When you win you win, & when you lose you lose

[BHendri5]

I keep hearing that the Chargers lost that game, more than the Patriots won the game, that is one of those old stupid stupid cliche's (whatever you call those sayings).

If you are a winner, you will always find a way to to do things, call plays make plays etc etc to give your team a chance to win, from the top of the organization to the bottom line players. From personnel changes/hiring to encouragement from the bench riders.

Wins can be pretty and wins can be ugly, but it is still a win, the same goes for losing.

Make no mistake the Patriots won that game, they played well enough, not great but well enough to give there team the opportunity to be in the game to win it as they did.

The Patriots had the edge at Coaching and staff, QB, Experience, @ headed RB to the 1 great one that the Chargers have, a number of good to very good LBs to the 1 that the Chargers have, (even though he learned a valuable lesson yesterday).

The Chargers learned hopefully a valuable lesson yesterday, and they will grow from it, next year put in the same situation I would pick them to win, but this season I just couldnot pick them to win, now if they had Brees still I would have picked them to win.

Brady is clutch, yeah he threw 3 Ints, but the result is they still won the game, and if your QB can throw 3 ints and still lead youto a victory that is clutch in my book.

Ints are not alwyas the QBs fault either, instead of coming up with bogus stat categories like dropped passes just to keep the negative light on T.O., they should come up with separating the reason why an int was thrown was it the QBs fault or a tipped pass or the WR ran the wrong route, or cut it off, or whatever.

Brady is clutch, and they will be better this weekend, their offense next season with the same WRs will be prolific, their defense may have a drop off, due to age and free agents, but if no one tug at more of their coaching staff they may be better.

When you lose, you put yourself in the position to watch the winning team celebrate on your field, doing whatever they earned the right to do by defeating you on your home field, so accept it go get dressed do your interview and go home, there was nothing classes about what the Patriots did.

LT, was just being a sore loser I guess, I hate losing, but I you cannot get mad at them you lost they took it.

 

[CATCH17]

Also I want to know what ever happened to a team just getting beat?

ESPN has brainwashed a lot of fans out there.

Someone is always to blame. Someones gotta be put on the hot seat after any loss.

You just cant get beat anymore.

I cant believe Schottenheimer is taking as much heat as he is when he put his team in a position to win but they just did some absolutely moronic stuff.

They got beat. Nobody needs to lose their job over it.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

I think in this case though, saying the Chargers lost more than the Patriots won is pretty accurate.

The Chargers gave them three points on the fumbled punt and the conduct penalty, then had the game all but won with the INT only to fumble it away. Then Marty challenged the play, burned a time out which if you add 40 seconds to the game clock for the Chargers at the end, not only might they have gotten closer for a FG, they might have scored a TD to win the game.

 

[Reality]

It's not just ESPN .. all sportscasters have fallen (if not turned) to the same tactics. They predict a without-a-doubt winner. If the team they pick loses a close game (9 or less points), they immediately say "they beat themselves" or "they were the better team but just not on that day" .. if they lose by 10 or more, they say "they just didn't look ready to play."

I'm a bottom-line person and Parcells "claims" to be that as well. Saying you had a better team than was out on the field is nothing more than an excuse. When it comes to the NFL, especially the playoffs, only one thing matters ... winning. Parcells loves to throw out these "one-liners" to make him appear all-knowing but he rarely follows or believes in those one-liners himself.

"You are what you are" is the perfect example. We were a better team? Right .. a "better team" doesn't go 9-8 on the year. Counting the playoffs, this team is 2 games above .500 after four years of Parcells being here .. at some point, you have to say, "you are what you are" and the Cowboys are "average."

Florida was a better team than Ohio State.
The Seahawks were a better team than the Cowboys.
The Patriots were a better team than the Chargers.
The Colts were a better team than the Ravens.
The Bears were a better team than the Seahawks.
The Saints were a better team than the Eagles.

