|
Post by shadyvsesham on May 7, 2017 1:42:30 GMT
No, a few people have said the Cowboys got worse. Skip Bayless is a fn Dallas Cowboy fanboy. He even said they have no CB and have gotten worse. Again, Skip is a fn fanboy. He is saying at best, 11-5, that's AT BEST from a Cowboys fanboy. He loves their offense, hate their defense.
No, I've been a Texan fan, as someone has said. Im upset atm Rockets just blew what they had. Could have went up 3-1, and instead, let SA go 2-1 and we are in a must win situation. I respect what NE has done, how can you not. See, Im actually, OBJECTIVE. Worried Dallas will win their 6th superbowl, IDGAF who wins if the Texans dont. How about you guys win A PLAYOFF game first, than we can discuss 6th superbowl.
Dallas wasnt that good at defense to begin with. They did the smart thing, use their RB and keep their defense off the field.
Wait, losing players from a crappy defense makes them better!? SO the guys who were on the bench, who couldnt beat those sorry starters, now some will start and this makes them better, the hell!?
Not everyone from the draft makes it. It's a crap shoot, it's like a Forest Gump line,"you never know what youre gonna get." Hell, DeShaun for my Texans, could be a flat out bust. Look at your lover, Tom Brady. 6th round pick, and now a top QB of all time (Everyone but you knows it, top 5 QB of all time, picked in the 6th round. You just dont know.)
It means nada, nothing, it's fn guess work.
You just dont know. Texans could have fn had Derek Carr, but we got burned on his brother David, didnt take them. He was taken (Derek) in the 2nd round, that means every fn franchise could have snagged him and said no. You dont know man.
Ill take the Giants. Got a bad @$$ WR core (They also got a another gr8 WR in the draft) and a superior defense. WHOA YOU MEAN A COWBOYS FAN SAYS THEYRE THE FAVORITES IN THE NFC, well color me fn shocked. Youre a fanboy dude, not objective.
Again Im a Texan fan, but when we played NE in the 2nd round I said,"O boy." I knew we were in trouble. Best record in the NFC, 1 one, and you lose to the packers, who lost to ATL. Hey, we lost to the champs, I can accept that.
________________
I lived in Houston all my life, even if one day I move, I got Houston blood in me forever. Rockets/Astros/Texans. Yea I've live and die Houston teams. TY for seeing that.
_____________
No, Im just not a butthurt child like you. You cry about MCU because youre a DC fanboy. You cry about NE because they now have as many superbowls as your Cowboys, and they did it all with ONE QB and ONE coach. It drives you mad. Youre so fn scared NE will win it's 6th title, and surpass you. Skip Bayless, the Dallas fanboy he is, even said NE is odds on favorite. UH OH
You havent posted anything to show an asterisk. I can show you the USC team, that lost to Texas in the rose bowl, I can link you to an asterisk. Youve been asked over and over, link me to an asterisk championship ring, you cant. Sorry, most people say Brady is the best, and if not, a mount rushmore QB. You can cry, whine and moan, idc. Just because im objective, doesnt mean Im not a Texan fan. You just are so much into drinking the Dallas koolaid, youre not objective. Same BS with your DC nonsense.
No one is as great as Jordan, but Brady is one of the closest to him. Jordan is on another league. Regardless, look at Brady's playoff record. If Brady played for Dallas, brought your franchise 5 rings, youd obey like the fanboy you are.
In the end, youre a three note kid. DC > MCU Dallas > NFL Marsha Marsha Marhsa/Brady Brady Brady. IT'S NOT FAIR, HE HAS 5 RINGS, IT'S JUST NOT FAIR, WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
That's it, that's your schtick.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on May 7, 2017 2:19:39 GMT
AH/DC lives in a fantasy world where 5x Super Bowl champ Tom Brady has not been declared the greatest ever by sports experts all across the country, and the Razzie award winning Batman vs Superman isn't one of the worst films of 2016, but one of the best. The chasm separating AH/DC from world the rest of us live in gets wider every day.
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on May 8, 2017 12:19:50 GMT
So the argument is that they were 13-3 last year so they HAVE to be good this year. Didn't they have 4 wins the year before? Didn't Atlanta have 6 wins the year before last? This is football, not the NBA. Teams can change year to year. The FACT is that every other team in the NFC East got better except the Cowboys, who had the easiest schedule in the entire NFL last year.
|
|
|
Post by marsexplorer on May 8, 2017 16:46:39 GMT
So the argument is that they were 13-3 last year so they HAVE to be good this year. Didn't they have 4 wins the year before? Didn't Atlanta have 6 wins the year before last? This is football, not the NBA. Teams can change year to year. The FACT is that every other team in the NFC East got better except the Cowboys, who had the easiest schedule in the entire NFL last year. You're an Eagles fan, you're opinion on this matter is moot.
