5 who could follow the Saints (from Pete Prisco)

[thunderkyss]

Bottom line is you cant build you cant build just through the draft. You have to take chances on 1 or 2 character issue guys Hargrove is an example and Maybe a vet. you have to over pay for (Sharper for example)

I dont think Kubes likes the older vet FA signings and I know McNair doesn't want to sign character issues. (L.Johnson, Benson) McNair likes to sign the tier 2 young guy that he has to over pay to get.

This philosopy has to change if the Texans are going to become a winning team. IMO

McNair has no say other than the character thing, but I believe Kubiak feels the same way any way. Just like Dungy. Character is not a bad thing.

Walter, Dressen, White, Myers, Leach, Antonio Smith, Eugene Wilson, Bernard Pollard, Sean Cody, Jeff Zgonina, Jaques Reeves, Matt Schaub....

I don't get what you're saying. You act like we haven't had success in Free Agency. You talk about Hargrove... & our defense was better..

 

[thunderkyss]

It's not going to happen but do not act like a vet like Casey Hapmton would NOT bring leadership to the Texans D and be that missing run stuffer.

This year, I can see a guy like Hampton wanting to come to Houston. Prior to this year, I would think most FA would just use us to get a bidding war going.

I think Hampton would be a good choice... with 9 years in the league though, I wouldn't want to tie up too much money in him. I know as a relatively healthy DT, he'll probably play for another 5, but we've already got a lot of money to spend on D.

 

[infantrycak]

I dont think Kubes likes the older vet FA signings and I know McNair doesn't want to sign character issues. (L.Johnson, Benson) McNair likes to sign the tier 2 young guy that he has to over pay to get.

This philosopy has to change if the Texans are going to become a winning team. IMO

They made an offer to Benson. Kind of nullifies that point.

 

[steelbtexan]

You're looking at it as, "Everything the Saints did was right" & "Everything the Texans did was wrong"

Our defense was better. The Texan's philosophy produced better results than the Saint's philosophy.

You've got yourself a bad argument, you can't win this one.

Really

The Saints philosohpy helped them win a SB

The Texans philosophy lead to the 1st 9-7 record in team history.

M-M that koolaid must be good.

The Texans didn't do everything wrong the had a great Draft. They just chose not to supplement the teams depth in FA.I'm just not drinking the koolaid as I've done before.

They just failed on the pro personel side signing Dunta for 10 mil for 1 year instead of signing Greer who is a much better player for 4yrs 22mil. for example.

This isn't hatered it's I expect the Texans to do everything they can to put the best team on the field as possible.

If the Texans are as you say better on defense why is it the Saints won the SB? They weren't that much better on offense than the Texans were they?

The Texans either dont have enough talent as the Saints or the or a better coached team. It's one or the other. Comparing the Saints to the Texans is laughable. The Saints have as many wins over the Colts as the Texans have won in 8 yrs getting to play the Colts twice a year.

The Saint have a better organizational philosopy than the Texans. There's no debate about that. They even proved it by beating our division champ in the SB.

 

[steelbtexan]

They made an offer to Benson. Kind of nullifies that point.

A low ball offer.

Benson wasn't a priority for them.

With their lack of depth at the RB position they made a tactical error by low balling and not signinng Benson to a contract before he left the the teams facility.

Kubes even said they made a mistake not signing Benson.

 

[steelbtexan]

This year, I can see a guy like Hampton wanting to come to Houston. Prior to this year, I would think most FA would just use us to get a bidding war going.

I think Hampton would be a good choice... with 9 years in the league though, I wouldn't want to tie up too much money in him. I know as a relatively healthy DT, he'll probably play for another 5, but we've already got a lot of money to spend on D.

Pittsburgh has already said Hampton is a priority signing. If they cant get a deal done Hampton will be frachised.

McNair has already stated that Hampton isn't the type of FA they are looking to sign. (Young 2nd tier FA type guy) as opposed to avet on their last contract.

Out of the other side of his mouth McNair speaks about the Texans needing more vet leadership.

I think we all know what McNair was saying without saying it.

 

[steelbtexan]

McNair has no say other than the character thing, but I believe Kubiak feels the same way any way. Just like Dungy. Character is not a bad thing.

Walter, Dressen, White, Myers, Leach, Antonio Smith, Eugene Wilson, Bernard Pollard, Sean Cody, Jeff Zgonina, Jaques Reeves, Matt Schaub....

I don't get what you're saying. You act like we haven't had success in Free Agency. You talk about Hargrove... & our defense was better..

Statistically the Texans defense was better.

Ask the Colts who had the better defense when it mattered most.

I'm talking about an overall philosophy. not just offense/defense/ST

Stats say the Texans should've been playing the Saints in the SB instead of the Colts. LOL

 

[GP]

They made an offer to Benson. Kind of nullifies that point.

Come on, cak.

Just because we made an offer to Benson in NO way means that the effort was a full one. If McNair is not cheap, then what the hell is the deal with losing out on Benson? LOL.

Yeah, we made an offer. And then promptly dropped out of the hunt once another team made their offer.

This team's methods, on running backs, would be funny if it were not so freaking sad.

But we can't voice our displeasure because (a) We're just bitching, (b) we ought to be thankful that we even have a team, (c) who are we to act like we know better than the owner and the coaches, (d) hindsight is 20/20, (e) etc. etc. the list goes on as to why we should shut up about it.

But year after year we suck coconuts in the running game, with the exception of one phantom year via Steve Slaton, and we're left with "Well, next year.."

If the running game doesn't materialize AND stabilize into some consistency, we can't close out the divisional teams that own us every season. MJD beats us by grinding it out in the final minutes of our games. Chris Johnson will continue to do what he does. Manning and his squad will do what they do. And we will do what we do: Sling crap against a wall and pretend we've addressed the running game.

Getting pretty freaking old watching this same show every season.

Having said that, I still raise the old flag

 

[thunderkyss]

Really

The Saints philosohpy helped them win a SB

The Texans philosophy lead to the 1st 9-7 record in team history.

