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

[Kevinicus]

Here is Dez, ball right thru his hands, last year this would be a td!
Cassel delivered a good ball here, and notice dez never closes his hands on the ball.
He is out of shape , out of practice and he has his payday, so I wonder how much help he is actually going to be.

Dez didn't have his hands where he wanted because he used one to defend Sherman from getting the INT. It's hard to tell from these stills, but that is why his right hand is so far away from the left.

 

[Kevinicus]

It's been a bad run. The most frustrating thing is, in 4 of the 5 games, we've been so close. Just a play or a penalty or a blown call or a whatever has been the difference between the win and the loss. The offense was completely toothless against both NE and SEA, but the defense has really come around. The OL is finally playing really well. We've got the role players, and now we've got Dez back, too. If we could just get the ST units to come together, block a bit better for the returner, get a returner back there who actually wants to be there, and cover our own damn kicks, I'd feel pretty good for when Tony gets back.

Was I the only one that thought that SEA team looked to be back in stride this week? That game felt like a defensive slug-fest. As opposed to two teams who were inept offensively. We're getting closer. We're just running out of time about as quickly as we're improving.

Gotta win at least one of these next two. Preferably both of them, and preferably with a win v. PHI if we only get one. But even 3-6 with 7 to go gives us a shot of getting in at 8-8 if Tony can manage 5-2 down the stretch. That's a tall order, but not unheard of. 6-1 is possible, even, if we're firing on all cylinders. Good teams have done better than that to close out seasons before, anyway.

No, it felt like two inept offenses...and one good defense. Most of Seattle's failures seemed to be simply poor throws by Wilson.

 

[Sasquatch]

1. The winning seasons can be attributed to offensive performance or Romo? Apparently, the offense can't do anything right now because Romo isn't playing. Based on your logic, Jason has made all sorts of personnel moves that made this team much more talented. Yet, Jason performed better with all these abysmal roster moves Wade allegedly made and gets credit for, including guys like Roy Williams and Felix Jones and Kitna as QB, but he can't win with his own talented roster that proves his superiority to Wade?

Did I get that woeful logic right?

2. I mean it's not like Wade specifically said he wanted Chris Johnson on Hard Knocks, while Jerry asked Jason and they wanted Felix. Oh, but it was like that. It's also not like Wade wanted Mike Solari as OL coach, who coached a zone scheme, while Garrett got Houck, the same guy he coached with in Miami and with the Cowboys when he was here, he also preferred a man scheme, with big hefty linemen. Oh, but it was like that. But I guess when Dallas was drafting flop OL all those years, it was because of Wade's decision of wanting a zone-blocking coach and had nothing to do with Garrett's decision of Houck, who only left when he retired, meaning Houck was still there even after Wade left... Did I get more of your woeful logic right?

I mean how many years did we waste when Garrett was OC with that shoddy OL that Garrett homers use to blame as one of the reasons for his lack of success, that Garrett supposedly had no part of, despite the above points, only for Jerry to bring in Callahan to implement a zone-blocking scheme with quicker and more agile linemen. That same guy who Jerry was then set on having Garrett stripped of his play-calling duties for?

3. What part of stats don't you understand? Offensive performance equates to yards, not points. The amount of yards one racks up doesn't have any bearing on win-loss record. When we look at 13-3, when Tony Sparano was baby-sitting Garrett, they were 2nd in points, but 13th in points allowed. In 2008, when Jason Garrett got full control of the offense, the guy dropped from 2nd in points, to 18. That is a whopping 16 teams in ranking, despite essentially having the same team and roster, including Romo. And the defense, was 20th in points allowed. AND GUESS WHAT? BRIAN STEWART was the defense coordinator.

2009, the Cowboys went to 14th in points WHILE THE DALLAS DEFENSE, when Wade took the play-calling away from Brian Stewart was SECOND in points allowed. So Dallas first play-off win in twenty years was because the defense coached by Wade was playing lights out, while Garrett kept waffling trying to score in the red-zone.

