WTF!!! Dall-ASS has 5 prime time games!!!

[slogriff]

It will keep happening every year. NFL seems to be buying into the "America's Team" crap. It is odd though, because the Skins are the leaders in profit every year (until now because of Dallas' new stadium) and are the leaders 8 years in a row now in attendance, home and away.

Similar to your previous assertion that Dallas was the 1st team to lose as a #1 seed at home in the playoffs, this statement is only partially correct.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/attendance?sort=away_total&year=2007

Since they have a stadium that is >10,000 seat bigger than any other team, they indeed have led the league in HOME attendance going back at least 7 years. This helped them lead in total attendance going back to 2001 when NYG led the NFL in total att.

This link goes back 7 yrs to 2001, and the skins haven't led in ROAD attendance one time let alone every year.

Wash vs Dallas(road attendance rank)

07- 12th vs 2nd

06- 26th vs 1st

05- 12th vs 4th

04- 21st vs 2nd

03- 7th vs 9th

02- 14th vs 10th

01- 4th vs 5th

[tr1]

:cry: :cry: :cry:

The ball was not greased up. That's straight retarded friend. It was just brand new.

And talk about Jason Campbell all you want. I promise you won't find a single Redskin fan on the planet that can write an entire paragraph about Jason not being able to hold a football and it being the football's fault.

Damned footballs. They ruin puke post-seasons. Shame on them.

[WVUforREDSKINS]

Dallas has 6

Philly has 5 including one thanksgiving night

NY Giants have only 4. Kinda low for beating the Pats in the Superbowl.

Was, of course has 3.

[tr1]

Similar to your previous assertion that Dallas was the 1st team to lose as a #1 seed at home in the playoffs, this statement is only partially correct.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/attendance?sort=away_total&year=2007

Since they have a stadium that is >10,000 seat bigger than any other team, they indeed have led the league in HOME attendance going back at least 7 years. This helped them lead in total attendance going back to 2001 when NYG led the NFL in total att.

This link goes back 7 yrs to 2001, and the skins haven't led in ROAD attendance one time let alone every year.

Wash vs Dallas(road attendance rank)

07- 12th vs 2nd

06- 26th vs 1st

05- 12th vs 4th

04- 21st vs 2nd

03- 7th vs 9th

02- 14th vs 10th

01- 4th vs 5th

So, okay smart guy...what's the reason they're so popular?

They haven't won a playoff game in eleven years.

Their record resembles the Skins over the last ten years.

Let me speculate. Is it because of that homer-group of NFL analysts of Aikman, Buck, Emmitt, Johnston, etc? Irvin?

These guys NEVER say anything negative about the pukes...instead it's crap like "the legend of Tony Romo sits to pee..."

Propaganda does work.

[elkabong82]

Anything that avoids implicating Campbell for his bad play is EXCUSE-MAKING. Bad line or no bad line. Amazing as to how Collins had the exavct same bad Oline and WRs, and ride s 4-game winning streak.

Who needs to have excuses made for him?

The guy that passed for over 4,000 yards, a 64% pass completion rate, 36 TDs, a QB Rating of 97.4 and led his team to a 13-3 record and to the playoffs... AND A TWO TIME PRO-BOWLER...

or

...the guy with 2700 yards, 12 TDs---a few of them garbage TDs like the one against the Patriots, a QB rating SOUTH of 80, a dubious stat of throwing more than 30 times---the Redskins are 0-10, and was riding a 4 game losing streak.

I see why the word bong is in your name... you've been hitting it too much.

When you give up 50-something sacks like the Lions and Chiefs, then you complain.

And as for your WRs "going in and out", Moss and Randel-El together missed only 3 games. And the one game that Moss missed, you guys won anyway. So here you go with the excuse making.

Aikmans' stats are irrelevant to this discussion. But check this. Aikman was immediately thrown into the fire. He didn't get to sit the bench for an entire year. I mean that's the excuse you use on Romo sits to pee of how he got to watch from the bench for 3 years. Well then if you want to compare Campbell to Aikman, you need to take that into account.

