Has there ever been a 11-1 team

[AzorAhai]

I'll never understand why people get so worked up about what the media says, and national media at that. Their jobs are to drive ratings and the media in America has no problems outright showing their bias. What they think has no bearings on what happens on that field. They can call them the worst team ever to win a SB for all I care.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

I'll never understand why people get so worked up about what the media says, and national media at that. Their jobs are to drive ratings and the media in America has no problems outright showing their bias. What they think has no bearings on what happens on that field. They can call them the worst team ever to win a SB for all I care.

Hopefully Dallas is 12-1 come Monday so that can just rehash the conversation.

 

[DFWJC]

If you'd asked me 4-5 games ago, I'd not given us much chance of winning it all.
But this team is capable and the league overall is a bit down this year--enough to where maybe even a team with our defense can do it.
Maybe
It seems every week the chinks in the armour of the so called top teams are ever widening.
It's really doable...imo.

 

[windward]

2007 is a good example where defense won out over one of the best offenses in NFL history (Giants versus Patriots I mean)

Patriots did not have a dominant ground attack though.

 

[kramskoi]

The 2011 Packers come to mind. They started 13-0 and ultimately went 15-1 with no running back over 600 yard rushing and a horrific defense that gave up nearly 6500 yards.

All season long the common refrain was their defense would ultimately be their undoing and it no longer than their 1st playoff game when they got beat handily by the Giants at Lambeau.

Dallas will have to give up 33 ppg over the next four to match the 2011 Packers for points allowed (19th...but dead last in yds). Right now they sit at 19 ppg...fifth in the NFL (18th in yds). The Giants are eighth at 19.75 ppg (17th in yds)...and the only real difference between Dallas and the Giants on defense is Sacks (+5) and INTs (+7)...otherwise they are two defenses that are performing somewhat similarly. That said, Dallas does seem to have an edge in red-zone defense.

That said...the 2011 Packers scored 31 INTs...and Dallas currently has only 4 (12 games). They might equal the number of sacks (29) by seasons end, but it is safe to say that the Dallas defense is very likely to end the 2016 regular season with less than 10 INTs...which is incomprehensible given the points allowed by the defense.

Finally...the 2011 Pack had about 1550 yds rushing. Dallas could get close to 1,000 yds more on the ground by season's end.

 

[AzorAhai]

Hopefully Dallas is 12-1 come Monday so that can just rehash the conversation.

In that case, I'm sure there will be at least 5 more threads created next week talking about the disrespect.

 

[BourbonBalz]

How was the time of possession of the Football last Thursday night against a team with no running game, kind of like the one Dallas faces again Sunday in New York but with a better QB and a better receiving core ..Dallas is nowhere near a top defense.....

Last two games should be alarming

Ah yeah, we won both of those game. I'll take it.

 

[slomoxn]

I seem to remember the 90's run with the same MO, we were next years team, too young, inexperienced, but up and comers. That turned into 3 out of four so I hope this is the same thing, at this point with the way the NFL is now I'll take 1 out of 1 if its this year. I'll worry about the next few after.

 

[BourbonBalz]

I understand your point. Having said that, I think the context of this discussion has to be taken into consideration. We're talking about Dak and his fantastic rookie year because we hope it leads to bigger and better things this year, namely a Super Bowl appearance and a Super Bowl victory.
We can say it hasn't hindered us now, but if we look at history, rookie quarterbacks haven't fared well as it relates to taking their teams to Super Bowls.
Which is why I said, yes, there is no evidence Dak has hindered us. But history says that rookie quarterbacks fall short of their goal.
I hope I'm wrong.

But has a rookie QB ever gotten the opportunity to play, much less start, on as good of a team (especially on offense) as we have this year? In general, only highly drafted QBs start or even play immediately. Those highly drafted QBs are normally on BAD teams that have very high draft picks. That's why rookie QBs usually have poor results. How many teams throughout the history of the NFL that make the playoffs in a QB's rookie year actually start the rookie? Not many I'd bet.

 

[lukin2006]

Well, you can't get to the super bowl unless you make the playoffs, we are in, we will stand a much better chance with HFA throughout...we can win the division Sunday and at least a first round bye...

I have more confidence in this team doing damage in the playoffs than I did the '07 or 14 team...

Our major flaw is our pass D, our run D is solid at this point...if MO comeback and plays the way he was before the injury maybe the pass D will be improved enough to make a run.

I just wonder if Dak is struggling in a playoff game would Garrett bring in Romo? Personally, that's why I'd like Romo to get some game action just in case...

 

[mrmojo]

They were not 11-1, but nobody thought the 92 Cowboy would go to the Super Bowl at this point in the season.

Your right, I believe we had just lost to the Commanders the game after thanksgiving and our chances at home field.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

In that case, I'm sure there will be at least 5 more threads created next week talking about the disrespect.

True, but I enjoy seeing these threads much more than the rehashed hate threads from last year.

 

[sean10mm]

If there ever was a year to have a crazy, out of nowhere Super Bowl win with a rookie QB, this is it.

Nobody in the NFC looks unbeatable. The Seahawks are insanely inconsistent and just lost the best player on the Legion of Boom. The NFC South looks like a great big nothingburger, and the Giants look mediocre at everything and JPP might need surgery. Green Bay is dead and nobody trusts the Lions.

The Patriots look great on paper, but just lost Brady's #1 weapon, and look suspect on defense whenever they aren't playing a total scrub at QB, which has been pretty much all year. This isn't the 2014 Super Bowl team, which had a healthy Gronk and a much more talented defense and was just sort of good at every damn thing.

The Raiders have a flashy offense and a horrible, awful, no-good defense outside of Mack. Like #30 in total defense we're talking here.

The Steelers, Ravens, and Broncos have all backslid. Nobody trusts the Chiefs because Alex "Tiny Hands, Noodle Arms" Smith is their QB.

 

[DFWJC]

Dallas will have to give up 33 ppg over the next four to match the 2011 Packers for points allowed (19th...but dead last in yds). Right now they sit at 19 ppg...fifth in the NFL (18th in yds). The Giants are eighth at 19.75 ppg (17th in yds)...and the only real difference between Dallas and the Giants on defense is Sacks (+5) and INTs (+7)...otherwise they are two defenses that are performing somewhat similarly. That said, Dallas does seem to have an edge in red-zone defense.

That said...the 2011 Packers scored 31 INTs...and Dallas currently has only 4 (12 games). They might equal the number of sacks (29) by seasons end, but it is safe to say that the Dallas defense is very likely to end the 2016 regular season with less than 10 INTs...which is incomprehensible given the points allowed by the defense.

Finally...the 2011 Pack had about 1550 yds rushing. Dallas could get close to 1,000 yds more on the ground by season's end.

In the end, that is how otherwsie dreadful defesne can survive.
Sacks and turnovers hide a lot of sins.