Would you interview just two people for your job?

[snapper]

I thought about including this in one of the multiple threads on the new hire, but feel it would just get lost and ignored. But I'd like to present this question, if you were hiring for a job, any job, much less the head coach of the Dallas Cowboys. Would you interview just two people and then call it a day?

I'd start with my top prospects (three minimum, but a total list of at least ten) and move on to the next tier if I had serious questions.

 

[John813]

If it was only McCarthy and Lewis, it was just one real interview really.

 

[gjkoeppen]

In the past Jerry has remarked about his admiration of McCarthy. It was speculated by the press then that if Jason was ever fired McCarthy would be his guy.

Several things.

1. Can McCarthy take charge and have a certain amount of autonomy, or will his opinions carry more weight in the final decisions the team makes?

We all think we know this answer. But I do not believe Jerry's stranglehold on the team is as black and white as we all think. His statements that he has the final decision on everything is usually truncated and leaves out where he states he breaks stalemates when there are two minds about an action of player. I have seen the results and surely am a vocal leader here about Jerry's meddling. But I also see this hire as more like a Parcels type hire. An experienced head coach who has a team with a wealth of talent who succeeds from a coach that did not possess the skill set to take that talent to the next level.

Allow me to expound on this idea. Jerry hired Jason with no head coaching experience. He eventually took the play calling away from Jason. He stated he was training Jason. He suffered through three 8-8 seasons, finally getting Jason surrounding talent for Romo. But one could say not enough. Surely history points fingers at the defense. My belief is Jason did not have either the complete understanding of his coaching requirements, or was too much of a milque toast to stand up and tell Jerry we need to improve on defense, get me the tools I need. Or he was so offensive minded he felt he could win with a great offense. Which speaks to ego.

McCarthy has a Super Bowl trophy at GB. One might argue his talent level afforded him his success. But truthfully, how far away is this version of the Cowboys? And won't McCarthy carry a bit more rhythm in the talent acquisition department, and won't his wins - the final arbiter of all coaches - allow him to have a heavier hand in decisions to improve this talent?

2. Will McCarthy level up to new innovations on both sides of the ball from his final few years as the head coach of GB?

Even with Rodgers, the head coach has to put people in position to succeed. The argument flying right now is Rodgers bailed him out of his wrongheadedness and perhaps antiquated ideas of offense. It's still too early to tell. But surely a thinking man would reflect on the decisions made and the results achieved and cobble a more direct path to success if his last tenure ended in failure.

I don't believe he is a one trick pony. Out from under the pressures he has had time to think on what was and how he would do it differently.

Here at the Zone, I'm certain we have quite a few people who play golf. Don't you reflect on your last game and how you would play shots differently to achieve a better score?

Why should McCarthy be different?

3. McCarthy comes from the West Coast offense. How will Dak perform in this offensive scheme?

I discount the people on this board who rail on Dak. People want to put blame on someone for their disappointment. So that question is more nebulous since we truly have nothing to base an opinion on. But truly Dak will need to get more accurate of the West Coast five yard pass and 40 yard RAC is the staple. We'll also need to accept the passing game is the running game and both Zeke and Pollard will be catching lots of balls.

My opinion is if you can get either one of those guys in the open with the ball out on the edge, that has to be a good thing.

But, I do not think the West Coast offense demands a Rodgers type of QB to be successful.

McCarthy has run a west coast but not a strict west coast offense. He had a receiver, Jordy Nelson that except for his last year with the packers, 2017 and his first couple, averaged anywhere from 13 - 18 yards per catch and was the packers leading receiver in catches all of the years except his last and first couple

None of us know for sure what his Cowboys offense will look like now and it's hard for me to think that a coach with his success would completely abandon the running game the Cowboys have. I don't think he'll lean on it as much as Garrett did but I doubt he will throw out an effective part of the game just to throw 5 yard passes. Unless the defense gets some help, it will still be in the Cowboys best interest to get a lead and use as much of te clock as they can limiting the amount of time the defense is on the field.
.

 

[gjkoeppen]

I think it first came from Sports Media Group, but I can't swear to it, Charlie.

So no actual quotes from the giants. Just someone's speculation AGAIN.
.

 

[Stash]

I'd start with my top prospects (three minimum, but a total list of at least ten) and move on to the next tier if I had serious questions.

At least engage in a thorough process. They did this *** backwards. Took forever to handle the firing and then literally hired the next guy oveenight. The chair wasn't even cold.

