Jason Garrett is the downfall of Dallas

[I LOVE ME SOME ME!]

I knew I woudl have to explain it when I asked it.

Patrick Crayton was not the 1st option on that play.

The QB is RIGHT not to throw it to Owens or Witten if they are covered.

It really isn't that difficult to grasp.

Yeah because Holmes didnt have 3 people near him. Bad pass ben, didnt throw it to Nate Washington who may have had one on one coverage. Lol i dont get that logic. Stars are stars for a reason. Remember who beat Newman? It was the steelers BEST reciever. You give the playmakers the ball with the game on the line. Whether its TO or Witten. All im saying and im right.

 

[jday]

You just can not trust a redhead with freckles. Laugh if you want but they are evil and will be the doom of us all.

We will rue the day we signed the freckles.

Please don't start with the rueing again. The rue has had it's day in the sun. Many a thread has been devoted to the usage of "rue." I rue the day "rue" was introduced to this board.

 

[I LOVE ME SOME ME!]

I disagree. I'll instead give the Giants credit for having a great run when it counted most, recognizing our top 2 WRs were hobbled, putting them in man coverage and bringing the blitz because they knew they could.

There was nothing wrong with the game plan.

Slants are your friend with man coverage. No? If you think nothing is wrong with Garrett i dont know what to say.

 

[khiladi]

Yeah Crayton missing on that wide open fade route, cause he stopped, had nothing, at all, to do with that loss. Shame on Garrett for calling that play and not knowing, before hand, that his starting WR would simply pull up for some unexplainable reason.

You mean Tony Romo actually bought time with his feet again, to even make the play... You mean the WR got confused like they did this year, multiple times because they were free-lancing...

Sounds tome about right with this year...

 

[khiladi]

I disagree. I'll instead give the Giants credit for having a great run when it counted most, recognizing our top 2 WRs were hobbled, putting them in man coverage and bringing the blitz because they knew they could.

There was nothing wrong with the game plan.

And teams essentially copied them this year, with utmost success... Like I said, the argument that the Cowboys offense was figured out this year is not true... Man up the Cowboys WRs, press them, knowing that with their long vertical routes their lineman can get to Romo....

 

[TheCount]

Slants are your friend with man coverage. No? If you think nothing is wrong with Garrett i dont know what to say.

Depends. QB's hate slants, just ask Kurt Warner. You never know if the LB will read it and drop back and you have to throw it quickly.

 

[theogt]

You keep saying this, but Jones is paying him a heck of a lot of money for an OC,

This is completely irrelevant. He gave him the big contract before he lost the confidence. Bad move, clearly, on Jones' part.

Wade's fired each of his other team coaches, but retained Garrett.

It wouldn't make any sense to fire a guy with that kind of contract. If they fire him, they're forced to pay him $9 million for nothing. So what do you do in that situation? You bring in a tutor.

I'd have to review Tony's comments after the Philly game b/c I have to admit I wasn't in the state of mind to listen to it live at the time, but I haven't heard Tony say anything particularly damning. The WRs not named Austin or Hurd I'll give you.

Tony said the word "exposed." He then went on to talk about how much scheme is important and that when you have a good scheme you can look better than you are and when you have a bad scheme you can look worse than you are. And this is from a guy that's about as coach-speak as you're going to get.

That's damning.

There's no reason to believe that if Garrett were a cancer he'd still have a job. Or that he'd even have been in line for a promotion again this offseason.

He got the interviews, but reports all around were that he wasn't getting the job because of the loss of confidence in Dallas. Hell, he had to have a 'sit down' with Tony because he thought Tony's comments damaged his chances of getting an HC job. It's hard to go from hottest candidate to getting fired. But he's gotten as close to that as you can get.

 

[khiladi]

Depends. QB's hate slants, just ask Kurt Warner. You never know if the LB will read it and drop back and you have to throw it quickly.

I think that was called by Lebeau, i.e. zone coverage by the LB, faking the blitz. Also, the formation that the Cardinals normally do in that type of situation, I believe is to have the RB or TE shift I believe, which would have forced Harrison to leave that area. I think that was mentioned by one of the coahes during half-time.

Also, the pass that Fitzgerald broke for 60 yards was a slant on a blitz, in man-coverage. Boldin thrives in slants as well. Amazing though, that Fitzgerald really didn't get anything going against double-coverage, just like TO.

 

[theogt]

I think that was called by Lebeau, i.e. zone coverage by the LB, faking the blizt. Also, the formation was that the RB didn't shift I believe, which would have forced Harrison to leave that area... The Cardinals normally shift in that area, I believe...

The pass that Fitzgerald broke for 60 yards was a slant on a blitz... Boldin thrives in slants...

Harrison never even faked a blitz. Warner just made a huge mistake by not seeing the guy at all.

 

[McCordsville Cowboy]

Harrison never even faked a blitz. Warner just made a huge mistake by not seeing the guy at all.

Exactly...

He just dropped into coverage and happened to be where Kurt's 3 step drop was taking him. Its not hard to look at the QB's eyes on a goaline slant.

 

[Hostile]

Yeah because Holmes didnt have 3 people near him. Bad pass ben, didnt throw it to Nate Washington who may have had one on one coverage. Lol i dont get that logic. Stars are stars for a reason. Remember who beat Newman? It was the steelers BEST reciever. You give the playmakers the ball with the game on the line. Whether its TO or Witten. All im saying and im right.

So because Ben connected on a pass he probably shouldn't have thrown it is a reflection on Garrett?

That is some screwed up logic right there. When your QB makes his reads it is a positive thing. I hate to tell you that, but it's the honest to Pete truth of the game of football.

 

[Hostile]

Slants are your friend with man coverage. No? If you think nothing is wrong with Garrett i dont know what to say.

You still have to get the pass off regardless of what the route is. The Giants were on Romo almost immediately on every play. If he has to move in the pocket the slant becomes a death play. You show me a slant route that can take 5 seconds to start the slant and I'll show you one slow friggin' WR who is not a threat to any Defense.

Holy crap, this is nonsense.

 

[koolaid]

Ward is better than Holmes? Oh god.

I got your back on this one, no way Ward is better than Holmes at this point in his career, especially in that super bowl game where he could barely run! That catch Holmes made was terrific, no way Ward would have even gotten to that ball with his jog/run, let alone make the stretch-leap to catch it.

 

[McCordsville Cowboy]

I got your back on this one, no way Ward is better than Holmes at this point in his career, especially in that super bowl game where he could barely run! That catch Holmes made was terrific, no way Ward would have even gotten to that ball with his jog/run, let alone make the stretch-leap to catch it.

Holmes has more talent than Ward ever did in his career.

Ward though has bigger heart and plays fearless.

 

[I LOVE ME SOME ME!]

Its funny to me that people want to blame TO so bad they cant think straight. I saw two qb's give their playmakers the ball the whole 4th quarter. Running deep routes, intermediate,slants. Whatever to get them the ball. If you think Jason Garrett does that you need help. Hines Ward was barely looked at in the 4TH. Crayton shouldnt be looked at in clutch situarions in the playoffs either. Let me die going to my big money men. Funny thread seeing the excuses for Garrett and Romo though. Sad

 

[Idgit]

This is completely irrelevant. He gave him the big contract before he lost the confidence. Bad move, clearly, on Jones' part.

It wouldn't make any sense to fire a guy with that kind of contract. If they fire him, they're forced to pay him $9 million for nothing. So what do you do in that situation? You bring in a tutor.

I don't doubt that Jerry and Wade both think Garrett needs support. He clearly does. He's doesn't have much experience and he's the top offensive mind in the organization. He doesn't have much support in place and it makes sense to get him someone he can rely on. That's a far cry from a case for lost confidence.

And you don't think Jerry and Garrett could work out an amicable departure if Jerry wanted one? If Garrett's here, it's because Jerry wants him here, and the fact that he's here and making a lot of money to stay here means the owner hasn't lost confidence in him.

