Looking at Wade's four playoff losses

cowboyjoe

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,433
Reaction score
751
CanadianCowboysFan;3118213 said:
I think Johnson started that playoff game but I understood Wade was told by upper management that Johnson was to be the starter.

Yes, but my point is, did wade have the you know what to say, no sir, this is my qb, if you want him to be the qb, you play him, i am outa here. Stand up to him, be a man.

Otherwise your a big chicken! And a whus!
 

cowboyjoe

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,433
Reaction score
751
DFWJC;3118204 said:
That's a level-headed take on things. You may be right.

I do like the adjustments Wade has made since last season. This group seems more close-knit and not the type at all that would quit on their coaches like that team that fell apart last season. Good coaches continue to learn their entire careers (see Mack Brown and others)...but even with Wade's willingness to adjust, he may not be the guy. Again, the jury is still out, imo.

Just for some perspective:
Tom Landry lost 4 of his first 5 playoff games and he did NOT suck.
Bill Cowher lost 3 of first 4 playoff games and was HC 14 years before winniing a title.

Yeah but my point is this, wade has coached since 30 years, and been a head coach and coordinator since 81 I believe, that is more than enough to know what your doing and fix things before they need fixing.

Yet, he wants us to whine and moan for him as the head coach, no sir, you earn that respect first. Your the one wade that popped off and said, i dont get the respect that belicheck gets, and some people even have said you have a better winning percentage then jimmy johnson or tom landry. You started this wade with your belly aching, whiing and crying like a baby.

Shut up and coach and earn that respect first with some playoff wins.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
Hoofbite;3117653 said:
Well he's certainly a better defensive coach than Parcells. Parcells couldn't coach a defensive to save his life.

And at this stage in both of their lives, he's a better head coach.
 

cowboyjoe

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,433
Reaction score
751
brooksey1;3118201 said:
Good ole wade has NOT earned the respect of a playoff winning coach yet. The key word is yet. Can he do it? Not sure, I have not been a big believer of Wade but I'm hoping he can achieve some post season success this year. He has won some big games. I'm also hoping Romo can deliver. Keep in mind there are countless players and coaches who have failed only to find success later, sometime lots of it. Let's hope Wade has learned from his failures. If not he is out of Dallas, period.

Yeah, but why hasnt he done it since he started coaching since 81 and been a head coach some and defensive coordinator some. That should be well enough time to know what the NFL is all about coaching as a head coach.

No more excuses! Like Jay Ratliff said shut up and play, shut up and coach wade.
 

cowboyjoe

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,433
Reaction score
751
DFWJC;3118141 said:
What's worse: 1) not making the playoffs at all or 2) playing so well you win the division, get a bye (which is about the same as a playoff win by the way) and then barely losing to the Super Bowl Champion. I'll take option #2 all day long.

Not me, no way, if we had a head coach with backbone, those players wouldnt have gotten to go off the bye week, they would have been ready for that game and kept on winning.

Thats the part that bugs me to heck, we had a super bowl team, but they werent coached right in January.

Then, he wants us not to say he is a better coach than Tom Landry or Jimmy Johnson. Landry or J Johnson didnt have the players that wade had in 2007.

There is no excuse for that. Yet, we had to go through the 2008 season, with everything is ok, dont worry, then at the end after the whupping by the eagles we hear, everything isnt ok, changes have to take place and it starts with me.

To me, he earns no respect for that, till he gets off of his lazy duff and starts winning in december and january.

If he doesnt like it, prove me wrong, instead of whining and complaining that he gets no respect.
 

dbair1967

Arch Defender
Messages
30,782
Reaction score
1
dmq;3117629 said:
A great coach wins 2 of these games.

How? and define a "great coach" then

Also, do you consider Bill Cowher a "great" coach? If so, how do you explain him losing several home playoff games where his team was favored?

You say a "great" coach wins 2 of the 4 games that Wade has coached in, yet in only 1 of them did he have the better team and was favored to win.
 

cowboyjoe

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,433
Reaction score
751
theogt;3118233 said:
Well he's certainly a better defensive coach than Parcells. Parcells couldn't coach a defensive to save his life.

And at this stage in both of their lives, he's a better head coach.

I disagree with you on that, part of the problem is with jerry jones, always has and always will (now dont get me wrong, Jerry has done everythign he can with the new stadium, paying players, getting players to get to the playoffs, etc) till jerry is forced to acknowledge that Jimmy Johnson had total control in trades, cuts, waives, and fines, etc. At the same time, the coaches here like wade has signed the contract with jerry, so they are the head coach, come high water or not.