M-M that koolaid must be good.

I'll concede the point the veteran leadership the Saints have acquired through FA helped them win a Super Bowl. If that's the philosophy you're talking about, you're right.

But this conversation started with you saying the Saints did a better job at filling their holes through FA & Payton's willingness to pay his DC out of his pocket.

Statistically speaking, we performed better than the Saints overall, defensively. That's a fact. That fact leads me to believe we filled our holes better than the Saints, and did a better job filling our DC vacancy.

They just failed on the pro personel side signing Dunta for 10 mil for 1 year instead of signing Greer who is a much better player for 4yrs 22mil. for example.

No argument from me here.

But Scout.com has Greer listed as the second best corner available in FA 2009.

I don't know why Kubiak didn't go and get the best two FA CBs in FA.... what was he thinking?

This isn't hatered it's I expect the Texans to do everything they can to put the best team on the field as possible.

But you've got the benefit of hindsight. Show me a link, where you said we should have dumped Dunta & went after Greer.

If the Texans are as you say better on defense why is it the Saints won the SB? They weren't that much better on offense than the Texans were they?

The Texans either dont have enough talent as the Saints or the or a better coached team. It's one or the other.

Why didn't the Colts win? Is it because they aren't coached as well, or are they less talented? It has to be one or the other.

Comparing the Saints to the Texans is laughable. The Saints have as many wins over the Colts as the Texans have won in 8 yrs getting to play the Colts twice a year.

Are you saying our offense isn't in the same league?

Are you saying our defense isn't better?

The Saint have a better organizational philosopy than the Texans. There's no debate about that. They even proved it by beating our division champ in the SB.

Is their organizational philosophy better than the Colts? Better than the Vikings? Better than the Cowboys? Or Patriots?

or does their winning the Super Bowl say something totally different?

 

[thunderkyss]

Kubes even said they made a mistake not signing Benson.

Kubiak takes the blame for everything. Sometimes, you just gotta know he is protecting somebody else.

Ask Kubiak about the Dynamic between him & Rick Smith. He'll give you a story about Rick signing players, & Kubiak had no idea until the next day at practice.

He was either lying then, or he is lying about Benson.

Or he just might be trying to get past the Monday morning coaches. Benson was trash before he got here. If we signed him, chances are just as good that he wouldn't have found his reason to prove himself.

The only team that took him in, was the team that let him go.

 

[gary]

Do they want more vet leadership or what?

 

[gary]

If Peppers became a FA right now, would Bob offer him a contract and pay him? I would him and Mario together would be sweet IMO.

 

[GP]

Kubiak takes the blame for everything. Sometimes, you just gotta know he is protecting somebody else.

Ask Kubiak about the Dynamic between him & Rick Smith. He'll give you a story about Rick signing players, & Kubiak had no idea until the next day at practice.

He was either lying then, or he is lying about Benson.

Or he just might be trying to get past the Monday morning coaches. Benson was trash before he got here. If we signed him, chances are just as good that he wouldn't have found his reason to prove himself.

The only team that took him in, was the team that let him go.

This is rich. It really is.

As to signing players and Kubiak not knowing.......I say "what if" that's not exactly in the context of Rick Smith going behind Kubiak's back to sign players that Rick Smith wants, and "what if" we can interpret that to mean that once Kubiak goes after a player he leaves the contract crap and all its dealings with Rick Smith (and thus Kubiak won't know if he got his player until sometimes a day later)?

In short: Kubiak wants Benson, but the front office doesn't get it done.

Which brings us to the issue of Kubiak getting all the blame. He is the man at the wheel. Do I know how hard Kubiak pushed for Benson once the Bengals entered the contract talks? No. I just know someone, somewhere in the organization felt he wasn't worth outbidding Cincy for.

I want my head coach to get who he wants. Obviously we never would have offered a contract if Kubiak didn't want him on the team. Or if it's a case of Kubiak being served up the players that the front office tells him he WILL put on his team, then the organization is even more messed up than I could have imagined.

Either way, we let a competent running back slip through our fingers. Yet we have no problem scooping up guys that eventually crash and burn once they get their big chance here in Houston.

The mindset is flawed when it comes to running backs. I am growing tired of the "efforts" to produce a competent running game. Thanks for Alex Gibbs and all, but I need to see more beef if the Texans are honest about getting a running game started. Moving up in the draft and grabbing Ingram would show some real sincerity about wanting a potentially prolific, long-term running back who has size AND agility. Or, if that's too bold...grab a real center whose blocking skills doesn't resemble the T-Rex from Toy Story.

We're potentially one step away from really turning the tide on this team's seasonal departure from closing out closely-contested games. Kubiak's future rests upon nailing the running game in 2010. I have no doubt that he will either make HUGE efforts to do so, or he will continue tip-toeing through the tulips and die by the philosophy that's now fully 4-years-old.

I think it's a long shot that we produce a real running game.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

I'm not wading through all these messages. But.

Here's my take.

Saying that Team A's philosophy is better than Team B's philosophy because Team A won a SB and Team B hasn't made the playoffs is fundamentally flawed. It's too simplistic a view.

Why? Because no team wins the SB every year. Different philosophies work. But only one philosophy wins per year. And all philosophies are trying to put the best possible team on the field year in and year out.

There are some philosophies that are intrinsically bankrupt that can still win you a SB. The Redskins are an example of a bankrupt approach. And most fans if they were given their way, would follow that Redskins extremely aggressive approach. And in a given year, that approach could simply by random chance happen to put together the right pieces at the right time to win a SB. But it's not going to be sustainable. And in general, it's going to give you a substandard product.

The Saints and Texans philosophies don't seem that radically different to me. And saying that the Texans aren't trying to put the best team possible on the field is wrong. They're just not following the same philosophy to do that as you would.

 

[steelbtexan]

For the record. Our defense was better than the Saints defense in 2009. They had more Interceptions, but that's it. Our defense allowed less points per game. less yards per game. Less rushing yards, & less passing yards.

Statistically, Smith & Kubiak did a better job filling holes on the defensive side than Payton & Loomis.

