We're not talking about whether Garrett was reluctant to give up playcalling; he clearly was.
He could have learned his lesson, hard to believe considering how arrogant he's been, but there's no motivator like self interest. Fortunately, there's no guarantee Jerry would let him go back to the way things were. He still hasn't given Garrett that extension, and I would hope he'd demand that JG stick to the winning formula.
Sure I did. Box scores, heavy use of the draw, name dropping Phil Costa and Nate Livings, etc.
The reason we couldn't do it successfully is on him. If Rob Ryan could lobby for CBs, Garrett could have lobbied for linemen from 2007 to 2010. He only suddenly, supposedly, gave a shit about that when he became HC (only he didn't care too much, he was cool with adding only one new lineman per season and using crap like Holland, Livings, Bernadeau and Costa in the meantime).
The reason this approach is effective now is because teams have had to overcommit to stopping the run to limit it. This has opened them up to being shredded in the pass game. What's that? Tony Romo has 10 TDs and no INTs in these couple of games where Murray is being held to a low ypc? Bingo.
And that is your agenda. You want to believe that Garrett could not have taken a different approach to his coaching philosophy. I and several others do not buy into that because of the circumstances that occurred as his career evolved with Dallas. If we are going to bring the media guys into it then how about all the speculation each year in the media about getting fired and how he couldn't control a game because of his approach to the game.
m
If we're gonna talk about his game management blunders, that is more than fair; there is plenty of evidence of those. I would attribute his mismanagement of the Green Bay and Detroit games in that category. In those games, even running into a wall and going three and out and punting wins you the games, and he should have realized that.
Wasn't talking about management blunders. I was talking about the media attacking Garretts philosophy.
Ok... Please point me to the media member who writes articles about the offense's performance in depth every week like Sturm does, and who substantiates the opinion that Garrett refused to run the ball and that was the reason it was ineffective.
If that's your math then only one fixed it because the change wasn't made until two were already in place.
Incorrect.
I guess it depends on what you mean by focusing on it. He didn't focus on getting the line he needed for way way way too long. He had a lot of opportunities to stand on a table for guys like Ryan Kalil, Max Unger, Duane Brown, and he only showed interest in skill players.
He could have, yes. I'm not sure how much say he actually had prior to becoming HC, but yeah, the obsession with getting a TE has for sure interfered with personnel.
It's simply not true that the pieces weren't in place to run it last year. In 2013 we were 8th in the NFL at 4.5 YPA.
You need to read more carefully.
A much different 4.5 per carry, I assure you. This one has been accomplished facing heavy 8-9 man fronts a lot. It's why Romo is tearing it up so easily right now.
It's not coincidence. Linehan has proven a better situational playcaller and of course has proven he's able to stick with the run for his own part.
No one thinks the running game could have been great in 2011 or 2012 with that personnel. You're arguing against a point nobody is making. I've only ever said that we could have gotten ~3 yards per carry and protected the defense better, even with a bad running game. We did it in 2003 (515 rushing attempts) with an equally bad line, an assortment of bad RBs and no QB.
Pretty sure LT's point is that the run was a weakness because Garrett would abandon it.
I don't know if that was better. We ran in 2003 because Quincy Carter was the QB. In 2012 we had Tony Romo. Made sense to lean on him.
No, it didn't make sense to lean on Romo because we would have won more games keeping those 2011-2013 defenses off the field as long as possible. Working time of possession in our favor and having players like Ware and Hatcher still fresh in the 4th quarter would have kept the word "gutless" out of a lot of chatter threads. That's not rocket science, that's football 101.
I was saying the opposite. I think they should have run more but Garrett' s philosophical mindset wouldn't stick with it.