Coaching has a bullseye on them now

[Big_D]

Foles, you got to be kidding? He's had 2 good years out of 6. He lost his starting job in Philly, then after getting traded to the rams and a poor year the rams drafted Goff and he knew he lost his starting job again so he asked for his release and got it, then he was signed as a backup for KC with an option for a 2nd year but didn't exerciser it so Foles ended up in Philly again as a backup. So Foles 2nd season he went to the pro bowl and last season he played part of the year and the eagles won the Super Bowl and for those 2 seasons you're proclaiming him some super QB?
.

It was sarcasm. Funny how it takes talent to execute and win, yet proven wrong by this one example of a journeyman winning a super Bowl under quality coaching. Meanwhile if Garrett had Foles, no doubt the team would fold and fall apart. Just the natural order of things.

 

[Sydla]

Foles, you got to be kidding? He's had 2 good years out of 6. He lost his starting job in Philly, then after getting traded to the rams and a poor year the rams drafted Goff and he knew he lost his starting job again so he asked for his release and got it, then he was signed as a backup for KC with an option for a 2nd year but didn't exerciser it so Foles ended up in Philly again as a backup. So Foles 2nd season he went to the pro bowl and last season he played part of the year and the eagles won the Super Bowl and for those 2 seasons you're proclaiming him some super QB?
.

He’s mocking you.

Foles is a perfect example of where a coaching staff can make a difference in game days and in scheming.

 

[Roadtrip635]

It was sarcasm. Funny how it takes talent to execute and win, yet proven wrong by this one example of a journeyman winning a super Bowl under quality coaching. Meanwhile if Garrett had Foles, no doubt the team would fold and fall apart. Just the natural order of things.

You shoulda used sarcasm font, to make it easier.....

 

[Jake0]

It all depends on the circumstances. This wasn’t a playoff team for each of the seven previous seasons. The ones where it was, we didn’t lose the playoff games because of the coaching.

No excuse to lose the game to Green Bay with their 8th, 9th, 10th, and 14th string DBs. Their whole team was ravaged. Losing to Rodgers with one leg.

Remember what Atlanta proceeded to do to them the next week? Absolutely destroyed, which is what Dallas should have done with decent coaching. Game shouldn't have been remotely close. Coaching is to blame I say.

Relying purely on talent and technique is utter trash. Combine the talent/technique with scheme, gameplan, playcalling and you can win championships. So many more coaches have done more with less.

The GREAT picks of Smith/Fred/Martin have been wasted. T Smith is a generational talent and his prime was wasted. The OLine is now expensive and off their rookie deals. Romo's prime was wasted. Dez's prime was wasted. Witten's prime was wasted. Garrett wasted them all.

I could not believe Garrett survived this past offseason. Only can hope he doesn't survive the next.

 

[gjkoeppen]

It was sarcasm. Funny how it takes talent to execute and win, yet proven wrong by this one example of a journeyman winning a super Bowl under quality coaching. Meanwhile if Garrett had Foles, no doubt the team would fold and fall apart. Just the natural order of things.

Actually it happened before with the ravens and Trent Dilfer but that was more of a case of a super defense making up for a below average QB.
.

 

[stilltheguru88]

The passing game is under pressure. When a team shuts down Zeke will Garrett be able to put Dak and the wrs in positions to succeed? It’s easy to say hand the ball to 21 like he did all throughout the documentary. It’s hard when teams with elite defenses take that away.

 

[gjkoeppen]

No excuse to lose the game to Green Bay with their 8th, 9th, 10th, and 14th string DBs. Their whole team was ravaged. Losing to Rodgers with one leg.

Remember what Atlanta proceeded to do to them the next week? Absolutely destroyed, which is what Dallas should have done with decent coaching. Game shouldn't have been remotely close. Coaching is to blame I say.

Relying purely on talent and technique is utter trash. Combine the talent/technique with scheme, gameplan, playcalling and you can win championships. So many more coaches have done more with less.

The GREAT picks of Smith/Fred/Martin have been wasted. T Smith is a generational talent and his prime was wasted. The OLine is now expensive and off their rookie deals. Romo's prime was wasted. Dez's prime was wasted. Witten's prime was wasted. Garrett wasted them all.

I could not believe Garrett survived this past offseason. Only can hope he doesn't survive the next.

