Cowboys Coaches Watch Thread...

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,705
 

Plan9Misfit

Appreciate The Hate
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
5,836

Grrrr, Jerry. GRRRRR.
As usual, the lower level nobodies are the ones canned, while the ones responsible aren’’t punished. What’’s next, Joan? Firing box clerks?
 

Hoffa

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
427
Yeah, no, it's not like you said at all. It's just as false when you repeated it as the first time you said it. Basically a lie.

Most teams who lose their starting QBs for the entire season -- especially those without 27 year old former Pro Bowl QBs in reserve -- miss the playoffs.

Again with the blatant false equivalence. Yeah, teams lose important guys to injury. Do they lose their starting QBs for 13 games? And of those, how many make the playoffs? And of those, how many have 27 year old former Pro Bowlers as their backups? You have stats on that? I doubt it.
I can think of one team in recent memory that lost their starting QB for the season and had a former Pro Bowl QB in reserve and not only missed the playoffs, but crashed and burned horrifically - the 2015 Dallas Cowboys.

Did the stars align this year? Because by my count, our star TE retired just before the draft, our star all-pro center missed the entire year with a rare disease, our starting DT went nuts and didn't show up all year, and we had no capable WR on the roster until week 8. And we still won the division and made the playoffs and won a round.

Stars align. :lol
And the Chiefs are playing for an AFC Championship at home without their star RB and safety against the Patriots, whose star TE is a shell of himself, and star WR got busted for drugs a few weeks ago and is out. They're also playing without their top draft pick, Isaiah Wynn, who tore his achilles. The Rams are without a key WR and just ran over us with fucking CJ Anderson. The Eagles were probably a dropped pass away from another NFC Championship with their backup QB. Garrett doesn't get extra credit for dealing with issues that literally just about every team in the NFL has to overcome every season.

Yeah, it's a travesty, it's also ancient history and I already addressed it.

Since then, he's won the division 3 times in 5 years, and reached the divisional round of the playoffs each time and played a very close, down to the wire game. The other two times, he had lost his starting QB for the season, and then barely missed the playoffs when his All Pro RB was wrongfully suspended for 6 games. THAT IS WHY HE IS HERE. The 8-8's are virtually irrelevant at this point.

You guys are trying to build some sort of case and make those three 8-8 seasons part of the referendum against him -- "No one coaches 8 seasons with only 3 playoff appearances and keeps their job!" -- but it's so laughably transparent why you have to paint the numbers that way.... because that's the only way the numbers look bad.

Yes, it is true, most coaches who get relatively this far into their coaching careers with this relative lack of post season success get fired.

But Garrett wasn't fired. So that ship of firing him for three straight 8-8 seasons has sailed. Get over it.
Am I arguing that Garrett should be fired today because of his three straight 8-8 seasons? I haven't said that in any of my responses to you, so I'm not sure if you're just willfully arguing against a straw man here, or if - in your haste to hop on top of Garrett's minuscule ginger dick and go for a ride - that you're just legitimately confused about who you're responding to.

What I am telling you is that I don't think he's a very good coach, and that I don't think he's gotten the most out of his team, and that your hysteria that about clutching your Garrett pearls because if we let him go, we're sure to end up with John Fox as his replacement, is asinine.

Evaluating him now based on what happened in 2011-12-13 is not only stupid, but it's also not how any owner in the league operates.
I don't think anyone is "evaluating him" based on those seasons, but if you're going to try to tell me with any sort of certainty that the only reason Garrett missed the playoffs in 2015 was because Romo got hurt, then it's absolutely relevant to bring up the fact that he missed the playoffs three straight years with a healthy Romo. In fact, Romo had a winning season every year he started at QB until Garrett took over.


No one is asking you to. Maybe you have a reading comprehension problem. I've been suggesting that I'm open to upgrading him if a quality candidate can be secured.

But a blind firing is just as likely a downgrade as an upgrade to this scenario, so you'd be stupid to do it.

