Sorry JGF

[fringe]

We really haven't beaten anyone other than the teams we should beat. I don't think we're #4- maybe #4 in the NFC.

[Lubeck]

We really haven't beaten anyone other than the teams we should beat. I don't think we're #4- maybe #4 in the NFC.

 

That is a hellava lot more than we have done in recent years.

[fringe]

That is a hellava lot more than we have done in recent years.

if you look at last year's record, you'll see the same. we beat everyone worse than us and lost to everyone better. we have an easier schedule this year.

[osi724dasack]

like I said...until we beat Dallas, im not even thinking about any success this year...

 

if we lose to dallas, and then win 4 of 5...then I wouldnt rule out success

[BIGBLUE01]

We really haven't beaten anyone other than the teams we should beat. I don't think we're #4- maybe #4 in the NFC.

 

Blunatic, for someone I respect on this board, I cant believe the falseness you are displaying here, let me put it in perspective:

 

Differences from last yr are that yes, we did beat the bad teams and lose to the good. This year, we are POUNDING the teams we should beat (ala NE) and we have only lost to two good teams thus far, and that was the 1st two games of the season. You can never judge a team until at LEAST, 3 games into a season. The major difference this season, we beat a good team w/ a winning record(Wash), something the Cowgirlz have yet to do. They have played mostly crappy teams, aside from us and the Pats. We barely lost a shootout to them and the Pats destroyed em. Everyone else theyve played stunk, and they barely got by two of em(Buf and Minny)

[BadEgg]

like I said...until we beat Dallas, im not even thinking about any success this year...

 

if we lose to dallas, and then win 4 of 5...then I wouldnt rule out success

 

I think I agree with what you are saying. The Giants/Dallas game will be overhyped but, in the big picture, I don't think it's a huge game.

 

Dallas comes back from the bye playing 3 straight NFC east opponents. They need to win 2 of 3. I could care less who those 2 wins come against, as long as they win 2. And the Giants wouldn't be a bad one to lose since the Giants are playing better than Wash and Philly, and the Cowboys have already beaten the Giants.

 

I also think its tough to sweep NFC east teams in any given year. If Dallas splits with their NFC east opponents, and wins the rest of their games, they're 12-4, and I'll take it. That's atleast good enough for a home playoff game. In fact, 11-5 isn't horrible.

 

I think the same is true with the Giants, if they lose to the Cowboys but bounce back and win the rest of their NFC East games, that game will not have great relevance.

 

Interestingly, the game that might come back to haunt the Giants is the Packers game.

 

In my opinion, the two biggest games the Cowboys have played this season were the Giants and the Vikings. They had to win at home on opening night. And they had to beat the Vikings after losing to the Pats at home. Frankly, I don't care how they beat the Vikings or what the finally score was, it would have been a disaster to lose that game. That Vikings game was much more important than the over-hyped Patriots game.

 

And, if Adrian Peterson and the Vikings offesive line is healthy when you guys play them, I would not overlook them. The Giants should win, but Peterson is definetly a player that can changes games by himself.

[BIGBLUE01]

I think I agree with what you are saying. The Giants/Dallas game will be overhyped but, in the big picture, I don't think it's a huge game.

 

Dallas comes back from the bye playing 3 straight NFC east opponents. They need to win 2 of 3. I could care less who those 2 wins come against, as long as they win 2. And the Giants wouldn't be a bad one to lose since the Giants are playing better than Wash and Philly, and the Cowboys have already beaten the Giants.

 

I also think its tough to sweep NFC east teams in any given year. If Dallas splits with their NFC east opponents, and wins the rest of their games, they're 12-4, and I'll take it. That's atleast good enough for a home playoff game. In fact, 11-5 isn't horrible.

 

I think the same is true with the Giants, if they lose to the Cowboys but bounce back and win the rest of their NFC East games, that game will not have great relevance.

 

Interestingly, the game that might come back to haunt the Giants is the Packers game.

 

In my opinion, the two biggest games the Cowboys have played this season were the Giants and the Vikings. They had to win at home on opening night. And they had to beat the Vikings after losing to the Pats at home. Frankly, I don't care how they beat the Vikings or what the finally score was, it would have been a disaster to lose that game. That Vikings game was much more important than the over-hyped Patriots game.

 

And, if Adrian Peterson and the Vikings offesive line is healthy when you guys play them, I would not overlook them. The Giants should win, but Peterson is definetly a player that can changes games by himself.

 

How can you say that our game would have no great relevance? So your saying if Dallas sweeps us, but in the end we are close in records battling for the div. or a playoff spot, that wouldnt make a difference?

