McMahon: 7.5 wins for Cowboys? Football Outsiders explains

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

Midswat. Let me try this.

Last offseason, we lost T.O., Canty, Zach Thomas, Henry, Roy, Ellis, and Pacman. That's 7 starter or 6.5--with Pacman being a part time starter. Now we lost them becuase they were cut. But technically, it still adds up to the same thing had we lost them to injury and placed on IR, with the sole difference is that they instead of being on IR they simply are no longer on our team.

How many publications predicted that the Cowboys would finish either 3rd or 4th in the divisioon? Nearly all of them. Naturally, when you lose 7 starters. But yet the Cowboys won 11 games AND the division. The point is that the lost of those 7 starters didn't derail the Cowboys' season. It's immaterial as to how they were lost, whether via FA, cut, or injury, the impact would still be projected the same.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

The only way I could see making valid injury predictions would be if a player had a history of injuries, or an older roster.

Coincidentally, those are two reason's why I dont' think the Redskins will amount to much this year. McNabb has a history of injuries, and at WR, RB, QB, and OL they're an old team.

And while we have age at OL and MLB, we're relatively young everywhere else and we don't have many injury prone players outside of maybe Felix Jones.

Now that makes sense. I can fully understand a prediction of an injury based on hisotry. It's been 2005 since McNabb last played a full season.

 

[sbk92]

To me, it's simple. You just have to not be a homer to understand it.

When you just went through a season of no key injuries to your starters, when your QB took every snap of the season for the first time in team history, odds are you won't be so lucky the following season. And if that's the case, it's not a stretch to think an 11 win team can turn into a 7 or 8 win team.

This is especially true when you're coached by a career loser like Wade Phillips. You want to talk about history, the guy's got a resume of fail.

This is a ridiculous prediction only to a Cowboys fan. To the rest of the NFL world it's plausible.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

To me, it's simple. You just have to not be a homer to understand it.

Has nothing to do with homerism. That's just your weak ass attempt to discredit.

When you just went through a season of no key injuries to your starters, when your QB took every snap of the season for the first time in team history, odds are you won't be so lucky the following season.

Luck had nothing to do with it. And you say odds... what odds? Be specific. 50%, 75%... 1%? I think Roy's injury was key. Hamlin's injury was key. We've had players that played through injuries. And who is to say that Romo will take every snap this upcoming season? Romo didn't need to play every snap last season. If the Cowboys have a comfortable lead, he may sit. Or are you saying this is the first time in Cowboys' history that a QB played all 16 games?

And if that's the case, it's not a stretch to think an 11 win team can turn into a 7 or 8 win team.

But all of that would depend on when the injury takes place, and where, and to whom, and how. But none of that is sound analysis. You accuse me of being a homer, but you and the ones predicting injuries with nothign to base it upon, reeks of a Cowboys-hater.

This is especially true when you're coached by a career loser like Wade Phillips. You want to talk about history, the guy's got a resume of fail.

This is a ridiculous prediction only to a Cowboys fan. To the rest of the NFL world it's plausible.

Yep. 2 divison titles in the last 3 year. Wade's the devil. And how do you define failure?

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

And another thing... what do injuries or the prediction of injuries have to do with Wade? Another one of your very insightful analysis. Thing is, the Cowboys have not had a losing season since Wade took over. But you like to ballwash Parcells. What good di his history do for the Cowboys, when it mattered most?

 

[Midswat]

To me, it's simple. You just have to not be a homer to understand it.

Give me a break.

They're suggesting that because we didn't have any team crippling injuries last year, we're going to have some this year.

That's retarded.

I'll grant you I'm a homer . . . but that's retarded logic any way you slice it.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

Give me a break.

They're suggesting that because we didn't have any team crippling injuries last year, we're going to have some this year.

That's retarded.

I'll grant you I'm a homer . . . but that's retarded logic any way you slice it.

It is. Because the Colts, Saints, Vikings, Packers, Chargers, etc also didn't have any team crippling injurues last year, but yet how come the Cowboys are being singled out in supposedly having them this year? Look... it may very well happen that we have such an injury or injuries, but it would not be because we didn't have them last year. And the way you are carrying on, it's as if you hope said injuries happen so that you can claim to have been right AND probably hope that this gets rid of Wade. But those injuries would only go to leave Wade blameless, it wouldn't be his fault that the injuries took place.

 

[Midswat]

And another thing... what do injuries or the prediction of injuries have to do with Wade? Another one of your very insightful analysis. Thing is, the Cowboys have not had a losing season since Wade took over. But you like to ballwash Parcells. What good di his history do for the Cowboys, when it mattered most?

You have to take sbk's comments with a grain of salt. He's blind to reality when it comes to Parcells.

Everything good that happens to the team is because of Parcells, while everything bad is Jerry and Wade's fault. There is no inbetween.

The reality is, Parcells had a strong influence in changing the mindset and culture of the franchise. We absolutely needed him here when he came, and we're a much better franchise as a result of him being here. That said, his press conferences were much better than his actual game day coaching.

Wade has come in and done what Parcells couldn't do, and that is win division titles and playoff games. He's got the defense playing better than they have since the Porn-Stach was in charge in 1992. And he and Jerry have worked together to make some great personnel moves.

 

[sbk92]

I won't even entertain a couple of idiots who think Wade Phillips is doing what Parcells can't.

That kind of idiocy doesn't deserve a second of my time.

My rebuttal will be at the hall of fame induction. And lack of another.

 

[Midswat]

I won't even entertain a couple of idiots who think Wade Phillips is doing what Parcells can't.

That kind of idiocy doesn't deserve a second of my time.

My rebuttal will be at the hall of fame induction. And lack of another.

He is doing here what Parcells couldn't.

And if Parcells is smart, his Hall of Fame speech will consist of four words: "Thank you Bill Belicheck."

Edit: For the record . . . you're "Parcells is God! Wade/Jerry is the Devil" schtick is far from entertaining. Ridiculous, played out, and completely lacking credibility are more applicable descriptions.