Jones Says Record Won't Be Deciding Factor For Garrett

[Wolfpack]

Yet all indications are Jerry gives Jason more control than Wade had. Go figure. Nice foil hat Beast.

At best it looks about the same to me.

Neither could set their own staff and both either had play calling forced on them or taken away. Both had to give in to roster/ line up moves and both have had FA and draft picks forced on them.

If you mean that Jason has had a great impact in drafting, then I'll agree with you. I think Jason has a much clearer vision of what he wants and has more influence in that area than Wade, who mostly appeared disinterested in roster / drafting activities.

This is Jerry's sandbox and he is going to be large and in charge at all costs and I think in his twisted 40 year old mind, he really thinks he is the Head Coach.

 

[scooper]

Hey look Midswat has dropped the act.

I really have no clue what you're referring to but do you add anything to this forum except following me around and making these weird posts?

 

[Hostile]

At best it looks about the same to me.

Neither could set their own staff and both either had play calling forced on them or taken away. Both had to give in to roster/ line up moves and both have had FA and draft picks forced on them.

If you mean that Jason has had a great impact in drafting, then I'll agree with you. I think Jason has a much clearer vision of what he wants and has more influence in that area than Wade, who mostly appeared disinterested in roster / drafting activities.

This is Jerry's sandbox and he is going to be large and in charge at all costs and I think in his twisted 40 year old mind, he really thinks he is the Head Coach.

The staff is entirely Garrett's. The rest of it isn't worth addressing.

 

[xwalker]

At best it looks about the same to me.

Neither could set their own staff and both either had play calling forced on them or taken away. Both had to give in to roster/ line up moves and both have had FA and draft picks forced on them.

If you mean that Jason has had a great impact in drafting, then I'll agree with you. I think Jason has a much clearer vision of what he wants and has more influence in that area than Wade, who mostly appeared disinterested in roster / drafting activities.

This is Jerry's sandbox and he is going to be large and in charge at all costs and I think in his twisted 40 year old mind, he really thinks he is the Head Coach.

I think this coaching staff are all Garrett hires.

Jerry did force the play-calling issue last season, but otherwise Garrett appears to be in control of the coaching staff.

Garrett had ties to most of the coaches on the staff or specifically wanted certain coaches.

He had ties to Kiffin, Marinelli, Dooley, Pope, etc.. He specifically wanted Callahan because he wanted to move to the Zone Blocking Scheme.

The last coach that was forced onto Garrett was Rob Ryan. If Garrett wanted to keep Ryan he would still be here.

 

[TheDude]

Sorry, but a lot of this stinks of hindsight to me. Garrett said after the game that he feared a negative play and that he was at the range he wanted to be in. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but a quick glance at the statistics show that may have very well been the last field goal that Bailey has missed from 40-49 (he was perfect from 40-49 in 2012 and 2013). So to recap, Garrett discerned that the ball was at the point where his kicker was almost automatic and there is a ton of evidence to support that. He ran the clock down to ensure no further opportunities for the Cards. He feared a negative play, because at those distances a few yards really do matter. It sounds like most of you are mad because Bailey missed the kick, which is usually the case when hindsight is 20/20.


If you are mad because Garrett played it safe, then of course there are tons of hypocrites on this board who got mad when Garrett tried to pick up a first down running against the Lions last year and got burned because Tyron Smith committed a totally ridiculous, inexcusable penalty. Even without the penalty, there was strong statistical evidence that Garrett's call was perfectly defensible (over an 80% probability of winning at that point) but because it didn't work (hindsight), people got mad.

Before I answer this I'll ask you if you genuinely believe that the "negative play" excuse is plausible, logical, rational, or even moderately genuine - much less planned given the game situation in question? Or is it a provable bold face lie and excuse to justify a screw up?

 

[junk]

At best it looks about the same to me.

Neither could set their own staff and both either had play calling forced on them or taken away. Both had to give in to roster/ line up moves and both have had FA and draft picks forced on them.

