Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck
It was entertaining to read through that old thread. Joshua was annoyed by the hire because the team didn't seem to consider or interview anyone other than Wade. That seems like a reasonable position to take. I was annoyed because I thought it was largely a PR move, which it was, and because I just sort of generally like being annoyed. I wanted a younger DC who'd bring in new ideas and so on but it would be unreasonably churlish of me to ignore the fact that today's defense despite its several problems is playing very well.
I did mention my conviction that the team would not win with Kubiak as head coach. I have surely remained consistent in that regard.
|
Yes, Joshua's concern was very reasonable. I think it was right too, even though Wade has obviously worked out very well. But he definitely considered the Wade hire just like the Bush hire in how it happened. Kubiak stumbled into a stupid hire and a great one, luck of the draw I guess. Either way both hires are on him/Smith.
And you have been constant (and constantly correct) in declaring we would not win with Kubiak. I still think a strong personality at QB could make up for the nice guy issues with Kubiak (like Cushing does for Wade, the defense without him is not close to the same, he may be as valuable as JJ). I have no problem replacing Kubiak at the same time as Schaub and would do it that way if I was in charge. For continuity's sake (because we are close), I would be ok with dumping Schaub and giving Kubiak a year with a new QB. That is the other reason Freeman appeals to me more than a rookie. Rookie QBs for veteran coaches are usually about prolonging their own time since they can call for patience with the rookie. I don't want a rookie so we need 3 more years to evaluate what we already know about Kubs. Honestly if we could get a proven winner who wanted to come here and was the missing piece at QB that would be ideal. Of course when will that ever happen (Peyton Manning who we stupidly turned away).