The All Encompassing FIRE KUBIAK & REPLACEMENT thread

[buddyboy]

Tell you what. I'll just give you an example that happens over and over and over here in Houston. Kubiak has done this since the beginning and shows absolutely no signs of changing. This is from last night's play-by-play:



Look at the time stamps. The Texans had the ball with 3:26 left and just drained the clock as if they were ahead. The Patriots called timeouts. They wanted the ball back. When the Pats had the ball, the Texans called no timeouts. When the Texans had the ball at the end of the half, they wasted what clock was left. Kubiak took two timeouts into the locker room with him. He basically curled up in a ball and begged to get to halftime. He plays scared in a game that you can't play with fear of failure.

It's a running joke around here that if the team is facing 3rd and long inside it's own 35, it's going to be a draw play to the right. And with about a 90% accuracy, we're right. It always is. Kubiak just gives up on the series and punts. No one's asking for 4 streaks there, but maybe mix in a screen, a bubble screen, hell ... even a toss play. Oooh, maybe even a draw to the left! LOL. I'm not busting your chops here, but you're just not familiar with the clock management issues, the tendency to quit in certain situations, the inability to adjust to the other team's game plan, and the questionable play calls in certain situations. Kubiak has a lot of strengths. He is a damn good play designer. When he gets this team's offense going in a rhythm, it's an awesome sight to behold. Generally, he drafts offensive guys pretty well. But when it comes to grading him as a HEAD coach, he's just not good. He can't do defense - AT ALL. He hired bad defensive coaches and stuck with them until his job was on the line. He drafted bad defensive players. He sucks at all the aforementioned things that a HEAD coach has to do.

He's just an offensive coordinator trying to play head coach, and he's not very good at it.

You didn't answer the question; are we 11-2 in spite of Kubiak?

 

[76Texan]

Tell you what. I'll just give you an example that happens over and over and over here in Houston. Kubiak has done this since the beginning and shows absolutely no signs of changing. This is from last night's play-by-play:

Look at the time stamps. The Texans had the ball with 3:26 left and just drained the clock as if they were ahead. The Patriots called timeouts. They wanted the ball back. When the Pats had the ball, the Texans called no timeouts. When the Texans had the ball at the end of the half, they wasted what clock was left. Kubiak took two timeouts into the locker room with him. He basically curled up in a ball and begged to get to halftime. He plays scared in a game that you can't play with fear of failure.

He's just an offensive coordinator trying to play head coach, and he's not very good at it.

The Pats called the first time-out because they didn't like the personnel they had on the field. The Texans were ready to snap the ball; they actually did snap the ball, but NE barely got the TO call in.

The previous play was an incomplete pass, there was no need for the Texans to call time-out.

The second TO is mandatory due to injury of their CB; they had to use the TO within 2 mins to tend to an injured player.
Again, the previous play was an incomplete pass, there's no need for the Texans to call time-out.

 

[thunderkyss]

You didn't answer the question; are we 11-2 in spite of Kubiak?

I think what they are saying is that Kubiak's 11-2 team won't win the Super Bowl. It's not inspite of Kubiak, but who did we really beat?

They are saying the AFC is weak, The Broncos weren't the Broncos we see out there today & we just showed everyone the Ravens are bigger pretenders than we are.

I don't subscribe to this line of thinking, but the evidence before us is hard to deny.

We're going to have to be a much better team to win our first play-off game this year.

The Patriots, Broncos, & really even the Bengals are better now than they were at the beginning of the year. We are not. That's the way I see it. There are good reasons why we are not. But nobody cares & they shouldn't. Kubiak's job is to get them better before the play-offs start.

& winning games isn't going to be enough. Winning games that count is all that matters. The targets been moved again, but that's the way it goes.

 

[76Texan]

When the Pats got the ball back; they were either in the sugar huddle or no huddle.

They had enough time to try to go downfield for a FG.
You don't want to call a time-out to help them.

 

[Foxboro Steve]

When the Pats got the ball back; they were either in the sugar huddle or no huddle.

They had enough time to try to go downfield for a FG.
You don't want to call a time-out to help them.

I agree with this. There was no need to call time out on D and help NE. Also, you wouldn't burn a TO on an incomplete pass.

Seems to me there's a high level of frustration with your team. You can micro-manage it to death. When the Pats went up 21-0, your game plan pretty much got flushed down the toilet. IMO, you have to have an elite (HOF-type) QB to lead a team back from three scores down on the road. Manning, Brady, Rogers, Brees are at the top of that very short list. They might be the only ones.

 

[eriadoc]

You didn't answer the question; are we 11-2 in spite of Kubiak?

That's because there's no correct answer to the question. In many ways, the team is 11-2 because of Kubiak. He has great play design, he generally puts players in positions to succeed on offense, and he has drafted reasonably well on offense. On other other hand, the team loses big games and plays down to its competition in many ways because of Kubiak. How many times have you seen our defense get a team into 3rd and long and they run a draw play? I'm constantly pointing out how the other team doesn't do it. They pass the ball. They try to convert. The defense got Brady into some 3rd and long situations last night and he came out slinging. Our offense lies down. Kubiak wastes clock where he could be calling plays. Kubiak goes to run the clock out too soon when he has a lead and that's resulted in some close calls this year. He lacks the killer instinct.

