Patriots compared to Cowboys (detailed stat analysis after w

Lexy · Joined: 16 Nov 2007 Posts: 10

On Dec 4, 2:10 pm, "observer" wrote:
> ---
>
> Based on stats accessible from the following
> websites:
>
> Pro Football Weekly
> http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL+Statistics/default.htm
>
> ESPN
> http://tinyurl.com/hncnl
>
> First off, according to Jeff Sagarin's latest
> rankings, the Patriots have had the 16th tough-
> est schedule, the Cowboys have had the 14th
> toughest schedule, with the Cowboys playing
> more top 10 and top 16 teams than the Patriots:
> http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl07.htm
>
> So, scheduling differences do not give either
> team a particular advantage in the following
> stat analysis, though if one were willing to
> argue about it, it would be the Patriots that
> have a slight advantage via a slightly weaker
> schedule.
>
> -33- stat categories were analyzed:
>
> o Cowboys lead in -15- categories
> o Patriots ahead in -17- categories
> o the teams tied in -1- category
>
> ---
>
> Red Zone Offense
>
> 2. New England, 72.2% TD percent
> 6. Dallas, 58.1% TD percent
>
> ---
>
> Red Zone Defense
>
> 25. Dallas, 56.7% TD percent allowed
> 32. New England, 70.8% TD percent allowed
>
> ---
>
> Team Efficiency - Offense
>
> 1. New England, 6.41 yards per offensive play
> 2. Dallas, 6.40 yards per offensive play
>
> ---
>
> Team Efficiency - Defense
>
> 5. Dallas, 4.87 yards allowed per defensive play
> 10. New England, 4.98 yards allowed per defensive play
>
> ---
>
> Net Turnovers
>
> 1. New England, +16
> 6. Dallas, +7
>
> ---
>
> Yards per Game
>
> 1. New England, 425.3
> 2. Dallas, 390.9
>
> ---
>
> Points per Game
>
> 1. New England, 39.1
> 2. Dallas, 32.9
>
> ---
>
> Passing Yards per Game
>
> 1. New England, 304.0
> 3. Dallas, 269.5
>
> ---
>
> Passing Yards per Attempt
>
> 1. Dallas, 8.78
> 2. New England, 8.56
>
> ---
>
> Passer-Rating
>
> 1. New England, 121.7
> 2. Dallas, 107.1
>
> ---
>
> Average Yards per Reception
>
> 1. Dallas, 13.3
> 4. New England, 12.2
>
> ---
>
> Sacks Allowed
>
> 2. New England & Dallas, 16
>
> ---
>
> Rushing Yards per Game
>
> 7. Dallas, 121.4
> 8. New England, 121.3
>
> ---
>
> Rushing Yards per Attempt
>
> 5. Dallas, 4.3
> 12. New England, 4.1
>
> ---
>
> Third Downs Percent 1st Downs Made
>
> 1. New England, 50.4%
> 5. Dallas, 48.6%
>
> ---
>
> Average Kickoff Return
>
> 2. New England, 26.5 including 2 TDs
> 21. Dallas, 22.5
>
> ---
>
> Average Punt Return
>
> 7. Dallas, 10.82
> 8. New England, 10.77
>
> ---
>
> Field Goal%
>
> 9. New England, 87.5%, including 1/2 from 40-49 yards, 0/0 from 50+ yards
> 11. Dallas, 87.0%, including 6/6 from 40-49 yards, 2/4 from 50+ yards
>
> ---
>
> Punting Net
>
> 6. Dallas, 40.9
> 20. New England, 38.4
>
> ---
>
> Yards per Game Allowed
>
> 3. New England, 289.4
> 8. Dallas, 303.9
>
> ---
>
> Points per Game Allowed
>
> 5. New England, 17.4
> 13. Dallas, 20.7
>
> ---
>
> Passing Yards per Game Allowed
>
> 6. New England, 196.6
> 18. Dallas, 218.3
>
> ---
>
> Passing Yards per Attempt Allowed
>
> 6. Dallas, 6.40
> 10. New England, 6.79
>
> ---
>
> Passer-Rating Allowed
>
> 4. Dallas, 72.6
> 10. New England, 77.0
>
> ---
>
> Average Yards per Reception Allowed
>
> 12. Dallas, 10.9
> 15. New England, 11.3
>
> ---
>
> Sacks
>
> 4. Dallas, 33
> 7. New England, 31
>
> ---
>
> Rushing Yards per Game Allowed
>
> 4. Dallas, 85.6
> 6. New England, 92.8
>
> ---
>
> Rushing Yards per Attempt Allowed
>
> 8. Dallas, 3.8
> 19. New England, 4.1
>
> ---
>
> Third Downs Percent 1st Downs Allowed
>
> 5. New England, 33.8%
> 11. Dallas, 38.8%
>
> ---
>
> Average Kickoff Return Allowed
>
> 9. New England, 21.6
> 18. Dallas, 23.1
>
> ---
>
> Average Punt Return Allowed
>
> 9. New England, 7.6
> 29. Dallas, 12.5
>
> ---
>
> Field Goal% Allowed
>
> 17. Dallas, 81.8%
> 28. New England, 90.0%
>
> ---
>
> Punting Net Allowed
>
> 23. New England, 40.2
> 30. Dallas, 42.6
>
> ---
Seems the teams are pretty close on most of those stats with Dallas
having tiny edges over the Pats.Redzone offense and defense look like
a wide desparity.Somehow I don't think a Pats/Cowboys rematch will end
up a blowout by the Pats.I think they have a good chance to beat them
in the Superbowl.Of course the Pats will be heavily favored.Would be
awesome if the 'Boys proved them wrong

