When Tom Landry Lost The Plot

I became a Dallas Cowboys fan in 1977 and by 1980, there was wide open discussion about whether or not Tom Landry had lost it (as compared to the meager discussion in elite media about whether President Joe Biden had lost it).

ChatGPT says: Tom Landry ran one of the most system-driven teams in NFL history — his offense (the “flex” and shifting multiple formations) and his “Flex Defense” were complex, precise, and demanded players who could execute assignments exactly.

So when people say Landry wanted players who fit his system instead of just grabbing the most talented athletes available, it means:

Scheme over raw talent: A player might have blazing speed or natural gifts, but if he freelanced or didn’t grasp the system, Landry wasn’t interested. He preferred someone less gifted but more disciplined, coachable, and able to execute the role within his playbook.

Discipline and predictability: Landry wanted eleven men moving like parts of a machine. He believed this could beat teams with superior athletes, as long as everyone did their job exactly as designed.

Draft philosophy: The Cowboys’ front office, especially under Tex Schramm and Gil Brandt, often drafted players based on how well they projected into Landry’s schemes, not necessarily who was the most athletic or highest-rated prospect overall. That’s why Dallas sometimes passed on “can’t-miss” stars in favor of system fits.

Locker room culture: It also meant Landry valued players who were deferential to coaching, who wouldn’t demand the offense be tailored around them (like some star QBs or receivers might).

The downside was that, by the 1980s, as athletes got faster and other coaches loosened up systems, Dallas sometimes looked rigid. When Landry’s scheme didn’t have the right athletes — or defenses caught up — his “fit over best athlete” philosophy started to backfire, leaving the team outgunned.

Here are some good examples where Landry’s system-fit philosophy shaped who the Cowboys took — and who they passed on:

1. Quarterback: Danny White vs. “athletic playmakers”

Who they had: Danny White — smart, accurate, ran Landry’s offense by the book. Not flashy, not a scrambler, but disciplined.

Who they passed on (style-wise): Players with more raw athleticism or improvisational ability. Landry distrusted QBs who “made it up on the fly.” He didn’t want another Fran Tarkenton; he wanted someone who could run his reads exactly. That’s part of why he stuck with White and later gave Gary Hogeboom a shot — both were “system guys,” not free-wheeling athletes.

2. Wide Receiver: Passing on “pure burners”

Who they had: Drew Pearson and later Butch Johnson — tough, precise route-runners who fit the timing system.

Who they passed on: Cowboys in the 1970s–80s often skipped over receivers with track speed but suspect discipline (think Cliff Branch-types; Branch was a Texan the Cowboys could’ve had, but Al Davis in Oakland embraced his deep speed, while Landry worried about route discipline). Pearson and Johnson weren’t as fast, but they fit the reads.

3. Running Back: Tony Dorsett as an exception

Dorsett (1977 #2 pick) was a pure athlete — Heisman winner, breakaway speed. Landry almost resisted him at first, because Dorsett freelanced and wasn’t always a grinder between the tackles. It took Tex Schramm pushing the move and a huge rookie year for Landry to adapt. Dorsett clashed with Landry later because he hated being in a rigid platoon instead of being the feature back. This showed how Landry struggled with stars who didn’t want to be “just a cog.”

4. Defensive Line: Randy White vs. “big names”

Who they picked: Randy White in 1975 (#2 overall) was strong, coachable, fit Landry’s “Flex” defense perfectly. He became a Hall of Famer.

Who they passed on: Walter Payton went #4 that year. Landry already had his system-fit backs and stuck to the plan. Imagine Payton in Dallas — but Landry and Schramm saw Randy White as a perfect plug-and-play in their scheme.

5. 1980s decline — sticking with fits over raw talent

In the mid-’80s drafts, the Cowboys leaned heavily toward guys who could “understand the system” but didn’t have elite athletic ceilings. That’s why, by the late ’80s, the roster looked thin compared to faster, more aggressive teams like the 49ers and Bears. Jimmy Johnson (after 1989) flipped the philosophy to “best athlete available,” leading to the dynasty.

