We can agree on that for sure. I think McNair, for all of his trying, is too 1) conservative and 2) loyal for his own good. I'm kind of left wondering how he became so rich in the first place, being this weak on the trigger. Maybe his business acumen does not cross paths with his football heart. Do I "buy" any excuses they give? Hell no. Do I think the lockout *justifies* them doing what they did? Hell no. Just like with the extension Kubiak got, I don't agree with it, but I understand how it could have made sense to someone else.
I understand how it makes sense when you think it out (the lockout excuse) but what I'm trying to highlight with my posts is that the rest of the league doesn't seem to be as afraid of it as our owner does. It's like he has a mental handicap when it comes to football and our media gives him the excuses. This year it's the lockout, but IT'S ALWAYS SOMETHING. Consider that he offered Dom Capers a way to keep his job if he would fire the defensive staff. Looking at the Dolphins, that is a team that hired a coach three years ago, won their division and is now 7-9 two straight years. They considered firing their coach IF AND ONLY IF they could get one of two men they considered an upgrade. Our coach has never been to the playoffs, has had one winning season, and is 6-10 now in his fifth year. Our owner has another excuse why he can't fire him. That troubles me. And I don't think it bodes well for the future of this franchise.
I do think it is fair to temper things somewhat since it is clear that no one in the league (aside from San Fran) is going the high price route. It does look like everyone is keeping costs reined in with the lockout on the horizon. Which makes some sense, it could be a complete waste of an asterisk season. I'd be FUMING if Cowher had been snatched up. The downside is, I don't buy the scenario that McNair cleans house next year and brings in Cowher. 1. Captain Excuse is going to be armed to the teeth with the lockout wiping away the offseason, teams struggling with out of shape starters, and a short year. Way too easy for him to say he wants to see what they do after a full offseason/season (2012). 2. Wade's 3 year deal at decent money. I can't see him eating that contract 12 months after signing it. If Kubiak's gone, Wade's the new head coach. And I'm done with this joke of a franchise.
This is the truth. And everyone needs to be prepared for it to happen. Whether that means going out and finding a new team or going to counseling is up to you.
Thar she blows! I disagree with your first part of the post as I've already demonstrated, but these two points are spot on imo. Kubiak will be safe next year with almost no exception. They go 7-9 or something we can blame the lockout and integrating a new defense. God forbid this team has a winning season next year without making the playoffs. Ugh.
eh, no it's not. it's a very, very reasonable scenario--entirely plausible and even somewhat likely, but it's not "truth". it's just a forecast. meh. my psychological well-being and my affection for the Texans/all-things-Houston will both outlive McNair and Wade just fine, tyvm.
justtxyank - as is often typical of message board discourse, we're splitting too many hairs. If you look at the choices individually, they don't necessarily hold up to intense scrutiny. I mean, I've never argued you were wrong. But I'm looking at it more collectively: Four losing coaches were retained. Two more, on the back end of winning but disappointing seasons, were also retained. Six of 7 seven coaching vacancies are (likely) being filled by cheaper (in some cases, MUCH cheaper) coordinators. High profile coaches remain unemployed. In fact, if not mistaken, we're not seeing any former HCs recycled. I think those actions together *could* indicate that the prospect of a lockout is impacting more franchises than just the Texans (if it’s even impacting the Texans). I wouldn’t say I’m “embracing” the idea; I don’t think anybody else is embracing it, either. Just that we understand it – assuming the lockout excuse is even in play. If you told me you were going to rob a bank because you’re unemployed and needed to find a way to put food on your family’s table - I wouldn’t agree with your choice; I certainly wouldn’t embrace it – but I’d understand it. Maybe some of us are just glass half-full people. But I’ve thought for a VERY long time now that Kubiak’s greatest singular failure was not building a solid defensive infrastructure from the get-go, which is doubly frustrating when you consider he seems to absolutely understand the importance of building a solid offensive infrastructure. The hiring of Wade Phillips, IMO, seems to indicate that, at long last, they’ve FINALLY identified a massive organizational blindness and taken a pretty drastic step to rectify it. It bodes well that they’ll move on to the next logical step which is finding talented veterans to help quickly implement and execute Phillips’ scheme. The Phillips hiring, for all the things to not like about it, feels like a team at least TRYING to be urgent, which is long overdue.
This may sound unusual to you, but the point is that it isn't. Look at the research I posted and you'll see that this happens every year. This year was no different really.
I saw it & agree with DonnyMost: It lacks context. Show me the multiple coaches on the hot seat that didn't get fired. Or the article detaling Cowher's supposed list of desired destinations that flamed out and never came to fruition. You detailed 25 different coaching changes over 4 offseasons - 3 saw interim coaches become permanent; this year alone, two interim coaches became permanent. Again, you're *not* wrong; I think your points are valid. Not sure why our points *are* wrong and *in*valid, though, especially when there's nothing but conjecture filling the void.
John Fox to Denver. I'm stunned they didn't take Dennison. That is some serious coin they will be shelling out to 3 separate coaches.
Good hire. After the Josh McDaniels fiasco, I was shocked that they even talked to an OC without HC experience.
There you go Ric, a retread head coach gets the HC job. And Ric, I'm not going to say you are wrong. Maybe you are right and it's had some intangible effect. But, pretend for a moment that you know nothing about the lockout potentially occurring and then look at this offseason vs other offseasons and you'll see there is really no difference in terms of coaching changes. It's pretty much business as usual, which further lends itself to what I've said for two years now that all the lockout garbage that John McClain has been spewing has been what was fed to him as propaganda by the organization in this town that has admitted to lying to him to spread information they wanted put out there.
Except, a lot of writers - national writers - have been speculating as to the lockout's possible impact. Peter King, for one. I've heard McClane's worst-case scenario and it sounds perfectly plausible, based not on conjecture as much as what he experienced/covered in 1987. I think there's merit to maintaining coaching continuity if the lockout is a prolonged one; I think owners have every right to hesistant to pay multiple coaches to not coach their teams, etc.
This whole lockout business needs to be looked at in perspective. Bob McNair is a MAJOR proponent of the lockout. He's the one owner who SHOULD be making a move this off-season, but bottom line is he's the ringleader for the lockout that everybody is so scared of. Why would he make a dynamic change when he's championing the cause for a lockout?? Just because keeping Kubiak is justifiable doesn't make it stink any less.
I do agree with the obvious blunder of signing a 3 year deal that exceeds Kubes deal. But Wade's deal doesn't include DC assistants and staff right? Part of the poison pill of extending Kubiak was that all of his staff was signed on for the extra years as well?
