Marshall Faulk this morning

[Boyzmamacita]

And the Cowboys were almost shut out by the Commanders... The point is, Dallas has an issue with certain scheming, which is primarily the cover 2 and zone schemes. It is what it is and Dallas has to adjust...

That's your point. Their point is to bash Dallas like they always do. That's my point.

 

[BourbonBalz]

Marshall Faulk and Tom Jackson HATE the Cowboys for some reason. I don't know why, but it's obvious they do. It's either that or their networks want them to appear to hate us for ratings. Neither guy EVER has anything good to say about the Cowboys. Not only that, they both always have a smug little smirk on their faces when they're downplaying the Cowboys as a team. Again, either they have a grudge or it's all just for TV ratings. Maybe a bit of both.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Marshall is the same guy that just said that Jeff Fisher wearing the Colts jersey and saying he wanted to know what it felt like to be a winner was a 'smart move.'

Give me a break.

The Eagles also forced Dallas to throw to Roy, and lost at Philly.

Pick up the blitz on the weakside, don't make dumb mistakes and if Romo is semi-accurate we'll likely be tough to beat. EVEN IF it's the Saints.






YAKUZA

 

[BourbonBalz]

Faulk (along with Warren Sapp) also continued to harp on the fact that Romo said he doesn't what it takes to win a Super Bowl because he hasn't done it yet. Bit of tongue in cheek from Romo and these two idiots spent 10 minutes talking about it. I guess when you don't have enough sense to actually discuss anythiing really related to the game, you reach for what you can to fill air time.

 

[fanfromvirginia]

Much of the media gets lazier by the day. Very little researched reporting by journalists. Quite a lot of screaming-head talk shows in it's place.

This is a great point. The media -- both generally and sports specifically -- is incredibly lazy. It's in part a function of the 24-hours news media. ESPN, for example, has to fill a lot of hours. The way they've chosen to do it is to have a few talking heads devoted specifically to football and a few generalists who spend part of their time talking about football. So they have to spend a lot of time either on air or preparing to be on air -- makeup, meetings, driving to and from the studio, flying from city to city, etc. So it would be extra work for them to actually spend the time sifting through a message board like this, for example, before going on air to talk about the Cowboys. But make no mistake -- it could be done one way or the other. But ESPN doesn't do it because they don't have to. Cable TV is in oligopoly -- there's just not that much competitive pressure available to make ESPN produce on-air content that doesn't suck.

The Internet is another matter entirely -- we're in here instead of on ESPN.com for a good reason. Because most of the factors working against competition are missing on the Internet.

Which makes me realize I really need to donate to this site, which I hereby promise to do by gametime next Sunday.

 

[TheGoat73]

Marshall reminds me of a tomato sitting on a window sill waiting to get ripe!

ROFLMAO.....this sounded like a Tom Brokaw quip.

 

[fanfromvirginia]

Faulk is still hurting from Romo ignoring him when he requested a interview a year or 2 ago...He actually showed up at VR but Tony wouldn't talk to him.:laugh1:

Cool dogs.

 

[BourbonBalz]

Mariuchi (sp?) and Trent Dilfer are about the only football "talking heads" I can stand. I think they, particularly Dilfer, know more about football then the rest of those guys combined. Plus, they don't let their biases dictate what they bring to the table.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Faulk (along with Warren Sapp) also continued to harp on the fact that Romo said he doesn't what it takes to win a Super Bowl because he hasn't done it yet. Bit of tongue in cheek from Romo and these two idiots spent 10 minutes talking about it. I guess when you don't have enough sense to actually discuss anythiing really related to the game, you reach for what you can to fill air time.

When asked what it takes to win a Super Bowl Romo basically said 'I don't know.'

Sapp understood that he really doesn't know, but stated that as a leader you can't tell your 'troops' you don't know what to do. Even if it is the truth.

Faulk agreed and said that Romo could always talk to Staubach and Aikman. He claimed Romo doesn't do that, but I (nor Marshall) have no idea if that's actually true.

I don't *think* it really matters if a guy has an interview with somebody and says he really doesn't know what it takes to win a Super Bowl. I think it may be an indicator of Romo's quality of leadership. But I don't think it will play a role in today's games.






YAKUZA

 

[twentytwo]

Faulk (along with Warren Sapp) also continued to harp on the fact that Romo said he doesn't what it takes to win a Super Bowl because he hasn't done it yet. Bit of tongue in cheek from Romo and these two idiots spent 10 minutes talking about it. I guess when you don't have enough sense to actually discuss anythiing really related to the game, you reach for what you can to fill air time.

I mentioned this in another thread earlier. Just because these so-called "experts" played the game does NOT mean they are actually worth watching. Most of them sound like fools.

 

[CCBoy]

That's your point. Their point is to bash Dallas like they always do. That's my point.

You have proven your being a fan...to anyone listening, LOL.

And those Giants will suddenly jump out, benching two of their earlier season starters and proven elements in their defensive line. Then they lose their middle linebacker, and have been 'soft' against the run. They also are supposed to become stronger by switching a starter at cornerback, where they were having problems, and now making a corner a safety in a two deep set. Yea, some great insights against a very strong passing team that now has in December, a healthy trio of running backs and who can challenge any team, know it in advance or not, when running the ball.

I'm with you here, don't get me started on the Eagles who are again depending on Reggie Brown and a super duper Celek. They are only on their third middle linebacker.

 

[big dog cowboy]

The Internet is another matter entirely -- we're in here instead of on ESPN.com for a good reason. Because most of the factors working against competition are missing on the Internet.

Which makes me realize I really need to donate to this site, which I hereby promise to do by gametime next Sunday.

I think that is a GREAT idea.

 

[STSINAZ]

Didn't catch all of it but basically he said the Cowboys were "exposed" against Green Bay, and he's surprised teams haven't forced Tony to go to Roy. Also he said, nothing is different this year compared to last year except there's no T.O., when commenting non Tony's NFL Network interview.

I wonder, does Marshall even watch Dallas' games or research the team at all? I would say it's pretty ridiculous to say nothing has changed except T.O.. I'm pretty sure we have a great special teams unit, and a defense #2 in points allowed. I bet the majority of fans on this board would do a better job than this guy.

GUESS MARSHALL WAS RIGHT