Has anything changed?

[casmith07]

I'm inclined to lean in this direction, especially after watching Barber remove his helmet the other day while still on the field. Seriously, what an idiot.

Reaction from a guy that has been reading the papers the last two weeks calling him done in Dallas.

His ego appears to be a little above the team at this point.

 

[Little Jr]

When things went wrog under wade it was wades fault. When things go wrong uner Garrett it everyones fault but garretts. That and we went from a bad team to an avg team is the only thing I see that has change, Keep Garrett and we'll be avg again next year. I'm sure it still wont be his fault though to a lot on this board.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

I can't explain what even happened those two games, except that i think we have some very heartless and gutless football players on this team.

However, the first 6 games under Wade, we were in every game. Since Garrett took over, we are in every game.

Under both coaches, we have been in pretty much every game, yet found pathetic and embarassing ways to lose. You just can't do that. Im glad we fight, but again, this is the Dallas Cowboys.

Im not ok with fighting, i expect to win. I expect a coach that won't tolerate dumb mistakes and will make sure they don't happen in the first place, at least not nearly so often. These past two weeks i've seen a sloppy effort. 7 fumbles against the Saints. An Eagles game that we should have won, and let them come back and get the win at the end.

For the record again, i like Garrett, and some of the changes he's made. I think he deserves a chance to come in here and get his own staff set up and let us see what he can do. However, there are still thinks to be skeptical about with him.

Its the same thing we saw under Wade, when we were "in" those games as well.

We were only in the game the first 5 games under Wade and the biggest reason we were in those games was Tony Romo. Followed by Dez Bryant.

The game wound up closer, than it should have been, in game 6, against the Giants, after Romo went down because Dez Bryant refused to quit. This team, some of the players obviously gutless, absolutely quit the moment Romo went down.

Garrett has had us in games, and winning, with a 38 year old back up QB. Now lots of guys have to do that but I assure you that with Wade this team isn't 4-3 at this point with Kitna.

4-3 is always going to be a glaring improvement over 1-7. It doesn't matter how you slice it, or why it's happening, it's a simple fact that the team is better with Garrett than they were with Wade.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

We were only in the game the first 5 games under Wade and the biggest reason we were in those games was Tony Romo. Followed by Dez Bryant.

The game wound up closer, than it should have been, in game 6, against the Giants, after Romo went down because Dez Bryant refused to quit. This team, some of the players obviously gutless, absolutely quit the moment Romo went down.

Garrett has had us in games, and winning, with a 38 year old back up QB. Now lots of guys have to do that but I assure you that with Wade this team isn't 4-3 at this point with Kitna.

4-3 is always going to be a glaring improvement over 1-7. It doesn't matter how you slice it, or why it's happening, it's a simple fact that the team is better with Garrett than they were with Wade.

We were in the first 6 games, doesn't matter why.

No one is arguing that we arn't better off with Garrett than Wade, though that's not really saying much at all. lol

 

[zack]

I respect that Jason has won a few games, but why shouldn't he. The Cowboys were a playoff team last year with high expectations. He should have won some games. The Cowboys should have blown out the Skins and Cardinals and we barely beat the Skins and lost to a horrible, horrible Cardinals team.

IMO keeping him here will continue with the losing culture. The team responded in the short term, but next year, I think the mentality will creep back in. I think he will make a fine coach with a squad that he hasn't coached already.

There are a couple of things that disturb me about him. The defense has played horrible, especially the secondary. Who has been the best secondary player over the past several games? I would say Scandrick. So, why does he continue to play Jenkins and even Newman who are constantly blowing coverage and giving up huge plays. Shoot..make a statement, bench one of them, put in Scandrick or McCann. At least these guys will give effort, but he doesn't. Again, he is the head coach, not the Offensive Coordinator.

Barber is another one. I have no respect for him continuing to play this guy. So, he had his best game against the Cardinals, big deal...Tashard Choice still has more long runs that he does in half the games...But, Garrett continues to play him. With all of the celebration penalties we have had this year, Barber then pulls his lid off. He wouldn't have seen the field for the rest of the game. Make a statement, bench him, but he didn't...

I wish I had an answer for who should be the coach next year. Jerry has his work cut out for him......

 

[Stautner]

The only thing i would say to this is when you have so many of these things that keep happening, they arn't really flukes anymore.

The "fluke" missed XP, the "fluke" tipped pass, the "fluke" falling in a cut, the "fluke" 7 fumbles against the Saints, the "fluke" 91 yard pass TD that we allowed against the Eagles..

