ESPNews: Jason Garrett Top Candidate

[iceberg]

Yeah. I think BP took us as far as he could.

in all fairness, he had a long haul. while i didn't like bp the coach, i do respect the man and i do acknowledge he's made us a better team. but his methods didn't add up to me to be what we'd need to put us over the top.

for example - bledsoe. well known get him a good line and he'll be ok. so we get him and then don't give him the line he needs. why? why get someone who you KNOW their flaws and do nothing to shield him from them?

just wasn't adding up to me, but we're off and running now. will just get interesting from here.

 

[BulletBob]

So I'd take any owner who opens his wallet and lets the football decisions be made my an experienced GM.

You're evading the direct question - You still haven't named anyone.

If Jones is the idiot you make him out to be, you should be able to easily name at least 10 owners who are better than he.

Give me a list of owners whom you would rather have had in charge of the Dallas Cowboys over the past 2 decades.

Prove your point that Jones is a football idiot / lousy owner / lousy GM by listing all those owners who are far superior.

 

[iceberg]

You're evading the direct question - You still haven't named anyone.

If Jones is the idiot you make him out to be, you should be able to easily name at least 10 owners who are better than he.

Give me a list of owners whom you would rather have had in charge of the Dallas Cowboys over the past 2 decades.

Prove your point that Jones is a football idiot / lousy owner / lousy GM by listing all those owners who are far superior.

this is one of those facts that will get "preferenced" away. jones doesn't do it their way, so he's moron.

all billionaires are morons, i suppose. it's just luck they got as far as they did in life.

 

[VA Cowboy]

You're evading the direct question - You still haven't named anyone.

If Jones is the idiot you make him out to be, you should be able to easily name at least 10 owners who are better than he.

Give me a list of owners whom you would rather have had in charge of the Dallas Cowboys over the past 2 decades.

Like I said, it's not about the owner, it's about the GM. Can you not comprehend that?

And I know if I name anyone all you're going to do is say that JJ has three SB's and act like it was his doing. Then you'll discount any other person who also doesn't have at least 3 SB rings.

But what has JJ done since he took full control when Jimmy left? We won one SB with virtually the same team the won back-to-back SB's when Jimmy was here, then we collapsed to three consecutive 5-11 seasons and here we are four years later still trying to work our way back.

Prove your point that Jones is a football idiot / lousy owner / lousy GM by listing all those owners who are far superior.

I never said he was a lousy owner - other than the fact he won't hire a real GM. He is a lousy GM, so what does a list of other owners have to do with anything?

 

[VA Cowboy]

this is one of those facts that will get "preferenced" away. jones doesn't do it their way, so he's moron.

all billionaires are morons, i suppose. it's just luck they got as far as they did in life.

You guys don't get it.

You do realize that someone can be smart and a billionaire and yet not be a good GM don't you?

Bill Gates is the richest man in the world, but do you want him hiring you next HC or running your draft?

Being smart and rich is irrelevant to football, but carry on....

 

[BulletBob]

Like I said, it's not about the owner, it's about the GM. Can you not comprehend that?

What I cannot comprehend is why you refuse to answer a simple question.

I'll play the game on your terms then.

If Jerry is such an idiot GM, it should be easy to name 10-15 GMs who have done a better job than Jerry. I'll bet you can't name 5 better GMs.

Go ahead ...

And I know if I name anyone all you're going to do is say that JJ has three SB's and act like it was his doing. Then you'll discount any other person who also doesn't have at least 3 SB rings.

Yeah how silly of me to use the Super Bowl as a measuring stick for success in the NFL.

But what has JJ done since he took full control when Jimmy left? We won one SB with virtually the same team the won back-to-back SB's when Jimmy was here, then we collapsed to three consecutive 5-11 seasons and here we are four years later still trying to work our way back.

VA, what do you think an NFL Owner does? Just sit back and write the checks? Does the organization run on its own?

Who do you think creates the environment that attracts the top talent in this league both players and coaches?

I'll make it even simpler, name 3 Owner/GM combinations that have done better than Jones/Jones ...

Remember, Jones is a football idiot, so this shouldn't be too hard ...

** CHECKMATE **

 

[Doomsdayblitz]

The last time Jones hired the first person he talked to as HC was Chan Gailey, and we all know how well that turned out. Not that I'm against Garrett, I just would like to see JJ interview SEVERAL qualified candidates before making such an important decision.
My guess is that Garrett was hired as OC, with the agreement that if JJ didn't find anyone he liked better, Garrett would elevate to HC.

