Garrett's Thinking

[jwooten15]

This might be kind of long. My apologies ahead of time.

I am bored at work, so I am watching full-game highlights of the glory days ('92-'96).. Multiple times throughout the game, the camera pans to the Cowboy sideline, where inevitably, I see Jason Garrett there, holding his clipboard.

Seeing this got me to thinking...Garrett's philosophy and approach as a coach today is inherently based on the lessons he learned from A) his father, and B) standing on those Cowboy sidelines, witnessing greatness. And in theory, that style would still work in today's NFL.

ON OFFENSE
In those days, our lines literally controlled every facet of the game. Teams knew that a run was coming on 3rd and short. Yet they couldn't stop it! The offensive line (and Moose) were the perfect unit to team up with Emmitt's style of running. But it wasn't just the line that got all those yards for Emmitt. His vision and durability and toughness, again, was the perfect fit for what the Cowboys wanted to do. And I saw multiple times where we killed teams with play action because they were being forced to focus so much on our running game, which they hadn't been able to stop all day. Then add on top of that, the connection and cohesion Aikman and Irvin had-- that in itself was unguardable. The passing game fed off the running game to create a deadly combination. Greatness in all areas.

This is the mold that Garrett and staff are trying to re-establish today. And last year, we saw it coming together, to a certain degree. We had a dominant offensive line, we had a workhorse back in Murray who was the perfect compliment to what this OL provides. And we had Romo --> Dez and Romo --> Witten in the passing game, gelling together. That made it really hard for defenses to stop us.

But this season, we got cute. We undervalued Murray (or overvalued the offensive line as the sole reason for Murray's success), and didn't bring in the type of back we need to continue dominating in the run game. That, to go along with the injuries to Dez and Romo.. Well, I guess there might be good reasons that we ended up 4-12.

ON DEFENSEThis is still the major difference between the Dynasty Cowboys and the Cowboys of today. The defensive lines of the 90's was something to be seen. An amazing combination of power, skill, tenasity and football smarts. The line could consistently apply pressure to the QB without bringing extra men or trying to get cute with blitzes that opened holes in the defense. And to compliment them, we had the best cover corner in history of the game on shutting down one side of the field. And then there were playmaking, hard hitting safeties (who knew how to take correct angles and adequately tackle somebody) covering the back end.

I think we did a good job of loading up on the the defensive line last offseason. Greg Hardy didn't produce the numbers everyone was expecting, but nobody really produced the numbers we expected (except maybe Lee and Lawrence). In my opinion, he could be the Charles Haley of this team as long as we can put the right guys behind him. We are in dire need of an upgrade at safety, and we really need a replacement for Hayden to stuff the run. There are multiple holes in our defense, but I think that can be fixed.

OVERALL
I see where Jason Garrett is trying to take this team. It worked for the Cowboys in the past, and I know it could work for them now. My problem is though, that I'm not sure that Garrett is the right COACH to be leading them. As a front office guy, I think he'd be great. And I do like his vision of where he wants the team to go. We're trying to replicate a Jimmy Johnson team without having Jimmy Johnson to lead us.

Do I think these problems can be fixed? The majority of them, sure I do. Health of our QB and star WR alone will make this team look much better than the product we saw in 2015. But we really need to get an above average or potentially great running back in here to pair with our great OL. Make people fear the run (or the threat of the run), then burn them in the passing game when they are forced to load the box. Simple, yet so hard to do. I don't think we are far off on the offensive side of the ball, given that Romo can stay in one piece.

Defense is going to be a little harder to fix. We are in a time crunch with Romo's age, so we have probably 2 years to get it right. Is that enough time? Who knows. I don't think we have to be dominant to win a championship (like in the Dynasty years), but we definitely need upgrades at multiple positions before we can even dream of a Super Bowl.

So there are my thoughts. We are in a bad spot, but not as bad as some think. There's still hope. With a little luck, you never know what can happen. I finally do have faith in some of the front office. They are leading the team, personnel-wise, is a good direction. Here's to hoping we have a great draft class, and that we come out on fire in 2016!

 

[CashMan]

Something that worked 20yrs ago, might not work now. IMO, the fullback position is kinda being fazed out.

 

[jazzcat22]

Nice write up.
As much as I keep saying it, in the first 2 rounds, come away with a bell cow RB and a QB of the future.
Then fill in the voids not addressed through any FA's.
Need that long term bell cow RB, and take care of the future at QB as well, as a back up to Romo.

Bring back Hardy and RoMac, as you know what you have in them, as opposed to a rookie or yet more FA's looking for a paycheck as well.
Tender Leary and the OL is set, unless he leaves, then we can get a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick.
Possibly bring back mo for a low cost deal for depth or id Carr is released.

 

[jazzcat22]

Something that worked 20yrs ago, might not work now. IMO, the fullback position is kinda being fazed out.

