How can anyone defend these coaches?

[jobberone]

Hank Stram with the Chiefs.

As far as what Johnson did for the game, he brought forth the concept of having a rotation of defensive line players to keep the team fresh. Johnson also brought more of a speed based approach to defense, largely going in the face of what had been a power/size approach around the league. He also changed the approach to the draft with working with Mike McCoy to develop the trade chart, and to accumulate picks to utilize more of a "fishnet" approach to player acquisition.

Johnson didn't invent rotation. He just took advantage of one of the deepest rosters I've ever seen esp on the DL. Johnson didn't invent a speedy defense. Other teams have had fast lite LBs. I assume that's what you're referring to as DBs are all over the place since the merger. Bud Carson was one of the first NFL coaches to use quick fast lite LBs but not the first. He's the father of the Tampa 2 concept using Lambert as that cover MLB. Johnson didn't invent the draft chart by himself either. Jerry et al get credit for that, too. I don't know what the fishnet approach is but teams have stockpiled and traded picks since early on esp the Cowboys Tex Schramm. Jimmy was a great communicator and greater motivator. He also had a very good eye for talent and more so for coaching talent. He was a bit ruthless, too, which can be a good thing at times.

 

[Hook'em#11]

I think we're 1-1. That makes us a moral 500 under Jason Garrett.

And, also , remember. It's all a process.. Can't forget that...

My lord, what have my beloved Cowboys become.

 

[jobberone]

Well since I saw both Tom and Jimmy coach and build teams I think I am a good judge of both. First I want to say Tom was a good coach but Jimmy Johnson was the best coach of all time Cowboys or anywhere else, yeah I said that and I meant it. Now Why do I say that? When Jimmy Johnson was coaching at Miami I saw what he did and loved it, build a championship team. I said I love this guy and I wish he would coach the Cowboys. Not only did he build championship teams he gave them attitude. When Jimmy had his players walk off the plane in army uniforms to play the Sooners, I loved it, what attitude what swagger. Then he comes to Dallas and inherits the worst team in the league and four years later we are winning Superbowls and he built the team that won 3 Super Bowls. Compare all the years Tom coached the Cowboys to the ones Jimmy did and give an honest answer, who produced the most for the Cowboys. Don't get me wrong I liked Tom, but the team had gone to hell in the 80's and something had to be done. Jimmy did it, and did it well indeed. Jimmy was the only coach to win Superbowls and a National Championship in college. Jimmy knew how to get the most out of players and could handle head cases, Tom could not (Hollywood Henderson and Duane Thomas are examples). Jimmy said all players are not treated the same, people that produce get special treatment. Guess what ? The cream did rise to the top. I could go on and on but Jimmy is , how shall I put it? "The best there is,the best there was, and the best there ever will be". FOOTNOTE #1 Bret Hart.

Well, Tom learned to treat some a little different over time but he's a different generation than Jimmy. Being in war makes one different and that entire generation was different than the next three. And it's just a different style of coaching and a different human being. You're welcome to your opinion though. If you put Jimmy's record up besides Landry's then there is not much comparison. Landry is considered one of the greatest coaches of all time and rightfully so. Jimmy has a rep but I wouldn't put him in the same class...not even close. Jimmy will not likely see his bust at the HOF.

 

[dallasdave]

Well, Tom learned to treat some a little different over time but he's a different generation than Jimmy. Being in war makes one different and that entire generation was different than the next three. And it's just a different style of coaching and a different human being. You're welcome to your opinion though. If you put Jimmy's record up besides Landry's then there is not much comparison. Landry is considered one of the greatest coaches of all time and rightfully so. Jimmy has a rep but I wouldn't put him in the same class...not even close. Jimmy will not likely see his bust at the HOF.

