PDA

View Full Version : Baldinger: Bob McNair "content with mediocrity"


Pages : [1] 2

Wolf
02-04-2010, 11:25 PM
NFL Network's Brian Baldinger shared some tough love for the Texans and owner Bob McNair this morning during an interview with Marc Vandermeer and John Lopez on Houston's SportsRadio 610.

Like many of you, I watch NFL Network regularly but I can't recall 'Baldy' going off on McNair, Kubiak and the Texans like he did this morning.

Here's how it went down.
Vandermeer: "Houston Texans, your thoughts…"

Baldinger: (chuckles) "Obviously Bob Mc Nair is content with mediocrity. The playoffs must not be that important... they’ve had four years to get it right. And I don’t know if they’re any better. I mean, when Matt Schaub plays like he did this year, plays 16 games they’re a pretty good team, but … to me … I don’t think they’re ever going to get it right."

Lopez: "I’m sensing that you think extending Gary Kubiak was a mistake."

Baldinger: "Like I said, if you want to go 8-8 … you want to go 9-7 and kind of just be at the brink, if that’s good enough, then that’s what you do, you stay with him. I don’t understand. Four years to get it right in this league to get it right is twice the eternity (?) that anybody really should get because you can win in this league right now – the Jets showed you. All you can do is keep stockpiling talent – tell me how they’re going to get better?"

You can listen to the entire podcast here, from the SportsRadio610 audio vault.



I just wished someone would have reminded Baldinger that Rex Ryan's Jets had the exact same record in 2009 that Eric Mangini's Jets had in 2008.


http://www.examiner.com/x-778-Houston-Texans-Examiner~y2010m2d4-Baldinger--Bob-McNair-content-with-mediocrity

beerlover
02-05-2010, 12:03 AM
there is a certain local radio host saying the same "Mighty" thing :)

infantrycak
02-05-2010, 12:21 AM
there is a certain local radio host saying the same "Mighty" thing :)

And he is a DICK not because of his message but because of his delivery. Berating people, being repetitive, etc. Plus today he said the Jets improved from 8-8 so he knows ****e.

GuerillaBlack
02-05-2010, 12:41 AM
He's talking like his pinky....way out there.

Double Barrel
02-05-2010, 01:12 AM
This thread is going nuclear in 3...2...1...

Goatcheese
02-05-2010, 01:23 AM
This was my reaction when I read this nitwit's comments.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPl6FGeftaQ

BigTimeTexanFan
02-05-2010, 07:19 AM
And he is a DICK not because of his message but because of his delivery. Berating people, being repetitive, etc. Plus today he said the Jets improved from 8-8 so he knows ****e.


I won't listen to that tool not because I don't agree with his message, but because he has absolutely no objectivity what so ever. Plus his message day in and day out is the exact same thing. Not sure what he will do for a show once the Texans finally make the playoffs.

DeMarCushPoll
02-05-2010, 07:21 AM
The jets showed us what? That anyone can make to the playoffs when they're spotted two games?

He will choke on those words next season. AssBag!


How often do these so-called experts get it right anyway?

SheTexan
02-05-2010, 07:21 AM
I think it's called "blind faith" rather than mediocrity. Our owner must have faith that Kubiak and the "good old boy's club" will eventually pull it off and take his team to the BIG SHOW! Who knows??! I'll guess we'll see this time next year!

Thorn
02-05-2010, 07:28 AM
I think it's called "blind faith" rather than mediocrity. Our owner must have faith that Kubiak and the "good old boy's club" will eventually pull it off and take his team to the BIG SHOW! Who knows??! I'll guess we'll see this time next year!

Exactly. There is no way McNair spends all this money because he WANTS an 8-8 team. He wants in the playoffs and in the Super Bowl just like every other owner. How he intends on getting the Texans there is the argument, not whether or not he WANTS to get there, because he does.

TEXANS84
02-05-2010, 07:56 AM
Add to Peter King speaking the truth this morning as well on 610.

King:"Listen, we sit every Sunday and wonder...how are the Texans going to screw up this game. It's not like they are going to get beat...they are going to find somehow to lose the game. Also, tell me a meaningful game that they have played in and won in the past three years. What, they beat the Colts once?"

Vandermeer: "Yeah, but we put on the 4 game winning streak at the end of the season to close out strong".

King: "But the barn door is shut at 5-7, I'm sorry. They shouldn't be in that situation."

Spoke the truth...and it hurts. I'm sure his podcast will be up shortly.

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 07:59 AM
This thread is going nuclear in 3...2...1...

What a football guy saying what some of us have said....wow, maybe he should get an email to stick pink soap somewhere, that will teach him for thinking for himself.:kitten:

I'm glad there are some voices around town now that don't feel the need to just to follow a company line

Add to Peter King speaking the truth this morning as well on 610.

King:"Listen, we sit every Sunday and wonder...how are the Texans going to screw up this game. It's not like they are going to get beat...they are going to find somehow to lose the game. Also, tell me a meaningful game that they have played in and won in the past three years. What, they beat the Colts once?"

Vandermeer: "Yeah, but we put on the 4 game winning streak at the end of the season to close out strong".

King: "But the barn door is shut at 5-7, I'm sorry. They shouldn't be in that situation."

Spoke the truth...and it hurts. I'm sure his podcast will be up shortly.

Funny part about this is that I've sene King keep the Texans in his top 15 all year based on the talent they have. He has made some nice comments. So it isn't like his goal is to bag on them.

HuttoKarl
02-05-2010, 08:09 AM
It's harsh, but both Baldinger and King have a good point. (I've never said that about Peter King before, but a stopped clock is right twice a day...) Houston coaching and players (esp. C/K. Browns) put our team in a crappy position. Had we not shat the bed against Arizona and Tennessee and Indy twice, we wouldn't have to hear them say anything.

Hardcore Texan
02-05-2010, 08:10 AM
Wow, Baldinger seems out of touch with reality. I always enjoyed his analysis on NFLN, but that may change. It just didnt' seem very objective (going by the quote in the OP, I have not listened to the podcast yet).

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 08:12 AM
What a football guy saying what some of us have said....wow, maybe he should get an email to stick pink soap somewhere, that will teach him for thinking for himself.:kitten:

I'm glad there are some voices around town now that don't feel the need to just to follow a company line



Funny part about this is that I've sene King keep the Texans in his top 15 all year based on the talent they have. He has made some nice somments. So it isn't like his goal is to bag on them.

It's simply a matter of being the youngest team in the NFL. I wonder if King was sitting watching N.O play the past two seasons and thinking the same thing?

It usually takes very young and talented teams a few years to work themselves over the hump... look at the following teams:

Baltimore Ravens 2000... they had something like three 8-8 seasons in a row leading into a decade of championship level football.

Tennessee Titans (late 1990s and early 2000s)... three or four seasons around .500

Arizona Cardinals 2008 3 or 4 consecutive 7-8 win teams before breaking through, barely.


It doesn't have to happen that way. Sure, the Texans could've won another game or two. But, they didn't. And, I don't think it says anything about the team going forward except how close to great they are. I'm hardly going to panic because Kris Brown, Chris Brown weren't clutch last year. If Schaub, AJ, Mario, Cushing, etc... were choking away games at the end, then I'd be worried.

El Tejano
02-05-2010, 08:35 AM
I typically agree with Baldinger. I believe he was one of a few people who praised the Texans for acquiring Matt Schaub. He even said not to be suprised if the Texans start to show improvement just from that transaction alone back then. So I respect what he has to say. Mostly what he says is true but I think he just doesn't agree with Kubiak as being the guy to take The Texans to the playoffs and that's where I disagree.

I believe Kubiak will get us there. He says we have had four years to make it right but really we've only had 3 in terms of Kubiak having a decent QB. Let's face it, Kubiak wanted to be a head coach so he let Bob Mcnair hear what he wanted - that we could win with David Carr. Then he showed Mcnair we couldn't, and he went and got a good one. Since then we've seen lots of improvement offensively and now his QB has full grasp of the offense. When it comes to defense, he's never had the DC he's wanted until this year and there was some good defensive play this year after the shaky first month. Our team is young but we got alot of returning people.

As much as I believe Kubiak is the guy to take us to the playoffs, this year is a very critical year for him IMO. If he can make the playoffs, can he get our team to show up and be successful? If he can't do that or even get us there period, he needs to be gone.

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 08:37 AM
It's simply a matter of being the youngest team in the NFL. I wonder if King was sitting watching N.O play the past two seasons and thinking the same thing?

It usually takes very young and talented teams a few years to work themselves over the hump... look at the following teams:

Baltimore Ravens 2000... they had something like three 8-8 seasons in a row leading into a decade of championship level football.

Tennessee Titans (late 1990s and early 2000s)... three or four seasons around .500

Arizona Cardinals 2008 3 or 4 consecutive 7-8 win teams before breaking through, barely.


It doesn't have to happen that way. Sure, the Texans could've won another game or two. But, they didn't. And, I don't think it says anything about the team going forward except how close to great they are. I'm hardly going to panic because Kris Brown, Chris Brown weren't clutch last year. If Schaub, AJ, Mario, Cushing, etc... were choking away games at the end, then I'd be worried.

So inserting players that weren't clutch over and over and losing in the same painful way year after year doesn't say anything about a team going forward?I think that was King's and Balldingers point..it does.

BigBull17
02-05-2010, 08:37 AM
I kinda get what he's saying, but you also have to look at the other side. This is a team that with a play here and there, they are a 12 win team. Do you really want to go with uncertainty when you truley are so close? Cower would be solid, but thats a change in scheme. IDK, I'm ok with the extension, cause if it doesn't work, Bob eats the cash.

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 09:09 AM
So inserting players that weren't clutch over and over and losing in the same painful way year after year doesn't say anything about a team going forward?I think that was King's and Balldingers point..it does.

I agree.

This is a good point.

For me, I try to understand why he did what he did. If it made sense, even if it wasn't what I would have done.... then I've got to weigh that with the other tangibles Kubiak has done, good & bad alike. Then see if the bad out-weighs the good.

For the life of me, I can't understand how anyone's "score card" can be so overwhelmingly to the bad, that it justifies firing him.

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 09:10 AM
So inserting players that weren't clutch over and over and losing in the same painful way year after year doesn't say anything about a team going forward?I think that was King's and Balldingers point..it does.


Well, when your starting HB is injured and your backup can't pass protect and also puts the ball on the ground, your choices quickly diminish. When your kicker, coming off an all-pro season, collapses in the middle of the season, there is not much to do. The thing to be excited about is that neither player will be on the roster, much less in a position to impact the games next year!

Hardcore Texan
02-05-2010, 09:12 AM
Baldinger and King both know if Kubiak tanks next year he's gone anyway, extension really doesn't mean that much so it just seems like they are taking potshots at Kubiak.

Instead of saying McNair is content with mediorcrity, how about saying McNair obviously thinks it's worth building on what we have done and try to get it done another season or two instead going back to the drawing board with a brand new coach, brand new assistants, and a brand new system. Rarely does that lead to instant success. So say something like McNair is really putting in all on the table and giving Kubiak another season (or two) to finish what he started. And if doesn't work out it will look like a bad decision. Judging it before it happens is stupid. (See the '06 draft)

It's a dumb statement to say he's content with mediorcrity. If you want to take a dig at McNair then say he's loyal to a fault. That's more of a fair statement given the opportunity he gave Capers and is now giving Kubiak.

And the Jets comparison is weak, the way the Jets got in was a long shot, sure they made the most of it and rode the momentum. But you want your teams to win their division and be a power house, not back into the playoffs on a longshot because two teams laid down. At the end of the day anyone will take what they can get. But to make it out like the Jets made all the right moves and navigated the season so great is beyond a huge reach. I would not bank on the circumstances that led them to the playoffs to align so perfectly next time. You're not always going to get that kind of outside help to get you a spot in the dance.

Didnt' they have the same record as the Texans in the regular season? It's a game of inches, to praise the team that made it by the skin of their teeth and to say the team that didn't is happily mediocre is ridiculous.

The Jets should be praised for making the best out of the opportunity however, they took it and ran and good for them.

I still have not read the entire article or listen to the podcast, just going by the quotes posted, and maybe I won't even bother now cause it just seems like hot air.

Texans_Chick
02-05-2010, 09:24 AM
I couldn't give a **** what Baldinger says about this subject. Or any national guy.

There's 32 teams in the league. Even the closest observers of the NFL do not know each team in detail.

Baldinger is good when he is breaking down film, but I'm guessing he doesn't know more than just generalities about the team.

And look at what an expert Peter King is on the NFL:

Media accuracy rankings for NFL season predictions (http://thebiglead.com/index.php/2010/01/07/media-accuracy-rankings-for-nfl-season-predictions/)

Lots of opinions in the world. Some more well-reasoned than others. I think that there is a rational case that can be made for changing coaches, but I don't think Baldinger's comments as summarized hits the mark.

I've come to realize that I don't care what media person says what. That I like rational comments, fact based comments no matter what the source.

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 09:31 AM
I couldn't give a **** what Baldinger says about this subject. Or any national guy.

There's 32 teams in the league. Even the closest observers of the NFL do not know each team in detail.

Baldinger is good when he is breaking down film, but I'm guessing he doesn't know more than just generalities about the team.

And look at what an expert Peter King is on the NFL:

Media accuracy rankings for NFL season predictions (http://thebiglead.com/index.php/2010/01/07/media-accuracy-rankings-for-nfl-season-predictions/)

Lots of opinions in the world. Some more well-reasoned than others. I think that there is a rational case that can be made for changing coaches, but I don't think Baldinger's comments as summarized hits the mark.

I've come to realize that I don't care what media person says what. That I like rational comments, fact based comments no matter what the source.


I totally agree. You and I know more about the Texans organization than any national media person. We can glean information simply by observing posture or subtle nuances in a Kubiak press conference. Baldinger has almost certainly never heard one. You, Jeremy Rice, Diehard Chris, AJ, LZ, and a few board members, along with my own observations are where I get the best and most detailed information about this team.

Baldinger disparaging this organization bothers me much less than someone like Dexman, Vinny, HoustonSpartan, Texecutioner, or other board members. Even though I think those boardmembers conclusions are wrong, I know they've put the time and thought into learning and understanding the team.

Second Honeymoon
02-05-2010, 09:32 AM
i couldn't agree more with what Baldinger said. oh by the way, baldinger was one of the first guys to call out David Carr for the horrible QB that he was. he was absolutely the first national guy to critique his pocket awareness and not blame the OL and coaching for every problem the guy had. I remember saying 'wow, finally some guys sees what the smart Texans fans have seen since David showed up in town'.....the sheeple were still talking about coaching and the Offensive Line. freaking stupid.

something tells me this guy knows more than most of the homers around here.

Baldinger calls it like he sees it, and unlike many of the local yayhoos and homers on this board, he is objective, knowledgeable and brutally honest.

It's quite obvious McNair is content with mediocrity based on the moves he has made in coaching, the moves he has made in free agent personnel, and the moves he has made in marketing. McNair lost me when he said they gave Kubiak an extension after comparing him to other coaches that had been hired since Kubiak. That is a freaking joke. No way in hell is that true. Kubiak hasn't done diddly but half of yall want a freaking statue of the guy for getting to the Mt.Everest-like peak of 9-7.

Screw these losers and screw the people that keep making excuses for their failures.

Thorn
02-05-2010, 09:33 AM
For the life of me, I can't understand how anyone's "score card" can be so overwhelmingly to the bad, that it justifies firing him.

I don't think anyone can argue against the fact Kubiak and Smith have done a much better job with this team than Capers and Casserly did. And also that the Texans are vastly improved from what they were Kubiaks first year here. The difference comes is whether you think, based on what has happened, that Kubkiak has what it takes to make a playoff team out of the Texans.

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 09:36 AM
And the Jets comparison is weak, the way the Jets got in was a long shot, sure they made the most of it and rode the momentum.

But to make it out like the Jets made all the right moves and navigated the season so great is beyond a huge reach.


Didnt' they have the same record as the Texans in the regular season?

Truth be told, and it doesn't matter if the Texans was that team kept out or not.... But the truth is, If the Colts had played to win in week 15, the Jets would have finished 8-8.


Before you go there.... forget about the Texans for a moment, this has nothing to do with the Texans.

But the Jets would have lost to the Colts, they would have finished 8-8, one game worse than the 9-7 of Mangini's last season.

Because the Colts pulled their starters in a game they would have won, in week 15, the Jets are 9-7, their coach is the greatest thing since bread pudding, and they "don't settle for mediocrity."

This, IMHO, is another reason you can't use a teams W-L record to judge how good or bad a coach, or a team is. It has almost nothing to do with it.

Disclaimer: I am not passing judgement on whether the Jets are a good team, or a bad team. I am not saying this year's Jets is better or worse than last year's Jets. I am not saying anything at all in reference to the Texans. All I'm saying, is the Jets W-L record alone is not a good reflection of that team.

Ole Miss Texan
02-05-2010, 09:36 AM
I think there is a lot of truth that has been said.

But McNair isn't content with mediocrity. Some may disagree with Kubiak being Head Coach, some may disagree with him being the Head Coach going forward... but McNair sees the team that Kubiak & Smith have put together and thinks that the two of them going forward is the highest percentage of having a successful team. He's not happy with 8-8 or 9-7 seasons, he thinks Kubiak is the best option to take us to 10+ wins and into the playoffs. Plain and simple. End of story, case closed.

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 09:51 AM
I don't think anyone can argue against the fact Kubiak and Smith have done a much better job with this team than Capers and Casserly did. And also that the Texans are vastly improved from what they were Kubiaks first year here. The difference comes is whether you think, based on what has happened, that Kubkiak has what it takes to make a playoff team out of the Texans.

Well, unless you think that Kubiak caused: the Chris Brown fumbles, the Steve Slaton fumbles, the Ryan Moats fumble and the odd overturn of the call at Indy, the Kris Brown missed FGs, the Bironas made 53 yd field goal, the Schaub interception at Arizona, the Schaub injury vs. Jacksonville, the Colts laying down versue NYJets in week #16, the Bengals laying down vs. Jets in week #17...

Unless he's responsible for every single one of those things, then clearly Kubiak can make the Texans a playoff team. Because, if any of those things happen differently, the Texans are in the playoffs.

The real question is whether he has what it takes to elevate the team's play enough to overcome a lot of misfortune. Last season, he couldn't quite get it done. I do believe he can, though. However, next season we could breeze to an 11 win season without him being tested in that way. So, it's a question that may not get answered for 2-3 years. Next season, I'm hopeful we get a few more bounces, we're even more talented and experienced, and we stay relatively healthy. If all that happens, he could coach this team worse than he did last season and we'll still be in the playoffs.

Big Lou
02-05-2010, 10:17 AM
First off I will admit that I'm a Kool Aid Drinker, and part of the Kubes Fan Club. (Although I was starting to look at the life boat out of the corner of my eye this year)

I know it's this guys job to bloviate, but shut the F up already. Many people have made the points about the Jets already, spotted games and similar record and such. What this ***** didn't talk about was Rex Ryan didn't inherit a 2-14 team that was about as bad s anything Detroit puts on the field every year. THAT TAKES A WHILE TO FIX! Just because they overachieved in year two an possibly three (Year three is debateable) it shouldn't be held against them!

I would much rather have a team built that makes incremental improvement (As long as it's sustained!) rather than 4 bad years and one good.

Everyone jumped on the Atlanta, Baltimore, and Miami look what they did in one year band wagon, and look at them now. Baltimore made the playoffs, but they have been a very consistent team that Harbaugh took over. Also did any of these teams lose 2/3's of thier interior offensive line, thier All Pro caliber TE and have thier #1 RB have a meltdown? Injuries happen, but when you have your Offense lose the group of guys the Texans lost it takes a toll, yet this offense was still top 5!

I hope, scratch that, I know that this Douche will eat his words next year.

HE CAN KISS MY MEDIOCRE ASS!!!!

TEXANS84
02-05-2010, 10:22 AM
Funny part about this is that I've sene King keep the Texans in his top 15 all year based on the talent they have. He has made some nice comments. So it isn't like his goal is to bag on them.

Peter King had the Texans winning the division this year. From what I gathered from his voice this morning, he's pretty much given up on the Texans and postseason.

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 10:43 AM
He's talking like his pinky....way out there.

:lol:

That was awesome GB!

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 10:56 AM
I totally agree. You and I know more about the Texans organization than any national media person. We can glean information simply by observing posture or subtle nuances in a Kubiak press conference. Baldinger has almost certainly never heard one. You, Jeremy Rice, Diehard Chris, AJ, LZ, and a few board members, along with my own observations are where I get the best and most detailed information about this team.

Baldinger disparaging this organization bothers me much less than someone like Dexman, Vinny, HoustonSpartan, Texecutioner, or other board members. Even though I think those boardmembers conclusions are wrong, I know they've put the time and thought into learning and understanding the team.

"Gleaned information" that had Carr turning into the next Kurt Warner or the one where he was a top passer in the league once he mastered that pocket presence?Excuse me but I feel like this is a mad lib for you and you just take said Texans personnel person and plug them into the same paragraphs years later. Not saying we haven't all been wrong or that Kubes won't succeed but I wouldn't be so over the top since it seems the "Carr-Haters" are now your "Pink-Soapers."

I don't trust all national media but I trust they do their job..watching and analyzing football through the eyes of guys who played and got years of experience. Some do a good job, others don't, but I'll listen.

Double Barrel
02-05-2010, 11:08 AM
I'm not sure about McNair being "content with mediocrity", but I feel fairly confident that he is not discontent with it, either. Owners show their discontent by changing coaching staffs, and McNair has gone the opposite way by giving him a two year extension. (btw, I'm not arguing for/against that action, but just commenting on this specific story about Baldinger's remarks).

I doubt McNair is 'happy' with 9-7, but it would not be that shocking if he is satisfied with it. The fact is that McNair had a playoff or bust attitude before the season, but that 'or else' mentality was merely talk when it came down to action. At least that was my perception going into the 2009 season.

Does anyone honestly think that McNair will fire Kubiak if we repeat 9-7 and miss the playoffs in 2010? I don't, and we have this season to support that perspective.

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 11:14 AM
"Gleaned information" that had Carr turning into the next Kurt Warner or the one where he was a top passer in the league once he mastered that pocket presence?Excuse me but I feel like this is a mad lib for you and you just take said Texans personnel person and plug them into the same paragraphs years later. Not saying we haven't all been wrong or that Kubes won't succeed but I wouldn't be so over the top since it seems the "Carr-Haters" are now your "Pink-Soapers."

I don't trust all national media but I trust they do their job..watching and analyzing football through the eyes of guys who played and got years of experience. Some do a good job, others don't, but I'll listen.

As Texanchick said, I'll listen to someone like Jaworski breakdown tape. But, that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about someone in the national media assessing the state of the franchise... He's not spent the time to study them to have any idea. I guarantee you that we know more about the roster than he does. Do you think he knows that Adibi, KBentley are our primary backup LBs? Or, does he even realize the youth on this team? Does he know about Kubiak's nervous tapping on the podium? Does he know that when Kubiak says a player got "dinged", it means he got a concussion? Does he know that McNair did not give Kubiak a vote of confidence when asked during the season? Or, does he know how the power brokerage between Rick Smith and Gary Kubiak work? Does he even know that Matt Schaub has less than 40 starts in his career? Did he even read the reasons McNair articulated for keeping Kubiak here? Can he name 5 starters from the 2005 Houston Texans? I bet he has no concept how deficient the talent was then.

The last time the national media starting attacking McNair was after the 2006 draft. How do those tirades look now?

WWJD
02-05-2010, 11:22 AM
Baldinger is just like any other guy with a national microphone..if he agrees with you or me he's smart and well informed.

If he doesn't he's a national guy and doesn't know much about the local team.

That's the spin I get from any national media type.

Double Barrel
02-05-2010, 11:23 AM
What I find really amusing is that folks tend to hype national media figures when they say something agreeable, but then dismiss them if they disagree.

If Baldinger said it was a great idea to extend Kubiak for two years, the same ones that are discounting him in this thread would be talking about what a great football analyst he is, and those that support him now would reverse their positions.

This quote comes to mind when reading these threads:

"One of my favorite philosophical tenets is that people will agree with you only if they already agree with you. You do not change people's minds."
~ Frank Zappa

p.s. lol @ WWJD. I saw your post after I said this. ;)

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 11:25 AM
I'm not sure about McNair being "content with mediocrity", but I feel fairly confident that he is not discontent with it, either. Owners show their discontent by changing coaching staffs, and McNair has gone the opposite way by giving him a two year extension. (btw, I'm not arguing for/against that action, but just commenting on this specific story about Baldinger's remarks).

I doubt McNair is 'happy' with 9-7, but it would not be that shocking if he is satisfied with it. The fact is that McNair had a playoff or bust attitude before the season, but that 'or else' mentality was merely talk when it came down to action. At least that was my perception going into the 2009 season.

Does anyone honestly think that McNair will fire Kubiak if we repeat 9-7 and miss the playoffs in 2010? I don't, and we have this season to support that perspective.


I'm glad that McNair doesn't set arbritrary standards to make his decisions. I would rather him look at the situation in a more holistic manner, understanding that complexities exist. There are variables and circumstances which can not be forecast ahead of time. It would be foolish to ignore those and make decisions solely on an arbritrary standard. I would be just as adamant about this if the Texans were a playoff team but it was evident that the coach wasn't good. You know, situations that have happened in the NFL where a coach stays around longer than he should, when it's clear that he has no clue what he's doing:

Wayne Fontes
Mike Tice
Barry Switzer
Marvin Lewis (just bought himself another 2 years)
Lovie Smith


meanwhile, some teams are able to make great decisions that is counter-intuitive to simply a W/L record. for example,

NYJets fired Mangini despite 9-7 (with injured QB), coming off a playoff appearence under Mangini in 2007.

WWJD
02-05-2010, 11:25 AM
Great minds think alike DB...or so I've been told. :)

Mr. White
02-05-2010, 11:30 AM
Baldinger just said something that we read everyday on this board. He has no idea what he's talking about.

/sarcasm

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 11:33 AM
What I find really amusing is that folks tend to hype national media figures when they say something agreeable, but then dismiss them if they disagree.

If Baldinger said it was a great idea to extend Kubiak for two years, the same ones that are discounting him in this thread would be talking about what a great football analyst he is, and those that support him now would reverse their positions.

This quote comes to mind when reading these threads:

"One of my favorite philosophical tenets is that people will agree with you only if they already agree with you. You do not change people's minds."
~ Frank Zappa

p.s. lol @ WWJD. I saw your post after I said this. ;)

That's not true. Sure, it's nice to hear Peter King pick the Texans to win the division. I like to hear that. But, I never argued or thought to myself, "man, the Texans are good. I know that because Peter King picked them and he's a smart guy". Fans like to hear good things about their team. That's natural. I've consistently mocked and criticized the local and national sports media simply because it has become a joke. I don't watch pregame shows. I can't watch ESPN or any studio show on NFL network. I listen to a lot of Sirius NFL radio but I don't ever brag about Adam Schein picking the Texans to win... because he's a dope and doesn't know what he's talking about. Now, if Tim Ryan studies the Texans and says he thinks they are on the brink of great things, I'll get a little excited. If he studies them and says they are in trouble, I'll get a little concerned.

badboy
02-05-2010, 11:34 AM
For me I guess it is like the old saying I can talk about my family but if someone else does, the fighting begins. If you want to criticise my team, then go through each game with them (and me) & I might respect your POV.Swoop in with negative comments once or twice does not convince me you know anything but are probably regurgitating what you heard someone else say. I truly doubt the players on any team listen to these bozos so why should we?

Second Honeymoon
02-05-2010, 11:36 AM
I totally agree. You and I know more about the Texans organization than any national media person. We can glean information simply by observing posture or subtle nuances in a Kubiak press conference. Baldinger has almost certainly never heard one. You, Jeremy Rice, Diehard Chris, AJ, LZ, and a few board members, along with my own observations are where I get the best and most detailed information about this team.

Baldinger disparaging this organization bothers me much less than someone like Dexman, Vinny, HoustonSpartan, Texecutioner, or other board members. Even though I think those boardmembers conclusions are wrong, I know they've put the time and thought into learning and understanding the team.

umm, no you don't. baldinger and king have forgotten more football than you will ever know. that is just ridiculous comment. you are a fan that pays to watch football, they are experts that are paid to watch football. they didn't win the lottery. there is a reason they get paid. to act like you and even TC know more than King about even the local team is ludicrous.

dale, vinny and I told you that Carr sucked yet you said it was eveyrone else's fault that Carr sucked. You were proven wrong time and time again but now you say that we were wrong. no, you were wrong.

and you will be wrong again.

Second Honeymoon
02-05-2010, 11:38 AM
I don't think anyone can argue against the fact Kubiak and Smith have done a much better job with this team than Capers and Casserly did. And also that the Texans are vastly improved from what they were Kubiaks first year here. The difference comes is whether you think, based on what has happened, that Kubkiak has what it takes to make a playoff team out of the Texans.

exactly thorn. is kubiak going to get us to the Super Bowl? its obvious he isn't....so why the hell are we extending him?

he is the guy to keep us mediocre...and keep the sheeple moving through the turnstile.

local legend my ass, he is an average HC at best

Hardcore Texan
02-05-2010, 11:40 AM
i couldn't agree more with what Baldinger said. oh by the way, baldinger was one of the first guys to call out David Carr for the horrible QB that he was. he was absolutely the first national guy to critique his pocket awareness and not blame the OL and coaching for every problem the guy had. I remember saying 'wow, finally some guys sees what the smart Texans fans have seen since David showed up in town'.....the sheeple were still talking about coaching and the Offensive Line. freaking stupid.

something tells me this guy knows more than most of the homers around here.

Baldinger calls it like he sees it, and unlike many of the local yayhoos and homers on this board, he is objective, knowledgeable and brutally honest.

It's quite obvious McNair is content with mediocrity based on the moves he has made in coaching, the moves he has made in free agent personnel, and the moves he has made in marketing. McNair lost me when he said they gave Kubiak an extension after comparing him to other coaches that had been hired since Kubiak. That is a freaking joke. No way in hell is that true. Kubiak hasn't done diddly but half of yall want a freaking statue of the guy for getting to the Mt.Everest-like peak of 9-7.

Screw these losers and screw the people that keep making excuses for their failures.

I didn't really get that from the majority of the posts in this thread. I saw a lot of posters being pretty objective. I think you just needed to get a good rant out to start your day, this post makes zero sense to me.

I have been damn critical of Kubiak this past season and that's not about to change because of an extension. People trying to pretend they know what McNair is thinking and what he is happy or unhappy about is downright laughable.

Being able to break down tape and compare key matchups is what Baldinger is good at, rubbing a crystal ball and telling me what others feel..... and how next season will go......not so much. National sports personalities who haven't taken their time to dig into the facts and actually draw logical conclusions have a hard time passing as a credible source IMO. At the end of the day, these people are paid to give opinions. And we know opinions are like aholes.

We all have the right to be proven wrong in our opinions, but at least a lot of us take the time and effort to shape them. Everyone that supports Kubiak is not a loser, just like people who oppose Kubiak are not. I can make a pretty good case for both sides. Throwing out blanket statements and lashing out at fellow fans because the don't agree with you is lame. It's okay to have differring view, one will be proven right eventually.

I for one am not making excuses for anyone's failures. Kubiak has to go out there an earn it this year. To know if giving him another year was a good idea or a mistake has yet to be realized to infer anything different is guess work and should not be stated as fact.

One thing is for sure, I will be watching very closely and I will be pulling for my Texans regardless of who wears the headset.

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 11:41 AM
This thread is going nuclear in 3...2...1...

Well it held in there a little longer than I think both you and I thought it would. Make no mistake now though, it's on it's way.....

Second Honeymoon
02-05-2010, 11:42 AM
Well, unless you think that Kubiak caused: the Chris Brown fumbles, the Steve Slaton fumbles, the Ryan Moats fumble and the odd overturn of the call at Indy, the Kris Brown missed FGs, the Bironas made 53 yd field goal, the Schaub interception at Arizona, the Schaub injury vs. Jacksonville, the Colts laying down versue NYJets in week #16, the Bengals laying down vs. Jets in week #17...

Unless he's responsible for every single one of those things, then clearly Kubiak can make the Texans a playoff team. Because, if any of those things happen differently, the Texans are in the playoffs.

The real question is whether he has what it takes to elevate the team's play enough to overcome a lot of misfortune. Last season, he couldn't quite get it done. I do believe he can, though. However, next season we could breeze to an 11 win season without him being tested in that way. So, it's a question that may not get answered for 2-3 years. Next season, I'm hopeful we get a few more bounces, we're even more talented and experienced, and we stay relatively healthy. If all that happens, he could coach this team worse than he did last season and we'll still be in the playoffs.

earth to dalemurphy. earth to dalemurphy. HE DID CAUSE THAT!!

he called a timeout for crying out loud. did you even watch the games? he gave Caldwell a timeout so he could look and see if it was worth reviewing.

Alll they had to do was have Schaub QB sneak, instead they waited for the clock to run down so they could take 10 freaking seconds off the clock because Kubiak was scared of giving Peyton 10 extra seconds...so instead he lost 7 freaking points.

you have lost all credibility...you don't even know what is going on.

basically, nothing is the fault of the coach. not the poor in-game adjustmenst, not the team comign out flat 75% of the season, not the poor halftime adjustments, not the being able to keep team inspired for a full game. no, none of that is on Gary. After all he is from Houston. he is God.

Yes, players contribute greatly to game's outcomes but to put it all on players is just stupid. Gary's stupidity cost us 3 games this year and will continue to do so because he plays scared, too much of a wuss to even watch critical plays, and gets outcoached by even the most rookiest of coaches.

whatever......go make love to your Kubiak love doll.

Second Honeymoon
02-05-2010, 11:45 AM
I'm glad that McNair doesn't set arbritrary standards to make his decisions. I would rather him look at the situation in a more holistic manner, understanding that complexities exist. There are variables and circumstances which can not be forecast ahead of time. It would be foolish to ignore those and make decisions solely on an arbritrary standard. I would be just as adamant about this if the Texans were a playoff team but it was evident that the coach wasn't good. You know, situations that have happened in the NFL where a coach stays around longer than he should, when it's clear that he has no clue what he's doing:

Wayne Fontes
Mike Tice
Barry Switzer
Marvin Lewis (just bought himself another 2 years)
Lovie Smith


meanwhile, some teams are able to make great decisions that is counter-intuitive to simply a W/L record. for example,

NYJets fired Mangini despite 9-7 (with injured QB), coming off a playoff appearence under Mangini in 2007.


Switzer?!?!?! the dude won a Super Bowl. his teams came out prepared and ready to play. Dude did an exemplary job getting that team prepared and they came out sticking people. The reason the Cowboys lost their dynasty-like run wasn't because of JJ leaving, it was because they lost Irvin who was the heart and soul of that team. Couple that with injury problems for Aikman and that was the demise. contrary to sheeple opinion, it wasn't just Jimmy's team. It was the team Jimmy assembled but that was a different team and was 2 years removed from Jimmy when they won.

Switzer was a HELLUVA coach both in college and NFL. He probably should have won 2 Super Bowls if not for the turnover issue the Cowboys had in Candlestick the year after Jimmy left. Something tells me they would have wiped the floor with the Stan Humphries-led Chargers team...

Geez, I just don't get it. Guys win Super Bowls and they should be run out of town, but a guy has a .500 record and he is God.

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 11:47 AM
umm, no you don't. baldinger and king have forgotten more football than you will ever know. that is just ridiculous comment. you are a fan that pays to watch football, they are experts that are paid to watch football. they didn't win the lottery. there is a reason they get paid. to act like you and even TC know more than King about even the local team is ludicrous.

dale, vinny and I told you that Carr sucked yet you said it was eveyrone else's fault. but now you say that we were wrong. no, you were wrong.

and you will be wrong again.

I do know more about the Texans than King or Baldinger... without a doubt. So do you. That doesn't mean that I know more about football than they do.

Regarding Carr, I was encouraged that he was going to be good until 2005. Then, I argued he should have an opportunity to play for a real offense in 2006. I thought there was a good chance we'd see dramatic improvement from 2005. My impression of him in 2003-2004 was that he was a young, improving QB. I had not heard about his lack of committment at that point. I gave up on him in the middle of the 2006 season. So, yes I was wrong about Carr... just like Dan Reeves and Gary Kubiak was. I'm wrong about stuff all the time. Just like you were wrong about Frank Bush and Vinny was comedicly wrong about Brian Cushing. And, you are right, I will be wrong again. And, so will Brian Baldinger and Peter King.

Double Barrel
02-05-2010, 11:50 AM
I'm glad that McNair doesn't set arbritrary standards to make his decisions. I would rather him look at the situation in a more holistic manner, understanding that complexities exist. There are variables and circumstances which can not be forecast ahead of time. It would be foolish to ignore those and make decisions solely on an arbritrary standard.

I'm not quite sure what you just said... :um:

Arbitrary is defined: Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle

It seems to me that McNair is basing decisions on arbitrary standards, whereas other owners have firm goals that must be met in order to earn an extension.

Every team in the league experiences "variables and circumstances which can not be forecast ahead of time" every year. There are reasons and there are excuses, and often they are the same thing. It depends on which side of the aisle you're on, I guess.

You say that our our owner is 'holistic' in his decisions (whatever that means), then it stands to reason that his obvious arbitrary standards reveal his true feelings.

And that is clearly a sense of contentment with the direction of this team by granting Kubiak not only a 'stay of execution' but a pardon with a two year extension.

I'm not arguing about the pro/con of keeping Kubiak. He's our head coach for 2010 and most likely beyond.

What Baldinger said is probably closer to the truth than not. Flower the language all you want, but the support of Baldinger's perspective is in action, not words. McNair's actions clearly reveal his position on the subject.

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 11:52 AM
This thread is going nuclear in 3...2...1...

Well it held in there a little longer than I think both you and I thought it would. Make no mistake now though, it's on it's way.....

http://www.keyboardcrewchief.com/keyboard/stories/uploads/nuclear_bomb_mushroom_cloud.jpg

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 11:53 AM
Switzer?!?!?! the dude won a Super Bowl. his teams came out prepared and ready to play. contrary to sheeple opinion, it wasn't just Jimmy's team. It was the team Jimmy assembled but that was a different team and was 2 years removed from Jimmy when they won.

Switzer was a HELLUVA coach both in college and NFL. He probably should have won 2 Super Bowls if not for the turnover issue the Cowboys had in Candlestick the year after Jimmy left.
Geez, I just don't get it. Guys win Super Bowls and they should be run out of town, but a guy has a .500 record and he is God.

I blame the Texas educational system for cranking out people this ignorant.


So, you excuse Switzer's failings because of turnovers but you blame Kubiak for missed FGs and turnovers... interesting.

You are restating my point. Sometimes, because of all kinds of variables, poor coaches can have success, good ones can fail (Belichek in Cleveland). It happens. If you think that Barry Switzer is a good NFL head coach then you clearly are delirious. He was a fool! He was a 57 year old man that attempted to carry a handgun on to a commercial airline. What does that say about his decision-making ability to you?

By the way, have you ever listened to Moos Johnston talk about that Superbowl win? His RB coach, the name eludes me, walked up to him after the game and said that was the greatest performance by a group of players in the history of the NFL. Referencing winning a superbowl inspite of the awful head coach.

Hardcore Texan
02-05-2010, 11:55 AM
basically, nothing is the fault of the coach. not the poor in-game adjustmenst, not the team comign out flat 75% of the season, not the poor halftime adjustments, not the being able to keep team inspired for a full game. .

Now these are some the same very things I was very upset with Kubiak about, and since he is coming back I hope we don't see any of this next year. Another one was coming out flat against the Jets in the opener and getting man-handled. I was so pissed off about that and lay all that blame on the HC.

I would have definitely supported bringing in Cowher, but I don't who else out there besides him would be a definite upgrade over Kubiak.

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 11:56 AM
I'm not quite sure what you just said... :um:

Arbitrary is defined: Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle

It seems to me that McNair is basing decisions on arbitrary standards, whereas other owners have firm goals that must be met in order to earn an extension.

Every team in the league experiences "variables and circumstances which can not be forecast ahead of time" every year. There are reasons and there are excuses, and often they are the same thing. It depends on which side of the aisle you're on, I guess.

You say that our our owner is 'holistic' in his decisions (whatever that means), then it stands to reason that his obvious arbitrary standards reveal his true feelings.

And that is clearly a sense of contentment with the direction of this team by granting Kubiak not only a 'stay of execution' but a pardon with a two year extension.

I'm not arguing about the pro/con of keeping Kubiak. He's our head coach for 2010 and most likely beyond.

What Baldinger said is probably closer to the truth than not. Flower the language all you want, but the support of Baldinger's perspective is in action, not words. McNair's actions clearly reveal his position on the subject.


You are calling McNair a liar and saying that Baldinger knows better what is in McNair's head/heart than many of us do. Why?

McNair said that he believes the stability of the organization with Kubiak in place is the best way to achieve success next year and the years' following. Why is he lying?... He could be wrong, certainly.

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 12:01 PM
http://www.keyboardcrewchief.com/keyboard/stories/uploads/nuclear_bomb_mushroom_cloud.jpg

Throwing out the David Carr card is pretty dirty, I think racial slurs should be more welcomed around here than that!

Hardcore Texan
02-05-2010, 12:06 PM
I'm not quite sure what you just said... :um:

Arbitrary is defined: Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle

It seems to me that McNair is basing decisions on arbitrary standards, whereas other owners have firm goals that must be met in order to earn an extension.

Every team in the league experiences "variables and circumstances which can not be forecast ahead of time" every year. There are reasons and there are excuses, and often they are the same thing. It depends on which side of the aisle you're on, I guess.

You say that our our owner is 'holistic' in his decisions (whatever that means), then it stands to reason that his obvious arbitrary standards reveal his true feelings.

And that is clearly a sense of contentment with the direction of this team by granting Kubiak not only a 'stay of execution' but a pardon with a two year extension.

I'm not arguing about the pro/con of keeping Kubiak. He's our head coach for 2010 and most likely beyond.

What Baldinger said is probably closer to the truth than not. Flower the language all you want, but the support of Baldinger's perspective is in action, not words. McNair's actions clearly reveal his position on the subject.

Maybe McNair didn't think he could get a better replacement or had a better option for next year, maybe he wanted to give Kubiak one more season and did the extension as a show of public backing of his coach. Maybe he spoke to Cowher or another coach offline. We don't know, that's part of the point. And for Baldinger or anyone else to infer that he is content with being mediocre is BS. They have no clue what went into McNair's decision.

Me personally, I would not have done the extension. And if I could not have had a significant upgrade at the HC spot I would have made the move. Anything less than a significant upgrade (a proven winner) gives us a lesser chance to be successful next year IMO. I would have not done the extension and told Kubiak, this year is for all the marbles, it's a contract year for you and this team has to get it done or it's game over.

GP
02-05-2010, 12:09 PM
For me I guess it is like the old saying I can talk about my family but if someone else does, the fighting begins. If you want to criticise my team, then go through each game with them (and me) & I might respect your POV.Swoop in with negative comments once or twice does not convince me you know anything but are probably regurgitating what you heard someone else say. I truly doubt the players on any team listen to these bozos so why should we?

Only one problem with this line of reasoning you have:

1a. If Baldinger or King says something GOOD about us, there will be a rush by everyone to post it as a new thread and brag about how someone "seems to finally give the Texans some love for a change!"

1b. Heck, there is a gaggle of people on here who get their undies all bunched up if we are too far down in someone's Power Rankings or Post-Draft Report. I used to be one those, until I realized that I got to take the bad along with the good.

1c. Also, we post threads all the time, and take great joy in them, when an analyst rips Vince Young or Reggie Bush. LOL. Right? That analyst suddenly becomes the smartest person in the world. Unless he messes with US.

Not every review is going to be a glowing review of our team. And TC is pretty accurate when she says she doesn't listen to the voices--I, too, limit my intake to the people who seem to put forth the most honest effort.

I trust Baldinger above almost every other of his colleagues out there. His film dissection of Carr and Schaub, when the whole deal went down for Schaub, was soooo accurate that it was creepy freaky good.

Michael Smith is also someone who is not a hack; someone who seems to be objective and not silly all the time.

There is something to the idea/theory of being a homer and how it clouds a fan's thought process.

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 12:11 PM
Now these are some the same very things I was very upset with Kubiak about, and since he is coming back I hope we don't see any of this next year. Another one was coming out flat against the Jets in the opener and getting man-handled. I was so pissed off about that and lay all that blame on the HC.
I would have definitely supported bringing in Cowher, but I don't who else out there besides him would be a definite upgrade over Kubiak.

I was livid. It was the only game I've ever walked out on early. I left in the middle of the 3rd quarter. That was a disgrace and I think Kubiak deserves a lot of blame for that one. Not just for them being flat, but also for being unprepared for the A gap blitzes. And, for the safety situation. They should've never gone into the season without upgrading at safety.

I think the other bad showing by Kubiak was the home game versus Jacksonville. The way they handled Grossman was a mistake as well as the Chris Brown HB pass fiasco.

However, I can't escape the fact that this young team continues to improve and play hard under him. I really believe its on the cusp and think blowing it up right now would be a mistake. Barring catastrophic injuries next season, I can't imagine still being supportive of Kubiak if the Texans don't win at least 10-11 games.

infantrycak
02-05-2010, 12:11 PM
The reason the Cowboys lost their dynasty-like run wasn't because of JJ leaving, it was because they lost Irvin who was the heart and soul of that team.

Irvin was lost 2 seasons after Switzer was fired.

Switzer was a poor choice to follow JJ particularly because their Hall of Fame QB had purposely gone to a different school to avoid Switzer in college.

It was the team Jimmy assembled but that was a different team and was 2 years removed from Jimmy when they won.

Switzer was a HELLUVA coach both in college and NFL.

I'm sorry but I just can't give too much credit to a guy taking over a back to back SB team and then winning one with essentially the same team. And I was a Cowboys fan in that era. Switzer was sitting on the sideline watching JJ's team win.

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 12:13 PM
Opinions are like a-holes. Everyone has one :thinking: :user: and some people are one. :breakdance:

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 12:14 PM
Throwing out the David Carr card is pretty dirty, I think racial slurs should be more welcomed around here than that!

BTW, I mentioned your Carr view on page 1 not to throw it in your face but to show that we all aren't "experts" on this team or any team despite thinking to know every little move. It also shows that any one of our heart felt opinions can be off. I think Baldinger is a guy that studies his stuff. I think King says some really stupid stuff at times and can be a blowhard. But I also think they talk to people within organizations and around the league all day, every day and that they might have a better feel for some situations than any of us. I think alot of what we process is the b.s. we get fed.

WWJD
02-05-2010, 12:21 PM
I bet Marc needed a Vanderhug after Brian's harsh words...:)

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 12:25 PM
BTW, I mentioned your Carr view on page 1 not to throw it in your face but to show that we all aren't "experts" on this team or any team despite thinking to know every little move. It also shows that any one of our heart felt opinions can be off. I think Baldinger is a guy that studies his stuff. I think King says some really stupid stuff at times and can be a blowhard. But I also think they talk to people within organizations and around the league all day, every day and that they might have a better feel for some situations than any of us. I think alot of what we process is the b.s. we get fed.

I agree. And, I do understand that I'm an optimist-leaning fan. That is intentional. It doesn't mean I'm delusional or I don't pay attention.

My point regarding Baldinger and where I think you are wrong is that I don't think he does a lot of homework regarding the interworkings of the organization. To Texanchicks point, it's not feasable. He covers 32 teams and frankly has a job in media instead of coaching because he values his free time. So, I doubt he does the serious homework you think he does. That being said, if he made a point on coaching tape about the Texans, I would certainly be inclined to respect it.

Double Barrel
02-05-2010, 12:39 PM
I do know more about the Texans than King or Baldinger... without a doubt. So do you. That doesn't mean that I know more about football than they do.

Baldinger has been propping the Texans all season long. He's been one of the more fairer analysts on NFL Playbook (NFLN) about the Texans because he bases his opinions on game tape and not the general sense of the 'expansion' Houston Texans.

His views have always been objective, and he's been saying all along that the Texans have the talent to make the playoffs, but they are inconsistent in playcalling and execution. He places responsibility on both the players and the coaches.

In this story, he was asked specifically about the extension to Kubiak. Based upon what he has seen ALL season in game film, it is his take that Kubiak is not leading this team to the level that it could be at. Our four game losing streak to division opponents showed a lot of folks that we have the talent but seem to be missing some intangible(s) that would push these players to finish games strong when it really matters. That is one of the responsibilities of coaching.

You are just proving my earlier point that if he had supported the extension, you'd be cheering him right now. :)

You are calling McNair a liar and saying that Baldinger knows better what is in McNair's head/heart than many of us do. Why?

McNair said that he believes the stability of the organization with Kubiak in place is the best way to achieve success next year and the years' following. Why is he lying?... He could be wrong, certainly.

I never called McNair a liar. That is a disingenuous and intellectually dishonest statement on your part. I could take that as an insult if I was so inclined, but I find it more laughable than anything.

Like I said, I'm not arguing pro/con of Kubiak. He's our HC. Period.

But what Baldinger stated could be perceived as right if you look at it from some perspectives, and that's all I'm trying to point out. Blink twice if you can at least comprehend this statement (even if you disagree with it, comprehension does not equal agreement).

Please try to be a little less emotional in your defense of your position.

Mailman
02-05-2010, 12:40 PM
earth to dalemurphy. earth to dalemurphy. HE DID CAUSE THAT!!

he called a timeout for crying out loud. did you even watch the games? he gave Caldwell a timeout so he could look and see if it was worth reviewing.

DID YOU WATCH THE GAME? Do you not remember how quickly it all unfolded?

This is the most unfair line of attack on Kubiak all year, but that should surprise no one since you've repeatedly demonstrated your inability to be an fair analyst. By any objective measure, blaming that sequence of events on the least culpable individual is absurd. The culpable parties are the replay official for overturning the call on the field with a horribly wrong decision (and we KNOW it was the WRONG CALL!!!) and Moats for fumbling the ball in the first place. The argument that Kubiak caused it all by letting the clock wind down to the two-minute warning (not a called timeout, btw) is simplistic hogwash that ignores the totality of circumstance. Yes, we were all screaming at our TVs for the Texans to hurry up and run a play but--and here's the key that you intentionally ignore--Gary Kubiak and Matt Schaub weren't sitting on their sofas watching the game on a big ass HDTV. They were trying to call the next play, score a TD, and do it by using the most time possible to keep The Peyton off the field. Nobody on the Texans sideline had any clue that the play was even remotely controvertible because all the players and the officials acted as if it was a routine fumble out of bounds. And guess what? IT WAS!!!!

Yet you blame that whole sequence on Gary Kubiak? Not Moats, not the dumbass replay official, but the coach on the sideline who was never told by any of his players or his assistant coaches that the play was questionable.

If you refuse to analyze that series of events as they unfolded from the perspective of a coach on the sideline and not a fan sitting at home with the advantage of replay in real time, then you have no credibility on the Kubiak topic whatsoever.

Double Barrel
02-05-2010, 12:42 PM
http://www.keyboardcrewchief.com/keyboard/stories/uploads/nuclear_bomb_mushroom_cloud.jpg

and BOOM! goes the thread. :shades:

[off topic] it is amazing to me that something so destructive and powerful as a nuke can be so amazing to look at. Nice, but very scary, pic, man.

infantrycak
02-05-2010, 12:49 PM
But what Baldinger stated could be perceived as right if you look at it from some perspectives, and that's all I'm trying to point out.

From the could be perceived part absolutely. I don't have a problem with Baldinger or anyone thinking Kubiak should be gone or shouldn't have been extended. I do think his manner of expression is wrong and displays something seen around here a lot - attempting to characterize the intent or belief of someone else. I understand saying McNair made a mistake because of X, Y and Z. I think it is wrong to say McNair is "content" or that other MB members are "content." It's a not very subtle form of character assassination spun off a disagreement on conclusions.

Mailman
02-05-2010, 12:50 PM
"My whole mindset in that scenario right there, really, what had happened over there (with the fumble), the topic never came up that there was a problem over there. So I was strictly trying to control the game from the standpoint of hoping not to put our defense back on the field and give Peyton (Manning) the ball with too much time. I was very comfortable. I think it would've been second-and-two. We go to the two-minute warning. Hopefully we score on second down, if we don't, we score on third. We're taking time off the clock, so we don't put our defense in a bad situation and we go in 13-7 at the half. So I'm trying to control the football game from that standpoint. Obviously, when we come back from the two-minute warning, then the discussion starts. ‘Oh, they're looking at this play. This ball might be out.' So at that point it's too late, but it was not a discussion up until that point."

SH blames Kubiak even though Kubiak wasn't told anything by anyone!

What an objective guy.

Double Barrel
02-05-2010, 12:55 PM
From the could be perceived part absolutely. I don't have a problem with Baldinger or anyone thinking Kubiak should be gone or shouldn't have been extended. I do think his manner of expression is wrong and displays something seen around here a lot - attempting to characterize the intent or belief of someone else. I understand saying McNair made a mistake because of X, Y and Z. I think it is wrong to say McNair is "content" or that other MB members are "content." It's a not very subtle form of character assassination spun off a disagreement on conclusions.

But, would you agree that McNair is not discontent with the example of providing a two year extension? If you think McNair is discontented at this point, please provide an explanation to support this view.

Content just means satisfied. And satisfied is a temporary feeling at a specific point in time. I don't see why this is an issue that has so many inflamed. We are a mediocre team with lots of promise, and I know quite a few fans (including MB members) that are content with our progress to this point.

I do not see Baldinger trying to make inflammatory statements. He's just calling it like he sees it, and his case can be made with supporting evidence. It's not a big deal, folks.

GP
02-05-2010, 12:55 PM
However, I can't escape the fact that this young team continues to improve and play hard under him. I really believe its on the cusp and think blowing it up right now would be a mistake. Barring catastrophic injuries next season, I can't imagine still being supportive of Kubiak if the Texans don't win at least 10-11 games.

I'm just throwing this out there as a possible explanation of why you feel how you feel, particularly the statement of yours that I bolded.

Maybe, as it has been theorized, Gary Kubiak does the following very well:

1. He has a fairly good knack for seeing what a team's needs are. This means he makes a pretty good "scout" and identifies talent. We know he has done a better job at that than the Capers-Casserly era. Would everyone agree with that? A good 90% of us would, IMO.

2. He has definitely pinpointed that Schaub could do better than Carr, and he has built a nice offense that is vastly better than what we had with Capers-Casserly. Scouting of Schaub + Better offense scheme + AJ = Improvement.

3. He seems to deflect praise when we win, and absorb responsibility when we lose. That's admirable.

On the flip side:

1. Goofy roster decisions, which includes questionable handling of running backs and what I consider to be a favor towards certain wide receivers, as well as the issue with our kicker. Hindsight claims are just weak, to me. If you and I see it...shouldn't the coach see it, too? Simple stuff. Supposedly.

2. Coming out VERY flat when there's no reason for it. I still don't know how this is an issue with the players. I really think the guy is a Practice kind of coach, and he runs games like he's in practice drills. It's good to be chill, but is he frozen out there?

3. The in-game situations that he ought to be in control of more. It was quoted at the end of 2008 by a few people with the Texans, including Kubiak, that he was going to be a HEAD COACH on gameday in 2009, instead of micro-managing the playcalling. Hmmm.....well....uh.....NOT. Chalk it up to Kyle maybe not doing his job as well as he could have, maybe? Maybe.

4. His squeamish reactions to big, game-deciding plays. OK, so maybe this is a personal preference thing. I don;t think this is what MAKES him a bad coach, but I do think it's one of the symptoms of the problem he has with being a better head coach.

5. So are we not really prepared on game day? Someone here caught the statement by Kubiak that they had used some of the bye week this year to not just prepare for the MNF game vs. Titans...but that he also tried to get them ready for the Colts a little bit, too. Seirously? Just concede the Colts game already! I am 100% serious. The MNF game should have been THE only ting you focus on. No Manning, No Colts, no ANYTHING but the Titans. Destroy the Titans, in our house, and we are in the playoffs the way it went the rest of the season.

6. But he can't win against divisional rivals. No sugar-coating this one.

RESULT OF ANALYSIS:

Gary Kubiak is good at finding talent, taking crap and making it better. He is good at building a competent and viable offense in today's NFL. But in terms of the other half of being a head coach? He isn;t there. It's not even close.

So maybe the tiger can change those stripes. Maybe he can't.

To me, Kubiak making the turn and biringing it all home to us Texans fans is like trying to hit a bulls-eye, from 1,000 yards, with a BB gun. You have the rifle, the ammo, and maybe even a scope. But you don't have the full, logistical requirements to hit the mark that's there in the NFL world.

Not now, at least. And who is to say he will or won't in 2010? Or beyond? None of us do. But I think we have a good betting line to start with.

Kaiser Toro
02-05-2010, 01:06 PM
"Content with mediocrity," based on results is exactly right. We have never had a winning record in our conference, we have never had a winning record in our division and Kubiak's overall record is 31-33. We are a mediocre team, with a coach who calls his players kids and can't watch important plays. BTW, he is in a conference that he played and coached his whole professional life.

Kubiak in my opinion has done a decent job in getting us out of the Capers/Casserly mess, but this is looking more and more like the Peter Principle coming into play. The coach needs to change his approach/messaging in my opinion. Perhaps, we will see the Year 5 plan define his players as men, and he will act like a man on the sidelines.

infantrycak
02-05-2010, 01:11 PM
But, would you agree that McNair is not discontent with the example of providing a two year extension? If you think McNair is discontented at this point, please provide an explanation to support this view.

Content just means satisfied. And satisfied is a temporary feeling at a specific point in time. I don't see why this is an issue that has so many inflamed. We are a mediocre team with lots of promise, and I know quite a few fans (including MB members) that are content with our progress to this point.

I do not see Baldinger trying to make inflammatory statements. He's just calling it like he sees it, and his case can be made with supporting evidence. It's not a big deal, folks.

Well I shorthanded by only typing content but the quote in the title is the real point, "content with mediocrity." To me that means an assertion by Baldy or the folks around here that McNair thinks the team and coach are mediocre and he is still satisfied or content. That's an assertion independent of any merits argument for either side on Kubiak's performance. It's an attack on his character and thinking. It's displayed here in people saying he doesn't care about the team's results as long as the marketing department keeps pulling in revenue. I don't think there is a shred of evidence for that kind of attack or any reason to believe McNair isn't doing what he believes is best for the team. There are good arguments against Kubiak but content with mediocrity is an assertion McNair actually believes Kubiak is not the best guy for the job but just doesn't care enough to do anything about it. I just don't buy that. I think he simply came to a different conclusion, that Kubiak is the best guy to take the Texans to the next level.

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 01:12 PM
I'm just throwing this out there as a possible explanation of why you feel how you feel, particularly the statement of yours that I bolded.

Maybe, as it has been theorized, Gary Kubiak does the following very well:

1. He has a fairly good knack for seeing what a team's needs are. This means he makes a pretty good "scout" and identifies talent. We know he has done a better job at that than the Capers-Casserly era. Would everyone agree with that? A good 90% of us would, IMO.

2. He has definitely pinpointed that Schaub could do better than Carr, and he has built a nice offense that is vastly better than what we had with Capers-Casserly. Scouting of Schaub + Better offense scheme + AJ = Improvement.

3. He seems to deflect praise when we win, and absorb responsibility when we lose. That's admirable.

On the flip side:

1. Goofy roster decisions, which includes questionable handling of running backs and what I consider to be a favor towards certain wide receivers, as well as the issue with our kicker. Hindsight claims are just weak, to me. If you and I see it...shouldn't the coach see it, too? Simple stuff. Supposedly.

2. Coming out VERY flat when there's no reason for it. I still don't know how this is an issue with the players. I really think the guy is a Practice kind of coach, and he runs games like he's in practice drills. It's good to be chill, but is he frozen out there?

3. The in-game situations that he ought to be in control of more. It was quoted at the end of 2008 by a few people with the Texans, including Kubiak, that he was going to be a HEAD COACH on gameday in 2009, instead of micro-managing the playcalling. Hmmm.....well....uh.....NOT. Chalk it up to Kyle maybe not doing his job as well as he could have, maybe? Maybe.

4. His squeamish reactions to big, game-deciding plays. OK, so maybe this is a personal preference thing. I don;t think this is what MAKES him a bad coach, but I do think it's one of the symptoms of the problem he has with being a better head coach.

5. So are we not really prepared on game day? Someone here caught the statement by Kubiak that they had used some of the bye week this year to not just prepare for the MNF game vs. Titans...but that he also tried to get them ready for the Colts a little bit, too. Seirously? Just concede the Colts game already! I am 100% serious. The MNF game should have been THE only ting you focus on. No Manning, No Colts, no ANYTHING but the Titans. Destroy the Titans, in our house, and we are in the playoffs the way it went the rest of the season.

6. But he can't win against divisional rivals. No sugar-coating this one.

RESULT OF ANALYSIS:

Gary Kubiak is good at finding talent, taking crap and making it better. He is good at building a competent and viable offense in today's NFL. But in terms of the other half of being a head coach? He isn;t there. It's not even close.

So maybe the tiger can change those stripes. Maybe he can't.

To me, Kubiak making the turn and biringing it all home to us Texans fans is like trying to hit a bulls-eye, from 1,000 yards, with a BB gun. You have the rifle, the ammo, and maybe even a scope. But you don't have the full, logistical requirements to hit the mark that's there in the NFL world.

Not now, at least. And who is to say he will or won't in 2010? Or beyond? None of us do. But I think we have a good betting line to start with.

I wouldn't characterize some of the points the way that you did... particularly the bullseye/BB gun analogy. But, it's a good post and there isn't a lot there to squabble with. I would probably add a few in his Pros column. But, until there are more results, I think it's a fair list.

Mailman
02-05-2010, 01:23 PM
Here's a thought experiment for the bottom-liners like Baldinger and others who use the playoffs as a results-based metric for Gary Kubiak's performance and Bob McNair's assessment of his franchise:

Let's assume the Bengals and/or Colts decided to play their starters in the last two weeks of the season and the Jets lost one of those games. Gary Kubiak's Texans finish with the same 9-7 record, but *this* 9-7 record gets them into the playoffs. Same team, same coach, same record, same owner, same everything....but they're a playoff team. All because of events they did not control.

Does this make Kubiak a better coach? Does it make McNair an owner who wants to win? Does it change the debate at all?

Kaiser Toro
02-05-2010, 01:50 PM
Here's a thought experiment for the bottom-liners like Baldinger and others who use the playoffs as a results-based metric for Gary Kubiak's performance and Bob McNair's assessment of his franchise:

Let's assume the Bengals and/or Colts decided to play their starters in the last two weeks of the season and the Jets lost one of those games. Gary Kubiak's Texans finish with the same 9-7 record, but *this* 9-7 record gets them into the playoffs. Same team, same coach, same record, same owner, same everything....but they're a playoff team. All because of events they did not control.

Does this make Kubiak a better coach? Does it make McNair an owner who wants to win? Does it change the debate at all?

No, it does not for me. He can't get his teams ready to play until the end of the year, which suggests to me he is a slow/hesitant learner or implementer, or that his team has to much pride.

I want Kubiak to succeed, but historicals and feel provide me no comfort like some of y'all.

Texans_Chick
02-05-2010, 01:54 PM
It's quite obvious McNair is content with mediocrity based on the moves he has made in coaching, the moves he has made in free agent personnel, and the moves he has made in marketing. McNair lost me when he said they gave Kubiak an extension after comparing him to other coaches that had been hired since Kubiak. That is a freaking joke. No way in hell is that true. Kubiak hasn't done diddly but half of yall want a freaking statue of the guy for getting to the Mt.Everest-like peak of 9-7.

Screw these losers and screw the people that keep making excuses for their failures.

Hey, I personally can see the pros and cons of giving Kubiak another contract, letting him lame duck, or firing him.

But I think what we can all agree on is that there's no reason to disagree in a disagreeable way.

There is enough nastiness in the world without increasing it.

People tend to get particularly testy in the offseason because there's no new stuff to talk about so they get into some poster on poster violence. But there's no need for message board drama. I think everyone wants to see the team win more, it's just that different people have different thoughts on what the best way of doing that is. If they happen to end up being right, a lot of time it is more likely due to providence then particular prognostication skills.

Let's get along peoples. Disagree with people's arguments, not so much being nasty towards people.

:kitten:

The Pencil Neck
02-05-2010, 02:00 PM
exactly thorn. is kubiak going to get us to the Super Bowl? its obvious he isn't....so why the hell are we extending him?

he is the guy to keep us mediocre...and keep the sheeple moving through the turnstile.

local legend my ass, he is an average HC at best

This is the part we disagree with.

If it was obvious that Kubiak wasn't the guy to get us to the Super Bowl, then we wouldn't be having this argument.

infantrycak
02-05-2010, 02:03 PM
No, it does not for me. He can't get his teams ready to play until the end of the year, which suggests to me he is a slow/hesitant learner or implementer, or that his team has to much pride.

I want Kubiak to succeed, but historicals and feel provide me no comfort like some of y'all.

We were 5-3 at the half way point. We had a better 1st half of the season than 2nd and that was with 3 games played with the worst D in football.

JB
02-05-2010, 02:07 PM
We were 5-3 at the half way point. We had a better 1st half of the season than 2nd and that was with 3 games played with the worst D in football.


Facts have no place in this discussion!:specnatz:

threetoedpete
02-05-2010, 02:16 PM
Well all I know is don't get your hand between two dogs and a bone. The basic problem has always been....and I understand those of you with an agenda, that you really high balled the talent on the roster when Kubiak took over. We switched defenses. Switched quarterbacks....switched offensive schemes. And any one of those things would of set the club back four of five years. Any one of those things. And we had three of them piled on top of one another. And the fourth thing is the Colts. They've out drafted us and Manning has flat out out played us.

Lastly, we run the Denver West Coast offense. The main bomb thrower in here ...if you believe that Cower, or Gruden, Dungy, or Mariochie or anyone is not going to tear down the roster once again and bring in his system and his philosophies, and his players...you're just a fool. You are going to have the same kind of roster turn over you had with Kubiak. Someone posted it the other day what was it 80% ? And the very first guy who would go is Andre Johnson. Because he is the most valuable piece we have on the roster. He has the highest resale value.

The very first thing you have to have as an organization is stability. And that, with all due respect to Bladinger and the monkeys at sports610 radio, is what the owner just bought for us....believe it or not.

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 02:19 PM
We were 5-3 at the half way point. We had a better 1st half of the season than 2nd and that was with 3 games played with the worst D in football.

Looks like another myth busted.

Kaiser Toro
02-05-2010, 02:20 PM
We were 5-3 at the half way point. We had a better 1st half of the season than 2nd and that was with 3 games played with the worst D in football.

I was there for the 5-3 start, and saw the annual AFC South Slide. If it were not for another strong finish, we would most likely not be having this discussion.

And that was good for another......Wayne Fontes moment! :)

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 02:21 PM
Not saying we haven't all been wrong or that Kubes won't succeed but I wouldn't be so over the top since it seems the "Carr-Haters" are now your "Pink-Soapers."


I'm not a Pink-Soaper.

I'm a Carr Hater.

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 02:22 PM
Well all I know is don't get your hand between two dogs and a bone. The basic problem has always been....and I understand those of you with an agenda, that you really high balled the talent on the roster when Kubiak took over. We switched defenses. Switched quarterbacks....switched offensive schemes. And any one of those things would of set the club back four of five years. Any one of those things. And we had three of them piled on top of one another. And the fourth thing is the Colts. They've out drafted us and Manning has flat out out played us.

Lastly, we run the Denver West Coast offense. The main bomb thrower in here ...if you believe that Cower, or Gruden, Dungy, or Mariochie or anyone is not going to tear down the roster once again and bring in his system and his philosophies, and his players...you're just a fool. You are going to have the same kind of roster turn over you had with Kubiak. Someone posted it the other day what was it 80% ? And the very first guy who would go is Andre Johnson. Because he is the most valuable piece we have on the roster. He has the highest resale value.

The very first thing you have to have as an organization is stability. And that, with all due respect to Bladiner and the monkeys at sports610 radio, is what the owner just bought for us....believe it or not.

1 Bolded) Again, part of the debate. No team takes 4-5 seasons to implement systems. Most don't have the time or patience. This day and age I give teams 2 to get it out there(1st to learn and get the vocab, etc and the 2nd to pick up little nuances and start to see it as a while) and by the 3rd you should be going...when it comes to a system. You can win in that time too but I'd say the 3rd is when you click.

2 Bolded) Not true either. No coach tears down full teams with talent. They bring in their type guys, sure, but top coaches will adjust to the talent and then mix in their guys. That is what used to set Parcells apart. He could collect his guys in a hurry and turn teams.

I'm not a Pink-Soaper.

I'm a Carr Hater.

I was just talking in parallels between those debates and this one when it came to how he categorized the other side, not as to where everyone still falls.

Thorn
02-05-2010, 02:24 PM
I'm not a Pink-Soaper.

I'm a Carr Hater.

I like pistachios. :)

Grams
02-05-2010, 02:25 PM
Don't confuse people with facts.

threetoedpete
02-05-2010, 02:27 PM
1 Bolded) Again, part of the debate. No team takes 4-5 seasons to implement systems. Most don't have the time or patience. This day and age I give teams 2 to get it out there(1st to learn and get the vocab, etc and the 2nd to pick up little nuances and start to see it as a while) and by the 3rd you should be going...when it comes to a system. You can win in that time too but I'd say the 3rd is when you click.

2 Bolded) Not true either. No coach tears down full teasm with talent. They bring in their type guys, sure but top coaches will adjust to the talent and then mix in their guys. That is what used to set Parcells apart. He could collect his guys in a hurry and turn teams.

1. Obviously this one is.
2. And yes they do. It's happening right now in Detroit, and Kansas City. And soon it will happen in San Diego. And three years after that, New Orleans. The NFL is always an ebb and flow. The tide is either coming in or going out. And , obviuosly, for Robert C. McNair the tide for the next three years is coming in.
And his opinion is the one that counts..doesn't it ?

And we can both watch with great anticipation what happens in Arizona with their QB switch and see just how long it takes them, without roster moves, to reach the NFC championship once again. Under you're point, shouldn't take very long should it ?

....two years as you post ? three ?

The Pencil Neck
02-05-2010, 02:32 PM
RESULT OF ANALYSIS:

Gary Kubiak is good at finding talent, taking crap and making it better. He is good at building a competent and viable offense in today's NFL. But in terms of the other half of being a head coach? He isn;t there. It's not even close.

So maybe the tiger can change those stripes. Maybe he can't.

To me, Kubiak making the turn and biringing it all home to us Texans fans is like trying to hit a bulls-eye, from 1,000 yards, with a BB gun. You have the rifle, the ammo, and maybe even a scope. But you don't have the full, logistical requirements to hit the mark that's there in the NFL world.

Not now, at least. And who is to say he will or won't in 2010? Or beyond? None of us do. But I think we have a good betting line to start with.

Think about guys like Tony Dungy and Bill Cowher and Marty Schottenheimer. These guys built good teams and still couldn't get into the Super Bowl. For years and years. Dungy and Cower finally made it and finally won. But prior to them finally winning, a lot of people wanted to get rid of them as coaches and bring in someone to close the deal. Fisher, Dennis Green, Schottenheimer, Levy, Reeves, Wade Phillips, ... a lot of really good coaches have never closed the deal.

You say that Kubiak isn't a head coach because he's made some bad game day decisions and because there have been times when his teams have come out flat. But you can't find a coach in the league who hasn't made bad game day decisions and most of them have had teams that have come out flat. This team has also fought back and fought hard.

This team has continued to improve. The talent is getting deeper. Our play on both sides of the ball is getting better. I don't see any reason to believe that it won't continue to improve.

So to me, it comes down to strategy. And I believe in a stable organization. I don't believe that making changes every couple of years is a good strategy. And if we clean house and start over, there's no guarantee that whoever we bring in is going to do better no matter how big or small the reputation and there's a good chance we'll get worse. If we clean house, there's actually a higher chance of getting worse than there is of getting better. You can point to the Ravens or the Dolphins or the Jets all you want but the reality is that teams that get into that 2-3 years or bust mentality usually bust.

Until Kubiak shows me that he's doing a bad job, I'm going to continue to back him. I think he's doing a good job. I think our 2009 team was undeniably better than our 2008 team which was undeniably better than our 2007 team which was ... And until we are undeniably worse, I go for stability and even then, those people who are calling for Kubiak's head but using Fischer as an example of a good coach, there's a precedent with guys like Fischer for letting them re-load when the team falls apart.

And for those who bring up HWWNBN, although I was for giving him a chance to prove himself in a real offense, when he failed to prove himself, I was one of the most vocal that he should be gotten rid of. I haven't seen anything from Kubiak that makes me think he's not up to this job. And, yes, I've already seen all the games and plays that you point to as evidence that he's incompetent as a head coach and I don't see it.

HOU-TEX
02-05-2010, 02:34 PM
I like pistachios. :)

I like beer. :shades:

Mailman
02-05-2010, 02:34 PM
No, it does not for me...

Right. Your agreement illustrates the points many of us are making about judging Kubiak's performance. Many fans are rightly frustrated with the franchise's inability to get to the postseason. Houston hasn't sniffed an NFL playoff game since, what, 1994? However, I don't think we should allow that win-or-else, playoffs-or-bust sentiment born of years of frustration to cloud our ability to judge the coach's performance. Our scrutiny should not end with the team's record or whether they made the playoffs. I understand the NFL is a results-oriented league, but "results" go beyond wins and losses. It's not just about what the record is but how the team arrived there. How did they play? Where did the team improve? Did it regress in areas that were unexpected? What role, if any, did injuries play? How tough was your division that year?

The bottom-liners will likely dismiss these questions as excuse-making, whereas many of us will likely see them as potential reasons worth discussing.

The Pencil Neck
02-05-2010, 02:34 PM
Well all I know is don't get your hand between two dogs and a bone. The basic problem has always been....and I understand those of you with an agenda, that you really high balled the talent on the roster when Kubiak took over. We switched defenses. Switched quarterbacks....switched offensive schemes. And any one of those things would of set the club back four of five years. Any one of those things. And we had three of them piled on top of one another. And the fourth thing is the Colts. They've out drafted us and Manning has flat out out played us.

Lastly, we run the Denver West Coast offense. The main bomb thrower in here ...if you believe that Cower, or Gruden, Dungy, or Mariochie or anyone is not going to tear down the roster once again and bring in his system and his philosophies, and his players...you're just a fool. You are going to have the same kind of roster turn over you had with Kubiak. Someone posted it the other day what was it 80% ? And the very first guy who would go is Andre Johnson. Because he is the most valuable piece we have on the roster. He has the highest resale value.

The very first thing you have to have as an organization is stability. And that, with all due respect to Bladinger and the monkeys at sports610 radio, is what the owner just bought for us....believe it or not.

And, guys, you should all know that if TTP and I agree about something other than needing to improve our offensive line, it's one of the signs of the apocalypse.

LonerATO
02-05-2010, 02:36 PM
Add to Peter King speaking the truth this morning as well on 610.

King:"Listen, we sit every Sunday and wonder...how are the Texans going to screw up this game. It's not like they are going to get beat...they are going to find somehow to lose the game. Also, tell me a meaningful game that they have played in and won in the past three years. What, they beat the Colts once?"

Vandermeer: "Yeah, but we put on the 4 game winning streak at the end of the season to close out strong".

King: "But the barn door is shut at 5-7, I'm sorry. They shouldn't be in that situation."

Spoke the truth...and it hurts. I'm sure his podcast will be up shortly.

God I hate Peter King so much and its not because he is saying this about the Texans.

No More 8-8's
02-05-2010, 02:40 PM
You know alot of these guys would have wanted Jeff Fisher fired after his first couple years too.

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 02:43 PM
1. Obviously this one is.
2. And yes they do. It's happening right now in Detroit. And soon it will happen in San Diego. And three years after that, New Orleans. The NFL is always an ebb and flow. The tide is either coming in or going out. And , obviuosly, for Robert C. McNair the tide for the next three years is coming in.
And his opinion is the one that counts..doesn't it ?

And we can both watch with great anticipation what happens in Arizona with their QB switch and see just how long it takes them, without roster moves, to reach the NFC championship once again. Under you're point, shouldn't take very long should it ?

....two years as you post ?

I think you are off on what I said. The reason why Arizona will have trouble isn't their system, it is their QB...Leinert is a huge step back. It has nothing to do with their system and implementing it. He knows the system and isn't as good as Warner, plain and simple. They still have talent.

And yes, it is an ebb and flow but you have to be successful to see the one side or the other. Detroit has switched coaches because their management was horrible. It's an overhaul because Millen gave them nothing but a few guys. Why San Diego? Norv is doing pretty well. Their QB is young enough and they have options behind LT.

Again, if Kubiak wasn't here and someone else came in to take the talent they have now...they wouldn't need 4-5 years. That is just a fallacy that people bring up with coaching changes.

You know alot of these guys would have wanted Jeff Fisher fired after his first couple years too.

This statement gets made every debate and it is a completely different situation. People said the Texans got a pass with Katrina. The Oiler/Titans were moving all over his first 3 years and as someone went through in another thread, they were also losing alot of the talent they had. It is like the Landry analogy. Why is it always the few guys he comapres to and not the majority that fail?It's like everyone in a past life was someone famous and not a **** shoveler behind Ye Olde Store.

ChampionTexan
02-05-2010, 02:45 PM
I like beer. :shades:

Does it make you a jolly good fellow?

The Pencil Neck
02-05-2010, 02:45 PM
You know alot of these guys would have wanted Jeff Fisher fired after his first couple years too.

Just think if our coach went 5-11 and 4-12 like Fisher did in 2004 and 2005?

Txn_in_Oki
02-05-2010, 02:45 PM
Houston hasn't sniffed an NFL playoff game since, what, 1994?

I've seen this said before and I don't understand how people can involve the team we have now in discussions about not being in the playoffs since 1994.

Like it or not this was a from scratch expansion team, not an established team that unfortunately **** the bed and has been locked in a perpetual hell after much success as a franchise.

I've done my share of complaining about this team this year but to call them mediocre is pushing it a bit.

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 02:45 PM
I'm not quite sure what you just said... :um:

Arbitrary is defined: Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle

It seems to me that McNair is basing decisions on arbitrary standards, whereas other owners have firm goals that must be met in order to earn an extension.


So if the Jets lost that Sunday Night game..... Kubiak earned his extension?

I know my arguments are hard to follow .. but try to see what I'm saying.

Had the Jets lost, we would have made the play-offs, in reality, Kubiak wouldn't have done any better or worse than what he did.....

making the play-offs that way is arbitrary... the Jets making the play-offs was arbitrary.

It wasn't you, but someone said Ryans turned things around..... the Jets got into the play-offs, because Baltimore lost Week 16 to an amazing last second catch in the end-zone. But Rex Ryans' 9-7 is better than Kubiak's 9-7 because Ryans got to the play-offs?

I'm not getting it.

The Pencil Neck
02-05-2010, 02:47 PM
Again, if Kubiak wasn't here and someone else came in to take the talent they have now...they wouldn't need 4-5 years. That is just a fallacy that people bring up with coaching changes.

Historically since 1990 (not including last year), teams that are 7-9 to 9-7 and change coaches do 1-2 games worse. There are cases where they improve but on average, they don't.

I ran the numbers myself.

Kaiser Toro
02-05-2010, 02:56 PM
Right. Your agreement illustrates the points many of us are making about judging Kubiak's performance. Many fans are rightly frustrated with the franchise's inability to get to the postseason. Houston hasn't sniffed an NFL playoff game since, what, 1994? However, I don't think we should allow that win-or-else, playoffs-or-bust sentiment born of years of frustration to cloud our ability to judge the coach's performance. Our scrutiny should not end with the team's record or whether they made the playoffs. I understand the NFL is a results-oriented league, but "results" go beyond wins and losses. It's not just about what the record is but how the team arrived there. How did they play? Where did the team improve? Did it regress in areas that were unexpected? What role, if any, did injuries play? How tough was your division that year?

The bottom-liners will likely dismiss these questions as excuse-making, whereas many of us will likely see them as potential reasons worth discussing.

I can't speak to Houston issues with success on the football field given I was a Cowboys fan until 1999, but I am quite aware of the lament that Houston folks have. Given that, I am not one that believes in long term fixes for professional sports franchises, save for new franchises, with no history. Personnel, staff, and money can all have an immediate impact on attitude. Right now, for this fan I have to rely on one player bringing the attitude on every play, a rookie, while the coach cowers.

As much as you would like to paint me with a label, it is off. Kubiak has served this team well from where he took it over, granted his erroneous declaration that he could save Carr may have held us back one year. I firmly believe that McNair is doing the right thing with the extension he provided. Kubiak does need to grow a pair, it is BS if you do not think the other players do not talk about him not watching a big play go down.

How did they play? They were on a record pace to be the worst defense of all time after three games. Running game was horrendous. They were 1-6 against the division. I did not think they played well enough to be a playoff team.

Where did the team improve? Passing game - Schaub starting 16 games better happen again next year; Turnover Ratio - we still had a negative number against our opponents; YoY Sacks made (+5) and given up (-7)

Did it regress in areas that were unexpected? Running game. Injuries happen, not an excuse in professional sports with such a short window.

Division toughness? Could care less, the object is to win more than your lose.

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 02:57 PM
Historically since 1990 (not including last year), teams that are 7-9 to 9-7 and change coaches do 1-2 games worse. There are cases where they improve but on average, they don't.

I ran the numbers myself.

Sure, it could but 4-5 years? A new coach doesn't mean starting from scratch. Sometimes its an attitude adjustment and you can see how their systems fit. As I've used before..the Chiefs in the late 80s were ok under John Mackovic and then were 8-24 under Frank Gansz. Then Schottenheimer comes in, has 2 drafts that net Neil Smith and Derrick Thomas and they are on a playoff run for years starting that second season. The Texans have talent to work with and anyone who might have come in wasn't destined to just rebuild for years.

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 02:58 PM
Anything less than a significant upgrade (a proven winner) gives us a lesser chance to be successful next year IMO. I would have not done the extension and told Kubiak, this year is for all the marbles, it's a contract year for you and this team has to get it done or it's game over.

I agree with most everything you said, except how you define definite upgrade.

The main reason I want to keep Kubiak, is that I believe he has built a Helluva team, in a short amount of time. While Cowher may be an upgrade at instilling a certain attitude into a team...... I don't think his in game decisions are a "definite" upgrade. I also don't think he could have built this team as fast as Kubiak (yes, I said as fast) has, so I would quesion how long this team would be successful in the years past 2010.

I believe in my heart-of-hearts, if Kubiak was first given this team in the state it is now, you would have seen that "instant" success "everyone" is looking for.

I can not say with certainty that any other coach would have been able to do what Kubiak has done if they were given this franchise in 2006. Not Payton, definitely not Cowher, not Parcells, no one. For all you literary challenged, that is not to say that Payton or Parcells couldn't have done better....

But for all the people who say the right way to build a team is primarily through the draft, this is what you get... being "smart" in FA... this is what you get.

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 03:03 PM
Another one was coming out flat against the Jets in the opener and getting man-handled. I was so pissed off about that and lay all that blame on the HC.


I just want to point out the Jets man-handled the Pats the same way in week 2. They man-handled the Titans (a much more physical team than ours) the same way week 3.

I understand we had more time to prepare for them. I'm just saying, Bellichick & Fisher get a pass, because they've won, & been in SuperBowls. I get that. But the point is if Rex Ryan befuddled these two great coaches, how much of a stretch is it to give Kubiak a little slack?

I'm pissed about it too, don't get me wrong. But taken in perspective, it's not as bad as we make it out to be. Rookie Coach or whatever.... Rex Ryans ain't no joke.

The Pencil Neck
02-05-2010, 03:13 PM
Sure, but 4-5 years?

This gets back to one of my old points. If you give a guy a few years and all he can get to is a 8-8 or 9-7 record and you ditch him, then you're probably going to take a step back. What that coach does after that, well that's beyond the scope of what I looked at. You might have to swallow a year or two of sub .500 ball like the Rams did with Vermiel. But teams sometimes get into a frenzy of dumping coaches like the Redskins, Lions, the Jets during the 90's, etc., and it's hard to pull yourself up from the pit.

That's why McNair is trying to model himself on the Steelers. It took Cowher a long, long time before he won a SB and he had some years where his teams weren't that good.

Since 1980, most teams have gone 5-6 years without a playoff appearance at least 1 time, some teams for longer. Since we're started as a new franchise, I think that gives us a little more of a grace period. And I think we're making the playoffs next year.

GP
02-05-2010, 03:15 PM
I just want to point out the Jets man-handled the Pats the same way in week 2. They man-handled the Titans (a much more physical team than ours) the same way week 3.

I understand we had more time to prepare for them. I'm just saying, Bellichick & Fisher get a pass, because they've won, & been in SuperBowls. I get that. But the point is if Rex Ryan befuddled these two great coaches, how much of a stretch is it to give Kubiak a little slack?

I'm pissed about it too, don't get me wrong. But taken in perspective, it's not as bad as we make it out to be. Rookie Coach or whatever.... Rex Ryans ain't no joke.

Uh oh.

You just kinda' swerved into what we have been saying, TK. Did you catch what you just did?

You essentially are saying that Rex Ryan befuddled two great coaches.

You're swerving into our territory, TK. In essence, you just stated that Rex Ryan has something going on. Which is what we have said. So that 9-7 record of his, compared to ours, IS a bit different...right?

And it's different because of the leader. The head honcho. Gameday readiness. Smartness to dissect an opponent's schemes and thwart them when it counts the most.

:oops:

Double Barrel
02-05-2010, 03:16 PM
So if the Jets lost that Sunday Night game..... Kubiak earned his extension?

I know my arguments are hard to follow .. but try to see what I'm saying.

Had the Jets lost, we would have made the play-offs, in reality, Kubiak wouldn't have done any better or worse than what he did.....

making the play-offs that way is arbitrary... the Jets making the play-offs was arbitrary.

It wasn't you, but someone said Ryans turned things around..... the Jets got into the play-offs, because Baltimore lost Week 16 to an amazing last second catch in the end-zone. But Rex Ryans' 9-7 is better than Kubiak's 9-7 because Ryans got to the play-offs?

I'm not getting it.

Well, Kubiak earned his extension because he got his extension. All that matters in that regard is what the owner thinks about it.

Now perhaps Baldinger would change his tune if we had made the playoffs...

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 03:21 PM
This gets back to one of my old points. If you give a guy a few years and all he can get to is a 8-8 or 9-7 record and you ditch him, then you're probably going to take a step back. What that coach does after that, well that's beyond the scope of what I looked at. You might have to swallow a year or two of sub .500 ball like the Rams did with Vermiel. But teams sometimes get into a frenzy of dumping coaches like the Redskins, Lions, the Jets during the 90's, etc., and it's hard to pull yourself up from the pit.

That's why McNair is trying to model himself on the Steelers. It took Cowher a long, long time before he won a SB and he had some years where his teams weren't that good.

Since 1980, most teams have gone 5-6 years without a playoff appearance at least 1 time, some teams for longer. Since we're started as a new franchise, I think that gives us a little more of a grace period. And I think we're making the playoffs next year.

Took him a long time but he took off running when he got them..he took Knolls last team..7-9 and then went 11-5, 9-7, 12-4, 11-5, 10-6, 11-5..that is alot of goodwill built up. He also drafted like a mother. His only bad stretch was after those first 6 years he had 7-9, 6-10 and then 9-7. He only had one more losing season after that. If Kubes was in the 11-5 range and mistakes from Year 3 were gone, then this subject would be moot. But they aren't, despite what McNair is trying to mdel it after.

The Pencil Neck
02-05-2010, 03:37 PM
Took him a long time but he took off running when he got them..he took Knolls last team..7-9 and then went 11-5, 9-7, 12-4, 11-5, 10-6, 11-5..that is alot of goodwill built up. He also drafted like a mother. His only bad stretch was after those first 6 years he had 7-9, 6-10 and then 9-7. He only had one more losing season after that. If Kubes was in the 11-5 range and mistakes from Year 3 were gone, then this subject would be moot. But they aren't, despite what McNair is trying to mdel it after.

He took off running but he got the reputation of a guy who couldn't win the big one. 14 years and lots of AFC championship games lost in his own house and a lost SB. And he inherited a lot of good players from Noll (Nickerson, Woodson, Lloyd and most of his offense as well).

Kubes will get us there. It takes just a little patience.

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 03:42 PM
He took off running but he got the reputation of a guy who couldn't win the big one. 14 years and lots of AFC championship games lost in his own house and a lost SB. And he inherited a lot of good players from Noll (Nickerson, Woodson, Lloyd and most of his offense as well).
Kubes will get us there. It takes just a little patience.

I've mentioned that very thing ad naseum.

BTW, with regards to stability of teams that some folks have mentioned:

In the Pirates / Steelers 75 year history 3 coaches have coached well over half of their existence:

Parker 8 seasons
Cowher 15 Seasons
Noll 22 seasons

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 03:47 PM
I've mentioned that very thing ad naseum.

BTW, with regards to stability of teams that some folks have mentioned:

In the Pirates / Steelers 75 year history 3 coaches have coached well over half of their existence:

Parker 8 seasons
Cowher 15 Seasons
Noll 22 seasons

That is great with the right coaches.

Cowher might have inherited some guys but those guys got Knoll 7-9 and he turned it to 11-5 and kept going. 6 years isn't an anomaly...he kept drafting well and retooling.

I also think in the day you could afford to keep guys. That is why you had Landry, Knoll, Bud, etc. There was no cap and teams could stay together and gel and you kept your core and kept adding. Now you don't keep guys beyond a certain amount of years and you have to produce.

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 03:58 PM
That is great with the right coaches.

Cowher might have inherited some guys but those guys got Knoll 7-9 and he turned it to 11-5 and kept going. 6 years isn't an anomaly...he kept drafting well and retooling.

I also think in the day you could afford to keep guys. That is why you had Landry, Knoll, Bud, etc. There was no cap and teams could stay together and gel and you kept your core and kept adding. Now you don't keep guys beyond a certain amount of years and you have to produce.

It could be that Noll was burnt out... Who knows? Do you?? If so, I want you picking my lotto numbers. :shades:

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 04:02 PM
P.S.... My non linear equations professor once told me, always account for variable change.
~Ben Campbell

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 04:03 PM
It could be that Noll was burnt out... Who knows? Do you?? If so, I want you picking my lotto numbers. :shades:

No and my numbers haven't worked either. Just the Texas Two Step for a few hundred grand...not being greedy.:goodluck:

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 04:08 PM
No and my numbers haven't worked either. Just the Texas Two Step for a few hundred grand...not being greedy.:goodluck:

I'd be happy winning $810.85. :choke:

Point was we don't know what was going on behind the scenes. Noll was getting way older and the players were, well basically staying young. Maybe they weren't responding to Noll anymore. He was a hard ass. Who's to say?

ChampionTexan
02-05-2010, 04:11 PM
Uh oh.

You just kinda' swerved into what we have been saying, TK. Did you catch what you just did?

You essentially are saying that Rex Ryan befuddled two great coaches.

You're swerving into our territory, TK. In essence, you just stated that Rex Ryan has something going on. Which is what we have said. So that 9-7 record of his, compared to ours, IS a bit different...right?

And it's different because of the leader. The head honcho. Gameday readiness. Smartness to dissect an opponent's schemes and thwart them when it counts the most.

:oops:

At the beginning of the season, The Jets and their D under Ryan were a bit of an unknown. Leaving Kubiak out of the equation for a bit, I'm not going to give Ryan to much credit for being able to pull out a victory as a relative unknown commodity (at least as a head coach) even if it was against two really good coaches. This is kind of like a first-time QB looking like an All-Pro, until there's some tape of him, and that first D-Coordinator figures out how to shut him down. In games 4-10, they lost 6 of 7 games (including 4 division games in a row), 4 of those games were to teams who finished the year below .500, and the only victory in that stretch was over a 5-11 Raiders team. They then won 3 of the next 4 games, but didn't beat a team that finished the year above .500 in any of those four games. They then played the two infamous games against Indy and Cincy to go 9-7, and win the tiebreaker - getting into the playoffs.

And by the way, this motley rag-tag bunch of knuckleheads that Rex took over and coached to a 9-7 had only been able to go 9-7 the year before he got there, meaning he had the exact same record that got the previous coach fired.

I realize the difference between making the playoffs, and not making the playoffs, but ignoring that, I'm not sure I see a big difference between the two regular season records when looked at in a vacuum.

infantrycak
02-05-2010, 04:19 PM
Cowher might have inherited some guys but those guys got Knoll 7-9 and he turned it to 11-5 and kept going.

Cowher didn't inherit a great team but he certainly inherited an above average team. Knoll's last year they were running a rookie QB as well. But overall I think Cowher did a good job. But I don't buy into the fire Shottenheimer after 14-2 mentality either.

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 04:33 PM
Noll's final season Cowher's first season
Offensive Starters Offensive Starters
QB Neil O'Donnell QB Neil O'Donnell*
QB Bubby Brister RB Barry Foster*+
RB Barry Foster FB Merril Hoge
FB Merril Hoge WR Jeff Graham
WR Louis Lipps WR Dwight Stone
WR Dwight Stone TE Adrian Cooper
TE Eric Green TE Eric Green
TE Adrian Cooper LT John Jackson
TE Mike Mularkey LG Duval Love
LT John Jackson C Dermontti Dawson*
LG Tom Ricketts RG Carlton Haselrig*
C Dermontti Dawson RT Tunch Ilkin
RG Carlton Haselrig RT Justin Strzelczyk
RT Tunch Ilkin Defensive Starters
Defensive Starters LDE Kenny Davidson
LDE Aaron Jones NT Gerald Williams
LDE Keith Willis RDE Donald Evans
NT Gerald Williams LOLB Jerrol Williams
RDE Donald Evans LILB Hardy Nickerson
LOLB Bryan Hinkle RILB David Little
LILB Hardy Nickerson ROLB Greg Lloyd*
RILB David Little LCB Rod Woodson*+
ROLB Greg Lloyd* RCB D.J. Johnson
LCB D.J. Johnson SS Carnell Lake
RCB Rod Woodson* FS Darren Perry
SS Carnell Lake
FS Thomas Everett


* = Pro Bowl
+ = 1st team All-Pro

GP
02-05-2010, 04:35 PM
At the beginning of the season, The Jets and their D under Ryan were a bit of an unknown. Leaving Kubiak out of the equation for a bit, I'm not going to give Ryan to much credit for being able to pull out a victory as a relative unknown commodity (at least as a head coach) even if it was against two really good coaches. This is kind of like a first-time QB looking like an All-Pro, until there's some tape of him, and that first D-Coordinator figures out how to shut him down. In games 4-10, they lost 6 of 7 games (including 4 division games in a row), 4 of those games were to teams who finished the year below .500, and the only victory in that stretch was over a 5-11 Raiders team. They then won 3 of the next 4 games, but didn't beat a team that finished the year above .500 in any of those four games. They then played the two infamous games against Indy and Cincy to go 9-7, and win the tiebreaker - getting into the playoffs.

And by the way, this motley rag-tag bunch of knuckleheads that Rex took over and coached to a 9-7 had only been able to go 9-7 the year before he got there, meaning he had the exact same record that got the previous coach fired.

I realize the difference between making the playoffs, and not making the playoffs, but ignoring that, I'm not sure I see a big difference between the two regular season records when looked at in a vacuum.

My opinion on the Mangini vs. Ryan seasons of 9-7:

Mangini is a FREAK. He's scary. That's why they didn't care that he had a 9-7 record. Out of all the Patriots ex-assistants and coordinators who later became coaches after those Super Bowl wins, Mangini is by far the weirdest and most unpredictable cat out of the bunch. Weiss isn't too far behind, and McDaniels is gaining ground. Crennel? He's the loveable fuzzball that doesn't fit in with the rest of the crew. He's the wheel man.

So I think Mangini got himself fired due to his freakness. And his freakness continued on with the things going down in Cleveland. He might be the only head coach who tries to get more cute than Kubiak.

Rex Ryan found a way to will himself and his rookie QB into position for a playoff berth. When he was reciting his Christmas Wish List during that one presser, I was like "LOL. You are genius. You're essentially telling the Colts and the Bengals that they can protect their star players AND do a good charitable work by laying down for the Jets." Nicely done, Rex.

He's a chip off the old block.

Joe Texan
02-05-2010, 05:02 PM
Balsucker can stuff a sock in it. I will not watch him again, And watch when we win in Dallas in February, I hope Marc Vanderqueer and J LO get him back and let me have a word with his ass. I shows that the 610 bunch has no balls when it comes to standing up for the Texans.

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 05:58 PM
Uh oh.

You just kinda' swerved into what we have been saying, TK. Did you catch what you just did?

You essentially are saying that Rex Ryan befuddled two great coaches.

You're swerving into our territory, TK. In essence, you just stated that Rex Ryan has something going on. Which is what we have said. So that 9-7 record of his, compared to ours, IS a bit different...right?

And it's different because of the leader. The head honcho. Gameday readiness. Smartness to dissect an opponent's schemes and thwart them when it counts the most.

:oops:

If we can agree that Ryans is a good coach.... then we can say that 9-7 isn't a bad thing. They (the Jets) are actually 8-8 but they were given a game. At least 1. Even then, if you think that team is better than they were in 2008 (9-7), then you can see my side of the argument concerning the Texans, despite going 8-8, 8-8, 9-7.

I never said that it's going to take 4 years to be successful if we get a new coach. I think we'll win 10+ games regardless who our coach is in 2010. My position is that we'll win 10+ games in 2011, 2012, 2013, etc... with Kubiak. Regardless what our schedule is, kinda like the Colts.

Not like Sparano ( a good coach no doubt), or Harbaugh, or Smith, or even Payton. Or Ryans? Do you really think the Jets will win more than 9 games next year? I don't.

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 06:16 PM
If Kubes was in the 11-5 range and mistakes from Year 3 were gone, then this subject would be moot. But they aren't, despite what McNair is trying to mdel it after.
True...

True...

I understand some thinking our standards are low, because we keep refering to the 2-14 team that Kubiak took over.... but it is what it is.

I agree whole heartedly, that the Texans should have easily won 10 games, & I'm very, very disappointed that we didn't.

I can see(understand) the POV, that it was Kubiak's fault that we lost those 7 games. How much credit does he get for losing 6 of those by 7 points or less? Which is an improvement over what where we were.

Again, I'm still upset, and disappointed we didn't win just one of those games. I'm not trying to make that look like success.

To me, that looks like progress.... just like the progress we've seen the last three years.

GP
02-05-2010, 06:31 PM
If we can agree that Ryans is a good coach.... then we can say that 9-7 isn't a bad thing. They (the Jets) are actually 8-8 but they were given a game. At least 1. Even then, if you think that team is better than they were in 2008 (9-7), then you can see my side of the argument concerning the Texans, despite going 8-8, 8-8, 9-7.

I never said that it's going to take 4 years to be successful if we get a new coach. I think we'll win 10+ games regardless who our coach is in 2010. My position is that we'll win 10+ games in 2011, 2012, 2013, etc... with Kubiak. Regardless what our schedule is, kinda like the Colts.

Not like Sparano ( a good coach no doubt), or Harbaugh, or Smith, or even Payton. Or Ryans? Do you really think the Jets will win more than 9 games next year? I don't.

If you had asked me, last off-season, who had the better chance to make the playoffs--Jets or Texans--I would have said Texans.

So I can't sit here and say that the Jets CAN'T win more than 9 games in 2010. They won 9, this year, and made it to the playoffs. They weren't supposed to get into the playoffs...except they didn't buy into that bit of conventional wisdom, did they?

Your statement(s) and my commentary within those statements: We're going to win 10+ games next year regardless who our coach is. But the Jets, [who made the playoffs and went to the AFC Championship Game this year], won't win 9+ games. And we're going to win 10+ games in 2011, 2012 and 2013, and maybe beyond [did we switch divisions and I didn't hear about it?].

:ok:

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 06:48 PM
Rex Ryan found a way to will himself and his rookie QB into position for a playoff berth.

He's a chip off the old block.


Found a way to will himself to a win?

He was in the same position as Kubiak after week 15 he was out of the play-offs same as us. He could will himself to two wins, and still miss the play-offs.

He got into the play-offs, because the Ravens lost a heartbreaker.

Unless you're saying he willed Joe Flacco to a 4th Qtr fumble...

his will had little if anything to do with getting the Jets to the play-offs.

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 06:56 PM
Your statement(s) and my commentary within those statements: We're going to win 10+ games next year regardless who our coach is. But the Jets, [who made the playoffs and went to the AFC Championship Game this year], won't win 9+ games. And we're going to win 10+ games in 2011, 2012 and 2013, and maybe beyond [did we switch divisions and I didn't hear about it?].

:ok:

I don't want to keep tearing at the Jets...... but if you think that is a better team than hours.... this conversation isn't going anywhere anyway.

& not only do I think our team is better, I think our team is much, much better.... not even close better.

Remember we are in this particular discussion because you & I both agree their 9-7 is different than our 9-7.

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 06:56 PM
Rex Ryan found a way to will himself and his rookie QB into position for a playoff berth.

He's a chip off the old block.

It's called the NFL's best rushing attack.


Then the Jets should fire him now, because Buddy never won anything as a head coach.

GuerillaBlack
02-05-2010, 07:30 PM
True...

True...

I understand some thinking our standards are low, because we keep refering to the 2-14 team that Kubiak took over.... but it is what it is.

I agree whole heartedly, that the Texans should have easily won 10 games, & I'm very, very disappointed that we didn't.

I can see(understand) the POV, that it was Kubiak's fault that we lost those 7 games. How much credit does he get for losing 6 of those by 7 points or less? Which is an improvement over what where we were.

Again, I'm still upset, and disappointed we didn't win just one of those games. I'm not trying to make that look like success.

To me, that looks like progress.... just like the progress we've seen the last three years.

But some of those losses would not have happened if Kubiak had cut both Browns. All we had to do was win one game out of the four game divisional stretch. I want Kubiak to succeed and take this team to the promise land, but I don't have much faith in him.

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 07:37 PM
But some of those losses would not have happened if Kubiak had cut both Browns. All we had to do was win one game out of the four game divisional stretch. I want Kubiak to succeed and take this team to the promise land, but I don't have much faith in him.

Not using injury as an excuse but it should be noted that those 4 consecutive games were on the heels of losing OD..

I'm not sayin, I'm just sayin'.

dalemurphy
02-05-2010, 07:44 PM
But some of those losses would not have happened if Kubiak had cut both Browns. All we had to do was win one game out of the four game divisional stretch. I want Kubiak to succeed and take this team to the promise land, but I don't have much faith in him.

I've never seen an NFL team play games without a placekicker. Not sure how that would've helped matters.

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 07:48 PM
I've never seen an NFL team play games without a placekicker. Not sure how that would've helped matters.

I heard that if K. Brown was cut, Al Del Greco was available.. :worm:

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 07:58 PM
But some of those losses would not have happened if Kubiak had cut both Browns. All we had to do was win one game out of the four game divisional stretch. I want Kubiak to succeed and take this team to the promise land, but I don't have much faith in him.

6 in one hand, half a dozen in the other.

I don't want to get into the fire Kris Brown thing. We did that. bottom line, the only thing you are guaranteeing is that Kris Brown wouldn't be the one trotting out there. There is no guarantee the outcome of the games would have been different.

Chris Brown... All I can say, Arian Foster must look like crap in practice.

Wolf
02-05-2010, 08:32 PM
I heard that if K. Brown was cut, tony zendejas was available.. :worm:

fixed it for ya
:kitten:

ChampionTexan
02-05-2010, 09:29 PM
I heard that if K. Brown was cut, Al Del Greco was available.. :worm:

Even Al thinks that's a really bad idea...

http://cdn.bleacherreport.com/images_root/slideshows/994/slideshow_99415/display_image.jpg

...but maybe there's an Al out there who could answer our RB questions:

http://www.clevelandcurse.com/wp-content/themes/extreme-sports-10/images/albundy.jpg

HoustonFrog
02-05-2010, 09:38 PM
I don't want to keep tearing at the Jets...... but if you think that is a better team than hours.... this conversation isn't going anywhere anyway.

& not only do I think our team is better, I think our team is much, much better.... not even close better.

Remember we are in this particular discussion because you & I both agree their 9-7 is different than our 9-7.

This is where it is hard to understand people. Thunder...not only do the Jets have scoreboard...a complete ass kicking...but then they made a run late...9-7 or not. Your comments make no sense when head to head comes into play.

Texan_Bill
02-05-2010, 09:49 PM
Even Al thinks that's a really bad idea...

http://cdn.bleacherreport.com/images_root/slideshows/994/slideshow_99415/display_image.jpg

...but maybe there's an Al out there who could answer our RB questions:

http://www.clevelandcurse.com/wp-content/themes/extreme-sports-10/images/albundy.jpg


:lol:
Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiice!!! I tried to rep you, but the ol' must spread rep thing came into play.

thunderkyss
02-05-2010, 10:38 PM
This is where it is hard to understand people. Thunder...not only do the Jets have scoreboard...a complete ass kicking...but then they made a run late...9-7 or not. Your comments make no sense when head to head comes into play.

I know if all you're looking at is the scoreboard, it's hard to understand what I'm saying.

head to head wouldn't have been an issue if the Colts played the whole game week 15... I know it's not a knock on the Jets because the Colts laid down.

The Colts laid down..... the Bengals laid down....

but the Jets went on a run??

When the Colts decided to play... the same team we can't beat.... Peyton figured out that defense in one QTR & hung 30 points on them, & their offense couldn't move keep up.

It's been years since we looked that bad against the Colts.

Hervoyel
02-05-2010, 11:24 PM
http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc272/Hervoyel/GrandpaSimpson.gif

steelbtexan
02-05-2010, 11:51 PM
Bottom line is Baldy King and Steel B find 6-10,8-8,8-8,9-7 as mediocore.

McNair feels differently and that's all that counts.

Dale: McNair counts on fans like you and TK.

The board wouldn't be the same without you.

Time will tell who's right but I value professionals like Baldy and King's opinion. Hopefully the Soapers are wrong about McNair and Kubes.

Meanwhile McNair will keep on running to the bank with everybodies $. It doesn't matter which side is right or wrong. That's the humorous thing about this arguement.

Mailman
02-06-2010, 12:59 AM
Where in the world is Ian Howfield when you need him?

Thorn
02-06-2010, 05:21 AM
http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc272/Hervoyel/GrandpaSimpson.gif

must..spread...rep....


Exactly Herv. Exactly.

thunderkyss
02-06-2010, 06:14 AM
Bottom line is Baldy King and Steel B find 6-10,8-8,8-8,9-7 as mediocore.

McNair feels differently and that's all that counts.

The extension is more about next year than this year.

McNair probably thinks that is mediocre as well. I think that's mediocre. Neither McNair or I feel we will be 9-7 or worse next year. We see progress being made. We feel we are behind schedule, & next year, we'll begin our dominance of the AFC South.

Dale: McNair counts on fans like you and TK.

Glad to be there for him. I'm counting on owners like McNair

The board wouldn't be the same without you.

Time will tell who's right but I value professionals like Baldy and King's opinion. Hopefully the Soapers are wrong about McNair and Kubes.

I never said anything to devalue the opinion of Baldinger, King, or you... I do hope you're wrong. Well, actually I know you're wrong. But I still value your opinion.

Meanwhile McNair will keep on running to the bank with everybodies $. It doesn't matter which side is right or wrong. That's the humorous thing about this arguement.

True... but until Reliant stops selling out for Texans' games, I don't expect McNair to do any different. During a time of Recession, I think it would have been a nice gesture by McNair to give us a reprieve.. I would like for the beer cups to get bigger, & cheaper.... but I doubt that's going to happen again.

But yes, bottom line. I like the progress I've seen since 2006. I would like to see that progress continue for another 10 years. I think Gary Kubiak is the most logical choice going forward.

Had he been fired, and Chan Gailey brought in here, I would have been upset, I would expect a 10 win season in 2010, & I would have been preparing my excuses in the event we fell short of that expectation.

We would still be having this discussion.

bckey
02-06-2010, 06:45 AM
Wow. I wish these threads with all the same old arguments about Kubiak and McNair would die out. This could turn out to be a very long offseason at this rate.

Grams
02-06-2010, 07:28 AM
Wow. I wish these threads with all the same old arguments about Kubiak and McNair would die out. This could turn out to be a very long offseason at this rate.

Amen.

thunderkyss
02-06-2010, 07:28 AM
Wow. I wish these threads with all the same old arguments about Kubiak and McNair would die out. This could turn out to be a very long offseason at this rate.

Plenty of other threads to occupy your time. I understand, soon every thread will turn into this argument... but that's not the case at the moment.

The thread title pretty much said what this one was about.

You're not interested where this thread is going. That's fine.

My friends and I still feel there is value re-hashing these tired arguments. Jaded, though we may be.... we feel like we are making progress.

For me anyway, it's not about trying to change anyone's mind. It's more about trying to understand where they are coming from. On that, I think I am gaining.

DexmanC
02-06-2010, 08:13 AM
Interesting how 610 pulled that interview from its vault.

Homer radio at its finest.

Vinny
02-06-2010, 09:11 AM
Teams get a reputation from what they do on the field. Our reputation is a team that is mediocre and cannot win a meaningful game. We go into this season "playoffs or bust"...then we extend the coach after his team just totally craters for an entire month when it's time to make a run for the playoffs. Is that really win or bust? Based on how happy everyone in the org was after beating the little sisters of the poor to close out the season strong, I'd say it isn't all that hard for me to see that NFL pundits don't see the Texans with battle rose colored glasses. Is it really all that hard for the fans to see how the various teams around the NFL get their National perceptions?

What is the sad part is that people think that this team should be "respected" because we have some kind of awesome offense between the 20's and have a cool logo. This team won't get any more National love until they win more games and make the playoffs a time or two.

infantrycak
02-06-2010, 09:35 AM
Teams get a reputation from what they do on the field. Our reputation is a team that is mediocre and cannot win a meaningful game. We go into this season "playoffs or bust"...then we extend the coach after his team just totally craters for an entire month when it's time to make a run for the playoffs. Is that really win or bust? Based on how happy everyone in the org was after beating the little sisters of the poor to close out the season strong, I'd say it isn't all that hard for me to see that NFL pundits don't see the Texans with battle rose colored glasses. Is it really all that hard for the fans to see how the various teams around the NFL get their National perceptions?

What is the sad part is that people think that this team should be "respected" because we have some kind of awesome offense between the 20's and have a cool logo. This team won't get any more National love until they win more games and make the playoffs a time or two.

I don't think there is a team out there that is "better" than the Texans thinking they can mail the game in now because the Texans "can't win a meaningful game. You really think Peyton is prepping any less hard for the Texans because we have been their ***** on the record? I agree on the respect part totally. People need to just shut up about that. I just don't agree that reputation as it applies to other teams means they are discounting the Texans at this point.

Not directed to you, but what did I predict would be the pivotal 4 week stretch on the season?

CloakNNNdagger
02-06-2010, 09:47 AM
Teams get a reputation from what they do on the field. Our reputation is a team that is mediocre and cannot win a meaningful game. We go into this season "playoffs or bust"...then we extend the coach after his team just totally craters for an entire month when it's time to make a run for the playoffs. Is that really win or bust? Based on how happy everyone in the org was after beating the little sisters of the poor to close out the season strong, I'd say it isn't all that hard for me to see that NFL pundits don't see the Texans with battle rose colored glasses. Is it really all that hard for the fans to see how the various teams around the NFL get their National perceptions?

What is the sad part is that people think that this team should be "respected" because we have some kind of awesome offense between the 20's and have a cool logo. This team won't get any more National love until they win more games and make the playoffs a time or two.


We have been turning into a society where we are told that we and our kids should be praised in face of "failure"............solely based on so-called "effort," even if not real. It's a simple case of reward based on what I intended to do, rather than what I have done. It hasn't worked in our education system, it doesn't work in the business model. It has long been said that "NFL" stands for Not For Long.........except, of course, you subscribe to the "New Order" and you are part of the Texans organization.

Vinny
02-06-2010, 09:47 AM
Teams get a reputation from what they do on the field. Our reputation is a team that is mediocre and cannot win a meaningful game. We go into this season "playoffs or bust"...then we extend the coach after his team just totally craters for an entire month when it's time to make a run for the playoffs. Is that really win or bust? Based on how happy everyone in the org was after beating the little sisters of the poor to close out the season strong, I'd say it isn't all that hard for me to see that NFL pundits don't see the Texans with battle rose colored glasses. Is it really all that hard for the fans to see how the various teams around the NFL get their National perceptions?

What is the sad part is that people think that this team should be "respected" because we have some kind of awesome offense between the 20's and have a cool logo. This team won't get any more National love until they win more games and make the playoffs a time or two.

I don't think there is a team out there that is "better" than the Texans thinking they can mail the game in now because the Texans "can't win a meaningful game. You really think Peyton is prepping any less hard for the Texans because we have been their ***** on the record? I agree on the respect part totally. People need to just shut up about that. I just don't agree that reputation as it applies to other teams means they are discounting the Texans at this point.

Not directed to you, but what did I predict would be the pivotal 4 week stretch on the season? I'm talking about National perception. What makes you or any of the homers here think that the Texans deserve to be thought of as one of the leagues top franchises when they can't win a game of any importance? EVER? It's been a friggin' decade and Kubiak hasn't shown the ability to win important games outside of games at the end of the year once we were pretty much eliminated (He's been the head coach for 64 games right?).

One more thing...Bob McNair needs to stop coming out publicly and saying anything about 'playoffs or bust'. It just sounds hollow coming from him. He was really pleased last season with 8-8 and he is really pleased with 9-7 this year. Good for him, but spare me with the playoffs or bust mantra because it's disingenuous blather.

bckey
02-06-2010, 10:42 AM
Teams get a reputation from what they do on the field. Our reputation is a team that is mediocre and cannot win a meaningful game. We go into this season "playoffs or bust"...then we extend the coach after his team just totally craters for an entire month when it's time to make a run for the playoffs. Is that really win or bust? Based on how happy everyone in the org was after beating the little sisters of the poor to close out the season strong, I'd say it isn't all that hard for me to see that NFL pundits don't see the Texans with battle rose colored glasses. Is it really all that hard for the fans to see how the various teams around the NFL get their National perceptions?

What is the sad part is that people think that this team should be "respected" because we have some kind of awesome offense between the 20's and have a cool logo. This team won't get any more National love until they win more games and make the playoffs a time or two.

Excellent post Vinny. Pretty much sums up my thoughts on this topic.:thumbup

Wolf
02-06-2010, 11:30 AM
If you liked Brian Baldinger's comments, you're going to love this.

One day after Baldinger called out Texans owner Bob McNair on the Vandermeer and Lopez morning show on Houston’s SportsRadio610, Sports Illustrated senior NFL writer Peter King piled on a heavy dose of reality that Texans fans are sure to appreciate.

I already know what you're thinking. A natural reaction by some Texans fans will be “Peter King is a [insert derogatory name here].”

But love him or hate him, this is a guy with a national audience, far greater than Baldinger, and this is what he's thinking (now). And on this one – it's hard to disagree with most of what he's saying.

This isn't like the time Michael Lombardi said Matt ‘Schwab’ isn’t a leader. Sometimes (sometimes)it’s okay to listen to these guys. And sometimes the truth hurts.

The last two days certainly turned into a “if you don’t want to hear the answer, don’t ask the question” experience for Vandermeer.

A transcript of the Texans portion of the interview follows. If you want to listen to the interview, click here, (the part about the Texans is near the end) or check out SportsRadio610’s podcast archive from Miami. They’ve done a nice job archiving interviews from the last several days.

Vandermeer may have prompted King’s response a bit by setting it up with comments on the several close losses by the Texans in 2009. Here’s how it went:



http://www.examiner.com/x-778-Houston-Texans-Examiner~y2010m2d5-Peter-Kings-turn-to-pile-on-Texans

Vinny
02-06-2010, 11:44 AM
Interesting how 610 pulled that interview from its vault.

Homer radio at its finest.

it's still up

http://itmpodcasttrack.com/podcast_track.mp3?iTunes=play&stationId=886&episodeId=4364512&url=http://podcast.sportsradio610.com/kilt2/2202067.mp3

WWJD
02-06-2010, 11:48 AM
The truth hurts...

DexmanC
02-06-2010, 11:57 AM
Listening to both Baldinger AND King, NOTHING they said was wrong.
It was unfiltered TRUTH, and if the team doesn't like it, THEY need
to change it ON THE FIELD.

'nuff said.

bckey
02-06-2010, 12:02 PM
I'm not a big Peter King fan but after listening to this interview I think everything he said regarding the Texans was spot on.

houstonspartan
02-06-2010, 01:16 PM
Teams get a reputation from what they do on the field. Our reputation is a team that is mediocre and cannot win a meaningful game. We go into this season "playoffs or bust"...then we extend the coach after his team just totally craters for an entire month when it's time to make a run for the playoffs. Is that really win or bust? Based on how happy everyone in the org was after beating the little sisters of the poor to close out the season strong, I'd say it isn't all that hard for me to see that NFL pundits don't see the Texans with battle rose colored glasses. Is it really all that hard for the fans to see how the various teams around the NFL get their National perceptions?

What is the sad part is that people think that this team should be "respected" because we have some kind of awesome offense between the 20's and have a cool logo. This team won't get any more National love until they win more games and make the playoffs a time or two.

Vinny, well said and well thought out. I agree 100 percent.

I just read Peter King's comments and was floored. He was 100 percent. And I liked how he was direct and to-the-point: Enough with the excuses. Win.

Joe Texan
02-06-2010, 01:54 PM
This thread just makes me happy I do not have to listen to any of you yahoos on the radio or TV. And I can see from what yall are writing that your ratings would "can" you before you got on a show.

thunderkyss
02-06-2010, 02:40 PM
One more thing...Bob McNair needs to stop coming out publicly and saying anything about 'playoffs or bust'. It just sounds hollow coming from him. He was really pleased last season with 8-8 and he is really pleased with 9-7 this year. Good for him, but spare me with the playoffs or bust mantra because it's disingenuous blather.

Vegas or Bust....

What does that mean? Does that mean if I don't make it to Vegas I'm going to ditch my car?

To me, that means no excuses, whatever it takes, that's where we are going. It means I don't have a plan B... "well, if we don't make it to Vegas we'll stop in Colorado for some skiing." No, it means I'll sell the clothes off my back if I have to, to get to Vegas.

Same thing here. Play-offs or bust, means we don't have a plan B, means a winning season would be a disappointment, if there are no play-offs to go with it.

It doesn't mean heads are going to roll...... & Bob was pretty clear about that early on. When he was asked, what the problem was, he said it was a player issue, an on the field issue.

I challenge anyone to produce something concrete with McNair putting the pressure on Kubiak... anything saying McNair is not happy with Kubiak.

All the Kubiak's job is on the line crap was born in the media & on these boards, McNair said no such thing. Never alluded to it either.

I do agree, if we truly had a play-offs or bust attitude, Larry Johnson would have been on this team.... so I'll agree with that.

But I don't believe Kubiak's job was ever in jeopardy.

Lucky
02-06-2010, 02:54 PM
"It’s time for the Texans to win. And I’m not saying anything that anybody in Houston doesn’t know and doesn’t feel. But this thing about well they’re close and they won four down the stretch … I don’t give a darn.. Really.
Really, it's past time for the Texans to win. They should have won in 2008, and used that success as a springboard into 2009. But, that's quibbling. Forget the final record of 9-7. 5-7 was a failure. Just as 0-4 and 3-7 were failures in 2008. Why does everything have to be sugar coated for some of the Texans fans?

Here's a question (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1177037&postcount=63) I asked this offseason during the Sunshine Club debates:

If they win the rest of their games after elimination in 2009, will that be enough to warrant a contract extension to Kubiak?The answer was...yes. The loss in JAX effectively ended the Texans playoff chances. The Texans were a win in Oakland away from pulling the same feat in 2008. The Houston Texans. Winning when it no longer matters! Try selling PSLs with that slogan.

It's obvious to casual observers such as Baldinger and King that the Texans don't win when the season is on the line. That must change in 2010. If 2009 was "The Year of No Excuses" (right), then 2010 is "Really, the Year of No Excuses. We're serious this time. No fooling."

No reasonable fan can call this a young team. The core of this group is in the prime of their careers. Only 8 NFL head coaches have longer tenures than Gary Kubiak. 6 of those coaches have taken their team to the Super Bowl. That's this big game at the end of the season where they hand out a trophy to the winner, and stuff. At this point, progress should be measured by what type of hardware is being held after the last game.

thunderkyss
02-06-2010, 03:35 PM
Really, it's past time for the Texans to win. They should have won in 2008, and used that success as a springboard into 2009.

I agree.

Here's a question (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1177037&postcount=63) I asked this offseason during the Sunshine Club debates:
If they win the rest of their games after elimination in 2009, will that be enough to warrant a contract extension to Kubiak?


Fisher, Tomlin, Ryans, Harbaugh.... all considered "good coaches" around here nowadays. All had the same problems Kubiak did.

I understand they've had success recently. But my point is still, if these "good coaches" can suffer from the same things that plagued Kubiak..... poor division record, 3-4 game loosing streaks, loosing when it really counts... etc... that means it can happen to good coaches.

yes or no, does that make sense?

If it could happen to a good coach.... that means Kubiak is not a bad coach simply because it happened to him.. does that make sense? I'm not saying that since Kubiak suffered the same fate, it makes him a good coach. I'm just saying this isn't "evidence" that Kubiak is a bad coach.

He's built a good team, solid young foundation, with the stats to show they can play well in this league. That to me says he's a good coach.

He may be a slow coach.... I won't argue with that. But to say he'll never get us over the hump, is like saying Dungy & Manning can't win the big games.

How long do we give him to do it, I don't know. But I don't think 5 years instead of 4 is asking too much. & yes, I've already said if we don't win big next year, he needs to go.

I'll go so far as to say if we don't win the division, I want him gone.

If that means anything to you.

JB
02-06-2010, 03:47 PM
I agree.


Fisher, Tomlin, Ryans, Harbaugh.... all considered "good coaches" around here nowadays. All had the same problems Kubiak did.

I understand they've had success recently. But my point is still, if these "good coaches" can suffer from the same things that plagued Kubiak..... poor division record, 3-4 game loosing streaks, loosing when it really counts... etc... that means it can happen to good coaches.

yes or no, does that make sense?

If it could happen to a good coach.... that means Kubiak is not a bad coach simply because it happened to him.. does that make sense? I'm not saying that since Kubiak suffered the same fate, it makes him a good coach. I'm just saying this isn't "evidence" that Kubiak is a bad coach.

He's built a good team, solid young foundation, with the stats to show they can play well in this league. That to me says he's a good coach.

He may be a slow coach.... I won't argue with that. But to say he'll never get us over the hump, is like saying Dungy & Manning can't win the big games.

How long do we give him to do it, I don't know. But I don't think 5 years instead of 4 is asking too much. & yes, I've already said if we don't win big next year, he needs to go.

I'll go so far as to say if we don't win the division, I want him gone.
If that means anything to you.

I think that may be a little strong TK. In the division we play in with Manning, winning the division may not be realistic because of overall record. I will not be upset with a winning record in the division. The main things I expect to see out of our Texans are consistant effort and to be competitive in every game. If we come out totally unprepared for any game like we did against the Jets and the MNF game against the Ticks, I will be leading the charge to get Kubiak canned. But if we go 4-2 in the division and 11-5 overall and miss the playoffs, perhaps Kubiak is doing his job. There are more considerations than playoffs and winning the division.

infantrycak
02-06-2010, 04:14 PM
I'm talking about National perception. What makes you or any of the homers here think that the Texans deserve to be thought of as one of the leagues top franchises when they can't win a game of any importance? EVER?

And where did I say anything about respect other than to agree folks need to shut up about it?

It's been a friggin' decade and Kubiak hasn't shown the ability to win important games outside of games at the end of the year once we were pretty much eliminated (He's been the head coach for 64 games right?).

The loss in JAX effectively ended the Texans playoff chances.

It has been 8 years, yes 64 games otherwise known as 4 seasons for Kubiak. I don't know where y'all get this games didn't count thing this season. We won our last game and still had a chance at the playoffs. Spit the bitterness bit out for just a minute. Every year there are teams making the playoffs on tiebreakers. Might as well say our playoff chances ended week one.

Hardcore Texan
02-06-2010, 04:18 PM
And where did I say anything about respect other than to agree folks need to shut up about it?





It has been 8 years, yes 64 games otherwise known as 4 seasons for Kubiak. I don't know where y'all get this games didn't count thing this season. We won our last game and still had a chance at the playoffs. Spit the bitterness bit out for just a minute. Every year there are teams making the playoffs on tiebreakers. Might as well say our playoff chances ended week one.

Exactly. And according to king/baldinger we don't win where there is something to play for. And the pats where trying to win that game, Brady was put back in at the start of the second half way after the Welker injury.

Lucky
02-06-2010, 04:43 PM
We won our last game and still had a chance at the playoffs.
The Ravens and the Jets finished at 9-7. Both with tiebreakers over the Texans. The Texans 7th loss, in Jacksonville, effectively ended the Texans playoffs chances. There was nothing the Texans could have done on their behalf at that point to earn a playoff berth.

DexmanC
02-06-2010, 04:47 PM
I think that may be a little strong TK. In the division we play in with Manning, winning the division may not be realistic because of overall record.

Tennessee didn't let that bother THEM last year when they won the division.
Nutcutting time for this coaching regime is RIGHT NOW. I know you see it,
but you don't wanna be a meanie.

infantrycak
02-06-2010, 04:53 PM
The Ravens and the Jets finished at 9-7. Both with tiebreakers over the Texans. The Texans 7th loss, in Jacksonville, effectively ended the Texans playoffs chances. There was nothing the Texans could have done on their behalf at that point to earn a playoff berth.

I understand that perfectly well. And like I said every year there are teams that need to win in week 17 plus have something else happen that get into the playoffs. Or like the last game in 2008 have everything fall their way and don't take care of business by losing to the Texans. This year we weren't spoiling someone else with no chance of our own, we took care of business and the rest didn't fall into line. That happens. And I just disagree on effectively ended. During that 4 week stretch the Ravens or Jets could have lost on any weekend. Not being in control of your own fate and being out of the playoffs are not the same thing. This meaningless game stuff is silly at least this year. We finished our 16th game and were not out of the playoffs. It wasn't a meaningless game.

thunderkyss
02-06-2010, 05:02 PM
The Ravens and the Jets finished at 9-7. Both with tiebreakers over the Texans. The Texans 7th loss, in Jacksonville, effectively ended the Texans playoffs chances. There was nothing the Texans could have done on their behalf at that point to earn a playoff berth.

Along that same line of thinking, the Jets didn't do anything to earn their playoff berth. They got in, because Baltimore lost to Pittsburgh, week 16.

Same thing as us having a shot with a Jets loss week 17.

DexmanC
02-06-2010, 05:03 PM
We finished our 16th game and were not out of the playoffs. It wasn't a meaningless game.

It was effectively a consolation prize for handing control of your playoff
lives over to the Jaguars. At the end of the day, whenever the Texans
have had a chance to get that "big win," they CHOKE. This is what
Baldinger and King were very clear about. King even went so far as to say
that EVERYONE in that NBC studio on "Football Night In America" watch
every game wondering HOW the Texans are gonna lose it.

This is a well-earned reputation they have nationally. All we have now is
"hope," because there are no results that point to us competing within our
division and closing out games to the top-half-of-the-league teams.

Lucky
02-06-2010, 05:11 PM
During that 4 week stretch the Ravens or Jets could have lost on any weekend.
The Jags limped home 0-4. As did the Broncos. A few wins down the stretch by one of these teams, and the Texans would have been eliminated much earlier. We can play the "what if" game all day long. The Texans had no chance at the playoffs after the loss to the Jags. That's an indisputable fact.

thunderkyss
02-06-2010, 05:20 PM
The Jags limped home 0-4. As did the Broncos. A few wins down the stretch by one of these teams, and the Texans would have been eliminated much earlier. We can play the "what if" game all day long. The Texans had no chance at the playoffs after the loss to the Jags. That's an indisputable fact.

No chance? The chances were pretty good that the Texans would make the play-offs, until Curtis Painter took his first NFL snap.

& that's an indisputable fact.

DexmanC
02-06-2010, 05:28 PM
No chance? The chances were pretty good that the Texans would make the play-offs, until Curtis Painter took his first NFL snap.

& that's an indisputable fact.

Nice 0-4 glossover. Gloss over the fact the reason the Colts were able
to rest their starters for the last two games of the season were partly
because the Texans HANDED OVER two wins to them.

Hardcore Texan
02-06-2010, 05:29 PM
Along that same line of thinking, the Jets didn't do anything to earn their playoff berth. They got in, because Baltimore lost to Pittsburgh, week 16.

Same thing as us having a shot with a Jets loss week 17.

Yep, and had it been us that got in and made it all the way to the AFC championship game this conversation/thread would not be happening, and that's kind of the point we are making.

I think we all want to win and it not come to getting lucky, including the owner and people saying he's content with being mediocre is good ole fashion conjecture yet it has legs with some.

thunderkyss
02-06-2010, 05:55 PM
Yep, and had it been us that got in and made it all the way to the AFC championship game this conversation/thread would not be happening, and that's kind of the point we are making.

I think we all want to win and it not come to getting lucky, including the owner and people saying he's content with being mediocre is good ole fashion conjecture yet it has legs with some.

I'm with you... but you don't see me "propping" the Jets because, "They took care of business." They are just as lucky to get into the play-offs as we would have been.

My post you quoted had nothing to do with the Texans...

It was more about the Jets, and how they are regarded by "Texans" fans. Complete double standard.

thunderkyss
02-06-2010, 05:57 PM
Nice 0-4 glossover. Gloss over the fact the reason the Colts were able
to rest their starters for the last two games of the season were partly
because the Texans HANDED OVER two wins to them.

I'm not glossing over any fact, as that wasn't relevant to the argument at the time.

Yes, you make a good point.

Fact remains our chances were as good as the Jets for making the play-offs, before Painter entered that game.

sbalderrama
02-06-2010, 07:14 PM
the sheeple...

This faux word immediately turns me off of anything you might want to say, but hey, if it makes you feel superior in your own mind have at it.

infantrycak
02-06-2010, 07:38 PM
The Jags limped home 0-4. As did the Broncos. A few wins down the stretch by one of these teams, and the Texans would have been eliminated much earlier. We can play the "what if" game all day long. The Texans had no chance at the playoffs after the loss to the Jags. That's an indisputable fact.

Hardly. Many teams have made it on narrower chances but if that's the drum you want to bang go for it. Not even close to an indisputable fact. Rather than indisputable I find that assertion laughable.

But hey it's done. We didn't get in. We need a neutral arbitrator - someone get Peyton on the line and ask whether he would rather have faced the Jets or Texans?

Nice 0-4 glossover. Gloss over the fact the reason the Colts were able to rest their starters for the last two games of the season were partlybecause the Texans HANDED OVER two wins to them.

Nice 4-0 gloss over. We took care of business and they didn't. In case you haven't noticed it doesn't matter when you get the wins it is how many that counts. Oh and your Colts comment is totally figment of your hatination. Make them 12-2 going into the last two games and the Texans 9-5 we couldn't catch them for division or home field.

HoustonFrog
02-06-2010, 10:14 PM
I find it humorous that the Texans were one of those blown games from the playoffs(according to some) and a better record...7 points and under and yet 5 games they won were by 7 points or under. Could have lost alot more too. When is that reality mentioned? No need to keep blaming the Jets. You are what you are and they kicked the Texans ass.

I'm surprised at some of the Pat game love here also. They sat 3 of their top D backs to rest them. They could have played if the game was needed. They took guys in and out all game. It was a win but stop acting like they went all out to win. Please child. As King said, add that to the Rams and Seattle game and it wasn't like the were steaming toward the playoffs. They made their bed in the mid 4 games. That is all there is to it. In the end the blame lies in the mirror

Overall, I hear a Dead or Alive song going in my head and I'll back away with good intentions.

houstonspartan
02-06-2010, 10:51 PM
I find it humorous that the Texans were one of those blown games from the playoffs(according to some) and a better record...7 points and under and yet 5 games they won were by 7 points or under. Could have lost alot more too. When is that reality mentioned? No need to keep blaming the Jets. You are what you are and they kicked the Texans ass.

I'm surprised at some of the Pat game love here also. They sat 3 of their top D backs to rest them. They could have played if the game was needed. They took guys in and out all game. It was a win but stop acting like they went all out to win. Please child. As King said, add that to the Rams and Seattle game and it wasn't like the were steaming toward the playoffs. They made their bed in the mid 4 games. That is all there is to it. In the end the blame lies in the mirror

Overall, I hear a Dead or Alive song going in my head and I'll back away with good intentions.

LOL!

I literally laughed at loud.

Texan_Bill
02-06-2010, 11:34 PM
This is both the greatest and the most asinine thread........... ever.:thisbig:

Hardcore Texan
02-06-2010, 11:44 PM
I find it humorous that the Texans were one of those blown games from the playoffs(according to some) and a better record...7 points and under and yet 5 games they won were by 7 points or under. Could have lost alot more too. When is that reality mentioned? No need to keep blaming the Jets. You are what you are and they kicked the Texans ass.

I'm surprised at some of the Pat game love here also. They sat 3 of their top D backs to rest them. They could have played if the game was needed. They took guys in and out all game. It was a win but stop acting like they went all out to win. Please child. As King said, add that to the Rams and Seattle game and it wasn't like the were steaming toward the playoffs. They made their bed in the mid 4 games. That is all there is to it. In the end the blame lies in the mirror

Overall, I hear a Dead or Alive song going in my head and I'll back away with good intentions.


I hope none of this is directed at me. I have been very objective about it, I know the record, I know the wins have to come in the division, I have been VERY critical of the performance of the team especially in that context. But stating that it's crapshoot at the end of the season, some teams make it by the skin of their teeth and some don't it truthful and objective and talking about how small the differences are, are also truthful, and how perception is changed by being on either side of that is too. I thought we were just talking about all the possiblities, and how slight a margin of what is perceived as success. My main and only problem is saying McNair is content with anything is freaking stupid......like anyone outside his trusted circle knows, pretty much my contention all along in this thread. This effin debate has just turned into nothing but hot air and a waste of key strokes. People say a win is a win, no matter what this and that and say the pats win wasn't important when there was in fact something on the line. I could care less at this point, the season is over, the team needs to get better and take care of their own business. Things like "please child" and other remarks I am reading just come across as condescening "you don't have a clue and your're not on my level so don't even try" type attitude.

Norg
02-07-2010, 12:19 AM
iam sure miami has something to play for when we played them

ChampionTexan
02-07-2010, 12:21 AM
This is both the greatest and the most asinine thread........... ever.:thisbig:

And the best part is there's lots more just like it!

The Pencil Neck
02-07-2010, 02:45 AM
The Texans had no chance at the playoffs after the loss to the Jags. That's an indisputable fact.

I don't think this word means what you think it means.

Pantherstang84
02-07-2010, 07:47 AM
I hope none of this is directed at me. I have been very objective about it, I know the record, I know the wins have to come in the division, I have been VERY critical of the performance of the team especially in that context. But stating that it's crapshoot at the end of the season, some teams make it by the skin of their teeth and some don't it truthful and objective and talking about how small the differences are, are also truthful, and how perception is changed by being on either side of that is too. I thought we were just talking about all the possiblities, and how slight a margin of what is perceived as success. My main and only problem is saying McNair is content with anything is freaking stupid......like anyone outside his trusted circle knows, pretty much my contention all along in this thread. This effin debate has just turned into nothing but hot air and a waste of key strokes. People say a win is a win, no matter what this and that and say the pats win wasn't important when there was in fact something on the line. I could care less at this point, the season is over, the team needs to get better and take care of their own business. Things like "please child" and other remarks I am reading just come across as condescening "you don't have a clue and your're not on my level so don't even try" type attitude.

Rep.

HoustonFrog
02-07-2010, 07:51 AM
I hope none of this is directed at me. I have been very objective about it, I know the record, I know the wins have to come in the division, I have been VERY critical of the performance of the team especially in that context. But stating that it's crapshoot at the end of the season, some teams make it by the skin of their teeth and some don't it truthful and objective and talking about how small the differences are, are also truthful, and how perception is changed by being on either side of that is too. I thought we were just talking about all the possiblities, and how slight a margin of what is perceived as success. My main and only problem is saying McNair is content with anything is freaking stupid......like anyone outside his trusted circle knows, pretty much my contention all along in this thread. This effin debate has just turned into nothing but hot air and a waste of key strokes. People say a win is a win, no matter what this and that and say the pats win wasn't important when there was in fact something on the line. I could care less at this point, the season is over, the team needs to get better and take care of their own business. Things like "please child" and other remarks I am reading just come across as condescening "you don't have a clue and your're not on my level so don't even try" type attitude.

HT, it was directed at no one

1) I was well sauced after a nice party that my wife and I had attended last night

2) Over alot of pages I'd seen alot about how the team was a missed kick here or a TD there from winning or tying games. Very true. But just like a win is a win, a loss is a loss. I just wanted to point out in general that 5 of their wins was by a TD or less too so the other argument can be made. Especially flat games like the Rams.

3) What am I doing up with the kids right now?

4) Again, saw much talk of the Pats game and again, a win is a win but in that talk it was mentioned how the Pats were putting Brady in to win. Why did they sit him to start then if it was such a big game?King mentions this. They also sat alot of iffy key personnel in their secondary. Ones that probably would have played if the playoffs were on the line. I don't think sitting Moss would have happened either.

It was just random, deep thought by a mind that was pickled at the time :)

Lucky
02-07-2010, 10:14 AM
I don't think this word means what you think it means.
Don't be condescending. It's meant exactly as intended.

I've tired of playing these reindeer games. I'm done with discussing the 2009 Houston Texans. My opinion doesn't count, anyway. The only opinion that counts is from the guy who writes the checks. His opinion has been heard.

So everyone gets a clean slate for 2010, as far as I'm concerned. There should be only one objective from this organization. And that should be to become champions. Every free agent signing, every draft selection, every mini camp, every training camp practice session should have that in mind. The goal is not to "improve". It's to raise the Vince Lombardi Trophy on February 6, 2011 in Arlington, Texas.

http://tapperass.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/vince-lombardi-trophy-for-super-bowl-xlii2.jpg

dalemurphy
02-07-2010, 10:51 AM
Don't be condescending. It's meant exactly as intended.

I've tired of playing these reindeer games. I'm done with discussing the 2009 Houston Texans. My opinion doesn't count, anyway. The only opinion that counts is from the guy who writes the checks. His opinion has been heard.

So everyone gets a clean slate for 2010, as far as I'm concerned. There should be only one objective from this organization. And that should be to become champions. Every free agent signing, every draft selection, every mini camp, every training camp practice session should have that in mind. The goal is not to "improve". It's to raise the Vince Lombardi Trophy on February 6, 2011 in Arlington, Texas.
http://tapperass.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/vince-lombardi-trophy-for-super-bowl-xlii2.jpg

I don't think you and Mr. McNair are on the same page. He wants to build a sustainable and healthy organization. He also wants his organization to stand for things beyond winning. Here's a question that I think is good for fans to really consider:

Which of these two options would you prefer?:
A. Texans win the Superbowl next year but fall back into mediocrity the two following years.

B. Texans don't win the Superbowl but make the playoffs three consecutive seasons and have at least one serious run (AFC Championship, at least)

Certainly those aren't the only two possibilities... But, the point is that a lot of fans would prefer option A over B. I disagree. I'm pretty sure Bob McNair disagrees as well. He certainly wants to win a Superbowl but I think he'd rather build an organization like Phildelphia has run rather than win a Superbowl and fade away again. It's an important distinction, because I don't think he's going to sell out for a single season like a lot of you may want him to do.

MannyFresh
02-07-2010, 11:05 AM
I don't think you and Mr. McNair are on the same page. He wants to build a sustainable and healthy organization. He also wants his organization to stand for things beyond winning. Here's a question that I think is good for fans to really consider:

Which of these two options would you prefer?:
A. Texans win the Superbowl next year but fall back into mediocrity the two following years.

B. Texans don't win the Superbowl but make the playoffs three consecutive seasons and have at least one serious run (AFC Championship, at least)

Certainly those aren't the only two possibilities... But, the point is that a lot of fans would prefer option A over B. I disagree. I'm pretty sure Bob McNair disagrees as well. He certainly wants to win a Superbowl but I think he'd rather build an organization like Phildelphia has run rather than win a Superbowl and fade away again. It's an important distinction, because I don't think he's going to sell out for a single season like a lot of you may want him to do.


He's starting to sound eerily familiar to other "Mc" just up the road.... McLane

WWJD
02-07-2010, 11:18 AM
Your goal should be to win the Super Bowl every year. Every year.

I bet that's Peyton's goal. I bet Brady thinks that. I bet Joe Montana said every single start to every single year he played that he was going to be in that game and win.

JB
02-07-2010, 11:21 AM
Your goal should be to win the Super Bowl every year. Every year.

Exactly! And every year there are 31 teams that have failed that season.

beerlover
02-07-2010, 11:45 AM
I don't think you and Mr. McNair are on the same page. He wants to build a sustainable and healthy organization. He also wants his organization to stand for things beyond winning. Here's a question that I think is good for fans to really consider:

Which of these two options would you prefer?:
A. Texans win the Superbowl next year but fall back into mediocrity the two following years.

B. Texans don't win the Superbowl but make the playoffs three consecutive seasons and have at least one serious run (AFC Championship, at least)

Certainly those aren't the only two possibilities... But, the point is that a lot of fans would prefer option A over B. I disagree. I'm pretty sure Bob McNair disagrees as well. He certainly wants to win a Superbowl but I think he'd rather build an organization like Phildelphia has run rather than win a Superbowl and fade away again. It's an important distinction, because I don't think he's going to sell out for a single season like a lot of you may want him to do.

lets end this discussion beerlover style- one from avg. tasting/avg. brewer side & second an exceptional taster/exceptional brewers side.

the average taster/fan just wants to quench his or her own thirst, just as long as its cold & wet/live NFL football. while the average brewer wants to make as much money as he or she can by providing what sells out quickly/Relient. So the avg. taster is satisfied/fans & the average brewer is satisfied/McNair.

the exceptional taster fan wants more from his beverage, whether it be a specific malt, hop or yeast flavor. He or she is not satisfied with just something cold & wet wanting more flavor, award winning/TexansTalk fan. The exceptional brewer wants to market his beverage to those who support him or her to keep producing highly driven, recognized, award winning beer/playoffs/Kubiak?

there is nothing that can quench my thirst like winning :wesmantexanfan:/:trophy:

Lucky
02-07-2010, 11:50 AM
Which of these two options would you prefer?:

Don't get into bizarro scenarios. That's TK's department. There's nothing about winning a championship that automatically drags a team into mediocrity. That has more to do with players becoming too comfortable and satisfied, or too expensive for a team to keep under the cap.

As those whining about the Colts and Bengals resting starters stated, you play to win the game. Project that mentality out, and you play to win the championship. Certainly, there has to be some team building to get to that point. The Saints have been building for 4 seasons, and have the opportunity today. If they accomplish that goal, what would preclude them from repeating?

In an NFL.com 2009 preseason interview (http://www.nfl.com/videos/houston-texans/09000d5d80fc01c0/Gary-Kubiak-on-2009-season), Kubiak said that a "realistic" goal would be to get into the playoffs. I asked the question then, if the head coach doesn't believe that winning the Super Bowl is realistic, how will the players ever feel that way? Kubiak needs to set the bar high. That's what great coaches do.

thunderkyss
02-07-2010, 12:25 PM
I don't think you and Mr. McNair are on the same page. He wants to build a sustainable and healthy organization. He also wants his organization to stand for things beyond winning. Here's a question that I think is good for fans to really consider:


Certainly those aren't the only two possibilities...

Normally, you and I are on the same page, concerning this issue. But I disagree with this statement.

Yes, I acknowledge that you said these aren't the only options... but still.

McNair, I think believes just like Lucky, every year, the goal is Super Bowl.

The difference, is that Lucky... or at least many of the people here, feel that Kubiak should be fired because we didn't get into the play-offs. Thereby they believe McNair accepts the "mediocrity" Kubiak has delivered.

One reason they believe Kubiak should have been fired, is because that is the way it has gone in the NFL in recent years. So they've got a point.

At the end of 2008, we all agreed that we need to stop shooting ourselves in the foot. This year, I think we are all saying the same thing.

thunderkyss
02-07-2010, 12:30 PM
the exceptional taster fan wants more from his beverage, whether it be a specific malt, hop or yeast flavor. He or she is not satisfied with just something cold & wet wanting more flavor, award winning/TexansTalk fan. The exceptional brewer wants to market his beverage to those who support him or her to keep producing highly driven, recognized, award winning beer/playoffs/Kubiak?

there is nothing that can quench my thirst like winning :wesmantexanfan:/:trophy:
So you think McNair couldn't care less if we ever win a Super Bowl, as long as we sell out Reliant?

You think Dale is happy that we sell out Reliant?

I would bet Dale, just like me, and I'll gaurantee every other Sunshiner wants a SuperBowl just as badly as you do.

The only difference is that we believe Kubiak will get us there. You & the Soapers don't.

But we all want a Super Bowl.

thunderkyss
02-07-2010, 12:38 PM
Don't get into bizarro scenarios. That's TK's department.

:kitten:

As those whining about the Colts and Bengals resting starters stated, you play to win the game.

Just to clarify..... I'm not whining about them resting their starters. My only complaint is when people say, "The Jets took care of business" when they did no such thing. They needed & got the kind of help the Texans needed. Not only with the Colts laying down (I don't think the Bengals had a chance to beat the Jets), but with Pittsburgh beating the Ravens week 16.

In an NFL.com 2009 preseason interview (http://www.nfl.com/videos/houston-texans/09000d5d80fc01c0/Gary-Kubiak-on-2009-season), Kubiak said that a "realistic" goal would be to get into the playoffs. I asked the question then, if the head coach doesn't believe that winning the Super Bowl is realistic, how will the players ever feel that way? Kubiak needs to set the bar high. That's what great coaches do.

John Kitna was laughed at when he said it was realistic for the Lions to win 10 games..... I agree the goal should be set high... & I can see what you mean Kubiak should be trying to win the Super Bowl every year.

By the same token, when we discussed what was realistic for this team, many did not believe we could win 10 games.....

dalemurphy
02-07-2010, 12:39 PM
So you think McNair couldn't care less if we ever win a Super Bowl, as long as we sell out Reliant?

You think Dale is happy that we sell out Reliant?

I would bet Dale, just like me, and I'll gaurantee every other Sunshiner wants a SuperBowl just as badly as you do.

The only difference is that we believe Kubiak will get us there. You & the Soapers don't.

But we all want a Super Bowl.

TK,

My point isn't about the ultimate goal. But, about what sacrifices a person is willing/ unwilling to make in order to reach his goal. In this instance, I don't believe McNair wouldn't make the same/ or as many sacrifices for a single Superbowl trophy as Jerry Jones will. Jerry would structure contracts and bring in FAs that could greatly help the team in the short term but also lead to some purging and rough years in the long term. McNair has said many times that he wants to follow the models of these organizations: NE, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh... Nothing about that precludes championships. However, in that model, they don't look at each season and "do everything possible" to make the Superbowl. Those organizations are steady. They don't sell out for one season. That's all I was trying to say.

thunderkyss
02-07-2010, 12:51 PM
TK,

My point isn't about the ultimate goal. But, about what sacrifices a person is willing/ unwilling to make in order to reach his goal.



In this instance, I don't believe McNair wouldn't make the same/ or as many sacrifices for a single Superbowl trophy as Jerry Jones will. Jerry would structure contracts and bring in FAs that could greatly help the team in the short term but also lead to some purging and rough years in the long term.

If Jerry was running this team, Chris Brown.. or Ryan Moats at least, since we weren't playing him anyway... would have been cut, & Larry Johnson would have got the majority of Carries on Monday Night.

If "Play-offs or bust" was real, I can't imagine a scenario that Larry Johnson doesn't end up on this team.

McNair has said many times that he wants to follow the models of these organizations: NE, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh... Nothing about that precludes championships. However, in that model, they don't look at each season and "do everything possible" to make the Superbowl. Those organizations are steady. They don't sell out for one season. That's all I was trying to say.

No, but they end up with a Fred Taylor, or a Terrell Owens, or a Corey Dillon & Randy Moss on their team.

We end up with Chris Brown, Ahman Green & Eric Moulds.

steelbtexan
02-07-2010, 01:20 PM
So you think McNair couldn't care less if we ever win a Super Bowl, as long as we sell out Reliant?

You think Dale is happy that we sell out Reliant?

I would bet Dale, just like me, and I'll gaurantee every other Sunshiner wants a SuperBowl just as badly as you do.

The only difference is that we believe Kubiak will get us there. You & the Soapers don't.

But we all want a Super Bowl.

Great Post

I hope the soapers (including myself) are wrong.

If we are wrong I'm sure JT will be here to remind us in the most classless way possible.

We all want a Super Bowl win, you're right some just want to see it in our lifetimes. With the pace McNair makes decisions the results of seeing a Texan hoisting a SB trophy is ? at best atleast during or lifetimes.

Like I stated before it really doesn't matter. It's McNair's team and he wiill keep on cashing those checks.

BTW McNair said it was playoffs or bust before the season began, No playoffs, no reprecussions.

McNair isn't willing to make changes in his gravy train. When McNair says playoffs or bust this year I will just laugh.

McNair wants to win a SB but not at the expense of the bottom line. IMO

Hardcore Texan
02-07-2010, 01:27 PM
HT, it was directed at no one

1) I was well sauced after a nice party that my wife and I had attended last night

2) Over alot of pages I'd seen alot about how the team was a missed kick here or a TD there from winning or tying games. Very true. But just like a win is a win, a loss is a loss. I just wanted to point out in general that 5 of their wins was by a TD or less too so the other argument can be made. Especially flat games like the Rams.

3) What am I doing up with the kids right now?

4) Again, saw much talk of the Pats game and again, a win is a win but in that talk it was mentioned how the Pats were putting Brady in to win. Why did they sit him to start then if it was such a big game?King mentions this. They also sat alot of iffy key personnel in their secondary. Ones that probably would have played if the playoffs were on the line. I don't think sitting Moss would have happened either.

It was just random, deep thought by a mind that was pickled at the time :)

It's all good. I was TUI (typing under the influence) as well last night. I took it as directed towards me or some of the others that are saying very similiar things in there post. Every once in awhile I might just get a little defensive after a couple of brews.....:spy:

In the end we all want the same thing, a damn trophy!

GP
02-07-2010, 01:33 PM
I don't think this word means what you think it means.

http://www.youthink.com/quiz_images/full_962863878.jpg

DexmanC
02-07-2010, 08:59 PM
Here's to tonights Superbowl ending all excuses for Gary Kubiak.
Losing close aint' cute anymore.

houstonspartan
02-07-2010, 09:03 PM
Here's to tonights Superbowl ending all excuses for Gary Kubiak.
Losing close aint' cute anymore.

LOL.

I am honestly impressed with Sean Payton. I was rooting for the Colts, but I can't ignore what Sean Payton has done in four years. He went from 3-13 to two Championship games, a Super Bowl appearance and a Super Bowl win.

Gotta give him some props. He's a great coach.

MEGA SWATT
02-07-2010, 09:20 PM
I hope this will motivate the whole Texans organization. I'm so tired of watching everyone else celebrate their team's success.

Hervoyel
02-07-2010, 09:24 PM
I agree, he's just being an ass about the whole thing. If the Texans were in the NFC South they'd have done just as well with Gary as the Saints had done with Sean. No doubt about it. It's the lousy division they play in that's prepared them so well to hand Indianapolis a 30-17 Super Bowl loss, not any kind of superior coaching or drafting.

We have a good team now and much of that is indeed because of Gary Kubiak. That they are miserable against their division opponents, in pressure situations and in important games is also very much because of Gary Kubiak. Works both ways.

Can't wait for next year though. We're on our way now! Playoffs or Bust or Not! Maybe! Yeah!

HoustonFrog
02-07-2010, 10:01 PM
I agree, he's just being an ass about the whole thing. If the Texans were in the NFC South they'd have done just as well with Gary as the Saints had done with Sean. No doubt about it. It's the lousy division they play in that's prepared them so well to hand Indianapolis a 30-17 Super Bowl loss, not any kind of superior coaching or drafting.

We have a good team now and much of that is indeed because of Gary Kubiak. That they are miserable against their division opponents, in pressure situations and in important games is also very much because of Gary Kubiak. Works both ways.

Can't wait for next year though. We're on our way now! Playoffs or Bust or Not! Maybe! Yeah!

Would rep you, blah, blah, blah

infantrycak
02-07-2010, 10:59 PM
LOL.

I am honestly impressed with Sean Payton. I was rooting for the Colts, but I can't ignore what Sean Payton has done in four years. He went from 3-13 to two Championship games, a Super Bowl appearance and a Super Bowl win.

Gotta give him some props. He's a great coach.

Fans act like coaching smarts are only dependent on the ultimate outcome and that is stupid. Fact is coaching is like playing blackjack - you play the odds. Have the game tonight with the Saints losing buy 3 or less and Payton is the donkey for his 4th down decision. "He gave the game away, blah, blah, blah" His decision was neither smarter or dumber because of the ultimate outcome.

houstonspartan
02-07-2010, 11:08 PM
Fans act like coaching smarts are only dependent on the ultimate outcome and that is stupid. Fact is coaching is like playing blackjack - you play the odds. Have the game tonight with the Saints losing buy 3 or less and Payton is the donkey for his 4th down decision. "He gave the game away, blah, blah, blah" His decision was neither smarter or dumber because of the ultimate outcome.

All I was saying is that he has done a good job since he was hired in New Orleans. And, if they'd lost tonight, he still would be seen as a good coach.

Sure, coaching is like gambling, but let's not forget that there are certain people better at gambling than others.

It's not just about ultimate outcome. I, personally, think that the coach of the San Diego Chargers - can't think of his name right now - is a good coach.

thunderkyss
02-07-2010, 11:16 PM
All I was saying is that he has done a good job since he was hired in New Orleans. And, if they'd lost tonight, he still would be seen as a good coach.

Sure, coaching is like gambling, but let's not forget that there are certain people better at gambling than others.

It's not just about ultimate outcome. I, personally, think that the coach of the San Diego Chargers - can't think of his name right now - is a good coach.

What do you think about the talent they added through the draft vs the players they've acquired through FA?

MannyFresh
02-07-2010, 11:21 PM
I hope this will motivate the whole Texans organization. I'm so tired of watching everyone else celebrate their team's success.

Motivate them to get "nails" kicker like the Saints have....that dude was kicking like nobody's business tonight. That's how you kick field goals Krissy Brown!

infantrycak
02-07-2010, 11:25 PM
All I was saying is that he has done a good job since he was hired in New Orleans. And, if they'd lost tonight, he still would be seen as a good coach.

Sure, coaching is like gambling, but let's not forget that there are certain people better at gambling than others.

It's not just about ultimate outcome. I, personally, think that the coach of the San Diego Chargers - can't think of his name right now - is a good coach.

And don't get me wrong. I think Payton has done a great job as well. And I agree he would have done a good job regardless of the outcome tonight.

I guess that is a point I have been trying to make around here. Perception is reality and yet variable. Texans win against the Jets in game 1 and lose against the Pats in game 16 to end with the same record and they are in the playoffs. The entire MB, radio discussion, etc. is different. Does that truly reflect in any way on Kubiak as a coach?

Texecutioner
02-08-2010, 12:48 AM
This thread just makes me happy I do not have to listen to any of you yahoos on the radio or TV. And I can see from what yall are writing that your ratings would "can" you before you got on a show.

Well, apparently there are people on the radio saying similar things, because you wrote an angry letter to them as well. The truth can be ugly sometimes, but denying it is worse in the end.

HoustonFrog
02-08-2010, 08:08 AM
And don't get me wrong. I think Payton has done a great job as well. And I agree he would have done a good job regardless of the outcome tonight.

I guess that is a point I have been trying to make around here. Perception is reality and yet variable. Texans win against the Jets in game 1 and lose against the Pats in game 16 to end with the same record and they are in the playoffs. The entire MB, radio discussion, etc. is different. Does that truly reflect in any way on Kubiak as a coach?

Actually yes it does because the Jets game was the first game of the season and they came out flat and ill prepared. So yes, it does make a difference on how he coached. Your first game sets a tone. If they win that game then they have 9 wins going into the Pats game and maybe it would not have mattered as much if they were in...the whole season sets up differently. I mean you can play mess with the schedule all you want. Fact is, they didn't get in and he gets some of the blame. Did Thunder steal your pass word?:)

Hervoyel
02-08-2010, 08:09 AM
I feel like I left a sarcasm smiley or two out in previous posts on this thread.

silvrhand
02-08-2010, 08:31 AM
Add to Peter King speaking the truth this morning as well on 610.

King:"Listen, we sit every Sunday and wonder...how are the Texans going to screw up this game. It's not like they are going to get beat...they are going to find somehow to lose the game. Also, tell me a meaningful game that they have played in and won in the past three years. What, they beat the Colts once?"

Vandermeer: "Yeah, but we put on the 4 game winning streak at the end of the season to close out strong".

King: "But the barn door is shut at 5-7, I'm sorry. They shouldn't be in that situation."

Spoke the truth...and it hurts. I'm sure his podcast will be up shortly.

The Texans are one of the best at playing meaningless football.

CloakNNNdagger
02-08-2010, 09:00 AM
I feel like I left a sarcasm smiley or two out in previous posts on this thread.

The sarcasm could only have been missed by the "newbies"...........or those who have had one too many.:drunk:

BigTimeTexanFan
02-08-2010, 09:05 AM
Fans act like coaching smarts are only dependent on the ultimate outcome and that is stupid. Fact is coaching is like playing blackjack - you play the odds. Have the game tonight with the Saints losing buy 3 or less and Payton is the donkey for his 4th down decision. "He gave the game away, blah, blah, blah" His decision was neither smarter or dumber because of the ultimate outcome.

After the Saints recovered that on-side kick everyone I was watching the game with were all saying how great a call that was by the coach. My response was it's only a great call because it worked. Had it not worked and they lost, Payton would have been the goat.

infantrycak
02-08-2010, 09:07 AM
Actually yes it does because the Jets game was the first game of the season and they came out flat and ill prepared. So yes, it does make a difference on how he coached. Your first game sets a tone. If they win that game then they have 9 wins going into the Pats game and maybe it would not have mattered as much if they were in...the whole season sets up differently. I mean you can play mess with the schedule all you want. Fact is, they didn't get in and he gets some of the blame. Did Thunder steal your pass word?:)

Yes Kubiak gets some of the blame, no doubt about it. But there is plenty of blame to go around and any one little piece different and we at least get to watch the Texans in an away playoff game. Heck if they get paired with the Bengals we probably get to see them in at least two playoff games. Did you notice how much of the footage being used to analyze how to attack the Colts was from the Texans?

After the Saints recovered that on-side kick everyone I was watching the game with were all saying how great a call that was by the coach. My response was it's only a great call because it worked. Had it not worked and they lost, Payton would have been the goat.

Yup people judge the wisdom on the result and that is a perfect example because an onside kick literally rests on the bounce of the ball.

dalemurphy
02-08-2010, 09:08 AM
Add to Peter King speaking the truth this morning as well on 610.

King:"Listen, we sit every Sunday and wonder...how are the Texans going to screw up this game. It's not like they are going to get beat...they are going to find somehow to lose the game. Also, tell me a meaningful game that they have played in and won in the past three years. What, they beat the Colts once?"

He's right that the Texans don't get beat anymore. They are a talented team that play very well together.... until they don't. I just think King is lacking the conclusion: youth and inexperience- I think that's why. With all the experience these guys have gained the past 2 seasons, it should change next year. The Miami and NE were big games that we won. And, so was the game vs. SF and at Buffalos earlier in the year, as well as at Cincy.

Vandermeer: "Yeah, but we put on the 4 game winning streak at the end of the season to close out strong".

King: "But the barn door is shut at 5-7, I'm sorry. They shouldn't be in that situation."

He's right. They shouldn't have been in that situation. They should've won more games. They blew it this year.

Spoke the truth...and it hurts. I'm sure his podcast will be up shortly.
The speaking of the truth hurts a lot less than the disappointment I experienced when we lost those games and when we missed out on the playoffs.

King makes valid points. I just think the conclusions that he, Baldinger, and others make are wrong. But, we'll find out a lot more next season. Depending on who's correct about the coach and organization and depending on other variables like injuries, I predict the Texans win between 7 and 13 game. How's that for going out on a limb?

ChampionTexan
02-08-2010, 09:13 AM
After the Saints recovered that on-side kick everyone I was watching the game with were all saying how great a call that was by the coach. My response was it's only a great call because it worked. Had it not worked and they lost, Payton would have been the goat.

I heard Payton say they believed there was a 70-80% chance that they would recover the kick. Assuming he's right, what this means is that 7 or 8 times out of 10 it would have worked, 2 or 3 times out of 10, it would have been Colts ball in great field position, and 10 out of 10 times it would have been a great call.

I think this was the turning point in the game - particularly coming on the heels of the Saints FG that ended the first half (after a three and out by the Colts).

Unfortunately, it brought back memories of a the on-side kick the Jags did against the Texans to open up the second half of one of their 2008 games. I thought that was the turning point in that game also.

Second Honeymoon
02-08-2010, 09:16 AM
The Saints proved last night that it doesnt take forever to turn things around. The Saints had the same if not less talent than the Texans did in 2006, and they turned it around and got to 2 NFC Conference Championships and ultimately a Super Bowl. We are throwing a party and rewarding 9-7 with extensions and 'votes of confidence'.

You know its a bad time when the Saints make your organization look like a joke. maybe the Saints thieving Houston's casual fans and bandwagonners will put the pressure on McNair to bring a winner to town. If the Saints can do it, so can we. We just need to stop nickel and diming our coaching staff and stop nickel and diming our roster.

But for now Baldy is right. McNair is content with mediocrity, maybe last night's outcome and the subsequent Saints hysteria here in Houston, will make McNair wake up and smell the coffee.

silvrhand
02-08-2010, 09:17 AM
Yes Kubiak gets some of the blame, no doubt about it. But there is plenty of blame to go around and any one little piece different and we at least get to watch the Texans in an away playoff game. Heck if they get paired with the Bengals we probably get to see them in at least two playoff games. Did you notice how much of the footage being used to analyze how to attack the Colts was from the Texans?

Yup people judge the wisdom on the result and that is a perfect example because an onside kick literally rests on the bounce of the ball.

Sure when everyone expects it, this was an unexpected risky but brilliant play call, it kept Peyton off the field yet again. They kept the pressure on Manning and eventually forced him to make a mistake, which they then won the game on. They didn't have much to lose, the colts just could not get any pressure on Brees once Freeney's ankle was done.

The saints won the coaching battle last night, it was very obvious.

infantrycak
02-08-2010, 09:19 AM
I heard Payton say they believed there was a 70-80% chance that they would recover the kick. Assuming he's right, what this means is that 7 or 8 times out of 10 it would have worked, 2 or 3 times out of 10, it would have been Colts ball in great field position, and 10 out of 10 times it would have been a great call.

I think this was the turning point in the game - particularly coming on the heels of the Saints FG that ended the first half (after a three and out by the Colts).

Unfortunately, it brought back memories of a the on-side kick the Jags did against the Texans to open up the second half of one of their 2008 games. I thought that was the turning point in that game also.

He can say they believed there was a 110% chance they recover the ball and it doesn't make it true. I liked the 4th down call which failed and don't like the onside kick call that succeeded.

Texans_Chick
02-08-2010, 09:19 AM
I heard Payton say they believed there was a 70-80% chance that they would recover the kick. Assuming he's right, what this means is that 7 or 8 times out of 10 it would have worked, 2 or 3 times out of 10, it would have been Colts ball in great field position, and 10 out of 10 times it would have been a great call.

I think this was the turning point in the game - particularly coming on the heels of the Saints FG that ended the first half (after a three and out by the Colts).

Unfortunately, it brought back memories of a the on-side kick the Jags did against the Texans to open up the second half of one of their 2008 games. I thought that was the turning point in that game also.


On average, the statistics show that there is a 60% chance (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2010/02/my_super_bowl_diary_in_video_f.html) of recovering a surprise onside kick.

He was very fortunate that they recovered. Given the way that scrum went, it is quite possible The Peyton would have had the ball + a short field to get a touchdown.

All this being said, I wish this thread title would die and we would put this conversation elsewhere.

HOU-TEX
02-08-2010, 09:43 AM
On average, the statistics show that there is a 60% chance (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2010/02/my_super_bowl_diary_in_video_f.html) of recovering a surprise onside kick.

He was very fortunate that they recovered. Given the way that scrum went, it is quite possible The Peyton would have had the ball + a short field to get a touchdown.

All this being said, I wish this thread title would die and we would put this conversation elsewhere.

If the Colt player (#81 I think) wouldn't have lunged forward and hit the ball there would've been a penalty and The Peyton would've had the ball in Saints territory. The ball hadn't gone 10 yards when the Colt hit it. The ball appeared to be curving towards the sideline away from the 10 yard mark.

Just thought I'd throw out my .02

Texan_Bill
02-08-2010, 09:47 AM
All this being said, I wish this thread title would die and we would put this conversation elsewhere.

No kidding!

http://billmeis.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/broken-record.jpg

:gun:

Second Honeymoon
02-08-2010, 09:49 AM
He can say they believed there was a 110% chance they recover the ball and it doesn't make it true. I liked the 4th down call which failed and don't like the onside kick call that succeeded.

agreed. payton got a little lucky last night.

dalemurphy
02-08-2010, 10:15 AM
He can say they believed there was a 110% chance they recover the ball and it doesn't make it true. I liked the 4th down call which failed and don't like the onside kick call that succeeded.

I totally agree. I didn't mine the onside but I love the 4th down call. I think teams should almost always go for it on 4th down and reasonably short if they are inside the 10. Unless it's late in the game and the score dictates a FG, it's almost always the right call, IMO. By the way, that's one area where Kubiak's game management is pretty strong.

Second Honeymoon
02-08-2010, 10:56 AM
I totally agree. I didn't mine the onside but I love the 4th down call. I think teams should almost always go for it on 4th down and reasonably short if they are inside the 10. Unless it's late in the game and the score dictates a FG, it's almost always the right call, IMO. By the way, that's one area where Kubiak's game management is pretty strong.

yeah, you have to go for it against the Colts. against the Ravens, Jets, or other defensive team you take the 3 points, but against your top offensive squads like the Colts you have to go for it.

The onsides kick was insane but it worked out. props to Payton.

Mailman
02-08-2010, 12:30 PM
And don't get me wrong. I think Payton has done a great job as well. And I agree he would have done a good job regardless of the outcome tonight.

I guess that is a point I have been trying to make around here. Perception is reality and yet variable. Texans win against the Jets in game 1 and lose against the Pats in game 16 to end with the same record and they are in the playoffs. The entire MB, radio discussion, etc. is different. Does that truly reflect in any way on Kubiak as a coach?

Guess I gotta get busy spreading the rep wealth because this is a very good post.

thunderkyss
02-08-2010, 02:22 PM
After the Saints recovered that on-side kick everyone I was watching the game with were all saying how great a call that was by the coach. My response was it's only a great call because it worked. Had it not worked and they lost, Payton would have been the goat.

Not only that..... If Kubiak would have called that same outside stretch 3 times in a row turning it over on downs..... you'd never hear the end of it.

Then to open the second half with an onside kick..... doesn't matter if it worked or not, Kubiak would be crucified for that.

thunderkyss
02-08-2010, 02:29 PM
The saints won the coaching battle last night, it was very obvious.

Anyone want to talk about the lack of intensity the Colts had? I mean they only scored 7 points in the last three Qtrs of the game.

When are they going to learn you have to play 4 Qtrs of football to win in this league?

Talk about mediocre. :kitten:

Norg
02-08-2010, 02:40 PM
Wouldn't that be sweet if it was the texans vs the the saints
I think we could have beaten the saints handly by at least
14 points I can't wait for next season all rdy playing the NFC
east and all

DexmanC
02-08-2010, 06:32 PM
Anyone want to talk about the lack of intensity the Colts had? I mean they only scored 7 points in the last three Qtrs of the game.

When are they going to learn you have to play 4 Qtrs of football to win in this league?

Talk about mediocre. :kitten:

Kind of hard to score points when you're sitting on your ass. The Saints
executed their gameplan, and once the scored dictated the Colts HAD to score,
that's when they were finally able to force Peyton to make a fatal mistake.

Peyton Manning had the ball only THREE PLAYS in the entire second quarter,
and then the Saints executed an onside kick to further keep Peyton sitting.
That's how you beat the Colts, but only the Saints were able to execute
that well-known gameplan this season. There was nothing "mediocre" about
that game.

The Saints just killed any excuse you guys could possibly use to save Kubiak's
ass yet again. I feel he's retarding the growth of this team, you don't. I
hope I'm wrong, but I doubt I am.

GP
02-08-2010, 06:38 PM
Not only that..... If Kubiak would have called that same outside stretch 3 times in a row turning it over on downs..... you'd never hear the end of it.

Then to open the second half with an onside kick..... doesn't matter if it worked or not, Kubiak would be crucified for that.

One of the things that I have to actually give major props to Kubiak for, is how he took more risks in 2009 than he ever had in any season prior to this one.

He went for it on 4th down a lot more than he ever has. And he was doing it long before our annual Rally 'Round The Coach final four or five games of the season.

I would not crucify Kubiak for attempting an onside kick against the Colts. You do everything you can do to get the ball back when you play the Colts. Look, chances are that Manning takes it from the 20, on a normal Saints kickoff to start the 2nd half, andh e eats up clock and STILL scores a TD.

But what Sean Payton did, is attempt to multiple things:

1. Prohibit the Colts and Manning from having the ball. The Saints essentially wasted the coin flip by going 3-and-out in their opening series. Now they are looking at giving Manning the ball to start the 2nd half. Ouch.

2. Play the percentages. I have a feeling the stats show that an onside kick is statistically more likely to succeed than Chris Brown trotting with the ball and lobbing it to a receiver near the goal line when the defense is already playing the goal line to begin with. I'm just sayin'.....

3. Swing momentum back to his team and ignite the offense a bit. This would have helped spark the whole offense, which needed a break. And it also rallies the Saints defense, because they see that the coach is doing whatever it takes to keep Brees on the field.

It was a great call whether it works or not. It's the Super Bowl, you're playing Peyton Manning, and you don't have much else to do BUT to try and throw that play at them. If Kubiak was doing that, in THAT same scenario as Sean Payton did, I would not be mad if it failed to give us the ball back. And I say that with all honesty.

The Chris Brown HB pass is a bad call because it was done at the absolutely worst time: We had the Jags defense on their heels, it was 1st down near the end zone for pete's sake, Chris Brown telegraphed that it was a HB pass as soon as he received the ball from Schaub, and he should have tossed it out of bounds. Fail, Fail, Fail, and Fail some more.

Even Kubiak didn;t try to defende the poor playcall in his Loser Monday presser. He owned up to that one very quickly once it was posed to him as a question.

The debate over the HB Pass Debacle should end. It really should. Sunshiners are using this instance the same way the birthers are debating Obama's citzenship papers. It's futile.

thunderkyss
02-08-2010, 07:10 PM
One of the things that I have to actually give major props to Kubiak for, is how he took more risks in 2009 than he ever had in any season prior to this one.

He went for it on 4th down a lot more than he ever has. And he was doing it long before our annual Rally 'Round The Coach final four or five games of the season.

shweeewww.... at least that's one thing.

It was a great call whether it works or not. It's the Super Bowl, you're playing Peyton Manning, and you don't have much else to do BUT to try and throw that play at them. If Kubiak was doing that, in THAT same scenario as Sean Payton did, I would not be mad if it failed to give us the ball back. And I say that with all honesty.

I think it was a gutsy call, I won't deny that. But I felt the same way I felt when I saw Chris Brown pull the ball back to throw... what's it called? Chutzpa... I like it.

To tell you the truth, after I saw the Saints recovered, I said, "GK would never have the gnads to call that play... maybe that's what GP & Dex are talking about."

But honestly, I could live without it.

Don't twist that into saying I applaud Kubiak for the half back pass. I wouldn't have done it either. But it's that same chutzpa Peyton showed last night... I think anyway. Prior to that series, and there have been series after that, where we didn't get it done on the goal line. If you want to play percentages.... it was time to pull something out of the ole posterior.

The Chris Brown HB pass is a bad call because it was done at the absolutely worst time: We had the Jags defense on their heels, it was 1st down near the end zone for pete's sake....

That's when you do it.


Chris Brown telegraphed that it was a HB pass as soon as he received the ball from Schaub, and he should have tossed it out of bounds. Fail, Fail, Fail, and Fail some more.

If it were telegraphed, they would have been covering the TE. He was wide open, they were playing the run.

Even Kubiak didn;t try to defende the poor playcall in his Loser Monday presser. He owned up to that one very quickly once it was posed to him as a question.

I don't think we can take Kubiak at his word when he is at the podium. He's just protecting his players.... that's what he's always done.

Take McNair's words with Kubiak's actions.... he's been trying to get our leaders to take over the game all year long. That's what this team is missing.

The debate over the HB Pass Debacle should end. It really should. Sunshiners are using this instance the same way the birthers are debating Obama's citzenship papers. It's futile.

I promise, I won't bring it up again until you do.

But I think we can milk this one till September.

Lucky
02-08-2010, 07:38 PM
On average, the statistics show that there is a 60% chance (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2010/02/my_super_bowl_diary_in_video_f.html) of recovering a surprise onside kick.

Excellent piece (http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/09/onside-kicks.html) you linked in your blog. I love that they showed the math, as opposed to some of the other stat sites.

The EP for a failed onside attempt is -2.1 pts, and the EP for a success is +1.2 pts. At first glance it appears onside kicks are always losing propositions. But don’t forget that you’ve always got to kickoff somehow, and a normal kickoff averages -0.7 pts for the kicking team.


EP(normal KO) = -0.7
EP(onside recovery) = +1.2
EP(onside failure) = -2.1


Let’s call the success rate ‘x’. Solving for the break-even success rate, where the combined expected points of an onside kick equal that of a normal kick, we get:


1.2x + (1-x)(-2.1) = -0.7
1.2x - 2.1 +2.1x = -0.7
3.3x = 1.4
x = 42.4%


So 60% is a lot more than the break even success rate of 42%, and as long as a team has the element of surprise, onside kicks are well worth the risk—at least under ‘normal’ football conditions. Late in games, however, depending on the score and time remaining, we can’t use the EP analysis anymore. We need to turn to win probability analysis, something I’ll look at in part 2 of this article.

The catch is that teams can’t do this very often. The key is that the onside attempt is unexpected. As soon as a team is known for sneaky onside kicks, its success rate will go down. But this isn’t such a bad thing. As opponents are forced to respect the threat of an onside kick, their normal kick return blocking will suffer, allowing overall net kickoff distance to improve. Ultimately, there would be an equilibrium, making life more difficult for the receiving team.So according to the Advanced NFL Stats, the Saints onside kick was a good risk. As long as they hadn't onside kicked much in previous games. And that doesn't take into account Peyton Manning and the Colts' drive success percentage.

Still, I thought it was crazy when it happened live. Maybe that's why it works, when it seems absolutely crazy. I know the Saints were a different team after that play.

Regarding the thread, these things always morph into something else. First it was Baldinger, then onsides kicks, later I might post some barbecue recipes. Maybe that means we're content with anarchy? It's the offseason, so everything's a bit looser.

Here are some stats I compiled myself of passes attempted by non-QBs (or wildcat QBs) during the '09 season.

12-28-224 yards 6 TDs 7 INTs 71.1 Passer Rating

A boom or bust play. Then I looked at only RB passes (non-wildcat):

3-12-55 3 TDs 3 INTs 46.1 Passer Rating

So you have a 1 in 4 chance at success. A 1 in 4 chance at total failure. And a 50/50 chance that you'll run another play. Incredibily risky. It's the type of play you want to run with a big lead, and then just to put on film for future opponents to prepare for. An atrocious play call. Which as GP pointed out, Kubiak admitted to. I'm fairly certain that "Stagger Gary" won't find its way back into future game plans.

The Pencil Neck
02-08-2010, 08:04 PM
Kind of hard to score points when you're sitting on your ass. The Saints
executed their gameplan, and once the scored dictated the Colts HAD to score,
that's when they were finally able to force Peyton to make a fatal mistake.

Peyton Manning had the ball only THREE PLAYS in the entire second quarter,
and then the Saints executed an onside kick to further keep Peyton sitting.
That's how you beat the Colts, but only the Saints were able to execute
that well-known gameplan this season. There was nothing "mediocre" about
that game.

The Saints just killed any excuse you guys could possibly use to save Kubiak's
ass yet again. I feel he's retarding the growth of this team, you don't. I
hope I'm wrong, but I doubt I am.

Six plays, I believe.

But that's beside the point.

I think you have a very, very warped view of how easy it is to take a team to the Super Bowl. You seem to think that any really good coach can come in and take a team, any team, from scratch to the Super Bowl or at least, to the play offs, in 3-4 years.

If it were that easy, more teams would make it to the Super Bowl and no team would go for 4-5 years without going to the playoffs. When you consider that half the teams in the league haven't made it to the Super Bowl (since the merger) and and in the past 30 years, only 5 teams haven't had a playoff drought of over 4 years (Giants, Ravens, Broncos, Vikings, and Steelers) and 17 teams have had a drought of 7+ years in that same period... including the Texans. And the Texans were starting at a deficit.

Kubiak has improved this team each year. If the team takes a big step backwards next year, I'll join your side and ask for Kubiak to be gone. But I don't see anything, including the schedule, that makes me believe that this team is going to be worse next year.

thunderkyss
02-08-2010, 08:38 PM
So you have a 1 in 4 chance at success. A 1 in 4 chance at total failure. And a 50/50 chance that you'll run another play.

Out of curiosity... do you know what our TD/redzone ratio was prior to that game?

Goatcheese
02-08-2010, 08:57 PM
Kind of hard to score points when you're sitting on your ass. The Saints
executed their gameplan, and once the scored dictated the Colts HAD to score,
that's when they were finally able to force Peyton to make a fatal mistake.

Peyton Manning had the ball only THREE PLAYS in the entire second quarter,
and then the Saints executed an onside kick to further keep Peyton sitting.
That's how you beat the Colts, but only the Saints were able to execute
that well-known gameplan this season. There was nothing "mediocre" about
that game.

The Saints just killed any excuse you guys could possibly use to save Kubiak's
ass yet again. I feel he's retarding the growth of this team, you don't. I
hope I'm wrong, but I doubt I am.

I'm so tired of all the excuses.

Stop making excuses!

Woulda, coulda, shoulda!

Blah, blah, blah!

Parrot, parrot, parrot!

Regurgitate, regurgitate, regurgitate!

/end pink soaper imitation :rolleyes:

thunderkyss
02-08-2010, 09:53 PM
But that's beside the point.

I think you have a very, very warped view of how easy it is to take a team to the Super Bowl. You seem to think that any really good coach can come in and take a team, any team, from scratch to the Super Bowl or at least, to the play offs, in 3-4 years.

Does anybody remember Jim Haslett?

He was the coach that brought a winning attitude to that club. Brought them their first play-off victory by beating the St Louis Rams... the greatest show on turf... in 2000 I believe. They had won their division, the NFC West for the second time in team history. That play-off team was built off the failed efforts of Mike Ditka, who brought that team Ricky Williams, Cam Cleeland, Mark Fields, La'Roi Glover, Sammy Knight, Keith Mitchell, Alex Molden, Chris Naeole, Kieth Poole, Willie Roaf, Kyle Turley, & Fred Weary.

In 2000, they went 10-6. after Ditka went 3-13 the year before. They then finished 7-9 in 2001, 9-7 in 2002. Both times missing the play-offs. In 2003 & 2004, they finished 8-8. In 2005, the Saints finished 3-13 once again, never playing a home game in their home stadium thanks to Hurricane Katrina.

That 2005 roster included players like Jamal Brown(actually, I think the whole 2006 OL was Hasslette's except the center), Devery Henderson, Duece McAllister, Joe Horn, Will Smith, Darren Howard, I think both starting corners, and a safety (I can't remember their names).

I am not saying Payton was handed a Championship team. I think he's done an excellent job keeping that team fresh, with good young talent. He also seems to hit on his FA aquisitions. despite going 7-9, then 8-8 the two years after their first NFC Championship appearance.

So yeah, Neck, I'm with you. It's not like he started from scratch.

DexmanC
02-08-2010, 11:38 PM
Six plays, I believe.

But that's beside the point.

I think you have a very, very warped view of how easy it is to take a team to the Super Bowl. You seem to think that any really good coach can come in and take a team, any team, from scratch to the Super Bowl or at least, to the play offs, in 3-4 years.

If it were that easy, more teams would make it to the Super Bowl and no team would go for 4-5 years without going to the playoffs. When you consider that half the teams in the league haven't made it to the Super Bowl (since the merger) and and in the past 30 years, only 5 teams haven't had a playoff drought of over 4 years (Giants, Ravens, Broncos, Vikings, and Steelers) and 17 teams have had a drought of 7+ years in that same period... including the Texans. And the Texans were starting at a deficit.

Kubiak has improved this team each year. If the team takes a big step backwards next year, I'll join your side and ask for Kubiak to be gone. But I don't see anything, including the schedule, that makes me believe that this team is going to be worse next year.

I'm just asking for playoffs. The Superbowl talk will begin once we reach
the PLAYOFF milestone. Most teams we call ourselves contending with
next year have made that mark within the last four years. All I'm saying,
is that if this cat can't get it done in FIVE, the organization needs to
quit dragging its feet.

I seen his episode. Hopefully, this regime can get this show out of
syndication.

sbalderrama
02-08-2010, 11:43 PM
On average, the statistics show that there is a 60% chance (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2010/02/my_super_bowl_diary_in_video_f.html) of recovering a surprise onside kick.

According to Peter King, the odds were probably even more in the Saints favor based on what they saw on tape:

"When the Saints looked at the Colts on tape, they saw two up-men on the front line of the Indy kick-return team cheating. That is, when the kicker approached the ball, two guys on the right of the kick-return unit -- as the kickoff team looked ahead, to the left -- turned and began retreating to set up their blocks for a return just before the ball was kicked. So when Payton saw this, he figured the Saints would definitely try an onside kick at some point of the game."

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/02/08/mmqb.superbowl/index.html#ixzz0f0xdgsIA

HOU-TEX
02-09-2010, 09:17 AM
I'm so tired of all the excuses.

Stop making excuses!

Woulda, coulda, shoulda!

Blah, blah, blah!

Parrot, parrot, parrot!

Regurgitate, regurgitate, regurgitate!

/end pink soaper imitation :rolleyes:

My tongue tripped and fell when I got to this line. Say it 3 times fast. hehe :)

GP
02-09-2010, 02:59 PM
That's when you do it.

If it were telegraphed, they would have been covering the TE. He was wide open, they were playing the run.

I don't think we can take Kubiak at his word when he is at the podium. He's just protecting his players.... that's what he's always done.

Take McNair's words with Kubiak's actions.... he's been trying to get our leaders to take over the game all year long. That's what this team is missing.

Ah, I see now. The picture is clearer.

You think:

A.) Going for the HB Pass on 1st down was a dagger-in-the-heart play. But I don't think that's the right spot to pull out that play.

B.) You didn't think it was telegraphed. I re-watched that play on the day it happened. I wanted to see what caused it to fail. Yes, the TE was open. But he was open because he slipped by what was easily a very smart, shallow zone where the defense was wisely stringing that play out to the sideline. They were, IMO, taunting and daring Chris Brown to throw that pass. Re-watch it, TK, if you have it still--You'll see that Chris Brown does a very BAD job of selling that play as a running play. He did, man. It's true. He takes the ball from Schaub, and IIRC, he's almost immediately slowing down to a trot and pulling the ball back to get ready for a throw. It was telegraphed. Our oline was blocking like it's a pass play, not trying to get to the next level like they would on a run block. The defense was tipped verrry early.

C.) Kubiak admitted that HE made that call. Schaub does not get to audible out of a pass play and into another pass play--Some say he can, but I don't think he does. Schaub would have audibled out of that play. He's smarter than that. Supposedly.

The moment Kubiak called that play, it was going to happen. So I think you're saying, by your comments, that this is STILL on the players for not stepping up and owning that situation. That it's plausible that McNair was right when he defends Kubiak and blames the players?

Isn't that a tad bit too slanted toward the coach, in terms of being defended to the point that the owner calls out the players for not helping the coach overcome his own gameday deficiencies? I was really taken aback about the little scolding that McNair threw at the players. Maybe that's aimed at Mario. If so, I understand. But not the majority of other players out there. Those guys busted their collective butts this past season.

This was the first year that I have watched, where I could see all areas of the team giving their best effort. In the past, certain people and certain groups would sort of take turns dogging it. You could see the indifference in their body language. This year? I stand by what I say: The players lapped Kubiak when comparing their perspective roles and responsibilities.

That's how I see it. So it's just my take. I can see now that we're pretty far apart on coach vs. players. Right?

thunderkyss
02-09-2010, 03:14 PM
hi guys

GuerillaBlack
02-09-2010, 08:38 PM
Not using injury as an excuse but it should be noted that those 4 consecutive games were on the heels of losing OD..

I'm not sayin, I'm just sayin'.

Yeah, but we were ahead on both Indy games. Bad coaching is what lost us those games...not losing OD. I mean, he would have definitely helped, but we were in positions to win regardless.

I've never seen an NFL team play games without a placekicker. Not sure how that would've helped matters.

Ever heard of signing a new kicker?

dalemurphy
02-09-2010, 10:44 PM
Yeah, but we were ahead on both Indy games. Bad coaching is what lost us those games...not losing OD. I mean, he would have definitely helped, but we were in positions to win regardless.



Ever heard of signing a new kicker?


You said we'd have won at least one of those 4 games, if we'd only fired the Browns. It was a ridiculous statement. First of all, why on earth would we have fired Kris Brown before the Tennessee game? He missed one big kick the week before against Indy but was excellent for us the past 2 1/2 seasons. If we cut him after the Tennessee game, I'm not sure how that helps us since he didn't miss a kick vs. Indy or vs. Jacksonville. Perhaps you wanted him replaced with a magic kicker? that could score more points per FG than Kris Brown could, who went 3 for 3 over those two games.

Regardless of all that, how ridiculous do you have to be to think that simply cutting players can make your position stronger in the middle of the season?
Too bad the Redskins didn't cut Jason Campbell in October. Imagine how much better they would've been at QB. Or, perhaps Jacksonville should've cut their starting DEs in order to improve their pass rush. Maybe Baltimore could've cut Derek Mason in order to improve their passing game?

houstonspartan
02-10-2010, 12:01 AM
You said we'd have won at least one of those 4 games, if we'd only fired the Browns. It was a ridiculous statement. First of all, why on earth would we have fired Kris Brown before the Tennessee game? He missed one big kick the week before against Indy but was excellent for us the past 2 1/2 seasons. If we cut him after the Tennessee game, I'm not sure how that helps us since he didn't miss a kick vs. Indy or vs. Jacksonville. Perhaps you wanted him replaced with a magic kicker? that could score more points per FG than Kris Brown could, who went 3 for 3 over those two games.

Regardless of all that, how ridiculous do you have to be to think that simply cutting players can make your position stronger in the middle of the season?
Too bad the Redskins didn't cut Jason Campbell in October. Imagine how much better they would've been at QB. Or, perhaps Jacksonville should've cut their starting DEs in order to improve their pass rush. Maybe Baltimore could've cut Derek Mason in order to improve their passing game?


Dale, you and I have discussed this over and over. Replacing a kicker late in the season isn't really all that hard. Ask that somewhat successful team in New Orleans.

Kickers are a dime a damn dozen.

Texecutioner
02-10-2010, 12:15 AM
You said we'd have won at least one of those 4 games, if we'd only fired the Browns. It was a ridiculous statement. First of all, why on earth would we have fired Kris Brown before the Tennessee game? He missed one big kick the week before against Indy but was excellent for us the past 2 1/2 seasons. If we cut him after the Tennessee game, I'm not sure how that helps us since he didn't miss a kick vs. Indy or vs. Jacksonville. Perhaps you wanted him replaced with a magic kicker? that could score more points per FG than Kris Brown could, who went 3 for 3 over those two games.

Regardless of all that, how ridiculous do you have to be to think that simply cutting players can make your position stronger in the middle of the season?
Too bad the Redskins didn't cut Jason Campbell in October. Imagine how much better they would've been at QB. Or, perhaps Jacksonville should've cut their starting DEs in order to improve their pass rush. Maybe Baltimore could've cut Derek Mason in order to improve their passing game?

I don't think it's completely all about the fact that we didn't "start" a new kicker over Brown, but it's more about the fact that we never once even looked for another kicker or tried out any new legs. Had Kubes at least tried out some new guys and signed a guy for the rest of the season and let him and Kris Brown compete day after day through practice to see who had the hotter leg than I don't think you'd hear the criticism as much. Had we brought a guy in as a back up and Kubes said he felt that Brown still had been more accurate and he felt more confident in Brown from the practices then I wouldn't have been as upset about how we neglected to look elsewhere. I could have lived with that possibly. At least it showed that Kubes wasn't getting to complacent with the same ole guys who weren't doing their job. It wouldn't have been as bad that way. But since he did nothing at all, and just let nature take it's course "assuming" that the problems would fix themselves on their own and Brown continued to get worse and worse and hurt the team's chances, well the criticism is very valid and Kubes should be held accountable for not acting.

dalemurphy
02-10-2010, 12:18 AM
Dale, you and I have discussed this over and over. Replacing a kicker late in the season isn't really all that hard. Ask that somewhat successful team in New Orleans.
Kickers are a dime a damn dozen.

That didn't happen in New Orleans. Hartley was on the roster before the season started.

That's not the point, though. He was arguing that we'd have won at least one of those 4 games if Brown was cut. But, there isn't one coach in the NFL that would've cut Kris Brown before the Tennessee game. Kris Brown never missed another kick in any Texan loss after the Monday night game versus Tennessee.

Texecutioner
02-10-2010, 12:24 AM
That didn't happen in New Orleans. Hartley was on the roster before the season started.

That's not the point, though. He was arguing that we'd have won at least one of those 4 games if Brown was cut. But, there isn't one coach in the NFL that would've cut Kris Brown before the Tennessee game. Kris Brown never missed another kick in any Texan loss after the Monday night game versus Tennessee.

But he sure as hell missed a few in those last few wins.


I mean, he couldn't even make a freaking extra point FG. It got darn ugly at the end of the season man. No excuse for not looking at what other legs might have been out there that could have possibly contributed.

dalemurphy
02-10-2010, 12:44 AM
But he sure as hell missed a few in those last few wins.


I mean, he couldn't even make a freaking extra point FG. It got darn ugly at the end of the season man. No excuse for not looking at what other legs might have been out there that could have possibly contributed.

Hello? What are you responding to? Nobody is arguing this point. Once again, the point I was making is that Kris Brown did not adversely affect our W/L record after the point when cutting him would've been a consideration.

I'm sure the heck not defending Kris Brown!