Helman: Dez - “We Want It More” Than We Did During 8-8 Seasons

[Genghis Khan]

the team didnt underachieve the last 3 years..they just weren't good. It's amazing what happens when you put draft picks into your offensive line and they remain healthy. We've been saying it for years. We aren't a super bowl team this year either until we start plugging in the necessary pieces on defense, but we have definitely improved astronomically from the past 10 years

The offensive line performed at a similar level last year. Look at the numbers. Look at what green bay said after the game last year.

The team wasn't run in the best way.

 

[1bigfan13]

The offensive line performed at a similar level last year. Look at the numbers. Look at what green bay said after the game last year.

The team wasn't run in the best way.

Agreed. The Cowboys probably left at least 2 wins on the table in each of the past 3 seasons; largely due to poor game management by the HC.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I think you are conflating two different concepts.

You are what your record says you are is about facing reality. And it's true; they were 8-8 teams. That's all they were.

But the question is, why are you what you are?

If I remember correctly, Parcells when he said that was referring to the notion that the 2002 team was better than the record indicated. Then he promptly took largely the same team to the playoffs in 2003. That whole thing demonstrates the difference between "you are what your record says you are" and a team that is capable of more under the right direction.

The 8-8 teams were capable of more under better direction.

Exactly. That Parcells quote was more about the dreadful teams he was always taking over not buying into the idea that they were victims of bad luck, or bad calls, or were otherwise actually much better than their record indicated. He said that so they'd understand that everyone was replaceable and they'd better work their tails off and listen to him if they wanted to turn things around.

 

[GForce78NJ]

The offensive line performed at a similar level last year. Look at the numbers. Look at what green bay said after the game last year.

The team wasn't run in the best way.

while I think you are definitely right about how the team was not managed well at all, you can't say Zack Martin isnt a HUGE upgrade over Nate Livings/Mackenzie Bernedau. Frederick has another year of experience, Doug Free is playing better than last year (although he was good last year too).

We also left more than 2 wins on the board last year, 4 games we lost by no more than 6pts. I'm personally happy not to see as many fade routes from the 2.

 

[Genghis Khan]

while I think you are definitely right about how the team was not managed well at all, you can't say Zack Martin isnt a HUGE upgrade over Nate Livings/Mackenzie Bernedau. Frederick has another year of experience, Doug Free is playing better than last year (although he was good last year too).

We also left more than 2 wins on the board last year, 4 games we lost by no more than 6pts. I'm personally happy not to see as many fade routes from the 2.

The o-line is better than last year for the reasons you indicated. My only point is that they were very good last year, particularly run blocking, and fully capable of doing last year what they are doing now.

 

[L.T. Fan]

The o-line is better than last year for the reasons you indicated. My only point is that they were very good last year, particularly run blocking, and fully capable of doing last year what they are doing now.

Yeah it's pretty simple. The teams of the past three years could have done better I believe with properly handling. When you think out it they did pretty well with less than average management and handling. The biggest difference in then and now is that personnel are being utilized better. Having said that there is still untapped potential on the roster that needs to be used. Garrett is learning but he has a way to go. Sure the OL personnel is better but they are also just this season started to be used to maximize the talents of others. Garrett was too narrow to see the big picture. He did finally enlist help. Hopefully the ideology will be to stay with the strength within the lineup.

 

[Jiggyfly]

I am not saying this team does not work harder but the real reason this team has been 8-8 is coaching, the Green Bay game last year and the inability to beat the blitz the year before in Washington.

Those are the most egregious, but I can point out 4 other games easily.

 

[GForce78NJ]

I hate to say it because I normally hate the Percy Harvin type of players for my team, but we could use a home-run hitter in that type of role, possibly as a 3rd WR.

 

[Texas Ace]

Not saying we will win it all this year, but I don't see a juggernaut team out there that is just clearly better than everyone else...so it is pretty wide open. Green Bay is the scariest team right now IMO...and I think we could definitely hang with them.

Green Bay scares me, but it's funny how so many pundits have them as this dominating powerhouse when they just got beat by 4-6 New Orleans 2 weeks ago.

They'd be a matchup nightmare for us, but they can be beat.

