This season seems earily similar to 2003!

[AtlCB]

1. We won a tough game on the road very early in the season that no one expected us to win: 2003 vs. N.Y. Giants, 2005 vs. San Diego.

2. We lost to a team at home that we should have beaten: 2003 vs. the Vick-less Falcons, 2005 vs. the Deadskins.

3. We have one loss and will be underdogs facing an 0-3 team on the road that we are not expected to beat: 2003 vs. Jets, 2005 vs. Oakland.

4. We are facing back to back road games against opponents that are extremely close to each other: New York in 2003, Bay area in 2005.

5. Our fifth game will be played against an injured McChunky soup.


Unfortunately, our schedule is much tougher than the 2003 schedule.

 

[Portland Fanatic]

1. We won a tough game on the road very early in the season that no one expected us to win: 2003 vs. N.Y. Giants, 2005 vs. San Diego.

2. We lost to a team at home that we should have beaten: 2003 vs. the Vick-less Falcons, 2005 vs. the Deadskins.

3. We have one loss and will be underdogs facing an 0-3 team on the road that we are not expected to beat: 2003 vs. Jets, 2005 vs. Oakland.

4. We are facing back to back road games against opponents that are extremely close to each other: New York in 2003, Bay area in 2005.

5. Our fifth game will be played against an injured McChunky soup.


Unfortunately, our schedule is much tougher than the 2003 schedule.

This team has so much more talent it's not even funny, but across the board still very young. However, all the other stuff is interesting.

 

[SupermanXx]

2003 has been my favorite season since 1995

 

[wileedog]

Unfortunately, our schedule is much tougher than the 2003 schedule.

Our backfield in 2003 was Carter and T-Ham.

If that doesn't make you feel better I don't know what will....

 

[ravidubey]

2003 has been my favorite season since 1995

It was clear we were pretenders in 2003 from the start. Yes we were playing good defense but we all knew the Cowboys' grip on winning was tenuous and this was emphasized repeatedly against any good team that we played who had it's collective head on straight.

I'll take 1998-- at least that year Dallas had the offense and enough playmakers on defense to make things interesting. Randy Moss spoiled the party for us at Thanksgiving and Aikman looked awful in the postseason, but we definitely earned our 10-6 record that year.

[EDIT]
Duh, forgot 1996, the "suspension and field goals" year. Despite adversity, we still finished 10-6 and beat both Superbowl teams. Had Leon Lett and Michael Irvin played in Carolina I think we would have rolled passed them in the playoffs as well. Oh well...

 

[DipChit]

I was thinking about this last night but on a more basic level. Simply being the 3rd year in a row we've started 2-1. Last year it ended up not meaning jack, finishing 6-10. The year before of course we did some things well and went 10-6 although even at that there was no chance of truly competing at the end because our offense was so hideous.

So whats that mean for this year.. split the difference and go 8-8? Who knows. But should we get a playoff birth one way or another, I'll feel better about one thing. The fact that we'll at least stand a better chance to score more points than maybe a token TD and a couple of field goals.

We already have 10 TD's in three games. I think in '03 we didnt get our 10th offensive TD til like game 6.

 

[Hostile]

This team reminds me of the 1991 team. A lot in fact.

 

[Cbz40]

You are all wrong.....the 1975 team. The dirty dozen gave the vets the inspiration they needed. So I ask you this.... When was the last time you saw a vet, such as LA, get as excited as he did on Sunday?

 

[jcblanco22]

It was clear we were pretenders in 2003 from the start. Yes we were playing good defense but we all knew the Cowboys' grip on winning was tenuous and this was emphasized repeatedly against any good team that we played who had it's collective head on straight.

I'll take 1998-- at least that year Dallas had the offense and enough playmakers on defense to make things interesting. Randy Moss spoiled the party for us at Thanksgiving and Aikman looked awful in the postseason, but we definitely earned our 10-6 record that year.

[EDIT]
Duh, forgot 1996, the "suspension and field goals" year. Despite adversity, we still finished 10-6 and beat both Superbowl teams. Had Leon Lett and Michael Irvin played in Carolina I think we would have rolled passed them in the playoffs as well. Oh well...

Aikman and Bledsoe's performances are very similar when you compare '98 to '05, you are right ravidubey.

