Kubes on the hotseat????

[The Pencil Neck]

This totally misrepresents what I and others have been saying. I want to be a team that can make a big step in a single year and is ALSO a good team in the playoffs. I think that is preferrable to taking three years of small steps to be a good team in the playoffs. It is not mutually exclusive that a team makes rapid progress and is actually good.

I have asked twice on this thread if people want a small step this year or a big step. Only one person answered, and he didn't prefer the small step. I hope a small step isn't the goal of the coaches, front office, and players either.

I think that looking at small steps as the right way to build works best in hindsight. Few people would really prefer year after year of incremental improvement that isn't leading to tangible results.

I look at this viewpoint as like saying "do you like to breath?" Well... duh?

Would I prefer to see our team take a big step and win a Super Bowl next year as opposed to going 9-7 and losing the first round of the playoffs? Well... duh? Of course.

I prefer a team that goes 8-8 for 4 straight years to a team that goes 4-12 for 4 straight years. And of course, I'd really prefer to win the SB 4 years in a row.

Every single fan would love to go 19-0 next year and then every year after that. But as a fan, you really can't expect that. PLAYERS should strive for that. They shouldn't be happy with any losses. But as fans, we aren't players.

If we make incremental changes every year, it doesn't make a difference unless we see those changes showing up in the play of the team and eventually the record. And eventually this strategy should lead to a perennial power house that is challenging every year for the title, like the Steelers. But if you get upset that things aren't changing fast enough, there's a possibility that you'll throw the baby out with the bathwater and turn into the Lions and be a perennial loser as opposed to being the Falcons or Dolphins and having a huge turnaround. By going for the big name and making the big changes, you're taking a big risk and that risk is that you're going to have a team that implodes and is crap. If it was that easy, everyone would be doing it.

I really won't be that upset if we finish 9-7 and miss the playoffs next year. I won't be that upset if we finish 8-8 and make the playoffs. That doesn't mean that I don't want us to go 19-0, I just don't expect it.

 

[Runner]

I look at this viewpoint as like saying "do you like to breath?" Well... duh?

Well... duh. Now you see my frustration in the beginning of this thread. Many people say the Texans are building the "right way" because they are going slow and immediately throw stones at teams that make big improvements (Atlanta, Miami for instance). They state fast movers are going to crash and burn and the Texans are guaranteed years of success. My point has always been that neither side is guaranteed anything, so take success when you can get it.

I'm trying to point out that the minute the Texans make a big leap in record - which may be this year - that will suddenly become "the right way". This "slow moving as the right way of doing things" bromide only works in hindsight.

=================

Would I prefer to see our team take a big step and win a Super Bowl next year as opposed to going 9-7 and losing the first round of the playoffs? Well... duh? Of course.

If people are so convinced that slow building is the right way of doing things, than the answer shouldn't be so "well... duh? Of course". (Note that I didn't add Super Bowl to my scenario, where the team comes up a little short). If the Texans make a big leap, isn't that tantamount to sacrificing a future with a stable high level of play?

===================

But if you get upset that things aren't changing fast enough, there's a possibility that you'll throw the baby out with the bathwater and turn into the Lions and be a perennial loser as opposed to being the Falcons or Dolphins and having a huge turnaround.

There is an equal possibility that if a team stays the course year after year with no meaningful improvement outside of stats and woulda coulda shouldas, they could waste a lot of time. Key players could get injured or leave the team, other teams leapfrog them, etc.

 

[Fox]

I look at this viewpoint as like saying "do you like to breath?" Well... duh?

Would I prefer to see our team take a big step and win a Super Bowl next year as opposed to going 9-7 and losing the first round of the playoffs? Well... duh? Of course.

I prefer a team that goes 8-8 for 4 straight years to a team that goes 4-12 for 4 straight years. And of course, I'd really prefer to win the SB 4 years in a row.

Every single fan would love to go 19-0 next year and then every year after that. But as a fan, you really can't expect that. PLAYERS should strive for that. They shouldn't be happy with any losses. But as fans, we aren't players.

If we make incremental changes every year, it doesn't make a difference unless we see those changes showing up in the play of the team and eventually the record. And eventually this strategy should lead to a perennial power house that is challenging every year for the title, like the Steelers. But if you get upset that things aren't changing fast enough, there's a possibility that you'll throw the baby out with the bathwater and turn into the Lions and be a perennial loser as opposed to being the Falcons or Dolphins and having a huge turnaround. By going for the big name and making the big changes, you're taking a big risk and that risk is that you're going to have a team that implodes and is crap. If it was that easy, everyone would be doing it.

I really won't be that upset if we finish 9-7 and miss the playoffs next year. I won't be that upset if we finish 8-8 and make the playoffs. That doesn't mean that I don't want us to go 19-0, I just don't expect it.

Must spread rep, great post. I want us to take big steps every season. I'm not going to jump on the fire the staff band wagon if we make less than big progress next season, as long as we're still showing some progress.

 

[thunderkyss]

Well... duh. Now you see my frustration in the beginning of this thread. Many people say the Texans are building the "right way" because they are going slow and immediately throw stones at teams that make big improvements (Atlanta, Miami for instance). They state fast movers are going to crash and burn and the Texans are guaranteed years of success. My point has always been that neither side is guaranteed anything, so take success when you can get it.

I do not disagree.

I'm trying to point out that the minute the Texans make a big leap in record - which may be this year - that will suddenly become "the right way". This "slow moving as the right way of doing things" bromide only works in hindsight.

To throw another wrench in there for you.......

I was never one that said the Texans' plan is to build slowly but surely. I'm sure Kubiak would have loved to be playing for the division title by now, but things just didn't work out that way.

