Wow... one loss and people are going nuts

[Hostile]

Kind of like Butt-Hurt :laugh2:?

There is always a broader perspective.

I guarantee you Jerry Jones sees the "broader perspective" and that is exactly why Wade Phillips doesn't have a contract extension.

Sorry but when trying to find out why a group of players perform the way they do, the past is the only thing you have to go on.

Name me one season that has ever been guided by the previous season in the History of the NFL.

Good luck with that needle in a haystack. Especially in the parity driven times we are in now. You're putting way too much freaking emphasis on one loss. That is the broader perspective and you can't refute with me using NFL History or facts to back your theory up.

It cannot be done. But by all means good luck.

 

[Bach]

I would invite you to discuss football with me, but it would interrupt the chafing. So I'll simply ask, do you have a point or scratching an itch that I don't give two hoots in hell about?

Football or talk about prevarication is all good with me.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

Name me one season that has ever been guided by the previous season in the History of the NFL.

Good luck with that needle in a haystack. Especially in the parity driven times we are in now. You're putting way too much freaking emphasis on one loss. That is the broader perspective and you can't refute with me using NFL History or facts to back your theory up.

It cannot be done. But by all means good luck.

Wade Phillips is 0-4 lifetime in the Playoffs.

If that isn't seeing things from a Broader Perspective, then I don't know what is.

 

[Hostile]

Football or talk about prevarication is all good with me.

:laugh2:

The next football discussion I see you involved in will be the first one in a long time. I can't even remember the last time you attempted to actually talk about football. It has been that long.

You start the discussion. I can't wait to see how this goes. You lead, I'll follow.

 

[Bach]

There's no such thing as a trend. Look it up, it's no longer in the dictionary. It was just an illusion this whole time.

 

[Hostile]

Wade Phillips is 0-4 lifetime in the Playoffs.

If that isn't seeing things from a Broader Perspective, then I don't know what is.

I love how this has changed directions all of the sudden. Now we're talking coaching. I now have to defend a coach I don't even defend ever.

But I am resilient. Let's give this a go.

Can you please show me that every coach in NFL History who started out 0-4 in the post season never ever won in the post season?

If not, what exactly is your point?

 

[Hostile]

There's no such thing as a trend. Look it up, it's no longer in the dictionary. It was just an illusion this whole time.

About the caliber of the response I figured. Very DCC wannabe tough guy nonsense. They're a bad influence on you Bach. You used to be one of the best football guys to read on the old forum. Now, not so much.

You couldn't discuss football for even one post despite an engraved invitation.

 

[30yrheel]

:laugh2:

The next football discussion I see you involved in will be the first one in a long time. I can't even remember the last time you attempted to actually talk about football. It has been that long.

You start the discussion. I can't wait to see how this goes. You lead, I'll follow.

we can all show off our vocabulary, college degrees, knowledge of the history of cowboys football.
doesn't change the fact that this is a mediocre team with a loser of a head coach.

 

[Bach]

I guess now we're going to move into the realm of "well, all things are possible if you give it enough time" argument. Hey, there may be hope for Campo afterall, since you can't prove that he may never win a playoff game if given the chance to be a HC again.

Yay blind homerism.

 

[zrinkill]

Very DCC wannabe tough guy nonsense.

That is where he is getting this from ...... the billboard boys and their phony polls.

 

[Bach]

About the caliber of the response I figured. Very DCC wannabe tough guy nonsense. They're a bad influence on you Bach. You used to be one of the best football guys to read on the old forum. Now, not so much.

You couldn't discuss football for even one post despite an engraved invitation.

That post of mine wasn't a response to yours.

 

[Hostile]

I guess no we're going to move into the realm of "well, all things are possible if you give it enough time" argument. Hey, there may be hope for Campo afterall, since you can't prove that he may never win a playoff game if given the chance to be a HC again.

Yay blind homerism.

I am neither blind nor a homer and you know it.

Strawman argument segues don't work with me. You've seen me own this kind of crap for years. Try this with a mouth breather like thorn.

I have never defended Campo. You know it. I know it. I can back it up. All of this is the illusion I said it was Bach. You've slipped past football talk to jumping from thread to thread to thread whining like you know something but you can't back it up when challenged civilly.

