Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Kubiak wants immediate improvement

steelbtexan said:
Call it now

Would you rather have last yrs schedule or this yrs schedule?
Click to expand...

This years. Skins, I think they'll be a wild-card, & whether you get a though game or a light game, will just depend on which team shows up.

The Giants ain't got nothing.

Philly, Denver... whatever.

Colts, San Diegoe, Jets, Baltimore, Tennessee

I want to see the Texans play those teams. We'll see what we've really got, should put one side of the debate or the other to rest, and we can move on.
 
DexmanC said:
Don't do this (:pop:) to those guys.

This schedule makes me think the Texans are gonna get (:kitten:)
all season long. I truly hope I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

So you don't expect them to do well.

You hope they do.

Because of their schedule, and your opinion of the coach, you expect what? 7 wins? 8?

You hope, because they are your favorite team, that they win 10-12 games.
 
thunderkyss said:
This years. Skins, I think they'll be a wild-card, & whether you get a though game or a light game, will just depend on which team shows up.

The Giants ain't got nothing.

Philly, Denver... whatever.

Colts, San Diegoe, Jets, Baltimore, Tennessee

I want to see the Texans play those teams. We'll see what we've really got, should put one side of the debate or the other to rest, and we can move on.
Click to expand...

You forgot the Cowboys...they are better than Tennessee, I'm not as worried about Tennessee as I am about Dallas.
 
Dwade said:
Well if we beat Indy week 1 that would ease my mind a lot. Until then I'm not gonna get my hopes up too much.
Click to expand...

**** a bunch of hopes and dreams! The preseason is all about 19-0!!!
 
steelbtexan said:
Call it now

Would you rather have last yrs schedule or this yrs schedule?
Click to expand...

I think this year's schedule isn't going to be as hard as people are making it out.

Comparing our NFC opponents, the NFC West had a couple of good teams and a couple of bad teams. The NFC East has one really good team, and three teams that are big question marks. We went 3-1 against the NFC West and we could easily do the same thing against the NFC East. I think this is where most people think the hardest games are but I don't think it's going to be nearly that bad. I don't care that we've never beaten these teams before. The only other times we've played them, Carr was the QB.

Our AFC opponents, last year we had the AFC East and this year we've got the AFC West. I consider the East tougher than the West. We went 3-1 against the East and we should do that well against the West.

Our other two teams last year were the Bengals and the Raiders and we went 2-0 against those guys. This year, we're getting the Jets and the Ravens and I think we can beat both of these teams but those are going to be two hard games.

That leaves our division. And I don't expect to go 1-5 in our division again. I expect us to go at least 3-3 in the division.

I think the two schedules are very similar. This year's schedule is a little harder in some ways but I expect the Jags to be worse this year than last. So, for me, it's a wash.
 
Dwade said:
You forgot the Cowboys...they are better than Tennessee, I'm not as worried about Tennessee as I am about Dallas.
Click to expand...

I think we are in that league... Jet's, Baltimore, Tennessee. I want to see how we do against them.

Indy & San Diego are the best in our conference (I think) I want to see how we play them.

I'm really not feeling the Cowboys, it's going to be fun game to watch in a novelty kind of way. I don't think how we stack up against them means much in the big picture kind of way.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
I think this year's schedule isn't going to be as hard as people are making it out.

Comparing our NFC opponents, the NFC West had a couple of good teams and a couple of bad teams. The NFC East has one really good team, and three teams that are big question marks. We went 3-1 against the NFC West and we could easily do the same thing against the NFC East. I think this is where most people think the hardest games are but I don't think it's going to be nearly that bad. I don't care that we've never beaten these teams before. The only other times we've played them, Carr was the QB.

Our AFC opponents, last year we had the AFC East and this year we've got the AFC West. I consider the East tougher than the West. We went 3-1 against the East and we should do that well against the West.

Our other two teams last year were the Bengals and the Raiders and we went 2-0 against those guys. This year, we're getting the Jets and the Ravens and I think we can beat both of these teams but those are going to be two hard games.

That leaves our division. And I don't expect to go 1-5 in our division again. I expect us to go at least 3-3 in the division.

