Will the coaching staff stay intact?

TwoCentPlain

Numbnuts
Messages
15,171
Reaction score
11,084
Wow just wow. If you think Garrett and his philosophy hasn't contributed to the better drafting of players and his focus on details and actually practicing instead of making cupcakes hasn't helped build a more determined, physical team you are sadly mistaken.

Wow just wow. If you think Garrett Marinelli and Linehan and Callahan and his their philosophy coaching techniques hasn't haven't contributed to the better drafting of players and his their focus on details and actually practicing instead of making cupcakes hasn't helped build a more determined, physical team you are sadly mistaken.

And what, do tell, is 'Garrett's philosophy?' First, you have to accomplish SOMETHING as a head coach before you even mention a philosophy. His 'philosophy' is so good that one or two less victories this year and he would have been ran out of town.

Can you point to anything even remotely that suggests Garrett is responsible for the better drafting of players of recent? Because obviously you watched nothing of the draft war room live videos the last few years. Was it Garrett who was touting Hitchens or was it the special teams coach going out on the limb for him? I can't remember.
 

Oh_Canada

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,083
Reaction score
4,222
Wow just wow. If you think Garrett Marinelli and Linehan and Callahan and his their philosophy coaching techniques hasn't haven't contributed to the better drafting of players and his their focus on details and actually practicing instead of making cupcakes hasn't helped build a more determined, physical team you are sadly mistaken.

And what, do tell, is 'Garrett's philosophy?' First, you have to accomplish SOMETHING as a head coach before you even mention a philosophy. His 'philosophy' is so good that one or two less victories this year and he would have been ran out of town.

Can you point to anything even remotely that suggests Garrett is responsible for the better drafting of players of recent? Because obviously you watched nothing of the draft war room live videos the last few years. Was it Garrett who was touting Hitchens or was it the special teams coach going out on the limb for him? I can't remember.

Can you prove any of your theories? Are you in the war room with everyone or just a really good lip reader? He inherited a hot mess when he got to Dallas and constructed a COACHING staff and a team that is now a serious contender and did it with little cap room and a ton of dead money. You can spew that blind hatred all you want, but it seems he has plenty of respect in the coaching fraternity and it's obvious his team plays hard for him unless of course you are such a football or psychological savant that you can tell it's false respect as well.
 

Idgit

Fattening up
Staff member
Messages
58,971
Reaction score
60,826
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Wow just wow. If you think Garrett Marinelli and Linehan and Callahan and his their philosophy coaching techniques hasn't haven't contributed to the better drafting of players and his their focus on details and actually practicing instead of making cupcakes hasn't helped build a more determined, physical team you are sadly mistaken.

And what, do tell, is 'Garrett's philosophy?' First, you have to accomplish SOMETHING as a head coach before you even mention a philosophy. His 'philosophy' is so good that one or two less victories this year and he would have been ran out of town.

Can you point to anything even remotely that suggests Garrett is responsible for the better drafting of players of recent? Because obviously you watched nothing of the draft war room live videos the last few years. Was it Garrett who was touting Hitchens or was it the special teams coach going out on the limb for him? I can't remember.

The reality is that the NFL is too competitive for you to not have a coach at any level not delivering. The HC, the OC, the DC...they're all have to have necessary competence--and their players need to be good-- or you're going to lose to a team where they do. That said, it doesn't matter what is Linehan, or what is Marinelli, or what is Garrett. Garrett's above them in the org chart, and he's responsible for their presence here. If the coordinators weren't delivering, you'd be complaining that Jason didn't do anything to change them. It happens on his watch, he gets the credit for it.

As for the drafting, that's another one of those dodges that 'works' only because none of us has enough detailed information to know exactly what goes on. It doesn't matter. Again, it's Garrett's staff, on Garrett's watch. If it's not working, it's his responsibility to fix it or he loses his job. If it is working, he gets credit for it working. Sure, there will be fans like yourself who choose to believe the system works from the bottom up, and that the support of the players, the coaches, and the people above JG in the organization all fall into the category of 'what are they supposed to say?' There's no getting around that. The rest of us will just have to make our judgements off of the play of the team, the support of the players, the Coach of the Year talk we're starting to hear, and the large extension he's about to get this offseason. Maybe that all happened because of the new coordinators we brought in this offseason. I guess we'll just never know.
 

blindzebra

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,560
Reaction score
4,451
Really? And just what was my "previous stance"? And exactly how am I playing both sides? Both sides of what?

And it is also a well-known fact that Fred and Martin were NOT who they went into that draft saying they've got to have. Shazier would have definitely been a Cowboy this year if he wasn't plucked by the Steelers, (which worked out well for the Cowboys). And if Jones was aiming for OL in 2013 as you say, why would he trade down while they flew off the board? One could infer that he coveted a defensive player, but when he traded to the back end of the 1st round, all his pet cats were gone and he went back to the deepest part of the draft, reaching for what many said should have been a 3rd rounder in Fred, but in retrospect was probably picked only a round earlier than he should have been.

For you to speculate different is purely that, speculation. Not evidence.

Comprehension issues or do you just choose to ignore what is written?

I said we were not targeting them, but that we still had a plan in place to improve the OL.

In 2013 what should we have done? Trade multiple picks to move into the top 10? Because that is what needed to happen. After pick 12 teams started reaching to grab OL and we did the smart thing we added picks and still got a player we wanted. Once again just because we didn't pull an RG3 move did not mean improving the OL wasn't the plan. In fact us not doing so adds even more evidence of Garrett having a positive influence on Jerry.

In 2014, yes we wanted Barr, yes we wanted Donald because defense was what kept us from the playoffs in 2013, but once again that proves nothing about us wanting to fix the OL and run more. Good teams have a plan in place and adjust that plan. We had the splashy move right there with Manziel. Mosely, Pryor, Clinton-Dix and Ford were all there for defense. But what did we do? We drafted a guard.
We also tried to trade for SF's pick in the 3rd round for Trai Turner but he got drafted just ahead of that pick. Again we played our board and got a player we wanted. A player that fit the plan. At a position Jerry would have never drafted that high before Garrett.

So pull out the haters playbook and play the war room cam that doesn't show Garrett pounding the table and screaming as proof he had no say in the draft card.
 

Idgit

Fattening up
Staff member
Messages
58,971
Reaction score
60,826
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Comprehension issues or do you just choose to ignore what is written?

I said we were not targeting them, but that we still had a plan in place to improve the OL.

In 2013 what should we have done? Trade multiple picks to move into the top 10? Because that is what needed to happen. After pick 12 teams started reaching to grab OL and we did the smart thing we added picks and still got a player we wanted. Once again just because we didn't pull an RG3 move did not mean improving the OL wasn't the plan. In fact us not doing so adds even more evidence of Garrett having a positive influence on Jerry.

In 2014, yes we wanted Barr, yes we wanted Donald because defense was what kept us from the playoffs in 2013, but once again that proves nothing about us wanting to fix the OL and run more. Good teams have a plan in place and adjust that plan. We had the splashy move right there with Manziel. Mosely, Pryor, Clinton-Dix and Ford were all there for defense. But what did we do? We drafted a guard.
We also tried to trade for SF's pick in the 3rd round for Trai Turner but he got drafted just ahead of that pick. Again we played our board and got a player we wanted. A player that fit the plan. At a position Jerry would have never drafted that high before Garrett.

So pull out the haters playbook and play the war room cam that doesn't show Garrett pounding the table and screaming as proof he had no say in the draft card.

If we drafted them in the first round, we targeted them. You don't draft players you didn't target in the first round. Any other interpretation is a reach.
 

Irving Cowboy

The Chief
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
92
Comprehension issues or do you just choose to ignore what is written?

I said we were not targeting them, but that we still had a plan in place to improve the OL.

In 2013 what should we have done? Trade multiple picks to move into the top 10? Because that is what needed to happen. After pick 12 teams started reaching to grab OL and we did the smart thing we added picks and still got a player we wanted. Once again just because we didn't pull an RG3 move did not mean improving the OL wasn't the plan. In fact us not doing so adds even more evidence of Garrett having a positive influence on Jerry.

In 2014, yes we wanted Barr, yes we wanted Donald because defense was what kept us from the playoffs in 2013, but once again that proves nothing about us wanting to fix the OL and run more. Good teams have a plan in place and adjust that plan. We had the splashy move right there with Manziel. Mosely, Pryor, Clinton-Dix and Ford were all there for defense. But what did we do? We drafted a guard.
We also tried to trade for SF's pick in the 3rd round for Trai Turner but he got drafted just ahead of that pick. Again we played our board and got a player we wanted. A player that fit the plan. At a position Jerry would have never drafted that high before Garrett.

