The assumption of a better GM

cowboysfan99

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,075
Reaction score
1,751
Jerry would be considered a great GM...if there were no salary cap. He's proved time and time again that he can't build a championship team with salary cap restrictions.
 

nightrain

Since 1971
Messages
14,503
Reaction score
24,338
The majority of us want the owner to hire a GM and turn it over to him, at least that's my take.

There are others that want him to step down and turn it over to his son, which defies all known logic to me....and mankind.

But let's say he does decide to hire a GM. Is he going to hire one better than he's been or one worse? His ego is tied up with his team. Another's success accentuates his failure.

Who do you think might have been his first one he hired? Larry Lacewell? Hiring friends is as bad as hiring family.

Look at who Snyder turned his team over to in the beginning, that Sopranos cat Vinny Cerrato, the Lions let Matt Millen sink their ship and Snyder upped his play when he hired a drunk as his GM who promptly got hammered in the coaches booth, got kicked out and ended up in the press box and fired.

We're beginning to see turnover at the GM level that rivals HC's and does the owner's hiring of HC's give us a clue as to his hiring of a GM?

Be careful of what you wish for and before anyone writes they couldn't do any worse, oh yes, they could do a lot worse.

Our two best hopes are that 1) he finally gets it, begins working full time and is able to be a top rate GM or 2) we get lucky. I am not so sure I would hope that he hire a GM.
The well is poisoned and placing a pawn in the front office is not going to save this franchise. The Cowboys may get lucky and win something with the current structure in place, but it will be an uphill battle a require a great deal of luck, so I vote for your #2.

The culture of Jerryworld is more about optics and less about commitment and sacrifice. The latter usually conditions a team to have a grit and edge that shows up when the sledding is toughest. Johnson was the last to make that work in Dallas. Parcells was close, but quit.
 

atlantacowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
18,076
Reaction score
24,789
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
RT, how likely do you think that is with the previous HC getting 10 years?

You are arguing a point that is already made, what they've been doing hasn't worked. And Booger is not changing the way he does things. The worse GM job in the NFL would be working for him because he's incapable of hands off.

There is no way he would have stood back and let Pederson wreck his plans for his QB after Roseman had extended him. He would have been neck deep in that entire thing.

I really think if we knew the involvement that Booger has in the day to day, even those that think it's too much would be shocked. I think it is one man's team and all do his bidding.

I wonder how many GM's approve the weekly game plan?

You really think Jerry spends a lot of time learning football? He doesn't follow college football or even most NFL football. He couldn't tell you the starting tackles on the Ravens. I'd be surprised if he could tell you all 32 starting QBs. He doesn't do the work required to be a good GM. Rather he delegates everything, gets briefings, and uses what information he has to make a decision. But that decision is rarely ever from any real personal knowledge, philosophy, or football insight.

Of course, he wouldn't be able to work with a real GM. His reasoning for not hiring one is basically that he makes the final decision on everything anyway so why pay a GM? He would just be another opinion in the room.

This dry spell doesn't end until Jerry removes himself from football operations.....or dies.
 
Last edited:

IceStar-D7

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,127
Reaction score
7,412
"Be careful for what we wish for as far as GM goes"??? How can it get any worse??? I'd trade in Jerry like I'd trade in a girls 34a for a 34Dhttps://encrypted-tbn0.***NOT-ALLOWED***/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS7ezoNuMxpq4scy7bj7Hwu8Xcbv7mEn12eIg&usqp=CAU
 
Last edited:

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,054
Reaction score
46,962
This is silly. Jerry has changed his approach on how to build the team, and what the team should look like, multiple times. The team was built and approached differently from Parcells to Wade, Wade to JG, and now JG to McCarthy. None of those teams were constructed the same and Jerry always builds to what his coaches and personnel ppl want. That's what every GM should do.
You keep missing the fact that Jerry hires the personnel.

What exactly makes you give Jerry a pass?
 

Creeper

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,829
Reaction score
17,537
This is silly. Jerry has changed his approach on how to build the team, and what the team should look like, multiple times. The team was built and approached differently from Parcells to Wade, Wade to JG, and now JG to McCarthy. None of those teams were constructed the same and Jerry always builds to what his coaches and personnel ppl want. That's what every GM should do.

I see your point. Jerry is a great GM and would have won 14 Super Bowls had his coaches and players not let him down.
 

black label

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,919
Reaction score
8,100
3-2-yao-ming-face-png.png
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
You don’t wish to debate the matter. You just want to be contrary.
There's no debate. 25 years is selective data, specifically to leave out the successful years.

