Cowboys seek rematch with Patriots

Full story: WFAA-TV Dallas

The Dallas Cowboys want another shot at the New England Patriots. The day after the disappointing 48-27 loss to the Patriots, the Cowboys certainly did not sound like a team that took a hit in the confidence ...
Comments
381 - 400 of 400 Comments Last updated Feb 14, 2008
First Prev
of 20
Next Last
cowboyfansince75

Friendswood, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#394
Feb 4, 2008
 

Judged:

1

Oh Skidmark!!!!!!!!!!Where you at, buddy? It looks like Dallas did rematch the best team in the NFL, didn't they? Hiding out today? Tell us about the weak NFC!!!!!!Tell us about how we are all idiots for not being bandwagon fans!!!!Too bad you can't tell us about perfection!!!!!

“You are by what you do!”

Since: Apr 07

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#395
Feb 4, 2008
 
I wonder how long into the '08 season before we tv viewers see another T.O. sideline; sports conference; tv interview implosion!!??! Will it be the first, fifth, or eighth game of the week?

As far as the Cowboy vs Patriot rematch is concerned -- my question is, will it have the tv ratings to back up the relative importance to the respective team's playoff and championship drive!!??!!

Don't worry Cowboy fans, don't worry ABOUT THE PATRIOTS that is...Your team's primary goal ought to be (1) getting Wade Philipps first playoff victory and (2) In order to do that -- they got to get past the NYGeemen!!
cowboyfansince75

Friendswood, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#396
Feb 5, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

1

N2blaque wrote:
I wonder how long into the '08 season before we tv viewers see another T.O. sideline; sports conference; tv interview implosion!!??! Will it be the first, fifth, or eighth game of the week?
As far as the Cowboy vs Patriot rematch is concerned -- my question is, will it have the tv ratings to back up the relative importance to the respective team's playoff and championship drive!!??!!
Don't worry Cowboy fans, don't worry ABOUT THE PATRIOTS that is...Your team's primary goal ought to be (1) getting Wade Philipps first playoff victory and (2) In order to do that -- they got to get past the NYGeemen!!
Given that Romo is 3-1 vs the Giants (and 4-1 vs anyone named Manning), that is far from an issue. The Cowboys defeated the Giants twice last season by double digits, and only lost the divisional round game by 4. It's alot harder to stay on top than it is to get there. That's why there are so few repeat-champions. I can only think of 7 in the Super Bowl era--60's Packers, 70's Dolphins, 70's Steelers, 80's 49ers, 90's Cowboys, 90's Broncos, and the Patriots of the current decade.

Of course, every fan thinks his team will join those ranks. The odds just are not in your favor, especially winning the Super Bowl with 6 losses. Your team peaked at just the right time in the season. As difficult as it was to "catch lightning in a bottle" once, imagine how difficult it would be to do it again next year. It is not as if the Giants really dominated anyone all season. Enjoy the trophy, because you won't have it next year. Don't worry, it will still be safe within the division...

“You are by what you do!”

Since: Apr 07

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#397
Feb 5, 2008
 
cowboyfansince75 wrote:
<quoted text>Given that Romo is 3-1 vs the Giants (and 4-1 vs anyone named Manning), that is far from an issue. The Cowboys defeated the Giants twice last season by double digits, and only lost the divisional round game by 4. It's alot harder to stay on top than it is to get there. That's why there are so few repeat-champions. I can only think of 7 in the Super Bowl era--60's Packers, 70's Dolphins, 70's Steelers, 80's 49ers, 90's Cowboys, 90's Broncos, and the Patriots of the current decade.
Of course, every fan thinks his team will join those ranks. The odds just are not in your favor, especially winning the Super Bowl with 6 losses. Your team peaked at just the right time in the season. As difficult as it was to "catch lightning in a bottle" once, imagine how difficult it would be to do it again next year. It is not as if the Giants really dominated anyone all season. Enjoy the trophy, because you won't have it next year. Don't worry, it will still be safe within the division...
And Tony Romo's sucess vs the Geemen has got him what, where!!??!! I don't care about what one's record is during the regular season...ALL THAT COUNTS IS THE PLAYOFFS....WIN OR GO HOME!!
cowboyfansince75

Friendswood, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#398
Feb 5, 2008
 
N2blaque wrote:
<quoted text>And Tony Romo's sucess vs the Geemen has got him what, where!!??!! I don't care about what one's record is during the regular season...ALL THAT COUNTS IS THE PLAYOFFS....WIN OR GO HOME!!
Or in our case, win or STAY home.

