PDA

View Full Version : How do you feel about Kubiak?


Rey
01-20-2012, 12:48 PM
I was listening to the radio this morning and the guys were talking with some sports writer or radio host from another city...don't remember who he was...

Anyways, they asked him what his perception of Wade was and what he thought about his chances at being a head coach.

The guy called him average. Said he was a mediocre head coach and basically was maxed out. He said he is not a leader of men and is not suited to being a "bad guy" which according to him you sometimes have to be when you are the boss. But he called him maybe a top 10 d-coordinator of all time. Top 5 in today's game.

(I don't agree with a lot of what he said)

The conversation led to what his thoughts on Kubiak were. He said he did not vote Kubiak for AFC coach of the year because he had only had a pretty good season once out of 6 years. He sounded like he didn't think all that much of Kubiak. He stated that one pretty good year does not erase all the previous years of failure he has experienced. He then rounded it out by saying that he doesn't think that Gary or Wade are really all that great of head coaches. He called both of them brilliant minds that specialize in offense and defense respectively, but he said as head coaches they were not impressive.


So My question is, how much good will has Gary bought with you this season?

Is he completely out of the dog house? (if he was ever in yours)

Is he still on your hot seat?

If he has a bad year next year, then what?

IDEXAN
01-20-2012, 12:53 PM
Parcells had a saying: "you are what your record says you are", which means Kubiak is a winner. End of story.

TexCanada
01-20-2012, 12:53 PM
I agree with most of what that guys says. However, one thing that has to be said about Kubiak is that he always has his players playing hard for him. Even when we had bad seasons his players never quit on him. Kubiak should get some huge credit for that even if he does have some short-comings when it comes to his game-day decisions (although he was much better this year at that).

axman40
01-20-2012, 01:00 PM
Parcells had a saying: "you are what your record says you are", which means Kubiak is a winner. End of story.
How does 47-49= winner?
:vincepalm:

TejasTom
01-20-2012, 01:02 PM
Jason Cole from Yahoo Sports

Double Barrel
01-20-2012, 01:03 PM
Kubiak moved up in my mind. Like TexCanada mentioned, this team has no history of locker-room defection under Kubiak. Even former players speak highly of him, and I think this is something that should be taken into account.

Then, keeping this team playing hard through the injuries this season is something that should garner much respect. Teams could just fall apart when losing key playmakers on both sides of the ball, but this team not only continued to play hard, but seemed to elevate their game many times.

I'm still not completely sold that he's a 'great' head coach, but, that being said, he's definitely improving over time. I think I would prefer him over many other coaching candidates out there, so that's sort of a backhanded compliment.

Going full homer, I'd like to see him as HC for the next decade if it meant that he's stayed here due to tremendous success and not undying loyalty by the owner.

What I don't want to see is a Jeff Fisher record. 16 years as HC of the Titans and only 6 winning seasons / playoff appearances.

Rey
01-20-2012, 01:06 PM
Jason Cole from Yahoo Sports

Ahhhh....

Thanks....

I will remember his name now because he definitely struck a chord with me because he really just spoke his mind...No sugar coating...

Playoffs
01-20-2012, 01:08 PM
Kubiak moved up in my mind. Like TexCanada mentioned, this team has no history of locker-room defection under Kubiak. Even former players speak highly of him, and I think this is something that should be taken into account.

Then, keeping this team playing hard through the injuries this season is something that should garner much respect. Teams could just fall apart when losing key playmakers on both sides of the ball, but this team not only continued to play hard, but seemed to elevate their game many times.

I'm still not completely sold that he's a 'great' head coach, but, that being said, he's definitely improving over time. I think I would prefer him over many other coaching candidates out there, so that's sort of a backhanded compliment.

Going full homer, I'd like to see him as HC for the next decade if it meant that he's stayed here due to tremendous success and not undying loyalty by the owner.

What I don't want to see is a Jeff Fisher record. 16 years as HC of the Titans and only 6 winning seasons / playoff appearances.
My thoughts exactly.

:logo:

kiwitexansfan
01-20-2012, 01:11 PM
I voted for 10 years. I like stability.

Also if he is here for ten years it means we are being successful.

Rey
01-20-2012, 01:12 PM
I agree with most of what that guys says. However, one thing that has to be said about Kubiak is that he always has his players playing hard for him. Even when we had bad seasons his players never quit on him. Kubiak should get some huge credit for that even if he does have some short-comings when it comes to his game-day decisions (although he was much better this year at that).

Kubiak moved up in my mind. Like TexCanada mentioned, this team has no history of locker-room defection under Kubiak. Even former players speak highly of him, and I think this is something that should be taken into account.

Then, keeping this team playing hard through the injuries this season is something that should garner much respect. Teams could just fall apart when losing key playmakers on both sides of the ball, but this team not only continued to play hard, but seemed to elevate their game many times.

I'm still not completely sold that he's a 'great' head coach, but, that being said, he's definitely improving over time. I think I would prefer him over many other coaching candidates out there, so that's sort of a backhanded compliment.

Going full homer, I'd like to see him as HC for the next decade if it meant that he's stayed here due to tremendous success and not undying loyalty by the owner.

What I don't want to see is a Jeff Fisher record. 16 years as HC of the Titans and only 6 winning seasons / playoff appearances.

What I want to know is, if Wade leaves for a HC job or if Wade retires or gets sick again, can Kubiak get 'er done....

The couple games Wade was out we did not look like the same club. We looked like the old Texans. Like the Gary Kubiak imprinted version of the Texans.

This team just had a different aura when Wade was with the team...

I don't know what to make of it, because Wade was not coaching the offense. That was Kubiak's baby. No Schaub, Andre hurt for a long time...Starting guard gets hurt...

He still kept the offense competitive/productive.

I'm in wait and see mode. The guy Jason Cole brought up a lot of good points and he got me thinking about Kubiak and I cannot say right now that this one year has given Kubiak a bunch of good grace for me. I just can't say that right now.

Heck of a year. He does a lot of things well. But....I dunno...I'm a little wary of Gary...

Mr. White
01-20-2012, 01:13 PM
Parcells had a saying: "you are what your record says you are", which means Kubiak is a winner. End of story.

Speaking of Parcells, I've been tough on Kubiak over the years because I used to think the only guys that could win Super Bowls are guys like Parcells. I thought that style was really the only way to lead. I thought there was no way that a HC who calls the offense could win a Super Bowl.

...then I heard that Sean Payton has called the offense the whole time he's been the HC at New Orleans. And I'm sure he isn't the only one. The thing that he needed to get over the hump was to bring in a really good defensive mind.

After McNair brought Wade in, I decided to shut up and put away the pink soap. Now I think Kubiak is a damn good coach as long as they keep a strong DC around.

IDEXAN
01-20-2012, 01:14 PM
How does 47-49= winner?
:vincepalm:
You don't understand. See whether its finance or football you always go with the trend line and Kubiak has had winning seasons in 2 of the last 3 years capped off by the teams first ever postseason win this year. He's a winner.
Got it ?

JCTexan
01-20-2012, 01:19 PM
There are at least three answers I like in this poll. I would love Kubiak to be here for the next ten years. That would mean he has had tremendous success. So yes, I'm fine with him being here for the next ten years if it means Houston has a ton of playoff victories. I would easily say I'm on the fence and will wait and see what happens next year, but I think a bad year would definitely warrant a Kubiak firing. If Houston has a bad year and finishes with five or six wins I would be pretty upset and want him fired. If that happens one playoff appearance in seven years would not satisfy me enough to want him here after next year.

So I voted bad year= want him gone.

axman40
01-20-2012, 01:19 PM
You don't understand. See whether its finance or football you always go with the trend line and Kubiak has had winning seasons in 2 of the last 3 years capped off by the teams first ever postseason win this year. He's a winner.
Got it ?
When he goes over 500 ,then he will be a winner.I am not sold on Kubiak if Wade leaves.

:fans:

Texan_Bill
01-20-2012, 01:31 PM
When he goes over 500 ,then he will be a winner.I am not sold on Kubiak if Wade leaves.

:fans:

Signed,

Wayne Fontes' 67-71 record. :rolleyes:

Double Barrel
01-20-2012, 01:32 PM
What I want to know is, if Wade leaves for a HC job or if Wade retires or gets sick again, can Kubiak get 'er done....

The couple games Wade was out we did not look like the same club. We looked like the old Texans. Like the Gary Kubiak imprinted version of the Texans.

This team just had a different aura when Wade was with the team...

I don't know what to make of it, because Wade was not coaching the offense. That was Kubiak's baby. No Schaub, Andre hurt for a long time...Starting guard gets hurt...

He still kept the offense competitive/productive.

I'm in wait and see mode. The guy Jason Cole brought up a lot of good points and he got me thinking about Kubiak and I cannot say right now that this one year has given Kubiak a bunch of good grace for me. I just can't say that right now.

Heck of a year. He does a lot of things well. But....I dunno...I'm a little wary of Gary...

Really good questions and some of the same stuff that I've rolled around in my mind.

The two games in Wade's absence are hard for me to big picture, because the team was coming off of the franchise's first AFCS championship and it's pretty normal for teams to have a so-called "winning hangover".

It's just strange coincidence, I guess.

But, you are right, those two games looked like the 2006-2010 Texans, not the 2011 Texans that had just went on a 7 game win streak to post a 10 win record.

I'll be honest with you, there are some questionable Kubiak calls in my mind that I have just wondered about but have not said much because of the thrill of success. I go back to the play calling that got Schaub hurt. Why send your franchise QB up the gut on your own 1 yard line? Don't we have RBs and a FB on the roster for that dirty work? It's not like it was for a TD or even a first down, and I never understood that call from the moment it happened way back when. The fact that it turned out to be the same play that took our starting QB out just adds a little salt to the wound.

I'm not slamming Kubiak here and I certainly feel that he should be the HC in 2012 with 100% conviction. I hate owners that fire head coaches after the playoffs, ever since Bud pulled that bush league move with Bum in 1980.

That being said, a head coach is not above scrutiny because of success.

Weird, but I am still a little wary of Gary, but I am not wary about "Wary"! :D

DonnyMost
01-20-2012, 01:42 PM
I feel the same about him as I always did. He's an OC, Wade is a DC. Together they make a good tandem. Gary's game management has improved over the years, but it's still pretty obvious he's not a complete coach. That being said, if Rick Smith & Bob McNair can keep plugging in good DC's to go alongside Gary, I have no problem with him.

cbs1507
01-20-2012, 01:52 PM
How does 47-49= winner?
:vincepalm:

Bill Belichick was 41-55 in his first 6 years. I guess that guy from the radio didn't think much of him either. :fingergun:

OzzO
01-20-2012, 02:13 PM
I feel the same about him as I always did. He's an OC, Wade is a DC. Together they make a good tandem. Gary's game management has improved over the years, but it's still pretty obvious he's not a complete coach. That being said, if Rick Smith & Bob McNair can keep plugging in good DC's to go alongside Gary, I have no problem with him.

Seconded. I have no problem with Wary. However, if we lose "W", "ary", the W's (in the win column) in the future - back to the hot seat / launch pad with the remaining front office.

eriadoc
01-20-2012, 02:21 PM
I don't like the overall job he's done, and if I had my way, he would have been gone a couple years ago. I posted in another thread basically the same thing this sports writer said, which is one good year does not erase the bad from the past. What it does do is buy him the opportunity to make people overlook those years.

Kubiak is a very good offensive coordinator. He seems to be a guy that the team will fight for, which is a must. In the end though, I keep stumbling on too many moves or decisions that just strike me as dumb, and then play out that way. Even with this season's success, we just heard about how he was running practices before Wade got here where the DL wasn't allowed to bat balls. WTF? I mean, that's just freakin' stupid. So here's this guy, supposed to be this brilliant mind, and he does **** like that? Or he drafts guys and then never plays them. Or he plays the ones that have proven they suck way too long. Then there are the on-field things like challenges, time management (better this year), etc.

He just has way too many "WTF?" moments for me to consider him a good HC. No idea how that fits into the poll, so I didn't vote. As for Wade, I think he's gotten a lot more flack for being a way better HC than Kubiak has been. That doesn't mean Wade is a great HC, but he shouldn't be panned.

Vinnie
01-20-2012, 02:22 PM
I'm somewhere between option 5 & 6. I went with 6. Hopefully they can keep the duo together and it will result in a championship.

Hervoyel
01-20-2012, 03:10 PM
My opinion doesn't fit into any of these choices. I'm thinking that Kubiak did a lot to put my mind at ease last season. I think that right now 2010's 6-10 record looks like the aberration and that Kubiak is getting better. I'd have fired him years ago but at this stage I think we all get behind Gary (and Wade) and hope for the best. I guess #6 is closest to how I feel except I'm not so sure that neither one of them is necessarily a good head coach. They might both have learned how to get it done by now.

axman40
01-20-2012, 03:15 PM
My opinion doesn't fit into any of these choices. I'm thinking that Kubiak did a lot to put my mind at ease last season. I think that right now 2010's 6-10 record looks like the aberration and that Kubiak is getting better. I'd have fired him years ago but at this stage I think we all get behind Gary (and Wade) and hope for the best. I guess #6 is closest to how I feel except I'm not so sure that neither one of them is necessarily a good head coach. They might both have learned how to get it done by now.
That would be my hope.
:fans:

KA4Texan
01-20-2012, 03:22 PM
Honestly I would much rather lose Kubiak than Wade.

To come in and change everything up as horrible as we were with a "short time" to change it with everything going on. I was BEYOND amazed.

Heres to hoping Wade sticks around and makes this D even scarier than it is now (and for once I mean that as a good thing)

I would be comfortable keeping Gary the next 10 years as long as Wade comes chained to him, but since that wasn't an option I had to go with the last option.

Dread-Head
01-20-2012, 03:26 PM
Meh...

ChampionTexan
01-20-2012, 03:32 PM
I think while there's a ton of culpability for it on Kubiak's part, he's been the victim of some extraordinarily bad defensive coordinating prior to this year.

In term of how that reflects on him as a HC, it depends on how well he's learned to avoid that if/when the need ever arises for Kubiak and the Texans to replace Wade.

I think with very few exceptions, most successful HC's in the NFL aren't deeply involved on both sides of the ball. I honestly think Sean Payton's had a pretty hands off approach to the Saints D with Greg Williams there, and will continue to handle it that way with Spagnuolo aboard. I don't even think Williams has been all that great while he was there - just considerably better than anything Kubiak's hired before Wade. I believe McCarthy in Green Bay and Reid in Philly are in the same boat. Belichick is an exception to this, and while there may be another one or two out there who fit that description, none leap to mind.

I have no desire whatsoever to see a Texan coaching staff without both Kubes and Wade anytime in the near future, but if/when that happens, I'd still much rather see Kubes as HC with a new DC then see Wade become HC. While I have respect for Wade's record as a HC, I still see upside with Kubiak, and I don't see that with Wade.

Ole Miss Texan
01-20-2012, 03:38 PM
I want Kubiak as HC and Wade as DC for a long time. I think with where this team finally is and the coaching we have in place that we will be very good for a long long time. Still work to be done though.

2012Champs
01-20-2012, 04:01 PM
Gary and all other HC are much like the President of the good old USA they get far too much credit when things go right and far too much blame when they go wrong

Thorn
01-20-2012, 04:15 PM
Kubiak with Wade is a good pair I can support. Kubiak without Wade, not so much.

Goldensilence
01-20-2012, 04:56 PM
I voted if next year is bad, let him go.

Like others I think there's been too many WTF moments. I think he's made some good personnel moves and some very questionable ones. The ones that come to mind are his choices for DC prior to Wade coming: Richard Smith and Frank Bush? Others include choosing to stick with "his guys" despite the fact they are maxed out on talent. His choice to go with Amobi over Willis, even with a trade down!

