Originally Posted by Blazing Arrow
If you want to count the 1-5 mid season take over that is fine but again if you think Kubiak is a better coach then the Fish you have lost your mind.
Right now? With Fisher in his 14(.5) season as HC and Kubiak in his 4th? No. Compare apples to apples whenever possible and for the sake of fairness drop each of their first seasons. Fisher didn't get an entire first season and arguably in both of their cases it was the year they had each had the least amount of input into the team they had to take on the field. Fisher inherited a R&S offense without a triggerman and Kubiak inherited an offense with nobody (DC) at the helm.
Then all you can do is compare Kubiak's last two years with Fishers first two complete seasons. That would be Kubiak's twin 8-8 records vs. Fishers 7-9 and 8-8 records in 95-96.
Kubiak could go 8-8 for two more years and still have Fisher by a single game.
If you take each of their careers from the year following the teams 2-14 crash then it reverses. Kubiak went 6-10, 8-8, and 8-8. Fisher went 7-9, 8-8, and 8-8.
It's a one game swing either way.
The facts show clearly that Fisher started almost exactly like Kubiak has. I know how bad both of those rosters were at the time each man took over their respective franchise and I'm here to tell you Fisher had less rebuilding to do in 1995 than Kubiak did here in 2005. Granted he had the move to cope with so I call that a wash either way.
If Kubiak gets the Texans over .500 this year and dare I hope, to the playoffs then yes, he is absolutely a better coach than Jeff Fisher was following his fourth year
. He will have gone from 2-14 to a winning record and a playoff berth in a shorter period of time than Jeff did.
How it plays out remains to be seen. 2009 is an important year if you're a Texans fan (and I know you're not but you can't help but acknowledge this). It's really "the" year where we find out if we're going in the right direction or not.