DallasDomination
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 11,791
- Reaction score
- 6,205
Without owens we're still good but not nearly as dominant as e would with Him. Pray he doesnt go down.
Deep_Freeze;2145294 said:Well, Randal was just a guy I drew out of my head, Antoino Bryant among others, it is really a long list that doesn't only include WRs.......and now it is easy to poke holes in them cause it is hindsight.
In 3 years, most of the guys you list we will be able to poke the same exact holes in. Problem with skill position projects is that they come with a higher profile and get more emotional supporters than some backup offensive lineman. They may not be out the door yet, but thats not a ringing endorsement since we really have tried to skate by at the position hoping that we hit the jackpot like we did with Romo.
DallasDomination;2145303 said:Without owens we're still good but not nearly as dominant as e would with Him. Pray he doesnt go down.
CATCH17;2144923 said:Am I the only one on here who would not tottally freak out if for some strange reason Owens got hurt and had to miss some time or possibly the season.
I see so many of you saying that if TO goes down then we will just be a average team.
How does a team with 13 Pro Bowlers all of a sudden become average if we lose 1 man.
YoMick;2145473 said:If TO goes down we go .500 at best over the games he misses.
Its not rocket science. We are not a dominant power running team. Even with the new additions our running game needs ALOT of work.
We went 0-2 without Emmitt. Same things applies here.
You could make the argument that (leave Romo out of this because I am talking about guys catching from Romo)... that TO is 25% of this offense if not more.
We would only be running on 6 out of 8 cylinders if TO goes down. Sputtering and backfiring our way through the misfortune.
YoMick;2145473 said:If TO goes down we go .500 at best over the games he misses.
Its not rocket science. We are not a dominant power running team. Even with the new additions our running game needs ALOT of work.
We went 0-2 without Emmitt. Same things applies here.
You could make the argument that (leave Romo out of this because I am talking about guys catching from Romo)... that TO is 25% of this offense if not more.
We would only be running on 6 out of 8 cylinders if TO goes down. Sputtering and backfiring our way through the misfortune.
YoMick;2145473 said:If TO goes down we go .500 at best over the games he misses.
Its not rocket science. We are not a dominant power running team. Even with the new additions our running game needs ALOT of work.
We went 0-2 without Emmitt. Same things applies here.
You could make the argument that (leave Romo out of this because I am talking about guys catching from Romo)... that TO is 25% of this offense if not more.
We would only be running on 6 out of 8 cylinders if TO goes down. Sputtering and backfiring our way through the misfortune.
Doomsday101;2145491 said:I think that would hinge on 2 factors defense and the running game and I expect both to be much improved. If you can keep teams out of the endzone you don't have to put up alot of points.
dargonking999;2145516 said:Actually you don't have to be a dominant power running team. If our defense can step up to the plate and stop teams from scoring then our offense is good enough with Witten and the rest to at least get into FG range.
If we win games 3-0 its still a W.
sonnyboy;2145518 said:So Owens goes down in camp, you see us as an 8-8 team?
sonnyboy;2145518 said:So Owens goes down in camp, you see us as an 8-8 team?
defenses start keying on Witten and stacking the box to stop the run forcing Romo to beat them with Crayton and Austin/hurd.sonnyboy;2145518 said:So Owens goes down in camp, you see us as an 8-8 team?
YoMick;2145528 said:Partially agree.
And I will tell ya why.... if Owens goes down... opposing teams will ATTACK the box... WHO scares them on the receiving end? No one? Maybe Witten... but that wont be the norm.
THAT will make the running game EVEN harder.
See above.
9-7 at best. Yes.
Our 13-3 was very close to being 10-6 or 11-5 WITH Owens.
YoMick;2145528 said:Partially agree.
And I will tell ya why.... if Owens goes down... opposing teams will ATTACK the box... WHO scares them on the receiving end? No one? Maybe Witten... but that wont be the norm.
THAT will make the running game EVEN harder.
See above.
9-7 at best. Yes.
Our 13-3 was very close to being 10-6 or 11-5 WITH Owens.
dargonking999;2145538 said:Again this team is getting paid to much money to say that no one will be able to do anything offensively to win us more than 8 games. The Jags have no WR's, and there QB is now starting to emerge, but they have been able to be a 10 digit win team.
Are we not better team than the jaguars without Owens?
cowboys2233;2145553 said:Not to be a spell-checker, but you have a sig about wanting people to buy your book? You're not even capable of spelling "too" or "their" correctly, and quite frankly, your sentence construction is god-awful.
Here's an idea, learn how to write properly and then worry about making a living as a writer. Jesus.
dargonking999;2145538 said:Again this team is getting paid to much money to say that no one will be able to do anything offensively to win us more than 8 games. The Jags have no WR's, and there QB is now starting to emerge, but they have been able to be a 10 digit win team.
Are we not better team than the jaguars without Owens?