A targeted replacement is the only approach that makes sense.
No fucking shit. Has anyone advocated that we fire Garrett and intentionally hire someone worse? I think the fork in the road is definition of a "quality candidate" - most here don't seem to believe that Jason Garrett himself would be defined as a "quality candidate" - so just about anyone with a sound schematic understanding of how offensive football is successfully played in 2019 would be an upgrade. I'm just not buying into the fear mongering that we have to hold onto Garrett or else we're going to be stuck with Jeff Fisher.

But what I am saying is, if you aren't acting like a petulant fan, you are forced to admit that being a play or two away from the Championship Game three times isn't something to scoff at. If your goal is to get as far as you can and hope to give yourself a chance that the ball bounces your way and maybe you can will yourself to a Super Bowl, then having a starting point of "Divisional Title 60% of the time" -- which is where we have been in the past half decade across two different QB/RB/WR regimes -- it's not a bad place to be.
Amazing how after 9 years, Garrett can still never get that one lucky bounce, or "play or two" to go his way. Maybe that's the issue, that we're relying on that lucky bounce instead of going out and consistently, systematically and schematically defeating teams.

There is a legitimate argument that if the goal is winning a Super Bowl, you may have better odds trying to tweak the status quo rather than rolling the dice on a new head coach. Most new head coaches do not obtain three divisional championships ever, let alone in 5 years.
Most new head coaches don't get extended tenures like Garrett has though, so that's not really a fair comparison. New head coaches are generally hired by bad teams, and those teams are bad for a reason.


You are overselling our talent. We came into the year with the worst receiving corps in the league, bar none, and a bottom 15 QB.

That does not go "toe to toe" with any team in the NFL.

This year was absolutely not a "fall short," coaching year. Laughable sentiment.

He couldn't coach this roster over the top, sure. Maybe there are some who could.

But not most.
You're operating off the assumption of what you thought the roster would be on paper coming into the year, not what it actually ended up being.

Yes, coming into the season, we had no idea how good guys like LVE, Jaylon Smith, Byron Jones, etc. might be, but that's really irrelevant, because as it turned out, they were all excellent, Pro Bowl caliber players.

By the end of the season, we had those guys leading the defense, with a QB/RB/WR all playing among the best in the league at their position.

Regardless of what you assumed coming into the season, that's a roster that absolutely can go toe-to-toe with anyone in the league.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,473
I can think of one team in recent memory that lost their starting QB for the season and had a former Pro Bowl QB in reserve and not only missed the playoffs, but crashed and burned horrifically - the 2015 Dallas Cowboys.



And the Chiefs are playing for an AFC Championship at home without their star RB and safety against the Patriots, whose star TE is a shell of himself, and star WR got busted for drugs a few weeks ago and is out. They're also playing without their top draft pick, Isaiah Wynn, who tore his achilles. The Rams are without a key WR and just ran over us with fucking CJ Anderson. The Eagles were probably a dropped pass away from another NFC Championship with their backup QB. Garrett doesn't get extra credit for dealing with issues that literally just about every team in the NFL has to overcome every season.



Am I arguing that Garrett should be fired today because of his three straight 8-8 seasons? I haven't said that in any of my responses to you, so I'm not sure if you're just willfully arguing against a straw man here, or if - in your haste to hop on top of Garrett's minuscule ginger dick and go for a ride - that you're just legitimately confused about who you're responding to.

What I am telling you is that I don't think he's a very good coach, and that I don't think he's gotten the most out of his team, and that your hysteria that about clutching your Garrett pearls because if we let him go, we're sure to end up with John Fox as his replacement, is asinine.



I don't think anyone is "evaluating him" based on those seasons, but if you're going to try to tell me with any sort of certainty that the only reason Garrett missed the playoffs in 2015 was because Romo got hurt, then it's absolutely relevant to bring up the fact that he missed the playoffs three straight years with a healthy Romo. In fact, Romo had a winning season every year he started at QB until Garrett took over.




