An Example of Garrett's Playcall

[EGG]

Originally Posted by jobberone

It's not way off base but the situations are just not that equivalent. He didn't have to rebuild his OL. He hasn't had to work with these WRs ie Austin staying dinged up and Dez not having the ability to run routes properly. These are major problems for the team and Garrett

+1000

those are two major shortcomings that have a domino effect on everything the offense does. Their limitations severely impact their ability to execute and limits the play-calls at their disposal.

[Idgit]

Originally Posted by jterrell

Garrett can make his own life as a play-caller much easier by cleaning up the attention to detail stuff. His play-calling certainly faces more scrutiny because of penalties and turnovers.

He speaks often of the process but right now there needs to be a process put in place on penalties/turnovers. Start benching guys as we saw a bit last week with Hatcher. We need to see that on offense as well. If Romo throws 3 or more picks play Orton. We pay the guy for cripes sake.

Process-oriented mgmt only works if you have the right processes and actually use them. Far too often it is just lip service. Garrett has to make sure that doesn't happen on his watch. He needs a review of his processes to understand what's working well and what is failing.

[View Full Quote]As to the roster stuff Garrett isn't a lone guy there. We have a full personnel dept doing a good job. Guys we have brought in off the streets mostly have been able to play and help us. That is pro scouting. So I can't give him any special credit in this area. He isn't BP. He didn't build any of that personnel staff.

We sat Hatcher? What's that about? I hadn't noticed or heard anything on that front.

Where I credit Garrett for the quality of the roster, I imagine a process that works something like this: the coaches communicate to the scouting department what types of players they need and want for each position group, and how they expect to makeup the gameday roster. The proscouts evaluate the roster, and the roster of other teams to identify veteran options for improving position groups. The college scouts evaluate the college crop to identify opportunities that represent upgrades at various position groups. The front office takes the list and tries to bring in players that represent upgrades at a cost that works within their salary cap projections. The coaches then have to coach the talent for the scheme and turn everybody into probowlers.

If this is the loop, then building a team properly can fall down when coached don't really know what players they need. Or when they don't communicate their needs to the scouts properly. Or when scouts don't interpret that communication effectively or scout players properly. Or when the front office fails to land a targeted player at a price that works. Or when those targeted and signed players can't be coached properly once they're on the roster.

I give Garrett credit for the areas where coaching plays into that loop because I think he's shown signs of doing a good job in that regard (especially with the pro scouting acquisitions). I also think it's an area where Wade Phillips really fell down.

[REDVOLUTION]

My questions are:


1. Is it Garrett playcalling that is poor?

2. Is it the players not executing?

3. Are the plays that he calls high percentage plays? Favoring the offense?

[Chocolate Lab]

Eh, not one GM in football would have taken the 49ers roster in 2010 over ours. Claiming we had more problems to overcome is just absurd.

[Doomsday101]

Originally Posted by REDVOLUTION

My questions are:


1. Is it Garrett playcalling that is poor?

2. Is it the players not executing?

3. Are the plays that he calls high percentage plays? Favoring the offense?

I think there are times with all coaches where a call is questionable, I also know that player execution is critical. You can't have penalties that put your offense in long situation and not be predictable in order to pick up the 1st down. Hell 3rd and long we all know pass is coming so does the defense, your plays become more limited in those situations.

Players misfiring on plays QB hit the WR he drops it? Is that a bad play call by the coach or is it the fact the player dropped the ball? I see often where plays have been there for the taking and yet not executed.

Again all coaches even the tops in the league will make questionable calls when they work they are considered gutsy plays and when they fail the coach is called a moron.

I think Garrett understand this game a lot more than his critics think.

[Doomsday101]

Originally Posted by Chocolate Lab

Eh, not one GM in football would have taken the 49ers roster in 2010 over ours. Claiming we had more problems to overcome is just absurd.

I think many would take SF OL over ours. I think our group is improving but I also know SF bread and butter is running the ball. They ranked high in rushing last year and around the bottom of the league in passing the ball and played solid defense.

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by jterrell

Garrett's issue isn't scheme, it is execution of said scheme as well as handling play-calling, time mgmt and disciplinary actions all at once.

I am not sure very many are successful as what Garrett is trying to do and those that are probably have a ton more experience.