 

[gjkoeppen]

25 years.

Boo hoo hoo stasheroo's not getting his way again with the Cowboys. Get over it.
.

 

[McKDaddy]

Can't nobody replace me ..... so wouldn't matter

 

[stuckindc]

In the past Jerry has remarked about his admiration of McCarthy. It was speculated by the press then that if Jason was ever fired McCarthy would be his guy.

Several things.

1. Can McCarthy take charge and have a certain amount of autonomy, or will his opinions carry more weight in the final decisions the team makes?

We all think we know this answer. But I do not believe Jerry's stranglehold on the team is as black and white as we all think. His statements that he has the final decision on everything is usually truncated and leaves out where he states he breaks stalemates when there are two minds about an action of player. I have seen the results and surely am a vocal leader here about Jerry's meddling. But I also see this hire as more like a Parcels type hire. An experienced head coach who has a team with a wealth of talent who succeeds from a coach that did not possess the skill set to take that talent to the next level.

Allow me to expound on this idea. Jerry hired Jason with no head coaching experience. He eventually took the play calling away from Jason. He stated he was training Jason. He suffered through three 8-8 seasons, finally getting Jason surrounding talent for Romo. But one could say not enough. Surely history points fingers at the defense. My belief is Jason did not have either the complete understanding of his coaching requirements, or was too much of a milque toast to stand up and tell Jerry we need to improve on defense, get me the tools I need. Or he was so offensive minded he felt he could win with a great offense. Which speaks to ego.

McCarthy has a Super Bowl trophy at GB. One might argue his talent level afforded him his success. But truthfully, how far away is this version of the Cowboys? And won't McCarthy carry a bit more rhythm in the talent acquisition department, and won't his wins - the final arbiter of all coaches - allow him to have a heavier hand in decisions to improve this talent?

2. Will McCarthy level up to new innovations on both sides of the ball from his final few years as the head coach of GB?

Even with Rodgers, the head coach has to put people in position to succeed. The argument flying right now is Rodgers bailed him out of his wrongheadedness and perhaps antiquated ideas of offense. It's still too early to tell. But surely a thinking man would reflect on the decisions made and the results achieved and cobble a more direct path to success if his last tenure ended in failure.

I don't believe he is a one trick pony. Out from under the pressures he has had time to think on what was and how he would do it differently.

Here at the Zone, I'm certain we have quite a few people who play golf. Don't you reflect on your last game and how you would play shots differently to achieve a better score?

Why should McCarthy be different?

3. McCarthy comes from the West Coast offense. How will Dak perform in this offensive scheme?

I discount the people on this board who rail on Dak. People want to put blame on someone for their disappointment. So that question is more nebulous since we truly have nothing to base an opinion on. But truly Dak will need to get more accurate of the West Coast five yard pass and 40 yard RAC is the staple. We'll also need to accept the passing game is the running game and both Zeke and Pollard will be catching lots of balls.

My opinion is if you can get either one of those guys in the open with the ball out on the edge, that has to be a good thing.

But, I do not think the West Coast offense demands a Rodgers type of QB to be successful.

Dak seemed to do pretty well when he was throwing short passes..ad the team played well during that time..so if the WC Offense is short 5 yard passes ...then seemingly it should fit well...5 yard passes to Zeke and Pollard in open space is is a good recipe.

 

[snapper]

At least engage in a thorough process. They did this *** backwards. Took forever to handle the firing and then literally hired the next guy oveenight. The chair wasn't even cold.

I'd be curious to know how MM answered following questions during his interview:

1. Can you work with Prescott as your QB? What will you do to make him better?
2. What will you do to improve the defense? Who will be you DC?
3. Which players currently on the roster can you win with? Which players must go?

 

[johneric8]

This thread is setting us up to be trolled by a stupid question.. I've hired many people to work under me, and there have been times where time was of the essence. If I found someone that ticked all boxes and I knew I was lucky to have them, I would most certainly end the search. Also, lots depends on how much you already know about the potential hire.

 

[KJJ]

I thought about including this in one of the multiple threads on the new hire, but feel it would just get lost and ignored. But I'd like to present this question, if you were hiring for a job, any job, much less the head coach of the Dallas Cowboys. Would you interview just two people and then call it a day?

