What are those?

Love the Dynamic Duo. Zeke needs to take Dak shopping.
 
Love the youthful energy...chemistry seems genuine too.

As an aside, my favorite "what are those?" moment occurred when a kid at Michael Jordan's basketball camp asked Jordan "what are those?" The kids erupted and the old man had no clue about the joke...however...when he revealed that the shoes he had on were a pair of Jordan's that haven't even been released yet...that was classic! #Humbled
 
People always talk about the "New Triplets" and you see that absolute love the game in Dak and Zeke that you saw in Irvin and Emmitt. All of those guys would have played for meal money because they loved the game so much. Its great to see that kind of spirit in the team's stars again.
I loved the triplets as much as anyone but let's not choke on a load of fabricated ******** for nostalgia's sake. Emmitt didn't sit on his couch for an entire off-season and two games in because he was happy to play for "meal money". Irvin and Aikman would have bailed in a heartbeat if someone in FA would have knocked their socks off with an offer, had Jerry low-balled them. Let's at least attempt to keep it real, brother.
 
People always talk about the "New Triplets" and you see that absolute love the game in Dak and Zeke that you saw in Irvin and Emmitt. All of those guys would have played for meal money because they loved the game so much. Its great to see that kind of spirit in the team's stars again.
They would have wanted a mighty expensive meal lol
But they are having fun and good teams are teams having fun
 
I loved the triplets as much as anyone but let's not choke on a load of fabricated bull**** for nostalgia's sake. Emmitt didn't sit on his couch for an entire off-season and two games in because he was happy to play for "meal money". Irvin and Aikman would have bailed in a heartbeat if someone in FA would have knocked their socks off with an offer, had Jerry low-balled them. Let's at least attempt to keep it real, brother.
I don't think you took it the way he meant it. Obviously they wanted their fair share of the pie. But they loved the game and loved playing together
 
I don't think you took it the way he meant it. Obviously they wanted their fair share of the pie. But they loved the game and loved playing together
Of course they loved the game. And, ALL winning teams love to play together.
 
Zeke bullying Dak is considered camaraderie now?

I banned those three words from my classroom.

No bullying going down on my watch.
 
Zeke bullying Dak is considered camaraderie now?

I banned those three words from my classroom.

No bullying going down on my watch.
It isn't bullying when the other guy is bigger than you are and Dak is giving it right back to him with those talons he got for feet
 
I loved the triplets as much as anyone but let's not choke on a load of fabricated bull**** for nostalgia's sake. Emmitt didn't sit on his couch for an entire off-season and two games in because he was happy to play for "meal money". Irvin and Aikman would have bailed in a heartbeat if someone in FA would have knocked their socks off with an offer, had Jerry low-balled them. Let's at least attempt to keep it real, brother.

No way. Clearly Irvin and Emmitt would have thrown away millions of dollars, ignored the hundreds of lawyers working for the NFL Players Association, and then refused to cash their game paychecks. Clearly that is the point I was making.

"Playing for meal money" is a figure of speech. No one turns down money, but Irvin and Emmitt never held out for more money or gripped about their salaries. But they played before the salary cap at a time that Jerry could take care of everyone and still pay Starter salaries to backups, so there was a lot less pressure on either side of the negotiating table.
 
No way. Clearly Irvin and Emmitt would have thrown away millions of dollars, ignored the hundreds of lawyers working for the NFL Players Association, and then refused to cash their game paychecks. Clearly that is the point I was making.

"Playing for meal money" is a figure of speech. No one turns down money, but Irvin and Emmitt never held out for more money or gripped about their salaries. But they played before the salary cap at a time that Jerry could take care of everyone and still pay Starter salaries to backups, so there was a lot less pressure on either side of the negotiating table.
Now you've walked into total ******** Land. Learn your history, son, then get back to me.
 
Now you've walked into total Bull**** Land. Learn your history, son, then get back to me.

Funny, everyone else in this thread understood the point and didn't call it BS. The guy behind the learning curve is you - and in this case its middle school english class.....Son.
 
Now you've walked into total Bull**** Land. Learn your history, son, then get back to me.

BTW, the History is that Emmitt didn't hold out as a Cowboy, his agent held him out when he was a draft pick. There is a different and it confirms my point and doesn't negate it.
 
No way. Clearly Irvin and Emmitt would have thrown away millions of dollars, ignored the hundreds of lawyers working for the NFL Players Association, and then refused to cash their game paychecks. Clearly that is the point I was making.

"Playing for meal money" is a figure of speech. No one turns down money, but Irvin and Emmitt never held out for more money or gripped about their salaries. But they played before the salary cap at a time that Jerry could take care of everyone and still pay Starter salaries to backups, so there was a lot less pressure on either side of the negotiating table.

Emmitt never held out for more money?????!!

How old are you?

Are you sure youre a Cowboys fan?
 
93 as well

You are right, my bad. Emmitt lead the NFL in rushing in 1992 and lead the team to a Super Bow on a rookie contract paying him 465K that year. He was on an RFA contract and no other team offered him a contract, so he held out two games. I'm wrong on the statement above, but that kind of RFA situation is a million miles away from what would be called a holdout today.
 
You are right, my bad. Emmitt lead the NFL in rushing in 1992 and lead the team to a Super Bow on a rookie contract paying him 465K that year. He was on an RFA contract and no other team offered him a contract, so he held out two games. I'm wrong on the statement above, but that kind of RFA situation is a million miles away from what would be called a holdout today.
Nice back pedal but a hold out is a hold out (today and in 93). Two full games of a season is about as hold out as you can get coming off a Super Bowl win.
 
Keep back pedaling, kid. You couldn't possibly look any more ignorant than you already do. What do you have to lose, eh?

Actually, misunderstanding English and ending sentences with "eh?" is a bigger sign of ignorance.

Refusing to sign a RFA deal after winning a Super Bowl and rushing title is a different animal than holding out because you want to be paid more than your peers.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
464,054
Messages
13,786,136
Members
23,771
Latest member
LandryHat
Back
Top