At a certain point, i'd expect a good coach to mimimize these problems, as they seem to show a lack of focus and discipline by the team. We saw these things happen under Wade, and if we want to all suggest that Garrett is a much better coach and we'll be much more successful with him at the helm, then i don't expect to see these types of things continue to happen.

Who said a 91 yard pass was a fluke? That was a major screw up, period. But how do you coach away a tipped pass or a receiver that falls down? Those aren't mental mistakes or flaws in scheme or game plan, they are physical errors.

Nevertheless, I'm not trying to say Garrett is flawless by any stretch. All I'm saying is you can't condemn him for winning some close games that could have gone the other way. Teams that win games don't dominate every week - it just doesn't work that way. Winning teams find ways to win in the face of situations where they can lose.

All I'm saying is if a person is going to suggest we didn't earn a win in those close games that could have ended in the opponents favor, then it's only fair to likewise suggest our opponents didn't earn the win in the close games that could have ended in our favor. After all, how is it fair that every close game, win or lose, is an indictment of the Cowboys, and every close game, win or lose, indicates our opponent deserved to win?

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Who said a 91 yard pass was a fluke? That was a major screw up, period. But how do you coach away a tipped pass or a receiver that falls down? Those aren't mental mistakes or flaws in scheme or game plan, they are physical errors.

Nevertheless, I'm not trying to say Garrett is flawless by any stretch. All I'm saying is you can't condemn him for winning some close games that could have gone the other way. Teams that win games don't dominate every week - it just doesn't work that way. Winning teams find ways to win in the face of situations where they can lose.

All I'm saying is if a person is going to suggest we didn't earn a win in those close games that could have ended in the opponents favor, then it's only fair to likewise suggest our opponents didn't earn the win in the close games that could have ended in our favor. After all, how is it fair that every close game, win or lose, is an indictment of the Cowboys, and every close game, win or lose, indicates our opponent deserved to win?

A win is a win, and a loss is a loss.. no matter what people say. We have won some close games, but we've also lost some close games because of silly mistakes as well. Im glad we were able to pull out the close wins, but we can't keep losing close games due to ugly mistakes if we want to be a good football team. Its what we did under Wade, because we were in alot of those games as well until the end, and if Garrett wants to be here long term, it simply can't keep happening. The Saints game with 7 fumbles, and the one at the end, just can't happen. Its obviously a lack of focus and discipline. Same with letting a simple out route turn into 91 yards and a TD. Coverages simply can't break down that badly, and that many people on the D just can't not miss tackles and take horrible angles to allow that to happen. The Cardinals game is the same deal, missed extra point. Again, focus, discipline.. two of the major selling points for Garrett i thought.

He's done some good things so far, and there are other things that are still questionable in my eyes. He gets credit for those nice wins against the G men, and the Colts, but also has to take blame for the close losses as well. Again, im glad we're in each game and playing hard, but i expect more than "playing hard" from the Dallas Cowboys. That's a loser mentality to find that since we're playing hard its acceptable.

 

[Stautner]

A win is a win, and a loss is a loss.. no matter what people say. We have won some close games, but we've also lost some close games because of silly mistakes as well. Im glad we were able to pull out the close wins, but we can't keep losing close games due to ugly mistakes if we want to be a good football team. Its what we did under Wade, because we were in alot of those games as well until the end, and if Garrett wants to be here long term, it simply can't keep happening. The Saints game with 7 fumbles, and the one at the end, just can't happen. Its obviously a lack of focus and discipline. Same with letting a simple out route turn into 91 yards and a TD. Coverages simply can't break down that badly, and that many people on the D just can't not miss tackles and take horrible angles to allow that to happen. The Cardinals game is the same deal, missed extra point. Again, focus, discipline.. two of the major selling points for Garrett i thought.

He's done some good things so far, and there are other things that are still questionable in my eyes. He gets credit for those nice wins against the G men, and the Colts, but also has to take blame for the close losses as well. Again, im glad we're in each game and playing hard, but i expect more than "playing hard" from the Dallas Cowboys. That's a loser mentality to find that since we're playing hard its acceptable.

I can live with this because it's based on giving credit where due, and having issues where warrented. LatinMind wasn't doing that. To him both the wins and losses condemned Garrett, which is bogus crap.

