Me too. No team has ever been as bad as the Texans. No team has faced the challenges the Texans have had to face. Ever.
The "right way" seems to be to move slow in a fast paced league. If so, two 8-8 seasons in a row is nice and slow - success!
Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍
Kubes on the hotseat????
- Thread starter jshabang
- Start date
Me too. No team has ever been as bad as the Texans. No team has faced the challenges the Texans have had to face. Ever.
The "right way" seems to be to move slow in a fast paced league. If so, two 8-8 seasons in a row is nice and slow - success!
And the Texans were 7-9 one year removed from their collapse. Three years of Kubiak has gained a win? It seems like taking that team and replacing David Carr would have sent them to the heights of 8-8 too.
I know, I know - that's different somehow.
You're right. The Cards finished last in the NFC West in '06, not '05. Then, Arizona replaced their head coach in 2007, and went to the Super Bowl in 2008.
As you said, anything can be skewed to make a point.
Since Gary Kubiak has taken over as head coach, 24 NFL teams have made playoff appearances. 8 have not.
The list, please:
Buffalo Bills
Cincinnati Bengals
Cleveland Browns
Oakland Raiders
Detroit Lions
St. Louis Rams
San Francisco 49ers
And (drum roll please).....
Your Houston Texans
TheRealJoker
Hall of Fame
You're right. The Cards finished last in the NFC West in '06, not '05. Then, Arizona replaced their head coach in 2007, and went to the Super Bowl in 2008.
As you said, anything can be skewed to make a point.
Since Gary Kubiak has taken over as head coach, 24 NFL teams have made playoff appearances. 8 have not.
The list, please:
Buffalo Bills
Cincinnati Bengals
Cleveland Browns
Oakland Raiders
Detroit Lions
St. Louis Rams
San Francisco 49ers
And (drum roll please).....
Your Houston Texans
Dick Jauron has had 3 consecutive 7-9 seasons. Wonder how Bills fans feel about that?
10-6, 4-12,9-7 23-25 over 3 years. Mangini is gone. He will do a better job in Cleveland, than he did in NY, guaranteed. That team is older, and less talented now, than it was when he took over.
11-5, 5-11, 13-3 29-19 over 3 years. Arguably the best defense over the last decade. you can if you want, but I can't compare our team to theirs.
pass
Again, this was a pretty solid team on both sides of the ball, for a decade. They had one bad year........ not really comparable.
6-10, 13-3, 8-8 27-21 over 3 years. This team has been building for what, 6 years now? They were just waiting for their QB to move on, so they can move on. Hey, didn't their coach for 2006 get fired?
10-6, 8-8, 7-9 25-23 over 3 years. It may be just my opinion, but I think this team is worse than it was in 2006. They benefited from playing in the NFC, and in the NFC South.
5-11, 8-8, 9-7 22-26 over 3 years. Matt Lienart...... bust. Levi Brown..... 1st round right tackle...... Cromartie........ I like him. But for the most part, they got to the Superbowl because of the guys who were already on that team in 2005. They got to the Superbowl, by winning their division at 9-7. I don't think that team is much better than the 2005 team.
Arizona won't get to the play-offs in 2009. Neither will the Saints, or the Jets. I think we will. & I think we'll be going to the play-offs for the next 10 years, as division champs. But if that don't happen this year, I'm confident it will next year, with Kubiak. We're a better team than we were 3 years ago, and if we stay the course, we will be a better team 3 years from now.
P
Polo
Guest
Excellent post yo...
Agreed.
Anything above .500 is golden. Anything below you have to evaluate his job.
Not a whole lot you can do. It cost too much to cut them. Carr is the exception and the big blunder, but that was the only way he could get his job, so can't fault the man for that.
GP
Go Texans!
On your question of "How long would you give him"...How about this: There's no equation that you can calculate in regards to how long a coach is going to stay as your HC. Variables, in the NFL, change pretty dynamically in regards to things like hurricanes, injuries to your key players, the schedule giving you a raw deal every now and then, etc.
