That's not true iirc. I'm about to go over the data, but I'm pretty sure not SB organization has given the coach prior to winning the SB 4 years of no playoffs culminating in a 6-10 season (I still count year 1 and you don't). It technically is 5, but even if you whitewash the 1st season, I still don't think you're correct.
To find someone to fit your example: Mike Sherman went 9-7 12-4 playoffs 12-4 division title 10-6 division title 10-6 division title 4-12 with 3 pro bowlers getting on IR at start of year If you're discounting his first year like you do for Kubiak, then Sherman's 5yr was his first bad year. Then again, his 1st year 9-7 and not making the playoffs isn't so bad. Besides, coaches don't get fired after 1 year. Anyhow, are you telling me that Kubiak has done significantly better given the circumstances? All I'm saying is Sherman just had one bad year after starting off with 5 good years, making the playoffs 4 times and winning the division 3 times. That's just the harsher unfair standards that the Packers have. Tony Dungy is another example. Pete Carroll yr 1 playoffs division title, yr 2 playoffs, yr 3 8-8 fired "Patriot owner Robert Kraft said Friday that firing Carroll was one of the toughest decisions he has had to make since buying the team." http://articles.latimes.com/2000/dec/16/sports/sp-935 Circumstances were unfair to Carroll too, but if they didn't fire him, they never would have found Belichick who won his SB in yr 2, 4, and 5. Again, the only reason Kubiak has had the Texans in the playoffs now is that they have him time to grow this team. Look, that is a good thing, but depending on how this season goes it may be time to take the next step. SB winning organizations aren't that patient, and the example you keep bringing up is of a team whose coaches start off with overwhelming success.
Um, 6-10 is not a huge step back from 8-8? You keep redefining the parameters. You might have looked through things, but I painstakingly went through all SB winning franchises the other day. No SB winning franchise has ever tolerated a new hire to lead their team to the first 5 years of not making the playoffs culminating in the 5th year going 6-10 (or aka having a bad year as you admit), which was a step back from his newly established baseline as you argue for the reasoning behind other teams firing for a bad year. What is this half and half argument? I'm not saying Kubiak can't win the SB here. I'm not even saying you're wrong that he shouldn't be fired. I'm just saying if he accomplishes it, it will be truly a unique path to SB success, bc no other SB teams have done what the Texans have done...there are similarities to overall ideas, but a careful analysis of the specifics say otherwise. That's all. I hope it happens though...I truly do. I just don't have the faith that others do here.
I never said that 6-10 was good or acceptable, I've said it was a bad year like 10 times now at least. So I didn't redefine anything. Also, you're assuming that Bob McNair even considers Kubiak's first year. I'm assuming that like most people he's not, which would make his 5th year the 10-6 year, the year he was actually on the hot seat. It would make his first year the 8-8 year. Considering that McNair followed these same rules for Capers, he's not handling his team any different from those teams. We only have two coaches to go by, and just because he deviates one tiny bit because he's likely considering the circumstances doesn't mean he's being completely different. Just like the bucs fired Dungy even though he took his team to the playoffs, that usually does not end up well for teams but it did there...and it usually does not happen. Superbowl teams have not fired a coach that takes their team to the playoffs. They also DO give their coaches time, we can't pretend like 5 years is short in the NFL. There are players who career doesn't last that long.
Two facts: Dallas owner loves Romo, and Texans owner loves Kubiak. Two predications: Which team is going to win a SB with the owner lover sometimes soon? I would say neither. Romo is a turn over mechanism, Kubiak is too soft on this team. Of course, I do not care the Dallas cowboys, and I am glad that Jones keeps Romo forever, but it would be sad to see the Texans to not win it quickly because the Colts are going to be good soon.
Houston has the better shot because at least here the owner isn't playing GM and screwing up picking players. I don't think the problem is Schaub but rather the design of Kubiak's offense. It has become stale and predictable while relying too much on play action and zone stretch run plays. Teams have caught up with what Kubiak is doing and his response has been to get more and more conservative and Schaub is paying the price. Schaub is basically supposed to be a game manager and when his running game isn't working ( and this year it's been shaky) and he's forced to do more than he's comfortable doing, you wind up with games like this past Sunday's. Teams know that if they force Schaub to be a passer, their chances of winning increase because the Texans with Schaub do not have a deep threat quick strike offense.
After today's meltdown please fire the coach at least maybe even the offensive and defensive coordinators
Why do you want to fire the coordinators.... The offensive coordinator can't throw the ball for Schaub or make the reads... His play calling wasn't that bad. The defense played ok... But the air keeps getting sucked out of them when your QB plays the way Schaub does... You can see the writing on the wall from last year and the first game this year... If you keep doing what you're doing, you will continue to get what you get... Kubiak has to make some decisions... T_Man
Whether any Texan fan likes it or not, Schaub is it. Any rookie QB would take 2-3 years to develop. There isn't another Manning out there to fall into their laps. The Texans have their own Tony Romo. Schaub will likely be how Kubiak and the Texans future gets written. What would be perfect is a QB that could leave the pocket if needed but, how many years would a rookie QB take to develop before Andre is gone? What needs to happen is that the Texans hang their hat on defense and the running game, and take the load off Schaub late in games, unless they need him to pass. By now Kubiak should know Schaub just can't handle certain situations. And if not, Kubiak is out becuz, Schaub is his "child"
While I agree that getting a franchise QB via the draft is much easier said than done, last years playoffs featured 3 rookie QBs and 3 2nd year QBs.
TJ's numbers did not look good. http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/14114/year/2011/tj-yates It's Keenum who needs to get PT before the Texans use a high draft pick on another QB. They must find out what he's capable of. The odds are not favorable, but he gave no reason to doubt him when he get his chance to play in the preseason.
Remember the dweeb in high school who had the bad ass car? He had the money to drive the car that everyone wanted and everyone just knew the tail would be lining up if you had THAT car. But this dork didn't know what to do with it except drive around looking as out-of-place as you could. That's Kubiak. He has this monster defense (#1 as of this morning) and a top coordinator and more than enough offensive weapons to take you there, but doesn't have what it takes to use it. Coaches like Gruden and Cowher drool over this team and wonder just how long a guy like Kubiak gets to drive it. No disgrace in not being a good head coach. Hell, the woods are full of coaches who weren't cut out for head jobs. But recognize it and REPLACE him. NOW! KC did it. Denver and Indianpolis did it last year. And now they're top flight AFC contenders. And news flash: Forget the division. In two months, this team could easily be battling Tennessee and Indy for a wild card spot... or miss the playoffs all together. And another off-season of "next year". Ask Owen Daniels and Andre Johnson how that sounds to them...
1. joe marciano 2. matt schaub 3. gary kubiak those are the 3 guys that need to be fired ASAP. But since they work for bob mcnair, they get contract extensions.