I am not sure a coaching change makes us drastically better. You'd have to give me a lot more data. And I am not sure Garrett won't eventually be a great head coach. I tend to believe he will. But Coaching is a profession where there is absolutely no substitute for hard work and experience.

On the job training for the Dallas Cowboys really doesn't work.

Garrett has to be able to yank guys after penalties even if that guy is Jason Witten. He can't be too busy calling the next play. He has to handle clock mgmt much better. Those are not debatable takes imho.

[View Full Quote]This team moves the ball well enough and plays solid defense. But it commits too many penalties by far and too many turnovers by far. That is a simply lack of attention to detail. We could blame a bit of that on bad luck but after 30+ games Garrett hasn't reduced those issues at all.

The good news is we play weaker teams this 2nd half of the season. Weaker teams means we can get away with more mental and execution mistakes.

You can't yank guys esp if you have a much worse option if you do. If I'm Garrett then my number one concern is keeping Tony Romo in good enough shape to run my offense. Then you can prioritize your other concerns which I'd list as 2a,2b, yada. With the cap and parity you can't just cut or sit people easily esp if you have no depth. And that is on the GM much more than the HC.

The Chinese are great copiers for the most part. But there are plenty of times they make what looks like exact duplicates for a part even down to the serial number yada. But the part doesn't work. It fails every time you put it in. It's not made of the same stuff. You need to get the part from a reputable manufacturer if you want the machine to work at all and work well.

[Idgit]

Originally Posted by Doomsday101

I think many would take SF OL over ours. I think our group is improving but I also know SF bread and butter is running the ball. They ranked high in rushing last year and around the bottom of the league in passing the ball and played solid defense.

I personally think Harbaugh has done a better job early in his tenure than Garrett has, but it also doesn't really matter much. If Garrett's able to build a better team each season, gradually, I can deal with that. The question to me is, are we seeing a better team, or aren't we?

This year's been really weird. We're still losing close games to good teams. We were absolutely killed by turnovers early and by penalties, still. Our defense and ST have been pretty solid, generally, and our coverage units is much improved, but our offense has been less productive. On top of all that, we've not only had more than our share of injuries (does this bear out statistically? I don't know. I'm going to assume it does), but we've had multiple injuries to think position groups (OC, OG, S, RB--it's thin when you lose your top 2 backs). It's been awfully hard to get enough consistency to see what we've actually got on the roster. Now, normally, injuries aren't an excuse for losing games. But they are definitely relevant when it comes to evaluating what your coaches are trying to do. It's been a tough read in Dallas, and I think that bears out when you see how the team is viewed by the national media.

My own take is that we're getting deeper, and more organized, and that even if the results are still obscure, we should give the coach as much time as it takes for the results to not be obscure. If that means all of the rest of Romo's playing career, so be it. When the fog lifts, one way or another, we'll have our answer. I'm not in a hurry to rush things before then. It's been a long time since we've been a consistent contender for multiple seasons, but I can wait if I have to if we think we've got the guy who can do that. It's not easy to do, and it's not easy in Dallas, and it's not necessarily easier trying to find someone who can do it under Jerry Jones. If you think JG might be that guy, you gotta find out one way or another, even if it takes two more seasons to get an answer.

[junk]

Originally Posted by Idgit

I think the Harbaugh comparison is completely fair. He's done a great job with SF, and he's a great coach. They've definitely outperformed Garrett and the Cowboys so far.

Yep, I agree. Harbaugh has the benefit of years of experience that Garrett doesn't have. That is what is hurting Garrett right now more than anything IMO.

[Doomsday101]

Originally Posted by junk

Yep, I agree. Harbaugh has the benefit of years of experience that Garrett doesn't have. That is what is hurting Garrett right now more than anything IMO.

True Harbaugh has more experiance. I do find it funny that those who claim the running game is not as important in todays NFL can say that when SF offense is centered around their rushing game. They lead the league in rushing while sitting at 29th in passing. Harbaugh for the most part plays conservative football. Heck they have 5 int but then they don't throw the ball all that much.

[Bluestang]

Originally Posted by junk

So are you saying the team needs a #1 receiver option?

We need someone to consistently have that type of production.

Dez has been making strides, despite his assignment struggles this season. He's making slow improvements but he's not where the Cowboys thought he would be at this point in his career. He still has two more years on his rookie deal though.