Realistically, I think if there was no lockout this past offseason Gary would be gone. I think Gary knew this and was forced to go out and find a DC with a proven track record to save his job.

I don't know if its much as Gary Kubiak got better as a HC, mostly I think that having a great DC covered up some glaring deficiencies.

Pantherstang84
01-20-2012, 05:18 PM
The problem with Mr. Jason Cole of Yahoo Sport's thought process of his AFC Coach of the Year vote is this...

He was supposed to be voting for Coach the Year.

Not coach of the decade. Name another team that had to rely on 4 different starting QBs in the same season and still won their division and won a playoff game.

The problem with the intellectually lazy is that they let their prejudices and emotions guide their thoughts and not logic. Just another hack with a keyboard.

thunderkyss
01-20-2012, 05:54 PM
So My question is, how much good will has Gary bought with you this season?

Is he completely out of the dog house? (if he was ever in yours)

Is he still on your hot seat?

If he has a bad year next year, then what?

I like to think I'm fair. I think there are many aspects of the job that go unnoticed, but are extremely important towards building a dynasty.

I think Kubiak does many of these things extremely well.

You've got to be able to sell a vision. You've got to be able to pull people together. You've got to be able to control your locker room. You've got to be able to get the most out of your players. You've got to be able to get your players to "reach for greatness." You've got to be fair, you've got to make some tough decisions. You've got to be able to develop talent. You've got to be able to develop people. You've got to be able to change mindsets & behaviors.

I could go on. These are the things, I think, guys like Singletary and apparently Rex Ryan struggle with. But this is the foundation. If this work isn't done, it's difficult to build a winning franchise that will last. The Colts had this under Dungy. The Patriots have this under Bellicheck. You don't hear discension from their players, you constantly have guys stepping up & filling big shoes...... Sanders would get hurt, Bullit earned his spot.

We're seeing flashes of that.... maybe the beginning. Only time will tell.

Then there are the obvious things that you should see, that we don't.

#1 is the ability to win manageable games. Several people were extremely upset that we didn't beat the Saints or the Ravens in the regular season, with very good reason. We played extremely well for 3, maybe 3+ quarters, but fell apart at the end & ended up getting "blown out" of games that we were just "in"

We lost control of those games, which means he lost control of those games. This isn't something that is new. Many a Texans' fan have complained about this since 2006. Our fans know our team has beat itself consistently (although fewer this season).. we should have been 8-8 in 2006, you know that. We should have been 9-7, maybe 10-6 in 2007 & 2008...... should have been in the play-offs. We should have had 10+ wins in 2009.

Of course the other team gets some credit..... I'm factoring that in, otherwise I'd say we should have been 16-0.

I also don't think we do a good job of taking advantage of individual match-ups on game day, nor do we game-plan for them, & we don't adjust (by taking advantage of these match-ups) in games very well.

Bernard Pollard's name should have been called an aweful lot with Dressen & OD playing the whole game. We don't take advantage of poor or inexperienced CBs (like other teams have done to us), LBs, DEs, etc... we've played many games, where a player on the other team goes down, an OL, a safety, a DT.... & they've got to put in a back-up.... a rookie or someone who's just not good enough to start. We don't take advantage of that, we continue to do what we planned on doing.

Gameday, game management, finger on the pulse of the team kind of stuff..... he still has room for improvement.

I'm impressed at Kubiak's ability to be able to overcome adversity on offense... I always have, he's a great offensive mind, but that's OC territory, not HC responsibility. Wade vs Frank Bush, that's the only real difference if you ask me.

But, we should have won that Indy game at the end of the year. HC decisions could have been made through out that game that would have won it. Same thing with Tennessee.... that game shouldn't have come down to a 2 point conversion with time expiring.

That Baltimore game was winnable, we should have won it, if we had, my opinion of Kubiak would have changed. I said that when Schaub went down... maybe before.

My opinion, Kubiak doesn't get a contract extension unless he can put together back to back winning seasons......

Parcells had a saying: "you are what your record says you are", which means Kubiak is a winner. End of story.

Kubiak has a losing record as a HC. The Texans have a winning record for 2011.

ObsiWan
01-20-2012, 06:03 PM
Speaking of Parcells, I've been tough on Kubiak over the years because I used to think the only guys that could win Super Bowls are guys like Parcells. I thought that style was really the only way to lead. I thought there was no way that a HC who calls the offense could win a Super Bowl.

...then I heard that Sean Payton has called the offense the whole time he's been the HC at New Orleans. And I'm sure he isn't the only one. The thing that he needed to get over the hump was to bring in a really good defensive mind.

After McNair brought Wade in, I decided to shut up and put away the pink soap. Now I think Kubiak is a damn good coach as long as they keep a strong DC around.

This is it for me in a nutshell. Kubiak should stay to run the offense and train QBs. But he definitely needs a defensive sidekick like Wade (or some Wade-level equivalent) to keep the team clicking on both sides of the ball.

And let's not overlook the underlings. The gaggle of assistants Team Wary have gathered have done an outstanding job. They've turned Myers from whipping boy into a pro bowl player and seem to be on their way to doing the same thing with K.J. They successfully turned the "project" we feared Duane Brown would be into a serious monster. It hasn't all been successful (see J. Jones. ...hmmm... maybe we need a new WR coach.. :thinking:) but I think they play a key role in Team Wary's success.

I think the whole package is necessary. One or two bad pieces (say a DB coach that don't know what he's doing) and the whole thing could go to ruin.

ObsiWan
01-20-2012, 06:16 PM
The problem with Mr. Jason Cole of Yahoo Sport's thought process of his AFC Coach of the Year vote is this...

He was supposed to be voting for Coach the Year.

Not coach of the decade. Name another team that had to rely on 4 different starting QBs in the same season and still won their division and won a playoff game.

The problem with the intellectually lazy is that they let their prejudices and emotions guide their thoughts and not logic. Just another hack with a keyboard.

Eggggzackly!!
His vote should be based on performance during the 2011 season only. If he can't wrap his brain around that concept then maybe his voting rights should be revoked.

Double Barrel
01-20-2012, 06:16 PM
Gary and all other HC are much like the President of the good old USA they get far too much credit when things go right and far too much blame when they go wrong

'eh, in some ways yes, but in most ways no.

The president does not take office and then decide who will be every member of Congress and the Supreme Court.

The head coach of the Texas basically has control over every aspect of the team, including the GM by most accounts. He decides styles of gameplan and implementation of the offense and defense, as well as the final say over what players make the team.

In the end, the final product of a football team is very much representative of the head coach. Not so much for the president, simply because he does not have the power over government that a head coach has over his football team.

If anything, I'd say QBs are much like the president in your example. Too much credit and too much blame, but really just a cog in the machine that he neither builds nor completely controls.

gary
01-20-2012, 06:32 PM
I think Gary is good enough to win with Wade or any other good/great DC. I still wonder why he has not upgraded the number two receiver and some other gameday decisions he has made but overall with a great DC I think I am now fully behind him.

TheMatrix31
01-20-2012, 06:59 PM
I thought he did an unbelievable job this year, especially considering all the injuries and tumult. And the way the players play for and respond to him is incredible.

That said, if there's any slip into old habits, he needs to be gone.

bckey
01-21-2012, 12:56 AM
I don't like the overall job he's done, and if I had my way, he would have been gone a couple years ago. I posted in another thread basically the same thing this sports writer said, which is one good year does not erase the bad from the past. What it does do is buy him the opportunity to make people overlook those years.

Kubiak is a very good offensive coordinator. He seems to be a guy that the team will fight for, which is a must. In the end though, I keep stumbling on too many moves or decisions that just strike me as dumb, and then play out that way. Even with this season's success, we just heard about how he was running practices before Wade got here where the DL wasn't allowed to bat balls. WTF? I mean, that's just freakin' stupid. So here's this guy, supposed to be this brilliant mind, and he does **** like that? Or he drafts guys and then never plays them. Or he plays the ones that have proven they suck way too long. Then there are the on-field things like challenges, time management (better this year), etc.

He just has way too many "WTF?" moments for me to consider him a good HC. No idea how that fits into the poll, so I didn't vote. As for Wade, I think he's gotten a lot more flack for being a way better HC than Kubiak has been. That doesn't mean Wade is a great HC, but he shouldn't be panned.


This sums up what I think about Kubiak also.

WolverineFan
01-21-2012, 01:01 AM
As far as head coaching goes, I'm not a Kubiak fan. He's a great OC, but does not make great decisions during games. Too offensively focused, that was always his problem before we hired Wade.

Wade saved his job this year. As long as we have a good defense I want him around because of the offense he runs, but if it weren't for Wade we'd be shopping for a coach right now.

beerlover
01-21-2012, 01:20 AM
If Mr. McNair is happy then so be it, doesn't really matter what I or you or we have to say about it unless there is an avalanche of negative bad will (ain't happening).

I would like to see a more positive choice like, Kubiak is growing in his first head coaching position showing enough improvement to at least be considered elite Head Coaching material.

That's how I would vote. Even naysayers must admit Texans have come a long, long ways since 2005/2006. Other teams will recognize this & be happy to take him off Houston hands, seeing a leader with football savy who can execute a long term game plan (building his resume) with disclaimer: not for those seeking instant gratification or overnight success. So back to you, Bob enjoy the ride your investment is paying off :money:

Carr Bombed
01-21-2012, 02:30 AM
Bill Belichick was 41-55 in his first 6 years. I guess that guy from the radio didn't think much of him either. :fingergun:

And then he went on to win 3 SBs....see where the comparison doesn't compute.

This isn't a trash Gary Kubiak post, but simply a "don't compare him to belichick" post, because it's kinda silly at this point in time.

clutch
01-21-2012, 02:36 AM
If anyone thinks kubiak is going anywhere is delusional..with the team we have now..he will be the coach for years to come..unless we are horrible next year..then by all means NEXT MAN UP!!

Carr Bombed
01-21-2012, 02:56 AM
If anyone thinks Kubiak is going anywhere is delusional..with the team we have now..he will be the coach for years to come..unless we are horrible next year..then by all means NEXT MAN UP!!

Nothing will get you fired faster than high expectations.. The team we have now has nothing to do with Kubiak being here long term. How Kubiak is able to handle the talent on this team and meet those expectations will decide how much longer he coaches here. For our sake I hope he's the coach for a long time, because like another poster said...that means we're having a lot of success.

cbs1507
01-21-2012, 03:00 AM
And then he went on to win 3 SBs....see where the comparison doesn't compute.

This isn't a trash Gary Kubiak post, but simply a "don't compare him to belichick" post, because it's kinda silly at this point in time.

Yeah but those 3 rings have the benefit of hindsight...see where your observation doesn't compute. Do you think people gave "the hoody" all the praise he gets now after his 6th season? I am not comparing the 2. I am just pointing out that even HOF coaches don't just come into the league and start winning. Belichick struggled early on and learned from his mistakes. I think we can clearly see that Kubiak has learned from mistakes from past seasons, but some people can't get over the past. I think Kubiak has this franchise going in the right direction.

thunderkyss
01-21-2012, 03:03 AM
Yeah but those 3 rings have the benefit of hindsight...see where your observation doesn't compute. Do you think people gave "the hoody" all the praise he gets now after his 6th season? I am not comparing the 2. I am just pointing out that even HOF coaches don't just come into the league and start winning. Belichick struggle early on and learned from his mistakes. I think we can clearly see that Kubiak has learned from mistakes he has made. I think he has this franchise going in the right direction.

Your comparison makes perfect sense. Only a Kubiak hater would not be able to see the parallel.

SuperSerial
01-21-2012, 03:07 AM
Parcells had a saying: "you are what your record says you are", which means Kubiak is a winner. End of story.

Kubiak has a losing record as a head coach. Wipe the Kool Aid off your face.

End of story.

SuperSerial
01-21-2012, 03:08 AM
Parcells had a saying: "you are what your record says you are", which means Kubiak is a winner. End of story.

Kubiak has a losing record as a head coach. Wipe the Kool Aid off your face.

End of story.

cbs1507
01-21-2012, 03:12 AM
Kubiak has a losing record as a head coach. Wipe the Kool Aid off your face.

Kubiak is 47-49 after 6 seasons. Do you think he will have a losing record after next year?

Bill Bellichick was 41-55 after 6 seasons. Heck he won the SB the next season with a 11-5 record (which would have made his record 52-60). Did that make him a loser?

Lucky
01-21-2012, 08:16 AM
I voted for 10 years. I like stability.

Also if he is here for ten years it means we are being successful.
Kubiak was here for 5 years, and the team was not successful. If he's here another 10 years, it may mean that he's really McNair's illegitimate son.


What I don't want to see is a Jeff Fisher record. 16 years as HC of the Titans and only 6 winning seasons / playoff appearances.
Matching Fisher's record would mean Kubiak would take the Texans to the playoffs 5 of the next 10 seasons. I'd want more, but that is probably an above average ratio. And if one of those 5 years included a Super Bowl Championship, I would call it a very satisfactory 10 years.

I feel the same about him as I always did. He's an OC, Wade is a DC. Together they make a good tandem.
Gary has always been the head coach of the Texans offense. Now, he has a head coach of the Texans defense. It's working.

Bill Belichick was 41-55 in his first 6 years. I guess that guy from the radio didn't think much of him either. :fingergun:
Belichick became a much better coach when he got Tom Brady. Just like Kubiak became a better head coach when he got Wade Phillips.

I think while there's a ton of culpability for it on Kubiak's part, he's been the victim of some extraordinarily bad defensive coordinating prior to this year.
Kubiak has not been the victim. He personally selected those coaches. As Sean Payton personally selected Williams and now Spags. The difference is that Kubiak could only recruit his buddies from Denver. Payton canvassed the NFL coaching ranks and brought in the very best he could find. That's why Payton > Kubiak.

Kubiak will be here in Houston for the foreseeable future. He's about to get an extension. Wade will also be here. At least until the Texans win a Super Bowl, and the defense carries him off the field, ala Buddy Ryan and the '85 Bears. Right now, I'm very content with the coaching situation. I reserve the right to change my mind after an 8-8 season.

Thorn
01-21-2012, 09:38 AM
Kubiak is 47-49 after 6 seasons. Do you think he will have a losing record after next year?


Kubiak wouldn't be in good graces right now if it weren't for Wade Phillips. You take Phillips out of the equation for last season, and Kubiak would have had his normal crappy season. Wade saved Kubiak's ass, and that's all there is to it.

4Texans
01-21-2012, 09:38 AM
The problem with Mr. Jason Cole of Yahoo Sport's thought process of his AFC Coach of the Year vote is this...

He was supposed to be voting for Coach the Year.

Not coach of the decade. Name another team that had to rely on 4 different starting QBs in the same season and still won their division and won a playoff game..


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is what I was looking for.

Rey
01-21-2012, 10:35 AM
The problem with Mr. Jason Cole of Yahoo Sport's thought process of his AFC Coach of the Year vote is this...

He was supposed to be voting for Coach the Year.

Not coach of the decade. Name another team that had to rely on 4 different starting QBs in the same season and still won their division and won a playoff game.

The problem with the intellectually lazy is that they let their prejudices and emotions guide their thoughts and not logic. Just another hack with a keyboard.

Well...

That was part of his point...

Kubiak had not done anything miraculous the past few seasons he was here...He did give him credit for keeping the offense functional and keeping the team playing hard despite injuries, but he was basically saying that he didn't think he was a well rounded head coach. He said he was a brilliant offensive mind, but he would need to see more seasons like this one (perhaps one without Wade) to be convinced that Kubiak had actually morphed into a good head coach and deserved coach of the year.


I didn't agree with some of what he said, but I thought he made some good points.

I'll just be honest...The more I have thought about it, the more scared I am of this team without Wade (or a D cord of his caliber)...Just seems like the team played differently when Wade was gone and he was the main attraction again.