The bottom line is all that matters. How you got there (Chargers 14-2 regular season) is irrelevant. When the game ends, the better team has the most points. End of story.

-Reality

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Reality, while your premise is probably correct, why is it when we discuss Parcells first team and the fact Quincy Carter is the only starting QB for the Cowboys to win 10 games in a season as starter since Aikman in 1996, it is pooh poohed as "we won in spite of Carter, he sucked that year but the defence won for him" etc?

 

[Reality]

Reality, while your premise is probably correct, why is it when we discuss Parcells first team and the fact Quincy Carter is the only starting QB for the Cowboys to win 10 games in a season as starter since Aikman in 1996, it is pooh poohed as "we won in spite of Carter, he sucked that year but the defence won for him" etc?

The ONLY reason the Cowboys won 10 games that year was because of the defense, not the offense or Carter. Our defense was super-quick and very aggressive. Carter was the "bus driver" .. when he tried to do more, he got benched.

 

[burmafrd]

Brady stank the place up most of the game- his 3 picks could have very easily been 5. Rivers was pretty much the same- but at least he had the excuse that he was a playoff rookie. That was a game that plain and simple the better TALENTED team lost to a lesser talented but marginally better TEAM. Coaching was also the difference as BB clearly outdid Marty.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

The ONLY reason the Cowboys won 10 games that year was because of the defense, not the offense or Carter. Our defense was super-quick and very aggressive. Carter was the "bus driver" .. when he tried to do more, he got benched.

When was he benched during that season?

Still you have proved my point, the win is a win argument is only valid if it fits into the theory a poster is trying to prove. Since most posters don't like Carter, the fact he won 10 games as a starter is meaningless. Yet say for example Bellichick won this year only because he has the best QB in the NFL, that is proof for many that Bellichick is a great coach.

 

[CATCH17]

The ONLY reason the Cowboys won 10 games that year was because of the defense, not the offense or Carter. Our defense was super-quick and very aggressive. Carter was the "bus driver" .. when he tried to do more, he got benched.

People have absolutely 100% forgotten how good Roy Williams was that year for us. He was an absolute MONSTER.

He finished 2nd for Defensive Player of the Year that year and they just gave it to Ray Lewis.

People have so quick forgotten how good of a player Roy can be.

 

[Reality]

When was he benched during that season?

I didn't say he was benched that season .. I said, when he tried to do more than drive the bus, he got benched.

Still you have proved my point, the win is a win argument is only valid if it fits into the theory a poster is trying to prove.

I have been a bottom line person all my life. I don't care who the quarterback is if he's good. I will not give a player credit though when he wasn't the reason for the success. If you want me to compliment Carter, I will .. he didn't do too much to screw things up for the awesome defense we had that year. In other words, he wasn't "that bad."

Since most posters don't like Carter, the fact he won 10 games as a starter is meaningless. Yet say for example Bellichick won this year only because he has the best QB in the NFL, that is proof for many that Bellichick is a great coach.

As for me not liking Carter, I fully supported him just as I do all Cowboys quarterbacks. Unlike you and other Carter lover/hater's, I root and support whoever is the starting quarterback.

Carter had his chance and proved he was a below-average quarterback. Otherwise, he would be playing in the NFL now. Even average quarterbacks can find a career in the NFL as a backup. Where's Carter? Where's Hutchinson? Where's Leaf? Where's Henson?

At some point, you have to accept that maybe our quarterbacks just haven't been that good. I have .. no matter how much I supported them when they were playing for us.

-Reality

 

[smarta5150]

We lost the Seattle game... they didnt win that game

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Where in any of the posts I have made on this forum can it be said I did not support the starting QB? I wanted Carter to succeed, then Hutchless, then Carter again, then Testaverde, then Henson, then Testaverde, then Bledsoe and ultimately Romo.

I might like certain players more than others but no matter who is on the field, I want them to succeed.

 

[dfense]

I keep hearing that the Chargers lost that game, more than the Patriots won the game, that is one of those old stupid stupid cliche's (whatever you call those sayings).

