Just A Pathetic All Around Showing

THUMPER;4216780 said:
This reminded me a lot of the "Pickle Juice Game" where we seemed like a college team playing a pro team. Nothing was working and only a few guys played well.


That's probably the last time I felt this low about a loss to the Eagles. I felt worse for that one only because I hadn't expected the Eagles to be good at all.

I remember saying to my wife that day, cause I wasn't going to get to watch the game till later (had something going on and I was taping it) that the only way Dallas could possibly lose to the Eagles that day is if Dallas simply decided not to come to the stadium.

Ooops. Silly me. How could I have known Dallas indeed had decided not to show to the stadium that day. lol
 
I love the Cowboys, but this team is all talk.

"Nobody can beat us. We only beat ourselves..." is the talk of teams that win more consistently than they lose, and when they lose, they typically don't get blown out. If they do, it's not often, and it's a turnover prone game, unlike last night, where they were straight up manhandled.

This team gets complacent way too early in a game and its football IQ seems to be sorely lacking.

Sunday night was a game where they could have sent a message: go into Philly and beat a 12-0 Andy Reid coming off a bye. Instead it was the same old, same old.

You know what? While my brother was yelling expletives, and screaming "Garrett sucks", or "*** are they doing?", I wasn't even mad watching the game.

I just sat there and said "Oh well," just like most of the team.
 
Hoofbite;4217463 said:
Anyone who wasn't big on Free prior to this year wasn't basing their opinion on his play from last year because he was pretty damn solid. And even if someone wanted to hang on to the idea that Free didn't earn his contract leading up to it, Garrett still co-signed on his new deal.

I wasn't big on Free based on his play. He wasn't worth the big deal it would have taken to keep him.

That's what I said then and he's backed me up with his mediocre play this year. He's decent, nothing more.

I don't know what choice Garrett had in that. When you have nothing at the position you kind of have to keep anything resembling a player.

And as I said regarding Kosier, "serviceable".

Right. Instead of having a young quality player there, Garrett inherited a declining aging vet who on his best day you can say is "serviceable".

Regardless of why Tyron is playing, he's Garrett's guy. Not that Tyron even matters because he's been one of the better players on the line thus far.

Both tackles, Garrett's choice.

He's a Garrett guy but for this season alone they'd be better off with a quality vet there. Just for the rookie mistakes alone. But we don't have another option there due to years of inept drafting.



He's the guy running the offense.

He's coordinating the offense. He's not running the personnel department. I suggest you brush up on job titles and the responsibilities of each.


First and foremost, how do you know who does or does not have say? What are you basing that on?

Uh, their position in the organization?

Anybody who thinks coordinators are selecting players in NFL war rooms during the draft has their head up their rear end.

Why would Jerry have Jason sit in the war room if his input meant nothing?

Well, see....now you have to change my stance to make yours look better. I didn't say he had no input. I said he was no better than 5th in command with those picks on offense.


Garrett was hand picked by Jerry to be the HC of this team BEFORE WADE WAS HIRED.

Completely irrelevant to the discussion.

Garrett had sole control over the offense. Do you really think that Martellus was drafted because Wade had some great idea of running the 2-TE formation as the primary offense?

Or was that Jerry's idea?

Garrett has complete control in designing and coordinating the offense. He never had complete control over selecting players for that offense. No coordinator does. Otherwise they'd be in the front office.

Of course Garrett was in on the TE talk. But the identity of that TE was on the scouts. Hey, we could use a TE. Well here are the guys we have value grades on at that spot. Does Jason Garrett stack our board? Who is choosing the player?

He had and still has 100% control over the offense. Why anyone would think he wouldn't be involved in personel decisions as the OC is completely irrational. Literally, I cannot believe someone is suggesting that Garrett had no input.

Again, I didn't say he had no input. Read that again and again until it sinks in.

Anybody who thinks an offensive coordinator is the determining factor in picks made with a GM, VP of Personnel, Director of College and Pro scouting and a head coach in the room is laughably uninformed with the power structure of an NFL team.

He's a coordinator.

I suppose Kenyon Coleman and Abe Elam are here because Garrett wanted them here.

He had to want them here. Or they wouldn't be here. He hired his defensive coordinator. He wants some of his old players to follow him.

That would be an outstanding point had Garrett had former players in the drafts were talking about.

