Jason Garrett vs Jim Zorn

[Thinking Skins]

I'm thinking about the hiring of Jim Zorn as our head coach, and we've seen many articles comparing it to the hiring of Andy Reid in Philly. But I think its kinda comparable to Jason Garrett as well. Both are former players (both played as QBs). Both went on to coach QBs. Both became (or are becoming) first time play-callers on teams that a hall of fame coach resurrected. So lets look at how these guys did at respective times in their careers:

As a QB:

Zorn is one of the Seahawks all time greats (called one of the greatest left handers all time), Garrett was a Dallas backup for years who eventually went on to other teams like NY, TB and Miami, but not a stellar career

Advantage: if stellar play at QB has anything to do with playcalling, then the advantage goes to Jim Zorn.

As a QB coach:

Zorn was the QB coach for the Lions and then the Seahawks. With the Lions, he helped Charlie Batch set rookie records and put up the best passer ratings of his career. Then with the Seahawks, he helped develop arguably the best QB in the league behind Manning and Brady (look at the stats).

Garrett was the QB coach in Miami. He was there for the development of _______, uuh nobody. They have nobody at that posiion and they've had nobody there for a while. So what makes him a good QB coach or somebody worthy of an offensive coordinator position? Is it because he knows Jerry Jones? hmmmm.....

Advantage: if being able to develop players has anything to do with playcalling, then the advantage goes to Jim Zorn.

The Team they took over:

Both coaches will be (were) calling plays for a team that went to the playoffs the year before. The thing is that Jason Garrett took over a team with a QB that went to the pro bowl the year before and a thousand yard WR in T.O., as well as 3 other pro bowl players on offense (Witten, Fozell Adams, Andre Gurode). In comparison, Zorn takes over a team with 3 pro bowlers. Zorn takes over a team with two pro bowlers on offense (Chris Samuels and Chris Cooley).

Advantage: if having players who performed better in the previous year has anything to do with playcalling, then the advantage goes to Jason Garrett.

So looking at this comparison, I've got to give the advantage to Jim Zorn (2-1) over Jason Garrett. Really, looking at this stuff, I see no real reason for Jason Garrett to have been named the offensive coordinator in Dallas, let alone be considered for head coaching positions in Atlanta, Baltimore and Dallas. At least Zorn has a resume to back up his hiring. What does Garrett have? I understand that as an OC he can say that he helped direct the Cowboys offense last year, which was number 3 in the league. But this guy has the resume that I think will make fans and commentators question what they were thinking.

On the other hand, if Zorn can develop Campbell as he did with his two previous QBs and Moss (or one of the other WRs) can develop into a legit #1 WR, then Zorn is likely to have equal if not more success as Jason Garrett.

Just My Opinion

.... :dallasuck

[IbleedBnG83]

Interesting analysis. Of course one never correlates to the other, but you have to admit that Zorn has promise. Garrett however is still behind a head coach who has the ultimate decision. Zorn is at the top with much more pressure. I think the Andy Reid comparison is still more favorable. Hopefully its Reid like and not Morningwig type.

[SnyderMustGo]

Uh, except Jason Garrett was only a QB coach for 1 year; he didn't languish in that position for a decade without a sniff of interest from anyone. Garrett was a hot coaching prospect, and yet even he admitted he needed to be a coordinator first. And after a year, teams were already interested in him as head coach, which he declined.

I don't like the comparison to Jason Garrett for two reasons:

1. It really points out the shortcomings of Zorn (that he wasn't promoted quickly like Garrett; that he didn't get the seasoning that Garrett seemed to think he needed as a coordinator); and

2. It makes it kind of look like that little Danny was trying to copycat Jerry Jones by hiring a QB coach to be OC and heir apparent coach.

I prefer to not think of Zorn in that comparison.

I hope the analog is Reid, and we should focus on that comparison. Because the Garrett one is not complimentary, in my opinion.

[Thinking Skins]

Uh, except Jason Garrett was only a QB coach for 1 year; he didn't languish in that position for a decade without a sniff of interest from anyone. Garrett was a hot coaching prospect, and yet even he admitted he needed to be a coordinator first. And after a year, teams were already interested in him as head coach, which he declined.

