Mediocrity vs. change

[IrishAnto]

Switching out the secondary turned out to be one of their better moves.

Did they make the playoffs by doing it?

No doubt you'll tell me that we'll be better off in the future but that's part of the problem.
In Dallas the future is always some years off.

 

[xwalker]

Did they make the playoffs by doing it?

No doubt you'll tell me that we'll be better off in the future but that's part of the problem.
In Dallas the future is always some years off.

The point is that they make enough mistakes. Why use an example of a good decision?

 

[IrishAnto]

The point is that they make enough mistakes. Why use an example of a good decision?

It wasn't a good decision for the season just gone.
It might be a good decision for future seasons, but by then there'll be another whole in the dam.

 

[Section446]

We are the definitions of mediocrity.

 

[Diehardblues]

Jerry and Stephen Jones believe the way to success lies in stability at the head coaching position. It's somewhat understandable that they feel that way considering the lack of success overall we had switching from Gailey to Campo to Parcells to Phillips to Garrett.

But the Eagles are the latest team to show that change can be a good thing, that you've got to keep searching until you find a coach that has "it" or hits on the right formula for temporary success at the least. Pederson took his team to a Super Bowl championship in his second year as a head coach. The previous year Dan Quinn did the same for the Falcons.

It took Ron Rivera a little more time in Carolina to get the Panthers to the Super Bowl in 2015 (five years) but his opponent, Gary Kubiak, got Denver there his first year.

Even Jimmy Johnson had us trending up and then Super Bowl champions within four years. However, that was before free agency and the salary cap took hold, which I think makes it easier for coaches to turn a team around quickly. And if you look at Bill Belichick, his long-term success in New England began with winning a Super Bowl in his second year as coach there.

So what does this mean for Dallas? Eight years is more than enough time to see that the process isn't what wins championships. It's finding a coach who can do the most with the talent you have on the team now; one with a vision that adding a few key pieces can complete.

Jerry needs to learn from his past. When he came here, he cast aside a coach who is much better than Garrett will ever be but whose time had come to bring in a fresh, new approach. That led to three Super Bowl victories in four years. We might not catch lightning in a bottle again, but that certainly doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

This comes from someone who has not been against Garrett as a head coach. The trend is just too hard to ignore even going back beyond the coaches I mentioned. There's Pete Carroll (it took four years in Seattle), John Fox (two years in Carolina, three years in Denver), John Harbaugh (five years in Baltimore, but AFC Championship Game in first year), Jim Harbaugh (two years in San Francisco), Tom Coughlin (four years in New York), Mike McCarthy (five years in Green Bay, but NFC Championship Game in second year), Mike Tomlin (two years), Sean Payton (four years in New Orleans, but NFC Championship Game in first year) and Jim Caldwell (first year with Indianapolis). That's your Super Bowl coaches since 2010, with few outside of Belichick having sustained Super Bowl success.

I’m not necessarily convinced Jerry believes consistency is the best decision he just knows there’s probably not many HC out there he’d rather have willing to succumb to the puppetry style required here. And Garretts had just enough success in recent years to stay the course.

Remember we had a HOFamer in Parcells, best DC this era with Wade with not much better results. I believe our issues are more deeply rooted than HC.

Garrett is here because Jerry is comfortable with him as he doesn’t threaten his authority and perfect for his pursuit to prove he’s a football guy.

This is the path we have with Jerry. Garrett is a product of it. I think it could be worse. You’d think fans would have adjusted their mentality by now?

 

[Donut]

Tell Jethro.

 

[Diehardblues]

If Cowboys get back into the playoffs this year that’s going to be 3 in 5 years and 4 winning seasons in 5 years. Not bad for an inexperienced unproven HC puppet who shouldn’t be coaching in the NFL under a meddling GM/owner trying to get credit. Just saying...

 

[Donut]

Winning seasons are overrated - Super Bowls aren't. JMHO though.

 

[BotchedLobotomy]

Jerry and Stephen Jones believe the way to success lies in stability at the head coaching position. It's somewhat understandable that they feel that way considering the lack of success overall we had switching from Gailey to Campo to Parcells to Phillips to Garrett.

