My point was most of those successful coaches had stints of less than a decade with pretty much the same crew. Cowher, Shanahan, and (sorry I missed) Joe Gibbs seem to be the only ones who had very few constants from year one to the last year. Most of those coaches stepped down/were fired after their nucleus got too old/retired. They only had good runs for 5-8 years with the same nucleus. Dennis Green could be up there as well being as he had a revolving door at QB in Minnesota, but still had John Randle and Cris Carter.
I tend to think that Cowher would have more of a Pacells/Vermeil effect, in that he can be successful long-term anywhere he goes so long as the organization as a whole is not incompetent. The type of coach that can do a lot with a little (like making playoffs with Kordell Stewart at Qb), and if you give him some real talent (like when the Steelers got Roethlisberger and Polamalu), he can do really big things. Not to discredit Ditka, Jimmy Johnson, Shanahan or Mariucci, because you obviously have to know what you're doing to be that successful, but a lot of guys have to have a lot of things go right and have some very special players to win it all. I feel like Parcells and Vermeil always won as a team, and you could almost pluck anyone off of those teams and they wouldn't miss a beat. Obviously they come across some great players along the way (Faulk, Holmes in Vermeil's case), but it's not like the success hinged on those guys.
I just cant believe that a person like Cowher would be available and willing to come to Houston and that McNair wouldnt pull the trigger on that given the state of the Texans. Sure, McNair is a business man first, and the initial investment will lose him a few million dollars (pocket change for him)...but winning and playoffs will ultimately bring him more money and a larger fan base, not to mention, happiness from not choking year in and year out. Completely stupid and idiotic move to pass up on Cowher.
You do realize that, on average, after 3 years, there is an almost 100% turnover rate on each NFL team roster (save for a few positions like P, K, and QB)
It is about expectations, failure at their second job is relative to 1) what they had done before as a coach and to a lesser extent 2) what their new team had done prior to them getting there. Failure is a subjective term, so I didn't expect you to agree with all of my examples, but you could've been less of a dick about it after I went to the trouble to look up a twenty year sampling of coaches (and I'm sure there are more before these guys) at your request, even which after seeing you will not concede the point. So whatever man, Cowher is teh instant win!!!!1111111
How was I a dick about it? Just because some of your examples (Art Shell, really?) drew lols from me doesn't mean I was a dick to you. And I did concede the point that failure is possible, but I don't think the examples you gave are good sampling of failures considering the Texans current state.
Let's say Coughlin is canned by the Giants and they win the Cowher sweepstakes...what would the general consensus be about hiring Coughlin as HC?
I was going to add that to my last post. If for some reason the Giants fire Coughlin and hire Cower, I would be perfectly fine with bringing in Coughlin as HC. I'll take him over any other coach currently on the hotseat with their current team. Even Fisher. And I'd sure as hell take him over Kubiak...
6 years, 4 winning seasons, 3 playoff appearances, 2 playoff wins. 54-38 overall record. He failed miserably in his 2nd gig. How is that an invalid example? The Herman Edwards example was the weakest, which I openly admitted. He had modest success in NYJ (3 playoff appearances, 2 playoff wins, 3 winning seasons in 5 years). Not a world beater by any means, but based on his prior performance in NYJ, he bombed in KC, despite their modest expectations.
I completely disagree here. You're saying that it would be a smart business decision to stick with a coach who you know isn't working because you're unsure of about 6 months of a labor situation. And in the process, pass on a very unique opportunity to acquire arguably the best coach that will be available anytime in the next few years. That's a terrible business decision all around. This is all true - but good business decisions aren't about doing what is guaranteed not to end badly. They are about doing what is needed to give your chance at greatness. So the fact that Kubiak's salary would be a guaranteed loss doesn't make it a bad decision to fire him.
Art Shell? Really? You need me to explain why he is invalid? How about because he went 12 years between coaching gigs and when he was finally brought back it was to the Senile Al Davis controlled Raiders and he was so out of touch with football that he brought back a guy who had been out of football for years as well.
Read my signature. I want Kubiak gone no matter what. But I don't think he's *going* to be gone unless my plan happens. Not saying I agree with it, just saying that's how it is. Too much risk for Bobby, IMO.
