Also, being *ok* with losing that game and expecting them to lose are two different things. Given how many games they've pissed away this year, no one should be *ok* with losing that game.
Philly has a short week too, so that doesn't matter. But to answer your question, I guess I'd have to say 2 out of every 5 teams in the NFL would be favored, since their home record was 3-2 as of yesterday. Donny, all I'm saying is that I'm tired of the "moral" victories and all the excuses that come along with them.
I imagine a short week does matter, if you're on the road, especially facing an opponent you rarely play. When you have 3 days to prepare, and you have to spend 1 of them traveling, that is a much larger percentage of your prep time lost than during a normal week. Whereas Philly didn't lose that time. An extra day of prep could mean quite a bit in a game like that. Anyway, you know that only a handful of teams would've been favored to win that game. I'm not touting any moral victories, I'm trying to get you to realize that expecting to lose this game isn't some kind of acceptance of mediocrity. Lots of good teams wouldn't have been expected to win that game.
Let's wait and see how the Chiefs finish, but we had that cake schedule last year and managed only 9-7 by losing to a beatable Arizona team and literally blowing all but one of our division games. The Chiefs have absolutely made progress, and I expect them to be in the playoff hunt even next year. They aren't simply last years 4 win team with a softer schedule. The schedule is soft and their record will be inflated, but look at some of the steps they made for improvement that we have not: - Signed a solid vet RB to shore the position (Arian Foster has covered up the weakness we appeared to have going into the season, but you could parallel this to us needing a veteran CB) - Draft picks have panned out early: Eric Berry and Javier Arenas - Most of all, added PROVEN COACHES as coordinators. They didn't sit around and wait for years to see if unproven coaches could get it done. A lot of this is because they also have a proven GM.
I knew someone would call me out on the Chiefs comparison. I almost didn't list it. What about just the Falcons? They were 9-7 last year (does that record sound familiar?) Do you think the Falcons would have gone 0-4 against the Cowboys, Jags, Colts, and Chargers this year? Ric, I get that we have a hard schedule this year but I personally think the strength-of-schedule bit doesn't hold nearly as much weight as it used to in the NFL. Ever hear the old "on any given Sunday" expression? With a few exceptions, there really isn't much difference talent-wise that separates a 6-10 team from a 10-6 team these days. It's not like the Eagles vs. the Texans is some kind of a colossal Pearland vs. Cy-Creek type matchup... ( ) And you know what? I'm to the point where I would take an 11-5 season with a playoff win or 2 and to hell with what happens after that. I don't really care about sustaining a turnaround for more than one year. I just want a turnaround. Besides, there's no guarantee ANY team can sustain a turnaround for more than one year. But us Texan fans have no way of knowing that - since we're still waiting for that elusive turnaround season... The Eagles were 3-2 at home and the Texans were 2-3 on the road before last night. I'm not saying we should have been favored, but we shouldn't just automatically pencil in a loss. The Redskins won up there and they're horrible.
I don't want to split too fine a hair here; we absolutely blew it last year and I'm disappointed in the team this year. BUT... KC didn't play a 10-6, Warner-led Arizona team; they don't have to twice play a 14-2 Colt team (14-0 when actually trying); they have two division games against an opponent currently on a 5-16 run; they drew CLE and BUF (6-16, combined this year) as their two "parity" games while we got NE and CIN (20-12 last year). My guess is that if the Texans and Chiefs switched places, the Texans would be leading the West with 7+ wins and the Chiefs would be in last place and no one would be talking about what a "miraculous" one-year turnaround they've had. (And FYI: when you draft 5th, 3rd and 5th overall in three consecutive years, as the Chiefs did between '08-'10, you haven't turned it around in one year. You've been accumulating top talent for YEARS.) Didn't the Texans draft last year's Defensive Rookie of the Year? You'll get no rebuff from me here. I agree completely.
Like Parcells always said......you are what your record says you are. The Texans are 5-7. They are not going to be in the NFC West or AFC west anytime soon. They are what they are. They have always been what they have always been....either bad or mediocre at best. Sucks...but its the truth
I think the Falcons are a fair, if not wholly apt comparison: 4-12 in '07; 29-14 since. I hedge somewhat because the '07 implosion was, IIRC, the year a) Vick got busted; b) Petrino left mid-season. They were 7-9, 8-8 in the two years prior - so I would argue 4-12 was an anomaly, record-wise, based on extenuating circumstances. All things being equal, that’s probably a 7-to-9-win team in '07 if the youknowwhat doesn't hit the fan. Twice. So not an entirely different trajectory than the Texans over the same time period; difference being they imploded one year and put it together another (before falling back to mediocrity last year, again: more evidence '08 was a little flukey). I would argue the one mitigating factor is the Indianapolis Colts. I think even we, as Texan fans, take them for granted. But do you realize this will be the first year since 2002 that the Colts haven't won at least 12 games? Think about that. For every year of the Texans’ existence, it’s taken at least 12 wins to win their division. When you throw in Tennessee and Jacksonville routinely alternating 10+ win seasons over the same stretch... Again, I'm not excusing the Texans - but for them to have that breakout year, they had a much tougher road than a lot of these teams everyone keeps haphazardly comparing to the Texans in an apples-to-apples way. And it's absolutely frustrating beyond all belief that when the division finally does have an off-year, we're going to fail to take advantage of it. Crushing, in fact. I’m firmly in the “Kubiak’s had five years; enough already” camp. I don’t think he, as a head coach, is the primary problem – but I think he as a GM certainly is, and I’d welcome a change if a big-time head coach was brought on board.
