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.
He also thinks Prescott could make exponential advances in his sophomore year and turn a great offense into an immortal offense.
But he sees a potential downside. He thinks the three lost defensive backs were really pretty good, the Safety a good athelete and smart. The two corners experienced in the system and vastly underated and pershaps victimized by a weak pass rush.
Cagey, smart and aware of his own lack of real knowledge, he questions whether late round picks at the cornerback position can seamlessly step into the starting lineup. if they can (unlikely - E. Apple had more talent than your picks and he struggled last year) then you are a superbowl team (ie. with a little luck it's always about "a little luck"), and, if they don't then Dallas might well be a 500 team suffering from rooks, hi expectations and a tough schedule.
He's also old-fashioned and doesn't completely buy the new paradigm " Offense rules" and "imbalance can win".
So re-visit, note how smart the dude really is, pay homage. Revise untempered enthusiasm and recognize that the Cowboys defense might well be an achilles heel.
Cagey, smart and aware of his own lack of real knowledge, he questions whether late round picks at the cornerback position can seamlessly step into the starting lineup. if they can (unlikely - E. Apple had more talent than your picks and he struggled last year)
If you were as savvy as you imagine you'd probably like to know that they're not relying on any rookies to start, they have three vets who can if needed including a rookie who outplayed Apple that was drafted in the sixth round and started 11 games last year, and that when you're measuring teams by Pro Bowlers, which is a poor analysis at best, it doesn't make much of a case when you fail to include someone who actually made the Pro Bowl (Dak) from your list.
No it doesn't. My entire argument is that NFC East fanbases are biased as hell and know little to nothing about Dallas or Wentz. There are some exceptions but for the most part opinions are wildly off base.
Dallas kept their core and built thru the draft. None of the rest of the East can claim that. They were the best team in the division last season and losing some guys from the 26th ranked pass defense or their 5th and 6th best OL are unlikely to be enough to derail them. And that they're the favorites according to pretty much everyone for a reason.
Quote:
hinges on the main Cowboy players taking the next step and offsetting the losses from the offseason with ease yet aren't apply that same logic or chance to the Giants. Congrats.
No it doesn't. My entire argument is that NFC East fanbases are biased as hell and know little to nothing about Dallas or Wentz. There are some exceptions but for the most part opinions are wildly off base.
Dallas kept their core and built thru the draft. None of the rest of the East can claim that. They were the best team in the division last season and losing some guys from the 26th ranked pass defense or their 5th and 6th best OL are unlikely to be enough to derail them. And that they're the favorites according to pretty much everyone for a reason.
He says Witten is a year older and that hurts. So overall, Dallas took some hits but is regrouping via the draft. Depends on how they develop???
Quote:
hinges on the main Cowboy players taking the next step and offsetting the losses from the offseason with ease yet aren't apply that same logic or chance to the Giants. Congrats.
No it doesn't. My entire argument is that NFC East fanbases are biased as hell and know little to nothing about Dallas or Wentz. There are some exceptions but for the most part opinions are wildly off base.
Dallas kept their core and built thru the draft. None of the rest of the East can claim that. They were the best team in the division last season and losing some guys from the 26th ranked pass defense or their 5th and 6th best OL are unlikely to be enough to derail them. And that they're the favorites according to pretty much everyone for a reason.
Did the Giants not build through the draft in addition to also filling 2 huge holes at WR and FB/TE in FA? Again, you are applying your logic only to the Cowboys as if they are they only team that had draft picks or players who will improve in year 2 or 3.
I personally think Dallas is still the team to beat but their biggest question mark is year 2 Prescott and whether or not he improves. It's a valid question and if he doesn't, they are going to lose more games than in 2016. We see shitty sophomore years all the time, the Cowboys aren't above that.
Quote:
In comment 13519336 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
hinges on the main Cowboy players taking the next step and offsetting the losses from the offseason with ease yet aren't apply that same logic or chance to the Giants. Congrats.
No it doesn't. My entire argument is that NFC East fanbases are biased as hell and know little to nothing about Dallas or Wentz. There are some exceptions but for the most part opinions are wildly off base.
