Skins win by #21
Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 7:59 pmGibbs say its not by accident. RIP Sean Taylor! We'll see you pansies in 2 weeks. First, we have to smack around Seattle.
Page 1 of 2
Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 7:59 pmPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:07 pmthats random, but cool. im surprised espn hasnt picked up on it yet
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:06 amSo how many points did the cowgirls starters muster up? 3, I believe? Nice!
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 9:51 amBig Hoss wrote:So how many points did the cowgirls starters muster up? 3, I believe? Nice!
As long as you are using the word starters very loosely. No TO no Gurode.
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 9:54 amThis is an SMU board.
Re: Skins win by #21
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 10:40 amPonyDoh wrote:Gibbs say its not by accident. RIP Sean Taylor! We'll see you pansies in 2 weeks. First, we have to smack around Seattle.
I don't necessarily think it has to happen like this however when SMU was attracting 40-55,000 per game, the Cowboy's were struggling. Would be good for SMU if the Cowboy's started losing next yr.
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 10:48 amAs one of the faithful out at FedEX Field in the rain yesterday, it was a great game for the Redskins. I'm still a bit hoarse. Horrid game for the Cowboys. 1 yard rushing is almost unheard of. Romo was hurried often. Wide receivers looked tenative going over the middle. And the wet ball made for some sloppy play. And by the way, the Refs had a very bad day. Three calls reversed on replay. I look for the Redskins to have a tough game at Seattle and if they win that one to come really charging into Texas Stadium ready to play. I was surprised that Romo played given his thumb injury, and he looked a bit shaken up as he went off the field at halftime right after he was sacked by about 5 Redskins. But he did start the third quarter, so I assume he's okay.
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:25 amAs opposed to:SMUMan02 wrote:Big Hoss wrote:So how many points did the cowgirls starters muster up? 3, I believe? Nice!
As long as you are using the word starters very loosely. No TO no Gurode.
No Jason Campbell
No Rocky McIntosh
No Jon Jansen
and of course no Sean Taylor
Call it a wash, at least.
The advantage Washington had over Dallas was incentive, not personnel.
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:34 amDement-ed wrote:As opposed to:SMUMan02 wrote:Big Hoss wrote:So how many points did the cowgirls starters muster up? 3, I believe? Nice!
As long as you are using the word starters very loosely. No TO no Gurode.
No Jason Campbell
No Rocky McIntosh
No Jon Jansen
and of course no Sean Taylor
Call it a wash, at least.
The advantage Washington had over Dallas was incentive, not personnel.
No Randy Thomas, no Carlos Rodgers, no Brandon Lloyd...
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:03 pmEast Coast Mustang wrote:Dement-ed wrote:As opposed to:SMUMan02 wrote:Big Hoss wrote:So how many points did the cowgirls starters muster up? 3, I believe? Nice!
As long as you are using the word starters very loosely. No TO no Gurode.
No Jason Campbell
No Rocky McIntosh
No Jon Jansen
and of course no Sean Taylor
Call it a wash, at least.
The advantage Washington had over Dallas was incentive, not personnel.
No Randy Thomas, no Carlos Rodgers, no Brandon Lloyd...
I was waiting for a cowgirls fan to try to play the TO card so that I could throw out the list of players the Redskins were without. But you guys beat me to it. Bravo!
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:07 pmLet's be fair, the Cowboys would have been better off if Brandon Lloyd was on the field. How awful is that guy?
You'll be able to count the time between the end of the season and his departure from the Skins in seconds, I'd bet.
You'll be able to count the time between the end of the season and his departure from the Skins in seconds, I'd bet.
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:07 pmPlayers are irrelevant. Dallas had no motivation to win the game. Washington had all the motivation in the world.
As a Dallas fan, I'm not OK with our starters, professional athletes, playing a game in this manner, but all that matters now is the playoffs.
As a Dallas fan, I'm not OK with our starters, professional athletes, playing a game in this manner, but all that matters now is the playoffs.
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:21 pmDement-ed wrote:Let's be fair, the Cowboys would have been better off if Brandon Lloyd was on the field. How awful is that guy?
You'll be able to count the time between the end of the season and his departure from the Skins in seconds, I'd bet.
He's never lived up to the potential that he showed with San Fran, but he's a solid receiver nonetheless...and you're right, he'll probably be gone come February. That being said, we've had to bring in several WRs midseason, such as Keenan McCardell and Reche Caldwell, but they've adjusted to the offense quite nicely.
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:22 pmcouch 'em wrote:Players are irrelevant. Dallas had no motivation to win the game. Washington had all the motivation in the world.
As a Dallas fan, I'm not OK with our starters, professional athletes, playing a game in this manner, but all that matters now is the playoffs.
Does it remind you of the Mavs tanking the last week or so of the NBA regular season and then coming out flat in the playoffs?
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:51 pmYeah, it's completely unheard of that a team wins by 21. It's not like the scoring comes in multiples of 3 or 7. Why people are making this guy a martyr is beyond me.