Jerry's coaching conundrum has the Cowboys cornered

[Quickdraw]

Depends on whether you think this is a team building toward a ring or not and that seems to be the key to most posters.

What you write is fact and good enough for me because I am not SB or bust as far as calling a season a good one. But, turning a 3-5 team into a 1 playoff win team doesn't seem to impress most of the posters here and each season is marred by how far the team didn't get.

If they'd beaten LA but lost to NO in the NFC champs game, there would be almost as much negative and I flat don't get it. It's not like the Cowboys have been that relevant, except in the ratings, the last 20 years. The glory years are long gone and winning the East should carry more weight than it does, but it does not.

I tend to agree with you here Coach. This team was 3-5 and went on a 6 game winning streak and won the division. That's pretty impressive considering at 3-5, this team was doom and gloom and more than likely going to get less wins than the Giants.

I do however think that this coaching staff does not have the right combination to get the team to the next game. Maybe letting Linehan go will be the key. It'll all depend on who the next OC is and if he's calling plays. Plus, the team as a whole needs to be less predictable; both on offense and defense.

 

[G2]

I tend to agree with you here Coach. This team was 3-5 and went on a 6 game winning streak and won the division. That's pretty impressive considering at 3-5, this team was doom and gloom and more than likely going to get less wins than the Giants.

I do however think that this coaching staff does not have the right combination to get the team to the next game. Maybe letting Linehan go will be the key. It'll all depend on who the next OC is and if he's calling plays. Plus, the team as a whole needs to be less predictable; both on offense and defense.

In my opinion, our defense failed to get us to the next play off game. Yeah, we could have/should have score more points on offense, but I think we're 2 or 3 solid play-makers away of defense of becoming the kind of team that can shut down the better teams.

 

[skinsscalper]

Parity really hasn't had much effect on the Patriots, Steelers, Packers, Seahawks.....

Parity is for 25-26 teams. The others just win.

You invalidate everything you've posted with this one post.

The Steelers? When was the last time they were in the Super Bowl? How about the Packers? Seahawks? They had a flash in the pan run that lasted about 3 seasons.

Wahhh we're not the Patriots. No ****, genius. Neither are 31 other teams.

According to your viewpoint the Steelers, Packers, Seahawks and Patriots are in the Super Bowl every year and everyone else is just playing second fiddle. Then reality kicks in.

 

[Miller]

You invalidate everything you've posted with this one post.

The Steelers? When was the last time they were in the Super Bowl? How about the Packers? Seahawks? They had a flash in the pan run that lasted about 3 seasons.

Wahhh we're not the Patriots. No ****, genius. Neither are 31 other teams.

According to your viewpoint the Steelers, Packers, Seahawks and Patriots are in the Super Bowl every year and everyone else is just playing second fiddle. Then reality kicks in.

Steelers won 2005 and 2008 and were in the 2010...not too shabby. Have been in the payoffs 6 of the last 8 and were in the Conference Champ game a couple years back...worst record was .500.

Seahawks have been in the playoffs 12 times since 2003 with 3 SB appearances

Packers have been in playoffs 19 times since 1993 with 3 SB appearances and 4 Conference Championship losses

So I'd say those teams have done really well whereas we lost our way starting in 1996

 

[erod]

You invalidate everything you've posted with this one post.

The Steelers? When was the last time they were in the Super Bowl? How about the Packers? Seahawks? They had a flash in the pan run that lasted about 3 seasons.

Wahhh we're not the Patriots. No ****, genius. Neither are 31 other teams.

According to your viewpoint the Steelers, Packers, Seahawks and Patriots are in the Super Bowl every year and everyone else is just playing second fiddle. Then reality kicks in.

Think a bit harder please.

The teams I listed have been dominating this league for several years with only an occasional dip in their success. The rest of the league is perpetually in that 8-8 crowd with an occasional good year.

Hence, the point.

 

[skinsscalper]

Steelers won 2005 and 2008 and were in the 2010...not too shabby. Have been in the payoffs 6 of the last 8 and were in the Conference Champ game a couple years back...worst record was .500.

Seahawks have been in the playoffs 12 times since 2003 with 3 SB appearances

Packers have been in playoffs 19 times since 1993 with 3 SB appearances and 4 Conference Championship losses

So I'd say those teams have done really well whereas we lost our way starting in 1996

O.K. so the Steelers were in the Super Bowl 9 years ago. Neat. Conference championship a couple years ago and lost with a QB, WR, and RB playing at HOF levels.

The Packers have won one Super Bowl with a HOF QB at the helm for how long, now?

Yes, all of these teams have had some success but to say that there is no parity and these teams dominate the NFL landscape year in an year out is ******** hyperbole.

Also, let's take a look at the divisions those teams play in.

The Steelers have had what for competition in that division for the last 30 years? The Ravens. That's it.

How about the Packers? Minnesota jumps up once every 4 or 5 years and.....well, that's it.

How about the Seahawks? Anyone been dominant in that division. The Cardinals had their flash in the pan season. Ditto for the 49ers. Rams? Until this season they've been irrelevant since the greatest show on turf days.

The Patriots? Please. Jerry Jones would kill to be able to play the Bills, Dolphins and Jets 6 times a year.

And, yes, Captain Obvious, the Cowboys have lost their way since 96. That had nothing to do with my post or the one that was quoted. The premise was that those teams plow through parity and the rest of the league just wallows in mediocrity. If that were actually the case, those three teams (sans the Patriots) would have accounted for more than 5 Super Bowl wins (combined) since 1993 (since that's the time frame you chose for the Packers), no?

Those teams have had success, no doubt. But to pretend that they're dominating the league and everyone else is just hoping to keep up is ******** of the highest order.

 

[erod]

O.K. so the Steelers were in the Super Bowl 9 years ago. Neat. Conference championship a couple years ago and lost with a QB, WR, and RB playing at HOF levels.

The Packers have won one Super Bowl with a HOF QB at the helm for how long, now?

Yes, all of these teams have had some success but to say that there is no parity and these teams dominate the NFL landscape year in an year out is bull**** hyperbole.

Also, let's take a look at the divisions those teams play in.

The Steelers have had what for competition in that division for the last 30 years? The Ravens. That's it.

How about the Packers? Minnesota jumps up once every 4 or 5 years and.....well, that's it.

How about the Seahawks? Anyone been dominant in that division. The Cardinals had their flash in the pan season. Ditto for the 49ers. Rams? Until this season they've been irrelevant since the greatest show on turf days.

The Patriots? Please. Jerry Jones would kill to be able to play the Bills, Dolphins and Jets 6 times a year.

And, yes, Captain Obvious, the Cowboys have lost their way since 96. That had nothing to do with my post or the one that was quoted. The premise was that those teams plow through parity and the rest of the league just wallows in mediocrity. If that were actually the case, those three teams (sans the Patriots) would have accounted for more than 5 Super Bowl wins (combined) since 1993 (since that's the time frame you chose for the Packers), no?

Those teams have had success, no doubt. But to pretend that they're dominating the league and everyone else is just hoping to keep up is bull**** of the highest order.

Why is this only hard for you to understand?

Those are the teams that have dominated the playoff landscape for a decade. They are the teams that always seem to matter.

Meanwhile, teams like Dallas fluctuate regularly from 5-11 to 10-6 and back to 6-10, etc, etc.

Those teams listed aren't caught up in the parity backwash like the others.

 

[erod]

So did Jerry Jones tell you that personally or did you read that somewhere that can be quoted?

Everybody knows this.

Run the ball, play defense, oversee rather than call plays, old school style coach....that's what Jerry thought Jason would become. He's his chosen one.

 

[skinsscalper]

Think a bit harder please.

The teams I listed have been dominating this league for several years with only an occasional dip in their success. The rest of the league is perpetually in that 8-8 crowd with an occasional good year.

Hence, the point.

An occasional dip in their success? Sans the Patriots, the other teams have combined for 5 Super Bowl wins since 1996. And that's what this is about, right? Division titles, are meaningless, right? Wild card wins? Meaningless. Right? Divisional round appearances meaningless, right?

So congratulations. You come up with three other teams (again sans the Patriots) that have combined for 5 Super Bowl victories in 23 years. Gosh, I don't understand why teams just don't lay down and beg for mercy every time these juggernauts take the field.

For the sake of intellectual honesty, these team have had some great success over a pretty decent stretch of time. I'd love if Dallas had the same type of success. I'd also love if they played in the same cream puff divisions. The Steeler, Packers, Patriots and Seahawks have bee able to punch their ticket by basically showing up for the past 10 to 15 years.

 

[Redball Express]

I'd counter the argument with this:

Who was actually available this year?

Based on the hires made, I'd say not much.

So, if Payton wasn't available, or more likely decided to stay another year in New Orleans as long as Brees is there, there isn't an option available that would be a big improvement.

Next year? That might all change. Payton could be available, Riley could be ready, or Richard might be a viable, in-house candidate.

I just don't think there was much of an opportunity for a true upgrade this year, as sad as that is to say.

We are not going to improve by starting over with a new HC.

We will improve with improved play.

Again..

when it comes to playoffs..

3 out of 5 years Garrett has improved the team with delivering the Eastern Division.

Preceded by 3 years of 8-8 is not losing football.

Championships are the goal..

but I have always felt the team has to fail to learn how to win.

