PDA

View Full Version : Cleveland Talk Show Hosts Blasts Tex..err Browns


HoustonFrog
01-20-2011, 08:19 AM
This sounds like he has been hanging around here for the last month or so.Wonder if this is their flagship.

http://www.midwestsportsfans.com/2011/01/audio-cleveland-radio-host-greg-kozarik-goes-off-on-browns-fans-lerner-family/

Blake
01-20-2011, 09:38 AM
Can anyone post the gist of the conversation for those who dont want to stream stuff at work?

HoustonFrog
01-20-2011, 09:43 AM
Can anyone post the gist of the conversation for those who dont want to stream stuff at work?

It isn't a full stream...embedded youtube of the rant.

It was basically a radio talk show host saying he is tired of hearing about the "process" and being patient and how the Lerners are the devil and how all these other teams do well every year and Cleveland fans are sheep that accept the same b.s., etc/ It is funny. It just sounds EXACTLY like what has been going on here for the past month...myself included.

JB
01-20-2011, 09:44 AM
Can anyone post the gist of the conversation for those who dont want to stream stuff at work?

I didn't listen, but this is what was written...

Somebody woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning; and that somebody is Greg Kozarik, the host of Locked and Loaded on the Cleveland.com Digital Sports Network.

In an angry rant earlier today, Kozarik says many things, including the word “process” at least 50 times (I’m not exaggerating). Among the accusations he hurls to and fro: Browns are sheep; Browns management insanely tries the same things over and over again while expecting different results; and, he refers to the Lerner family as “the devil themselves”.

The line that will probably end up being the most memorable and notorious from this roughly 8:30 rant is this one:

Al Lerner himself is down in hell right now laughing with Satan, because do you know how much money he stole from Cleveland Browns fans?

I also blipsnipped it if you want to listen to the parts I picked out as highlights:

@00:29 The first reference to Browns fans being sheep.
@01:00 He makes his best point here, discussing why he will not "respect the process" while watching the Browns continue to lose as teams like Tampa Bay turn things around in one year.
@02:08 Another dig at the blind faith of Browns fans
@03:08 Clearly he does not think Peyton Hillis is Chuck Norris
@03:29 And, again, it's your fault Browns fans!
@03:45 The first reference to the Lerner family being the devil/Lucifer (plus a quick history lesson on the Browns leaving and coming back)
@05:26 ".500! You're getting excited? You're getting excited for .500?" - Yes Browns fans, you are SHEEP!
@06:38 "The Lerners are the devil themselves. Al Lerner himself is down in hell right now laughing with Satan, because do you know how much money he stole from Cleveland Browns fans?"
@07:59 This is the statement of a TRUE non-sheep Browns fan right here.

thunderkyss
01-20-2011, 09:45 AM
I think both franchises are proof of how difficult it is to get established in the NFL.

This Madden generation thinks it is so easy, but between the two franchises just about every permutation of coaches & general managers & players & Free Agents & everything else we talk about here has been tried to pretty much the same level of success.

Even teams like the The Saints, Tampa Bay Buccaneers & the Rams serves as example of what it takes to put together a winning franchise. It was a long time before those teams were even relevant, much less "winners." Those however also show that success is indeed acheivable.

Fire Kubiak..... hire the Chin... what could go wrong?

realistically, it's about much more than that.. much more than the playing on the field... much more than the game time decisions.

Runner
01-20-2011, 11:43 AM
The past few years the Browns were generally described as gormless by this board while the Texans were hailed as doing things right. Now the teams seem more similar than different. This shouldn't be a pleasant thought for Texans fans.

Or Browns fans.

Double Barrel
01-20-2011, 12:14 PM
I laugh at the notion of "parity" in the NFL.

We see the same things this year. Look at the final four teams. Yeah, they've been up and down over the years, but they all have one thing in common: Super Bowl championships in their histories.

Since the Texans arrived in 2002, it seems the same teams are at the bottom year in and year out. The Texans, Browns, Raiders, Lions, etc.

The Raiders have winning history, but their owner is senile so the model gets broken with them. But, when they eventually have a new owner, I have little doubt that they will rise again, simply because they have history to reflect upon.

