Jones Says Record Won't Be Deciding Factor For Garrett

[Hostile]

Their names are Mike Holmgren and Mike Reid. Holmgren was 9-7, 9-7, and 9-7 his first three years. You saw a trend. I saw a potential great Head Coach. Two years later, he was that. Yes, he had Brett Favre, a great QB. Andy Reid was 27-21.

I obviously meant Andy both times. No idea why I typed Mike twice. Must have had it on my brain for some stupid reason.

 

[CCBoy]

I obviously meant Andy both times. No idea why I typed Mike twice. Must have had it on my brain for some stupid reason.

Didn't Andy Reid have a very senior and experienced group of Philadelphia Coaches that were a strong support and influence there?

Do you see the same assembly in Dallas now, but without long periods together?

 

[TheDude]

Again, I am not comparing or saying Garrett is going to be like those guys. I'm saying no one could have predicted those guys would become legends based upon their first 3 years. Are you telling me you know for a fact that Mike McCoy in San Diego is destined for greatness as a Head Coach after his initial 9-7 season? Or that Chip Kelly already has the NFL world on white flag alert after 10-6? I hope you aren't. Are you consequently telling me that you already know that Joe Philbin cannot coach in the NFL after 2 years and 15-17? That Marc Trestman's 8-8 inaugural year sets a trend and he is a Garrett clone? Did you somehow know that after a 13-19 start that Ron Rivera was going to turn the Panthers into a 12 win team with a powerhouse Defense? I hope you aren't again.

I was a big Ron Rivera guy around here if you remember. I still remember a couple of the digs people got in after his first year was 6-10.

I have no idea how you state you aren't comparing Garrett to these guys and talk around it here and then use this later on "I pay attention to that because I studied a Head Coach named Tom Landry who was a decent player, but was noted not for his playing skills but for his brains for the game. Just like Dan Reeves. Just like Jason Garrett." You even included the Simile

I feel you are trying to obfuscate the issue, though. You seem fixated on summary records of coaches and downplay trends.

That aside, to support your argument for Garrett you have to draw parallels that show he is "like" a great. So lets not belabor that anymore.

I think I have asserted or alluded to twice that I think building a team today is and should be faster "process" because of FA, prior you can only build through the draft. This claim seems to be proven out with some glaring regularities. So I can't just take all eras as equal in this regard.

As to the McCoy, Kelly, Trestman, Philbin strawman - No one stating they are the next great legends, mehs or failures after 1 season (2 for Philbin) - but again you know that. However, Chip Kelly took a 4-12 team to 9-7 and a playoff birth in year 1. I would like to know why that accomplishment should be discard or when juxtaposed against a garrett season, not be look at with raised eyebrows and a nod of approval. That aside, I stated in my last post that SD, Philly (though I ommitted them, the math implied them) may not make it back. Chip could be a fraud and get figured out. However, his coaching job last year was pretty darn good. He had Vick - taylor made for the spread read/option - and moved to Foles mid year. He changed his gaming and Foles had a magnificent season. He demonstrated an ability to be decisive and make changes quickly.

As to Rivera, he took a 2-14 team to 6-10 in year 1, 7-9 in year 2. That is tangible process and progress. At the end of 2012, they were playing as good a ball as anyone. I am more surprised Atl folded than Carolina continuing upward.

Let's be honest here though. The tendency to give an example is to use the best choices. Especially when the point of the argument is to say that it is too soon to pull the eject lever. I actually have a database of every head coach in the History of the current 32 teams. If it would sit better with you for me to use other examples, I will.

Norv Turner's first 3 years thrilled me. For absolutely different reasons. 3-13, 6-10, 9-7. Washington didn't fire him after that 18-30 start. They gave him 4 more seasons. He made the playoffs exactly one time in that span. By the way, I'm not saying that is right or wrong. It is just passing along the info.

And why would they fire him after 3 years? the trajectory was going up. coming out of year 3 with improvements every year, Im sure Commander fans were very positive. then it stalled and got worse.Though he did get the shaft being the only coach with a winning record to get canned mid-season, after a 1-4 stretch after a 6-2 start. Turner built a competitive team quickly

Funny you mentioned Rich Kotite. He started out 29-19 for the Eagles. He was 36-28 when he got fired. Too many people remember his Jets years and forget the Eagles. I'm not saying the Eagles should have kept him, but I don't think he was the horrible football guy people remember with the Jets.

Well they should look at the eagle years as just as big of a resume failure. He took over a perennial 10-11 win team under buddy ryan and carried that talent over the next 2 years to 10 and 11 wins, respectively. Then his stamp began to show ink.he won 8 games and then 7 games the next 2 years.

But lets delve into that last year , he started 7-2 and then went 0-7. With the Jets, and i remember he being instrumental in the infamous Kyle Brady over Warren Sapp decision, he went 3-13 and 1-15. So in the last 39 games of his coaching career he was 4-35.

I have never run from my faith in Jason Garrett. If you remember, in 2007 when he got hired here as the OC I preferred him as HC to Wade Phillips, whom I did not, and still do not, dislike. Let me go on record here with you on something. I very rarely get excited about what I see as a potential future Head Coach, but when I do I am quite often right. Like many Cowboys fans I am sure, I wanted Dan Reeves to be the guy who replaced Tom Landry. Though I liked the extension of Landry's coaching tree I was very sad to see him go to the Broncos in 1981. He was 21-20 after 3 years by the way because the strike year of 9 games was sandwiched in there. I doubt many people saw Dan Reeves as a great coach at that time. But I did. 13-3, 11-5, 11-5, 10-4-1 over the next 4 years. And two trips to the Super Bowl. Yes, he had John Elway. You'll find I am not a bus driver kind of guy. I want great QBs, and I think we have one.

