If this forum was around...

[Temo]

On...

October 6th, 1992
September 13th, 1993
November 13th, 1995

I wonder what the posts would have looked like. :laugh2:

 

[mldardy]

On...

October 6th, 1992
September 13th, 1993
November 13th, 1995

I wonder what the posts would have looked like. :laugh2:

For the first Philly game, I think most people would have said it's early in the season and we will see Philly again at home.

That Buffalo game, everybody would have been all over Jerry to get Emmitt signed now.

The 2nd Philly game, I think this board has a meltdown like you wouldn't believe and want Barry fired immediately.
Edit: Sorry I didn't look. I thought that was the Philly game where we went for it on 4th and 1 TWICE.

That San Fran game, I think people would have been mad because we lost to the 49ers without Steve Young but realized we still could get homefield adv throughout the playoffs.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

^^^Let's focus on winning a Playoff Game first.

Furthermore, the 2009 Cowboys Defense is nowhere near comparable to those defenses.

 

[twentytwo]

For the first Philly game, I think most people would have said it's early in the season and we will see Philly again at home.

That Buffalo game, everybody would have been all over Jerry to get Emmitt signed now.

The 2nd Philly game, I think this board has a meltdown like you wouldn't believe and want Barry fired immediately.

I think the meltdown would have happened in the first Philly game. Troy's line looks pretty similar to a game we just watched.... except in this situation we got CRUSHED.

Troy got hurt in the game in 95 though, so I'm not so sure people would have been quite as upset.

 

[zrinkill]

Great post

 

[zrinkill]

^^^Let's focus on winning a Playoff Game first.

Furthermore, the 2009 Cowboys Defense is nowhere near comparable to those defenses.

But I always here how Tony's team has more talent than Troy's?

I am confused.

 

[Temo]

For the first Philly game, I think most people would have said it's early in the season and we will see Philly again at home.

That Buffalo game, everybody would have been all over Jerry to get Emmitt signed now.

The 2nd Philly game, I think this board has a meltdown like you wouldn't believe and want Barry fired immediately.

1. Really, so in 1992, before he won a superbowl, when Troy Aikman goes 19-38 and throws 3 pics to lose a game against a division rival, the board would have been fine?

2. Really, we lost the first 2 games because we were missing one player? That would have been the ONLY response? I thought those teams were STACKED with talent, no? I mean, you don't get blown out by an eventual 4-12 team in week 1 (Commanders, 35-16) missing ONE player, right? Aikman threw 2 picks, no TDs against Buffalo. If he doesn't throw 2 picks we probably win. Bet the board would have wanted his head.

3. I linked to the San Fran game, you're right, everyone would have melted down.

 

[mldardy]

This might have actually been said after that next win when the fans overreacted too positively, actually. Considering in 1992 it had been a decade without a playoff win and we were coming off a 1-15 and 7-9 seasons.

We won a playoff game the previous season at Chicago.

 

[Temo]

^^^Let's focus on winning a Playoff Game first.

Furthermore, the 2009 Cowboys Defense is nowhere near comparable to those defenses.

The point is that in 1992, Troy hadn't won much either. And no, before we go down that point, I'm not saying Troy=Romo. Or that 1992 Cowboys=2009 Cowboys.

What I'm saying is people need to stop overreacting.

 

[mldardy]

1. Really, so in 1992, before he won a superbowl, when Troy Aikman goes 19-38 and throws 3 pics to lose a game against a division rival, the board would have been fine?

2. Really, we lost the first 2 games because we were missing one player? That would have been the ONLY response? I thought those teams were STACKED with talent, no? I mean, you don't get blown out by an eventual 4-12 team in week 1 (Commanders, 35-16) missing ONE player, right? Aikman threw 2 picks, no TDs against Buffalo. If he doesn't throw 2 picks we probably win. Bet the board would have wanted his head.

3. I linked to the San Fran game, you're right, everyone would have melted down.

1. Yes because it was early in the season. Yeah sure some would have been frustrated but I think most would have looked at the bigger picture and that is we play Philly again at home.

2. We were missing arguably the best running back and best player in the NFL at that time and didn't have a a reliable backup and it showed because everyone was pressing including Jimmy.

 

[Temo]

We won a playoff game the previous season at Chicago.

Yes, surely Aikman's 9-18 for 180 yards was the catalyst for that win.

 

[mldardy]

Yes, surely Aikman's 9-18 for 180 yards was the catalyst for that win.