You are right there is no comparison in a few years Jimmy won 2 Superbowls and Tom won 2 Superbowls in 29 years. Also Jimmy built the team that won 3 Superbowls and Tom lost 3 Superbowls. Jimmy did so much more in a short period of time its not even funny. Jimmy left a team that was still great and when Tom was fired he had the worst team in the league. Jimmy was hard coach but never let top talent players be ruined, he got rid of bottom rung players. Tom let Hollywood Henderson go, and ruined Duane Thomas who was a top 3 back in the 1970's. You are right Jimmy is in a class by himself the only coach to win a Superbowl and a National Championship.

 

[dallasdave]

Hank Stram with the Chiefs.

As far as what Johnson did for the game, he brought forth the concept of having a rotation of defensive line players to keep the team fresh. Johnson also brought more of a speed based approach to defense, largely going in the face of what had been a power/size approach around the league. He also changed the approach to the draft with working with Mike McCoy to develop the trade chart, and to accumulate picks to utilize more of a "fishnet" approach to player acquisition.

Very Well Said Indeed Sir.

 

[Plankton]

Johnson didn't invent rotation. He just took advantage of one of the deepest rosters I've ever seen esp on the DL. Johnson didn't invent a speedy defense. Other teams have had fast lite LBs. I assume that's what you're referring to as DBs are all over the place since the merger. Bud Carson was one of the first NFL coaches to use quick fast lite LBs but not the first. He's the father of the Tampa 2 concept using Lambert as that cover MLB. Johnson didn't invent the draft chart by himself either. Jerry et al get credit for that, too. I don't know what the fishnet approach is but teams have stockpiled and traded picks since early on esp the Cowboys Tex Schramm. Jimmy was a great communicator and greater motivator. He also had a very good eye for talent and more so for coaching talent. He was a bit ruthless, too, which can be a good thing at times.

Tell me what the trend in the NFL was defensively at the time that Johnson came to the league, and investigate how it changed after that.

Johnson's approach was not restricted to linebackers. It was taking college LBs such as Tony Tolbert and making them DEs. It was taking college DEs such as Chad Hennings and making them DTs. Teams did not typically rotate linemen - they stuck with their starters. Johnson changed that, as he applied the same philosophy that he utilized at Miami in college.

As for the chart, you completely missed where I said that Johnson worked with Mike McCoy to come up with the chart. McCoy was Jones' oil investment partner from ventures in Oklahoma and Arkansas. I didn't give Johnson full credit for it, but he certainly was a driver in coming up with it, as he had full control over the personnel and the acquisition of personnel.

And, no one traded around the draft like the Cowboys did in Johnson's Dallas days. They made somewhere in the neighborhood of 50+ trades in that span. No one worked the draft that way on a consistent basis. He did it to accumulate as many players as possible, knowing that he would bust on a number of them. With that approach, you stood a much better chance of finding players that would stick. The Cowboys had 18 picks in 1991, and 15 in 1992. It made it possible for the Cowboys to whiff on guys such as James Richards, Tony Hill (the DE, not WR), and Kevin Harris in 1991, and James Brown and Tom Myslinski in 1992, because you have that many more draft picks to make up for those busts.

 

[dallasdave]

Tell me what the trend in the NFL was defensively at the time that Johnson came to the league, and investigate how it changed after that.

Johnson's approach was not restricted to linebackers. It was taking college LBs such as Tony Tolbert and making them DEs. It was taking college DEs such as Chad Hennings and making them DTs. Teams did not typically rotate linemen - they stuck with their starters. Johnson changed that, as he applied the same philosophy that he utilized at Miami in college.

As for the chart, you completely missed where I said that Johnson worked with Mike McCoy to come up with the chart. McCoy was Jones' oil investment partner from ventures in Oklahoma and Arkansas. I didn't give Johnson full credit for it, but he certainly was a driver in coming up with it, as he had full control over the personnel and the acquisition of personnel.

