Gosselin: Injuries are no excuse for another mediocre Dallas Cowboys season

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by Alexander, Jan 8, 2014.

  1. jterrell

    jterrell Penguinite

    23,109 Messages
    3,767 Likes Received
    ROFL. I can never tell if this is schtick or just poor logic.

    Did you bother to even look at the starter list for that article?
    Nate Livings. James Hanna, Will Allen.
    The simply truth is no one knew how Marinelli was employing our DL.
    It was guesses or trial moves.
    Initially most thought Ratliff was a 3T and Crawford was a SDE.
    Then nope, Ratliff is a 1T. Hatcher a 3T with Ben Bass RIGHT on his heels.

    Allen was beaten out by Wilcox then released.
    Hanna played a small portion of plays to the point we went out and got a full back.

    Only a complete moron thinks a 2nd year 3rd round pick who was a rotational player as a rookie has little to no value.
    You know who else wasn't on that list? Orlando Scandrick.
    Again the 22 starter nonsense is too limited to scope to mean much of anything.

    Did Livings being out hurt us? Did that hurt us more than Crawford?
    What about Will Allen? IF he had torn up a knee that's just as bad as Crawford right?

    The metric is stupid. STUPID. POINTLESS towards anything.

    BUT THE MOST HILARIOUS THING OF ALL...Quoting an article that claims to negate Crawford AFTER HE WAS INJURED.
    That article was July 25th... he was injured on the 22nd and ruled out for the season by the 23rd.
  2. Coy

    Coy Well-Known Member

    2,668 Messages
    1,206 Likes Received

    LOL, so saying how many teams lost starters due to injury is stupid and pointless, OK, it might not be perfect but it gives you a real good idea of what teams were hurt the most by injuries, if you can´t see that then don´t. And Crawford in your eyes would have taken the spot of Ware, Hatcher or Spencer?? haha now that´s funny.
    You just don´t get it, and missed the whole point of the article, because you keep on arguing over the same thing, did livings start week 1? Did Crawford start week 1? If your answer is NO then they ARE NOT CONSIDERED FOR THE SOLE PUPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE, Thank you.
    By the way here are a couple of links before July 25th (one on July 17th) in case you want to read them.



    Basically everyone in the world who follows Cowboys football expected to have those 4 as starters on the dline pre or post injury to Crawford, well except you of course.

    End of discussion.
  3. Screw The Hall

    Screw The Hall Well-Known Member

    2,501 Messages
    934 Likes Received
    Anyone who can watch that Green Bay game and then sit across from me with a straight face and tell me Jason Garrett has a clue what he is doing probably has some land I need to buy in the everglades.
    tantrix1969 and stasheroo like this.
  4. jterrell

    jterrell Penguinite

    23,109 Messages
    3,767 Likes Received
    good lord you are slow.
    tyrone crawford could not have started week 1 because he was injured for the season in july.

    and again those projected starter lists are terrible.
    the bottom has matt johnson and phil costa.
    it has dewayne harris as WR3.
    all the lists prove is that the lists are useless.
    which again proves the point... these projections are meaningless and thus a meaningless way to discuss injuries.
    they are wild arsed guesses.
    no one had seen kiffen and marinelli deploy these guys.

    it is you are clearly not able to logically follow that some fake "projected" starter missing games games is completely different and in no way equivalent to a true Pro Bowl caliber player that defines a team missing time.
    the method here does just that.

    and yes there was plenty of discussion about tyrone crawford possibly starting over hatcher.. or starting at SDE if we did not re-sign spencer.
    he was the young DL everyone wanted us to so badly draft except he had a year's experience.
    and for people who actually watch cowboys games they'd notice a very heavy rotation on the dl.
    a guy like crawford was going to play major snaps by anyone with a brain's estimation.

    would seattle not have been hurt with michael bennett being out all year?
    you know their sack leader who doesnt start for them?
    what about if bennett and avril had been out?
    they could have missed 32 and for this metricthey mean nothing....

    the flaw isnt hard to identify.
    Vintage likes this.
  5. Coy

    Coy Well-Known Member

    2,668 Messages
    1,206 Likes Received
    Hahahaha, my god you just don't get it, you already started with insults and I'd rather not take that route, so let's leave it here, a very intelligant man once told me, you can change dumb by teaching, you can change ugly with plastic surgery but you can't ever ever ever change stubbornness.
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2014
    Risen Star likes this.
  6. Redball Express

    Redball Express All Aboard!!!

    5,342 Messages
    1,902 Likes Received

    I take an overall slant that our players just don't want it bad enough.

    This has been going on since the Parcells era and more.

    We populate our team with too many lower rung players that are not from top programs so they just flat line in games with pressure.

    We don't beat teams with winning records and we don't beat teams with something on the line.

    Which means that the composition of the team is just poor.

    The character of the team is poor.

    The coaching of the team is poor.

    The ownership for all its riches..is poor.

    Now what?
  7. jterrell

    jterrell Penguinite

    23,109 Messages
    3,767 Likes Received
    get what? that you are yet to make a salient point in the thread? that you misspelled intelligent in a sentence about being dumb? that you ignored every fact in the thread to post drivel?

    the metric is bad. there is a ton of evidence as to why the metric is bad.

    whether you think injuries should be discounted completely or not it is clear using "expected" starters as the totality for measuring injuries is stupid.

    why stupid? because there are non-starters who are REALLY valuable.
    there are starters who are marginally valuable.
    there are guys who are projected to start yet lose jobs and there are guys who would have made pro bowls had they simply been healthy and on the field.
    only a complete donkey weighs all starters the same value to their teams.
  8. Coy

    Coy Well-Known Member

    2,668 Messages
    1,206 Likes Received
    Bet you'd love to have that donkey's salary.

Share This Page