If you are a winner, you will always find a way to to do things, call plays make plays etc etc to give your team a chance to win, from the top of the organization to the bottom line players. From personnel changes/hiring to encouragement from the bench riders.

Wins can be pretty and wins can be ugly, but it is still a win, the same goes for losing.

Make no mistake the Patriots won that game, they played well enough, not great but well enough to give there team the opportunity to be in the game to win it as they did.

The Patriots had the edge at Coaching and staff, QB, Experience, @ headed RB to the 1 great one that the Chargers have, a number of good to very good LBs to the 1 that the Chargers have, (even though he learned a valuable lesson yesterday).

The Chargers learned hopefully a valuable lesson yesterday, and they will grow from it, next year put in the same situation I would pick them to win, but this season I just couldnot pick them to win, now if they had Brees still I would have picked them to win.

Brady is clutch, yeah he threw 3 Ints, but the result is they still won the game, and if your QB can throw 3 ints and still lead youto a victory that is clutch in my book.

Ints are not alwyas the QBs fault either, instead of coming up with bogus stat categories like dropped passes just to keep the negative light on T.O., they should come up with separating the reason why an int was thrown was it the QBs fault or a tipped pass or the WR ran the wrong route, or cut it off, or whatever.

Brady is clutch, and they will be better this weekend, their offense next season with the same WRs will be prolific, their defense may have a drop off, due to age and free agents, but if no one tug at more of their coaching staff they may be better.

When you lose, you put yourself in the position to watch the winning team celebrate on your field, doing whatever they earned the right to do by defeating you on your home field, so accept it go get dressed do your interview and go home, there was nothing classes about what the Patriots did.

LT, was just being a sore loser I guess, I hate losing, but I you cannot get mad at them you lost they took it.

Well, they did. Picking off a pass on 4th down? When simply batting it down would give you the ball 10 yards further upfield, Stupid. Sack, forced fumble on 4-13. Then 15 yard headbutt. Stupid. Losing a TO to review an obvious fumble. Stupid. And there's more. Preventing any one of those things could have won them the game.

 

[Da Hammer]

i'm sorry but i dont agree especially when it comes to football. In baseball and basketball i believe 99% of the time the better team will win because its 7 games and if theres a lucky break for the lesser team that leads them to win lets say win Game 1 well that usually wont happen again and the better team in a long series will win.

I lived in Chicago when the Bulls had their 1st 3-peat and they would lose either game 1 or 2 a lot in series but they wouldnt lose again because they were just the better team. But in football if you lose the 1st game its over for you and the team doesnt get to prove they are better than the other team like in basketball and baseball you can. in Baseball i dont know how many times the Yanks would do the same lose game 1 during their dynasty and then win the series.

while football in 1 game a lot of times you dont know who the better team is because ANYTHING can happen in 1 game. You can get a lucky break (like the Brady INT yesterday where the defender fumbled) and you can win the game even if your not the better team but over a 7 game series the team is not gonna get lucky in every game and better team WILL WIN! or the Ref can blow a call that totally screws the other team and helps lead the underdog to the win. Too much happens in just 1 game to say the winner is the better team.

Now dont get me wrong, this has nothing to do with the Chargers/Pats game as i have always believed this. And i actually like it this way because it makes football funner than all the other sports because you have to play your A-game every game in the playoffs or its season over for your team. Thats why i love the World Cup of Soccer as well because like in football in the 2nd rd if u lose you go home.

 

[gbrittain]

It's not just ESPN .. all sportscasters have fallen (if not turned) to the same tactics. They predict a without-a-doubt winner. If the team they pick loses a close game (9 or less points), they immediately say "they beat themselves" or "they were the better team but just not on that day" .. if they lose by 10 or more, they say "they just didn't look ready to play."

