a Super Bowl berth.

Therefore, I could really care that the Bengals and Colts laid down for the Jets at the end of the regular season. Why? Because once the playoffs began, the Jets ended up one win away from the Super Bowl.

That could have been us, instead of the Jets.

Let me transition from the Jets, and onto the topic of our 9-7 season for a moment....

We needed one more win in the regular season to get our shot at the Colts in the AFC Title game. Take your pick out of any of those losses we had. I'll choose to pick the Jags game where Kubiak admitted in his Loser Monday presser that it was his HB pass play-call and it was the wrong call to make. Duh. It's first down, near the end zone, and you call a freaking HB pass.

But Kubiak only called the play, and Chris Brown was the one who didn't execute it properly...except there's the issue of why Chris Brown is even on the team at all, let alone the snap-taker that he was until the very last game of the season. Someone learns verrrrrrry slowly, I'm afraid. As if "when his butt is on the line, and not a second before that." As in "When he has no other alternative." Why is that? And isn't that the same philosophy that this team displays: Only performing juuust enough to shake the boo birds for awhile. As it was said in Remember The Titans: "Attitude reflect leadership."

Leads us to Kris Brown. Easily an even more disastrous roster decision than Chris Brown. The Cowboys axed their yippin' kicker. Was a smart move that you'd expect from a team trying to get enough wins to get into the big tournament. It was cold, it was swift. It was smart. Business.

I think we've been down this path before, right? Sounds familiar to me.

Now back to the Jets...

You say "Don't put words in my mouth," when I said you guys think our 9-7 got us into an Imaginary Playoffs. Well, what other assumption is left when the Sunshiners dismiss the Jets playoff appearance and that their 9-7 is not really any different than our 9-7?

It's so night-and-day that it's escaping the grasp of a lot of people on here. Instead, we're left to wrestle with everything but Gary Kubiak. Paraphrasing here, for effect: "He just needs more time. We're almost there. What else on our team can we examine and dissect? Kubiak knows that 2010 is it..."

No, 2009 was it. This team has done this song and dance before. Bob McNair is a slow learner, too. Maybe that's the synergy that he and Kubiak share with each other and endears one to the other. I dunno.

We are delaying our step to the next level by 1 or 2 years. That's 1 or 2 years off Andre Johnson's shelf life. And others, as well.

I predict the pink soap will be displayed on here by mid-season at the latest. I just wonder if the players will rally, like they have in the past, or if they just absolutely dog it because they're spent from the futility.

GP
02-07-2010, 04:22 PM
And, remember this: I was a Sunshine member and a very vocal part of the Keep Hope Alive tour during off-season, draft, camp, pre-season, and even after the Cardinals' loss.


I've been on both sides of this deal. I've seen the lay of the land.

Some of you are not really taking a risk or chance to allow yourself to see but only one perspective. You're invested in your ideology without the ability to lay it down and risk the off-chance that you might have to switch party affiliation.

I had to lay down my mistake, and it was laid down after we lost the MNF game. I saw the topography of the Texans playoff chances after that game, and it was a lot of valley with only a momentary hill named Seattle and St. Louis.

Even the Patriots game was a hill. They almost laid down with the same level of no-give-a-crap as the Bengals and Colts displayed. I say "almost" because they would insert and yank Brady to the degree that they thought they might outlast us or lose to us. It was like a dad who sandbags a few plays in basketball against his son, trying to give off the appearance that it's a competitive game. It was very nice of Bill to be fatherly to Kubiak like that. He didn't do that for Fisher.

The peak is high. I don't think our sherpa can guide us there.

GP
02-07-2010, 04:25 PM
Even the Patriots game was a hill. They almost laid down with the same level of no-give-a-crap as the Bengals and Colts displayed. I say "almost" because they would insert and yank Brady to the degree that they thought they might outlast us or lose to us. It was like a dad who sandbags a few plays in basketball against his son, trying to give off the appearance that it's a competitive game. It was very nice of Bill to be fatherly to Kubiak like that. He didn't do that for Fisher.

:ohsnap:

DexmanC
02-07-2010, 08:59 PM
Here's to tonights Superbowl ending all excuses for Gary Kubiak.
Losing ain't cute anymore.

LonerATO
02-07-2010, 09:14 PM
Here's to tonights Superbowl ending all excuses for Gary Kubiak.
Losing ain't cute anymore.

why did you post this in two threads?

HoustonFrog
02-07-2010, 10:00 PM
Even the Patriots game was a hill. They almost laid down with the same level of no-give-a-crap as the Bengals and Colts displayed. I say "almost" because they would insert and yank Brady to the degree that they thought they might outlast us or lose to us. It was like a dad who sandbags a few plays in basketball against his son, trying to give off the appearance that it's a competitive game. It was very nice of Bill to be fatherly to Kubiak like that. He didn't do that for Fisher.

.

Glad you said this. People complain non-stop about the Jets getting gimmees but ignore the Pats resting players and keeping their best players out for chunks of the game. Maybe other teams were pissed at that.

thunderkyss
02-07-2010, 10:04 PM
Here's to tonights Superbowl ending all excuses for Gary Kubiak.
Losing ain't cute anymore.

Do you think there are Vikings & Cowboy fans not making excuses?

thunderkyss
02-07-2010, 10:12 PM
Here's how the Jets 9-7 is different than our 9-7:

No, 2009 was it.

I'm not going to dispute anything you said in this post. Bottom line, basically, they're true.

Do you believe the 2009 Texans are a better team than they were in 2008?

I do. I believe the 2008 team was better than the 2007 team. I believe the 2007 team was better than the 2006 team. Bottom line.

I believe the 2010 team will be better than the 2009 team. We've got the evidence to support that thought... do you agree, or disagree?

Every team makes mistakes, every coach makes bad calls, every team gets screwed by the refs. Next year, we'll be so good, that none of that will matter.

I believe that will be the case because of Kubiak. That progress will carry on from 2010, to 2011, to 2012..... we have no reason to believe otherwise.

Bring in another coach, and we may have success in 2010, but the evidence shows we have no idea what 2011, or 2012 might look like. Whether you look at Miami, Baltimore, NYJets, or Atlanta.

ArlingtonTexan
02-07-2010, 10:12 PM
Do you think there are Vikings & Cowboy fans not making excuses?

Cowboys fans have a different problem, they think it is their right to be in the Superbowl and blame both Romo and Wade for not getting them there constantly. More a never satitsfied group than will make excuses group.

I don't know enough vikings fan.

The Pencil Neck
02-07-2010, 10:15 PM
Here's to tonights Superbowl ending all excuses for Gary Kubiak.
Losing ain't cute anymore.

Yeah. And no excuses for...

The Buffalo Bills
The New York Jets
The Cincinnati Bengals
The Cleveland Browns
The Jacksonville Jaguars
The Tennessee Titans
The Kansas City Chiefs
The San Diego Chargers
The Philadelphia Eagles
The Detroit Lions
The Minnesota Vikings
The Atlanta Falcons
The Carolina Panthers
The Arizona Cardinals
The Seattle Seahawks

Those are all the teams besides the Texans that haven't won a Super Bowl since the merger. Half the league. They're obviously not trying hard enough and don't want to win. After all, it only takes 4 years to build a SB winner.

houstonspartan
02-07-2010, 10:34 PM
Cowboys fans have a different problem, they think it is their right to be in the Superbowl and blame both Romo and Wade for not getting them there constantly. More a never satitsfied group than will make excuses group.

I don't know enough vikings fan.

LOL. So true.

I know a few Cowboy fans, and that's how they are. And, they actually, honestly think they are "America's team", as in, George Washington basically founded the team right after he discovered America.

And, they actually, truly think that God wants them to win all the time. And if they don't win, someone must have made God angry.

thunderkyss
02-07-2010, 10:38 PM
And, they actually, honestly think they are "America's team", as in, George Washington basically founded the team right after he discovered America.


:whip:

GP
02-08-2010, 08:41 AM
I'm not going to dispute anything you said in this post. Bottom line, basically, they're true.

Do you believe the 2009 Texans are a better team than they were in 2008?

I do. I believe the 2008 team was better than the 2007 team. I believe the 2007 team was better than the 2006 team. Bottom line.

I believe the 2010 team will be better than the 2009 team. We've got the evidence to support that thought... do you agree, or disagree?

Every team makes mistakes, every coach makes bad calls, every team gets screwed by the refs. Next year, we'll be so good, that none of that will matter.

I believe that will be the case because of Kubiak. That progress will carry on from 2010, to 2011, to 2012..... we have no reason to believe otherwise.

Bring in another coach, and we may have success in 2010, but the evidence shows we have no idea what 2011, or 2012 might look like. Whether you look at Miami, Baltimore, NYJets, or Atlanta.

I think the players have progressed, minus Kris Brown, Chris Brown, and Myers the center.

I don't think the coach has progressed. At least not at the same rate as the players have. I think the players are actually passing Kubiak in terms of them "getting it" vs. Kubiak "getting it" when we talk about personal responsibility in their roles on the team.

Mario is someone who isn't living up to his potential. I think he could be great, but something is going on that isn't producing the results you'd expect out of him. So I might have to throw Mario out there as someone who reminds me a lot of Gary Kubiak: They should be doing better, but we get production in spurts and there's no real way to know what performance you're going to get out of them.

dalemurphy
02-08-2010, 08:53 AM
I think the players have progressed, minus Kris Brown, Chris Brown, and Myers the center.

I don't think the coach has progressed. At least not at the same rate as the players have. I think the players are actually passing Kubiak in terms of them "getting it" vs. Kubiak "getting it" when we talk about personal responsibility in their roles on the team.

Mario is someone who isn't living up to his potential. I think he could be great, but something is going on that isn't producing the results you'd expect out of him. So I might have to throw Mario out there as someone who reminds me a lot of Gary Kubiak: They should be doing better, but we get production in spurts and there's no real way to know what performance you're going to get out of them.


How is Charles Grant living up to his potential in N.O., or his monstrous contract? What about Reggie Bush? How has R. Meachem played relative to his draft position and potential?

The Saints had a great season. And, Sean Payton has done a very good job with the team. However, every roster has examples of players underperforming their potential. A roster is made up of 53 homosapiens. There is no way to have all 53 physically and mentally engaged at the same time. Kubiak's players play hard for him, as a rule.

I'm not sure you can isolate the head coach's performance from the way his players perform. At least, that's what I think and is largely why I'm higher on Kubiak than most. Because, if I'm judging Kubiak on primarily his game management, I wouldn't grade him out near as a high. I just happen to think the system, player development, and player focus/motivation are the areas that a head coach makes his greatest impact. And, I'm very happy with Kubiak in that regard.

silvrhand
02-08-2010, 09:20 AM
I think the players have progressed, minus Kris Brown, Chris Brown, and Myers the center.

I don't think the coach has progressed. At least not at the same rate as the players have. I think the players are actually passing Kubiak in terms of them "getting it" vs. Kubiak "getting it" when we talk about personal responsibility in their roles on the team.

Mario is someone who isn't living up to his potential. I think he could be great, but something is going on that isn't producing the results you'd expect out of him. So I might have to throw Mario out there as someone who reminds me a lot of Gary Kubiak: They should be doing better, but we get production in spurts and there's no real way to know what performance you're going to get out of them.

great post, rep your way.

thunderkyss
02-08-2010, 02:18 PM
I just happen to think the system, player development, and player focus/motivation are the areas that a head coach makes his greatest impact. And, I'm very happy with Kubiak in that regard.

