Skins24 Posted August 7, 2003 Author Share Posted August 7, 2003 Our WRs are better. They also play in a system in which there stats will be high. Sorry...not seeing the contradiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goose34 Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 I think it is safe to say that all teams have there fair share of Morons. The power of the internet shows every team has their own fans who do nothing positive in representing their teams. Some fans are brutal because they wear their teams on their sleeve while other fans just may be not very intelligent. As a Cowboy fan, I think it is pretty obvious that the Cowboys have been brutal for the past three years and likely won't see their record improve much, if at all, this season. On the other hand the Redskins have been consistently mediocre the past three years. I say neither of us have anything to brag about. Our franchises are measured on Super Bowls and both of our teams pasts speak for themselves. In all fairness this is a Redskin board, and a good one at that. If us Cowboys expect to participate on this board you have to expect a different opinion on a lot of issues. The beauty of the NFL is that almost every team has a chance to win nowadays. If a NE Patriots fan told me they would win the Super Bowl a few years ago, I would have laughed them off this board. Same thing with Bucc fans last year. I would have told them to come back after they win a game in the cold. You never know what this season will hold. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion and for all I know....it may be right. Time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Tom (GF) I can't argue with your assessments there. I think I had the same perspective. though personally as much as I hate to admit it I like Ramsey ad I think he is going to be a good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boozeman3 Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Originally posted by Skins24 Our WRs are better. They also play in a system in which there stats will be high. Sorry...not seeing the contradiction. You used stats to support your assertion that Gardner is better. Then you stated that the stats are inflated by the system. That is a contradiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Tom: Good post buddy. Sounds pretty accurate. I would say however that based on future potential and fit to the offens they play in I would give a little more edge to Ramsey for his proven toughness and strong arm, and Trung for his blazing speed. JMO. boozeman3: No. But the cowboys did have the pony express which is far superior when you factor in that the internet has not proven itself yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins24 Posted August 7, 2003 Author Share Posted August 7, 2003 Originally posted by boozeman3 You used stats to support your assertion that Gardner is better. Then you stated that the stats are inflated by the system. That is a contradiction. I didn't say they were inflated by the system. Just that this system is better for WRs. Either way, Gardner had better stats (just 2 less tds), in his rookie year with Marty ball, than Bryant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkPSkins Posted August 7, 2003 Share Posted August 7, 2003 Why is saying that system inflated stats and the player is better a contradiction? Saying without any backup other than homerism that Bryant is clearly better than Gardner makes no sense though. Bryant is in a new system, while Gardner is not. Bryant had a decent rookie year, similar to Gardner's. Gardner improved in a new system and Bryant should, but it will not be a pass happy one like the skins. Gardner, now in his 3rd year and second in the same system should also improve. Gardner should, since he won't have the expectations of being the number one guy, remain a step ahead of Bryant this year. We'll see. While Bryant is a good player and may become even better. To just blindly say I'd take Bryant over Gardner because he's flashier is dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kornheiser Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 JOE CB: Nice analysis. I'd only differ in... (though it's close enough I see & respect your point) OG: a tie (Allen's in his twilight, but Thomas & Fiore are new) WR: Dallas-would you believe it?? (Coles, Jacobs, Russell & Johnson all being new; Jacobs & Russell never having caught an NFL pass. Football talent doesn't always transplant well or immediately. Redskins WRs have more unrealized potential than actual talent) I'm a a stickler for D though. They've never let us down - top 5, 10, 5. Though I recognize I'm in the minority. None the less I'd go... DL: Redskins. Dallas has the pro-bowler but Redskins have the Hall of Famer (lead both lines in sacks) and better ballance across. Supporting top 5,10 & 5 defense the last 3 years (can't be that bad). Talking face to face? I think I remember that. You had to actually have people skills to do it, right?... you had to listen; acknowledge peoples points; respect differences in opinion; not expound endlessly on your own points; use manners... and all that, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dest Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Originally posted by MarkPSkins Why is saying that system inflated stats and the player is better a contradiction? He said that Gardner was better, and to prove that he quoted his stats. But then right after that he said that the stats were inflated because of the offensive system. Thus the contradiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kornheiser Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 TOM GF: That's a little too objective, I'm going to have to ask you to leave the site. Just kidding. Looked good, I'd probably swap the DL for WR, with the same results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Originally posted by boozeman3 You used stats to support your