News: JJT: Jason Garrett no puppet for Cowboys

Atlanta sucks. Denver has manning. Without him they are not nearly as good a team. What has San Diego won ?

Arians is a coach I really like. I think he is doing a great job - but he did have a great defense when he arrived in arizona

 

Interesting. So you'll judge those teams and coaches by how they're playing and wins/losses but we have another criteria all together for Dallas? Got it.

 

Down goes Frasier.........Down goes Frasier.

Thanks for going deeper than I cared to go, that's a knockout if I ever saw one.

 

Atlanta did not suck when Smith took over they went deep in the playoffs twice something Garret has yet to do.

Fox took a Tebow led team into the playoffs and won a game, what has Garret done?

 

Perhaps you should take a course in reading comprehension. It wasn't unclear.

 

The reality is that Garrett inherited a roster with some pro bowlers and HOF candidates.

Its also reality that many of those singing the woes of the rookie HC martyr who was in a no win situation also predicted that each of the three 8-8 years the team would make the playoffs yet when they missed talked about the remarkable job Red did in getting the team to over achieve with such a piss poor roster - thats the same roster that should have gone 10-6 or 11-5 until they didnt and then it was amazing he could get to 8-8.

Its also reality that some revisionist history is going on in this thread as is the case often with the pro Garrett posters.

Its also reality that the pro Garrett revisionists are speaking some truth in this thread as well. Red has done a lot of really good things as the mediot referred to in the OP mentioned. Those really good things are so obvious that even the mediot could finally see it.

Red really wasnt a martyr and didnt inherit a roster that had no chance of winning. Does any sane football fan not think that there are coaches in this league that could have produced better records over the 3 yr period of mediocrity than Red did?

Lets see how this year plays out before we crown his ***. So far its looking really good, but we got a long way to go yet.

 

On this we can agree. The guy hired Chan Gailey, Campo, Wade . . . . . . . . so its perfectly acceptable for those who have questioned the Garrett hire, especially after three 8-8's to not drink the Kool Aid.

And Im saying this as a guy who likes Red for the most part.

 

I thot Garrett should have been gone after last year, but I also was fine with him staying because I had no idea who we might get that would be better. I couldnt think of one guy that Jerry would hire that I considered an improvement.

 

Before I say anything else, let me say that I do think that Harbaugh is a good coach. I'm not saying he isn't. I brought him up initially because another poster asked why some coaches win quickly and Garrett hasn't been to the playoffs yet, so I brought up the most often mentioned coach when that comes up. Jim Harbaugh.

Harbaugh is a good coach... but he did have a lot of good players when he coached his first game in SF.

In the post you quoted I said: "His roster was pretty much set the day he coached his first game for the niners."

That isn't talking about Harbaugh's ability to scout talent or bring it in, just what he had in his first game coached there. As I mentioned, I had originally posted it because the guy I was responding to was asking why some guys don't take 4 years to win, so I responded by saying that Harbaugh had a much better roster to begin his career than Garrett did. That is what I showed by providing a list of the talent that Harbaugh started with.

It was kind of up to the reader to determine if they thought the players were actually that talented. I think it was a good roster, but the reader would, I assumed, make their own judgement.

I wasn't talking about if new GM Trent Baalke (because he came in at the same time as Harbaugh and was responsible for the draft and free agency) brought any of those guys in.

Like I said, that is the two QB prospects that Harbaugh had from day 1. That is all I said.

Not sure why you think it is important that Smith isn't with the team any more. He still is playing for a playoff team in the NFL and he played damn well for Harbaugh, leading his team to the 13-3 record that you yourself mentioned.

I guess you could call it a gutsy decision to stick with Colin Kapernick after Smith got healthy... but it isn't like he sat Smith down healthy and went with Kap. He had no choice but to go with Kap when Smith got hurt and it didn't take a genius to see that Kap was playing well. A lot of coaches would likely have stuck with the hot hand in the middle of a season. Then, traded Smith for what you could get... which is what Harbaugh did.

That still has nothing to do with Smith and Kap being on the roster for Harbaugh's first game in SF.

