Fire Jason Garrett? Then You Would Have Fired Tom Landry

[diefree666]

Winning and losing was exactly the same as it was today and in 1967 nobody knew the Cowboys would have 20 consecutive winning seasons.

I am not comparing Garrett to Landry, I am comparing most of you to those in the mid 60's who wanted Landry fired. His playoff record at the time was exactly the same as Garrett's today right up to who they lost to and how.

The truth is, Garrett was one Dez catch and one Rodgers pass away from being "brilliant".

If Elliott had not been suspended then the Cowboys would have been in the playoffs again where anything could have happened and if you insist that Garrett would have blown it then it just makes you even more similar to those that wanted Landry gone.

I have touched on the hypocricy, many of you dislike being cornered by it so you are attempting to distract readers from recognizing this by falsely characterizing the nature of this debate.It didn't work. Those of you calling for Garrett's head would have wanted Landry fired within the same time frame as Garrett. None of you have really denied this..

you posted a very badly thought out OP and 90% of those responded simply tore you a new one. Take it like a man and stop whining.

 

[Sydla]

Lol,

"Different times...."

So, winning feels different now?

"How dare you compare the two men".....

Never did. Compared their results over the same length of experience. This is a results based league.

"Tom Landry was......"

Forgive me if I'm not impressed with some of you guy's ability to travel back to 1967 and predict Landry's future success. What he was in 1967 was the "Coach Who Can't win the Big One"

"Compare Garrett to current Super Bowl champion Coaches instead"

Compare Tom Landry's first 8 seasons to the championship coaches of the 60's. Again, same results for both.

But the most interesting aspect is so many attempts to deviate from the actual issue, the topic in thiis thread.

Tell me why you wouldn't fire Tom Landry in 1967 but you would fire Garrett despite having the exact same playoft record and close losses. Pretend that you are not an oracle and examine Landry only up to 1967. I already know that Landry was more successful in his 9th to his 29th year career compared to Garrett's non existent 9th to 29th years.

You could continue your feeble accusations of blasphemy and evasive insults or you could join the debate and make a meaningful rebuttal with actual facts of your own. Some of you have and I appreciate and respect you for it.

I just told you.

In Year 7, Garrett missed the playoffs with a team that went 13-3 the year before.

In year 7, Landry lost to the Packers in the NFL Championship game, 7 years into the entire existence of the Cowboys.

You really can't be this obtuse or dumb.

 

[Sydla]

We can all spin the facts to support our narrative.

The fact remains Landry struggled early on in the playoffs beginning 1-4 with a talented team. No shame in losing the first 2 against the team of the 60’s but next two losses to the Browns when we were favorites were widely criticized which also contributed to Merideth retiring early.

Fact is Landry was a legendary coach and everything the Cowboys became should be credited to Tom, Tex and Gil. But Tom had some struggles winning the big games against equal or better teams losing more championships than he won. That’s fair criticism.

Fact is Tom Landry got to a big game with an expansion team in Year 7.

Tell me again what Garrett was doing in Year 7?

I am embarrassed for any Cowboys fan that actually is trying to argue that Garrett could be like Landry.

Holy hell.

 

[diefree666]

in many ways Garret is the anti landry

No personal responsibility for anything that went wrong
No real understanding of game management
no ability to do in game adjustments
X's and O's are a complete mystery

 

[Sydla]

It saddens me that fans may look at this team and equate it to the Landry teams. It just says that we really don't know or understand what those teams were or what our history actually is.

I guess we have become used to what this team offers. That's unfortunate.

People are desperate to try to justify why Garrett is still employed. With each passing season, it gets harder and harder to defend him as the evidence mounts that he's not the guy.

And when you get near the end, the defenses for him will tend to get more and more ridiculous. Such as, the Landry comparison.

 

[Sydla]

Winning and losing was exactly the same as it was today and in 1967 nobody knew the Cowboys would have 20 consecutive winning seasons.

I am not comparing Garrett to Landry, I am comparing most of you to those in the mid 60's who wanted Landry fired. His playoff record at the time was exactly the same as Garrett's today right up to who they lost to and how.

The truth is, Garrett was one Dez catch and one Rodgers pass away from being "brilliant".