assertion that Gardner is better. Then you stated that the stats are inflated by the system. That is a contradiction. He was just pointing out how stupid you are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom [Giants fan] Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 You guys are nitpicking. You have to decide whether the Redskins run a better system for Wide Receivers or if the Redskins Receivers are actually just more talented regardless of the system. The only fair way to do this would be to swap receivers between the Redskins and Cowboys which we all know would never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SkinsHokie Fan Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Honestly I do not know how on earth Cowgirls fans can say they have better WR's with or without the "system" Looking at stats, age, physical attributes, injuries and attitude all homerism aside the Redskins wide recievers seem light years ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Certainly the Redskins project to run a better system for receivers than the Cowboys. That is an advantage that is pretty much not open for debate. As for sheer talent of the receivers, that's also not likely open for debate. Bryant is a nice NFL prospect who may succeed greatly. But, so was Gardner. So was Jacobs. In fact, Gardner and Jacobs were nearly uniformly considered superior NFL prospects than Bryant was. In terms of measurables, you certainly aren't getting an advantage with Bryant over Gardner. He's not as big or as fast as Gardner. Gardner seemed to improve on his dropsies and we don't know yet whether Bryant will or not. Coles is every bit as fast as Galloway and both share similar strengths as players, but, Coles has proven to be a No. 1 receiver capable of catching 89 passes where Galloway has always been around 70 catches which are more No. 2 stats. Glenn is a wild card as he also has talent, but he's had so much down time as a player and he's not been that good in few years, at some point the past reputation is going to be forgotten. It should probably already be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonny Joe Hog Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 You guys want the real and only bottom line to this discussion? Well, here it is. When the Cowboys are no longer beating us like a Tom-Tom on a regular basis I'll argue that our team is better than theirs. It's not about the units or the individual players. It's about beating them in head to head competition. This argument can only be settled on the field. As for the Head Coaches: please spare me! Parcells is one of the NFL's all-time great Head Coaches. At some point, I'd love to be able to say that SS is better, but first SS has a lot to prove to even be mentioned in the same category as Parcells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 SJH, I've read this entire thread, so could you please point out where a Redskin fan said Parcells wasn't a better coach than Spurrier? Can you point out which Redskin fan even put the two in the same category? No, you can't, so why did you write a retort to something we've not said? As for the rest, I hate to break it to you, but when we beat the Super Bowl champion Cowboys twice in 1995 we weren't better than them. We had their number and won and it was a nice feeling. The manner by which you determine whether one team is better than another is simple. Start at the top of the standings in the division. Work your way down. The one at the bottom is no good. The one at the top is better. The ones in the middle are just above the bottom and below the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Originally posted by Sonny Joe Hog Parcells is one of the NFL's all-time great Head Coaches. At some point, I'd love to be able to say that SS is better, but first SS has a lot to prove to even be mentioned in the same category as Parcells. You mean WAS, we don't know how he is now. He hasn't coached in over 3 or 4 years. He also doesn't have the same cast with him this time. Without Billicheck I don't feel so strong for him anymore. In Parcells prime yes he was a hall of fame coach, but he is past that now. If you didn't know Spurrier had more wins his rookie season than Parcells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foo Fighter Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Originally posted by jbooma You mean WAS, we don't know how he is now. He hasn't coached in over 3 or 4 years. He also doesn't have the same cast with him this time. Without Billicheck I don't feel so strong for him anymore. In Parcells prime yes he was a hall of fame coach, but he is past that now. If you didn't know Spurrier had more wins his rookie season than Parcells. WAS, huh. As if this mysterious coaching ability just goes away in a couple of years. You should check out a few of his press conferences sometime. Take today for example, he related a story on a discussion he had with Bryant on the intricacies of catching the ball to the left and right, above the body vs. below the waist. Later, he had complete recollection of specific details of a game experience he had while coaching at West Point in 1967. Amazing that this has-been of a coach can attract the likes of Chuck Fairbanks, Ron Wolf, and Tom Coughlin to come to his training camp and advise him on his team. I'm guessing that those men don't share your assessment of Parcell's ability to win without Belichek. But then, what do they know? The Cowboys may very well lose this year. It's not going to be because the coach has lost his touch. Besides, most of these guys will be ready to run through walls for the man by the time the season comes around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Originally posted by Foo Fighter WAS, huh. As if this mysterious coaching ability just goes away in a couple of years. You should check out a few of his press conferences sometime. Foo you make good points, but this is only the