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

[xwalker]

So then Shanahan won with Wade's players... You see how fallacious that logic is. Every situation is different... There are so many proofs of the incompetence of Jason, which becomes more and more apparent as time progresses, clearly demonstrating Wade got the shaft for this clown. For all the excuses Garrett gets, Wade isn't afforded any of them, though the reality is Wade was the one actually plagued by FO meddling and this FO has done everything to help Jason succeed, but he hasn't.

Wade had always maintained that he is against drafting a WR in the first round. That being said, Jerry leveraged a draft essentially to get Roy Williams to boost the 'struggling offense'. This was over a year before the team allegedly quite on Wade, meaning there was already recognition within the FO that the offense was struggling, before Wade ever 'lost the team' and the defense put up some duds after Garrett's offense couldn't move the ball. They also were, as I said, planning to hire Dan Reeves to oversee the running game, meaning irrespective of all the talk, the actions were clear that Jason Garrett was struggling and the FO was looking for ways to boost the offense. The offense was getting bashed because they weren't running the ball, but most homers wanted to blame that on Wade, because Garrett was their alleged savior. This despite the fact Wade didn't even touch the offense.

Even when he hired Linehan, Jerry mentioned coaches often gave lip service to the running game, but didn't run the ball. This was way after Wade left meaning, Jerry was clearly indicating Boy Wonder wasn't running the ball. When Rob Ryan was fired, the reason was he didn't generate TOs. And Garrett himself said that the offense could be more effective if the defense provided more chances, meaning he was looking for a scapegoat. But he continued to suck and he didn't score the ball, and was finally demoted. He couldn't even tolerate a well experienced coach like Callahan, who built the OL for that matter, to alter the offense for better.

The guy is a career politician... That's why he's latched onto Romo during basketball games...

No, that is not the logic that I've presented. The fact to Switzer won with Jimmy's players only indicates that the concept is possible. It does not indicate that it always happens or even that it happens a majority of the time. It only indicates that it can happen.

Most of the world knows that the Cowboys won the 1995 Super Bowl primarily because of Jimmy. He obtained the players and instilled an incredible sense of discipline and work ethic into them which carried over for a period of time but inevitably as more players retired or moved on in free agency that dissipated. Switzer was known for leaving the sideline to go to the bathroom, eating a hot dog on the sideline and going for twice on 4th down on their own end of the field.

Wade was/is a good D-Coordinator but was a bumbling goof as a Head Coach which is something that we've seen happen many times in the NFL.

 

[khiladi]

I like how this has devolved into now ripping Sturm for bias. He has been writing the same way and the same message for years. Go back and read anything from 2012-4. His message has been constant.

Classic…but it lets you know the desperation has set it.

And Sturm himself just wrote an article this off-season how he felt that Garrett, after last year, 'proved him wrong', which I clearly disagreed with. But as Boy Wonder often does, his constant lapse in judgment in the football fields earns unbiased eyes reasons to doubt him once again.

 

[xwalker]

I like how this has devolved into now ripping Sturm for bias. He has been writing the same way and the same message for years. Go back and read anything from 2012-4. His message has been constant.

Classic…but it lets you know the desperation has set it.

I'm not sure I would even call it bias. Just a piece pandering to fans. When the team is on multiple game losing streak, the amount of readers interested in the great details that he normally has in his work has probably dwindled significantly.

 

[khiladi]

No, that is not the logic that I've presented. The fact to Switzer won with Jimmy's players only indicates that the concept is possible. It does not indicate that it always happens or even that it happens a majority of the time. It only indicates that it can happen.

Most of the world knows that the Cowboys won the 1995 Super Bowl primarily because of Jimmy. He obtained the players and instilled an incredible sense of discipline and work ethic into them which carried over for a period of time but inevitably as more players retired or moved on in free agency that dissipated. Switzer was known for leaving the sideline to go to the bathroom, eating a hot dog on the sideline and going for twice on 4th down on their own end of the field.

Wade was/is a good D-Coordinator but was a bumbling goof as a Head Coach which is something that we've seen happen many times in the NFL.

