The "Right Kind of Guy" (quotes from Bill Belichick)

[Idgit]

Garrett was named HC after the 2010 season
That is 32 games by my count
16-16 is .500. Mediocre/average

Garrett lovers like to in luxe bus games as interim HC in 2010 season but it is well known that happened because Jerry read the players the riot act

You can bet your bottom dollar these homers would not be counting those games if we had a losing record in those games

Garrett record as HC is 16-16
He has been HC for 2 years

I don't believe that even you believe this is a sensible argument. In fact, this might be the most incomprehensible argument I've *ever* seen attempted on this board, and that's saying something. Because you clearly understand the frame of reference everyone is using here, and you have to be able to see that it's the accurate frame of reference. But you're still disputing it for some reason.

That said, I'm certainly not going to argue with you since you're demonstrable, categorically, wrong. The facts exist for everybody to see. I just don't understand why you're bothering.

 

[Vintage]

Seems like Belichick is just saying the right thing to the media to me. Either that or his idea of "RKG" and ours are extremely different. How many bad character guys have they taken a chance on in the past 5 years or so? Moss, Haynesworth, Denard Robinson, Aquib Talib, ect. I know there are a bunch more, especially late round picks, just can't think of them right now. Patriots seem to be all about acquiring as much talent as possible and letting their vet leadership handle the problem guys. Something I wish we were able to do.

Denard Robinson. Lol.

He plays for the Jaguars.

 

[visionary]

I don't believe that even you believe this is a sensible argument. In fact, this might be the most incomprehensible argument I've *ever* seen attempted on this board, and that's saying something. Because you clearly understand the frame of reference everyone is using here, and you have to be able to see that it's the accurate frame of reference. But you're still disputing it for some reason.

That said, I'm certainly not going to argue with you since you're demonstrable, categorically, wrong. The facts exist for everybody to see. I just don't understand why you're bothering.

I do believe that you will continue to argue even though you realize you don't have a leg to stand on

Can you tell me:

When was Garrett named HC (not interim HC) of the cowboys
How many games since the
His record as HC (not interim HC)

 

[Idgit]

I do believe that you will continue to argue even though you realize you don't have a leg to stand on

Can you tell me:

When was Garrett named HC (not interim HC) of the cowboys
How many games since the
His record as HC (not interim HC)

Sorry, I don't think I understood your question. Interim what?

 

[visionary]

Sorry, I don't think I understood your question. Interim what?

If reading comprehension is a problem at your age, ask one of your grand kids to read it to you

 

[Idgit]

If reading comprehension is a problem at your age, ask one of your grand kids to read it to you

Let's stay on topic and try not to be rude.

I want to answer your question for you, I just can't understand what your trying to get at with the abbreviation 'HC' in the phrase 'Interim HC.'

I know what I usually use 'HC' as an abbreviation for, but in this context, it doesn't make any sense.

 

[xwalker]

When you look at Head Coaches for the Dallas Cowboys you have to 1st consider that Jerry is the Owner/GM. You have to want the Head Coach that is most likely to win with the condition of Jerry being the GM.

Wade, Campo, and Switzer were all Jerry Puppets.

Parcells was too demanding of attention and made a significant amount of "seat of the pants" decisions like drafting Barbie Carpenter and Jacob Rodgers because their Dads were football guys or something to that effect. Parcells demand for attention just increased Jerry's desire to make some splash moves like TO and Roy Williams.

IMO, Garrett is about the best that you're going to get as a Head Coach with Jerry as the GM. Garrett is a stronger personality than Wade or Campo, but does not demand attention and complete control like Parcells. I think it also helps Garrett that Stephen Jones appears to "on his side" more than on Jerry's side of most issues (i.e. Garrett and Stephen are more conservative about giving out huge contracts to older players). Also, many of the past Cowboys' greats (Aikman, Emmitt, Irvin, Moose, etc.) are in Jerry's ear in support of Garrett which I believe sways Jerry to let Garrett run the team more than he did with Wade, Campo, etc..

 

[visionary]

When you look at Head Coaches for the Dallas Cowboys you have to 1st consider that Jerry is the Owner/GM. You have to want the Head Coach that is most likely to win with the condition of Jerry being the GM.

Wade, Campo, and Switzer were all Jerry Puppets.

Parcells was too demanding of attention and made a significant amount of "seat of the pants" decisions like drafting Barbie Carpenter and Jacob Rodgers because their Dads were football guys or something to that effect. Parcells demand for attention just increased Jerry's desire to make some splash moves like TO and Roy Williams.

