PDA

View Full Version : McNair: "We're not going to do something we think is crazy"


Pages : 1 [2]

steelbtexan
03-28-2011, 11:20 AM
& then there are the armchair GM's/coaches/owners/player fans who think they're being better fans somehow b/c they criticize every single thing organization does warranted or otherwise. Those that don't subscribe wholeheartedly to their philosophy are labeled, homers, sunshiners or "uber" fans.

What would you criticize the Texans about and the way they have gone about their business?

Mr teX
03-28-2011, 11:28 AM
No they haven't and no one outside of Texans homerville has ever pointed that out. As a matter of fact the Texans get criticized practically every year going into the season for doing hardly anything to improve their team outside of the draft.



I-cak has shown it in other threads, you just refuse to acknowledge it. Just b/c they don't sign the big name guys you or a few others like or want, doesn't mean they don't/haven't spent. There's only so many of those caliber of guys to go around. For those teams who don't sign those caliber of players, what do you think they're doing in FA? Chances are the exact same thing the texans are. & before you go off on a tirade about "well, they're all losers too" i can assure you, they're not.



You're right. We have no GM here that knows how to "sell" to players. Our GM is a half ass GM that shares the duties with Kubiak the dumbass and between both of them neither one of them knows how to paint a pretty picture for our future here. This isn't a rocket science question. It's real simple. You communicate with players or their agents and present what you plan on doing for the future to make both units top notch units and make them believe that they're an early part of that. You create excitement for that free agent to come here and be part of something huge. That, and you obviously have to pay them what they're worth at least. It's not that hard to sell a game plan to someone. If it's a guy like Nnamdi, you tell him that you're going to stack the secondary and your main focus will be to get good guys up front to rush the passer and that defense will become a huge focus since the offense is already great and that Nnamdi is going to be an essential part of that in the quest to winning a SB which is only a year or two away and that Houston will be a great place to retire.

Your mentality always seems with free agents always seems to be "we can't, we can't, we shouldn't, we shouldn't". It's a pessimistic style of thinking everything you might want to do to improve your team is a huge risk that will blow up unless it's drafting a bunch of unproven rookies to fill holes.

Go ask Morey how easy it is to lure top FA's here. reading your rationalization, we should have either Bosh or Melo here, no sweat....& he's a GM that everyone thinks is doing a good job! It's not pessimisim, it's realism. Real in the sense that short of doing something ridiculous, it's not as easy as you claim, real in the sense that it's not just 1 person/group that's the problem & real in the sense that, at the end of the day, i don't pretend to know what goes on at kirby.

Mr teX
03-28-2011, 11:33 AM
What would you criticize the Texans about and the way they have gone about their business?

Drafting, that's the only real thing imo.

FA moves...ehh too much out of their control to really criticize them for that.

Game day gaffes, Kubiak certainly has his fair share of them, but every coach does.

GP
03-28-2011, 03:10 PM
Drafting, that's the only real thing imo.

FA moves...ehh too much out of their control to really criticize them for that.

Game day gaffes, Kubiak certainly has his fair share of them, but every coach does.

So in other words, there isn't much control the coaches/GM/players have over the end result of each season?

According to you, we're just a victim of circumstance(s)? The poor drafting is the LEAST of this fan's worries because THAT is a big crap shoot to begin with. The other two things you've listed are definitely things that the Texans staff are easily responsible for, and it's not too hard to overcome.

Either a person has "it," or he doesn't. And if the top people in the organization can't fall as OUT of love with a coach and/or player as quickly as they fell IN love with 'em then there's the problem right there, IMO.

Mr teX
03-28-2011, 03:57 PM
So in other words, there isn't much control the coaches/GM/players have over the end result of each season?

According to you, we're just a victim of circumstance(s)? The poor drafting is the LEAST of this fan's worries because THAT is a big crap shoot to begin with. The other two things you've listed are definitely things that the Texans staff are easily responsible for, and it's not too hard to overcome.

Either a person has "it," or he doesn't. And if the top people in the organization can't fall as OUT of love with a coach and/or player as quickly as they fell IN love with 'em then there's the problem right there, IMO.

:vincepalm: It that what you got out of that post?

You can control what you do in the draft much more than you can in FA. You can choose the player YOU want (based on availability of course) & if you pick that player, he's gotta sign with you if he wants to play in the NFL as you have his rights...end of story, period. If you don't pick a quality player, that's on you.

The long & short of FA without delving into Restricted FA, franchise tagging & all the other crap is that teams don't have much if any control over whether the player comes to play for you or not. Sure, you can target who you want, get dressed up in your sunday best & if all else fails, beg & pleed with said targeted player but at the end of the day, said player Ultimately has the say so if he wants to come play for you or not. & as i have stated 7890756789567 times there are many reasons for that. Not just the select few you endorse to satisfy your agenda. This is why FA was such a big deal in the last player strike........The players wanted some say so in where they played & how they were dealt with.


it's not that they're "a victim of circumstance" as you incorrectly assume i put it, more of they are 1 many vying for the services of a select few & the odds are stacked against them that they will lose just by the sheer numbers of it. Again, if it was so easy as you & a few others say it is, then why was the almighty Darryl Morey unable to lure Bosh or Melo here? I mean you think he does a good job right? We had the "upper hand" with Carlos Beltran, why couldn't we keep him here?

What is with you dude. You don't think that 20 something other teams get the same results the texans get when they go after top FA's or something? You don't think that those other teams patch spots on their team once they lose out on top guys in FA?

& if you can find me a coach who hasn't screwed up in a game situation please share.

CloakNNNdagger
03-28-2011, 05:06 PM
"It's beyond my control" is an appropriate retort for an individual experiencing an epileptic seizure.........not for NFL owners, GMs and HCs experiencing one-half to one full decade of losing.

ObsiWan
03-28-2011, 05:42 PM
:vincepalm: It that what you got out of that post?

You can control what you do in the draft much more than you can in FA. You can choose the player YOU want (based on availability of course) & if you pick that player, he's gotta sign with you if he wants to play in the NFL as you have his rights...end of story, period. If you don't pick a quality player, that's on you.

The long & short of FA without delving into Restricted FA, franchise tagging & all the other crap is that teams don't have much if any control over whether the player comes to play for you or not. Sure, you can target who you want, get dressed up in your sunday best & if all else fails, beg & pleed with said targeted player but at the end of the day, said player Ultimately has the say so if he wants to come play for you or not. & as i have stated 7890756789567 times there are many reasons for that. Not just the select few you endorse to satisfy your agenda. This is why FA was such a big deal in the last player strike........The players wanted some say so in where they played & how they were dealt with.


it's not that they're "a victim of circumstance" as you incorrectly assume i put it, more of they are 1 many vying for the services of a select few & the odds are stacked against them that they will lose just by the sheer numbers of it. Again, if it was so easy as you & a few others say it is, then why was the almighty Darryl Morey unable to lure Bosh or Melo here? I mean you think he does a good job right? We had the "upper hand" with Carlos Beltran, why couldn't we keep him here?

What is with you dude. You don't think that 20 something other teams get the same results the texans get when they go after top FA's or something? You don't think that those other teams patch spots on their team once they lose out on top guys in FA?

& if you can find me a coach who hasn't screwed up in a game situation please share.

I love reasonable discussion.
:handshake:
One thing though; I'll bet those other 20 something teams who don't land the splashy free agent have reactionary fans who rant on local message boards and radio call-in shows just as we do.

And when the splashy free agent they'd "targeted" crashes and burns (see Haynesworth) they NEVER call back in and say, "damn, I was sure waaay wrong about him, I'm glad he signed over there instead of over here."

Check out this Walter Football link (http://walterfootball.com/freeagents2011recap.php) for their assessment of good, bad, and average F/A moves so far this year. Here's a taste...
http://walterfootball.com/images/fball/texansb_logo.gif Texans re-sign TE Owen Daniels: 4 years, $22 million; $6 million guaranteed - Good Move
Owen Daniels is one of the top tight ends in the NFL. He's coming off an injury, so the Texans are lucky enough to get him at a discounted rate.
Good example of not doing something "we think is crazy" IMHO. Even so, I'll bet some of you disagree with this move. "Man, they should have traded OD for some picks while he has value. Dreesen is good enough...."

and can someone tell me WTH a bunpan is...?
:bunpan:

Edit:
Dammit, I promised myself I wouldn't come back until we knew there would at least be real football this September.
http://www.desesperadaesperanca.com/images/Just%20when%20I%20thought%20I%20was%20out.jpg
Dammit!!Just when I thought I was out, they pulled me back in.

Texecutioner
03-28-2011, 07:35 PM
Go ask Morey how easy it is to lure top FA's here. reading your rationalization, we should have either Bosh or Melo here, no sweat....& he's a GM that everyone thinks is doing a good job! It's not pessimisim, it's realism. Real in the sense that short of doing something ridiculous, it's not as easy as you claim, real in the sense that it's not just 1 person/group that's the problem & real in the sense that, at the end of the day, i don't pretend to know what goes on at kirby.

And see this is literally the worst example you could have tried to use. And bringing Morey into this goes against every point you're trying to make if you're referring to me actually. Notice, you've never ever heard me criticize Morey and the Rockets haven't done jack in the NBA under Morey. However, Morey is a total bad ass. He's made all types of trades letting go of certain players at the right time and all types of moves bringing in free agents for low prices. Morey is constantly moving and shaking and beating down on other GM's. I love the guy. Look at any post of mine regarding Morey and you'll see nothing but praise and admiration from me. For you to even put Smithiak in the same breath as Morey is an insult that you should apologize for.

And the NBA is waaaaayy harder to land top stars in than the NFL is. Morey's job is ten times harder than Rick Smith and Morey is way better at it. He's a real pro GM. Morey has to operate in a league with a lack of superstars and with guaranteed contracts. GM's in the NFL get to deal with contracts where they can release players out of bad contracts. Morey is dealing with a league where players are a lot more of a crap shoot now days in a league where the small market cities get dumped on by the league where the NFL is much more balanced. Morey does a whole lot more with less and that he's always gotten admiration from me.

Texecutioner
03-28-2011, 09:18 PM
:vincepalm: It that what you got out of that post?

You can control what you do in the draft much more than you can in FA. You can choose the player YOU want (based on availability of course) & if you pick that player, he's gotta sign with you if he wants to play in the NFL as you have his rights...end of story, period. If you don't pick a quality player, that's on you.

You have everything backwards. Either that or you're just spinning things as usual. You can't control things or your destiny better with the draft. That's crazy. In free agency you know what you're getting. You've got a commodity and you've been able to see what the player has been able to do on the pro level. You have a good idea of what kind of person he is and if he conducts himself like a professional. With the draft you've got a ton of rookies that have never played on the pro level before and all of them have question marks here and there. Even if you get a guy that's talented as hell and can play, you still have to make sure that he doesn't have major character issues or thug behavior. Then if he doesn't have that, you need to make sure he can play on the pro level and start from season one and actually fill a big need on a unit. There are all sorts of rookies with all types of talent that look like a "can't miss" that end up being busts. With free agency you know what you've got if you're going after a great player. You know if he's worth that amount of money and you know what kind of impact he can make.

Also in the draft you've got no idea what players will be drafted before your picks come up. There might be one guy that fills a need. Will he there, will he not? Is there another guy at that position just as good? It's way to much of a crap shoot in the draft and in the first round where you can end up drastically over paying. The Texans have not faired well in their drafts either. They've gotten a few quality starters here and there, but ultimately they've gambled strictly on the draft have gotten little return from it. All these guys like Molden, Okam, Bennett, and multiple others could haven't been any type of help. Draft picks are overrated as hell.


it's not that they're "a victim of circumstance" as you incorrectly assume i put it, more of they are 1 many vying for the services of a select few & the odds are stacked against them that they will lose just by the sheer numbers of it. Again, if it was so easy as you & a few others say it is, then why was the almighty Darryl Morey unable to lure Bosh or Melo here? I mean you think he does a good job right? We had the "upper hand" with Carlos Beltran, why couldn't we keep him here?

And see the more you keep trying to justify lack of action on Smithiak by using other sports with completely different rules and salary cap terms show that you don't know what you're talking about at all. You're having to go towards other sports to try and paint things differently when they aren't even comparable at all. Every example from other sports you keep trying to use goes against your point as well. When you thought those up and posted them you should have realized that they make Smithiak look even worse.

Texan_Bill
03-28-2011, 09:27 PM
Round!!! Someone give me a round!! A .38 would work, a 9mm is good, or a 3 1/2", 12 gauge shotgun shell would work!! :gun:

So many geniuses, so little intelligence... :facepalm:

Surreal McCoy
03-29-2011, 02:39 AM
I see the moanfest is still in full force on TT - nice to know I haven't missed anything. People still complaining about not being guaranteed a winner within 10 years :wadepalm: Nevermind the fact the fact there was no football in Houston for six years. Maybe if you guys could think about it as a down payment of sorts, then you've only had a losing football for four years instead. Would that make it feel better, Diddums? :gun:

Lucky
03-29-2011, 05:54 AM
Maybe if you guys could think about it as a down payment of sorts, then you've only had a losing football for four years instead.
That makes me feel much better. Thanks for sharing your pretzel logic.

Mr teX
03-29-2011, 08:58 AM
And see this is literally the worst example you could have tried to use. And bringing Morey into this goes against every point you're trying to make if you're referring to me actually. Notice, you've never ever heard me criticize Morey and the Rockets haven't done jack in the NBA under Morey. However, Morey is a total bad ass. He's made all types of trades letting go of certain players at the right time and all types of moves bringing in free agents for low prices. Morey is constantly moving and shaking and beating down on other GM's. I love the guy. Look at any post of mine regarding Morey and you'll see nothing but praise and admiration from me. For you to even put Smithiak in the same breath as Morey is an insult that you should apologize for.

And the NBA is waaaaayy harder to land top stars in than the NFL is. Morey's job is ten times harder than Rick Smith and Morey is way better at it. He's a real pro GM. Morey has to operate in a league with a lack of superstars and with guaranteed contracts. GM's in the NFL get to deal with contracts where they can release players out of bad contracts. Morey is dealing with a league where players are a lot more of a crap shoot now days in a league where the small market cities get dumped on by the league where the NFL is much more balanced. Morey does a whole lot more with less and that he's always gotten admiration from me.


Ridiculous & laughable posts. WAAAYY harder to land top FA's in the NBA than it is in the NFL? Lack of superstars in the NBA? Really now?

1.) the nba's entire marketing scheme is around its superstars. I highly doubt they'd continue to undertake this strategy if there was this "lack of talent" you claim there is. Hell, one of the worst teams in the nba just had a guy set a record for double doubles in a season.

2.) The sheer numbers of it just don't add up. with 15 man rosters, i would think that the "talent" is much less diluted than it is in the NFL who have to field 53 man rosters. In addition to this, explain to me how Miami was able to land 3 of the top 10 players in the game in 1 offseason? How about NY landing Amare in that same offseason & then snagging Melo later in the same season? How about our very own rockets snagging Clyde midseason which proved to be the catalyst for our 2nd championship? Crap like that happens all the time in the NBA & many times changes the fortunes of teams in mid-season. & you really want to sit up here & say that there's a lack of talent in the NBA & that it's waayyy harder to land FA's in the NBA than it is in the NFL? Give me a break dude.


Who cares how much props you give morey & what you think of him, that's not the discussion. I posed a legit question & you came back with this mularkey. Tex, your posts are normally sound & most times make some sense...but now you're just reaching.

GP
03-29-2011, 09:19 AM
Ridiculous & laughable posts. WAAAYY harder to land top FA's in the NBA than it is in the NFL? Lack of superstars in the NBA? Really now?

1.) the nba's entire marketing scheme is around its superstars. I highly doubt they'd continue to undertake this strategy if there was this "lack of talent" you claim there is. Hell, one of the worst teams in the nba just had a guy set a record for double doubles in a season. You're trying to justify your logic, and you're sinking in your reasoning. In the NBA, you have to have a few "superstars" to accomplish anything. The Lakers are essentially Kobe Bryant and four other guys. Without him, they lose. Without LeBron, the Cavs are just five guys out there...and they're losing. Badly. The NBA and the NFL are worlds apart in terms of what makes for a good "team' as it relates to success on the playing surface. You know this to be true, but now you've thrown out an invented defense of your reasoning. Are you seriously saying that "How the NBA markets its superstars" is a valid, logical defense of your assertions? Come now. We're all adults here.

2.) The sheer numbers of it just don't add up. with 15 man rosters, i would think that the "talent" is much less diluted than it is in the NFL who have to field 53 man rosters. With only five guys on the court, versus 11 on a football field, and how the entire rules, court size/football field size, and how each game actually operates within that whole framework, YES it is possible for an NBA team to have a Kobe Bryant and just dominate the opponent. Again, slow down long enough to think about it and I know you'll wish you hadn't gone down this avenue of reasoning. You accuse me of trying to "win the debate" but I'm not the one throwing out wild examples and essentially taking this conversation into the murky waters you're dragging it into. Slow down and take a breath, think about it for a sec. That people such as texecutioner and myself would even continue to travel along the road with you on this is entertaining to the others, I would imagine. In addition to this, explain to me how Miami was able to land 3 of the top 10 players in the game in 1 offseason? Uh, maybe because they are trying to beat Kobe Bryant and it takes three superstars (Boston, for example) to get it done? What other team has come close to dethroning the guy? He's entered Michael Jordan status now, as much as I hate to even speak it out loud. How about NY landing Amare in that same offseason & then snagging Melo later in the same season? Same thing. The new "fad" is to try and get a trio of superstars to simply overwhelm the other team's single superstar. How about our very own rockets snagging Clyde midseason which proved to be the catalyst for our 2nd championship? Crap like that happens all the time in the NBA & many times changes the fortunes of teams in mid-season. & you really want to sit up here & say that it's waayyy harder to land FA's in the NBA than it is in the NFL? Give me a break dude. You can stop it with all the "pal" and "bro" and "dude" stuff. I know I started it, but notice how I stopped it and refuse to do it anymore with you. We're now into the arena of ideas, and should exclude the patronizing. Ideas are the focus, and your idea is not winning. NBA and NFL are two different beasts altogether. I'd rather try and compare MLB and NFL, since there's more in common than with the NBA.


Who cares how much props you give morey & what you think of him, that's not the discussion. Well, who brought up Morey in the first place? YOU entered his name into the discussion and now you deem that he can't be discussed? Look, once again you're trying to change the rules of this discussion once you see it's not working to your advantage. I applaud your passion, but the mechanics of your debate skills are lacking. I posed a legit question & you came back with this mularkey. Tex, your posts are normally sound & most times make some sense...but now you're just reaching. LOL. Nice wrap-up strategy: Flail your arms around, make big noise, and then accuse your opponent of doing what you've been doing this whole time. A wise man once said, "When you find yourself in a hole you can't get out of...stop digging." Are you going to continue digging until you reach China? You've dragged this conversation down so many twisting roads and darkened alleys, man...well, where were we to begin with???

