We have an injury-riddle season, and you all freak out

[Hoofbite]

Now, did you all expect some sort of miracle for us to be able to make the playoffs after all of this happening? In all honesty, I think we did better than we actually should have, considering we were close to winning 5 out of the 6 games we've lost this season by 7 points or less, if the defense wouldn't have collapsed in on itself in the final 3 minutes of the 4th quarter as it always does.

I've seen similar comments to this a few times and I can't help but wonder if people are aware of how the meaningless this is. If there was any sort of positive concept that was less meaningful than a moral victory or consolation prize, this would have to be it.

In 2014 the Bucs had 8 of these games​

In 2013 the Texans lost 14 straight games, 9 of them were by 7 points or less. 5 of those 9 were by a FG or less. Atlanta had 7 of these games this year.​

In 2012 the Lions had 8 of these games and the Panthers had 7.​

In 2011 the Vikings had 9 losses by a TD or less.​

Looking just at 2015, there are currently 3 teams who have lost 7 games by a TD or less. The Ravens, Chargers, and Giants. Dallas isn't even the best team in the division when it comes to "losing close". The Jaguars also have 6 losses by a TD or less this year. Both the Jaguars and Giants have more wins than Dallas, which would seemingly make them all that much more close to whatever it is this statistic is supposed to less us a team is close to. Other than a team has lost a lot, I'm not sure it says anything.

What did it say about Wade and his 5 losses by 7 points or less in just 8 games in 2010? Ask this board and you'll come up with a list of insults that could fill the video board at the stadium with size 6 font.

 

[cml750]

Don't re-write the history of this season. Yes, Dez went down and yes, Romo went down. But they were both expected back and all we needed were a couple of games to stay in the hunt in what is a horrifically bad NFC East. That is not a miracle in the making. Not even close. We also expected RoMac and Hardy back after their suspensions.

A real miracle would have been to make the playoffs if Romo or Dez were knocked out for the season. Once Romo came back, were were already in a deep hole and had it not been for playing in the NFC East, the season would have been lost already. We didn't need a miracle. We needed a HC to coach the team that he supposedly built over the last several years that had us accepting (and making excuses for) some mediocre .500 football with a franchise QB for multiple years.



I've been watching the same team but obviously you haven't. We traded up for Claiborne and Lawrence. We signed Carr to a big money contract and extended Scandrick and Crawford. We brought in Hardy and RoMac. That's 7 positions out of 11 off the top of my head but I know there have been others.



Um....we're 4 and 10 and won 1 game out of 10 with our back-up QB and you think we did better than we should have? Put the pipe down.....better yet, pass it around because that's some potent stuff you're smoking.

Merry Christmas

 

[jwitten82]

I've seen similar comments to this a few times and I can't help but wonder if people are aware of how the meaningless this is. If there was any sort of positive concept that was less meaningful than a moral victory or consolation prize, this would have to be it.

In 2014 the Bucs had 8 of these games​

In 2013 the Texans lost 14 straight games, 9 of them were by 7 points or less. 5 of those 9 were by a FG or less. Atlanta had 7 of these games this year.​

In 2012 the Lions had 8 of these games and the Panthers had 7.​

In 2011 the Vikings had 9 losses by a TD or less.​

Looking just at 2015, there are currently 3 teams who have lost 7 games by a TD or less. The Ravens, Chargers, and Giants. Dallas isn't even the best team in the division when it comes to "losing close". The Jaguars also have 6 losses by a TD or less this year. Both the Jaguars and Giants have more wins than Dallas, which would seemingly make them all that much more close to whatever it is this statistic is supposed to less us a team is close to. Other than a team has lost a lot, I'm not sure it says anything.

What did it say about Wade and his 5 losses by 7 points or less in just 8 games in 2010? Ask this board and you'll come up with a list of insults that could fill the video board at the stadium with size 6 font.

This post really needs it own thread.

 

[khiladi]

The Commanders have many, if not more than the Cowboys... Their OL for example has four first year players... 14 key players players on IR and a bunch of cast-offs and players signed off the street..

Dallas isn't in a unique situation..

More excuses..

 

[khiladi]

I've seen similar comments to this a few times and I can't help but wonder if people are aware of how the meaningless this is. If there was any sort of positive concept that was less meaningful than a moral victory or consolation prize, this would have to be it.

