Want respect?

[Batman1980]

I'd like to think a team with the history we have would be held to a higher standard than the "should probably be contracted from the league" Cleveland Browns.

 

[Diehardblues]

A head coach who has been with his team for 11 years better have a lot more to show for it than 0 divisional round wins and a shoddy record without a #1 QB.

Depends on what the priorities are.

 

[Diehardblues]

I'd like to think a team with the history we have would be held to a higher standard than the "should probably be contracted from the league" Cleveland Browns.

Breaking News...

The Bar has been lowered Cowboy fans..

 

[Batman1980]

Breaking News...

The Bar has been lowered Cowboy fans..

I know, the Jones family only cares about profits these days, sad state of affairs.

 

[JustChip]

Do you believe in the idea that head coaches should ultimately be judged by playoff wins? If winning in the playoffs isn’t the goal, what is the goal?

Certainly playoff success is the goal and what coaches are ultimately judged by. However, the $64,000 question is at what point do you pull the plug on the coach? Landry (and, please, no, this isn't comparing the capabilities of Garrett vs. Landry) was 1-4 his in first 5 playoffs before finally winning the Big One. So, is it after 6 playoff games and no title? Or after 3 with a 1-2 record? I'm not being glib, I'm truly only asking when is when?

Personally, how a team performs in those playoff games is critical in the evaluation. E.g., the Marvin Lewis and the Bengals haven't won a playoff game in, what, 7 tries? The reason most of the time is because they play undisciplined football, particularly on defense. That's totally on the coach. Contrast that with the Garrett playoffs and the team has been in both losses until the very end, and in the case of the latest, only lost because of an outstanding play by an outstanding player. There were things Garrett and the staff could do better, but I wouldn't hang the loss on him being outcoached.

 

[Diehardblues]

I know, the Jones family only cares about profits these days, sad state of affairs.

Jerry wants to win badly, but only his way or he’d step down and bring in a valid GM and HC.

It is what it is. Fans continuing to raise the lowered bar are setting themselves up. That’s how I see it.

 

[Batman1980]

I just teach myself to care less than I used to, I don't always succeed of course.

 

[Diehardblues]

I just teach myself to care less than I used to, I don't always succeed of course.

I still care . I just don’t have high expectations.Why would we this era?

 

[atlantacowboy]

Certainly playoff success is the goal and what coaches are ultimately judged by. However, the $64,000 question is at what point do you pull the plug on the coach? Landry (and, please, no, this isn't comparing the capabilities of Garrett vs. Landry) was 1-4 his in first 5 playoffs before finally winning the Big One. So, is it after 6 playoff games and no title? Or after 3 with a 1-2 record? I'm not being glib, I'm truly only asking when is when?

Personally, how a team performs in those playoff games is critical in the evaluation. E.g., the Marvin Lewis and the Bengals haven't won a playoff game in, what, 7 tries? The reason most of the time is because they play undisciplined football, particularly on defense. That's totally on the coach. Contrast that with the Garrett playoffs and the team has been in both losses until the very end, and in the case of the latest, only lost because of an outstanding play by an outstanding player. There were things Garrett and the staff could do better, but I wouldn't hang the loss on him being outcoached.

Comparing Garret to Landry b/c of initial playoff record is ludicrous and completely ignores the situations.

Landry built the cowboys from an expansion franchise and the arrow was always pointing up. Landry was an innovator on both sides of the ball, and a peerless leader of men. Garret posses none of these qualities or attributes. He's coaching the Dallas Cowboys b/c our flamboyant owner took a shine to him and knows he isn't going to tread on his spotlight. Garret hasn't earned this job and is clearly over his head as a HC which is why Jerry has to recruit former HC's to lead the offense and the defense...........Landry lead the cowboys on both sides of the ball and their was no question about the direction of the team. There was a sound football philosophy and a "cowboy way" of doing things.

Garret is coaching the cowboys b/c he makes things comfortable for Jerry around the team facilities. It has nothing to do with his record or playoff success. Therefore, I don't expect those to be factors in determining when he needs to go. Its a Bengals situations which is a really sad testament to how far this franchise has fallen.

 

[Blackrain]

Jerry wants to win badly, but only his way or he’d step down and bring in a valid GM and HC.

It is what it is. Fans continuing to raise the lowered bar are setting themselves up. That’s how I see it.

When you have Jerrys money the only things that can really excite you are the things you cant buy . The skill to build a championship team himself without more qualified help is one of those things .