I for one, thought 2006 was going to end better, that our offense was just going to start clicking, and we'd be hosting the AFC Championship game.

It wasn't till the end of 2007, that I realized how bad we really were.

But if we're going to take big steps, we're going to have to be more active in going after big name free agents. With our approach to FA, it's going to take time.

 

[Runner]

I do not disagree.


To throw another wrench in there for you.......

I was never one that said the Texans' plan is to build slowly but surely.

Not everyone does say that; some are very vocal about it though. It is kind of amazing how dense those of us who don't agree are.

However, I'm finding they aren't so vocal about preferring a slow improvement in the coming year.

 

[Lucky]

Brooke Bentley gets on the Sunshine Club's bad side during a HT.com live chat:

raven casey - Richmond, TX, US: is it true if u dont make the playoffs it layoffs for the coaching staff

Brooke Bentley: Hi Casey,
The Texans are a trendy pick this year as a team that can make a splash in the playoffs. The expectations are high in Reliant Stadium, and the pressure is on the coaches to make sure the team lives up to those expectations. But I can't make a blanket statement like "playoffs or pink slips" - too much happens during the course of an NFL season to make that claim. Let's just say that the pressure is on, and if the team doesn't make the playoffs heads could roll.

Javier - Houston, TX, US: Hello Brooke my question to you is if coach Gary Kubiak does not take the texans to the playoffs this upcoming season. do you think he will be on the hot seat to keep his job when the 2009 season is over.

Brooke Bentley: Hi Javier,
If the Texans don't make the playoffs this year, I think everyone in Reliant Stadium will be on the hot seat. Even the team's cafeteria crew. Owner Bob McNair is setting the bar at playoffs this year and he doesn't want to be let down.

Brooke, you just don't get it. This is not a must win season. It's a must improve season.

 

[JCTexan]

Well... duh. Now you see my frustration in the beginning of this thread. Many people say the Texans are building the "right way" because they are going slow and immediately throw stones at teams that make big improvements (Atlanta, Miami for instance). They state fast movers are going to crash and burn and the Texans are guaranteed years of success. My point has always been that neither side is guaranteed anything, so take success when you can get it.

I'm trying to point out that the minute the Texans make a big leap in record - which may be this year - that will suddenly become "the right way". This "slow moving as the right way of doing things" bromide only works in hindsight.

=================


If people are so convinced that slow building is the right way of doing things, than the answer shouldn't be so "well... duh? Of course". (Note that I didn't add Super Bowl to my scenario, where the team comes up a little short). If the Texans make a big leap, isn't that tantamount to sacrificing a future with a stable high level of play?

===================




There is an equal possibility that if a team stays the course year after year with no meaningful improvement outside of stats and woulda coulda shouldas, they could waste a lot of time. Key players could get injured or leave the team, other teams leapfrog them, etc.

Atlanta and Miami has had good teams, though. Atlanta was in the playoffs a couple of years ago when they had Vick. They lose their QB they start going downhill. Once they got their QB in Ryan they're back in the playoffs. Maybe that had something to do with it. Miami's case? I don't know, maybe they started building their team the right way? Taking Long with the first pick was the smartest thing they could have done, IMO. I still don't think the Dolphins will win their division this year with Brady coming back, though.

The Texans had little talent when Kubiak became the coach. They have gotten rid of every player except 4 or 5. The Texans aren't the laughing stock in the league like they were when Kubes took over. Is slow building the right way? It is when you get rid of almost every player in three years. Kubiak now has the players he wants on this team. I expect them to make the big leap this year. 10-6 or 11-5 is what I would predict. I don't think 9-7 gets us into the playoffs, so anything less then 10-6 & I will be disappointed.

 

[Runner]

Brooke, you just don't get it. This is not a must win season. It's a must improve season.

I think the target audience for her piece must be the less insightful fan. Maybe the term I'm looking for is "less inciteful".

In any case, we all know the old saying, "Mediocrity breeds success".



Note that this post was a joke.

 

[Thorn]

THE OFFSEASON IS KILLING ME. I DON'T WANT TO DISCUSS THE UNPREDICTABLE TEXANS FUTURE ANYMORE. I DON'T WANT TO DISCUSS POLITICS ANYMORE. I DON'T EVEN WANT TO KEEP POSTING THIS **** ANYMORE.

I just want to watch football. That is all. Thank you for your attention.

 

[dalemurphy]

The Texans were not the thrid best offense in the league. I swear if I had a nickel for every time I've heard that on this site I'd be rich. It isn't true though. They may have been up there in yards per game, but they weren't the third best scoring team on average points per game and that is all that matters which is how many points you score.

YOu want to see who the best offense is? Look at how many points they average per week?
You want to see who the best defense is? Look at how many points teams average against them every week.
I remember years and years ago one of those Eagles teams that went to the NFC championship was getting dogged throughout the season on their defense because of how many yards they gave up every game, but it was a pretty abusrd criticism by some of the ESPN analysts, because the Eagles had by far the best Red Zone defense in the league that year and were like in the top 3 of all defenses for what teams would average against them as far as the score board.

It's nice to see us up there in yards and categories like that, because it does show very nice signs of improvements but we had some awful red zone issues that stopped a lot of potential points from being on the score board for us.

