It was an odd thought from the beginning, but as others have pointed out in this thread - the comment itself - was another passive aggressive one that has crept up more than a few times in his OPs. The "snark patrol", and even the term "trolls" have been posted recently by the OP.
These type of comments, ironically, are no different than the "Jerry sucks" or perceived negative posts by the "snark patrol". Not everything is positive with the Cowboys - that's a reality whether you want to accept it or turn a blind eye to it.
His reports that he does are a good thing for this site, but at the same time they should not be above a second opinion or not challenged when someone feels they see inconsistencies.
The comment was definitely a passive dig. I'd argue strongly that that sort of comment is not ironically similar to the negative-for-attention posts, though. Most obviously, he's not doing it just for attention. He's commenting on it because he doesn't like the negativity.
And that's not a commentary on negative posting in general, because there's a lot to be critical of in Dallas and we have a ton of posters able to have those negative discussions that they support eloquently and with content. As opposed to drive-by quips or single-line unsupported criticisms begging others to take the time to demonstrate weren't serious or accurate in the first place. Most ( not all, but most) of these drive-bys are distractions from real topics, and I completely agree with him that they ought to be discouraged. At the same time, the posters are free to thread-poop as long as they stay inside the guidelines. That's pretty much good forum practice everywhere.
As for disagreeing with his football takes, I'd really hope some people do. That's the fun of the football forum.