Yeah, it's difficult to win the in the NFL, but damn near impossible to win with inept and incompetent ownership. For different reasons, the same teams share this common thread. Owners who cannot seem to pull their heads out of their asses to make decisions that put their teams in position to win more than they lose.

And just like championships leave a legacy with a team, even decades later, so does losing. And that's the problem with teams like the Texans, Browns, Lions, etc., they have a self-fulfilling prophecy of suck.

That's why a rant by a Cleveland radio host reverberates in Houston. We know where this guy is coming from, and we understand it because we live it. I'd say forward this rant to McNair, but I doubt he'd even get it and/or hear it, much less comprehend what it represents as it relates to his decisions and franchise.

Blake
01-20-2011, 12:18 PM
It isn't a full stream...embedded youtube of the rant.

It was basically a radio talk show host saying he is tired of hearing about the "process" and being patient and how the Lerners are the devil and how all these other teams do well every year and Cleveland fans are sheep that accept the same b.s., etc/ It is funny. It just sounds EXACTLY like what has been going on here for the past month...myself included.

Thanks REP!

Yeah that is the Texans to a T.

thunderkyss
01-20-2011, 12:26 PM
That's why a rant by a Cleveland radio host reverberates in Houston. We know where this guy is coming from, and we understand it because we live it. I'd say forward this rant to McNair, but I doubt he'd even get it and/or hear it, much less comprehend what it represents as it relates to his decisions and franchise.

But they're taking entirely different paths.... Cleveland is doing all the things people want Houston to do, & it hasn't got them any closer.

Look at Washington. Where are they now? They had that history, they have a Super Bowl Championship in their history. But they are at the bottom where we are & they have an owner who went out & got players. He went out & got a "sure thing" head coach... twice. & that franchise is in dissaray.


Make no mistake about it. If anyone on this board knows a sure fire way to turn a losing franchise into a Super Bowl contender year in & year out, there are at least 15 NFL franchises that would love to get them on the payroll.

eriadoc
01-20-2011, 12:49 PM
Make no mistake about it. If anyone on this board knows a sure fire way to turn a losing franchise into a Super Bowl contender year in & year out, there are at least 15 NFL franchises that would love to get them on the payroll.

Year in & year out? LOL, at this point I'll take "year".

Double Barrel
01-20-2011, 12:53 PM
But they're taking entirely different paths.... Cleveland is doing all the things people want Houston to do, & it hasn't got them any closer.


Sorta', but not really. Cleveland did not hire a bonafide GM, but rather a successful head coach with desires to be a GM. Holmgren is still unproven at that position, though, so the results are the same.

Look at Washington. Where are they now? They had that history, they have a Super Bowl Championship in their history. But they are at the bottom where we are & they have an owner who went out & got players. He went out & got a "sure thing" head coach... twice. & that franchise is in dissaray.

It goes back to my point about inept and incompetent ownership. Yeah, he finally got Joe Gibbs, but honestly, the dude was way past his prime. And even with the albatross of an owner around his neck, Gibbs still managed to get them to the playoffs twice in four seasons. The verdict is still out on Shanahan, but it's too early to tell after just one season.

Make no mistake about it. If anyone on this board knows a sure fire way to turn a losing franchise into a Super Bowl contender year in & year out, there are at least 15 NFL franchises that would love to get them on the payroll.

I'm not sure of your point. You can watch NFLN and ESPN for NFL coverage, and there are pundits with NFL experience that are doing the same thing we do on the boards: talk about the sport we love.

And perhaps we don't know the exact formula for a "sure fire way to turn a losing franchise into a Super Bowl contender year in & year out", but we damn sure know how to keep a franchise at the bottom year in and year out. We see it every season and watch it every year. We're experts on crappy teams in that regard.

What is interesting, though, is that there have been many instances where forum members saw things well ahead of our FO. It doesn't necessarily make them experts in football, but rather reveals the ignorance of those running the team we follow.

HoustonFrog
01-20-2011, 02:06 PM
I laugh at the notion of "parity" in the NFL.