 

[BlueStar II]

I also feel comfortable with Garrett as an OC, but as the HC, I'm still not sold on that. I'm more concerned that Garrett might become another puppet for Jones. If he's hired as HC, I would love to be proven wrong, but with Jones' track recorcd with other puppets, I still can't help but be concerned over this issue.

 

[iceberg]

You guys don't get it.

You do realize that someone can be smart and a billionaire and yet not be a good GM don't you?

Bill Gates is the richest man in the world, but do you want him hiring you next HC or running your draft?

Being smart and rich is irrelevant to football, but carry on....

smart people in the end do smart things - it's their nature. while i agree that a smart person could be a bad GM, a smart person tired of losing $ will adjust and quit doing stupid things they're not good at *if* they lose enough.

why you want to insist that once stupid always stupid is what i don't get.

 

[BulletBob]

smart people in the end do smart things - it's their nature. while i agree that a smart person could be a bad GM, a smart person tired of losing $ will adjust and quit doing stupid things they're not good at *if* they lose enough.

why you want to insist that once stupid always stupid is what i don't get.

Perhaps VA speaks from experience?

:laugh2:

I'm just kidding. Iceberg teed it up, so I had to take a swing ...

I enjoy the argument with VA ... he's no dummy.

 

[iceberg]

Perhaps VA speaks from experience?

:laugh2:

I'm just kidding. Iceberg teed it up, so I had to take a swing ...

I enjoy the argument with VA ... he's no dummy.

hey, i love great discussions where you can get after it and still be respectful! not out to upset anyone but wow - we do have a varied cross-section of thoughts all driven by different motivations. it gets messy sometimes. : )

 

[VA Cowboy]

What I cannot comprehend is why you refuse to answer a simple question.

I'll play the game on your terms then.

If Jerry is such an idiot GM, it should be easy to name 10-15 GMs who have done a better job than Jerry. I'll bet you can't name 5 better GMs.

Go ahead ...

Here's ten GM's I'd take over Jerry, if want any more just ask:

Scott Pioli
Sundquist/Shannahan
AJ Smith
Tom Heckert
Jerry Angelo
Mike Tannenbaum
Ernie Acorsi
Kevin Colbert
Marty Hurney
Bill Polian

Yeah how silly of me to use the Super Bowl as a measuring stick for success in the NFL.

It is rather silly when he wasn't the day-to-day hands-on GM back then and wasn't primarily responsible for them. The point we are talking about is JJ as a hands-on decision-making GM. He wasn't that when the '90's dynasty was built.

VA, what do you think an NFL Owner does? Just sit back and write the checks? Does the organization run on its own?

Who do you think creates the environment that attracts the top talent in this league both players and coaches?

Most NFL owners do hire a football man to run the football operations and then sit back and write the checks. He can create all the "environment" that he wants. Build the stadium, market the team he's great at that. That's not the problem, and I think you know it. It's when he starts making football decisions that he fails.

I'll make it even simpler, name 3 Owner/GM combinations that have done better than Jones/Jones ...

Remember, Jones is a football idiot, so this shouldn't be too hard ...

Jones is a football idiot, you don't have to remind me

Since Jerry took over as sole GM, he has failed. No other way around it.
You now want a list of better Owner/GM combinations? OK:

Kraft/Polian
Bowlen/Shannahan
Rooney/Cowher


What is it about Jerry the owner and Jerry the GM do you not understand?

 

[VA Cowboy]

why you want to insist that once stupid always stupid is what i don't get.

All I ever initially said was that it appears JJ is reverting back to his old ways of hiring an assistant before the HC. Since then, some took exception to that, and it has been blown out of proportion.

I have never said it will absolutely fail this time, but I don't see how anyone can deny that Jason is extremely inexperienced to be the HC, and if he isn't going to be the HC then he is being hired by JJ before we have a HC.

I simply see this as being similar to how JJ did things in the past, which didn't work.

 

[iceberg]

Since Jerry took over as sole GM, he has failed. No other way around it.
You now want a list of better Owner/GM combinations? OK:

Kraft/Polian
Bowlen/Shannahan
Rooney/Cowher

What is it about Jerry the owner and Jerry the GM do you not understand?

so, jerry wasn't the GM when johnson was around? considering your argument is that he's more or less an egomaniac power hungry freak of football nature, i find it odd you're willing to say he *didn't* want that power early on but somehow after success and *only* after success he chose to be all that you've chosen to hate.

this is one of those arguments i think the facts are being twisted to illustrate a personal tirade.

if jones is a power hungry control freak then he was a power hungry control freak when we won in the 90s. you can't "revisionist history" it away cause you're deep into an online argument where you say he's one thing *except* during a time that would hurt your argument.

party foul man.

