Right, they ran the same play that consistently abused Allen because of the defense we were running. I'm not sure you can blame Allen for a team torching a called zone. That's on Wade as far as I'm concerned. They are obviously exploiting the play you are running, so adjust. He didn't and the Raiders marched right down the field. He also called a two safety blitz (lol wut!) that left Allen on an island to make a tackle on a quick pass, something he is poor at. That's again, on scheme. Kareem is a better tackler, but Allen has better speed that generally allows him to stay with his receivers better. All that is moot thought right now. Kareem didn't burned on that bomb on Sunday, Manning blew his coverage.
And it seems weird to have to say this but - he made defensible choices. Capers was a solid pick; so, too, was Kubiak - a highly respected, young coordinator with a big-time successful mentor from, at the time, a very well-respected, well-run organization. Hard to heap too much blame on McNair for either choice. He's given Kubiak way too much rope and compounded that by hiring Smith. He should have been smarter and handed Kubiak an experienced, strong GM who could have been a much greater help to a rookie HC. But, by and large, I think he's been OK. I didn't love him bringing Kubiak back this year and demonstrating a lack of accountability - but I didn't out-and-out hate it, either. But if Kubiak fails this year.... he better clean house.
Another point I want to make on Bob McNair is that the man is not a football man. He runs a strong business side of the team but the football side has consistently lacked. McNair has DEFINITELY tried on that side though. Look at the type of people he has hired. Respected, high character guys who have been around the sport a long time. When he decided that Casserly (who was with the highest of high character guys in Washington for a good run) was not the football man he thought he was, he turned to another well respected, long tenured high character football in Dan Reeves to give him advice. When he let go of Casserly and Capers he went to an organization (Denver) that had been successful for a long time with the same staff in place and raided it. He took a well respected, high character football lifer in Kubiak and made him his head coach. This is akin to managerial moves in baseball in my opinion. Just because the move doesn't work out doesn't mean it was the wrong decision. He's hurt more by his inability to find a good voice to put in the organization as a team president type than any lack of effort or desire to win.
Read the post I made right after you made this one. Poor choices in terms of results, not in terms of the decision to hire them.
Yep; and as oppossed to his local baseball counterpart (who I also generally like), I prefer a more patient approach to the "Let's fire somebody" approach. I'm all for accountability - but McClane always seems to be rearranging chairs on the deck of the Titanic. And in the process, I think he's let a lot of good men go. It's hard to fathom Phill Garner and Jim Hickey were fired less than two years after taking a team to the WS. That's a little too extreme for my tastes. There is merit in stability. I think McNair, to his credit, sees Shannahan's long and successful tenure in Denver; the Steelers' long-tensured coaches - and wants to desperately create the same sustained excellence here. It's a good thought; maybe great - does he have the right guy for it? That's another question but I like the idea behind it a lot.
Exactly. Hindsight is always 20/20. The Capers hire was a great hire at the time. Look what he did with expansion Carolina before. Took them to within a game of the freakin' Superbowl. McNair wanted to model his franchise after the Steelers, so who better to bring in than Capers? In the end, 2-14 happened and that was that. I think it's safe to say Capers landed on his feet. Hiring Kubiak was a great hire at the time. He was probably the best coordinator out there with the most potential as a HC. That Broncos offense was unstoppable during their Superbowl years and that was all Kubiak. We had a #1 draft pick QB who needed coaching up after 2-14 so it seemed like the perfect fit at the time. He even had Houston roots, so the fans could get behind him right away. Anyone can 2nd guess a move years after it doesn't work out. The first thing he did that I strongly disagreed with at the time was retaining Kubiak last year. Should have been canned, no doubt. But despite us being 3-3 (and according to some here, mathematically eliminated from the playoffs for the next 10 years), this season still has to play out and it may prove to be the right move when it's all said and done. Most likely no, but you never know...
No you weren't disagreeing, but my initial post was ambiguously worded. I wasn't actually saying they were "bad" hires in the sense that he should have known better than to hire them. Those were "smart" hires. I just wanted to make sure I was clear.
Well it may end up "working out" but that doesn't mean he will be the right move. The flip side of "just because it didn't work out doesn't mean it wasn't the right decision" is "just because it did work out doesn't mean it WAS the right decision."
This is kind of how I feel about bringing in Wade. Ultimately, it may work out - the defense looks light years better than last year - but I'm still convinced McNair only brought him in for nostalgic reasons (i.e. attempt to placate angry fan-base by bringing back memories of Luv Ya Blue)
Yep. . . the playoffs are served on a platter this year but once Peyton comes back . . .or Jacksonville become competent I don't trust Kubiak to continue the 'success' of this year Rocket River
I don't believe this is fair. If the guy didn't have a track record of great--not just good--defenses and turning around defenses, then maybe. We don't know what is in McNair's head.
Unfair. Yes, the fix was in for Wade from the start with McNair apparently thinking Wade is a "rock star" in Houston. (WTF?) Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut (But what? What? Butt.) he was absolutely a qualified hire. Perhaps the most qualified person that this franchise has ever hired for a particular job.
What would you have done differently? Of course you have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. It's much harder to make correct decisions before you know the outcome of those decisions. I do know that he has spent hundreds of millions of dollars of his own money and pulled off a near miracle to get us an NFL team. I know that he has fired coaches and a GM that couldn't get the job done. I suspect more heads will roll if we don't make the playoffs this year. I know the Texans made a trade to upgrade the QB position. I know that we have acquired free agents to improve positions where we needed help. All fans are unhappy when their team doesn't perform well, but I don't think It's fair to say McNair doesn't care about winning. And don't you think McNair would make even more money if the Texans win a Superbowl? I think McNair is all about winning, he may be going about it in a way that you disagree with, but that doesn't mean he doesn't care, or that he is even wrong.
mcnair strategy is signability. <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/fQI4VYb6iGM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Winning is a cute by product but that's not what it is about guys. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves and believes in the tooth fairy. This is, was, and has always been about money. I wonder how much bob lanier made on this whole thing. wake up, I mean how many times is mcnair going to slap his wang in your face before you realize this? Winning? Yeah that's bob mcnairs bank account suckas! and if they win even better but who the f cares !! signability ! hooray
This cute theory is quickly debunked by the fact that the Texans spend money. He is not one of those owners who sits back and gets to the minimum threshold and then pockets everything else.
Exactly. Saying McNair only wants to make money is pretty silly, given the fact that he was a billionaire already.