My comments are in red.

El Tejano
03-29-2011, 09:32 AM
We're not going to do something we think is crazy. We're going to do something that's just plain stuipid!

GP
03-29-2011, 09:32 AM
I wonder if we're approaching :locked: territory?

Mr teX
03-29-2011, 09:35 AM
My comments are in red.

:vincepalm: Your reasoning is flat out garbage. LOL at Kobe & four other guys. Yeah, Pau Gasol is straight up trash. I guess with your reasoning it was Jordan & 4 other guys too then huh? Scottie Pippen was pretty much just along for the ride.


I give up, you win..it's clear you're too caught up in your agenda to think with any kind of reasonable common sense.

disaacks3
03-29-2011, 09:37 AM
I see the moanfest is still in full force on TT - nice to know I haven't missed anything. People still complaining about not being guaranteed a winner within 10 years :wadepalm: Nevermind the fact the fact there was no football in Houston for six years. Maybe if you guys could think about it as a down payment of sorts, then you've only had a losing football for four years instead. Would that make it feel better, Diddums? :gun: I never asked to be "guaranteed" anything. I would like McNair to step out of his comfort zone and hire guys with successful records and a decent amount of experience. While we're at it, how about signing Pro bowl caliber FAs when they're available? Keeping Kubiak after last year and stating "we're on the right track" isn't conducive to keeping a loyal fanbase happy.

HoustonFrog
03-29-2011, 09:39 AM
:vincepalm: Your reasoning is flat out garbage. LOL at Kobe & four other guys. Yeah, Pau Gasol is straight up trash. I guess with your reasoning it was Jordan & 4 other guys too then huh? Scottie Pippen was pretty much just along for the ride.


I give up, you win..it's clear you're too caught up in your agenda to think with any kind of reasonable common sense.

I'm not taking sides but you do know you are pretty much ignoring your own sunshiney posts no matter how much you try and spin it. That is why it goes around and around. Reread this one and you'll see why you got slammed. You pretty much left football results in the hands of the unseen football gods with this one. With all due respect of course. :)

Drafting, that's the only real thing imo.

FA moves...ehh too much out of their control to really criticize them for that.

Game day gaffes, Kubiak certainly has his fair share of them, but every coach does.

Ok, back to religion or something else for me

Mr teX
03-29-2011, 10:24 AM
I'm not taking sides but you do know you are pretty much are ignoring your own sunshiney posts no matter how much you try and spin it. That is why it goes around and around. Reread this one and you'll see why you got slammed. You pretty much left football results in the hands of the unseen football gods with this one. With all due respect of course. :)


Ok, back to religion or something else for me

I'm not spinning anything.

I & many others have acknowleged that Kubiak & Smith have done poorly.

I & many others have acknowledged that the organization hasn't exactly brought in great pro bowlers in via FA.

It can't be disputed, its fact.

Where the disagreement is is that these guys flat out refuse to acknowledge any other reasons for this teams failures other than what's on their plate....."the reason why this or that isn't happening is b/c _____________ isn't doing this or that." Doesn't matter if It has been shown to them in a number of different ways that some of their notions are either flat out wrong (Mcnair being cheap) or that they possibly couldn't know due to them being outside of the FO over on Kirby. It basically alll connected for them & that its total out of the realm of possibility that there are other reasons outside of their control that yield more influence than the ones they have in their heads why this or that doesn't happen.


It's funny really. I've got 1 guy calling my posts & way of looking at things as "sunshiney" & another guy in the same thread calling them "pessimistic".

Second Honeymoon
03-29-2011, 01:59 PM
I see the moanfest is still in full force on TT - nice to know I haven't missed anything. People still complaining about not being guaranteed a winner within 10 years :wadepalm: Nevermind the fact the fact there was no football in Houston for six years. Maybe if you guys could think about it as a down payment of sorts, then you've only had a losing football for four years instead. Would that make it feel better, Diddums? :gun:

nice rationalization. the good ole 'at least we have football' logic. i think Houston has some of the friendliest people in the country but absolutely some of the worst sports fans in the country. just clueless sheeple fans who think the idea of being a good fan is supporting anything with Houston on its jersey irregardless of performance. the same fans who think Bagwell is HOF worthy. the same fans who made excuse after excuse for Carr, McNair, and Kubiak/Smith. the same fans who ran Bud out of town even though he had good teams but race to McNair's defense even though Bud's product was FARRRRRRRRRR superior to this pile of crap we call the Texans.

Don't get me wrong. Bud was an ahole for leaving but don't act like Bob is some sort of football savior. We have the same amount of playoff appearances with the Texans that we had when we didn't have any football team at all.

Please Houston sports fan. Some of you need to grow a pair and maybe get out of your collective cocoon and wake up and smell the embarassment that is Texans football.

Second Honeymoon
03-29-2011, 02:05 PM
I never asked to be "guaranteed" anything. I would like McNair to step out of his comfort zone and hire guys with successful records and a decent amount of experience. While we're at it, how about signing Pro bowl caliber FAs when they're available? Keeping Kubiak after last year and stating "we're on the right track" isn't conducive to keeping a loyal fanbase happy.

way to put it in perspective. these homering yayhoos just don't get it. the same guys who thought David jsut needed an Offensive Line. Remember this one. 'David is great and isn't the problem. You can't throw the football when you are lying on your back'. yeah the same local yokels who said that are now the same local yokels who act like Kubiak is hampered by anything other than him and Rick's utter incompetence. can't you guys listen. gary, the messiah, said it himself. 'Its on me."

Gary is an embarassment and just go back and watch the 4th and 1 1/2 play that he thought was 4th and 1/2 yard. that NEVER happens to anyone else in this league. it happened to Gary. We came from behind to lose more than ANY OTHER TEAM IN HISTORY. That is on Gary. His inability to attract defensive talent coaching or players is on him. he is just too afraid to go out of his little cocoon of suckitude to get defensive coaches. He might have to share his 'secrets' with them. I thought the idea was to win the game not hire cronies and lose. ugh, gary you suck.

some people will just never get it. they got their Texans underoos and their pompoms (Joe Texan comes to mind) and are nothing more than myopic cheerleaders who are still parading around celebrating 9-7 and the 'genius' that is Kubiak.

what is funny is that if 5-7 four years in a row doesn't show you that a team and its leader sucks...what the hell will. I guess some people have to have a 2-14 season before they will admit that the Texans suck. And yes the Texans suck....and its not gonna get any better, in fact, probably worse....and then everyone will act like they knew it all along when in fact, they were homering with the rest of the yayhoos around here.

just a pathetic pathetic excuse for a team if you ask me. and it starts up top. Bob, Gary, AND Rick suck.

Mr teX
03-29-2011, 02:20 PM
nice rationalization. the good ole 'at least we have football' logic. i think Houston has some of the friendliest people in the country but absolutely some of the worst sports fans in the country. just clueless sheeple fans who think the idea of being a good fan is supporting anything with Houston on its jersey irregardless of performance. the same fans who think Bagwell is HOF worthy. the same fans who made excuse after excuse for Carr, McNair, and Kubiak/Smith. the same fans who ran Bud out of town even though he had good teams but race to McNair's defense even though Bud's product was FARRRRRRRRRR superior to this pile of crap we call the Texans.

Don't get me wrong. Bud was an ahole for leaving but don't act like Bob is some sort of football savior. We have the same amount of playoff appearances with the Texans that we had when we didn't have any football team at all.

Please Houston sports fan. Some of you need to grow a pair and maybe get out of your collective cocoon and wake up and smell the embarassment that is Texans football.

You sure got that right...starting with you.

Texecutioner
03-29-2011, 02:23 PM
Ridiculous & laughable posts. WAAAYY harder to land top FA's in the NBA than it is in the NFL? Lack of superstars in the NBA? Really now?

Yeah, that's what I said. Where are the superstars on teams like the Pacers, Bucks, Rockets, Raptors, Warriors, Sixers, Wolves, Pistons, and so many other teams. Probably about 75% of the league is missing a true franchise player. The NBA is lacking them big time and any argument otherwise is just silly when you look at the few teams who have at least one and the majority that don't have one at all.

1.) the nba's entire marketing scheme is around its superstars. I highly doubt they'd continue to undertake this strategy if there was this "lack of talent" you claim there is. Hell, one of the worst teams in the nba just had a guy set a record for double doubles in a season.

Are you honestly acting like a that guy is a superstar?? A guy who gets double doubles, but isn't a top flight scorer? Was Dennis Rodman a superstar to you as well then, because that's not the type of player I'm talking about. I'm talking about franchise players that have the ability to lead your team deep in the post season.

2.) The sheer numbers of it just don't add up. with 15 man rosters, i would think that the "talent" is much less diluted than it is in the NFL who have to field 53 man rosters. In addition to this, explain to me how Miami was able to land 3 of the top 10 players in the game in 1 offseason? How about NY landing Amare in that same offseason & then snagging Melo later in the same season? How about our very own rockets snagging Clyde midseason which proved to be the catalyst for our 2nd championship? Crap like that happens all the time in the NBA & many times changes the fortunes of teams in mid-season. & you really want to sit up here & say that there's a lack of talent in the NBA & that it's waayyy harder to land FA's in the NBA than it is in the NFL? Give me a break dude.

You see now you're just drowning by trying to go as far back as to 1995. Lol!! That was a whole different type of league 15 years ago. The NBA isn't nearly the same when we got Clyde. I'm talking about "right now" and the NBA has a lot more teams where people hardly even know who plays for them and can't even name 3 players on the majority of these teams other than Boston, Orlando, LA, NY, Dallas, Miami, and SA. The rest of the league has a bunch of no name guys and old fading "has been" types of guys that were superstars a long time ago that are merely average players now days. Hardly anyone can even name who the top 3 picks of the draft were in the last 5 years. The NBA is hurting for talent and for a new generation of stars like crazy. The NFL is stacked with 2 full rounds of top talent.




Who cares how much props you give morey & what you think of him, that's not the discussion. I posed a legit question & you came back with this mularkey. Tex, your posts are normally sound & most times make some sense...but now you're just reaching.

Oh, so now it's not okay to discuss Morey anymore? Lol! So when you figure out that using him as an example only hurt your argument you don't want him to come into context anymore than ha? Like I pointed out before "since you asked" Morey works under a much different and more challenging market for players and he's a lot more busy around the league either cutting deals or busting his ass trying to cut deals with other teams. He's gained a reputation around the league for being a swindler actually. There is always reports about Morey trying to pull something off with a trade or on a negotiation with different players. He does a ton for me to know that he's out doing everything he can and that he's committed and Les Alexander has never been cheap. Smithiaknair come out and say publicly that our strategy is "to build through the draft" and "We're not going to do anything crazy". That's their own words. As for their actions, their refusal to do everything possible to acquire proven players to fill holes has hurt the Texans every year that Smithiak has been here. The results are proof of that.

Mr teX
03-29-2011, 02:36 PM
Yeah, that's what I said. Where are the superstars on teams like the Pacers, Bucks, Rockets, Raptors, Warriors, Sixers, Wolves, Pistons, and so many other teams. Probably about 75% of the league is missing a true franchise player. The NBA is lacking them big time and any argument otherwise is just silly when you look at the few teams who have at least one and the majority that don't have one at all.



Are you honestly acting like a that guy is a superstar?? A guy who gets double doubles, but isn't a top flight scorer? Was Dennis Rodman a superstar to you as well then, because that's not the type of player I'm talking about. I'm talking about franchise players that have the ability to lead your team deep in the post season.



You see now you're just drowning by trying to go as far back as to 1995. Lol!! That was a whole different type of league 15 years ago. The NBA isn't nearly the same when we got Clyde. I'm talking about "right now" and the NBA has a lot more teams where people hardly even know who plays for them and can't even name 3 players on the majority of these teams other than Boston, Orlando, LA, NY, Dallas, Miami, and SA. The rest of the league has a bunch of no name guys and old fading "has been" types of guys that were superstars a long time ago that are merely average players now days. Hardly anyone can even name who the top 3 picks of the draft were in the last 5 years. The NBA is hurting for talent and for a new generation of stars like crazy. The NFL is stacked with 2 full rounds of top talent.






Oh, so now it's not okay to discuss Morey anymore? Lol! So when you figure out that using him as an example only hurt your argument you don't want him to come into context anymore than ha? Like I pointed out before "since you asked" Morey works under a much different and more challenging market for players and he's a lot more busy around the league either cutting deals or busting his ass trying to cut deals with other teams. He's gained a reputation around the league for being a swindler actually. There is always reports about Morey trying to pull something off with a trade or on a negotiation with different players. He does a ton for me to know that he's out doing everything he can and that he's committed and Les Alexander has never been cheap. Smithiaknair come out and say publicly that our strategy is "to build through the draft" and "We're not going to do anything crazy". That's their own words. As for their actions, their refusal to do everything possible to acquire proven players to fill holes has hurt the Texans every year that Smithiak has been here. The results are proof of that.

Doesn't hurt my argument, you just can't face the fact that you have no real retort for it. Luring FA's is the same across all sports basically. Go after the guy & hope the guy chooses you. It's tough to do...period. Along with the texans FO, there are 20 something other teams who don't succeed in luring top FA's to their teams. Why you insist on thinking the texans somehow are exempt from the odds these other teams face is beyond me.

You going off into all kinds of garbage about lack of talent across the nba just proves my point. Talk about spin..

Like i told GP, its obvious you're too far into your agenda to really use any shred of common sense so congratulations :clap:...you win...:thumbup..... im outta here...:brickwall:

ArlingtonTexan
03-29-2011, 02:45 PM
I wonder if we're approaching :locked: territory?

Not quite they are still attacking the arguments at this point, even though it has veered from normal "how much do you think the Texans suck" or "which part of the Texans suck more" programming.

Texecutioner
03-29-2011, 02:57 PM
Doesn't hurt my argument, you just can't face the fact that you have no real retort for it. Luring FA's is the same across all sports basically. Go after the guy & hope the guy chooses you. It's tough to do...period. Along with the texans FO, there are 20 something other teams who don't succeed in luring top FA's to their teams. Why you insist on thinking the texans somehow are exempt from the odds these other teams face is beyond me.

You going off into all kinds of garbage about lack of talent across the nba just proves my point. Talk about spin..

Like i told GP, its obvious you're too far into your agenda to really use any shred of common sense so congratulations :clap:...you win...:thumbup..... im outta here...:brickwall:

You talk as if you haven't been the guy who has been dead wrong for several off seasons now. Are you forgetting history here bud? You've said this same song and dance and yada yada going on several years now while the Texans lack of moves have only hurt them and have already been proven wrong. I don't think you really have the credibility at this point say that anyone's arguments lack common sense or to call it spin. At least have a track record of being correct to some degree or for having stances that were backed up by certain results. I've at least got several years of being backed up by Smithiak's suckitude to back up my claims and my observations as being accurate. All Smithiak has ever done is prove me right, and that's why we're still having this ridiculous conversation going into year 6 now.

And please stop talking about the NBA comparison should be thrown out, because you were the one that tried to bring it up in the first place. Either make your point and stick to your examples or just throw in the towel, but don't sit here and bring Morey and the NBA into this and turn right around and tell me not to talk about it when you realize it wouldn't support your argument. That's just childish.

TexCanada
03-29-2011, 04:43 PM
Comparing GMs is extremely difficult. Not only is it very different from sport to sport, it is also VERY different from team to team within the same sport. All I have to do is look at my favorite team in each sport to see the major differences.

Hockey: Calgary is a hockey-mad market, luring FAs is relatively easy as long as you meet their asking price (or close to it). Compare this to a GMs job with Florida and it is completely different.

Basketball: Toronto will never ever get a big name FA unless they are fresh out of Europe. (and if they are fresh out of Europe, they are probably not a big name FA anyway)

Basketball: Toronto (see reasoning for basketball)

Football: Texans. Not the ideal market for FAs, but certainly not a bad option either.

Smithiak + McNair don't have an impossible task here. Its not easy, but a good GM could create a team here that FAs would love to go to. The only thing we are missing is winning.

steelbtexan
03-29-2011, 05:04 PM
Doesn't hurt my argument, you just can't face the fact that you have no real retort for it. Luring FA's is the same across all sports basically. Go after the guy & hope the guy chooses you. It's tough to do...period. Along with the texans FO, there are 20 something other teams who don't succeed in luring top FA's to their teams. Why you insist on thinking the texans somehow are exempt from the odds these other teams face is beyond me.

You going off into all kinds of garbage about lack of talent across the nba just proves my point. Talk about spin..

Like i told GP, its obvious you're too far into your agenda to really use any shred of common sense so congratulations :clap:...you win...:thumbup..... im outta here...:brickwall:

If Rick and Gary cant lure top FA's then they are failing at that part of their jobs and should be fired and replaced by somebody that has a proven track record of being able to lure FA's. (Parcells,Gruden etc.....)

If the job of luuring top tier is to hard for Rick and Gary then they should be fired and replaced by somebody that is capable of luring said FA's. Or maybe just maybe BoB isn't interesed in spend the $$$$ that it takes to lure the top tier FA's to Houston.

Which one is the more plausible theory?

thunderkyss
03-29-2011, 05:16 PM
I get frustration and disappointment. What SH was communicating is disdain. I do not understand supporting things that one hates. It just doesn't make sense to me. I'm not saying that he is objectively wrong to continue rooting for the Texans. I'm simply attempting to understand the appeal.

I don't like liver. I do not, and will not support an establishment that keeps pushing liver on my plate.

Won't do it. Doesn't make sense.

thunderkyss
03-29-2011, 05:26 PM
Considering Bob McNair is both owner and founder, I'm not sure how that is true.


I'm sorry you don't get that, but our motivations aren't up for debate or your scrutiny. The issue here is the job being done by the Texans organization, by Bob McNair. In regards to building a winning team, they suck. Now, you can believe otherwise if you must. But the facts speak for themselves.

I get it. Houston Football is bigger than Bob McNair.

Bob McNair isn't Houston, Bob McNair isn't football. We were looking for a team before Bob stumbled into Houston.

thunderkyss
03-29-2011, 05:33 PM
last year, I stopped spending my money on them even after a 9-7 year. that just shows that I expect more than what they have given us as a fanbase. i love the idea of having a Houston football team but there is no way I am going to be happy with the product they have delivered. no way at all.


I joined the original board in 2002... stopped participating after 2004.... pretty much followed the Texans from a far.

They fired Capers, I came back.

I vowed never to leave again.


Die



Hard

Carr Bombed
03-29-2011, 05:36 PM
I see the moanfest is still in full force on TT - nice to know I haven't missed anything. People still complaining about not being guaranteed a winner within 10 years :wadepalm: Nevermind the fact the fact there was no football in Houston for six years. Maybe if you guys could think about it as a down payment of sorts, then you've only had a losing football for four years instead. Would that make it feel better, Diddums? :gun:

:spit:


This is sig worthy.

