Something I didn't realize

[wileedog]

The Eagles JV? Because they didn't play Vick?

They didn't play ANYBODY. 7 starters were in street clothes inactive.

And now Kolb with his 3 career starts is 'experienced?'

TThe point of discussion was whether the team raised it's level of play after Garrett took over, and it appears you agree with me on that.

I do, but I'm worried how much of that was a 'new boss in charge' bump and how much was real improvement.

Like I said, next year with his own system and players we can judge better.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

2nd half:

Giants
Indy
Saints
Philly
Philly Bench.

That's only 5 playoff teams, and really technically 4.

Giants didn't make the playoffs.

So it was Indy, Saints, and Philly. Of course Philly's JV (nice) wouldn't make the playoffs. And the bad teams we played were really bad.

 

[dbair1967]

We played 3 games against playoff teams in the 1st 8 games, and 6 games against playoff teams in the last 8 games.

We lost to the Skins and Giants under Wade, and beat the Skins and Giants under JG.

We scored 161 points in 8 games under Wade (20 ppg), and 233 points in 8 games under JG (29 ppg).

We could only find a way to win 1 game the 1st 8 games (12.5% winning percetage), and we found a way to win 5 games the last 8 games 62.5% winning percentage).

I just don't see how this can't be seen as an elevated level of play in the 2nd half of the year.

Dont go throwing facts into any of these arguments.

 

[Stautner]

They didn't play ANYBODY. 7 starters were in street clothes inactive.

And now Kolb with his 3 career starts is 'experienced?'



I do, but I'm worried how much of that was a 'new boss in charge' bump and how much was real improvement.

Like I said, next year with his own system and players we can judge better.

Kolb had 5 starts this year - don't know where you came up with 2 unless you skipped 2010 altogether. If you will remember he went into the season as the No.1 QB and Vick only got his chance when Kolb got injured. Later in the year Vick missed games with injury and Kolb started more.

I'm not saying Kolb is a long time NFL QB, but before that game he had thrown for 1,920 yards and McGee had thrown for 111 yards. A bit of a discrepency, don't you think? Not to mention that Kolb was considered starting material and the QB of the future by his team and only lost that status when his injury replacement excelled. On the other hand, McGee was a 3rd string project QB drafted in the 4th or 5th round with no hint of being ready to play, much less be tabbed as the QB of the future like Kolb.

And we lost one star WR, played most of the year without a starting DE, were working in rookies like Lee, Brandon Williams, Church and others, and still were stuck with duds like Colombo and Ball in the lineup.

It's ludicrous to act as if we were playing fully loaded and the Eagles were strapped.

 

[birdwells1]

Means he knows how to win with a 2nd and 3rd string QB and the loss of his best receiver.

I thought the standard around here was Super Bowls, Landry, and Johnson not Wade Phillips. People around here continue to compare Garrett to Wade as if that alone justifies his hiring. To judge the job Garrett did I think you would have to compare the last 8 games to the 2009 season. If you do that then they're probably pretty much even. I take out the first 8 games because that is an abberation in Cowboys recent history and anything judged against that will look good.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Kolb had 5 starts this year - don't know where you came up with 2 unless you skipped 2010 altogether. If you will remember he went into the season as the No.1 QB and Vick only got his chance when Kolb got injured. Later in the year Vick missed games with injury and Kolb started more.

I'm not saying Kolb is a long time NFL QB, but before that game he had thrown for 1,920 yards and McGee had thrown for 111 yards. A bit of a discrepency, don't you think? Not to mention that Kolb was considered starting material and the QB of the future by his team and only lost that status when his injury replacement excelled. On the other hand, McGee was a 3rd string project QB drafted in the 4th or 5th round with no hint of being ready to play, much less be tabbed as the QB of the future like Kolb.

And we lost one star WR, played most of the year without a starting DE, were working in rookies like Lee, Brandon Williams, Church and others, and still were stuck with duds like Colombo and Ball in the lineup.

It's ludicrous to act as if we were playing fully loaded and the Eagles were strapped.

I think he was just referring to the fact that they were both backup QB's, and while we played with all of our starters, they did play with backups, and third stringers, and a good portion of their practice squad too actually.

So we really should have had a huge advantage.

 

[wileedog]

Giants didn't make the playoffs.

So it was Indy, Saints, and Philly. Of course Philly's JV (nice) wouldn't make the playoffs. And the bad teams we played were really bad.

Yeah, was posting real quick and brainfarted. Although in fairness despite their win the Giants are probably still a better team than the Seahawks.

 

[wileedog]

It's ludicrous to act as if we were playing fully loaded and the Eagles were strapped.

I understand we were playing with McGee. But that's that's it. Other than Dez and maybe Spears that was the only major injuries or guys we were sitting.