It will work, it is basic football 101. Our players are better than your players.
Aikman often said the same thing. They had basically 3 or 4 running plays, out of some different formations. Everyone knew what was coming, they just couldn't stop it. They executed the plays very well, more so than they could be stopped.

The slant to Irvin, worked almost every time. This team needs to use Dez more in those situations. That i don't understand why Garrett doesn't see this. But I am no OC either, and if I stayed in a holiday Inn Express, it still wouldn't help me...LOL...

 

[Rockport]

Nice write up.
As much as I keep saying it, in the first 2 rounds, come away with a bell cow RB and a QB of the future.
Then fill in the voids not addressed through any FA's.
Need that long term bell cow RB, and take care of the future at QB as well, as a back up to Romo.

Bring back Hardy and RoMac, as you know what you have in them, as opposed to a rookie or yet more FA's looking for a paycheck as well.
Tender Leary and the OL is set, unless he leaves, then we can get a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick.
Possibly bring back mo for a low cost deal for depth or id Carr is released.

Hardys not coming back. He was a liability in the locker room. Exact same thing goes for McClain.

 

[CashMan]

It will work, it is basic football 101. Our players are better than your players.
Aikman often said the same thing. They had basically 3 or 4 running plays, out of some different formations. Everyone knew what was coming, they just couldn't stop it. They executed the plays very well, more so than they could be stopped.

The slant to Irvin, worked almost every time. This team needs to use Dez more in those situations. That i don't understand why Garrett doesn't see this. But I am no OC either, and if I stayed in a holiday Inn Express, it still wouldn't help me...LOL...

You are also speaking of either when there was no cap, or in its infancy stages, where you could have more talent.

 

[Alexander]

It will work, it is basic football 101. Our players are better than your players..

You can look at the most consistent winning teams over the last decade.

You won't find any team that out-talents the other across the board. You have equalizers, like a great coach, great QB, etc.

 

[Stash]

You can look at the most consistent winning teams over the last decade.

You won't find any team that out-talents the other across the board. You have equalizers, like a great coach, great QB, etc.

Exactly. In the salary cap era, you just can't 'out talent' the other team each week. Coaches need to provide a measure of an advantage as well and if they don't, they're a liability and not an asset. I would be very interested to hear about the last time Garrett and Co have out coached the guys on the other side of the field.

 

[CapnCook]

I think on defense, the absence of a salary cap allowed such a deep rotation on the defensive line - the team was able to keep fresh legs on the field at all times with almost no drop off in talent. And having a shut down CB was only part of the 95 team. Really, the corners weren't all that special before Sanders. It was having a real Safety in center field that elevated the corners. Everett, Woodson, Gant, Bates, Marion vs. Church, Wilcox, Heath...I think the big question mark is why doesn't Jerry get it?!?!?! We continue to roll out a terrible secondary season after season, yet, since Roy Willams what resources go towards a key safety?

On offense, in my opinion, the piece that is missing is Norv Turner. But without detailing the all the reasons, I will only ask a puzzling question I cannot answer...why is this offense always in shotgun when the base offense Jason watched and is supposedly emulating had the QB under center? Build a formidable line? I get it. Have a fullback and an all down back? I get it. Run it right at them and set up the pass. Run PA out of shotgun????

Jason is not running Norv's offense. This one looks more like Chan's. He's built his offense around his time with a clip board, but he has designed his scheme based on what he saw when he actually saw the field.

 

[MissionCoach]

You can look at the most consistent winning teams over the last decade.

You won't find any team that out-talents the other across the board. You have equalizers, like a great coach, great QB, etc.

Exactly...in the new era of "parity" in the NFL, Coaches, schemes, remaining flexible and making adjustments are the difference makers.

 

[jazzcat22]

You are also speaking of either when there was no cap, or in its infancy stages, where you could have more talent.

You can look at the most consistent winning teams over the last decade.

You won't find any team that out-talents the other across the board. You have equalizers, like a great coach, great QB, etc.

Exactly. In the salary cap era, you just can't 'out talent' the other team each week. Coaches need to provide a measure of an advantage as well and if they don't, they're a liability and not an asset. I would be very interested to hear about the last time Garrett and Co have out coached the guys on the other side of the field.

Yes, salary cap changed a lot of competitive balances. Jerry was the demise of his own team. As he was the one really promoting the salary cap idea. It tore his team apart. and losing Jimmy didn't help either.
And agree, the coaches need to get the right players for their systems, and not try to make the players fit into their systems. Like Dallas tries to make man to man cover guys play zone, or zone guys play man to man. They think speedy underweight DL are better than the big run stuffer, when they need both, as well as, OL disruption type players.
They have been poor at using the players to their abilities, and instead make them try something they just can't do as well.

 

[Alexander]

It was having a real Safety in center field that elevated the corners. Everett, Woodson, Gant, Bates, Marion vs. Church, Wilcox, Heath...I think the big question mark is why doesn't Jerry get it?!?!?! We continue to roll out a terrible secondary season after season, yet, since Roy Willams what resources go towards a key safety?

