For all the "We Were Almost There" threads

[rcaldw]

Obviously I don't take issue with anyone posting that kind of thing, THIS IS AN OPINION BOARD. But I would like to say that I think it is silly reasoning. For a couple of good reasons.

1. There were some teams that beat us that didn't get a sniff of the playoffs.
(Oakland and the Rams). Does this mean that they aren't far away either? After all they beat us, and we beat them or barely lost to them, etc, etc.

2. The NFL is the ultimate league of mediocrity these days. Anybody can beat anybody on any given Sunday.

3. It all changes EVERY SINGLE YEAR. Even if it is true that we were close this year it means absolutely nothing at the start of next year.

-The Philadelphia Eagles were in the Super Bowl last year, didn't even make the playoffs this year.
-The Patriots have done that before
-The Raiders have done that before

I understand the reasoning that we have a young defense that should be better next year, and that we had an underperforming offensive line that could be fixed next year. However, it is not uncommon in todays NFL to fix one thing only to spring a leak in some other area of the ship the next year.

a. The defense didn't really get better down the stretch (i.e., those young players improving)

b. I'm still not convinced that it was completely the offensive line, I think a completely immobile QB contributes to that. If we rush to a spot, we know we fill find him there almost every single time. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying we didn't have OL problems, we did. I just mean that every team that has Bledsoe has some trouble protecting him.

c. We have age on offense that we still have to address and injuries at skill positions could completely tank us.

I just don't see the same kind of foundation here that I see in some other teams that would allow for a "building momentum" for a franchise.

I hope I'm wrong.

 

[fortdick]

I don't count the Rams game. It was obvious they were let down and had no "want to" in that game. Think of the difference the week before against Car. when they wanted it

 

[Mol Mol]

Great Post.. I agree with it all

 

[Chuck 54]

Obviously I don't take issue with anyone posting that kind of thing, THIS IS AN OPINION BOARD. But I would like to say that I think it is silly reasoning. For a couple of good reasons.

1. There were some teams that beat us that didn't get a sniff of the playoffs.
(Oakland and the Rams). Does this mean that they aren't far away either? After all they beat us, and we beat them or barely lost to them, etc, etc.

2. The NFL is the ultimate league of mediocrity these days. Anybody can beat anybody on any given Sunday.

3. It all changes EVERY SINGLE YEAR. Even if it is true that we were close this year it means absolutely nothing at the start of next year.

-The Philadelphia Eagles were in the Super Bowl last year, didn't even make the playoffs this year.
-The Patriots have done that before
-The Raiders have done that before

I understand the reasoning that we have a young defense that should be better next year, and that we had an underperforming offensive line that could be fixed next year. However, it is not uncommon in todays NFL to fix one thing only to spring a leak in some other area of the ship the next year.

a. The defense didn't really get better down the stretch (i.e., those young players improving)

b. I'm still not convinced that it was completely the offensive line, I think a completely immobile QB contributes to that. If we rush to a spot, we know we fill find him there almost every single time. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying we didn't have OL problems, we did. I just mean that every team that has Bledsoe has some trouble protecting him.

c. We have age on offense that we still have to address and injuries at skill positions could completely tank us.

I just don't see the same kind of foundation here that I see in some other teams that would allow for a "building momentum" for a franchise.

I hope I'm wrong.

Excellent observations.

 

[AdamJT13]

1. There were some teams that beat us that didn't get a sniff of the playoffs.
(Oakland and the Rams). Does this mean that they aren't far away either? After all they beat us, and we beat them or barely lost to them, etc, etc.

How'd they do in their other games against playoff teams or almost playoff teams? If they beat them or took them down to the final minute or overtime, they might be justified in saying that. But the Raiders beat one playoff team and lost their other games against playoff teams by 10, 14, 19 and nine points. The Rams (whom I think we'd have beaten if it meant something) beat one playoff team and lost their other games against playoff teams by 20, six, 17, 15 and 15 points. So other than one "any given Sunday" win for each, they weren't close to playoff teams.

We were the opposite. Other than one "any given Sunday" blowout loss, we took every playoff team down to the final possession of the game or overtime, winning two games and losing by one point, three points (on the final play) and three points (in overtime).

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Obviously I don't take issue with anyone posting that kind of thing, THIS IS AN OPINION BOARD. But I would like to say that I think it is silly reasoning. For a couple of good reasons.

1. There were some teams that beat us that didn't get a sniff of the playoffs.
(Oakland and the Rams). Does this mean that they aren't far away either? After all they beat us, and we beat them or barely lost to them, etc, etc.

2. The NFL is the ultimate league of mediocrity these days. Anybody can beat anybody on any given Sunday.

3. It all changes EVERY SINGLE YEAR. Even if it is true that we were close this year it means absolutely nothing at the start of next year.

-The Philadelphia Eagles were in the Super Bowl last year, didn't even make the playoffs this year.
-The Patriots have done that before
-The Raiders have done that before

I understand the reasoning that we have a young defense that should be better next year, and that we had an underperforming offensive line that could be fixed next year. However, it is not uncommon in todays NFL to fix one thing only to spring a leak in some other area of the ship the next year.

a. The defense didn't really get better down the stretch (i.e., those young players improving)

b. I'm still not convinced that it was completely the offensive line, I think a completely immobile QB contributes to that. If we rush to a spot, we know we fill find him there almost every single time. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying we didn't have OL problems, we did. I just mean that every team that has Bledsoe has some trouble protecting him.

c. We have age on offense that we still have to address and injuries at skill positions could completely tank us.