I was responding to the notion that getting through the Giants will be any tougher for Dallas than it has recently been. These Cowboys play well against the Giants--when Crayton doesn't forget to bring his hands to the game!

The biggest difference for NY at the end of the season was Eli Manning's confidence and his play, but Eli never really played poorly against Dallas anyway...Just like this season, it will be the Giants having to get past Dallas again next year...I like OUR chances.

“You are by what you do!”

Since: Apr 07

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#399
Feb 5, 2008
 
cowboyfansince75 wrote:
<quoted text>Or in our case, win or STAY home.
I was responding to the notion that getting through the Giants will be any tougher for Dallas than it has recently been. These Cowboys play well against the Giants--when Crayton doesn't forget to bring his hands to the game!
The biggest difference for NY at the end of the season was Eli Manning's confidence and his play, but Eli never really played poorly against Dallas anyway...Just like this season, it will be the Giants having to get past Dallas again next year...I like OUR chances.
I have no doubt that the Cowboys want "redemption", not so much against the play of the wonderful (nearly perfect TD/INT (Eli's) ratio; top rank of the league (NYG) defense; no, rather an opportunity to make up for their (DAL) poor playoff performance.

It's my wish that the Cowboy staff come the start, anytime between now and the start of the '08 season, is to personally tell T.O. to shut the hell up (about making ridiculous predictions, that has up to this point FAILED)!!
cowboyfansince75

Friendswood, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#400
Feb 5, 2008
 
N2blaque wrote:
<quoted text>I have no doubt that the Cowboys want "redemption", not so much against the play of the wonderful (nearly perfect TD/INT (Eli's) ratio; top rank of the league (NYG) defense; no, rather an opportunity to make up for their (DAL) poor playoff performance.
It's my wish that the Cowboy staff come the start, anytime between now and the start of the '08 season, is to personally tell T.O. to shut the hell up (about making ridiculous predictions, that has up to this point FAILED)!!
A healthy Owens (in Dallas) has been an extremely productive one (28 TD's in the last two seasons--and a significant amount of those against your Giants). I know that the condition of his ankle allowed NY's db's to press him at the line of scrimmage in the playoff game, but you and I both know that isn't the norm. Why would the coaching staff tell him to shut up? Why would they care? I know I don't. As long as he continues to be that productive, he can say whatever he wants.

“You are by what you do!”

Since: Apr 07

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#401
Feb 5, 2008
 
cowboyfansince75 wrote:
<quoted text>A healthy Owens (in Dallas) has been an extremely productive one (28 TD's in the last two seasons--and a significant amount of those against your Giants). I know that the condition of his ankle allowed NY's db's to press him at the line of scrimmage in the playoff game, but you and I both know that isn't the norm. Why would the coaching staff tell him to shut up? Why would they care? I know I don't. As long as he continues to be that productive, he can say whatever he wants.
Are you negating the fact that Plaxico Buress, he too suffered a high ankle sprained and yet managed to overcome his injury, time and time again!! I know one can't compare one's injury to another, but what I can say is...There's no denying, whatever one's ankle injury it's PAINFUL!! The coaching staff don't need any loud mouths making their job doubly difficult!
cowboyfansince75

Friendswood, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#402
Feb 6, 2008
 
