Freeman: Would you?

[chuck]

Originally Posted by barrett

This just got a whole lot less hypothetical for me.

Fire his dumb ass and let him go back to Denver to coach Peyton. Think about how sweet that would look on the old resume! Steve Young, John Elway, Peyton Manning? What's the common thread? Gary Kubiak, noted genius.

The idea that some palm-licking retard like Kubiak had any positive input into the careers of the likes of Young or Elway is laughable.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by chuck

Fire his dumb ass and let him go back to Denver to coach Peyton. Think about how sweet that would look on the old resume! Steve Young, John Elway, Peyton Manning? What's the common thread? Gary Kubiak, noted genius.

The idea that some palm-licking retard like Kubiak had any positive input into the careers of the likes of Young or Elway is laughable.

I think you replied to the wrong post. Either way you're an idiot if you think Kubiak is always responsible when things go wrong but never a part of it when things go right.

[chuck]

Originally Posted by barrett

I think you replied to the wrong post. Either way you're an idiot if you think Kubiak is always responsible when things go wrong but never a part of it when things go right.

No, you're right. Let's give Kubiak all the credit he's due for the excellent defense under the outstanding leadership of DC Frank Bush.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by chuck

No, you're right. Let's give Kubiak all the credit he's due for the excellent defense under the outstanding leadership of DC Frank Bush.

Again you want to blame him for Bush and give no credit for Wade. It's one or the other. If he gets no credit for Wade he gets no blame for Bush and vice versa.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by barrett

Again you want to blame him for Bush and give no credit for Wade. It's one or the other. If he gets no credit for Wade he gets no blame for Bush and vice versa.

Actually, in those particular scenarios, a good argument could be made for what you said. Bush was promoted after everyone else was fired on what was one of the worst defenses in league history. Further, no one was even interviewed. There was never even an attempt to explain this ridiculousness other than Bush was Kubiak's buddy.

As for Wade, there has been serious speculation that he was forced on Kubiak. I guess we don't know for sure but considering his previous hires, it's not an unreasonable conclusion. So, a strong argument could be made that he does bear responsibility for Bush but deserves little credit for Wade.

[chuck]

Originally Posted by Joshua

As for Wade, there has been serious speculation that he was forced on Kubiak. I guess we don't know for sure but considering his previous hires, it's not an unreasonable conclusion. So, a strong argument could be made that he does bear responsibility for Bush but deserves little credit for Wade.

This is so staggeringly obvious that anyone taking a position otherwise can only be defending the palm-licker simply to be contrary.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by chuck

This is so staggeringly obvious that anyone taking a position otherwise can only be defending the palm-licker simply to be contrary.

Chuck, you are so transparent. You piss and whine about every loss but never give any credit for a win. Seriously, I have never seen you make a single positive comment about a coach for our franchise. Every win is in spite of them and every loss because of them. You are a broken record.

It's "staggeringly obvious" to you that we should be 4-0, but the guys who assembled and coached the team that should be 4-0 are palm-licking retards. That is what I mean by hollow. You give NO credit and all blame. Kubiak is the all powerful boogie man behind every failure but the impotent figure head behind every success. It can't be both ways. It's an intellectually dishonest argument.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by Joshua

Actually, in those particular scenarios, a good argument could be made for what you said. Bush was promoted after everyone else was fired on what was one of the worst defenses in league history. Further, no one was even interviewed. There was never even an attempt to explain this ridiculousness other than Bush was Kubiak's buddy.

As for Wade, there has been serious speculation that he was forced on Kubiak. I guess we don't know for sure but considering his previous hires, it's not an unreasonable conclusion. So, a strong argument could be made that he does bear responsibility for Bush but deserves little credit for Wade.

And it would be a hollow argument. Either Kubiak makes the hires and is responsible for the whole team or he is not. I personally think he does not have a huge hand in our defense, other than protecting them with TOP and a good running game. But Bill Bellachik is a defensive coach who gets all the credit for the Pats offense and none of the blame for the crappy defense of the past 5 years. That is what being the HEAD coach means. You are responsible. It is hollow to put it all on the head coach when a team loses and not when they win. That would be like saying we lost today because we are a pathetic group that turtles up when things get tough, because that is our head coach's personality. But we won late against SD and TEN and it has nothing to do with our HC's personality.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by barrett

And it would be a hollow argument. Either Kubiak makes the hires and is responsible for the whole team or he is not. I personally think he does not have a huge hand in our defense, other than protecting them with TOP and a good running game. But Bill Bellachik is a defensive coach who gets all the credit for the Pats offense and none of the blame for the crappy defense of the past 5 years. That is what being the HEAD coach means. You are responsible. It is hollow to put it all on the head coach when a team loses and not when they win. That would be like saying we lost today because we are a pathetic group that turtles up when things get tough, because that is our head coach's personality. But we won late against SD and TEN and it has nothing to do with our HC's personality.

No, the hollow argument is attributing the same responsibilty/credit to both decisions when it is very likely that only one decision was his (hint-the bad one) and the other decision was made in spite of his wishes (another hint-the good one).