PDA

View Full Version : Texans Lead NFL.......in RUNS on 3rd And Long


CloakNNNdagger
02-13-2013, 09:04 AM
We've had a thread where we discussed the Texans "Three and Out Percentages." Now we can look at......


RTC: Numbers on Texans 3rd-and-long runs (http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/post/_/id/47178/rtc-numbers-on-texans-third-and-long-runs)
February, 12, 2013
Feb 12
10:55
AM ET
By Paul Kuharsky | ESPN.com

Houston Texans

“The Texans faced 101 third-and-long situations. 23 of them were runs,” says Rivers McCown of Battle Red Blog. "That rate of 22% is nearly triple the league-average rate. A better way to say that? The Texans called nearly 9% of all third-and-long runs in the entire league last year."

To which I say: Great numbers here that really show Gary Kubiak’s unwillingness not just to take chances on third downs, but simply to throw. He really needs to self-evaluate in this area.

Is it Kubiak's "unwillingness" to pass on 3rd and long due to his own insecurity in taking chances in general........or is it a function of recognizing his QB's limitations?


This piece I present below is from 2009 ADVANCEDNFLSTATS.COM can add some comparative perspective to the 3rd and long subject. I would also have to keep in mind that in just the last couple of years, I believe that we have seen a distinct trending of most teams to lean more to the passing game than in the past.

Run-Pass Imbalance on 2nd and 3rd Downs (http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/12/run-pass-imbalance-on-2nd-and-3rd-downs.html)

ATXtexanfan
02-13-2013, 09:12 AM
No surprise on that one. Wonder how many attempted passes were short of first down marker.

ArlingtonTexan
02-13-2013, 09:21 AM
No surprise on that one. Wonder how many attempted passes were short of first down marker.

Short of the marker does not bother me as much as it does others. The defense knows where the first down marker is also. The problem for the Texans is that there are only two guys on offense where it is a reasonable bet for them to make a play based on thier skill to get to a first down Andre and Arian. Need more guys who can in some way make a play when the coverage dictates that the ball won't get the first down stick.

Rey
02-13-2013, 09:56 AM
I think we were also near the bottom in long passes attempted..not surprising given that we won a lot of games, our style of offense,
Lack of deep threats and the qb we roll out.

GP
02-13-2013, 10:11 AM
Short of the marker does not bother me as much as it does others. The defense knows where the first down marker is also. The problem for the Texans is that there are only two guys on offense where it is a reasonable bet for them to make a play based on thier skill to get to a first down Andre and Arian. Need more guys who can in some way make a play when the coverage dictates that the ball won't get the first down stick.

It bothers the hell out of me, and I'll tell you why: Defenses began to put heavier press coverage on a WR or TE who was at or just shy of the 1st down marker...and they rarely really bothered with the deeper receivers because they knew where Matt would go.

I started noticing on 3rd and long that we had a tendency to run only one WR or TE shallow and all others went deep...to draw coverage to them and free up the shallow man. But the better teams figured that out and started playing the shallow man a lot harder than they did the deeper receivers. I was sitting there and wondering if there was a pattern, and when it happened in the Patriots playoff game...I noticed it happening over and over again.

This QB has developed David Carr tendencies out of nowhere. This QB was a completely different QB the second half of the season (primarily after the two OT games we won). From that point forward, he really spiraled downward except for the away game at Tennessee. But then again, it was the TITANS.

Throw in a HC whom I think knows he's screwed and doesn't know how to get out of the corner he's painted himself and this entire team into, and it makes for a rough ending to the season.

Gary Kubiak is loyal, though. Matt Schaub will be the default starting QB come camp. Probably no competition for his spot. Gary will think he can maybe have a better year in 2013. In Gary's world, we just need one more shot.

Brisco_County
02-13-2013, 10:40 AM
Predicting the run on 3rd and long became a consistent way to get a laugh from everyone in my local sports bar.

ATXtexanfan
02-13-2013, 10:41 AM
Short of the marker does not bother me as much as it does others. The defense knows where the first down marker is also. The problem for the Texans is that there are only two guys on offense where it is a reasonable bet for them to make a play based on thier skill to get to a first down Andre and Arian. Need more guys who can in some way make a play when the coverage dictates that the ball won't get the first down stick.

short of the marker bothers me when schaub never hits a guy in stride and he's tackled immediately short of the marker. i blame the qb and playcaller. mainly the playcaller.

tru80texan
02-13-2013, 11:07 AM
Predicting the run on 3rd and long became a consistent way to get a laugh from everyone in my local sports bar.

It's laughable & disgusting at the same time. Even my wife & a friend of her's while watching a game made a joke after a 3rd & long was announced "Here comes the run!", then they followed it up w/ "If we know they are fixing to run why wouldn't the other team?". That's a fair question that all I could do was shake my head at because low & behold...there came the run. :toropalm:

The sad predictability known as a Gary Kubiak run offense has it's moments where it equates to what I call....pee wee football. It is what it is & we are stuck w/ it for the near future.:foottap:

GP
02-13-2013, 11:18 AM
Even an Alzheimer's afflicted person remembers that Gary is running the ball on 3rd and long.

eriadoc
02-13-2013, 11:46 AM
So when 76Texan argued against this all season, he was FOS? Yep.

Anyone who watched the games with a critical eye knew that Kubiak was giving up on 3rd down way too often. This is just an official indicator. It's a shame we have to have these sorts of official stats to prove what we already know.

ThaShark316
02-13-2013, 11:46 AM
I'm noticing something on 3rd and long:

Teams are blitzing the hell out of Schaub, making him check down. If it was 3rd and 8, NE (example; in the playoff game) released the hounds on him. Obviously, I need to go back and watch some more games and see more. That said, it's not all the blitz,; Schaub stopped stepping into throws in the 2nd half of the season. He faded away, if you will, on these throws. Led to underthrows, etc.

GP
02-13-2013, 11:54 AM
I'm noticing something on 3rd and long:

Teams are blitzing the hell out of Schaub, making him check down. If it was 3rd and 8, NE (example; in the playoff game) released the hounds on him. Obviously, I need to go back and watch some more games and see more. That said, it's not all the blitz,; Schaub stopped stepping into throws in the 2nd half of the season. He faded away, if you will, on these throws. Led to underthrows, etc.

Well, it's a combo deal.

(1) Blitz Schaub, and (2) Make sure the guy running the sole "escape route" is covered up and tackled as soon as he catches the ball. Then get ready to return a bad Donnie Jones punt...or actually, just stand there and watch his shank punt go out of bounds 25 yards down the field.

Pressure on Schaub and wrapping up the check-down receiver is all you had to do. Good defenses knew to do that against Schaub.

tru80texan
02-13-2013, 11:56 AM
I'm noticing something on 3rd and long:

Teams are blitzing the hell out of Schaub, making him check down. If it was 3rd and 8, NE (example; in the playoff game) released the hounds on him. Obviously, I need to go back and watch some more games and see more. That said, it's not all the blitz,; Schaub stopped stepping into throws in the 2nd half of the season. He faded away, if you will, on these throws. Led to underthrows, etc.

How is this any different from how any other offense gets handled on 3rd & long? IMO it's not any different. It's how the offense handles the situation & the Texans it seems handles it poorly a majority of the time. I'm sure there are numerous teams that have been blitzed on 3rd & long & have succeeded in converting them by not being forced into calling run plays or draws or checking down to underneath patterns short of the 1st down marker. Not calling for proper protection & sending in a conservative play call along w/ an ineffective #2 wr are all factors that fall on the HC who is suppose to be an offensive genius, but looks anything but that against the likes of the better HC's in the NFL...Belichick & McCarthy to name a few.

tru80texan
02-13-2013, 12:07 PM
So when 76Texan argued against this all season, he was FOS? Yep.

Anyone who watched the games with a critical eye knew that Kubiak was giving up on 3rd down way too often. This is just an official indicator. It's a shame we have to have these sorts of official stats to prove what we already know.

It's a shame that it takes these type of stats to prove to those that refused to acknowledge the obvious & the truth that they were wrong. Those that already knew normally don't need to justify the obvious.

Don't be too rough on 76 because our great Texan "insider" John McClain was once asked a question about Kubiak being predictable in his online chat & in his normal sarcastic way of answering questions he doesn't deem worthy he basically said that he has never heard that said about kubiak. Really?! McClain is another who foolishly chooses to ignore the obvious on occasion & is exactly why I look elsewhere for Texan/ NFL information.

