The Garrett System

[LatinMind]

Originally Posted by Blitzen32

Hmm.

Didn't Garrett induce the change process on that line in the first place?

A guy like Davis is now contributing well for a Super Bowl team.

Maybe it wasn't such a great idea to roll with guys like Phil Costa despite what Garrett had tried to convince the fans.

lol Davis is a backup and doesnt even play. So much for labeling people being fans who dont know whats going on.

[odog422]

Originally Posted by Bluestang

There is no evidence of this in the this thread at all.

As a matter of fact, theogt couldn't provide any quotes or evidence of it when I asked him to.

You're right, when you asked him for proof, he replied that he made it up, sarcastically. I went on the assumption that he wouldn't just make something up and attribute it to someone and that he didn't feel like trying to track down the quote.

So I'll just say I was wrong to make reference to it. The rest of my statement stands because that's what I've read and heard over the years. Now if you want to say that unless I provide the quotes, etc., you don't believe it, that's fine. But I'd counter that if someone who follows the Cowboys haven't heard Jerry or Garrett state or address their respective roles/responsibilities over the years, then they don't really follow the team too closely IMO.

Like I said, the role of a typical OC and being the OC here in Dallas is unlike any other in the league and most importantly, doesn't change the point of the OP.

[odog422]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

I wasn't being condescending.

I agree the structure here is unique. I just don't believe it involves the power hungry owner allowing his head coach to pick players, let alone his offensive coordinator.

He who covets that power so much is sure to use it. Jason Garrett has been but a voice in the ear of the GM since he's been here. A little louder voice since he's been the head coach. If things don't change, I'll want him gone but not because he's the cause of our issues. He just wouldn't be the guy to fix it under this unique structure you're talking about.

And I think more than anything, the power hungry owner wants his hand-picked OC-now-HC to succeed and IMO has probably ceded more influence to Garrett than to any coach here in a while. I'm not saying Garrett is the dominant voice, I'm saying he has a definite hand in the selection of personnel, particularly offensive personnel, including the OL. Again, the Dallas OC is not a typical OC. Jason's hire as OC was made with the ultimate goal of Jason as HC and why Jerry would not want his HC to be fully set up when he finally took over makes no sense. This would mean allowing him to help mold the roster to what he believes would bring success.

Jason is not the sole cause of our issues, and I personally believe the guy to fix it is the next guy who comes in here with the autonomy to select his staff, create his team environment and mold the team in the image he selects, ala Jimmy or Bill.

[Coy]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

They coach the players. They communicate with scouts on what they want/need. It's up to the scouting department and the GM to acquire the talent.

Norv Turner wasn't picking players in Dallas. Monte Kiffin wasn't picking players in Tampa Bay. Dick LeBeau isn't picking players in Pittsburgh.

You blame Garrett because it's convenient. Because he's the guy that can be replaced. That's the move that can turn everything around for the Cowboys. But a closer and honest look into the situation tells you differently. We've had these problems long before he arrived here as a coach.

I'm not blaming Garrett, you are not reading what I'm writing, I never said those coaches chose the players, I said the have an important input which you think they don't, I am only telling you that he has some of the blame for the lack of talent in the OL, it seems you are saying he has no blame at all, let's agree to disagree.

[kazzd58]

Originally Posted by Chocolate Lab

Because his running is obviously what makes him unique. Take away that and make him just a pocket passer and he's nowhere near the same threat.

At the end of the day u cant take that aspect of his game away cuz thats who he is.. A QB that can run

[Coy]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

I think he had very little input into selecting players as an OC. He's had more input as the head coach the last couple of offseasons.

Since this is a situation that was created over years and years of bad personnel decisions and/or bad scouting, I can't put it on the head coach of 2 years.

This pass the buck mentality to excuse our front office doesn't fly with me. Our roster isn't good enough. Hasn't been good enough for nearly two decades. When you start assigning blame you begin and end with the two guys running the personnel on this team during that entire time and not the head coach of the month/fall guy in waiting.

I don't get why you think that's my thinking, I've never stated that, in fact I believe our front office has made a very poor job in the past but that doesn't exclude that so has garrett.

[Picksix]

Originally Posted by Blitzen32

Hmm.

Didn't Garrett induce the change process on that line in the first place?

A guy like Davis is now contributing well for a Super Bowl team.

Maybe it wasn't such a great idea to roll with guys like Phil Costa despite what Garrett had tried to convince the fans.

It's clear that you're in love with the Niner's offense, and critical of ours, and that's fine. But to say that Leonard Davis is contributing well is really a stretch.

[Blitzen32]

Originally Posted by Picksix

It's clear that you're in love with the Niner's offense, and critical of ours, and that's fine. But to say that Leonard Davis is contributing well is really a stretch.

The whole Davis comment wasn't really meant to derail the emphasis of the thread.

Davis comes in the game for limited big packages. I understand that. He's effective as a blocker in those packages, and he wasn't completely washed up. We have ZERO depth on the OL right now, so for Garrett to happily cut a bunch of guys loose is what I am questioning. Perhaps a couple of those guys (with restructured contracts of course) could have been effective under a coach with vision as type #1 described in the OP.

