Search results

But who in the world EVER makes this type of financial commitment to a broken down old quarterback who can't even run anymore?

By the way am I the only one who is glad we don't have a collarbone issue? Tony's rebuilt collarbone is really holding up surprisingly well!

That one exists as well. But the SI cover one goes back to the 50s. Here's explanation, with many included examples. Sports Illustrated cover jinx - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wow can you please post those other two covers? And, welcome to The U!

I just realized - Does making the cover of SI jinx Dak?

Right, my whole gripe is you have to skim past three or four paragraphs of self-aggrandizement, to get to the frikkin point of the article. He writes for his own gratification and self importance primarily, not for the reader. The reader doesn't give two shits about him. Ironically, he laments...

Yeah perish the thought we'd ever have a third hall of famer with that number.

How you must wade through the first 3-4 paragraphs of anything he writes being about HIM. In order to get to the topic.

Clearly you need to read Jimmy's book, where he explains how you can build the best possible roster and have the best talent, but if the chemistry isn't there, you will fail. The player personnel talent level is much more in parity today then it was in the 80s-90s. It ain't JUST the talent that...

But, we somehow trust his judgement and decisions keeping Romo as a UDFA, re-signing Romo to his massive silly contract, drafting then re-signing Dez. You like to cite Jerry as the overall problem, but he gets no credit for Romo and Dez. And I didn't say they were the reason for the losing. I...

I don't actually hate either of them. I am merely over them. To me they both represent a losing culture that we're all now seeing has changed. It's like the long time black cloud that really isn't that much noticed until it's lifted. And you're like, 'wow, that sucked.'

He had Simms actually saying "Emmitt Smith power combined with Tony Dorsett speed." Coming from a guy who played when both were playing. I still really really wish they had given him #22.

What a great article. Refreshing to see one in which the first several paragraphs weren't about the writer instead of the subject. (Strum, anyone? SO fucking sick of that idiot.) It does the heart good and really warms my cackles to see this verification of the initial vibe I got from Dak -...

Yes, this. Therefore rendering Romo pretty much superfluous and as you point out, actually more limited of a offense and things a defense needs to prepare for, with him in there.

Yep I for one really appreciate the consistent 8-8 stuff. Not his fault of course, his W-L record is 80-53 as a starter. Without him carrying the team it woulda been 4-12 or worse, all those years. But Tony's done quite well for himself, 50 million dollars-plus well. He still has some good...

In a stunning reversal of fortune, showing how this is a parity-driven league and the era of dynasties is long over. They dropped their 4th game tonight, this time to lowly Tampa - and at HOME no less.

True dat. But even vs. Chicago, he wasn't checking into pass plays that I noticed. Of course we don't know what the original play calls are, so it's a shaky assumption.

Not anything like Romo's propensity, but more and more he is checking into running plays and also adjusting protection more. Really haven't seen him check into a pass play yet.

Yes, we still get to complain.

And my pick is again, DALLAS. Green Bay's secondary is suspect and can be exploited by Dak. Dallas' running game is bruising and dominant and has quick-strike capability. Say what you want about our defense, but it somehow pretty much bottled up one of the better offenses in the game vs. Cincy...