GP
03-29-2011, 05:46 PM
You sure got that right...starting with you.

(Sigh)

Why did you do that?

thunderkyss
03-29-2011, 05:50 PM
Many FAs don't consider us because we have shown no commitment to winning

What has Greenbay done in the last 6 years to show a commitment to winning?

Veteran head coach? Nope....
I personally think his resume was pathetic to tell you the truth.


Top tier FAs? Nope....
Am I wrong?


Better coach? Unquestionably.

Carr Bombed
03-29-2011, 05:59 PM
What has Greenbay done in the last 6 years to show a commitment to winning?

Veteran head coach? Nope....
I personally think his resume was pathetic to tell you the truth.


Top tier FAs? Nope....
Am I wrong?


Better coach? Unquestionably.

Green Bay has done a lot to show a commitment to winning. They can't spend a lot of money, because they're in one of the smallest markets in America, but it doesn't mean they don't show a commitment to winning.

steelbtexan
03-29-2011, 06:11 PM
Green Bay Signed Woodson in FA.

They were willing to take a chance on Rodgers and risk a fan revolt.

They drafted Raji high in the 1st rd. Then traded back into the late 1st rd for Mathews in the 2009 draft. Thereby having to pay 2 players 1st rd slot $$$$.

When Rick and Gary do something this agressive it will be the 1st time. Although this would be the yr to make a trade like that if it was eer going to happen. With the switch to a 3-4.

Texecutioner
03-29-2011, 06:47 PM
Green Bay Signed Woodson in FA.

How he didn't know that is beyond me. Woodson was one of the highest name top free agents on the market that year. The Packers had to pay him a lot of money as well and then extended him and they already had pretty good corners at the time. They saw a a very good corner and they went after him and it's paid off big time and Woodson wasn't even close to the corner that Nnamdi is.

They were willing to take a chance on Rodgers and risk a fan revolt.

And that there was about as bold as you could get. They did get a fan revolt. A huge one at that, and it paid off big time. They thought about their future and they've already got a SB.

GP
03-29-2011, 07:02 PM
Green Bay has done a lot to show a commitment to winning. They can't spend a lot of money, because they're in one of the smallest markets in America, but it doesn't mean they don't show a commitment to winning.

They had to show their books, too, because they're the only team in the NFL owned by the fans.

I might just become a Green Bay fan (as a hobby, since the Texans are like working all day at a failing, miserably managed company). Gotta' have a hobby, ya know!

Green Bay is owned by the fans, has to have TRUE transparency in their financial handling(s), and has not only been to the playoffs but has actually won at least ONE Super Bowl.

I'm becoming "franchise-confused" all of a sudden. :(

Texan_Bill
03-29-2011, 07:39 PM
They had to show their books, too, because they're the only team in the NFL owned by the fans.

I might just become a Green Bay fan (as a hobby, since the Texans are like working all day at a failing, miserably managed company). Gotta' have a hobby, ya know!

Green Bay is owned by the fans, has to have TRUE transparency in their financial handling(s), and has not only been to the playoffs but has actually won at least ONE Super Bowl.

I'm becoming "franchise-confused" all of a sudden. :(

Mormon hater!!! :hides:


I kid, I kid... It's called levity! ;)

Rey
03-29-2011, 08:22 PM
They had to show their books, too, because they're the only team in the NFL owned by the fans.

I might just become a Green Bay fan (as a hobby, since the Texans are like working all day at a failing, miserably managed company). Gotta' have a hobby, ya know!

Green Bay is owned by the fans, has to have TRUE transparency in their financial handling(s), and has not only been to the playoffs but has actually won at least ONE Super Bowl.

I'm becoming "franchise-confused" all of a sudden. :(


I AM a Greenbay fan.

My loyalties are with the Texans, but I am a fan of that franchise. I thought that they had a really good team at the beginning of the season so it was really cool to see them put it all together and parlay that into a Superbowl victory.

Really I don't even see how it's a debate about the Texans and what they have been about.

They aren't aggressive, don't take big chances...So yeah, "Not doing anything crazy" is just par for the course. I really didn't expect McNair to say anything else. We are one of the slowest moving organization in the league. Our coaches has overall sucked for a majority of the franchises tenure...

I honestly don't know how much McNair sucks at what he does, but I do know that what he's done so far hasn't yielded good results....So...if the shoe fits...

CloakNNNdagger
03-29-2011, 08:28 PM
What has Greenbay done in the last 6 years to show a commitment to winning?

Veteran head coach? Nope....
I personally think his resume was pathetic to tell you the truth.



Top tier FAs? Nope....
Am I wrong?


Better coach? Unquestionably.

What else is there to do in Green Bay?

thunderkyss
03-29-2011, 10:27 PM
& then there are the armchair GM's/coaches/owners/player fans who think they're being better fans somehow b/c they criticize every single thing organization does warranted or otherwise. Those that don't subscribe wholeheartedly to their philosophy are labeled, homers, sunshiners or "uber" fans.

What gets me, is that no matter how much history has shown that their ideas are no more a sure fire guarantee for success than what McNair did, they believe if McNair had took their "advice" we'd have multiple SuperBowls by now.

McNair should have hired Cowher, or Gruden, or Fisher, or some other "proven" head coach.

Never mind Jimmy Johnson in Miami, Gibbs in Washington, Vermeil or Martz or any number of coaches who have gone on to do "not so well" with other franchises.

Never mind that no Super Bowl winning coach has ever got a second team to the Super Bowl.

Never mind that Tomlinson wasn't a proven head coach.

Never Mind that Sean Peyton was never a head coach prior to the Saints, or that he didn't bring in a "proven" DC for his first 4 years.

Never mind that Mike McCarthy had no success whatsoever prior to being a head coach.

Surreal McCoy
03-29-2011, 10:33 PM
...the same fans who ran Bud out of town even though he had good teams ...

WOW! :wow: I mean...takes a lot to make me speechless, but...dear me

nytexan
03-29-2011, 10:37 PM
Never mind that no Super Bowl winning coach has ever got a second team to the Super Bowl. .

Does Mike Holmgrem ring a bell

Dutchrudder
03-29-2011, 10:40 PM
Does Mike Holmgrem ring a bell

He means 'head coach', not just a coach of a team. Plenty of coaches out there have won multiple super bowls with different teams, but no head coach has won one with two teams.

thunderkyss
03-29-2011, 10:42 PM
way to put it in perspective. these homering yayhoos just don't get it. the same guys who thought David jsut needed an Offensive Line. Remember this one. 'David is great and isn't the problem. You can't throw the football when you are lying on your back'. yeah the same local yokels who said that are now the same local yokels who act like Kubiak is hampered by anything other than him and Rick's utter incompetence. can't you guys listen. gary, the messiah, said it himself. 'Its on me."


Can anyone who believed in Carr & continues to believe in Kubiak please stand up? I'd love to know who SH is talking about everytime he brings this up.

I was the Anti-Carr & the Pro-Kubiak...

I don't know anyone who is pro-kubiak now. I think the "sunshine/koolaid" guys are in the "give it a rest, what's done is done, let's move one" group now. & the soapers are in the "No, I'm not finished crying about my sore panaynay yet." group.

thunderkyss
03-29-2011, 10:51 PM
Green Bay Signed Woodson in FA.

They were willing to take a chance on Rodgers and risk a fan revolt.

They drafted Raji high in the 1st rd. Then traded back into the late 1st rd for Mathews in the 2009 draft. Thereby having to pay 2 players 1st rd slot $$$$.

When Rick and Gary do something this agressive it will be the 1st time. Although this would be the yr to make a trade like that if it was eer going to happen. With the switch to a 3-4.

Maybe not Rick & Gary, but the Texans did draft Travis Johnson early in the first, then traded back in to get Babin also in the first round.

thunderkyss
03-29-2011, 11:10 PM
How he didn't know that is beyond me. Woodson was one of the highest name top free agents on the market that year. The Packers had to pay him a lot of money as well and then extended him and they already had pretty good corners at the time. They saw a a very good corner and they went after him and it's paid off big time and Woodson wasn't even close to the corner that Nnamdi is.


Wow, one whole big time FA move more than the Texans...... That is most definitely a much better commitment to win than the Texans have shown.


And that there was about as bold as you could get. They did get a fan revolt. A huge one at that, and it paid off big time. They thought about their future and they've already got a SB.

I don't know how huge it was. I thought most of the Packers fans were ready to move on from Favre & were hoping he really would retire "that" time. I think they were more upset about him playing for a team other than the Packers, than they were about the Packers letting him go.

Drafting Rogers in the first & letting him sit behind Favre for a few years, is about on the same level (to me) as trading two 2nd round picks & signing Matt Schaub, who I believe was the top QB available at the time.

2006: We get two of the top 10 FA DEs (http://profootball.scout.com/a.z?s=127&p=9&c=12&nid=83&lnid=83&rc=16&pid=23&yr=2006) (Kalu & Weaver). 4 of the top 8 stayed with their original teams.

2009: Suggs and Peppers didn't move (http://profootball.scout.com/a.z?s=127&p=9&c=12&nid=83&lnid=83&rc=16&pid=23&yr=2009) ( I think they were franchised) There was Jason Taylor & Antonio Smith, we got Antonio. We also signed Cato June, and franchised Dunta Robinson.

FA wise, I think we've been at least as active as Greenbay.

TexCanada
03-29-2011, 11:16 PM
Wow, one whole big time FA move more than the Texans...... That is most definitely a much better commitment to win than the Texans have shown.


I don't understand the argument here. Green Bay has obviously made the right moves, while the Texans have made the wrong moves. Therefore, the Pack should continue with what they are doing, while the Texans should be trying new things. Does it really matter how many FAs one team has signed compared to another?

steelbtexan
03-29-2011, 11:53 PM
I don't understand the argument here. Green Bay has obviously made the right moves, while the Texans have made the wrong moves. Therefore, the Pack should continue with what they are doing, while the Texans should be trying new things. Does it really matter how many FAs one team has signed compared to another?

Yep

But that doesn't fit the business as usual mode around here.

I dont understand why fans wouldn't want BoB to spend $$$$ necessaey to get the best FA's and draft picks possible. Thereby improving the talent level to a point that not even Gary could screw it up.

Double Barrel
03-30-2011, 11:06 AM
Never mind that no Super Bowl winning coach has ever got a second team to the Super Bowl.


Bill Parcells was the head coach of the New York Giants that won Super Bowls XXI and XXV and the New England Patriots that lost Super Bowl XXXI.

Mike Holmgren was the head coach of the Green Bay Packers that won Super Bowl XXXI and the Seattle Seahawks that lost Super Bowl XL.

So there's two coaches that prove your statement incorrect.

Other head coaches that have taken two teams to the Super Bowl:

Don Shula was the head coach the Baltimore Colts that lost Super Bowl III and of the Miami Dolphins that lost Super Bowl VI and won Super Bowls VII and VIII.

Dan Reeves was the head coach of the Denver Broncos that lost Super Bowls XXI, XXII, and XXIV and the Atlanta Falcons that lost Super Bowl XXXIII.

Dick Vermeil was the head coach of the Philadelphia Eagles that lost Super Bowl XV and the St. Louis Rams that won Super Bowl XXXIV.

It cracks me up that folks will try to use the above examples to dismiss Cowher in support of Kubiak. I'd take my chances with head coaches that have won a Super Bowl over the Beavis and Butthead we have right now, even if we end up losing a Super Bowl. But that's JMO.

HoustonFrog
03-30-2011, 11:15 AM
Bill Parcells was the head coach of the New York Giants that won Super Bowls XXI and XXV and the New England Patriots that lost Super Bowl XXXI.

Mike Holmgren was the head coach of the Green Bay Packers that won Super Bowl XXXI and the Seattle Seahawks that lost Super Bowl XL.

So there's two coaches that prove your statement incorrect.

Other head coaches that have taken two teams to the Super Bowl:

Don Shula was the head coach the Baltimore Colts that lost Super Bowl III and of the Miami Dolphins that lost Super Bowl VI and won Super Bowls VII and VIII.

Dan Reeves was the head coach of the Denver Broncos that lost Super Bowls XXI, XXII, and XXIV and the Atlanta Falcons that lost Super Bowl XXXIII.

Dick Vermeil was the head coach of the Philadelphia Eagles that lost Super Bowl XV and the St. Louis Rams that won Super Bowl XXXIV.

It cracks me up that folks will try to use the above examples to dismiss Cowher in support of Kubiak. I'd take my chances with head coaches that have won a Super Bowl over the Beavis and Butthead we have right now, even if we end up losing a Super Bowl. But that's JMO.

Thanks for this. Sometimes I'm convinced that people want to take a side just to do it. This is similar to the "Gary could be like Landry" argument despite the fact that Landry was a guy who was creating defenses..a genius at the time and was starting in a whole different era, time and place. Anyone who thinks a guy like Cowher...or other names...wouldn't bring in FAs, bring a different attitude and change the culture are fooling themselves. The culture now is 9-7 deserves a banner and be a good kid.

And back out again...proceed.

dalemurphy
03-30-2011, 11:46 AM
Thanks for this. Sometimes I'm convinced that people want to take a side just to do it. This is similar to the "Gary could be like Landry" argument despite the fact that Landry was a guy who was creating defenses..a genius at the time and was starting in a whole different era, time and place. Anyone who thinks a guy like Cowher...or other names...wouldn't bring in FAs, bring a different attitude and change the culture are fooling themselves. The culture now is 9-7 deserves a banner and be a good kid. As you said, I'd much rather see a team get to the playoffs and make a run then be afraid and hope a guy finally gets it.

And back out again...proceed.



I agree with you that a coaching change, if the right one, could certainly alter the culture, create excitement and higher expectations which would infect many areas of the organization. However, in case you didn't notice, there were a lot of head coaching jobs available and the highly sought after coaches with head coaching experience, like Cowher, still don't have a job. Based on your opinion of the Texans organization, surely you don't believe it is because the top guys are holding out for the Texans? In other words, those guys weren't interested in coaching this season (likely do to the CBA issues)...

Because of the CBA issues and the lack of available quality coaches with NFL experience, I think McNair thought it better to upgrade the defense and keep Kubiak in place rather than fire Kubiak and risk upheaval and being unable to acquire an elite coach. Whether you agree with that strategy or not, it is logically sound and reasonable.

Double Barrel
03-30-2011, 11:49 AM
I agree with you that a coaching change, if the right one, could certainly alter the culture, create excitement and higher expectations which would infect many areas of the organization. However, in case you didn't notice, there were a lot of head coaching jobs available and the highly sought after coaches with head coaching experience, like Cowher, still don't have a job.

Because they can afford to be picky. Why would Cowher want to take a crap job with a crap team? He's got nothing to prove, so why not wait?

Your premise proves absolutely nothing and borders on straw man territory.

Texecutioner
03-30-2011, 12:03 PM
Because they can afford to be picky. Why would Cowher want to take a crap job with a crap team? He's got nothing to prove, so why not wait?

Your premise proves absolutely nothing and borders on straw man territory.

That's exactly what Cowher has been doing. Waiting for the right job to open which is another reason why I like the guy, because he's smart and isn't dumb enough to take over some job that will blow up in his face. Cowher almost did take that Buffalo job two years ago though, which is what really tripped me out at the time. He was out there for like a week negotiating with Ralph Wilson of all people and when Wilson wouldn't commit to spending a certain amount of money to bring in quality players, Cowher said no thanks and wasn't going to screw himself to a job where the owner didn't seem committed to building a winner. Good for Cowher. I think he'd love to work here just like many other coaches since Bob Mcnair is such a softie for his coaching staff.

Dutchrudder
03-30-2011, 12:21 PM
That's exactly what Cowher has been doing. Waiting for the right job to open which is another reason why I like the guy, because he's smart and isn't dumb enough to take over some job that will blow up in his face. Cowher almost did take that Buffalo job two years ago though, which is what really tripped me out at the time. He was out there for like a week negotiating with Ralph Wilson of all people and when Wilson wouldn't commit to spending a certain amount of money to bring in quality players, Cowher said no thanks and wasn't going to screw himself to a job where the owner didn't seem committed to building a winner. Good for Cowher. I think he'd love to work here just like many other coaches since Bob Mcnair is such a softie for his coaching staff.

Given the general tendency for coaches to want to control the entire franchise, Houston would be ideal for a coach looking to have little oversight and accountability to the owner. It's not necessarily a knock on Bob, but it can be attractive to a prospective coach who wants to get involved in every aspect of the franchise.

HoustonFrog
03-30-2011, 12:21 PM
I agree with you that a coaching change, if the right one, could certainly alter the culture, create excitement and higher expectations which would infect many areas of the organization. However, in case you didn't notice, there were a lot of head coaching jobs available and the highly sought after coaches with head coaching experience, like Cowher, still don't have a job. Based on your opinion of the Texans organization, surely you don't believe it is because the top guys are holding out for the Texans? In other words, those guys weren't interested in coaching this season (likely do to the CBA issues)...

Because of the CBA issues and the lack of available quality coaches with NFL experience, I think McNair thought it better to upgrade the defense and keep Kubiak in place rather than fire Kubiak and risk upheaval and being unable to acquire an elite coach. Whether you agree with that strategy or not, it is logically sound and reasonable.

Because they can afford to be picky. Why would Cowher want to take a crap job with a crap team? He's got nothing to prove, so why not wait?

Your premise proves absolutely nothing and borders on straw man territory.

DB answered it and Tex added on but to add my own....

There were rumors that Cowher wanted 3 jobs. Two had coaches in place already that weren't going anywhere or they ended up staying after some weird actions by ownership(Miami). The Texans was one of them mentioned. You have offensive weapons. You have a D that is horrible but you can mold. You have facilities and you don't have expectations from the owner as to what was expected in 1-2 years. You also would get a massive amount of control. Why wouldn't that be attractive to a guy like Cowher? There were alot of coaching vaccancies with lower level talent...Cleveland among some...and no real hope of a quick turnaround. Cowher isn't coaching because he is handpicking an opening.

As for being logically sound and reasonable...it might seem that way unless you look at Bob's track record of extending a guy like Carr and then having failure and then extending a guy like Gary instead of waiting a year. After seeing that you realize it is out of living with mistakes compared to being sound.

Mr teX
03-30-2011, 12:25 PM
Yep

But that doesn't fit the business as usual mode around here.

I dont understand why fans wouldn't want BoB to spend $$$$ necessaey to get the best FA's and draft picks possible. Thereby improving the talent level to a point that not even Gary could screw it up.