JC did have some poor play, but he also had good play. All I said was the injuries to the O-line and WRs should be considered in the context. The O-line protects the QB, and the starters to an entire side of that line went down early in the season. That is going to have an effect, for example JC's fumbles. Not all of them were the fault of the O-line, but for sure some were.

Collins had Moss the entire time, and his longer tenure in the NFL and experience give him a quicker release than JC, which made up for some of the defencies along the O-line. Still Collins fumbled almost at a similar rate as JC, the sack rate is the similar as well.

If Romo sits to pee doesn't need excuses for him, why are you running around here making them for him any time one bad game of his is mentioned? You praise all of Romo sits to pee's numbers, but cast off some of JC's TDs as garbage? If you can't even separate bias from stats then I'm done with you, cuz obviously you are incapable of a coherent argument. Go ahead and put Probowl in capital letters, like it is the sole measurement of success. It's a popularity contest.

The word bong is in my name because it references El Kabong, a cartoon, which is why the pic is in my sig. Not that complicated. Maybe you should put the words "babbling infant" in your name.

Moss missed 2 games, and the revolving door comment was more about us having to lean on guys like McCardell, Caldwell, and Thrash. JC didn't have Moss for a couple games, and the games he did Moss struggled, it's been talked about at length in the stadium before. Collins comes in, the whole team is playing inspired, and all of a sudden the drops stop happening. Like I said though, injuires should be considered, but JC did have some poor performances, like the Tampa game for example.

How are Aikman's stats irrelevant, but the Skins somehow are when this a thread about the Cowboys? Aikman's became relevant when you started to trash JC for passer rating and win record when he has only played one semi-full season. Maybe if you didn't bring JC up the second someone had a criticism of Romo sits to pee, then I wouldn't bring Aikman into it. It simply means don't be so quick to judge, when your own team's history has shown a QB can do well despite an average season in the beginning.

Like I said many, many times, JC did have difficulties, but not all should fall directly on his shoulders. Injuries should be considered given their significance this past season. I'm not the one in here coming up with lame excuses like "the ball was slippery". That's just pathetic.

You also sem to forget in your trashing of JC that he came within one play of beating you guys.

[elkabong82]

Similar to your previous assertion that Dallas was the 1st team to lose as a #1 seed at home in the playoffs, this statement is only partially correct.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/attendance?sort=away_total&year=2007

Since they have a stadium that is >10,000 seat bigger than any other team, they indeed have led the league in HOME attendance going back at least 7 years. This helped them lead in total attendance going back to 2001 when NYG led the NFL in total att.

This link goes back 7 yrs to 2001, and the skins haven't led in ROAD attendance one time let alone every year.

Wash vs Dallas(road attendance rank)

07- 12th vs 2nd

06- 26th vs 1st

05- 12th vs 4th

04- 21st vs 2nd

03- 7th vs 9th

02- 14th vs 10th

01- 4th vs 5th

First off, I misworded the statement slightly, I think I told you that. What I have read is the Cowboys were the 1st #1 seed in the NFC to lose their first playoff game in the postseason. You say their the first since 1990, so who else was a #1 seed in the NFC and choked away their first playoff game?

The Skins led in the totals, when home and away are combined. Sure the 90K capacity ups our home number a bit, but we also set the record for attendance. The actual attendance, when you break down the total attendance number over 8 games, average very close to the stadiums capacity. So even with the largest stadium, we had the best attendance. The article that was posted in the stadium about this said the Skins led in attendance in away games, so if that's wrong it's cuz my source got it wrong.

[Micheal Westbrook]

I'm shocked the Patriots only got 4 primetime games, there by far the highest drawing team in the NFL.

[slogriff]

So, okay smart guy...what's the reason they're so popular?

They haven't won a playoff game in eleven years.

Their record resembles the Skins over the last ten years.

Let me speculate. Is it because of that homer-group of NFL analysts of Aikman, Buck, Emmitt, Johnston, etc? Irvin?

These guys NEVER say anything negative about the pukes...instead it's crap like "the legend of Tony Romo sits to pee..."

Propaganda does work.

I responded to an inaccurate assertion that the Skins led the league in Road attendance for the last 8 years and now you want me to address why the Cowboys are so popular?

