Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

A historical look at teams stuck in mediocrity and coaching changes...

Discussion in 'Houston Texans' started by DieHard Rocket, Dec 8, 2009.

Page 1 of 2

DieHard Rocket Contributing Member

Joined:

Sep 9, 2000

Messages:

9,390

Likes Received:

1,118

I don't have the time to get as thorough as I'd like with this, but I wanted to get a sense for how teams have fared in situations similar to the Texans right now. As in, how many teams have gone from average to very good in the standings because of a coaching change (or gone to very bad because of the change), and also which teams have stuck with a coach and succeeded even after multiple seasons of average play.

Just taking a quick look at some teams with that I think compare (trying to look for teams with at least 3 7-9 win seasons):

Buffalo Bills ('98-'03; Wade Phillips/Gregg Williams): Wade Phillips had a 10 and 11 win season followed by 8-8. They fired him, and went 3-13 under Gregg Williams in '01. Williams best of his three years was 8 wins. I think Phillips is good to compare to Kubiak in that they are both definitely capable head coaches, but are they capable of winning big? I think it's safe to say Buffalo made the wrong choice by not giving him another year.

Chicago Bears ('93-'98; Dave Wannstedt) : a little dated, but the Bears stuck with Wannstedt after having a 7-9, two 9-7 seasons, followed by another 7-9. He would only win 4 games each of the next two years. Safe to say they probably should have dumped him.

Denver Broncos ('06-'09; Mike Shanahan/Josh McDaniels) : not a great comparison since they had a history of winning teams and Super Bowl's, but Mike Shanahan's team was clearly on the decline and they stuck with him through a 9 and 8 win season, then went 7-9 his last year. This is still in progress, but it looks like McDaniels was the right move as they are 8-4 and on the verge of playoffs. Obviously their team compares very well to ours as well. They brought in fresh blood with a no-nonsense attitude and it worked.

Minnesota Vikings ('95-'01; Dennis Green/Mike Tice): Interesting case here. They were consistenly above average throughout Green's tenure, including 15, 10, and 11 win season's in '98-'00. In '01, he had his worst year and didn't make it through the season. Up until '07 they consistently won 6-9 games, but what would have happened if Green was still there? They let him go the year after Robert Smith retired, so the offense certainly took a hit. Was he at fault? They obviously downgraded with Mike Tice. Kubiak certainly doesn't have the history that Green had then, though.

New Orleans Saints ('00-'05; Jim Haslett/Sean Peyton) : Haslett started off well with 10 wins, then won 7, 9, 8, and 8 before going 3-13. Sean Peyton, another young coach, came in and turned it right around to 10 wins (with the help of Drew Brees). This strikes me as very similar to the Texans too, because they really tried to wait it out with Haslett but he just didn't get it done.

Seattle Seahawks ('95-98; '99-'08; Dennis Erickson/Mike Holmgren) : Dennis Erickson won 8, 7, 8, 8 before being replaced by Holmgren. Erickson took over a team that was absolute garbage. Eerily similar to the Texans in that we have a shot at a big-name coach like they did with Holmgren (and that Holmgren is potentially one of those big names). Holmgren didn't exactly tear it up, having 2 losing season's in his first 4 years, but from '03-'07 he produced winners and got to the Super Bowl (and lost in a controversial outcome).

Tennessee Titans ('95-'98; Jeff Fisher) : This is the one we've heard the most about. They waited him out through three 8 win seasons and won 13 games each of the next two years, and went to the Super Bowl. They rebuilt with him again in '04-'06 after Steve Mcnair and went on to success in '07 and '08.

Washington Redskins ('94-'99; Norv Turner) : They tried to wait out Norv Turner, and he finally plateud at 10 wins, but never made any noise in the playoffs. it's hard to analyze anything post-Turner since they've been such a mess of an organization.

Conclusion:
I think the biggest thing that I take away is that nobody has exactly "waited out" a coach and ended up with great results, other than the Titans. The question then becomes, is Kubiak capable of being on the same level as Fisher? I have my doubts; that example seems like an anomaly to me. History seems to point out that after 4 years, if a coach hasn't gotten a team over the hump, he's probably not going to. And if he does, is he going to ultimately get to a Super Bowl anyway (see Norv Turner, Washington)?

