Baby Shan Leaving Texans / Search for a New OC

[Keith]

Originally Posted by cland

2010 is Kubiak's year. He's finally got the staff he originally intended on, with Dennison and Bush as his two OC's. I give McNair a lot of credit for bringing in (and paying the salary of) all the coaches Kubiak has requested.

Not to mention the general manager as well...

One does get the sense though that news of Alex Gibbs riding off to the sunset is forthcoming.

[nunusguy]

With Kubiak basically being a lame-duck HC, Dennison must be about the least attractive OC in the league if he ends up here ?

[Roy P]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

With Kubiak basically being a lame-duck HC, Dennison must be about the least attractive OC in the league if he ends up here ?

I'm not following the logic.

Kubiak isn't necessarily a lame-duck and this offense was pretty successful. If Dennison can come in and can have a 4,000 yard QB, that's not a bad thing to have on your resume' if the team gets blown up. Secondly, if the team makes the playoffs, then Dennison is sitting in the Catbird seat.

One man's trash is another's treasure. Dennison might not be as good of a fit for another team in the league than he would be here. They don't call us "Denver-South" for no reason.

[popanot]

The fact is you can pretty much plug anyone in at OC and this offense should function just fine. I think that's been prove since we've had about a gazillion OCs and change-over in the offensive coaching staff since Kubiak's been here. Familiarity with Kubiak and his system is just icing on the cake.

[Keith]

Worth noting.

The Broncos turned down Washington’s request to interview Dennison because he would have coached the Redskins’ offensive line, meaning it was a lateral move. Under league rules, they could have denied the Texans’ permission to interview Dennison, too. But they didn’t because it would be a promotion from his current position as offensive line coach.

And also this quote from earlier in the article:

“We’re going to interview Rick (Monday),” coach Gary Kubiak said. “I want him, but we have to let things run their course.”

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...t/6808207.html

[Roy P]

Originally Posted by popanot

The fact is you can pretty much plug anyone in at OC and this offense should function just fine. I think that's been prove since we've had about a gazillion OCs and change-over in the offensive coaching staff since Kubiak's been here. Familiarity with Kubiak and his system is just icing on the cake.

If we could just plug in anybody, then why not Ray Brown of the Bufalo Bills? Perhaps Sean Kugler, since they are both out of a job. The Bills averaged 4.4 yards per carry (8th) while the Texans got 3.5 ypc (30th). The Bills also had a few rookies playing this season; Andy Levitre, Jamon Meredith, and Eric Wood. The Vets like Incognito and Scott have 5 and 3 years in the league.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorysta...M&d-447263-p=1

Taking a look at the combined starts for the Texans OL this season = 157
Then turn around and see just how inexperienced the Bills were = 91.

These coaches got more with less.
Fred Jackson : 237 carries 1062 yards 4.5 ypc
Steve Slaton : 131 carries 437 yards 3.3 ypc

[Roy P]

Originally Posted by Roy P

Perhaps Sean Kugler, since they are both out of a job. The Bills averaged 4.4 yards per carry (8th) while the Texans got 3.5 ypc (30th).

http://blogs.nfl.com/2010/01/13/stee...-coach-o-line/

Well that didn't last long....The Steelers jumped up.

The Steelers agreed to terms with Sean Kugler to become their offensive line coach, according to a league source.

Kugler was part of a Bills staff that has been allowed to interview for other jobs while the team searches for a new head coach. Pittsburgh, which had issues protecting the quarterback in recent years, fired offensive line coach Larry Zierlein after the season.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by Roy P

I'm not following the logic.

Here's my logic: NFL coachs are like employees in any industry in that they probably value job security more than monetary compensation or any other element when it comes to employment opportunities. So with that in mind and knowing the most talented get the best opportunities, going to work for regimes like Shanahans in Washington or Carrolls in Seattle would represent the top-range of job security while those where the HC has only a single year remaining on his contract would represent the other extreme.
Now of course if Kubiak gets an extension of time on his existing contract to reduce the uncertainy of his longevity here in Houston, that's changes things.

[Roy P]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

Here's
going to work for regimes like Shanahans in Washington or Carrolls in Seattle would represent the top-range of job security while those where the HC has only a single year remaining on his contract would represent the other extreme.