I don't like the comparison to Jason Garrett for two reasons:

1. It really points out the shortcomings of Zorn (that he wasn't promoted quickly like Garrett; that he didn't get the seasoning that Garrett seemed to think he needed as a coordinator); and

2. It makes it kind of look like that little Danny was trying to copycat Jerry Jones by hiring a QB coach to be OC and heir apparent coach.

I prefer to not think of Zorn in that comparison.

I hope the analog is Reid, and we should focus on that comparison. Because the Garrett one is not complimentary, in my opinion.

Maybe it does look that way. But I'm just wondering what Jason Garrett was doing to get him those interviews cause he wasn't doing anything on the field or in coaching.

I compare Zorn's problems to many of the problems with hiring the assistants of winning teams, they can't interview because their team is interviewing. But if you compare the resumes of Zorn and Garrett, then Zorn just blows him away. Maybe Garrett has good contacts or a good agent. I don't know, but he had done NOTHING to deserve an offensive coordinator position with the Cowboys last year.

[IbleedBnG83]

Sometimes its who you know. Zorn was coaching the QB's under Mike Holmgren. Holmgren ran the show, so there wouldn't be much interest in any of coordinators. I still think Garrett would be over rated because he took over a good team. If anything, we I think the o-coordinator from Cleveland should have gotten the biggest look, untill they extended him, because he took a bum team and turned them around.

Look at Mike McCarthy. He went from San Francisco, whose offense SUCKED under him, to Green Bay. Of course they had Favre, but the Packers were still sucking untill he came. You never know what you are going to get.

[Thinking Skins]

Honestly, I think that a guy like Cam Cameron has a great resume as a Qb coach. He helped develop Gus Ferrotte, Trent Green, Philip Rivers, and Drew Brees.

If you want to compare him as an OC, he was able to develop Drew Brees and Philip Rivers as well as lead the Chargers into one of the most productive offenses in the league (as his first OC gig). I don't think his head coaching thing is even comparable because he was taking over a rebuilding team so the 1-15 record isn't really indicative of his abilities. Even Jimmy Johnson had a 1-15 record before winning back to back super bowls.

[Thinking Skins]

Sometimes its who you know. Zorn was coaching the QB's under Mike Holmgren. Holmgren ran the show, so there wouldn't be much interest in any of coordinators. I still think Garrett would be over rated because he took over a good team. If anything, we I think the o-coordinator from Cleveland should have gotten the biggest look, untill they extended him, because he took a bum team and turned them around.

Look at Mike McCarthy. He went from San Francisco, whose offense SUCKED under him, to Green Bay. Of course they had Favre, but the Packers were still sucking untill he came. You never know what you are going to get.

The thing about McCarthy is that before San Fran he was in New Orleans and helped with that offense. Even he had a history. But Garrett had nothing. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. And people were willing to offer him their head coaching position.

[Thinking Skins]

Interesting analysis. Of course one never correlates to the other, but you have to admit that Zorn has promise. Garrett however is still behind a head coach who has the ultimate decision. Zorn is at the top with much more pressure. I think the Andy Reid comparison is still more favorable. Hopefully its Reid like and not Morningwig type.

You make a good point, and thats a big difference in the two positions that they hold. We'll see how much that effects them. But if there is an advantage to coaching experience, then maybe its the ability to handle more responsibilities. Zorn is the Head coach, QB coach, and offensive playcaller. Honestly, I'm more concerned about him being the HC and QBC than being the HC and offensive playcaller, as the second is a much more common thing than the first.

[IbleedBnG83]

Staying on the topic of comparison, I think it will be more interesting to see Zorn vs. Harbaugh. They are coming in at the same time as both first time coaches and non coordinators. Zorn has the more favorable team built but I think it will help gauge how well Zorn is doing.

[Thinking Skins]

Here's a Baltimore article comparing Jason Garrett to Brian Billick. I think thats a more healthy comparison.

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:xB0ozVzdbE8J:www.wnst.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryID/4442/Default.aspx+%22jason+garrett%22+stock&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=47&gl=us

[Thinking Skins]

Also, this comparison takes a look at QBs having to learn a new system. I don't know how different Garrett's system is to the one Parcells ran, but we do know that Romo sits to pee was able to pick it up in his first year.

So we can look at Zorn's new offense and whats to stop Campbell from picking it up in his first year and putting up a rating better than the 88 that Charlie Batch put up in Zorn's first year as a QB coach in Detroit?

