Who should be next Cowboys coach?

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

I never said that we should avoid bringing in a "Super Coach", and if Garrett totally flops over these next eight games I would probably be fine with bringing in a Gruden. I was merely pointing out that it's never as easy as bringing in a Super Coach to fix our problems. Plus, you make an excellent point when you say that it takes a lot to go right to win it all. That includes drive and hunger from your head coach.

Don't underestimate human nature here - it's a lot easier to have that drive and hunger when you're young and unproven. When you get have already proven yourself, have a fat contract, and don't have the energy of your youth, it can be hard to match the performance you put together through a masterful Super Bowl run. Look at the last four coaches in the Super Bowl - Whisenhunt, Tomlin, Caldwell, and Payton. These guys weren't brand names beforehand, yet it didn't seem to turn out too poorly for their teams.

Whether Garrett is the next of the new kids on the block to find coaching success remains to be seen. But I don't really see the point in writing him off already before he's coached his first game when the Super Coaches that everyone is clamoring for aren't going to be slam dunks (if history has anything to say about it). Why don't we just sit back and see what Garrett can do? If you've been paying attention so far, you might have noticed that he's already done some impressive things in his first week. I, for one, am interested to see if it will translate onto the gridiron.

A very nice post.

Look, deep down I would be fine if Garrett is successful and he completely proves me wrong (hopefully not with wins THIS year though - I really want a good draft).

All I want is for us to win - consistently. I want us to be the Dallas Cowboys I grew up with. A team that is feared league wide. You can't ALWAYS be that, but damn it we have the talent now so we should be and we aren't. That is so damn frustrating. I have no desire to screw these last 4-5 great years of Romo's career on a coach that has to learn on the job.

If Garrett truly has it, fine. Yeah, it will take a lot to win me over but if he proves me wrong by removing the dumb, putting inspired and dedicated players on the field, finds a way to stop the mistakes, etc he will eventually earn my respect. He has definitely done a few things lately that I have read about that impressed me, but I still know how shitty he has been as a coordinator. Maybe he is one of those guys that are shitty coordinators and good head coaches. I don't know.

My head, gut, and heart tell me he will fail and be replaced. When all 3 are set on one answer I am pretty adamant on my stance so forgive the short fuse. We all want the same thing ultimately - success from the Cowboys. Let's hope that 2011 is VERY different from 2010, regardless if Garrett is steering this ship or my preferred coaching options.

[mav4ever]

by fintastic

Why don't we just sit back and see what Garrett can do? If you've been paying attention so far, you might have noticed that he's already done some impressive things in his first week. I, for one, am interested to see if it will translate onto the gridiron.

i have been paying attention, and your right. and i would have never thought it.

imo wade was a pushover, and this bunch of players seemed to have the gawl to take advantage of it.

i thought garrett was too. i seem to be mistaken (i almost always am)

i voted "other" when this poll was started, but i voted too soon. (my bet is many of us did)

im pissed at these players for rolling over like they have. there was a statement made by a commentator (cant remember who it was) that said mike jenkins might as well spit in wade phillips face for pulling up scared on that play at the goal line. i cant say i disagree.

i'm pissed at these players.

i made the statement early in the thread that the new coach should be mike leach. not because i think they would get better, but because he is a royal prick, and thats just the company i feel like some of these guys have earned.

i'm all for seeing what jg can do. i dont know if he can do it the right way, but i do know he has SEEN THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT.

i thought he was jerry's boy, another yes man, but after hearing the way he has approached it, maybe i was wrong (as usual)

i hope so.

[Mav Addict]

Garrett has a wonderful opportunity in front of him, unfortunately he does not have Romo... The word is out about Garretts play calling - once he is down he will discontinue to run the ball- now this is a defensive coordinators dream.

If he does not call better plays and make better offensive adjustments, his tenure should end at 8 games... 7 points against the Jags is ridiculous ... The defense allowed 45 points and Wade was fired for that... If the offensive is Garrett's responsibility then he should lose his job and an entire new coaching staff should be brought in.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Mav Addict

Garrett has a wonderful opportunity in front of him, unfortunately he does not have Romo... The word is out about Garretts play calling - once he is down he will discontinue to run the ball- now this is a defensive coordinators dream.

