PDA

View Full Version : 5 who could follow the Saints (from Pete Prisco)


TexanBacker93
02-12-2010, 11:10 AM
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/12915117/the-winning-formula-five-that-can-make-super-jump

Love him or hate him (ok I don't know anyone who loves him) at least we're being talked about.

BIG TORO
02-12-2010, 11:18 AM
I think were going to make that Jump!

TexanBacker93
02-12-2010, 11:22 AM
After watching the playoffs this year I didn't think there was a team that the Texans couldn't, scratch that, shouldn't beat. They have to find a way to avoid the little mistakes that they make during close games. Maybe the 4th Quarter comeback against the Pats will spark that. As Peter King stated during Super Bowl week, people watch us wondering what we will do to implode this week. That has to stop and there is no reason this team can't play in February. I'd love to beat Jerry Jones and the Cowboys in their stadium.

thunderkyss
02-12-2010, 11:24 AM
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/12915117/the-winning-formula-five-that-can-make-super-jump

Love him or hate him (ok I don't know anyone who loves him) at least we're being talked about.

OK read... not really saying a lot.

What I think is interesting, and think we should probably start discussing, is that we've been in this situation before.

2004, we went 7-9. We thought we were going to be the next big thing, & the media were starting to tag us the same way. Then the bottom fell out.

I'd like to know what it is about this organization now, that will make that less likely to happen again.

My first thought, is that McNair has taken a seat further back in the bus. I think the biggest reason for the 2-14 season, was that David Carr had no accountability. Everyone in that locker room knew what the single biggest thing holding the team back was, & the head coach didn't have the power to do anything about it.

I'll admit there are some similarities with Kubiak. I don't know the rhyme or reason, why he'll start a Wali Lundy week 1, but make a Steve Slaton come in slowly, or an Arian Foster to come in even slower. Personally, I think the more pressure is on, the more conservative he wants to be. I think he needs to get over that.

I think our run game would have been much better, if he moved Caldwell to Center, started Arian Foster earlier, and or given Moats the ball more.

I know he has his reasons for all the moves he made, or didn't make, but I can't understand why he wouldn't put game changers in the game.

DiehardChris
02-12-2010, 11:43 AM
Prisco definitely suffers from relying too much on the stats in this case. Antonio Smith was worth the contract he signed. He started a little slow, but he was the most effective defensive lineman we had in 2009. He was great against the run and in the second half of the season he was consistently getting pressure on the QB.

Goatcheese
02-12-2010, 11:57 AM
2004, we went 7-9. We thought we were going to be the next big thing, & the media were starting to tag us the same way. Then the bottom fell out.

I'd like to know what it is about this organization now, that will make that less likely to happen again.


After the 2004 season the Texans took a hatchet to their roster in an effort to get younger, and the old guys they kept just got older.

If anything, this year they will try to add veteran experience instead of cutting the heart out of the defense. It would also be nice if we didn't fire the offensive coordinator at the beginning of the season.

HoustonFrog
02-12-2010, 12:11 PM
I saw this article the year before and the year before that. Until it happens, then I'll believe

BigBull17
02-12-2010, 12:15 PM
Prisco definitely suffers from relying too much on the stats in this case. Antonio Smith was worth the contract he signed. He started a little slow, but he was the most effective defensive lineman we had in 2009. He was great against the run and in the second half of the season he was consistently getting pressure on the QB.

Agfreed. I was very impressed with what he showed last year. He is very disruptive.

DiehardChris
02-12-2010, 12:16 PM
I saw this article the year before and the year before that. Until it happens, then I'll believe

Yeah, I'm a little sick of it myself... but it's a long, LONG offseason.

Joe Texan
02-12-2010, 12:23 PM
We are gonna make the Jump and watch the waggon rock

Thorn
02-12-2010, 12:42 PM
We all knew before last season started we had the ability, but could we? Well, here we are again before the next season knowing we have the ability, but will we?

Same ole same ole. Wait and see. Still though, I love me some Houston Texans anyway. :)

thunderkyss
02-12-2010, 03:37 PM
It would also be nice if we didn't fire the offensive coordinator at the beginning of the season.

Accountability... some Texans fans would like to see more of this.

dalemurphy
02-12-2010, 03:53 PM
We all knew before last season started we had the ability, but could we? Well, here we are again before the next season knowing we have the ability, but will we?

Same ole same ole. Wait and see. Still though, I love me some Houston Texans anyway. :)

But, weren't we a little delusional last year... Before we knew what we had in Cushing, G.Quin, and before we acquired Pollard, I thought we were a 10 win team. Of course it was possible to win ten games even without those heavy contributions but everything would've had to fall perfectly. We certainly couldn't afford all the injuries we suffered on offense.

I guess my point is that, from a talent standpoint, we have increased our margin of error. Another good off-season will increase it further. So, the odds are much better for a playoff season, despite what any of us have experienced in the past or any doubts we have about the coaching staff.

Khari
02-12-2010, 03:55 PM
Jump Jump
The Mac Dad will make you Jump Jump
The Daddy Mac will make you Jump Jump

:kingkong:

Norg
02-12-2010, 04:50 PM
What scares me is the

jags
titans
colts

can all make the jump has well

thunderkyss
02-12-2010, 07:23 PM
What scares me is the

jags
titans
colts

can all make the jump has well

That's the thing we all don't take into account. Daniel Jeremiah in Texans Chick's interview said it best, "it's impossible to predict how tough a schedule will be in the NFL." (http://blogs.chron.com/texanschick/2010/02/daniel_jeremiah_of_move_the_st.html)

All teams will be improving or regressing, and you never know which will do what.

But we know the Texans have gotten better, talent wise, year after year, after year.

threetoedpete
02-12-2010, 08:19 PM
Prisco definitely suffers from relying too much on the stats in this case. Antonio Smith was worth the contract he signed. He started a little slow, but he was the most effective defensive lineman we had in 2009. He was great against the run and in the second half of the season he was consistently getting pressure on the QB.

Considering what they've gotten out of the ghosts of free agents past, agreed. We had to pay a little more for hm because we aren't winners yet. I was well pleased with his performance. With Barwin under his wing, they both will make each other better as the seasons go on. Which in turn should make all the front seven much better.

I disagree with his player must step up. They need to at least an upgrade with competition at guard. And everyone should know by now whom I have the man love for. And whom I believe is the perfect fit. Iupati.

thunderkyss
02-12-2010, 09:19 PM
I disagree with his player must step up. They need to at least an upgrade with competition at guard. And everyone should know by now whom I have the man love for. And whom I believe is the perfect fit. Iupati.

I disagree as well. IMHO, the person that needs to step up is the CB playing opposite Glover Quinn. It's a shame when your 4th round rookie plays better than your Franchised Corner.

Malloy
02-12-2010, 09:25 PM
We all knew before last season started we had the ability, but could we? Well, here we are again before the next season knowing we have the ability, but will we?

Same ole same ole. Wait and see. Still though, I love me some Houston Texans anyway. :)

TY old man, ty :)

Goatcheese
02-13-2010, 12:19 AM
I disagree as well. IMHO, the person that needs to step up is the CB playing opposite Glover Quinn. It's a shame when your 4th round rookie plays better than your Franchised Corner.

By what standard?

Quin played 497 snaps in coverage, and gave up 587 yards, at 11.5 ypr/ 7.5 ypa.
D-Rob played 618 snaps in coverage, and gave up 544 yards, at 10.3 ypr/6.7 ypa.

Both had 0 interceptions.

GP
02-13-2010, 07:11 PM
...I don't know the rhyme or reason, why he'll start a Wali Lundy week 1, but make a Steve Slaton come in slowly, or an Arian Foster to come in even slower. Personally, I think the more pressure is on, the more conservative he wants to be. I think he needs to get over that.

I think our run game would have been much better, if he moved Caldwell to Center, started Arian Foster earlier, and or given Moats the ball more.

I know he has his reasons for all the moves he made, or didn't make, but I can't understand why he wouldn't put game changers in the game.

TK,

What I quoted of yours, above, is not an isolated incident.

Expand what you just said, and apply it to the favor he shows to Walter and Anderson vs. putting Jacoby Jones in there at the expense of making one of those two guys take a lower seat on the totem pole at WR.

So we have multiple instances of a head coach with roster problems...

1. Doesn't demote Myers at center, thereby making a statement that whoever gets Myers' job better do a better job or Kubiak's going to demote THAT guy and then put another person in there until the center position is made better. Maybe injuries precluded that Myers stays at center, though, so I give Kubiak a little bit of breathing room on this one.

2. Jacoby Jones. And I know there's one or two posters who are going to throw out the snaps stats and show that Jacoby got fair shots. Whatever. He's a dangerous guy and should be in there as a true #2. Period.

3. Running back mistakes. The unearthing of Steve Slaton in 2008's draft is now beginning to look less fantastic because he hung his hat on Steve, thinking he might have finally solved that puzzle. But then the fumbles began, then the Chris Brown experiment backfired in what can only be described as a colossal failure. We had a chance at Cedric Benson, laughing at him the first time and then relenting and showing such abject indifference that we let the Bengals outbid us. Oops. Then we had a shot at maybe a 1-year contract with Larry Johnson. Sigh. And finally, we sat Chris Brown's butt on the bench in the very last game and saw a heavy dose of Arian Foster. Gawd I hope Kubiak doesn't think he has found his saving grace at RB now. But, as we all know, there is a pattern here with Kubiak...

4. Kris Brown. Like I have said: Do we want to be seen as a kinder, gentler NFL franchise? Bob McNair votes "Yes!" Fine by me. Kubiak doesn't have to cut Kris after the MNF game. All he has to do is cut CHRIS Brown, since he's dead weight anyway. Then we could have signed a kicker in his place, sat Kris down and gave him a breather (let him clear his head), and let the new guy take a stab at it. Heck, if the new kicker stinks it up...it might give Kris Brown something he hasn't had in almost a whole decade: Competition and accountability. Think about it for a sec, and what that does to a guy's performance when he knows damn well that he has nobody looking over his shoulder. Even from a subconscious standpoint, it has an impact on someone's mentality toward his job.

5. I'm adding two new guys to this list: Connor Barwin and Amobi Okoye. These are two guys who might just be in over their heads, though Barwin's "motor" seems to be producing more RPM's than Amobi's.

These situations reflect roster decisions, with the last one being more of a drafting issue, I suppose. But the drafting issue turns into a roster situation pretty quickly because as we have seen from Kubiak: He will literally will his favored kids to success. Everyone likes to see this sort of loyalty to a small degree. But loyalty at the expense of the entire team is indicative, IMO, of someone who doesn't see things in a Big Picture mindset.

Which then goes on, IMO, to reveal why Kubiak also has problems with finding ways to beat divisional rivals and his problem with what some of us perceive to not being able to out-coach teams who are better than us.

In the grand scheme of things, Gary Kubiak is not currently a head coach whom I think is going to deliver a Super Bowl. Bob McNair believes he is, or is only saying this because it's all he can say right now. Who knows.

Casting our offensive statistical explosiveness aside, I ask myself one critical question: At the end of the day, is our head coach a guy who finds ways to beat the teams in his division (even if it's only going .500 against them) and does he inspire confidence with the decisions he makes regarding gameplanning and gameday strategies?

Kubiak doesn't get graded higher because he has Andre Johnson. Remove a few wild cards from this equation and let's really think about what we have here at head coach.

Alas, he's what we got and I concur that we should support him. But I want you to expand your critical thinking (that I quoted) and move it toward looking at Kubiak through that lens a bit more. It's why there's a constituency on here who can't find it within themselves to Keep Hope Alive.

I really feel that any success we're going to have in 2010 will be a reflection more upon the players than the quality of our head coach; that we'll win in spite of Kubiak, not because of Kubiak. Which makes people wonder what we'd do with a real gameday strategist at the controls of this team.

sandman
02-13-2010, 07:17 PM
By what standard?

Quin played 497 snaps in coverage, and gave up 587 yards, at 11.5 ypr/ 7.5 ypa.
D-Rob played 618 snaps in coverage, and gave up 544 yards, at 10.3 ypr/6.7 ypa.

Both had 0 interceptions.

I think you just made the argument yourself. You are pointing out that the franchised CB stats were one yard a reception better than the 4th round rookie, right?

I would say that Quinn played at about a 4th round rookie expectation, and DRob played WELL below his Franchise tag. So, relative to expectations, Quinn was the better player last year.

GP
02-13-2010, 07:17 PM
And I don't think I am re-routing this thread by going back to the debate about our coach.

The Saints are who they are, IMO, because of their head coach.

Sean Payton and Gary Kubiak should not be included in the same paragraph. The premise of the article is flawed because the two men are far apart when it comes to being the "total package" as a head coach.

Kubiak has his head buried in the details of his offense, and Payton appears to know how to make all the different parts of whole team function as one singular unit.

GuerillaBlack
02-13-2010, 07:18 PM
^^Great post GP!

dalemurphy
02-13-2010, 07:31 PM
TK,

What I quoted of yours, above, is not an isolated incident.

Expand what you just said, and apply it to the favor he shows to Walter and Anderson vs. putting Jacoby Jones in there at the expense of making one of those two guys take a lower seat on the totem pole at WR.