Noone is saying or has been saying they wouldn't want him to spend $$$ necessary to bring in these caliber of guys...but the key word is necessary. Would you honestly have approved of the FO dropping 100 million on a fat, lazy team-cancer inducing turd like Haynesworth? I know i wouldn't have & i bet many others wouldn't have either. Hell, People here scoffed at ATL giving Dunta what he got...& rightfully so.

You keep bringing this up like people in here are saying that they don't want this & its not true & tiresome.

As for all the folks in here talking about GB, Go up & down their starting lineups. It's clear what their strategy was. Them snagging woodson was a good pick up for them in FA but it was a calculated gamble (pretty much every team does this every year on at least 1-2 players) as he was thought to be on the downside of his career becoming injury prone & not really making alot of plays.....compared to what he was his 1st few years anyway; He'd also been developing a reputation as being injury prone. The point at which GB got him he wasn't thought to be this super duper caliber FA on par with a Peppers or a Haynesworth these past few years.

The same could be said for the saints getting Brees. He'd had productive years in SD, but that horrific arm injury he suffered kept lots of teams away...many of those teams needed a qb.

These kinds of gambles more often than not don't pan out.

ok..i'm really done this time...

Double Barrel
03-30-2011, 12:25 PM
That's exactly what Cowher has been doing. Waiting for the right job to open which is another reason why I like the guy, because he's smart and isn't dumb enough to take over some job that will blow up in his face. Cowher almost did take that Buffalo job two years ago though, which is what really tripped me out at the time. He was out there for like a week negotiating with Ralph Wilson of all people and when Wilson wouldn't commit to spending a certain amount of money to bring in quality players, Cowher said no thanks and wasn't going to screw himself to a job where the owner didn't seem committed to building a winner. Good for Cowher. I think he'd love to work here just like many other coaches since Bob Mcnair is such a softie for his coaching staff.

Yep. Almost all - if not all - head coaching vacancies are with losing teams. It is not very often that a winning team with lots of talent loses a coach to a firing or retirement.

A guy like Cowher has a ring, as well as lots of money and respect, so it is simply not in his best interest to take a job that is not optimal for him. I really don't understand the lack of understanding of this mentality and the criticism that this indicates that he is not a good coach. His records speak for themselves, and a guy like Kubiak can't even walk in Cowher's shadow at this point in time.

Even weirder is the perspective that we don't want a head coach with a ring, because of some silly statistic (i.e. "no coach has ever won two SBs with two different teams"). This from a team that has one winning season in it's history and absolutely nothing to speak of with regards to post-season experience. I say we get to the playoffs multiple times before we start concerning ourselves with winning a Super Bowl. Walk before you run and all that jazz.

Texecutioner
03-30-2011, 12:52 PM
Noone is saying or has been saying they wouldn't want him to spend $$$ necessary to bring in these caliber of guys...but the key word is necessary. Would you honestly have approved of the FO dropping 100 million on a fat, lazy team-cancer inducing turd like Haynesworth? I know i wouldn't have & i bet many others wouldn't have either. Hell, People here scoffed at ATL giving Dunta what he got...& rightfully so.

Good lord, get off of Albert Haynesworth. What does he have to do with anything? Every time this discussion pops up you or someone else brings this guy up as if he's the only free agent that's ever hit the open market. It's not a good example at all to use. Hardly anyone thought that Haynesworth was ever going to be a guy to sign a lot of money to. People knew he was a contract player and no one is surprised at how he played after getting paid, so stop throwing this guys' name around in every discussion that has to do with free agency as if he's the platform to look at when considering free agent moves.

Texecutioner
03-30-2011, 12:58 PM
Drafting Rogers in the first & letting him sit behind Favre for a few years, is about on the same level (to me) as trading two 2nd round picks & signing Matt Schaub, who I believe was the top QB available at the time.

One was a draft pick to look towards the future, and the other was a guy that was brought here to be a starter right away because the Carr experiment was over and we didn't have a QB. These situations couldn't be more different and that was a terrible comparison.

2006: We get two of the top 10 FA DEs (http://profootball.scout.com/a.z?s=127&p=9&c=12&nid=83&lnid=83&rc=16&pid=23&yr=2006) (Kalu & Weaver). 4 of the top 8 stayed with their original teams.

This is BS. Kalu and Weaver were never hot commodities on the market. They were average players when we signed them and nothing more.

2009: Suggs and Peppers didn't move (http://profootball.scout.com/a.z?s=127&p=9&c=12&nid=83&lnid=83&rc=16&pid=23&yr=2009) ( I think they were franchised) There was Jason Taylor & Antonio Smith, we got Antonio. We also signed Cato June, and franchised Dunta Robinson.

Antonio Smith was no hot commodity either. The Texans didn't have to break down any doors to get him against other teams. He was slightly above average and had some potential to him, but don't try and paint him as something he wasn't.

Dutchrudder
03-30-2011, 01:25 PM
Yep. Almost all - if not all - head coaching vacancies are with losing teams. It is not very often that a winning team with lots of talent loses a coach to a firing or retirement.

A guy like Cowher has a ring, as well as lots of money and respect, so it is simply not in his best interest to take a job that is not optimal for him. I really don't understand the lack of understanding of this mentality and the criticism that this indicates that he is not a good coach. His records speak for themselves, and a guy like Kubiak can't even walk in Cowher's shadow at this point in time.

Even weirder is the perspective that we don't want a head coach with a ring, because of some silly statistic (i.e. "no coach has ever won two SBs with two different teams"). This from a team that has one winning season in it's history and absolutely nothing to speak of with regards to post-season experience. I say we get to the playoffs multiple times before we start concerning ourselves with winning a Super Bowl. Walk before you run and all that jazz.

I know, it's like suggesting that putting Andre Johnson on the cover of Madden 2012 is going to make him break his legs...

Correlation does not equal causation.

dalemurphy
03-30-2011, 01:43 PM
Yep. Almost all - if not all - head coaching vacancies are with losing teams. It is not very often that a winning team with lots of talent loses a coach to a firing or retirement.

A guy like Cowher has a ring, as well as lots of money and respect, so it is simply not in his best interest to take a job that is not optimal for him. I really don't understand the lack of understanding of this mentality and the criticism that this indicates that he is not a good coach. His records speak for themselves, and a guy like Kubiak can't even walk in Cowher's shadow at this point in time.

Even weirder is the perspective that we don't want a head coach with a ring, because of some silly statistic (i.e. "no coach has ever won two SBs with two different teams"). This from a team that has one winning season in it's history and absolutely nothing to speak of with regards to post-season experience. I say we get to the playoffs multiple times before we start concerning ourselves with winning a Super Bowl. Walk before you run and all that jazz.


That is the philosophy which had me supporting Gary Kubiak to remain as head coach after 2008 and 2009. We were walking in '08 and '09. Unfortunately, instead of running, we fell on our face.

The argument to be made regarding that statistic is one of caution... Just because a coach was successful with one organization doesn't mean he is likely to be again (George Seifert, Mike Ditka) would be a couple alarming examples. I would agree with the argument that we don't go hunting after a coach who has won a Superbowl, as if that is the main criteria. I might shoot myself in the head if we tried to hire Barry Switzer, for instance. That being said, it would be hard not to be extremely excited about Bill Cowher or Tony Dungy being hired as HC.

I just don't think Cowher or Dungy was available this off-season. I don't think Gruden was either (wouldn't want him). Given that belief, other than Marty Schottenheimer, I'm not sure there was anyone out there I would want as the Texans new head coach heading into 2011.

Texecutioner
03-30-2011, 01:53 PM
What gets me, is that no matter how much history has shown that their ideas are no more a sure fire guarantee for success than what McNair did, they believe if McNair had took their "advice" we'd have multiple SuperBowls by now.

McNair should have hired Cowher, or Gruden, or Fisher, or some other "proven" head coach.

Never mind Jimmy Johnson in Miami, Gibbs in Washington, Vermeil or Martz or any number of coaches who have gone on to do "not so well" with other franchises.

Never mind that no Super Bowl winning coach has ever got a second team to the Super Bowl.

Never mind that Tomlinson wasn't a proven head coach.

Never Mind that Sean Peyton was never a head coach prior to the Saints, or that he didn't bring in a "proven" DC for his first 4 years.

Never mind that Mike McCarthy had no success whatsoever prior to being a head coach.

Man I swear, you'll go to any length you can to make it seem like the Texans haven't been that bad or that the coaching staff and management haven't been that bad. Here in this post as usual, you make stuff up that's not even true. If you expect people to take your posts seriously, you might want to at least get your facts straight when making an argument, because there are several inaccuracies in this and it's for a lost cause to begin with.

Texecutioner
03-30-2011, 01:56 PM
I just don't think Cowher or Dungy was available this off-season. I don't think Gruden was either (wouldn't want him). Given that belief, other than Marty Schottenheimer, I'm not sure there was anyone out there I would want as the Texans new head coach heading into 2011.

It isn't even a question of whether or not Cowher was available. He was out there assembling an entire staff and everything. The right jobs didn't open up for him though. This was the perfect off season to go after Cowher, because the NY Giants job was probably going to be the one that competed with our coaching job the most. As usual though, we failed to do anything because Gary is a nice guy with good hair.

dalemurphy
03-30-2011, 02:16 PM
It isn't even a question of whether or not Cowher was available. He was out there assembling an entire staff and everything. The right jobs didn't open up for him though. This was the perfect off season to go after Cowher, because the NY Giants job was probably going to be the one that competed with our coaching job the most. As usual though, we failed to do anything because Gary is a nice guy with good hair.

You can not possibly know whether McNair talked to Cowher about the Texans. Yours is a self-fulfilling possibly: you assume the worst about McNair and therefore the worst must be so.

HOU-TEX
03-30-2011, 02:20 PM
This is going to be the worst off-season ever.

dalemurphy
03-30-2011, 02:22 PM
This is going to be the worst off-season ever.

Already is: worst off-season and leading into the worst season.

Dutchrudder
03-30-2011, 02:25 PM
It isn't even a question of whether or not Cowher was available. He was out there assembling an entire staff and everything. The right jobs didn't open up for him though. This was the perfect off season to go after Cowher, because the NY Giants job was probably going to be the one that competed with our coaching job the most. As usual though, we failed to do anything because Gary is a nice guy with good hair.

There you go again, spouting off with more inaccuracies. How do you live with yourself lying to all of us day after day? Gary Kubiak has the worst hair of any coach in the NFL! Have you seen a closeup of his receding hairline? It looks like a boomerang landed on his forehead, or maybe he's trying to channel his inner-Manning...

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.aolnews.com/media/2010/02/kubiak-200.jpg

It's just awful, stop pretending like Kubiak has the greatest hair just because you love him so much. If you could take a step back from humping his leg, you might be able to see how bad his hair really is. It's all frizzy and carelessly stuffed under his headset, he certainly doesn't maintain it as well as other coaches like Mike Tomlin, Bill Belichek and Sean Payton. Even Jack Del Rio had a great year in 2006 where he looked quite dashing after switching to TRESemme.

Year after year, we have to deal with the shortcomings of his poor taste and stupid hair stylist. Seriously, what is he thinking surrounding himself with a stylist that agrees this is the look for him? He's had 6 years to find a competent hair dresser, but each time he fails because he wants one of his buddies to do it. If only he would go to Sportclips and get a new one who will challenge his attempt to pick a halfway decent look, then maybe he could command an NFL team properly.

I think given his track record of years of incompetence and poor taste, the only solution is to fire him and bring in a head coach with some real style. Someone who knows how to be a trendsetter and boldly don a style that he made his own. That's right, I'm talking about the man and his legendary mustache, Bill Cowher! Only he can redeem this franchise from 10 years of bad haircuts and no style!

http://prosportsblogging.com/psb/uploads/2010/11/bill-cowher.jpg


:sarcasm:

Texecutioner
03-30-2011, 03:08 PM
You can not possibly know whether McNair talked to Cowher about the Texans. Yours is a self-fulfilling possibly: you assume the worst about McNair and therefore the worst must be so.

Again, here we are with "we don't know what goes on" excuses. :vincepalm:

These are the lamest attempts to excuse Mcnair. We've heard this song and dance from you and a few others for years Dale, but at the end of the year it's the same sad results for the team and the same company line of "we'll build through the draft."

And yes I do know that he didn't talk to Cowher, because Cowher's been the hottest name on the market since he left the Steelers. Any time there has been even a hint that Cowher was talking to a team, it was all over the news and the sites that report this stuff. It was well documented when he was talking to the Bills as well. If Cowher and the Texans had been talking at all, the stuff gets reported. You guys who come up with this skull and Bones theories of the Texans secrecy where we never find anything out is just sad. It's just excuses for Uncle Bob because he brought football back to Houston. There was no reports about Bob talking to Cowher, because we resigned Kubiak last year and Bob Mcnair had no plans on ever firing Kubiak in the first place because "we were on the right track" in Bob's world. Why would he have talked to Cowher? He was happy with the team and their 6-10 record.

dalemurphy
03-30-2011, 03:32 PM
Again, here we are with "we don't know what goes on" excuses. :vincepalm:

These are the lamest attempts to excuse Mcnair. We've heard this song and dance from you and a few others for years Dale, but at the end of the year it's the same sad results for the team and the same company line of "we'll build through the draft."

And yes I do know that he didn't talk to Cowher, because Cowher's been the hottest name on the market since he left the Steelers. Any time there has been even a hint that Cowher was talking to a team, it was all over the news and the sites that report this stuff. It was well documented when he was talking to the Bills as well. If Cowher and the Texans had been talking at all, the stuff gets reported. You guys who come up with this skull and Bones theories of the Texans secrecy where we never find anything out is just sad. It's just excuses for Uncle Bob because he brought football back to Houston. There was no reports about Bob talking to Cowher, because we resigned Kubiak last year and Bob Mcnair had no plans on ever firing Kubiak in the first place because "we were on the right track" in Bob's world. Why would he have talked to Cowher? He was happy with the team and their 6-10 record.


Here is where your bias comes through so clearly. Bob McNair's statements regarding 2010, even in the midst of the season, don't even resemble "we are on the right track" nor did he sound "happy with the team and their 6-10 record".

The idea that you know McNair didn't explore Bill Cowher because it wasn't reported is laughable. We are not in New York. We are an unsuccessful, young franchise with one newspaper. The national media has very little concern for us, the local media is pathetic, and the Texans are a very closed organization. I, nor you, have any idea whether Cowher was a consideration or not. Seeing that there were a lot of jobs available this off-season and he never seriously looked at any of them, it is reasonable to conclude that he was not interested in coaching this season

There are plenty of things to criticize Bob McNair for without making stuff up. I do not understand your need to fictionalize your attacks. Stick to the facts. There's plenty there to complain about.

Texecutioner
03-30-2011, 03:43 PM
Here is where your bias comes through so clearly. Bob McNair's statements regarding 2010, even in the midst of the season, don't even resemble "we are on the right track" nor did he sound "happy with the team and their 6-10 record".

The idea that you know McNair didn't explore Bill Cowher because it wasn't reported is laughable. We are not in New York. We are an unsuccessful, young franchise with one newspaper. The national media has very little concern for us, the local media is pathetic, and the Texans are a very closed organization. I, nor you, have any idea whether Cowher was a consideration or not. Seeing that there were a lot of jobs available this off-season and he never seriously looked at any of them, it is reasonable to conclude that he was not interested in coaching this season

There are plenty of things to criticize Bob McNair for without making stuff up. I do not understand your need to fictionalize your attacks. Stick to the facts. There's plenty there to complain about.

Bias?? You just keep digging and digging that hole of yours. And now you're as desperate to say that a fan of the team has a bias?? :spit:

Seriously Dale this just gets more comical at this point. Now the excuse is that we just have one local paper so none of our news gets out there? Man, you'll never change. Every off season it's the same with you. You tell us we don't know what the Texans are doing like there is no media outlets that cover everything in the NFL. You get excited about every mid level or cast off from another team and act like they're some great player to get optimistic about no matter who they are. You excuse Mcnair and his minions for not doing jack and act like they're being smart and that the conservative approach is the right way to go. Only every time your analysis proves to be completely wrong while the criticisms for not filling the holes we need to fill every year get highlighted and the team train wrecks because of it.

I see and read about a ton of the stuff that the Texans do before they do it. I hear about a lot of the stuff the Texans are involved with. There is nothing wrong with Houston as a city. I hear about every team around the NFL. This yearly spin that "we just don't know" and that there is all this mystery about what we might have tried is just 3 year old excuse that is tiring and sad now. I can't believe that we're going into year 6 now with this regime and you're still spewing this same stuff that you've never been correct on yet.

Double Barrel
03-30-2011, 03:53 PM
There you go again, spouting off with more inaccuracies. How do you live with yourself lying to all of us day after day? Gary Kubiak has the worst hair of any coach in the NFL! Have you seen a closeup of his receding hairline? It looks like a boomerang landed on his forehead, or maybe he's trying to channel his inner-Manning...

<snip>

:spit:

Wish the system would let me rep you. Love the humor! :heh:

thunderkyss
03-30-2011, 04:46 PM
That's exactly what Cowher has been doing. Waiting for the right job to open which is another reason why I like the guy, because he's smart and isn't dumb enough to take over some job that will blow up in his face.

So there is something about what McNair, Kubiak, & Smith has done here that is good.... a decent foundation? Decent talent?

I think he'd love to work here just like many other coaches since Bob Mcnair is such a softie for his coaching staff.

I thought McNair was the cheap bastid that won't let us have any top tier FAs.

thunderkyss
03-30-2011, 04:58 PM
One was a draft pick to look towards the future, and the other was a guy that was brought here to be a starter right away because the Carr experiment was over and we didn't have a QB. These situations couldn't be more different and that was a terrible comparison.

The subject is commitment to win. Spending a first round pick on a QB to replace a legend is equivalent to giving up 2 second rounders to replace a #1 overall never was.

IMO that is....... towards showing a commitment to win.



This is BS. Kalu and Weaver were never hot commodities on the market. They were average players when we signed them and nothing more.

BS?????? I provided a link, showing Kalu & Weaver to be in the top 10 of DEs available that year. The link showed that 4 of the top 8 stayed with their original team.

I did not say anything that was not supported by the information in the link.

Antonio Smith was no hot commodity either. The Texans didn't have to break down any doors to get him against other teams. He was slightly above average and had some potential to him, but don't try and paint him as something he wasn't.

Again, I said nothing that was not supported by the info in the link.

Texecutioner
03-30-2011, 05:45 PM
So there is something about what McNair, Kubiak, & Smith has done here that is good.... a decent foundation? Decent talent?

Yeah, they've got a decent foundation and decent talent. They've been here 5 years now.


I thought McNair was the cheap bastid that won't let us have any top tier FAs.