We see the same things this year. Look at the final four teams. Yeah, they've been up and down over the years, but they all have one thing in common: Super Bowl championships in their histories.

Since the Texans arrived in 2002, it seems the same teams are at the bottom year in and year out. The Texans, Browns, Raiders, Lions, etc.

The Raiders have winning history, but their owner is senile so the model gets broken with them. But, when they eventually have a new owner, I have little doubt that they will rise again, simply because they have history to reflect upon.

Yeah, it's difficult to win the in the NFL, but damn near impossible to win with inept and incompetent ownership. For different reasons, the same teams share this common thread. Owners who cannot seem to pull their heads out of their asses to make decisions that put their teams in position to win more than they lose.

And just like championships leave a legacy with a team, even decades later, so does losing. And that's the problem with teams like the Texans, Browns, Lions, etc., they have a self-fulfilling prophecy of suck.

That's why a rant by a Cleveland radio host reverberates in Houston. We know where this guy is coming from, and we understand it because we live it. I'd say forward this rant to McNair, but I doubt he'd even get it and/or hear it, much less comprehend what it represents as it relates to his decisions and franchise.

It really struck a chord. You could replace "Cleveland" with "Houston" and talk and his rant was basically the same as we were doing here these past months. I just didn't realize that other cities had fallen into the same trap and being lulled by the "patience" and "process" message.

BTW, my favorite part is when he just starts going off about how teams aren't game planning for Joe Thomas..lol

Hookem Horns
01-20-2011, 02:20 PM
It really struck a chord. You could replace "Cleveland" with "Houston" and talk and his rant was basically the same as we were doing here these past months.

Not totally. Part of his rant was that the Browns have only made the playoffs once in their existence.
Besides making the playoffs his team got to bring back their name and colors. He should just STHU because it could be a lot worse, he could be a Houston fan.

HOU-TEX
01-20-2011, 02:26 PM
I laugh at the notion of "parity" in the NFL.

We see the same things this year. Look at the final four teams. Yeah, they've been up and down over the years, but they all have one thing in common: Super Bowl championships in their histories.
Since the Texans arrived in 2002, it seems the same teams are at the bottom year in and year out. The Texans, Browns, Raiders, Lions, etc.

The Raiders have winning history, but their owner is senile so the model gets broken with them. But, when they eventually have a new owner, I have little doubt that they will rise again, simply because they have history to reflect upon.

Yeah, it's difficult to win the in the NFL, but damn near impossible to win with inept and incompetent ownership. For different reasons, the same teams share this common thread. Owners who cannot seem to pull their heads out of their asses to make decisions that put their teams in position to win more than they lose.

And just like championships leave a legacy with a team, even decades later, so does losing. And that's the problem with teams like the Texans, Browns, Lions, etc., they have a self-fulfilling prophecy of suck.

That's why a rant by a Cleveland radio host reverberates in Houston. We know where this guy is coming from, and we understand it because we live it. I'd say forward this rant to McNair, but I doubt he'd even get it and/or hear it, much less comprehend what it represents as it relates to his decisions and franchise.

Yes, and they all have very good defenses.

Just another HOU-TEX random observation

Hookem Horns
01-20-2011, 02:36 PM
Not totally. Part of his rant was that the Browns have only made the playoffs once in their existence.
Besides making the playoffs his team got to bring back their name and colors. He should just STHU because it could be a lot worse, he could be a Houston fan.

I normally don't quote myself but I did just think of something. He did have to witness his old team win the Super Bowl for another fan base only a year after his team was re-established. Since then they have been a solid franchise for the most part.

Our old team continues to be the same old piece of crap, good for a while (choke when it matters) and then total suckfest mode. I really think they are in for a long suckfest this time around.

Now that I think about it I would rather not have that 1 playoff season and be Houston fan.

thunderkyss
01-20-2011, 03:02 PM
Sorta', but not really. Cleveland did not hire a bonafide GM, but rather a successful head coach with desires to be a GM. Holmgren is still unproven at that position, though, so the results are the same.

Could've swore he got the Seahawks to the Super Bowl as their GM & V.P. of football operations.

