Eagles, Giants, Bucs; win 2 out of those 3 and we will stay alive

Staubacher

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,315
Reaction score
23,740
Its up to this defense plain and simple. They've allowed 65 points in the last 2 games. The offense is what it is until our big boys come back if we get 20+ points a game (which we have) the defense has to do the rest with turnovers and clutch stops
 

RJ_MacReady

It's all in the reflexes
Messages
3,974
Reaction score
7,123
I can't see us beating the Pats... their offense is just too good... but I could see us beating the Seahawks in a defense dominated game.

Element of surprise, my dear Watson. Belichick is coming off of a bye week and I'm sure him with 2 weeks makes it even more of an unbeatable force. There's literally no way, on paper, we should even force a punt on their end (ala 2013 Broncos game). 99 times out a 100...we lose with this roster..embarrassingly. It's all part of the ploy to lull them into a state of false confidence and then WHAM! The plan really goes into effect when Coach Belichick runs into Dan "The Thug" Bailey in the tunnel. Operation Flailed Kerrigan is being green-lit as we speak.
 

endersdragon

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,109
Reaction score
4,801
Element of surprise, my dear Watson. Belichick is coming off of a bye week and I'm sure him with 2 weeks makes it even more of an unbeatable force. There's literally no way, on paper, we should even force a punt on their end (ala 2013 Broncos game). 99 times out a 100...we lose with this roster..embarrassingly. It's all part of the ploy to lull them into a state of false confidence and then WHAM! The plan really begins when Coach Belichick runs into Dan "The Thug" Bailey in the tunnel. Operation Flailed Kerrigan is being green-lit as we speak.

I would prefer that Hardy taking out Brady on the first drive... say for 4 games or so. Karma would be sweet... and Hardy seems like just the guy to deliver it :)
 

ActualCowboysFan

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,416
Reaction score
9,498
Oh cool, he should be able to go 5 of 7 or 6 of 7 still doesn't leave much room for error

Sure but it could be the difference between playoffs and staying home. And 8-8 could still do the trick as well. Last season the team was 12-4 and they could be in an identical situation at 9-7.
 

gdogg24

Well-Known Member
Messages
842
Reaction score
393
Sure but it could be the difference between playoffs and staying home. And 8-8 could still do the trick as well. Last season the team was 12-4 and they could be in an identical situation at 9-7.

I just had higher hopes for this year, I mean being in playoff mode from the time Romo comes back I don't know if this team can sustain that.
 

endersdragon

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,109
Reaction score
4,801
Sure but it could be the difference between playoffs and staying home. And 8-8 could still do the trick as well. Last season the team was 12-4 and they could be in an identical situation at 9-7.

That's sort of weird that 9-7 basically = 12-4.. we really got screwed over last year (especially as we beat the Seahawks... stupid Packers)
 

JoeyBoy718

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,715
Reaction score
12,709
I said after the Eagles game that we'd be okay if we went at least 3-5 with Romo out. People thought I was being a pessimist. Now people would be happy with 2 wins in the 7-8 games Romo will miss.

Fortunately we had a chance to win both games we lost. That means we're still as good as these teams even without 90% of our stars. We won't compete with New England or Seattle. I knew this after the Philly game. But we need to compete and actually win the other games. We can't afford to keep coming up short. Imagine how bad of shape we'd be in if the Giants didn't hand us a win.
 

endersdragon

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,109
Reaction score
4,801
I said after the Eagles game that we'd be okay if we went at least 3-5 with Romo out. People thought I was being a pessimist. Now people would be happy with 2 wins in the 7-8 games Romo will miss.

Fortunately we had a chance to win both games we lost. That means we're still as good as these teams even without 90% of our stars. We won't compete with New England or Seattle. I knew this after the Philly game. But we need to compete and actually win the other games. We can't afford to keep coming up short. Imagine how bad of shape we'd be in if the Giants didn't hand us a win.

I am starting to really wonder about the Seahawks right now... 1-2 and not looking that good against the 0-3 Lions.
 

RunDMC

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,407
Reaction score
2,286
You can't win with Brandon Weeden, and 0-11 in his last 11 starts proves this.

Yeah because he's the reason his team hasn't been able to win each time. It's all the quarterback's fault.
 

Wayne02

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,350
Reaction score
2,049
Yeah because he's the reason his team hasn't been able to win each time. It's all the quarterback's fault.

I don't care what the reason is, an average QB in this league can find a way to win one game out of 11 tries, he hasn't and he won't.
 

RunDMC

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,407
Reaction score
2,286
I don't care what the reason is, an average QB in this league can find a way to win one game out of 11 tries, he hasn't and he won't.

Of course you don't because you can't or won't see that it's a team game. It's not all on the quarterback. The dude had a 108 QB rating, didn't throw a pick, and then had a 90 YARD GAME WINNING DRIVE.

All this despite not having Dez Bryant and no other consistent playmakers.
 
Top