I'm thinking pretty much the same thing.

As for Mario, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt, with his "injury"

So he only got 9 sacks... boo hoo. If that's what we'll get out of him on a down year..... I'll take it.

But with Pollard, Demeco, Cushing & Antonio putting out the effort they have been, I can't believe Mario was sandbagging.

I may be wrong, and we'll see soon enough.

Texecutioner
02-08-2010, 03:22 PM
How is Charles Grant living up to his potential in N.O., or his monstrous contract? What about Reggie Bush? How has R. Meachem played relative to his draft position and potential?

What is the point at all in bringing up these players? They've got nothing to do with Mario Williams at all? You're trying to bring up inferior under achievers and compare them to Mario to make his lack of contributions to what people think he's capable sound less disappointing. Hell I could argue for any player I want to if I'm just going to look for others who do less to compare them to. Compare Mario to other top DE's around the league because he's supposed to be right towards the top for his size and abilities and for what he's paid. I remember before this season on another forum we discussed who the best DE in the league would be this season and most of the people thought it would be Mario. Myself and one other guy adamently argued for Jared Allen and said that he was better and Allen had a much better season than Mario this year. There were several DE's that were outproducing Mario pretty much all year this season and Mario should be right at the top.

Double Barrel
02-08-2010, 03:28 PM
Buddy was always one of those that talked alot of noise but he'd run at the first sign of stuff coming his way.

I'm thinking Rex would probably take it. He certainly has NO problem saying what he means.

Or showing what he means.

Funny how much Rex is like Buddy...and then you have Wade and Bum who would never act that way.

Wade is alot like his daddy too in alot of ways.

I don't know about all that. Buddy punched Kevin Gilbride in the face during an Oilers game. It was Buddy's defense that kept that season going for 11 straight wins. It probably wasn't kosher, but I think Gilbride probably deserved it. He always came across as a little smarmy and arrogant, IMO.

And as much as I like and respect Bum and his son, neither have rings. Buddy and Rex both have them. idonno:

infantrycak
02-08-2010, 03:30 PM
What is the point at all in bringing up these players?

I think the point was even great coaches can only coach up players to a degree. At some point it falls on the player to perform. I don't think Mario had as bad a year as you allege but in any case, maybe that is on Mario and not on the coaches.

Texecutioner
02-08-2010, 03:59 PM
I think the point was even great coaches can only coach up players to a degree. At some point it falls on the player to perform. I don't think Mario had as bad a year as you allege but in any case, maybe that is on Mario and not on the coaches.

I wasn't putting it on the coaches. I was putting it on Mario and I agree with your point in this scenario. Mario is a big boy and he shouldn't need any superior coaching to be a beast when it comes to rushing the passer. He's got the size and the skills and the abilities, so it's on him to bring out the beast and punish people. He's just never been a huge difference maker to me. He has spurts where he can pile up some numbers and have a few huge plays, but then he goes silent all to often. He just doesn't ever dominate games to where you think a QB is having nightmares about him like they would for a guy like Allen or Freeney or on the level that Dumbervill was playing this season.

Second Honeymoon
02-08-2010, 08:15 PM
I don't know about all that. Buddy punched Kevin Gilbride in the face during an Oilers game. It was Buddy's defense that kept that season going for 11 straight wins. It probably wasn't kosher, but I think Gilbride probably deserved it. He always came across as a little smarmy and arrogant, IMO.

And as much as I like and respect Bum and his son, neither have rings. Buddy and Rex both have them. idonno:

Buddy was great and Gilbride did deserve it. We lost Marcus Robertson because Moon and Gilbride wanted to pad their stats. I wonder if Cash, the TE of the Chiefs, is open for Montana on the TD play in the AFC Divisional game if Robertson was not on the bench injured. We will never know.

One thing though, Gilbride eventually got his ring too.

Imagine how great that defense would have been if Wilber Marshall had been healthier. Him and Lathon and Al Smith for 16 games would have been an insane LB corps. Didn't we have Barrow that year too? Man, that team was stacked. Holovak was a damn good GM. Hopefully our Texans can put together a talented squad of that caliber and hopefully have more playoff success than those crews did. That was a different era as far as salary cap goes, but if we can add a few more hosses to the defense, we could start bringing the noise like they did. That was my favorite Oiler season, excuse me if I get a little choked up.

Wolf
02-08-2010, 09:47 PM
Texans SLB Brian Cushing said he was "thrilled" to hear that head coach Gary Kubiak had reportedly agreed on a three-year contract extension with the Texans. According to The Houston Chronicle, Kubiak's contract now runs through the 2012 season. "He's one of those guys (who's) a players' coach," said Cushing, praising Kubiak for the progress the team has made on his watch. The Texans won their final four games of 2009, quelling speculation about Kubiak's job security and helping to pave the way for the contract extension.


http://www.profootballweekly.com/2010/02/07/raiders-not-sure-if-theyll-commit-to-morrison-2

Carr Bombed
02-08-2010, 09:53 PM
I haven't read this thread, but I'm still trying to figure out why a contract extension is supposed to change people's opinions of Kubiak. If anything it changes my opinion of Mr. McNair. Giving a 3 year extension to a underachieving coach who usually comes up short in every big/"turn the corner" game is flat out ridiculous.

Texecutioner
02-08-2010, 10:34 PM
I don't know about all that. Buddy punched Kevin Gilbride in the face during an Oilers game. It was Buddy's defense that kept that season going for 11 straight wins. It probably wasn't kosher, but I think Gilbride probably deserved it. He always came across as a little smarmy and arrogant, IMO.

And as much as I like and respect Bum and his son, neither have rings. Buddy and Rex both have them. idonno:

Come on now, I would have expected better out of you and Second Honeymoon Double Barrell. How in the world could Gilbride have deserved to be punched in the face in the middle of a game????? That was one of the most dispicable acts that any coach in any sport has ever displayed and it was a terrible thing to do before the Oilers were going into the playoffs to throw a punch at a fellow coach. Buddy had been known for pulling crap like that in the past as well. That wasn't the first coach that he assaulted either. Buddy was an extreme jerk for years in that regard. I knew the Gilbride family really well back then and Kevin Gilbride was not some arrogant guy. Maybe he came off that way to you on television, but he wasn't that way in person. That was one bullshit succer punch that he threw in between a few other coaches to. He knew that Kevin would have been held back right away as soon as the punch was thrown. That punch was as cheap as it gets.

And Gilbride has won a SB ring as well.

Second Honeymoon
02-09-2010, 08:33 AM
I haven't read this thread, but I'm still trying to figure out why a contract extension is supposed to change people's opinions of Kubiak. If anything it changes my opinion of Mr. McNair. Giving a 3 year extension to a underachieving coach who usually comes up short in every big/"turn the corner" game is flat out ridiculous.

thanks bro. glad to know that there are some that actually get it.

can we please win a game that means something. we just get worked in big games.

but boy we can beat the raiders, seahawks, and rams. whoopty-freaking-doo.

Second Honeymoon
02-09-2010, 08:34 AM
Come on now, I would have expected better out of you and Second Honeymoon Double Barrell. How in the world could Gilbride have deserved to be punched in the face in the middle of a game????? That was one of the most dispicable acts that any coach in any sport has ever displayed and it was a terrible thing to do before the Oilers were going into the playoffs to throw a punch at a fellow coach. Buddy had been known for pulling crap like that in the past as well. That wasn't the first coach that he assaulted either. Buddy was an extreme jerk for years in that regard. I knew the Gilbride family really well back then and Kevin Gilbride was not some arrogant guy. Maybe he came off that way to you on television, but he wasn't that way in person. That was one bullshit succer punch that he threw in between a few other coaches to. He knew that Kevin would have been held back right away as soon as the punch was thrown. That punch was as cheap as it gets.

And Gilbride has won a SB ring as well.

meh, gilbride sucked and was a stat monger like Moon...but that is another thread.

buddy ryan was great and he didn't even really try and hurt gilbride. how could he hurt Kevin? Buddy was an old man sticking up for his player that just blew out his knee because of the gilbride/moon hijinks.

Silver Oak
02-09-2010, 09:25 AM
thanks bro. glad to know that there are some that actually get it.

can we please win a game that means something. we just get worked in big games.

but boy we can beat the raiders, seahawks, and rams. whoopty-freaking-doo.

...and Patriots, Bengals, Miami, and San Francisco. 3 of those games were against playoff teams from this year, or the year previous, and all meant something to the other side.

of course, I'm one of those who don't "actually get it", so what do I know?

Second Honeymoon
02-09-2010, 09:36 AM
...and Patriots, Bengals, Miami, and San Francisco. 3 of those games were against playoff teams from this year, or the year previous, and all meant something to the other side.

of course, I'm one of those who don't "actually get it", so what do I know?

the bengals win was quality and we played real well against the Dolphins in a must-have game. those are good wins dont get me wrong. the 49er game was a good win but lets face it, the 49ers suck. The Patriots win was also a must-have game but we can all agree the Patriots didn't put up much of a fight yet still managed to make the game competitive. Still a good win and at least made the Jets-Bengals game mean something...although it meant nothing to the Bengals obviously.

you 'get it' more than most around here do, Silver Oak. I am not trying to be negative nancy, but we gotta start winning some divisional games and not just win enough games to keep Gary employed.

Hopefully things will turn around this year because its gonna be a long drought of football for us fans after 2010. we may never get our game back the way it was and it may become Baseball 2.0 as far as competitive balance goes. We don't want that and we need to pull out all stops to win in 2010. Not just make the playoffs but win the Super Bowl. that is what our goal should be every year. not 8-8 or 9-7 or playoffs...but Super Bowl. Shoot for the championship and even if you come short, you probably accomplished something worthy of mention and far more than you would have if your target is mediocrity or just playoffs.

Joe Texan
02-09-2010, 09:55 AM
Song is written just need to find a camera

Texecutioner
02-09-2010, 11:34 AM
meh, gilbride sucked and was a stat monger like Moon...but that is another thread.

buddy ryan was great and he didn't even really try and hurt gilbride. how could he hurt Kevin? Buddy was an old man sticking up for his player that just blew out his knee because of the gilbride/moon hijinks.

Gilbride's been a pretty good OC for a long time in this league. He's never been the greatest, but come on he helped anchor the Oilers to some great offenses where Warren Moon always threw that classic pick in so many games. And that horrible playoff game was on Buddy Ryan's defense. They gave up a 32 point lead for heaven's sake. And hell, Gilbride just won a SB ring with Eli Manning as his QB of that offense.

A player can get hurt on any given play. That wasn't Gilbride's fault that he got hurt. And you don't think that he was trying to hurt him? Really??? He freaking punched him and it was between two coaches to where Gilbride couldn't even defend himself or retaliate. It was as cheap of a move as I've ever seen. And that was extremely embarrassing to the Oilers organization at the time and that happened on the last game of the season right when we were headed into the playoffs. That was a huge distraction for that team to deal with and answer about at that time. It was the biggest story in the NFL at the time by far. And again, Buddy had done in the past as well. That wasn't his first time punching a fellow coach on the same staff. Buddy was being a piece of shit to Gilbride that entire season and it had been becoming a problem way before that punch ever took place.

