Texans Fire Richard Smith!!

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Roy P

Why not take a look at bringing in Jerry Gray to run the defensive side of the ball?

Heck yeah. I've brought up Gray's name here before, like here.

Originally Posted by painekiller

Remember all the big names we had listed when Kubiak was hired and he wanted Frank Bush and Richard Smith? Not Jim Bates, not Jerry Gray.

No matter what we want it's who Kubiak wants that matters.

Well, he maybe didn't want Gray because he interviewed against him for the HC position. Awkward! So I don't think Gray was a serious DC candidate back then, but if Kubiak is serious about giving someone other than Frank Bush a shot, then Gray ought to be heard from again.

But as you say, Kubiak is probably more interested in hiring the familiar.

Speaking of...

Originally Posted by painekiller

For the DB/CB David Gibbs of the KC Chiefs, formally of the Broncos. He is son of Alex. David has a solid track record and it would please Alex, which means he might stay longer.

Wow, how did I not think of this? Seems like an ideal hire for Kubiak. Would need to find a way to get the Chiefs to allow him to interview here, a la with something more than a lateral move, assuming Gibbs the Younger is still employed by KC in 2009 (situation with asst. coaches in KC is somewhat up in the air I think). Anyway, just asking him to be our DB coach if he is retained by KC would require their permission if I understand the rules correctly here.

[HPF Bob]

It wouldn't shock me at all to see Ray Rhodes move up to DC. He has both DC and HC experience and he's already under contract. Jerry Gray wouldn't hurt my feelings in the least but I'm sure it will cost less to promote your experienced assistants who are already here and hire assistants to replace them rather than go out and sign a new DC.

[kravix]

While I wouldnt mind seeing Rhodes step in as DC, i seriously doubt that it would happen. He came out of retirement to be an assitant, and like Gibbs, stated that he didnt want all the responsibilities of coordinator. I think he is happy where he is.

[edo783]

I doubt very much that Rhodes would take the DC job. He has some serious health issues that prevent him from putting in the hours and taking the stress that comes with a DC position.

[Roy P]

It really befuddles me to think that Kubiak would look within to fill the DC vacancy. The decision to fire Smith was not a last minute thing, Kubiak said he looked at the body of work and didn't see the progress required to bring Richard back. Now, if Kubiak saw this was coming, based upon the last couple of years (not the last couple of games) then it would have been prudent to give the duties to Bush in order to determine if there would be the NEED to bring in somebody from the outside or not during the offseason.

While I have thrown out some professional options, let me add some college spice to the situation. Here are three names worth considering for the vacancy.

Mark Banker – Oregon State, San Diego Chargers
Mike Archer – NC State, Pittsburgh Steelers
Vic Koenning – Kansas State University, Clemson, Memphis

These are three current defensive coordinators at the college level. Archer and Banker both have some professional experience. NC State was 16th in total defense, Oregon State was 11th in total defense, and Kansas State led the Nation in total defense. Here are their bio pages...

http://www.gopack.com/ViewArticle.db...&Q_SEASON=2008

http://www.osubeavers.com/sports/m-f...er_mark00.html

http://www.kstatesports.com/ViewArti...&Q_SEASON=2009

[painekiller]

Because there is not a better place to put this, on the other board, TT.com, one of the regular poster, Dan B., had a interesting encounter with Frank Bush

I then asked him what was the biggest change in our defense over the second half, and whether there were any changes he made in the last 8 games with our defensive scheme. In fact I asked him point blank if he was calling the plays.

He attributed the difference at the end of the season largely to Dunta, although he went out of his way to compliment our LB corps, and while he didn't say he called the plays, he did say that "Coach and I" (I assume Kubiak) banned certain plays by Smith, but let him call his own game otherwise. Maybe it's just me, but telling a coach that some of their basic plays are off limits is pretty damn close to removing play calling duties. I can see the conversation now -- "Sure you can call any play you want. Except that one. Or that one. Maybe this play would work?"

A very interesting little post, and you guys should all read the entire thing.

On all the boards I have watched a large group of poster screaming about how Kubiak was not dealing with Smith and the Defense, and how was he going to promote a person that was part of the problem. How? Why?

1) Kubiak is media smart, and he uses the media to build his guys and the program. He never airs his dirty laundry. He does that behind closed doors, as any good manager should.

2) How could he consider Bush? Think about how Bush finally arrived here? He came in not with the title of Co-DC, that was Smith's job, and Kubiak was not going to slap the man (Smith) in public with a Co-DC title. He came here and wanted to fit in, the defensive playbook had been basically designed and in place. Bush was not going to come in and wholesale change what Smith (his good friend) had already done.

We do not know the behind closed door workings, and should expect Kubiak, and McNair to be much better to assess the team.

I agree after last year, more control over Smith should have been done. But we are not sure about what micro managing Kubiak was doing on the defense, or lack of time for defensive matter due to micro managing of the offense.

Maybe Kubiak has grown enough as a HC to see the errors of his past and this time we get better results. If not I do not see McNair making the same CC for to long mistake.

[Roy P]

I understand the purpose of the Zone-Blitz. However, the benefit of "surprise" is outweighed by the risk of having Jesse Nading covering Devin Hester in the End Zone. I'm wondering if Kubiak informed Smith that that play was off limits.

Bush is the "Senior Defensive Assistant" so I guess he'll be heavily involved with any new defensive coordinator. Perhaps he will be the X.O. and make sure the trains run on time while the D.C. can think big strategy stuff.

[Bigtinylittle]

I read that post yesterday and my impression was that although it was a fascinating read, it didn't reveal as much as the poster thought it did. It just reinforced my belief that it is REALLY hard to know what is going on inside an organization like the Texans.

First, it didn't say what calls Kubiak disallowed, or even what percentage of the calls. Or what types of calls. A lot of fans have wondered whether Kubiak was unhappy with the lack of agressiveness of the defense and therefore during the season forced Smith to be more agressive, but what Bush said seems to reveal the exact opposite: that the midseason increase in blitzing was something brought about by new personnel on the field who allowed them to blitz more.

The truth is, this organization is VERY tight lipped. Nothing wrong with that, actually. Their job is to win, not to inform. I myself hold out the possibility that Kubiak may not even have been the one who decided to pull the plug on Smith. It may have been the owner. After all, the announcement came the day after Kubiak had a long meeting with him.

[dadmg]

Originally Posted by Roy P

Vic Koenning – Kansas State University, Clemson, Memphis

Haven't heard that name in awhile. He became head coach at the University of Wyoming the year I arrived on campus. By the time my junior year was done, we had five wins in three years and an absolutely atrocious defense. Ah, the good old days.