We weren't the third best offensive team in the league last season. When it came down to points per game we were like 15th or 16th and points is what matters. YOu can put all the yards you want in a game, you can have a RB that tears it up all game and a WR who catches a ton of balls piling on the stat sheet, but the only stat that matters in the end is the points stat, because that is what determines a winner from a loser at the end of the game and football is about points.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. Total yards being used as the primary barometer for ranking offenses and defenses is quite silly. That being said, I think using points is a bad barometer for judging defense and not the best barometer for offense either. Efficiency on either side of the ball is largely dependent on the goals. A ball control offense could be highly efficient and successful but not score that many points. Similarly, an aggressive on a team that has a bad running game, is going to give up a lot of points. Also, a team with a high-powered offense is always going to give up more yards and points than it would if the offense struggled.

I bring this up not to be argumentative but because, as Texan fans, I think the following list are the things we need to be looking for dramatic improvement in, on both sides of the ball.

1. 3rd down efficiency
2. turnovers
3. sacks
4. red zone efficiency

If we end up doing well on offense and defense in these categories, we are going to be a very, very good team- regardless of YPG or PPG rankings.

 

[Specnatz]

Brooke Bentley gets on the Sunshine Club's bad side during a HT.com live chat:

Brooke, you just don't get it. This is not a must win season. It's a must improve season.

Of course you forget about the gray area where if you win and do not make the playoffs.

I am not saying, I just saying.

 

[GP]

Brooke Bentley gets on the Sunshine Club's bad side during a HT.com live chat:

Brooke, you just don't get it. This is not a must win season. It's a must improve season.

So it's come down to an effort to triangulate David Carr, mediocre, and Gary Kubiak? Bill Clinton would be proud of the attempt.

LOL. Are you seriously trying to make that connection? David had zero ability to make any progress and subsequently help the team improve, and Gary Kubiak has easily done just that by his (and Rick Smith's) decision-making.

David was rationalizing his poor play by saying we needed to play well; that winning wasn't the goal but that playing well was the goal.

Sherman went bye-bye, and enter Kyle Shanahan who I think is doing a fine job thus far.

Richard Smith is gone. Enter Frank Bush who is more in line of what an NFL defense should do: No read-and-reaction; just get to the ball.

Weaver is gone. Enter Antonio Smith, and with no crazy cap-hell contract. In fact, there hasn't been a bad contract since Rick Smith showed up.

We drafted heavy on defense, specifically in the first two rounds. The help that people said DeMeco needed? It's here!

We have a great ZBS coach in Gibbs--We had tried some Sherman run blocking, but Gibbs turned the run game into something viable for a change. Now we have his son as the DB coach, and I think that's going to make a difference.

None of our offensive players left the team, so we're ready to go right from the start.

Dunta was tagged, esnuring that we get something of value in case he leaves.

Keeping Richard Smith for last season, IMO, is really the only big knock on Gary Kubiak in terms of being mediocre. Maybe the Ahman Green situation is also another knock on Kubiak. There are plenty of moves that show that he isn't satisfied with mediocre.

I still think that we have a situation here, on this board, where some fans are really upset at Gary Kubiak for not going after the big guns (in terms of coaching staff) and so a few people think that it will be his undoing. They don't like the Denver connections, they don't like the promoting from within for d-coord, and they don't like the "family" style of having Alex and David Gibbs on staff. In short: It all seems a bit "campy" and not high-profile enough to really win in today's NFL, and so the long knives are already out for Kubiak.

Thorn's post cracked me up! He needs our support right now. Someone drop by his house and check on him. See if the vanilla, mouth wash, and airplane glue is still there.

 

[Thorn]

Thorn's post cracked me up! He needs our support right now. Someone drop by his house and check on him. See if the vanilla, mouth wash, and airplane glue is still there.

LOL.

My supply of airplane glue is getting a tad low.........

 

[Double Barrel]

Brooke Bentley gets on the Sunshine Club's bad side during a HT.com live chat:

Brooke, you just don't get it. This is not a must win season. It's a must improve season.

And "improvement" is relative and subject to individual perception.

 

[Lucky]

So it's come down to an effort to triangulate David Carr, mediocre, and Gary Kubiak? Bill Clinton would be proud of the attempt.

Not even close. It had nothing to do with the Houston Texans head coach (who I believe is very aware of the temperature of his seat) and everything to do with the apologizers for said head coach. AKA, the Sunshine Club.

To his credit, the Houston Texans head coach has not attempted to undersell the importance of this season. His groupies? Well, that's another story.

 

[Runner]

Not even close. It had noting to do with the Houston Texans head coach (who I believe is very aware of the temperature of his seat) and everything to do with the apologizers for said head coach. AKA, the Sunshine Club.

To his credit, the Houston Texans head coach has not attempted to undersell the importance of this season. His groupies? Well, that's another story.

I hadn't noticed just how Carresque that philosophy is. I thought the quote was great: straight to the point, funny, mean... it's got it all!


If I was one of those guys who said such things, I'd say "Must spread rep yada yada yada".

 

[Lucky]

I hadn't noticed just how Carresque that philosophy is.

It could just be a case of an accidental intermingling of two random clubs (Sunshine and Mickey Mouse, respectively).

 

[GP]

Not even close. It had nothing to do with the Houston Texans head coach (who I believe is very aware of the temperature of his seat) and everything to do with the apologizers for said head coach. AKA, the Sunshine Club.

To his credit, the Houston Texans head coach has not attempted to undersell the importance of this season. His groupies? Well, that's another story.

I'd rather be an apologizer than to be someone who loathes the:

1. baby steps

2. slow progress

3. no playoffs

4. a mediocre 8-8 season

5. and generally anything else that can be conjured up to prove that Gary Kubiak's firing is imminent. The axe is an inch from his neck! GASP!