Said Gilbride the next day, "It's a daily, ongoing thing. The comments, the sarcasm, the denigrating and disparaging remarks toward the offense. We try to just survive it. That's what we're going to do. My best way of handling it is to try to stay far away from the guy and try not to respond to his incessant remarks and just stay focused on who I thought the opponent was -- the teams we play week to week."

Here's a little tid bit from Wade Phillips where he talks about what a piece of shit Buddy Ryan was.

Broncos coach Wade Phillips, who had worked for Ryan in Philadelphia, saw the punch on TV and said it didn't surprise him. "He has slugged people on the sideline before,'' Phillips said . "Assistant coaches who were next to him got it. I was always up in the press box with the headset on, so I didn't."

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/wildcoaches.html

The Pencil Neck
02-09-2010, 12:48 PM
the bengals win was quality and we played real well against the Dolphins in a must-have game. those are good wins dont get me wrong. the 49er game was a good win but lets face it, the 49ers suck. The Patriots win was also a must-have game but we can all agree the Patriots didn't put up much of a fight yet still managed to make the game competitive. Still a good win and at least made the Jets-Bengals game mean something...although it meant nothing to the Bengals obviously.

you 'get it' more than most around here do, Silver Oak. I am not trying to be negative nancy, but we gotta start winning some divisional games and not just win enough games to keep Gary employed.

Hopefully things will turn around this year because its gonna be a long drought of football for us fans after 2010. we may never get our game back the way it was and it may become Baseball 2.0 as far as competitive balance goes. We don't want that and we need to pull out all stops to win in 2010. Not just make the playoffs but win the Super Bowl. that is what our goal should be every year. not 8-8 or 9-7 or playoffs...but Super Bowl. Shoot for the championship and even if you come short, you probably accomplished something worthy of mention and far more than you would have if your target is mediocrity or just playoffs.

First off, the Niners didn't suck. They finished up 8-8. At the time we played them, they were 3-2 and a lot of people expect a lot from them. They beat the Cardinals twice.

Secondly, even though the Patriots didn't play a couple of guys who were hurt, they were playing to win. If that was a give-up game, then Randy Moss and Brady wouldn't have been playing at all.

Third, I think Kubiak's goal IS to win the Super Bowl. I don't think the goal is just getting to the play offs or just having a winning season. But different coaches approach that different ways. Many coaches take the approach of "Make it to the playoffs and once you get there THEN you shoot for the Super Bowl." Several coaches who've won Super Bowls have taken that mind set. It's very similar to the approach of just taking 1 game at a time. Just concentrate on winning the next game and don't look past it.

But ultimately, almost all of the talk you hear from coaches is just rhetoric. None of it really matters much. It doesn't really show you what's going on in the coaches head, it's not a good indicator of how that coach works with or motivates his players.

CloakNNNdagger
02-09-2010, 01:12 PM
For those of you who were not watching the infamous "punch" game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPK3cDl7Ftw

thunderkyss
02-09-2010, 03:25 PM
you 'get it' more than most around here do, Silver Oak. I am not trying to be negative nancy, but we gotta start winning some divisional games and not just win enough games to keep Gary employed.


We're all on the same page here. It's not like you're telling anybody anything they don't know.

Double Barrel
02-09-2010, 05:21 PM
Come on now, I would have expected better out of you and Second Honeymoon Double Barrell. How in the world could Gilbride have deserved to be punched in the face in the middle of a game????? That was one of the most dispicable acts that any coach in any sport has ever displayed and it was a terrible thing to do before the Oilers were going into the playoffs to throw a punch at a fellow coach. Buddy had been known for pulling crap like that in the past as well. That wasn't the first coach that he assaulted either. Buddy was an extreme jerk for years in that regard. I knew the Gilbride family really well back then and Kevin Gilbride was not some arrogant guy. Maybe he came off that way to you on television, but he wasn't that way in person. That was one bullshit succer punch that he threw in between a few other coaches to. He knew that Kevin would have been held back right away as soon as the punch was thrown. That punch was as cheap as it gets.

And Gilbride has won a SB ring as well.

Well, first off, Tex, my statement was purely tongue-in-cheek from a 'hardcore football fan' perspective. I hate the run & shoot for the 35-3 debacle, simply because they could not protect a lead. Gilbride's arrogance back then was that they did not even need a TE or FB on the roster. That's on him and Pardee as masters of the r&s.

My statement about Buddy Ryan was in direct response to WWJD, when she said "Buddy was always one of those that talked alot of noise but he'd run at the first sign of stuff coming his way."

I did not feel this was true, which has been clearly revealed by my statement and yours, as well. I'm not justifying his behavior - dude was temperamental, at best - but he certainly was not one to run away from trouble. But he called it like he saw it, and Gilbride's offense could not control the clock and Ryans called it the "chuck and duck". If Gilbride had just let Buddy blow off steam, the famous punch never would have happened. The truth is that Kevin started talking trash and Buddy punched him.

And I'm aware that Gilbride got a ring, but this was about the Ryans vs. the Phillips in my statement to WWJD.

Obviously, you have more of a personal stake in the story, so your objectivity is a bit slanted, but that's cool. Mine is, too, because 35-3 left a permanent stain on any player, coach, and franchise associated with it. Disgusting stuff, indeed.

And that horrible playoff game was on Buddy Ryan's defense. They gave up a 32 point lead for heaven's sake.

Now you're just plain wrong. Jim Eddy was the Oilers DC for that game, and he was fired as a scapegoat. He ended up in Dallas the next year and got two rings with them, IIRC. (I think the entire staff should have been sacked, but what do I know, I was just an angry fan.)

Buddy was hired the next season. The Oilers started the season 1-4, but it was Ryan's 46 defense that lit a fire and sent them on an 11 game winning streak.

He might have been a jerk, but he was one of the best DCs in the NFL. His 1985 Chicago Bears defense is still considered one of the best in football history.

Prior to that, he got a ring with the Jets in the infamous Joe Namath Super Bowl, creating multiple blitz packages that changed NFL defenses forever.

Then he was the DC for the Vikings "Purple People Eaters", one of the all-time great Ds in history.

You might not like him, but there is no denying his impact on pro football. There have been lots of jerks in the game, but when all that matters is wins and losses, I'd rather have a winning jerk than a nice guy loser. JMO

WWJD
02-09-2010, 05:32 PM
DB..my statement about Buddy running was in reference (and I should have said so) to an episode involving Jimmy Johnson..infamous bounty game...Buddy ran into the locker room before Jimmy could get to him and Jimmy said something to the effect of he was going to talk to Buddy but he ran his fat ass into the lockerroom.

That was the nice version Jimmy said at his after game press conference. In private I am sure he wasn't as well spoken.

Any other incidents involving Buddy I don't know about other than the punching Kevin thing which was a huge deal..

I always wished Jimmy would have had the chance to "talk" to Buddy face to face that day. Unfortunately Buddy ran and got away too soon. Sure wasn't any big man in him that day.

Silver Oak
02-09-2010, 05:35 PM
We're all on the same page here. It's not like you're telling anybody anything they don't know.

thats exactly right. just because I think Kubiak can get the job done in the next two seasons doesn't mean I would get down on my knees in front of the man.

if he has a serious falter, I would be among those calling for his termination, but that remains to be seen. I pay for my seats/parking/beverages/food/merchandise too, and want a winner as much as anyone.

Double Barrel
02-09-2010, 06:02 PM
DB..my statement about Buddy running was in reference (and I should have said so) to an episode involving Jimmy Johnson..infamous bounty game...Buddy ran into the locker room before Jimmy could get to him and Jimmy said something to the effect of he was going to talk to Buddy but he ran his fat ass into the lockerroom.

That was the nice version Jimmy said at his after game press conference. In private I am sure he wasn't as well spoken.

Any other incidents involving Buddy I don't know about other than the punching Kevin thing which was a huge deal..

I always wished Jimmy would have had the chance to "talk" to Buddy face to face that day. Unfortunately Buddy ran and got away too soon. Sure wasn't any big man in him that day.

ahhh, I gotcha'. I never heard about that incident, but the bounty thing rings a bell. It doesn't surprise me, though, as both Ryan and Johnson were very strong personalities. Was this when Buddy was HC of the Eagles?

Personalities never mattered much to me as a football fan. I don't really care if they are nice or mean or hard or soft or whatever. All that matters to me - as a football fanatic - is results.

And while I think it is great that a nice guy like Sean Peyton wins, it does not bother me at all if a-holes like Bill Parcells win. This is why Kubiak's personality has no impact on my evaluation and analysis of him as a HC. It's not a personal thing, but rather strictly the business of football.

Texecutioner
02-09-2010, 06:03 PM
Well, first off, Tex, my statement was purely tongue-in-cheek from a 'hardcore football fan' perspective. I hate the run & shoot for the 35-3 debacle, simply because they could not protect a lead. Gilbride's arrogance back then was that they did not even need a TE or FB on the roster. That's on him and Pardee as masters of the r&s.

My statement about Buddy Ryan was in direct response to WWJD, when she said "Buddy was always one of those that talked alot of noise but he'd run at the first sign of stuff coming his way."

Well I don't know about Buddy running from anyone either. That didn't seem like Buddy at all. He seemed to do the exact opposite. We are in agreement there.

I did not feel this was true, which has been clearly revealed by my statement and yours, as well. I'm not justifying his behavior - dude was temperamental, at best - but he certainly was not one to run away from trouble. But he called it like he saw it, and Gilbride's offense could not control the clock and Ryans called it the "chuck and duck". If Gilbride had just let Buddy blow off steam, the famous punch never would have happened. The truth is that Kevin started talking trash and Buddy punched him.

Buddy had been hounding Kevin for that entire season. It was no secret that they didn't get along. Buddy had been a jerk about it as well, and when we're talking about a guy whose history is known for being that way and for punching other coaches, well it's not hard to figure out that Gilbride was dealing with a lot of bullshit from the man. They were both coordinators hired to do their job. You may not have liked the Run N Shoot offense but it was very effective back in the day and I'll agree with you about the running off the clock thing, but Buddy had no right to act the way he did towards another coach who had a job just as high as his.

And it wasn't Gilbride that started off with BUddy. I could tell you Buddy's exact words that started that whole thing. He told Gilbride that it was "A junior High call." And I heard this from Gilbride's son himself and I had heard about what an ass Buddy was all that season before that incident ever happened. Gilbride then responded and said his own words in response and Buddy assaulted him in the middle of a game and showed no self control.

And I'm aware that Gilbride got a ring, but this was about the Ryans vs. the Phillips in my statement to WWJD.

Yeah, Gilbride is the OC for the Giants and he got his first ring a few years ago. I was very happy for him and his family.

Obviously, you have more of a personal stake in the story, so your objectivity is a bit slanted, but that's cool. Mine is, too, because 35-3 left a permanent stain on any player, coach, and franchise associated with it. Disgusting stuff, indeed.

I couldn't watch football for a while after that game. It was hard man. There is no way that I could ever experience a loss worse than the feeling I had that day and it's still painful actually.

I don't see how the hell the defense couldn't have held that lead though.



