Chiming in

[Gordon]

I think that the only reason the deadskins won was that bogus PI call on the interception that was ran back 80 yards to inside the 20 from Brunell.

Did you watch the game? Santana Moss' shoulder pad was out of his shirt? How do you explain that happenign to a WR before the ball even gets to him? There's nothing you can say to argue that call.

As for this game.. I don't think the Skins as much more than a 5-6 win team and I see the Cowboys at around 9-10.. Nevertheless, if I'm a betting man, I'm taking the Skins getting 6 points. Of course, I think the Boys are going to win, but when do they ever beat the Skins by more than 6 points? The game is going to be a straight up low scoring brawl. You guys don't give that defense enough respect. Though they dont have many big names (especially on the DL), it still works.

17-13 Boys

 

[BulletBob]

Hmmm...actually, I didn't say what you claim. I said that "the Bears are not a good offensive team", but 166 yards is still pretty stingy. Not dominating. Did you miss that? Or do dominating and stingy mean the same thing in your dictionary?

I also never said that the Cowboys offense is questionable. I just indicated that they won't be able to "run all over us".

Glad I could help clear things up! Plato always did appreciate an ethical argument based on facts.

OK - now we're arguing semantics, E-dog.

Your logic is still on shaky ground. Cowboys O against weak San Diego D = nothing to be impressed about. Commanders D agains terrible Bears O = "stingy."

You can't have it both ways - either playing well against a weak opposing team lends credibility to your team or it doesn't.

Basic Platonic Logic - no semantics. Q.E.D.

 

[E-Dog Night]

Lets straiten this out right now.

Kyle freaking Orton. 1st game as a starting QB. Need we say more? Stop me if im off here.

Att 28
Completions 15
Yards - 141
Comp % 53
Yrds / Attempt 5.0yrds - SMOKIN!!!
TD = 0
INT = 1
Long = 22 yrds
Rating = 52.8

Don't know what that straightens out. No one expected Kyle to have a big day (except for a handfull of Bears fans).

BTW, love the sig.

 

[WoodysGirl]

Maybe it has something to do with him getting burned by a 7th round draft pick WR in the last game against the Cowboys.

Not to ruin your good laugh. That was Sean Taylor.

 

[E-Dog Night]

OK - now we're arguing semantics, E-dog.

Your logic is still on shaky ground. Cowboys O against weak San Diego D = nothing to be impressed about. Commanders D agains terrible Bears O = "stingy."

You can't have it both ways - either playing well against a weak opposing team lends credibility to your team or it doesn't.

Basic Platonic Logic - no semantics. Q.E.D.

Words are important. You are putting words in my mouth that I didn't use, and counteracting points that I didn't actually make. You can't just blow that off by using the semantics cliche.

I'm not having having it any particular way. I'm saying that the Skins had the #3 defense in the NFL last year, and after holding a team - ANY team - to 166 yards (that's a REALLY small amount of total yards, as I am sure you will agree) is an indication that the D is starting right where it left off last year.

The Chargers, conversely, has the 2nd-worst pass defense in the league last year (Skins were 7th) and were 18th overall. 31st out of 32nd in passing! Isn't it logical, based on those indicators, that the Cowboys might not have as much success offensively against the Commanders?

Yes, clearly it is.

 

[stilltheguru]

we really need to watch out for the skins cornerback blitz.REALLY!

 

[Kilyin]

Not to ruin your good laugh. That was Sean Taylor.

Oh, right... Driveby. I don't know how I got them confused.

 

[Reality]

I would have thought everyone would have realized by now that records and stats mean nothing when the Cowboys and Commanders play ..

 

[BulletBob]

Words are important. You are putting words in my mouth that I didn't use, and counteracting points that I didn't actually make. You can't just blow that off by using the semantics cliche.

I'm not having having it any particular way. I'm saying that the Skins had the #3 defense in the NFL last year, and after holding a team - ANY team - to 166 yards (that's a REALLY small amount of total yards, as I am sure you will agree) is an indication that the D is starting right where it left off last year.

The Chargers, conversely, has the 2nd-worst pass defense in the league last year (Skins were 7th) and were 18th oberall. 31st out of 32nd in passing! Isn't it logical, based on those indicators, that the Cowboys might not have as much success offensively against the Commanders?

