Difference between Dallas and Washington.

[Ken]

Originally posted by Art

Ken,

Dallas doesn't have more depth on the offensive line than Washington. Prior to Dotson's injury you didn't have more depth on the defensive line either, though, I'll grant that to you at the moment again.

On the offensive line we have a veteran starter on multiple playoff teams IN RESERVE. Who do you have in reserve that is anything near Vickers in experience or quality? We both have lots of young players in reserve. Our starting offensive line is better than yours at at least three of five spots at the moment.

Further, we're deeper than you at corner, linebacker, QB, WR. While I grant you more depth at running back and defensive line at present, you are certainly behind us in terms of depth at those spots, and likely so at offensive line. So, if you lend great weight to depth positions, then great. We've got you there too.

Adams and Page are similar in most ways to Wynn for us. Fine players (though Page is less so). But, they are not on the verge of stardom and they are not mentioned as rising players to watch. They are capable enough, yes. But, they simply aren't that type of player anymore than Moore is for us at center. A fine player, yes, but nothing much more, and without a doubt nothing special.

The Greg Ellis mention is somewhat worrisome to be honest. He's not a pass rushing threat, though he seems capable against the run. He's so far away from being Pro Bowl material I can't really quantify it. Certainly if you are that high on Ellis given his performance through four years it'll be something worth watching. I'd be willing to wager he isn't even whispered as a Pro Bowl type player though.

Art,

Once again, it's like talking to the wall with you.

Just because you bring Kip Vickers off the bench does not mean you are deeper. Who cares if he's played in the playoffs? I will take Aaron Gibson and his 400lbs. and first round talent off my bench. I will also take the 380lbs. Charon Dorsey who started two games last year, and except for multiple penalties, shut down his opponent. One of the guys he shut out was Robert Porcher in the Finale last year. He also played the whole game last night out of nessecity because of injury and didn't miss a beat. I will also point out that our 5th round pick Matt Lehr was scheduled to be our opening day center until we drafted Gurode, so I figure he should be at least a solid back up, don't you?

And your offensive line is nowhere near as good as ours. You barely edge out our tackles, and our interior just blows yours away. He might be a rookie, but you cannot underestimate the addition of Andre Gurode (326lbs., biggest projected starting center in the league) to our line. He is virtually a first round OL and he has been nothing short of sensational since joining the Cowboys. I like Larry Moore, but I will take Gurode any day of the week. Kelvin Garmin played very well last year after starting out slowly. He really came on playing in what was essentially his rookie year after being injured his entire rookie year. Garmon, at 350 lbs, is a mauler who looks outstanding next to Gurode and Allen. You can come back with your petty retorts to these statements, but trust me, I wouldn't lie to you, our Offensive line is going to be great.

On to Greg Ellis. Please, my mentioning Ellis is not worrisome by a long shot. He is light years better than anyone on the Redskins line and I can prove it. Let's look at last years stats, in which Ellis was double and triple teamed the whole season, vs. those of the Redskins projected starters.

Big Daddy Wilkenson - 25tkls, 4 sacks, 0 FF, 2 ints(wow), 4 PD.

Renaldo Wynn- 40tkls, 5sacks, 1ff, 1PD

Darryl Gardener- 28tcks, 4sacks, 1ff, 2 PD.

Now, GREG ELLIS- 61tkls, 6 sacks, 3 ff, 5 PD.

Clearly, he is better than anyone on your team and he is another year removed from the horrific leg injury that ended his season a few years ago. The addition of GLover and Hardy and the return of Ekuban are going to create more one on one situations for Ellis which is going to increase his numbers dramatically.

About your WR's. I would take our top 3, Galloway, Ismail, and Bryant over anyone of yours. Gardner, is probably the only exception and I would only take him over Ismail. Both of our starting Wr's had over 50 catches last year in a year when they had 4 different young qb's throwing to them. Bryant, who cares if he is a rookie, has more talent than anyone on your roster. The X factors in this arguement are Rambo and Swinton who are better than your 4 and 5's by a lot.

This season is going to be very revealing and I just can't wait until you guys realize just how untalented your offense really is.

[skinsblitz]

All this analysis is great, but let me keep it simple for everyone. The difference between Dallas and Washington is that the Cowboys SUCK and the 'Skins don't. Pretty simple, huh?

[Blondie]

laurent blah blah blah, my penis is bigger than yours blah blah blah, boring, blah blah blah

Check out my poll!!! laurent

Ya know laurent...your posts have rendered me speechless.

:laugh: :shutup: :shutup: :rofl: :rotflmao:

Blondie

[Art]

Smith22, you wrote.

