Offseason predictions

[Dodger12]

And if you want to play that way Landry would not have had that 20 year streak based on your standards you'd have fired him in 64.

This is rich. You go from "drought years" of 77 to 92 to try and prove a point, then to the "final Landry years" and now you go to the inception of the franchise. In 1960 we went winless and didn't participate in the draft. In 1961 we went 4 - 9 - 1. In 1962 we went 5 - 8 - 1. One an argue we were steadily improving for an expansion team that didn't even participate in the draft it's first year. What criteria do you use when you claim some sort of improvement during Garrett's tenure here? Some abstract idea that players don't quit or we're drafting better, even though it doesn't show up in wins and losses? People try hard to convince themselves by claiming how Garrett carries himself like Landry, Garrett gives nice press conferences (which he doesn't, by the way), Garret went to Princeton, Garrett is the next Payton, etc. It gets real old, real quick.

Bottom line, we've never had a drought in the history of this franchise even remotely similar to what we've been seeing for going on almost two decades now. Never. You claiming that we are in a drought similar to 77 to 92 is comical. But as I've said before, I give the Garrett and Jerry fan boys credit for once again trying to think outside the box and come up with something as unique as this "77 to 92 drought" you speak of.

And one last point. I can live with the idea that Jerry is such a meddlesome owner and poor GM that Garrett can't succeed. I can buy that because we all know Jerry and he's more of a detriment to this team than any coach he hires. I can buy, to some extent, the fact that Garrett is coaching a team whose talent we over rate and maybe we're not much better than an average team. But Garrett has given multiple games away and has been nothing short of a failure at game and clock management. That's what I find inexcusable and I'm not willing to be patient for another year while an NFL HC learns the intricacies that even a high school coach would, should and does know.

 

[MikeT22]

'97-'12 we only won 1 playoff game. '77-'92 we were in 3 Super Bowls, winning 2 of them. Made it to 3 other NFC champ games and won multiple other playoff games.

Get this, Jimmy was hired in '89 and we went 1-15. But from '89-'91 we won as many playoff games as we have from '97-'12. Let that sink in.

 

[blindzebra]

This is rich. You go from "drought years" of 77 to 92 to try and prove a point, then to the "final Landry years" and now you go to the inception of the franchise. In 1960 we went winless and didn't participate in the draft. In 1961 we went 4 - 9 - 1. In 1962 we went 5 - 8 - 1. One an argue we were steadily improving for an expansion team that didn't even participate in the draft it's first year. What criteria do you use when you claim some sort of improvement during Garrett's tenure here? Some abstract idea that players don't quit or we're drafting better, even though it doesn't show up in wins and losses? People try hard to convince themselves by claiming how Garrett carries himself like Landry, Garrett gives nice press conferences (which he doesn't, by the way), Garret went to Princeton, Garrett is the next Payton, etc. It gets real old, real quick.

Bottom line, we've never had a drought in the history of this franchise even remotely similar to what we've been seeing for going on almost two decades now. Never. You claiming that we are in a drought similar to 77 to 92 is comical. But as I've said before, I give the Garrett and Jerry fan boys credit for once again trying to think outside the box and come up with something as unique as this "77 to 92 drought" you speak of.

And one last point. I can live with the idea that Jerry is such a meddlesome owner and poor GM that Garrett can't succeed. I can buy that because we all know Jerry and he's more of a detriment to this team than any coach he hires. I can buy, to some extent, the fact that Garrett is coaching a team whose talent we over rate and maybe we're not much better than an average team. But Garrett has given multiple games away and has been nothing short of a failure at game and clock management. That's what I find inexcusable and I'm not willing to be patient for another year while an NFL HC learns the intricacies that even a high school coach would, should and does know.

One more time for the comprehension impaired.

You want excellence correct? I measure that in championships, don't you?

I have said it at least 3 other times in this thread but here we go again.

DROUGHT AS IN YEARS PASSED WITHOUT WINNING A SUPER BOWL!

 

[blindzebra]

'97-'12 we only won 1 playoff game. '77-'92 we were in 3 Super Bowls, winning 2 of them. Made it to 3 other NFC champ games and won multiple other playoff games.

Get this, Jimmy was hired in '89 and we went 1-15. But from '89-'91 we won as many playoff games as we have from '97-'12. Let that sink in.

We were in one SB in 78...God the lack of reading skills on here is incredible.

 

[blindzebra]

This is rich. You go from "drought years" of 77 to 92 to try and prove a point, then to the "final Landry years" and now you go to the inception of the franchise. In 1960 we went winless and didn't participate in the draft. In 1961 we went 4 - 9 - 1. In 1962 we went 5 - 8 - 1. One an argue we were steadily improving for an expansion team that didn't even participate in the draft it's first year. What criteria do you use when you claim some sort of improvement during Garrett's tenure here? Some abstract idea that players don't quit or we're drafting better, even though it doesn't show up in wins and losses? People try hard to convince themselves by claiming how Garrett carries himself like Landry, Garrett gives nice press conferences (which he doesn't, by the way), Garret went to Princeton, Garrett is the next Payton, etc. It gets real old, real quick.