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on May 8, 2017 17:12:21 GMT
So the argument is that they were 13-3 last year so they HAVE to be good this year. Didn't they have 4 wins the year before? Didn't Atlanta have 6 wins the year before last? This is football, not the NBA. Teams can change year to year. The FACT is that every other team in the NFC East got better except the Cowboys, who had the easiest schedule in the entire NFL last year. You're an Eagles fan, you're opinion on this matter is moot. What I wrote is still true. Every team is improving, especially the Eagles and Giants, except the Cowboys. They had a ton of holes last season but got lucky in a few close games and had the easiest schedule in the NFL. Granted, every team needs a little luck, but to say they are the NFC favorites is laughable to me. The team needs to win a playoff game first.
|
|
|
Post by marsexplorer on May 8, 2017 17:23:38 GMT
You're an Eagles fan, you're opinion on this matter is moot. What I wrote is still true. Every team is improving, especially the Eagles and Giants, except the Cowboys. They had a ton of holes last season but got lucky in a few close games and had the easiest schedule in the NFL. Granted, every team needs a little luck, but to say they are the NFC favorites is laughable to me. The team needs to win a playoff game first. While I'm not arguing your point that the rest of the NFC East has gotten better and the Cowboys didn't, they still are the best team in that division right now and others agree with me. ESPN post-draft power ranking
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on May 8, 2017 17:29:18 GMT
What I wrote is still true. Every team is improving, especially the Eagles and Giants, except the Cowboys. They had a ton of holes last season but got lucky in a few close games and had the easiest schedule in the NFL. Granted, every team needs a little luck, but to say they are the NFC favorites is laughable to me. The team needs to win a playoff game first. While I'm not arguing your point that the rest of the NFC East has gotten better and the Cowboys didn't, they still are the best team in that division right now and others agree with me. ESPN post-draft power rankingPlease. The media has the Cowboys as the "best" every year. They are always world beaters until they aren't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2017 17:49:00 GMT
They have a rough schedule, but still. That's the same as the Titans and 1/2 win more than Carolina. Oddsmakers obviously know something. Arizona Cardinals 7.5 Atalanta Falcons 10 (u-120) Baltimore Ravens 9.5 (u-125) Buffalo Bills 6 Carolina Panthers 9 (o-120) Chicago Bears 5 Cincinnati Bengals 8.5 (o-120) Cleveland Browns 4 Dallas Cowboys 9.5 (o-120) Denver Broncos 8.5 (o-120) Detroit Lions 8 Green Bay Packers 10 (u-120) Houston Texans 8.5 (o-120) Indianapolis Colts 9 (u-115) Jacksonville Jaguars 5.5 (o-120) Kansas City Chiefs 9 (o-120) Los Angeles Chargers 7.5 Los Angeles Rams 5.5 (o-120) Miami Dolphins 7.5 Minnesota Vikings 8.5 New England Patriots 11 (o-120) New Orleans Saints 8.5 (u-120) New York Giants 9 (o-115) New York Jets 5.5 (o-120) Oakland Raiders 9.5 (o-120) Philadelphia Eagles 8.5 Pittsburgh Steelers 10.5 (o-120) San Francisco 49ers 4.5 Seattle Seahawks 10.5 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 8 Tennessee Titans 9.5 (u-120) Washington Redskins 7.5 (o-120) i'd bet the house on under - although they have a dominant o-line - i see a sophomore slump for Prescott - not so much Elliott. i go 8-8 or 9-7 tops. 7-9 wouldn't shock me.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 8, 2017 21:24:21 GMT
to say they are the NFC favorites is laughable to me. Tell that to the bookmakers in Vegas. They currently have the Cowboys as co-favorites along with the Falcons, Packers, and Seahawks.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 8, 2017 21:26:03 GMT
What I wrote is still true. Every team is improving, especially the Eagles and Giants, except the Cowboys. They had a ton of holes last season but got lucky in a few close games and had the easiest schedule in the NFL. Granted, every team needs a little luck, but to say they are the NFC favorites is laughable to me. The team needs to win a playoff game first. While I'm not arguing your point that the rest of the NFC East has gotten better and the Cowboys didn't, they still are the best team in that division right now and others agree with me. ESPN post-draft power rankingThe Vegas bookmakers currently have the Cowboys as co-favorites along with the Falcons, Packers, and Seahawks.
