The assumption of a better GM

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member
Messages
55,143
Reaction score
36,328
And we wish everyone would use all data. Such as, Jerry is responsible for hiring coaches and acquiring players. If they fail, it is on him. Just as it is w/ every GM. Don't you agree that all NFL GM's should be judged using the same criteria?
Right

Jethro should receive his due credit for the early success and the blame for lack of success since.

But not many survive such a run as last 25 years. Landry didn’t survive his downturn and Jone$ shouldn’t either.
 

Creeper

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,829
Reaction score
17,538
Right

Jethro should receive his due credit for the early success and the blame for lack of success since.

But not many survive such a run as last 25 years. Landry didn’t survive his downturn and Jone$ shouldn’t either.

But isn't the success of the early years with Jimmy Johnson and argument against Jerry? It proves a guy with the right football knowledge at GM can win in Dallas and that guy then was Jimmy. Jerry signed the checks, which is the owner's job not the GM's.
 

Hypotenoose

Well-Known Member
Messages
178
Reaction score
256
There's no debate. 25 years is selective data, specifically to leave out the successful years.

I don't even support Jerry or think he's a particularly good GM, I just wish people would be intelligent about it.
I didn’t leave them out. I attribute them to Jimmy running the ship, and he was. It’s why Jerry wanted him gone. He wasn’t getting enough credit. The putrid performance of the Cowboys post Jimmy (and granting Switzer) means Jerry and GM has probably failed unlike any GM in the history of any professional team. You can’t refute what I’ve just said. If so, do so. I suspect any response you might provide will be one of 2 variants: 1) I won’t counter your take on JJs GM reign and you are incorrect because I say so. 2) You are not giving Jerry credit for 3 rings (even though my argument is JJs GM reign). This is my last attempt at debating with you but you are acting incapable of doing so. Prove me wrong.
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
I didn’t leave them out. I attribute them to Jimmy running the ship, and he was. It’s why Jerry wanted him gone. He wasn’t getting enough credit. The putrid performance of the Cowboys post Jimmy (and granting Switzer) means Jerry and GM has probably failed unlike any GM in the history of any professional team. You can’t refute what I’ve just said. If so, do so. I suspect any response you might provide will be one of 2 variants: 1) I won’t counter your take on JJs GM reign and you are incorrect because I say so. 2) You are not giving Jerry credit for 3 rings (even though my argument is JJs GM reign). This is my last attempt at debating with you but you are acting incapable of doing so. Prove me wrong.
The idea that Jimmy was running the ship, with no input from Jerry, and then immediately Jerry was running the ship with no influence from the Head Coach is also stupid.
 

Hypotenoose

Well-Known Member
Messages
178
Reaction score
256
The idea that Jimmy was running the ship, with no input from Jerry, and then immediately Jerry was running the ship with no influence from the Head Coach is also stupid.
Alright. You are a troll. Duly noted. I’m going to say something else that will make you gleeful if you understand it. You are a dolt.
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
Alright. You are a troll. Duly noted. I’m going to say something else that going to give gleeful if you understand it. You are a dolt.
K that's fine. You are speculatively making stuff up to fit a narrative.

Would rather be a dolt than do that nonsense.
 

plasticman

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,395
Reaction score
15,915
That hire was the most puzzling one since Booger bought the team. Mainly because of your avatar. Reeves was a big Landry fan and the reason he went into coaching, pissed me off when he joined the Cowboys and made me happy when he quit.
There was no doubting hIs resume....player/coach under Landry, 10th winningest coach in NFL history, took two different teams to the Super Bowl.

At the very least he would have brought experience and expertise to a team that needed it.
Reeves was smart. The second he realized Jerry was going to screw him he was gone.
 

zrinkill

Cowboy Fan
Messages
46,290
Reaction score
26,408
As a GM he has an all time in season record of 255 wins and 225 loses ...... Which is pretty average ...... Combine that with the fact that he has not even sniffed the 3rd round of the playoffs in 25 years ........ Show me another GM that can get away with that and is considered to be doing a good job.
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,059
Reaction score
46,962
But isn't the success of the early years with Jimmy Johnson and argument against Jerry? It proves a guy with the right football knowledge at GM can win in Dallas and that guy then was Jimmy. Jerry signed the checks, which is the owner's job not the GM's.
As the GM, Jerry hired Jimmy. Full credit.
 

