How naive that fans want to blame just one person for all the playoff failures

[Chasing6]

So giving up aTD on the opening drive and the O gave up, what about a stop on the second drive and then the int. I think the majority of writers, fans and the owners know who were the major contributors to the debacle, the HC and the QB who did zero until it was to late, good thing GB put in their 2 team D guys that’s all it took to ignite the offense, stats time.

That is not what I said. You said the defense gave up. The offense kept trying evident of the points they scored.

It makes sense though, because if they did not give up then that had to just be horrendous defense giving up 6 TD's in a row. Good thing they did let up or it could have been 8.

 

[Brax]

That is not what I said. You said the defense gave up. The offense kept trying evident of the points they scored.

It makes sense though, because if they did not give up then that had to just be horrendous defense giving up 6 TD's in a row. Good thing they did let up or it could have been 8.

Have a nice day, I’m not going to beat a dead horse, believe what you will.

 

[kskboys]

"If ever you look around and find you are the smartest person in the room - LEAVE."

Those who know...know why.

OMG, Rocky just claimed he was smart!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Man, I just had no idea he was moonlighting as a comedian!!!!!

 

[kskboys]

I could be wrong but I believe there is very little disagreement from all observers concerning which team had the much greater internal drive and desire (a la grit) to advance in the postseason.

More like a D that can make stops and an O that didn't freak out. Desire and drive do you no good when your LB's barely weigh 2 bucks and your DT's are better served as backups. Lack of talent is still the glaring issue, just like always.

 

[Chasing6]

I could be wrong but I believe there is very little disagreement from all observers concerning which team had the much greater internal drive and desire (a la grit) to advance in the postseason.

We were looking past GB. Not sure if it was the Home win streak that made us over confidet
or what, but we got punched in the mouth both on and defense and offense.

Still can't believe a victory party was being planned well in advance.

 

[CowboyFrog]

We were looking past GB. Not sure if it was the Home win streak that made us over confidet
or what, but we got punched in the mouth both on and defense and offense.

Still can't believe a victory party was being planned well in advance.

I truly believe some here need the problem to be QB play, if its not they have to admit the problem may not be fixable because he owns the team and they know he will never part with his family toy...

 

[Romo_To_Dez]

I said D wasn’t very good but if the O showed up for more than 6 minutes maybe it would have helped the D.

How do we know this for sure. When the offense and Dak played very well against the Seahawks. And yet that didn't prevent the defense from giving up TD drive after TD drive to a Geno Smith lead offense. So that right there is evidence of how there is no guarantee that the defense would have been better if Dak had a turnover free game and the Cowboys offense had put up a better performance.

 

[hopemsu]

The Cowboys won Super Bowls in the 90s because they ran the ball, but just as importantly they had a QB who would make defenses pay if they crowded the line. Dak has had the luxury of having schemes tailored to cover his weaknesses since 2016.
However the warts show in big games, luckily for Dak we've had the weakest run of opponents in NFL history.
Cooper Rush plowed his way through our schedule, he's a awesome back up, but not a starter. Neither is Dak.

the cowboys won superbowls in the 90s because of almost no deficiencies on the whole TEAM. Troy Aikman would absolutely not be in the HOF had he played for another team. The cowboys in the 90s had a defense, especially when they were winning championships. The defense last year for the Chiefs was by far their biggest contributor to a super bowl run.

 

[Streifenkarl]

We were looking past GB. Not sure if it was the Home win streak that made us over confidet
or what, but we got punched in the mouth both on and defense and offense.

Still can't believe a victory party was being planned well in advance.

THIS I can fully agree with.

 

[Romo_To_Dez]

I truly believe some here need the problem to be QB play, if its not they have to admit the problem may not be fixable because he owns the team and they know he will never part with his family toy...

Dak had an very subpar game against GB and should have been better. But for some to try are trying to absolve the defense by claiming they would have played better if Dak and the offense was better. Or are claiming that Dak just made them give up and decided to stop trying. Implying how the defense would have been more lights out or played better if Dak and the offense had came out lighting up the scoreboard.

When the Seahawks game just proves how there is no guarantee the defense would have been playing better if Dak had played better. Dak and the Cowboys offense needed to score 41 points to beat a Geno Smith lead offense. Which shows how there has been a pattern of the defense playing badly sometimes, even when the offense is able to put 30 points or more on the scoreboard.