But there is a double standard here that has blinded you to what Kubiak has done here.

We tried the Mike Bell thing. Either he didn't get the message here, and needed to take a serious look at life outside the NFL, or we screwed the pooch. And we've got plenty of diamonds; Walter, Jacoby, Diles, Chris Taylor, Chris Spencer, and possibly Arian Foster.

Again, our defense performed better than theirs.

Not really.. stop fishing.

Again, our defense played better than their defense.

which FAs did you want us to sign? Shockey? I'm not following.

spell it out for me again, what is it that we aren't doing? Mike Bell? c'mon, is that why they went to the Super Bowl?

Sharper? he's only marginally better than Eugene.

Again, our defense performed better than theirs.


Other than preconcieved hatred bred out of bitterness, I can't see why this would be your Opinion.

We are as good as the Saints. We didn't start out that way in 2009, but we've gotten better as the season went on. We're on the right track.. McNair, Kubiak, & Smith have brought winning football to Houston.

I'm not going to spend time copying and pasting but I will try to respond to your answers in order

1.The defense is great I'm looking forward to a Super Bowl year. I guess they should re-sign Dunta and spend all of their draft choices upgrading the offense because un your world the Texans have a SB caliber defense.
2. Notice all draft picks, you have to fill some holes in FA when you have as many holes on the roster as the Texans do you will be thin talent wise and injuries will wreck your season. The current philosopy is why the Texans have no depth. IMO
3.I've spoken about the defense FA's I would have liked to seen signed not using hindsight but how I felt at the time. Greer instead of Dunta, E.James (which I was wrong about)

4. I didn't have a problem with Wilson over Sharper. They're compareable. Sharper happened to stay healthy all season. Wilson didn't.

5. No hatered just a different philosophy, I believe mine is the correct one. This has been bourne out by 8 going on 9 yrs of no playoffs. Something has got to change if the Texans want to have a successful franchise because what they have been doing isn't working.

6. The Texans are as good as the Saints LOL. Even Kubes said in the McNair/Kubes press confrence that the Texans are along way away from being a SB caliber team. His honesty was refreshing although I would like to know what along way awy means. 1,2,5 years?

7. We on the right track? That's your opinion not mine. Time will tell who's right.

8. Bringing winning football? Man that koolaid must be good. One 9-7 season doesn't constitute bringin winning football to me. If it does we have different opinions of what a winning organization looks like and different expectations.

 

[steelbtexan]

I'm not wading through all these messages. But.

Here's my take.

Saying that Team A's philosophy is better than Team B's philosophy because Team A won a SB and Team B hasn't made the playoffs is fundamentally flawed. It's too simplistic a view.

Why? Because no team wins the SB every year. Different philosophies work. But only one philosophy wins per year. And all philosophies are trying to put the best possible team on the field year in and year out.

There are some philosophies that are intrinsically bankrupt that can still win you a SB. The Redskins are an example of a bankrupt approach. And most fans if they were given their way, would follow that Redskins extremely aggressive approach. And in a given year, that approach could simply by random chance happen to put together the right pieces at the right time to win a SB. But it's not going to be sustainable. And in general, it's going to give you a substandard product.

The Saints and Texans philosophies don't seem that radically different to me. And saying that the Texans aren't trying to put the best team possible on the field is wrong. They're just not following the same philosophy to do that as you would.

Agreed

The example of a bankrupt philosophy is 8 yrs and no playoffs. You dont see fault in the Texans philosophy?

If you dont I dont know what to say. 8 yrs and counting. Here's hoping year no.9 is the charm.

On to the most exciting time of the year for Texan fans. The draft.

As I've said before all of this crap falls on McNairs head.

 

[steelbtexan]

Gary I'm going to answer both of youquestions in one post.

1.McNair says he wants more vet leadership but history says it isn't oging to happen.

2. I would sign Peppers too. It would be a way to show the fans McNair is serious about winning. If you think McNair will show Peppers the $ you're delusional. LOL

 

[gary]

Gary I'm going to answer both of youquestions in one post.

1.McNair says he wants more vet leadership but history says it isn't oging to happen.

2. I would sign Peppers too. It would be a way to show the fans McNair is serious about winning. If you think McNair will show Peppers the $ you're delusional. LOL

Just another way to show he is not willing to sign a great fa who has a lot left in him IMO.

 

[thunderkyss]

8. Bringing winning football? Man that koolaid must be good. One 9-7 season doesn't constitute bringin winning football to me. If it does we have different opinions of what a winning organization looks like and different expectations.

I don't agree with everything Kubiak has done, or will do. I don't expect you to.

But 9-7 is winning football.

& yes, this looks like a young winning organization, with a promising future.

Did the Saints look like a winning organization last year when they finished 8-8? or the year before when they finished 7-9?

 

[steelbtexan]

I'll concede the point the veteran leadership the Saints have acquired through FA helped them win a Super Bowl. If that's the philosophy you're talking about, you're right.

But this conversation started with you saying the Saints did a better job at filling their holes through FA & Payton's willingness to pay his DC out of his pocket.

Statistically speaking, we performed better than the Saints overall, defensively. That's a fact. That fact leads me to believe we filled our holes better than the Saints, and did a better job filling our DC vacancy.

No argument from me here.

But Scout.com has Greer listed as the second best corner available in FA 2009.

I don't know why Kubiak didn't go and get the best two FA CBs in FA.... what was he thinking?


But you've got the benefit of hindsight. Show me a link, where you said we should have dumped Dunta & went after Greer.



Why didn't the Colts win? Is it because they aren't coached as well, or are they less talented? It has to be one or the other.



Are you saying our offense isn't in the same league?

Are you saying our defense isn't better?





Is their organizational philosophy better than the Colts? Better than the Vikings? Better than the Cowboys? Or Patriots?

or does their winning the Super Bowl say something totally different?

TK
1. McNair said he wants more vet.leadership on the team. Lets hope he spends the $ to get it. Probably not going to happen.

