Yeah but I said losing coach. I really don't judge success in the NFL as winning a superbowl or not, how many great players and coaches would not make the cut if people did? Just so many variables in the game, more so than any other sport IMO. It remains to be seen if the Eagles will be like the Chargers and have a rough time finding success post-reid. I guess Reid would be comparable to Kubiak, since his first job was at the Eagles, but he always was good enough to keep the job. I think a 4-12 year is bad enough to get anyone fired though...thing is coaches seem to do better at their 2nd job, so I wouldn't be surprised if Reid is winning the superbowl soon.
Except you wouldn't. If Kim's data is right, then every SB winning coach has done so within their first 5 years outside of Cowher - so he'd have been the only guy fired by this standard in the last 25 years.
You seem to be jumping around. Your original argument was that you don't fire a coach if you want to want to win a SB. Except it's been shown that all the Superbowl-winning coaches did so early, meaning the previous guy was recently fired (or retired) in every case. Wouldn't this be an argument for firing Kubiak?
Should have been fired after this game. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Houston_Texans_season#Week_1:_vs._New_York_Jets Week 1 game. All we hear through training camp is talk about focus, high standards, new beginning, blah, blah, blah, typical training camp bull ####, and then they start the season, come out and roll over like dogs. No energy, no fight, nothing. Same old Texans, and they missed the playoffs by one game. No excuse to play like that! Losing is one thing, but I saw no effort that day.
Those are better examples of it, but it's certainly rare for a team to keep a mediocre coach for that long. I also do not consider Kubiak to be a mediocre coach. He's a good coach, he'll get a job if he's fired here I'm sure. He's not a GREAT coach, and it's hard to say whether a coach can improve or not but he's a good coach who seems to never get credit for doing what he did and that's building a winning culture here. Thanks to him 8-8 is actually a disappointment to houston fans and not some kind of success like it was years ago. That was their best chance. There is always this short window in the NFL where a team has hit that perfect balance...because the nest year after that everyone leaves because of cap issues. That's why it's so rare to see a team win it back to back, because you win it once and everyone goes off to get more money. All the people we lost because of those cap issues after that year...Demeco, Mario (whose still better than Reed or Mercilus...MUCH better) Winston, err the RG whose name I forget right now. With those two we had the best Oline in the NFL. Foster was a elite player. Andre was younger...they had hit that sweet spot. It's just like Houston sports though, injuries always making us wonder if only Tmac and Yao had stayed healthy that year we got Artest...or if Haynesworth wasn't a big fat POS who was out to hurt Schaub because it was the only thing he was good for.
At some point, the double "expansion franchise" scenario still goes into effect. The Texans were worse off when Kubiak took over than an expansion team... a 2-14 team with no depth, no extra picks, and one viable NFL player on both sides of the ball (Andre Johnson). The team out there now is still basically part of the rebuilding plan set forth then (OD, Brown, Schaub, Foster, A. Smith... then later on, Cushing, Watt). Once this core has reached its potential, or can no longer achieve success, you consider changing courses with a different regime. Even though Kubiak has been here for awhile, its not like he's had different core players or had to revamp/rebuild on the fly multiple times (minus getting a defensive coach who actually employed a real scheme).
lol, I missed this part. And Cowher made the SB in his 4th year and made the playoffs in his first 6 years in Pittsburgh. I do accept a luck factor. It's very unfair sometimes...but that data is very overwhelming. And if you want to judge each situation on an individual basis, then that's fine too since SB's are hard to get. But if that's the case, then fire him bc of Marciano, bc of being forced to get Wade. Fire him for not improving this year if they don't get to the AFC championship game.
Look at it yourself, he's right...but at the same time all of those coaches had a bad year on their way to winning a superbowl. Except for Harbaugh, (whose worst is 9-7), Dungy, Gruden, Holmgren, Switzer, Seifart... It's about half and half if you continue to go on, so yes if you were to fire a coach the moment he has a bad year then you'd be firing a lot of superbowl coaches. These teams did not fire their coaches early though, the coaches they bought in won early.
Can we accept the situation though here that Kubiak coached in a abnormally tough division? How often do 4th and 3rd place teams go 8-8? This is when people were calling for his head, then he went 6-10 and then followed that up with his recent success. If you're not counting the first year (which would seem reasonable) he's had one bad year as a coach.
