I did? Where did I point that out? I mean, my posts are not hiding - go through them, find what I did say and respond to that. I have zero idea and have never claimed otherwise. Do I believe we "tried hard"... I mean, yes? I would guess they kicked tires on free agents and worked hard on their scouting. Do you think otherwise?... We didn't lose to the Colts three times; we were 1-2 and at no point have I "proudly pounded" my chest. Look, laser focus on their final game at the expense of the previous 16 all you want. But I'm not going to apologize for taking a longer view of the season. You can "yeah but" it all you want - they won 11 games; they have a lot of talent... it's not a bad place to start a season. See - I don't think BoB is a **** coach. I'm not sure I'd argue he's a good coach... but I think the vitriol aimed at him is sometimes overly convenient - ie all the bad stuff is his fault; all the good stuff is in spite of him. I look at his overall body of work and.... it's been OK. He won 27 games in three seasons with Fitzpatrick, Hoyer/Mallet and Osweiler as his QBs. That's not easy! He won 11 games last year with an OL that we all know is sub-mediocre. That's also not easy! Should they have fired him with Rick Smith in 2017? Yes. Can they almost certainly do better? Yes. Am I disappointed/flabbergasted that he seems to have regressed overall (he was pretty doggone good in '14 and '15, IMO)? Yes. He's OK - should we settle for that? No. But, in the interim......
Yeah; I agree, generally, with one exception: it does not matter if *we* don't know who's making decisions... assuming *they* know. There seems to be a lot of focus on that - but... who cares? No one knows who's making the decision in, say, New England, either - but they win all the time so fans have better things to focus on. It's just not meaningful... again, assuming they know who's making the decisions.
i have no idea who inside knows what. I don't have any insider info. My take, from the outside looking in, is it's not a very well run organization.
It's sad to see that even an outsider like u can see past the winning record. U can see like some of us that Texans aren't that good regardless of their record. I feel like our wins are pretty meaningless if we just get sht on playoffs every single time we get in. Like I have yet to feel uber confident going into playoffs with the way our team is built under BOB. The first 2 we had sht qb leading us, by then I can see that BoB isn't that great of a coach who gets away with shtty coaching by getting AFC South Division title.
It doesn't appear to be... but, appearances have never won (or lost) games. And I think it's... an OK-run organization. I mean... there are some legitimate questions about some of the results - for instance: can someone explain Mike Devlin still having a job? But I also think there are examples of it being a very well-run organization - most of that tied to the talent they accumulated and/or been able to attract/retain.
Gotta love the dog pile on anyone having the gall to suggest the Texans may not be the worst franchise in professional sports.
Ummmm they may not be the worst but its pretty delusional to think they are well run. The in house hiring of GM Gaines was stupid, we then proceed to fire the man 16 months into a 5 year contract for a person we cant even hire. We have a hc who refused to get an offensive coordinator while proceeds to call the same stupid run play for the longest time. And to top it off, there seems to be no urgency to handle Clowney situation.
Perspective. You don’t know bad. Texans are far from the worst. Being dramatic much? Just because u don’t like the coach doesn’t mean it is not a well-run franchise.
Yeah, I want to be clear...I definitely don't think they're the worst run organization in pro sports. Not at all.
I think there are certain characteristics of well run organizations, in pro sports and otherwise, that are sort of prevailing and can be more easily spotted from the outside looking in. In a previous post you said you thought BOB was ok...that we shouldn't settle for that...but "in the interim...." It just feels like we've always been "in the interim." I'd say maybe it's just me...but I get the sense I'm definitely not alone in that sentiment. None of this is to say I think they're the worst run organization in pro sports or that I won't be rooting for them.
I always like reading your takes because you call out all the unnecessary hyperbole in these threads, but I gotta take issue with this... The playoff game we won was against a 3rd string QB who gifted us with 3 INTs and hasn't so much as made a 53-man roster since. And we were within 8 of the pats...for 3 minutes of the 4th quarter..until they scored and went up by 15 and eventually won by 18. We only scored 1 TD that game and it was in the 2nd quarter. We were never really a threat to win that game. I DO think 4 playoff games is a pretty good sample size. Is Joe Montana not a great Superbowl QB? He only has a 4-game sample size, after all - same as BOB's sample size. In 2 of BOB's 4 playoff games, his team has been totally unprepared and both of those games were basically over in the 1st quarter. The other was against a 3rd string QB. I think that's a pattern.
