I look at things more in the vein of "are you winning" vs "is the franchise trying" I can support a losing franchise that's trying. I have a tough supporting a team that only thinly veils a policy of "win just enough that they'll buy tickets" These days, I'm fairly soured on the Astros, and have been ever since McLane opted not to pay for hitting help when we had one of the greatest pitching rotations in MLB history make a WS run. He wasn't willing to go all in and get a title, and I still can not be convinced that he's willing to do so. I think he's driven purely by profit and is complacent with a team vying for Wild Card spots (only). The Rockets try. They may miss, but they try. Titles in the NBA always depend somewhat on health and luck, and we're clearly not a team operating based on bottom line only thinking. The Texans.....I believe they are trying, but are hurt by an owner that doesn't demand excellence within the organization. Having a fan-friendly franchise is the priority, with winning a very distant second. I can't say I have an awful lot of faith that we'll turn the corner when upper management holds on too long to losers (Carr, Capers, Casserly, DC Richard Smith, etc). Evan
Looking at just this year's playoffs alone, and the fact that there is VAST parity in baseball now... do you honestly think this is the best strategy? Also, the pitching wasn't that great in 2006... not to the point where an extra bat would push us to a for-sure world series title (sure, they could have won a sorry-ass division... at .500... but that really isn't "striving for excellence.") The bottom line matters very much to Les... hell, out of all the owners in Houston, he's the one MOST concerned with how much he's making because frankly, he's worth the least. The Rockets actually make up a sizable chunk of his net worth now... whereas the other two could virtually sell their franchises for nothing, and still be billionaires. It matters so much that he hired a GM who's able to swing deals and sign players for max value at low cost. They got lucky with Yao, lucky with T-mac, and they took a risk to get Artest (even though he was available 2 years ago, and would have been just as valuable then... maybe more so... in allowing this team to win). This may have been true to start the franchise (where they could have lit the american flag on fire, and still would have sold out games), but currently, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. This isn't baseball, where families take in a game or two a year under the sun, in a laid-back enviornment... no matter how the team is. In the NFL, if you're losing... its not very fan friendly. Winning, is fan friendly. You think Bob McNair doesn't want to win? Sure, he may not be telling his coach to call the plays themselves (like Jerry Jones just did to Wade Phillips), but he's still more than simply a luxury box/show up on sunday owner.
pssst... nick? down here: (whispering) starts with a "d", ends with an "arr" and doesn't contain the letters "v" or "y". they can deny it all they want... but i have a nearly impossible time believing it's not at least A major factor, given how those who thought he'd be the team's savior seem to now be the ones who can't find any satisfaction in what they're doing. not all of them - i know msn wasn't in that camp (i don't think). but then, he's also pretty rational (when not railing rosenfels); he'll engage in other's opinions, even respond to them positively. look: the texans have certainly given them MANY additional reasons to be upset; it's been a horribly run franchise. but there's a "drayton is cheap"-type vibe to the discourse that has to have roots SOMEWHERE and it can't just be losing, otherwise they'd have bitterness to the astros and rockets, too.
btw... the bills would actually add more credibility to my position. in '05, they won 5 games. they won 7 in '06 without ever being above .500 at any point in the season. in 2007 - year 3, coughcough - they again won 7, but were actually 7-6 before losing their final 3. i don't follow buffalo but anectdotally, their ascension looks to be progressive and not an overnight senation. they've also benefited from a comparably easier schedule this year - they have 3 wins against teams that are a combined 5-13 - so there may yet be some "fluke" to them. they play 3 straight division games coming up, so they may naturally regress. still, there's definite year-to-year growth there. on paper. and year 4 - same with tennessee - is the year they made the leap. compare that to those envious browns: '03: 5 wins; '04: 4 wins; '05: 6 wins; '06: 4 wins; '07: 10 wins; '08: on pace to win 5. i can't believe that'd be more satisfying - yea! we were good... for 12 months.
the texans have made many mistakes- losing is THE main reason people are losing interest in them They don't have the long time loyalties like the astros, rockets or oilers had to fall back on when they suck. how dare anyone be frustrated with 7 year old generic boring 2-4 team I've been saying every year, I'm trying, but they are making it hard to be a fan
1st two games of the season, blowouts: "it's not that their losing, it's HOW they are losing." next two games, close but no cigar: "damn! this team doesn't know how to close out games!" last two games, wins: "what a crappy team. i can't believe they didn't win by 47 touchdowns."
