Search results

Sure you do. It often takes a offseason of intense film and tendencies study to get the correct book on new players. You're only 5 wins better than 8-8, sneaking up on people accounts for those 5 wins.

You don't know what every player on the team knows, and you don't know what he was dedicated to. Other "guys" who were spotty performers? Right, no. You're comparing Whitehead to superstars. I am comparing Whitehead to other marginal, spotty players we KEPT over and over again, and Whitehead IS...

The numbers for the one, fluke season when we were sneaking up on people with a new QB and a new RB they had no book on. We won't be sneaking up on anyone this year. Might as well brace yourself for the 7-9 season that is looming.

THIS forum is the ONLY place on the web with "experts." LOL That wasn't your meter. Your meter was people thinking he was "garbage." Very few people anywhere were "positive" on the total unknown Dak, until he started playing with a star on his hat.

You're a master of the obvious, but you're also speculating. The bottom line is, with the established pattern of them hanging on to worthless players year after year, it is VERY safe to assume Whitehead was going to be there until final cuts, barring injury (which has happened) to guys like...

Minus the false crime report, he would have been there until the final cutdown, and would again have made the 53 man roster given a key injury or two. Even you should be smart enough to know that. They kneejerk fucking cut him because of a false police report that they didn't bother waiting to...

It was not. It is a 8-8 team that finished with a aberrant winning record, as it has been wont to do in some odd years since Garrett took over. We won't be sneaking up on anyone this year. Might as well brace yourself for the 7-9 season that is looming. Great writeup otherwise though. Good...

I don't remember seeing any of that.

I fixed that for you. It doesn't matter really, one fuck who was coaching the team while Romo quarterbacked. He was still going to be a bad risk taker, a china doll just like Parcells said, and just a yuk-yuk good ole boy, small college kid made good. That's really as far as - deep inside - he...

You should be celebrating how well he knows Garrett's system. 3 and out, three and out, three and out.

Let's not start pretending Romo is some victim here, and that he didn't have a hand in his own failures and demise.

Which, is silly. What they actually do is call everything that doesn't fit their meter of "positive," negative. Pretending that even just plain ole bare facts, are 'negative' if they're not necessarily nice. Dishonest with themselves.

You should be celebrating how well he knows Garrett's system. 3 and out, three and out, three and out.

That's not far off from the formula I devised, for 8-8 seasons. I just followed tendencies of a Garrett-coached team. Any 11-plus win seasons he has, are just aberrations. 1.) We suck in the opener, out of shape and not prepared for the opponent. 1 loss. 2.) In 8-8 seasons we typically split...

Two words: Dallas' Defense. Makes every scrub QB look like Payton Manning in his prime.

We have a cockeyed optimist in the house!

I don't care if it's the Palo Duro Dons. It's a L.

We always SUCK after the bye week with Ginger. In fact, after ANY time off with him at the helm. That's a essential assumption of the formula. I threw the GB win in there merely as a aberration. Nonsense. BUT, that might be how you get your 8-8. Zeke's not gonna be in shape, he probably fights...

I applied a formula to pick wins and losses on the 2017 schedule. It assumes no major injuries for either team. First of all, we're never in shape or prepared for the opener. So that's a L. Week 2 at Denver, one of the best defenses around. No Zeke, we're still not in shape, we falter in the...

So, the game was December 6th. What's significant about that?