preseason. How is he going to react when he finds out he has no QB and no RB. He doesn't have a brilliant mind coaching the defense. Ron Wolf has been out of football for quite some time. I do like Tom there but how long will he be there? He wants to be a head coach. You have to admit Billicheck was his safety blanket in new england and ny. The other problem with parcells is the health factor, how long can he last, the last I saw he didn't look so good. He isn't getting any younger and these cowboys are that very young. I would like to see him on a veteran team to see what he could do, I don't think we will see him in dallas more than 2 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boozeman3 Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Originally posted by jbooma Foo you make good points, but this is only the preseason. How is he going to react when he finds out he has no QB and no RB. He doesn't have a brilliant mind coaching the defense. Ron Wolf has been out of football for quite some time. I do like Tom there but how long will he be there? He wants to be a head coach. You have to admit Billicheck was his safety blanket in new england and ny. The other problem with parcells is the health factor, how long can he last, the last I saw he didn't look so good. He isn't getting any younger and these cowboys are that very young. I would like to see him on a veteran team to see what he could do, I don't think we will see him in dallas more than 2 years. This was a rich one. "How is he going to react when he finds out he has no QB and no RB?" I guess he will just shat his drawers and quit. I am pretty confident that he already knows what he has and what he is going to do about it. He knew what he was getting into when he took the job. "Ron Wolf has been out of football for quite some time." Uh, Wolf left Green Bay in 2001. That makes two years. Yeah, that is quite some time. In dog years. As far as the two years thing, that is open to speculation. But Parcells and an veteran team set in their ways would lead Parcells to that very same heart attack you appear to be insinuating. He saw a young team that he could mold. I think that excites and motivates him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Originally posted by boozeman3 Uh, Wolf left Green Bay in 2001. That makes two years. Yeah, that is quite some time. In dog years. Tell me something he has done good in the last 4 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boozeman3 Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Originally posted by jbooma Tell me something he has done good in the last 4 years? In Green Bay? He basically set Sherman up with a system that still works. He acquired Ahman Green for Fred Vinson straight up in 2000. Heckuva trade. 1999 draft: Took Mike McKenzie in the third, Cletidus Hunt in the third, Donald Driver in the seventh. Took Aaron Brooks in the fourth and was able to extort a higher draft choice for him. 2000 draft: Bubba Franks in the first, KGB in the fifth, Mark Tauscher in the seventh. I would say he is not a dunce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Originally posted by dest He said that Gardner was better, and to prove that he quoted his stats. But then right after that he said that the stats were inflated because of the offensive system. Thus the contradiction. I'd simply point out that Gardner is better because he's bigger and faster and performed better in a weaker offense as a rookie than Bryant did and was uniformly considered a better NFL prospect at draft time as compared to Bryant. I wouldn't use second-year numbers from Gardner against Bryant because other than Dale, no one expected Bryant to have huge numbers. He had nice numbers for a rookie and rookies are graded on a different scale. And pointing out everything I did would end the conversation until such time as Bryant actually surpasses Gardner on the football field which is something he's not yet done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Marty was out of coaching for a little while and he related how difficult it was to get his coaching legs back under him. Certainly it wouldn't be a big surprise to see some silly mistakes from Parcells early on as he gets back into the swing. But, Parcells is a true star as a coach. He is a guy who improves existing players and wins with them. He's a guy who gets more out of lesser talent than other coaches get out of more talent. He's a great advantage for the Cowboys over most teams. The question I have is whether he'll be in it long enough to make it work. He wasn't in it long enough in his last stop. He's not young and doesn't look at all healthy or fit. But as long as he's there and the longer he goes the better the Cowboys will become. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted August 8, 2003 Share Posted August 8, 2003 Originally posted by boozeman3 In Green Bay? He basically set Sherman up with a system that still works. He acquired Ahman Green for Fred Vinson straight up in 2000. Heckuva trade. 1999 draft: Took Mike McKenzie in the third, Cletidus Hunt in the third, Donald Driver in the seventh. Took Aaron Brooks in the fourth and was able to extort a higher draft choice for him. 2000 draft: Bubba Franks in the first, KGB in the fifth, Mark Tauscher in the seventh. I would say he is not a dunce. Booze I didn't say he was a dunce, but guess what they all ready have a GM there Mr. Jones remember him What I was saying about Wolf is what is he doing there? Is he an advisor? VP? What?? If he was a GM then yes I would be more scared but Mr. Jones is and will be forever :laugh: Wolf doesn't make a player better does he? He doesn't come with the incredible defense schemes that Billicheck does he? NO Do you think Jones will listen to him, hell now that isn't his style. I do love the Driver pick, Green was a gift from Holmgren, no other "smart" coach/gm would have done that trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.