News: FoxSports: Can Dak Prescott lead this year's Cowboys to a Super Bowl?

[Ranching]

Was I supposed to take the red or the blue pill before reading that.

 

[88sAndHeartbreak]

Right.

So to @88sAndHeartbreak 's comment.
"We have a talented enough team to make an impact in the post season, and I challenge anyone to prove the opposite."

The fact our "talented enough team" hasn't made an impact in the post season in 27 years, is all the proof that's needed.

Proof exists in the past and the present, never in the future. You can't prove a future event; you can only prove a past event or a present event.

So if a person says this team isn't talented enough, he/she can look to last year to offer proof - or in this case the past 27 years. But a person can't look into the future to prove this team is talented enough to make an impact.

Now, maybe this team is. But when that manifests itself it will be the present not the future.

Actually we can speculate based off last year, since we didn't lose because we weren't talented enough. We lost because of the mistakes that were made by the team/coaching staff.

If we stumbled and fumbled into the playoffs with a 7-8 record you would have a point. But we didn't, so...

 

[tyke1doe]

Was I supposed to take the red or the blue pill before reading that.

I was thinking more deciphering the space-time continuum.

 

[Typhus]

I was thinking more deciphering the space-time continuum.

I took both so Im covered then.

 

[Typhus]

There’s a lot of dope fiends in this thread parading ad Cowboy fans…

Please provide a list

 

[tyke1doe]

Actually we can speculate based off last year, since we didn't lose because we weren't talented enough. We lost because of the mistakes that were made by the team/coaching staff.

Yet, our talent wasn't enough to overcome those "other" things. So were/are we "talented enough"?

If we stumbled and fumbled into the playoffs with a 7-8 record you would have a point. But we didn't, so...

You don't get off that fast. You said we were talented enough to make an impact in the playoffs. We were not by virtue of the fact that we didn't, and we loss. That is a fact that has already been proven. Now prove we're talented enough to make an impact this year?

You can't because that answer lies ... in the future.

 

[john van brocklin]

Possible, but not likely

 

[morat1959]

For the 100th time, NO team with Dak as the starter will EVER win a SB.

 

[88sAndHeartbreak]

Yet, our talent wasn't enough to overcome those "other" things. So were/are we "talented enough"?


You don't get off that fast. You said we were talented enough to make an impact in the playoffs. We were not by virtue of the fact that we didn't, and we loss. That is a fact that has already been proven. Now prove we're talented enough to make an impact this year?

You can't because that answer lies ... in the future.

Being talented and executing a good gameplan are two very different things. We lost because we didn't execute a good gameplan, not because we weren't talented enough. If talent alone won SB's, Dan Marino would have 17 rings.

So like I said before... we are talented enough to make an impact, but we have to minimize the mistakes.

 

[tyke1doe]

Being talented and executing a good gameplan are two very different things. We lost because we didn't execute a good gameplan, not because we weren't talented enough. If talent alone won SB's, Dan Marino would have 17 rings.

Sounds like you've got all kinds of excuses. So we're talented but ... our shoes weren't tied right. The stars weren't aligned. We got injured. The coaches called the wrong play.

There's always something you'll use to reason we are talented but ...

But maybe it's we simply aren't talented enough to make an impact.

So like I said before... we are talented enough to make an impact, but we have to minimize the mistakes.

Be that as it may, my point is that's nothing you can prove now. I can prove we aren't because we haven't made an impact in the playoffs in 27 years.
You say we are put you have no proof.
Your proof may or may not come ... in the future.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Please provide a list

Its against forum rules but they know who they are lol.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Cmon Roy, just a little hope

Hope isnt a conversation.

 

[88sAndHeartbreak]

Sounds like you've got all kinds of excuses. So we're talented but ... our shoes weren't tied right. The stars weren't aligned. We got injured. The coaches called the wrong play.

There's always something you'll use to reason we are talented but ...

But maybe it's we simply aren't talented enough to make an impact.



Be that as it may, my point is that's nothing you can prove now. I can prove we aren't because we haven't made an impact in the playoffs in 27 years.
You say we are put you have no proof.
Your proof may or may not come ... in the future.

Edit:

You know what... you got it. I'm not doing this anymore.

 

[Hagman]

 

[Section446]

Nope, he's just an average QB.

 

[PAPPYDOG]

Only in the.....

 

[Jipper]

I honestly want to know if he can lead them to a playoff win first….then a divisional round win….then a nfcc game win….

forget super bowl and start on step one…

 

[Jimbo123]

Maybe he'll win a playoff game, but the SB. Come on man, be real.

 

[Motorola]

Yet, our talent wasn't enough to overcome those "other" things. So were/are we "talented enough"?


You don't get off that fast. You said we were talented enough to make an impact in the playoffs. We were not by virtue of the fact that we didn't, and we loss. That is a fact that has already been proven. Now prove we're talented enough to make an impact this year?

You can't because that answer lies ... in the future.

I never tire of watching that show. A good number of actors and actresses appeared in episodes before they became big-time in tv and /or the movies.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Yes he could. And Pauley Shore could become NFL commissioner.