On your question of "Under what circumstances would you give him the boot"...I'd like to think that it's a really simplistic way of evaluating the team:
1. Are we drafting in the top 5 every season? If so, there's a serious issue going on in the deep recesses of the team's facilities.
2. Are we able to put ourselves into position to win a game, and if we are, what's the talent level of that opposing team we are in position to beat? If we're out of games by the start of the 2nd quarter, then there's some serious issues going on with the coaching and planning, etc.
3. Are we scoring points, or are we squeaking by on lucky bounces and blown coverages and getting points in garbage time?
That's not the whole list, but it's a glance at what I think are some of the things that indicate the HC is steady and reliable, or out of touch with the surrounding environment.
Gary Kubiak is far from the best coach in the league, so I will not sit here and act like he's a god or anything. In fact, I was right there with SH and IlliniJen before the Lions game and the Bengals game...seething with anger about the condition of our team. But I can say, genuinely, that I was wrong. I should have had more patience with Kubiak, and with Schaub.
The tendency of message board arguments is that people take up a position, and they hold it like they're defending the Alamo. So it shall be.
I just think there's a lot of anxiousness and nervous energy going on right now, and it's causing people to use the "His butt is gone if x, or y, or z happens" card. Maybe that's over-analyzing it, but I can't think of any other reason as to why the mob has turned so violently against the guy all of a sudden. The off-season moves, IMO, were spot-on with no outrageous contracts given to questionably-talented players (like Weaver or Wade). The draft is not being panned by the people who spend their lives studying college players. Our schedule is favorable. Life is good. Or so I thought...
It's not "caving" to be happy with 8-8, btw. Give me 8-8 over 2-14 any day.
I don't see this team regressing. The hurricane, and getting smacked around until the last half of the season, is what made this team hardened enough to take advantage of the breaks they caught with this year's schedule.
Ole Miss Texan
Hall of Fame
I'm not calling you out or anything, I just genuinely want to know. I keep hearing Kubiak must be accountable for Bush. My question is why? Do we know that Frank Bush was the #1 guy on the list? Do we know Kubiak fought for this guy over getting any other defensive coordinator? I know it was the general concensus that Bush was going to step forward, but what about the other coaches out there we looked at for the DC position?
I'm just saying it wouldn't be right to hold Bush over Kubiak's head if the Texans did their due diligence and talked to a lot of people. What if Kubiak/Smith/McNair wanted a couple other guys to come in but those guys didn't agree so they then went with Bush?
So let's see. Going to the Super Bowl one year and not making the play-offs (maybe!) the next is not as good as not making the play-offs one year and making them (maybe) the next.
Does anyone question the assumption that building slowly guarantees long term success?
CloakNNNdagger
Hall of Fame
They're hoping against all hopes for their high expectations to be met this year....................."7-9 or bust."
Vinny
shiny happy fan
lots of their fans are mad about it. Jauron hasn't been able to get any of his teams over the hump, so many in their fan base aren't happy.
GP
Go Texans!
Some good questions in that post, Ole Miss.
Specnatz
Hall of Fame
Generally speaking, I would think so. I just do not think that it always mannefest itself that way.
For examble: The Colts .. They had two seasons of 9-7 with a drop to 3-13 (Got Manning and new coach Mora) another 3-13 season ( Edgerrin James [trade of Faulk]). 13-3, 10-6, and then 6-10 (New Coach Dungy and Dwight Freeney) they have been winning ever since.
A lot may say it was a fast rise but not really if you consider that they were up and down a lot before the years I mentioned.
Over the last 24 hours a lot has been posted about what other teams have done. I would rather look at the we had and where we were in regards to players and cap status when Kubiak and then Smith took. Honestly, I think we may have had at the start of 2006 only 3 players on our roster that could start for another team (AJ D-Rob and Pitts). Of course I did not count punter or kicker but I guess I could say we had 4 with with Brown but not our punter. Hell I think the Detroit Lions of last year have twice that and they did not win a single game.
Like I said before it is not a black and white thing in regards to playoffs or bust for Gary Kubiak, they is some gray area. I just want to see the team improving and going in the right direction.