And yeah, I was posting real quick and didn't look up Kolb's starts. Should have done that. Still, you called him a "veteran" QB, which he clearly is not.

The Eagles de-activated most of their best players. They had 2nd and 3rd stringers out there across the board. I'm not saying we were 'loaded', I'm saying the Eagles put nothing on the field. They were playing not to get injured.

 

[WoodysGirl]

Don't you think the penalties are part of the level of play? What I mean is, if somehow the penalty problem that we have had the last few years improved after Garrett took over, wouldn't that equate to the level of play improving? After all, level of play isn't just about individual ability to make a play, its about the overall ability to consistently do the job.

The penalty problem actually began improving under Wade. It continued under Garrett. I don't give credit to JG for that.

I also have a hard time believing that a team that was 1-7 with Wade and playing mostly bottom teams that didn't even sniff the playoffs didn't have to raise their level of play to go 5-3 against mostly playoff level teams.

I agree. They raised their level of play from the depth they spiraled to the last two games of Wade's tenure.

 

[Kevinicus]

Why does everyone give Garrett credit for the penalties? The penalties went down while Wade was still the coach.

And to say the team didn't give effort in the first 6 games is stupid. Wade got effort until Romo went down.
And one has to question if Garrett got the team to play hard again, or if Jerry did (or a combination of the two).

Pretty much the only reason there was a record difference is turnovers. That is the one major thing that was different under Garrett.

I think some people just think since the team was 1-7 they were just completely void of talent and couldn't compete with anyone, so they're amazed at a few victories and want to ignore the negatives. The truth is that the Cowboys, even after Romo went down were one of the most talented teams in the league and should be expected to hang in and compete against anyone. I don't think 5 wins should have surprised anyone, in fact it should have been expected if the team pulled their heads out of their posteriors. Thankfully they did and were able to win some games, but they could have been better and were pretty sloppy much of the time. Garrett still has a long way to go.

 

[Cowboyslife]

Yeah, was posting real quick and brainfarted. Although in fairness despite their win the Giants are probably still a better team than the Seahawks.

But the Seahawks knocked off the defending champs...

 

[Stautner]

I think he was just referring to the fact that they were both backup QB's, and while we played with all of our starters, they did play with backups, and third stringers, and a good portion of their practice squad too actually.

So we really should have had a huge advantage.

Playing a 3rd string developmental QB that had never started an NFL game may not completely take away whatever advantage we should have had, but at the very least it comes darn close.

We are talking about the pivitol offensive position, and the guy that controls the action - they had their projected long time starting QB at the helm, and we had a 3rd string developmental QB that had never started an NFL game.

Did anyone expect him to put up 30?

Think about it - suppose we had been able to use Kitna and they were using a 3rd string QB that few NFL fans had ever even heard of and who had nevers started a game? How would that have affected expectations for the game? Well, it works both ways.

When you add that our 3rd string developmental QB had to rely on Manny Johnson as a target, and add the fact that we were never as good a team as the Eagles to begin with (meaning that we were more handicapped to begin with, so losses impact us more), then I don't really see much of an advantage.

I understand we were playing with McGee. But that's that's it. Other than Dez and maybe Spears that was the only major injuries or guys we were sitting.

And yeah, I was posting real quick and didn't look up Kolb's starts. Should have done that. Still, you called him a "veteran" QB, which he clearly is not.

The Eagles de-activated most of their best players. They had 2nd and 3rd stringers out there across the board. I'm not saying we were 'loaded', I'm saying the Eagles put nothing on the field. They were playing not to get injured.

4 years in the league doesn't mean you are a veteran? The term "veteran" doesn't only apply to long time starters, it applies to guys with experience in th eleague. I didn't call him a veteran starter, although he had started a number of NFL games and was the planned Eagles starter this year and for years to come had he not got hurt and opened the door for Vick.

The bottom line is Kolb had quality NFL experience and had already been deemed to be the Eagles starter for years to come, and McGee was a 3rd string developmental guy with no experience.

I understand the Eagles deactivated a number of players, but they were a better team with better depth - on top of Kolb, who, again, the Eagles had already determined to be a starting caliber QB, they had Harrison at RB, who is explosive and has put up some big numbers in limited time in Cleveland last year and who has more 100 yard rushing games than Felix and Choice combined, Avant catches 40-50 passes a year - they were short handed, but not handcuffed.

Why does everyone give Garrett credit for the penalties? The penalties went down while Wade was still the coach.

And to say the team didn't give effort in the first 6 games is stupid. Wade got effort until Romo went down.
And one has to question if Garrett got the team to play hard again, or if Jerry did (or a combination of the two).

Pretty much the only reason there was a record difference is turnovers. That is the one major thing that was different under Garrett.

