Biggest Winners Clash

[T-RO]

Stats are numbers. Their meaning is arbitrary unless you delve into the facts behind them.

Simply put, last year this team had one of the easiest schedules in the league. This year not so much. That doesn't take away their accomplishment, because you have to play the schedule. But to post a 17-6 record to brag about doesn't take in that fact of ease of schedule.

Miami had an undefeated season once. Yet they are considered to have had the third easiest schedule in the history of the NFL. Does that make them the best? I don't believe so.

Dan Marino and Tony Romo neither won Super Bowls. How do they figure in the history of the NFL?

This stat reminds me of off-season football when they tested people for their foot speed. They classified the groups. The slowest were called the turtles. I recall the coaches put me in that group because they didn't pay much attention since I was not a stud player. I lapped the guys several times because I was much faster, and should have been in the top group.. So I was the fastest in the turtle. Comparatively speaking I may have been a bit above middle of the pack of fastest guys there.

So should I brag about my "first place?" Statistically I smoked those guys.

See my point. I suspect not.

One last point. When was the last Super Bowl win for this team? 1995.

So we are twenty one years away from a championship. Most, if not all of the factual bragging rights I know of about this sport is championships.

Champions don't argue any stat but that stat. All the rest rely on statistical fallacy to support flagging egos about teams that are not champions.

I find it interesting--if perhaps bizarre-that you want to refer to wins and losses as "stats" and then try to frame wins and losses as almost meaningless stats.

Stats are numbers within a game. A win and a loss--in contrast--is the outcome...the final verdict. You seem eager to conflate stats and outcomes, all to defend a feeble cause of hateful banner waiving.

An average team wins 1 title every 32 years. That is average by scientific, mathematically irrefutable terms. Winning a Super Bowl is ridiculously hard.

We fans might feel entitled to win titles more than 3 times per century but that speaks more to our inflated expectations than to the reality of the odds.

Dallas has it's work cut out to go from a good team to a championship team. I suspect we won't get there this year, but could seriously threaten to do so next season.

I'm grateful to have a team that is well above average and may be poised to do even greater things.

 

[TwoDeep3]

I find it interesting--if perhaps bizarre-that you want to refer to wins and losses as "stats" and then try to frame wins and losses as almost meaningless stats.

Stats are numbers within a game. A win and a loss--in contrast--is the outcome...the final verdict. You seem eager to conflate stats and outcomes, all to defend a feeble cause of hateful banner waiving.

An average team wins 1 title every 32 years. That is average by scientific, mathematically irrefutable terms. Winning a Super Bowl is ridiculously hard.

We fans might feel entitled to win titles more than 3 times per century but that speaks more to our inflated expectations than to the reality of the odds.

Dallas has it's work cut out to go from a good team to a championship team. I suspect we won't get there this year, but could seriously threaten to do so next season.

I'm grateful to have a team that is well above average and may be poised to do even greater things.

The comparison of wins/loses in this context was to elevate the team in regard to all the other teams that are not the Pats. Or to coattail the Pats.

Simply an exercise in elevating the team for ego purposes.

Hey, that's fine. But after so many years and not being in the NFC Championship game, it makes these threads a bit pointless. Because this is done with players (Romo) and this team, over and over in place of actually accomplishments.

Tom Landry said, "Stay close to the top. Get to the NFC Championship game. Then pop through to the Super Bowl every few years.

By the way, wins/losses are stats.

 

[T-RO]

Tom Landry said, "Stay close to the top. Get to the NFC Championship game. Then pop through to the Super Bowl every few years.

That's an admirable goal for a coach. But 32 teams all think and say the same thing.

By the way, wins/losses are stats.

They are numbers so in one sense you are correct. But people in front offices, the players, the vast majority of fans view Wins and Losses as meaningful outcomes...as verdicts. Why even watch football otherwise?

Only someone eager to dismiss the facts....hide the facts, disparage the facts..would characterize them as you have here.

Our Dallas Cowboys have been VERY GOOD the past two years at winning football games.

There was a lot to criticize Jones for in letting Jimmy go and in salary cap and personnel mis-management...and that lasted two decades. But clearly there have been changes in philosophy and approach.

We have a bit further to go to improve the defense so that our winning odds rise come playoff times. I suspect the team will succeed in addressing that as they've got a ton of young, improving players and are loaded in the draft because of crafty decision-making.

 

[TwoDeep3]

That's an admirable goal for a coach. But 32 teams all think and say the same thing.

