Jason Garrett quickly becoming one of the longest term head coaches

[Fletch]

then so was Jimmy Johnson and whats wrong with that

I guess we should get Chip Kelly's college scheme. At least it would then be college ready.

 

[FiveTime]

He's a good Monday - Saturday coach.

Gameday he offers nothing.

It is unacceptable to be so basic at the NFL level from a scheme standpoint as we are.

Luckily we built a line that can impose their will on teams but if it ever comes down to play design it's usually just us hoping Romo can make a play outside of the scheme.

and the 1990's Super Bowl teams were not basic??

 

[CATCH17]

and the 1990's Super Bowl teams were not basic??

It's not the 90s anymore.

Passing schemes have evolved and the rules favor the passing game as well.

There are more effective ways to take advantage of these rules and we are handicapping ourselves by not being more dynamic.

 

[CATCH17]

I guess we should get Chip Kelly's college scheme. At least it would then be college ready.

The only reason the Eagles contend is because of that scheme.

Their roster is barely average but they get teams running sideline to sideline and just pound it up the middle.

Anyways, they are more radical then I would like to be.

I just want more legal pick plays, more bubble screens, and passes that get rid of the ball quick when teams send the house on us. Like all of the top teams use.

 

[Garrettop]

The lack of a screen game, even when Dallas had a young Felix Jones, and long pre-dating Garrett, has always puzzled me. On the other hand, the fact that it is so predictable when Dallas will run a draw, and yet the draw is pretty much always successful, is also a little puzzling (and no, I'm not talking about just on 3rd and impossible). Linehan liked screens at his previous stops iirc, so it is possible we may see more this year now that he has another/full offseason to implement things.

 

[Dodger12]

Fortunately for JG, he's operating within a period in time whereby many crucial facets of the organization as a whole are functioning at a high degree of efficiency. Needless to say, he deserves credit for that development.

That, of course, would include not only the HC but the OC, DC, and the positional coaches as well. Jerry is thankfully playing a much-appreciated role as a GM who has learned to stay out of the way of those who are actually good at what they do. Credit him for that situation as well.

Will McClay has proven to be a terrific hiring in terms of his talent acquisition abilities and organizational acumen. I'm hopeful he'll become our GM eventually, even if for no other reason than to prevent other teams from pilfering his talents away from us. He's a valuable commodity aside from that singular reason, however. It'd surely be a shame to lose him to another team as their GM when he could do the same for us.

Do we know if McClay was Garrett's idea? Or was Jerry pissed at TC for the Floyd fiasco, including his (and Garrett's) public display of disapproval? Either way, our better drafting coincided with the McClay promotion so there's something to be said for that but there's nothing out there that McClay was a Garrett guy.

And for all this talk about Jerry stepping away, does anyone really believe that the Gregory pick was Garrett? Again, there's talk about Garrett having to be convinced into the pick. And who spoke with Gregory and Collins before the pick/acquisition? Jerry. Jerry makes the call and that's OK but this idea of him stepping aside or playing a lesser role is just based on nothing even remotely reliable.

 

[Wolfpack]

then so was Jimmy Johnson and whats wrong with that

I don't think that was the case. It's is a common thought all these years later.

Jimmy doesn't get credit for how different his defense was, it changed the NFL. So his scheme left opposing offenses with fewer choices of success than normal.

On offfence, yes they were content to run a few basic plays, if the defense couldn't stop them. When Jimmy felt pressure, you'd see the more aggressive down the field routes, reverses and on side kicks and what else he thought he had to do.

Jason has tended to run simple schemes and predictable plays now matter the talent level, defense or game flow.

 

[Bullflop]

Do we know if McClay was Garrett's idea? Or was Jerry pissed at TC for the Floyd fiasco, including his (and Garrett's) public display of disapproval? Either way, our better drafting coincided with the McClay promotion so there's something to be said for that but there's nothing out there that McClay was a Garrett guy.

And for all this talk about Jerry stepping away, does anyone really believe that the Gregory pick was Garrett? Again, there's talk about Garrett having to be convinced into the pick. And who spoke with Gregory and Collins before the pick/acquisition? Jerry. Jerry makes the call and that's OK but this idea of him stepping aside or playing a lesser role is just based on nothing even remotely reliable.

I don't believe I implied that Jerry is no longer doing anything whatsoever to benefit his team with Jason Garrett stepping in to replace him as GM. Even Jerry himself states he's part of a committee to make decisions, just as he claims he has been all along. Whether that's true or not and to what extent is academic. What's important is that Jerry isn't taking it upon himself to make decisions without the benefit of consulting with his partners first. In that sense, I believe he's taken a step back.

