Bob McNair, "We really wanted to keep Frank. It was tough, because Frank is a good coach. He really showed that this last game."
Just adding logs to the fire for why it's not always a 2 year setback to get things going with a new head coach. I gave an example from another sport showing what can happen with a first year dude coming in to a team with some established talent.
Where was this last year?? How many failed backs tried to run the system last year and had us near the bottom of the league in rushing??
I left them out because the point of my post was talking about running backs that put up great stats for a year or two in Denvers ZB system. Then becam nothing on other teams. We never got to see TD in any other offense, but Portis did have a couple good years not in the system. Fact is, the system can make some decent backs look really good. Hell look at Slatons rookie year. Hopefully Foster can be a star in any system, but my post was to question somebody saying he would be good in any system.
Disagree. It's not hypocritical in the least. If you create a system that puts a guy in position to succeed that well, then go away from it for no freaking good reason freaking at all, then there damn sure is good reason to criticize and it's anything but hypocritical. Kubiak nearly abandoned the run at some of the worst possible times this year. Foster had 1600 yards and all, but there were games the team could have won if we had controlled the clock more instead of running out more "bootlegs" that weren't fooling anybody. Of course, that's nitpicking what was a pretty good offense while the D was the real problem, but it's still a valid criticism. If you have a historically pathetic D, why the hell *wouldn't* you want to keep them the hell off the field? Every undereducated, inexperienced, unwashed armchair coach (like myself) knows that running the ball eats clock more than passing. You'd better believe I'll criticize Kubiak for that. It's warranted, not "hypocritical".
LOL yep. I mean it sounds so stupid that you wouldn't think he said it, but then this is the same man that gloated that other owners were "proud" of his team.
I was browsing old Chron articles and I found one that quoted McNair as saying that he didn't want to fire Capers but that he kind of had to after the 2-14 season. Seriously. He didn't really want to fire Capers after going 2-14. With that in mind, that Bush "quote" doesn't seem far fetched.
Kubiak just said Johnny Holland (LBs) and David Gibbs (DBs) are gone, as well as assistant Robert Sala.
Math doesn't add up: Foster leads the league in rushing. Derrick Ward was a very capable backup. Ward had a very good YPC average as well. Yet there were 6 other teams who ran for more yardage. Give you the Chiefs who had the 2 headed monster(and used them) and the Eagles with Vick adding a buncha yards with his feet. I'm thinking Foster needed probably 10% more carries but Ward should have been used more as well. The running game was underutilized. Just think, if Schaub was maintaining a 110 QB rating and doing well yet the team would pound the run when it wasn't working all that well. Folks would be uspet at not using the passing game more.
Saleh is Asst. LB Kollar (DL) may be ducking and weaving out of this since he's Asst. Head Coach. And Ray Rhodes is apparently just a semi-retired consultant. Pretty much a clean sweep, otherwise. Marciano apparently dodges a battle axe.
I remember hearing that Capers was given the ability to stay if he would fire Vic Fangio and Capers refused.
Gary kubiak during his conference said something like this: I had to do what was best for the texans;it was a tough day. Kind of funny the way it came out.
Dang... week after week Texans special teams looked bad (only SD looked worse). ST coacs are usually the "characters" of the coaching staff, and I am sure Marciano is a popular guy. But the texans needed to clean out that part of the team too...
