If this forum was around...

[Temo]

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.

Actually, Deion was with us that game, and his lack of preparation was one of the reasons we gave up so many points so early.

But the other stuff. Last year when we lost to the Rams everyone lost their minds... and I AGREED. We got blown out. That's bad. But losing a close game is BETTER than getting blown out. We know we're not bad, unlike after the Rams game last year. We have to fix stuff and come back strong; sure Romo is going to throw more picks, but he's going to win games for you too. He has before.

I just don't get the wildly disproportionate response to a game we lost in the last seconds and had a few bounces go against us.

 

[zrinkill]

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?

I was told that in this thread

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=162600


Then when I laid out the side by side comparison ..... nobody wanted to talk about it any more.

funny that.

 

[JonJon]

Actually, Deion was with us that game, and his lack of preparation was one of the reasons we gave up so many points so early.

But the other stuff. Last year when we lost to the Rams everyone lost their minds... and I AGREED. We got blown out. That's bad. But losing a close game is BETTER than getting blown out. We know we're not bad, unlike after the Rams game last year. We have to fix stuff and come back strong; sure Romo is going to throw more picks, but he's going to win games for you too. He has before.

I just don't get the wildly disproportionate response to a game we lost in the last seconds and had a few bounces go against us.

You sure about Deion? I am pretty certain Deion won the Superbowl with the 49ers that year and then joined the Cowboys the following season when we beat the Steelers in the SB. I'll have to check to be sure.


Edit: Yes you are right. I thought this was game was about the NFC Championship game from 1994 where we lost 38-28. This game is actually the next season regular season game. Big difference. My bad.

 

[Temo]

You sure about Deion? I am pretty certain Deion won the Superbowl with the 49ers that year and then joined the Cowboys the following season when we beat the Steelers in the SB. I'll have to check to be sure.

Nah, I purposely only picked games in season where we won the Super Bowl. I also specifically remember Deion because I was a huge Deion fan at the time (I was a kid) and I was disappointed that he seemed tired and out of place all the time in that game (he didn't sign with the team until Week 2 of the season, as I recall).

He did pick it up later in the season and the Cowboys avoided the 49ers in the playoffs enroute to the last of their SB victories.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

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

I don't know where you got those numbers but I was certain that Aikman didn't even play in that playoff win. Steve played in that game and won. Aikman played the next week against Detriot, though I don't believe he actually started, when we got blown out by the Lions.

In fact looking at the stats on NFL.com that was correct. Steve started both those games. Aikman, to that point, had never won a playoff game.

On...

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

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

The Eagles in 1992 would have been a major meltdown. There will be people telling you now, with the full picture, that they wouldn't have. They'd have looked big picture. BS. Complete and total BS.

They'd have freaked out and blown up. They'd have been calling for Aikmans head about how he couldn't win big games. To that point Aikman had never won a playoff game. The team did in 1991 but Aikman didn't even play in the game they won at Chicago. They'd have wanted him run out on a rail and would have been talking about how he was a 1st round, 1st pick in the draft, bust cause he couldn't win any big games. They'd have fried him, without a doubt.

The Bills game in 1993 he'd have been cut his slack cause they'd just won their Superbowl. The board would have freaked out but they'd have freaked out that Jerry was being greedy and wouldn't pay Emmitt. That would have been the meltdown there. They'd have been calling for Jerry's head.

The 1995 Niners game would have been a disaster to some extent but might have been over looked. Going in the fans would have believed we should crush them without Steve Young. Up until the point where Aikman got hurt they'd have been pissed that we were blowing a game against a team we should be beating. The moment he got hurt they'd have chalked it up to not having Aikman when we really needed him and it would have been forgotten.

The bigger meltdown would have happened later that year in the Philly game and I can't even imagine how pissed off this board would have been at Barry Switzer.

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.

Well that idea is horrible then. Romo has to win a playoff game to get more rope but the two games can't be compared cause the team had won a playoff game in 1991? So is it that a team has to win a playoff game or just the QB? Cause in 1992 Troy Aikman hadn't won jack as a starting QB.

It's either a team game folks or it isn't. Either teams win playoff games, and big games, or only the QB does. People can't have it both ways in order to fit their argument or stance on one player to another.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Another key game in 1992, very early on, that might have caused a meltdown was how the Cowboys blew a 34-0 lead on the Giants in week two and allowed the GMen to pull it back to 34-28 and only a late INT, IIRC, on the Giants very last possession of the game kept them from coming all the way back. I can imagine that a ton of people on this board would have been super pissed off at the defense and would have wanted to cut or trade anyone who didn't make a play in the game. It would have probably been pretty ugly to.

And we'd have had the same usual suspects telling us to quit drinking the kool-aid and that our team would just ultimately fail, as they always did, cause they couldn't do this or that. Troy Aikman would have been a bum, especially after the Philly game on Monday night, who couldn't win big games and would never be able to win big games. You know the drill.

 

[Temo]

I don't know where you got those numbers but I was certain that Aikman didn't even play in that playoff win. Steve played in that game and won. Aikman played the next week against Detriot, though I don't believe he actually started, when we got blown out by the Lions.

In fact looking at the stats on NFL.com that was correct. Steve started both those games. Aikman, to that point, had never won a playoff game.

My excuse is that I was 6 years old at the time

 

[TellerMorrow34]

My excuse is that I was 6 years old at the time

lol. Good enough.