Our assistant coaches really like coaching for Garrett

[Toruk_Makto]

On what planet does play action get a QB killed?

When you can't protect the QB and give rushers an extra 2 seconds to rush your QB while disregarding the play fake.

 

[rcaldw]

When you can't protect the QB and give rushers an extra 2 seconds to rush your QB while disregarding the play fake.

Khiladi, when it comes to Garrett, is the equivalent of the guy who died saying the earth was flat. He believed it passionately, he was tenacious, he just could not admit what others had come to see.... and now his body is buried underneath the dirt of this big round ball and he has to spin around and around and around on what he denied existed. Kinda sad actually

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Our OL was garbage for years because of Garrett and His desire to have Houck his coach, with power-blocking hefty lineman.

The first year Houck left not a single OL was drafted, Dallas going Claiborne and shelling out money for Carr in free agency. Dallas drafted five Defensive players and two offensive players, both skilled players.

Dallas then switched defensive schemes the next year firing Ryan. They also had Floyd their number one pick and Jerry over-ruled last minute via Marinelli, not Garrett. An they picked Frederik with Wisconsin ties and Callahan. After that they didn't pick a single lineman.

The next year Dallas had three defensive players ahead of Martin, all drafted before him.

The reality is Jerry and Jason were all blaming the defense and not talent on offense. Jerry finally removed Garrett from playcalling duties on offense because he wasn't getting the job done. When Jerry made the switch to Libehan he effectively said it was a problem in utilizing the talent on offense, not a flaw In offensive Personnel itself. You won't find a single statement fromJerry or Jason during these years that they think talent on offense was an issue. Everything was targeted at defense, including the change from Rob Ryan to Kiffen. Garrett flat out said they needed more TOs to give the offense more chances.

These are all facts. You can't spin out of it.

Are you really complaining that they have not drafted more OL? Or is it nonsense about they only lucked into drafting OL? Just seems ignorant to the process. Houck was the guy that ushered in Smith. The USC connections and all that. We traded back to get Fred. You have no idea how that decision was arrived at specifically so excluding any of them is pretty ignorant.

Garrett was involved hiring Linehan. Both Jones, McClay and an agent are as well at the very least. Garrett and Linehan are friends from working together in Miami under Saban. Your bias is pretty obvious here.

 

[khiladi]

When you can't protect the QB and give rushers an extra 2 seconds to rush your QB while disregarding the play fake.

Lol... A play action is a drop back, fake hand off. It isn't an empty set, pass blocking formation that got Romo killed all the time. If you can't block on play action, you can't block on anything.

You claimed we didn't run
Play action because of protecting the QB. That's the dumbest argument in the world, especially in the context of our offense, where we ran plenty of formations which threatened Romo, who was amongst the most sacked QBs because of them.

Just stop..

 

[khiladi]

Are you really complaining that they have not drafted more OL? Or is it nonsense about they only lucked into drafting OL? Just seems ignorant to the process. Houck was the guy that ushered in Smith. The USC connections and all that. We traded back to get Fred. You have no idea how that decision was arrived at specifically so excluding any of them is pretty ignorant.

Garrett was involved hiring Linehan. Both Jones, McClay and an agent are as well at the very least. Garrett and Linehan are friends from working together in Miami under Saban. Your bias is pretty obvious here.

Lol.. We went Smith because we lost Flozell to protect the left side of Romo. Smith was a no brained and many considered to be the best OL
Coming out in years.

Garrett specifically said in the context of 2012 that they draft BPA and fill needs via free agency. He then said Smith was an exception and they wouldn't draft that way, but even then like I said, it's absurd to mKe the argument that Smith was an exception because Smith was a BPA.

Did you even read what I said above anour Houck and the 2012 draft where Dallas didn't draft a single OL, but five defensive players and 2 skill players on offense?

So much for the argument that building OL was a priority of Garrett..

 

[khiladi]

I remember the story of Garrett homers that it had nothing to do with playcalling previously, but all about execution. They defended vociferously that Garrett was in charge of playcalling and wanted to be, but the players just sucked. Now suddenly the story is that Garrett never was against not calling the plays. And Scott Linehan was his master plan.

