|
Post by jets.penguin on Jan 6, 2015 11:23:27 GMT -5
Originally, Quinn was my first choice but after listening to a few other posters and doing a little research my opinion has changed. I do believe he has a chance to be a good HC in the league but at this juncture with the Jets, I want to play the odds. I'd rather Kubiak than Quinn and here's why:
1. The defense was number 1 in the 2 years that he led it but wasnt it also number 1 the year before Quinn got there?
2. He has a LOT of talent on his side of the ball so is it the coaching or the talent that someone else can make look just as good?
I like Kubiak because:
1. He addresses the change we need to hire someone who is from the other side of the ball
2. He is a good coach, that bum Matt Shaub QB'ing is a MAJOR reason his team went south. If you look at the teams in the playoffs the one consistent thing is the QB's. That being said us not having one of the upper echelon QB's means we need a certain level of expertise on that side of the ball. Kubiak also maintained a good defense during his time from the texans.
3. He has 3 superbowl rings and has been to the big show 6 times!!
4. If you look at the improvement that Flacco and the offense had made this year you have to admit that he has had positive influence since joining them. 5. He is the only candidate that has head coaching experience not named Marrone.
Who else has this resume? Discuss
|
|
|
Post by adpz on Jan 6, 2015 11:29:53 GMT -5
The thing that concerns me with Kubiak - was how SOFT those teams were in HOU when he was the HC.
He doesn't have that problem in BAL because he has a nasty D and a culture built around that.
If Kubiak were to be our coach - and I can see some of the positives - we'd really need to make sure we have a DC who can run a tough D.
|
|
|
Post by joepnyj1 on Jan 6, 2015 11:36:24 GMT -5
Originally, Quinn was my first choice but after listening to a few other posters and doing a little research my opinion has changed. I do believe he has a chance to be a good HC in the league but at this juncture with the Jets, I want to play the odds. I'd rather Kubiak than Quinn and here's why: 1. The defense was number 1 in the 2 years that he led it but wasnt it also number 1 the year before Quinn got there? 2. He has a LOT of talent on his side of the ball so is it the coaching or the talent that someone else can make look just as good? I like Kubiak because: 1. He addresses the change we need to hire someone who is from the other side of the ball 2. He is a good coach, that bum Matt Shaub QB'ing is a MAJOR reason his team went south. If you look at the teams in the playoffs the one consistent thing is the QB's. That being said us not having one of the upper echelon QB's means we need a certain level of expertise on that side of the ball. Kubiak also maintained a good defense during his time from the texans. 3. He has 3 superbowl rings and has been to the big show 6 times!! 4. If you look at the improvement that Flacco and the offense had made this year you have to admit that he has had positive influence since joining them. 5. He is the only candidate that has head coaching experience not named Marrone. Who else has this resume? Discuss You make a great case. Kubiak's abilities as an offensive coordinator are very good. The running game was amazing with Foster and Tate in Houston and with Baltimore he developed a gameplan for Justin Forsett (who is nothing more than a scat back) to succeed as a lead back. My problem is on the defensive side of the ball and his questionable leadership abilities to motivate his team to win the big game. Houston had a pretty talented team under him...a top 5 defense, a great offense with multiple weapons...etc..yet they couldn't win the big game when it counted. He will also need a top notch defensive coordinator to come along with him, someone like Wade Phillips or Jim Shwartz. He would not be a bad choice but I would much rather go with Quinn, Bowles or Morrone.
