I didn't take offense to this article as dismissing the Cowboys. If I was the teams in our division I wouldn't be scared of Dak until he gets a couple of W's, and that will happen and they'll be scared. What I think is funny and what stood out to me is what this article was predicated on and all the contradictions. Basically this article said that due to Romo's injury and Bradford being traded and Cousins being a one year wonder we have the inside track on the division. That's a losers mentality. The article isn't saying how much improved the roster is and how good the team is going to play. It speaks mostly to the woes of the other teams in the division and how with those woes the Giants have a chance. It's also a contradiction when in one sentence the author says that Dak's preseason play isn't a concern because he's going against vanilla defenses. then a couple sentences later he says that the Giants lack of offense is not a concern because the preseason games don't count. Well which one is it? You can't dismiss Dak's play in the preseason while validating the Giants offense because it was the preseason. It was the preseason for every team, so if Dak is putting up huge numbers against vanilla defenses then Eli should have put up the same numbers against vanilla defenses. If he didn't then the giants have something to worry about that a rookie put up better numbers then your veteran against vanilla defenses.
The Giants may argue "well we didn't want to get Eli hurt so we didn't play him much in the dismissive preseason", and my counter to that would be if you had a solid offensive line then you wouldn't be worried about it. But the offensive line wasn't addressed in the article, I wonder why the author didn't allude to the play of the offensive linemen foir the upcoming season as why they will win the East. The author was too busy pointing out everyone else's injuries.
I'm not scared of any team that feels they can compete due to their competitors suffering injuries.