No fucking shit. Has anyone advocated that we fire Garrett and intentionally hire someone worse? I think the fork in the road is definition of a "quality candidate" - most here don't seem to believe that Jason Garrett himself would be defined as a "quality candidate" - so just about anyone with a sound schematic understanding of how offensive football is successfully played in 2019 would be an upgrade. I'm just not buying into the fear mongering that we have to hold onto Garrett or else we're going to be stuck with Jeff Fisher.



Amazing how after 9 years, Garrett can still never get that one lucky bounce, or "play or two" to go his way. Maybe that's the issue, that we're relying on that lucky bounce instead of going out and consistently, systematically and schematically defeating teams.



Most new head coaches don't get extended tenures like Garrett has though, so that's not really a fair comparison. New head coaches are generally hired by bad teams, and those teams are bad for a reason.




You're operating off the assumption of what you thought the roster would be on paper coming into the year, not what it actually ended up being.

Yes, coming into the season, we had no idea how good guys like LVE, Jaylon Smith, Byron Jones, etc. might be, but that's really irrelevant, because as it turned out, they were all excellent, Pro Bowl caliber players.

By the end of the season, we had those guys leading the defense, with a QB/RB/WR all playing among the best in the league at their position.

Regardless of what you assumed coming into the season, that's a roster that absolutely can go toe-to-toe with anyone in the league.

Well said.
 

Texas Ace

Teh Acester
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,400
I can think of one team in recent memory that lost their starting QB for the season and had a former Pro Bowl QB in reserve and not only missed the playoffs, but crashed and burned horrifically - the 2015 Dallas Cowboys.



And the Chiefs are playing for an AFC Championship at home without their star RB and safety against the Patriots, whose star TE is a shell of himself, and star WR got busted for drugs a few weeks ago and is out. They're also playing without their top draft pick, Isaiah Wynn, who tore his achilles. The Rams are without a key WR and just ran over us with fucking CJ Anderson. The Eagles were probably a dropped pass away from another NFC Championship with their backup QB. Garrett doesn't get extra credit for dealing with issues that literally just about every team in the NFL has to overcome every season.



Am I arguing that Garrett should be fired today because of his three straight 8-8 seasons? I haven't said that in any of my responses to you, so I'm not sure if you're just willfully arguing against a straw man here, or if - in your haste to hop on top of Garrett's minuscule ginger dick and go for a ride - that you're just legitimately confused about who you're responding to.

What I am telling you is that I don't think he's a very good coach, and that I don't think he's gotten the most out of his team, and that your hysteria that about clutching your Garrett pearls because if we let him go, we're sure to end up with John Fox as his replacement, is asinine.



I don't think anyone is "evaluating him" based on those seasons, but if you're going to try to tell me with any sort of certainty that the only reason Garrett missed the playoffs in 2015 was because Romo got hurt, then it's absolutely relevant to bring up the fact that he missed the playoffs three straight years with a healthy Romo. In fact, Romo had a winning season every year he started at QB until Garrett took over.




No fucking shit. Has anyone advocated that we fire Garrett and intentionally hire someone worse? I think the fork in the road is definition of a "quality candidate" - most here don't seem to believe that Jason Garrett himself would be defined as a "quality candidate" - so just about anyone with a sound schematic understanding of how offensive football is successfully played in 2019 would be an upgrade. I'm just not buying into the fear mongering that we have to hold onto Garrett or else we're going to be stuck with Jeff Fisher.



Amazing how after 9 years, Garrett can still never get that one lucky bounce, or "play or two" to go his way. Maybe that's the issue, that we're relying on that lucky bounce instead of going out and consistently, systematically and schematically defeating teams.



Most new head coaches don't get extended tenures like Garrett has though, so that's not really a fair comparison. New head coaches are generally hired by bad teams, and those teams are bad for a reason.




You're operating off the assumption of what you thought the roster would be on paper coming into the year, not what it actually ended up being.

Yes, coming into the season, we had no idea how good guys like LVE, Jaylon Smith, Byron Jones, etc. might be, but that's really irrelevant, because as it turned out, they were all excellent, Pro Bowl caliber players.

By the end of the season, we had those guys leading the defense, with a QB/RB/WR all playing among the best in the league at their position.

