Did The Cowboys Have A Better Season Than The Redskins?

jamf · 01-14-2008, 06:05 PM

Cowboys all the way.

They played great most of the year.
Most of their players has career years.
They gave their fans alot to cheer for.

I'm proud of this years team but they did underachieve the first half of the year.
They blew too many games in the fourth quarter.
Injuries, Injuries and More Injuries....
Most importantly, A wonderful young man lost his life this year. Btw, He was a pretty good football player too.

The Redskins finished strong and I am proud of them, but 2007 was not a good year to be a redskins fan or player.

sancho2613 · 01-14-2008, 06:19 PM

I would have to say the Cowboys for the most part. They finished with the franchise best record and they didn't loose a great teamante and coach. I do feel that the way the redskins handled it and came out playing for Taylor was AMAZING and I thought that at the end of the season the Redskins had a better chance of getting farther into the playoffs then the Cowboys. So it's kind of hard because like i said what the Skins did was amazing but i'd have to give it to the Cowboys because they did have a lot of accomplishments (records) and they had a bye week. The biggest reason I would think they had a better season was because they didn't loose anybody special and I think it would be hard to say the Skins had a better season when they lost a great player and a HOF coach....

coggs · 01-14-2008, 06:42 PM

You can look at it from two ways. First, d***as had a better record, won the division, and was the top seed. So, in that regard, yes. If you view at from expectations, than no. Outside of this site, noone expected the skins to be a factor, but many had d***as going to the super bowl from day 1. Throw in the fact that they rallied to make the play-offs, the sean taylor tragedy, and you have to say absolutely not.

#56fanatic · 01-15-2008, 08:17 AM

I honestly cant see this even up for debate. the cowboys finished 13-3, skins 9-7. The cowboys won the games they were suppose to, the offense finished in the top 5, defense not really sure where they finished, but had to be top 10. Romo, TO, Witten, Barber all had good if not great years. Most importantly, the 1st goal of every team is to win their division, which they did impressively. they were the #1 seed in the playoffs for the NFC. we were #6, and had to fight our way in winning the last 4 games. Comparison to how they did in the playoffs is moot. Are you going to say the same thing about the colts? I hate to say it, but the Cowboys had a much better season than we did. We lost games we could have won. we blew how many games in 4th quarter 6-7?? They made plays to win games, we didn't make them.

This is just a ridiculous thread. I am a very big cowboy hater, but realistically our season was not even close to theirs.

saden1 · 01-15-2008, 09:22 AM

They won more games but when the games mattered the most they were one-and-done just like us. Plus they probably have the inside track on the "Most Disappointing Team Ever" crown. When you're 13-3 and then lay an egg in the first game you've got a lot of explaining to do.

Coff · 01-15-2008, 10:28 AM

Having the #1 seed in the conference and losing in the first round is as dissapointing as going 3-13. We had a better season. Regardless of what happens to the Giants though, they had the best season of any NFC East team.

mcarey032 · 01-15-2008, 10:57 AM

Being highly biased, I would say that we did. When you are a number one seed in the playoffs and get a bye week, you are supposed to at least make it to the NFC championship game. They clearly had not been playing good football the last month of the season, whereas the Redskins had been playing their best ball of the year in December. The real tragedy for us is that we weren't able to capitalize on the momentum in the Seattle game. Dallas made stupid undisciplined mistakes at home. There is no reason to get a false start at home ever. It's one thing for your offensive line to get one on the road, but at home? Come on. Also there were several drops by the wideouts that led to the offense's inefficency to keep drives going. As bad as the score was in the seattle game, we should have won. As close as the cowboys game was they definitely should have lost anyway. They had been lucky in a couple of close games which they squeaked out victories. Their 13-3 was highly inflated, if you ask me.