 

[iceberg]

All I ever initially said was that it appears JJ is reverting back to his old ways of hiring an assistant before the HC. Since then, some took exception to that, and it has been blown out of proportion.

I have never said it will absolutely fail this time, but I don't see how anyone can deny that Jason is extremely inexperienced to be the HC, and if he isn't going to be the HC then he is being hired by JJ before we have a HC.

I simply see this as being similar to how JJ did things in the past, which didn't work.

the 1993 past or the 1999 past?

again i think you seperate this out for convenience for your argument, not actual happenings.

 

[VA Cowboy]

so, jerry wasn't the GM when johnson was around? considering your argument is that he's more or less an egomaniac power hungry freak of football nature, i find it odd you're willing to say he *didn't* want that power early on but somehow after success and *only* after success he chose to be all that you've chosen to hate.

this is one of those arguments i think the facts are being twisted to illustrate a personal tirade.

if jones is a power hungry control freak then he was a power hungry control freak when we won in the 90s. you can't "revisionist history" it away cause you're deep into an online argument where you say he's one thing *except* during a time that would hurt your argument.

party foul man.

You are really going to lose any credibility you may have if you are arguing that Jerry was the acting GM during the first five years when Jimmy was here.

Are you really saying that Jerry is the football brains behind the 90's dynasty???

Talk about revisionist history.

Yeah, Jerry is an egomaniac. It's been documented that the first few years after he bought the team he was busy getting the organization financially sound while Jimmy and company were building the team on the field.

It was only after we became successful and Jerry saw how it was put together that he felt he could do it just as well as Jimmy and company had done.

After he fell flat on his face he finally relented some and brought BP in. That didn't work as well as expected, and here we are today.

But please tell me you really think Jerry was the primary responsible acting GM during the early days. I need a good laugh.

 

[VA Cowboy]

the 1993 past or the 1999 past?

again i think you seperate this out for convenience for your argument, not actual happenings.

The "past" is referring to the post-Jimmy days and the pre-Parcells days.

 

[VA Cowboy]

we do have a varied cross-section of thoughts all driven by different motivations. it gets messy sometimes. : )

What's your motivation, besides trying to defend Jerry the GM and his failed ways?

 

[SkinsandTerps]

I would take Polian, Belichik, Colbert, or maybe even Loomis as a GM.

 

[iceberg]

You are really going to lose any credibility you may have if you are arguing that Jerry was the acting GM during the first five years when Jimmy was here.

Are you really saying that Jerry is the football brains behind the 90's dynasty???

Talk about revisionist history.

Yeah, Jerry is an egomaniac. It's been documented that the first few years after he bought the team he was busy getting the organization financially sound while Jimmy and company were building the team on the field.

It was only after we became successful and Jerry saw how it was put together that he felt he could do it just as well as Jimmy and company had done.

After he fell flat on his face he finally relented some and brought BP in. That didn't work as well as expected, and here we are today.

But please tell me you really think Jerry was the primary responsible acting GM during the early days. I need a good laugh.

well i'm sure if you talk to enough people i don't have any crediblity anyway - so find those people and make sure you talk only to them when attacking my viewpoint. it's what people do who load up bullets not facts into their arguments.

if you want to believe jones sat on his tail and did nothing while johnson did it all then fine - you do that. i don't think it's realistic to think that jones will put aside his "ego" when his entire "problem" from fans like you *IS* that very ego. where did he keep it during those years, WV? how come he could put it in check and yet still earn the egomaniac who'll never do good rep?

quite the contradiction to me and no, i won't buy into that cause the facts simply do not line up.

The "past" is referring to the post-Jimmy days and the pre-Parcells days.

like i said - you're limiting your history when it suits your purpose - and you're doing so now. i can't and won't do that. people do what they do and in the end, that's simply what they're going to do. if jones is the monger you describe "in your own timeframe" then he was before that and he will be after that as well. to take a timeslice out of this ONLY because it favors our argument i find convenient and frankly, blinding. i'm sure i can go find some years hitler did some good for his people and then call the rest irrelevant, but not many would let me get away with such a logic faux pau.

What's your motivation, besides trying to defend Jerry the GM and his failed ways?

calling out what i don't see as a logical use of facts. not defending anyone. jones has his problems and he's earned them. while people "do what they do" they also learn when it effects their own bottom line of importance. jjones as a GM is tough to defend and not my goal.

but i'm not gonna slice and dice things into piles i can more easily use for *my own views* - the whole picture is out there to figure out and talk about. but i'm not gonna sit here and agree that you can take a few bad years and define a career.

if that were the case parcells is a total failure cause i'm only gonna look at the last 4 decembers of his career and the rest isn't relevant to my argument.

would you allow such a statement to be "valid" in your eyes?