Rey
01-21-2012, 10:44 AM
My opinion, Kubiak doesn't get a contract extension unless he can put together back to back winning seasons......



Kubiak has a losing record as a HC. The Texans have a winning record for 2011.

I'm surprised at your vote TK...

I took you for an ardent Kubiak supporter.

I'm actually kind of surprised by the votes in general. I thought more people would have voted that he deserved a one year grace period based on this year.

axman40
01-21-2012, 10:45 AM
I'm surprised at your vote TK...

I took you for an ardent Kubiak supporter.

I'm actually kind of surprised by the votes in general. I thought more people would have voted that he deserved a one year grace period based on this year.
Did you see the two games without Wade?

thunderkyss
01-21-2012, 12:52 PM
Kubiak was here for 5 years, and the team was not successful. If he's here another 10 years, it may mean that he's really McNair's illegitimate son.

In the ultimate terms of Ws & Ls, you're correct. However, when looking at the big picture, from a franchise's perspective, mildly successful?

Maybe?

We've got a great foundation with a young core.


Matching Fisher's record would mean Kubiak would take the Texans to the playoffs 5 of the next 10 seasons. I'd want more, but that is probably an above average ratio. And if one of those 5 years included a Super Bowl Championship, I would call it a very satisfactory 10 years.


Nothing's guaranteed. However, this pretty much describes our future outlook at this time.

thunderkyss
01-21-2012, 12:57 PM
I'll just be honest...The more I have thought about it, the more scared I am of this team without Wade (or a D cord of his caliber)...Just seems like the team played differently when Wade was gone and he was the main attraction again.

All those guys love Kubiak.

But they played their asses off for Wade's approval..... they played for Wade. Take Wade away & they have to find another reason to put it all on the line. Which is why I think it was bull**** to think Wade interviewing with TampaBay was not a distraction.

The way Wade handled the situation, as if he was unaware of the distraction it would cause... leads me to understand why he shouldn't be a head coach. I doubt Wade could have kept this team together with what they've been through the 5 seasons prior.

But Kubiak did.

thunderkyss
01-21-2012, 01:04 PM
I'm surprised at your vote TK...

I took you for an ardent Kubiak supporter.



Most people do. My arguments are usually about providing balance to the conversation. The anti-Kubiak rhetoric has been so out of whack for so long, I'm usually trying to provide Kubiak-pro arguments.

The man has his weaknesses, but so do all head-coaches. Bellichick, Billick, Parcells, JJohnson, Crennel, Fox, Rex, etc... ain't none of them perfect.

Are his weaknesses so big that they'll keep us from reaching the Super Bowl? Are they so big they'll hold this team back from multiple play-off appearances? Are they so big they'll prevent this team from multiple back-to-back winning seasons?

We'll see.

cbs1507
01-21-2012, 01:31 PM
Kubiak wouldn't be in good graces right now if it weren't for Wade Phillips. You take Phillips out of the equation for last season, and Kubiak would have had his normal crappy season. Wade saved Kubiak's ass, and that's all there is to it.

First of all we didn't need Wade. We NEEDED a good defensive coordinator. Wade Phillips was the best one available. I am tired of fans believing it was Wade that did everything. He fixed the defense. That's it. When we had all those mediocre seasons we had mediocre to poor defense. We have been a top 10 offense in every season since 2007. Top 5 since 2008. Wade had nothing to do with offense. That was never our problem.

Every coach needs a great supporting cast.

Belichick hasn't won a SB since Charlie Weis left. He hasn't won a playoff game prior to this season (if you want to count Denver because they will probably lose to the Ravens) since Josh McDaniels left.

Peyton was 7-9 and 8-8 in the 2 seasons prior to his hiring of Gregg Williams. He won the SB the next year.

Pittsburgh Steelers have Dick Lebeau.

You can make the argument that none of these coaches would have done anything with the supporting cast that they made the accomplishments with.

bckey
01-21-2012, 01:40 PM
All those guys love Kubiak.

But they played their asses off for Wade's approval..... they played for Wade. Take Wade away & they have to find another reason to put it all on the line. Which is why I think it was bull**** to think Wade interviewing with TampaBay was not a distraction.

The way Wade handled the situation, as if he was unaware of the distraction it would cause... leads me to understand why he shouldn't be a head coach. I doubt Wade could have kept this team together with what they've been through the 5 seasons prior.

But Kubiak did.

For once I totally agree with you. Great post!

burro
01-21-2012, 03:08 PM
Kubiak is the best offensive coordinator that we have ever had and I hope we keep it that way.

axman40
01-21-2012, 07:23 PM
Let the first Golden Era of Texans Football Begin!
:texflag::fans::texflag:

mattieuk
01-21-2012, 08:59 PM
Kubiak has to deliver playoff football again next year - simple. We don't make the postseason again, and he is gone. As far as I'm concerned, the playoffs is a different beast - anything can happen in one game. Kubiak should, and must be judged on what he does over the first 16 games of the season. If we win the division again - give him the multi-year contract. If we don't - after making the playoffs the year before with multiple injuries - he would be toast.

I hope he is here for many years to come, and his hands start to get weighed down with Superbowl rings.

Ghostform
01-21-2012, 10:43 PM
As long as he is handcuffed to Wade or some other proven DC then im fine with him being here. Next season will also be a good indicator to see if Kubiak deserves an extension with the schedule we have.

Scooter
01-22-2012, 01:48 AM
how do i feel about kubiak? read all of the posts here and among other teams' forums quoting "most complete team in football" and "starting qb away from the superbowl" to know how i feel about kubiak.

kubiak's not the best head coach ever, never will be. what he is is a great offensive coach and someone that all 53 will fight for every single day. a fan favorite here (bill cowher) is only half of that. in the past 3 seasons we've had the league leading passer, the league leading receiver, the league leading rusher, and the "best offensive line in football" ... that's how i feel about kubiak.

wade phillips is alone with dick lebeau among truly great defensive coordinators, and we need to give him king midas money to stay here, but look what he's working with. all but 3 (4 once mario went down) of wade's players were already here - kubiak put that talent on defense together by turning lemons into all pros on offense and giving the defense a sh*t-ton of resources. that's how i feel about kubiak.

i've preached for years that i'm here for the long haul, give him time because he's doing it right and building over from the draft. once our picks get closer to becoming vets we'll be dominant. well, our 2006 draft is now in their prime as young veterans ... how's our roster look?

edit: i come across as a bit angry when i drink lol.

thunderkyss
01-22-2012, 02:34 AM
well, our 2006 draft is now in their prime as young veterans ...

QFT

:cow:

SuperSerial
01-22-2012, 10:57 AM
Kubiak is 47-49 after 6 seasons. Do you think he will have a losing record after next year?

Bill Bellichick was 41-55 after 6 seasons. Heck he won the SB the next season with a 11-5 record (which would have made his record 52-60). Did that make him a loser?

Holy cow I sure hope he won't have a losing record after next season.

Comparing him to BB is weak. For every BB, there are a hundred others who stunk it up in their first few years and continued to stink it up or just fizzed out. Don't forget to remind the jury about the hundred others. Then again, you might not win the court case if you don't twist the facts.

cbs1507
01-22-2012, 12:53 PM
Holy cow I sure hope he won't have a losing record after next season.

Comparing him to BB is weak. For every BB, there are a hundred others who stunk it up in their first few years and continued to stink it up or just fizzed out. Don't forget to remind the jury about the hundred others. Then again, you might not win the court case if you don't twist the facts.

I am not comparing him to Belichick. You are comparing Kubiak to Belichick. Belichick has a 17 year body of HC work. Kubiak has 6 years of HC work. I am comparing their first 6 years. Belichick had a worse record, the same amount of playoff wins/appearances. Kubiak has 1 division title in that span (0 for Belichick). You are using the benefit of hindsight. I am saying look at their 1st 6 years (since Kubiak does not have another 11 to compare to BB). Do you seriously think coaches immediately experience success in their early years?

My point is that it takes time for a coach to win in this league (especially when they have to build a franchise). I don't think anyone can argue that Kubiak has done a great job building this franchise into a contender.

ObsiWan
01-22-2012, 01:04 PM
First of all we didn't need Wade. We NEEDED a good defensive coordinator. Wade Phillips was the best one available. I am tired of fans believing it was Wade that did everything. He fixed the defense. That's it. When we had all those mediocre seasons we had mediocre to poor defense. We have been a top 10 offense in every season since 2007. Top 5 since 2008. Wade had nothing to do with offense. That was never our problem.

Every coach needs a great supporting cast.

Belichick hasn't won a SB since Charlie Weis left. He hasn't won a playoff game prior to this season (if you want to count Denver because they will probably lose to the Ravens) since Josh McDaniels left.

Peyton was 7-9 and 6-10 in the 2 seasons prior to his hiring of Gregg Williams. He won the SB the next year.

Pittsburgh Steelers have Dick Lebeau.

You can make the argument that none of these coaches would have done anything with the supporting cast that they made the accomplishments with.

Correct on all points.
Must spread rep.

It will be interesting to see who replaces Williams in New Orleans and how they fare next season.

The major failure of Kubiak's "term" is that he didn't do sufficient research in order to get a high quality defensive mind to run our defense.

ObsiWan
01-22-2012, 01:08 PM
Holy cow I sure hope he won't have a losing record after next season.

Comparing him to BB is weak. For every BB, there are a hundred others who stunk it up in their first few years and continued to stink it up or just fizzed out. Don't forget to remind the jury about the hundred others. Then again, you might not win the court case if you don't twist the facts.

What facts did he "twist"? Just because the truth doesn't suit your side of the argument doesn't make it untrue.

cbs1507
01-22-2012, 01:10 PM
Correct on all points.
Must spread rep.

It will be interesting to see who replaces Williams in New Orleans and how they fare next season.

The major failure of Kubiak's "term" is that he didn't do sufficient research in order to get a high quality defensive mind to run our defense.

Steve Spagnuola is the new DC in NO.

Yeah I believe he deserves criticism for the questionable hiring of Frank Bush. But the only thing that kept us out of playoffs and from being contenders was a solid defense. I hope he learns from this in the future (just in case Wade leaves). Other than that I think he has done an exceptional job with the franchise.

wildroot
01-22-2012, 04:45 PM
My point is that it takes time for a coach to win in this league (especially when they have to build a franchise). I don't think anyone can argue that Kubiak has done a great job building this franchise into a contender.

You know, people say this but every year there's a Jim Harbaugh that comes in as a first year HC and sets the league on it's ear. It's too late to talk about replacing Kubiak now. We've already gone through the long and tidious rebuilding job that only happens in Houston. OK, we're there...Gary got his six (6!) years to turn this team around. That much time is plenty for probably anyone to turn a team around, it's just that in this day and age there are so many really good HC's out there that can do it in much less time, or at least aren't given an eternity (in football years) to do the job. The belief was that if we replaced Kubiak 2 or 3 years ago we'd go into a major re-re-building process....again, see Jim Harbaugh (SF 49ers) Sometimes the team has the talent everywhere but at the top. Although I give the team all the props for winning the South Division, let's be honest....the Division all but imploded on it's own leaving us sort of holding the trophy. But I'd wait and see what happens next year before I'd extend him again.

I'd like to see what we can do with a healthy Matt Schaub in the playoffs.

Texan_Bill
01-22-2012, 04:48 PM
:gun: I just punched myself in the junk!!!


OUCH!!!! *no children this year!*

cbs1507
01-22-2012, 05:08 PM
You know, people say this but every year there's a Jim Harbaugh that comes in as a first year HC and sets the league on it's ear. It's too late to talk about replacing Kubiak now. We've already gone through the long and tidious rebuilding job that only happens in Houston. OK, we're there...Gary got his six (6!) years to turn this team around. That much time is plenty for probably anyone to turn a team around, it's just that in this day and age there are so many really good HC's out there that can do it in much less time, or at least aren't given an eternity (in football years) to do the job. The belief was that if we replaced Kubiak 2 or 3 years ago we'd go into a major re-re-building process....again, see Jim Harbaugh (SF 49ers) Sometimes the team has the talent everywhere but at the top. Although I give the team all the props for winning the South Division, let's be honest....the Division all but imploded on it's own leaving us sort of holding the trophy. But I'd wait and see what happens next year before I'd extend him again.

I'd like to see what we can do with a healthy Matt Schaub in the playoffs.

You would have a good point, except Jim Harbaugh did not build that franchise...


My point is that it takes time for a coach to win in this league (especially when they have to build a franchise). I don't think anyone can argue that Kubiak has done a great job building this franchise into a contender.

...Jim Harbaugh came into a good situation. The 49ers were essentially the Texans of the NFC for the past 4 seasons. Good talent on the roster, but just not getting it done on the field. He deserves credit for getting them to believe, but not the credit for building that team. Nice try though.

welsh texan
01-22-2012, 06:00 PM
I've got to be honest, I wouldn't have extended Kubiak after 9-7, I'd have left him on the hotseat through 6-10, and I'd have therefore fired him before 10-6.

I saw progress throughout his tenure up till this season, I saw him building talent on the roster and I saw the team slowly improve, far too slowly for my likeing at the time though.

Now that we've got to where we are I see that I'd have been in the wrong, yet I still wouldn't mortgage the house on his coaching style leading us to a decade of domination in the AFC South.

I still see a lot of things that worry me, like his playcalling tendencies when under pressure, for instance. He hasn't shown me that he can go out and spend a top pick on an offensive skill player and find real value yet, which he's going to need to do now.

With all that said, the future looks brighter now than its ever done, it's really hard not to think, from a fans perspective, that this team could be heading to the Superbowl in 12 months time, and thats down to the job Kubiak has done.

cbs1507
01-22-2012, 07:31 PM
I've got to be honest, I wouldn't have extended Kubiak after 9-7, I'd have left him on the hotseat through 6-10, and I'd have therefore fired him before 10-6.

I saw progress throughout his tenure up till this season, I saw him building talent on the roster and I saw the team slowly improve, far too slowly for my likeing at the time though.

Now that we've got to where we are I see that I'd have been in the wrong, yet I still wouldn't mortgage the house on his coaching style leading us to a decade of domination in the AFC South.

I still see a lot of things that worry me, like his playcalling tendencies when under pressure, for instance. He hasn't shown me that he can go out and spend a top pick on an offensive skill player and find real value yet, which he's going to need to do now.

With all that said, the future looks brighter now than its ever done, it's really hard not to think, from a fans perspective, that this team could be heading to the Superbowl in 12 months time, and thats down to the job Kubiak has done.

What's you definition of a top pick? Because I don't even think we spent a 1st round pick on an offensive player during Kubiak's tenure. Also, we got Ben Tate in the 2nd round if it means anything.

Carr Bombed
01-22-2012, 07:38 PM
Yeah but those 3 rings have the benefit of hindsight...see where your observation doesn't compute. Do you think people gave "the hoody" all the praise he gets now after his 6th season? I am not comparing the 2. I am just pointing out that even HOF coaches don't just come into the league and start winning. Belichick struggled early on and learned from his mistakes. I think we can clearly see that Kubiak has learned from mistakes from past seasons, but some people can't get over the past. I think Kubiak has this franchise going in the right direction.

Is trotting out the same knucklehead and expecting that same bum to win the #2 receiver position really "learning from past mistakes?"

The only person who really learned from past mistakes was Bob McNair, when he went over his coach and G.M. and hired a experienced Dcoord who had a proven track record and didn't just settle for another F.O.G.

I'm willing to give Kubiak a extension and I'm willing to give him some more time, but I'm not ready to act like he's turned a corner coaching wise or someone who's "learned from past mistakes". He still has to prove that.

wildroot
01-22-2012, 07:41 PM
You would have a good point, except Jim Harbaugh did not build that franchise...