If you mean that Jason has had a great impact in drafting, then I'll agree with you. I think Jason has a much clearer vision of what he wants and has more influence in that area than Wade, who mostly appeared disinterested in roster / drafting activities.

This is Jerry's sandbox and he is going to be large and in charge at all costs and I think in his twisted 40 year old mind, he really thinks he is the Head Coach.

Truth. Although I really don't think Garrett has much say in the draft room.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Before I answer this I'll ask you if you genuinely believe that the "negative play" excuse is plausible, logical, rational, or even moderately genuine - much less planned given the game situation in question? Or is it a provable bold face lie and excuse to justify a screw up?

Being afraid of something bad happening in that situation is probably a bit illogical (I'd love to see stats for those situations) but otherwise I believe Garrett was being honest with about 75% certainty.

 

[TheDude]

So Lets take Garrett at his word that as long as they got to the 32 yard line (not 33) and was content on Bailey kicking a 49yd Field goal because 49 has a 4 handle and it is still in the 4 point traditional FF range meaning 49 is just as easy 40.

There are 2 Timeouts left.

When Dez catches the ball with 24 seconds left to play for a 1st and 10. No timeout used. This fits with the "Thank god we got to the 32 - Bring on Bailey"

Now....

In the NFL teams have 40 seconds timed from the end of the previous down, or 25 seconds after the ball is declared ready for play after certain administrative stoppages and game delays. So if you are concerned about a "negative play", would you:

a) Line up and clock the ball with 0:07 left -

• Negative play risk #1 - Botched/fumbled snap
• Negative play rsk #2 - false start - 5 yard penalty

b) Call a timeout with play clock at 0:02 and dont give the offense a chance a option a)

• Negative play risk #1 - botched snap -Overtime. (I'll leave out blocked FG or fumble returns since the likely final play outcome would have been a FG anyway)

c) Call a Timeout with :07 to play in case of a botched snap

• Negative play #1 - Botched snap- Timeout. rekick from 55-57yards
• Negative play #2 - Botched snap - overtime.

Option B or C is the only correct way to sell "negative play concern." The negative plays in Options B or C are inherent in any situation - so really a moot point.

In no circumstance can anyone ever justify clocking the ball on 1st and 10 with :07 and then immediately using a TO. To use a TO after clocking the ball further shows that the FG was not prepared to rush onto the field and get ready to kick the ball within the play clock. Even then, the timeout vs clocking allows 1:50 to get ready for the final kick

Therefore, what stinks may not be your assumption of my hindsight is 20/20 and perhaps veiled accusation of hypocrisy, but it might be the defense of anything Garrett without serious critical thinking of the specific game situation. The only hindsight in your first response to me was you looking at the Detroit game and trying to shoehorn the Az situation to there. In Detroit we needed to waste time, not need points, There was no "setting up for a 49yd" to win FG.

One of the traits they teach in some consultancy and leadership groups is to never fully admit you made a mistake. However, that is only if you can derive a plausible deniability or deflection. This ridiculous excuse was allowed because no one followed up and hammered it home. It works on people who are more than willing to accept anything told to them, it really is unnerving to others.

I fully expect if Garrett would have said "I was afraid Bane was going to sinkhole the field between the 15-25 yard lines and didn't want to risk players falling into a rocky abyss" there would be people that would buy that argument as well.

Now the way the Cowboys lose games under the Garret tenure thus far, I dont think I would even raise an eyebrow if the field did implode. But I still wouldnt use that to justify a prior illogical decision.

 

[Turtle0986]

I would hate to ask but what will it take for Jones to finally fire Garrett? I know he has said one thing and done another like he did with Wade but were coming from the last three seasons going 8-8, and blowing the final game in a do or go home for the playoffs

 

[TheDude]

Okay, I'm going to again make a comparison, because I absolutely agree with the substance of this. Tom Landry was smart from the word go. It took his team several years to catch up to his visions When they did, it was magical. The best time of my life as a football fan was knowing every year we were in the hunt. That simply isn't easy to do, and in this day and age of football, it is even harder to do IMO because there is a salary cap, and tangible (make that fungible) efforts to keep parity. Landry did not apply them well at first. Do you know when it sank in for the players? According to Bob Lilly it happened when Landry stood before them and wept because he had not been able to convey his concepts well enough for them to be accepted.