If he does not call better plays and make better offensive adjustments, his tenure should end at 8 games... 7 points against the Jags is ridiculous ... The defense allowed 45 points and Wade was fired for that... If the offensive is Garrett's responsibility then he should lose his job and an entire new coaching staff should be brought in.

Yeah, the thing about Garrett is that he isn't even a good offensive coordinator - we're ranked 19th in the league in points scored (20.1 PPG) and 12th in the league in total yardage (31st in total rushing yards!)

Sure, you could blame Romo's injury, but those numbers were pretty much the same before he went down - not to mention that our offensive struggles in the red zone extend back to last season.

[Underdog]

Jerry Jones heard from Super coaches

link

IRVING, Texas -- Dallas Cowboys owner/general manager Jerry Jones said Super Bowl-winning coaches have contacted him about becoming his next head coach, but he hinted that he hopes interim coach Jason Garrett will earn the job on a permanent basis.

"I will say that before I made the decision with Wade Phillips, I had Super Bowl-winning coaches solicit this job," Jones said during his weekly appearance on KRLD-FM.

Jones, who fired Phillips on Monday after the Cowboys fell to 1-7, did not elaborate which coaches had contacted him or whether he intended to pursue any of the available coaches with Super Bowl rings -- a group that includes Bill Cowher, Jon Gruden, Brian Billick and Tony Dungy.

Jones cut off a follow-up question, suggesting it'd be inappropriate to discuss the issue three days after appointing Garrett as the interim coach.

Dungy said Friday that he had no interest in the Cowboys' job.

"I'm not interested. But you never know what's going to happen or who's going to call. ... I do think it's a better job than people think," Dungy told "The Dan Patrick Show." "It would be somebody like me, but it wouldn't be me.

"[Jones] needs a Bill Cowher or Jon Gruden or Mike Holmgren. Those are the kind of guys he needs. All three of those guys would be pretty good right now."

When Jones introduced Garrett as the interim coach Monday, he emphasized that Garrett would be strongly considered as a long-term candidate if the Cowboys showed promise in the second half of the season. Jones said Friday that Garrett won't necessarily be judged by how many wins the Cowboys have the remainder of the season.

"It's a huge challenge for our team and, of course, a huge challenge for Jason," Jones said. "If he can meet this challenge square on and he can pull his nose up, if he can do things that you see that direction, then that's going to be impressive. Very few people have ever come into a coaching situation with any more challenges.

"We all know his qualities. He's from a great football background. He's got a great background with the Cowboys. I know what he's capable of, his demeanor, how he carries himself, how he approaches. I know all of those things. There's no stranger here for me in Jason Garrett. How the team responds, what we can do on a player-by-player basis, all of those things will weigh into it. I do not have a won-loss percentage in mind or a number of wins that impact what I do in the future."

Garrett was one of 11 coaches who interviewed with Jones after Bill Parcells resigned following the 2006 season. Jones hired Garrett, who won three Super Bowl rings with the Cowboys as Troy Aikman's backup, as the offensive coordinator before hiring Phillips.

Garrett added the assistant head coach title and was made the highest-paid assistant coach in the league after the 2007 season, when he turned down an offer to become the Baltimore Ravens' head coach.

He also was strongly pursued by the Atlanta Falcons that winter. Jones said Friday that Garrett, who also interviewed with the St. Louis Rams and Denver Broncos, has turned down three offers to become a head coach in the past three years.

Jones, who said Parcells solicited the Cowboys' job in 2003, expects there will be great interest again in the Dallas vacancy.

However, he made it clear he's more concerned about finding the right fit than hiring a coach with a résumé that will impress fans.

"John Madden told me the Cowboys do not need a big-name coach," Jones said. "The Cowboys have a big name. What the Cowboys need is a good coach."

.

[sike]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Yeah, the thing about Garrett is that he isn't even a good offensive coordinator - we're ranked 19th in the league in points scored (20.1 PPG) and 12th in the league in total yardage (31st in total rushing yards!)

Sure, you could blame Romo's injury, but those numbers were pretty much the same before he went down - not to mention that our offensive struggles in the red zone extend back to last season.

that is fairly damning.

[ribosoma]

Originally Posted by sike

that is fairly damning.