Sure, but, uh.... our QB wasn't much better. Also, if we're going to discredit the Texans for playing a 3rd string never-was (which is fair) - don't we also have to cut BoB some slack for starting Osweiler and Hoyer in two of his four playoff games? Yes, they are... probably better than Cook but... not by much. (Hoyer is - but he wasn't that afternoon.) Not a threat to win, no (they're NEVER a threat to win in NE...) - but the Texans were absolutely *in* that game. The defense played well and Osweiler and his receivers left some big plays on the field. Given, again, Osweiler - I think they maximized their effort in that game. I certainly never thought it was solely, or even mostly BoB's fault - as a coach. Joe Montana started 23 playoff games; yes, he was good in four Super Bowls - but he was really good in the playoffs, generally - as we were crushingly reminded in '94. I assume those two games are KC and Indy? Look, I'm not going to defend a 30-0 drubbing. But the Chiefs ran the opening kick back and Hoyer was an absolute disaster - and I think it'd be fairly difficult to pin his performance on BoB. The guy choked. I can't wrap my head around the Colts game. Watson wasn't very good - but, again: I never sensed it was a preparation/game plan failure. Watson just picked the worst time to have his worst game. (And Hopkins being hurt didn't help, either.) I could list a string of issues I have with BoB (virtually every decision he's made with his QBs, short of finally inserting Watson into the line-up - and even that, he handled poorly) - but here's where I land: I thought he was flat-out great in '14 and pretty good in '15. (Do we all remember him putting JJ Watt at tight end - how fun that team was? Or him throwing out his game plan and UH'ing it for two weeks with Keenum?) I think he was hampered by Osweiler in '16 and undone by Watson's injury in '17. But I thought he was pretty doggone good last season, working around a terrible OL and injuries to Fuller & Coutee. Yes! Blame him for the OL - that is another area where he has flat-out failed (from either a personnel or development standpoint - or both). And I hope all the shenanigans this offseason means he's lost power not gained it; that these NE guys are going to have a higher standard and hold him to it. We'll see. But I'm excited to see Watson, Hopkins, Fuller & Coutee. I think the Johnson deal was good, too. And I think the defense will be pretty decent, as well. I'm optimistic, and I certainly don't get all the rampant doom-and-gloom. Too many are acting like we're coming off a 2-win season. THEY WON 11 GAMES! And everyone wants to "yeah but" it. I don't get it.
Just a heads up, injuries are only relevant here when the other team has them and/or they can be used to discredit a Texan victory.
Hopkins being hobbled or DW4 having a bad day didn't have anything to do with the defense giving up two 75-yard TD drives on the first two drives of the game. These were long TD drives, not just a couple of fluky big plays. That's just a team not being ready to play - which IMO falls on the coach. How can you not be ready to play in a home playoff game against an inferior division rival??
Eh........ I went back and looked at the play-by-play... on both of the Colts' drives, Texan defensive veterans were whistled for offsides on crucial third downs, Watt on the first series (3rd and 7), Merciless on the second (3rd and 5). Watt's wiped out a stop. I can't blame BoB for those. And the offense went 3-and-out to "answer" the 7-0 deficit and threw an interception in response to the 14-0 deficit. Again... was coaching or execution the problem? I'm not arguing BoB was blameless. Just that not everything's binary; we don't have to land at 0 or 100 on the scale - it's OK to be the 40s, 50s, 60s and see that there were actually *a lot* of factors. Having said that... I just don't know how BoB is supposed to coach around the QB not playing well. To me, that game comes back to that.
I used to keep a running tab of BOB's record in "big games" and games against teams with winning records. It got so depressing I had to stop.
For BOB, win/loss records actually get recorded like this: win/loss/losses where he gets back within one possession in the 4th quarter I'd guess the hope is that the L's in that last category can be converted into wins. But he has like a 100% failure rate in clock management scenarios, and does his jerk store routine whenever he's asked about it in conferences.