ThaShark316
02-13-2013, 12:15 PM
How is this any different from how any other offense gets handled on 3rd & long? IMO it's not any different. It's how the offense handles the situation & the Texans it seems handles it poorly a majority of the time. I'm sure there are numerous teams that have been blitzed on 3rd & long & have succeeded in converting them by not being forced into calling run plays or draws or checking down to underneath patterns short of the 1st down marker. Not calling for proper protection & sending in a conservative play call along w/ an ineffective #2 wr are all factors that fall on the HC who is suppose to be an offensive genius, but looks anything but that against the likes of the better HC's in the NFL...Belichick & McCarthy to name a few.

No, you're right. Texans do sort of handle 3rd and long like a group of idiots at times. Sometimes though, I actually don't mind the checkdowns when their is pressure. I don't even want a pick or sack/fumble to happen. SOMETIMES, excuse me, I don't mind.

P.S.; Can we please stop calling Mike McCarthy a genius? Never seen such an "ehhhhh" coach get so much praise.

thunderkyss
02-13-2013, 01:36 PM
It's the same strategy Schaub & Kubiak won 12 games with. We beat the Broncos, we beat the Bears, we beat Baltimore.... it worked. We scored a lot of points, we kept our turnovers down.....

It didn't work against the Packers & it didn't work against the Patriots. It didn't work against Minnesota, or Inday @ Indy. But no one expected us to go undefeated right? We were going to win some we shouldn't, & we were going to lose some we shouldn't, right?

The Strategy did not get us to the AFC CHampionship Game.


eh.....

dream_team
02-13-2013, 01:44 PM
I'd like to see this stat split up to where we are on the field. Makes a big difference if we're pinned inside our own 20 or not. If it's like 80% inside the 20, but around 1-2% outside the 20... then I'm ok with this stat.

You have to keep in mind we have one of the best defenses in football. Why take chances when we don't have to.

If we're playing a high-powered offense, or the defense is playing like crap... then yes, I'd like to see us take more chances. But for majority of this season, we didn't have to.

76Texan
02-13-2013, 02:28 PM
As with any number, one often has to look deeper.

Of the third and long that the Texans faced, nearly 81% of the time, it was for 11 yards and longer.

The league averaged just 53% (and the Texans number was included).

That's a HUGE difference.

The more important question is why did the Texans get to third and very long a lot more often than the rest of the league?

It could be that the run game sucked.
It could be a false start or a holding penalty that pushed the ball back further.
Or something else.

There are other numbers that add to it to skew the situation further; for example, there were 3 QB scrambles that were scored as runs, but they were really pass plays.

tru80texan
02-13-2013, 02:42 PM
No, you're right. Texans do sort of handle 3rd and long like a group of idiots at times. Sometimes though, I actually don't mind the checkdowns when their is pressure. I don't even want a pick or sack/fumble to happen. SOMETIMES, excuse me, I don't mind.

P.S.; Can we please stop calling Mike McCarthy a genius? Never seen such an "ehhhhh" coach get so much praise.

I completely understand not wanting a turnover or negative play depending on the field position, but field position is hardly the lone factor that contributes to kubiaks ineffective play calling on 3rd & longs. It really doesn't seem to matter where they are at on the field, 3rd & long on their side of the field results in the same ineffective play calling to eventually punt. 3rd & long on the opposition's side of the field leads to the same ineffective play calling to lead to a FG. We have all seen it at its finest this past season. Those that haven't are simply refusing to acknowledge the truth, but that doesn't change the facts. Kubiak & Dennison are highly predictable on 3rd & long & if the opposition really wants to stall the Texans offense & get off of the field on 3rd & long, send a blitz. Sad but true.

I never claimed McCarthy was a genius. I claimed he was one of the better HC's in the NFL & he has proven that imo because he has dealt w/ the exact situation Kubiak has dealt w/ in the past & has quite a bit more success. Average to mediocre defense, no running game, & relying on the passing offense to carry the team is what McCarthy has dealt w/ & gotten to the playoffs with. Kubiak had the same situation & produced 0 playoffs & 1 winning season 07, 08, & 2009. When finally getting a running game in 2010, kubiak managed to regress going 6-10. I don't think McCarthy is a genius but he has managed to keep his team winning & competitive despite their shortcomings. Something kubiak has proven he has trouble doing. So for that reason I do believe McCarthy is 1 of the better HC's & by far better then kubiak.

76Texan
02-13-2013, 02:44 PM
Actually, the two runs scored to Schaub were kneel downs to end the game; one scramble was on Yates avoiding pressure.

Two more times, the Texans were working the clock.

And 8 times, they were inside their own 10, mostly deep.

tru80texan
02-13-2013, 02:56 PM
Actually, the two runs scored to Schaub were kneel downs to end the game; one scramble was on Yates avoiding pressure.

Two more times, the Texans were working the clock.

And 8 times, they were inside their own 10, mostly deep.

LOL! So the predictable play calling on 3rd & long that is often laughed at or criticised is skewed & stems from a few kneel downs & working the clock. Okkkkk.... I think not, but as I said earlier there are some who refuse to acknowledge the obvious which is the truth. You can lead the horse to water, but can't make them drink. Lead them to Battle Red koolaid & it will disappear.

steelbtexan
02-13-2013, 03:06 PM
I'm noticing something on 3rd and long:

Teams are blitzing the hell out of Schaub, making him check down. If it was 3rd and 8, NE (example; in the playoff game) released the hounds on him. Obviously, I need to go back and watch some more games and see more. That said, it's not all the blitz,; Schaub stopped stepping into throws in the 2nd half of the season. He faded away, if you will, on these throws. Led to underthrows, etc.

The reason he stopped stepping into his throws had to do withhis foot injury.

What's that crap about Moon in your sig. I wouldn't ever apologize to that wife beater, who despite having the most talented team in the NFL never even made it to an AFC championship and was one of the major contributors to Houston losing my beloved Oilers. He did lead his team to the most embarassing loss in NFL history, that says something.

76Texan
02-13-2013, 03:40 PM
LOL! So the predictable play calling on 3rd & long that is often laughed at or criticised is skewed & stems from a few kneel downs & working the clock. Okkkkk.... I think not, but as I said earlier there are some who refuse to acknowledge the obvious which is the truth. You can lead the horse to water, but can't make them drink. Lead them to Battle Red koolaid & it will disappear.

There's nothing about truth that needs to be discussed here, just facts.

First, you have to be able to separate facts into several categories where they belong before you can make some sense out of those different categories of facts.

Only after that can you stand a chance to get to the truth.

76Texan
02-13-2013, 05:01 PM
What it really boils down to is that we expected a drop off from Winston to Newton, and then Newton got injured.

We expected a drop off from Brisiel to Caldwell and then Caldwell got injured.
When you have 3 guys playing one position (RG) in the same season, two of the survivors are rookies who can't beat out a previously back-up (yet).

You have a Wade Smith who played more injured than at any time in his career.

You have Myers and Brown both having not as good a year as last.

You pretty much got whipped across the board, how do you expect a lot of good out of third and long (or any situation really) is just daydreaming.

That is the truth, besides the fact that Schaub didn't play well and that the D sucked and the ST sucked.

thunderkyss
02-13-2013, 05:23 PM
What it really boils down to is that we expected a drop off from Winston to Newton, and then Newton got injured.

We expected a drop off from Brisiel to Caldwell and then Caldwell got injured.
When you have 3 guys playing one position (RG) in the same season, two of the survivors are rookies who can't beat out a previously back-up (yet).

You have a Wade Smith who played more injured than at any time in his career.

You have Myers and Brown both having not as good a year as last.

You pretty much got whipped across the board, how do you expect a lot of good out of third and long (or any situation really) is just daydreaming.

That is the truth, besides the fact that Schaub didn't play well and that the D sucked and the ST sucked.

Don't worry '76, when it all starts to click next season, they'll be back. Some won't be back until we clinch the #1 seed, which most likely won't happen next season, some won't be back until we win the AFC Championship game, some won't be back until we win the Super Bowl.

