SPORTSDAY

Posted by Joseph from Houston @ 4:49 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

Those Cowboys were definitely the most stacked team in NFL history--and I'd argue that they may have been even better with the addition of Deion the next year or the year after that. HOF players: Aikman, Smith, Irvin, Woodson, maybe Haley, maybe Novaceck. The Pats maybe have 2 with Brady and Moss, but who else? Boys definitley have the edge!

Posted by Mike @ 4:50 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

Oh Jimmy broke NFL rules by cheating? I wasn't aware of this. What did he do? Do you have that scoop Timmy? I mean, unless you do there's no reason to assume he did, like most other coaches.

I think it's a very over-spoken assumption that "everyone cheats". I didn't hear that "everyone cheats" until Belicheat got caught. I'm not gonna minimize his offense by saying "everyone else does it" because I've never heard of it.

Posted by Mark @ 4:54 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

Look, our team this year has nothing on the team of '93, and we played them pretty strong.

I will take not only the '93 Cowboys, but the 49'ers and the Bills, too.

Posted by Brandon B @ 4:56 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

The depth of the Cowboys' offensive and defensive lines would sway the game in the Cowboys favor. And how soon we forget the greatness of Aikman. Brady might be able to move a hair better than Aikman, but Aikman had a much, much better arm than Brady. I won't argue the receivers other than to say you are smoking crack if you think Irvin didn't have the same game-breaking ability as Moss. Irvin didn't torch defenses, but when you needed 7 yards on third down, Irvin always kept the drive alive. Moss is great, but he isn't great at picking up the tough yards that prolong drives.

Posted by Roland @ 4:56 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

Add to Coaching: the fact that coaches told Jerry when he joined the Competition Committee that EVERYONE knew the Cowboys' plays and still couldn't stop them. So add a category for SWAGGER: (Cowboys +3)

Posted by Mr.ToddMunn @ 4:58 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

It's funny that people would even bother to argue which team was best. Hands down it would be the Cowboys!

Its for the simple reason that free agency back then was NOT the same as it is now. Back then teams were able to keep a large cluster of very talented players on one roster w/o worrying about the cap.

The Pats have a system (with the exception of a few players) largely run by no-name players. Their players play well within the system and that is what makes the Pats good. It helps that they have Brady, Moss, and some notable defensive players. But by and large, the Pats personnel overall would not be able to keep up with a stacked team like the 90s Cowboys.

You put this Pats team against the early 90's 49ers or Cowboys and it would be a no contest. Cowboys or 49ers would handily win against these Pats.

Posted by rick @ 5:02 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

hey the 93 team was not in a salary cap era like these days. you had damn good teams in san fran, green bay, washington and green bay. the pats would be on the 2nd tier in the 90's. this leaque is awful. the dynasty of the 90's will always be the measuring stick. any of the superbowl teams in the 90'S COULD BEAT THESE PATS.

Posted by Brad in Miami @ 5:08 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

I think you're all forgetting that no one gives a crap what Goose has to say about anything.

Posted by clay @ 5:15 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

Yeah, Dallas wins out with the more talented roster, even if Tim overstates the advantage at a couple spots It's all about winning at the line of scrimmage and the Dallas O-line would do that, even against Seymore and Wilfork. On the other side, the Haley, Jeffcoat and Tolbert would generate at least as good a pass rush as Indy did, and is probably a little better than Indy at linebacker and in the secondary. NE running game would also be a non factor. With all that and the Cowboy's ball control O, I wouldn't see NE scoring more than about 20, which wouldn't be enough.

Posted by ap @ 5:24 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

"SS Rodney Harrison can take all the HGH in the world and he won't be as good as Darren Woodson. "

Amen.

You really think that the corners are a wash? I don't recall K-Smith being as big of a ball hawk as Asante Samuels currently is. But I only remember his post-achilles playing period.

Posted by JV @ 5:24 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

Look how many good teams there were in the 90's. The NFC East around that time was dominant.

Look at the Pats division right now, Jets suck, Dolphins suck, Bills suck, thats 6 wins right there!! I'll add to that, Raiders suck, 49'ers suck, Bengals suck,...