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on May 10, 2017 11:59:47 GMT
While I'm not arguing your point that the rest of the NFC East has gotten better and the Cowboys didn't, they still are the best team in that division right now and others agree with me. ESPN post-draft power rankingThe Vegas bookmakers currently have the Cowboys as co-favorites along with the Falcons, Packers, and Seahawks. And my point still stands. The media always loves the Cowboys in the offseason. They are always 'so good' and Superbowl favorites. Meanwhile they have won two playoff games in 20 years.
|
|
|
Post by shadyvsesham on May 10, 2017 12:47:44 GMT
DSD is right, Cowboys are "Americas team," every fn sports show discusses them all the fn time.
DSD is right as well, Eagles and Giants, especially the Giants, got better, Dallas got worse. You cant deny it.
They have lost 3 starters in: Ron Leary, Barry Church and Terrell McClain Ron Leary....a good guard Barry Church - Strong Safety McClain - DT
What have they done in the offseason? Giants and Eagles both got better. DSD is right, every year we here,"This is it, theyre the favorites to win it all. Won 2 playoff games in 20 years and they wanna talk about super bowl!?
I am actually unbiased and like it or not, NE is the odds on favorite. They got so much better. They got Stephon Gilmore, KEPT Malcolm Butler (He is whining atm, but if he wants big money, he will have to play for his big contract. If he whines, mopes, and does horribly, he will cost himself major dollars. I see him getting over it and playing big to get his big $$$$$$$$$)
They kept Hightower. NE gave Brady a fn weapon in Cooks....phew boy is that a weapon. Gronk will be back (I dont trust it though, but if he stays healthy...Gronk, Cooks, and Edelman...uh oh).
They also got D. Allen for a decent backup TE option, cant trust Gronk. Again, I am actually unbiased and NE look go also gotten better, the fn super bowl team got BETTER.
Again, Im a Texan fan, and I like what we did. WHAT I DONT like, selfishly, is how Indy and the Titans also got better as well. Im hoping we give Deshaun the starting gig and lets see what he can do. Can he really do worse > Brock? Im excited to see what DeShaun will give us. We got the defense we got a great underrated WR and a solid running game. QB was our weakness. (I think we could also use a little better O line, but QB was by far our glaring weakness. If Deshaun can prove himself, maybe grab an O Line piece in free agency, as if I remember, going on memory, we dont got a 1st or 2nd round pick in next years draft....ouchie!)
I hope DeShaun fills that void!
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 10, 2017 14:58:06 GMT
DSD is right, Cowboys are "Americas team," every fn sports show discusses them all the fn time. DSD is right as well, Eagles and Giants, especially the Giants, got better, Dallas got worse. You cant deny it. They have lost 3 starters in: Ron Leary, Barry Church and Terrell McClain Ron Leary....a good guard Barry Church - Strong Safety McClain - DT What have they done in the offseason? Giants and Eagles both got better. LOL!!! You're so afraid of the Cowboys winning Super Bowl LII that you've convinced the Cowboys got worse by losing several key defensive players. But the Cowboys got better. I'm a San Francisco Giants fan. In 2015, Tim Lincecum was a starting pitcher for the Giants. But the Giants didn't bring Lincecum back in 2016. And the team got better! Lincecum was great over his first 5 to 6 seasons. But by 2015, Lincecum wasn't pitching well and wasn't getting the job done. Not bringing Lincecum back in 2016 made the team better. Similarly, the Cowboys defense wasn't getting the job done last season. So losing several key players from a defense that wasn't getting the job done doesn't hurt the Cowboys. On the contrary, the team got better because those players who weren't getting the job done are gone and the Cowboys picked up some good players in the draft, which was rated A-. And with Dak and Zeke and that dominating OL having a full year's experience playing together, that's why the Cowboys are co-favorites to go to the Super Bowl.