2. Check the Dunta thread you will see I thought he should be let go. Greer is hindsight but that's why the pro scouting dept gets paid and you and I dont. No if they had let Dunta walk and signed Greer they would only be paying one FA CB and gotten a bargain on him compared to what Dunta was paid. I here that Clements is going to be cut by SF this offseason the Texans shold take a look at him if he gets cut. He would be an upgrade over Dunta. IMO

3. The Colts didn't win the SB because they got out coached. Payton was willing to take chances (He played to win) Caldwell played not to lose and it cost his team a SB.

4. The Texans and Saints are about the same on defense but the most important statistic is forced turnovers. (it usually translates directly to W/L)
The Saints were better than the Texans in this area.

5. The Saints offense was better than the Texans regardless of what the stats say. They are across the board tallent wise, excluding AJ. Kubes did a good job masking their diffiencies. The O needs a talent upgrade worse than the D. IMO If the O gets an upgrade in the OL and RB positions this offense could be something really special. It would be the quickest way to catch up with the Colts. IMO You aren't going to out defend Manning.

6. Maybe, Maybe not but all of those teams listed seem to be more commited to winning than the Texans, some of them may go about it wrong but the win at all cost theory is there. Not so with the Texans.

 

[GP]

I'm not wading through all these messages. But.

Here's my take.

Saying that Team A's philosophy is better than Team B's philosophy because Team A won a SB and Team B hasn't made the playoffs is fundamentally flawed. It's too simplistic a view.

Why? Because no team wins the SB every year. Different philosophies work. But only one philosophy wins per year. And all philosophies are trying to put the best possible team on the field year in and year out.

There are some philosophies that are intrinsically bankrupt that can still win you a SB. The Redskins are an example of a bankrupt approach. And most fans if they were given their way, would follow that Redskins extremely aggressive approach. And in a given year, that approach could simply by random chance happen to put together the right pieces at the right time to win a SB. But it's not going to be sustainable. And in general, it's going to give you a substandard product.

The Saints and Texans philosophies don't seem that radically different to me. And saying that the Texans aren't trying to put the best team possible on the field is wrong. They're just not following the same philosophy to do that as you would.

Let's talk specifics, then.

Do you agree with the RUNNING BACK/RUNNING GAME philosophy that the Texans have constructed over the past 8 years? And more specifically, the past four years?

I don't. I didn't buy the Ahman Green signing, not even for one second. Lots of people loved the name recognition aspect of it, but Green Bay let him go way too easy for my taste. And it fleshed out that way. I expect my NFL franchise to (a) not buy a turd with sprinkles on top, and (b) not try and sell it to me as a brownie.

We found a bit of a win-win with the move down in the draft that gained Duane Brown and then Slaton later on in the draft. I think Brown is out of position, and I don't expect Steve Slaton to reproduce what he did in his rookie season here. Hate to be a Doug Downer about it, but the time for being optimistic about injured Texans running backs who were a flash-in-the-pan to begin with deems it necessary, IMO, to depart from sentimentalism and embark upon the idea of just moving on. Forward.

The Saints found a workable mix of passing and running. We're going to have to do the same thing, if we're going to say that we're built on the same model as the Saints.

Let's just boil this down to its base ingredients: 2010 will come down to whether or not Kubiak can nail the running game.

That's a proposition bet if there ever was one, IMO.

 

[steelbtexan]

Just another way to show he is not willing to sign a great fa who has a lot left in him IMO.

Yep

You see what's going on, I see what's going on

So many cant see the forest for the trees and what the motives and goals of the Texans franchise is.

 

[GP]

Yep

You see what's going on, I see what's going on

So many cant see the forest for the trees and what the motives and goals of the Texans franchise is.

I think the Texans, specifically Bob McNair, do want to win all the time. He doesn't have the goal of just being profitable, IMO.

He just seems to either be intentionally moving slowly toward that goal, or is learning on-the-job. Maybe even a mix of both.

Hopefully this thing culminates into the sort of iconic franchise that is found in Green Bay, Pittsburgh, and/or Dallas: Teams that have a huge cult-like following and a unique aura about them.

Waiting is the hard part.

 

[gary]

I think the Texans, specifically Bob McNair, do want to win all the time. He doesn't have the goal of just being profitable, IMO.

He just seems to either be intentionally moving slowly toward that goal, or is learning on-the-job. Maybe even a mix of both.

Hopefully this thing culminates into the sort of iconic franchise that is found in Green Bay, Pittsburgh, and/or Dallas: Teams that have a huge cult-like following and a unique aura about them.

Waiting is the hard part.

Agree, I am just posting what should be done sooner rather than later and I hope he starts learning faster. LOL

 

[steelbtexan]

I think the Texans, specifically Bob McNair, do want to win all the time. He doesn't have the goal of just being profitable, IMO.

He just seems to either be intentionally moving slowly toward that goal, or is learning on-the-job. Maybe even a mix of both.

Hopefully this thing culminates into the sort of iconic franchise that is found in Green Bay, Pittsburgh, and/or Dallas: Teams that have a huge cult-like following and a unique aura about them.

Waiting is the hard part.[/QUOTE}


Double post delete

 

[steelbtexan]

I think the Texans, specifically Bob McNair, do want to win all the time. He doesn't have the goal of just being profitable, IMO.

He just seems to either be intentionally moving slowly toward that goal, or is learning on-the-job. Maybe even a mix of both.

Hopefully this thing culminates into the sort of iconic franchise that is found in Green Bay, Pittsburgh, and/or Dallas: Teams that have a huge cult-like following and a unique aura about them.

Waiting is the hard part.

1. I hope you're right
2. Moving slowly/understatement Learninig on the job LOL People who took the short bus to school learn quicker than McNair. Maybe McNair did take the short bus to school. How did somebody that is as slow a learner as McNair amass a billion dollar fortune? This is why I ask ? about McNairs motives.
3. I hope you're right but McNair needs a different business model if the Texans are going to be a perrenial playoff team. IMO The aura is already there from the fans. We're just waiting on McNairs learning curve to catch up.
4. You're right Waiting is the hardest thing to do. While McNair learns on the job.