|
|
|
Post by jets.penguin on Jan 6, 2015 11:42:19 GMT -5
Originally, Quinn was my first choice but after listening to a few other posters and doing a little research my opinion has changed. I do believe he has a chance to be a good HC in the league but at this juncture with the Jets, I want to play the odds. I'd rather Kubiak than Quinn and here's why: 1. The defense was number 1 in the 2 years that he led it but wasnt it also number 1 the year before Quinn got there? 2. He has a LOT of talent on his side of the ball so is it the coaching or the talent that someone else can make look just as good? I like Kubiak because: 1. He addresses the change we need to hire someone who is from the other side of the ball 2. He is a good coach, that bum Matt Shaub QB'ing is a MAJOR reason his team went south. If you look at the teams in the playoffs the one consistent thing is the QB's. That being said us not having one of the upper echelon QB's means we need a certain level of expertise on that side of the ball. Kubiak also maintained a good defense during his time from the texans. 3. He has 3 superbowl rings and has been to the big show 6 times!! 4. If you look at the improvement that Flacco and the offense had made this year you have to admit that he has had positive influence since joining them. 5. He is the only candidate that has head coaching experience not named Marrone. Who else has this resume? Discuss You make a great case. Kubiak's abilities as an offensive coordinator are very good. The running game was amazing with Foster and Tate in Houston and with Baltimore he developed a gameplan for Justin Forsett (who is nothing more than a scat back) to succeed as a lead back. My problem is on the defensive side of the ball and his questionable leadership abilities to motivate his team to win the big game. Houston had a pretty talented team under him...a top 5 defense, a great offense with multiple weapons...etc..yet they couldn't win the big game when it counted. He will also need a top notch defensive coordinator to come along with him, someone like Wade Phillips or Jim Shwartz. He would not be a bad choice but I would much rather go with Quinn, Bowles or Morrone. True but we have NO idea if Quinn, Bowles or any newly appointed HC can win the big one.... or even has the management skills to be the HC. Hell we don't know if they can win the little one. The spotlight in nyc is whitehot, thats a lot of pressure for a newbie
|
|
|
Post by Jet Blast on Jan 6, 2015 11:42:22 GMT -5
I like Kubiak because: 1. He addresses the change we need to hire someone who is from the other side of the ball
2. He is a good coach, that bum Matt Shaub QB'ing is a MAJOR reason his team went south. If you look at the teams in the playoffs the one consistent thing is the QB's. That being said us not having one of the upper echelon QB's means we need a certain level of expertise on that side of the ball. Kubiak also maintained a good defense during his time from the texans. 3. He has 3 superbowl rings and has been to the big show 6 times!! 4. If you look at the improvement that Flacco and the offense had made this year you have to admit that he has had positive influence since joining them. 5. He is the only candidate that has head coaching experience not named Marrone. I am not against hiring Kubiak if he turns out to be the best candidate. I am against not hiring the best candidate if he happens to be on the defensive side of the ball. While an offensive coach would be nice, we are doing ourselves a disservice if we limit the choice to an offensive coach.
|
|
|
Post by jets.penguin on Jan 6, 2015 11:43:19 GMT -5
The thing that concerns me with Kubiak - was how SOFT those teams were in HOU when he was the HC. He doesn't have that problem in BAL because he has a nasty D and a culture built around that. If Kubiak were to be our coach - and I can see some of the positives - we'd really need to make sure we have a DC who can run a tough D. I can see that point but I think as he got better players the defense got better. I dont think anyone ion the league would call JJ Watts soft but he'd definitively have to get someone in who can rub a tough defense. We do have some good pieces to start with. I also think he has enough pull within the league to attract the kind of person that a rookie might not be able to.
|
|
|
Post by jets.penguin on Jan 6, 2015 11:44:19 GMT -5
I like Kubiak because: 1. He addresses the change we need to hire someone who is from the other side of the ball
2. He is a good coach, that bum Matt Shaub QB'ing is a MAJOR reason his team went south. If you look at the teams in the playoffs the one consistent thing is the QB's. That being said us not having one of the upper echelon QB's means we need a certain level of expertise on that side of the ball. Kubiak also maintained a good defense during his time from the texans. 3. He has 3 superbowl rings and has been to the big show 6 times!! 4. If you look at the improvement that Flacco and the offense had made this year you have to admit that he has had positive influence since joining them. 5. He is the only candidate that has head coaching experience not named Marrone. I am not against hiring Kubiak if he turns out to be the best candidate. I am against not hiring the best candidate if he happens to be on the defensive side of the ball. While an offensive coach would be nice, we are doing ourselves a disservice if we limit the choice to an offensive coach. thats true, I knew that wouldnt be enough of a reason to hire him by itself, thats why I listed a few other things that I think lean in his favor.