I'm a bottom-line person and Parcells "claims" to be that as well. Saying you had a better team than was out on the field is nothing more than an excuse. When it comes to the NFL, especially the playoffs, only one thing matters ... winning. Parcells loves to throw out these "one-liners" to make him appear all-knowing but he rarely follows or believes in those one-liners himself.

"You are what you are" is the perfect example. We were a better team? Right .. a "better team" doesn't go 9-8 on the year. Counting the playoffs, this team is 2 games above .500 after four years of Parcells being here .. at some point, you have to say, "you are what you are" and the Cowboys are "average."

Florida was a better team than Ohio State.
The Seahawks were a better team than the Cowboys.
The Patriots were a better team than the Chargers.
The Colts were a better team than the Ravens.
The Bears were a better team than the Seahawks.
The Saints were a better team than the Eagles.

The bottom line is all that matters. How you got there (Chargers 14-2 regular season) is irrelevant. When the game ends, the better team has the most points. End of story.

-Reality

I have yet to read a good defense of why BP should stay. I am not at all saying someone has not written a defense of BP, I just have not read it.

I have heard things like he is better than Campo, we went to the playoffs, and etcetera but have yet to read a really good defense of why BP should stay in which will all likelihood be a lame duck year.

I seriously do not know what will make next year so different than this year. Rookies in the draft at this point are becoming less likely to start. I mean look at Bobby Carpenter.

It is an honest question. I do not dislike BP for the sake of disliking him. I thought I was in heaven when JJ signed BP. Why should I, a BP critic, be encouraged by the idea that he might be coming back next year? Why do the BP supporters think next year will be different?

In addition to the quesiton above, I would mention that being better than Campo is not really a defense. There appears to be this notion that we can be what we are with Parcells or be like the Campo years. What about the third option? Maybe we could be better.

These are the known facts:

Two games over .500 including playoffs in the four years he has been here.

Did better with Campo's talent than he has ever done with his own.

No division titles.

No playoff wins.

Still can not pressure the QB.

Still have a very average at best OL.

Has not been able to produce better than a 4 game winning streak with players he brought in and drafted = Very inconsistent.

Two consecutive seasons with no improvement and only going one game over .500

All these "accomplishments" in the NFC.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

I can only judge from my own personal experience but I look forward to Cowboy games far more now than I did under Campost. We might not win, but at least we are an interesting team now and I don't go in thinking we will lose.

Get rid of Parcells, keep Parcells, I really don't care because unless our players start to cover, stop dropping snaps, stop dropping passes, missing open receivers, it won't matter who is wearing the headsets.

No amount of my whining about the result will change the result.

If we are to get rid of Parcells, then you better make sure it is someone who can handle the pressure of being the Cowboys' coach. Gailey couldn't, Campo couldn't and to a lesser extent, Switzer couldn't.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I can only judge from my own personal experience but I look forward to Cowboy games far more now than I did under Campost. We might not win, but at least we are an interesting team now and I don't go in thinking we will lose.

Get rid of Parcells, keep Parcells, I really don't care because unless our players start to cover, stop dropping snaps, stop dropping passes, missing open receivers, it won't matter who is wearing the headsets.

No amount of my whining about the result will change the result.

If we are to get rid of Parcells, then you better make sure it is someone who can handle the pressure of being the Cowboys' coach. Gailey couldn't, Campo couldn't and to a lesser extent, Switzer couldn't.

excellent post...for a Canuck :

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

I keep hearing that the Chargers lost that game, more than the Patriots won the game

I hear ya...

For all the BS about Brady and how is lucky or not that good or just part of a system.... HE, I repeat Brady WON THAT game... down by 8, massive pressure(in the game and mentally) and he prevails YET AGAIN.

 

[Sarge]

To blame the Chargers loss on Shottyhymer is tempestuous.

 

[DipChit]

I keep hearing that the Chargers lost that game, more than the Patriots won the game, that is one of those old stupid stupid cliche's (whatever you call those sayings).

Exactly.. the better team just won!

Just like in the '94 NFC Championship game when the Niners beat us.

Err.. wait.