Well that 21-20 record in first 3 years is a little skewed since the throw away strike year was 2-7 was sandwiched between 10-6 and 9-7 - both over 500 ball.

Not enough for you? As you know I walked onto a college football team. On the coaching staff of that team was a QBs Coach that I knew was going to be a great Coach. I also got to meet a former graduate assistant, and I knew he was going to be a great head coach too. In fact I hoped he would be the guy who replaced my college Head Coach one day. Both went on to be Head Coaches in the NFL, one won a Super Bowl. Their names are Mike Holmgren and Mike Reid. Holmgren was 9-7, 9-7, and 9-7 his first three years. You saw a trend. I saw a potential great Head Coach. Two years later, he was that. Yes, he had Brett Favre, a great QB. Andy Reid was 27-21. I still remember people saying he had never been an OC in the NFL and didn't deserve a HC gig. In fact he has never served as an OC at any level. I knew he'd be a great Head Coach. I would also like to point out that when some were wanting Sean Payton gone, I was saying he was going to be a good HC.

Not enough, you pick summary records and then negated the trend component within. But Im still playing

I assume all of these examples are to somehow support the garret claim to be a great HC.

Holmgren
I'll take 9-7 - its a winning record. He made the playoffs in the last two 9-7 records - ironically losing to dallas both times. So you can argue that his first 3 years of 9-7s were really 10-6s had it not been for the Dallas Dynasty. Also Before Holmgren got there, GB won 6 and 4 games the prior 2 years. Again tangible progress and process.

Reid
Philly - Year 1 - 5-11, Year 2 - 11-5 (playoffs) , Year 3 - 11-5 Playoffs. The record the year Before he got there 3-13
KC Year 1 - 11-5 - Playoffs. The record the year Before he got there 4-12
Playoffs in 10-15 years coaching

So both of these coaches inherited much worse teams and made the playoffs in year 2. This supports my assertion that it doesn't take 5-15 years to build a team. To compare Garrets potential using these 2 really is a disservice to their accomplishments.

My excitement and faith in Garrett is coming from the exact same place as it did for those 3 guys. When I see a guy who is that smart and loves football I think it is the foundation of greatness. Yes, I do think Garrett can be great. I have since the early 1990's when Ernie Zampese stated that Jason Garrett was Troy Aikman's personal QB Coach as he was the 3rd QB on the team. I pay attention to stuff like that. I pay attention to things like tams wanting a guy to stop playing and join their coaching staff. The Cowboys and the Giants both wanted that of Garrett. I pay attention when a guy like Nick Saban wants to take him along to Alabama as his OC. I pay attention to that because I studied a Head Coach named Tom Landry who was a decent player, but was noted not for his playing skills but for his brains for the game. Just like Dan Reeves. Just like Jason Garrett.

All of that is warm and fuzzy, but not every person a HC wants on a staff is going to be a "great HC" Maybe they are better suited to be a Coordinator (Turner, LeBeau, Fangio, Phillips) Maybe a GM. Just because there is an INITIAL clamoring for someone, when they get the job you get to see if they really have clothes. The NFL is littered with The Romeo Crennels, Charlie Weisz,

I don't get the carping over Garrett's Princeton education. Things would be better if he was dumb? Well, fortunately for the Dallas Cowboys he is not dumb. Ozzie Newsome, a man I respect like I do very few in the NFL, said Jason Garrett was aiming too low in wanting to be an NFL Head Coach. He said the man should run for President. You can discount Ozzie, Zampese, and Saban all you want over triple 8-8's. I'm not going to. Yes, I have faith in the man, and I have that faith because I see what he inherited, what he did without Tony Romo, what he has done since taking over as the HC in turning this roster into a team I can be proud of and have hope in. I like what he is building. That doesn't mean I am happy with 8-8, because I am not. But I damn sure wouldn't have been happy with Landry's first 3 years, Noll's first 3, Reeves first 3, Holmgren's first 3 either. Funny isn't it that we'd all probably be happy with Kotite's.

Its great if he is smart, but I work in an industry where being the smartest plays little into if you are a good leader or a manger. I think he works in an industry where he can use his education to create deflection and redirect very easily. I work with many Ivy league MBAs and Phds as well as tier II college grads. On average are the Ivy league guys more talented, probably. But BY NO MEANS IS IT A FOREGONE FACT.

As far as this Ozzie Newsome quote, I wish we could get off that as some proof, What if Barack Obama told Hillary he thought she could be a great NFL head coach? It was a compliment from a good football guy after an interview.

But speaking of all of this Garrett intelligence. Can you point to me what innovative gameplan, system he has implemented? I see no Landry Flex, Shotgun, Chip Kelly rapid fire read/option - It seems to be out of a text book with a couple of minor tweaks. On top of this, he has no real set philosophy on defense. Why not change to the 4-3 on Day 1? Why not move to a Zone blocking scheme year 1 instead of tasking Houck with teaching a new system to scrubs in year 1 and then throwing him away? Why draft to emulate the patriots offense 12 package and then have TEs who cant block?

And what he inherited, was a franchise QB and a team who made the playoffs in 2-4 years (missing the 2008 season due in part - (my opinion mind you) - his legendary horrific call to keep Brad checkdown Johnson as a backup when the entire preseason showed he had nothing. I have posted his line in those 3 games. A 20 point loss to a 2-14 Rams team.

