5 who could follow the Saints (from Pete Prisco)

[sandman]

So basically in the history of the league no team has ever started out with more against them than the Texans. I get it now. I'll move along.(massive exaggeration for effect)

I guess I am just trying to figure out what groundwork and identity about this franchise was established in the first four years of expansion averaging 4.5 wins a season that set expectations on Kubiak that he would have them as SB contenders in 4 years.

Playoffs? Sure, by all means. He has not met those expectations. This team has the talent to, and should be, in the playoffs. That is squarely on his shoulders. But ever since NOLA won the SB, the conversation has morphed into why Kubiak can't win a Super Bowl in 4 years like Payton can. That is where the expectations are getting ridiculous.

 

[sandman]

So basically in the history of the league no team has ever started out with more against them than the Texans. I get it now. I'll move along.(massive exaggeration for effect)



Actually I don't believe this. A 10-6 record lets people know.."he can get there." Right now that is still debatable and thus these threads.

So what would that do to the Legend of Sean Payton had he gone 10-6 and not made the playoffs in 2006?

What if Kubes goes 10-6 next year and they miss the playoffs? He proved he could "get there" to 10-6, if we are just looking for a win count.

It is an arbitrary number. NYJ got into the playoffs this year with the same record as the Texans. Hell, it took until the last game of the season before the Texans were eliminated from the playoffs.

 

[HoustonFrog]

I guess I am just trying to figure out what groundwork and identity about this franchise was established in the first four years of expansion averaging 4.5 wins a season that set expectations on Kubiak that he would have them as SB contenders in 4 years.

Playoffs? Sure, by all means. He has not met those expectations. This team has the talent to, and should be, in the playoffs. That is squarely on his shoulders. But ever since NOLA won the SB, the conversation has morphed into why Kubiak can't win a Super Bowl in 4 years like Payton can. That is where the expectations are getting ridiculous.

First, nice post

Second, my comment was really a smart ass one...sorry.. due to the fact that it isn't just NO. The Jets, The Dolphins, the Falcons and a host of other teams have been discussed but somehow most, despite really solid arguments, don't meet the criteria for some. IMHO it is a cop out in some ways because it relates back to the first regime and this mindset that there is some leeway to give. I just refuse to give leeway after 4 years....especially since at the start of last year there was a "playoff or bust" chant. Many of the teams listed started from crap too and because of turnarounds are getting some breathing room.

So what would that do to the Legend of Sean Payton had he gone 10-6 and not made the playoffs in 2006?

What if Kubes goes 10-6 next year and they miss the playoffs? He proved he could "get there" to 10-6, if we are just looking for a win count.

It is an arbitrary number. NYJ got into the playoffs this year with the same record as the Texans. Hell, it took until the last game of the season before the Texans were eliminated from the playoffs.

I look at seasons as they progress. One win against a team resting players to get to 9-7 doesn't impress me. Impressing me would be winning the games you needed when you were set up at 5-3. If they go 10-6, that is a very nice number. The problem is, that isn't what happened with the Saints in 06. They made a serious playoff run. As for this year, the Jets were in because they literally pummeled the Texans the first game of the season with a rookie QB and coach. They were prepared. That is why they were there.

 

[sandman]

First, nice post

Second, my comment was really a smart ass one...sorry.. due to the fact that it isn't just NO. The Jets, The Dolphins, the Falcons and a host of other teams have been discussed but somehow most, despite really solid arguments, don't meet the criteria for some. IMHO it is a cop out in some ways because it relates back to the first regime and this mindset that there is some leeway to give. I just refuse to give leeway after 4 years....especially since at the start of last year there was a "playoff or bust" chant. Many of the teams listed started from crap too and because of turnarounds are getting some breathing room.



I look at seasons as they progress. One win against a team resting players to get to 9-7 doesn't impress me. Impressing me would be winning the games you needed when you were set up at 5-3. If they go 10-6, that is a very nice number. The problem is, that isn't what happened with the Saints in 06. They made a serious playoff run. As for this year, the Jets were in because they literally pummeled the Texans the first game of the season with a rookie QB and coach. They were prepared. That is why they were there.

Thanks, and yes, this team should be in the playoffs. I'm not a Kubiak apologist. I thought proving it in the final year of his contract was more than enough "good faith" that McNair should have placed in him. The extension was ridiculous.

Not directed at you, and maybe it is because I get frustrated at how this town turned into West New Orleans, but the Sean Payton Bromance Festival needs to move on. If it comes out as defending Kubes, that was not my intention. The corpse of Jim Caldwell that was propped up on the Indy sideline for 19 weeks could get this team to the playoffs.

 

[thunderkyss]

So basically in the history of the league no team has ever started out with more against them than the Texans. I get it now. I'll move along.(massive exaggeration for effect)

Nobody is saying that. Not at all.