So pull out the haters playbook and play the war room cam that doesn't show Garrett pounding the table and screaming as proof he had no say in the draft card.

OL was the plan in 2013, but the Jerry panicked when guards went off the board early. I think it was something Jerry committed to Romo before his contract. He even admitted in the post draft press conference they were focusing on OL.

Jerry said: "Frankly, to the extent that we could stay within our grades, we put an emphasis on the interior of our offensive line".
For The Record: Cowboys Address Questions About First Day Of Draft In Press Conference - Blogging The Boys

However, anyone watching the war room cam that year, who is being honest with themselves, could tell that Garrett was angry, frustrated and confused. It certainly wasn't the look of a man who is directing the war room (because he doesn't)

Also from that press conference:
"If you look at our team and our roster over the last few years, we had a lot of really good football players who played well for us for a long time on the offensive line. But they were older guys; they were guys who made a lot of money and guys we loved having here. But we have had to transition from that group of guys, and you know the names, guys we loved having on our team, but we had to get younger.

We started that process a couple of years ago in drafting Tyron Smith. We feel great about that pick, and we made some moves in free agency last year to try to solidify different parts of our offensive line.

The infrastructure of football teams are your offensive and defensive lines. The best teams in the league are strong up front on both sides of the ball and we feel like we need to continue to get stronger there. That’s going to help our football team. You’ve heard me say it a lot, we need to run the ball better; running the ball better is going to make our offense better; it’s going to make our team better. And we are going to work very hard as an organization to run it better. That’s at the coaching level, but it’s also when you add players up front; we feel like they can help us."

So, in 2013, after the draft, he also spoke about wanting to run the ball better. And, he proceeded to tie the franchise record for fewest rushing attempts in a season.

From a text book, fundamental level, Garrett has decent ideas. The problem is, he simply can't execute them. The two TE approach is another example. OK, so he told Linehan he wanted to run the ball more. Great, Jerry neutered Garrett and took away OC responsibilities and you get someone who can actually execute what should be a fairly common sense tactic. I'm not sure that is a great trait in a coach. On paper, he can come up with good ideas, but it takes someone else to actually go make them happen. Do you really think if Garrett still had his fingers in the offense, they'd have committed to the run like they did this year? No way.

Shazier was the pick last year and they resorted to Martin once he was gone. So it isn't like they said "Hey, we're almost there with the running game, now that we can draft a first round guard, we can actually do it." No, they drafted Martin as a fall back plan because Barr and Shazier were gone. The only thing that really changed the offense this year was Garrett had his OC responsibilities fully revoked. Guess what, a run first offense can control the clock and limit the damage done by a weak defense. Plus it keeps your head coach from blowing games with a lead because you are inexplicably passing.

I also think the other thing they did was revoke Romo's ability to check out to a pass this year. Protect him from himself to a certain extent.

And, finally, if rebuilding the OL was a Garrett plan, why did he invest 2 picks in 2011, none in 2012, one in 2013 and one in 2014. Wouldn't he have focused on it sooner (and with greater numbers) instead of, for example, a corner (Claiborne) or a luxury second TE (Escobar)?
 

blindzebra

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,560
Reaction score
4,451
OL was the plan in 2013, but the Jerry panicked when guards went off the board early. I think it was something Jerry committed to Romo before his contract. He even admitted in the post draft press conference they were focusing on OL.

Jerry said: "Frankly, to the extent that we could stay within our grades, we put an emphasis on the interior of our offensive line".
For The Record: Cowboys Address Questions About First Day Of Draft In Press Conference - Blogging The Boys

However, anyone watching the war room cam that year, who is being honest with themselves, could tell that Garrett was angry, frustrated and confused. It certainly wasn't the look of a man who is directing the war room (because he doesn't)

Also from that press conference:
"If you look at our team and our roster over the last few years, we had a lot of really good football players who played well for us for a long time on the offensive line. But they were older guys; they were guys who made a lot of money and guys we loved having here. But we have had to transition from that group of guys, and you know the names, guys we loved having on our team, but we had to get younger.

We started that process a couple of years ago in drafting Tyron Smith. We feel great about that pick, and we made some moves in free agency last year to try to solidify different parts of our offensive line.

The infrastructure of football teams are your offensive and defensive lines. The best teams in the league are strong up front on both sides of the ball and we feel like we need to continue to get stronger there. That’s going to help our football team. You’ve heard me say it a lot, we need to run the ball better; running the ball better is going to make our offense better; it’s going to make our team better. And we are going to work very hard as an organization to run it better. That’s at the coaching level, but it’s also when you add players up front; we feel like they can help us."

