They were tearing up the league last year before RT Lane Johnson got hurt. Their point differential was positive and suggestive of how dominant they were.
I like Prescott and think he'll move forward this year, but I like Wentz better and his pedigree seemingly suggests that his second-year advancement will be exponential and is more certain than Precott's. I saw glimpses of potential that was off the charts, with a super strong arm, leadership abilities and much more than merely mobile.
They added a superb vet receiver (Jeffries?) to what had been a very weak corp. That alone should provide a significant upgrade.
Mgmt. has demonstrated that they're way above "competent".
The are somewhat dependent on a corner they drafted with a knee injury, but the first round DE could be downright scary and move that allready capable front seven to dominant. And, unlike Dallas, who we match up well with, Philly's front seven might exploit our offensive line - meanin that if we match up well with Dallas, Philly matches up well with us.
Dallas is losing three defensive backfield starters and two defensive linemen (one through suspension). They picked darn near on the bottom of the draft and are lookin for rooks to fill those holes (for the most part though Brown, Scarndrick and Jones return).
And Dallas's schedule is brutal too. How does a New secondary look against OBJ, Marshall, Ephram, Vereen & Shepard? They face Julio Jones early too. That's a darn tough way to open.
One has to like their offense, but there's two new linemen and everything went right for them last year.
I don't understand Vegas or so many of TV/s pundits who have made Dallas a heavy favorite. I can see them being excellent again, but I think this edition could just as easily struggle. We've been looking at each other, but Wash and Philly are so dramatically improved that I can see them in the hunt too.
FAct is, I've seen this division be very tough and competitive at the top, but I don't see a last place team among the four and while I think we could be over the top crazy good, I also think anything could happen and surprises are going to be more likely than not.
Curious, to see how other - more knowledgeable than me - posters see it.
Look, NYG went 9-2 in their final 11 games last year, a year all NYG fans knew was a transition year with a revamped defense and a first year HC. Included in that stretch was the one game Dallas had penciled in as a must-win, @NYG. We're obviously happy with the outcome. Rational Giants fans want improvement - they're not entirely happy with the play of the offense and they don't want to start out a season 2-3 again. But there are real roster-based reasons for Giants fans to expect improvement from their offense and real reasons to hope that the defensive play down the stretch is repeatable. Only time will tell, but there is absolutely no reason a Giants fan should feel "jealous" of the Cowboys going into this year, excepting a few acknowledged positions.
Quote:
Dallas finished above the Giants on the way to winning the division. What would they have to be jealous of?
Seriously? Wouldn't Dallas fans be ecstatic if they'd signed three all-pros on their defense last year, or this year for that matter? So we're just supposed to believe they're happier NOT signing all-pros because they're building their team "the right way"? C'mon.
Not if the results were finishing behind the Giants. Dallas fans would rather win the East than see the team pay big $ for second place. Seems pretty simple.
Not if the results were finishing behind the Giants. Dallas fans would rather win the East than see the team pay big $ for second place. Seems pretty simple.
I guess you've misunderstood my argument, since nobody would argue with what you've said there. "Any fan would rather win their division than see their team pay big $ for second place". You're right, that is a simple argument and means nothing.
I'll try again to see if you've misunderstood or incapable of understanding.
I was making a point about how the argument of "building a team the right way" is weak. I used for an example what the Giants did - which is to take one of the worst defenses in the history of the league, and upgrade it with available salary cap dollars by signing 3 all-pros.
Can you agree that "the right way" can include signing all-pros when you have the cap space to do so, particularly when you want to strengthen a unit?
If so, there is no need to keep emphasizing that Dallas is building their team "the right way", as though that's the only way to build a winning franchise. That's not necessarily correct. Let me remind you that in 2007 the Giants won a super bowl. That year the starters included the following players acquired through free agency:
Madison Hedgecock
Plaxico Burress
Kareem McKenzie
Shaun O'Hara
Fred Robbins
Antonio Pierce
Kawika Mitchell
Sam Madison
Jeff Feagles.