 

[noshame]

the cowboys won superbowls in the 90s because of almost no deficiencies on the whole TEAM. Troy Aikman would absolutely not be in the HOF had he played for another team. The cowboys in the 90s had a defense, especially when they were winning championships. The defense last year for the Chiefs was by far their biggest contributor to a super bowl run.

Thanks for contributing. I need a good chuckle from time to time.

Troy Aikman had a passer rating of 111.9 with 689 yards, 5 touchdowns and 1 interception in 3 games in Super Bowls in his career.

 

[Brax]

How do we know this for sure. When the offense and Dak played very well against the Seahawks. And yet that didn't prevent the defense from giving up TD drive after TD drive to a Geno Smith lead offense. So that right there is evidence of how there is no guarantee that the defense would have been better if Dak had a turnover free game and the Cowboys offense had put up a better performance.

41-35 but Dak did nothing against GB until the end, take away the 2 int’s and let say the D gave up 34 you believe Dak and the O doing basically nothing for 3 quarters is a non factor, staying on the field with a struggling D is a priority also the score at half would have been 14-7 or maybe 10-7 at halftime as bad as the D played it would have been a 3 to 7 point difference, sorry it’s in Dak who wilted and disappeared, biggest problem was the total lack of preparation of the team and for MM to say his team was prepared should of resulted in a immediate firing, sorry there’s no spin Dak dug another hole and again couldn’t find a way to get out of it. Paying the O side of the ball twice the D side means the O is the strength of the team the last 3 seasons come playoff time they are the weak link.

 

[Romo_To_Dez]

41-35 but Dak did nothing against GB until the end, take away the 2 int’s and let say the D gave up 34 you believe Dak and the O doing basically nothing for 3 quarters is a non factor, staying on the field with a struggling D is a priority also the score at half would have been 14-7 or maybe 10-7 at halftime as bad as the D played it would have been a 3 to 7 point difference, sorry it’s in Dak who wilted and disappeared, biggest problem was the total lack of preparation of the team and for MM to say his team was prepared should of resulted in a immediate firing, sorry there’s no spin Dak dug another hole and again couldn’t find a way to get out of it. Paying the O side of the ball twice the D side means the O is the strength of the team the last 3 seasons come playoff time they are the weak link.

I'm not denying that Dak should have played better. And was a big factor in why that game turned out the way that it did. I'm just not for completely absolving the defense of their poor performance by putting it all on Dak. Nor do I want our defensive players to have the mentality that it's okay for them to play badly if the QB has a subpar performance or just not take responsibility for how they perform in a playoff game, by deciding that they are going to give up or not even try if the QB isn't coming out lighting up the scoreboard or throws picks.

While Dak's QB play is compared to other QBs who performed better in the playoffs. The defenses effort can also be compared to how other defenses played in the playoffs. We saw offenses go through 2 or 3 quarters without putting up a lot of points and defense that didn't use that as an excuse to give up TD drive after TD drive. And saw QBs who turned the ball over and yet their defense still did enough to keep them in the game. So our offense stalling out for a few quarters, isn't an excuse for the defense to perform badly all game long, to the point of leaving some of the GB WRs so open, that there wasn't even a Cowboys defender in the screen shot of some of the frames. Dak isn't to blame for that.

And even in the instance of the Cowboys moving on from Dak, I don't want the next Cowboys QB to be saddled with a defense who is going to decide that they'll give up during the game in the offense isn't playing well. Or that they are going to blame the QB for their poor perform, if he doesn't happen to have a good game himself.

 

[Brax]

I'm not denying that Dak should have played better. And was a big factor in why that game turned out the way that it did. I'm just not for completely absolving the defense of their poor performance by putting it all on Dak. Nor do I want our defensive players to have the mentality that it's okay for them to play badly if the QB has a subpar performance or just not take responsibility for how they perform in a playoff game, by deciding that they are going to give up or not even try if the QB isn't coming out lighting up the scoreboard or throws picks.

While Dak's QB play is compared to other QBs who performed better in the playoffs. The defenses effort can also be compared to how other defenses played in the playoffs. We saw offenses go through 2 or 3 quarters without putting up a lot of points and defense that didn't use that as an excuse to give up TD drive after TD drive. And saw QBs who turned the ball over and yet their defense still did enough to keep them in the game. So our offense stalling out for a few quarters, isn't an excuse for the defense to perform badly all game long, to the point of leaving some of the GB WRs so open, that there wasn't even a Cowboys defender in the screen shot of some of the frames. Dak isn't to blame for that.

