Does KC's win over Philly validate our loss more?

[Risen Star]

That's because some Cowboy's fans feel entitled after our 2 dynasties happened. They don't get the fact that if it was so easy to be a dynasty, every team would be one. In today's salary cap era, each organization has to have a great deal of luck as well as great decision making, drafting, etc.

So get over it. The glory days are done and the odds we'll get another dynasty are very slim. If what it takes for you to enjoy your team is total domination or else, then you are in a plethora of sad Sundays. Enjoy the victories the Boys do get. What's the point of being a fan if only misery is what you get. Sure it was more fun in the days of the Triplets, but I can still take joy and relief in a close win in today's world.

You must be one of the guys chanting "Jerry!" at camp every summer.

Your gold star fan card is in the mail.

 

[Doomsday101]

After watching the KC win over Philly last night, does the win make our one loss look more reasonable? The KC defense played very well and held the "vaunted" philly offense down for the most part...of course, the eagles had 5 turnovers (was it 6?) and that helped things, but a lot of that was caused by pressure.

IMO, our loss doesn't look so bad when you think that philly's offense was held in check just 5 days after KC held our struggling offense in check. This is a glass-half-full thought process, I will admit. the offense certainly has a lot to fix/update/improve and mush of that starts with the play-calling. But, I would have felt much worse about our loss if philly had trounced KC.

what say you?

I think KC is better than what some of us may have thought but does not change how poorly the Cowboys played in the loss.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

After watching the KC win over Philly last night, does the win make our one loss look more reasonable? The KC defense played very well and held the "vaunted" philly offense down for the most part...of course, the eagles had 5 turnovers (was it 6?) and that helped things, but a lot of that was caused by pressure.

IMO, our loss doesn't look so bad when you think that philly's offense was held in check just 5 days after KC held our struggling offense in check. This is a glass-half-full thought process, I will admit. the offense certainly has a lot to fix/update/improve and mush of that starts with the play-calling. But, I would have felt much worse about our loss if philly had trounced KC.

what say you?

Does not really validate or invalidate anything for those that already have their opinions set in stone.

 

[ElGatoGrande]

What on Earth would it validate? This team has been a .500, middle of the pack, "coulda-shoulda won that game" team for 15+ years. The only team that was validated was KC.

Congratulations KC, welcome back to the middle of the pack.

 

[Dhragon]

You must be one of the guys chanting "Jerry!" at camp every summer.

Your gold star fan card is in the mail.

I'll be watching the mail for it, lol.

I get it that the vaunted past of our team has set you up with unrealistic expectations that unfortunately may never be repeated in your lifetime but you really do need to open your eyes and mind and see reality (not our beloved administrator by actual reality).

I see myself as neither a "Realist" who continues to harp on every little fault of our team nor a rose colored glasses fan who always thinks our team is going to the Superbowl every year and applauds every thing the team does ( i.e. never been a fan of hire the Red One as HC, don't really see much in DeMarco, have hated how the team has ignored the O-line until recently, etc). But I do take pleasure in Cowboy's wins when they occur, even if they do so only by a small margin. And I don't realistically expect our team to become a dynasty when there are 31 other teams trying to stop us from doing so and create their own legacy. If by chance, the Boys can return to dominance, I'll be beyond ecstatic and raise my expectations accordingly. Until then, I'll still be happy with wins and good play when it occurs.

Note: Why DO Realists have such Unrealistic expectations anyway?

 

[mrmojo]

Does nothing for us....does the Giants getting humiliated by Denver INvalidate the Cowboys victory against them? The Cowboys are what they are, the Chiefs are showing what a change in philosophy and a good coaching staff can do, and it may also show how weak the NFC East is this year.

 

[Bullflop]

The fact that we did better than another team that went 4-12 last year isn't exactly anything to feel good about.
The Eagles are transitioning on offense with a new coach. Their offense has a good excuse for sputtering while ours should be improving over last year rather than staying somewhat tame. We should have won against a team with a new coach and a very vanilla offense. Hopefully, we'll learn from our mistakes.

 

[Risen Star]

I'll be watching the mail for it, lol.

I get it that the vaunted past of our team has set you up with unrealistic expectations that unfortunately may never be repeated in your lifetime but you really do need to open your eyes and mind and see reality (not our beloved administrator by actual reality).