If Romo didn't have escapability, then you can be sure that the yardage gained, let alone red-zone scoring would have been dramatically reduced. Basically what your praising Garrett's play-calling for, is nothing but defenses playing deep coverage not giving up the big play, allowing Dallas to flounder when the field shortened.

When you actually look at 2010, the year Wade got fired, despite being 7th in terms of points allowed, during the first 8 games with Garrett as coach, the OFFENSE LED BY GARRETT turned the ball over a whopping 19 TIMES. 19 times in 8 games. 5 out of 8 games, the team couldn't even brak 50 yards rushing. Against the Commanders, Garrett could only put up 7 points and gave 7 to the Commanders, after calling a bomb on a 4th down, right before the half , having only 80 yards to go, with Romo having to check-down to Choice, who then fumbled it. I guess that was Wade's fault...

And the Dallas defense generated 10 turnovers. So the offense was putting that much pressure on the defense. Even the game against the Giants, when Wade's defense let close to 500 yards of total offense by the Giants, they created 5 TOs. And that offense managed a whopping less than 300 yards of total offense.

Your stats don't support what you claim they support. What that means is when the team allegedly quite on Wade, the offense kept turning the ball over putting tremendous pressure on the defense.

4. And you claim Wade's record has been woeful, where-ever he went, how does coaching a Buffalo team to the play-offs with scrubs like Flutie and Johnson and a meddling FO prove his ineptness?

This post should be rated T for graphically detailed violence. Blood has been spilt in ample quantities.

 

[Idgit]

No, it felt like two inept offenses...and one good defense. Most of Seattle's failures seemed to be simply poor throws by Wilson.

Interesting take. I have to say that I just disagree. We did a good job keeping Wilson in the pocket and closing it around him, for the most part. We kept contain. We took the ball away from him. We limited them to a lot of 3 and outs. Covered Graham well, for the most part. Their players said as much, after the game, too.

For their part, they played good defense, as well. Because they've got one of the better defenses in the league, and they got 5-6 players back over their bye.

I thought it was a really good game last week. I know I"m pretty much alone in that, but whatever. It was.

 

[Roadtrip635]

Man, I wonder how other teams win games with backup QBs, must be black magic or vodoo at work

Maybe the head coach should be held responsible for not having a competent backup on the roster......yea, crazy idea to even suggest a head coach is responsible for the performance of the team.....what was I thinking

 

[Sydla]

Not at all. You either have a quality backup--which is almost nobody--or you play better around them at all other positions. What you don't do is play poor defense, or not get any takeaways at all, give up ST scores, have thoughtless penalties take away possessions or put your bad QBs in 2nd or 3rd and 20s. That sort of stuff. It's no great mystery.

Even with all of that, we've had good opportunities to win 4 of these 5 games.

As for the competent backup, who you got? Who should we have signed that we didn't who was competent and wanted to sit behind Tony for a while? Or are we spending a top pick on a guy? Should have taken Derek Carr over Zack Martin maybe? In retrospect, that looks brilliant. Last year, it would have been a big mistake. What changed? The decision making? Or the circumstances? Come on, be honest, now.

A lot these can also be attributed to poor coaching though. I know it's shocking but often times teams that aren't well coached make lots of mental errors, turn the ball over, make numerous special teams gaffes, fail to execute, etc. That can be a sign of inadequate or not great coaching.

And sometimes, when a team subtracts a key player, the mediocrity of the coaching becomes amplified because the start player or players often cover up for the shortcomings of the staff.

 

[Kevinicus]

Interesting take. I have to say that I just disagree. We did a good job keeping Wilson in the pocket and closing it around him, for the most part. We kept contain. We took the ball away from him. We limited them to a lot of 3 and outs. Covered Graham well, for the most part. Their players said as much, after the game, too.

For their part, they played good defense, as well. Because they've got one of the better defenses in the league, and they got 5-6 players back over their bye.

I thought it was a really good game last week. I know I"m pretty much alone in that, but whatever. It was.

