The Mega Jerry/Garrett/Coach/Front-Office Bashing Thread **merged**

[rpntex]

Linehan calls plays from JG's playbook, any new plays would have to be JG approved.

Linehan calls the plays but he could have to call certain plays in certain situations.

Linehan is not a normal OC and does not run the offense,

Yet last year, people said the offense was 109% attributable to Linehan. This year, he "does not run the offense".

Wit all due respect, not one of us (including me, you, reboot, et al) knows to what degree Linehan's control of the offense extends. I just find it comical - and grossly hypocritical - that when its successful, he gets full credit. When it's not, it's 100% on Garrett.

 

[ConstantReboot]

Yet last year, people said the offense was 109% attributable to Linehan. This year, he "does not run the offense".

Wit all due respect, not one of us (including me, you, reboot, et al) knows to what degree Linehan's control of the offense extends. I just find it comical - and grossly hypocritical - that when its successful, he gets full credit. When it's not, it's 100% on Garrett.

I don't know where you got that idea that people attribute 109% to Linehan calling all the plays last year. When Linehan landed here he saw the good in Callahan's running plays and actually inserted it as part of the game plan. Thus you had a duopoly of offensive coordinators of Linehan working with passing game - while Callahan focused on the run game.

The question isn't whether how much Linehan called all the plays last year in comparison to this year. We all know that Callahan had a significant contribution to the running game last year. But not this year.

The question should be why did we give up on a running game that was so effective last year - to one that was based on an RBBC system to unproven and untested RBs?

Surely, anyone can see that this years running attack is so much different than last years.

We've seen this offense before. Linehan maybe calling the plays. But its from Garrett's playbook.

So the question is why did we change our running attack style which lead to the failure of this season? Only person that could have made those changes is Garrett. Not Linehan. Thus I don't understand why Garrett is getting a pass for making this crucial blunder.

 

[Redball Express]

well ,IMO, 7 losses in a row is unacceptable by anyone's standards; that they had the lead or were in all 7 games just shows how inept the offensive scheme is...they cant hold a lead...they let the defense get gassed by the end of the game which causes them to suck...the abandonment of a run game astounds me....all of this is squarely on Garrett...if it is on a different coach, then Garrett needs to get fired...NONE of that part of this franchise is on Jerry Jones....now, EVERYTHING else is on him.....

...this team is pathetic right now and they rest their season's hopes on an ailing, rusty superstar and the rest of the division's inability to, well, be any good.....

...regardless, I will be watching all 60 minutes of their game this week and every week

You and the rest of us, bro.

 

[Redball Express]

I don't know where you got that idea that people attribute 109% to Linehan calling all the plays last year. When Linehan landed here he saw the good in Callahan's running plays and actually inserted it as part of the game plan. Thus you had a duopoly of offensive coordinators of Linehan working with passing game - while Callahan focused on the run game.

The question isn't whether how much Linehan called all the plays last year in comparison to this year. We all know that Callahan had a significant contribution to the running game last year. But not this year.

The question should be why did we give up on a running game that was so effective last year - to one that was based on an RBBC system to unproven and untested RBs?

Surely, anyone can see that this years running attack is so much different than last years.

We've seen this offense before. Linehan maybe calling the plays. But its from Garrett's playbook.

So the question is why did we change our running attack style which lead to the failure of this season? Only person that could have made those changes is Garrett. Not Linehan. Thus I don't understand why Garrett is getting a pass for making this crucial blunder.

Not sure Garrett is getting a pass.

I do think he has had to go along with team decisions to re-align the cap by letting Murray go and spending the money and draft picks on Defense and FAs like Hardy.

I think when it came time to re-sign Marinelli in the off-season which everybody thought needed to be done after the Rob Ryan experience..

the bosses agreed to improve the defense with the resources.

It obviously hasn't panned out.

To me..with Romo injured and Dez not being 100%...

it's just impossible to know where things begin and end with the problems.

We do need more than McFadden at RB..

that's a no-brainer.

I do think this time we will draft one in '16 to fix that.

But it's probably too late for us now to fix things.

 

[Idgit]

Turbin came in and was very complimentary of the culture and the work ethic of the team in Dallas. He didn't compare it directly to CLE, but you know what he was getting at. Nice to hear an outsider suggest we're all pulling in the same direction and working hard still, right?

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Not saying that Callahan was playbook was anything great. Just that he never really got to implement it because Garrrett took over midseason calling the same ole' vanilla plays he's been calling all along.