Texans_Chick
Utopian Dreamer
My view is here:
Gary Kubiak on the hotseat? No, I don't think so.
Sunshine or schleprock? I know some people are either-or. I also think most people's egocentric view of things is that they are the realist and everyone else who disagrees with them is a pessimist or an optimist. I made an attempt at being real, for better or worse.
Gary Kubiak on the hotseat? No, I don't think so.
Sunshine or schleprock? I know some people are either-or. I also think most people's egocentric view of things is that they are the realist and everyone else who disagrees with them is a pessimist or an optimist. I made an attempt at being real, for better or worse.
GP
Go Texans!
Good post, at least in terms of it matching up with what I think about this topic.
If we suited up the best Capers Texans team and played it against last year's Kubiak Texans team, and factored in all other variables...I think the Kubiak team runs circles around the Capers team.
If that doesn't help give some perspective to what we had and what we have, then I don't know what will. Kubiak's worse day is equal to Capers' best day, IMO. I know there's some issues with our access to talent, as an expansion team, but still...
Mr. White
Retired OLine Coach
Belichick comparisons aside, I guess I just look at the bottom line. While I'm sure there are plenty of reasons to think the team is better now, the record doesn't reflect it.
If there's a better indicator than wins and losses as to a head coach's effectiveness, I don't know what it is.
The fact of the matter is that Kubiak is still an unknown commodity as a head coach. I guess 8-8 seasons will do that for a guy. Looks like some of us think he should get a longer rope as a result. I'm just not one of 'em.
P
Polo
Guest
We're talking about a two year time span. Two consecutive seasons of 8-8...
Not a whole career...
Sure wins and loses are a great gauge if you have enough data to compile.
Folks said Belichick sucked too when he started off...Now he's considered a genius...
I do understand your position of "look at the bottom line", but I to me that is kind of lazy analysis...
Let me ask you this question...
Do you think that Kubiak still has his job because he's getting the benefit of the doubt even though his team didn't get any better last year
or
Do you think that he still has his job and the owners confidence because despite the record the organization feels like the team has taken strides forward?
Honestly, I feel like it's option two.
TheRealJoker
Hall of Fame
I would say its option two because of the extenuating circumstances with Hurricane Ike that played a large part in our rough start along with the fact he's proven that he can develop players on at least one side of the ball.
That's doesn't mean that he's not on the hot seat if he doesn't get us to the playoffs or a 10 win season next year. Improvement is nice, but if you aint improving in the W/L column then you aint really improving at all.
GP
Go Texans!
Good blog entry, Steph.
I haven't clicked on the Spanish Inquisition link (youtube video) but I have a good idea I know it is. LOL.
TEXANRED
Texan-American
My POV is that all of those that you listed are just excusses for failure.
Lets say my job was as a box cutter and my responsibilites included to not only cut the boxes but also to stack them neatly in the corner and I had to cut at least 11 boxes a day.
Unfortunately I was only able to cut 8 boxes a day. My blade was dull or it broke. I couldn't stack them neatly in the corner cus the trash was full. Maybe I didn't even have 11 boxes to cut.
But, at the end of the day I was unable to perform my job. I failed. Everything I listed was an excuse as to why I would not of been able to do my job.
Broken blade? Get a new one. Dull blade? Get a new one. Trash full? Empty it. I don't have enough boxes? Find more.
The excuse button is broken and out of order.
Ole Miss Texan
Hall of Fame
Except that there are 31 other "people" trying to cut boxes too.
GP
Go Texans!
Oh, I didn't know we were looking for perfection here. My bad.
I mean, seriously...no person bats 1.000..........do they?
You're living in a fantasy land if you view it in that sense of extremism. This t-e-a-m has progressed, and I think we can all agree upon that. Nothing I said, in my three points, makes excuses or allowances for things that CAN go wrong with any team at any time. And those broader points are better benchmarks than something as narrow as "You have to get x-amount of wins," or "You have to make the playoffs."
