I'm so sick of hearing about our great offense

[TheSport78]

First off I want to say that I have high hopes for this Dallas team in 2007. However when reporters like Mickey Spagnola are talking up our offense because it put up 425 points (not including playoffs), it ticks me off. I looked at the Cowboys' 2006 season game-by-game and Spagnola is incorrect in his analysis. He forgot that our defense scored 4 TD's in 06' (28 pts) and scored once on special teams (Newman punt return TD against DET, 7 pts). Him and other reporters/fans need to look at the facts. If you discard the defensive and special teams scores, our offense really put up 390 points scored in the regular season, and only 55 of those points went against teams with winning records. We were 1-3 against teams with winning records by the way. This is what the Cowboys have been known for pretty recently. We beat up on the bad teams and struggle against the good teams. Until the Cowboys of the 21st century learn how to play in big game situations against solid teams CONSISTENTLY, I'm not going to get excited about this year. I think our inability to come through in the "big game" was due to a lack of character and a lack of leadership on both sides of the ball. I'm hoping Romo will become that leader we've lacked for about 7 years now, and Hamlin to become that QB of the defense we need badly.

Against teams that ended with winning records in 06')
Week 5: @ PHI (17 pts.)
Week 11: IND (14 pts.)
Week 14: NO (17 pts.)
Week 16: PHI (7 pts.)

Note: All stats do NOT include the playoff game @ SEA.

 

[MonsterD]

I believe we have helped solve half the issues if our offense with strengthening the O-line. Now two huge question marks are how Romo and Julius are going to play this season.

 

[NoLuv4Jerry]

First off I want to say that I have high hopes for this Dallas team in 2007. However when reporters like Mickey Spagnola are talking up our offense because it put up 425 points (not including playoffs), it ticks me off. I looked at the Cowboys' 2006 season game-by-game and Spagnola is incorrect in his analysis. He forgot that our defense scored 4 TD's in 06' (28 pts) and scored once on special teams (Newman punt return TD against DET, 7 pts). Him and other reporters/fans need to look at the facts. If you discard the defensive and special teams scores, our offense really put up 390 points scored in the regular season, and only 55 of those points went against teams with winning records. We were 1-3 against teams with winning records by the way. This is what the Cowboys have been known for pretty recently. We beat up on the bad teams and struggle against the good teams. Until the Cowboys of the 21st century learn how to play in big game situations against solid teams CONSISTENTLY, I'm not going to get excited about this year. I think our inability to come through in the "big game" was due to a lack of character and a lack of leadership on both sides of the ball. I'm hoping Romo will become that leader we've lacked for about 7 years now, and Hamlin to become that QB of the defense we need badly.

Against teams that ended with winning records in 06')
Week 5: @ PHI (17 pts.)
Week 11: IND (14 pts.)
Week 14: NO (17 pts.)
Week 16: PHI (7 pts.)

Note: All stats do NOT include the playoff game @ SEA.

You won't get an argument out of me...I have been saying that for months...I really do not care what we did against the Texans or the Falcons or the Bucs or the Cards....we should be beyond comparing oursleves to doormat teams...we struggled against good teams and we struggled in December...we got swept by the Eagles ( and this was not that great of a philly team)...we split with a terrible Commanders team....and we split with a mediore Giants team...until we start taking these teams that are inferior in talent to us...and crushing them like a grape...then we are all just hoping.

 

[Big Dakota]

I'm not blaming Bill totally, but i think we will be a lot less vanilla on O and D with Wade and Jason. We became so darn predictable in December EVERY STINKIN YEAR under Parcells.

 

[AdamJT13]

The offense also put up 35 points against Carolina and 38 against Tennessee. Both of those teams went 8-7 against everyone else and would have been 9-7 overall if we hadn't beaten them.

