91Èȱ¬

They aren't going to make the post-season and Kubiak goes this year, I'm afraid.

I think the most notable point about the 4 consecutive losses is that they were all to divisional rivals. Not sure the precise stats, but the Titans and Colts have dominated the Texans for several years, and the fact Houston never make the post-season rather suggests that they struggle in these most important games.

So perhaps it's less that the Texans don't have big-game temperament, and more that they are weighed down by the fact they win so rarely against their closest rivals. Maybe it's psychological, maybe it's that they get routinely out-coached, but it is a clear pattern and it costs Houston every year.

Another thing this year is that Houston cannot run the ball. Slaton was a bust before his injury, and it's no secret that without a running game, there's no way to manage the clock. Against a team like the Colts, that's a huge problem, even with a 17 point lead.

There was talk that they might sign Larry Johnson, you can understand why they didn't... but new coach or not, next year the running game has to be upgraded.

I think you can tie it all together in a nice, neat little bow. During last week's stomping of the Seahawks, Kubiak unleashed and emphasized the team's talented air attack, led by Andre Johnson. He did not even -- as he often does -- back off and start playing ball control (read: running) offense once we got a lead. Magically, the lead just kept expanding and the game was over at halftime.

The problem with Kubiak is that, despite having a great passing team, he always wants to recreate the Denver teams that he assisted for that ran the ball most of the time. Even when his only options at back are retreads like Brown or 3rd down size backs like Slaton, he wants to run the ball all the time. So he actually handcuffs his powerful offense by forcing it into traditional, conservative playcalling where the run has to be established before passing opens up. The irony being that Houston burned Seattle last week on the first play by simply throwing deep. No need to set that up with a run. Kubiak just refuses to play some of the nice cards in his hand as often as he could. If I were him this would be a dominant passing team, not some goody "balanced" attack.

You also have to question how Kubiak manages games. Usually what happens in games like the one he blew against the Colts a few weeks back is that, once he gets a lead (usually by passing), he tries to milk the clock by running the ball. But the running attack can't sustain enough drives and the Texans end up punting. Against a powerful offense like the Colts', you start providing opportunities to come back, and they often get taken. I mean, can you really "run out the clock" on Peyton Manning? No, his offense will get down the field too quick. It's all misguided. And the irony is that if he left his foot on the offensive gas and kept passing -- like he did against Seattle -- perhaps they blow the opposition out and it's not even close. His "clock" tactics keep the score down and the opposition competitive.

Before we consider these new pearls of wisdom, would you like to revisit your September piece about Reggie Bush being washed up now that the Saints are 13 - 0 with Bush playing an integral role in the Saints offense all season? That might gives us folks a baseline for assessing the quality of the punditry on offer here.

Ahhh the modern sports fan craving instant success. It doesn't work like that very often. Look at any sport and the best teams stick with their manager for the long haul. NFL franchises that have done this have, on average, been more succesful than those that chop and change at a whim.

You article is also in complete contrast to one posted elsewhere on the web that points out that past Superbowl managers rarely go on to have similar levels of success again. So there is no guarantee that any of the 6 former Superbowl winning managers potentially on the marker would deliver overnight success to Houston or any other team.

I wouldn't defend everything you write, Neil, especially not your predictions(!), but you were right about Reggie Bush not performing to the level his draft-pick suggested he should.

Will be very interesting to see what happens this off-season with Bush. I'd not be at all surprised to see another team look at a player with Bush's mercurial skill and show him the money that Payton won't. He's got the potential to be a game-changer, and can add spark to any offense. Of course the Saints are the one franchise least in need of this sort of talent.

"Ahhh the modern sports fan craving instant success."

No its not Chris the Texans have every right to expect post-season football.
6-10 in 2006.
8-8 in 2007
8-8 in 2008

It looks again this year that they will be an 8-8 team, if this is the eventual outcome then Kubriak has to go because it shows the team have become stagnated and he has taken as far as he can.

Imperiative, add to poor play-calling also. The RB half-back pass versus the Jags was a shocking play-call especially as the Texans had drove down to 5 and had got a first down.

All said about Reggie Bush, the Saints' use of RBs remains guesswork and might be contributing to his underachieving - They have three decent tail-ends.

Pierre Thomas (5.3), leads Reggie Bush (5) and Mike Bell (4.2) in average YPC, yet Bell is the highest recipient of Brees' hand-offs. Bush, meanwhile, seems to be the RB targetted most for their passing game. Thomas seems to be the flex option, despite being the more productive in both plays. Yet can we predict how Sean Payton is going to deploy his backfield? I can't, which makes Fantasy Football ownership of any of them a nightmare!

I suspect Bush would benefit from from a set-up like the one Chris Johnson has at Houston, or Jamaal Charles at Kansas ("Hike, running left, AGAIN, hike, hike") before deciding this argument.

*Correction: Chris Johnson at the Titans. But I like the way I brought the discussion full-circle back to Houston!