PDA

View Full Version : Who here looked at the schedule before the season and counted @ Ravens as a win?


TexansFanatic
10-16-2011, 08:35 PM
I've been posting a lot of negative stuff lately so I'm going to balance that with this thought:

I never expected the Texans to beat the Ravens. I counted this game as a loss before the season even began.

In fact, I expected it to be really ugly. I expected Schaub to get knocked out. I expected him to throw at least one pick-six.

So, truthfully, I was kinda-sorta pleasantly surprised that the Texans made it a game until late.

Having said that, I'm still pissed about the Raiders game. And I still think the Texans let a victory slip away from them in New Orleans.

This team should be 4-2 at worst and could be 5-1. So basically we're watching another typical Kubiak season of woulda-coulda-shoulda unfold again.

Going forward, I'm expecting 6 more wins and a nail-biter-down-to-the-last-weekend struggle for control of the division with the Titans. The division is there for the taking, but I won't be surprised in the least if the Texans don't seize control of it and make it their btch.

gwallaia
10-16-2011, 08:36 PM
I expected to be 4-2 here. The Raiders loss was inexcusable.

ThaShark316
10-16-2011, 08:39 PM
4-2...Raiders loss killed it.

Next 4 I got W, W, W, 50/50.

fiasco west
10-16-2011, 08:39 PM
You are right that you are usually a glass half empty guy so this post is surprising to me.

I know even in the thread I said I expected a loss here, (and even one against Pittsburgh before I saw how bad their Oline really was against the Colts the week before)

So 3-3 right now is not bad for me. Losing this game is not DOOOOOM for me.

BUT....

The Titan game will say a lot about this team. No excuses, with or without Andre. They NEED to win.

Maddict5
10-16-2011, 08:39 PM
I expected to be 4-2 here. The Raiders loss was inexcusable.

lost our best offensive and defensive players for it.. so not quite INexcusable ;)

im realistic & wouldve taken 3-3 at this stage if you had told me all the things that have happened so far. suppose that might make me a bad fan for being realistic and not expecting to win every game but whatever

Dishman
10-16-2011, 08:40 PM
Look, this team loses games it should win. You'd hope they'd come up big and win a game people might consider them losing. What we have here is a team that loses the games it's supposed to lose and loses a few of the games they're supposed to win. Now what does that get us?

Mr. Texan
10-16-2011, 08:42 PM
I'm sure the bills looked at the patriots on the schedule and thought loss but they went out and won the game anyways. jussayin.

but that oakland loss was inexcusable with or without mario and aj.

Texans Pride
10-16-2011, 08:44 PM
Who gives a crap if we "win" our division when there's a bunch of crap teams in it? For what; so we can go into the first round of the playoffs and get our asses handed to us because we play an actual real playoff team?

TexansFanatic
10-16-2011, 08:44 PM
Look, this team loses games it should win. You'd hope they'd come up big and win a game people might consider them losing. What we have here is a team that loses the games it's supposed to lose and loses a few of the games they're supposed to win. Now what does that get us?

It gets us a team that could possibly win its division as long as every other team in the division sucks.

;-))

Maddict5
10-16-2011, 08:48 PM
I'm sure the bills looked at the patriots on thier schedule and thought loss but they went out and won the game anyways. jussayin.

but that oakland loss was inexcusable with or without mario and aj.

conversely the pats fans prob had it marked as a W. does that make it inexcusable too?

and the recent SB champions & NFC east leading Giants prob had the seahawks at home marked as a W.. but they had injuries to some important guys and lost. just saying.

plus the raiders arent exactly chopped liver this year

Texas T
10-16-2011, 08:49 PM
I've been posting a lot of negative stuff lately so I'm going to balance that with this thought:

I never expected the Texans to beat the Ravens. I counted this game as a loss before the season even began.

In fact, I expected it to be really ugly. I expected Schaub to get knocked out. I expected him to throw at least one pick-six.

So, truthfully, I was kinda-sorta pleasantly surprised that the Texans made it a game until late.

Having said that, I'm still pissed about the Raiders game. And I still think the Texans let a victory slip away from them in New Orleans.

This team should be 4-2 at worst and could be 5-1. So basically we're watching another typical Kubiak season of woulda-coulda-shoulda unfold again.

Going forward, I'm expecting 6 more wins and a nail-biter-down-to-the-last-weekend struggle for control of the division with the Titans. The division is there for the taking, but I won't be surprised in the least if the Texans don't seize control of it and make it their btch.

This game has always been a loss for me. I have decided that for the rest of the year I will go into every game expecting a loss so sometimes I'll actually be happy.
It's sad that I have come to this but I can't figure out which games they will win and which they will lose.

brakos82
10-16-2011, 08:49 PM
Limping into the playoffs still counts.

Signed,
'08 Cards, '08 Chargers, '10 Seahawks

TexansFanatic
10-16-2011, 08:50 PM
conversely the pats fans prob had it marked as a W. does that make it inexcusable too?

I guarantee you the Pats feel like that loss was inexcusable. That's what winners do. They expect to win and they don't make excuses for losses.

Mr. Texan
10-16-2011, 08:51 PM
i guarantee you the pats feel like that loss was inexcusable. That's what winners do. They expect to win and they don't make excuses for losses.

+2.

Texans Pride
10-16-2011, 08:52 PM
Limping into the playoffs still counts.

Signed,
'08 Cards, '08 Chargers, '10 Seahawks

Normally I'd agree with you....Nah, not with this team though....Their behavior patterns have been the same for years. In fact, it's probably a moot point because if they play like this, there's no way in hell they will win this division.

TheMatrix31
10-16-2011, 08:52 PM
Who gives a crap if we "win" our division when there's a bunch of crap teams in it? For what; so we can go into the first round of the playoffs and get our asses handed to us because we play an actual real playoff team?

You and everyone LIKE you would be the SAME people who would march up and down this board and everywhere else bitching and moaning about how we didn't take advantage of a crappy division and this and that and this and that.

Spare me that BS.

I had us at 4-2 after six games, with a loss to Baltimore and either NO or Pittsburgh. One game off the pace. That would normally be okay, but I'm not liking what I'm seeing from the offense. At all. The Front 7 have shored up, but the secondary has not, and there's way too much that is troubling me to truly be "okay" with where we're at.

Rey
10-16-2011, 08:53 PM
I've never been a schedule predictor. Teams change so much from year to year.

The problem was not that I saw this as a loss before the season. The problem is that I saw it as a lost earlier this week.

TexansFanatic
10-16-2011, 08:54 PM
This game has always been a loss for me. I have decided that for the rest of the year I will go into every game expecting a loss so sometimes I'll actually be happy.
It's sad that I have come to this but I can't figure out which games they will win and which they will lose.

I can help you with that. Pretty simple formula, really.

If it's an away game and the home team is really good, the Texans are going to lose.