I just don't see the same kind of foundation here that I see in some other teams that would allow for a "building momentum" for a franchise.

I hope I'm wrong.

1. And the Panthers lost to the Saints. So I guess they aren't close, either?
2. Yet there were several teams this year that didn't win five games.
3. So the Texans are just as close as we or, say, the Bucs are?
a. The "rookie wall" doesn't have a special name for nothing.
b. I'll give you this one.
c. True, but the playoffs are showing that defense wins.

 

[Ashwynn]

Your arguement about they beat us but we beat that team and they lost to that team is so false.

You have to look at the big picture.

The pple saying we are almost there are right. They also are looking at the BIG picture. not just one teams game against common opponents. You have to encompas the entire year, look at where the boys were last year against themselves this year, see progress, we are getting better.

Then take that picture to the rest of the league, consider parity and then measure up against the rest of the crowd.

When done successfully, you too will see we are very close to the end of this road. We dont have much further till we get on the expressway that leads to the Superbowl.

The D is solid and based on a firm foundation of mixed youth/vigor and age/experience. The O needs some work and with attention to that in the draft and FA we will be a totally solid team, as you know the kicker situation will be addressed.

Then its a matter of gaining confidence and familiarity with your fellow comrades in arms. Then its a matter of watching the victory parade in downtown Dallas.

We are not far off at all. If you cant see that in todays NFL, you either arn't looking for it, or you refuse to see or you just dont know what to look for.

 

[AtlCB]

Obviously I don't take issue with anyone posting that kind of thing, THIS IS AN OPINION BOARD. But I would like to say that I think it is silly reasoning. For a couple of good reasons.

1. There were some teams that beat us that didn't get a sniff of the playoffs.
(Oakland and the Rams). Does this mean that they aren't far away either? After all they beat us, and we beat them or barely lost to them, etc, etc.

This point is ridiculous:

The Panthers lost to New Orleans.
The Seahawks lost to Green Bay.
The Steelers lost to Baltimore.

 

[jterrell]

How'd they do in their other games against playoff teams or almost playoff teams? If they beat them or took them down to the final minute or overtime, they might be justified in saying that. But the Raiders beat one playoff team and lost their other games against playoff teams by 10, 14, 19 and nine points. The Rams (whom I think we'd have beaten if it meant something) beat one playoff team and lost their other games against playoff teams by 20, six, 17, 15 and 15 points. So other than one "any given Sunday" win for each, they weren't close to playoff teams.

We were the opposite. Other than one "any given Sunday" blowout loss, we took every playoff team down to the final possession of the game or overtime, winning two games and losing by one point, three points (on the final play) and three points (in overtime).

um, what he said.

Seriously. Dallas lost 1 game against a weak opponent that mattered. Oakland. Oakland back before Randy Moss was whining and Warren Sapp was on ice. They were 0 for and were FAVORED to win the game.

 

[Ashwynn]

Hmmm....just noticing in Adams text, the usage of his words, the spelling actually, made me wonder if hes had any training or education in the media/journalism field.

I know I tried journalism as a major for a semester, and there they taught me to spell numbers less then 10 (meaning zero to nine). and then use the actual numebrs for 10+.

So Adam, you would not be Mike Fisher or JJT after all? Just curious as I read your post and it hit me your using proper journalism technique taught in higher educational facilities and you never mispell a word either.

 

[scottsp]

3. It all changes EVERY SINGLE YEAR. Even if it is true that we were close this year it means absolutely nothing at the start of next year.

Right on. No one knows. Hopefully, we take that next step. Which is why I really look forward to this offseason.

 

[jterrell]

Hmmm....just noticing in Adams text, the usage of his words, the spelling actually, made me wonder if hes had any training or education in the media/journalism field.

I know I tried journalism as a major for a semester, and there they taught me to spell numbers less then 10 (meaning zero to nine). and then use the actual numebrs for 10+.

So Adam, you would not be Mike Fisher or JJT after all? Just curious as I read your post and it hit me your using proper journalism technique taught in higher educational facilities and you never mispell a word either.

Are you serious?

Adam is educated but much more highly so than those 2 gentlemen.
I'd guess Adam has a professional degree of some sort. I'd guess corporate attorney or professional agent.

The Steven Jones comparisons are apropos.

 

[DipChit]

Hmmm....just noticing in Adams text, the usage of his words, the spelling actually, made me wonder if hes had any training or education in the media/journalism field.

I actually think he's a robot cause you'll notice he rarely if ever gets into the business of predicting outcomes ahead of time or debating who a better player *might* be.

He simply waits until the facts are actually in and then analyzes the data.

 

[Undisputed]

I really don't think we are as close as we appeared. We knocked off some good football teams yes, but the most important thing come playoff time is consistency. And this year our boys had absolutely none. They never showed that they could knock off decent teams week by week. The closest thing we got was back to back wins against the Eagles and the Giants early in the year.

With that being said I am hopeful for next year. A few key changes and we are definately in the hunt.

 

[Ashwynn]

Are you serious?

Adam is educated but much more highly so than those 2 gentlemen.
I'd guess Adam has a professional degree of some sort. I'd guess corporate attorney or professional agent.

The Steven Jones comparisons are apropos.

Hey no knock to Adam, just something that struck me while reading his post. it occured to me that most pple dont write numbers the way he did in his post. That is a journalistic trait. Just got the gears in my head turning for a sec. But dont worry, the cob webs have regained their proper place.

PS. anyone know if Steven Jones is journalism major? or studied journalism in college? - lol.