Although I think Garrett has often gotten too cute with his play-calling over the years, it seemed that the majority of red zone problems the Cowboys faced in the past centered on the inevitable false-start penalties that would move them out of manageable third downs. You just can't consistently overcome errors like that when the field shrinks towards the endzone.

With that said, the decline of the offensive line is, in my view, the biggest culprit of the team's woes. Line play is the base of the football pyramid. Everyone knew the Cowboys had to address their lack of quality depth and athleticism on the o-line, yet they haven't addressed that weakness in any meaningful way for several years. It really doesn't matter how many stud skill-position players you have if they aren't getting the ball because the only thing standing between a blitzing linebacker and your quarterback is an old, injured guard who is too slow to slide out and pick him up and a rookie fullback who doesn't know his head from a hole in the ground.

Whether Garrett is deemed "the guy", or they attract an experienced coach in the off-season doesn't really matter when the anchor of your team is old and unathletic. Even if they draft two o-linemen in the upcoming draft, it usually takes a few seasons for them to get their sea legs. And very few teams would be willing to deal a decent offensive lineman in a trade, so that leaves them in all-too-familiar position of securing the rights of an older player through free agency.

Even if there are attractive linemen on the market, it would be foolish to think that an organization who picked a running back in the first round simply because he went to the same school as the owner/GM would have the savvy to find the best player available.

So, in short, regardless of who coaches, this team is cursed by a prideful owner who has to be completely humiliated in order to enact any meaningful change... and even then, he often goes right back to being an idiot shortly thereafter.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by ribosoma

So, in short, regardless of who coaches, this team is cursed by a prideful owner who has to be completely humiliated in order to enact any meaningful change... and even then, he often goes right back to being an idiot shortly thereafter.

Hence we need a coach with real clout who commands respect around the NFL. It's not even enough that the new coach simply be good at his job. It has to be someone with an established record of post-season success and a recognizable name. Jerry will always hold the title of GM, but a coach like that will (for a variety of reasons) inevitably have far more control over the team than someone like Garret ever could, just like Parcells did.

This is one of several reasons why I hope that Garret doesn't get the job long-term. Bottom line, no matter how authoritative or forceful a personality he may have, he's still ultimately just another puppet for Jerry. He has absolutely no leverage with Jerry whatsoever (whereas a Cowher or a Gruden would have plenty.) Jerry hand-picked this guy for a reason. They go way back and Garret just gives Jerry that same warm fuzzy feeling inside that he gets from all his puppet-coaches (because Jerry knows that he has total control over Garret.)

Now you're right about Jerry needing to be completely humiliated to enact real change. I think it's fair to say that this season he has been thoroughly and utterly humiliated beyond anything he ever thought was possible; much worse than at any other time since he's owned the Cowboys. If ever there was a time that Jerry's ego was wounded enough for him to surrender some of his control, this is it.

[ribosoma]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Hence we need a coach with real clout who commands respect around the NFL. It's not even enough that the new coach simply be good at his job. It has to be someone with an established record of post-season success and a recognizable name. Jerry will always hold the title of GM, but a coach like that will (for a variety of reasons) inevitably have far more control over the team than someone like Garret ever could, just like Parcells did.

This is one of several reasons why I hope that Garret doesn't get the job long-term. Bottom line, no matter how authoritative or forceful a personality he may have, he's still ultimately just another puppet for Jerry. He has absolutely no leverage with Jerry whatsoever (whereas a Cowher or a Gruden would have plenty.) Jerry hand-picked this guy for a reason. They go way back and Garret just gives Jerry that same warm fuzzy feeling inside that he gets from all his puppet-coaches (because Jerry knows that he has total control over Garret.)

Now you're right about Jerry needing to be completely humiliated to enact real change. I think it's fair to say that this season he has been thoroughly and utterly humiliated beyond anything he ever thought was possible; much worse than at any other time since he's owned the Cowboys. If ever there was a time that Jerry's ego was wounded enough for him to surrender some of his control, this is it.

As evidenced by the play on the field, I would say that the Cowboys definitely needed someone other than Wade as head coach, but I wasn't exactly thrilled to see him get the job in the first place. From my perspective, personnel has far more to do with winning in the NFL than having a big name head coach does.