They are numbers so in one sense you are correct. But people in front offices, the players, the vast majority of fans view Wins and Losses as meaningful outcomes...as verdicts. Why even watch football otherwise?

Only someone eager to dismiss the facts....hide the facts, disparage the facts..would characterize them as you have here.

Our Dallas Cowboys have been VERY GOOD the past two years at winning football games.

We have a bit further to go to improve the defense so that our winning odds rise come playoff times. I suspect the team will succeed in addressing that as they've got a ton of young, improving players and are loaded in the draft because of crafty decision-making.

I enjoy the victories. I suffer the losses.

I believe the stats in the original post has a flaw and is misleading. I stated such.

Sorry if you feel like I wanted to rain on everyone's parade. But I have been fairly consistent with my disdain for stats.

“There are three types of lies -- lies, damn lies, and statistics.”
― Benjamin Disraeli

I don't believe Disreali truly said this. But it sums up my feelings since stats, like documentaries, tend to come to the conclusion which mirrors the creator's agenda.

 

[T-RO]

I enjoy the victories. I suffer the losses.

I believe the stats in the original post has a flaw and is misleading. I stated such.

Sorry if you feel like I wanted to rain on everyone's parade. But I have been fairly consistent with my disdain for stats.

“There are three types of lies -- lies, damn lies, and statistics.”
― Benjamin Disraeli

In your thinking... winning football games is nothing but a stack of lies. We'll... I don't suppose anything will persuade you. You'd probably view a Super Bowl title as "The Great Deception"

Oye.

 

[TwoDeep3]

In your thinking... winning football games is nothing but a stack of lies. We'll... I don't suppose anything will persuade you. You'd probably view a Super Bowl title as "The Great Deception"

Oye.

No, that is your interpretation. I said nothing of the kind. You are now being obtuse with your comments. I merely stated the OP's foundation had flaws. I then pointed them out when you challenged that idea. Now you have gone down a rabbit hole of absurdity. You have now moved to the point where you just want to argue.

I posted this in another thread, but will post it here. Yesterday, the Cowboys played their 886th game counting regular season and post season. Not pre-season. Of those almost 900 games, I have seen well over 750 of them. and I feel like it could be over 800. I missed their first Super Bowl winning year because I was in Vietnam. Sporadic games during their first five years when my father could not get the tickets his company bought.

My point is, I've been one since day one. Don't try to characterize me because you think you know me. I just believe there is some blue sky in that record, and there is more to it than just 17-6.

 

[T-RO]

I posted this in another thread, but will post it here. Yesterday, the Cowboys played their 886th game counting regular season and post season. Not pre-season. Of those almost 900 games, I have seen well over 750 of them. and I feel like it could be over 800. I missed their first Super Bowl winning year because I was in Vietnam. Sporadic games during their first five years when my father could not get the tickets his company bought.

You've watched a lot of football games and served in Vietnam...ergo your opinions are right? So convincing!

Here are lifetime winning percentages:
Jimmy Johnson, 80-64..... . .556
Jason Garrett, 62-49...... .559

Now...do I think Jason is in the same league as JJ? Not even close. Garrett has such a limited role with the Cowboys I sometimes wonder what he does.

The reality is that the team has failed to acquire and develop enough good defensive players, but the talent on the roster is clearly on the rise over the past 3-4 years. The organization is operated w/vastly more intelligence in recent years.

Johnson had the liberty of coaching Dan Marino, but he never won titles in Miami. That's because it's hard. Really hard...everything must come together.

 

[TwoDeep3]

You've watched a lot of football games and served in Vietnam...ergo your opinions are right? So convincing!

Here are lifetime winning percentages:
Jimmy Johnson, 80-64..... . .556
Jason Garrett, 62-49...... .559

Now...do I think Jason is in the same league as JJ? Not even close. Garrett has such a limited role with the Cowboys I sometimes wonder what he does.

The reality is that the team has failed to acquire and develop enough good defensive players, but the talent on the roster is clearly on the rise over the past 3-4 years. The organization is operated w/vastly more intelligence in recent years.

Johnson had the liberty of coaching Dan Marino, but he never won titles in Miami. That's because it's hard. Really hard...everything must come together.

Find another sandbox to play in. We're done.

 

[CowboyRoy]

I find it interesting--if perhaps bizarre-that you want to refer to wins and losses as "stats" and then try to frame wins and losses as almost meaningless stats.

