I'd be in favor of keeping Rick Dennison (OC), John Benton (OL Coach), Chick Harris (RB Coach), and Greg Knapp (QB Coach) if/when Kubiak is let go. The offense is a reason to be optimistic about the Texans. If the defense was mediocre, we'd be running away with the AFC South this year, IMO. Four consecutive 5-7 starts to the season have made it exceedingly difficult to rally behind Coach Kubiak - and that's tough for me to say because I like the guy, know that he wants to win badly, but just can't seem to not trip himself up at times. Major, to your poing, if there was a coach who was well-versed in the West Coast Offense and could bring in a good defensive staff, I think this team turns the corner. What's to say that the coach isn't Kubiak, and he just needs to have his Denver-security blanket taken away and forced to work with someone he doesn't know who is infinitely more capable than Richard Smith and Frank Bush? I almost can't help but think that if you can get by with doing a kitchen/bathroom remodel, why demolish the whole house? (in the minority, I know).
Again, you're missing the entire point and not understanding what a sunk cost is. As I just stated: A sunk cost isn't something that has no value. A sunk cost has *nothing to do* with current or past value. It has to do with future decision making. The fact that Kubiak was here for the last 5 years is completely irrelevant to any future decision making. If you wouldn't hire him today over some other guy, you shouldn't retain him today over some other guy.
The argument against that is the defense wasn't this bad last year and they had the same results. Same record, same maddening losses, same ways of self-destructing.
Last year they had no running game and two Chris/Kris Browns on the roster.... Additionally, they had a healthy DeMeco Ryans and (a rookie) Connor Barwin. At the end of last year, they found a running game to compliment that improved defense (and coincidentally won out to finish the year 9-7).
And the year before, they had a running game with Steve Slaton. That's the whole point - the circumstances change every year, but the results don't: they just find a different way to lose.
You mean the year Schaub got hurt and Sage started 5 games in a row, that year? Come on, who wins big in the league with a back-up QB playing week in and week out? When Schaub came back, they went 3-1 to finish the year. Yes, Kubiak has been a constant, but the offense has improved by every measure. Now the defense has to do the same. Oh yeah, and the special teams. To me, that talks more to personal and scheme - which Kubiak is not absolved blame from - but we need to be careful in making blanket statements even if Kubiak is forthcoming and saying, "it's on me." He's not the one telling guys to miss kicks, drop balls, etc. The team has to continue to grow. Growth and the patience that comes with that is hard to swallow; I get that. I wish it would've happened this year
Ultimately, I think it will come down to whether or not McNair is willing to pay an entire coaching staff 2 years worth of salary after letting them go. I really think he screwed the pooch by giving Kubiak that absurd 3 year extension. I understand that he didn't want to have a "lame duck" coach, but I would think that's still better than being handcuffed the way they are now. If we miss out on Cowher, Gruden, Dungy, or any other upgrade at the coaching position because McNair was too quick on the trigger to keep his man, I'm going to seriously be upset.
And I think therein lies where I’m disconnecting from a lot of people, re: Kubiak. I don’t hold ’06 or ’07 against Kubiak. IMO, he did *exactly* what was expected: He took a terrible team and made it respectable quickly. The first time I had any expectations was 2008. But I have to give that year an INC because Schaub missed five games. You could certainly question, at that point, the wisdom of investing in Schaub – but from a head coaching perspective, there was nothing yet to suggest that we had a dud. In fact, you could judge him very favorably given they won 8 and coaxed a 1,200-yard season out of Slaton, etc with a back-up QB rosencoptering all over the place. Turning to these past two years: for all the good and bad things he and the team have done, I think it’s fair to isolate 6 extraordinary games, all of which literally came down to the final play of the game. In their 23 other games, the team is 14-9 – that’s a 10-win pace. I’m not excusing the 6 losses; I’m not going to argue they should be 20-9, or any such nonsense. I instead want to talk about what I think are different perspectives of those 6 games. I think – and correct me if I’m wrong, please – a lot of fans view them wholly as six games the team blew; straight up, no chaser. Good teams don’t blow six games over a two-year period in that fashion; good head coaches don’t blow six games over a two-year period in that fashion. And that take has a ton of merit, no question. Does a Bill Cowher go 0-6 in those games? I think that’s an absolutely fair assessment. I see it ever-so differently. I certainly pin the Jacksonville/half-back option pass on Kubiak. Dumber than dumb. I’m still floored by it. BUT… failing, twice, to score and tie games from the one-yard line, twice missing manageable, game-tying FGs… IMO, those are on the personnel. I’m not sure what else a coach is supposed to do – how does Bill Cowher turn those into OT games? If you have your team in position to succeed…. I mean, that’s his job. Fast-forwarding to this year: The Jacksonville game was a fluke; plain and simple. It’s hard to excuse it because of the expectations and the other 5 collapses – but to me, it’s a singularly extraordinary ending. A bad bounce. I find it hard to hold anyone accountable for it. The Jet game is absolutely on the defense. If you can’t stop a mediocre QB from driving 70 yards in 50 seconds with no timeouts… Personally, I would have fired Frank Bush before the team cleared out of the locker room. So six games. And I can honestly say one of them is wholly Kubiak’s fault. That’s not to say he didn’t make additional mistakes in those games: But they all came down to personnel, being in a great position to succeed, failing miserably. If I’m McNair, those 6 games tell me: 1) my GM/personnel department is failing, first and foremost; 2) Frank Bush must go. I just struggle pinning 5 of those 6 games on the head coach. If you see it differently, I’d love to hear your take. And bear in mind: I agree that, regardless of fault, no head coach should lose those 6 games. I completely understand holding him accountable and firing him. I’m trying to shed insight into why, failing that, I’d be OK with a front office/defensive overhaul as a plan B.