I think some people just think since the team was 1-7 they were just completely void of talent and couldn't compete with anyone, so they're amazed at a few victories and want to ignore the negatives. The truth is that the Cowboys, even after Romo went down were one of the most talented teams in the league and should be expected to hang in and compete against anyone. I don't think 5 wins should have surprised anyone, in fact it should have been expected if the team pulled their heads out of their posteriors. Thankfully they did and were able to win some games, but they could have been better and were pretty sloppy much of the time. Garrett still has a long way to go.

I don't give Jason credit for the penalties improving, but neither do I ignore the fact that penatlies improved under Garrett.

And I don't recall anyone saying the team was void of talent. The consensus has always been that there is talent, but there are holes.

The bottom line is you can talk about the turnovers, penalties or whatever, but those things are part of the game, and they are part of what coaches deal with, and the Cowboys dealt with those things much better the 2nnd half of the season and found ways to win in the 2nd half of the season despite playing a much tougher schedule than they did the 1st half.

Of course Garrett has a way to go - never said that he didn't. All I have said is that the team clearly improved the 2nd half of the year under Garrett.

 

[wileedog]

4 years in the league doesn't mean you are a veteran? The term "veteran" doesn't only apply to long time starters, it applies to guys with experience in th eleague. I didn't call him a veteran starter, although he had started a number of NFL games and was the planned Eagles starter this year and for years to come had he not got hurt and opened the door for Vick.

He has 319 career pass attempts (in a pass happy offense). That's about half a season's worth.

I don't care how long he's sat on the bench, no one would call a guy with a half a season worth of playing time a 'veteran' QB.

Does he have more than McGee? Sure. But he's not a frontline starter either.

I understand the Eagles deactivated a number of players, but they were a better team with better depth - on top of Kolb, who, again, the Eagles had already determined to be a starting caliber QB, they had Harrison at RB, who is explosive and has put up some big numbers in limited time in Cleveland last year and who has more 100 yard rushing games than Felix and Choice combined, Avant catches 40-50 passes a year - they were short handed, but not handcuffed.

The point is you called them a playoff team. Are you really trying to put across the idea that the Eagles playing without Vick, without Jackson, without most of the starting personnel on the lines like Cole are the equivalent of a playoff caliber team?

I understand we were playing with McGee, but we did not play well with our starting unit against their backups. Period. And to say that was against a quality opponent when it was really a team just trying to get through a game without any injuries is silly.

 

[The Realist]

Why does everyone give Garrett credit for the penalties? The penalties went down while Wade was still the coach.

And to say the team didn't give effort in the first 6 games is stupid. Wade got effort until Romo went down.
And one has to question if Garrett got the team to play hard again, or if Jerry did (or a combination of the two).

Pretty much the only reason there was a record difference is turnovers. That is the one major thing that was different under Garrett.

I think some people just think since the team was 1-7 they were just completely void of talent and couldn't compete with anyone, so they're amazed at a few victories and want to ignore the negatives. The truth is that the Cowboys, even after Romo went down were one of the most talented teams in the league and should be expected to hang in and compete against anyone. I don't think 5 wins should have surprised anyone, in fact it should have been expected if the team pulled their heads out of their posteriors. Thankfully they did and were able to win some games, but they could have been better and were pretty sloppy much of the time. Garrett still has a long way to go.

If the only difference was turnovers, then apparently Garrett on 1.5 days notice to take over as HC can coach creating turnovers better than Wade can in 25-30+ years of coaching D in the NFL can.

Total night and day.

 

[Stautner]

He has 319 career pass attempts (in a pass happy offense). That's about half a season's worth.

I don't care how long he's sat on the bench, no one would call a guy with a half a season worth of playing time a 'veteran' QB.

Does he have more than McGee? Sure. But he's not a frontline starter either.

The point is you called them a playoff team. Are you really trying to put across the idea that the Eagles playing without Vick, without Jackson, without most of the starting personnel on the lines like Cole are the equivalent of a playoff caliber team?

I understand we were playing with McGee, but we did not play well with our starting unit against their backups. Period. And to say that was against a quality opponent when it was really a team just trying to get through a game without any injuries is silly.

Thje Eagles considered Kolb a starter - again, Kolb was already tabbed as the Eagles QB for the long term and only lost that status because of injury and how Vick played, not because the Eagles soured on him. Hell, the Cowboys haven't even committed to McGee as a backup, much less anything beyond that. He will still have to comein and prove himself worth y of being the 3rd teamer next year.

Here's the bottom line - we had a QB that was certain to suffer from first start jitters and who didn't even have the benefit of any experience to know he could play at an NFL level, and they had a player who the organization had backed as the starting QB for the long term and who had a proven ability to put up some big numbers (several 300+ yard games). That's a huge discrepency.