IMO, Garrett is about the best that you're going to get as a Head Coach with Jerry as the GM. Garrett is a stronger personality than Wade or Campo, but does not demand attention and complete control like Parcells. I think it also helps Garrett that Stephen Jones appears to "on his side" more than on Jerry's side of most issues (i.e. Garrett and Stephen are more conservative about giving out huge contracts to older players). Also, many of the past Cowboys' greats (Aikman, Emmitt, Irvin, Moose, etc.) are in Jerry's ear in support of Garrett which I believe sways Jerry to let Garrett run the team more than he did with Wade, Campo, etc..

As usual Xwalker, you make a lot of sense
I agree that Garrett is likely the best we can expect from Jerry (in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king)

I just expected better from Jason because I felt that he had the traits a good HC should have
I have been disappointed by, not just the lack of results, but by the lack of discipline and accountability on the team and the continued lack of attention to the lines

The bottom line is that even though Jerry is at fault from a systemic standpoint, Jason (by all accounts) has enough influence over Jerry to be responsible for a lot of what is going on during the game, talent acquisition, coaching decisions, adjustments and game planning, discipline e and accountabity

We may choose to look away but there is no way we can absolve Garrett of responsibility

 

[Hoofbite]

I think you're wrong about what RKG is to Garrett. It is not simply a player who is not going to cause him any trouble. I think it is a far more nuanced notion of a player who is

1. intelligent
2. works hard off the field physically in training
3. works hard cognitively with the coaches and in film study
4. has a good team first attitude
5. plays with hustle to and a bit through the whistle
6. plays physically
7. plays with confidence
8. has a high football IQ with good instincts

I do think the changes he instituted has started to turn this team around. I think this team was in gradual decline from its peak in 2007 to its trough in the middle of the 2010 season with a 1-7 record. He inherited a team where most of its best players were already past their peaks so people over-estimated the talent he had (Bigg, Gurode, Barber, RW11, Colombo, TNew, Rat) and the young players on the roster were just not developing into quality starters worth keeping (Felix, Mike Jenkins, MartyB, Free). So you combine a bunch of vets declining and a 4 consecutive poor drafts from 2006-9 and you have a veteran laden team that is declining and without any youth waiting in the wings to pick things up.

Right now the only guys who were starters when Wade was here and are projected as starters next year are:

Romo
Witten
Miles Austin
Demarcus Ware
Anythony Spencer
Jay Ratliff

That's it - 2.5 years later and only 6 starters are left on the team and 3 more may be gone next season possibly leaving only Romo, Witten and Ware. Jerry doesn't like to talk about rebuilding but that kind of roster change is rebuilding basically. But Garrett managed to rebuild while having to deal with multiple bad contracts handed out by his incompetent GM and GM's son, lots of dead cap space, only one top 10 choice which was a #9 pick (we had to trade up and give up a second rounder for Mo), no extra draft picks that were generated by selling off players from the old regime and 4 poor drafts leaving very little ascending core players to develop (this is where Jim Harbaugh's situation was different - the 49ers were drafting well for years before he got there so there was a ton of young and ascending talent already there). I think it is very impressive what he managed to do with so little in the way of resources to get the job done and while being forced to always focus on the short-term with Jerry wanting to go to the SB every year despite how unrealistic that may be.

I think Garrett has done a good job turning the roster around. I think only the injuries on the defense and Center, generally very poor season from guys along the OL and Romo throwing too many interceptions last year kept us out of the playoffs. Right now I do expect us to be a much improved team and the moves made over the last 2.5 years under Garrett are about to pay dividends.

Meh. I was just trying to say that Belichick's definition is likely broader because he rules the roost and doesn't have to worry about a player running to the owner.

You listed off 8 items you think qualifies as an RKG. How many would it take to be missing in order to disqualify a guy from RKG status?

As far as turning the team around, not sure I really see it. Perhaps the appearance has changed but the results haven't necessarily followed. He inherited a QB which is more than most 1 year coaches. Hell, John Fox had Orton and Tebow to work with and he won a playoff game.

Not to mention what he "inherited" was a team that he played a significant role in building.

I have hope that this season is better but what fan doesn't?

I think the list of reasons why Dallas struggled goes beyond the one's you listed. Horrible first half offense backed the team into a corner down the stretch and when combined with the injuries it was a wrap.

It's really time to see it on the field. All the lip service and all the talk of turning things around doesn't mean much if the result on the field are only moderately better.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Really think we could go 8-8 for three more years and in 2016 people would still be claiming they see the RKG turnaround progress we're making.

Never has so much been made of a default cliche that many coaches use. It's amazing.