Regardless of what you assumed coming into the season, that's a roster that absolutely can go toe-to-toe with anyone in the league.
Way to drop the mic on him.
 

p1_

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
26,454

Who are the most recent new hires?
 

Hoffa

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
427

Who are the most recent new hires?
My guess would be John DeFilippo or, God forbid, Darrell Bevel.

Can't imagine why DeFilippo wouldn't want this job, unless becoming our OC is contingent on running the "Garrett playbook" and letting him continue to oversee the offense. DeFilippo probably has carte blanche in Jacksonville.
 

UncleMilti

This seemed like a good idea at the time.
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
17,981
My guess would be John DeFilippo or, God forbid, Darrell Bevel.

Can't imagine why DeFilippo wouldn't want this job, unless becoming our OC is contingent on running the "Garrett playbook" and letting him continue to oversee the offense. DeFilippo probably has carte blanche in Jacksonville.
Well, if the Jones clan is stuck on bringing in another OC with the caveat that they run Garretts archaic offense, they'll be lucky if Howdy Doody takes the fuckin job.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,473
I wonder if what we discussed with this mystery offensive coach wasn't about being our OC, but maybe a consultant or Kris Richard type of role. That would make sense then that an OC position elsewhere would be more appealing.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,473
I wonder if what we discussed with this mystery offensive coach wasn't about being our OC, but maybe a consultant or Kris Richard type of role. That would make sense then that an OC position elsewhere would be more appealing.
Well, this comment didn't age well.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
I can think of one team in recent memory that lost their starting QB for the season and had a former Pro Bowl QB in reserve and not only missed the playoffs, but crashed and burned horrifically - the 2015 Dallas Cowboys.
If you can only think of one team who lost their starting QB and then crashed and burned, you aren't thinking hard enough. I can think of three teams that tanked this year alone, once they lost their starting QB. The 49ers, the Redskins, and the Bengals.

Matt Cassel was a bum when he was here. Don't try to pretend like he was anywhere close to on par with Nick Foles.

And the Chiefs are playing for an AFC Championship at home without their star RB and safety against the Patriots, whose star TE is a shell of himself, and star WR got busted for drugs a few weeks ago and is out. They're also playing without their top draft pick, Isaiah Wynn, who tore his achilles. The Rams are without a key WR and just ran over us with fucking CJ Anderson. The Eagles were probably a dropped pass away from another NFC Championship with their backup QB. Garrett doesn't get extra credit for dealing with issues that literally just about every team in the NFL has to overcome every season.
Who is giving him extra credit? You said it takes the stars aligning for him to "sniff" the playoffs and/or playoff success.

Obviously the stars didn't align this year and yet we still not only made the playoffs but also won a round. So what you said was simply wrong.

Is the argument not that the stars aligned, but that he simply had to deal with what everyone else dealt with? Maybe, but that's not what you said.

Also, I will obviously grant you, yes, fucking BILL BELICHICK and ANDY REID and SEAN MCVAY are better coaches than Garrett.

I agree we could surely use a coach of that caliber and if you'll kindly point me in their direction, I'll pack Garrett's bags and drive him to the airport myself. Lincoln Riley would do as well.

Am I arguing that Garrett should be fired today because of his three straight 8-8 seasons?
Well, every time you bring up "3 playoff appearances in 8 years," that is exactly what you are doing. You are holding him accountable for the first three years of his regime, not the last couple.

But if you are going to cede that point and never bring it up again, I'm happy to move on and address the only truly legitimate criticism of Garrett -- which is that we can probably find common ground on agreeing that, while he is a solid coach and has established that he's fully competent and capable of being a second round playoff coach, he may not be the guy to get us over the hump to the conference championship and beyond.

And once we acknowledge that this is the main issue with Garrett, we can begin to talk about upgrades who CAN get us past the division round.

Hint: It's not Adam Gase or Vic Fangio, so bring me a name in hand (I've already suggested Lincoln Riley) and we may get somewhere productive.