"What? What games have you been watching? "

I've probably been watching the games in which the Redskins have won more than the Cowboys. Remember, Smith, and I know it's hard for you to do so, but, Dallas is a twin 5-11 last place football team. I KNOW every spot you have is perfect. But, once you get off Planet Cowboy and look at the reality fo twin 5-11, you'll recognize that it's not.

"Dallas has Ellis, Ekuban, Glover and Noble starting. Backing them up, we have Myers (starting DT last year), Zellner (starting DE last year) and Nix (solid run stuffing backup last year). Demetric Evans also is a backup at DE who played a lot last year and was excellent against the run. We also have both draft picks back from last year and they are healthy now (Stewart and Blade)."

Didn't I tell Ken I would grant you the advantage at defensive line depth? If yes, why are you discussing it? With Dotson, who is a long time successful pro playing both end and tackle the argument could be different. But, without him, it can't. Since I've already given this point, do you need to make it over again? I can't give it to you twice you realize?

"Talk all you want about your OL, come the end of the season you will see how much better our OL is."

I will and have talked as much as I want about your offensive line. Again, we have better depth today, if not as good a starter at left guard and right guard, which appears to make Cowboy fans think that's all there is to an offensive line. Tragic really.

"At this point, you don't even have EVEN ONE proven #1 WR on your roster. The only depth you have is Lockett. Anthony should be cut according to most skins fans here, so we won't even mention him. Basically, neither team has proven depth with the rest of the WR's, but I'll still take Bryant, Rambo and Swinton any day of the week over your backups."

This won't make you look very bright, but here goes. At present the three names you just gave me as your superior depth have 10 professional catches for 145 yards and 1 TD. Kevin Lockett has 99 more catches and 1300 more yards and three more TDs as a backup receiver in this league than the TOTAL NFL performance of YOUR guys. Anthony, who I agree may see the Turk, hasn't yet and as a projected depth guy he has 144 catches, 1850 yards and 16 touchdowns as a pro.

Whether he's cut or not, he is presently factored in, and it wouldn't matter if he is cut or not, because it simply further validates the difference between Cowboy fans and Redskin fans. Swinton, Rambo and Bryant have 10 professional catches for 145 yards and they present you more depth than us, or, probably in your view, ANYONE.

You see, we have guys who've never done anything in the pros too. Skaggs and Doering and Thompson and McCants. We like their prospects too. But, I don't even have to mention them because they're career nothings in the NFL and so are your guys. That you presume greatness before anything is accomplished is what makes you a lesser fan than I. You simply are so far away from having any depth advantages, which is what we're discussing, at WR that it is a spot you should have moved right beyond. That you can't shows you have no concept of your 5-11 last place football team.

Every team has young players who have done nothing in the NFL that the fans will be excited about. We are excited about that for our team. But, from a Cowboy fan, we can have guys who've actually performed in the NFL and STILL not get an advantage over you because, well, just because you have such strong young studs, right?

Please, Smith. Your post is possibly the least informed and certainly the most lopsided from a Cowboy fan on this board in some time. When you can't even grant the obvious that makes me know discussing football with you is less something done between two people of reasonable knowledge, but, rather from one guy who doesn't care about the facts and only sees the Star as his method of making his point, and another guy who's laughing at him for doing so.

[Tommy-the-Greek]

Originally posted by laurent

blah blah blah, my penis is bigger than yours blah blah blah, boring, blah blah blah :jerkoff:

This is funny as hell. Redskin fans are hung like my great great great great great great grandfather the trojan horse. They hid a small army in his penis. We can all get on our knees and pogo stick around the room.:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[SkinnedGator]

When Spurrier came to UF, UGA had a tradition of beating the Gators in every big game whether they were the better team or not...they just had our number. When Spurrier came in, the attitude changed and the Gators won 90% of the games while setting records for most devastating defeats of our arch-rival. He did alot to cure the complex many Gators had developed over the decades...and put 3 UGA coaches out of the business while he was at it.

He says Dallas will be our UGA...believe it!

[Art]

Ken, you wrote.

"Art,

Once again, it's like talking to the wall with you. "

This is as far as I've read in your post, but, I presume it won't be far different than to you. I haven't seen another word and I presume your argument is going to be that a guy who's started for playoff teams is in some way less impressive than a guy who weighs 400 pounds. Or, that Swinton and Bryant are the future of the Cowboys. To you it matters little that your young guys have done nothing and our young guys have done nothing. Your young guys probably project so highly in your view they get the advantage at every spot over guys on our team who've actually done something in the league because your guys are Cowboys. Now, perhaps I'm reflexive here, so, let's read further and I'll apologize if I've trivialized your point.