It goes back to my point about inept and incompetent ownership. Yeah, he finally got Joe Gibbs, but honestly, the dude was way past his prime. And even with the albatross of an owner around his neck, Gibbs still managed to get them to the playoffs twice in four seasons. The verdict is still out on Shanahan, but it's too early to tell after just one season.

I'm not sure of your point. You can watch NFLN and ESPN for NFL coverage, and there are pundits with NFL experience that are doing the same thing we do on the boards: talk about the sport we love.


Except they do it with a little class, & don't act as if they knew better. They don't call people ignorant or inept or incompetent when they have never shown to be able to do any better.

Sure we can second guess & imagine what would have happened if we went this way, or that..

But history shows new teams starting out..... don't do very well, for a very long time. Carolina & Jacksonville were the exception.. not the rule.

Teams that fall in the gutter usually stay there for a very long time. That includes Greenbay, Dallas, Jets, Miami, INdy/Baltimore, Cincinnatti, etc.....



What is interesting, though, is that there have been many instances where forum members saw things well ahead of our FO. It doesn't necessarily make them experts in football, but rather reveals the ignorance of those running the team we follow.

Or....... maybe some people here are just ignorant of all the stipulations & circumstances.... or just chose to ignore them... that lead to the decisions this franchise has made.

Hookem Horns
01-20-2011, 03:15 PM
But history shows new teams starting out..... don't do very well, for a very long time. Carolina & Jacksonville were the exception.. not the rule.



If you would have posted that in 2004 I would have agreed. Carolina and Jax are the exception to the rule, the rule that states most expansion teams don't make it to their conference title games in only their 2nd season.

It took Tampa Bay 4 seasons to make the NFC title game. They started in 76 and were one game away from the Super Bowl in 79.

The Seahawks went 9-7 in their 3rd season of existence however missed the playoffs that season. They did go to the playoffs in 1983. So before the Texans came around they were the worst of the modern expansion teams since it took them 8 seasons.

The expansion Browns took 4 seasons to make the playoffs.

So most expansion teams make it to the playoffs by their 4th season. The Texans and Seahawks are the exception, not the rule.

Clearly the Texans are the worst of the "modern" expansion lot.

Runner
01-20-2011, 03:20 PM
It didn't take long to hit on the Panglossian "we live in the best of all worlds" response:

The Texans are as good as they can be. No one could have done better. No decisions could have been made better. If a fan doesn't believe it, they just don't understand how the NFL works.

Sorry. When Candide saw monkeys raping women, he killed them. He didn't think that was the best of all worlds. Even after Dr. Pangloss spun it - maybe the monkeys and women were lovers - he still didn't buy it.

Spin each decision, each coach, each game all you want; the Texans aren't "as good as they could possibly be" after nine years.

ArlingtonTexan
01-20-2011, 03:43 PM
Longest Playoff Drought Current

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NFL_franchise_post-season_droughts#Longest_active_post-season_drought

for too lazy to click the link

Only three teams since the Texans came into the league have not made the playoffs: Lions, Bills, Texans

Only 5 teams not in the playoffs since the Smithiak error...I mean era started: Browns, 49ers, Raiders, Rams, Broncos

Double Barrel
01-20-2011, 03:53 PM
Could've swore he got the Seahawks to the Super Bowl as their GM & V.P. of football operations.

Perhaps you should educate yourself first before typing such stuff.

Following the 2002 season, Holmgren (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Holmgren) was terminated as Seahawks General Manager. The Seahawks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Seahawks) went to the Super Bowl in 2006.

He was a horrible GM according to most people in the know.

Mike Holmgren - A Good GM? (http://sea.scout.com/2/816748.html)

Except they do it with a little class, & don't act as if they knew better. They don't call people ignorant or inept or incompetent when they have never shown to be able to do any better.

You obviously don't watch that much television analysis.

And give me a break with your arrogant condescending BS about "class". That is laughable. We're fans of a billion dollar entertainment medium, and you want to spew some nonsense about "class".

As far as calling someone ignorant or inept or incompetent, it is what it is.

What do you call an owner that has been unable to assemble a successful staff for a decade? Please answer this question, because your opinions always seem scattered and without focus. It's my perception, but I'd really be interested in reading your CLASSY answer to this question.