Archived from group: alt>sports>football>pro>dallas-cowboys

observer · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 196

---

Based on stats accessible from the following
websites:

Pro Football Weekly
http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL+Statistics/default.htm

ESPN
http://tinyurl.com/hncnl

First off, according to Jeff Sagarin's latest
rankings, the Patriots have had the 16th tough-
est schedule, the Cowboys have had the 14th
toughest schedule, with the Cowboys playing
more top 10 and top 16 teams than the Patriots:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl07.htm

So, scheduling differences do not give either
team a particular advantage in the following
stat analysis, though if one were willing to
argue about it, it would be the Patriots that
have a slight advantage via a slightly weaker
schedule.

-33- stat categories were analyzed:

o Cowboys lead in -15- categories
o Patriots ahead in -17- categories
o the teams tied in -1- category

---

Red Zone Offense

2. New England, 72.2% TD percent
6. Dallas, 58.1% TD percent

---

Red Zone Defense

25. Dallas, 56.7% TD percent allowed
32. New England, 70.8% TD percent allowed

---

Team Efficiency - Offense

1. New England, 6.41 yards per offensive play
2. Dallas, 6.40 yards per offensive play

---

Team Efficiency - Defense

5. Dallas, 4.87 yards allowed per defensive play
10. New England, 4.98 yards allowed per defensive play

---

Net Turnovers

1. New England, +16
6. Dallas, +7

---

Yards per Game

1. New England, 425.3
2. Dallas, 390.9

---

Points per Game

1. New England, 39.1
2. Dallas, 32.9

---

Passing Yards per Game

1. New England, 304.0
3. Dallas, 269.5

---

Passing Yards per Attempt

1. Dallas, 8.78
2. New England, 8.56

---

Passer-Rating

1. New England, 121.7
2. Dallas, 107.1

---

Average Yards per Reception

1. Dallas, 13.3
4. New England, 12.2

---

Sacks Allowed

2. New England & Dallas, 16

---

Rushing Yards per Game

7. Dallas, 121.4
8. New England, 121.3

---

Rushing Yards per Attempt

5. Dallas, 4.3
12. New England, 4.1

---

Third Downs Percent 1st Downs Made

1. New England, 50.4%
5. Dallas, 48.6%

---

Average Kickoff Return

2. New England, 26.5 including 2 TDs
21. Dallas, 22.5

---

Average Punt Return

7. Dallas, 10.82
8. New England, 10.77

---

Field Goal%

9. New England, 87.5%, including 1/2 from 40-49 yards, 0/0 from 50+ yards
11. Dallas, 87.0%, including 6/6 from 40-49 yards, 2/4 from 50+ yards

