I said should be extended. Not deserves to be extended. Let me elaborate: 1) Respect for Authority - An organization needs to stand behind its head coach. That tells the players that they will be held responsible and accountable for the team's success. The head coach has to be the alpha dog. And the pack works better knowing who their leader is. 2) Organizational Stability - Not in the schematic sense that has been argued for. That is overrated. As an organization, it will be easier to keep employees, and attract new ones, if the team projects stability. A long term contract for the leader of the team projects that commitment and stability. 3) Planning for the Future - Most people work better without someone looking over their shoulder. It is more likely that a head coach will do what is in the long-term best interests of the organization, if they believe they will be a part of the organization in the future. We will never know how close Gary Kubiak came to being fired. What we do know is that he will be the Houston Texans head coach in 2010. Therefore, he must be given the trust and authority to command this team. Coaching on a lame duck contract (his current deal ends after the 2010 season), would undermine that authority and revoke the trust. Assistant coaches who could leave this offseason, would. Possible free agents would look at more stable situations. Chaos on the team would prevail, if adversity hits during the season. It's a no win situation. Now, in no way should a contract extension bind Gary Kubiak to this team, if they fail to meet the organizational goals. If Bob McNair has to eat the contract, so be it. But, the perception of the organization has to indicate that Gary Kubiak is in total command. That can only happen with a contract extension.