Garrett 13 in HC Power Rankings

MileyDancer said:
If we win a close playoff game because Garrett made a gutsy call, I'll give him credit. I'm only half-blinded by hate. I just don't think we will. It'll be because we somehow won despite stupid decisions he's made. If we hadn't spiked the ball, went for it, and won against GB, I'd praise Garrett. That didn't happen.
Click to expand...

Each to their own. I don't follow anyone blindly but I do give both blame and credit to any and everyone. people take their own hatred of people be it Jerry, Garrett or others and refuse to acknowledge any good that person has done. As for GB game I saw nothing wrong with Dallas on their final drive, they moved the ball in good position and with a timeout there was time for them to go for a win and that is what they did. Dak getting a ball batted down at the line of scrimmage with a wide open Dez coming across the middle killed that drive and left the Cowboys in a situation of tying the game, I would take that same chance again today
 
perrykemp said:
That Packers team was totally predicated on Aaron Rodgers playing like superman ever week. It was one of the worst 'teams' to play in a NFC Championship game in a long while.

Rodgers was merely mortal in that game and they got stampeded.

It's ultimately an example of why Superbowl winning teams are 'typically' more balanced.
Click to expand...

Rodgers was merely mortal because Atlanta found a way to get after him. They brought multitudes of blitzes, etc. to try to make him unsettled.

He still threw for 290 and 3 TDs.
 
Sydla said:
Rodgers was merely mortal because Atlanta found a way to get after him. They brought multitudes of blitzes, etc. to try to make him unsettled.

He still threw for 290 and 3 TDs.
Click to expand...
Something Marinelli would NOT do. Is their defensive line That much better? Or is their DC more creative? Marinelli is pretty vanilla.
 
I love how people are attributing hirings to specific people as if they know. Idj at least spoke to a specific article talking about Garrett looking to change the scouting department when he came in but others are just comfortable parsing it out individual by individual. smh

And this attempt to separate Garrett from the selection of players is belied quite easily. He is front and center with the Jones boys in on every conversation in the ear of the general manager and VP of player personnel. We've seen it on the war room cam for the past 5 years.

Then of course there is no individual more responsible for the rosters development from the moment prospects get here than the head coach. Jason Garrett has executuve control and oversight over every single practice and meeting.

As for the spike in the 4th quarter, you may not like but you should at the very least recognize the probability study that indicates that win probability didn't go down when he did it. It's not like the indefensible calling timeouts with the lead and time running down or icing his kicker. Here is an article that details it fairly well.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...rter-spike-vs-green-bay-packers-kill-nfl-2017

People want him to be aggressive. . . . except when he is.
 
Sydla said:
It's time to start producing. The "build" is over. No more learning curve. No more excuses. 7 years in, time to start producing. I do not deny that it is quite possible that Garrett could be a very good coach that will start delivering big playoff wins now for us. But that has to start now. I don't want to be here 2-3 years from now looking at more playoff futility and having people still trying to tell us what a good coach he is.
Click to expand...

That is not for you to say and it's amusing because from your rhetoric it reads like that ship has already sailed for you. You just have no say and front with this.

Personally, I feel in the salary cap era you have to constantly be rebuilding. You cannot afford to be inefficient and hold onto aging players and unlike other sports the career arcs are half as long.

I also prefer to evaluate after the season as opposed to knee jerking ultimatums before it's even started.
 
That's being generous honestly... I think he's an OK head coach but his decisions in crunch time have me looking for my BP pills sometimes!
 
FuzzyLumpkins said:
That is not for you to say and it's amusing because from your rhetoric it reads like that ship has already sailed for you. You just have no say and front with this.

Personally, I feel in the salary cap era you have to constantly be rebuilding. You cannot afford to be inefficient and hold onto aging players and unlike other sports the career arcs are half as long.

I also prefer to evaluate after the season as opposed to knee jerking ultimatums before it's even started.
Click to expand...

Well why you should constantly be looking at tweaking, rebuilding, whatever you want to call it (like the Patriots), it also can't be an excuse for why your team continually fails to make any real playoff noise. So while I certainly agree one cannot rest in the NFL and just think once one builds a good roster you are set for years, you also can't use the notion that you have to constantly be tweaking the roster as an excuse for failure.
 
CowboysYanksLakers said:
That's being generous honestly... I think he's an OK head coach but his decisions in crunch time have me looking for my BP pills sometimes!
Click to expand...

I understand that he does not beget confidence in fans but I think that has more to do with the media and water cooler conversation than anything real.

Personally I ignore my emotional response and look to the players. I don't think it's hard to argue that they buy in.

Perfect voluntary session and workout attendance, guys putting in extra work at football camps and staying in Dallas to work here in the dead month before TC. You see it on gamedays where guys bring it down after down even through adversity like in the Eagles, Bengals, and 49er games. You don't see guys spitting the bit and freelancing. Then after all is said and done you hear his words coming out of their mouths in interviews and appearances.

While the fanbase may be uneasy the team undoubtedly believes and it's evidenced through word and action.
 
Sydla said:
Well why you should constantly be looking at tweaking, rebuilding, whatever you want to call it (like the Patriots), it also can't be an excuse for why your team continually fails to make any real playoff noise. So while I certainly agree one cannot rest in the NFL and just think once one builds a good roster you are set for years, you also can't use the notion that you have to constantly be tweaking the roster as an excuse for failure.
Click to expand...

Terming it excuses is your way of parsing it. Your psychology is limited to your own head.

Personally, I feel that people always looking for fault and blame and see arguments against them as excuses as unproductive. Honest evaluation is important. Scapegoating is not. I want problem solvers not problem finders and finger pointers.

You act like we got embarrassed by a bad team in the playoffs. In fact the game was well fought and went down to the wire. Demanding things as you've been doing is the definition of entitled.
 
all iknow is it took jimmy Johnson four years to build a team that won back to back superbowls regardless of whatever the circumstances where salary cap or not its been seven years and one wildcard playoff win time for postseason success or time to move on
 
cowboyblue22 said:
all iknow is it took jimmy Johnson four years to build a team that won back to back superbowls regardless of whatever the circumstances where salary cap or not its been seven years and one wildcard playoff win time for postseason success or time to move on
Click to expand...
And Jimmy had a worse team that he inherited than Garrett did.
 
cowboyblue22 said:
all iknow is it took jimmy Johnson four years to build a team that won back to back superbowls regardless of whatever the circumstances where salary cap or not its been seven years and one wildcard playoff win time for postseason success or time to move on
Click to expand...

True with no FA and a boat load of draft picks coming off the Walker deal not to mention vet players off that deal whom they Cowboys choose to keep. Add to that a Vikes team who tanked so those picks we got from them where top picks. I credit Johnson and the Cowboys for the turn around. You get Aikman, he already had Irving who was drafted under Landry and you get Emmitt Smith to form the triplets.

Walker Trade

  • Minnesota's 1st round pick in 1990 (21) (traded this pick along with pick (81) for pick (17) from Pittsburgh to draft Emmitt Smith)
  • Minnesota's 1st round pick in 1991 (conditional on cutting Solomon) – (12) (Alvin Harper)
  • Minnesota's 2nd round pick in 1991 (conditional on cutting Howard) – (38) (Dixon Edwards)
  • Minnesota's 2nd round pick in 1992 (conditional on cutting Holt) – (37) (Darren Woodson)
  • Minnesota's 3rd round pick in 1992 (conditional on cutting Nelson) – (71) (traded to New England, who drafted Kevin Turner)
 
FuzzyLumpkins said:
Terming it excuses is your way of parsing it. Your psychology is limited to your own head.

Personally, I feel that people always looking for fault and blame and see arguments against them as excuses as unproductive. Honest evaluation is important. Scapegoating is not. I want problem solvers not problem finders and finger pointers.

You act like we got embarrassed by a bad team in the playoffs. In fact the game was well fought and went down to the wire. Demanding things as you've been doing is the definition of entitled.
Click to expand...

Speaking of parsing.

That's why you are a hoot and are entertained by you. You accuse people of doing things and then you do the same thing.
 
Sydla said:
First, the shuffling in the scouting department in 2012 was because a guy left to go to the Packers and they had to replace that guy. And all they did was shift region responsibilities between scouts. There wasn't this big overhaul of the scouting department in 2012. There was only one new person added in 2012.

2013 was the first real big change when Stephen promoted McClay to work under him and gave him way more responsibility in building the draft boards, etc.

Garrett was not the driving force in those moves.

I have never once even used the term "development". I've never said Garrett should not get credit for developing players. But the ultimate test of player development is what happens on the field and this is where you and I disagree. Winning 13 games but crapping out in the playoffs isn't some massive achievement in my book. One playoff win in 7 years isn't a sign to me that he and his staff are doing a fantastic job developing the players. I need more on field success before I can sit there and say he's done a great job at developing a championship caliber roster.

The key piece to building a roster is actually acquiring the talent first that can later be developed. Some seem to want to try to give him credit for that as well, and I think that's bogus.
Click to expand...

You can't separate the role of player development from the role of player selection, so trying to parse the two is pointless. What we know is that he's the primary agent in the organization for player development, and that everybody else who has a role there reports to Jason. And we know he's got some role in player selection, because we see him in the draft room, we get stories about him reviewing tape on Elliott down to the last day before the draft, we see the role his subordinate coaches play on draft day, because we've been told that Garrett came in with strong feelings about how players and coaches need to work together to build a team, and because it only makes sense that an NFL head coach has input in player selection. Nobody disputes Bill Parcel's role in the draft. Wade came out and publicly abdicated his role in player selection, saying his job is to coach the players Jerry selects. With Jason, Jerry, Stephen, and Jason have said all along the selection process is a collaborative effort. There's no good reason to disbelieve them unless it's just what you want to believe.

As a side note, "shuffling" is a fair term for 2012. Not sure what issue you had with me bringing it up, but the fact remains they've reorganized the scouting department quite a bit during Garrett's tenure. He doesn't have the authority to do that singlehandedly, but then nobody ever suggested he did. What I suggested was that it was done collaboratively, that it correlated to the team winning more and having better players, and that he deserves credit for whatever his role was in the shuffling. Only if you have an agenda would you believe all this stuff happens without a lot of input from the team's head coach.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/2012/05/25/veteran-scout-addition-among-staff-changes
 
FuzzyLumpkins said:
He changed his scheme to that 3-3-5 and blitzed and ran pressure games quite a bit against GB.
Click to expand...

I was AFK for a bit there, but was going to say the same thing. It was effective enough--against a decent OL and a great QB--that you wondered why we hadn't done more of it in other close games last year. Or whether or not the overhaul of the secondary was done with bringing more pressure in mind.

That seems unlikely, given Marinelli's tendencies, but that playoff game at least has me wondering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 86 more.
Total: 4,032 (members: 186, guests: 3,846)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,653
Messages
13,824,510
Members
23,781
Latest member
Vloh10
Back
Top