So in some ways, they're 11-2 in spite of Kubiak. In some ways, they're 11-2 because of Kubiak. The problem is, his deficiencies are much, much harder to overcome against the types of teams that they'll face in the playoffs. When the team is playing the Titans or Jags, it's a little easier for the defense to shoulder the burden of Kubiak letting off the gas or not playing aggressively enough. When they play the Pats, nto so much.

Do you think the Chargers were a playoff team those years despite Norv Turner? Do you think the Browns, Chiefs, and Chargers were a playoff team all those years despite Marty Schottenheimer? Do you think the Tampa Bay Bucs were a playoff team for those four or five years prior to Chucky despite Tony Dungy? It's not that black and white, but it can be pretty evident when a guy has shortcomings that are going to prevent the team from succeeding at the highest level. Kubiak's shortcomings are the same now as they were in 2009, or even in 2006. He's not changing. He is who he is.

 

[ObsiWan]

I think what they are saying is that Kubiak's 11-2 team won't win the Super Bowl. It's not inspite of Kubiak, but who did we really beat?

They are saying the AFC is weak, The Broncos weren't the Broncos we see out there today & we just showed everyone the Ravens are bigger pretenders than we are.

I don't subscribe to this line of thinking, but the evidence before us is hard to deny.

We're going to have to be a much better team to win our first play-off game this year.

The Patriots, Broncos, & really even the Bengals are better now than they were at the beginning of the year. We are not. That's the way I see it. There are good reasons why we are not. But nobody cares & they shouldn't. Kubiak's job is to get them better before the play-offs start.

& winning games isn't going to be enough. Winning games that count is all that matters. The targets been moved again, but that's the way it goes.

And it will continue to be moved by some.
Reason: They wanted Cowher here but Uncle Bob stuck it out with Gary Kubiak. Some part of them, no matter what this team manages to achieve with Kubiak as coach, will always be pissed about that.
ALWAYS.

Edit:
To be fair, I, too, will continue to "move the goalposts" as the team evolves. What made ME happy last year - getting to the playoffs - won't be enough this year. This year I expect an AFC championship appearance, minimum. Next year, I expect a Super Bowl appearance, minimum. The year after that - and every year that follows - I will expect SB wins.

 

[76Texan]

It's a running joke around here that if the team is facing 3rd and long inside it's own 35, it's going to be a draw play to the right. And with about a 90% accuracy, we're right. It always is. Kubiak just gives up on the series and punts. No one's asking for 4 streaks there, but maybe mix in a screen, a bubble screen, hell ... even a toss play. Oooh, maybe even a draw to the left! LOL. I'm not busting your chops here, but you're just not familiar with the clock management issues, the tendency to quit in certain situations, the inability to adjust to the other team's game plan, and the questionable play calls in certain situations. Kubiak has a lot of strengths. He is a damn good play designer. When he gets this team's offense going in a rhythm, it's an awesome sight to behold. Generally, he drafts offensive guys pretty well. But when it comes to grading him as a HEAD coach, he's just not good. He can't do defense - AT ALL. He hired bad defensive coaches and stuck with them until his job was on the line. He drafted bad defensive players. He sucks at all the aforementioned things that a HEAD coach has to do.

He's just an offensive coordinator trying to play head coach, and he's not very good at it.

Since 2007 (I used this as to refer to the time that Schaub first arrived in Houston), on 3rd or 4th and longer than 15, the league average in converting these long situations is 11.1%

The Texans converted at a clip of 10.4% with the pass (48 attempts,) and 14.3% with the run (28 attempts.)

They were sacked 3 times while trying to convert with the pass, resulting in further loss of yardage.

Which would rather go with?

 

[eriadoc]

And it will continue to be moved by some.
Reason: They wanted Cowher here but Uncle Bob stuck it out with Gary Kubiak. Some part of them, no matter what this team manages to achieve with Kubiak as coach, will always be pissed about that.
ALWAYS.

It will continue to be moved, but your reasoning is dead wrong. The reason is actually much simpler - we want a Super Bowl. When you're a 2-14 team, the target is to improve. When you're an 8-8 team, the target becomes having a winning record and maybe making the payoffs. When you've made the playoffs, the target becomes winning a Super Bowl. If you seriously think your team is a Super Bowl contender, then you expect to see certain indicators to that effect. Winning games against elite competition is one such indicator. Losing those games tends to indicate that your team will lose big games in the playoffs. Hence the frustration.

 

[76Texan]

I agree with this. There was no need to call time out on D and help NE. Also, you wouldn't burn a TO on an incomplete pass.

Seems to me there's a high level of frustration with your team. You can micro-manage it to death. When the Pats went up 21-0, your game plan pretty much got flushed down the toilet. IMO, you have to have an elite (HOF-type) QB to lead a team back from three scores down on the road. Manning, Brady, Rogers, Brees are at the top of that very short list. They might be the only ones.

There are always some who doesn't like a HC that has not won anything of significance, I understand that.

But sometimes, people bring up some funny reasons!

 

[eriadoc]

Since 2007 (I used this as to refer to the time that Schaub first arrived in Houston), on 3rd or 4th and longer than 15, the league average in converting these long situations is 11.1%

The Texans converted at a clip of 10.4% with the pass (48 attempts, and 14.3% with the run (28 attempts.)