"Just because you bring Kip Vickers off the bench does not mean you are deeper. Who cares if he's played in the playoffs? I will take Aaron Gibson and his 400lbs. and first round talent off my bench."

So far I haven't trivialized it. Gibson was taken in the first round, so that's your advantage, eh? The Redskins picked an offensive tackle from Penn State in the first round a few years ago. He's out of the league for sucking right now, but, if you added him he'd probably be better too, right? Or, is it just first round talents who've been cut, done nothing but eat, but since they weigh 400 pounds they must be ok?

Gibson is a blown draft pick you are trying to rehabilitate. If it works out, that's great for you. But his performance in this league hasn't been over the last couple of years, as good as Vickers, who has been the starting tackle for a playoff football team as recently as last year. Gibson has already been jettisoned despite his first-round talent from the team that picked him. If he works out for you, congrats. But, in terms of proven ability in depth, he's got less than Vickers. And after these two players we are still talking about a bunch of young guys we have hope for.

"I will also take the 380lbs. Charon Dorsey who started two games last year, and except for multiple penalties, shut down his opponent. One of the guys he shut out was Robert Porcher in the Finale last year. He also played the whole game last night out of nessecity because of injury and didn't miss a beat. I will also point out that our 5th round pick Matt Lehr was scheduled to be our opening day center until we drafted Gurode, so I figure he should be at least a solid back up, don't you?"

Dorsey isn't going to get an advantage over Tucker for us just because he eats more. After Gibson and Vickers NEITHER team has a player that has shown enough to be anything other than an unknown hope for us both. The only depth we're talking about is known depth. Every team has the same young prospects they hope will pan out. We have them too. I know Lehr, who was pencilled in as a starter, should qualify in your world, but, he's never started and never shown himself to be a great value person yet. At one point last year we had Mookie Moore written in as our starting guard. Then we got Szott and Coleman and we cut Moore. Was that still good depth just because we were going to call him our starter at one point? Or, in fact, was it that he simply wasn't any good as it turned out? And Moore had started for us too. Young guys we hope work out sometimes do. Sometimes, like Moore, they do not. In neither case do they qualify as depth. Depth is proven NFL ability playing behind the starter. Depth is precious for any team and most simply have hope behind the starters. If every team has hope behind them, no team is getting an advantage.

In discussing KNOWN NFL performance to this point Vickers provides us more depth than Gibson does you. But, Gibson can eat more at Burger King so, take that factor and weigh it for what it's worth.

"And your offensive line is nowhere near as good as ours. You barely edge out our tackles, and our interior just blows yours away."

Gotcha. Our Pro Bowl left tackle and strong right tackle are frequently considered the best young tackle tandem in football. But, these two guys just barely edge out your tackles now. Fascinating. A rookie at center for you who's never taken a snap gets the presumed advantage over a guy with three years of starting experience behind him in a passing offense like Indy? Sorry there chief, but, I have to hold you to the same point I hold everyone. A young player may turn out ok, but, until they do ANYTHING they don't get an advantage over someone who's done anything. Certainly I'd take Gurode and Williams on my team. But, before the first snap, they are simply rookies who've yet to prove capable. In Gurode's case, I suspect he'll provide you an advantage on the interior before too long. But, Moore is a quality enough player that it may not happen quite as quickly as we suspect.

"He might be a rookie, but you cannot underestimate the addition of Andre Gurode (326lbs., biggest projected starting center in the league) to our line."

Yawn. Back to the "Our rookies are straight to the Pro Bowl" argument you guys are fond of. It's no secret we loved Gurode here. I have NO doubt he'll be a fine addition for you. But, until he's taken a snap he's nothing more than a second-round pick who has to show himself as something in this league FIRST before being someone you can underestimate. Hell, it's hard to estimate a player with no snaps in the league at all, much less to underestimate him. What you CAN do however is overestimate his projected value. Here it appears you've done just that.

"He is virtually a first round OL and he has been nothing short of sensational since joining the Cowboys. I like Larry Moore, but I will take Gurode any day of the week."

Smoot was virtually a first round CB last year but you guys didn't grant that argument until he showed something. Gurode may be the same for you this year. But, until he shows himself capable, a young, three year starter in Indy isn't going to be a guy who's the problem.