Dallas kept their core and built thru the draft. None of the rest of the East can claim that. They were the best team in the division last season and losing some guys from the 26th ranked pass defense or their 5th and 6th best OL are unlikely to be enough to derail them. And that they're the favorites according to pretty much everyone for a reason.
Did the Giants not build through the draft in addition to also filling 2 huge holes at WR and FB/TE in FA? Again, you are applying your logic only to the Cowboys as if they are they only team that had draft picks or players who will improve in year 2 or 3.
I personally think Dallas is still the team to beat but their biggest question mark is year 2 Prescott and whether or not he improves. It's a valid question and if he doesn't, they are going to lose more games than in 2016. We see shitty sophomore years all the time, the Cowboys aren't above that.
Also, LB Sean Lee had a career year and is now a year older. Will he repeat that kind of year or will he fall to his usual injuries? Also, safety valve TE Jason Witten is a year older and isn't going to get any better obviously.
The Giant can stop the run. I believe that until proven otherwise so look for us to force Prescott to beat us. And look for Eli to attack that secondary and also for Perkins to run on that DL.
Quote:
In comment 13519343 elbowj said:
Quote:
In comment 13519336 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
hinges on the main Cowboy players taking the next step and offsetting the losses from the offseason with ease yet aren't apply that same logic or chance to the Giants. Congrats.
No it doesn't. My entire argument is that NFC East fanbases are biased as hell and know little to nothing about Dallas or Wentz. There are some exceptions but for the most part opinions are wildly off base.
Dallas kept their core and built thru the draft. None of the rest of the East can claim that. They were the best team in the division last season and losing some guys from the 26th ranked pass defense or their 5th and 6th best OL are unlikely to be enough to derail them. And that they're the favorites according to pretty much everyone for a reason.
Did the Giants not build through the draft in addition to also filling 2 huge holes at WR and FB/TE in FA? Again, you are applying your logic only to the Cowboys as if they are they only team that had draft picks or players who will improve in year 2 or 3.
I personally think Dallas is still the team to beat but their biggest question mark is year 2 Prescott and whether or not he improves. It's a valid question and if he doesn't, they are going to lose more games than in 2016. We see shitty sophomore years all the time, the Cowboys aren't above that.
Does Dallas see improvement in Prescott or will teams figure him out a bit? hard to say right now but 5 interceptions is ridiculously low for anyone and will be hard to repeat that low number again.
Also, LB Sean Lee had a career year and is now a year older. Will he repeat that kind of year or will he fall to his usual injuries? Also, safety valve TE Jason Witten is a year older and isn't going to get any better obviously.
The Giant can stop the run. I believe that until proven otherwise so look for us to force Prescott to beat us. And look for Eli to attack that secondary and also for Perkins to run on that DL.
Dallas was actually #1 against the run. And Eli has averaged less than 200 yards per game vs. Dallas in the last two years.
And Dak actually only threw 4 Elis last season.
Quote:
In comment 13519372 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
In comment 13519343 elbowj said:
Quote:
In comment 13519336 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
hinges on the main Cowboy players taking the next step and offsetting the losses from the offseason with ease yet aren't apply that same logic or chance to the Giants. Congrats.
No it doesn't. My entire argument is that NFC East fanbases are biased as hell and know little to nothing about Dallas or Wentz. There are some exceptions but for the most part opinions are wildly off base.
Dallas kept their core and built thru the draft. None of the rest of the East can claim that. They were the best team in the division last season and losing some guys from the 26th ranked pass defense or their 5th and 6th best OL are unlikely to be enough to derail them. And that they're the favorites according to pretty much everyone for a reason.
Did the Giants not build through the draft in addition to also filling 2 huge holes at WR and FB/TE in FA? Again, you are applying your logic only to the Cowboys as if they are they only team that had draft picks or players who will improve in year 2 or 3.
I personally think Dallas is still the team to beat but their biggest question mark is year 2 Prescott and whether or not he improves. It's a valid question and if he doesn't, they are going to lose more games than in 2016. We see shitty sophomore years all the time, the Cowboys aren't above that.
Does Dallas see improvement in Prescott or will teams figure him out a bit? hard to say right now but 5 interceptions is ridiculously low for anyone and will be hard to repeat that low number again.