Furthermore, I don't know how anyone can look at the roots the Garrett family has in Dallas and think that their voices wouldn't be heard. Do you even realize how many Garrett's are working for this team right now?

That family has a history with this team as a player, scout, assistant coach and now as a head coach and you really want us to believe that these guys' thought process has no bearing on what happened or happens.

Good luck selling that.

This is the third time you've changed my stance to he had no input. See, there's a big void between no input and your highly intelligent stance of the coordinator was making all the offensive picks in our draft.

I'm saying the truth is somewhere in the middle of that void. Of course he wasn't making the picks. He was a coordinator. No NFL war room is run by a coordinator. I feel like I'm talking to a 12 year old here.



They didn't have a choice. It wouldn't have mattered who the coach was, they couldn't go any longer ignoring that area as they had in the past.



Parcells? Please.

Yes, that's right. Parcells. Because when you have an OL in this condition it's because you've failed for years to add quality talent. And that takes us through Wade and to Parcells. If the Jacob Rogers and Stephen Petermans and James Martens and Robert Brewsters had panned out, we wouldn't have this problem today.

Garrett's so far down the totem pole of blame for this that it's not even worth discussing.
 
Completely irrelevant to the discussion.

I love how you gloss over the fact that Garrett has been the head coach in waiting for four years. That's completely relevant to the discussion and only further supports the fact that Garrett has been making decisions for the offense. Jerry knew Garrett was going to eventually take over all along so why wouldn't he let him get who he wanted for the offense? If Jerry's future head coach told him they needed to draft offensive line, they would have. That's the job of a GM and scouts. To get what their coaches what they need. There's no doubt in my mind that as OC and Assistant Head Coach Garrett had just as much say in drafting or signing offensive personnel as anyone in the organization.
 
That game Sunday night made me so mad that I turned it off before it was over. My expectations are very low now. :(
 
Risen Star;4216842 said:
No, he did not.

The situation with our offensive line is a result of horrible talent evaluation over the years at the position. Garrett inherited next to no talent along the 5 starting spots and no ability to be aggressive in free agency to fill any of those holes.

So he was left to choose between Bill Nagys and David Arkins to make the best of a bad situation.


Except for the fact that we cut an All-Pro center who had occasional bad snaps for a joke of a pro center, who can barely get a snap to Romo.

I fully believe our center Costa is killing our offense. If I were Garrett I'd play Kowalski over him regardless of if he is as good of a blocker. Costa's snaps are all over the place and completely negate the shotgun b/c Romo can't look down field right away b/c he has to worry about the snap.
 
You know...I can deal with an off night. And I can deal with the other team just coming out and executing better. I can also deal with a blow-out. **** happens. I get it.

But what I CAN'T deal with is giving up, and that's exactly what happened right before the half Sunday night. Murray has a good run and gets the ball near the Cowboy 40 yard line. It's 4th and 2. I think there was about 40-45 seconds left in the half. Romo gets them lined up, and then......

nothing.

They let the clock run down and....punt.

And THAT'S when I knew it was really over, turned off the TV, and posted my disgust in the game thread.

What I'd like to know is WHY. Would anyone care to fill me in on WHY Garrett decided to punt the ball away after FINALLY starting to move the ball for really the first time all night?

I mean, I don't see it. So what if they turn it over on downs. It was 24-zip. Was he afraid that it might be 27-zip or 31-zip? So what? You're getting your *** kicked. What possible difference could it make? All that did was make you and everyone out on the field look like a coward.

I'm sure some will disagree, and that's fine, but in my opinion, that was the most gutless thing I've seen this team do in years....
 
Hoofbite;4216772 said:
.

2 Top WRS
Not even close. One very good, top 10 in the NFC receiver. Not top 5. And one young tempermental guy with great physical ability, little experience, and no mental understanding of how to win. Average it out, 10th best receiver and 30th best receiver, you have a slightly above average receiving core.
Best All Around TE in the NFL & Best Blocking TE (So We're Told)
A very good TE no doubt.
More than capable QB
Very capable QB who lost the team 2 games
Solid #3 WR
in his fourth game with the team
What Appears To Be A Potential Stud RB
What appears to the untrained eye to be a potential stud, but in reality is a very good, productive college player with a lot of ability and potential, but lacks great top end speed and no NFL experience prior to October. Why do you think Murray looks so good, because of his natural ability, or because of the coaching?
 