The other scary thing is what if we bring in a new coach and it fails? The examples of this are the Vikings and Bills. The difference is they were both perennial winning franchises that were probably on the way down in the first place. We are not.

I really like the Saints and Seahawks examples above, and I think those are examples we can really use in our scenario. Both teams gave coaches ample time (4 plus years) of mediocrity to get it together, then made a change and ultimately became successful by finding the right guy. In the Saints case, it was a young unproven coach. In the Seahawks case, it was a proven winner. Either of which should be available this offseason for the Texans- the tricky part is choosing the right guy.

Ultimately, the bottom line to me is that Kubiak, while he may be capable of getting us to 10 or 11 wins, will not be able to do it consistently and it would take a run of absolute magic to get us to the Super Bowl under him. There is not much precedence for a team losing a step by replacing a coach in scenario's similar to ours, so fear of that should be thrown out the window in my opinion. With so many options potentially available this offseason, the time is now to make the change.

#1 DieHard Rocket, Dec 8, 2009

2 people like this.

Mr. Clutch Contributing Member

Joined:

Nov 8, 2002

Messages:

46,550

Likes Received:

6,131

Great post. I think this shows that a coach is what he is. It's unlikely that Kubiak will suddenly become a consistent playoff caliber coach after 4 years of being average. Possible, but unlikely. I think it's worth the risk to go for a new coach and hoping we strike lighting in a bottle with another Sean Payton.

#2 Mr. Clutch, Dec 8, 2009
Dubious Contributing Member

Joined:

Jun 18, 2001

Messages:

18,317

Likes Received:

5,089

Misplaced under the Coach Cowher thread I posit that the head coach is probably less of a factor than 1. acquiring a super star or two 2. ducking major injuries 3. not having too many busts among your high draft picks 3. getting the benefit of luck, the preponderance of calls and turnovers falling your way. That, the actual coaching is done by the same fraternity of friends and families that just rotate from team to team.

I think it could be proven, but not by me.

There are superstars among head coaches and general managers but they are rare and you can't predict which young coordinator will grow into one or how long that takes.

#3 Dubious, Dec 8, 2009
Landlord Landry Member

Joined:

Mar 3, 2008

Messages:

6,857

Likes Received:

295

I'd like to see an historical look at some teams that fired a coach after a 1, 2, or 3 win season and how long it took the new coach to get into the playoffs. I don't have the time to look it up, and I'm not using this as an excuse for Kubiak(honestly, it's becoming harder and harder to defend him.)...I'm just genuinely curious what some averages might be.

#4 Landlord Landry, Dec 8, 2009
DieHard Rocket Contributing Member

Joined:

Sep 9, 2000

Messages:

9,390

Likes Received:

1,118

Landlord Landry said:

I'd like to see an historical look at some teams that fired a coach after a 1, 2, or 3 win season and how long it took the new coach to get into the playoffs. I don't have the time to look it up, and I'm not using this as an excuse for Kubiak(honestly, it's becoming harder and harder to defend him.)...I'm just genuinely curious what some averages might be.
Click to expand...

I'll try to look later, but I'm guessing that chances are even the next coach wasn't given more than 4-5 years in most cases, so it would probably be a moot point. I'm betting that in most cases, it took more than one coach replacement to go from 3 or less wins to 10+.

There are some exceptions, obviously, like the Dolphins last year. And the Saints were pretty bad before they got Peyton/Brees.

#5 DieHard Rocket, Dec 8, 2009
DieHard Rocket Contributing Member

Joined:

Sep 9, 2000

Messages:

9,390

Likes Received:

1,118

Dubious said:

Misplaced under the Coach Cowher thread I posit that the head coach is probably less of a factor than 1. acquiring a super star or two 2. ducking major injuries 3. not having too many busts among your high draft picks 3. getting the benefit of luck, the preponderance of calls and turnovers falling your way. That, the actual coaching is done by the same fraternity of friends and families that just rotate from team to team.

I think it could be proven, but not by me.

There are superstars among head coaches and general managers but they are rare and you can't predict which young coordinator will grow into one or how long that takes.
Click to expand...

