And this is why my stance was deliberately extreme. The only way to respond to such an irrational, unfair, unjustified opinion in Jason Garrett is to match it's intensity with quotes, facts, and common sense observation.
Its entirely necessary to use this saturation process for many reasons.
First, the irrational arguments eventually get louder because it becomes the only weapon they have once you strip away the false premises they use. They literraly try to shout over you in an effort to distract those wanting to get both sides.
Secondly, they are going to demand every peice if information you use soiner or later, first claiming it doesn't exist. Then they quickly move to discreting the source or funding some way to claim it as irrelevant, without any relevant basis. Remember, you are the only one that is required to show real proof like a statistical trend or web links.
They only require themselves to mention a sparse handful of events which they then use to blanket an entire body of work.
The truth is, they are too comfortable in their patented excuses and blames. Ironically they are totally unprepared for circumstance that need no blame because the team is experiencing success. They can't tell you why the success exists, but they want to make sure you know it's not the people they blame for a currently nonexistant failure