Now, I'm not saying Garrett needs to cry in front of his team so that they want to go to war for him, but I am saying that it is entirely possible that the team, being young, and in transition has not yet caught up to his vision of the team yet. I absolutely think the key veterans have. I absolutely think the coaches have. The key is when will the rest of the team? I actually think it happened 2 years ago for the most part when the last of the malcontents were removed, but as I continue to say we've been too injured the last 2 years to do anything about it, particularly on Defense.

Again I dont see the Landry comparison (or specific example) as relevant without someone accepting some large bridge eventually arriving at the same possible outcome. Landry, as you stipulate, was an innovator, it is a totally reasoned story that he found it hard for professionals that have played a set style, to suddenly embrace a new style, especially, since the results weren't occuring "wins". He also began with an expansion team, hence


Flip side, I think you stipulate Garrett is not innovating anything since your rebuttal was a question about Lombardi, Reid, Walsh, etc. So his vision his vision is a little more soft skill than technical skill. Getting a team to play hard, play smart, be ready, etc. shouldn’t be as hard to grasp than a “Flex”, shotgun, spread, read option, fast pace game that some have never seen.


Also, I was in a work sponsored team building seminar about 12 years ago around Covey’s “7 Habits of Highly successful People.” One of the first questions to the audience was “What makes good leaders?” . One of the Senior VPs raised his hand and said “You need good followers.” Needless to say that answer was not in the presentation and he also was not long for his job. Point is, a find it hard to believe if Garrett is Great Leader that he had that many antagonist players that impeded that vision. To coin a phrase from the Navy Seals “There are no bad boat crews. Only bad leaders.” This seems more like an indictment than a factor beyond control

Love Dick Jauron personally. You don't see the relevance. I call those parallels. I do. I don't see the relevance of a belief in a trend in football. You do. It doesn't make either of us wrong, it just makes us different in approach. Personally I'm okay with that. In truth I do not see Garrett as a Noll in the making. I don't see him as anyone in particular in the making. That is why I for the most part do not compare him to other coaches. I did in this thread make a consolation about intelligence.

Again, the lack of his success has been countered with a comparison to Landry, Noll, etc. The second order excuse is he is smart and building something. I present Jauron as another bright guy, who had a great staff and has basically failed as a HC. I cannot, by trade or analytical makeup, just give the ground that Landry is more appropriate than Kotite, Handley or Jauron.


I also can’t take a single point in time record and draw any relevant comparisons. I need to see composition. If you present me with 2 coaches with 24-24 records with the following trend over those years


Coach A : 1 win; 8 wins, 15 wins

Coach B: 15 wins, 8 wins, 1 Win


I can unequivocally tell you which coach is on the hot seat in at the end of year 3 and which one is causing concern or happiness after year 2. Extreme example, but trends matter

Well, I could promise to never use a stat again in a conversation we are having but I'd probably forget and do it anyway, so no promises.

Ha, always interested in numbers. So feel free to float them.


As an aside, Its funny, I am a Romo supporter and all the stats look great on him, but the wins have trended down or stagnant. I justify this by defense stats etc, but it comes if Im consistent I do fall back on some assumptions I have a hard time disproving and have to use intuition.

Now, I'm going to make a comparison because I agree. Rolando McClain, Henry Melton, Brandon Weeden, Ryan Williams, Uche Nwaneri, Amobi Okoye, Justin Durant, and Terrell McClain. I am probably forgetting someone. All are examples to me of that kind of Free Agent signing. Veteran guys with starting experience, who can come in and get your team through until they draft someone great to take over. Like we hopefully have done with Zack Martin.



