The Cost of Meaningless Close Wins

[Corso]

His celebrity assistant stated he uses talc regularly.

Ha ha ha!

 

[Carson]

It’s funny the people complaining about us winning meaningless games are the ones that hate Pitts.

Had we lost, Pitts would be our pick

 

[MyFairLady]

Hard to imagine we could have sucked even worse than we did.

 

[MaineBoy]

Cowboys are in the win business. They don't take the field to lose.

That’s a ridiculous and inaccurate statement for a team that has Jerry Jones as the GM and his son as the Personnel guy. They have won nothing of consequence for 25 years and counting. The ultimate proof ? They both still have their jobs. The Cowboys are in the entertainment business.

 

[OmerV]

You are 100% correct. We had NO chance of making any noise making the playoffs because our division is terrible.

These fans that want to go 6-10 instead of 3-13 are a problem.

These are probably the same fans that love Romo for going 8-8 every year and keeping us drafting somewhere in the 20s when a couple of years drafting in the 10s might've gotten their hero a ring or at least some real playoff runs.

You think we knew we couldn't make any noise in the playoffs after only the 1st week of the season? Are you really suggesting we should have started tanking the season by Week 2? Do you truly not find that to be ridiculous?

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

You think we knew we couldn't make any noise in the playoffs after only the 1st week of the season? Are you really suggesting we should have started tanking the season by Week 2? Do you truly not find that to be ridiculous?

Once Dak was injured we should've never even tried to win another game last year.

How many teams get the chance to have a #1 offense coming back and a top 3 draft pick? That could've been us this year, but nope, we had to win a few meaningless games and move ourselves down the board.

 

[DandyTom64]

Band geek

Or the drama club.

 

[OmerV]

Once Dak was injured we should've never even tried to win another game last year.

How many teams get the chance to have a #1 offense coming back and a top 3 draft pick? That could've been us this year, but nope, we had to win a few meaningless games and move ourselves down the board.

Dak wasn't injured in Week 2, yet you literally said you 100% agreed with the OP that we should have been intentionally losing games by Week 2.

But even if talking about Week 5 when Dak got hurt, the team was 2-3 and very much in it, and there was a reason we signed a veteran like Andy Dalton. A team can't start trying to lose games that early, if for no other reason than the league would not tolerate it - especially with the division still up for grabs. That's big no, no. The league isn't even fond of playoff bound teams sitting starters the last week or two of the season, but tolerates because it's not actually tanking, but rather just keeping players healthy going into the playoffs.

But on top of that, a team cannot breed a winning attitude by it is willing to give up with 15/16 (or even 11/16) of the season yet to play. It's unreasonable to ask players and coaches to fluctuate from being willing quitters to intense winners.

The very essence of athletic competition is the struggle to overcome obstacles, and you cannot teach a team to do that by quitting after Week 1 (or even Week 5 after Dak got hurt)

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

The Cowboys should have lost their games against Atlanta (week 2), the Giants (week 5), and the Vikings (week 11). The Cowboys could of had the 3rd overall pick. They could have received the same haul the Dolphins did for the 3rd pick. In this scenario Surtain or Horn would likely be available at 12. Plus they would have 2 extra 1st round picks + an extra 3rd round pick in the future. They could have also selected a QB at 3 and trade Dak. A ridiculous botched onside kick + signing Andy Dalton cost this franchise for years to come.

most NFL games go into the 4th quarter close. so I am not surprised to see those games go the way they did. the first two were early in the season, so you can't look at those games in hindsight....but later on in the year, when it was obvious....I think if the bengals, niners and eagles had their starting QBs, probably we lose 2 out of 3 games.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

You should never sign a good veteran backup quarterback unless you are ready for a Super Bowl run.

Jerry thinks every year we are making a superbowl run. he sells that to everyone every year.

 

[lurkercowboy]

The object of the NFL is to play well and win games. All draft picks are iffy. Call it the Brandt uncertainty principle. I'd rather a team play hard in every game.

 

[McKDaddy]

So the Cowboys should have lost week two and week five to secure a better draft position? Lmao! Ok.

not week 2 but by week 5 it was clear this team was not a contender. any talk to the contrary is ill conceived at best.

 

[OmerV]

not week 2 but by week 5 it was clear this team was not a contender. any talk to the contrary is ill conceived at best.

The Cowboys were 2-3 after Week 5. Not time to panic, and certainly not time for management and the head coach to prove to the players and coaches they are quitters who don't believe in them.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Dak wasn't injured in Week 2, yet you literally said you 100% agreed with the OP that we should have been intentionally losing games by Week 2.

But even if talking about Week 5 when Dak got hurt, the team was 2-3 and very much in it, and there was a reason we signed a veteran like Andy Dalton. A team can't start trying to lose games that early, if for no other reason than the league would not tolerate it - especially with the division still up for grabs. That's big no, no. The league isn't even fond of playoff bound teams sitting starters the last week or two of the season, but tolerates because it's not actually tanking, but rather just keeping players healthy going into the playoffs.

But on top of that, a team cannot breed a winning attitude by showing the team it is willing to give up with 15/16 (or even 11/16) of the season yet to play. It's unreasonable to ask players and coaches to fluctuate from being willing quitters to intense winners.

The very essence of athletic competition is the struggle to overcome obstacles, and you cannot teach a team to overcome obstacles by quitting after Week 1 (or even Week 5 after Dak got hurt)

I'm not talking about week 2. I don't care about that lucky win that was given to us because a team was more incompetent than us for once. I said once Dak was injured.

We was 1-3 when Dak was injured. Dalton lead us to the Giants win (unfortunately). Then Dalton was injured. I don't care if we was never out of it because the division was on of the worst of all time. Making the playoffs at 6-10 is embarrassing and only hurts your future.