I think you get the point. The state of the NFL right now is junior varsity.

Goose has a screw loose.

Posted by colorado kool aid @ 5:25 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

I'll take Aikman in '93 over any QB to ever play the game -- his passes were ALWAYS on target and got there in a hurry. I think Jimmy would have won 4 Super Bowls in a row had he been coaching the Cowboys -- I'm curious what you think he did that was cheating . . . if you make the claim, provide something to back it up with. The 93 Cowboys were the best in NFL history and would beat even this great Patriots team -- which is heading to #2 status.

Posted by Jeff L. @ 5:29 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

I'd have to agree with giving the edge to the 93 Cowboys.

Leaning on the power running game like they did, with that offesive line, they were tough to stop. While Aikman was awesome, the team had the ability to win games without him if he went down (Garrett, Wilson, etc) If you pluck Brady from the Patriots' lineup, they'd be in trouble.

Posted by david @ 5:37 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

There are a number of teams in the past that would kill any team in the present league.

Posted by David Hickey @ 5:57 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

The 1993 Cowboys beat three Hall of Fame QB's during their playoff run (Favre, Young and Kelly) by a combined 44 points, for what it's worth. We'll see who the Pats beat the in playoffs this year.

I would like to see an expert analysis on the 1992-95 Cowboys vs. the 2001-04 Patriots to see which was the better "3 Super Bowls in 4 years" team of all time. Of course, if the Pats win it all again this year, we may have to concede that they had the better run, but with a big hairy asterisk.

Posted by misterbretty @ 5:59 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

I always think these comparisons of offensive line vs. offensive line are dumb. The opposing offensive lines aren't on the field at the same time! The matchup comparisons should be the Cowboys O-line versus the Patriots D-line. That will give you a better idea of who'd win. (Although I still think the 1993 Cowboys matchup very well and probably would win).

Posted by Steve C @ 6:02 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

"Oh Jimmy broke NFL rules by cheating? I wasn't aware of this. What did he do? Do you have that scoop Timmy? I mean, unless you do there's no reason to assume he did, like most other coaches.

...

Posted by: Mike | November 14, 2007 4:50 PM"

==================
Dear Mike,

I know you think you are awesome, especially with the tone of your comment. However, a simple Google search of "Jimmy Johnson admits to cheating" shows clearly that Timmy Mac didn't make this story up.
Maybe you should re-consider how awesome you are, or at least spend 10 seconds on Google.

Posted by DougO @ 7:15 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

Dallas in the Nineties would kill this team. Their second string could probably give them a good game. And not just Dallas, but most good teams in that era. The Pats might be a wild card in 93.

This is one of the weakest leagues in NFL history, as shown also by top heavy records by Green Bay, yes even Dallas, Indy, Detroit, etc. Seriously, are any of those teams have such a guady record in a good, deep league where you play a dangerous team every week?

The Patriots are nowhere close to that level. In fact, I don't even think this is the best Patriots team. The previous versions had far better defenses and more depth.

Posted by Michael @ 9:33 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

My top 2 reasons for thinking that the game would Dallas' way have more to do with the era than anything else:
a) as others have pointed out, there was no salary cap and free agency was only on the horizon.
b) the depth of the Dallas team was great due to a) as well as the fact that there were only 28 teams back then. That means that the 212 players allocated to the 4 additional teams were really dispersed over the remaining 28 teams.

To think of it another way, there are 212 players in the NFL right now who would not have had NFL employment had the league not expanded. If uniformly distributed, that means that on every team there are 7 to 8 guys who would not be in the league.

That, to me, shows that the Patriots team would be relatively watered down vs. the Dallas team.

All that said, give NE their due. They ARE great and what we're witnessing may not be done again for another 40 years.

Posted by Stevo @ 9:48 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

Let's see em win the superbowl before goose brings out the anointing oil. Remember a couple years back when USC was supposed to be "the greatest college team ever" and then had vince young kick their butts? I HOPE the pats go undefeated into the superbowl, it will make it that much sweeter when the cowboys (or someone) upsets them.