Bottom line, we've never had a drought in the history of this franchise even remotely similar to what we've been seeing for going on almost two decades now. Never. You claiming that we are in a drought similar to 77 to 92 is comical. But as I've said before, I give the Garrett and Jerry fan boys credit for once again trying to think outside the box and come up with something as unique as this "77 to 92 drought" you speak of.

And one last point. I can live with the idea that Jerry is such a meddlesome owner and poor GM that Garrett can't succeed. I can buy that because we all know Jerry and he's more of a detriment to this team than any coach he hires. I can buy, to some extent, the fact that Garrett is coaching a team whose talent we over rate and maybe we're not much better than an average team. But Garrett has given multiple games away and has been nothing short of a failure at game and clock management. That's what I find inexcusable and I'm not willing to be patient for another year while an NFL HC learns the intricacies that even a high school coach would, should and does know.

So having 2 seasons plagued by injuries leaving your defense gutted and awful isn't an excuse, but being in an expansion draft and having small improvements in wins and losses in an time with fewer teams and a deeper talent pool is?

I call BS.

You guys would have been screaming for Landry's head from 63 until we finally won it in 71.

 

[Dodger12]

You want excellence correct? I measure that in championships, don't you?

Look in the mirror. I'm not the guy defending the HC who didn't know how to coach with a 3 touchdown lead to start the second half.....and he did it twice. You have an odd way of applying and defending excellence when it comes to Garrett.

 

[blindzebra]

Look in the mirror. I'm not the guy defending the HC who didn't know how to coach with a 3 touchdown lead to start the second half.....and he did it twice. You have an odd way of applying and defending excellence when it comes to Garrett.

So answer this...

All history after the fact removed.

Would you be calling for Landry to be fired after failing to make the playoffs after 3 years?

 

[Dodger12]

So answer this...

All history after the fact removed.

Would you be calling for Landry to be fired after failing to make the playoffs after 3 years?

Without a draft his first year, no QB and coaching an expansion team? How can you even compare the first 3 years in that scenario with what Garrett was dealing with when he took over the team?

 

[Dodger12]

So having 2 seasons plagued by injuries leaving your defense gutted and awful isn't an excuse, but being in an expansion draft and having small improvements in wins and losses in an time with fewer teams and a deeper talent pool is?

I call BS.

As opposed to showing no improvement in an NFL with more teams, a watered down talent pool and a system built on parity where teams can quickly turn their fortunes around from year to year?

Don't call BS, call a doctor.

 

[blindzebra]

Without a draft his first year, no QB and coaching an expansion team? How can you even compare the first 3 years in that scenario with what Garrett was dealing with when he took over the team?

So some excuses are okay then.

Yet being a win away with injuries causing two of the worst defenses in history does not matter?

Can you say hypocrite?

 

[slomoxn]

So all you guys do is complain about being competitive but not winning Super Bowls and when I highlight 2 periods between Super Bowls and call them droughts it is lunacy...lol

If stupidity could replace oil this forum could put the Middle East out of business.

I'm reading all these posts and trying to figure out where I fit in... But what has me thinking now is who complained about the years listed? Maybe one of the problems we have on here is miscommunication. If I'm correct I don't believe anyone has a problem with the years following the 70's into the 80's, the reality is we knew that change could come.

What we are facing now is not the issue of change but he issue of no one feels any hope that real change will happen as long as our current owner and GM is around. Honestly I think that is the gist of the problem that hope of a better future is in the hands of someone that has given us no hope because he is delusional in his own ability to build a winning team.

We could start the rebuilding of this team, go 1-15, for two years straight, have strong drafts in the interim and everyone would be talking brightly of the future... If it weren't Jerry doing it, at this point not to many trust his abilities any longer to build a good team, and that has nothing to do with winning a playoff game. The 70's andd 80's we were still competitive even without winning it all, difference is we felt hope each year that we would be competitive the next year. That hope is gone and I believe that is why so many feel so down and negative. We basically feel there is nothing to look forward to because he doesn't seem to know what he is doing.

There is no rhyme or reason to the way they are building this team, every three years they switch to another system of something. Looking back on promising QB's in the league that had a revolving door of offensive systems and coordinators they were deemed flops for not producitng. How easy is it to produce when you never are able to get comfortable with a system and really learn it?

Alex Smith comes to mind, considered a mediocre qb and maybe he is, but now this mediocre qb is winning because he has a good system and finally a chance to learn it. Our team has no direction and jerry is the mastermind not providing it. As much as changes for the team he needs to step away to give fans hope again.

 

[slomoxn]

So the final Landry years were better than the current years?

Buried? Not.

The final Landry years were not that good but they weren't this bad, we still had hope with him because he had a track record of winning. These past 17 yeears have a record of losing or mediocrity and no hope of change coming.

