We havent seen anything yet

[Stash]

Wentz is a great young QB but the fact is we have one of our own too. Difference is,... Wentz has a head coach that will scheme to highlight his strengths and cover his weaknesses. We dont have that. Instead we have a guy that will clap, slap players on the butt, and shriek out...YEAH!! YEAH!! F YEAH!!! From the sidelines as if that sort of thing is what wins games. Slogans only hold up so long, at some point you actually have to BE A COACH and scheme to put your players in position to win .

And there's the fundamental problem.

Fans simply want to blame the players for everything, and then those same players are somehow better elsewhere? Both before, and then after they're in Dallas, how and why is that?

A coach's job is to put their players in the best possible position to make plays. If a coach can't do that, they're not good enough.

This staff can't, ergo they're not good enough.

And there's no greater example of it than the head coach. He can "talk" coach very well, he just can't "coach" coach.

 

[Melonfeud]

And there's the fundamental problem.

Fans simply want to blame the players for everything, and then those same players are somehow better elsewhere? Both before, and then after they're in Dallas, how and why is that?

A coach's job is to put their players in the best possible position to make plays. If a coach can't do that, they're not good enough.

This staff can't, ergo they're not good enough.

And there's no greater example of it than the head coach. He can "talk" coach very well, he just can't "coach" coach.

That's a bingo StashRoo!
Bullseye, popped it square in the coolio, 4 run homer,laid it down like the Titanic,,, er,,,I've more,OH,YES! mini Moore but yer' catching the gist

 

[Hayseed]

One of my biggest problems with Garrett is that he always blames everything on lack of execution. Couple things on that.......A... What about lack of execution from the head coach and coaching staff. Why is it that only they are immune? B......... If all losses only stem from lack of execution than no coach anywhere EVER, deserves to be fired regardless of record. Afterall,... it wasnt their fault it was the players who didnt execute the play or gameplan correctly! LOL THAT....my friends is a load of horseschitt! It is a coaches job to see to it that plays and gameplans are executed properly. It is what they are hired to do. Garrett is a weak coach. A "middling" type talent. Just as simple as that. If this team truly wants to move forward then it cannot be with him.

 

[Hayseed]

All I know is this. General Eisenhower had two different speeches prepared for the days following the D day invasion at Normandy. One if the invasion succeeded, one if it failed. Pretty damn sure I can say with a high degree of confidence that the failure speech wouldnt have included in it anything about how the invasion plan was sound and would have worked if only the troops would have executed it properly. That is simply NOT what any REAL leader does.

 

[IheartRomo]

One of my biggest problems with Garrett is that he always blames everything on lack of execution. Couple things on that.......A... What about lack of execution from the head coach and coaching staff. Why is it that only they are immune? B......... If all losses only stem from lack of execution than no coach anywhere EVER, deserves to be fired regardless of record. Afterall,... it wasnt their fault it was the players who didnt execute the play or gameplan correctly! LOL THAT....my friends is a load of horseschitt! It is a coaches job to see to it that plays and gameplans are executed properly. It is what they are hired to do. Garrett is a weak coach. A "middling" type talent. Just as simple as that. If this team truly wants to move forward then it cannot be with him.

Kind of falls in line with what the majority of us having been saying about Garrett for at least a few years if not more: If your coach needs superior talent to get any type of results and is unwilling or unable to scheme to paper over weaknesses, then what good is the coach?

Aynone can win when you've got the best players (Phil Jackson). A good coach helps his team reach results exceeding their talent or ability level (Brad Stevens w/ the Celtics). To me that's the true litmus test of how good a coach is.

Garrett has proven utterly inept at even attempting to adjust when losing a star player (Romo, Tyron, Lee). It is completely unacceptable to become non-competitive when losing a great player, especially a non-QB. It's unheard of ineptitude.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No kidding. Thats why I said in my post that he rang up a Super Bowl win AGAINST THE TITANS. I did that because I thought anyone who actually knows football will KNOW that I was CLEARLY talking about his time as OC for the Rams because thats when they played the Titans in the Super Bowl. Hmmmmmmmmm,,,,,

Then what is to stop me from pointing out that Garrett won SB's against the Steelers? I mean we are not comparing like to like and instead making nonsense comparisons after all.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

All I know is this. General Eisenhower had two different speeches prepared for the days following the D day invasion at Normandy. One if the invasion succeeded, one if it failed. Pretty damn sure I can say with a high degree of confidence that the failure speech wouldnt have included in it anything about how the invasion plan was sound and would have worked if only the troops would have executed it properly. That is simply NOT what any REAL leader does.

Cool story. Have anything other than wishful thinking for us?

Protip: it's bad enough to speak for other people; it's much worse to speak for dead military leaders. It's abundantly obvious you were not a military officer at any point in your life.

 

[Hayseed]

Kind of falls in line with what the majority of us having been saying about Garrett for at least a few years if not more: If your coach needs superior talent to get any type of results and is unwilling or unable to scheme to paper over weaknesses, then what good is the coach?