Again, you say we limited them to these things, and on a few occasions we did, but I felt for the most part, when Seattle failed to convert it was usually a poor throw or a drop more than anything Dallas did. A very poor offense and OL gave up no sacks, and put up 100 yards more than Dallas' did. Dallas held the run in check, but I thought they were less than impressive defending the pass (outside of Hardy's INT).

 

[Idgit]

Again, you say we limited them to these things, and on a few occasions we did, but I felt for the most part, when Seattle failed to convert it was usually a poor throw or a drop more than anything Dallas did. A very poor offense and OL gave up no sacks, and put up 100 yards more than Dallas' did. Dallas held the run in check, but I thought they were less than impressive defending the pass (outside of Hardy's INT).

I just don't see it that way. Marinelli talked about 'the well' last week, and that's what we did. Kept contain and constricted around Russell and made it tough for him to make plays. Wilson had 210 yards, and they had 13 points. That's not just him throwing the ball poorly.

I'd have to see the plays you're referring to when you say it was 'usually a poor throw or a drop,' though. I don't think it usually was. I think we just played good defense again.

 

[Idgit]

A lot these can also be attributed to poor coaching though. I know it's shocking but often times teams that aren't well coached make lots of mental errors, turn the ball over, make numerous special teams gaffes, fail to execute, etc. That can be a sign of inadequate or not great coaching.

And sometimes, when a team subtracts a key player, the mediocrity of the coaching becomes amplified because the start player or players often cover up for the shortcomings of the staff.

It's not shocking. You just have to substantiate that it's happening in Dallas. The ST problems I've said multiple times I do think are a coaching problem, so let's set that aside since it's an area where we agree.

These other things can definitely be signs of inadequate coaching. They can also have other causes. I'd submit that the other causes are personnel related. That it's Russell not holding containment in ATL. That it's Church getting a meaningless hold on a turnover v. the Giants. That it's Patmon or Claiborne dropping passes that hit them in the hands against the Falcons and the Saints. And I don't think it's reasonable to expect the coaches to be responsible for passes bouncing off of players' hands. Or for rookie 5th rounders starting before they're ready because your top three preferred options are hobbled or unavailable. Or for Linehan to coach a 90 start veteran QB to not miss wide open WRs with wounded ducks that 'just came out funny' or to not throw into double coverage to a guy who's not open on first down in a drive where we need points. But maybe that's just me.

 

[Kevinicus]

I just don't see it that way. Marinelli talked about 'the well' last week, and that's what we did. Kept contain and constricted around Russell and made it tough for him to make plays. Wilson had 210 yards, and they had 13 points. That's not just him throwing the ball poorly.

I'd have to see the plays you're referring to when you say it was 'usually a poor throw or a drop,' though. I don't think it usually was. I think we just played good defense again.

Start with the 3rd downs that they failed to convert on. One would be where the WR dropped a pass in his hands with Carr just standing there. And again, you have to remember, this was a poor offense Dallas faced. Teams averaged over 4 sacks a game against them. Dallas got 0, and didn't seem to have much pressure most of the time.

 

[Sydla]

It's not shocking. You just have to substantiate that it's happening in Dallas. The ST problems I've said multiple times I do think are a coaching problem, so let's set that aside since it's an area where we agree.

These other things can definitely be signs of inadequate coaching. They can also have other causes. I'd submit that the other causes are personnel related. That it's Russell not holding containment in ATL. That it's Church getting a meaningless hold on a turnover v. the Giants. That it's Patmon or Claiborne dropping passes that hit them in the hands against the Falcons and the Saints. And I don't think it's reasonable to expect the coaches to be responsible for passes bouncing off of players' hands. Or for rookie 5th rounders starting before they're ready because your top three preferred options are hobbled or unavailable. Or for Linehan to coach a 90 start veteran QB to not miss wide open WRs with wounded ducks that 'just came out funny' or to not throw into double coverage to a guy who's not open on first down in a drive where we need points. But maybe that's just me.

It's not reasonable to hold the coaches responsible for Patmon dropping an interception. Or one random hold by Church. Or one guy randomly not holding contain.

