I would literally take any defense from 2006-2009 over any defense from 2016-20019. I can’t think of any one thing Dak’s defenses do better than the 2006-2009 defenses did. They don’t pressure the QB better. they don’t force take aways better, they don’t create more short fields, they don’t score as often.
Nope. That's why I laugh when the romosexuals claim we had no talent etc etc.
And that proves what? You think anyone who joins the board today hasn’t been a fan?
The 2016 defense was pretty much on par with the 2014 defense. One forced one 3 & outs and the other forced more turnovers but they were about the same. They both were protected by the run game and they both gave up 1.89 points per drive and the both got torched in the playoffs by an injured GB team.
Bang bang bang
They gave up entirely too many points? On a per drive basis they gave up fewer points. They were protected less. But you still have me a stat. What didn’t they do that Dak’s defense apparently doesn’t? Coming up big when it matters certainly isn’t it. I’ve already stated Romo’s early defenses got more pressure on the QB, they created more take aways, set up more short fields, scored way more TDs than Dak’s defenses.
Yes they did but they were hung out to dry by our top 10 offense that couldn’t hardly do jack and turned the ball over multiple times. The defense just didn’t get blitzed right out of the gate like the 2016 defense did against GB. This is why I feel you just have your nose in a stat sheet but don’t recall a lot of details in these games.
Revisionist history at it’s finest ever. Romo goes in that booth and people forget what he was on that field smh.
