From: floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Floyd Goodrich)
Subject: Re: Dallas was beaten by bad luck, not the eagles!
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin Tx.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 17:38:53 GMT

jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
>floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Floyd Goodrich) writes:
>>jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
>>
>>
>>Well, while I disagree with a lot of what the original poster said, I 
>>do think that Dallas held their own for 2-3 quarters against the best 
>>team in the NFL.   While the Eagles forced a lot of breaks, you
>>can't always count on the bounces to go either for you or against you.
>>Now I'm not going to start with IFs about this game, but I do think
>>you have to look at why Dallas lost.  In spite of the 31-7 score, Philly
>>had to fight to earn the victory.  Dallas can look at this game in order
>>to focus on what they can do to beat Philly next time....
>>
>I quite don't understand your point about bounces or breaks. The
>Cowboys had some TOs and the Eagles converted them into points.
>That is not luck.

No, it's not luck; the Eagles forced Dallas to make some mistakes.  That is
a credit to the Eagles D.  But there were 2 turnovers that were flat out
mistakes on Aikman's part and 2 that were on weird plays.  Aikman can 
(hopefully for Dallas fans) correct those letdowns on his part.  In another
game in a different settings, the ball can bounce the other way in those
weird situations.  I don't think Philly really has a defensive play to
force an OL to end up fumbling a pass after he catches it, they just seized
the opportunity.  So Dallas needed a break or 2 and better QB decisions.  If
those 2 things happen, it's a different game.  If not, Philly will win
the next matchup, too.

My point was that Dallas did some things well.  I've seen the Eagles play
all 4 of their games this year, and despite the score, I think Dallas played
better against them than any of the other teams.  The way the Eagles are
playing right now, Dallas won't beat them without a bit of luck.  But they
can eliminate the stupid mistakes and hope for a bit of luck in November in
Dallas.  Situations where "luck" didn't help Dallas the past game were
not recovering 2 fumbles, an interception off a tip in the end zone, a lame
duck pass that even a Girl Scout could have intercepted, and a lineman
receiving a deflected pass.  If weird plays happen the other way in Dallas,
Philly won't have a 31-7 victory again.  That's the gist of it.

>> 2) interception in end zone- Troy, what did you think you could accomplish 
>>    with that?  OK, it was a lucky bounce into the arms of the Eagles, but
>>    you can't take that chance.  Bad decision (mostly) and a little bad luck.
>>
>This particular pass, lucky bounce as you put it, is one of those
>that "could have" "gotten in" to the intended receiver. We have all
>seen it happen in prior games, right? The only difference is if he
>makes it, it is referred to a as "great pass", "right between the numbers"
>or "he put it where only the receiver could get it".  This pass was
>INT'd and now everyone is saying, "bad decision", "should have 
>thrown it away", or "he should run in", or whatever. That is life.

Right.  And it could have fallen to the ground  ==> FG and 10-10 game.
But Aikman's misguided decision resulted in a costly TO, not an easy FG.

>> 3) wounded duck interception - OK, Troy, your arm got hit when you threw
>>    the ball.  You really couldn't have done anything about that.  Granted,
>>    90% of the time, this ball falls to the ground for an incomplete pass,
>>    but this is the Eagles.  They have a nasty habit of coming up with big
>>    defensive plays.  Good Eagles execution but a weird play.
>>
>This is where "luck" comes into play, more so than the INT in the
>end zone, IMHO. On the plus side, for the Eagles, it takes alert,
>quick reacting defenders to come up with the ball. As you stated,
>the ball usually hits the ground.

Of course, this play turned the tide of the game.  A driving Dallas team
moving toward a possible tying or go-ahead score gives the Eagles possession
on the 45.  Eagles score:  17-7.

>> 4) fumble by offensive lineman - that he ended up with the ball was sheer
>>    inanity.  That he tried to run and fumbled was more of the same.
>>
>Bad discipline by idiotic lineman. As you state, he should have just
>fallen on the damn ball. On the flip side, if he were to have picked
>it up and ran it in, he would have made the highlights and he would
>have kept the ball and gotten high-fived in the end zone. :-) Those
>are the breaks of the game.

No question: these are the breaks. The opportunistic Eagles defense took
advantage of the chance to strip the ball from someone not used to carrying 
it.  But if the Eagles have to rely on these types of plays to beat people,
they're not going to get it done very often.  Fortunately for them, they
don't have to.

>Dallas had a couple of opportunities to convert TOs into 14 points,
>but THEY didn't. It seems good, all around teams, will convert these
>TOs into points a great percentage of the time. Oops, a statistic.  :-)

True, and that's part of my point.  The Eagles defense forced Dallas to
turn the ball over. That kept Dallas from scoring and it gave the Eagles
21 points as well.  Just realize they can't always count on a QB having
a bad game or an offensive lineman fumbling.  That's all.

>You are slipping into the "IF" twilight zone.:-)

OK, how's this?  Dallas has a better chance of winning in Dallas WHEN
they eliminate silly turnovers and get a couple of lucky breaks.  :-)


Floyd Goodrich
floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com

Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro