Are The Cowboys Super Bowl Contenders?

[GimmeTheBall!]

Or are we pretenders? I think this is a pretty good team, with some holes to fill still. I honestly can't see us making a run at the Super Bowl trophy. I can see us making the playoffs and winning a playoff game, but that's about it. We seem to lack a certain necessary something I can't put my finger on. Leadership perhaps? Anyway, you never know how the ball will bounce so we'll have to wait & see. Winning builds confidence and that will be key for this year's team. A great draft is needed and Romo needs to continue to grow. In today's NFL, of course, anything can happen. Are we ready to take on the Colts and Patriots of this league THIS year? Thoughts?

If the weak sisters New Orleans Saints can become Super Bowl contenders last year, I certainly think the Cowboys can take that step this year.
If the wheels had not come off of the Boys defense last year, we would have gone deep into the playoffs.

Yes, the Cowboys are SB contenders.
The Bears, like the Seattle Seasucks last year, will falter badly in the regular season this coming year and the Saints will become their old selves again.

Look for the Cowboys and Bears to battle it out in the NFC championship and the Cowboys to match up against the Patriots in the Super Bowl.

star: in 2007)

 

[firehawk350]

Clements and Newman are debatable. Henry is the 2nd corner, not Glenn.

But if you would be so kind, why are Clements, Harris, and the unnamed 3rd corner better than the 'boys trio?

Clements is better. 16 passes defensed, 3 INTs and 1 TD. Newman; 11 passes defensed, 1 INT and 0 TDs. So in what way is Newman better?
Harris is the number three corner, so I was comparing #3 to #3. But Harris IS better then Henry BTW, but Spencer is their #2. Henry may be better (I'm not sure, I didn't watch enough 9ers games to know) then Spencer but the difference between Glenn and Harris more then makes up for it.

 

[Stash]

Okay, sorry, I didn't know Colombo signed a two year, I thought it was one. And please, elaborate, why is Cooley worse then Witten? San Fran's top three CBs (I didn't say secondary) ARE better then yours. Nate Clements > Newman and Walt Harris is WAY better then Glenn.

Now I see your problem, it's basic math:

You claim that San Fran's 3 corners are better than Dallas' and then mention 2?!?!?

And you claim that Cooley (who couldn't block me) is better than Pro Bowler Jason Witten when numbers say otherwise?

The fact is that you obviously know next to nothing about the subject you're trying to talk about.

Get your facts straight before you try to chime in next time.

:skins:

 

[burmafrd]

The reason Wittens td production went down is that we used MB3 as the guy down on the goal line.

 

[burmafrd]

Clements stats look better. Newman real stats - based on KC Joyners matrix and accepted by intelligent people outside of skin fans- is much better because Newman was not thrown at nearly as much as clement was. Newman allowed fewer catches, fewer tds, a lower completion rate. In every way that matters outside of BSPN highlights Newman is a much better CB.

 

[firehawk350]

Career 252 2838 11.3 42 14 Witten
Career 314 3609 11.5 59 24 Shockey
Career 165 1822 11.0 66 19 Cooley

Pretty much even at that look. Then you look closer
G C YD AV L TD FD
2004 WAS 16 37 314 8.5 31 6 23 Cooley
2005 WAS 16 71 774 10.9 32 7 44
2006 WAS 16 57 734 12.9 66 6 33


2002 NYG 15 74 894 12.1 30 2 49 Shockey
2003 NYG 9 48 535 11.1 46 2 29
2004 NYG 15 61 666 10.9 38 6 32
2005 NYG 15 65 891 13.7 59 7 46
2006 NYG 15 66 623 9.4 25 7 37


2003 DAL 15 35 347 9.9 36 1 18 Witten
2004 DAL 16 87 980 11.3 42 6 44
2005 DAL 16 66 757 11.5 34 6 40
2006 DAL 16 64 754 11.8 42 1 37


And you see how remarkably steady Wittens production has been over the last 3 years.

HA! Witten had a great 2nd year and hasn't even come close since. Bad first year, then a great second year. Then declined 3rd year and then again 4th.

Let's REALLY look at the comparison between Witten and Cooley. Bottom line, Cooley had a better 06 campaign, so I won't even go there.
Witten: 252 2838 11.4 42 14
Cooley: 165 1822 11.0 66 19

So Witten has 87 more catches, 1016 more yards, a .4 better YPC average. Cooley has a longer reception (66 yards) and 5 more TDs even though he played a season less.
Projecting an average season for him, he still comes up 200 yards and about 20 catches short of Witten. But he's up more then 12 TDs from Witten. I'll take the 12 TDs over the 200 yards any day of the week.

 

[firehawk350]

Now I see your problem, it's basic math:

You claim that San Fran's 3 corners are better than Dallas' and then mention 2?!?!?

And you claim that Cooley (who couldn't block me) is better than Pro Bowler Jason Witten when numbers say otherwise?

The fact is that you obviously know next to nothing about the subject you're trying to talk about.

Get your facts straight before you try to chime in next time.

:skins:

Reading clearly isn't your best subject, I explained why I only mentioned two.

 

[Hostile]

You aim to please me??? Wow, full service... Thanks

Okay, again, I ask, why do you think that? I mean, unless you know that for a fact (as in, you personally talked to every GM), tell me why.

Dude, it's okay to like the players on your team. I have no issue with that. But you claimed that a Pro Bowl TE in 2006 was the 3rd best TE, not in the entire 32 team league, or 16 team conference, in the 4 team division.

No friggin' way and I shouldn't have to explain it to you. You find me one source that ranks Cooley above him and I will be amazed. Again, I like Cooley.

Oh and I can't stand Shockey, but admit he's a talented idiot. So this isn't about my personal tastes like yours obviously is.

