Originally Posted by Runner
I used 50% to make the example clearer. Would you think a 50% coach is doing Ok?
Let's look at that 68%. Some would argue that the Texans have better talent than 75% of the league. In that case 68% is under performing.
Kubiak has had this job longer than most head coaches. He has had more time to get things exactly as he wants them. 68% is the best he can do?
As an aside, what does the 68% represent; what did you use to rank the coaches? If we are going to dig into the numbers that would be good to know
A coach going 8-8 may be okay and it may not it certainly depends on many factors. Like the Texans making it to the second round of the playoffs despite the loss of Schaub, Johnson and Williams. On an adjusted basis I would say that was well overperforming. Making it to the second round of the playoffs puts your team's performance besting 68.75% of the league. The level of talent on the team is better ranked by folks who do this for a living rather than fans. Also the expectations and how things run are probably better handled by McNair as a bussiness man vs random fans.