I think one thing that might help a new coach coming in next season is the schedule. The AFC South looks to be going through a down period with Tennesse in flux and Indy starting to show their age. If the new CBA keeps the last place schedule format then the Texans are looking at a weak Buffalo team, Denver and Cincinnati along with probably Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Baltimore out of the North. If they keep the rotating divisons format then we'll draw the NFC South I believe which means strong competition from NOLA, Atlanta and maybe Tampa but another easy one against Carolina at home. A new coach can do some damage right away with that potential schedule as only Pitt, Baltimore, Indy (Twice), NOLA and Atlanta appear tough games with home games against Pitt, Atlanta and Indy.
But even WITH that mitigating factor, we still would have been 11-5 last year if we hadn't been SWEPT by the (IMO) inferior jags. And that MNF game against the titans...my GOD...that was the most frustrating loss in Texans history for me. It was precisely the moment I jumped off the Kubiak bandwagon. Also, remember that the Falcons are in the same division as the team that beat the Colts in the Superbowl last year. They've had their own "mitigating factor" for the last couple of years. Another example of turning it around quicker than the Texans is Tampa Bay. Yes, they don't have any "impressive" wins this year but they're undefeated against teams they're supposed to beat. Can you say that about the Texans? Have you EVER been able to say that about the Texans? Besides, the Bucs were 3-13 last year. They weren't really "supposed" to beat ANY team this year except perhaps for the hapless Panthers. Good to hear you finally state this.
At this point, if Kubiak is still here next year, I'm leaning towards jumping ship and not wasting my time following the team until he's replaced.
I swear I can't even have this argument any more. That's not directed at you, personally. I'm just so tired of it all. 9 years of this crap. The last 3 years looking exactly the same....5-7 with 4 game losing streaks in each of those seasons. It's just old...tired...boring. There's so very little that's compelling about this product to me right now...I can't imagine trotting the same thing out next year and pretending to be excited about it.
Hey man, some might tell you there's no hope in hand just because they feel hopeless...but you don't have to be a thing like that. :grin:
^ those are excuses u kind of are...but i think we all do to some extent u play the schedule u are given....u win enough games to make the playoffs..or u dont...the Texans dont....its that simple
Saints’ records since 2002 and before their obvious breakthrough last year: 9-7, 8-8, 8-8, 3-13, 10-6, 7-9, 8-8. And here the Colts are, on pace to win 10 games and everyone’s champing at the bit to write their obituary. Yeah, I WISH the Texans had the Saints as their mitigating factor. Since 2002, here are the top two win totals each year for the South’s first and second place teams (excluding the Texans): ’02: 11, 10 ’03: 12, 12 ’04: 12, 9 ‘05: 14, 12 ’06: 12, 8 ’07: 13, 11, (and 10 - FYI) ’08: 13, 12 ’09: 14, 8 I always argue degrees; try to avoid black and white. It’s never an easy: “This guys sucks!” He might – but there are A LOT of things to consider. I’m not excusing the Texans; I’m disappointed in both last and this year. I’ve pronounced Kubiak a failure as a general manager and that, at the very least, he needs to be stripped of power and forced to reconfigure his staff and front office. At the same time, you (universal “you”) can’t throw around “so-and-so turned it around in one year!” and compare it apples-to-apples to the Texans. If very nearly every single year, you’re guaranteed at least 4 games against 10+ win teams (and sometimes *6*, as happened in 2007), that makes it appreciably harder to get over the hump, coming from where the Texans came from. During Kubiak’s tenure, the AFC South teams have produced exactly three losing seasons (out of a possible 24). This year, the Titans will likely make it 4 (out of 27, assuming IND and JAX finish their 10-win pace). There is no other division in football this consistently good, top to bottom. Not a winning record among their seven wins. They include four victories against the 1-10 Panthers (twice), 2-9 Bengals and 3-8 Cardinals. Against teams with winning records, the Bucs are 0-4 and have been outscored 113-50. Looking at the season right now, the Texans should have beaten: WAS, DAL, OAK and TEN. And sure enough: they’re 3-1 against the only teams they’ve played with (current) worse records. I've actually been saying it for several weeks.
you are essentially saying that the Texans failure to make the playoffs/succeed is due to the division they are in.....thats an excuse they havent succeded bc they havent found a way to win enough games...period
Everyone knows it is the toughest division in football but at some point you have to rise above. I think also . . . I have no stats but the Texans seem to lead the league in WTF losses every year Rocket River
awesome!! rep for you (someone asked me how that was my sig when i was so down on the rockets...i told them it's my view with more important things than the health of my favorite teams)
