You can disagree all you want, but your position is merely conjecture. What has happened isn't any different than what normally does. But if it makes you feel better to think this isn't an incompetent organization and that no other teams are going through a "Trauma" this year because of the fear of the lockout, so be it. Me, I see teams so afraid of the lockout that there have been more changes this year than last. Teams so afraid of the lockout that they have hired coordinators just like they usually do. Please read the below and tell me why this season seems like such a stray from the usual and justifies the argument that the league is fearful of the lockout. This is a 5 year sample.
When you weigh pure numbers against each other without looking at context (for example, how many coaches were justified in being fired in those years vs. this year, how many "established" coaches were available for hire then vs. now, etc), it is easy to make your argument. The fact of the matter is this; the NFL will likely see a labor stoppage in 2011. After a new CBA is reached, a team with a new head coach will have 2 weeks to meet their team, install schemes, bring in free agents, sign rookies, and generally get their collective s**t together before the season starts, putting them at a severe disadvantage relative to other teams that did not change entire coaching staffs. If you think that isn't affecting the decisions of some owners to 1) maintain continuity on their staff and 2) not overspend on big ticket coaches (as if any owner wants to pay a coach a butt-load of money to NOT coach a team in case the labor stoppage goes well into the season or beyond), then sorry, but you're fooling yourself. Believe what you want to believe, I really don't care at this point.
It has to do with availability, justtxyank. When big names are readily available, Jerry Jones is absolutely, positively interested. Big-name coaches, big-name players. Jason Garrett was a hot commodity. In 2008. He had actually fallen out of favor in Dallas with many fans and many thought he should have been fired at the end of the 2009 season. He was a safe, cheap choice by Jones. Except for the ones that are bringing back 6-10 Jeff Fisher, 4-12 Marv Lewis and 7-9 Tony Soprano. For all the talk about Cowher/Gruden - the by far two hottest (and most expensive) coaching commodities this offseason, an offseason that featured 7 teams definitively looking for new coaches and another 3 pondering coaching changes - neither will be on a sideline next year. You think that’s just a coincidence? That the lockout was not a factor at all? Cowher freaking lives in Carolina. Maybe the lockout was no factor whatsoever. We'll never know as teams are banned from talking about it. But it does seem cheaper/safer decisions are being made. No; I think they should have fired Gary Kubiak. Not last year – that’s absurd, but certainly this offseason. My point - my only point - is that IF the lockout played a factor in McNair’s decision (and we have no way of knowing), there’s anecdotal evidence to suggest he wasn’t the only owner that might have compromised his decisions based on a possible lockout. I didn’t post DURING (much of) THE SEASON. In fact, if memory serves, my first post DURING THE SEASON called for not only McNair to fire Kubiak but to contact Cowher at CBS and get a jump on the competition (and next season) by bringing him in for the final however many weeks of the season were left.
This 2 weeks thing is awesome. Thanks John McClain! For all you know they will get a labor agreement done in the next 60 days. Maybe they will maybe they won't. As for coaches who should be fired this year who weren't, please name them so I can lol at you naming coaches who have been to the playoffs when you yourself defended keeping Kubiak last year despite no playoff appearances. It will be awesome hypocrisy that will be so fun! As for big name coaches who want back in, there are two, Gruden and Cowher. One team TRIED TO HIRE COWHER. He, for the third consecutive season, did not get hired because he wouldn't agree to the stipulations of his hiring by the team. Jets, Buffalo and now Miami have all tried to hire him in consecutive offseasons. On Gruden, there are no indications he is even willing to return to the sidelines.
Based on what? Jerry Jones has hired one "big name" NFL head coach. One. Jerry still loves the man. I cut these two quotes together so I could lol at you thinking those three coaches should be fired in a normal offseason but then argue that Kubiak shouldn't have been fired last year. Lewis won the division LAST YEAR, Sporano is two years removed from winning his division as is Jeff Fisher. They should be fired in a normal offseason, but it is absurd that Kubiak should have been fired after four years and no playoffs. L oh freaking l. Only one of those coaches has indicated he wanted back in, Cowher, and he would be on the sideline if he didn't have such tough demands regarding personnel control. Anecdotal evidence that doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Good for you?
Don't you think there's a reason that virtually no one is anticipating/projecting that the CBA will be worked out before the season starts? I'd love if if they did, but I don't see anybody banking on a full season this year, or at the very least, a full off-season (training camp, etc). As for head coaches that could've been fired, if it's all the same to you, I'm not going to waste any more time talking to you about this or researching stuff and posting it here, just so you can disagree with it since you had your mind made up already. If you want to know who they are, I'm sure you can google it yourself, or you probably already know, since there were rumblings for months about each of them getting canned. And sorry to burst your hypocrisy bubble, but it isn't *my* personal opinion that said coaches should be fired. Even though this is completely offtopic; in regards to Kubiak and my defense of him last year, I said if he failed this year I would want him gone, and I've stuck to that. I don't agree with the extension he got, but I understand what Bob was thinking when he did it. And, on a personal note, I don't know who shat in your cheerios this morning, but you are being a colossal dick. Maybe chill out with that?
