Machota: Cowboys offseason wrap-up - Top highlights and observations from minicamp week

[p1_]

I think had Marinelli and Richard hypothetically remained though, most of the team would still have at least known what they were supposed to do and would have been able to teach the rooks and other newbies.

Covid isolation would not have been the extreme factor it ended up being. This is where MM really struck out in 2020, he should have recognized we were fucked and done everything he could to keep continuity just like he did on offense with Moore.

Again, I'm glad we dumped Garrett and have higher hopes for 2021, but in 2020 we net downgraded.

we downgraded in defensive staff namely. Nolan was an abject failure, and yes I certainly lay that at Fat Mike's feet. But stephen did no one ANY favors by signing the worst choices for defensive free agents possible. I cant think of one that impressed, aside for 5 minutes of Aldon Smith. Just shite, pure and simple.

 

[ravidubey]

we downgraded in defensive staff namely. Nolan was an abject failure, and yes I certainly lay that at Fat Mike's feet. But stephen did no one ANY favors by signing the worst choices for defensive free agents possible. I cant think of one that impressed, aside for 5 minutes of Aldon Smith. Just shite, pure and simple.

Exactly… complete ass, and MM was there in lockstep with the Joneses.

Multiple strikes against right out of the gate in defensive coaching choice, decision to do a complete defensive overhaul, carte blanche approval of the latest haul of washed up free agents, and gametime missteps with analytics.

Despite that early retardation I choose to remain optimistic. Quinn appears to be an upgrade, and MM still has been to the mountaintop before. If we get any luck with injuries we could go far.

 

[Simpleton]

The organization as a whole has no overarching defensive philosophy, no guiding principles, they just latch on to whatever preferences the flavor of the month DC has and hope for the best.

They've managed to luck into a concept of how to build an offense through the OL, partially because of those 90's teams but largely because Garrett forced them into it seemingly with Tyron in 2011 and it all came together over the next 3-5 years.

With all that said, defensive football and talent evaluation is much more nuanced and scheme-dependent, which is probably why there's no real organizational north star. Everybody knows what an elite WR or LT looks like no matter what scheme you run, but to discern the differences and right fit for a Seattle Cover-3 vs. a multiple blitz heavy Ravens/Steelers 3-4 vs. a classic Tampa-2 takes a nuanced understanding of slight variations in roles and that's just something this organization doesn't have.

It's how you end up with Charlton over Watt, because the organization didn't have the creativity to envision what a role would look like for a guy like Watt who wasn't a cookie-cutter scheme fit, so they just deferred to Marinelli.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I'll disagree about this organizational defensive philosophy. Who does that besides Pittsburgh? I guess New England, but that's all Belichick, not the owner.

In fact, I'd say that Jerry had a defensive organizational philosophy in the 43 after Parcells and Wade left -- the Lacewell influence -- but his HC wanted more of a 34/multiple look, so they let him do that. I think that's better than forcing the HC to do what he might not want.

Sure, you can't be completely changing every other year, but a good coach can take what he has, add a couple of draft picks and FAs, and get things on the right track. Look at Phillips making Greg Ellis a successful 34 OLB when he looked like the classic guy 43-only guy. Bradie James probably wasn't his favorite style of ILB in his defense but he made it work by doing what good coaches do, figuring out a player's strengths and weaknesses and putting him in position to do those things and not what they're bad at. Hopefully Quinn can do that.

 

[Simpleton]

I'll disagree about this organizational defensive philosophy. Who does that besides Pittsburgh? I guess New England, but that's all Belichick, not the owner.

In fact, I'd say that Jerry had a defensive organizational philosophy in the 43 after Parcells and Wade left -- the Lacewell influence -- but his HC wanted more of a 34/multiple look, so they let him do that. I think that's better than forcing the HC to do what he might not want.

Sure, you can't be completely changing every other year, but a good coach can take what he has, add a couple of draft picks and FAs, and get things on the right track. Look at Phillips making Greg Ellis a successful 34 OLB when he looked like the classic guy 43-only guy. Bradie James probably wasn't his favorite style of ILB in his defense but he made it work by doing what good coaches do, figuring out a player's strengths and weaknesses and putting him in position to do those things and not what they're bad at. Hopefully Quinn can do that.

