Was McCarthy the logical hire or just a feel good after Garrett?

[Idgit]

I agree it was an easy and comfortable hire for Jerry.

Just to note this wasn’t my words on original post. But I thought it was worthy of recognition to ponder.

Over the years I’ve often enjoyed playing devils advocate. But since the hire the wave has been overwhelmingly positive and felt some backlash or opposing perspective was needed.

FWIW, I’m just as “meh” on it as I was then. He’s a good coach, and he seems like a good guy. I do t think we’ve addressed yet the factors that have actually held the team back, so it’s tough to get too excited. Mainly I hope the change of pace invigorates everybody. Also, the ST should be a fairly easy fix. Outside of that, we have a lot up in the air in terms of personnel. It could end up being pretty good, or really bad. I’m just waiting for free agency.

 

[jazzcat22]

It was never the plan to hire McCarthy. Jerry himself already said that, during the interview with McCarthy, he felt like catching lightning in a bottle.
Jerry made the decision right there at that moment.

Remember the plan was to keep the whole offensive coaching staff together and hire a new defensive minded coach.

So it was reported, not sure I buy into it. Unless I missed something where the FO said otherwise.

 

[G2]

He's consistently wrong.

But will chirp he's on the right side of history.

 

[visionary]

From a résumé perspective, the hiring of McCarthy is an otherwise smart decision as he won a Super Bowl, consistently defeated division rivals and reached the playoffs routinely. From a logical perspective, this hiring feels like it was a mistake.

He is an offensive-minded head coach. McCarthy was an offensive coordinator for seven seasons before becoming a head coach, where he called all the offensive plays. But he was fired in Green Bay for having an unimpressive and stale offensive gameplan (in addition to his rift with Rodgers).

Unless McCarthy has revamped his offensive scheme, then there is little reason to believe that this coaching change will be any different from keeping Jason Garrett.

The hiring of the once offensive guru seemed rushed as the NFL season had yet to officially have concluded. The offseason is where offensive and defensive coordinators are open to head coaching positions, particularly those that are currently a part of a playoff run.

Only time will tell how this hiring will affect the success of the Dallas Cowboys. Time is dwindling, however, as their core and elite talent is aging day-by-day and their fans begin to grow restless over the continuous lack of success.

Let’s hope that Jerry Jones sees something that nobody else sees in Mike McCarthy and he can establish the ‘Boys as a powerhouse .
https://nflspinzone.com/2020/01/10/dallas-cowboys-mike-mccarthy-answer/

Yet another post in your fetish against McCarthy

Can we at least give him a year to coach before panning him? Meanwhile you gave 10 years of one excuse after another to your hero, Garrett

 

[Miller]

I think McCarthy was a very good hire and I think the year away from the sideline was good for McCarthy as he brought in assistants to review film or things he has done in the past, looked to different concepts currently being employed and things he saw that was not working.

I agree with this. Then I also heard Troy and many other analysts going through how he is a great hire because of what he brings with the offense, being a year away, his work with QBs..and it makes sense.

 

[cern]

Mac seems a bright guy. Seems to me a great hire.

 

[Diehardblues]

I don't get your logic here. Yes, the good playoff resume' is there. Leaning on that is logical. Taking a coach whose teams consistently won their division is logical. Not grasping the illogic here.



His downfall in GB can easily be attributed to poor talent acquisition and his QB not being a team player. I mean, who would question the generational talent ARog? And Ted Thompson (GM) hated free agency (FA's picked GB up tremendously this year) and had 3-4 years of poor drafting. GB's running game sucked toward the end of MM's tenure due to TT's talent acquisition thus he had to rely on a QB who went off the farm frequently.



First our talent core ... should be good another 5-6 years (I think we are one of the youngest teams in the league) if we can continue to pay. If we draft well then we can keep talent at playoff caliber levels.

MM has said he is keeping a lot of the old scheme and changing terminology. He's keeping the previous OC. He spent a year in a barn with other experienced football minds LEARNING more about successful schemes around the league.

Was it a rushed hire ... no ! It was an early hire. And to me, the most logical. Pro experience, known disciplinarian, seems smart, beat the Cowboys everytime we played GB almost. Jerry coulda dove off into the unknown grabbing a coach with no pro experience or an NFL experienced coordinator with no HC experience. No, none of that would have meshed with talent that your post has already alluded to that is ready to win now. (" Time is dwindling, however, as their core and elite talent is aging . . . ")





I'm never sure what Jerrah sees but plenty of other experienced NFL observers and personnel really like the hire for the Cowboys. I think Jerry made the logical and really good choice. Kinda reminds me of the Parcel's hire which was working until Jerry sabotaged it.