"Kelvin Garmin played very well last year after starting out slowly. He really came on playing in what was essentially his rookie year after being injured his entire rookie year. Garmon, at 350 lbs, is a mauler who looks outstanding next to Gurode and Allen. You can come back with your petty retorts to these statements, but trust me, I wouldn't lie to you, our Offensive line is going to be great. "

If Jones was going up against Garmon, we'd have an advantage here. That he's not, and we have an unknown here, you certainly appear stronger than we do at this spot right now. I suspect we'll add a body here to increase our depth or starting quality. Until we do I don't argue the advantage he has at this spot. It's probably even close to as great as the advantage Samuels and Jansen have over Page and Adams. .

"On to Greg Ellis. Please, my mentioning Ellis is not worrisome by a long shot. He is light years better than anyone on the Redskins line and I can prove it. Let's look at last years stats, in which Ellis was double and triple teamed the whole season, vs. those of the Redskins projected starters.

Big Daddy Wilkenson - 25tkls, 4 sacks, 0 FF, 2 ints(wow), 4 PD.

Renaldo Wynn- 40tkls, 5sacks, 1ff, 1PD

Darryl Gardener- 28tcks, 4sacks, 1ff, 2 PD.

Now, GREG ELLIS- 61tkls, 6 sacks, 3 ff, 5 PD. "

This is curious. Wilkinson and Gardener are tackles, though Gardener may get end time. The defensive line is also the most difficult spot to use "stats" to boost because in many cases, great players who are impact players and Pro Bowl players don't put up huge numbers at this spot because they are called upon for something else.

Ellis may be better than anyone we have at end, but not that we have on the line. In can prove it. First, Gardener's numbers came in half a season. Second, Wilkinson was invited by the players to be an alternate to the Pro Bowl. The players didn't invite Ellis, did they? The players know who is and is not good.

Ellis isn't as good as Sam Adams or Ted Washington either, though he may have better "numbers". I think you know this. But, perhaps not.

"Clearly, he is better than anyone on your team and he is another year removed from the horrific leg injury that ended his season a few years ago. The addition of GLover and Hardy and the return of Ekuban are going to create more one on one situations for Ellis which is going to increase his numbers dramatically. "

It's hard to argue with a statement that simply doesn't have any real basis in reality Ken. Ellis is most certainly not clearly better than anyone on the Redskins. He may be fairly argued better than our ends at this point, though, again, he's Greg Ellis and Bruce Smith is Bruce Smith. When the two line up, guess who's going to get more attention?

You'd have me believe Ellis, at defensive end, was doubled and tripled? Few ends can ever be tripled, because you don't run a tight end and a running back at anything other than a dominate player. Reggie White and Bruce Smith have been tripled. Not, Ellis.

Dan Wilkinson was probably the most dominate defensive tackle in football over the last 10 or so weeks of last season. He probably only had 18 tackles during that time. Sam Adams once had 52 tackles and 7 sacks and was a lesser player then than when he had 23 tackles and 2 sacks a year ago. Depending on what the lineman is asked to do they can still be very good without showing up as much in the stat book. Again, I suspect you know this and are simply yammering.

"About your WR's. I would take our top 3, Galloway, Ismail, and Bryant over anyone of yours. Gardner, is probably the only exception and I would only take him over Ismail. Both of our starting Wr's had over 50 catches last year in a year when they had 4 different young qb's throwing to them. Bryant, who cares if he is a rookie, has more talent than anyone on your roster. The X factors in this arguement are Rambo and Swinton who are better than your 4 and 5's by a lot. "

Ken, assuming you recall our conversation was about depth, let me refer you to my response to Smith22. Your reserves in Rambo and Swinton and Bryant have 10 catches for 145 yards in this league. Our No. 3 guy has 99 more catches and 1300 more yards by himself. Sorry, but, you lose the depth argument.

Further, Gardner was, with Robinson and Terrell, the highest rated receivers in the draft last year. More highly thought of than any receivers in THIS draft. Not only does he get an advantage over Ismail, but also Bryant, and perhaps even Galloway, though, Galloway still has a reputation that exceeds his production of late. No matter really, I don't argue at present that our receivers are better than yours starting. I think Green and Gardner will outperform Ismail and Galloway, but, until it happens, I can't give the Redskins an advantage. See how consistent I am?

"This season is going to be very revealing and I just can't wait until you guys realize just how untalented your offense really is."

Funny. Our offense was better than yours last year, and we've replaced seven starters from the starting group a year ago to try to make it better. Your offense has added one tight end and one rookie to make your starting 11 better. You, if you'll recall, are a fan of a team that was 5-11 last year, right? How undertalented were you that you just aren't realizing?

[Tommy-the-Greek]

Art, You should have been a lawyer. You state a point then prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Nice post.

[Skins24]

lol, you read all of that tommy?