...Jim Harbaugh came into a good situation. The 49ers were essentially the Texans of the NFC for the past 4 seasons. Good talent on the roster, but just not getting it done on the field. He deserves credit for getting them to believe, but not the credit for building that team. Nice try though.

Jim Harbaugh took a perenial loser team (at least for the last 6 or 7 years) and turned it into a NFC Title contending team in ONE year....and that would be a year without a TC, a new system etc...he should get all the credit for making the pieces work. Dudes an incredible coach.

Seems like no matter with which team one tries to compare us to after a coaching change, be it N.O. when Peyton took over, the Jets when Ryan took over or SF when Harbough took over for some reason the response is always that Kubiak had it way tougher. No one would have looked at the SF team last year and seen a NFC championship contending team. Only now that it's come to pass do some people say that the talent was there all of the time. Yeah, we all knew Alex Smith stood shoulder to shoulder with Brady, Drew and Eli all this time right?

wildroot
01-22-2012, 07:45 PM
The only person who really learned from past mistakes was Bob McNair, when he went over his coach and G.M. and hired a experienced Dcoord who had a proven track record and didn't just settle for another F.O.G.



Let's don't forget it was McNair that went out and hired Phillips, if it was up to Kubiak we'd still probably have Bush out there. He kept Richard Smith at least a year too long before finally cutting him loose.
.

cbs1507
01-22-2012, 07:55 PM
Jim Harbaugh took a perenial loser team (at least for the last 6 or 7 years) and turned it into a NFC Title contending team in ONE year....and that would be a year without a TC, a new system etc...he should get all the credit for making the pieces work. Dudes an incredible coach.

Seems like no matter with which team one tries to compare us to after a coaching change, be it N.O. when Peyton took over, the Jets when Ryan took over or SF when Harbough took over for some reason the response is always that Kubiak had it way tougher. No one would have looked at the SF team last year and seen a NFC championship contending team. Only now that it's come to pass do some people say that the talent was there all of the time. Yeah, we all knew Alex Smith stood shoulder to shoulder with Brady, Drew and Eli all this time right?

What have the Texans been in the past 10 years (let alone 6 and 7)? Like I already said he got into a good situation. The teams was already stacked, he only had to get the guys to buy in. He did a good job in doing it. That's it though. He didn't build the team. He just got the guys to buy in.

They were the favorites to win the NFC West for the past few seasons. Sound familiar? I guess you were the only person that didn't realize they actually had talent on their team for the past few year. They just needed someone to put it together.

wildroot
01-22-2012, 09:36 PM
What's you definition of a top pick? Because I don't even think we spent a 1st round pick on an offensive player during Kubiak's tenure. Also, we got Ben Tate in the 2nd round if it means anything.

Duane Brown.

cbs1507
01-22-2012, 09:45 PM
Duane Brown.

Well he said offensive skill player. So I thought that meant someone who handles the rock.

ObsiWan
01-22-2012, 10:14 PM
Jim Harbaugh took a perenial loser team (at least for the last 6 or 7 years) and turned it into a NFC Title contending team in ONE year....and that would be a year without a TC, a new system etc...he should get all the credit for making the pieces work. Dudes an incredible coach.

Seems like no matter with which team one tries to compare us to after a coaching change, be it N.O. when Peyton took over, the Jets when Ryan took over or SF when Harbough took over for some reason the response is always that Kubiak had it way tougher. No one would have looked at the SF team last year and seen a NFC championship contending team. Only now that it's come to pass do some people say that the talent was there all of the time. Yeah, we all knew Alex Smith stood shoulder to shoulder with Brady, Drew and Eli all this time right?

That's because it's true.

How many of the players that were here when Kubiak came in in 2006 are still here? Only Andre Johnson. Just one guy worth keeping out of the 53 man roster Kubiak inherited.

How much of the personnel did Payton (Peyton is the QB) have to turn over? Rex Ryan? Jim Harbaugh came into the best situation of all. I can't think of anyone Harbaugh had to replace.

Now I do give Harbaugh credit making better use of the strengths of that team and for teaching Alex Smith the tricks to being a smarter QB. Hell, maybe that's all 'Frisco needed... a smarter offensive.

But to say Kubiak and the other coaches came into equivalent situations and therefore the turnarounds should have taken the same short amount of time is not doing one's homework.

Kinda like those talking heads who assumed that the Niners had no talent and were doomed to the cellar again. They didn't look close enough.

Rey
01-22-2012, 10:52 PM
That's because it's true.

How many of the players that were here when Kubiak came in in 2006 are still here? .

I always hear this, but I'm not sure what it means.

Those guys aren't here because kubiak wanted it that way. Kubiak didn't make it happen with the guys he had so he turned the roster.

I'm not saying the roster was super talented, but he didn't elevate their level of play much. And 2006 was 6 years ago. How many teams have a large number of their players from 6 years ago?

Kubiak could have been fired after last year and very few would have felt it was unjust.

Regardless of how hard he had it, the guy has gotten six years. He should thank god McNair is who he is.

I like kubiak a lot, but I'm still very skeptical of him as a headcoach. I want a superbowl. Can kubiak get us there. I hope so.

ObsiWan
01-23-2012, 12:22 AM
I always hear this, but I'm not sure what it means.

Those guys aren't here because kubiak wanted it that way. Kubiak didn't make it happen with the guys he had so he turned the roster.

I'm not saying the roster was super talented, but he didn't elevate their level of play much. And 2006 was 6 years ago. How many teams have a large number of their players from 6 years ago?

Kubiak could have been fired after last year and very few would have felt it was unjust.

Regardless of how hard he had it, the guy has gotten six years. He should thank god McNair is who he is.

I like kubiak a lot, but I'm still very skeptical of him as a headcoach. I want a superbowl. Can kubiak get us there. I hope so.

Then we're of similar mindset. Because that's exactly where I am. If Kubiak had gotten fired after backsliding to 6-10, I would not have been surprised. And he still does things in his gameplan I don't agree with. Like not using Tate more during the course of the game to make sure Foster had fresher legs down the stretch.... just to name one thing...

I think we're all hoping Team Wary takes us to a Super Bowl or two before it's all said and done.

LongTimeLurker
01-23-2012, 09:34 AM
i want him as long as wade can be DC

eriadoc
01-23-2012, 10:48 AM
When a good poker player rakes a pot and gets ahead of the curve, he starts to bully the table. He uses his stack size to dominate the table to the point where it isn't even about the cards in his hand anymore. A bad poker player will win a big hand and then sit on his stack. The good poker player can burn out on an all-in, but it's not as likely as that bad poker player's stack slowly dwindling away, which is a certainty.

You decide which poker player Kubiak is.

Dread-Head
01-23-2012, 12:08 PM
I was looking for "Meh..."

thunderkyss
01-23-2012, 12:32 PM
When a good poker player rakes a pot and gets ahead of the curve, he starts to bully the table. He uses his stack size to dominate the table to the point where it isn't even about the cards in his hand anymore. A bad poker player will win a big hand and then sit on his stack. The good poker player can burn out on an all-in, but it's not as likely as that bad poker player's stack slowly dwindling away, which is a certainty.

You decide which poker player Kubiak is.

I don't think we can tell from what we've seen. It's a totally different game.

I also don't think the chances are greater that the bad poker player's stack will dwindle before the good poker player gets burned on an all-in.

Unless you're saying most of the poker players on WSOP are bad players.

eriadoc
01-23-2012, 01:25 PM
I don't think we can tell from what we've seen. It's a totally different game.

I also don't think the chances are greater that the bad poker player's stack will dwindle before the good poker player gets burned on an all-in.

Unless you're saying most of the poker players on WSOP are bad players.

Then you haven't spent any significant time at a poker table. The WSOP has nothing to do with it.

2012Champs
01-23-2012, 01:37 PM
I don't think we can tell from what we've seen. It's a totally different game.

I also don't think the chances are greater that the bad poker player's stack will dwindle before the good poker player gets burned on an all-in.

Unless you're saying most of the poker players on WSOP are bad players.

Then you haven't spent any significant time at a poker table. The WSOP has nothing to do with it.




Given time the bad player will end at zero. The all in burn by a pro so long as he has the bankroll will win out in the long run. The reason is the good player isnt just going to go all in on bs and given enough run time the math should work in the favor of those who know the odds

eriadoc
01-23-2012, 01:42 PM
Given time the bad player will end at zero. The all in burn by a pro so long as he has the bankroll will win out in the long run. The reason is the good player isnt just going to go all in on bs and given enough run time the math should work in the favor of those who know the odds

Yep. Anyway, the point of the analogy wasn't to get all in depth about poker play. It's just to say that the best players in the world play aggressively. There's nothing you hate more than watching a good player take a guppy's chip stack, because you know he's going to use it all night long against the rest of the table. If the guppy gets lucky and wins a big hand, you're pretty happy, because that means you have an easier route to the player's chips he lucked off on. Kubiak turtles up and sits on his pile way too frequently and predictably.

When he sits down at the table of coaches, he has a hard time finding the sucker.

2012Champs
01-23-2012, 03:35 PM
Yep. Anyway, the point of the analogy wasn't to get all in depth about poker play. It's just to say that the best players in the world play aggressively. There's nothing you hate more than watching a good player take a guppy's chip stack, because you know he's going to use it all night long against the rest of the table. If the guppy gets lucky and wins a big hand, you're pretty happy, because that means you have an easier route to the player's chips he lucked off on. Kubiak turtles up and sits on his pile way too frequently and predictably.

When he sits down at the table of coaches, he has a hard time finding the sucker.



Now that the season has passed I was more interested in the poker chat :(

welsh texan
01-23-2012, 03:36 PM
Well he said offensive skill player. So I thought that meant someone who handles the rock.

Yep, thats what I said, Duane Brown was a good pick and clearly shows good coaching, but wasn't a skill player, Ben Tate looks like a good pickup where we took him but at the same time he wasn't the top pick.

Kubiak has shown me that he's got caught up in taking the player with the highest ceiling in the first round before, and that has burned us because it doesn't take much account of his likelyhood of reaching that ceiling. Amobi Okoye? If Kubes goes out and takes a WR who, like JJ, who might be good in 5 years time if he changes his entire game, I'll be extremely disappointed in him.

thunderkyss
01-23-2012, 03:41 PM
Kubiak turtles up and sits on his pile way too frequently and predictably.


This gets repeated all the time.

But he goes all half-back pass on us in Jacksonville & we call him an idi0t.

He's got Schaub airing it out to start overtime against the Ravens

He has Tj Yates throwing bombs despite Ed Reed bricking two possible INTs..

yeah, he turtles up all right.

I've said it before, I don't know so much about Kubiak being "conservative" hell, he needs Dennison to remind him to keep running the ball.

But so far, everytime he's tried to put the gas on the floor, Steve Slaton fumbles at the Goal line, or Chris Brown fumbles at the goal line, or Ryan Moats fumbles on the 1, or Schaub throws the ball directly at the defending player, or Andre kicks a ball off his knee, or Quin bats the ball into a WRs hands or some wild off the wall Rosencopter **** happens.

To me, this is akin to the "pro" not going all-in on some BS hand.


But that's just me. (By the way, I'm one of the guys who has yet to forgive Kubiak for the 2010 season).

welsh texan
01-23-2012, 03:52 PM
Welcome to the TexansTalk Poker Analogy Society! :ahhaha:

GP
01-24-2012, 10:20 AM
The play calling in the last two Texans possessions of the Ravens game bummed me out. It reeked of hurried desperation, when it should have been methodical and varied.

Ravens were giving up lots of shallow to intermediate stuff, playing their safeties deep and basically giving ground if we'd have taken advantage of it. We could have gained 10 yards every play. THEN you hit the double move or slant and go after you get to about their 30...Ravens would have tightened up and would have begun looking to stop the shallow stuff.

So for me, I scratch my head on where Kubiak's prowess went to on those last two possessions. Maybe he got tired and the fatigue of all they've dealt with just set in..."Ah to hell with it, just go deep to Andre, OK TJ? Sling it deep and let 'er rip." Those two possessions didn't look like the Kubiak I know.

If Kubiak brain farts on his offense personnel in draft, free agency, and current players...we're going to have a rough time. This is a guy who cut Hartmann and then fortunately brought him back after he realized what a mistake he made. This is a guy who also forces Jacoby Jones upon Marciano. Look, Kubiak is making that sort of personnel decision. It wasn't Marciano who cut Hartmann and it isn't Marciano deciding to leave Jacoby in as PR after botching a punt that led to the Ravens first TD. Kubiak has to make smart personnel moves. Period.

Can he do it? Or will he over-think it and try to be cute?

Kubiak has his team's loyalty. Beyond that, I'm a little shaky on some of the things he's known for doing year in and year out. How he handles the QB situation will be instrumental to our ( and his) success. He has to find more dynamic receiving threats too. And he has to keep his o-line strong and dominant again in 2012. He has a lot of work to do.

Rey
01-24-2012, 11:09 AM
The play calling in the last two Texans possessions of the Ravens game bummed me out. It reeked of hurried desperation, when it should have been methodical and varied.

Ravens were giving up lots of shallow to intermediate stuff, playing their safeties deep and basically giving ground if we'd have taken advantage of it. We could have gained 10 yards every play. THEN you hit the double move or slant and go after you get to about their 30...Ravens would have tightened up and would have begun looking to stop the shallow stuff.

So for me, I scratch my head on where Kubiak's prowess went to on those last two possessions. Maybe he got tired and the fatigue of all they've dealt with just set in..."Ah to hell with it, just go deep to Andre, OK TJ? Sling it deep and let 'er rip." Those two possessions didn't look like the Kubiak I know.

If Kubiak brain farts on his offense personnel in draft, free agency, and current players...we're going to have a rough time. This is a guy who cut Hartmann and then fortunately brought him back after he realized what a mistake he made. This is a guy who also forces Jacoby Jones upon Marciano. Look, Kubiak is making that sort of personnel decision. It wasn't Marciano who cut Hartmann and it isn't Marciano deciding to leave Jacoby in as PR after botching a punt that led to the Ravens first TD. Kubiak has to make smart personnel moves. Period.

Can he do it? Or will he over-think it and try to be cute?

Kubiak has his team's loyalty. Beyond that, I'm a little shaky on some of the things he's known for doing year in and year out. How he handles the QB situation will be instrumental to our ( and his) success. He has to find more dynamic receiving threats too. And he has to keep his o-line strong and dominant again in 2012. He has a lot of work to do.


I think overall his playcalling is good...Sometimes the execution isn't quite right...but his offenses produce.


I used to be a big Kubiak guy, but as strange as this sounds....I think that this year made me lose more faith in him as a head coach...

thunderkyss
01-24-2012, 12:22 PM
The play calling in the last two Texans possessions of the Ravens game bummed me out. It reeked of hurried desperation, when it should have been methodical and varied.


Even though this flies in the face of the "turtling up" accusations, I agree 100%

We got the ball with 2:52 left in the game, on our 28, with three time outs plus the 2 minute warning.

1-10-HOU 28 (2:44)
13-T.Yates pass deep left to 80-A.Johnson to HOU 46 for 18 yards (29-Ca.Williams).

1-10-HOU 46 (2:17)
(No Huddle, Shotgun) 13-T.Yates pass short middle to 80-A.Johnson to BAL 38 for 16 yards (20-E.Reed).

Two-Minute Warning

1-10-BAL 38 (2:00) (Shotgun) 13-T.Yates pass deep right intended for 80-A.Johnson INTERCEPTED by 20-E.Reed at BAL 4. 20-E.Reed to BAL 4 for no gain (80-A.Johnson). Ed Reed's 8th career interception of post-season.

I was shocked, I was surprised. I thought with that kind of time, we'd small ball them to death. A little screen, an outside zone, we could have done anything we wanted. I was thrilled that Tj got the ball to Andre. I was not expecting the throws.... big throws. But I figured it would definitely open up the ground game.