Aynone can win when you've got the best players (Phil Jackson). A good coach helps his team reach results exceeding their talent or ability level (Brad Stevens w/ the Celtics). To me that's the true litmus test of how good a coach is.

Garrett has proven utterly inept at even attempting to adjust when losing a star player (Romo, Tyron, Lee). It is completely unacceptable to become non-competitive when losing a great player, especially a non-QB. It's unheard of ineptitude.

A little background on why I feel the way I do. When it comes to football and being a Die Hard Dallas Cowboys fan im in my own special little hell here in a way. Im a very big college football fan. HUGE Wisconsin Badger fan. I sit back and watch the Badgers over the coarse of the last 20 some odd years consistently be ranked in the upper echelons of the sport while primarily playing with kids that most of the other ranked teams wouldnt even have on their bench let alone starting. 5 star athletes? WHATS THAT!...LOL They win with 1, 2, and three stars, and plenty of walk ons. THAT.......... is creating a culture. THAT.......... is ACTUAL COACHING. Winning with less, far less in most cases then the other guy.

Then I watch my favorite NFL team stumble through season after season even though they have the best of everything handed to them on a silver platter, Man,.... talk about aggravating. It irks me,... just irks me to the very core because I KNOW what good coaching and culture can accomplish. The Dallas Cowboys simply do not have that and wont until they get rid of Jason Garrett. Time to once and for all move forward. When this season is done,.......... so should HE BE TOO!

 

[Hayseed]

Then what is to stop me from pointing out that Garrett won SB's against the Steelers? I mean we are not comparing like to like and instead making nonsense comparisons after all.

Maybe because Garrett sat on the bench doing nothing. Meanwhile Martz was designing game plans and calling plays on game day. Please......... quit with your nonsense and foolishness.

 

[Hayseed]

Cool story. Have anything other than wishful thinking for us?

Protip: it's bad enough to speak for other people; it's much worse to speak for dead military leaders. It's abundantly obvious you were not a military officer at any point in your life.

It is abundantly obvious that NOBODY loves you. I have always felt kind of sorry for social leper's, except in your case because you bring most of it on yourself. Must suck to be so obviously miserable in life.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Early line is Philly 3 point favorite. When you factor in Dallas is at home that means Vegas sees them as 6 points better.

I'm waiting for double platinum guy to show up here and guarantee a Cowboys win haha

Blimey!!!!
3 points????
I smell an upset!

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

It is abundantly obvious that NOBODY loves you. I have always felt kind of sorry for social leper's, except in your case because you bring most of it on yourself. Must suck to be so obviously miserable in life.

You tell him, Hayseed!!
I bet the chess club and his evil caretaiker would frag Fuzzy if they could!!!!
I cannot stand him with his pretensions, flying off to Buffalo with
Sandra Dee acting all popular and stuff!!! I bet he doesn't have the newest Madden!!

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

It's been a while since I've seen a blood bath. That's what's coming.

I hate it when you brood like Superman in his fortress of solitude.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if we came out and won this game. I really wouldn't. I wouldn't be surprised if we lost by 20 at the same time.

So you are saying ... you are saying ... that the universe is just a series of accidents and our life plans have no meaning or revelance???!!!
Do the chiefs of staff and the justice league know this????

 

[TheHerd]

All I know is this. General Eisenhower had two different speeches prepared for the days following the D day invasion at Normandy. One if the invasion succeeded, one if it failed. Pretty damn sure I can say with a high degree of confidence that the failure speech wouldnt have included in it anything about how the invasion plan was sound and would have worked if only the troops would have executed it properly. That is simply NOT what any REAL leader does.

In fact, leader do the opposite. Coaches should take the heat when they lose, and then pass out accolades when they win.

And with the players, do the opposite again - don't let them get big headed with wins nor too depressed over losses.

 

[alphaxg1]

We can pretty much count on it. This is the same guy who lost game after game after game because he was too stubborn to simply just run the ball and milk the clock when we had the game won. I remember after the Detroit loss even Jerry made the comment....." A case could be made that even if we had run the ball on EVERY play in that second half there is no way Detroit would have time to come back" LOL Im hoping people are finally waking up to what Garrett REALLY is. We have a frigging nutcase coaching our team.

You are absolutely right!

 

[Melonfeud]

All I know is this. General Eisenhower had two different speeches prepared for the days following the D day invasion at Normandy. One if the invasion succeeded, one if it failed. Pretty damn sure I can say with a high degree of confidence that the failure speech wouldnt have included in it anything about how the invasion plan was sound and would have worked if only the troops would have executed it properly. That is simply NOT what any REAL leader does.

Did you know general McArthur awarded Lyndon B. Johnson ( who was a reservist & sitting Senator) a silver star(I believe that's what it was) for going up on a reconnaissance/ observation mission and obtaining valuable information, yet,only L.B.J. was awarded this citation from amongst the other crew members aboard that plane( pilot, co-pilot,navigator,ect,,,ZILCH)
AS MacArthur was convinced Franklin D. Roosevelt had dispatched him to spy on him