And, no one traded around the draft like the Cowboys did in Johnson's Dallas days. They made somewhere in the neighborhood of 50+ trades in that span. No one worked the draft that way on a consistent basis. He did it to accumulate as many players as possible, knowing that he would bust on a number of them. With that approach, you stood a much better chance of finding players that would stick. The Cowboys had 18 picks in 1991, and 15 in 1992. It made it possible for the Cowboys to whiff on guys such as James Richards, Tony Hill (the DE, not WR), and Kevin Harris in 1991, and James Brown and Tom Myslinski in 1992, because you have that many more draft picks to make up for those busts.

You said it and it shows that Jimmy Johnson changed the whole way defense was played in the NFL and also was the best drafter of all time in addition to being the best coach of all time.

 

[TimHortons]

Lmao. I've heard it all now.

Exactly. If we don't match up with the Broncos, chargers or lions who have great passing attacks but no running game, and they don't match up with the Vikings who have a running game and an atrocious passing game, who exactly do we match up with?

 

[Stash]

And you should try to address the argument, rather than arguing I shouldn't make it just because it's unpopular.

I have, with actual facts rather than unsubstantiated excuses.

No factors whatsoever excused them from not running the ball like they did - none.

But that gets ignored in your rush to defend the indefensible.

You can enjoy the win all you want, just don't try to pull wool over any eyes other than your own.

 

[jobberone]

You are right there is no comparison in a few years Jimmy won 2 Superbowls and Tom won 2 Superbowls in 29 years. Also Jimmy built the team that won 3 Superbowls and Tom lost 3 Superbowls. Jimmy did so much more in a short period of time its not even funny. Jimmy left a team that was still great and when Tom was fired he had the worst team in the league. Jimmy was hard coach but never let top talent players be ruined, he got rid of bottom rung players. Tom let Hollywood Henderson go, and ruined Duane Thomas who was a top 3 back in the 1970's. You are right Jimmy is in a class by himself the only coach to win a Superbowl and a National Championship.

You're right. How can I possibly argue against Jimmy. Jimmy's overall record is 89-68. He had playoff appearances three times with the Cowboys and two with the Dolphins winning one playoff game there. His winning % was 53% in Miami and his great drafting was good but had some embarrassments, too. Landry had 20 st8 winning seasons still a record and not likely to be broken anytime soon. If you add in the 7-7 record in 65 then that's 21 st8 non-losing seasons in a row. Landry was 270-178 and that includes a 25-53 record the first six years of the Cowboys'. Landry took his team to the NFL championship game pre-merger or the NFC CC game or SB 12 times from 66-82 which will never be equaled IMHO. That's 12 out of 17 years. You can make an argument that Tom should have won a few more overall championships out of that but just getting there is an unbelievable feat I think.

BTW, Tom didn't ruin either of those two players. Henderson ruined what should have been a HOF career with cocaine. Hardly Tom's fault wouldn't you say. And Thomas ruined his own career with the help of a militant Jim Brown. People are responsible for their own behavior.

I loved Jimmy Johnson but he ain't no Tom Landry nor was he anything compared to Don Shula either. You can have the last word.

 

[Plankton]

You said it and it shows that Jimmy Johnson changed the whole way defense was played in the NFL and also was the best drafter of all time in addition to being the best coach of all time.

I don't know that he was the best drafter or coach of all time, but he was very good at both.

Bill Walsh was very underrated at personnel. Ozzie Newsome has obviously been very good at personnel.

 

[Idgit]

I have, with actual facts rather than unsubstantiated excuses.

Cool. If you'd like to link to the actual facts you provided, I'll be sure to address any that I haven't already. I don't remember a lot of them. Mostly I remember stuff like this: "No factors whatsoever excused them from not running the ball like they did - none," which I consider just an unsubstantiated opinion.

 

[Stash]

Cool. If you'd like to link to the actual facts you provided, I'll be sure to address any that I haven't already. I don't remember a lot of them. Mostly I remember stuff like this: "No factors whatsoever excused them from not running the ball like they did - none," which I consider just an unsubstantiated opinion.

Tell that to the head coach you're trying to defend who is publicly agreeing with me.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

DeMarco Murray 7.8 yard average on his 4 carries.

