NFL Replay: Cowboys vs. Redskirts

4 TD by TO was good but be forreal ST was not playing that game. I know and all cowboys fan know If ST was playing it will not be no 4td for TO. OK yall beat up and TO did a great job with 4 TD passes and We beat cowboys and Commanders Defence did a great great with FEW running yards yall got.



Rest in Peace ST
 
Redskins2008;2094227 said:
OK yall beat up and TO did a great job with 4 TD passes and We beat cowboys and Commanders Defence did a great great with FEW running yards yall got.
:huh:
 
I cringe every time you post dude. Speaking as a Skins fan, you gotta clean it up a bit. Regardless, you are right, the lack of ST allowed TO to score all those TDs. I don't think it will happen again this because that is the game where we tried to play Doughty at FS (we thought Taylor would be back and Landry didn't need to try to learn FS for only a couple of games). Landry at FS would not have allowed 4 TDs.
 
Chocolate Lab;2094229 said:
If I read it right, he was saying that you beat us and TO did a great job (4 TDs). However, the Skins also beat the Cowboys and the defense did a great job only giving up 1 rushing yard all game (Marion Barber had -2 if I remember correctly). That's what he was saying...
 
firehawk350;2094232 said:
If I read it right, he was saying that you beat us and TO did a great job (4 TDs). However, the Skins also beat the Cowboys and the defense did a great job only giving up 1 rushing yard all game (Marion Barber had -2 if I remember correctly). That's what he was saying...

Are you guys seriously going to use week 17 as a sample?
 
tomson75;2094245 said:
Are you guys seriously going to use week 17 as a sample?
Don't say "you guys", I was just clarifying his post for chocolab... Regardless, don't blame the skins for your lack of fire. If you didn't want to play the game, you shouldn't have had your starters in in the 3rd. If you want to win the game and not having to deal with the loss, win the game.
 
firehawk350;2094250 said:
Don't say "you guys", I was just clarifying his post for chocolab... Regardless, don't blame the skins for your lack of fire. If you didn't want to play the game, you shouldn't have had your starters in in the 3rd. If you want to win the game and not having to deal with the loss, win the game.

Yet you respond with this lame *** defense of why that particular victory was of some actual significance to anyone but the Commanders?

I think "you guys" is pretty accurate here.

Oh, and "I" didn't have a lack of fire. "I" didn't have "my" starters in the 3rd. "I" didn't lose the game. ;)

...and for your information, we had 2nd stringers playing throughout the game. Just because a few Cowboys starters were still out there doesn't mean they were giving the Commanders their best shot.
 
tomson75;2094255 said:
Yet you respond with this lame *** defense of why that particular victory was of some actual significance to anyone but the Commanders?

I think "you guys" is pretty accurate here.

Oh, and "I" didn't have a lack of fire. "I" didn't have "my" starters in the 3rd. "I" didn't lose the game. ;)

...and for your information, we had 2nd stringers playing throughout the game. Just because a few Cowboys starters were still out there doesn't mean they were giving the Commanders their best shot.
I think how you played in week 17 was a very good indicator of how you played in the next game. Like ****.
 
Skinsmaniac;2094278 said:
Hehe, whatever makes you feel better about gaining one yard on the ground.

Whatever makes you feel better about rooting for an insignificant team.
 
Skinsmaniac;2094278 said:
Hehe, whatever makes you feel better about gaining one yard on the ground.

Wasn't is pretty well known the Cowboys were going to play a bland game before the game even started? I think even most Cowboy fans admitted that the boys would probably lose that game
 
tomson75;2094281 said:
Whatever makes you feel better about rooting for an insignificant team.
Do you define significance like Wade? By winning playoff games by having a first round bye?:laugh2:
 
thewireman;2094288 said:
Wasn't is pretty well known the Cowboys were going to play a bland game before the game even started? I think even most Cowboy fans admitted that the boys would probably lose that game
Most Cowboys fans probably did. But there was a loud contingent of fans on this board that thought that the Cowboys' starters were good enough to beat us only playing one half.
 
Skinsmaniac;2094289 said:
Do you define significance like Wade? By winning playoff games by having a first round bye?:laugh2:

Certainly more so than not having had earned the bye, and then proceeding to lose in the wild card 35-17...to a team that was so good they lost the following week 42-20 to a team that lost the following week to the team that we outplayed (but eventually won the championship).

Yeah, I'd say that is a bit more significant.
 
tomson75;2094255 said:
Yet you respond with this lame *** defense of why that particular victory was of some actual significance to anyone but the Commanders?

I think "you guys" is pretty accurate here.

Oh, and "I" didn't have a lack of fire. "I" didn't have "my" starters in the 3rd. "I" didn't lose the game. ;)

...and for your information, we had 2nd stringers playing throughout the game. Just because a few Cowboys starters were still out there doesn't mean they were giving the Commanders their best shot.
Let's see the number of starters playing throughout the game. I've got TO, Newman and Gurode not playing. So in actuality, you had more starters in that game then we did.

Just face it dude, we were playing better at that point and it showed. I don't care how you want to justify it, if the Cowboys didn't want the game, just put in second string.
 
tomson75;2094297 said:
Certainly more so than not having had earned the bye, and then proceeding to lose in the wild card 35-17...to a team that was so good they lost the following week 42-20 to a team that lost the following week to the team that we outplayed (but eventually won the championship).

Yeah, I'd say that is a bit more significant.
That's a whole lot of spin right there... We could just easily say that we were the last team to beat the champs, who beat you on the way there.
 
tomson75;2094255 said:
...and for your information, we had 2nd stringers playing throughout the game. Just because a few Cowboys starters were still out there doesn't mean they were giving the Commanders their best shot.

Hell, Alan Ball and Courtney Brown were seeing plenty of action on the field. They are not even 2nd stringers.




YAKUZA
 
Yakuza Rich;2094313 said:
Hell, Alan Ball and Courtney Brown were seeing plenty of action on the field. They are not even 2nd stringers.




YAKUZA
FYI, you had more starters in that game than we did (19 out of 22 vs. our 16 out of 22)...
 
firehawk350;2094306 said:
Let's see the number of starters playing throughout the game. I've got TO, Newman and Gurode not playing. So in actuality, you had more starters in that game then we did.

Just face it dude, we were playing better at that point and it showed. I don't care how you want to justify it, if the Cowboys didn't want the game, just put in second string.

Have you ever seen a team "just put in the second string" to start a game? There is a reason teams don't do that. You guys were playing well, I'll give you that, but you've pointed out that two of our arguably best players were out (in positions where we had little to no depth)....and then there is the fact that many of out other starters were only playing with limited snaps. Either way, we clearly were not giving you our best shot. I don't have to justify anything. You won, and no one cares.

firehawk350;2094307 said:
That's a whole lot of spin right there... We could just easily say that we were the last team to beat the champs, who beat you on the way there.

Spin? You mean like the spin I derived that post from.

How would you define significance? Honestly, how would you rate the significance of the Cowboys for 2008? the Skins?

That's what I thought.
 
Back
Top