So we have multiple instances of a head coach with roster problems...

1. Doesn't demote Myers at center, thereby making a statement that whoever gets Myers' job better do a better job or Kubiak's going to demote THAT guy and then put another person in there until the center position is made better. Maybe injuries precluded that Myers stays at center, though, so I give Kubiak a little bit of breathing room on this one.

2. Jacoby Jones. And I know there's one or two posters who are going to throw out the snaps stats and show that Jacoby got fair shots. Whatever. He's a dangerous guy and should be in there as a true #2. Period.

3. Running back mistakes. The unearthing of Steve Slaton in 2008's draft is now beginning to look less fantastic because he hung his hat on Steve, thinking he might have finally solved that puzzle. But then the fumbles began, then the Chris Brown experiment backfired in what can only be described as a colossal failure. We had a chance at Cedric Benson, laughing at him the first time and then relenting and showing such abject indifference that we let the Bengals outbid us. Oops. Then we had a shot at maybe a 1-year contract with Larry Johnson. Sigh. And finally, we sat Chris Brown's butt on the bench in the very last game and saw a heavy dose of Arian Foster. Gawd I hope Kubiak doesn't think he has found his saving grace at RB now. But, as we all know, there is a pattern here with Kubiak...

4. Kris Brown. Like I have said: Do we want to be seen as a kinder, gentler NFL franchise? Bob McNair votes "Yes!" Fine by me. Kubiak doesn't have to cut Kris after the MNF game. All he has to do is cut CHRIS Brown, since he's dead weight anyway. Then we could have signed a kicker in his place, sat Kris down and gave him a breather (let him clear his head), and let the new guy take a stab at it. Heck, if the new kicker stinks it up...it might give Kris Brown something he hasn't had in almost a whole decade: Competition and accountability. Think about it for a sec, and what that does to a guy's performance when he knows damn well that he has nobody looking over his shoulder. Even from a subconscious standpoint, it has an impact on someone's mentality toward his job.

5. I'm adding two new guys to this list: Connor Barwin and Amobi Okoye. These are two guys who might just be in over their heads, though Barwin's "motor" seems to be producing more RPM's than Amobi's.

These situations reflect roster decisions, with the last one being more of a drafting issue, I suppose. But the drafting issue turns into a roster situation pretty quickly because as we have seen from Kubiak: He will literally will his favored kids to success. Everyone likes to see this sort of loyalty to a small degree. But loyalty at the expense of the entire team is indicative, IMO, of someone who doesn't see things in a Big Picture mindset.

Which then goes on, IMO, to reveal why Kubiak also has problems with finding ways to beat divisional rivals and his problem with what some of us perceive to not being able to out-coach teams who are better than us.

In the grand scheme of things, Gary Kubiak is not currently a head coach whom I think is going to deliver a Super Bowl. Bob McNair believes he is, or is only saying this because it's all he can say right now. Who knows.

Casting our offensive statistical explosiveness aside, I ask myself one critical question: At the end of the day, is our head coach a guy who finds ways to beat the teams in his division (even if it's only going .500 against them) and does he inspire confidence with the decisions he makes regarding gameplanning and gameday strategies?

Kubiak doesn't get graded higher because he has Andre Johnson. Remove a few wild cards from this equation and let's really think about what we have here at head coach.

Alas, he's what we got and I concur that we should support him. But I want you to expand your critical thinking (that I quoted) and move it toward looking at Kubiak through that lens a bit more. It's why there's a constituency on here who can't find it within themselves to Keep Hope Alive.

I really feel that any success we're going to have in 2010 will be a reflection more upon the players than the quality of our head coach; that we'll win in spite of Kubiak, not because of Kubiak. Which makes people wonder what we'd do with a real gameday strategist at the controls of this team.


Don't you think you would have had very similar criticisms of Sean Payton after their season in 2007 and 2008 if you were a Saints' fan?

Anytime a team disappoints, then of course there are going to be some poor performances/decisions that contributed to the disappointment. Those of us that support Kubiak, in general, believe two things: 1. most/all coaches make similar mistakes that cost their teams sometimes... 2. history is unlikely to repeat itself in 2010.

sandman
02-13-2010, 07:37 PM
And I don't think I am re-routing this thread by going back to the debate about our coach.

The Saints are who they are, IMO, because of their head coach.

Sean Payton and Gary Kubiak should not be included in the same paragraph. The premise of the article is flawed because the two men are far apart when it comes to being the "total package" as a head coach.

Kubiak has his head buried in the details of his offense, and Payton appears to know how to make all the different parts of whole team function as one singular unit.

I would agree with you, as long as it is not based on the flawed premise that they both have been at the helm of their respective teams for 4 years and Payton has already won a Super Bowl.

Payton had the benefit of inheriting a consistent .500 team (2000-2004) before having one bad year in 2005, and having Brees drop in his lap. Kubiak got a team with 2,4 and 5 wins in three of the four years before, and David Carr.

Let's not forget that before this season, Payton was a .500 coach as well. So basically, for an entire decade, the Saints were a .500 team except for one year (2005).

What Payton has shown is that he was finally able to take the Saints version of the 2007-2009 version of the Texans and make them a winning playoff team. That is something that Gary will probably never do, and thus the difference between the two.

thunderkyss
02-13-2010, 09:04 PM
TK,

What I quoted of yours, above, is not an isolated incident.
Alas, he's what we got and I concur that we should support him. But I want you to expand your critical thinking (that I quoted) and move it toward looking at Kubiak through that lens a bit more. It's why there's a constituency on here who can't find it within themselves to Keep Hope Alive.

I'm not the only Sunshiner that sees the same things. I agree with you on Jacoby vs Walter.. it's not that Walter isn't a #2, but Jacoby is a game-changer, a play-maker. I think we feel the same about Caldwell over Myers.... it's not that Myers suck(if you watch him play, he plays very well) but Caldwell plays as well, plus he's bigger, stronger, & just as fast.

The difference, is that what you see as the only conclusion, we know there are a hundred different scenarios that could have played out. Jacoby might have got the big head..... Caldwell could have got Schaub killed.... who knows.

I could be totally wrong, but I would bet if Slaton didn't have the fumbles, we would have seen Foster sooner. Or if it wasn't do-or-die with 4 back-to-back division games that late in the season, we'd have seen Foster sooner. But it's hard to say.

I know it sounds like I'm waxing over Kubiak's flaws. I'd like to have a serious discussion about them, I know they are there, you know they are there, we all know they are there. But you soapers only have one solution...

I really feel that any success we're going to have in 2010 will be a reflection more upon the players than the quality of our head coach; that we'll win in spite of Kubiak, not because of Kubiak. Which makes people wonder what we'd do with a real gameday strategist at the controls of this team.

Because there are no strategic demands for throwing for 4,770 yards with no running game. Plug in Andre, Plug in Schaub, anyone could do it. :sarcasm:

Or for taking the 30th rank defense to 13 after spotting the league three games. That's a much better improvement than Sean Payton had & he payed Greg Williams out of his own pocket.

You guys look past everything Kubiak has done well, and focus on what he's done poorly..... & that's all you want to talk about.

The Saints went 8-8 last year, 7-9 the year before, with a team that proved they could go 10-6. But we complain that Kubiak can't inspire a team that went 8-8 for the first time in their history to do better than 8-8 the year after they did it for the first time. :kitten:

thunderkyss
02-13-2010, 09:17 PM
And I don't think I am re-routing this thread by going back to the debate about our coach.
The Saints are who they are, IMO, because of their head coach.

Here we go.

Sean Payton and Gary Kubiak should not be included in the same paragraph. The premise of the article is flawed because the two men are far apart when it comes to being the "total package" as a head coach.

Exactly what I'm talking about.

Regardless what their teams records were, the good experience level on each team was different. The teams they play on a yearly basis, different. Their approach to FA, different.

Kubiak has his head buried in the details of his offense, and Payton appears to know how to make all the different parts of whole team function as one singular unit.

Here is the double standard. Payton goes out and get's Greg Williams after Benson said he wouldn't pay for him..... & "he knows how to make all the different parts of a whole team function as one singular unit."

Kubiak's defense has improved much better than Greg Williams' has. But Gary's head is buried in his offense.....

c'mon man!!!

steelbtexan
02-13-2010, 09:23 PM
TK

1. What are Kubes flaws in your opinion.
2. What is your solution to the problem (s)

I will give you my solutions

1. Do everything possible including taking chances on ? character guys,spending $ and draft picks to fix long standing problems at RB,OL and DB. Fire whoever has been making questionable talent decisions in FA. (Probably Bobby Greir)
2. Hire a specific person to assist Kubes on clock management and use of timeouts. This is the new hires only job.
3. Win more games and this problem takes care of its self.

Yeah the McNair has a different approach to FA than the Saints. The difference is that the Saints have a good approach to filling holes. The Texans approach stinks,

I dont fault Kubes for FA. That falls on McNair. Even though some MB members say McNair gives Kubes anything he wants in FA. We dont know this to be fact. We do know McNair said the Texans wouldn't go after tier 1 players in FA.

This is telling to me.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this TK.

Goatcheese
02-13-2010, 09:55 PM
I think you just made the argument yourself. You are pointing out that the franchised CB stats were one yard a reception better than the 4th round rookie, right?

That 1 yard is what separates good from average. It's the difference between being 8th best and 30th.

I would say that Quinn played at about a 4th round rookie expectation, and DRob played WELL below his Franchise tag. So, relative to expectations, Quinn was the better player last year.

Quin played quite well actually. He was one of the top 5 corners to come out of this draft.

Saying that a 6th year veteran performed much better than Quin isn't a knock. Being the 54th best corner means he's a starting caliber #2, just not anywhere near a #1, which Robinson has proven capable of.

thunderkyss
02-13-2010, 10:42 PM
TK

1. What are Kubes flaws in your opinion.
2. What is your solution to the problem (s)

Kubiak does seem to favor some players more than others, & it doesn't appear to be performance based. I'm talking about Slaton vs Moats... IMHO, Slaton should have got a lot more bench time. The line wasn't playing very well early in the season anyway, let Moats take the beating while Slaton straightens his head.

I think he needs to at least talk to his leaders before he sends them on the field. They're young, they need settling. If he's got Mario or Antonio on the sidelines on a regular rotation, he needs his position coaches in their ear telling them what needs to be done, like a trainer who has his boxer in the corner between rounds.

He needs to develop a short memory. We goofed up 2 minute drills back in 2006, & it took us 3 years before we tried one again.




Yeah the McNair has a different approach to FA than the Saints. The difference is that the Saints have a good approach to filling holes. The Texans approach stinks,

I dont fault Kubes for FA. That falls on McNair. Even though some MB members say McNair gives Kubes anything he wants in FA. We dont know this to be fact. We do know McNair said the Texans wouldn't go after tier 1 players in FA.

This is telling to me.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this TK.
I'd love for you to tell me which holes they filled. Their pass rush is as ineffective as ours. Their secondary is as passive as ours. Their defense is statistically worse than ours.

It's not that they got better players than we do.... would you rather have Fujita, Vilma, Shanle as your starting LBs or Diles, Demeco, Cushing?

Don't think Busing vs Sharper. At the time, it was Eugene vs Sharper.

IMHO, the FA thing is a question of whether you want to win now, or later.

By the way, I don't think the Saints broke the bank on any of their FAs.

thunderkyss
02-13-2010, 10:47 PM
That 1 yard is what separates good from average. It's the difference between being 8th best and 30th.



In this particular instance, the differential in number of snaps makes that one yard seem huge..... in Dunta's favor.

I don't want to argue this point, based on those stats, because they don't really tell you what happened. It's not like they were manned up for every snap, & I don't know how they attributed the yards to the individual corner. I think Dunta had a good year... but Quin looked to be the better cover corner.

gary
02-13-2010, 11:22 PM
TK

1. What are Kubes flaws in your opinion.
2. What is your solution to the problem (s)

I will give you my solutions

1. Do everything possible including taking chances on ? character guys,spending $ and draft picks to fix long standing problems at RB,OL and DB. Fire whoever has been making questionable talent decisions in FA. (Probably Bobby Greir)
2. Hire a specific person to assist Kubes on clock management and use of timeouts. This is the new hires only job.
3. Win more games and this problem takes care of its self.

Yeah the McNair has a different approach to FA than the Saints. The difference is that the Saints have a good approach to filling holes. The Texans approach stinks,

I dont fault Kubes for FA. That falls on McNair. Even though some MB members say McNair gives Kubes anything he wants in FA. We dont know this to be fact. We do know McNair said the Texans wouldn't go after tier 1 players in FA.