The sunshine club is really just a bunch of fans who are more pleased with this team than at any other point in the team's BRIEF history. We're not the ones who are inventing imaginary, theoritical hot seats and trying to forecast how many years he has left, what conditions of failure have to exist for him to get axed, and then trying to convince others that there even is a hot seat in the first place.

In professional sports, the so-called hot seat is always warm and ready to get pretty hot over any number of things. So I'm not buying the whole idea that Kubiak is scrambling any more than he normally would be--He wants to succeed more than any of us do. And I don't buy the idea that he's a failure if we don't get to the playoffs this year. Heck, the record is even subject for strict interpretation.

To me, it's apparent that some of you guys here (the rain cloud club) are tired of the Kubiak era, and are ready to move on. Your tired of the Denver connections (as evidenced by all the snotty threads about it) , a lot of the rain cloud gang thinks Kubiak goofed up by hiring Bush as d-coord (yet they smooth it over by saying "I'll take a wait-and-see approach") , and I sense that the overall consensus by most of the rain cloud club is that Kubiak doesn't have what it takes because great coaches get it done by now.

You can say you're taking a wait-and-see approach, trying to not be too much of a homer, etc., but in reality (IMO) you've already given up and you're trying to foretell the future that you want to see occur. And at the same time, you take pot-shots at those who don't fall into line with it. Typical message board bullcrap. Let's remember who started the name-calling. I think "sunshine club" was the first shot of the battle, correct? Up until that point, IIRC, the thread was fairly civil and free of tags and labels. But when one side starts to lose a handle on things, it turns to an ad hominem situation where it escalates to name-calling and labeling and making fun of people.

This team is doing great. I love it. Sue me.

The great philosopher Vinny once said: Wake me up when it's August.

 

[GP]

It could just be a case of an accidental intermingling of two random clubs (Sunshine and Mickey Mouse, respectively).

I think this thread is done. It's spiraled downward into kindergarten name-calling and shamefest.

As always.

 

[gtexan02]

 

[Texecutioner]

 

[GP]

Well I've got to admit GP, I have found it rather peculiar about some of these posts of yours where you're defending Kubiak to the death, when just last season you were ready to take his heart out like you were Hannibal Lector. I was actually going to ask you about that earlier, because I seemed to find this 180 thing a little confusing.

And I'm not saying any of this as an insult or anything like that because I think you're a very good poster and I firmly remember a lot of this because you and I had the same position on this subject for a good amount of time. I think you have made some points and all in this thread, even though I still happen to disagree with a lot of them.

I hear what you're saying about the team starting to look better and I've been a little more open minded about Kubes than I was last season myself, but I still don't think a guy in his 4th season should be in the hot seat if he hasn't made the post season yet, and this year we have all agreed that it is pretty attainable. Kubes has a good enough team to do it without question, so now it's time to simply DO IT. If he has a season where there really isn't any progression record wise, then I don't see the point in keeping a guy to coach the team that just keeps us average. If he gets us to 10-6 or 11-5 and we get to the playoffs, then those baby steps look more and more like they're working. We all want the same thing here, so let's hope that Kubes makes it happen.

I've always enjoyed your posts and commentary, so again I don't want you to think that I'm trying to go back and forth in here in an argument, but only in friendly debate my man.

Thank you. We're all going to get it wrong from time to time. And my whole point in this thread is that I think some people are refusing to believe that this whole bag is a good thing and should be continued whether we hit the magical benchmarks that we're all applying to this team and its future under Kubiak.

I have never ducked from my previous views. It's just that it was a lot easier to be shaky about the Kubiak era back in the middle of the '08 season, even right through the Lions and Bengals games, because we had always seemed to (a) beat the easy teams and (b) stink it up at the end, only to win that last game of the year. But the last half of the season, specifically after the Bengals/Lions, was the type of team that I expected under Kubiak. It just didn't materialize until then.

Chalk that up to a combination of these factors: A rough opening schedule, a hurricane that screwed up our teams' emotions and bye week, Rosencopter, Schaub figuring out how to avoid the injury-causing hits, a ZBS scheme and Slaton who worked well with one another, the handcuffing of Richard Smith by Kubiak and Bush, Kubiak's ability to finally admit that he needed to let Kyle run the offense, and the way the team closed out GB at Lambeau on a really Lambeau'ish day and the Bears when the Bears were playing for the playoffs. That's a lot to happen in a season (for THIS team, at least).

The fact that we can even argue about making or missing the playoffs, to me, is an indication that the HC, GM, and owner have done a good job of turning this thing around. I don't remember an off-season under Casspers where we felt we even had a shot at playoffs, though we'd pretend we did!

To me, it was more of a "sunshine" philosophy back in '07 than it is now. But that's just me. Thank you for the input. If Kubiak's contract really is up at the end of this season, which I think I read that it was, then I can't see McNair not extending him at least one more year or something along the same lines that doesn't lock Kubiak into long-term dollars. That'd make '10 a very stressful year for all of us fans, including myself.

 

[HOU-TEX]

I like Kubiak

 

[Texecutioner]

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. Total yards being used as the primary barometer for ranking offenses and defenses is quite silly. That being said, I think using points is a bad barometer for judging defense and not the best barometer for offense either. Efficiency on either side of the ball is largely dependent on the goals. A ball control offense could be highly efficient and successful but not score that many points. Similarly, an aggressive on a team that has a bad running game, is going to give up a lot of points. Also, a team with a high-powered offense is always going to give up more yards and points than it would if the offense struggled.

I bring this up not to be argumentative but because, as Texan fans, I think the following list are the things we need to be looking for dramatic improvement in, on both sides of the ball.