The fact is that we don't know the full spectrum of Garrett's offense yet because the offensive line has been average at best since he was given the job. I would be willing to bet that his playbook has been cut in half due to the quarterback not having the time to run through his progressions and an average offensive line allowing at least one defensive player into the backfield at the point of attack on running plays. Those things tend to get offensive coordinators fired in the NFL.

In addition, I've read that Jerry has allowed coaches to get involved in the drafting of players. That is a horribly flawed way to do things. Your scouts are supposed to draft for your scheme. That's what Pittsburgh and New England do. That's why they have an inordinate amount of continuity. That's why they don't wet the bed over losing veteran players. They know that they have two or three guys they have been grooming right behind their star players. They also let their scouts find players that fit their scheme that will fall to them in later rounds. To them, they don't give a damn what other teams do. They welcome teams like the Cowboys to pass on Mendenhall because they want a "change-of-pace" back to compliment their horribly over-valued starting running back. Whenever that happens, they simply go to the board their scouts have put together and get the most value they possibly can for their draft position.

A new coach won't fix that. This team's window is closing rapidly, and their personnel decisions at key positions (offensive line, nosetackle, inside linebacker, safety, and corner) have, at least temporarily, slammed that window shut and sealed it with an arc welder. Barring a complete overhaul of the defensive secondary, linbackers, and offensive line, like I said, in my opinion, you could reanimate the corpse of Lombardi and he would be just as screwed as Wade was.

Jerry is the most important figure in this whole equation, and, as the past has shown us, that's not a good thing for Cowboy fans. The presumption that Jerry will make all the right moves is, to me, just as ridiculous as criticizing Garrett for trying to bake a blue ribbon cake with no eggs and a pile of dog poop for an offensive line.

Fix the way the Cowboys handle personnel, and then you may have something. Until then, enjoy the drafts where they are supposedly going after special teams players, only to cut almost all of them within two seasons.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by ribosoma

Fix the way the Cowboys handle personnel, and then you may have something. Until then, enjoy the drafts where they are supposedly going after special teams players, only to cut almost all of them within two seasons.

That's what I'm saying. I'm not saying big name coaches are necessarily better at anything. I'm merely saying that a big name coach is the only kind of coach that will be able to make personnel decisions.

[ribosoma]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

That's what I'm saying. I'm not saying big name coaches are necessarily better at anything. I'm merely saying that a big name coach is the only kind of coach that will be able to make personnel decisions.

Even under Parcells, Jerry made the personnel decisions. Jerry allowed the Tuna input (that's what she said), but whatever input he had didn't really amount to much in regards to the draft. Cowher or Gruden would want to make the personnel decisions, which is not necessarily a good thing. Again, the best organizations in the NFL have great scouts and GMs. A head coach is not supposed to make personnel decisions. He is supposed to have some input, but the GM is the real #1 in any successful NFL operation. The Patriots had Scott Pioli, the Steelers have Kevin Colbert, the Giants have Jerry Reese. Those guys run the show. A GM is supposed to be the bastard who makes the cold, calculated decisions. Jerry had to be begged by his son to finally let T.O. go before he finally nuked the crap out of the locker room. Let's not forget that, as powerful as some think Parcells was here, he hated T.O. and wanted him gone from day 1, but Jerry said no and that was that. So, even when momentarily conceding power, Jerry is still the guy who buys the groceries... and that guy has dementia and quite possibly the worst muskrat carcass hairpiece the world has ever seen. Jerry has become Al Davis. Until he completely steps aside from any personnel involvement, call me cynical, but history has shown that he will absolutely kill his team.

[Mavericks Rockets Fan]

Rod Marinelli

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by ribosoma

Even under Parcells, Jerry made the personnel decisions. Jerry allowed the Tuna input (that's what she said), but whatever input he had didn't really amount to much in regards to the draft. Cowher or Gruden would want to make the personnel decisions, which is not necessarily a good thing. Again, the best organizations in the NFL have great scouts and GMs. A head coach is not supposed to make personnel decisions. He is supposed to have some input, but the GM is the real #1 in any successful NFL operation. The Patriots had Scott Pioli, the Steelers have Kevin Colbert, the Giants have Jerry Reese. Those guys run the show. A GM is supposed to be the bastard who makes the cold, calculated decisions. Jerry had to be begged by his son to finally let T.O. go before he finally nuked the crap out of the locker room. Let's not forget that, as powerful as some think Parcells was here, he hated T.O. and wanted him gone from day 1, but Jerry said no and that was that. So, even when momentarily conceding power, Jerry is still the guy who buys the groceries... and that guy has dementia and quite possibly the worst muskrat carcass hairpiece the world has ever seen. Jerry has become Al Davis. Until he completely steps aside from any personnel involvement, call me cynical, but history has shown that he will absolutely kill his team.