So, if our defense had stunk in those games, too, and we had lost to the Panthers and Titans, they both would have gone 9-7 and the this entire thread wouldn't be necessary. It's the same with scoring 23 points and beating the Giants, who finished 8-8. If we lost that game, they'd be a winning team. And if we had swept the Eagles, they wouldn't be a winning team.

In other words, it's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy -- if the offense plays well and beats teams, they don't end up with winning records. If the offense doesn't play as well and loses, they do.

 

[TheSport78]

The offense also put up 35 points against Carolina and 38 against Tennessee. Both of those teams went 8-7 against everyone else and would have been 9-7 overall if we hadn't beaten them.

So, if our defense had stunk in those games, too, and we had lost to the Panthers and Titans, they both would have gone 9-7 and the this entire thread wouldn't be necessary. It's the same with scoring 23 points and beating the Giants, who finished 8-8. If we lost that game, they'd be a winning team. And if we had swept the Eagles, they wouldn't be a winning team.

In other words, it's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy -- if the offense plays well and beats teams, they don't end up with winning records. If the offense doesn't play as well and loses, they do.

When we beat Carolina, they fell to 4-4 and had many opportunities to go above .500, which is something they failed to do. Just because they finished 8-8 doesn't mean they didnt finish with a winning record b/c of the Cowboys loss, but because they were an inconsistent football team. Tennessee is a different story b/c they got hot later in the year, but lost in the season finale to the below-average Buffalo Bills. The Titans were lucky to win 8 games b/c Vince Young single-handedly won numerous games for them. We all know the Giants crumbled in the 2nd half of the season and the Cowboys took advantage of that. We BARELY beat a declining Giants team that was lucky to make the playoffs (thanks Deadskins!).

 

[kTXe]

Well, without similar numbers for the other teams in the league, your numbers are absolutely meaningless. Since I don't want you to look like a fool for such a stupid omission in a statistical argument, I will go ahead and provide some numbers for comparison.

Here were the top 10 teams in scoring last year by total points scored.
1. San Diego (492)
2. Indianapolis (427)
3. Chicago (427)
4. Dallas (425)
5. New Orleans (413)
6. Philadelphia (398)
7. New England (385)
8. Cincinnati (373)
9. Jacksonville (371)
10. St. Louis (367)

Ok, now lets look at the top 10 teams in scoring when removing points scored by their defense and special teams (punt and KO returns).
1. San Diego (471)
2. Indianapolis (413)
3. New Orleans (392)
4. Dallas (390)
5. New England (378)
6. Chicago (371)
7. Cincinnati (364)
8. Philadelphia (363)
9. Jacksonville (357)
10. St. Louis (353)

Hmm...Dallas looks to be in a very similar position to the previous ranking. But screw Spags for spreading such filthy lies! Lies, damn you!


Oh, and I'm not going to break down how each of these teams' offenses fared against winning teams. Too much work.

 

[AdamJT13]

When we beat Carolina, they fell to 4-4 and had many opportunities to go above .500, which is something they failed to do. Just because they finished 8-8 doesn't mean they didnt finish with a winning record b/c of the Cowboys loss, but because they were an inconsistent football team. Tennessee is a different story b/c they got hot later in the year, but lost in the season finale to the below-average Buffalo Bills. The Titans were lucky to win 8 games b/c Vince Young single-handedly won numerous games for them. We all know the Giants crumbled in the 2nd half of the season and the Cowboys took advantage of that. We BARELY beat a declining Giants team that was lucky to make the playoffs (thanks Deadskins!).

You didn't qualify anything in your original post other than "teams that ended with winning records."

If you want to re-write your hypothesis, feel free. Until then, it's just another case of the numbers making themselves.

 

[Big Dakota]

Well, without similar numbers for the other teams in the league, your numbers are absolutely meaningless. Since I don't want you to look like a fool for such a stupid omission in a statistical argument, I will go ahead and provide some numbers for comparison.

