Scruggs: Mike Lombardi Rips Jason Garrett's Coaching Ability

I consider the 2015 season the true measure of his coaching ability...
Without his franchise QB he couldn't win a game... I see back-up QB's winning games all over the league, just not with Garrett coaching their team.

UncleMilti said:

You are cherry picking. You know as well as anyone else that the NFL today is not defined by true talent. Its so watered down, that coaching and basic good luck plays into winning the SB. Dallas had a superb chance of at least getting to the SB last year. They were 100% healthy according to Garrett and our QB was having a season like no one had seen in a long time and a RB that couldn't be stopped.. As far as GB and Rodgers...Rodgers might be good, but he was still handicapped by his missing players and Atlanta exposed that easily.

Click to expand...

Coaching can be a differentiator, but I am not claiming Garrett is a Bills Parcells or Bill Belichik type who is capable of making that difference. I am saying Garrett will take this team where the talent allows him, but the roster was not so talented (mainly because of defense deficiencies) that he could have autopiloted it to a Super Bowl, which seems to be the claim by some. I think he took one of the more talented teams in the conference and got them relatively close to getting out of the conference... they were one of the last 4 teams standing. To me... that's all just, rather average. But I wouldn't have said that this team was the talent-laden favorites by far and the coach let them down. I mean, talent wise I think they were right there with Atlanta and GB and probably the Giants too.

Let's tap the breaks on our QB. He was having a ROOKIE season like one not seen very often. Compared to QBs in general he was not much more than an average Pro Bowl season. Good, sure, but this was not unstoppable Peyton Manning driving the offense.

I won't really argue that point, because you are right...I'm not sure there's a better candidate out there right now. but even if one pops up, Garrett ain't going anywhere. But it doesn't negate the fact the guy comes up small in big games.

Click to expand...

Well that's a Jerry problem, not mine.

I advocated replacing Garrett with Reid after 2013. If we go 6-10 this year or something and Sean Payton hits the market I will be for calling him.

I am not a fan of a punitive firing and then a blind coaching search in this scenario. This is not the same as realizing we have to get rid of Barry Switzer and then having to look around for which desperate coordinator wants to come here badly enough and we find Chan Gailey. I would want a targeted search like when we sought out Parcells.

And to do that, you have to be coming off a season where you have an opportunity to sell that change, not when your coach just won coach of the year.

As for coming up small in big games... as Nick Eatman says, that's short term memory problems to an extent. Garrett had to win big games to GET to the big games he lost. So he's not coming up small in all big games. The nature of playoffs though, is that you always lose the last game of the season unless you win the Super Bowl. So we remember the season ending losses more than we remember beating New Orleans in New Orleans in a crucial late season game along the way.

To me, having a team that can string together 12-4 seasons but yet get bounced when the games really matter is worse than having 6-10 teams. At least a 6-10 is reason to say, "well we suck ass" instead of "hey we won 12 games only to sit home to watch another Championship game and SB". That's fucking maddening.

Click to expand...

I don't agree, and what's more, I'm not sure you can possibly believe that. Look at the Cowher Steelers. Always in that position until they FINALLY won one. Took him like a decade of 10-6's.

Angrymesscan said:

I consider the 2015 season the true measure of his coaching ability...
Without his franchise QB he couldn't win a game... I see back-up QB's winning games all over the league, just not with Garrett coaching their team.

Click to expand...

This is the epitome of the absolute backwards of what you should be evaluating any coach on. He spends all season, all career, designing his team around a centerpiece, and then he loses that centerpiece, and then you want to judge based on that small sample size being shorthanded?

All it demonstrates is improvising abilities and how gimmicky you can get in squeaking out cheap wins, because you are almost never a legit threat to make the playoffs without a quality QB. Parcells and Belichick have done it, but.... you know.... Parcells and Belichick.

That entire season should be basically thrown out in terms of evaluation, its worthless.

mschmidt64 said:

This is the epitome of the absolute backwards of what you should be evaluating any coach on. He spends all season, all career, designing his team around a centerpiece, and then he loses that centerpiece, and then you want to judge based on that small sample size being shorthanded?

All it demonstrates is improvising abilities and how gimmicky you can get in squeaking out cheap wins, because you are almost never a legit threat to make the playoffs without a quality QB. Parcells and Belichick have done it, but.... you know.... Parcells and Belichick.

That entire season should be basically thrown out in terms of evaluation, its worthless.

Click to expand...

How many QBs did Pittsburgh use that season and they were planning to have Rothlisberger all season?

mschmidt64 said:

This is the epitome of the absolute backwards of what you should be evaluating any coach on. He spends all season, all career, designing his team around a centerpiece, and then he loses that centerpiece, and then you want to judge based on that small sample size being shorthanded?

All it demonstrates is improvising abilities and how gimmicky you can get in squeaking out cheap wins, because you are almost never a legit threat to make the playoffs without a quality QB. Parcells and Belichick have done it, but.... you know.... Parcells and Belichick.

That entire season should be basically thrown out in terms of evaluation, its worthless.

Click to expand...

Not sure if serious.

boozeman said:

Not surprising.

Your stated if he had 2015 Romo, those 8-8 seasons go 11-5. I call bullshit.

It took him being stripped of the play calling responsibilities for him to even sniff above .500. He had Romo in his prime and squandered the best years of his career having little to no reliance on the run game. It is not a coincidence 2015 Romo was with a run game.

Click to expand...

Seems right to me.

Mike Lombardi really carries no merit with me. If you look at his track record as GM and pro personnel director he has a track record of a retard.

People have issues with Garrett, I get it, but what he did last year was amazing. Lose your franchise QB right before the season starts and leads an improbable great season.