Damn you with your logic! False hope is all I have left! Don't take that from me too.

[ribosoma]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Damn you with your logic! False hope is all I have left! Don't take that from me too.

Haha.

Me too, man. Me, too.

I hope Stephen is given a chance to do his thing soon, because he has been the only voice of reason at Valley Ranch for the past several years.

[ribosoma]

Originally Posted by Mavericks Rockets Fan

Rod Marinelli

Joe Piscopo...

I'm sorry, are we randomly naming Italians?

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by ribosoma

Haha.

Me too, man. Me, too.

I hope Stephen is given a chance to do his thing soon, because he has been the only voice of reason at Valley Ranch for the past several years.

Yep, I definitely like what I have seen/heard from Stephen. So there might be a light at the end of the tunnel.

Of course, that could always just be an oncoming train too.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Don't look now, but the Boys look alive in Ginger's first game as head coach.

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Don't look now, but the Boys look alive in Ginger's first game as head coach.

Maybe it's not a bad idea to give the Ginger a chance, huh?

This looks like a totally different team out there. This is how the team should have looked all season long.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

Maybe it's not a bad idea to give the Ginger a chance, huh?

This looks like a totally different team out there. This is how the team should have looked all season long.

It's good that they're showing signs of life, but man, I really don't want them to win any more games this season. They desperately need a strong draft.

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

It's good that they're showing signs of life, but man, I really don't want them to win any more games this season. They desperately need a strong draft.

Personally, I'd rather see a pulse out of this team. Having a team full of quitters and overrated players that you would need to lose out isn't the kind of problem you want on your hands. That's not exactly something you can fix in one draft. Plus, having a top 5 pick is overrated. Unless this CBA dramatically fixes the rookie pay scale, I don't know if a top 5 pick is really worth it, especially when you consider that the types of positions you take in the top 5 aren't really holes for the team.

[Thespiralgoeson]

After just watching the Boys beat the Giants, I think there's probably about an 80% chance that Garret will be the head coach next year, for better or worse. The bar has been set so low, that pretty much all that needs to happen for him to win Jerry over is for the team to just show effort. Honestly I bet the team could go 0-7 the rest of the year and Garret would still get the job so long as Mike Jenkins doesn't turn down any more tackles.

I'd rather have a proven head coach, but there certainly are many advantages to promoting within your own ranks. I've never liked Garret as a coordinator, but who knows, maybe he's better at managing a whole team than he is just calling plays for an offense.

[Male30Dan]

I would caution those that might be getting pumped about Garrett and what he did for this win by just saying that if the Giants didn't play like we typically do this win still likely doesn't happen (TD called back by penalty, 2 INTs with balls thrown at the end zone after long successful drives - 1 returned for a TD, 3rd down penalties extending Dallas drives, lost fumble on a snap, etc).

The group definitely played different, especially in the 1st half, but I mentioned that should be expected the 1st game no matter who the coach is.

Don't get me wrong as I am not here to shit on Garrett but I just want to point out how horrible NY played as evidence that we aren't world beaters here. Nice to see the heart. Nice to see the desire. Nice to see them play almost an entire game without a mistake offensively (with the late INT and the missed FG as the biggest dings).

With that said, I still see them winning no more than 3 total ballgames over these final 8. I don't think Kitna plays out of his mind from here on out and, frankly, if we aren't going to win all 8 in a row I hope he doesn't and I hope we do lose as many as possible.

[chumdawg]

Dan, they should win #2 next week with Detroit. You are saying you can't see them winning more than one other game. Hell, they just beat (and beat DOWN, let's be honest) what was the best team going in the NFC, and on that team's billion-dollar home turf.