I understand, Major. Kubiak is a sunk cost; his offense is not. For all the money, time and effort you've poured into it, if you fire Kubiak, your offense is going to have tremendous value to incoming head coaching candidates, so much, in fact, it will actually improve the quality of the candidate. Therefore, it is not a sunk cost. You will reap the benefit of that investement with (better) future decision-making.
I agree - I don't have any problem with Kubiak's first few years. But they went 8-8 with Schaub missing 5 games. And then the next year, they improved by 1 game despite him missing 0 games. And the following year, they got worse despite him missing 0 games. There's a problem there. That's all certainly true. And I agree that you can't blame all that on a head coach. But I would argue that there are games the other way as well - KC, Washington this year - that easily could have gone the other way too. So the 10-win pace is misleading because it only accounts for the "unlucky" games and not the "lucky" games. In terms of whether its on the coach, the specific final play certainly isn't. But perhaps a different attitude or better play earlier in the game means that none of those games come down to the fluke play in the first place. The other issue is that after a few times, it's a coincidence. But as many times as it's happened, it's simply becoming a trend. And sometimes the best way to fix that is simply a fresh start. These kinds of things become self-fulfilling in some cases. Players (and fans) start expecting the team to lose in spectacular fashion. Given the Jacksonville and Jets fiascos, everyone was sort of expecting the Baltimore ending after they made the big comeback. I admit - it's easy to see among fans, but we have no idea if the players or the coaches view it that way, so I have no idea if this has any real relevance from a coaching change perspective. But given all the other reasons to make a change, this could just be an added plus. Take Dungy at Tampa Bay for example. There was nothing wrong with his coaching and no one will argue that he is not a great coach. The team was consistently really really good. But sometimes just making a change lets you take the best of one coach and add on good things about another coach. It lets you change things up and see if you can take a step forward with a team that just doesn't seem to be taking that next step. Tampa Bay got Gruden and promptly won a Superbowl. Was it anything specific to Gruden? Who knows - he certainly didn't sustain that success. But the number of examples of teams that are in ruts changing coaches and making a leap forward is pretty numerous.
Agreed - the whole team itself is not a sunk cost. There are a lot of good things on defense in Williams, Ryans, Cushing as well. My point on the sunk cost was specific to Kubiak.
Sure, sure - I think, over the course of 23 random NFL games, you’re going to win and lose by a variety of ways and it’ll even out. You’ll outcoach the opponent; the opponent will outcoach you. You’ll outplay the opponent; the opponent will outplay you. You’ll get a lucky bounce; they’ll get a lucky bounce, etc. But losing *six times* on the game’s final play – I just consider that abnormal and worthy of extrapolation. It’s certainly a slippery slope… if this, then that and not here but there…. I just think if, despite mistakes along the way – which every coach/player will make at some point, even the great ones – you’re *still* in position to tie the game on its final play…. You’re talking about extraordinary circumstances. Excellent points.
There are a million ways to spin the mediocrity and the blown opportunities over the last 3 years, but IMO the hope that we can turn the corner with the current staff is gone. As good as our offense is, I still don't have a lot of faith in the play-calling (especially in crunch time) and decision making. Every time we make a big play at a crucial situation, I feel like the offense did it despite the incompetency of the coaching staff because they are that talented (ex: Andre's big 4th quarter catch against Washington). Not to be an armchair coach, because I know how important film study is, but over the last two years I have found myself constantly disagreeing with playcalling decisions (even on successful plays). Then I watch other teams play and they just do things that make more sense within their offense (ie not having an immobile QB with a weak arm constantly rolling out). In the NFL, a lot of games are going to come down to the last possession. Our coaches have shown themselves to be completely handicapped at finishing a game with the right calls. You can sit here and tell yourself that if only we had done ____, we would have won in those last second situations, but the bottom line is that we have consistently found different ways to lose those types of games over the last two years. Spin it any other way you want, but the end-all-be-all of the discussion is one winning season in four years (not counting 2006 to be fair) and no playoffs is not good enough to keep your job. And even if we vastly improve the defense next year, we're still going to have games coming down to the wire and my bet is that we still won't find ways to win them.
No way I take Gruden...I would get Mariuchi before I get him....Our DC should be Cushing..Let him call the damn plays
Ric, I appreciate your points, but man....I am so tired of people rationalizing the last 2 years by saying all those DEVASTATING losses could've gone either way. The bottom line is wins and losses. Period. All that other stuff is just conjecture. I'm with you about Kubiak's 1st 2 years. Maybe even 3. But there's no excuses for the last 2 years. If not for the titans and their 3rd string QB totally quitting on their lame-duck coach and handing us a win, this team would be in the midst of a 7-game losing streak right now. On what planet does a team keep their head coach under those circumstances? I understand you're not advocating keeping Kubiak over Cower. My point is that he should be gone no matter what. 8-22 against winning teams. 5-7 for 4 seasons in a row. It's time for a change. Yes...just for the sake of change. Yes...even though you risk bringing in another coach who might not be the next Bill Belichick. Yes...even if it means bringing in a different offense.
Sorry. I really believe with a good drafting of defensive backs and maybe one signing of a good OLB that this team with the current coaches would be on their way to the Super Bowl. I see no other substantial weaknesses on this team besides defensive backfield, and an OLB to play opposite Cushing. The offense is great and even sustained injuries and suspensions. The defense needs Demeco and Cushing healthy and playing, they need defensive backfield help, and another stud backer on the outside.
Consistently only putting together one good half of football, and also having a knack for blowing games at the most crucial time does not worry you? From a talent perspective, yes, we are close ... but I think the ceiling for this team as-coached is about 10 wins, and that's with a lot of luck. It would take A LOT of luck to win more than say, one, playoff game.
