Fair point; the difference is that, for now anyway, Garrett is more or less keeping everything the same: same personnel, same coaching staff, same offensive/defensive philosophies. If the Texans switch coaches, and they bring in a new system, it'll require new players (remember: as much as people worry about a 3-4, the OL is built exclusively for ZBS. I'm not sure those guys fit the model Cowher built in PITT, for instance). Then you have to jettison the dummies and losers and mis-evaluated on top of that. I would guess this team, one of the youngest in football, will look radically different in 2-3 years if a new regime is brought in. I no longer think, personnel-wise, they're as close as people think. (And they're light years behind the Cowboys, IMO, in terms of personnel.)
Good post, I commented on this with a friend of mine who lives in Detroit, we were talking after the Texans game and Before the Cowboys had started; he commented that no matter, at least the Texans still had a better record than Dallas. My reply was that it would not surprise me at all if the Texans and Cowboys finished the season with strikingly similar records and that losing just wasn't entrenched in the Cowboy culture like it is with the Texans. Pretty pathetic.
Wow, that's not pretty to look at. Don't know how anyone can defend the guy after looking at those numbers. 1-4 after the bye week....that's just sickening. Any team besides the Texans still have a coach at the helm with those kinds of numbers - and no playoff games? I don't think that's a bad plan, actually. I don't understand why some people are saying we shouldn't mess with going from a 4-3 to a 3-4. You don't want to disrupt what may end up being LITERALLY the worst defense in the history of the NFL? I mean, what are we clinging to here?
Bingo. There are a lot of issues with this team. The reason I put most of the blame on Kubiak though is that he has total control of the organization. He picks his coaches, he picked his GM and he picks his players. Let's run through he excuses... The DC is running a defense that is too vanilla. Well one, as the head coach Kubiak should step in and tell him to change, but two, that's HIS guy. The defensive players are too inexperienced to be relied on. Well, he's the one who wanted to run with them instead of bringing in veterans to supplement them at the corner spot. The offensive line isn't giving Matt Schaub enough time He's picked all of the players on the offensive line and their small stature fits the mold he wants them to fit. They've been done in by a few bad plays here and there He's the play caller Matt Schaub might not be a "winner" (Whatever that means) Schaub is Kubiak's guy. He wanted him and he orchestrated the move to get him. The talent base he inherited was bad This is absolutely true, but the entire roster has been turned over except for Andre Johnson. The players picked since he's taken over just aren't good enough This may be true, but he picks them. He's turned over the entire roster and put players he wants in place. Sure it's his guys, but it takes time to implement a system It isn't like this is year 2. Point me to another coach that had total personnel control, got to pick his own coaches, got to turn over his entire roster and still needed more than 5 seasons to "implement his system." OK, Ok, but if we get rid of Kubiak we'll have to start over again! Another 3 year rebuilding process! Signed, 2008 Miami Dolphins 2008 Atlanta Falcons 2008 Baltimore Ravens 2006 New York Jets 2006 New Orleans Saints 2003 Dallas Cowboys Special Cases: the 2005 New York Giants won 11 games after winning only 4 two years prior. It took Coughlin two years. It took Joe Gibbs two years to get a 5 win Redskins team to 10 wins. Marvin Lewis took over a 2 win team in 2003, and after 2 8-8 seasons he went 11-5 and won the division. Mike McCarthy took over a 4 win Packer team and after one 8-8 season went 13-3 and won the division. Martyball took over a Charger team that had won 1 game and 5 games in back to back seasons, and after two years he went 12-4 and went to the playoffs. In this decade alone we've seen teams turn around in 1 or 2 years. Kubiak has had 5 years and the best the team has done is 9-7 and they appear to be backsliding. This decade tells us that in today's NFL if you pick the right head coach he can turn you around in 2 years from abysmal to a playoff team. If you really nail it he can do it in one year. There's just no excuse for 5 years to go by without getting to the playoffs, no matter what the talent base was at the beginning, and there is nothing in the past decade to tell us it should be a total rebuild if we hire a new coach unless we make the wrong hire. (AGAIN) Edit: I think it's important to remember that those great turnarounds were from bad teams to good teams. This team isn't bad. It's probably going to be something like 8-8, 8-8, 9-7, 7-9. The right hire can get this team to the playoffs in one season.
Because nobody wants to rebuild. Again. The hope is that you have enough in place that a roster tweak and new coaching staff might be able to make chicken salad out of this group: That's the fear; that's mine, at least. I don't think they have *any* personnel that fits a 3-4 beyond Cushing and Ryans.
Dude, when Sean Payton took over the Saints they turned over something like 35 players or something crazy in one offseason and then won 10 games. Your fears are unfounded because you think about it the way it's gone with the Texans. You also assume that a new coach will want to completely abandon what he inherits RIGHT AWAY as opposed to a gradual shift.