In 2011, when the Giants again won a SB, they had the following acquired through FA:
David Baas
Kareem McKenzie
Chris Canty
Michael Boley
Antrel Rolle
Without these players they wouldn't have won either SB. Keep patting yourself on the back for your divisional title last year. Don't sign any players (even ones you want to keep like Church because you don't have any cap space) and count on the draft to build your team. Doing so will hopefully bring you another 20 years like the last one.
The fact of the matter is that the Cowboys have been too cash-strapped to be players in free agency. That will change in the future, but this year that was a fact. Trying to boast about the strategy of not spending money (when you don't have any) is a weak argument. Get it?
Quote:
Not if the results were finishing behind the Giants. Dallas fans would rather win the East than see the team pay big $ for second place. Seems pretty simple.
I guess you've misunderstood my argument, since nobody would argue with what you've said there. "Any fan would rather win their division than see their team pay big $ for second place". You're right, that is a simple argument and means nothing.
I'll try again to see if you've misunderstood or incapable of understanding.
I was making a point about how the argument of "building a team the right way" is weak. I used for an example what the Giants did - which is to take one of the worst defenses in the history of the league, and upgrade it with available salary cap dollars by signing 3 all-pros.
Can you agree that "the right way" can include signing all-pros when you have the cap space to do so, particularly when you want to strengthen a unit?
If so, there is no need to keep emphasizing that Dallas is building their team "the right way", as though that's the only way to build a winning franchise. That's not necessarily correct. Let me remind you that in 2007 the Giants won a super bowl. That year the starters included the following players acquired through free agency:
Madison Hedgecock
Plaxico Burress
Kareem McKenzie
Shaun O'Hara
Fred Robbins
Antonio Pierce
Kawika Mitchell
Sam Madison
Jeff Feagles.
In 2011, when the Giants again won a SB, they had the following acquired through FA:
David Baas
Kareem McKenzie
Chris Canty
Michael Boley
Antrel Rolle
Without these players they wouldn't have won either SB. Keep patting yourself on the back for your divisional title last year. Don't sign any players (even ones you want to keep like Church because you don't have any cap space) and count on the draft to build your team. Doing so will hopefully bring you another 20 years like the last one.
The fact of the matter is that the Cowboys have been too cash-strapped to be players in free agency. That will change in the future, but this year that was a fact. Trying to boast about the strategy of not spending money (when you don't have any) is a weak argument. Get it?
[quote] In comment 13520410 elbowj said:
Quote:
Not if the results were finishing behind the Giants. Dallas fans would rather win the East than see the team pay big $ for second place. Seems pretty simple.
I guess you've misunderstood my argument, since nobody would argue with what you've said there. "Any fan would rather win their division than see their team pay big $ for second place". You're right, that is a simple argument and means nothing.
I'll try again to see if you've misunderstood or incapable of understanding.
I was making a point about how the argument of "building a team the right way" is weak. I used for an example what the Giants did - which is to take one of the worst defenses in the history of the league, and upgrade it with available salary cap dollars by signing 3 all-pros.
Can you agree that "the right way" can include signing all-pros when you have the cap space to do so, particularly when you want to strengthen a unit?
If so, there is no need to keep emphasizing that Dallas is building their team "the right way", as though that's the only way to build a winning franchise. That's not necessarily correct. Let me remind you that in 2007 the Giants won a super bowl. That year the starters included the following players acquired through free agency:
Madison Hedgecock
Plaxico Burress
Kareem McKenzie
Shaun O'Hara
Fred Robbins
Antonio Pierce
Kawika Mitchell
Sam Madison
Jeff Feagles.
In 2011, when the Giants again won a SB, they had the following acquired through FA:
David Baas
Kareem McKenzie
Chris Canty
Michael Boley
Antrel Rolle
Without these players they wouldn't have won either SB. Keep patting yourself on the back for your divisional title last year. Don't sign any players (even ones you want to keep like Church because you don't have any cap space) and count on the draft to build your team. Doing so will hopefully bring you another 20 years like the last one.