This was true in the 60s when we could not beat the Packers to break thru.

It was true in the early 90s when we had to fail leading up to the 90s teams.

It's true now.

This team has to want it badly.

It's the only thing that matters

For the first time in decades..

this team played every game in the last half of the season with it's back to the wall in all three phases of the game.

Can we keep that hunger?

I hope so

 

[erod]

An occasional dip in their success? Sans the Patriots, the other teams have combined for 5 Super Bowl wins since 1996. And that's what this is about, right? Division titles, are meaningless, right? Wild card wins? Meaningless. Right? Divisional round appearances meaningless, right?

So congratulations. You come up with three other teams (again sans the Patriots) that have combined for 5 Super Bowl victories in 23 years. Gosh, I don't understand why teams just don't lay down and beg for mercy every time these juggernauts take the field.

For the sake of intellectual honesty, these team have had some great success over a pretty decent stretch of time. I'd love if Dallas had the same type of success. I'd also love if they played in the same cream puff divisions. The Steeler, Packers, Patriots and Seahawks have bee able to punch their ticket by basically showing up for the past 10 to 15 years.

My point wasn't about world championships. It's about the teams always in the playoff mix for championships.

Pittsburgh and Green Bay haven't celebrated division championships in years the way we do here. They usually win their divisions, and they almost always go to the playoffs and have made it to the divisional and conference championship rounds on a routine basis.

Dallas is just like Cincinnati, San Diego, Minnesota, or Detroit. Up, down, up, down, up, down.

Mike McCarthy just got fired after making the playoffs in 11 of 12 years or some such. Garrett kept his job for winning his 2nd playoff game in a decade.

 

[erod]

We are not going to improve by starting over with a new HC.

We will improve with improved play.

Again..

when it comes to playoffs..

3 out of 5 years Garrett has improved the team with delivering the Eastern Division.

Preceded by 3 years of 8-8 is not losing football.

Championships are the goal..

but I have always felt the team has to fail to learn how to win.

This was true in the 60s when we could not beat the Packers to break thru.

It was true in the early 90s when we had to fail leading up to the 90s teams.

It's true now.

This team has to want it badly.

It's the only thing that matters

For the first time in decades..

this team played every game in the last half of the season with it's back to the wall in all three phases of the game.

Can we keep that hunger?

I hope so

In other words, the Cowboys are now no different than the Lions or Bengals.

 

[skinsscalper]

My point wasn't about world championships. It's about the teams always in the playoff mix for championships.

Pittsburgh and Green Bay haven't celebrated division championships in years the way we do here. They usually win their divisions, and they almost always go to the playoffs and have made it to the divisional and conference championship rounds on a routine basis.

Dallas is just like Cincinnati, San Diego, Minnesota, or Detroit. Up, down, up, down, up, down.

Mike McCarthy just got fired after making the playoffs in 11 of 12 years or some such. Garrett kept his job for winning his 2nd playoff game in a decade.

And again, I'd love to play in the cream puff divisions that the Packers and Steelers play in.


The original point I was addressing had nothing to do with the Cowboys (and neither did your post that I quoted) but talk in circles if you must.

 

[CouchCoach]

In my opinion, our defense failed to get us to the next play off game. Yeah, we could have/should have score more points on offense, but I think we're 2 or 3 solid play-makers away of defense of becoming the kind of team that can shut down the better teams.

Agree, the Rams coaching staff saw the weak points from the beginning and exploited them, mostly with a backup power back. The Cowboys were not able to counter well enough.

We expound on the really good D players but it was the <good ones that doomed that game. The Cowboys lost because they failed to execute the basic fundamental of defense, tackling.

 

[CouchCoach]

And again, I'd love to play in the cream puff divisions that the Packers and Steelers play in.


The original point I was addressing had nothing to do with the Cowboys (and neither did your post that I quoted) but talk in circles if you must.

Bears and Vikings are cream puffs? Ravens are cream puffs? The AFC East is THE cream puff division.

 

[skinsscalper]

Bears and Vikings are cream puffs? Ravens are cream puffs? The AFC East is THE cream puff division.

The Bears? Are you kidding me? They got gorilla stomped in the Super Bowl a lifetime ago and have been an NFC North doormat for the better part of three decades. Go ahead and rattle off the impressive list of accomplishments of the Minnesota Vikings for, say, their entire existence. I'm married to a Vikings fan, homeboy. I live their joke of an existence by proxy.

Try again.

 

[northerncowboynation]

Like most all of you, I've seen enough of this stale one-act play. Garrett did some important things here, but that was long ago, and it's definitely time for a new coach and approach.

But who? And how?

All of Jerry's GM sins are haunting him right now, and the Cowboys are a cloudy mess. What are the Cowboys wanting to be exactly? And who would really want to come here of any repute?

Some say he wants Sean Payton, and that makes enough sense with their history. But I just don't see how that would work.

Beyond just the contractual aspect of this, what has Payton ever done without Drew Brees? He got fired as the Giants' offensive coordinator. And just how is he going to institute his offense here with Dak Prescott? That offensive style just doesn't suit Dak's strengths and weaknesses.

Much of the same can be said for Josh McDaniels, or Lincoln Riley, or any other young passing guru coach out there. That's the flavor of the day, but just where is the fit for a coach like that in Dallas right now?

The eyes say this is a run-oriented, defensive football team, which is the opposite of what the Sean McVay crazed league is heading toward. That's perfectly fine, but it doesn't warrant the type of coach that everybody is clamoring for.

Rather than trying to incorporate things this offense isn't suited to do with Dak, wouldn't it be smarter to go after a more defensive-minded head coach in the traditional Parcells or Jimmy model?

That's what Jerry has hoped Garrett would become. Garrett takes that type of approach, but it's not amounting to anything beyond moderate regular season success. It works much of the time, but when a game gets sideways and the Cowboys have change up, most of the time they just can't.

A change of scheme is a good idea if you can do it. Maybe this team can make that change, and maybe it can't.

I think Jerry is afraid to take that leap of faith on a big-money new coach, and I think he's afraid to hear the truth from that new coach when he gets here. Money owed means power, and Jerry doesn't like handing that over to anyone. So he does nothing. Again.

Jerry, Garrett, and Dak are forever intertwined. They will win or go down together.

If Jerry capitulates and brings in a new guy, it won't be his idea. He hates that. It means WE were right, and even in grand victory, it will be a bitter pill. His way didn't work. Ours did.

That's like Jimmy Johnson all over again, and it would gnaw him to his core.

bahahaha Jerry hates when the fans are right? C'mon man, we've been right for years don't you know that. And Jerry is the billionaire, doubtful listening very much to the poor and down trodden

 

[CCBoy]

We are not going to improve by starting over with a new HC.

We will improve with improved play.

Again..

when it comes to playoffs..

3 out of 5 years Garrett has improved the team with delivering the Eastern Division.

Preceded by 3 years of 8-8 is not losing football.

Championships are the goal..

but I have always felt the team has to fail to learn how to win.

This was true in the 60s when we could not beat the Packers to break thru.

It was true in the early 90s when we had to fail leading up to the 90s teams.

It's true now.

This team has to want it badly.

It's the only thing that matters

For the first time in decades..

this team played every game in the last half of the season with it's back to the wall in all three phases of the game.

Can we keep that hunger?

I hope so

The team had to learn the level required for a December through January run. The staff also needed to come together for that kind of a late run...with success.

 

[Rajveer]

We finished in the top 8 teams in the NFL this year. We have won the NFC East 3 out of the last 5 years.

We also have the 2nd youngest team in the NFL right now.

Lets stop beginning every story with how much of a mess our organization is just to give our threads more relevance.

We are not really in that bad of shape.

We are not the Patriots or the Alabama Crimson Tide that come close to the ultimate goal on a yearly basis. We are a team that has been stuck in mediocrity for over 2 decades. If you have had a recent history like that, small successes during a season don't count for much unless you are content in winning the east every year and making an early exit out the playoffs. There are coaches in this league who have been fired for that type of performance. Also our recent success has not accounted for much in the following year. We always seem to take a step backward due to either injuries, losing talent due to cap space, coaching or bone head calls during a playoff game. Only to think that we are one piece away from winning it all. Then we fix that only to realize we have another glaring need. We are always next year's super bowl winners on paper. Now no team is perfect and all teams have a weakness, however good coaching can diminish those flaws and make due with what they have. We don't have the coaching strength to even get that done. We lose Romo, the offense is out of whack, we lose Lee and and whole defense use to collapse. This year we fixed the Lee issue and the whole defense still collapsed in the last game.

I don't think anyone is stating stuff to make their threads more relevant. They are talking based on our recent history and expectations that we carry every off season. I think most of us Fans are now only optimistically cautious as we realize, we are never a step away unless there is a fundamental change in the way we run things. I want this team to win like everyone else does but my expectations are much lowered now than they were during our glory days.

 

[ESisback]

And again, I'd love to play in the cream puff divisions that the Packers and Steelers play in.


The original point I was addressing had nothing to do with the Cowboys (and neither did your post that I quoted) but talk in circles if you must.

How about the Pats?
1)Creampuff division
2)inflated balls, stealing signals, working the refs, Brady getting preferential treatment, etc.
3)Great combo—HC and QB

1+ 2 + 3 = 20 year dynasty