Even the most dedicated Garrett fan

Sydla said:
Yeah. I think they will win. That Giants team is even a shell of the one we saw in September and they weren't that good back then either.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure. They've given our offense problems even when it wasn't the trainwreck it is now. I think we could very well have a rough time scoring on them, even with this personnel.
 
CowboyRoy said:
Not with a straight face you couldnt.
Click to expand...

You most very well could. you probably couldn't argue it against Romo fans........but against non-biased fans? You very well could.

Staubacher said:
Because it assumes an either-or situation, as if Dak wouldn't exist if Romo beat him out. We'd have Romo starting and Dak coming in if Romo got hurt, and Dak eventually taking over anyway. The argument is always Romo shouldn't have had a chance to play because he may have gotten hurt.

Sorry if the logic is too complex to grasp, seems to be an issue here..
Click to expand...

So why do you think Romo retired as opposed to going to another team and starting for them?

Trouty said:
Gotta disagree with you here, my boi. Romo made the careers of his coaches (as well as a few WRs) and kept us as relevant as a single man can for this dysfunctional side show.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you. I wouldn't make the argument. But there is a argument to be made.
 
JW82 said:
would have to agree, if they lose to a team who just fired their HC and GM, who is missing their entire receiving corp, just benched their QB a week ago, after getting their best LB back and having 10 days to prepare, he should be canned by days end.. right? They should.
Click to expand...
Contrary to what some may think I'm not a 100% Garrett homer and if we lose this game I won't be calling for his head but the leash will be much much much shorter and I may have another Thanksgiving Day type meltdown. I read on ESPN that Sterling Shepherd may be out now too. I don't even know what starters or 2nd stringers for that matter they have left. They may not even have enough players to put on the field come kick off, haha.
 
phildadon86 said:
7 of 8 coaches have been to or won a super bowl since Garrett became head coach. You wanna compare playoff wins? Or are you more of a regular season matters more kind of guy?
Click to expand...

We were talking about wins in general, so that's what I was referencing.

When the playoff wins thing comes up, my response is always 1. I'm glad we're at a point now where we're talking playoff wins, at least and 2. there are lots of different reasons why teams lose playoff games. Since I don't think 'coaching' was at fault for either GB loss, I don't consider it a significant argument against Garrett. I know other fans feel differently about the reasons behind those losses, and I'm happy to debate those reasons, as well. But it's not enough to just look at playoff record and conclude you need to change the coach.
 
Sydla said:
No, we have an axe to grind with a coach who struggles to win big games, has some pretty noticeable examples of where he and his staff got outcoached, and has little to no playoff success in 7 years as a head coach. He's put two good teams on the field in 7 seasons and in both those seasons they spit the bit in the playoffs, once as the #1 seed in the NFC.

And absolutely, it bothers me that he's likely going to be the head coach regardless of how this season goes. He doesn't lose enough to get fired but doesn't win enough to actually win anything of any significance.

We are in coaching purgatory.
Click to expand...
This is the sobering truth. Damn.
 
Sydla said:
If they rip off four straight wins, get in the playoffs and finally make a bit of noise, I'll shut up for a long time about Garrett.

My issue with him as always been that he has no playoff success and in the end, that's what this is all about. Competing and winning championships. He's had two seasons in 7 years where he had a team that could contend and in both seasons, he failed to even get to the NFC Title game.
Click to expand...
Sydla said:
To me.......... there is really no difference between going 5-11 and .500 in a season and not making the playoffs. I am all about what you do in the postseason. That's why you even play these games............ win enough, make the postseason, make a playoff run.

So to me, the difference between 5-11 and 8-8 isn't great enough where one is fireable and one is not.
Click to expand...
Killing it, Syd
 
Idgit said:
We were talking about wins in general, so that's what I was referencing.

When the playoff wins thing comes up, my response is always 1. I'm glad we're at a point now where we're talking playoff wins, at least and 2. there are lots of different reasons why teams lose playoff games. Since I don't think 'coaching' was at fault for either GB loss, I don't consider it a significant argument against Garrett. I know other fans feel differently about the reasons behind those losses, and I'm happy to debate those reasons, as well. But it's not enough to just look at playoff record and conclude you need to change the coach.
Click to expand...

Just don't hurt yourself stooping that low, you're liable to throw your back out.
 
Sydla said:
You sure you want to do that?
Click to expand...

It is what it is. I'm not hiding from records. I just wish it were easier to do.

I believe after 2014 we were in the upper quartile for wins as a team in the Garrett regime. That's because at that point somebody had calculated it for an article. Since then we've had the 4-12, the 13-3, and now 6-6, so we're most likely treading water.

Or go look at HC winning percentages for active coaches. That's pretty close to the same thing. Either way his .552 qualifies my 'fair number of games' statement.
 
stasheroo said:
Just don't hurt yourself stooping that low, you're liable to throw your back out.
Click to expand...

I mean, is this a conversation we can have, or not? There ought to be room for an actual discussion on the topic.

But it gets difficult because it's a topic where the opinions are 10-1 against. It's way too easy for the discussion to get driven into a ditch.
 
stasheroo said:
Garrett is the eighth-longest tenured head coach in the NFL; six of the seven who have been in their position longer than Garrett have won at least one Super Bowl.

Does this make anyone feel better or worse?
Click to expand...

Since I don't think the HC is the reason we haven't won the Superbowl (I've provided what I think the reason is, above), I'd consider this stat irrelevant to the argument. I wouldn't let any coach go for not winning a championship if I really thought the reasons for not winning it weren't attributable to the coaching. I'd fix the things I thought were keeping the tam from winning, instead.
 
Trouty said:
Worse! Gah!!!! :(

We're the most important team in the NFL. We need to win. We were winners. This 20+ years of nonsense has to end.
Click to expand...

If you had a fast car with two flat tires, would you replace the transmission because it's a fast car that needs to be fast?

Because I'd address the tires first. That can't be just me, right?
 
Idgit said:
It is what it is. I'm not hiding from records. I just wish it were easier to do.

I believe after 2014 we were in the upper quartile for wins as a team in the Garrett regime. That's because at that point somebody had calculated it for an article. Since then we've had the 4-12, the 13-3, and now 6-6, so we're most likely treading water.

Or go look at HC winning percentages for active coaches. That's pretty close to the same thing. Either way his .552 qualifies my 'fair number of games' statement.
Click to expand...

It doesn't look any better there either.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/

His .552 ranks 62nd overall, looking up at Chuck Pagano.

It's not good no matter how someone wants to tilt his head.
 
Idgit said:
If you had a fast car with two flat tires, would you replace the transmission because it's a fast car that needs to be fast?

Because I'd address the tires first. That can't be just me, right?
Click to expand...
The tires are the coaching staff, right now. Well, at least one of the tires, El Presidente. The car is the Dallas Cowboys, transmission and all!
 
Idgit said:
Since I don't think the HC is the reason we haven't won the Superbowl (I've provided what I think the reason is, above), I'd consider this stat irrelevant to the argument.
Click to expand...

But of course you would. Kills any argument anyone would try to make otherwise.

I wouldn't let any coach go for not winning a championship if I really thought the reasons for not winning it weren't attributable to the coaching. I'd fix the things I thought were keeping the tam from winning, instead.
Click to expand...

Amazing the lengths people will go for this guy. He's not responsible for anything to some people. Just pick up your check Jason!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 23,286 (members: 33, guests: 23,253)
Robots: 875

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
474,265
Messages
14,526,421
Members
24,208
Latest member
CowboysQC
Back
Top