Do you guys remember when

[ravidubey]

Where his true value lies is in how he has helped shape the power structure of the organization, along with Stephen. Jerry's trust in Garrett is a big part of why he's taken a step back and let Stephen/McClay/Garrett handle things more in terms of personnel and decision making. I feel like it's taken a community to reel in Jerry, just one person (even his son) wouldn't have been enough, and Garrett has been a big part in that. If the HC was someone that Jerry didn't like/trust as much I doubt the organizational structure would have improved as much as it has over the last 4-5 years.

McClay and Stephen have had much stronger and beneficial influence than Garrett. As far as we know before 2016, Garrett's biggest contribution was advocating Felix Jones.

Jerry admits drafting offensive linemen was more about being "Romo-friendly", and not to better suit "Garrett's offense". Drafting improved in 2013, when McClay was elevated.

Frankly, Garrett's signature move was keeping Dak as starter over Romo.

I personally felt that hurt us in the short term as it forced a more conservative offense, but long term it's increased Garrett's credibility and authority within the organization.

He started out as Jerry's boy/puppet, and the only way to shake that label was to make a major decision that conflicted with what the Joneses wanted.

 

[townsend]

Stability certainly plays a part in a teams success. It isn't the only factor otherwise everyone would just keep their coaching departments in place until they win a Superbowl but to pretend like it doesn't help a team any is pure lunacy. Personally I don't want to change systems and coaching staffs under our new franchise QB in Dak Prescott. Who knows if he has the same type of success in a different system. I don't want to change systems on this O-line, this RB or hell even this defense. We found something that worked really well last year and we would be dumb as hell to think our team would benefit from revamping the coaching staff.

This is mostly my position. We probably have the best version of this team we could hope for.

Yes we have a mediocre head coach, but mediocre coaches have won Super Bowls. For most of Garrett's tenure the concern has been whether our narrow window would be wasted as we lost the Parcells era talent.

Now that our team has figured out how to consistently put together talented rosters, we can relax a little. No reason to radically restructure a team that doesn't have an expiration date.

 

[fortsbest]

I don't think anyone said that until the 21st post in the thread, so that isn't what "kicked off" this thread.

That said, this team will never win a super bowl under Garrett (ever) so there's no need to argue the validity of this statement.

Ever, ever, ever, ever, ever!

That would be me that started that portion and I stand by it. He consistently does the thing in crucial games (read playoff) that either prevents or makes it harder for us to win that particular game and it will take superior play by the on-field talent to overcome it and win one. Or they will so overpower a team by their play, any mistake call he makes will be irrelevant.

 

[Smitty]

Your position remains foolish. Garrett has never gone three games in a row without making a game-losing mistake? False.

Garrett has never called a game where his gameplan worked and there were no screw ups to overshadow them? Also false.

Finally.... Garrett has a hand in acquiring and developing that overwhelming talent.

So if we win a Super Bowl with him... it will not be in spite of him but at least partially due to him.

 

[fortsbest]

Your position remains foolish. Garrett has never gone three games in a row without making a game-losing mistake? False.

Garrett has never called a game where his gameplan worked and there were no screw ups to overshadow them? Also false.

Finally.... Garrett has a hand in acquiring and developing that overwhelming talent.

So if we win a Super Bowl with him... it will not be in spite of him but at least partially due to him.

It's all a mute point and we really won't know until his tenure is over.












At which time we will see no Super Bowl rings on his finger as a head coach here.

 

[townsend]

The argument is poorly structured to say that.
A. Garrett is prone to mistakes
C. Therefore we can never win a Super Bowl.

Because the argument assumes.
B. Head coaches that make mistakes never win Super Bowls.
Which is provably false.

The correct, true, assertion would be
A. Garrett is prone to mistakes.
B. HCs that have made mistakes in crucial moments have cost their teams a chance at winning in the playoffs.
C. Therefore, Garrett might cost us a chance at a SB run by making a mistake in a crucial moment.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Finally.... Garrett has a hand in acquiring and developing that overwhelming talent.

So if we win a Super Bowl with him... it will not be in spite of him but at least partially due to him.

What hand in personnel? None of us know what he does in that area. I suspect you aren't blaming him for Claiborne, though.

And if we win a Superbowl it will be because we got fantastically lucky and won the lottery on Dak. If we'd gotten Connor Cook like we wanted, we'd have basically no chance.

 

[midswat]

I think we saw when we passed on the DT and traded down while Garrett sat with a fuming look on his face that he doesn't have as much input on personnel. Nor should he. His dad was a shit scout and I'm sure Jason is as well.

I give all roster improvement to stephens influence over deddy (passing on that drunk bust QB) and Will McClay.