What transpired in each and every instance, we simply aren't privy to. I couldn't care less whether Will McClay was a Garrett guy or Jerry's brainstorm. What matters most is Jerry has given Garrett a role in decision making nowadays, whereby other coaches before him weren't always necessarily afforded that opportunity.

Will McClay has been allowed clout in draftday decisions and talent acquisitions that previously were oftentimes reserved for Jerry, much to the dismay of many of us Cowboys fans.

The current method of operation is working -- and Jerry is listening to those around him. Thank God for that.

 

[Idgit]

Maybe so. But I would also say that he was extremely effective at self preservation and its paid off nicely for him. He's probably bought himself at until we've seen 2-3 years of whoever Romo's replacement will be.

I've heard this description of Jason's methods, but I have to say that I've never seen a convincing explanation of it. He's pretty much said the same thing and done the same things since the day he got here. With the possible exception of the GB game from 2013, where he struck me as doing a very thin job of covering for the play calling, he's been very careful to keep conflicts internal and away from the press. He's been under contract and obviously had tons of support form the organization, including a fairly strong public champion in Stephen Jones. He's never really been in a position where he had to preserve himself.

And, if that weren't the case, he'd never have earned the support of the team, the QB, the coaching staff in general like he clearly has at this point. The sort of transparent manipulation you're suggesting had been going on is pretty transparent. It's tough to build the sort of culture JG has built in Dallas on a shaky foundation like that.
I think it's much more likely that people didn't like his explanations for some of his early decisions and reacted to the fact that he's relatively good at talking to the media and not really saying anything. They wanted blood, and he was handing them turnips, and they projected a bit of frustration onto him from that.

We'll see how he does when it comes time to replace the QB. That's probably the hardest job an NFL HC has to do if he's going to stick around for many years.

 

[Section446]

Who would have thought.

 

[BigStar]

Look at the roster Garrett inherited in 2010 and it is easy to see why he didn't start posting 12-4 seasons right off the bat. Most of the good players on that roster were in steep decline and the drafts from 2006-2009 only netted Free, Spencer and Scandrick as major ongoing contributors. Ratliff was in steep decline already as were Newman, Colombo, Gurode, Kosier, RW (safety), RW (WR), TO, Brooking, Brady James. Ware was still a beast but by mid-2012 he would be a shadow of his former self due to injury. Ditto for Spencer by the start of 2013. Ditto for Sean Lee who missed a big chunk of 2013 and then all of 2014. He did have Dez but many people thought he was more likely to self-destruct then become a star at that point in time.

The roster just wasn't there. We had "names" but they were mostly either injured, entitled or in decline. We had no extra draft picks nor did we do a quick rebuild by tanking the roster by trading vets for picks and then getting top 5 picks to add All-Pro potential players to the mix. What we had was a QB and a patient front office who could spot talent that would work in our systems and we leveraged that into rebuilding without losing.

How many current key cogs of the roster were established stars when Garrett took over in mid-2010? I'd argue we're down to Witten and Romo now (I don't think Free is a cog anymore, just a stop-gap solution at RT). That is a monumental roster rebuild to get from where we were at the time he took over (a team that was 1-7) to the start of the 2014 season (a team that would go 12-4). I would certainly agree that not all the credit should go to Garrett but what part of Jerry Jones' GM resume argues that he is capable of putting together a strong team without a great HC? He got somewhere in the past with Parcells and Jimmy Johnson, two HOF coaches. He got nowhere with guys like Gailey, Campo and Wade.

Anyhow, I think this whole argument over assigning credit for Garrett's success is silly. Good coaches tend to find themselves associated with good front offices and good coordinators/assistant coaches. It is far too big of a job for one man to do but without the right guy at the HC job I don't think winning can be sustained. We saw how everything fell apart with Wade and the same thing would happen here if Garrett were replaced by a below average HC fairly quickly.

He's also had a franchise QB throughout his tenure. He wasted those prime years, but all is good now. I am happy the team is winning but come on. He needed 3 1st round OL, top 5 WR, 2 established coordinators, an OC that pulled a complete 180 on Garret's previous gameplans, the leagues leading rusher, and a franchise QB to finally win a playoff game. The team had enough talent to have been in the playoffs before last season? His learning curve, or "renovation of the roster that still includes a franchise QB" took 4 years and cost us a Romo in his prime. When I say prime, I mean the deep ball is still on the table

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

I'll be the first one to admit that I'm not a huge fan of Jason Garrett, though I do appreciate what he has put together here, and what he is putting together.