I think the two schedules are very similar. This year's schedule is a little harder in some ways but I expect the Jags to be worse this year than last. So, for me, it's a wash.
Click to expand...

NFC West is the worst division in the league, NFC East is a tough division.
AFC West is easier than AFC East.
The key is winning those division games...

@thunder - the Cowboy's game matters in getting that extra win, but we won't play them again unless we both make the Super Bowl, so I agree.
 
Dwade said:
NFC West is the worst division in the league, NFC East is a tough division.
AFC West is easier than AFC East.
The key is winning those division games...

@thunder - the Cowboy's game matters in getting that extra win, but we won't play them again unless we both make the Super Bowl, so I agree.
Click to expand...

NFC East WAS a tough division. I think they're paper tigers now.

The Giants aren't the team they were a few years ago. Their defense isn't as stout and Manning is starting to revert to his pick happy form. Their running game isn't as good as it used to be, either.

The Eagles don't have Westbrook or McNabb, anymore. And although I like Kolb, I think he's going to struggle a bit. I don't think McCoy takes Westbrook's place. And the Eagle D isn't the fearsome thing it was in decades past.

The Redskins had a good D last year but they're revamping it to go to the 3-4. I think all of their running backs have seen better years and I don't think they've got the offensive weapons to keep pace.

The Redskins and Cowboys defenses gave up fewer yards than ours did last year but only the Cowboys D gave up fewer points. The Giants D gave up 26 points per game.

A couple of years ago, this division was as strong as any other division in football but that was then. The Cowboys are the cream of this crop and I think that even they are beatable.
 
Dwade said:
NFC West is the worst division in the league, NFC East is a tough division.
AFC West is easier than AFC East.
The key is winning those division games...
Click to expand...

This isn't news, this is talking heads stuff.

I agree with TPN, the NFC East ain't all that. The Cowboys, and fluff.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
The Giants aren't the team they were a few years ago. Their defense isn't as stout and Manning is starting to revert to his pick happy form. Their running game isn't as good as it used to be, either.
Click to expand...

Probably has something to do with the loss of Plaxico and pressure from them not running the ball as well.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
NFC East WAS a tough division. I think they're paper tigers now.

The Giants aren't the team they were a few years ago. Their defense isn't as stout and Manning is starting to revert to his pick happy form. Their running game isn't as good as it used to be, either.

The Eagles don't have Westbrook or McNabb, anymore. And although I like Kolb, I think he's going to struggle a bit. I don't think McCoy takes Westbrook's place. And the Eagle D isn't the fearsome thing it was in decades past.

The Redskins had a good D last year but they're revamping it to go to the 3-4. I think all of their running backs have seen better years and I don't think they've got the offensive weapons to keep pace.

The Redskins and Cowboys defenses gave up fewer yards than ours did last year but only the Cowboys D gave up fewer points. The Giants D gave up 26 points per game.

A couple of years ago, this division was as strong as any other division in football but that was then. The Cowboys are the cream of this crop and I think that even they are beatable.
Click to expand...

Giants are a weird team to figure out. They started 5-0 last year, finished 8-8, they remind me of Denver. Very inconsistent.

Washington is gonna be better, they had a top 10 defense last year and McNabb might spark their offense. I say they go 7-9, maybe 8-8.

Cowboys are gonna be good, their defense is crazy. Biggest weakness is O-line so we need Mario to step up that game
 
thunderkyss said:
This years. Skins, I think they'll be a wild-card, & whether you get a though game or a light game, will just depend on which team shows up.

The Giants ain't got nothing.

Philly, Denver... whatever.

Colts, San Diegoe, Jets, Baltimore, Tennessee

I want to see the Texans play those teams. We'll see what we've really got, should put one side of the debate or the other to rest, and we can move on.
Click to expand...

Fair enough

History says the Redskins in D.C, and the Eagles in Philly aren't going to be easy.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
NFC East WAS a tough division. I think they're paper tigers now.

The Giants aren't the team they were a few years ago. Their defense isn't as stout and Manning is starting to revert to his pick happy form. Their running game isn't as good as it used to be, either.