I'm not sure that Garrett should have been making huge roster decisions (particularly about the OL) based off 2 years experience as a QB coach, and a handful of years as an inconsistent, somewhat mediocre OC.

Everyone is complaining about the weak OL right now, and it's clear that Garrett played a huge part in the series of cuts that got us into this mess.

[Bluestang]

Originally Posted by Blitzen32

The whole Davis comment wasn't really meant to derail the emphasis of the thread.

Davis comes in the game for limited big packages. I understand that. He's effective as a blocker in those packages, and he wasn't completely washed up. We have ZERO depth on the OL right now, so for Garrett to happily cut a bunch of guys loose is what I am questioning. Perhaps a couple of those guys (with restructured contracts of course) could have been effective under a coach with vision as type #1 described in the OP.

I'm not sure that Garrett should have been making huge roster decisions (particularly about the OL) based off 2 years experience as a QB coach, and a handful of years as an inconsistent, somewhat mediocre OC.

Everyone is complaining about the weak OL right now, and it's clear that Garrett played a huge part in the series of cuts that got us into this mess.

The team tried to renegotiate with Andre Gurode, but he didn't want to restructure his contract, so he was cut instead. No coach is going to convince a player to take less money regardless of how "decorated" he is.

Bigg was a salary cap causualty as well but I suspect there were other reasons why he was let go. I recall when Garrett instituited the "shirt and tie" dress code policy Bigg mocked the idea by wearing a very small tie with his shirt. (it was beyond ridiculous)

It makes you wonder what else Bigg wasn't complying with and those were the type of things that Garrett has been fixing with the team. Part of that is having the players believe in what your saying and doing.

It seems pretty silly to the average person, but like myself when you spend your life in the military and you work around fighter aviation maintenance....every little detail needs to be followed no matter how silly it is in order to be successful. It's probably seems like overkill for a football team but I can understand the concept.

[xwalker]

Originally Posted by Fansince64

And in 2010 - notice all three were on the roster under Mike Singletary - they had a record of 6-10. In 2011 with Harbaugh, they went 13-3.

Teams rarely win with 2 rookies on the OL. The difference between a Rookie OL and a second year starter on the OL is usually very significant.

[xwalker]

Originally Posted by Blitzen32

The whole Davis comment wasn't really meant to derail the emphasis of the thread.

Davis comes in the game for limited big packages. I understand that. He's effective as a blocker in those packages, and he wasn't completely washed up. We have ZERO depth on the OL right now, so for Garrett to happily cut a bunch of guys loose is what I am questioning. Perhaps a couple of those guys (with restructured contracts of course) could have been effective under a coach with vision as type #1 described in the OP.

I'm not sure that Garrett should have been making huge roster decisions (particularly about the OL) based off 2 years experience as a QB coach, and a handful of years as an inconsistent, somewhat mediocre OC.

Everyone is complaining about the weak OL right now, and it's clear that Garrett played a huge part in the series of cuts that got us into this mess.

Leonard Davis received a 49 Million Dollar contract from the Cowboys.

Leonard Davis played for $950K in SF this year.

There is a high probability that Dallas would have kept him at least for an extra year if they could have paid him $950K, even as a backup.

You're blaming Garrett for cutting a player that was scheduled to make 10M while significantly under-performing. You're justification that Garrett made a mistake is that the player has contributed a handful of snaps while getting paid near the vet minimum (for a player with his number of years in the league).

Regardless of your intention or lack of intention to "derail" the thread, this type of statement makes everything else in your post(s) seem irrelevant.

[Picksix]

Originally Posted by xwalker

Leonard Davis received a 49 Million Dollar contract from the Cowboys.

Leonard Davis played for $950K in SF this year.

There is a high probability that Dallas would have kept him at least for an extra year if they could have paid him $950K, even as a backup.

You're blaming Garrett for cutting a player that was scheduled to make 10M while significantly under-performing. You're justification that Garrett made a mistake is that the player has contributed a handful of snaps while getting paid near the vet minimum (for a player with his number of years in the league).

Regardless of your intention or lack of intention to "derail" the thread, this type of statement makes everything else in your post(s) seem irrelevant.

This. Garrett didn't "happily" let anyone go. He needed to make significant changes. He needed to cut players who had a lot more name than game, and were making way too much money. As for Davis, he would be a good option for a few plays a game as a jumbo package blocker for a minimum salary. But that's not what he would have been had Garrett kep him around.

[Clove]

I believe you have to have a system/identity in place. However, you have to be able to adjust based on who you have. Same system, but tweak a few things to suit certain players.

Garrett's problem is how he calls the plays during the game. Not necessarily the system.

[xwalker]

When I encounter extreme stupidity, It reminds me that the half of the world with above average intelligence couldn't be above average without the other half.

[trueblue1687]

Originally Posted by WPBCowboysFan

Harbaugh was given a loaded roster. That might have just a little to do with his success.

I probably wouldn't use that argument if you're trying to distinguish him from Garrett in that regard
.