I just worry the Texans have been built so specifically, that a new regime is going to have to do more than just jettison the never-weres and underachievers and fill the various holes. Assuming a switch to a 3-4, what DL stay? They’ve specifically drafted smaller, quicker DTs; the 3-4 requires bigger, stronger DTs. And the ends are required to be run-stopping studs. Antonio Smith might fit that mold – but he’s one of the dumber players on the team. A 3-4 casts Mario Williams into purgatory. And what do you do with the offensive line? Again, they’re smaller, quicker linemen developed to block a very specific way. I even worry, though less so, about Foster – can he run in a more traditional scheme? Or is he a system back? A perfect fit for the ZBS? And then look at all the holes, regardless of regime/scheme – the secondary is terrible, the LBs are terrible, the DL can’t rush the passer and the defense as a whole can’t tackle. Ugh. It’s a mess.
The Texans would be a lot better with a great coach....they have enough draft picks stockpiled, and enough talent, what they don't have, it seems is a cohesive plan week in and week out. Kubiak is a problem, I think most of us agree...he is not a bad coach, but he is not a good one either. DD
I'm not really arguing for or against the 3-4, just making the point that there's nothing wrong with wanting to totally overhaul a HISTORICALLY bad defense. I love Ryans, Cushing and Mario as much as the next guy, but theoretically I'd rather have a good no-name defense playing in a solid fundamental scheme than have 3 good players surrounded by a bunch of trash playing in a scheme that makes Jim Eddy look like Chuck Noll.
They've been built so specifically but they suck. Why don't you see that Ric? Be it a 4-3, or a 3-4, any new coach that comes in is going to want to replace two, maybe 3 defensive linemen, two, maybe 4 (lol!) members of the secondary. You are talking about, even if we stay in a 4-3, needing to replace somewhere around 6 members of the defense. You could honestly argue that of the 11 men on defense only two of them (3 if you want to give Cushing benefit of the doubt and 4 if you believe in Quinn) are worth saving. With a roster like that, I just can't bring myself to care whether a new coach wants to change the system or not.
Ric, with all due respect, this is reminding me of when the Oilers were hesitant to get rid of the Run and Shoot after the league figured it out because we didn't have any TE's on the roster. Mario is great - but not great enough to keep us from getting a coach who could possibly change the entire direction of the franchise.
And then promptly went 7-9 and 8-8 in the two subsequent years. While I would absolutely LOVE to trade coaching staffs with the Saints, I'd much rather trade divisions. From '01-'08, the Saints were 57-55 (I always throw '05 out with the Saints - that was the outlier of all outliers.). In those 7 seasons, they never won more than 10 and never lost more than 9. The difference? In '06, when they got to 10 wins, their division was mediocre, compiling a 19-29 record. They went 4-2 - the *only* time, between '01 and '08 that they posted a winning record against their division. The AFC South (minus the Texans) has *never* posted an aggregate losing record. In fact, since 2002, it's had 2 or more teams win 9+ games in 6 of the 8 seasons (last year and '06 were the only exceptions - though, technically, they did have two 9+ win teams last year). So Payton overachieved in '06, fell back the next two years before putting it all in place. The overhaul was *not* overnight.
Whoah, whoah, justtxyank & ima_drummer2k.... I'm merely bemoaning a rebuild, not arguing against it. I literally cannot stomach what I fear will be a 2+ year reset.
You know....the more I watch, the more I think a "2 year reset" might be exactly what this franchise needs.
We have 3 major pro sports teams in Houston. 2 of the 3 are fooling themselves. 1 just recently blew it up after years of fooling themselves. It sucks to be a fan of these teams, right now.
To be fair to Ric, he IS advocating a coaching change. He's just disappointed in that he thinks that means rebuilding. I think everyone is starting to agree that Kubiak is just spinning his wheels right now. I don't think the team is nearly as far away as he does, but we'll see. I think you see coaches come in all the time and reshuffle personnel and immediately improve a team, and I don't think our talent (especially on defense) is suited to what they are doing now anyway, so I'm not really concerned with a coach blowing that side of things up. But who knows - a lot of it depends on getting the right coach.
Frankly, after all of this, I no longer fear having to rebuild the defense to play the 3-4 ... if the best coach available wants it that way, so be it. Besides, we do have some of the personnel that might fit. Barwin could play OLB, Mario could flex between OLB/DE, Smith at DE, Cushing and Demeco in the middle. The key is finding an anchor for a nose tackle, which makes a truly great 3-4 like the Steelers have with Hampton or the Pats with Wilfork. We already need to rebuild the secondary, whether we go to 3-4 or not. As far as I'm concerned they can all go, even Pollard. Quin showed yesterday that he is average at best (not even counting the hail mary). I would probably keep KJ and GQ, but sure as hell wouldn't be penciling them in as starters next year. And other than Troy Nolan, the rest of them can go. Bad defense + poor situational playcalling on offense = bad football. There is no saving Kubiak at this point. You can only give him the benefit of the doubt so many times before you realize he's just ignorant when it comes to winning in crunch time.
