Remember This Cowboys Team? Let's Talk About Coaching and Talent

stasheroo said:

Apparently some people would rather stick with a proven loser than risk change in an effort to actually get better.

Sad.

Click to expand...

Look, taking all of the passionate fire out of it. Garrett is a decent HC. He is a high quality motivator, he has for a decade kept his locker room behind him. I question that now, but the players are still saying they are behind Coach Garrett. Whatever, I digress.

He has been middle of the road. A middle of the road HC with high caliber talent and coordinators was a recipe that Jerry thought would work. He didn’t make any moves because he could have gambled and gotten a much worse HC.

Puppet theory and jokes aside, I think he felt he had a mid to high level HC, not GOAT level but not bargain bin either and it was the best place to stay.

He was on the roulette table and just kept betting RED all night. And you know what? He broke even. We’ve been about .500 for a decade. It’s time take a real gamble though and place a real bet on a coach that will change this culture and climate and push this talented crew to the championship they can achieve!

The time is now Jerry, push ‘em all in!!
How bout dem Cowboys!!!

daboyzruleperiod said:

That's like saying Dallas hired Switzer & won it all.

Gruden won with Dungy's team just as the Steelers Tomlin won with Cowerds

Click to expand...

Right. That’s my point.

So stick with Garrett and win nothing? what are you driving at? Maybe compete for the division and call it a day. lol There needs to be a long term solution, it's not about what happens in 2020, But the next decade give or take. We already know how the last couple decades went. And that early 90s team was in a complete rebuild. Sure there were some pieces in place, but none of those players mentioned did much of anything before that.

efh313 said:

Look, taking all of the passionate fire out of it. Garrett is a decent HC. He is a high quality motivator, he has for a decade kept his locker room behind him. I question that now, but the players are still saying they are behind Coach Garrett. Whatever, I digress.

He has been middle of the road. A middle of the road HC with high caliber talent and coordinators was a recipe that Jerry thought would work. He didn’t make any moves because he could have gambled and gotten a much worse HC.

Puppet theory and jokes aside, I think he felt he had a mid to high level HC, not GOAT level but not bargain bin either and it was the best place to stay.

He was on the roulette table and just kept betting RED all night. And you know what? He broke even. We’ve been about .500 for a decade. It’s time take a real gamble though and place a real bet on a coach that will change this culture and climate and push this talented crew to the championship they can achieve!

The time is now Jerry, push ‘em all in!!
How bout dem Cowboys!!!

Click to expand...

Jerry had a glorious vision. That family friend and 'adopted son' Jason Garrett would develop into 'his Landry'. And that he would ultimately have a brilliant Super Bowl winning coach for the next 20-years plus. That clearly never materialized and it's tough for Jerry to face facts and disappointment and have to send 'extended family' packing.

daboyzruleperiod said:

That's like saying Dallas hired Switzer & won it all.

Gruden won with Dungy's team just as the Steelers Tomlin, won with Cowhers.

Click to expand...

But Dungys team never won anything. 2-4 in the postseason. Can't compare Switzer to Gruden and what each coach inherited. It's not even close.. Cowboys were arguably the greatest team ever when Switzer got them. Yes there was talent there on the defensive side in TB but they certainly weren't winning Super Bowls. A city that never won a championship. That's all they were in 2002. Just another team that couldn't get over that hump.

Shadowfax said:

Yes, and in 1991, they hired Norv Turner as the offensive coordinator and that changed everything for them.

Click to expand...

I want to understand what you're saying:

I said Jimmy had a great roster and a losing season in '90. You said we hired Norv and got good. Jimmy went to Miami and couldn't win.

Are you saying Norv is why we won? Didn't he go to the Chargers, already a playoff team before he arrived, and not be able to get out of the divisional round, even when they had the one great season while he was HC?

Jimmy Johnson was in YEAR 2 of his coaching career in the pre modern free agency era. What in the world...

Another "It's tough to find * blank and blank* so we have to accept mediocrity!"

