News: Bob Sturm: Why I was so wrong about Cowboys coach Jason Garrett

[CowboysFaninHouston]

I'm sorry, do you have some kind of inside connection with the team or Jerry? You are a fan just like me, so you are privy to the same facts or statements that I am. Which you then draw interpretation. Now there is no doubt that you are biased towards Garrett and I am biased against. However, when most of the fan base, the owner, the results and the person himself show errors and admissions, then that pretty much certifies it. Just like most of the fans think Garrett did a great job last year. He did. He was able to just focus on what he does well. But I am under no illusions that this was all part of a process. IF Garrett was running the offense last year and Linehan was still in Detriot, this team would NOT have gone 12-4. Now that is my opinion, but it is based on 8 year of watching him coach and FACTUAL results.

ahhhh, excuse me. doesn't the same question apply to you? do you have some kind of an inside connection with Jerry and Stephen? you often seem to speak as if you know what jerry really meant and that you know of facts of things that have happened that nobody else knows....

so is you beef with garrett about him as an OC or as a HC? you seem to mix the two up quite frequently.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

That is your opinion.

Garrett failed because he was terrible at being and OC. We missed the playoffs all 3 years in part because he got out coached every week. And it was definitely every week. Game plans were poor, the team was ill prepared and penalty prone. The in game or half time adjustments were bad or non existent. With a franchise QB like Romo and the fire power we had on offense, this team should have made the playoffs all 3 years. And no doubt he killed Wades coaching tenure to some degree with the way he called the game. Lord knows that Wade would have NEVER picked Garrett as his OC and would have certainly fired his overwhelmed butt a year or two into this had he had the power to do so.

8-8 is failure in my book. You must have really low standards. This was NOT a low talent roster on a rebuild. This team definitely had a enough talent to make the playoffs and had a franchise QB in the prime of his career the entire time. Witten, Dez, Owens, pro bowl lineman, Ware, ect....ect.... And the NFC East was generally week the last 4 years. Not the mention the team caved in December EVERY year under Garrett.

To me that is failure. But hey, to you, he was doing great right? Higher standards.

yet they ended up 8-8 and were in the playoff hunt all three years in the last week of the season, two of the games being played away and one of the games with a back up QB. how could he be out coached every week and still win 8 games and be a playoff contender? specially when everyone and the same media and fans you like to quote, had predicted 4-12 to 6-10 at best in those three years? isn't it exceeding expectations when you beat what everyone predicts?

and you outlined a few players, but failed to mention the horrible defenses we had. you point to ware, yet failed to mention he was injured including that game against the Commanders where he played with one arm and couldn't tackle. you failed to mention the team specially the defense suffered a large number of injuries two years ago and we had one of the worst all time defenses. yes, one of the worst all time. yet the offense carried the team to an 8-8 record. you want to pin everything on offense and garrett,, yet in all of this never mentioned the team's defensive failures and how wade who was supposed to be this defensive guru left the tank so empty we had people off the street starting for the team.

yeah, lets conveniently forget facts that don't suit your argument.

its called spinning

btw, wade is a 3 time failed HC. facts speak for themselves. he screwed up the cowboys. that's a fact. and wade needed the most help in picking all of his coaches.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

There is no comparison at all. Two different teams and different situations. And if you look at JUST record when making a decision, then you have already missed the boat. Neither Belichick or Carrol made the coaching blunders that Garrett has made. Not even close.

For you to even imply that Garrett is in the same class as Bellicheck or Carroll is an embarrassment to those two fine coaches. And to use the word GREAT to describe Garrett is a complete joke.

oh, how convenient. I guess it doesn't suit your argument. the fact is that at the same juncture, those head coaches had the same opportunities to draft, acquire players for a long period in forming a team to fit their philosophy. they had the same opportunities to hire their staff and pull things together. yet they didn't.

and let me ask you since you spoke so as a matter of factly. did you watch carroll coach games? all of those games? week in week out? did you watch bilicheck coach the browns? week in week out? how do you so as a matter of factly state that they didn't have blunders? didn't carol get fired? he had two 6-10 seasons. he lost 10 games. he took over a new England playoff reasy team and in three years went from 10-6 to 8-8. guess who followed Carroll as new England head coach?

so explain why the record doesn't matter? is it because it doesn't suit your argument and disproves all you have said? please spin for the forum.....

