This was Bill Parcells football

CATCH17;2977388 said:
Thats what receivers do when Bruce Thorton is in coverage.

Don't forget the Dog chasing cars CB the best CB since Deion Sanders to wear the Star Derick Ross now that was a stud him and Larrimore where dabomb

Though neither could top Alundis Brice
 
We ran for 250 yards against the Giants and lost.

Miami ran for 500 yards (seemed like) last Monday night against the Colts and lost.

Tampa Bay gashed us in week one with running--and lost.

You only win consistently in the modern NFL through the quarterback, downfield weapons and in scoring 28 points or more.
 
T-RO;2977475 said:
We ran for 250 yards against the Giants and lost.

Miami ran for 500 yards (seemed like) last Monday night against the Colts and lost.

Tampa Bay gashed us in week one with running--and lost.

You only win consistently in the modern NFL through the quarterback, downfield weapons and in scoring 28 points or more.


You're joking right? There's far to many example of the opposite for me to even start to list them. A strong running game and good D have been the backbone of far to many good teams and championship teams over the year to make that argument
 
Super Bowl teams now pass the ball 60% & of the time now and get nearly 70% of their yardage through the air. Teams win Super Bowls with third string running backs as long as they have good quarterbacks.

And why are you bringing defense into the discussion? The topic is offense.

The Steelers and Cards were ranked like 22nd and 28th in rushing last season and how the heck were they in the Super Bowl?

It's funny because people think of the Steelers as a power running game when they have been nothing of the sort since Bettis. Offensively they ride on the pass, as do the other two dominant teams of the era, the Pats and the Colts. All three of those teams have had virtually anonymous and inter-changeable runners.
 
Everyone wants the big NT in the middle and move Ratliff to defensive end.

I hear the Jon "Trash can full of dirt" Nix is available.
 
Rampage;2977107 said:
Romo actually threw a good pass on that but Roy didn't catch it. that was on Roy. the 2nd fade I have no idea what was going on with that.


Romo cant throw a fade to save his life. For some stupid reason, he underthrows guys down there. You throw up alley-oops below the rim and for some STUPID reason he does it.

Ill take Jeff Brantley over Romo. At least he can throw the fade.
 
Oldschool7;2977508 said:
Super Bowl teams now pass the ball 60% & of the time now and get nearly 70% of their yardage through the air. Teams win Super Bowls with third string running backs as long as they have good quarterbacks.

And why are you bringing defense into the discussion? The topic is offense.

The Steelers and Cards were ranked like 22nd and 28th in rushing last season and how the heck were they in the Super Bowl?

It's funny because people think of the Steelers as a power running game when they have been nothing of the sort since Bettis. Offensively they ride on the pass, as do the other two dominant teams of the era, the Pats and the Colts. All three of those teams have had virtually anonymous and inter-changeable runners.

That does not mean that's the best model for the Cowboys to follow. Historically, the best teams play to their strengths, and limit turnovers.
 
Bleu Star;2977620 said:
So true. Our strength is the running game.

But some people think if you say that, you are saying Romo is a bad QB.
 
I enjoyed the game last night. It was all about domination and control. Like the pregame mentioned, it is all about wins. I hope Romo gets a chance to sit down with Troy and realize this.

Numbers mean nothing unless you have a ring. He should ask Marino whether he would give up his records and HOF for a Super Bowl ring.
 
theebs;2977070 said:
I cant wait to see all the same people who wanted a conservative game from romo complain about this.

This game tonight is exactly what every whiny fan and media member begged for.

They all got it, some moments of the game were carbon copies of the game against ny and this time romo was smart and the backs got the ball.

Yet I know the media and most of the fans are going to complain.


I'm not. Just let Romo keep the game close instead of going buck wild. He doesn't have to be superman. He played a game exactly like the one Eli played to beat Dallas. If Romo would have played like this against NY, Dallas would be 3-0 right now. Give me a game with no turnovers and 200 yards rushing any day of the week.
 
T-RO;2977475 said:
We ran for 250 yards against the Giants and lost.

Miami ran for 500 yards (seemed like) last Monday night against the Colts and lost.

Tampa Bay gashed us in week one with running--and lost.

You only win consistently in the modern NFL through the quarterback, downfield weapons and in scoring 28 points or more.

Reeeeeeeeeaaaaach
 
Oldschool7;2977508 said:
Super Bowl teams now pass the ball 60% & of the time now and get nearly 70% of their yardage through the air. Teams win Super Bowls with third string running backs as long as they have good quarterbacks.

And why are you bringing defense into the discussion? The topic is offense.

The Steelers and Cards were ranked like 22nd and 28th in rushing last season and how the heck were they in the Super Bowl?

It's funny because people think of the Steelers as a power running game when they have been nothing of the sort since Bettis. Offensively they ride on the pass, as do the other two dominant teams of the era, the Pats and the Colts. All three of those teams have had virtually anonymous and inter-changeable runners.
There's not one way to win a Super Bowl.

For every team that won it with a strong passing game, I could name you a team that won it with a strong running game.

But two things I bet just about all them have in common is

1. They don't turn the ball over.

and

2. Play stingy defense.



Simple as that. Which is what we did last night.
 

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,579
Messages
13,819,830
Members
23,780
Latest member
HoppleSopple
Back
Top