Archer: Continuity a key for Jason Garrett's coaching staff

[Cotton]

Wait...now we're arguing if we actually achieved continuity? Oi ve.

Surely you of all people know that the joke about continuity on this board was because we kept fools like Wade Wilson on staff, right?


Wait, bad example.

 

[Cotton]

Good thing I just said that it's not a good idea to keep Dave Campo around for continuity then.

But if, in theory, he was here for half a decade, it would not be surprising if his schemes were better implemented at the end of his tenure than at the beginning

Just should have waited 2 more years, right?

 

[data]

Surely you of all people know that the joke about continuity on this board was because we kept fools like Wade Wilson on staff, right?


Wait, bad example.

Wade Wilson's still on the staff?

 

[Cotton]

Wade Wilson's still on the staff?

Uhh...

 

[Smitty]

But if, in theory, he was here for half a decade, it would not be surprising if his schemes were better implemented at the end of his tenure than at the beginning

Just should have waited 2 more years, right?

No, of course not. It would never have been enough no matter how long he had.

But it still would have been a factor in whatever lousy end he achieved.

 

[NoDak]

While I to like that we have Linehan and Marinelli, Garrett also deserves some credit. Sure, he's made some bonehead decisions in the past, but it's not like he's the only coach to ever make a mistake. I've bitched about him, too. But to think he's nothing but an empty shirt is being dishonest. Let's not pretend that Linehan and Marinelli haven't had their share of shitty coaching stops.

While Garrett might not be as good as some people would have you believe, he's not nearly as bad as other's would have you believe, either. I truly think he gets a bad rap here partially because he's doggedly supported by Hostile and Schmitty.

 

[VA Cowboy]

Wade Wilson's still on the staff?

He's the offenses Monte Kiffin.

 

[Cotton]

No, of course not. It would never have been enough no matter how long he had.

But it still would have been a factor in whatever lousy end he achieved.

Yeah, it would have been a terrible factor, just like if we had stayed with Garrett as play caller. Some continuity is terrible, but continuity with good coaches is not. We are finally this year seeing a good continuity instead of 3 straight .500 seasons where continuity was a stupid idea.

 

[Cotton]

While I to like that we have Linehan and Marinelli, Garrett also deserves some credit. Sure, he's made some bonehead decisions in the past, but it's not like he's the only coach to ever make a mistake. I've bitched about him, too. But to think he's nothing but an empty shirt is being dishonest. Let's not pretend that Linehan and Marinelli haven't had their share of shitty coaching stops.

While Garrett might not be as good as some people would have you believe, he's not nearly as bad as other's would have you believe, either. I truly think he gets a bad rap here partially because he's doggedly supported by Hostile and Schmitty.

So, it still holds... Garrett having less responsibility equals more winning. I agree with that.

 

[VA Cowboy]

While Garrett might not be as good as some people would have you believe, he's not nearly as bad as other's would have you believe, either. I truly think he gets a bad rap here partially because he's doggedly supported by Hostile and Schmitty.

He gets most of the bad rap because he did nothing to deserve the job except being a comfortable in house hire for Jerry. He did nothing most of his first few years as HC, especially with play calling and game management. We get Marinelli as DC and then bring in Linehan as play caller and suddenly we just break through the .500 barrier. I don't think it's any coincidence our success this year happened when we finally had two solid coordinators and JG's role was diminished. Under Jerry, this is probably as good as it'll get though. It could definitely be worse, so I'll just hope we keep Marinelli and Linehan for awhile and keep making smart personnel moves.

 

[data]

So if we threw Garrett in a locked closet, Mercury Morris might not get to pop the champagne bottle next season.

 

[Smitty]

Yeah, it would have been a terrible factor

No, that isn't true. You don't think that the players being exposed to his schemes for 3-4-5 years in a row, and mastering the details and nuances of his schemes, doesn't have a positive effect?

Of course it would.

It's just that that positive aspect is outweighed by the fact that he was a shitty coach and was making other mistakes, or that he didn't make them practice hard or have good habits.

But even for bad coaches there would be a positive factor to the continuity. It just would be outweighed by the bad things.

In this year's case, there was also a positive to the continuity of Garrett's regime. The players bought into what he was preaching, and it generated a bunch of guys who did not roll over in December for once.

 

[data]

Once we got rid of Parcells, we went 13-3

 

[NoDak]

So, it still holds... Garrett having less responsibility equals more winning. I agree with that.

Interpret it however you want. Frankly, I don't give a shit what he does as long as the team buys into what he's selling and we are winning. It's not like he's the only HC to ever have his OC and DC have prominent roles. Hell, Jimmy Johnson and his coordinators come to mind. And before you fly into a tizzy, no... I'm not saying Garrett is as good as Jimmy was. Only that Jimmy had coordinators that factored quite a bit into our success.

 

[jsmith6919]

There's a reason why the most successful franchises also happen to be the most stable.

Every organization that has continuity has a HC that showed something in the first 3 years. Winning brings the continuity not the other way around.

*Unless you're in the family portrait

 

[NoDak]

He gets most of the bad rap because he did nothing to deserve the job except being a comfortable in house hire for Jerry. He did nothing most of his first few years as HC, especially with play calling and game management. We get Marinelli as DC and then bring in Linehan as play caller and suddenly we just break through the .500 barrier. I don't think it's any coincidence our success this year happened when we finally had two solid coordinators and JG's role was diminished. Under Jerry, this is probably as good as it'll get though. It could definitely be worse, so I'll just hope we keep Marinelli and Linehan for awhile and keep making smart personnel moves.

I give less than a single fuck about how he got here years ago. I care about now and what we do moving forward.

Or should I still be pissed over how Jerry fired Landry?

 

[Smitty]

Every organization that has continuity has a HC that showed something in the first 3 years.

Define "showed something."

Winning brings the continuity not the other way around.

Incorrect. Again, the mere presence of the same terminology, playbook, schemes, etc, being around for years at a time, can allow players to master them better and then execute them better.

Usually if this doesn't manifest in "showing something" within 3 years, then whatever the coach has to offer won't be good enough no matter how much of a postive effect continuity has. But that's not always the case.

 

[jsmith6919]

Define "showed something."

Made the playoffs in the first 3 years.

 

[jsmith6919]

Usually if this doesn't manifest in "showing something" within 3 years, then whatever the coach has to offer won't be good enough no matter how much of a postive effect continuity has. But that's not always the case.

It never gets a chance because most owners don't have a HC who is in the family portrait.

 

[Smitty]

Made the playoffs in the first 3 years.

Factually and provably wrong.