Payton vs Garrett

[ABQCOWBOY]

Alex Smith was the returning QB from 2010 and was the starter for Harbaugh in his first year when the 49ers went 13-3 and made the NFC title game.

It wasn't until 2012 that Kaepernick played. But not because they wanted to make a change. Kap was forced to play after Smith got a concussion and missed two games in the middle of the year. Kap played well in relief and it created a controversy.

Further, yes they changed their offensive scheme to more power running but guess how many starters from teh 2010 west coast offense team started for the 2011 power running 49ers?

10. The only change was at C.

They also switched a 3-4 but made little to no changes in the front seven - the core players were the same - Sopoaga, McDonald, Smith, Brooks, Bowman, Willis.......... all on the team before Harbaugh took over. Only major changes the 49ers made on defense was in the secondary.

So the idea that the 49ers tore it down is quite a stretch. They kept the core and most of the starting depth chart in place and just brought in a competent coach.

Oh, but that's really not even half the story. Comparing 2011 to 2012 is not what you should be comparing. What you should be comparing is 2010 to 2011, which is when Harbaugh took over.

In that year, the coaching staff turned over. Jim Raye was the OC and Greg Manusky was the DC. Jason Michael, Jerry Sullivan, Jason Tarver, all gone the next year. Tomsula was the only survivor.

On the Offensive side of the ball, the only starters still starting from 2010 to 2011 were Smith, Gore, Crabtree, Davis, Staley, and Iupati or, 6 starters out of 11.

On the Defensive side of the ball, Sopoaga, Smith, Willis and Goldson. 4 starter out of 11.

That's half the starts replaced when Harbaugh came over and pretty much all of the coaching staff.

 

[Dodger12]

So if you agree, then we are in agreement about the possibility of a rebuild being zero. Is that a fair statement?

Without that kind of approach, it's not happening and the other thing that's not happening is a coach like Payton coming to Dallas to be a yes man to Jerry. If Payton doesn't have full control, he won't be coming IMO. Jerry knows this as well. Payton to Dallas is not going to be a reality because of that IMO.

If/When we get a new coach, he will absolutely have to rebuild this roster. If we were to get a new HC tomorrow, we would still need a FB, a #2 WR and a TE and that's assuming Romo comes back healthy.

On defense, we need DL, CB, LB and safety help.

Unless a new HC can get more out of guys like Escobar and Williams that Garrett couldn't. About the only thing set long term on this team is the OL, #1 WR and probably even Byron Jones who has played pretty well by all accounts.

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

The problem, WP, is that the right coach would be a guy who has a vision and who would demand complete control. I just don't see that happening in Dallas at this point.

Cant argue that problem at all.

 

[Sydla]

Oh, but that's really not even half the story. Comparing 2011 to 2012 is not what you should be comparing. What you should be comparing is 2010 to 2011, which is when Harbaugh took over.

In that year, the coaching staff turned over. Jim Raye was the OC and Greg Manusky was the DC. Jason Michael, Jerry Sullivan, Jason Tarver, all gone the next year. Tomsula was the only survivor.

On the Offensive side of the ball, the only starters still starting from 2010 to 2011 were Smith, Gore, Crabtree, Davis, Staley, and Iupati or, 6 starters out of 11.

On the Defensive side of the ball, Sopoaga, Smith, Willis and Goldson. 4 starter out of 11.

That's half the starts replaced when Harbaugh came over and pretty much all of the coaching staff.

For one, of course a change at the head coach level would require changes in assistants. No one has ever denied that. Of course with a new head coach comes a new staff. Not sure why you are arguing that point. Everyone who wants a coaching change now knows that and frankly probably wants an entire new staff. So this is a bizarre point for you to make.

And on your second point, you are not right

For example, the starters on offense that were carryovers from 2010 in 2011 were:

QB - Smith
RB - Gore
FB - Norris
WR - Crabtree
WR - Morgan
OT - Staley
OG - Iupati
OG - Rachal
OT - Davis
TE - Davis

The only starter that was changed from the 2010 team was Davis Baas, who was the starting C in 2010.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

For one, of course a change at the head coach level would require changes in assistants. No one has ever denied that. Of course with a new head coach comes a new staff. Not sure why you are arguing that point. Everyone who wants a coaching change now knows that and frankly probably wants an entire new staff. So this is a bizarre point for you to make.

