From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Subject: Re: Dallas was beaten by bad luck, not the eagles!
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 06:02:06 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.162708.19337@oakhill.sps.mot.com> floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Floyd Goodrich) writes:
>jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
>
>>Do I hearing "moooing" here. Come on 'Boyz, you were beat. It wasn't
>>like the score was 31-30, Eagles favor. This was a stomp you, spit in
>>your face, call your sister a SL*T, and embarrass you nation wide
>>telecast. I guess the lights were too bright and the crowd was too
>>loud and biased. 'Boyz want a lollypop?
>
>Dallas played well on Monday night against Washington in a game that had
>all the hype that this one did.  Why do you think it was the spotlights
>that caused this loss instead of just the Eagles beating Dallas?  Do you
>think Dallas was really better and just choked under the lights?  I don't.
>Or were you just baiting Dallas fans?
>
First things first. I am neither an Eagles or Dallas fan. I just
dislike Dallas more. Secondly, it was sacarasm, taunting and
whatever to give the Dallas folks a "dig". With all the woofing
they spewed out prior to this game, I figured they deserved it.

>>Please don't start with your IF's and lucky breaks, or whatever. A
>>good team will convert TOs into points. That is what separates 
>>Men from the 'Boyz. If Cunningham is just *so, so*, what is 
>>Troy "Can't get no satisfaction" Aikman.
>
>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.

>Was there nothing positive for the Dallas team to think about the Philly 
>game?  Bottom line was they lost.  How can they do better in the future?
>Simple, they have to focus on what they did well in this game and eliminate
>the mistakes they made.  (I can't remember the last time Dallas turned the
>ball over 4 times and won.)
>
You asked the questions and answered them, so there is not much I
can add here.

>OK, what would you say to your team if you were the Dallas coaching staff?
>You have to reinforce the positives, eliminate the negatives, and try to
>do better next time. (Was there nothing good to say about SF's loss to Buffalo?)
>I might start by saying that we got our butts kicked, primarily because
>of turnovers and not being able to keep the ball long enough for the 
>defense to get any rest.  On the positive side, Dallas moved the ball well
>at times, only to piss away good scoring opportunities.

>And I would look at the turnovers:
> 1) interception - Aikman underthrows the ball by a couple of yards.  The
>    coverage was good, there wasn't heavy pressure.  Don't do that again
>    Troy, improve your execution, that was your fault.  Bad execution.
>
A couple of yards, a couple of inches, an INT is an INT in my book.
Beyond that, ALL QB's make mistakes.

> 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.

> 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.

> 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.

>Summary:  1 bad decision (plus a fortunate bounce), 1 bad execution, 
>          2 weird ones.  
>
>Result:  21 Eagles points and lost a chance at a FG for Dallas.
>
>Three of these turnovers came when Dallas was moving the ball fairly well.
>They killed the present drive and the momentum of the Cowboys' offense.
>Now the Eagle defense caused these turnovers.  Take nothing away from them.
>IMO, this is why the Eagles have such a good defense:  they don't make the
>big play constantly, they do what they did against Dallas.  They give up 
>a few yards, Dallas seems to be driving, then BOOM a turnover off a freak
>play.  BOOM a turnover off a bad decision by the QB.  The drive is over
>and the Eagles have the ball 50 yards away from the end zone.
>
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.  :-)

>The Eagles converted a high percentage of third downs on their (short) TD
>drives, but they never drove the ball at will (until the game was already
>out of hand) and they never went on long, sustained drives to score.  Philly
>made their breaks in the first half (or else they could have been down 14-3)
>and continued to do so in the second half to build their lead.  By 24-7, the
>game was over and the Eagles D knew Dallas had to pass.
>
>The Dallas D got to Cunningham.  He fumbled twice, but Dallas couldn't 
>recover.  They sacked him 3-4 times I think and pressured him on other
>occasions.  They intercepted him for the first time this year.  But they
>got worn down when they couldn't stay off the field in the second half.
>Walker ran wild.
>
>I think IF Aikman can overcome the mental block about playing vs. Philly,
>the second game will be much closer.  A couple of breaks go Dallas' way and
>they could win the next game.  But IF Aikman makes the decisions he made 
>in this game, the score will be about the same.  As poorly as they played,
>there were still positives for Dallas to focus on:  Dallas still moved the 
>ball on O; Philly never sustained a long drive on O (on the few occasions
>they had the opportunity to); Dallas return teams played fairly well.  
>And all this against what looks for now to be the best team in the league.
>
You are slipping into the "IF" twilight zone.:-)
>
>Floyd Goodrich
>floydg@oakhill.sps.mot.com


-- 
  ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@sysengr.pacbell.com	--------	
  Let us be thankful for the fools; but for them the rest
  of us could not succeed.  -   Mark Twain