And...don't go giving the Giants all that kind of credit, as if they are a team that should always be expected to execute everything perfectly. Hell, the last time we saw them we were up a smooth 20-7 before Romo went out. And when that happened, that's when you expect your defense to STEP UP and say "Okay, our QB is down, and we've got a lead...looks like it's on us to win this thing." Instead they bent over and showed their ass. What I'm saying is: don't give the Giants credit for that. (Or for beating up on an actually poor Seattle team, etc.)

I do hear your point, about caution and about how things could have gone the other way round. But...they didn't go the other way round when we were getting kicked in the balls every week by Lady Luck, on our way to a 1-4 record. What I am maintaining is that when it comes down to it, if you put the Cowboys and Giants on a neutral field for a seven-game series, I think the Cowboys would win.

And if that is indeed true, then your prediction of no more than two wins the rest of the way is likely misguided.

[dirno2000]

Dan you could qualify our first four losses the same way. The fact that the Giants made some mistakes doesn't make the win any less impressive. We beat one of the hottest teams in the league in their place. All you can do is win the game that's on the field that day.

As far as 8-0 or bust I love draft season as much as anyone but I'm not going to root for my team to lose. First of all no matter how bad it gets I'm still going to watch the Cowboys and I don't want to watch sh**y football every Sunday.

Also Garret is trying to change the culture in the locker room and positive reinforcement in the form of wins can only make it easier. Granted, you seen to be convinced that he can't coach so you're probably not worried about that but no matter who the coach is next season having these player in a positive environment as opposed to a poison one can only help next season.

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Dan, they should win #2 next week with Detroit. You are saying you can't see them winning more than one other game. Hell, they just beat (and beat DOWN, let's be honest) what was the best team going in the NFC, and on that team's billion-dollar home turf.

I am not positive about any win Chum... We were 1-7 before today so let's not go expecting any victory, even against Detroit. As far as beat, and beat DOWN, dude you really didn't watch that game if you think that. Look at the yardage (pass and rush), time of possession, 1st downs, 3rd down percentage, etc. The difference was bonehead mistakes and penalties. They played HORRIBLE regarding mistakes/miscues and they still were in the game.

And...don't go giving the Giants all that kind of credit, as if they are a team that should always be expected to execute everything perfectly. Hell, the last time we saw them we were up a smooth 20-7 before Romo went out. And when that happened, that's when you expect your defense to STEP UP and say "Okay, our QB is down, and we've got a lead...looks like it's on us to win this thing." Instead they bent over and showed their ass. What I'm saying is: don't give the Giants credit for that. (Or for beating up on an actually poor Seattle team, etc.)

Dude, I am not saying they should, but there is a huge difference between perfect and absolutely horrible.

I do hear your point, about caution and about how things could have gone the other way round. But...they didn't go the other way round when we were getting kicked in the balls every week by Lady Luck, on our way to a 1-4 record. What I am maintaining is that when it comes down to it, if you put the Cowboys and Giants on a neutral field for a seven-game series, I think the Cowboys would win.

With this roster and the current injuries? I would be so confident that I would put my life up on that bet against you.

And if that is indeed true, then your prediction of no more than two wins the rest of the way is likely misguided.

Maybe, but if we win any more than that and don't win all 8 we are stupid.

Comments above.

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by dirno2000

Dan you could qualify our first four losses the same way. The fact that the Giants made some mistakes doesn't make the win any less impressive. We beat one of the hottest teams in the league in their place. All you can do is win the game that's on the field that day.

Yes you could and fair enough. I didn't say it wasn't a good win, just that the Giants played a major role in the loss.

As far as 8-0 or bust I love draft season as much as anyone but I'm not going to root for my team to lose. First of all no matter how bad it gets I'm still going to watch the Cowboys and I don't want to watch sh**y football every Sunday.

Well, that's you. Me? I see the bigger picture. Winning 6 of 8 to finish 7-9 does NOTHING but drop you from the top 5 to a much lower number. But hey, we finished strong. YAH!

Also Garret is trying to change the culture in the locker room and positive reinforcement in the form of wins can only make it easier. Granted, you seen to be convinced that he can't coach so you're probably not worried about that but no matter who the coach is next season having these player in a positive environment as opposed to a poison one can only help next season.