What I am telling you is that I don't think he's a very good coach, and that I don't think he's gotten the most out of his team, and that your hysteria that about clutching your Garrett pearls because if we let him go, we're sure to end up with John Fox as his replacement, is asinine.
You can feel free to not think that, but the facts are that he's recently been a division winning coach 60% of the time, which is already way better than most, and if he had his starting QB it's probably more like 80% of the time.

So what you are really alleging is that I don't have to be concerned because literally any coach we hire will not only be able to win the division with this current iteration of the roster 60% of the time or better, but that literally any coach we hire will be able to take us further as well.

I reject that as nonsense and not supported by any evidence in the slightest.

If you'd like to suggest a name of who you think specifically may be able to do better than that, I'm all ears. I've suggested Lincoln Riley or perhaps trying to lure Payton out of New Orleans, though that might require waiting another year.

I don't think anyone is "evaluating him" based on those seasons, but if you're going to try to tell me with any sort of certainty that the only reason Garrett missed the playoffs in 2015 was because Romo got hurt, then it's absolutely relevant to bring up the fact that he missed the playoffs three straight years with a healthy Romo. In fact, Romo had a winning season every year he started at QB until Garrett took over.
No, this entire paragraph is dead wrong. And this is why: The TREND is important. It's way more relevant that he's been successful to the level of divisional round in 3 of the last 5 years than it is that he went 8-8 three times in a row.

The trend alone speaks pretty good volumes about Garrett as at least an average coach (if I accept, for example, that the roster is above average; though with a bottom 15 QB in Prescott to this point in his career, and our lack of depth and quality at WR, I'm not sure our roster is significantly better than other playoff or near playoff teams).

And what's more, the trend would look even better if it hadn't been for the type of catastrophe that sinks the vast majority of teams: loss of your starting QB for 75%+ of your regular season.

Yeah, the Paytons and Reids and Belichik's and McVay's of the world can overcome that. And your point is? That's my point; that's the entire reason why we need to be sure the next coach is of that caliber, or at least give us as good a chance of having that as possible.

The Fangios and Gases and Foxes and Fishers of the world can't overcome that. And Garrett's resume stacks up favorably compared to them (better, really).

No fucking shit. Has anyone advocated that we fire Garrett and intentionally hire someone worse? I think the fork in the road is definition of a "quality candidate" - most here don't seem to believe that Jason Garrett himself would be defined as a "quality candidate" - so just about anyone with a sound schematic understanding of how offensive football is successfully played in 2019 would be an upgrade. I'm just not buying into the fear mongering that we have to hold onto Garrett or else we're going to be stuck with Jeff Fisher.
It's not fear mongering. Look at the names that have been hired this offseason.

Kingsbury is a huge question mark and he's the best one of the lot. The rest: a bunch of retreads, journeymen or boring ass hires who are not likely to move the needle. Fangio, Gase, Matt Lafleur, Brian Flores, Bruce Arian's half retired ass.

That's what we would have been picking from. No fucking thanks.

Unless you are gonna tell me that we're going for the Riley home run. Or we're gonna pry Payton loose from NO. Or something like that. Then sign me up. I'm all on board.

Amazing how after 9 years, Garrett can still never get that one lucky bounce, or "play or two" to go his way. Maybe that's the issue, that we're relying on that lucky bounce instead of going out and consistently, systematically and schematically defeating teams.
Agreed. Yes, that is the issue. That's what I'm saying. The way Garrett runs things, he can obviously achieve a certain level of success (winning the division, making the playoffs, winning a round against the lesser playoff teams -- and he's actually quite good at achieving this level of success), but he's incapable of coaching up a non-elite roster to beat the truly good bye-week teams. He'd need a lucky break or lucky bounce.

Still, I'll take that -- relatively good chances of making the divisional round, and then hope for a lucky bounce or two -- rather than risking that Adam Gase is my next coach and I might get significantly worse. Then even a lucky bounce doesn't help things. Yeah, maybe we get a better coach than Gase. But maybe we don't.