If it's an away game and the home team is average, the Texans could win but will still probably find a way to lose.

If it's a home game, and the visiting team is really good, the Texans will lose most of the time.

If it's a home game and the visiting team is average, the Texans are likely to win but don't be surprised if they blow it.

Naiirb
10-16-2011, 08:57 PM
Its not that fact we lost, its how we lost that has everyone so frustrated.

Quoting Nick Scurfields twitter post
The Texans gained 42, 6, 6 and 9 yards on 4 drives in the 4th quarter en route to a season-low 14 points & 293 yards

Yes we were playing the Ravens D, but this offense is suppose to be better than that.

brakos82
10-16-2011, 08:57 PM
Normally I'd agree with you....Nah, not with this team though....Their behavior patterns have been the same for years. In fact, it's probably a moot point because if they play like this, there's no way in hell they will win this division.

There's no way in hell the Seahawks should have been in the playoffs last year... they won 3 out-of-division games that year.

Cerberus
10-16-2011, 08:59 PM
Well, I figured they would have lost to Indy, but once Peyton went down that became a predicted win. So 1-0 was expected. Then I counted on a win against Miami (2-0), loss to New Orleans (2-1), a home win against the Steelers (3-1), a loss to the Raiders (3-2) and Baltimore (3-3). So to me they are doing as expected so far, and I think most of their wins lay down the road against inferior teams like Jax, Cleveland, and Tampa. Add to that games they should win because of home field advantage, i.e., Atlanta, Carolina and Tenn. Leaves me thinking they should go 10-6 or 9-7.

Endcoachment
10-16-2011, 09:01 PM
I think the general consensus is this was a game we could have won. Not only that but if we can't win a close game like this, it will be a one and done when and a big IF when we get to the playoff.

Cerberus
10-16-2011, 09:05 PM
. . . plus the raiders arent exactly chopped liver this year

I've noticed a lot of Texan fans seem to think they were playing last year's Raiders or something. The Raiders are 4-2, and could have been 5-1 had they not blown the 20 point lead they had on the Bills. Of course, now that Jason Campbell is out for the season things don't look so rosy for them unless they can pull off a Pastorini/Plunkett QB change with Campbell/Boller. Although I seriously doubt it. I guess if the Texans had played the Lions or 49ers and lost, that too would have been inexcusable. :vincepalm:

False Start
10-16-2011, 09:05 PM
I remember a lot of folks saying if we come out of the first 6 games 3-3 "I'll be happy." Now that we are 3-3 people are tripping the hell out....go figure. :kitten:

Endcoachment
10-16-2011, 09:09 PM
I remember a lot of folks saying if we come out of the first 6 games 3-3 "I'll be happy." Now that we are 3-3 people are tripping the hell out....go figure. :kitten:

Its the way we are 3-3. I've never seen a Texan game we looked in control of.

Dishman
10-16-2011, 09:14 PM
It gets us a team that could possibly win its division as long as every other team in the division sucks.

;-))

Then this could be our year!!

hradhak
10-16-2011, 09:19 PM
Schaub actually played a pretty good game. I even think the playcalling was pretty good. Our execution left a lot to be desired. No run blocking, Arian slipping (when no one else seemed to be), etc.

It seems to me that we always come to a fork in the road every game. This game it was at 19-14 in the 4th. We make a drive and score we can keep it competitive, but instead we don't execute.

I'm not giving Kubes a pass. These losses ultimately fall on him. But we should direct some of our anger at some of the players as well.

brakos82
10-16-2011, 09:20 PM
Its the way we are 3-3. I've never seen a Texan game we looked in control of.

Well, except against the Clolts.

TheMatrix31
10-16-2011, 09:23 PM
Its the way we are 3-3. I've never seen a Texan game we looked in control of.

Agreed about the "way" but we've definitely looked in control AT TIMES in games. Problem is two halves. Against the lowly Colts (i know, no big deal, but you have to win the winnable ones), and the defense has looked pretty freakin' dominant in geral At least the front seven. Offensively? Not so much. Aside from the first drive against Pittsburgh though, that was beautiful.

I've noticed a lot of Texan fans seem to think they were playing last year's Raiders or something. The Raiders are 4-2, and could have been 5-1 had they not blown the 20 point lead they had on the Bills. Of course, now that Jason Campbell is out for the season things don't look so rosy for them unless they can pull off a Pastorini/Plunkett QB change with Campbell/Boller. Although I seriously doubt it. I guess if the Texans had played the Lions or 49ers and lost, that too would have been inexcusable. :vincepalm:

I've been saying this for so long. Disgusting how everyone treated the Raiders as some easy win. Delusional and arrogant for no reason.

amazing80
10-16-2011, 09:25 PM
Im not pissed we're 3-3, thats fine given the strength of schedule the first 6 weeks. Im pissed because we SHOULD BE 4-2 and we blew it. Next week becomes a MUST WIN. Going down 3-4 and a loss to the only team in our division that will give us a run for our money is not acceptable.

False Start
10-16-2011, 09:30 PM
Its the way we are 3-3. I've never seen a Texan game we looked in control of.

Yeah I get what you're saying and somewhat agree, the Saints game and today's game aggravated the hell out of me. :pissed: :hankpalm:

valleytexfan
10-16-2011, 09:33 PM
I would normally think this way, but no more. This team can be 6-0! I'll even concede the Saints game and say 5-1.
Today, the D played well enough to win. This is on Schaub and the offense. Does that include Kubiak? Yes. End of discussion. :gun:

DexmanC
10-16-2011, 09:44 PM
Is this thread an attempt to take today's loss out of the context of the
CURRENT 2011 SEASON? You know... The one going on RIGHT NOW?

thunderkyss
10-16-2011, 09:50 PM
In fact, I expected it to be really ugly. I expected Schaub to get knocked out. I expected him to throw at least one pick-six.


I did expect to see a lot of turnovers go the Ravens way.

So I've been thinking. This used to be a dangerous offense. There was a time when we were the most feared team on 1st down.... remember that?

2010, we lost little Shanny, gained Dennison & the offense slowed down. 1st half, we looked lethargic, then when our backs were against the wall, we toook off the leash.

This year, first halfs look a little better, but the second half, we're on the leash again.

What if Kubiak is trying to control (micro-manage) the offense to prevent us from experiencing those goofy things that used to happen for no reason?

So, we look back at our three losses... we lost them in the 4th Qtr.... even with the controlled offense, we're in these games to the 4th Qtr... Up until the last play of the Raiders game, we're not losing because of stupid mistakes. Uncanny mistakes.

Those mistakes, that happen during clutch time.

What if Kubiak is just getting these guys into these situations, trying to manage these "clutch times" to help our team master those situations?

What if they are showing Kubiak that they are handling those situations better..... recovering the fumble in the endzone... no turnover against the Ravens... they were +7 coming into this game & they didn't get one turnover today.