I see myself as neither a "Realist" who continues to harp on every little fault of our team nor a rose colored glasses fan who always thinks our team is going to the Superbowl every year and applauds every thing the team does ( i.e. never been a fan of hire the Red One as HC, don't really see much in DeMarco, have hated how the team has ignored the O-line until recently, etc). But I do take pleasure in Cowboy's wins when they occur, even if they do so only by a small margin. And I don't realistically expect our team to become a dynasty when there are 31 other teams trying to stop us from doing so and create their own legacy. If by chance, the Boys can return to dominance, I'll be beyond ecstatic and raise my expectations accordingly. Until then, I'll still be happy with wins and good play when it occurs.

Note: Why DO Realists have such Unrealistic expectations anyway?

The Dallas Cowboys used to be a cut above the rest. That's what made them the Dallas Cowboys. There was a commitment to excellence.

Then a lunatic oil salesman took the team hostage. Now fans like you are perfectly fine with rubbing elbows with the Bengals.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

The Cowboys beat the 49ers in San Francisco during the 2011 season, and it ultimately meant nothing because the Cowboys still missed the playoffs.

Having said that, we should be more optimistic about this team going forward than the 2011 version for two reasons:

1) The 2011 secondary was trash. There were two Will Allens playing safety, a broken down Terence Newman, and an increasingly apathetic Mike Jenkins. Church and Carr by themselves make the 2013 secondary better, and JJ Wilcox is close to beating out Will Allen.

2) The 2011 interior offensive line was terrible with no hope of getting any better. The players had already peaked or had very low ceilings. In 2013, Leary and Frederick are young players who have a legitimate chance to improve substantially as the season moves forward. Brian Waters has already peaked, but he had an extremely high ceiling.

None of this is a guarantee, but they are reasons for optimism.

 

[Denim Chicken]

I'll be watching the mail for it, lol.

I get it that the vaunted past of our team has set you up with unrealistic expectations that unfortunately may never be repeated in your lifetime but you really do need to open your eyes and mind and see reality (not our beloved administrator by actual reality).

I see myself as neither a "Realist" who continues to harp on every little fault of our team nor a rose colored glasses fan who always thinks our team is going to the Superbowl every year and applauds every thing the team does ( i.e. never been a fan of hire the Red One as HC, don't really see much in DeMarco, have hated how the team has ignored the O-line until recently, etc). But I do take pleasure in Cowboy's wins when they occur, even if they do so only by a small margin. And I don't realistically expect our team to become a dynasty when there are 31 other teams trying to stop us from doing so and create their own legacy. If by chance, the Boys can return to dominance, I'll be beyond ecstatic and raise my expectations accordingly. Until then, I'll still be happy with wins and good play when it occurs.

Note: Why DO Realists have such Unrealistic expectations anyway?

Ah, the typical pessimistic, demoralized, faultfinding outlook with the ever important caveat—that prognostications are subject to revision in hindsight with the presence of success.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

I

Just shows that KC is a good team. That is all that game last night showed outside of the fact that the birds are in big trouble.

I would bet that KC is a team runs a 7-1 or 6-2 record the first half do season and then the nfl reality gods kick in and they finish 8-8 or 7-9.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

No, the score did that. 17-16 Chiefs

 

[JohnsKey19]

No. It just shows that the Cheifs are a solid team and pretty much handled Philly on the road. That does not change the fact that we lost a game that should have been a W due to 2 late turnovers.

 

[ShiningStar]

After watching the KC win over Philly last night, does the win make our one loss look more reasonable? The KC defense played very well and held the "vaunted" philly offense down for the most part...of course, the eagles had 5 turnovers (was it 6?) and that helped things, but a lot of that was caused by pressure.

IMO, our loss doesn't look so bad when you think that philly's offense was held in check just 5 days after KC held our struggling offense in check. This is a glass-half-full thought process, I will admit. the offense certainly has a lot to fix/update/improve and mush of that starts with the play-calling. But, I would have felt much worse about our loss if philly had trounced KC.

what say you?

Nope, just proves we are on a better track and if we can sort out the offense, a much better team. We were with them and could have won if not for the phantom PI on Clairborn, so it just validates that the chiefs arent as strong as people think OR have to look at dallas better, and its time to say that their isnt much seperation from the teams than people want to paint. I think a few teams will sepearate themselves, but maybe not hold it for a whole season like we used to see it. I think for some people the old glasses are still on and for some they are looking at new data that says wow, you can flip a team in a years span and all you need are fewer components than you used to need.