What the hell does this have to do with whether or not he's softie towards his coaches or not? Why do you ask such silly questions that don't solve anything? I said that many coaches would want to coach under an owner like Mcnair because he's soft on his staff and gives them a very long leash and he's not controlling. Most coaches would want to work for something like that. We weren't discussing whether or not if Cowher would or wouldn't come here as far as free agents go. It's quite possible that Mcnair would go after a lot more fee agents if a coach like Cowher or someone else was here. Maybe he'd listen to them and they'd convince him. We already know that he doesn't go after them under Smithiak though. There is 5 years to prove that. Stop looking for angles to argue just to argue. It's a waste of time.

Texecutioner
03-30-2011, 05:51 PM
The subject is commitment to win. Spending a first round pick on a QB to replace a legend is equivalent to giving up 2 second rounders to replace a #1 overall never was.

IMO that is....... towards showing a commitment to win.

We had no QB. Of course they were going to go out and get one. Spending two draft picks to get a QB doesn't prove squat. If this is what you're going to try and use out of 5 years, man this is sad.

BS?????? I provided a link, showing Kalu & Weaver to be in the top 10 of DEs available that year. The link showed that 4 of the top 8 stayed with their original team.

I did not say anything that was not supported by the information in the link.

What does your link prove? It doesn't prove anything. Weaver was an average player on a great Ravens defense that made him look better. The Texans didn't even have to compete to get Weaver or Kalu. They were average players on the market and that's all the Texans have ever signed.


Again, I said nothing that was not supported by the info in the link.

Smith is probably the hottest free agent that they ever went after and that speaks volumes and proves my point exactly. The fact that you're trying to use Weaver, Kalu, and Smith as evidence to suggest that we don't have an awful GM and scouting department for free agents isn't making a case for the Texans. You're making them look worse actually.

Mr teX
03-30-2011, 05:56 PM
Good lord, get off of Albert Haynesworth. What does he have to do with anything? Every time this discussion pops up you or someone else brings this guy up as if he's the only free agent that's ever hit the open market. It's not a good example at all to use. Hardly anyone thought that Haynesworth was ever going to be a guy to sign a lot of money to. People knew he was a contract player and no one is surprised at how he played after getting paid, so stop throwing this guys' name around in every discussion that has to do with free agency as if he's the platform to look at when considering free agent moves.

Do you even read the crap you post? Yes, "everyone" knew he was a contract player, "everyone" knew he was not a guy that you want to give alot of money to........ but guess what? every damn team was still set to go after the guy when he became a FA. Even Tenn. who knew about this guy's tendencies to slack off.

And the only reason Haynesworth is brought up "every" time is b/c he's just the latest. But,

hey, you've bragged about checking in on rotoworld to see who's doing what in FA lol, feel free to take your pick of all these sought after names to hit FA that get ridiculously overpaid only to not live up to the hype & in many cases set those respective franchises back years. Off the top of my head:

Larry Brown
Scott Mitchell
Javon Walker
Nate Clements
David Boston


soon to be added to the list:

Dunta Robinson


I'm sure there are tons more lesser known ones that i don't know about but are none of those "good" examples either lol? Knowing you, i suspect not. But rather than come back with something to back your claim, you'll just side step it & harp on the same crap you've been on. Nothing is ever a "good" example to you when it doesn't fit in your little rigid box or you can't formulate any semblance of a credible retort to it. You don't have a clue.

Texecutioner
03-30-2011, 06:19 PM
Do you even read the crap you post? Yes, "everyone" knew he was a contract player, "everyone" knew he was not a guy that you want to give alot of money to........ but guess what? every damn team was still set to go after the guy when he became a FA. Even Tenn. who knew about this guy's tendencies to slack off.

And the only reason Haynesworth is brought up "every" time is b/c he's just the latest. But,

What is your point? Get off of Haynesworth. No one cares how bad he's been. Most people predicted he wouldn't live up to anything and the minute you run to the "Look at what happened to the Redskins" you show exactly how little you have to offer in a discussion regarding free agency and why the Texans should or shouldn't make moves. You look for the worst example you can find and then you just pipe all over it thinking you're making a point, but it shows that you don't have anything to fall back on. No one cares about a lousy fat ass like Haynesworth and no one ever expected the Texans to go after him.

hey, you've bragged about checking in on rotoworld to see who's doing what in FA lol, feel free to take your pick of all these sought after names to hit FA that get ridiculously overpaid only to not live up to the hype & set franchises back years. Off the top of my head:

Larry Brown
Scott Mitchell
Javon Walker
Nate Clements
David Boston


soon to be added to the list:

Dunta Robinson

I'm sure there are tons more lesser known ones that i don't know about but are none of those "good" examples either lol? Knowing you, i suspect not. But rather than come back with something to back your claim, you'll just side step it & harp on the same crap you've been on. Nothing is ever a "good" example to you when it doesn't fit in your little rigid box or you can't formulate any semblance of a credible retort to it. You don't have a clue.

No, nothing from you is ever good enough because you're a homer for Smithiak and an apologist who spins things and after several years of posting has yet to admit that all of your constant excuses and defense tactics for Smithiak has proven to be all wrong because they have never succeeded. You've called yourself a homer in the past by your own admission so why would anyone take your arguments as valid when you've been proven wrong for several years now. You don't seem to get it. Your credibility is shot when you say the same stuff over and over and keep finding yourself to have been incorrect. There are years worth of posts where you've said the same stuff you're saying now and you've been wrong over and over.

And how pathetic to just pull up a list of players that didn't work out for teams. Are you really that scared? The Texans build through the draft mentality has never worked and yet you cheer with these pom poms and want them to do the same thing over and over. I'd be a fool to consider anything you've said at this point as a sound argument when it's the same jargon that's been written for years. How have you not figured out yet that you're theories haven't worked? At least own up and admit that you've been wrong before calling anyone's posts crap. When you can't do that it just shows that you'll stick up for whomever coaches here no matter what and that you're just going to toe the company line. Forget about actually being objective. Forget about the fact that the Texans were just 6-10 and Mcnair's over all record is a losing one. Forget that the Texans are bottom feeders around the league still. They're doing everything they can to land free agents. We just don't hear about it, because it's a secret and we're right on the right track.

Lucky
03-30-2011, 07:02 PM
This is going to be the worst off-season ever.
We have Bob McNair to thank for that.

infantrycak
03-30-2011, 07:41 PM
We have Bob McNair to thank for that.

Please expound?

Rey
03-30-2011, 07:52 PM
Here is where your bias comes through so clearly. Bob McNair's statements regarding 2010, even in the midst of the season, don't even resemble "we are on the right track" nor did he sound "happy with the team and their 6-10 record"

I get what you're saying, but actions speak louder than words. Lots of people with the Texans say the right things but their actions, so far, have not reflected a lot of those words.

Yes Bob McNair said he wasn't happy, but he hasn't done a whole lot to really 'change' things...

That said, even though some people aren't all that enthusiastic about it, I give him credit for bringing in Wade..a credible d-coordinator...

Off-season isn't over, but I can completely see why people think we will see the same old, same old in the up-coming months and maybe into the season..

Lucky
03-30-2011, 08:18 PM
Please expound?
Even after the horrific 2005 campaign, we at least had a new regime to look forward to. We had hope. What do we have now? A good defensive coordinator coming in to solve all of the this team's problems? I'm not buying it. Well, I guess I am buying it since I'm renewing. But, you know what I mean.

thunderkyss
03-30-2011, 09:52 PM
What the hell does this have to do with whether or not he's softie towards his coaches or not? Why do you ask such silly questions that don't solve anything? I said that many coaches would want to coach under an owner like Mcnair because he's soft on his staff and gives them a very long leash and he's not controlling.

True. But you also said he turned down the Bills job because they wouldn't spend money on FAs......


What does your link prove? It doesn't prove anything. Weaver was an average player on a great Ravens defense that made him look better. The Texans didn't even have to compete to get Weaver or Kalu. They were average players on the market and that's all the Texans have ever signed.




Smith is probably the hottest free agent that they ever went after and that speaks volumes and proves my point exactly. The fact that you're trying to use Weaver, Kalu, and Smith as evidence to suggest that we don't have an awful GM and scouting department for free agents isn't making a case for the Texans. You're making them look worse actually.

The links prove they were the best, or among the best at their position in those respective FA markets.

It's not that the Texans were being cheap, they were looking at certain positions, and got the best they could at the time.

thunderkyss
03-30-2011, 09:58 PM
The Texans build through the draft mentality has never worked....

Yeah....

signed
Walter, Leach, Dressen, Schaub, Myers, Wade Smith, Antonio Smith, Shuan Cody, Mark Anderson, Jason Allen

(a bunch of guys who prove the Texans don't use a draft only mentality)

Mr teX
03-31-2011, 08:12 AM
What is your point? Get off of Haynesworth. No one cares how bad he's been. Most people predicted he wouldn't live up to anything and the minute you run to the "Look at what happened to the Redskins" you show exactly how little you have to offer in a discussion regarding free agency and why the Texans should or shouldn't make moves. You look for the worst example you can find and then you just pipe all over it thinking you're making a point, but it shows that you don't have anything to fall back on. No one cares about a lousy fat ass like Haynesworth and no one ever expected the Texans to go after him.



No, nothing from you is ever good enough because you're a homer for Smithiak and an apologist who spins things and after several years of posting has yet to admit that all of your constant excuses and defense tactics for Smithiak has proven to be all wrong because they have never succeeded. You've called yourself a homer in the past by your own admission so why would anyone take your arguments as valid when you've been proven wrong for several years now. You don't seem to get it. Your credibility is shot when you say the same stuff over and over and keep finding yourself to have been incorrect. There are years worth of posts where you've said the same stuff you're saying now and you've been wrong over and over.

And how pathetic to just pull up a list of players that didn't work out for teams. Are you really that scared? The Texans build through the draft mentality has never worked and yet you cheer with these pom poms and want them to do the same thing over and over. I'd be a fool to consider anything you've said at this point as a sound argument when it's the same jargon that's been written for years. How have you not figured out yet that you're theories haven't worked? At least own up and admit that you've been wrong before calling anyone's posts crap. When you can't do that it just shows that you'll stick up for whomever coaches here no matter what and that you're just going to toe the company line. Forget about actually being objective. Forget about the fact that the Texans were just 6-10 and Mcnair's over all record is a losing one. Forget that the Texans are bottom feeders around the league still. They're doing everything they can to land free agents. We just don't hear about it, because it's a secret and we're right on the right track.


Pretty mcuh did what i knew you'd do...completely sidestep, change your stance & ramble on...

Funny, you're talking about owning up to being wrong....yet you can't even own up to being wrong about crap you've incorrectly spout off about. Typical Texecutioner post. Its funny really b/c guys like you will critcize the John McClain's & Richard Justice's of the world all day. Well at least they have some kind of inside connection to the team that lends credibility to what they say..albeit not too much. Then you'll turn right around & expect folks to believe any & everything you say regarding the texans or whatever. Why? Because you read Rotoworld, Lol. Really?

At this point your bias is obvious. You can't even keep someone's stance long enough in your head to formulate a response that makes sense...Like i said, YOU. DON'T. HAVE. A. CLUE...

HOU-TEX
03-31-2011, 09:53 AM
We have Bob McNair to thank for that.

Even after the horrific 2005 campaign, we at least had a new regime to look forward to. We had hope. What do we have now? A good defensive coordinator coming in to solve all of the this team's problems? I'm not buying it. Well, I guess I am buying it since I'm renewing. But, you know what I mean.

My point has more to do with the lockout and CBA situation than a McNair bitchfest.

No free agency, no player trades, no player signings and no workouts to read about = Worst off-season ever.

In turn, we'll have more threads similar to this one. Rainbows, rain clouds and egos all balled up in one lovely thread.

disaacks3
03-31-2011, 09:55 AM
Even weirder is the perspective that we don't want a head coach with a ring, because of some silly statistic (i.e. "no coach has ever won two SBs with two different teams"). This from a team that has one winning season in it's history and absolutely nothing to speak of with regards to post-season experience. I say we get to the playoffs multiple times before we start concerning ourselves with winning a Super Bowl. Walk before you run and all that jazz. Yep, until Emmit Smith, no rushing champ had ever won the Superbowl....good thing they didn't 'buy in' to the curse. Maybe we should dump Arian Foster just in case.

You can not possibly know whether McNair talked to Cowher about the Texans. Yours is a self-fulfilling possibly: you assume the worst about McNair and therefore the worst must be so. It's easy to assume the worst when he retains Kubiak after no playoffs AGAIN and then tells the world that the Texans are "On the Right Track" after dropping 3 games from their previous record. It's like listening to THIS guy talk:

http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/images/07-minister.jpg

Texecutioner
03-31-2011, 10:10 AM
Yeah....

signed
Walter, Leach, Dressen, Schaub, Myers, Wade Smith, Antonio Smith, Shuan Cody, Mark Anderson, Jason Allen

(a bunch of guys who prove the Texans don't use a draft only mentality)

Again, you prove my point completely with this list and you don't even know it.

All these guys together have amounted to nothing but a bunch of 8-8 seasons and a 6-10 season in year 5, but go right back and pat Gary Kubiak on the back for doing a great job.

Texecutioner
03-31-2011, 10:20 AM
Pretty mcuh did what i knew you'd do...completely sidestep, change your stance & ramble on...

[QUOTE=Mr teX;1673283]Funny, you're talking about owning up to being wrong....yet you can't even own up to being wrong about crap you've incorrectly spout off about. Typical Texecutioner post. Its funny really b/c guys like you will critcize the John McClain's & Richard Justice's of the world all day. Well at least they have some kind of inside connection to the team that lends credibility to what they say..albeit not too much. Then you'll turn right around & expect folks to believe any & everything you say regarding the texans or whatever. Why? Because you read Rotoworld, Lol. Really?

You should have listened to GP a long time ago when he told you to stop digging. You more you post the more you expose that you don't have an informative response here, and it's a waste of time. You're a cheerleader for the Texans and nothing more where objectivity doesn't even exist. Next off season you'll be hammering the same exact garbage once again when the Texans don't do anything again like you've done for several off seasons now and by the team's results it's only showed that you'll spin excuses for management over and over.

At this point your bias is obvious. You can't even keep someone's stance long enough in your head to formulate a response that makes sense...Like i said, YOU. DON'T. HAVE. A. CLUE...

Lol!! My response to the drivel from some of the homers like yourself has been the same every season in here. Gary Kubiak sucks as a HC and Rick Smith is not a real GM and the Texans won't go anywhere with these clowns and that building through the draft only won't get this team anywhere. Unfortunately I've yet to be proven wrong by your heroes on Kirby.

Double Barrel
03-31-2011, 11:06 AM
Yep, until Emmit Smoth, no rushing champ had ever won the Superbowl....good thing they didn't 'buy in' to the curse. Maybe we should dump Arian Foster just in case.

Come to think of it, no coach with the first name "Gary" has ever been to a Super Bowl, so what the heck are they thinking? The Texans are not a first-time-for-everything kind of team, 'eh??

It's easy to assume the worst when he retains Kubiak after no playoffs AGAIN and then tells the world that the Texans are "On the Right Track" after dropping 3 games from their previous record. It like listening to THIS guy talk:

http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/images/07-minister.jpg

yeah, 5-7 for the fourth year in a row, and his "right track" comment did not seem to reflect reality or inspire confidence in the fan base that he can see the forest through the trees. He said this after they lost to go 5-8 after starting the season 4-2. Even the casual fans who don't follow the team every day had to wonder WTF he was babbling on about with this one.

I just re-read that article (http://www.khou.com/sports/football/McNair-Texans-on-right-track-changes-may-be-made-112026969.html), and this line really makes me wonder:

"I was just overwhelmed by the comments our competitors had to say about our team, because it had never happened before," said McNair. "They were all, frankly, pulling for us after the way we came back (Monday night) and they were heartbroken and they could see how upset I was."

"and they were heartbroken and they could see how upset I was" - could the other owners have been patronizing him since he was so upset about the loss? They've all been there, but I have honestly never heard and NFL owner whimper so much in public. They had to be thinking "noob" as they patted him on the back and winked at each other. Bob never realized the "kick me" sign that they had just planted on his backside.

Texecutioner
03-31-2011, 11:24 AM
Come to think of it, no coach with the first name "Gary" has ever been to a Super Bowl, so what the heck are they thinking? The Texans are not a first-time-for-everything kind of team, 'eh??



yeah, 5-7 for the fourth year in a row, and his "right track" comment did not seem to reflect reality or inspire confidence in the fan base that he can see the forest through the trees. He said this after they lost to go 5-8 after starting the season 4-2. Even the casual fans who don't follow the team every day had to wonder WTF he was babbling on about with this one.

But you don't know what he was really thinking. That was just owner talk to the public. We don't know what he was really saying behind closed doors. You don't know if he called Cowher that same night and was turned down either. For all we know he was all over management and was trying to contact every available HC on the market, but the lockout looming scared them all away and circumstances just screwed the Texans.

I just re-read that article (http://www.khou.com/sports/football/McNair-Texans-on-right-track-changes-may-be-made-112026969.html), and this line really makes me wonder:



"and they were heartbroken and they could see how upset I was" - could the other owners have been patronizing him since he was so upset about the loss? They've all been there, but I have honestly never heard and NFL owner whimper so much in public. They had to be thinking "noob" as they patted him on the back and winked at each other. Bob never realized the "kick me" sign that they had just planted on his backside.

Oh yeah, go ahead and insult the guy that bought football back to Houston. That was really an easy task. A man that accomplished as much as he has isn't near that gullible to buy into any of that. Give me a break. He's a multi Billionaire and he deserves our utmost respect as fans. We should be happy just to have a team and to have something to talk about. Remember all those years when we had nothing after Bud left. If you think that Bob isn't committed to putting out a winning team than you're just piping out of your gums and aren't really a committed fan.

:sarcasm:

Mr teX
03-31-2011, 12:20 PM
But you don't know what he was really thinking. That was just owner talk to the public. We don't know what he was really saying behind closed doors. You don't know if he called Cowher that same night and was turned down either. For all we know he was all over management and was trying to contact every available HC on the market, but the lockout looming scared them all away and circumstances just screwed the Texans.



Oh yeah, go ahead and insult the guy that bought football back to Houston. That was really an easy task. A man that accomplished as much as he has isn't near that gullible to buy into any of that. Give me a break. He's a multi Billionaire and he deserves our utmost respect as fans. We should be happy just to have a team and to have something to talk about. Remember all those years when we had nothing after Bud left. If you think that Bob isn't committed to putting out a winning team than you're just piping out of your gums and aren't really a committed fan.

:sarcasm:

Speculation & opinions half-way rooted in facts still does not equal definitively knowing. This is where your whole argument falls on its face & why you just can't seem to get it.

Texecutioner
03-31-2011, 01:16 PM
Speculation & opinions half-way rooted in facts still does not equal definitively knowing. This is where your whole argument falls on its face & why you just can't seem to get it.