And on your second point, you are not right

For example, the starters on offense that were carryovers from 2010 in 2011 were:

QB - Smith
RB - Gore
FB - Norris
WR - Crabtree
WR - Morgan
OT - Staley
OG - Iupati
OG - Rachal
OT - Davis
TE - Davis

The only starter that was changed from the 2010 team was Davis Baas, who was the starting C in 2010.

I am not arguing that point. I think that if you go back, you find that it is others who are arguing with me over this.

Here are the starters from 2010 to 2011.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sfo/2010_roster.htm

2010:

QB Alex Smith
RB Frank Gore
FB Moran Norris
WR Michael Crabtree
WR Josh Morgan
TE Vernon Davis
TE Delanie Walker
LT Joe Staley
LG Mike Iupati
C David Baas
RG Chilo Rachal
RT Anthony Davis
Defensive Starters
LDE Isaac Sopoaga
NT Aubrayo Franklin
RDE Justin Smith*
LOLB Manny Lawson
LILB Takeo Spikes
RILB Patrick Willis*+
ROLB Parys Haralson
LCB Shawntae Spencer
RCB Nate Clements
FS Dashon Goldso


2011:

QB Alex Smith
RB Frank Gore*
FB Bruce Miller
WR Michael Crabtree
TE Vernon Davis
LT Joe Staley*
LG Mike Iupati
C Jonathan Goodwin
RG Adam Snyder
RT Anthony Davis
Defensive Starters
LDE Ray McDonald
NT Isaac Sopoaga
RDE Justin Smith*+
LOLB Ahmad Brooks
LILB NaVorro Bowman+
RILB Patrick Willis*+
ROLB Parys Haralson
LCB Carlos Rogers*
RCB Tarell Brown
SS Donte Whitner
FS Dashon Goldson*

 

[Sydla]

Your link is incomplete. For example, in 2011 it shows no starting WR opposite of Crabtree. That WR who started a majority of the games opposite Crabtree in 2011 was Morgan. Further, it shows, Miller as the starting FB in 2011, but Norris actually was the starter but then got benched. Same with Rachal who started the season at RG but was also replaced.

It's an argument of semantics. The 49ers did not make sweeping changes to their roster in 2011. The majority of their offensive starters to start the year were hold overs from the previous team.

Yes, the defense saw more starters but that was because they switched to a 3-4................ but note, that the "new" players that started in the 3-4 in 2011 were already on the roster - Ray McDonald was already on the roster when he became the starter at DE. Bowman was already on the roster when he started at ILB next to Willis. Ahmad Brooks was also on the roster when he started at OLB in 2011.

The fact is, there wasn't a ton of change in San Fran other than what happened at the coaching level - new coaches, new schemes. And yet despite those scheme changes, especially on defense going to a 3-4, the 49ers went 13-3 in Harbaugh's first year. So Harbaugh is another example of a coach making a difference in one season and that bringing in a new coach to replace Garrett doesn't mean we have to go through growing pains.

 

[ConstantReboot]

No Catch. That's not what would happen. It takes time to build continuity. It would not be an overnight thing. There isn't a Coach out there as good as Parcells and he could not win overnight here. Payton would not win overnight here either. I like Payton, he was my first choice as a replacement when we got rid of Parcells but it's not going to be an overnight thing. If you want to say that we should make a move now to start over, then OK. I would understand that but, I don't kid myself. It would mean that we are probably throwing away the last years of Tony's career.

Why would Payton not be a winner here? He has already coached Romo before and knows how to use it. I'm sure he will take what Romo can and can't do and run with it.

I'm all for getting Payton here. Garrett has done absolutely nothing to make the proper changes to make this into a winning franchise. Heck, Garrett and his playbook is the one thats holding back the team. Its Garrett's inability to make changes that is hurting this team. WE need change in a bad way and keeping Garrett just hurts the team further on.

Tony's last years are being wasted because of Garrett. Its also tearing the lockerroom apart. The time to make changes is now. If we can get Payton now why wait at the end of the season? It probably won't happen - but if the team wants to change its entire philosophy overnight. Then Payton is a good bet to do it with.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Your link is incomplete. For example, in 2011 it shows no starting WR opposite of Crabtree. That WR who started a majority of the games opposite Crabtree in 2011 was Morgan. Further, it shows, Miller as the starting FB in 2011, but Norris actually was the starter but then got benched. Same with Rachal who started the season at RG but was also replaced.

