What is the real reason we kept Kubiak?

[nut]

I want to get excited about the new season but how is he going to become a different coach in the offseason? I don't see our personnel being good enough to carry him. What was the reasoning behind keeping him? Not just being a jerk, I'd really like to know.

[gary]

Real reason. Bob not wanting to be on the hook for having to pay two coaches.

[IlliniJen]

Because he's a really. nice. guy.

That's all I got. I know it's not because of his coaching skills.

[TexCanada]

Originally Posted by nut

I want to get excited about the new season but how is he going to become a different coach in the offseason? I don't see our personnel being good enough to carry him. What was the reasoning behind keeping him? Not just being a jerk, I'd really like to know.

1) Because Bob likes him and wants him to succeed.
2) He is a good O-coordinator, and he now has only that to focus on, as Phillips is now entirely in control of the D.

[GP]

Oh brother.....

NTSA (Not This **** Again)

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by nut

I want to get excited about the new season but how is he going to become a different coach in the offseason? I don't see our personnel being good enough to carry him. What was the reasoning behind keeping him? Not just being a jerk, I'd really like to know.

First off, let me say that we should have fired him. And if it had been a regular situation, I think we may have fired him. Personally, I would have fired him.

BUT.

With this owner/player standoff, the teams are probably not going to have as much time to prepare their teams for the coming season as they normally have. Because of that, it's probably better to have some continuity than having to install an entirely new offense and defense like you'd have to do with a total house cleaning.

OTOH, how good is our offense and how bad was our defense? We lost several (5) tight games that we could have won if our defense hadn't been epically bad. Kubiak has shown the ability to build a great offense but he has also shown an inability to build a great defense. The signing of Wade Phillips COULD change that. It MIGHT be a step in the right direction.

I personally think that we immediately have a better defense just with the addition of Wade Phillips even if we don't add any other players to the defense.

IF Wade does significantly improve the defense and IF Kubiak can keep the offense on track... we should be a 10-11 win team. Those are a bunch of IFs and like I said, if it was me, I would have fired Kubiak and this next season be damned.

[steelbtexan]

And here we go........

LOL

[steelbtexan]

Originally Posted by gary

Real reason. Bob not wanting to be on the hook for having to pay two coaches.

Or this

[Big Lou]

Because we're on the righ track..........

Just kidding, I always liked Kubiak, and was behind him 100% until like week 12 of this year, and I wanted him to pull it together even then, but felt like he needed to go at that point.

Now I don't know. I want to be behind him, but if he doesn't get it done this year he has to go.

As to your question, the reason he was kept is because the Texans have had a top 5 Offense 3 years running.......

[Wolf6151]

Originally Posted by gary

Real reason. Bob not wanting to be on the hook for having to pay two coaches.

Ding, Ding, Ding we have a winner. This is it. Bob screwed up a year earlier and gave Gary a 3 yr. extension. No matter how bad we are in 2011 I expect that he'll be here in 2012 as well because they can blame a bad season on the 3-4 defense switch/it takes more than 1 yr. to create a great defense, CBA talks and delayed workouts, new personnel coaches and players, etc... Also after next season Gary will only have 1 season left under contract and Bob doesn't want to pay 2 head coaches.

[TheMatrix31]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

First off, let me say that we should have fired him. And if it had been a regular situation, I think we may have fired him. Personally, I would have fired him.

BUT.

With this owner/player standoff, the teams are probably not going to have as much time to prepare their teams for the coming season as they normally have. Because of that, it's probably better to have some continuity than having to install an entirely new offense and defense like you'd have to do with a total house cleaning.

OTOH, how good is our offense and how bad was our defense? We lost several (5) tight games that we could have won if our defense hadn't been epically bad. Kubiak has shown the ability to build a great offense but he has also shown an inability to build a great defense. The signing of Wade Phillips COULD change that. It MIGHT be a step in the right direction.

I personally think that we immediately have a better defense just with the addition of Wade Phillips even if we don't add any other players to the defense.

IF Wade does significantly improve the defense and IF Kubiak can keep the offense on track... we should be a 10-11 win team. Those are a bunch of IFs and like I said, if it was me, I would have fired Kubiak and this next season be damned.