Also, LB Sean Lee had a career year and is now a year older. Will he repeat that kind of year or will he fall to his usual injuries? Also, safety valve TE Jason Witten is a year older and isn't going to get any better obviously.
The Giant can stop the run. I believe that until proven otherwise so look for us to force Prescott to beat us. And look for Eli to attack that secondary and also for Perkins to run on that DL.
Dallas was actually #1 against the run. And Eli has averaged less than 200 yards per game vs. Dallas in the last two years.
And Dak actually only threw 4 Elis last season.
They are acting as if the three starting defensive backs were let go voluntarily so they could bring in younger faster and more aggressive ball hawks.
That's not the case, they were under cap pressure. I think a case can be made that those three were the heart of the defense and were good players victimized by a poor pass rush.
Our friend likes to talk about a bias, the most outlandish proposition set forth is that rookie corners can step in and perform immediately. The question should be "can they perform at all".
Those new dbacks were taken relatively late in the draft, and they don't have great measureables. The word is that they're "ball hawks" , leaders, rich in intangibles...or exactly the type of player who can't step up.
Then there's the smug line that tells us how smart they are building through the draft. The assumption is that once the son took over sanity and sagacity rule in the city that has oil wells downtown.
I don't see that. Gregory was a no.2, Jaylon Smith almost a late one....they were terrible picks...no matter how it turns out (and we are "result orientated" way too much).
The odds of Jaylon Smith ever returning were probably only a little more than 50% and even if he did there's the lost year when he might have pushed them to the Superbowl.
Dak Prescott was complete luck. Teams give up roster to get a franchise QB...Dallas got him for a crappy fourth rounder - or virtually as a gift. The odds of that happening are about 200 to 1, but when it does franchise so benefit that Superbowls come their way.
Seattle and New England are the only two teams I can think of (it's 1:00 AM) that enjoyed that largesee and look what they did.
Collins is another first rounder that they got for absolutely nothing
So the idea that this team was built rationally with sagacious drafting is Cowboy Kool Aid. The idea that they gave up three starting defensive backs to improve is more baloney.
You can do worse case and best case scenario's for all of the teams. The Cowboys' Best case can't be denied...but it's based on Prescott making a move up (very likely), Jaylon coming back and being effective (unlikely) and late round rookies solidifying a secondary (most unlikely). It's based on a team going 13-3 last year with a rookie QB and that alone is reason to make them the favorite, but it also ignores the loss of five starters on the defense and the effect that that might have.
They are a team of great potential with a corresponding downside. But granting that ....stop with the brilliance about the way the team was fashioned.
Dallas profited from pure dumb luck and got Prescott with the approximately the 150 th. pick in the draft and without that great luck you would have put together four wins or so for two years in a row and be regarded as a laughing stock.
Cowboys 2016 Draft Board revealed - ( New Window )
Being scolded about bias is funny.
They are acting as if the three starting defensive backs were let go voluntarily so they could bring in younger faster and more aggressive ball hawks.
That's not the case, they were under cap pressure. I think a case can be made that those three were the heart of the defense and were good players victimized by a poor pass rush.
Our friend likes to talk about a bias, the most outlandish proposition set forth is that rookie corners can step in and perform immediately. The question should be "can they perform at all".
Those new dbacks were taken relatively late in the draft, and they don't have great measureables. The word is that they're "ball hawks" , leaders, rich in intangibles...or exactly the type of player who can't step up.
Then there's the smug line that tells us how smart they are building through the draft. The assumption is that once the son took over sanity and sagacity rule in the city that has oil wells downtown.
I don't see that. Gregory was a no.2, Jaylon Smith almost a late one....they were terrible picks...no matter how it turns out (and we are "result orientated" way too much).
The odds of Jaylon Smith ever returning were probably only a little more than 50% and even if he did there's the lost year when he might have pushed them to the Superbowl.
Dak Prescott was complete luck. Teams give up roster to get a franchise QB...Dallas got him for a crappy fourth rounder - or virtually as a gift. The odds of that happening are about 200 to 1, but when it does franchise so benefit that Superbowls come their way.
