This is why I'm hesitant to extend Garrett

[visionary]

I never said he wasn't responsible. I'm just stating the double standards. When things go bad its all on Garrett. When things went well...people did EVERYTHING they could to give Linehan and Maranelli credit as if Garrett was a long for the ride. It just doesn't add up. You can't have it one way and not the either. Maranelli's defense doesn't look as All-World as it did and Linehan's showing what Lion's fans hated about him but its Garrett's fault because his backup quarterback in Kyle Orton decided to "retire" and they had NO salary cap money to sign a decent backup and had to rely on a cheap solution in Brandon Weeden.

If there was a crime committed here it was the lack of investment in a young quarterback in the draft in previous years. The crime wasn't wasting 800,000 on Brandon Weeden.



I'm not going to use the injury excuse here. Teams all of the league have injuries. Most more than us. This team should be able to function with Weeden at quarterback. But this team is TOO reliant on Tony Romo's skillset.
Its too reliant on Tony Romo's ability to extend plays and get a breakdown in coverage.

This problem arose WHEN Romo was out there getting his back caved in because of he and this teams inability to adjust and read blitzes.

You just said a whole lot of nothing buddy

Can u answer my questions by a simple yes/no?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

You just said a whole lot of nothing buddy

Can u answer my questions by a simple yes/no?

Uhh did you actually read what I wrote? I answered you're question. This is a message board here and I assume we're all capable of reading a few sentences. We shouldn't have to dumb our content and posts down for a simple "yes/no" answer.

But if that's what you want then fine. The answer is "no".

Do you have a certain agenda for Garrett? "Yes/no"?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

It's still his offense. Even with changes, certain weaknesses in the passing routes and the offense are becoming evident once again, especially with the blitz. If we don't have Romo, the offense looks like a joke. Linehan is the play-caller it's technically not his offense.

This is why I said, I wouldn't really get too over-blown about Linehan until we see the teams he played once, react to him the second time. Let's see how he adjusts to the blitz schematically, even with Romo. The Commanders feasted on this offense with the blitz even with Romo.

I do see some adjustments with more screens, which is good.

But khiladi, while the above is true, let's not escape the fact that people here on this site....some of the same people upset with Garrett are the same ones who didn't want to give him ANY credit for this team or its offense.

This offense is built around its offensive line. When you have a incompetent quarterback back there at center than all of a sudden you can play for the run and stack the box. The offensive line are only 5 men. This thing about it being just Weeden's fault or just Garrett's fault......those are just scapegoats. Its much bigger than just two guys. The offensive as a whole as well as the coaches are to blame for this.

 

[visionary]

Here were my questions

↑

As HC is Garrett not in charge of practices? Can he not evaluate QB play?

If he did, why is he not responsible for Weedens pathetic play ?

We shouldn't have to dumb our content and posts down for a simple "yes/no" answer.

But if that's what you want then fine. The answer is "no".

Lol,
So basically you are saying that Weeden was brought in without Garrett's input, that he is not in charge of practices and cannot evaluate QB play therefore is not responsible for Weedens play

Got it

 

[Beast_from_East]

McCoy CAN hit the broad side of a barn. Have you looked at that video clip of Weeden floating around? The one where he totally locked onto Dez...and then missed him by about ten yards...on a ten yard pass? The one where Beasley was right in front of his frickin' face with no one within ten yards of him? That single play sums up how pitiful and futile Weeden's peformance was. The fact that we didn't get blown out by 50 in that game is a big positive, IMO.

If it wasn't for Arizona dropping about 15 passes, they would have put a 40 burger on us.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Did Garrett sign off on going into the season with Weeden as romo's back up?

As HC is Garrett not in charge of practices? Can he not evaluate QB play?

If he did, why is he not responsible for Weedens pathetic play ?

 

[Beast_from_East]

I agree that he would want to keep him; perhaps an assistant coach or two would be sacrificed instead ("round up the usual suspects...")...