What was crazy about that Thanksgiving game was Aikman threw for 455 that day--remember the beauty to Jeffers?--and we still lost. I think that was his most prolific passing day ever, followed by the season opening OT win against the Skins in '99 (I think he also threw for 379 against the Cardinals his rookie year. but I believe he was in the 380s in the game against Washington). Hard to believe he had his best passing days under Gailey yet still apparently went over his head to JJ and had a role in his departure.

 

[Jay9508]

I dont know if yall noticed but the cowboys defense sucks, it is ranked 23rd

 

[Portland Fanatic]

You are all wrong.....the 1975 team. The dirty dozen gave the vets the inspiration they needed. So I ask you this.... When was the last time you saw a vet, such as LA, get as excited as he did on Sunday?

It's been to long pops...too long! Maybe Cortez will be a changed man...his fault or not, maybe if he misses he will fear LA will kick his arse in public. He may not miss another FG or PAT the rest of year....

 

[Cbz40]

It's been to long pops...too long! Maybe Cortez will be a changed man...his fault or not, maybe if he misses he will fear LA will kick his arse in public. He may not miss another FG or PAT the rest of year....

That incident could make him the best kicker in the league......fear can be a wonderful thing,,,,

 

[junk]

So I ask you this.... When was the last time you saw a vet, such as LA, get as excited as he did on Sunday?

When I tried to take one of his cookies....

 

[lurkercowboy]

It was clear we were pretenders in 2003 from the start. Yes we were playing good defense but we all knew the Cowboys' grip on winning was tenuous and this was emphasized repeatedly against any good team that we played who had it's collective head on straight.

I'll take 1998-- at least that year Dallas had the offense and enough playmakers on defense to make things interesting. Randy Moss spoiled the party for us at Thanksgiving and Aikman looked awful in the postseason, but we definitely earned our 10-6 record that year.

[EDIT]
Duh, forgot 1996, the "suspension and field goals" year. Despite adversity, we still finished 10-6 and beat both Superbowl teams. Had Leon Lett and Michael Irvin played in Carolina I think we would have rolled passed them in the playoffs as well. Oh well...

Great nickname for 1996. One of us should go through and give every year a nickname like that.

 

[Martice]

Our backfield in 2003 was Carter and T-Ham.

If that doesn't make you feel better I don't know what will....

Hi Willie. If I'm correct, in 2003 we went 5-1 and that's when the wheels began to fall off. We won't know what tyoe of team we truely have until after the 1/2 way point of this season. Also, I believe our offense was one of the top offenses in the league early on as well.

So I agree with the original poster. This season is earily similar to 2003 and we made the playoffs that year!!

Go Cowboys.

 

[adbutcher]

This team reminds me of the 1991 team. A lot in fact.

Now where did I hear that before?

 

[wileedog]

Hi Willie. If I'm correct, in 2003 we went 5-1 and that's when the wheels began to fall off. We won't know what tyoe of team we truely have until after the 1/2 way point of this season. Also, I believe our offense was one of the top offenses in the league early on as well.

So I agree with the original poster. This season is earily similar to 2003 and we made the playoffs that year!!

Go Cowboys.

The wheels came off because everyone figured out they didn't need to pay attention to T-Ham at all, and that if you put an extra man into coverage Quincy had no idea what to do and for the most part became a dump off passer. Tampa Bay exposed that to the rest of the league, and it was all down here from there.

Our D was good from day 1 that year, although they didn't do the things that needed to be done to beat good teams - pressure the QB and create TOs.

The difference is this year the offense is not a liability - it can't be almost completely nullified just by confusing Quincy Carter. Meanwhile the defense I think is still finding itself, and will be for several weeks at least. Lots of young kids and a new scheme. But they are also doing things the 2003 didn't do, such as said QB pressure and getting turnovers, and I think both of those things will increase steadily as the season progresses.

In short I see very little in common with the 2003 team. The offense was largely being run by caretakers and leftovers from the Campo daze. The defense was effective at what it did, but had no room to get any better and wasn't Championship caliber. This one isn't either yet, but at least its got a lot more ceiling to it and showes flashes at times of what it will be.

Everyone hates the word, but what this team has that the 2003 team never did is 'potential'. I really think that in 2003 we squeezed just about everything we were going to get out of that team. Conversely, I don't think anyone knows just how good this one can be yet.

 

[EveryoneElse]

I dont know if yall noticed but the cowboys defense sucks, it is ranked 23rd

They have been playing like the 32nd ranked defense. I think we've all noticed.