Teams that fall in the gutter usually stay there for a very long time. That includes Greenbay, Dallas, Jets, Miami, INdy/Baltimore, Cincinnatti, etc.....

Success is a cycle that is proven throughout NFL history.

With the exception of the Bengals - who have their own issues with an INEPT, INCOMPETENT, & IGNORANT owner - I would not be surprised to see the other teams reach success before the Texans. Green Bay and the NYJ are already there (hey, there's those cycles!), and not even sure why you'd mention Indy right now.

Or....... maybe some people here are just ignorant of all the stipulations & circumstances.... or just chose to ignore them... that lead to the decisions this franchise has made.

You should give yourself more credit.

It didn't take long to hit on the Panglossian "we live in the best of all worlds" response:

The Texans are as good as they can be. No one could have done better. No decisions could have been made better. If a fan doesn't believe it, they just don't understand how the NFL works.

Sorry. When Candide saw monkeys raping women, he killed them. He didn't think that was the best of all worlds. Even after Dr. Pangloss spun it - maybe the monkeys and women were lovers - he still didn't buy it.

Spin each decision, each coach, each game all you want; the Texans aren't "as good as they could possibly be" after nine years.

Well said, man. The PomPom Patrol gives me gas sometimes.

Hookem Horns
01-20-2011, 04:05 PM
http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/6421/bobshine.gif

thunderkyss
01-20-2011, 05:32 PM
The expansion Browns took 4 seasons to make the playoffs.

So most expansion teams make it to the playoffs by their 4th season. The Texans and Seahawks are the exception, not the rule.

& the Browns haven't been back since. If the Texans make the playoffs the twice in the next 3 years, we'll have done better than the Browns did in 12 years.

So there's still time.

thunderkyss
01-20-2011, 05:41 PM
It didn't take long to hit on the Panglossian "we live in the best of all worlds" response:

The Texans are as good as they can be. No one could have done better. No decisions could have been made better. If a fan doesn't believe it, they just don't understand how the NFL works.

Spin each decision, each coach, each game all you want; the Texans aren't "as good as they could possibly be" after nine years.

Not exactly what I'm saying. Sure the Texans could have done better.

I'm just saying it's not as easy as many people here are making it seem.

thunderkyss
01-20-2011, 05:51 PM
Longest Playoff Drought Current

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NFL_franchise_post-season_droughts#Longest_active_post-season_drought

for too lazy to click the link

Only three teams since the Texans came into the league have not made the playoffs: Lions, Bills, Texans

Only 5 teams not in the playoffs since the Smithiak error...I mean era started: Browns, 49ers, Raiders, Rams, Broncos

The 49ers & the Raiders haven't been to the play-offs since 2002. The Cleveland Browns....... been once in their 12 year history. The Bills & the Lions haven't been since 1999.

Is there anything we are saying that McNair should have done, that these guys didn't do?

& that's my point. It's easy to sit here on a message board, & say he should do this, or he should do that.

Then sit back & say, "it would have worked."

But in real life, it don't work like that.
:koolaid:

thunderkyss
01-20-2011, 05:53 PM
What do you call an owner that has been unable to assemble a successful staff for a decade? Please answer this question, because your opinions always seem scattered and without focus. It's my perception, but I'd really be interested in reading your CLASSY answer to this question.


New.

ArlingtonTexan
01-20-2011, 06:21 PM
The 49ers & the Raiders haven't been to the play-offs since 2002. The Cleveland Browns....... been once in their 12 year history. The Bills & the Lions haven't been since 1999.

Is there anything we are saying that McNair should have done, that these guys didn't do?

& that's my point. It's easy to sit here on a message board, & say he should do this, or he should do that.

Then sit back & say, "it would have worked."

But in real life, it don't work like that.
:koolaid:

Not sure why you think you need to bold and restate anything, because you changed nothing. The Texans were in the league in the 2002 season when those three you bolded make the playoffs. The point is that it is actually quite easy to make the playoffs in the NFL.