Think about what teams the Texans compared to in 2002... it wasn't the Cowboys, Redskins, Dolphins, or the Jets. It was the early Tampa Bay Buccaneers, the Arizona Cardinals, the Detroit Lions and yes the Saints fit that group, because they had only just become a mediocre team. In Fact, if you want to point to a coach that has done what Kubiak hasn't been able to, then Jim Haslett is the guy you should be comparing him to. Although Mike Ditka was putting together some talent, his team performed poorly year after year. Jim Haslett came in & almost over night, the Saints were beating one of the best teams in the NFL at that time(the St Louis Rams: The Greatest Show on Turf) on a regular basis. He took a consistently bad franchise to a 10-6 record, a play-off win, and consistent mediocre performance.

Fast forward to the end of the 2005 season. The Texans were worse off than they were in 2002. Their veteran leaders were exiled. They overpaid several FAs, & were in cap hell. Arizona had been putting together a talented squad, but weren't able to put together a winning season. Detroit was pretty much like the Texans.. not any better than they were in 2002.

Eric Mangini also took over the Jets in 2006. They had gone 4-12 the previous year. In 2006, Mangini & the Jets went 10-6 and made a wild-card appearance. But the Jets went 10-6 in 2004. Pennington got hurt pretty bad in '05, and IMHO was the main reason they did so badly. They were 6-10 in 2003, 9-7 in 2002, 10-6 in 2001, and 9-7 in 2000. So they were already mediocre when Mangini took over. He was fired, because they remained mediocre following the 2006 season (4-12 in 2007, 9-7 in 2008), and was no closer to finding their franchise QB after 3 seasons.

 

[thunderkyss]

As for this year, the Jets were in because they literally pummeled the Texans the first game of the season with a rookie QB and coach. They were prepared. That is why they were there.

Never mind that the Colts laid down for them in week 16, other wise they would have been 8-8, & the Texans would have been in the play-offs.

They didn't win that game, week 16, because they were prepared. They were in the play-offs, because the Colts took care of business early. The Jets had nothing to do with that win, and were just lucky the Colts weren't on their schedule earlier, or that the Colts didn't care about going 16-0.

 

[thunderkyss]

Thanks, and yes, this team should be in the playoffs. I'm not a Kubiak apologist. I thought proving it in the final year of his contract was more than enough "good faith" that McNair should have placed in him. The extension was ridiculous.

I'm also not a big fan of the extension. I thought, if McNair wanted to prove a point, he would not offer the extension, until week 3 (after Kubiak wins week 1, and starts at least 2-1).

But since he extended Kubiak this early, that tells me McNair believes Kubiak is the right man.... based on bringing us from pathetic to mediocre.

I don't agree with him, I think Kubiak needs a kick in the pants. But I don't think it's ridiculous.

If we get to the play-offs next year, I bet McNair will "rip-up" Kubiak's contract again, & make him one of the highest paid Coaches in the league.

I don't think this contract was a reward, as much as it was a vote of confidence.

 

[HoustonFrog]

Never mind that the Colts laid down for them in week 16, other wise they would have been 8-8, & the Texans would have been in the play-offs.

They didn't win that game, week 16, because they were prepared. They were in the play-offs, because the Colts took care of business early. The Jets had nothing to do with that win, and were just lucky the Colts weren't on their schedule earlier, or that the Colts didn't care about going 16-0.

Do you think other teams may have been pissed that the Pats were taking Brady out, that Moss sat many series after doing whatever he wanted to the secondary and that 3 of their top DBs sat to rest up?Just saying, it wasn't as blatant but they weren't going all out for anything. I hate that argument. If the Texans take care of business it is a non-issue.

Thanks, and yes, this team should be in the playoffs. I'm not a Kubiak apologist. I thought proving it in the final year of his contract was more than enough "good faith" that McNair should have placed in him. The extension was ridiculous.

Not directed at you, and maybe it is because I get frustrated at how this town turned into West New Orleans, but the Sean Payton Bromance Festival needs to move on. If it comes out as defending Kubes, that was not my intention. The corpse of Jim Caldwell that was propped up on the Indy sideline for 19 weeks could get this team to the playoffs.

No problem. I don't take this stuff personally and I'm just trying to further the debate with counter points. I think many people just see the Saints as a dregs of the league for so long so to see them with a SB after some tough times, it makes people wonder why it is going so slow here. I also think Payton is a much more aggressive coach...JMO.

 

[thunderkyss]

Do you think other teams may have been pissed that the Pats were taking Brady out, that Moss sat many series after doing whatever he wanted to the secondary and that 3 of their top DBs sat to rest up?Just saying, it wasn't as blatant but they weren't going all out for anything. I hate that argument. If the Texans take care of business it is a non-issue.