Do you think McNair will be one of the hardest of the hard line owners in the new CBA negociations?

I would bet money the answer is yes. LOL

 

[GP]

1. I hope you're right
2. Moving slowly/understatement Learninig on the job LOL People who took the short bus to school learn quicker than McNair. Maybe McNair did take the short bus to school. How did somebody that is as slow a learner as McNair amass a billion dollar fortune? This is why I ask ? about McNairs motives.
3. I hope you're right but McNair needs a different business model if the Texans are going to be a perrenial playoff team. IMO The aura is already there from the fans. We're just waiting on McNairs learning curve to catch up.
4. You're right Waiting is the hardest thing to do. While McNair learns on the job.

Do you think McNair will be one of the hardest of the hard line owners in the new CBA negociations?

I would bet money the answer is yes. LOL

Yeah, I'm just trying to keep this real. In the end, we are the fans of this team. We don't own it. We pay to watch it.

So to that extent, I can't sit here and say (with 100% authority) that they're all a bunch of idiots and I can do better. You're going to lose credibility, as a fan who tries to expound on this team, when you take the approach that McNair is a doofus and we're just tolerating his ignorance.

Even I can sense when I am becoming a Doug Downer...and it will undercut my standing with the members here. Not trying to tell you how to think or act on here, just giving you my thoughts that I've sort of grown to understand about message boarding.

For things he got wrong (David Carr) he has shown an ability to correct (Matt Schaub). McNair could have told Kubiak "Tough luck, you're keeping David Carr because he IS this team's QB!" McNair seems to place loyalty and commitment a lot further than any of us would. Can be good, and can be bad. Maybe he's erring on the side of being the good guy. That's OK.

Here's to hoping that we get more right than we get wrong.

 

[GuerillaBlack]

It's not going to happen but do not act like a vet like Casey Hapmton would NOT bring leadership to the Texans D and be that missing run stuffer.

It would have happened if Cowher was the coach. Hampton (Houston native) said it himself.

 

[GuerillaBlack]

I don't agree with everything Kubiak has done, or will do. I don't expect you to.

But 9-7 is winning football.

& yes, this looks like a young winning organization, with a promising future.

Did the Saints look like a winning organization last year when they finished 8-8? or the year before when they finished 7-9?

Weren't you just before saying the Eagles and Cowboys weren't consistent because of a 9-7 season? One season is not consistent. Texans have to be least four games over .500 again. Then you'll be right.

 

[gary]

It would have happened if Cowher was the coach. Hampton (Houston native) said it himself.

I read that too.

 

[thunderkyss]

Weren't you just before saying the Eagles and Cowboys weren't consistent because of a 9-7 season? One season is not consistent. Texans have to be least four games over .500 again. Then you'll be right.

That conversation was about the qualilty of the team. Consistently over 10 wins was my definition of good.

I said the Cowboys were an upper-mediocre team.

We are a middle of the pile mediocre team. (mediocre mediocre)

9-7 is winning football.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

Agreed

The example of a bankrupt philosophy is 8 yrs and no playoffs. You dont see fault in the Texans philosophy?

If you dont I dont know what to say. 8 yrs and counting. Here's hoping year no.9 is the charm.

On to the most exciting time of the year for Texan fans. The draft.

As I've said before all of this crap falls on McNairs head.

What I saw is the philosophy change.

You didn't?

You don't see an explosive offense and a defense that's good and both getting better?

 

[The Pencil Neck]

Let's talk specifics, then.

Do you agree with the RUNNING BACK/RUNNING GAME philosophy that the Texans have constructed over the past 8 years? And more specifically, the past four years?

I don't. I didn't buy the Ahman Green signing, not even for one second. Lots of people loved the name recognition aspect of it, but Green Bay let him go way too easy for my taste. And it fleshed out that way. I expect my NFL franchise to (a) not buy a turd with sprinkles on top, and (b) not try and sell it to me as a brownie.

We found a bit of a win-win with the move down in the draft that gained Duane Brown and then Slaton later on in the draft. I think Brown is out of position, and I don't expect Steve Slaton to reproduce what he did in his rookie season here. Hate to be a Doug Downer about it, but the time for being optimistic about injured Texans running backs who were a flash-in-the-pan to begin with deems it necessary, IMO, to depart from sentimentalism and embark upon the idea of just moving on. Forward.

The Saints found a workable mix of passing and running. We're going to have to do the same thing, if we're going to say that we're built on the same model as the Saints.

Let's just boil this down to its base ingredients: 2010 will come down to whether or not Kubiak can nail the running game.

That's a proposition bet if there ever was one, IMO.

Dude. If you're such a great evaluator of NFL talent that you knew Ahman Green was such a bad move AND you're able to do that consistently so that this isn't just a fluke on your part, then you're in the wrong business.

Seriously.

You can call that move an obvious fail all you want but that's just hindsight. A lot of people thought Ahman had enough tread on his tires to give us a few good seasons. A lot of people had him as the highest ranked FA prospect that year. I know some people were worried about that move but a lot of people are worried about every move we've ever made. Schaub was considered by a lot of people to be the backup most worthy of a start shot and when we picked him up, a lot of people on this board considered him a career backup who'd never be anything else. So, happening to be right about Green's tread doesn't strike me as omniscience as much as luck.

Over the past 4 years, we've had a lot of positions that we've needed to fix. We thought we had it mostly fixed with Slaton but that turned out to be wrong. Hopefully, this year we get the RB solved.

 

[GP]

Dude. If you're such a great evaluator of NFL talent that you knew Ahman Green was such a bad move AND you're able to do that consistently so that this isn't just a fluke on your part, then you're in the wrong business.

Seriously.

You can call that move an obvious fail all you want but that's just hindsight. A lot of people thought Ahman had enough tread on his tires to give us a few good seasons. A lot of people had him as the highest ranked FA prospect that year. I know some people were worried about that move but a lot of people are worried about every move we've ever made. Schaub was considered by a lot of people to be the backup most worthy of a start shot and when we picked him up, a lot of people on this board considered him a career backup who'd never be anything else. So, happening to be right about Green's tread doesn't strike me as omniscience as much as luck.

