Despite the drama, the Good Time Train is still on track - Page 2 - Dallas Cowboys Forum

DFWJC · 02-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chocolate Lab

How can you possibly say this?

You mean the "otherwise" or unintentional part? I'll stay with that, I don't think he did most of that stuff with ill intent to undermine Garrett.

Just because he skipped meetings and ranted that he could be a better head coach or that the offense was letting them down doesn't mean he had ill intent--at least the second part was not just a person being pissed off in the moment.
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

I do think it was odd that a normally high-road guy like Ware would say yesterday that you can't win making all of those turnovers--and not taking any resposibility of the other side of the turnover equation. I think that came straight out of frustration--which was voiced for all to hear by Ryan.
Problem is, the defense was even worse at gaining turnovers than the offesne was at giving them up--and that was hard to do this year.

mgcowboy · 02-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risen Star

Two reasons, and of course in my opinion.

1) When Rob was hired, I thought it was a Garrett move. I can't backtrack on that now. Rob's demeanor on defense seemed to fit Garrett's more stoic presence on the sidelines. I didn't see Jerry going out and bringing in the less heralded Ryan boy.

2) It doesn't make sense for Jason Garrett to completely change direction on defense when he's clearly entering a season with his job on the line. It's win or go home time for him. Why add a transition period on defense with so much on the line? Time is not on his side. It simply doesn't pass the smell test.

He's not changing directions.. he is GETTING BACK to his course. He told JJ you got your pick and it didn't work. Go get me a DC who does A, B, and C..and both agreed kiffin is the man both agree on...

People who debate JJ undermining JG, or JG is not involved in the hires need to realize this. Garrett doesn't care how JJ goes about hiring personnel, or who he hires. He tells JJ this is what I am looking for and what I can work with. If JJ brings someone like RR JG tells him OK but he doesn't fit what I asked for so don't coming knocking on my door when things don't work.

Garrett (with Stephen support) is working with what Jerry is giving him, maybe being allowed on 30% of hires, but he will take that and work with the 70% JJ brings in. As long as JJ is there this is your best bet Cowboys fans...Garrett is the best option to work in the circumstances the organization is in...

Woods · 02-01-2013

I said it before and I will say it again,

It seems to me that JJ/Garrett knew before the final game of the season that RR was gone and exactly who they were going to replace him with.

There wasn't much of an interview process end of the regular season for a DC, nor was there much discussion post the season ending about whether to stick with the 34 or go to the 43.

JJ/Garrett already knew what they were going to do immediately after the Redskins game and who they were going to hire, imo.

wileedog · 02-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by erod

Acquisitions have made much more sense.

Maybe I'm just getting old and grumpy, but what has made "much more sense" around here lately?

Spending our top 2 picks and $50M on CBs just before we switch to a Tampa 2, even while we again ignore our terrible safety play?

The fact that the one player we can't win without keeps getting killed every year, so we decide to protect him by going bargain basement shopping at garage sales for an interior Oline? What is the most glaring need on the team now needs to compete with a defensive scheme switch for resources.

That we keep taking chances on guys who drop in the draft because they are injury prone, and then whine about "injury bugs" when they can't stay on the field?

Or giving a guy LT money after one decent season, only to see him actually stink so you have to draft another T and move him to be a completely overpriced RT, which BTW he also isn't very good at either?

I got an idea, Jay Ratliff is an undersized 3-4 NT who has been taking a beating for 8 years and his production is falling off a cliff. Let's extend him!

"But the culture has changed!" you say. Really? So that wasn't said Ratliff getting caught for DUI barely a month after another teammate was killed because of a drunken team party?

And as for the Jerry circus, just what do you call the last couple of weeks with the "this is all my idea!/this is all Jason's idea!" circle Jerry keeps running around in? He's calling plays! He's not calling plays! He wants to call plays but Jerry won't let him. Of course he is calling plays, and its all his idea to call or not call plays!

Heck, the fact that Lacewell and Tom C are back to being Jerry's main advisers should be enough to terrify anyone who was paying attention in the 90's.

"But the drafting has been better." Well yeah, if your benchmark is 2009 no question, its better. By the same token if your coaching benchmark is Wade, Garrett's better too.

Just not feeling the big turnaround because a few of our 1st round draft picks didn't bomb.

jjktkk · 02-01-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risen Star

Two reasons, and of course in my opinion.