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on May 10, 2017 18:32:09 GMT
DSD is right, Cowboys are "Americas team," every fn sports show discusses them all the fn time. DSD is right as well, Eagles and Giants, especially the Giants, got better, Dallas got worse. You cant deny it. They have lost 3 starters in: Ron Leary, Barry Church and Terrell McClain Ron Leary....a good guard Barry Church - Strong Safety McClain - DT What have they done in the offseason? Giants and Eagles both got better. LOL!!! You're so afraid of the Cowboys winning Super Bowl LII that you've convinced the Cowboys got worse by losing several key defensive players. But the Cowboys got better. I'm a San Francisco Giants fan. In 2015, Tim Lincecum was a starting pitcher for the Giants. But the Giants didn't bring Lincecum back in 2016. And the team got better! Lincecum was great over his first 5 to 6 seasons. But by 2015, Lincecum wasn't pitching well and wasn't getting the job done. Not bringing Lincecum back in 2016 made the team better. Similarly, the Cowboys defense wasn't getting the job done last season. So losing several key players from a defense that wasn't getting the job done doesn't hurt the Cowboys. On the contrary, the team got better because those players who weren't getting the job done are gone and the Cowboys picked up some good players in the draft, which was rated A-. And with Dak and Zeke and that dominating OL having a full year's experience playing together, that's why the Cowboys are co-favorites to go to the Super Bowl. They definitely did not get better. The OL changed as well. You seem to think the rookies will come in and the defense won't change. Also, I will continue to say it, the Cowboys are always Super Bowl favorites, but they need to win more playoff games than they have in 20 years to win a ring this year. They will crash and burn this year like they always do. One good season meshed in between crap does not change that.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 10, 2017 19:11:18 GMT
LOL!!! You're so afraid of the Cowboys winning Super Bowl LII that you've convinced the Cowboys got worse by losing several key defensive players. But the Cowboys got better. I'm a San Francisco Giants fan. In 2015, Tim Lincecum was a starting pitcher for the Giants. But the Giants didn't bring Lincecum back in 2016. And the team got better! Lincecum was great over his first 5 to 6 seasons. But by 2015, Lincecum wasn't pitching well and wasn't getting the job done. Not bringing Lincecum back in 2016 made the team better. Similarly, the Cowboys defense wasn't getting the job done last season. So losing several key players from a defense that wasn't getting the job done doesn't hurt the Cowboys. On the contrary, the team got better because those players who weren't getting the job done are gone and the Cowboys picked up some good players in the draft, which was rated A-. And with Dak and Zeke and that dominating OL having a full year's experience playing together, that's why the Cowboys are co-favorites to go to the Super Bowl. They definitely did not get better. The OL changed as well. You seem to think the rookies will come in and the defense won't change. Also, I will continue to say it, the Cowboys are always Super Bowl favorites, but they need to win more playoff games than they have in 20 years to win a ring this year. Your argument is as weak as shadyvsesham's weak argument ("they lost several key defensive players so they must be worse"). In 1981, the 49ers had 3 rookie starters in their defensive backfield and to win a Super Bowl, they had to win more playoff games than they had since joining the NFL in 1950.
Guess what? The 1981 49ers, with 3 rookie starters in their defensive backfield and only 2 postseason wins since joining the NFL in 1950, won the Super Bowl.
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on May 10, 2017 19:17:08 GMT
They definitely did not get better. The OL changed as well. You seem to think the rookies will come in and the defense won't change. Also, I will continue to say it, the Cowboys are always Super Bowl favorites, but they need to win more playoff games than they have in 20 years to win a ring this year. Your argument is as weak as shadyvsesham's weak argument ("they lost several key defensive players so they must be worse"). In 1981, the 49ers had 3 rookie starters in their defensive backfield and to win a Super Bowl, they had to win more playoff games than they had since joining the NFL in 1950.
Guess what? The 1981 49ers, with 3 rookie starters in their defensive backfield and only 2 postseason wins since joining the NFL in 1950, won the Super Bowl.
My argument was many folds. One, the team got worse. Two, all of the other teams in the division got better. Three, football has A LOT of parity and 4 win teams can make the playoffs and vice versa. It happens every year. Four, it's the Cowboys. They have won two playoff games in 20 years. Stop being fooled. Finally, I feel they overachieved last year. They had the easiest schedule in the NFL and were not as good as their record. Also, Dak looked great, but is a little overrated. He did not have to do much. They will not win the division this year.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on May 10, 2017 19:25:57 GMT
Your argument is as weak as shadyvsesham's weak argument ("they lost several key defensive players so they must be worse"). In 1981, the 49ers had 3 rookie starters in their defensive backfield and to win a Super Bowl, they had to win more playoff games than they had since joining the NFL in 1950.
Guess what? The 1981 49ers, with 3 rookie starters in their defensive backfield and only 2 postseason wins since joining the NFL in 1950, won the Super Bowl.
They have won two playoff games in 20 years. Still trying to use the weak argument that I've already taken apart. Did you not understand my previous post? The 49ers had won only 2 postseason games in 31 years before they won the Super Bowl in 1981. How many postseason wins the 49ers had in the previous 3 decades didn't mean a thing as far as the 1981 49ers winning the Super Bowl. Similarly, how many postseason wins the Cowboys have had in the past 2 decades doesn't mean a thing as far as this year's Cowboys team winning the Super Bowl.
