Funny, I haven't missed a Cowboys game in 35 years and I can remember games they lost but should have won. But I can't think of many games in the Garrett era where he lost games when Cowboys had a multi-score lead.I disagree. They’re an excellent team. Their greatest strength is their consistency. They almost always beat the teams they’re supposed to beat. That’s why they’re so difficult to catch in the standings once they get out ahead of you. It sounds like a trivial detail—”They beat the teams they’re better than. Big whoop.”—but it’s not. Jason Garrett never joined the ranks of good because he didn’t consistently win games he should’ve won. He lost to bad teams. He blew multi-score leads in the fourth quarter when his win probability was well over ninety percent. The Eagles seldom do this.
There were three in his first full year. Detroit, New York, and New York.Funny, I haven't missed a Cowboys game in 35 years and I can remember games they lost but should have won. But I can't think of many games in the Garrett era where he lost games when Cowboys had a multi-score lead.
2011 ? I'll give you the Lions game. Cowboys had a 20 to 3 lead at the half and then Romo threw 2 pick sixes in the third quarter and they ended up losing. One pick to Bobby Carpenter ahhh!There were three in his first full year. Detroit, New York, and New York.
The Cowboys had 34-22 lead with five minutes left against the Giants.2011 ? I'll give you the Lions game. Cowboys had a 20 to 3 lead at the half and then Romo threw 2 pick sixes in the third quarter and they ended up losing. One pick to Bobby Carpenter ahhh!
But the Giants games, the Cowboys never had a lead in either game. First one was close all game 37-34
I see your point, They remind me of the Vikings team from last year....1. Comparables.
2. A single impressive victory... Miami. And a single victory in which the outcome was never really in doubt... Tampa Bay.
This is a fortunate team. Yes, it's sometimes better to be lucky than good. No doubt. This post is just looking at the question of "how good are they really?"
They might be the weakest, most vulnerable 7-1 team in recent memory.
Now, none of that matters to Sunday's outcome specifically. They could continue to be fortunate, and we could lose. Reality, otoh, is most NFL games are that way... a bad team that plays at or near their ceiling often is capable of defeating a good team that plays at or near its floor.
I'm only making the point that is the subject header... this Eagles team has so far proven to be something less than the hype they're enjoying from being 7-1.
hmmm… you know after watching both teams it just seems we put more pressure on the QB. Maybe we just don't get the sacks because we over pursue? I'll be honest I'm not much into stats, but I wonder how many QB hurries they have opposed to us? It sure seems like we have more.I agree with everything except about their pass rush. They have 25 sacks so far compared to Cowboys 18. Their DL has been very tough.
Well I agree with most of that I wouldn't go that far the Eagles deserve a little bit of hype I mean they did go to the Super bowl last year now they started out with only one loss and yeah the Miami victory is supposed to be impressive but you forgot to mention that the Philadelphia Eagles didn't get penalized one time in that game and the penalties against Miami were insane and they were missing four of their starters in that game I mean two of their corners were out I mean who is A.J. Brown beating??1. Comparables.
2. A single impressive victory... Miami. And a single victory in which the outcome was never really in doubt... Tampa Bay.
This is a fortunate team. Yes, it's sometimes better to be lucky than good. No doubt. This post is just looking at the question of "how good are they really?"
They might be the weakest, most vulnerable 7-1 team in recent memory.
Now, none of that matters to Sunday's outcome specifically. They could continue to be fortunate, and we could lose. Reality, otoh, is most NFL games are that way... a bad team that plays at or near their ceiling often is capable of defeating a good team that plays at or near its floor.
I'm only making the point that is the subject header... this Eagles team has so far proven to be something less than the hype they're enjoying from being 7-1.
I wouldn't go that far but the Eagles are being overhyped... The problem is we're playing on the road in their house probably going to be a cold game outdoors with our Kelly's heel so it might be tough to beat them but they're definitely not unbeatable they never have been the Cowboys play the Eagles very well they play the NFC East very well we have a problem with the 49ers right there outside of that i'm not that worried..I see your point, They remind me of the Vikings team from last year....
Great point. Winning the games "you're supposed to win" is a great way to rack up wins.I disagree. They’re an excellent team. Their greatest strength is their consistency. They almost always beat the teams they’re supposed to beat. That’s why they’re so difficult to catch in the standings once they get out ahead of you. It sounds like a trivial detail—”They beat the teams they’re better than. Big whoop.”—but it’s not. Jason Garrett never joined the ranks of good because he didn’t consistently win games he should’ve won. He lost to bad teams. He blew multi-score leads in the fourth quarter when his win probability was well over ninety percent. The Eagles seldom do this.
HahaLol they have been “lucky” a lot.
ALL of us!Who is we in this scenario?
Hurts is on pace for 40 total TDs and is 23-2 over his last 25 games. Doesn't seem "exposed" to me?I think it's even simpler than that. IMO they have an overrated QB who has been exposed.
And what 37 turnovers?Hurts is on pace for 40 total TDs and is 23-2 over his last 25 games. Doesn't seem "exposed" to me?