Here's a thought: Just ride out Garrett for another year or two until either he turns the corner or you can pry away Payton or lure Riley. Either Garrett gets lucky and we do get over the hump, or the next time an elite coach comes up (and it does happen!), you pounce on him.

Remember, I was all for us chasing Andy Reid when he was available. Just wait till the next Reid is available then strike.

Meanwhile, what if you fire Garrett now, and then next year Payton leaves New Orleans? You're fucked, because Jerry isn't gonna fire the new coach after a year.

We are actually in a great spot for being able to poach the next Super Coach prospect. Either Garrett delivers a NFCC title or Super Bowl, or we fire him citing lack of progress and pounce on Payton or Riley next year or the year after, still within the window of opportunity for Dak and Elliott.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
why dont we hear Carmichael's name bandied about coaching vacancies? Is he Payton's flunkie?
I've wondered about this as well. Hell, Dan Campbell gets more run, and he's the TE coach there.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,488
My guess would be John DeFilippo or, God forbid, Darrell Bevel.

Can't imagine why DeFilippo wouldn't want this job, unless becoming our OC is contingent on running the "Garrett playbook" and letting him continue to oversee the offense. DeFilippo probably has carte blanche in Jacksonville.
DeFillipo just agreed with the Jags though.
 

Hoffa

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
427
If you can only think of one team who lost their starting QB and then crashed and burned, you aren't thinking hard enough. I can think of three teams that tanked this year alone, once they lost their starting QB. The 49ers, the Redskins, and the Bengals.

Matt Cassel was a bum when he was here. Don't try to pretend like he was anywhere close to on par with Nick Foles.
You asked about teams who lost their starting QB and had a Pro Bowler waiting on the bench and I gave you one. I'm not sure what the Redskins, 49ers and Bengals have to do with this, but don't hurt yourself moving those goalposts.


Who is giving him extra credit? You said it takes the stars aligning for him to "sniff" the playoffs and/or playoff success.

Obviously the stars didn't align this year and yet we still not only made the playoffs but also won a round. So what you said was simply wrong.

Is the argument not that the stars aligned, but that he simply had to deal with what everyone else dealt with? Maybe, but that's not what you said.

Also, I will obviously grant you, yes, fucking BILL BELICHICK and ANDY REID and SEAN MCVAY are better coaches than Garrett.

I agree we could surely use a coach of that caliber and if you'll kindly point me in their direction, I'll pack Garrett's bags and drive him to the airport myself. Lincoln Riley would do as well.
Stars aligning is relative to the rest of the NFL. No, we didn't have a 100% healthy roster, but no one did. But when you look at the hand that was dealt to Garrett - playing in a division with two absolute basement dwellers helped. The stiffest competition, the Eagles, came into the season without their starting QB (then got him back and lost him again later), without their star WR for a few weeks, lost their top THREE RB's (Darren Sproles, Jay Ajayi, Corey Clement) to injuries, lost their other starting WR (Mike Wallace) for the season in Week 2 and lost two of 4 starters in the secondary to injury.

That's just one example. Shit happens in this league, and it sucked to lose Frederick and David Irving, but in the grand scheme of things, I don't know how you could ask for a much better path to success in the NFL than that.


You can feel free to not think that, but the facts are that he's recently been a division winning coach 60% of the time, which is already way better than most, and if he had his starting QB it's probably more like 80% of the time.

So what you are really alleging is that I don't have to be concerned because literally any coach we hire will not only be able to win the division with this current iteration of the roster 60% of the time or better, but that literally any coach we hire will be able to take us further as well.

I reject that as nonsense and not supported by any evidence in the slightest.

If you'd like to suggest a name of who you think specifically may be able to do better than that, I'm all ears. I've suggested Lincoln Riley or perhaps trying to lure Payton out of New Orleans, though that might require waiting another year.
Am I alleging that? Did I say that? Did I say anything remotely close to that? Incredible job of taking a stand to "reject" some fake shit you just pulled out of thin air.

