Why Daryl Johnston says firing Jason Garrett would 'sabotage' the Cowboys

[CF74]

Poor little guy. You have to insult someone to get your point across? LOL

Garrett doesnt pick the players. But by all means keep making me laugh little guy.

You’re like a bored little house wife that picks fights for attention, but zero substance.

 

[Big_D]

I haven’t seen anyone comparing Jason’s coaching to Toms. The comparisons are to their lack of early playoff success and how many seasons it took to win a championship.

Anyone who compares their knowledge of football, team building skills, eye for talent, coaching techniques, innovative contributions and brilliance would be severely misguided IMO and I’d argued it relentlessly. There’s absolutely no comparison at least at this point in Jason’s career.

Even comparing their slow starts is flawed since Tom started with an expansion team and by year 7 was in a NFL championship game. The only facts which can be compared is his 1-4 start in playoff games and the early frustration of losing the big playoff games.

The comparisons are the insinuation that he's on the same trajectory.

 

[JustChip]

For me? He needs to win in the playoffs. At least one game, maybe two.

What about you?

For me is if he has a losing season. That would be a definite trendline in the wrong direction after 13-3 then 9-7 (or 8-8 if you prefer).

 

[Diehardblues]

The comparisons are the insinuation that he's on the same trajectory.

Those would be purely premature to speculate without knowing what’s to come which no one knows.

But beyond the obvious comparisons we could never make between the two there are some if your wanting to look for them.

There was much criticism of Landry when he received his 10 year extension before making the playoffs and not being able to win the big playoff games in those early years. And that was some very good teams.

Landry’s criticism of losing the big games would always haunt him as he lost 7 of 12 conference championships he was in. The Cowboys could have gone to 12 Super Bowls. 7 in the 70’s alone all under Landry. And that doesn’t count the numerous other big playoff games we lost like in 68 and 69 when we were prohibited favorites.

Cowboys under Landry were in position and had a good enough team we could have set marks never to be matched again like UCLA and Boston of basketball .

It is what it is. Landry is all time fav Cowboy and it was that consistency which was the gold standard. There were other coaches who came along and had more instant success but none stood the test of time with such a consistent contender.

 

[CowboyRoy]

You’re like a bored little house wife that picks fights for attention, but zero substance.

Hey bud, Im not the one getting so upset and throwing out the insults. This whole thread of mine was talking to the jokers that think that Garrett is the walk around GM. Then you chimed in. And from what I can tell you agree that Garrett, like some other coaches, dont pick the players. Yet you are finding a way to argue with me. So the irony is that its you that is picking the fight.

either play nice or get lost. I could care less which.

 

[Stash]

For me is if he has a losing season. That would be a definite trendline in the wrong direction after 13-3 then 9-7 (or 8-8 if you prefer).

So you would be OK with another 9-7 and no playoffs?

 

[Pants]

I can retire in another 10 years or so (I won't because I can't afford it); so I assume that Garrett will still be the head coach unless something drastic happens (huge losing season, ot they kick him up to head cheerleader or something) - I have given up on the prospects of a legit head coach in charge of the team

oh, and Moose, sabotaging the team if Garrett is sent packing? only if the players are brainwashed into thinking JG is "it".....wait, new thread idea "Are the players being hypnotized into following Garrett?" Afterall, the last name of the team owner is Jones, and wasn't there that little koolaid thingy with a Jones? just sayin'

 

[JustChip]

So you would be OK with another 9-7 and no playoffs?

No, that would be a continuation of an unacceptable trend, 2 non-playoff years in a row. And, honestly, I would be supporting getting rid of him even if they go 9-7, make the playoffs, but are not competitive in the one playoff game. I would probably be the same if we go 13-3 and weren't competitive in the 1st playoff game. I'll be ok with a repeat of 2016. They were very competitive in the Packers game to the point of being in a position to win with 1 minute left and lost on a great play by a HoF QB and a better play by a journeyman TE.

I guess the bottom line for me is, I hate to say it's this or bust. I will look at the season as a whole at the end and would make a decision based on what I see. There can be extenuating circumstances, but the leash on those is short. The coaching staff failed miserably in 2015. I give them the benefit of doubt for 1 year, but not more than once if a 2015 year occurs again. I think the benefit of the doubt for 2015 was justified in 2016.

I will say, though, that if we're something like 1-6 and are being embarrassed like in Wade's last season, there's no reason to wait to review because the team most likely will have stop buying what he's selling. He should suffer the same fate as Wade.

 

[Stash]

No, that would be a continuation of an unacceptable trend, 2 non-playoff years in a row. And, honestly, I would be supporting getting rid of him even if they go 9-7, make the playoffs, but are not competitive in the one playoff game. I would probably be the same if we go 13-3 and weren't competitive in the 1st playoff game. I'll be ok with a repeat of 2016. They were very competitive in the Packers game to the point of being in a position to win with 1 minute left and lost on a great play by a HoF QB and a better play by a journeyman TE.

I guess the bottom line for me is, I hate to say it's this or bust. I will look at the season as a whole at the end and would make a decision based on what I see. There can be extenuating circumstances, but the leash on those is short. The coaching staff failed miserably in 2015. I give them the benefit of doubt for 1 year, but not more than once if a 2015 year occurs again. I think the benefit of the doubt for 2015 was justified in 2016.