The Eagles don't have Westbrook or McNabb, anymore. And although I like Kolb, I think he's going to struggle a bit. I don't think McCoy takes Westbrook's place. And the Eagle D isn't the fearsome thing it was in decades past.

The Redskins had a good D last year but they're revamping it to go to the 3-4. I think all of their running backs have seen better years and I don't think they've got the offensive weapons to keep pace.

The Redskins and Cowboys defenses gave up fewer yards than ours did last year but only the Cowboys D gave up fewer points. The Giants D gave up 26 points per game.

A couple of years ago, this division was as strong as any other division in football but that was then. The Cowboys are the cream of this crop and I think that even they are beatable.
Click to expand...

I like your way of thinking.
 
When it comes to the NFC East, Chargers, Jets, Ravens, Jags, Titans,
and Colts, the issue is NOT "whether they can be beaten." The issue
is "can the TEXANS beat them."

ALL of the teams in the NFC East pose the same matchup problems for this team.
Beating them will amount to the Texans having to grow up, as they are the types of
teams that historical kick the Texans ass something-embarrassing. If this team is
bound for postseason, look for NO WORSE than a 7-5 record out of the gate.

Time this team learns how to win in the AFC South. That will solve a lot
of their problems.
 
On any given Sunday, any team can beat any other team.

I think at this point, it will come down to mental toughness and desire. We have very good players that have the athletic ability. But do they have the mentality to keep it up for an entire game - not a half, not 3 quarters, but the entire 60 minutes? Do they go into any game thinking they can win or are they going into games hoping they can squeek one out?

It was posted all last year that we were a "young" team. Well this year we need to grow up to be able to play with the big boys.

If they do, we win.
 
Grams said:
On any given Sunday, any team can beat any other team.

I think at this point, it will come down to mental toughness and desire. We have very good players that have the athletic ability. But do they have the mentality to keep it up for an entire game - not a half, not 3 quarters, but the entire 60 minutes? Do they go into any game thinking they can win or are they going into games hoping they can squeek one out?

It was posted all last year that we were a "young" team. Well this year we need to grow up to be able to play with the big boys.

If they do, we win.
Click to expand...

Agreed

Last yr not playing for 4 qtrs was my biggest gripe with Kubes coaching. More than the x's and o's of coaching.

The ability to get a team to play consistently hard for 4 qtrs is what makes a great coach. IMHO
 
thunderkyss said:
So you don't expect them to do well.

You hope they do.

Because of their schedule, and your opinion of the coach, you expect what? 7 wins? 8?

You hope, because they are your favorite team, that they win 10-12 games.
Click to expand...

Of course I EXPECT them to do well.

I just won't PREDICT they will.

Expect =/= Predict

Google the terms.
 
DexmanC said:
When it comes to the NFC East, Chargers, Jets, Ravens, Jags, Titans,
and Colts, the issue is NOT "whether they can be beaten." The issue
is "can the TEXANS beat them."

ALL of the teams in the NFC East pose the same matchup problems for this team.
Beating them will amount to the Texans having to grow up, as they are the types of
teams that historical kick the Texans ass something-embarrassing. If this team is
bound for postseason, look for NO WORSE than a 7-5 record out of the gate.

Time this team learns how to win in the AFC South. That will solve a lot
of their problems.
Click to expand...

Do you think you are the only one privy to this way of thinking?
 
Grams said:
I think at this point, it will come down to mental toughness and desire. We have very good players that have the athletic ability. But do they have the mentality to keep it up for an entire game - not a half, not 3 quarters, but the entire 60 minutes? Do they go into any game thinking they can win or are they going into games hoping they can squeek one out?

It was posted all last year that we were a "young" team. Well this year we need to grow up to be able to play with the big boys.

If they do, we win.
Click to expand...

Have you ever played a team sport? I'm not asking to be mean or anything. But let's say you're playing softball, you get to first base. The guy who normally bats behind you just pop-flied out. The next person comes up to bat, and you know that person strikes out more than not. So you're on first base. How ready are you to get a good leap off first, and make a strong run towards second?

Let's say he tip-fouls the first 5 pitches. After you've jumped and ran, then came back; jumped and ran, then came back; jumped and ran, then came back, etc.. Are you 100% ready on that 6th pitch?