---

Punting Net

6. Dallas, 40.9
20. New England, 38.4

---

Yards per Game Allowed

3. New England, 289.4
8. Dallas, 303.9

---

Points per Game Allowed

5. New England, 17.4
13. Dallas, 20.7

---

Passing Yards per Game Allowed

6. New England, 196.6
18. Dallas, 218.3

---

Passing Yards per Attempt Allowed

6. Dallas, 6.40
10. New England, 6.79

---

Passer-Rating Allowed

4. Dallas, 72.6
10. New England, 77.0

---

Average Yards per Reception Allowed

12. Dallas, 10.9
15. New England, 11.3

---

Sacks

4. Dallas, 33
7. New England, 31

---

Rushing Yards per Game Allowed

4. Dallas, 85.6
6. New England, 92.8

---

Rushing Yards per Attempt Allowed

8. Dallas, 3.8
19. New England, 4.1

---

Third Downs Percent 1st Downs Allowed

5. New England, 33.8%
11. Dallas, 38.8%

---

Average Kickoff Return Allowed

9. New England, 21.6
18. Dallas, 23.1

---

Average Punt Return Allowed

9. New England, 7.6
29. Dallas, 12.5

---

Field Goal% Allowed

17. Dallas, 81.8%
28. New England, 90.0%

---

Punting Net Allowed

23. New England, 40.2
30. Dallas, 42.6

---

Preacher · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 50

observer wrote:
> "Venger" wrote ...
>> Justin Pate wrote:
>>> The Patriots right now are the better team. No excuses or spin, please. We
>>> should not act like Packer fans.
>> Agreed. Patriots have shown on the field they are better than us.
>> Doesn't mean we can't beat them, but they sure as hell can beat us.
>
> The Patriots, near-losses to the Eagles,
> a team the Cowboys whooped 38-17
> in Philly with McNabb at QB, and the
> Ravens, a team ranked among the bottom-
> dwellers in the league, and no, the Patriots
> aren't riding high, but instead are beginning
> to show some weaknesses.
>
> As for the win over the Cowboys, they
> were the better team that day. As for what
> has transpired since then, both teams are
> undefeated.
>
> A rematch? I'll be interested in seeing how
> well the Cowboys can play on the defen-
> sive side of the ball once Anthony Henry
> returns to starter status. That's a potential
> difference-maker that few Cowboys fans
> have paid all that much attention to. And
> on offense, even with Terry Glenn in re-
> hab, Tony has excelled, so the skies the
> limit as to what the Cowboys can do if/
> when Terry returns.
>
> And, of course, having the game film from
> the Eagles and Ravens and Colts near-wins,
> in addition to 14 days rest rather than 6
> after an emotional Monday night win, those
> factors are bonuses the Cowboys didn't have
> the first time around, but will have were a
> rematch to take place.

I don't hear anyone saying that the Cowboys wouldn't have a chance
against these guys. In fact, I think most of us Dallas fans are anxious
for a re-match, and think Dallas has a pretty good shot.

But all the statistics in the world won't change that the Pats beat the
Cowboys - in Dallas, no less. Dallas was in that game most of the way,
and even led in the 3rd quarter, so it's clear that they can hang with
NE. But don't expect anyone to be wowed by who has the edge in punt
return average or yards allowed per pass attempted.

NE is better until Dallas proves otherwise on the field.

Mattu · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 51

On Dec 4, 2:20 pm, "MZ" wrote:
> "observer" wrote in message
>
> $0$22427$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
>
>
>
> > The Patriots, near-losses to the Eagles,
> > a team the Cowboys whooped 38-17
> > in Philly with McNabb at QB, and the
> > Ravens, a team ranked among the bottom-
> > dwellers in the league, and no, the Patriots
> > aren't riding high, but instead are beginning
> > to show some weaknesses.
>
> > As for the win over the Cowboys, they
> > were the better team that day. As for what
> > has transpired since then, both teams are
> > undefeated.
>
> > A rematch? I'll be interested in seeing how
> > well the Cowboys can play on the defen-
> > sive side of the ball once Anthony Henry
> > returns to starter status. That's a potential
> > difference-maker that few Cowboys fans
> > have paid all that much attention to. And
> > on offense, even with Terry Glenn in re-
> > hab, Tony has excelled, so the skies the
> > limit as to what the Cowboys can do if/
> > when Terry returns.
>
> After having watched the game last night, do you STILL believe that Richard
> Seymour isn't a significant upgrade over Jarvis Green? And so why is
> Anthony Henry such a key upgrade from the last matchup while Richard Seymour
> isn't?
>
> > And, of course, having the game film from
> > the Eagles and Ravens and Colts near-wins,
>
> You mean the "blueprints"?

Near-wins? Aren't those normally called losses?

Justin Pate · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 18

The Patriots right now are the better team. No excuses or spin, please. We
should not act like Packer fans.

observer · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 196

"Justin Pate" wrote ...
>
> The Patriots right now are the better team. No excuses
> or spin, please. We should not act like Packer fans.