What does overcoming obstacles with our back up QB that everyone knew was only going to be here for 1 year do for anybody? The team was done. The only reason we won the games we did was because we were playing teams that was more injured then us (Bengals) or was just flat out in disarray (Eagles). There was no positives from last year, so the idea of us playing to "overcoming obstacles" didn't work out for anybody except the teams ahead of us in the draft that.

Like I said, Romo being praised for taking "bad teams" to 8-8 records was embarrassing when in reality it did nothing but hurt the team going forward. A bad team going 8-8 guarantees that we draft in the middle of the pack, and they stay in the middle of the pack. That's why we had 3 straight 8-8 seasons.

 

[ghst187]

Says you.

Nice job backing up your claim. Solid.

troy Aikman vs Tony Mandarich

 

[LACowboysFan1]

That’s a ridiculous and inaccurate statement for a team that has Jerry Jones as the GM and his son as the Personnel guy. They have won nothing of consequence for 25 years and counting. The ultimate proof ? They both still have their jobs. The Cowboys are in the entertainment business.

And what constitutes "entertainment"? Losing games? If it's just fans watching and buying merchandise, what gets more fans and sells more merchandise?

Winning or losing? Winning, of course. How many t-shirts and caps were sold after each Cowboys SB win? And that's in addition to what folks buy during the season. More money for Jerry.

The whole view of "Jerry just cares about making money" coupled with "He doesn't want to win" makes no sense.

There are fans like me, very long term Cowboys fans, that are just too dadgum old to change to another team. For me at least, becoming a Cowboys fan wasn't a conscious decision like "Hey I like this team, think I'll become a fan". I watched Cowboys and other NFL games, the Cowboys "won me over", for whatever reason. When the Texans got into the league, I watched some of their games. Just couldn't get into them, even when they beat Dallas in their first ever regular season game.

But we'll be gone before too many years pass. Some of the older fans left when JJ bought the team and fired Landry. They were replaced with the 1990's Cowboys fans. Those too will die, or get sick of the losing, and JJ will need new fans. Can he get those by not winning SBs? Imho, no.

There is zero reason for JJ to not try to make the Cowboys the top team. NONE. He tries, but the problem is he won't let anybody else get much of the credit, ergo he's still the gm and has decision making on "socks to jocks". That's the problem, it's not a lack of desire to win.

I know, we've had this conversation for a long time and in great detail. Nobody's changing their mind, probably. But that's one of the things about being a Cowboys fan, always something to "cuss and discuss" with each other about...

 

[Reverend Conehead]

The Cowboys should have lost their games against Atlanta (week 2), the Giants (week 5), and the Vikings (week 11). The Cowboys could of had the 3rd overall pick. They could have received the same haul the Dolphins did for the 3rd pick. In this scenario Surtain or Horn would likely be available at 12. Plus they would have 2 extra 1st round picks + an extra 3rd round pick in the future. They could have also selected a QB at 3 and trade Dak. A ridiculous botched onside kick + signing Andy Dalton cost this franchise for years to come.

Professional athletes aren't going to tank games. It's literally their job to do whatever they can within the rules of the game to win. That's the case whether they're fighting for a playoff spot or if they're already ruled out of the playoffs and just playing for pride. Even if there are no playoffs ahead, each player is playing to keep his roster spot. You just can't ask any player to tank for a better draft position. That makes the chances of a player getting cut greater.

 

[Jake]

These fans that want to go 6-10 instead of 3-13 are a problem.

What anyone on this board wants is meaningless as to whether the team goes 3-13 or 6-10. It's like I'm explaining this to children.

"Okay boys, we had a good week of practice. Now let's go out there and throw the game. Sure some of you are playing for contracts, and your careers, but that's not what matters. What matters is the Cowboys having the highest possible draft pick, even though several of you won't even be here next year."

That's how stupid it sounds, kids.

 

[Jake]

That's why you start benching guys and giving players who aren't good opportunities.

Maybe get a little more aggressive with some of your defensive schemes and see if you give up a extra big play or 2.

So you're benching guys who are good enough to win just to make sure you can lose? I'm sure that works great in Madden.

STOP EXPECTING COACHES AND PLAYERS TO THINK LIKE FANS. These are grown men playing for their jobs.

"Okay boys, we had a good week of practice. Now let's go out there and throw the game. Sure some of you are playing for contracts, and your careers, but that's not what matters so some of you might even get benched for the cause. What matters is the Cowboys having the highest possible draft pick, even though several of you won't even be here next year."

That's how stupid it sounds.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Professional athletes aren't going to tank games. It's literally their job to do whatever they can within the rules of the game to win. That's the case whether they're fighting for a playoff spot or if they're already ruled out of the playoffs and just playing for pride. Even if there are no playoffs ahead, each player is playing to keep his roster spot. You just can't ask any player to tank for a better draft position. That makes the chances of a player getting cut greater.

Yes, what makes one athlete a top NFL player vs. another? For one thing it's desire to excel and to WIN. Seriously doubt there's more than a tiny handful of NFL players just "in it for the money". Money is great, but if you know anything about how beat up NFL players get, even a couple of million dollars a year may not make up for constantly being in pain during the season, and probably a while after that. Just witness Andew Luck - making millions and millions a year, but the constant wear and tear of his body finally got to him. Maybe he's a "wimp", guess that's possible.

Players play to win. It's ingrained since Pee Wee football, can't just "turn off the switch" and not try to win. And who wants to get benched for a backup? That backup just might take your job, your very high paid job. That's not even considering what the players' union or the league has to say about sitting good players so you can lose, and you can bet they will know that, the "well we just want to see if player X can handle it if our starter is out" b.s. won't be tolerated. Every team is part of the league's success....