But the Eagles are the latest team to show that change can be a good thing, that you've got to keep searching until you find a coach that has "it" or hits on the right formula for temporary success at the least. Pederson took his team to a Super Bowl championship in his second year as a head coach. The previous year Dan Quinn did the same for the Falcons.

It took Ron Rivera a little more time in Carolina to get the Panthers to the Super Bowl in 2015 (five years) but his opponent, Gary Kubiak, got Denver there his first year.

Even Jimmy Johnson had us trending up and then Super Bowl champions within four years. However, that was before free agency and the salary cap took hold, which I think makes it easier for coaches to turn a team around quickly. And if you look at Bill Belichick, his long-term success in New England began with winning a Super Bowl in his second year as coach there.

So what does this mean for Dallas? Eight years is more than enough time to see that the process isn't what wins championships. It's finding a coach who can do the most with the talent you have on the team now; one with a vision that adding a few key pieces can complete.

Jerry needs to learn from his past. When he came here, he cast aside a coach who is much better than Garrett will ever be but whose time had come to bring in a fresh, new approach. That led to three Super Bowl victories in four years. We might not catch lightning in a bottle again, but that certainly doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

This comes from someone who has not been against Garrett as a head coach. The trend is just too hard to ignore even going back beyond the coaches I mentioned. There's Pete Carroll (it took four years in Seattle), John Fox (two years in Carolina, three years in Denver), John Harbaugh (five years in Baltimore, but AFC Championship Game in first year), Jim Harbaugh (two years in San Francisco), Tom Coughlin (four years in New York), Mike McCarthy (five years in Green Bay, but NFC Championship Game in second year), Mike Tomlin (two years), Sean Payton (four years in New Orleans, but NFC Championship Game in first year) and Jim Caldwell (first year with Indianapolis). That's your Super Bowl coaches since 2010, with few outside of Belichick having sustained Super Bowl success.

I have no doubt wins and losses mean something to Jerry, but I also believe it's not at the level of importance he puts in wins and losses on his bottom line. Jerry has found himself a coach that does just enough to keep his team relevant in the wins/loss column, but he has also seen that despite a mediocre showing from Garrett's teams, his bottom line with the Cowboys has done exceptionally well in the same time frame. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that Jerry's bottom line growing is because of Garrett. What I am doing is inferring that Jerry's bottom line is growing in spite of Garrett. Jerry may be wallowing in mediocre when it comes to wins and losses with the Dallas Cowboys, but he is doing very very well when it comes to his bottom line.
At this point, Jerry the business man is running the Dallas Cowboys, and he sees no reason to change what is working.

 

[Buzzbait]

Some of the early win coaches took over teams with good roster situations.
The Eagles GM should get at least half the credit for their SB win.

I'll go for that, so let's dump our GM and HC both!

 

[atlantacowboy]

Jerry and Stephen Jones believe the way to success lies in stability at the head coaching position. It's somewhat understandable that they feel that way considering the lack of success overall we had switching from Gailey to Campo to Parcells to Phillips to Garrett.

But the Eagles are the latest team to show that change can be a good thing, that you've got to keep searching until you find a coach that has "it" or hits on the right formula for temporary success at the least. Pederson took his team to a Super Bowl championship in his second year as a head coach. The previous year Dan Quinn did the same for the Falcons.

It took Ron Rivera a little more time in Carolina to get the Panthers to the Super Bowl in 2015 (five years) but his opponent, Gary Kubiak, got Denver there his first year.

Even Jimmy Johnson had us trending up and then Super Bowl champions within four years. However, that was before free agency and the salary cap took hold, which I think makes it easier for coaches to turn a team around quickly. And if you look at Bill Belichick, his long-term success in New England began with winning a Super Bowl in his second year as coach there.

So what does this mean for Dallas? Eight years is more than enough time to see that the process isn't what wins championships. It's finding a coach who can do the most with the talent you have on the team now; one with a vision that adding a few key pieces can complete.