I'm legitimately confused on your talking point about "well, we can't fire Garrett unless we have a better option." Who on earth is saying that we should fire Garrett and then just throw darts against the wall and hope one hits a target? Has anyone suggested that? Clearly, the point of firing Garrett, would be to hire an upgrade. I don't think anyone, even a buffoon like Jerry, blindly goes into a coaching search not having some semblance of an idea of who they're aiming for. Bill Parcells didn't just fall out of the sky in 2004. He was the plan all along.

Well, every time you bring up "3 playoff appearances in 8 years," that is exactly what you are doing. You are holding him accountable for the first three years of his regime, not the last couple.

No, this entire paragraph is dead wrong. And this is why: The TREND is important. It's way more relevant that he's been successful to the level of divisional round in 3 of the last 5 years than it is that he went 8-8 three times in a row.

The trend alone speaks pretty good volumes about Garrett as at least an average coach (if I accept, for example, that the roster is above average; though with a bottom 15 QB in Prescott to this point in his career, and our lack of depth and quality at WR, I'm not sure our roster is significantly better than other playoff or near playoff teams).
I'm bringing up his entire regime because it all counts, and it all matters, and it especially matters when you continue trying to push the idea that the only reason he missed the playoffs in recent memory was because of injuries, when the reality is, that in previous seasons - when he didn't have to deal with those catastrophic injuries, he still missed the playoffs.

Trends are important, but there's also a term in statistics called an outlier. As badly as you may want to believe Garrett has this plane trending up, it might just be that he can't keep the nose up long enough until it regresses back to the mean.

It's not fear mongering. Look at the names that have been hired this offseason.

Kingsbury is a huge question mark and he's the best one of the lot. The rest: a bunch of retreads, journeymen or boring ass hires who are not likely to move the needle. Fangio, Gase, Matt Lafleur, Brian Flores, Bruce Arian's half retired ass.

That's what we would have been picking from. No fucking thanks.

Unless you are gonna tell me that we're going for the Riley home run. Or we're gonna pry Payton loose from NO. Or something like that. Then sign me up. I'm all on board.
Since you like trends so much, again, the trend with Jerry is not to hire retreads. The majority of his hires are first-time coaches, why do you keep ignoring this trend to push your inane talking point that we're going to wind up stuck with a JAG coach if we dare to let Garrett walk?

There are fantastic coaches out there. One of them gets hired just about every year. McVay last year, Pederson the year before. Reid a couple years before them. Dan Quinn got hired in 2015 or 16. I don't know if you'd consider him one of the top coaches in the NFL, but the guy's been to the Super Bowl.

Lincoln Riley or Sean Payton or Nick Saban or some hotshot coordinator isn't sitting on their recliner waiting for an NFL GM to send them a "sup?" text. These guys have jobs and responsibilities, and many of them are very protective of their spots and particular about leaving a good situation for a questionable one (see Josh McDaniels). But you're off base in suggesting that the coaching hires around the league are indicative of what we would be looking at. The Dallas Cowboys job is just about the most prestigious coaching job in sports, save for maybe head coach of the Lakers or Yankees. If and when this opens up, everyone is going to be interested. I don't think Bill Parcells was going to come out of retirement to coach the Detroit Lions, but he sure as hell did for the Dallas Cowboys.

Here's a thought: Just ride out Garrett for another year or two until either he turns the corner or you can pry away Payton or lure Riley. Either Garrett gets lucky and we do get over the hump, or the next time an elite coach comes up (and it does happen!), you pounce on him.

Remember, I was all for us chasing Andy Reid when he was available. Just wait till the next Reid is available then strike.

Meanwhile, what if you fire Garrett now, and then next year Payton leaves New Orleans? You're fucked, because Jerry isn't gonna fire the new coach after a year.

We are actually in a great spot for being able to poach the next Super Coach prospect. Either Garrett delivers a NFCC title or Super Bowl, or we fire him citing lack of progress and pounce on Payton or Riley next year or the year after, still within the window of opportunity for Dak and Elliott.
I'm fine with giving Garrett one more season, without an extension, and putting out feelers on Riley, Payton, whomever else in the meantime. I think a solid decade is enough time for a "process" to bear fruit.
 
Top Bottom