[Tommy-the-Greek]

Sure did, Art is one of the few posters I enjoy reading the whole post.:laugh:

[Skins24]

Yeah I know tommy,

I read all of it too...well, most of it...er,

...some of it......

Ok, ok!

I just looked at the words!!

There, you happy!?

[laurent]

This is funny as hell. Redskin fans are hung like my great great great great great great grandfather the trojan horse. They hid a small army in his penis. We can all get on our knees and pogo stick around the room.

Haha, you literally had me laughin out loud here. I'll have to stash this one away somewhere in my cerebral cortex.

[DCDave]

Cowboy fan here.

(Somewhat) interesting debate. I think that the redskins have advantages at certain positions, notably cornerback, but the cowboys have a pretty good level of talent across the board whereas the skins seem to have gaps in certain areas. Take wide receiver. The poster (Art?) who suggested that the 'skins have more depth than the 'boys at WR because Kevin Lockett has more catches than Antonio Bryant makes a reasonable point, but ignores what I thought was the original upshot of this thread - young, emerging talent. True, Lockett has lots of NFL catches, but he's no Antonio Bryant from a talent standpoint. While there's nothing wrong with Lockett, I suspect that there are a number of 'skins fans on this board who would personally push Kevin Lockett from a moving vehicle if it meant the 'skins could get Bryant. Because you know as well as we do what Bryant is capable of.

And the skins have obvious holes in the interior offensive line. From reading the post and listening to the sportstalk radio here in DC, your O-line coach has indicated that the team is scanning the waiver wire to find one or two competent interior linemen. When you're scanning the waiver wire in the middle of camp to look for starters, that doesn't speak too well to your depth. And as for your offensive tackles, I really like Jansen and think he's excellent. As for Samuels, he's extremely talented, moreso than Jansen and either Adams or Page for Dallas, but I just think he's soft. I have to say that I lost alot of respect for the guy when Ekuban beat him for a sack, then dragged his quarterback on the turf of Texas stadium, and Samuels just stood there and watched. I guarantee you, if that had been Flozell Adams, he would have ripped Ekuban's head off. But Samuels just watched.

And that's the biggest difference between the two teams, really. Attitude. The cowboys play every game, every down like its life or death. We've lost alot of games over the past couple of years, because frankly we've lacked talent. But, never for lack of effort or aggression. That fire is still there, as you've seen if you've seen any of the HBO Hard Knocks shows. The fire that has gotten us past you guys 9 times in a row, despite the fact that you guys usually had the more talented team during that stretch. While you guys do have a standout "plus attitude" guy like Arrington, you've lost guys like Lang and Barber. I think you underestimate the significance of those losses. And as for the talent level, as Jerry Jones says, that worm is turning. We had one of the better defenses in the league last year, as well as one of the best rushing offenses in the NFL. If we get production at the QB spot, and play the way we play, the cowboys will very quickly become a team with very few holes. I honestly believe that the cowboys are closer to being a championship caliber team than the redskins.

Just my opinion.

[chiefhogskin48]

Originally posted by DCDave

Cowboy fan here.

(Somewhat) interesting debate. I think that the redskins have advantages at certain positions, notably cornerback, but the cowboys have a pretty good level of talent across the board whereas the skins seem to have gaps in certain areas. Take wide receiver. The poster (Art?) who suggested that the 'skins have more depth than the 'boys at WR because Kevin Lockett has more catches than Antonio Bryant makes a reasonable point, but ignores what I thought was the original upshot of this thread - young, emerging talent. True, Lockett has lots of NFL catches, but he's no Antonio Bryant from a talent standpoint. While there's nothing wrong with Lockett, I suspect that there are a number of 'skins fans on this board who would personally push Kevin Lockett from a moving vehicle if it meant the 'skins could get Bryant. Because you know as well as we do what Bryant is capable of.

And the skins have obvious holes in the interior offensive line. From reading the post and listening to the sportstalk radio here in DC, your O-line coach has indicated that the team is scanning the waiver wire to find one or two competent interior linemen. When you're scanning the waiver wire in the middle of camp to look for starters, that doesn't speak too well to your depth. And as for your offensive tackles, I really like Jansen and think he's excellent. As for Samuels, he's extremely talented, moreso than Jansen and either Adams or Page for Dallas, but I just think he's soft. I have to say that I lost alot of respect for the guy when Ekuban beat him for a sack, then dragged his quarterback on the turf of Texas stadium, and Samuels just stood there and watched. I guarantee you, if that had been Flozell Adams, he would have ripped Ekuban's head off. But Samuels just watched.

