McLovin;2994103 said:
Absolutely none nor did I expect it to. But for a message board, which by its creation is about opinions, I don't care to make educated guesses.
Some think that the only reason this place exists is to praise something.
Like when the poster stated that Witten would have more catches if TO was here.... you retaliated with sarcastic - "We are doomed."
What is undeniable is that this team is struggling, the major points are opened to debate (Wade, Jerry, Garrett, etc). If you look at how the Denver game transpired, the running game was taken away and the passing game failed.
The ONLY move made last year was getting rid of TO. While what's done is done, many ridiculed posters for saying it was a dumb move in the big scheme of things. Those same people are by in large the ones who are now "waiting and seeing"
Some think that the only reason this place exists is to curse something.
Regardless, my conversation, which was a bit more extensive than your excerpt, had very little to do with bestowing praise. Here is that conversation in its entirety:
thechosen1n2;2993706 said:
We have lost the production of our two best receivers. POINT BLANK PERIOD.
Taking into account the offseason moves, this was a given before the season even began. Correction. Heck, that was true before training camp began. The only question was to what severity. Here was my response:
DallasEast;2993757 said:
There was going to be a loss of receiver production after Owens was waived. The franchise stated as such by saying that the offense would become more "Romo friendly" and it's greater emphasis on the running game. The real question is whether the new offensive strategy will be effective in the long run this season.
Where's the praise? Please point it out so I'll know as well.
Was what I said debatable? Did I even attempt to counter his earlier statement? OR did I reiterated the obvious, which was that even if the offense was clicking on all cylinders, observers should anticipate that receiving productivity would be lower based upon the team's
current offensive strategy.
Granted, the passing game was minimized due to poor execution. At this juncture,
I could have also stated it would not have been a certainty that, even with Owens on the field, that it would have been enough to counteract the
actual offensive miscues.
However, I didn't. I thought that perhaps the acknowledgment of how the passing offense performed as a whole during a predetermined Owens-less game would factor in. After all, if this passing offense is going to live or die as it is currently composed, why begrudge the point that Owens could have made any difference?
Can't the current offense be praised or belittled on its on merits or pitfalls? Or must opinion thread after opinion thread beleaguer the absence of a player who is no longer neither on the Cowboys sidelines nor inside its Miller Lite lockerroom?
You speak of praise. I ask you this,
"Is it not bestowing praise if you're initiating conversation about a non roster player who has zero impact on the 2009 season by stating what he would have POSITIVELY done as a member of the offense if he were still here"? If your answer is yes, then allow me to offer another opinion of what could have happened if Owens had not been released in early March.
He could have fractured his leg in multiple places. It's my opinion. It probably wouldn't have happened, but can anyone say that it couldn't have happened--to ANY PLAYER for that matter?
Of course not, but let's MAKE it relevant,
especially about players who... are... no... longer... on... the... r-o-s-t-e-r, shall we?
:starspin
Back to his response:
thechosen1n2;2993786 said:
What im saying is Witten would have between 5 and 8 catches of 25 to 40 yards by now between the hash marks. Safeties would be cheating over to help owens whether we think he has lost a step or not. This aint TO love its just the truth. Would I have signed TO for huge money after this season, no, but I would not payed him 9 mil for him not to be here either.
The woulda, coulda, shouldas. Quite frankly, I'm surprised that...
DallasEast;2993807 said:
Without Terrell Owens, we're doomed. Got it. Thanks.
...was the only thing I said afterwards.