Here were the top 10 teams in scoring last year by total points scored.
1. San Diego (492)
2. Indianapolis (427)
3. Chicago (427)
4. Dallas (425)
5. New Orleans (413)
6. Philadelphia (398)
7. New England (385)
8. Cincinnati (373)
9. Jacksonville (371)
10. St. Louis (367)

Ok, now lets look at the top 10 teams in scoring when removing points scored by their defense and special teams (punt and KO returns).
1. San Diego (471)
2. Indianapolis (413)
3. New Orleans (392)
4. Dallas (390)
5. New England (378)
6. Chicago (371)
7. Cincinnati (364)
8. Philadelphia (363)
9. Jacksonville (357)
10. St. Louis (353)

Hmm...Dallas looks to be in a very similar position to the previous ranking. But screw Spags for spreading such filthy lies! Lies, damn you!


Oh, and I'm not going to break down how each of these teams' offenses fared against winning teams. Too much work.

Ouch!!!!

 

[TheSport78]

Well, without similar numbers for the other teams in the league, your numbers are absolutely meaningless. Since I don't want you to look like a fool for such a stupid omission in a statistical argument, I will go ahead and provide some numbers for comparison.

Here were the top 10 teams in scoring last year by total points scored.
1. San Diego (492)
2. Indianapolis (427)
3. Chicago (427)
4. Dallas (425)
5. New Orleans (413)
6. Philadelphia (398)
7. New England (385)
8. Cincinnati (373)
9. Jacksonville (371)
10. St. Louis (367)

Ok, now lets look at the top 10 teams in scoring when removing all points scored by their defense and special teams.
1. San Diego (471)
2. Indianapolis (413)
3. New Orleans (392)
4. Dallas (390)
5. New England (378)
6. Chicago (371)
7. Cincinnati (364)
8. Philadelphia (363)
9. Jacksonville (357)
10. St. Louis (353)

Hmm...Dallas looks to be in a very similar position to the previous ranking. But screw Spags for spreading such filthy lies! Lies, damn you!


Oh, and I'm not going to break down how each of these teams' offenses fared against winning teams. Too much work.

I understand your point, but my main argument is that only 55 points came against winning teams. That's 14.1% of total points scored. Not exactly great. I wasn't comparing Dallas' point total to other teams in the league. I was simply stating that Spagnola was incorrect in the "425 point total." I wasn't comparing to other teams. I was comparing our offense against below-average or above-average NFL teams. Also, no need to get personal lol..

 

[kTXe]

I understand your point, but my main argument is that only 55 points came against winning teams. That's 14.1% of total points scored. Not exactly great. I wasn't comparing Dallas' point total to other teams in the league. I was simply stating that Spagnola was incorrect in the "425 point total." I wasn't comparing to other teams. I was comparing our offense against below-average or above-average NFL teams. Also, no need to get personal lol..

Like I said, I'm not going to bother with that part of your argument (which Adam has already punched a major hole in) because it would take far too long for me to break down. However, I can guarantee that the average team is going to score less against winning teams. It's the way it works.

Also, you come out saying that you are "so sick of hearing about our great offense" because "reporters like Mickey Spagnola are talking up our offense because it put up 425 points" when "our offense really put up 390 points". That sounds an awful lot like someone trying to cite the mere 390 points scored by our offense as a reason for it not being "great". If all you meant to convey was that Spags was wrong, you need to completely rethink the way you wrote your original post.

 

[TheSport78]

Like I said, I'm not going to bother with that part of your argument (which Adam has already punched a major hole in) because it would take far too long for me to break down. However, I can guarantee that the average team is going to score less against winning teams. It's the way it works.

Also, you come out saying that you are "so sick of hearing about our great offense" because "reporters like Mickey Spagnola are talking up our offense because it put up 425 points" when "our offense really put up 390 points". That sounds an awful lot like someone trying to cite the mere 390 points scored by our offense as a reason for it not being "great". If all you meant to convey was that Spags was wrong, you need to completely rethink the way you wrote your original post.

read my post over again..

