It is that bad if you want to see a playoff team. It's not acceptable losing 4 games, all of which you could have won had you applied more drive and focus. Ric loves to chime about how he doesn't care that the offense only puts it together for 2 quarters a game since they score enough to win. Well, they didn't on Monday (14 pt first half, 3 pt second). They didn't in Indianapolis (3 pt first half, 14 pt second). They didn't in Arizona (shutout first half, 21 pt second). They didn't against Jacksonville (21 pt first half, 3 pt second). We got away with it in our wins (and it absolutely was going on in the wins as well), but I'm not okay with a coaching staff that is unable to instill the motivation and focus to play 4 quarters of football. I'm not. It is a critical responsibility of your head coach. If you are fiery but unable to implement a good gameplan, you are not going to be a successful playoff coach. If you have a good gameplan but can not get the best play out of your roster, you are not going to be a successful playoff coach. Kubiak has taken us out of the Capers/Casserly era nightmare, but I am pessimistic on this team's chances of taking the next step under his direction. And in pro sports, time is precious. For most teams on the verge, you are looking at a 3 to 4 year window. I'm not alright with playing an endless wait and see stay the course approach when our franchise player (Johnson) is already in his 7th season. Drayton declined to bring in the obviously needed bat to the Astros (World Series year) and squandered the greatest pitching rotation the franchise will ever see. When you get close, you HAVE to make your push. Fire Kubiak. Hire Cowher. Throw money and picks to get a good nose tackle and safety. Kick A**.
If you're good enough to get close, you're only good enough to get close. You are what your record says you are. They are 1-3 in their division, and have beaten only one solidly good football team. 5-5. The very definition of mediocre. If they even finish 9-7, I will say there were "good" (but not *that* good). Just a little above average. I'm extremely impressed with how the talent has progressed. I'm befuddled by the continued inconsistency and mediocrity, though.
ummm...I agreed to your terms, I only said I needed to think about what the sig would say. You never responded in that thread. If anyone is "chicken poop", its you for backing out AFTER the game with the result the way it is. http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?p=4883925#post4883925 Anyways, I am fine with you being a sore loser about it, enjoy the rest of the season.
Eventually the worm turns. You can't expect a coin toss (speaking losely, obviously these games were not decided by chance, but about as close as can be) to end up tails 5 more times because the first 5 times were tails. They are good, not average. Every stat says that except for W/L (I can hear the "just win" trolls making snide, short-sighted, shallow comments already)... and eventually it will average out and show in the W/L, be it this year or next. Question is will Kubiak live to see the coin start landing heads up?
not to mention your running game is suspect partly because you are starting to backup guards. just imagine if this ninth ranked offense could run the ball
The games were decided based on the fact that kicker couldn't make kicks and the running backs couldn't punch in the ball from the 1 yard line. That's not simple luck. That's players not being able to do their job. And even, that would only have tied each of those games - not won them. So they weren't 50/50 games. That said, they are still making progress. Losing by a TD or less is better than losing by multiple possessions (as they were doing last year). That's a definite step forward. But it's not just bad luck. What? They are statistically above average on offense and punting. They are below average on defense and kicking. That gets pretty close to average.
Didn't read it that way. At any rate, you waited until after the game to chime in with your half of the deal. Sorry, but it just doesn't work like that.
I was waiting. The way I understood it, there was nothing in place yet for me to back out of. You roll in after the game is over with "oh by the way here are my terms". Come on, man. Get real.
I find his post basically just restating the point I made. Yeah, I said the loses weren't luck. However, they were very close, razor-thin in some cases. And beyond that, is has been the vast majority of the losses. I take exception to his accusation of their "averageness" though. They're top 10 offensively. Almost dead center average defensively. Average return game. Above average punting/special teams coverage. And Kris Brown is having an abnormally off year. (Bottom 10) So there you have it. I'd call that "good", and not "average". Edit: If you want to call it average, that's your call... more power to you... but I'm more than willing to go out on a limb and say they will *improve* as we go towards the years end and, regardless of W/L, you will call them "good" by the time the season is over.
That's fair, Donny. I'll argue that if they're "good", they'll win at least 9 games this year. No excuses. If you win 8 games, you're average.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on these points. But Pgabriel was right: The proper time for this discussion is in the off season should Kubiak get the axe. But I do see where you are coming and why you feel this way.
I don't understand why you are saying the terms were changed, the bet was a sig bet right? Winner of the game gets to decide what it says...didnt think having the message not set in stone was a deal breaker for you. I didnt change anything after the game, go look at the post, its very clear. Go ahead and remove the signature since your gonna cry about it and not put what I want anyways. I remember there being a huge deal with a sig bet I had before, where I put the signature was related to a sig bet and that person freaked out as well. I think I will avoid sig bets from now on.
dave, it's a very simple concept. you set all terms in advance. if you find yourself in more than one controversy concerning sig bets, perhaps you should have a look at the common denominator.
No point in arguing over it, I don't think me deciding what the signature should be, changes the terms of the bet. Either way, just remove the signature and go on with your life.
How could you not? It can't be a blank check situation. Otherwise, someone could come in and claim that the sig is: "I sleep with my own mother" Agree in full before the game. You're very much in the wrong with this back and forth.
Did you read the original post where the bet was made? I agreed to a bet where the winner decides the other persons signature, he had already made it clear what mine would say, I told him I would let him know. He never responded. And I didn't come in with anything outrageous after the fact, all I asked for was him to include a stat line showing his record as a starter. He is being a puss with the disclaimer, and a sore loser because the Texans got shown up once again. I'm done posting about it, enjoy the loss against the colts this wknd.