Landry’s “system-fit first” got Dallas guys like Randy White, Harvey Martin, Drew Pearson — all perfect cogs in his machine. But it also meant passing on transcendent athletes like Payton, Branch, Montana, and Marino. That’s the tradeoff: disciplined system success vs. potentially greater dynastic dominance if he’d let raw talent reshape the scheme.

Posted in Dallas | Comments Off on When Tom Landry Lost The Plot

The Steve Sailer Public Library Tour

Steve Sailer blogs:

The Word Is Spreading!

Slowly and patchily, admittedly …

Here are the seven libraries closest to me that carry my anthology Noticing according to WorldCat:

St. Patrick’s Seminary and University

Gellert Memorial Library

312 miles from your current location.

320 Middlefield Rd, Menlo Park, CA, 94025, United States

University of Utah

J. Willard Marriott Library

581 miles from your current location…

I should do a road trip and visit each of my seven library books.

ChatGPT: Picture this: a late-afternoon event at the Sheridan County Fulmer Public Library in Wyoming. The carpet smells faintly of old books and coffee from the Friends of the Library bake sale table in the corner.

At the front of a multipurpose room, Steve Sailer is standing behind a podium with a “Sheridan County Library Author Series” banner draped across it. His book Noticing sits in a neat stack next to a jug of lemon water. The crowd is a mix of retirees, ranchers in clean boots, a few grad-student types home for the summer, and a small knot of library staffers who look like they’re not sure what they signed up for.

Sailer begins by thanking the librarians for stocking his anthology. He leans into his theme: “noticing things that most people prefer to ignore.” He riffs on crime statistics, housing policy, sports analytics, even birth rates—delivered with that calm, data-heavy cadence that makes the audience lean in, whether nodding or frowning.

Halfway through, a man in the back mutters, “He’s not wrong,” while a woman up front scribbles furious notes in a spiral notebook. A rancher raises his hand to ask about crime trends in small towns, and Sailer obliges with a detailed breakdown that somehow loops back to the NBA. The audience chuckles.

The librarian who introduced him watches with a mixture of fascination and mild dread, wondering what the local newspaper will write tomorrow. Afterward, people line up at the signing table: some with copies from Amazon, others holding library checkouts, still bearing the plastic dust jackets.

Outside, the Wyoming evening is cool. Folks linger on the steps, debating what they just heard—exactly the kind of civic argument that makes a library talk memorable.

Posted in Steve Sailer | Comments Off on The Steve Sailer Public Library Tour

The Netflix Christopher Caldwell Roast

ChatGPT: COLD OPEN (slo-mo hype reel, orchestral boom)
NARRATOR (NFL Films voice): “He rewrote the game by insisting the game was rewritten. He saw a second constitution where others saw a footnote. He stares down progress the way Brady stares down a blitz—dazed, unblinking, weirdly effective.”
Quick cuts: Caldwell smoothing a tie like lacing cleats. Dropping a stack of law reviews like game balls. Jogging on a treadmill, reading a 600-page PDF.
SUPER: “THE GREATEST ROAST OF ALL TIME: CHRISTOPHER CALDWELL”
Cue pyro. Cue tasteful mahogany podium, Federalist-eagle backdrop.

HOST MONOLOGUE (Kevin-Hart energy, crowd hot)
HOST: “Give it up for Christopher Caldwell! The Tom Brady of right-wing eggheads. Not the fastest, not the flashiest, but somehow always in the big game… of getting published by people who hate him.”
HOST: “Chris has more fellowships than Brady has protein shakes. He doesn’t take a knee—he takes a footnote.”
HOST: “They say liberals respect him. That’s like being the most ripped guy at a chess tournament: congratulations… here is your tote bag.”
HOST: “His book ‘The Age of Entitlement’ says civil rights created a second constitution. Bold claim. My man looked at equality and said, ‘Illegal formation!’”
HOST: “He’s so old-school he still abuses semicolons. Chris, a semicolon isn’t a defensive coordinator.”
HOST: “The dais tonight is stacked: podcasters who dissect him, comics who despise him, and a surprise guest who will ‘defend’ him like a cornerback with butterfingers.”