So, in 2013, after the draft, he also spoke about wanting to run the ball better. And, he proceeded to tie the franchise record for fewest rushing attempts in a season.

From a text book, fundamental level, Garrett has decent ideas. The problem is, he simply can't execute them. The two TE approach is another example. OK, so he told Linehan he wanted to run the ball more. Great, Jerry neutered Garrett and took away OC responsibilities and you get someone who can actually execute what should be a fairly common sense tactic. I'm not sure that is a great trait in a coach. On paper, he can come up with good ideas, but it takes someone else to actually go make them happen. Do you really think if Garrett still had his fingers in the offense, they'd have committed to the run like they did this year? No way.

Shazier was the pick last year and they resorted to Martin once he was gone. So it isn't like they said "Hey, we're almost there with the running game, now that we can draft a first round guard, we can actually do it." No, they drafted Martin as a fall back plan because Barr and Shazier were gone. The only thing that really changed the offense this year was Garrett had his OC responsibilities fully revoked. Guess what, a run first offense can control the clock and limit the damage done by a weak defense. Plus it keeps your head coach from blowing games with a lead because you are inexplicably passing.

I also think the other thing they did was revoke Romo's ability to check out to a pass this year. Protect him from himself to a certain extent.

And, finally, if rebuilding the OL was a Garrett plan, why did he invest 2 picks in 2011, none in 2012, one in 2013 and one in 2014. Wouldn't he have focused on it sooner (and with greater numbers) instead of, for example, a corner (Claiborne) or a luxury second TE (Escobar)?

LOL I told you that you'd use the war room cam. So Miss Cleo what was he mad at, perhaps he wanted to take Frederick there? Perhaps he thought we got too little for trading down? Maybe Jerry got the drunken farts? What we have is you seeing what you want to see.

And one more time. Garrett never wanted to be HC/OC that was Jerry...quote is out there saying as much...oh that's right, Jerry lied because it supports Garrett.

We did start running more last year once Garrett took play calling back...that part always gets left out by you guys doesn't it?

I wonder why you keep ignoring the attempted trade up to the late 3rd with SF for Turner even after drafting Martin? Oh, that's right because it doesn't fit the argument.

As for not spending an entire draft or two on the lines...hard to do when you have holes everywhere and you have an owner that wants the team to be in contention and refuses to use the word rebuild. That type of roster change requires, dare I say it, a process and time.

In any case I am done debating the obvious with posters who wouldn't know a fact if it hit them in the face.
 

Irving Cowboy

The Chief
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
92
LOL I told you that you'd use the war room cam. So Miss Cleo what was he mad at, perhaps he wanted to take Frederick there? Perhaps he thought we got too little for trading down? Maybe Jerry got the drunken farts? What we have is you seeing what you want to see.
Likewise.

I saw a head coach who was completely checked out of any of the decision making processes that were taking place that day.
And one more time. Garrett never wanted to be HC/OC that was Jerry...quote is out there saying as much...oh that's right, Jerry lied because it supports Garrett.
Really. I remember Garrett acting like someone was taking his rattle when he was stripped of his playcalling duties.
We did start running more last year once Garrett took play calling back...that part always gets left out by you guys doesn't it?
Really? Lets take the first four weeks of 2013 and compare them to the last 4 weeks of the season, shall we?
Week 1: 23 attempts
Week 2: 16 attempts
Week 3: 34 attempts
Week 4: 16 attempts
Week 14: 28 attempts
Week 15: 18 attempts
Week 16: 23 attempts
Week 17: 18 attempts
Wow. A whopping 2 whole carries more in a span of 4 games? What we have is you seeing what you want to see.
I wonder why you keep ignoring the attempted trade up to the late 3rd with SF for Turner even after drafting Martin? Oh, that's right because it doesn't fit the argument.
Because in the long run it really doesn't mean anything.
As for not spending an entire draft or two on the lines...hard to do when you have holes everywhere and you have an owner that wants the team to be in contention and refuses to use the word rebuild. That type of roster change requires, dare I say it, a process and time.
An entire draft, eh? Please show me where that has been stated by myself or anyone else, or admit you make stuff up.
In any case I am done debating the obvious with posters who wouldn't know a fact if it hit them in the face.
Right, because it's only a fact if you say so.
 

nablives

Active Member
Messages
978
Reaction score
232
If the offense keeps rolling, especially if it can get them as far as a competitive NFCCG, Linehan is going to get some offers elsewhere. I can't imagine Tennessee wouldn't come calling with a draft pick that might be high enough to land him either Mariotta or Winston. He may find the situation pretty tempting, depending on what he wants to do with his career.
 

romothesavior

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,512
Reaction score
4,366
Pretty sad that some folks just can't give Garrett credit.

