From: rjk@dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu (Raymond K)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Dallas was beaten by bad luck, not the eagles!
Date: 9 Oct 1992 18:29:12 GMT
Organization: X-Ray Crystallography / Howard Hughes Medical Institute
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu

In article <1992Oct7.170925.7690@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> jmd@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (joseph.m.dakes) writes:
>
>"Bad luck" is losing the rights to your All-Pro TE because some judge in
>the middle of nowhere decides the way the NFL has been doing things for
>the past decade is illegal.

No, that's called "stupidity".  The Eagle organization had plenty of 
warning that they were going to lose their *former* All-Pro TE.  Even
after he got his best offer, he allowed the Eagles to match it, which
they declined to do.  If they thought that he was that important to
their team, they would have matched the offer.  Why continue to bitch
about it?

>                             "Bad luck" is losing your starting CB for a
>season due to a freak knee injury on natural grass. 

No, that's called "football".  In a game where bodies fly into bodies
and high paid, high round draft picks fall by the wayside because of
"freak injuries", nothing should be surprising.  Every team has stories
of such happenings.

>                                                   "Bad luck" is losing
>your All-World defensive lineman for an eternity so he can be part of the
>All-Heaven team.  That's "bad luck".

No, that's called "wreckless driving".

>"Bad luck" isn't throwing three interceptions against the NFL's #1 ranked
>defense when you are forced to throw the football because your rushing
>attack was completely shutdown.  That's "terrible execution" and "superior
>play" on the other side of the football.

Granted, I don't think "bad luck" is the proper term to use for this
game, or really any game.  The ball is shaped funny, sometimes things
bounce your way, sometimes they don't.  But "terrible execution" and
"superior play" doesn't quite cut it either.

>The Eagles beat the Cowboys on both sides of the ball.  It wasn't even
>close.  Anybody that says otherwise is either an optomistic Cowboys fan
>or knows nothing about football.

....or isn't an Eagles fan.  I wouldn't quite say the "Eagles beat the
Cowboys on both sides of the ball", even though I think I know something
about football and am an admitted "optimistic Cowboys fan".  But you 
can't justify this point based on the final score.  If you think you
can, why did you watch the game?  You could have just checked the final
score on the news.  The trouble is, "playing well" doesn't always
correlate to wins/losses or score.  As I've said before, the current
group of players who the Eagles rely on to win games have been around
the block a few times, have gone through the up and down weeks, and the
playoff losses.  I think they finally have learned something about
what it takes to win.  The Cowboys, like any young team learning how
to win, will acquire this also.

>The rematch at Dallas is another story, but I'll leave that to you
>Cowboys fans to discuss for now.  We Eagles fans have more important games
>to look forward to.

All fans do.  The Cowboys or their fans won't sit around bemoaning
last Monday night.  That would only lead to a "Seahawk surprise"
this Sunday!!!   :-)


Ray         GO COWBOYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!