I'm actually glad that he was retained... yeah, shocker, I know. I agree with the sentiment that head coaching and QB stability results in wins, and it results in playoff success. Keeping systems in place make it easier to have success from year to year. While other teams are trying to implement new offenses and defenses, we're focused on getting better and executing better.

One of my biggest criticisms of Garret is that it seemed as though he was blocking some NFL quality coaching talent from coming here, particularly with Norv Turner and maybe even Dan Reeves back in 2009.

I think having Linehan and Marinelli here and with consistency from year to year gives us tremendous upside that is often overlooked. I think we're starting to see a lot less turnover on offense (even though we lost Murray), because the offense has stabilized. Linehan came in pretty much working off of Garrett's system which was similar to his own and this is Marinelli's second year as coordinator (though we ran the same system with Kiffin). Stability combined with smart player acquisition and I think we're on the right path.

Bill Belichick - 2000 - 175 games
Marvin Lewis - 2003 - 100 games
Tom Coughlin - 2004 - 96 games
Mike McCarthy - 2006 - 94 games
Sean Payton - 2006 - 80 games
Mike Tomlin - 2007 - 82 games
John Harbaugh - 2008 - 72 games
Jason Garrett 2010 - 41 games

I will say that basically everyone on this list one a super bowl within 3-4 years, so we do need to see some return from Garrett. I do think it was inappropriate for a rookie head coach to try to be offensive coordinator and head coach at the same time. I think that set us back. That being said, I think Garrett is going to be well placed in the future to be a top head coach. I do think he is smart and motivational. It was funny when Jerry said it, but the Cowboys did invest in training him to be the head coach. I just hope it didn't cost too much (i.e. Romo's career, it cost too much for Ware).

You assume he was blocking coaching talent from coming there? do you know for a fact that Norv Turner was interested in coming here? or you assumed garrett blocked it? or is it because garrett is here and Norv didn't want to come? so garrett blocked him!!?

also regarding Reeves, it was jones and not garrett. Reeves wanted more power of control and Jones didn't want to give it up.

you praised and criticized garrett in the same breath.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

He's a good Monday - Saturday coach.

Gameday he offers nothing.

It is unacceptable to be so basic at the NFL level from a scheme standpoint as we are.

Luckily we built a line that can impose their will on teams but if it ever comes down to play design it's usually just us hoping Romo can make a play outside of the scheme.

what basic? Parcells was basic. steelers under cowher were basic. seahawks are basic. it comes down to talent and execution.

 

[BigStar]

then so was Jimmy Johnson and whats wrong with that

It was 1989-1994...Passing offenses were in still in their infancy. But you're correct in that SEA's O isn't pretty either.

 

[CATCH17]

what basic? Parcells was basic. steelers under cowher were basic. seahawks are basic. it comes down to talent and execution.

Seahawks passing game is not basic. They do a lot of dynamic things offensively and all the time fool teams with play design.

Just because you pound the rock doesn't mean youre basic.

The Patriots run the heck out of the football and they are dynamic as well.



As far as the Steelers.. You're right.. That was a basic offense that relied on a dynamic defense and Big Bens ability to make plays outside of the scheme.


Execution matters yes.. Putting youre players in the best position to execute matters as well.

When you have a bad Oline you do things to help them out. Garrett never did that..

When teams load the box and blitz you do things to slow that down.. Garrett never did that.

When teams aren't letting Dez catch the ball 15+ yards downfield you find other ways to get the ball in his hands. Garrett never did that.

 

[Eskimo]

He's also had a franchise QB throughout his tenure. He wasted those prime years, but all is good now. I am happy the team is winning but come on. He needed 3 1st round OL, top 5 WR, 2 established coordinators, an OC that pulled a complete 180 on Garret's previous gameplans, the leagues leading rusher, and a franchise QB to finally win a playoff game. The team had enough talent to have been in the playoffs before last season? His learning curve, or "renovation of the roster that still includes a franchise QB" took 4 years and cost us a Romo in his prime. When I say prime, I mean the deep ball is still on the table

Your argument doesn't make any sense. Every team gets a first round pick every year. The Cowboys have developed all those players since he got here, he didn't inherit any of those players. Dez was a hot mess for good chunks of his first 2 years here and many people called for his release multiple times on this site and in the media - he became the player he is today under Garrett's direction and you can't assume that would have happened anywhere else. Many teams have missed on picking OL that many people here coveted (Eric Fisher, Lane Johnson, Jon Cooper, Chance Warmack, Justin Pugh). Heck, the Travis Frederick pick was ripped to shreds here. If drafting OL were such a blueprint to success how come the Cowboys hadn't done so in about 30 years before Garrett arrived and yet 3 out of 4 years we went that way in the draft during his stay here and hit a HR each time.