2010. That team, if you remember and I have posted links, was supposed to be in the hunt for the Home SB. Season starts off with a 13-7 loss to Wash. Wash's TD, if you remember, came on a :04 before halftime fumble recovery on a screen pass at their own 40 (D. Hall / T Choice). I put 98% of that on Garrett. Down 0-3 with :04 seconds left you kneel on the ball. Romo doesn't have a 65 yard arm, no time for a FG on a completion. All risk no reward. .

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010091212/2010/REG1/cowboys@Commanders#menu=gameinfo|contentId:09000d5d81a91002&tab=recap

Then Romo went on to have abysmal games against Chicago, Tenn and Minn. They were spanking NY until romo got collarboned. THat great 5-3 finish included a record setting pace of turnovers by the defense and a win with stephen McGee over The Eagles JV the last week team since they were already in the playoffs.

And to the last part. I refuse to compare Landry and Noll eras. But Reeves and Holmgrens records were on the surface better and trajectory a lot better. As for Kotite, after year 3, I dont think the Philly fans were happy - and they were right.

It is more than enough to do that and not have us cap strapped in 2015. I'm not looking to sign a huge name guy to some in here and be our savior. I'm looking at not losing a guy like Dez.

Pardon me for saying it, but the cupboard has been bare here before and it was restocked through Free Agency. Leonard Davis, Kyle Kosier, Marc Colombo, Even a little of that in 2011 when Garrett got rid of the 80% of his OL. We could still be going that route to field an OL. He hasn't. Instead he is building through the Draft, and in my opinion has taken 3 solid foundation guys. He is building it for the long term.

That is what I want.

He traded an Expensive OLine FAs for an expensive CB FA (then applied the cherry by using the first 2 picks in the 2012 draft on another CB). And Kyle Kosier was a great value FA pick as was Columbo. Both were cheap in comparison to Davis.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Jerry will never learn.

The correct answer is - we will look at the season as a whole. The. Decide.
He just talks too much.

 

[TheFinisher]

Just uttering the words "iced his own kicker" would reduce your credibility down to zero... if it wasn't already there from the beginning.

Well, as a supporter you have to pretend it didn't happen because that alone made him a joke.

So by all means, keep pretending these clown episodes don't happen regularly with Garrett. It doesn't hurt my feelings, or change the fact that they did in fact occur.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Well, as a supporter you have to pretend it didn't happen because that alone made him a joke.

So by all means, keep pretending these clown episodes don't happen regularly with Garrett. It doesn't hurt my feelings, or change the fact that they did in fact occur.

I'll do you a favor and pretend that you really don't think that "icing the kicker" is a real thing. Let me guess, you're one of those people who thinks that a coin lands on heads ten times in a row, the odds are different for the 11th toss?

 

[TheFinisher]

I'll do you a favor and pretend that you really don't think that "icing the kicker" is a real thing. Let me guess, you're one of those people who thinks that a coin lands on heads ten times in a row, the odds are different for the 11th toss?

Yes, apparently myself and every pro and college head coach since the merger believe in calling a timeout before a kick to try and make a kicker overthink it on the 2nd try, as it's been going on consistently for about a half century.

And Jason Garrett apparently became the first to go rogue by icing his own, successfully. See, he is an innovator just like Landry!!

 

[TheDude]

I obviously meant Andy both times. No idea why I typed Mike twice. Must have had it on my brain for some stupid reason.

no worries -knew what you meant

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Yes, apparently myself and every pro and college head coach since the merger believe in calling a timeout before a kick to try and make a kicker overthink it on the 2nd try, as it's been going on consistently for about a half century.

And Jason Garrett apparently became the first to go rogue by icing his own, successfully. See, he is an innovator just like Landry!!

And if you had ever done a shred of original thinking in your life instead of just parroting what other people say, you would know that icing the kicker has statistically been an ineffective tactic. Although it's far more embarrassing that you think a team could actually lose a game because of icing the kicker.

 

[TheDude]

I'll do you a favor and pretend that you really don't think that "icing the kicker" is a real thing. Let me guess, you're one of those people who thinks that a coin lands on heads ten times in a row, the odds are different for the 11th toss?

I see "icing the kicker" as the catchphrase to a horrifically managed ending to a game. Him "Icing his kicker" wasn't the blunder,but it is the game that might be the single handedly worse series of coaching in my memory. I just rewatched on the the Game Rewind. The fact that there were 2 TOs and the only one used was right after clocking the ball to set up for a FG says alot (i.e. why even clock the ball? Just call the TO w/ 7 seconds left)

1:06 left - 1st and 10 on the Cardinal 44 - False start
1:06 left - 1st and 15 - incomplete pass 12 yards on a sideline route
1:01 left - 2nd and 15 - Delay of game (a staple of the Garrett Romo "snap the ball w/ 0:00001 on the clock" that provides 0 benefit - See Brady and Manning, Brees, et al)
1:01 left - 2nd and 20 - now at the 50 - Dez catches a 9 yrd pass in bounds with 0:54 remaining (No TO and 3rd down conversion likely needed for a good FG attempt)
0:32 left (18 seconds to snap the ball). Romo and Dez bail out the issue of not taking a TO on the previous play with a great throw and catch over the middle for a first down.(TO could have been called at 0:24 seconds)
0:07 - Ball clocked to settle for a 49yd FG.
0:07 - TO called right beffore the snap - Missed FG, take a TO in the pocket to end regulation - lose in OT.

I am sure some other coach has made a similar dumb series at one point - but I could never imgine a Parcells caliber coach (or any attention to detail/scenario coach doing the same)

 

[TheFinisher]

And if you had ever done a shred of original thinking in your life instead of just parroting what other people say, you would know that icing the kicker has statistically been an ineffective tactic. Although it's far more embarrassing that you think a team could actually lose a game because of icing the kicker.