 

[midswat]

The argument is poorly structured to say that.
A. Garrett is prone to mistakes
C. Therefore we can never win a Super Bowl.

Because the argument assumes.
B. Head coaches that make mistakes never win Super Bowls.
Which is provably false.

The correct, true, assertion would be
A. Garrett is prone to mistakes.
B. HCs that have made mistakes in crucial moments have cost their teams a chance at winning in the playoffs.
C. Therefore, Garrett might cost us a chance at a SB run by making a mistake in a crucial moment.

Garrett absolutely did cost us a shot at it last year. I know the Falcons dismantled that Green Bay team we lost too, but that's because we came in unprepared and the dumbass spike. The NFC was weak last season, we had HFA, and the perfect offense to counter Atlantas attack. We could've run on them all day and kept them off the field.

We will never get an easier road to the Super Bowl than we had last year.

 

[Genghis Khan]

We will never get an easier road to the Super Bowl than we had last year.

Shit.

That's a sobering thought and may well be true.

 

[Smitty]

Shit.

That's a sobering thought and may well be true.

I do not think it's true. I think playing 2 QBs playing at MVP level (Rodgers and Ryan) with our defense made it pretty tough.

How about the path the Patriots had? Two QB-less teams?

We could easily have an easier path than we would have had this year.

 

[NoDak]

I think we saw when we passed on the DT and traded down while Garrett sat with a fuming look on his face that he doesn't have as much input on personnel. Nor should he. His dad was a shit scout and I'm sure Jason is as well.

I give all roster improvement to stephens influence over deddy (passing on that drunk bust QB) and Will McClay.

Cherry picking one instance to decide whether or not somebody is a good talent evaluator is kinda retarded. Unless you are willing to say Jerry Jones is a good talent evaluator considering he overruled Parcells to take DeMarcus Ware over Marcus Spears. Or even Shawne Merriman, which most said would be better.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I do not think it's true. I think playing 2 QBs playing at MVP level (Rodgers and Ryan) with our defense made it pretty tough.

How about the path the Patriots had? Two QB-less teams?

We could easily have an easier path than we would have had this year.

Yeah I agree. The Falcons and Packers were anything but a cakewalk to the Superbowl.

 

[midswat]

Cherry picking one instance to decide whether or not somebody is a good talent evaluator is kinda retarded. Unless you are willing to say Jerry Jones is a good talent evaluator considering he overruled Parcells to take DeMarcus Ware over Marcus Spears. Or even Shawne Merriman, which most said would be better.

What one instance did I use to decide if someone was a good talent evaluator?

 

[boozeman]

Shit.

That's a sobering thought and may well be true.

Yeah, last year was a hell of an opportunity and we squandered it. Things will be more hairy this year.

 

[ravidubey]

Garrett absolutely did cost us a shot at it last year. I know the Falcons dismantled that Green Bay team we lost too, but that's because we came in unprepared and the dumbass spike. The NFC was weak last season, we had HFA, and the perfect offense to counter Atlantas attack. We could've run on them all day and kept them off the field.

We will never get an easier road to the Super Bowl than we had last year.

Boom.

What a clusterfuck of a game that was.

 

[boozeman]

Boom.

What a clusterfuck of a game that was.

Yet people still give Marinelli a pass.

We had a piss poor scheme initially to deal with Rodgers.

Once they got ahead, he started with the funky blitz shit and Jeff Heath became a god.

 

[Simpleton]

Yeah, last year was a hell of an opportunity and we squandered it. Things will be more hairy this year.

It's very hard to project who will be what but what NFC team sticks out as a huge threat?

Green Bay has mostly the same team as last year, same with Seattle and Atlanta, and I suspect the Falcons will have a hangover after last year. The Giants could be tough if their defense plays like they did last year but their OL/running game is still poor and all they really did was add some extra WR's. Arizona and Carolina could definitely rebound but they each have pretty big holes, especially Arizona with Palmer who seems one hit from retirement.

Tampa Bay or New Orleans could surprise.

You have to seize every opportunity that you can in the NFL and last year was certainly a missed opportunity but let's not act like the NFC is flush with juggernauts or something now.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Yet people still give Marinelli a pass.

We had a piss poor scheme initially to deal with Rodgers.

Once they got ahead, he started with the funky blitz shit and Jeff Heath became a god.

Happened against Detroit too. It's weird. It's like the defensive game plan sucks fairly often, bit we're pretty good at mid game defensive adjustments.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Happened against Detroit too. It's weird. It's like the defensive game plan sucks fairly often, bit we're pretty good at mid game defensive adjustments.

In game adjustments are normal in the NFL.