1. 3rd down efficiency
2. turnovers
3. sacks
4. red zone efficiency

If we end up doing well on offense and defense in these categories, we are going to be a very, very good team- regardless of YPG or PPG rankings.

Good post Dale, and I think that you're right on quite a few counts here. Those line items right there are where we had a lot of issues last season and if we can improve on those OUR POINT averages should bu higher than what they were last season.

 

[Runner]

The name of this thread is unfortunate. Just because I don't like the slow progress that the team is making doesn't mean I am looking for ways to say I want Kubiak fired. He seems to be an all right guy (as did Dom) and the players seem to like him (as they did Dom for some seasons). Kubiak is more inspirational...but I digress.

For me this discussion is about success and expectations, not about firing the coach. I want to see real success, not an interpreted version of why the Texans are so darn good. I'm pretty sure the players and coaches want real success too. When Andre does his wokouts in Miami, I doubt he uses, "but we are a damn fine 8-8" when he and his peers are talking about their seasons and careers.

Lucky put it pretty starkly with his "This isn't a must win season, it's a must improve season". I don't want to be happy with expectations that are a straight paraphrase of one of Dave's worst moments as a Texan. What did he say? Something like "It's not a must win game, it's a must play well game".

I still grin every time I see it put that way.

 

[Polo]

When Andre does his wokouts in Miami, I doubt he uses, "but we are a damn fine 8-8" when he and his peers are talking about their seasons and careers.

I bet he does.

If guys try to rag on him, I can imagine him saying something like "don't let the record fool you bro".

To me it sounds like you're suggesting that when guys rag on him for being on an 8-8 team he just bows down and says "yeah, you're right...we suck"...

By him being a player on the team, I guarantee his thought process is more in line with the exact opposite of how you and lucky are viewing it.

I seriously doubt he thinks that Kubiak should be anywhere close to a hotseat.

 

[Polo]

Lucky put it pretty starkly with his "This isn't a must win season, it's a must improve season". I don't want to be happy with expectations that are a straight paraphrase of one of Dave's worst moments as a Texan. What did he say? Something like "It's not a must win game, it's a must play well game".

I still grin every time I see it put that way.

This is where you guys lose me.

If you play well, often times you will win. Sometimes though, there are situations in which a team can play well but still not get the win.

Kubiak's job involves a multitude of tasks and priorities. The results on the field ultimately boil down to what kind of a job he and the GM are doing. I don't see how you can imply that the only way to judge him boils down to one aspect--Wins and Loses. I just don't think it's that clear cut.

The Dolphins won a bunch of games last year, but to me that doesn't mean that Sporano is a great or even good coach.

I think that there are some that are looking at the total package of how Kubiak has transformed the team and then there are some that only want to quantify success in W's and L's. JMO.

 

[Runner]

I bet he does.

If guys try to rag on him, I can imagine him saying something like "don't let the record fool you bro"

Andre has been part of successful football teams and has been a success in life. I doubt he compromises his definition of success that much.

He may do the "wait until you see us year" thing though. But again, he'd be expecting real success.

But who knows, maybe he does brag up the Texans.

 

[Runner]

This is where you guys lose me.

If you play well, often times you will win. Sometimes though, there are situations in which a team can play well but still not get the win.

Kubiak's job involves a multitude of tasks and priorities. The results on the field ultimately boil down to what kind of a job he and the GM are doing. I don't see how you can imply that the only way to judge him boils down to one aspect--Wins and Loses. I just don't think it's that clear cut.

The Dolphins won a bunch of games last year, but to me that doesn't mean that Sporano is a great or even good coach.

I think that there are some that are looking at the total package of how Kubiak has transformed the team and then there are some that only want to quantify success in W's and L's. JMO.

So if the Titans go 8-8 next year and the Texans go 11-5, do you agree with the Titans fans who spin things (just a legitimately as Texans fans do) their way, point to a stable head coach and past success, and say they are still better than the Texans?

I think wins and losses would have a new allure for some people here if that happened next year.

 

[GP]

I bet he does.

If guys try to rag on him, I can imagine him saying something like "don't let the record fool you bro".

To me it sounds like you're suggesting that when guys rag on him for being on an 8-8 team he just bows down and says "yeah, you're right...we suck"...

By him being a player on the team, I guarantee his thought process is more in line with the exact opposite of how you and lucky are viewing it.

I seriously doubt he thinks that Kubiak should be anywhere close to a hotseat.

I think it's plausible that AJ knows that he and this team are better now than they ever have been. I think he respects Kubiak for giving Carr that golden last chance, but being able to cut him loose and move onto a better QB scenario. Then again, AJ tends to make any QB look pretty good.

I think if any player has lost faith, it's Dunta. He's not happy, and I don't know if it's money, team, both, or a whole lot more than just those two variables. Dunta is a guy that I think is a lost cause for this team.

 

[GP]

So if the Titans go 8-8 next year and the Texans go 11-5, do you agree with the Titans fans who spin things (just a legitimately as Texans fans do) their way, point to a stable head coach and past success, and say they are still better than the Texans?

I think wins and losses would have a new allure for some people here if that happened next year.

I think they got to the Super Bowl with Fisher, as well as a few playoff games (including this past season), and it's hard for them to see clearly. To me, it's a borderline Shanahan/Broncos situation where the HC had done well for a long period of time, but they can't win a SB. the only difference is that Shanahan has accomplished it and Fisher hasn't. I would bet there are a lot of Titans fans from that SB appearance year that are ready to move Fisher along, even though he's done a fairly steady job under what must be depressing circumstances to operate as an HC under Bud Adams.