Jerry needs to learn from his past. When he came here, he cast aside a coach who is much better than Garrett will ever be but whose time had come to bring in a fresh, new approach. That led to three Super Bowl victories in four years. We might not catch lightning in a bottle again, but that certainly doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

This comes from someone who has not been against Garrett as a head coach. The trend is just too hard to ignore even going back beyond the coaches I mentioned. There's Pete Carroll (it took four years in Seattle), John Fox (two years in Carolina, three years in Denver), John Harbaugh (five years in Baltimore, but AFC Championship Game in first year), Jim Harbaugh (two years in San Francisco), Tom Coughlin (four years in New York), Mike McCarthy (five years in Green Bay, but NFC Championship Game in second year), Mike Tomlin (two years), Sean Payton (four years in New Orleans, but NFC Championship Game in first year) and Jim Caldwell (first year with Indianapolis). That's your Super Bowl coaches since 2010, with few outside of Belichick having sustained Super Bowl success.

Good post. I don't think "stability" is any kind of organizational philosophy in regard to success. It has become more of the default go-to quip whenever Jerry's asked the question b/c he lacks answers.

I just think Jerry is getting older and is far less inclined to want to change. He has never viewed the head coaching position with respect. He declared that "anyone can coach this team" in Jimmy Johnson's final year, and then went on to "prove" his point by hiring Barry Switzer.........So, thats his take on the head coach. He has always viewed the front office as the lead in regard to all football matters. Its like fantasy football to him. He feels that if you collect enough talent, you are going to win no matter who coaches. This erroneous thinking is why he doesn't understand or put much credence into things like team chemistry. That is why is signs guys like pacman jones, TO and Greg Hardy. He thinks its all about collecting the right amount of talent..........the cheaper the better.

 

[gimmesix]

But there’s limits to what any coach can do with scrubs.
You think any coach would be happy with Stephen Jones current policy of only getting scrubs in Free Agency.
Hell even Belichick gets thrown a bone or two each year and I sure we both agree Garrett is no Belichick.
The reality is just about everything you could change in a football club has been changed over the last 22 years except for J&S Jones and the results on the field are still the same.
So now you expect HC number 6 to make a significant difference?
I think you’re setting yourself up for a big disappointment.

I can't say Garrett isn't the reason for the policy. It's been enacted since he's been here so I don't know his level of involvement.

I believe things did change when Parcells was here. Jerry Jones admitted that his philosophy changed because Parcells was the coach. Some will point to TO to say that it didn't, but Parcells signed off on the signing. Despite what some want to believe about Jones, he has changed over the last 22 years. Once he went all in with free agency, overpaying for players to the point that when they came here they did not leave without a contract. Now, we're at the reverse of that philosophy. The coach does make a difference in how Jones acts as the GM. Those who don't see that just want to hate Jones for everything he does.

If Jones had a strong-willed head coach like Belichick, I guarantee his philosphy would shift to what Belichick wants, just like it did with Parcells. Ireland became the de facto GM because Parcells wanted it. We shifted to the 3-4 because Parcells wanted it. We brought in FOBs because Parcells wanted it.

 

[gimmesix]

Some of the early win coaches took over teams with good roster situations. The Eagles GM should get at least half the credit for their SB win.

We had been 13-3 and 11-5 in two of the four years Phillips was coach, with the 11-5 season coming the year before the team tanked. We had a good backfield, just drafted Dez Bryant to pair with Miles Austin, had a top tight end, and some pretty good defensive personnel. A head coach who understood what to do with that personnel and what he needed to add to it could have done more. Garrett chose to completely junk the offensive line and start his process with players like Phil Costa starting.

When Payton took over the Saints they were coming off two 8-8 seasons and had just finished 3-13. When Quinn took over in Atlanta, the Falcons were coming off 4-12 and 6-10 seasons although they had been good three years before he arrived. Philly had good personnel but Chip Kelly certainly didn't know what to do with it, just like Garrett doesn't know how to maximize what he has.