That's where I think we need to work on our mentality. Each player needs to believe that their teammate is going to do his job at 110% on the next play. Not just your Cushings, or Demecos, or Pollards. But when Bulman comes on the field, we can't have Diles thinking, "ah hell" know what I mean?

When Steve fumbles the ball, we don't need Sean Cody thinking, "I knew it." We don't need Myers wondering, "Why in the hell are we calling that play with Mr. Fumblitus out here?"

When the offense turns the ball over, they need to know the defense is going to prevent the other team from scoring.

When the defense forces a 3 & out or force a turn-over, they need to know the offense is going to put 7 on the board.

I don't think it's simply needing to toughen up their mentality, I think they need to trust each other to do their job, so that each individual can do their job as best they can on every single play.
 
DexmanC said:
Of course I EXPECT them to do well.

I just won't PREDICT they will.

Expect =/= Predict

Google the terms.
Click to expand...

If I expect it to rain tomorrow, I cut my grass today. I'll check my windshield wipers today, I'll check the tread on my tires. When I leave the house in the morning, I'll have my raincoat, and an umbrella with me.

If I expect my team to do poorly in the upcoming season, I'll continue to remind everyone of the multitude of reasons that could & most probably should happen.

again, and again, and again... I might even put some stat, designed to kill optimism, in my signature.
 
thunderkyss said:
If I expect it to rain tomorrow, I cut my grass today. I'll check my windshield wipers today, I'll check the tread on my tires. When I leave the house in the morning, I'll have my raincoat, and an umbrella with me.

If I expect my team to do poorly in the upcoming season, I'll continue to remind everyone of the multitude of reasons that could & most probably should happen.

again, and again, and again... I might even put some stat, designed to kill optimism, in my signature.
Click to expand...

If I expect it to rain tomorrow, I make sure to have my umbrella in my car
when I leave the house. I'm prepared for minor occurrences so my tires
and wipers are part of my routine maintenance schedule. Should rain not
come, to meet my expectation, no disappointment in that, because I
was prepared for the event, should it be contrary to my objectives for
the day.

If I expect my team to do well, I give them all the players they ask for.
I let my head coach select his team of coaches and players, and give
him FIVE FREAKING YEARS to let his selections get to their primes.

I, having given my head coach all he needed to meet my expectation,
know there should be no surprise when he's given a tour of the back door should
he fail this season.

I expect this coach to lead this team to the playoffs this season. It's up
to HIM to meet MY expectation.

Expectations =/= Predictions

By the way...
RIP EXCUSES (2006-2009)
The First Twelve Games (Where Playoff Teams Are Made):
2007: (5-7) | 2008: (5-7) | 2009: (5-7) | 2010: The Year of Change?
Click to expand...
An air conditioning unit has a thermometer, not to discourage
you from using AC. It has a thermometer to let you know when you've used ENOUGH of it.

If THESE stats come up good this season, we can use more of Kubiak. If THESE stats come up bad,
time to SHUT IT OFF. This is my gauge for the 2012 season. Do the Texans give THEMSELVES
a REAL SHOT at postseason, or do they turn it on when the pressure is off?
 
DexmanC said:
Of course I EXPECT them to do well.

I just won't PREDICT they will.

Expect =/= Predict

Google the terms.
Click to expand...

ex·pect   /ɪkˈspɛkt/ Show Spelled[ik-spekt] Show IPA
–verb (used with object)
1. to look forward to; regard as likely to happen; anticipate the occurrence or the coming of: I expect to read it. I expect him later. She expects that they will come.
2. to look for with reason or justification: We expect obedience.
3. Informal . to suppose or surmise; guess: I expect that you are tired from the trip.
4. to anticipate the birth of (one's child): Paul and Sylvia expect their second very soon.
Click to expand...

This is the crux of it. To expect something is to think that it's likely to happen. And like you said, you don't predict it happening which implies strongly that you don't think it's likely to happen. And if you don't think it's likely to happen, then you don't expect it.

When you use the word expect, that's what I expect you to mean.