Seattle and New England are the only two teams I can think of (it's 1:00 AM) that enjoyed that largesee and look what they did.
Collins is another first rounder that they got for absolutely nothing
So the idea that this team was built rationally with sagacious drafting is Cowboy Kool Aid. The idea that they gave up three starting defensive backs to improve is more baloney.
You can do worse case and best case scenario's for all of the teams. The Cowboys' Best case can't be denied...but it's based on Prescott making a move up (very likely), Jaylon coming back and being effective (unlikely) and late round rookies solidifying a secondary (most unlikely). It's based on a team going 13-3 last year with a rookie QB and that alone is reason to make them the favorite, but it also ignores the loss of five starters on the defense and the effect that that might have.
They are a team of great potential with a corresponding downside. But granting that ....stop with the brilliance about the way the team was fashioned.
Dallas profited from pure dumb luck and got Prescott with the approximately the 150 th. pick in the draft and without that great luck you would have put together four wins or so for two years in a row and be regarded as a laughing stock.
About the only thing you got right was that the Gregory pick was terrible. Jaylon Smith was red shirted last year, Dallas knew this when they drafted him. This year will determine if that was a wise decision.
The remake on the secondary was not brought on by the cap. Under Stephen Jones Dallas dose'nt over pay in free agency. Jones sets a hard number and sticks to it. Just look back since he took over the running of the team and you will see this over and over again.
The players Dallas lost were good players, they all received contracts higher than Dallas was willing to pay. But look at each individual player and you can see why Dallas decided to move on from. Carr was the last player Dallas gave a large contract to in free agency and under performed. Claiborne was to up and down and not consistent as a player to warrant a new contract. Wilcox never became the player Dallas thought he would be.. The one player Dallas wanted back was Church, but Jacksonville offered more than Dallas was willing to match.
That's the free agency part of it. On the draft side there were going to be many good CBs. So many CBs that Dallas was able to draft in the 2nd and 3rd rounds players with 1st round talent. Players like you said were athletic and "ball hawks". That second trait is very important to a Marinelli defense. It's important that the defense produce turnovers, and in the secondary those are interceptions. Something the previous secondary couldn't produce.
The way the team has been constructed is the right way, through the draft. If in the future Smith and Tapper can become starters(for a total of 6)the 2016 draft will be the greatest in team history.
It's justifiable if you doubt Dallas, but this team will again exceed the expectations of the doubters and be in the playoffs.
Quote:
I concede: Dallas has a very high upside they also have a high downside (or is it low downside).
They are acting as if the three starting defensive backs were let go voluntarily so they could bring in younger faster and more aggressive ball hawks.
That's not the case, they were under cap pressure. I think a case can be made that those three were the heart of the defense and were good players victimized by a poor pass rush.
Our friend likes to talk about a bias, the most outlandish proposition set forth is that rookie corners can step in and perform immediately. The question should be "can they perform at all".
Those new dbacks were taken relatively late in the draft, and they don't have great measureables. The word is that they're "ball hawks" , leaders, rich in intangibles...or exactly the type of player who can't step up.
Then there's the smug line that tells us how smart they are building through the draft. The assumption is that once the son took over sanity and sagacity rule in the city that has oil wells downtown.
I don't see that. Gregory was a no.2, Jaylon Smith almost a late one....they were terrible picks...no matter how it turns out (and we are "result orientated" way too much).
The odds of Jaylon Smith ever returning were probably only a little more than 50% and even if he did there's the lost year when he might have pushed them to the Superbowl.
Dak Prescott was complete luck. Teams give up roster to get a franchise QB...Dallas got him for a crappy fourth rounder - or virtually as a gift. The odds of that happening are about 200 to 1, but when it does franchise so benefit that Superbowls come their way.
Seattle and New England are the only two teams I can think of (it's 1:00 AM) that enjoyed that largesee and look what they did.
Collins is another first rounder that they got for absolutely nothing
So the idea that this team was built rationally with sagacious drafting is Cowboy Kool Aid. The idea that they gave up three starting defensive backs to improve is more baloney.