 

[visionary]

I'm reading all these posts and trying to figure out where I fit in... But what has me thinking now is who complained about the years listed? Maybe one of the problems we have on here is miscommunication. If I'm correct I don't believe anyone has a problem with the years following the 70's into the 80's, the reality is we knew that change could come.

What we are facing now is not the issue of change but he issue of no one feels any hope that real change will happen as long as our current owner and GM is around. Honestly I think that is the gist of the problem that hope of a better future is in the hands of someone that has given us no hope because he is delusional in his own ability to build a winning team.

We could start the rebuilding of this team, go 1-15, for two years straight, have strong drafts in the interim and everyone would be talking brightly of the future... If it weren't Jerry doing it, at this point not to many trust his abilities any longer to build a good team, and that has nothing to do with winning a playoff game. The 70's andd 80's we were still competitive even without winning it all, difference is we felt hope each year that we would be competitive the next year. That hope is gone and I believe that is why so many feel so down and negative. We basically feel there is nothing to look forward to because he doesn't seem to know what he is doing.

There is no rhyme or reason to the way they are building this team, every three years they switch to another system of something. Looking back on promising QB's in the league that had a revolving door of offensive systems and coordinators they were deemed flops for not producitng. How easy is it to produce when you never are able to get comfortable with a system and really learn it?

Alex Smith comes to mind, considered a mediocre qb and maybe he is, but now this mediocre qb is winning because he has a good system and finally a chance to learn it. Our team has no direction and jerry is the mastermind not providing it. As much as changes for the team he needs to step away to give fans hope again.

great post
lack of hope and direction are a big part of the frustration

the reality is that any owner would have fired a GM that had won nothing in 17 years
any GM would have fired a HC that went 8-8 for 3 striaght years with no playoffs with a top 10 QB

but both those people will be here next year solely because one owns the team and the other is "in the family portrait" and neither have any idea what they are doing and anyone with half a brain can see that they are both in over their heads

 

[Chocolate Lab]

So some excuses are okay then.

Yet being a win away with injuries causing two of the worst defenses in history does not matter?

Can you say hypocrite?

LOL. So Landry having the worst collection of talent maybe in NFL history isn't legitimate but having a few starters out on defense in a terribly down year for the NFCE is.

You should quit while you're behind.

 

[Risen Star]

My offseason prediction is the owner won't make the one necessary change to turn the team around and give it a chance on a level playing field. He'll excuse holes in the roster and expect the power of positive thinking to make the difference in 2014. No big changes to the roster. We don't have the cap room even if we wanted to. Possibly some cosmetic moves amongst the coaching staff. Stuff fans will cling to as the missing ingredient but it won't be any more successful than firing Rob Ryan or giving Bill Callahan the play calling this year.

More of the same for next year. It's failed for 18 years so far. Don't even act like you know what will happen the 19th year. Unless you feel like giving us the winning lottery numbers or something, Mr. Cleo.

 

[silver]

Nothing will change as long as Jerry is the GM so with that said I expect everybody back intact coaching staff, front office and veterans under contract. Maybe they'll redo Austin's deal but I doubt they cut ties with Ware.

 

[blindzebra]

LOL. So Landry having the worst collection of talent maybe in NFL history isn't legitimate but having a few starters out on defense in a terribly down year for the NFCE is.

You should quit while you're behind.

The collective IQ of you guys would not surpass a rock.

I am saying BOTH are legitimate excuses.

I do find it interesting how you guys don't have the guts to stand by your convictions. If Garrett deserves to be fired so did the 1960's Tom Landry. 6 years to get a winning record. 7 years to make the playoffs. Geesh what a bum.

 

[Aven8]

To the OP.

Fire the entire coaching staff with the exception of Bishachia. Marinelli will most likely leave wherever Lovie lands anyway.

Get rid of maybe of couple of contracts, Low hanging fruit Austin, etc.

Start fresh with whole new offense and team concept. It's really not that hard, and I don't see why Jerry at his age wouldn't feel excited about a fresh new scheme and direction for the team.

 

[WoodysGirl]

Alot of whizzing going on in this thread, but not many predictions...unless whizzing is part of the prediction.

Nobody cares about folks who no longer post on the board..or their reasons why. There are many forums on the 'Net and folks can post wherever they want. While the Zone isn't for everybody, we're not going to allow people to continue to denigrate the people who DO post here. If you don't like it here or the people who post here, I simply recommend Logging Out. Problem solved.

 

[rickster14]

I have been a Cowboys fan since before I can remember (I'm 43 now). This has been one of the worst seasons I can ever remember being a fan. I don't know whether it's time to rebuild or not. Personally, I can't see JG being much help in any situation.

If injuries had no ravished the DL and LB core, I think this year would have looked different. The offense has been good enough to win. I just have no faith in the D.

I don't think we have enough draft picks or $$ to fix the DL. Considering the fact that Hatcher is more than likely gone, I can't rely on the return of Crawford & Bass to make things much better.

My prediction is a bad 2014, bad enough that we won't have the hope we had this year. Our best hope is for JJ to hire a coach who has enough backbone and ego to stand up to him. If he wins, JJ can live with that for a while.