What does me saying icing the kicker have anything to do with parroting. It's done every week in the NFL BRuh, whether it has a high probability of success has nothing to do with anything discussed here.

 

[Hostile]

I have no idea how you state you aren't comparing Garrett to these guys and talk around it here and then use this later on "I pay attention to that because I studied a Head Coach named Tom Landry who was a decent player, but was noted not for his playing skills but for his brains for the game. Just like Dan Reeves. Just like Jason Garrett." You even included the Simile

That moment, yes I did make a comparison to Landry and Reeves. Rather to their intelligence. Are you saying that Garrett is not smart? Where did I say Noll was smart "like" Garrett? I merely pointed out that he did not have results after 3 years and still managed to build a football team that made them what they are now.

Here, I will make a comparison between Noll and Garrett to illustrate the difference. Both went to small schools not known as football factories, but rather as academic institutions. Both played High School football in Cleveland, OH. Noll for Benedictine and Garrett for University. After pedestrian careers as players both got their start in coaching as position coaches, then Coordinators, and finally moved to Head Coach. Noll after 8 years, Garrett after 7.

That is a comparison. It talks about more than one thing in which they are similar besides rough starts to their career as head cheese.

I feel you are trying to obfuscate the issue, though. You seem fixated on summary records of coaches and downplay trends.

I don't know about fixation, but when the only thing I am doing is stating a fact that some football coaches got off to rocky starts it seems the right approach to the point I am trying to make.

That aside, to support your argument for Garrett you have to draw parallels that show he is "like" a great. So lets not belabor that anymore.

One parallel, after several back and forth discussions about it, and about intelligence. Beyond that it was merely statistics.

I think I have asserted or alluded to twice that I think building a team today is and should be faster "process" because of FA, prior you can only build through the draft. This claim seems to be proven out with some glaring regularities. So I can't just take all eras as equal in this regard.

I think Free Agency can rip a team apart as fast as it can build it up. That is just my opinion. I really don't intend to support it with much in the way of pertinent facts or discussion. I personally do not like building through Free Agency. I do not mind taking a chance on someone else's high Draft picks, but I'd much rather hit on players in the Draft, build that way, and receive Compensatory picks for players who leave via high priced Free Agency as opposed to spending in Free Agency. I've never seen the Commanders, the perennial winners of the Off Season Free Agency period, turn into actual winners. The Eagles built a "dream team" in free agency. The problem was, it was a nightmare. I'll never forget all the bellyaching around here about how great they were becoming while Rome burned. In retrospect it was better than I thought it was going to be when they crashed and burned with all that high priced nothing.

As to the McCoy, Kelly, Trestman, Philbin strawman - No one stating they are the next great legends, mehs or failures after 1 season (2 for Philbin) - but again you know that. However, Chip Kelly took a 4-12 team to 9-7 and a playoff birth in year 1. I would like to know why that accomplishment should be discard or when juxtaposed against a garrett season, not be look at with raised eyebrows and a nod of approval. That aside, I stated in my last post that SD, Philly (though I ommitted them, the math implied them) may not make it back. Chip could be a fraud and get figured out. However, his coaching job last year was pretty darn good. He had Vick - taylor made for the spread read/option - and moved to Foles mid year. He changed his gaming and Foles had a magnificent season. He demonstrated an ability to be decisive and make changes quickly.

Kelly was 10-6, not 9-7. Other than that I don't have much to add to what you said.

As to Rivera, he took a 2-14 team to 6-10 in year 1, 7-9 in year 2. That is tangible process and progress. At the end of 2012, they were playing as good a ball as anyone. I am more surprised Atl folded than Carolina continuing upward.

I wasn't surprised when Atlanta folded after injuries hit them so hard. I saw them play live in 2012 and that was a fantastic football team. But even a fantastic football team ages, loses players to free agency or injury, and can suffer a frustrating season.

I wonder what you will say if Carolina regresses back to 6-10 this year? Will you say that their progression ended? I'm not really arguing with you on this, I just see it a little differently. They are going to have a tougher schedule this year, and they suffered some losses. They might come back down to earth a little. Especially if the Falcons and Saints are both better. It can affect an entire season adversely. That's football. I'd like to see them have some success though because I do still very much like Rivera, and I like Cam Newton too.

And why would they fire him after 3 years? the trajectory was going up. coming out of year 3 with improvements every year, Im sure Commander fans were very positive. then it stalled and got worse.Though he did get the shaft being the only coach with a winning record to get canned mid-season, after a 1-4 stretch after a 6-2 start. Turner built a competitive team quickly

Commanders fans are positive every year. Has their positivity (is there a real word for this?) paid off? For that matter, has mine? In retrospect most of us say Norv is a good OC but not a good HC.

Well they should look at the eagle years as just as big of a resume failure. He took over a perennial 10-11 win team under buddy ryan and carried that talent over the next 2 years to 10 and 11 wins, respectively. Then his stamp began to show ink.he won 8 games and then 7 games the next 2 years.

But lets delve into that last year , he started 7-2 and then went 0-7. With the Jets, and i remember he being instrumental in the infamous Kyle Brady over Warren Sapp decision, he went 3-13 and 1-15. So in the last 39 games of his coaching career he was 4-35.

Ah, so now you are agreeing with me. Looking at the record only for evidence of success or failure doesn't give you a true indication of anything. I agree. Barry Switzer was 12-4, 12-4, 10-6 out the gate, but I thought he sucked as a Head Coach in the NFL. He wasn't building anything. If anything I felt he was tearing this team down. In 1997 we got exactly what I expected, a team laden with future Hall of Famers, who couldn't get out of their own way because they had no direction. I see direction now, and I like it. I'd rather be pointed up than down.