I agree that just playing hard isn't enough, but everything has to be looked at in context. If there is real improvement, a real upward trend, and there is real expectation that the improvement will continue, then wins and losses in for an interim coach who hasn't had an opportunity to make changes can't be the entire picture. Sure there has to be wins, but taking a team from the trash heap to a top team in half a season can't be the standard. Jimmy johnson didn't even win until his 3rd year.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

I agree that just playing hard isn't enough, but everything has to be looked at in context. If there is real improvement, a real upward trend, and there is real expectation that the improvement will continue, then wins and losses in for an interim coach who hasn't had an opportunity to make changes can't be the entire picture. Sure there has to be wins, but taking a team from the trash heap to a top team in half a season can't be the standard. Jimmy johnson didn't even win until his 3rd year.

I definately understand what you're saying, although im of the belief that this team isn't the "trash heap" that some want to make it out to be. Im not sure if you were just using that term as a generalization, or if you really think this team is trash, but this is the same team that took us to the postseason and got us our first playoff win in 15 years, just last season. The same team that crushed the Eagles 3 times and shut them down in the playoffs.

I think there is definate talent on this team, which is why i expect more than just "playing hard" with Garrett running things. Wins and losses arn't the entire picture i see when debating how well JG has done so far though. We've been playing hard most of the time yes, but we've also had a considerable amount of sloppy play, poor execution, and a lack of focus that have cost us. He has done some good things and made some changes i really like, but again too many of the silly mistakes keep popping up. We have to nip those in the bud. I think he's done enough to warrent a chance to lead this team though.

 

[Tommy]

I've argued plenty against Red using multiple sound arguments.

You should post them on cowboyszone sometime.

 

[Stautner]

I definately understand what you're saying, although im of the belief that this team isn't the "trash heap" that some want to make it out to be. Im not sure if you were just using that term as a generalization, or if you really think this team is trash, but this is the same team that took us to the postseason and got us our first playoff win in 15 years, just last season. The same team that crushed the Eagles 3 times and shut them down in the playoffs.

I think there is definate talent on this team, which is why i expect more than just "playing hard" with Garrett running things. Wins and losses arn't the entire picture i see when debating how well JG has done so far though. We've been playing hard most of the time yes, but we've also had a considerable amount of sloppy play, poor execution, and a lack of focus that have cost us. He has done some good things and made some changes i really like, but again too many of the silly mistakes keep popping up. We have to nip those in the bud. I think he's done enough to warrent a chance to lead this team though.

I don't think the team is trash, but I do think the first half of the season that's what our performance showed. I agree completely there is more talent here than our record shows and that we should be winning games, but the fact is we weren't, the team hit bottom, and Garrett helped pull the team out. The question is simply whether Garrett can really keep the trend going, and can get them to play to their full potential, or if there is a limit to what he can do with the team? I think that's a very hard question to answer at this point. Having to start with a team on the skids and being unable to make changes since they were already halfway into the season just isn't a full guage of what he can or can't do, so a lot is left on Jerry making a determination on what he thinks and what he sees. Unfortunately aws fans we have a very limited picture of what is going on in the lockerrom and on the practice field, so its harder for us to say.

 

[Tommy]

Take away the two games where this entire team quit, and look at the first 6 games we played under Wade, and the last 7 we've played under Garrett, and tell me what the big changes are?

Good idea! Wow it does look the same.

Wait! Now lets take away Garrett's 2 worst games and look how much better we look.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

I don't think the team is trash, but I do think the first half of the season that's what our performance showed. I agree completely there is more talent here than our record shows and that we should be winning games, but the fact is we weren't, the team hit bottom, and Garrett helped pull the team out. The question is simply whether Garrett can really keep the trend going, and can get them to play to their full potential, or if there is a limit to what he can do with the team? I think that's a very hard question to answer at this point. Having to start with a team on the skids and being unable to make changes since they were already halfway into the season just isn't a full guage of what he can or can't do, so a lot is left on Jerry making a determination on what he thinks and what he sees. Unfortunately aws fans we have a very limited picture of what is going on in the lockerrom and on the practice field, so its harder for us to say.

Fair statement. I've said before i believe one of the reasons i feel he deserves a chance and to be our next HC is because of the limited time he's had as the interim to really prove much. Its a shame we didn't get rid of Wade earlier so we'd have a bigger sample size to evaluate Garrett off of. As it is now, the organization has to make a very tough decision based on a small body of work.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

I don't understand why we have to take away the two worst losses under Wade in order to try and make it seem like this team was the same.

So do we get to throw out the Cards and eagles losses for Garrett?

 

[RoyTheHammer]

I don't understand why we have to take away the two worst losses under Wade in order to try and make it seem like this team was the same.

So do we get to throw out the Cards and eagles losses for Garrett?