I think we're seeing smart deals, combined with solid drafting now, and with a focus on improvement and creating tradition. I'm not really sure what there is to be pissed about beyond 8-8, and as I've mentioned repeatedly, injuries played a huge factor in the last 2 years of that.

Hopefully they contribute, but I think those examples prove that there s better access to talent in todays era than in the Landry Noll era. Since the league as you say is set up for parity, I suppose you can say Garrett teams have completely achieved mediocrity.


As for pissed, I really am not pissed. I don’t agree with the 2012 draft at all. That much resources on CBs is crazy. The emulations and malleable schemes to “what did someone do last year that worked” seems alive and well. I don’t think players have been put in systems and situations that play to their strengths. Even when a 3-4, we never had a true NT. Ratliff had some decent years, but he wasn’t the perfect fit. I fully expect the offense may morph to a Kelly offense or single wing or whatever if we get mudstomped by one at some point.


I mean we hear for 3 years about how we are going to run the ball more and we bounce on the bottom every year. It just feels weird

That's a good comparison to me. I think the waiver of John Abraham was a huge negative factor for them too. He was a true leader on their Defense and they lacked that last year. My biggest fear is the loss of Ware for similar reasons. I hope Lawrence can pick up some of the slack his leaving makes. I hope we can offset the loss of Lee with the arrival of McClain, whom I still have a lot of faith in.


And I think we are the opposite. Put our Offense with that Defense and I will guarantee you a Super Bowl. I think either team could have their strength carry them a long way, but the weaker side is going to have to be the difference for each team at some point. That is why I like the youth movement we are making. Put as many hungry dogs on the field as you can at one time, and turn them loose. It isn't perfect, but if it supplements this Offense, which I think can be great, I'll take it.

Forgot about Abraham, good call. I think the Ware move was probably necessary, but I also think it was only forced that way due to the cap mgmt. situation that only Dallas and Washington do with benefits from each org. I am excited to see Lawrence, but I also hope they continue looking for pressure players. Ware was used too much.

Switzer didn't hire himself. The day he was hired I predicted the Cowboys would have a downward spiral that would take years to dig out of. Great college coach. A disaster in the NFL when the talent quit being hungry enough to carry this team.


All Head Coaches are the architects, but some of them aren't as good as others at building. Barry Switzer was, by all accounts, a great guy to be around. There's no denying he is a football legend. But at the college level. He wasn't an architect like Jimmy Johnson, who I think was a visionary coach in some ways. The talent carried that team, whereas the talent in conjunction with the Head Coach built it. That's what I want to see again.

FA eroded a lot of the Cowboys and the horrendous drafts in the 1990s. I absolutely Jimmy was an architect, no one else was really in place then. Jimmy just came from college and scouted all these players. He traded Walker immediately and stockpiled picks.


I don’t think all coaches are architects. John Fox doesn’t strike me as an architect, neither does Mike White or Mike Tomlin . The organizations have to be on the same page and commit to a philosophy. 2012 is still too close for me to through it out the window and press reset.

I'm not among the lynch Jerry crowd. I have my issues with him, but I also happen to think he is a top notch, caring individual, and I respect that. I think he's a hell of a lot smarter about football than his harshest critics are if you want to be truthful. Who would you rather talk football with, Jerry Jones, or Dale Hansen? I'll take Jerry all day, every day.


Did you hear the podcast I did with Ted Sundquist, former GM of the Broncos? If not, PM me and I'll get you the link. His praise of Jerry might surprise you. He basically ratified what I have been saying about the management of this football team and how all teams operate. Namely as a consortium of opinions designed to come to a solid conclusion rather than some lone gun playing fantasy football with a real team.

Yeah, that is a separate topic. I definitely have some issues there. To me, you see real quick and real progress both times Jerry hired a respected Football guy. Johnson and Parcells.


