Stephen Jones: 0-5 without Romo is unacceptable

NoDak

Hotlinking' sonofabitch
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,899
McGee beat the Eagles in his first career start, 14-13.
 

Carp

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
15,127
I am referencing Garretts record and what jmech may have been getting at with backups. Possibly he was counting the 0/8 with backups when Garrett was head coach.
He was the head coach.
 

NoDak

Hotlinking' sonofabitch
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,899
And anyone who actually watched knew what a farce that game was.
And? The question wasn't if he has ever looked like a HOFer. It was if he ever was the QB during a game we won.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,350
The point was Garrett isn't 0-8 or anywhere close to it with backup QBs.
 

1bigfan13

Your favorite player's favorite player
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
27,085
The bottom line is Garrett is going to have to step outside his comfort zone if he wants to pull out a win while Romo is out.

I'm not advocating for him to coach aggressively/recklessly from start to finish but there will certainly be points in the game where he needs to cast conventional wisdom to the side in order to steal some points or possessions.

Kind of like we saw with Mike Tomlin and the Steelers a few weeks ago when they allowed Leveon Bell to run it in for a score on the final play of the game rather than settling for a FG attempt.

Garrett is going to have to roll the dice some as well. Maybe not to the degree of the Tomlin example but instead of punting or attempting a FG on 4th and 1 in plus territory, go for it to see if you can keep the drive alive. Instead of always trying to pound it up the middle on 3rd and short, run a little play-action to see if you can catch the defense off-guard. Etc.
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,354
The bottom line is Garrett is going to have to step outside his comfort zone if he wants to pull out a win while Romo is out.

I'm not advocating for him to coach aggressively/recklessly from start to finish but there will certainly be points in the game where he needs to cast conventional wisdom to the side in order to steal some points or possessions.

Kind of like we saw with Mike Tomlin and the Steelers a few weeks ago when they allowed Leveon Bell to run it in for a score on the final play of the game rather than settling for a FG attempt.

Garrett is going to have to roll the dice some as well. Maybe not to the degree of the Tomlin example but instead of punting or attempting a FG on 4th and 1 in plus territory, go for it to see if you can keep the drive alive. Instead of always trying to pound it up the middle on 3rd and short, run a little play-action to see if you can catch the defense off-guard. Etc.
The robot will need to grow balls soon.

Teams that play it safe like he does will get their asses handed to them nine times out of ten.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,688
The robot will need to grow balls soon.

Teams that play it safe like he does will get their asses handed to them nine times out of ten.
They absolutely will. Playing safe with a hampered team is a solid recipe foe getting a whipping.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,134
Garrett's system relies on a QB with Romo's skills.

It is a high-risk, high-reward system.

Even when dumbed down and leaning on the run, backups have a hard time making this system work because they lack deep (15-25 yard) accuracy.

Forget the McGee game vs Philly backups, Kitna was able to get it going for a few games thanks to taking shots downfield and some heroic play from Dez Bryant.

It's not Garrett, but a system that does not adjust well when you downgrade the QB's and lead WR's skills.

You'd find a similar problem in Green Bay if Rodgers went out along with Nelson.

Denver's offense OTOH might not be impacted at all.

It has nothing to do with Kubiak's skills over Garrett's as coaches, but rather their choice of offensive systems.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
Garrett's system relies on a QB with Romo's skills.

It is a high-risk, high-reward system.

Even when dumbed down and leaning on the run, backups have a hard time making this system work because they lack deep (15-25 yard) accuracy.

Forget the McGee game vs Philly backups, Kitna was able to get it going for a few games thanks to taking shots downfield and some heroic play from Dez Bryant.

It's not Garrett, but a system that does not adjust well when you downgrade the QB's and lead WR's skills.

You'd find a similar problem in Green Bay if Rodgers went out along with Nelson.

Denver's offense OTOH might not be impacted at all.

It has nothing to do with Kubiak's skills over Garrett's as coaches, but rather their choice of offensive systems.
So you're forgetting the performances they got out of Quinn?
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
I don't think this system is high risk high reward. I think it's antiquated and needs a huge amount of talent to win matchups and an Elite QB to find them.
 

kidd

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
2,377
I don't think this system is high risk high reward. I think it's antiquated and needs a huge amount of talent to win matchups and an Elite QB to find them.
It's similar to the system Norv and Jimmy ran. It hasn't been as successful in their other stops either.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
It's similar to the system Norv and Jimmy ran. It hasn't been as successful in their other stops either.
Exactly, it's a 90s offense. The only wrinkle is Callahan added a more modern rushing attack.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,134
So you're forgetting the performances they got out of Quinn?
I'm guessing you mean Matt Flynn, and I thought he barely won one game with them in like his whole career with them.

When Rodgers went down in 2013 they had serious problems behind Wallace and Flynn. Sure they beat Dallas, but that was all on Garrett.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
I'm guessing you mean Matt Flynn, and I thought he barely won one game with them in like his whole career with them.

When Rodgers went down in 2013 they had serious problems behind Wallace and Flynn. Sure they beat Dallas, but that was all on Garrett.
Flynn, yes, got him mixed up with that third stringer who hung around here for a few years. His record as a starter in GB was 3-2 with 13 TDs and 6 INTs. If our backup could do that we'd be leading the division.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,134
Flynn, yes, got him mixed up with that third stringer who hung around here for a few years. His record as a starter in GB was 3-2 with 13 TDs and 6 INTs. If our backup could do that we'd be leading the division.
One of those games was a no pressure game with the playoffs clinched. The two victories in relief were each by a point.

Basically the team went from dominant to iffy very fast once Rodgers cracked his collar bone. They also had Eddie Lacy and Jason Garrett in fuck-up-sure-win-by-continually-passing mode while we have d-Mac and have faced Payton, Coughlin, Belichick, and Carroll-- all former Super Bowl winners.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
One of those games was a no pressure game with the playoffs clinched. The two victories in relief were each by a point.

Basically the team went from dominant to iffy very fast once Rodgers cracked his collar bone. They also had Eddie Lacy and Jason Garrett in fuck-up-sure-win-by-continually-passing mode while we have d-Mac and have faced Payton, Coughlin, Belichick, and Carroll-- all former Super Bowl winners.
He still played a lot better than Weeden.
 
Top Bottom