Of course, I was a little knee-jerked when I saw the INT... "HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN!!!" then I heard Kubiak explain it the next day. Said they were looking for one safety, man coverage on Andre. If that's what he saw, Tj was supposed to get the ball to Andre before the safety got there.

I rewatched it & sure enough Tj hesitated. Had he pulled the trigger earlier, it's plausible that we could have got the ball to Andre. It was a good call, just not executed to perfection.

GP
01-24-2012, 12:25 PM
I think overall his playcalling is good...Sometimes the execution isn't quite right...but his offenses produce.


I used to be a big Kubiak guy, but as strange as this sounds....I think that this year made me lose more faith in him as a head coach...

I'm neutral.

He had a bit of an embarrassing moment this time last year when McNair had lunch with Bum Phillips and then Wade gets whisked into the d-coord chair. I mean, that was a HUGE slap to the face of Kubiak that McNair had to relieve him of that duty.

Next, Kubiak's gotta' play nice and hope that Wade works wonders with the defense AND that he (Kubiak) steadies the course for the offense. It has to be a perfect storm in 2011 for Kubiak to remain in good graces with everyone.

Throw in the injuries we had, which would have sunk any of the other 31 teams. I mean it. Would the Saints stand a chance with their 3rd string QB, no Will Smith, and many other key players gone from the lineup for 3 weeks or more at a time? I don't think so. Therefore, I think Kubiak's locker room standing with his guys is what got us the AFC South title and into round 2 of the playoffs.

I really think the Ravens game was the final straw for us. It was the ceiling that existed due to a long, long road of obstacles. What's terrible, IMO, is that had we beat the Ravens that day...and I don't think I'm being a homer here...I think we beat the Patriots and we're in the Super Bowl. But all in all, the ceiling was there and we couldn't bust through it. It gives all of them something to work for in 2012. They know this. They know it to their core.

Kubiak made Marvin Lewis look like Kubiak used to look before this season. IN the two playoff games, Kubiak made decisions on when to challenge and when NOT to challenge that he's never been able to do properly in the past. I think he raised his game. But he lost it in those last two possessions, IMO.

I wonder what 2012 brings? Hopefully fewer significant injuries and more of what we saw in 2011. Good time to be a Texans fan, for sure.

HJam72
01-24-2012, 12:35 PM
The play calling in the last two Texans possessions of the Ravens game bummed me out. It reeked of hurried desperation, when it should have been methodical and varied.

Ravens were giving up lots of shallow to intermediate stuff, playing their safeties deep and basically giving ground if we'd have taken advantage of it. We could have gained 10 yards every play. THEN you hit the double move or slant and go after you get to about their 30...Ravens would have tightened up and would have begun looking to stop the shallow stuff.

So for me, I scratch my head on where Kubiak's prowess went to on those last two possessions. Maybe he got tired and the fatigue of all they've dealt with just set in..."Ah to hell with it, just go deep to Andre, OK TJ? Sling it deep and let 'er rip." Those two possessions didn't look like the Kubiak I know.

If Kubiak brain farts on his offense personnel in draft, free agency, and current players...we're going to have a rough time. This is a guy who cut Hartmann and then fortunately brought him back after he realized what a mistake he made. This is a guy who also forces Jacoby Jones upon Marciano. Look, Kubiak is making that sort of personnel decision. It wasn't Marciano who cut Hartmann and it isn't Marciano deciding to leave Jacoby in as PR after botching a punt that led to the Ravens first TD. Kubiak has to make smart personnel moves. Period.

Can he do it? Or will he over-think it and try to be cute?

Kubiak has his team's loyalty. Beyond that, I'm a little shaky on some of the things he's known for doing year in and year out. How he handles the QB situation will be instrumental to our ( and his) success. He has to find more dynamic receiving threats too. And he has to keep his o-line strong and dominant again in 2012. He has a lot of work to do.

On at least one of those slings, A.J. was supposed to be the decoy, but Reed faked out Yates and managed to recover extremely well when it looked to Yates like he couldn't. The pass is generally designed to go up the middle for about 20 yards (or so) to (I believe) Walter, but Yates took the bait and slung it to a A.J. By the time it got there, he was very-well covered. Point being Kubiak didn't call that play intending for the bomb that was thrown for A.J. Ed Reed is a master.

Rey
01-24-2012, 12:50 PM
Throw in the injuries we had, which would have sunk any of the other 31 teams. I mean it. Would the Saints stand a chance with their 3rd string QB, no Will Smith, and many other key players gone from the lineup for 3 weeks or more at a time? I don't think so. Therefore, I think Kubiak's locker room standing with his guys is what got us the AFC South title and into round 2 of the playoffs.

I really think the Ravens game was the final straw for us. It was the ceiling that existed due to a long, long road of obstacles. What's terrible, IMO, is that had we beat the Ravens that day...and I don't think I'm being a homer here...I think we beat the Patriots and we're in the Super Bowl. But all in all, the ceiling was there and we couldn't bust through it. It gives all of them something to work for in 2012. They know this. They know it to their core.



Here's my take on that...

Injuries; Yes...We had plenty and we had them to key players BUT...the guys who stepped in and filled those roles didn't play like "rookies" or "third stringers"...

Much of that credit goes to the coaches, of course, but my point is that once you found out those guys could actually play a little bit the injury excuses kind of went out the window for me. Now, I think that we definitely would have been better if we had not had those key injuries....But once you're there, you're there...

Once you are in position to win the game, win it. Don't make the kind of mistakes that can cost your team the game...That goes for players and coaches...

It's fun to think....oh we'll be back next year...But nothing is guaranteed....I'd like to hope we can keep the train rolling....but look how many teams almost get to the top of the mountain one year and then struggle to get back there the next year...or the next few years....

I think Kubiak did a great job all year long with the offense. Sure he made some questionable calls at times but they were only questionable because they didn't work...He has his issues he needs to iron out...

So I'm with you. I'm on the fence about him as a head coach. Despite Wary doing a good job this year, we need Kubiak to actually be a good head coach if we want to win a super bowl.

Our schedule will be harder this up coming season. This will be a real test for Kubiak. Can he get us into the play-offs with a good record and can we at least get back to the divisional round and possible win it. I hope so.

thunderkyss
01-24-2012, 12:56 PM
Once you are in position to win the game, win it. Don't make the kind of mistakes that can cost your team the game...That goes for players and coaches...


I agree. I thought that was the reason we scaled it back a bit for the last three games of the year. To work on our run game & find out what Tj can do well consistently.

It looked exactly like that when we routed Cincinnati & I was expecting more of the same.

I understood coming out slinging it, back that defense up & get our run game going. But I thought we put more on Tj's plate than we needed to.

cbs1507
01-24-2012, 01:00 PM
On at least one of those slings, A.J. was supposed to be the decoy, but Reed faked out Yates and managed to recover extremely well when it looked to Yates like he couldn't. The pass is generally designed to go up the middle for about 20 yards (or so) to (I believe) Walter, but Yates took the bait and slung it to a A.J. By the time it got there, he was very-well covered. Point being Kubiak didn't call that play intending for the bomb that was thrown for A.J. Ed Reed is a master.

Yeah because Kevin Walter was WIDE OPEN on a seam route down the middle on the last INT.

On the 2nd INT Walter was TRIPLE COVERED. Andre Johnson beat his man on the sideline (safety was occupied with Walter) so he was WIDE OPEN. Defense play soft coverage, so Foster was WIDE OPEN in the flat with space to run.

People need to stop playing playcalling. They plays were designed to perfection. It's all about execution. Point blank. If Yates doesn't chuck up the INTs, I guarantee you we run some more.

Double Barrel
01-24-2012, 01:15 PM
He had a bit of an embarrassing moment this time last year when McNair had lunch with Bum Phillips and then Wade gets whisked into the d-coord chair. I mean, that was a HUGE slap to the face of Kubiak that McNair had to relieve him of that duty.

McNair met with Bum Phillips and Dan Pastorini before the end of the 2010 season, when Frank Bush was still on the staff. This is straight from Pastorini's mouth during a recent interview.

They were not trying to undermine Kubiak, though. Bum and Dan obviously had their motives, but Kubiak and Wade have a friendship that goes back to the 1970's and Luv Ya Blue days.

Kubiak was 100% on board with signing Wade, but he could not be a part of the initial meeting due to the fact that the season was still going and he still had a DC on the staff.

Just to clarify that it was never a so-called "slap in the face" within that circle. This is more of projection by fans than anything in reality, and this according to those that were involved with the hiring process.

infantrycak
01-24-2012, 01:25 PM
McNair met with Bum Phillips and Dan Pastorini before the end of the 2010 season, when Frank Bush was still on the staff. This is straight from Pastorini's mouth during a recent interview.

They were not trying to undermine Kubiak, though. Bum and Dan obviously had their motives, but Kubiak and Wade have a friendship that goes back to the 1970's and Luv Ya Blue days.

Kubiak was 100% on board with signing Wade, but he could not be a part of the initial meeting due to the fact that the season was still going and he still had a DC on the staff.

Just to clarify that it was never a so-called "slap in the face" within that circle. This is more of projection by fans than anything in reality, and this according to those that were involved with the hiring process.

Exactly. Another fan made myth of McNair hiring Wade over Kubiak's objection or even opinion.

Rey
01-24-2012, 01:29 PM
The folks that voted that Kubiak should be fired and Wade promoted to head coach...I'd like to hear why you believe that if you have the time to respond...

Double Barrel
01-24-2012, 01:30 PM
Exactly. Another fan made myth of McNair hiring Wade over Kubiak's objection or even opinion.

It's amusing how many fans seem to have "insider information" about playcalling and personnel moves with a team that is traditionally as tight lipped as the KGB during the Cold War. Then, to see biased assumptions presented as factual evidence in spite of, you know, actual facts straight from the source just adds to the fun.

:pop:

Thorn
01-24-2012, 01:42 PM
It's amusing how many fans seem to have "insider information" about playcalling and personnel moves with a team that is traditionally as tight lipped as the KGB during the Cold War. Then, to see biased assumptions presented as factual evidence in spite of, you know, actual facts straight from the source just adds to the fun.

:pop:

Good point. It does not take away from the fact that a good DC was not hired by Kubiak for his first five seasons. His sixth season the organization (or someone) brought in Wade and the Texans finally achieved success.

Whatever is made of all this, my opinion of Kubiak will not change, and that is he should have been gone a long time ago. But, since he's here, and as long as Wade is here to cover his ass, I'm good with it.

GP
01-24-2012, 01:46 PM
McNair met with Bum Phillips and Dan Pastorini before the end of the 2010 season, when Frank Bush was still on the staff. This is straight from Pastorini's mouth during a recent interview.

They were not trying to undermine Kubiak, though. Bum and Dan obviously had their motives, but Kubiak and Wade have a friendship that goes back to the 1970's and Luv Ya Blue days.

Kubiak was 100% on board with signing Wade, but he could not be a part of the initial meeting due to the fact that the season was still going and he still had a DC on the staff.

Just to clarify that it was never a so-called "slap in the face" within that circle. This is more of projection by fans than anything in reality, and this according to those that were involved with the hiring process.

Where did I ever say that Kubiak objected or that he had an opinion on it???

I never said such a thing, but Icak implies that I did and so that's that, huh? LOL.

Kubiak had no choice in the matter. No voice. It didn't matter what he said or didn't say, McNair was hiring Wade with or without Kubiak. It's insulting for my post to get twisted in that matter. I was here when everything went down, remember?

All I said is that it WAS a slap in Kubiak's face. There's no two ways about it. For the owner to have let Kubiak hire two BAD d-coordinators and then for that same owner to come in and save the day by hiring Wade...you guys can bet your boots that Kubiak's feelings were indirectly affected. He's human.

That's all I said. You think if YOU were the HC and YOU had hired your one DCs and then the owner goes out and gets Wade that it doesn't sting at least a tiny bit? Sure it does.

That's all I said. But a big Thank You to Icak for once again putting words into my post, equating me as being some fan who carries out myths. I didn't anything of the sort. If I did, show me where I said that Kubiak objected to it or had a voice in it. You'll seek but you will not find.

cbs1507
01-24-2012, 01:47 PM
Kubiak made some "buddy/buddy" choices hiring defensive coordinators. It backfired tremendously. But I don't think Kubiak had objection to Wade Phillips when Bob McNair hired him and allowed Phillips to assemble his guys on that side of the ball. As an organization, they realized that we had a solid offense that had been productive since 2007 (top 10 every year since 2007. top 5 every year since 2008). So we decided to get an experienced defensive coordinator to shore up our underachieving defense. I don't think Kubiak had any objection to this, and it allowed us to grow as a franchise. Some coaches are too stubborn to admit they were wrong, so I think that is a good trait for a head coach.

GP
01-24-2012, 01:48 PM
LOL. Wow.

That's all I can say. :spin:

GP
01-24-2012, 01:55 PM
The folks that voted that Kubiak should be fired and Wade promoted to head coach...I'd like to hear why you believe that if you have the time to respond...

I didn't vote, but I will say that Kubiak should remain head coach.

I don't want Wade Phillips "head coaching" this team. Kubiak has his warts, but all in all he manages the team all year long in a way that the players have responded VERY well to. And that's the key thing.

He's going to goof up, but then again all HCs do at some point. I give the nod to Kubiak due to his ability to keep the players engaged and focused, even through a horrible 2011 season where we could have seen lesser "teams" implode.

infantrycak
01-24-2012, 02:24 PM
Where did I ever say that Kubiak objected or that he had an opinion on it???

I never said such a thing, but Icak implies that I did and so that's that, huh? LOL.

I made no such implication. To state it plainly we (as an entire fan base which would include you) don't know exactly what happened. But since you opted to be a classic example:

Kubiak had no choice in the matter. No voice. It didn't matter what he said or didn't say, McNair was hiring Wade with or without Kubiak.

We do not know that. You and others can keep pretending you do and it still won't make it known fact.

Double Barrel
01-24-2012, 03:32 PM
Good point. It does not take away from the fact that a good DC was not hired by Kubiak for his first five seasons. His sixth season the organization (or someone) brought in Wade and the Texans finally achieved success.

Whatever is made of all this, my opinion of Kubiak will not change, and that is he should have been gone a long time ago. But, since he's here, and as long as Wade is here to cover his ass, I'm good with it.

Coaches are no different than the rest of us in that networking pays dividends. They usually hire coaches that they have worked with in the past, and it makes sense to bring in someone that you trust as a head coach.

If you look at Kubiak's resume, it's pretty much Denver Broncos with a little 49ers and Texas A&M thrown in. He's not a journeyman coach that has been with a lot of teams and formed a lot of contacts in his network.

Wade was not available until mid-2010. I have no doubt that if Wade had been available sooner, he would have received the call.

Where did I ever say that Kubiak objected or that he had an opinion on it???

I never said such a thing, but Icak implies that I did and so that's that, huh? LOL.

Kubiak had no choice in the matter. No voice. It didn't matter what he said or didn't say, McNair was hiring Wade with or without Kubiak. It's insulting for my post to get twisted in that matter. I was here when everything went down, remember?

All I said is that it WAS a slap in Kubiak's face. There's no two ways about it. For the owner to have let Kubiak hire two BAD d-coordinators and then for that same owner to come in and save the day by hiring Wade...you guys can bet your boots that Kubiak's feelings were indirectly affected. He's human.

That's all I said. You think if YOU were the HC and YOU had hired your one DCs and then the owner goes out and gets Wade that it doesn't sting at least a tiny bit? Sure it does.

That's all I said. But a big Thank You to Icak for once again putting words into my post, equating me as being some fan who carries out myths. I didn't anything of the sort. If I did, show me where I said that Kubiak objected to it or had a voice in it. You'll seek but you will not find.