The fact of the matter is that the Cowboys have been too cash-strapped to be players in free agency. That will change in the future, but this year that was a fact. Trying to boast about the strategy of not spending money (when you don't have any) is a weak argument. Get it?
No. And the boast that was repeated all of once is that Dallas is confident in an approach that largely ignores free agency because they've been more successful with that approach than the rest of the East has. It was made in resposnse to the oft reissued claim that Dallas did nothing to improve. That belief is apparently centered on the notion that free agency is the only occurrence in the offseason. If you were to look at recent history in the NFC East you'd see that Washington and Philadelphia always improve the most in the offseason. Because they're very active in signing names, sometimes from Dallas. Dallas loses guys. Everyone has a big circle jerk over how horrible Dallas will be now. Then they start playing games and sure enough Dallas still does that better than they're free spending division mates. You're right that there's more than one way to skin a cat. But for all of Dallas cap woes, they allowed .8 points a game more than the Giants. Scored a TD more a game. Won the division. And didn't get blown out in the playoffs. The free spending Giants were on the wrong side of the ledger there. So I'm failing to see why you'd insist that I'd be jealous of a less successful approach.
The Cowboys have battled cap woes for the entire salary cap era. They have always been completely negligent of the cap. More than any other team. I'm sure you weren't pounding your chest at the billions of free agents they've brought in over the years. But now, you have to change your narrative. Although I wouldn't be surprised if you weren't even alive the last time Dallas won a Super Bowl. You seem very, ummm, young. We will go with young so as to not hurt your sensitivities.
the last time the cowboys actually accomplished anything.
The Cowboys have battled cap woes for the entire salary cap era. They have always been completely negligent of the cap. More than any other team. I'm sure you weren't pounding your chest at the billions of free agents they've brought in over the years. But now, you have to change your narrative. Although I wouldn't be surprised if you weren't even alive the last time Dallas won a Super Bowl. You seem very, ummm, young. We will go with young so as to not hurt your sensitivities.
Your reputation for astute yet cutting analysis was apparently well earned. Don't light any matches though. Dem scarecrows burn quick.
the last time the cowboys actually accomplished anything.
I want to see how Prescott does this year now that teams have had a chance to review & evaluate how the Cowboys execute the offense, a safe offense based on the run. Kudos to the Cowboys for 13-3 and a strong year. I look forward to camp an the writeups on how things are going for each team.
I'm sure you do enjoy it. I mean you made it up so it makes sense that you'd like it.
My only contention is that with the recent arrest issues coupled with all the new bodies on the roster, well, how can you not see the Cowboys struggling early much like the Giants struggled early last year with a new all-star cast? Football is the ultimate team sport and it takes time to gel. Thoughts?
Quote:
that all the replacement players will just step in without a hitch, picking up the slack and not only equaling but besting the 13-3 record last year.
I'm sure you do enjoy it. I mean you made it up so it makes sense that you'd like it.
So your formula is no longer good? I thought you opined that the prior years record guaranteed the same or better record? HMMM?
Quote:
In comment 13520577 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
that all the replacement players will just step in without a hitch, picking up the slack and not only equaling but besting the 13-3 record last year.
I'm sure you do enjoy it. I mean you made it up so it makes sense that you'd like it.
So your formula is no longer good? I thought you opined that the prior years record guaranteed the same or better record? HMMM?
I believe the error there is in the interpretation, but no never argued that. Good try though
My only contention is that with the recent arrest issues coupled with all the new bodies on the roster, well, how can you not see the Cowboys struggling early much like the Giants struggled early last year with a new all-star cast? Football is the ultimate team sport and it takes time to gel. Thoughts?
They had a starting QB with about 10 days to prep. Lost the first one. Then won 11 straight. Not much of a concern.
Quote:
I appreciate your POV. Your a Dallas fan and of course see your team in a good light much like I see mine in a good light.