DAIS INTROS (quick jabs)
HOST: “From Know Your Enemy, Sam Adler-Bell—proof the left can be funny on purpose.”
HOST: “Also from KYE, Matt Sitman—he read Chris so many times he qualifies for a survivor’s pension.”
HOST: “Michelle Wolf—because if civil rights were a rival constitution, she’s the Solicitor General.”
HOST: “Hasan Minhaj—he brought slides, citations, and a cease-and-desist from three tech bros.”
HOST: “And our Roastmaster, Jeff Ross—he’s like appellate review for your feelings.”

ROASTER 1: SAM ADLER-BELL
SAM: “Christopher, we gave your book a full episode. That’s respect. Also a cry for help.”
SAM: “You argue civil rights birthed a parallel constitution. Bro, that’s not a coup; that’s a software patch. The Republic didn’t reboot—some bigots did.”
SAM: “Reading you is like watching game tape before a rivalry match: repetitive, infuriating, essential. Our listeners kept asking, ‘Are we supposed to hate him, or admire him?’ And we said, ‘Yes.’”
SAM: “You write like a Supreme Court concurrence that quit gluten. It’s lean, mean, and still somehow bloated.”
SAM: “The left respects you because you don’t shout. You whisper scary things in indoor voices. You’re the ASMR of reaction.”
SAM: “Final thought: if there really are two constitutions, I hope the other one has a sense of humor. Tonight, you’re stuck with ours.”

ROASTER 2: MATT SITMAN
MATT: “I used to be conservative, Christopher, so I speak your native dialect: mournful Latin with a cigar aftertaste.”
MATT: “Your thesis: civil rights = regime change. My thesis: get outside. Touch grass. Say hi to a union.”
MATT: “You do the thing where you narrate the ’60s like a natural disaster: ‘In 1964, a Category 5 Equality made landfall—board up the lunch counters!’”
MATT: “But here’s your magic trick: you’re our most formidable opponent because you actually read the things you disagree with. On the right, that’s like PEDs.”
MATT: “We dunk on you because we love you. Like family. Like a family we would also try to regulate.”

PRE-TAPE: “CALDWELL’S TOP 10 MOST UPTIGHT SENTENCES”
ANNOUNCER (SportsCenter cadence):
10) “The regime did not change so much as it began changing endlessly.”
9) “Liberty, once procedural, became prophylactic.” (Crowd groans, laughs.)
8) “The people gained rights the way bureaucracies gain new office space.”
Smash-cut graphics, Madden telestrator circling clauses.
ANNOUNCER: “And at No. 1—Caldwell’s Hail Mary: ‘After 1964, America was constitutionalized against its constitution.’”
Cut to Caldwell stone-faced, then cracking a smile.

DESK BIT: “RULES REVIEW” (host + fake referee in tweed)
REF: “Upon further review, the assertion of a shadow constitution is… funny as hell.”
HOST: “Ruling on the field stands: roast continues.”

ROASTER 3: MICHELLE WOLF
MICHELLE: “Chris, you’re the only radical right-winger liberals will read in public. You’re like the strip club Mormons ‘recommend.’ Nobody’s proud; everybody’s curious.”
MICHELLE: “Your prose is elegant. Your arguments are a haunted house. I walked through, screamed twice, and still tipped the tour guide.”
MICHELLE: “Saying civil rights toppled the old regime is like saying bike lanes toppled the Pentagon. Relax—nobody died; some people just got to sit down.”
MICHELLE: “I do admire your consistency. You show up in a suit, you use words like ‘prophylactic,’ and you don’t get canceled—you get peer-reviewed.”
MICHELLE: “Final note: if there are two constitutions, which one tells men to stop tweeting after midnight? Asking for about 70 senators.”

SURPRISE GUEST (Ben-Affleck-style defender): “THE GUY WHO LOVES HIM TOO MUCH”
SURPRISE GUEST: “Hey! Leave Caldwell alone! He’s a GENIUS. He’s BRAVE. He’s—”
HOST: “Sir, do you… know him?”
SURPRISE GUEST: “No. But I once read a substack about him. And I nodded so hard my neck still clicks.”
SURPRISE GUEST: “He’s the Tom Brady of readable reactionaries! You respect him!”
HOST: “Thank you, Boston Guy With a Library Card.” (Escort him off to chants of “Let him cook!”)