This is telling to me.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this TK.Getting better through the draft is fine with me but don't anyone tell me there is not anyway to continue that same trend without going after SOME FA's. Oh, please give me a break. Not you personally but I am just saying do not give me that garbage. Most NFL teams these days draft well AND pick up a couple of FA's to go along with others you draft. There are more than enough FA's out there who have a number of years left but you have to be willing to pay them. You should not just put a team full of draft picks out there every singe Sunday and wait to get better that is a huge part of the Texans many years of suckage IMO. On D when you know you're just a DT or player on the other side of Mario even a DB away from improving the D that much more you do not always have to just sit back and draft someone and say, hopefully he pans out by the 2015 season after being drafted in the 2010 draft for exsample. Trade for one or two of those or pick up one or two FA's big names I might add just for once and then draft the other. I don't care but that is the difference between the Texans and top teams like the Steelers, Pats, and the Colts their ownership knows how to mix and match so to speak Bob either chooses not to or he does not know how to. It's really how those teams have stayed on top for this long if you ask me. This is not a knock against Bob it's just the blunt truth and you and me know it. All of us want the samething though an SB win but I just wish the Texans would go after a big name FA just one time and try to speed up the progress even more. I know this post was not ment for me to reply to but here are my thoughts on this subject anyway.

steelbtexan
02-13-2010, 11:47 PM
Thanks for the reply

You put my thoughts into words much better than I could have.

Apparently you misunderstood we are in total agreement on this subject.

Every year they dont make moves to succeed is one less year of AJ,Dunta,Matt,and Ryans career.

gary
02-13-2010, 11:55 PM
Thanks for the reply

You put my thoughts into words much better than I could have.

Apparently you misunderstood we are in total agreement on this subject.

Every year they dont make moves to succeed is one less year of AJ,Dunta,Matt,and Ryans career.My post was not a rage at you or anyone here. I just think both ways should be done.

sandman
02-14-2010, 12:05 AM
Saying that a 6th year veteran performed much better than Quin isn't a knock. Being the 54th best corner means he's a starting caliber #2, just not anywhere near a #1, which Robinson has proven capable of.

When in the 2009 season, or post injury for that matter, did DRob prove he was capable of being a #1 CB?

Unless we are talking about for this specific team, where the secondary was a known weakness. But that is like saying he was the prettiest ugly chick at the bar.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 12:30 AM
TK its not about the how much $ is spent comparitively. It's about filling holes.

The Saints new coming into this year they had holes on the DL,DB's and they needed depth at RB.

These were the same holes the Texans had except we needed aLB too.

They drafted the DT from USC Ellis. Because they knew about the possible suspensions of their starting DE's they also signed Spicer (who wasn't good) and Hargrove (who the Texans never would've signed because of off field stuff)

In the secondary they signed Greer (Cheap) coming off injury, Sharper (They got lucky that he didn't get injured, and drafted Jenkins. When you put all of this together with the 2008 trade for Vilma and signing Bobby McCray in FA(who I really wanted the Texans to sign) the Saints developed a good deep fast defense.

On offense for the depth they needed at RB the Saints added Texan cut M.Bell and found a Diamond in the rough (Something the Texans are still looking for going into year 5 of the Smithiak regime)

What did the Texans do in the mean time? They Sign A.Smith in FA, franchise Dunta to the tune of 10 mil a year, re-sign Wilson, they also draft Cush,Barwin and Quin. They also sign Foster as an UDFA.

Meanwhile they make Ryans and OD play under the tag designation.

Did you know the Saints only had 1 draft pick in the first 3rds of the draft. (Ellis) They traded a 2nd for Shockey and their 3rd rd pick Arnoux tore his ACL and was lost for the season. How did they manage to have a winning record much less win a SB without draft picks? By making trades and FA signings for productive Vet leaders, taking chances on a few character issue guys and a HC that was willing to pull $ out of his pocket to get the most qualified DC.

This long rambling post was made to let people see what forward thinking organizations like the Saints are doing compared to what the Texans need to be doing to reach the level of the Saints.

It's on McNair to decide if he wants to step up to the plate and bring a winner that the Texans fans deserve,or continue status quo. So far the signs aren't promising. IMHO

This lo

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 12:33 AM
My post was not a rage at you or anyone here. I just think both ways should be done.

To be successful it has to be a mixture of both philosophies.

That's the way the Saints,Jets and Vikings were built.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 12:39 AM
When in the 2009 season, or post injury for that matter, did DRob prove he was capable of being a #1 CB?

Unless we are talking about for this specific team, where the secondary was a known weakness. But that is like saying he was the prettiest ugly chick at the bar.

LOL

I'm not sure Dunta was in the top 5 CB's in the NFL pre-injury.

GP
02-14-2010, 12:56 AM
Don't you think you would have had very similar criticisms of Sean Payton after their season in 2007 and 2008 if you were a Saints' fan?

Anytime a team disappoints, then of course there are going to be some poor performances/decisions that contributed to the disappointment. Those of us that support Kubiak, in general, believe two things: 1. most/all coaches make similar mistakes that cost their teams sometimes... 2. history is unlikely to repeat itself in 2010.

I think the big knock on the Saints was the drafting of Reggie Bush AND the issue of Jason David at CB.

Funny how we have Kubiak and Payton who are both offensive guys, being held responsible for their defensive rosters: It's eerie with the similarity in DB problems we've each had. Compound this with the idea that "what if" we had taken Bush or Young at #1 and Mario goes to the Saints? Mario now has a ring, and Bush is stuck on the Texans...and the national media lambasts the Texans for (a) passing on Mario and (b) relegating a national icon known as Reggie Bush to the role of poor, pitiful "stuck on the Texans" Reggie Bush.

The difference is that Payton got on his pony and whipped and spurred to get those DB issues resolved. Kubiak is working, IMO, a little slower in the sense that he's built the LB crew (with drafting Brian Cushing) and our DB crew is almost there if we can nail down the CB position a bit more.

All of this aside, I wonder if Drew Brees is a better overall QB than Schaub. Can Schaub put up the stats? Obviously he can. But which QB has that intangible killer instinct that just seems to know how to win any type of game that rolls his way? Brees. They had a late-season slump, but they won when it counted. The Saints found a way to beat the Cardinals, the Vikings, and the Colts...three teams we dang sure couldn't beat in 2009 (pre-season included).

Is Payton a benefactor of Drew Brees getting "not much sniff" from the other 31 teams in the NFL? Yes. But is he also a man who found a way to beat the teams that we couldn't? Yep.

That's what makes a coach a Super Bowl champion coach in my book.

And that's the standard bearer.

Goatcheese
02-14-2010, 02:03 AM
When in the 2009 season, or post injury for that matter, did DRob prove he was capable of being a #1 CB?

Unless we are talking about for this specific team, where the secondary was a known weakness. But that is like saying he was the prettiest ugly chick at the bar.

He showed it the whole season.

LOL

I'm not sure Dunta was in the top 5 CB's in the NFL pre-injury.

Nobody said anything about top 5. There are 64 starting corner jobs in the NFL. 32 #1's, and 32 #2's.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 10:09 AM
He was paid as a top 5 CB. 10 mil LOL.

This was a bad deal.

The Saints signed Greer for 4 yrs 22 mil. locking up their no.1 cb for a long time.

While Smithiak are going to be looking at drafting a CB in the first 3 rds of the draft.

Just another sign of mismanagement by McNair/Smithiak.

infantrycak
02-14-2010, 10:21 AM
TK its not about the how much $ is spent comparitively. It's about filling holes.

The Saints new coming into this year they had holes on the DL,DB's and they needed depth at RB.

These were the same holes the Texans had except we needed aLB too.

They drafted the DT from USC Ellis. Because they knew about the possible suspensions of their starting DE's they also signed Spicer (who wasn't good) and Hargrove (who the Texans never would've signed because of off field stuff)

In the secondary they signed Greer (Cheap) coming off injury, Sharper (They got lucky that he didn't get injured, and drafted Jenkins. When you put all of this together with the 2008 trade for Vilma and signing Bobby McCray in FA(who I really wanted the Texans to sign) the Saints developed a good deep fast defense.

On offense for the depth they needed at RB the Saints added Texan cut M.Bell and found a Diamond in the rough (Something the Texans are still looking for going into year 5 of the Smithiak regime)

What did the Texans do in the mean time? They Sign A.Smith in FA, franchise Dunta to the tune of 10 mil a year, re-sign Wilson, they also draft Cush,Barwin and Quin. They also sign Foster as an UDFA.

Meanwhile they make Ryans and OD play under the tag designation.

Did you know the Saints only had 1 draft pick in the first 3rds of the draft. (Ellis) They traded a 2nd for Shockey and their 3rd rd pick Arnoux tore his ACL and was lost for the season. How did they manage to have a winning record much less win a SB without draft picks? By making trades and FA signings for productive Vet leaders, taking chances on a few character issue guys and a HC that was willing to pull $ out of his pocket to get the most qualified DC.

This long rambling post was made to let people see what forward thinking organizations like the Saints are doing compared to what the Texans need to be doing to reach the level of the Saints.

It's on McNair to decide if he wants to step up to the plate and bring a winner that the Texans fans deserve,or continue status quo. So far the signs aren't promising. IMHO

This lo

Funny, all this with 95% about defense and McNair and Kubiak being incompetent and the Texans D improved more than the Saints D and was a better D than the Saints D. Bottom line the Saints won off of a fantastic offense and some lucky/opportunistic D play.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 10:38 AM
Funny, all this with 95% about defense and McNair and Kubiak being incompetent and the Texans D improved more than the Saints D and was a better D than the Saints D. Bottom line the Saints won off of a fantastic offense and some lucky/opportunistic D play.

This isn't about the Texans D vs the Saints D or the Texans O vs the Saints O.

This is about the Saints making bold agressive moves despite having very few draft choices.

In contrast to the Texans making very few moves not being agressive, building mostly through the draft.

This is the difference between a playoff team/SB winner and a team which finishes 7-9, 9-7 regularly.

Not all of the moves the Saints make are going to work out. But atleast they are trying to do everything they can to put the best product on the field as possible.

When the bold moves the Saints make do work you have teams that make the confrence finals or win the the SB like this year.

The Texans could learn a thing or two by looking at how the Saints go about their business. Or for that matter the Vikings or Jets.

Oh well the most exciting time of the Texans season is coming up soon. The draft

Really sad

infantrycak
02-14-2010, 11:04 AM
You can call them bold but bottom line the Texans' moves on D were more effective. I don't see how you spin that into a failing of the coaching or ownership.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 12:03 PM
You can call them bold but bottom line the Texans' moves on D were more effective. I don't see how you spin that into a failing of the coaching or ownership.

Your looking strictly at the numbers.

I'm talking about philosophies.

2 entirely differenet things.

Every hole you fill in FA is one that you dont have to fill in the draft and vice versa. Ideally you would want to fill 2/3 needs in FA and 2/3 in the draft every year. Fillng 5 holes per year. You sign2 young FA's to 4 yr deals and draft 2/3 guys that can play each year. If you still feel as though there are needs to address you sign a vet FA to a 1/2 yr deal.

With this philosophy a team should have few holes within 3 yrs.

Last year the Texans had holes at DT,DE, LB,RB,CB and needed depth at OL. That's 6 needs. They prioritized DE and LB (pass rush) was their biggest need.

Hence A.Smith in FA and Cush and Barwin in the draft. They hit on a long shot with Quin. They ignored depth on the OL or missed on Caldwell. Wouldn't it have been nice to have signed a couple of vet FA's that were low cost signings like OL Weigman or Carlisle when Myers Brisiel, or Pitts got hurt? They chose to go with Slaton and C.Brown (who was coming off back surgrey) and an UDFA (Foster) at RB. When for a few extra $ they could've signed Benson. These kinds of inexpensive FA signings are huge for depth purposes.

This year the Texans have holes at RB,CB,S,DT and S

I hope they fill 2 of these needs in FA My choices would be C.Taylor (3yr deal and if you have to over pay a little you do it.) and J.Jolly. He's from Houston and should be available in FA) McNair wont sign him because of drug thing but he would be a perfect fit. (Hargrove would be an example of a character chance that paid off)

That would leave CB,OG and S as the big 3 needs. This is a deep draft that those 3 needs could be filled with guy that could be starters right away. (Wilson,Burnett and Asamoah would be my choices) Then you can spend the rest of the draft getting depth or BPA.

Bottom line is you cant build you cant build just through the draft. You have to take chances on 1 or 2 character issue guys Hargrove is an example and Maybe a vet. you have to over pay for (Sharper for example)

I dont think Kubes likes the older vet FA signings and I know McNair doesn't want to sign character issues. (L.Johnson, Benson) McNair likes to sign the tier 2 young guy that he has to over pay to get.

This philosopy has to change if the Texans are going to become a winning team. IMO

gary
02-14-2010, 12:19 PM
It's not going to happen but do not act like a vet like Casey Hapmton would NOT bring leadership to the Texans D and be that missing run stuffer.

thunderkyss
02-14-2010, 12:34 PM
They drafted the DT from USC Ellis. Because they knew about the possible suspensions of their starting DE's they also signed Spicer (who wasn't good) and Hargrove (who the Texans never would've signed because of off field stuff)

In the secondary they signed Greer (Cheap) coming off injury, Sharper (They got lucky that he didn't get injured, and drafted Jenkins. When you put all of this together with the 2008 trade for Vilma and signing Bobby McCray in FA(who I really wanted the Texans to sign) the Saints developed a good deep fast defense.

For the record. Our defense was better than the Saints defense in 2009. They had more Interceptions, but that's it. Our defense allowed less points per game. less yards per game. Less rushing yards, & less passing yards.