What if.. we take the leash off later this year & can be reasonably assured we won't see those uncanny mishaps at inopportune times?

TexansFanatic
10-16-2011, 09:56 PM
Is this thread an attempt to take today's loss out of the context of the
CURRENT 2011 SEASON? You know... The one going on RIGHT NOW?

The point of the original post was to temper all the bitching I saw in other threads about today's game.

I was thinking, "Why are these people pissed we lost an away game to the team that is likely to be the Super Bowl representative of the AFC?"

I was pissed last week. This week, not so much.

If they shape up and start winning the games they're supposed to win and throwing in a few wins against teams they're not expected to beat, I'll be happy from here on out.

But if they lose next week and start their 6th season under this regime at 3-4, I will be officially writing the regime off. Kubiak will, at that point, clearly be the problem.

TexansFanatic
10-16-2011, 10:00 PM
I did expect to see a lot of turnovers go the Ravens way.

So I've been thinking. This used to be a dangerous offense. There was a time when we were the most feared team on 1st down.... remember that?

2010, we lost little Shanny, gained Dennison & the offense slowed down. 1st half, we looked lethargic, then when our backs were against the wall, we toook off the leash.

This year, first halfs look a little better, but the second half, we're on the leash again.

What if Kubiak is trying to control (micro-manage) the offense to prevent us from experiencing those goofy things that used to happen for no reason?

So, we look back at our three losses... we lost them in the 4th Qtr.... even with the controlled offense, we're in these games to the 4th Qtr... Up until the last play of the Raiders game, we're not losing because of stupid mistakes. Uncanny mistakes.

Those mistakes, that happen during clutch time.

What if Kubiak is just getting these guys into these situations, trying to manage these "clutch times" to help our team master those situations?

What if they are showing Kubiak that they are handling those situations better..... recovering the fumble in the endzone... no turnover against the Ravens... they were +7 coming into this game & they didn't get one turnover today.

What if.. we take the leash off later this year & can be reasonably assured we won't see those uncanny mishaps at inopportune times?

Oh, my friend, I think you are walking dangerously near the edge of the precipice that separates you from utter delusion and fantasyland.

Kubiak isn't playing interseasonal head games and taking on early losses in the interest of big wins later. Please let go of that thought right away.

Rey
10-16-2011, 10:10 PM
I did expect to see a lot of turnovers go the Ravens way.

So I've been thinking. This used to be a dangerous offense. There was a time when we were the most feared team on 1st down.... remember that?

2010, we lost little Shanny, gained Dennison & the offense slowed down. 1st half, we looked lethargic, then when our backs were against the wall, we toook off the leash.

This year, first halfs look a little better, but the second half, we're on the leash again.

What if Kubiak is trying to control (micro-manage) the offense to prevent us from experiencing those goofy things that used to happen for no reason?

So, we look back at our three losses... we lost them in the 4th Qtr.... even with the controlled offense, we're in these games to the 4th Qtr... Up until the last play of the Raiders game, we're not losing because of stupid mistakes. Uncanny mistakes.

Those mistakes, that happen during clutch time.

What if Kubiak is just getting these guys into these situations, trying to manage these "clutch times" to help our team master those situations?

What if they are showing Kubiak that they are handling those situations better..... recovering the fumble in the endzone... no turnover against the Ravens... they were +7 coming into this game & they didn't get one turnover today.

What if.. we take the leash off later this year & can be reasonably assured we won't see those uncanny mishaps at inopportune times?

I honestly don't recall exactly how we played 3 seasons ago.

That said I recall the offense being more explosive with sage at qb. I recall sage being more of a gun slinger.

I'm trying hard to remember but I can't remember a whole lot of times the offense scored early and often in previous years. I remember being in situations where passing was necessary and we subsequently aired it out.

Shanny or no shanny I honestly have never thought of this offense as a juggernaut.

Endcoachment
10-16-2011, 10:17 PM
Well, except against the Clolts.

0 points in the second half doesnt scream 'control' to me.

TexansFanatic
10-16-2011, 10:20 PM
I honestly have never thought of this offense as a juggernaut.

Juggernauts take what they want when they want it.

I can't imagine anyone here could honestly say that definition describes the Texans.

thunderkyss
10-16-2011, 10:21 PM
Kubiak isn't playing interseasonal head games and taking on early losses in the interest of big wins later. Please let go of that thought right away.

If Kubiak is the control freak perfectionist we think he is, he probably thinks we lose if we played that uncontrolled-explosive style.. we lost as many games that way as we have trying to control the games.

I don't think it's necessarily a head game.... just trying to get better doing what we do.

TexansFanatic
10-16-2011, 10:31 PM
If Kubiak is the control freak perfectionist we think he is, he probably thinks we lose if we played that uncontrolled-explosive style.. we lost as many games that way as we have trying to control the games.

I don't think it's necessarily a head game.... just trying to get better doing what we do.

If Kubiak could get his offense to score a touchdown every time they had the ball, he would.

If Kubiak could get his defense to score a touchdown every time the opposing offense had the ball, he would.

If Kubiak could get his special teams to score a touchdown every time they were on the field, he would.

But to think he is holding back any phase of his team on even one single play in an effort to produce a team that methodically controls each game from start to finish, scoring just the right amount in each quarter so as not to tip the balance, is pure fantasy.

It's a mind-blowing bit of conjecture with zero basis in reality, but I give you credit for creative thinking.

Endcoachment
10-16-2011, 10:48 PM
If Kubiak could get his offense to score a touchdown every time they had the ball, he would.

If Kubiak could get his defense to score a touchdown every time the opposing offense had the ball, he would.

If Kubiak could get his special teams to score a touchdown every time they were on the field, he would.

But to think he is holding back any phase of his team on even one single play in an effort to produce a team that methodically controls each game from start to finish, scoring just the right amount in each quarter so as not to tip the balance, is pure fantasy.

It's a mind-blowing bit of conjecture with zero basis in reality, but I give you credit for creative thinking.

It's not fantasy, in fact you are quoting the Packers, Patriots, and even the Saints.

Is Arian better than Rice? Maybe

Is Shaub on par with Flacco? I'd say so, minus the arm.

etc. see where im getting at?

thunderkyss
10-16-2011, 10:49 PM
If Kubiak could get his offense to score a touchdown every time they had the ball, he would.

If Kubiak could get his defense to score a touchdown every time the opposing offense had the ball, he would.

If Kubiak could get his special teams to score a touchdown every time they were on the field, he would.

But to think he is holding back any phase of his team on even one single play in an effort to produce a team that methodically controls each game from start to finish, scoring just the right amount in each quarter so as not to tip the balance, is pure fantasy.

It's a mind-blowing bit of conjecture with zero basis in reality, but I give you credit for creative thinking.