So basically, you want me to believe in a discussion with you trying to prove Wade destroys teams, you were just demonstrating a 'logical possibility' with regards to Switzer and the Cowboys in the same breath.... It's also a 'logical possibility' that Shanahan has a SB, because of Wade's team... So what exactly were you trying to prove by raising the issue?

So tell me, did Wade leave the sidelines, eat a hot-dog and go for it twice on 4th down like Switzer? You know who did make a bumbling decision like that. Jason Garrett did, trying to go for it against the Commanders with no time left, Dallas needing like 80 yards to go and Choice ended up fumbling the ball on a check-down, with the Commanders running it back for a TD the year Wade got fired... Ate least Wade took the blame like a real man, unlike Garrett who hid for like 3 days from the media. Did Wade make as many bungling time management gaffes like Garrett, which are on par with Switzer's bone-headed decisions?

Wade was 13-3, 9-7, 10-6 and 1-7... That's 3 winning seasons and Dallas first play-off win in who knows how long and the losing season, Dallas was still looking for a number 2 receiver, who was suppose to make Garrett's offense magical.. If he didn't have Garrett, who knows how successful Romo could have been..

 

[xwalker]

Cassell has functioned as a NFL QB and won games in the NFL.

This isn't some crap QB that never wins and should be out of the league.

He is 33 now. He was never known for a really strong arm. Even many elite QB fall off around this age so a non-elite QB is even more likely to fall below the level of what is needed from an NFL QB when they get older. He also had a training camp and off-season with those teams.

 

[xwalker]

So basically, in a discussion with you trying to prove Wade destroys teams, you were just demonstrating a 'logical possibility' with regards to Switzer and the Cowboys in the same breath.... Sure... So tell me, did Wade leave the sidelines, eat a hot-dog and go for it twice on 4th down? You know who did make a bumbling decision like that. Jason Garrett did, trying to go for it against the Commanders with no time left, and Choice ended up fumbling the ball and the Commanders running it back for a TD the year Wade got fired...

Wade was 13-3, 9-7, 10-6 and 1-7... That's 3 winning seasons and Dallas first play-off win in who knows how long... If he didn't have Garrett, who knows how successful Romo could have been..

There is not point trying to have a reasonable debate with a guy that has a sig indicating his bias and hatred for Garrett.

 

[CATCH17]

He is 33 now. He was never known for a really strong arm. Even many elite QB fall off around this age so a non-elite QB is even more likely to fall below the level of what is needed from an NFL QB when they get older. He also had a training camp and off-season with those teams.

Keep telling yourself this.


We need a wizard at QB to win with Jason Garrett.

 

[khiladi]

There is not point trying to have a reasonable debate with a guy that has a sig indicating his bias and hatred for Garrett.

Because your not biased for Garrett.. Some people's biases are justified and some aren't...

 

[Idgit]

I'm not sure I would even call it bias. Just a piece pandering to fans. When the team is on multiple game losing streak, the amount of readers interested in the great details that he normally has in his work has probably dwindled significantly.

It's not bias at all. It's just his opinion, which he's perfectly entitled to. But for a guy who normally just provides great, detailed information, it's bound to happen that inserting opinions periodically is going to lead to not everybody agreeing with all of them. Saying you disagree with an opinion is not ripping on somebody for bias.

 

[xwalker]

Maybe... Never know now...

Is Randle worse than Antonio Bryant was?

I really don't know how significant the issues are with Randle. Some guys are just super immature and others will never "get it". Antonio Bryant has some type of legit psychological problem from what I understand. AntiSocial Personality Disorder or something like that.

One guy that is around the Cowboys thinks Randle had an emotional overload last week because several things happened to him in a short period of time. He got the report from the NFL that he is likely to be suspended at some point. He got the news that McFadden would be the starter. He had an injury that prevented him from what he probably saw as an opportunity to finally have a big game. He had some type of issue with his current Girlfriend. He had a few weeks prior of the media constantly harping on replacing him with C-Mike.

