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

[ABQCOWBOY]

NFL teams have access to advanced metrics and have expert consultants in that area. I know for certain that the Cowboys invest significantly in that area.

I'm fairly certain that probabilities from that data would indicate that not going for it in a close game gives the higher probability of winning.

I realize that as a fan it's easy to envision them making the 4th down conversion because after all it's just 1 stinking yard; however, IIRC, it's about a 20% change of making it on 4th and 1 and being inside the Red Zone probably lowers that probability even more.

They do have teams that look at these things and I'm certain that the Cowboys invest in this type of analysis but that analysis, in this situation, is of little value IMO. You have a starting QB in his second start with the team. What kind of statistical basis do you have to work with from that? You have a team who, IMO, just needs to find a way to win a couple of games and hold out till your starter comes back. What, I wonder, would those statistics suggest, based on the last 5 games? You really can't, IMO, rely on statistical analysis in that situation. There is not enough credible date to base it on.

 

[Zman5]

Yeah. And I disagree with that point. They weren't necessary, and they would have been foolish risks under the circumstances. And being underdogs have nothing to do with anything.

Not surprised knowing your history of blind support for JG.

Being the underdog has everything to do with what he is saying. The superior team does not need to take any unnecessary risks because they can beat the inferior opponent straight up. Only chance the inferior team to win is take some risks.

This has been true for battles through out history. Not just in sports but military and corporate world as well.

Sturm is right in saying that JG still coaches the team as if we were the superior/equal team.
JG is delusional.

 

[dallasfan4lizife]

To think he just signed a 5 year 30 million dollar contract is depressing. Make no mistake, we are in this mess year after year because Jerry Jones is the GM.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

It's really not worth it, people. There are those who are never going to blame Coach/Player X no matter the circumstance. Conversely, there are those who are never going to credit Coach/Player X.

Sturm is the most reliable analyst you will find in the sports media.

 

[Jarv]

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.

Well the buck stops with the head coach. If he can't take the heat...

 

[xwalker]

Actually I don't. It's really a simple question. Is Garrett good enough to win a SB? It's not about being perfect or the greatest ever or better than Jimmy Johnson or whatever else you want to come up with.

And no, you'd be wrong. Garrett is likely a better coach than Phillips. But that's like arguing which would you prefer to eat......... a spoonful of cat turds or a heaping plate of dog poop? Both would be awful, just the cat poop might be a bit more tolerable.

Great coaches do make mistakes. But they typically have far more successes than failures, far more good calls than bad calls, far more good games than bad games, far more sound game plans than bad ones. So when a guy like McCarthy or Payton makes a mistake, you temper that with the understanding that these guys have shown time and time again they are great coaches. When Garrett makes a mistake or has a bad game, you don't have the resume or safety net to fall back on. He made that mistake or had that bad game because it's likely he's just not a very good head coach, a middle of the pack coach like you suggest.

And I firmly believe we are on a 0-5 streak because he's just not a very good head coach. That doesn't mean I think it's 100% his fault. But he has a hand in this mess just like the QBs do, the front office does for even having these bad QBs, etc.

I would be very happy to see Garrett fired at season's end and see Jones go out and get a quality coach to give Romo a fighting chance at a SB run these last few years of his career here.

Do you notice 1 thing in common with Payton, McCarthy and Belichick? They all have Franchise QBs.

The issue of who is on the roster as the backup QBs is a different issue from the primary topic of this thread; however, I'll address it anyway. Yes, they screwed up on Weed. I have no way to know how much of that is on the coaches and how much is on the front office. The QB coach did claim in the spring that Weed was the most improved player and this staff does have a history of misjudging the backup QB (see Brad Johnson); however, I also know the front office loves to take shots with previous high round draft picks like Weed. It a difficult issue because they collectively had to make the decision back in March before seeing if Weed had improved before they were even practicing. Once the preseason showed that he struggled with real game conditions it was too late.

Having said that, even if they knew Weed couldn't cut it, what were the other options. Many teams don't even have a starting QB that is a reasonable NFL player. Managing to have both a quality start and a quality backup is even harder. They had one when they had Orton but the fact that he might be a decent player is the reason that he forced his way out. He saw an opportunity to start somewhere else. Obviously, drafting a QB in 2015 would not have solved the 2015 QB issue.

