Watkins: Cowboys offense not a big problem

[Clay_Allison]

We do know he's better because of how dramatically it changed after Wade left

But still not good enough.

Dramatically, how? Did the Ratliff situation show us holding people accountable for their actions or level of play? How about Austin? Who are we holding accountable for not playing up to their contract and not getting the job done? Certainly Garrett isn't holding himself accountable for blowing leads and refusing to run the football.

Preaching it doesn't do anything until you cut some dead weight and knucklehead players.

 

[Rev]

Preaching it doesn't do any good when the players see right through it. There is no accountability in Dallas whatsoever.

 

[Smitty]

Dramatically, how?

How not? We saw more benchings -- even temporary ones -- since Garrett took over than we ever did under Wade... which was like none. Just this year he benched Murray, he benched Bruce Carter, Miles Austin saw his time reduced and didn't walk back into a starting role, he released Will Allen, Claiborne is no longer a starting corner, etc. He stepped into the process with the playcalling with Callahan when that wasn't working well.

And then there's the whole thing about actually showing up to team meetings on time.... which Wade never made players actually do.... etc.

Preaching it doesn't do anything until you cut some dead weight and knucklehead players.

We've done more of that under him than we did in the 3.5 years previously. It's not perfect but it was a large shift.

 

[Smitty]

Preaching it doesn't do any good when the players see right through it. There is no accountability in Dallas whatsoever.

Well, and that's on the GM, unfortunately. Which is why we need someone with the weight to truly back up his words to take it to the next level of accountability. Garrett can only do so much since he can't force Jerry into the background.

But I know, I know, Jay Gruden would really change this. Damn, we were too slow and the Skins stole him.

 

[NoDak]

And all this supposed accountability has done what, exactly? Got us to 8-8? Or was it the next season of 8-8? Maybe the last season of 8-8?

 

[Smitty]

And all this supposed accountability has done what, exactly? Got us to 8-8? Or was it the next season of 8-8? Maybe the last season of 8-8?

I agree. It hasn't been good enough.

We need to replace him with someone who is good enough.

Damn! We just missed out on Jay Gruden.

 

[NoDak]

But I know, I know, Jay Gruden would really change this. Damn, we were too slow and the Skins stole him.

Not one person on this board was calling for Jay Gruden.

But, hey. Deflect. Spin. Bait and switch. Garrett would be proud of you.

 

[NoDak]

Damn! We just missed out on Jay Gruden.

Ayuh.

 

[Smitty]

Not one person on this board was calling for Jay Gruden.

But, hey. Deflect. Spin. Bait and switch. Garrett would be proud of you.

It's not deflecting, dumbass, those are the guys getting hired and interviewed right now.

Jay Gruden, Mike Munchak, Jim Caldwell, Ken Whisenhunt. A veritable hall of fame ballot. Excuse me while I wipe my ass with that list. I'm not firing Garrett for those guys.

When David Shaw starts getting play about being a hot NFL prospect, then it will be time to consider him, and as I've said, I don't know enough about him, maybe he's the upgrade we need.

 

[NoDak]

And here comes the name calling.

You were the one being stupid and insinuating we would be upset over "losing" Gruden. Guess when you use hyperbole it's ok, but when anybody else does...

 

[Rev]

Well, and that's on the GM, unfortunately. Which is why we need someone with the weight to truly back up his words to take it to the next level of accountability. Garrett can only do so much since he can't force Jerry into the background.

But I know, I know, Jay Gruden would really change this. Damn, we were too slow and the Skins stole him.

Its up to the coach to bring that up as well. Keep crying about Jay and Caldwell, though. I don't see his name brought up by anybody here. Next you will probably cry about Zimmer. Whatever makes you think scores a point for your side I guess.

 

[Smitty]

Its up to the coach to bring that up as well.

Right, and if he's not able to do it under a Jerry regime, he's not the coach for us, since we live under a Jerry regime. Parcells was able to make an impact.... if Garrett can't, we need to get rid of him and get someone more like Parcells.

I agree.

Keep crying about Jay and Caldwell, though. I don't see his name brought up by anybody here.

What name are you bringing up?

I'm saying we shouldn't fire Garrett for guys like those two. If you agree that we shouldn't fire Garrett for them, then what the fuck are you complaining about?

You want to fire Garrett for someone better than them? Yeah, so do I.

Next you will probably cry about Zimmer. Whatever makes you think scores a point for your side I guess.

That is scoring a point for my side. Next you will probably say "Nobody brought up Zimmer's name." Good.... then we all agree he shouldn't be a guy we fire Garrett for as well. I'm glad we've ruled out all the coaches who are getting hired right now.... it reinforces the notion that we'd be picking from shitty options.