 

Agreed on the Packer game. if anything, thatll be the one to haunt us. But I fully believe they got off to a good start, and it wont last.

 

And the only reason your saying the Pats game was overhyped is because you lost. That was a big game, in the sense that it showed where the cowboys stand. They are not in the same league as Indy and NE, they are in the thick of it with most of the NFC teams.

[Lubeck]

How can you say that our game would have no great relevance?

 

He is already working on excuses.

[BIGBLUE01]

He is already working on excuses.

 

LOL, thats why the long absences, eh?

[fringe]

Blunatic, for someone I respect on this board, I cant believe the falseness you are displaying here, let me put it in perspective:

 

Differences from last yr are that yes, we did beat the bad teams and lose to the good. This year, we are POUNDING the teams we should beat (ala NE) and we have only lost to two good teams thus far, and that was the 1st two games of the season. You can never judge a team until at LEAST, 3 games into a season. The major difference this season, we beat a good team w/ a winning record(Wash), something the Cowgirlz have yet to do. They have played mostly crappy teams, aside from us and the Pats. We barely lost a shootout to them and the Pats destroyed em. Everyone else theyve played stunk, and they barely got by two of em(Buf and Minny)

thank you for respecting me but i didnt display falseness-just an opinion- we haven't really breaten anyone yet. when we do, i'll have a different opinion. don't fall for the hype.

 

[Herc]

you guys seriously think the colts are better than the pats?????

[Virginia Giant]

you guys seriously think the colts are better than the pats?????

I have made 2 garuntees this year.

 

 

1: VT will beat Boston College

 

 

2: Colts will beat Pats.

[Herc]

that's fine, i wont be surprised at all if the colts beat the pats, the colts are an amazing team--im just saying the better team doesn't always win in football

[Virginia Giant]

that's fine, i wont be surprised at all if the colts beat the pats, the colts are an amazing team--im just saying the better team doesn't always win in football

I agree the beter team doesn't always win, and both are awesome teams. My reasoning is when they play, both in a couple weeks and if they play in the playoffs, the game/s will likely become a shootout, and I'll put my money on Peyton coming out ahead over Brady if so.

[BIGBLUE01]

thank you for respecting me but i didnt display falseness-just an opinion- we haven't really breaten anyone yet. when we do, i'll have a different opinion. don't fall for the hype.

 

You dont think the Redskins are a good team? Or even decent? They have a winning record and we beat em. Something the cowgirlz havent done, beat a team w/ a winning record. Plus, the way we played the cowboys? Our D wasnt with the program yet and we lost a shootout. Can you imagine what were gonna do to them next time we play?

 

Sorry, Im all about the hype this time, its too different.

[BadEgg]

You dont think the Redskins are a good team? Or even decent? They have a winning record and we beat em. Something the cowgirlz havent done, beat a team w/ a winning record. Plus, the way we played the cowboys? Our D wasnt with the program yet and we lost a shootout. Can you imagine what were gonna do to them next time we play?

 

Sorry, Im all about the hype this time, its too different.

 

Bigblue, take off the Osi jersey and think before you write. You are all about hype and excuses. Allow me to illustrate:

 

Hype: The Giants beat the Redskins. These are not the John Riggins and Joe Theisman Redskins. These are the Jason Campbell Redskins who, in all likelyhood, will struggle to make the playoffs and will probably be one and done if they do. And, the last time I checked, neither Joe Montana or Jerry Rice were playing in the meadowlands last Sunday. Good lord, Westbrook was MIA the Eagles game. Do we really need to address the Jets or the Falcons?

 

Fact: The Giants could have made a statement by beating the Cowboys in their own backyard, and they fell short.

 

Fact: The Giants could have made a statement by beating the Packers in their home opener, and they got owned.

 

Excuse: Our defense was not "up to speed" early in the season. What?

 

Fact: Nearly every team, in one facit of the game or another, is not "up to speed" on opening day. And speaking of up to speed, the Cowboys were also learning a new system without a LB (Burnett), their best pass rusher (Ellis), and they're best CB (Newman). And their nose takle (Ferguson) played about a quarter. Yes, when you run a 3-4 defense, the nose tackle is somewhat important...

 

Question: Do you really think Newman or Henry (provided he is healthy) are going to give Burress 12 yard cushions all day long in the Meadowlands?

 

You have to give the Giants credit for winning games, and I'm not arguing that the Cowboys have beat better teams, but the truth of the matter is that, regardless of what occurs in the meadowlands, we probably will not know how good either the Cowboys or Giants are until late December.