We've got plenty of stars, and the only true bust to date under Kubiak is Okoye. But we've more than made up for that by grabbing good players in later rounds- OD, Winston, Slaton, etc.

#6 DieHard Rocket, Dec 8, 2009
Mr. Clutch Contributing Member

Joined:

Nov 8, 2002

Messages:

46,550

Likes Received:

6,131

DieHard Rocket said:

We've got plenty of stars, and the only true bust to date under Kubiak is Okoye. But we've more than made up for that by grabbing good players in later rounds- OD, Winston, Slaton, etc.
Click to expand...

To be fair, OD is injured and Slaton has disappeared.

#7 Mr. Clutch, Dec 8, 2009

DieHard Rocket Contributing Member

Joined:

Sep 9, 2000

Messages:

9,390

Likes Received:

1,118

Mr. Clutch said:

To be fair, OD is injured and Slaton has disappeared.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was referring to #1 and 3 of his factors.

Slaton might be attributed to injury too, since his shoulder has bothered him most of the year. Also to the fact that our interior o-line was destroyed by injury.

Any coach is going to have to deal with injuries though. We've proven that we have more than enough healthy talent to win (seeing as how we almost won the past 4 games), so it still comes down to coaching to me. Especially with that last game- you just don't lose that game with the playoffs on the line if you are a good coach.

#8 DieHard Rocket, Dec 8, 2009
Major Member

Joined:

Jun 28, 1999

Messages:

41,445

Likes Received:

15,886

DieHard Rocket said:

Yeah, I was referring to #1 and 3 of his factors.

Slaton might be attributed to injury too, since his shoulder has bothered him most of the year. Also to the fact that our interior o-line was destroyed by injury.

Any coach is going to have to deal with injuries though. We've proven that we have more than enough healthy talent to win (seeing as how we almost won the past 4 games), so it still comes down to coaching to me. Especially with that last game- you just don't lose that game with the playoffs on the line if you are a good coach.
Click to expand...

In addition, whatever you want to say about the injuries this year, they were much harder hit the past two years when they lost their QB for multiple games, as well as their all-pro corner and wide-receiver for extended periods. The fact that they are looking at an identical or worse record despite the extra health does not help the case for the coach.

#9 Major, Dec 8, 2009
Mr. Clutch Contributing Member

Joined:

Nov 8, 2002

Messages:

46,550

Likes Received:

6,131

Major said:

In addition, whatever you want to say about the injuries this year, they were much harder hit the past two years when they lost their QB for multiple games, as well as their all-pro corner and wide-receiver for extended periods. The fact that they are looking at an identical or worse record despite the extra health does not help the case for the coach.
Click to expand...

Well then you have to give credit to Kubiak for getting to 8-8 despite having the likes of Sage as his QB and journeymen filling his secondary.

#10 Mr. Clutch, Dec 8, 2009
emjohn Contributing Member

Joined:

Jul 29, 2002

Messages:

12,132

Likes Received:

567

Nice idea, OP!

I'll play along, sticking with the Salary Cap Era (1994-)

Cardinals:
Tobin/Plummer era (4 years): 7, 4, 9, 6 wins and fired during 3 win season
McGinnis/Plummer era (3 yrs): 7, 5, 4 wins
Green era (Warner/Leinart): 6, 5, 5 wins
Wisenhunt/Warner: 8, 9 wins and a Superbowl appearance (8 wins so far this yr)

Falcons:
Reeves/Chandler (6 yrs): 7, 14 (+ SB), 5, 4, 7, 9 wins, fired during 5 win season
Mora/Vick (3 yrs): 11, 8, 7 wins
transition year (2007)
Smith/Ryan: 11 wins, 6 so far this yr

Ravens:
Marchibroda/Testaverde (3 yrs): 4, 6, 6 wins
Billick era (multiple QBs, 9 yrs): 8, 12 (+ SB), 10, 7, 10, 9, 6, 13, 5 wins
Harbaugh/Flacco: 11 wins, 6 this yr