I will say, though, that if we're something like 1-6 and are being embarrassed like in Wade's last season, there's no reason to wait to review because the team most likely will have stop buying what he's selling. He should suffer the same fate as Wade.

It sounds like our opinions are very close to one another's.

 

[JustChip]

It sounds like our opinions are very close to one another's.

Probably. I think where I differ from most on here (not necessarily you) is the fixation on only playoff win in 7 years. Landry only won 1 of his first 5 playoff games. And this isn't a Landry vs. Garrett, or Garrett is as good as Landry, post. It's simply a statement that the potential error in basing a decision on only 1 playoff win.

 

[CF74]

Hey bud, Im not the one getting so upset and throwing out the insults. This whole thread of mine was talking to the jokers that think that Garrett is the walk around GM. Then you chimed in. And from what I can tell you agree that Garrett, like some other coaches, dont pick the players. Yet you are finding a way to argue with me. So the irony is that its you that is picking the fight.

either play nice or get lost. I could care less which.

No you just Assumed I was defending Garrett, and now your britches are on fire lol

 

[CowboyRoy]

No you just Assumed I was defending Garrett, and now your britches are on fire lol

Garrett doesnt roster build here!!! Now say something mean and nasty because you agree with me. LOL

 

[Alexander]

The comparisons are the insinuation that he's on the same trajectory.

If he was on the same trajectory as Landry he would have had a game by his seventh year that was for the league championship. Instead we get the glory of beating the Detroit Lions and the gosh darn it would would have won more if not for that pesky Aaron Rodgers.

 

[Diehardblues]

So you would be OK with another 9-7 and no playoffs?

It would depend if we looked like a 10 win and or playoff team.

No one is picking us to win division and most have us somewhere in 6-10th in conference behind Phil,Minn, LA, Atl, GB, NO and in the mix of SF, Car and Sea.

That doesn’t look like expectations of the playoffs or more than 9 wins which Vegas has us as 8 1/2 Over/ Under.

Where are we coming up with these higher expectations ?

 

[Diehardblues]

Garrett doesnt roster build here!!! Now say something mean and nasty because you agree with me. LOL

Is that a fact that can be supported with a link or just an opinion that Garrett isn’t influencing the roster?

 

[Stash]

Probably. I think where I differ from most on here (not necessarily you) is the fixation on only playoff win in 7 years. Landry only won 1 of his first 5 playoff games. And this isn't a Landry vs. Garrett, or Garrett is as good as Landry, post. It's simply a statement that the potential error in basing a decision on only 1 playoff win.

We certainly differ there. I see no similarities in the respective situations at all.

 

[Diehardblues]

If he was on the same trajectory as Landry he would have had a game by his seventh year that was for the league championship. Instead we get the glory of beating the Detroit Lions and the gosh darn it would would have won more if not for that pesky Aaron Rodgers.

And the fact our defense blew.

If we had a defense similar to the one Landry had in those early playoff losses I feel almost certain the results would have been more favorable for us.

It continues to be a one target theme blaming our HC instead of all of the contributing factors.

 

[Diehardblues]

Probably. I think where I differ from most on here (not necessarily you) is the fixation on only playoff win in 7 years. Landry only won 1 of his first 5 playoff games. And this isn't a Landry vs. Garrett, or Garrett is as good as Landry, post. It's simply a statement that the potential error in basing a decision on only 1 playoff win.

Its spinning the facts to support a narrative just as only 2 playoff appearances is another fact they use to spin it.

Obviously you don’t see them spinning the fact we’ve been a contender every season but one. And that Garrett matched as many division crowns and playoff wins as the previous 3 coaches this Century. Those facts don’t support their narrative.

 

[Stash]

It would depend if we looked like a 10 win and or playoff team.

No one is picking us to win division and most have us somewhere in 6-10th in conference behind Phil,Minn, LA, Atl, GB, NO and in the mix of SF, Car and Sea.

That doesn’t look like expectations of the playoffs or more than 9 wins which Vegas has us as 8 1/2 Over/ Under.

Where are we coming up with these higher expectations ?

The lack of legitimate excuses.

The team won 13 games just 2 years ago. 2017 was the year of excuses - "no Zeke", "no Sean Lee", "no Tyron Smith."

That's over with and done. Can't use those again. And if these coaches can't win with the talent they've been given, there will be no excuses for it. And no answer other than that they're just not good enough.

If the arrow for wins points down again, this head coach will rightfully be fired.

 

[Diehardblues]

The lack of legitimate excuses.

The team won 13 games just 2 years ago. 2017 was the year of excuses - "no Zeke", "no Sean Lee", "no Tyron Smith."

That's over with and done. Can't use those again. And if these coaches can't win with the talent they've been given, there will be no excuses for it. And no answer other than that they're just not good enough.

If the arrow for wins points down again, this head coach will rightfully be fired.

We don’t have the same roster as 2016. Using that as a barometer is again using that fact to support your narrative.

There’s no way to know what our expectations will be this season until it begins unfolding.