Right. So like I said -- when the stars align, everything falls into place, and we don't get battered by injuries while everyone else around us does, then yeah, we can get a sniff.
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.
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.
Look, teams lose important guys to injury every year.
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 don't like to play the "what if" game. It would have taken 10-6 to reach the playoffs last year, and we were only 6-4 with Zeke (and that's counting the meaningless 6-0 Week 17 win over an Eagles team that wasn't even trying), so there's no guarantee we make the playoffs if he plays all 16. Additionally, we had only one winning season in the last four prior to Romo's 2015 injury. So, no guarantee we are able to recapture 2014, even with a healthy Romo. Could have just as easily been another 8-8.
Outside of playing "what if" - we do know sure that Garrett had four full seasons of prime Tony Romo and got one bite of the playoff apple. That's a fucking travesty.
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.
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.
Instead, coaches, including Garrett, are being evaluated on where they are headed, not where they've been years ago, and the best predictor of where they are headed is RECENT history, not distant history. But every time you make the "3 playoff appearances in 8 seasons" argument, you are baking into the analysis EQUAL WEIGHT to his first three 8-8 seasons.
But they don't deserve that weight if you are evaluating how well you think he's gonna do in the future. The best projection of the near-future Cowboys with Garrett at the helm would probably be roughly what they have been since Dak Prescott and Ezekiel Elliott arrived, and then factor in a plus or a minus to that based on future personnel moves, coaching staff adjustments, strength of opponents, and general intangibles.
And given that recent history (3 division crowns in the last 5 years, including 2 with Prescott), that is a very big "SOMETHING." It's not nothing.
I'm not going to start popping Champagne over three division titles.
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 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.
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.
Now, there's also a legitimate argument -- and this is the LEGITIMATE criticism of Garrett, as opposed to the crybaby part about how he should have been fired after going 8-8 three times but wasn't, that argument is stupid and pointless -- there is a LEGITIMATE concern that Garrett has peaked at division titles and divisional playoff round appearances. That's the legitimate, credible concern. That Garrett has established a pattern of building a team that, when it has it's starting QB, is able to make the playoffs and/or win the division approaching 80% of the time, but that he just can't elevate them over the hump.
That's a legit concern.
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.
Making the playoffs really isn't the herculean task the Cowboys have made it look like during Garrett's tenure.
Not too herculean winning the division three out of the last 5 years. He's clearly onto something.
The top organizations are there just about every year
The ones with the elitist of the elite QBs, for the most part.
Now, whether through front office skill of guys like McClay, or just sheer dumb luck, we've actually assembled a really quality roster that can compete man-for-man with just about anyone in the NFL. I genuinely don't know how much input Garrett does or does or does not have in the personnel currently on this team, so I won't speculate on that, but suffice to say that while I generally think we have the talent on the depth chart to go toe-to-toe with anyone in the NFL, it is on the sideline where we continue to fall short.
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.