A persons resume will tell you a lot on whether you want to waste your time with them. Jerry wanted a proven head coach and McCarthy was probably the best candidate out there. Jerry likely had his sights set on McCarthy early on and didn’t waste any time making the move once Garrett was terminated. It’s not like Jerry hasn’t given this a lot of thought with the way this past season went.

 

[gimmesix]

And the organization had no problem with you hiring that first interview and ending the process right there?

No. Why would they?

If you find a good candidate for the job you are offering, it doesn't seem too smart to me to essentially say, "Hold on, while I check if I can find a better candidate." The person is actively looking for a job and might be quickly picked up by the next one to interview him or her.

In fact, I've had that happen before. I had a good, but not perfect, candidate interview and decided to keep looking. I had no better candidates seek the job and lost that good one because I hesitated.

 

[gimmesix]

A persons resume will tell you a lot on whether you want to waste your time with them. Jerry wanted a proven head coach and McCarthy was probably the best candidate out there. Jerry likely had his sights set on McCarthy early on and didn’t waste any time making the move once Garrett was terminated.

As far as proven NFL coaches go, I'd say that McCarthy clearly had the best resume.

 

[Stash]

No. Why would they?

If you find a good candidate for the job you are offering, it doesn't seem too smart to me to essentially say, "Hold on, while I check if I can find a better candidate." The person is actively looking for a job and might be quickly picked up by the next one to interview him or her.

In fact, I've had that happen before. I had a good, but not perfect, candidate interview and decided to keep looking. I had no better candidates seek the job and lost that good one because I hesitated.

Because hiring the first candidate shows a lack of thoroughness and leads any impartial observer and other candidates to the conclusion (many times rightly), that the actual process was a farce and the decision was already made. I've seen plenty of people get into real trouble based on that practice.

 

[jaythecowboy]

Some jobs you barely have to interview for at all. All you have to do is check the boxes of what they want and you're in.

 

[wileedog]

Jerry wanted a proven head coach and McCarthy was probably the best candidate out there.

This is probably the bottom line. Jerry just wasted the last 10 years trying to 'groom' a new young coach He also believes this roster is built to win now. The idea that he was going to turn the team over to a college coach or a young, inexperienced coordinator was probably always wishful thinking.

In that light, there really aren't too many other coaches available out there with McCarthy's post-season experience and a ring to show for it.

 

[KJJ]

As far as proven NFL coaches go, I'd say that McCarthy clearly had the best resume.

He had the best resume and he won’t be looked at as a yes man or puppet.

 

[seamus18]

I see it as Mike McCarthy is the first proven winning NFL coach that Jerry has hired since Bill Parcell. Good enough for me right now. Enough reaches.

 

[KJJ]

This is probably the bottom line. Jerry just wasted the last 10 years trying to 'groom' a new young coach He also believes this roster is built to win now. The idea that he was going to turn the team over to a college coach or a young, inexperienced coordinator was probably always wishful thinking.

In that light, there really aren't too many other coaches available out there with McCarthy's post-season experience and a ring to show for it.

It’s obvious he didn’t want to bring in another coach that he had to groom. McCarthy has had success at the NFL level and has a lot of experience.

 

[SackMaster]

You cite these as if they're good examples of success.

And you go through the process, the Cowboys went through the motions. And just two at that. And one simply to comply with the Rooney Rule.

This isn't about Garrett. It's about rushing right into the next guy as if this were a game of musical chairs.No, that's dismissive and false.

You know it and I know it. I already told you that I'm capable of taking emotion out of it and it's still bad decision making. But that blows your theory to **** so you ignore it.

Who is to say the Cowboys did not go through the process? There were rumors that well before the season ended that the Cowboys were looking into several people as possible head coaches. Just like a hiring manager would go through and reject resumes, maybe the front office had a set of qualifications that many of the media / fan "favored" HC replacements did not match. Therefore there was no point in wasting time.

The ONLY way you have a valid point is if you were a actual part of the Dallas Cowboys hiring process. If not, you are the one who has a faulty "theory". As someone who has taken part of the hiring process on both ended in a few different business sectors, I can tell you that the best interviewing processes is a short and sweet one. Rarely does a company pick a bad employee if they go with their instincts.

So I got to ask, if the Cowboys interviewed 150 people and still hired the first guy they interviewed in McCarthy, you would not be complaining?

Is that REALLY your issue?

I suspect it is not because the more you post the more you sound like a whiny child who did not get their way, no matter how much you deny it.