But from your response about googling the meaning of the word, I think you're using the word in the SECOND meaning there. You're looking forward to it with reason and justification but you don't think it's likely to happen. Right? When you said "expect", that wasn't the definition that came to my mind. What came to my mind was the FIRST definitin.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
This is the crux of it. To expect something is to think that it's likely to happen. And like you said, you don't predict it happening which implies strongly that you don't think it's likely to happen. And if you don't think it's likely to happen, then you don't expect it.

When you use the word expect, that's what I expect you to mean.

But from your response about googling the meaning of the word, I think you're using the word in the SECOND meaning there. You're looking forward to it with reason and justification but you don't think it's likely to happen. Right? When you said "expect", that wasn't the definition that came to my mind. What came to my mind was the FIRST definitin.
Click to expand...

Predicting it would mean that I believe it DEFINITELY WILL happen.
That's a little too strong. I believe it's LIKELY they make post season,
because Bob Mcnair has taken action this offseason which makes me
think he's of the same opinion I am.

So, yes. I expect the Texans to make good on the goals of this season.
I just will not predict the outcome. I will predict Kubiak is gone if they turn
in another season like last year. Mcnair has just been too active for me to
believe otherwise.

I have faith in the will and talent of the team, but hardly any at all in Kubiak.
Kubiak will either have to evolve as a coach, or the team will have to win in
spite of HIS lack of growth as a HEAD COACH.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
This is the crux of it. To expect something is to think that it's likely to happen. And like you said, you don't predict it happening which implies strongly that you don't think it's likely to happen. And if you don't think it's likely to happen, then you don't expect it.

When you use the word expect, that's what I expect you to mean.

But from your response about googling the meaning of the word, I think you're using the word in the SECOND meaning there. You're looking forward to it with reason and justification but you don't think it's likely to happen. Right? When you said "expect", that wasn't the definition that came to my mind. What came to my mind was the FIRST definitin.
Click to expand...

Definition TWO is definitely the context in which I'm using the word "expect."
You're exactly right. My use of the term is correctly applied. "You don't believe
it's likely to happen" is a meaning YOU are applying to it. I'm not saying THAT part.
Leave DEFINITION TWO as it's written, and you have the context of my use of
the word "expect."
ex·pect   /ɪkˈspɛkt/ Show Spelled[ik-spekt] Show IPA
–verb (used with object)
1. to look forward to; regard as likely to happen; anticipate the occurrence or the coming of: I expect to read it. I expect him later. She expects that they will come.
2. to look for with reason or justification: We expect obedience.
3. Informal . to suppose or surmise; guess: I expect that you are tired from the trip.
4. to anticipate the birth of (one's child): Paul and Sylvia expect their second very soon.
Click to expand...
 
DexmanC said:
Predicting it would mean that I believe it DEFINITELY WILL happen.
That's a little too strong. I believe it's LIKELY they make post season,
because Bob Mcnair has taken action this offseason which makes me
think he's of the same opinion I am.

So, yes. I expect the Texans to make good on the goals of this season.
I just will not predict the outcome. I will predict Kubiak is gone if they turn
in another season like last year. Mcnair has just been too active for me to
believe otherwise.

I have faith in the will and talent of the team, but hardly any at all in Kubiak.
Kubiak will either have to evolve as a coach, or the team will have to win in
spite of HIS lack of growth as a HEAD COACH.
Click to expand...

I'm cool with that.
 
DexmanC said:
If I expect my team to do well, I give them all the players they ask for.
I let my head coach select his team of coaches and players, and give
him FIVE FREAKING YEARS to let his selections get to their primes.

I, having given my head coach all he needed to meet my expectation,
know there should be no surprise when he's given a tour of the back door should
he fail this season.
Click to expand...

So by your standards, Kubiak has at least through the 2011 season, since McNair didn't give Kubiak everything he wanted. Most people easily point out David Carr, so that's the only one I'll take credit for here. 2010 will be Kubiak's 4th season with "his" players.

But I'll also go out on a limb, and say Chester Pitts and Dunta Robinson were also forced on Kubiak. I honestly believe Andre Johnson & DD were part of the deal, but DD worked his way out, and Andre... well that's a no brainer.
 