My only contention is that with the recent arrest issues coupled with all the new bodies on the roster, well, how can you not see the Cowboys struggling early much like the Giants struggled early last year with a new all-star cast? Football is the ultimate team sport and it takes time to gel. Thoughts?
They had a starting QB with about 10 days to prep. Lost the first one. Then won 11 straight. Not much of a concern.
Quote:
In comment 13520585 SGMen said:
Quote:
I appreciate your POV. Your a Dallas fan and of course see your team in a good light much like I see mine in a good light.
My only contention is that with the recent arrest issues coupled with all the new bodies on the roster, well, how can you not see the Cowboys struggling early much like the Giants struggled early last year with a new all-star cast? Football is the ultimate team sport and it takes time to gel. Thoughts?
They had a starting QB with about 10 days to prep. Lost the first one. Then won 11 straight. Not much of a concern.
Prescott was there the entire camp. Truly amazing what he accomplished, yes, but we are talking team defense here in particular. Many moving parts. I mean, D. Wilson is done brandishing a handgun with witnesses. Caroll will certainly be suspended for the DWI at some point. New bodies. I mean, that is a LOT of change. Realistically, if this was the Giants I'd be worried about early season lapses just because that is what tends to happen with many new faces? Thoughts?
All those guys will be there for camp. Defense isn't why Dallas wins football games. Wilson who knows but the NFL doesn't seem to quick. Plus he's a SAM backer playing 20% of the snaps. About as many as Irving. They're returning the majority of their snaps in the secondary. It's not nearly the issues Giants fans wish it was IMO. Fortunate that they're playing Eli and they have his number. That's why Dallas is giving 6 points rn in week one.
I just don't get it, but then I've always been happy with the size of my penis, and I never felt the need to compensate for any "shortcomings" by getting into fights with strangers.
Heavy sigh.
Quote:
In comment 13520593 elbowj said:
Quote:
In comment 13520585 SGMen said:
Quote:
I appreciate your POV. Your a Dallas fan and of course see your team in a good light much like I see mine in a good light.
My only contention is that with the recent arrest issues coupled with all the new bodies on the roster, well, how can you not see the Cowboys struggling early much like the Giants struggled early last year with a new all-star cast? Football is the ultimate team sport and it takes time to gel. Thoughts?
They had a starting QB with about 10 days to prep. Lost the first one. Then won 11 straight. Not much of a concern.
Prescott was there the entire camp. Truly amazing what he accomplished, yes, but we are talking team defense here in particular. Many moving parts. I mean, D. Wilson is done brandishing a handgun with witnesses. Caroll will certainly be suspended for the DWI at some point. New bodies. I mean, that is a LOT of change. Realistically, if this was the Giants I'd be worried about early season lapses just because that is what tends to happen with many new faces? Thoughts?
All those guys will be there for camp. Defense isn't why Dallas wins football games. Wilson who knows but the NFL doesn't seem to quick. Plus he's a SAM backer playing 20% of the snaps. About as many as Irving. They're returning the majority of their snaps in the secondary. It's not nearly the issues Giants fans wish it was IMO. Fortunate that they're playing Eli and they have his number. That's why Dallas is giving 6 points rn in week one.
Hypothetically, if Wilson is suspended 2 games; if Caroll is suspended 2 games; and, god knows who else it HURTS. Sure, if Elliott and Prescott were suspended due to their ongoing issues it is a much bigger, material blow (they won't be suspended IMHO) than Wilson and Caroll.
As for the opening day line, the 6 points has to do with how Las Vegas thinks the money will be bet and not who will win. Apples and Oranges.
Fact is, I'm a bit worried about Eli, our OT's, FS D. Thompson's injury; whether our young RB's are ready, etc. Until the pads go on and we see a few pre-season games we won't have a true barometer of how good we've become.
On defense, I truly believe we are coming out of the gates on FIRE; that MLB B. Goodson is going to be an overall upgrade; that our depth is better this year; that M. Thompson is going to surprise & stay healthy; and, our DT rotation will be just good enough. You can't have every piece of the puzzle perfect.