Just as frustrated about the safety situation as you are, but how many great ones are there in the league? Berry? Thomas? There are good ones, but mostly they are plucked in the 2nd-4th rounds where we feel it is okay to take projects like Wilcox and the immortal Matt Johnson.

 

[jwooten15]

I think on defense, the absence of a salary cap allowed such a deep rotation on the defensive line - the team was able to keep fresh legs on the field at all times with almost no drop off in talent. And having a shut down CB was only part of the 95 team. Really, the corners weren't all that special before Sanders. It was having a real Safety in center field that elevated the corners. Everett, Woodson, Gant, Bates, Marion vs. Church, Wilcox, Heath...I think the big question mark is why doesn't Jerry get it?!?!?! We continue to roll out a terrible secondary season after season, yet, since Roy Willams what resources go towards a key safety?

On offense, in my opinion, the piece that is missing is Norv Turner. But without detailing the all the reasons, I will only ask a puzzling question I cannot answer...why is this offense always in shotgun when the base offense Jason watched and is supposedly emulating had the QB under center? Build a formidable line? I get it. Have a fullback and an all down back? I get it. Run it right at them and set up the pass. Run PA out of shotgun????

Jason is not running Norv's offense. This one looks more like Chan's. He's built his offense around his time with a clip board, but he has designed his scheme based on what he saw when he actually saw the field.

Makes a lot of sense. I think you're right. The problem is that he is so dead set on what he believes that he's not willing to adapt when a kink gets thrown into the system.

He has to rely on Romo to drive the offense. Much more than Aikman ever had to. And that's part of the problem.

 

[CapnCook]

Just as frustrated about the safety situation as you are, but how many great ones are there in the league? Berry? Thomas? There are good ones, but mostly they are plucked in the 2nd-4th rounds where we feel it is okay to take projects like Wilcox and the immortal Matt Johnson.

Very fair point. I am fairly certain since messing around with Alan Ball, we could have taken the resources spent on Carr and Claiborne and upgraded to the point where we wouldn't have been so needy at the CB position in the first place.

 

[Doc50]

Exactly. In the salary cap era, you just can't 'out talent' the other team each week. Coaches need to provide a measure of an advantage as well and if they don't, they're a liability and not an asset. I would be very interested to hear about the last time Garrett and Co have out coached the guys on the other side of the field.

Yeah, that's a major indictment -- during an era when finding an edge is so important, we rarely have any coaching advantage; it's usually a liability.

 

[Stash]

Yeah, that's a major indictment -- during an era when finding an edge is so important, we rarely have any coaching advantage; it's usually a liability.

That's what I see.

I honestly can't think of the last time we out coached or outsmarted an opponent. And I think that's a big reason why we have been the epitome of a middle of the road team with a head coach with a middle of the road record. You are what your record says you are.

 

[DallasEast]

Nice OP and thread. My only sticking point is running back. In my opinion, it wasn't so much undervaluing DeMarco Murray or overvaluing the offensive line as much as it was overvaluing Joseph Randle and hedging our bets on Darren McFadden.

The OL lacked the steady overall cohesiveness this season as it showed in 2014. Some of its gaffes may be attributed to Bill Calahan's departure. Having a functionally solvent salary cap is a necessity in today's era of the NFL. The front office didn't throw the bank at Murray which was a good thing because Murray was gonna get paid and it's unlikely he would've compromised for less.

Too much trust was placed in Randle. Some people lack the mental faculties necessary in seeing what golden opportunities truly are. Randle's mind lives in a dimly lit world. Randle was the second largest misjudgment by the front office, trailing only the Cleveland Brown stain wonder unaffectionately named Brandon Weeden.

McFadden turned out to be a win for the front office. He demonstrated atypical durability. McFadden preformed well although he didn't enjoy the same number of opportunities as McFadden did the previous season. Free agency offered slim pickings from the running back well. Maybe the front office would've taken a chance on Frank Gore perhaps. Who knows? Their negotiations with McFadden lagged into and dragged past the start of free agency. The chance of retaining Murray was respected until he threw in his Eagles trump card, which was a big blow. Luckily, landing McFadden helped soften it somewhat.

 

[DandyDon52]

the 90's team had a much better defense, which greatly helped them win the 2 SB's, it seems the offense got
most of the credit.
When we let murray go, that would be the same as not paying emmitt and trying to find another good RB to replace him.
They kept the chemistry going back then and it led to 2 SB wins in a row.
Had they tried to replace emmitt that might not have happened.

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

Exactly...in the new era of "parity" in the NFL, Coaches, schemes, remaining flexible and making adjustments are the difference makers.

This is true and its depressing when you consider our future at HC.

 

[cml750]

I can't get past the title. Garrett thinks???? What was he thinking when we couldn't win a game without our superstar QB save Desean Jackson making a beyond boneheaded move??? I don't think he thinks too much. Less Garrett has ALWAYS proven to be more in his time here! You can't say that about the truly good coaches in this league.