When using your example you should have also noted that the same falcon team that destroyed the peckers had the most epic collapse in Super Bowl history losing after having a 25 point lead 18 minutes left to play.

Look I never said that a good game plan and schemes and play calling doesn't help to win games and there are exceptions to everything like Foles, but game in and game out even the best play calling and game plans and schemes don't on their own win games. The players still have to have talent and each player on each play has to do his job to carry out those plays. There have been coaches that were good on one team with talent and then have been with other teams that didn't have the same level of talent and didn't win much of anything.

During most of Romo's years he didn't have the line he had his last year or two and for most of Romo's career he also played on a team with a defense that surrendered more 4th quarter leads than just about any team. The Cowboys got as far as they were going to get because of Romo, Witten and a then young and good Bryant were able to do.
.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Well, that's certainly not an unpopular opinion here.

I don't deny that we could second guess things that happened in the 8-8 seasons that could have turned a game or two around. Those teams weren't playoff caliber rosters, though. We were lucky to be playing relevant football in week 17 each of those seasons.

that should work both ways. Those teams won games that they had no business winning. Historically bad defenses don't have even records typically.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So the difference between Jeff Fisher lead Goff and Mcvay lead Goff was just the qb working a little harder? The game plan had nothing to do with it?

You have no idea what the difference is. You keep trying to backdoor to the conclusion you want but you are nowhere near getting there.

 

[Mr_437]

What changed? JG has squandered talent for many years.

 

[Idgit]

that should work both ways. Those teams won games that they had no business winning. Historically bad defenses don't have even records typically.

I think 2011 and 2012 anyway finished up just about where they should have. 2013 was a team I thought should probably have made the playoffs. That was the year we lost the the NFCN teams, including that DET game we should have won where the coaches bizarrely tried to put Carr/Heath on CJ and he ate their children, and the GB game where Rodgers came back from the long injury and we fell apart when we lost the two ILBs and couldn't stop them in the 2nd half. The whole Callahan play calling debacle. That team was good enough to qualify if they'd beat the Eagles but couldn't do it with Romo out. I don't remember anymore who had the tie-breaker if we'd ended 9-7 tied with PHI having won one of the NFCN games instead of beating them head-head. I buy that team probably ought to have been 9-7. I don't buy 10-6, and, even though it was close, upsetting PHI in week 17 was a tall order.

Either way, the point is that those teams from 2011-2013 were decent, had a great QB, but they weren't great teams. They weren't playoff-lock or even playoff-favorites. They were playoff contenders.

 

[Jake0]

When using your example you should have also noted that the same falcon team that destroyed the peckers had the most epic collapse in Super Bowl history losing after having a 25 point lead 18 minutes left to play.

Look I never said that a good game plan and schemes and play calling doesn't help to win games and there are exceptions to everything like Foles, but game in and game out even the best play calling and game plans and schemes don't on their own win games. The players still have to have talent and each player on each play has to do his job to carry out those plays. There have been coaches that were good on one team with talent and then have been with other teams that didn't have the same level of talent and didn't win much of anything.

During most of Romo's years he didn't have the line he had his last year or two and for most of Romo's career he also played on a team with a defense that surrendered more 4th quarter leads than just about any team. The Cowboys got as far as they were going to get because of Romo, Witten and a then young and good Bryant were able to do.
.

I'm not seeing what the collapse in the super bowl against a very good all around team has to do with the comparison of two teams that had an extreme talent advantage over the Packers, one which blew them out, the other who lost a game they had no business losing.

Talent/Technique are absolutely critical. Not having the proper coaching to utilize said talent wastes it.

Many of Romo's prime years were wasted due to lack of talent unfortunately. He never had an elite defense to back him up.

 

[Diehardblues]

It all depends on the circumstances. This wasn’t a playoff team for each of the seven previous seasons. The ones where it was, we didn’t lose the playoff games because of the coaching.

Not according to the Lynch Mob.

You’d think we have Super Bowl talent that the coaching continues to hold back . Lol

 

[Diehardblues]

I think 2011 and 2012 anyway finished up just about where they should have. 2013 was a team I thought should probably have made the playoffs. That was the year we lost the the NFCN teams, including that DET game we should have won where the coaches bizarrely tried to put Carr/Heath on CJ and he ate their children, and the GB game where Rodgers came back from the long injury and we fell apart when we lost the two ILBs and couldn't stop them in the 2nd half. The whole Callahan play calling debacle. That team was good enough to qualify if they'd beat the Eagles but couldn't do it with Romo out. I don't remember anymore who had the tie-breaker if we'd ended 9-7 tied with PHI having won one of the NFCN games instead of beating them head-head. I buy that team probably ought to have been 9-7. I don't buy 10-6, and, even though it was close, upsetting PHI in week 17 was a tall order.

Either way, the point is that those teams from 2011-2013 were decent, had a great QB, but they weren't great teams. They weren't playoff-lock or even playoff-favorites. They were playoff contenders.

Offensively those 8-8 teams were playoff contenders but defensively not only some of the worst in Cowboy history but all time NFL futility in some categories.

Basically those were 4 or 5 win teams without Romo.

Contending until week 17 was truly an achievement in a rebuilding mode. I do agree 2013 was the best opportunity to get in but we’d have been one and done easily.

 

[Diehardblues]

I'm not seeing what the collapse in the super bowl against a very good all around team has to do with the comparison of two teams that had an extreme talent advantage over the Packers, one which blew them out, the other who lost a game they had no business losing.

Talent/Technique are absolutely critical. Not having the proper coaching to utilize said talent wastes it.

Many of Romo's prime years were wasted due to lack of talent unfortunately. He never had an elite defense to back him up.

Dak hasn’t had an elite defense yet to back him up either.

The last time we had an elite defense heading into the playoffs was carrying Quincy Carter.

 

[Captain-Crash]

rebuilding after 2 years of Dak.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Well, more specifically, the offensive staff has a bullseye on them now.

Now, more than ever, they are going to have to game plan and scheme an offensive system that can move the ball and score points. Even with the addition of Williams along the OL, in the NFL, you can't just line up and run the ball 40 times a game and expect to win. They are going to have to come up with a passing game that meshes with Prescott and do so with a roster of #2 type and in the case of guys like Gallup, Brown, even Austin, that are unknowns.

Initial expectations around here seem to be that we should be a playoff team in 2018, however, I wonder if as the season progresses and the team scuffles, will people blame all the "new" personnel on offense.

Garrett and company have an opportunity to shut a lot of people up, including myself, if they can turn this team in a playoff team and cobble together a very good offense. Taking what we have on offense and doing that would be a very good accomplishment.

Ummm.....I would say at least 2/3rds of the game you can definitely lineup and run the ball 40 times and expect to win. With this line, this RB, and this QB that can run as well. And that is what we should be doing.

And why would Garrett or anyone shut anyone up by making the playoffs? LOL

This team should make the playoffs in their sleep.

Making the playoffs is a "very good accomplishment"?

Wow........just wow.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Coaching always has a bullseye on it in the NFL. And nothing will shut the fans up no matter how it plays out. They criticize the team for offensive ineptitude when it’s in the top five in the league in offensive production. If the team doesn’t win, it’ll be the scheme or the clock management or the use of challenge flags. Whether that stuff played any actual role or not.

At the end of the day, if he’s still a ginger and still claps, they’ll still hate on the staff if the team doesn’t advance and win a Superbowl, without much regard for what the reasons for that might actually be.

True enough. There are always those types. Just like there are always the types that will give Garrett a pass no matter what, even when its completely obvious those things had an effect. Or Garrett comes out himself and admits he screwed up.

 

[CowboyRoy]

It’ll depend on why the team or the staff actually falls short.

So last year, the staff was unprepared for the departure of Zeke. Both from a personnel standpoint and a scheme standpoint.

Then you have the coaching misfires such as the Atlanta debacle where the staff was unprepared to change anything when Green went in for Smith. And then they were woefully late in doing anything about it quickly enough DURING the game.

And we can also see quite clearly from their own words and actions that the offense was still in "Romo friendly" mode and not curtailed enough into "dak friendly" mode. In fact, it was one of the biggest things they did this off season was to alter the scheme and personnel in this way.

Are these things you agree with, are denying, or claiming arent on the coaches?

 

[Idgit]

True enough. There are always those types. Just like there are always the types that will give Garrett a pass no matter what, even when its completely obvious those things had an effect. Or Garrett comes out himself and admits he screwed up.

I haven’t seen the latter, but I’ll take your word they exist.

I’m about as big a Garrett fan as we have on the site, and I know I’ve been in many, many discussions about his shortcomings. I also know he gets criticized for all sorts of **** that’s got nothing to do with anything.