No, I've got 5 years of a lack of action to fall back on. You've got 5 years of saying using these same excuses and spin efforts that have proven to equal failure, and yet you can't come to grips with the fact that you've been proven wrong and that the lack of action have not gotten the team anywhere. But go right on ahead and keep hiding under the same line of "we don't know" what happens and act like the Texans somehow are the only team in the league that knows how to operate under extreme secrecy and that there has never been a problem with their approach to improving the team. Keep ignoring the fact that we still haven't even sniffed a playoff birth and that we just went 6-10.

HoustonFrog
03-31-2011, 01:35 PM
Here is where I'd like to see the team...on this list

http://twitter.com/#!/evansilva

Most aggressive teams for visits & workouts: #Patriots (38), #Dolphins (37), #Broncos (28), #Browns (26), #Falcons & #Ravens (25)

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/09/2011-draft-visits-and-workouts-tracker/

Houston Texans (2)

*Baylor cornerback Antareis Bryan (3/23).

South Carolina cornerback Chris Culliver (?/?).

Dutchrudder
03-31-2011, 02:10 PM
Here is where I'd like to see the team...on this list

http://twitter.com/#!/evansilva



http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/09/2011-draft-visits-and-workouts-tracker/

That's just sad. I don't see how anyone could find the lack of effort in scouting acceptable.

Texecutioner
03-31-2011, 02:23 PM
Here is where I'd like to see the team...on this list

http://twitter.com/#!/evansilva



http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/09/2011-draft-visits-and-workouts-tracker/

Great!! We've got two while the majority of other teams around the NFL have like 10 and above. We're on the right track baby!!! :whip:

El Tejano
03-31-2011, 02:39 PM
Great!! We've got two while the majority of other teams around the NFL have like 10 and above. We're on the right track baby!!! :whip:


Now we got two but if you notice for Culliver there are question marks for the date. Now, I'm hoping that is because 28 teams were at the South Carolina pro day and we were there but it couldn't be confirmed if we were looking at Culliver or the other two guys.

Either way, nice to see we are the only team that's made two visits in the league. Oh and yeah, we don't know what the team is doing because this stuff never gets reported. It's just that 31 other teams have reported who they've met with or what college pro days they've attended.


NFL | Three South Carolina players work out for execs
Wed, 30 Mar 2011 20:18:17 -0700

South Carolina S Chris Culliver, WR Tori Gurley and DL Cliff Matthews worked out in front of personnel from 28 of 32 NFL teams Wednesday, March 30, at South Carolina's Pro Day, reports The Associated Press. Neither of the three players are expected to go in the first round of the NFL Draft



Read more: http://www.kffl.com/hotw/NFL?page=2#ixzz1ICw6R01s

ArlingtonTexan
03-31-2011, 02:41 PM
If nothing else this thread shows that no CBA, and no real news makes too many people absolutely illogocal.

:gun:

Texecutioner
03-31-2011, 02:55 PM
Now we got two but if you notice for Culliver there are question marks for the date. Now, I'm hoping that is because 28 teams were at the South Carolina pro day and we were there but it couldn't be confirmed if we were looking at Culliver or the other two guys.

Either way, nice to see we are the only team that's made two visits in the league. Oh and yeah, we don't know what the team is doing because this stuff never gets reported. It's just that 31 other teams have reported who they've met with or what college pro days they've attended.

Yeah, but remember we are the ultimate team of extreme secrecy where no one knows what we're up to. Just because it's not reported in any way shape or form doesn't mean that we're not making all kinds of calls and visits. Remember that we also are just a small hokey town with one paper and reporters who wouldn't dare to leak out any of our strategic plans. We're the insurgency of the NFL only that even after the off season we never know what our insurgency was, because nothing ever happens. :spy:

dalemurphy
03-31-2011, 03:15 PM
Great!! We've got two while the majority of other teams around the NFL have like 10 and above. We're on the right track baby!!! :whip:

Superbowl champs (Green Bay)= 2... Also, Pittsburgh, Indy, and New Orleans all near the bottom of the list in "reported" visits.

TEX- So, are the Packers screwing up too?

HoustonFrog
03-31-2011, 03:28 PM
Superbowl champs (Green Bay)= 2... Also, Pittsburgh, Indy, and New Orleans all near the bottom of the list in "reported" visits.

TEX- So, are the Packers screwing up too?

They just won the SB. I'll give them a pass right now.

Teams that have continuous non-playoff records should try a little harder maybe. Again, here is the usual rub...."20 other teams did it." 20 other teams aren't perennial losers. Look at who visited the most..Patriots.

For a minute you guys have to stop the "if Team A did it and we did it then why not rag on them." The message board I'm on is a Texans board where they have yet to do anything in a winning manner. So from the perspective of 9 years of no playoffs I'd expect more, no matter what other teams are doing.

evansilva Evan Silva
Least aggressive visits & workouts team: #Raiders (1). They'll be constructing their draft board strictly based on Combine results.

dalemurphy
03-31-2011, 03:46 PM
They just won the SB. I'll give them a pass right now.

Teams that have continuous non-playoff records should try a little harder maybe. Again, here is the usual rub...."20 other teams did it." 20 other teams aren't perennial losers. Look at who visited the most..Patriots.

For a minute you guys have to stop the "if Team A did it and we did it then why not rag on them." The message board I'm on is a Texans board where they have yet to do anything in a winning manner. So from the perspective of 9 years of no playoffs I'd expect more, no matter what other teams are doing.


Look, if you want to complain that McNair has not had a winning formula, has made crucial effors, and has failed as an owner the past 9 years, I won't argue.

However, either it is true that only having two reported visits with college players indicates poor management or it doesn't? Tex uses the fact that the Texans have been unsuccessful as the primary evidence that everything they do is wrong... Then, he ridicules everything they do. It's some of the most flawed and bitter logic I have ever seen.

Double Barrel
03-31-2011, 03:46 PM
To be fair, our scouting department infiltrates these events and the reason that they are never noticed is because they are so good at playing the cat and mouse game of stealth scouting. Fortunately, we have an exclusive picture of one of our elite scouts in action:

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRqgjo3gqpnH2b21F7Ndrm4af7nAWIN0 a_gzGefzXXNbLoUDU5vVw&t=1

Dutchrudder
03-31-2011, 04:00 PM
Look, if you want to complain that McNair has not had a winning formula, has made crucial effors, and has failed as an owner the past 9 years, I won't argue.

However, either it is true that only having two reported visits with college players indicates poor management or it doesn't?Tex uses the fact that the Texans have been unsuccessful as the primary evidence that everything they do is wrong... Then, he ridicules everything they do. It's some of the most flawed and bitter logic I have ever seen.

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTxO5lhJaxzP0lSGkDyPVdn0NxfR9ppA _Y7yNSMtYtkjN_ssxViKA&t=1

How is that wrong?

steelbtexan
03-31-2011, 04:01 PM
Mr. Tex you're right and everybody that thinks BoB, Gary and Rick stink are wrong.

Meanwhile fans that are realistic realize that the playoffs, much less a SB is a long way away from happening.

Hate to burst your buble with facts like their track record.

steelbtexan
03-31-2011, 04:06 PM
Four 5-7 starts to seasons in a row speak volumes about BoB, Gary and Ricks competence. But TK and Mr.Tex cant see the forrest for the trees.

gary
03-31-2011, 04:14 PM
Phillips will be the next head coach so don't worry Bob has this all plan out just perfectly so just sit back and relax it is a nice day.

disaacks3
03-31-2011, 04:21 PM
Phillips will be the next head coach so don't worry Bob has this all plan out just perfectly so just sit back and relax it is a nice day.

That's precisely the turn of events that many of us FEAR. Wade just left a HC job, he was fired for his performance. Like Kubiak, his best fit may simply be as a coordinator.

Mr teX
03-31-2011, 04:24 PM
They just won the SB. I'll give them a pass right now.

Teams that have continuous non-playoff records should try a little harder maybe. Again, here is the usual rub...."20 other teams did it." 20 other teams aren't perennial losers. Look at who visited the most..Patriots.

For a minute you guys have to stop the "if Team A did it and we did it then why not rag on them." The message board I'm on is a Texans board where they have yet to do anything in a winning manner. So from the perspective of 9 years of no playoffs I'd expect more, no matter what other teams are doing.

I see what you're saying HF & i agree to a certain extent if nothing else, i wish they would do it just so they could shut some people up. But me personally, i'm not gonna get overly excited if i see 20+ names lined up for interviews/workouts or if they have what they have now at the end of the day.

The reason being is b/c i would still hope that they are relying on what they see on tape the most. Also, doing things in a winning manner is relative. Sure the Patriots are at the top for having the most visits lined up...the colts & steelers are closer to the bottom. Where do you estimate the line is drawn for winning teams & how many interviews you should have lined up?

gary
03-31-2011, 04:29 PM
That's precisely the turn of events that many of us FEAR. Wade just left a HC job, he was fired for his performance. Like Kubiak, his best fit may simply be as a coordinator.I did not say I am in favor of it just an idea.

infantrycak
03-31-2011, 04:48 PM
It's just that 31 other teams have reported who they've met with or what college pro days they've attended.

Very few if any of the reports come from teams. Look at your KFFL link for sources. It isn't the teams

NFL | Three South Carolina players work out for execs
Wed, 30 Mar 2011 20:18:17 -0700

South Carolina S Chris Culliver, WR Tori Gurley and DL Cliff Matthews worked out in front of personnel from 28 of 32 NFL teams Wednesday, March 30, at South Carolina's Pro Day, reports The Associated Press. Neither of the three players are expected to go in the first round of the NFL Draft

Now go look through that PFT.com's list and see if Gurley, Culliver and Matthews are listed on 28 teams.

Double Barrel
03-31-2011, 05:18 PM
Phillips will be the next head coach so don't worry Bob has this all plan out just perfectly so just sit back and relax it is a nice day.

yep. I've got a running bet with a good friend of mine. He says no way, and I say it is our destiny. Wade will be our next HC if he is not hired by another team before then.

gary
03-31-2011, 05:30 PM
See now just rest your head and go to sleep. Remember no worries.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lz_hZQtLqEI&feature=related

Second Honeymoon
03-31-2011, 05:32 PM
Oh yeah, Wade is basically Head Coach-In Waiting. If the team continues to be pathetic and soft, they will make the move. No doubt and it's practically preordained by fate, logic, and unknown cosmic forces with a grudge against Houston.

The Cowher ship has probably sailed...as if that ship would make it out of drydock, much less sail.

6-10 is my prediction just like it was last year....but I am the crazy one.

gary
03-31-2011, 05:39 PM
I hope I am wrong about Wade but I won't be.

Texecutioner
03-31-2011, 06:11 PM
Look, if you want to complain that McNair has not had a winning formula, has made crucial effors, and has failed as an owner the past 9 years, I won't argue.

However, either it is true that only having two reported visits with college players indicates poor management or it doesn't? Tex uses the fact that the Texans have been unsuccessful as the primary evidence that everything they do is wrong... Then, he ridicules everything they do. It's some of the most flawed and bitter logic I have ever seen.

Honestly Dale, I don't see how you even have the adacity to argue with me at this point considering every argument you've made for the last 3 seasons has blown up in your face. How would anyone take your football observations at face value at this point? And months ago you were actually talking about calling people out after game one of the season. Lol! Keep digging......Keep digging......

I'll repeat that the Texans will go nowhere and will waste their seasons as long as Gary Kubiak and Rick Smith are running this organization.

Texecutioner
03-31-2011, 06:14 PM
Oh yeah, Wade is basically Head Coach-In Waiting. If the team continues to be pathetic and soft, they will make the move. No doubt and it's practically preordained by fate, logic, and unknown cosmic forces with a grudge against Houston.

The Cowher ship has probably sailed...as if that ship would make it out of drydock, much less sail.

6-10 is my prediction just like it was last year....but I am the crazy one.

The funny thing is that you have been blasted more than anyone I've ever seen on this site, yet your predictions have been on point every season. You were "the only" guy on this site that predicted a 6-10 season last year and got ripped apart for it as usual. Yet, no one came back and apologized. Just more insults about how you're a horrible fan for talking about this team objectively. Even I thought that you were going a little over board by predicting 6-10 last off season, but you were right on point.

Texecutioner
03-31-2011, 06:20 PM
Superbowl champs (Green Bay)= 2... Also, Pittsburgh, Indy, and New Orleans all near the bottom of the list in "reported" visits.

TEX- So, are the Packers screwing up too?

I knew one of you would bring up GB since they had only like two. Lol!

GB just won the SB with all kinds of injuries and yet guys like you use injuries for excuses every year. They've got a competent management running their organization, a good coach, an elite QB, and they've been drafting damn well. Why would I get on GB's case? They haven't been an embarrassment of the league sitting there right with the Lions almost every season like we have. The Texans should be one of the most active teams out there because they keep under achieving and going nowhere. When the Texans are hitting the playoffs in multiple seasons and have a HC that shows that he's competent at building a winner for multiple seasons where he can be trusted I won't laugh at the fact that in year 9 of suckage that there one of the least active teams around. I'll get excited about the Texans up coming season when they have a new coach that isn't named Wade Phillips because he'll most likely be the next guy after this year and we'll get 3 or 4 more years of this same nonsense and then you can act like Wade Phillips is the next big thing that knows best like you have with Smithiak the last few seasons.

Rey
03-31-2011, 06:22 PM
They just won the SB. I'll give them a pass right now.

Teams that have continuous non-playoff records should try a little harder maybe. Again, here is the usual rub...."20 other teams did it." 20 other teams aren't perennial losers. Look at who visited the most..Patriots.

For a minute you guys have to stop the "if Team A did it and we did it then why not rag on them." The message board I'm on is a Texans board where they have yet to do anything in a winning manner. So from the perspective of 9 years of no playoffs I'd expect more, no matter what other teams are doing.

I agree wholeheartedly. I even alluded to this in another post.

The Texans have not earned the benefit of the doubt so you can't really fault people for being upset that they appear to be doing the same old stuff.

Another way to look at it would be like people taking a class. Some people can do well just by showing up and taking the test. Others have to study.Some people can study and still fail.

You have to find the method that works best for YOU....but continuing to do the same thing and getting failing results is just stupid.

gary
03-31-2011, 06:23 PM
Who knows if Smith is actually running the orginization or just how much he is?

infantrycak
03-31-2011, 06:34 PM
I don't understand all this Wade is HC in waiting talk. If Wade does a decent job next year and the D improves so will the record and odds are Kubiak doesn't get fired. If the D does not improve and the O stays the same or gets better what in the world makes people think McNair is going to fire the successful side of the team and promote the unsuccessful side? It makes no sense.

gary
03-31-2011, 06:40 PM
I don't understand all this Wade is HC in waiting talk. If Wade does a decent job next year and the D improves so will the record and odds are Kubiak doesn't get fired. If the D does not improve and the O stays the same or gets better what in the world makes people think McNair is going to fire the successful side of the team and promote the unsuccessful side? It makes no sense.My thinking is that if the defense improves a decent amount but for some reason the Texans still don't make the playoffs then you have to believe Wade has a chance at the very least, no?

dalemurphy
03-31-2011, 06:49 PM
I knew one of you would bring up GB since they had only like two. Lol!

GB just won the SB with all kinds of injuries and yet guys like you use injuries for excuses every year. They've got a competent management running their organization, a good coach, an elite QB, and they've been drafting damn well. Why would I get on GB's case? They haven't been an embarrassment of the league sitting there right with the Lions almost every season like we have. The Texans should be one of the most active teams out there because they keep under achieving and going nowhere. When the Texans are hitting the playoffs in multiple seasons and have a HC that shows that he's competent at building a winner for multiple seasons where he can be trusted I won't laugh at the fact that in year 9 of suckage that there one of the least active teams around. I'll get excited about the Texans up coming season when they have a new coach that isn't named Wade Phillips because he'll most likely be the next guy after this year and we'll get 3 or 4 more years of this same nonsense and then you can act like Wade Phillips is the next big thing that knows best like you have with Smithiak the last few seasons.

So, what is your point about organizations only bringing in two people?

infantrycak
03-31-2011, 06:54 PM
My thinking is that if the defense improves a decent amount but for some reason the Texans still don't make the playoffs then you have to believe Wade has a chance at the very least, no?

My thought is if the D gets to mid pack and the O is at least as good then the team will win 9+ games and McNair won't fire Kubiak.

gary
03-31-2011, 07:02 PM
My thought is if the D gets to mid pack and the O is at least as good then the team will win 9+ games and McNair won't fire Kubiak.And that is an IF just like me you are trusting the fact that if only the D gets better then they will be in. Maybe. But that is not a given thing nor is mine.

Texecutioner
03-31-2011, 07:19 PM
So, what is your point about organizations only bringing in two people?

It wasn't about other organizations. It was about the Texans being one of the least active here which is no surprise and is the same status quo they've been running for years. They should be doing everything possible at this point heading into season 10, but as to no surprise they see no reason for change and I'm reminded that Bob Mcnair feels that we're "on the right track." :gun:

I didn't post about the workouts thing though. El Tejano did and he's been questioning why we haven't been involved with work outs for players for weeks now and I agree with his questioning as well. I wasn't surprised and I just made some humor out of it.

Texecutioner
03-31-2011, 07:24 PM
I don't understand all this Wade is HC in waiting talk. If Wade does a decent job next year and the D improves so will the record and odds are Kubiak doesn't get fired. If the D does not improve and the O stays the same or gets better what in the world makes people think McNair is going to fire the successful side of the team and promote the unsuccessful side? It makes no sense.

I think it's because this would be year 6 of Kubiak going nowhere and people are thinking that Mcnair would finally fire Gary Kubiak and if so hiring a nice guy like Wade would be the typical status quo for what Bob likes. Plus, Wade has the ties to Houston from his daddy and Bob loved it when grandpa Bum was out here at the end of last season spreading his flare around the Houston fans that think he's a god. It just makes sense that Bob would want a guy like Wade if he ever decides to let go of Gary and Bob would probably like the baby steps of improvement that Wade would bring to the defense and would probably give him several years of mulligan seasons just like he did with Capers and Kubiak to get things right and he'd be very patient. I totally think that Wade will be our next HC, that is if he ever lets go of Gary Kubiak. I'm not sure he ever will at this point.

Second Honeymoon
03-31-2011, 08:36 PM
The funny thing is that you have been blasted more than anyone I've ever seen on this site, yet your predictions have been on point every season. You were "the only" guy on this site that predicted a 6-10 season last year and got ripped apart for it as usual. Yet, no one came back and apologized. Just more insults about how you're a horrible fan for talking about this team objectively. Even I thought that you were going a little over board by predicting 6-10 last off season, but you were right on point.

You can't let your best DB go when your secondary was already piss poor. It's pretty simple.

They actually surprised me on offense. I thought they would take a step back but they took a step sideways by adding a running game out of nowhere. It was a double edged sword though because Arian definitely saved Rick Smith's job but probably Gary's too and I can't see how that helps the Texans win.