First of all those weren’t my words. I simply copied them from the link I provided. I’m not staying he was a bad hire simply providing some arguing points.

I’d only add Jerry basically hired the first HC he interviewed after his token one to satisfy Rooney Rule. Which was I thought the strongest part of this opinion not waiting until the season completed with more candidates available from teams still in playoffs.

And considering we are retaining our OC it would have appeared to me and others that a more defensive minded or background HC would have been in order to reshape our greatest weakness.

 

[Diehardblues]

It was never the plan to hire McCarthy. Jerry himself already said that, during the interview with McCarthy, he felt like catching lightning in a bottle.
Jerry made the decision right there at that moment.

Remember the plan was to keep the whole offensive coaching staff together and hire a new defensive minded coach.

Right

And why this hire was not only sudden but surprising to many. And in this writers opinion...not logical.

 

[Stash]

I agree with this. Then I also heard Troy and many other analysts going through how he is a great hire because of what he brings with the offense, being a year away, his work with QBs..and it makes sense.

I think some fans look at their backgrounds and somehow think that McCarthy and Kellen Moore both willingly chose to enter into a situation where they will be in conflict with one another? How does that make any shred of sense? What both have chosen to do is to work together and collaborate in the hopes that together they can make the offense even better. Given the strengths of both offenses, if they can somehow manage to pair together the strengths of both, the offense can be a nightmare to defend.

And I think the dynamic will be Moore and McCarthy talking through the headsets on gameday, running things by one another.

I'm excited and optimistic for the potential.

 

[Diehardblues]

Mac seems a bright guy. Seems to me a great hire.

On the surface it does. But then almost anyone after Garrett would have been welcome to most.

This writers opinion though I believe questions some factors which need to be considered. And why I shared.

 

[Stash]

Mac seems a bright guy. Seems to me a great hire.

If nothing else, he's a proven, competent head coach.

A clear step up from the past wasted decade.

 

[Doomsday101]

It's common knowledge McCarthy chose Alex Smith.. Maybe he didn't have the final decision but i'm sure his opinion heavily influenced their decision.

It is common knowledge that as OC he may have some input but was not the sole person when it came to the draft in SF. Again 22 other teams passed on Rodgers and Alex Smith was the QB most draft people felt should be the top pick. Does not change the fact that a year later McCarthy was named HC of GB and Rodgers was backup and they worked a lot with him to get him ready before letting Favre go. A move that was not overly popular with GB fans. To discredit the coaching that went into taking a young QB and getting him ready I think is very short sighted

 

[CouchCoach]

This is the OP's attempt at more shots at the new HC that he gave a derogatory nickname too early on and giving team officials nicknames is childish, as I am sure Booger would agree. But it is a fair question because of the manner in which McC was hired.

Booger states he wants a NFL HC much to the detriment of all the rumors about Riley and Meyer openly politicking for the job. I saw only two possibilities, McC or Rivera unless he's going to talk Billick, Cowher or Dungy back into coaching. The rest were coordinators and that's always a risk. None of the previous coordinators/coach turned HC had worked since Landry.

We would be foolish to think McC didn't approach this interview with the knowledge that this owner was on record with the word "comfortable" so turning himself from interviewee to candidate to hire him now, don't hesitate, had to include some of that. No HC was getting hired that did not make the owner comfortable, was never going to happen. Now, what that entails and to what degree that will take place, we'll just have to wait and see it unfold.

I expect Booger to continue with some of the HC duties like injury updates, who's in and out but for the life of me, I can't think of one HC that actually likes doing that. Most of them would be happy to never be interviewed.

I like this hire and he was one of my two choices so there's that. I like the fact he sat out a year and had time to reflect and within that reflection came an evaluation of his past coaching. What he learned about himself we will never know except through how he runs this team as opposed to his last one. He did coach for 13 seasons with the same team and that says something and he's worked with high level QB's.

My sense for this forum is that most are wait and see but I have seen some "guardedly optimistic's" about this and I wonder about that. You are either in or out or waiting, optimism shouldn't have to be guarded unless you are fearful of disappointment or recriminations from other members. It's OK to be optimistic and not couch that with a safety net. I am optimistic that this was one of the two best hires Booger could have made. Because when I consider the type owner/GM, we need a HC that he will not talk to about coaching but one that he will listen to about what it takes to make a team. I do think we got one of the two guys out there that he will listen to more.