Defend getting away from that.

Thanks in advance.

 

[jobberone]

I have, with actual facts rather than unsubstantiated excuses.

No factors whatsoever excused them from not running the ball like they did - none.

But that gets ignored in your rush to defend the indefensible.

You can enjoy the win all you want, just don't try to pull wool over any eyes other than your own.

You don't always have to run the ball to win although I'm a big proponent of running the ball effectively. There is nothing factual about the bolded. Walsh didn't use the run to set the pass up most of his career but the other way around. Later on when he had a better team to run with he used it more often. I've seen Tom Belichick have Brady throw the ball over 50 times to win playoff games. I've seen them run the ball effectively as well. There is no one recipe for winning games in this league. They play pass you try to run. They play the run you try to pass. You also have to do what is working for you and what plays to your strengths and gets around your weaknesses. That's coaching.

They were run blitzing and came prepared to take the run away. You're foolish to run into a brick wall over and over or even to force the run when you're given the pass. Another part of the problem is we just don't run the ball well. You can make the argument we don't run it well because we don't 'commit' to running the ball. But you are making an argument based on opinion rather than fact. Maybe you're right. I don't think so because you win in this league throwing the ball. The onus when teams play to put pressure on Tony and show and actually run and pass blitz a lot is for Tony to beat it. He didn't against KC but did against Washington. I haven't looked at the Det or SD game enough to comment. The run wasn't there yesterday and I have no problem taking what the defense gives us and what we can do best esp considering the state of our run game and the loss of Waters.

I'm not sure why you're even upset about it. Tony threw the ball well. We didn't score more because we killed our own drives with penalties and dropped balls. The game wasn't close because we didn't run the ball. It was also close because we didn't stop their run game but then AD creates that problem for many teams even when they pack the box.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

You don't always have to run the ball to win although I'm a big proponent of running the ball effectively. There is nothing factual about the bolded. Walsh didn't use the run to set the pass up most of his career but the other way around. Later on when he had a better team to run with he used it more often. I've seen Tom Belichick have Brady throw the ball over 50 times to win playoff games. I've seen them run the ball effectively as well. There is no one recipe for winning games in this league. They play pass you try to run. They play the run you try to pass. You also have to do what is working for you and what plays to your strengths and gets around your weaknesses. That's coaching.

They were run blitzing and came prepared to take the run away. You're foolish to run into a brick wall over and over or even to force the run when you're given the pass. Another part of the problem is we just don't run the ball well. You can make the argument we don't run it well because we don't 'commit' to running the ball. But you are making an argument based on opinion rather than fact. Maybe you're right. I don't think so because you win in this league throwing the ball. The onus when teams play to put pressure on Tony and show and actually run and pass blitz a lot is for Tony to beat it. He didn't against KC but did against Washington. I haven't looked at the Det or SD game enough to comment. The run wasn't there yesterday and I have no problem taking what the defense gives us and what we can do best esp considering the state of our run game and the loss of Waters.

I'm not sure why you're even upset about it. Tony threw the ball well. We didn't score more because we killed our own drives with penalties and dropped balls. The game wasn't close because we didn't run the ball. It was also close because we didn't stop their run game but then AD creates that problem for many teams even when they pack the box.

Your not running the ball over and over into a brick wall in the game vs the Vikings.

1. You can't have a good YPC average in a game if you are running into a brick wall. If you were running into a brick wall you would have a crappy YPC average.

2. You can not keep running the ball over and over into a brick wall excuse, when you run it less than ten times in a whole game.

Now there are many things that can be argued and have been argued in this thread but frankly I don't see how anyone can say we did not run the ball or we can't run the ball more because we are running into a brick wall, when it was quite obvious that that is an incorrect statement based on the stats...at least for THIS game.

 

[Idgit]

Tell that to the head coach you're trying to defend who is publicly agreeing with me.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

DeMarco Murray 7.8 yard average on his 4 carries.