Agreed.

[Double Barrel]

Originally Posted by nut

I want to get excited about the new season but how is he going to become a different coach in the offseason? I don't see our personnel being good enough to carry him. What was the reasoning behind keeping him? Not just being a jerk, I'd really like to know.

"The first thing you have to do is identify the problem. You know, we did not perform the way I thought we should perform. And I’m disappointed by it and I’m upset by it; I’m not happy about it at all. We have to evaluate what we think was the basis for that record. What was the cause of it? And until you properly identify the problem, you can’t solve it. And so the first thing you do is identify the problem, and that’s the process that we’re going through, trying to determine where we have fallen short, and then we can look at what the various options are.

“And the options are, quite frankly, you can go in and you can replace all the coaches or you can replace the head coach. Well, when you do that, that’s very traumatic because then they want to come in and they want to replace all the players quite often. Sometimes, they want to replace all the scouts. On the other hand, if there’s a way to solve the problem without it being so traumatic – and if you do it in a traumatic fashion, I believe it sets you back two years. So is your situation so bad that you think there’s no other recourse and the only way you can solve it is to tear up your organization and set it back two years? That’s one consideration. And if that’s what you have to do, then fine, you do it.

“On the other hand, if you think you can isolate it and it’s not that severe, it’s like the guy going into the doctor with a headache. Is he going to give you aspirin or send you in for brain surgery? You have to determine what’s really needed under the circumstances.”

~ Bob McNair - January 2, 2011

And there you have it. Replacing the head coach after a mediocre 37-43 record in five seasons is just too traumatic for this owner. And since he believes 6-10 and still playing hard and losing close games in the end "is on the right track" (his words), you can expect more of this stuff in 2011/2012.

After all, 80 games is just not enough to truly evaluate a head coach.

[Doppelganger]

The real reason?

How about the 5 real reasons:

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.

[Texecutioner]

Originally Posted by Big Lou

Texans have had a top 5 Offense 3 years running.......

Why do some of you continue to say this? It's false. If you're looking at NFL rankings as an indicator then you're looking at one of the worst indicators for what the best offense or defense is. We might have been a top offense once since Kubiak's been here, but not more than twice. Kubiak has great players on offense. He's not a great offensive play caller by any means.

[HTown2ATX]

Originally Posted by Doppelganger

The real reason?

How about the 5 real reasons:

5.

Is that the old Scrooge McDuck bank from the old cartoon Ducktales?

Used to love that show when I was a kid.

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by Texecutioner

Why do some of you continue to say this? It's false. If you're looking at NFL rankings as an indicator then you're looking at one of the worst indicators for what the best offense or defense is. We might have been a top offense once since Kubiak's been here, but not more than twice. Kubiak has great players on offense. He's not a great offensive play caller by any means.

So what do you want to use as a metric for how good the offense is? How do you want to grade offenses?

We had the leading rusher in the NFL last year and our QB threw over 4000 yards and the year before, our QB threw for the 6th most passing yards in the history of the NFL.

Say what you want, but our offense has been pretty good for the past 3 years.

[beerlover]

clearly the impending lock-out which should have been our first clue the owners planned this out in advance so Bob knew when he kept Gary all along.

[gary]

I would hate to see Wade taken out of his role as DC and replaced once again with another DC if Gary does get fired.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

So what do you want to use as a metric for how good the offense is? How do you want to grade offenses?

There is no good argument the offense is not good.

Points - 9th
Yards - 3rd
1st downs/game - 2nd
3rd down % - 9th

[Doppelganger]

Originally Posted by HTown2ATX

Is that the old Scrooge McDuck bank from the old cartoon Ducktales?

Used to love that show when I was a kid.

Yup. Well done! Its the Scrooge McDuck Money Vault. I always thought it was a bit goofy to keep all your money in a massive vault with a bright Dollart sign on the top that is viewable by everyone. I mean he is pretty much saying, yep, here it is, here is all my money!

Plus he had essentially no real security.

But that's how Scrooge rolled I suppose.