Statistically, Smith & Kubiak did a better job filling holes on the defensive side than Payton & Loomis.

But there is a double standard here that has blinded you to what Kubiak has done here.

On offense for the depth they needed at RB the Saints added Texan cut M.Bell and found a Diamond in the rough (Something the Texans are still looking for going into year 5 of the Smithiak regime)

We tried the Mike Bell thing. Either he didn't get the message here, and needed to take a serious look at life outside the NFL, or we screwed the pooch. And we've got plenty of diamonds; Walter, Jacoby, Diles, Chris Taylor, Chris Spencer, and possibly Arian Foster.

What did the Texans do in the mean time? They Sign A.Smith in FA, franchise Dunta to the tune of 10 mil a year, re-sign Wilson, they also draft Cush,Barwin and Quin. They also sign Foster as an UDFA.

Again, our defense performed better than theirs.

Meanwhile they make Ryans and OD play under the tag designation.

Not really.. stop fishing.

Did you know the Saints only had 1 draft pick in the first 3rds of the draft. (Ellis) They traded a 2nd for Shockey and their 3rd rd pick Arnoux tore his ACL and was lost for the season. How did they manage to have a winning record much less win a SB without draft picks? By making trades and FA signings for productive Vet leaders, taking chances on a few character issue guys and a HC that was willing to pull $ out of his pocket to get the most qualified DC.

Again, our defense played better than their defense.

which FAs did you want us to sign? Shockey? I'm not following.

This long rambling post was made to let people see what forward thinking organizations like the Saints are doing compared to what the Texans need to be doing to reach the level of the Saints.

spell it out for me again, what is it that we aren't doing? Mike Bell? c'mon, is that why they went to the Super Bowl?

Sharper? he's only marginally better than Eugene.

Again, our defense performed better than theirs.

It's on McNair to decide if he wants to step up to the plate and bring a winner that the Texans fans deserve,or continue status quo. So far the signs aren't promising. IMHO


Other than preconcieved hatred bred out of bitterness, I can't see why this would be your Opinion.

We are as good as the Saints. We didn't start out that way in 2009, but we've gotten better as the season went on. We're on the right track.. McNair, Kubiak, & Smith have brought winning football to Houston.

Lucky
02-14-2010, 12:49 PM
We are as good as the Saints.
Just ask the Colts.

thunderkyss
02-14-2010, 01:15 PM
Your looking strictly at the numbers.

I'm talking about philosophies.

2 entirely differenet things.


You're looking at it as, "Everything the Saints did was right" & "Everything the Texans did was wrong"

Our defense was better. The Texan's philosophy produced better results than the Saint's philosophy.

You've got yourself a bad argument, you can't win this one.

thunderkyss
02-14-2010, 01:27 PM
Bottom line is you cant build you cant build just through the draft. You have to take chances on 1 or 2 character issue guys Hargrove is an example and Maybe a vet. you have to over pay for (Sharper for example)

I dont think Kubes likes the older vet FA signings and I know McNair doesn't want to sign character issues. (L.Johnson, Benson) McNair likes to sign the tier 2 young guy that he has to over pay to get.

This philosopy has to change if the Texans are going to become a winning team. IMO

McNair has no say other than the character thing, but I believe Kubiak feels the same way any way. Just like Dungy. Character is not a bad thing.

Walter, Dressen, White, Myers, Leach, Antonio Smith, Eugene Wilson, Bernard Pollard, Sean Cody, Jeff Zgonina, Jaques Reeves, Matt Schaub....

I don't get what you're saying. You act like we haven't had success in Free Agency. You talk about Hargrove... & our defense was better..

thunderkyss
02-14-2010, 01:34 PM
It's not going to happen but do not act like a vet like Casey Hapmton would NOT bring leadership to the Texans D and be that missing run stuffer.

This year, I can see a guy like Hampton wanting to come to Houston. Prior to this year, I would think most FA would just use us to get a bidding war going.

I think Hampton would be a good choice... with 9 years in the league though, I wouldn't want to tie up too much money in him. I know as a relatively healthy DT, he'll probably play for another 5, but we've already got a lot of money to spend on D.

infantrycak
02-14-2010, 01:41 PM
I dont think Kubes likes the older vet FA signings and I know McNair doesn't want to sign character issues. (L.Johnson, Benson) McNair likes to sign the tier 2 young guy that he has to over pay to get.

This philosopy has to change if the Texans are going to become a winning team. IMO

They made an offer to Benson. Kind of nullifies that point.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 01:50 PM
You're looking at it as, "Everything the Saints did was right" & "Everything the Texans did was wrong"

Our defense was better. The Texan's philosophy produced better results than the Saint's philosophy.

You've got yourself a bad argument, you can't win this one.

Really

The Saints philosohpy helped them win a SB

The Texans philosophy lead to the 1st 9-7 record in team history.

M-M that koolaid must be good.

The Texans didn't do everything wrong the had a great Draft. They just chose not to supplement the teams depth in FA.I'm just not drinking the koolaid as I've done before.

They just failed on the pro personel side signing Dunta for 10 mil for 1 year instead of signing Greer who is a much better player for 4yrs 22mil. for example.

This isn't hatered it's I expect the Texans to do everything they can to put the best team on the field as possible.

If the Texans are as you say better on defense why is it the Saints won the SB? They weren't that much better on offense than the Texans were they?

The Texans either dont have enough talent as the Saints or the or a better coached team. It's one or the other. Comparing the Saints to the Texans is laughable. The Saints have as many wins over the Colts as the Texans have won in 8 yrs getting to play the Colts twice a year.

The Saint have a better organizational philosopy than the Texans. There's no debate about that. They even proved it by beating our division champ in the SB.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 01:58 PM
They made an offer to Benson. Kind of nullifies that point.

A low ball offer.

Benson wasn't a priority for them.

With their lack of depth at the RB position they made a tactical error by low balling and not signinng Benson to a contract before he left the the teams facility.

Kubes even said they made a mistake not signing Benson.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 02:06 PM
This year, I can see a guy like Hampton wanting to come to Houston. Prior to this year, I would think most FA would just use us to get a bidding war going.

I think Hampton would be a good choice... with 9 years in the league though, I wouldn't want to tie up too much money in him. I know as a relatively healthy DT, he'll probably play for another 5, but we've already got a lot of money to spend on D.

Pittsburgh has already said Hampton is a priority signing. If they cant get a deal done Hampton will be frachised.

McNair has already stated that Hampton isn't the type of FA they are looking to sign. (Young 2nd tier FA type guy) as opposed to avet on their last contract.

Out of the other side of his mouth McNair speaks about the Texans needing more vet leadership.

I think we all know what McNair was saying without saying it.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 02:09 PM
McNair has no say other than the character thing, but I believe Kubiak feels the same way any way. Just like Dungy. Character is not a bad thing.

Walter, Dressen, White, Myers, Leach, Antonio Smith, Eugene Wilson, Bernard Pollard, Sean Cody, Jeff Zgonina, Jaques Reeves, Matt Schaub....

I don't get what you're saying. You act like we haven't had success in Free Agency. You talk about Hargrove... & our defense was better..

Statistically the Texans defense was better.

Ask the Colts who had the better defense when it mattered most.

I'm talking about an overall philosophy. not just offense/defense/ST

Stats say the Texans should've been playing the Saints in the SB instead of the Colts. LOL

GP
02-14-2010, 02:12 PM
They made an offer to Benson. Kind of nullifies that point.

Come on, cak.

Just because we made an offer to Benson in NO way means that the effort was a full one. If McNair is not cheap, then what the hell is the deal with losing out on Benson? LOL.

Yeah, we made an offer. And then promptly dropped out of the hunt once another team made their offer.

This team's methods, on running backs, would be funny if it were not so freaking sad.

But we can't voice our displeasure because (a) We're just bitching, (b) we ought to be thankful that we even have a team, (c) who are we to act like we know better than the owner and the coaches, (d) hindsight is 20/20, (e) etc. etc. the list goes on as to why we should shut up about it.

But year after year we suck coconuts in the running game, with the exception of one phantom year via Steve Slaton, and we're left with "Well, next year.."

If the running game doesn't materialize AND stabilize into some consistency, we can't close out the divisional teams that own us every season. MJD beats us by grinding it out in the final minutes of our games. Chris Johnson will continue to do what he does. Manning and his squad will do what they do. And we will do what we do: Sling crap against a wall and pretend we've addressed the running game.

Getting pretty freaking old watching this same show every season.

Having said that, I still raise the old flag :texflag:

thunderkyss
02-14-2010, 02:15 PM
Really

The Saints philosohpy helped them win a SB

The Texans philosophy lead to the 1st 9-7 record in team history.

M-M that koolaid must be good.

I'll concede the point the veteran leadership the Saints have acquired through FA helped them win a Super Bowl. If that's the philosophy you're talking about, you're right.

But this conversation started with you saying the Saints did a better job at filling their holes through FA & Payton's willingness to pay his DC out of his pocket.

Statistically speaking, we performed better than the Saints overall, defensively. That's a fact. That fact leads me to believe we filled our holes better than the Saints, and did a better job filling our DC vacancy.

They just failed on the pro personel side signing Dunta for 10 mil for 1 year instead of signing Greer who is a much better player for 4yrs 22mil. for example.

No argument from me here.

But Scout.com (http://profootball.scout.com/a.z?s=127&p=9&c=12&yr=2009&nid=83&lnid=83&rc=16&pid=30) has Greer listed as the second best corner available in FA 2009.

I don't know why Kubiak didn't go and get the best two FA CBs in FA.... what was he thinking? :sarcasm:


This isn't hatered it's I expect the Texans to do everything they can to put the best team on the field as possible.

But you've got the benefit of hindsight. Show me a link, where you said we should have dumped Dunta & went after Greer.


If the Texans are as you say better on defense why is it the Saints won the SB? They weren't that much better on offense than the Texans were they?

The Texans either dont have enough talent as the Saints or the or a better coached team. It's one or the other.


Why didn't the Colts win? Is it because they aren't coached as well, or are they less talented? It has to be one or the other.



Comparing the Saints to the Texans is laughable. The Saints have as many wins over the Colts as the Texans have won in 8 yrs getting to play the Colts twice a year.

Are you saying our offense isn't in the same league?

Are you saying our defense isn't better?




The Saint have a better organizational philosopy than the Texans. There's no debate about that. They even proved it by beating our division champ in the SB.

Is their organizational philosophy better than the Colts? Better than the Vikings? Better than the Cowboys? Or Patriots?

or does their winning the Super Bowl say something totally different?

thunderkyss
02-14-2010, 02:19 PM
Kubes even said they made a mistake not signing Benson.

Kubiak takes the blame for everything. Sometimes, you just gotta know he is protecting somebody else.

Ask Kubiak about the Dynamic between him & Rick Smith. He'll give you a story about Rick signing players, & Kubiak had no idea until the next day at practice.

He was either lying then, or he is lying about Benson.

Or he just might be trying to get past the Monday morning coaches. Benson was trash before he got here. If we signed him, chances are just as good that he wouldn't have found his reason to prove himself.

The only team that took him in, was the team that let him go.

gary
02-14-2010, 02:19 PM
Do they want more vet leadership or what?

gary
02-14-2010, 02:41 PM
If Peppers became a FA right now, would Bob offer him a contract and pay him? I would him and Mario together would be sweet IMO.

GP
02-14-2010, 02:43 PM
Kubiak takes the blame for everything. Sometimes, you just gotta know he is protecting somebody else.

Ask Kubiak about the Dynamic between him & Rick Smith. He'll give you a story about Rick signing players, & Kubiak had no idea until the next day at practice.

He was either lying then, or he is lying about Benson.

Or he just might be trying to get past the Monday morning coaches. Benson was trash before he got here. If we signed him, chances are just as good that he wouldn't have found his reason to prove himself.

The only team that took him in, was the team that let him go.

This is rich. It really is.

As to signing players and Kubiak not knowing.......I say "what if" that's not exactly in the context of Rick Smith going behind Kubiak's back to sign players that Rick Smith wants, and "what if" we can interpret that to mean that once Kubiak goes after a player he leaves the contract crap and all its dealings with Rick Smith (and thus Kubiak won't know if he got his player until sometimes a day later)?

In short: Kubiak wants Benson, but the front office doesn't get it done.

Which brings us to the issue of Kubiak getting all the blame. He is the man at the wheel. Do I know how hard Kubiak pushed for Benson once the Bengals entered the contract talks? No. I just know someone, somewhere in the organization felt he wasn't worth outbidding Cincy for.

I want my head coach to get who he wants. Obviously we never would have offered a contract if Kubiak didn't want him on the team. Or if it's a case of Kubiak being served up the players that the front office tells him he WILL put on his team, then the organization is even more messed up than I could have imagined.

Either way, we let a competent running back slip through our fingers. Yet we have no problem scooping up guys that eventually crash and burn once they get their big chance here in Houston.

The mindset is flawed when it comes to running backs. I am growing tired of the "efforts" to produce a competent running game. Thanks for Alex Gibbs and all, but I need to see more beef if the Texans are honest about getting a running game started. Moving up in the draft and grabbing Ingram would show some real sincerity about wanting a potentially prolific, long-term running back who has size AND agility. Or, if that's too bold...grab a real center whose blocking skills doesn't resemble the T-Rex from Toy Story.