It's not that people can't give him credit. It's that some of you are giving him way too much, way too early.

He undeniably made some major coaching blunders over the past few years, and it took giving him up some strategic control for the team to really succeed.

He gets a lot of credit for helping put the organization back on track and for a nice season this year. He deserves an extension. But I need to see sustained success and some postseason runs before I heap praise on him. That's not an unreasonable position to take.
 

Dodger12

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,142
Reaction score
3,532
LOL I told you that you'd use the war room cam. So Miss Cleo what was he mad at, perhaps he wanted to take Frederick there? Perhaps he thought we got too little for trading down? Maybe Jerry got the drunken farts? What we have is you seeing what you want to see.

I don't think there was any question the debate was over Floyd who they had a top 5 grade on. I mean, we know where Floyd graded because that was discussed ad nauseam after the draft. He didn't fit into our 3 -4 and didn't have that "quick twitch" Marinelli and Kiffin wanted. You can't tell me you don't recall that, as it was reported quite often after the draft? I don't think any other name was mentioned or reported other than Floyd for that pick. Add to that TC's demotion for his little tantrum and it's obvious for anyone with half a brain to figure out what went on that day.
 

blindzebra

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,560
Reaction score
4,451
Likewise.

I saw a head coach who was completely checked out of any of the decision making processes that were taking place that day.

Really. I remember Garrett acting like someone was taking his rattle when he was stripped of his playcalling duties.

Really? Lets take the first four weeks of 2013 and compare them to the last 4 weeks of the season, shall we?
Week 1: 23 attempts
Week 2: 16 attempts
Week 3: 34 attempts
Week 4: 16 attempts
Week 14: 28 attempts
Week 15: 18 attempts
Week 16: 23 attempts
Week 17: 18 attempts
Wow. A whopping 2 whole carries more in a span of 4 games? What we have is you seeing what you want to see.

Because in the long run it really doesn't mean anything.
An entire draft, eh? Please show me where that has been stated by myself or anyone else, or admit you make stuff up.
Right, because it's only a fact if you say so.

Why go first 4 and last 4 games?

Could it be because we ran it 14 times and 19 times in weeks 5 and 6 and 20 and 30 times in weeks 12 and 13?

Gotta laugh at the seeing what you want to see when you make statements like I saw a coach completely checked out or acting like someone took his rattle...both your perception with no supporting evidence. While I have a HC talking about building to run and then adding pieces to the OL and a quote from the guy that owns the team...you know things that support an argument and not pure speculation pulled from thin air.

And FYI you are the one saying building the lines with numbers...so lets look.

2011 Smith, Arkin and Nagy so 3 not 2 like you said.

2012 Crawford and Wilber for the 3-4 front and we added Livings and Bernadeau

2013 Frederick, signed Parnell, Weems, Kowalski and Waters, Selvie, Hayden and multiple DL after season started.

2014 Martin, Hills, Hawkins, Lawrence, Mincey, McClain, Melton, Gardner, Bishop, Crawford, Brent, Okoye, Whalen and Coleman.

No we did not invest any numbers into the lines under Garrett. 13 OL and 15 DL in 4 years.

This should be where you run away tail between your legs, but I am sure you will dismiss it and return with more speculation and opinion without anything to back it up.
 

Irving Cowboy

The Chief
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
92
I suppose I could have included the entire season's rushing attempt totals but for the sake of argument, and because you'd delve into an even deeper debate about when exactly Red took back the reins, (even though he didn't want to, according to you), I picked the first and last 4 weeks.

13 OL and 15 DL in 4 years... quantity over quality I see. If they had signed 24 of each would that prove your point even more? Only to you, I suppose.

As for me running away with my tail between my legs, you must be taking lines from your mentor... because I have no idea how I'm supposed to do that over the internet. Please show me.
 

blindzebra

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,560
Reaction score
4,451
I suppose I could have included the entire season's rushing attempt totals but for the sake of argument, and because you'd delve into an even deeper debate about when exactly Red took back the reins, (even though he didn't want to, according to you), I picked the first and last 4 weeks.