 

[Eskimo]

As usual Xwalker, you make a lot of sense
I agree that Garrett is likely the best we can expect from Jerry (in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king)

I just expected better from Jason because I felt that he had the traits a good HC should have
I have been disappointed by, not just the lack of results, but by the lack of discipline and accountability on the team and the continued lack of attention to the lines

The bottom line is that even though Jerry is at fault from a systemic standpoint, Jason (by all accounts) has enough influence over Jerry to be responsible for a lot of what is going on during the game, talent acquisition, coaching decisions, adjustments and game planning, discipline e and accountabity

We may choose to look away but there is no way we can absolve Garrett of responsibility

You have to remember that we have had 3 first round draft picks since Garrett took over and 2 second round picks.

With those 5 premium picks we selected:

2 OL (2 of the 3 first rounders)
1 TE (someone who will play a bit on the line)
1 LB (part of the front 7 on defense)
1 CB (scouts rated as best defensive player on the board, #2 overall)

If you extend to the 3rd round we have had 9 picks:

2 OL
1 TE
1 DL
1 LB
1 CB
1 S
1 WR
1 RB

So only 2 of the 9 picks went to true offensive skill players (TE is 1/2 blocker and 1/2 receiver to me but you can call it 3 if you want). 3 of the 9 picks went to linemen.

You also can't just evaluate how much emphasis on where we are drafting without looking at what is already on the roster. The current line contains 3 players who have been named to the Pro Bowl within the past 2 years. Their combined salaries on an averaged basis over their contracts is around $32M. Are there many more expensive lines in the league than that? I would argue that is valuing the trenches but just investing more dollars in vets than draft picks since we had a number of good vets there already.

I do agree with the notion that more should be invested in the DL because the age structure of the line is poor right now. Personally I'd try to ditch Spencer in the next vet FA and try to sign a premier DL to take his place on the roster who is much younger. I also think we need to think hard about positioning ourselves in the next draft to get a good DL. I was hoping we would get one this year but apparently it didn't align well with our draft boards when our picks were made. I thought there were some good players available where Escobar went but it sounds like Kiffen and Marinelli like what they already have for this year for some reason and the remaining players didn't fit their scheme well.

I just hope we don't make the mistake we made with the OL where we let them get old with no prospects in the wings. I actually think we should consider drafting a DL in the 7th round every year given our success there. We seem to recognize players there who have potential:

Jay Ratliff
Josh Brent
Sean Lissemore

That's a pretty good haul for minimal investment. Someone has an eye for diamonds in the rough there. You could also even add in a guy like Stephen Bowen who we found as a UDFA

 

[Idgit]

Really think we could go 8-8 for three more years and in 2016 people would still be claiming they see the RKG turnaround progress we're making.

Never has so much been made of a default cliche that many coaches use. It's amazing.

I know you're stretching it for the purpose of making an argument, but, obviously, that's probably not true. Well, maybe it's true: 'people' is a pretty low hurdle to clear. But room temperature on JG right now is about 50/50, wouldn't you say? Another close miss next season and it'll be 80/20 for firing him. If he were to get another year then, it would be with overwhelming fan disapproval. The following year there'd be no reprieve.

Out of curiosity, though, CL, hypothetical question. Do you think the 2011 squad would have finished 8-8 with the kind of injury depletion we suffered in 2012? I know it's tough to answer, but I really thought the 2012 squad started far bumpier than I'd ever hoped for from weeks 2-6 (Offensively only. The OL, the WRs, and Jason Witten's spleen, in particular). But thought the defense played really well and the offense came around and we were a pretty darn good team there for a few weeks. We couldn't sustain the depletions, but I still think the team showed a lot better than it had the previous season, showed a lot of grit and a lot of what I've personally been looking for for years around here.

There's little excuse for the offensive confusion early. And the results are the results. I'm not excusing the lack of depth due to injuries or the turnovers or the no takeaways. I'm just saying that I think last year's 8-8 team showed a lot more promise than the 2011 8-8 team. That there were some obvious extenuating circumstances that suggest there's at least a possibility of this team trending upward despite the flat won-loss record.

It's not that anybody is content with 8-8. 8-8 is 8-8. We all get that. It's that some of the things we saw in the last two seasons we think bode well for progress this year and next despite last season's record. We've all seen how much a team's fortunes can vary--positively or negatively--in one off season. Obviously, there are factors other than how you ended up last year that come into play when trying to gauge how ready the team is to compete in the coming season.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

Dallas actually rallied and improved, the team played better plus was more productive after the injuries.

Jerry is dis-functional and therefore the entire Dallas Cowboys organization follows suit.