Dude, don't get all defensive when your speculation and assumptions are questioned.

Show me some evidence, ANY EVIDENCE, that Kubiak was disrespected, slapped in the face, or his authority as HC overriden by the owner.

And PLEASE, show me ANYTHING that supports "Kubiak had no choice in the matter".

I have seen and heard interviews with Bob McNair, Bum Phillips, Dan Pastorini, Wade Phillips, Rick Smith, and Gary Kubiak the past year that ALL indicate a cohesive set of events. They are not covering up anything. Kubiak and Wade have been friends for decades, so they are in each other's coaching networks. Kubiak could not be a part of the initial meeting because he was a) busy being a head coach during an on-going season, and b) most likely did not look good as a HC to be interviewing a potential DC when he already had a guy yet to be fired.

All this Kubiak was forced to do this or made to do that is just nonsense. Think about it: Kubiak chose the GM and was given full authority by the owner, who is obviously big on the head coach when looking at his 6 years with this team.

We are not putting words in your mouth. Please show me where Kubiak was "embarrassed" (your words), was "relieve(d) of that duty" (your words), or slapped in the face (your words).

I don't have to make stuff up when you go full frontal asinine. :fingergun:

Kubiak made some "buddy/buddy" choices hiring defensive coordinators.

Including Wade, considering that they have been friends since the 1970's.

Phillips, fired as the head coach of the Dallas Cowboys after a 1-7 start, has strong ties to both the city and Kubiak.

He grew up in the area and played linebacker at the University of Houston in the 1960s. He began his NFL coaching career in the late 1970s with the Houston Oilers, who were coached by his father, Bum. Kubiak was a ball boy for the Oilers back then, and the two have remained friends across 30 years.

Source (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/nfl/01/05/texans-wade-phillips/index.html#ixzz1kPS1L3Sp)

GP
01-24-2012, 06:40 PM
DB, why don't you mention the people by name instead of being vague when you address someone in your post? Is it too much to ask for you to quote the dumbasses instead of having people on here make assumptions about which dumbasses you're talking about? I think it's good MB etiquette (since that's a topic lately) to do so. Just quote me, or CarrBombed, and give us that much. We deserve that shred of decency on here. Period.

Back to the topic:

Without you going all sarcastic on me, like you do when someone disagrees with you, let's just agree to stick with the topic OK?

The topic, now, is whether I have proof or not about all this crap with Kubiak and Wade. I don't have to have proof, DB. Do YOU have proof? No, you don't. We're all speculating, aren't we? So why go to such lengths to call out people (such as me or CarrBombed, etc.) for speculating when that's all anybody has at the end of the day.

In my view, you cannot just say "Well, Wade wasn't available until mid-2010 and since he and Kubiak go back to the Denver days, Kubiak would have called him up." Oh really? That's as much speculation as anything I have said here! That's connecting dots that you don't have the proof to make those assumptions.

What we DO have, is this: (1) Kubiak hired Richard Smith who failed abysmally and then (2) Kubiak hired Frank Bush who also failed abysmally. The next evidence we have to examine is this: (3) Early 2011, Bum Phillips and Pastorini met with McNair and felt Wade should be d-coord.

Now, help me understand if it was Gary Kubiak who arranged this meeting or not. In terms of speculation, can we not agree that it is HIGHLY unlikely that Gary Kubiak would ask Bum Phillips and Pastorini to meet with Bob McNair and try to get Wade Phillips as d-coord?

I never said Kubiak suggested one way or another. Based on what we know from pre-2011 and what happened in early 2011, it's safe to say that the head coach of the Houston Texans (Gary Kubiak) was not exactly the guy who decided to hire Wade Phillips. The hiring of Wade came upon the heels of a meeting between BUM PHILLIPS and BOB McNAIR. Gary's opinion, one way or the other, was either not sought or was not a determining factor. At this stage of the ballgame, McNair was doing the hiring and the decision-making.

Lastly, there's not a man on this earth (especially men who coach football) who wouldn't feel a tinge of ire for having hired his own DCs until one point in time when your boss (McNair in this case) decides you don't have the chops to find the right guy for the job. It's human nature. I never said Gary hated it, that he loathed it, etc. I just said it's there in the back of his brain...like it would be for any of us here. But, I get hammered and accused of creating myths.

How? What myth am I propping up? That Wade was hired by Bob? He was. That Kubiak didn't choose Wade? He probably didn't, but we'll never know. In the grand scheme of things, you bring YOUR proof to the table if mine is so important. All this "Prove your point" BS is just that: BS. We'll never know unless someone writes a book, until then...it's. just. discussion. No need in painting me or anybody else as being liars or propping up myths.

GP
01-24-2012, 06:49 PM
I made no such implication. To state it plainly we (as an entire fan base which would include you) don't know exactly what happened. But since you opted to be a classic example:



We do not know that. You and others can keep pretending you do and it still won't make it known fact.

Oh, so Bob McNair is going to stake all of 2011 on whether Gary approves of Wade as d-coord or not?

Which is more likely: Bob said, "Gary, I'm bringing in Wade. Hope that sits OK with you." Gary, who is on that proverbial hot seat for having chosen the two previous d-coords, and who also told McNair "Shucks, I can work with David Carr and we'll see what we get out of him..." says the same damn thing he did when he interviewed for the job the first time. "Yes sir, I think that's a good idea."

Or....Gary has an all-day or half-day or one-hour meeting with McNair where McNair listens intently to what Gary Kubiak thinks about Wade Phillips.

Come on, man! Proof? Proof is in the historicity of how this team has functioned and how Kubiak has the right answers at the right times for McNair.

I tell you what, just find me your source and the text or audio or video of where it shows Kubiak dialed up Wade and mentioned him to McNair and was Wade's biggest fan around January'ish of 2011.

Everything points toward Bob and Bum (and Wade on the side) angling for the job and Kubiak rubber-stamping it like he should have.

GP
01-24-2012, 06:53 PM
I've made my statements. It's clear what I am saying and I don't think it's conspiracy theory stuff nor unlikely. It's based on the historicity of Kubiak's survival techniques (having the right answers) and the PROOF that Wade's daddy met with the boss man and Wade got hired soon thereafter.

Anything more from me on this would just be back-and-forth rhetoric between me and two mods.

So I'm done. You guys can make hash of me all you want. By the way you guys hammered me, you'd think I was proposing we trade Mario and Schaub for Peyton Manning. LOL.

Pieman2005
01-24-2012, 07:28 PM
I agree with most of what that guys says. However, one thing that has to be said about Kubiak is that he always has his players playing hard for him. Even when we had bad seasons his players never quit on him. Kubiak should get some huge credit for that even if he does have some short-comings when it comes to his game-day decisions (although he was much better this year at that).

I wouldn't say he always had the team playing hard. Remember 2010-2011 season? So many games where we came out of the game not playing hard or even trying as it seemed.

cbs1507
01-24-2012, 07:39 PM
I wouldn't say he always had the team playing hard. Remember 2010-2011 season? So many games where we came out of the game not playing hard or even trying as it seemed.

I guess that's why we came back from all those deficits. We competed in every game, especially that debacle of a run down the stretch where we kept losing the games in the 4th quarter. If that wasn't playing hard I don't know what is. Nobody saw one player quit on their coach, even when we were mathematically out. I can't say the same for Wade (GB monstrosity). He is better off as our d-coordinator.

Double Barrel
01-24-2012, 07:47 PM
I had a lengthy reply, but I just decided vugg it, not worth it, delete.

Look, GP, I'm asking for proof of your position in order to truly comprehend what happened when Wade was hired. If you can provide something, I will be glad to change my perspective accordingly.

The question was not rhetorical to argue with you, which for whatever reason(s) you immediately establish a defensive perimeter. My asking for evidence was an honest question that certainly did not deserve your time that was to required to prepare the subsequent diatribe.

We are both Texans fans, so same team and all that stuff, right? And I always welcome information that challenges the status quo and I have absolutely no problem in absorbing new details for a paradigm shift in perspective.

I did keep the following nugget from my novel, mainly because I thought it was funny:

DB, why don't you mention the people by name instead of being vague when you address someone in your post? Is it too much to ask for you to quote the dumbasses instead of having people on here make assumptions about which dumbasses you're talking about? I think it's good MB etiquette (since that's a topic lately) to do so. Just quote me, or CarrBombed, and give us that much. We deserve that shred of decency on here. Period.


Carr Bombed has got to be wondering why you decided to drag his good name through the mud...

The rest of it I will not engage, simply because I have no desire to hash or hammer or whatever it is that redundant discussions do in the end. :bunpan:

thunderkyss
01-24-2012, 08:23 PM
The rest of it I will not engage, simply because I have no desire to hash or hammer or whatever it is that redundant discussions do in the end. :bunpan:

Does the gerbil with the bunpan mean you think he's a dumbass?

ObsiWan
01-24-2012, 11:38 PM
Does the gerbil with the bunpan mean you think he's a dumbass?

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSxl2W7rcubFZ5eEYFh6ko8_lWhJR_Cd 3YU65HfHGLNDfj65EWvfQ

:stirpot:

b0ng
01-25-2012, 01:15 AM
Oh, so Bob McNair is going to stake all of 2011 on whether Gary approves of Wade as d-coord or not?

Which is more likely: Bob said, "Gary, I'm bringing in Wade. Hope that sits OK with you." Gary, who is on that proverbial hot seat for having chosen the two previous d-coords, and who also told McNair "Shucks, I can work with David Carr and we'll see what we get out of him..." says the same damn thing he did when he interviewed for the job the first time. "Yes sir, I think that's a good idea."

Or....Gary has an all-day or half-day or one-hour meeting with McNair where McNair listens intently to what Gary Kubiak thinks about Wade Phillips.

Come on, man! Proof? Proof is in the historicity of how this team has functioned and how Kubiak has the right answers at the right times for McNair.

I tell you what, just find me your source and the text or audio or video of where it shows Kubiak dialed up Wade and mentioned him to McNair and was Wade's biggest fan around January'ish of 2011.

Everything points toward Bob and Bum (and Wade on the side) angling for the job and Kubiak rubber-stamping it like he should have.

This post pretty much proves you don't have any actual evidence of what you say and that you are just speculating. Which is fine as long as you don't try to present it as fact, which is what the overall tone sounds like.

I find it hard to believe that somebody that has multiple thousands of posts on this messageboard actually knows what goes on with the Texans staff behind closed doors.

infantrycak
01-25-2012, 10:00 AM
Anything more from me on this would just be back-and-forth rhetoric between me and two mods.

Seriously? - play the last bastion defense of claiming martyrdom. Wow. As if the fact you were having a discussion with among others moderators played ANY role in the discussion.

HoustonFrog
01-25-2012, 10:14 AM
Hey everyone. Congrats on the season. Out of pocket here in Chicago with alot going on but dropped in today and saw this and wanted to respond. I'm still not a Gary fan and on the fence with the guy. Honestly, it makes me wonder how far the Texans would be ahead of their current pace if a real D coordinator was hired to start years ago instead of Friends of Gary. You can't take away this season but overall I look at him as an offensive coordinator Wade where he is a better Coordinator than HC. I agreed with many before the season that this was going to be a good one for Gary but that might just buy him some more mediocrity. What I mean by that is you end up with a Marvin Lewis who people respect and like but overall they sprinkle mediocre to bad seasons with 11-5 so they get more votes by the boss but then its right back to .500. That is how I see it playing out. I hope I'm wrong because it was a fun run to watch up here. But I just don't see him being a guy that gets it done overall. Good guy, great football mind, jut not a guy who brings it home year in and year out. Hope everyone is well in H-Town

Runner
01-26-2012, 02:53 PM
My opinion of Kubiak hasn't changed. Looking at his body of work, this year is an anomaly. I think the easy schedule had as much to do with the 10-6 record as anything else did. During the rest of his tenure, the team usually stayed about the same or incrementally improved every season. One year they performed significantly worse.

I think he was fortunate not to be fired after each of the three previous seasons.

If he does well next year, my opinion will probably change and I might think he has finally become a competent head coach. However, that won't change my opinion that his previous poor coaching has held the Texans back. This season should not have been the Texans first season in the play-offs. Kubiak looked like a rookie head coach for too many seasons.

ThaShark316
01-26-2012, 03:12 PM
Y'all know that's my guy.

Someone tell Bob McNair to get his "This one's for Gary" speech ready.

drunkcookie
01-27-2012, 04:19 PM
Hell i dunno what to think right now...

Before the season i was thinking, "probably shouldn't have brought this guy back.." i mean just look at the other stories around the league entering this season... the Jets were coming off of two AFC C'ship game appearances with a coach who had only been there two years... KC went from bad to the playoffs with a first year, first time HC... Then over in Tampa they went from bad to 10-6 with a new coach... I meam, AZ made the super bowl with a coach who hadn't been there long... I leave out Tomlin in The Burg, that job was turn-key...

So my thinking was: Why in such a short period of time had these new HCs turned their teams into really good teams so quick, yet our guy going on forever hadn't made it to the playoffs, and was coming off a 6-10 season? It wasn't that i thought he could never bee a good coach but damn, couldn't we have done better than 9-7 at least once? Hell, at least 9-7 twice? I, along with everyone else was running out of patience...

Fast-forward to now... The Jets aren't going anywhere with that lockerroom, they think offense is offensive and didn't make the playoffs... The Chiefs axed the HC that took 'em to the playoff mid-season because the team sucked, the Bucs went from 10-Six to sucky quick and axed their HC as well, and AZ was terrible... All of those teams i was so envious of are in bad spots just one year later, while i can look at the Texans and honestly say things should be real good for a while, not just a year or even two...

Maybe there IS something to that whole patience thing, and not going for the quick, short-lived success... The jury is still out in SF...

welsh texan
01-27-2012, 05:12 PM
Hell i dunno what to think right now...

Before the season i was thinking, "probably shouldn't have brought this guy back.." i mean just look at the other stories around the league entering this season... the Jets were coming off of two AFC C'ship game appearances with a coach who had only been there two years... KC went from bad to the playoffs with a first year, first time HC... Then over in Tampa they went from bad to 10-6 with a new coach... I meam, AZ made the super bowl with a coach who hadn't been there long... I leave out Tomlin in The Burg, that job was turn-key...

So my thinking was: Why in such a short period of time had these new HCs turned their teams into really good teams so quick, yet our guy going on forever hadn't made it to the playoffs, and was coming off a 6-10 season? It wasn't that i thought he could never bee a good coach but damn, couldn't we have done better than 9-7 at least once? Hell, at least 9-7 twice? I, along with everyone else was running out of patience...

Fast-forward to now... The Jets aren't going anywhere with that lockerroom, they think offense is offensive and didn't make the playoffs... The Chiefs axed the HC that took 'em to the playoff mid-season because the team sucked, the Bucs went from 10-Six to sucky quick and axed their HC as well, and AZ was terrible... All of those teams i was so envious of are in bad spots just one year later, while i can look at the Texans and honestly say things should be real good for a while, not just a year or even two...

Maybe there IS something to that whole patience thing, and not going for the quick, short-lived success... The jury is still out in SF...

All great points you make which reflect my views as well. Just a couple of things that worry me, you highlight the number of 'bad' teams that have one good season and then fall back down into mediocrity right away again.

And also, the thing with the patience, we all have to hope that the really slow turnaround will pay dividends now that we're getting to the point where we have to start signing our 'build through the draft' mentality to vet contracts.

Either, as we all hope, Rick Smith and Co. have it all planned out so that we can sign them all to the contracts the market will dictate, or, in the next year or two, the core of this team is going to be ripped out and we'll forever be acquiring young talent and not being able to afford their peak years.

This board seems pretty confident that our club is set up to succeed for years, and so am I, I'm just slightly mindful of the possible pitfalls that could lead to our downfall.