We're potentially one step away from really turning the tide on this team's seasonal departure from closing out closely-contested games. Kubiak's future rests upon nailing the running game in 2010. I have no doubt that he will either make HUGE efforts to do so, or he will continue tip-toeing through the tulips and die by the philosophy that's now fully 4-years-old.

I think it's a long shot that we produce a real running game.

The Pencil Neck
02-14-2010, 02:43 PM
I'm not wading through all these messages. But.

Here's my take.

Saying that Team A's philosophy is better than Team B's philosophy because Team A won a SB and Team B hasn't made the playoffs is fundamentally flawed. It's too simplistic a view.

Why? Because no team wins the SB every year. Different philosophies work. But only one philosophy wins per year. And all philosophies are trying to put the best possible team on the field year in and year out.

There are some philosophies that are intrinsically bankrupt that can still win you a SB. The Redskins are an example of a bankrupt approach. And most fans if they were given their way, would follow that Redskins extremely aggressive approach. And in a given year, that approach could simply by random chance happen to put together the right pieces at the right time to win a SB. But it's not going to be sustainable. And in general, it's going to give you a substandard product.

The Saints and Texans philosophies don't seem that radically different to me. And saying that the Texans aren't trying to put the best team possible on the field is wrong. They're just not following the same philosophy to do that as you would.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 02:46 PM
For the record. Our defense was better than the Saints defense in 2009. They had more Interceptions, but that's it. Our defense allowed less points per game. less yards per game. Less rushing yards, & less passing yards.

Statistically, Smith & Kubiak did a better job filling holes on the defensive side than Payton & Loomis.

But there is a double standard here that has blinded you to what Kubiak has done here.

We tried the Mike Bell thing. Either he didn't get the message here, and needed to take a serious look at life outside the NFL, or we screwed the pooch. And we've got plenty of diamonds; Walter, Jacoby, Diles, Chris Taylor, Chris Spencer, and possibly Arian Foster.

Again, our defense performed better than theirs.

Not really.. stop fishing.

Again, our defense played better than their defense.

which FAs did you want us to sign? Shockey? I'm not following.

spell it out for me again, what is it that we aren't doing? Mike Bell? c'mon, is that why they went to the Super Bowl?

Sharper? he's only marginally better than Eugene.

Again, our defense performed better than theirs.


Other than preconcieved hatred bred out of bitterness, I can't see why this would be your Opinion.

We are as good as the Saints. We didn't start out that way in 2009, but we've gotten better as the season went on. We're on the right track.. McNair, Kubiak, & Smith have brought winning football to Houston.

I'm not going to spend time copying and pasting but I will try to respond to your answers in order

1.The defense is great I'm looking forward to a Super Bowl year. I guess they should re-sign Dunta and spend all of their draft choices upgrading the offense because un your world the Texans have a SB caliber defense.
2. Notice all draft picks, you have to fill some holes in FA when you have as many holes on the roster as the Texans do you will be thin talent wise and injuries will wreck your season. The current philosopy is why the Texans have no depth. IMO
3.I've spoken about the defense FA's I would have liked to seen signed not using hindsight but how I felt at the time. Greer instead of Dunta, E.James (which I was wrong about)

4. I didn't have a problem with Wilson over Sharper. They're compareable. Sharper happened to stay healthy all season. Wilson didn't.

5. No hatered just a different philosophy, I believe mine is the correct one. This has been bourne out by 8 going on 9 yrs of no playoffs. Something has got to change if the Texans want to have a successful franchise because what they have been doing isn't working.

6. The Texans are as good as the Saints LOL. Even Kubes said in the McNair/Kubes press confrence that the Texans are along way away from being a SB caliber team. His honesty was refreshing although I would like to know what along way awy means. 1,2,5 years?

7. We on the right track? That's your opinion not mine. Time will tell who's right.

8. Bringing winning football? Man that koolaid must be good. One 9-7 season doesn't constitute bringin winning football to me. If it does we have different opinions of what a winning organization looks like and different expectations.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 02:53 PM
I'm not wading through all these messages. But.

Here's my take.

Saying that Team A's philosophy is better than Team B's philosophy because Team A won a SB and Team B hasn't made the playoffs is fundamentally flawed. It's too simplistic a view.

Why? Because no team wins the SB every year. Different philosophies work. But only one philosophy wins per year. And all philosophies are trying to put the best possible team on the field year in and year out.

There are some philosophies that are intrinsically bankrupt that can still win you a SB. The Redskins are an example of a bankrupt approach. And most fans if they were given their way, would follow that Redskins extremely aggressive approach. And in a given year, that approach could simply by random chance happen to put together the right pieces at the right time to win a SB. But it's not going to be sustainable. And in general, it's going to give you a substandard product.

The Saints and Texans philosophies don't seem that radically different to me. And saying that the Texans aren't trying to put the best team possible on the field is wrong. They're just not following the same philosophy to do that as you would.

Agreed

The example of a bankrupt philosophy is 8 yrs and no playoffs. You dont see fault in the Texans philosophy?

If you dont I dont know what to say. 8 yrs and counting. Here's hoping year no.9 is the charm.

On to the most exciting time of the year for Texan fans. The draft.

As I've said before all of this crap falls on McNairs head.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 03:08 PM
Gary I'm going to answer both of youquestions in one post.

1.McNair says he wants more vet leadership but history says it isn't oging to happen.

2. I would sign Peppers too. It would be a way to show the fans McNair is serious about winning. If you think McNair will show Peppers the $ you're delusional. LOL

gary
02-14-2010, 03:19 PM
Gary I'm going to answer both of youquestions in one post.

1.McNair says he wants more vet leadership but history says it isn't oging to happen.

2. I would sign Peppers too. It would be a way to show the fans McNair is serious about winning. If you think McNair will show Peppers the $ you're delusional. LOLJust another way to show he is not willing to sign a great fa who has a lot left in him IMO.

thunderkyss
02-14-2010, 03:21 PM
8. Bringing winning football? Man that koolaid must be good. One 9-7 season doesn't constitute bringin winning football to me. If it does we have different opinions of what a winning organization looks like and different expectations.

I don't agree with everything Kubiak has done, or will do. I don't expect you to.

But 9-7 is winning football.

& yes, this looks like a young winning organization, with a promising future.

Did the Saints look like a winning organization last year when they finished 8-8? or the year before when they finished 7-9?

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 03:38 PM
I'll concede the point the veteran leadership the Saints have acquired through FA helped them win a Super Bowl. If that's the philosophy you're talking about, you're right.

But this conversation started with you saying the Saints did a better job at filling their holes through FA & Payton's willingness to pay his DC out of his pocket.

Statistically speaking, we performed better than the Saints overall, defensively. That's a fact. That fact leads me to believe we filled our holes better than the Saints, and did a better job filling our DC vacancy.

No argument from me here.

But Scout.com (http://profootball.scout.com/a.z?s=127&p=9&c=12&yr=2009&nid=83&lnid=83&rc=16&pid=30) has Greer listed as the second best corner available in FA 2009.

I don't know why Kubiak didn't go and get the best two FA CBs in FA.... what was he thinking? :sarcasm:


But you've got the benefit of hindsight. Show me a link, where you said we should have dumped Dunta & went after Greer.



Why didn't the Colts win? Is it because they aren't coached as well, or are they less talented? It has to be one or the other.



Are you saying our offense isn't in the same league?

Are you saying our defense isn't better?





Is their organizational philosophy better than the Colts? Better than the Vikings? Better than the Cowboys? Or Patriots?

or does their winning the Super Bowl say something totally different?

TK
1. McNair said he wants more vet.leadership on the team. Lets hope he spends the $ to get it. Probably not going to happen.

2. Check the Dunta thread you will see I thought he should be let go. Greer is hindsight but that's why the pro scouting dept gets paid and you and I dont. No if they had let Dunta walk and signed Greer they would only be paying one FA CB and gotten a bargain on him compared to what Dunta was paid. I here that Clements is going to be cut by SF this offseason the Texans shold take a look at him if he gets cut. He would be an upgrade over Dunta. IMO

3. The Colts didn't win the SB because they got out coached. Payton was willing to take chances (He played to win) Caldwell played not to lose and it cost his team a SB.

4. The Texans and Saints are about the same on defense but the most important statistic is forced turnovers. (it usually translates directly to W/L)
The Saints were better than the Texans in this area.

5. The Saints offense was better than the Texans regardless of what the stats say. They are across the board tallent wise, excluding AJ. Kubes did a good job masking their diffiencies. The O needs a talent upgrade worse than the D. IMO If the O gets an upgrade in the OL and RB positions this offense could be something really special. It would be the quickest way to catch up with the Colts. IMO You aren't going to out defend Manning.

6. Maybe, Maybe not but all of those teams listed seem to be more commited to winning than the Texans, some of them may go about it wrong but the win at all cost theory is there. Not so with the Texans.

GP
02-14-2010, 03:38 PM
I'm not wading through all these messages. But.

Here's my take.

Saying that Team A's philosophy is better than Team B's philosophy because Team A won a SB and Team B hasn't made the playoffs is fundamentally flawed. It's too simplistic a view.

Why? Because no team wins the SB every year. Different philosophies work. But only one philosophy wins per year. And all philosophies are trying to put the best possible team on the field year in and year out.

There are some philosophies that are intrinsically bankrupt that can still win you a SB. The Redskins are an example of a bankrupt approach. And most fans if they were given their way, would follow that Redskins extremely aggressive approach. And in a given year, that approach could simply by random chance happen to put together the right pieces at the right time to win a SB. But it's not going to be sustainable. And in general, it's going to give you a substandard product.

The Saints and Texans philosophies don't seem that radically different to me. And saying that the Texans aren't trying to put the best team possible on the field is wrong. They're just not following the same philosophy to do that as you would.

Let's talk specifics, then.

Do you agree with the RUNNING BACK/RUNNING GAME philosophy that the Texans have constructed over the past 8 years? And more specifically, the past four years?

I don't. I didn't buy the Ahman Green signing, not even for one second. Lots of people loved the name recognition aspect of it, but Green Bay let him go way too easy for my taste. And it fleshed out that way. I expect my NFL franchise to (a) not buy a turd with sprinkles on top, and (b) not try and sell it to me as a brownie.

We found a bit of a win-win with the move down in the draft that gained Duane Brown and then Slaton later on in the draft. I think Brown is out of position, and I don't expect Steve Slaton to reproduce what he did in his rookie season here. Hate to be a Doug Downer about it, but the time for being optimistic about injured Texans running backs who were a flash-in-the-pan to begin with deems it necessary, IMO, to depart from sentimentalism and embark upon the idea of just moving on. Forward.

The Saints found a workable mix of passing and running. We're going to have to do the same thing, if we're going to say that we're built on the same model as the Saints.

Let's just boil this down to its base ingredients: 2010 will come down to whether or not Kubiak can nail the running game.

That's a proposition bet if there ever was one, IMO.

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 03:43 PM
Just another way to show he is not willing to sign a great fa who has a lot left in him IMO.

Yep

You see what's going on, I see what's going on

So many cant see the forest for the trees and what the motives and goals of the Texans franchise is.

GP
02-14-2010, 04:02 PM
Yep

You see what's going on, I see what's going on

So many cant see the forest for the trees and what the motives and goals of the Texans franchise is.

I think the Texans, specifically Bob McNair, do want to win all the time. He doesn't have the goal of just being profitable, IMO.

He just seems to either be intentionally moving slowly toward that goal, or is learning on-the-job. Maybe even a mix of both.

Hopefully this thing culminates into the sort of iconic franchise that is found in Green Bay, Pittsburgh, and/or Dallas: Teams that have a huge cult-like following and a unique aura about them.

Waiting is the hard part.

gary
02-14-2010, 04:23 PM
I think the Texans, specifically Bob McNair, do want to win all the time. He doesn't have the goal of just being profitable, IMO.

He just seems to either be intentionally moving slowly toward that goal, or is learning on-the-job. Maybe even a mix of both.

Hopefully this thing culminates into the sort of iconic franchise that is found in Green Bay, Pittsburgh, and/or Dallas: Teams that have a huge cult-like following and a unique aura about them.

Waiting is the hard part.Agree, I am just posting what should be done sooner rather than later and I hope he starts learning faster. LOL

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 04:29 PM
[QUOTE=GP;1365629]I think the Texans, specifically Bob McNair, do want to win all the time. He doesn't have the goal of just being profitable, IMO.

He just seems to either be intentionally moving slowly toward that goal, or is learning on-the-job. Maybe even a mix of both.

Hopefully this thing culminates into the sort of iconic franchise that is found in Green Bay, Pittsburgh, and/or Dallas: Teams that have a huge cult-like following and a unique aura about them.

Waiting is the hard part.[/QUOTE}


Double post delete

steelbtexan
02-14-2010, 04:32 PM
I think the Texans, specifically Bob McNair, do want to win all the time. He doesn't have the goal of just being profitable, IMO.

He just seems to either be intentionally moving slowly toward that goal, or is learning on-the-job. Maybe even a mix of both.

