Garrett says lack of turnovers led to defensive coordinator turnover

[dbair1967]

I told all of you idiots in week 5 this defense was a piece of shit and precisely for this reason.

All you morons came in defending Ryan and his horrendous defense.

Thankfully our FO is smarter than the fools on this board

A cetain Ryan lover in this forum wont like this.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

lol

About 40 yards of field position. And you're probably 10 times less likely to score on a punt return than a turnover.

The fact that you're trying to defend that statement just further cements the fact you're a moron.

Gee... how many days later? It took you that long to come up with that answer... and it's still weak. It depedns on the punter, but so what? WHO CARES. It still adds up to the same thing, you the only one that seems incapable of grasping this simple idea. And the fact that it took you days later to come with this weak shit and still not grasp it, says more about you than it does me.

Who says, "I'm glad we PUNTED the ball 40 yards downfield, instead of throwing an INT 40 yards downfield, Or FUMBLED the ball 40 yards downfield".

The fact that a punt results in a difference of field position is its only saving grace but technically it still adds up to the same thing as a fumble and/or a INT.

 

[Irving Cowboy]

That add up to the SAME THING IDIOT. Of course you can't grasp that.

If an offense throws and INT, or fumbles, or goes 3 and out and PUNTS, or turns the ball over on downs... WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? They add up to the exact same thing: the offense failed to score on that possession, and ball is still TURNED OVER to the other team.

This sounds like something Hostile would try to pass down to his flock.

Ridiculous stance.

 

[peplaw06]

Gee... how many days later? It took you that long to come up with that answer... and it's still weak. It depedns on the punter, but so what? WHO CARES. It still adds up to the same thing, you the only one that seems incapable of grasping this simple idea. And the fact that it took you days later to come with this weak shit and still not grasp it, says more about you than it does me.

Who says, "I'm glad we PUNTED the ball 40 yards downfield, instead of throwing an INT 40 yards downfield, Or FUMBLED the ball 40 yards downfield".

The fact that a punt results in a difference of field position is its only saving grace but technically it still adds up to the same thing as a fumble and/or a INT.

I couldn't fail this hard if I tried.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Don't sell yourself short, bruh.

 

[Hoofbite]

“That’s 28 more opportunities with the ball,” Garrett said. “Give me some of those 28 opportunities - just not in the first half."


FIFY, Jason.

Well shit, when you compare to the absolute best and use that as a reason to fire the guy, you're ignoring that in all likelihood there's no fucking way you will even come close to what the Bears did. 7 whole teams were above 30 on the season. It's not like getting 2-3 turnovers a week is some fucking simple task. How about instead of trying to shoot for the moon you start by looking at where the league average is at.

I wonder how long it will be before Jerry forces the team to draft a running QB. He copied the Wildcat and clearly he thinks just running the Tampa 2 will result in a bunch of additional turnovers so it's only a matter of time before he'll be calling for the option offense.

 

[Rynie]

How many points did we make off of turnovers with a short field? Garrett's offense seemed to always stall in the red zone, and if not he lacked the inability to sustain drives.

I'm not so hung up on turnovers as in fumble recoveries or INTs. If you think about it, punts/3 and outs can be considered turnovers. If the defense doesn't get a "turnover", but forces the opposing offense to punt the ball, is just as good as a turnover, because it adds up to the same thing: the opposing offense failure to score on that possession.

The Cowboys' defense forced a lot of punts/3 and outs, and got the ball back for the offense; but oftentimes, no sooner they got the ball back for the offense, and barely stepped off the field, they have to go back on, because the offense pissed tha topportunity away by going 3 and out.

How many turnovers did the Cowboys' offense commit? If Ryan was fired for the lack of turnovers, Garrett should be fired for the abundance of turnovers.

I couldn't agree more with this post, especially the last sentence.

 

[dbair1967]

I couldn't agree more with this post, especially the last sentence.

and as I pointed out earlier, the OC has been/will be "fired" and a new playcaller is gonna be put in place

 

[peplaw06]

I couldn't agree more with this post, especially the last sentence.

Please tell me you mean you couldn't agree more with everything but the second paragraph...

That part of the post is insane.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

This sounds like something Hostile would try to pass down to his flock.

Ridiculous stance.

No it isn't. But I'm through trying to explain something that really does not need explaining.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

Please tell me you mean you couldn't agree more with everything but the second paragraph...

That part of the post is insane.

Explain how they are different aside from field position?

Aside from the mechanics... what exactly is different from a INT, a fumble, and a 3 and out punt? I'm waiting.

The optics look worse with INTs and a fumble because those often results from recklessness or miscalculation, whereas with punting it's deliberate.

 

[GloryDaysRBack]

I don't think there is anyone on here who will agree with a punt = a turnover.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Fags

 

[bbgun]

Fags

I missed this last week. Just wasn't the same when my dad called me that.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Lol

Notice I was the only one who didn't believe that you defected? Respek.

 

[bbgun]

The Thailand joke was gold. Conversely, GloryDaysRBack doesn't seem to care for me. :tear

 

[peplaw06]

Explain how they are different aside from field position?

Aside from the mechanics... what exactly is different from a INT, a fumble, and a 3 and out punt? I'm waiting.

The optics look worse with INTs and a fumble because those often results from recklessness or miscalculation, whereas with punting it's deliberate.

Field position. Momentum shifts. You're almost 20 times more likely to score a TD on a turnover than on a punt return, and that's just on the play itself. If the defense gets a turnover in the other team's end of the field, the offense can actually lose yards, and they still score points with a FG. The odds of that happening on a punt are almost zero.

And just for grins... 2012 regular season numbers

796 total turnovers
71 INT TDs
21 FR TDs
92 total TDs on turnovers

Scoring percentage 11.6%

2448 Total Punts
18 Punt Return TDs

Scoring percentage 00.7%

I don't have the numbers, but if you take FGs after turnovers into consideration, I would guess that you're probably 30 times more likely to score points after a turnover than on a punt.

Any more questions?

 

[Hoofbite]

and as I pointed out earlier, the OC has been/will be "fired" and a new playcaller is gonna be put in place

Garrett was given 6 years to try it out. After his second season, Dallas was near the bottom in terms of turning the ball over.

Ryan got 2 years and apparently it's conclusive enough in those two seasons, neither of which were ranked as low as Garrett's second season, that he's gotta go.

You can try to paint it as the same thing but why lie? Rob was fired, Jason still collects a check from Dallas. The fact that the OC performance got him his HC job pretty much means Dallas should have gone with another HC. They didn't because Jason is Jerry's golden child.

 

[GloryDaysRBack]

The Thailand joke was gold. Conversely, GloryDaysRBack doesn't seem to care for me. :tear

Not true! I said it was probably a joke

 

[dbair1967]

Garrett was given 6 years to try it out. After his second season, Dallas was near the bottom in terms of turning the ball over.

Ryan got 2 years and apparently it's conclusive enough in those two seasons, neither of which were ranked as low as Garrett's second season, that he's gotta go.

You can try to paint it as the same thing but why lie? Rob was fired, Jason still collects a check from Dallas. The fact that the OC performance got him his HC job pretty much means Dallas should have gone with another HC. They didn't because Jason is Jerry's golden child.

I would have let him go afte the season myself, but short of that changes were necessary in all 3 phases and changes were made. Perhaps the guy will be a better HC than he was OC.

Ryan was inept though and thats why he got canned. The defense this year was epic bad, and they blew countless 4th quarter leads in 2011 when the defense was on the field with a chance to close out a win. For two years the team couldnt force a turnover to save their life, and other than a few occassions never came up with pressure on key 3rd down passes, allowing easy conversions.