But they'll be back.

steelbtexan
02-13-2013, 05:40 PM
What it really boils down to is that we expected a drop off from Winston to Newton, and then Newton got injured.

We expected a drop off from Brisiel to Caldwell and then Caldwell got injured.
When you have 3 guys playing one position (RG) in the same season, two of the survivors are rookies who can't beat out a previously back-up (yet).

You have a Wade Smith who played more injured than at any time in his career.

You have Myers and Brown both having not as good a year as last.

You pretty much got whipped across the board, how do you expect a lot of good out of third and long (or any situation really) is just daydreaming.

That is the truth, besides the fact that Schaub didn't play well and that the D sucked and the ST sucked.

And the fact that they had to face 8-9 men in the box constantly because there wasn't a deep threat opposite AJ. Atleast JJ for all of his suckitude time here provided that.

God how I hope they dont draft another WR from the slow/lacking in WR/DB talent Big 10. Draft somebody from a passing confrence like the Big 12/Pac 10. If you want a better faster version of JJ they should draft Marquise Goodwin in the 3rd rd. He's going to light up the combine.

Jules Winnfield
02-13-2013, 06:25 PM
Just another testament to how much of an offensive guru kubiak is.

I still smdh when i think about the days everyone was calling kubiak an offensive guru.

Sad stuff.

We also probably lead the league or close to the top of 2nd and long running plays.


Those who called Kubiak an offensive guru, yall should slap yourselves in the face.

thunderkyss
02-13-2013, 06:58 PM
Well if Kubiak is a guru & we ran it on 3rd & long an inordinate number of times (which I know we did) then you'd have to think there was a reason. I'd like to know what that reason was, but most speculate that Kubiak is too conservative, or restricts Matt, or that Matt is shell-shocked.... & I just find those reasons hard to believe.

I don't believe that is the future of our offense. Hopefully, it is a thing of the past.

Jules Winnfield
02-13-2013, 08:39 PM
i really wish somebody would put up how often the texans ran on 2nd and long.

That is the real problem. When people ask why the texans are always in 3rd and long situations, its because they always run on 2nd and long situations and it always fails to pick yards hence we are always on 3rd and long situations with captain check down matt cotton sloth.

check the 2nd and long running play stats.

that's one of the main problems.

Texan_Bill
02-13-2013, 08:44 PM
We've had a thread where we discussed the Texans "Three and Out Percentages." Now we can look at......



Is it Kubiak's "unwillingness" to pass on 3rd and long due to his own insecurity in taking chances in general........or is it a function of recognizing his QB's limitations?


This piece I present below is from 2009 ADVANCEDNFLSTATS.COM can add some comparative perspective to the 3rd and long subject. I would also have to keep in mind that in just the last couple of years, I believe that we have seen a distinct trending of most teams to lean more to the passing game than in the past.


Run-Pass Imbalance on 2nd and 3rd Downs (http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/12/run-pass-imbalance-on-2nd-and-3rd-downs.html)


Yes........

AND No!

To be honest, I didn't read the link. That said is there a chance (and you attorneys out there - you know who you are, might appreciate this) that it might be quite the opposite knowing these things:

A) The Texans are well aware of the league tendancies on 3rd and long
B) The Texans know that the league is well aware of league tendancies, and finally
C) The Texans have, if not the best RB in the league, one of the top 3 running backs in the league with Arian Foster.

IMO, the FAIL comes with Kubiak relying on the right side of the line which didn't always allow Arian Foster to do Arian Foster "things".

steelbtexan
02-13-2013, 08:47 PM
Well if Kubiak is a guru & we ran it on 3rd & long an inordinate number of times (which I know we did) then you'd have to think there was a reason. I'd like to know what that reason was, but most speculate that Kubiak is too conservative, or restricts Matt, or that Matt is shell-shocked.... & I just find those reasons hard to believe.

I don't believe that is the future of our offense. Hopefully, it is a thing of the past.

Or maybe just maybe


Wait for it





Wait for it






Matt was playing with a bum foot

Wolf
02-13-2013, 08:55 PM
i really wish somebody would put up how often the texans ran on 2nd and long.

That is the real problem. When people ask why the texans are always in 3rd and long situations, its because they always run on 2nd and long situations and it always fails to pick yards hence we are always on 3rd and long situations with captain check down matt cotton sloth.

check the 2nd and long running play stats.

that's one of the main problems.
Arian Foster ....any stat imaginable


http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/12497/arian-foster

Justin Forsett
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/11467/justin-forsett

Ben Tate
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/13210/ben-tate



I wish there was a generic stat sheet but haven't found one yet

Texan_Bill
02-13-2013, 08:57 PM
I'd be curious as to the teams that the Texans played what their 'split' was on going for a pass on 3rd and long versus their season average, given JJ Watt et al as a consideration.

Seriously, that would be interesting to me at least.

:swatter: + sacks

= Baller!

Wolf
02-13-2013, 09:04 PM
I'd be curious as to the teams that the Texans played what their 'split' was on going for a pass on 3rd and long versus their season average, given JJ Watt et al as a consideration.

Seriously, that would be interesting to me at least.

:swatter: + sacks

= Baller!

Here is Watts

1st down 11 sacks 1stf 7pd 2 ff
2nd down 3.5 sack 8stf 4pd 2 ff
3rd down 5 sacks 5 pd
4th down 1sack
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/13979/jj-watt

thunderkyss
02-13-2013, 09:31 PM
Matt was playing with a bum foot

I believe the dead arm thing more than the bum foot. I just didn't see it & I've watched the last games several times, at least once, paying special attention to his feet.

Premier
02-13-2013, 09:39 PM
23 out of 101? seems low.. what would the number be if they counted screens too...

steelbtexan
02-13-2013, 09:58 PM
I believe the dead arm thing more than the bum foot. I just didn't see it & I've watched the last games several times, at least once, paying special attention to his feet.

So you must have noticed that Matt wasn't stepping into his throws? Could that have had anything to do with his foot being hurt?

Or did somebody stick a rock in his sock every week?

After 10 yrs in the NFL Matt suddenly started having problems with his footwork. Do you think that could've been because he had one of the most debilitating injuries a football player regardless of position could possibly have?

Or maybe as you say Matts arm just cant hold up for a complete season. Either way the Texans need to find his heir apparent in the worst way. I mean Brees/Rodgers/Stafford etc....anyone with 2 healthy feet, even Peytons arms didn't fall off and they threw the ball considerably more than Matt did last yr.

76Texan
02-13-2013, 10:14 PM
It's kinda of funny.

So what if the Texans tendency is to run on third and long?

Y'all got to remember that the tendency of many other teams is to pass, and much more heavy at that.
If there's something predictable, well you can count on that.

It makes more sense to say that the Texans buck the trend, that they do things other teams don't do; they were more unpredictable than the rest.

Texan_Bill
02-13-2013, 10:29 PM
Here is Watts

1st down 11 sacks 1stf 7pd 2 ff
2nd down 3.5 sack 8stf 4pd 2 ff
3rd down 5 sacks 5 pd
4th down 1sack
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/13979/jj-watt

While that's money my brother, my quest of a question was this:

How much different did the Texans opponents stray from their own tendancies versus the Texans defense compared to the NFL's stastiscal tendancies?

*EDIT*

I would suspect that their tendancies were slightly lower than their season average.

Of course I could be completely wrong, but again, it's completely interesting to me.

thunderkyss
02-14-2013, 12:19 AM
So you must have noticed that Matt wasn't stepping into his throws? Could that have had anything to do with his foot being hurt?

Or did somebody stick a rock in his sock every week?

After 10 yrs in the NFL Matt suddenly started having problems with his footwork. Do you think that could've been because he had one of the most debilitating injuries a football player regardless of position could possibly have?

Or maybe as you say Matts arm just cant hold up for a complete season. Either way the Texans need to find his heir apparent in the worst way. I mean Brees/Rodgers/Stafford etc....anyone with 2 healthy feet, even Peytons arms didn't fall off and they threw the ball considerably more than Matt did last yr.

I mean I saw no evidence or any foot injury. He had no problem planting his feet, he stepped into his throws, he pushed off both feet equally well. If there was an issue with is foot, he didn't act like it.

I also did not see any evidence of a dead arm, but I'd believe it more because the evidence is more subjective.

dream_team
02-14-2013, 04:02 AM
Just another testament to how much of an offensive guru kubiak is.