That's my whole point. Do not just fire Garrett and then begin a coaching search that may end up with you choosing between Zimmer and Jay Gruden, like in 2006 when Parcells stepped down and we ended up with a coaching search that amounted to choosing between Norv and Wade.

If we have a guy we like.... well, who is it? Target him and go get him, but make sure he's a quality name. If we were talking Bill Cowher, for example, I'd be on board. Yes, target an elite guy and go get him. Obviously Cowher is not available, but I'm open to suggestions.

But a punitive firing and then blind coaching search is a horrible idea.

 

[Smitty]

And here comes the name calling.

Saying I'm baiting and switching is the equivalent of name calling.

You were the one being stupid and insinuating we would be upset over "losing" Gruden. Guess when you use hyperbole it's ok

I wasn't insinuating anyone would be upset over losing Gruden, it was sarcasm indicating that we didn't lose anything that anyone would be upset over.

 

[Clay_Allison]

How not? We saw more benchings -- even temporary ones -- since Garrett took over than we ever did under Wade... which was like none. Just this year he benched Murray, he benched Bruce Carter, Miles Austin saw his time reduced and didn't walk back into a starting role, he released Will Allen, Claiborne is no longer a starting corner, etc. He stepped into the process with the playcalling with Callahan when that wasn't working well.

And then there's the whole thing about actually showing up to team meetings on time.... which Wade never made players actually do.... etc.



We've done more of that under him than we did in the 3.5 years previously. It's not perfect but it was a large shift.

We didn't see any benchings to speak of until this year, and he's still a hypocrite who never admits he makes mistakes after he f*cks up colossally in games. How is anyone going to take his "accountability" seriously when he's an excuse merchant who tries to pretend the QB audibled out of a play when it was a called check play and he did not tell Romo not to execute the check because of the situation?

 

[NoDak]

Saying I'm baiting and switching is the equivalent of name calling.

 

[Cotton]

Smitty is a baiter. A pro one at that.

 

[Smitty]

We didn't see any benchings to speak of until this year, and he's still a hypocrite who never admits he makes mistakes after he f*cks up colossally in games. How is anyone going to take his "accountability" seriously when he's an excuse merchant who tries to pretend the QB audibled out of a play when it was a called check play and he did not tell Romo not to execute the check because of the situation?

I feel like he's constantly saying that even he needs to get better. I think he says the same things about himself as he says about the team, but that's not good enough for people because they don't see the ensuing improvement.

It's irrelevant... we agree he needs to be replaced.

 

[Carl]

A little of subject, but Parcells is "A Football Life" on NFL Network tonight.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I do know it's true, we just got done with a true loser who leads every team he's with to utter collapse. 1-7 with us followed up by 2-14 with the Texans.

There are plenty of coaches out there who don't preach this and it's a definite negative.

I agree with you we should be looking to replace Garrett, who has simply not been good enough in a Jerry run environment to get a team over the 8-8 hump of mediocrity.

But until the reality that we could very well do worse is acknowledged, we're gonna continue to have these debates. And frankly if you read the columnists who are worth reading like Sturm, you'll see him indicate that there is good and bad. The militant anti-Garrett "worst coach ever" nonsense is fan anger hyperbole and it's no more credible than the hyperbole that is homerism.

We need a new coach but it needs to be the right one or we'll be no better off or very possibly worse.

As for your point about Reid, I did say that I would fire Garrett for Reid last year. The volume of my stance on that is completely irrelevant and the fact that you are trying to read into it and decipher ulterior motives is conspiracy theory bullshit and proof of your irrationality.

tl;dr translation: It's true because I say so and as proof, I will compare him to the worst HC in the history of everything.

Also, you don't seem to know what the definition of conspiracy theory is.

Finally, what's more irrational, calling for the release of a HC who has consistently failed through his own fault, or constantly defending said HC despite claiming that he is mediocre and needs to be replaced.

You keep arguing points that nobody is arguing against. Nobody is saying replace him with any shitty old coach down the pike. Nobody.

But there are coaches out there, right now, who would do a better job than Garrett. Let's go get the BEST of those and give it a try.

 

[Genghis Khan]

The sad part of this whole argument is that it probably stems from the fact that Smitty doesn't want to admit he was wrong for supporting Garrett in the first place.

Except he's subtly admitting he was wrong about Garrett. Hell, even Garrett's biggest supporter -Jerry - is telling us that Smitty was wrong about on-the-job-trainee Garrett.

Smitty, just admit you were wrong about Garrett and we can all move on. It's ok. We already know.