So Garrett took back the playcalling and Callahan becomes the scapegoat. Therefore, him jettison to the Commanders at a lower contract.

Whether you wanted Murray gone or not the verdict is that the Cowboys FO totally messed up. Never found a viable replacement for Murray and end the end went with a totally different system, the RBBC which eventually came back to bite us.

I never liked Callahan even when he was a head coach. his forte is OL coach. and that's what we miss. if he was any sort of good OC, one of 31 other teams would have hired him as such. he made a lateral move to the Commanders because of his demotion in dallas. and I never thought we should have implemented his full play book, given expectations of the team and where we were. regardless we struggled offensively with him calling plays.

with that said, I fully agree the FO messed up on multiple fronts. RB,back up QB, DL, LB. there was no plan B

 

[Rockport]

Yet last year, people said the offense was 109% attributable to Linehan. This year, he "does not run the offense".

Wit all due respect, not one of us (including me, you, reboot, et al) knows to what degree Linehan's control of the offense extends. I just find it comical - and grossly hypocritical - that when its successful, he gets full credit. When it's not, it's 100% on Garrett.

Its just ignorant fans who want instant gratification that Madden and Sally give them.

 

[iceberg]

i just fail to see how this is only 6 pages.

there's a lot more hate than that these days. some of you are slackin!

 

[khiladi]

Not saying that Callahan was playbook was anything great. Just that he never really got to implement it because Garrrett took over midseason calling the same ole' vanilla plays he's been calling all along.

So Garrett took back the playcalling and Callahan becomes the scapegoat. Therefore, him jettison to the Commanders at a lower contract.

Whether you wanted Murray gone or not the verdict is that the Cowboys FO totally messed up. Never found a viable replacement for Murray and end the end went with a totally different system, the RBBC which eventually came back to bite us.

Tony Sparano was not a great OC, but got the number 2 ranked scoring offense with Romo.

Callahan got to a SB with the Raiders on his rushing attack and Gannon was eventually MVP of that season. All you have to do is look at the rushing numbers with the Raiders in particular to understand how much of an impact he has. Mark Sanchez best years was behind the line of Callahan and when he left, Sanchez started hitting his head on the butt of the center.

Garrett sucked so bad as an OC, he couldn't get into the end-zone with Romo at QB.

It's becoming abundantly clear that last year's success had to do with the flexibility afforded to by Romo. Linehan can't make gold out of glitter with Garrett's playbook. Dallas offense is simply trash without Romo. And the reality is, the OL is playing reasonably healthy and a guy like Weeden had over a year to be coached in this offense and at least, develop son repoire but nothing happened. Look at how Beasley was non-existent this year without Romo.

Whatever success this team has was when Romo had to free-style. Now he's involved in the game planning. So he made a lot of adjustments at the line.

What a waste of his prime years for the training of this clown.

 

[khiladi]

The reason why we were better last year, was because of increased role of Romo in the game-planning, even with the addition of Linehan.

Romo was given, by Jerry, as I quoted above even more flexibility in the offense, changing plays at the line. With the running game of Callahan and the Linehan-Romo relationship in the passing game, the dynamic worked.

We suck this year, because Romo is gone and the coaches don't have Romo to make them look good. We can't even win a game with a back-up QB, who isn't even involved in the game-planning, meaning he's simply attacking based on what Linehan and Garrett draw up.

And just as an aside, the first two games this year with Romo, we looked sloppy up-front and we won, because Romo did his miraculous, mostly pre-Callahan, save the day routine, winning at the last minute.

 

[Alexander]

The reason why we were better last year, was because of increased role of Romo in the game-planning, even with the addition of Linehan.

Romo was given, by Jerry, as I quoted above even more flexibility in the offense, changing plays at the line. With the running game of Callahan and the Linehan-Romo relationship in the passing game, the dynamic worked.

We suck this year, because Romo is gone and the coaches don't have Romo to make them look good. We can't even win a game with a back-up QB, who isn't even involved in the game-planning, meaning he's simply attacking based on what Linehan and Garrett draw up.

And just as an aside, the first two games this year with Romo, we looked sloppy up-front and we won, because Romo did his miraculous, mostly pre-Callahan, save the day routine, winning at the last minute.

They stumbled upon a formula in 2014 that I think surprised even them. They turned to the run to relax Romo's back after a bad outing in the opener and lo and behold, they got on a roll and rode the wave. I also think that they realized a side effect of running the ball allowed Romo to take a step back and guide the games better.