[Chanhillbilly]

Jason Garrett is a football bat...

[IbleedBnG83]

I feel good about Zorn, especially since he will be working with the QB's directly. There is no grey area as to what the o-coordinator is attempting to achieve and what the QB coach is teaching.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

You forgot something:

Garrett is ghey.

Not that theres anything wrong with that...

Just sayin

[VCDefectors]

I'll try to address some of your points about Garrett. Please note that I do think highly of Zorn and I'm not going to make an attempt to make a judgment about who is better at this point.

1. About QB playing experience. It certainly does help to have playing experience at a particular position if you are going to coach it. But it's not as important as you think it is. If being a starter for 10-12 years was a prerequisite for being a good coach, you would see them in current NFL coaching positions. But that is usually not the case.

2. Garrett spent his career in Dallas mentoring Aikman as a backup QB. That's right, mentoring. Garrett comes from a long family lineage of coaches, went to Princeton (i.e. an incredibly smart guy), and knew even back during his college days that coaching was his long term destiny. He spent many years as a player carrying the clipboard, working side-by-side with the offensive staff, coaches, and coordinators in implementing and designing plays. He also focused on helping Aikman get ready for each Sunday, coaching him on his mechanics, studying game film, going over plays, the game plan. He was basically playing the role of a coach as a player.

3. In short, for what Garrett lacks in NFL coaching experience, he appears to make up for it with being thorough in completing his tasks, leadership skills, gaining the confidence and trust of players, being incredibly articulate, and really knowing the Xs and Os of the game. That's at least what I have heard/read about him from the past.

I hope this helps. I realize that me being a Cowboys fan isn't necessarily going to qualify this as an objective analysis, but I think I have accurately highlighted the key points in understanding why Garrett is/was a hot coaching prospect.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

VCD you make some good points.

It sucks but Garrett is one of the best OCs in the league, and I think he'll make a great head coach some day.

Hopefully someone hires him away from Dallas :fingersx:

[VCDefectors]

VCD you make some good points.

It sucks but Garrett is one of the best OCs in the league, and I think he'll make a great head coach some day.

Hopefully someone hires him away from Dallas :fingersx:

I think so too, and I'm not just saying that because I'm a Cowboys fan. I read stuff even back in the mid 90s that many people thought he was going to be a good coach.

Chances are good that some team out there will lure him away. Garrett can't keep turning down head coaching positions like he did last season. But I do know that Garrett has publicly stated (you can look up his January press conference video on the Cowboys website if you care that much ) how much he likes being in Dallas and that he and his family feel Dallas is their home.

[Thinking Skins]

2. Garrett spent his career in Dallas mentoring Aikman as a backup QB. That's right, mentoring. Garrett comes from a long family lineage of coaches, went to Princeton (i.e. an incredibly smart guy), and knew even back during his college days that coaching was his long term destiny. He spent many years as a player carrying the clipboard, working side-by-side with the offensive staff, coaches, and coordinators in implementing and designing plays. He also focused on helping Aikman get ready for each Sunday, coaching him on his mechanics, studying game film, going over plays, the game plan. He was basically playing the role of a coach as a player.

Maybe you're more in the loop than I am, but whenever I hear Aikman talk about the person who helped mold him as a QB, I always hear him give credit to Norv. I've never heard Garrett's name come up. Do you have any references, like news articles or interviews that say this?

Even if this is true, thats saying that a guy like Todd Collins or Trent Dilfer or Kurt Warner or any of these career backup QBs that are brought in to help mentor young QBs will be a good head coach. I don't really see that as a pre-requisite for making a good coach.

And what happened with Joey Harrington and the QBs in Miami? What did he do in Miami that had him being considered for the position of OC in Dallas? Or is it all based on being a good player-coach?

[william1970]

:dallasuckAn interesting feed this. I've read all the posts on here and I must conclude with the former point made by D's my hero - A head coach is an entity in his own right.

Thinking about all the great head coaches over the years, it is true that many of them have played and understand the game. But there are other good coaches out there, who have lived in the shadow of great names and thus never got the playing time. Consider all the players on the bench behind the likes of John Elway or Brett Favre - some of who are now good coaches on decent teams.