That sort of expectation is so beyond the normal reasoning skills of someone who has to employ a head coach for a professional sports organization. Once you find a guy who doesn't annually do those things I listed, you would be smart to hang onto him.
The opposite way of handling things is to do what Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder do, and you'll never see anything of real value come of it. Sure, it's a lot of noise and excitement with all the moves and deals they make...but what does it earn you to blow millions of dollars on players, ask fans to help pay for that, then take a freaking dart and hit the wall where all the owner's good ideas are located? Because I have to assert that lustful owners who try to buy an NFL championship every year could do a better job if they WOULD just throw a dart at the wall of great ideas.
No, I'm sorry. I can't accept this tripe that we have to stand, with pitchforks and torches at the ready, in case Gary Kubiak's team doesn't do x, y, or z. I once ragged on McNair AND Kubiak AND Schaub. I mean, I was the chief witch hunter around here. But after the way I saw the whole team sort of rally around each other and function like we had expected them to from the get-go, I realized that the first half of the season was a cruel joke that the league's scheduling office and mother nature dealt us. Hell, we might have challenged for a wild card bid if those two things were a little less obstructive.
This team is stable and poised for a run. The experts picked the Cardinals for like 4 straight years as the sleeper pick to win it all. Each year they got a little better. The columnists I read are saying those same things about us, which began last off-season.
I've come full circle on this deal. I was still a skeptic of the Kubiak and Schaub plan even after the wins vs. the Lions and the Bengals. I said "Let me see them do this to the rest of the teams on the schedule, then I'll believe."
Maybe I'm from Missouri after all? Or, I'm related to Thomas.
GP
Go Texans!
Exactly. I've prefaced my posts with a heavy dose of "The guy is not god, and he has some deficiencies to correct."
A collapse of firing proportions would be easily noticed. It's not like there would be any doubts. We've seen it before; we know its DNA.
I just don't see any of those same "markers" that I saw in the Capers' era. While I had looked forward to the seasons under Capers, since it was our new team and all, I also knew what those seasons held for us. That 2-14 season didn't sneak up on any of the more knowledgeable fans.
Second Honeymoon
Hall of Fame
please dont be so anti-saints biased spec. i know thats the cause du jour around here to bash Bush and the Saints but you do realize that they were arguably one of the top offenses in the NFL amid a slew of injuries. This offseason they have made it a priority to upgrade their defense, specifically the secondary.
don't act like the Saints suck so you can feel better about the Texans currently being a losing franchise. that aint the Saints fault. that is on mcnair, casserley, carr, and to some extent smithiak.
stop making excuses for Kubiak and accept the facts. dude has been a losing football coach over a 3 year span. he has done some good for the offense but his inability to attract quality defensive coaches makes me worry. is that wrong to worry and question his ability to attract good coaching specifically8 on the defensive side. There is no way in hell Bush deserved to be promoted. Period. But Kubiak had no one else to go to because he has serious inadequacies on hte defensive side.
spec, we all want the same thing. a winner. some of us just arent as patient as others and there is nothing wrong with that. we all know what patience got us with Capers and Carr. it got us half a decade of embarassing football and pathetic performances. sorry if i dont want to sit around and wait for another crew to have a decade to try and build a winner....
Last edited:
You will never earn your Sunshine Club patch with that kind of objective perspective.
Good take, though, and pretty much how I see it. I think Kubiak has at least two more years - minimum - unless there is a catastrophic meltdown with the team.
Specnatz
Hall of Fame
In the last two years what have the saints actually won? You say they have a great offense and bad D ... sounds just like another team you say you root for but love dogging. Payton has done some good for the offense but his defense sucks and it has gotten worse under his tenure. The same things you are giving a pass to the saints for your blasting the Texans for, so please tell me again which team it is you are for? The saints were mediocre when Payton took over and they won one year and went back down and a lot of folks are saying Payton is this great coach and is beyond reproach. Sorry but only one winning season followed by two losing ones does not make a great coach.