1) In the nine seasons that the Texans participated in only three teams (Bills, Lions, and texans) have not made the playoffs. This puts the Texans in the bottom 10% of the league.

2) Only an additional 5 have not made the playoffs in the 5 seasons that Kubiak has coached the Texans. this mean the Texans are in the bottom 25% (8 of 32).

3) For all the greatness people claim tha Manning and the Colts have two largely mediocore franchise (Jags and Titans) in our division have both won 12 plus games in the last 5 years and won the division.

The facts, (versus opinions or assumptions) are that it is quite easy to make the playoffs in the NFL and that if you don't do it over 10 (well 9 seasons) you are bad franchise (the Lions) or even 5 years (75% of the league does) you are at least in a really bad cycle.

The Texans fans are not holding the Texans to a silly Cowboys fans standard (Superbowl or you suck); they are holding the Texans to a standard of just being another NFL franchise...that is one capable of making the playoffs when the best team in your division is injury riddled by any standard and the other two are mediocore. A standard that is quite easy to meet. That is the way the NFL really works.

Lucky
01-20-2011, 07:31 PM
Only 5 teams not in the playoffs since the Smithiak error...
I wish I had said that. Must spread rep.

...If the Texans make the playoffs the twice in the next 3 years...
Are we going to go through another offseason playing the "If" game? There's no "ifs" about it. The Texans are losers. Two different organizations hired by one man have each failed. Maybe not to the same extent. But failure, none the less.

"If" theTexans make the playoffs twice in the next 3 years under Gary Kubiak, that would still be a poor to mediocre overall performance. Two playoff seasons out of 8 is not great.

Bob McNair's biggest problem is his inability to admit failure. He's in denial that he picked the wrong horse twice. I would bet that if the Houston Texans were losing $$$, he wouldn't be so steadfast in his decisions. The NFL as a business is completely out of touch with the business reality of the world. Win and you make money. Lose and you make money. Whether you achieve or flounder, you're still getting richer. Where's the incintive to succeed on the field? I guess it has to reside in the ego of the owner. So maybe I'm wrong. Bob McNair's biggest problem may be that his ego is too small.

Runner
01-20-2011, 07:33 PM
& the Browns haven't been back since. If the Texans make the playoffs the twice in the next 3 years, we'll have done better than the Browns did in 12 years.

So there's still time.

That "if" is what you've been talking about for three years. It's a tough one for a team that has quit treading water and started sinking.

What "if" there is no improvement next year? Does that guarantee two years of playoffs to follow? Logic based on unfounded hope isn't sound. It isn't really logic.

thunderkyss
01-20-2011, 08:03 PM
That "if" is what you've been talking about for three years. It's a tough one for a team that has quit treading water and started sinking.

What "if" there is no improvement next year? Does that guarantee two years of playoffs to follow? Logic based on unfounded hope isn't sound. It isn't really logic.

We're talking about the Browns being more successful than the Texans, because they've been to the playoffs once in 12 years.

The Texans have not been in existence for 12 years. They've only been around 9 years.

That if, in that instance is not about Rainbows, Sunshines, & freak'n lollipops.

The expansion Browns took 4 seasons to make the playoffs.

So most expansion teams make it to the playoffs by their 4th season. The Texans and Seahawks are the exception, not the rule.
It's about comparing apples to apples. The Texans still have 3 years to make the playoffs once, to be considered as abyssmal of a failure as Cleveland.

steelbtexan
01-20-2011, 08:24 PM
TK tell me who sets up these guidelines and stipulations that seem to be holding the Texans franchise back?

What are some of these guidelines and stipulations?

Hookem Horns
01-20-2011, 09:44 PM
& the Browns haven't been back since. If the Texans make the playoffs the twice in the next 3 years, we'll have done better than the Browns did in 12 years.

So there's still time.

LOL ... and if the Texans win the next 7 Super Bowls they will have done better than any team in history.

Thunder, I am not sure what you do for a living however if something ever happens there you would be a perfect fit for the Texans PR department.

We're talking about the Browns being more successful than the Texans, because they've been to the playoffs once in 12 years.

The Texans have not been in existence for 12 years. They've only been around 9 years.