I still smdh when i think about the days everyone was calling kubiak an offensive guru.

Sad stuff.

We also probably lead the league or close to the top of 2nd and long running plays.


Those who called Kubiak an offensive guru, yall should slap yourselves in the face.

I still consider him an offensive guru, so I went ahead and slapped myself for you.

klockWork
02-14-2013, 04:38 AM
He IS a offensive guru. Just not on 3rd & long. And not when his starting QB is Schaub.

silentassassin
02-14-2013, 11:14 AM
The majority of these came from behind their own 20 yard line. Very predictable trend, and the only explanation for it is to create space for a punt. -_-

El Tejano
02-14-2013, 01:47 PM
Cowher said Kubiak is an offensive Guru! Just saying.

Steal Your Face
02-14-2013, 10:06 PM
I'd like to see this stat split up to where we are on the field. Makes a big difference if we're pinned inside our own 20 or not. If it's like 80% inside the 20, but around 1-2% outside the 20... then I'm ok with this stat.

You have to keep in mind we have one of the best defenses in football. Why take chances when we don't have to.

If we're playing a high-powered offense, or the defense is playing like crap... then yes, I'd like to see us take more chances. But for majority of this season, we didn't have to.

Field position on "3rd and long" makes a huge difference.
So does the yardage necessary make a big difference ... 3rd and 7 as opposed to 3rd and 12.

But another major factor is the score and time. If we are facing a 3rd and long ahead 28 - 7 with 6 minutes to play, I am perfectly OK if Kubiak runs the ball 100% of those times.

Steal Your Face
02-14-2013, 10:10 PM
Just another testament to how much of an offensive guru kubiak is.

I still smdh when i think about the days everyone was calling kubiak an offensive guru.

Sad stuff.

We also probably lead the league or close to the top of 2nd and long running plays.


Those who called Kubiak an offensive guru, yall should slap yourselves in the face.

Even so ... we also "lead the league or close to the top" in wins.

tru80texan
02-15-2013, 08:02 AM
Cowher said Kubiak is an offensive Guru! Just saying.

Really? Got a link? If not, I guess we would just have to take it for what its worth.

I think Belichick thinks otherwise & proved it...twice. Just saying..

thunderkyss
02-15-2013, 09:22 AM
Even so ... we also "lead the league or close to the top" in wins.

Ah.... the good ol days, when that was all that matters.

Kubiak must be doing a great job now that expectations are much higher. We got a steal when we extended him. Hope to lock him up for a long time to come. Then they'll be complaining that we didn't run the score up while winning our first Super Bowl.

thunderkyss
02-15-2013, 09:24 AM
Really? Got a link? If not, I guess we would just have to take it for what its worth.

I think Belichick thinks otherwise & proved it...twice. Just saying..

Here is a thread (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98384), with a link where Cowher was very complimentary of Kubiak. I don't know that he's called Kubiak a guru, but he's pretty high on him none-the-less.

tru80texan
02-15-2013, 10:58 AM
Here is a thread (http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98384), with a link where Cowher was very complimentary of Kubiak. I don't know that he's called Kubiak a guru, but he's pretty high on him none-the-less.

Thanks for the link. I'm having issues listening to it because I'm on my phone.

As of late, kubiak has taken some criticism for his offense & how he utilizes it & makes adjustments, or lack thereof, accordingly. I haven't heard the term "guru" used to describe him in quite some time by anyone outside of Houston to he honest. He's under contract so we have time to see if he is capable of convincing the naysayers, fans & media. Myself included to be honest.

GP
02-15-2013, 11:08 AM
What's Cowher going to do, act like Meril Hodge and completely urinate on a head coach like Hodge did on Tebow?

Nobody debates the idea that Gary Kubiak is good at things. It's just that he isn't raising his game to new levels and finding creative ways to overcome periods of low productivity...he's leveling out and not responding to the shifting sands of the NFL.

You can be a smart person and still be dumb.

tru80texan
02-15-2013, 12:02 PM
What's Cowher going to do, act like Meril Hodge and completely urinate on a head coach like Hodge did on Tebow?

Nobody debates the idea that Gary Kubiak is good at things. It's just that he isn't raising his game to new levels and finding creative ways to overcome periods of low productivity...he's leveling out and not responding to the shifting sands of the NFL.

You can be a smart person and still be dumb.

Couldn't agree more as far Kubiak & him progressing as a coach. The simple & easy comeback will be he's a 12-4 coach & that's enough to satisfy some. Unfortunately, I want & expect more then AFC South Championships & pretty regular season records. I truly doubt the Colts fans were happy w/ just AFC South banners year in & year out, but this is new to us & hopefully eventually we too will all expect & want more as well.

thunderkyss
02-15-2013, 12:48 PM
Couldn't agree more as far Kubiak & him progressing as a coach. The simple & easy comeback will be he's a 12-4 coach & that's enough to satisfy some. Unfortunately, I want & expect more then AFC South Championships & pretty regular season records. I truly doubt the Colts fans were happy w/ just AFC South banners year in & year out, but this is new to us & hopefully eventually we too will all expect & want more as well.

The difference is when the Colts were racking up AFC South Championship banners, I don't think their fans were eager to run their HC & QB out of town. They may have been, but I don't know.

I doubt Ravens' fans were as bad as we are here the last few years & they started out with a better team.

I doubt the Falcons fans were as bad.


And I could be completely wrong about all those. I'm disappointed we didn't get tot he AFC Championship, but I understand things don't always happen the way I want. We ran out of gas...... it happens.

Forget the fact that the Patriots won 3 Superbowls with Brady & Belichick & imagine we had the same type of seasons they had since 2005. Nine years going to the play offs, only getting to the Super Bowl twice, & failing both times.

That's a bonafide multiple Super Bowl Champion coach & QB, both going to the HoF & they couldn't get it done in nine years. So it's not the end of the world.

It's odd, to me, that we think our team is good enough to win a championship, but have no love for the QB or the HC... & many of us wouldn't piss on the GM to save his life.

dream_team
02-15-2013, 02:20 PM
Couldn't agree more as far Kubiak & him progressing as a coach. The simple & easy comeback will be he's a 12-4 coach & that's enough to satisfy some. Unfortunately, I want & expect more then AFC South Championships & pretty regular season records. I truly doubt the Colts fans were happy w/ just AFC South banners year in & year out, but this is new to us & hopefully eventually we too will all expect & want more as well.

Every fan wants their team to be a dynasty... perennial division champs and multiple super bowl championships. At the same time, I'm realistic. Becoming a dynasty is extremely difficult and requires some luck on your side.

The Colts stuck with Dungy for five playoff seasons before they eventually made it to the Super Bowl. Are you suggesting the Colts should have let Dungy go and kept circulating coaches until they found one that brought them to the SB?

tru80texan
02-15-2013, 05:13 PM
Every fan wants their team to be a dynasty... perennial division champs and multiple super bowl championships. At the same time, I'm realistic. Becoming a dynasty is extremely difficult and requires some luck on your side.

The Colts stuck with Dungy for five playoff seasons before they eventually made it to the Super Bowl. Are you suggesting the Colts should have let Dungy go and kept circulating coaches until they found one that brought them to the SB?

I think some skill goes into creating a dynasty being that it means it is prolonged success. Discounting & attributing a dynasty to luck seems a bit off base imo. Believe it or not, good coaching & making good personnel decisions throughtout the years is considered a skill as opposed to luck w/ some franchises.

Comparing the Belichick led Pats & Dungy led Colts to kubiak is apples & oranges imo. Their turned their teams around & showed sound progress throughout their tenures & established standards of excellence that was expected by the team & fans. I'm not saying the Texans don't want or expect excellence amongst the players, but sometimes coaching alone can limit & hold a team back. The Texans have been deemed talented for years & have also been deemed underachievers as well. This year "frauds" was added to the list to describe them. That is something I don't recall ever being used to describe the Pats or the Colts in the past. The constant underachieving by the Kubiak led Texans is what has led to the doubts & naysayers over YEARS. If some how Kubiak & Schaub had led the Texans to "only" 2 Super Bowls & failed, I truly doubt the criticism would be the same. The problem is that is NOT the case & 2 playoff appearences in 7 seasons is hardly comparable to what Dungy & Belichick accomplished early in their careers w/ the Pats & Colts & assuming kubiak will accomplish the same based on his history thus far seems to be a bit of reach to say the least.