BUt back to parcells he rebuilt this team, and rebuilt the poor drafting we had.

this team had super bowl calibership in 2007, but the team wasnt coached right in december and january.
 

dbair1967

Arch Defender
Messages
30,782
Reaction score
1
cowboyjoe;3118248 said:
I disagree with you on that, part of the problem is with jerry jones, always has and always will (now dont get me wrong, Jerry has done everythign he can with the new stadium, paying players, getting players to get to the playoffs, etc) till jerry is forced to acknowledge that Jimmy Johnson had total control in trades, cuts, waives, and fines, etc. At the same time, the coaches here like wade has signed the contract with jerry, so they are the head coach, come high water or not.

BUt back to parcells he rebuilt this team, and rebuilt the poor drafting we had.

this team had super bowl calibership in 2007, but the team wasnt coached right in december and january.

Parcells did a great job of rebuilding the talent here, he did a lousy job of coaching it.
 

cowboyjoe

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,433
Reaction score
751
dbair1967;3118243 said:
How? and define a "great coach" then

Also, do you consider Bill Cowher a "great" coach? If so, how do you explain him losing several home playoff games where his team was favored?

You say a "great" coach wins 2 of the 4 games that Wade has coached in, yet in only 1 of them did he have the better team and was favored to win.

This is my definition of a great coach, that coach wins 2 or more superbowls. Not one, with getting lucky and finally winning one, but that head coach wins 2 super bowls or more.

Tom Landry, Vince Lombardi, Don Shula, Bill Parcells, Chuck Noll - whom I hate with a passion, Joe Gibbs, and Bill Walsh - whom I hate too. But those coaches are great coaches, just winning some playoff games and getting to the suiper bowl doesnt count, you have to win more than one super bowl.

Bottom line, the goal in the NFL is to get your team and win super bowls. Just like players that have gotten to the super bowl and lost say doesnt mean a thing, its all about winning those championships in the NFC or AFC and the super bowl.
 

cowboyjoe

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,433
Reaction score
751
dbair1967;3118255 said:
Parcells did a great job of rebuilding the talent here, he did a lousy job of coaching it.

yes and no, with the talent he had and no leaders on the team, its hard to win without leaders on your team.

We are finally seeing leaders on this team like Brooking, Jay Ratliff, Bradie James, Tony Romo, Jason Witten step up and be counted and hold players accountable.

You first have to have leaders, then those players start instilling team chemistry to the team and how important team is and not I. Then, the team wins and keeps winning.
 

cowboyjoe

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,433
Reaction score
751
dbair1967;3118243 said:
How? and define a "great coach" then

Also, do you consider Bill Cowher a "great" coach? If so, how do you explain him losing several home playoff games where his team was favored?

You say a "great" coach wins 2 of the 4 games that Wade has coached in, yet in only 1 of them did he have the better team and was favored to win.

I do not consider cowher a great coach, never will, how many superbowls did he win?
one, just one
In what 15 years, it took him 15 years as a head coach to win one superbowl.

Example, how many super bowls did chuck noll win, 4, and I hate Noll with a bloody passion. But he won, thats the bottom line in the NFL win the superbowl. Get your team there and win.

wade should have won that 2007 game, because we had the better talent, etc, but because goofy wade let players have the weekend off and part of the bye week, while not working the players out in pads at all in november and december, teh players got soft.

Thats on wade, no one else, but softee cupcake wade.

Now, has wade changed some yes, if you listened to a podcast roy williams said, the players practiced this week in pads, got that in pads. But it took wade 30 years to learn that little lesson, you have to keep the players sharp and focused.
 

CF74

Vet Min Plus
Messages
26,167
Reaction score
14,623
cowboyjoe;3118263 said:
I do not consider cowher a great coach, never will, how many superbowls did he win?
one, just one
In what 15 years, it took him 15 years as a head coach to win one superbowl.

Example, how many super bowls did chuck noll win, 4, and I hate Noll with a bloody passion. But he won, thats the bottom line in the NFL win the superbowl. Get your team there and win.

I'll never understand the love Cowher gets around here, it's putrid if ya ask me...
 

utrunner07

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,326
Reaction score
262
dbair1967;3118243 said:
Also, do you consider Bill Cowher a "great" coach? If so, how do you explain him losing several home playoff games where his team was favored?