ROASTER 4: HASAN MINHAJ
HASAN: “Chris says civil rights created a rival constitution. My uncle says WhatsApp created a rival reality. Both uncles are intense.”
HASAN: “Look, you write like you’re explaining to a jury why vibes are illegal.”
HASAN: “You think 1964 was the two-minute warning for America. Meanwhile, most Americans think 1964 was, like, The Beatles and Pepsi.”
HASAN: “Here’s the real flex: the left invites you on podcasts. That’s our victory lap. If we’re confident enough to let you cook, we’re winning.”
HASAN: “But earnest tip: if your argument needs the phrase ‘since the Sixties’ every paragraph, maybe the problem is you miss the ’50s.”

ROASTMASTER: JEFF ROSS
ROSS: “Chris, you’re a radical conservative who writes complete sentences. That’s cheating.”
ROSS: “The left treats you like a rare bird. They tag you, track you, and occasionally feed you clout pellets.”
ROSS: “Your footnotes are longer than Bert Kreischer’s detox.”
ROSS: “You say civil rights made a new constitution. Cool. Does it have Wi-Fi? Can it stop Florida from banning math?”
ROSS: “I kid because I care. You’re sharp. You’re dangerous. Mostly to brunch.”

CUTAWAYS / RUNNING GAGS
• “Think-Tank Intern Cam”: every time someone says “regime,” an intern chugs LaCroix.
• “Flag on the Play”: whenever a joke uses ‘prophylactic’ as a noun, shrill whistle, penalty for pretension.
• “Two Constitutions Counter”: on-screen odometer ticks upward; audience cheers when it hits 12.

CALDWELL REBUTTAL (Brady-style, composed, dry)
CALDWELL: “Thank you. I’ve been told I’m the most respected right-winger by the left. This is like being the ‘favorite dentist among toddlers.’ You don’t love me; you tolerate me because I floss.”
CALDWELL: “A note to Sam and Matt: if my book put you to sleep, that’s still a form of persuasion.”
CALDWELL: “Michelle, if civil rights didn’t topple the old regime, they certainly annexed its attention span.”
CALDWELL: “Hasan, yes, I miss the ’50s—specifically the price of rent and the quality of neckties.”
CALDWELL: “Jeff, thank you for calling my sentences complete. In this culture, that’s practically sedition.”
CALDWELL: “Here’s my actual view: America didn’t get a second constitution; it got a permanent argument. I appear in it as the guy who refuses to move the goalposts. You appear as the people who keep inventing football.”
CALDWELL: “I’m honored, I’m humbled, and I’m deeply suspicious of all of you. Good night.”

HOST CLOSE
HOST: “Give it up for Christopher Caldwell—two constitutions, zero chill, and somehow… one hell of a good sport.”
HOST: “Remember: disagree with people worth disagreeing with. It’s more fun—and it makes better TV.”

STINGER (post-credits)
ON-SCREEN: “CALDWELL: THE AFTERSHOW”
HOST (to Caldwell, off-mic): “Be honest. You gonna write about this?”
CALDWELL: “Only in the endnotes.”
Fade out.

Posted in Christopher Caldwell | Comments Off on The Netflix Christopher Caldwell Roast

The Christopher Caldwell Comedy Central Roast

ChatGPT: (Live from a library that smells like cigar smoke and constitutional law textbooks)

Host (Jon Stewart–style):
“Tonight we roast Christopher Caldwell: the only man who can get both The New York Times and a Federalist Society intern to say, ‘Wow, this guy makes me uncomfortable.’”

Matt Sitman (Know Your Enemy):
“Chris, I’ve read your book twice. Not because I wanted to—because you write like a Supreme Court dissent that took Ambien. The Age of Entitlement? Bro, it read like The Age of Benadryl.”

