Archer: How similar are Jason Garrett, Pete Carroll?

[SilverStarCowboy]

About 20+ years of experience of coaching at every level of football is the only tiny little difference.

uhmmmm.....the Pink Elephant in the Room ....^^^^^^^^

 

[17yearsandcounting]

uhmmmm.....the Pink Elephant in the Room ....^^^^^^^^

It is more like 30 years of experience. Carroll has been coaching since Garrett was 6.

 

[Risen Star]

About 20+ years of experience of coaching at every level of football is the only tiny little difference.

The biggest difference is their owners.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

A pink elephant with purple polka dots....it's equally both.

The Owner (plus a successful GM) and the experience (or lack there of) both play the part of the devil and the deed.

 

[Nirvana]

One's specialty is defense, and one doesn't have a specialty.

 

[Idgit]

A pink elephant with purple polka dots....it's equally both.

The Owner (plus a successful GM) and the experience (or lack there of) both play the part of the devil and the deed.

How much did the experience help Bill Parcels in the same situation? Not enough. Again, it's not always coaching that causes teams to not get over the hump.

 

[CyberB0b]

How much did the experience help Bill Parcels in the same situation? Not enough. Again, it's not always coaching that causes teams to not get over the hump.

Yes, but it's not like they are mutually exclusive, either. Garrett is learning on the job. Carroll has decades of experience

 

[Idgit]

Yes, but it's not like they are mutually exclusive, either. Garrett is learning on the job. Carroll has decades of experience

This much is true. Carroll's obviously a very accomplished coach with three HC gigs in the NFL and the success he's had in college and now in SEA.

Garrett, though, and the training stuff. It's not like the guy didn't play QB in the league for 15 years. He played in NO, DAL, the CFL, NY, TB, and MIA--under some pretty good coaches and coordinators. Then he retired and joined Nick Saban's staff as QB coach for 2 years before coming over to be our OC from 2007-2010. That's a pretty good CV for a young coach.

I know people like to pile on Jerry's training comment, but, in context, Jerry's said they brought this guy into the organization and developed him from QB coach to HC over the course of 7 seasons. Every first-time coach has some growing pains, but the training in this context refers to the entirety of Jason's time here. And Jerry's right in that. You don't really want to take the gamble you took making a very young QB coach your OC with the express purpose of developing him into a head coach, and then let the guy go after three competitive seasons in the NFCE when you know the team was also beset with injuries on defense and required some rebuilding and depth on both sides of the ball after the slump in 2010.

 

[kevm3]

So Dez Bryant, Demarco Murray, Tony Romo, Jason Witten, Tyron Smith, Travis Frederick, Dwayne Harris, Dan Bailey, Sean Lee and Demarcus Ware aren't good players? What do we need to win, 1st round picks in every position? Coaching matters. Garrett should be slowly rising in the ranks, learning under the best coaches around and honing his craft. Instead, his learning process was disrupted and he was fast tracked by Jerry Jones and the experience gap shows.

If it's all about 'the talent' then explain the Patriots and all of their moving parts. They didn't have a great defense this year and they had a ton of inexperienced guys on their offense and yet they went deep into the play-offs. A combination of brady and belliceck took them that far.

 

[Idgit]

So Dez Bryant, Demarco Murray, Tony Romo, Jason Witten, Tyron Smith, Travis Frederick, Dwayne Harris, Dan Bailey, Sean Lee and Demarcus Ware aren't good players? What do we need to win, 1st round picks in every position? Coaching matters. Garrett should be slowly rising in the ranks, learning under the best coaches around and honing his craft. Instead, his learning process was disrupted and he was fast tracked by Jerry Jones and the experience gap shows.

If it's all about 'the talent' then explain the Patriots and all of their moving parts. They didn't have a great defense this year and they had a ton of inexperienced guys on their offense and yet they went deep into the play-offs. A combination of brady and belliceck took them that far.

If coaching matters as much as you say, how good do you think this year's defense would have been if it played in Seattle? Let's say for giggles Carroll had the two years prior to coach 'em up. Remember he gets the whole defense, and not just Sean Lee, who was hurt, and Demarcus, who was hurt and largely ineffective late in the year. Do you think SEA still wins the big game? Do they win their conference only? Their division even? Be honest.