You say a "great" coach wins 2 of the 4 games that Wade has coached in, yet in only 1 of them did he have the better team and was favored to win.

Bill Cowher is NOT, NOT a great coach, he is a good coach that was in a great situation for a long time. IMO, a great coach in Bill Cowher's position gets at least 3-4 superbowls at of his time in Pittsburgh with the talent he had.

I have no idea why Bill Cowher has all the sudden become so highly regarded. Some educated people think Bill is a great coach (and that is fine we all have our own little strange opinions, I for one think Flozell is still pretty dang good, but im in the minority here) but IMO, most of the people that think Bill is great are simply ignorant and only claim he is great because he is one of the four head coaches that they can name.

Proceed.
 

The Emperor

Marcus Aurelius Maximus
Messages
3,881
Reaction score
2
No, I think I finally figured out where the anti-Wade crowd is coming from. I think I see their concerns finally about Wade Phillips as head coach. If he were truly the head coach, he would tell Garrett, "All right, cut it out. We're up 24-20 on these guys, and it was because of the legs of our backs and the weight of our O-Line. Pound that rock." Instead, he just accepts that Garrett is the assistant head coach and let's him have cart blanche with the offense, even when we're down to the nut-cutting.

Jason Garrett is a good offensive coordinator when you're playing the Seahawks at home in Week 8 (i.e. "peacetime consiglieri"). I'm still not sold on his ability to call a winning game plan in a critical game in December (i.e. "wartime consiglieri"). That's not to say Garrett would come out and turn Romo into Jake Delhomme or something, but it's to say that many scenarios like Pittsburgh in 2008 are on our horizon.

Think back to The Godfather in that scene where Sonny and Tom Hagen are talking before the family dinner on Sunday. Sonny says, "Pop had Genco, and look what I have!" indicating that Tom Hagen was not a wartime consiglieri. If you'll remember, Tom was trying to patch things up, whereas Sonny wanted to pursue an aggressive course of action.

That's how it is with Jason Garrett. I think he can do good for us when it's easy, but when it's December and cold on the road, I don't know if he can get it done. Just because he hasn't so far does not mean he can't or he won't; he's still young and if he's willing to learn and not be a doctrinaire dolt, he can get it done.

This is where a real head coach comes into play. Seriously, what was Jimmy Johnson good at? Really, what was his specialty? Nothing. His specialty was being a leader and decision maker. He let Norv and Butch/Dave do their thing on their sides of the ball, but when it came down to the nut-cutting, he would override them and tell them what he wanted. He didn't specifically meddle, but he meddled enough that he got his way. Take the famous catch-and-run by Harper in the '92 NFC Championship game. At the beginning of that drive, Norv asked Jimmy, "What do you want to do?" Jimmy said, "I want to score!" Bing. Of course, the decision was between taking time off the clock or scoring. Jimmy wanted to score and certainly the scoring drive was not intended to be that expedient.

So, that's the conundrum with Wade Phillips. If he were really a head coach, he would override Garrett on some of those boneheaded play-calls. Of course, even if he has been, we'd never hear about it because the mediots are framing Wade Phillips as some softie who doesn't know what he's doing on the sidelines or is some kind of yes-man, but that's who the mediots are, those rats. Look what they did to my Cowboys and look what they did to my country, those scum vermin. Anyway, even if Wade were overriding Garrett, we wouldn't hear about it, and if you were to do so, it would only be because you watched the entire postgame press conference on DallasCowboys.com, not because the demons in the media told you about it.

Wade Phillips said at the beginning of this year that he thought being the head coach of the Dallas Cowboys was a dream job and he wasn't, "going down without a fight." Well, if he believes one word of what he just said, then he would get up in Garrett's business when he was making boneheaded play-calls in crunch time. So, now, the question becomes whether or not Wade Phillips himself is a "wartime consiglieri." He's one heck of a defensive coordinator -- no doubt about it. Is he one heck of a coach? Well, if you want to beat the Seahawks at home in Week 8 on a 12:00 PM game with third tier announcers, he seems to be the coach for the job.

Make no mistake about it: those are my 'Boys out there. Yes, Wade Phillips and Jason Garrett are my 'Boys. The day they aren't is the day they are no longer with the Cowboys. I know many fans have trouble with that issue of loyalty, but that's who they are and why they easily get gulled by the mediots and further prove Henry Louis Menckin's adage about, "No one ever lost money betting against the intelligence of Cowboys fans." I want to see Wade Phillips and Jason Garrett succeed, but I'm also in search for the truth. And from the evidence I've seen, I see that these guys aren't wartime consiglieris. I'm not saying us winning a playoff game or having a successful December is out of the question, but I am saying I see where the concerns are that people have for these two gentlemen.

