Norm claiming 8-3 is about as bad as we could've been

Chocolate Lab

Run-loving Dino
Messages
37,104
Reaction score
11,428
The30YardSlant;3105890 said:
No, but it means that we, as the fans of a supposed contender, should expect to beat them

How can you say we were a supposed contender when you have trashed this team non-stop until maybe the last week or two? You're doing the same thing as Norm.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
Chocolate Lab;3106018 said:
How can you say we were a supposed contender when you have trashed this team non-stop until maybe the last week or two? You're doing the same thing as Norm.
"We'll never win more than 8 games."

*Cowboys win 8 games in the first 11*

"Yeah, but we were supposed to win those games."

:huh:

I think I get why Folk has been off. The "realists" keep moving the goal post.
 

EndGame

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,357
Reaction score
367
One thing that no one has mentioned is that the Eagles, Giants, and Commanders have played an extremely similar schedule to Dallas', and many so-called experts picked two or even all three of them to finish higher than Dallas. Two of them realistically still could (season ain't over) but right now all three teams have records worse than Dallas'.
 

Beast_from_East

Well-Known Member
Messages
30,140
Reaction score
27,231
Chocolate Lab;3105520 said:
He's basically saying that looking back at it, this is about as bad as we could've been at this point. It's the same old game that when we're getting ready to play a solid team -- like, say, Atlanta -- it's a big game against a good team and it'll be a real indication of what kind of team we have.

Then after we've beaten them, well of course we should've beaten that scrub team, because they weren't really any good. :rolleyes:

This wears me out as much as anything. Going into the season, a lot of pundits picked us to be very average, or even to fall completely apart. Remember that? Remember when 44-6 was an indication of how rudderless, gutless, and overrated this team was? But now in hindsight, oh, of course this team should've whipped those teams because they're clearly much better.

No, you can't have it that way. These players and coaches weren't gifted the games they won -- they had to go out and work their tails off and execute well enough on gameday to win.

Please don't anyone bother with the "Why do you get upset about what the media say" stuff, because I promise that this isn't keeping me up at night. ;) Just pointing out a way of thinking that I don't think makes any sense, and almost everyone in the media does it.

These guys were all predicting a .500 season at best in August and now 8-3 is the worst we could have been???

Did I miss something??? If we were a .500 ball club in August, then how the hell is 8-3 the worst record we could have??? We should be like 6-5 or something according to these so called "experts" back in August.
 

The30YardSlant

Benched
Messages
24,287
Reaction score
0
Chocolate Lab;3106018 said:
How can you say we were a supposed contender when you have trashed this team non-stop until maybe the last week or two? You're doing the same thing as Norm.

I've been told by countless posters here and mediots that we are a contender. You can't argue that we are a contender and then say you don't expect to beat the worst teams in football. We're either not as good as advertised and it was an accomplishment to beat all those bad teams, or we are contenders and and beat a bunch of teams that we should have expected to beat.
 

Randy White

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,167
Reaction score
80
Chocolate Lab;3105520 said:
He's basically saying that looking back at it, this is about as bad as we could've been at this point. It's the same old game that when we're getting ready to play a solid team -- like, say, Atlanta -- it's a big game against a good team and it'll be a real indication of what kind of team we have.

Then after we've beaten them, well of course we should've beaten that scrub team, because they weren't really any good. :rolleyes:
.



Actually what he's saying makes sense and it's coming from a supporter's point of view. The Jerrathor, sort of, backed up the same feeling with his " let's not get too full of ourselves " speech to the players after the game.

His point is that this team is talented enough to be better than 8-3. He likes this team more than any other recent Cowboys group because they're unselfish. He also said that 8-3 is nothing to sneeze at and being on top of the division is nice, but nothing has been accomplished yet and he doesn't want to start hearing ( from the players OR coaches ) that losing " 2 or 3 games in December is fine as long as we get to the playoffs. " That's the same mentality that did the 2007, 13-3 squad in on the first round of the playoffs and EXACTLY what this team needs to stay away from.

We criticize Wierdo Werder for being an butthat reactionist, deservingly imo, so let's not fall into the same trap ourselves.
 

The30YardSlant

Benched
Messages
24,287
Reaction score
0
theogt;3106032 said:
"We'll never win more than 8 games."

I actually predicted 10-6 during the preseason, with 11-5 being a possibility

I never predicted 8 wins. I said after the KC game that if we don't fix our problems ASAP, we will have a tough time winning more than 8 games. We came out of the bye and looked fantastic for 3 games, blowing out Atlanta and Seattle and winning in Philly. We then went into a shell and played our two worst games of the year back to back, then beat up on a terrible team yesterday.

What does all that mean? It means we are a very talented team with great potential that has some serious consistency issues. I believe it is because we are poorly coached.
 

Beast_from_East

Well-Known Member
Messages
30,140
Reaction score
27,231
The30YardSlant;3106092 said:
I actually predicted 10-6 during the preseason, with 11-5 being a possibility

I never predicted 8 wins. I said after the KC game that if we don't fix our problems ASAP, we will have a tough time winning more than 8 games. We came out of the bye and looked fantastic for 3 games, blowing out Atlanta and Seattle and winning in Philly. We then went into a shell and played our two worst games of the year back to back, then beat up on a terrible team yesterday.

What does all that mean? It means we are a very talented team with great potential that has some serious consistency issues. I believe it is because we are poorly coached.