I agree, that's not what I'm saying.

TexansFanatic
10-16-2011, 10:50 PM
It's not fantasy, in fact you are quoting the Packers, Patriots, and even the Saints.

Is Arian better than Rice? Maybe

Is Shaub on par with Flacco? I'd say so, minus the arm.

etc. see where im getting at?

I'm thoroughly lost. Please clue me in.

TexansFanatic
10-16-2011, 10:51 PM
I agree, that's not what I'm saying.

Help a brother out. Where did I go astray?

thunderkyss
10-17-2011, 09:35 AM
Help a brother out. Where did I go astray?

Playing fast, playing aggressive, taking shots... we're not that offense anymore. Last year, the only time we did that was when we were down by 30.

We played aggressive on offense in 2007, 2008, 2009, but there was always some goofy crap happening. 2010 he tried to slow them down, control the game but we kept digging holes we had to fight to get out of, so he'd get aggressive again & we'd look good for a little while, put ourselves in position to win, & screw up again. I think Kubiak is trying to slow them down, trying to control those situations, trying to keep the game from getting too big for our team.

The only difference between this year & last year, is that our defense has kept the games close for the most part.

HuttoKarl
10-17-2011, 09:45 AM
Who gives a crap if we "win" our division when there's a bunch of crap teams in it? For what; so we can go into the first round of the playoffs and get our asses handed to us because we play an actual real playoff team?

Me. Probably a bunch of others too.

Vinny
10-17-2011, 09:46 AM
Me. Probably a bunch of others too.

the bar stays low

TheMatrix31
10-17-2011, 10:09 AM
Winning a division with a bunch of crappy teams is much, much better than losing a division with a bunch of crappy teams.

We don't control what division we're in or what schedule we have. We just have to go and win.

Like I've said multiple times:

The same people who say winning a division with crappy teams is worthless and unnecessary then getting rocked in the first round are the VERY SAME people that would start a ****ing revolution if the team DIDN'T win the division with crappy teams.

thunderkyss
10-17-2011, 10:10 AM
the bar stays low

That's where it needs to be till we can prove that we'll do better.

Just because I've been lifting weights for 5 years doesn't mean that I should be benching 315 if I started at 90lbs, had a couple of accidents along the way, was doing it wrong for the first two years...

Kubiak should still go if we sneak in & are one & done. But I'd be happy to get into the play offs. I'll even go to the parade.

Vinny
10-17-2011, 10:11 AM
That's where it needs to be till we can prove that we'll do better.

Just because I've been lifting weights for 5 years doesn't mean that I should be benching 315 if I started at 90lbs, had a couple of accidents along the way, was doing it wrong for the first two years...

Kubiak should still go if we sneak in & are one & done. But I'd be happy to get into the play offs. I'll even go to the parade.
your goal isn't to keep lifting the same 90lbs for 6 years is it? Kubiak took a 6-10 team and 4 years later we have a 6-10 team. Wash, rinse, repeat.

What good is it to get beat like a drum in the playoffs just because your division is crappy and your team is just the least crappy team?

Honoring Earl 34
10-17-2011, 10:17 AM
your goal isn't to keep lifting the same 90lbs for 6 years is it? Kubiak took a 6-10 team and 4 years later we have a 6-10 team. Wash, rinse, repeat.

What good is it to get beat like a drum in the playoffs just because your division is crappy and your team is just the least crappy team?

I want to be like the Packers , Saints , Pats , Steelers , and such . Not Arizona , Seattle , and KC .

I'm ready to whif for Griff .

Runner
10-17-2011, 10:22 AM
3-3, 4-2.

All off-season people talk about the Texans being contenders, being elite, having a shot at the Super Bowl, etc. Then when the rubber hits the road they say they never expected to beat the good teams.

Beating the weak teams is good; elite teams should take care of that business most of the time.

However, elite, contending, Super Bowl capable teams have to beat other good teams. So no, 3-3 isn't good enough to convince me the Texans are elite or even on "the right track".

I guess if the Texans do finish off strong and wipe the floor with the weak part of their schedule that will be the incremental improvement so highly touted around here in years past. Yippee!

Honoring Earl 34
10-17-2011, 10:29 AM
3-3, 4-2.

All off-season people talk about the Texans being contenders, being elite, having a shot at the Super Bowl, etc. Then when the rubber hits the road they then say they never expected to beat the good teams.

Beating the weak teams is good; elite teams should take care of that business most of the time.

However, elite, contending, Super Bowl capable teams have to beat other good teams. So no, 3-3 isn't good enough to convince me the Texans are elite or even on "the right track".

I guess if the Texans do finish off strong and wipe the floor with the weak part of their schedule that will be the incremental improvement so highly touted around here in years past. Yippee!

They'll start that kick after they're way behind just to come up short ( 5-7 and end up 9-7 ) . The saving grace for some ( fans ) is that it's like racing turtles this year and we can back into the playoffs .

thunderkyss
10-17-2011, 10:39 AM
your goal isn't to keep lifting the same 90lbs for 6 years is it? Kubiak took a 6-10 team and 4 years later we have a 6-10 team. Wash, rinse, repeat.

What good is it to get beat like a drum in the playoffs just because your division is crappy and your team is just the least crappy team?

He got to 280 lbs, tore a muscle, got set back to 180lbs.. it happens.

DexmanC
10-17-2011, 10:42 AM
That's where it needs to be till we can prove that we'll do better.

Just because I've been lifting weights for 5 years doesn't mean that I should be benching 315 if I started at 90lbs, had a couple of accidents along the way, was doing it wrong for the first two years...

Kubiak should still go if we sneak in & are one & done. But I'd be happy to get into the play offs. I'll even go to the parade.

If the bar were set high, and you didn't settle for substandard performance,
you'd be lifting 315 WELL within 5 years, hell, within TWO.

As long as the bar is set low, then "good enough" will be just below the bar.
The bar must be set high, and continually being raised. That's what
champions do. Jim Harbaugh didn't take over 1-15 Stanford, and concede
the conference to USC. He demanded excellence from them, and they
achieved it. That mindset has taken a sucky 49ers team to 5-1, by
beating a 5-0 team ON THE ROAD. Six years in, and Kubiak has
NEVER accomplished anything like that.

Shoot for the stars, and land on the moon.

Vinny
10-17-2011, 10:43 AM
He got to 280 lbs, tore a muscle, got set back to 180lbs.. it happens.at least you sell out your stadium huh?

thunderkyss
10-17-2011, 10:45 AM
If the bar were set high, and you didn't settle for substandard performance,
you'd be lifting 315 WELL within 5 years, hell, within TWO.

As long as the bar is set low, then "good enough" will be just below the bar.
The bar must be set high, and continually being raised. That's what
champions do.

Shoot for the stars, and land on the moon.