This offseason after Murray was allowed to leave, something changed. Suddenly they thought a journeyman back like Lance Dunbar would be a weapon. They force fed him the ball in all of his games like he was some Reggie Bush-lite in Linehan's offense, much like how his last offense with the Lions was.

That was the design for the season, I am firmly convinced of that. We were going to go RBBC with Dunbar as a wildcard. We saw in the first game, it was like any other year, like 2014 never happened. Romo was left to save the day.

 

[khiladi]

They stumbled upon a formula in 2014 that I think surprised even them. They turned to the run to relax Romo's back after a bad outing in the opener and lo and behold, they got on a roll and rode the wave. I also think that they realized a side effect of running the ball allowed Romo to take a step back and guide the games better.

This offseason after Murray was allowed to leave, something changed. Suddenly they thought a journeyman back like Lance Dunbar would be a weapon. They force fed him the ball in all of his games like he was some Reggie Bush-lite in Linehan's offense, much like how his last offense with the Lions was.

That was the design for the season, I am firmly convinced of that. We were going to go RBBC with Dunbar as a wildcard. We saw in the first game, it was like any other year, like 2014 never happened. Romo was left to save the day.

One of your takes in the off-season that struck me was DMC with the Raiders in a zone-blocking scheme under our current OL coach..

It struck me as odd they got DMC, the decision making in this FO as regards to the run game.

 

[rpntex]

I don't know where you got that idea that people attribute 109% to Linehan calling all the plays last year. When Linehan landed here he saw the good in Callahan's running plays and actually inserted it as part of the game plan. Thus you had a duopoly of offensive coordinators of Linehan working with passing game - while Callahan focused on the run game.

The question isn't whether how much Linehan called all the plays last year in comparison to this year. We all know that Callahan had a significant contribution to the running game last year. But not this year.

The question should be why did we give up on a running game that was so effective last year - to one that was based on an RBBC system to unproven and untested RBs?

Surely, anyone can see that this years running attack is so much different than last years.

We've seen this offense before. Linehan maybe calling the plays. But its from Garrett's playbook.

So the question is why did we change our running attack style which lead to the failure of this season? Only person that could have made those changes is Garrett. Not Linehan. Thus I don't understand why Garrett is getting a pass for making this crucial blunder.

I got the idea about Linehan getting all of the credit from this very forum – I watched it all season. I can't begin to count how many times I read "the difference in the offense from last year is that Garrett is not calling the plays". Last year, people weren't crediting Garrett with it being "his playbook". This year, however, he gets a lion share of the blame "because it is his playbook". Callahan did not have a copyright on the running plays that were called last year. When he left, I'm pretty sure he left them in the playbook. If they're not being called this year, thats still on the OC. I get it – we are throwing the ball in the situations where we would have run it last year. Once again, that's Linehan's contribution.

We got away from what worked so well last year for one reason – Demarco Murray priced himself out of this offense. Wait… Let me stop myself. I don't think we would have been any more effective running the ball with Murray this year than we have been. The RBBC wasn't necessarily a bad idea. It just didn't work here for a number of reasons - not all of which had to do with the running backs. We ran the ball effectively the first two weeks of the season… Not great, but effectively. Once Romo and Dez went down, opposing coordinators started selling out against the run and daring Dallas to beat them through the air. top all of that off with the inconsistent play of the line, and you have a listing effect of resu top all of that off with the inconsistent play of the line, and you have a less than effective result. We would have seen the same result with Murray back there as well.

And yes, I have read your opinion that, had Murray been here, Romo would have never been injured. That Murray would have picked up the blitzing linebacker most likely, preventing the sack. That's nothing but BS there. And here's why…

On the play were Romo was injured, Dallas was operating out of an empty backfield. Murray would've been nowhere near the pocket to pick up the blitz – no running back was in the backfield. He was out on a pass route. If Murray were still in Dallas on that play, he would've been on a pass route as well. Kinda hard to pick up the blitz when you're out on a route.

 

[khiladi]

There were plenty of people arguing the playbook sucked even last year. They always predicated on the fact that Romo made it happen.

The fact that it worked better with Linehan, with Garrett being stripped from the play-calling last year doesn't negate the central premise that Garrett's playbook sucked. It simply means Linehan called plays much better than Garrett did, within Garrett's own garbage playbook with Romo still running the offense..

All of it was still predicated on Romo running the offense...

I personally thought Callahan leaving was the biggest loss of the off-season and it would impact the offense the most, with Romo out.

I swear, people just set up a bunch of strawmans..