N2blaque wrote:
<quoted text>Are you negating the fact that Plaxico Buress, he too suffered a high ankle sprained and yet managed to overcome his injury, time and time again!! I know one can't compare one's injury to another, but what I can say is...There's no denying, whatever one's ankle injury it's PAINFUL!! The coaching staff don't need any loud mouths making their job doubly difficult!
You are viewing Owens as he was in San Fran and Philly.
He isn't making anyone's job more difficult. Funny how that perception seems to pervade the medis and opposing teams' fans. None of the Cowboys' current coaching staff seems to think so. They are 10 times better with him. If anything, he can make a coach look very good.
This has nothing to do with Burress. It is about the timing of the injury, and its specific impact. Even a fool could see that the Giants were able to play him completely differently without the support of that ankle. Owens is a completely different player than Plaxico. How he threatens a defense is completely different. Instead of gameplanning Owens, the Giants could focus their gameplan (and that extra defender) on Romo and Witten. You know fully well that in their next meeting, the Giants will not have that extra defender freed. They will either go back to doubling Owens, or suffer the consequences as they have in the past. The Giants were able to stop the Cowboys' offense because Patrick Crayton and Sam Hurd were the only healthy wide receivers, and Witten was the only weapon which scared them on the field. That is not a knock on the Giants, but if you think it wasn't a lucky break for them, then you are kidding yourself.

“You are by what you do!”

Since: Apr 07

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#403
Feb 7, 2008
 
cowboyfansince75 wrote:
<quoted text>You are viewing Owens as he was in San Fran and Philly.
He isn't making anyone's job more difficult. Funny how that perception seems to pervade the medis and opposing teams' fans. None of the Cowboys' current coaching staff seems to think so. They are 10 times better with him. If anything, he can make a coach look very good.
This has nothing to do with Burress. It is about the timing of the injury, and its specific impact. Even a fool could see that the Giants were able to play him completely differently without the support of that ankle. Owens is a completely different player than Plaxico. How he threatens a defense is completely different. Instead of gameplanning Owens, the Giants could focus their gameplan (and that extra defender) on Romo and Witten. You know fully well that in their next meeting, the Giants will not have that extra defender freed. They will either go back to doubling Owens, or suffer the consequences as they have in the past. The Giants were able to stop the Cowboys' offense because Patrick Crayton and Sam Hurd were the only healthy wide receivers, and Witten was the only weapon which scared them on the field. That is not a knock on the Giants, but if you think it wasn't a lucky break for them, then you are kidding yourself.
You speak in terms of TO as if he's the differnce maker between victory and defeat (vs Giants superbowl run), and that's simply not the case. Why not? Well for one thing, TO doesn't play defense and won't ever. That being said, the Cowboys stunk on defense, and to my knowledge not one of those defensive players had injury that prevented them from taking the field. They got man-handled. On the flipside, the NYG were minus LB, Mathias Kiwanuka; RB, Derek Ward, not to mention CB, Aaron Ross played 1/2 the game with a separated shoulder. The Cowboys ought to be happy they were given a chance to win, rather than had been blown completely out the water.
NFC East-3 playoff teams

Dallas, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#404
Feb 7, 2008
 
Patriots suck, just like the horrible AFC East. The NFC East was, is, and always will be the most competitive division in football. All four teams are storied franchises that win consistently. Look at all the NFL championships and Superbowl wins won within that division. More than any division in the NFL. After the Giants superbowl victory when asked if the Giants were intimidated by the Patriots, "We weren't scared of the Patriots. We play in the NFC East where teams are tougher and more physical." - Amani Toomer. Greatest team ever my ass. There are 42 teams in NFL history that were greater than this Patriots team because they won the game that mattered the most. They all ended the season with a ring. Can't say the same for the '07 Patriots. Your 18 wins mean NOTHING!
Cowboyup

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#405
Feb 7, 2008
 
Hold on not 2 black, stupid name, but what do you mean the cowboys did not have any injuries, they did have injuries on both offense and defense, players were recouping, or out of the game. TO played but he was not 100%, same with their DB's. Did this make a difference however, not where it counted on the line, the O-line was healthy, and the giants d-line played well, and brought the heat in the form of blitzes, dallas should have counter ounched with shorter routes, or by running the ball, but didn't and got beat, no sweat, well see you next year, black man.

“You are by what you do!”