Austin hamstring issues have been his problem but he hasn't missed a game this year because of them.

I have some concerns about your comment.

Of course you would.

Dallas has invested heavily in their receivers. A first round pick and a guy who signed a pretty major FA deal. If they need to go the well again for yet another option, that would lead one to believe that either those guys aren't really what they are cracked up to be (which points to an issue with talent evaluation) or that Garrett needs (or thinks he needs) overwhelming resources to execute his scheme.

A quick scan of the top offenses (specifically passing) show quite a few teams that don't have the options in the passing game that Dallas does and are making it work

The Packers have invested:

a 2nd round pick on WRs Jordy Nelson, Greg Jennings, and Randall Cobb.

The Saints invested:

a 1st round on WR Robert Meachem - who is no longer with the team

a 2nd on WR Devery Henderson and a 7th on WR Marques Colston

They aquired Lance Moore through free agency in 2005, but he didn't breakout until 2010

The Patriots invested:

traded a 4th round pick for Randy Moss - but that only lasted 3 seasons.

traded a 2nd round and 7th round pick for Wes Welker

a 2nd on TE Rob Grownkowski and a 4th on TE Aaron Hernandez


The Falcons invested:

a 1st round pick in Roddy White and then traded for Julio Jones giving up 5 total draft picks to include their 2012 1st and 4th round picks

[EGG]

Originally Posted by Chocolate Lab

Eh, not one GM in football would have taken the 49ers roster in 2010 over ours. Claiming we had more problems to overcome is just absurd.

Ha! The only position group the 2010 Cowboys had superior talent in was QB and WR. Vernon Davis and Witten are a "push"...

[visionary]

Originally Posted by Doomsday101

True Harbaugh has more experiance. I do find it funny that those who claim the running game is not as important in todays NFL can say that when SF offense is centered around their rushing game. They lead the league in rushing while sitting at 29th in passing. Harbaugh for the most part plays conservative football. Heck they have 5 int but then they don't throw the ball all that much.

harbaugh is basically the coach i had thought garrett would be

play smart football, dont commit penalties
stay disciplined as a team, dont commit penalties and dont turn the ball over
run the ball, have a good OL
play solid to superior on STs and win the field position battle

you couple this with the QB we have and we are talking about consistent contender

alex smith is not half the QB romo is

unfortunately, garrett thinks buzz words and smart phrases are enough

he is lacking in follow through

as jt said, the process only works if you have the right process in place and if you have an open mind and have systems in place that will tell you if the process is working or not and if you are actually willing to learn and change

it is clear garrett is severely lacking in these areas

dont just talk the talk, walk the walk

[Doomsday101]

Originally Posted by visionary

harbaugh is basically the coach i had thought garrett would be

play smart football, dont commit penalties
stay disciplined as a team, dont commit penalties and dont turn the ball over
run the ball, have a good OL
play solid to superior on STs and win the field position battle

you couple this with the QB we have and we are talking about consistent contender

alex smith is not half the QB romo is

unfortunately, garrett thinks buzz words and smart phrases are enough

he is lacking in follow through

as jt said, the process only works if you have the right process in place and if you have an open mind and have systems in place that will tell you if the process is working or not and if you are actually willing to learn and change

it is clear garrett is severely lacking in these areas

dont just talk the talk, walk the walk

SF is conservative they hardly throw the ball they run it they lead the league in rushing. I would love to be more conservative in the offense and run the ball you find you have less int when the QB is not throwing that often.

I give Harbaugh credit he uses the OL and the RB he inherited and ask Alex Smith not to do much.

I think Garrett is going to be fine, I think he knows a bit more about this game than his critics do. No issue with anyone putting heat on him he is the HC and the team is not winning, however we have had seasons where offense was producing and it was Ryan defense letting us down.

[Idgit]

Originally Posted by Doomsday101

True Harbaugh has more experiance. I do find it funny that those who claim the running game is not as important in todays NFL can say that when SF offense is centered around their rushing game. They lead the league in rushing while sitting at 29th in passing. Harbaugh for the most part plays conservative football. Heck they have 5 int but then they don't throw the ball all that much.

The running game can be important. If running effectively keeps you from passing ineffectively, and if your outstanding defense keeps the other guys from passing effectively all the time, you can win a lot of games that way.