13 OL and 15 DL in 4 years... quantity over quality I see. If they had signed 24 of each would that prove your point even more? Only to you, I suppose.

As for me running away with my tail between my legs, you must be taking lines from your mentor... because I have no idea how I'm supposed to do that over the internet. Please show me.

Typical.

We have added 4 OL that start...I forgot to add Leary...as well as Bernadeau and Parnell.

Crawford is a keeper on the DL and Mincey, Melton, Selvie and Hayden have all played reasonably well. The jury is still out on our redshirt rookie DL.

Seems you just got schooled again.
 

Irving Cowboy

The Chief
Messages
1,646
Reaction score
92
Seems you just got schooled again.
Every team has 4 OL that start. As a matter of fact, they have 5 that start. What's your point? After Smith, Fred, and Martin you drop somewhat with Free, and then there's everyone else.

You are barely treading water by holding up average Joes like Bernadeau, Parnell, Mincey, Hayden, etc as shining examples of what the organization has done to improve. But continue thinking you've schooled me if that makes your Christmas day better, because anyone besides your clique of Owners and a few on here can see how pathetic your argument really is. I'd dare to say it's more funny than pathetic.
 

blindzebra

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,560
Reaction score
4,451
Every team has 4 OL that start. As a matter of fact, they have 5 that start. What's your point? After Smith, Fred, and Martin you drop somewhat with Free, and then there's everyone else.

You are barely treading water by holding up average Joes like Bernadeau, Parnell, Mincey, Hayden, etc as shining examples of what the organization has done to improve. But continue thinking you've schooled me if that makes your Christmas day better, because anyone besides your clique of Owners and a few on here can see how pathetic your argument really is. I'd dare to say it's more funny than pathetic.

Learn to read. We added 4 starters on the OL since Garrett took over. You know the OL most are saying is the best in the NFL. And last I checked all but a few of the idiots holding on to the hate agree that Garrett has become a fine HC. I suggest finding a new team to pretend to root for and start trolling their board, because your small little group has become the laughing stock of this one.
 

slomoxn

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,850
Reaction score
1,051
In a nutshell, this is Garrett's extreme value to the organization. It is the sole reason why I had any belief early on that he might succeed. I had my doubts after the awful 2012 offseason (where it appeared that Jerry had lost all patience with Garrett's "processs") but after this season, Garrett might just rest a little more control from the lunatic owner and his dimwitted son.

Garrett appears to have handled the situation beautifully. Allowing the Jones boys to lap up the spotlight, mouth footballisms, and appear as if they actually contribute to the football discussions around the ranch. All the while, Garrett has deftly introduced an actual overriding philosophy and vision for a team.
arr
So although Garrett might not be a good OC, he might not be a good game manager, he has been real good at doing something his strange position requires--mitigating the influence of the Jones boys on the development of the team.

I don't know why more people don't seem to understand this point, I stated in a different post that Garrett despite the Jones' constant meddling and mistakes he was the only person that was able to get them to allow his vision to take place. His personality does not mind being behind the scenes making the correct decisions while they hog the limelight. Those around the league that "know" football know who is making the moves and I'm sure he gets credit in coaching and managing circles; for him that is enough. I'm sure a superbowl victory would be the ultimate for him though and no matter how much Jerry holds on to the trophy, after 18 years of his mistakes I'll give full credit to Garrett. Jerry gets credit for doing it his way finally, (Jason's that is).

BTW for the retractors, I do not on any level believe Garrett has this success without his asst. coaches, Marinelli, and Linehan, this team didn't improve until he found someone that could make his vision work, he had a plan but was fully incapable of making it come to fruition. He got them as far as he could and they pushed them to the next level. IMHO
 

cowboyfan4life2

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,207
Reaction score
3,427
I think that both Linehan and Marinelli stays, I don't see either one getting hc jobs anytime soon. We might lose some position coaches, but the big three will stay intact.
 

Idgit

Fattening up
Staff member
Messages
58,971
Reaction score
60,826
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Let's keep this thread from being even less Christmassy if we can, ok? Thanks, everybody.
 

Redball Express

All Aboard!!!
Messages
16,253
Reaction score
12,758
Callahan is the guy who probably leaves.

I think everyone else probably comes back.

This would be my guess.

Especially after getting 3 Pro Bowlers recognized.

Callahan has to get big accolades for that.

So maybe he ships out on a good note.
 
Top