So we are where we are . Im just happy we have come full circle with our offensive scheme and are now a ball control , power running smash mouth style that moves the chains and protects the ball along with many of our weaknesses .

This at least provides good football to watch as we can impose our will on many teams. Even if they know whats coming its still hard to stop with the talent we have when healthy

A year like 2016 is really the best we can hope for with our current situation. That's where the bar rests for me
Good power running to watch , minimal gut wrenching turnovers and qualify to play in the post season . Sure we probably go out in the first round but we could get lucky and go to the next round .

 

[Falco78]

wipe your tears away little fellow, if Dak nose dives further, the stale will get better.

Even though stats disagree with your incorrect statement...

 

[JustChip]

Comparing Garret to Landry b/c of initial playoff record is ludicrous and completely ignores the situations.

Landry built the cowboys from an expansion franchise and the arrow was always pointing up. Landry was an innovator on both sides of the ball, and a peerless leader of men. Garret posses none of these qualities or attributes. He's coaching the Dallas Cowboys b/c our flamboyant owner took a shine to him and knows he isn't going to tread on his spotlight. Garret hasn't earned this job and is clearly over his head as a HC which is why Jerry has to recruit former HC's to lead the offense and the defense...........Landry lead the cowboys on both sides of the ball and their was no question about the direction of the team. There was a sound football philosophy and a "cowboy way" of doing things.

Garret is coaching the cowboys b/c he makes things comfortable for Jerry around the team facilities. It has nothing to do with his record or playoff success. Therefore, I don't expect those to be factors in determining when he needs to go. Its a Bengals situations which is a really sad testament to how far this franchise has fallen.

Did you miss where I said "(and, please, no, this isn't comparing the capabilities of Garrett vs. Landry)"? I don't even begin to compare Garrett's coaching abilities to Coach Landry's. I was simply addressing the oft-stated criticism of Garrett being his playoff record and the folly thereof. If you applied the same rationale to Coach Landry at the same point you would've missed out on 20+ consecutive winning seasons, 2 Super Bowl wins with 5 total Super Bowl appearances.

I'm guessing you're of similar age to me based on your response. If I'm right, you should remember there was no shortage of criticism of Coach and support for a change after the '63 season. They had just taken a step back record-wise and there was significant belief that the arrow was not, indeed, pointing up. Fortunately, Clint was not so emotionally driven nor short-sighted; he wisely shut the naysayers up by giving Coach a 10 year contract extension. It took almost the full 10 years to reach the pinnacle and win a championship.

I'm guessing, again based on your response, that some measure of your criticism of Garrett is really an editorial on Jerry. I apologize if I'm wrong, but I'm likewise guessing you initially felt the same about Jimmy because of how Jerry treated Landry, especially after 1-15 in 1989. There was zero indication the arrow was pointing up after that season. Likewise, there was zero indication of what was to follow - 3 Super Bowl wins.

There are definitely better coaches than Garrett (and worse by the way). But if a change needs to be made, base it on something other than his playoff record.

 

[Captain-Crash]

Yep it was hard for Jimmy and Jerry to buy the best players to win 3 super bowls..

 

[atlantacowboy]

Did you miss where I said "(and, please, no, this isn't comparing the capabilities of Garrett vs. Landry)"? I don't even begin to compare Garrett's coaching abilities to Coach Landry's. I was simply addressing the oft-stated criticism of Garrett being his playoff record and the folly thereof. If you applied the same rationale to Coach Landry at the same point you would've missed out on 20+ consecutive winning seasons, 2 Super Bowl wins with 5 total Super Bowl appearances.

I'm guessing you're of similar age to me based on your response. If I'm right, you should remember there was no shortage of criticism of Coach and support for a change after the '63 season. They had just taken a step back record-wise and there was significant belief that the arrow was not, indeed, pointing up. Fortunately, Clint was not so emotionally driven nor short-sighted; he wisely shut the naysayers up by giving Coach a 10 year contract extension. It took almost the full 10 years to reach the pinnacle and win a championship.

I'm guessing, again based on your response, that some measure of your criticism of Garrett is really an editorial on Jerry. I apologize if I'm wrong, but I'm likewise guessing you initially felt the same about Jimmy because of how Jerry treated Landry, especially after 1-15 in 1989. There was zero indication the arrow was pointing up after that season. Likewise, there was zero indication of what was to follow - 3 Super Bowl wins.

There are definitely better coaches than Garrett (and worse by the way). But if a change needs to be made, base it on something other than his playoff record.

You absolutely made the comparison between the 2 coaches initial playoff records which is absurdly out of context.

