CZ tends to be very apologetic towards the Cowboys organization and Jerry Jones. In fact, many posters are unabashed and unapologetic apologists. It can be very annoying, especially during tumultuous, disappointing seasons such as this past one.
Even a normally positive fan such as myself has rolled his eyes at some of the homer commentary around here. However, you'll never find me complaining about it. If you don't like the tenor of a board, go elsewhere. It truly is that simple. Either you enjoy posting and reading here, or you don't.
I've been as critical of Jerry Jones the GM as anyone else on this board, and I've been vociferous in my criticism. One playoff win in over a decade is not indicative of a well run organization. Very few people will argue this point because it doesn't rely on one's feelings or satisfaction level. It's simply a statement of fact. And if those who frequently criticize Jerry Jones would adhere to this point, they would be better off. Instead, they get lured down rabbit holes that, in reality, have no bearing on their arguments.
Here's an example of a rabbit hole: Jerry's level of responsibility in the 90s Super Bowl wins is irrelevant to his performance at GM over the past fourteen years. Past success is no guarantee of future success, and past accolades will not save one's job -- they certainly didn't save Tom Landry's job.
My advice is this: Identify your central argument, stick with it, and don't take comments so personally.