If they go out and at least compete for Aso, It would at least show that they mean what they say. Building a winner. Andre, Matt, and the rest of the offense made enough plays to win most football games, but bad coaching talent and bad coaching decisions lost the season.

Maybe we get a break in draft and get Quinn and maybe they land Aso but unless they can get some difference makers like that, it's gonna be same ole same ole.

steelbtexan
03-31-2011, 08:50 PM
The funny thing is that you have been blasted more than anyone I've ever seen on this site, yet your predictions have been on point every season. You were "the only" guy on this site that predicted a 6-10 season last year and got ripped apart for it as usual. Yet, no one came back and apologized. Just more insults about how you're a horrible fan for talking about this team objectively. Even I thought that you were going a little over board by predicting 6-10 last off season, but you were right on point.

I was close at 7-9

Darn Broncos

LOL

steelbtexan
03-31-2011, 08:53 PM
I don't understand all this Wade is HC in waiting talk. If Wade does a decent job next year and the D improves so will the record and odds are Kubiak doesn't get fired. If the D does not improve and the O stays the same or gets better what in the world makes people think McNair is going to fire the successful side of the team and promote the unsuccessful side? It makes no sense.

You are talking about Kubiak.

They finished 9-7 with a top 15 defense in 2009.

So dont get your hopes up.

infantrycak
03-31-2011, 09:04 PM
You are talking about Kubiak.

They finished 9-7 with a top 15 defense in 2009.

So dont get your hopes up.

You are making my point and I said nothing about hopes. If Wade does a reasonable job then I expect 9+ wins and in that event I doubt McNair fires Kubiak unless the offense has regressed. If Wade doesn't build a mid-pack D then we might not get the 9+ wins but then it makes no sense to promote the guy who failed and fire the guy who succeeded in their specialty areas. I think if Kubiak is gone, everyone is gone.

Carr Bombed
03-31-2011, 09:12 PM
I was close at 7-9

Darn Broncos

LOL

I was on the 8-8 train.......it just seemed inevitable.

The Jags and Broncos screwed me :)

steelbtexan
03-31-2011, 09:14 PM
You are making my point and I said nothing about hopes. If Wade does a reasonable job then I expect 9+ wins and in that event I doubt McNair fires Kubiak unless the offense has regressed. If Wade doesn't build a mid-pack D then we might not get the 9+ wins but then it makes no sense to promote the guy who failed and fire the guy who succeeded in their specialty areas. I think if Kubiak is gone, everyone is gone.

I see what you're saying.

So you think BoB will bring back Rick and Gary if the get another 9 win season?

More mediocrity, some around here set their sights alot higher than 9 win seasons. BoB doesn't appear to have set his goals above 9 wins. But if their is a fan revolt after this season I could see BoB hire Wade to appease his fanbase.

I mean what football fan in Houston could get upset with BoB for hiring Bums' boy.

Good PR is and has been what BoB's Houston Texans are all about.

dalemurphy
03-31-2011, 09:14 PM
I was on the 8-8 train.......it just seemed inevitable.

The Jags and Broncos screwed me :)

I was on the 11-5 Train.

The Texans screwed me!

steelbtexan
03-31-2011, 09:17 PM
I was on the 8-8 train.......it just seemed inevitable.

The Jags and Broncos screwed me :)

After the draft you should start up another thread predicting the Texans win total next season.

It will be interesting to see who else falls off the bandwagon if Rick and Gary have their usual draft.

steelbtexan
03-31-2011, 09:18 PM
I was on the 11-5 Train.

The Texans screwed me!

True

LOL

Lucky
03-31-2011, 09:30 PM
I mean what football fan in Houston could get upset with BoB for hiring Bums' boy.

(raises hand)

Lucky
03-31-2011, 09:45 PM
My point has more to do with the lockout and CBA situation than a McNair bitchfest.
What exactly has been lost due to the CBA expiring? Free agency has been delayed. There will still be a draft. Not a game, regular season, preseason, scrimmage, mini camp, has been missed. It's much ado about nothing thus far. The NFL and players will work this out. Whether the Texans figure it out in 2011 is the big question in my mind.

steelbtexan
03-31-2011, 09:57 PM
What exactly has been lost due to the CBA expiring? Free agency has been delayed. There will still be a draft. Not a game, regular season, preseason, scrimmage, mini camp, has been missed. It's much ado about nothing thus far. The NFL and players will work this out. Whether the Texans figure it out in 2011 is the big question in my mind.

Agreed

The Texans should proceed as though there will be no FA. Even though if they can agree on a CBA.

There will be a short FA signing period where FA's that are mid tier will get overpaid due to organizations will panic.

El Tejano
04-01-2011, 07:54 AM
Very few if any of the reports come from teams. Look at your KFFL link for sources. It isn't the teams



Now go look through that PFT.com's list and see if Gurley, Culliver and Matthews are listed on 28 teams.

I'm going to have to concede. Your point has been proven by the famous Gil Brandt. In this link he is saying that Bengals LB coach and 10 other team reps were at Stephen F Austin Pro Day. No mention of the Texans.

However, the same Gil Brandt told a Texan fan on Sirius NFL Radio that the Texans were indeed there and were interested in LB Jabara Williams.

HOU-TEX
04-01-2011, 08:47 AM
What exactly has been lost due to the CBA expiring? Free agency has been delayed. There will still be a draft. Not a game, regular season, preseason, scrimmage, mini camp, has been missed. It's much ado about nothing thus far. The NFL and players will work this out. Whether the Texans figure it out in 2011 is the big question in my mind.

No free agency means nothing to follow for fans. Fans can't track and read about players being sought after by their home teams. Most teams would've reported this week for strength and conditioning. So, I'm speaking more of the entertainment value for fans. We're in a huge dead spot right now. Floating around in dead space looking for something to grab on to. An article like this pops up and bam, fans grab on to it. Even though it's basically meaningless.

Eh, I'd rather be tracking FA's and reading articles and watching videos of FA and player interviews.

HuttoKarl
04-01-2011, 09:02 AM
I was on the 11-5 Train.

The Texans screwed me!

I thought they'd go 15-1, so don't feel too bad. :specnatz:

infantrycak
04-01-2011, 09:44 AM
So you think BoB will bring back Rick and Gary if the get another 9 win season?

I think it depends on the circumstances. IF the O regresses for some reason and the D is top ten then I could see a transition to Wade as HC. 9-7 makes the playoffs for some teams almost every year. If they make the playoffs then I don't see anyone fired. If the O is an explosive top 5 O but the D still fails but shows some improvement then I suspect everyone stays. If the O falters and the D doesn't develop then I could see everyone blown out.

More mediocrity, some around here set their sights alot higher than 9 win seasons. BoB doesn't appear to have set his goals above 9 wins.

I said 9+ wins to not be overly optimistic. In any event, how the 9 wins come and what they mean are significant. Arizona got to the SB on 9 wins.

76Texan
04-01-2011, 09:48 AM
I think it depends on the circumstances. IF the O regresses for some reason and the D is top ten then I could see a transition to Wade as HC. 9-7 makes the playoffs for some teams almost every year. If they make the playoffs then I don't see anyone fired. If the O is an explosive top 5 O but the D still fails but shows some improvement then I suspect everyone stays. If the O falters and the D doesn't develop then I could see everyone blown out.



I said 9+ wins to not be overly optimistic. In any event, how the 9 wins come and what they mean are significant. Arizona got to the SB on 9 wins.

This about sums it up for me!

Second Honeymoon
04-01-2011, 10:01 AM
Arizona won 12 games that year including 2 road playoff wins. I know what you meant by 9 games, but I don't want to belittle the Cards accomplishment and act like the Texan's miraculous 9 win season is even remotely comparable to the Cardinal's run.

I do think there is a scenario where Kubiak and Phillips are both cut loose if it all comes tumbling down...again. So I am with you there but it would be such a classically bad move to promote Wade, it would fall in line with how the Texans have operated or, more accurately, failed to operate. That is why I think it will end up shaking out like that.

thunderkyss
04-01-2011, 10:08 AM
Again, you prove my point completely with this list and you don't even know it.

All these guys together have amounted to nothing but a bunch of 8-8 seasons and a 6-10 season in year 5, but go right back and pat Gary Kubiak on the back for doing a great job.

Nobody is patting anybody on the back, and this does not prove your point. Your point, that is being argued here, is that the Texans have been utilizing a build through the draft only mentality.

These FA acquisitions have amounted to more than half our draft picks.

The Texans are building through the draft & supplementing through FA, like all the great teams.

Does not mean, so don't start arguing, that I think the Texans are great, or doing a great job.

It means you are wrong about the Texans draft only mentality.

Double Barrel
04-01-2011, 10:12 AM
I don't understand all this Wade is HC in waiting talk. If Wade does a decent job next year and the D improves so will the record and odds are Kubiak doesn't get fired. If the D does not improve and the O stays the same or gets better what in the world makes people think McNair is going to fire the successful side of the team and promote the unsuccessful side? It makes no sense.

I think Kubiak's fate rests solely on making the playoffs. So the D could improve, O stays good enough, they go 9-7 and miss the playoffs, and I think McNair would have a tough case to make for a HC with 6 seasons and no playoff appearances.

But, I don't assume that the offense will stay solid. I certainly hope and expect it, but AJ is a year older, we have no guarantee that Foster will be as good as he was last season, and they are an injury or two away from being merely average (like many teams).

I think Wade is here for the long haul, though. I think just based on tenure, he will outlast Gary. Think about it: if the D improves, it locks Wade in as a DC for awhile. All that needs to happen at some point is for Gary's team to fall short, be it 2011, 2012, or beyond. Unless someone hires Wade as HC (which he does not anticipate happening), Wade will remain on staff and McNair is certainly the kind of loyal owner that would promote from within his organization, especially with a coach with Wade's resume on his staff.

It's all speculation, so no need to remind. I'm basing my thoughts on 9 years of watching this owner, and this scenario just seems like the logical next step. He's done the overhaul thing with a new coach, and it's just too traumatic for him by his own words. So promoting a DC to HC makes sense to prevent trauma and much hand-wringing.

76Texan
04-01-2011, 10:17 AM
Is there a scenario for Wade to step up as a HC and Gary stepping down to be the OC?

thunderkyss
04-01-2011, 10:23 AM
Four 5-7 starts to seasons in a row speak volumes about BoB, Gary and Ricks competence. But TK and Mr.Tex cant see the forrest for the trees.

No, I agree with that. You can't find anything I've said since 2009 to refute that.

Some of the arguments made against the Texans M.O. doesn't make sense. Bob is trying IMO, sometimes things work, sometimes they don't. He's not doing as many things 180 degrees from what successful owners are doing, as some would have you think.

That's all I'm saying.

gary
04-01-2011, 11:08 AM
I just think Wade fits the mold of McNair being Bum's boy and all.

Texecutioner
04-01-2011, 11:18 AM
No, I agree with that. You can't find anything I've said since 2009 to refute that.



Well there is like hundreds of posts from all last season and the one before that where you didn't agree. Do you think people have amnesia around here or something? You repped Kubiak as this great coach in the making all year long and made every attempt that you could to belittle other coaches who have achieved a lot more in your persuit to defend Kubiak. Are you denying this?

Rey
04-01-2011, 04:54 PM
You are making my point and I said nothing about hopes. If Wade does a reasonable job then I expect 9+ wins and in that event I doubt McNair fires Kubiak unless the offense has regressed. If Wade doesn't build a mid-pack D then we might not get the 9+ wins but then it makes no sense to promote the guy who failed and fire the guy who succeeded in their specialty areas. I think if Kubiak is gone, everyone is gone.

I really think it depends on how you see the Texans offense. Personally, I think some of our numbers were inflated due to getting behind early and having to air it out late.

There were quite a few games where the offense did not perform as expected. There were also a few times where the offense failed to convert in "must get" situations. Granted, they did have their fair share of clutch performances but we have not really seen how they play when it's a close game all day long...

Yes the offense has put up some good numbers, but I wouldn't call them a sure thing. Will Foster/the running game keep it up? Will a key player or two go down? Do the Titans and/or Jags improve?

There are lots of factors involved in wins and losses.

I could easily see a scenario where the defense makes a dramatic improvement but we still come out with a losing record.

infantrycak
04-01-2011, 05:38 PM
There were quite a few games where the offense did not perform as expected. There were also a few times where the offense failed to convert in "must get" situations.

Identify the games where the O failed and then tally it up against the games where the D failed.

Bottom line is the O put up 24.4 points per game. That should be enough to win if the D shows up. Only one team with that or more points failed to get to .500 and the majority were playoff teams. The SB winner was at 24.2 ppg.

I could easily see a scenario where the defense makes a dramatic improvement but we still come out with a losing record.

That was the unless the offense regresses part of that post. If it doesn't and the D makes a dramatic improvement there is no reasonable expectation of a losing record.

Texecutioner
04-01-2011, 05:56 PM
Identify the games where the O failed and then tally it up against the games where the D failed.

Bottom line is the O put up 24.4 points per game. That should be enough to win if the D shows up. Only one team with that or more points failed to get to .500 and the majority were playoff teams. The SB winner was at 24.2 ppg.



That was the unless the offense regresses part of that post. If it doesn't and the D makes a dramatic improvement there is no reasonable expectation of a losing record.

You missed his point entirely. He said that the Texans offense had nice stats, but he felt that they were over blown stats that looked good on paper for the most part. He mentioned the fact that several games the Texans took to long to start scoring while the defense started giving up to many points early on and the offense was just throwing the ball around like crazy playing catch up to get higher points and in many situations the offense had the ball to clinch a game and couldn't do it or would lose the ball. There were problems with the offense.

infantrycak
04-01-2011, 06:02 PM
You missed his point entirely. He said that the Texans offense had nice stats, but he felt that they were over blown stats that looked good on paper for the most part. He mentioned the fact that several games the Texans took to long to start scoring while the defense started giving up to many points early on and the offense was just throwing the ball around like crazy playing catch up to get higher points and in many situations the offense had the ball to clinch a game and couldn't do it or would lose the ball. There were problems with the offense.

Then name the games where the O failed. I didn't miss the point, I don't think it is true. Notice I didn't mention any stat but the one that determines games - points. With a halfway decent D last year we win 9-11 games. Not claiming the O is perfect at all.

It is really pretty simple. Every D was scared of our O. No O was scared of our D.

Rey
04-01-2011, 06:06 PM
Identify the games where the O failed and then tally it up against the games where the D failed.

We all know that the O performed better than one of the worst defenses in league history.

The point is that they have shown that they are more than capable of playing awful. They have had some bad starts and some bad finishes...and there were some games where they just stunk all the way through.



Bottom line is the O put up 24.4 points per game. That should be enough to win if the D shows up. Only one team with that or more points failed to get to .500 and the majority were playoff teams. The SB winner was at 24.2 ppg.

I don't think that is a reliable indicator.

The Texans haven't always been as bad on defense as they were last year. Under Kubiak the offense has consistently hovered around 24 pts/gm yet we've never made the play-offs and have only gotten above .500 once...


That was the unless the offense regresses part of that post.

Huh? You said that if the defense makes a reasonable improvement then you expect 9+ wins and you don't expect to see Kubiak gone unless the offense has regressed...

I said I could see a scenario where the defense improves a lot, but we still have a losing record. 9+ wins is not a losing record...

Rey
04-01-2011, 06:08 PM
Every D was scared of our O. No O was scared of our D.

I don't think there were many teams that were scared of either unit. Sure they respected our offense more, but I don't see many teams shaking in their boots because the Texans offense is coming to town...

Respect/knowing we're capable of putting up points isn't the same thing as fear.

I think teams probably feared Vick and the Eagles, Peyton, Brady...Our offense doesn't strike that kind of fear...mainly because we don't really win anything...

Texecutioner
04-01-2011, 06:20 PM
I don't think there were many teams that were scared of either unit. Sure they respected our offense more, but I don't see many

Respect/knowing we're capable of putting up points isn't the same thing as fear.

Exactly. No defense was in total fear of the Texans. Come on man, who are we kidding. Teams respected our offense, but they were nothing to fear except for that 2nd half blast that would always come when the offense wouldn't hardly do a thing for the first half, but all to frequently it would be to late.

I think teams probably feared Vick and the Eagles, Peyton, Brady...Our offense doesn't strike that kind of fear...mainly because we don't really win anything...

No question they feared those teams more. They've all had historically consistent teams that made the post season year after year in the last decade. The Texans haven't sniffed the post season yet. I don't know why some people don't seem to get that we're looked at just like another Detroit Lions around the league. We've had more embarrassing losses than most teams around the league the last two seasons.

infantrycak
04-01-2011, 06:21 PM
I don't think that is a reliable indicator.

It's called scoreboard. It is the most reliable indicator out there. Look at winning teams and they do one or both of scoring more than league average or holding teams to under league average. Our D out sucked our O.

Huh? You said that if the defense makes a reasonable improvement then you expect 9+ wins and you don't expect to see Kubiak gone unless the offense has regressed...

Huh back at you. Yeah if the O is as good as the last two years I expect 9+ wins if the D gets to mid-pack.

I don't think there were many teams that were scared of either unit.

Then you are fooling yourself. You don't hang 28 points on a Ravens D that normally gives up 16.9, hang 27 on a Jets D that normally gives up 19, and recover from 14 and 21 point deficits multiple times and not get respected by other teams.

Texecutioner
04-01-2011, 06:32 PM
Then you are fooling yourself. You don't hang 28 points on a Ravens D that normally gives up 16.9, hang 27 on a Jets D that normally gives up 19, and recover from 14 and 21 point deficits multiple times and not get respected by other teams.

You just brought up a game that further helped out Rey's point though. Against the Ravens the offense had the ball to where all they needed to do was march down the field and get into FG position and they threw a pick 6 ending the game. That was a game where this supposed great offense had their opportunity to clinch and failed. One of Rey's points about the offense were that "There were also a few times where the offense failed to convert in "must get" situations. That was one of those obvious situations. They also did the same thing against the Jags and didn't convert. They lost the ball on a fumble. I've mentioned this multiple times over the last two seasons when people try acting like this offense is so great. When we're in "must get" situations where the game is on the line and we need to close we all to often have that epic fail moment instead of closing the game. That's not what top notch offenses do that NFL defenses feel they need to fear.

infantrycak
04-01-2011, 06:42 PM
You just brought up a game that further helped out Rey's point though. Against the Ravens the offense had the ball to where all they needed to do was march down the field and get into FG position and they threw a pick 6 ending the game. That was a game where this supposed great offense had their opportunity to clinch and failed. One of Rey's points about the offense were that "There were also a few times where the offense failed to convert in "must get" situations. That was one of those obvious situations. They also did the same thing against the Jags and didn't convert. They lost the ball on a fumble. I've mentioned this multiple times over the last two seasons when people try acting like this offense is so great. When we're in "must get" situations where the game is on the line and we need to close we all to often have that epic fail moment instead of closing the game. That's not what top notch offenses do that NFL defenses feel they need to fear.

