1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

Jones Says Record Won't Be Deciding Factor For Garrett

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by Bluestang, Jul 23, 2014.

  1. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Well-Known Member

    2,814 Messages
    635 Likes Received
    At best it looks about the same to me.

    Neither could set their own staff and both either had play calling forced on them or taken away. Both had to give in to roster/ line up moves and both have had FA and draft picks forced on them.

    If you mean that Jason has had a great impact in drafting, then I'll agree with you. I think Jason has a much clearer vision of what he wants and has more influence in that area than Wade, who mostly appeared disinterested in roster / drafting activities.

    This is Jerry's sandbox and he is going to be large and in charge at all costs and I think in his twisted 40 year old mind, he really thinks he is the Head Coach.
    junk likes this.
  2. scooper

    scooper Benched

    150 Messages
    148 Likes Received
    I really have no clue what you're referring to but do you add anything to this forum except following me around and making these weird posts?
  3. Hostile

    Hostile Tacos are a good investment Zone Supporter

    119,053 Messages
    2,972 Likes Received
    The staff is entirely Garrett's. The rest of it isn't worth addressing.
  4. xwalker

    xwalker Well-Known Member

    13,620 Messages
    5,780 Likes Received
    I think this coaching staff are all Garrett hires.

    Jerry did force the play-calling issue last season, but otherwise Garrett appears to be in control of the coaching staff.

    Garrett had ties to most of the coaches on the staff or specifically wanted certain coaches.

    He had ties to Kiffin, Marinelli, Dooley, Pope, etc.. He specifically wanted Callahan because he wanted to move to the Zone Blocking Scheme.

    The last coach that was forced onto Garrett was Rob Ryan. If Garrett wanted to keep Ryan he would still be here.
    Heelsboy and Hostile like this.
  5. McLovin

    McLovin Well-Known Member

    3,528 Messages
    1,220 Likes Received
    Before I answer this I'll ask you if you genuinely believe that the "negative play" excuse is plausible, logical, rational, or even moderately genuine - much less planned given the game situation in question? Or is it a provable bold face lie and excuse to justify a screw up?
  6. junk

    junk I've got moxie

    9,289 Messages
    240 Likes Received
    Truth. Although I really don't think Garrett has much say in the draft room.
    daveferr33 likes this.
  7. Super_Kazuya

    Super_Kazuya Well-Known Member

    1,883 Messages
    997 Likes Received
    Being afraid of something bad happening in that situation is probably a bit illogical (I'd love to see stats for those situations) but otherwise I believe Garrett was being honest with about 75% certainty.
  8. McLovin

    McLovin Well-Known Member

    3,528 Messages
    1,220 Likes Received
    So Lets take Garrett at his word that as long as they got to the 32 yard line (not 33) and was content on Bailey kicking a 49yd Field goal because 49 has a 4 handle and it is still in the 4 point traditional FF range meaning 49 is just as easy 40.

    There are 2 Timeouts left.

    When Dez catches the ball with 24 seconds left to play for a 1st and 10. No timeout used. This fits with the "Thank god we got to the 32 - Bring on Bailey"

    Now....

    In the NFL teams have 40 seconds timed from the end of the previous down, or 25 seconds after the ball is declared ready for play after certain administrative stoppages and game delays. So if you are concerned about a "negative play", would you:

    a) Line up and clock the ball with 0:07 left -
    • Negative play risk #1 - Botched/fumbled snap
    • Negative play rsk #2 - false start - 5 yard penalty
    b) Call a timeout with play clock at 0:02 and dont give the offense a chance a option a)
    • Negative play risk #1 - botched snap -Overtime. (I'll leave out blocked FG or fumble returns since the likely final play outcome would have been a FG anyway)
    c) Call a Timeout with :07 to play in case of a botched snap
    • Negative play #1 - Botched snap- Timeout. rekick from 55-57yards
    • Negative play #2 - Botched snap - overtime.