DexmanC said:
So, yes. I expect the Texans to make good on the goals of this season.
I just will not predict the outcome. I will predict Kubiak is gone if they turn
in another season like last year.
Click to expand...

So, in your opinion, Kubiak will be back in 2011?

Yes or no?
 
thunderkyss said:
So, in your opinion, Kubiak will be back in 2011?

Yes or no?
Click to expand...

Nah. Sean Payton rebuilt his roster, made the playoffs within 2 years.

Five is enough with Kubiak. Bob has given Kubiak WAY MORE than
ANY coach could EVER expect.

Sometimes, I think you're just trying to get my goat. I ain't gone lie.
Some of your replies to me, piss me the hell off.
LOL.
 
DexmanC said:
Nah. Sean Payton rebuilt his roster, made the playoffs within 2 years.

Five is enough with Kubiak. Bob has given Kubiak WAY MORE than
ANY coach could EVER expect.

Sometimes, I think you're just trying to get my goat. I ain't gone lie.
Some of your replies to me, piss me the hell off.
LOL.
Click to expand...

Payton took a team that already had playoff talent but had been under performing (primarily because Aaron Brooks was so inconsistent) and got it to the playoffs in his first year.

A lot of those players on that team were already there. On the offense, 8 of the 14 starters were already with the team and 3 were drafted that year. The 3 starters that were brought in were Drew Brees, TE Mark Campbel who started 10 games, Jeff Faine who they got to replace LeCharles Bentley (who was considered a monster at the time).

And on the defense, 6 of the 13 starters were already on the team and 1 was picked up in the draft that year. (There are more than 11 starters because of changes during the season.) They did a great job on this side totally replacing their LB corp and bringing in DT Hollis Thomas.

He DID add a lot of quality starters. I'll give him that. Payton did a masterful job in bringing in some great players and giving that team what it needed. But he was starting with a lot more quality in place than Kubiak was: Deuce McAllister, Will Smith, Charles Grant, Devery Henderson, Joe Horn.

Deny it all you want but Kubiak started from a very unique position with regards to the talent and tradition of the team. The closest comparison would be the Browns* of 99 and I think they were given a more beneficial way into the league. And Casserly really had screwed up our roster.

If you look at the Saints of today, there are still guys playing from that original roster but there aren't on the Texans... except for Kris Brown and hopefully that's over, too.

* Note that the Browns have been to the playoffs once in the decade since they've been back in the league and have had 2 winning seasons. Sure, they got to the playoffs sooner than we did but that was a fluke. I like to think we're in a better position with this team.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
Payton took a team that already had playoff talent but had been under performing (primarily because Aaron Brooks was so inconsistent) and got it to the playoffs in his first year.
Click to expand...

That teams was also in the play-offs despite Brooks in two of the four years prior to Payton taking over, and was one of a few teams that could consistently beat the Greatest show on turf.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
Deny it all you want but Kubiak started from a very unique position with regards to the talent and tradition of the team. The closest comparison would be the Browns* of 99 and I think they were given a more beneficial way into the league. And Casserly really had screwed up our roster.
Click to expand...

I would love for anyone to name one coach who took over a team with 4 consecutive losing seasons (we had never even been to 8-8 before Kubiak) who got to the play-offs in 4 years or less.
 
DexmanC said:
Definition TWO is definitely the context in which I'm using the word "expect."
You're exactly right. My use of the term is correctly applied. "You don't believe
it's likely to happen" is a meaning YOU are applying to it. I'm not saying THAT part.
Leave DEFINITION TWO as it's written, and you have the context of my use of
the word "expect."
Click to expand...

My goodness. See what the period our last and first regular season games does to people.

Roll on week one!
 
thunderkyss said:
That teams was also in the play-offs despite Brooks in two of the four years prior to Payton taking over, and was one of a few teams that could consistently beat the Greatest show on turf.
Click to expand...

Prior to 2006, their last playoff appearance was in 2000.
 
thunderkyss said:
That teams was also in the play-offs despite Brooks in two of the four years prior to Payton taking over, and was one of a few teams that could consistently beat the Greatest show on turf.
Click to expand...

The last time the Saints made the playoffs prior to Payton coming on board was in 2000. The last time prior to that was 1992 under Jim Mora.

Their records during the four years prior to Payton were '02:9-7 (no playoffs), '03:8-8 '04:8-8, and '05:3-13.
 
ChampionTexan said:
The last time the Saints made the playoffs prior to Payton coming on board was in 2000. The last time prior to that was 1992 under Jim Mora.

Their records during the four years prior to Payton were '02:9-7 (no playoffs), '03:8-8 '04:8-8, and '05:3-13.
Click to expand...

So in your opinion, do you think that team had the talent to get to the play-offs or not?


(thank you for correcting me, I'm not trying to make light of my error, but I addressed it in another post.)
 
DexmanC said:
Definition TWO is definitely the context in which I'm using the word "expect."
You're exactly right. My use of the term is correctly applied. "You don't believe
it's likely to happen" is a meaning YOU are applying to it. I'm not saying THAT part.
Leave DEFINITION TWO as it's written, and you have the context of my use of
the word "expect."
Click to expand...

Your expection then, is based on the time Kubiak has been head coach, correct?

It has nothing to do with how good, or not good this team is, right?
 
thunderkyss said:
I would love for anyone to name one coach who took over a team with 4 consecutive losing seasons (we had never even been to 8-8 before Kubiak) who got to the play-offs in 4 years or less.
Click to expand...

Ken Whisenhunt
Jim Haslett
Dick Vermeil(Rams)
Tony Dungy(Bucs)
Glanville(Oilers)

Singletary could be added if he does it within next 2 years. Also some of the guys listed above may or may not fit description. Some of them had losing seasons of their own in their first year or two(with prior losing season) but yes, had gotten to the playoffs in 4 years in less.
 
thunderkyss said:
Your expection then, is based on the time Kubiak has been head coach, correct?

It has nothing to do with how good, or not good this team is, right?
Click to expand...

Seems to me, you're cheering for Kubiak MORE than you are for the Texans.

It's your right to do so.
 
thunderkyss said:
I would love for anyone to name one coach who took over a team with 4 consecutive losing seasons (we had never even been to 8-8 before Kubiak) who got to the play-offs in 4 years or less.
Click to expand...

In 1992, Bobby Ross took over the Chargers who'd been 6-10, 6-10, 6-10, and 4-12 before he got there. He turned that team into an 11-5 team and took them to the playoffs. That's pretty impressive.

Parcells ALMOST did that with the Cowboys. It was only 3 consecutive losing seasons, however. When Parcells was with the Patriots, they'd had 4 consecutive losing seasons and then a losing season under him before he took them to the playoffs. When Parcells took over the Jets, they'd had 3 consecutive losing seasons and he turned them around to a 9-7 team his first year, but they missed the playoffs.

Fassel took the Giants to the playoffs his first year there after 2 consecutive losing seasons before he got there.

Tony Dungy came to a Buccaneer team that had 13 consecutive losing seasons and in 2 seasons had them at 10-6 and in the playoffs. But it took him a season.

Most coaches take a year to be able to turn it around.
 
HoustonSportsFan09 said:
Ken Whisenhunt
Jim Haslett
Dick Vermeil(Rams)
Tony Dungy(Bucs)
Glanville(Oilers)

Singletary could be added if he does it within next 2 years. Also some of the guys listed above may or may not fit description. Some of them had losing seasons of their own in their first year or two(with prior losing season) but yes, had gotten to the playoffs in 4 years in less.
Click to expand...

Ooops, dammit, I missed Haslett and the saints.

But the rest of these guys didn't make it. Dungy had a losing season before turning it around. So did Glanville. Vermiel had 2 losing seasons before turning it around.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
Ooops, dammit, I missed Haslett and the saints.

But the rest of these guys didn't make it. Dungy had a losing season before turning it around. So did Glanville. Vermiel had 2 losing seasons before turning it around.
Click to expand...

You're right. Which I mentioned they may not qualify because they had some losing season themselves before turning around in 4 yrs or less. But agree overall on your previous post/point

Most coaches take a year to be able to turn it around.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top