IRRESPONSIBLE what are you, fan police? spare me the assumptions and the superfan approach for the 7 year old franchise that hasn't won jack diddly crap. i've said over and over again that i was wrong about VY and glad the texans didn't take him. i should know better than engage you in these threads...in my umpteen bazillion posts here you rank as the only person i've ever put on ignore here. the only one. you never fail to disappoint.
Ah its been a great season for season ticket holders. First the FG to beat denver in the preaseason than the Indy, Miami and Detroit games. These games all came down to the wire granted not the results we all wanted. But man you really cant ask more for more "entertainment" so far this season...
I've waited for so long for the Bengals to come to Houston...and now I could care less about seeing them. Fire Marvin.
Of course MM is bitter. He has a right to be bitter as he's invested his time, money and devotion to this team for what's going on 7 years now. You completely miss what he's saying here: He's angry because he CARES. He's simply expressing how he feels on a personal level - nothing more, nothing less. And I can respect that even if I don't burn with the same level of passion for the Texans as does MM. They can go 2-14 this season and my level of emotional attachment would be the same as if they'd hung up a 12-4 record. Sorry, but decades of living and dying with the Oilers have left their toll on me. It's not insulting if you take the time to understand when someone is expressing personal emotions and not looking for a debate on whether or not those emotions have any validity. But more so than that, you have to ACCEPT his and the others feelings on this matter as legitimate. Is it so wrong for some folks to be simply tired of watching Houston pro football teams continue to go nowhere? I don't think so. Over the past couple of years, I have read many of your posts. They are always well written and thoughtful. I have also seen you engaged in some pretty nasty exchanges on this board - many of which I considered to be unfortunate due to the level of personal insults hurled your way. As such, I feel that you've become a little too defensive in an effort to preempt some of the crap that gets thrown your way. That's why I believe that you are or were unable to see what MM was saying and where it was coming from. And again, that's your perrogative. I don't happen to agree with it per se because to me, it's a rationalization but if it makes you feel better about the past 7 years then who am I to take issue with that? But I think you should take a step back and not only acknowledge the pain and anger out there but also understand and accept the fact that these emotions exist in no small part because McNair and his football operation caused them to exist. He brought back professional football to Houston and asked that folks care about the Houston Texans. OK, those fans like MM who bothered to care should not be made to have to feel like they've been played for fools.
Those wins were against 2 teams with a 2-8 record combined, not to mention we were at home and almost blew leads. But I see what you're saying. The offense is improving and we really are looking better week to week.
There are teams that go from crap to good immediately all the time. The Saints and Titans went from 2nd and 3rd worst records in football to the playoffs in one year. Baltimore went from 6-10 to 13-3 in a year. Green Bay went from 4-12 to 13-3 in two years. In the NFC South, the past 4 (5?) years, the last place team the year before has won the division the next year - Atlanta has an outside chance this year to continue that streak. Pittsburgh went from 6-10 to 15-1 in one year. Etc. Etc. In some cases (Green Bay, Pitt), there's a lot of talent and it may have been a product of a down year. But for those NFC South teams, the Saints, and the Titans, they all sucked for several years before the sudden good years.
lord... get over yourself... i never fail to disappoint? just for you: my yawns are yawning. i've never taken any of this personally, and i've certainly never made any of it personal. i enjoy the dialogue, debate and opportunity to express opinions. so what's your problem, MADMAX? is that even your real name?... i don't see this same disdain for other losing houston franchises - you're telling me that there's not more to it? that i should just accept, at face value, that you're angier at the texans for 5 losing seasons (especially on the heels of an 8-8 finish: not a losing season) than you are at the rockets, who haven't won a playoff game since the 90's?.... that you can't accept 5 losing seasons as you pine for memories of the oilers, who routinely turned in much longer stretches of losing football....? whatever. so go ahead: ignore me - oh, and post about ignoring me (ouch) - all you want; hell, send out a personal email to every member of the BBS - as i always say - in the immortal word of tommy lee jones' agent in the hit oscar-nominated film, the fugitive: i don't care.