Fisher, IIRC, now has the longest running tenure of a HC. Right? And I seem to recall that people had used Fisher's first 3 or 4 years' W-L record as a barometer to guage Kubiak's first 3 years or so. I think the comparison was fairly close to one another, which makes for a good argument as to why a team needs to re-sign its HC if he's showing that he's not a total team wrecker.

If we had Kubiak for 10 years, and we had four mediocre seasons, and the remaining six were a mix of playoff games and a Super Bowl win or a very close loss in the SB, I'd be OK. You have to be realistic, and the list of dynasty-type coaches is a short one. Heck, even Coughlin finally stumbled upon a SB title. There's too many variables, IMO, to make the HC debate even a really legitimate debate.

When we talk of dynasty-type coaches, the list is pretty short. Otherwise, you're looking at stumbling upon a SB appearance (and maybe a win at the SB) at a less-than-thrilling clip. And the idea of rolling a new head coach into the position every 3 or 4 years, regardless of what progress or stability he brought to the team, is (for me) less than exciting.

I think there's a chance it becomes Capers version 2.0 more than it would become a deal of getting us into the promised land. Then we're right back where we started. No mistake about it, the hardest fan gig in the world is to be a fan of an NFL team. Short season, no "best of" playoff series, and seasons that can hinge upon a single injury to one or two key players.

 

[Double Barrel]

The great philosopher Vinny once said: Wake me up when it's August.

You must sleep before you can be woken up.

 

[Runner]

I think they got to the Super Bowl with Fisher, as well as a few playoff games (including this past season), and it's hard for them to see clearly. To me, it's a borderline Shanahan/Broncos situation where the HC had done well for a long period of time, but they can't win a SB. the only difference is that Shanahan has accomplished it and Fisher hasn't. I would bet there are a lot of Titans fans from that SB appearance year that are ready to move Fisher along, even though he's done a fairly steady job under what must be depressing circumstances to operate as an HC under Bud Adams.

Lots of verbiage there so I'll try to boil it down. In the first paragraph you seem to indicate that in fact if the Texans have the best w/l record that is what matters, and have even started to provide anti-spin arguments to what the Titans fans would say.

I'd like to say something witty about contradictions here, and I've started to do so three times. I find I'm speechless though.

 

[thunderkyss]

For me this discussion is about success and expectations, not about firing the coach. I want to see real success, not an interpreted version of why the Texans are so darn good. I'm pretty sure the players and coaches want real success too. When Andre does his wokouts in Miami, I doubt he uses, "but we are a damn fine 8-8" when he and his peers are talking about their seasons and careers.

So at the end of the season, if we are 15-1, and we only played one team with a winning record...... you'd feel we made progress?

& If I were Andre, I'd talk about starting in a pro-bowl, & being the #1 receiver no matter what way you look at it.

 

[thunderkyss]

..... No mistake about it, the hardest fan gig in the world is to be a fan of an NFL team. Short season, no "best of" playoff series, and seasons that can hinge upon a single injury to one or two key players.

Deep






deep......

 

[Runner]

So at the end of the season, if we are 15-1, and we only played one team with a winning record...... you'd feel we made progress?

15-1 is very successful.

You've made two posts on this thread - a bad 15-1 team and a 4-12 Texans team that has improved from last year. Such strawmen are OK to make a point, but can you list a few examples of such teams so I know what you are talking about? I'm especially interested in the bad 15-1 teams.

& If I were Andre, I'd talk about starting in a pro-bowl, & being the #1 receiver no matter what way you look at it.

So we're agreed - he's not bragging on how good his 8-8 team is. Thanks for your support.

 

[thunderkyss]

15-1 is very successful.

You've made two posts on this thread - a bad 15-1 team and a 4-12 Texans team that has improved from last year. Such strawmen are OK to make a point, but can you list a few examples of such teams so I know what you are talking about? I'm especially interested in the bad 15-1 teams.

So you're saying regardless of the oponent, as long as we're 15-1 we're a good team?

If that's the case, why direct your ire at Kubiak? Instead, lets put the schedule makers on the hot seat, if we don't have a winning season in '09.

My point isn't that there are bad 15-1 teams out there, but that the record at the end of the season only tells part of the story. To fire a head coach who appears to be doing everything right... IMHO, simply because of that doesn't make a lot of sense.

If we're not where McNair thinks we should be at the end of the year.... then Kubiak should be on the hot seat regardless of his record.

If injuries prevent us from having a winning record, then I would say Kubiak is on the hot seat, because that is an issue we've struggled with since before he got here.

If we're 9-7, and one game out of the play-offs, and we lost 6 games by 3 points or less, Kubiak should be on the hot seat, if he elected to go for it one third down instead of kicking the field goal in 2 of those losses.

If our pass rush is still not respectable, and we go 13-3 on the strength of our offense, Kubiak should still be on the hot seat.

If we've got 4 first round picks in the front 7, & two of them are pro-bowlers, and we still can't stop anybody on third down.... Kubiak should be on the hot seat, even if we're better than 9-7... he should be gone, if we're worse than 7-9.

But if we're 2-14 because the President of the United States blew up the levee and flooded our City, then refused to help until the death tole became unsurmountable..... I would hope McNair would give the man a little leeway.

But all things considered, with the schedule we have this year, if we don't get ten wins, I would be surprised. & I think Kubiak will be on the hot seat for 2010.

 

[Runner]

My point isn't that there are bad 15-1 teams out there, but that the record at the end of the season only tells part of the story. To fire a head coach who appears to be doing everything right... IMHO, simply because of that doesn't make a lot of sense.

I knew there weren't any bad 15-1 teams out there without even looking. You know how I knew? The record told me they weren't a bad team!