Since: Apr 07

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#406
Feb 8, 2008
 
Cowboyup wrote:
Hold on not 2 black, stupid name, but what do you mean the cowboys did not have any injuries, they did have injuries on both offense and defense, players were recouping, or out of the game. TO played but he was not 100%, same with their DB's. Did this make a difference however, not where it counted on the line, the O-line was healthy, and the giants d-line played well, and brought the heat in the form of blitzes, dallas should have counter ounched with shorter routes, or by running the ball, but didn't and got beat, no sweat, well see you next year, black man.
Let the EXCUSE OLYMPICS begin...!! It's a long time in between XLII superbowl and the start of the '08 season, isn't it!!??!! Can't you Cowboy fans be happy for the Giant fans for once in your miserable lives!!??!!
cowboyfansince75

Friendswood, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#407
Feb 8, 2008
 
N2blaque wrote:
<quoted text>You speak in terms of TO as if he's the differnce maker between victory and defeat (vs Giants superbowl run), and that's simply not the case. Why not? Well for one thing, TO doesn't play defense and won't ever. That being said, the Cowboys stunk on defense, and to my knowledge not one of those defensive players had injury that prevented them from taking the field. They got man-handled. On the flipside, the NYG were minus LB, Mathias Kiwanuka; RB, Derek Ward, not to mention CB, Aaron Ross played 1/2 the game with a separated shoulder. The Cowboys ought to be happy they were given a chance to win, rather than had been blown completely out the water.
The Cowboys stunk on defense???? They held your Super Bowl Champion Giants to 57 total yards and 7 points in the second half of that playoff game!!! There is NO DOUBT in my mind that a healthy Owens would have made a HUGE difference!!! They were healthy on defense. No one claimed they were not. The Cowboys defense gave them a chance to win. The offense was hobbled, and in the second half--ineffective. Your analysis of that game is extremely questionable--no, forget that--it's just plain wrong!. Check the second half gamestats. 57 yards of offense and a mere 7 points by the NY Giants. That is good defense. Anyone who says differently has lost his mind!
Patsrule

Beverly, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#408
Feb 8, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

1

NFC East-3 playoff teams wrote:
Patriots suck, just like the horrible AFC East. The NFC East was, is, and always will be the most competitive division in football. All four teams are storied franchises that win consistently. Look at all the NFL championships and Superbowl wins won within that division. More than any division in the NFL. After the Giants superbowl victory when asked if the Giants were intimidated by the Patriots, "We weren't scared of the Patriots. We play in the NFC East where teams are tougher and more physical." - Amani Toomer. Greatest team ever my ass. There are 42 teams in NFL history that were greater than this Patriots team because they won the game that mattered the most. They all ended the season with a ring. Can't say the same for the '07 Patriots. Your 18 wins mean NOTHING!
That's not true. The Patriots won the title of AFC Champions. They were one of the only two teams to win any title with the word champions attatched to it this year. That's out of 42 teams, Plus no other team as EVER gone 18 wins in a row. That's not NOTHING. Stop being a sore winner.
cowboyfansince75

Friendswood, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#409
Feb 8, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

Patsrule wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not true. The Patriots won the title of AFC Champions. They were one of the only two teams to win any title with the word champions attatched to it this year. That's out of 42 teams, Plus no other team as EVER gone 18 wins in a row. That's not NOTHING. Stop being a sore winner.
The 18 wins was impressive. With that said, it IS nothing when you do not finish it with a SB win--the way the '85 Bears and '89 49ers did. And the poster you responded to is correct. The NFC East does have 11 SB titles now, and did send 3 teams to the postseason---including the #1 seed in the NFC, as well as the eventual best team in the league. If you don't play your best ball when it counts, it means nothing. Trust me, I feel for you. Dallas was the best team in the NFC all season long--but look what that got them--the same thing being the best team in the league all season long got the Pats--nothing!
NFC East-3 playoff teams

Dallas, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#410
Feb 9, 2008
 
Patsrule wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not true. The Patriots won the title of AFC Champions. They were one of the only two teams to win any title with the word champions attatched to it this year. That's out of 42 teams, Plus no other team as EVER gone 18 wins in a row. That's not NOTHING. Stop being a sore winner.
The 42 teams I was referring to were the 42 previous superbowl champions not the 32 teams that are in the league. They hoisted the Lombardi trophy and the Patriots did not. There is only 1 true champion every season, so don't give me that 'word champions attached' crap. There were 8 divisional champs this season. Where did that get them? 18 wins in a row is meaningless if you don't win the big one. If you ask me I'd rather be in the Giants position being the ONLY NFC team to end the regular season 10-6 and win the superbowl than be the ONLY team to win 18 in row and not win the game's ultimate prize. Ask any team in the NFL what they'd rather have. I'm pretty sure they'd all pick the ring over the 18 wins. And I'm not being a sore winner, I was just tired of everyone anointing the Patriots the best team of all time before the season was over.
cowboyfansince75