#56fanatic · 01-15-2008, 01:28 PM

[quote=mcarey032;408043]Being highly biased, I would say that we did. When you are a number one seed in the playoffs and get a bye week, you are supposed to at least make it to the NFC championship game. They clearly had not been playing good football the last month of the season, whereas the Redskins had been playing their best ball of the year in December. The real tragedy for us is that we weren't able to capitalize on the momentum in the Seattle game. Dallas made stupid undisciplined mistakes at home. There is no reason to get a false start at home ever. It's one thing for your offensive line to get one on the road, but at home? Come on. Also there were several drops by the wideouts that led to the offense's inefficency to keep drives going. As bad as the score was in the seattle game, we should have won. As close as the cowboys game was they definitely should have lost anyway. They had been lucky in a couple of close games which they squeaked out victories. Their 13-3 was highly inflated, if you ask me.[/quot

This is a total homer/hater remark. sorry, not to jump on you. If the question was who played better the last 4 weeks, then yes the Skins played better. Some of the statements : false start at home, every team in the NFL gets false starts at home, even ours (a lot!) drops happen on every team, even ours (remember seattle) Lucky a couple of games, maybe, but dont you think we were lucky in some of our 9 wins, Miami, Jets, Arizona to mention a few. Fact is, there were 13-3 with basically the same schedule as ours. we were 9-7, I dont see how anyone could say we had a better season, that is just crazy. You are judged on your record, that was says you had a better season. We were 6th best in the NFC, they were #1 in the NFC. They won the division, that alone says they had a better overall season.

01-14-2008, 06:19 PM	#2
sancho2613 Special Teams Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Arizona Posts: 199	Re: Did The Cowboys Have A Better Season Than The Redskins? I would have to say the Cowboys for the most part. They finished with the franchise best record and they didn't loose a great teamante and coach. I do feel that the way the redskins handled it and came out playing for Taylor was AMAZING and I thought that at the end of the season the Redskins had a better chance of getting farther into the playoffs then the Cowboys. So it's kind of hard because like i said what the Skins did was amazing but i'd have to give it to the Cowboys because they did have a lot of accomplishments (records) and they had a bye week. The biggest reason I would think they had a better season was because they didn't loose anybody special and I think it would be hard to say the Skins had a better season when they lost a great player and a HOF coach.... __________________ It doesn't take talent to win...just blood, sweat, heart, tears, time, and a good coach.

01-14-2008, 06:42 PM	#3
coggs Special Teams Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: staten island Age: 49 Posts: 477	Re: Did The Cowboys Have A Better Season Than The Redskins? You can look at it from two ways. First, d*as had a better record, won the division, and was the top seed. So, in that regard, yes. If you view at from expectations, than no. Outside of this site, noone expected the skins to be a factor, but many had d*as going to the super bowl from day 1. Throw in the fact that they rallied to make the play-offs, the sean taylor tragedy, and you have to say absolutely not. __________________ "Everyone is talking about their dynasty. Well, OUR DYNASTY STARTS TONIGHT."--Michael Strahan, pre-game huddle Pep talk, February 3rd, 2008.

01-15-2008, 08:17 AM	#4
#56fanatic The Starter Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Charlotte NC Age: 51 Posts: 1,801	Re: Did The Cowboys Have A Better Season Than The Redskins? I honestly cant see this even up for debate. the cowboys finished 13-3, skins 9-7. The cowboys won the games they were suppose to, the offense finished in the top 5, defense not really sure where they finished, but had to be top 10. Romo, TO, Witten, Barber all had good if not great years. Most importantly, the 1st goal of every team is to win their division, which they did impressively. they were the #1 seed in the playoffs for the NFC. we were #6, and had to fight our way in winning the last 4 games. Comparison to how they did in the playoffs is moot. Are you going to say the same thing about the colts? I hate to say it, but the Cowboys had a much better season than we did. We lost games we could have won. we blew how many games in 4th quarter 6-7?? They made plays to win games, we didn't make them. This is just a ridiculous thread. I am a very big cowboy hater, but realistically our season was not even close to theirs.