Which would rather go with?

You're either not reading my posts or not getting it. I don't have heartburn with 3rd and long running, or passing. Do whichever they want. Just mix it up. Don't do the same 3rd and long draw to the right that they almost always do. Mix in a screen, bubble screen, toss play, draw to the LEFT (Woohoo!), outlet pass over the middle to the back, slant-go route, double move ... there are plays that you can run that are sufficiently conservative that have a chance to succeed and that mix up your look on film for scouting purposes. Doing the same thing every time is effectively quitting not only on that play, but in future games when teams play your tendencies.

Also, 3rd and 15 has its own set of stats, but the Texans do it on 3rd and 9 inside their own 35. So while I appreciate your point, it's not 100% applicable.

 

[Double Barrel]

Yeah, they think it's all Kubiak.

Last I looked, neither Kubiak nor Wade has played a single down this season.
But let's excuse the players.
It's Kubiak.

Just one quick question: Who picked the players?

You didn't answer the question; are we 11-2 in spite of Kubiak?

If you are satisfied with a great regular season team, then this is a good question.

Some of us want more than just a great regular season team. Some of us recognize that the regular season is merely a means to an end.

Great teams are forged in the playoffs against other great teams. So far, our team does not look like they are quite ready to compete at that level.

I love me some 11-2 like anyone, but the difference is that I'm not celebrating the record. Their record will be 0-0 come January, and all that regular season stuff was just jockeying for position.

 

[thunderkyss]

Edit:
To be fair, I, too, will continue to "move the goalposts" as the team evolves. What made ME happy last year - getting to the playoffs - won't be enough this year. This year I expect an AFC championship appearance, minimum. Next year, I expect a Super Bowl appearance, minimum. The year after that - and every year that follows - I will expect SB wins.

I understand moving the goal, but not see a Super Bowl until next year?

Last year we were saying we would have been in the Super Bowl had Matt been healthy. We also said he was the one injury that really took us out of the Super Bowl.

NO, I won't be happy unless we win the Super Bowl. Had we not got spanked by the Packers/Patriots, I'd have been happy with just getting there & playing well.

But now.... no. We need to win the Super Bowl. We've got issues, no doubt. But I guarantee you whoever wins the Super Bowl will have issues of their own.

 

[Foxboro Steve]

There are always some who doesn't like a HC that has not won anything of significance, I understand that.

But sometimes, people bring up some funny reasons!

and.... to continue.... the offense didn't go down 21 or 28-zip. I would say if you have a b!tch, it's in the secondary. Brady picked 'm apart, and there were some dudes wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide open last night. Lloyd and Stallworth should never be that open 35 yards deep. Whether that's a scheme, personnel, or both, I can't say, I don't watch enough of your games.

 

[76Texan]

You're either not reading my posts or not getting it. I don't have heartburn with 3rd and long running, or passing. Do whichever they want. Just mix it up. Don't do the same 3rd and long draw to the right that they almost always do. Mix in a screen, bubble screen, toss play, draw to the LEFT (Woohoo!), outlet pass over the middle to the back, slant-go route, double move ... there are plays that you can run that are sufficiently conservative that have a chance to succeed and that mix up your look on film for scouting purposes. Doing the same thing every time is effectively quitting not only on that play, but in future games when teams play your tendencies.

Also, 3rd and 15 has its own set of stats, but the Texans do it on 3rd and 9 inside their own 35. So while I appreciate your point, it's not 100% applicable.

The record (like I had said a few times before, you can use Play Finder at ProFootball Reference) shows that we used the pass 48 times and the run 28 times.

The draw play brings the best result, why not use it?

 

[Exascor]

It will continue to be moved, but your reasoning is dead wrong. The reason is actually much simpler - we want a Super Bowl. When you're a 2-14 team, the target is to improve. When you're an 8-8 team, the target becomes having a winning record and maybe making the payoffs. When you've made the playoffs, the target becomes winning a Super Bowl. If you seriously think your team is a Super Bowl contender, then you expect to see certain indicators to that effect. Winning games against elite competition is one such indicator. Losing those games tends to indicate that your team will lose big games in the playoffs. Hence the frustration.

I'm with you. I want to win the Superbowl. This year. Every year. It's a tough goal to have though. REALLY tough.

You know what Kubiak and Belichick have in common? Neither has won a Superbowl since Kubiak became a head coach. Oh yeah - Belichick has Brady too.

 

[76Texan]

and.... to continue.... the offense didn't go down 21 or 28-zip. I would say if you have a b!tch, it's in the secondary. Brady picked 'm apart, and there were some dudes wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide open last night. Lloyd and Stallworth should never be that open 35 yards deep. Whether that's a scheme, personnel, or both, I can't say, I don't watch enough of your games.

Both safeties bit the play action pass on one.

Bradie James (whom I said is the most suspected LB in coverage) just got back from an injury and allowed Hernandez one.

He's the one who makes the D call, and he allows Hernandez to be all by himself on another.

 

[Foxboro Steve]

Both safeties but the play action pass on one.