Defend getting away from that.

Thanks in advance.

Ok. Well, technically, that's not a link to actual facts provided earlier in the thread, and, rather, it's just a link to an article that has part of Jason's quotes on the topic from his post game press conference. But I'll defend it, anyway, since you asked so nicely.

Or, rather, I'll let Jason's comments on the subject defend it, since he's saying the same things I've been saying in the thread, anyway. The question about the running game starts at the 3:15 s mark.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/multim...nference/0169b4fc-47ed-420c-a3c8-1547c4ed56e3

 

[Stash]

You don't always have to run the ball to win although I'm a big proponent of running the ball effectively. There is nothing factual about the bolded. Walsh didn't use the run to set the pass up most of his career but the other way around. Later on when he had a better team to run with he used it more often. I've seen Tom Belichick have Brady throw the ball over 50 times to win playoff games. I've seen them run the ball effectively as well. There is no one recipe for winning games in this league. They play pass you try to run. They play the run you try to pass. You also have to do what is working for you and what plays to your strengths and gets around your weaknesses. That's coaching.

Murray 7.8 yards per 4 carries, defend decision to abandon him?

They were run blitzing and came prepared to take the run away. You're foolish to run into a brick wall over and over or even to force the run when you're given the pass. Another part of the problem is we just don't run the ball well. You can make the argument we don't run it well because we don't 'commit' to running the ball. But you are making an argument based on opinion rather than fact. Maybe you're right. I don't think so because you win in this league throwing the ball. The onus when teams play to put pressure on Tony and show and actually run and pass blitz a lot is for Tony to beat it. He didn't against KC but did against Washington. I haven't looked at the Det or SD game enough to comment. The run wasn't there yesterday and I have no problem taking what the defense gives us and what we can do best esp considering the state of our run game and the loss of Waters.

With a franchise low in attempts, you cannot make that statement. This team did not even attempt to run the ball against steam that gave up almost 200 yards the prior game. Inexcusable.

But go on and try to tell us what a tough out this 1-7 team was ad what a quality victory we should be celebrating. Sorry, not buying any of what you're trying to sell.

I'm not sure why you're even upset about it. Tony threw the ball well. We didn't score more because we killed our own drives with penalties and dropped balls. The game wasn't close because we didn't run the ball. It was also close because we didn't stop their run game but then AD creates that problem for many teams even when they pack the box.

Upset about bold-faced lies told in an effort to excuse total ineptitude.

Upset when some want to make excuses for a rut of mediocrity and sell them to everyone else.

This team just squeaked out a win at home against an NFL bottom feeder and will soon be publicly humiliated for the world to see by an actually good team en route to another 8-8 or worse wasted season.

Not going to apologize for not being happy with this being the current state of my favorite team.

Any not going to try to make lame excuses for it either.

 

[Stash]

Ok. Well, technically, that's not a link to actual facts provided earlier in the thread, and, rather, it's just a link to an article that has part of Jason's quotes on the topic from his post game press conference. But I'll defend it, anyway, since you asked so nicely.

Or, rather, I'll let Jason's comments on the subject defend it, since he's saying the same things I've been saying in the thread, anyway. The question about the running game starts at the 3:15 s mark.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/multim...nference/0169b4fc-47ed-420c-a3c8-1547c4ed56e3

Thanks, but I'm not interested in hearing the latest and greatest excuse for why Garrett can't coach the NFL running game.

 

[visionary]

No, there isn't.

And nobody outside of one person is trying.

Even the man responsible for it isn't.

some people just have preconceived notions that are wrong but they have argued from that side for so long that their whole ego is built around them

they cannot admit they are wrong even though they know they are

 

[Stash]

some people just have preconceived notions that are wrong but they have argued from that side for so long that their whole ego is built around them

they cannot admit they are wrong even though they know they are

Hey, I've got two and a half seasons of 8-8 backing up what I'm saying.

I'm more than secure in my position.

They haven't got enough fingers for this dike.