 

[Diehardblues]

Good post. I don't think "stability" is any kind of organizational philosophy in regard to success. It has become more of the default go-to quip whenever Jerry's asked the question b/c he lacks answers.

I just think Jerry is getting older and is far less inclined to want to change. He has never viewed the head coaching position with respect. He declared that "anyone can coach this team" in Jimmy Johnson's final year, and then went on to "prove" his point by hiring Barry Switzer.........So, thats his take on the head coach. He has always viewed the front office as the lead in regard to all football matters. Its like fantasy football to him. He feels that if you collect enough talent, you are going to win no matter who coaches. This erroneous thinking is why he doesn't understand or put much credence into things like team chemistry. That is why is signs guys like pacman jones, TO and Greg Hardy. He thinks its all about collecting the right amount of talent..........the cheaper the better.

To some degree I would concur with Jerry that it is all or at least mostly about the talent . If you amass more than the other team it provides you an advantage .

Great coaching comes in when you need to build a team or try to make the most of a team with holes in talent.

But it’s why my campaign in trying to overcome Jerry and Jason has been about more elite talent in the key positions because this is a talent driven league.

 

[jterrell]

Jerry and Stephen Jones believe the way to success lies in stability at the head coaching position. It's somewhat understandable that they feel that way considering the lack of success overall we had switching from Gailey to Campo to Parcells to Phillips to Garrett.

But the Eagles are the latest team to show that change can be a good thing, that you've got to keep searching until you find a coach that has "it" or hits on the right formula for temporary success at the least. Pederson took his team to a Super Bowl championship in his second year as a head coach. The previous year Dan Quinn did the same for the Falcons.

It took Ron Rivera a little more time in Carolina to get the Panthers to the Super Bowl in 2015 (five years) but his opponent, Gary Kubiak, got Denver there his first year.

Even Jimmy Johnson had us trending up and then Super Bowl champions within four years. However, that was before free agency and the salary cap took hold, which I think makes it easier for coaches to turn a team around quickly. And if you look at Bill Belichick, his long-term success in New England began with winning a Super Bowl in his second year as coach there.

So what does this mean for Dallas? Eight years is more than enough time to see that the process isn't what wins championships. It's finding a coach who can do the most with the talent you have on the team now; one with a vision that adding a few key pieces can complete.

Jerry needs to learn from his past. When he came here, he cast aside a coach who is much better than Garrett will ever be but whose time had come to bring in a fresh, new approach. That led to three Super Bowl victories in four years. We might not catch lightning in a bottle again, but that certainly doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

This comes from someone who has not been against Garrett as a head coach. The trend is just too hard to ignore even going back beyond the coaches I mentioned. There's Pete Carroll (it took four years in Seattle), John Fox (two years in Carolina, three years in Denver), John Harbaugh (five years in Baltimore, but AFC Championship Game in first year), Jim Harbaugh (two years in San Francisco), Tom Coughlin (four years in New York), Mike McCarthy (five years in Green Bay, but NFC Championship Game in second year), Mike Tomlin (two years), Sean Payton (four years in New Orleans, but NFC Championship Game in first year) and Jim Caldwell (first year with Indianapolis). That's your Super Bowl coaches since 2010, with few outside of Belichick having sustained Super Bowl success.

Lots of bad teams change coaches and GMs regularly and stay bad.
The Eagles have managed to win 1 year... and to do it they brought back Andy Reid's offense, lol.

The Eagles tried massive change with Chip Kelly. That didn't work at all so they reverted to the old system of Reid.

 

[visionary]

Jerry and Stephen Jones believe the way to success lies in stability at the head coaching position. It's somewhat understandable that they feel that way considering the lack of success overall we had switching from Gailey to Campo to Parcells to Phillips to Garrett.

But the Eagles are the latest team to show that change can be a good thing, that you've got to keep searching until you find a coach that has "it" or hits on the right formula for temporary success at the least. Pederson took his team to a Super Bowl championship in his second year as a head coach. The previous year Dan Quinn did the same for the Falcons.

It took Ron Rivera a little more time in Carolina to get the Panthers to the Super Bowl in 2015 (five years) but his opponent, Gary Kubiak, got Denver there his first year.