Let's be honest, most HC's w/ kubiaks record over the amount of years he has been given w/ a franchise would've been fired for his performance. Plain & simple. He has been very fortunate w/ having Uncle Bob as his boss.

dream_team
02-15-2013, 05:48 PM
I think some skill goes into creating a dynasty being that it means it is prolonged success. Discounting & attributing a dynasty to luck seems a bit off base imo. Believe it or not, good coaching & making good personal decisions throughtout the years is considered a skill as opposed to luck w/ some franchises.

Comparing the Belichick led Pats & Dungy led Colts to kubiak is apples & oranges imo. Their turned their teams around & showed sound progress throughout their tenures & established standards of excellence that was expected by the team & fans. I'm not saying the Texans don't want or expect excellence amongst the players, but sometimes coaching alone can limit & hold a team back. The Texans have been deemed talented for years & have also been deemed underachievers as well. This year "frauds" was added to the list to describe them. That is something I don't recall ever being used to describe the Pats or the Colts in the past. The constant underachieving by the Kubiak led Texans is what has led to the doubts & naysayers over YEARS. If some how Kubiak & Schaub had led the Texans to "only" 2 Super Bowls & failed, I truly doubt the criticism would be the same. The problem is that is NOT the case & 2 playoff appearences in 7 seasons is hardly comparable to what Dungy & Belichick accomplished early in their careers w/ the Pats & Colts & assuming kubiak will accomplish the same based on his history thus far seems to be a bit of reach to say the least.

Let's be honest, most HC's w/ kubiaks record over the amount of years he has been given w/ a franchise would've been fired for his performance. Plain & simple. He has been very fortunate w/ having Uncle Bob as his boss.

I mostly agree with what you said, but...

I'm not discounting what the Patriots have done as luck. I just said dynasties require "some luck". For example, Bledsoe getting injured was a blessing in disguise. The tuck rule fiasco. The whole spygate incident. Those are instances of luck that went the Pats way and helped them to multiple super bowls. To be an NFL dynasty, you'll need an all-time great coach, an all-time great QB, and some stuff to luckily go your way. The Patriots had all three. (Unfortunately, the Texans have none of those)

Also, you may be giving Dungy a little too much credit. That Colts team was already decent when he took over. The Colts were already one of the best offenses in the league, they simply needed some defensive help. Dungy made it to the playoffs 7 times with the Colts, but only reached the Super Bowl once. Is that acceptable to you? Before the Colts, he coached the Bucs for 6 years and couldn't get them to the Super Bowl. In fact, in both cases, once Dungy left the Bucs & Colts, his predecessor brought the team to the Super Bowl. Kubiak did more in regards to re-building a team.

GP
02-15-2013, 06:30 PM
Every fan wants their team to be a dynasty... perennial division champs and multiple super bowl championships. At the same time, I'm realistic. Becoming a dynasty is extremely difficult and requires some luck on your side.

The Colts stuck with Dungy for five playoff seasons before they eventually made it to the Super Bowl. Are you suggesting the Colts should have let Dungy go and kept circulating coaches until they found one that brought them to the SB?

Probably helped Dungy that he had a perennially awesome QB who had that team knocking on the door of the Super Bowl quite regularly.

Kubiak doesn't have that to lean upon, so my gripe is that he's tied himself to Schaub...and by default that means Gary Kubiak is sinking his own ship rather than sailing with the wind.

I know, I know, "What other QB could he install into his offense right now?" Maybe he should think about an open QB competition; and genuinely make it a 100% true competition and not just for show?

To me, he can't blindly lean on Schaub due to the way the guy really sunk after the Detroit game. From that point forward, his QB spiraled downward with every game except the Titans away game and maybe our home game vs Colts. All other games were below standard.

So yeah, the Colts and Patriots are two teams whose QBs are almost the teams' real head coach in a sense...there is an understanding that you got no problem at QB, you're just trying to shore up whatever unit needs fixing and you're a threat (a LEGITIMATE threat) each year.

We were called frauds by the doof up in New England, and I recall Mike Lombardi calling us "soft" two years ago. I hate that those guys were dickweeds with HOW they said it, but that's sort of the truth when it's all boiled down to its base element.

thunderkyss
02-15-2013, 06:43 PM
The problem is that is NOT the case & 2 playoff appearences in 7 seasons is hardly comparable to what Dungy & Belichick accomplished early in their careers w/ the Pats & Colts & assuming kubiak will accomplish the same based on his history thus far seems to be a bit of reach to say the least.


To be fair, you should probably go back to Belichick in Cleveland & Dungy in Tampa.


Let's be honest, most HC's w/ kubiaks record over the amount of years he has been given w/ a franchise would've been fired for his performance. Plain & simple. He has been very fortunate w/ having Uncle Bob as his boss.

I don't know about that. He's only had 2 losing seasons, both 6-10 (12-20), then two 8-8 seasons (28-36), a 9-7 season (37-43), a 10-6 season (47-49), & a 12-4 season (59-53). He's got a .527 win percentage after 112 games. I'm sure there are a lot of coaches who would take that.

thunderkyss
02-15-2013, 07:11 PM
FYI, Dungy was fired from Tampa with a .549 win percentage, and 4 play off appearances. They won one division title. They won twice in the Wild Card rounds, and lost twice in the Wild Card round (2000 & 2001). He was in Tampa from 96-01, 6 years.

He was followed by Jon Gruden who was the Bucs coach from 2002-2008, 7 years, .513 win percentage, three division titles, one conference Championship, one Super Bowl.


2002 -- 12-4
2003 -- 7-9
2004 --5-11
2005 -- 11-5
2006 -- 4-12
2007 -- 9-7
2008 -- 9-7 (loosing the final 4 of the year)


So...... I might be wrong.

tru80texan
02-15-2013, 08:48 PM
FYI, Dungy was fired from Tampa with a .549 win percentage, and 4 play off appearances. They won one division title. They won twice in the Wild Card rounds, and lost twice in the Wild Card round (2000 & 2001). He was in Tampa from 96-01, 6 years.

He was followed by Jon Gruden who was the Bucs coach from 2002-2008, 7 years, .513 win percentage, three division titles, one conference Championship, one Super Bowl.


2002 -- 12-4
2003 -- 7-9
2004 --5-11
2005 -- 11-5
2006 -- 4-12
2007 -- 9-7
2008 -- 9-7 (loosing the final 4 of the year)


So...... I might be wrong.

Gruden's tenure w/ TB is a perfect example of just how lucky Kubiak has been to work for Uncle Bob.

Here's another former HC's records for one team before he was ultimately fired:
13-3
9-7
11-5
1-7
Any guesses on who led his team to these records before being dismissed? Try Wade Phillips in Arlington for the answer. Just another example of a HC who failed to meet the expectations but has obviously outperformed Kubiak as a HC. Wade is a constant reminder to Kubiak on just how lucky he has been because I believe had he been in any other town w/ any other owner kubiak would most definitely would've already been an OC as opposed to being a HC. Others have been fired despite accomplishing more. No doubting that.

Uncle Rico
02-15-2013, 08:49 PM
kubiak needs another competent offensive football mind around him instead of his buddies. he needs a guy who will be blunt and brutally honest and not just pander to the 'system'. when its not working, and kubester is stuck in the headlights, he needs someone to slap him out of it. i dont know who, but a REAL OC would be a start.

i really think that the year or two when shanahan jr was calling the plays it was the most creative and productive with the lesser talent. gary needs to manage the game and stay in tune with everything thats going on, not just one side of the ball.

tru80texan
02-15-2013, 08:53 PM
To be fair, you should probably go back to Belichick in Cleveland & Dungy in Tampa.



I don't know about that. He's only had 2 losing seasons, both 6-10 (12-20), then two 8-8 seasons (28-36), a 9-7 season (37-43), a 10-6 season (47-49), & a 12-4 season (59-53). He's got a .527 win percentage after 112 games. I'm sure there are a lot of coaches who would take that.