Now you're just plain wrong. Jim Eddy was the Oilers DC for that game, and he was fired as a scapegoat. He ended up in Dallas the next year and got two rings with them, IIRC. (I think the entire staff should have been sacked, but what do I know, I was just an angry fan.)

Buddy was hired the next season. The Oilers started the season 1-4, but it was Ryan's 46 defense that lit a fire and sent them on an 11 game winning streak.

Yeah, I guess I must have gotten my years messed up from back then. It was so long ago and I was a kid. I had always remembered that being Buddy's defense that blew that lead.

He might have been a jerk, but he was one of the best DCs in the NFL. His 1985 Chicago Bears defense is still considered one of the best in football history.

Prior to that, he got a ring with the Jets in the infamous Joe Namath Super Bowl, creating multiple blitz packages that changed NFL defenses forever.

Then he was the DC for the Vikings "Purple People Eaters", one of the all-time great Ds in history.

You might not like him, but there is no denying his impact on pro football. There have been lots of jerks in the game, but when all that matters is wins and losses, I'd rather have a winning jerk than a nice guy loser. JMO

Oh, I'm not saying that he wasn't a great coach and one of the best of all time as a DC. He certainly was and before that punch he threw at Gilbride I was always a big fan of his even though I heard a lot of nasty things about the guy from the Gilbrides. I had no idea he was a coach for those Jets that won the SB or the Vikings either. I just knew about him being the DC for the Bears and the HC of the Eagles before the Oilers and how he created those blitz packages and the 46 defense. Michael Irvin always said that going into Philly and playing those Eagles teams under Buddy Ryan was the most scariest teams he ever had to play.

I've always appreciated his legacy, but hated him for that awful punch he threw at the time because it was right before the playoffs and I saw how much bullshit Gilbride's kids had to deal with because of it as well being made fun of from other kids and adults even when that happened.

I'm with you though. I like a hard nosed coach like Buddy and I love Rex Ryan. Those are the types of coaches that I like, with exception to the lack of self control that Buddy had with the punching of other coaches and all.

Wolf
02-09-2010, 06:05 PM
bounty bowl was in 1989. this is Jimmy recently talking about the for some reason (that he doesn't know) is the Eagles had a bounty on Lois Zendejas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOW9oYaSQdg

Double Barrel
02-09-2010, 06:10 PM
That's cool, Tex! I appreciate your insight and perspective. Like I said, I wasn't defending Buddy Ryan. The punch was uncalled for looking back in hindsight. I just remember finding it funny at the time because I had a very strong dislike of Gilbride due to leftover and unresolved anger from 'that game'.

Funny thing was that I was at the Jets game when the punch happened, but we didn't know about it until we heard the post-game show on the way home.

GuerillaBlack
02-09-2010, 06:21 PM
First off, the Niners didn't suck. They finished up 8-8. At the time we played them, they were 3-2 and a lot of people expect a lot from them. They beat the Cardinals twice.

Once we got our lead against San Francisco, we let them right back into the game and they started torching us in the second half. That happened far too often this season.

Secondly, even though the Patriots didn't play a couple of guys who were hurt, they were playing to win. If that was a give-up game, then Randy Moss and Brady wouldn't have been playing at all.

If the game really meant something to the Patriots, they wouldn't have keep pulling Brady/Moss in and out. Brady didn't even play on the last drive.

Third, I think Kubiak's goal IS to win the Super Bowl. I don't think the goal is just getting to the play offs or just having a winning season. But different coaches approach that different ways. Many coaches take the approach of "Make it to the playoffs and once you get there THEN you shoot for the Super Bowl." Several coaches who've won Super Bowls have taken that mind set. It's very similar to the approach of just taking 1 game at a time. Just concentrate on winning the next game and don't look past it.

What coaches? I would think the goal would always be Super Bowl. You don't get a first round of playoffs badge. And I don't think Kubiak will take us to the promise land. I'd LOVE to be wrong about that, but I'm not seeing it from him.

Texecutioner
02-09-2010, 06:22 PM
That's cool, Tex! I appreciate your insight and perspective. Like I said, I wasn't defending Buddy Ryan. The punch was uncalled for looking back in hindsight. I just remember finding it funny at the time because I had a very strong dislike of Gilbride due to leftover and unresolved anger from 'that game'.

I know you to well in here to think that you would have defended Ryan's famous punch.

Yeah, old memories man. THose were some fun years, but some really bad old wounds to. I'll admit that I have a certain bias with the Gilbrides. I knew his entire family very well back then and I still communicate with his son even now and he coaches at Temple university. He's been climbing the ladder for a long time now and I'm very proud of him. Kevin Gilbride the coach also coached my baseball team while all of this happened and I can tell you that their entire family were all class acts.

Funny thing was that I was at the Jets game when the punch happened, but we didn't know about it until we heard the post-game show on the way home.

Ha ha! So was I. I don't think anyone in the stadium knew, because we sure as hell didn't. The Oilers put on a nice ass whooping that day against the Jets and I remember getting home and seeing it on the news and couldn't believe it.

WWJD
02-09-2010, 06:48 PM
ahhh, I gotcha'. I never heard about that incident, but the bounty thing rings a bell. It doesn't surprise me, though, as both Ryan and Johnson were very strong personalities. Was this when Buddy was HC of the Eagles?

Personalities never mattered much to me as a football fan. I don't really care if they are nice or mean or hard or soft or whatever. All that matters to me - as a football fanatic - is results.

And while I think it is great that a nice guy like Sean Peyton wins, it does not bother me at all if a-holes like Bill Parcells win. This is why Kubiak's personality has no impact on my evaluation and analysis of him as a HC. It's not a personal thing, but rather strictly the business of football.

Buddy put out a bounty on the Cowboys kicker..Zendajas or whatever his name was...and they did get him. That's what ticked Jimmy off and he was purple in his post game press conference. He was so mad...Buddy always hated the Cowboys and it went to the Landry days when he played guys that crossed the picket line while Buddy's team was just scrubs. I guess he never got pass that but he was an ornery old man anyway. Landry never said much about it as far as I can remember..the games counted after all..but that whole strike thing just rubbed different folks different ways.

Anyway that's what I was talking about. I doubt Rex would go off like that on the sidelines...number one he'd be suspended immediately and while he may be hot headed like his dad I think he has a bit more self control.

WWJD
02-09-2010, 06:51 PM
bounty bowl was in 1989. this is Jimmy recently talking about the for some reason (that he doesn't know) is the Eagles had a bounty on Lois Zendejas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOW9oYaSQdg

Thanks for posting this..I didn't see it until after I posted...I was at that bounty bowl game. Oh brother....
Jimmy was something else.

The Pencil Neck
02-09-2010, 07:22 PM
Once we got our lead against San Francisco, we let them right back into the game and they started torching us in the second half. That happened far too often this season.


That's a different issue. The point was being an 8-8 team means that you don't suck.


If the game really meant something to the Patriots, they wouldn't have keep pulling Brady/Moss in and out. Brady didn't even play on the last drive.


Brady didn't play on the last drive because he got CRUSHED by Mario on the past play of the penultimate drive. Brady was in for the entire game except for 2 drives. Moss was in for most of the game, I'd have to go back and check to see if he got pulled more than normal.


What coaches? I would think the goal would always be Super Bowl. You don't get a first round of playoffs badge. And I don't think Kubiak will take us to the promise land. I'd LOVE to be wrong about that, but I'm not seeing it from him.

Brian Billick. Wouldn't even talk about playoffs during the season to the point that he outlawed the use of the word. No one on the team could use the "p" word. Once he got to the playoffs, THEN he started talking about going all the way.

Cowher. In 2000, he refused to talk about getting to the playoffs until they had won X number of games.

The rest of these are from memory and my memory could be faulty: Shanahan, Coughlin, Dungy.

Vermeil even has quotes about just getting to the playoffs and it doesn't matter how you got there, after that you can make some noise. And I thought that was a relatively well-known/prevalent quote. You can't get to the Super Bowl if you don't get to the playoffs. But if you can get to the playoffs, it doesn't matter how you got there, you've got a shot at the Super Bowl.

Ultimately, it's all just rhetoric. Everyone's goal is the same. There's not a player or a coach out there that doesn't want to win the SB.

Carr Bombed
02-09-2010, 08:57 PM
...and Patriots, Bengals, Miami, and San Francisco. 3 of those games were against playoff teams from this year, or the year previous, and all meant something to the other side.

of course, I'm one of those who don't "actually get it", so what do I know?

Apparently you don't get it.

I'm talking about big games where everybody says "did we turn the corner" and then we go out and lay a freaking egg.

I mean greeeaattt, we beat Cincy after coming out of the gate limping with a 2-3 record with losses to the Jags and NY (rookie QB and rookie head coach). Wow, we beat Cincy and then beat the lowly Raiders and Bills.....maybe just maybe we can freaking parley that into a HUGE win over the Colts and position ourselves great for a playoff run. :rolleyes:

WRONG!

Once again when it's "turn the corner" time........we shat all over ourselves. Not only that though, we also start a 4 game freaking division slide.

Now let's get on to the other "signature wins" that you speak of :choke:

Miami was a decent win, but Miami wasn't exactly a powerhouse this year and Houston was just doing what they do best....win games after they're elbow deep in the crap that they created. Same for Pats game, we beat a Pats team that didn't exactly have too much to play for. How about we start actually getting wins like that earlier in the season before we all but mathematically eliminate ourselves from the playoffs. :rolleyes:

Did we turn a corner this year......umm no, so what's the point in bringing up wins like that when we fell on our face when it mattered? Getting swept by the Jags and going 1-5 in the division including a 4 game divisional slide eliminates any good feeling that going on a run when all counted out would bring (LOL, seriously we do that every damn year....when does it ever carry over?) I'm tired of people pointing to wins this team racks up at the end of the year when they're pretty much eliminated while completely ignoring horrible losses against sub par talent or the inability to get a signature win that would actually put other teams on notice. Yes we beat the Bengals.....who cares, we got swept by Jacksonville which is why people/teams view this franchise as a running joke.

But hey....Kubiak got that 3 year extension regardless of having pretty much having no signature wins as a coach here. (honestly the only really huge win I remember is the victory over the Colts in '06 and that was because it was the first time we ever beat the Colts.....and haven't beat them since). Sorry, after 4 seasons of seeing the same exact thing over and over, I'm not going to suddenly expect things to change, just because we all want it to. This team does the same thing year in and year out and then people get pissed when the same thing happens. I was content with bringing Kubaik back, just because his feet were going to be held to the flames....then our owner had to run off and give him a 3 year extension.

Silver Oak
02-09-2010, 09:26 PM
Apparently you don't get it.

I'm talking about big games where everybody says "did we turn the corner" and then we go out and lay a freaking egg.

I mean greeeaattt, we beat Cincy after coming out of the gate limping with a 2-3 record with losses to the Jags and NY (rookie QB and rookie head coach). Wow, we beat Cincy and then beat the lowly Raiders and Bills.....maybe just maybe we can freaking parley that into a HUGE win over the Colts and position ourselves great for a playoff run. :rolleyes:

WRONG!

Once again when it's "turn the corner" time........we shat all over ourselves. Not only that though, we also start a 4 game freaking division slide.