 

[Jiggyfly]

Green Bay scares be, but it's funny how so many pundits have then as this dominating powerhouse when they just hit beat by 4-6 New Orleans 2 weeks ago.

They'd be a matchup nightmare for us, but they can be beat.

They scare me, but they have flaws like we do, and unlike us we could make them 1 dimensional of offense.

I am going to be really pissed if we swoon this year because the NFC is wide open.

 

[Carp]

Green Bay scares me, but it's funny how so many pundits have them as this dominating powerhouse when they just got beat by 4-6 New Orleans 2 weeks ago.

They'd be a matchup nightmare for us, but they can be beat.

Things could change, but at this point they are playing the best football out there. NE can make an argument too, but the way that GB is crushing teams now is god damn ridiculous.

BTW...any team we play can be beat if we follow the gameplan that we had against Seattle...run the ball and limit mistakes.

 

[1bigfan13]

Green Bay scares me, but it's funny how so many pundits have them as this dominating powerhouse when they just got beat by 4-6 New Orleans 2 weeks ago.

They'd be a matchup nightmare for us, but they can be beat.

Their passing game is off the charts but I still think it would be a toss up between the Cowboys and Packers.

Lacy hasn't been anything special so I'm not too concerned about their running game and their defense has been kind of suspect. Especially their rush defense. Our OL and Murray would chew them up.

 

[Simpleton]

I think I'd rather play Green Bay on the road than in Dallas. Rodgers has a history of poor play in extreme cold in the playoffs, he threw 9 TD's against 0 INT's through 3 of the 4 games in the playoffs in 2010, including a performance where he chewed up Pittsburgh in the Super Bowl, and I believe they had the best defense in the league that year. However in the NFC Championship a few weeks before in Chicago, he only went 17/30 for 244 yards, 0 TD's and 2 INT's.

The year they went 15-1 they lost their first playoff game at home against the Giants with Rodgers going 26/46 for 264 yards, 2 TD's and 1 INT, not terrible but certainly not the type of performance he usually puts up. Then last year against the Niners he only went 17/26 for 177 yards, 1 TD and no picks.

Obviously these were strong defenses he was going up against too but I think that Super Bowl year really shows how the cold can affect him. Aside from the Chicago game he had one of the best playoff runs for a QB ever but he damn near lost the NFC Championship to a backup in the cold of Chicago.

Our defense isn't on the level of those others but we have the run game to control a game in those conditions. I'm not totally sure I'd rather play them in Green Bay than Dallas but I'm leaning that way.

 

[jsmith6919]

I think I'd rather play Green Bay on the road than in Dallas. Rodgers has a history of poor play in extreme cold in the playoffs, he threw 9 TD's against 0 INT's through 3 of the 4 games in the playoffs in 2010, including a performance where he chewed up Pittsburgh in the Super Bowl, and I believe they had the best defense in the league that year. However in the NFC Championship a few weeks before in Chicago, he only went 17/30 for 244 yards, 0 TD's and 2 INT's.

The year they went 15-1 they lost their first playoff game at home against the Giants with Rodgers going 26/46 for 264 yards, 2 TD's and 1 INT, not terrible but certainly not the type of performance he usually puts up. Then last year against the Niners he only went 17/26 for 177 yards, 1 TD and no picks.

Obviously these were strong defenses he was going up against too but I think that Super Bowl year really shows how the cold can affect him. Aside from the Chicago game he had one of the best playoff runs for a QB ever but he damn near lost the NFC Championship to a backup in the cold of Chicago.

Our defense isn't on the level of those others but we have the run game to control a game in those conditions. I'm not totally sure I'd rather play them in Green Bay than Dallas but I'm leaning that way.

I don't get this, yes Rodgers had a bad game in the cold but there's noway that whole team isn't better acclimated to it than ours. Just look at how miserable they all looked when we played Chicago last year.

 

[Simpleton]

I don't get this, yes Rodgers had a bad game in the cold but there's noway that whole team isn't better acclimated to it than ours. Just look at how miserable they all looked when we played Chicago last year.

He's had a bad game almost every time he's played in extreme cold in the playoffs, we'll see how we look in Chicago this year.

 

[data]

To be expected at your age.

BOOM

HEYOOOOOOO

STAY DOWN

I will provide well-deserved props for this.