Over the past 4 years, we've had a lot of positions that we've needed to fix. We thought we had it mostly fixed with Slaton but that turned out to be wrong. Hopefully, this year we get the RB solved.

Schaub is a guy that I was thrilled with when we got him, but soon felt he was Glass Joe from the Punch Out video game, and then swung back to see that maybe he's a bit more resilient than his first season with the Texans showed.

Anytime a team (Green Bay) lets a guy (Ahman Green) walk so easily, you have to smell the smoke and wonder where the fire is at.

This isn't about trying to be a wannabe NFL scout for the Texans. This is about being a fan of the Texans and being a bit more skeptical now that we've had 6, 7, or 8 years' worth of player & coaching moves and offensive/defensive schemes and the actual gameday performances to analyze and discuss.

This team has enough history, thus far, that we can all sit down and start to see patterns developing in the player & coaches moves, and offensive/defensive schemes and the actual gameday performances.

The biggest pattern that has developed is that this team has ALWAYS been about passing, with the offensive line built for passing and the running game takes a big back seat. Our only true, legitimately consistent RB was Domanick Davis who was expected to be a special teamer and 3rd down guy...at best. James Allen, Stacy Mack, Jonathan Wells, Samkon Gado, Ron Dayne, Tony Hollings, Wali Lundy, Ahman Green, Ryan Moats, Steve Slaton, and there's about 4 or 5 more that I am forgetting...this is our list of running backs we've placed confidence upon.

Meanwhile, people thought the Titans were crazy for drafting all those running backs as early as they did. Well, turns out that the move might have been pretty smart. Can't say that I applaud them for drafting Vince Young, but the picks on RBs was a great move. Because they can run that ball and eat up clock.

Give this Texans team a REAL running game, and Kubiak becomes a legend around here for a long time. Maybe even Tom Landry'esque. But I won't bet on him finding that groove on the running game in 2010.

If he does, he's the man. But I can't see it happening because we've had four years of historicals to look at. And it doesn't paint a pretty picture for the running game in 2010.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

Schaub is a guy that I was thrilled with when we got him, but soon felt he was Glass Joe from the Punch Out video game, and then swung back to see that maybe he's a bit more resilient than his first season with the Texans showed.

The point was that a lot of people take both sides in these things. It's very rarely so cut and dried that everyone can say categorically that getting player X is a mistake. And from the perspective of foresight in stead of hindsight, the Ahman Green deal wasn't nearly as atrocious as you make out. Sure, in hindsight it didn't work out, but that was a good and valid attempt to get a seriously good RB in here.

Anytime a team (Green Bay) lets a guy (Ahman Green) walk so easily, you have to smell the smoke and wonder where the fire is at.

Come on, man. Teams give up on players with tread on the tires all the time.

This isn't about trying to be a wannabe NFL scout for the Texans. This is about being a fan of the Texans and being a bit more skeptical now that we've had 6, 7, or 8 years' worth of player & coaching moves and offensive/defensive schemes and the actual gameday performances to analyze and discuss.

This team has enough history, thus far, that we can all sit down and start to see patterns developing in the player & coaches moves, and offensive/defensive schemes and the actual gameday performances.

The biggest pattern that has developed is that this team has ALWAYS been about passing, with the offensive line built for passing and the running game takes a big back seat. Our only true, legitimately consistent RB was Domanick Davis who was expected to be a special teamer and 3rd down guy...at best. James Allen, Stacy Mack, Jonathan Wells, Samkon Gado, Ron Dayne, Tony Hollings, Wali Lundy, Ahman Green, Ryan Moats, Steve Slaton, and there's about 4 or 5 more that I am forgetting...this is our list of running backs we've placed confidence upon.

I disagree that this team has always been about passing. The Domanick Davis versions of our team were running teams. They tried to pass, but they were about the run. I also disagree with looking for patterns over two different FO's. And I disagree that this coaching staff has been all about the pass. In 2006, this was a run team. Kubes has tried to fix the running game several different ways and with Slaton, thought he had his main back and just needed to add depth. that didn't wokr out. The pass is what we happen to do best and Kubiak had to adjust to being a pass first team. But it's wrong to say this has always been a passing team.

Meanwhile, people thought the Titans were crazy for drafting all those running backs as early as they did. Well, turns out that the move might have been pretty smart. Can't say that I applaud them for drafting Vince Young, but the picks on RBs was a great move. Because they can run that ball and eat up clock.

And they finished 3rd in the division and out of the playoffs.

I'm not saying that's a bad strategy. If you go back and look at my recent posts, I'm lobbying for bringing in a FA RB and for drafting RB early and drafting RB late. I'm for making the RB a position of strength on this team.

But I don't think using the Titans as an example of a good drafting strategy is slightly misguided. After all those draft picks on the RB, they've already gotten rid of one guy and are probably ditching another. They got lucky with Chris Johnson and were able to use LenDale long enough to get Johnson blooded and ready for duty. But they had to keep drafting and drafting that position until they found the right guy. And he wasn't ready immediately. In a way though, we should follow that strategy and keep drafting RB's high and low until we find the right guy.

We've been following that strategy for CB. Let's wait until April and see if we're going to start following that strategy for RB.

Give this Texans team a REAL running game, and Kubiak becomes a legend around here for a long time. Maybe even Tom Landry'esque. But I won't bet on him finding that groove on the running game in 2010.

If he does, he's the man. But I can't see it happening because we've had four years of historicals to look at. And it doesn't paint a pretty picture for the running game in 2010.

You're unhappy because of what you THINK is going to happen. At least, give it a chance to happen. And you're basing some of your fears on the previous regime.

This regime has steadily solved problems and improved the team. The running game is a concern. It wasn't that big of a concern last draft. I expect them to make several moves to address the running game.

