If We Played SF today, do we win?

[CATCH17]

I think we can beat anyone.

As long as we can run the ball like we are then we can.


I still worry about the defense and this team being so mistake prone though but we look as good as anyone really.

 

[romothesavior]

I still worry about the defense and this team being so mistake prone though but we look as good as anyone really.

I agree with this. We have out-played every team we've played, most of them by a considerable margin. But we spotted San Francisco a huge lead, spotted Seattle about 17 points, gave Houston a lot of help with penalties, etc.

This team is clearly capable of beating anyone. Including themselves.

 

[Wheeltax]

I don't think there's any question that Dallas could/would beat SF if they met this weekend.

 

[the_h0wey]

Week 1 was ugly, but do we match up well against them? Remember, they also handed Philly their only loss.

Why would we be playing them on a Tuesday?

 

[FLcowboy]

Week 1 was ugly, but do we match up well against them? Remember, they also handed Philly their only loss.

The 49ers looked really good after they settled down last night, but I don't think the Rams are at the same level as the 49ers. The 49ers should have won the game. They were leading 24-17 late in the game, and the pick 6 sealed it for the 49ers. Not a particularly overwhelming victory in my opinion especially given the Rams' quarterback situation. With Dallas's ground attack and subsequent ball control, the 49ers couldn't afford to go 14 down.

The first game was a fluke, with Romo finally getting live meaningful snaps under center. If Romo were to play them today, a much different result would ensue. Williams's confidence is much higher now and so is his production. He is on the verge of demanding double coverage, much like Bryant, and that spells disaster for the opposing defenses. They'll be forced to choose their poison.

Now to the defense: Spencer and Lawrence are going to provide a pass rush that wasn't available in the first game. Claiborne's replacement, Moore, is playing at a higher level than Claiborne did in the first game. Scandrick is not playing in the first game, and is now playing a a high level. And the biggest difference on defense might be the emergence of Ro McClain.

Nope, I see Dallas winning handily.

 

[Doomsday101]

I hope to get a chance to see that rematch.

 

[Plankton]

The Cowboys controlled the line of scrimmage in that game. They lost the game because of a lack of attention to detail, turnovers (see the first point), Romo being less than 100% in terms of his legs/back, and a couple of quick hitting big plays.

The Cowboys showed in that game that they could land punches. Since then, they have drawn blood and finished teams off.

It would be a tough game, but I do think that they would win.

 

[Bullflop]

If we were to eliminate the errors we could best the 49ers. If not, the same story as before.

Anytime you have several turnovers in any one game, your chances really aren't worth much.

Having said that, I would only hope we get to play them in the playoffs and see if we really deserve it.

 

[Risen Star]

I think we do, but SF is the only team to beat the Cowboys and Eagles. They have also been to the NFC championship 3 yrs straight, they are the team to beat.

I disagree. The team to beat is the team the Cowboys just beat. They're the champs and they've been the favorite to do it again.

 

[perrykemp]

They're a team that if they play their best game and we play terribly they can beat us. But that's true of some other teams. See Colts and Philly. I don't put those teams in the same category as the Chargers and Broncos.

This.

Cowboys are a better team than the Packers, but not so much better that Aaron Rodgers couldn't carry the day if he was red-hot and the Cowboys played just OK.

If both teams bring their A-game, then Cowboys win.

 

[KDM256]

I believe Dallas can beat San Francisco if they played again.... Revenge factor on a piss poor performance in week 1 would be the focus.

 

[big dog cowboy]

I think we can beat anyone.

I like the way you think.

 

[perrykemp]

I think we can beat anyone.

Which is another way of saying that the Cowboys are the best team in the NFL at the moment.

 

[Setackin]

I disagree. The team to beat is the team the Cowboys just beat. They're the champs and they've been the favorite to do it again.

They also aren't playing great football, SF is.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

If we play them the way we've played the last 5 games, yes. I think we win. If we play them the way we played them in the first game, we probably lose.

 

[cowboys2233]

The only teams I don't like our chances against are the Broncos and Chargers, and that's purely due to their QBs. If we play mistake-free football, I think we can dominate both of those teams as well.

Green Bay too. Any team that has Aaron Rodgers is a threat, especially when they have talented receivers. Their defense is horrid but Rodgers is always an X factor. Broncos do not scare me at all -- Peyton is starting to look really old, despite the fact that he's putting up really good numbers again and they have ZERO run game. Chargers? Maybe. Phillip Rivers is another X factor and that dude can get really, really hot.

 

[cowboys2233]

They also aren't playing great football, SF is.

Don't really know how you can say that. I think Seattle would (and will) destroy San Fran. I don't know what you're all looking at but this San Fran team isn't very good, especially in their current state (no Bowman or Smith). They are Seattle Light and we would hammer them in a rematch.

 

[cowboys2233]

I think we do, but SF is the only team to beat the Cowboys and Eagles. They have also been to the NFC championship 3 yrs straight, they are the team to beat.

Um, Seattle is the defending champs and have owned San Fran over the last couple of years. San Fran beat us because Romo was an absolute shell in the first game and the team had not committed to the run game the way they have now. Not giving Murray the ball in both of those goal line situations (both of which ended up in turnovers and zero points for us) was inexcusable. San Francisco beat Philly because Philly isn't as good as most would have you believe.

 

[Setackin]

Um, Seattle is the defending champs and have owned San Fran over the last couple of years. San Fran beat us because Romo was an absolute shell in the first game and the team had not committed to the run game the way they have now. Not giving Murray the ball in both of those goal line situations (both of which ended up in turnovers and zero points for us) was inexcusable. San Francisco beat Philly because Philly isn't as good as most would have you believe.

Ur right I'm srry, I guess the Cowboyscan get sized for their rings now. They're 5-1 with nothing to fear.

 

[cowboys2233]

Ur right I'm srry, I guess the Cowboyscan get sized for their rings now. They're 5-1 with nothing to fear.

The discussion wasn't whether the Cowboys are going to win the SB, it was a discussion about the "team to beat." You said it was San Fran. I'm just telling you you're wrong, it's Seattle. You used the fact that San Fran has been to the NFC championship the last three years as one of your main reasons, as if that is somehow more telling than the fact that Seattle is the defending SB champs and have beaten up on San Fran over the last couple of years. You used the fact that San Fran is the only team to beat the Cowboys and Philly, completely disregarding how awful and careless the Cowboys were in that opening game.