Bradie James (whom I said is the most suspected LB in coverage) just got back from an injury and allowed Hernandez one.

He's the one who makes the D call, and he allows Hernandez to be all by himself on another.

That's a problem that Brady's gonna identify every time...LB's on Hernandez are generally a mismatch. If there's one that's suspect to begin with...he should be shadowing RB's, and put someone else out on Hernandez. That's a DC issue IMO.

 

[Scooter]

I think what they are saying is that Kubiak's 11-2 team won't win the Super Bowl. It's not inspite of Kubiak, but who did we really beat?

we beat the afc west winner, the afc north winner, beat the bengals twice last year, the steelers last year, the jets, and are about to put 2 beatdowns on the colts. so, outside of the patriots we've beaten all of the playoff teams. kinda paints a picture doesnt it.

 

[76Texan]

You're either not reading my posts or not getting it. I don't have heartburn with 3rd and long running, or passing. Do whichever they want. Just mix it up. Don't do the same 3rd and long draw to the right that they almost always do. Mix in a screen, bubble screen, toss play, draw to the LEFT (Woohoo!), outlet pass over the middle to the back, slant-go route, double move ... there are plays that you can run that are sufficiently conservative that have a chance to succeed and that mix up your look on film for scouting purposes. Doing the same thing every time is effectively quitting not only on that play, but in future games when teams play your tendencies.

Also, 3rd and 15 has its own set of stats, but the Texans do it on 3rd and 9 inside their own 35. So while I appreciate your point, it's not 100% applicable.

When using the 9 yard parameter, the Texans had 295 attempts to convert with the pass at a 22.7% clip.

They tried it with the run only 88 times, at a 11.4% conversion rate.

Clearly, between 9 and 14 yards, the Texans went with the pass a whole lot more (247 times as opposed to 60 times with the run).

They had better results with the pass and that was why they went more with the pass to convert 9-14 situations.

Any way you look at it, Kubiak gets the best results out of different situations.

 

[wolf123]

This thread will be around forever...

 

[76Texan]

That's a problem that Brady's gonna identify every time...LB's on Hernandez are generally a mismatch. If there's one that's suspect to begin with...he should be shadowing RB's, and put someone else out on Hernandez. That's a DC issue IMO.

Right, and the DC is Wade Phillips who still has a winning record against BB's teams.

 

[76Texan]

This thread will be around forever...

Until we win the SB, at least.

Or maybe if we win it by one point, it will be brought back again, LOL!

 

[buddyboy]

It will continue to be moved, but your reasoning is dead wrong. The reason is actually much simpler - we want a Super Bowl. When you're a 2-14 team, the target is to improve. When you're an 8-8 team, the target becomes having a winning record and maybe making the payoffs. When you've made the playoffs, the target becomes winning a Super Bowl. If you seriously think your team is a Super Bowl contender, then you expect to see certain indicators to that effect. Winning games against elite competition is one such indicator. Losing those games tends to indicate that your team will lose big games in the playoffs. Hence the frustration.

If you are satisfied with a great regular season team, then this is a good question.

Some of us want more than just a great regular season team. Some of us recognize that the regular season is merely a means to an end.

Great teams are forged in the playoffs against other great teams. So far, our team does not look like they are quite ready to compete at that level.

I love me some 11-2 like anyone, but the difference is that I'm not celebrating the record. Their record will be 0-0 come January, and all that regular season stuff was just jockeying for position.

These are both good posts and worth discussing. The frustration here comes from, "we're good at beating mediocre to bad teams, we can't beat elite teams".

Which, from the two games this season, seems accurate. If we take the two games against Green Bay and against New England in a vaccuum, all indications are that this team will not succeed in the playoffs against elite caliber teams.

But really, if we're judging our team for playoff success/failure, it's not fair to judge them based on regular season success/failure, is it? We've seen recent Super Bowl winners have regular season mediocrity, yet post-season dominance. How can we extrapolate this to the playoffs when we've seen a grand total of ONE playoff run with Kubiak with a backup quarterback.

If we go to the playoffs this year and lay an egg, it'll be painful. If we go to the playoffs the following year and lay another egg, it's time for change.

Until then, if our goal is the Super Bowl, do you guys really think a head coaching change is the quickest way to that end? The moaning about Kubiak confuses me sometimes about whether people want change or they're just complaining for the sake of complaining.

 

[eriadoc]

...stats...

Tell you what, here's what I know, beyond the shadow of a doubt. Every single time they've run the draw play this year on 3rd and long inside their own 35, they've failed except once. I can go back and pull up game logs if I were so inclined, but I'm not. They're run it in just about every game at least once, multiple times in a couple others. They have succeeded with it ONCE. That's the stat I'm talking about. You want to take it to a more general place, but that's not where I'm going with it. I don't have a problem with Kubiak's 3rd down calls across the board. I have a problem with his play calling in very specific situations. Generally speaking, he does a great job. I've said that repeatedly in many of my posts. He's a great X's and O's guy. He just has no feel for adjustments and he goes to the "quit to fight another day" card way too fast. You can interpret the stuff you're looking up any way you want. I know what my eyes have told me, and if you want another data point, just go read the gameday threads. In the moment, when the play is being called, read what's being posted. Plenty of people are seeing the same thing I am.