And that's the biggest difference between the two teams, really. Attitude. The cowboys play every game, every down like its life or death. We've lost alot of games over the past couple of years, because frankly we've lacked talent. But, never for lack of effort or aggression. That fire is still there, as you've seen if you've seen any of the HBO Hard Knocks shows. The fire that has gotten us past you guys 9 times in a row, despite the fact that you guys usually had the more talented team during that stretch. While you guys do have a standout "plus attitude" guy like Arrington, you've lost guys like Lang and Barber. I think you underestimate the significance of those losses. And as for the talent level, as Jerry Jones says, that worm is turning. We had one of the better defenses in the league last year, as well as one of the best rushing offenses in the NFL. If we get production at the QB spot, and play the way we play, the cowboys will very quickly become a team with very few holes. I honestly believe that the cowboys are closer to being a championship caliber team than the redskins.

Just my opinion.

The main difference right now is coaching. To be honest, I think Campo is at best Jerry's puppet who gets his defense to play hard, and at worst, Jerry's puppet who is perhaps the worst head coach in football.

The Skins have a decisive advantage as far as that's concerned, and I think most fans will eventually agree. Coaching does make a significant difference when the talent is more or less equal, which is tends to be in the NFL. NBA basketball this is not- players cant coach themselves, and mediocre players can be made to look better by playing to their strengths (as Gibbs showed).

[shawn]

and yet all the skins have done the past two years is go 8-8 !!! and I know I know it was marty's fault, it was norv's fault, it was snyder not knowing and it was deion's fault...its always somebody's fault who is not on the team any more....and SS the second coming of football Jesus is here (just like marty the chess master, blah blah blah)... all the probowlers and nothing to show for it ....

so I guess if this makes you feel better about the teams under achievements in the past two years by all means go ahead...make your self feel better, and keep the list handy, because you will need it again, just like two years ago and last year....

[Art]

Allow me to reply .

"Cowboy fan here.

(Somewhat) interesting debate. I think that the redskins have advantages at certain positions, notably cornerback, but the cowboys have a pretty good level of talent across the board whereas the skins seem to have gaps in certain areas."

Understood. The Cowboys were 5-11 for two consecutive years and they have pretty good talent across the board whereas the Skins, who have been 8-8 the last two years, seem to have gaps in certain areas. This is the type of thing that certainly adds "interest" to this conversation. But, really Dave, it's wholly unworthy.

Back to a point made a while back about our Cowboy fan friends. They believe they have a team with a great offensive line, strong running back, super receivers, awsome defensive line, superior linebackers and an underrated and solid secondary, to go along with an emerging talent at QB. You were 5-11. Either some or all of that is not true. In fact you do not have good talent level across the board. In fact you have serious gaps in talent and it's not just seemingly, it's actual performance based.

Likewise, the Redskins do as well. But the talent level is so much younger and more proven here than there, it's a difficult comparison of teams to make given the overwhelming advantages we have provided in this thread as actual observable football talent on the field rather than 5-11 football talent on the field that somehow qualifies as pretty good talent level across the board. Hardly.

"Take wide receiver. The poster (Art?) who suggested that the 'skins have more depth than the 'boys at WR because Kevin Lockett has more catches than Antonio Bryant makes a reasonable point, but ignores what I thought was the original upshot of this thread - young, emerging talent."

Correct. And while Bryant without doubt qualifies as young, he does with serious doubt qualify as emerging. You see, you can't emerge until you actuall perform somewhat on the field. Bryant may be a young rising star for you like Jansen and Smoot are for us. But, until he is that, he's not that despite the fact that you'd like him to be. Further, Bryant, while a fine prospect, would have been the fifth rated prospect coming out of the previous draft behind Terrell, Robinson, Gardner and Moss. Like Smoot, who was the best CB prospect in his draft, he wasn't similarly rated at the position in CB drafts with more talent.

"True, Lockett has lots of NFL catches, but he's no Antonio Bryant from a talent standpoint."

Projected NFL talent is simply projected until it's applied. Ramsey has more projected NFL talent than Carter does. Until he throws a pass he's not even as good as Carter, though, like with Bryant, we have more to work with there than you have as Bryant gives you more to work with than we have in Lockett. Hope it works out for us both.

"While there's nothing wrong with Lockett, I suspect that there are a number of 'skins fans on this board who would personally push Kevin Lockett from a moving vehicle if it meant the 'skins could get Bryant. Because you know as well as we do what Bryant is capable of. "

Yes. We do know what he's capable of. Complete and total flame out. That's what you meant right? He is capable of total failure as much as complete success, correct?