Regardless where I set the bar isn't going to change what the Texans are going to do. They're shooting for a Super Bowl.

I'm just saying I will be happy to buy play-off tickets regardless how they get in.

I'll be happy to watch a road play-off game.

I'm not going to Reliant & boo the team or wave fire Kubiak signs if the team is 3-3 or even 3-4.

DexmanC
10-17-2011, 10:45 AM
He got to 280 lbs, tore a muscle, got set back to 180lbs.. it happens.

Wish him well during rehab, and let another strong man get under the bench.

That SHOULD happen..

Texan_Bill
10-17-2011, 10:46 AM
I expected to be 4-2 here. The Raiders loss was inexcusable.

I actually had the Raiders as a "swing" game, meaning I had the Texans @ 4-2 OR 3-3 at this point. The Raiders are not a bad football team.

DexmanC
10-17-2011, 10:47 AM
Regardless where I set the bar isn't going to change what the Texans are going to do. They're shooting for a Super Bowl.

I'm just saying I will be happy to buy play-off tickets regardless how they get in.

I'll be happy to watch a road play-off game.

I'm not going to Reliant & boo the team or wave fire Kubiak signs if the team is 3-3 or even 3-4.

They SAY they're shooting for the Superbowl. Their actions SCREAM
"ok" is good enough. I think Kubiak should've been fired at 9-7, but I'm tired
of being proven right about it.

HOU-TEX
10-17-2011, 10:49 AM
A sign that your team hasn't gotten there when everyone expects a loss. Sad, if I might say

Hervoyel
10-17-2011, 10:53 AM
I thought that at this point we would have beaten the Colts, Dolphins, and Raiders comfortably and we would have won one of the Saints/Steelers/Ravens games to be 4-2.

I agree with everyone else that the Raiders loss was inexcusable. I consider it the single biggest sign that these are the same old Texans (followed closely by the choke against the Saints).

We are one game off of the pace I thought they'd be on going into this season.

I've decided that we're going to win Sunday to go to 4-3. eriadoc's prediction setting up another 5-7 in a previous thread is so compelling that I don't see how the Texans can resist playing it out.

ObsiWan
10-17-2011, 10:56 AM
Well, except against the Clolts.
...Speaking of the Colts' game...

Remember when a couple of us raised the alarm about how the offense faded in the second half against the Colts??

Remember how we were beat down and told to shut up and enjoy the win??

Remember these warning posts from me during the Colts' game??
Quote:

Originally Posted by ObsiWan http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1772727#post1772727)
We're still only playing one half of football.
Too many damned turnovers - one in the Red Zone.
When you take "your foot off the gas" or start "coasting" you get sloppy.

I don't like it.


Originally Posted by ObsiWan http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1772751#post1772751)
Not being negative. Just pointing out the things that need polishing up. We strive to be a playoff team, right?
Well playoff teams don't take entire halfs off.
Playoff teams minimize turnovers.
All I'm saying is we still have a bit of work to do.


GP and CnnnD and some others warned you folks in WEEK ONE that this offense wasn't sharp as it should be and that the lack of an edge would bite us in the backside against the better teams. Well, we were shouted down and told to "shut up and enjoy the win" for our trouble.

See what we were saying way back then?

Vinny
10-17-2011, 10:57 AM
I thought that at this point we would have beaten the Colts, Dolphins, and Raiders comfortably and we would have won one of the Saints/Steelers/Ravens games to be 4-2.

I agree with everyone else that the Raiders loss was inexcusable. I consider it the single biggest sign that these are the same old Texans (followed closely by the choke against the Saints).

We are one game off of the pace I thought they'd be on going into this season.

I've decided that we're going to win Sunday to go to 4-3. eriadoc's prediction setting up another 5-7 in a previous thread is so compelling that I don't see how the Texans can resist playing it out.everyone is chirping about how we have a cake schedule going fwd, but Tampa just beat the Saints, Atlanta will have it's bugs worked out by the time we get there, Cincinnati has one of the best defenses in the NFL and Cam Newton is the kind of QB that tends to beat the Texans like a red headed step child. This mentally soft team will struggle to beat those teams in my view.

thunderkyss
10-17-2011, 11:00 AM
I agree with everyone else that the Raiders loss was inexcusable. I consider it the single biggest sign that these are the same old Texans (followed closely by the choke against the Saints).


I think this is the point really.

We choked in New Orleans, we choked against Oakland, & we choked yesterday.

It's ok to get beat once in while, but to go toe-to-toe with a team only to choke at the end.... to show that we can play with them for 45 minutes, but fail in the final 15 minutes.

That's what is screaming same old Texans.

Errant Hothy
10-17-2011, 11:04 AM
your goal isn't to keep lifting the same 90lbs for 6 years is it? Kubiak took a 6-10 team and 4 years later we have a 6-10 team. Wash, rinse, repeat.

What good is it to get beat like a drum in the playoffs just because your division is crappy and your team is just the least crappy team?

This...

If the bar were set high, and you didn't settle for substandard performance,
you'd be lifting 315 WELL within 5 years, hell, within TWO.

As long as the bar is set low, then "good enough" will be just below the bar.
The bar must be set high, and continually being raised. That's what
champions do. Jim Harbaugh didn't take over 1-15 Stanford, and concede
the conference to USC. He demanded excellence from them, and they
achieved it. That mindset has taken a sucky 49ers team to 5-1, by
beating a 5-0 team ON THE ROAD. Six years in, and Kubiak has
NEVER accomplished anything like that.

Shoot for the stars, and land on the moon.

...and this.

DX-TEX
10-17-2011, 11:11 AM
A sign that your team hasn't gotten there when everyone expects a loss. Sad, if I might say

Thats what i was about to say. When you accept mediocrity your get mediocrity,

Cerberus
10-17-2011, 03:36 PM
I actually had the Raiders as a "swing" game, meaning I had the Texans @ 4-2 OR 3-3 at this point. The Raiders are not a bad football team.

It is funny to see people's reactions to losing to the Raiders. They either assumed the Texans were playing last year's Raiders, or they are too young to remember when the Raiders were good and they see the Raiders the way I see the Bengals. Funny thing is, how would those same people have handled a loss to the Chiefs? After all, the Chiefs won the AFCW last year, right? Problem is, last year's Chiefs and this year's Chiefs are two different teams, much like last year's Raiders and this years Raiders. Well, at least until Jason Campbell went down and out for the season.

I thought that at this point we would have beaten the Colts, Dolphins, and Raiders comfortably and we would have won one of the Saints/Steelers/Ravens games to be 4-2.

I agree with everyone else that the Raiders loss was inexcusable. I consider it the single biggest sign that these are the same old Texans (followed closely by the choke against the Saints).

Inexcusable because???? Because you weren't aware the Raiders are better than you gave them credit for being?

I know I predicted the Raiders to win by 3-4 points.

