Mike Lombardi Rips Jason Garrett's Coaching Ability

[Idgit]

In my defense, it is easy to 'misunderstand ' someone who constantly talks out of both sides of his mouth

A poster with your lung history of double talk and jerry and Garrett lap-doggery is always going to hedge his bets because you know Garrett is going to spit the bit when the chips are down

That's excuse is dishonest. I understand that it's frustrating to not be able to land a punch in an argument on merits. But stick to the topic and try to contribute that way where you can. This thread isn't about your dislike for me.

 

[visionary]

When you have 53 guys on the team, and about 8 on the practice squad, It's pretty impossible to have 61 saints on the team. About 5 of those guys are going to be pure hell no matter how you look at it, so I don't blame coaches for that. But for the winning part, you have to blame coaches for wins and losses, especially over time. At the end of the day, his job is based on wins/losses.

Agree
When you are GIFTED a top 5 QB, making the playoffs should be practically a given and you should be judged on your playoff record

Garrett homies don't want to hear it

 

[JBell]

Except it wasn't. We couldn'T run out the clock because they had timeouts and preserving our TO increased the chacne of our scoring a td.

We did not have the lead.

When you look at all probabable outcomes it is ambiguous and not certain as the redball haters pretend.

You're missing the point, they didn't need to call a timeout with 50 seconds left.

The previous play was an 8-9 yard pass to Witten. Everyone was already near the LOS for the next play, it wouldn't have taken much time for Dak to call another play at the line. Wasting a down on a crucial drive with that amount of time left is inexcusable.

I'm not guaranteeing that having that extra down would've resulted in scoring the game winning TD.

But the way Dak had the offense rolling in the 2nd half, it's very likely they'd have extended the drive with that extra down, and at the very least chewed off more time and sent the game into OT. GB would have never had an opportunity to win it in regulation.

 

[BAT]

That doesn't equate to a fair shot. A fair shot would be letting him have full control of this team and Jerry collecting checks and being a spectator.

So fair shot = living in a fantasy world?

I don't recall Jimmy needing "fair shots" to win championships, especially since you and Idiot are advocating that Jerry's input is part of the reason Jimmy "lucked" into delivering 3 SBs to Big D.

 

[BAT]

Full control?
The guy is not even competent enough to have full control of a high school team
He had been shown to be incompetent at every level of coaching and people just want to keep promoting him

Incompetent is strong, mediocre may be more accurate these days. But he was below average calling plays as a coordinator and it was a big reason Jerry took that responsibility away from him. Against Garrett's preference but Jerry was absolutely right to do so, unfortunately it was YEARS too late.

 

[lukin2006]

Baring a deep run in the playoffs this should be JG last season and with any other team it would be, not with the Cowboys...

JG doesn't much impress me, many a coach have taken over bad teams and turned them around far quicker...

 

[BAT]

Baring a deep run in the playoffs this should be JG last season and with any other team it would be, not with the Cowboys...

JG doesn't much impress me, many a coach have taken over bad teams and turned them around far quicker...

But you don't understand, Garrett is the only coach who never got a fair shot.

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

Baring a deep run in the playoffs this should be JG last season and with any other team it would be, not with the Cowboys...

JG doesn't much impress me, many a coach have taken over bad teams and turned them around far quicker...

They didn't understand that it takes years to turn a team around. Dan Quinn took Atlanta to a SB in his second year. I guess he didn't hear about the process.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You're missing the point, they didn't need to call a timeout with 50 seconds left.

The previous play was an 8-9 yard pass to Witten. Everyone was already near the LOS for the next play, it wouldn't have taken much time for Dak to call another play at the line. Wasting a down on a crucial drive with that amount of time left is inexcusable.

I'm not guaranteeing that having that extra down would've resulted in scoring the game winning TD.

But the way Dak had the offense rolling in the 2nd half, it's very likely they'd have extended the drive with that extra down, and at the very least chewed off more time and sent the game into OT. GB would have never had an opportunity to win it in regulation.

Spiking the ball and saving time and the timeout gave a better probability of a TD. It did not work out that way. As it was we tied the game and they had a very low probability to score. You have no idea what Dak was prepared to do in the play prior to the spike.

"The way Dak had the offense rolling" ended up in two straight incompletions.

At the end of the day Garrett went for the TD and the win as opposed to running the clock as much as possible to force OT ie playing not to lose. The actual probabilities end up being even looking at the various options. There is nothing to get over except the lack of a pass rush that allowed Rodgers to play at maximum level for most of that game.

 

[SlammedZero]

Yeah I'm not sure I agree with everybody jumping all over Garrett for the GB playoff loss. I get it felt like it should have been a win, but at that point, Green Bay was rolling. When you get an offensive juggernaut like GB coming in on a roll like that, they are going to come in swinging from the word go. Our defense just wasn't good enough for that. If anything, I think the resiliency of this team to climb back into it and make it a game spoke volumes. These teams, you have to admit, never seem to quit on Garrett.