"And the skins have obvious holes in the interior offensive line. From reading the post and listening to the sportstalk radio here in DC, your O-line coach has indicated that the team is scanning the waiver wire to find one or two competent interior linemen. When you're scanning the waiver wire in the middle of camp to look for starters, that doesn't speak too well to your depth. And as for your offensive tackles, I really like Jansen and think he's excellent. As for Samuels, he's extremely talented, moreso than Jansen and either Adams or Page for Dallas, but I just think he's soft. I have to say that I lost alot of respect for the guy when Ekuban beat him for a sack, then dragged his quarterback on the turf of Texas stadium, and Samuels just stood there and watched. I guarantee you, if that had been Flozell Adams, he would have ripped Ekuban's head off. But Samuels just watched."

It's almost tiresome really. Yes, the Cowboys have a superior interior offensive line at the moment. Yes, the Redskins have a superior outside of the line at the moment. Yes, you're starting a rookie at center and yes we have a young starter from Indy with us. Again, until you actually apply the projection, these players are nothing, no matter how you'd like them to be something before doing anything.

"And that's the biggest difference between the two teams, really. Attitude. The cowboys play every game, every down like its life or death."

The Redskins were 0-5 and finished 8-3, winning meaningless games at the end of the year. Further, we appear to have a different air about this team than previous. No matter though, it's your NEXT statement that is funny.

"We've lost alot of games over the past couple of years, because frankly we've lacked talent."

Wait, I thought you had pretty good talent across the board? Which is it again? Hardy, Glover and Westbrook to go with a class of rookies is enough to give you pretty good talent level across the board now? Please. Of your rookie class, it's more likely than not that two of them will work out and the rest won't. Just like ours.

"But, never for lack of effort or aggression. That fire is still there, as you've seen if you've seen any of the HBO Hard Knocks shows."

Well, I've seen lots of stuff on the Hard Knocks shows. I've seen yawning. I've seen joking on the sideline with Emmitt. I've seen the cr@p debate. I've seen guys singing. I've seen a guy's mom say she didn't want her boy to be gay. I've seen a mean cheerleader coach. I haven't, though, seen great fire. What part of the show is that part in?

"The fire that has gotten us past you guys 9 times in a row, despite the fact that you guys usually had the more talented team during that stretch."

Correct. As we still are and yet you may get us twice more. We're still better than you. And you are still 5-11 until your not.

"While you guys do have a standout "plus attitude" guy like Arrington, you've lost guys like Lang and Barber."

Right. And Armstead and Trotter and Wynn and Gardener are notorious for accepting losing and having no leadership or attitude to speak of. Wait a minute, I forgot your point. Care to make it again?

"I think you underestimate the significance of those losses."

I think you underestimate the significance of those gains. Oh, and say hello to Marvin Lewis. You may have missed it, but he's our coordinator now and he always puts up cr@ppy defenses.

"And as for the talent level, as Jerry Jones says, that worm is turning. We had one of the better defenses in the league last year, as well as one of the best rushing offenses in the NFL."

You didn't have one of the better defenses in the league. You had a defense that surrendered very few yards. But, you didn't prevent a lot of teams from scoring and you didn't get any sacks and you didn't create many turnovers. In fact, there's more to being a great defense than surrendering yards. There's a whole bunch of other categories you know. How strong was the Dallas defense last year? Just strong enough to compel Jerry Jones to replace four starters with free agents and draft picks. Trust me, Jones didn't think you were that good a defense last year.

"If we get production at the QB spot, and play the way we play, the cowboys will very quickly become a team with very few holes. I honestly believe that the cowboys are closer to being a championship caliber team than the redskins."

Sure you do. But, the facts speak for themselves. You have far less young, proven, emerging talent. You have lesser coaching. You have less proven depth at most positions, though, I keep discounting the guys who've never done anything, but since they are Cowboys they are therefore remarkable. Sorry about that but I can't help myself.

If Gurode, Ross and Bryant pan out completely, the Cowboys will approach the Redskins in young talent, but approach is not equal. And approach only if Gardner and Russell/McCants and Ramsey simply totally fail.

In the real world, the 5-11 Cowboys have substantial weakness. A long-past-prime running back who's name demands playing time ahead of potentially a more dangerous, better player. A receiving group that is playing on reputation and not performance for three years (two in Ismail's case). An offensive line that has questions at the edges. A defensive line that lacks a true pass rusher and hasn't played a scheme that demonstrates the linebackers can pick up the slack (0 sacks all last year). Abysmal corners who force the DC to play soft umbrella coverages.

