Falcons lose starting cornerback Williams for the season *Merged*

[ArmyCowboy]

Or how about we stop the arguing and realize all this is moot because it was against Kansas-****ing-City

Please let me know before the games start in the future if the opponant is worth getting excited over beating.

I'd hate to be happy over a Cowboys win only to find out later that the opposing team wasn't worth being happy about.

Thanks in advance.

 

[dadymat]

Please let me know before the games start in the future if the opponant is worth getting excited over beating.

I'd hate to be happy over a Cowboys win only to find out later that the opposing team wasn't worth being happy about.

Thanks in advance.

for future references use this chart...

1) any loss will be considered a huge game that was a must win against a good team

2) any win will be
A) that team sucks
B) it was a fluke win
C) we only won because of blown coverages

also when judging a players stats alway emphasize the negatives over the positives...ie....Romo had 350 yds 2 tds and no ints with a 113 rating.....but that dont count because he only completed 20 of 34 passes


and side note --NO VICTORY WILL BE ENJOYED EVER UNLESS ITS A PLAYOFF WIN--A DECEMBER WIN-----OR SB VICTORY--and then only enjoyed briefly cause the other team sucked anyway and thatll be the only reason for said win

 

[wileedog]

it's not how you start it's how you finish. in both the Carolina and Denver games Romo missed 4 throws inside the 5 yard line.

So we know what needs to be worked on.

But its hard to call a passing offense terrible because they've muffed 4 red zone tries after marching down the field into the red zone. Its not like we got there because of turnovers.

 

[Nav22]

Clowns who don't know football: you won't win a football argument with Adam when it's a battle of logic/reason.

It's honestly borderline sad going through this thread and reading the constant failures.

Now, an emotional hissy fit? You'll dominate Adam in this sort of venue.

 

[zeroburrito]

Clowns who don't know football: you won't win a football argument with Adam when it's a battle of logic/reason.

It's honestly borderline sad going through this thread and reading the constant failures.

Now, an emotional hissy fit? You'll dominate Adam in this sort of venue.

looking at a page of stats is not logic/reason. stats in football are almost useless. anyone that watches the games knows we are having trouble throwing the ball. the 3-2(the only stat that really means anything) record confirms it.

 

[Nav22]

 

[Aikbach]

I'm ignorant of their roster defensively but with Brooking here you gotta believe Dallas has an insider's edge.

 

[AdamJT13]

looking at a page of stats is not logic/reason. stats in football are almost useless. anyone that watches the games knows we are having trouble throwing the ball. the 3-2(the only stat that really means anything) record confirms it.

That's a silly argument. You could have a 6-0 team that doesn't throw well or an 0-6 team that does. It's like saying the Titans' record confirms that they're "having trouble running the ball."

We had trouble throwing the ball against the Giants. That was obvious. But in the other games, our passing offense has been pretty good, other than a few plays here and there (mostly in the red zone).

 

[AMERICAS_FAN]

Calm down. His post was about our offense, not about our defense's inability to close out games.

We should be able to discuss specific aspects of the team without having people like you whine about our overall record being the only thing we should discuss.

Right, and if you noticed my follow-up post, which is two posts above your quoted reply, you'd see that I'm discussing our offense also and shooting a hole through that inflated number-one-offense ranking. You'd also notice that our overall record - which is all that really matters - is not all I'm discussing in my posts. Actually I'm explaining our average-ish recrd by talking about the true ability (or should I say inability) of the offense. But you'd rather call me a whiner than try to see the reality there. I get it man; you have an insider's perspective, so I guess that gives you the right to always be right.

 

[AdamJT13]

Right, and if you noticed my follow-up post, which is two posts above your quoted reply, you'd see that I'm discussing our offense also and shooting a hole through that inflated number-one-offense ranking.

Which exactly proves the point I made.



Edit: I just read your "follow-up" post, and you did nothing of the sort.


Here's what you said:

That's exactly how I see it. I also see a Cowboy team that quit at the end of last season and still struggles to close. Everyone wants to treat this team with kid gloves. Sorry, not me, not any more.

At some point this team has to prove that they're not soft. Beating KC the way they ended up having to (i.e. having to overcome their owen pitiful play against a bad team) is a good start. But KC is not quite the "measuring stick" either. In fact we lost the two "measuring stick" games we played this season.

Sorry if I wish to NOT use the excuse that those two losses came against undefeated teams, or to NOT use the offensive ranking, to whine about how we should be ranked higher in the poor power-ramnkings. Sorry, but those undefeated teams are undefeated because they beat us. And that #1 ranking has nothing to do with hte fact that we struggle to score TDs in the red zone.

Until we start winning those games and scoring those TDs, we're just 3-2, sandwiched in the middle of our division. Sorry, but that's not "change"; not until that changes anyways.​

Boy, that's really some offensive analysis there.

