Cowboys defensive rankings during Super Bowl years

[Typhus]

It worked creating one for Romo. And then strictly enforcing throughout.

It’s the same basis we have for other subjects corralled into one setting.

I wish there was a better way . As we learned with Romo there wasn’t. The Homers are going to continue slobbering inciting responses and the Haters are trolling threads when he becomes subject matter.

At least a pinned thread .

One pinned thread would be ideal,, far too many times good threads discussing other than Dak get rolled off the front page.
Just not sure if the server could handle the overload, there would probably be 40 million posts in that pinned thread.

 

[Diehardblues]

I believe the moral of the story is that stats can be construed by either party in any debate to support a narrative.
No different than Dak extremists waving stats as valid evidence to support their claim.

While I’d agree some Slobberers do present stats to support their spin , In this particular case the total scoring stats were presented as an overall ranking which isn’t an official measurement used by the NFL to rank team defenses. The fan who presented as such admirably confessed which I applaud.

 

[Sydla]

I believe the moral of the story is that stats can be construed by either party in any debate to support a narrative.
No different than Dak extremists waving stats as valid evidence to support their claim.

True but in this case, when one honestly looks at the totality of stats for our defenses over the last 5-7 years, anyone concluding we fielded some real good defenses at times over that period are just being disingenuous to try to win an argument. We haven't had a really good defense for over a decade.

At the end of the day, when you look at 2016, for example, they did a good job of hiding what was a really mediocre defense. But when they ran into a real offense in the playoffs, it was game over. Dak and the O struggled at the start and this defense was on the field longer than normal and the Packers exploited all their flaws.

 

[Diehardblues]

True but in this case, when one honestly looks at the totality of stats for our defenses over the last 5-7 years, anyone concluding we fielded some real good defenses at times over that period are just being disingenuous to try to win an argument. We haven't had a really good defense for over a decade.

True and this doesn’t provide Dak an excuse.

It’s just another contributing factor why our franchise has come up short this era which there are several moving pieces.

Dak is not exempt from some criticism as well but not the sole cause or at the top of the list.

 

[Typhus]

True but in this case, when one honestly looks at the totality of stats for our defenses over the last 5-7 years, anyone concluding we fielded some real good defenses at times over that period are just being disingenuous to try to win an argument. We haven't had a really good defense for over a decade.

I honestly dont believe that @MountaineerCowboy actually believed those Ds were even decent, but his intention was to show that stats can paint a pretty picture when being selective and guided.
Just the way I interpreted it.

 

[Captain-Crash]

yep sorta like the projected 6000 yards and 2.5 wins. Since he only won one game out of six on a watermelon once-in-a-lifetime kick. you can say in six more games he wins one more with some miracle, then four left you can give him a half a win. 2.5 wins but some awesome stats
just some projected stats.

 

[Diehardblues]

Real fans don’t care about 5 or 6,000 yards. That’s just a stat our idiotic owner , fantasy fans or slobberers would use in defense of Dak.

The truth is we could have a team that comes up short disappointing us without the QB being the main cause. As a matter of fact he could be more part of the reason why we were as competitive as we were.

Those with agendas outside what’s best for our team will not want to admit to these simple analysis though. Not enough drama .

 

[Sydla]

I honestly dont believe that @MountaineerCowboy actually believed those Ds were even decent, but his intention was to show that stats can paint a pretty picture when being selective and guided.
Just the way I interpreted it.

If that was his point then I guess but it seemed to me he wanted in on the Dak dump some where doing in this thread.

If that wasn't his intent, my apologies to him.

 

[Captain-Crash]

9 out of 10 slobbers as you call them Gregg are Romo haters. They are driving to prove Romo was the problem for everything.

 

[Diehardblues]

9 out of 10 slobbers as you call them Gregg are Romo haters. They are driving to prove Romo was the problem for everything.

I’m aware of some of these. And called them out. But our QB is always going attract over zealous fans. Romo did as well. How would you describe the Dak Haters ?

This is a Cowboys fans site. We should expect some over the top cheerleaders . The mentality should be much like attending a Cowboys home game. Be prepared for more cheering than booing.

It’s up to those with more critical thinking and analysis to swerve away. Objectivity is often difficult to find on fan forums. Dak threads much like the old Romo threads weren’t a place to go for sound discussions.

But if our QB is your only issue with our franchise and team then I’d suggest there is an agenda at play.

 

[starfan1]

9 out of 10 slobbers as you call them Gregg are Romo haters. They are driving to prove Romo was the problem for everything.

9 out of 10 Dak hater are Romosexuals still salty Romo is gone and Dak took his job See how that works!