That's what a 5-11 team is. Glover will help. As will a healthy Hardy and perhaps even an ok Westbrook. Your rookies are great picks. Congrats on them. Let's see how they do. I'm very bullish on Gurode, Bryant and Williams personally. But, as rookies, it's not likely they'll be the lynchpins right now. The Redskins are far closer today than the Cowboys. The Redskins have more talent to be closer in the future than the Cowboys. And if EVERY young player on the Cowboys becomes a star, well, then the Redskins still have more young talent even if all our young players fail.

"Just my opinion."

Just the facts.

[Art]

Uh, Shawn. All the Cowboys have done is go 5-11. Laugh it up fuzzball .

[shawn]

yeh, but I am not the one sitting here counting pro-bowlers...accept reality and Art, you need to change your style a bit, as soon as some one says something to burst your bubble you start name calling.....its so typical.....same routine over and over...

[Art]

Shawn,

You ever watch Star Wars? It was kind of supposed to be a funny you know. Further, you didn't burst my bubble. You are a fan of a 5-11 team. NOTHING you can say can make you more than that. I'm the fan of an 8-8 team. I admit we have problems. You're in dead last and you have none. That's how we differ.

Accept reality Shawn. The Redskins have more young proven talent. The Redskins have JUST as much young unproven talent. The Redskins have better coaching. The Redskins have better players. The Cowboys may well be prepared to beat the Redskins again, but, last I checked, beating the Redskins didn't prepare you for championship football which Dave thinks you are more near than we.

Reality is by every measure of young, future talent, the Redskins are well, well, well ahead. The ONLY counters you have is that some of your players don't get the respect they deserve. Fine. The world is a crazy place you know. .

[shawn]

art, one funny thing is that you say until bryant, gurode, etc. play and produce stats they are not going to count as the talent on the skins who have some stats...ok, lets say we agreed, but then you go and say the coaching staff of the skins is better as well, yet, SS has yet to coach a game in this league!!?? wouldn't campo be considred better in this scenario as well? I am using your logic

[luckydevil]

That soft oline player only gave up one sack last year.

[shawn]

art, keep in mind, 8-8 and 5-11 don't mean cr@p....its superbowls that count and neither team has had any for a while and as far as I loooked the skins sat home during playoffs and so did the cowboys....8-8 and all and didn't you go through the same arguments 2 years ago..proving how talented the skins are and why they are superbowl bound!!!

I mean if you have all these probowlers and yet you can't even make the playoffs then they are one big underachieving group. and that's the label; that has been used on the skins for the past couple of years...

[Tommy-the-Greek]

Shawn, If you think the Skins are underachievers at 8-8. And you think the cowboys are more talented. What do you call what the cowboys did the last two years at 5-11???? What exactly do you call there performance?

[Art]

Shawn,

To use my logic you must understand logic. Spurrier has been a Heisman Trophy winner. He's been an NFL player. He's been an assistant coach. He's been a head coach on the lower level professional level. He's been a head coach on the college level. He's won every stop he's made. If you don't grasp that Spurrier has a substantially different resume than Gurode or Bryant, then really, there's no help for you.

Spurrier may well fail in the NFL. That's obviously very possible. But, the benefit of the doubt is going to go HIS way before it goes to a 10-22 head coach and an offensive coordinator that's been previously fired a couple of times. We're not talking about the Cowboys with a GOOD head coach. We're talking about a head coach with among the worst records in the league.

Given Spurrier's pedigree, he's clearly getting an edge. Not so if he was also coordinating with the defense though. But, he's not. We have Marvin Lewis there. How's he stack up. Hell, Lewis is likely a better head coach than anyone you've got, and he's never been one yet. . So, when using my logic, try to remember that Spurrier's got far fewer questions about him than a rookie draft pick. No matter how much you wish it wasn't so, it is simply so.

[Art]

Shawn, two years ago I may have felt the Redskins were talented enough to compete for a title. Every conversation is prefaced in such talks by "barring injury." The Redskins were 6-2 before the injuries became too much to overcome. The Redskins were 6-2 against the toughest part of their schedule. No question a healthy Redskin team could have gone further. It wasn't healthy. It was first or second in man games missed to injury, can't remember which now.

It happens. I was disappointed in the injuries we had that led to the fall of a very good team. Of course I was. It was a team coming off a 10-6 record and a division title that had gotten stronger in the offseason. Every offseason move the Redskins made that year worked out perfectly. The defense improved from 30th to 4th. Arrington and Samuels were solid. What failed was the existing players who got hurt and couldn't match the previous year.

Tough break for us. But, at the end of the last three seasons, I've had to look down in the standings to see the Cowboys and while that's not the same as winning a Super Bowl, it certainly is a pleasing sight.

Here's to four..... :cheers: