Remove Mickey's name and it's still a poor article.
For one, it starts by suggesting Cowboys fans are being impatient with a coach heading into Year 9 with two playoff wins on his entire resume. That's an idiotic argument to try to make right out of the shoot. From that point on, you knew exactly where the author was going to go with this article.
The author points out that it's unfair to blame Garrett for the run we are on and that guys like Parcells and Campo and Phillips apparently are shielded from criticism. But Garrett has not accomplished anything more than those guys have. A year before Garrett took over, Phillips had the Cowboys winning a playoff game. So if the author wants to make sure that Campo and Parcells and Phillips get their fair share of criticism for the two decades of futility, how in the world should Garrett then be somehow rewarded for not being much better than those guys? But that's essentially what the author wants.............. for people to see Garrett as being better than those guys and not worthy of the criticism. It's bizarre.
Then the author goes into the debate over regular season wins and where the Cowboys rate after the three years, of course, again neglecting the lack of any real postseason success. He brings up examples of organizations that made a coaching change like the Lions and Cardinals and how the teams played worse after a change. But what he fails to note is that no one in Detroit, for example, is screaming to bring back Caldwell or lamenting that they should have never fired him. Most teams that fire a middling coach and bring in one who does worse, simply acknowledge the truth - they got rid of a middling coach and hired a bad one and probably need a new one. I suspect there won't be very many fans in Cincinnati screaming to bring back Marvin Lewis if the new staff stinks. They'll acknowledge the reality of their situation - they had a middling coach who accomplished little in over a decade and a half and their ownership made a cruddy hire to replace him. Mickey, like some fans here, seem to think that if you get rid of an average coach and then hire a bad one, that means the decision to fire the average coach was wrong. No, all it says is that you hired a bad coach to replace him. That's it.
The author goes on to make the silly argument of "he's only had one losing season" but that's a disingenuous argument because 8-8 isn't a winning record either. And Garrett spit out three of them in his career. But given the direction the author was taking the argument, it's not surprising that he wants to chalk up 8-8 records as apparently some level of success.
Your last paragraph is, respectively, pure poppycock and, frankly, insulting to some Cowboys fans who have laid out a very well constructed argument as to why a change needed to be made at HC that has nothing to do with how he looks clapping. There is no "maybe many" that want him out because of his clapping. The "many" have laid out pretty fair reasons as to why a change needs to be made that isn't just based on whims and how Garrett looks on the sideline during the season.
...NOT!
