Turnovers are player problems not coaching problems

[Vandyr]

Any coach or pro wr will tell you thats a catchable ball that needs to be caught.

Yea, and any coach or pro QB will tell you you get the most gain if you hit your receivers in stride, especially when his defender is beaten and the field in front of him is wide open. Why not hold the QB to the same standard as the WR?

 

[johnmeuir]

You cannot blame the players. It starts with the leadership.

I have not leaned one way or the other with Jason Garrett until yesterday. When I saw his dumb founded, helpless, deer in headlights look and the entire Cowboys sideline looking exactly like him, I knew he had to go.

People in leadership positions not putting the right players on the field to create turnovers is a problem, maybe not THE problem, but a large one. Along with seemingly not having a plan of attack and getting the team fired up and ready.

 

[mmohican29]

*Yawns*


Like I said, the loudest ones in here criticizing Coop, dont have an athletic bone in their body.

Well then- I suppose you played QB @ Wherdafuq HS too, and dropped dimes like a meter maid.

Might have played @ that nice D3 stadium in '86 with a 3rd place finish two hours away in Nobody Acres too.

But you got flipped to Flanker in 10th grade, and the rest is history.

 

[Runwildboys]

Not true, he was pretty bad in the Miami game throwing too far in front of a receiver and was picked off, he threw behind Cobb against the Skins and was picked off, and he threw behind Cobb again against the Saints which resulted in us needing to punt.

Seems people have short term memory loss when it comes to evaluating Dak. The Jerry effect.

He did have occasional misses in those games, but as a rule, he was throwing more very well placed balls, leading the receivers. Also, I believe the Cobb interception was catchable too, and Dak intentionally threw it a bit behind to keep Cobb safe, but I may be combining two different plays in my mind.

I'm not saying he was perfect, but he was certainly looking more accurate.

 

[Parcells4Life]

You cannot blame the players. It starts with the leadership.

I have not leaned one way or the other with Jason Garrett until yesterday. When I saw his dumb founded, helpless, deer in headlights look and the entire Cowboys sideline looking exactly like him, I knew he had to go.

People in leadership positions not putting the right players on the field to create turnovers is a problem, maybe not THE problem, but a large one. Along with seemingly not having a plan of attack and getting the team fired up and ready.

Grown men should get themselves fired up. I doubt Belicheck makes rousing pre game speeches.

Defensively I will agree the scheme doesn’t put players in position to get turnovers.

But the idea that Dak and Amari aren’t the ones to blame for the INT is ridiculous. Or that Witten and Zeke wouldn’t have fumbled if Garrett told them more not to fumble.

 

[Sydla]

Grown men should get themselves fired up. I doubt Belicheck makes rousing pre game speeches.

Defensively I will agree the scheme doesn’t put players in position to get turnovers.

But the idea that Dak and Amari aren’t the ones to blame for the INT is ridiculous. Or that Witten and Zeke wouldn’t have fumbled if Garrett told them more not to fumble.

OK. So Garrett or Moore isn't to blame for dropped passes or fumbles.

Can we hold them accountable for anything? What about Marinelli and Richard? Can we hold them accountable, even partially, for a run defense that gets shredded?

 

[johnmeuir]

Grown men should get themselves fired up. I doubt Belicheck makes rousing pre game speeches.

Defensively I will agree the scheme doesn’t put players in position to get turnovers.

But the idea that Dak and Amari aren’t the ones to blame for the INT is ridiculous. Or that Witten and Zeke wouldn’t have fumbled if Garrett told them more not to fumble.

It doesn’t have to be a speech. Jason Garrett is quite good at those I think.

But specifically the Cooper INT, it’s absolutely their fault.

I’m just looking at the bigger picture and the entire team just looked unenthusiastic and uninterested. The coach is bad.

 

[shabazz]

Lol @ easy catch


I can tell most of you havent played a sport in your life. That wasnt an easy catch

In this forum we see people creating entire threads where alot of ancillary crap is spewed out but the real reason is just to include one phrase to protect The One. Great job on reading and recognizing the facade

 

[Runwildboys]

Grown men should get themselves fired up. I doubt Belicheck makes rousing pre game speeches.

Defensively I will agree the scheme doesn’t put players in position to get turnovers.

But the idea that Dak and Amari aren’t the ones to blame for the INT is ridiculous. Or that Witten and Zeke wouldn’t have fumbled if Garrett told them more not to fumble.

Some people seem to think coaches can hypnotize players to never make mistakes.

To those who want to claim that the coaches are responsible for the fumbles, interceptions, and stupid (There's a reason they're called stupid.) penalties, let me just say, you take the adage, "practice makes perfect" too literally.

 

[Runwildboys]

OK. So Garrett or Moore isn't to blame for dropped passes or fumbles.

Can we hold them accountable for anything? What about Marinelli and Richard? Can we hold them accountable, even partially, for a run defense that gets shredded?

Yes, they definitely deserve some of the blame for not scheming the defense well enough to stop the huge runs, especially the ones that go up the middle.

 

[Runwildboys]

"It can't be the players' faults. I like them."

 

[ondaedg]

Are takeaways a coaching problem or player problem?