[Nas]

Badegg, I think it's safe to say that your team and our team are neck 'n neck. Some pick the Giants as the better team and some pick Dallas. I feel even though you guys won the first game, that we are NOW the better team. But since you're 1) one game ahead of us and 2) you beat us head to head... you have the bragging rights.

 

Both teams have great offenses but defensively, the Giants are head 'n shoulders above the boys.

 

Right now I'm worried about a classic trap game in London. When that game is over, I will pay attention to Dallas-Giants game.

 

[BIGBLUE01]

Bigblue, take off the Osi jersey and think before you write. You are all about hype and excuses. Allow me to illustrate:

 

Hype: The Giants beat the Redskins. These are not the John Riggins and Joe Theisman Redskins. These are the Jason Campbell Redskins who, in all likelyhood, will struggle to make the playoffs and will probably be one and done if they do. And, the last time I checked, neither Joe Montana or Jerry Rice were playing in the meadowlands last Sunday. Good lord, Westbrook was MIA the Eagles game. Do we really need to address the Jets or the Falcons?

 

Fact: The Giants could have made a statement by beating the Cowboys in their own backyard, and they fell short.

 

Fact: The Giants could have made a statement by beating the Packers in their home opener, and they got owned.

 

Excuse: Our defense was not "up to speed" early in the season. What?

 

Fact: Nearly every team, in one facit of the game or another, is not "up to speed" on opening day. And speaking of up to speed, the Cowboys were also learning a new system without a LB (Burnett), their best pass rusher (Ellis), and they're best CB (Newman). And their nose takle (Ferguson) played about a quarter. Yes, when you run a 3-4 defense, the nose tackle is somewhat important...

 

Question: Do you really think Newman or Henry (provided he is healthy) are going to give Burress 12 yard cushions all day long in the Meadowlands?

 

You have to give the Giants credit for winning games, and I'm not arguing that the Cowboys have beat better teams, but the truth of the matter is that, regardless of what occurs in the meadowlands, we probably will not know how good either the Cowboys or Giants are until late December.

 

 

Yeah the Cowboys were learning a system, that they still havent learned. You dont find that stuff out until 3 or 4 games into the season. Thats why its not an excuse, its fact. You need to rephrase that one.

 

And Burress wont be getting cushions like that, youre right. What you failed to mention was, that Plax will just take those receptions, none of your scrub secondary players have a choice in that matter.

 

And my point about the Skins is, you can say what you want, and reality is, they have and have had all season, a winning record. if you gotta give credit to the Gmen, you gotta give credit to the Skins for winning games. The only team worth a crap that Dallas beat, is us. And in the first game, with all were facing, we barely lost a shootoout. Plus, we havent been BARELY getting by scrub teams(i.e. BUF, MINNY). Anyways egg, I respect your opinions, I rather like talking football with you now, you know what youre talking about. But if you measure up the boys and Giants up to now, they are rather close, with the edge going to the Giants.

[ksm7]

How can you say that our game would have no great relevance? So your saying if Dallas sweeps us, but in the end we are close in records battling for the div. or a playoff spot, that wouldnt make a difference?

 

Agreed on the Packer game. if anything, thatll be the one to haunt us. But I fully believe they got off to a good start, and it wont last.

 

And the only reason your saying the Pats game was overhyped is because you lost. That was a big game, in the sense that it showed where the cowboys stand. They are not in the same league as Indy and NE, they are in the thick of it with most of the NFC teams.

 

As usual, the Dog will add that this is not what he said - what he said is if the giants lose that game, and go on to win the next four or five, that game will ultimately have no relavance, in that most likely that would be enough to have the giants win the division...or at least be in the playoffs...it is called making an inference from text...

[BIGBLUE01]

As usual, the Dog will add that this is not what he said - what he said is if the giants lose that game, and go on to win the next four or five, that game will ultimately have no relavance, in that most likely that would be enough to have the giants win the division...or at least be in the playoffs...it is called making an inference from text...

 

No, what you are saying is called..."mumbo jumbo crap".

 

He clearly said what I stated, the fact that you have to try anyway to make me look like Im not understanding, shows you must have some kinda crush on me. Sorry dog, I dont roll that way. Besides, Im taken.

 

Let me help you understand, since you ride the short bus. IF....IF....IF, being the key word, IF the Giants lose that game, and go on to win the rest. IF, do you get it now schmucky? What happens if we win that game, and then end up being tied w/ Dallas for the division.? You dont think this game will have relevance? See, There are many scenarios at this point of the season, but all of them would be a better scenario if we win that game.