A little off topic of my previous post but since you complimented me and called me "smart" I'll give it a shot.

The cowboys have had great success in their past (some of us are old enough to remember that far back:) ) to make them worthy of being popular. From 1967-'83 they missed making the playoff just 1 time. Going to 5 super bowls winning 2. In the mid-90's, they became the first team to ever win 3 SBs in 4 yrs.

So the question you seem to want an answer to is why are the Cowboys still a very popular team when they haven't won a playoff game in over a decade?

I'll make you happy and agree their continued popularity is assuredly helped by their extensive media coverage. Dallas has a large established fan base due to their earlier successes and plays in large NFCE markets. If your going fishing why wouldn't you go where you know there are fish? By doing Cowboy segments every 5 mins you tap into a known large market of fans that love/hate the cowboys and a bi-product is they are going to grow the Cowboy market too. Unlike you, the NFL actually likes casual fans watching their product and yes casual fans will more likely follow the teams they see on TV.

Bottom line Dallas is a team that has a history worthy of being popular and a lazy, income-driven media that panders to those fans across America.

[AmishGangsta]

Bottom line Dallas is a team that has a history worthy of being popular and a lazy, income-driven media that panders to those fans across America.

That and they are more attractive to pop-culture, in my opinion -- mainly the country western scene.

There are a lot of people who buy Cowboys gear because they actually think they are real-life Cowboys.

[WVUforREDSKINS]

I'm shocked the Patriots only got 4 primetime games, there by far the highest drawing team in the NFL.

You sure? I don't think many people outside of NE like them. And those born in NE tend to stay there unlike people born in DC, Dallas, Philly, or NY, who tend to move around. Which is why all those teams have fans all over the US

Especially Dallas who has many bandwagon fake, fairwether fans all over.

[BigDFan5]

Here's some good news for you all...Here in Dallas people are pissed because the last home game at Texas Stadium is a NFL Network game against the Ravens

Why would they be pissed they get to see their team in prime time against a weak opponent

[BigDFan5]

I'm pretty sure it has to do with keeping production costs down...shooting in Philly is probably much cheaper than shooting in places like New York, Los Angeles or D.C....

Plus, you can disguise Philly as another city a lot easier than you can disquise New York or D.C. ("Hey, when did the Washington Monument get moved to Chicago?!").

It has nothing whatsoever to do with market size lol :laugh:...

I am not a film making expert but Philly has some of the most unfriendly taxes for business in the country I dont see how that is conductive to lower production costs

[BigDFan5]

Ok to those pointing out the fact of Homo's dad cancer issue - explain the choke against the Seahawks?

Seattle has nothing to do with Romo sits to pee as a QB he shouldnt have been holding anyway

[BigDFan5]

So because the ratings are high for the Cowboys, that automatically means they'll garner the highest ratings? Sorry, but it seems to me the team that leads in attendance (home and away) 8 years running would also garner the highest viewership. It's kind of hard to see if other teams can bring in higher ratings when the bulk of primetime games goes to one team.

Cowboys are in the highest rated games every year prime time or not. They have had the highest rated games on CBS, Fox, ESPN and NFL Network for the last couple years running

and of course the Redskins lead in attendance they have the biggest stadium in the NFL by a good margin

Why is the NFL stressing parity if they're only going to put the majority of the focus of primetime games on one team? Don't you think it would make more sense to evenly distribute it among the top teams? It may make sense to focus on Dallas because they have a lot of bandwagon teams, but spreading the distribution out better might also lead to good profits. You don't know until you try.

Parity on the playing field not in the pocketbook, while you may like throwing the bandwagon label around the fact is the Dallas Cowboys consistently rank #1-3 in most popular team polls and have for many many years including years where we were 5-1 three times in a row

[slogriff]

First off, I misworded the statement slightly, I think I told you that. What I have read is the Cowboys were the 1st #1 seed in the NFC to lose their first playoff game in the postseason. You say their the first since 1990, so who else was a #1 seed in the NFC and choked away their first playoff game?

I again re-read the other post and see no post acknowledging you misworded your statement. I wouldn't have brought it up again if there was that acknowledgement.

