Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by theranchsucks, Sep 25, 2013.
Wrong as usual.
If I remember correctly, there were two reasons people disliked the draft trade:
1) They really felt that Floyd was an excellent player at that spot and would have made a major difference to this team over the long haul. There is nothing flawed in that concept; Floyd DOES look like a nice player and many would likely have been fine staying there. That said, Jerry, the GM, did not feel that was the best strategy for this team. I can get behind that as well.
2) They felt we got the lower end of the bargain based on the draft value charts, and that we 'reached.' I did not then, nor do I now consider this a valid argument against. A draft pick is only valuable in what you spend it on. If we got a perennial solid starter AND a good WR with an 18th pick, that is value. I don't care what points say.
I do find it patently absurd that somebody would think that Garrett (a former QB, QB coach, O-Coordinator and playcaller) would insist on a 3-4 DE to play in a 4-3 Tampa 2 scheme and had that overridden as we picked 3 offensive players in our first four picks.
Offensive minded coaches usually don't insist on getting defensive players, particularly Defensive Tackles, particularly DT's that don't fit our scheme. And they usually don't come away wishing that they got that player rather than having a starting center, a tight end and a wide receiver.
If we are likely to see an offensive centric Head Coach being overridden it would be if they wanted a center and instead we passed to get a DT. And then we got a linebacker and a corner with the next couple of picks.
Garrett didn't know that Spencer was out for the Year, the latest indictment of Owner/Coach not being on the same page to go along with Draft and Play Calling duties
At the very least the dirty laundry list on lack of communication continues to grow.
Garrett knew Monday night after the results came in from the MRI Monday afternoon.
"We just wanted to make sure we did everything the right way," Garrett said. "Last week it just didn't feel great to him. He felt like there was something wrong. He got the MRI late Monday afternoon and we got the word Monday night. This is the best thing for him going forward. We're fully confident it's going to be handled the right way and he will be back and there is a lot more football left in him."
Maybe Jerry got a new guy to clean his Glasses.
Oh no, silly me that is his son in laws job.
So, who's the new guy?
I haven't and I think it'd be ridiculous for anyone to even try to take that stance after having watched it. If such people exist, I'd like to see some hands go up.
Unfortunately you can't re-watch at DC.com and I don't think anyone screen capped it. Pulled this from twitter right after it happened.
Dude was pissed and basically stayed that way for a good amount of time.
The Floyd situation tells you all you really need to know.
Kiffin and Marinelli came to Dallas and after just 3 months of being on the job they were overruling the draft board. Do people really expect others to believe that Garrett didn't have similar pull on the offensive side during his time as '"future head coach"?
You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You imply that all the bad aspects of this team in the past are his fault because "it's his baby" but say that we have talent now in spite of him. You can't fault him for the bad but deny him for the good. Well you can but you'd be two faced... and nobody wants that. It seems that you may have an agenda... hmmmm. Do you?
If guessing that your talking about recently and not the past... Just a guess tho
That may be true who knows. But Kiffin and Marinelli were changing our defense and should have some input.
Some people think that if you don't parrot what someone else says, you must be disagreeing with them. They don't understand that you can agree with the intent of the post and still not say exactly what it said. Some people don't understand that the english language is a versatile thing and can be used to say multiple things in multiple ways. I hope this helps "those" people.
I have this same point to Garrett apologists
Garrett has been incharge of the offense for 6+years and has significant say in offensive personnel for 6+ years
the revisionist history and interpretation are nauseating
here is a thought, maybe garrett has more respect for the opinion of the scouts and ciskowski
maybe he actually believes that the process should work the way it is supposed to instead of being over-ruled by an unqualified GM, and his eve less qualified son, on a whim
So explain why it is 'overruling' Garrett when we traded down and picked up an offensive player (Frederick) instead of a defensive player (Floyd)?
And then we picked up 2 more offensive players (Escobar and Williams)...3 out of the first 4 picks were offensive players.
It would seem to me that if you were 'overruling' an offensive coach like Garrett, he would not want a defensive player in the first place. And that you would go with defensive players instead of offensive players.
My viewpoint is that Jerry, Stephen and Garrett were looking to trade down. They discussed this before the draft and how we needed more personnel and more young players. This was also considered a poor draft, so usually the idea is to acquire more picks in bad draft classes.
I just don't see Floyd as an option for this team. And I'm hardly rueing the day we passed up on him.
Maybe Ciskowski was upset about it and complained to the press. I have my doubts. But, I see no logic in the claim that Garrett was dead set on picking Floyd and got overturned.
Here's what Wikipedia had on Floyd:
Floyd is listed as a defensive tackle, but considered to be best fit as Defensive End in a 3–4 defensive alignment.[8
Floyd was also brought in by Philly....to be looked at as a 3-4 DE.
How is that 'revisionist history.'
Garrett was a Qb. He was a QB coach. He was an O-Coordinator. He was an offensive playcaller.
Floyd was considered to best fit in the 3-4 as a DE.
And if Garrett has more respect for Ciskowski than Kiffin and Marinelli when it comes to a D-Lineman, then there's an issue.