Now let's get on to the other "signature wins" that you speak of :choke:

Miami was a decent win, but Miami wasn't exactly a powerhouse this year and Houston was just doing what they do best....win games after they're elbow deep in the crap that they created. Same for Pats game, we beat a Pats team that didn't exactly have too much to play for. How about we start actually getting wins like that earlier in the season before we all but mathematically eliminate ourselves from the playoffs. :rolleyes:

Did we turn a corner this year......umm no, so what's the point in bringing up wins like that when we fell on our face when it mattered? Getting swept by the Jags and going 1-5 in the division including a 4 game divisional slide eliminates any good feeling that going on a run when all counted out would bring (LOL, seriously we do that every damn year....when does it ever carry over?) I'm tired of people pointing to wins this team racks up at the end of the year when they're pretty much eliminated while completely ignoring horrible losses against sub par talent or the inability to get a signature win that would actually put other teams on notice. Yes we beat the Bengals.....who cares, we got swept by Jacksonville which is why people/teams view this franchise as a running joke.

But hey....Kubiak got that 3 year extension regardless of having pretty much no signature as a coach here. (honestly the only really huge win I remember is the victory over the Colts in '06 and that was because it was the first time we ever beat the Colts.....and haven't beat them since). Sorry, after 4 seasons of seeing the same exact thing over and over, I'm not going to suddenly expect things to change, just because we all want it to. This team does the same thing year in and year out and then people get pissed when the same thing happens. I was content with bringing Kubaik back, just because his feet were going to be held to the flames....then our owner had to run off and give him a 3 year extension.

by your post, it looks like you are reluctant to give the team credit when they do beat a good team, yet all too willing to pile on when they lose to a team they're "supposed" to beat.

look at every NFL season in the last decade. each and every week there are upsets, near losses, defeats pulled from the jaws of victory, and vice-versa. welcome to the wonderful world of parity pal!

I would assume it's part of the maturation process a team must go through...or at least most teams. the Texans are no different from the vast majority of them CB. I truly believe that losing the stigma of being a losing franchise is one of the toughest things for a team to overcome. we can point to the Saints and their 42 year struggle to make it to the promised land.

it irritates me to see detractors point to this so called "historical" trend the team has shown. 8 years is an awfully small amount of time to draw any kind of conclusion as to what the personality of the team is...or isn't. IMO, we're just now beginning to see what this coach and GM can do, yet that's the point some want to tear it all down and restart?

Carr Bombed
02-09-2010, 09:48 PM
by your post, it looks like you are reluctant to give the team credit when they do beat a good team, yet all too willing to pile on when they lose to a team they're "supposed" to beat.

look at every NFL season in the last decade. each and every week there are upsets, near losses, defeats pulled from the jaws of victory, and vice-versa. welcome to the wonderful world of parity pal!

I would assume it's part of the maturation process a team must go through...or at least most teams. the Texans are no different from the vast majority of them CB. I truly believe that losing the stigma of being a losing franchise is one of the toughest things for a team to overcome. we can point to the Saints and their 42 year struggle to make it to the promised land.

it irritates me to see detractors point to this so called "historical" trend the team has shown. 8 years is an awfully small amount of time to draw any kind of conclusion as to what the personality of the team is...or isn't. IMO, we're just now beginning to see what this coach and GM can do, yet that's the point some want to tear it all down and restart?

Teams get upset all the time, that's a no brainer.....however teams don't get "upset" or have a inability to win a big game when it's staring them in the face all the time. Which is what has happened with the Texans and Kubiak. You can shrug it off, but it's there staring everybody in the face and for all the world to see. (which is why you have NFL people around the league commenting on it)

Also I don't understand the Saints 42 year analogy, don't understand it at all. It's not like they had one coach for that 42 year stint who everybody was "waiting" for him to get them over the hump. They do however have a coach who just finished his 4th season (like Kubiak) and now he has a SB trophy. As of right now, Kubiak is MUCH closer to one of those no name Saints coaches that they had during that 42 year stretch rather than the guy who got hired the same year as he did. It's funny how some people sit around here and act like it's just a given that Houston is going to have success with Kubiak. I mean why is that...the guy is horrible within his division and has been underachieving the past 2 seasons. 9-7 was NOT a bookmark year for this team, it was NOT a successful year (no matter how much Houston's PR department will try to paint it as one this offseason), but people act like it was because it was the first time we have had a "winning season" and that's what draws me up the wall crazy.

You say I bag on this team and I'm "reluctant to give the team credit when they do beat a good team, yet all too willing to pile on when they lose to a team they're "supposed" to beat". (which isn't true at all...they just haven't had any signature/bookmark wins yet) I say.....after 4 seasons of watching people start "have the Texans turned the corner" threads (puke, vomit, puke...I can't stand those threads and I'm tired of hearing that phrase), how about we actually see this coach bring home a win in one of those games before we jump off the fence and give him a undeserved 3 year extension.

It's getting to the point where people are so freaking scared of another Dom Capers that they are willing to settle for a Gary "king of mediocre and meaningless wins" Kubiak. Yay, we don't suck.....we're just mediocre and irrelevant, which in my eyes is worse than flat out sucking, because at the end of the day you don't know whether to **** or get off the pot with the guy and in the end you just end up wasting years in the process. Nothing is worse than being a year in and year out middle of the pack mediocre team.

I mean, feel free to bump this post at the end of next year.....I'm praying and hoping that I'll have plenty of crow to eat, because it'll be in the Texans' best interest if that happens, but sadly I don't think it will.

Wolf
02-09-2010, 09:59 PM
Where the Texans have done poorly and somewhat hindered their progress is the Fa signings over 8 years (I am not giving Kubiak an excuse for Casserly and all his draft picks that aren't with us or in the league anymore and that is another story )

Who? in the 8 years of this franchise's existence has really made a splash(been solid) when it came to our FA signings ?

I may have short term memory loss but Pollard made one for us(solidifying the safety position) and jury is still out on Smith(did play better in the last half of the season)

hopefully this year, if the Texans do go with some FA signings, that those players will contribute (and I am not saying McNair needs to be Snyder and break the bank)

reason for the post is Sharper made a huge impact for the Saints this season (that came to mind) along with Greg Williams as DC

Carr Bombed
02-09-2010, 10:16 PM
reason for the post is Sharper made a huge impact for the Saints this season (that came to mind) along with Greg Williams as DC

You might as well add Drew Brees into that mix as well.....they've kicked ass in FA, but they've also had some duds (Jason David)

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j141/ECKoolAid/lolsports/jason-david.jpg

Still though...unlike Houston they're outnumbering the duds with great FA acquisitions.

dalemurphy
02-09-2010, 10:32 PM
2006 : 1st pick of draft ......... 31 teams with better records
2007 : 8th pick of draft ....... 24 teams with better records
2008 : 17th? pick of draft ..... 15 teams with better records
2009 : 20th pick of draft ....... 12 teams with better records

So, we have the youngest team in the NFL and have steadily improved each season. I'm not sure how anyone can dispute those points. If all of the pro-Kubiak crowd acknowledges that the team needs to win more division games and needs to continue to improve... And, of course, if we acknowledge that some head coaches have done a better than he has...

Then, can you Soapers acknowledge that continuous, yearly improvement and the development of young talent and young leaders are reasons to be optimistic going into this season? Furthermore, could you acknowledge that Kubiak deserves credit for the acquisition and development of these players as well as construction of the system many of them are beginning to excel in?

If so, perhaps we can put this thread away until one of the groups overreacts after the first loss/ or win in September.

steelbtexan
02-09-2010, 10:38 PM
6-10,8-8,9-7

I guess that's improvement.

Wolf
02-09-2010, 10:49 PM
2006

Indy 12-4
Jags 8-8
Tenn 8-8
Hou 6-10

2007

Indy 13-3
Jags 11- 5
Tenn 10- 6
Hou 8-8

2008
Tenn 13-3
Indy 12-4
Hou 8-8
Jags 5-11



I feel we got better (even though our record was only 1 game better) but so did other teams we played.

bottom line is win within the division

dalemurphy
02-09-2010, 10:58 PM
2006




I feel we got better *even though our record was only 1 game better) but so did other teams we played.

bottom line is win within the division

I don't remember who made the argument(maybe Lucky).
While I understand that we need to do better in the division, I wasn't seeing how the divisional record reflected as poorly on Kubiak as some have argued it does. But, Lucky, I think had a very good point:

The argument is that there is so much familiarity between divisional opponents that the strengths/weaknesses of coaches will come more into focus, as a result. So, the idea that Kubiak's overall record is so much better than his divisional record is an indication that he can get out-coached.

I disagree with the conclusion. But, it's an interesting and valid argument. And, something I'll be watching for this season. I still tend to believe that the division record disparity is simply a matter of playing in a very difficult division. But, we'll see next season because we play teams like: Baltimore, NYJets, Dallas, NYG, Phillie, SD. All those teams are clearly on par (at least) with Tennessee and much better than Jacksonville. So, it'll be interesting to see if the trend continues.

houstonspartan
02-09-2010, 11:57 PM
I don't remember who made the argument(maybe Lucky).
While I understand that we need to do better in the division, I wasn't seeing how the divisional record reflected as poorly on Kubiak as some have argued it does. But, Lucky, I think had a very good point:

The argument is that there is so much familiarity between divisional opponents that the strengths/weaknesses of coaches will come more into focus, as a result. So, the idea that Kubiak's overall record is so much better than his divisional record is an indication that he can get out-coached.

I disagree with the conclusion. But, it's an interesting and valid argument. And, something I'll be watching for this season. I still tend to believe that the division record disparity is simply a matter of playing in a very difficult division. But, we'll see next season because we play teams like: Baltimore, NYJets, Dallas, NYG, Phillie, SD. All those teams are clearly on par (at least) with Tennessee and much better than Jacksonville. So, it'll be interesting to see if the trend continues.

Come on. The divisional record is all that matters.

We have seen these guys twice a year for several years, and we can't figure out their game plan? And, with the exception of Indy, the teams have had the same coaches for the last four years?

Come on.

dalemurphy
02-10-2010, 12:31 AM
Come on. The divisional record is all that matters.

We have seen these guys twice a year for several years, and we can't figure out their game plan? And, with the exception of Indy, the teams have had the same coaches for the last four years?

Come on.


There is a flipside to your argument... you do realize? I didn't think the Texans looked unprepared in any of those 4 games we lost in November. Nor, did I get that impression last season, with the exception of the defensive gameplan at INDY... but, the DC was replaced.

That being said, there were mistakes: Chris Brown!, the handling of Sexy Rexy when Schaub was injured, allowing R.Mathis to make a play in the 4th quarter even though Freeney wasn't suited up.

If anything, it seemed to me that Indy was totally overwhelmed by our offensive gameplan vs. Indy. Also, Indy struggled with our defense, I thought. I just don't see a distinction between the divisional losses and the loss to Arizona, in terms of coaching.

The only game I felt the coaching staff really looked unprepared and out-coached was vs. NYJets... and, that's not a team in the division. So, I just don't see how we are being out "game planned" in the division.

Texecutioner
02-10-2010, 12:38 AM
So, I just don't see how we are being out "game planned" in the division.

1-5 is what it says it is.

dalemurphy
02-10-2010, 12:41 AM
1-5 is what it says it is.