He took huge steps forward...the Philly overtime game was massive in my mind. He understood the defensive limitations and aggressively went for the win. Sealed up a couple other wins with Beasley screens over running Zeke into the stacked up line. There are so many positives...I am going in expecting another great season.

mschmidt64 said:

This is the epitome of the absolute backwards of what you should be evaluating any coach on. He spends all season, all career, designing his team around a centerpiece, and then he loses that centerpiece, and then you want to judge based on that small sample size being shorthanded?

Click to expand...

Small sample size of going 1-11 in 12 games?

Anyone remember the time when we only needed one more win to get to nine and take the lousy NFC East? But Garrett with Romo couldn't even beat McCarthy with Matt Freaking Flynn?

Oh yeah, that was 2013, the same year a mediocre Bears team led by backup Josh McCown blew us out in Chicago.

Funny how other teams don't just give up when their starting QB gets hurt.

Simpleton said:

Taking a step back from this I think the litmus test for Garrett should be that he at least gets the team to an NFCC in the next two years, and if not he's gone. If there are catastrophic injuries or some kind of mitigating circumstances maybe he gets a third but I think the pressure has to be on given that this team should be one of the best in the conference over the next couple years.

Click to expand...

I agree with this completely.

mschmidt64 said:

No one is dismissing them... in fact they are pretty central to my stance that they demonstrate improvement.

8-8... 12-4... 13-3. See? Arrow up.

I love this pretend game you are playing that there isn't a trend upwards. You actually think we finish .500 or worse with Romo in 2015?

Click to expand...

Probably would have done the same 8-8 thing with the other messes like Joe Randle going on. But hey, needle in the right direction.

boozeman said:

Probably would have done the same 8-8 thing with the other messes like Joe Randle going on. But hey, needle in the right direction.

Click to expand...

No way. McFadden took over before long, he was at least stable.

10-6 at worst.

mschmidt64 said:

This is the epitome of the absolute backwards of what you should be evaluating any coach on. He spends all season, all career, designing his team around a centerpiece, and then he loses that centerpiece, and then you want to judge based on that small sample size being shorthanded?

All it demonstrates is improvising abilities and how gimmicky you can get in squeaking out cheap wins, because you are almost never a legit threat to make the playoffs without a quality QB. Parcells and Belichick have done it, but.... you know.... Parcells and Belichick.

That entire season should be basically thrown out in terms of evaluation, its worthless.

Click to expand...

Vermeil too.

Things I've learned

• You can't judge a coach by how he coaches his team when the starting QB is lost (2015). Lets just sweep that 4-12, and 1-11 without Romo thing under the rug.
• We should give Garrett major props for how he coached the Cowboys after they lost their starting QB (2016).
• We can't give Linehan sole credit for the offensive performance, because Garrett is the head coach and he's ultimately responsible."
• It's not Garretts fault we lose in the playoffs because the defense is terrible. And that is all Marinellis fault, not Garrett. It's not his fault he's only been the coach 7 years, has never been able to fix the defense, and has gone through 4 defensive coordinators.
• Despite other teams making changes, and sometimes those changes being successful to include Super Bowl appearances, we should be satisfied with Garrett because after 7 years (been with the team 11 years total, btw) he finally "has us pointed in the right direction." Sounds oddly familiar to "I see whats being built here", btw.

Yeah, no difference at all between losing your starting QB and having zero to work with versus coaching a good performance out of a rookie who does have talent.

Lulz.

I mean, I didn't say most of what you've paraphrased up there, but whatever. Honesty isn't the average Garrett-hater's strong suit.

I'd argue that you, and other Garrett backers in this thread have said exactly what I posted.

And why did Garrett have "zero to work with" once Romo got hurt? Wasn't he the head coach for years and years prior to that season and didn't he have a direct hand in selecting those QB's to be the back up quarterbacks? And didn't those QB's who - as you say - were zero to work with, miraculously win games with other franchises both prior to coming to Dallas and after once leaving Dallas?

Odd.

mschmidt64 said:

Yeah, no difference at all between losing your starting QB and having zero to work with versus coaching a good performance out of a rookie who does have talent.

Lulz.

I mean, I didn't say most of what you've paraphrased up there, but whatever. Honesty isn't the average Garrett-hater's strong suit.

Click to expand...

I don't love Garrett but I think it's pretty hard to ever argue that you should get rid of a coach after a 13-3 season with a first round playoff bye. Give the guy a season or two with Dak and if things start to look like they are heading south, then you change coaches. It's way premature at this point.

It's also funny to me that most of the people who want Garrett out, also predicted that we would be lucky to win 8 games last season. Mostly just curmudgeons wanting something to bitch about. Or they've just always hated Garrett and last season was probably the worst example of why Garrett should be fired.

Cowboysrock55 said:

Give the guy a season or two with Dak and if things start to look like they are heading south, then you change coaches

Click to expand...

what's the point? no quality coach would ever put up with Jerry's bullshit, which is how we know Garrett is a bootlicking, easily intimidated dud.

I bet Garrett could have been a great coach if he would have followed the natural progression.

Going from QB coach right into HC-in-waiting did him no favors.

You can read all the books you want, but working with guys who've done it goes a long way.

I think Garrett would do well coaching college, provided he has an exceptional staff. He's a gutless cheerleader.

mcnuttz said:

I bet Garrett could have been a great coach if he would have followed the natural progression.

Going from QB coach right into HC-in-waiting did him no favors.

You can read all the books you want, but working with guys who've done it goes a long way.

Click to expand...

he's a former Dallas qb. that was his main qualification for the job.