 

[firehawk350]

2003 DAL 15 35 347 9.9 36 1 18 Witten
2004 DAL 16 87 980 11.3 42 6 44
2005 DAL 16 66 757 11.5 34 6 40
2006 DAL 16 64 754 11.8 42 1 37


And you see how remarkably steady Wittens production has been over the last 3 years.

Actually, he got better after his first year and has been on a decline since then.

 

[Stash]

Reading clearly isn't your best subject, I explained why I only mentioned two.

Nice 'attempt' anyway.....

But you still look like a :mule:

 

[Hostile]

Actually, he got better after his first year and has been on a decline since then.

Uh, no he hasn't. In his 2nd year he was used more, but his production has not delined at all.

Simply amazing.

 

[burmafrd]

I tried to explain it to you- you are just too messed up to understand. With 3different QBs, and a very different set of circumstances - 2004 there were no real good WRs with Glenn injured and Key with a bad leg the second half of the season, not to mention Vinny as QB; 2005 Glenn was back and Key was there so the load was much less; 2006 With TO and GLenn and MB3 getting the call inside the 10. But through all that Witten was incredibly steady and reliable. Not to mention a MUCH BETTER BLOCKER then COOLEY or SHOCKEY. WItten is the complete TE that Cooley and SHockey are not.

 

[superpunk]

Jason Wittens Football Outsiders DVOA rankings for the past few years

2006: 3rd
2005: 2nd
2004: 3rd

Cooley's

2006: 9th
2005: 4th
2004: 18th

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php

Holy statistical evaluations, batman. He almost sniffed Witten's air in 2005, though. So that's something to hang your hat on.

 

[firehawk350]

Dude, it's okay to like the players on your team. I have no issue with that. But you claimed that a Pro Bowl TE in 2006 was the 3rd best TE, not in the entire 32 team league, or 16 team conference, in the 4 team division.

No friggin' way and I shouldn't have to explain it to you. You find me one source that ranks Cooley above him and I will be amazed. Again, I like Cooley.

Oh and I can't stand Shockey, but admit he's a talented idiot. So this isn't about my personal tastes like yours obviously is.

I hate Shockey, I think he's an idiot. I like Witten far more, but Shockey is an equal TE. I'm willing to concede that. Cooley is a better TE. I'll look into the ranking source for you.

 

[Stash]

HA! Witten had a great 2nd year and hasn't even come close since. Bad first year, then a great second year. Then declined 3rd year and then again 4th.

Let's REALLY look at the comparison between Witten and Cooley. Bottom line, Cooley had a better 06 campaign, so I won't even go there.
Witten: 252 2838 11.4 42 14
Cooley: 165 1822 11.0 66 19

So Witten has 87 more catches, 1016 more yards, a .4 better YPC average. Cooley has a longer reception (66 yards) and 5 more TDs even though he played a season less.
Projecting an average season for him, he still comes up 200 yards and about 20 catches short of Witten. But he's up more then 12 TDs from Witten. I'll take the 12 TDs over the 200 yards any day of the week.

Better backup the Commanders money truck for Marion Barber then, he had more "TD's" than both your overpaid backs combined.

I mean if that's your version of logic......

 

[Hostile]

I hate Shockey, I think he's an idiot. I like Witten far more, but Shockey is an equal TE. I'm willing to concede that. Cooley is a better TE. I'll look into the ranking source for you.

Talent wise Shockey is better. I can admit that.

Witten is a notch below and is a better blocker. Not part of a TE's stats BTW.

The best measure of a TE is in how many first downs they generate, because in obvious passing downs they can be receivers or blockers. Go back and look at those stats again and do the math.

I'm not saying it because he's a Cowboy. Jason Witten is one of the top 5 TEs in the NFL. Cooley isn't. I'm sorry, that isn't meant to offend. So if you are, oh well.

 

[firehawk350]

Jason Wittens Football Outsiders DVOA rankings for the past few years

2006: 3rd
2005: 2nd
2004: 3rd

Cooley's

2006: 9th
2005: 4th
2004: 18th

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/te.php

Holy statistical evaluations, batman.

Holy one-man's opinion, batman. As if KC Joyner is the end-all be-all of statiscal evaluation. In what way, in 05, was Witten better? He had less catches, yards and TDs.

 

[firehawk350]

Better backup the Commanders money truck for Marion Barber then, he had more "TD's" than both your overpaid backs combined.

I mean if that's your version of logic......

Haha, I didn't say that was my only measuring stick. I said I would take the 12 more TDs over the 200 extra yards.
Anyways, Portis had 7 TDs in the very few games he had played in.

 

[bbgun]

Then declined 3rd year and then again 4th.

Two words: Drew Bledsoe. Witten became relevant again when Romo was under center, although I would never refer to him as a "2006 Pro-Bowl TE." Injury replacements like him and Flo are not legitimate Pro-Bowlers.

 

[firehawk350]

I tried to explain it to you- you are just too messed up to understand. With 3different QBs, and a very different set of circumstances - 2004 there were no real good WRs with Glenn injured and Key with a bad leg the second half of the season, not to mention Vinny as QB; 2005 Glenn was back and Key was there so the load was much less; 2006 With TO and GLenn and MB3 getting the call inside the 10. But through all that Witten was incredibly steady and reliable. Not to mention a MUCH BETTER BLOCKER then COOLEY or SHOCKEY. WItten is the complete TE that Cooley and SHockey are not.

As for better blocker, the only thing I remember about Witten was that hideous hold on Daniels in the first Boys-Skins game. Cooley has been reliable in the run game and we don't keep him in in the pass game.
As for Cooley, he hasn't had the easiest road either. He was the only other target in 05 and was great then. And in 06 he had to deal with Mark Brunell (and his spent arm) and Jason Campbell coming in and learning. Still VERY productive.