I never once mentioned Bush, not once. He is not worth talking about and neither is the back-up QB for the giants. I was referring to their record. Where did I say sit around for a decade? I said we have to see improvement and that I am not a black&white guy who says playoffs or bust.
Second Honeymoon
Hall of Fame
making the NFC championship game is far more than your boy Kubiak has ever done...so please taste some reality. as for your claim that I am not a Texans fan, I have four endzone field level seats + PSL licenses that speak otherwise. My name is etched in glass at the stadium in thanks for helping build Reliant and you act like you are a better fan than me because you are a homer and I am just honest? give me a break. So while you are watching the game at your boyfriends house or at the local sports bar, I will be at the game, truly supporting my Texans both vocally, financially, and emotionally. Does that make me a better or more true fan than you? No...but it is proof positive of my fandom and my love for my team and of that there is no question. I just don't reward failure and champion losing football with praise and blind loyalty like you. we are different fans. you are a casual fan, while I am a hardcore fan. diffrent strokes for diffrent folks.
I never said the Saints were great or that Payton was a great coach. I just stated that you were poo-pooing what the Saints have done and that just shows how you struggle with being objective. Bottom line, the Saints have been more successful as a team. Not only have they made the playoffs but they also won a playoff game....until we can even approach such feats its really dishonest and biased for you to badmouth the Saints while acting like the Texans are so damn successful.
and for the record, i am not 'dogging' the Texans. i am just calling a spade a spade and calling it like i sees it. I am also not alone in my thoughts. In fact, most of the more knowledgeable and objective fans share my opinion that Kubiak needs to start winning or he will be on the 'hot seat'. What is so wrong with wanting a winner and not pining for a new contract for a losing head coach...which is what you are doing.
I love my Texans and I love my NFL. I just can't stand losers and I definitely can't stand people who make excuse after excuse for said losers. Haven't we learned anything from the Texans past? it's quite obvious that some of us have learned nothing.
lets have the Texans win one meaningful game before we start throwing stones at other franchises...just one. please.
So, are you saying Kubiak was the wrong guy, that we should have hired a coach more like Sean Payton, gone to the AFC championship game, then have two loosing seasons, and you would be happier with that, than with what we've done so far?
I'm just not that way.
Specnatz
Hall of Fame
I will not go with a personal attack like you do but do you freaking read what I wrote and what I expect from Kubiak and the team?
As far as making excuses for losers you have made plenty for vy but since he went to UT that is different I suppose. As far as learning, what is wrong with wanting to do it like the Steelers and have consistancy and not have knee jerk reactions. As long as the team is improving (which I have stated over and over but you have failed to read that) and not regressing why change the HC. The Steelers do not change HC every 3 or 4 years because they realize steady improvement is better than being a one year wonder like I see the saints as.
Why is it dishonest or biassed of me to offer up my opinion of how I see the saints but you can offer up what ever freakin opinion you have about the Texans and it should be etched in stone? I said they won in 2006 but have not done crap since then. That is fact not opinion by the way ( http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nor/ ) as seen here.
lets have the Texans win one meaningful game before we start throwing stones at other franchises...just one. please. HUGH? so because the Texans have not had a winning season I am not entitled to an opinion about any other team?
Seriously SH get some help.
Second Honeymoon
Hall of Fame
i would have rather had an AFC championship game (2 playoff wins), and two losing seasons of 7-9 than 7-9, 8-8, 8-8. like that is something to debate.
of course i would rather go to the playoffs and win than not go and never win. so you don't think losing one more game a year would be worth one year where you win around 14 games and are one quarter away from the super bowl? cmon thunder. your smarter than that.
Put me down for preferring an AFC Championship game followed by two losing seasons over a losing season followed by two more non-winning seasons.
I'll take success followed by disappointment over mediocrity spun as great success any time.
Second Honeymoon
Hall of Fame
I will not go with a personal attack like you do but do you freaking read what I wrote and what I expect from Kubiak and the team?