 

[17yearsandcounting]

How much did the experience help Bill Parcels in the same situation? Not enough. Again, it's not always coaching that causes teams to not get over the hump.

Yeah, coaching and experience certainly played no part in getting a 5-11 team to 10-6 and in the playoffs with Wincy, Hambone and the gang.

 

[kevm3]

Our team is offense heavy, and if we had a head coach like Sean Payton who is an offensive coach, we would have at least been in the play-offs, if not the second round. If coaching doesn't matter, can you explain the drastic transformation of San Francisco under Harbaugh or Kansas City once Andy Reid went over there? Seattle under Carroll? Another Harbaugh winning in Baltimore? You need both talent AND coaching. Without proper coaching and implementing a solid system, those guys in Seattle don't play nearly as well as they do now. A lot of those guys in Seattle are later round picks, so how can Seattle be purely about talent unless we're going to go on record and say Seattle has the best scouting in the league by far?

 

[coult44]

Oh, Carroll is obviously a good coach. I never said he wasn't. The point I'm making is that other factors affect a HC's winning percentage.

What affects a HC's winning percentage is being good. Look at where he's come from, and more importantly the time and expereince that he has. Pete Carrol's coaching Resume makes JG's look embarrassing. More than that, it makes me wonder what in the heck JG is doing being the HC of the Dallas Cowboys. It is PATHETIC that he could be our HC, and I finally understand where JJ's "training" comment came from. This topic got me interested in taking a closer look at where and what Pete Carrol has done in his career. With the career he's had, there was very little luck involved with what he has been able to do with Seattle. When it's all said and done, his "coaching tree" could rival that of most the coaches we call great...

 

[Idgit]

Yeah, coaching and experience certainly played no part in getting a 5-11 team to 10-6 and in the playoffs with Wincy, Hambone and the gang.

The year we had the stingiest defense in the entire league? That was a fantastic job of coaching, both from the coordinator and the head coach. Still, though, he was what his record said he was at the end. Middling under Jerry Jones, with his upgraded rosters and all. Experience and ability are not going to make up for a deficient roster in the long run.

 

[Clove]

This has to be a troll article, it just has to be.

 

[coult44]

Whatever in the world are you talking about, coult? I may disagree with you 100% of the time. That hardly makes me wrong. I think Carroll's a very good coach. I never suggested otherwise.

And thanks for the compliments, but, honestly, I don't mind being opposite the crowd on this issue. I was opposite the crowd in Wade as a DC, too. And on Zimmer as a DC, for that matter. And on Newman's career being done. And on Witten's being done last season. And on the need to sign and expensive OG in the offseason the last two years. When I swim upstream, I've had a habit of being right a lot more often than I have of being wrong. And I don't care what any of the rest of you have to say on the topic. I think Jason Garrett's a good coach who still has some learning to do and who's fighting an uphill battle against a dysfunctional organization (read: Jerry). He's made some mistakes, but the importance of those mistakes on building a successful organization overall get blown completely out of proportion by a fan base that is out for blood because they're tired of losing. So much so, that the biggest things JG has done wrong or should own are actually things that he's getting a pass on (fixing the pass defense and the flip flopping on DCs).

It's backwards, and the fact that a lot of regular posters here think it's not doesn't change my opinion in the least.

Being opposite is cool. Believe me, I know better than most. However, being opposite for the sake of being opposite is phony and creates nothing but instigation.

JG has NO coaching pedigree. Dallas and Jerry Jones is his last stop as a head coach. The Dallas Cowboys fan base is not out for blood. We expect great things because of who we used to be. Dallas used to be considered "THE FRANCHISE". Like the Yankees, or the Lakers. Look what the Yankees have done this off season. Pay attention to what the Lakers will do in the next year or two. They will not settle for mediocrity like we have.. JG being the HC in Dallas is proof for the entire football world to know where this organization is, and what it stands for.

Just for fun read these two pages...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Carroll#Early_life
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Garrett#High_school_career

 

[Little Jr]

This much is true. Carroll's obviously a very accomplished coach with three HC gigs in the NFL and the success he's had in college and now in SEA.