 

[Techsass]

It worked creating one for Romo. And then strictly enforcing throughout.

It’s the same basis we have for other subjects corralled into one setting.

I wish there was a better way . As we learned with Romo there wasn’t. The Homers are going to continue slobbering inciting responses and the Haters are trolling threads when he becomes subject matter.

At least a pinned thread .

Sorry, but I remember that Romo Zone on the defunct Dallas Cowboys forum. That was asinine. The only time I went there was when a thread I was responding to got moved there before I hit enter. Your starting QB is going to generate posts & most fans have a real interest in the guy.

 

[Diehardblues]

Sorry, but I remember that Romo Zone on the defunct Dallas Cowboys forum. That was asinine. The only time I went there was when a thread I was responding to got moved there before I hit enter. Your starting QB is going to generate posts & most fans have a real interest in the guy.

I understand but the discussions become asinine. Not a safe haven for most fans. Mostly attracts trolls. It’s basically a battle between both extreme sides. And it needs to have a playground of it’s own.

 

[Captain-Crash]

9 out of 10 Dak hater are Romosexuals still salty Romo is gone and Dak took his job See how that works!

yep, looks like one of the dakgobblers just showed up.

 

[Brax]

Yes, and this is a topic which needs cleaning up as well.

We currently have a few of those type characters as well as one Homer who continues inciting them.

No red flags in attaching 666 to Dak. Shocking this religious slander is allowed.

I guess the purse is more powerful than the pen. If that’s the case in this forum then I won’t be here much longer. Or I’ll offer to buy them all out.

You should start your own forum if you don’t like the way this one is run. You have a problem and should not view threads you don’t like as it appears the majority doesn’t have a problem with the way the forum is run. You should go back to that old forum you helped to shut down with your wonderful suggestions and censorship views. Get a life and by the way you are breaking rule 1 by constantly criticizing the way this forum is run. You also are a hypocrite who views and posts to the very threads you say shouldn’t be here. It might be better for you to take a break and disappear for a while.

 

[PAPPYDOG]

Diehardblues said: ↑
Yes, and this is a topic which needs cleaning up as well.

We currently have a few of those type characters as well as one Homer who continues inciting them.

No red flags in attaching 666 to Dak. Shocking this religious slander is allowed.

I guess the purse is more powerful than the pen. If that’s the case in this forum then I won’t be here much longer. Or I’ll offer to buy them all out.

You should start your own forum if you don’t like the way this one is run. You have a problem and should not view threads you don’t like as it appears the majority doesn’t have a problem with the way the forum is run. You should go back to that old forum you helped to shut down with your wonderful suggestions and censorship views. Get a life and by the way you are breaking rule 1 by constantly criticizing the way this forum is run. You also are a hypocrite who views and posts to the very threads you say shouldn’t be here. It might be better for you to take a break and disappear for a while.

Hey Diehard what purse are you talking about???

 

[Brax]

Sorry, but I remember that Romo Zone on the defunct Dallas Cowboys forum. That was asinine. The only time I went there was when a thread I was responding to got moved there before I hit enter. Your starting QB is going to generate posts & most fans have a real interest in the guy.

The optimum word is defunct maybe that’s what he wants to do kill off another one.

 

[Jarv]

And yet I proved it with logic and facts.

Proved what?

 

[Diehardblues]

You should start your own forum if you don’t like the way this one is run. You have a problem and should not view threads you don’t like as it appears the majority doesn’t have a problem with the way the forum is run. You should go back to that old forum you helped to shut down with your wonderful suggestions and censorship views. Get a life and by the way you are breaking rule 1 by constantly criticizing the way this forum is run. You also are a hypocrite who views and posts to the very threads you say shouldn’t be here. It might be better for you to take a break and disappear for a while.

On the contrary I’ve applauded how well this site is run. I’m just suggesting a tweak on Dak threads.

It appears only those who frequent with antagonist ways in those threads are against it.

 

[Rockport]

Diehardblues said: ↑
Yes, and this is a topic which needs cleaning up as well.

We currently have a few of those type characters as well as one Homer who continues inciting them.

No red flags in attaching 666 to Dak. Shocking this religious slander is allowed.

I guess the purse is more powerful than the pen. If that’s the case in this forum then I won’t be here much longer. Or I’ll offer to buy them all out.






Hey Diehard what purse are you talking about???

You said that before that you would be gone for a year if the Cowboys signed Dak. Yet here you are after only a couple months. So your word is worthless. 666 is the sign of the Devil and you shouldn't be allowed to sport it. Also, it says A LOT about you.