If you have any question Garrett blew it...

[TTexasTT]

In todays presser...Garrett hinted at the play when holding was called but stopped short of "singling out a player". Who ran the ball that play? Tanner, wasnt it? He was asked about the play call/design and thats when he said (paraphrase)... We dont like to call out any player, but yes that play we wanted it to stay inside, get what you can going north south and not bouncing it outside.

But...as he points this out today, I quickly am thinking...well isnt that coaching? Was this kid told to not go outside?

He probably just thinks that its really nobodys business but the teams.

 

[Deep_South]

Our punter is not good at punting the ball inside the 20. It seems to me that it usually lands right on the 15 or in the end zone. Our short passing game was not working - Romo only had 14 completions the whole game. The running game was getting stuffed. The defense was getting owned the entire game and almost set the all time record for ineptness.

I just don't think the "right" thing to do there is as simple a decision as I thought when watching the game. (I wanted Romo to sling it on our possession with 3-something minutes left. Ditto on the one with Smith's hold - no faith in the defense.) But, in the end, Garrett got us a 6 point lead, and all the defense had to do was keep the Lions from scoring a touchdown for one minute. They failed.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Yep. Even Stockton and Billick agreed that Garrett should trust in his kicker and go for the 3 points. Which he did. It's not his fault that we could not get any pressure from our front four during the Lions final possession. Heck, we didn't get any pressure on Stafford whatsoever. One sack by Hatcher? No wonder Calvin had a career day. Stafford had all day.

but why would he think that all of a sudden we would be able to stop them when we really hadn't all day?

 

[85Cowboy85]

Is this article suggesting this information could have been available to Garrett within the time span between third and fourth down? Because it's laughable to suggest that someone could intuitively make a decision based on the small difference between those odds. It's not like he had 4 to a royal flush in video poker and tossed it out for two kings...

You could do this with today's technology easily. There are freshman computer science students who could make a program that tells you situational odds based on game situation. Just stick it on on ipad give it to somebody up in the booth and have them on a headset with Garrett.

The thing is though for whatever reason nobody in the league follows those odds. All the statistics for years have said teams should go for it on fourth down a lot more. Parcells was really the only guy here who would do that aggressively.

 

[Idgit]

I didn't like the two earlier punts, either, so that's good to see those ended up being mistakes. I do wonder on how the math is adjusted for league-wide situational metrics to go for it on 4th and 2 when we're down to our 3rd option at running back and don't have an average trust in our running game to convert, for example.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

You could do this with today's technology easily. There are freshman computer science students who could make a program that tells you situational odds based on game situation. Just stick it on on ipad give it to somebody up in the booth and have them on a headset with Garrett.

The thing is though for whatever reason nobody in the league follows those odds. All the statistics for years have said teams should go for it on fourth down a lot more. Parcells was really the only guy here who would do that aggressively.

In 35 seconds though? So Garret pulls out his iPad, starts fiddling with the dropdowns that say "select quarter" and "select down", does all of that and then presses the button, then he gets his answer? He sees one is 94 percent and the other 87% and that is a big enough difference for him to just ignore his gut and follow the program? And all of this happens in a screaming dome with people in his headset and the play clock running down?!?

 

[Staubacher]

In todays presser...Garrett hinted at the play when holding was called but stopped short of "singling out a player". Who ran the ball that play? Tanner, wasnt it? He was asked about the play call/design and thats when he said (paraphrase)... We dont like to call out any player, but yes that play we wanted it to stay inside, get what you can going north south and not bouncing it outside.

But...as he points this out today, I quickly am thinking...well isnt that coaching? Was this kid told to not go outside?

Garrett - "we (meaning he) doesn't like to point out any player, but...IT WAS TANNER HE DID IT NOT ME"

 

[Cowboy4ever]

but why would he think that all of a sudden we would be able to stop them when we really hadn't all day?

The game I watched, they stopped them on downs just the series before that, which led to a Fg and a 6 point lead. Hard to blame the idea that the D could keep them from going 80 yards in 50 seconds with no time outs. The odds favor the D by a huge margin.

 

[dfan32]

You know if Garrett had called three kneel downs and still lost, everyone would scream how he should have run the ball three times. No doubt about it.

 

[ConstantReboot]

Honestly I dont think either of them woulda yanked Romo in favor of Orton or chewed out a RB for doing nothing wrong.

Parcells yanked Bledsoe in favor of a no name QB named Romo. But that was because of the INT that he threw and bad play. Romo wasn't beyond that so really I doubt he would have been yanked. However, what I wanted to point out was there was that these two coaches had an unbelievable control over their team that it made them winners. Garrett doesn't have that control over his team like Parcells and Jimmy.