Stats are numbers within a game. A win and a loss--in contrast--is the outcome...the final verdict. You seem eager to conflate stats and outcomes, all to defend a feeble cause of hateful banner waiving.

An average team wins 1 title every 32 years. That is average by scientific, mathematically irrefutable terms. Winning a Super Bowl is ridiculously hard.

We fans might feel entitled to win titles more than 3 times per century but that speaks more to our inflated expectations than to the reality of the odds.

Dallas has it's work cut out to go from a good team to a championship team. I suspect we won't get there this year, but could seriously threaten to do so next season.

I'm grateful to have a team that is well above average and may be poised to do even greater things.

Actually your are a beaten down cowboys fan that has lost his way. And now your just happy to have a nice season here and there. It’s enough to wave your pom poms and then go....”oh well, better luck next year”!!!

 

[CowboyRoy]

That's an admirable goal for a coach. But 32 teams all think and say the same thing.

They are numbers so in one sense you are correct. But people in front offices, the players, the vast majority of fans view Wins and Losses as meaningful outcomes...as verdicts. Why even watch football otherwise?

Only someone eager to dismiss the facts....hide the facts, disparage the facts..would characterize them as you have here.

Our Dallas Cowboys have been VERY GOOD the past two years at winning football games.

There was a lot to criticize Jones for in letting Jimmy go and in salary cap and personnel mis-management...and that lasted two decades. But clearly there have been changes in philosophy and approach.

We have a bit further to go to improve the defense so that our winning odds rise come playoff times. I suspect the team will succeed in addressing that as they've got a ton of young, improving players and are loaded in the draft because of crafty decision-making.

You call 4-3 very good?. That’s pathetic

 

[CowboyRoy]

In your thinking... winning football games is nothing but a stack of lies. We'll... I don't suppose anything will persuade you. You'd probably view a Super Bowl title as "The Great Deception"

Oye.

Winning football games is meaningless unless it amounts to winning playoff games. Surely you can understand that simple point. But then again that doesn’t suit your agenda now does it?

 

[CowboyRoy]

You've watched a lot of football games and served in Vietnam...ergo your opinions are right? So convincing!

Here are lifetime winning percentages:
Jimmy Johnson, 80-64..... . .556
Jason Garrett, 62-49...... .559

Now...do I think Jason is in the same league as JJ? Not even close. Garrett has such a limited role with the Cowboys I sometimes wonder what he does.

The reality is that the team has failed to acquire and develop enough good defensive players, but the talent on the roster is clearly on the rise over the past 3-4 years. The organization is operated w/vastly more intelligence in recent years.

Johnson had the liberty of coaching Dan Marino, but he never won titles in Miami. That's because it's hard. Really hard...everything must come together.

Find another sandbox to play in. We're done.

He’s comparing jimmy to garret by posting regular season records. He doesn’t get it obviously.

 

[T-RO]

He’s comparing jimmy to garret by posting regular season records. He doesn’t get it obviously.

Sorry if I've offended your religion by stating two coach's win-loss records.

 

[remdak]

....I was told there would be no math.....

 

[CheapietheCheapskate]

Lol a season and a half??

Here is a stat: 2 playoff winning in TWENTY ONE years!

This franchise SUCKS!

 

[T-RO]

You call 4-3 very good?. That’s pathetic

Where did I say 4-3 was "very good"? (hint: nowhere)

Our combined record for 2016 and 2017 certainly classifies as very good.

 

[T-RO]

Lol a season and a half??

Here is a stat: 2 playoff winning in TWENTY ONE years!

This franchise SUCKS!

It did suck for about 15 years... If you can't see the improvement in talent lately...that's a lack of perception.

 

[big dog cowboy]

LOL..........go back one more year and what does that look like? Talk about convenient timeline to prove a laughable point.

What's so laughable? Dates back to the arrival of Dak and Zeke. It clearly makes the beginning of a new era in Dallas.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Sorry if I've offended your religion by stating two coach's win-loss records.

Winning regular season games is meaningless unless it leads to playoff success and championships. Why you even bother talking about the regular season is a mystery. You seem thoroughly impressed. Another mystery. Agenda hunting that's all this is. You are trying to find some small way to hail Garrett by using selective, narrow statistics.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Where did I say 4-3 was "very good"? (hint: nowhere)

Our combined record for 2016 and 2017 certainly classifies as very good.

The ONLY thing impressive is last year. 4-3 is NOT impressive. At least not to me. And even last year where did that get us? A loss in our first playoff game at home. Meaningless. But by all means champion it.