There are still some scapegoats in the yard before we get to the sacred cow in the barn....................................if you know what I mean.

 

[fifaguy]

There are still some scapegoats in the yard before we get to the sacred cow in the barn....................................if you know what I mean.

I do; very well said (as usual)...

 

[Idgit]

Hey, it's also a function of the personnel available. No problem blaming the HC for the losses, if you're also willing to credit him for the giant 6 game winning streak. But you got a pick which way you want to have it, first.

 

[visionary]

Hey, it's also a function of the personnel available. No problem blaming the HC for the losses, if you're also willing to credit him for the giant 6 game winning streak. But you got a pick which way you want to have it, first.

What does that have to do with whether Garrett agreed to sign off on Weeden or not? And is in charge of practices or not?
If he did and is, then Weedens performance is his direct responsibility

This is the same guy who elected to go with a washed up brad johnson

No amount of lipstick will hide this pig

If weeden was responsible for the loss , that is squarely on Garrett

 

[Idgit]

What does that have to do with whether Garrett agreed to sign off on Weeden or not? And is in charge of practices or not?
If he did and is, then Weedens performance is his direct responsibility

This is the same guy who elected to go with a washed up brad johnson

No amount of lipstick will hide this pig

If weeden was responsible for the loss , that is squarely on Garrett

I don't agree. I'd say if Weeden is responsible for the loss, it's squarely on Weeden. If Garrett's solely responsible for Weeden's presence on the roster, that's solely on Garrett. If he shares responsibility for Weeden on the roster, then it's partially on Garrett.

The point is, there is a lot that's the responsibility of the Head Coach. So it's fine and fair if you want to hold the things that don't work out against him. Just remember to keep it in a context and to credit him for the roster decisions that do work out. Because there dozens and dozens of them made each season. And not all of them are slam dunks. This year so far, a lot more has worked our right than has worked out wrong, and the shell game of blaming him for whatever goes wrong and not crediting him for anything that goes right is pretty transparent and not fooling anybody.

 

[Nexx]

im tired garrett being constantly out coached. has he done a good job creating a nice culture and attitude in the locker? yes! does he have the players trust and are they willing to play hard for him ? yes! but just as OP said, im tired of his inability to get his team to adjust, to put his team in the best position to win, to out scheme the opponent. these almost never happen.

 

[TrailBlazer]

You don't make a decision like that mid season, regardless.

 

[visionary]

I don't agree. I'd say if Weeden is responsible for the loss, it's squarely on Weeden. If Garrett's solely responsible for Weeden's presence on the roster, that's solely on Garrett. If he shares responsibility for Weeden on the roster, then it's partially on Garrett.

The point is, there is a lot that's the responsibility of the Head Coach. So it's fine and fair if you want to hold the things that don't work out against him. Just remember to keep it in a context and to credit him for the roster decisions that do work out. Because there dozens and dozens of them made each season. And not all of them are slam dunks. This year so far, a lot more has worked our right than has worked out wrong, and the shell game of blaming him for whatever goes wrong and not crediting him for anything that goes right is pretty transparent and not fooling anybody.

Lol of course you don't think so because it is logical

Weeden is who he is, the QB with some of the worst QB play in the NFL even BEFORE this year

The person that elected to put the teams future on him in case of romos (you know the guy with back surgeries last 2 years) inability to play is responsible

Other second year coaches (Kelly) are winning with their backups in the middle of the game on the road

Heck first year HC s (gruden) came into our stadium and beat us with his THIRD string QB

And this guy can't get his back up ready?

You're right..... He can't possibly be responsible

 

[Idgit]

Lol of course you don't think so because it is logical

Weeden is who he is, the QB with some of the worst QB play in the NFL even BEFORE this year

The person that elected to put the teams future on him in case of romos (you know the guy with back surgeries last 2 years) inability to play is responsible

Other second year coaches (Kelly) are winning with their backups in the middle of the game on the road

Heck first year HC s (gruden) came into our stadium and beat us with his THIRD string QB

And this guy can't get his back up ready?

