FWST: Jason Garrett does things his way

[CCBoy]

Jason Garrett does things his way
By Randy Galloway

rgalloway@star-telegram.com

At a much quicker pace than expected, Jason Garrett has moved closer to a Valley Ranch rarity, so rare that only Jimmy Johnson and Big Bill have made the cut. Garrett's real close, but he's not there yet.

Before we can officially declare Red J as the Cowboys' official football boss of bosses, one last thing needs to happen by the NFL's final cutdown-to-53 deadline on Saturday.

Marty B, injured or not, must be gone.

To keep it as impressively hard-core as Garrett has made it the last five weeks, to continue to make roster spots and starting jobs about on-the-field production and not about the number or name on the back of the uniform, am I wrong here on Martellus Bennett?

Plus, if you scan the entire roster isn't Martellus the No. 1 pet of one Jerry Jones?

How can Jason be boss of bosses at Valley Ranch if Jerry's pet is allowed to hang around, dropping passes and cracking more jokes than linebackers?

Disclaimer: All of the above is a personal rant, except, of course, there is truth involved. Marty B won't be dumped, at least I don't think so....



Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/08...#ixzz1WhYD6gc8

[Iago33]

This is silly. Everyone is using the "purging" to say Garrett needs to get rid of those players they don't like. Shouldn't we let Garrett decide which players don't fit? hmmm?

[Hostile]

Originally Posted by Iago33

This is silly. Everyone is using the "purging" to say Garrett needs to get rid of those players they don't like. Shouldn't we let Garrett decide which players don't fit? hmmm?

That happens every year though. We all have agendas and some players don't fit ours, but they do fit what the team sees.

For example, Montrae Holland. I keep hearing that if we keep Holland what message was sent by cutting Gurode is blunted. That's nonsense. Yet people say it over and over. There is no comparison between Gurode and Holland in salary, status, or anything beyond the OL. One was a high paid starter. The other has been a backup here for a long time with only occasional starts.

How in the name of little green apples is it the same if we cut Holland?

[Mash]

More gibberish from the mediots...

Keep a pet cat = must be Garrett decision

Cut a pet cat = must be a Jerry decision

Cut a player you hate = Garrett making a statement.

Keeping a player you hate = Garrett is a puppet and Jerry is a meddler

I firmly believe if Wade last year wanted to cut half the OL.....Jerry and Stephen would of made it work.....

JG is making changes here...and its great...Jerry always listens.....

[dmq]

From the sounds of it in an interview, it sounded like Gurode being gone was actually a Jerry decision.

[Hostile]

Originally Posted by dmq

From the sounds of it in an interview, it sounded like Gurode being gone was actually a Jerry decision.

Jerry Jones, Stephen Jones, Tom Ciskowski, Jason Garrett, Judd Garrett, and Todd Williams.

Those are the 6 people who are invested heaviest in personnel decisions. Not one of them makes a move that the others disagree with. Not even Jerry Jones.

There is no such thing as a Jerry move. Or a Jason move. It is and always has been a Dallas Cowboys move. The article does not say Jerry released Gurode. It says the Cowboys did.

I can put those decision makers in order ranking highest to lowest if you wish, but I will spare that and say Jason Garrett's opinion holds the highest weight in that room. If by that you want to call it a Garrett move, feel free. It is still a Cowboys move.

Those 6 men make plans for 2011 and beyond. They make moves based upon cap, talent, and other intangible factors. If Jason Garrett had said he wanted Gurode, Andre would not be auditioning his services in Seattle, Washington. He would be in Miami with the team.

[Mash]

Originally Posted by Hostile

Jerry Jones, Stephen Jones, Tom Ciskowski, Jason Garrett, Judd Garrett, and Todd Williams.

Those are the 6 people who are invested heaviest in personnel decisions. Not one of them makes a move that the others disagree with. Not even Jerry Jones.

There is no such thing as a Jerry move. Or a Jason move. It is and always has been a Dallas Cowboys move. The article does not say Jerry released Gurode. It says the Cowboys did.

I can put those decision makers in order ranking highest to lowest if you wish, but I will spare that and say Jason Garrett's opinion holds the highest weight in that room. If by that you want to call it a Garrett move, feel free. It is still a Cowboys move.

[View Full Quote]Those 6 men make plans for 2011 and beyond. They make moves based upon cap, talent, and other intangible factors. If Jason Garrett had said he wanted Gurode, Andre would not be auditioning his services in Seattle, Washington. He would be in Miami with the team.

I dont know how people fail to understand this. It seems we seem to like to give credit to only one person ....and blame to only one person......

Its like everything bad is Jerry's doing.....and anything positive...approved....is someone elses move...it cant be Jerry.

When in fact....its always been a collective decision

[dmq]

I don't fail to see that, but I do think sometimes one guy does the convincing to the others. It sounded like Jerry convinced the others that it was in the best interest of the team to not pay your backup 6 million.

[Doomsday101]

Originally Posted by dmq

I don't fail to see that, but I do think sometimes one guy does the convincing to the others. It sounded like Jerry convinced the others that it was in the best interest of the team to not pay your backup 6 million.

I'm sure that played a significant role but I think that plays a role in New England, Pittsburge and other franchise around the league.