 

[CATCH17]

It is common knowledge that as OC he may have some input but was not the sole person when it came to the draft in SF. Again 22 other teams passed on Rodgers and Alex Smith was the QB most draft people felt should be the top pick. Does not change the fact that a year later McCarthy was named HC of GB and Rodgers was backup and they worked a lot with him to get him ready before letting Favre go. A move that was not overly popular with GB fans. To discredit the coaching that went into taking a young QB and getting him ready I think is very short sighted

Yeah.. I give him a little credit.. I also give him credit for only winning 1 title with arguably the most talented QB of all time and credit for his departure helping them go to a NFC championship game.

 

[Doomsday101]

Yeah.. I give him a little credit.. I also give him credit for only winning 1 title with arguably the most talented QB of all time and credit for his departure helping them go to a NFC championship game.

Same could be said for Sean Payton and Drew Brees. I think all that proves is how hard it is to make it and win a SB.

 

[cml750]

Sigh, this is just a "I am sad my hero Garrett is gone" thread more than a true question about McCarthy. McCarthy may or may not be the right coach, only time will tell. What was obvious for at least the last eight years is that Garrett was not the right coach yet Jerry had an insane attachment to Garrett's mediocrity. It caused him to look through rose colored glasses much like the OP and a few others on this forum and never see how pathetic of a coach Garrett was/is. If McCarthy flames out he will be gone within three years like Garrett should have been. Keeping a bad coach for a decade was ludicrous. Either McCarthy is the right guy or we move in a few years to someone else we hope is the right guy.

 

[CouchCoach]

Yeah.. I give him a little credit.. I also give him credit for only winning 1 title with arguably the most talented QB of all time and credit for his departure helping them go to a NFC championship game.

Who were your choices over McC?

 

[ICP]

I think it was logical. As much as I would have liked to have seen a young up and coming guy get the job, I think it was a forgone conclusion that jerry would go with a so-called proven veteran head coach after the Garrett fiasco.

 

[Diehardblues]

This is the OP's attempt at more shots at the new HC that he gave a derogatory nickname too early on and giving team officials nicknames is childish, as I am sure Booger would agree. But it is a fair question because of the manner in which McC was hired.

Booger states he wants a NFL HC much to the detriment of all the rumors about Riley and Meyer openly politicking for the job. I saw only two possibilities, McC or Rivera unless he's going to talk Billick, Cowher or Dungy back into coaching. The rest were coordinators and that's always a risk. None of the previous coordinators/coach turned HC had worked since Landry.

We would be foolish to think McC didn't approach this interview with the knowledge that this owner was on record with the word "comfortable" so turning himself from interviewee to candidate to hire him now, don't hesitate, had to include some of that. No HC was getting hired that did not make the owner comfortable, was never going to happen. Now, what that entails and to what degree that will take place, we'll just have to wait and see it unfold.

I expect Booger to continue with some of the HC duties like injury updates, who's in and out but for the life of me, I can't think of one HC that actually likes doing that. Most of them would be happy to never be interviewed.

I like this hire and he was one of my two choices so there's that. I like the fact he sat out a year and had time to reflect and within that reflection came an evaluation of his past coaching. What he learned about himself we will never know except through how he runs this team as opposed to his last one. He did coach for 13 seasons with the same team and that says something and he's worked with high level QB's.

My sense for this forum is that most are wait and see but I have seen some "guardedly optimistic's" about this and I wonder about that. You are either in or out or waiting, optimism shouldn't have to be guarded unless you are fearful of disappointment or recriminations from other members. It's OK to be optimistic and not couch that with a safety net. I am optimistic that this was one of the two best hires Booger could have made. Because when I consider the type owner/GM, we need a HC that he will not talk to about coaching but one that he will listen to about what it takes to make a team. I do think we got one of the two guys out there that he will listen to more.

Of course it’s a fair question. And just because he was one of two on your list doesn’t mean it satisfies everyone.

 

[CouchCoach]

Of course it’s a fair question. And just because he was one of two on your list doesn’t mean it satisfies everyone.

Did I say it did? I was prequalifying my comments as I was on board with this hiring. No hidden agenda...…...like some I know.

Do you think any HC would have satisfied everyone? Even your choice for HC? Whoever that was. BTW, who was your guy?