That is just ignoring the entirety of the game and frankly any football reality. No offense is perfect. Never has been, never will be. They all have fumbles and INT's. We never would have been in position to as you "it's oh so easy" say drive 99 yards down the field if the offense hadn't already driven 99 yds and 95 yds with a 2 pt. conversion already. The O came back from being down 21 pts. twice. Bottom line the O dramatically outscored the opposing D's average in the Ravens game and the D dramatically allowed more points than the opposing O normally scored. In the Jags game the D gave up 66 yards and a TD in 8 seconds.

Rey
04-01-2011, 06:43 PM
It's called scoreboard. It is the most reliable indicator out there. Look at winning teams and they do one or both of scoring more than league average or holding teams to under league average. Our D out sucked our O.

Then why have the Texans only gotten above .500 once since Kubiak has been here?

The D hasn't always been as bad as they were last year. Sure they've never been great, but they have done enough in games in past years and we've still lost.

I look at games individually. A team can get a high scoring avg. by scoring a lot of points in one or two games.




Then you are fooling yourself. You don't hang 28 points on a Ravens D that normally gives up 16.9, hang 27 on a Jets D that normally gives up 19, and recover from 14 and 21 point deficits multiple times and not get respected by other teams.

Sorry, but teams don't fear sub .500 ball clubs.

I really think it's kind of silly to say that teams were scared of any unit we put on the field.

1) If I'm on defense I know that if I give up points that my offense will have no trouble scoring them back

2) Despite the scoring avg. the Texans offense looked inept often last year. Relying on late game comebacks to boost your offensive stats are not what good offenses tend to do.

Consistently put up points. Score early and often.

Then maybe teams will fear the Texans offense. Until that time, they will only fear guys like Andre and Foster, but not the unit as a whole.

steelbtexan
04-01-2011, 06:43 PM
I think it depends on the circumstances. IF the O regresses for some reason and the D is top ten then I could see a transition to Wade as HC. 9-7 makes the playoffs for some teams almost every year. If they make the playoffs then I don't see anyone fired. If the O is an explosive top 5 O but the D still fails but shows some improvement then I suspect everyone stays. If the O falters and the D doesn't develop then I could see everyone blown out

.



I said 9+ wins to not be overly optimistic. In any event, how the 9 wins come and what they mean are significant. Arizona got to the SB on 9 wins.

If 9-7 gets Gary to the playoffs. I can livve with it. But not be thrilled with the progress this team has made.

If they finish 9-7 and dont make the playofffs. I will feel like a lab rat chasing cheese if no changes are made.

Rey
04-01-2011, 06:45 PM
That is just ignoring the entirety of the game and frankly any football reality. No offense is perfect. Never has been, never will be. They all have fumbles and INT's. We never would have been in position to as you "it's oh so easy" say drive 99 yards down the field if the offense hadn't already driven 99 yds and 95 yds with a 2 pt. conversion already. The O came back from being down 21 pts. twice. Bottom line the O dramatically outscored the opposing D's average in the Ravens game and the D dramatically allowed more points than the opposing O normally scored. In the Jags game the D gave up 66 yards and a TD in 8 seconds.


Cak, had the defense not nutted up and made some key stops then we can't make a comeback either.

Doesn't mean the defense had a good game.

The units work together.

You're talking about other offenses, but "feared" offenses aren't throwing game winning TD's to the other team...Feared offenses aren't putting their defense in bad situations for entire halves.

The scoring avg is great, but playing one good half of football is bad and not anything to fear no matter how you slice it.

steelbtexan
04-01-2011, 07:08 PM
No, I agree with that. You can't find anything I've said since 2009 to refute that.

Some of the arguments made against the Texans M.O. doesn't make sense. Bob is trying IMO, sometimes things work, sometimes they don't. He's not doing as many things 180 degrees from what successful owners are doing, as some would have you think.

That's all I'm saying.

Which successful owner has kept a .500 or less GM/HC for 5 /going on 6 yrs.?

gary
04-01-2011, 07:16 PM
I don't know I just know I am off the Kubiak bandwagon and hope that he proves me wrong at this point.

dalemurphy
04-02-2011, 01:04 AM
Which successful owner has kept a .500 or less GM/HC for 5 /going on 6 yrs.?

Bob McNair.

leebigeztx
04-02-2011, 03:02 AM
To me, a good offense comes into a game and impose their will. The texans didnt do that. Despit the so called explosive offense, oakland scored more. Despite the explosive offense, 70% of the passes were 7 yds or less. The best example I can give is the game vs denver. a explosive offense wouldve scored 40 againsr the after a 21 pt lead.

Lucky
04-02-2011, 06:38 AM
Which successful owner has kept a .500 or less GM/HC for 5 /going on 6 yrs.?

Bob McNair.
If you define success as making $$$, then dale is correct. Otherwise, I haven't a clue as to what he's referring to.

Mr teX
04-02-2011, 09:16 AM
To me, a good offense comes into a game and impose their will. The texans didnt do that. Despit the so called explosive offense, oakland scored more. Despite the explosive offense, 70% of the passes were 7 yds or less. The best example I can give is the game vs denver. a explosive offense wouldve scored 40 againsr the after a 21 pt lead.

C'mon, now you guys are just nitpicking. Noone's offense shows up 16 out of 16 weeks and plays awesome. Every team's offense has games where they struggle. That doesn't mean that they're not an explosive offense. Using your criteria, only the 98' vikings & the 05' patriots would qualify as being explosive.

Rey
04-02-2011, 09:41 AM
C'mon, now you guys are just nitpicking. Noone's offense shows up 16 out of 16 weeks and plays awesome. Every team's offense has games where they struggle. That doesn't mean that they're not an explosive offense. Using your criteria, only the 98' vikings & the 05' patriots would qualify as being explosive.

I agree. The Texans offense can be explosive. Just about everyone's offense has the potential to be explosive.

dalemurphy
04-02-2011, 09:49 AM
If you define success as making $$$, then dale is correct. Otherwise, I haven't a clue as to what he's referring to.


referring to Humor.

drs23
04-02-2011, 11:03 AM
There you go again, spouting off with more inaccuracies. How do you live with yourself lying to all of us day after day? Gary Kubiak has the worst hair of any coach in the NFL! Have you seen a closeup of his receding hairline? It looks like a boomerang landed on his forehead, or maybe he's trying to channel his inner-Manning...

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.aolnews.com/media/2010/02/kubiak-200.jpg

It's just awful, stop pretending like Kubiak has the greatest hair just because you love him so much. If you could take a step back from humping his leg, you might be able to see how bad his hair really is. It's all frizzy and carelessly stuffed under his headset, he certainly doesn't maintain it as well as other coaches like Mike Tomlin, Bill Belichek and Sean Payton. Even Jack Del Rio had a great year in 2006 where he looked quite dashing after switching to TRESemme.

Year after year, we have to deal with the shortcomings of his poor taste and stupid hair stylist. Seriously, what is he thinking surrounding himself with a stylist that agrees this is the look for him? He's had 6 years to find a competent hair dresser, but each time he fails because he wants one of his buddies to do it. If only he would go to Sportclips and get a new one who will challenge his attempt to pick a halfway decent look, then maybe he could command an NFL team properly.

I think given his track record of years of incompetence and poor taste, the only solution is to fire him and bring in a head coach with some real style. Someone who knows how to be a trendsetter and boldly don a style that he made his own. That's right, I'm talking about the man and his legendary mustache, Bill Cowher! Only he can redeem this franchise from 10 years of bad haircuts and no style!

http://prosportsblogging.com/psb/uploads/2010/11/bill-cowher.jpg


:sarcasm:

Well presented factual case. Well documeted with visual aids. No holes in your case whatsoever. Well done young man. :lol:

MSR

ObsiWan
04-02-2011, 07:12 PM
C'mon, now you guys are just nitpicking. Noone's offense shows up 16 out of 16 weeks and plays awesome. Every team's offense has games where they struggle. That doesn't mean that they're not an explosive offense. Using your criteria, only the 98' vikings & the 05' patriots would qualify as being explosive.

you forgot to mention that both of those "explosive offenses" were slowed down in playoff time. as you said, every offense, even these record breaking ones, has games where they struggle.

thunderkyss
04-02-2011, 09:55 PM
Well there is like hundreds of posts from all last season and the one before that where you didn't agree. Do you think people have amnesia around here or something? You repped Kubiak as this great coach in the making all year long and made every attempt that you could to belittle other coaches who have achieved a lot more in your persuit to defend Kubiak. Are you denying this?

No, I think people have agendas.

My stance before the 2010 season, was that the team was ready. My belief was that any coach could take that team to 10+ wins. Gary built that team, so we might as well let him stay there & be the guy.

I also painted a picture of a 10 win season that I believe should still culminate in Gary Kubiak's firing. If we got to Jan 2, 2011 at 10-5, with a win against the Jags putting us in the play-offs, & a loss meaning we watch...... I wanted Gary gone.

I have stated that it makes no sense to me that Kubiak was still part of this organization after Jan 3rd, unless McNair doesn't want to do the new HC & new GM again at the same time. But I expected Rick Smith to be gone by now in that event.

I'm holding on to hope of hopes, that Rick Smith was told get Aso or be gone...... but we won't know if that is the case for another 2 or 3 months at least.

My arguments have been against arguments that simply don't make sense. That we need to be active in FA & overpay to get talent if we want to win. Greenbay didn't do it, they've been as inactive in FA as we have. So has Indianapolis, so has Pittsburgh.

That we have to hire a "proven winner" in a coach. Miami didn't, Atlanta didn't, Baltimore didn't, Greenbay didn't.

I think Kubiak has done an outstanding job with our offense, & I've said as much. I haven't said one good thing about Gary Kubiak the head coach since the end of 2009.

NBT
04-03-2011, 01:46 PM
Let me get this straight, you want the owner and his team to go away? And yet you still sport an an avatar supporting said team and post on a message board dedicated to them? Ok, makes sense I suppose.

It goes under the heading of "think before you Post"!
We didn't like Bud Adams so we sacrificed the Oilers, and were without a Pro team for 6 years of absolute boredom. We have the Texans now and we damn sure don't want to lose them. What, hopefully will happen is that McNair will get more savy as the team matures. At least I hope so.

Double Barrel
04-04-2011, 01:02 PM
We didn't like Bud Adams so we sacrificed the Oilers...

"we" ??? :um: Who is this "we" you speak of?

Historical evidence reveals that ONE MAN made the decision to move that team, and it was not a fan, local politician, or any other person not named Bud Adams.

Fans had nothing to do with that decision, and if that fat greedy rat had just been patient and willing to work with the Houston Rodeo, he'd be the overlord of a shiny new stadium on Kirby.

Sorry, just had to clarify that situation. :tiphat:

HoustonFrog
04-04-2011, 01:25 PM
Here is where I'd like to see the team...on this list

http://twitter.com/#!/evansilva



http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/09/2011-draft-visits-and-workouts-tracker/

They are up to 4 on the new list, including a TE...hip-hip horray

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/09/2011-draft-visits-and-workouts-tracker/

GP
04-05-2011, 09:58 AM
"we" ??? :um: Who is this "we" you speak of?

Historical evidence reveals that ONE MAN made the decision to move that team, and it was not a fan, local politician, or any other person not named Bud Adams.

Fans had nothing to do with that decision, and if that fat greedy rat had just been patient and willing to work with the Houston Rodeo, he'd be the overlord of a shiny new stadium on Kirby.

Sorry, just had to clarify that situation. :tiphat:

I've been thinking about this (several of you are cringing right now)...

Had Bud Adams stayed here, right now we'd be enduring his senile behavior. And, we see what he bases his draft picks upon (which means God only knows what we'd have on the field right now). Although there's no way of knowing if the Houston Oilers (all these past years) would have equaled or even surpassed what the Tennessee Titans have produced, we still would have had today's weirdo Bud Adams running the show.

So all things considered, maybe our current Texans situation is at least a little less embarrassing version of what Bud Adams is displaying these days? I dunno, maybe I'm just grasping at straws (at this point) to convince myself that things aren't as bad here as I believe them to be! LOL.

It's the whole, "Well, at least we're not THEM" rationlization game. See my sig photo, below.

Rule No. 1 in life: Always surround yourself with people inferior to you, so that you look a little better than everyone else. Hey, it's worked for Gary Kubiak so far!

Texecutioner
04-05-2011, 10:45 AM
I've been thinking about this (several of you are cringing right now)...

Had Bud Adams stayed here, right now we'd be enduring his senile behavior. And, we see what he bases his draft picks upon (which means God only knows what we'd have on the field right now). Although there's no way of knowing if the Houston Oilers (all these past years) would have equaled or even surpassed what the Tennessee Titans have produced, we still would have had today's weirdo Bud Adams running the show.

So all things considered, maybe our current Texans situation is at least a little less embarrassing version of what Bud Adams is displaying these days? I dunno, maybe I'm just grasping at straws (at this point) to convince myself that things aren't as bad here as I believe them to be! LOL.

It's the whole, "Well, at least we're not THEM" rationlization game. See my sig photo, below.

Rule No. 1 in life: Always surround yourself with people inferior to you, so that you look a little better than everyone else. Hey, it's worked for Gary Kubiak so far!

The Titans have had a lot more success than the Texans have since the Texans have been in existence. Bud has done much better than Mcnair has.

GP
04-05-2011, 11:12 AM
The Titans have had a lot more success than the Texans have since the Texans have been in existence. Bud has done much better than Mcnair has.

I think it might fall under the "it's all relative" heading, though.

He didn't win a Super Bowl, and now his team looks completely clueless with their QB situation, Adams' numerous fines from the league due to poor conduct, a new inexperienced head coach and "friends of Munchak" syndrome hitting their locker room. Therefore, any success he had has now become eroded.

Once again: There's no way of knowing what the current Houston Oilers would look like (had they been here all these past years). But I think it's certain that Bud Adams is growing senile and kookier by the year. In fact, I'm almost certain that had he not moved the franchise when he did...he would have moved it a year or two later anyways. Or, what if he had just moved it a few years ago? Then we'd have no NFL football to discuss, as it pertains to "our team" we have now.

I'm not an emergent apologist or anything, just saying it's interesting (to me) to think about the What If's, etc.

steelbtexan
04-05-2011, 11:53 AM
The Tacks have been way more successful than the Texans.

If winning is the only priority, the Texans have been the Tacks b....

You not only have Bud to blame. But also Buds minions. Along with that wife beating,philandering,choking,racist that is Warren Moon.

HoustonFrog
04-05-2011, 11:54 AM
I think it might fall under the "it's all relative" heading, though.

He didn't win a Super Bowl, and now his team looks completely clueless with their QB situation, Adams' numerous fines from the league due to poor conduct, a new inexperienced head coach and "friends of Munchak" syndrome hitting their locker room. Therefore, any success he had has now become eroded.

Once again: There's no way of knowing what the current Houston Oilers would look like (had they been here all these past years). But I think it's certain that Bud Adams is growing senile and kookier by the year. In fact, I'm almost certain that had he not moved the franchise when he did...he would have moved it a year or two later anyways. Or, what if he had just moved it a few years ago? Then we'd have no NFL football to discuss, as it pertains to "our team" we have now.

I'm not an emergent apologist or anything, just saying it's interesting (to me) to think about the What If's, etc.

The above bolded is going to be an interesting experiment. Maybe "Friends of Gary" just suck alot worse than "Friends of Mike." So we will see how any "Friends of" works out. I know some coaching circles are people you know but there is a difference between familiarity and "give my buddy a shot."

Double Barrel
04-05-2011, 02:52 PM
I've been thinking about this (several of you are cringing right now)...

Had Bud Adams stayed here, right now we'd be enduring his senile behavior. And, we see what he bases his draft picks upon (which means God only knows what we'd have on the field right now). Although there's no way of knowing if the Houston Oilers (all these past years) would have equaled or even surpassed what the Tennessee Titans have produced, we still would have had today's weirdo Bud Adams running the show.

So all things considered, maybe our current Texans situation is at least a little less embarrassing version of what Bud Adams is displaying these days? I dunno, maybe I'm just grasping at straws (at this point) to convince myself that things aren't as bad here as I believe them to be! LOL.

It's the whole, "Well, at least we're not THEM" rationlization game. See my sig photo, below.

Rule No. 1 in life: Always surround yourself with people inferior to you, so that you look a little better than everyone else. Hey, it's worked for Gary Kubiak so far!

You need to read "Oiler Blues: The Story of Pro Football's Most Frustrating Team (http://www.amazon.com/Oiler-Blues-Story-Footballs-Frustrating/dp/1891422006)" sometime. You'd quickly realize that Houston endured his 'senile' behavior for decades! Seriously, old Bud pales in comparison to young Bud.

As far as "what if...", the fact of the matter is that the majority of the star players that took the Titans to the Super Bowl were drafted as Oilers. I have little doubt that this team would have made it to the Super Bowl if they had still been in Houston.

To Bud's credit (and I rarely give him any), he did admit that his biggest mistake was not letting the Astros leave town first. So I think the Oilers would still be here if he had played the game and been patient for a stadium deal, but true to his nature, greed got the better of him and the rest is history.

As far as Bud vs. Bob...m'eh, different times in history. Bud was a big part of the AFL's success and eventual merger with the NFL, so I've got to give him that credit. Back then, it was not a sure fire investment with pro football, and certainly nothing like it is today where you have an almost guarantee on your investment (as close as it could ever be, at least).

The Oilers are a part of my history as a football fan. That connection was forged through great wins and heartbreaking failure. And while I'm a Texans fan for as long as they have Houston in the name, I have yet to feel the emotional connection to the team like I did with the Oilers many years ago. Most likely because the Texans have always...well, to be honest...sucked.

texanchris
04-05-2011, 05:10 PM
http://houston.sbnation.com/houston-texans/2011/4/5/2092823/jonathan-joseph-nnamdi-asomugha-texans-offseason-vonta-leach-2011-rumors
Looks like they are interested in Jonathan Joseph according to McClain. I would be happy with this signing because Joseph can be a good number 1 corner and not take up a lot of the cap space that Asomugha would.

False Start
04-05-2011, 05:59 PM
http://houston.sbnation.com/houston-texans/2011/4/5/2092823/jonathan-joseph-nnamdi-asomugha-texans-offseason-vonta-leach-2011-rumors
Looks like they are interested in Jonathan Joseph according to McClain. I would be happy with this signing because Joseph can be a good number 1 corner and not take up a lot of the cap space that Asomugha would.

From that link, if they don't resign Leach, I really think its gonna come back to bite them in the ass big time! :toropalm: