Nick Saban on zone defenses

[JustChip]

Which one do you believe stands the better chance to make you highly successful in the next 3-4 years? The guy who has had 7 years in this very job and done squat or the guy who, yes, had a blah two year run in Miami a decade or so ago but has won NCs at two different big time college programs?

Shoot, I'd take Urban Meyer over Garrett without even blinking too.

Circumstances and situations play HUGE roles in success or failure. There's no question Urban Meyer and Nick Saban are excellent coaches, but that does not guarantee they would be successful here in this situation. Hell, Bill Belichek failed in Cleveland, but has become a GOAT in NE. Part of that is he learned from the Cleveland experience, but also that the situations were drastically different (none the least of which is lucking into Tom Brady). You may still opt to try something new vs. continuing with the current, and that's fine, but don't in any way think that means success will automatically follow.

 

[OmerV]

Which one do you believe stands the better chance to make you highly successful in the next 3-4 years? The guy who has had 7 years in this very job and done squat or the guy who, yes, had a blah two year run in Miami a decade or so ago but has won NCs at two different big time college programs?

Shoot, I'd take Urban Meyer over Garrett without even blinking too.

I didn't say I would be opposed to giving Saban a shot (other than I think he's a prick), I just said his ability to be a successful NFL coach isn't a given.

 

[Sydla]

Circumstances and situations play HUGE roles in success or failure. There's no question Urban Meyer and Nick Saban are excellent coaches, but that does not guarantee they would be successful here in this situation. Hell, Bill Belichek failed in Cleveland, but has become a GOAT in NE. Part of that is he learned from the Cleveland experience, but also that the situations were drastically different (none the least of which is lucking into Tom Brady). You may still opt to try something new vs. continuing with the current, and that's fine, but don't in any way think that means success will automatically follow.

There is no guarantee. But in this scenario, we've been afforded the opportunity to see one of the coaches actually coach here. We've seen Garrett coach for 7 years and that 7 year run has largely resulted in mostly disappointing results.

So, to me, choosing a guy who has done little in 7 years to magically turn it around for the next 3-4 seems like a real stretch. So in that sense, I'd rather take the chance on a guy who has not only been successful in college, but dominated in college at two different major programs and runs systems that are pretty much NFL style systems.

 

[Sydla]

I didn't say I would be opposed to giving Saban a shot (other than I think he's a prick), I just said his ability to be a successful NFL coach isn't a given.

He would not be my first choice. But between him and Garrett, it's a no brainer to me.

 

[Dre11]

Think about what you are saying. You believe that a coach who has done pretty much zero in 7 seasons as the Cowboys coach would be a better coach for this team the next 3-4 years than a guy who has won national championships at two different major college programs, two programs that are basically NFL farm teams.

And your proof is, "well Garrett won one playoff game in 7 seasons and Saban, despite being arguably one of the 5 greatest college coaches of all time, lasted only two seasons in Miami a decade ago".

I don’t need to think about anything, I could give a rats tail what he’s done in college, he’s not doing it on the highest level, I know coaches who’s won just as many or more HS state titles . Does it make them better than Saban? He ‘s coaching against lesser competition and talent. Get out of here with that nonsense.

 

[Sydla]

I don’t need to think about anything, I could give a rats tail what he’s done in college, he’s not doing it on the highest level, I know coaches who’s won just as many or more HS state titles . Does it make them better than Saban? He ‘s coaching against lesser competition and talent. Get out of here with that nonsense.

LOL.

The difference between HS and college is entirely different than between a major college program and the NFL.

The fact you think that’s a fair comparison is hilarious.

 

[JustChip]

There is no guarantee. But in this scenario, we've been afforded the opportunity to see one of the coaches actually coach here. We've seen Garrett coach for 7 years and that 7 year run has largely resulted in mostly disappointing results.

So, to me, choosing a guy who has done little in 7 years to magically turn it around for the next 3-4 seems like a real stretch. So in that sense, I'd rather take the chance on a guy who has not only been successful in college, but dominated in college at two different major programs and runs systems that are pretty much NFL style systems.

I understand and fair enough. My only point is that there is a general lack of understanding here that circumstances play a significant role in success and failure. I personally don't think Meyer or Saban will be any more successful here than Garrett. I'm not sure Jimmy would be successful here today.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Today I learned that Brian Billick is a better football coach than Bear Bryant.

He had more success at the "highest level."

 

[Alexander]

Today I learned that Brian Billick is a better football coach than Bear Bryant.

He had more success at the "highest level."

You also just have to admit that John Harbaugh is better than Tom Osbourne and Woody Hayes too. Highest level.

 

[Corso]

Nick Saban talking about what every mediocre coach already knows.
So impressive and definitely deserving of multiple pages on a Cowboys Forum.

You streaking goobs... What the heck is being argued over here?

The Dead Zone of the NFL is making fans, trying to cross the desert, to see mirages and oases.

Yikes!

 

[Melonfeud]

There was a bit of a difference though in that the Cowboys were starting a team from scratch at the time, so there were no immediate expectations of success.

Didn't they get to high grade or cherry pick existing teams rosters or draft picks? I recall reading something along those lines down in the ZONES cellar archives & the existing teams were very resentful of that.

 

[Corso]

Didn't they get to high grade or cherry pick existing teams rosters or draft picks? I recall reading something along those lines down in the ZONES cellar archives & the existing teams were very resentful of that.

What on Earth are you talking about?
And I don't normally say that to you...

 

[Melonfeud]

What on Earth are you talking about?
And I don't normally say that to you...

In 1960 the expansion team that's gathered us together in tribal fashion, was 'allowed' certain preferential considerations in stocking it's roster,,,
That didn't 'fly' all that well with the established teams at the time

 

[OmerV]

Didn't they get to high grade or cherry pick existing teams rosters or draft picks? I recall reading something along those lines down in the ZONES cellar archives & the existing teams were very resentful of that.

Seems I recall something about them being able to pick up players from other teams, but they didn't have the choice of the top players from around the league. It may have been that each team could protect so many of their players and the Cowboys could choose from the rest.

 

[Corso]

In 1960 the expansion team that's gathered us together in tribal fashion, was 'allowed' certain preferential considerations in stocking it's roster,,,
That didn't 'fly' all that well with the established teams at the time

Ah... esta clear ahora.

 

[Melonfeud]

Seems I recall something about them being able to pick up players from other teams, but they didn't have the choice of the top players from around the league. It may have been that each team could protect so many of their players and the Cowboys could choose from the rest.

Ya,thanks! I recall it similarly as you laid it out, now

 

[OmerV]

In 1960 the expansion team that's gathered us together in tribal fashion, was 'allowed' certain preferential considerations in stocking it's roster,,,
That didn't 'fly' all that well with the established teams at the time

I FOUND THIS ON WIKIPEDIA

On March 13, 1960, the franchise selected 36 players in an expansion draft. Each of the other 12 NFL teams were allowed to protect 25 players from their 36-man roster. The franchise was then were given 24 hours to select three players from those unprotected by each other team.

 

[Melonfeud]

I FOUND THIS ON WIKIPEDIA

On March 13, 1960, the franchise selected 36 players in an expansion draft. Each of the other 12 NFL teams were allowed to protect 25 players from their 36-man roster. The franchise was then were given 24 hours to select three players from those unprotected by each other team.

Awesome

*I can see why upstart teams wouldn't be well received at the time under those circumstances by their opponents & opposing fan bases

 

[Corso]

Seems I recall something about them being able to pick up players from other teams, but they didn't have the choice of the top players from around the league. It may have been that each team could protect so many of their players and the Cowboys could choose from the rest.

You are correct. The Cowboys had to select the Chaz Greens and the dudes who would be backing up Jeff Heath of all people, for their team.

 

[Sydla]

I understand and fair enough. My only point is that there is a general lack of understanding here that circumstances play a significant role in success and failure. I personally don't think Meyer or Saban will be any more successful here than Garrett. I'm not sure Jimmy would be successful here today.

In saying that you don’t think Saban would have done a better job you are saying Garrett is his equal or maybe better.

Are you also saying Jimmy Johnson wouldn’t have done a better job than Garrett too? In other words, Garrett is also Johnson’s equal?