rockj7
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 2,465
- Reaction score
- 2,195
Meh, this board has known this for 10+ years.
perfectly put
Meh, this board has known this for 10+ years.
The whole board? Not at all. Garrett still has apologists. I always thought he sucked. He was the suckiest, suckface of all the suckers.
You simply don't get it. It was definitely an interview worth watching if your a fan of the cowboys hence the reason I posted it. we sit on these forums and talk amoungst ourselves about every facet of our team and this interview does provide some food for thought.youre insufferable, I've seen you start thread and all the ones I see is about the old coaching staff, you like the scorned wife.
In regards to current players sticking up for garrett, well what do you expect them to do?
I've met Garrett myself personally and while it was brief, I thought he did indeed come off phoney and not the kind of guy you would want to have a beer with
That's really how I feel. I think that JG being a subpar HC has been proven 100% unequivocally beyond any doubt. His terrible game management just didn't get any better. Misevaluation of players, misuse of players, very strange O game plans that all too often didn't make sense.Meh, this board has known this for 10+ years.
Yeah, but they are such outliers, I really don't think it's inaccurate to say the whole board.The whole board? Not at all. Garrett still has apologists. I always thought he sucked. He was the suckiest, suckface of all the suckers.
Yep...Pricenton is about right. This word salad crap doesn't fly long enough in a professional lockeroom. None of these so called Garrett guys had Championship pedigree. Travisis a very good player. Professional Football players respect personal accomplishments but when Princeton snobbishness and lack of results rule the day.....all your intellectual word salad is just talkFirst... Jesse who? We live in an era when, if it's on the internet, it has to have some merit, as long as it fits someones' desired narrative, and never mind that any organization composed of several dozen men, there inherently will be some variety in perceptions.
Second, and following up on that last premise, when a guy like Travis Frederick is as supportive and complimentary of Red as he was, I don't brush that off as fluff. Nor do I presume that his perceptions of Red were limited to himself and a few others.
How many were Red supporters, how many were detractors, and how many were somewhere in the middle?
I don't pretend to know. Some do. I don't.
These things aren't scientifically investigated. There is no pretense that some objective data collection was performed and analyzed, no pretense that a court of law would find the hearsay so overwhelming that a conviction would be handed down.
Some pretend otherwise... and all they need is a former player making some accusations and telling what he's heard, and that's all they need to hear. It seems to give them something approaching orgasm, it really does.
And am I an "apologist" because I don't even barely agree with all the "suckiest" perspective.
I'm really not, but that again is what best fits the narrative of the anti-JG-mob. I'm really just a normal person who tries to approach any given issue, no matter how big or small, with a high priority on being fair to all concerned, and treating people like I would want to be treated.
Red had his flaws. I'm one of those who cited them as occasion arose to cite them. Red also had flawed people working above him. And below him. And Red had/has critics who even today are still so emotionally stoked about, not just his performance as a coach, but his very character as a person, that it takes minimal gas lighting to get them going... let alone 3 hours worth of it.
They, too, are flawed. And a major flaw of that population of people is that they don't get that. You can tell not only by what they say, but how they say it. There's no detectable appreciation for balance and objectivity, no recognition that even in the most extreme head coach hiring situations, NFL teams don't find one of us fans and say, "Hey, you seem to know what you're talking about... how would you like to be our coach for the next year or two?" No, they identify people who have some track record and some reputation that appears to be promising, and depending on results and a handful of other factors, they keep them in those positions accordingly. Not saying anything we all... all... don't already know actually, but it's relevant to this thread yet one of those inconvenient truths to the thread's premise.
So what's my analysis?
My analysis is that Red wasn't wrong, but rather entirely right, to be as consistent as he was in his messaging. My analysis is that mere mortals can find it increasingly difficult to come up with new ways of saying the same old... but constitutionally right (in the character sense, I mean, not legal)... ways, and after a decade, particularly without having been able to claim a Super Bowl appearance, it was "just time."
My analysis is that Aikman probably had it right when he observed that Red deserved a better fate in his last contract year than to not have the chance to determine for himself who he wanted on his coaching staff, and to not regularly have his voice and his messages conflict with what was coming out of the GM/owner's; and, to late to do anything about it, Jerry admitted to as much.
My analysis is that sometimes when someone seems really sure of himself, the people who that tends to rub raw the most are people who themselves are constantly being second-guessed in their lives and who covet having reason for that kind of self-confidence.
Tying a bow on it...