The stats don't show a clear superiority by
either team, but instead show that the Cow-
boys and Patriots are surprisingly close.

Keep in mind, the Cowboys don't have a pol-
icy of 'running up the score', so when the Cow-
boys have dominated a team, they tend to back
off rather than trying to rub it in the opponent's
face.

The Patriots, on the other hand, think that wide
victory margins are good for morale, and as
such, one wonders what those close games
(near-losses) versus the Eagles and Ravens
are doing to their confidence.

Their next opponent, the Steelers, per the Sagarin
rankings, they've had the weakest schedule this
season, but with a strong running game and the
league's leading defense and a strong QB, they
should have a good shot at pulling off an upset.
Add to that the recent Patriots' near-losses, and
I certainly am not convinced that your assertion,
"the Patriots are the better team" rings true.

---

MZ · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 130

"observer" wrote in message $0$22413$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
>
> ---
>
> Based on stats accessible from the following
> websites:
>
> Pro Football Weekly
> http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL+Statistics/default.htm
>
> ESPN
> http://tinyurl.com/hncnl
>
> First off, according to Jeff Sagarin's latest
> rankings, the Patriots have had the 16th tough-
> est schedule, the Cowboys have had the 14th
> toughest schedule, with the Cowboys playing
> more top 10 and top 16 teams than the Patriots:
> http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl07.htm
>
> So, scheduling differences do not give either
> team a particular advantage in the following
> stat analysis, though if one were willing to
> argue about it, it would be the Patriots that
> have a slight advantage via a slightly weaker
> schedule.
>
> -33- stat categories were analyzed:
>
> o Cowboys lead in -15- categories
> o Patriots ahead in -17- categories
> o the teams tied in -1- category

Which team leads in the relevant one? You know, win-loss record?

Venger · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 55

Justin Pate wrote:
> The Patriots right now are the better team. No excuses or spin, please. We
> should not act like Packer fans.

Agreed. Patriots have shown on the field they are better than us.
Doesn't mean we can't beat them, but they sure as hell can beat us.

Venger

observer · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 196

"Venger" wrote ...
>
> Justin Pate wrote:
> >
> > The Patriots right now are the better team. No excuses or spin, please. We
> > should not act like Packer fans.
>
> Agreed. Patriots have shown on the field they are better than us.
> Doesn't mean we can't beat them, but they sure as hell can beat us.

The Patriots, near-losses to the Eagles,
a team the Cowboys whooped 38-17
in Philly with McNabb at QB, and the
Ravens, a team ranked among the bottom-
dwellers in the league, and no, the Patriots
aren't riding high, but instead are beginning
to show some weaknesses.

As for the win over the Cowboys, they
were the better team that day. As for what
has transpired since then, both teams are
undefeated.

A rematch? I'll be interested in seeing how
well the Cowboys can play on the defen-
sive side of the ball once Anthony Henry
returns to starter status. That's a potential
difference-maker that few Cowboys fans
have paid all that much attention to. And
on offense, even with Terry Glenn in re-
hab, Tony has excelled, so the skies the
limit as to what the Cowboys can do if/
when Terry returns.

And, of course, having the game film from
the Eagles and Ravens and Colts near-wins,
in addition to 14 days rest rather than 6
after an emotional Monday night win, those
factors are bonuses the Cowboys didn't have
the first time around, but will have were a
rematch to take place.

---

observer · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 196

"MZ" wrote ...
>
> "observer" wrote ...
> >
> > The Patriots, near-losses to the Eagles,
> > a team the Cowboys whooped 38-17
> > in Philly with McNabb at QB, and the
> > Ravens, a team ranked among the bottom-
> > dwellers in the league, and no, the Patriots
> > aren't riding high, but instead are beginning
> > to show some weaknesses.
> >
> > As for the win over the Cowboys, they
> > were the better team that day. As for what
> > has transpired since then, both teams are
> > undefeated.
> >
> > A rematch? I'll be interested in seeing how
> > well the Cowboys can play on the defen-
> > sive side of the ball once Anthony Henry
> > returns to starter status. That's a potential
> > difference-maker that few Cowboys fans
> > have paid all that much attention to. And
> > on offense, even with Terry Glenn in re-
> > hab, Tony has excelled, so the skies the
> > limit as to what the Cowboys can do if/
> > when Terry returns.
>
> After having watched the game last night, do you STILL believe that Richard
> Seymour isn't a significant upgrade over Jarvis Green? And so why is
> Anthony Henry such a key upgrade from the last matchup while Richard
> Seymour isn't?

