Garrett or Dak to blame?

Jake

Beyond tired of Jerry
Messages
36,067
Reaction score
84,350
So I decided to look at records and teams that Garrett coached and see if Garrett is the reason for losing or if it's because of Dak.....

I didn't use any playoff games, just regular season. I also didn't use GB or division opponents

Saints 2-5
Arizona 1-3
Patriots 0-3
Seattle 2-4
Bills 1-2
Bears 2-3
Panthers 0-3
Falcons 1-3
Chargers 0-2
Broncos 0-2
Jets 0-3

While we do see a couple of good teams on that list, Garrett has struggled against very bad teams.... not just in the Dak era but Romo too. Garrett never beat the Jets, Broncos, Chargers, Panthers or Patriots and could almost add Arizona, Bills and Falcons to that list.

Now let's look at some teams he had winning records against.

Lions 4-2
Colts 2-1
49ers 3-1
Rams 4-1
Bucs 4-1

Dak was the QB that lost the only game in Garrett's time as HC to the Rams and Colts.

Cassel was the QB that lost to the Bucs

Romo was the QB that lost to the Lions twice and the 49ers once.

In closing these things don't tell the entire picture but what it does tell that regardless if Garrett had Romo, Dak or another QB he struggled to beat some bad teams. It's been a coaching issue when you can't beat the Jets in a 10 year span or beat Broncos, Chargers, Panthers, Patriots and might as well say Arizona, Atlanta or the Bills. Dak was the QB that beat Arizona and Atlanta to keep Garrett from being 0-4 against them. Romo was the QB that beat the Bills so Garrett didn't go 0-3 against them like Garrett record against the Jets and Patriots.

Did you happen to consider any other factors, like special teams and defense?:huh:
 

Gangsta Spanksta

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,766
Reaction score
8,775
In a similar fashion, I could post a thread saying "Garrett or Jerrah" which would point all of the blame to Jerrah since the cowboys were losing bad and having negative trends before Garrett was head coach.
 

PUSHfold

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,796
Reaction score
2,333
The defense has been a weakness since the 90s and I put that squarely on Jerry because he's chosen to focus primarily on shiny offensive players.

The organization/ Garrett FINALLY rebuilt the OL in the most painfully slow way possible and began reaping the benefits about the time Romo's body started falling apart. And, again, the defense was a detriment.

In walks Dak with his talents and his faults, helping in some ways and hurting in others. He has been a net negative since Romo left,,, and again, the defense is no help.

Blame Garrett all you want, that's certainly the bandwagon thing to do, he wasn't able to overcome the hurdles, but ultimately it's the GM and the QB who have had more impact.


Wait what? A 4th round QB who walks in to save our 2016 season and goes on to become a top 10 QB with room to grow has been a net negative?

I swear the crap y'all say on this forum sometimes is ridiculous. What's beyond asinine? Is there a word for that? That's what this is.
 

408Cowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,785
Reaction score
6,219
The Cowboys have had a lot of success with Dak as the QB. Their record is 40-24 in the regular season and they've made the playoffs twice in 4 years.

It is impossible that both Dak and Garrett were bad.

Either Dak was better than his record because he had to overcome Garrett and his offense...

OR

Garrett was a super awesome HC and with a great offensive scheme to make the playoffs twice in 4 years with a terrible QB.

Anyone that criticizes Dak is by definition praising Garrett.
Accurate
 

Irvin88_4life

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,442
Reaction score
26,292
Did you happen to consider any other factors, like special teams and defense?:huh:
No I didn't. I did the exercise to show Garrett had never beat the Jets and other teams that have bad records.
 

rnr_honeybadger

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,305
Reaction score
17,074
Most of those losses were also because of the kicker and holding on to that knucklehead. Not to mention Garrett's insanity of kicking into the wind in Foxboro - all because he didn't want to go for it on 4th down.
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
I'm not really sure this methodology shows much.

But Jason Garrett sucked. He was, what, 1-13 without either of those guys? That's more telling than w/l against specific opponents.
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,434
Reaction score
12,208
We do realize that teams are not indefinitely good or bad, right? That they do fluctuate (except the Pats).

Also, both (and more).
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,434
Reaction score
12,208
The Cowboys have had a lot of success with Dak as the QB. Their record is 40-24 in the regular season and they've made the playoffs twice in 4 years.

It is impossible that both Dak and Garrett were bad.

Either Dak was better than his record because he had to overcome Garrett and his offense...

OR

Garrett was a super awesome HC and with a great offensive scheme to make the playoffs twice in 4 years with a terrible QB.

Anyone that criticizes Dak is by definition praising Garrett.

Logical fallacy alert.

No, it is not impossible. They are not mutually exclusive. Unless you want to insult all the other players and suggest they don't matter.
 

PA Cowboy Fan

Well-Known Member
Messages
24,702
Reaction score
50,025
Garrett wasted more talent than any coach I know especially since he had 10 years to do it. Dak still has things to prove and hopefully he'll be able to do it now that he has a coach.
 

charron

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,366
Reaction score
13,726
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
Under Garrett they built an incredible power running offense that spanned 2 QB's. Garretts failure as a HC was not on the offensive side of the ball. His biggest failure is not helping ST or Defense enough. It doesn't matter that Jerry meddled in some of the coaching staff decisions like not allowing his HC to call plays, or promoting Quin to ST coach and not hiring proven coaches that Jerry did say were his decisions. We failed to win and it was time for Jerry to let go and for the most part it sees he is letting the new coach run the show and that is what needed to happen. But there is no reason to not give credit for the guy who helped build a power offense that allowed a late 4th round pick to succeed as a rookie with an average at best defense by leaning on the run game and running an easy route scheme. This style/scheme Garrett used which was considered QB friendly is about to make Dak one of the highest overpaid QB's in history.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
Ultimately it falls to the HC. Does Dak share in it? Sure, he does as does every member of this team. All players make mistakes within games from missed tackles that lead to points, to jumping off sides giving the opponent a 1st down when they should be punting, mistakes on the OL of having a big play called back because of a penalty to WR dropping passes. In the end the one who oversees the team takes the greatest responsibility and that is HC.
 

ConstantReboot

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,218
Reaction score
9,886
The defense has been a weakness since the 90s and I put that squarely on Jerry because he's chosen to focus primarily on shiny offensive players.

The organization/ Garrett FINALLY rebuilt the OL in the most painfully slow way possible and began reaping the benefits about the time Romo's body started falling apart. And, again, the defense was a detriment.

In walks Dak with his talents and his faults, helping in some ways and hurting in others. He has been a net negative since Romo left,,, and again, the defense is no help.

Blame Garrett all you want, that's certainly the bandwagon thing to do, he wasn't able to overcome the hurdles, but ultimately it's the GM and the QB who have had more impact.

Nice try side-stepping Garrett. Guess who is still on the team?
 

Captain-Crash

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,336
Reaction score
33,520
it's everybody else, it's not dak, he's the best ever. it wasn't his fault he missed the trash can with his water cup, the trash can should have been bigger.
 
Top