I think he has had enough money and is willing to spend to keep the team from 2-14 during lean years, so do I think he tries. But again, trend arrows with Johnson and Parcells went from almost directly up whereas others have meandered at level to dropping.

Frog will always be one of my favorites. Did you know his team nickname was Frog? If not, you do now.


Part of me agrees with this. Part of me disagrees vehemently. I am going to address that part with one question. Coaches you admire don't "blow" games? I personally have never seen that Coach at any level of football.

It is hard to find indisputable “blown games.” Most of the time, the call would be find if the play is executed. I cannot think of another game in which the ending was so unprepared and there for the taking. The hC should solely own the TO and clock. When it is completely botched and then bold faced lied about, it sets bad with me.


Im sure all coaches make mistakes, though

I've never expected my validation on my convictions to come from any other place.


So, what you are saying is if he created a run and shoot that was hard to deal with for one year, maybe a year and half it would impress you more than teaching sound football principles does?


It won't me.

No, but if Walsh can instill the WCO in 3 years and get a playoff appearance, if Kelly can come in and install a new offense and win 10 games, then I would expect someone teaching “sound football principles” should have an easier job. If it takes 3 years to continually teach these new principles, then he has to start over basically every 3-4 years since the majority of the team will turnover.


It almost sounds like another indictment of the organization or Garrett that he drafts or acquires such unsound players that he has to spend an inordinate of time teaching rudimentary football versus advanced topics like Payton and Walsh, etc.

Forgive me, but I just don't see the relevance of worrying about why any coach makes a switch.

I do, different schemes require different personnel and that impacts drafts and FA.

I'll make a prediction for you right now that is no doubt about it going to stir up trouble here. I apologize for that now. If we have another good, Defensive Line focused draft in 2015 we're going to win the Super Bowl, maybe a couple of them, with this team and staff. After that, we're going to be in a rebuilding mode to replace Romo possibly. But, I think we're a lot more ready for that than we were when we lost Troy. Not because we've drafted our Steve Young or Danny White to replace a legend (I realize calling Tony that is risky) but because we'll have a veteran team capable of leading a rookie Draft pick when we need to go that route. I think we're going to grab out future QB in 2015 personally and this will be moot. My point is, this team is grooming.

No need to apologize, there is definitely a chance that happens. Assuming the DL is targeted in 2015 and the LBs and Safety position is shored up. It is possible.


I’ll agree with you OLine /new QB premise completely as well. However, The QB will matter. I think some of the Campo teams were decent…good defense, good oline (Allen, Adams) but the QB situation was abysmal.

I don't want you or anyone else to eat crow. Well, maybe a few people it would be funny as hell, but I probably put those jerks on Ignore anyway. You want me to eat crow if this goes down in flames, fine. I will. I did with Drew Henson. I'm not afraid of being wrong. We're all wrong from time to time.

[/quote]

I'm not wrong about this guy. If me saying that upsets people, oh well. Either they will get over it, or they won't. I'm way past the point of caring what some people think. I don't want you to eat crow. I want you to open your eyes beyond 8-8 to see what is being built. if that doesn't thrill you, then I don't know what can. The fact of the matter is greatness is built steadily so it can be sustained. It is not a one year up, next year down, take a lot of risks for another year up type of "trend." We all want sustained greatness. That comes with a price that we are paying. There will be a pay off. Book it


.[/quote]


Maybe that was a bad choice of words – I don’t need or want you to eat any crow. I will surely give you credit if you are correct – you can book that.


I think bring this back on topic. My premise is I cant with certainty say that Jason Garrett will succeed or fail. I say he is more likely to fail because he has so far lacked success and his successful contemporaries, parcells, Reid, Holmgren, etc also made quick impacts.


You have a conviction and faith. I will never convince you that you should see doubt, and that’s fine.


Maybe I’ll ask you one more question.


Let’s say for whatever hypothetical reason, Jerry lets Garrett go at the end of the year. .


Do you see him becoming a HC for another NFL team in 2015?