The 12 years thing makes sense, the Al Davis thing is iffy... as others have succeeded and failed with him in control in the modern era. Unless Moe knows something we don't about the correlation between Al Davis' actions and the Raiders failure/success.
Coaches: I think too many are trying to boil things down way too far. There are coaches that won ring(s) and flopped after. A lot of the time, those guys inherited a great team, got a ring out of it, but couldn't build up a team elsewhere (Mooch being a prime example - they did nothing but slide under him). Personally, I'm wary of great Dungy and Gruden may be in actuality. The coaches that can build and coach a great team to their full potential are few and far between - an enormous factor in success is always getting lucky with a couple of HOF guys. Still, what are the odds of an established playoff coach finding success with the Texans versus a talented coordinator taking his first crack at the big seat? Cowher spent 15 years with the Steelers. You can't run a team that long without proving who you are as a coach. Critics could say that his first 6 years were a product of starting off with a great team, but after a 3-year mediocre stretch, rebuilt the crew and had 4 stellar years out of 5, culminating with the championship. 5 times he missed the playoffs, 5 times he got them to the AFC championship game. Worst year was 6 wins. As far as listing coaches, I'd say look at the ones who stayed with a team for at least 8 years (or had success in general for 10+ years) and made it to the Superbowl at least twice. That shortens the list considerably, but weeds out those that don't belong (Herm Edwards? Seriously?). Shanahan remains a valid knock - he's already alienated the entire lockerroom after being so arrogant. He needed to clean house if he was going to be such a jack to the vets. Seifert is another guy I'd argue was able to ride off an inherited team (Bill Walsh). I'd be thrilled if we either brought in Cowher or Fisher. I'm not a fan of Coughlin, personally. He can't coexist with star players with the way he communicates. High likelihood of teams tuning him out and turning on him inside of 3 years, despite his rings.
How do you inherit a team for 8 years...? I can see riding coattails for 2 years... maybe 3... but 8? All this being said, I would be much more confident in Cowher, Gruden, Fisher, or Coughlin succeeding here next year than Kubiak. Problem is, Bob is the one writing the checks... not Donny
Not trying to be mean, but if the point is to come up with folks that are comparable to Cowher.....they should be comparable. Cowher with Steelers: 149-90-1 (0.623) 5 AFC appearances, 2 AFC championships, 1 Super Bowl win 10 playoff appearances in 15 years Shell: 54-38 (0.587) 1 AFC appearance (loss) 3 playoff appearances in 6 years
They never had to rebuild that team - with no salary cap, that was one of the teams that kept adding talent to no end, including the mercenary team that won in 94. My point was that Seifert never rebuilt a team that fell out of contention. He went to Carolina and couldn't do it. Something that our new coach absolutely must do and something that Cowher has done. No argument on that point
Their tenures aren't much comparable in size, but if Shell stayed with the Raiders for as long as Cowher did with the Steelers and kept up his W/L pace, his overall record wouldn't be too far off from what Cowher's was. Probably would've picked up some decent playoff runs along the way, too. It's hard to find any comparisons to Cowher simply because of how freakin' long he was in Pittsburgh. My point was to show that previous success does not guarantee future success. Cowher looks like the best bet, he is the big fish in the pond no doubt, but I am not going to buy my superbowl ticket just because he's coming here... maybe it is just my jaded Texans heart, but I could see Jesus Christ coming here and f***ing up badly.
That's cool, but you don't think that it gives greater odds of suceeding versus a first time head coach? I wouldn't either, I want them to take the next step, and Super Bowls are so elusive, it's silly for anyone to expect someone to bring it. I want them to be a serious time that make the playoffs more often than not, and get a few victories there. Kubiak was good for breathing life into the offense, now it's time for the next step. I'm not as confident about Gruden, Dungy, etc...but in Cowher I trust.
Oh I understand - sorry if I came across thinking you wanted to keep him. I just think people are too quickly jumping on the idea that McNair simply won't do anything. I don't think we know enough about his background to say whether he'd fire Kubiak or not. He certainly fired Capers the minute they took their first step backward, but it was also a much bigger step back. I also think a good businessperson is going to be forward-looking, and they won't let a short-term contract affect their long-term vision if the first opportunity presents itself. I'd like to believe McNair is smart enough to see that bigger version. But like the rest of it, it's all conjecture at this point. We'll hopefully know in early January!