    Option B or C is the only correct way to sell "negative play concern." The negative plays in Options B or C are inherent in any situation - so really a moot point.

    In no circumstance can anyone ever justify clocking the ball on 1st and 10 with :07 and then immediately using a TO. To use a TO after clocking the ball further shows that the FG was not prepared to rush onto the field and get ready to kick the ball within the play clock. Even then, the timeout vs clocking allows 1:50 to get ready for the final kick

    Therefore, what stinks may not be your assumption of my hindsight is 20/20 and perhaps veiled accusation of hypocrisy, but it might be the defense of anything Garrett without serious critical thinking of the specific game situation. The only hindsight in your first response to me was you looking at the Detroit game and trying to shoehorn the Az situation to there. In Detroit we needed to waste time, not need points, There was no "setting up for a 49yd" to win FG.

    One of the traits they teach in some consultancy and leadership groups is to never fully admit you made a mistake. However, that is only if you can derive a plausible deniability or deflection. This ridiculous excuse was allowed because no one followed up and hammered it home. It works on people who are more than willing to accept anything told to them, it really is unnerving to others.

    I fully expect if Garrett would have said "I was afraid Bane was going to sinkhole the field between the 15-25 yard lines and didn't want to risk players falling into a rocky abyss" there would be people that would buy that argument as well.

    Now the way the Cowboys lose games under the Garret tenure thus far, I dont think I would even raise an eyebrow if the field did implode. But I still wouldnt use that to justify a prior illogical decision.
  9. Turtle0986

    Turtle0986 Member

    58 Messages
    7 Likes Received
    I would hate to ask but what will it take for Jones to finally fire Garrett? I know he has said one thing and done another like he did with Wade but were coming from the last three seasons going 8-8, and blowing the final game in a do or go home for the playoffs
    Chocolate Lab likes this.
  10. McLovin

    McLovin Well-Known Member

    3,528 Messages
    1,220 Likes Received

    Again I dont see the Landry comparison (or specific example) as relevant without someone accepting some large bridge eventually arriving at the same possible outcome. Landry, as you stipulate, was an innovator, it is a totally reasoned story that he found it hard for professionals that have played a set style, to suddenly embrace a new style, especially, since the results weren't occuring "wins". He also began with an expansion team, hence


    Flip side, I think you stipulate Garrett is not innovating anything since your rebuttal was a question about Lombardi, Reid, Walsh, etc. So his vision his vision is a little more soft skill than technical skill. Getting a team to play hard, play smart, be ready, etc. shouldn’t be as hard to grasp than a “Flex”, shotgun, spread, read option, fast pace game that some have never seen.


    Also, I was in a work sponsored team building seminar about 12 years ago around Covey’s “7 Habits of Highly successful People.” One of the first questions to the audience was “What makes good leaders?” . One of the Senior VPs raised his hand and said “You need good followers.” Needless to say that answer was not in the presentation and he also was not long for his job. Point is, a find it hard to believe if Garrett is Great Leader that he had that many antagonist players that impeded that vision. To coin a phrase from the Navy Seals “There are no bad boat crews. Only bad leaders.” This seems more like an indictment than a factor beyond control


    Again, the lack of his success has been countered with a comparison to Landry, Noll, etc. The second order excuse is he is smart and building something. I present Jauron as another bright guy, who had a great staff and has basically failed as a HC. I cannot, by trade or analytical makeup, just give the ground that Landry is more appropriate than Kotite, Handley or Jauron.


    I also can’t take a single point in time record and draw any relevant comparisons. I need to see composition. If you present me with 2 coaches with 24-24 records with the following trend over those years


    Coach A : 1 win; 8 wins, 15 wins

    Coach B: 15 wins, 8 wins, 1 Win


    I can unequivocally tell you which coach is on the hot seat in at the end of year 3 and which one is causing concern or happiness after year 2. Extreme example, but trends matter




    Ha, always interested in numbers. So feel free to float them.