 

[Runner]

To me it sounds like you're suggesting that when guys rag on him for being on an 8-8 team he just bows down and says "yeah, you're right...we suck"...

I didn't say he said that; those are your words.

If you can find where I've said the Texans suck, please quote me on it so I can retract it. There is a difference between not great and suck. The worst I've called them is mediocre.

What I have said is that the Texans aren't a great team with a fake 8-8 record. They are about average. I also think wins and losses are very important. I think scoring points is more important than racking up yards (and I think they'll solve that issue this year). I think stepping up and beating teams is more successful than blaming losses on the schedule.

I think the Texans fans should try to be a little realistic in evaluating their team - they should look at them with the same set of rules they use to evaluate other teams in the league.

 

[Runner]

I think it's plausible that AJ knows that he and this team are better now than they ever have been.

I have no doubt he knows that. The "best Texans team ever" may be deemed faint praise though.

 

[huckdabuck]

DIE THREAD DIEEEEEEEEEEEEE! Seriously.

 

[hollywood_texan]

DIE THREAD DIEEEEEEEEEEEEE! Seriously.

I believe this is the request...





Seems reasonable to me.

Lock it up!

 

[NitroGSXR]

Lock it up!

Please do.

 

[Texecutioner]

My point isn't that there are bad 15-1 teams out there,

What? You can go 15-1 and be a bad team? Sorry, but that is crazy as anything I've ever heard. Any NFL player will tell you that there are no easy weaks in the NFL. There is so much talent and parody around the league and you can be beat on any given Sunday.

And it would be impossible for any 15-1 team to only play one winning team as well. There has NEVER been a bad 15-1 team and there is no argument to ever say that there ever has been. That's almost perfection for god sakes.

 

[Marcus]

I'd rather be an apologizer than to be someone who loathes the:

1. baby steps

2. slow progress

3. no playoffs

4. a mediocre 8-8 season

5. and generally anything else that can be conjured up to prove that Gary Kubiak's firing is imminent. The axe is an inch from his neck! GASP!

The sunshine club is really just a bunch of fans who are more pleased with this team than at any other point in the team's BRIEF history. We're not the ones who are inventing imaginary, theoritical hot seats and trying to forecast how many years he has left, what conditions of failure have to exist for him to get axed, and then trying to convince others that there even is a hot seat in the first place.

In professional sports, the so-called hot seat is always warm and ready to get pretty hot over any number of things. So I'm not buying the whole idea that Kubiak is scrambling any more than he normally would be--He wants to succeed more than any of us do. And I don't buy the idea that he's a failure if we don't get to the playoffs this year. Heck, the record is even subject for strict interpretation.

To me, it's apparent that some of you guys here (the rain cloud club) are tired of the Kubiak era, and are ready to move on. Your tired of the Denver connections (as evidenced by all the snotty threads about it) , a lot of the rain cloud gang thinks Kubiak goofed up by hiring Bush as d-coord (yet they smooth it over by saying "I'll take a wait-and-see approach") , and I sense that the overall consensus by most of the rain cloud club is that Kubiak doesn't have what it takes because great coaches get it done by now.

You can say you're taking a wait-and-see approach, trying to not be too much of a homer, etc., but in reality (IMO) you've already given up and you're trying to foretell the future that you want to see occur. And at the same time, you take pot-shots at those who don't fall into line with it. Typical message board bullcrap. Let's remember who started the name-calling. I think "sunshine club" was the first shot of the battle, correct? Up until that point, IIRC, the thread was fairly civil and free of tags and labels. But when one side starts to lose a handle on things, it turns to an ad hominem situation where it escalates to name-calling and labeling and making fun of people.

This team is doing great. I love it. Sue me.

The great philosopher Vinny once said: Wake me up when it's August.

Kudos GP!!!! Best post you've ever written.

 

[GP]

Kudos GP!!!! Best post you've ever written.

Well, you and I hardly agree on anything. So, I'll take it. Thanks.

One thing that I can say that you were right about it: It has more to do with the level of talent that's on the field than it does with coaches and schemes.

I didn't always buy into that, but the thing that I think has made Kubiak and Rick Smith turn this team around from 2-14 to 8-8, and a shot at the next level, is more of a function of their ability to locate and position the right players in the right spots.

With Capers and Casserly, it always felt "forced" and not as if it were natural, in terms of the scheme, the players, and where they played and what they were asked to do. In fact, there was a lot of Fangio in Richard Smith and his squad of coaches...which led to the d-coord (IMO) doing all the wrong things with all the wrong players. It was just a repeat of the Capers days on the defense side of the ball: Read-n-react, bend-but-don't-break, go very vanilla on your pre-snap look, etc. Not too hard to bring a no-talent guy into that defense and get him up-to-speed on what to do. That's why a guy like Dunta stayed so pissed off all the time: He probably thought he was on a junior college team all those years.

Getting better talent has taken a lot of pressure off Gary Kubiak, IMO.

 

[Second Honeymoon]

Well, you and I hardly agree on anything. So, I'll take it. Thanks.

One thing that I can say that you were right about it: It has more to do with the level of talent that's on the field than it does with coaches and schemes.

I didn't always buy into that, but the thing that I think has made Kubiak and Rick Smith turn this team around from 2-14 to 8-8, and a shot at the next level, is more of a function of their ability to locate and position the right players in the right spots.