 

[MileyDancer]

When you get an offensive juggernaut like GB coming in on a roll like that, they are going to come in swinging from the word go. Our defense just wasn't good enough for that.

So, why didn't we come out swinging from the word GO? We came out flat, looking unprepared. That's on the head coach.

 

[SlammedZero]

So, why didn't we come out swinging from the word GO? We came out flat, looking unprepared. That's on the head coach.

Fair enough. Definitely can be put on the head coach. I also think this was a pretty young team. They'll learn.

 

[Idgit]

Fair enough. Definitely can be put on the head coach. I also think this was a pretty young team. They'll learn.

We scored on our first drive. The 2nd I believe was the one effectively ended by the unsportsmanlike conduct call on Butler. Other than Dak's pick on the Beasly screen and the last Rodgers pass, that penalty might have been the third biggest play of the game.

We were down 21-3 before we even blinked.

It wasn't coaching. It was our inability to stop Rodgers.

 

[TheSkaven]

Pure hate. Garrett really came into his own last year. This is his team now. His game plans last year were outstanding. His 4th down calls were likewise excellent. Good use of time outs.

What more do people want? The Green Bay game was not on him. The Cowboys' defense simply wasn't good enough, that's on personnel.

 

[MileyDancer]

We scored on our first drive. The 2nd I believe was the one effectively ended by the unsportsmanlike conduct call on Butler. Other than Dak's pick on the Beasly screen and the last Rodgers pass, that penalty might have been the third biggest play of the game.

We were down 21-3 before we even blinked.

It wasn't coaching. It was our inability to stop Rodgers.

Jesus. Our offense, an offense that beat GB away already that season, could only score 3 points in what almost the entire first half? We looked completely unprepared like we only had 2 days to prepare. Often under Garrett we've looked lackadaisical after a week off. But that's not on coaching, though.

 

[Idgit]

Jesus. Our offense, an offense that beat GB away already that season, could only score 3 points in what almost the entire first half? We looked completely unprepared like we only had 2 days to prepare. Often under Garrett we've looked lackadaisical after a week off. But that's not on coaching, though.

I pointed out that the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty killed one of the three drives in question, and we scored on another of them. That's hardly controversial stuff.

If you feel the third stalled due to head coaching, I'm happy to hear why.

Nobody said scoring three points in three drives was a good thing. Your argument was that the problem was specifically with the head coach.

 

[Idgit]

Pure hate. Garrett really came into his own last year. This is his team now. His game plans last year were outstanding. His 4th down calls were likewise excellent. Good use of time outs.

What more do people want? The Green Bay game was not on him. The Cowboys' defense simply wasn't good enough, that's on personnel.

Our fans will bend over backwards to keep from acknowledging the issues with defensive personnel for some reason. And it's not just the head coach they'll blame for it. For years, Tony Romo was the one who couldn't get it done with that anchor of a defense. Now that he's gone, the problem is obviously the coaches. I don't get it.

 

[jobberone]

Agree
When you are GIFTED a top 5 QB, making the playoffs should be practically a given and you should be judged on your playoff record

Garrett homies don't want to hear it

QB is the most important position but they play with 22+. There are multiple QBs in the HOF who never won big in the playoffs. Some should be in the HOF but aren't and they never won anything because they were saddled with terrible teams. Plus, QBs surrounded by great teams are elevated on the rising tide as well.

The game isn't that simple and you know that is true. BTW, I'm thinking Fouts and Marino as well as A Manning more than any Dallas QB.

 

[logan]

Yeah I'm not sure I agree with everybody jumping all over Garrett for the GB playoff loss. I get it felt like it should have been a win, but at that point, Green Bay was rolling. When you get an offensive juggernaut like GB coming in on a roll like that, they are going to come in swinging from the word go. Our defense just wasn't good enough for that. If anything, I think the resiliency of this team to climb back into it and make it a game spoke volumes. These teams, you have to admit, never seem to quit on Garrett.

And yet a week later Green Bay got shut down by an Atlanta defense that was statistically inferior to ours. They were hardly some sort of juggernaut.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Jesus. Our offense, an offense that beat GB away already that season, could only score 3 points in what almost the entire first half? We looked completely unprepared like we only had 2 days to prepare. Often under Garrett we've looked lackadaisical after a week off. But that's not on coaching, though.

Cannot say I am surprised by your need to oversimplify.

Most of the early drives were marred by mistakes. Garrett didn't make Butler commit the phantom unsportsmanlike penalty nor Dak to miss open receivers. Garrett was not the reason for repetitive defensive holding calls on third down.

Dak had shown slow starts throughout the year. That is not unusual for a rookie QB. I guarantee you the coaches don't teach their DBs to blatantly hold past the stem of the route.

And of course when the team turned it around and came back with a vengeance, Garrett gets zero credit for making adjustments or the like.

And what is this often looked lackadaisical buisness? Making up unsubstantiated nonsense is fun I guess.