Would your answer vary under the following records?:


- 10-6

- 8-8

- 6-10

 

[CCBoy]

I would hate to ask but what will it take for Jones to finally fire Garrett? I know he has said one thing and done another like he did with Wade but were coming from the last three seasons going 8-8, and blowing the final game in a do or go home for the playoffs

Hey, can't get enough verses of 'Blame it on the O'Mallys.'

Oh wait, that was the adult version...

 

[CCBoy]

Now where were the tar buckets at the burn barrels? Oh...wrong thread, huh?

 

[CCBoy]

Clean up on isle 13...

 

[Alexander]

I would hate to ask but what will it take for Jones to finally fire Garrett? I know he has said one thing and done another like he did with Wade but were coming from the last three seasons going 8-8, and blowing the final game in a do or go home for the playoffs

It would take an embarrassing string of events, even worse that what people perceived as the team "quitting" on Wade Phillips.

I feel pretty secure that any injury to Romo will be given to Garrett as an excuse that was not provided in the least to Phillips. That team quit when it was clear Romo was done for the year just as much as anything else. If that happens again, Garrett may just get a pass--he is that much a part of the family portrait.

But one thing that does help is that trying to sign Garrett to an extension under the same circumstances would be impossible to sell to most fans.

 

[Doomsday101]

Jones also said last night this is a do or die season for this team, Jason is going to have to win if he expects to get an extention on his contract. If winning was not a factor he would not be in the last year of the deal they would already have his contract extended to put to rest the talk of Hot seat

 

[Hostile]

Again I dont see the Landry comparison (or specific example) as relevant without someone accepting some large bridge eventually arriving at the same possible outcome. Landry, as you stipulate, was an innovator, it is a totally reasoned story that he found it hard for professionals that have played a set style, to suddenly embrace a new style, especially, since the results weren't occuring "wins". He also began with an expansion team, hence

Well, truthfully, the only relevance I am pitching here is that great coaches can have rough starts before their teams become great. No, I do not think that means every coach just needs more time.

Flip side, I think you stipulate Garrett is not innovating anything since your rebuttal was a question about Lombardi, Reid, Walsh, etc. So his vision his vision is a little more soft skill than technical skill. Getting a team to play hard, play smart, be ready, etc. shouldn’t be as hard to grasp than a “Flex”, shotgun, spread, read option, fast pace game that some have never seen.

The idea here is interesting, but I think it doesn't quite make the point you want. In football we're talking about 11 men on the field at the same time. 11 different minds. 11 different bodies. Getting all 11 to play together on plays isn't exactly "See Spot run." Football is human chess. It's very much a mental game as well as physical, and the fact of the matter is small things matter. Inches and seconds matter. Sometimes you have to teach that in a different way. For instance do you know for sure that no player on our team is dyslexic, has ADHD, or any other type of learning disability? Of course not. None of us know unless the player is forthcoming about it, and I really wouldn't blame a player for not revealing that. Now, I'm not saying any of our players are, but the possibility is certainly there. You have to know how to teach that. It isn't as simple as saying, "this is all basic, so you guys ought to get it right away, and let's go win."

Also, I was in a work sponsored team building seminar about 12 years ago around Covey’s “7 Habits of Highly successful People.” One of the first questions to the audience was “What makes good leaders?” . One of the Senior VPs raised his hand and said “You need good followers.” Needless to say that answer was not in the presentation and he also was not long for his job. Point is, a find it hard to believe if Garrett is Great Leader that he had that many antagonist players that impeded that vision. To coin a phrase from the Navy Seals “There are no bad boat crews. Only bad leaders.” This seems more like an indictment than a factor beyond control

I played football with Stephen R. Covey's son Sean. He threw the prettiest spirals I have ever seen. They corkscrewed into your hands snug as could be. Had he loved the game, I think he could have been great. He was playing football simply to get through college to go on to his Dad's business. Sorry for the segue, but I thought you might find it interesting.