Even Jimmy Johnson had us trending up and then Super Bowl champions within four years. However, that was before free agency and the salary cap took hold, which I think makes it easier for coaches to turn a team around quickly. And if you look at Bill Belichick, his long-term success in New England began with winning a Super Bowl in his second year as coach there.

So what does this mean for Dallas? Eight years is more than enough time to see that the process isn't what wins championships. It's finding a coach who can do the most with the talent you have on the team now; one with a vision that adding a few key pieces can complete.

Jerry needs to learn from his past. When he came here, he cast aside a coach who is much better than Garrett will ever be but whose time had come to bring in a fresh, new approach. That led to three Super Bowl victories in four years. We might not catch lightning in a bottle again, but that certainly doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

This comes from someone who has not been against Garrett as a head coach. The trend is just too hard to ignore even going back beyond the coaches I mentioned. There's Pete Carroll (it took four years in Seattle), John Fox (two years in Carolina, three years in Denver), John Harbaugh (five years in Baltimore, but AFC Championship Game in first year), Jim Harbaugh (two years in San Francisco), Tom Coughlin (four years in New York), Mike McCarthy (five years in Green Bay, but NFC Championship Game in second year), Mike Tomlin (two years), Sean Payton (four years in New Orleans, but NFC Championship Game in first year) and Jim Caldwell (first year with Indianapolis). That's your Super Bowl coaches since 2010, with few outside of Belichick having sustained Super Bowl success.

"Stability" is important when you have proven success
"Stability " is the height of excuse making when you have proven mediocrity and incompetence

It's not difficult to under for people with any intelligence

 

[gimmesix]

Good post. I don't think "stability" is any kind of organizational philosophy in regard to success. It has become more of the default go-to quip whenever Jerry's asked the question b/c he lacks answers.

I just think Jerry is getting older and is far less inclined to want to change. He has never viewed the head coaching position with respect. He declared that "anyone can coach this team" in Jimmy Johnson's final year, and then went on to "prove" his point by hiring Barry Switzer.........So, thats his take on the head coach. He has always viewed the front office as the lead in regard to all football matters. Its like fantasy football to him. He feels that if you collect enough talent, you are going to win no matter who coaches. This erroneous thinking is why he doesn't understand or put much credence into things like team chemistry. That is why is signs guys like pacman jones, TO and Greg Hardy. He thinks its all about collecting the right amount of talent..........the cheaper the better.

I think Jerry's feeling about head coaching shifted after Campo, which is why he brought Parcells in. I don't believe that he wanted to move on from Parcells, and I believe he had to move on from Phillips and was willing to pull the plug quickly because he had his handpicked "future" already on the team. I believe that Jones married himself to the idea that stability leads to championships, and as long as Garrett is able to mix in a few playoff seasons, he'll stay married to it.

I believe the Super Bowl success of other teams show that this is a very faulty philosophy.

 

[gimmesix]

Lots of bad teams change coaches and GMs regularly and stay bad.
The Eagles have managed to win 1 year... and to do it they brought back Andy Reid's offense, lol.

The Eagles tried massive change with Chip Kelly. That didn't work at all so they reverted to the old system of Reid.

I agree, and that could be the case here. However, that's no reason to ignore the pattern.

 

[Diehardblues]

We saw what an infusion of talent made on our OL. We saw what a top RB can add and enhance all around him despite the same coaching . It’s why I was so excited when it looked like Dak might be more elite than Romo.

I truly believe elite talent is the only legit answer with the obstacles Jerry insist on with his meddling and puppetry coaching.

 

[gimmesix]

"Stability" is important when you have proven success
"Stability " is the height of excuse making when you have proven mediocrity and incompetence

It's not difficult to under for people with any intelligence

12-4 and 13-3 are "proven" success. The Joneses see that as proof that Dallas is only a play or two away from being Super Bowl champions. I believe they are buying into fool's gold. These other coaches have shown that if you don't strike gold within the first five years, then it's time to start digging somewhere else.