Baltimore is the perfect example of it I think, and I don't mean it just purely from a 3-4 vs. 4-3 standpoint, but more having organizational values of what you want a defense and your defensive players to look like. The Ravens for damn near 20 years have always valued huge NT's who can stuff the middle, and just being really good against the run in general, while cycling through hybrid edge rushers who they can mix and match in their exotic blitz scheme.

They've consistently shown the ability to develop then move on from guys like Za'Darius Smith, Pernell McPhee, Matt Judon, and Adalius Thomas without missing much of a beat, and being able to replace them through the draft. The organization knows what to look for in defensive prospects and how to prioritize certain traits and body types for what they run.

I think that sort of organizational north star is missing in Dallas and they end up overly reliant on whatever preferences their DC of the moment has.

 

[ravidubey]

I think that sort of organizational north star is missing in Dallas and they end up overly reliant on whatever preferences their DC of the moment has.

Unfortunately the Cowboys north star defensively has been to
1) 1st round CB's
2) 1st round DE's
3) 2nd round LBs or Pass rushers, preferably those who slipped in the draft for medical, drug, or psychological reasons
4) 3rd round 'twitch' DL who inevitably ends up being a tweener who can't do any one thing well
5) Never draft safeties
6) Stubbornly make a point of ignoring 1T/NT
7) Run the ball and emphasize time of possession to cover up the inevitably weak defense.
8) Laugh quietly to themselves like they know better, even in the face of being totally wrong.

They view bend don't break as an ideal, and CB's are the lipstick on that pig.

It's a recipe for mediocrity, and they are utterly and wholly committed to it.

That's why the drafting of Bohanna was such a shock, even if it was the 6th round.

 

[boozeman]

I'll disagree about this organizational defensive philosophy. Who does that besides Pittsburgh? I guess New England, but that's all Belichick, not the owner.

Fact is, teams with continuity do that. It all starts at the top. Longtime GMs have their brand of football. They get guys who fit what they want to do consistently. That is how you build the scouting paradigm. Ours changed like everyone else after bad hires at DC.

We had a decade of Garrett. Think about it. That was plenty of time to come up with a defensive ideology. The Joneses have always favored offense and it shows a lot.

 

[Genghis Khan]

We had a decade of Garrett. Think about it.

Do I have to?

 

[boozeman]

Do I have to?

 

[p1_]

The Joneses have always favored offense and it shows a lot.

Funny, the only time we won in the postseason we had strong defense.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Fact is, teams with continuity do that. It all starts at the top. Longtime GMs have their brand of football. They get guys who fit what they want to do consistently. That is how you build the scouting paradigm. Ours changed like everyone else after bad hires at DC.

So you want the Joneses telling their HC what defense to run? Or you want them hiring only HCs who will run the defense they prefer? That sounds like the opposite of what we've all wanted. I want the coach to make the decision, and if he wants to go from a 43 to a 34, I think that's fine.

Simp had a good example of Baltimore, but most everyone else changes from time to time. Look how many more 34 teams there are than there were 10 or 15 years ago. Even Belichick has run a 43 when that's what his personnel dictates. He's also thrown it 50 times a game when I'm sure that's not the offense he prefers.

Maybe we aren't talking about the same thing. Do I agree we'd have been better off with Ozzie Newsome instead of Jerry, of course. But I think our main problem defensively isn't changing schemes, it's that they haven't found any good players. And yes, Garrett was a huge part of that because his main concern was protecting his own ass so he wanted offense as much as possible. But it's not like Taco or Awuzie or Charles Tapper failed because of scheme fit. They just weren't any good.

 

[p1_]

So you want the Joneses telling their HC what defense to run? Or you want them hiring only HCs who will run the defense they prefer? That sounds like the opposite of what we've all wanted. I want the coach to make the decision, and if he wants to go from a 43 to a 34, I think that's fine.

Simp had a good example of Baltimore, but most everyone else changes from time to time. Look how many more 34 teams there are than there were 10 or 15 years ago. Even Belichick has run a 43 when that's what his personnel dictates. He's also thrown it 50 times a game when I'm sure that's not the offense he prefers.