01-15-2008, 10:57 AM	#7
mcarey032 Special Teams Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Arlington, VA. Posts: 215	Re: Did The Cowboys Have A Better Season Than The Redskins? Being highly biased, I would say that we did. When you are a number one seed in the playoffs and get a bye week, you are supposed to at least make it to the NFC championship game. They clearly had not been playing good football the last month of the season, whereas the Redskins had been playing their best ball of the year in December. The real tragedy for us is that we weren't able to capitalize on the momentum in the Seattle game. Dallas made stupid undisciplined mistakes at home. There is no reason to get a false start at home ever. It's one thing for your offensive line to get one on the road, but at home? Come on. Also there were several drops by the wideouts that led to the offense's inefficency to keep drives going. As bad as the score was in the seattle game, we should have won. As close as the cowboys game was they definitely should have lost anyway. They had been lucky in a couple of close games which they squeaked out victories. Their 13-3 was highly inflated, if you ask me.

01-15-2008, 01:28 PM	#8
#56fanatic The Starter Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Charlotte NC Age: 51 Posts: 1,801	Re: Did The Cowboys Have A Better Season Than The Redskins? [quote=mcarey032;408043]Being highly biased, I would say that we did. When you are a number one seed in the playoffs and get a bye week, you are supposed to at least make it to the NFC championship game. They clearly had not been playing good football the last month of the season, whereas the Redskins had been playing their best ball of the year in December. The real tragedy for us is that we weren't able to capitalize on the momentum in the Seattle game. Dallas made stupid undisciplined mistakes at home. There is no reason to get a false start at home ever. It's one thing for your offensive line to get one on the road, but at home? Come on. Also there were several drops by the wideouts that led to the offense's inefficency to keep drives going. As bad as the score was in the seattle game, we should have won. As close as the cowboys game was they definitely should have lost anyway. They had been lucky in a couple of close games which they squeaked out victories. Their 13-3 was highly inflated, if you ask me.[/quot This is a total homer/hater remark. sorry, not to jump on you. If the question was who played better the last 4 weeks, then yes the Skins played better. Some of the statements : false start at home, every team in the NFL gets false starts at home, even ours (a lot!) drops happen on every team, even ours (remember seattle) Lucky a couple of games, maybe, but dont you think we were lucky in some of our 9 wins, Miami, Jets, Arizona to mention a few. Fact is, there were 13-3 with basically the same schedule as ours. we were 9-7, I dont see how anyone could say we had a better season, that is just crazy. You are judged on your record, that was says you had a better season. We were 6th best in the NFC, they were #1 in the NFC. They won the division, that alone says they had a better overall season.

01-14-2008, 06:05 PM	#1
jamf Pro Bowl Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: San Diego Ca Posts: 5,348	Re: Did The Cowboys Have A Better Season Than The Redskins? Cowboys all the way. They played great most of the year. Most of their players has career years. They gave their fans alot to cheer for. I'm proud of this years team but they did underachieve the first half of the year. They blew too many games in the fourth quarter. Injuries, Injuries and More Injuries.... Most importantly, A wonderful young man lost his life this year. Btw, He was a pretty good football player too. The Redskins finished strong and I am proud of them, but 2007 was not a good year to be a redskins fan or player.

01-15-2008, 09:22 AM	#5
saden1 MVP Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Seattle Age: 46 Posts: 10,069	Re: Did The Cowboys Have A Better Season Than The Redskins? They won more games but when the games mattered the most they were one-and-done just like us. Plus they probably have the inside track on the "Most Disappointing Team Ever" crown. When you're 13-3 and then lay an egg in the first game you've got a lot of explaining to do. __________________ "The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder." -Jenkins

01-15-2008, 10:28 AM	#6
Coff Impact Rookie Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Halfmoon, NY Posts: 687	Re: Did The Cowboys Have A Better Season Than The Redskins? Having the #1 seed in the conference and losing in the first round is as dissapointing as going 3-13. We had a better season. Regardless of what happens to the Giants though, they had the best season of any NFC East team.

Did The Cowboys Have A Better Season Than The Redskins?

Locker Room Main Forum