They said last year that Romo was audibling out of Garrett's run plays as an excuse for lack of running the ball, no longer the issue being personnel. Even Garrett tried to throw Romo under the bus during Green Bay and said he audibles out of a run play as if that one run play defined the whole half. Garrett homers than jumped on it and said, there you have it. Romo is at fault.


But then Romo got injured and Kyle Orton was QB and tossed the ball over forty times that game.

The point is, why fabricate a story that this was Garrett's plan all Along now. Yeah, the set up worked last year. But it wasn't clearly because of Garrett's 'process'. Just admit he sucked at playcalling all along.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Lol... A play action is a drop back, fake hand off. It isn't an empty set, pass blocking formation that got Romo killed all the time. If you can't block on play action, you can't block on anything.

You claimed we didn't run
Play action because of protecting the QB. That's the dumbest argument in the world, especially in the context of our offense, where we ran plenty of formations which threatened Romo, who was amongst the most sacked QBs because of them.

Just stop..

A qb turns his back to oncoming rushers when he play fakes and the rb isn't in position to pick up a free rusher.

Dude tis is basic x's and o's.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Lol.. We went Smith because we lost Flozell to protect the left side of Romo. Smith was a no brained and many considered to be the best OL
Coming out in years.

Garrett specifically said in the context of 2012 that they draft BPA and fill needs via free agency. He then said Smith was an exception and they wouldn't draft that way, but even then like I said, it's absurd to mKe the argument that Smith was an exception because Smith was a BPA.

Did you even read what I said above anour Houck and the 2012 draft where Dallas didn't draft a single OL, but five defensive players and 2 skill players on offense?

So much for the argument that building OL was a priority of Garrett..

You sure like making up stories. You build on facts and come up with some real nonsense. They really didn't want to draft those 3 guys in the first round and clearly don't prioritize the position.

If you want to go through these mental gymnastics to deflect blame from Garrett then go ahead. Just sounds like sour grapes to me.

 

[cml750]

Injuries played a huge part of the last 2 years.

No doubt but injuries are part of the game and cant be helped. The mistakes Garrett made could have easily been rectified. I am not trying to argue. I am happy where the team is right now and think the needle is pointing up but I need another good year from Garrett to buy in completely.

 

[cml750]

I remember the story of Garrett homers that it had nothing to do with playcalling previously, but all about execution. They defended vociferously that Garrett was in charge of playcalling and wanted to be, but the players just sucked. Now suddenly the story is that Garrett never was against not calling the plays. And Scott Linehan was his master plan.

They said last year that Romo was audibling out of Garrett's run plays as an excuse for lack of running the ball, no longer the issue being personnel. Even Garrett tried to throw Romo under the bus during Green Bay and said he audibles out of a run play as if that one run play defined the whole half. Garrett homers than jumped on it and said, there you have it. Romo is at fault.


But then Romo got injured and Kyle Orton was QB and tossed the ball over forty times that game.

The point is, why fabricate a story that this was Garrett's plan all Along now. Yeah, the set up worked last year. But it wasn't clearly because of Garrett's 'process'. Just admit he sucked at playcalling all along.

Agreed!!!

 

[Hostile]

No doubt but injuries are part of the game and cant be helped. The mistakes Garrett made could have easily been rectified. I am not trying to argue. I am happy where the team is right now and think the needle is pointing up but I need another good year from Garrett to buy in completely.

Can't be helped but do change team dynamics. No one can tell me that the Giants and Falcons were not devastated by injuries last year. the same way we were the previous 2 years. It changes how you play the game. Detroit marched down the field and we couldn't stop them. You can't tell me that with some better defenders we couldn't have. I just don't buy that. The Coach plays a role no doubt. I point directly towards abandoning the run against Green Bay. Wrong decisions that led more to the loss than the execution on the field.

I'd say the team learned from that loss, wouldn't you?

 

[cml750]

Can't be helped but do change team dynamics. No one can tell me that the Giants and Falcons were not devastated by injuries last year. the same way we were the previous 2 years. It changes how you play the game. Detroit marched down the field and we couldn't stop them. You can't tell me that with some better defenders we couldn't have. I just don't buy that. The Coach plays a role no doubt. I point directly towards abandoning the run against Green Bay. Wrong decisions that led more to the loss than the execution on the field.

