Ex-Steelers Coach Cowher 'open' to a return to the field

If he did that the town would explode. That's the dream scenario.

 

i'd rather khs head coach gary joseph be the coach of this team than kubiak, so of course, cowher would be awesome.

if kubiak is kept because they're too scared to change coaches during the lockout and there are fans that agree with that, then those fans deserve this ****ed up franchise and vice versa. enjoy being the kansas city royals/memphis grizzlies/rice football of the nfl. losers.

 

At the VERY LEAST, it sure would make things around Reliant Park a whole helluva lot more interesting....for a change...

 

but but but there may be a lockout. we can't change coaches if there's a lockout!!!

 

Same, but I just don't see it happening.

 

Maybe you should sit down, take a breath...

A team mired in 7-to-9 wins a year and falling just short of the playoffs, while frustrating, has absolutely no relevance to sad-sack franchises that can't compete with their peers for talent or success.

I certainly don't agree with keeping him if you've determined you need to make a change. But I *understand* the hesitation and reluctance to do so with the 2011 season up in the air. You don't do your new coach any favors hiring him during a lock-out in which he's prevented from getting ready for the upcoming season. He'd have no access to players. None. Possibly well into what would have been training camp. That's a GIGANTIC issue; you can't ignore that.

It's an unfortunate situation but it's still a legitimate issue.

 

If Cowher does come I hope he retains some of the staff on the offensive side of the ball.

 

so our new defensive coaches won't have any time with the players in case there's a lockout. does that mean frank bush and the rest should stick around?

i'm sick and ****ing tired of relaxing and taking a breath. no expansion franchise has taken this long to make the playoffs. i've been relaxing and taking a breath since two thousand muther****ing two. **** the texans if they keep kubiak, lockout or no. they'll definitely lose me as a diehard fan if they do that. i have better things to do with my time than to watch the same disappointing **** happen one more year.

 

I'm not getting my hopes up but if this were to happen...

Spoiler

 

Where I see the logic in being hesitant to make a coaching change due to the probable lock out if Mr. McNair has some forsight there are really more advantages than disadvantages if...

1. You look at how you are going to become a title contender. If you are convinced this regime is going to get you to the Super Bowl, you better be right because the fans are getting sick... not making a change could prove disastrous if you are disadvantaged by a lock out and Kubiak can't get the team to the playoffs.

In other words Lock out plus poor season= total fan rebellion!

2. If becoming a Super Bowl contender is going to take a better staff then you have the advantage of looking towards the 2012 or 2013 season. With the lockout I would think cleaning house would give the new regime some grace from fans and if you get a quality coaching staff in here you have multiple reasons to watch the 2011 scenario play out since it likely will be weird anyways- potential strike, maybe shortened season, perhaps changes to the schedule etc.

I think the lock out would work to McNair's advantage if he wanted to make a change.

If he got a name coach that can get it done he has bought himself some grace for 2011 with fans and if he picks the right coach we could have a chance to utilize the talent we have before they all wilt through age or injuries.

 

Lesser of two evils; would you rather new defensive coaches have no access to the defense or (possible) new head coach, offensive coach and defensive coach have no access?

Oh, no - what will the franchise do without you as a diehard fan huffing and puffing and whinning about the team???? I'm kidding - but I think it's fair to ask that you reconsider things when you're obviously not as emotional as you are right now.

I don't even disagree with you, per se. I just think there are two unique factors at play: 1) it's patently obvious what the problem is; it's conceivable that a simple change on defense could be the cure; 2) the lockout looms and changes everything. It's easy for us to write McNair's checks; but I don't begrudge him for being hesitant to want to pay multiple staffs to not coach his football team.

 

are you sure about that? I agree in general with the rest of your take (the unquoted portion), but I'm not sure this statement is accurate.

 

pretty positive.

 

He's right. We are technically, judged solely by playoff appearences, the worst expansion franchise since the merger.

 

- The special teams get grossly outplayed every game and we're constantly in an uphill field position battle?
- The "script" for beginning of the game every week is bad and the Texans have found themselves down by two touchdowns more than any other team in NFL history?

Oh yeah, that, too.

But you know this team has more than one glaring problem.

 

Memory failed me. For some reason I thought I remembered the 'boys and the bucs each taking over ten years.

Thanks for the correction.

 

The team is down by two touches because their defense sux. Expecting the Texan offense to always outscore all opponents, with good or bad defenses, is not a winning formula in the NFL. The Texans scored 28 points against one of the NFL's best defenses last night. We should be cheering the Texans offense, unconditionally. But noooo ...

The Texans offense aint broke.

 

True....but.....the Texans for the season average less than 3 points in the first quarter of play. In only two games have we notched a first quarter TD, in 6 games out of 14 it's been a goose egg.

We're behind because the defense gives up easy points....and because our offense can't score for ***** to start games. It's both things together.

 

Grossly overblown, imo. Special teams has had no bearing on our record, good or bad. Please cite examples. Keep in mind, Rackers has been consistently good, we've blocked a huge FG, blocked a punt against SD.......

As I understand it, the primary function of the script is to get a better read on the defense and what they're doing and how they react to things so you can better attack it as the game goes along. A de facto preseason game, if you will, where you're not showing anything.

Sounds silly, I know - and I'll admit to not fully understanding it. But look at how the team operates, not sometimes, but every single week: Routine slow start followed by scorching hot finish in which they seem to have the defense's #. This has been their calling card certainly the past two years. And notice: it's *rarely* the other way around: Fast start, slow finish. So I think - *think* - the slow start, while not intentional, is somewhat expected/understood.

It's failing, then, is on the defense, which is routinely falling behind 2-3 scores. If they were capable of holding the opponent to 7 or 3 or - gasp! - 0 points in the first half, I think we'd have a much different perspective on how they operate. But the defense literally can't stop anyone.

Again, I don't FULLY understand it but that's how I've heard it explained. IOW, the fast finishes necessitate a slow(er) start. That's why I've never worried about "inconsistency" from the offense. If you can put up a game's worth of #s in 2Qs - and they do: a lot - who cares?

Eh.... I would argue it has one glaring problem and lot of nusiances.

 

Oh, I'm with you all the way on this. Let me clarify what I meant (emjohn touched on it just above, too).

The minimum of two touchdowns scored on us every freaking week before halftime is absolutely on this historically bad defense.

but

if Kubiak had a better game plan, we'd either be tied or down by less than, you know, FOURTEEN.

Like you said, the offense ain't broke. So why does it always take two quarters to finally get in gear?

Bottom line, it seems to me anyway: if your talent can IMPROVISE better than you can plan, you ain't planning all that well.

to say the least.