Jump to content


Photo

Cowboys in 2012


  • Please log in to reply
355 replies to this topic

#26 Tree

Tree

    International Gunslinger of Science

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canuckistan

Posted 11 June 2011 - 10:21 PM

Having a TE as your top receiver is usually a strong sign you're on a losing team.

#27 Drizzle

Drizzle

    Middle Name: Theman

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,872 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haggard Ass Backwoods, NY

Posted 11 June 2011 - 10:22 PM

I'm not gonna lie, it's pretty bleak. However, with enough pressure and good lb play a weak secondary can be overcome.
look at the '07 fluke.


We had a good secondary in 07, especially in the playoffs, dude. Corey Webster practically won the Championship game for us.

#28 fringe

fringe

    Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,639 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:02 PM

Having a TE as your top receiver is usually a strong sign you're on a losing team.


A tree of reason in the forest of morons.

#29 GolfingGuy

GolfingGuy

    What the fuck you looking at Jabroni?

  • Section MODs
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,396 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queens, NY.

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:09 PM

I'm not gonna lie, it's pretty bleak. However, with enough pressure and good lb play a weak secondary can be overcome.
look at the '07 fluke.


Except that you have DeMarcus Ware and well...that's pretty much it.

#30 Cowboyz

Cowboyz

    the flaccidator

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 463 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:12 PM

We had a good secondary in 07, especially in the playoffs, dude. Corey Webster practically won the Championship game for us.


after you started getting pressure you had a 'good' secondary. Or at least what appeared statistically as a good secondary. funny how pressure can do that.
Youre pass defense was the worst in the league thru the first 3 weeks, if I remember correctly, and again later in the season showed some definite weakness when the pressure wasn't there.

Dude, there 1. probably isn't going to be a season and 2. if there is, free agency hasn't come yet. We will probably find someone there. Plus, we have Goff who did fine last year, anyway. And at least we have a legitimate secondary.

This is like ripping on you because you guys still haven't found bodies to replace your awful offensive line. Can't replace them if you can't even sign players. Dumbass.


1. no shit? Did you hear OBL is dead? 2.refer to no. 1.
so are you gonna find someone in fa or did Goff really do just fine? I doubt both would be the case.

Jerry is more likely to cover our weaknesses in fa, than the tischs covering yours. Our oline won't be a problem.

BTW storm, I came here to talk football. I'm not a troll, I"m not inflammatory. You guys wear your hearts on the old sleeve here don't you?

If you don't want a differing viewpoint/opinion here, let me know and I'll move down the road.

If you guys would rather look at the same old 4 month old posts than debating with another team's fan on a new one, I don't have a problem finding a new place to talk football.

#31 GolfingGuy

GolfingGuy

    What the fuck you looking at Jabroni?

  • Section MODs
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,396 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queens, NY.

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:14 PM

If your front 4 can get pressure = secondary is good.

If your front 4 can't get pressure = secondary stinks.

Riveting stuff, chap.

#32 Cowboyz

Cowboyz

    the flaccidator

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 463 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:15 PM

Having a TE as your top receiver is usually a strong sign you're on a losing team.


haha is this guy real?

I take it you don't remember the '86 giants? Aren't you a giants fan?

#33 Cowboyz

Cowboyz

    the flaccidator

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 463 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:18 PM

If your front 4 can get pressure = secondary is good.

If your front 4 can't get pressure = secondary stinks.

Riveting stuff, chap.


You guys are so sensitive about this team, it's almost as if your team stinks and you guys are tired of hearing about it.

Come on. You've got a great team, and I'm looking forward to watching them play my boyz.

If you don't want to debate about it, no need to be an a-hole.

It's more like this:
If your front 4 can get press. = you don't need a good secondary
if your front 4 don't get it = you better have a good secondary

so go back and look at your storybook season. look at the games where the pressure was absent and tell me how your secondary performed.

#34 fringe

fringe

    Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,639 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:19 PM

I dont have material friend i just like talking about football.
Smack. Didnt mean to hurt anyones feelings.
If u guys r so sensitive, i understand why its a ghosttown

you need to know that no one here cares to add members so the ghost town remarks remain lame. i'm not sensitive to any good smack but yours is not. go to BBI if you want a good place to flame.

#35 GolfingGuy

GolfingGuy

    What the fuck you looking at Jabroni?

  • Section MODs
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,396 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queens, NY.

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:20 PM

You guys are so sensitive about this team, it's almost as if your team stinks and you guys are tired of hearing about it.

Come on. You've got a great team, and I'm looking forward to watching them play my boyz.

If you don't want to debate about it, no need to be an a-hole.


You're the one who's saying all the redundant stuff we all ready know.

So.....

#36 Drizzle

Drizzle

    Middle Name: Theman

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,872 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haggard Ass Backwoods, NY

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:21 PM

after you started getting pressure you had a 'good' secondary. Or at least what appeared statistically as a good secondary. funny how pressure can do that.
Youre pass defense was the worst in the league thru the first 3 weeks, if I remember correctly, and again later in the season showed some definite weakness when the pressure wasn't there.