Well that 21-20 record in first 3 years is a little skewed since the throw away strike year was 2-7 was sandwiched between 10-6 and 9-7 - both over 500 ball.

2-7 would have turned into 9-7 if those 7 games hadn't been cancelled? I got faith in the man, but that's some serious faith. I love Dan Reeves. I'm not putting him down in any way. He had to build the Broncos into something, and let's face it he did take over a team with recent success under Red Miller.

Not enough, you pick summary records and then negated the trend component within. But Im still playing

I assume all of these examples are to somehow support the garret claim to be a great HC.

Not really. These examples were given to explain why I put stock in my own opinion on what you want in a Head Coach...namely brains. Some brass is great too.

Holmgren
I'll take 9-7 - its a winning record. He made the playoffs in the last two 9-7 records - ironically losing to dallas both times. So you can argue that his first 3 years of 9-7s were really 10-6s had it not been for the Dallas Dynasty. Also Before Holmgren got there, GB won 6 and 4 games the prior 2 years. Again tangible progress and process.

Reid
Philly - Year 1 - 5-11, Year 2 - 11-5 (playoffs) , Year 3 - 11-5 Playoffs. The record the year Before he got there 3-13
KC Year 1 - 11-5 - Playoffs. The record the year Before he got there 4-12
Playoffs in 10-15 years coaching

So both of these coaches inherited much worse teams and made the playoffs in year 2. This supports my assertion that it doesn't take 5-15 years to build a team. To compare Garrets potential using these 2 really is a disservice to their accomplishments.

So what you are essentially saying is that if Garrett had won the last game each of these three seasons and made the playoffs your entire outlook would be different? That's cool, and I respect it, but mine wouldn't. I'm not looking just at wins and losses. I want to see what is being done to win for this year, and for the future. Anyone can build a one season glory team and then fall apart. Look at Washington in 2012. I don't want that. People keep talking about what a coach inherits. Jason Garrett inherited a 1-7 team with a lot of high priced, under achieving veterans. I fail to see how that is a fully stocked cupboard that indicates he should be above where things are now, especially given the injuries of the last 2 years.

All of that is warm and fuzzy, but not every person a HC wants on a staff is going to be a "great HC" Maybe they are better suited to be a Coordinator (Turner, LeBeau, Fangio, Phillips) Maybe a GM. Just because there is an INITIAL clamoring for someone, when they get the job you get to see if they really have clothes. The NFL is littered with The Romeo Crennels, Charlie Weisz,

No guts, no glory. I'll take my chances. I am pretty sure I am right about this guy and tunes will change.

Its great if he is smart, but I work in an industry where being the smartest plays little into if you are a good leader or a manger. I think he works in an industry where he can use his education to create deflection and redirect very easily. I work with many Ivy league MBAs and Phds as well as tier II college grads. On average are the Ivy league guys more talented, probably. But BY NO MEANS IS IT A FOREGONE FACT.

As far as this Ozzie Newsome quote, I wish we could get off that as some proof, What if Barack Obama told Hillary he thought she could be a great NFL head coach? It was a compliment from a good football guy after an interview.

But speaking of all of this Garrett intelligence. Can you point to me what innovative gameplan, system he has implemented? I see no Landry Flex, Shotgun, Chip Kelly rapid fire read/option - It seems to be out of a text book with a couple of minor tweaks. On top of this, he has no real set philosophy on defense. Why not change to the 4-3 on Day 1? Why not move to a Zone blocking scheme year 1 instead of tasking Houck with teaching a new system to scrubs in year 1 and then throwing him away? Why draft to emulate the patriots offense 12 package and then have TEs who cant block?

Can you point me towards what innovative system Vince Lombardi implemented? You think rushing Jim Taylor off tackle on a sweep was an innovation? Or Bill Walsh? Or Chuck Noll? Or Andy Reid? Hey, tell me what kind of innovator Jimmy Johnson was? Landry was an innovator, but do you notice how few teams copied Landry? Paul Brown on the other hand, quite copied. Bill Walsh didn't invent the WCO. Not many people know that. I hope you do.

I still remember when Jack Pardee's Run and Shoot and Tony Sparano's Wildcat were going to set the NFL on fire. Except that next year the Defenses did their homework, caught up, and made those things null. I remember when the 46 was the Defense du jour. Where is it now? As I recall, Rob Ryan's "amoeba" defense in Cleveland was going to be our calling card.

I have no issue with Garrett teaching steady, ball control Offense and Defense. Many successful Head Coaches have done the same. And I have no issue with switching a defensive scheme either. Bill Parcells did it. Lots of teams do. Some switch back. I'm interested to see what our 4-3 can do with healthy players. I don't believe any team can run a 3-4, a 4-3, or a 46 without personnel.

And what he inherited, was a franchise QB and a team who made the playoffs in 2-4 years (missing the 2008 season due in part - (my opinion mind you) - his legendary horrific call to keep Brad checkdown Johnson as a backup when the entire preseason showed he had nothing. I have posted his line in those 3 games. A 20 point loss to a 2-14 Rams team.

2010. That team, if you remember and I have posted links, was supposed to be in the hunt for the Home SB. Season starts off with a 13-7 loss to Wash. Wash's TD, if you remember, came on a :04 before halftime fumble recovery on a screen pass at their own 40 (D. Hall / T Choice). I put 98% of that on Garrett. Down 0-3 with :04 seconds left you kneel on the ball. Romo doesn't have a 65 yard arm, no time for a FG on a completion. All risk no reward.

Is that the only team that failed to live up to hype? If he had been the Head Coach for the entire season that year perhaps things could have been different. I honestly feel very bad for Wade Phillips because I do like the man and think he is a very good football guy. But maybe just not cut out to be a HC.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010091212/2010/REG1/cowboys@Commanders#menu=gameinfo|contentId:09000d5d81a91002&tab=recap

Then Romo went on to have abysmal games against Chicago, Tenn and Minn. They were spanking NY until romo got collarboned. THat great 5-3 finish included a record setting pace of turnovers by the defense and a win with stephen McGee over The Eagles JV the last week team since they were already in the playoffs.

And to the last part. I refuse to compare Landry and Noll eras. But Reeves and Holmgrens records were on the surface better and trajectory a lot better. As for Kotite, after year 3, I dont think the Philly fans were happy - and they were right.

Where you may be presuming something wrong is to think I am happy with 8-8 three straight years. I'm no different than those Eagles fans. I'm not happy. However, I don't think I'm wrong either. Hindsight is 20/20 vision. We've all got it. When this is all said and done I hope you will be able to say you respect my foresight. I'm going to stick to my guns here amigo. I see something that I have wanted for a very long time. I like the direction more than the results. I like it more because I believe direction is more important than results. That's just me. You don't have to agree. I'll still respect ya.

 

[Hostile]

no worries -knew what you meant

That makes one of us.

~grin~

 

[Idgit]

I see "icing the kicker" as the catchphrase to a horrifically managed ending to a game. Him "Icing his kicker" wasn't the blunder,but it is the game that might be the single handedly worse series of coaching in my memory. I just rewatched on the the Game Rewind. The fact that there were 2 TOs and the only one used was right after clocking the ball to set up for a FG says alot (i.e. why even clock the ball? Just call the TO w/ 7 seconds left)

1:06 left - 1st and 10 on the Cardinal 44 - False start
1:06 left - 1st and 15 - incomplete pass 12 yards on a sideline route
1:01 left - 2nd and 15 - Delay of game (a staple of the Garrett Romo "snap the ball w/ 0:00001 on the clock" that provides 0 benefit - See Brady and Manning, Brees, et al)
1:01 left - 2nd and 20 - now at the 50 - Dez catches a 9 yrd pass in bounds with 0:54 remaining (No TO and 3rd down conversion likely needed for a good FG attempt)
0:32 left (18 seconds to snap the ball). Romo and Dez bail out the issue of not taking a TO on the previous play with a great throw and catch over the middle for a first down.(TO could have been called at 0:24 seconds)
0:07 - Ball clocked to settle for a 49yd FG.
0:07 - TO called right beffore the snap - Missed FG, take a TO in the pocket to end regulation - lose in OT.

I am sure some other coach has made a similar dumb series at one point - but I could never imgine a Parcells caliber coach (or any attention to detail/scenario coach doing the same)

That series was a disaster. Not all because of the coaching, but Garrett definitely played a role in blowing that. 'Icing the kicker' had nothing to do with it, though.

 

[BoysFan4ever]

You guys know way too much about games that happened years ago. I barely remember yesterday.

I glossed over it because stuff like that makes my eyes cross but it's impressive.

 

[TheFinisher]

That series was a disaster. Not all because of the coaching, but Garrett definitely played a role in blowing that. 'Icing the kicker' had nothing to do with it, though.

HE CALLED A TIMEOUT THAT WIPED AWAY WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A DAN BAILEY GW KICK!! BAILEY MISSED THE FOLLOWING ATTEMPT.

You guys call it whatever you want, but Garrett came out of that with egg all over his face.

 

[TheDude]

HE CALLED A TIMEOUT THAT WIPED AWAY WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A DAN BAILEY GW KICK!! BAILEY MISSED THE FOLLOWING ATTEMPT.

You guys call it whatever you want, but Garrett came out of that with egg all over his face.

That said...there was 24 seconds on the clock 1st and 10 and 2 TOs at the 31. Who the hell settles for a FG there and doesn't run a play and not using a TO

 

[Idgit]

HE CALLED A TIMEOUT THAT WIPED AWAY WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A DAN BAILEY GW KICK!! BAILEY MISSED THE FOLLOWING ATTEMPT.

You guys call it whatever you want, but Garrett came out of that with egg all over his face.

Silliness. He called the TO because the ST coordinator wanted it. The TO happened prior to the kick, and the rest doesn't matter. That's *exactly* what you want your HC doing in that situation, and the fact that the kicker 'made' the attempt that never happened and then missed the subsequent kick is irrelevant.

He had egg on his face for that series, but not because he used a timeout when the coordinator wanted one.

And I don't want to minimize Garrett's role in that game, because his time management very probably cost us a victory there. That game, along with the GB game last year, are the two best examples of what I consider to be flat out coaching mistakes that have cost us games (as opposed to the run-of-the-mill second guessing that goes on after every single close loss any team has). So, he deserves his blame. It's just not for what happened after calling a timeout when the ST coordinator wanted one.

 

[Idgit]

That said...there was 24 seconds on the clock 1st and 10 and 2 TOs at the 31. Who the hell settles for a FG there and doesn't run a play and not using a TO

Yep. That's my biggest beef with that series. He clearly lost track of how many TOs he had, and he still had time to run a play, anyway.

 

[TheDude]

That moment, yes I did make a comparison to Landry and Reeves. Rather to their intelligence. Are you saying that Garrett is not smart? Where did I say Noll was smart "like" Garrett? I merely pointed out that he did not have results after 3 years and still managed to build a football team that made them what they are now.

No, not saying he isn't smart. Look, there are vast degrees and tapestries of intelligence. The key is how you apply them and how effective your intelligence can translate to value in a job. There is also intuition and creativity. If I am going into battle Id be just as happy with Alvin York as Bill Gates - probably moreso since there is a record and trend with one in battle. I wouldn't call Barry Switzer as smart as Garrett, but he was effective at OU.

