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

[MichaelWinicki]

Originally Posted by Hoofbite

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

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

The person in charge of the offense was replaced.

[a_minimalist]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

It's more likely that Jason Garrett didn't decide to give up control over his own offense on game day, get rid of his brother and switch defensive schemes entering a year where his job is on the line.

When you factor that in with who he works for and that guy coming right out and telling you he's going to make it uncomfortable for everyone, it's pretty reasonable to assume the head coach has made concessions to keep his job.

I guess what is is, after 17 years of this nonsense, only one of us is still willing to make excuses for Jerry Jones.

It could also be that Garrett is willing to try it. Garrett and Jones clearly have a different relationship than Jones has had with any other coach. Garrett has been a part of the organization for a while. You earn trust and respect that way. That falls into many things in life...not just in football. I have no idea what happened. No one does. You could be right or I could be. Something tells me that they both decided on it if it actually happens. I wouldn't put it past Garrett to take play calling duties back over if he thinks he'd be better at it and Jerry saying okay.

You're going by the past and the past isn't always an indicator of the future. Its a good starting point but when you reach a certain tipping point, which I think we are at, or close to, things change. At this point we can only hope for the best for the organization.

[5Stars]

Originally Posted by a_minimalist

It could also be that Garrett is willing to try it. Garrett and Jones clearly have a different relationship than Jones has had with any other coach. Garrett has been a part of the organization for a while. You earn trust and respect that way. That falls into many things in life...not just in football. I have no idea what happened. No one does. You could be right or I could be. Something tells me that they both decided on it if it actually happens. I wouldn't put it past Garrett to take play calling duties back over if he thinks he'd be better at it and Jerry saying okay.

You're going by the past and the past isn't always an indicator of the future. Its a good starting point but when you reach a certain tipping point, which I think we are at, or close to, things change. At this point we can only hope for the best for the organization.

[percyhoward]

Originally Posted by jterrell

We can all be mad we didn't score every time...

We could calmly address the fact that we've been 20th in red zone TD for the last two years.

[Hoofbite]

Originally Posted by MichaelWinicki

The person in charge of the offense was replaced.

While I just got home, I've yet to see anything that's rock solid. Also, being "replaced" isn't necessarily how I would classify a person willfully delegating duties to another guy. Unless of course it wasn't his own decision.

Additionally, it's not like Garrett was replaced when he turned in the 31st ranked turnover team in the NFL after only his second year, back in 2008.

I don't think it's reasonable to point to turnovers as the primary reason for firing a guy. Could they have been better? Of course. But seasons like this happen. Pittsburgh had 15 last year and 20 this year. Houston had 18 last year.

I wonder if there's any sort of influence on how often a team plays with the lead or plays while trailing that is in play. I'm just guessing that teams that are forcing the opponent to play "catch up" and take additional risks are more likely to pull in turnovers.

[percyhoward]

Originally Posted by Hoofbite

I don't think it's reasonable to point to turnovers as the primary reason for firing a guy. Could they have been better? Of course. But seasons like this happen. Pittsburgh had 15 last year and 20 this year. Houston had 18 last year.

I wouldn't try to get inside Garrett's mind and say "what he really meant was..." because I don't have any idea. But for *me* it wouldn't mean a whole lot that Pittsburgh and Houston only forced that many turnovers because they have been two of the better pass defenses the last couple of years, based on DPR. Dallas' pass D has been one of the worst.

Point being, passer rating differential has a significantly higher correlation with winning than turnover differential.

Great point about teams playing catchup being more likely to turn it over, though. It's absolutely true.