This Team Compared With 70s and 90s Cowboy Teams

[HogsRLegends]

How do you all think this team would fare against the other 5 Cowboys Super Bowl championship teams?

I don't remember your teams from the 70's, but I do remember the 90's dynasty. I think that this team is as good if not better offensively, even without a workhorse like Emmitt Smith.

Defense is the major question mark, 2007 Cowboys have shown flashes of brilliance but also inconsistency. 92, 93, and 95 Cowboys defense was consistently tough, but also further along in the learning curve then this defense.

Record-wise you are off to a better start then any other Cowboys team...so that must also say something

What do you all think?

 

[Mavs Man]

It is really difficult to compare teams from different eras. The talent level has changed. There are more teams, now. The rules are different.

All I can do is compare those teams against the teams they played against. The 70s teams were known for their Doomsday Defense, and starred Roger Staubach and Tony Dorsett as arguably the best QB/RB set of that decade (or ever). The 90s Cowboys featured a feared, top-ranked "no-name" defense and the Triplets of Aikman/Smith/Irvin, right up there with the best QB/RB/WR set in history. Throw in an All-Pro TE in Novacek and a top notch OL and that was a very complete team that dominated the league in the early to mid-90s.

We'll see how this team does, but it will take a number of years yet to decide that.

 

[Bizwah]

How do you all think this team would fare against the other 5 Cowboys Super Bowl championship teams?

I don't remember your teams from the 70's, but I do remember the 90's dynasty. I think that this team is as good if not better offensively, even without a workhorse like Emmitt Smith.

Defense is the major question mark, 2007 Cowboys have shown flashes of brilliance but also inconsistency. 92, 93, and 95 Cowboys defense was consistently tough, but also further along in the learning curve then this defense.

Record-wise you are off to a better start then any other Cowboys team...so that must also say something

What do you all think?

Not even close talent-wise.

Our nineties teams didn't put up huge points mainly because we imposed our will on them physically with Emmitt. Our teams in the ninties were the last great teams the NFL had.

 

[kingwhicker]

I think all five of them would smoke this one as well as the three that lost the Super Bowl. I think a few that didn't get to the Super Bowl (81 and 94, maybe 96) would too.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

That is a hard question

90's team had the D, therefore it wins.

 

[ultra5]

How do you all think this team would fare against the other 5 Cowboys Super Bowl championship teams?

I don't remember your teams from the 70's, but I do remember the 90's dynasty. I think that this team is as good if not better offensively, even without a workhorse like Emmitt Smith.

Defense is the major question mark, 2007 Cowboys have shown flashes of brilliance but also inconsistency. 92, 93, and 95 Cowboys defense was consistently tough, but also further along in the learning curve then this defense.

Record-wise you are off to a better start then any other Cowboys team...so that must also say something

What do you all think?

we would get SMOKED by the 90's teams....

 

[lane]

our offense is equal to the 1977 defense.

relentless.

our defense is two players away.

 

[IndianaCowboyFan]

our defense is two players away.

What two in your opinion?

 

[Aikbach]

The league is not as good as it was 15 years ago, the Dallas and New England teams of the present would be crushed by Dallas and San Francisco of the era, the Buffalo Bills might even be better than Dallas and New England of today.

Those teams were juggernauts, loaded rosters of unparalleled proportions, the 2007 Cowboys have a great offense three or four defensive studs and depth that pails in comparison to the 90s teams.

The line between good and bad in the age of parity comes down to coaching and execution because about 20 or 22 of the 32 teams have pretty evenly matched talent when you get down to it.

The expansion of the league watered down the talent pools on any given roster overall.

 

[ultra5]

The league is not as good as it was 15 years ago, the Dallas and New England teams of the present would be crushed by Dallas and San Francisco of the era, the Buffalo Bills might even be better than Dallas and New England of today.

Those teams were juggernauts, loaded rosters of unparalleled proportions, the 2007 Cowboys have a great offense three or four defensive studs and depth that pails in comparison to the 90s teams.

The line between good and bad in the age of parity comes down to coaching and execution because about 20 or 22 of the 32 teams have pretty evenly matched talent when you get down to it.

The expansion of the league watered down the talent pools on any given roster overall.

you, my friend, speak with the wisdom of a wise man!...

 

[5Stars]

That is a hard question

90's team had the D, therefore it wins.

Yeah, the 90's Cowboys only had Aikman, huh?

 

[lane]

What two in your opinion?

cason

long

 

[Kangaroo]

Not to mention the salary cap as well affected things. Rookies getting 30 million is lame when it should be the players that put up get that type of money.

If you miss on a top 5 pick you are hurt for 3-5 years not because of just the player but the amount of money you have to invest in them salary wise. That is a joke unto itself and forces team to rush guys in the line up before they are ready. That needs to be looked at by the NFL and fixed.

 

[Aikbach]

you, my friend, speak with the wisdom of a wise man!...

I'm as smart as I am handsome.