1. no shit? Did you hear OBL is dead? 2.refer to no. 1.
so are you gonna find someone in fa or did Goff really do just fine? I doubt both would be the case.

Jerry is more likely to cover our weaknesses in fa, than the tischs covering yours. Our oline won't be a problem.

BTW storm, I came here to talk football. I'm not a troll, I"m not inflammatory. You guys wear your hearts on the old sleeve here don't you?

If you don't want a differing viewpoint/opinion here, let me know and I'll move down the road.

If you guys would rather look at the same old 4 month old posts than debating with another team's fan on a new one, I don't have a problem finding a new place to talk football.


If our only weakness is MLB (which other than running backs who are so damn inconsistent, it really is) then I like our chances better than you covering up 9 weaknesses on offense (Witten and Dez Bryant being the exceptions) and like 6 on defense (pretty solid d line and a couple good linebackers).

And Kevin Boss is a good TE. Eli and Gilbride don't utilize him as the every down receiver because, they, ya know, have quite a few good wide receivers instead of, ya know, one good receiver (and a QB that can't stay upright, or if he can, can't get the ball to anyone, I'm not sure which is the most pressing, though).

And hey, don't get all bent out of shape because you are forgetting to look into the mirror. Your team was horrid last year and will be horrid this year, too. Jason Garrett isn't going to change the fact you have an awful offensive line, an awful quarterback, a group of underachieving running backs, one and half good wide receivers (never know what you're gonna get with Austin) and no secondary.

I didn't call you a troll. I called you a dumbass because, like every other Cowboy fan, you seem to know little to nothing about football, or your own team, for that matter.

#37 Drizzle

Drizzle

    Middle Name: Theman

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,872 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haggard Ass Backwoods, NY

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:22 PM

But it's pretty pointless to come in here and talk about weaknesses when NO TEAM can even fill a weakness at this point. Goff was definitely a serviceable linebacker. An upgrade would be good. How is that different from any other teams views on free agency?

#38 Cowboyz

Cowboyz

    the flaccidator

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 463 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:22 PM

you need to know that no one here cares to add members so the ghost town remarks remain lame. i'm not sensitive to any good smack but yours is not. go to BBI if you want a good place to flame.


again, I haven't flamed anyone. You guys are seriously a bunch of assholes.
I just want to have a good time talking football, when there is no football talk to be found.

#39 GolfingGuy

GolfingGuy

    What the fuck you looking at Jabroni?

  • Section MODs
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,396 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queens, NY.

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:23 PM

again, I haven't flamed anyone. You guys are seriously a bunch of assholes.
I just want to have a good time talking football, when there is no football talk to be found.


Clearly when your first thread is "Cowboys in 2012"

:busted_cop:

#40 fringe

fringe

    Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,639 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:24 PM

haha is this guy real?

I take it you don't remember the '86 giants? Aren't you a giants fan?


problem is '86 was a long time ago. RB's were dominant then too.

problem is the 2 teams without GM's Dallas and oakland- are stuck with what worked in the past while other teams are innovative.

i feel for you Z. at least the rangers are good.

#41 Cowboyz

Cowboyz

    the flaccidator

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 463 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:25 PM

You're the one who's saying all the redundant stuff we all ready know.

So.....


Isn't all talk this time of year redundant?

No one's twisting your arm to read or reply to me, chap.

#42 Cowboyz

Cowboyz

    the flaccidator

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 463 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:27 PM

Clearly when your first thread is "Cowboys in 2012"

:busted_cop:


Yes I'm going out on a limb and saying we win it all in 2012.



Is that inflammatory to you? that's the sensitivity I'm talking about.


It's a discussion starter, and don't look now, but here we are.

#43 Drizzle

Drizzle

    Middle Name: Theman

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,872 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haggard Ass Backwoods, NY

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:27 PM

again, I haven't flamed anyone. You guys are seriously a bunch of assholes.
I just want to have a good time talking football, when there is no football talk to be found.


There's no football talk to be found because there isn't going to be football, lol. Unless, that is, you want to talk about 2010 team weaknesses (ours was mainly special teams and an inconsistent defense) that have yet to be addressed because, um, there's not going to be football.

Come to general discussion, it's a little bit more fun when there's, um, not going to be football.

#44 Cowboyz

Cowboyz

    the flaccidator

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 463 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:37 PM

If our only weakness is MLB (which other than running backs who are so damn inconsistent, it really is) then I like our chances better than you covering up 9 weaknesses on offense (Witten and Dez Bryant being the exceptions) and like 6 on defense (pretty solid d line and a couple good linebackers).

And Kevin Boss is a good TE. Eli and Gilbride don't utilize him as the every down receiver because, they, ya know, have quite a few good wide receivers instead of, ya know, one good receiver (and a QB that can't stay upright, or if he can, can't get the ball to anyone, I'm not sure which is the most pressing, though).

And hey, don't get all bent out of shape because you are forgetting to look into the mirror. Your team was horrid last year and will be horrid this year, too. Jason Garrett isn't going to change the fact you have an awful offensive line, an awful quarterback, a group of underachieving running backs, one and half good wide receivers (never know what you're gonna get with Austin) and no secondary.