I was a fan of Jimmy Johnson from day 1 b/c it was time for Landry to retire, though I did not like the way Jerry handled it. So, wrong there buddy. The Cowboys were not an expansion team in 1989 and had some nice pieces in place....like Michael Irvin and Troy Aikman. It was very obvious Jimmy was using the 1989 season as an audition.

As for Landry in 1963, there was very little criticism of him b/c he was already a respected coach in NY and not some kid in need of training wheels. The assassination of JFK in Dallas is what derailed that season. And what were the "expectations" for an expansion team in year 3-4 back in 1963? Hint: it wasn't the playoffs. It took a long time to build teams back then b/c you only had the draft.

 

[JustChip]

You absolutely made the comparison between the 2 coaches initial playoff records which is absurdly out of context.

I was a fan of Jimmy Johnson from day 1 b/c it was time for Landry to retire, though I did not like the way Jerry handled it. So, wrong there buddy. The Cowboys were not an expansion team in 1989 and had some nice pieces in place....like Michael Irvin and Troy Aikman. It was very obvious Jimmy was using the 1989 season as an audition.

As for Landry in 1963, there was very little criticism of him b/c he was already a respected coach in NY and not some kid in need of training wheels. The assassination of JFK in Dallas is what derailed that season. And what were the "expectations" for an expansion team in year 3-4 back in 1963? Hint: it wasn't the playoffs. It took a long time to build teams back then b/c you only had the draft.

Yes, I made the comparison of their initial playoff record, not of their skills or capabilities as coaches. I expressly pointed that out.

And, yes, the expectations for an expansion team in year 3-4 were certainly not the playoffs. But that didn't stop the naysayers from voicing that a coaching change was needed. It didn't help that the Texans had won their championship (and, no, I'm not comparing the NFL and AFL at that time).

My point is most definitely not out of context. Playoff record is playoff record. And I guarantee many today criticizing Garrett for his playoff record would've been the doing the very same with Landry in 1970, expansion team and circumstances be damned. What a mistake that would've been. I won't presume to predict the future with Garrett, but if the team were to get to the NFCC this year and maybe win the Super Bowl next year, what would that say about firing him solely because of a 1-2 record. Now, you may say Garrett isn't capable of getting to the NFCC or SB, which is fine, but it isn't because he's 1-2 in playoff games. Period.

Regarding, Jimmy, as I said, I made an assumption that I admitted could be wrong. And apologized in advance if I was. But neither do I play revisionist history (and I'm not insinuating or accusing you of doing). Obviously not you, but the vast majority of people today waxing nostalgic about Jimmy and the glory days weren't doing so in 1989. Oh, there were supporters, but they weren't the majority. Or if they were, they were the silent majority then and vocal majority now. I, for one, openly questioned whether Jimmy was just a college coach not cut out for the big leagues. Obviously I was wrong in hindsight, but I won't be caught saying "oh, I knew all along he was going to lead us to 2 Super Bowls)"

Just to be very, very clear, I loved Coach Landry. Not simply because of his coaching, but because of what it did as a B-17 pilot in WW2 and what he exemplified in his walk of life outside football. But that has zero to do with my original question - do you fire a coach simply because he's gone 1-2 in his first 3 playoff games and the 2 losses the team was tied or moving to tie is the last minutes of the game? Make it a blind test and takes names out of it and simply go on the record of the last 4 years which encompasses the playoff years.

 

[atlantacowboy]

Yes, I made the comparison of their initial playoff record, not of their skills or capabilities as coaches. I expressly pointed that out.

And, yes, the expectations for an expansion team in year 3-4 were certainly not the playoffs. But that didn't stop the naysayers from voicing that a coaching change was needed. It didn't help that the Texans had won their championship (and, no, I'm not comparing the NFL and AFL at that time).

My point is most definitely not out of context. Playoff record is playoff record. And I guarantee many today criticizing Garrett for his playoff record would've been the doing the very same with Landry in 1970, expansion team and circumstances be damned. What a mistake that would've been. I won't presume to predict the future with Garrett, but if the team were to get to the NFCC this year and maybe win the Super Bowl next year, what would that say about firing him solely because of a 1-2 record. Now, you may say Garrett isn't capable of getting to the NFCC or SB, which is fine, but it isn't because he's 1-2 in playoff games. Period.