 

[eriadoc]

But really, if we're judging our team for playoff success/failure, it's not fair to judge them based on regular season success/failure, is it?

There's a big difference between judgment and prediction.

 

[utahmark]

He has not coached in 6 years. Does he even want to coach? does not seem like it. If he did decide to coach would he have the same fire as he used to have? Would he dedicate his life to out team? If we did get him would it take 13 years to win a superbowl? That's how long it took in pittsburgh. You really willing to wait 13 years? I think Cowher is happy where he is. I would'nt want him anyway.

Do all you guys wanting a new coach think our players on offense would be good in any other system. Our offensive line would need a complete overhaul. Our recievers would need a huge upgrade. I'm not ready to rebuild our team. I know some coaches come in and win right away but only if the right players are in place for what they want to do and unless you think Kyle Shanahan is ready to become a head coach we don't have the right players to win in any other system, At least on offense.

Unless the Harbaugh's have another brother I don't know about or this team loses the next 3 regular season games and gets knocked out in the first round of the playoff's I would rather stick to with what has gotten us here. Keep showing up in the playoff's and maybe we might just get hot at the right time. Thats really the key to winning it all anyway.

 

[Marcus]

Just one quick question: Who picked the players?

That is absolutely no reason to be excusing player performance. I've seen that response come up every single time we have this never ending proverbial players vs. coaches debate, and I think it's weak. The players need to be held just as accountable as the coaches. To only point a finger at the coaches, screams "quick fix". And quick fixes do not exist.

 

[utahmark]

Tell you what, here's what I know, beyond the shadow of a doubt. Every single time they've run the draw play this year on 3rd and long inside their own 35, they've failed except once. I can go back and pull up game logs if I were so inclined, but I'm not. They're run it in just about every game at least once, multiple times in a couple others. They have succeeded with it ONCE. That's the stat I'm talking about. You want to take it to a more general place, but that's not where I'm going with it. I don't have a problem with Kubiak's 3rd down calls across the board. I have a problem with his play calling in very specific situations. Generally speaking, he does a great job. I've said that repeatedly in many of my posts. He's a great X's and O's guy. He just has no feel for adjustments and he goes to the "quit to fight another day" card way too fast. You can interpret the stuff you're looking up any way you want. I know what my eyes have told me, and if you want another data point, just go read the gameday threads. In the moment, when the play is being called, read what's being posted. Plenty of people are seeing the same thing I am.

He is not running the play to get a first down. He is running it to protect our QB from our non-pass blocking offensive line. We saw that we could'nt win in the playoff's without Schaub. I think this year he would like to see if we can win with him.

 

[eriadoc]

Until then, if our goal is the Super Bowl, do you guys really think a head coaching change is the quickest way to that end? The moaning about Kubiak confuses me sometimes about whether people want change or they're just complaining for the sake of complaining.

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, it's about pointing out the shortcomings I see in an effort to wake people up to the realization about Kubiak that I came to long ago. I don't expect Kubiak to be fired tomorrow, nor would I want that. But I do not believe that he will ever win a Super Bowl with this team and I do not trust him to win big games.

Honestly, this thread is no different than the ongoing Fire David Carr thread back in the day. Some people came to the conclusion that Carr was not the guy long before others did and tried to explain why they came to that conclusion. Other people bashed them for their opinion and argued against it. We'll see who's wrong or right about this issue, but it isn't about that, IMO. It's about identifying weaknesses in the team and analyzing it. Every single week this team goes up against a good team, the checkmark for coaching goes to the other team. That's an area that can be improved. Since I want this team to win a Super Bowl, I am going to keep pointing out that deficiency in the hopes that enough people will finally recognize the truth and sway public opinion. Plenty of people will disagree with me, and that's fine. I'm trying to be as respectful in my arguments as possible, because it's all just opinion.

 

[eriadoc]

He is not running the play to get a first down.

That's kind of my point all along.

 

[Foxboro Steve]

Tell you what, here's what I know, beyond the shadow of a doubt. Every single time they've run the draw play this year on 3rd and long inside their own 35, they've failed except once. I can go back and pull up game logs if I were so inclined, but I'm not. They're run it in just about every game at least once, multiple times in a couple others. They have succeeded with it ONCE. That's the stat I'm talking about. You want to take it to a more general place, but that's not where I'm going with it. I don't have a problem with Kubiak's 3rd down calls across the board. I have a problem with his play calling in very specific situations. Generally speaking, he does a great job. I've said that repeatedly in many of my posts. He's a great X's and O's guy. He just has no feel for adjustments and he goes to the "quit to fight another day" card way too fast. You can interpret the stuff you're looking up any way you want. I know what my eyes have told me, and if you want another data point, just go read the gameday threads. In the moment, when the play is being called, read what's being posted. Plenty of people are seeing the same thing I am.

What's third and long? Third and 6? Third and 18? Third and 25? Many teams will run a draw on a "third and a mile" to set up the punt in that instance. They give up the offensive series for field position. In short, lose the battle (the series) win the war (field position/game). If the D goes 3 and out then you gain in field position.

Posts like yours above would get crucified on the Pats boards. Guys would expect you to site a trend, and not talk about generalities. It would help if you gave some stats beyond the Pats game. I am not saying you're wrong, I am saying show me the evidence to back up your point more than just your frustration with play calling.

