We compete, we just don't win. Beat the Titans by three the first time, lost by three the second. Lost to the Colts by three (road) and eight (home). Lost to the Jags by seven (home) and five (road). All one-possession games; so they definitely compete. They've just fallen short, the classic loser's lament.
No way. Not this time. I think McNair has had enough. He can't say so now, but if we finish 8-8 and miss the playoffs (my prediction), Kubiak is gone. [bbs catchphrase] Book it. [/bbs catchphrase]
We don't have a winning record against any of the teams in our division. We're 8-8 against the Jags We're 1-15 against the Colts We're 4-12 against the Titans cumulative record against division: 13-35. (.278) 32-44 against everyone else: (.421) This season we're 1-5. We managed one division win. I'm sorry, but winning 28% all time and one out of five this season isn't competing.
I sometimes wonder what a new coach brings besides the placation of the fans. Kubiak has a world of experience in his assistant coaches and some young up and comers giving him innovation. Is the 3/4 better than the 4/3 ... given the personnel available? Does Frank Bush just not know how to pressure the quarterback? Is the zone blocking system a wrong headed choice? It didn't look like it last year. Is Alex Gibbs too soft? (hardly) So unless we are getting a superstar, I have no problem with Coach Kubes. Would hiring Mike Zimmer keep our backs from fumbling on the 1 yard line? We probably just need to hire a Shaman or Voodoo doctor to change our luck.
New ideas, new attitude, fresh start, new schemes, etc. What makes the Texans so unique in the history of the NFL that a coaching change makes a difference with so many other teams but wouldn't have an impact on the Texans?
I think outside of a few superstars or a team with a couple of superstars there is a lot of parity in the NFL where a huge percentage of the games are decided by penalty calls and turnovers. It's a crap shoot. And changing coaches is a crapshoot. You interview and hire a guy because you think they are the most competent, and when fate works against you, you fire him and do the same thing again... until you get a coach that either lucks into a difference making superstar or gets an uncanny streak of luck in call and turnovers. Capers and Casserly sort of felt incompetent. To me, Kubiak and Smith just seem unlucky.
While I agree with your assessment about the NFL, generally...I disagree to the extent you're saying that any good coach is just a lucky coach.
He's going to be loyal to Kubiak until the end. Remember Capers got one more year then he should have...so don't be surprised that Gary is our coach next year.
Keeping throwing stats like that around, and you're liable to get a coach fired :grin: Can't pin the David Carr era results on Kubiak (save the one year) and Schaub. Bottom line is that we've actually competed better in games with the division foes since Schaub got here 2007-2009. I don't think there was a single division game this year where I was thinking, "Gosh, we have no chance today against these guys." Yes, those results haven't translated to wins, but I'm willing to chalk this up to a part of the process of taking the next step. Closing out teams and games is that final step before the Texans can be legitimate playoff contenders. This season, they weren't able to do that. AJ had a great article about this very topic on his blog. Definitely worth a read.
If that's the case and it's all just luck, there's no harm in changing coaches either, right? But who's the superstar that took Miami from a 1-15 team to a playoff team last year? Was that just luck? Did Ken Whisenhunt just get lucky to join the Cardinals right when they were going to be successful after decades of futility? etc. Players certainly make a huge difference, and you can't do much without them. But a good coach can put them in the better position to succeed than a mediocre coach.
I think we will change coaches and the saga of the unknown will begin again. But for clarification: There are a few outstanding coaches and a few head coaches that aren't suited to that job. But I think almost every coach who makes it to the NFL level has a basic competence in the X's and O's of the game. But among the group of average skilled coaches, some will be blessed with having superior talent, some will be cursed by injury, some will benefit and some will lose when the turnover and penalty odds go against them. I think a large part of their success is out of their control. In the incestuous world of NFL coaches there are very few who actually know or innovate things the other teams don't know about. A biggest active determinant of their success may be the people and system they use to evaluate talent and manage their salary cap. There is no easier example of that than the Manning/Leaf debate. Take Manning and you are set for a decade, take Leaf and you set the team up for years of futility ... and a fired coaching staff. For Ken Whisenhunt , he has the advantage of having Bill Parcells running his evaluation staff. The Texans may be better served by cherry-picking from Parcell's scouts than by hiring a head coach.
I'm no football expert, but here's something that bothers me about Kubiak. When he was hired, he obviously carried the tag of being the "the Denver guy." I remember clearly that most commentators, when speculating about Kubiak as a coach, said "Well, one thing we know for sure is he will run the the ball effectively! Denver used their ZBS to turn 496 different running backs into 1,000-yard rushers. No way he doesn't get the running game working!" Well, four years later and the Texans still have no running game. He even brought in Mr. ZBS Alex Gibbs, and nothing. He has made no move toward signing any running back worth a damn as a free agent (except Ahman "Oww!!" Green) and hasn't drafted any backs expected to do much. Was Kubiak really so arrogant as to believe his press that he could turn any NFL schmuck into a 1,000-yard back? I'm inclined to believe that he was that arrogant. There has been nothing to show from hiring Mr. ZBS Running Game and Pals. It's a tribute to the team's quarterback and receiving corps that they have won any games. There are several other things that bother me about Kubiak, too, but they've already been covered here.
from that article: In his 3-3/4 years as Texans head coach, Kubiak is 7-16 all time against the AFC South (3-13 against the Titans and Colts) and 20-16 against the rest of the league. Let that sink in for a minute. 2006 (3-3) 2007 (1-5) 2008 (2-4) 2009 (1-4)
To everyone who says "we're so close", how do you figure? We're on pace to go 7-9 after two 8-8 seasons. How does that translate into being "close?" Do you mean we're close to being as good as we were 2 years ago when we were average?
they're better than they were when Kubiak took over the team. they're no better than they were at the end of last season.
We're on pace to go 7-9. Kubiak's first year, we were 6-10. So, in 3 years, we've improved by 1 game. Whoopee.