Antonio Bryant threw the Jersey in Parcells' face on just an average day in practice when he was not under any outside pressure.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

One...because Denver's defense is better than Seattle's right now. Two...the Dallas offense presented Seattle with little challenge, especially in the all-important fourth quarter. Three...the Dallas defense was on the field for 11 minutes of the fourth quarter (27 snaps). You could see they were gassed after the blocked FG. What I'm saying is they should have been more aggressive than simply going three runs and then out...putting those guys right back out there. The defense hands you a red-zone opportunity, a blocked FG and limits Seattle on third down conversions (until the last drive). Dallas needed Seattle's sense of urgency on offense in the fourth quarter, instead they had only Garrett's and Linehan's...in other words...how good does the defense need to be to mitigate the overt ineptitude of coaching as it pertains to the Cowboys?

Denver is better, probably playing the best of anybody in the league. but Seattle is still a very good tough defense. specially going against an undermanned offense in the worst way.

second, the defense was on the field 11 minutes in the 4th...but 5.5 of which came in that last drive after we went up 12-10. prior to that in the beginning of the 4th, they gave up another 5.5 minute drive....so up until the 4th quarter. TOP was dallas 27 minutes dallas. 18 minutes for seattle. so again it comes down to 4th quarter. in the beginning of the 4th, they should have been fresh. yet they gave up 3 first downs, and despite the blocked FG (which is the special teams btw) they allowed them to drive, attempt a field goal and get 50 yards. so in the 4th quarter, they gave up 10 of the games 19 first downs....and 130 yards of total 330. so once again the defense collapsed in the 4th quarter.

this fatigue stuff is BS. this defense is not that good. why would they be gassed in the beginning of the 4th quarter? and why not show the ability to make two crucial stops in the 4th quarter? how come all these other defenses can make stops, despite the TOP or how much they have been on the field. defense has made plenty of mistakes and has had plenty of missed opportunities.

and its obvious the coaches are not trusting the offense. its obvious why. both of these back up QBs have missed opportunities. cassel missed dez couple of times. missed Beasley on that last drive, missed williams. we missed some crucial blocks. a team limited offensively can't make those type of mistakes. and given that defense is full force now and we have had most of our investments on that side of the ball, they are way under performing. with the investment on that side of the ball and the type of players that were touted to be on defense, I expect a dominating, controlling defense like Denver or seattle or jets or cardinals. we got ZERO sacks against one of the worst OL in the league that had given up league high 31 sacks so far. yet we got a big fat zero for sacks.

the ineptitude of coaching extends to the defense with the type of investment in money & draft picks made on that side of the ball. teams are made in the 4th quarter and right now, offense, defense and special teams is failing in the 4th.

 

[khiladi]

Seattle drove the last drive, because they were running illegal picks. You can't engage your WR in a block when the ball isn't thrown and even Troy pointed out that egregious first down if I remember correctly. Nobody can defend that type of nonsense.

 

[CATCH17]

Seattle drove the last drive, because they were running illegal picks.

Yep...

2 big 3rd down conversions that they knew the refs wouldn't call at that point in the game.

 

[khiladi]

Yep...

2 big 3rd down conversions that they knew the refs wouldn't call at that point in the game.

That was so blatant and for the NFL to act like they are going to call these plays this year is a joke. It clearly lends credence to the fact that they dictated the outcome of the game, especially after they called that same penalty on McFadden when there was no such thing. That Seattle WR was blocking the CB from the snap and drove him up like 7 yards to clear the area.

 

[xwalker]

Because your not biased for Garrett.. Some people's biases are justified and some aren't...

No, I don't have any particular affection for Garrett. It's all just logic to me.

You need to be realistic. It's not like you can just replace Garrett with Belichick. Many many HC hires fail in the NFL. Just look at the Skins history of Head Coaches that failed. Jerry is still the owner and will not give another HC full control like Jimmy had or even what Parcells had. I'm not sure that I blame him either. Look at what Chip Kelly did when he got full control. He made many personnel moves which could set the team back for years if he can't make them work and is replaced by another HC.

Even Jimmy gave away some young developmental player in his final year because he didn't expect to be around much longer. He traded a young LB to his buddy Wannstedt in Chicago for basically nothing. Some scouts told Jerry this player had a lot of potential and while never publicized, this caused a significant rift between Jimmy and Jerry.

If you don't understand how bad Wade was long term for the team, then it's basically impossible to discuss the Cowboys HC issue. The core of all good teams is strong locker-room chemistry and Wade completely obliterated that to the point that his defense just completely quit on him. The Cowboys basically had to replace all but a select few players from the Wade era because once the mentality has been ruined, it just has to be cleansed.