I don't believe we had the talent to be a definitive playoff team but we did compete for a playoff spot every year of his tenure here. That is a good coaching job by almost any standard. Our starting interior OL back in 2011 was Bill Nagy, Phil Costa and Kyle Kosier playing on his last legs.

The part that he did inherit was a top 10 QB, a great TE, a great WR who couldn't stay healthy (Austin) and 1.5 seasons of a great pass rusher (Ware). There was talent but outside of the QB position a bottom 10 roster in the league overall the day he took over.

Go back and look at the 2010 roster he inherited and explain to me where all the established talent to build a playoff team was outside of Romo, Witten and Ware. And remember, we are talking about their futures, not their past. I've already made my case there wasn't much established talent to work with but show me what I have missed or discounted. Since those players are no longer here justify the strength of that roster by showing they were great players by being successful elsewhere after they left.

Here are the guys I can think of. Marty Bennett who was a knucklehead and didn't want to backup Witten anymore. Terence Newman who had a very bad second half of 2011 before rebounding with the Bengals as a 3rd CB. Demarcus Ware who is a nickel pass rusher who has gotten about 5 sacks in the second half of the last 3 seasons. Jason Hatcher who at 32 years old was not part of our future is a solid DT with the Commanders but did play at a high level for us from 2011-2013. However, in Hatcher's case he got no offers in UFA in 2011 before coming back to the Cowboys and only established himself thereafter (i.e. he wasn't really an established player back in 2010).

 

[Galian Beast]

You assume he was blocking coaching talent from coming there? do you know for a fact that Norv Turner was interested in coming here? or you assumed garrett blocked it? or is it because garrett is here and Norv didn't want to come? so garrett blocked him!!?

also regarding Reeves, it was jones and not garrett. Reeves wanted more power of control and Jones didn't want to give it up.

you praised and criticized garrett in the same breath.

It could very well have been Jones. In fact I've heard it reported both ways, however if I'm a head coach who is secure in what they offer, I demand a proper staff.

You're right I did praise and criticize him in the same breath. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

 

[Dodger12]

I don't believe I implied that Jerry is no longer doing anything whatsoever to benefit his team with Jason Garrett stepping in to replace him as GM. Even Jerry himself states he's part of a committee to make decisions, just as he claims he has been all along. Whether that's true or not and to what extent is academic. What's important is that Jerry isn't taking it upon himself to make decisions without the benefit of consulting with his partners first. In that sense, I believe he's taken a step back.

I don't think there's any question that Jerry or any other GM doesn't listen to "trusted" voices. The problem with Jerry is that the voices he trusted (ie: Lacewell) were not always the right voices.

I couldn't care less whether Will McClay was a Garrett guy or Jerry's brainstorm. What matters most is Jerry has given Garrett a role in decision making nowadays, whereby other coaches before him weren't always necessarily afforded that opportunity.

What evidence is out there that Garrett has a role in the decision making process? That he's one of Jerry's trusted voices? Folks could probably show more evidence where Garrett is not part of that process, or at least as much as some people assume he is.

 

[Bullflop]

I don't think there's any question that Jerry or any other GM doesn't listen to "trusted" voices. The problem with Jerry is that the voices he trusted (ie: Lacewell) were not always the right voices.



What evidence is out there that Garrett has a role in the decision making process? That he's one of Jerry's trusted voices? Folks could probably show more evidence where Garrett is not part of that process, or at least as much as some people assume he is.

Jerry has stated himself at least several times that he includes Garrett in the decision-making process. That's enough for me to think so. His tendency to act differently during the draft and in apparently taking more time to consult others causes me to believe it's so. He also has stated how he trusts JD on many occasions. Stephen has also been awarded on a more active role. Those who believe Garrett has an influence on him will do so. Those who don't believe it certainly aren't obliged to. I think the turnaround in our fortunes speaks for itself.

 

[Dodger12]

@Bullflop / Including your HC in the decision making process is a relative term. I don't like Garrett as a HC. But Garrett is the HC and, as such, should have one of the bigger voices in the process, especially when it comes to how he handles "his" staff. I think that Garrett had it with Linehan and Marinelli (to a lesser extent) but not with Callahan and Kiffin.

No self respecting HC would allow himself to be called a trainee and no NFL owner who respects his HC would describe him as such. I'm not sure how the GM of a billion dollar franchise who thinks his HC is in training can value his assessment on personel, coaches, etc.....