What?

 

[Temo]

1. Yes because it was early in the season. Yeah sure some would have been frustrated but I think most would have looked at the bigger picture and that is we play Philly again at home.

2. We were missing arguably the best running back and best player in the NFL at that time and didn't have a a reliable backup and it showed because everyone was pressing including Jimmy.

1. That SHOULD have been the response. But then we're talking about the same people who are losing their minds over a last-second loss to the Giants in week 2.

2. Then I guess we would have been all over Aikman for not being able to win games and relying on Emmitt.

 

[Vtwin]

Apples and oranges.

I wonder if the 92,93,95 Zoners would have seen more potential in those teams or in this team?

Personally, the 92 loss to the Eagles didn't phase me. We had won three straight, coming off a bye and the Eagles had been in our heads for years.

The two losses to open the 93 season didn't phase me either. Still had the hangover and were missing the eventual all time leading rusher in the NFL with nobody to back him up.

The 95 loss to the 49's..... well that was a bit harder to take because in some ways it signaled the beginning of the end.

disclaimer:

My thoughts on the comparison of these two teams is not intended to indicate that I think the 2009/2010 team is done after two games. We don't really no jack about this team yet and I really do think they can overcome themselves and go on to have an exciting season in which the sky is the limit.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

But I always here how Tony's team has more talent than Troy's?

I am confused.

And anyone saying that is obviously not watching the games.

I wonder what the longest stretch those Cowboys defenses went without a Sack or Turnover?

 

[Hostile]

On...

October 6th, 1992
September 13th, 1993
November 13th, 1995

I wonder what the posts would have looked like. :laugh2:

Welcome to hand wringing hysteria. If our football coaches had it we'd have neurotic players who spent practice time on psychiatrists couches.

We live in a time when people are very soft.

A wise old cowboys once told me, "be grateful for fools. Without them none of us would amount to a damn thing."

 

[THEHEREAFTER]

Horrible thread in that the 92 team had shown they can win a playoff game the prev year at Chicago but I get your point. My point is let Romo WIN A PLAYOFF GAME and he'll get more rope.

 

[JonJon]

I actually remember all of those games. Does that mean I'm getting old?

Anyway, those games were bad losses, but still do not compare to Sunday night. The easiest of those was the Bills loss. It is known as their "revenge" game. This game was following the 52-17 spanking that we put on them in the SB the previous season. They simply out-hustled us. However, Emmitt was still exercising his contract hold-out and had not signed, so he didn't play. That gave us an "out" as to why we lost. Plus the Bills were still very, very good at the time. Now if you really wanted to gauge a reaction, you should have listed the previous week where we got blown out by Washington 35-16. That was a horrible loss where turnovers told the story.

The Eagles game was a bad loss, but we where still growing then. It was an exciting time, but we were young and had not arrived yet. The Eagles were still a very good team and simply out-played Dallas.

Now that 49ers game would have gotten major reaction. I still remember that game vividly. Granted the 49ers were still very good, loaded with talent, and dominant with Young, Rice, Deion Sanders. That first half was a complete disaster. The 49ers were jacked up and the Cowboys came into the game flat. I even remember ther two teams getting into pre-game fights initiated by the 49ers. But I still felt that the Cowboys comitted stupid turnovers and also got jobbed by the refs on some bad calls. But the reality is, we got out-payed, out-hustled, and thats why we lost.

Now here is why I say the Giants loss was worse; we still dominated the game despite the 4 turnovers, lack of pass rush, and swiss cheese pass defense. If we don't commit those turnovers, we walk out of there with a comfortable, "easy win" victory. We beat ourselves and thats why it is hard to accept.

 

[Temo]

Horrible thread in that the 92 team had shown they can win a playoff game the prev year at Chicago but I get your point. My point is let Romo WIN A PLAYOFF GAME and he'll get more rope.

But what the hell does a Week 2 loss to the Giants have to do with playoff success, at all? If Romo craps the bed late in the season again, fine go ahead and give me your worst.

I purposely chose earlier games for a reason. A bad game and a close content during the second week of the season is NOT the time to lose your mind.

 

[viman96]

^^^Let's focus on winning a Playoff Game first.

Furthermore, the 2009 Cowboys Defense is nowhere near comparable to those defenses.

Focus on winning? None of are suiting up for the Cowboys. Fans need to focus on being knowledgeable of the team and the ups and downs that come with ANY season.