IrishAnto

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,945
Reaction score
1,906
The patriots will put everything in perspective.

Tom Brady helped get the GM credit, and even the coach. The GM and organization was propped up for a long time.

There is good a chance they will not be relevant for the next 5-10 years, and who knows how long before they get to another superbowl.

If this does happen(which I am leaning towards), why did the so called "great organization/gm/owner" not have preparations ready for the departure of Brady

Strange that the superbowl followed the star player
Patirots with a competant qb were horrible

Besides some bad contract, Jones is not as bad as people think
Maybe wait and see what the Pats do in the next 3-5 years rather than think their done after one year.
I doubt it takes them 25+ years to get back to an AFC Championship.
There’s 25 years worth of proof to say Jerry is a poor GM.
 

CouchCoach

Staff member
Messages
41,122
Reaction score
74,900
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
As the GM, Jerry hired Jimmy. Full credit.
And allowed him to do what he had to do to build the team while Booger did what he had to do to try and turn it into the black. Full credit there as well.

Booger is a needy attention whorre but I fault Johnson in not at least meeting him halfway and acknowledging him and I think that was his plan to facilitate his exit. I think that became the plan after the draft where he refused to show up until Wannstedt talked him into it because Booger wanted to give the appearance he was approving each pick.

Ya know, I always worked for someone else as a manager and I always felt part of my job was to help make them look good and smart for hiring me. Employees don't get into ego tussles with their boss unless they want to be free agents.

Jimmy seems to want to make it all about him building it. He was allowed to do that by probably the only owner that would have let him do what he did.
 

dsturgeon

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,144
Reaction score
3,961
Maybe wait and see what the Pats do in the next 3-5 years rather than think their done after one year.
I doubt it takes them 25+ years to get back to an AFC Championship.
There’s 25 years worth of proof to say Jerry is a poor GM.

My assumption is that tom brady was the reason for the "dynasty" that the patriots had. The GM and coaching was given more credit than they deserved.

Besides that anomaly, teams don't stay on top for long.

Since the salary cap, there is usually a 1-3 year period where teams have a chance of winning. And that chance depends on a special player or group.

The patriots no longer have that anomaly. They have the same chance as the 31 other teams. They will need to hit on that special player or group of players that will give them that 1-3 year period, where they have a chance to win the superbowl. The odds are against them.

Since the superbowl wins, Jerry has had a few legitimate chances at winning a superbowl. He didn't win, but he put together a combination that could do it. That is better than a lot of teams during that time period. I don't think Jerry is as bad as some people think.

Since the salary cap 15 teams have won a superbowl. That is 27 years

Cowboys 2
Buccs 2
Patriots 6
Ravens 2
Giants 2
packers 2
Broncos 3

The cowboys 2 were together
Giants 2 were together
Broncos had 2 together
Steelers had 2 together
Patriots had 2 groups of 3 wins
the rest were separate time periods

So, besides the patriots, teams seem to win at max 1 or 2 superbowls with that special team. Brady had 2 sets of 3.

17 teams have not won a superbowl in the salary cap era.

My point is putting together a team that can win a superbowl is a big deal. Even if you dont win.
 
Last edited:

IrishAnto

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,945
Reaction score
1,906
My assumption is that tom brady was the reason for the "dynasty" that the patriots had. The GM and coaching was given more credit than they deserved.

Besides that anomaly, teams don't stay on top for long.

Since the salary cap, there is usually a 1-3 year period where teams have a chance of winning. And that chance depends on a special player or group.

The patriots no longer have that anomaly. They have the same chance as the 31 other teams. They will need to hit on that special player or group of players that will give them that 1-3 year period, where they have a chance to win the superbowl. The odds are against them.

Since the superbowl wins, Jerry has had a few legitimate chances at winning a superbowl. He didn't win, but he put together a combination that could do it. That is better than a lot of teams during that time period. I don't think Jerry is as bad as some people think.

Since the salary cap 15 teams have won a superbowl. That is 27 years

Cowboys 2
Buccs 2
Patriots 6
Ravens 2
Giants 2
packers 2
Broncos 3

The cowboys 2 were together
Giants 2 were together
Broncos had 2 together
Steelers had 2 together
Patriots had 2 groups of 3 wins
the rest were separate time periods

So, besides the patriots, teams seem to win at max 1 or 2 superbowls with that special team. Brady had 2 sets of 3.