Posted by Saint Jimmy @ 9:57 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

The NFL was much different before true free agency and then later the salary cap. The good teams were absolutely stacked at each position. And prior to this season I would have put money on the 93 Cowboys backups to beat the Cheats starters. But this year I think that the Cheats might have made it a pretty good game although they'd still lose by double-digits.

Another thing to consider when comparing both teams. Other teams in the NFL knew what plays and defenses we were going to run but STILL couldn't beat us. As good as the Cheats have been this year I seriously doubt that they would be nearly as good if they told the other team what they were going to run.

Posted by Hester @ 10:09 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

"Back in my day, we played without helmets or pads. Those teams back then would eat the Patriots for breakfast" Gimme a break!!! You guys are all high and mighty with some of these claims its almost laughable. And Jimmy Johnson has been a staunch supporter of Bill Belichick. He even explained how he used to film defensive signals from the sidelines all the time unless the press box was opposite the other team (Away games, games the Patriots got caught). So every team does do it fellas, Jimmy admits it!!! Because its not a big deal!! Jimmy did admonish BB though because he kept doing it after the memo earlier this year. Thats why BB got fined so heavily, not because its something new.

Posted by TSmith @ 10:23 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

so do the cowboys have a video library of defensive signals from the opposing sideline that needs to be turned over to the nfl? Did Jimmy take them home with him when he quit? Jimmy sniffed to much hairspray the day he made that comment. Since the Pats library of stolen goods doesn't go back to 93 I say the Cowboys win this one. However, the Pats could maybe have beaten the Bills to get a shot at the Cowboys.

Posted by Gary @ 11:01 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

I'm sorry, folks, but I think every team since about '97 or so should bear an asterisk called salary-cap free agency. Since every team suffers from the same disadvantage, you can't see it so much in watching teams playing each other, but relative to earlier teams they suffer enormous disadvantages. Players do not stay on one team long enough (particularly in areas like offensive line) to develop the kind of intricate coordination that was the norm, at least for better teams; even less can any team have the depth of talent that the dynasty teams of old had. So this one's not even close.

Posted by Scott @ 11:29 PM Wed, Nov 14, 2007

93 Cowboys have huge advantages at Running Back, Offensive Line, and Defensive Line. I don't buy Brady over Aikman (call that even) or Moss over Irvin (exactly what has Moss done in really big games, like the playoffs). It's easy to make plays against weak opponents; it's a lot tougher when the against a quality opponent when the season is on the line. Not only does Dallas win easily, the 07 Patriots wouldn't even make it to the Super Bowl. That years Bills was definitely a better team.

Posted by Mike @ 12:17 AM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Steve C nice attempt at trying to be more "awesome" than me but it's not gonna happen in this lifetime. See, I have the facts and logic on my side. You? Stupidity.

See, all the other teams were doing it TOGETHER. Why does that make a difference? It makes for an even playing field. DO-YOU-UNDERSTAND? I'll say again because you appear to be a bit slow: EVEN PLAYING FIELD. IN OTHER WORDS, THERE'S BALANCE.

When you are the only team doing this and breaking an NFL rule in the process it's worthy of all the attention, asterisks, criticism, embarrassment, and contempt generated.

Sorry, but the asterisk on the Pats' "dynasty" will never go away. It's a marked advantage to have and myself and everyone else with a brain will make sure everyone is aware and reminded of it from here on out. All your excuses, defenses, and sermons from Wesley Crusher, I mean Albert Breer, will be futile.

Have a nice day.

Long live King Mike.

Posted by D.B. from N.M. @ 12:49 AM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Yeah, Jimmy Johnson admitted to doing the same thing Belichick did. In fact, he said everybody did it. The reason why its a big deal is because Goodell sent out a memo to the teams at the beginning of the season not to do it anymore but Belichick continued to do it. Mangini busted Belichick and threw him under the media bus.

Unfortunately, the Patriots are that good I guess, because of Brady, Moss, Welker, and a damn good offensive line. Its not a chess match to the Patriots. Its checkers. Defenses plays press, Brady throws deep to Randy Moss. Defense plays back coverage, you throw to Welker on a slant. If both are covered you throw to Watson or Stallworth. If all else fails, you throw your checkdown to Faulk. This is just what Brady does so well. He reads defenses and he has help from the coordinators who communicates to him through the helmet. To play defense against the Pats you dont play to stop the run and make Brady beat you because he will beat you. Bottom line, defenses need to key on Brady!!!