If we had won made the play-offs, I would have counted it as a hollow victory. Backing into the play-offs, isn't making the play-offs IMHO.

The team, Jets, Texans, Cowboys.... whoever has every right to make the most of it once they get there.

But don't tell me the Jets were in the play-offs because they were "prepared"

 

[The Pencil Neck]

So basically in the history of the league no team has ever started out with more against them than the Texans. I get it now. I'll move along.(massive exaggeration for effect)

Teams have been worse than the Texans over the past 3 years.

Believe it or not.

Actually I don't believe this. A 10-6 record lets people know.."he can get there." Right now that is still debatable and thus these threads.

That's bull.

If a coach goes 10-6 and then 8-8 or 9-7 and there are going to be some fans saying that he's not the coach to go all the way. And some times, they may be right. (Mangini comes to mind.)

Until Kubiak goes to the Super Bowl, there are still going to be people who're going to be saying that he doesn't have "it". And even if he does go to the Super Bowl, there are going to be people who are going to say it was a fluke. If Kubiak wins 10+ games the next 4 seasons and doesn't win a Super Bowl, some people are going to be saying that he doesn't have the killer instinct or he can't win the big game.

There are always going to be naysayers.

 

[HoustonFrog]

If we had won made the play-offs, I would have counted it as a hollow victory. Backing into the play-offs, isn't making the play-offs IMHO.

The team, Jets, Texans, Cowboys.... whoever has every right to make the most of it once they get there.

But don't tell me the Jets were in the play-offs because they were "prepared"

The prepared comment was dealing with how they started the season and came out and took it to the Texans. Also, the Colts game wasn't a blowout with Manning in there. There is no guarantee they lose and they didn't look unprepared. They won games when they had to, including laying an ass whooping on the Texans. So they were better.

That's bull.

If a coach goes 10-6 and then 8-8 or 9-7 and there are going to be some fans saying that he's not the coach to go all the way. And some times, they may be right. (Mangini comes to mind.)

Until Kubiak goes to the Super Bowl, there are still going to be people who're going to be saying that he doesn't have "it". And even if he does go to the Super Bowl, there are going to be people who are going to say it was a fluke. If Kubiak wins 10+ games the next 4 seasons and doesn't win a Super Bowl, some people are going to be saying that he doesn't have the killer instinct or he can't win the big game.

There are always going to be naysayers.

It's not bull. I understand your comments and Yys there are always naysayers but overall if a coach takes a team to the playoffs then many look to that year as what can happen every year. So if Kubes went 10-6 in Year 1 or 2, then this year would have been one where the expectations weren't hoping to slide in at 9-7 but that it was expected. It buys coaches a little leeway. More expectations but leeway. The questions remain but not as many when a guy has similar results with more talent. That is the status right now. Will it ever happen with him? I'm actually of the opinion that a coach needs to be evaluated every year to see where the team is headed. Not calling for his head but serious evaluation of how the team is functioning under him.

 

[thunderkyss]

The prepared comment was dealing with how they started the season and came out and took it to the Texans.

They took it to the Patriots & the Titans. Were they unprepared as well?

I'm not saying that we were prepared to play him week 1. I am saying that he was relentless in a way that no one expected until week 4, when the league said, "oh, you're going to play like that?"

I understand what he did in Baltimore... but the relentless ferocity of selling out on almost every play was different.... He wanted to make a statement, and he did, for three weeks.

They won games when they had to, including laying an ass whooping on the Texans.

They won the games they did, and that's about it. They didn't control their own destiny until the Ravens lost week 16. They didn't clinch the wild-card until week 17.

So they were better.

They had a better season. But they aren't a better team.

I'll make a wager with you right now, that we win more games in 2010 than the Jets do. I'll even let you decide what the bet will be for.... I'm not scared.

 

[HoustonFrog]

They had a better season. But they aren't a better team.

I'll make a wager with you right now, that we win more games in 2010 than the Jets do. I'll even let you decide what the bet will be for.... I'm not scared.

Thunder, no matter how you spin it you are wrong. They were a better team last season. 2010 doesn't matter. They played the Texans straight up and exploited weaknesses....stuffing the run, Revis on AJ, running at the Texans and controlling the game. I'm sorry but that opinion is just weak and is why many people get frustrated here. There is no spin to an ass kicking.

 

[thunderkyss]

I'm sorry but that opinion is just weak and is why many people get frustrated here. There is no spin to an ass kicking.

They kicked our ass, big deal. That's part of the game. They kicked the Patriots ass as well, the Patriots were able to pay them back later in the season. We didn't have that opportunity.

They had a better season. They went to the play-offs, we didn't.

It's not spin, I think we're a better team.