 

[AdamJT13]

read my post over again..

It has the same flaws no matter how many times someone reads it.

But like I said, feel free to write a better hypothesis.

 

[Clove]

IT just sucks that we didn't put our hands around the necks of these teams.

We had tons of opportunity to put teams away but we then would go conservative. I know I could remember a couple of losses where we were up, and didn't put the team away, and wound up losing.

If this mentality doesn't change, expect another season of fraudulent offensive dominance, since Mickey seems to think we were.

 

[Sarge]

I'm not blaming Bill totally, but i think we will be a lot less vanilla on O and D with Wade and Jason. We became so darn predictable in December EVERY STINKIN YEAR under Parcells.

Every stinkin' PLAY.

 

[burmafrd]

You look at any team- and see the difference in points scored vs good or bad teams. You are not going to find much difference except for the very best offenses. EVEN they are going to score less against good teams.
This is like moaning because the sun comes up in the east every day.

 

[superpunk]

I'm not blaming Bill totally, but i think we will be a lot less vanilla on O and D with Wade and Jason. We became so darn predictable in December EVERY STINKIN YEAR under Parcells.

Every stinkin' PLAY.

It's like people didn't even watch this team last year - but feel qualified to talk about it anyways.

 

[Alexander]

It's like people didn't even watch this team last year - but feel qualified to talk about it anyways.

Absolutely.

It is like I said before the imbecile train has left the port and quite a few have got in line to take their turn tooting the horn.

I can understand the bitterness to a degree. I would have loved to have been more aggressive in the wildcard game and I feel our inability to stop the hemorraging on defense was unacceptable.

It is clear that the fans that didn't like Coach Parcells and his mannerisms got angrier, however and now resort to filling in the gaps they do not remember with their imagined complete incompetence from both him and his staff even down to the playcalling.

When I read a comment like "every stinkin' PLAY" that oozes a complete and utter lack of thought on the season and ignores the myriad of reasons why things did not turn out like we all wanted.

The collapses are puzzling and could possibly be laid at the feet of Parcells, that is certainly a consideration.

But "every stinkin' play" being predictable is probably one of the more thoughtless comments I have read on this forum recently. And that is saying a lot.

 

[superpunk]

Absolutely.

It is like I said before the imbecile train has left the port and quite a few have got in line to take their turn tooting the horn.

I can understand the bitterness to a degree. I would have loved to have been more aggressive in the wildcard game and I feel our inability to stop the hemorraging on defense was unacceptable.

It is clear that the fans that didn't like Coach Parcells and his mannerisms got angrier, however and now resort to filling in the gaps they do not remember with their imagined complete incompetence from both him and his staff even down to the playcalling.

When I read a comment like "every stinkin' PLAY" that oozes a complete and utter lack of thought on the season and ignores the myriad of reasons why things did not turn out like we all wanted.

The collapses are puzzling and could possibly be laid at the feet of Parcells, that is certainly a consideration.

But "every stinkin' play" being predictable is probably one of the more thoughtless comments I have read on this forum recently. And that is saying a lot.

I just can't fathom how anyone could watch the offense we put out there last year, with all the exotic sets and motion and calls, and come to the conclusion that it was vanilla or boring.

Was it plain-jane on defense? Absolutely. But that worked like gangbusters through 10-11 games. (even though we - the people on this forum) saw the flaws in it in the preseason)

On offense? Give me a break. We were anything but predictable on offense.

It's like the moronic myth that EVERY time it was third and long we were running draws to Barber, when in fact Barber only had 12 such carries all year.

You want a better offense? Call Julius Jones. Tell his sorry *** to manage more than 3.7 ypc against those winning teams (without that 77 yarder). That'll work wonders for the offense, no matter how "predictable" it is.

 

[burmafrd]

If you want a better offense build a better O line. Which is what we have gradually done over the last 3-4 years. This is the year it SHOULD be good.