Jason Garrett Senior Bowl Interview Tweets - 1/22/13

[MichaelWinicki]

Originally Posted by EGTuna

Sacks <> Interceptions. Pressures can cause interceptions. Did you xref pressures with turnovers? I am not sure.

No question that QB pressures are a big influence on interceptions and I don't think the Cowboys created enough pressure so in that aspect I do agree with Risen Star.

However this team only rushed 3 guys... A lot. A whole lot, which again falls back onto the shoulders of the defensive coordinator.

[Doomsday101]

Originally Posted by MichaelWinicki

No question that QB pressures are a big influence on interceptions and I don't think the Cowboys created enough pressure so in that aspect I do agree with Risen Star.

However this team only rushed 3 guys... A lot. A whole lot, which again falls back onto the shoulders of the defensive coordinator.

True when you stop and think, on many 3rd down situation where the opposing team was in long yardage sure passing down instead of bringing the heat Ryan would rush 3.

[Redball Express]

Originally Posted by ufcrules1

Nice job. I love reading these. I would be fine with Callahan calling the plays, just anyone but JG. We have had 7 years of bad play calling, time to give someone else a shot and see what happens.

We need a playcaller that attacks defenses.

I think Garrett and Romo are just too coozy. Red way too often covers for Romo's shortcomings and playcalls so as not to expose Romo in certain situations.

We need a playcaller who understands what the QB needs to do and call the play and get it done. If I see one more 1st and 10 run up the middle to start games only to be turned into 2 and 15..I'll puck.

Let's get a professional OC in there..for heavensake.

: RedBaLL EXPreSS:

[nalam]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

If you can't pressure the QB, you won't get many turnovers.

If you want to really address the reason behind that I'd look at the decision to stockpile cornerbacks over a DC change.

having said that our D-L was a wreck all year , ratliff, brent and coleman out , plus sean and Bruce also being out didn't help. Ware was slowed by injuries , only spencer brought it.

I guess if we have marginally better safety play our turnovers would have increased , Mccray ....

[DFWJC]

Originally Posted by Chocolate Lab

Translation: "Jerry hasn't told me what he's doing there yet."

So funny that Garrett always wanted to call plays but now he's suddenly perfectly fine with not doing it.

My guess is that Jery is blowing smoke...again.

But he keeps saying that HE is the one that was insisiting that Garrett call the plays.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, I think Garrett even came out and said that he never insisted on calling plays and that being able to focus on HC duties only would be great.

Garrett may be a lot of things to a lot of people, but I've never viewed him as a liar.

[ConstantReboot]

Originally Posted by Idgit

Why is this clear?

It could just as easily be him making a concession because it became clear that running the defense the way he wants the team to run it requires more of his time that he thought he'd have to give.

Or it could be that it took a year of working with Callahan to get to a point where the thought handing over the play calling reins made sense.

Or it could be that the calling of the actual plays is more done by several on the offensive staff and that 'turning it over' is actually more a matter of who tells the conclusion to Tony than anything else, and that handing that over frees him up to do other things he's decided he needs to make time for during games.


[View Full Quote]'Play calling' is mostly important as a symbol to unhappy fans who want to see some sign that the HC's authority is getting called into question, so they can later complain about an organization that hires puppets instead of actual leaders to run the team. That's a boring argument, in my opinion.

Not true. If fans can see the obvious that play calling has been bad for several years then whomever that Jerry refers to have probably told him the same thing.

This isn't about what fans wanted. This is Jerry realizing the truth about this team and that Garrett needs to stop calling the plays and allow someone else to do it. He should not have done so in the first place since it seems he was overwhelmed.

We have lost games because of our predictability on offense and that teams already know how to stop us. Secondly, Garrett is too stubborn to give up the playcalling and that he thinks he can do it since he knows the 90s playbook and can bring it into this offense.

Garrett's downfall isn't his playcalling. Its his inability to change plays or call plays that fit the talent of this team. Other teams have adapted and Garrett is too resistant to any type of change whatsoever.

[5Stars]

Originally Posted by WoodysGirl

Rowan Kavner ‏@KavnerDC
Garrett's not currently at the South practice, as he's interviewing potential coaches

Why is Garrett doing the interviews?

I thought it was Jerry that did all the hire and fire stuff.

[CowboysYanksLakers]

Finally... I always thought Garrett would be a much better head coach if he left the play-calling duties up to someone else.