That terrible team was coming off a win over the 7-2 Bengals and beat the Eagles a couple of weeks ago as well. We were not playing the local JV team here fellas.
 

mldardy

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,614
Reaction score
7,310
The30YardSlant;3105824 said:
He has a point. Tampa Bay, Carolina, Kansas City, Seattle, Washington and Oakland are all subpar/bad/terrible teams this year, and of those teams only Carolina was expected to be good before the season started. Our only two quality wins are Atlanta and Philly, and Atlanta has been in a nosedive since we played them.

We still have a lot to prove, and it starts next week.
Complaining about who we beat is so stupid. You could do this with every team right now that is in contention for a playoff spot. The Cowboys did what they had to do and that is win game, win games they are supposed to. Every game in the NFL is a hard one and they made some of those games easy and some hard but the bottom line is they won them. Quality wins? Again silly. Guess who had a hand in making those teams bad. The Cowboys.

I would guess that if we beat some of those teams you say we have a lot to prove against starting next week then you will say those aren't quality wins either.
 

The30YardSlant

Benched
Messages
24,287
Reaction score
0
Beast_from_East;3106115 said:
That terrible team was coming off a win over the 7-2 Bengals and beat the Eagles a couple of weeks ago as well. We were not playing the local JV team here fellas.

Oakland has the worst offense the league has seen in a long time, and their defense isnt much better. They are one of the 3 worst teams in football.

Almost every bad team wins a game or two they shouldnt every year, and many good teams lose a game or two they shouldnt. That doesnt mean the fanbases of the good teams should expect it.
 

jobberone

Kane Ala
Messages
54,219
Reaction score
19,659
Idgit;3105580 said:
I'm with you on the first two, but the Packers took it to us. I agree that we should win 7-10 against that team, and that we left plays on the field in that game, but they beat us soundly.

They beat us like a red headed step child.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
The30YardSlant;3106092 said:
I actually predicted 10-6 during the preseason, with 11-5 being a possibility

I never predicted 8 wins. I said after the KC game that if we don't fix our problems ASAP, we will have a tough time winning more than 8 games. We came out of the bye and looked fantastic for 3 games, blowing out Atlanta and Seattle and winning in Philly. We then went into a shell and played our two worst games of the year back to back, then beat up on a terrible team yesterday.

What does all that mean? It means we are a very talented team with great potential that has some serious consistency issues. I believe it is because we are poorly coached.
O RLY?

The30YardSlant;3022735 said:
We're a bottom 3rd NFL team, primarily because we are one of if not the worst coached team
How many "bottom 3rd NFL teams" win 10 games? You may claim that you never said that we'll win only 8 games (though you probably did somewhere), but you've actually said worse, so it doesn't really matter all that much.
 

kmd24

Active Member
Messages
3,436
Reaction score
0
The one thing in defense of the pundits is the emergence of Miles Austin. But really, I tend to agree with the OP.
 

The30YardSlant

Benched
Messages
24,287
Reaction score
0
The30YardSlant;3106092 said:
I never predicted 8 wins. I said after the KC game that if we don't fix our problems ASAP, we will have a tough time winning more than 8 games.

I believe it is because we are poorly coached.

What part of this are you not getting? It really isnt that hard.
 

tomson75

Brain Dead Shill
Messages
16,720
Reaction score
1
The30YardSlant;3106168 said:
What part of this are you not getting? It really isnt that hard.

Not nearly as hard as your gears are stripping. Now your just buying time....
 

The30YardSlant

Benched
Messages
24,287
Reaction score
0
tomson75;3106177 said:
Not nearly as hard as your gears are stripping. Now your just buying time....

1: It's "you're"

2: He referenced a post I made a while back in which I said we were playing like a bottom third team mainly due to poor coaching, which I is what I admitted to saying 4 posts earlier.

I'm simply at a loss as to why he believes he made some sort of profound point
 

tomson75

Brain Dead Shill
Messages
16,720
Reaction score
1
The30YardSlant;3106182 said:
1: It's "you're"

Lmao...actually, it's not. It's possessive, as in ownership of the gears. You are = you're

...but thanks for the laugh.

2: He referenced a post I made a while back in which I said we were playing like a bottom third team mainly due to poor coaching, which I is what I admitted to saying 4 posts earlier.

I'm simply at a loss as to why he believes he made some sort of profound point

Right. Like I said. Gears stripping. You said something dumb, then admitted to it later. All is well.
 

CATCH17

1st Round Pick
Messages
67,663
Reaction score
86,202
jobberone;3106136 said:
They beat us like a red headed step child.

Yeah but as anyone terrified if we have to play the Packers?

It was an upset.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
The30YardSlant;3106182 said:
1: It's "you're"

2: He referenced a post I made a while back in which I said we were playing like a bottom third team mainly due to poor coaching, which I is what I admitted to saying 4 posts earlier.

I'm simply at a loss as to why he believes he made some sort of profound point
Actually, you said "we're a bottom 3rd team," not "we're playing like a bottom 3rd team."

One is a statement of our then current state. The other is a statement of our absolute state, which would apply to our entire season.

Also, if we're going to be precise about our grammar and typing, numbers under 10 are to be spelled out, not written in their numerical form. Thus, your statement should read, "... I admitted to saying four posts earlier."
 

zeroburrito

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,767
Reaction score
1,001
tomson75;3106185 said:
Lmao...actually, it's not. It's possessive, as in ownership of the gears. You are = you're

...but thanks for the laugh.



Right. Like I said. Gears stripping. You said something dumb, then admitted to it later. All is well.


"now _your_ just buying time"
 
Top