Yes, clearly it is.

So, it doesn't matter how poor the Skins opposing team had been playing, but it is nonetheless logically astute to point out how poor the Cowboys opposing team was playing.

Crystal clear.

 

[E-Dog Night]

So, it doesn't matter how poor the Skins opposing team had been playing, but it is nonetheless logically astute to point out how poor the Cowboys opposing team was playing.

Crystal clear.

Finally! It really shouldn't have taken that long for me to explain it.

One question: Do you think Bledsoe will complete 75% of his passes against the Commanders?

 

[Kilyin]

Finally! It really shouldn't have taken that long for me to explain it.

One question: Do you think Bledsoe will complete 75% of his passes against the Commanders?

Why not? Testaverde completed 60% of his in the second game. At this point I think anyone has to say Bledsoe > Testaverde

 

[jackrussell]

I think the Boys are going to win, but when do they ever beat the Skins by more than 6 points?

I'm getting old and can't remember, let me know if you find an answer.

While you're at it, could ya tell me the last time the Skins ever beat the Cowboys by, um, anything?

 

[E-Dog Night]

Why not? Testaverde completed 60% of his in the second game. At this point I think anyone has to say Bledsoe > Testaverde

I would say that's been true at pretty much all points. One thing I've noticed about Bledsoe though, particularly with the Bills, was that he gets off to great starts and falters down the stretch. I guess the logic here is that won't happen under Parcells' watch?

And actually, it was 58.9% for testaverde in game #2 last year...

 

[Kilyin]

I would say that's been true at pretty much all points. One thing I've noticed about Bledsoe though, particularly with the Bills, was that he gets off to great starts and falters down the stretch. I guess the logic here is that won't happen under Parcells' watch?

And actually, it was 58.9% for testaverde in game #2 last year...

I know, I rounded off, cause 60 looks better than 58.9.

I don't know what the logic is on Bledsoe, I just hope he keeps playing like he did last night.

 

[Gordon]

I'm getting old and can't remember, let me know if you find an answer.

While you're at it, could ya tell me the last time the Skins ever beat the Cowboys by, um, anything?

Did I not say the Cowboys were going to win? All I said was that they weren't going to blow the Skins out like many believe.

 

[jackrussell]

Did I not say the Cowboys were going to win? All I said was that they weren't going to blow the Skins out like many believe.

I don't see where I inferred you didn't say that. I, like you, asked a inane question. Are those reserved for Commanders fans only?

 

[Gordon]

I don't see where I inferred you didn't say that. I, like you, asked a inane question. Are those reserved for Commanders fans only?

Sorry, I guess I took your comment the wrong way.

 

[dallasblue05]

I would say that's been true at pretty much all points. One thing I've noticed about Bledsoe though, particularly with the Bills, was that he gets off to great starts and falters down the stretch. I guess the logic here is that won't happen under Parcells' watch?

And actually, it was 58.9% for testaverde in game #2 last year...

Either way, you cant really argue that Bledsoe is better then Vinny.....you also cant make the claim, going on yesterday, that he falters down the stretch. Yeah, it was a great catch by Keyshawn, however, had the throw not been perfect, he wouldnt have had a chance........it doesnt really matter what "logic" or fancy talk you use, the Boys are better than the skins on paper, they played better against a better team.....and quite frankly, if/when they beat the skins next week, it wont be a surprise to anyone. Now, that is FOTBALL LOGIC, screw Plato, and even as a skins fan yourself, if you know football, you know that what I am saying is true.


CAN I GET A WITNESS, lol.

 

[jackrussell]

Sorry, I guess I took your comment the wrong way.

Hey, I will answer your question though. In the last 20 meetings between Dallas and Washington, Dallas has beaten the Skins by 6 or more points in 11 of those games, by 7 or more in 8 of them, including 2003(21-14, 27-0) and 2002(27-20).

 

[dallasblue05]

Hey, I will answer your question though. In the last 20 meetings between Dallas and Washington, Dallas has beaten the Skins by 6 or more points in 11 of those games, by 7 or more in 8 of them, including 2003(21-14, 27-0) and 2002(27-20).

nice one, lol, thats it, rub it in......see thats the kind of stuff I like to see......who needs to be nice when you can just be real, lol!!