As far as making excuses for losers you have made plenty for vy but since he went to UT that is different I suppose. As far as learning, what is wrong with wanting to do it like the Steelers and have consistancy and not have knee jerk reactions. As long as the team is improving (which I have stated over and over but you have failed to read that) and not regressing why change the HC. The Steelers do not change HC every 3 or 4 years because they realize steady improvement is better than being a one year wonder like I see the saints as.
Why is it dishonest or biassed of me to offer up my opinion of how I see the saints but you can offer up what ever freakin opinion you have about the Texans and it should be etched in stone? I said they won in 2006 but have not done crap since then. That is fact not opinion by the way ( http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nor/ ) as seen here.
lets have the Texans win one meaningful game before we start throwing stones at other franchises...just one. please. HUGH? so because the Texans have not had a winning season I am not entitled to an opinion about any other team?
Seriously SH get some help.
i have been very critical of VY and dude deserves it. he has really screwed the pooch as a Titan.
how is 7-9, 8-8, then 8-8 improving. it is maintaining but hardly improving. yes, the offense has greatly improved but the defense has gotten worse and he still failed to get a proven DC in the position.
the saints won in 2006 and were one game from Super Bowl and havent won crap since. the texans have never won crap. period. Advantage Saints and that isn't open for debate. it's fact. I will say that both teams look to have equal hopes in 2009 but based on history, any non-biased person would say the Saints have had more success than a team that has never had a winning season and never won a meaningful game...in fact, they get blown out in most meaningful games with possible playoff implications (ravens and browns blow outs come to mind)
anywho, may the Texans kick some ass this year and may we end all this debate by dominating in 2009 and finally fielding a balanced, well run, and winning team. I think all of us fans deserve it. You. Me. All of us. We have been through enough already.
Last edited:
Second Honeymoon
Hall of Fame
of course you would Runner. any sane individual would. those Luv Ya Blue Oilers only got to the AFC Championship game, but I guess our Texans have done better for their fans than old school Oilers did when you use that kinda logic.
Last edited:
TheRealJoker
Hall of Fame
I seem to recall you saying you would have rather taken VY over Mario knowing what we know today because you feel he would've been a success in Houston. That there thingy is called making an excuse for a loser.
Specnatz
Hall of Fame
The saints have two (2000, 2006) playoff wins in their entire time in the league. Yeah put me down for that is the way I want my team modeled after.
Last edited:
The saints have two (2000, 2006) playoff wins in their entire time in the league. Yeah put me down for that is the way I want my team modeled after.
That wasn't the question, so your sarcasm is a little lame.
I believe my answer was complete in that it contained a rephrasing of the question. Nowhere does it reference the Saints or modeling the Texans after anyone. It does indicate a preference for real success over hyped up mediocrity.
Who would be, if not Kubiak? Gary Kubiak hired Frank Bush, just as he hired Richard Smith previously. These are Kubiak's choices. They have not been foisted upon him. Shouldn't people who make decisions ultimately be accountable for their decisions?
I want one of the best box cutters cutting boxes for me. And if the guy I have isn't getting the boxes cut, I need to find a box cutter who can. It's really that simple.
From TexansChick's blog (link above):
No one questions whether Gary Kubiak wants to win. Or that Bob McNair not only wants the team to win, but wants a man like Gary Kubiak to lead them. The question remains, is Gary Kubiak capable of turning the Houston Texans into a winner? Because no matter how much he's loved and loves back, or how well he speaks...Gary Kubiak has to win to keep his job.
There are differing opinions on whether Kubiak can win with the Texans. But, everyone is pretty much in agreement that they want Gary Kubiak to win with the Texans. That much should be understood. And I don't think Kubiak's biggest supporters believe Kubiak should keep his job because he's a great guy and a good speaker. They see Kubiak as the man to take the Texans to the Promised Land.
I'm certain Bob McNair feels the same way. As much as he admires Kubiak, he won't keep him on as head coach just for the sake of stability. McNair has to believe in Kubiak. As long as he does, Kubiak is the Texans head coach.
But it's the assumption that McNair will continue to believe (a total collapse withstanding), is what baffles me. I see McNair has somewhat misjudged. Just because he doesn't act like a spoiled brat (Daniel Snyder) or a micromanager (Jerry Jones) doesn't mean that Bob isn't growing a little impatient. I doubt he foresaw 7 years without a winning season after that opening win versus the Cowboys. He has to be tired of losing. Until his team is in the playoffs, his pride and joy will be labeled a loser. And if the Texans miss the playoffs once again this season, McNair will have to ask himself this question:
"If Gary Kubiak can't win in 2009, why do I believe he will win in 2010?"
Ole Miss Texan
Hall of Fame
I was more or less wondering about the process in which Frank Bush got hired. It would be one thing if Kubiak came out and said how he didn't want to interview ANY other person for the job and wouldn't even listen, that Bush was his guy, period the end. It would be another thing if they legitimately brought in a few DC candidates, especially if Kubiak & Co. liked those guys and offered them the job. If those guys didn't want it and then they regressed to their fall back plan with Frank Bush, how can you blame Kubiak?
I havn't read anywhere that really discusses that process. I don't think too much would be public so it's one of those "we'll never know" sorta deals.
A NFL head coach's job requirements are multifaceted. One extremely important aspect is building a good staff. If Kubiak can't bring in good defensive coaches to complement his offensive staff, that's a failure on his part.
Gary Kubiak is the head coach of the Houston Texans. Not the head coach of the Houston Texan's offense. He's already received one defensive do-over. The buck has to stop at Gary Kubiak.
Second Honeymoon
Hall of Fame
qft
Ole Miss Texan
Hall of Fame
I partially agree, don't get me wrong. But there's other circumstances too. What if this candidate got a better offer from a defense like the Eagles or Giants, just for example and McNair didn't want to pony up. Isn't Rick Smith involved in some of those decisions or is the GM more responsible for the players?
I just think there's so much to it that I'm not comfortable talking in absolutes about things I don't know.
Frankly, I think you are just making up scenarios that don't exist nor have ever been suggested. I'm sure that there is a number that McNair wouldn't meet on an assistant coach. I doubt he would go as high as Gary Kubiak's $2 million salary, for instance. But has there ever been a documented example of McNair not willing to spend money when asked? There's no logical reason to consider that a possibility.
Nor that Rick Smith would veto a candidate for the defensive coordinator position. Or that Rick Smith has the power to do so. I realize that you are uncomfortable with absolutes. Just trying to understand why you're so willing to fling wildass hypotheticals?
IlliniJen
Hall of Fame
Nah, I think most people here on this thread have been objective and put forth some good information and ideas. This has been a valuable discussion from both sides.
Ole Miss Texan
Hall of Fame
I was just giving some hypothetical suggestions from two opposite ends of the spectrum soley to point out that we really don't know the specifics of Bush's hire. Unless anyone is aware of some articles written, I havn't read them.
The McNair example is just one of those 'what ifs'. I've never been one to say McNair has been cheap or didn't want to pay (free agents for example). I'm just throwing that out there. I think there is a logical reason to consider it a possibility like you said earlier, the candidate could want the same as Kubiak's salary. Unlikely yes, of course, but not impossible.
I don't know what you mean about Rick Smith vetoing a candidate... and he is probably just one cog to the wheel.
The wildass hypotheticals are just two examples using people at the top of the organization that has some say in the things that go on with the organization. We could come up with hundreds scenarios... I'm not trying to predict exactly what happened, i'm strictly just pointing out that there are other scenarios that could have happened besides the only one being talked about: This was Kubiak's hire so he should get canned because of it, if it fails.
I'm not sitting here trying to say Kubiak deserves a free pass or he shouldn't get any blame if Bush fails. I'm more or less just playing devil's advocate and saying there's a lot of pieces to the puzzle. Of course he bears more responsibility than just about anybody because he IS the head coach. My uncomfortableness is the same feeling when someone blames the QB for an interception because he saw it on the box score. It could have been a perfectly thrown ball but the WR tipped it up causing an INT. I'm just saying I didn't watch that game so It's hard for me to go ahead and blame the QB. eh!?