    As an aside, Its funny, I am a Romo supporter and all the stats look great on him, but the wins have trended down or stagnant. I justify this by defense stats etc, but it comes if Im consistent I do fall back on some assumptions I have a hard time disproving and have to use intuition.




    Hopefully they contribute, but I think those examples prove that there s better access to talent in todays era than in the Landry Noll era. Since the league as you say is set up for parity, I suppose you can say Garrett teams have completely achieved mediocrity.


    As for pissed, I really am not pissed. I don’t agree with the 2012 draft at all. That much resources on CBs is crazy. The emulations and malleable schemes to “what did someone do last year that worked” seems alive and well. I don’t think players have been put in systems and situations that play to their strengths. Even when a 3-4, we never had a true NT. Ratliff had some decent years, but he wasn’t the perfect fit. I fully expect the offense may morph to a Kelly offense or single wing or whatever if we get mudstomped by one at some point.


    I mean we hear for 3 years about how we are going to run the ball more and we bounce on the bottom every year. It just feels weird


    Forgot about Abraham, good call. I think the Ware move was probably necessary, but I also think it was only forced that way due to the cap mgmt. situation that only Dallas and Washington do with benefits from each org. I am excited to see Lawrence, but I also hope they continue looking for pressure players. Ware was used too much.



    FA eroded a lot of the Cowboys and the horrendous drafts in the 1990s. I absolutely Jimmy was an architect, no one else was really in place then. Jimmy just came from college and scouted all these players. He traded Walker immediately and stockpiled picks.


    I don’t think all coaches are architects. John Fox doesn’t strike me as an architect, neither does Mike White or Mike Tomlin . The organizations have to be on the same page and commit to a philosophy. 2012 is still too close for me to through it out the window and press reset.



    Yeah, that is a separate topic. I definitely have some issues there. To me, you see real quick and real progress both times Jerry hired a respected Football guy. Johnson and Parcells.


    I think he has had enough money and is willing to spend to keep the team from 2-14 during lean years, so do I think he tries. But again, trend arrows with Johnson and Parcells went from almost directly up whereas others have meandered at level to dropping.



    It is hard to find indisputable “blown games.” Most of the time, the call would be find if the play is executed. I cannot think of another game in which the ending was so unprepared and there for the taking. The hC should solely own the TO and clock. When it is completely botched and then bold faced lied about, it sets bad with me.


    Im sure all coaches make mistakes, though



    No, but if Walsh can instill the WCO in 3 years and get a playoff appearance, if Kelly can come in and install a new offense and win 10 games, then I would expect someone teaching “sound football principles” should have an easier job. If it takes 3 years to continually teach these new principles, then he has to start over basically every 3-4 years since the majority of the team will turnover.


    It almost sounds like another indictment of the organization or Garrett that he drafts or acquires such unsound players that he has to spend an inordinate of time teaching rudimentary football versus advanced topics like Payton and Walsh, etc.



    I do, different schemes require different personnel and that impacts drafts and FA.



    No need to apologize, there is definitely a chance that happens. Assuming the DL is targeted in 2015 and the LBs and Safety position is shored up. It is possible.


    I’ll agree with you OLine /new QB premise completely as well. However, The QB will matter. I think some of the Campo teams were decent…good defense, good oline (Allen, Adams) but the QB situation was abysmal.





    [/quote]

    I'm not wrong about this guy. If me saying that upsets people, oh well. Either they will get over it, or they won't. I'm way past the point of caring what some people think. I don't want you to eat crow. I want you to open your eyes beyond 8-8 to see what is being built. if that doesn't thrill you, then I don't know what can. The fact of the matter is greatness is built steadily so it can be sustained. It is not a one year up, next year down, take a lot of risks for another year up type of "trend." We all want sustained greatness. That comes with a price that we are paying. There will be a pay off. Book it


    .[/quote]


    Maybe that was a bad choice of words – I don’t need or want you to eat any crow. I will surely give you credit if you are correct – you can book that.