 

[thunderkyss]

The biggest pattern that has developed is that this team has ALWAYS been about passing, with the offensive line built for passing and the running game takes a big back seat. Our only true, legitimately consistent RB was Domanick Davis who was expected to be a special teamer and 3rd down guy...at best. James Allen, Stacy Mack, Jonathan Wells, Samkon Gado, Ron Dayne, Tony Hollings, Wali Lundy, Ahman Green, Ryan Moats, Steve Slaton, and there's about 4 or 5 more that I am forgetting...this is our list of running backs we've placed confidence upon.

Meanwhile, people thought the Titans were crazy for drafting all those running backs as early as they did. Well, turns out that the move might have been pretty smart. Can't say that I applaud them for drafting Vince Young, but the picks on RBs was a great move. Because they can run that ball and eat up clock.

Give this Texans team a REAL running game, and Kubiak becomes a legend around here for a long time. Maybe even Tom Landry'esque. But I won't bet on him finding that groove on the running game in 2010.

If he does, he's the man. But I can't see it happening because we've had four years of historicals to look at. And it doesn't paint a pretty picture for the running game in 2010.

I completely agree with everything you've said here. One thing I'll add, is the teams "philosophy" has always been to build a ZBS OL, then we would have success with less than spectacular (value)running backs.

I like what I've seen from the OL on the later part of the season. I think Kubiak has a lot of options with the "talent" we already have. If we add a 1st round Guard, all the better.

Until I see the finished product of a dominant OL run game, I personally won't be itching for the Texans to draft a "feature" back. You mentioned the Titans & their penchant for drafting running backs early. They had a dominant, physical OL, so IMHO, it made sense for them.

 

[sandman]

Agreed

The example of a bankrupt philosophy is 8 yrs and no playoffs. You dont see fault in the Texans philosophy?

If you dont I dont know what to say. 8 yrs and counting. Here's hoping year no.9 is the charm.

On to the most exciting time of the year for Texan fans. The draft.

As I've said before all of this crap falls on McNairs head.

The Saints went through EIGHT seasons of being a mediocre .500 ball club, with ONE playoff appearance three years ago, before winning the Super Bowl this year.

Just not seeing how Benson and Payton are the standard that we should be holding the McNair and Smithiak up against. The Texans can just as easily have a breakout SB year next year, after only FOUR years of mediocre .500 ball.

 

[sandman]

He showed it the whole season.



Nobody said anything about top 5. There are 64 starting corner jobs in the NFL. 32 #1's, and 32 #2's.

That is arguing on semantics and you know it.

Just because you are the #1 CB on your specific team doesn't make you better than every #2 CB on every other team.

Name me a playoff team, or any team at or above .500 this last year, that would have traded #1 CB's with us.

The Texans overpaid him with the franchise tag because they knew they did not have anyone better than him, not because they believed he was really that good. That is more of an indictment on the state of the team's overall secondary than anything else.

 

[thunderkyss]

The Texans overpaid him with the franchise tag because they knew they did not have anyone better than him, not because they believed he was really that good. That is more of an indictment on the state of the team's overall secondary than anything else.

That is debatable. The Texans may believe he is a true #1. The talk around the league, is that he is a true #1. Scout.com has him ranked as the best CB scheduled to hit free agency this year, and he was there last year as well. They ranked him higher than Jabari Greer last year, and this year he is ranked higher than Richard Marshall, Fabian Washington, Nick Harper, and Leigh Bodden.

Not that Scout.com is the end all be all, but they're not usually very far off when ranking players.

 

[steelbtexan]

Yeah, I'm just trying to keep this real. In the end, we are the fans of this team. We don't own it. We pay to watch it.

So to that extent, I can't sit here and say (with 100% authority) that they're all a bunch of idiots and I can do better. You're going to lose credibility, as a fan who tries to expound on this team, when you take the approach that McNair is a doofus and we're just tolerating his ignorance.

Even I can sense when I am becoming a Doug Downer...and it will undercut my standing with the members here. Not trying to tell you how to think or act on here, just giving you my thoughts that I've sort of grown to understand about message boarding.

For things he got wrong (David Carr) he has shown an ability to correct (Matt Schaub). McNair could have told Kubiak "Tough luck, you're keeping David Carr because he IS this team's QB!" McNair seems to place loyalty and commitment a lot further than any of us would. Can be good, and can be bad. Maybe he's erring on the side of being the good guy. That's OK.

Here's to hoping that we get more right than we get wrong.

I dont know how McNair ran his oil/gas business but I'm sure he ran it with profits in mind. Just as he runs the Texans.

I'm also sure McNair leaned about the oil/gas business quicker than the NFL business. How long does Mcnair get a pass for learning on the job? After 8 yrs I would have thought that he knows how to put together after 8 years of learning. I dont believe McNair is that big of a doofus.

Then I see him extending Kubes with no reason unless you like mediocrity. This makes me think he's a doofus.

 

[sandman]

That is debatable. The Texans may believe he is a true #1. The talk around the league, is that he is a true #1. Scout.com has him ranked as the best CB scheduled to hit free agency this year, and he was there last year as well. They ranked him higher than Jabari Greer last year, and this year he is ranked higher than Richard Marshall, Fabian Washington, Nick Harper, and Leigh Bodden.

Not that Scout.com is the end all be all, but they're not usually very far off when ranking players.

Fair enough. But being considered the top ranked FA is just like saying he was the best CB the Texans had on their roster. It is a subjective analysis based on the FA population. It could be a weak FA market this year.

How about this: Among the 32 CB's in the league that are listed as their teams #1 CB, where does Dunta rank? Top 10? Top 20?

 

[sandman]

I dont know how McNair ran his oil/gas business but I'm sure he ran it with profits in mind. Just as he runs the Texans.

I'm also sure McNair leaned about the oil/gas business quicker than the NFL business. How long does Mcnair get a pass for learning on the job? After 8 yrs I would have thought that he knows how to put together after 8 years of learning. I dont believe McNair is that big of a doofus.

Then I see him extending Kubes with no reason unless you like mediocrity. This makes me think he's a doofus.

