Clutch Prescott

[G2]

I’m so honored that you’d take the time out to google search lyrics and cut and paste them here for me in such a nice color and font.

You're welcome! It's a crap song that I don't know so I had to look it up. Hope it helps!

"Well he's on the table and he's gone to code
And I do not think anyone knows
What they're doing here
And your friends have left you, you've been dismissed
I never thought it would come to this
And I, I want you to know
Everyone's got to face down the demons
Maybe today, you could put the past away"

 

[TheHerd]

On a play Fleming pulled an ole and left a basically unblocked Vernon a free run.

 

[LovinItAll]

All else aside, do you really think the Cowboys of the 90's weren't a dynasty???

I don't, because they weren't able to stretch their success over a protracted period of time. Don't get me wrong, I think they were an awesome team and I loved every minute of football they played (well, I still do, but you know what I mean). I think that if JJ and JJ hadn't 'broken up', they had a real shot at becoming a dynasty. They were 'dynastic looking' during that stretch, but the drop off after the '95 season was pretty bad. With the main parts of our offensive engine intact, we only made the playoffs as a WC team after that.

I'm not taking a second of success away from them. From 1-15 in '89 to 3 SBs by '95 was amazing, but on the whole, it was a short period of time. Dynasties, in my mind, enjoy dominate success over a decade or more. We just didn't do that.

Again, partity in the NFL is supposed to give every team a shot at relevance periodically. Aside from the Pats, helped out by playing in a horrible division and with the GOAT taking a big discount, there have been no dynasties since the salary cap was put in place.

I don't have a problem if you define dynasty differently. That's just my take.

 

[LovinItAll]

Don't forget Tom Landry's 20 years of consecutive winning season from 1966 to 1985.

I was really addressing post-salary cap teams.

 

[Roadtrip635]

Our offense couldn't have played very well, otherwise why would that Barkley reach for the end zone be what everyone's still drooling over? It really wasn't that great a play. A couple inches was the difference between a TD and a turnover.

The media loves it because he's the new thing, but then the next new thing comes along and the media will fawn all over that. They only build you up to tear you down and too many people eat it up.

 

[cern]

I’m so honored that you’d take the time out to google search lyrics and cut and paste them here for me in such a nice color and font.

third eye blind. my fav's a tune called December. "don't talk about, no need to shout, turn your head now baby and spit me out".

 

[Runwildboys]

I don't think so, my definition of a dynasty is pretty restrictive, like the Cowboys of the mid 60's to the 80's, or the Patriots of the 2000's. Teams that for over 10 years were "in the hunt" EVERY year practically. The 90's Cowboys were in that realm from 1991-1998. but that's only 8 years....

Okay. Personally, I'd say 3 SBs in 4 years (and a hair away from 4 straight) and being the team to beat for most of a decade constitutes a dynasty, but everyone has their own definition.

 

[khiladi]

I’m not but you may want to print these posts and let him review it.


These questions are very relevant to football. You have become one of the cowboyszone trolls over your hatred for our QB. It’s bizarre I know. But it is what it is.
This is a message board remember. I’m not breaking any of the rules. (Your words).

You are either miserable when Dak does well and we win or you are a fraud who just wants to antagonize fellow cowboys fans. Either way it’s sad.

Again, you clearly don’t know what trolling is. My posts discuss football, irrespective of what motivations are. It is as much a football post as a Dak-homer, because of his infatution with Dak, tries to spin his conservative nature of being a Checkdown Charlie as proof of his accuracy. I’m not going to sit and whine about him and ask him why he spends all his time riding a mediocre QBs jock? I’ll just dispute his position.

You on the other hand are not doing that. You are the one making this a personal issue which is closer to violating the rules than my posts you are complaining about.

You understand homie?

 

[khiladi]

Okay. Personally, I'd say 3 SBs in 3 years (and a hair away from 4 straight) and being the team to beat for most of a decade constitutes a dynasty, but everyone has their own definition.

Pretty much every football expert considers that Dallas team a dynasty and the definition of dynasty was never ‘winning seasons’ while not winning Super Bowls. I’m not sure where their definition came from..

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Okay. Personally, I'd say 3 SBs in 3 years (and a hair away from 4 straight) and being the team to beat for most of a decade constitutes a dynasty, but everyone has their own definition.

Wow, somebody who doesn't have to have it all their own way! That's a rarity here

 

[LovinItAll]

So basically what you are saying is the only dynasty ever in football is the Patriots... the Steelers weren’t.. the 49ers weren’t. Have the Patriots ever won three SBs in four years?

I said this in another reply: I was speaking to the post-salary cap era. Yes, I think the Cowboys, Steelers, and 49'ers have all had dynasties.