All things being equal and we are healthy, I like us opening day though I think it will be a close game and not some blowout.
This is where I'm at with elbowj. I think Dallas is the team to beat - but can't seem to get elbowj to concede ANYTHING. What's wrong with admitting that some of the events over the past 4-5 months could set Dallas back just a little? I like to chat football with guys who are realists - have no real interest in doing it with guys who cannot admit any step backwards and rest entirely on their team's upside. It's too bad.
Quote:
that's exactly my point. No matter what happens there's apparently no downside and only upside for the Cowboys. Coming on this thread you'd think we were talking about the Patriots.
This is where I'm at with elbowj. I think Dallas is the team to beat - but can't seem to get elbowj to concede ANYTHING. What's wrong with admitting that some of the events over the past 4-5 months could set Dallas back just a little? I like to chat football with guys who are realists - have no real interest in doing it with guys who cannot admit any step backwards and rest entirely on their team's upside. It's too bad.
No way Wilson & Caroll aren't a "blow" to the team. And Ezekiel Elliott could end up being suspended as well. It ain't good.
I just don't get it, but then I've always been happy with the size of my penis, and I never felt the need to compensate for any "shortcomings" by getting into fights with strangers.
Heavy sigh.
I don't get it either. It takes a special kind of person with no life to troll other teams message boards with the sole intent to ignite arguments
fanatic II : 7/2/2017 12:15 pm : link : reply
Since 2006 Dallas has competed for the NFC East title into week 17. The two exceptions were 2010 and 2015 when Romo was injured. Last year was the exception when Romo was injured and Dallas competed for the division.
If the last 11 years are any indication it would predict that the division will go through Dallas.
History is funny. Since 2006, Dallas have finished 3rd or 4th in the division 4 times. They finished 2nd 3 times, and first 4 times. If you extend back to 2000, they finished dead last the same number of times as first.
The difference from that view to BBI is if the Giants go 8-8 or 7-9, any talk about them competing for a division title late in the year is called a loser mentality.
Let's bottom line it. In the last 16 years, the Cowboys have made the playoffs 6 times and have two playoff wins.
In the same period, the Giants have made the Super Bowl three times with two rings.
Quote:
NO
fanatic II : 7/2/2017 12:15 pm : link : reply
Since 2006 Dallas has competed for the NFC East title into week 17. The two exceptions were 2010 and 2015 when Romo was injured. Last year was the exception when Romo was injured and Dallas competed for the division.
If the last 11 years are any indication it would predict that the division will go through Dallas.
History is funny. Since 2006, Dallas have finished 3rd or 4th in the division 4 times. They finished 2nd 3 times, and first 4 times. If you extend back to 2000, they finished dead last the same number of times as first.
The difference from that view to BBI is if the Giants go 8-8 or 7-9, any talk about them competing for a division title late in the year is called a loser mentality.
Let's bottom line it. In the last 16 years, the Cowboys have made the playoffs 6 times and have two playoff wins.
In the same period, the Giants have made the Super Bowl three times with two rings.
The question of the thread was "who is the greater threat".
I pointed out since 2006(when Romo began to start) Dallas has been in the run for the division or playoffs right up to week 17. The only years that didn't occur was in 2010 and 2015 when Romo was hurt.
If you go by this past history it would say to you that Dallas will be in the run for the division or playoffs right up to the last game and thus the greater threat.
It has nothing to do with winning, it has to do with the team you believe will be there at the end competing against you for the division or playoff spot. That answer is Dallas.
Quote:
response from a Dallas fan:
Quote:
NO
fanatic II : 7/2/2017 12:15 pm : link : reply
Since 2006 Dallas has competed for the NFC East title into week 17. The two exceptions were 2010 and 2015 when Romo was injured. Last year was the exception when Romo was injured and Dallas competed for the division.
If the last 11 years are any indication it would predict that the division will go through Dallas.
History is funny. Since 2006, Dallas have finished 3rd or 4th in the division 4 times. They finished 2nd 3 times, and first 4 times. If you extend back to 2000, they finished dead last the same number of times as first.