 

[eriadoc]

That is absolutely no reason to be excusing player performance. I've seen that response come up every single time we have this never ending proverbial players vs. coaches debate, and I think it's weak. The players need to be held just as accountable as the coaches. To only point a finger at the coaches, screams "quick fix". And quick fixes do not exist.

I agree with this, with the caveat that it's the coach's job to put players in position to succeed. When a coach picks a player that has a very low chance of succeeding and then puts him in positon, and he fails, there's only so much blame you can put on the player. When I look at rookie Ben Jones getting blown up by Vince Wolfork, I recognize that Ben Jones is not getting the job done. But why was he put in that position? In part because Kubiak thought he could do without Winston and/or Brisiel. In part because the guy Kubiak really thought could do the job (Caldwell) couldn't, even when he was healthy. When Jacoby Jones dropped that punt in the Ravens game after displaying a tendency to do that for YEARS, I screamed obscenities at him through my TV set. When Kubiak put Jacoby back out there multiple times after that, I redirected my ire.

Kubiak absolutely bears a large percentage of the blame for his players not getting the job done. There are places where it's all on the player, for sure, but there are plenty of places that you can easily point to Kubiak.

 

[eriadoc]

Guys would expect you to site a trend, and not talk about generalities.

As I said in the post you quoted, I can go to the game logs and so can anyone else. Frankly, it's not a disputed point around here. We all know, even the people who disagree with my conclusions, what plays I'm talking about.

 

[76Texan]

Tell you what, here's what I know, beyond the shadow of a doubt. Every single time they've run the draw play this year on 3rd and long inside their own 35, they've failed except once. I can go back and pull up game logs if I were so inclined, but I'm not. They're run it in just about every game at least once, multiple times in a couple others. They have succeeded with it ONCE. That's the stat I'm talking about. You want to take it to a more general place, but that's not where I'm going with it. I don't have a problem with Kubiak's 3rd down calls across the board. I have a problem with his play calling in very specific situations. Generally speaking, he does a great job. I've said that repeatedly in many of my posts. He's a great X's and O's guy. He just has no feel for adjustments and he goes to the "quit to fight another day" card way too fast. You can interpret the stuff you're looking up any way you want. I know what my eyes have told me, and if you want another data point, just go read the gameday threads. In the moment, when the play is being called, read what's being posted. Plenty of people are seeing the same thing I am.

Here are the numbers for this year.

With the run:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/play_finder.cgi?request=1&match=summary_all&year_min=2012&year_max=2012&team_id=htx&opp_id=&game_type=R&playoff_round=&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&quarter=1&quarter=2&quarter=3&quarter=4&quarter=5&tr_gtlt=lt&minutes=15&seconds=00&down=3&down=4&ytg_gtlt=gt&yds_to_go=9&yg_gtlt=gt&yards=&is_first_down=-1&fp_gtlt=gt&fp_tm_opp=team&fp_ydline=&type=RUSH&is_turnover=-1&is_scoring=-1&no_play=0&game_day_of_week=&game_location=&game_result=&margin_min=&margin_max=&order_by=yards

There have been very few true situations there.

When we have a lead in the fourth, running is not a bad choice.
When the half is about to end, running is not a bad choice.
When your team is back inside its own ten, running is not a bad choice.
When the outcome of the game is already clear, it doesn't matter what you do.

With the pass:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/play_finder.cgi?request=1&match=summary_all&year_min=2012&year_max=2012&team_id=htx&opp_id=&game_type=R&playoff_round=&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&quarter=1&quarter=2&quarter=3&quarter=4&quarter=5&tr_gtlt=lt&minutes=15&seconds=00&down=3&down=4&ytg_gtlt=gt&yds_to_go=9&yg_gtlt=gt&yards=&is_first_down=-1&fp_gtlt=gt&fp_tm_opp=team&fp_ydline=&type=PASS&is_turnover=-1&is_scoring=-1&no_play=0&game_day_of_week=&game_location=&game_result=&margin_min=&margin_max=&order_by=yards

Clearly we used the pass a whole more, especially when you consider where we are on the field, what the scores are, etc.

 

[Marcus]

This thread will be around forever...

Look on the bright side . . at least there's only ONE of them. Before someone came up with the "all encompassing" idea with that quarterback who won't be named, there was 50 fricken thousand of them.

 

[Porky]

This.

Kubiak is an above-average coach. He can draw up plays with the best of them, his players love him, and he has taken us from 2-14 to 11-2. But he is terrible at deviating from his pre-determined gameplan, clock management, and all things defense (think of the DCs he hired before Wade was hired).

But until there is someone out there who is better than Kubiak, we should roll with Kubiak. There is no sense in making a change just for the hell of it.

This

 

[Foxboro Steve]

Here are the numbers for this year.

With the run:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/play_finder.cgi?request=1&match=summary_all&year_min=2012&year_max=2012&team_id=htx&opp_id=&game_type=R&playoff_round=&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&quarter=1&quarter=2&quarter=3&quarter=4&quarter=5&tr_gtlt=lt&minutes=15&seconds=00&down=3&down=4&ytg_gtlt=gt&yds_to_go=9&yg_gtlt=gt&yards=&is_first_down=-1&fp_gtlt=gt&fp_tm_opp=team&fp_ydline=&type=RUSH&is_turnover=-1&is_scoring=-1&no_play=0&game_day_of_week=&game_location=&game_result=&margin_min=&margin_max=&order_by=yards

There have been very few true situations there.