You can do worse case and best case scenario's for all of the teams. The Cowboys' Best case can't be denied...but it's based on Prescott making a move up (very likely), Jaylon coming back and being effective (unlikely) and late round rookies solidifying a secondary (most unlikely). It's based on a team going 13-3 last year with a rookie QB and that alone is reason to make them the favorite, but it also ignores the loss of five starters on the defense and the effect that that might have.
They are a team of great potential with a corresponding downside. But granting that ....stop with the brilliance about the way the team was fashioned.
Dallas profited from pure dumb luck and got Prescott with the approximately the 150 th. pick in the draft and without that great luck you would have put together four wins or so for two years in a row and be regarded as a laughing stock.
About the only thing you got right was that the Gregory pick was terrible. Jaylon Smith was red shirted last year, Dallas knew this when they drafted him. This year will determine if that was a wise decision.
The remake on the secondary was not brought on by the cap. Under Stephen Jones Dallas dose'nt over pay in free agency. Jones sets a hard number and sticks to it. Just look back since he took over the running of the team and you will see this over and over again.
The players Dallas lost were good players, they all received contracts higher than Dallas was willing to pay. But look at each individual player and you can see why Dallas decided to move on from. Carr was the last player Dallas gave a large contract to in free agency and under performed. Claiborne was to up and down and not consistent as a player to warrant a new contract. Wilcox never became the player Dallas thought he would be.. The one player Dallas wanted back was Church, but Jacksonville offered more than Dallas was willing to match.
That's the free agency part of it. On the draft side there were going to be many good CBs. So many CBs that Dallas was able to draft in the 2nd and 3rd rounds players with 1st round talent. Players like you said were athletic and "ball hawks". That second trait is very important to a Marinelli defense. It's important that the defense produce turnovers, and in the secondary those are interceptions. Something the previous secondary couldn't produce.
The way the team has been constructed is the right way, through the draft. If in the future Smith and Tapper can become starters(for a total of 6)the 2016 draft will be the greatest in team history.
It's justifiable if you doubt Dallas, but this team will again exceed the expectations of the doubters and be in the playoffs.
Being scolded about bias is funny.
It's not false. Dallas had the #1 ranked rush defense in the NFL. That's a fact. Other measurements can certainly add context but per the NFL Dallas was #1.
They are acting as if the three starting defensive backs were let go voluntarily so they could bring in younger faster and more aggressive ball hawks.
That's not the case, they were under cap pressure. I think a case can be made that those three were the heart of the defense and were good players victimized by a poor pass rush.
Our friend likes to talk about a bias, the most outlandish proposition set forth is that rookie corners can step in and perform immediately. The question should be "can they perform at all".
Those new dbacks were taken relatively late in the draft, and they don't have great measureables. The word is that they're "ball hawks" , leaders, rich in intangibles...or exactly the type of player who can't step up.
Then there's the smug line that tells us how smart they are building through the draft. The assumption is that once the son took over sanity and sagacity rule in the city that has oil wells downtown.
I don't see that. Gregory was a no.2, Jaylon Smith almost a late one....they were terrible picks...no matter how it turns out (and we are "result orientated" way too much).
The odds of Jaylon Smith ever returning were probably only a little more than 50% and even if he did there's the lost year when he might have pushed them to the Superbowl.
Dak Prescott was complete luck. Teams give up roster to get a franchise QB...Dallas got him for a crappy fourth rounder - or virtually as a gift. The odds of that happening are about 200 to 1, but when it does franchise so benefit that Superbowls come their way.
Seattle and New England are the only two teams I can think of (it's 1:00 AM) that enjoyed that largesee and look what they did.
Collins is another first rounder that they got for absolutely nothing
So the idea that this team was built rationally with sagacious drafting is Cowboy Kool Aid. The idea that they gave up three starting defensive backs to improve is more baloney.
You can do worse case and best case scenario's for all of the teams. The Cowboys' Best case can't be denied...but it's based on Prescott making a move up (very likely), Jaylon coming back and being effective (unlikely) and late round rookies solidifying a secondary (most unlikely). It's based on a team going 13-3 last year with a rookie QB and that alone is reason to make them the favorite, but it also ignores the loss of five starters on the defense and the effect that that might have.
