Ric, LOL, I don’t disagree with anything you said above. To be honest, I certainly didn’t expect us to beat the Steelers, but I would have liked to see us be somewhat competitive for AT LEAST a quarter. Hell, how about a SERIES or two. Is that too much to ask from an NFL team? This isn’t a Division I powerhouse vs. some I-AA team playing sacrificial lamb just to get a nice payday. Moral victories are for college, not NFL teams. It just very frustrating seeing this team marred by the same problems we had under Capers. I get everything you say about Kubiak’s 1st year being our REAL expansion year. But shouldn’t we be able to convert a 3rd down every now and then? Or maybe punch it in on 1st and goal? Or get a red-zone TD? Doesn’t have to be every time, just every once in a while (when the outcome of the game is still in doubt…). When Jacoby went out of bounds on that punt return, I said to myself “He didn’t score. Let’s just line up the FG team now.” How about containing the scrambling ability of 50-year old Kerry freakin’ Collins? How about calling some plays that everyone and their mother doesn’t know are coming? 1st and 10? Defense has 8 in the box? Here comes a run up the middle for no gain. What a shock. How about not having our LB's trying to cover the Steelers WR's??? I’m kind of rambling now, but it’s just so frustrating. I don’t expect us to win every game. I don’t even expect us to win much more than we lose. I just want the games to competitive and entertaining. Only reason the t*** didn’t blow us out like the Steelers did is because Fisher’s ball control offense. Seriously, when we were only down by 2 at halftime, did anyone really think we had a chance to win? I didn’t.
I'm not sure there was anything from the last game that frustrated me more than that. They actually ran plays for the guy.
but those are always misnomers, MM; guys like justice love 'em (and write about 'em) because they make for a compelling story (last to first, yea!). but guys like justice are also lazy so they never bother to look beneath the surface. take the saints' "miraculous" turnaround. they were 7-9, 9-7, 8-8, and 8-8 in the four years prior to 2005, ie a pretty consistently average football team. and they actually started 2005 2-2. then deuce mcallister blew out his knee, the burden of playing 16 road games started to grow... and they ended up losing 10 of 11. but that was NOT a 3-13 team. they probably needed a shake-up, some new blood, sure - but they were NEVER "2005 houston texans" bad. they also had a pretty favorable schedule in 2006 to help the turnaround: they played two teams that won double-digit games that year and only 3 teams total that finished above .500. the texans (after sunday) will likely match that total (all on the road) by week 3 of this year and then add a 4th the following sunday. (and they get to play 3 of those first 4 teams AGAIN before the season is out, more than doubling the number the saints had to contend with.) sure enough, after NO's "miraculous turnaround" in 2006, they finished last year 7-9 (losing to the texans, too, if you'll recall). this year? off to a 1-2. would a one-year anomaly really satisfy you? the texans are trying to build something better, more lasting. tennessee is the model, but look at their journey: 12-4 in '03; 5-11 and 4-12 the next two years. in '06, they were 8-8. last year 10-6. this year 3-0. they're not a one-year wonder. but it took them three average, or worse, years before they made the leap and they now look like a team with a strong foundation moving forward. this is kubiak's third year.... the texans weren't awful in 2002; they had decent veteran talent on defense that kept them in a lot of games. but i get your point, even though i disagree with it. because while it may have been true against pittsburgh (though a lot of other teams would have looked equally as bad in the same situation), they did not look that inept against tennessee. they didn't play paticularly well, true - but they still should have/could have won the game. meaning their talent level is finally at a place where, even when they're misfiring, they stay in games - that's encouraging. it's year 3....