Uh, ok. The one guy that did come in after Harbaugh arrived in January (Goodwin) has already been cut. The guys that were there in 2010, he kept.

I don't see how that helps your argument, but whatever.

How in the hell did he not step in to Gore who had been there for years? A blind idiot would have known to resign Frank Gore.

And again, the guy that you so want to show came in after Harbaugh (Hunter) has been cut.

All you're showing so far is that the guys drafted prior to 2011 are guys that were keepers and that the one's Baalke and Harbaugh brought in aren't.

I really don't know any other way to say that I was listing who was on their opening day roster for 2011. Where did I say that any individual was anything? I just listed the fairly well known guys and left off most of the unknowns.

How is listing guys on his opening day roster ridiculous? You should read what is written and not try to guess at what is being said.

If you think there wasn't a lot of talent on his opening day roster, then address that, because that is what I was saying. All the rest of this muck is just posturing.

Would I have wanted Crabtree over Dez? Hell no. I would have taken him over every other WR that Garrett had that year though. Edwards and Ginn would have been much better than Austin and Ogletree.

Infinitely better? Good Lord. Talk about ridiculous. Here are the WR's who were on Dallas' opening day roster in 2011: Dez, Austin, Kevin Ogletree, Patrick Crayton, Jesse Holly, Laurent Robinson (really signed on sept. 7th)Sam Hurd, Roy Williams, Manuel Johnson, and Titus Ryan.

Ryan, Ogletree, Holley, Hurd, and Johnson were flat out jokes as NFL players. Austin was trending down before Garrett ever took over and Williams and Crayton were flat out done. All that group did was take a chunk of salary cap space. It was a group that Garrett would have to completely redo minus Dez.

Jim Harbaugh just called and he said please stop trying to help him... you're just making him look bad.

Like I might have mentioned a time or two, I was listing who was on the opening day roster.

So you didn't like Harbaugh's WR group. For the love of Pete, just say that.

Um, ok, Vernon Davis sucks.

Poor Harbaugh having to use such a terrible TE.

If you would rather have Marty B than Delanie Walker, I don't even know what to say. It is no wonder you think San Francisco's talent wasn't good when Harbaugh took over.

Walker was the only player on the Titans who could even hurt Dallas when we played them this year. He is a hell of a player.

And yes, he is no longer on the 49'ers. I'm not sure why you keep saying that like it matters.

As long as we agree that he was there when Harbaugh came in, that's all I'm saying.

I've already stated that I think Harbaugh is a good coach. I never said he wasn't. Again, you're reading into things people write what they haven't said.

Yes, yes... no longer there.

Yes, drafted by Baalke. Where did I say he wasn't?

So, it was mainly guys that came in when Harbaugh was coach that are no longer with the team.

And again, ridiculous is that you didn't even mention the group that I was comparing it to: Terence Newman, Mike Jenkins, Orlando Scandrick, Mike Hamlin, Cletus Gordon, Brian McCann, Danny McCray, Gerald Sensabaugh, Jamar Wall, and Patrick Watkins.

So, yes Carlos Rodgers. Goldson. Whitner. Madeue Williams.

They were much better than what Garrett had, which is all I was trying to show. Not that San Francisco would keep their DB's for ever and ever and never cut them or that they were all pro bowlers.

It really isn't difficult.

That is who Harbaugh had to kick and punt in 2011.

Even though I was only talking about their opening day roster, if it will make you happy, I will break down who was there in 2010 and who wasn't.

Of the list that I made of the Niner players, here is who came in after Jim was hired:

QB Colin Kapernick (draft)
OL Jonathan Goodwin (free agent)
RB Kendall Hunter (draft)
WR Braylon Edwards (free agent)
LB Aldon Smith (draft)
CB Carlos Rodgers (free agent)
S Donte Whitner (free agent)
S Madeue Williams (free agent)
K David Akers (free agent)

Here are the guys from that list that was there prior to Harbaugh:

QB Alex Smith
OL Alex Boone
OL Anthony Davis
OL Mike Iupati
OL Joe Staley
RB Frank Gore
WR Michael Crabtree
WR Ted Ginn
TE Vernon Davis
TE Delanie Walker
DL Ray McDonald
DL Justin Smith
DL Issac Sopoaga
LB Navorro Bowman
LB Ahmad Brooks
LB Patrick Willis
SS Dashon Goldson
S CJ Spillman
P Andy Lee

I don't see how that helps you though because really everyone but Aldon Smith is much less impressive than the list of guys he walked in to. Many of the second group of guys is core players who have been to pro bowls.

