Cowboys Over-Performed?

[ActualCowboysFan]

This was exactly the point of the article that teams that win a lot of close games will tend to regress to the mean the next year. The thing is the Cowboys have a QB that’s been very good in these close game situations over his three year career. They also have a running game that can control the clock. The Cowboys may just be a team that is built to win close games.

Their record closing out games they have a lead in is absurd. They showed it in the first Eagles game but it's like 34-2 under Garrett.

 

[Dre11]

Using your logic............ no.

The players executed well for 11 games, not so well in 7.

Garrett had no real bearing on the outcomes.

There you have it. I love where you went, you couldn't continue your narrative if you said yes. They absolutely executed the unimaginative , simplistic scheme (as you would call it) to win.

 

[Mr_Strol]

It's going to suck when they take that trophy next week and hand it to the leader of a worthless statistic. It's so stupid that they're still playing games when the fine folks at football outsiders have already told us who is the best.

Here comes somebody else who doesn't understand the point of the article.

So you are saying there is zero luck in football? The best team wins every single time? No other variables matter?

Dallas beating the Cardinals is the same as beating the Patriots according to your logic.

 

[ActualCowboysFan]

Here comes somebody else who doesn't understand the point of the article.

Yeah that doesn't relate to my post. You cited DVOA as the more accurate measurement of the team's performance instead of their actual record. Im just curious why they're still playing football when DVOA has already determined the best team? Pretty sure KC's historic performance by that statistic have already wrapped up the season. That's why they're the champs. Remind me what time do the Chiefs play this weekend?

 

[Sydla]

There you have it. I love where you went, you couldn't continue your narrative if you said yes. They absolutely executed the unimaginative , simplistic scheme (as you would call it) to win.

LOL. I was simply using your silly narrative to answer your question.

The "narrative" doesn't change for me. I've never said that Garrett is a bad coach that comes up with crap game plans, etc. Don't confuse me with the ninnies who call him one of the worst coaches in the league who runs a pee wee style offense. I've never once said that. He's a decent coach. The kind that can lead a team to a decent to good regular season from time to time but will often come up short in the playoffs where coaching, adjustments, the ability to self scout, make changes, etc. often is at a premium.

So yes, if you want me to, I can say that Garrett did a nice job in 10 regular season games this year resulting in a playoff appearance.

In the end, he's had 8 full seasons to prove he's one of the best coaches in the league and take the Cowboys to an elite level. He's failed to do so. I think the Cowboys should be looking for a coach that can take them further than they've gone since Garrett has been here. He's had more than enough time IMO to make his mark here.

 

[Sydla]

Now answer my question, Dre.

Are you upset that they fired Linehan? Or Alexander? Or say Dooley? Were those guys unfairly scapegoated by the players who simply didn't perform what they wanted? That the coaches were unfairly fired for players not executing what they wanted?

 

[Dre11]

Now answer my question, Dre.

Are you upset that they fired Linehan? Or Alexander? Or say Dooley? Were those guys unfairly scapegoated by the players who simply didn't perform what they wanted? That the coaches were unfairly fired for players not executing what they wanted?

Nope, wouldn't been fine if they kept them too. As a Coach going in you know where the blame is going no matter what, and most coach's will fall on the sword.

 

[Mr_Strol]

Yeah that doesn't relate to my post. You cited DVOA as the more accurate measurement of the team's performance instead of their actual record. Im just curious why they're still playing football when DVOA has already determined the best team? Pretty sure KC's historic performance by that statistic have already wrapped up the season. That's why they're the champs. Remind me what time do the Chiefs play this weekend?

Really? find me where I said DVOA was the most accurate measurement? I cited it, nothing more. You have completely missed the point of the post if that is what you are focused on.

 

[ActualCowboysFan]

Really? find me where I said DVOA was the most accurate measurement? I cited it, nothing more. You have completely missed the point of the post if that is what you are focused on.

Read the post I replied to. My issue is with someone favoring clearly flawed statistics instead of actual performance.

 

[Crown Royal]

The offense had Zeke, Tyron, Martin and Amari Cooper. All 4 are All-Pro type talents.

Hurns ended up as the #4 WR and he is better than TWill who was the #2 WR some years.

Beasley is one of the better slot WRs in the league.

The only player that would give to the nod to any of the Romo years over this year's roster is Witten.

The years between Mike Irvin's last game and the Romo era were not very good regardless of some big name players remaining.

Maybe 97 and 98 but Novacek's last season was 95 and they struggled to find a replacement for him.

Irvin was injured early in the 99 season.

The 2007 offense was more loaded than the 2018 offense talent wise, for that year. It would begin a downhill slide the next year, but that offense was dominant. The defensive front that year was also better than the one we had this year (prime Ware, Jay Ratliff, Jason Ferguson, etc.).

