Sturm's Morning After: Cowboys have a coaching mess; Garrett ignores reality of the underdog

[xwalker]

So when we are 0-7, 0-8 or 0-9 without Romo its ok cause vanilla boy has nothing to do with it?

The theory now is that backup QB's are never supposed to win anymore in the nfl

You would be irrate if another team beat the Cowboys with Romo and Dez healthy and the other team's QB was Weed or Cassel.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

A significant amount of the blame for the issues you just stated lies with Garret. How do you reconcile that?

Also, how do you and X reconcile the fact that other teams are winning all over the league with back-up QB's regularly, yet this team is on a 5 game skid.

My biggest issue isn't as much the five losses in a row, it is how they have transpired. This team has been flat-out out-coached for weeks in a row. I agree, you need to limit mistakes with a backup QB in there, but you have to have the ability as a coaching staff to adapt to a changing atmosphere IN GAME. When the other team starts to figure you out and you stop being able to move the ball, something has to change. You can't rest on your laurels. Thats not coaching.

I am generally with you and especially X on almost everything, but I can't side with anyone absolving Garret of a great deal of responsibility in the uneven, spotty and mistake riddled mess of a team. Furthermore, these are issues that have plagued this team for years. They had Garrett on the hot seat after three 8-8 seasons. A 12-4 season doesn't erase that.

Is it all on Garrett? Absolutely not. There is a great deal of blame to go around coupled with the injuries. Garrett's inability to adapt and/or make decisions under pressure has handcuffed this team far more than the QB position in my opinion.

 

[cml750]

Maybe he was. Maybe he wasn't a very good head coach in Cleveland, and he needed to get fired, and spend a few more years as an assistant under a truly great coach before he realized what changes he needed to make, and what work he needed to do to become a great coach.

Maybe Pete Carroll needed to get fired twice in the NFL, and move down to the College game for a while before he realized what did and didn't work for him and what it would take for him to be a great NFL coach.

Jason Garrett hasn't faced that kind of adversity. He's had everything handed to him on a silver platter since the moment he was hired as offensive coordinator. Maybe he doesn't reach his potential until he goes through some of those tribulations, or maybe he's just not a good coach and never will be.

Either way, the current set-up doesn't appear to be working.

Excellent post!!!

 

[texbumthelife]

You would be irrate if another team beat the Cowboys with Romo and Dez healthy and the other team's QB was Weed or Cassel.

So you're saying we should never want or expect to beat the odds? What is with all these "ifs"?

We've lost five in a row, 3 of them to terrible teams. One was winless! In doing so, the team has made little to no on-field adjustments, even though they've had leads in what, four of those games?

 

[Sydla]

I don't reconcile it. I consider it all his responsibility. I just don't know how to say that in a way that anybody actually believes me, apparently.

Because in the process of saying this, you then want to butt heads with those who want to lay blame on Garrett. That's what is bizarre, at least to me.

We sit at 2-5 because Garrett is just not a very good coach. He's not the sole or only reason we are where we are, but he's a big reason along with the QB. For all the reasons you stated in a previous post, for his seemingly inability to adjust on the fly in games, to his conservative thinking at crucial times................. all of that. It's why Garrett is an issue now............ one of a few issues, yes.

 

[DenCWBY]

Garrett can't coach period.

I'll say this. He's not a good enough coach to adjust the offense in dire situations to win. I mean Denver totally rewrote their offense in mid season for Tebow and won a playoff game. That offensive genius is now HC for San Diego and struggling.
Some probably most Offensive Coordinators should be left at that position and never put into a head coaching role. Garrett never was a "great" offensive strategist that I can recall. I don't even know if Garrett could be a competent OC at this point. We need offensive minds right now, not cheerleaders.

 

[xwalker]

Excuses are like *******s.

We were leading that game and they made adjustments. We didn't. That has happened how many of the last five games? Of the five games we've lost, two were to a team with a winning record. We are losing to bad teams. Regardless of who was their QB.

When Weed or Cassel are your QB you don't need excuses. It just reality that you are highly likely to loose.

Anybody would have said at the beginning of the season that the Cowboy would be unlikely to win if Romo didn't play regardless of the coaching.

Losing is difficult and it's easier to blame the coaches or somebody instead of just taking the losses like a man.

 

[MRV52]

The coaches are always wrong when they don't win regardless of the probabilities involved.

If they had gone for it and didn't make it, the same people saying they should have gone for it would be saying it was the wrong call to go for it.

5 times is a bit too much, coaches are at fault in some of them.

 

[Sydla]

Or the coaching overachieved to keep the games as close as they've been. With a HC like Campo and his OC they would get blown out of all of them.

LOL. Why do you keep bringing up bad coaches? It's the most bizarrely insane tactic in this entire thread.

It's like arguing Milwaukee Best is a great beer when compared to the beer that has been sitting in an open container on the counter for the last 3 months.

 

[xwalker]

So you're saying we should never want or expect to beat the odds? What is with all these "ifs"?

We've lost five in a row, 3 of them to terrible teams. One was winless! In doing so, the team has made little to no on-field adjustments, even though they've had leads in what, four of those games?