Risen Star;4218324 said:
I wasn't big on Free based on his play. He wasn't worth the big deal it would have taken to keep him.

That's what I said then and he's backed me up with his mediocre play this year. He's decent, nothing more.

I don't know what choice Garrett had in that. When you have nothing at the position you kind of have to keep anything resembling a player.

Right. Instead of having a young quality player there, Garrett inherited a declining aging vet who on his best day you can say is "serviceable".

He's a Garrett guy but for this season alone they'd be better off with a quality vet there. Just for the rookie mistakes alone. But we don't have another option there due to years of inept drafting.

He's coordinating the offense. He's not running the personnel department. I suggest you brush up on job titles and the responsibilities of each.

Brush up on job titles? You're gonna base you opinion on the literal definition of a job title rather than what has been laid out in front of you?

Uh, their position in the organization?

Anybody who thinks coordinators are selecting players in NFL war rooms during the draft has their head up their rear end.

I think they're sure as hell contributing.

Well, see....now you have to change my stance to make yours look better. I didn't say he had no input. I said he was no better than 5th in command with those picks on offense.

In this case, having zero input and having minimalist input to the point of being free from guilt are one in the same.

If you don't think that Garrett has enough input to be held responsible, you might as well think he doesn't have any at all.

Completely irrelevant to the discussion.

No, it's entirely relevant. You've defined how you view his job based on what the "OC's" job title says he does but choose to ignore the fact that most OCs are not hired before the coach?

Garrett has complete control in designing and coordinating the offense. He never had complete control over selecting players for that offense. No coordinator does. Otherwise they'd be in the front office.

Of course Garrett was in on the TE talk. But the identity of that TE was on the scouts. Hey, we could use a TE. Well here are the guys we have value grades on at that spot. Does Jason Garrett stack our board? Who is choosing the player?

And you can't design your offense without players that fit it.

If Marty wouldn't have been viewed as a good fit, there would have been no point in drafting him regardless of the grade because there was no need. You wanna know how this is a FACT? Because they had just ditched a guy they didn't view as a good fit in Fasano, a player only 2 years removed from being drafted himself.

The only reason Marty was drafted is because he was supposed to be a better complement. That is a fact. TE wasn't actually a need, it was a luxury.

This wasn't a case where there was a huge gaping hole that had to be filled.

Again, I didn't say he had no input. Read that again and again until it sinks in.

And it still won't matter because your claim of him being free from responsibility stays the same.

If you want me to retract every time I said "zero" and insert "minimal", whatever. It doesn't change anything because you're still attributing so little input to him that you refuse to hold him responsible.

Anybody who thinks an offensive coordinator is the determining factor in picks made with a GM, VP of Personnel, Director of College and Pro scouting and a head coach in the room is laughably uninformed with the power structure of an NFL team.

He's a coordinator.

And anyone who thinks the OC should skate by for a lack of OL over the course of a 5 years is just as uninformed.

He had to want them here. Or they wouldn't be here. He hired his defensive coordinator. He wants some of his old players to follow him.

That would be an outstanding point had Garrett had former players in the drafts were talking about.

It proves exactly what you say doesn't happen actually does.

Do you really believe that either of those guys would be here now if not for Rob? And do you really believe either would be here if Rob didn't want them?

This is the third time you've changed my stance to he had no input. See, there's a big void between no input and your highly intelligent stance of the coordinator was making all the offensive picks in our draft.

Making all the picks or providing input and signing off on them?

I'm saying the truth is somewhere in the middle of that void. Of course he wasn't making the picks. He was a coordinator. No NFL war room is run by a coordinator. I feel like I'm talking to a 12 year old here.

The whole lot of them come together and make the picks, Garrett included. If it's a group decision, it's just as much any person's fault as it is the collective's.

Yes, that's right. Parcells. Because when you have an OL in this condition it's because you've failed for years to add quality talent. And that takes us through Wade and to Parcells. If the Jacob Rogers and Stephen Petermans and James Martens and Robert Brewsters had panned out, we wouldn't have this problem today.

Garrett's so far down the totem pole of blame for this that it's not even worth discussing.

Then don't discuss it. Feel free to absolve the man for his unit's shortcomings.

I won't.
 
Hoofbite;4216772 said:
Looked like he had one small leg and one giant leg last night. One Calista Flockhart leg and one Roseanne Bar.

:laugh2:
 
Back
Top