Debate?

[xpistofer]

Therefore, even if the '72 Dolphins are not the best team of all time, the '92 Cowboys definitely are not, either.

non sequitur

 

[Sammy Baugh]

non sequitur

Not a non-sequitur. Let's rehash what I said:
The '92 Cowboys are not the best team of all time because
1) they were thrashed by the Eagles 31-7
2) they lost to a 6-10 Rams team
3) they didn't even have the best record in the NFC, much less the NFL

Do you follow now?

Take the '85 Bears: no one blew them out, they didn't lose to any crappy teams, and they had the best record in the league to go with their Super Bowl triumph. No brainer, '85 Bears win this argument, too.

 

[Hostile]

Were it not for free agency, the cap, and Jimmy's departure, we could have been the equal of those 1970s Steeler teams.

I think so too. I actually have the audacity to think we could have won 4 in a row and maybe 5.

 

[bbgun]

I think so too. I actually have the audacity to think we could have won 4 in a row and maybe 5.

Dicey considering Irvin's troubles/suspension. Jimmy or no Jimmy, you still need your best players on the field.

 

[burmafrd]

when you are talking best teams of all time you have to go by a particular year.You look at how they dominated and who they dominated. Then you look at the playoffs and who theybeat and how they beat them.

By that criteria the 71 boys have to be up there- they destroyed or dominated in their last seven games of the season and on through the playoffs.

The 72 Fins squeaked by several dud teams in the season and just how dominate were they in the playoffs? And they won their SB by how many points?

You look at the 92 Boys and they dominated good or great teams through the playoffs.

THe 85 Bears have to be considered due to their domination through the season and the playoffs.

TO me its the 71 Boys, 78 Steelers, 85 Bears/92Boys (cannot really pick there)

It pains me to put the Steelers there but they were a great team and they did beat us in the SB (the 78 Boys were a great team as well)

 

[Hostile]

Dicey considering Irvin's troubles/suspension. Jimmy or no Jimmy, you still need your best players on the field.

I don't think for one minute the players would have gone the route they did if Jimmy was still there. The day Barry was hired I told a friend the Cowboys would have legal troubles by multiple players.

 

[CATCH17]

Dicey considering Irvin's troubles/suspension. Jimmy or no Jimmy, you still need your best players on the field.

Irvin may have never had his troubles.

Under Barry the entire thing turned into a circus.

The substitute teacher was in town.

 

[DallasEast]

Nope. Everyone remembers "wide right." But everyone also remembers the times that the Bills made it to the big dance and got spanked.

The only reference I've ever read or heard anyone describe the Bills being "beaten up" in the Super Bowl by the Giants was by you. Just pointing that out.

 

[DallasEast]

And...?

Since the Fins could not play 16 in the regular season, it would be unfair to penalize them. Know one knows whether they would have lost the two extra games....or won them.

Further, the Fins were still the only NFL team to go undefeated through 14 games.

But fine, leave the Fins out of it. The '92 Cowboys didn't even have the best record in the NFC. The '92 Cowboys were crushed by the Eagles 31-7. The '92 Cowboys lost to a 6-10 Rams team. Therefore, even if the '72 Dolphins are not the best team of all time, the '92 Cowboys definitely are not, either.

Are you claiming that I made came to that conclusion? If not, wassup?

 

[Sammy Baugh]

The only reference I've ever read or heard anyone describe the Bills being "beaten up" in the Super Bowl by the Giants was by you. Just pointing that out.

Please read again, more closely this time. The first mention I simply pointed out that others beat up on the Bills, too. I did not mention the Giants specifically.

The second time I specifically pointed out that the Giants won only by a missed field goal. I specifically spoke against the idea that the Bills were "beaten up" by the Giants in that Super Bowl.

Please read more closely next time.

 

[Sammy Baugh]

Are you claiming that I made came to that conclusion? If not, wassup?

Do you see anyone else in this thread arguing that the '92 Cowboys were the best of all time? If so, perhaps I was speaking to them, since you are not the only person who posts in this forum.

 

[DallasEast]

Please read again, more closely this time. The first mention I simply pointed out that others beat up on the Bills, too. I did not mention the Giants specifically.

The second time I specifically pointed out that the Giants won only by a missed field goal. I specifically spoke against the idea that the Bills were "beaten up" by the Giants in that Super Bowl.

Please read more closely next time.

The Cowboys did beat up on the Bills in the Super Bowl but, then again, so did everyone at that time.

'Everyone' in this instance equates to the Giants, Commanders and Cowboys (twice).

That is your error and no one else's.

You then attempted to correct your error after the fact. Nice try. No one bought that. Sorry.

 

[DallasEast]

Do you see anyone else in this thread arguing that the '92 Cowboys were the best of all time? If so, perhaps I was speaking to them, since you are not the only person who posts in this forum.

Everyone (excluding you of course) within this thread has not argued that the 1992 Cowboys were the 'best of all-time'.

Do you make these types of observation errors all the time or is just here on CowboysZone

 

[Sammy Baugh]

Everyone (excluding you of course) within this thread has not argued that the 1992 Cowboys were the 'best of all-time'.

Do you make these types of observation errors all the time or is just here on CowboysZone

Funny, I do not see the word "everyone" in my statement, only in yours.

 

[DallasEast]

Funny, I do not see the word "everyone" in my statement, only in yours.

Touche.

 

[ZeroClub]

I'm glad to see that the '72 Dolpins are no longer in this discussion.