That if, in that instance is not about Rainbows, Sunshines, & freak'n lollipops.

It's about comparing apples to apples. The Texans still have 3 years to make the playoffs once, to be considered as abyssmal of a failure as Cleveland.

You can't compare the Texans 3 years from now because the Browns will be 3 years older too. Comparing apples to apples is comparing what the Browns had done in their first 9 years, not the other way around.

As of right now the Browns are already ahead of the Texans. They just fired their head coach, the Texans have to wait at least one more season for that to happen.

Dishman
01-20-2011, 09:49 PM
New.



What's your definition of new? Are you saying the owner is the NFL equivalent of a 10 year old child? If so, we need to find him a nanny with NFL experience so he knows to look both ways before crossing the street.

I wouldn't call the Texans "new", so I sure wouldn't consider the only owner of that franchise since its birth "new" either. How about un-enlightened?

thunderkyss
01-20-2011, 10:08 PM
TK tell me who sets up these guidelines and stipulations that seem to be holding the Texans franchise back?

What are some of these guidelines and stipulations?

I didn't say there were guidelines & stipulations holding the Texans back.

I said we don't know all the inputs McNair used to make his decisions.

thunderkyss
01-20-2011, 10:13 PM
As of right now the Browns are already ahead of the Texans. They just fired their head coach, the Texans have to wait at least one more season for that to happen.

So you would bet money that the Browns will get to the playoffs before the Texans.......... from this point forward?

Runner
01-20-2011, 10:55 PM
So you would bet money that the Browns will get to the playoffs before the Texans.......... from this point forward?

The fact that there is a legitimate discussion comparing the Browns and Texans organizations says enough.

steelbtexan
01-20-2011, 11:27 PM
I didn't say there were guidelines & stipulations holding the Texans back.

I said we don't know all the inputs McNair used to make his decisions.

So whatever guidelines or stipulations McNair has set up seems to be keeping the Texans from winning?

McNair is totaly responsible for a decade of losing Due to these stipulations?

I thought Saint BoB the benevolent walked on water?

thunderkyss
01-21-2011, 05:26 AM
The fact that there is a legitimate discussion comparing the Browns and Texans organizations says enough.

They are the two newset expansion teams, started only three years apart from each other. There will be similarities.

Double Barrel
01-21-2011, 01:31 PM
Not exactly what I'm saying. Sure the Texans could have done better.

I'm just saying it's not as easy as many people here are making it seem.

What is easy is status quo. What is easy to do is lose a lot of games but still make money. What is easy to do is make bad decisions based upon personal choices that do not put the best people available on the job.

Any one of us are just as capable of being a bad owner with regards to running a losing franchise as McNair. That really says nothing about us, though, and a lot about McNair.

As far as "not as easy as many people here are making it seem", I think ArlingtonTexan put forth a very eloquent post proving this assumption wrong.

McNair is willing to accept continuous mediocre results more than the overwhelming majority of NFL owners. This is not criticism, but just the fact of the matter proven by his history.

And I think Runner really hit the nail on the head about comparing us to the Browns. Isn't that the point of this thread to begin with? That our team can be compared to the freakin' Browns??

New.

So how long does that excuse get trotted out before even you don't buy it?

My perception is that you do not think criticism of this FO is justified. And this is a fundamental difference between us that will most likely never be rectified.

houstonspartan
01-21-2011, 03:34 PM
& the Browns haven't been back since. If the Texans make the playoffs the twice in the next 3 years, we'll have done better than the Browns did in 12 years.

So there's still time.

Sweet Jesus, I almost have no words for your level of excuse-making for this team. Wow.

thunderkyss
01-21-2011, 04:03 PM
Sweet Jesus, I almost have no words for your level of excuse-making for this team. Wow.

I'm not making an excuse. That comment was in reply to another post stating the Browns is a better organization that the Texans. I'm simply stating the Browns success is based on making the playoffs once in a 12 year period.

It is possible for the Texans to go to the playoffs 3 times in their first 12 year period.

Double Barrel
01-21-2011, 04:17 PM
I'm not making an excuse. That comment was in reply to another post stating the Browns is a better organization that the Texans. I'm simply stating the Browns success is based on making the playoffs once in a 12 year period.

