How much is it all worth?

[SaltwaterServr]

Think of the past season, and how the mediot prognosticators are writing us off for 3rd or 4th in the NFC East. Think of 2007 and the 13-3 record as well.

Take into consideration that we are what our record says we were last season, a 9-7 team.

Now with that 9-7 record how many losses are the following worth?

• losing Terrell's 8 games production of under 40 yards receiving
• losing situational pass rusher Greg Ellis
• losing Anthony Henry's sub par coverage skills
• losing Roy 38's three games of production
• losing Kevin Burnett's nickel and dime coverage skills
• losing the distraction of Tank, Pacman, 81, and Ellis

Now with that 9-7 record, how many wins are the following worth?

• a healthy offensive line for the season
• having Romo healthy for an entire season
• having Felix Jones healthy for an entire season
• having MB3 healthy for an entire season
• having Terrence Newman healthy for an entire season
• having special teams not killing us with poor field position or returned TD's
• having a full offseason for Roy Wi11iams to get on the same page with Tony
• having 2 second year cornerbacks who both could start tomorrow morning if need be
• drafting a slew of rookies who led their conferences in sacks
• having Matt McBriar flipping field position for us on stalled drives
• having Martellus Bennett come on and exhibit the same flashes he showed last year
• having a legitimate 3rd running back who tore into Pittsburgh like no other running back did in any other game last year

How can anyone realistically sit there and expect 9-7 again for this upcoming season?

 

[jswalker1981]

We may miss Burnett's coverage ability, but we'll have to see for sure. If you look at the schedule, this season should be easier to get wins then last year. We play the AFC West, the weakest division in football, instead of the AFC North. But even then, we still have our division, NFC South, an improved Seattle team, and the Packers in Green Bay. And not to mention we play @NYG, SD, @NO, @WAS, and PHI in December. I think we could do very well this year, but I can also see where some outsiders might think less of our team. This year, a lot of the younger guys need to step up and prove why they were drafted.

 

[TwoDeep3]

What if the media is right?

 

[TNCowboy]

All of those players aren't going to be healthy for an entire season. Just won't happen.

 

[Hostile]

I don't think there is any way this team finishes below 10-6. Why do I say that? One thing above all, pride. This team has read the negative press. They know the labels attached to them. They are going to step up with some attitude this year.

We scored 362 points. I think we will improve on that.

We allowed 365 points. I know we will improve on that.

Special Teams will be much improved.

Team chemistry and attitude will be much better.

I just don't see the 9-7 or 8-8 logic. Call me a homer if it makes you feel better. The media right? Wouldn't be the first time but it is rare.

 

[DFWJC]

Although I too think 10-6 or better is doable, you framed almost all of your points to reach the conclusion you wanted to reach.

They were all valid points but obviously many of the them could be flipped 180degrees to negatives.

Just for arguments sake:

*We lose TOs 1054 yards and 10 TDs
*We lose Greg Ellis' 8 sacks and 1 interception
*We lose Henry's 51 tackles, 2 sacks, 1 pick, and 5 PDs
*etc, etc


*Our line is fairly old so odds a full season of no injuries is almost zero
*No guarantees Romo will be healthy 16 games...we can hope
*No guarantees barber will be heralthy...we can hope
*No Guarantees Felix will be healthy...we can hope
*Certainly no guarnett that Special Teams will be better...we hope
*etc, etc

The point is...I agree with your bottom line, but playing very simple Devil's Advocate it's easy to shoot down many of those hypothoses.

I'll say we go anywhere from 9-7 to 12-4...so bottom line is the same.

 

[Hoofbite]

Think of the past season, and how the mediot prognosticators are writing us off for 3rd or 4th in the NFC East. Think of 2007 and the 13-3 record as well.

Take into consideration that we are what our record says we were last season, a 9-7 team.

Now with that 9-7 record how many losses are the following worth?

• losing Terrell's 8 games production of under 40 yards receiving
• losing situational pass rusher Greg Ellis
• losing Anthony Henry's sub par coverage skills
• losing Roy 38's three games of production
• losing Kevin Burnett's nickel and dime coverage skills
• losing the distraction of Tank, Pacman, 81, and Ellis

Now with that 9-7 record, how many wins are the following worth?

