Search results

It hasn't experienced success - by Roger Staubach's canon definition of a "successful" Dallas Cowboys season - since 1995. The ONLY successful Dallas Cowboys season, according to canon Staubach, is one that ends with hoisting the Lombardi Trophy. 12-4 is a decent season, not a successful one...

No we are not. We are pointing out it's uniquely Garrett.

I was watching that - he seemed to have more purpose, and definitely had more zip on the ball.

Nobody ever said it is ALL luck. Your problem is you are unable to debate at all, without constantly moving goal posts and changing what the opponent says - even making stuff for the opponent to allegedly have said, out of whole cloth. Garrett NOW is different from Garrett THEN in one respect...

So, you answer with a bunch of crap not at all related to the statements and so full of straw it's a major fire hazard. Which is about what I've decided you are, just a flame baiter. No one said "icing the kicker" is always successful. Someone pointed out that Garrett ICED HIS OWN KICKER. Is...

I asked because you were pouring on the Garrett praise, and wondered if you even know his record. And now you say you don't know. Who's childlike and ignorant here?

You're making a awful lot of assumptions about someone you don't even know based on almost zero information. Were I one to do that, I would be saying the same things about you cheerleading for what everyone pretty much knows is a mediocre coach - Garrett. You "see what's being built here" with...

No, they're not. They think they have the committee they need for the 300 carries they plan to split between them.

Because like most of us, you couldn't conceive of the massive amount of breaks this team was going to get, and no way does anyone conceive of a back in a Garrett coached team getting 400 carries. All of this amounted to only four more wins.

I haven't seen anyone here yet that fits this qual. You pretend they don't carefully construct what they're going to say publicly. Every player on every team parrots the coach. Meanwhile you carefully avoid answering any of the quite legitimate questions I've posed. What exactly, are the...

Again you fail to see the difference between legitimate skepticism and just negativity for the sake of negativity. And we're NOT "winning now." We won four more games last year than the previous three. "Winning now" is when this happens over at least a couple more years, consistently. And it's...

This was back when they were still trying to lie to us about Tony's back, but it does go to the core of Garrett in my opinion. He's simply not a running game believer.

It's a Vimeo embed, if you're on a phone it might not render.

That was a big play really stabbed them in the heart.

Because none of it is defensible, and you already forgot you already tried to defend it by saying "Garrett doesn't do that but whatever" when the facts are, he does it all the time. Did you forget he said after the Tennessee game last year that running the ball too much was messing Romo's...

Not play calling anymore. How many coaches in the history of the NFL were offensive coordinators, were promoted to HC and still called the plays, then had the play calling duties stripped? ONE. What exactly, are the advantages Garrett gives us on game day? Name just one please. What's his...

That's right this is two different eras we're talking about. Pre and post salary cap. Hey Statman, let's limit your entire premise to the post salary cap era, shall we? Let's start this in 1996 how bout?

No one's said this. You are arguing a straw man here.

Statman I am forced to agree with the bolded above and no, it's not a question of semantics, it is a question of correct definitions of words. Use the right terms.

He's HOW MUCH over .500? Winning? When this team wins it is in spite of Garrett, not in any way because of.