Fact: Fisher isn't a .500 coach. Fisher has gone to a Super Bowl. Fisher has gone to the playoffs.
Fact: Your hatred of VY consumes you. Your counterpoint to every argument about anything football-related is 'VY sucks'. Very progressive and intelligent.
Fact: Cowher has been to 2 Super Bowls and kept the Steelers competitive even amidst total garbage at QB. Once he got a decent QB, he won.
Fact: Any time someone gives you an argument against Kubiak, you just deflect the facts and go for hyperbole and utter BS. If you have an argument in favor of Kubiak, present it. Talking about things that have nothing to do with Kubiak or trying to compare proven winning coaches to Kubiak, just shows that you have nothing to say except BS.
Fact: If you spent more time being objective about your own team and less team trying to demean people from other team's, maybe you wouldn't have such a narrow view of your own team.
Once again, how is a .500 record worth of a 3 year extension? That's right. It's not.
So go ahead and make a very fresh joke about VY and sausage or about how the Cowboys suck and hurt your peepee.
cmon Bill, you are better than that. Just because I don't want my team rewarding mediocrity, isn't a reason to try and change the subject because you have nothing to stand on.
Bottom line is that the Texans have embraced a coach who gave them a .500 record.
The contract extension doesn't have anything to do with whether it was earned or not. That would be a horrible way to do business. Instead, it's about what is best for the Texans. Bob McNair may fully believe that Kubiak underperformed in 2008 and/or 2009. But, perhaps he looked at the team, his options if he lets Kubiak go, the growth and direction of the team, the supporting staff including the GM, and decided that retaining Kubiak with an extension is the thing most likely to lead this team to success the next couple years.
Regarding the Fisher comparison: It is my belief that Gary Kubiak will have taken his team to at least one superbowl, will have a better than .500 record, and have gone to the playoff multiple times if he coaches the Texans for 15 years.
Let's see if you can honestly answer direct questions. Here are a few:
Who was the better coach
in 2009 only?:
Fisher or Kubiak
Sparano or Kubiak
Tomlin or Kubiak
M.Smith or Kubiak
Del Rio or Kubiak
Coughlin or Kubiak
Fox or Kubiak
Since everything comes down to W/L records, it would have to be Kubiak in almost every case. I'll acknowledge that Coughlin was better in '07, but while Kubiak hired Bush to fix his defense, Coughlin hired Sheridan to destroy his. Tomlin was cleary better in '08. However, this season his team laid eggs against KC, Oakland, and Cleveland with the division/playoffs on the line. Jeff Fisher took a 13 win team (whom he coached really well in '08) to 7-9, i think.
See, I believe talent, scheduling, luck, veteran leadership all play a big part in the success/failure of a team. However, when these things are mentioned to support Kubiak in the face of his record, you scoff. You argue that Wins and playoffs are the only measuring stick. Then, you hold up guys like Mike Smith and Tony Sparano as examples of superior coaching. Okay. Fine. Perhaps they were in '08. But, what about now? And remember, circumstances like the talent one has to work with can't be a factor, according to you.
By the way, don't forget how long it took Fisher to get his teams to the playoffs. Again, circumstances are irrelevant, remember?
How does Tomlin take a championship team and in one season turn them into a mediocre squad that loses 3 games to the worst franchises in the NFL? Either he is a bad coach now or there are other factors that mitigate the season he had.