But when it's week after week of mistakes. When Church is making numerous mistakes almost every week. When it's guys running lazy routes almost every week. When it's guys missing their assignments every week............. Don't act like it's just a random mistake here or a random mistake there. This team is making numerous mistakes each week, making boneheaded plays each week, showing lack of fundamentals at times each week.

At some point, when the problems continue to persist, it's insane to keep blaming the players and playing the woe is me card for the coaching staff.

 

[Idgit]

...But when it's week after week of mistakes. When Church is making numerous mistakes almost every week. When it's guys running lazy routes almost every week. When it's guys missing their assignments every week............. Don't act like it's just a random mistake here or a random mistake there. This team is making numerous mistakes each week, making boneheaded plays each week, showing lack of fundamentals at times each week.

The thing is, you guys might say these things are going on, but that doesn't mean they're going on. What are the numerous mistakes Church is making? The blown coverage on the TD that Jeff Spicolli caught last week? What? Lazy routes almost every week? That's a new one for me. Who's running the lazy routes?

Otherwise, all I hear is unhappy fans claiming numerous mistakes and poor fundamentals without much support. Hard to give that much credit.

At least Broaddus takes the time to point out the plays he thinks the QB is blowing for us.

 

[Sydla]

The thing is, you guys might say these things are going on, but that doesn't mean they're going on. What are the numerous mistakes Church is making? The blown coverage on the TD that Jeff Spicolli caught last week? What? Lazy routes almost every week? That's a new one for me. Who's running the lazy routes?

Otherwise, all I hear is unhappy fans claiming numerous mistakes and poor fundamentals without much support. Hard to give that much credit.

At least Broaddus takes the time to point out the plays he thinks the QB is blowing for us.

So wait? Are you claiming that we aren't seeing a lot of mistakes (bad penalties, missed tackles, missed opportunities, dumb decisions, etc) each week? So other than the QB, the rest of the team has played really well? LOL. Broaddus has pointed out quite a few times poor routes Williams has run for example, including against the Giants that resulted in that DRC pick and score.

You set up strange strawman arguments. I don't think one person who has criticized Garrett or this staff has tried to argue that Weeden or Cassel has been playing well only to be let down by bad coaching. So the Broaddus comment is peculiar because says something that no one has really tried to argue. Of course we are suffering at the hands of poor QB play. But it's also compounded by mediocre coaching. No one has said this team needed to win 4 of the last 5. What people have said is that while the QB play has been poor when you lose 5 games in a row, even with a backup, the coaching staff has to bear a big heap of responsibility themselves as well.

 

[Idgit]

Start with the 3rd downs that they failed to convert on. One would be where the WR dropped a pass in his hands with Carr just standing there. And again, you have to remember, this was a poor offense Dallas faced. Teams averaged over 4 sacks a game against them. Dallas got 0, and didn't seem to have much pressure most of the time.

Ok, so I went and did the work. There were 4 drives that ended on 3rd downs. The first was good man coverage by Carr, a bad Wilson pass that the WR got a hand on and dropped. The next was good coverage by Jones on a contested pass to Graham that was in the catch radius but behind him, but again, good coverage on a contested play. The third third down was a play where we'd flushed Wilson and he threw deep down the sideline to Graham who again couldn't make what would have been a tremendous pass. The fourth was the Hardy pick.

So, yeah, overall, I'd say we were playing good enough defense to make it hard on Wilson, and he couldn't convert as a result.

 

[Idgit]

So wait? Are you claiming that we aren't seeing a lot of mistakes (bad penalties, missed tackles, missed opportunities, dumb decisions, etc) each week? So other than the QB, the rest of the team has played really well? LOL. Broaddus has pointed out quite a few times poor routes Williams has run for example, including against the Giants that resulted in that DRC pick and score.

