So what does beating KC mean?

Bleu Star;3008592 said:
It spoke volumes.

Yes sir it did.

I predicted that we would win by at least 2 Touchdowns. Once the game started, I thought the only thing that would slow us down was the inclement weather.

However, the weather had nothing to do with how horrible we played.

I was completely shocked when Todd Haley told Joe Buck that he thought the best way they could win was to force the Cowboys to put the ball in Tony Romo's hands.

I didn't think we needed a blowout but man, we were horrible. It reminded me of the old Dave Campo teams.

DragonCowboy;3008626 said:
I think the Kansas City game means that Dallas usually plays to the level of its opponents.

We played a much, much better game against the Giants (despite all those turnovers we were in it until the end). We just aren't the type of team that will destroy a bad team, but I think we definitely will pick it up against the better teams. I think the Atlanta game will go down to the wire, just as almost all of our games have so far.

I agree with this.

The 2009 Dallas Cowboys will be alot like the 2005 Cowboys. I think they will play to the level of the competition. They will even manage to beat good teams like the Eagles and Giants at least once and be in the hunt the entire Season. However, they will most likely come up short in their bid to make the Playoffs.
 
Maikeru-sama;3008563 said:
Actually, the Kansas City game said alot about this team.

Well, yeah, I'm not expecting the Cowboys to beat Atlanta. I do think they have a shot IF they can somehow turn this victory into momentum.

But, generally, I agree with your implication -- the overall crappy play greatly outweighed the ending.
 
fanfromvirginia;3008656 said:
Well, yeah, I'm not expecting the Cowboys to beat Atlanta. I do think they have a shot IF they can somehow turn this victory into momentum.

But, generally, I agree with your implication -- the overall crappy play greatly outweighed the ending.

No doubt.

They will play Atlanta tough and they have a very good shot at winning.

I haven't seen Atlanta play this year but I know the Cowboys, much like the 2005 club has enough talent to be competitive with most teams on the Schedule.

I think what hurt worse was watching the Fox Game Breaks showing Manning and McNabb destroying the competition.
 
True, we haven't beaten anyone of consequence yet. We beat a TB team that had high hopes to begin the season and did it on their field. We beat a KC team on their field, and we beat Carolina at home.

We lost to the 5-0 Giants (being hailed on TV as perhaps the best team in the NFL today)...we lost that game at the very end when we had dominated that so-called great team all game long despite Romo's explosion of turnovers.

We lost to the 5-0 Broncos (a team finally getting its due after beating NE today...a defense that is for real with a QB playing shockingly well) and we lost by 7 on a big play near the end of the game and left our win on the 1 yard line after a great drive at the very end.

If we don't think our wins mean anything, then maybe our competitiveness against two 5-0 teams means we at least have hope. In those games, one would have to say that Romo played poorly and that we need to learn how to win the close games. Okay, so it was KC, we still stepped up in overtime with the chips stacked against us, both defensively and offensively, to win.

For comparison, the great Pittsburg Steelers (Super Bowl Champions) are also 3-2, and they only beat the lowly Lions by 8 points.

As I said in the opening thread, this win doesn't mean much of anything, but Romo played his best game and we overcame tons of mistakes to win on the road in overtime against a desperate team that had nothing to lose. I can easily see us imploding and finishing 7-9 or 8-8, but I can also imagine this team continuing to play hard (no one can deny that), getting better, and possibly finishing 10-6 with a shot at the playoffs.

On paper, I don't think we have as good a team as Philly or NY, so it would be a major accomplishment if we finish in 2nd place. Who would have thought that NY would lose Burris and still have a far better receiving corps than us? Just a couple of years ago, Philly's receivers were a joke...with Macklin, Jackson, and some quality extras, Philly now has the best WR's in the game.

However this season turns out, we'd better hope Miles Austin can come on strong and be the real deal. We have nothing at the position, and nothing includes the kid everyone is in love with from VA.

Look up and down our offensive depth chart. Dallas draft picks? UDFA? It's crazy how we've neglected the offense in the draft. Today we were playing with 2 undrafted WR's and a 7th round draft pick! Occasionally a team finds an undrafted gem that can start or even star for it, but Dallas counts on the undrafted and late draft picks throughout most of the offensive roster. Roy W, Columbo, and Davis are former #1's for other teams that they didn't want anymore. The one first rounder we've actually used on offense (Felix JOnes) doesn't start and never gets more than 10 touches, usually fewer, even when healthy.

And those who think Garrett would make a good head coach....omg...that guy is closer to being the problem than he is the solution. If Jerry made him any promises, that might be why he's holding onto Wade so tightly...JG is not ready for that job. Our draft investment and best players are on the defensive side...I'm just hoping Wade and JG can do their jobs as coordinators and keep their heads out of their butts.
 
wayne motley;3008986 said:
And those who think Garrett would make a good head coach....omg...that guy is closer to being the problem than he is the solution. If Jerry made him any promises, that might be why he's holding onto Wade so tightly...JG is not ready for that job. Our draft investment and best players are on the defensive side...I'm just hoping Wade and JG can do their jobs as coordinators and keep their heads out of their butts.

Interim... Sink or swim situation while not totally tossing this season in the can... Makes sense to me.
 
And those who think Garrett would make a good head coach....omg...that guy is closer to being the problem than he is the solution. If Jerry made him any promises, that might be why he's holding onto Wade so tightly...JG is not ready for that job. Our draft investment and best players are on the defensive side...I'm just hoping Wade and JG can do their jobs as coordinators and keep their heads out of their butts.

Garrett reminds me of one of those white collar CEO's kids who's pop wants him to take over the company when he retires/dies. He went to the big name school and got a big name education. Maybe even did a few internships at his dad's company while in school. Now that he's graduated, he's got a big position job without actually earning it. Slowly he's gaining experience, and he may do great in the future, but right now he's getting to play with a big part of daddy's toy without causing too many problems, but he's still not ready for prime time.
 
1) It means the team did not lie down like dogs and showed some toughness.

2) More importantly, the sting of the Denver loss is lessened. NE legitimized Denver today. The Broncos are better than I thought.
 
wayne motley;3007755 said:
Extra Tidbit: No doubt in my mind that Keith Brooking is the single greatest offseason move we've made in a while; you have to love the way this guy plays and the heart he brings to it. Did you see him running down the sideline on that one offensive play? That guy is teaching everyone on this team how to win.


Couldn't have said it better myself.
 
How about fire Garrett and see what Wade can actually do without being interfered with?
 
WoodysGirl;3008438 said:
I don't think this game was anything to get too excited about. However, I do think we're gonna have to get used to these type of games all year.

Up and down throughout and not knowing the outcome until the very end.

Very valid point M.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
465,944
Messages
13,906,358
Members
23,793
Latest member
Roger33
Back
Top