I don't even support Jerry or think he's a particularly good GM, I just wish people would be intelligent about it.
 

Starforever

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,529
Reaction score
5,069
CowboysZone DIEHARD Fan
The GM position is fine, its Jerry occupying the position that is the problem.
 

CouchCoach

Staff member
Messages
41,122
Reaction score
74,900
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
You really think Jerry spends a lot of time learning football? He doesn't follow college football or even most NFL football. He couldn't tell you the starting tackles on the Ravens. I'd be surprised if he could tell you all 32 starting QBs. He doesn't do the work required to be a good GM. Rather he delegates everything, gets briefings, and uses what information he has to make a decision. But that decision is rarely ever from any real personal knowledge, philosophy, or football insight.

Of course, he wouldn't be able to work with a real GM. His reasoning for not hiring one is basically that he makes the final decision on everything anyway so why pay a GM? He would just be another opinion in the room.

This dry spell doesn't end until Jerry removes himself from football operations.....or dies.
He does follow the Razorbacks. Oops, you're right, he doesn't follow football.
 

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member
Messages
55,143
Reaction score
36,328
You really think Jerry spends a lot of time learning football? He doesn't follow college football or even most NFL football. He couldn't tell you the starting tackles on the Ravens. I'd be surprised if he could tell you all 32 starting QBs. He doesn't do the work required to be a good GM. Rather he delegates everything, gets briefings, and uses what information he has to make a decision. But that decision is rarely ever from any real personal knowledge, philosophy, or football insight.

Of course, he wouldn't be able to work with a real GM. His reasoning for not hiring one is basically that he makes the final decision on everything anyway so why pay a GM? He would just be another opinion in the room.

This dry spell doesn't end until Jerry removes himself from football operations.....or dies.
Well done !
The well is poisoned and placing a pawn in the front office is not going to save this franchise. The Cowboys may get lucky and win something with the current structure in place, but it will be an uphill battle a require a great deal of luck, so I vote for your #2.

The culture of Jerryworld is more about optics and less about commitment and sacrifice. The latter usually conditions a team to have a grit and edge that shows up when the sledding is toughest. Johnson was the last to make that work in Dallas. Parcells was close, but quit.
One of the best responses !
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,054
Reaction score
46,962
There's no debate. 25 years is selective data, specifically to leave out the successful years.

I don't even support Jerry or think he's a particularly good GM, I just wish people would be intelligent about it.
And we wish everyone would use all data. Such as, Jerry is responsible for hiring coaches and acquiring players. If they fail, it is on him. Just as it is w/ every GM. Don't you agree that all NFL GM's should be judged using the same criteria?
 

Creeper

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,829
Reaction score
17,537
And we wish everyone would use all data. Such as, Jerry is responsible for hiring coaches and acquiring players. If they fail, it is on him. Just as it is w/ every GM. Don't you agree that all NFL GM's should be judged using the same criteria?

Using the last 25 years is not being selective either. It is using the most relevant data we have. Its not like we picked only the least successful years out of the last 25. If we were running an assembly line for a product and the last 25 to come off the line were defective we would discern a problem exists. That is all we are doing with Jerry. Frankly, I don't see how anyone can look at the Cowboys last 25 years and argue Jerry is not the problem for a variety of reasons not the least of which is his choice of coaches, players, and the atmosphere that surrounds the team. Jerry is good owner because of how he promotes the team, but he is a lousy GM.

On the contrary, I think it would be selective to to pick the years the Cowboys have had some success or a decent draft, to argue that Jerry is not the real problem.
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,054
Reaction score
46,962
Using the last 25 years is not being selective either. It is using the most relevant data we have. Its not like we picked only the least successful years out of the last 25. If we were running an assembly line for a product and the last 25 to come off the line were defective we would discern a problem exists. That is all we are doing with Jerry. Frankly, I don't see how anyone can look at the Cowboys last 25 years and argue Jerry is not the problem for a variety of reasons not the least of which is his choice of coaches, players, and the atmosphere that surrounds the team. Jerry is good owner because of how he promotes the team, but he is a lousy GM.

On the contrary, I think it would be selective to to pick the years the Cowboys have had some success or a decent draft, to argue that Jerry is not the real problem.
It'd be a different evaluation if someone took over the Lions for 2-3 years. Might not be enough time to judge. But 25 years? Holy Malarky, that's just sick.
 
Top