Maybe we aren't talking about the same thing. Do I agree we'd have been better off with Ozzie Newsome instead of Jerry, of course. But I think our main problem defensively isn't changing schemes, it's that they haven't found any good players. And yes, Garrett was a huge part of that because his main concern was protecting his own ass so he wanted offense as much as possible. But it's not like Taco or Awuzie or Charles Tapper failed because of scheme fit. They just weren't any good.

The Garrett era does smack of a void in star defensive talent, or even solid talent

 

[Cotton]

So you want the Joneses telling their HC what defense to run? Or you want them hiring only HCs who will run the defense they prefer? That sounds like the opposite of what we've all wanted. I want the coach to make the decision, and if he wants to go from a 43 to a 34, I think that's fine.

This is 1000000% correct. Hire a good coach, and let him take it from there.

Well, first hire a real fucking GM, and let him take it from there is more accurate.

 

[boozeman]

Funny, the only time we won in the postseason we had strong defense.

It is a pretty clear trend. We can do all of the offensive numbers. We did it for years with Garrett. Still didn't mean shit at the end of the day.

 

[Cotton]

It is a pretty clear trend. We can do all of the offensive numbers. We did it for years with Garrett. Still didn't mean shit at the end of the day.

 

[boozeman]

So you want the Joneses telling their HC what defense to run? Or you want them hiring only HCs who will run the defense they prefer? That sounds like the opposite of what we've all wanted. I want the coach to make the decision, and if he wants to go from a 43 to a 34, I think that's fine.

We all know that the coach is not going to make the final decision as long as there a Jones breathing. Even an all-timer like Parcells had to take it slow, keeping a 4-3 maven like Zimmer for a season.

Simp had a good example of Baltimore, but most everyone else changes from time to time. Look how many more 34 teams there are than there were 10 or 15 years ago. Even Belichick has run a 43 when that's what his personnel dictates. He's also thrown it 50 times a game when I'm sure that's not the offense he prefers.

It all requires either a strong head coach or a strong front office. Name the last time we really had either?

That is the frustrating part about this. There have been constants. You know this. We are not like other teams.

Maybe we aren't talking about the same thing. Do I agree we'd have been better off with Ozzie Newsome instead of Jerry, of course. But I think our main problem defensively isn't changing schemes, it's that they haven't found any good players. And yes, Garrett was a huge part of that because his main concern was protecting his own ass so he wanted offense as much as possible. But it's not like Taco or Awuzie or Charles Tapper failed because of scheme fit. They just weren't any good.

The "good players" thing only matters when you look at it with perspective.

Bill Belichick hasn't been able to draft his way out of a fucking paper bag. But for some reason, they always find pro personnel that can fill in the gaps to get by. Bitch just is a master at pivoting.

Taco, Awuzie, Tapper and countless others are not a case of talent but more scheme fit.

Most of the time when we flunk on a player, they still seem to stick around in the NFL for a while.

That just shows we can identify NFL talent somehow, we just can't get the mesh with the scheme right because we keep fucking changing it.

It all goes back to the "GM". And it ain't McClay. There is a reason why that guy won't go take a real job with the 31 other teams in the league.

In fact, I don't think anyone in the Cowboys' organization operates with a clear focus on being the General Manager of the team and concentrating on talent. It is all delegated. And even those charged with results aren't accountable.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Taco, Awuzie, Tapper and countless others are not a case of talent but more scheme fit.

I don't know how you say that. Not like they went to a 34 and flourished. They just aren't /weren't very good. (And the front doesn't matter for secondary anyway.)

 

[Chocolate Lab]

That's why the drafting of Bohanna was such a shock, even if it was the 6th round.

Just going off memory and observation, but it always seemed like those GB teams had big guys in the middle. Not just one big fat guy and a quick guy, either, but a lot of times more than one big DT.

 

[boozeman]

I don't know how you say that. Not like they went to a 34 and flourished. They just aren't /weren't very good. (And the front doesn't matter for secondary anyway.)

Yet two of the three...even Charlton are going to play on Sundays this year.

But neither one of them were fits. Neither one could do what we asked of them at the moment.

The moment. Or short-shit era or whatever.

 

[boozeman]

Just going off memory and observation, but it always seemed like those GB teams had big guys in the middle. Not just one big fat guy and a quick guy, either, but a lot of times more than one big DT.

Gilbert Brown and B.J. Raji.