Again, did you really expect McGee to lead teh team to 3 or 4 TD's? Answer that.

And no, I am not considering the Eagles a playoff caliber team without all their players - if you took that from what I was saying the point flew right past you. The point is that the Cowboys weren't a playoff team even with their starters, and they have less depth at key positioins than the Eagles, so when you take away a few starters, including their QB and a starting WR, it hurts them more than it hurts the Eagles to lose starters. Especially when you consider some of the spots we lost we had to rely on 3rd teamers or practice squad guys like Manny Johnson to fill.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Playing a 3rd string developmental QB that had never started an NFL game may not completely take away whatever advantage we should have had, but at the very least it comes darn close.

We are talking about the pivitol offensive position, and the guy that controls the action - they had their projected long time starting QB at the helm, and we had a 3rd string developmental QB that had never started an NFL game.

Did anyone expect him to put up 30?

Think about it - suppose we had been able to use Kitna and they were using a 3rd string QB that few NFL fans had ever even heard of and who had nevers started a game? How would that have affected expectations for the game? Well, it works both ways.

When you add that our 3rd string developmental QB had to rely on Manny Johnson as a target, and add the fact that we were never as good a team as the Eagles to begin with (meaning that we were more handicapped to begin with, so losses impact us more), then I don't really see much of an advantage.

We did put up 17 points in one half against the Cardinals the week before under McGee. He finished that game with a QB rating over 100. I don't think we should have expected 30 points, but it certainly was a possibility considering the way he played the week before when he was just thrown into the game with no prep time. So i honestly thought he would be just fine against a group of practice squad guys and third stringers, considering he had a full week of reps and practice. It was a disappointing performance all around.

 

[Stautner]

We did put up 17 points in one half against the Cardinals the week before under McGee. He finished that game with a QB rating over 100. I don't think we should have expected 30 points, but it certainly was a possibility considering the way he played the week before when he was just thrown into the game with no prep time. So i honestly thought he would be just fine against a group of practice squad guys and third stringers, considering he had a full week of reps and practice. It was a disappointing performance all around.

Surely you aren't telling me that 17 points per half was your ongoing expectation for McGee after one half of football playing against the 5-11 Cardinals who were 29th in the NFL in yards allowed and 30th in points allowed per game?

And you keep telling me he was playing against a bunch of 3rd teamers and practice squad guys. What I heard was 7 starters didn't play for the Eagles. With Vick, Jackson, Maclin, McCoy and Celek not playing, that could have only left a maximum of 2 on the defense.

 

[wileedog]

And you keep telling me he was playing against a bunch of 3rd teamers and practice squad guys. What I heard was 7 starters didn't play for the Eagles. With Vick, Jackson, Maclin, McCoy and Celek not playing, that could have only left a maximum of 2 on the defense.

7 is how many were completely inactive, they were in street clothes.

Just because a lot of the other starters were suited up doesn't mean they spent significant time in the field.

 

[Stautner]

7 is how many were completely inactive, they were in street clothes.

Just because a lot of the other starters were suited up doesn't mean they spent significant time in the field.

And it doesn't mean they didn't spend significant time on the field either.

The bottom line you can't nit pick every single factor as if it is THE factor - and you can't change the fact that even if there were some defensive players that didn't play much that it was a QB with even less experience that had to try and take advantage of it. Sure they had more people out than we did, but like I said, us having a QB that we aren't even sure is worthy of being a 2nd, or even a 3rd teamer counteracts a lot of that.

Face it, McGee was 11-27 for 127 yards, and that shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone regardless of who he was playing. It's absolutely ridiculous to suggest the standard expectation for any young NFL QB would be to step into his 1st start and be just fine, and that's especially true with a project player who had never even so much as had mop up work before the previous week. It would be ridiculous to expect anything less than a drop off.

 

[Cowboys2008]

Jason instantly had them playing good. It really wasn't until we had been mathmatically eliminated from the playoffs where the play started to dip back down towards pathetic. And even still, that was during a major QB shuffle with Kitna going down and McGee having to come in, not to mention the absence of Dez and a hurt RW. And then who can forget the hobble show of Felix, the 2-3 time limp he'd exhibit each game having to go off the field- you can't tell me he was 100%. Add in Barber to the injured, an unsure OL playing for their Cowboy lives, and we won't even get into the DB probs we started having or the other defensive side troubles that arose around the end of the year.

Bottom line though, the mountain continued growing towards impossible, yet some how Jason kept that team focused enough and going straight to get all the way to 5-3. And like the OP said, a hair away from 8-0. Impressive if you ask me. All in all, it's no wonder to me why Garrett has been retained.