If Elliott had not been suspended then the Cowboys would have been in the playoffs again where anything could have happened and if you insist that Garrett would have blown it then it just makes you even more similar to those that wanted Landry gone.

I have touched on the hypocricy, many of you dislike being cornered by it so you are attempting to distract readers from recognizing this by falsely characterizing the nature of this debate.It didn't work. Those of you calling for Garrett's head would have wanted Landry fired within the same time frame as Garrett. None of you have really denied this..

The truth is Garrett is one lucky penalty in the Lions game away from never even having won a playoff game.

 

[diefree666]

as regards the argument that the same people that are wanting Red Ball out the door would have said the same to Landry at 7 years is of course absurd.

Now fans as a whole are impatient (you do know fan is short for fanatic right?)

And some are irrational like the Romo haters.

BUT the vast majority of real fans understand a whole lot more than you think as underlying your original post is a clear attitude of contempt for most fans


To start with most of us understand that Tom Landry was about 10 TIMES more qualified to be a HC when he started then Red Ball was.
Frankly I would argue that Tom Landry was more qualified to be a HC WHEN HE STARTED then Red Ball is RIGHT NOW.

And back then people would have looked at what Tom Landry faced as he started out and shook their heads- The Dallas Cowboys started out with less THAN ANY OTHER EXPANSION TEAM IN THE HISTORY OF THE NFL.
Tom Landry's team's showed steady improvement every year until they hit a slow patch; and that is when the fans got restless as they expected the improvement to continue without pause.
I have not found any Expansion Team that did better then the Boys did in the history of the NFL. Now Tampa Bay and Carolina had early success but it petered out short of where Dallas got to.
By year 7 despite the fact that it was tougher to make the championship game then it is to even make the playoffs back then Dallas was getting there every year. Falling short but getting there.
And look at who we were losing too as well.
So I REJECT THE IDEA that more than a few were really bummed as Landry came into year 7. They wanted more but at the same time look at how close we were getting.


NOW contrast Red Ball.
Took over a team that had won the division and a playoff game the year before; had a franchise QB and two players that will certainly be in the HOF one day.
This new HC = what had he ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHED as a coach before? Very little if anything. Sure he got interest from a couple of teams to be a HC but in the end WAS HE OFFERED ANY?
Now look at his record. Mediocre is all it is. inconsistent from one season to the next and from game to game. Never two really good seasons back to back.
NO SIGN OF STEADY IMPROVEMENT.
HOW many times to the playoffs when in this day and age even losing teams have made it in?

 

[LACowboysFan1]

I have not found any Expansion Team that did better then the Boys did in the history of the NFL.

Dolphins won the SB 6 years after the team came into existence.

Just for the record...

 

[Whyjerry]

If you include Jason Garrett's term as interum Head Coach then he has eight seasons under his belt.

Garrett's playoff record is 1-2. Both losses came in the final minute against Green Bay.

Let's take a look at Tom Landry's first eight seasons....

Landry's playoff record was 1-2. Both losses came in the final minute against Green Bay.

If you believe that Jason Garrett should be fired then it would be hypocritical to insist you would have not felt the same about Tom Landry after his first eight seasons.

Tom Landry took the Cowboys to their first Super Bowl in his tenth season as their Head Coach. Over the next ten seasons they went to 4 more Super Bowls and 7 conference championships.

This current team is built. They will see vast improvement in the secondary, they have their pass rushers. They will get a full season from Elliott, Prescott can forget his sophomore season, the offensive line remains elite.

If you remain committed to the firing of Garrett, prepare to accept the consequences of your opinion.

The Cowboys will go the Super Bowl next season and it will become a habit.

This cracks me up - Tom Landry coached an expansion team. Garrett has had a talented roster and real QB since day one. The compare Landry to Garrett is just plain silly.

 

[visionary]

No, Idgit I don't. I know I've read that before and it stuck in my noggin. Was over a year ago, maybe 2, maybe more. Wished I'd saved it to refer back to but I only got active on some of the Cowboy message boards 2 or so years ago ... didn't know I'd need to be referencing that.

Welcome

You'll soon learn that ANY criticism of Garrett is unacceptable to some posters despite all evidence

 

[diefree666]

Dolphins won the SB 6 years after the team came into existence.