To be fair, Gruden's Super Bowl team was assembled by Dungy. A talented underachieving team that needed a HC change to get over the hump to reach its potential. Hmmmmm...sounds a bit familiar. Just need a head coaching change to complete the puzzle.

thunderkyss
02-15-2013, 09:01 PM
Wade is a constant reminder to Kubiak on just how lucky he has been because I believe had he been in any other town w/ any other owner kubiak would most definitely would've already been an OC as opposed to being a HC. Others have been fired despite accomplishing more. No doubting that.

True. Doesn't mean they made the right decision though. The Buccaneers have been treading water since Gruden left, the Cowboys... well, let's just say Texans' fans laugh at the Cowboys, especially since Wade left.

Remember back in 2006, there were 10 new head coaches. Only 3 of those guys are still employed as head coaches & those teams are much better off than the 7 teams who fired their coaches at least once since 2006.

The Packers, The Saints, The Texans, all have the same head coaches that were hired in 2006.

The Lions, the Bills, the Rams, the Chiefs, the Vikings, the Jets, & the Raiders aren't any better now than they were in 2006, none of them are closer to a Super Bowl than we are. Only the Jets had more success, two AFC Championship games, never won their division, in that time.

ObsiWan
02-16-2013, 09:25 AM
True. Doesn't mean they made the right decision though. The Buccaneers have been threading water since Gruden left, the Cowboys... well, let's just say Texans' fans laugh at the Cowboys, especially since Wade left.

Remember back in 2006, there were 10 new head coaches. Only 3 of those guys are still employed as head coaches & those teams are much better off than the 7 teams who fired their coaches at least once since 2006.

The Packers, The Saints, The Texans, all have the same head coaches that were hired in 2006.

The Lions, the Bills, the Rams, the Chiefs, the Vikings, the Jets, & the Raiders aren't any better now than they were in 2006, none of them are closer to a Super Bowl than we are. Only the Jets had more success, two AFC Championship games, never won their division, in that time.

This is why Uncle Bob, rightly or wrongly (I'm going with rightly), believes in organizational stability.

Back to the original topic...

That stat is worthless without context. And the linked article provide absolutely none.
These questions have been asked - and ignored by the bashers - by others during the flow of this thread. So, by way of summary, here they are again:
1. What end of the field were we on? Were we deep in our own territory? Midfield? Redzone? Goal line?
2. How much time was left in the game and were we ahead or behind? If we're up double digits late in the fourth quarter, then so what?
3. How had the opposing defense been playing us? More specifically, how were they playing us in each given situation? Was the pass rush squad on the field? Then hell yeah, I might run a draw or run right at the pass-rush specialist.
4. Finally, how many of those runs were a check off decisions by Schaub because he thought a run had a better chance of success than the pass play that had been called by Kubiak??

Without context, that stat means next to nothing. Except to restart Kubiak bashing.

But that was your intent from the beginning, wasn't Jean? You sneaky devil.
:D

Edit: Oh and that stat says we still passed 4 out of 5 times on third down. Who cares if it leads the league. The league average includes all the sucky teams that HAD to pass on third down because they were behind most of the game and/or had crap for a running attack so passing was the lesser of two evils.

tru80texan
02-16-2013, 12:17 PM
True. Doesn't mean they made the right decision though. The Buccaneers have been threading water since Gruden left, the Cowboys... well, let's just say Texans' fans laugh at the Cowboys, especially since Wade left.

Remember back in 2006, there were 10 new head coaches. Only 3 of those guys are still employed as head coaches & those teams are much better off than the 7 teams who fired their coaches at least once since 2006.

Thee Packers, The Saints, The Texans, all have the same head coaches that were hired in 2006.

The Lions, the Bills, the Rams, the Chiefs, the Vikings, the Jets, & the Raiders aren't any better now than they were in 2006, none of them are closer to a Super Bowl than we are. Only the Jets had more success, two AFC Championship games, never won their division, in that time.

There is one huge difference that explains why the Saints & Packers are different from the Texans....Super Bowl appearences & wins maybe. Once again another example of how we glorify small accomplishments in attempt to justify the job kubiak has done thus far. He has not produced what McCarthy & Payton have & assuming he deserves the same lattitude seems foolish to me.

Once again, other HC's have been fired by their teams despite doing equal to or better jobs then kubiak has done. Plain & simple.Todd Haley, Raheem Morris, & Tony Sparano all took their teams to the playoffs in less time then Kubiak & were ultimately fired before kubiak. Others such as Jim Harbaugh, John Harbaugh, Mike Smith, & Pete Carroll have also turned their teams around in much shorter periods of time then Kubiak & ultimately returned their respective teams to playoffs as well. Obviously some amongst that latter group have not only won the much coveted division title that we glorify in Houston, but they have taken it a step further winning Conference Championships & the Super Bowl. Hard to believe, but its true. Once again, all these accomplishments in less time then kubiak has had.

Kubiak is w/out a doubt a "baby steps" type of coach who is very fortunate that he works for an owner that accepts those baby steps as "progress" & has a fan base that glorifies them as well. I think this team is underachieving compared to others & I believe it starts at the top w/ a HC who is too occupied w/ being everyone's buddy as opposed to making the moves necessary to get this team to the next level. Coaches & players. Marciano is a perfect example as was Frank Bush & Richard Smith. Walter & possibly Schaub could examples of his player decisions.

Side note- Mentioning the Lions as 1 of your failed organizations is hardly fair when you compare Schwartz's progress to Kubiak's. Schwartz progressed every season & returned a dismal Lions team to the playoffs, 3rd season, in less time then Kubiak accomplished it. Schwartz then regressed this season but how is that any different the kubiak in 2010? If anything most could say Schwartz is doing a better job then kubiak did early on. Just saying...

thunderkyss
02-16-2013, 01:23 PM
There is one huge difference that explains why the Saints & Packers are different from the Texans....Super Bowl appearences & wins maybe. Once again another example of how we glorify small accomplishments in attempt to justify the job kubiak has done thus far. He has not produced what McCarthy & Payton have & assuming he deserves the same lattitude seems foolish to me.


I never said Kubiak deserved any lattitude, only credit for what he has done. You're pretty good about pointing out all the bad, but there's some good in their as well. This organization is a lot better of than it was in 2006. That was my point, that can't be denied.


Once again, other HC's have been fired by their teams despite doing equal to or better jobs then kubiak has done. Plain & simple.Todd Haley, Raheem Morris, & Tony Sparano all took their teams to the playoffs in less time then Kubiak & were ultimately fired before kubiak. Others such as Jim Harbaugh, John Harbaugh, Mike Smith, & Pete Carroll have also turned their teams around in much shorter periods of time then Kubiak & ultimately returned their respective teams to playoffs as well. Obviously some amongst that latter group have not only won the much coveted division title that we glorify in Houston, but they have taken it a step further winning Conference Championships & the Super Bowl. Hard to believe, but its true. Once again, all these accomplishments in less time then kubiak has had.


Again, each situation is different. We have an owner who didn't know the business of football when he got the team, knew even less four years later when Casserly & Capers left. Then we replace the crappiest GM in the league with a guy who never been a GM before, & our new head coach is also learning on the job. There's more to building a football team than putting a bunch of guys on the field & giving them a motivational speech, you know that.


Kubiak is w/out a doubt a "baby steps" type of coach who is very fortunate that he works for an owner that accepts those baby steps as "progress" & has a fan base that glorifies them as well. I think this team is underachieving compared to others & I believe it starts at the top w/ a HC who is too occupied w/ being everyone's buddy as opposed to making the moves necessary to get this team to the next level. Coaches & players. Marciano is a perfect example as was Frank Bush & Richard Smith. Walter & possibly Schaub could examples of his player decisions.


They may very well be the case & just like there are teams that found instant success with new head coaches in less time than Kubiak, there are some that have done worse. The Cowboys, two years running they lose the last game of the year & the division (Last year, 9-7 won the division, 2012 10-6 won the division). Buffalo continues to spiral into the CFL, KC...... ten years later & no QB, no coach.

I'm not saying it was the right decision to keep Kubiak, but I like where the organization is now, compared to where the teams that hired new head coaches in 2006 & continue to play the HC carousel are.


Side note- Mentioning the Lions as 1 of your failed organizations is hardly fair when you compare Schwartz's progress to Kubiak's. Schwartz progressed every season & returned a dismal Lions team to the playoffs, 3rd season, in less time then Kubiak accomplished it. Schwartz then regressed this season but how is that any different the kubiak in 2010? If anything most could say Schwartz is doing a better job then kubiak did early on. Just saying...

