Archer: Jason Garrett worried about Eagles, not job

boozeman said:

It means a couple of local NBA people like Cuban and Carlisle are supporting Garrett. Maybe they are drinking buddies or something.

I do not give a shit.

Click to expand...

Or they have ulterior motives, like keeping Garrett means Mavs will continue being >>> Cowboys

Carp said:

I think they he is talking about the injuries.

Click to expand...

So do I. He could have been saying that few coaches could have come to this point with all the injuries and replacements that have happened to the team this season. Make your own decision whether that determination has merit.

It doesn't matter really...WGAS a shit what they think.

Carp said:

It doesn't matter really...WGAS a shit what they think.

Click to expand...

Probably no one cares, except Jerry. Validates what he already wants to do, keep his boy Garrett.

Carp said:

It doesn't matter really...WGAS a shit what they think.

Click to expand...

Pretty much.

I only know Cuban since he is like the Steinbrenner of the NBA or something.

But this Carlisle guy...I could not tell you who the eff he is since I literally do not give a crap about the NBA or basketball in general.

It is basically like soccer to me. Don't care. Don't want to care.

Carp said:

I think they he is talking about the injuries.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but what has he "done" under those circumstances besides throw games so badly it looks like he was trying to shave points? He hasn't done anything to cope with the injuries successfully yet.

boozeman said:

Pretty much.

I only know Cuban since he is like the Steinbrenner of the NBA or something.

But this Carlisle guy...I could not tell you who the eff he is since I literally do not give a crap about the NBA or basketball in general.

It is basically like soccer to me. Don't care. Don't want to care.

Click to expand...

Carlisle had a good amount of success in the Eastern conference before getting to Dallas and throughout his career he's gotten close to the Finals several times only to come a bit short until he finally broke through and won it all a few years ago. I'm sure Carlisle/Cuban are drawing some kind of parallel in their minds, or perhaps they're just paying lip service, but they're completely different situations since Garrett has had pretty much no success as a coach ever.

All you need to know about Carlisle is he looks exactly like a bald Jim Carrey.

VA Cowboy said:

Probably no one cares, except Jerry. Validates what he already wants to do, keep his boy Garrett.

Click to expand...

It will be a much harder sell if we lose on Sunday though. Jones has been getting raked pretty hard this year and it could compel him to fire Garrett and go after a Gruden or Holmgren. Holmgren seems to respect Jerry and could work here...which I supoort, but am also concerned he could turn out to be another Shanahan.

Clay_Allison said:

Yeah, but what has he "done" under those circumstances besides throw games so badly it looks like he was trying to shave points? He hasn't done anything to cope with the injuries successfully yet.

Click to expand...

You'd have to ask Carlisle that...it is just my interpretation of his point.

Carp said:

It will be a much harder sell if we lose on Sunday though. Jones has been getting raked pretty hard this year and it could compel him to fire Garrett and go after a Gruden or Holmgren. Holmgren seems to respect Jerry and could work here...which I supoort, but am also concerned he could turn out to be another Shanahan.

Click to expand...

I'd actually take my chances with that than continue with the next glorfied, neutered coordinator with Jerry pulling all the strings. But I think if Jerry does fire Garrett, we won't get a Gruden or Holmgren or another other established HC. I can't see Jerry caving and giving up control to an actual HC again. At his age he probably knows his time is running out and he's far more interested in trying to win his way than he is in just trying to win.

But I think Jerry will use injuries as an excuse to bring back Garrett so he won't have to make a decision now on another coach. The most I think we'll get is a new DC...of Jerry's choosing.

Carp said:

It will be a much harder sell if we lose on Sunday though. Jones has been getting raked pretty hard this year and it could compel him to fire Garrett and go after a Gruden or Holmgren. Holmgren seems to respect Jerry and could work here...which I supoort, but am also concerned he could turn out to be another Shanahan.

Click to expand...

Please.

Jerry has been "raked hard" ever since he got Johnson to punch his own ticket out of town.

He does not give a shit. In fact, he gets more excited when the pressure is on. He fashions himself as a "maverick" and he does not care...he just doesn't.

I think nothing short of dying keeps Garrett from returning.

He seems damn sure of it.

If Jones fires him, it is a pro rasslin' move.

Jerry Jones responds to Mark Cuban’s comments, says there’s not one area where Jason Garrett can improve
By Jon Machota
jmachota@dallasnews.com
10:36 pm on December 27, 2013 |

Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban said Thursday night that Jerry Jones “would be crazy” to fire Cowboys head coach Jason Garrett.

Cuban went on to say that the hardest thing to do in professional sports is hiring a head coach.

Jones was read Cuban’s comments and had the following response Friday morning on 105.3 The Fan [KRLD-FM].

“Certainly I have a lot of respect for Mark,” Jones said. “I will assure you that I can and will make mental notation of all of those plusses that he’s talking about, particularly the relationship of the coach with the team and its status.

“I will go ahead and tell you Jason has this team, and he has the respect of the team. He has a good, really good charisma with the team. It would be right at the top of the list of his plusses. Just as important in my mind is that we all know where he is in his career. We all know that frankly, Jason had not coached but maybe two years before he came in to coach as coordinator for us, and he’s been on a stepped-up plan. He came in very early in his career as a coordinator, a play-caller, and obviously he came in very early in his career as a head coach in the NFL and the Cowboys. Now, that’s quite an investment that we’ve made in him, because we all know you don’t hit the ground running.

“Everybody knows you make mistakes. Having said that, they were made on our watch. They were made at our expense. Now let’s take advantage. We paid for it, let’s take advantage of what he’s gained and how he’s evolved as a coach. He’s a better coach. There’s not one thing that I’ve seen in where he could improve – and I’m talking Jason Garrett – that is terminal relative to him being an outstanding head coach.”

It wouldn't surprise me one bit to find out Jerry asked Cuban to publicly back gingerfuck

Not one area he can improve in? Really?

Iamtdg said:

Not one area he can improve in? Really?

Click to expand...

Well, it is not like Jones is capable of knowing what the hell a coach is supposed to do during a game.

boozeman said:

Well, it is not like Jones is capable of knowing what the hell a coach is supposed to do during a game.

Click to expand...

Jones knows exactly what the coach is supposed to do during the game. Sit up in his box and get his glasses cleaned so he can see clearly that he has no clue what's going on.

Iamtdg said:

Not one area he can improve in? Really?

Click to expand...

It's jones-speak and he's not saying what it sounds like he's saying.

Jerry is saying that the areas Garrett needs to improve on are not things that keep Garrett from being an outstanding coach. In other words, the areas Garrett needs to improve on are minor.

As an aside, that entire quote scares the eff out of me.

Jerry is basically saying that Garrett learned on the job and he's not about to fire him now when the investment in him is about to pay off.

Jerry is just stupid enough to believe that stupid shit, too.

That probably means Garrett is back next year no matter what, and if by some miracle we win that probably buys Garrett at least 2 more years, rather than 1.