Friendswood, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#411
Feb 9, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

NFC East-3 playoff teams wrote:
<quoted text>
The 42 teams I was referring to were the 42 previous superbowl champions not the 32 teams that are in the league. They hoisted the Lombardi trophy and the Patriots did not. There is only 1 true champion every season, so don't give me that 'word champions attached' crap. There were 8 divisional champs this season. Where did that get them? 18 wins in a row is meaningless if you don't win the big one. If you ask me I'd rather be in the Giants position being the ONLY NFC team to end the regular season 10-6 and win the superbowl than be the ONLY team to win 18 in row and not win the game's ultimate prize. Ask any team in the NFL what they'd rather have. I'm pretty sure they'd all pick the ring over the 18 wins. And I'm not being a sore winner, I was just tired of everyone anointing the Patriots the best team of all time before the season was over.
I think alot of people were tired of that. There are several teams of the past (prior to the salary cap era) that would have beaten the snot out of the 2007 Patriots...even if they had won the Super Bowl. There are teams from the late 80's and early 90's so saturated with talent that you would be hard pressed to find more than two or three guys on the Patriots roster that could start for them. Those teams were the main reason for implementing the salary cap in the first place. The Pats may very well (so far) be THE dynasty of the salary cap era, but that's about it.
NFC East-3 playoff teams

Dallas, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#412
Feb 9, 2008
 
cowboyfansince75 wrote:
<quoted text>I think alot of people were tired of that. There are several teams of the past (prior to the salary cap era) that would have beaten the snot out of the 2007 Patriots...even if they had won the Super Bowl. There are teams from the late 80's and early 90's so saturated with talent that you would be hard pressed to find more than two or three guys on the Patriots roster that could start for them. Those teams were the main reason for implementing the salary cap in the first place. The Pats may very well (so far) be THE dynasty of the salary cap era, but that's about it.
I totally agree cowboyfan. I give the Patriots credit for having success in the salary cap era, but if you matched them up those pre-salary cap teams, they would've been killed. Those teams were stacked with unbelievable talent on both sides of the ball and their offenses were up against more physical defenses. Now with all these rules of protecting the quarterback and limitations on how to tackle, i.e. helmet to helmet and horse collar, its a less physical game and you can see all these offenses breaking records left and right. Thats not a coincidence. I think the Cowboys of the 90's were the most impressive dynasty even though they only won 3 because of the schedule they had to go through. Competing in a division with Reggie White and the Eagles, playing against the last 2 superbowl champions in the Giants and Redskins and then having to go through the 49ers and Packers in the playoffs who would eventually be superbowl champions just blows my mind away. If this team didn't self-destruct from Jimmy leaving and losing several starters because of the salary cap being implemented, this team would've had the potential to 5-peat.
Jeff

Syracuse, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#413
Feb 14, 2008
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Hmm...that's funny, been gone a while. Where is skidmark and patsfan. Not surprising that they raen't here after the pats choke in the superbowl. What dicks

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 20
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Patrick Crayton Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Brady, Pats Remain Perfect (Oct '07) Jan '11 Belichick Domination 223
Could Dallas Cowboys Trade, Release Patrick Cra... (Sep '10) Sep '10 Loko 1
Cowboys send Crayton to SD, McQuistan to Miami (Sep '10) Sep '10 Tony Romo 2
Cowboys throw, catch, block better than day before (Aug '10) Aug '10 sun city fan 7
Cowboys take on Cowboys North Sunday in Hall of... (Aug '10) Aug '10 Jojo 3
Cowboys to take on Cowboys North - the Bengals (Aug '10) Aug '10 Dr Phil 5
Cowboys to take on Cowboys North - the Bengals (Aug '10) Aug '10 proFootballTickets 1

Search the Patrick Crayton Forum:
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••