Heck, when the 1992 Cowboys won the 1st of their 3 Super Bowls in 4 years, they had to win more postseason games than the franchise had won in 9 years. But that didn't stop the 1992 Cowboys from winning the Super Bowl.
|
|
|
Post by klawrencio79 on May 10, 2017 20:09:20 GMT
They have won two playoff games in 20 years. Still trying to use the weak argument that I've already taken apart. Did you not understand my previous post? The 49ers had won only 2 postseason games in 31 years before they won the Super Bowl in 1981. How many postseason wins the 49ers had in the previous 3 decades didn't mean a thing as far as the 1981 49ers winning the Super Bowl. Similarly, how many postseason wins the Cowboys have had in the past 2 decades doesn't mean a thing as far as this year's Cowboys team winning the Super Bowl.
Heck, when the 1992 Cowboys won the 1st of their 3 Super Bowls in 4 years, they had to win more postseason games than the franchise had won in 9 years. But that didn't stop the 1992 Cowboys from winning the Super Bowl.
I like to park in handicapped spaces while handicapped people make handicapped faces.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on May 10, 2017 20:42:14 GMT
I heard a similar argument from a delusional Browns fan.
Some teams have been losers for so long that losing has become embedded in their team culture.
A team like the Cowboys can be a season long Super Bowl favorite and stacked with a record number of pro-bowl players yet still manage a humiliating one & done in the play-offs.
It's in their nature.
|
|
|
Post by shadyvsesham on May 11, 2017 3:25:18 GMT
DC-FanWhy would I be worried of you guys winning a super bowl when you've won all of 2 playoff games in 20 years. Hell my Texans, a franchise that has been around since 2002, we have at least won 3 playoff games. Dallas, WON 2, FN 2, and super bowl, you wanna talk about the super bowl. Your problem is youre a Dallas fanboy. Giants got better, Eagles got better, but hey, at least the Redskins didnt get too much better, right? LMAO, wait, youre a SF and Dallas fan!? Youre one of those fair weathered fan boys. I thought you'd be a Dallas Cowboys/Texas Rangers/Mavericks fan but you are apparently just a fanboy...I wish I could say Im shocked. Comparing 2 different sports, not even close to comparison. Football and baseball are two different sports. www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/total/position/defenseRanked 14th, middle of the road. You guys also got to benefit from a massively weak schedule. So yea, losing key players and having their backups, the guys who couldnt beat those players, makes your team better? LOL It is like you dont grasp football. Who cares what pros rank them. You know how many busts happen in the draft, you just never know. IT IS ALL guesswork. You dont seem to be able to grasp this. They wont, if they make the playoffs (I think they might, as a wild card team) they will be one and done, like they are every year, and NE IS the odds on favorites to win it all. That will make your head explode. YOU ARE AFRAID NE WILL WIN THEIR 6TH, and they got more cred to make that claim, over Dallas..2 playoff wins in 20 years, BRAVO! Want a slow clap? This is your MO. *THROWS TEMPER TANTRUM...* YOUR argument is weak, it is weak! Please believe me....please believe me. DSD's argument is legit. See what NE did, they got BETTER. See they added pieces. They kept Hightower and Butler, they got Gilmore and Cooks. See, that is a team GETTING BETTER. You get guys, not lose them, to get better. Im surprised I gotta explain this to you. ROOKIES ARE A FN CRAP SHOOT. This is what you do, fine one "team" that did it. THIS ISNT THE NORM DUDE, you had to go to 1981 to find a team to back this insanely weak argument. If this happened a lot, you'd have a case, but it proves what DSD was saying. You had to go ALLLLLLL the way back to 1981. WOW, a team from 1981. They also had Joe Montana....can we wait a few seasons before we call Dak the next coming of Joe Montana? Jesus christ.... Youve taken apart nothing, which is why everyone here posting is laughing at you. Do you grasp that, youre like a kid in high school who got his @$$ beat, everyone said you lost the fight but you go,"I DID NOT, I WON!" Sure, if you wanna pretend you won have fun. Yea I read that dumb argument, where you had to search and search and had to go back to 1981. NE would smoke Dallas up. Sadly, my Texans just arent ready. I like Deshaun though, but SF also had Joe fn Montana, you know, a mount rushmore QB. Im sure you've heard of him. Again, lets wait before we call Dak Montana ffs. They arent winning the super bowl this time. Get ready to cry about NE, theyre the actual odds on favorites.
|
|