Winning organizations don't have this mentality.

LovinItAll said:

I want to understand what you're saying:

I said Jimmy had a great roster and a losing season in '90. You said we hired Norv and got good. Jimmy went to Miami and couldn't win.

Are you saying Norv is why we won? Didn't he go to the Chargers, already a playoff team before he arrived, and not be able to get out of the divisional round, even when they had the one great season while he was HC?

Click to expand...

I am saying that their offense was holding them back under David Shula. They hired Norv and that changed everything. Jimmy had already put everything in place, including a who’s who of talent, but the players will tell you that Norv and Charles Haley put them over the top. They never would have won Super Bowls with David Shula as offensive coordinator, even with Jimmy as head coach.

I never understand why people equate the failure of coordinator as a head coach to being a poor coach overall. Norv was a great coordinator (like Wade Phillips) who was never a great head coach. There are lots of similar examples of the same.

cowboyblue22 said:

the packers don't seem to have had a problem this season after moving on from their head coach

Click to expand...

Stop with the comparison of other teams, please!! The packers don’t have Jerry Jones messing up everything

Shadowfax said:

I am saying that their offense was holding them back under David Shula. They hired Norv and that changed everything. Jimmy had already put everything in place, including a who’s who of talent, but the players will tell you that Norv and Charles Haley put them over the top. They never would have won Super Bowls with David Shula as offensive coordinator, even with Jimmy as head coach.

I never understand why people equate the failure of coordinator as a head coach to being a poor coach overall. Norv was a great coordinator (like Wade Phillips) who was never a great head coach. There are lots of similar examples of the same.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. For the record, I like Norv and loved having him as our OC. He didn't do anything in Minnesota as OC for the Vikings except lose a wildcard game one year, went 4-12 as the OC in Cleveland, had a losing season in SF as OC, couldn't make the playoffs in Miami as OC, and has been a disaster in Carolina as the OC.

Even without Haley, our roster was VERY strong. Are you saying that everything must be perfect to consistently make deep playoff runs?

There are obviously one hit wonder SB teams (win or lose), but our fan base (including me) wants the type of extended excellence that Pats fans currently enjoy and probably now take for granted. I have no idea how to get that, as there has been exactly one coach that has been able to deliver it in the FA era. I might argue that Tomlin seems to be doing a lot with nothing, at least this year.

Here's where your argument seems to be now: We had a SB-caliber roster loaded with future HoF'ers in 1990. We also went 7-9 that year. Haley and Turner arrive and bang, we get red hot, so Turner and Haley were the difference makers. Others give the success of that roster to Jimmy and/or the players.

Or maybe we had such good players that as soon as they matured a little - but before they got too old - we went on a previously unprecedented run. We won a SB with Switzer a year after not winning a SB with Switzer, then we went into a decline as the players aged.

BHendri5 said:

Stop with the comparison of other teams, please!! The packers don’t have Jerry Jones messing up everything

Click to expand...

But they do have Mr. Arron Rodgers

CyberB0b said:

The Rams, Ravens, and 49ers rebuilt in the time Garrett has been the head coach. There's plenty of proof that it doesn't take a decade to turn a team around.

Click to expand...

add Seattle to that group, and dallas usually beats Seattle even in their 1st SB era.
They went downhill and are now back up it seems, 10-2 and looking to be a top 2 seed this year.

LovinItAll said:

The Coach: Jimmy Johnson

Key Roster Names:

QB - Aikman
RB - E. Smith
RB - Moose
WR1 - Irvin
TE - Novacek
OGs - Newton, Gogan
OTs - Tuinei, Cheek
C - Stepnoski

Pretty good offense there, right?

The 1990 Cowboys started off 3-7. There was no social media, but they were getting CRUSHED by the media at the time. They said Johnson was in over his head (that would change just 6 games later), Aikman was being vilified because the offense was pathetic (they score 20 points once in 10 games), etc. Yet, in a terrible NFCE at the time, they managed to win 4 in a row and needed to finish just 8-8 to make the playoffs. Spoiler: Aikman got hurt and we lost the last two, finishing 7-9.