You're right..... He can't possibly be responsible

It's adorable that you think your reasoning is logical, but I'll stand by the opinion that you need to judge the coach by all of his decisions and not just by the ones that don't work out.

The fact that other coaches in a 32 team league have different problems that don't include their backup QBs doesn't really prove anything. I'm not sure the Eagles don't actually have a problem at QB, either. The fact that they got through the Texans game doesn't really say all that much. We'll see how their QB position works out for them in the coming weeks.

That said, you might want to start getting used to the idea that other teams have good coaches, too. Especially in this case the Eagles with Chip Kelley. If he gets his team to the NFCE division crown with a combination of Nick Foles and Mark Sanches, the guy's a wizard as far as I'm concerned. It's got very little to do with Dallas, though.

 

[visionary]

I

That said, you might want to start getting used to the idea that other teams have good coaches, too.

I am already used to this idea having watched our trainee being out coached by first year HCs

 

[Idgit]

I am already used to this idea having watched our trainee being out coached by first year HCs

Great, then there shouldn't be much for you to complain about. Enjoy 6-3. Hopefully we're 7-3 at the bye, and we'll have magically done it without the benefit of a good head coach.

 

[khiladi]

But khiladi, while the above is true, let's not escape the fact that people here on this site....some of the same people upset with Garrett are the same ones who didn't want to give him ANY credit for this team or its offense.

This offense is built around its offensive line. When you have a incompetent quarterback back there at center than all of a sudden you can play for the run and stack the box. The offensive line are only 5 men. This thing about it being just Weeden's fault or just Garrett's fault......those are just scapegoats. Its much bigger than just two guys. The offensive as a whole as well as the coaches are to blame for this.

The problem though is the Commanders game in and of itself when Romo was in. There were way too many times that we had free runners through Romo. This has been a problem schematically with this team for ages. Too long of vertical routes and WRs not adjusting their routes when the blitzes are coming. No matter how good an OL is, they can only block so many people. If teams copy the Commanders blueprint and the Cowboys don't adjust, the problems will still occur. We do use more screens this year though.

 

[Doomsday101]

Here were my questions

↑

As HC is Garrett not in charge of practices? Can he not evaluate QB play?

If he did, why is he not responsible for Weedens pathetic play ?




Lol,
So basically you are saying that Weeden was brought in without Garrett's input, that he is not in charge of practices and cannot evaluate QB play therefore is not responsible for Weedens play

Got it

Garrett is responsible for Weeden play and that of all the players, he is responsible for the job his coordinators do as well. Weeden played poorly I doubt anyone expected him to play that poorly. He filled in decently vs Washington helping the offense to 10 points in 2 drives. Asking that question I guess I don't get it, was Jimmy responsible for the play of Babe Laughenberg the guy completed 35% of his passes in Dallas 1 TD and 6 ints so what was Johnson looking at? Weeden had a poor game no one has question that and if you feel better saying it Jason fault well fair enough.

 

[Idgit]

The problem though is the Commanders game in and of itself when Romo was in. There were way too many times that we had free runners through Romo. This has been a problem schematically with this team for ages. Too long of vertical routes and WRs not adjusting their routes when the blitzes are coming. No matter how good an OL is, they can only block so many people. If teams copy the Commanders blueprint and the Cowboys don't adjust, the problems will still occur. We do use more screens this year though.

If you haven't seen it already, take a look at Sturms breakdown of the sacks in that game. It's a great thread. In most cases, the issue was execution, though, and not scheme. Or, it goes back to the discussion we were having on the board when Linehan was getting so much credit for giving a team an identity: we tried to stick with what we do and to make them come out of what they wanted to do, and we were unsuccessful at it. There's a fine line between establishing an identity and 'stubbornness.'

Actually, the line isn't even all that fine. It's just a function of whether or not you win.