It's an argument of semantics. The 49ers did not make sweeping changes to their roster in 2011. The majority of their offensive starters were hold overs.

Yes, the defense saw more starters but that was because they switched to a 3-4................ but note, that the "new" players that started in the 3-4 in 2011 were already on the roster - Ray McDonald was already on the roster when he became the starter at DE. Bowman was already on the roster when he started at ILB next to Willis. Ahmad Brooks was also on the roster when he started at OLB in 2011.

The fact is, there wasn't a ton of change in San Fran other than what happened at the coaching level - new coaches, new schemes. And yet despite those scheme changes, especially on defense going to a 3-4, the 49ers went 13-3 in Harbaugh's first year. So Harbaugh isn't some proof of your stance that a new coach means it's likely a rebuild and that culture change means growing pains.

I don't agree. There was a significant degree of change in personnel but lets say we just talk about coaching. do realize that if we are just talking about coaching, that represents a change in both Offensive scheme and Defensive scheme. That alone is a huge change.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Why would Payton not be a winner here? He has already coached Romo before and knows how to use it. I'm sure he will take what Romo can and can't do and run with it.

I'm all for getting Payton here. Garrett has done absolutely nothing to make the proper changes to make this into a winning franchise. Heck, Garrett and his playbook is the one thats holding back the team. Its Garrett's inability to make changes that is hurting this team. WE need change in a bad way and keeping Garrett just hurts the team further on.

Tony's last years are being wasted because of Garrett. Its also tearing the lockerroom apart. The time to make changes is now. If we can get Payton now why wait at the end of the season? It probably won't happen - but if the team wants to change its entire philosophy overnight. Then Payton is a good bet to do it with.

Read the rest of the thread, this question will likely be answered for you.

 

[Sydla]

I don't agree. There was a significant degree of change in personnel but lets say we just talk about coaching. do realize that if we are just talking about coaching, that represents a change in both Offensive scheme and Defensive scheme. That alone is a huge change.

You can disagree all you want but facts don't support you.

The opening day starting line up for the 2011 49ers offense had ten starters that were hold overs from the 2010 team and the defense had 7 players starting that were on the roster in 2010 as well. So of the opening day 22 starters............... 17 were on the roster in 2010.

How anyone can argue significant personnel change is puzzling.

And yes, a new coaching staff means new schemes. But Harbaugh brought new schemes to 49ers.......... won right away. Ariens brought new schemes to Arizona.......... won right away. Kelly brought a bizarre college offense and switched to a 3-4 in Philly and won the division his first year. Payton brought new schemes to NO............. won right away.

At this point, I am not even sure what the heck you are arguing at this point. Yes, new coaches bring new schemes. But as we have shown, just because you have a new coach that brings in new schemes doesn't mean your team has to take a step back. There are quite a few examples of coaches taking over programs, bringing in new schemes (And in some cases, new players) and they won right from the jump.

 

[ConstantReboot]

Read the rest of the thread, this question will likely be answered for you.

I have read the rest of the thread. You can win immediately with a new coach. Payton has been around the block long enough to know what works on offense and he has Romo.

Garrett has done absolutely nothing to warrant keeping as coach. Its time for a change and change can happen immediately.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I have read the rest of the thread. You can win immediately with a new coach. Payton has been around the block long enough to know what works on offense and he has Romo.

Garrett has done absolutely nothing to warrant keeping as coach. Its time for a change and change can happen immediately.

If you have read the entire thread, then what is the driving force for a coach like Payton to come and coach in Dallas?

 

[Sydla]

Oh and guess what? Even if Garrett stays, the personnel still has to be changed anyway........ we need at least 2 LBs, more secondary help, more DL help, likely another WR and another TB.

So trying to refute the Harbaugh example by saying they had significant personnel change is strange when we have to make some serious changes anyway to our personnel too.

 

[ConstantReboot]

If you have read the entire thread, then what is the driving force for a coach like Payton to come and coach in Dallas?

Possibly won't happen since Jerry likes a puppet like Garrett.

We are a cursed organization. We will never become a winning franchise as long as Jerry doesn't see it as a problem. If Garrett remains coach we are still doomed to mediocrity for a very long time.