17 teams have not won a superbowl in the salary cap era.

My point is putting together a team that can win a superbowl is a big deal. Even if you dont win.
The Cowboys team that won in the salary cap era was built before the cap and you know it.
Sine we last won the SB 13 of the 16 teams in the NFC have been to the Championship, 12 two or more times. We’re one of the three who haven’t.
Jones is a failure in the salary cap era!
If you think otherwise, your kidding yourself.
 

dsturgeon

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,144
Reaction score
3,961
The Cowboys team that won in the salary cap era was built before the cap and you know it.
Sine we last won the SB 13 of the 16 teams in the NFC have been to the Championship, 12 two or more times. We’re one of the three who haven’t.
Jones is a failure in the salary cap era!
If you think otherwise, your kidding yourself.

I know it, but the cowboys superbowls are still part of the numbers.

Who cares about the NFC championship? Only the superbowl winner is not a loser
 

Whirlwin

Cowboy , It’s a way of life.
Messages
23,977
Reaction score
16,255
CowboysZone DIEHARD Fan
The majority of us want the owner to hire a GM and turn it over to him, at least that's my take.

There are others that want him to step down and turn it over to his son, which defies all known logic to me....and mankind.

But let's say he does decide to hire a GM. Is he going to hire one better than he's been or one worse? His ego is tied up with his team. Another's success accentuates his failure.

Who do you think might have been his first one he hired? Larry Lacewell? Hiring friends is as bad as hiring family.

Look at who Snyder turned his team over to in the beginning, that Sopranos cat Vinny Cerrato, the Lions let Matt Millen sink their ship and Snyder upped his play when he hired a drunk as his GM who promptly got hammered in the coaches booth, got kicked out and ended up in the press box and fired.

We're beginning to see turnover at the GM level that rivals HC's and does the owner's hiring of HC's give us a clue as to his hiring of a GM?

Be careful of what you wish for and before anyone writes they couldn't do any worse, oh yes, they could do a lot worse.

Our two best hopes are that 1) he finally gets it, begins working full time and is able to be a top rate GM or 2) we get lucky. I am not so sure I would hope that he hire a GM.
Wish for. Pray for more like it. At least we have William Maclay he’s helping. But Jerry you got to get rid of the loyalty and start running this more as a business
 

IrishAnto

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,945
Reaction score
1,906
I know it, but the cowboys superbowls are still part of the numbers.

Who cares about the NFC championship? Only the superbowl winner is not a loser
If you can’t even get to the NFC Championship, your not winning any SBs that’s why should care.
 

aria

Well-Known Member
Messages
17,543
Reaction score
16,793
This is silly. Jerry has changed his approach on how to build the team, and what the team should look like, multiple times. The team was built and approached differently from Parcells to Wade, Wade to JG, and now JG to McCarthy. None of those teams were constructed the same and Jerry always builds to what his coaches and personnel ppl want. That's what every GM should do.
Lol, yeah. I’m sure Garrett was clamoring for Hardy. I’m sure they all wanted high risk players like Jaylon, LVE, Gregory, etc. Even if that was the case a good GM would say it’s too risky. Do you think JG wanted Paxton Lynch as much as Jerry did?
 

fivetwos

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,061
Reaction score
25,888
The well is poisoned and placing a pawn in the front office is not going to save this franchise. The Cowboys may get lucky and win something with the current structure in place, but it will be an uphill battle a require a great deal of luck, so I vote for your #2.

The culture of Jerryworld is more about optics and less about commitment and sacrifice. The latter usually conditions a team to have a grit and edge that shows up when the sledding is toughest. Johnson was the last to make that work in Dallas. Parcells was close, but quit.
Nailed it.

Well done.
 

aria

Well-Known Member
Messages
17,543
Reaction score
16,793
There's no debate. 25 years is selective data, specifically to leave out the successful years.

I don't even support Jerry or think he's a particularly good GM, I just wish people would be intelligent about it.
So based on the posts, pretty much everyone in this thread is unintelligent except you. Got it.
 
Top