And if the Texans bring in someone else in the off-season if Kubiak doesn't get to the AFC championship game, then they can follow the same model of SB winning teams. I will investigate the prior coaching regime of SB winning organizations later.
I agree that his circumstances should give him some favor. Can you agree that he's had a longer leash though? Can you agree that he has also made some terrible decisions? I've already stated my position on when he should have been fired and when he should be at the end of this season if they don't succeed enough.
That model would be patience and stability. Which is what those teams do. It'll be interesting to see how long those teams stick with coaches that are losing or maybe even have mediocre coaches. Most teams in the NFL are way too quick to fire a coach and IMO if you can't tell if a coach improved or regressed then you've fired him too soon. Certainly he has, but I think that's true for a lot of guys. A lot of coaches are stubborn, especially the better ones. I don't know why we still have Marciano as ST coach and right now the right side of the line sucks. Our Oline sucks (and has for 3 games) and if that continues then he's going to have his 2nd bad season any ways. They knew it was a hole last year and it doesn't seem to have gotten better, even when Brown was playing.
Since this peaked my interest, let's examine not SB winning coaches, but the previous coaching regime to them. Before John Harbaugh there was Brian Billick who is already covered in this thread. Before Tom Coughlin there was Jim Fassel who 58-53 in 7 years, making the playoffs in his 1st, 4th (made the SB), and 6th year. Before Mike McCarthy there was Mike Sherman who was 57-39 in 6 years, making the playoffs 4 times and winning the division 3 times. Before Sean Payton there was Jim Haslett who was 45-51 in 6 year, making the playoffs only in his 1st year. Before Mike Tomlin there was Bill Cowher who is already covered in this thread. Before Tony Dungy there was Jim Mora who was 32-32 in 4 years, making the playoffs in his middle two years. Before Bill Belichick there was Pete Carroll who was 27-21 in 3 years, making the playoffs his first two years. I don't think this is overwhelming evidence of Extra Long Organizational Stability and giving relatively successful coaches the benefit of the doubt and a lot of time to win the SB. It's not super instability, but it's not super long tenures either. Kubiak being fired after 5 years might have been somewhat unfair given the circumstances, but hell, it would have been justified and not out of step with what SB winning organizations have done.
Keeping a guy like joe marciano as your special team coach is beyond me, I mean we have probably one of the worst special teams year in and year out.
One thing you will find as I looked at it too is that all of the coaches that were fired, were after pretty bad seasons, we are talking about 5 wins or less seasons. The Steelers have had 3 coaches in the past 45 years, most of the teams that have won superbowls have given their coaches a pretty good leash..unless that coach just has a flat out bad season. Once you hit rock bottom there is not much to lose any ways. You are right, that if he was fired his 5th year it would be the norm...but what is out of the norm is that Kubiak's teams have in general with the exception of one year, got better each year. It's going to be hard finding a team that has fired a coach that has had success, while you are right that teams will fire a team in 5 years, that's usually after the coach has had a very bad season, something Kubiak hasn't had yet. The 6-10 year stands out as the one bad season, which he then followed up with a 12-4 year I just don't agree that he should have been fired. The years the team starts moving back, I'll be ready to get behind that move because that means he's drafting bad, coaching these guys up bad, and is not filling holes and reloading correctly. These teams are not firing coaches that are winning divisions and going to the playoffs. At least if they are smart. If Kubiak starts losing, if he goes 4-12 or even loses the division then I could see him being replaced because he's set the expectation of winning the division and going to the playoffs so that's the expectation he has to meet nearly every year. I guess we agree to disagree. I just think the stablest of franchises do have a model of patience. They aren't replacing coordinators every year like the Cowboys and they are just fine with their coaches making the playoffs. Within those 10 year spans those teams have about 2-3 coaches. 10 years as a coach is considered a long time so 5 years isn't exactly really short either.
I would have never, never hired either Kubiak or Schaub. I thought they were bad decisions initially, and I still think they were bad choices. Rising tides floats all ships. The talent level of the team has vastly improved, so they get credit for making the playoffs. They don't deserve it. Our first playoff game was lead by a back up QB, Schaub didn't play. I think that the team has "succeeded" in spite of Kubiak. Imagine what they could do with an elite coach and an elite QB. I have believed that, believe it now, and will continue to believe it. Say what you want, with the right leadership this team could do better.
Some ignorance on this bored really just pisses me off... Schaubs fine.. there's only 3 hall of fame qbs in the league.. Not everyone can have one.