The bottom line is that when teams lose regardless of the reason, fans blame the Head Coach. Some of the current and past great HC's in history were run out of town at one time. Belichick in Cleveland, etc.. Those Cleveland fans back then actually thought that Belichick was incompetent.

 

[Sydla]

But we aren't talking about going 5-0 over Romo's injury. Just squeeze out a win or two in games we were in. The Steelers did it with Mike Vick, for example.

But we haven't. That falls on the coaching staff as much as it does FO failures and bad QB play IMO.

PS - My Garrett issue is more than just what's gone on over these 5 games. He's was 8-8 for three straight seasons and one 12-4 year doesn't mean he suddenly has figured it out. At this point, it's an anomaly.

 

[xwalker]

My question is did we run ANY pick plays? I'm being serious when I say I don't even know if it's in our playbook because of all the throws we ask the QB's to make - that's the easiest and most effective.

They do it occasionally. I recall a specific play against the Pats where Williams set a pick for Beasley. IIRC, Witten got called for it early this season.

There is also the issue that it does not work as well against some defenses as others. It works against the Cowboys because offenses know that the Cowboys limit Claiborne to a very simplistic scheme.

 

[fifaguy]

When was the last time that the Cowboys played like they had nothing to lose?

 

[DOUBLE WING]

The bottom line is that when teams lose regardless of the reason, fans blame the Head Coach. Some of the current and past great HC's in history were run out of town at one time. Belichick in Cleveland, etc.. Those Cleveland fans back then actually thought that Belichick was incompetent.

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.

 

[Fletch]

Yeah, I thoroughly disagree with this. Taking unnecessary risks with Matt Cassel against the SEA secondary when they're compressed in the red zone is a bad bet. The fact that the Cowboys were underdogs is irrelevant. The only question is, 'do you have a play that you can convert with?' If you've got one, call it. If you don't, you take the fg. In this case, it's Sturm who doesn't fully understand what the underdog role required yesterday. And he should, since he saw what the downfield risk taking got us just last week against a much lesser secondary.

One more defensive stop wins that game. If you're betting the outcome on one of the two units we fielded yesterday, who you putting it all on? I'm saying 'defense,' with some enthusiasm on this one.

I agree, and Bo Jackson would tell you, "Stroong."

 

[Idgit]

Not surprised knowing your history of blind support for JG.

Being the underdog has everything to do with what he is saying. The superior team does not need to take any unnecessary risks because they can beat the inferior opponent straight up. Only chance the inferior team to win is take some risks.

This has been true for battles through out history. Not just in sports but military and corporate world as well.

Sturm is right in saying that JG still coaches the team as if we were the superior/equal team.
JG is delusional.

If I had a history of blind support for anything, your post would have more merit. Just because I disagree with most of the stupid play calling criticisms doesn't mean I have blind support. If you don't happen to agree with the actual criticisms of the coaches I have on record, that's fine, but let's not just pretend they don't exist because you want to go back to criticizing reflexively.

I know what Sturm is saying. He's wrong here. It does not matter what the perception of who was the superior team was yesterday. The reality was, we were stopping their offense, and they were stopping ours, and the game was very much still up for grabs. The smart play was still the high percentage play in that situation. At home, with sub-par QB play facing one of the better defenses in the NFC. The way it played out, it ought to be obvious that taking additional risks was very definitely *not* our only chance yesterday.

JG's not delusional. Since you assert that without evidence, I'll just dismiss it the same way.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

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

43 days ago, the Cowboys last won a football game. I am guessing a drought like that is generally a good sign that your season has gone into the dumpster.

43 days in the wilderness...wandering....looking for an answer. Somewhere. Anywhere.

Maybe it is this retread life-long QB who can save us. Nope. Let's try another one. Grab the one who has played on all of the other teams in the league. He is slightly better. Not really. Keep looking. Maybe it is that third guy who is over there on the bench and never played a snap in the NFL. Maybe he is the one who can save us.

Doubtful.

But, what could it hurt to try? That is where we are - where numerous people want to try the kid who has never taken a snap.

43 days in the football desert is enough to make a team see things off in the distance that look like an oasis of hope.

Perhaps it is the sack machine who is suspended by the league. He can save it... Or maybe it will be the return of the franchise wide receiver. Surely, when he comes back...

One of these combinations is likely to stop the bleeding, right? Hello?

This team will win another game this year. I am sure of it. Now, the question becomes whether it will happen while this team is potentially still alive. If, in fact, you are optimistic enough to think 2-5 is still alive, that is.