Because the team wasn't even playing in those two games, its like we forfeited. Honestly i try not to think of them at all because i was so disgusted watching them. Heartless and gutless.

The team isn't the same under Garrett as we were under Wade, but we're still seeing some of the same results.

 

[Tommy]

Fair statement. I've said before i believe one of the reasons i feel he deserves a chance and to be our next HC is because of the limited time he's had as the interim to really prove much. Its a shame we didn't get rid of Wade earlier so we'd have a bigger sample size to evaluate Garrett off of. As it is now, the organization has to make a very tough decision based on a small body of work.

I agree. I think that Garrett has made some positive changes in the short time he has had. I dont understand what some peoples expectations are with him taking over for 2 months in the middle of the season. Did you expect him to go from 1-7 the first half to the SB contenders you thought we were in the 2nd half? Thats not realistic. I dont know if he will be a great coach. I hope he is. But I like what Ive seen so far.

 

[zrinkill]

Good idea! Wow it does look the same.

Wait! Now lets take away Garrett's 2 worst games and look how much better we look.

:laugh2:

 

[RoyTheHammer]

I agree. I think that Garrett has made some positive changes in the short time he has had. I dont understand what some peoples expectations are with him taking over for 2 months in the middle of the season. Did you expect him to go from 1-7 the first half to the SB contenders you thought we were in the 2nd half? Thats not realistic. I dont know if he will be a great coach. I hope he is. But I like what Ive seen so far.

Realistically there have been some positives yes, but some negatives as well. There's surely no reason to say at this point that Garrett is far and away the most qualified man for the job, though i believe he will ultimately get it next year.

 

[Dhragon]

You should post them on cowboyszone sometime.

LOL, I was wondering if anyone would take a swing at that softball pitch.

Here are what in my eyes are reasons not to keep Jason Garrett as HC all in one place, free of charge:

1) Red benefited from the spike in a team's attention when the HC was fired (Wade). Just like when Leslie Frasier took over in Minnesota, the players recognized their own career mortality and the next few games they played their A-game. We all saw how good this team COULD play in those first few games, beating the Giants, the Colts and almost the Saints.

That established what this team is capable of. Now fast forward to the last few games. Where we won or almost won against playoff caliber teams, we now can't even win against the very worst teams. I guarantee that team playing against the Giants, Colts and Saints would not have lost or even been in a close game against the Skins or the Cardinals.

The team has lost its edge again. A great coach could have maintained that level our team achieved. Red has not. The team which could beat the Giants and Colts is no more. Now they cannot beat the lowly Cards. I want a coach which can get and maintain the best in our team. Sue me.

2) Red has not even now fully learned the OC job. How long will it take him to learn to be a HC well enough to win a Superbowl? Probably several years at best.

I truly feel Romo is a top notch QB capable of winning a Superbowl if we have a top notch HC/OC to help him. Before Red can become that he will need some on-the-job-training. By that time Romo might no longer be in his prime and capable anymore.

3) Jerry has been more out in the press than ever since Red has become HC. This will continue if Red keeps that job. More Jerry spouting off is NOT what we need. Less Jerry is. That will only occur if we get a strong, respected HC in here.

The stronger the better. No one can keep Jerry out of it completely, not even Parcells. But a coach with skins on the wall would probably be able to limit the amount of Jerry at least a little. Any decrease in Jerry is a good thing IMO.

4) Red is NOT Sean Payton. Most people have so much rueage over losing Sean Payton that they just can't seem to believe that maybe Red is NOT the same. For every Payton, there are many more young hotshot coordinators given the chance only to fail horribly. Just because Red is fairly young and has some well known supporters (Aikman, Babe, etc) doesn't mean he is all that.

You got to separate Red from Payton, but I believe many on here just can't do that. He doesn't have the same experience or temperment.

5) Red seems fake to me. I once had a boss who would read all sorts of books on leadership and management. He would quote stupid phrases out of those books all the time. The books told him how he was supposed to act towards people. It came across fake and most saw right through him.

Garrett, in his PC, sounds scarily similar to those books. Different phrases he uses sound eerily similar to what my former boss used to say. I'd be willing to bet Red has some of the same leadership books he studies. Comes across fake to me. If players start to see the same, they will be turned off as well.

5) Various other more minor things, but since this is already long enough and aren't too important, I'll skip.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Nice post, Dhargon.

I have to say that I see some of the same things you do in your #5. Haven't seen anyone else say that before, but I've felt it for a while.

I guess we both have to hope Hell has Sunday Ticket.