When we have a lead in the fourth, running is not a bad choice.
When the half is about to end, running is not a bad choice.
When your team is back inside its own ten, running is not a bad choice.
When the outcome of the game is already clear, it doesn't matter what you do.

With the pass:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/play_finder.cgi?request=1&match=summary_all&year_min=2012&year_max=2012&team_id=htx&opp_id=&game_type=R&playoff_round=&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&quarter=1&quarter=2&quarter=3&quarter=4&quarter=5&tr_gtlt=lt&minutes=15&seconds=00&down=3&down=4&ytg_gtlt=gt&yds_to_go=9&yg_gtlt=gt&yards=&is_first_down=-1&fp_gtlt=gt&fp_tm_opp=team&fp_ydline=&type=PASS&is_turnover=-1&is_scoring=-1&no_play=0&game_day_of_week=&game_location=&game_result=&margin_min=&margin_max=&order_by=yards

Clearly we used the pass a whole more, especially when you consider where we are on the field, what the scores are, etc.

I didn't know you could do that. nice job.

 

[76Texan]

Take the time to go through each situation from both those links.

At the end of the day, people should realize that all this third and long stuff is just smoke.

 

[76Texan]

I didn't know you could do that. nice job.

I stumbled on it earlier this year, it's a new feature.

 

[Marcus]

I agree with this, with the caveat that it's the coach's job to put players in position to succeed. When a coach picks a player that has a very low chance of succeeding and then puts him in positon, and he fails, there's only so much blame you can put on the player. When I look at rookie Ben Jones getting blown up by Vince Wolfork, I recognize that Ben Jones is not getting the job done. But why was he put in that position? In part because Kubiak thought he could do without Winston and/or Brisiel. In part because the guy Kubiak really thought could do the job (Caldwell) couldn't, even when he was healthy. When Jacoby Jones dropped that punt in the Ravens game after displaying a tendency to do that for YEARS, I screamed obscenities at him through my TV set. When Kubiak put Jacoby back out there multiple times after that, I redirected my ire.

Kubiak absolutely bears a large percentage of the blame for his players not getting the job done. There are places where it's all on the player, for sure, but there are plenty of places that you can easily point to Kubiak.

And that falls flat when you consider what choices he had at that particular time. When Ben Jones, the rookie, wasn't getting the job done, who did he have an an alternative at the time. When he using Jacoby Jones at the time, what was his alternative, at the time? Just a little bit too much second guessing born out of hindsight, but I realize by now, this is the way it works. Monday morning quarterbacking reigning supreme.

 

[buddyboy]

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, it's about pointing out the shortcomings I see in an effort to wake people up to the realization about Kubiak that I came to long ago. I don't expect Kubiak to be fired tomorrow, nor would I want that. But I do not believe that he will ever win a Super Bowl with this team and I do not trust him to win big games.

Honestly, this thread is no different than the ongoing Fire David Carr thread back in the day. Some people came to the conclusion that Carr was not the guy long before others did and tried to explain why they came to that conclusion. Other people bashed them for their opinion and argued against it. We'll see who's wrong or right about this issue, but it isn't about that, IMO. It's about identifying weaknesses in the team and analyzing it. Every single week this team goes up against a good team, the checkmark for coaching goes to the other team. That's an area that can be improved. Since I want this team to win a Super Bowl, I am going to keep pointing out that deficiency in the hopes that enough people will finally recognize the truth and sway public opinion. Plenty of people will disagree with me, and that's fine. I'm trying to be as respectful in my arguments as possible, because it's all just opinion.

I can understand believing that Kubiak will not ever bring us to a Superbowl. I can see the deficiencies, but I think every coach has deficiencies and that these flaws that people see in Kubiak aren't so severe that a superbowl is impossible. I'd say we have just as much of a chance with any other coach out there outside of Belichick class coaches.

But if you truly don't think Kubiak will take us there, and you've said the goal is the Superbowl, why wouldn't you be calling for his firing? Otherwise, you're changing public opinion to...what?

 

[Exascor]

It will continue to be moved, but your reasoning is dead wrong. The reason is actually much simpler - we want a Super Bowl. When you're a 2-14 team, the target is to improve. When you're an 8-8 team, the target becomes having a winning record and maybe making the payoffs. When you've made the playoffs, the target becomes winning a Super Bowl. If you seriously think your team is a Super Bowl contender, then you expect to see certain indicators to that effect. Winning games against elite competition is one such indicator. Losing those games tends to indicate that your team will lose big games in the playoffs. Hence the frustration.

I'm with you. I want to win the Superbowl. This year. Every year. It's a tough goal to have though. REALLY tough.

You know what Kubiak and Belichick have in common? Neither has won a Superbowl since Kubiak became a head coach. Oh yeah - Belichick has Brady too.