I didn't call you a troll. I called you a dumbass because, like every other Cowboy fan, you seem to know little to nothing about football, or your own team, for that matter.



This is what I was looking for. Discussion.

A little biased, but better than the a one-liner from a guy who didn't even know his own team history.

If we have 9 weaknesses on offense, and 6 on defense we wouldn't be competetive at all. No team would. 6-10 would be a miracle.

Kevin Boss might be a good te. They're a dime a dozen. Great one's are harder to come by. Boss is consistently a non-factor, with 2-3 highlights per year.
So let's not get carried away. Maybe Gilbride sees him for what he is, a nonfactor.

I know you didn't call me a troll, I'm saying I'm being treated like one.

#45 Cowboyz

Cowboyz

    the flaccidator

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 463 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 June 2011 - 11:52 PM

There's no football talk to be found because there isn't going to be football, lol. Unless, that is, you want to talk about 2010 team weaknesses (ours was mainly special teams and an inconsistent defense) that have yet to be addressed because, um, there's not going to be football.

Come to general discussion, it's a little bit more fun when there's, um, not going to be football.



There will be football. bank it. both sides too greedy to let that happen.
players are just trying to shorten training camp, before they finally give in.

#46 Cowboyz

Cowboyz

    the flaccidator

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 463 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 June 2011 - 12:03 AM

problem is '86 was a long time ago. RB's were dominant then too.

problem is the 2 teams without GM's Dallas and oakland- are stuck with what worked in the past while other teams are innovative.

i feel for you Z. at least the rangers are good.



WR's led most every team in catches that year, I just double chkd. Sure the running game was every teams focus, but that's neither here nor there. WR were the number one target on most teams.

any other psuedo facts you got for me?

#47 Drizzle

Drizzle

    Middle Name: Theman

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,872 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haggard Ass Backwoods, NY

Posted 12 June 2011 - 12:16 AM

This is what I was looking for. Discussion.

A little biased, but better than the a one-liner from a guy who didn't even know his own team history.

If we have 9 weaknesses on offense, and 6 on defense we wouldn't be competetive at all. No team would. 6-10 would be a miracle.

Kevin Boss might be a good te. They're a dime a dozen. Great one's are harder to come by. Boss is consistently a non-factor, with 2-3 highlights per year.
So let's not get carried away. Maybe Gilbride sees him for what he is, a nonfactor.

I know you didn't call me a troll, I'm saying I'm being treated like one.


I think given the right circumstances and team philosophy, Boss would excel. Look at, as someone mentioned, Shiancoe on the Vikings. He wasn't utilized because we had Shockey (who also wasn't used to his potential)...but throw him on the right team (Brett Favre made a career out of making good tight ends great) and he excelled. I think the same would be true for Boss. Unfortunately, we don't need him much and it's a shame because he's a tough son of a bitch over the middle and a real gamer. He's come up big for us in several games when we needed it most. None bigger than in the Super Bowl. The Giants have been straying away from the Tight End as an every game focal offensive weapon since Shockey. Now we have probably 3-4 starting caliber wide receivers and, if not, a few very good number 3 options if they were on any other team.

The Gmen just lack consistency on both sides of the ball. And I, until he's gone, will blame Gilbride for that. Manning shares some blame in that, too, because he's one of the biggest inconsistencies on the team. The talent is there (presuming we can keep guys like Bradshaw and Steve Smith on for the long term). I really didn't see middle linebacker as a glaring weakness on defense, though I know many of the guys here did as well as, obviously, fans and analysts from around the league. I thought a big problem was an inconsistent pass rush (all the members on here will praise Osi but the dude had 11.5 sacks....8 of them came in the first 6 games.....) and inconsistency yet again in the secondary...especially safety. I think you can explain a lot of it on Fewell being new, a safety coming off a pretty serious injury (Phillips), and another safety (a very overrated safety, in my opinion) still learning the playbook (Rolle). Corey Webster was solid as ever and so was Terrell Thomas, but there were games where they gave up big plays and plays they got burnt on.

#48 fringe

fringe

    Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,639 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 12 June 2011 - 12:32 AM

WR's led most every team in catches that year, I just double chkd. Sure the running game was every teams focus, but that's neither here nor there. WR were the number one target on most teams.

any other psuedo facts you got for me?


i thought you were touting the TE's as dominant? i thought you brought up the giants of 1986 to back up your TE argument. I must've been seeing things. too much wine today.

#49 Virginia Giant

Virginia Giant

    Real Virginian

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,644 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Wilderness of Virginia

Posted 12 June 2011 - 02:15 AM

If '07 was a fluke, at least Giants fans have a fluke season to reflect on in the last, what, working on 20 years? Goff is serviceable, obviously that is a position that can be upgraded, but Goff is fine at mlb.

The Giants as a whole are closer to winning the super bowl than the Cowboys.

#50 Tree

Tree

    International Gunslinger of Science

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canuckistan

Posted 12 June 2011 - 02:30 AM

haha is this guy real?

I take it you don't remember the '86 giants? Aren't you a giants fan?

86? Really? I thought we were discussing the present?

Dallas, Cleveland, San Fransisco, Oakland...great company you're in there.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users