 

[Dodger12]

facts are facts. results matter. results are garrett has never had a losing season as a head coach, despite lack of talent. facts are that garrett has executed on his plan while wade flushed this team down the toilet.

Yes, facts are facts. Unless you're a Garrett shill. Then we find these unique standards to define success like "never had a losing season." I've never heard that being used as a barometer to measure a HC with a franchise QB until folks like you pulled it out of a hat. Talk about spinning. No one spins better than those folks who struggle to defend Garrett's failures as a HC.

facts are that the anti garrett crowd will forever only point to not running the ball as the only reason that garrett is not an OC.

Well, that and also the fact of his poor clock management and poor situational play calling. He was an amateur. He was afforded the ability to learn on the job for the past 7 years while blowing games in historical fashion that had never been witnessed in the history of this franchise. Yes, results should matter.

garrett has forgotten more about football in one day, that you have learned your entire life. that my friend is a fact you can take to the bank.

And Wade Phillips has forgotten more about football in one day than you or I would ever learn in a lifetime. You can take that to the bank to. But that certainly didn't stop you from being critical of Wade so I'm not sure why you should feel that gives Garrett some defense from criticism. It's called consistency but those things only apply to Garrett in your world.

 

[Dodger12]

oh, how convenient. I guess it doesn't suit your argument. the fact is that at the same juncture, those head coaches had the same opportunities to draft, acquire players for a long period in forming a team to fit their philosophy. they had the same opportunities to hire their staff and pull things together. yet they didn't.

Those coaches didn't inherit a franchise QB which is the hardest position (maybe in all of sports) to find. When coaches have a franchise QB, they either win or get fired. Unless you're Garrett of course because you're building "something."

so explain why the record doesn't matter? is it because it doesn't suit your argument and disproves all you have said? please spin for the forum.....

You're right; it should matter unless you're defending Garrett. Then that argument goes out the window. But let me take a stab and answer the question.......because it was some "process?" Because they were building something but just didn't have the time to finish?

And you do realize that Pete Carroll in NE went 10 and 6, 9 and 7 and 8 and 8 with 2 playoff appearances and a shot at the playoffs in 1999 but slid in the second half of the season to finish 8 and 8 (sound familiar). But for some franchises, that's not good enough....unless you're Dallas and a Garrett shill. Then it's defendable. Oh, and Carroll never had a losing season in NE either but was still fired........

 

[BigStar]

Those coaches didn't inherit a franchise QB which is the hardest position (maybe in all of sports) to find. When coaches have a franchise QB, they either win or get fired. Unless you're Garrett of course because you're building "something."



You're right; it should matter unless you're defending Garrett. Then that argument goes out the window. But let me take a stab and answer the question.......because it was some "process?" Because they were building something but just didn't have the time to finish?

And you do realize that Pete Carroll in NE went 10 and 6, 9 and 7 and 8 and 8 with 2 playoff appearances and a shot at the playoffs in 1999 but slid in the second half of the season to finish 8 and 8 (sound familiar). But for some franchises, that's not good enough....unless you're Dallas and a Garrett shill. Then it's defendable. Oh, and Carroll never had a losing season in NE either but was still fired........

No one should be proud of a 4 year "process" with a franchise QB wasting away. This single aspect seems to be left out of the equation when supporting JG's miscues prior '14 (not to mention my main gripe against JG). Romo's career is allowed to wait, etc. and BB/Carroll definitely weren't afforded top 5 QBs in their first coaching stints either

Bledsoe probably should have been tbh but trowing motion/pocket awareness doomed him (still a decent QB; Carroll did better than JG in this regard and can't be disputed by way of record). This is futile though (both sides will still get their way (end result), just some think another HC may add more in terms of X's and O's, etc.), we're going to support him going forward and the team should be able to retain Lin/Rod with high salaries alone (just renewed, but still)considering their failures as HCs, etc.

 

[Primetime42]

No one should be proud of a 4 year "process" with a franchise QB wasting away. This single aspect seems to be left out of the equation when supporting JG's miscues prior '14 (not to mention my main gripe against JG). Romo's career is allowed to wait, etc. and BB/Carroll definitely weren't afforded top 5 QBs in their first coaching stints either

Bledsoe probably should have been tbh but trowing motion/pocket awareness doomed him (still a decent QB; Carroll did better than JG in this regard and can't be disputed by way of record). This is futile though (both sides will still get their way (end result), just some think another HC may add more in terms of X's and O's, etc.), we're going to support him going forward and the team should be able to retain Lin/Rod with high salaries alone (just renewed, but still)considering their failures as HCs, etc.

Drew Bledsoe and Vinny Testaverde were not scrubs.

 

[BigStar]

Drew Bledsoe and Vinny Testaverde were not scrubs.

 

[Primetime42]

Nice thought, but poor execution in not using the quote that accompanies this.

 

[BigStar]

Nice thought, but poor execution in not using the quote that accompanies this.

Was a late night...El Paso, "I remember spending a month there one night" Mainstream show

 

[CowboyRoy]

Fascinating. Here again are your words:
Your reference of "1 good year" is to 2014. You conditionally state that Garrett's development as a great head coach would require "more" to convince you. Logically, your condition depends on the team producing "more." Your condition is contingent upon the team producing "more" during the 2015 season.

Thus, the earliest opportunity for your condition to convince you about Garrett being a great head coach is at the conclusion of the team's 2015 season. Hey, it's your thoughts that directed your fingers to type your condition. Even so, you illogically keep rehashing everything that has formulated your opinion about Garrett to this point. Just like you have done throughout this thread. Just like your response to my statement:
CowboyRoy, how can the team produce similar or better results (e.g. "more") beyond last season if the team has not had an opportunity to play an additional season at the very least?

Illogical. My reply had zero to do with your current expectations, your personal opinions of Garrett's or the team's limitations, past offensive performance, lack of performance, etc. It had everything to do with stating I do not believe you will ever be convinced and subsequently declare Garrett a "great head coach." Additionally, it is illogical for you to provide commentary about your modified opinion of Garrett when the team has not yet played an additional season.

Admittedly, I cannot see the future but I doubt I will ever be proven wrong. That's it for me. Continue your rants about Garrett with my blessing. Your unchanging narrow-mindedness is taxing enough to push me back to the sidelines of this latest transparent Garrett suckfest.

My view is based on the way Garrett has coached. I knew nothing about Garrett as a coach when he came here. It was a clean slate. He lost me with the way that he coached this offense, and then this team as the OC/HC. He has a lot to prove. Especially since he has screwed up so much since he has been here. It was quite obvious that Garrett was in way over his head when Jones hired him. These are also Jones own words two years ago when talking about the team suffering at the hands of Garrett learning.

Now maybe you are the type of guy that loves everything Cowboy no matter what. Or maybe you are just the type of fan to give everyone and everything the benefit of the doubt. Sorry pal, that's not me. You want to talk about almost anything NOT Garrett on the Cowboys and I will be all smiles. Not Garrett.

Now the problem with your one more winning season is that you assumed I meant it would take more than one "winning season". Its much more beyond record for me. I want to see Garrett coach properly. Fortunately for the Cowboys, we will no longer have to see Garrett bumble the offense. And to some degree, at least for me, Garrett has proven that he is already a bad coach in my mind. Now having him do less is working. But how do I give a guy credit for doing less and the team taking the next step because of it.

If we win a championship then no doubt Garrett will deserve some credit. Because even though to some degree in my mind, it will be in spite of him, credit will be deserved. He obviously does SOME things very well. As long as he is kept in that small box, we will be fine.

As far as wrong, ALL Garrett supporters have already been proven wrong. 8 years of wrong.