I feel a bit silly for thinking 'Fire Kubiak' a year ago right now, I'm not going to feel silly if my dreams are shattered in a year or two from now, but I am well and truly on board for the time being.

Marcus
01-27-2012, 05:14 PM
Maybe there IS something to that whole patience thing, and not going for the quick, short-lived success... The jury is still out in SF...

Patience? Really? That's never gonna happen.

There's something else that's never gonna happen. By now, people already have their minds made up about Kubiak. No amount of winning is going to change anything.

welsh texan
01-27-2012, 05:46 PM
Patience? Really? That's never gonna happen.

There's something else that's never gonna happen. By now, people already have their minds made up about Kubiak. No amount of winning is going to change anything.
Err, so I guess the last 6 years just flew by did they?

6 years of patience Marcus, we've seen the first harvest from that now, I think for very valid reasons (precedent for one, lots of other teams having one good season and then falling back into the melee, and also worries about our cap situation) people are still a little wary of whether this is going to be the start of something special

But to say patience is never going to happen after waiting for 6 years is a very odd statement, we've shown plenty of patience, and now is the time for that to pay off.

Marcus
01-27-2012, 06:41 PM
Err, so I guess the last 6 years just flew by did they?

6 years of patience Marcus, we've seen the first harvest from that now, I think for very valid reasons (precedent for one, lots of other teams having one good season and then falling back into the melee, and also worries about our cap situation) people are still a little wary of whether this is going to be the start of something special

But to say patience is never going to happen after waiting for 6 years is a very odd statement, we've shown plenty of patience, and now is the time for that to pay off.

I was referring to the statement "have patience, and not going for the quick short-lived success". There are many who favor firing a coach every single year until one eventually gets lucky, and the team has a winning season. Nothing of their doing of course, but that hardly matters. Most fans simply want the HC replaced after a bad season, in order to get that mental reset going into the offseason.

thunderkyss
01-27-2012, 06:42 PM
Fast-forward to now... The Jets aren't going anywhere with that lockerroom, they think offense is offensive and didn't make the playoffs... The Chiefs axed the HC that took 'em to the playoff mid-season because the team sucked, the Bucs went from 10-Six to sucky quick and axed their HC as well, and AZ was terrible... All of those teams i was so envious of are in bad spots just one year later, while i can look at the Texans and honestly say things should be real good for a while, not just a year or even two...

Maybe there IS something to that whole patience thing, and not going for the quick, short-lived success... The jury is still out in SF...

Which is why I started this thread (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89182), to have this discussion.

Are we looking at fools gold? Or is Gary Kubiak a mad genius who had been in the basement piecing together a foundation that will stand the test of time?

Double Barrel
01-27-2012, 07:22 PM
Patience? Really? That's never gonna happen.

There's something else that's never gonna happen. By now, people already have their minds made up about Kubiak. No amount of winning is going to change anything.

I guess I'm different, always the anti-pop, going against the grain until the day I drop.

I wanted Kubiak gone last season. I do not want him gone after the 2011 season. Winning changed everything.

Short of a drastic plunge - i.e. 2-14 - I do not think I will want him gone after the 2012 season.

thunderkyss
01-27-2012, 07:42 PM
I guess I'm different, always the anti-pop, going against the grain until the day I drop.

I wanted Kubiak gone last season. I do not want him gone after the 2011 season. Winning changed everything.

Short of a drastic plunge - i.e. 2-14 - I do not think I will want him gone after the 2012 season.

& I don't understand that.... 2010 is only one year removed from our first winning season. No, we didn't make the play-offs, but that had as much to do with chance than anything else. The 9-7 Jets (we were as good as the Jets that year) went to the AFC Championship game.

2010, I swear we were the most exciting team to watch that year. Didn't win a lot (6-10) But man we lost in some of the most head-scratching, improbable ways.

Now we're winning in 2011.

If we're 9-7.... 8-8, 7-9 you won't want him gone?

really?

Double Barrel
01-27-2012, 08:30 PM
& I don't understand that.... 2010 is only one year removed from our first winning season. No, we didn't make the play-offs, but that had as much to do with chance than anything else. The 9-7 Jets (we were as good as the Jets that year) went to the AFC Championship game.

2010, I swear we were the most exciting team to watch that year. Didn't win a lot (6-10) But man we lost in some of the most head-scratching, improbable ways.

Now we're winning in 2011.

If we're 9-7.... 8-8, 7-9 you won't want him gone?

really?

2009 - First winning season and all that was meaningless when you are sitting at home watching other teams in the playoffs. Just my perspective.

2010 was just another year in a long period of perpetual mediocrity. I did not see anything that told me the team was truly improving, especially when I consider it the head coach's responsibility on the final outcome of both sides of the ball. And starting 4-2 and ending 2-8 is pathetic. Why would I have faith in that kind of trend? 5-7 four years in a row? Can you understand how 5 years of mediocrity might just getting tiring to root for as a fan?

As far as 2012, my own perspective is that 2011 bought Kubiak a lot of goodwill. That's just me, though, and I know a lot of folks will disagree (and that's alright). I think Kubiak would have to lose this team's faith in him for them to not be a playoff team next season. 2011 broke a lot of bad habits and established the foundation for something that should carry over for years.

The NFL is a results based business. Waiting a decade to finally get to the playoff had even the most homer of fans calling for Kubiak's head. There were some folks that surprised me last year because they were just tired and worn out of mediocre results. I never blame anyone for how they feel. It's their right, regardless if I agree or disagree with them.

Texan_Bill
01-27-2012, 08:35 PM
If Kubiak loses the Pro-Bowl for the AFC, I say fire his ass!! :cool:

drunkcookie
01-27-2012, 08:42 PM
Are we looking at fools gold? Or is Gary Kubiak a mad genius who had been in the basement piecing together a foundation that will stand the test of time?

We'll have to wait and see, eh? I tell you this much: i like the Texans' chances of winning the superbowl next year more than that of any of the other teams mentioned...

But even with success next year and going on into the future i wouldn't grant mad genius status... Gary+Wade+Rick may just be a darn good combo that works... And having things work is the bottom line no matter if it's one guy or a combo...

McNair the mad genius?

Rey
01-27-2012, 09:15 PM
I think if kubiak puts together another winning season and continues to show growth as a coach folks will let him in. But this is his first play off run since he's been here and often times the team has looked stupid under his watch. Wade brought a tremendous amount to the team, so I can understanbd folks still being skeptical of kubiak the Head Coach.
Patience? Really? That's never gonna happen.

There's something else that's never gonna happen. By now, people already have their minds made up about Kubiak. No amount of winning is going to change anything.

Texecutioner
01-28-2012, 12:41 PM
Patience? Really? That's never gonna happen.

There's something else that's never gonna happen. By now, people already have their minds made up about Kubiak. No amount of winning is going to change anything.

I think that several posts in this thread debunk that statement.

There are many who favor firing a coach every single year until one eventually gets lucky, and the team has a winning season. Nothing of their doing of course, but that hardly matters. Most fans simply want the HC replaced after a bad season, in order to get that mental reset going into the offseason.

This is such an exaggeration and you know it. I've never read a post from anyone in here that has suggested to fire a coach any time a bad season exists. Nice hyperbole, but not the truth.

thunderkyss
01-28-2012, 01:17 PM
I think that several posts in this thread debunk that statement.



I don't believe they do. As we saw during the season, these same people were down on Kubiak after we lost to Carolina... 7 game win streak be damned.

I would wager, if we go 13-0 through next season, it would be love & roses & koolaid flowing down Kirby. Lose that 14th game & it's back to "same old Kubiak" "Wade is the reason for the 13-0, Kubiak for the lost game." etc... etc...

Runner
01-28-2012, 05:17 PM
I would wager, if we go 13-0 through next season, it would be love & roses & koolaid flowing down Kirby. Lose that 14th game & it's back to "same old Kubiak" "Wade is the reason for the 13-0, Kubiak for the lost game." etc... etc...

I don't get the point of making up stupid scenarios so the poster can argue against them to show how dumb the "other side" is.

How about "I would wager that if the Texans start off 0-8 next year, people would say that three games were because of bad officiating, two were lost because of thunderstorms, and the other three were because they had to play three tough teams in a row, and one was coming off a bye! Kubiak has them on the right track! The team he took over sucked!"

Wow - I just proved pro-Kubiak people are wrong, unreasonable, and probably mentally deficient. It was so easy too. I should have used this tactic long ago.

Or not.

ObsiWan
01-28-2012, 05:21 PM
I don't get the point of making up stupid scenarios so the poster can argue against them to show how dumb the "other side" is.

How about "I would wager that if the Texans start off 0-8 next year, people would say that three games were because of bad officiating, two were lost because of thunderstorms, and the other three were because they had to play three tough teams in a row, and one was coming off a bye! Kubiak has them on the right track! The team he took over sucked!"

Wow - I just proved pro-Kubiak people are wrong, unreasonable, and probably mentally deficient. It was so easy too. I should have used this tactic long ago.

Or not.

You ignored the first part of the post - which was not hypothetical - where some people (not all to be sure) jumped all over Kubiak when we failed to stretch that 7-game winning streak to 8 when we lost to Carolina. I seem to recall several "Kubiak cannot win without Wade..." posts. Remember those??

Texecutioner
01-28-2012, 05:28 PM
I don't get the point of making up stupid scenarios so the poster can argue against them to show how dumb the "other side" is.

How about "I would wager that if the Texans start off 0-8 next year, people would say that three games were because of bad officiating, two were lost because of thunderstorms, and the other three were because they had to play three tough teams in a row, and one was coming off a bye! Kubiak has them on the right track! The team he took over sucked!"

Wow - I just proved pro-Kubiak people are wrong, unreasonable, and probably mentally deficient. It was so easy too. I should have used this tactic long ago.

Or not.

For the record TK said that he would completely bail all support on Gary Kubiak after this season if he did not reach the AFC Championship or further. Yet, now he is still saying extreme things to defend the guy or to make his criticizers sound foolish that aren't even true. Kubiak could go 3-13 next season and the guy would act like he never even supported him. It's exactly why I don't take anything he says seriously especially when he makes up scenarios like that.

GNTLEWOLF
01-28-2012, 08:42 PM
My opinion of Kubiak hasn't changed. Looking at his body of work, this year is an anomaly. I think the easy schedule had as much to do with the 10-6 record as anything else did. During the rest of his tenure, the team usually stayed about the same or incrementally improved every season. One year they performed significantly worse.

I think he was fortunate not to be fired after each of the three previous seasons.

If he does well next year, my opinion will probably change and I might think he has finally become a competent head coach. However, that won't change my opinion that his previous poor coaching has held the Texans back. This season should not have been the Texans first season in the play-offs. Kubiak looked like a rookie head coach for too many seasons.

I have to agree with Runner on this one. I’m not convinced that this season is for real. I tend to think it is probably an anomaly given the data base of evidence in existence thus far.
I have long maintained my belief that Kubiak is Marvin Lewis and the Texans are the Bengals of the AFC South. Lewis’ record so far has been that he stays right around a .500 record career. One year he will have his team in the play-off with a winning record and the next year or two he will be at or near the bottom of the division. I see Kubiak as that guy.
I have removed my “Fire Kubiak” avatar for now. I am waiting to see how next year turns out. I think that if the team has a convincing winning record next year along with a return to the play-offs that he should be extended. If not then …well it’s been fun…see ya!. I’m not sure the winning record and play-offs this year were so much a function of Kubiak’s growth as a Head Coach as much as a combination of an AFC South weakened by re-building, an overall soft schedule and Wade having taken over the defense. I’m waiting to see more. I am not satisfied with one real winning season (not counting the 9-7 here) and one play-off win when compared to the rest of the 6 year record. Give me another year or two looking good and I’m on board.

thunderkyss
01-28-2012, 09:47 PM
For the record TK said that he would completely bail all support on Gary Kubiak after this season if he did not reach the AFC Championship or further. Yet, now he is still saying extreme things to defend the guy or to make his criticizers sound foolish that aren't even true. Kubiak could go 3-13 next season and the guy would act like he never even supported him. It's exactly why I don't take anything he says seriously especially when he makes up scenarios like that.

Whoa..... I'm not defending Kubiak.. show me his defense.

Kubiak has not earned an extension... That's where I said I would be if we did not reach the AFC Championship game.

& you have a big problem with reading comprehension. I'd love for you to post the "evidence" where I said I would pull out all support... but I know you won't find it.

badboy
01-28-2012, 10:03 PM
I think this past season was a combination of several thing including shcedule, Manning not playing, Wade's draft and his 52 defense; emergence of our Oline playing together healthy most games; two FA DBs and Gary doing a bit better with his game plan. I am not shouting that we did so well in spite of our head coach but I am considering it as a possibility. With the right moves we could be even better and if that's the case he should get a mid-season extension.

SuperSerial
01-29-2012, 05:37 AM
I am not comparing him to Belichick. You are comparing Kubiak to Belichick. Belichick has a 17 year body of HC work. Kubiak has 6 years of HC work. I am comparing their first 6 years. Belichick had a worse record, the same amount of playoff wins/appearances. Kubiak has 1 division title in that span (0 for Belichick). You are using the benefit of hindsight. I am saying look at their 1st 6 years (since Kubiak does not have another 11 to compare to BB). Do you seriously think coaches immediately experience success in their early years?

My point is that it takes time for a coach to win in this league (especially when they have to build a franchise). I don't think anyone can argue that Kubiak has done a great job building this franchise into a contender.

Yes you are comparing Kubiak to BB.

I am not comparing anyone to anything. I don't know how you decided I was comparing anything. I was just commenting on your comment.

All I am saying is there are several Kubiak homers out there who blindly defend Kub's mediocre start by telling the world about BB's first six years to compare with Kub's first 6, as if that means Kubiak is somehow on the road to greatness. In other words, "Just keep dealing with this guy because if BB can suck and then be great, so can Kub".

My comment was simple. When you try to defend Kub with the BB comparison, don't conveniently forget to talk about the hundreds of coaches who may have had bad or mediocre starts as well, and later never amounted to anything. You are singling out one coach who was successful later in his career to compare Kub to. In that sense, you are twisting what the "jury" gets to hear, and are trying to mind screw them into getting the verdict you want. That is twisting the facts like a slick defense lawyer.

No big deal. That type of smoke and mirrors is expected from the Kool Aid Krowd.

thunderkyss
01-29-2012, 09:48 AM
My comment was simple. When you try to defend Kub with the BB comparison, don't conveniently forget to talk about the hundreds of coaches who may have had bad or mediocre starts as well, and later never amounted to anything. You are singling out one coach who was successful later in his career to compare Kub to. In that sense, you are twisting what the "jury" gets to hear, and are trying to mind screw them into getting the verdict you want. That is twisting the facts like a slick defense lawyer.

No big deal. That type of smoke and mirrors is expected from the Kool Aid Krowd.

I don't think it is smoke & mirrors. I am not hoping that Kubiak stays with the Texans for any length of time, but it is a valid point. Your rebuttal, that for every Belichick, there are a hundred Marvin Lewises is equally valid (if not accurate).

Belichick studied under the great Parcells, but he was not 100% ready to turn a team around, not a team like the expansion Browns (ooh, look, a similarity), however once he got to an organization with a more structure in place, he was able to build something special.

It's a dream, a pipe dream that Kubiak can build something here. Everyone with that argument knows that. Still a valid point, but the soapers won't let the rainbow warriors have one valid point.

Runner
01-29-2012, 10:06 AM
You ignored the first part of the post - which was not hypothetical - where some people (not all to be sure) jumped all over Kubiak when we failed to stretch that 7-game winning streak to 8 when we lost to Carolina. I seem to recall several "Kubiak cannot win without Wade..." posts. Remember those??