Again, the lack of his success has been countered with a comparison to Landry, Noll, etc. The second order excuse is he is smart and building something. I present Jauron as another bright guy, who had a great staff and has basically failed as a HC. I cannot, by trade or analytical makeup, just give the ground that Landry is more appropriate than Kotite, Handley or Jauron.

I don't think I said it is more appropriate.

As an aside, Its funny, I am a Romo supporter and all the stats look great on him, but the wins have trended down or stagnant. I justify this by defense stats etc, but it comes if Im consistent I do fall back on some assumptions I have a hard time disproving and have to use intuition.

This missed me. I am sorry if I should have caught something and didn't.

Hopefully they contribute, but I think those examples prove that there s better access to talent in todays era than in the Landry Noll era. Since the league as you say is set up for parity, I suppose you can say Garrett teams have completely achieved mediocrity.

I think you can also say the final chapter is not written.

As for pissed, I really am not pissed. I don’t agree with the 2012 draft at all. That much resources on CBs is crazy. The emulations and malleable schemes to “what did someone do last year that worked” seems alive and well. I don’t think players have been put in systems and situations that play to their strengths. Even when a 3-4, we never had a true NT. Ratliff had some decent years, but he wasn’t the perfect fit. I fully expect the offense may morph to a Kelly offense or single wing or whatever if we get mudstomped by one at some point.

I mean we hear for 3 years about how we are going to run the ball more and we bounce on the bottom every year. It just feels weird

Well, I'm pissed so I just assume most of us are. But I admit I'm more pissed about the injuries than anything else and I honest to Pete have a hard time understanding why people don't think we'd have been a better team without the injuries of the last 2 years. How much better? I can't say that, but I do feel like a healthy Defense could have stopped Detroit. Or kept Green Bay from making that comeback. If we're merely talking 2 games better the last 2 years I don't think all of this conspiracy theory stuff is worth discussing. Inches, seconds, and health. Gain a few inches here, save a few seconds there to give yourself more time, and have healthy players and you can win. I can't speak for you, but I don't see a team that gives up. They could have simply thought, "We can't beat Denver anyway, so let's just put it in cruise control and not get anyone hurt." They didn't. And I really don't know how anyone can be upset that our QB brought us back to victory with what amounted to a broken back. I don't get it. I don't want to get it. Call me whatever name you need, but if we have him that last game I think we finish the sweep. I really do. It wasn't meant to be. I personally can't pin his injury on a coach or a trainer or a GM. That's scapegoating 101, and I don't play that.

Forgot about Abraham, good call. I think the Ware move was probably necessary, but I also think it was only forced that way due to the cap mgmt. situation that only Dallas and Washington do with benefits from each org. I am excited to see Lawrence, but I also hope they continue looking for pressure players. Ware was used too much.

The only flaw I have with this is that we could have kept Ware and still been under the cap. I do understand how much it saves us, but it was not impossible. I too am excited to see Lawrence, once he gets away from Tyron Smith that is. Love that he is stonewalling everyone.

FA eroded a lot of the Cowboys and the horrendous drafts in the 1990s. I absolutely Jimmy was an architect, no one else was really in place then. Jimmy just came from college and scouted all these players. He traded Walker immediately and stockpiled picks.

I don’t think all coaches are architects. John Fox doesn’t strike me as an architect, neither does Mike White or Mike Tomlin . The organizations have to be on the same page and commit to a philosophy. 2012 is still too close for me to through it out the window and press reset.

The Head Coach is always the architect. The personnel guys take their cues and direction based upon their vision. The better the Head Coach, the better the results. If you listen to that Podcast you're going to hear an NFL GM tell you that.

Yeah, that is a separate topic. I definitely have some issues there. To me, you see real quick and real progress both times Jerry hired a respected Football guy. Johnson and Parcells.

I 100% agree with this. I also think Garrett has the makeup to be that kind of Head Coach and I do not say that lightly.

