2012 Will Come Down to Coaching

[Risen Star]

Of course there are other possibilities. We don't how the other teams' offseasons will go. But none of the other teams are really that good. Of course the NYG are playing great now but they didn't this season and as good as they have been under Coughlin, they have been wildly inconsistent from year to year.

Part of my point, which I didn't clearly lay out, is that we are almost certainly going to have a lot of resources at our disposable to use on filling holes. Not all of them will get filled to anyone's satisfaction but most teams have glaring holes, even those that contend, and definitely every team in this division. Assuming we use most of those resources, we are going to fill enough holes that we have a real shot at the division.

So what if we fail to adequately address our issues with those resources? Does it still come down to coaching?

 

[fanfromvirginia]

Oversimplification does not lead to a better understanding. What does 'it comes down to coaching' even mean?

The overall level of coaching will be the biggest factor in whether or not we win the division. I'm not discouting the other factors, which of course will matter. I just think this will be the biggest.

It's oversimplified to you (and many others I presume) but to me I think the narrow question of whether or not the Cowboys win the division when you look at how the division turned out, the resources available to the team, and the relative likelihood that the FO will utilize those resources.

 

[fanfromvirginia]

So what if we fail to adequately address our issues with those resources? Does it still come down to coaching?

My theory is that the target is large, so to speak. We don't have to do that well to add enough resources to make us competitive (barring a major jump by some other divisional team, which is of course possible.) If we spend, say, 18 million of that available cap space and acquire at least a few FAs, then we will hit on enough improvements to give us enough talent to win the division, if the coaching is good.

Here's another way to put it -- once you spend those resources, the range on the players' overall ability (not taking into account the effects of coaching) will be more narrow than the range of our overall coaching capabilities, which is still about as wide as it can be.

 

[CaptainMorgan]

Of course coaching is important, we all saw how poor coaching effected several games this season. I think JG will learn and improve.

That said this division is going to be stacked next year. The Eagles could be very very good, the Giants may be world champs and the skins will have a shiny new QB. We have to upgrade and in a big way on defense.

 

[fanfromvirginia]

Let me add and clarify and bit more, since my theory is being met with a lot of healthy skepticism. Talent acquisition, and how well we do it during the offseason, is extremely important and will matter a great deal next year and in the coming years. In order to be truly competitive in the NFL next year, we pretty much have to thread the needle. But in order to win the division only, I expect we have a lot more leeway than people are assuming.

Here are the primary factors, in order and IMO, in determining whether or not we win the NFC East next year:

1. Coaching
2. Whether or not another team makes great improvements
3. Injuries
4. Our talent acquisition

If you were to make the same list for our chances at getting to the NFC title game, for example, I would put talent acquisition at the top, without question.

 

[Dodger]

I don't think it's about coaching at all. I think it's about how well the Cowboys improve the talent level of this team. Do they sign another Davis or Roy Williams type? Do they draft more Rogers or Carpenters? Or do they sign and draft guys that can actually produce over an extended period of time?

If we get more of the 2009 type of draft and sign FAs who are a season away from being done, then we're in for more of the same.

 

[fanfromvirginia]

Nobody likes my theory.

:tantrum:

 

[Risen Star]

My theory is that the target is large, so to speak. We don't have to do that well to add enough resources to make us competitive (barring a major jump by some other divisional team, which is of course possible.) If we spend, say, 18 million of that available cap space and acquire at least a few FAs, then we will hit on enough improvements to give us enough talent to win the division, if the coaching is good.

Here's another way to put it -- once you spend those resources, the range on the players' overall ability (not taking into account the effects of coaching) will be more narrow than the range of our overall coaching capabilities, which is still about as wide as it can be.

Ah, so you have an issue with the coaching and that's what this thread is really about.

Okay. Now it makes sense. Because telling fans of a team with a roster with so many holes and clearly inferior to two others in the division that next year it all comes down to coaching seemed ridiculous. I get it now.

 

[jterrell]

Hard to argue that 2011 didn't come down to Coaching. We literally needed one more win to knock the Giants from the playoffs regardless of head to head match ups and we had some shaky 4th quarter clock mgmt in multiple late losses.

All that said JG is not a dummy. He'll have a plan to handle late game mgmt next year. I am not a big fan of Garrett but I don't doubt his intelligence. Almost everyone needs experience to reach their peak performance. Garrett is no different. The mistake was probably made by those thinking he was.


