The Cowboys Keep Making Changes. Why Aren't They Making Progress?

By Gabby Whitfield | Cowboys Analysis

There is a difference between making changes and making progress.

The Dallas Cowboys have certainly made changes.

They've traded for established veterans, invested in younger talent, reshaped portions of their roster, and committed considerable financial resources to players they believe can help them win.

On paper, the Cowboys look like an organization determined to move forward.

Five games into the 2026 season, however, they're 2–3. And for all the movement surrounding this franchise, the football itself looks remarkably familiar.

The offense can be explosive. The defense can be vulnerable. Individual players can deliver performances that make you believe something special is developing, only for the team to follow with another game full of missed opportunities and breakdowns.

Dallas isn't standing still in the personnel department.

It's standing still in the standings.

Cowboys Making Changes, but Where Is the Improvement?

The Cowboys making changes to their roster is nothing new. What's frustrating is how little those changes have improved the team's consistency.

Consider the work Dallas has done to reshape its roster.

The Cowboys acquired Rashan Gary to strengthen their pass rush. They brought in Broderick Jones to provide another option along the offensive line. They invested draft capital in Caleb Downs and Malachi Lawrence, two young defenders with the potential to become important pieces of the franchise's future.

Then, with the season already underway, Dallas traded for cornerback Joey Porter Jr., another attempt to address a defense that hasn't performed consistently enough.

Meanwhile, the organization has made substantial financial commitments on offense, including the franchise tag for George Pickens and a new contract for Javonte Williams.

None of these decisions should be judged solely by five games. Some of the younger players are still developing, and Porter has barely had time to settle into his new surroundings.

But collectively, these moves were supposed to help Dallas become a better football team.

That improvement has been difficult to see consistently.

The Numbers Tell Two Different Stories

Through five games, Dallas is averaging 27.6 points per contest. That's a productive offense by almost any reasonable standard.

Unfortunately, the Cowboys are allowing 27.2.

Think about that for a moment.

For all the offensive production, Dallas is barely outscoring its opponents on average. Every touchdown drive seems to carry the uncomfortable possibility that the defense will surrender one of its own.

Against Tampa Bay, the Cowboys lost 24–16 to a team that entered the game without a victory. The Buccaneers rushed for 241 yards, including a 72-yard run by Bucky Irving.

That isn't merely a bad afternoon for one defender.

It's a breakdown that raises questions about tackling, assignments, preparation, and whether the defensive personnel are functioning together as intended.

And when the offense compounded those problems with turnovers, the Cowboys found themselves in another familiar position: possessing enough talent to compete, but not enough consistency to win.

Individual Promise Is Not the Same as Team Progress

There are legitimate reasons for optimism.

George Pickens has demonstrated the ability to change a game. Javonte Williams has provided valuable production. Young defenders such as Caleb Downs and Malachi Lawrence offer hope that Dallas is developing a stronger foundation.

Those contributions matter. They shouldn't disappear simply because the team's record is disappointing.

But football isn't a collection of individual highlight reels.

A promising rookie cannot compensate for every missed tackle. A productive receiver cannot erase every turnover. And a major trade doesn't automatically repair a unit that struggles with communication and execution.

The question isn't whether Dallas has talented players.

Clearly, it does.

The question is why those players haven't consistently produced a better team.

At What Point Does This Become a Coaching Problem?

There is an uncomfortable question hanging over the Cowboys' first five games.

If Dallas has invested in better players, added experienced veterans, and brought in promising young talent, why does the team continue to struggle with so many of the same problems?

At what point do we stop looking exclusively at the players and start examining the people responsible for preparing them?

Coaching cannot eliminate every mistake. Even the best players miss tackles, drop passes, and make poor decisions.

But there is a difference between an occasional mistake and a recurring problem.

When a defense repeatedly struggles to stop the run, the questions cannot end with which linebacker missed a tackle or which defensive lineman lost his assignment. We also have to ask whether players understand their responsibilities, whether the scheme fits their strengths, and whether the coaching staff is making effective adjustments.

The same applies offensively.

If certain players are consistently struggling, why are they being placed in situations where those weaknesses can repeatedly hurt the team? Are coaches adapting their approach, or simply hoping that another week of practice will produce a different result?

Head coach Brian Schottenheimer and his staff have responsibilities that extend beyond assembling a game plan.

They must develop players, establish discipline, recognize weaknesses, and make difficult personnel decisions when necessary.

And perhaps most importantly, they must make the individual pieces work together.