TheMatrix31
10-17-2011, 09:32 PM
Just more delusion from Texans fans.

The Raiders are (were, I guess now) a pretty damn good team. Why everyone is treating that loss as "inexcusable" is ****ing ridiculous to me.

Now, if you want to talk about the patterns that LED to the loss, then that's another thing.

TexansFanatic
10-17-2011, 09:42 PM
Just more delusion from Texans fans.

The Raiders are (were, I guess now) a pretty damn good team. Why everyone is treating that loss as "inexcusable" is ****ing ridiculous to me.

Now, if you want to talk about the patterns that LED to the loss, then that's another thing.

Your expectations are clearly very low and I'm actually envious. I wish I could be happy with average.

If you can't expect a win at home against a team as poorly managed and coached as the Raiders have been for the better part of the past couple of decades then what meaningful games can you ever expect to win?

If you're expecting a loss against any team that can be classified as above average then what possible hope can you have of seeing your team succeed in the post-season?

TheMatrix31
10-17-2011, 11:43 PM
Your expectations are clearly very low and I'm actually envious. I wish I could be happy with average.

If you can't expect a win at home against a team as poorly managed and coached as the Raiders have been for the better part of the past couple of decades then what meaningful games can you ever expect to win?

If you're expecting a loss against any team that can be classified as above average then what possible hope can you have of seeing your team succeed in the post-season?

A) I'm not happy with average at all.

B) It speaks on your understanding of other teams around the league if you think that the Raiders were the same team as years past. Thinking the Raiders are just the "same ol Raiders" is straight up arrogance about some perceived stature of our team AND ignorance of how far they've come.

C) I want wins every single week. Very, very badly. I have holes in my wall that can attest to my desire to win. But as someone who has no control over the team or the way they execute, and as someone who understands that this team is hurting, a work in progress, not the Patriots, and coached by Kubiak....the only thing I can expect is to compete in every game. And we have.

Does that mean I demand less? Does that mean I'm okay with losing? Does that mean I'm a "Kubiak sunshiner" (which, btw, has got to he the dumbest thing I've heard to describe someone who supports a coach) Does that mean any of the things that you or other people think it means? No.

80tothezone
10-17-2011, 11:57 PM
Its not that fact we lost, its how we lost that has everyone so frustrated.

Quoting Nick Scurfields twitter post


Yes we were playing the Ravens D, but this offense is suppose to be better than that.

without dre? i don't think they are right now as DM learns the system maybe they could be but with two average WR'S and one just joined the team WR i didn't really expect much.

TexansFanatic
10-18-2011, 12:17 AM
It speaks on your understanding of other teams around the league if you think that the Raiders were the same team as years past. Thinking the Raiders are just the "same ol Raiders" is straight up arrogance about some perceived stature of our team AND ignorance of how far they've come.

I've actually followed the Raiders pretty closely for over 30 years mainly because a good friend of mine is a seriously nutty Raiders fan and he has essentially forced me to know a lot about his beloved Silver & Black.

They typically have a talented roster, but the mayhem an old/crazed Al Davis brought to that organization made it doubly difficult for them to compete. That may change now that he's gone, but he hadn't been gone for many hours before the Texans played them most recently.

The fact that the Texans absolutely dominated the Raiders in the first half is what I consider compelling evidence that I was correct to expect the Texans to win. The Raiders couldn't convert a third down, Darren McFadden had difficulty gaining a single yard, and Jason Campbell was harassed into errant throws repeatedly.

The Texans looked like they were going to make short work of the Raiders but then they just went to bed. Up by a score of 14-6, the Texans looked like they felt they had proven their point and they were done for the day.

That sort of performance is screaming out that the team lacks a fire, discipline, and proper leadership.


I'm not happy with average at all. But as someone who has no control over the team or the way they execute, and as someone who understands that this team is hurting, a work in progress, not the Patriots, and coached by Kubiak....the only thing I can expect is to compete in every game. And we have.

Does that mean I demand less? Does that mean I'm okay with losing? Does that mean I'm a "Kubiak sunshiner" (which, btw, has got to he the dumbest thing I've heard to describe someone who supports a coach)

Here's where you've lost me.

You mention that the Texans aren't the Patriots. What separates them from the Patriots and what's keeping the Texans from closing that gap?

How can you say the team is a work in progress when they've been, give or take a game or two, a .500 team every single season for the past 5 years?

Doesn't a work in progress usually improve over time?

You've also essentially admitted that the team is hamstrung by Kubiak's leadership but you also support him. Maybe it's just me, but that seems like a striking contradiction. Why would you support a coach you know to be an impediment to his team's success?

TheMatrix31
10-18-2011, 12:20 AM
Well obviously. That's what I'm saying. Kubiak sucks, that's why we haven't seen progress, and that's why we shouldn't expect to roll an opponent like Oakland?

Where did I say I support him? I've been pretty adamant about me not liking him, and have said like 8 times in multiple threads since yesterday alone that I've wanted him gone since the set of 2009 Failures.

TexansFanatic
10-18-2011, 12:26 AM
Where did I say I support him? I've been pretty adamant about me not liking him, and have said like 8 times in multiple threads since yesterday alone that I've wanted him gone since the set of 2009 Failures.

Sorry. My mistake.

I misinterpreted this:

Does that mean I'm a "Kubiak sunshiner" (which, btw, has got to he the dumbest thing I've heard to describe someone who supports a coach)

Carry on, brother. ;-))

Cerberus
10-18-2011, 12:33 AM
If you can't expect a win at home against a team as poorly managed and coached as the Raiders have been for the better part of the past couple of decades then what meaningful games can you ever expect to win?

See, that shows your ignorance of the Raiders. Poorly managed? How is that? They run their team a certain way, though it may not be what is best for other teams, it has worked for the Raiders. You are seeing stories coming out now that reinforce that which those of us that closely follow the team already knew. It is like when people say the game passed Davis by, and now you're hearing he knew everything from coverages on Def, Off and ST, to every player on every team. Apparently you were duped by the media.

They typically have a talented roster, but the mayhem an old/crazed Al Davis brought to that organization made it doubly difficult for them to compete.

Once again, that just shows you don't know what you are talking about, and have been swayed by mediots like Al Michaels, Dr. Z, and Michael Silver, who are known to have personal problems with Davis/Raiders. Al Michaels sided with Marcus Allen who didn't show up when Davis didn't make him the highest paid player in the NFL, even though he was the highest paid RB at the time. Davis also got Allen out of trouble he got into with cocaine, but you never hear about that do you. Dr. Z had a problem with Ken Stabler, who supposedly slept with Z's wife; now ex-wife. Michael Silver wrote a derogatory article and was banned from the Raider locker room until he ran crying to the NFL League office, so you won't hear anything nice from him either. Glenn Dickey lost his job at the SF Gate for writing an article that was full of falsehoods.