Hopefully this thing culminates into the sort of iconic franchise that is found in Green Bay, Pittsburgh, and/or Dallas: Teams that have a huge cult-like following and a unique aura about them.

Waiting is the hard part.

1. I hope you're right
2. Moving slowly/understatement Learninig on the job LOL People who took the short bus to school learn quicker than McNair. Maybe McNair did take the short bus to school. How did somebody that is as slow a learner as McNair amass a billion dollar fortune? This is why I ask ? about McNairs motives.
3. I hope you're right but McNair needs a different business model if the Texans are going to be a perrenial playoff team. IMO The aura is already there from the fans. We're just waiting on McNairs learning curve to catch up.
4. You're right Waiting is the hardest thing to do. While McNair learns on the job.

Do you think McNair will be one of the hardest of the hard line owners in the new CBA negociations?

I would bet money the answer is yes. LOL

GP
02-14-2010, 04:54 PM
1. I hope you're right
2. Moving slowly/understatement Learninig on the job LOL People who took the short bus to school learn quicker than McNair. Maybe McNair did take the short bus to school. How did somebody that is as slow a learner as McNair amass a billion dollar fortune? This is why I ask ? about McNairs motives.
3. I hope you're right but McNair needs a different business model if the Texans are going to be a perrenial playoff team. IMO The aura is already there from the fans. We're just waiting on McNairs learning curve to catch up.
4. You're right Waiting is the hardest thing to do. While McNair learns on the job.

Do you think McNair will be one of the hardest of the hard line owners in the new CBA negociations?

I would bet money the answer is yes. LOL

Yeah, I'm just trying to keep this real. In the end, we are the fans of this team. We don't own it. We pay to watch it.

So to that extent, I can't sit here and say (with 100% authority) that they're all a bunch of idiots and I can do better. You're going to lose credibility, as a fan who tries to expound on this team, when you take the approach that McNair is a doofus and we're just tolerating his ignorance.

Even I can sense when I am becoming a Doug Downer...and it will undercut my standing with the members here. Not trying to tell you how to think or act on here, just giving you my thoughts that I've sort of grown to understand about message boarding.

For things he got wrong (David Carr) he has shown an ability to correct (Matt Schaub). McNair could have told Kubiak "Tough luck, you're keeping David Carr because he IS this team's QB!" McNair seems to place loyalty and commitment a lot further than any of us would. Can be good, and can be bad. Maybe he's erring on the side of being the good guy. That's OK.

Here's to hoping that we get more right than we get wrong.

GuerillaBlack
02-14-2010, 05:21 PM
It's not going to happen but do not act like a vet like Casey Hapmton would NOT bring leadership to the Texans D and be that missing run stuffer.

It would have happened if Cowher was the coach. Hampton (Houston native) said it himself. ;)

GuerillaBlack
02-14-2010, 05:34 PM
I don't agree with everything Kubiak has done, or will do. I don't expect you to.

But 9-7 is winning football.

& yes, this looks like a young winning organization, with a promising future.

Did the Saints look like a winning organization last year when they finished 8-8? or the year before when they finished 7-9?

Weren't you just before saying the Eagles and Cowboys weren't consistent because of a 9-7 season? One season is not consistent. Texans have to be least four games over .500 again. Then you'll be right.

gary
02-14-2010, 05:45 PM
It would have happened if Cowher was the coach. Hampton (Houston native) said it himself. ;)I read that too.

thunderkyss
02-14-2010, 05:45 PM
Weren't you just before saying the Eagles and Cowboys weren't consistent because of a 9-7 season? One season is not consistent. Texans have to be least four games over .500 again. Then you'll be right.

That conversation was about the qualilty of the team. Consistently over 10 wins was my definition of good.

I said the Cowboys were an upper-mediocre team.

We are a middle of the pile mediocre team. (mediocre mediocre)

9-7 is winning football.

The Pencil Neck
02-14-2010, 06:49 PM
Agreed

The example of a bankrupt philosophy is 8 yrs and no playoffs. You dont see fault in the Texans philosophy?

If you dont I dont know what to say. 8 yrs and counting. Here's hoping year no.9 is the charm.

On to the most exciting time of the year for Texan fans. The draft.

As I've said before all of this crap falls on McNairs head.

What I saw is the philosophy change.

You didn't?

You don't see an explosive offense and a defense that's good and both getting better?

The Pencil Neck
02-14-2010, 07:16 PM
Let's talk specifics, then.

Do you agree with the RUNNING BACK/RUNNING GAME philosophy that the Texans have constructed over the past 8 years? And more specifically, the past four years?

I don't. I didn't buy the Ahman Green signing, not even for one second. Lots of people loved the name recognition aspect of it, but Green Bay let him go way too easy for my taste. And it fleshed out that way. I expect my NFL franchise to (a) not buy a turd with sprinkles on top, and (b) not try and sell it to me as a brownie.

We found a bit of a win-win with the move down in the draft that gained Duane Brown and then Slaton later on in the draft. I think Brown is out of position, and I don't expect Steve Slaton to reproduce what he did in his rookie season here. Hate to be a Doug Downer about it, but the time for being optimistic about injured Texans running backs who were a flash-in-the-pan to begin with deems it necessary, IMO, to depart from sentimentalism and embark upon the idea of just moving on. Forward.

The Saints found a workable mix of passing and running. We're going to have to do the same thing, if we're going to say that we're built on the same model as the Saints.

Let's just boil this down to its base ingredients: 2010 will come down to whether or not Kubiak can nail the running game.

That's a proposition bet if there ever was one, IMO.

Dude. If you're such a great evaluator of NFL talent that you knew Ahman Green was such a bad move AND you're able to do that consistently so that this isn't just a fluke on your part, then you're in the wrong business.

Seriously.

You can call that move an obvious fail all you want but that's just hindsight. A lot of people thought Ahman had enough tread on his tires to give us a few good seasons. A lot of people had him as the highest ranked FA prospect that year. I know some people were worried about that move but a lot of people are worried about every move we've ever made. Schaub was considered by a lot of people to be the backup most worthy of a start shot and when we picked him up, a lot of people on this board considered him a career backup who'd never be anything else. So, happening to be right about Green's tread doesn't strike me as omniscience as much as luck.

Over the past 4 years, we've had a lot of positions that we've needed to fix. We thought we had it mostly fixed with Slaton but that turned out to be wrong. Hopefully, this year we get the RB solved.

GP
02-14-2010, 11:33 PM
Dude. If you're such a great evaluator of NFL talent that you knew Ahman Green was such a bad move AND you're able to do that consistently so that this isn't just a fluke on your part, then you're in the wrong business.

Seriously.

You can call that move an obvious fail all you want but that's just hindsight. A lot of people thought Ahman had enough tread on his tires to give us a few good seasons. A lot of people had him as the highest ranked FA prospect that year. I know some people were worried about that move but a lot of people are worried about every move we've ever made. Schaub was considered by a lot of people to be the backup most worthy of a start shot and when we picked him up, a lot of people on this board considered him a career backup who'd never be anything else. So, happening to be right about Green's tread doesn't strike me as omniscience as much as luck.

Over the past 4 years, we've had a lot of positions that we've needed to fix. We thought we had it mostly fixed with Slaton but that turned out to be wrong. Hopefully, this year we get the RB solved.

Schaub is a guy that I was thrilled with when we got him, but soon felt he was Glass Joe from the Punch Out video game, and then swung back to see that maybe he's a bit more resilient than his first season with the Texans showed.

Anytime a team (Green Bay) lets a guy (Ahman Green) walk so easily, you have to smell the smoke and wonder where the fire is at.

This isn't about trying to be a wannabe NFL scout for the Texans. This is about being a fan of the Texans and being a bit more skeptical now that we've had 6, 7, or 8 years' worth of player & coaching moves and offensive/defensive schemes and the actual gameday performances to analyze and discuss.

This team has enough history, thus far, that we can all sit down and start to see patterns developing in the player & coaches moves, and offensive/defensive schemes and the actual gameday performances.

The biggest pattern that has developed is that this team has ALWAYS been about passing, with the offensive line built for passing and the running game takes a big back seat. Our only true, legitimately consistent RB was Domanick Davis who was expected to be a special teamer and 3rd down guy...at best. James Allen, Stacy Mack, Jonathan Wells, Samkon Gado, Ron Dayne, Tony Hollings, Wali Lundy, Ahman Green, Ryan Moats, Steve Slaton, and there's about 4 or 5 more that I am forgetting...this is our list of running backs we've placed confidence upon.

Meanwhile, people thought the Titans were crazy for drafting all those running backs as early as they did. Well, turns out that the move might have been pretty smart. Can't say that I applaud them for drafting Vince Young, but the picks on RBs was a great move. Because they can run that ball and eat up clock.

Give this Texans team a REAL running game, and Kubiak becomes a legend around here for a long time. Maybe even Tom Landry'esque. But I won't bet on him finding that groove on the running game in 2010.

If he does, he's the man. But I can't see it happening because we've had four years of historicals to look at. And it doesn't paint a pretty picture for the running game in 2010.

The Pencil Neck
02-15-2010, 03:10 AM
Schaub is a guy that I was thrilled with when we got him, but soon felt he was Glass Joe from the Punch Out video game, and then swung back to see that maybe he's a bit more resilient than his first season with the Texans showed.

The point was that a lot of people take both sides in these things. It's very rarely so cut and dried that everyone can say categorically that getting player X is a mistake. And from the perspective of foresight in stead of hindsight, the Ahman Green deal wasn't nearly as atrocious as you make out. Sure, in hindsight it didn't work out, but that was a good and valid attempt to get a seriously good RB in here.


Anytime a team (Green Bay) lets a guy (Ahman Green) walk so easily, you have to smell the smoke and wonder where the fire is at.


Come on, man. Teams give up on players with tread on the tires all the time.


This isn't about trying to be a wannabe NFL scout for the Texans. This is about being a fan of the Texans and being a bit more skeptical now that we've had 6, 7, or 8 years' worth of player & coaching moves and offensive/defensive schemes and the actual gameday performances to analyze and discuss.

This team has enough history, thus far, that we can all sit down and start to see patterns developing in the player & coaches moves, and offensive/defensive schemes and the actual gameday performances.

The biggest pattern that has developed is that this team has ALWAYS been about passing, with the offensive line built for passing and the running game takes a big back seat. Our only true, legitimately consistent RB was Domanick Davis who was expected to be a special teamer and 3rd down guy...at best. James Allen, Stacy Mack, Jonathan Wells, Samkon Gado, Ron Dayne, Tony Hollings, Wali Lundy, Ahman Green, Ryan Moats, Steve Slaton, and there's about 4 or 5 more that I am forgetting...this is our list of running backs we've placed confidence upon.


I disagree that this team has always been about passing. The Domanick Davis versions of our team were running teams. They tried to pass, but they were about the run. I also disagree with looking for patterns over two different FO's. And I disagree that this coaching staff has been all about the pass. In 2006, this was a run team. Kubes has tried to fix the running game several different ways and with Slaton, thought he had his main back and just needed to add depth. that didn't wokr out. The pass is what we happen to do best and Kubiak had to adjust to being a pass first team. But it's wrong to say this has always been a passing team.


Meanwhile, people thought the Titans were crazy for drafting all those running backs as early as they did. Well, turns out that the move might have been pretty smart. Can't say that I applaud them for drafting Vince Young, but the picks on RBs was a great move. Because they can run that ball and eat up clock.


And they finished 3rd in the division and out of the playoffs.

I'm not saying that's a bad strategy. If you go back and look at my recent posts, I'm lobbying for bringing in a FA RB and for drafting RB early and drafting RB late. I'm for making the RB a position of strength on this team.

But I don't think using the Titans as an example of a good drafting strategy is slightly misguided. After all those draft picks on the RB, they've already gotten rid of one guy and are probably ditching another. They got lucky with Chris Johnson and were able to use LenDale long enough to get Johnson blooded and ready for duty. But they had to keep drafting and drafting that position until they found the right guy. And he wasn't ready immediately. In a way though, we should follow that strategy and keep drafting RB's high and low until we find the right guy.

We've been following that strategy for CB. Let's wait until April and see if we're going to start following that strategy for RB.


Give this Texans team a REAL running game, and Kubiak becomes a legend around here for a long time. Maybe even Tom Landry'esque. But I won't bet on him finding that groove on the running game in 2010.

If he does, he's the man. But I can't see it happening because we've had four years of historicals to look at. And it doesn't paint a pretty picture for the running game in 2010.

You're unhappy because of what you THINK is going to happen. At least, give it a chance to happen. And you're basing some of your fears on the previous regime.

This regime has steadily solved problems and improved the team. The running game is a concern. It wasn't that big of a concern last draft. I expect them to make several moves to address the running game.

thunderkyss
02-15-2010, 10:20 AM
The biggest pattern that has developed is that this team has ALWAYS been about passing, with the offensive line built for passing and the running game takes a big back seat. Our only true, legitimately consistent RB was Domanick Davis who was expected to be a special teamer and 3rd down guy...at best. James Allen, Stacy Mack, Jonathan Wells, Samkon Gado, Ron Dayne, Tony Hollings, Wali Lundy, Ahman Green, Ryan Moats, Steve Slaton, and there's about 4 or 5 more that I am forgetting...this is our list of running backs we've placed confidence upon.