That is what separates a collection of talented football players from a successful football team.

It would be unfair to suggest that every Cowboys failure is the result of poor coaching. Players are professionals, and execution remains their responsibility.

But it would be equally unfair to evaluate this team's disappointing performance without seriously examining the coaching.

Perhaps the talent has been overestimated. Perhaps the roster still has weaknesses management has failed to address. Or perhaps the coaching staff has not yet figured out how to get the most from the players it has.

More than one of those things can be true.

Even Good Coaches Need Answers

Christian Parker has inherited a difficult assignment, and five games into the season, it's clear he hasn't found all the answers.

That isn't an indictment of his ability as a coach. It's an acknowledgment of what we're watching every week.

The Cowboys' defense has struggled with tackling, run fits, communication, and consistency. Individual players have made mistakes, certainly, but when those mistakes repeatedly become collective breakdowns, the responsibility extends to the coaching staff.

Parker knows that. He doesn't need anyone in the stands to explain what a 72-yard run looks like on film.

And perhaps that's why the addition of Mike Pettine makes sense.

On October 12, Dallas hired Pettine as a senior defensive assistant. He brings extensive NFL coaching experience and an established relationship with Parker, having worked with him in Green Bay.

According to Schottenheimer, the possibility of bringing Pettine aboard had been discussed well before the season began. That matters. The hiring shouldn't automatically be interpreted as a loss of confidence in Parker or a desperate reaction to one disappointing game.

But the timing certainly gives the move significance.

The defense has struggled. The coaching staff recognizes that improvements are needed. And now another experienced voice is joining the effort to find solutions.

Pettine may help identify weaknesses, improve communication, simplify assignments, or offer a different perspective on how Dallas approaches opposing offenses.

Those are possibilities, not accomplishments we can credit him with before he's coached a game in Dallas.

There's no shame in a young coordinator benefiting from an experienced colleague.

But there's also no reason to pretend the defense is performing adequately simply because its coordinator is still learning his personnel.

The Cowboys hired Parker to build a defense capable of helping them win football games. He deserves the opportunity to make that happen, and Pettine may help him get there.

Opportunity and accountability aren't mutually exclusive. The defense is struggling, Parker is responsible for improving it, and the results need to change.

What Dallas's History Should Have Taught Us

The great Cowboys teams understood something that still matters today: talent becomes championship football only when it operates within a coherent system.

Tom Landry's teams were built around preparation, defined responsibilities, and a recognizable identity. The championship teams of the 1990s combined outstanding personnel with an approach that made their individual strengths work together.

Those teams weren't perfect. They made mistakes and lost games.

But you could generally recognize what they were trying to be.

Five games into 2026, Dallas is still searching for that kind of identity.

Is this an offense-first team capable of overwhelming opponents? A physical team built around controlling the line of scrimmage? A defense that can pressure quarterbacks and create turnovers?

There are glimpses of each possibility.

There hasn't been enough evidence of any one of them becoming dependable.

Spending Money Is Not the Same as Solving Problems

This is where the discussion must extend beyond the players and coaches.

Every significant contract and trade represents a decision about how the Cowboys will allocate limited resources.

Money committed to one player cannot always be redirected to another. Draft picks traded today are selections the organization won't have available tomorrow.

That doesn't mean Dallas should avoid aggressive moves. Sometimes acquiring proven talent is exactly what a team needs.

But those decisions must eventually produce results.

If the Cowboys are spending more, trading valuable draft capital, and continually adjusting their roster only to experience the same recurring weaknesses, it's reasonable to question whether the organization is identifying the right problems.

Or whether it's simply paying more to live with them.

The Difference Between Hope and Evidence

Five games do not define an entire season.

There is still time for the younger players to develop, the newcomers to settle in, and the coaching staff to find combinations that work.

The Cowboys have shown enough offensively to suggest they can win games. Their individual talent is not imaginary.

But improvement cannot remain something we expect to happen eventually.

At some point, it has to become visible in the standings, in defensive stops, in cleaner execution, and in the ability to finish games without repeatedly undermining their own efforts.

The front office is responsible for acquiring the talent. The players are responsible for executing. The coaches are responsible for making it all work together.

Five games into the season, the Cowboys have yet to demonstrate that those three responsibilities are producing a better football team.

Dallas doesn't need another reminder that change is possible. It needs proof that someone knows how to turn change into progress.

The Cowboys don't need to prove they're willing to make moves. They've already done that.

They need to prove those moves are taking them somewhere.