Excuse me, I fail to see the big improvement
in run defense that some thought Seymour
would bring. The Patriots run defense looks
weak.

As for Anthony Henry over Jacques Reeves,
that improvement will not only help the Cow-
boys pass defense, but will help all defensive
areas, including the pass rush which the Cow-
boys already excel in -and- the rush defense
which the Cowboys already excel in.

>
> > And, of course, having the game film from
> > the Eagles and Ravens and Colts near-wins,
>
> You mean the "blueprints"?

MZ · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 130

"observer" wrote in message $0$22419$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
>
> "Justin Pate" wrote ...
>>
>> The Patriots right now are the better team. No excuses
>> or spin, please. We should not act like Packer fans.
>
> The stats don't show a clear superiority by
> either team, but instead show that the Cow-
> boys and Patriots are surprisingly close.

12-0 vs. 11-1.

It's pretty close and nobody's surprised.

> Keep in mind, the Cowboys don't have a pol-
> icy of 'running up the score', so when the Cow-
> boys have dominated a team, they tend to back
> off rather than trying to rub it in the opponent's
> face.

So do the Pats, hence the whole "taking out your starters" thing.

> The Patriots, on the other hand, think that wide
> victory margins are good for morale, and as
> such, one wonders what those close games
> (near-losses) versus the Eagles and Ravens
> are doing to their confidence.
>
> Their next opponent, the Steelers, per the Sagarin
> rankings, they've had the weakest schedule this
> season, but with a strong running game and the
> league's leading defense and a strong QB, they
> should have a good shot at pulling off an upset.
> Add to that the recent Patriots' near-losses, and
> I certainly am not convinced that your assertion,
> "the Patriots are the better team" rings true.

12-0 vs. 11-1.

observer · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 196

"Preacher" wrote ...
>
> "observer" wrote ...
> >
> > "Venger" wrote ...
> >>
> >> Justin Pate wrote ...
> >>>
> >>> The Patriots right now are the better team. No excuses or spin, please. We
> >>> should not act like Packer fans.
> >>
> >> Agreed. Patriots have shown on the field they are better than us.
> >> Doesn't mean we can't beat them, but they sure as hell can beat us.
> >
> > The Patriots, near-losses to the Eagles,
> > a team the Cowboys whooped 38-17
> > in Philly with McNabb at QB, and the
> > Ravens, a team ranked among the bottom-
> > dwellers in the league, and no, the Patriots
> > aren't riding high, but instead are beginning
> > to show some weaknesses.
> >
> > As for the win over the Cowboys, they
> > were the better team that day. As for what
> > has transpired since then, both teams are
> > undefeated.
> >
> > A rematch? I'll be interested in seeing how
> > well the Cowboys can play on the defen-
> > sive side of the ball once Anthony Henry
> > returns to starter status. That's a potential
> > difference-maker that few Cowboys fans
> > have paid all that much attention to. And
> > on offense, even with Terry Glenn in re-
> > hab, Tony has excelled, so the skies the
> > limit as to what the Cowboys can do if/
> > when Terry returns.
> >
> > And, of course, having the game film from
> > the Eagles and Ravens and Colts near-wins,
> > in addition to 14 days rest rather than 6
> > after an emotional Monday night win, those
> > factors are bonuses the Cowboys didn't have
> > the first time around, but will have were a
> > rematch to take place.
>
> I don't hear anyone saying that the Cowboys wouldn't have a chance
> against these guys. In fact, I think most of us Dallas fans are anxious
> for a re-match, and think Dallas has a pretty good shot.
>
> But all the statistics in the world won't change that the Pats beat the
> Cowboys - in Dallas, no less. Dallas was in that game most of the way,
> and even led in the 3rd quarter, so it's clear that they can hang with
> NE. But don't expect anyone to be wowed by who has the edge in punt
> return average or yards allowed per pass attempted.
>
> NE is better until Dallas proves otherwise on the field.

The stats reveal a lot about team's strengths
and weaknesses, and show amazing similar-
ities between a team some thought (pre-
Eagles and pre-Ravens games) were un-
beatable -and- a team that no one on the
planet predicted would have a legitimate
shot at a 15-1 record with 4 games left in
the season.