 

[cern]

Again, you clearly don’t know what trolling is. My posts discuss football, irrespective of what motivations are. It is as much a football post as a Dak-homer, because of his infatution with Dak, tries to spin his conservative nature of being a Checkdown Charlie as proof of his accuracy. I’m not going to sit and whine about him and ask him why he spends all his time riding a mediocre QBs jock? I’ll just dispute his position.

You on the other hand are not doing that. You are the one making this a personal issue which is closer to violating the rules than my posts you are complaining about.

You understand homie?

I feel you. I was despised on the old dc.com for negative comments about romo and his leadership. and then there was "the glitch"

 

[khiladi]

I said this in another reply: I was speaking to the post-salary cap era. Yes, I think the Cowboys, Steelers, and 49'ers have all had dynasties.

The salary cap was first used in 1994, so Dallas was by that definition a dynasty.. like I said, the only reason that dynasty ended that ‘quickly’ is because the talent of Dallas was abruptly decimated by Free agency in its modern form and Jerry’s idiocy.

 

[fairviewfarmer]

He proves it again and again and again...

I mentioned it in another thread, but when Dak scrambles and throws, good things happen more often than not. When he stays in the pocket, its a short pass or a sack. Keep him scrambling!

 

[Roadtrip635]

Eli Manning apparently sucks though and did all this against a way better defense that’s been carrying Dak all year long, including giving this offense 14 points against a garbage Tampa Bay team and stopping the Giants offense when they needed to.

I mean it’s not like the Giants haven’t been blowing fourth quarters all year long, including multiple times in the last minute. Oh wait a minute...

The defense played a poor game. Now you're using the excuse that you complain about Dak supporters using "when they needed to". The Giants scored on 6 of 6 drives before the last one with a minute left. You're just upset we won and that Dak played well. Your tears are delicious.

 

[Runwildboys]

I don't, because they weren't able to stretch their success over a protracted period of time. Don't get me wrong, I think they were an awesome team and I loved every minute of football they played (well, I still do, but you know what I mean). I think that if JJ and JJ hadn't 'broken up', they had a real shot at becoming a dynasty. They were 'dynastic looking' during that stretch, but the drop off after the '95 season was pretty bad. With the main parts of our offensive engine intact, we only made the playoffs as a WC team after that.

I'm not taking a second of success away from them. From 1-15 in '89 to 3 SBs by '95 was amazing, but on the whole, it was a short period of time. Dynasties, in my mind, enjoy dominate success over a decade or more. We just didn't do that.

Again, partity in the NFL is supposed to give every team a shot at relevance periodically. Aside from the Pats, helped out by playing in a horrible division and with the GOAT taking a big discount, there have been no dynasties since the salary cap was put in place.

I don't have a problem if you define dynasty differently. That's just my take.

I'd say the Patriots are definitely the greatest dynasty, especially considering that they're doing it for so long during a period specifically designed to create and maintain parity, but I don't think those are the sole parameters to define a dynasty. I respect your opinion, but agree to disagree.

 

[G2]

Missing FGs also pisses me off.

 

[khiladi]

I feel you. I was despised on the old dc.com for negative comments about romo and his leadership. and then there was "the glitch"

I loved Romo and while his defenders were bashing the defense, I among a few others were consistently saying the offense was at fault because of the incompetence of Jason Garrett and all the stats that people were masquerading around were empty stats and the team each season would eventually implode like it did.

Like I said, Garrett’s hands on the offense ruined Romo’s legacy and the one year he finally got rid of him with Linehan, he had his MVP season and they actually ran the ball.

 

[khiladi]

The defense played a poor game. Now you're using the excuse that you complain about Dak supporters using "when they needed to". The Giants scored on 6 of 6 drives before the last one with a minute left. You're just upset we won and that Dak played well. Your tears are delicious.

Uh no.

I’ve said many things about this game in different posts and threads, including the fact that Eli outperformed Dak against a much better defense in the second half, while Dak homers constantly have no problems disrespecting Eli. Apparently the same criteria by which they say Eli sucks doesn’t apply to Dak...

 

[cern]

I loved Romo and while his defenders were bashing the defense, I among a few others were consistently saying the offense was at fault because of the incompetence of Jason Garrett and all the stats that people were masquerading around were empty stats and the team each season would eventually implode like it did.

Like I said, Garrett’s hands on the offense ruined Romo’s legacy and the one year he finally got rid of him with Linehan, he had his MVP season and they actually ran the ball.

I liked tony's gunslinging ways. like the same thing in dak. but I never considered tony a leader of the team. in that respect, dak is way ahead of him. of course, with risk comes reward. and also a sack and loss of yards. but the pass to bease yesterday came from a broken pocket. I think dak grew up a lot yesterday.