One should never apologize for applying the golden rule to any situation. It is called "golden" because it is effectively the ultimate morally superior standard that every perspective ought to pass through... whether that's talking about something actually meaningful in life, like doing right by family and friends, or talking about something that is merely a form of recreation and entertainment like sports and sports personalities.
outliers
Yep...Pricenton is about right. This word salad crap doesn't fly long enough in a professional lockeroom. None of these so called Garrett guys had Championship pedigree. Travisis a very good player. Professional Football players respect personal accomplishments but when Princeton snobbishness and lack of results rule the day.....all your intellectual word salad is just talk
It’s a pretty good measure of how objective a fan forum is willing to be about an unpopular HC when you get threads like this propping up takes like Jesse Holley’s and ignoring the countless other takes by higher profile players that say exactly the opposite.
Pat yourselves on the back all you want for living in an echo chamber, but the guy won a lot of games. He’s got the respect of the vast majority of his former players. He’s well-respected across the league, and was out of work for about three days before landing a premium OC gig. He’ll very likely be an NFL HC again within the next two seasons. You have to be low-functioning to say he’s not at least a decent coach. And I’m not even going to get into the stupidity of going all-in on Mike McCarthy and his staff. The guy’s definitely a decent coach himself. But to think he’s a shoe-in to fix what’s been broken since 1993 around here? Really? I’m going to believe it when I believe it.
I don't follow these anti-JG-mob threads to any degree b/c they're, on their face, predictable and, worse, irrelevant for the last 5 months.
So, I wouldn't know if you are one who is considered a JG advocate.
Except for the "likely be a HC again within 2 years" part... and I'm not saying he won't, I'm just saying there are too many things that can happen for me to feel comfortable in saying the word "likely"... the rest of that sounds pretty sound.
Suffice it to say, there's a difference between saying nice things, and going beyond that to say
"I’m very fortunate to have spent the time that I did with coach Garrett. Whether he’s here next year or somewhere else next year, the group of men that he’s going to be in front of will be better men and better players because of it.”
Whoa. Didn't see that coming. Who can argue with that? I'm convinced now. Why didn't you say so in the first place.
Sp he cant be a man and tell Scandrick or Dez to sit the F down? Lmao was Jerry gonna punish him for it? So many excuses for that phonyTo guru's comment, we evidently disagree about two things.
First, that the roster wasn't always ultimately controlled over the last 10 years by the owner/GM. (I believe it was, and with the exception of the Jimmy and Parcells years, always has been.)
Second, that Jimmy's philosophy was wrong--ie, the one where he came out and said he had a different standard for a Micheal Irvin than he did for a John Roper or Curvin Richards. (I believe he was right.)
rubbed lots
.........when a guy like Travis Frederick is as supportive and complimentary of Red as he was, I don't brush that off as fluff. Nor do I presume that his perceptions of Red were limited to himself and a few others.
How many were Red supporters, how many were detractors, and how many were somewhere in the middle?
I don't pretend to know. Some do. I don't.
These things aren't scientifically investigated. There is no pretense that some objective data collection was performed and analyzed, no pretense that a court of law would find the hearsay so overwhelming that a conviction would be handed down.
Some pretend otherwise... and all they need is a former player making some accusations and telling what he's heard, and that's all they need to hear. It seems to give them something approaching orgasm, it really does.
And am I an "apologist" because I don't even barely agree with all the "suckiest" perspective.....................
I'm really not, but that again is what best fits the narrative of the anti-JG-mob. I'm really just a normal person who tries to approach any given issue, no matter how big or small, with a high priority on being fair to all concerned, and treating people like I would want to be treated.
Red had his flaws. I'm one of those who cited them as occasion arose to cite them. Red also had flawed people working above him. And below him. And Red had/has critics who even today are still so emotionally stoked about, not just his performance as a coach, but his very character as a person, that it takes minimal gas lighting to get them going... let alone 3 hours worth of it.
They, too, are flawed. And a major flaw of that population of people is that they don't get that. You can tell not only by what they say, but how they say it. There's no detectable appreciation for balance and objectivity, no recognition that even in the most extreme head coach hiring situations, NFL teams don't find one of us fans and say, "Hey, you seem to know what you're talking about... how would you like to be our coach for the next year or two?" No, they identify people who have some track record and some reputation that appears to be promising, and depending on results and a handful of other factors, they keep them in those positions accordingly. Not saying anything we all... all... don't already know actually, but it's relevant to this thread yet one of those inconvenient truths to the thread's premise...................
So many excuses