Hmmm, Payton goes 25-23 in the three years before winning a SB, after the team went 42-38 from 2000-2004, and Benson has the right philosophy to stick with him.

But Kubiak goes 25-23 in the last three years, after taking over a team that went 18-46 from 2002-2005, and McNair is a doofus for sticking with him.

 

[JB]

Hmmm, Payton goes 25-23 in the three years before winning a SB, after the team went 42-38 from 2000-2004, and Benson has the right philosophy to stick with him.

But Kubiak goes 25-23 in the last three years, after taking over a team that went 18-46 from 2002-2005, and McNair is a doofus for sticking with him.

Don't you know that logic and common sense have no place on this MB?

 

[HoustonFrog]

Hmmm, Payton goes 25-23 in the three years before winning a SB, after the team went 42-38 from 2000-2004, and Benson has the right philosophy to stick with him.

But Kubiak goes 25-23 in the last three years, after taking over a team that went 18-46 from 2002-2005, and McNair is a doofus for sticking with him.

You can't just throw togther total records and say "see" its the same. Payton came in and went 10-6 his first year and made it to the NFC Championship game. After that he bought himself some patience. They then went 7-9 and 8-8(what is normal around here). Then he does 13-3 his 4th year and wins a SB. You are discounting Kubiak's first year like it didn't exist and then saying they were in the same place. Apples and oranges. I'm not saying they are the perfect example of who to follow. I just don't think your total record tells the story when you take away their first year. That year lays the groundwork.

 

[thunderkyss]

You can't just throw togther total records and say "see" its the same. Payton came in and went 10-6 his first year and made it to the NFC Championship game. After that he bought himself some patience. They then went 7-9 and 8-8(what is normal around here). Then he does 13-3 his 4th year and wins a SB. You are discounting Kubiak's first year like it didn't exist and then saying they were in the same place. Apples and oranges. I'm not saying they are the perfect example of who to follow. I just don't think your total record tells the story when you take away their first year. That year lays the groundwork.

I don't think that is what he is saying. I read it to mean that the Saints had some success before Payton got there. The Texans were woefully pathetic before Kubiak got here.

the Soapers bring up their 2005 records as if that reflects the sum of those teams prior to the new coaches, and say, "See they started out the same."

The Saints were a play-off team in 2000, and spent the next 4 seasons hovering around 8-8, like we are doing now. They had a bad year in 2005. Their success in 2006 has just as much to do with their performance prior to 2005 + the addition of Sean Payton. Their record in 2007 & 2008 speaks to that same conclusion.

 

[infantrycak]

They had a bad year in 2005.

And there was a pretty obvious reason other than football talent. But I guess moving around is only a factor when Jeff Fisher is being discussed.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

the Soapers bring up their 2005 records as if that reflects the sum of those teams prior to the new coaches, and say, "See they started out the same."

The Saints were a play-off team in 2000, and spent the next 4 seasons hovering around 8-8, like we are doing now. They had a bad year in 2005. Their success in 2006 has just as much to do with their performance prior to 2005 + the addition of Sean Payton. Their record in 2007 & 2008 speaks to that same conclusion.

And don't forget that the Saints 3-13 season included the whole Katrina thing. That team was better than their 3-13 record.

 

[sandman]

You can't just throw togther total records and say "see" its the same. Payton came in and went 10-6 his first year and made it to the NFC Championship game. After that he bought himself some patience. They then went 7-9 and 8-8(what is normal around here). Then he does 13-3 his 4th year and wins a SB. You are discounting Kubiak's first year like it didn't exist and then saying they were in the same place. Apples and oranges. I'm not saying they are the perfect example of who to follow. I just don't think your total record tells the story when you take away their first year. That year lays the groundwork.

I see your point; however, if Kubiak went 10-6 with a playoff appearance and followed it up with a 7-9 season, we both know Texans fans would have been calling for his head. Heck, they wanted him run out of town because he *only* went 9-7 this year.

As to the first year, I am not discounting it. I am just trying to point out that Payton and Kubiak did not take over teams at the same level. Payton took a consistently .500 team and made them SB winners after 4 years. Kubiak took a consistently bad team and made them consistently .500 in the same number of years.

Payton took a team averaging 8 wins a season for 5 years (if you discount the one bad season of 2005) and has averaged 9 wins in his 4 year tenure.

Kubiak took a team averaging 4.5 wins a season for 4 years and has averaged 8 wins a season in his 4 year tenure.

Now, I am not arguing that Kubiak is a better coach or even as good a coach as Payton. And no, it is not just about the stats because Payton has a Lombardi, which is the ultimate separation point between the two. I'm just saying that you can't judge Kubiak based on what Payton has done, because their starting points were apples and oranges.

Not at you personally, but the Payton>Kubes, Reggie>Mario and Benson>McNair rants because the Saints won the SB is growing thin. Of course, if the Colts had won, we would be hearing about how the corpse of Jim Caldwell outcoached Kubiak all season long to a Super Bowl win, so I guess there is no pleasing everyone.

 

[HoustonFrog]

So basically in the history of the league no team has ever started out with more against them than the Texans. I get it now. I'll move along.(massive exaggeration for effect)

I see your point; however, if Kubiak went 10-6 with a playoff appearance and followed it up with a 7-9 season, we both know Texans fans would have been calling for his head. Heck, they wanted him run out of town because he *only* went 9-7 this year.

Actually I don't believe this. A 10-6 record lets people know.."he can get there." Right now that is still debatable and thus these threads.

 

[sandman]

I don't think that is what he is saying. I read it to mean that the Saints had some success before Payton got there. The Texans were woefully pathetic before Kubiak got here.

the Soapers bring up their 2005 records as if that reflects the sum of those teams prior to the new coaches, and say, "See they started out the same."

The Saints were a play-off team in 2000, and spent the next 4 seasons hovering around 8-8, like we are doing now. They had a bad year in 2005. Their success in 2006 has just as much to do with their performance prior to 2005 + the addition of Sean Payton. Their record in 2007 & 2008 speaks to that same conclusion.

Thanks. You put it a bit more succinctly than my ramblings...