As a Skins fan since '82, I long for the glory days again. I believe it won't be long. When the great Joe Gibbs returned, he put fight into the team. These were virtually the same players; but they had fighting spirit. Why? Because it takes a WINNER to show players how to WIN. Joe Gibbs was successful at NASCAR too. The man is, was and always will be a winner in my book.

The Skins made the playoffs last season, despite the awful death of a key player in Sean Taylor and the problems that Joe Gibbs was having on the sidelines. In the game where he called timeout twice very late in the 4th Qtr, you could see the despair on Joe's face - I felt so sorry for him as he realised that his coaching career was coming to a close. BUT DESPITE THIS, JOE SHOWED THEM HOW TO WIN.

For sure, players will always respect other players who have made certain goals, such as the Pro-Bowl, Super Bowl, or who have gone on to have succesful head coaching careers. Ulimately it is the players who are taking the hits on Sunday's - and the players have to respect the Head Coach. Would anybody argue with the Tuna?

Having a great athletic ability - and putting that into practice - is surely a qualifying earner for a head coach. But it is not the only standard to measure. Somebody with a great technical level for the game, could do just as well.

In short, a head coach needs to be (1) A Winner (2) Have respect by the players (3) Have a great technical level for the game and (4) Deliver results.

I HATE to say it, but the Dallas intruder on these forums made good points!

Over here in England, I'm looking forward to my 26th season as a Pigskin. I think this season will be a good one. I've also just got tickets for the Saints v Chargers international series on October 26th in Wembley. Any skins fans from the states, in section 529 of Wembley on that day --- give me a big shout and I'll buy you a beer!

HAIL TO THE REDSKINS! OUR TIME WILL COME AGAIN!

[VCDefectors]

Maybe you're more in the loop than I am, but whenever I hear Aikman talk about the person who helped mold him as a QB, I always hear him give credit to Norv. I've never heard Garrett's name come up. Do you have any references, like news articles or interviews that say this?

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news.cfm?id=B22B5C28-CA87-FF40-03BE130F15A493E8

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/football/cowboys/stories/011708dnspoaikman.27c788c.html

http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblogs/nfl/2007/11/aikman_says_garrett_is_gone_af.html

Even if this is true, thats saying that a guy like Todd Collins or Trent Dilfer or Kurt Warner or any of these career backup QBs that are brought in to help mentor young QBs will be a good head coach. I don't really see that as a pre-requisite for making a good coach.

And what happened with Joey Harrington and the QBs in Miami? What did he do in Miami that had him being considered for the position of OC in Dallas? Or is it all based on being a good player-coach?

The other names you mention are players who had shown no sign of coaching aspirations. So I won't comment on the prospects of any of them becoming a coach.

Besides, I never said anything about mentoring a starting QB being a prerequisite for making a good coach. I merely meant to point out that while most backups in the NFL are busy preparing to play, Garrett readily took on coaching-type duties to gain coaching experience.

I also think you are overstating Garrett's one year with Harrington. If a QB can't play, he can't play. Find me a coach that was able to get a good season performance out of Harrington, then maybe you might be able to make a case. Garrett is not a miracle-worker.

[cphil006]

Jim Zorn was a better QB.

[bulldog]

the Redskins offense since 2004 has been limited by first the physical frailties of the quarterback (Brunell) and then by the ultra-conservative playcalling from the coaches.

hopefully with more talent (although less experience) at the qb position and a fresh outlook and approach from Zorn, the Redskins will take better advantage of the opportunities that are presented to them during games.

too many times the team has had to settle for field goals in the red zone because Gibbs didn't want to put the ball in the air within the 30-35 yard line and attack the end line.

[cphil006]

We'll find out soon enough

[[[ghost]]]

More than anything else, I hope Zorn hasn't come on too late for the development of Campbell. If he's going to develop our QB the way he developed Hasselback, then he needs to have someone he can mold, not someone who has already been molded by several different coaches and schemes already.

[jimster]

Uh, except Jason Garrett was only a QB coach for 1 year; he didn't languish in that position for a decade without a sniff of interest from anyone.

It makes it kind of look like that little Danny was trying to copycat Jerry Jones by hiring a QB coach to be OC and heir apparent coach.

Maybe he's trying to "copycat" other successful position coaches that came from the Holmgren tree without a sniff of interest from anyone, like Andy Reid, Steve Mariucci, Jon Gruden, Dick Jauron, Mike Sherman. - All coaches who got their teams to the playoffs quickly.