The magic in game adjustment is another fan calling card.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

I'll say this. He's not a good enough coach to adjust the offense in dire situations to win. I mean Denver totally rewrote their offense in mid season for Tebow and won a playoff game. That offensive genius is now HC for San Diego and struggling.
Some probably most Offensive Coordinators should be left at that position and never put into a head coaching role. Garrett never was a "great" offensive strategist that I can recall. I don't even know if Garrett could be a competent OC at this point. We need offensive minds right now, not cheerleaders.

Excellent point

 

[Idgit]

At what point do you say screw the odds and just open things up? 2-7? 2-8? He's coaching not to lose and it aint workin. Wouldn't hurt my feelings to see him down the road.

I never say 'screw the odds.' Just play them and get the team better underneath where you're not good enough. What's the point of playing agains the odds? They're called 'odds' for a reason.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

The magic in game adjustment is another fan calling card.

Tell that to Bill B

 

[Sydla]

No, not really.

They have faced teams that had their starting QB and the Cowboys had backups. The probability is that they were going to lose. They don't have a dominant defense to makeup for having a scrub backup QB.

Just because you feel entitled to win with a backup QB over teams with their starter, it does not mean that it's coaching that prevented it from happening.

Yes, really. Shoot, you, yourself said that Garrett is likely a middle of the pack NFL coach. Which makes him average, mediocre, whatever word you want to use to describe middle of the pack.

A non-mediocre coach probably wins at least one of the last 5.

So frankly, you sound confused at this point.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

I never say 'screw the odds.' Just play them and get the team better underneath where you're not good enough. What's the point of playing agains the odds? They're called 'odds' for a reason.

At this point the team is what it is. Coaching has to put them in the best position to win. Conservative isn't working. If not for a special teams gaff we would have beat the Giants even after turning the ball over multiple times.

 

[xwalker]

Excuses are like *******s.

We were leading that game and they made adjustments. We didn't. That has happened how many of the last five games? Of the five games we've lost, two were to a team with a winning record. We are losing to bad teams. Regardless of who was their QB.

Opinions are like backsides, everybody has one.

Everyone gets an opinion even though half of those people are in the bottom half of the population in terms of intelligence.

 

[texbumthelife]

When Weed or Cassel are your QB you don't need excuses. It just reality that you are highly likely to loose.

Anybody would have said at the beginning of the season that the Cowboy would be unlikely to win if Romo didn't play regardless of the coaching.

Losing is difficult and it's easier to blame the coaches or somebody instead of just taking the losses like a man.

Right, so now my manhood is being questioned because I am calling out a coach who was on the hot seat just over a season ago? On a message board. A message board built for the reason of fans expressing their thoughts. Classy move, guy.

Cassell has won quite a few games and been to a Pro Bowl. Yeah, I expect to win A game with that guy. As far as Weeden goes, it was Garrett's call to run with him as the back-up and Garrett's call to stick with him.

You've got one of the best offensive lines in the league. You have a defense that has allowed 13 points in back to back games. You played a winless team and a 2 win team.

It's not a vaccuum where quarterback play is the only thing that matters, although that's great for your absolutely hilarious lack of ability to make any substantial argument.

But please, continue to enlighten me with you clever retorts and cutdowns.

 

[Idgit]

Because in the process of saying this, you then want to butt heads with those who want to lay blame on Garrett. That's what is bizarre, at least to me.

We sit at 2-5 because Garrett is just not a very good coach. He's not the sole or only reason we are where we are, but he's a big reason along with the QB. For all the reasons you stated in a previous post, for his seemingly inability to adjust on the fly in games, to his conservative thinking at crucial times................. all of that. It's why Garrett is an issue now............ one of a few issues, yes.

It's not bizarre at all. I blame him for the things I think he ought to be held responsible for, and don't blame him for the things I don't think he's doing wrong.

We're not 2-5 because he's not a good coach. We're 2-5 because we can't throw the ball effectively and we can't take it away. We can't throw the ball effectively because we don't have an good QB2 and we can't take it away because 'I don't really know why but it's probably got something to do with the man coverage and just plain old bad luck.'

Also, our ST coverage and return units aren't good enough because Garrett and others erred in assembling the talent on that side of the ball this season.

Winning in the NFL is hard. A coach can be a good coach and still responsible for bad decisions when he makes them. It just so happens that a lot of the stuff that normally masks those types of judgements got blown out of the water this year, and we've been badly exposed. I can acknowledge all that, and still think the coaching staff is good relative to the rest of the league and that we're still on the right track as an organization.

 

[Idgit]

Seattle isn't playing like two time champs. They really stink just like we do.

They're not playing like two-time champs. Or they haven't been. They looked pretty good this week, I thought.

Then again, this time last year they weren't playing that well, either. Then they turned it on. Getting 5-6 guys back healthy for Dallas might be the ignition they needed to spark another NFCW run. Who knows?

 

[Idgit]

At this point the team is what it is. Coaching has to put them in the best position to win. Conservative isn't working. If not for a special teams gaff we would have beat the Giants even after turning the ball over multiple times.

What if 'conservative' is the best position to win, and it's still not working? Because that might be the case right now.

We'd have definitely beaten the Giants if not for the gaffes. That's not an argument for gaffes.