If Garrett were to be replaced, the new HC would inherit a terrific situation with the roster and locker-room mentality; whereas, Garrett inherited the worst possible situation just like Parcells inherited a bad situation from Campo.

I not really a fan of the Garrett offense, per se; however, with Jerry doing the hiring, I would be more afraid of getting a new HC than keeping Garrett.

The reality is that the Cowboys would likely only have 1 or 2 losses at most if Romo and Dez didn't get injured. It is unlikely that any other HC would have a winning record in the 5 games without Romo. Maybe they would have had a win or two with a little luck but if they played the past 5 games again with Garrett there's a good chance they might have won a couple also.

They've kept the games close and given themselves chances to win which is generally the strategy for most teams with scrub backup QB and especially when their top player on the team other than the QB is also out.

 

[khiladi]

No, I don't have any particular affection for Garrett. It's all just logic to me.

You need to be realistic. It's not like you can just replace Garrett with Belichick. Many many HC hires fail in the NFL. Just look at the Skins history of Head Coaches that failed. Jerry is still the owner and will not give another HC full control like Jimmy had or even what Parcells had. I'm not sure that I blame him either. Look at what Chip Kelly did when he got full control. He made many personnel moves which could set the team back for years if he can't make them work and is replaced by another HC.

Even Jimmy gave away some young developmental player in his final year because he didn't expect to be around much longer. He traded a young LB to his buddy Wannstedt in Chicago for basically nothing. Some scouts told Jerry this player had a lot of potential and while never publicized, this caused a significant rift between Jimmy and Jerry.

If you don't understand how bad Wade was long term for the team, then it's basically impossible to discuss the Cowboys HC issue. The core of all good teams is strong locker-room chemistry and Wade completely obliterated that to the point that his defense just completely quit on him. The Cowboys basically had to replace all but a select few players from the Wade era because once the mentality has been ruined, it just has to be cleansed.

If Garrett were to be replaced, the new HC would inherit a terrific situation with the roster and locker-room mentality; whereas, Garrett inherited the worst possible situation just like Parcells inherited a bad situation from Campo.

Garrett inherited Romo.. So what exactly is Garrett in now? Did he inherit that as well?

 

[xwalker]

Garrett inherited Romo.. So what exactly is Garrett in now? Did he inherit that as well?

I don't even know your point.

Romo and Witten were Garrett guys even when Wade was the HC. When TO made his big stink, it was assistant coach Garrett that stood up to him, not HC Wade.

 

[khiladi]

I don't even know your point.

Romo and Witten were Garrett guys even when Wade was the HC. When TO made his big stink, it was assistant coach Garrett that stood up to him, not HC Wade.

It's pretty clear... Your basically making excuses that Garrett can't win now without Romo.. So what exactly did Garrett inherit from Wade that he had to rebuild to make the team legitimate, if he can't win without Romo?

Wade had Romo and has done much better overall, with a crappier team per your own argument, which Garrett had to rebuild, but Garrett can't still win with the better team without Romo...

You see how much your argument makes sense? Just a bunch of excuses for Boy Wonder that lead to all sorts of contradictions in thought..

 

[xwalker]

It's not bias at all. It's just his opinion, which he's perfectly entitled to. But for a guy who normally just provides great, detailed information, it's bound to happen that inserting opinions periodically is going to lead to not everybody agreeing with all of them. Saying you disagree with an opinion is not ripping on somebody for bias.

Yes, he has done plenty of the difficult work in the past which should entitle him to an off the cuff opinion more than the vast majority of people fans or media are entitled to have.

 

[xwalker]

It's pretty clear... Your basically making excuses that Garrett can't win now without Romo.. So what exactly did Garrett inherit from Wade that he had to rebuild to make the team legitimate, if he can't win without Romo? Wade had Romo and has done much better overall, with a crappier team per your own argument...

This is just a waste of my time.

You don't want to understand so you're not going to understand despite the fact that I've given you many detailed responses and examples and all I get in return is basically your opinion that Garrett sucks because you emotionally "feel" like he sucks.