Leaving to conclude Jerry Jones, isn't the RKG.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Wade's record was much better... I guess that's a reflective of going from a better coach to a worse coach. So JG turned a team that won the division and an actual game in the play-offs, to one that has yet to make the play-offs and struggles to reach .500 every season.

Wow the Garrett hate is strong in this one.

 

[CF74]

When you look at Head Coaches for the Dallas Cowboys you have to 1st consider that Jerry is the Owner/GM. You have to want the Head Coach that is most likely to win with the condition of Jerry being the GM.

Wade, Campo, and Switzer were all Jerry Puppets.

Parcells was too demanding of attention and made a significant amount of "seat of the pants" decisions like drafting Barbie Carpenter and Jacob Rodgers because their Dads were football guys or something to that effect. Parcells demand for attention just increased Jerry's desire to make some splash moves like TO and Roy Williams.

IMO, Garrett is about the best that you're going to get as a Head Coach with Jerry as the GM. Garrett is a stronger personality than Wade or Campo, but does not demand attention and complete control like Parcells. I think it also helps Garrett that Stephen Jones appears to "on his side" more than on Jerry's side of most issues (i.e. Garrett and Stephen are more conservative about giving out huge contracts to older players). Also, many of the past Cowboys' greats (Aikman, Emmitt, Irvin, Moose, etc.) are in Jerry's ear in support of Garrett which I believe sways Jerry to let Garrett run the team more than he did with Wade, Campo, etc..

I totally concur. Garrett is the RKG to work around, with, and thru Jerry. I see a lot of damage control (By Garrett) but little by little Jerry is listening to Jason. The fact that we have drafted 2 O-linemen in the 1st round speaks volumes to that in my estimation. Stay the course Jerry, don't let the mediots and the casual fans sway you, stay the course....

 

[tm1119]

Denard Robinson. Lol.

He plays for the Jaguars.

Lol no idea why I typed Denard Robinson. I meant Alfonzo Dennard. Got arrested before the draft and the Patriots scooped him up in the 7th and he was a contributer right away for them.

 

[SWG9]

IMO, Garrett is about the best that you're going to get as a Head Coach with Jerry as the GM. Garrett is a stronger personality than Wade or Campo, but does not demand attention and complete control like Parcells. I think it also helps Garrett that Stephen Jones appears to "on his side" more than on Jerry's side of most issues (i.e. Garrett and Stephen are more conservative about giving out huge contracts to older players). Also, many of the past Cowboys' greats (Aikman, Emmitt, Irvin, Moose, etc.) are in Jerry's ear in support of Garrett which I believe sways Jerry to let Garrett run the team more than he did with Wade, Campo, etc..

I said the same thing when Garrett was hired: for whatever reason, Jerry seems willing to defer to Garrett a little.

Not sure if I still feel that way after the last offseason.

If I were running things, Garrett would get four full years doing things his way before I'd consider interfering or canning him, but I sincerely doubt that will happen.

 

[DBOY3141]

Lol no idea why I typed Denard Robinson. I meant Alfonzo Dennard. Got arrested before the draft and the Patriots scooped him up in the 7th and he was a contributer right away for them.

And he got arrested this off-season and could miss some games. He's a knucklehead and that's the reason he was there in the 7th round. Don't think he will be with the Pats 2 years from now.

 

[slomoxn]

As usual Xwalker, you make a lot of sense
I agree that Garrett is likely the best we can expect from Jerry (in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king)

I just expected better from Jason because I felt that he had the traits a good HC should have
I have been disappointed by, not just the lack of results, but by the lack of discipline and accountability on the team and the continued lack of attention to the lines

The bottom line is that even though Jerry is at fault from a systemic standpoint, Jason (by all accounts) has enough influence over Jerry to be responsible for a lot of what is going on during the game, talent acquisition, coaching decisions, adjustments and game planning, discipline e and accountabity

We may choose to look away but there is no way we can absolve Garrett of responsibility

I agree with the part of having the traits a good HC should have but not the bolded part. At least not anymore, Jerry completely blew any semblance of me thinking Jason ran this team with the draft, I'm no longer complaining about not taking Floyd with the 31st pick but my issue is and was that IF Garrett had been able to do what he wanted Floyd would have been the pick. That isn't what Jerry wanted so they traded down, no problem with the trade but problem with overruling the man coaching the team. Jerry has been and always will be the last decision maker and as a result this team will always be mediocre as he makes two good moves to turn around and make three bad moves right after.

 

[Sportsbabe]

Just because he doesn't spoon feed the media with answers, doesn't mean a strategy doesn't exist.

It's a shame you have to point this out to people. Oh well, its the times we live in. The manufacturing of some percieved controversy, then sit back and watch the mice swarm to the cheese.