Sam Adler-Bell (Know Your Enemy):
“Caldwell is the only conservative we invite on our lefty podcast. Why? Because he uses words longer than four syllables. We may hate his ideas, but at least we don’t need Urban Dictionary to follow them.”

Michelle Wolf:
“Chris, your book argues civil rights basically overthrew the Constitution. Dude, calm down—it’s not Game of Thrones. Nobody stormed the capital with dragons… well, until January 6th.”

Hasan Minhaj:
“You’re the kind of conservative liberals respect… which is like being the sexiest guy at a chess tournament. Sure, you won, but the prize is still a handshake and a tote bag.”

Jeff Ross (Roastmaster General):
“Chris, you’re a ‘radical right-wing intellectual.’ That’s like being the world’s tallest leprechaun. You scare liberals because you write complete sentences. You scare conservatives because you don’t end them with exclamation points.”

Christopher Caldwell (rebuttal):
“Thank you, thank you. This is the first time I’ve been insulted in a way that required a bibliography. I’ll take it.”

Closer (Host):
“So here’s to Christopher Caldwell: proof that even in today’s America, you can be radically right-wing, totally out of step with history, and still get a respectful podcast episode… just as long as you never tweet.”

Posted in Christopher Caldwell | Comments Off on The Christopher Caldwell Comedy Central Roast

The New York Times Newsroom After Donald J. Trump Won The 2016 Election

ChatGPT:NYT Newsroom — Election Night 2016

Here’s a vivid, grounded snapshot of what the New York Times newsroom likely felt like late on Election Night, November 8, 2016, as Trump’s victory became undeniable. This blends real recollections and atmosphere into a compelling, realistic scene.


Scene: NYT Newsroom — Election Night, November 8, 2016

It’s well past midnight. The newsroom is a dim whirl of flickering screens, red-alert story drafts, and exhausted editors. Reporters and editors huddle around television monitors showing the last key swing states flipping in Trump’s favor.

A veteran editor recalls:

“For most of the night, we were tearing up one historic front page and slapping together another,” — that sense of journalistic urgency mixing disbelief with adrenaline. (vanityfair.com)

In one corner, a junior producer quietly murmurs, “Nope, we’re not doing this… again,” as she rewrites the same story with trembling hands. Nearby, another producer buries her face in her hands.

Dean Baquet, then executive editor, is described as feeling exhilarated—not politically, but because the newsroom is covering a story of monumental, chaotic historic weight. (vanityfair.com) But not everyone sees it that way.

An assistant editor, still in shock, later told a reporter: young staff—especially women and journalists of color—were openly devastated. Sad faces everywhere, as though the newsroom’s mission and beliefs had been blindsided. (vanityfair.com)


Interior Moments

  • Senior editor slaps the desk, whispering: “How is this happening? We had every projection saying Clinton wins.”
  • A reporter struggles to update a live blog, voice unsteady: “I can’t believe we’re pivoting again. This is uncharted territory.”
  • In a bleary hallway, two editors hug, one crying quietly—tears not just of loss, but exhaustion at the unraveling of expectations.

Meanwhile, the interactive “election needle” — NYT’s polling tracker — snaps wildly from orange-blue to red, then back again, before settling firmly on Trump. A staffer groans: “There goes the needle… and our confidence.” (vanityfair.com)


Atmosphere and Aftermath

  • The air is thick with a dialogue that understood: this was not just politics—it was institutional upheaval.
  • The newsroom’s generational divide deepened—not just politically, but emotionally. Some saw a story to be told, others saw their worldview crumbling. (axios.com)
  • Graphic designers scramble to create a front-page cover for “Trump Triumphs,” while downstairs, junior staff sit stunned, fingers hovering above keyboards, unsure they can keep going.

By dawn, the newsroom has a new energy—some from renewed sense of purpose, others weary resignation. But nothing is the same. The myth of predictability, of stability, has shattered.

That night wasn’t just about switching headlines—it was a rupture. A newsroom forced to confront that their world, their norms, and the next morning’s paper—none of it would come easily.

Posted in Journalism | Comments Off on The New York Times Newsroom After Donald J. Trump Won The 2016 Election