I didn't say he and his coaches "are doing nothing". I said they (specifically Garrett) are very ineffective. There's a difference.
Well I said sarcastically that "Apparently if you're not being a coordinator as a head coach, you're doing nothing."
You bolded that line in your quote and said "I think there's a lot of truth to that." So excuse my confusion.
He's average at best. Definitely not the worst coach in the league but he's middle of the pack at best. Always has been, and probably always will be. Not sure why you've always been so dug in on retaining a mediocre coach.
I more or less agree, though I don't think we need the superlative "at best" in there. He's middle of the pack. In a big group of average head coaches.
I remain "dug in" because they've made it to the Divisional Round 3 times in the last 5 years and it looks like they are very well on their way again this year. There is a baby that could get thrown out with the bathwater here.
I get it that the natives are restless because he hasn't won the big one, or even gotten to a Championship game, but my frustration stems from the lack of acknowledgement that he offers anything. He does. He's been the head coach over a period of time that started out relatively slow (the source of a large part of the frustration with him, unarguably; the feeling that he should have been fired after the first three 8-8's, but he wasn't, so tough shit), but has since culminated in a run, which looks like it is continuing, that surpasses anything we've had since Jimmy was here.
Not that I'm saying he deserves all the credit for this. But he's the captain of the ship. You can't separate
him from
it.
I also get frustrated because of all the literal idiocy found in the hot takes about him: He's an idiot, he doesn't know how to call an offense, he doesn't know how to run a team, he doesn't know X, Y, Z.
The hyperbole undermines the point. A realistic take (he hasn't been good enough) would get very little objection. Instead, we have to create fictional narratives because that's the only way to win the argument.
As far as Dak's development, I give more credit to Romo, and Wade Wilson than Garrett.
Well first let us clarify: I'm not saying Garrett himself tutelaged Prescott an inordinant amount. Of course the starting QB (who became the backup QB) and the QB coach were involved. But yet again, then that means that Wilson and Linehan were doing the coaching, and they did a good job. Furthermore, it's never the sole job of the HC to be the hands-on primary coach for the developmental QB, so this isn't a strike on Garrett.
I'm merely pointing out that you said you don't think Garrett's doing anything, but that's demonstrated by his assistants never getting promoted (implying they aren't doing anything either). But someone was coaching Prescott, and well.
And frankly developing a QB, which is done by the QB coach or assistant staff, trickles up to the head coach, as it did with Parcells and Romo. Payton and Lee were coaching Romo. But Romo remains a Parcells guy, and Prescott is a Garrett guy.
To sum this all up, the team has been pretty damn well coached for the past half decade, actually. And that trickles down from Garrett. Absent serious injury and unfair suspension, they are probably 5-for-5 in playoff appearances.
Plus the further along we go down the road, the clearer it's becoming that NFL teams completely whiffed on their assessment of Dak Prescott leading up to the 2016 draft. Just like they've done several times before: Russell Wilson, Tom Brady, Romo, Hasselback, etc.
Well there is simply no doubt that the talent evaluators whiffed on Prescott; the Cowboys did too or they would have taken him fourth overall. But that's besides the point.
He did not display in college skills that merited going fourth overall, because they were not refined and shown in college. Someone brought it out of him - that's good coaching. Brady and Wilson undoubtedly also received excellent coaching to develop them.
Consider this. Dak immediately played at a high level during practices and training camp in 2016.
That is false. Dak was a horrific practice player in early 2016.
But even if your point was true, it's contradicted by the fact that you just said you give Romo and Wilson credit for developing him.
Prescott did not walk into Dallas ready-made to be a high end QB. He was thrust into the spotlight and it was quickly found that he was way, WAY better than anyone had scouted him, but he was also protected. And he has grown leaps and bounds in his abilities since 2016. Gosh, the past 10-11 regular season games should be screaming to you that he's come a long, long way.
His mechanics, his reads, his confidence, all look entirely different than it used to. That's not just playcalling.
It's weird how Garrett hasn't been able to sprinkle this magical QB whisperer dust on other "raw" QBs in Dallas.
No, that's not weird at all. Has Pete Carroll found another Russell Wilson? No.
It's rare to find a diamond in the rough. But that doesn't mean they didn't need coaching. Of course they did. And we've personally witnessed Dak's growth over the last 4 years.
Has he helped some? Absolutely. But the process didn't take near as much heavy lifting as you want to make it out to be.
Uh, well, then thank you for ceding my point.
I'm not arguing that Garrett took a QB who otherwise would have been Stephen McGee and turned him into a Pro Bowler.
I'm saying, simply, that no matter how much talent was bubbling unnoticed under the surface, a guy who is a fourth rounder simply has not unleashed his potential in college, and he's not NFL-ready with no coaching. The staff in 2016 -- and granted, it was more hands-on Wilson and Linehan -- did an excellent job coaching Prescott.
And it looks like, as we start 2019, that they've cleared the next hurdle by getting him Kitna and Moore as the voices in his ear now.
And yeah, that direction, even if not the hands-on instruction, comes from the HC.