Bills:
Phillips/Flutie (3 yrs): 10, 11, 8 wins
Williams/Bledsoe (3 yrs): 3, 8, 6 wins
Mularky/mixed (2 yrs): 9, 5 wins
Jauron/Edwards era: 7, 7, 7, fired this yr

Panthers:
Capers/Collins era (4 yrs): 7, 12 (+SB), 7, 4 wins
Seifert/Buerlin era (3 yrs): 8, 7, 1 wins
Fox/Delhomme era (8 yrs): 7, 11 (+ SB), 7, 11, 8, 7, 12 wins (5 this yr)

Bears:
Jauron/mixed era (5 yrs): 6, 5, 13, 4, 7 wins
Smith/mixed era (6 yrs): 5, 11, 13 (SB), 7, 9 wins (5 this yr)

Bengals:
Costlett/Blake era (4 yrs): 8, 7, 3, 4 wins
LeBeau/Kitna era (4 yrs): 4, 6, 2, wins
Lewis/Palmer era (7 yrs): 8, 8, 11, 8, 7, 4 wins (9 so far this yr)

Browns:
Palmer/Couch (2 yr) era: 2, 3 wins
Davis/mixed (4 yr) era: 7, 9, 5, 4 wins
Crennel/mixed (4 yr) era: 6, 4, 10, 4 wins

Cowboys:
Switzer/Aikman (4 yrs) era: 12, 12 (SB-W), 10, 6 wins
Gailey/Aikman (2 yr) era: 10, 8 wins
Campo/mixed (3 yr)era: 5, 5, 5 wins
Parcells/mixed (4 yrs) era: 10, 6, 9, 9 wins
Phillips/Romo (3 yrs) era: 13, 9 wins (8 so far this yr)

Broncos Shanahan (14 yrs) era:
/Elway: 8, 13, 12 (SB-W), 14 (SB-W) wins
/Griese: 6, 11, 8, 9 wins
/Plummer: 10, 10, 13, 9 wins
/Cutler: 7, 8 wins

Lions:
Ross/mixed (4 yrs) era: 9, 5, 8, 9 wins
Mornhinweg/mixed (2 yr) era: 2, 3 wins
Mariucci/Harrington (4 yr) era: 5, 6, 5 wins
Marinelli/Kitna (3 yr) era: 3, 7, ZERO

Packers:
Sherman/Farve (6 yr) era: 9, 12, 12, 10, 10, 4 wins
McCarthy/mixed (4 yr) era: 8, 13, 6 wins (8 this yr)

Colts:
Infante/Harbaugh ( 2yr) era: 9, 3 wins
Mora/Manning (4 yr) era: 3, 13, 10, 6 wins
Dungy/Manning (7 yr) era: 10, 12, 12, 14, 12 (SB-W), 13, 12 wins (note: WOW)

Jags:
Coughlin/Brunell (8 yr) era: 4, 9, 11, 11, 14, 7, 6, 6 wins
Del Rio/mixed (7 yr) era: 5, 9, 12, 8, 11, 5 wins (7 so far this yr)

Chiefs:
Cunninghan/Grbac (2 yr) era: 9, 7 wins
Vermeil/Green (5 yr) era: 6, 8, 13, 7, 10 wins
Edwards/Huard (3 yr) era: 9, 4, 2 wins

Fins:
Johnson/Marino (4 yr) era: 8, 9, 10, 9 wins
Wannstedt/Fiedler (5 yr) era: 11, 11, 9, 10, 4 wins
Saban/mixed (2 yr): 9, 6 wins

Vikings:
Tice/Culpepper (4 yr) era: 6, 9, 8, 9 wins
Childress/mixed (4 yr) era: 6, 8, 10 wins (10 this yr)

Pats:
Carroll/Bledsoe (3 yr) era: 10, 9, 8 wins
Belichick/Brady (10 yr) era: 5, 11 (SB-W), 9, 14 (SB-W), 14 (SB-W), 10, 12, 16 (SB), 11 wins (7 this yr)

Saints:
Ditka/Tolliver (3 yr) era: 6, 6, 3 wins
Hastlett/Brooks (6 yr) era: 10, 7, 9, 8, 8, 3 wins
Payton/Brees (4 yr) era: 10, 7, 8 wins (12 this yr)