I'm not suggesting that 2018 was completely devoid of talent, but losing Frederick was HUGE, the TEs are all JAGs at this point, the OL was as weak as it has been since 2013 and the defense has hole or two on it, though it makes a good argument.

I DO think that next year it may be in the running for most talent sinc ethen, but I don't buy it for 2018.

 

[xwalker]

The 2007 offense was more loaded than the 2018 offense talent wise, for that year. It would begin a downhill slide the next year, but that offense was dominant. The defensive front that year was also better than the one we had this year (prime Ware, Jay Ratliff, Jason Ferguson, etc.).

I'm not suggesting that 2018 was completely devoid of talent, but losing Frederick was HUGE, the TEs are all JAGs at this point, the OL was as weak as it has been since 2013 and the defense has hole or two on it, though it makes a good argument.

I DO think that next year it may be in the running for most talent sinc ethen, but I don't buy it for 2018.

The WRs were Rocket and James McKnight. David LaFleur was the TE.

Alonzo Spellman and Darren Hambrick were starters on defense.

 

[Sydla]

Nope, wouldn't been fine if they kept them too. As a Coach going in you know where the blame is going no matter what, and most coach's will fall on the sword.

So they just were good soldiers and fell on their swords despite the fact that they did fine jobs and the players simply let them down?

Also, I forgot to mention, it's not surprising that you appear to have a background in coaching. That would fit in with not putting all that much blame on coaches when a team struggles. I suspect a lot of coaches believe they are very good and just that the players or other circumstances have always failed them.

 

[Bob-Lillys-War]

Players over-achieved despite Jason Garrett , yes .

 

[Stash]

This is where You're flawed, most teams are made up with multiple types of players with different strengths. No team have all their players with the same strengths and weaknesses . What they do is what this team was built to do best is run the ball. It doesn't mean because you run the ball it's going to be successful, even though it's the teams strength. 1 miss block, false start, or a player getting blown up can kill a play. That's execution. A ball hit a player right in the hand he drops it, is that on the coach? A drop int, a miss read of a hole? ZEKE had some, a bad route?

Always excuses.

 

[Dre11]

So they just were good soldiers and fell on their swords despite the fact that they did fine jobs and the players simply let them down?

Also, I forgot to mention, it's not surprising that you appear to have a background in coaching. That would fit in with not putting all that much blame on coaches when a team struggles. I suspect a lot of coaches believe they are very good and just that the players or other circumstances have always failed them.

It has nothing to do with thinking you're good. It's a golden rule that you take the blame, that's understood, but when you go in with your team for film study, the tape don't lie, the tape will show you every breakdown in a gameplan and that's why you hear players come out later and say "we have to execute betted" after seeing the tape.

 

[Dre11]

Always excuses.

Call it what you want, there's been a lot of issues, spanning back 25 years and majority of the issues are the same.....lol

 

[408Cowboy]

Nope, wouldn't been fine if they kept them too. As a Coach going in you know where the blame is going no matter what, and most coach's will fall on the sword.

Garrett's the head coach when does he fall? How many coordinators and position coaches fell on the sword since he's been here?

I have a question that you can hopefully give a simple yes or no to. Do you think that if Garrett took over the Patriots when Bellichick did even with the experience he has today that the Patriots would be as successful as they are? Mind you in this hypothetical everything remains the same for the Patriots except they have Garrett instead of BB. Would they have the same success?

 

[Dre11]

Garrett's the head coach when does he fall? How many coordinators and position coaches fell on the sword since he's been here?

I have a question that you can hopefully give a simple yes or no to. Do you think that if Garrett took over the Patriots when Bellichick did even with the experience he has today that the Patriots would be as successful as they are? Mind you in this hypothetical everything remains the same for the Patriots except they have Garrett instead of BB. Would they have the same success?

I would say damn close to the same success, I believe in Players and Brady os a great one. Just as I feel BB wouldn't have won here.

 

[Bob-Lillys-War]

Garrett's the head coach when does he fall? How many coordinators and position coaches fell on the sword since he's been here?

I have a question that you can hopefully give a simple yes or no to. Do you think that if Garrett took over the Patriots when Bellichick did even with the experience he has today that the Patriots would be as successful as they are? Mind you in this hypothetical everything remains the same for the Patriots except they have Garrett instead of BB. Would they have the same success?

Yes , because Bob Kraft is a cheat , and owns the refs, & roge goodell.

 

[Dre11]

Garrett's the head coach when does he fall? How many coordinators and position coaches fell on the sword since he's been here?

I have a question that you can hopefully give a simple yes or no to. Do you think that if Garrett took over the Patriots when Bellichick did even with the experience he has today that the Patriots would be as successful as they are? Mind you in this hypothetical everything remains the same for the Patriots except they have Garrett instead of BB. Would they have the same success?

Now let's ask you this, would Bb have the same success on Cleveland if everything was the same ? Remember in 1996 he was fired after going 5-11, when a lot of folks thought that team should've been in the playoffs.