Basically, Davis didn't like media people, so they returned the favor by writing negative things that people like you gobbled up. For example, for example I doubt you even knew Davis didn't sue the NFL to move the Raiders from Oakland to L.A.? He counter-sued! Did you know the attorney for the NFL that lost that case? His name was Paul Tagliabue!

Anyway, point is you don't know what you are talking about with regard to the Raiders.

The fact that the Texans absolutely dominated the Raiders in the first half is what I consider compelling evidence that I was correct to expect the Texans to win. The Raiders couldn't convert a third down, Darren McFadden had difficulty gaining a single yard, and Jason Campbell was harassed into errant throws repeatedly.

Really? Because the score at halftime was 14-12. Oh yeah, from my seat in the stadium the Raiders started taking over about midway through the 2nd quarter, which means they made good adjustments as the game progressed. And had Jason Campbell not overthrown Schilens on the flea-flicker the Raiders would have gone into the half on top! Schaub hit his long throw for a TD, but that was against an injured McClain. So you see, it is all in how you look at things.

TheMatrix31
10-18-2011, 12:34 AM
My guess is you didn't quote the right person...

TexansFanatic
10-18-2011, 12:45 AM
My guess is you didn't quote the right person...

That's my guess, too.

And here's my answer to his post:

HUH???

What exactly has been working for the Raiders for the past eight seasons?

2003 -- 4-12
2004 -- 5-11
2005 -- 4-12
2006 -- 2-14
2007 -- 4-12
2008 -- 5-11
2010 -- 8-8

And aside from a break in the dark clouds at the turn of the century when Jon Gruden managed to right the ship in spite of Al Davis, it was more of the same dismal, directionless lunacy in the nineties.

Over the course of the past 25 seasons, the Raiders have won 180 games which averages out to 7.2 wins per season.

Oh yeah, the Raiders have been a real commitment to excellence for some time now. :sarcasm:

Cerberus
10-18-2011, 12:56 AM
My guess is you didn't quote the right person...

I was just fixing that. I pulled his quote off of your response. Sorry.

Cerberus
10-18-2011, 01:02 AM
That's my guess, too.

And here's my answer to his post:

HUH???

What exactly has been working for the Raiders for the past eight seasons?

2003 -- 4-12
2004 -- 5-11
2005 -- 4-12
2006 -- 2-14
2007 -- 4-12
2008 -- 5-11
2010 -- 8-8

And aside from a break in the dark clouds at the turn of the century when Jon Gruden managed to right the ship in spite of Al Davis, it was more of the same dismal, directionless lunacy in the nineties.

Oh yeah, the Raiders have been a real commitment to excellence for some time now. :sarcasm:

You said 30 years! And Gruden did it WITH Al Davis, and he'll tell you that himself.

5 Super Bowl appearances and 3 Lombardi Trophies, and that doesn't count the times the Raiders got screwed out of going, i.e., The Snow Job and the Rob Lytle fumble.

Here, because you obviously are clueless when it comes to the Raiders:

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/19/sports/sports-of-the-times-no-replay-on-nfl-s-wrong-call.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av-xZ4QUKAg Start watching at about 8:28 in the video, and make sure you watch the replay.

TexansFanatic
10-18-2011, 01:14 AM
You said 30 years!

Here is precisely what I said:

I've actually followed the Raiders pretty closely for over 30 years mainly because a good friend of mine is a seriously nutty Raiders fan and he has essentially forced me to know a lot about his beloved Silver & Black.

As you can see, I didn't say they've sucked for 30 years. But it wasn't long after their then record-setting beatdown of the Redskins that they began their decline into utter mediocrity.

It's clear you are a classic Raiders fan who has bought all of the Al Davis propaganda that paints him as a rebel so persecuted by the presiding powers of the NFL that his record has been distorted.

My friend, there is no running away from the numbers. The Raiders, aside from a handful of bright spots over the past quarter century, have been the very poster child for a dysfunctional, under-achieving organization.

But by all means, keep pimping your swashbuckling band of mavericks meme to the uninformed.

Cerberus
10-18-2011, 01:29 AM
Here is precisely what I said:

I've actually followed the Raiders pretty closely for over 30 years mainly because a good friend of mine is a seriously nutty Raiders fan and he has essentially forced me to know a lot about his beloved Silver & Black.

As you can see, I didn't say they've sucked for 30 years. But it wasn't long after their then record-setting beatdown of the Redskins that they began their decline into utter mediocrity.

It's clear you are a classic Raiders fan who has bought all of the Al Davis propaganda that paints him as a rebel so persecuted by the presiding powers of the NFL that his record has been distorted.

My friend, there is no running away from the numbers. The Raiders, aside from a handful of bright spots over the past quarter century, have been the very poster child for a dysfunctional, under-achieving organization.

But by all means, keep pimping your swashbuckling band of mavericks meme to the uninformed.

If you really think that, then I'm embarrassed for you.

Yes, Davis was hard to work for, but that is because he pushed his people to be the best they could be. Some resented it, and some embraced it. You really need to stop listening to the mediots, and listen to people who actually associated with Davis, i.e., Hue Jackson, Jon Gruden, John Madden, etc. . . Not the Shanahan's, Warren Sapps and Al Michaels of the world.

GNTLEWOLF
10-18-2011, 10:24 AM
I've been posting a lot of negative stuff lately so I'm going to balance that with this thought:

I never expected the Texans to beat the Ravens. I counted this game as a loss before the season even began.

In fact, I expected it to be really ugly. I expected Schaub to get knocked out. I expected him to throw at least one pick-six.

So, truthfully, I was kinda-sorta pleasantly surprised that the Texans made it a game until late.

Having said that, I'm still pissed about the Raiders game. And I still think the Texans let a victory slip away from them in New Orleans.

This team should be 4-2 at worst and could be 5-1. So basically we're watching another typical Kubiak season of woulda-coulda-shoulda unfold again.

Going forward, I'm expecting 6 more wins and a nail-biter-down-to-the-last-weekend struggle for control of the division with the Titans. The division is there for the taking, but I won't be surprised in the least if the Texans don't seize control of it and make it their btch.

Before the season started, I looked at the schedule and thought the Texans might go 8-8. I definately had the Ravens picked as a loss for this team, even given that everone would be healthy. That said, I suppose I shouldn't be upset about this loss or any of the others that the Texans suffer.