Meanwhile, people thought the Titans were crazy for drafting all those running backs as early as they did. Well, turns out that the move might have been pretty smart. Can't say that I applaud them for drafting Vince Young, but the picks on RBs was a great move. Because they can run that ball and eat up clock.

Give this Texans team a REAL running game, and Kubiak becomes a legend around here for a long time. Maybe even Tom Landry'esque. But I won't bet on him finding that groove on the running game in 2010.

If he does, he's the man. But I can't see it happening because we've had four years of historicals to look at. And it doesn't paint a pretty picture for the running game in 2010.


I completely agree with everything you've said here. One thing I'll add, is the teams "philosophy" has always been to build a ZBS OL, then we would have success with less than spectacular (value)running backs.

I like what I've seen from the OL on the later part of the season. I think Kubiak has a lot of options with the "talent" we already have. If we add a 1st round Guard, all the better.

Until I see the finished product of a dominant OL run game, I personally won't be itching for the Texans to draft a "feature" back. You mentioned the Titans & their penchant for drafting running backs early. They had a dominant, physical OL, so IMHO, it made sense for them.

sandman
02-15-2010, 11:05 AM
Agreed

The example of a bankrupt philosophy is 8 yrs and no playoffs. You dont see fault in the Texans philosophy?

If you dont I dont know what to say. 8 yrs and counting. Here's hoping year no.9 is the charm.

On to the most exciting time of the year for Texan fans. The draft.

As I've said before all of this crap falls on McNairs head.

The Saints went through EIGHT seasons of being a mediocre .500 ball club, with ONE playoff appearance three years ago, before winning the Super Bowl this year.

Just not seeing how Benson and Payton are the standard that we should be holding the McNair and Smithiak up against. The Texans can just as easily have a breakout SB year next year, after only FOUR years of mediocre .500 ball.

sandman
02-15-2010, 11:11 AM
He showed it the whole season.



Nobody said anything about top 5. There are 64 starting corner jobs in the NFL. 32 #1's, and 32 #2's.

That is arguing on semantics and you know it.

Just because you are the #1 CB on your specific team doesn't make you better than every #2 CB on every other team.

Name me a playoff team, or any team at or above .500 this last year, that would have traded #1 CB's with us.

The Texans overpaid him with the franchise tag because they knew they did not have anyone better than him, not because they believed he was really that good. That is more of an indictment on the state of the team's overall secondary than anything else.

thunderkyss
02-15-2010, 12:17 PM
The Texans overpaid him with the franchise tag because they knew they did not have anyone better than him, not because they believed he was really that good. That is more of an indictment on the state of the team's overall secondary than anything else.

That is debatable. The Texans may believe he is a true #1. The talk around the league, is that he is a true #1. Scout.com has him ranked as the best CB scheduled to hit free agency this year, and he was there last year as well. They ranked him higher than Jabari Greer last year, and this year he is ranked higher than Richard Marshall, Fabian Washington, Nick Harper, and Leigh Bodden.

Not that Scout.com is the end all be all, but they're not usually very far off when ranking players.

steelbtexan
02-15-2010, 01:35 PM
Yeah, I'm just trying to keep this real. In the end, we are the fans of this team. We don't own it. We pay to watch it.

So to that extent, I can't sit here and say (with 100% authority) that they're all a bunch of idiots and I can do better. You're going to lose credibility, as a fan who tries to expound on this team, when you take the approach that McNair is a doofus and we're just tolerating his ignorance.

Even I can sense when I am becoming a Doug Downer...and it will undercut my standing with the members here. Not trying to tell you how to think or act on here, just giving you my thoughts that I've sort of grown to understand about message boarding.

For things he got wrong (David Carr) he has shown an ability to correct (Matt Schaub). McNair could have told Kubiak "Tough luck, you're keeping David Carr because he IS this team's QB!" McNair seems to place loyalty and commitment a lot further than any of us would. Can be good, and can be bad. Maybe he's erring on the side of being the good guy. That's OK.

Here's to hoping that we get more right than we get wrong.

I dont know how McNair ran his oil/gas business but I'm sure he ran it with profits in mind. Just as he runs the Texans.

I'm also sure McNair leaned about the oil/gas business quicker than the NFL business. How long does Mcnair get a pass for learning on the job? After 8 yrs I would have thought that he knows how to put together after 8 years of learning. I dont believe McNair is that big of a doofus.

Then I see him extending Kubes with no reason unless you like mediocrity. This makes me think he's a doofus.

sandman
02-15-2010, 02:00 PM
That is debatable. The Texans may believe he is a true #1. The talk around the league, is that he is a true #1. Scout.com has him ranked as the best CB scheduled to hit free agency this year, and he was there last year as well. They ranked him higher than Jabari Greer last year, and this year he is ranked higher than Richard Marshall, Fabian Washington, Nick Harper, and Leigh Bodden.

Not that Scout.com is the end all be all, but they're not usually very far off when ranking players.

Fair enough. But being considered the top ranked FA is just like saying he was the best CB the Texans had on their roster. It is a subjective analysis based on the FA population. It could be a weak FA market this year.

How about this: Among the 32 CB's in the league that are listed as their teams #1 CB, where does Dunta rank? Top 10? Top 20?

sandman
02-15-2010, 02:13 PM
I dont know how McNair ran his oil/gas business but I'm sure he ran it with profits in mind. Just as he runs the Texans.

I'm also sure McNair leaned about the oil/gas business quicker than the NFL business. How long does Mcnair get a pass for learning on the job? After 8 yrs I would have thought that he knows how to put together after 8 years of learning. I dont believe McNair is that big of a doofus.

Then I see him extending Kubes with no reason unless you like mediocrity. This makes me think he's a doofus.

Hmmm, Payton goes 25-23 in the three years before winning a SB, after the team went 42-38 from 2000-2004, and Benson has the right philosophy to stick with him.

But Kubiak goes 25-23 in the last three years, after taking over a team that went 18-46 from 2002-2005, and McNair is a doofus for sticking with him.

JB
02-15-2010, 02:23 PM
Hmmm, Payton goes 25-23 in the three years before winning a SB, after the team went 42-38 from 2000-2004, and Benson has the right philosophy to stick with him.

But Kubiak goes 25-23 in the last three years, after taking over a team that went 18-46 from 2002-2005, and McNair is a doofus for sticking with him.

Don't you know that logic and common sense have no place on this MB?

HoustonFrog
02-15-2010, 03:18 PM
Hmmm, Payton goes 25-23 in the three years before winning a SB, after the team went 42-38 from 2000-2004, and Benson has the right philosophy to stick with him.

But Kubiak goes 25-23 in the last three years, after taking over a team that went 18-46 from 2002-2005, and McNair is a doofus for sticking with him.

You can't just throw togther total records and say "see" its the same. Payton came in and went 10-6 his first year and made it to the NFC Championship game. After that he bought himself some patience. They then went 7-9 and 8-8(what is normal around here). Then he does 13-3 his 4th year and wins a SB. You are discounting Kubiak's first year like it didn't exist and then saying they were in the same place. Apples and oranges. I'm not saying they are the perfect example of who to follow. I just don't think your total record tells the story when you take away their first year. That year lays the groundwork.

thunderkyss
02-15-2010, 03:54 PM
You can't just throw togther total records and say "see" its the same. Payton came in and went 10-6 his first year and made it to the NFC Championship game. After that he bought himself some patience. They then went 7-9 and 8-8(what is normal around here). Then he does 13-3 his 4th year and wins a SB. You are discounting Kubiak's first year like it didn't exist and then saying they were in the same place. Apples and oranges. I'm not saying they are the perfect example of who to follow. I just don't think your total record tells the story when you take away their first year. That year lays the groundwork.

I don't think that is what he is saying. I read it to mean that the Saints had some success before Payton got there. The Texans were woefully pathetic before Kubiak got here.

the Soapers bring up their 2005 records as if that reflects the sum of those teams prior to the new coaches, and say, "See they started out the same."

The Saints were a play-off team in 2000, and spent the next 4 seasons hovering around 8-8, like we are doing now. They had a bad year in 2005. Their success in 2006 has just as much to do with their performance prior to 2005 + the addition of Sean Payton. Their record in 2007 & 2008 speaks to that same conclusion.

infantrycak
02-15-2010, 04:04 PM
They had a bad year in 2005.

And there was a pretty obvious reason other than football talent. But I guess moving around is only a factor when Jeff Fisher is being discussed.

The Pencil Neck
02-15-2010, 04:08 PM
the Soapers bring up their 2005 records as if that reflects the sum of those teams prior to the new coaches, and say, "See they started out the same."

The Saints were a play-off team in 2000, and spent the next 4 seasons hovering around 8-8, like we are doing now. They had a bad year in 2005. Their success in 2006 has just as much to do with their performance prior to 2005 + the addition of Sean Payton. Their record in 2007 & 2008 speaks to that same conclusion.

And don't forget that the Saints 3-13 season included the whole Katrina thing. That team was better than their 3-13 record.

sandman
02-15-2010, 04:46 PM
You can't just throw togther total records and say "see" its the same. Payton came in and went 10-6 his first year and made it to the NFC Championship game. After that he bought himself some patience. They then went 7-9 and 8-8(what is normal around here). Then he does 13-3 his 4th year and wins a SB. You are discounting Kubiak's first year like it didn't exist and then saying they were in the same place. Apples and oranges. I'm not saying they are the perfect example of who to follow. I just don't think your total record tells the story when you take away their first year. That year lays the groundwork.

I see your point; however, if Kubiak went 10-6 with a playoff appearance and followed it up with a 7-9 season, we both know Texans fans would have been calling for his head. Heck, they wanted him run out of town because he *only* went 9-7 this year.

As to the first year, I am not discounting it. I am just trying to point out that Payton and Kubiak did not take over teams at the same level. Payton took a consistently .500 team and made them SB winners after 4 years. Kubiak took a consistently bad team and made them consistently .500 in the same number of years.

Payton took a team averaging 8 wins a season for 5 years (if you discount the one bad season of 2005) and has averaged 9 wins in his 4 year tenure.

Kubiak took a team averaging 4.5 wins a season for 4 years and has averaged 8 wins a season in his 4 year tenure.

Now, I am not arguing that Kubiak is a better coach or even as good a coach as Payton. And no, it is not just about the stats because Payton has a Lombardi, which is the ultimate separation point between the two. I'm just saying that you can't judge Kubiak based on what Payton has done, because their starting points were apples and oranges.

Not at you personally, but the Payton>Kubes, Reggie>Mario and Benson>McNair rants because the Saints won the SB is growing thin. Of course, if the Colts had won, we would be hearing about how the corpse of Jim Caldwell outcoached Kubiak all season long to a Super Bowl win, so I guess there is no pleasing everyone.

HoustonFrog
02-15-2010, 04:47 PM
So basically in the history of the league no team has ever started out with more against them than the Texans. I get it now. I'll move along.(massive exaggeration for effect) :rolleyes:

I see your point; however, if Kubiak went 10-6 with a playoff appearance and followed it up with a 7-9 season, we both know Texans fans would have been calling for his head. Heck, they wanted him run out of town because he *only* went 9-7 this year.



Actually I don't believe this. A 10-6 record lets people know.."he can get there." Right now that is still debatable and thus these threads.

sandman
02-15-2010, 04:47 PM
I don't think that is what he is saying. I read it to mean that the Saints had some success before Payton got there. The Texans were woefully pathetic before Kubiak got here.

the Soapers bring up their 2005 records as if that reflects the sum of those teams prior to the new coaches, and say, "See they started out the same."

The Saints were a play-off team in 2000, and spent the next 4 seasons hovering around 8-8, like we are doing now. They had a bad year in 2005. Their success in 2006 has just as much to do with their performance prior to 2005 + the addition of Sean Payton. Their record in 2007 & 2008 speaks to that same conclusion.

Thanks. You put it a bit more succinctly than my ramblings...

sandman
02-15-2010, 04:55 PM
So basically in the history of the league no team has ever started out with more against them than the Texans. I get it now. I'll move along.(massive exaggeration for effect) :rolleyes:

I guess I am just trying to figure out what groundwork and identity about this franchise was established in the first four years of expansion averaging 4.5 wins a season that set expectations on Kubiak that he would have them as SB contenders in 4 years.

Playoffs? Sure, by all means. He has not met those expectations. This team has the talent to, and should be, in the playoffs. That is squarely on his shoulders. But ever since NOLA won the SB, the conversation has morphed into why Kubiak can't win a Super Bowl in 4 years like Payton can. That is where the expectations are getting ridiculous.

sandman
02-15-2010, 05:00 PM
So basically in the history of the league no team has ever started out with more against them than the Texans. I get it now. I'll move along.(massive exaggeration for effect) :rolleyes:



Actually I don't believe this. A 10-6 record lets people know.."he can get there." Right now that is still debatable and thus these threads.

So what would that do to the Legend of Sean Payton had he gone 10-6 and not made the playoffs in 2006?

What if Kubes goes 10-6 next year and they miss the playoffs? He proved he could "get there" to 10-6, if we are just looking for a win count.