And even in the instance of the Cowboys moving on from Dak, I don't want the next Cowboys QB to be saddled with a defense who is going to decide that they'll give up during the game in the offense isn't playing well. Or that they are going to blame the QB for their poor perform, if he doesn't happen to have a good game himself.

Defense was definitely not good against GB but they played very well in the 2 SF Playoff losses, Dak seems to wilt away in playoff games with good D’s and decent Os. If it was a shoot out and Dak played great the whole game no complaints but he basically showed up the last quarter and not all of that

 

[Rockport]

Show some facts on that. So scoring 16 points through 3 quarters and being responsible for 14 points for GB was the D fault, 3 and out Dak when he wasn’t throwing a int or pick 6 had nothing to do with it. Just say it Dak sucked and the D didn’t have a chance.

It was certainly the worst defensive performance of any Cowboys team I’ve seen. The Bears slaughtered them one year but that was expected. I don’t remember a worst playoff performance by a Cowboys defense than that GB fiasco.

 

[Brax]

It was certainly the worst defensive performance of any Cowboys team I’ve seen. The Bears slaughtered them one year but that was expected. I don’t remember a worst playoff performance by a Cowboys defense than that GB fiasco.

Only you could make up something like this, I guess we agree that Dak can’t hold up his end unless he has that 85 bears D, so what happened in those 2 SF debacles I suppose you are blaming the D for that too, oh it was the refs that’s a great fallback when Dak craps the bed again. Your answer is to make him the highest paid QB who is the biggest choker in NFL history, makes sense too you as he was an almost MVP without a single first place vote. Like I said if Dak showed the whole game and loss I’d accept that but showing up for 6 minutes when the second string is out there and padding stats is pathetic except to those with Dak blinders on

 

[Chasing6]

the cowboys won superbowls in the 90s because of almost no deficiencies on the whole TEAM. Troy Aikman would absolutely not be in the HOF had he played for another team. The cowboys in the 90s had a defense, especially when they were winning championships. The defense last year for the Chiefs was by far their biggest contributor to a super bowl run.

100% correct!!! Best team money could buy.

In 5 of Troy's seasons he threw more INT's than TD's. In his career he averaged 2 TD's more per year than INT's for a career total of +24.

 

[Romo_To_Dez]

Only you could make up something like this, I guess we agree that Dak can’t hold up his end unless he has that 85 bears D, so what happened in those 2 SF debacles I suppose you are blaming the D for that too, oh it was the refs that’s a great fallback when Dak craps the bed again. Your answer is to make him the highest paid QB who is the biggest choker in NFL history, makes sense too you as he was an almost MVP without a single first place vote. Like I said if Dak showed the whole game and loss I’d accept that but showing up for 6 minutes when the second string is out there and padding stats is pathetic except to those with Dak blinders on

And I guess you are saying that the defense can't hold up their end, unless the QB is perfect and the offense is lighting up the scoreboard for all 4 quarters. So by this logic, why pay any of the defensive players a big contract if they have to rely on the QB to be perfect and the offense to have to score 30+ points to win some games? You are saying that I have on "Dak blinders." Just because I expect the rest of the team, including the defense to also do their part when it comes to the playoffs. The defense is just as much to blame for GB's back ups coming in.

Parsons is set to become the highest paid Non-QB player and defender in the NFL. So I expect him and the rest of the defense to show up in the playoffs and do their part. Just like I expect Dak to.

I don't blame the defense for losing against SF because those games I can put the loss entirely on QB play. Especially the 2022 playoff game against SF. But the GB game isn't the case of the game being entirely on one player or one side of the ball.

 

[kskboys]

the cowboys won superbowls in the 90s because of almost no deficiencies on the whole TEAM. Troy Aikman would absolutely not be in the HOF had he played for another team. The cowboys in the 90s had a defense, especially when they were winning championships. The defense last year for the Chiefs was by far their biggest contributor to a super bowl run.

The 90's super bowl winning Cowboys were Defensive teams.

 

[kskboys]

100% correct!!! Best team money could buy.

In 5 of Troy's seasons he threw more INT's than TD's. In his career he averaged 2 TD's more per year than INT's for a career total of +24.

Don't recall any expensive FA's we signed. Who are you referring to? Haley and Casillas were trades.

Our super bowl winning teams were clearly built from the draft, w/ a few key additions such as Haley and Casillas.