Just for the record...

ach. Missed that one. Don Shula. Should have looked closer.

come to think of it the Fin teams of the 70's seem to get forgotten. Raiders, Vikings, Steelers, Cowboys are usually the ones mentioned

 

[visionary]

This cracks me up - Tom Landry coached an expansion team. Garrett has had a talented roster and real QB since day one. The compare Landry to Garrett is just plain silly.

Garrett defenders are like some of our politicians. In order to avoid facts, they will make outlandish and completely idiotic comparisons or comments so that we will get lost in a discussion around how ridiculous that suggestion is and lose sight of the real problem

If you have a low enough intelligence level that someone has to point out the differences between Landry and Garrett then you're likely not old enough to be allowed to post

 

[LACowboysFan1]

"Tell me why you wouldn't fire Tom Landry in 1967 but you would fire Garrett despite having the exact same playoft record and close losses. Pretend that you are not an oracle and examine Landry only up to 1967."

I'll tell you, but if you won't accept my reasoning, it's rather pointless isn't it? But here it is:

Landry lost the NFL CHAMPIONSHIP GAME, against arguably the most powerful team in the NFL at the time, by 7 pts in 1966 and by 4 pts in the Ice Bowl.

The Cowboys had to win multiple playoff games just to get to the NFL Championship game. To fail to win it all against a team like the Packers, including a game having to play in conditions the Cowboys NEVER had to play in, on a late game touchdown in which the Cowboys' defenders were unable to gain any traction on the frozen ground, just meant that the team needed a bit more luck or maybe a player or two. They were CLOSE to being a "winner".

Garrett hasn't even made it to the conference championship game. He's had enough chances to win it with a very good to excellent team....

 

[LACowboysFan1]

I have seen this type of "discussion" before, I grew up a Cowboys fan (since about age 13) in East Texas. A year after graduating college I move to Houston.

Thinking initially "I'm a Cowboys fan, but I can root for the Oilers, too, since they're an AFC team, would be nice to have two teams to cheer for".

But the local paper had a call-in feature and put the caller's comments in the sports section every date. There began to be discussions about who was the better coach - Landry or Bum Phillips. Finally one guy called in and said Phillips was better because "his first 3 years he had a better record than Landry's first 3 years", like comparing a brand new expansion team's coaching record to an established team's coaching record was a valid comparison.

That's when I lost my enthusiasm for the Oilers...

 

[Whyjerry]

Garrett defenders are like some of our politicians. In order to avoid facts, they will make outlandish and completely idiotic comparisons or comments so that we will get lost in a discussion around how ridiculous that suggestion is and lose sight of the real problem

If you have a low enough intelligence level that someone has to point out the differences between Landry and Garrett then you're likely not old enough to be allowed to post

Seriously. TL is an all time great. The man had a stretch where the Cowboys went to playoffs 18 out of 20 years. He was a gentleman, great coach, and big time innovator. To compare him to Jason Garrett is just plain stupid.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Seriously. TL is an all time great. The man had a stretch where the Cowboys went to playoffs 18 out of 20 years. He was a gentleman, great coach, and big time innovator. To compare him to Jason Garrett is just plain stupid.

In the defense somewhat of the original post, I don't see that he compared Garrett to Landry, exactly, though it could be interpreted as such. He was asking why you wouldn't have fired Landry after a 1-2 post-season record, in a 7 year stretch.

But that still doesn't alter my argument that Landry had far more success in that 7 years than Garrett has had in HIS 7 years, my point being that getting to the NFL championship game against a powerhouse Packers team that had won the championship the year before in 1966 and again getting to the Ice Bowl shows PROMISE, whereas Garrett's losing at home to a Giants wildcard team, a Packers team with a gimpy Rodgers and a Packers team that they were unprepared to play doesn't give one much confidence that he can get "over the hump"...

 

[CyberB0b]

I was having a rough week, but this brought a little humor. Thanks OP .

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Seriously. TL is an all time great. The man had a stretch where the Cowboys went to playoffs 18 out of 20 years

Despite their success, the Patriots are still 3 years away from matching Landry's record of 20 straight winning seasons. Even if they match it in 3 more years, for it to take 36 years for another team to match the record again shows Landry's greatness...

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Firing a head coach that went to the NFL championship game two years in a row would have been the epitome of stupidity...

 

[Hoofbite]

Argument is still every bit as stupid as it was 2-3 years ago.