I think Callahan was a tremendous hire. I also think crazy Ryan does a good job. They both can handle making decisions and facing players, fans and media for those decisions. They can be delegated to and provide sounding boards for Garrett. They also both have aspirations of being a head man again. If Garrett has in game issues next year he'll probably be fired and those 2 become leading candidates to replace him. But again, Garrett isn't stupid. He knows he can't have blown 4th quarter leads and a top 5 QB but fail to make playoffs in 2012 is he wants to keep his job.

IMHO we are well positioned for 2012 with a 3rd place schedule, all our draft picks, plenty of cap money to spend and proven veteran coordinators for both offense and defense.

 

[fanfromvirginia]

Ah, so you have an issue with the coaching and that's what this thread is really about.

Okay. Now it makes sense. Because telling fans of a team with a roster with so many holes and clearly inferior to two others in the division that next year it all comes down to coaching seemed ridiculous. I get it now.

Whoa. Slow down there with the reading between the lines. I am on the record as a qualified fan and cautious optimist of both Garrett and Ryan.

 

[Risen Star]

Whoa. Slow down there with the reading between the lines. I am on the record as a qualified fan and cautious optimist of both Garrett and Ryan.

Well then I don't understand the last parapgraph in that post I responded to.

 

[fanfromvirginia]

Well then I don't understand the last parapgraph in that post I responded to.

I'll put it this way. The jury is very much out on JG and RR and there are a lot of widely varying opinions, which could all be correct. They could be great; they could be terrible. More likely, they'll be somewhere in between but exactly where they wind up is of course very, very important and we just don't yet have enough information to say one way or the other.

If I had to be the farm, however, I would bet that given the resources, JG and RR will both prove to be at least good, if not better. In terms of this theory, if I had to bet the farm on whether or not the Cowboys win the division next season *assuming JJ spends much/most of the available cap money*, I'd bet yes. Because I'm cautiously optimistic about these two.

 

[CoCo]

Was the collapse this year considered the players' fault? I don't know about that. There were clear coaching mistakes in the AZ game. And plenty of people blamed Garrett earlier in the year for play calling in DET and, especially, in NE.

I think people who don't like Garrett want to believe that there's a conspiracy to not evaluate him fairly. But the reality is, he's rumored to be doing a great job during the week. He's made some obvious game-day mistakes. He has a decent roster with holes in the secondary and at pass rush and, to a lesser extent, in the interior OL. Otherwise, the jury's still out on how he'll perform and we just have to wait and see what moves we make in the offseason and how his game-day coaching does or doesn't improve.

Some believe he hasn't been fairly evaluated his since his return to the org in 2007.

1. Hired by Jerry, BEFORE the HC was hired.
2. No previous OC experience and very shallow coaching resume in terms of formal years of experience.
3. Got all the credit for a successful 2007 offense when Sparano was also a contributor that year.
4. Took very little heat for team failures during Wade's time here even though he was OC and in some people's eyes close to a co-HC.
5. Has a hand in team failures in 2010, watched Wade take the fall, then received the "gift of bounce" so many interim HCs receive, regardless of their actions.
6. Was hired as HC without a clear mandate of support from his resume and without a thorough review of other HC options by Jerry.
7. Mismanaged the clock vs AZ, and called a TO before a potentioal game-winning kick as requested by his ST coach. We ultimately lost the game.
8. At 7-4 controlled the division but couldn't deliver, a win at AZ, at home vs NYG with the game well in hand late, a home win vs Philly, or a winner-take-all event at NYG.
9. Generally not perceived by his critics as willing to take responsibility for his own mistakes.
10. No great tangible proof that the teams discipline (penalties) has significantly improved.

I think that pretty much covers what the anti-Garrett folks feel.

 

[visionary]

I think Callahan was a tremendous hire. I also think crazy Ryan does a good job. They both can handle making decisions and facing players, fans and media for those decisions. They can be delegated to and provide sounding boards for Garrett. They also both have aspirations of being a head man again. If Garrett has in game issues next year he'll probably be fired and those 2 become leading candidates to replace him. .

:ralph: :ralph:

you just made the best case for keeping garrett

do not want either of those 2 as HC of the cowboys

although i would not put it past jerry to make someone like callahan HC if he does fire garrett