• a healthy offensive line for the season
• having Romo healthy for an entire season
• having Felix Jones healthy for an entire season
• having MB3 healthy for an entire season
• having Terrence Newman healthy for an entire season
• having special teams not killing us with poor field position or returned TD's
• having a full offseason for Roy Wi11iams to get on the same page with Tony
• having 2 second year cornerbacks who both could start tomorrow morning if need be
• drafting a slew of rookies who led their conferences in sacks
• having Matt McBriar flipping field position for us on stalled drives
• having Martellus Bennett come on and exhibit the same flashes he showed last year
• having a legitimate 3rd running back who tore into Pittsburgh like no other running back did in any other game last year

How can anyone realistically sit there and expect 9-7 again for this upcoming season?

I dunno, I'd rather wait until the team proves they can than accept it as a given.

Seen far too much go wrong far too often to assume this team will improve on its record.

 

[Future]

This team is still as talented as any team in the NFC, no doubt about it. Picking them to finish any worse than 10-6 is ludacris imo.

 

[sonnyboy]

This team is still as talented as any team in the NFC, no doubt about it. Picking them to finish any worse than 10-6 is ludacris imo.

Good OP and thread. But this is the bottom line. Tell me what NFC team is better/more talented and why?

 

[CATCH17]

Its time for the young guys to be the Stars of this team instead of Owens.

Our guys have more than enough talent to step up and they got a bigtime Quarterback to help with that as well.

 

[Dodger]

How can anyone realistically sit there and expect 9-7 again for this upcoming season?

Because if they're right, it's "I told you so," but if they're wrong, it's "they outperformed expectations," all of which sounds better than the other way around because if they pick us to go 11-5 and they're wrong, they get to hear "you really screwed that one up" all year.

 

[sonnyboy]

Here's the problem as I see it in prognostications. Especially among the fan base which often slide to far to the negative or positive due to the emotion involved.

I agree with Parcels when he said "you are what you are". But people too often apply this logic in making a projection and it's flawed logic for a few reasons.

1) Parcels was referring to the hear and now. If you're 5-5 after week 10 than you 5-5. This logic never held water when it came to guessing what might happen next year.

2) 13-3 isn't always 13-3. 9-7 isn't always 9-7. You have to look inside the record and understand how a team achieved that result when you are attempting to use the previous result as a baseline to project next years performance.

With the benefit of hindsight, it's obvious:
* That the 2003 Cowboys were a weak 10-6. The won many close games had few impressive wins and were non-competitive in multiple contests. I could go on and on about this team but the bottom line is they didn't have the horses. They had few injuries so it's not like they we're ever without key contributers, yet they have multiple games were they looked as if they couldn't win. There's no way that team could have ever won a SB.

* The 2005 Cowboys lost a meaningless season ender to a weak team at home. Almost certainly would've finish 10-6.
I viewed the 2005 Cowboys as a legit 10 win team. Unlike the 2003 Cowboys, they had their fair share of injuries. Flozell being the real killer. This team demonstrated much better potential than the 2003 team. They had one ugly loss in Wash when everything went wrong and the injured OL was exploited. (just like last years philly game). But if memory serves, they were in the other 5 losses and played some real good football against the best the NFL had to offer.

* Just like the 2005 Cowboys the 2006 Cowboys gave up a meaningless season ender at home to a weak team. Absolutely should've won 10 games that year. The 2006 Cowboys as we all know was really two completely diferent teams....pre and post Romo.
With Romo they could beat anyone and played to the level of an 11 win team. No boubt that team would've won 11 games had Romo started week one.

* The 13-3 2007 Cowboys was completely legit. They were clearly an upgrade over the 2006 Cowboys who were good yet very inconsistent under Romo.
This 2007 was the 2nd best team that year. Sure they had a cuople fortune wins, but they also had a couple late losses with the #1 seed all but locked up.

I'll follow up this post later.........

 

[CF74]

How much is it all worth?

How much is winning playoff games worth??? Getting rid of all that dead weight is what will get us there.

10-6 or better with some post season action...:starspin

 

[Future]

Good OP and thread. But this is the bottom line. Tell me what NFC team is better/more talented and why?

that can't be answered

 

[TwoDeep3]

Because if they're right, it's "I told you so," but if they're wrong, it's "they outperformed expectations," all of which sounds better than the other way around because if they pick us to go 11-5 and they're wrong, they get to hear "you really screwed that one up" all year.