Regarding, Jimmy, as I said, I made an assumption that I admitted could be wrong. And apologized in advance if I was. But neither do I play revisionist history (and I'm not insinuating or accusing you of doing). Obviously not you, but the vast majority of people today waxing nostalgic about Jimmy and the glory days weren't doing so in 1989. Oh, there were supporters, but they weren't the majority. Or if they were, they were the silent majority then and vocal majority now. I, for one, openly questioned whether Jimmy was just a college coach not cut out for the big leagues. Obviously I was wrong in hindsight, but I won't be caught saying "oh, I knew all along he was going to lead us to 2 Super Bowls)"

Just to be very, very clear, I loved Coach Landry. Not simply because of his coaching, but because of what it did as a B-17 pilot in WW2 and what he exemplified in his walk of life outside football. But that has zero to do with my original question - do you fire a coach simply because he's gone 1-2 in his first 3 playoff games and the 2 losses the team was tied or moving to tie is the last minutes of the game? Make it a blind test and takes names out of it and simply go on the record of the last 4 years which encompasses the playoff years.

I just think Landry and Tex were getting old and the game was passing them by particularly in the evaluation of college players. Back in the 80's the league was still all about the draft, and Landry and Tex found very few good players in the drafts from 1980-1987. In fact, it was probably among the worst drafting in the NFL. I'm not sure who that fell on more but something had to change. Landry's run ended b/c he couldn't replace retiring and injured players. It caught up to him. Jimmy came in with a wealth of knowledge about college players and it just seemed like a good fit. Most of the folks who hated him in the beggining were Landry diehards and it wouldn't have mattered who stepped in.

 

[JustChip]

I just think Landry and Tex were getting old and the game was passing them by particularly in the evaluation of college players. Back in the 80's the league was still all about the draft, and Landry and Tex found very few good players in the drafts from 1980-1987. In fact, it was probably among the worst drafting in the NFL. I'm not sure who that fell on more but something had to change. Landry's run ended b/c he couldn't replace retiring and injured players. It caught up to him. Jimmy came in with a wealth of knowledge about college players and it just seemed like a good fit. Most of the folks who hated him in the beggining were Landry diehards and it wouldn't have mattered who stepped in.

There was a lot of reaching in the 80 drafts. Kind of similar to what Jerry did for most of the post-Jimmy time. I don't know that Tex and Landry would've been able to turn it around like Jerry and Jimmy (and, yes, I give Jerry some credit for the early years). For one, they would've definitely drafted Aikman, but Coach Landry wouldn't have started him in 89, maybe not even 90. That might have actually worked out and prolonged Aikman's career, but that's conjecture. And I have no doubt they wouldn't have done the Walker trade. Can't prove it, but Coach Landry valued experience very highly. I thought it was time for Landry to go, I just didn't like the way it was done. Results matter, but there was no reason for the disrespectful way it was done.

 

[atlantacowboy]

There was a lot of reaching in the 80 drafts. Kind of similar to what Jerry did for most of the post-Jimmy time. I don't know that Tex and Landry would've been able to turn it around like Jerry and Jimmy (and, yes, I give Jerry some credit for the early years). For one, they would've definitely drafted Aikman, but Coach Landry wouldn't have started him in 89, maybe not even 90. That might have actually worked out and prolonged Aikman's career, but that's conjecture. And I have no doubt they wouldn't have done the Walker trade. Can't prove it, but Coach Landry valued experience very highly. I thought it was time for Landry to go, I just didn't like the way it was done. Results matter, but there was no reason for the disrespectful way it was done.

They would have had the same problem after that first #1 overall draft pick. They just weren't any good evaluating college players. 8 poor drafts in a row is not an aberration. The Walker trade was something that only Jimmy Johnson would have come up with. Tex and Landry never made blockbuster trades like that.........hell, nobody did. Jimmy turned the league upside down and did things in ways nobody had ever done before. His draft slot points system or some tweaked variation of it is still used today.

 

[JustChip]

They would have had the same problem after that first #1 overall draft pick. They just weren't any good evaluating college players. 8 poor drafts in a row is not an aberration. The Walker trade was something that only Jimmy Johnson would have come up with. Tex and Landry never made blockbuster trades like that.........hell, nobody did. Jimmy turned the league upside down and did things in ways nobody had ever done before. His draft slot points system is still used today.

I don't know if you classify the trade with Seattle to be able to draft Tony D as a blockbuster, but it was definitely a significant trade at the time. I don't remember exactly what they gave up.

 

[kskboys]

I don't know if you classify the trade with Seattle to be able to draft Tony D as a blockbuster, but it was definitely a significant trade at the time. I don't remember exactly what they gave up.

We stole Tony D.