Frankly, it doesn't look like Baalke is doing as good a job as the guys who were there before him.

I was talking about the fact that SF had a taskmaster in 2010 in Mike Singletary and that Dallas has notorious cupcake Wade Phillips letting the inmates run the asylum.

Singletary wasn't a good coach but he had gotten rid of some of the guys who weren't tough guys before Harbaugh got there. So yeah, he could have been weeding out the malcontents for 3 years but still not been able to win.

Phillips had a team of players who managed to quit on him in the middle of a season. And he's had that everywhere he's been a head coach.

Harbaugh has had very good records there for his three seasons... but if you can't see the team is trending in the wrong direction then that explains why you don't know what I mean. They aren't as good, although they are still good. There are rumblings of trouble behind the scenes and yes, that leads to an eventual collapse of the regime.

But, if you don't see it that way, then good for you.

This is just silly. It isn't a difficult concept that the 2013 team that went 8-8 was a better team than the one that went 8-8 in 2012. Schedules are different. Teams in the division are different... for that matter every team is different every year. The 2013 team had fewer holes than the 2011 and 2012 teams.

And what has that got to do with aiming high? I just said it was improving. Not that I or anyone aspired to be 8-8. It looks like you were just looking to take a shot there.

 

It was very clear, I agree. I'm just wondering why you don't hold Garrett to those same standards when judging. I got it...we're building something for the long term to sustain success. But I guess 3 straight NFC title appearances with a shot at the SB is not really the type of sustained success you're looking for since the "genius" in SF "isn't looking so hot." You've got some high standards, just apply them equally across the board.

 

This is were I am at as well.

This annointing is way over the top.

 

You can add Fox, Smith and Harbaugh (Both) to that list as well.

All have done more with comparable talent.

 

Clearly you don't get it if you think I am holding him to different standards. Here, let me show you. It isn't hard to see, but you aren't, can't, or won't. My guess is the latter. I will use only the part you quoted, not the parts you skipped even though they would further illustrate that you didn't bother to comprehend what was plainly said.

"Oh, and as to the "dynasty" Jason Garrett is creating here, I've never said he was, and it isn't created yet if he is."

You can hopefully note that I clearly said I have not announced the building of any dynasty, and that I clearly do not think he has done it yet, and that I even left it open to question with the phrase "if he is" at the end. So, in your world the different standard I am holding Garrett to is that I do not yet acknowledge that he is building a dynasty here? Very odd different standard if I don't think he is and I don't think they did. Reason number 1 why I think your lack of getting it was the last reason.

"I said I want sustained greatness not a flash in the pan and he is going about it the right way to do that. It still has to manifest itself on the field."

Do I want a dynasty? My gosh yes. The only people who don't are fans of other teams who hate this team. I believe there are right and wrong ways to build a team into a consistent winner, and I think Garrett is going about it the right way. I will say my exact phrase right now so that there is no doubt. "I like what I see being built." Now, having said that, note the last part in bold. "It still" means "hasn't happened yet." "Has to" means it is "imperative that." "Manifest itself" means produce "tangible evidence of." I hope I do not have to explain what on the field means. So, you're saying I hold Garrett to a standard I do not hold other coaches to. Interesting. I believe I am saying He has work to do to show that he has built the team that I want to see. I mean, from here, it looks plain as day that this is exactly what I said. How you can misconstrue that...well, it really isn't a mystery given the DCU mindset.

Next I gave some examples of coaches I have seen lauded as guys people wish we had here. Namely Pete Carroll, Jim Harbaugh, Chip Kelly, and Sean Payton. Do the Seahawks look like the juggernaut everyone (including me) predicted? See, I don't think they do. I still think they are a fantastic football team, don't get me wrong, but I see where their physical nature isn't manifesting itself quite like I expected. I see cracks in the foundation. The inability to control Percy Harvin doesn't look real impressive to me.

Now, understand something, I hate Pete Carroll, but I respect him. Same with Chip Kelly. They are former Pac12 coaches who regularly beat my alma mater to death. Now they are coaching rival teams. Seattle not as big a rival as Philly obviously. But I am still not a fan. I predicted the Eagles would come apart this year before the season started. I didn't look too sharp in that one so far this year, but last week and 2 of the next 4 weeks I will hopefully see my prediction come to light a little. I do find it funny in an ironic sort of way that the QB I pimped for Dallas is getting it done in the NFL. I could have sworn you guys all told me he couldn't.

I wasn't ever as high on Jim Harbaugh as you guys. Yet another Pac 12 coach that I hate. Now, maybe all the smoke of him leaving won't turn out to be real, but I think all of the drama adversely affects his football team. I think they should be better than they are. Yeah, he had some very good instant success. I think he inherited a really good football team. My friend Jared is a 49ers fan. That is his only real flaw as far as I am concerned. I told him before Singletary's last year that I thought his 49ers were going to the Super Bowl that year. I do not know what the disconnect was, but they sucked and I think Harbaugh walked into a gold mine and has done great. I still do not like the drama that comes with him.

Now we get to Sean Payton, whom I truly like better than all three of those guys and who I have said on several occasions I think will come back to Dallas one day and work with Stephen Jones, whom he gets along with great. Not going to lie to you, I picked New Orleans and Denver as my Super Bowl teams this year. I look to be wrong on both, and really wrong on the Saints. I think Payton is a great coach. But see I'm not shocked that even great coaches like him and Pete Carroll can have bad seasons. I do not think he could have one in Dallas and be treated any differently than Garrett is. The bottom line is I think a whole ton of posters can't stand Garrett because of my big mouth, and you know what, who the hell cares? If I am the litmus test of the DCU group think then so be it. I do not feel all that important, but I'm flattered.

I don't think any of these coaches are done. But I also do not think any of them are a Jimmy Johnson or a Bill Belichick, the other two Head Coaches I named. The last two coaches to build what I think are dynasties. I think Garrett is following the Belichick model, and I like it. I don't give two squirts of piss if others don't see it without wins. I still see him building a long term run as Head Coach with defined ways of doing things, thinking, and teaching. I do not think there can ever be another Jimmy, and I don't think Jimmy could repeat the magic he had here, not even with Jerry. What he had was rare, a plethora of high Draft picks and an energy that no one could have kept bottled up. But I want a long term Belichick more than I want a short term Jimmy.

Now, I do not think I could have broken my post down any further than that. Notice, that nowhere is Garrett graded differently than any of those coaches. It could not be any plainer if it had a GPS and a Sherpa. If you want to wander aimlessly off the trail searching for something I did not say is there, go ahead, but you're going to look blind doing it.

 

Oh Dodger isn't going to like that one bit.

I'm pretty sure that he thinks there is no way for the niners to be talented and still go 6-10 in 2010.

 

People can disagree. Before that season started I thought they were the best team in the NFL. People here know how much I liked Mike Iupati in that Draft. People know how much I like Patrick Willis. I liked Bowman and Mays too. Clearly I turned out to be wrong on Mays. That was an 8-8 team in 2009 that lost some very close games and I thought they had a great off season and would be the team to beat. I don't know what happened, but they just did not gel. I think Harbaugh inherited a gold mine. Others are allowed to disagree. Harbaugh himself mentioned the talent when he came on board. He did a lot with it. No doubt. Give credit where due, and I do.

I see him in much the same way I see a Parcells or a Jimmy. Ultra intense coaches who have quick success and burn out fast. If other want that, they can have it. I don't. I've had my fill of 2 to 5 years Head Coaches. I want a sustained control for a long time. We're clearly getting that now. We should all be happy. Naturally that means some aren't.

 

Maybe you have me confused with another poster but I don't think I ever stated that you claimed Garrett was building a "dynasty" so I don't know why you're going off in that direction. You've held that "sustained greatness" mantra which is about the only thing I'd attribute to you but certainly not a dynasty. But that sustained greatness is still hard to swallow after 3 .500 seasons. I'm not even sure a team can live up to that expectation in today's NFL. At best, you need to stay very competitive when you have a franchise QB and take your shots. IMO, that requires some solid drafts, savvy FA acquisitions and a relatively injury free season. And even then some luck is involved. You made a good post recently where you spelled out this very thing and listed some young talent and some good FA pick-ups. The cards are falling right with Melton, McClain and some young studs on the OL. But, at some point, the results have to be seen in the win-lost column.

You're making yourself look very foolish. Let me also keep it simple for you. You can question other coaches and bring up issues they may be having. That's all well and good. But those folks have some skins. Garrett has yet to clinch a playoff spot yet you like what he's building going .500 with a franchise QB. Color me unimpressed at this point. "At this point" means as of now and "tangible evidence" means playoffs, playoff victories and other universally accepted barometers of success used by NFL standards.

And given your dynasty references (that I never made) and your mini defensive diatribe to something that was never stated (by me), it looks like one side misconstrued a post and, from the looks of it, it wasn't me. But what I find funny is that this is multiple responses to me where you've mentioned DCU. What bearing does that have and what purpose does it serve? I've never mentioned or made reference to you setting up a knock off website, naming it uniquely similar sounding to the Cowboy's Zone, screening all the members to stifle any opposing views and opinions and no doubt recruiting members from CZ. And you want to bring up the "DCU mindset?" Yes, you're a real prince.

For the most part, when the coaches you mentioned have come up in conversations, it's because some Garrett homer wants to compare them, not because people wish we had them. The only exception is Sean Payton and that's only because of his previous ties to the Cowboys and his relationship to the Jones family. Case in point is this very thread. How in the world do people compare Garrett to Harbaugh, Chip Kelly, Pete Carroll, etc.? It's an assinine comparison that flies int he face of the "process" crowd so now they invent the excuse that those coaches had more talent when they were hired than Garrett. Forget about the fact that Kelly, Harbaugh, Carroll or Payton didn't have an existing franchise QB like Garrett did which is the most difficult position to find and the biggest requirement for future success in today's NFL.

Who is "you guys" because I have no idea who you pimped beyond Brandon Weeden the moment he was signed by Dallas. And, in case you haven't noticed, he didn't get it done.

Interesting. So the Niners go from 5 and 11 in 2008, 8 and 8 in 2009 and you predicted a SB appearance in 2010? So other coaches don't require a multi-year rebuilding process? And did you think they would go to the SB with Shaun Hill who beat out Alex Smith for the starting QB position in 2009? Or did Smith's 81 QB rating that year after Hill was benched give you a clue that he'd take them to the SB the following year?

Bottom line is the 9ers finished 6 and 10 in 2010 and somehow folks (like you) characterize this as a coach walking into a gold mine, especially with an uncertain QB situation. Up to that point, Smith had won 19 games in 50 NFL starts. Folks can look back now and say the 9ers were talented but nothing would indicate that; not their record nor their QB situation. I remember back then thinking how horrible the 9ers were and how much a bust Alex Smith was. That was also the common belief on CZ as well, from what I recall. The 9ers were just bad. But you thought they were so talented (and SB bound) that the only person you told this to was your friend "Jared?" Did you post it on CZ? I bet not........

Get off yourself man, you're just not that important and hardly a litmus test for people's opinions about the Cowboys. Your arrogance to even assume that is very unflattering. Many folks here, including myself, have stated that they were Garrett supporters but soured on him as his game day flaws became utterly apparent. Garrett's record is a reflection of Garrett himself and the only thing that kept him from having a worse coaching record is Romo saving his ***.

You're so blind you can't even see it. You're grading Garrett on criteria that you yourself admit doesn't include winning. Yet you're comparing him and his "model" to coaches that have actually won and have turned teams around relatively quickly. Forget the GPS and Sherpa, it's too late for that. You're stuck on the summit in the middle of a zero visibility blizzard and below freezing temperatures Take off the gloves, remove your coat and unfasten the goggles. They say after a while things start to get warm before the end comes.