It is possible for the Texans to go to the playoffs 3 times in their first 12 year period.

If that happens, man, I will be the first in line to eat my crow and admit my wrongness. And I couldn't be happier doing it as a Texans fan.

I want to be wrong about McNair/Kubiak, I really do, because that means they turned into a consistent playoff contending owner/head coach.

However, I tend to think that just because something is possible, it does not necessarily mean that it's probable.

JB
01-21-2011, 04:20 PM
If that happens, man, I will be the first in line to eat my crow and admit my wrongness. And I couldn't be happier doing it as a Texans fan.

I want to be wrong about McNair/Kubiak, I really do, because that means they turned into a consistent playoff contending owner/head coach.

However, I tend to think that just because something is possible, it does not necessarily mean that it's probable.

Wait! You mean that Publishers Clearing House Sweepstakes check is not in the mail?!!! :cry2:

Double Barrel
01-21-2011, 06:26 PM
Wait! You mean that Publishers Clearing House Sweepstakes check is not in the mail?!!! :cry2:

Oh, it's in the mail! It just doesn't have your address on it! :fingergun:

JB
01-21-2011, 07:45 PM
Oh, it's in the mail! It just doesn't have your address on it! :fingergun:

:pissed:

thunderkyss
01-21-2011, 07:47 PM
However, I tend to think that just because something is possible, it does not necessarily mean that it's probable.

Not the point.

Double Barrel
01-21-2011, 07:53 PM
Not the point.

Not your point, but it is my point. :thisbig:

Runner
01-21-2011, 10:22 PM
Not your point, but it is my point. :thisbig:

You're going to be embarrassed if the Texans win three Super Bowls next season.

eriadoc
01-22-2011, 01:09 AM
New.

What the hell does that have to do with anything? The only way "new" plays into it is if you're pointing out McNair's inexperience at building a football team. And that might hold a little water, but when someone is inexperienced at something, they need to surround themselves with people who have experience doing whatever that is.

It is possible for the Texans to go to the playoffs 3 times in their first 12 year period.

Yeah, and it was possible that the team was going to win their last XYZ number of games this year like you kept saying. Anyone with more IQ than optimism recognized and predicted that the season was done when they hit 5-7, if not before. Ignoring the obvious doesn't make the obvious go away. The Texans will not go to the playoffs 3 times in their first 12 years of existence. If you need to date-time stamp that statement, go for it. It's not a limb I'm going out on, it's a steel beam reinforced pier with freakin' anti-gravity pods on it. Reality is reality. Yes, it's technically possible that the Texans could go to the playoffs the next 3 years. It's technically possible that I could fly to South America and hook up with Shakira now that she's single. And that is exactly how far removed from the playoffs the Texans really are.

I swear man, you really do post some of the most ridiculous crap sometimes, and I know you're smart enough to only be doing it for effect. Because if you actually believe the shit you're typing ....

Well, you would need help. I'm pretty sure the Texans FO is not that delusional.

thunderkyss
01-22-2011, 12:54 PM
The Texans will not go to the playoffs 3 times in their first 12 years of existence.

Because if you actually believe the shit you're typing ....


I never said they would go to the playoffs over the next three years.

That statement was in reference to the Browns are better than the Texans....

All I'm saying is that it's possible. If they go to the play-offs twice over the next three years, they'd have done better than the Browns over their first 12 years.

If they go once in the next three years, they would be as successful.

If playoff appearances are your measure of success.

thunderkyss
01-22-2011, 12:56 PM
The Texans will not go to the playoffs 3 times in their first 12 years of existence.

I'm pretty sure the Texans FO is not that delusional.

I would be pretty disappointed if the Texans start the 2011 season thinking they won't make the play-offs. If they think they can go in 2011, why wouldn't they think they can go the two following years?

:koolaid:

Runner
01-22-2011, 06:12 PM
I never said they would go to the playoffs over the next three years.



By now we all know you never say they "will" do your outlandish what ifs. You just want us to believe that your remote scenarios support the idea that the Texans are something more than they are.