|
|
|
Post by carlito1171 on Jan 6, 2015 11:45:23 GMT -5
The thing that concerns me with Kubiak - was how SOFT those teams were in HOU when he was the HC. And this is why you say NO to Kubiak!
|
|
|
Post by Touchable on Jan 6, 2015 11:47:31 GMT -5
Kubiak is the kind of guy who just screams quality OC but average at best HC.
He's got the Norv Turner syndrome.
I wouldn't totally despise the move but I sure as hell wouldn't prefer him over Quinn, Marrone or Bowles.
|
|
|
Post by joepnyj1 on Jan 6, 2015 11:47:59 GMT -5
I like Kubiak because: 1. He addresses the change we need to hire someone who is from the other side of the ball
2. He is a good coach, that bum Matt Shaub QB'ing is a MAJOR reason his team went south. If you look at the teams in the playoffs the one consistent thing is the QB's. That being said us not having one of the upper echelon QB's means we need a certain level of expertise on that side of the ball. Kubiak also maintained a good defense during his time from the texans. 3. He has 3 superbowl rings and has been to the big show 6 times!! 4. If you look at the improvement that Flacco and the offense had made this year you have to admit that he has had positive influence since joining them. 5. He is the only candidate that has head coaching experience not named Marrone. I am not against hiring Kubiak if he turns out to be the best candidate. I am against not hiring the best candidate if he happens to be on the defensive side of the ball. While an offensive coach would be nice, we are doing ourselves a disservice if we limit the choice to an offensive coach. Totally agree and lets not forget that the head coach needs to be a part of all facets of the game including the defense and special teams. Just because you hire an offensive coach doesn't mean your offense will be good.
|
|
|
Post by vicmill on Jan 6, 2015 12:06:11 GMT -5
Originally, Quinn was my first choice but after listening to a few other posters and doing a little research my opinion has changed. I do believe he has a chance to be a good HC in the league but at this juncture with the Jets, I want to play the odds. I'd rather Kubiak than Quinn and here's why: 1. The defense was number 1 in the 2 years that he led it but wasnt it also number 1 the year before Quinn got there? 2. He has a LOT of talent on his side of the ball so is it the coaching or the talent that someone else can make look just as good? I like Kubiak because: 1. He addresses the change we need to hire someone who is from the other side of the ball 2. He is a good coach, that bum Matt Shaub QB'ing is a MAJOR reason his team went south. If you look at the teams in the playoffs the one consistent thing is the QB's. That being said us not having one of the upper echelon QB's means we need a certain level of expertise on that side of the ball. Kubiak also maintained a good defense during his time from the texans. 3. He has 3 superbowl rings and has been to the big show 6 times!! 4. If you look at the improvement that Flacco and the offense had made this year you have to admit that he has had positive influence since joining them. 5. He is the only candidate that has head coaching experience not named Marrone. Who else has this resume? Discuss You make a great case. Kubiak's abilities as an offensive coordinator are very good. The running game was amazing with Foster and Tate in Houston and with Baltimore he developed a gameplan for Justin Forsett (who is nothing more than a scat back) to succeed as a lead back. My problem is on the defensive side of the ball and his questionable leadership abilities to motivate his team to win the big game. Houston had a pretty talented team under him...a top 5 defense, a great offense with multiple weapons...etc..yet they couldn't win the big game when it counted. He will also need a top notch defensive coordinator to come along with him, someone like Wade Phillips or Jim Shwartz. He would not be a bad choice but I would much rather go with Quinn, Bowles or Morrone. I don't know if you can say that. Maybe it was his leadership abilities, schemes and motivational skills that took below average talent on a team that had never won many games prior to his arrival and made them a playoff team several times with Matt Schaub at QB, buitl a pretty studly defense and even won a playoff game with Case Keenum... that's not bad. And who were the great players he had? It also was his first coaching experience and I'm sure he learned. As an example, Cleveland was BB's first coaching experience, didn't do so well, and then flourished when he got to NE. I don't know if he's the best guy or not, but I wouldn't jump to those conclusions so quick.