I could see the Seattle and the Washington jobs being considered more "high risk" than here. Also, Dennison wasn't going to beat out Mike's son as the OC in D.C. no matter how talented. As for Carroll, he probably wants somebody he has worked with before and shares his offensive philosophy.

In the NFL, there are no "safe jobs" so working with people you like where you feel free to "do your thing" with minimal intrusion, can be more important in job selection than having job security.

[Roy P]

Quote:
“We’re going to interview Rick (Monday),” coach Gary Kubiak said. “I want him, but we have to let things run their course.”

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...t/6808207.html


If we are to comply with the Rooney rule, who is our minority candidate to interview? Do we give Chick Harris an opportunity to interview to put a check in the box? Could we perhaps interview the Packers', Edgar Bennett? Maybe the Eagles' Ted Williams (who was a member of Ray Rhodes' staff) would be an interesting fit, considering how I'd like to utilize Slaton like the Eagles use Westbrook. When Kubiak says "we have to let things run their course." is he really saying, we have to make sure we don't get reprimanded by the league for not giving a minority a legitimate interview because we already have our guy?

This isn't even about racism. Kubiak obviously didn't let race preclude him from wanting Frank Bush as the D.C. Just curious if we have found a top minority candidate to interview for a "playcaller" position.

[texan]

Originally Posted by Roy P

If we are to comply with the Rooney rule, who is our minority candidate to interview?

I'm pretty sure the Rooney rule only applies to the head coach and front office positions.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

Here's my logic: NFL coachs are like employees in any industry in that they probably value job security more than monetary compensation or any other element when it comes to employment opportunities. So with that in mind and knowing the most talented get the best opportunities, going to work for regimes like Shanahans in Washington or Carrolls in Seattle would represent the top-range of job security while those where the HC has only a single year remaining on his contract would represent the other extreme.
Now of course if Kubiak gets an extension of time on his existing contract to reduce the uncertainy of his longevity here in Houston, that's changes things.

I think your logic is seriously flawed here. There is no way you can say the guy with the longest contract has the best job and is thus the best coach.

You have guys who are payed more for two years then another guy is for 4. It would be insane to say I have a better job making 500k for 4 years then you have making 2 million for 2 years. Not to mention buyout levels, bonuses, etc... These contracts are not simple things. They are also not concrete or permanent. You could be under contract for years when some crypt keeper takes out his overhead projector and explains why he isn't going to pay you anymore money.

Either way, Kubiak runs our offense and I am not extremely concerned about who the OC is, as long as Kubiak is comfortable.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by barrett

I think your logic is seriously flawed here. There is no way you can say the guy with the longest contract has the best job and is thus the best coach.

You have guys who are payed more for two years then another guy is for 4. It would be insane to say I have a better job making 500k for 4 years then you have making 2 million for 2 years. Not to mention buyout levels, bonuses, etc... These contracts are not simple things. They are also not concrete or permanent. You could be under contract for years when some crypt keeper takes out his overhead projector and explains why he isn't going to pay you anymore money.

Either way, Kubiak runs our offense and I am not extremely concerned about who the OC is, as long as Kubiak is comfortable.

Notwithstanding what happened to Carrolls predecessor in Seattle, Shanahan & Carroll are almost guaranteed atleast 2 years no matter how bad their first year turns out while I think the Texans are less likely to finish above .500 next year than they were this year, and if that scenario becomes reality Kubiak and his staff will have a very tough time sticking in Houston beyond 2010.

[cland]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

Notwithstanding what happened to Carrolls predecessor in Seattle, Shanahan & Carroll are almost guaranteed atleast 2 years no matter how bad their first year turns out while I think the Texans are less likely to finish above .500 next year than they were this year, and if that scenario becomes reality Kubiak and his staff will have a very tough time sticking in Houston beyond 2010.

Perhaps Dennison isn't quite as 'glass half empty' and sees a team on the rise, a coach that has completed it's first winning season and was a QB injury (Frye) away from the playoffs. And if you're going to get an OC job...starting with the #1 passing offense isn't a bad way to go.