The difference from that view to BBI is if the Giants go 8-8 or 7-9, any talk about them competing for a division title late in the year is called a loser mentality.
Let's bottom line it. In the last 16 years, the Cowboys have made the playoffs 6 times and have two playoff wins.
In the same period, the Giants have made the Super Bowl three times with two rings.
The question of the thread was "who is the greater threat".
I pointed out since 2006(when Romo began to start) Dallas has been in the run for the division or playoffs right up to week 17. The only years that didn't occur was in 2010 and 2015 when Romo was hurt.
If you go by this past history it would say to you that Dallas will be in the run for the division or playoffs right up to the last game and thus the greater threat.
It has nothing to do with winning, it has to do with the team you believe will be there at the end competing against you for the division or playoff spot. That answer is Dallas.
But I still think the defection on defense plus the potential suspensions will hurt them early and a slow start is very likely. If the Giants offense can't exploit that secondary, well, what can I say I'd be surprised.
But I still think the defection on defense plus the potential suspensions will hurt them early and a slow start is very likely. If the Giants offense can't exploit that secondary, well, what can I say I'd be surprised.
100% agree and it's foolish to write Dallas off altogether. They are the team to beat, but on opening night I expect our offense should be able to put up points and move the ball in the air against that defense. I also will be very disappointed if we can't do that, provided we're relatively healthy.
I'm going to be disappointed if our defense lets them control the ground game too, but that is far from a given. With a new DT joining the starting DL and a new MLB, I could definitely see them moving the ball on us. I'm not hoping that's the case. I'd like to see us gel on defense from day one, but let's not pretend that we won't have a brand new signal caller on defense at Mike who could take some adjusting of his own. And if we're fair we'll acknowledge that his biggest test of the season may be against the Dallas running game on opening night.
So fanaticII is correct when he says that Dallas is more of a threat than Philly. Anything else is wishful thinking on Giants fans part, imo.
Quote:
The Cowboys will be in it until the end. Their offense is too strong not to win some close games and such.
But I still think the defection on defense plus the potential suspensions will hurt them early and a slow start is very likely. If the Giants offense can't exploit that secondary, well, what can I say I'd be surprised.
100% agree and it's foolish to write Dallas off altogether. They are the team to beat, but on opening night I expect our offense should be able to put up points and move the ball in the air against that defense. I also will be very disappointed if we can't do that, provided we're relatively healthy.
I'm going to be disappointed if our defense lets them control the ground game too, but that is far from a given. With a new DT joining the starting DL and a new MLB, I could definitely see them moving the ball on us. I'm not hoping that's the case. I'd like to see us gel on defense from day one, but let's not pretend that we won't have a brand new signal caller on defense at Mike who could take some adjusting of his own. And if we're fair we'll acknowledge that his biggest test of the season may be against the Dallas running game on opening night.
I wonder if JT Thomas heals up enough and sticks since he's solid in coverage?
Link - ( New Window )
Strength of schedule also counts.
Quote:
Football Outsiders have Philly as their sixth ranked defense, Cowboys as their 18th ranked defense and the Giants second. Just food for thought Link - ( New Window )
Interesting. These rankings mean more to me than the pure Points Allowed statistics; yards allowed.
Strength of schedule also counts.
FO has Dallas winning the division and the Giamts at 8-8.
Are you sure you aren't looking at 2016, just as you thought point differential crossed over years instead of being predictive of the current year.
I'm starting to think your grasp of statistics is pretty fucking shitty.
They don't have a single team projected to be below 5-11 in record. That would be the 1st time that happened since a 16 game schedule was released. The probability of that happening is extremely, extremely low.
When a company who lives on statistics posts something that absurd, I'm not sure using their metrics is really going to make an argument strengthened
And for them too...
And for them too...
My guess for the Giants is 11-5 and the Cowboys 10-6, Eagles 9-7 and Skins 7-9. What does that mean? Absolutely nothing but wishful thinking.