"Stepchild" implies that they were moved from somewhere else (or existed before Houston). They didn't... they are just as synonymous with Houston as the Oilers were when they started in the AFL in the 60's. The only difference is longevity and not having an ******* for an owner. Success would help them be "accpeted" by the city a helluva lot faster (given this cities propencity to only cheer for winners)... but it should by no means be a requirement. Hell, most people here scrutinize/analyze the Texans because they've been so frightenly medicore/inconsistent since inception... not because of success. As far as this season is concerned, I'll wait till they at least get a home game against a beatable opponent before I consider this team as bad as the 2005 one. Yes, they should have looked better against the Steelers... but they were playing a team clicking on all cylinders, and when that happens, its hard to muster up much (going back to when the Oilers used to steamroll some opponents... namely the Broncos and Browns... I thought those teams had no business being in the NFL also). The more alarming facet of the Titans game was the complete breakdown in logical coaching. Poor use of challenges, poor decision making on going for it on every 4th down, and poor play-calling. They had enough 'talent' (if you can call it that) to beat a team on the road that is now 3-0... they just had some of the poorest execution I've ever seen from any NFL game ever (hell, they couldn't even get the XP right). Regardless, unlike 2005, there are still going to be salvageable parts of this team no matter how poorly they perform. The 2005 team needed to be gutted due to the plethora of botched 1st day picks/trades/free agents that had just accumulated on top of each other (Babin? Buchannon? Boseli? Gaffney? Wade?). While Kubiak/Smith may ultimately need to be cut loose due to continued mediocrity... they would not be leaving the team in shambles as the last regime did. In fact, their young nucleus/foundation sitll looks highly promising when compared to other teams... they still, however, lack depth at the trench positions (plagued them since expansion year).
let's not dismiss the level of competition (now a combined 5-1 after going 20-12 last year) or the impact the hurricane had. the astros have been in a funk ever since - why should we assume the texans weren't also thrown off their game? because to me, on sunday, the texans looked like a team with its mind elsewhere: mental errors they haven't shown a lot of: johnson dropping a TD, kubiak not challenging the mccarreins catch, the FG team botching an extra point....
While I certainly can see where Ric is coming from here, I just don't accept that we have to to look at 2006 as a "do over". That's just another excuse in my opinion to explain away bad football and unfortunately for GK due to his mistakes particularly with QBs, he has no more time left for excuses. I watched the Oilers run through excuse after excuse after excuse for years without even bothering to field a semblance of a professional football team and so far, the Texans look like they've adopted that model perfectly. As such, I have to agree with your position because it mirrors that of mine: I'm not asking for 10 win seasons, playoffs or even a division championship. No, all I'm asking is that they show me some heart, desire, pride and progress on the field. And above all else, quit offering up the same lame-ass excuses after turning in the same pitiful effort game after game after game. Like you said: At the very least, they should at least look like they belong in this league. Now to me that means that Kubiak had best start fielding a team with a real football identity other than that of the NFL equivalent of cannon fodder and it has got to start on Sunday and continue thereafter. Houston football fans are fair - they will stand by the team if they can see that the effort to grow and get better is there. But it is both unrealistic and outright wrong to expect and ask them to swallow what they've gotten for the past 7 years and then turn around and say "well 2006 was a reboot year so this is really year 2 and not year 7 like it says on the calendar". That's just another copout from an organization that's become very skilled in the art of the copout.
uhm... HillBoy...? they were 2-14 two years ago. last year, they finished 8-8. and you're going to let two games against two very good-to-elite teams, on the road, derail all the progress they've made? come on..... HillBoy, that idea is (TM) Ric; i'm the one saying it, not the organization. they're much too smart/savvy to ever say something like that publically. it's MY opinion that if fans could understand and adopt such an approach, it'd make what is an arduous task easier to swallow. they are not (yet) a good football team; they have A LOT to do.... if you're frustrated now because kubiak inherited a flat-out awful team... the ride's not getting smoother any time soon. i mean, goodness - if last spring, the NFL had released a schedule that read: @ PIT, @ TEN, @ JAX, IND - every single one of us would have thought, "if we're lucky, we'll go 1-3......" and now you want to jump ship and declare the kubiak era a bust?
hell, the more i look at it - 1-3 would have been the expected record for almost EVERY team in the NFL facing that gauntlet of a schedule. and the few truly great teams in the NFL probably would have been satisfied with 2-2 (which the texans can still pull off). that is a BRUTAL schedule. toss a hurricane into the middle of it.......