I was commenting on the made up scenario and making up such scenarios to "prove" something. I thought that was clear.

cbs1507
01-29-2012, 02:02 PM
Yes you are comparing Kubiak to BB.

I am not comparing anyone to anything. I don't know how you decided I was comparing anything. I was just commenting on your comment.

All I am saying is there are several Kubiak homers out there who blindly defend Kub's mediocre start by telling the world about BB's first six years to compare with Kub's first 6, as if that means Kubiak is somehow on the road to greatness. In other words, "Just keep dealing with this guy because if BB can suck and then be great, so can Kub".

My comment was simple. When you try to defend Kub with the BB comparison, don't conveniently forget to talk about the hundreds of coaches who may have had bad or mediocre starts as well, and later never amounted to anything. You are singling out one coach who was successful later in his career to compare Kub to. In that sense, you are twisting what the "jury" gets to hear, and are trying to mind screw them into getting the verdict you want. That is twisting the facts like a slick defense lawyer.

No big deal. That type of smoke and mirrors is expected from the Kool Aid Krowd.

Dude you cannot compare 17 years to 6 years. I thought I made that clear. Was Belichick a great coach after 6 years? NO. If you cannot see the parallel I cannot help you. There are plenty of coaches that have early success but cannot sustain it. Those coaches don't last very long. Look at the situations in KC, TB and even the NY Jets. Most great coaches had to go through a learning curve (regardless of early success or not) and Belichick (and many others) was not exempt from it. It's that simple. Is Kubiak a great coach? IDK. Only time will tell. But he's not as bad as many people try to make him out to be.

steelbtexan
01-29-2012, 02:28 PM
Gary should thank god everyday that Manning got hurt and Bum helped Wade get the DC job.

How many games did Gary win without Wade this yr?

Gary is Gary a quality OC. Wade is Wade a quality DC. Together they make a great combo.

This yr hopefully Gary makes the offensive draft picks and Wade makes the defensive draft picks. While Rick is locked in the bathroom for 3 days.

BetaV1
01-29-2012, 03:25 PM
I remember last season when I said Sean Payton without Gregg Williams was akin to Gary Kubiak without a decent defensive coordinator (in this case, Wade.) I got mocked for it, or said how it was a "bad comparison." Looks like history once again showed the truth. :)

I hope Gary is the coach for a long, long time. The downside is that the guy clearly needs to have someone else pick his defensive hires, but there is no mistaken Gary's offensive genius. Can you say that we don't make the effort each year to fix any problems from the previous year? One year we can't run the ball, we fix that. The next we can't convert on third downs, we fix that. The next we can't finish games, we fix that. Some will argue that a great head coach will rarely make those mistakes. No. Because if that same coach continues to make that one same mistake, then that's far from great. A great head coach learns from his mistakes. I say Gary does that.

Others have pointed out, and sorry if I can't recall names here, that Gary keeps his guys in line. That is another great quality that the great head coaches have. The NFL now-a-days is a league where coaches last maybe an average of three seasons and patience has been thrown out the window thanks to guys like the Harbaughs, Rex Ryan, and Ken Whisenhunt coming in and going far in the blink of an eye.

Now we're seeing what happens though when things get rocky with these guys. Rex Ryan's first "down" year, in what happens to be his third year, and suddenly you're hearing all kinds of locker room turmoil. The Texans have had far gloomier times under Kubiak than the Jets have had under Rex's 8-8 season this year, yet not once have we seen any of these Texan players throwing one another under the bus or going to the media to stir the pot. Kubiak has the actual respect of his players, as opposed to the false respect many other coaches in the league have (if we're winning, everything is okay). Not many coaches in this league have that kind of influence. Kubiak does.

thunderkyss
01-29-2012, 03:46 PM
Now we're seeing what happens though when things get rocky with these guys. Rex Ryan's first "down" year, in what happens to be his third year, and suddenly you're hearing all kinds of locker room turmoil. The Texans have had far gloomier times under Kubiak than the Jets have had under Rex's 8-8 season this year, yet not once have we seen any of these Texan players throwing one another under the bus or going to the media to stir the pot. Kubiak has the actual respect of his players, as opposed to the false respect many other coaches in the league have (if we're winning, everything is okay). Not many coaches in this league have that kind of influence. Kubiak does.

In 2006, there were several rumors.... players in it for the check... David Carr not putting in the work.. Dunta also had his time in the media that year..... then there was the franchise Dunta year....

It hasn't all been peaches & cream in the Texans locker room under Kubiak.

Rey
01-29-2012, 04:53 PM
The difference between rex anbd kubiak are the expectations and past success. When you get one game away from the superbowl twice and then fail to make the play offs you are going to have guys getting angry. Whereas the texans have mostly been like wide eyed kids.

wildroot
01-29-2012, 05:33 PM
In BB's 7th year he won the SB....

BetaV1
01-29-2012, 06:54 PM
In 2006, there were several rumors.... players in it for the check... David Carr not putting in the work.. Dunta also had his time in the media that year..... then there was the franchise Dunta year....

Granted, not being in the area, I've probably missed some things, so I'm sure you're correct. It did spur me to research a bit into Robinson's comments of Carr and you were most certainly right here. (Although I should point that in the same article, Robinson spoke extremely highly of Kubiak. :) but I digress.)

The thing is that when a team has as many emotionally draining seasons as the Kubiak-era Texans have, you'd figure the coach would lose the locker room at some point, especially after the 6-10 2010 season. I think you'd agree that Kubiak and his players maintaining a positive environment overall is something not many coaches can draw from their players.

The difference between rex anbd kubiak are the expectations and past success. When you get one game away from the superbowl twice and then fail to make the play offs you are going to have guys getting angry. Whereas the texans have mostly been like wide eyed kids.

Wait, so Kubiak's expectations are inherently lower than Rex's? And I'd agree with you about the Texans being "wide eyed kids" if this were the third year into the Kubiak era, but it's not. This is year six. SIX. It took four years to get a record above mediocrity. It took six years for Gary's team to make the playoffs. I'd be inclined to say players should be more angry with five years of nothing than one year of 8-8 after two AFC Championship appearances.

Meanwhile, a lot of other coaches on losing teams lost their locker rooms long before one year, such as Eric Mangini in Cleveland and Josh McDaniels in Denver. Todd Haley lost his even when the team was on their way to a division title just last year. The players have to respect you, and gaining the respect of these guys isn't as easy as people probably think it is.

Texan_Bill
01-29-2012, 07:11 PM
Meh, Kubiak sucks and it's time to cut bait.


:stirpot:

Rey
01-29-2012, 09:38 PM
Wait, so Kubiak's expectations are inherently lower than Rex's? And I'd agree with you about the Texans being "wide eyed kids" if this were the third year into the Kubiak era, but it's not. This is year six. SIX. It took four years to get a record above mediocrity. It took six years for Gary's team to make the playoffs. I'd be inclined to say players should be more angry with five years of nothing than one year of 8-8 after two AFC Championship appearances.

Meanwhile, a lot of other coaches on losing teams lost their locker rooms long before one year, such as Eric Mangini in Cleveland and Josh McDaniels in Denver. Todd Haley lost his even when the team was on their way to a division title just last year. The players have to respect you, and gaining the respect of these guys isn't as easy as people probably think it is.

Mangini and McDaniels had both experienced some success before their teams went awry. McDaniels got off to a rocky start with the players from the beggining but he had a pretty good start on the playing field.

It's just a fact that the New York Jets had higher expectations heading into this season and previous seasons than the Houston Texans did. If you want to call that inherent...so be it...

welsh texan
01-30-2012, 10:24 AM
Mangini and McDaniels had both experienced some success before their teams went awry. McDaniels got off to a rocky start from the beggining.

It's just a fact that the New York Jets had higher expectations heading into this season and previous seasons than the Houston Texans did. If you want to call that inherent...so be it...

Got to feel that McDaniels ego was a bigger factor than his ability to coach in his time. Lots of decisions were made in that time that make you wonder what the hell he was thinking.

ObsiWan
01-31-2012, 03:22 AM
Gary should thank god everyday that Manning got hurt and Bum helped Wade get the DC job.

How many games did Gary win without Wade this yr?

Gary is Gary a quality OC. Wade is Wade a quality DC. Together they make a great combo.

This yr hopefully Gary makes the offensive draft picks and Wade makes the defensive draft picks. While Rick is locked in the bathroom for 3 days.

Kubiak lost two games without Wade running the D this year.
Kubiak lost four games WITH Wade running the D this year.
He lost twice as many games WITH Wade as without.

So what?

I agree with the rest of your post and have said so many times. Together they won ten games and the division title. May next year together be even better.

For the record, I'm starting to believe Rick Smith doesn't really make any picks. He goes out and finds the free agents we need to fill voids left after the draft. And he's done a pretty decent to very good job in that area.
Now I could be all wrong, but I think the draft is directed by the coaches.
Rick may hand in the selection card but it's the coaching staff who decides which name is on that card.

SuperSerial
01-31-2012, 03:38 AM
Dude you cannot compare 17 years to 6 years. I thought I made that clear. Was Belichick a great coach after 6 years? NO. If you cannot see the parallel I cannot help you. There are plenty of coaches that have early success but cannot sustain it. Those coaches don't last very long. Look at the situations in KC, TB and even the NY Jets. Most great coaches had to go through a learning curve (regardless of early success or not) and Belichick (and many others) was not exempt from it. It's that simple. Is Kubiak a great coach? IDK. Only time will tell. But he's not as bad as many people try to make him out to be.

Okay fair enough brah. Whatever you say is good.

Let's all agree we want the Texans to win, no matter who is at the helm. Get 'er dun'.

thunderkyss
01-31-2012, 05:40 PM
Now I could be all wrong, but I think the draft is directed by the coaches.
Rick may hand in the selection card but it's the coaching staff who decides which name is on that card.

Since Kubiak has been here, this has been a group-think organization. Every decision is made by a group. Bob, Cal, Gary, Rick, and whoever may be at OC, DC, & position coaches, & all the scouts. Last off-season defense was definitely the focal point & I'm sure Wade's opinion weighed in heavily. But it's not like he said, "Get me Jonathan Joseph at all cost, not that Nnamdi guy." Everyone had them ranked Nnamdi, then Jjo.

Von Miller, Marcell Darius, Patrick Peterson, Aldon Smith, JJ Watt, Nick Farely, Robert Quin.. the rest of the league may not have ranked them that way, but I have no doubt Rick Smith did. Taking JJ Watt over Farely & Quin looked like classic Rick Smith to me, gambling that Ayers & Reed would be there in the second.

I like Wade & I'm not trying to take anything away from the job he did in H-Town. But just two years ago, Rick Smith was heralded as one of the best young executives in the NFL. I can't find the story, but I found this (http://www.tnj.com/in-the-front-office) from 2008

Rick Smith, general manager
Houston Texans
Smith, 38, is entering his third season as general manager for the Houston Texans. The youngest GM in the NFL, his first job with the league was in 1996 as an assistant defensive back’s coach for the Denver Broncos. In 2008, he received the Tank Younger Award for outstanding work in an NFL front office.

I know everyone was/is extremely excited about Wade Phillips, but this organization is starting to look like the organization we hoped we were getting when Bob dropped them dollahs on Kirby.

Rey
01-31-2012, 05:51 PM
Since Kubiak has been here, this has been a group-think organization. Every decision is made by a group. Bob, Cal, Gary, Rick, and whoever may be at OC, DC, & position coaches, & all the scouts. Last off-season defense was definitely the focal point & I'm sure Wade's opinion weighed in heavily. But it's not like he said, "Get me Jonathan Joseph at all cost, not that Nnamdi guy." Everyone had them ranked Nnamdi, then Jjo.

Von Miller, Marcell Darius, Patrick Peterson, Aldon Smith, JJ Watt, Nick Farely, Robert Quin.. the rest of the league may not have ranked them that way, but I have no doubt Rick Smith did. Taking JJ Watt over Farely & Quin looked like classic Rick Smith to me, gambling that Ayers & Reed would be there in the second.

I like Wade & I'm not trying to take anything away from the job he did in H-Town. But just two years ago, Rick Smith was heralded as one of the best young executives in the NFL. I can't find the story, but I found this (http://www.tnj.com/in-the-front-office) from 2008



I know everyone was/is extremely excited about Wade Phillips, but this organization is starting to look like the organization we hoped we were getting when Bob dropped them dollahs on Kirby.

I don't know how much Rick Smith had to do with the Watts pick, but I have no doubt in my mind that he plays a large role in the draft process. No way can one person handle that process by themselves.

I agree with most of what you say here. The organization as a whole is what really matters anyways. Well...Right now it's what matters...

Who or what is the glue that is going to help us see many years of success even when different parts start to go elsewhere (Knapp to Oakland for instance)...

Was this just a magical year, or did someone or some people in the organization finally get it right? Perfect storm?

Goldensilence
01-31-2012, 08:57 PM
I don't know how much Rick Smith had to do with the Watts pick, but I have no doubt in my mind that he plays a large role in the draft process. No way can one person handle that process by themselves.

I agree with most of what you say here. The organization as a whole is what really matters anyways. Well...Right now it's what matters...

Who or what is the glue that is going to help us see many years of success even when different parts start to go elsewhere (Knapp to Oakland for instance)...

Was this just a magical year, or did someone or some people in the organization finally get it right? Perfect storm?

The offense has looked pretty damn good the past 2-3 years with Kubiak getting the pieces he wanted to fit. The offensive coaching staff as well is pretty solid in that they all are on the same page philosophically speaking. The other thing is at the most key position QB, Kubiak gets productivity because of how the offense operates.

The problem the past 2-3 years has been a defense that starts slow and towards the end of the year picks it up. There's also been a lack of a real coherent scheme. I know the phrase "aggressive 4-3" got ran into the ground by Smith and Bush, but the reality is its was always a "read and react defense".

I would say amazing turnaround on defense without a doubt, but the real reason this was a magical season bar none was not only getting a DC with a real track record, but one that is elite. There has been a identity offensively, but this year we got a defensive one. That made ALL the difference in the world.

thunderkyss
02-01-2012, 10:06 AM
The offense has looked pretty damn good the past 2-3 years with Kubiak getting the pieces he wanted to fit. The offensive coaching staff as well is pretty solid in that they all are on the same page philosophically speaking. The other thing is at the most key position QB, Kubiak gets productivity because of how the offense operates.

The problem the past 2-3 years has been a defense that starts slow and towards the end of the year picks it up. There's also been a lack of a real coherent scheme. I know the phrase "aggressive 4-3" got ran into the ground by Smith and Bush, but the reality is its was always a "read and react defense".

I would say amazing turnaround on defense without a doubt, but the real reason this was a magical season bar none was not only getting a DC with a real track record, but one that is elite. There has been a identity offensively, but this year we got a defensive one. That made ALL the difference in the world.

hmm...

I'll agree that our offense has put up "good" stats over the years, but to say the problem has been primarily a defensive problem for the alst 2-3 years isn't exactly accurate.

We've had trouble offensively one way or the other for the last 6 years. We couldn't run the ball in '06 or '07... the running game of '08 proved to be unsustainable. I don't think our OL got on track until mid-way through the '09 season.

We've had red-zone issues, turnover issues, health issues, depth issues on the offensive side of the ball, just like on the defensive side. Kubiak has done a much better job of managing those issues with lesser talent. But we need play-makers on the offensive side of the ball.

The way we were able to run the ball vs Cincy & the first half of the Baltimore game was impressive. Was that because we had AJ on the field? If so, I think we need to get studs at the OG positions to allow us to run the ball at will. Everyone wants another playmaker at the #2 WR position, & though we all love Schaub, it's time to start thinking about his replacement.

Bottom line, I'd love to see what Kubiak can do when the talent on the offensive side of the ball resembles that of the defense. I think the man is an offensive genius & has "gotten us by" with what he had to work with.