 

[dupree89]

He probably just thinks that its really nobodys business but the teams.

do you ever add anything to this forum other than mindless drivel like....

Jason Garrett doesnt care about you.
Jerry Jones doesnt know you or care to know you.
What the team does isnt anyone's business.
Thankfully the coaching staff doesnt listen to you.


This is the type of stuff that you are known for. Is this the best you can do? Are you on here just to be miserable? I hope you're not trying to come off as being smarter than the rest of us- because you're failing, if thats the case.

 

[TTexasTT]

do you ever add anything to this forum other than mindless drivel like....

Jason Garrett doesnt care about you.
Jerry Jones doesnt know you or care to know you.
What the team does isnt anyone's business.
Thankfully the coaching staff doesnt listen to you.


This is the type of stuff that you are known for. Is this the best you can do? Are you on here just to be miserable? I hope you're not trying to come off as being smarter than the rest of us- because you're failing, if thats the case.

Because all of that is true? All the posts crying about how change is demanded are laughable. I highly doubt your personal life is held to the same standard.
Im not going to join your pity party.
Dont clump yourself in as "the rest of us" genius. How much time do you have on your hands to where you follow a member around quoting him. I dont even know who you are. On a scale of 1 to 10 how pathetic are you acting (p.s. Its 11)
Just put me on ignore and be dont with it.

 

[85Cowboy85]

In 35 seconds though? So Garret pulls out his iPad, starts fiddling with the dropdowns that say "select quarter" and "select down", does all of that and then presses the button, then he gets his answer? He sees one is 94 percent and the other 87% and that is a big enough difference for him to just ignore his gut and follow the program? And all of this happens in a screaming dome with people in his headset and the play clock running down?!?

Ideally he doesn't have to fiddle. The game situation information could be entered by someone in the booth or update automatically as the game progresses and stored somewhere. Garrett picks up his ipod and touches the situational analysis app. The app finds the where the information is stored, makes calculations and outputs the best course of action. It would take five seconds max. For the amount of resources the Jones's have it would be no problem at all to make something like this.

The bigger challenge is philosophically how do you want to calculate these odds. You could go and look back at what teams made what decisions and how they fared. But is what happened in 1960 really relevant? All teams are different also. For example the statistics say you should almost always run on third and 2 or less but with our guards maybe that's not the best course of action.

 

[dfan32]

Parcells yanked Bledsoe in favor of a no name QB named Romo. But that was because of the INT that he threw and bad play. Romo wasn't beyond that so really I doubt he would have been yanked. However, what I wanted to point out was there was that these two coaches had an unbelievable control over their team that it made them winners. Garrett doesn't have that control over his team like Parcells and Jimmy.

Parcell's is a great coach but his Dallas team folded in December under him just as it did with others. And at the end he lost them (theteamaltogether. The love he gets for his accomplishments in Dallas is misplaced.

 

[TTexasTT]

Parcell's is a great coach but his Dallas team folded in December under him just as it did with others. And at the end he lost them (theteamaltogether. The love he gets for his accomplishments in Dallas is misplaced.

agreed

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Ideally he doesn't have to fiddle. The game situation information could be entered by someone in the booth or update automatically as the game progresses and stored somewhere. Garrett picks up his ipod and touches the situational analysis app. The app finds the where the information is stored, makes calculations and outputs the best course of action. It would take five seconds max. For the amount of resources the Jones's have it would be no problem at all to make something like this.

The bigger challenge is philosophically how do you want to calculate these odds. You could go and look back at what teams made what decisions and how they fared. But is what happened in 1960 really relevant? All teams are different also. For example the statistics say you should almost always run on third and 2 or less but with our guards maybe that's not the best course of action.

I think, as you've demonstrated, it could be feasible but I just can't see there being enough time to use the information. No coach is going to just blindly follow it, and if a coach pulls it up and sees something that shocks him too much be probably shouldn't be a coach. I would think the best use would be, interestingly enough, like it's being used now: in hindsight. The more you learn, the more knowledge you have to draw on for next Sunday.

 

[ConstantReboot]

Parcell's is a great coach but his Dallas team folded in December under him just as it did with others. And at the end he lost them (theteamaltogether. The love he gets for his accomplishments in Dallas is misplaced.

It did fold in December. But the good that he did outweighed the bad. He turned this organization around from the doldrum of Campo's leadership. You may not like Parcells and may disagree with him on many things. But you can't discount his achievments in Dallas. Without Parcells, we would still have Jerry turning this franchise into a circus.