 

[Vintage]

Why are we "subtracting" the Austin plays? What do you think happens if Austin doesn't break those tackles? We just stop playing offense on that drive. We just hand the ball over to Kansas City and say, "Hey, your turn."

No. We continue to drive until we either stall or score. Romo probably adds to his yardage totals anyway.... can't just subtract those 2 long plays by Austin.

 

[AdamJT13]

Why are we "subtracting" the Austin plays? What do you think happens if Austin doesn't break those tackles? We just stop playing offense on that drive. We just hand the ball over to Kansas City and say, "Hey, your turn."

No. We continue to drive until we either stall or score. Romo probably adds to his yardage totals anyway.... can't just subtract those 2 long plays by Austin.

Well, see, if we subtract our three longest plays from each game, we're barely above average on offense. And our defense is only one 80-yard TD run allowed in each game away from being the worst in the NFL.

That's unacceptable.

 

[gimmesix]

Really a non-issue IMO. Both Kansas City and Carolina have pretty bad secondary's and we struggled passing the ball for the majority of both games.

Unless Garrett grew a brain over the bye, I seriously doubt we'll be able to take advantage

Carolina played pass defense and challenged us to run.

We passed for 351 yards against Kansas City. The only thing that hurt us against the Chiefs were mistakes.

 

[Mansta54]

And 250 of those yards came from Miles Austin against KC. A guy breaking tackles against a bad defense doesn't constitute as a great performance for the passing game as a whole.

 

[gimmesix]

We had no almost trouble throwing the ball against Carolina. Romo completed 13 of his first 17 passes and finished 22-for-33 for 255 yards. Witten caught every single pass thrown to him, and both wide receivers averaged more than 10 yards per target. There were a few key passes that were dropped or fell incomplete, but overall, the passing game worked quite well in that game.

Against Kansas City, it was mostly the same thing. Even if you take away Austin's YAC after breaking tackles on his two long TDs, Romo still threw for 260 yards.

In both games, the only real problems with the passing game came on a few goal-to-go plays.

But Romo missed some passes he should have completed, some receivers dropped passes they should have caught and Flozell false-started 250 times, so therefore this offense sucks, right?

The expectations of some people are unreal. I think we can all see that this offense has potential to be better, and maybe that's what frustrates some fans, but I don't understand why that causes some to overreact and try to downplay what the offense has done.

 

[silverbear]

Really a non-issue IMO. Both Kansas City and Carolina have pretty bad secondary's and we struggled passing the ball for the majority of both games.

Unless Garrett grew a brain over the bye, I seriously doubt we'll be able to take advantage

Over the years, I've kept waiting for you to find a clue... I'm about to give up...

Garrett's offense ranks first in the NFL, or hadn't you noticed??

 

[jobberone]

Well, we aren't where we want to be offensively. I'll say it. And here's justa few reasons.

We are not scoring when we really need to 'often enough'. We have failed to score tying TDs and lost games when on the one yard line. We've made too many mistakes killing drives. We've turned the ball over too often and its cost us. All despite the fact we have the number one offense in the league.

We are poor in field position and we're giving up game winning drives at the end of the game when we've played better before then.

OTOH, we are in every game so far right most up to the last minute or even seconds. You can look at that as bad or good or for what it is.

 

[SaltwaterServr]

Well, see, if we subtract our three longest plays from each game, we're barely above average on offense. And our defense is only one 80-yard TD run allowed in each game away from being the worst in the NFL.

That's unacceptable.

There should be a CZ.com "Trophy Room" for each member in which the rest of the population could vote when said member took another to task and exposed another member's lack of knowledge or out and out illogical bias on a particular subject.

We'd have to contribute $$$ just to help with the extra bandwidth cost of keeping Adam's Trophy Room online.

 

[JonJon]

for future references use this chart...

1) any loss will be considered a huge game that was a must win against a good team

2) any win will be
A) that team sucks
B) it was a fluke win
C) we only won because of blown coverages

also when judging a players stats alway emphasize the negatives over the positives...ie....Romo had 350 yds 2 tds and no ints with a 113 rating.....but that dont count because he only completed 20 of 34 passes


and side note --NO VICTORY WILL BE ENJOYED EVER UNLESS ITS A PLAYOFF WIN--A DECEMBER WIN-----OR SB VICTORY--and then only enjoyed briefly cause the other team sucked anyway and thatll be the only reason for said win

Don't forget to add that we don't score touchdowns like every other team. The only reason we score touchdowns is because:

A) We broke a tackle and ran the rest of the way (If the other team wasn't so bad a tackling, we wouldn't have scored).
B) The other team blew a coverage (If we didn't call a play that confused the defense, they would've made the stop).
C) Our RB found a cutback lane and ran for the TD (If the RB ran into the arms of the defense, he wouldn't have scored).

The bottom line is that we only score points or get yards because our players are better than the other team and we call plays that catch the other team off guard. If we didn't outplay the other team, we would lose.


</sarcasm>