Couldn't possibly be that some people look at unproven players and think they maybe don't tote the water to fill the previous shoes?

Of course not. It has to be an "I Told You So" comeback.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Here's the problem as I see it in prognostications. Especially among the fan base which often slide to far to the negative or positive due to the emotion involved.

I agree with Parcels when he said "you are what you are". But people too often apply this logic in making a projection and it's flawed logic for a few reasons.

1) Parcels was referring to the hear and now. If you're 5-5 after week 10 than you 5-5. This logic never held water when it came to guessing what might happen next year.

2) 13-3 isn't always 13-3. 9-7 isn't always 9-7. You have to look inside the record and understand how a team achieved that result when you are attempting to use the previous result as a baseline to project next years performance.

With the benefit of hindsight, it's obvious:
* That the 2003 Cowboys were a weak 10-6. The won many close games had few impressive wins and were non-competitive in multiple contests. I could go on and on about this team but the bottom line is they didn't have the horses. They had few injuries so it's not like they we're ever without key contributers, yet they have multiple games were they looked as if they couldn't win. There's no way that team could have ever won a SB.

* The 2005 Cowboys lost a meaningless season ender to a weak team at home. Almost certainly would've finish 10-6.
I viewed the 2005 Cowboys as a legit 10 win team. Unlike the 2003 Cowboys, they had their fair share of injuries. Flozell being the real killer. This team demonstrated much better potential than the 2003 team. They had one ugly loss in Wash when everything went wrong and the injured OL was exploited. (just like last years philly game). But if memory serves, they were in the other 5 losses and played some real good football against the best the NFL had to offer.

* Just like the 2005 Cowboys the 2006 Cowboys gave up a meaningless season ender at home to a weak team. Absolutely should've won 10 games that year. The 2006 Cowboys as we all know was really two completely diferent teams....pre and post Romo.
With Romo they could beat anyone and played to the level of an 11 win team. No boubt that team would've won 11 games had Romo started week one.

* The 13-3 2007 Cowboys was completely legit. They were clearly an upgrade over the 2006 Cowboys who were good yet very inconsistent under Romo.
This 2007 was the 2nd best team that year. Sure they had a cuople fortune wins, but they also had a couple late losses with the #1 seed all but locked up.

I'll follow up this post later.........

Again you make assumptions on why someone posts their ideas that don't concur with your thoughts. I can cite you chapter and verse why I think this team will play around .500 ball.

Not one of the items I feel are significant have one thing to do with your assumptions.

This has zip to do with emotion. It has to do with the experience and age of players on this team.

 

[burmafrd]

Anyone calling our O line old knows zip about football.

 

[TNCowboy]

Good OP and thread. But this is the bottom line. Tell me what NFC team is better/more talented and why?

No, the bottom line is this team is 9-7 3 of the last 4 years.

That's pretty much they should be expected to finish until they prove otherwise. All the 11-5s and 12-4s have to be classified as wishful thinking.

 

[Dodger]

Couldn't possibly be that some people look at unproven players and think they maybe don't tote the water to fill the previous shoes?

Of course not. It has to be an "I Told You So" comeback.

Even if what you say is the reason for their skepicism, it's usually followed by an "I told you so." That's basic human nature, especially if their opinion is met with resistance.

Duh.

 

[notherbob]

I have quit having any expectations of this group of players. I'm glad to see Jerry flushed the toilet this spring and getting rid of all that old crap is, in my view, the best thing that has happened to this bunch in years and gives me some hope for this season.

Fortunately, I probably won't be watching much of it on TV this year as our mast and antenna were destroyed in a storm a few months ago and a little later our TV was knocked out by lightning.

We can afford to replace it and even get some kind of satellite dish but we are enjoying the peace and quiet so much that we don't want to replace it at this time...maybe later but not now. We're actually having real conversations now and getting so much more work done and things accomplished and goals achieved that we're afraid if we get a new TV it would eat into our newfound good life and productivity.

We're in no hurry. Maybe if the team plays well in December and January (HA!) we might consider getting a new TV. Of course by then football season will be over and there would be no need or desire for TV.

Life is good and it just keeps getting better.