I'd fire Schwartz because he does not appear to have control of that locker room, can't control his players, & he embarrasses the organization at least twice a year with his goofy rants. The only progress the Lions have made in the time that Schwartz has been there, is Stafford & Cj and that's probably more on the players than the coach. I may be wrong, tell me what other improvements have been made since Schawrtz has been with the Lions. 4 years into it, I could tell you that our offense had improved, I could tell you that our talent level had improved.

But, as far as not being fair, I wasn't comparing Kubiak to Schwartz, I'm comparing the Texans to the Lions since 2006.

tru80texan
02-16-2013, 02:35 PM
I never said Kubiak deserved any lattitude, only credit for what he has done. You're pretty good about pointing out all the bad, but there's some good in their as well. This organization is a lot better of than it was in 2006. That was my point, that can't be denied.



Again, each situation is different. We have an owner who didn't know the business of football when he got the team, knew even less four years later when Casserly & Capers left. Then we replace the crappiest GM in the league with a guy who never been a GM before, & our new head coach is also learning on the job. There's more to building a football team than putting a bunch of guys on the field & giving them a motivational speech, you know that.



They may very well be the case & just like there are teams that found instant success with new head coaches in less time than Kubiak, there are some that have done worse. The Cowboys, two years running they lose the last game of the year & the division (Last year, 9-7 won the division, 2012 10-6 won the division). Buffalo continues to spiral into the CFL, KC...... ten years later & no QB, no coach.

I'm not saying it was the right decision to keep Kubiak, but I like where the organization is now, compared to where the teams that hired new head coaches in 2006 & continue to play the HC carousel are.



I'd fire Schwartz because he does not appear to have control of that locker room, can't control his players, & he embarrasses the organization at least twice a year with his goofy rants. The only progress the Lions have made in the time that Schwartz has been there, is Stafford & Cj and that's probably more on the players than the coach. I may be wrong, tell me what other improvements have been made since Schawrtz has been with the Lions. 4 years into it, I could tell you that our offense had improved, I could tell you that our talent level had improved.

But, as far as not being fair, I wasn't comparing Kubiak to Schwartz, I'm comparing the Texans to the Lions since 2006.

I'm simply pointing out facts. Don't shoot the messanger because they are all not pleasant & some choose to forget & ignore history. It may be negative, but that's not my doing. And at what point do we finally turn the corner & expect & want more from our team & quit using the tired excuse "we are better then we were in the capers/ casserly years"? At some point MOST would believe the bar has to be raised & that crutch of an excuse for underachieving has to give way imo. That could just be me though...

Let's please not act as if kubiak has worked miracles & dealt w/ circumstances that no other new HC's have not dealt with. It sounds good for dramatic purposes, but some of the HC's I mentioned earlier have dealt with franchises that were obviously headed in the wrong direction & they were capable of turning them around quicker. Kubiak is hardly the measuring stick on how long it should take a HC to turn around a franchise because others have done it quicker w/ teams that at one point seemed just as pathetic as the Texans before kubiak.

You would fire Schwartz for losing control of the team...that's interesting. And how do think kubiak's leadership was perceived in the past when he had not only 1 BUT 2 players suspended for violating the drug policy to go along w/ a team that found every possible way to lose a game in 2010 & then topped it off in the same season against the Titans, of all teams, to have a complete meltdown that led many to believe the team quit on kubiak in route to a defeat...oh & let's not forget...that's the same game that Cushing & Antonio got into a shoving match on the field that ultimately got the Texans penalized. LOL! That was the lowest of lows for me that season & yet you suggest firing Schwartz for losing control of a team, but keeping kubiak after all that was ok. A bit of a double standard, don't you think?

I guess its safe to say...we will have to agree to disagree. :handshake:

thunderkyss
02-16-2013, 03:32 PM
And at what point do we finally turn the corner & expect & want more from our team & quit using the tired excuse "we are better then we were in the capers/ casserly years"? At some point MOST would believe the bar has to be raised & that crutch of an excuse for underachieving has to give way imo. That could just be me though...


I'm pretty sure the bar has been raised. I am not using anything as a crutch. You're suggesting that we should have parted ways with Kubiak a long time ago. I wouldn't have been surprised had he been fired myself. But he wasn't.

I'm just pointing out that there is no guarantee we would be better off had we fired him. Would you be happy if we swapped places with the Lions? Since 2006 our franchise went the way as their's did & their franchise went the way ours did?

I have a feeling you'd be upset with McNair for not being able to find the "right" coach & making it to the play offs once since 2006 & being one & done at that. Your argument would be that 3 teams hired a head coach in 2006 that took their teams to multiple division championships, past the wild card round, & two of those teams won Super Bowls, while Bob McNair baby steps his way to a 4-12 season. You'd be calling for Schwartz head after 4 years, 3 of which were losing seasons (where Kubiak has only had 2 losing season after 7).

Now you're complaining that we didn't get past the divisional round of the play offs. The bar has been raised.


You would fire Schwartz for losing control of the team... A bit of a double standard, don't you think?


Not at all, I'd have fired Kubiak after the 2010 season myself, but I understand why McNair didn't & I think his plan worked out better than mine would have.

I'm disappointed that we lost 3 of our last 4 games. I'm disappointed we didn't win home field advantage. I'm disappointed we didn't get past the divisional round. I'm disappointed we didn't win the Super Bowl. I'm shocked that coach Joe Marciano wasn't fired or resigned due to health issues. I'm scared, that we may have missed the best opportunities to win a Super Bowl (2011 & 2012) we'll ever have.

But I don't think it's time to blow it up & start all over, & I don't think Kubiak's or Schaub's better days are behind them. Next year is a whole new season & I'm anxiously looking forward to it.

tru80texan
02-16-2013, 03:41 PM
I never said Kubiak deserved any lattitude, only credit for what he has done. You're pretty good about pointing out all the bad, but there's some good in their as well. This organization is a lot better of than it was in 2006. That was my point, that can't be denied.



Again, each situation is different. We have an owner who didn't know the business of football when he got the team, knew even less four years later when Casserly & Capers left. Then we replace the crappiest GM in the league with a guy who never been a GM before, & our new head coach is also learning on the job. There's more to building a football team than putting a bunch of guys on the field & giving them a motivational speech, you know that.



They may very well be the case & just like there are teams that found instant success with new head coaches in less time than Kubiak, there are some that have done worse. The Cowboys, two years running they lose the last game of the year & the division (Last year, 9-7 won the division, 2012 10-6 won the division). Buffalo continues to spiral into the CFL, KC...... ten years later & no QB, no coach.

I'm not saying it was the right decision to keep Kubiak, but I like where the organization is now, compared to where the teams that hired new head coaches in 2006 & continue to play the HC carousel are.



I'd fire Schwartz because he does not appear to have control of that locker room, can't control his players, & he embarrasses the organization at least twice a year with his goofy rants. The only progress the Lions have made in the time that Schwartz has been there, is Stafford & Cj and that's probably more on the players than the coach. I may be wrong, tell me what other improvements have been made since Schawrtz has been with the Lions. 4 years into it, I could tell you that our offense had improved, I could tell you that our talent level had improved.

But, as far as not being fair, I wasn't comparing Kubiak to Schwartz, I'm comparing the Texans to the Lions since 2006.

I'm simply pointing out facts. Don't shoot the messanger because they are all not pleasant & some choose to forget & ignore history. It may be negative, but that's not my doing. And at what point do we finally turn the corner & expect & want more from our team & quit using the tired excuse "we are better then we were in the capers/ casserly years"? At some point the MOST would believe the bar has to be raised & that crutch of an excuse for underachieving has to give way imo. That could just be me though.

Let's please not act as if kubiak has worked miracles & dealt w/ circumstances that no other new HC's have not dealt. It sounds good for dramatic purposes, but some of the HC's I mentioned earlier have dealt with franchises that were obviously headed in the wrong direction & they were capable of turning them around quicker. Kubiak is hardly the measuring stick on how long it should take a HC to turn around a franchise because others have done it quicker w/ teams that at one point seemed just as pathetic as the Texans before kubiak.