I hold the 90's Cowboys in high regard, maybe one of the best teams ever assembled. Still, good teams and good coaches can have bad years.

You want to switch coaches? Okay. Be prepared for some possible losing, though. Even with a great team, it may take years before another coach gets a team to gel, and many of today's players might be past their peak performing years.

In 1996, I didn't consider our team old and the roster was almost exactly the same as our SB teams. No more SBs, though.

Click to expand...

you are comparing apples to oranges, lol but I see your point, but it just does not fit the current situation with JG and this team.
Are you thinking that this team with JG as HC is on the verge of becoming a SB team???
I have some of the 91 games, and all of the 92 games, and I noticed the same thing , that a lot of the SB team guys were there in 91.
The 91 team had SB potential, but Aikman got hurt in game 10 and was ready to play physically, but not in the groove for playing in the detroit WC game.
They won and got in with buerlien but were not as good as they would have been had Aikman not got hurt and played the whole season.

The other thing was they lost games early in the 91 season that sort of doomed them to the WC level and the 2 SB years they were top seed , play only
2 games at home then the SB.
Had they won enough of those early games to finish top seed, and Aikman not hurt, then they would not have had to play detroit on the road, or even at all.
If they did it would be in Dallas with a Aikman who had played all year.
To me that was the main difference between the 91 and 92 teams.
In 92 Aikman plays whole season and they win more early games and finish top seed.
The also had more time to gel as units off def ST and added norv hailey and some others. But Jimmy preached lets be top seed, play at home, because
that does make a difference, avoid the extra games and or road games.

The 92 team did not look awesome during the season, they did enough to win enough games and then once in playoffs they stepped up
their play and rolled to the SB and rolled over Buffalo. That is a 3 game stretch if your top seed.

Dallas is nowhere near being a SB team right now , they are not on the verge, they are too sloppy and inconsistent, they look great at times,
then play awful. The coaching is pitiful running out of time and not using timeouts is horrible game mgmt, and there is no excuse for JG doing that.
The punt return, the kickoff short but guy in endzone, those are all things that would not happen with jimmy as hc in his 2nd year onward.
JG needs to go elsewhere and be an asst coach for years, then maybe he can learn more of the basic stuff, and as far as common sense I dont
think he has any.

LovinItAll said:

The Coach: Jimmy Johnson

Key Roster Names:

QB - Aikman
RB - E. Smith
RB - Moose
WR1 - Irvin
TE - Novacek
OGs - Newton, Gogan
OTs - Tuinei, Cheek
C - Stepnoski

Pretty good offense there, right?

The 1990 Cowboys started off 3-7. There was no social media, but they were getting CRUSHED by the media at the time. They said Johnson was in over his head (that would change just 6 games later), Aikman was being vilified because the offense was pathetic (they score 20 points once in 10 games), etc. Yet, in a terrible NFCE at the time, they managed to win 4 in a row and needed to finish just 8-8 to make the playoffs. Spoiler: Aikman got hurt and we lost the last two, finishing 7-9.

I hold the 90's Cowboys in high regard, maybe one of the best teams ever assembled. Still, good teams and good coaches can have bad years.

You want to switch coaches? Okay. Be prepared for some possible losing, though. Even with a great team, it may take years before another coach gets a team to gel, and many of today's players might be past their peak performing years.

In 1996, I didn't consider our team old and the roster was almost exactly the same as our SB teams. No more SBs, though.

Click to expand...

you are comparing apples to oranges, lol but I see your point, but it just does not fit the current situation with JG and this team.
Are you thinking that this team with JG as HC is on the verge of becoming a SB team???
I have some of the 91 games, and all of the 92 games, and I noticed the same thing , that a lot of the SB team guys were there in 91.
The 91 team had SB potential, but Aikman got hurt in game 10 and was ready to play physically, but not in the groove for playing in the detroit WC game.
They won and got in with buerlien but were not as good as they would have been had Aikman not got hurt and played the whole season.