Giants:
Reeves/Brown (4 yr) era: 11, 9, 5, 6 wins
Fassel/Collins (7 yr) era: 10, 8, 7, 12, 7, 10, 4 wins
Coughlin/Manning (6 yr) era: 6, 11, 8, 10 (SB-W), 12 wins (7 this yr)

Jets:
Kotite/mixed (2 yr) era: 3, 1 wins
Parcells/mixed (3 yr) era: 9, 12, 8 wins
(Groh - 9 wins)
Edwards/Pennington (5 yr) era: 10, 9, 6, 10, 4 wins
Mangini/Pennington (3 yr) era: 10, 4, 9 wins

Raiders:
Yikes. Let's just say Gruden (8, 8, 12, 10 wins) was the only real era they've had with the cap.

Eagles:
Rhodes/mixed (4 yr) era: 10, 10, 6, 3 wins
Reid/McNabb (11 yr) era: 5, 11, 11, 12, 12, 13, 6, 10, 8, 9 wins (8 this yr)

Steelers:
(Cowher pre-dates the cap)
Tomlin/Roethlisberger (3 yr) era: 10, 12 (SB-W) wins (6 this yr)

Chargers:
Riley/mixed (3 yr) era: 5, 1, 8 wins
Schottenheimer/Brees (5 yr) era: 8, 4, 12, 9, 14 wins
Turner/Rivers (3 yr) era: 11, 8 wins (9 this yr)

49ers:
Mariucci/Garcia (6 yr) era: 13, 12, 4, 6, 12, 10 wins
Erickson/mixed (2 yr) era: 7, 5 wins
Nolan/Smith (3 yr) era: 4, 7, 5 wins

Seahawks:
Erickson/mixed (4 yr) era: 8, 7, 8, 8 wins
Holmgren/Hasselbeck (10 yrs) era: 9, 6, 9, 7, 10, 9, 13 (SB), 9, 10, 4 wins

Rams:
Brooks/mixed (2yr) era: 7, 6 wins
Vermeil/Banks (3 yr) era: 5, 4, 13 (SB-W) wins
Martz/Warner-Bulger (6 yr) era: 10, 14 (SB), 7, 12, 8, 6 wins
Linehan/Bulger (3 yr) era: 8, 3, 2 wins

Bucs:
Dungy/Dilfer (6 yr) era: 6, 10, 8, 11, 10, 9 wins
Gruden/mixed era (7 yr): 12 (SB-W), 7, 5, 11, 4, 9, 9 wins

Titans Fisher era:
/Chandler (2 yr): 7, 8 wins
/McNair (9 yr): 8, 8, 13 (SB), 13, 7, 11, 12, 5, 4 wins
/Young-Collins (4 yr): 8, 10, 13 wins (5 this yr)

Redskins:
Turner/mixed (7 yr) era: 3, 6, 9, 8, 6, 10, 8 wins
Shottenheimer/Banks 8 win season
Spurrier/Ramsey (2 yr) era: 7, 5 wins
Gibbs/mixed (4 yr) era: 6, 10, 5, 9 wins

#11 emjohn, Dec 8, 2009

1 person likes this.
emjohn Contributing Member

Joined:

Jul 29, 2002

Messages:

12,132

Likes Received:

567

Whew!

Things I take from the above:
1. The Raiders are a disgusting mess.
2. Aside from the (solitary???) Fisher exception, if you don't win in your first 3 years, it probably isn't happening period. In fact, nearly every coach peaks within their first 4 years.
3. There's definitely something to be said for coach-QB pairings being a big deal. Of course, QB isn't a concern for the Texans.

#12 emjohn, Dec 8, 2009
Major Member

Joined:

Jun 28, 1999

Messages:

41,445

Likes Received:

15,886

emjohn said:

Whew!

Things I take from the above:
1. The Raiders are a disgusting mess.
2. Aside from the (solitary???) Fisher exception, if you don't win in your first 3 years, it probably isn't happening period. In fact, nearly every coach peaks within their first 4 years.
3. There's definitely something to be said for coach-QB pairings being a big deal. Of course, QB isn't a concern for the Texans.
Click to expand...