Garrett, though, and the training stuff. It's not like the guy didn't play QB in the league for 15 years. He played in NO, DAL, the CFL, NY, TB, and MIA--under some pretty good coaches and coordinators. Then he retired and joined Nick Saban's staff as QB coach for 2 years before coming over to be our OC from 2007-2010. That's a pretty good CV for a young coach.

I know people like to pile on Jerry's training comment, but, in context, Jerry's said they brought this guy into the organization and developed him from QB coach to HC over the course of 7 seasons. Every first-time coach has some growing pains, but the training in this context refers to the entirety of Jason's time here. And Jerry's right in that. You don't really want to take the gamble you took making a very young QB coach your OC with the express purpose of developing him into a head coach, and then let the guy go after three competitive seasons in the NFCE when you know the team was also beset with injuries on defense and required some rebuilding and depth on both sides of the ball after the slump in 2010.

I don't think I've seen someone use the years a guy played in the league for someones coaching resume. They guy got a oc job after 2 years of being a qb coach. That's not the norm. The guy got a hc gig after 3.5 years of being a oc and 5.5 years of total coaching exp. He wasn't ready and still isn't.

 

[CyberB0b]

Garrett, though, and the training stuff. It's not like the guy didn't play QB in the league for 15 years. He played in NO, DAL, the CFL, NY, TB, and MIA--under some pretty good coaches and coordinators. Then he retired and joined Nick Saban's staff as QB coach for 2 years before coming over to be our OC from 2007-2010. That's a pretty good CV for a young coach.

I strongly disagree. Playing and coaching are two different things, by a mile. The guy had 2 years of NFL coaching experience before being handed the OC job. I would be willing to bet that he is the most inexperienced head coach in the league.

Even "up and comers" like Jay Gruden, Mike McCoy, Chip Kelly, Joe Philbin, Gus Bradley, Chuck Pagano, Bill O'Brien, Mike Pettine, and Doug Marrone have at least a decade of coaching experience under their belt, with a majority of them having 15+ years at different levels of football.

 

[Idgit]

I don't think I've seen someone use the years a guy played in the league for someones coaching resume. They guy got a oc job after 2 years of being a qb coach. That's not the norm. The guy got a hc gig after 3.5 years of being a oc and 5.5 years of total coaching exp. He wasn't ready and still isn't.

Many of the guys he played with were on record at one point or another saying that Jason had been grooming himself to be a coach since his playing days. Again, when Kiffin was hired, he specifically told the story of Jason Garrett during his time in Tampa wanting to go there in order to get a chance to pick his brain about the Tampa Two.

It's hardly a stretch to consider that a guy who's the son of a coach and a scout, who played QB for 15 years in professional football for a half dozen or so different organizations relies on that experience as a head coach.

And, for the record, though people forget, CLE wanted to interview him for OC when he was MIA's QB coach, and they were denied permission. And Baltimore and Atlanta both were interested in the guy as a head coach and he declined their overtures to stay in Dallas as a coordinator. This argument that he didn't earn his promotions and wasn't ready as a result is a bad one that's not supported by the facts.
The problems in Dallas are with the ownership and with the personnel right now, and not necessarily with the head coach. The owner is not going to change. If things are going to get better, it's going to be because we address the personnel properly.

 

[Idgit]

Being opposite is cool. Believe me, I know better than most. However, being opposite for the sake of being opposite is phony and creates nothing but instigation.

I don't necessarily think of you as a poster who's got a lot of experience being opposite, but if you say you like it, I'm not going to argue with you.

I wouldn't know anything about being opposite for the sake of being contrary to a bunch of disgruntled sports fans on the internet. That doesn't sound very cool to me, but then that's not what I'm doing. If you weren't wrong on this topic, then I wouldn't be contrary and you wouldn't be feeling like I'm instigating anything. But unless you realize that just claiming I'm wrong isn't an argument and you'd have to defend your position with something other than quoting unrelated wiki articles, we're probably not going to get far enough that you realize why it is I actually don't agree with you on this one. There are good reasons for it, though. I'm trying to explain them clearly, but that's easier said than done to a group of people who already have their mind made up and who aren't easily convinced by the sorts of things that can be measured and correlated.