Tony said the word "exposed." He then went on to talk about how much scheme is important and that when you have a good scheme you can look better than you are and when you have a bad scheme you can look worse than you are. And this is from a guy that's about as coach-speak as you're going to get.

That's damning.

We'll agree to disagree how damning that really is. The team was exposed, and schemes are all eventually exposed. We didn't make adjustments well, which is my big beef with Garrett last year. But I've never heard Tony say anything that approached finger pointing or that singled out Garrett. It was all 'we' and all in the context of corrections that needed to be made. It's somehow become accepted that Tony has an issue with Garrett, and I don't see much meat on that bone.

He got the interviews, but reports all around were that he wasn't getting the job because of the loss of confidence in Dallas. Hell, he had to have a 'sit down' with Tony because he thought Tony's comments damaged his chances of getting an HC job. It's hard to go from hottest candidate to getting fired. But he's gotten as close to that as you can get.

He got awfully close with the Rams. And the actual reports were that the perception of Garrett due to the down season in Dallas didn't hurt him with the owners. Sure, he's a harder sell to a new fanbase after what happened in Dallas, and that factors into a political decision like hiring a head coach, but it doesn't speak to his ability or his reputation around the league. Reeves was very complimentary of Jason in his short time working around him.

 

[theogt]

I don't doubt that Jerry and Wade both think Garrett needs support. He clearly does. He's doesn't have much experience and he's the top offensive mind in the organization. He doesn't have much support in place and it makes sense to get him someone he can rely on. That's a far cry from a case for lost confidence.

Needing a mentor, to me, means they've lost confidence in him.

And you don't think Jerry and Garrett could work out an amicable departure if Jerry wanted one? If Garrett's here, it's because Jerry wants him here, and the fact that he's here and making a lot of money to stay here means the owner hasn't lost confidence in him.

It's the law. He's entitled to the money based on the contract. Why would he just give up money he's entitled to?

We'll agree to disagree how damning that really is. The team was exposed, and schemes are all eventually exposed. We didn't make adjustments well, which is my big beef with Garrett last year. But I've never heard Tony say anything that approached finger pointing or that singled out Garrett. It was all 'we' and all in the context of corrections that needed to be made. It's somehow become accepted that Tony has an issue with Garrett, and I don't see much meat on that bone.

He blamed the scheme. Said it was exposed. And that's not fingerpointing at Garrett? Even Garrett had to have a sitdown with Tony over it. Why would Garrett do that if it wasn't fingerpointing at him?

Of course it's fingerpointing. We will just have to agree to disagree.

He got awfully close with the Rams. And the actual reports were that the perception of Garrett due to the down season in Dallas didn't hurt him with the owners. Sure, he's a harder sell to a new fanbase after what happened in Dallas, and that factors into a political decision like hiring a head coach, but it doesn't speak to his ability or his reputation around the league. Reeves was very complimentary of Jason in his short time working around him.

He didn't get close to the Rams job beyond simply interviewing. He wasn't even in the top couple of selections. Garrett just insisted on having a second visit and they obliged him.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

LOL

Pointing fingers at JG when we have the laughingstock of the NFL as our coach.

Git real, you Wade brown-nosers!

 

[Hostile]

Its funny to me that people want to blame TO so bad they cant think straight. I saw two qb's give their playmakers the ball the whole 4th quarter. Running deep routes, intermediate,slants. Whatever to get them the ball. If you think Jason Garrett does that you need help. Hines Ward was barely looked at in the 4TH. Crayton shouldnt be looked at in clutch situarions in the playoffs either. Let me die going to my big money men. Funny thread seeing the excuses for Garrett and Romo though. Sad

What can I tell you? Try and learn the game. Throwing to covered Receivers is dumb football.

 

[theogt]

LOL

Pointing fingers at JG when we have the laughingstock of the NFL as our coach.

Git real, you Wade brown-nosers!

Show me the quote where anyone on the team points to Wade's playcalling/schemes as a problem for the team. I can show you multiple quotes from multiple players on our team and opponents that say that Garrett's scheme/playcalling is a problem.

Keep your head in the sand, though, please.