They are a team of great potential with a corresponding downside. But granting that ....stop with the brilliance about the way the team was fashioned.
Dallas profited from pure dumb luck and got Prescott with the approximately the 150 th. pick in the draft and without that great luck you would have put together four wins or so for two years in a row and be regarded as a laughing stock.
You're full of misinformation and the jealousy drips off the screen. Dallas spent more time with Dak than any other QB. Then they drafted him.
2nd and 3rd isn't late round. They're not being relied on as starters. Awuzie has insane measurables. You're off here. You copped a little info from a dying board but it was corrupted in the process of your interpretation.
on paper at least ,wentz should improve in year 2 that eagles team before a few key injuries last year was better than dallas in my view
dallas are going to lean on zeke the more they do that the more tape people get to stop him the harder it will be for dallas to rely on that alone. they need some help at WR dez isnt the dominant player he used to be, still good but not as uncoverable as he once was,witten is solid but time is catching up with him dallas is becoming all about the run and this is now a passing league
i also think washington is making improvements they were the number 8 ranked offence last year they added some parts to the defence as well they are still a work in progress but could easily finish 2 or 3rd in the division i think the division comes down to a fight between the eagles and giants
with dallas fighting washington not to end up bottom this year
with each week that passes another cowboys player runs into a potential ban that was another one this week LB damien wilson aggravated assault you have to figure a ban will follow this charge to add to gregory and irvin on an already ravaged front 7 that just opens the door for the giants week 1 and for dallas to fall behind early once that happens the clamour for romo will only make things harder on dak
it would probably have been better for dak had romo signed for another team as it stands jerry can bring him back whenever he wants
on paper at least ,wentz should improve in year 2 that eagles team before a few key injuries last year was better than dallas in my view
dallas are going to lean on zeke the more they do that the more tape people get to stop him the harder it will be for dallas to rely on that alone. they need some help at WR dez isnt the dominant player he used to be, still good but not as uncoverable as he once was,witten is solid but time is catching up with him dallas is becoming all about the run and this is now a passing league
i also think washington is making improvements they were the number 8 ranked offence last year they added some parts to the defence as well they are still a work in progress but could easily finish 2 or 3rd in the division i think the division comes down to a fight between the eagles and giants
with dallas fighting washington not to end up bottom this year
with each week that passes another cowboys player runs into a potential ban that was another one this week LB damien wilson aggravated assault you have to figure a ban will follow this charge to add to gregory and irvin on an already ravaged front 7 that just opens the door for the giants week 1 and for dallas to fall behind early once that happens the clamour for romo will only make things harder on dak
it would probably have been better for dak had romo signed for another team as it stands jerry can bring him back whenever he wants
The front seven is not so ravaged. The ends are Lawrence, Charlton, Tapper, and Mayowa. The tackles are Crawford, Collins, Thronton, and Paea. I haven't included other players that are in the mix.
The perception about the Dallas defense not having any depth at DL or secondary is just not true. What Dallas doesn't have are name or well known players. In Dallas's case the sum is greater than the whole.
Quote:
they only had 340 attempts against them for 3.9 yards per rush. Seattle and NYG had the best yards against sustained over more carries. You can draw whatever conclusions you want for how/why that happened but the math doesn't lie. NYG at .3 yards better and Seattle at .5 yards better (with 100 more attempts against).
Being scolded about bias is funny.
It's not false. Dallas had the #1 ranked rush defense in the NFL. That's a fact. Other measurements can certainly add context but per the NFL Dallas was #1.