Are you sure you aren't looking at 2016, just as you thought point differential crossed over years instead of being predictive of the current year.
I'm starting to think your grasp of statistics is pretty fucking shitty.
Scoring margin is predictive from year to year and I wasn't the one who brought up FO and they made the prediction for 2017. Anything else?
Quote:
I come here to talk about the football team I root for (and occasionally other things, too), but it would never occur to me to go to a message board for fans of another team just to talk trash and get into arguments. I mean, what's the point?
I just don't get it, but then I've always been happy with the size of my penis, and I never felt the need to compensate for any "shortcomings" by getting into fights with strangers.
Heavy sigh.
I don't get it either. It takes a special kind of person with no life to troll other teams message boards with the sole intent to ignite arguments
Well, it looks like we are dealing with a very special type of loser. This is now back to back weekends for this basement dweller.
Keeping on typing this doesn't make it true. Scoring margin is most definitely not predictive from year to year - it may be predictive within a current year (but that isn't the point).
YAJ debunked it pretty clearly in the other thread where scoring margin in a previous year was said to be predictive of the next year's success.
Quote:
Scoring margin is predictive from year to year
Keeping on typing this doesn't make it true. Scoring margin is most definitely not predictive from year to year - it may be predictive within a current year (but that isn't the point).
YAJ debunked it pretty clearly in the other thread where scoring margin in a previous year was said to be predictive of the next year's success.
Did you realize that the FO predictions, that you claimed didn't exist, are based on it right? Another oopsie
Dallas will be a threat but it will take some time. I suspect they could be off to a slow start before the defense begins to put it together.
I am hoping the Giants stay sharp and get to 5-0; Dallas 2-3.
Philly is harder for me to judge at this point. But no way you can say Dallas is clearly "better" with this off-season.
Do you mean the same FO predictions that don't have a single team lower than 5-11 this year nor do their predictive wins in total equal the predictive losses?
That's a huge "oopsie", but not on my part. You realize you're basing an argument around a system that is predicting that no team will be worse than 5-11 - which hasn't happened once since the 16 game schedule is folly, right?
Quote:
Did you realize that the FO predictions, that you claimed didn't exist, are based on it right? Another oopsie
Do you mean the same FO predictions that don't have a single team lower than 5-11 this year nor do their predictive wins in total equal the predictive losses?
That's a huge "oopsie", but not on my part. You realize you're basing an argument around a system that is predicting that no team will be worse than 5-11 - which hasn't happened once since the 16 game schedule is folly, right?
Quote:
Did you realize that the FO predictions, that you claimed didn't exist, are based on it right? Another oopsie
Do you mean the same FO predictions that don't have a single team lower than 5-11 this year nor do their predictive wins in total equal the predictive losses?
That's a huge "oopsie", but not on my part. You realize you're basing an argument around a system that is predicting that no team will be worse than 5-11 - which hasn't happened once since the 16 game schedule is folly, right?
That changes the fact that it exists and is relied upon by them for their predictions how? Your position was that I made it up, that they didn't make predictions, and that it was debunked. None of those are true. They do make predictions, their predictions are based on a statistical formula designed by Daryl Morey and no salty Giants fans angry at what how they view the respective positions can change it. Seems odd that your confidence is based on your own poor knowledge and utter reliance on weak personal attacks. You were wrong and made at data. Shits funny.
Quote:
Was every bit as good as the Dallas OL. Go ahead and compare sack and rushing totals with both units. Please. Then sprinkle in wins and losses for justice. Please. Go ahead.
All Pros
NYG OL= 1
Dallas OL= 5
Postseason success
NYG - Yes
Dallas - No.
Ok fine. I will allow that the Dallas OL is a slight tick better but make no mistake, the Giants OL DOMINATED the NFL for a good stretch of time. If the Dallas OL is better, it isn't by very much.
And please, don't sit here and tell me that Dallas doesn't get too much hype at times-- all pro accolades included and I know full well the value of the all pro nod. It's legit. Still, what I say is true.