1) When Rob was hired, I thought it was a Garrett move. I can't backtrack on that now. Rob's demeanor on defense seemed to fit Garrett's more stoic presence on the sidelines. I didn't see Jerry going out and bringing in the less heralded Ryan boy.

2) It doesn't make sense for Jason Garrett to completely change direction on defense when he's clearly entering a season with his job on the line. It's win or go home time for him. Why add a transition period on defense with so much on the line? Time is not on his side. It simply doesn't pass the smell test.

But this could possibly be the exact reason for the change. Jason's feeling the heat, and felt the need to bring in a new D. Cord., someone he is familar with. Maybe hes seen two seasons worth of Ryan's defenses, and decided that the results just aren't there.

TwoDeep3 · 02-02-2013

I see this off season as pushing all your chips into the middle of the table.

The defense is being overhauled. If Ryan wasn't the guy, were there no other 3-4 defensive coordinators that could have kept the philosophy and not completely revamp the scheme?

My concern is the time it will take to get up to speed for the players we retain.

To play this sport it has to be second nature where your assignment puts you on every play. While there are some really good players, there will be a learning curve.

This is why I was opposed to changing horses in mid stream.

We all talk about the window of opportunity this team has. Meaning this squad.

If Ryan was a distraction, then could they not have found another 3-4 coach and maintained a semblance of consistency in defense and still improve?

I don't believe this was a prudent move by revamping the defense and then changing play callers to boot.

And this discounts the fact that a retooling of some players will be necessary, which adds to the burden of making these changes.

So either this will be a brilliant stroke of genius and the team will make the play-offs and be a force, or they will again be a mediocre team to poor.

I just don't see these changes as positive, but more a gamble, and there will be no middle ground between feast or famine.

CowboyMcCoy · 02-02-2013

Again, good write up. The historical part is fabulous. I just fail to see why/where the part about the present isn't just mere speculation.

CowboyMcCoy · 02-02-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by jobberone

Generally teams that are on the cusp don't stay there. They improve or decline. Or they have a horrible injury year yada and fade.

I think we will be improved. We might be in it next year esp by the end of the year or we might be a year away like 91. We'll see.

BTW, it's not cheer up or move out. There's nothing wrong with a negative post or thread esp if its reasoned. There's nothing wrong with an occasional negative vent. Just don't pee in people's Cheerios.

JoborOne. I agree most teams don't stay on the cusp. I just look at our lineup, our aging talent and say this is the one team that could defy that logic. We shall see. But I will point out that I'm right more than I am wrong. History will show you that.

**Idgit** · 02-02-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by CowboyMcCoy

JoborOne. I agree most teams don't stay on the cusp. I just look at our lineup, our aging talent and say this is the one team that could defy that logic. We shall see. But I will point out that I'm right more than I am wrong. History will show you that.

It'd be interesting to take a poll someday, see how many of us think we're right more often than we're wrong. I bet it's significantly more than half of us.

TwoDeep3 · 02-02-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Idgit

It'd be interesting to take a poll someday, see how many of us think we're right more often than we're wrong. I bet it's significantly more than half of us.

Be certain to add to your results all those names of posters who found fault with the ones who questioned the moves over the last two seasons when they suggested this team would be an 8 win season.

Seems the issues this site is going through creates a great deal of amnesia.

CowboyMcCoy · 02-02-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Idgit

It'd be interesting to take a poll someday, see how many of us think we're right more often than we're wrong. I bet it's significantly more than half of us.

Woosh with the sarcasm. But it'd be interesting to collect actual data on who is right more than wrong. I'd bet I'd be up there, joking aside.

CowboyMcCoy · 02-02-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoDeep3

Be certain to add to your results all those names of posters who found fault with the ones who questioned the moves over the last two seasons when they suggested this team would be an 8 win season.

Seems the issues this site is going through creates a great deal of amnesia.

Dude, this site has had selective amnesia for a long, long time. If you don't know that, then you haven't been paying attention to who got the invite and who didn't, etc. O, how we forget.

odog422 · 02-02-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by wileedog

Maybe I'm just getting old and grumpy, but what has made "much more sense" around here lately?

Spending our top 2 picks and $50M on CBs just before we switch to a Tampa 2, even while we again ignore our terrible safety play?