They were #1 in total yards allowed, which is a shitty barometer when they didn't have anywhere close to the best YPC against (a whole half yard worse than Seattle as I pointed out earlier). This isn't something I'm plucking out of thin air. Who was harder to run against, Dallas or Seattle/NYG? The answer is simple and it doesn't take a fan of either team to see it.
on paper at least ,wentz should improve in year 2 that eagles team before a few key injuries last year was better than dallas in my view
dallas are going to lean on zeke the more they do that the more tape people get to stop him the harder it will be for dallas to rely on that alone. they need some help at WR dez isnt the dominant player he used to be, still good but not as uncoverable as he once was,witten is solid but time is catching up with him dallas is becoming all about the run and this is now a passing league
i also think washington is making improvements they were the number 8 ranked offence last year they added some parts to the defence as well they are still a work in progress but could easily finish 2 or 3rd in the division i think the division comes down to a fight between the eagles and giants
with dallas fighting washington not to end up bottom this year
with each week that passes another cowboys player runs into a potential ban that was another one this week LB damien wilson aggravated assault you have to figure a ban will follow this charge to add to gregory and irvin on an already ravaged front 7 that just opens the door for the giants week 1 and for dallas to fall behind early once that happens the clamour for romo will only make things harder on dak
it would probably have been better for dak had romo signed for another team as it stands jerry can bring him back whenever he wants
The front seven is not so ravaged. The ends are Lawrence, Charlton, Tapper, and Mayowa. The tackles are Crawford, Collins, Thronton, and Paea. I haven't included other players that are in the mix.
The perception about the Dallas defense not having any depth at DL or secondary is just not true. What Dallas doesn't have are name or well known players. In Dallas's case the sum of the parts are greater than the whole.
There is nothing wrong with drafting the base of your team and re-signing the core players you drafted to long-term deals. There is nothing wrong with saving your cap money, not overspending to keep marginal players, so that you have more money to spend on your own drafted players later on. There is also nothing wrong with using your cap savings earned by passing on re-signing your own players and signing better ones when you have the cap dollars to do it.
When a poster continually points out that building the team through the draft is "right" they are also implying the inverse, that buying players through FA is "wrong". To me, following a season when a divisional rival spent big bucks and all the biggest signings turned into All-Pros, pointing out that a cash-strapped team like Dallas is refusing to spend cap dollars is either fantasy or a way to deal with serious jealousy. I think the second, but there are deluded fans out there.
If Dallas had the money and could sign Snacks, OV and Jackrabbit, would Dallas fans not want them to because that's not the "right way" to build a team?
The players I didn't include are draft choices who may make the team or practice squad.
The other players are Demontre Moore, Richard Ash, and Zach Collins.
Dallas would have to keep 10 DL for one of these players to make team.
There is nothing wrong with drafting the base of your team and re-signing the core players you drafted to long-term deals. There is nothing wrong with saving your cap money, not overspending to keep marginal players, so that you have more money to spend on your own drafted players later on. There is also nothing wrong with using your cap savings earned by passing on re-signing your own players and signing better ones when you have the cap dollars to do it.
When a poster continually points out that building the team through the draft is "right" they are also implying the inverse, that buying players through FA is "wrong". To me, following a season when a divisional rival spent big bucks and all the biggest signings turned into All-Pros, pointing out that a cash-strapped team like Dallas is refusing to spend cap dollars is either fantasy or a way to deal with serious jealousy. I think the second, but there are deluded fans out there.
If Dallas had the money and could sign Snacks, OV and Jackrabbit, would Dallas fans not want them to because that's not the "right way" to build a team?
Dallas finished above the Giants on the way to winning the division. What would they have to be jealous of?
There is nothing wrong with drafting the base of your team and re-signing the core players you drafted to long-term deals. There is nothing wrong with saving your cap money, not overspending to keep marginal players, so that you have more money to spend on your own drafted players later on. There is also nothing wrong with using your cap savings earned by passing on re-signing your own players and signing better ones when you have the cap dollars to do it.
When a poster continually points out that building the team through the draft is "right" they are also implying the inverse, that buying players through FA is "wrong". To me, following a season when a divisional rival spent big bucks and all the biggest signings turned into All-Pros, pointing out that a cash-strapped team like Dallas is refusing to spend cap dollars is either fantasy or a way to deal with serious jealousy. I think the second, but there are deluded fans out there.
If Dallas had the money and could sign Snacks, OV and Jackrabbit, would Dallas fans not want them to because that's not the "right way" to build a team?
You probably have to go back to the 90s to find the last time Dallas had success with high priced free agents. I prefer the way the team is being run under Stephen Jones. Free agency is used to find bridge players until the future is drafted.