The red carpet is out there. The invitation is real. You said you were game. This is lame. I can hurl names at you too. I'd rather not. I'd rather discuss actual football.

The question is, can you even do that any more? You used to do it as good as anyone on the forums. What happened?

 

[Hostile]

That post of mine wasn't a response to yours.

:laugh2:

Riiiiiiiiight.

I used the word "illusion" and you weren't pointing that response at me?

Dude, this isn't good enough to pass Jr. High debate.

 

[Hostile]

we can all show off our vocabulary, college degrees, knowledge of the history of cowboys football.
doesn't change the fact that this is a mediocre team with a loser of a head coach.

I've invited people to a football discussion, not a dog pile ***** session. You are welcome to join if you think you have anything valid to say.

I used small words so as not to show off my vocabulary and degrees.

 

[30yrheel]

I've invited people to a football discussion, not a dog pile ***** session. You are welcome to join if you think you have anything valid to say.

I used small words so as not to show off my vocabulary and degrees.

all i see is arguing between members.
i don't think it's "going nuts" to be disappointed in this team and venting your frustration.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

I love how this has changed directions all of the sudden. Now we're talking coaching. I now have to defend a coach I don't even defend ever.

But I am resilient. Let's give this a go.

Can you please show me that every coach in NFL History who started out 0-4 in the post season never ever won in the post season?

If not, what exactly is your point?

I was always talking about coaching, not sure what you've talking about.

 

[Hostile]

all i see is arguing between members.
i don't think it's "going nuts" to be disappointed in this team and venting your frustration.

I didn't say it was. That is the theme of other posters. I am not riding anyone's coat tails.

Teach me about "broader perspective." The invitation is real and not just to the guys you think I am arguing with, and not just to you. I think "broader perspective" is nothing more than a fancy phrase designed to say "I told you so and I've been telling you so for years." That's all illusions as I have already said and it remains un-refuted.

It's a strange kind of argument for me to compliment the man on how he used to be one of the best pure football posters in any discussion. I'm not arguing with him. I'm inviting him to come back. I respect him more than he even knows.

He has a huge advantage in this discussion. He's a member of a forum who would love to gang up on me in a debate. He can take both sides back there and get all of their minds to work on besting me in the debate and they can enjoy all kinds of private insults at my expense while they are at it. Me versus an entire forum of my most ardent detractors.

I hear crickets.

Tell you anything?

 

[Bach]

:laugh2:

Riiiiiiiiight.

I used the word "illusion" and you weren't pointing that response at me?

Dude, this isn't good enough to pass Jr. High debate.

I was referring to this post http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2963085&postcount=84

I wasn't responding to that post of yours

 

[Hostile]

Yeah, I think the biggest thing people seemed to misunderstand is that most people who are panicking are not just looking at this lost in a vacuum, they are grouping several bad losses under this current regime and group of players together.

How can you not see things from a broader perspective?

I was always talking about coaching, not sure what you've talking about.

So the "bad losses" in that post were not Baltimore and Philly and now the Giants? They are a playoff loss in 2007 and 3 other playoff losses with teams not named The Dallas Cowboys?

That's broader perspective is it? Enlighten me more. This is fascinating. I have never realized that a coach's losses with other teams translate to his current team. Tell me how the playoff losses with Denver and Buffalo affect the 2009 Dallas Cowboys.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I didn't say it was. That is the theme of other posters. I am not riding anyone's coat tails.

Teach me about "broader perspective." The invitation is real and not just to the guys you think I am arguing with, and not just to you. I think "broader persepctive" is nothign more than a fancy phrase designed to say "I told you so and I've been telling you so for years." That's all illusions as I have already said and it remains un-refuted.

It's a strange kind of argument for me to compliment the man on how he used to be one of the best pure football posters in any discussion. I'm not arguing with him. I'm inviting him to come back. I respect him more than he even knows.

He has a huge advantage in this discussion. He's a member of a forum who would love to gang up on me in a debate. He can take both sides back there and get all of their minds to work on besting me in the debate and they can enjoy all kinds of private insults at my expense while they are at it. Me versus an entire forum of my most ardent detractors.

I hear crickets.

Tell you anything?

just observing here, but someone used broader perspective in the wrong context then

a broader perspective would include a large group of people along a large time-frame