The Big Bad Dak is terrible thread

What's crazy about this thread is if the title was Dak is the greatest QB Dallas has had since Aikman. I guarantee you it would be taken down or put in with other threads by mods. Smh
 
Chasing6 said:
Now they are infatuated with phenom 2.0 Backflip Bazooka Joe.

:omg:.....:laugh:.....:lmao:
Click to expand...
They were shanting want Milton yesterday after the 1st Drive....the Defense "We already in tank mode":laugh:
 
Gangsta Spanksta said:
Reading comprehension might be needed. First off, where in the post does it say it is about you? Do you not know the difference between between talking to you versus that of talking about you? Heck, people answer posts left by other people without even the intent of talking to them, just leaving their own little comment or what have you. So you think that whenever someone replies to one of your messages, they are talking about you? interesting...
Click to expand...
Once again, you replied to my post about how our offense looked better when CD was out and even against a good defense like GB.
In that context, when no clear subject is referenced, one can only assume you are referring to me. That's just common sense. Something that you seem to lack. Do you know that you could have just posted your comment without quoting my post if that was your intention?
 
Zman5 said:
Once again, you replied to my post about how our offense looked better when CD was out and even against a good defense like GB.
In that context, when no clear subject is referenced, one can only assume you are referring to me. That's just common sense. Something that you seem to lack. Do you know that you could have just posted your comment without quoting my post if that was your intention?
Click to expand...
English is a language that you take into context by what is actual said. I don't know why you seem to have a guilty conscience or an egotistical viewpoint that every reply to a message of yours has to be about you. Like I said, it takes some reading comprehension on your part. If the message does not say you explicitly, then you cannot presume that the message is about you implicitly.

Now originally you said to someone what about GB, and me personally wouldn't use a team we tied against as if it was some kind of win, because that Tie can be the difference that keeps us out of the playoffs. I never once said you in particular bragged about it in the context of the English language. I do believe that we benefited in the last decade in playing in the NFC East. Taking Greenbay into context in the last decade we are 1-5-1 against them. So 1 win out of 7 attempts, wouldn't exactly make me think that we've been good against GB. If the Cowboys were in the NFC our record across the board wouldn't be as inflated as it is now. Then to take last nights game into context too, we got beat by the worst record team of the NFC West as well. You have the right to think by all means that the GB game was a good game. Me I wouldn't use it as supporting evidence of anything at this point of the season, because it isn't even given that we will end up in 2nd place in the East, and if we don't make the playoffs that tied game was more a liability than something positive, and that is how it would be remembered historically as well. I mean people on here were praising the Cowboys vs Eagles game on here. In my eyes, this team has a lot more to accomplish before I feel we have bragging rights to anything. That's just my own view.
 
Gangsta Spanksta said:
English is a language that you take into context by what is actual said. I don't know why you seem to have a guilty conscience or an egotistical viewpoint that every reply to a message of yours has to be about you. Like I said, it takes some reading comprehension on your part. If the message does not say you explicitly, then you cannot presume that the message is about you implicitly.

Now originally you said to someone what about GB, and me personally wouldn't use a team we tied against as if it was some kind of win, because that Tie can be the difference that keeps us out of the playoffs. I never once said you in particular bragged about it in the context of the English language. I do believe that we benefited in the last decade in playing in the NFC East. Taking Greenbay into context in the last decade we are 1-5-1 against them. So 1 win out of 7 attempts, wouldn't exactly make me think that we've been good against GB. If the Cowboys were in the NFC our record across the board wouldn't be as inflated as it is now. Then to take last nights game into context too, we got beat by the worst record team of the NFC West as well. You have the right to think by all means that the GB game was a good game. Me I wouldn't use it as supporting evidence of anything at this point of the season, because it isn't even given that we will end up in 2nd place in the East, and if we don't make the playoffs that tied game was more a liability than something positive, and that is how it would be remembered historically as well. I mean people on here were praising the Cowboys vs Eagles game on here. In my eyes, this team has a lot more to accomplish before I feel we have bragging rights to anything. That's just my own view.
Click to expand...
It's obvious your reading comprehension is lacking, or you didn't even bother reading the post before replying to it. I never said a tie vs GB was "some kind of win". I said the offense played better vs GB compared to last three games. You should read the post or learn to understand what you read before replying with wrong assumptions.
 
Zman5 said:
It's obvious your reading comprehension is lacking, or you didn't even bother reading the post before replying to it. I never said a tie vs GB was "some kind of win". I said the offense played better vs GB compared to last three games. You should read the post or learn to understand what you read before replying with wrong assumptions.
Click to expand...
Well this argument is getting kind of circular. Actually, your original point was that the offense looked better without CD, to which someone else replied that we can't play the Giants and Washington every game, and to which you replied what about GB. I didn't really bother getting into my opinion about CD there, I was just adding my own soundbite that we didn't really win against GB, originally. If we talking about CD, I would say that there isn't enough of a sample size yet of data.
 
Gangsta Spanksta said:
Well this argument is getting kind of circular. Actually, your original point was that the offense looked better without CD, to which someone else replied that we can't play the Giants and Washington every game, and to which you replied what about GB. I didn't really bother getting into my opinion about CD there, I was just adding my own soundbite that we didn't really win against GB, originally. If we talking about CD, I would say that there isn't enough of a sample size yet of data.
Click to expand...
As you can see my posts had nothing to do with any moral victories or claiming a win when we tied GB.
 
Dorsett33 said:
What's crazy about this thread is if the title was Dak is the greatest QB Dallas has had since Aikman. I guarantee you it would be taken down or put in with other threads by mods. Smh
Click to expand...

The mods start this thread after games where Dak struggles to keep it all in one thread. Instead of the first page being littered with tons of threads trashing Dak

I wish they'd do this same thing after Dak has a big week. Because thats exactly what you get in those circumstances. 80% of the front page is some thread about how Dak basically walks on water and they leave them all up

Ironically The reality is exactly the opposite of what you're complaining about here. And yet you're still playing the Dak victim card. :huh:
 
HonoluluCowboy said:
Do you speak English ? Every post is word salad mixed with unabashed Dak love. Weirdo
Click to expand...
Hallelujah.....the Culture language is safe.... imagine a Dak Hater chosen QB leading a 21st Century NFL lockerroom:laugh: :laugh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 13 more.
Total: 794 (members: 113, guests: 681)
Robots: 1,411

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
469,773
Messages
14,196,334
Members
23,839
Latest member
KILA_B
Back
Top