    I think bring this back on topic. My premise is I cant with certainty say that Jason Garrett will succeed or fail. I say he is more likely to fail because he has so far lacked success and his successful contemporaries, parcells, Reid, Holmgren, etc also made quick impacts.


    You have a conviction and faith. I will never convince you that you should see doubt, and that’s fine.


    Maybe I’ll ask you one more question.


    Let’s say for whatever hypothetical reason, Jerry lets Garrett go at the end of the year. .


    Do you see him becoming a HC for another NFL team in 2015?


    Would your answer vary under the following records?:


    - 10-6

    - 8-8

    - 6-10
    dreghorn2, Dodger12 and junk like this.
  11. CCBoy

    CCBoy Well-Known Member

    17,242 Messages
    1,404 Likes Received
    Hey, can't get enough verses of 'Blame it on the O'Mallys.'

    [IMG]


    Oh wait, that was the adult version...
  12. CCBoy

    CCBoy Well-Known Member

    17,242 Messages
    1,404 Likes Received
    [IMG]

    Now where were the tar buckets at the burn barrels? Oh...wrong thread, huh?
  13. CCBoy

    CCBoy Well-Known Member

    17,242 Messages
    1,404 Likes Received
    Clean up on isle 13...

    [IMG]
  14. Alexander

    Alexander What's it going to be then, eh?

    25,200 Messages
    5,430 Likes Received
    It would take an embarrassing string of events, even worse that what people perceived as the team "quitting" on Wade Phillips.

    I feel pretty secure that any injury to Romo will be given to Garrett as an excuse that was not provided in the least to Phillips. That team quit when it was clear Romo was done for the year just as much as anything else. If that happens again, Garrett may just get a pass--he is that much a part of the family portrait.

    But one thing that does help is that trying to sign Garrett to an extension under the same circumstances would be impossible to sell to most fans.
  15. Doomsday101

    Doomsday101 Well-Known Member

    78,417 Messages
    3,747 Likes Received
    Jones also said last night this is a do or die season for this team, Jason is going to have to win if he expects to get an extention on his contract. If winning was not a factor he would not be in the last year of the deal they would already have his contract extended to put to rest the talk of Hot seat
  16. Hostile

    Hostile Tacos are a good investment Zone Supporter

    119,053 Messages
    2,972 Likes Received
    Well, truthfully, the only relevance I am pitching here is that great coaches can have rough starts before their teams become great. No, I do not think that means every coach just needs more time.

    The idea here is interesting, but I think it doesn't quite make the point you want. In football we're talking about 11 men on the field at the same time. 11 different minds. 11 different bodies. Getting all 11 to play together on plays isn't exactly "See Spot run." Football is human chess. It's very much a mental game as well as physical, and the fact of the matter is small things matter. Inches and seconds matter. Sometimes you have to teach that in a different way. For instance do you know for sure that no player on our team is dyslexic, has ADHD, or any other type of learning disability? Of course not. None of us know unless the player is forthcoming about it, and I really wouldn't blame a player for not revealing that. Now, I'm not saying any of our players are, but the possibility is certainly there. You have to know how to teach that. It isn't as simple as saying, "this is all basic, so you guys ought to get it right away, and let's go win."

    I played football with Stephen R. Covey's son Sean. He threw the prettiest spirals I have ever seen. They corkscrewed into your hands snug as could be. Had he loved the game, I think he could have been great. He was playing football simply to get through college to go on to his Dad's business. Sorry for the segue, but I thought you might find it interesting.

    I don't think I said it is more appropriate.

    This missed me. I am sorry if I should have caught something and didn't.

    I think you can also say the final chapter is not written.