It is an arbitrary number. NYJ got into the playoffs this year with the same record as the Texans. Hell, it took until the last game of the season before the Texans were eliminated from the playoffs.

HoustonFrog
02-15-2010, 05:02 PM
I guess I am just trying to figure out what groundwork and identity about this franchise was established in the first four years of expansion averaging 4.5 wins a season that set expectations on Kubiak that he would have them as SB contenders in 4 years.

Playoffs? Sure, by all means. He has not met those expectations. This team has the talent to, and should be, in the playoffs. That is squarely on his shoulders. But ever since NOLA won the SB, the conversation has morphed into why Kubiak can't win a Super Bowl in 4 years like Payton can. That is where the expectations are getting ridiculous.

First, nice post

Second, my comment was really a smart ass one...sorry.. due to the fact that it isn't just NO. The Jets, The Dolphins, the Falcons and a host of other teams have been discussed but somehow most, despite really solid arguments, don't meet the criteria for some. IMHO it is a cop out in some ways because it relates back to the first regime and this mindset that there is some leeway to give. I just refuse to give leeway after 4 years....especially since at the start of last year there was a "playoff or bust" chant. Many of the teams listed started from crap too and because of turnarounds are getting some breathing room.

So what would that do to the Legend of Sean Payton had he gone 10-6 and not made the playoffs in 2006?

What if Kubes goes 10-6 next year and they miss the playoffs? He proved he could "get there" to 10-6, if we are just looking for a win count.

It is an arbitrary number. NYJ got into the playoffs this year with the same record as the Texans. Hell, it took until the last game of the season before the Texans were eliminated from the playoffs.

I look at seasons as they progress. One win against a team resting players to get to 9-7 doesn't impress me. Impressing me would be winning the games you needed when you were set up at 5-3. If they go 10-6, that is a very nice number. The problem is, that isn't what happened with the Saints in 06. They made a serious playoff run. As for this year, the Jets were in because they literally pummeled the Texans the first game of the season with a rookie QB and coach. They were prepared. That is why they were there.

sandman
02-15-2010, 05:15 PM
First, nice post

Second, my comment was really a smart ass one...sorry.. due to the fact that it isn't just NO. The Jets, The Dolphins, the Falcons and a host of other teams have been discussed but somehow most, despite really solid arguments, don't meet the criteria for some. IMHO it is a cop out in some ways because it relates back to the first regime and this mindset that there is some leeway to give. I just refuse to give leeway after 4 years....especially since at the start of last year there was a "playoff or bust" chant. Many of the teams listed started from crap too and because of turnarounds are getting some breathing room.



I look at seasons as they progress. One win against a team resting players to get to 9-7 doesn't impress me. Impressing me would be winning the games you needed when you were set up at 5-3. If they go 10-6, that is a very nice number. The problem is, that isn't what happened with the Saints in 06. They made a serious playoff run. As for this year, the Jets were in because they literally pummeled the Texans the first game of the season with a rookie QB and coach. They were prepared. That is why they were there.

Thanks, and yes, this team should be in the playoffs. I'm not a Kubiak apologist. I thought proving it in the final year of his contract was more than enough "good faith" that McNair should have placed in him. The extension was ridiculous.

Not directed at you, and maybe it is because I get frustrated at how this town turned into West New Orleans, but the Sean Payton Bromance Festival needs to move on. If it comes out as defending Kubes, that was not my intention. The corpse of Jim Caldwell that was propped up on the Indy sideline for 19 weeks could get this team to the playoffs.

thunderkyss
02-15-2010, 07:15 PM
So basically in the history of the league no team has ever started out with more against them than the Texans. I get it now. I'll move along.(massive exaggeration for effect) :rolleyes:



Nobody is saying that. Not at all.

Think about what teams the Texans compared to in 2002... it wasn't the Cowboys, Redskins, Dolphins, or the Jets. It was the early Tampa Bay Buccaneers, the Arizona Cardinals, the Detroit Lions and yes the Saints fit that group, because they had only just become a mediocre team. In Fact, if you want to point to a coach that has done what Kubiak hasn't been able to, then Jim Haslett is the guy you should be comparing him to. Although Mike Ditka was putting together some talent, his team performed poorly year after year. Jim Haslett came in & almost over night, the Saints were beating one of the best teams in the NFL at that time(the St Louis Rams: The Greatest Show on Turf) on a regular basis. He took a consistently bad franchise to a 10-6 record, a play-off win, and consistent mediocre performance.

Fast forward to the end of the 2005 season. The Texans were worse off than they were in 2002. Their veteran leaders were exiled. They overpaid several FAs, & were in cap hell. Arizona had been putting together a talented squad, but weren't able to put together a winning season. Detroit was pretty much like the Texans.. not any better than they were in 2002.

Eric Mangini also took over the Jets in 2006. They had gone 4-12 the previous year. In 2006, Mangini & the Jets went 10-6 and made a wild-card appearance. But the Jets went 10-6 in 2004. Pennington got hurt pretty bad in '05, and IMHO was the main reason they did so badly. They were 6-10 in 2003, 9-7 in 2002, 10-6 in 2001, and 9-7 in 2000. So they were already mediocre when Mangini took over. He was fired, because they remained mediocre following the 2006 season (4-12 in 2007, 9-7 in 2008), and was no closer to finding their franchise QB after 3 seasons.

thunderkyss
02-15-2010, 07:21 PM
As for this year, the Jets were in because they literally pummeled the Texans the first game of the season with a rookie QB and coach. They were prepared. That is why they were there.

Never mind that the Colts laid down for them in week 16, other wise they would have been 8-8, & the Texans would have been in the play-offs.

They didn't win that game, week 16, because they were prepared. They were in the play-offs, because the Colts took care of business early. The Jets had nothing to do with that win, and were just lucky the Colts weren't on their schedule earlier, or that the Colts didn't care about going 16-0.

thunderkyss
02-15-2010, 07:27 PM
Thanks, and yes, this team should be in the playoffs. I'm not a Kubiak apologist. I thought proving it in the final year of his contract was more than enough "good faith" that McNair should have placed in him. The extension was ridiculous.


I'm also not a big fan of the extension. I thought, if McNair wanted to prove a point, he would not offer the extension, until week 3 (after Kubiak wins week 1, and starts at least 2-1).

But since he extended Kubiak this early, that tells me McNair believes Kubiak is the right man.... based on bringing us from pathetic to mediocre.

I don't agree with him, I think Kubiak needs a kick in the pants. But I don't think it's ridiculous.

If we get to the play-offs next year, I bet McNair will "rip-up" Kubiak's contract again, & make him one of the highest paid Coaches in the league.

I don't think this contract was a reward, as much as it was a vote of confidence.

HoustonFrog
02-15-2010, 07:43 PM
Never mind that the Colts laid down for them in week 16, other wise they would have been 8-8, & the Texans would have been in the play-offs.

They didn't win that game, week 16, because they were prepared. They were in the play-offs, because the Colts took care of business early. The Jets had nothing to do with that win, and were just lucky the Colts weren't on their schedule earlier, or that the Colts didn't care about going 16-0.

Do you think other teams may have been pissed that the Pats were taking Brady out, that Moss sat many series after doing whatever he wanted to the secondary and that 3 of their top DBs sat to rest up?Just saying, it wasn't as blatant but they weren't going all out for anything. I hate that argument. If the Texans take care of business it is a non-issue.

Thanks, and yes, this team should be in the playoffs. I'm not a Kubiak apologist. I thought proving it in the final year of his contract was more than enough "good faith" that McNair should have placed in him. The extension was ridiculous.

Not directed at you, and maybe it is because I get frustrated at how this town turned into West New Orleans, but the Sean Payton Bromance Festival needs to move on. If it comes out as defending Kubes, that was not my intention. The corpse of Jim Caldwell that was propped up on the Indy sideline for 19 weeks could get this team to the playoffs.

No problem. I don't take this stuff personally and I'm just trying to further the debate with counter points. I think many people just see the Saints as a dregs of the league for so long so to see them with a SB after some tough times, it makes people wonder why it is going so slow here. I also think Payton is a much more aggressive coach...JMO.

thunderkyss
02-15-2010, 07:48 PM
Do you think other teams may have been pissed that the Pats were taking Brady out, that Moss sat many series after doing whatever he wanted to the secondary and that 3 of their top DBs sat to rest up?Just saying, it wasn't as blatant but they weren't going all out for anything. I hate that argument. If the Texans take care of business it is a non-issue.

If we had won made the play-offs, I would have counted it as a hollow victory. Backing into the play-offs, isn't making the play-offs IMHO.

The team, Jets, Texans, Cowboys.... whoever has every right to make the most of it once they get there.

But don't tell me the Jets were in the play-offs because they were "prepared"

The Pencil Neck
02-15-2010, 07:48 PM
So basically in the history of the league no team has ever started out with more against them than the Texans. I get it now. I'll move along.(massive exaggeration for effect) :rolleyes:


Teams have been worse than the Texans over the past 3 years.

Believe it or not.


Actually I don't believe this. A 10-6 record lets people know.."he can get there." Right now that is still debatable and thus these threads.

That's bull.

If a coach goes 10-6 and then 8-8 or 9-7 and there are going to be some fans saying that he's not the coach to go all the way. And some times, they may be right. (Mangini comes to mind.)

Until Kubiak goes to the Super Bowl, there are still going to be people who're going to be saying that he doesn't have "it". And even if he does go to the Super Bowl, there are going to be people who are going to say it was a fluke. If Kubiak wins 10+ games the next 4 seasons and doesn't win a Super Bowl, some people are going to be saying that he doesn't have the killer instinct or he can't win the big game.

There are always going to be naysayers.

HoustonFrog
02-15-2010, 07:58 PM
If we had won made the play-offs, I would have counted it as a hollow victory. Backing into the play-offs, isn't making the play-offs IMHO.

The team, Jets, Texans, Cowboys.... whoever has every right to make the most of it once they get there.

But don't tell me the Jets were in the play-offs because they were "prepared"

The prepared comment was dealing with how they started the season and came out and took it to the Texans. Also, the Colts game wasn't a blowout with Manning in there. There is no guarantee they lose and they didn't look unprepared. They won games when they had to, including laying an ass whooping on the Texans. So they were better.

That's bull.

If a coach goes 10-6 and then 8-8 or 9-7 and there are going to be some fans saying that he's not the coach to go all the way. And some times, they may be right. (Mangini comes to mind.)

Until Kubiak goes to the Super Bowl, there are still going to be people who're going to be saying that he doesn't have "it". And even if he does go to the Super Bowl, there are going to be people who are going to say it was a fluke. If Kubiak wins 10+ games the next 4 seasons and doesn't win a Super Bowl, some people are going to be saying that he doesn't have the killer instinct or he can't win the big game.

There are always going to be naysayers.

It's not bull. I understand your comments and Yys there are always naysayers but overall if a coach takes a team to the playoffs then many look to that year as what can happen every year. So if Kubes went 10-6 in Year 1 or 2, then this year would have been one where the expectations weren't hoping to slide in at 9-7 but that it was expected. It buys coaches a little leeway. More expectations but leeway. The questions remain but not as many when a guy has similar results with more talent. That is the status right now. Will it ever happen with him? I'm actually of the opinion that a coach needs to be evaluated every year to see where the team is headed. Not calling for his head but serious evaluation of how the team is functioning under him.

thunderkyss
02-15-2010, 08:57 PM
The prepared comment was dealing with how they started the season and came out and took it to the Texans.

They took it to the Patriots & the Titans. Were they unprepared as well?

I'm not saying that we were prepared to play him week 1. I am saying that he was relentless in a way that no one expected until week 4, when the league said, "oh, you're going to play like that?"

I understand what he did in Baltimore... but the relentless ferocity of selling out on almost every play was different.... He wanted to make a statement, and he did, for three weeks.

They won games when they had to, including laying an ass whooping on the Texans.

They won the games they did, and that's about it. They didn't control their own destiny until the Ravens lost week 16. They didn't clinch the wild-card until week 17.

So they were better.



They had a better season. But they aren't a better team.

I'll make a wager with you right now, that we win more games in 2010 than the Jets do. I'll even let you decide what the bet will be for.... I'm not scared.

HoustonFrog
02-15-2010, 09:18 PM
They had a better season. But they aren't a better team.

I'll make a wager with you right now, that we win more games in 2010 than the Jets do. I'll even let you decide what the bet will be for.... I'm not scared.

Thunder, no matter how you spin it you are wrong. They were a better team last season. 2010 doesn't matter. They played the Texans straight up and exploited weaknesses....stuffing the run, Revis on AJ, running at the Texans and controlling the game. I'm sorry but that opinion is just weak and is why many people get frustrated here. There is no spin to an ass kicking.

thunderkyss
02-15-2010, 09:22 PM
I'm sorry but that opinion is just weak and is why many people get frustrated here. There is no spin to an ass kicking.

They kicked our ass, big deal. That's part of the game. They kicked the Patriots ass as well, the Patriots were able to pay them back later in the season. We didn't have that opportunity.

They had a better season. They went to the play-offs, we didn't.

It's not spin, I think we're a better team.