You set up strange strawman arguments. I don't think one person who has criticized Garrett or this staff has tried to argue that Weeden or Cassel has been playing well only to be let down by bad coaching. So the Broaddus comment is peculiar because says something that no one has really tried to argue. Of course we are suffering at the hands of poor QB play. But it's also compounded by mediocre coaching. No one has said this team needed to win 4 of the last 5. What people have said is that while the QB play has been poor when you lose 5 games in a row, even with a backup, the coaching staff has to bear a big heap of responsibility themselves as well.

Sigh. I'm not sure how much clearer I can be about what I"m claiming. If *you're* the one claiming you're seeing mental errors or sloppy routes or whatever, let em know. Who, when, where, what game? I'll even go look up the play if you ever provide one. But don't just give me oblique references to things you think you heard Broaddus say at some point. I can't do anything with that.

Similarly, if my arguments are 'straw men' tell me which ones. My argument is that the problem is *not* coaching, it's QB play. Which is why I'm providing context where the plays are there, the execution from the other players is there, and the QB is just not getting it done. If you want to make a case that it's both QB play and coaching, then show some shred of evidence somewhere that there's a coaching liability somewhere. My saying there's a specific cause for the problem and then showing what I think it is is not setting up a straw man in any sense of the word.

And why can't a team lose 5 games in a row for no other reason than they have insufficient personnel? I don't get that. If you can point to the personnel, and point to the plays and point to the injuries and the suspensions and the circumstances that have lead to the problem, why can't that be a simple enough explanation for what's gone wrong? Do you really believe it's not possible to lose 5 close NFL games (4, really) just because your talent isn't quite good enough?

 

[khiladi]

Cassell two weeks ago kept a drive alive with a sideline pass, where he had to break the sideline, followed by the TD to Street on another play that same drive, where he kept the play alive.

Cassell gets blame for poor play, but that TD was an example where it was all him making something happen.

 

[khiladi]

The INT by Cromartie, that was an awful route by Williams. It was also on a 2nd and nine, after Dallas predictably ran. It was also one where Dallaa didn't even show a possibility of run. It was also one where Dallas was trying to pick up a significant amount of yardage on one of their typical routes, which requires timing with the WRs and reps.

Cromartie read that from the very beginning for a reason..

The very next series, where Cassell threw another INT. It was second and 7, after they ran again. I wouldn't be surprised if their was no threat of the run either considering our lack of play action. Both throws that series were long plays attacking deep left.

Cassell isn't choosing the plays after three or four weeks in Dallas... It's not like our passing game isn't limited in where and how we attack..

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

What's irrational is constantly coming up with excuses for Garrett. When he was slogging through 8-8 seasons, excuses galore.

Here's the reality. If Jason Garrett is a quality coach like you seem to be insinuating, then Jason Garrett should have found a way to win just once in these last 5 games. Because that's what a quality coach would do.

Eventually, people will realize just how average a coach he is. Unfortunately it will be at the expense of wasting Romo's last few good years.

You like channeled mein thots but with beter words and stuff. I wishyou would repesent me here and in court.

 

[lothos05]

If you haven't seen it yet, here's Broaddus' vid re: the missed opportunities this week. The last one is a heart breaker, in my opinion, though it is the play where Bennett dove classily at the QB's knees.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/video/2015/11/03/film-room-missed-opportunities-against-seattle

Thank you, Idgit. I'm far from an expert but these plays seem well-designed. It just seems that one missed block or read is what is really hurting the team. I can live with Collins missing Williams because he's going to get better and doubt that he misses next time. Those two pass plays put a pit in my stomach because if Romo's in there, Dez's is a TD and Beasley goes for a long gain.

 

[Ender]

What's irrational is constantly coming up with excuses for Garrett. When he was slogging through 8-8 seasons, excuses galore.

Here's the reality. If Jason Garrett is a quality coach like you seem to be insinuating, then Jason Garrett should have found a way to win just once in these last 5 games. Because that's what a quality coach would do.

Eventually, people will realize just how average a coach he is. Unfortunately it will be at the expense of wasting Romo's last few good years.

cool story bro.. Garret wasnt throwing three picks or checking down to the running back for three strait games.