[Erik_H]

Originally Posted by DOUBLE WING

What's wrong with groupthink? Some of the most profound changes in American history have happened when a group of people got together and decided they wanted to make a change.

Anyway, that's not even what's happening here anyway. It's just a bunch of people using the same avatar. I don't even think our "group" (which isn't really a group) has a name. Nothing like GROZ.

You make a good enough attempt at a defense here, but the fact remains that avatars are sort of designed to 'put a face to the name'. If a bunch of people are using the same avatar and often beating a dead horse to a rotting maggot ridden pureé about a particular unchangeable issue, then it should not be surprising to find that you are considered to be a group.

Because the issue of JJ the GM is not changing, that group is looked at by me and others as boring (to put it nicely) or as incessantly annoying infection to this Forum (not as nice). As a result, I see the avatar and am immediately biased against whatever might be written within a particular post. Feel free to use whatever avatar you like, but don't act surprised that the reaction is not what you hoped for.

[5Stars]

Originally Posted by Erik_H

You make a good enough attempt at a defense here, but the fact remains that avatars are sort of designed to 'put a face to the name'. If a bunch of people are using the same avatar and often beating a dead horse to a rotting maggot ridden pureé about a particular unchangeable issue, then it should not be surprising to find that you are considered to be a group.

Because the issue of JJ the GM is not changing, that group is looked at by me and others as boring (to put it nicely) or as incessantly annoying infection to this Forum (not as nice). As a result, I see the avatar and am immediately biased against whatever might be written within a particular post. Feel free to use whatever avatar you like, but don't act surprised that the reaction is not what you hoped for.

[DOUBLE WING]

Originally Posted by Erik_H

You make a good enough attempt at a defense here, but the fact remains that avatars are sort of designed to 'put a face to the name'. If a bunch of people are using the same avatar and often beating a dead horse to a rotting maggot ridden pureé about a particular unchangeable issue, then it should not be surprising to find that you are considered to be a group.

Because the issue of JJ the GM is not changing, that group is looked at by me and others as boring (to put it nicely) or as incessantly annoying infection to this Forum (not as nice). As a result, I see the avatar and am immediately biased against whatever might be written within a particular post. Feel free to use whatever avatar you like, but don't act surprised that the reaction is not what you hoped for.

Whatever bias you want to have toward certain posters here is your own issue to deal with. I'm not really here to make friends (or enemies), just to post about the team. It doesn't effect me in the slightest if you do or don't read my posts. What I do find ironic is how much you guys like to incessantly point out that you are ignoring posts from my "group".

Here's a thought -- if you disagree, either state your point of view, or just shut up about it. Following people around in every post to reiterate how much you despise certain posters here isn't really helping things.

[iceberg]

Originally Posted by DOUBLE WING

Whatever bias you want to have toward certain posters here is your own issue to deal with. I'm not really here to make friends (or enemies), just to post about the team. It doesn't effect me in the slightest if you do or don't read my posts. What I do find ironic is how much you guys like to incessantly point out that you are ignoring posts from my "group".

Here's a thought -- if you disagree, either state your point of view, or just shut up about it. Following people around in every post to reiterate how much you despise certain posters here isn't really helping things.

Jumping into almost every thread with your agenda doesn't help much either.

[DOUBLE WING]

Originally Posted by iceberg

Jumping into almost every thread with your agenda doesn't help much either.

I don't really delve into personal stuff here. Any post I make is about the Cowboys. So if you want to call my opinion an agenda, that's fine. But one thing I do is keep posts on topic. So all I ask is if people disagree with me.. either state why you disagree, or please just ignore the post. Trolling/baiting replies only exacerbate the problem.

IMO, there really isn't even a problem anyway. I have no problem with differing points of view. That's why we have this board. This place wouldn't be quite the same if everyone agreed.

There's a lot of fans that are sick of the status quo and aren't afraid to talk about it. You just have to deal with that or ignore it.

[Hoofbite]

Originally Posted by WoodysGirl

Garrett said No. 1 thing he thought about with DC change was turnovers. Credited Ryan's work thru injuries but had to have more turnovers.

Ranking 28th in takeaways on defense is a fireable offense.

Ranking 25th in turnovers on offense.....meh.

[5Stars]

Originally Posted by Hoofbite

Ranking 28th in takeaways on defense is a fireable offense.

Ranking 25th in turnovers on offense.....meh.

It's definetly uncomfortable at VR.

For the players that the Cowboys had last season without getting all banged up?

I hope someone will fix this mess.