The other thing was they lost games early in the 91 season that sort of doomed them to the WC level and the 2 SB years they were top seed , play only
2 games at home then the SB.
Had they won enough of those early games to finish top seed, and Aikman not hurt, then they would not have had to play detroit on the road, or even at all.
If they did it would be in Dallas with a Aikman who had played all year.
To me that was the main difference between the 91 and 92 teams.
In 92 Aikman plays whole season and they win more early games and finish top seed.
The also had more time to gel as units off def ST and added norv hailey and some others. But Jimmy preached lets be top seed, play at home, because
that does make a difference, avoid the extra games and or road games.

The 92 team did not look awesome during the season, they did enough to win enough games and then once in playoffs they stepped up
their play and rolled to the SB and rolled over Buffalo. That is a 3 game stretch if your top seed.

Dallas is nowhere near being a SB team right now , they are not on the verge, they are too sloppy and inconsistent, they look great at times,
then play awful. The coaching is pitiful running out of time and not using timeouts is horrible game mgmt, and there is no excuse for JG doing that.
The punt return, the kickoff short but guy in endzone, those are all things that would not happen with jimmy as hc in his 2nd year onward.
JG needs to go elsewhere and be an asst coach for years, then maybe he can learn more of the basic stuff, and as far as common sense I dont
think he has any.

I'm going to point two examples, one very, very recent and one not so recent to demonstrate just how bad Jason Garret is. I'll keep it brief.

1. 2019 Steelers are 7-5 with their 3rd string QB, 2nd and 3rd string RB, and WRs that would make last year's pre-Amari Cowboys WRs look good. Tomlin has been OUTSTANDING. What happens to Garrett when he loses his QB, but still has pro-bowl talent elsewhere? 4-12 (with 3 wins coming in Romo starts).

2. In 2003, Bill Parcells, in perhaps the greatest coaching job in Cowboys history took a team with Squincy at QB and Troy Hambrick at RB, and went 10-6 and made the playoffs. The defense was terrific (thanks to Parcells/Zimmer). Garret gets this team to 4-12, 5-11 at best.

Garrett is the opposite of the old Bear Bryant saying, "I'll take mine and beat yorn, and take yorn and beat mine." For Garrett it's, "I'll take mine and lose to yorn, and take yorn, and lose to mine."

Garrett is a good judge of offensive talent. He should be in charge of offensive player scouting.

CyberB0b said:

The Rams, Ravens, and 49ers rebuilt in the time Garrett has been the head coach. There's plenty of proof that it doesn't take a decade to turn a team around.

Click to expand...

Exactly. The 5yr rebuilding process died about 19yrs ago.

We see that 90's team as talented by the end results. In 1990 we didn't have a QB or RB playing in their 4th year and the D wasn't finished. That was a young team on the rise that hadn't learned how to win yet. The players you name were on the team but they got much better. So it's apples to oranges because they hadn't yet become house hold names. Now if the 93 team was 6-6 you might have a point.

efh313 said:

Look, taking all of the passionate fire out of it. Garrett is a decent HC.

Click to expand...

If you take all of the "passionate fire," whatever that means, out of it, this is unequivocally false.

He is an active detriment to this team, and has been for his entire tenure.

Future said:

If you take all of the "passionate fire," whatever that means, out of it, this is unequivocally false.

He is an active detriment to this team, and has been for his entire tenure.

Click to expand...

What I mean is that we are all being a bit gratuitous in our assessment of his overall work. In a league where in the past decade there have been clear teams that were losing teams, like the Dolphins and Browns, JG led us to mediocrity. It’s not success but its not failure either. He clearly doesn’t have what it takes to get us over the hump, but I’ll be honest he did enough in enough seasons to keep me going man we are one or two position players away, one or two blown calls away, one or two drop passes, etc, etc, etc...

And that Hope sells...

Enter Jerry the business man.

But that’s a topic for another thread.