Here, I will make a comparison between Noll and Garrett to illustrate the difference. Both went to small schools not known as football factories, but rather as academic institutions. Both played High School football in Cleveland, OH. Noll for Benedictine and Garrett for University. After pedestrian careers as players both got their start in coaching as position coaches, then Coordinators, and finally moved to Head Coach. Noll after 8 years, Garrett after 7.

That is a comparison. It talks about more than one thing in which they are similar besides rough starts to their career as head cheese.

that's fine, But I dont see the relevance that because person A achieved x on certain path, person B will do the same following a similar path. Here is a counter example.

The man graduated from Yale in 1973. Drafted by the Lions he played 8 years in the NFL with a decent career. He was the Buffalo Bills DB coach for 1 season in 1985, followed by eight years a db coach at GB.. He became Def Coord of Jax in 1995 after 4 seasons and 3 playoff appearances he became the HC of Chicago. In the first 3 years he went 6-10,5-11,13-3. So this smart, Ivy league, decorated NFL guy looks to be on a roll. Well, the next 2 years he goes 4-12 and 7-9. Fired. After a DC job and interim HC stint in Detroit going 1-4, proceeded to take Buffalo to 3 consecutive 7-9 seasons fired in year 4 after a 3-6 start

Dick Jauron was always lauded as an intelligent guy and good coordinator to this day. A good HC he has not proven to be. My point, Jason has as much chance of being Jauron Jr as Landry Jr. as a HC. Jauron is a proven DC too

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2007/7/3/93214/59886

I don't know about fixation, but when the only thing I am doing is stating a fact that some football coaches got off to rocky starts it seems the right approach to the point I am trying to make.

One parallel, after several back and forth discussions about it, and about intelligence. Beyond that it was merely statistics.

as a stat guy by trade, I get quesy when people use stats without context, significance testing, etc just to cherry pick a point.

I think Free Agency can rip a team apart as fast as it can build it up. That is just my opinion. I really don't intend to support it with much in the way of pertinent facts or discussion. I personally do not like building through Free Agency. I do not mind taking a chance on someone else's high Draft picks, but I'd much rather hit on players in the Draft, build that way, and receive Compensatory picks for players who leave via high priced Free Agency as opposed to spending in Free Agency. I've never seen the Commanders, the perennial winners of the Off Season Free Agency period, turn into actual winners. The Eagles built a "dream team" in free agency. The problem was, it was a nightmare. I'll never forget all the bellyaching around here about how great they were becoming while Rome burned. In retrospect it was better than I thought it was going to be when they crashed and burned with all that high priced nothing.

I'll agree with principle you dont build a team through FA, but you can sure as hell supplement. Kyle Kosier was a great signing and made up for the whiff on Jacob Rogers. .If you "moneyball" and sign for roles and depth, you'll see that it is a valuable tool - no argument that in the wrong hands it can be lethal - like $50M on a CB and #1,#2 pick on a CB in the same year.

And watching the Eagles burn that year was fun

Kelly was 10-6, not 9-7. Other than that I don't have much to add to what you said.

Thanks. That actually makes me feel worse

I wasn't surprised when Atlanta folded after injuries hit them so hard. I saw them play live in 2012 and that was a fantastic football team. But even a fantastic football team ages, loses players to free agency or injury, and can suffer a frustrating season.
I wonder what you will say if Carolina regresses back to 6-10 this year? Will you say that their progression ended? I'm not really arguing with you on this, I just see it a little differently. They are going to have a tougher schedule this year, and they suffered some losses. They might come back down to earth a little. Especially if the Falcons and Saints are both better. It can affect an entire season adversely. That's football. I'd like to see them have some success though because I do still very much like Rivera, and I like Cam Newton too.

Commanders fans are positive every year. Has their positivity (is there a real word for this?) paid off? For that matter, has mine? In retrospect most of us say Norv is a good OC but not a good HC.

I thought Ryan could weather the Julio injury and I think I over estimated his game a little, it reminded me of when Dallas lost Irvin, the team deflated. I never saw Julio as a big part of that chemistry but maybe he was.

Carolina is interesting, it all rests on Cam. I like the defense Rivera has built, but that offense just doesn't seem to have the horses to make a deep run. If Cam regresses, that is a 6-10 team for sure, but I see them in the 9-10 win area. But Rivera has shown progress

Ah, so now you are agreeing with me. Looking at the record only for evidence of success or failure doesn't give you a true indication of anything. I agree. Barry Switzer was 12-4, 12-4, 10-6 out the gate, but I thought he sucked as a Head Coach in the NFL. He wasn't building anything. If anything I felt he was tearing this team down. In 1997 we got exactly what I expected, a team laden with future Hall of Famers, who couldn't get out of their own way because they had no direction. I see direction now, and I like it. I'd rather be pointed up than down.

Here is where the debate gets tangential. So far I have replied with accepting your position that Garrett is the architect here and whatever is or isn't being built is from his hand. Maybe we need to stake positions on when where and how Garrett was given carte blanche to build. For Switzer, he was hired to manage the talent he was bequeathed. Maybe you have a different view, but I believe that Jerry was out to prove he was the architect of the early 1990s dynasty and he could do it "his way" I dont think Switzer was hired to change or build anything. I am not defending switzer the coach here, but I dont want to assign failure solely to a mercenary drunk coach who wasn't tasked in the building role.