Understood, but for me, it's still fun to b**** about. Beats the hell out of talking about the post-Tenderfoot Rockets. I can not handle Houston sports radio period - save for the occasional unintentional comedy of listening to the idiot callers. Half of them sound like Fat Albert characters. Definitely agree on this one. Agree here too, but I just can't believe even McNair would promote him to HC under any circumstance. Maybe I'm naive, but I just can't believe he would do that. You can always jump on my far-fetched theory that McNair hires Cower after next year's inevitable 5-7/7-9 non-playoff season. I'm unexcited about us drafting anyone, frankly. If it were up to me, I'd abandon this "build the team through the draft" philosophy for a few years and concentrate more on FA's. I'd be looking to trade down for extra picks just for roster depth, since that's what most of our post-2006 picks end up being anyway. I will always care because I love Houston and I love the NFL. Hell, this team could go 5-7 for four years in a row and never make the playoffs and I'd still......wait, we've already done that. See? I still care! If nothing else, you could watch the games next season just for the comedy relief. That's what I did this year during our hot 2-8 finish. It was sort of like watching the Oilers between 81 and 86. You do it just for the laughs.
Its radical the Texans have their built in excuse for the upcoming 2011-2012 season ready to go and have distributed it through the media to filter to the fans. Got to get us prepared - there's a labor stoppage so no new coaches, (except the 49'ers. They were VERY feed up with losing - Texans? ahh not so much. In fact - not at all.) no FA's (just projecting based on the Texans craptitude - also, since John Mclain was told recently by the Texans to constantly keep bringing up how the Texans payroll was high in 2009 LMAO I expect the worst and the excuse of "we tried, but everything happened so quick after the CBA, we didn't want to make rush decisions with payroll and anyway, have you seen our kids battlin?!?! Awe shucks gosh darn it these kids keep battlin!) I wonder if the Texans brass has started some exploratory committee to review potential excuses for 2012-2013's 5-11 season. How will they figure out how to stay the course of mediocrity then? What will be their excuse for Kubiak's blunders then? We'll see, it will be interesting!!
justtxyank, do me a favor and please find the post in which I said they “should be fired.” I’m arguing only that it’s *possible* that those three coaches, all rumored to be on the hot seat and coming off disappointing seasons in which they won a combined 17 games, were not fired because of the pending lockout. I don’t know that for a fact – but it at least has some merit, IMO. And none of this idle speculation about the lockout has anything to do with my *opinion* of Gary Kubiak’s job status. Sure. You can do play it that way, all too-cool-for-school and what not. Or… you can admit you misspoke and made yourself look silly by falsely attributing something to me. Your call, justtxyank.
Show me SOME sort of research to back up your side and maybe I can come to your understanding. As it stands now, I'm the only who's doing any research. You are just resorting to hypotheticals and anecdotal evidence.
Sorry Ric, I mislabeled what you were saying. You are suggesting that them NOT being fired after their runs which included playoffs in the last two years, the last YEAR in one case, is a potential sign of fear of the lockout. Yet you defended keeping Kubiak after four years and no playoffs. Do you not see how those two fail to make sense? I'm sorry, when I read your response I wasn't sure what you were responding to with that post. I realize now that I said you made the argument during the season and that is what you meant to respond to. I do apologize for falsely attributing that argument to you when you did not make it.
I'm sure I'll be more interested in September...I'm just so burned out on them now. The same dead horse I've been beating for over a year now. But it's not like I have another team...and it's not like my 10 year old isn't going to force me to watch the NFL with him next season.
I have no opinion on what the Bengals, Dolphins and/or Titans should have done with their head coaches. I'm merely suggesting that its possible they weren't fired because of the lockout. Do you understand the difference? WRT Kubiak: I thought they should have fired him. The team needs to (re)set the standard for this organization. 8-9 wins, and 6-10 especially, should no longer be tolerated. But McNair disagreed with me. I'm far more interested in his why and whether it has any merit than endlessly griping about something I can't affectively change. I believe you can objectively explore, and possibly agree with (some of) his perspective independent of your own opinion.
I'll be the first to admit that it is all conjecture, but it makes a lot of sense and is more compelling to me than taking plain numbers from years past out of context and pointing to that as evidence to the contrary. Like I said, this is not in defense of Kubiak or McNair, so don't take it as such. I'm on your team here in terms of wanting change and being upset with the lack of it. So take that for what it's worth, since I disagree with you yet still want Kubiak gone and am not happy with McNair's complacency.
Why would suggest the lockout had a role in them keeping their jobs though? Those are teams with recent success. Your argument that the lockout may have led to them keeping their implies that under normal circumstances they may have lost them. You then say it would have been ridiculous to fire Kubiak after last year, his fourth without a playoff game. So if it would have been ridiculous to suggest firing Kubiak last year, why would be plausible that teams might fire coaches this year who have been to the playoffs, even winning their divisions in a short timespan? I know what you believe. You've said it enough that I get it. My issue is that while some are embracing the excuse being given to him by the media, I do not believe it is an excuse with merit, nor an excuse that the rest of the league is using. MY point, is that this is another brick in the argument that we might have a football incompetent owner. Heck, even his comment that he usually says "i hope this works out, but now I know it will" about hiring Wade illustrates it. Why would NOT FEELING THAT WAY about every coach he's ever hired not have been a sign to him that something was wrong?
Look Donny, I know it seems like this thread has gotten heated, so let me say that I'm not trying to be a jerk. My issue with Kubiak is over. I don't care. He's back, and I've fully embraced the idea that he/and or Wade Phillips will be the head coach of this team for the next 3-5 years. My issue is with the owner who I have grown to believe is incompetent as a football man. That is the source of my frustration and that is what I'm trying to get at and highlight.