|
|
|
Post by DDNYjets on Jan 6, 2015 12:07:39 GMT -5
I think the judge is going to throw this case out.
|
|
|
Post by vicmill on Jan 6, 2015 12:17:42 GMT -5
There's almost no way for us as fans to project the success of a coordinator into the HC role. It requires different skill sets and some make the transition well, while others, not so much. Everybody loves Quinn because his defense has been successful, but that's not what makes a great head coach. Rex was great as a DC but was a lousy head coach. I'm hoping that with the expertise of Wolf and Casserly, Woody will be able to make an informed decision, based on a thorough interview and background check (talking to just about everyone that's ever worked with the guy). As fans, we just don't have access to that type of information.
At least Kubiak has a reasonable track record as a HC. Again, I'm not saying he's the answer, but he should at least be a consideration.
|
|
|
Post by joepnyj1 on Jan 6, 2015 12:26:39 GMT -5
You make a great case. Kubiak's abilities as an offensive coordinator are very good. The running game was amazing with Foster and Tate in Houston and with Baltimore he developed a gameplan for Justin Forsett (who is nothing more than a scat back) to succeed as a lead back. My problem is on the defensive side of the ball and his questionable leadership abilities to motivate his team to win the big game. Houston had a pretty talented team under him...a top 5 defense, a great offense with multiple weapons...etc..yet they couldn't win the big game when it counted. He will also need a top notch defensive coordinator to come along with him, someone like Wade Phillips or Jim Shwartz. He would not be a bad choice but I would much rather go with Quinn, Bowles or Morrone. I don't know if you can say that. Maybe it was his leadership abilities, schemes and motivational skills that took below average talent on a team that had never won many games prior to his arrival and made them a playoff team several times with Matt Schaub at QB, buitl a pretty studly defense and even won a playoff game with Case Keenum... that's not bad. And who were the great players he had? It also was his first coaching experience and I'm sure he learned. As an example, Cleveland was BB's first coaching experience, didn't do so well, and then flourished when he got to NE. I don't know if he's the best guy or not, but I wouldn't jump to those conclusions so quick. Andre Johnson, Arian Foster, Owen Daniels....a great offensive line...and a plethora of defensive studs JJ Watt, Brian Cushing, Pollard, Ryans, Quin, etc...There is no question that Kubiak did wonders with the offense.
|
|
|
Post by vicmill on Jan 6, 2015 13:10:28 GMT -5
I don't know if you can say that. Maybe it was his leadership abilities, schemes and motivational skills that took below average talent on a team that had never won many games prior to his arrival and made them a playoff team several times with Matt Schaub at QB, buitl a pretty studly defense and even won a playoff game with Case Keenum... that's not bad. And who were the great players he had? It also was his first coaching experience and I'm sure he learned. As an example, Cleveland was BB's first coaching experience, didn't do so well, and then flourished when he got to NE. I don't know if he's the best guy or not, but I wouldn't jump to those conclusions so quick. Andre Johnson, Arian Foster, Owen Daniels....a great offensive line...and a plethora of defensive studs JJ Watt, Brian Cushing, Pollard, Ryans, Quin, etc...There is no question that Kubiak did wonders with the offense. Johnson, Watt and Cushing were first round draft picks, but the rest? ..... maybe they were mediocre players that were developed into great players by Kubiak. The reality is we will never know.
|
|