ESPN blowhards, like Sean Salisbury, are
drooling over the Patriots, were the Cow-
boys to make it to a Super Bowl game
against them, having a *14* to *21* point
advantage in that game.

Lunacy, the Eagles and Ravens coming
within a hair of beating 'em, and the best
non-Patriots team in football said to be
a *14* to *21* point underdog.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong, but I
see reason to believe that the Cowboys,
with Anthony Henry in starter health
status, and with Terry Glenn, and with
the factors mentioned above, will be a
lot more for New England to handle than
they were coming off an emotional Mon-
day night win the first time around.

---

Of course, I also believe that the Packers
may very well be a lot more for the Cow-
boys to handle, with Woodson & KGB
& Favre healthy, than they were in the
first meeting, were they and the Cowboys
to meet in the NFC Championship game.

---

MZ · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 130

"observer" wrote in message $0$22427$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
> The Patriots, near-losses to the Eagles,
> a team the Cowboys whooped 38-17
> in Philly with McNabb at QB, and the
> Ravens, a team ranked among the bottom-
> dwellers in the league, and no, the Patriots
> aren't riding high, but instead are beginning
> to show some weaknesses.
>
> As for the win over the Cowboys, they
> were the better team that day. As for what
> has transpired since then, both teams are
> undefeated.
>
> A rematch? I'll be interested in seeing how
> well the Cowboys can play on the defen-
> sive side of the ball once Anthony Henry
> returns to starter status. That's a potential
> difference-maker that few Cowboys fans
> have paid all that much attention to. And
> on offense, even with Terry Glenn in re-
> hab, Tony has excelled, so the skies the
> limit as to what the Cowboys can do if/
> when Terry returns.

After having watched the game last night, do you STILL believe that Richard
Seymour isn't a significant upgrade over Jarvis Green? And so why is
Anthony Henry such a key upgrade from the last matchup while Richard Seymour
isn't?

> And, of course, having the game film from
> the Eagles and Ravens and Colts near-wins,

You mean the "blueprints"?

MZ · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 130

"observer" wrote in message $0$22430$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
>
> "MZ" wrote ...
>>
>> "observer" wrote ...
>> >
>> > The Patriots, near-losses to the Eagles,
>> > a team the Cowboys whooped 38-17
>> > in Philly with McNabb at QB, and the
>> > Ravens, a team ranked among the bottom-
>> > dwellers in the league, and no, the Patriots
>> > aren't riding high, but instead are beginning
>> > to show some weaknesses.
>> >
>> > As for the win over the Cowboys, they
>> > were the better team that day. As for what
>> > has transpired since then, both teams are
>> > undefeated.
>> >
>> > A rematch? I'll be interested in seeing how
>> > well the Cowboys can play on the defen-
>> > sive side of the ball once Anthony Henry
>> > returns to starter status. That's a potential
>> > difference-maker that few Cowboys fans
>> > have paid all that much attention to. And
>> > on offense, even with Terry Glenn in re-
>> > hab, Tony has excelled, so the skies the
>> > limit as to what the Cowboys can do if/
>> > when Terry returns.
>>
>> After having watched the game last night, do you STILL believe that
>> Richard
>> Seymour isn't a significant upgrade over Jarvis Green? And so why is
>> Anthony Henry such a key upgrade from the last matchup while Richard
>> Seymour isn't?
>
> Excuse me, I fail to see the big improvement
> in run defense that some thought Seymour
> would bring. The Patriots run defense looks
> weak.

It might look weak, but it looks a lot weaker with Jarvis Green in there
than with Seymour in there.

> As for Anthony Henry over Jacques Reeves,
> that improvement will not only help the Cow-
> boys pass defense, but will help all defensive
> areas, including the pass rush which the Cow-
> boys already excel in -and- the rush defense
> which the Cowboys already excel in.

Yes, Anthony Henry is better than Reeves. But I'm still not sure how you
can pump up that upgrade will completely dismissing the addition of Richard
Seymour -- a guy who most people think is um...a pretty good player.

QuiGon · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 99

"observer" wrote in message $0$22427$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
>
> And, of course, having the game film from
> the Eagles and Ravens and Colts near-wins,
> in addition to 14 days rest rather than 6
> after an emotional Monday night win, those
> factors are bonuses the Cowboys didn't have
> the first time around, but will have were a
> rematch to take place.

And how do you plan to simulate 50 MPH wind gusts in Arizona...? Maybe a
sandstorm will hit Glendale and the retractable roof will malfunction in the
"open" position....