I'd say the team learned from that loss, wouldn't you?

They did do much better this year which is why I am willing to give Garrett a chance. It looks like he would have learned from mistakes made in 2011 and 2012 but better late than never. Like I said, they did better. I am satisfied this season. I just need to see another good season before I buy into Garrett wholeheartedly.

 

[Hostile]

They did do much better this year which is why I am willing to give Garrett a chance. It looks like he would have learned from mistakes made in 2011 and 2012 but better late than never. Like I said, they did better. I am satisfied this season. I just need to see another good season before I buy into Garrett wholeheartedly.

Like I said, I don't know that there is anything wrong with that.

My only issue is why some people insult a guy who is so focused on returning us to our glory stature. That I don't get. The doubts, like yours are natural.

I am rare in that I wanted this guy before he was even hired here as the OC. I always felt he was going to have this effect on the football team, and I loved what I saw him trying to build. I knew it would take time. I could not foresee the injuries of the previous 2 seasons and how they would delay that.

We're all different. That doesn't mean we all want different things. I don't think we do at all.

 

[cml750]

Like I said, I don't know that there is anything wrong with that.

My only issue is why some people insult a guy who is so focused on returning us to our glory stature. That I don't get. The doubts, like yours are natural.

I am rare in that I wanted this guy before he was even hired here as the OC. I always felt he was going to have this effect on the football team, and I loved what I saw him trying to build. I knew it would take time. I could not foresee the injuries of the previous 2 seasons and how they would delay that.

We're all different. That doesn't mean we all want different things. I don't think we do at all.

Agreed!! The success of the Dallas Cowboys comes only behind God and family to me. I hope I do not get in trouble for saying "God" on a forum (oh my goodness) but I do put HIM first in EVERYTHING I do.

 

[Stryker44]

I just knew that Marinelli wasn't going anywhere. Everytime I watched him you can see the passion oozing from his coaching the players. He just looked like he was made for this defense and that the defense was made from him. I just found it hard to believe he would just walk away from what he loved doing here to go to the worst team in the NFL and give it all up. His fingerprints are all over this defense. Plus the FO respects him. That trade up for Lawrence would not have been possible by anyone but Marinelli. He didn't draft Lawrence. But he had a heavy influence to swing that trade.

How did Marinelli win favor over the front office from Kiffin?

 

[ConstantReboot]

How did Marinelli win favor over the front office from Kiffin?

Kiffen campaigned for Marinelli to be the DC instead of him. Told the front office that Marinelli deserved to be DC and that he would like to stand down so that Marinelli can be DC.

 

[Stryker44]

Kiffen campaigned for Marinelli to be the DC instead of him. Told the front office that Marinelli deserved to be DC and that he would like to stand down so that Marinelli can be DC.

He did? I thought he was demoted by Jerry.

 

[ConstantReboot]

He did? I thought he was demoted by Jerry.

I read that Kiffen went into Jerry's office asked that his good friend Marinelli be promoted DC and he would voluntarily step down. Which made realize why would Marinelli abandon Dallas for Tampa when your old time friend just vouched for you to become the DC at Dallas?

 

[Stryker44]

I read that Kiffen went into Jerry's office asked that his good friend Marinelli be promoted DC and he would voluntarily step down. Which made realize why would Marinelli abandon Dallas for Tampa when your old time friend just vouched for you to become the DC at Dallas?

That would be really odd though wouldn't it? Didn't he train Marinelli and bring him up from nothing in Tampa Bay? Why would he agree to be his subordinate now?

 

[ConstantReboot]

That would be really odd though wouldn't it? Didn't he train Marinelli and bring him up from nothing in Tampa Bay? Why would he agree to be his subordinate now?

I'm not sure. Just stating what I read. Maybe someone else can clarify. I guess its because Kiffen thought he was too old to be DC and would like to pass it onto his good friend Marinelli.

I believe that if it weren't for Kiffen Marinelli would not have been here. So whoever brought Kiffen here did a pretty good job at least in the long run.