What's interesting is that it appears there is a sector of people who think success isn't entirely or exclusively earned, but rather it's in conjunction with good fortune. Luck, good fortune, a series of circumstantial events. Fate.
This explains why some are a little bit more "chill" as it pertains to whether a coach should be fired or not.
I'm not saying that the Rabitt's Foot gang doesn't think Kubiak should have been fired--A lot of them have said that he should have been fired. But I think it explains their willingness to not get their panties in a bunch like the Soapers have over the deal. Too many factors involved, possibly, to say it was this or that (exclusively).
THEORY: Soapers think the end result is a sum total of the efforts of the people in charge of managing, planning, coaching, and playing the game of football. Rabbit Footers think that an element outside the control of man is linked to the end result (in addition to managing, planning, etc.).
This could explain why each side is entrenched against the other so often. On one side, there are those who think you can rise above and conquer any obstacle in your path--It's you vs. the world, find a way to adapt and overcome. On the other side of the aisle, there's a group who indeed values all of those ideals yet also thinks there's a certain ceiling you reach pertaining to the element of "What if Drew Bledsoe was never injured?"
My reasoning dictates that it was inevitable that Brady was going to get a shot. In the NFL, things seem to level themselves out pretty well. The NFL has always held intrugue for me because it's a place where everyone figures out fairly quickly who has the goods and who doesn't--The only squelching of talent seemingly arises either out of injury to the upward-trending athlete (Bo Jackson), trouble with the law (Burress), just flat out leaving the game altogether (Barry Sanders, Glen Coffe, etc.), or an owner and/or coach/GM who falls in love with the starter and doesn't have the good sense to see that the 2nd or 3rd string guy is the better option.
Even in the face of all those things I listed above, the best in the NFL seemingly find a way to rise to the top. One way or another, whether it's in camp, preseason games, injuries, a contract dispute and subsequent trading/releasing of the player, etc....all roads lead to the guy with the best talent getting his shot at some point or another.
To me, this renders the "What if Drew Bledsoe had never been injured" scenarios a bit of a moot point. What if Jimmy Johnson had never become a coach at all, what if he was a tire salesman instead? What if there wasn't an NFL at all? What if, what if, what if, etc. I think there is certainly something to the idea that a good bounce here, or a bad call by a ref there, can impact the end result.
I just think nothing of what I have seen from the Texans has shown me that they have a smidgen of ability to test the top tier of the NFL and truly challenge those teams in a one-on-one gameday situation for a chance at a SB ring. The offense? Maybe. Yet they still are a tricky group to rely upon when you look at 2010's efforts all season long.
I think we're a team that doesn't know how to deal with adversity and unfortunate bounces to the point of taking it by the tail and just throwing it out of the entire stadium. No killer instinct, IMO. No do-or-die persona, IMO. And I think that eminates from the top (McNair) to the middle (Kubiak) to the bottom (Players). There's a sense of "Gosh darn, we're gettin' our stuff together and we'll get there soon! Just hold on, everybody! We're a'comin..."
Grates on some people's nerves.
)