I actually look at the final 53 to see how many players have played for othet teams and how many are home grown.
If my way too early 53 is close it should be McFadden, Butler, Cooper, Looney, Bell, Irving, Mayowa, Thornton, and Paea. That's 10, which is actually higher than in recent years.
The players I didn't include are draft choices who may make the team or practice squad.
The other players are Demontre Moore, Richard Ash, and Zach Collins.
Dallas would have to keep 10 DL for one of these players to make team.
fanatic II - saying your team has depth in the secondary following an offseason like the one your team has had is a stretch at best. You may not be counting on rookies to play well, but it sure sounds like it. It's true this draft had depth @DB, but considering the guys you just let go are you certain that Dallas found qualified replacements? If Carr (FA 5-yr/50MM in 2012), Claiborne (1st Rd 6th overall) were not players worthy of a strong second contract, what does that say about Dallas' ability to find talented CB? They've been trying to get top players in their secondary for half a decade now. Church is the one player they wanted back you say, but why wouldn't they have ponied up HALF of what they paid Carr just five years ago to keep him? He wasn't worth it?
I'm not arguing that the Eagles are more of a threat than Dallas. Not at all. I don't believe that.
What I'm wondering about is the thinking when you lose 7 starters or key contributors to your defense (Church, Carr, McClain, Claiborne, Wilcox and Crawford) and are counting on either their backups, rookies, or players returning from significant injury (Jaylon Smith) and a handful of cheap FA (Blanton, Carroll, Paea, and Moore), and expecting the defense to be as good or better. To me that seems like very wishful/optimistic thinking on your part. Certainly you can understand how someone who ISN'T a Dallas fan would look at that change and think things might take a step backward. Even if the players are all just as good or better, it is reasonable to expect the defense to take some time to grow and adjust.
The biggest reason why Giants fans are optimistic about their defense is because of what happened in the last 11 games of the 2016 season. Don't forget, the Giants opened up 2-3. The defense, while adding 3 all-pro players and another solid starter, failed to reach its potential in the early part of the season. Why is it difficult to believe that the same won't be true of Dallas. It seems the best one should hope for is that the defense for Dallas will click by later in the season, and that the offense can carry them to the playoffs.
Quote:
The players I didn't include are draft choices who may make the team or practice squad.
The other players are Demontre Moore, Richard Ash, and Zach Collins.
Dallas would have to keep 10 DL for one of these players to make team.
fanatic II - saying your team has depth in the secondary following an offseason like the one your team has had is a stretch at best. You may not be counting on rookies to play well, but it sure sounds like it. It's true this draft had depth @DB, but considering the guys you just let go are you certain that Dallas found qualified replacements? If Carr (FA 5-yr/50MM in 2012), Claiborne (1st Rd 6th overall) were not players worthy of a strong second contract, what does that say about Dallas' ability to find talented CB? They've been trying to get top players in their secondary for half a decade now. Church is the one player they wanted back you say, but why wouldn't they have ponied up HALF of what they paid Carr just five years ago to keep him? He wasn't worth it?
I'm not arguing that the Eagles are more of a threat than Dallas. Not at all. I don't believe that.
What I'm wondering about is the thinking when you lose 7 starters or key contributors to your defense (Church, Carr, McClain, Claiborne, Wilcox and Crawford) and are counting on either their backups, rookies, or players returning from significant injury (Jaylon Smith) and a handful of cheap FA (Blanton, Carroll, Paea, and Moore), and expecting the defense to be as good or better. To me that seems like very wishful/optimistic thinking on your part. Certainly you can understand how someone who ISN'T a Dallas fan would look at that change and think things might take a step backward. Even if the players are all just as good or better, it is reasonable to expect the defense to take some time to grow and adjust.
The biggest reason why Giants fans are optimistic about their defense is because of what happened in the last 11 games of the 2016 season. Don't forget, the Giants opened up 2-3. The defense, while adding 3 all-pro players and another solid starter, failed to reach its potential in the early part of the season. Why is it difficult to believe that the same won't be true of Dallas. It seems the best one should hope for is that the defense for Dallas will click by later in the season, and that the offense can carry them to the playoffs.
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.
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.