Since the NFL went to its current playoff format in 1990, Dallas is the first #1 seed to lose in the Divisional round. From 1975-1989 there were 4 teams that lost in the divisional round (their 1st playoff game).

Your previous post was in regards to #1 seed losing at home. Which of course is different from your new question of losing the first playoff game. Since 1990, 7 NFC teams lost at home in the playoffs. These would obviously have all been in the Championship game.

The Cowboys had a bye. That is the only reason they went deeper in the playoffs than the Skins. Both teams were 0-1 in the playoffs this past season. Except only 1 team is the first ever to lose as a #1 seed at home in the playoffs. Nice try.

http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/release.jsp?release_id=1942

[Tennessee Ed]

The best thing after a day of grillin', drinkin, and watching football?

A nightcap watching the 'boys lose!:dallasuck

Love them or HATE THEM, people will be watching. What are you going to watch, Matlock reruns.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

I am not a film making expert but Philly has some of the most unfriendly taxes for business in the country I dont see how that is conductive to lower production costs

I'd have to know Philly's business tax codes and exemptions list to answer that lol...it's not all about taxes, though, when it comes to production crews and where they shoot. These crews have to pay to do their shooting...it could be that what they're being charged negates any tax issues.

[Tennessee Ed]

^^^

Film and TV get incentives (tax breaks) to offset the costs of production in high cost locations (cities ).

[Califan007 The Constipated]

^^^

Film and TV get incentives (tax breaks) to offset the costs of production in high cost locations (cities ).

There ya go... :thumbsup:

[Passizle]

Actually, they have 6 Prime Time games.

As for Jerry and the draft, no he's not in New York for it, and neither is Snyder. Jerry has a war room.

Correct! And he will playing a little missle command under that podium!

[No_Pressure]

Prime time games aren't what they're cracked up to be. Playing MNF and SNF all the time could screw a team up to be honest. I'm glad its not the Redskins. Whenever we get a bunch of prime time games we choke and have a bad season.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Prime time games aren't what they're cracked up to be. Playing MNF and SNF all the time could screw a team up to be honest. I'm glad its not the Redskins. Whenever we get a bunch of prime time games we choke and have a bad season.

We won three prime time games in a row at the end of last season and made the playoffs...

[Peregrine]

The only reason the Cowboys get that many games is because the ratings will be good, mostly thanks to all of the diehard Redskins fans wanting to see them lose. Lets face it, as Redskins fans we basically determine what happens in the NFL. All the best teams are in the NFC east(they have to be to compete with the skins), and all of the best ratings are NFC east games(Skins fans watching them).

[Fred Jones]

The only reason the Cowboys get that many games is because the ratings will be good, mostly thanks to all of the diehard Redskins fans wanting to see them lose. Lets face it, as Redskins fans we basically determine what happens in the NFL. All the best teams are in the NFC east(they have to be to compete with the skins), and all of the best ratings are NFC east games(Skins fans watching them).

WOW, a statement filled with nothing but facts.

[elkabong82]

Cowboys are in the highest rated games every year prime time or not. They have had the highest rated games on CBS, Fox, ESPN and NFL Network for the last couple years running

and of course the Redskins lead in attendance they have the biggest stadium in the NFL by a good margin

Parity on the playing field not in the pocketbook, while you may like throwing the bandwagon label around the fact is the Dallas Cowboys consistently rank #1-3 in most popular team polls and have for many many years including years where we were 5-1 three times in a row

I didn't say Dallas didn't have the highest TV ratings, I know they do. What I was suggesting is that the allotment of primetime games be spread out more evenly amongst the top teams. In fact, I believe they are trying to branch out what with them giving the Browns 5 primetime games.

If your read the whole post on attendance, even for a large stadium, the Skins have the highest attendance. Not ticket sales, actual attendance. The stadiums size helps, but that is a lot of seats to fill, and the Skins attendance at each home game is still near capacity. I am willing to bet there are a lot of teams who wouldn't have nearly as good attendance records if they had a stadium as large as we do. They have smaller stadiums, and out attendance to capacity ratio is still better.