So maybe to encapsulate the entire point, and I've said it before, I think since there is a lack of tangible football success, you can't assign all good things to garrett and bad things to happenstance/Jones/tidal flow or whatever. He wears the badge for 2012 as brightly as the any good in the 2014 offseason

2-7 would have turned into 9-7 if those 7 games hadn't been cancelled? I got faith in the man, but that's some serious faith. I love Dan Reeves. I'm not putting him down in any way. He had to build the Broncos into something, and let's face it he did take over a team with recent success under Red Miller.

Again we can branch off on another debate topic if you wish, I think dan Reeves was a good/decent coach, and has had more tangible success than garret at similar career points. Reeves had Elway and Elway was a stud.When Reeves went to NYG his teams got progressively worse every year and ended up at 31-33 with wins in order from 11,9,5,6. In 7 years in Atlanta he had one great 14 win season surrounded by seasons of 7,5,4,7,9,3. So I dont really see him as an architect/builder either.

Not really. These examples were given to explain why I put stock in my own opinion on what you want in a Head Coach...namely brains. Some brass is great too.

So what you are essentially saying is that if Garrett had won the last game each of these three seasons and made the playoffs your entire outlook would be different? That's cool, and I respect it, but mine wouldn't. I'm not looking just at wins and losses. I want to see what is being done to win for this year, and for the future. Anyone can build a one season glory team and then fall apart. Look at Washington in 2012. I don't want that. People keep talking about what a coach inherits. Jason Garrett inherited a 1-7 team with a lot of high priced, under achieving veterans. I fail to see how that is a fully stocked cupboard that indicates he should be above where things are now, especially given the injuries of the last 2 years.

Well, yeah, "you play to win the game." But its not as easy as just saying 1 game. You have to win the Detroit and GB games, you have to win the KC game, That makes the final game irrelevant. 2011, You dont blow the AZ game (detailed in this thread). when I look at how down the NFC East was last year, it was almost like the stars aligned. I look at these last 3 years and then remember that Parcells took Quincy Carter and Troy Hambrick to a playoff game and it is a horse pill to swallow.

No guts, no glory. I'll take my chances. I am pretty sure I am right about this guy and tunes will change.

I respect someone who has convictions, but at some point results (wins) are the final arbiter

Can you point me towards what innovative system Vince Lombardi implemented? You think rushing Jim Taylor off tackle on a sweep was an innovation? Or Bill Walsh? Or Chuck Noll? Or Andy Reid? Hey, tell me what kind of innovator Jimmy Johnson was? Landry was an innovator, but do you notice how few teams copied Landry? Paul Brown on the other hand, quite copied. Bill Walsh didn't invent the WCO. Not many people know that. I hope you do.

Well I dont need to worry Lombardi (7-7,8-6,11-3 1st 3 years), Noll, Reid, Walsh (2-14, 6-10, 13-3 1st 3yrs) because they all had pretty rapid velocity in producing wins and playoffs. I was asking that since Jason is smart, is that intelligence manifesting in innovation since it doesn't in the other metrics we have hashed through. Again I don't know why we are putting these men in the same breath as Garrett as a foregone conclusion.

I still remember when Jack Pardee's Run and Shoot and Tony Sparano's Wildcat were going to set the NFL on fire. Except that next year the Defenses did their homework, caught up, and made those things null. I remember when the 46 was the Defense du jour. Where is it now? As I recall, Rob Ryan's "amoeba" defense in Cleveland was going to be our calling card.

I have no issue with Garrett teaching steady, ball control Offense and Defense. Many successful Head Coaches have done the same. And I have no issue with switching a defensive scheme either. Bill Parcells did it. Lots of teams do. Some switch back. I'm interested to see what our 4-3 can do with healthy players. I don't believe any team can run a 3-4, a 4-3, or a 46 without personnel.

I agree with you on Kelly, this is an interesting year there. If he gets better, Im gonna be ill mainly because the one thing Philly can do since Lurie took over is hire coaches. As of now, jury is out.

The Parcells situation with the 4-3 vs Garrett's is different. Parcells took the job and had a 4-3 team (cue the small Coakley jokes). He made no secret he wanted a 3-4. Garrett was fine with a 3-4 for 2 years and never mentioned a switch until Jerry said "2013 offseason will see changes and uncomfortable ones."

Is that the only team that failed to live up to hype? If he had been the Head Coach for the entire season that year perhaps things could have been different. I honestly feel very bad for Wade Phillips because I do like the man and think he is a very good football guy. But maybe just not cut out to be a HC.

No, but there is a remarkable regularity that the Cowboys seem not to live up to the hype. At this point I wish Jerry would have just hired garrett as HC we would have all the proof we need now. Maybe Garrett would be the next wade, cut out to be an OC not a HC - maybe he is the next great HC the jury is getting closer to a verdict and doesn't need 4 more years to decide. .

Where you may be presuming something wrong is to think I am happy with 8-8 three straight years. I'm no different than those Eagles fans. I'm not happy. However, I don't think I'm wrong either. Hindsight is 20/20 vision. We've all got it. When this is all said and done I hope you will be able to say you respect my foresight. I'm going to stick to my guns here amigo. I see something that I have wanted for a very long time. I like the direction more than the results. I like it more because I believe direction is more important than results. That's just me. You don't have to agree. I'll still respect ya.

I'll have no problem eating crow if you are right, but I expect reciprosity if you are not. You have an intuition, you're at a disadvantage and burden for proof. I have alot of Cowboy history to harken back to. The real culture change came in 2003 - and left in 2007. Now I will stipulate that this last offseason could very well be the epiphany for Jones/Garrett era. That given, I expect fast results, because others have demonstrated it CAN be done. Football lives and windows are finite and way too dependent on a QB and ours is closer to the end than the beginning[/quote][/quote]