You nailed it with a question. Both but scheme is more important. Takeaways are the ultimate equalizer and we're the worst team in the NFL over the last 7 year's at getting them. To put it into perspective, the Pats have as many INTs in 5 games than we have in our last 21 games.

It was the reason JJ hired the ole Tampa Bay coaches so we could start generating some turnovers. I would argue that more passes hit our DBs in the back of their heads than any other team. Heck it happened again yesterday.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Haven’t for many years.
Comes hand in hand with the bend but don’t break conservative playing style

That's partly it, bend don't break as far as pass defense goes means you back off the receivers and tackle them for short gains. But time and again I see our DTs and DEs grab the quarterback for a sack and never swipe at the ball to knock it loose. Never see players grab at the ball when another player has a firm grip on the ball carrier and it's a certain tackle already. That is coachable....

 

[LACowboysFan1]

You nailed it with a question. Both but scheme is more important. Takeaways are the ultimate equalizer and we're the worst team in the NFL over the last 7 year's at getting them. To put it into perspective, the Pats have as many INTs in 5 games than we have in our last 21 games.

It was the reason JJ hired the ole Tampa Bay coaches so we could start generating some turnovers. I would argue that more passes hit our DBs in the back of their heads than any other team. Heck it happened again yesterday.

Well the old saying is that cornerbacks are receivers that can't catch...

 

[ondaedg]

Well the old saying is that cornerbacks are receivers that can't catch...

Agreed but I gotta believe there is a "system" issue here. I've never seen a team where none of the DBs know where the ball is when they're contesting a catch.

 

[Parcells4Life]

Agreed but I gotta believe there is a "system" issue here. I've never seen a team where none of the DBs know where the ball is when they're contesting a catch.

The defensive system is taught to face the receiver not the ball. Richard wants to cause more incompletions than INTs. I don’t agree with the system but it is what it is

 

[tyke1doe]

Because he had better players?

I already addresses this point on previous pages.
Aikman was one of those BETTER players. He also turned the ball over three times in the 1994 NFC Championship.
How does this once efficient and careful quarterback go to becoming a turnover machine?
He does because as Aikman even said, the team lacked DISCIPLINE after Johnson left.
In sum, Johnson STRESSED being a disciplined football team that paid attention to all the little details of the game, including offense, defense and SPECIAL TEAMS. We have never had a special teams like we did under Johnson. We would block punts, run punts back for touchdowns, etc.
Also, in big moments, we hardly EVER turned the ball over. During the 92-93 march to Super Bowl 27, I don't think we had one turnover in the playoffs.
That didn't happen by chance. It's because Johnson and staff stressed the importance of how costly turnovers are. Yet when Johnson left, Aikman and company turned the ball over three times giving the 49ers a 21-0 lead. Yeah, it's all about the better players.
It's interesting that Belichick's teams rarely turn the ball over. And when they do, they're able to overcome them. We're not a team that can do that regularly, not against the better teams.
Yes, coaching plays a part in an undisciplined team. And undisciplined teams turn the ball over.

 

[droopdog7]

I already addresses this point on previous pages.
Aikman was one of those BETTER players. He also turned the ball over three times in the 1994 NFC Championship.
How does this once efficient and careful quarterback go to becoming a turnover machine?
He does because as Aikman even said, the team lacked DISCIPLINE after Johnson left.
In sum, Johnson STRESSED being a disciplined football team that paid attention to all the little details of the game, including offense, defense and SPECIAL TEAMS. We have never had a special teams like we did under Johnson. We would block punts, run punts back for touchdowns, etc.
Also, in big moments, we hardly EVER turned the ball over. During the 92-93 march to Super Bowl 27, I don't think we had one turnover in the playoffs.
That didn't happen by chance. It's because Johnson and staff stressed the importance of how costly turnovers are. Yet when Johnson left, Aikman and company turned the ball over three times giving the 49ers a 21-0 lead. Yeah, it's all about the better players.
It's interesting that Belichick's teams rarely turn the ball over. And when they do, they're able to overcome them. We're not a team that can do that regularly, not against the better teams.
Yes, coaching plays a part in an undisciplined team. And undisciplined teams turn the ball over.

And where was all this discipline when JJ went to Miami? Oh that's right, he didn't have the better players then.

Don't forget that even Barry Switzer, a terrible coach in many ways, won a SB with those players two years after Jimmy left.

 

[tyke1doe]

And where was all this discipline when JJ went to Miami? Oh that's right, he didn't have the better players then.

Don't forget that even Barry Switzer, a terrible coach in many ways, won a SB with those players two years after Jimmy left.

You conveniently missed the point. Did JJ's Miami teams turn the ball over?
We're not talking about winning and losing, although Jimmy's Miami teams made the playoffs.
We're talking about whether coaching plays a role in a team's turnover. It does. Preventing turnovers is something coaches teach, some better than others.
You can argue to the nth degree and stumble upon an example that doesn't fit, but it's not coincidental that some teams turn the ball over more than other teams. And that has to do with players AND with coaching.

 

[Bob-Lillys-War]

Some of you do understand there is training, planning and scheming to prevent fumbles and interceptions right ?

Also penalties , etc ...


Some of you ...