Yes you are comparing Kubiak to BB.
I am not comparing anyone to anything. I don't know how you decided I was comparing anything. I was just commenting on your comment.
All I am saying is there are several Kubiak homers out there who blindly defend Kub's mediocre start by telling the world about BB's first six years to compare with Kub's first 6, as if that means Kubiak is somehow on the road to greatness. In other words, "Just keep dealing with this guy because if BB can suck and then be great, so can Kub".
My comment was simple. When you try to defend Kub with the BB comparison, don't conveniently forget to talk about the hundreds of coaches who may have had bad or mediocre starts as well, and later never amounted to anything. You are singling out one coach who was successful later in his career to compare Kub to. In that sense, you are twisting what the "jury" gets to hear, and are trying to mind screw them into getting the verdict you want. That is twisting the facts like a slick defense lawyer.
No big deal. That type of smoke and mirrors is expected from the Kool Aid Krowd.
Dude you cannot compare 17 years to 6 years. I thought I made that clear. Was Belichick a great coach after 6 years? NO. If you cannot see the parallel I cannot help you. There are plenty of coaches that have early success but cannot sustain it. Those coaches don't last very long. Look at the situations in KC, TB and even the NY Jets. Most great coaches had to go through a learning curve (regardless of early success or not) and Belichick (and many others) was not exempt from it. It's that simple. Is Kubiak a great coach? IDK. Only time will tell. But he's not as bad as many people try to make him out to be.