Boring?? The Texans are a lot of things but boring is not one of them, at least not this year. The last 4 games (2/3rds of the season) have been very entertaining.
and i've routinely proven what a fallacy that idea is... here're the saints' win totals dating back to 2002 - try and spot the anomaly: 9, 8, 8, 3, 10, 7. and they're currently on pace to win 7 games. hmmmm... anything significant happen in the NO area in 2005.....? nothing coming to mind here.... not true; the titans - who i've consistently held up as the model franchise the texans should be emulating - went 8-8 after posting the 3rd worst record in football and did NOT make the playoffs. they were 4-12 in '04 and '05; 8-8 in '06 (year three of the rebuild); 10-6 last year and on pace to win, well, 16 games this year. you can actually see - from their wins - a progression. but they did NOT go from 4 to the playoffs. btb: it's year 3 of the kubiak regime. and then followed that up with... 5 wins last year. packer win totals since 2002: 12, 10, 10, 4, 8, 13. i don't follow them, but that 4-win season looks like an anomaly. they probably weren't 4-win bad; they just ran into a slew of injuries and/or bad luck. you know what? i actually went and checked this and it's 100% true; every year since 2002. that's pretty frickin' amazing. unfortunately, the afc south is a slightly better division. my guess is that the texans would gladly switch 6 games against the titans, colts and jags for six games against any 3 of those nfc south teams, especially given they went 3-1 against them last year. again, time to play "spot the hard-to-miss anomaly" - steeler win totals, 2001-2005: 13, 10, 6, 15, 11. any guesses? yep. and i think you mean, "In most cases..." you're continuing to play fast and loose with the facts - first of all, the saints are part of the nfc south; and neither new orleans nor tennessee "sucked for several years before the sudden good years." it is categorically not true. and none of the NFC south teams "sucked for several years" either - here're their win totals since 2002: TB: 12, 7, 5, 11, 4, 9 NO: 9, 8, 8, 3, 10, 7 CR: 7, 11, 7, 11, 8, 7 AT: 9, 5, 11, 8, 7, 4 there's no sustained sucking evident in any of those win totals - inconsistency, sure. but there're no 2-14's among the bunch. the saints' 3 win season is thrown out; otherwise, as mentioned above: i think it's a product of being in a mediocre division with mediocre teams. in that five-year stretch, TB averaged 8 Ws; NO 7.5; CAR 8.5; ATL 7. and they're are really only 2 bad/good flip-flops: TB in '04/'05 (5 to 11 wins); ATL in '03/'04 (5 to 11 wins) - i'm not including NO because their 3-win season was a total fluke. but here's the thing: those were both 6-win swings. kubiak and the texans had a 4-game swing in a single year; unfortunately, the starting win total was 2, not 5 - but that's not kubiak's fault. so the texans have been among those to drastically reverse their course in a single year. they were just really, really, really bad in the "bad" portion. and fans don't seem to want to give them credit for that, which makes no sense. i can't imagine what, in 2006, would have dampened their enjoyment of such a quick turnaround.......... really, seriously: i'm at a loss. i hope that doesn't DISAPPOINT anyone, but... i can't think of anything........... not a single thing that might've happened in 2006.............
I meant over their entire life. Definitely not this year They have just seemed very generic and cookie cutter so far. Maybe that is more of the way the NFL is these days than them. I don't know.
It's funny that for every other team, your standard is to look at 4 or 5 year trends. But for the Texans, you only look at the 2-win season. Why not try the same for the Texans? Here are their win totals the last 5 years: 5, 7, 2, 6, 8 And on pace for 5 or 6 this year so far, though it's hard to say so far since their losses are to some of the best teams in football and their wins are against some of the worst. But overall, seems to be pretty stable outside of the one outlier that you consistently use as a reference point, no? So despite the increased talent (especially at the QB position) and coaching change, there hasn't been much overall improvement in the net results of the product. I can completely see why fans would be frustrated.