However, Just because I , trying to be realistic thought this team might not be all that and a bag of chips, doesn't mean that I don't have serious homer expectations from my team. I, as a fan expect my team to win, every game. And isn't it a shame that this many years in, we still look at a schedule and expect losses. If this is truely "our year", then we should look at the schedule and expect to win them all, even though reality says it won't happen. If this is a good team we should be upset about any loos that could realistically be a win. But this team isn't there yet. And the tell is that fans of this team are still satisfied that we were beaten by real contenders. We should be the contenders that other teams measure success by. Anyway, that is why I am upset about any of these losses. We should be beyond that by now.
As a fan of this team, I have become accustomed to the promises every year that "this will be our year", only to be disappointed over and over again. But hope springs eternal, and I always hope that what I saw in that schedule, and the weaknesses in this team are only mirrages conjured up by years of being let down, and by being a former Kubiak fan who now feels we can't unload this albotross soon enough.
I know it seems contradictory, but, so is the life of a Houston Texans fan. I'm still battling though and maybe someday, if we hire a real HC, the chasm between the reality of our potential and the hopes of someone who truely wants this team to win will be bridged. Maybe.....

Cerberus
10-18-2011, 10:30 AM
The NFL is generally cyclic, so it is not uncommon to see a great team be down for several years before there is a resurgence. Now, the Texans haven't been around that long in reality, but they are getting "there".

Maddict5
10-18-2011, 10:40 AM
Your expectations are clearly very low and I'm actually envious. I wish I could be happy with average.

If you can't expect a win at home against a team as poorly managed and coached as the Raiders have been for the better part of the past couple of decades then what meaningful games can you ever expect to win?

If you're expecting a loss against any team that can be classified as above average then what possible hope can you have of seeing your team succeed in the post-season?

not that i agree with your view that decades old performance has much relevance to current results but if i did (and to answer your question).....

maybe a win at home against a team as well managed and coached as the Steelers have been for the better part of the past couple of decades?

they say 'any given sunday' for a reason

mussop
10-18-2011, 10:52 AM
I haven't read any of this thread. I just don't care enough anymore to argue about whether or not this team is as good as it should be. We are NOT!!!! So i'm going to throw in my two cents and leave. After Kubiak has had six years to build this team, how can anyone be happy with where we are when you look at the schedule and say to yourself, I don't expect to win games against the good teams?

Any coach that has had 6 years to build a team should have a team that realistically expects to win games against good teams. Not all of them but you shouldn't be going into a season expecting to loose against good teams. I can see saying that is going to be a tough one, but expecting to loose?

****ing sad man!!!!!

thunderkyss
10-18-2011, 11:17 AM
Any coach that has had 6 years to build a team should have a team that realistically expects to win games against good teams. Not all of them but you shouldn't be going into a season expecting to loose against good teams. I can see saying that is going to be a tough one, but expecting to loose?

****ing sad man!!!!!

Not only that, but how many of us could predict a inept 4th Qtr offense?

Double Barrel
10-18-2011, 11:31 AM
So, if expectations should be .500 after week six, then why not .500 after week 8?

Or .500 after week 12? Week 17?

Kubiak is a mediocre head coach, so the results should be no surprise. That the Texans are .500 after week six of his sixth season is par for the course. It is what he has always been, and there is no sign that he will be anything more than what he's proven to be in 86 games as the Texans head coach.

86 GAMES. Let that sink in for a moment.

Expect nothing from Kubiak's team, and you will not be disappointed.

TexansFanatic
10-18-2011, 02:22 PM
You really need to stop listening to the mediots, and listen to people who actually associated with Davis, i.e., Hue Jackson, Jon Gruden, John Madden, etc. . . Not the Shanahan's, Warren Sapps and Al Michaels of the world.

Just to be clear, I actually have a high regard for Al Davis. He made a lot of enemies during his life, but I seriously doubt anybody lacked respect for what he was able to accomplish. He was an amazing force of nature before he completely lost his mind. But nobody can ever take from him the fantastic success he had in shaping the Raiders brand.

All that said, there can be no refuting the numbers. We can argue all day about all kinds of nuance, but you can't look at the sky and tell me it's red and you can't look at all those losing seasons and tell me Al didn't lose his mojo. Aside from a few bright spots over the past 25 years, the teams he put on the field were a joke.

During their first 25 years, it was unusual when the Raiders failed. Over the past 25 years, the more rare occurrence was seeing the team succeed.

Texans Pride
10-18-2011, 09:26 PM
You and everyone LIKE you would be the SAME people who would march up and down this board and everywhere else bitching and moaning about how we didn't take advantage of a crappy division and this and that and this and that.

Spare me that BS.

Please don't assume you know me and/or what I think.

badboy
10-18-2011, 10:41 PM
Back to the thread and not insulting each other, I picked us winning. 15-1 was my prediction. Loss to Steelers was the only guaranteed loss I saw. I had us 5-1 with a basically down hill run to playoffs. I thought Foster and Tate would be best duo in NFL and Ward would have at least 5 TD plunges.

Vinny
10-18-2011, 11:19 PM
Back to the thread and not insulting each other, I picked us winning. 15-1 was my prediction. Loss to Steelers was the only guaranteed loss I saw. I had us 5-1 with a basically down hill run to playoffs. I thought Foster and Tate would be best duo in NFL and Ward would have at least 5 TD plunges.hmmm, so close.

TheMatrix31
10-19-2011, 01:28 AM
Please don't assume you know me and/or what I think.

I don't have to assume, and I don't have to know you.

thunderkyss
10-19-2011, 02:34 AM
Back to the thread and not insulting each other, I picked us winning. 15-1 was my prediction. Loss to Steelers was the only guaranteed loss I saw. I had us 5-1 with a basically down hill run to playoffs. I thought Foster and Tate would be best duo in NFL and Ward would have at least 5 TD plunges.

Only two games off. Not bad considering you weren't counting on decimating injuries to our RBs, WRs, and Aj & Mario in particular.

FYI, our remaining schedule is a combined 21-34, only 4 games against teams with winning schedules. We could run the table & finish 13-3. I wonder if Kubiak would be looked at any differently even if it's just winning 10 in a row against a schedule of losing teams.

Another FYI, I think Demeco is very close to being the player he needs to be. We may be in for a very, very exciting season yet.

HJam72
10-19-2011, 09:56 AM
Only two games off. Not bad considering you weren't counting on decimating injuries to our RBs, WRs, and Aj & Mario in particular.

FYI, our remaining schedule is a combined 21-34, only 4 games against teams with winning schedules. We could run the table & finish 13-3. I wonder if Kubiak would be looked at any differently even if it's just winning 10 in a row against a schedule of losing teams.

Another FYI, I think Demeco is very close to being the player he needs to be. We may be in for a very, very exciting season yet.

Nah, we got 5 division games left to lose....making us 8-8. :kubepalm:

thunderkyss
10-19-2011, 10:02 AM
Nah, we got 5 division games left to lose....making us 8-8. :kubepalm:

Kubiak's in my dog house. I wouldn't piss on him to save his life. I might do it for the heck of it, but not if he were stung by a jellyfish or anything like that.


I wouldn't think any differently of him unless we dominate those games & get to the AFC Championship game.