That doesn't mean we're losing because of the game plan, though. As I said, there were certainly costly mistakes by the coaching staff is some of the games but I totally disagree that we had poor game plans. I thought our game plans versus Indy were great for both games.

The Pencil Neck
02-10-2010, 01:25 AM
1-5 is what it says it is.

So is 8-2.

DexmanC
02-10-2010, 01:42 AM
So is 8-2.

The big difference is, our division record consistently sucks (1-5, 2-4, 1-5).
Our out-of-division record is consistently good (7-3, 6-4, 8-2).

If we're to believe the year-to-year "improvement," there would be a
reasonable progression against the teams and coaches we see the most.
Such an improvement is NOT there, so it's the bone-of-contention the
"sunshiners" want to downplay, and the "soapers" focus on.

This season will either be a continuation of the previous three years, or
a huge step in either direction (positive or negative.) Anything less than
a marked improvement in the positive direction will result in a huge chunk
of the fanbase identifying Bob Mcnair as a bad owner with a low football
I.Q.

I surely hope such an outcome is not in store for us in 2010.

Wolf
02-10-2010, 05:38 AM
as I am going to be captain obvious here

winning in the division gives a full game swing in the division standings and we aren't playing the " I hope this team beats that team to get in" so we can hopefully go up a game in the standings

just saying to say.

GuerillaBlack
02-10-2010, 07:42 AM
Just look at Cincy. Wasn't good outside of the division, but took care of business in their division. They made the playoffs. We need to at least be splitting the series with all the teams in our division.

dalemurphy
02-10-2010, 08:01 AM
Just look at Cincy. Wasn't good outside of the division, but took care of business in their division. They made the playoffs. We need to at least be splitting the series with all the teams in our division.

Of course we do. Everyone understands that, in order to be successful, it's vital that we do well in our division. Not one person on this board (Joe Texan doesn't count) would argue that point. Of course!

The issue is if the divisional record, in particular, illustrates that the team's weakness is it's coaching. Many of us that believe in Kubiak think it's simply a combination of very tough divisional foes and a little misfortune this season. Some of the Soapers argue that familiarity between teams will tend to highlight coaching deficiencies. I'm not sure who's right.

All that being said, I am sure that Cincy's divisional record this year was an anomaly and doesn't speak to good coaching. Without a doubt, they will fall back in that division and I'd bet the farm they aren't even in the playoff hunt in 2010.

HoustonFrog
02-10-2010, 08:07 AM
Bacically I saw one game...one game...where the team looked prepared from start to finish..Cincy. Besides that the team either started quick and then got outplanned at half and the other team hung around and made it a game or they started slow and looked uninspired and unprepared and then would come out looking better in half 2. One game out of 16.

b0ng
02-10-2010, 08:11 AM
Secondly, even though the Patriots didn't play a couple of guys who were hurt, they were playing to win. If that was a give-up game, then Randy Moss and Brady wouldn't have been playing at all.



I'm sorry but you don't march out Brian Hoyer onto the field when Brady is perfectly healthy if you are trying to win.

b0ng
02-10-2010, 08:13 AM
Bacically I saw one game...one game...where the team looked prepared from start to finish..Cincy. Besides that the team either started quick and then got outplanned at half and the other team hung around and made it a game or they started slow and looked uninspired and unprepared and then would come out looking better in half 2. One game out of 16.

What about the Raider game?

GP
02-10-2010, 08:28 AM
I'm sorry but you don't march out Brian Hoyer onto the field when Brady is perfectly healthy if you are trying to win.

Uh, they left Brady int the game for a long time, then pulled him.

Then they put Brady BACK in.

Like I said the other day: Bill was Kubiak's daddy. A good daddy, when he's playing a game with his son, sandbags it a little to let the son think he's playing 100%.

Bill pulled and/or yanked Tom Brady according to how much he felt he needed to win the game. Do we do that, b0ng? Do yuou see us pulling Schaub and inserting our backup because we can coast along? Nope.

Once Bill saw that he needed a boost, back came Tom Brady.

He was trying to minimize the chances of Tom Brady getting hurt.

You guys are not admitting that Tom Brady was not pulled for the remainder of the game. He was in and out, as needed. And they still almost beat us.

This argument, like the HB pass play argument, is dead.

b0ng
02-10-2010, 08:36 AM
Uh, they left Brady int the game for a long time, then pulled him.

Then they put Brady BACK in.

Like I said the other day: Bill was Kubiak's daddy. A good daddy, when he's playing a game with his son, sandbags it a little to let the son think he's playing 100%.

Bill pulled and/or yanked Tom Brady according to how much he felt he needed to win the game. Do we do that, b0ng? Do yuou see us pulling Schaub and inserting our backup because we can coast along? Nope.

Once Bill saw that he needed a boost, back came Tom Brady.

He was trying to minimize the chances of Tom Brady getting hurt.

You guys are not admitting that Tom Brady was not pulled for the remainder of the game. He was in and out, as needed. And they still almost beat us.

This argument, like the HB pass play argument, is dead.

What? Are you saying the Pats were trying to win that game? I find that hard to believe when you are putting your 2nd string QB in for no reason at all at random times throughout the game.

If Belichik wanted to win that game he wouldn't have pulled Brady at all, but he really didn't care since it was the last game of the season. At best, at best, the only reason I can even see putting Brady back out on the field is if you say "Well, we need to get Tom some reps with Julian Edelman" and that's probably it.

I will say it again for emphasis, there is no way you are trying to win the game when you march out 2nd string QB for no apparent reason (Brady wasn't injured, game was still in contention).

That father/son analogy is just plain weird. Why would Belichik have any feeling about Gary good or bad? Because the Broncos dusted off NE in the 2005 playoffs? I don't get it.

HoustonFrog
02-10-2010, 08:42 AM
What about the Raider game?

No. The score was lopsided but that game had the above problems I mentioned. They came out relatively slow and then had a very nice 2nd quarter. But the offense was stagnant the second half and Oakland shut them down. The scores were a safety and a kickoff return. The only thing I took from that game was that Oakland was one of the worst teams I had seen play in years.

b0ng
02-10-2010, 08:53 AM
No. The score was lopsided but that game had the above problems I mentioned. They came out relatively slow and then had a very nice 2nd quarter. But the offense was stagnant the second half and Oakland shut them down. The scores were a safety and a kickoff return. The only thing I took from that game was that Oakland was one of the worst teams I had seen play in years.

The Texans played conservatively in the 2nd half to run down the clock once they saw that the Oakland O had absolutely no answers for their defense. People gripe about the 2nd half of that game because the Texans didn't put up another 20 point half but why air the ball out all over the field when you are up 29-6? Less hits on Schaub and you get a chance to try to work out the issues in the running game (Of course this obviously did not do much to help them in the long run of the season but hey, why not).

Matt Schaub had all of 2 passes on 4 possessions in the 4th quarter alone, and they (The Texans offense) shut down the passing game pretty much after Schaub got sacked by Richardson in the 3rd.

infantrycak
02-10-2010, 08:57 AM
If the game really meant something to the Patriots, they wouldn't have keep pulling Brady/Moss in and out. Brady didn't even play on the last drive.

Brady didn't play on the last drive because he got CRUSHED by Mario on the past play of the penultimate drive. Brady was in for the entire game except for 2 drives. Moss was in for most of the game, I'd have to go back and check to see if he got pulled more than normal.

What Pencil said. If they didn't care Brady would have stayed out of the game once pulled. Instead they put him back in to play almost the entire game until he got crushed by Mario and threw a pick. There is no explanation for putting Brady back in the game other than trying to win.

reason for the post is Sharper made a huge impact for the Saints this season (that came to mind) along with Greg Williams as DC

Sharper was a huge fluke in an older player suddenly revitalizing his play and Bush improved the Texans D far more than Greg Williams improved the Saints D.

Come on. The divisional record is all that matters.

Bad year to make this assertion since the divisional record had zero to do with the Texans not making the playoffs. They could have won any one of the seven losses and made the playoffs. They also could have had exactly the same record and made the playoffs if they beat the Jets (a non-divisional game) and lost another game elsewhere. So yes the divisional record was annoying but it was not all that mattered.

What? Are you saying the Pats were trying to win that game? I find that hard to believe when you are putting your 2nd string QB in for no reason at all at random times throughout the game.

Random times. Try end of the half with a lead and then after your star QB gets plastered. That's not random. Brady only missed 2 series in the game.

HoustonFrog
02-10-2010, 08:58 AM
The Texans played conservatively in the 2nd half to run down the clock once they saw that the Oakland O had absolutely no answers for their defense. People gripe about the 2nd half of that game because the Texans didn't put up another 20 point half but why air the ball out all over the field when you are up 29-6? Less hits on Schaub and you get a chance to try to work out the issues in the running game (Of course this obviously did not do much to help them in the long run of the season but hey, why not).

Matt Schaub had all of 2 passes on 4 possessions in the 4th quarter alone, and they (The Texans offense) shut down the passing game pretty much after Schaub got sacked by Richardson in the 3rd.

Still, until about midway through the 3rd the score was still a 2 TD game and wasn't over. It wasn't like the offense decided to slow play it to start the half. They couldn't put up points. The 4th quarter was a non-factor because of the kickoff return but the offense didn't perform the second half coming out.

I'm sorry but you don't march out Brian Hoyer onto the field when Brady is perfectly healthy if you are trying to win.

Agree, they can spin the Pats game but the Pats didn't care. In fact Belichick had been known to tank games before to get the lower seed for a better matchup. 3 or 4 didn't matter to them at the time except where they went next. And 4 would have been a date with the Colts if they win, a game Belichick loves. They sat 3 DBs who could have played but sat. Brady had cracked ribs for weeks and they were just trying to get him some rhythm and see what happened. Moss got sat some series too and he was doing pretty well up until that. They were basically playing around in that game with lineups.

GP
02-10-2010, 09:01 AM
What? Are you saying the Pats were trying to win that game? I find that hard to believe when you are putting your 2nd string QB in for no reason at all at random times throughout the game.

If Belichik wanted to win that game he wouldn't have pulled Brady at all, but he really didn't care since it was the last game of the season. At best, at best, the only reason I can even see putting Brady back out on the field is if you say "Well, we need to get Tom some reps with Julian Edelman" and that's probably it.

I will say it again for emphasis, there is no way you are trying to win the game when you march out 2nd string QB for no apparent reason (Brady wasn't injured, game was still in contention).

That father/son analogy is just plain weird. Why would Belichik have any feeling about Gary good or bad? Because the Broncos dusted off NE in the 2005 playoffs? I don't get it.

Others are backing up what I am saying: Bill pulled and re-inserted Brady as needed, to make sure he had a shot at winning while minimizing chances of hurting Brady. 2 drives is all the backup had, and one of those was after Brady got touched up by Mario at the very end.

My father-son example was just for fun. As in "Kubiak is 11 and Bill is a grown man." That's all.

b0ng
02-10-2010, 09:10 AM
Others are backing up what I am saying: Bill pulled and re-inserted Brady as needed, to make sure he had a shot at winning while minimizing chances of hurting Brady. 2 drives is all the backup had, and one of those was after Brady got touched up by Mario at the very end.

My father-son example was just for fun. As in "Kubiak is 11 and Bill is a grown man." That's all.

Belichik takes the ball out of his star QB's hands when the score is 34-27 on the last drive in the 4th quarter, come on now, how is that trying to win? NE had all their TO's to work with.

HFrog: I'm going to sit on the Texans basically playing a complete game and shutting down the Raiders offense the entire time allowed the staff to futz with the running game in the 2nd half to try to get them rolling. Sure Schaub threw a couple of passes here and there but it was nothing like that first half. You can tell that going into the 2nd half up 20-6 on a team that is QB'd by Jamarcus Russell that the Texans were happy with how the D was playing and decided to play the offense at a neutered level to focus on the run game. I would say (And this is a total prediction on my part) that if the Raiders scored a TD at any time during the 2nd half that the offense would've come out throwing a lot more than what they did.

HOU-TEX
02-10-2010, 09:18 AM
Belichik takes the ball out of his star QB's hands when the score is 34-27 on the last drive in the 4th quarter, come on now, how is that trying to win?

That was because the turf was bad..:rolleyes: I thought you were better than that, Hoody.....mmkay, no I didn't. Puh C.

Second Honeymoon
02-10-2010, 09:55 AM
Gilbride's been a pretty good OC for a long time in this league. He's never been the greatest, but come on he helped anchor the Oilers to some great offenses where Warren Moon always threw that classic pick in so many games. And that horrible playoff game was on Buddy Ryan's defense. They gave up a 32 point lead for heaven's sake. And hell, Gilbride just won a SB ring with Eli Manning as his QB of that offense.

the 35-3 debacle was why Ryan was brought to Houston. Jim Eddy was the defensive coordinator for the 35-3 season. You know, Jim Eddy, the guy that looked like a retarded version of Jonathan Winters.

Ryan was brought in and we instantly became the best defense in the league. Joe Montana did drive down the field to win the game in our only home playoff game in the Astrodome at the end of the game, but at least it was Montana...and if not for Gilbride/Moon's stat farming, Marcus Robertson probably breaks up that play to Kerry Cash over the middle for a TD. I will remember Cash throwing the football into that fan-made portrait banner of Buddy Ryan's face till the end of eternity. Closest I have come to crying at a sporting event. Thought we were destined for Super Bowl that year.

Ryan was a great coach and it was because of Moon and Gilbride trying to farm for stats that led to the interception, which put Ryan's defense back on the field when they should have been hitting the locker room. If the game is in the bag, and its a meaningless end of season game, why do you have to try and pad your stats. It was on both Gilbride and Moon.

I know you have some family connections to Gilbride, so I don't expect to change your opinion. I am just saying that Ryan was 10 times the coach that Gilbride was and Ryan was the reason we went 13-3 that year. Gilbride had to coach for another nearly 20 years to even get a sniff of a ring. He got one and kudos to him, but Buddy already had one.

Buddy is my guy though. I am blatantly biased and very partial. Totally admit it. That was a magical year but we just couldn't get past the Montana magic. Imagine if we win that game. I think we would have rolled the Bills in a revenge matchup against them in Astrodome just hte year after 35-3. Then guess what. We would have got the matchup we have all clamored for in the Super Bowl. Jimmy Johnson's Cowboys v. Buddy Ryan's Oilers. OMFG, that would have been a bloodbath. But Joe punked us and then had a bad game against the Bills and lost int he AFC Championship Game. Then the Bills got rolled by JJ's Cowboys for the Pokes' 4th Lombardi Trophy.

The Pencil Neck
02-10-2010, 10:10 AM
I'm sorry but you don't march out Brian Hoyer onto the field when Brady is perfectly healthy if you are trying to win.

Then Belichik is a fool for not making up his mind and running the risk of losing all of them. He should have either not played them at all or he should have played them to win.

I think Brady got pulled for the last drive because he got crushed by Mario on that interception and Belichik decided it was a better thing to pull him than him get hurt, too.

HoustonFrog
02-10-2010, 10:10 AM
Belichik takes the ball out of his star QB's hands when the score is 34-27 on the last drive in the 4th quarter, come on now, how is that trying to win? NE had all their TO's to work with.

HFrog: I'm going to sit on the Texans basically playing a complete game and shutting down the Raiders offense the entire time allowed the staff to futz with the running game in the 2nd half to try to get them rolling. Sure Schaub threw a couple of passes here and there but it was nothing like that first half. You can tell that going into the 2nd half up 20-6 on a team that is QB'd by Jamarcus Russell that the Texans were happy with how the D was playing and decided to play the offense at a neutered level to focus on the run game. I would say (And this is a total prediction on my part) that if the Raiders scored a TD at any time during the 2nd half that the offense would've come out throwing a lot more than what they did.

Ok, so even if we agree to disagree and I give you that game that would be 2 complete games. Not perfect mind you but complete games. Still pretty sketchy for a season. I also don't mean complete as every second of every quarter is played perfectly. Just competing and game planning.. a chess match. The feeling that you aren't watching 2 separate teams.

b0ng
02-10-2010, 10:14 AM
Ok, so even if we agree to disagree and I give you that game that would be 2 complete games. Not perfect mind you but complete games. Still pretty sketchy for a season. I also don't mean complete as every second of every quarter is played perfectly. Just competing and game planning.. a chess match. The feeling that you aren't watching 2 separate teams.

Of course. I didn't mention any other games because that was literally the only other one I could even think of that could possibly be called a great win for the Texans on all sides of the ball.

Texan_Bill
02-10-2010, 10:21 AM
:brickwall:

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and
expecting different results."

~Benjamin Franklin

GP
02-10-2010, 10:24 AM
Belichik takes the ball out of his star QB's hands when the score is 34-27 on the last drive in the 4th quarter, come on now, how is that trying to win? NE had all their TO's to work with.

You're saying that the Patriots DID NOT try to win the game due to Brady not being in on the final drive?

So this means the other 98% of the game, we didn't see the Patriots trying to win the game? Your idea of the Patriots mailing it in is wrapped up in one drive? Come on, now.

The Colts started Manning against the Jets and then they pulled him. They pulled him a LOT earlier than Bill pulled Tom Brady. And Tom Brady got put back into the game vs. the Texans. Then was pulled again.

Which gives off the impression that the Patriots were coasting, then accelerating, then coasting, so on and so forth.

They were trying to win the game. They did not mail it in. We played a Patriots team that was "on the ropes," but we were not putting them away. It took a huge comeback, one that was improbable based on points and time left in the game.

If that game is played in week 7 or week 10, we lose the game in all practicality. And we almost lost in the last week vs. the Pats when they were jacking around with their starting lineup all game long.

That was Bill doing the bare minimum he had to do in order to win while he thought he could win, or pack it up once it was clear he wasn't going to win. He didn't really mail it in until the very last minute.

Again: This is futile to try to argue against it. Just as the sun comes up in the east and sets in the west, the Patriots were winning that game handily, then yanking starters, then putting them back in when it got close again. There was no "mailing it in" until it was obvious that there was more for Bill to lose by keeping the guys in there.

The Colts and the Bengals were full-fledged cowards. Bill, even after losing Welker, still has his guys in there as much as possible to win the game. That's some stones, IMO.

The Pencil Neck
02-10-2010, 10:25 AM
as I am going to be captain obvious here

winning in the division gives a full game swing in the division standings and we aren't playing the " I hope this team beats that team to get in" so we can hopefully go up a game in the standings

just saying to say.

Of course you want to win your divisional games. Winning teams generally win in their division. And winning a divisional game gives you a full game swing with that divisional opponent. BUT. Ultimately your divisional standings are based on your entire record. You can win all your divisional games and go 6-10 and you can lose all your divisional games and go 10-6. It is mathematically possible, although highly unlikely, to lose all your divisonal games and win the division. Your divisional w/l record only applies to tie-breakers when you've got the same record as a divisonal opponent.

Cincy is being held up as an example. And they're an example if your goal is only to reach the playoffs. They were able to dominate their division and win enough non-divisional games to get win their division. But then, because they sucked outside of their division, they lost their first game in the playoffs. Bad.

Do we need to win more divisional games? Of course we do. But having a bad divisional record to this point isn't a sign that Kubiak needed to get canned this year.

b0ng
02-10-2010, 10:30 AM
Then Belichik is a fool for not making up his mind and running the risk of losing all of them. He should have either not played them at all or he should have played them to win.

I think Brady got pulled for the last drive because he got crushed by Mario on that interception and Belichik decided it was a better thing to pull him than him get hurt, too.

At that point though, when you decide to pull Brady when you are within a TD of tying the game, you are not trying to win.

The 2 drives that Brady got pulled for? Both of them were the final drives for NE at the end of each respective half. Whatever the reasoning behind it is, I can guarantee that "we're trying to win here!" isn't it. At that point the Pats were packing their bags and thinking about how to get out quickly. There was to be no answering drive to score, there would be no late game magic because they did not want to even try for it.

The Texans had to work hard to win the game, but in no way does that mean the Pats were trying throughout the whole game.

dalemurphy
02-10-2010, 10:32 AM
Ok, so even if we agree to disagree and I give you that game that would be 2 complete games. Not perfect mind you but complete games. Still pretty sketchy for a season. I also don't mean complete as every second of every quarter is played perfectly. Just competing and game planning.. a chess match. The feeling that you aren't watching 2 separate teams.

Seattle.
at Cincinnati.
Oakland.
at Buffalo.
NE.
at INDY
vs. Tenn.

Those are all games where the team looked prepared or made quick adjustments and seemed to have a good plan to win the game.

By the way, I'd love to see your list for other teams in the NFL. Because what you are looking for doesn't happen often in the NFL. So, show me all the "complete games" that these teams played:

Arizona
Baltimore
NE
Cincinnati
Baltimore
Green Bay
Dallas

There's a group of teams that made the playoffs. Show me a list of any of their "complete games" using the same standards that you hold the Texans to.

The Pencil Neck
02-10-2010, 10:38 AM
At that point though, when you decide to pull Brady when you are within a TD of tying the game, you are not trying to win.

The 2 drives that Brady got pulled for? Both of them were the final drives for NE at the end of each respective half. Whatever the reasoning behind it is, I can guarantee that "we're trying to win here!" isn't it. At that point the Pats were packing their bags and thinking about how to get out quickly. There was to be no answering drive to score, there would be no late game magic because they did not want to even try for it.

The Texans had to work hard to win the game, but in no way does that mean the Pats were trying throughout the whole game.

Removing a team's will to win is a winning strategy. Making the other team surrender is a winning strategy.

Mario's hit on Brady removed Belichik's will to win. He started off the game wanting to win it and expecting to win it. He was going to play Brady for a half and expected to coast to a win after that. But it didn't work out that way, I'm sure Brady lobbied to be put back in so they could win the game. And at the end, we removed Belichik's desire to compete.

That's a good win in my book.

b0ng
02-10-2010, 10:43 AM
Removing a team's will to win is a winning strategy. Making the other team surrender is a winning strategy.

Mario's hit on Brady removed Belichik's will to win. He started off the game wanting to win it and expecting to win it. He was going to play Brady for a half and expected to coast to a win after that. But it didn't work out that way, I'm sure Brady lobbied to be put back in so they could win the game. And at the end, we removed Belichik's desire to compete.

That's a good win in my book.

You can attribute the win as much to the Texans as you could the playing field if that is the case. The grass did as much to sap Belichik's will to win as much as any play the Texans D made that game.

Silver Oak
02-10-2010, 10:46 AM
Seattle.
at Cincinnati.
Oakland.
at Buffalo.
NE.
at INDY
vs. Tenn.

Those are all games where the team looked prepared or made quick adjustments and seemed to have a good plan to win the game.

By the way, I'd love to see your list for other teams in the NFL. Because what you are looking for doesn't happen often in the NFL. So, show me all the "complete games" that these teams played:

Arizona
Baltimore
NE
Cincinnati
Baltimore
Green Bay
Dallas

There's a group of teams that made the playoffs. Show me a list of any of their "complete games" using the same standards that you hold the Texans to.

I did a quick look over at NFL.com, and very first Dallas game I clicked on had an interesting headline pop up...

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009092800/2009/REG3/panthers@cowboys

dalemurphy
02-10-2010, 10:58 AM
You can attribute the win as much to the Texans as you could the playing field if that is the case. The grass did as much to sap Belichik's will to win as much as any play the Texans D made that game.

For the sake of consistency, how do you feel about the Jets last two wins that allowed them to make the playoffs instead of the Texans?

b0ng
02-10-2010, 11:03 AM
For the sake of consistency, how do you feel about the Jets last two wins that allowed them to make the playoffs instead of the Texans?

The Jets were basically gift wrapped a playoff spot. It is more debateable that the Pats tried harder than the Colts or the Bengals did, but in the end all 3 teams in each scenario (Colts, Bengals, Pats) played like they did not give a hoot about the games.

The Pencil Neck
02-10-2010, 11:16 AM
You can attribute the win as much to the Texans as you could the playing field if that is the case. The grass did as much to sap Belichik's will to win as much as any play the Texans D made that game.


If that were the case, Brady would have been out in the first quarter.

HoustonFrog
02-10-2010, 12:13 PM
Seattle.
at Cincinnati.
Oakland.
at Buffalo.
NE.
at INDY
vs. Tenn.

Those are all games where the team looked prepared or made quick adjustments and seemed to have a good plan to win the game.

By the way, I'd love to see your list for other teams in the NFL. Because what you are looking for doesn't happen often in the NFL. So, show me all the "complete games" that these teams played:

Arizona
Baltimore
NE
Cincinnati
Baltimore
Green Bay
Dallas

There's a group of teams that made the playoffs. Show me a list of any of their "complete games" using the same standards that you hold the Texans to.

You're kidding right? We are talking Texans here. So stay on point. I know that is hard in spin land where you throw out other teams and try and deflect but you have to concentrate. If you really think those were all complete games then you are looking final score and just ignoring the football played.

Cincy--the game I admitted

Oakland--IO said I didn't think was but can see the argument

Buffalo--Really?The game where one of the worst teams in the league was winning at half. Their inept offense was moving the ball all first half. How is that a complete game? 3 turnovers in the first half? Out prepared. They didn't show up until the 4th.

NE--Are you serious?Again, a win. But they were as flat as a pancake the first half. There was zero urgency. In fact, go find the game thread. There were many of us that were stating that the team was sleepwalking for 3 quarters and then started playing for their lives in the 4th. Not a complete game. Missed assignments left and right. Missed FGs. Sloppy play. 4th quarter was what they should have looked like playing for their lives

at Indy--Seriously Dale, this is one of the games that everyone points to that shows the split of first vs 2nd half. The first half was completely dominated by the Colts. Manning was 19-of-25 for 176 yards in the 1st quarter alone. They went up 13-0 and the Texans hadn't gotten a 1st down yet until midway through the 2nd. They were lucky it wasn't worse. Then they woke up.

vs Tenn--You mean the game where no one was covering a RB at WR and where Tenn was killing them while the defense broke down over and over to start the game..that game?

You are incredible. As I said, complete game don't have to be perfect games, they don't have to be pretty games. Just games where a team competes and is prepared and fighing for a majority of all 4 quarters. It was uncanny how many games the Texans had either a bad first or second half or just looked flat at times...in big games. Not all NFL teams do it all the time. But I bet they do it 4 times more than twice. Did you see the Colts or any top teams have many games where they were off?The Saints had a few stinker games but they also had a ton that were complete whippings.

dalemurphy
02-10-2010, 12:31 PM
You're kidding right? We are talking Texans here. So stay on point. I know that is hard in spin land where you throw out other teams and try and deflect but you have to concentrate. If you really think those were all complete games then you are looking final score and just ignoring the football played.

Cincy--the game I admitted

Oakland--IO said I didn't think was but can see the argument

Buffalo--Really?The game where one of the worst teams in the league was winning at half. Their inept offense was moving the ball all first half. How is that a complete game? 3 turnovers in the first half? Out prepared. They didn't show up until the 4th.

NE--Are you serious?Again, a win. But they were as flat as a pancake the first half. There was zero urgency. In fact, go find the game thread. There were many of us that were stating that the team was sleepwalking for 3 quarters and then started playing for their lives in the 4th. Not a complete game. Missed assignments left and right. Missed FGs. Sloppy play. 4th quarter was what they should have looked like playing for their lives

at Indy--Seriously Dale, this is one of the games that everyone points to that shows the split of first vs 2nd half. The first half was completely dominated by the Colts. Manning was 19-of-25 for 176 yards in the 1st quarter alone. They went up 13-0 and the Texans hadn't gotten a 1st down yet until midway through the 2nd. They were lucky it wasn't worse. Then they woke up.

vs Tenn--You mean the game where no one was covering a RB at WR and where Tenn was killing them while the defense broke down over and over to start the game..that game?

You are incredible. As I said, complete game don't have to be perfect games, they don't have to be pretty games. Just games where a team competes and is prepared and fighing for a majority of all 4 quarters. It was uncanny how many games the Texans had either a bad first or second half or just looked flat at times...in big games. Not all NFL teams do it all the time. But I bet they do it 4 times more than twice. Did you see the Colts or any top teams have many games where they were off?The Saints had a few stinker games but they also had a ton that were complete whippings.

The elite teams can play poorly and still control games sometimes. That's the only difference. How prepared did the Colts look in the first half at HOuston or in the 2nd half vs. Houston. Wouldn't your argument cut both ways?

Regarding Buffalo, I don't see how 3 turnovers = a lack of preparation. By the way, Buffalo was coming off a win vs. NYJets, who turned it over 6 time.

Vs. Tennessee was the Monday night game. It was a well played game that came down to field goals. I don't see the lack of preparation there.

The reality is that you are holding the Texans to a higher standard than is realistic in the NFL. Teams win ugly. It happens all the time. Teams lose ugly, too. You are criticizing the Texans for behaving the way almost every team in the NFL does. The competitive balance is such that this happens all the time. Just look at any of the teams who won between 8 and 11 games and you are going to see it all the time. Until we are great, we aren't!

Joe Texan
02-10-2010, 12:36 PM
You're kidding right? We are talking Texans here. So stay on point. I know that is hard in spin land where you throw out other teams and try and deflect but you have to concentrate. If you really think those were all complete games then you are looking final score and just ignoring the football played.

Cincy--the game I admitted

Oakland--IO said I didn't think was but can see the argument

Buffalo--Really?The game where one of the worst teams in the league was winning at half. Their inept offense was moving the ball all first half. How is that a complete game? 3 turnovers in the first half? Out prepared. They didn't show up until the 4th.

NE--Are you serious?Again, a win. But they were as flat as a pancake the first half. There was zero urgency. In fact, go find the game thread. There were many of us that were stating that the team was sleepwalking for 3 quarters and then started playing for their lives in the 4th. Not a complete game. Missed assignments left and right. Missed FGs. Sloppy play. 4th quarter was what they should have looked like playing for their lives

at Indy--Seriously Dale, this is one of the games that everyone points to that shows the split of first vs 2nd half. The first half was completely dominated by the Colts. Manning was 19-of-25 for 176 yards in the 1st quarter alone. They went up 13-0 and the Texans hadn't gotten a 1st down yet until midway through the 2nd. They were lucky it wasn't worse. Then they woke up.

vs Tenn--You mean the game where no one was covering a RB at WR and where Tenn was killing them while the defense broke down over and over to start the game..that game?

You are incredible. As I said, complete game don't have to be perfect games, they don't have to be pretty games. Just games where a team competes and is prepared and fighing for a majority of all 4 quarters. It was uncanny how many games the Texans had either a bad first or second half or just looked flat at times...in big games. Not all NFL teams do it all the time. But I bet they do it 4 times more than twice. Did you see the Colts or any top teams have many games where they were off?The Saints had a few stinker games but they also had a ton that were complete whippings.

Spoken like a true Cowboy fan would love to see it. To win a game in the NFL is as difficult one week as the next, to say that the team played flat but won then STFU the win is a win is a win, just like 19 to 10 when cowpukes cried about it being Campos team W is all it is. We played well enough to win games we lost due to rotten luck and bad calls as well as mistakes.
Your just a cowboy fan that is bitter cause he cannot be a full blown Texan Fan. Come on Frog quit hopping in the mud and get on the waggon.

b0ng
02-10-2010, 12:44 PM
If that were the case, Brady would have been out in the first quarter.

1st qtr or game winning drive, the end result was the same. If you're going to say that Belichik was trying to win in every way imaginable while putting Brian Hoyer out there for what could be a game saving drive then I don't know what to say.

HoustonFrog
02-10-2010, 12:56 PM
Spoken like a true Cowboy fan would love to see it. To win a game in the NFL is as difficult one week as the next, to say that the team played flat but won then STFU the win is a win is a win, just like 19 to 10 when cowpukes cried about it being Campos team W is all it is. We played well enough to win games we lost due to rotten luck and bad calls as well as mistakes.
Your just a cowboy fan that is bitter cause he cannot be a full blown Texan Fan. Come on Frog quit hopping in the mud and get on the waggon.

I lost you at 19-10 :)

My arguments have nothing to do with being a Cowboy fan. Purely from watching all these games and having the same comments in one half or another...."why do they look flat in such a big game;" "what is the defense doing" and "the offense is out of sync."

The elite teams can play poorly and still control games sometimes. That's the only difference. How prepared did the Colts look in the first half at HOuston or in the 2nd half vs. Houston. Wouldn't your argument cut both ways?

Regarding Buffalo, I don't see how 3 turnovers = a lack of preparation. By the way, Buffalo was coming off a win vs. NYJets, who turned it over 6 time.

Vs. Tennessee was the Monday night game. It was a well played game that came down to field goals. I don't see the lack of preparation there.

The reality is that you are holding the Texans to a higher standard than is realistic in the NFL. Teams win ugly. It happens all the time. Teams lose ugly, too. You are criticizing the Texans for behaving the way almost every team in the NFL does. The competitive balance is such that this happens all the time. Just look at any of the teams who won between 8 and 11 games and you are going to see it all the time. Until we are great, we aren't!

As my old coach would say, "turnovers and sloppy play are from a lack of concentration." When you practice and prepare sloppy, you play sloppy. The Bills offense was putrid. Their point total wasn't high but they were moving it. The Texans were completely out of sync. I agree....yack :)..with JT that some wins are just going to be sloppy but they count. My standard is that you should have more that 2 games where the team shows up for one half.