I do think it says a great deal of Reid and maybe just maybe he wasnt the only problem in Philly as people wanted to believe.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Anybody paying half attention should have recognized that KC was a much better team then their record of 2012 indicated.

What last night's game should have told us is that the sky is not falling because we lost to KC. We absolutely should have won that game but it doesn't mean we are horrible. Means we have still not figured out how to eliminate the mistakes that keep killing us in games against teams we should be able to handle.

 

[CATCH17]

99% of us were saying it was a trap game just like Seattle last year.

Our players played hard but we just got outcoached.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Everybody loses a close game here and there. Really good teams ONLY lose close games. Losing (or winning) a close game tells you just about nothing. People spend way too much time focusing on the woulda-coulda-shoulda games.

If you want to know how good a team is, look at the blowouts. A team that blows out a lot of opponents and rarely gets blown out is a good team. Teams that don't win any blowouts are not good teams. They may have a good record one year because they happen to win more than their share of the close games, but that just means they got lucky: the outcome of a close game is a lot more random than the outcome of a blowout (obviously).

A good example is the 2010 Packers. They finished only 10-6. But they went 5-0 in blowouts vs. 2-6 in games decided by 4 points or less. They didn't get the breaks or make the plays to eke out those close ones, but they didn't have to. And their blowout record was a much better indicator of overall team quality than the close game record.

The Cowboys blew out one team last year and haven't played in one yet this year. Until they do, we have no evidence that they're better (or worse) than they've been.

 

[ShiningStar]

Everybody loses a close game here and there. Really good teams ONLY lose close games. Losing (or winning) a close game tells you just about nothing. People spend way too much time focusing on the woulda-coulda-shoulda games.

If you want to know how good a team is, look at the blowouts. A team that blows out a lot of opponents and rarely gets blown out is a good team. Teams that don't win any blowouts are not good teams. They may have a good record one year because they happen to win more than their share of the close games, but that just means they got lucky: the outcome of a close game is a lot more random than the outcome of a blowout (obviously).

A good example is the 2010 Packers. They finished only 10-6. But they went 5-0 in blowouts vs. 2-6 in games decided by 4 points or less. They didn't get the breaks or make the plays to eke out those close ones, but they didn't have to. And their blowout record was a much better indicator of overall team quality than the close game record.

The Cowboys blew out one team last year and haven't played in one yet this year. Until they do, we have no evidence that they're better (or worse) than they've been.

I cant agree with that, I think our defense is better, nothing against Rob Ryan, but im loving the turn overs and im liking where its going. The offense , okay its got its problems, but its not as bad as people thought the Oline was going to be. Maybe they can fix it. I jsut think from the little things, the team has made the changes it needed to make and this team has more potential than i saw last year. OKay the record might say otherwise, but so far that defense is doing better i feel than last year and I give Rob the pass for the injuries.

 

[Blackspider214]

Absolutely not. We had a chance to take a 10pt lead in that game and push the Chiefs behind the 8ball but could not do it. Too many silly mistakes and 2 turnovers did not help. Then our defense at the very end could not get our offense the ball back with any time remaining.

Eagles are not a good team. Their defense is horrid and their offense is a gimmick with not that great of a QB. So because KC beat them does not make me feel better about our loss.

 

[JD_KaPow]

I cant agree with that, I think our defense is better, nothing against Rob Ryan, but im loving the turn overs and im liking where its going. The offense , okay its got its problems, but its not as bad as people thought the Oline was going to be. Maybe they can fix it. I jsut think from the little things, the team has made the changes it needed to make and this team has more potential than i saw last year. OKay the record might say otherwise, but so far that defense is doing better i feel than last year and I give Rob the pass for the injuries.

I'm not sure we disagree. I'm certainly hopeful that we're better, but if that's true, the results have to show up on the field at some point in the form of convincing victories. This week against the Rams would be a good place to start.

We got 6 takeaways against the Giants...who turned it over 4 times in their next game. We got 0 takeaways against the Chiefs...who haven't turned it over yet this season. Do those outcomes say more about us or our opponents? I'm not drawing any conclusions yet. And that goes for the whole team, until I see something compelling one way or the other.