FiniteMan!
New Member
- Messages
- 118
- Reaction score
- 0
I wonder what Jerry's Criteria is for a head coach.
In his shoes I would want someone who:
1) Can keep Tony Romo under control. I want a head coach who will ride Jason Garrett about his turnovers. You can talk about having "innovative offensive minds" around, but at the end of the day, Romo doesn't lack for making good plays----he suffers for making the bad ones. You need a coach who carries a big stick to keep Romo grounded.
2) Can keep TO productive and modestly cancerous. In some regards, Parcells did a pretty good job of not talking about TO and setting the guy off. But there seems to have been a lot of thought on the team that players like TO and Roy Williams had their own set of rules. I think that had Parcells undercut for a chunk of last season --- until Romo emerged. I think you need a coach with skins on the wall who can discipline TO, but is savy enough to do it without setting off our thin skinned semi-star.
3) Can keep the fear of the head coach in place. I think when a team goes from a firm disciplinarian (argueably Parcells) to a softer voice, a lot of players will slack off. Young guys won't feel pushed and as such some just won't develop.
4) Have coached a team to at least the Conference title game. A coach who hasn't done that simply lacks experience or the the head coaching acumin to be percieved as at Parcells level. This is a team that with the right coach could become a superbowl team next season. With the wrong coach it decay like the team did in the Campo/Gailey years.
5) Following up on 4; you need a coach who knows how to win games. Norv Turner knows how to run an offense, but is over his head as a head coach. He doesn't know how to get a team to win.
6) Additonally following on 4; You need a coach who can maintain a team. I feel like short term fixes usually don't work out, so while many including Jerry might disagree, I think there has to at least be the illusion that your coach is in place long term. Players have to think the coach is in place long term otherwise you will not get consistent effort from some of your players. You will always be at risk of players laying out or actively rebelling in trying to bring about change.
7) Can get and hold Roy Williams' attention. There's a guy who needs a head coach to ride him.
8) Can bring in a scheme that maximizes the team's best talents. Defensively, the great Parcells flunked this one. Parcells ran off Glover in pursuit of his almighty 3-4. Imagine how much better the cowboys' defense would have looked last season with glover providing a consitent push inside and Roy Williams seeing a steady menu of blitzes. Bringing in "a 3-4 expert" is not going to be a pancea. Jerry is too influenced by Parcells if he beleives that. I fully expect greg Ellis, the teams second legit pass rusher, to get cut for salary reasons "since they don't play the 4-3 and have so much invested in other LBs." Look for the cowboys to again suffer through the same mistake as letting glover go. In laymans terms, players who can rack up double digit sacks are too important to just let go. The cowboys will probably do that again this season. I doubt Carpenter ever becomes a double digit sacker---although I think he will be a solid LB.
I suspect his criteria is:
1) cheap.
2) Willing to take orders from Jerry, Steven, and possibly even Bill --- but definitely Jerry.
3) Be willing to be buddies with Jerry and treat him like an equal and even party with him from time to time.
4) Be willing to publicly glow about Jason Garrett and privately work with him quietly.
5) Be a 3-4 proponent, because according to Bill the 3-4 is the greatest defense in the world and only fools play the 4-3. I think this may be tied to Jerry's insecurities. Jerry has been involved with 3 great coaches: Tom Landry, Jimmy Jones, and Bill Parcells. Jerry fired Tom Landry and Jimmy Johnson walked out on him. Both situations lead Jerry to be skewered in the media. Bill became Jerry's friend and treated him like an equal. The 4-3 defense is the legacy of Landry and Johnson. The 3-4 is the legacy of Parcells. It may seem that I am unfairly making Jerry seem like a simpleton. I am not trying to, but imagine if Parcells told Jerry something like "Why do you insist on playing the 4-3? I have told you all of the stretegic reasons that I prefer the 3-4. It is a better defense. Why can't you let go of Jimmy Johnson's legacy?" I am sure something like that was said to Jerry at some point by Parcells. And I am sure Jerry would react in this manner if that was ever said. I think sometimes people get steered by emotion, while thinking they are using logic.
6) To be someone who won't be successful IN SPITE of Jerry; ALA Jimmy. Jerry doesn't want a coach who will leave in a huff; He doesn't want a successful big time NFL coach who has had run ins with a GM or Owner (The Tuna situation was different IMO because Parcells came in equally humbled, equally desperate to rehab his reputation. Parcells NEEDED it to work.); Jerry doesn't want a coach who he can't replace and have similar success. He wants people to look at the cowboys and see a successful franchise because of Jerry Jones --- not a successful franchise when Jerry is not the loudest voice on the team.
7) To be someone with no connection to the previous administration. If it is true that Dan Reeves called Jerry and Jerry just turned him down, this is definitely part of it. There are a number of coaches who would do a better job than Wade Phillips with this team, that have Landry ties. Dan Reeves and Mike Ditka would be good short term fixes if Jerry wants to go that way and they would both probably take the job in a heartbeat. Heck, Danny White would probably be a pretty good NFL head coach if given a shot. Jerry has always seemed to want to establish the Cowboys as America's team under his rule. He has never taken advantage of all the natural boosters he could have by embracing Landry era Cowboys. I think he is scared that he might fire A Dan Reeves and that Reeves would say, "he's no Tex Schramm and he doesn't run the franchise with the class of a CLint Murchinson." It is just sad to see a man quiver in the fear of his predecessors' excellence. Come on Jerry! You are definitely better than Bum Bright!
I consider Jerry's likely criteria to be limited, insufficient, and sad. This won't end well.
In his shoes I would want someone who:
1) Can keep Tony Romo under control. I want a head coach who will ride Jason Garrett about his turnovers. You can talk about having "innovative offensive minds" around, but at the end of the day, Romo doesn't lack for making good plays----he suffers for making the bad ones. You need a coach who carries a big stick to keep Romo grounded.
2) Can keep TO productive and modestly cancerous. In some regards, Parcells did a pretty good job of not talking about TO and setting the guy off. But there seems to have been a lot of thought on the team that players like TO and Roy Williams had their own set of rules. I think that had Parcells undercut for a chunk of last season --- until Romo emerged. I think you need a coach with skins on the wall who can discipline TO, but is savy enough to do it without setting off our thin skinned semi-star.
3) Can keep the fear of the head coach in place. I think when a team goes from a firm disciplinarian (argueably Parcells) to a softer voice, a lot of players will slack off. Young guys won't feel pushed and as such some just won't develop.
4) Have coached a team to at least the Conference title game. A coach who hasn't done that simply lacks experience or the the head coaching acumin to be percieved as at Parcells level. This is a team that with the right coach could become a superbowl team next season. With the wrong coach it decay like the team did in the Campo/Gailey years.
5) Following up on 4; you need a coach who knows how to win games. Norv Turner knows how to run an offense, but is over his head as a head coach. He doesn't know how to get a team to win.
6) Additonally following on 4; You need a coach who can maintain a team. I feel like short term fixes usually don't work out, so while many including Jerry might disagree, I think there has to at least be the illusion that your coach is in place long term. Players have to think the coach is in place long term otherwise you will not get consistent effort from some of your players. You will always be at risk of players laying out or actively rebelling in trying to bring about change.
7) Can get and hold Roy Williams' attention. There's a guy who needs a head coach to ride him.
8) Can bring in a scheme that maximizes the team's best talents. Defensively, the great Parcells flunked this one. Parcells ran off Glover in pursuit of his almighty 3-4. Imagine how much better the cowboys' defense would have looked last season with glover providing a consitent push inside and Roy Williams seeing a steady menu of blitzes. Bringing in "a 3-4 expert" is not going to be a pancea. Jerry is too influenced by Parcells if he beleives that. I fully expect greg Ellis, the teams second legit pass rusher, to get cut for salary reasons "since they don't play the 4-3 and have so much invested in other LBs." Look for the cowboys to again suffer through the same mistake as letting glover go. In laymans terms, players who can rack up double digit sacks are too important to just let go. The cowboys will probably do that again this season. I doubt Carpenter ever becomes a double digit sacker---although I think he will be a solid LB.
I suspect his criteria is:
1) cheap.
2) Willing to take orders from Jerry, Steven, and possibly even Bill --- but definitely Jerry.
3) Be willing to be buddies with Jerry and treat him like an equal and even party with him from time to time.
4) Be willing to publicly glow about Jason Garrett and privately work with him quietly.
5) Be a 3-4 proponent, because according to Bill the 3-4 is the greatest defense in the world and only fools play the 4-3. I think this may be tied to Jerry's insecurities. Jerry has been involved with 3 great coaches: Tom Landry, Jimmy Jones, and Bill Parcells. Jerry fired Tom Landry and Jimmy Johnson walked out on him. Both situations lead Jerry to be skewered in the media. Bill became Jerry's friend and treated him like an equal. The 4-3 defense is the legacy of Landry and Johnson. The 3-4 is the legacy of Parcells. It may seem that I am unfairly making Jerry seem like a simpleton. I am not trying to, but imagine if Parcells told Jerry something like "Why do you insist on playing the 4-3? I have told you all of the stretegic reasons that I prefer the 3-4. It is a better defense. Why can't you let go of Jimmy Johnson's legacy?" I am sure something like that was said to Jerry at some point by Parcells. And I am sure Jerry would react in this manner if that was ever said. I think sometimes people get steered by emotion, while thinking they are using logic.
6) To be someone who won't be successful IN SPITE of Jerry; ALA Jimmy. Jerry doesn't want a coach who will leave in a huff; He doesn't want a successful big time NFL coach who has had run ins with a GM or Owner (The Tuna situation was different IMO because Parcells came in equally humbled, equally desperate to rehab his reputation. Parcells NEEDED it to work.); Jerry doesn't want a coach who he can't replace and have similar success. He wants people to look at the cowboys and see a successful franchise because of Jerry Jones --- not a successful franchise when Jerry is not the loudest voice on the team.
7) To be someone with no connection to the previous administration. If it is true that Dan Reeves called Jerry and Jerry just turned him down, this is definitely part of it. There are a number of coaches who would do a better job than Wade Phillips with this team, that have Landry ties. Dan Reeves and Mike Ditka would be good short term fixes if Jerry wants to go that way and they would both probably take the job in a heartbeat. Heck, Danny White would probably be a pretty good NFL head coach if given a shot. Jerry has always seemed to want to establish the Cowboys as America's team under his rule. He has never taken advantage of all the natural boosters he could have by embracing Landry era Cowboys. I think he is scared that he might fire A Dan Reeves and that Reeves would say, "he's no Tex Schramm and he doesn't run the franchise with the class of a CLint Murchinson." It is just sad to see a man quiver in the fear of his predecessors' excellence. Come on Jerry! You are definitely better than Bum Bright!
I consider Jerry's likely criteria to be limited, insufficient, and sad. This won't end well.
