what? lol "they're getting better even though we lost two, that just shows how bad it is to lose two". As far as which year is worse than this year, the year before last. We lost Schaub, AJ, and (iirc) an o-lineman. We also had to give up for good on Spencer (unless that was the year before), we lost that TE that we drafted, we lost Glenn Earl (iirc) and several other defensive injuries, some even in the preseason. It was brutal. But the Schaub and AJ losses were just huge.
O-Line is a cohesive unit. The fact that they are slowly getting better shows how much of a cohesive unit it is. So losing 2 of them was a big problem. 2007 - Owen daniels was in full force so no TE loss can sway me. Sage went 4-1 as a starter with Matt out and outplayed Matt in the Titans game (4 TD's in 4th quarter), I agree about Andre, and the defensive losses were not as bad as this year.
I was actually agreeing with you, CaseyH (hence the roll eyes) on your assertion to ima_drummer2k's claim that our record outside of the division is negated by our poor performance within the division. ima keeps saying that just because we're 1-5 in the division this year that we're not competitive against the Colts/Jags/Titans. My point is that all 6 games were one-possession games that could've gone either way. We're a couple of plays from being .500 or better in the division. If we get some breaks (yes, there is an element of luck in being good) next year, we're looking at this team a lot differently. Heck, if (capital I, capital F) we got those breaks this year, no one is calling for Kubiak's head. That's why I keep saying, separate the results from the product on the field and the somewhat "flukey" nature of some of our losses. In other words, don't throw out the baby with the bath water. Go Texans!
How do you know this year's O-Linemen didn't outplay the starters? The RBs certainly outplayed Slaton. As far as 2007, they lost two O-linement (plus a backup, and another expected starter didn't ever heal from his 2006 injury). They lost Schaub and Andre. Their starting RB missed 10 games, and their backup was hobbled during the last part of the season. The defensive secondary lost 2 starters (including Dunta Robinson) and a backup that had become a starter. In total, 6 members of the secondary went on the IR, and 17 players went on the IR (compared to 10 this year)
You're saying it isn't? If we win just 2 of those 5 losses, we're basically in the playoffs already. How can you just brush them off because they were "close"? BTW, neither game with the Jags should've been close anyway. They are not that good. How can I put this..... 1-5 is not competitive. I don't know how else to explain it, man. It doesn't matter that they were close. We've been hearing this for 3 years now. Every team in the league can point to 4 or 5 games that could've gone either way. Those breaks tend to even out after a while, but they never do with us. Why is that? Don't get me wrong. Like I said in another thread, I don't think we should fire Kubiak just for the sake of firing him. If it's up to me, it's either Cower or another year for Kubiak. Those are the only 2 options for my money. But the "if this would've happened and that not happened, we would be great!!!" mantra gets old after 3 straight years of it.
We are owned by this division at this point. Teams that take care of business in their division go the playoffs....teams that don't watch the playoffs from home. I'd say that's nearly universal. Close games are so common in the NFL...even from the very best teams to the very worst (i'm thinking about that Saints/Redskins game a couple of weeks back as an example)...that I can't take solace in close losses...not when the expectation was that by year 4, we ought to be in the playoffs.
Desi, I've seen your line of reasoning from a lot of folks. I really disagree, but my frustration is from hearing it all over the place -- so my vitriol below is not aimed personally at you. ...and ima is correct. It is the job of the teams on the field to make it "go their way". One team failed five out of six times. That is such horsecrap. The 2-14 team was "a couple plays" from being 8-8. That 8-8 team last year was "a couple of plays" from being 12-4. But they didn't make those "couple of plays". Completely and entirely disagree. In fact, I consider this line of reasoning to be bull****. You make your own "luck". For the 1000th time, for every "bad bounce" or "bad call" in each of these games, I can point out at least two or three gaffed executions or idiot calls from the coaching staff. Don't tell me that horsecollar cost you the game when you threw two picks, fumbled a ball away, and missed a FG. Because that's bull****. ...said all the fans after 2006, 2007, and 2008. bull****. you don't need "breaks" when you execute properly and call the right games. The interception thrown from inside the five by our freaking third-string halfback, for example, was not a "bad break". No can do. The product of the field is the sole cause of the results. They are 1-5 in their division, because that is how well they played. They are 6-7, because that is how well they played. Now, on this point we agree. It may *not* be time for Kubiak to be sacked. There *are* good things happening (the defense, for example, has made marked improvement). So we can look at the bright side and be honest about their strengths, but I prefer to do so without making excuses for the results. They're not 6-7 because of "bad luck." They've *earned* that 6-7. Some things I want to see next year: Defense to start the season strong. No more of this "well we needed a few games to buy in" or "we had to adjust to the new scheme" BS. Bush is back for a second year after what looks to be a fantastic second half of his first season; I want to see them kick ass from the first snap of the season. No long losing streaks. If this team is maturing, then they can recover after a bad loss, a heartbreaking loss, or whatever and give a solid effort the next week. I expect Mario to not disappear for four weeks. And I sure as hell don't want to hear, after four weeks of losing football, that they're now playing "inspired football" and "rallying around their coach." "Rally" BEFORE your ass is in a sling, Texans! Agreed entirely.
I just looked at it...just to check...and you're pretty much dead on. The 2-14 team from 2006 lost 5 games by 6 points or less. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Houston_Texans_season the 8-8 team last year lost 3 games by 6 points or less. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Houston_Texans_season Close losses are not consoling to me. There was a time when they were...when moral victories were ok. Not anymore. It's enough already.
Right. Losers console themselves with "well, two plays this season go differently and we're 8-5!!" Winners don't have to find "moral victories". Because they, you know, actually won.
Exactly. Every single week there are close games. Just this past week alone, 6 out of the 16 games played were decided by a touchdown or less. Losing close games in the NFL is nothing to hang your hat on unless you have a loser's mentality. If you're a Texan fan, would you feel fomfortable trash-talking a Jags fan by saying "sure, you swept us this year, but they were both close games...." Not me.
No one is arguing that you can count the losses as wins. I even said in my previous post, if they had won a couple of more games, people would have a different take on Kubiak and the job he's done ("lock him up with a new contract!!"). Additionally, no one is saying that this team isn't really hard to watch, or that it's fun to watch them invent new ways to lose close games. I get it, we're all frustrated. Believe me, I live up in Dallas and have to constantly root for my team (thanks to Sunday Ticket) while putting up with these Cowboys fans all the time. Just once, I want to make the playoffs while the Cows miss just to hold it over them, their 5 trophies, and new stadium. My competitive in the division line is due to the improvement in the quality of games, and not the end result. I can see why people see 1-5 and say that it might be time for a change. I'm just so used to watching them get routinely taken to the woodshed by these teams (save J-ville) that close, competitive games where I don't wake up Sunday morning thinking, "Gosh, this is gonna be painful - we've got no shot" is improvement. That we expect to play and win these games (home or away) is improvement. Sucks that it took 6 or 7 years to get here, but that's our reality. The NFL is the ultimate "make your plays and you win" league. Not arguing that we haven't made enough winning plays, I'm just saying, law of averages, it's gotta be better for us soon. As for the "luck" factor. The TexansChick had this as her blog posting today. She links to a statistical study that claims the Texans are one of the five least lucky teams this year (Advanced NFL stats). Some of it reads like rationalization, but from what read, I thought it was an interesting read. Go Texans - still holding out hope that 9-7 gets it down this year...10-6 and we would've definitely been planning parties for January
actually, i think the Colts are the only team that routinely beats us like a drum on the scoreboard. I think (without looking) we've played lots of close games against the Titans in our history...but they've beaten us more than we've beaten them...every season. 1-5 this year is ridiculous.
I gave it a quick read desi, and I'm sorry but I just don't buy it. She's lumping all these factors into a megastat and proclaims the unluckiest teams. Is it any wonder that teams with losing records are the unluckiest? I'll say it again: for every "unlucky" event in any one Texans game I can find at least two or three botched plays. A stoooopid play call, a fumble or three, a pick, a blown coverage, a running back lined up wide that everyone ignores, PayMe falling and worshiping at baby Vince's feet, etc. And I don't mean to sound like the Texans "suck" or anything -- this is infinitely better than 2005! But they should have won some of those games. Some of the players weren't giving their best effort. Some of the play calling was just horrible. Kris Brown fell off the planet. And when you say, "if they win at least two of those games, everyone is singing a different tune about Kubiak." You are right, and well they should be. But that's just it: ...they didn't win.
Horse**** on both links and the "luck" argument. (and I like Texanschick a lot) The model used was idiotic, and only useful if applied to fantasy football (I scored the 2nd most points in the league, but played everyone else on their best day and lost). There is a prominent difference between "luck" and "execution". When Schaub gets the yips late in the game and sends a ball 5 feet over the head of a wide open guy in the endzone, that's not bad luck. When Brown hooks a critical FG when it's lined up for him or 20 yds out, it's not bad luck. When Brown constantly gets stuffed or fumbles at the goalline, that's not bad luck. When the offense is a juggernaught for 1 half and dead silent the other, EVERY SINGLE GAME, that's not bad luck. The Texans constantly fail to execute in critical moments. I could write something off to luck when it's a fluke happening. A single Brown fumble. A single Brown missed late game FG. The offense going cold a couple games. When it happens all the time, it's not a fluke. It's not luck. It's quacking like a duck.
Well, if it makes you feel any better, there is a reasonable chance that one of those things may very well happen this year (hint: it ain't the Texans). That's just it. None of those teams have taken us to the woodshed since 2005. In 2006, we were 2-4 in the division and 3 of the 4 losses were by a TD or less. In 2007, we were 1-5 in the division and 3 of the 5 losses were by a TD or less. In 2008, we were 2-4 in the division and 3 of the 4 losses were by a TD or less. This year, we are 1-5 in the division and 5 of the 5 losses were by a TD or less. So basically, in the last 4 seasons, we are 6-18 in the division and 14 of the 18 losses were by a TD or less. Do you see a pattern here?? We've been using this "it's okay because the games were close" argument for 4 years now, and nothing has changed. THAT'S why we're frustrated. Desi, I’m honestly not trying to pile on. I actually thought like you do as recently as a month ago. When we were 5-4, I was going around telling everyone we were 3 plays away from being 8-1. But after that MNF loss, I’m done with that argument forever. That game literally ripped my heart out. There was SO much riding on that game. First MNF game ever for the Texans, Bud and the hated titans coming to town, Vince being the starter, playoffs on the line….that was our chance to turn the whole season…..hell, the whole history of the FRANCHISE around. And what do we end up with? Yet another DEVASTATING (but close) division loss.
ima, emjohn, MadMax, and msn, I don't think you're piling on at all. In fact, I appreciate the dialog as it's something that keeps me glued to the boards following our teams while living outside of H-town :grin: I really do share your frustrations, I'm just hopeful that with another year we'll have one of those "click" moments where the team can take off. I was in the camp that wanted to stick with Carr too long, and I'm probably in the minority here as well. Just hoping and praying, what more can a fan do? Go Texans!