With Capers and Casserly, it always felt "forced" and not as if it were natural, in terms of the scheme, the players, and where they played and what they were asked to do. In fact, there was a lot of Fangio in Richard Smith and his squad of coaches...which led to the d-coord (IMO) doing all the wrong things with all the wrong players. It was just a repeat of the Capers days on the defense side of the ball: Read-n-react, bend-but-don't-break, go very vanilla on your pre-snap look, etc. Not too hard to bring a no-talent guy into that defense and get him up-to-speed on what to do. That's why a guy like Dunta stayed so pissed off all the time: He probably thought he was on a junior college team all those years.

Getting better talent has taken a lot of pressure off Gary Kubiak, IMO.

We have had plenty of talent since Day One even under Capers. Carr sank Capers almost singlehandedly and our defense has sucked ever since. Kubiak has turned the offense around ever since Carr left, but his team's defenses have been woefully poor and he has been pitifully slow to react and then we he finally fires the failure Richard Smith, he hires from within and gives the job to someone who is far less qualified than many of the possible replacements out there in league circles.

Why Kubiak hires Denver defensive coaching, I will never know...Marinelli was out there, Gregg Williams, Rivera, to name just a few. What has Bush done during his time with the defense to merit him keeping his job much less being promoted to Defensive Coordinator? I just don't see it...and it seemed like either a cheap move by the front office/ownership or just a failure of a job by Kubiak to recruit truly the best guy for the job. Was he worried about hiring someone out of the loop that would challenge his 'vast' defensive acumen or his defensive scheme preferences?

That being said, this thread has probably run its course. We all pretty much agree that Kubiak has to do a good job in order to keep his job and not be on the 'hot seat'. Some of us just have different ideas on the definition of 'good job' and 'hot seat' and its causes division amongst basically likeminded fans on this issue.

8-8 probably brings a little heat but probably not enough to be look at as serious. Worse case would be no contract extension and enter 2010 as lame duck. 7-9 or worse, all bets are off due to his contract situation.

I don't think that is unreasonable or doom and gloom. It's just NFL reality.

 

[dalemurphy]

We have had plenty of talent since Day One even under Capers. Carr sank Capers almost singlehandedly and our defense has sucked ever since. Kubiak has turned the offense around ever since Carr left, but his team's defenses have been woefully poor and he has been pitifully slow to react and then we he finally fires the failure Richard Smith, he hires from within and gives the job to someone who is far less qualified than many of the possible replacements out there in league circles.

Why Kubiak hires Denver defensive coaching, I will never know...Marinelli was out there, Gregg Williams, Rivera, to name just a few. What has Bush done during his time with the defense to merit him keeping his job much less being promoted to Defensive Coordinator? I just don't see it...and it seemed like either a cheap move by the front office/ownership or just a failure of a job by Kubiak to recruit truly the best guy for the job. Was he worried about hiring someone out of the loop that would challenge his 'vast' defensive acumen or his defensive scheme preferences?

That being said, this thread has probably run its course. We all pretty much agree that Kubiak has to do a good job in order to keep his job and not be on the 'hot seat'. Some of us just have different ideas on the definition of 'good job' and 'hot seat' and its causes division amongst basically likeminded fans on this issue.

8-8 probably brings a little heat but probably not enough to be look at as serious. Worse case would be no contract extension and enter 2010 as lame duck. 7-9 or worse, all bets are off due to his contract situation.

I don't think that is unreasonable or doom and gloom. It's just NFL reality.

I agree with some of what you are saying. I think Kubiak was a year late in ridding us of Richard Smith. However, I appreciate that he wanted to give the guy a fair opportunity, which didn't exist until 2008... 2006 because of a horrid lack of talent and dramatic scheme change and 2007 because of injuries.

Now, regarding Kubiak's choice in Bush as DC. I am willing to rake him over the coals if it doesn't work out but I don't think his selection has anything to do with being threatened. After all, the guy has hired Alex Gibbs, Ray Rhodes, and Mike Sherman (who actually had a different vision of the offense).

As far as the team having talent, clearly the defense underachieved last season. That being said, the talent level of this team has been atrocious. In 2003 and 2004, we had some decent talent on the defensive side of the ball, but it was old and breaking down. By 2005, the Texans were one of the least talented NFL teams I've ever seen.

 

[Runner]

I will sat that they certainly have given David Gibbs some interesting pieces to work with in lieu of Dunta not being around, which judging from this OTA, isn't necessarily a bad thing. We're getting a chance to look at some of the young talent we've got on the back end of the defense.

I think this paragraph clears up the Dunta situation. Dunta has always been a team leader, and I think he knew these young CBs needed as many reps as possible. He has sacrificed his good name with the fans by "holding out" (wink, wink) to ensure the secondary improves. The team and its fans owe him their gratitude.


p.s. I like this bright side stuff! If the optimism works out, I'll consider changing my username to Dr. Pangloss.

 

[steelbtexan]

I agree with some of what you are saying. I think Kubiak was a year late in ridding us of Richard Smith. However, I appreciate that he wanted to give the guy a fair opportunity, which didn't exist until 2008... 2006 because of a horrid lack of talent and dramatic scheme change and 2007 because of injuries.

Now, regarding Kubiak's choice in Bush as DC. I am willing to rake him over the coals if it doesn't work out but I don't think his selection has anything to do with being threatened. After all, the guy has hired Alex Gibbs, Ray Rhodes, and Mike Sherman (who actually had a different vision of the offense).

As far as the team having talent, clearly the defense underachieved last season. That being said, the talent level of this team has been atrocious. In 2003 and 2004, we had some decent talent on the defensive side of the ball, but it was old and breaking down. By 2005, the Texans were one of the least talented NFL teams I've ever seen.

Agreed

I think that Mr. McNair/FO have tied Kubes hands on how much money is in the budget for asst. coaches and a good portion of that money was spent on A.Gibbs.