[Pottsville Maroons]

Originally Posted by Hostile

For example, Montrae Holland. I keep hearing that if we keep Holland what message was sent by cutting Gurode is blunted. That's nonsense. Yet people say it over and over. There is no comparison between Gurode and Holland in salary, status, or anything beyond the OL. One was a high paid starter. The other has been a backup here for a long time with only occasional starts.

How in the name of little green apples is it the same if we cut Holland?

I can't speak for anyone else, but my reason for cutting Holland has nothing to do with Gurode, in fact it's in spite of cutting Gurode as it further jeopardizes our depth. Holland's simply not "doing things the right way": coming to camp out of shape is indicative of exactly what Garrett does not want from his players. Also, he doesn't fit the profile of Garrett's OL, so it should be an easy decision for Garrett. I've read where Houck all but said that, once Holland was healthy (in shape), he was pencilled in as a starter. I haven't heard from any source where Holland has done anything in this camp to actually earn that role. Quite the opposite, actually. The Team saw Holland's level of conditioning when Camp started and they know the lack of OL depth. Cutting Holland crystalizes Garrett's mantra: "Do your best every day". Holland simply hasn't shown any desire to do that. Keeping him because he plays a position of need says to established players at other positions of need that they're safe due to demand and not due to their performance. That type of double standard can divide the locker room, a room that Garrett is trying to unify.

[Doomsday101]

Originally Posted by Pottsville Maroons

I can't speak for anyone else, but my reason for cutting Holland has nothing to do with Gurode, in fact it's in spite of cutting Gurode as it further jeopardizes our depth. Holland's simply not "doing things the right way": coming to camp out of shape is indicative of exactly what Garrett does not want from his players. Also, he doesn't fit the profile of Garrett's OL, so it should be an easy decision for Garrett. I've read where Houck all but said that, once Holland was healthy (in shape), he was pencilled in as a starter. I haven't heard from any source where Holland has done anything in this camp to actually earn that role. Quite the opposite, actually. The Team saw Holland's level of conditioning when Camp started and they know the lack of OL depth. Cutting Holland crystalizes Garrett's mantra: "Do your best every day". Holland simply hasn't shown any desire to do that. Keeping him because he plays a position of need says to established players at [View Full Quote]other positions of need that they're safe due to demand and not due to their performance. That type of double standard can divide the locker room, a room that Garrett is trying to unify.

I disagree not in that I like Holland only that it is not just making a statement. Making a statement without an alternative is not smart move. Had Costa not shown Garrett good play I doubt Gurode is let go it is a 2 fold process not just about making statement. If Dallas can find a replacement to take over the role Holland currently has then move him out but to do it just to claim a statement makes little sense. As far as what it tells other player does not change guys know if they do not play as expected they will be moved out as soon as an alternative can be found

[CoCo]

Originally Posted by Hostile

Jerry Jones, Stephen Jones, Tom Ciskowski, Jason Garrett, Judd Garrett, and Todd Williams.

Those are the 6 people who are invested heaviest in personnel decisions. Not one of them makes a move that the others disagree with. Not even Jerry Jones.

There is no such thing as a Jerry move. Or a Jason move. It is and always has been a Dallas Cowboys move. The article does not say Jerry released Gurode. It says the Cowboys did.

I can put those decision makers in order ranking highest to lowest if you wish, but I will spare that and say Jason Garrett's opinion holds the highest weight in that room. If by that you want to call it a Garrett move, feel free. It is still a Cowboys move.

[View Full Quote]Those 6 men make plans for 2011 and beyond. They make moves based upon cap, talent, and other intangible factors. If Jason Garrett had said he wanted Gurode, Andre would not be auditioning his services in Seattle, Washington. He would be in Miami with the team.

I don't fail to see that, but I do think sometimes one guy does the convincing to the others. It sounded like Jerry convinced the others that it was in the best interest of the team to not pay your backup 6 million.

I'm sure that played a significant role but I think that plays a role in New England, Pittsburge and other franchise around the league.

Bingo, Bingo, Bingo! Agree with it all.

[CoCo]

Brace yourself for what I'm about to say.

Great, great article by Galloway.

Actually you could leave out the Bennett part for my sake, but otherwise...

[CoCo]

And here's the part I don't get about folks who are not excited about Garrett. Can't you at least be excited about the fact that the HC has a very strong presence at VR not seen since Bill & Jimmy?

The organization has never had more credibility than when those two were in the HC office. And yes I believe I can say that and at the same time agree with Hostile's assertion that its team decision-making, like it always has been.

Credibility is returning to the Dallas Cowboys. Can success be far behind?

[baj1dallas]

Originally Posted by Hostile

That happens every year though. We all have agendas and some players don't fit ours, but they do fit what the team sees.

For example, Montrae Holland. I keep hearing that if we keep Holland what message was sent by cutting Gurode is blunted. That's nonsense. Yet people say it over and over. There is no comparison between Gurode and Holland in salary, status, or anything beyond the OL. One was a high paid starter. The other has been a backup here for a long time with only occasional starts.

How in the name of little green apples is it the same if we cut Holland?

one is a waste of a roster space. The other was probably going to be our best lineman this season.