Please, list the excuses being offered by the Texans. Now, if you want to call fans out for offering these excuses up, be my guest--because I was just as guilty in 2004, 2005, and 2006. But I don't recall hearing the Texans brass making those excuses. That 'copout hasn't come from the organization! The only person I've heard say that is Ric! It's fine to disagree with Ric's position (I explained my beef with it a few posts ago), but completely disingenuous to credit the Texans with that--unless you can provide evidence that they've made similar statements themselves.
Again, don't disagree with this. My problem isn't with being 0-2. My problem is looking totally inept while doing so. I hope you're right about the hurricane, but let's be honest - the Steelers could have gone Sam Wyche and dropped 63 on us if they hadn't called off the dogs in the 2nd half. I know they're good, but they only won 2 more games than we did last year and remember we had 15 season-ending injuries to our starters. I don't think the discrepancy should be that huge at this point.
well, sure - they were also winning a super bowl three years ago... here're the scores of the last five steeler home openers prior to this year: 34-15, 24-21, 34-7, 28-17, 26-3; that's an average score of 29-13. they haven't lost one since 2002. the texans were not the first, they'll certainly not be the last to get stung by that buzzsaw.
PROGRESS??? Exactly WHAT progress are you seeing out there? I During the preseason? In Pittsburgh? In Nashville? You call what they're selling us progress? Because I see regression more than anything. And again, I'm not asking for the second coming of the 1970s Steelers here. All I'm asking is for them to quit reminding us of the Houston Oilers or worse, the Capers-Casserly years and to start showing us that what they are doing will actually work in real life. That's not even a minimal expectation level because I'm not assigning a won-loss number - they could go 3-13 and I'd be satisfied if I saw a team going out there and making an effort to compete even if it results in a loss. What is there to understand here? That they were a bad team? That they were run by a joke of a GM? That their coach was an incompetent dumbass? That they ruined their QB? I think we have all been able to figure all that out for ourselves. But that understanding doesn't absolve McNair of any responsibility for feeding us this mess nor does it provide him with a "Get Out Of Jail Free" card. Actions have consequences and fan dissatisfaction is the price you have to pay here. And I COMPLETELY understand what he inherited but in all honesty, he's done himself no favors. He was wrong about Carr and he's been wrong about Green and now folks are right to question his choice of Schaub. But Kubiak had to understand and accept what he was walking into when he took this job. And foremost on his list should have been that thanks to the previous regime, his margin for error was zero. If he didn't understand that, then he was a fool and he played himself and we will all have to suffer through yet another coaching change-rebuilding because of it. But by now, he should have been able to infuse some semblance of the correct attitude into this team. I liken it to the Oakland Raiders when John Madden took over. Before the wins started coming, he infused an attitude toward the game that made the subsequent winning possible. That's what I don't see Kubiak doing here at all and that's exactly what I wanted him to do when he took over: get rid of that sad sack loser mentality that had become entrenched here. I knew that they had to overhaul the roster and that that would take time. But I wasn't prepared for seeing the same sorry ineptness that I saw under Capers three years into his tenure. They have too many Chester Pitts' and Ahman Greens and not enough Demecos. That is something that should not be tolerated period. Losing and looking bad has not only become expected, it's become accepted and that has to stop or else Kubiak will find himself out of a job in two years. And again, I am not declaring Kubiak a bust but unless I stop seeing pitifully bad football from his team, I most definitely will.
I put the last game all on kubiac's shoulders. yeah shaub played less than desirable but the playcalling was TERRIBLE in the red zone. Maybe somebody else should call the plays.
I feel bad for Andre Johnson man, he has been productive year in and year out, if the texans don't do something quick i can see him going out the door!
They won 4 games in 2002, Ric. That sure ain't good. If we're 4-12 this season, are you still going to be talking about progress?