 

[visionary]

Turbin came in and was very complimentary of the culture and the work ethic of the team in Dallas. He didn't compare it directly to CLE, but you know what he was getting at. Nice to hear an outsider suggest we're all pulling in the same direction and working hard still, right?

Unfortunately these are exactly the sort of disingenuous comments I have come to expect from you

A new player was "complimentary" of the culture and work habits of his new team in the first week?
You don't say
Stop the presses !!!
Garrett truly had done s great job

 

[khiladi]

Unfortunately these are exactly the sort of disingenuous comments I have come to expect from you

A new player was "complimentary" of the culture and work habits of his new team in the first week?
You don't say
Stop the presses !!!
Garrett truly had done s great job

From Cleveland, of all places..

 

[Alexander]

There were plenty of people arguing the playbook sucked even last year. They always predicated on the fact that Romo made it happen.

The fact that it worked better with Linehan, with Garrett being stripped from the play-calling last year doesn't negate the central premise that Garrett's playbook sucked. It simply means Linehan called plays much better than Garrett did, within Garrett's own garbage playbook with Romo still running the offense..

All of it was still predicated on Romo running the offense...

It is not the playbook per se. It is the offensive design, down to the concept level. Some passing games have designed throws, scripted upon combinations that flip coverages to get the desired result. It just seems that too often we look for our receivers to beat their assigned man via option routes to present opportunities, which is why you keep hearing about execution. I would really like to hear Garrett explain how his design differs from the Coryell offense because it seems basically the same.

Linehan and Garrett are basically from the same school of thought. The offense, even if Linehan could re-write the playbook would probably be the same. That's probably why he was brought in and Callahan demoted. Different viewpoints on how to design an offense.

 

[visionary]

There were plenty of people arguing the playbook sucked even last year. They always predicated on the fact that Romo made it happen.

The fact that it worked better with Linehan, with Garrett being stripped from the play-calling last year doesn't negate the central premise that Garrett's playbook sucked. It simply means Linehan called plays much better than Garrett did, within Garrett's own garbage playbook with Romo still running the offense..

All of it was still predicated on Romo running the offense...

I personally thought Callahan leaving was the biggest loss of the off-season and it would impact the offense the most, with Romo out.

I swear, people just set up a bunch of strawmans..

The fact is that Garrett would not know what an adjustment was if it hit him in the face
The reason last year worked well is precisely because they did not have to adjust. They ran it successfully with Murray and when something had to be altered romo would do it at the line

Garrett could just spit and clap and clap some more

 

[Idgit]

Unfortunately these are exactly the sort of disingenuous comments I have come to expect from you

A new player was "complimentary" of the culture and work habits of his new team in the first week?
You don't say
Stop the presses !!!
Garrett truly had done s great job

I think you think you're making me look bad with a post like this somehow, visionary, but you're not. It makes your perspective look petty and negative. You're capable of actually talking football when you put your mind to it. You should do that more often. Also, you need to look up what the word 'disingenuous' means.

There's nothing wrong with a comment on a message board saying a newly signed player was complimentary of the way the practice was run. And there's nothing wrong with a fan of that team thinking that's nice to hear. For anyone who didn't hear the interview, it really was good if you're at all interested in the perspective of a backup RB. Funny, and he seems like a good guy who wants to fit in, which makes a player easier to root for in my book.

 

[ConstantReboot]

And yes, I have read your opinion that, had Murray been here, Romo would have never been injured. That Murray would have picked up the blitzing linebacker most likely, preventing the sack. That's nothing but BS there. And here's why…

On the play were Romo was injured, Dallas was operating out of an empty backfield. Murray would've been nowhere near the pocket to pick up the blitz – no running back was in the backfield. He was out on a pass route. If Murray were still in Dallas on that play, he would've been on a pass route as well. Kinda hard to pick up the blitz when you're out on a route.

If we had Murray, 3 things would have happened:

1. Eagles would not have blitzed because they would have believed it was a run play. Which in that situation we would have ran the ball with Murray anyways.

2. If we did go with a pass with Murray in the backfield he would have picked up the blitzing man. Why? Well he did it often enough in 2014 and he was our best blocking back.

3. With Murray, we would NOT have used a empty backfield especially on 1st downs. Going wide with 3 receivers with no RB to block in the backfield when our plays take an eternity to develop is a recipe for disaster. If you want to emulate the Patriots RBBC then put more quick passing plays in the game. Throw away the crap that Garrett has us run - which takes forever to develop.

This is the fault of the coaches, mainly Garrett. Should have never experimented with the RBBC and should have stuck with what got us in the playoffs: run the ball with a featured back.