He is a shit coordinator that had a good game by throwing it down the field more. Truth be told, no one knew if he could coach prior to today and all he did was show that he could take advantage of a team opposite his that made a crap load of mistakes. He gets credit from me for that - no doubt. He was impressive overall. With that said, I still take my chances with the guys/environment to get a MUCH stronger draft.

Comments above...

[alexamenos]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

Personally, I'd rather see a pulse out of this team. Having a team full of quitters and overrated players that you would need to lose out isn't the kind of problem you want on your hands. That's not exactly something you can fix in one draft. Plus, having a top 5 pick is overrated. Unless this CBA dramatically fixes the rookie pay scale, I don't know if a top 5 pick is really worth it, especially when you consider that the types of positions you take in the top 5 aren't really holes for the team.

Straight up. Losing lts of games and playing like crap doesn't solve any problems, even if it moves you up a few spots in the draft.

[Mav Addict]

I'll eat crow for now.... Lets see if Garrett will continue to make minor adjustments... Let's see if can pull off another game like today... Good win against the team I hate most...best tasting crow ever

[dirno2000]

Well, that's you. Me? I see the bigger picture. Winning 6 of 8 to finish 7-9 does NOTHING but drop you from the top 5 to a much lower number. But hey, we finished strong. YAH!

Does your big picture include a coach? Because if Garret can finish 6-2 with the hand he was dealt and with this schedule then I think we've found one.

[Jerry Stackhouse]

I'm sad to see Wade Phillips go. He was my favorite Cowboys coach since Dave Campo.

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by dirno2000

Does your big picture include a coach? Because if Garret can finish 6-2 with the hand he was dealt and with this schedule then I think we've found one.

I thought he didn't have to win games to show you or Jerry that Garrett was the real deal. Which is it?

[sike]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

After just watching the Boys beat the Giants, I think there's probably about an 80% chance that Garret will be the head coach next year, for better or worse. The bar has been set so low, that pretty much all that needs to happen for him to win Jerry over is for the team to just show effort. Honestly I bet the team could go 0-7 the rest of the year and Garret would still get the job so long as Mike Jenkins doesn't turn down any more tackles.

I'd rather have a proven head coach, but there certainly are many advantages to promoting within your own ranks. I've never liked Garret as a coordinator, but who knows, maybe he's better at managing a whole team than he is just calling plays for an offense.

this is roughly how I feel.

[MavsX]

the verdict on jason garret is still out in my opinion. Truthfully, i want him to fail. I want a gruden or a cowher or someone like that to coach my team. Maybe we don't need someone like that. Who knows.

I will say i was impressed with the way they came out and played well. Lets see if they can keep that up. I was also impressed with the way Garret handled the marion barber situation with the media. I liked how he put his foot down and made sure the media understood how it's going to be. As a sidenote, the 'media' sucks, bunch of a-holes trying to create drama out of nothing.

[FINtastic]

I've been hearing rumors of Gruden going to fill that new position at the University of Miami. I'm guessing there will be a few unhappy campers around here if that goes down.

Starting to look more and more like our future is in the hands of the Strawberry Hope.

[dude1394]

Gruden doesn't do much for me...cowher does...I would like someone with some proven longevity as well as being a heck of a coach..

Fisher from Tennessee I like also..

Other than those, garret's probably as good as any.

[dirno2000]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

I've been hearing rumors of Gruden going to fill that new position at the University of Miami. I'm guessing there will be a few unhappy campers around here if that goes down.

Starting to look more and more like our future is in the hands of the Strawberry Hope.

I've read that too but Peter King insists it's not happening for what that's worth.

[chumdawg]

Gruden strikes me as a guy who would have a ton of success at a school like Miami.

[sike]

I just want to remove obstacles for this team's success and add any many variables that at least could lead to this team becoming a strong contender right away...Garret could be a great coach in the future...but surely a proven coach adds to the percentages of being a serious winner.

[mkat]

I feel like getting Jason Garrett is probably the right call. Letting him go seems like it could be another Sean Peyton situation.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by mkat

I feel like getting Jason Garrett is probably the right call. Letting him go seems like it could be another Sean Peyton situation.

The difference here is that I thought Peyton was actually a good coordinator.