    Well, I'm pissed so I just assume most of us are. But I admit I'm more pissed about the injuries than anything else and I honest to Pete have a hard time understanding why people don't think we'd have been a better team without the injuries of the last 2 years. How much better? I can't say that, but I do feel like a healthy Defense could have stopped Detroit. Or kept Green Bay from making that comeback. If we're merely talking 2 games better the last 2 years I don't think all of this conspiracy theory stuff is worth discussing. Inches, seconds, and health. Gain a few inches here, save a few seconds there to give yourself more time, and have healthy players and you can win. I can't speak for you, but I don't see a team that gives up. They could have simply thought, "We can't beat Denver anyway, so let's just put it in cruise control and not get anyone hurt." They didn't. And I really don't know how anyone can be upset that our QB brought us back to victory with what amounted to a broken back. I don't get it. I don't want to get it. Call me whatever name you need, but if we have him that last game I think we finish the sweep. I really do. It wasn't meant to be. I personally can't pin his injury on a coach or a trainer or a GM. That's scapegoating 101, and I don't play that.

    The only flaw I have with this is that we could have kept Ware and still been under the cap. I do understand how much it saves us, but it was not impossible. I too am excited to see Lawrence, once he gets away from Tyron Smith that is. Love that he is stonewalling everyone.

    The Head Coach is always the architect. The personnel guys take their cues and direction based upon their vision. The better the Head Coach, the better the results. If you listen to that Podcast you're going to hear an NFL GM tell you that.

    I 100% agree with this. I also think Garrett has the makeup to be that kind of Head Coach and I do not say that lightly.

    Be honest with me here, do you think Parcells or Johnson could have won as much as they did with as many injuries to key positions the last two years? I honestly don't. Maybe it's the football purist in me, but I think better players simply matters.

    Tony Sparano came in and got 11 wins with his Wildcat. Are you so sure Kelly is the messiah of Philly? I personally would take Andy Reid over him any day. Andy inherited a 2-14 team, Kelly inherited a 4-12 team. Andy won 11 games, Kelly 10. Andy came to Philly and whipped him. I think Kelly is going to have a Sparano come back to earth.

    Yes, I know this. So no coach should ever install a scheme they prefer? I just can't agree with that.

    Okay, I admit to some confusion here. If you agree it is possible...with this staff and team...how is Garrett not supported 100% by you? You can't say this is possible if he is the problem. If you can say this, and mean it, don't you think you are validating my points here? That the team is being built with a specific purpose in mind.

    No need to.

    I have it because I got EXACTLY what I wanted. I wanted a guy who was smarter than just about everyone in the room. A guy who comes from a football background and family. A guy who had ties to and loyalty to the Dallas Cowboys. I was excited that parcells came here, but I have to tell you, it bothered me to see our guys eschewed and Jim Burt and other Giants players brought in to mentor our guys. We're not the Giants. I didn't like that. I get the whole FOB stuff to build the team, but not to mentor it. If you liked Jim Burt in here then more power to you. I get it on one level, just like I get it with Joe Gibbs speaking to the team under Garrett, but it bothers me too. I won't lie to you, I am a Cowboys guy. Period, and I don't think I should have to apologize for that or duck my head to anyone for it. This is my team, and I am fiercely proud of our heritage and place in History. I wanted a guy who is also fiercely loyal to that, and Garrett is. I wanted discipline back. I wanted things done a certain way, because I think that leads to winning. I wanted professionalism back. You can say whatever you want about 8-8, and I will probably nod my head. But this team is not a joke. They do fight. Guess what? Sometimes the other team does too, and has more weapons to fight with. That's just a fact of life in football.

    It depends on when he is fired doesn't it? I mean is every job open? Then yes, I am 100% sure he would get at least one. If there are only 2 or 3 left, maybe not if the teams want D guys. I hate to say this, but there are owners out there who are privately congratulating Jerry on who our HC is. This guy is very respected. I agree, the results need to improve.

    No, my answer would stay what it is above.
  17. Beast_from_East

    Beast_from_East Well-Known Member

    15,465 Messages
    2,884 Likes Received
    Wow, 17 pages.........lol

    Not much else to say so I will leave this last thought. Garrett can be compared to Landry, Walsh, Lombardi, or any other great coach all day long and it really doesn't matter.

    Words without deeds are just that, words.
    bysbox1 likes this.

Share This Page