The fact that the one player we can't win without keeps getting killed every year, so we decide to protect him by going bargain basement shopping at garage sales for an interior Oline? What is the most glaring need on the team now needs to compete with a defensive scheme switch for resources.

That we keep taking chances on guys who drop in the draft because they are injury prone, and then whine about "injury bugs" when they can't stay on the field?

Or giving a guy LT money after one decent season, only to see him actually stink so you have to draft another T and move him to be a completely overpriced RT, which BTW he also isn't very good at either?

[View Full Quote]

Guess I'm in the "getting old and grumpy" crowd as well, because to me, your post is spot on.

Lack of team identity, on both sides of the ball, the totally illogical attempts at addressing up what was absolutely viewed as a critical area of weakness going into last offseason, the throwing of money at unprovens and past their prime... I've seen this before... I thought I was the only one who wondered if part of our draft strategy is to draft at least two players who are currently rehabbing or will be after the draft. I've seen this before...

Culture change? Players missing assignments routinely keep playing way past what is acceptable in my view. Absolutely I follow no team like I follow my Cowboys, but how many times have I watched games featuring certain teams generally accepted as "quality" teams - quality being defined as routine playoff participants (e.g., pats, steelers, giants) - and heard the announcers speak of how so and so isn't playing because he put the ball on the ground, or doesn't know his assignments?

The process? I guess more than anything I view the "process" as "coachspeak" based on what I mentioned in culture change. Don't really know that I see anything substantial being formed or improved. I've read many point to the second half of the season - but I also remember in the first half of the season when we were getting beat everyone saying "wait til the second half of the year when the quality of opposition goes down, maybe we can salvage something..." The process also, I guess, entails Jason learning how to consistently manage a game to win, i.e., make those 3-4 decisions per game in clock management, or team direction, which turn most games one way or the other.

I, too, think the OP's historical perspective was great. Unfortunately, I don't see us as having transitioned to Garrett, I see us as having come full circle with Jerry once again at the fore. As I said, I've seen this before. God bless him, he's trying his best, but he simply will never do right by himself, the team or, this fan, at least, as long as what's most important is not only that he gets the credit, but that he gets proclaimed as being somehow, ahead of the pack or smarter than everyone else. See drafting injured players. See hiring OC with less actual coaching experience than most high school football coaches and then promoting him to HC, although body of work to date does not warrant it. So now make moves to try to fix what logically (to me anyway), is not working, by revamping responsibilities, hiring new coaches, arbitrarily changing schemes, and, as was said, flipping the script daily on whose idea was what. If the man himself said that he would fire a GM with the results he's had, yet will not relinquish his hold on the position and allow a proper chain of command, that says to me that what's most important to Jerry is that we win his way, not that we win.

So basically, to sum up, not seeing a big turnaround here, either. Even though I really like some of our young guys. I just worry they're going to be the next generation of players not done right by the organization by their careers being wasted, ala Romo, Ware, Witten, while Jerry tries to figure out the next way to "beat" the system.

CopenhagenCowboy · 02-02-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by wileedog

Maybe I'm just getting old and grumpy, but what has made "much more sense" around here lately?

Spending our top 2 picks and $50M on CBs just before we switch to a Tampa 2, even while we again ignore our terrible safety play?

The fact that the one player we can't win without keeps getting killed every year, so we decide to protect him by going bargain basement shopping at garage sales for an interior Oline? What is the most glaring need on the team now needs to compete with a defensive scheme switch for resources.

That we keep taking chances on guys who drop in the draft because they are injury prone, and then whine about "injury bugs" when they can't stay on the field?

Or giving a guy LT money after one decent season, only to see him actually stink so you have to draft another T and move him to be a completely overpriced RT, which BTW he also isn't very good at either?

[View Full Quote]

Excellent post. I agree with almost all of it.

Beast_from_East · 02-02-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by erod

During Wade's reign, I relieved myself quite regularly in many a Cowboy breakfast bowl. Hated everything about the feel of that haphazard time.

Yea, the Wade era was terrible.

We only won 2 division titles and a playoff game under him in 3.5 seasons.

Boy genius has been here 2.5 seasons and can barely sniff .500

But lets get back to crapping on Wade and how horrible a time that was.