You would fire Schwartz for losing control of the team...that's interesting. And how do think kubiak's leadership was perceived in the past when he had not only 1 BUT 2 players suspended for violating the drug policy to go along w/ a team that found every possible way to lose a game in 2010 & then topped it off in the same season against the Titans, of all teams, to have a complete meltdown that led many to believe the team quit on kubiak in route to a defeat...oh & let's not forget...that's the same game that Cushing & Antonio got into a shoving match on the field that ultimately got the Texans penalized. LOL! That was the lowest of lows for me that season & yet you suggest firing Schwartz for losing control of a team, but keeping kubiak after all that was ok. A bit of a double standard, don't you think?

I guess its safe to say...we will have to agree to disagree. :handshake:

Texecutioner
02-16-2013, 05:13 PM
This has always been the biggest thing that bothers me about Kubiak the turtle. The guy is the most yellow coach I've ever seen in these situations. No trickery, no creativity, and flat out no balls in these situations.

And people please stop with the BS that he just doesn't trust Schaub. Gary's pulled this bull**** for years since he first got here when we had Carr and also the first two seasons where Rosenfels played half the time while Schaub was hurt. Gary is a play not to lose coach.

But this particular thing has hurt the Texans in many games and flat out stopped our offense from having opportunities to sustain drives. In Gary's first two seasons here I used to wish at times that he would just carry a Texans jersey over to the other side of the field since he wasn't actively trying to beat the other team with regular plays on a 3rd down. He'd just give up on the drive. It made the Texans so easy to beat for years.

This statistic is not surprising at all. I would have bet money on it if it was asked prior to this thread.

Texecutioner
02-16-2013, 05:20 PM
He IS a offensive guru. Just not on 3rd & long. And not when his starting QB is Schaub.

This is flat out joke at this point. Especially to say he can't be because of Schaub. Who the hell do you think brought Schaub in here and has kept him as the QB all these years genius? The alleged guru you're talking about. So you completely contradict yourself by galling him a GURU and then blaming his QB for why he doesn't look like one now according to you.

Anyone calling Kubiak a guru is definitely struggling especially when the Texans offense completely fell apart at the end of last season. The running game fell off, the Oline fell off, Schaub played like trash, the entire thing fell apart at the most important part of the season. Kubiak had no answers at all, nor did he make any adjustments to his system. Kubiak didn't have a clue on how to get things rolling again.

Any myth of Kubiak being anything close to a offensive GURU crashed and burned badly last season. No offensive GURU lets their entire offense go to **** that easily when they had been one of the most dominant teams all year long.

thunderkyss
02-16-2013, 07:35 PM
At some point the MOST would believe the bar has to be raised & that crutch of an excuse for underachieving has to give way imo. That could just be me though.

You would fire Schwartz for losing control of the team... but keeping kubiak after all that was ok. A bit of a double standard, don't you think?


Actually I was on board with firing Kubiak after 2010, but I understand why McNair didn't & in hindsight, I'm okay with it. Again, what are the expectations for Detroit next season?

The point is that a new head coach doesn't guarantee anything. There have been a few HCs that have done better than Kubiak in less time, but there have been many more who did not.

GP
02-18-2013, 02:15 PM
The point is that a new head coach doesn't guarantee anything. There have been a few HCs that have done better than Kubiak in less time, but there have been many more who did not.

Being the HC of a 12-4 team also doesn't guarantee that you can pilot that same team to another division title and advance past the divisional round of the playoffs, either.

Guarantees are a joke. You can't guarantee anything in the NFL, well...actually, you can guarantee that you'll probably see the same things you saw the previous 5 or 6 years if you're bringing back that same HC again.

What things have we seen from Gary that never get resolved year after year?

1. Lack of a truly GOOD wide receiver to match with AJ. Gary Ball seems to place emphasis on studly AJ and a bevy of role players who run certain routes and get their number called as a last resort.

2. Without two or three good TEs, his system is not that great. AJ and OD were the keys to this team's success. With Foster in the mix, very deadly. But each of those three have been held out fro various reason and various times, and the outcome is rough for offensive production on a consistent basis. Gary is in danger of having no real TE threat to help our his system.

3. Sporadic playcalling. Take your pick of any of the following: (A) The infamous draw play on 3rd and long, (B) Screen passes to a WR or a RB that work satisfactorily about 10% of the time, with the OT toss to AJ vs. Jags this season being the 10% that it worked. Who else in this league cannot execute nor defend a screen pass like we do? We suck at it, on both sides. That's SOFT, IMO. (C) Let's run when we should pass and pass when we should run, because the defense will NEVER see that coming! Yeah, except they do. The good defenses do, at least. I could go on, but I want to move on to something else.

4. Awful personnel choices, dumb loyalty that costs the team, etc. I would wager that Wade Phillips is the only non-Kubiak guy who has been hired to this team since Kubiak became HC. Can't nobody convince me that as soon as Wade was fired from Dallas that Gary went racing to Rick and Bob and blurted out that we just gotta' get this guy to Houston and on the double! He chose the prior two DC's who were absolute DUDS...and I have zero confidence that he was a Wade Phillips To Houston, Please! guy until he saw the writing on the wall--Either your signature will be on this hiring decision, or Wade will be your replacement. An offer Gary couldn't refuse. Now look, we've got a clearly FAILING special teams unit and he won't fire and replace Marciano. Typical.

5. Took him a few seasons to beat the Ravens, and he did so in extreme style...now we just need two or three more seasons to beat teams like the Packers and Patriots. (Sigh) Awesome. Does he get this done with both teams in two seasons or will it be two seasons to beat Packers and two seasons to beat Patriots? I'm tingling with anticipation! :heart:

6. Refusal to adjust. Because let's face it, he's a guru...a genius...if we just run our offense and our guys are "on," nobody can stop us. Championship.

You're right, taking a chance on a new HC would be less of a guarantee than we can handle.

GP
02-18-2013, 02:22 PM
Meanwhile, head coaches are getting hired and fired (business as usual), and certain head coaches are adapting to the new style of NFL that Goodell has been shouting from the mountain tops for about three years now.

Let those who have ears, hear his words and receive them.

Or ignore at your own peril.

Gary's loyalty is blinding his management of this team. When his team is "on," it looks spectacular the amount of faith and loyalty he gives his coaches and players. When he's off, it hinders the team's ability to adapt and grow.

We very well could see this rubber band snap back to it's initial state of being that Gary found it in IF some of his shortcomings are not solved/corrected. My bet is that Gary will go down swinging, go down with his ship, and then it'd be pretty easy for Bob to hand it over to Wade who said "Aw gee, I wanna' be a head coach again someday. Shucks, I'd like to give 'er one more shot, ya' know..." Wish granted. Stay tuned, folks.

Kevin Sumlin as the new O-Coordinator. Wade would hand the DC job to Vance Joseph. That would be a palatable way to make Wade the HC if Bob wanted to badly enough. Stay strong on defense, with a known commodity that the players like (Vance Joseph) and hire the NEW "guru" Kevin Sumlin to bring some much-needed fresh air to Houston's offense. I think Sumlin would love the chance to use Foster at RB, btw. He could put up insane numbers.

thunderkyss
02-18-2013, 03:51 PM
Being the HC of a 12-4 team also doesn't guarantee that you can pilot that same team to another division title and advance past the divisional round of the playoffs, either.

You're right, taking a chance on a new HC would be less of a guarantee than we can handle.



Gary's loyalty is blinding his management of this team. When his team is "on," it looks spectacular the amount of faith and loyalty he gives his coaches and players. When he's off, it hinders the team's ability to adapt and grow.


I just pointed out that 10 franchises hired new head coaches in 2006. Seven of those teams have hired a new head coach at least once between then & now. None of those seven are doing as well as the Houston Texans. The Jets have reached the AFC Championship game twice since 2006. But they've followed that up with back to back disappointing seasons, missing the play offs two years running.

None of you would be happy with that right now. None of you would be saying, At least Gary got us to back to back AFC Championship games. You'd be calling for his head. The Jets though appear to have either realized the error in that kind of thinking, or Rex has got some pictures somewhere.



...and hire the NEW "guru" Kevin Sumlin to bring some much-needed fresh air to Houston's offense. I think Sumlin would love the chance to use Foster at RB, btw. He could put up insane numbers.

When we get dependable receivers again, people will be calling Gary's offense "fresh" again.