 

[76Texan]

And that falls flat when you consider what choices he had at that particular time. When Ben Jones, the rookie, wasn't getting the job done, who did he have an an alternative at the time. When he using Jacoby Jones at the time, what was his alternative, at the time? Just a little bit too much second guessing born out of hindsight, but I realize by now, this is the way it works. Monday morning quarterbacking reigning supreme.

You cannot win every battle in the trench to begin with.
A ZBS scheme like ours normally have smaller linemen.
You win some, you lose some.
The RB has to read the block and make the right decision.
The QB has to hit the open man.
The receivers (especially the more reliable veterans) have to make the catch.

It seems like some people wants an All-Star line-up; and they will also be the first to complain about the cap situation.

 

[Doppelganger]

I am not sure I should post in here...

 

[Foxboro Steve]

Take the time to go through each situation from both those links.

At the end of the day, people should realize that all this third and long stuff is just smoke.

I just did it for NE.

On third and greater than 9 to go, the Pats ran the ball 8 times, converted one first down. They threw the ball 46 times, converting 17. 37% converted via pass.

In the same situation, Houston passed 38 times, converting 7. 18% conversion rate. You also threw 4 picks. You guys ran it an astounding 22 times, converting the aforementioned one time. That would wind the ever loving snot out of me as well.

The difference between staffs? I bet Belichick knew this off the top of his head, and clearly, who ever is calling plays for you guys, doesn't. Now, this is the old "put the ball in the hands of our best player" theory. But, as eriadoc has pointed out, it ain't working.

what a neat toy that is!

 

[76Texan]

I just did it for NE.

On third and greater than 9 to go, the Pats ran the ball 8 times, converted one first down. They threw the ball 46 times, converting 17. 37% converted via pass.

In the same situation, Houston passed 38 times, converting 7. 18% conversion rate. You also threw 4 picks. You guys ran it an astounding 22 times, converting the aforementioned one time. That would wind the ever loving snot out of me as well.

The difference between staffs? I bet Belichick knew this off the top of his head, and clearly, who ever is calling plays for you guys, doesn't. Now, this is the old "put the ball in the hands of our best player" theory. But, as eriadoc has pointed out, it ain't working.

what a neat toy that is!

You forgot to consider the situations a I had mentioned in an earlier post.

There are only but a few times that are true situations when we need to convert using the run (you can count it with one hand).

One out of five, for example, is 20%.


...

You can sort the plays by date by clicking on the headline "date" in that particular column.

We had 4 situations in the Dolphins game, for instance.

In the second quarter, facing 3rd and 20 at their 20, we opted to run.

Then we kicked the FG to take the lead.

Our defense was playing great; the call is not too conservative there.

The other 3 times was in the fourth quarter, when we already had a big lead.

Run the ball, punt, and play defense.

We were not giving the Dolphins anything the whole day, nothing is going to or needs to change now.

 

[eriadoc]

Here are the numbers for this year.

With the run:

That thing is not accurate. I just started looking at game logs to post here, and then I realized I don't give a damn enough to bother going through 13 games worth of game logs to prove something that's evident to even a casual fan. Nonetheless, the second game log I looked at had the exact situation I talk about. The team was up, but the game was far from over, and it was 3rd and long inside the 10. Draw play to the right for 6 yards, then punt. Then gave up a TD to make it interesting. That wasn't listed at your link.

I'm not even going over that crap. It's not worth my time. But if you want to use your link for stats, you need to cross reference it with some game logs on NFL.com. Your link is incomplete.

 

[Double Barrel]

That is absolutely no reason to be excusing player performance.

I do not disagree with you. However, this is a Kubiak thread. And this team respresents Kubiak as a head coach, from his coaching staff all the way down to the bench.

That is absolutely no reason to be excusing player performance. I've seen that response come up every single time we have this never ending proverbial players vs. coaches debate, and I think it's weak. The players need to be held just as accountable as the coaches. To only point a finger at the coaches, screams "quick fix". And quick fixes do not exist.

I did not excuse player performance. You can think it's weak, your right to an opinion.

The point being that the buck stops at Kubiak at the end of the day. His players, his schemes, his preparation, his playcalling. The players can only run the plays given to them. Gary calls all of those on offense.

ONE MAN - Kubiak - has more influence on games than any other person in this organization.

BTW, I'm not advocating quick fix or firing Kubiak at this point. I'm just saying that all the blind and delusional homer glasses that some folks wear need to be taken off. Kubiak is much like Norv Turner to me right now. He can put together a solid regular season team, but his team has yet to be anything until they earn it. I think we just need to be pragmatic and accept the limitations accordingly. The difference between criticism and skepticism.

He got his ass handed to him by Belichick last night. I do not see some magical transformation in the playoffs where Kubiak could out-coach Belichick. A team like the Patriots would have to beat themselves for us to win a playoff game, which is highly unlikely.

 

[Foxboro Steve]

You forgot to consider the situations a I had mentioned in an earlier post.

There are only but a few times that are true situations when we need to convert using the run (you can count it with one hand).

One out of five, for example, is 20%

Forgive me for being the noob, but I am not following you. Why wouldn't you want to convert? Running the ball 22 times on 3rd and greater than nine to go seems excessive to me. It's not like Foster is your only option. Johnson is the #1 or #1a WR in the league. Daniels is no slouch at TE.