But if by chance Payton announces he'd like to coach for the Cowboys - the impact will be immediate. Our offense will finally start going in the right direction once again - with or without Romo.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

No. According to that link, Almost half the teams starters turned over from one year to the other. You can say that they were already there but they weren't starting, which is the point.

Here are my original statements:

Coaching changes mean starting over. Starting over means that you probably waste another two seasons of Tony's career.



Garrett isn't going anywhere people. Move on.

It is absolutely true. A new coach means a new scheme, it means a new coaching staff, it means personnel changes, it also probably means change in the management and in the scouting staff. Payton is not Garrett or Wade or any number of other coaches. Payton has skins on the wall and I do not believe that he would be a yes man coach who just goes along with whatever Jerry says. He doesn't have to. He will have options.

Both of these statements are true. It is you who are arguing with me over the validity of each of those. There is no argument. What I said is true and there will be no change of Head Coach.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Oh and guess what? Even if Garrett stays, the personnel still has to be changed anyway........ we need at least 2 LBs, more secondary help, more DL help, likely another WR and another TB.

So trying to refute the Harbaugh example by saying they had significant personnel change is strange when we have to make some serious changes anyway to our personnel too.

There will not be serious changes to the personnel because there will be no head coaching changes. We might see a RB and we might see a Safety. We might see a RT but we won't see whole sale changes to the starters. Not going to happen but you can continue to push this agenda. Won't chance a thing IMO.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Possibly won't happen since Jerry likes a puppet like Garrett.

We are a cursed organization. We will never become a winning franchise as long as Jerry doesn't see it as a problem. If Garrett remains coach we are still doomed to mediocrity for a very long time.

But if by chance Payton announces he'd like to coach for the Cowboys - the impact will be immediate. Our offense will finally start going in the right direction once again - with or without Romo.

If a really good coach came to Dallas, then I would agree because that would likely mean that he has full control. The problem is that this is not going to happen. Any really good HC will not come here because they will not put themselves in a situation where they are taking orders from Jerry. If one did come here, it would probably be to end their careers and just make one last big payday.

The problem here is that I tell the truth but people don't like what I'm saying and then they somehow confuse the truth with a misguided opinion that the truth is what I want. It's not what I want to see but it is the truth.

 

[Sydla]

No. According to that link, Almost half the teams starters turned over from one year to the other. You can say that they were already there but they weren't starting, which is the point.

But if there are major roster personnel changes, wouldn't that mean that you'd find starters from OUTSIDE your current roster? But they didn't. 17 of their opening day starters in 2011 came from THEIR OWN ROSTER from 2010. And the offense, that made a complete shift in scheme from west coast to power running, started the year with 10 starters who were starters from the previous year.

And in the end, none of this really changes the underlying point. The idea that if we make a coaching change now means we are likely destined to have to go through growing pains is a total stretch.

There are examples where new coaches came in and won right away. New schemes, new players, whatever. There are coaches that won right away.

And your arguing in the Harbaugh point is even sillier when you think about it. Not only did Harbaugh apparently bring in two new schemes on both sides of the ball, he brought in new players according to you and STILL WON 13 games. And by the way, wasn't the 2011 preseason shortened by the lockout? So he had even less normal practice time and still won 13 games.

So explain to me again how if we change coaches we can't win right out of the gate under a new coach?

 

[ConstantReboot]

If a really good coach came to Dallas, then I would agree because that would likely mean that he has full control. The problem is that this is not going to happen. Any really good HC will not come here because they will not put themselves in a situation where they are taking orders from Jerry. If one did come here, it would probably be to end their careers and just make one last big payday.

The problem here is that I tell the truth but people don't like what I'm saying and then they somehow confuse the truth with a misguided opinion that the truth is what I want. It's not what I want to see but it is the truth.

Well most of your post was that Payton would not have an immediate effect here in Dallas and that it will take a long time. I don't think you were referring to anything about Jerry and how his reluctance to not make the big change. If I missed that part so be it.

But the thing is that this is the rant zone right? Thus this is where we bring in our rants about Garrett or Jerry and the Cowboys organization as a whole. Otherwise if they want the truth - they can call it the truthzone.

 

[Sydla]

Bruce Ariens doesn't have complete control. Hrabaugh didn't have complete control in San Fran (which led to his eventual leaving). Kelly didn't have complete control when he started in Philly.

So no, the Cowboys don't necessarily have to hire a guy that is going to demand complete control.