Also from that, out of 55 coaching changes listed, 34 times led to an improvement in wins the next year. 21 times led either no improvement or regression. This does include coaches who retired or otherwise left voluntarily though.

It counters the idea that a new coach needs a few years to "rebuild" or put in a new system.

#13 Major, Dec 8, 2009

Luckyazn Contributing Member

Joined:

Jun 23, 2003

Messages:

4,375

Likes Received:

68

I cant believe Jacksonville are in the playoff spot.

seems like we have an avg. coach & qb = avg. team

#14 Luckyazn, Dec 8, 2009
emjohn Contributing Member

Joined:

Jul 29, 2002

Messages:

12,132

Likes Received:

567

Major said:

Also from that, out of 55 coaching changes listed, 34 times led to an improvement in wins the next year. 21 times led either no improvement or regression. This does include coaches who retired or otherwise left voluntarily though.

It counters the idea that a new coach needs a few years to "rebuild" or put in a new system.
Click to expand...

It absolutely murders the arguments of a few unnamed posters in this subforum.

#15 emjohn, Dec 8, 2009
Dubious Contributing Member

Joined:

Jun 18, 2001

Messages:

18,317

Likes Received:

5,089

I'll put some time in this later today but some trends I see are

1. Yes it does look like a change of coaches yields a better record the next year. But now so much as to get in the playoffs

2.Consistent winning is quarterback related (Manning Brady McNabb, Warner)

3. A few years after a Super Bowl, genius coaches end up getting fired.

#16 Dubious, Dec 9, 2009
msn Member

Joined:

Dec 31, 2002

Messages:

11,726

Likes Received:

2,093

Dubious said:

3. A few years after a Super Bowl, genius coaches end up getting fired.
Click to expand...

Of course, the genius coach was hired a couple years before the SB, too.

But shoot, why bother with going to a SB? We'll just fire the genius in a couple years, anyway.

#17 msn, Dec 9, 2009
DieHard Rocket Contributing Member

Joined:

Sep 9, 2000

Messages:

9,390

Likes Received:

1,118

Dubious said:

I'll put some time in this later today but some trends I see are

2.Consistent winning is quarterback related (Manning Brady McNabb, Warner)

3. A few years after a Super Bowl, genius coaches end up getting fired.
Click to expand...

When I think of Schaub, I have my doubts that he's capable of permanently being put in a category with the great winning quarterbacks of the league...but if a guy like Eli Manning can win a super bowl and be a consistent winner, I think Schaub certainly can (just like Eli, with the right supporting cast). I have no doubt that he is every bit as talented as Eli.

Also, I think it's only natural that a coaches run is going to end eventually after winning a Super Bowl. It's hard enough to win in the NFL, so once the bar is set that high it is hard to get back. This should not shy us away from going after the great coaches available, if that's what you mean.

#18 DieHard Rocket, Dec 9, 2009

Hey Now! Contributing Member

Joined:

Jan 20, 2000

Messages:

14,214

Likes Received:

4,912

Dubious said:

1. Yes it does look like a change of coaches yields a better record the next year. But now so much as to get in the playoffs
Click to expand...

you have to factor in timing. if a team is bad for 2, 3, 4 years, it's, at the very least, stockpiling high draft choices and (likely) developing young talent.

a coaching change might very well be serendipitously-timed and the new guy taking over may simply benefit from the younger players finally being ready. let's call it the tim purpura effect.

#19 Hey Now!, Dec 9, 2009
Major Member

Joined:

Jun 28, 1999

Messages:

41,445

Likes Received:

15,886

Ric said:

you have to factor in timing. if a team is bad for 2, 3, 4 years, it's, at the very least, stockpiling high draft choices and (likely) developing young talent.

a coaching change might very well be serendipitously-timed and the new guy taking over may simply benefit from the younger players finally being ready. let's call it the tim purpura effect.
Click to expand...

The other side of this is that a coaching change could occur because of terrible talent development and/or front office decisions that led the team to have a dearth of talent, leaving the new coach with little or nothing to work with. Oddly enough, this is also known as the Tim Purpura effect.

#20 Major, Dec 9, 2009

(You must log in or sign up to post here.)

Page 1 of 2

Share This Page