I think he has had enough money and is willing to spend to keep the team from 2-14 during lean years, so do I think he tries. But again, trend arrows with Johnson and Parcells went from almost directly up whereas others have meandered at level to dropping.

Be honest with me here, do you think Parcells or Johnson could have won as much as they did with as many injuries to key positions the last two years? I honestly don't. Maybe it's the football purist in me, but I think better players simply matters.

No, but if Walsh can instill the WCO in 3 years and get a playoff appearance, if Kelly can come in and install a new offense and win 10 games, then I would expect someone teaching “sound football principles” should have an easier job. If it takes 3 years to continually teach these new principles, then he has to start over basically every 3-4 years since the majority of the team will turnover.

Tony Sparano came in and got 11 wins with his Wildcat. Are you so sure Kelly is the messiah of Philly? I personally would take Andy Reid over him any day. Andy inherited a 2-14 team, Kelly inherited a 4-12 team. Andy won 11 games, Kelly 10. Andy came to Philly and whipped him. I think Kelly is going to have a Sparano come back to earth.

I do, different schemes require different personnel and that impacts drafts and FA.

Yes, I know this. So no coach should ever install a scheme they prefer? I just can't agree with that.

No need to apologize, there is definitely a chance that happens. Assuming the DL is targeted in 2015 and the LBs and Safety position is shored up. It is possible.

Okay, I admit to some confusion here. If you agree it is possible...with this staff and team...how is Garrett not supported 100% by you? You can't say this is possible if he is the problem. If you can say this, and mean it, don't you think you are validating my points here? That the team is being built with a specific purpose in mind.

Maybe that was a bad choice of words – I don’t need or want you to eat any crow. I will surely give you credit if you are correct – you can book that.

No need to.

I think bring this back on topic. My premise is I cant with certainty say that Jason Garrett will succeed or fail. I say he is more likely to fail because he has so far lacked success and his successful contemporaries, parcells, Reid, Holmgren, etc also made quick impacts.

You have a conviction and faith. I will never convince you that you should see doubt, and that’s fine.

I have it because I got EXACTLY what I wanted. I wanted a guy who was smarter than just about everyone in the room. A guy who comes from a football background and family. A guy who had ties to and loyalty to the Dallas Cowboys. I was excited that parcells came here, but I have to tell you, it bothered me to see our guys eschewed and Jim Burt and other Giants players brought in to mentor our guys. We're not the Giants. I didn't like that. I get the whole FOB stuff to build the team, but not to mentor it. If you liked Jim Burt in here then more power to you. I get it on one level, just like I get it with Joe Gibbs speaking to the team under Garrett, but it bothers me too. I won't lie to you, I am a Cowboys guy. Period, and I don't think I should have to apologize for that or duck my head to anyone for it. This is my team, and I am fiercely proud of our heritage and place in History. I wanted a guy who is also fiercely loyal to that, and Garrett is. I wanted discipline back. I wanted things done a certain way, because I think that leads to winning. I wanted professionalism back. You can say whatever you want about 8-8, and I will probably nod my head. But this team is not a joke. They do fight. Guess what? Sometimes the other team does too, and has more weapons to fight with. That's just a fact of life in football.

Maybe I’ll ask you one more question.

Let’s say for whatever hypothetical reason, Jerry lets Garrett go at the end of the year. .

Do you see him becoming a HC for another NFL team in 2015?

It depends on when he is fired doesn't it? I mean is every job open? Then yes, I am 100% sure he would get at least one. If there are only 2 or 3 left, maybe not if the teams want D guys. I hate to say this, but there are owners out there who are privately congratulating Jerry on who our HC is. This guy is very respected. I agree, the results need to improve.

Would your answer vary under the following records?:

- 10-6

- 8-8

- 6-10

No, my answer would stay what it is above.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Wow, 17 pages.........lol

Not much else to say so I will leave this last thought. Garrett can be compared to Landry, Walsh, Lombardi, or any other great coach all day long and it really doesn't matter.

Words without deeds are just that, words.