 

[CowboyRoy]

garrett as OC and play caller produced 5 top 10 finishes coupel of top 5...yeah he sucks as an OC.

garrett took over a team that was 11-5? which team? oh, the team that wade inherited and failed to make better. the team that got schooled by the giants and couldn't make a simple stop in the final two minutes of the game. the team that ended up 1-7 and was so deployed of talent that there were college teams with more talent.

facts are facts. results matter. results are garrett has never had a losing season as a head coach, despite lack of talent. facts are that garrett has executed on his plan while wade flushed this team down the toilet. facts are that garrett as an OC has consistently produced top 10 offense.

facts are that the anti garrett crowd will forever only point to not running the ball as the only reason that garrett is not an OC. fcts are that you or your couple of brothers on this board have never been to produce a single fact to back up any assertions you have made and constantly spin things and avoid directly answering any questions the multitude of posters on this board have asked you.

garrett has forgotten more about football in one day, that you have learned your entire life. that my friend is a fact you can take to the bank.

all the jibberish I have read on your posts only make you into a clown. proof enough.

Any fool with Romo at QB, Dez, Owens, Witten, Murray can have a top offense statistically with yards. No great feat. That offense was already top notch before he got here. What he did was transform a great offense into a one dimensional, uncreative, penalty ridden, non running, red zone inefficient offense. Now if you cant see the difference in those two things beyond the ability to score or rack up yards, then its no wonder you remain clueless in your analysis. If you want to see results, just look at the record and the fact we couldnt make the playoffs.

 

[CowboyRoy]

what does a running game have to do with success of a team? 5 of the top 10 running teams didn't even make the playoffs last year. so your assertion that we need to have a strong running game to be successful is far from reality and its the only thing all these anti-garrett crowd keep pointing to.

facts are this team blossomed under garrett and his leadership. can't deny that.

LOL....This team blossomed as soon as Garrett was reduced to fanny patting figure head. When a real offensive mind took over the offense we blossomed. Facts are stubborn things. Nothing to do with Jason Garrett.

Less Jason Garrett=6 more wins.

And as far as the running game, there are other facets to a team then running the ball. You combine a strong run game with Romo and the passing game and you will have a much better team. Oh wait, you just saw the results last year. Still dont get it? Well maybe you just DONT GET IT!!

 

[CowboyRoy]

what does a running game have to do with success of a team? 5 of the top 10 running teams didn't even make the playoffs last year. so your assertion that we need to have a strong running game to be successful is far from reality and its the only thing all these anti-garrett crowd keep pointing to.

facts are this team blossomed under garrett and his leadership. can't deny that.

If you cant see how a running game can help a team, then you are nothing short of _______. Fill in the blank for yourself.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Belichek is loved by his players as well. So much for another of your theories.

LOL.........Coaching is more than liking players or them liking you. Its like I am talking to a mentally handicapped child throwing a fit.

If you cant see the difference between a Bellicheck and Garrett or why Bellicheck is such a great coach then its no wonder you dont get it.

Honestly, if you think Garrett is Bellicheck, then enjoy being clueless. More power to you. Ignorance is truly bliss. LOL

 

[CowboyRoy]

wade had experience. he was also a failure (and now three times). what experience did John Harbaugh have? what experience did Bilicheck have when he became head coach of the browns? if teams hired head coaches with experience only, we woul dhave a league of head coaches that are 90+ and some trying to coach from the beyond.

this was probably your dumbest post so far.

and in seven years he produced 4 top 10 offenses. a team that hasn't had a losing record in 4 years. yeah.....not worth it....

Here, let me clue you in to how this usually works. Most coaches go into college coaching and have some success there before they come to the NFL.

Garrett did what exactly? He was the QB coach for a few years before Jones hired him. Had never been a head coach at ANY level. Not the NFL, college, Highschool, or pop warner.

And it certainly showed here in Dallas. When the owner himself tells us that we have suffered through his growing pains, then unfortunately that is the kiss of death for you. No arguing any more. Jones was just stating the obvious. Facts are stubborn things aren't they?

And last time I checked, Bellicheck had 4 SB rings? And you continue to compare Garrett to him. LOL

But keep it coming. Blowing your nonsense out of the water is becoming a full time job for me. FYI...Notice all the likes I keep getting on my posts?

 

[Rockport]

LOL.........Coaching is more than liking players or them liking you. Its like I am talking to a mentally handicapped child throwing a fit.

If you cant see the difference between a Bellicheck and Garrett or why Bellicheck is such a great coach then its no wonder you dont get it.

Honestly, if you think Garrett is Bellicheck, then enjoy being clueless. More power to you. Ignorance is truly bliss. LOL

You must be drunk or on drugs. I never said Garrett is Belichek. LOL!

 

[CowboyRoy]

one good year? I say the previous three were also good years. going 8-8 while completely turning a team over and remaining competitive is always good. those are facts my son. facts which you like to skip.

(don't forget you haven't mentioned garrett didn't run the ball enough in about 10 posts, so you are due).

the media and fans bashing garrett doesn't have anything to do with facts for the team. and you want to quote double speak jerry? I can throw you a few jerry quotes. like how he wanted Manziel and had the card in his hand and was ready to turn it in. he has a long list of quotes and meddling that are all FACTS as you said.

and garrett has consistently produced top 10 offenses. not sure why that fact is lost on you (this is your clue to jump in on the he didn't run the ball enough).

and since you are into quotes. didn't linehan say garrett told him he wants to run the ball like they did in the 90's. or did that quote get lost in the shuffle somewhere.

and contrary to your drivel. not any fool can run an offense and score because they have talent. do you really want me to dig up the failures in head coaching..... this is the kind of drivel that people like you post and then later quote as facts, but its far far far from any fact anyone with the slightest knowledge of football knows. this is the kind of drivel that you use to bash garrett. its called spinning.

that same linehan you love to point to so frequently sucked as a head coach and struggled offensively and wouldn't run the ball. and he had full control. so was it linehan? or was it garrett's demands and the team he handed to Linehan?

LOL........yah, thats because you have low standards obviously. All 3 years we had to win one more game to make the playoffs and failed miserably. Out coached. And every one of those years Garrett bumbled at least two or 3 games with his coaching.

Buy hey "what great years those were". LOL

 

[DallasEast]

My view is based on the way Garrett has coached. I knew nothing about Garrett as a coach when he came here. It was a clean slate. He lost me with the way that he coached this offense, and then this team as the OC/HC. He has a lot to prove. Especially since he has screwed up so much since he has been here. It was quite obvious that Garrett was in way over his head when Jones hired him. These are also Jones own words two years ago when talking about the team suffering at the hands of Garrett learning.

Now maybe you are the type of guy that loves everything Cowboy no matter what. Or maybe you are just the type of fan to give everyone and everything the benefit of the doubt. Sorry pal, that's not me. You want to talk about almost anything NOT Garrett on the Cowboys and I will be all smiles. Not Garrett.

Now the problem with your one more winning season is that you assumed I meant it would take more than one "winning season". Its much more beyond record for me. I want to see Garrett coach properly. Fortunately for the Cowboys, we will no longer have to see Garrett bumble the offense. And to some degree, at least for me, Garrett has proven that he is already a bad coach in my mind. Now having him do less is working. But how do I give a guy credit for doing less and the team taking the next step because of it.

If we win a championship then no doubt Garrett will deserve some credit. Because even though to some degree in my mind, it will be in spite of him, credit will be deserved. He obviously does SOME things very well. As long as he is kept in that small box, we will be fine.

As far as wrong, ALL Garrett supporters have already been proven wrong. 8 years of wrong.

There can no longer be any doubt. These replies to me have been examples of either conscious avoidance or awareness deficit. It's fascinating regardless of which one is the true answer.

CowboyRoy, would you do me the honor of re-reading each of my previous posts that I directed to you and reply again based on the already established conversation? Just for the heck of it. Think of it as... indulging my curiosity. Thanks so much.

 

[DallasEast]

You must be drunk or on drugs. I never said Garrett is Belichek. LOL!

I could be wrong but I doubt any artificial mind-altering influences are involved. You never said Garrett was Belichek but he may "see" the words nonetheless.