Personally, I think the determining factors are Keith Brooking and Joe DeCamillis. They bring the personality and the leadership of the Wade Phillips system that Wade himself does not bring to the table. I really think if we still had Akin Ayodele and had Joe Marciano, for instance, as our special teams coach, we probably would be 6-5 like the Giants, maybe worse. Brooking definitely has interest in both sides of the ball, something Wade Phillips does not. And because of Brooking's contagious enthusiasm, it has spilled over onto guys like DeMarcus Ware. Can you imagine Ware going over to the sidelines when the Cowboys and Steelers were tied up at 13-13 last year and saying, "What does that name say on the back of your jersey? We've got your back; don't worry about it." Brooking, by his presence, does not hold merely the defense accountable. He's holding the team accountable.

So, the whole thing is intricately warped. It's not just a simple diagnosis. It's not "Wade sucks" or "Garrett is hopeless." No, it's as complex as a necktie, but just as simple to undo. Did you know that you can undo a necktie with one pull? Well, we can fix our problems with simple solutions. A) Garrett has to establish the run. B) Wade has to override Garrett when he's infected with too much hubris. And that's it. Those are the solutions. We don't need to fire anyone per se. We don't need to bring in Mike Holmgren or kvetch that we didn't hire Josh McDaniels or whatever. We can win with these guys. We really can, but they are going to have to make simple amendments to their strategies in order for us to succeed.

Those are my thoughts.
 

utrunner07

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,326
Reaction score
262
cowboyjoe;3118263 said:
wade should have won that 2007 game, because we had the better talent, etc, but because goofy wade let players have the weekend off and part of the bye week, while not working the players out in pads at all in november and december, teh players got soft.

haha you are going to get flamed for this, (but im with you). Also lets not blame that loss entirely on Wade, Jason Garrett needs his fair share, the play calling and offensive schemes were more than lacking.
 

Chocolate Lab

Run-loving Dino
Messages
37,104
Reaction score
11,425
Emperor - very well written post.

However -- and I hate to bring this up again, but -- Wade tried to get his guy on Jason's side of the ball in Dan Reeves and that mysteriously fell apart at the last minute thanks to the untenable clause Jerry put in. I listened to the Westwood One broadcast of the Raiders game today when I was messing around the house, and Dan was pretty critical of our not running it better, and wondered why we were running so much zone blocking with our huge OL when the power, man-on-man plays were working so much better. So if he were here, I think we'd see some things done differently, especially in the run game.

But someone didn't want that.

So, who does this go back to again? It isn't Wade. It's the man up above him on the organizational chart.

Now should Wade resign in protest over the arrangement? I guess he could, but he'd probably see that as giving in, and he doesn't want to be a quitter. I'd probably feel the same way.
 

vta

The Proletariat
Messages
8,753
Reaction score
11
Chocolate Lab;3118300 said:
Emperor - very well written post.

However -- and I hate to bring this up again, but -- Wade tried to get his guy on Jason's side of the ball in Dan Reeves and that mysteriously fell apart at the last minute thanks to the untenable clause Jerry put in. I listened to the Westwood One broadcast of the Raiders game today when I was messing around the house, and Dan was pretty critical of our not running it better, and wondered why we were running so much zone blocking with our huge OL when the power, man-on-man plays were working so much better. So if he were here, I think we'd see some things done differently, especially in the run game.

But someone didn't want that.

So, who does this go back to again? It isn't Wade. It's the man up above him on the organizational chart.

Now should Wade resign in protest over the arrangement? I guess he could, but he'd probably see that as giving in, and he doesn't want to be a quitter. I'd probably feel the same way.

I get the impression Jerry is a big fan of the big passing game. Big, entertaining plays that appeal to casual fans, who find grind it out football boring.

I was talking to someone who doesn't care or know much about football and that's his mindset: it's boring, but for the huge pass plays. Jerry's a business man, he wants to rope everybody in.
 

Hoofbite

Well-Known Member
Messages
40,865
Reaction score
11,566
bbgun;3118163 said:
That's because most people are allergic to bull****.

This thread is enough to send someone into anaphylactic shock.
 
Top