When Tony Romo was injured back on September 20th, the initial thought in every reasonable thinking Cowboys fans' mind was simply that the season is likely over. The one thing you simply cannot do in the NFL is to lose your starting QB for 2 months. The math doesn't work out. It can't be done.

But, then, the dust settles, and you start to try to figure out a way to break the code. The reasons are obvious. This is not a video game that you simply hit "reset" and start over. No, if you are going to start over in the NFL, it takes a year off everyone's contract and career and it requires 12 months of waiting. Nobody has time for that.

So, if you are like me, you get out the schedule and talk yourself into stealing a game here and a game there. Surely, if you must play for 2 months without Tony Romo, you can get three wins somewhere in there, right?

Or at least two? How about just a win against anyone?

This season is not what we had in mind as we stood in Oxnard looking at a very deep, talented, and confident team that seemed comfortable laying out their navigational path to the Super Bowl.

On Sunday, the Cowboys were in a very advantageous position in the game entering the 4th Quarter. They had outgained the 2-time defending NFC Champions in yardage and were going in to take the lead after that aforementioned sack machine just turned the game on its ear by batting a pass into the air that he intercepted and then tried to return to the end zone. If the offense can't score, maybe Greg Hardy can.

He tried. But, was tripped up at the 16-yard line. Down 10-9, the Cowboys now had the ball given to them inside the Seahawks 20-yard line with something any observer would label as the "golden opportunity that they simply cannot afford to waste."

http://beta.sportsdaydfw.com/dallas-cowboys/cowboys/2015/11/02/sturms-morning-garrett-ignores-reality-underdog

sorry, I disagree with this. specially at that juncture of the game. it was obvious there wasn't going to be a lot of points. it was obvious our defense was going to keep it close. so why give away 3 points, which coul dhave made the difference in the game....at that juncture of the game, you do take the points and not the risk. now, if he wants to complain about 1st and 2nd quarter and not taking shots, then we can have a debate....at that point. we are down 10-9 and a field goal puts us ahead. our defense had played great, it was going to be a close game. in those tight quarters. with those safties and CBs, its hard to say take a chance....

and I bet if we did take a chance. and it would be intercepted, the article would say why take a chance in a close game when one point will be the difference and put yourself in a position to have to score a TD at the end against a great defense.

now, I did have a problem with how they used Dez. Sherman was locked on him all day, except when dez played in the slot...so they should have ran a few more plays with him from the slot. put Beasley out wide and let Sherman's coverage be wasted on him. I know the coaches don't trust escobar... as he has greatly underwhelmed, but put him in for some three TE formations and mix up the TEs in routes (who stays to block, who goes). I actually wanted to see Dez and Williams in the slot, that would have created problems for seattle defense.

but at that juncture of a game. 10-9, your defense playing great....you have to make sure you don't turn the ball over

 

[jjktkk]

Garrett can't coach period.

Where you saying the same thing last year?

 

[Jarv]

If they did an analysis on predictability, JG would come in first. Does he read or is he even aware of Strum's article? Yes!

My predictability meter says JG takes a lot more chances next week...and Philly will be ready for it. JG's problem is he just reacts to slowly and the other coaches see it. Next week is big chances week and that is what Philly will be expecting.

 

[black label]

Where you saying the same thing last year?

Romo has saved Garrett

Garrett way is sickening to watch

He cares more about himself than than the team around him

 

[jjktkk]

we would of won the last two games with Weeden.

Garret is making mistakes - he is listening to idiots.

Oh boy... Is that you Mrs. Weeden?

 

[xwalker]

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.

The current setup where they are losing without Romo and with a limited Dez for 1 game? Most coaches lose in that situation.

 

[BoysfanfromCanada]

To think he just signed a 5 year 30 million dollar contract is depressing. Make no mistake, we are in this mess year after year because Jerry Jones is the GM.

Jerry Jones the GM assembled the best team in the nfc East, including adding players like Hardy, Irving, Collins and White who all played very well. It's not his fault the team just collapsed with the loss of one player. If Garret liked Weeden in the off season, JJ wasn't going to argue

 

[jjktkk]

Romo has saved Garrett

Garrett way is sickening to watch

He cares more about himself than than the team around him

You show me a coach in any sport that consistently wins with bad players. NEWSFLASH! It takes great players to win in this league. And why would Garrett care more about himself than the team? How would that benefit Garrett?