2021 Random Cowboys Stuff Thread

[Genghis Khan]

I could go with this list, too. I am always back and forth on the Eagles and Redskins. Only thing that tips the boat is the DTC.

If I didn't live in this infernal area I'd probably feel differently.

Also helps that the Redskins have been mostly bad and a league embarrassment for 20 or so years.

 

[data]

1. Eagles
2. Redskins
3. Giants
4. SF
5. Packers

I view the Packers and 49ers are more fierce rivals than the Giants. Seems more frequent that vs Packers or vs 49ers with something at stake occurs.


Packers 8 playoff games: NFCC in Cotton Bowl with Don Meredith end zone INT, Ice Bowl, 1982 Div, 1993 playoffs, 1994 playoffs, 1995 NFCC, 2014 Dez catch, 2016 Div

49ers 6 NFCC: NFCC 1970, NFCC 1971, The Catch, 1992 NFCC, 1993 NFCC, 1994 NFCC

There's an NFL Films documentary dedicated to Dallas vs SF.

-----

For the most part, Cowboys and Giants historically seem to alternate competitiveness. We've only met the Giants once in the postseason (2007). Quick glance and both teams making the playoffs in the last 50 years has happened maybe 5 times.

Recently, 1993 Emmitt game, 2007 Div Round, 2011 Week 17 Do-or-Die are important games.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I view the Packers and 49ers are more fierce rivals than the Giants. Seems more frequent that vs Packers or vs 49ers with something at stake occurs.

For the most part, Cowboys and Giants seem to alternate competitiveness. We've only met the Giants once in the postseason. Quick glance and both teams making the playoffs in the last 50 years has happened maybe 5 times.

Recently, 1993 Emmitt game, 2007 Div Round, 2011 Week 17 Do-or-Die are important games.

Just off top of my head:
Packers 7 playoff games: NFCC in Cotton Bowl with Don Meredith end zone INT, Ice Bowl, 1993 playoffs, 1994 playoffs, 1995 NFCC, 2014 Dez catch, 2016 Div

49ers 6 NFCC: NFCC 1970, NFCC 1971, The Catch, 1992 NFCC, 1993 NFCC, 1994 NFCC

There's an NFL Films documentary dedicated to Dallas vs SF.

It's just hard for me to put a non-division rival above a division rival right now.

The Coughlin Giants for example were a thorn in our side both in season and the playoffs.

Meanwhile we haven't had a meaningful game against SF in almost 30 years.

We have of course against the Packers, but even at that I feel like the 07 team that lost to the Giants had a better overall chance than the 14 or 16 teams that lost to the Packers. Even if the chances are equal, competing for divisions and facing them twice a year every year puts the Giants over the top for me.

If we were still getting deep in the playoffs consistently (or at all for that matter) I'd probably rank things differently.

 

[data]

It's just hard for me to put a non-division rival above a division rival right now.

The Coughlin Giants for example were a thorn in our side both in season and the playoffs.

Meanwhile we haven't had a meaningful game against SF in almost 30 years.

We have of course against the Packers, but even at that I feel like the 07 team that lost to the Giants had a better overall chance than the 14 or 16 teams that lost to the Packers. Even if the chances are equal, competing for divisions and facing them twice a year ever year puts the Giants over the top for me.

If we were still getting deep in the playoffs consistently (or at all for that matter) I'd probably rank things differently.

I get what you're saying, just putting a perspective on it going all the way back to to 1970.

When was the last time we had a meaningful game vs Washington, though? Once in 2012 or whatever? Then it goes back to 1992/1993 regular season. Going by that 2007 logic, why not rank the Giants over Washington?

 

[p1_]

Pretty stupid and immature to reference how much he's being paid.

I didn’t interpret it that way. I saw it as him saying what matters what Jerry thinks, and not the dumbass rabble. The one that wants Pollard to start over Zeke. And if that’s true, I would agree with him. Jerry signs the checks, his opinion matters most. Not the rabble.

 

[Simpleton]

I didn’t interpret it that way. I saw it as him saying what matters what Jerry thinks, and not the dumbass rabble. The one that wants Pollard to start over Zeke. And if that’s true, I would agree with him. Jerry signs the checks, his opinion matters most. Not the rabble.

Still not great.

If he said the coaches are who matter then great but he basically said all that matters is his salary/what those paying him think.

Which is true mostly, but also a symptom of this teams dysfunction under Jerry.

 

[bbgun]

Those who get paid ... play. Doesn't matter if their understudy is better.

 

[shoop]

I put the Eagles first based on the last 20 years.

Agreed, can't stand them.

Honestly at this point I don't view anyone outside of the division as a "rival". The team hasn't been relevant in a long time. SF, GB, and Pit are all based on playoffs and SBs.

 

[Smitty]

While this is probably true I'm already tired of the bullshit clamoring from the fans and media who think they're being smart by calling for Pollard to start.

At the end of the day Pollard can't handle 20-25 touches every game for 17 weeks, he needs someone like Elliott to split time with and keep him fresh so he can be most impactful. If I had to pick only one of them to be the bell cow it'd still be Elliott because I think Pollard is literally incapable of doing it week in and week out while staying effective.

Now, that doesn't change the fact that Pollard will probably be more impactful because he has gamebreaking speed, or the fact that Elliott is clearly overpaid, but the fact of the matter is that Elliott still needs to have a big role in the offense.

The balance we have right now between the two is actually just about perfect, even if Elliott is overpaid. Just go with the hot hand on a game by game basis and it'll all work itself out.

It's just that stupid Cowboy fans and the media who don't actually know shit about football love to fetishize "lead backs" like we should always have an Emmitt-type situation with a single back who gets 90% of the touches.

It doesn’t mean Pollard is an every down starter but it does mean that Zeke can’t be carried at that salary much longer.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I get what you're saying, just putting a perspective on it going all the way back to to 1970.

When was the last time we had a meaningful game vs Washington, though? Once in 2012 or whatever? Then it goes back to 1992/1993 regular season. Going by that 2007 logic, why not rank the Giants over Washington?

Good question and there's no hard or fast rule. There's just something about the Redskins. That rivalry ran really deep. The Giants stuff runs more recent but is a really small window of stuff.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I actually would put the Giants ahead of Washington because of those Coughlin teams. 1. Eagles, 2. Giants, 3. Skins. I'm old enough to remember the old Redskins rivalry -- kind of -- but that was so long ago. Last time we had any kind of big games with them seemed like the Gibbs vs Parcells days, and neither of those teams were that good.

 

[roughneck266]

Can we make his nickname The Terminator?

My man... Git em.

 

[boozeman]

 

[Cotton]

 

[mcnuttz]

I wrote a rap about it. wanna hear it, here it goes.

 

[Cotton]

 

[ravidubey]

OK, Moore is growing on me a little.

Prolly thanks to Dak playing at a high level

 

[Simpleton]

Moore isn't going anywhere next season unless Dak is like MVP or we go to the Super Bowl or something.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Moore isn't going anywhere next season unless Dak is like MVP or we go to the Super Bowl or something.

I'm not so sure about that.

 

[Cotton]