In 2014 the Bucs had 8 of these games​

In 2013 the Texans lost 14 straight games, 9 of them were by 7 points or less. 5 of those 9 were by a FG or less. Atlanta had 7 of these games this year.​

In 2012 the Lions had 8 of these games and the Panthers had 7.​

In 2011 the Vikings had 9 losses by a TD or less.​

Looking just at 2015, there are currently 3 teams who have lost 7 games by a TD or less. The Ravens, Chargers, and Giants. Dallas isn't even the best team in the division when it comes to "losing close". The Jaguars also have 6 losses by a TD or less this year. Both the Jaguars and Giants have more wins than Dallas, which would seemingly make them all that much more close to whatever it is this statistic is supposed to less us a team is close to. Other than a team has lost a lot, I'm not sure it says anything.

What did it say about Wade and his 5 losses by 7 points or less in just 8 games in 2010? Ask this board and you'll come up with a list of insults that could fill the video board at the stadium with size 6 font.

 

[Junglist]

The injuries quit being an excuse after the New Orleans game.

 

[Idgit]

I've seen similar comments to this a few times and I can't help but wonder if people are aware of how the meaningless this is. If there was any sort of positive concept that was less meaningful than a moral victory or consolation prize, this would have to be it.

In 2014 the Bucs had 8 of these games​

In 2013 the Texans lost 14 straight games, 9 of them were by 7 points or less. 5 of those 9 were by a FG or less. Atlanta had 7 of these games this year.​

In 2012 the Lions had 8 of these games and the Panthers had 7.​

In 2011 the Vikings had 9 losses by a TD or less.​

Looking just at 2015, there are currently 3 teams who have lost 7 games by a TD or less. The Ravens, Chargers, and Giants. Dallas isn't even the best team in the division when it comes to "losing close". The Jaguars also have 6 losses by a TD or less this year. Both the Jaguars and Giants have more wins than Dallas, which would seemingly make them all that much more close to whatever it is this statistic is supposed to less us a team is close to. Other than a team has lost a lot, I'm not sure it says anything.

What did it say about Wade and his 5 losses by 7 points or less in just 8 games in 2010? Ask this board and you'll come up with a list of insults that could fill the video board at the stadium with size 6 font.

The point of that argument isn't to suggest that a lot of teams in the NFL don't lose close. About half of all teams lose by less than a TD, and about a quarter lose by less than a fg. The point of the argument is that the line between winning and losing in the NFL is incredibly thin, and there are lots of things that can cause teams to lose games.

And Wade didn't get fired because of the narrowness of his losses. Jerry said at the time he didn't want to change coaches mid-season. Wade was fired because we got clocked by the Jags and then destroyed by the Packers in back to back weeks and his estimation was that Wade had lost the team, which I think was pretty accurate given how the season turned out.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

After 20 years of mediocrity and less, the problem has to be obvious, why over look that fact.

 

[Hoofbite]

The point of that argument isn't to suggest that a lot of teams in the NFL don't lose close. About half of all teams lose by less than a TD, and about a quarter lose by less than a fg. The point of the argument is that the line between winning and losing in the NFL is incredibly thin, and there are lots of things that can cause teams to lose games.

No, the stats themselves show that the line between winning and losing is thin.

The point of the argument is to minimize how poorly the team has played this year in an attempt to suggest that things will be better without all the misfortune. And then the guy says the team did better than they should have? How low can they possibly go? Most of those close losses were already to other bad teams. To go any lower they'd have to actually go against the grain and get blown out in every game.

 

[Idgit]

No, the stats themselves show that the line between winning and losing is thin.

The point of the argument is to minimize how poorly the team has played this year in an attempt to suggest that things will be better without all the misfortune. And then the guy says the team did better than they should have? How low can they possibly go? Most of those close losses were already to other bad teams. To go any lower they'd have to actually go against the grain and get blown out in every game.

I don't think that's the point, either. The point is only that the line between a season's success or failure is very thin, and so any number of things can make a significant difference. It's usually a compound cause and not some singular shortcoming.

There's no minimizing how poorly the team has played. The won-loss record is explicit.