Oh sorry.....got on a rant. I hate the Patriots!!!

Posted by STEVE WAINWRIGHT @ 6:46 AM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

ANYONE EVER NOTICE GOOSE ALMOST ALWAYS PICKS THE UNDERDOG TO WIN ON THE WEEKLY PICKS. I THINK HE'S DOING IT AGAIN.

Posted by Joe @ 2:20 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Geez.....I seem to remember that the Cowboys actually lost a couple of games that year. The 2007 New England Patriots have not and WILL NOT lose a game this year.

By the way the Patriots clearly win at Defensive Line and the Secondary....and the most obvious overreach is the Coaching aspect. Bill Belichick is the Greatest Head Coach in Football History. We are talking about a guy in the relm of Lombardi and Walsh. Johnson was a nice coach for a couple of years but come on.

Posted by B. Real @ 2:32 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

The least you could have done was be realistic. Are you kidding? Better yet - I will give you a re-do in February after the Patriots are 19-0. This Patriots team would have wiped the floor with the 93 Cowboys - unless, your Patrick Crayton, that numbskull doesn't even think they will make it to Arizona. What a bunch of yahoos you got on that newspaper. objective? fair? balanced? unbiased? NOT!

Typical newspaper just trying to pander to its dwindling readership!

Posted by the one and only #81 @ 2:43 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

what are you people on down there in Texas? seriously? im not even gonna talk trash cause i cant even understand how you came to your conclusion.....i mean seriously!Belichick is the best coach in NFL history and in your ratings you even point out the fact that he has more SuperBowls and he isnt even retired yet!...i mean seriously guys lets try to be objective instead of just boostin your egos...please....

Posted by Thomas F. Brady @ 2:48 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!im sorry i just read that someone on here thinks the '93 Bills are better than the present day Pats........HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! like my boy Randy just said what are you guys on?!?!? honestly we all want to know up here in the Bean we are gettin jealous i mean we go to work every day while you just sit at home takin halucenagenics(sp)all day....

Posted by rick @ 2:50 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

You are idiots. You think that secondary would stop Moss, Welker and Stallworth? Think again. And the defense of the Pats is wayyyyy smarter than the Cowboys--Pats would win 29-17. Belichick, Brady and the rest are more competitive than those stacked teams. With Deion--you might have a chance.

Posted by JDG @ 2:51 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

First of all the Patriots D-Line is much better than the Cowboys D-Line ever was.

Bill B. will go down as one of the top 3 coaches in NFL HISTORY! Jimmy J. was a great coach no doubt, but doesn't that fact that they won after he left prove this point??

Finally, these Patriots will go down as the Greatest of All Time if they run the table. That will also mean they won there 4th title. Something those Cowboys never did.

Posted by Ken @ 2:58 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

I would say this is a good piece for discussion. I remember the Dallas team of 93' and I think they would have beaten the Patriots. Even as a Patriots fan I would like to think the opposite. The thing that impressed me with the Dallas team was their dominance on the offensive and defensive line. Would Brady have time to throw? Could the Patriots run the ball? This is really the main question. I think Dallas would have been able to run and pass enough to win the game. I think the Dallas defense could probably stop the Pats offense just enough. The only way the Pats would win could be by Belicheck designing a great game plan.

Posted by Butcha @ 3:08 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Todays Patriots would have destroyed the Cowboys secondary but overall the Cowboys defense may have held the Pats to 50 points. Let's face it,, the Patriots would have knocked Aikman out of the game by halftime. J. jones would have been crying on the sidelines just like he was a couple of weeks ago. Patriots 45 Cowboys 3

Posted by Dallas1977 @ 3:18 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

"Finally, these Patriots will go down as the Greatest of All Time if they run the table. That will also mean they won there 4th title. Something those Cowboys never did."

Posted by: JDG | November 15, 2007 2:51 PM

JDG,

Apparently they don't stress math in the North East as much. Dallas has 5 CHAMPIONSHIP RINGS!!!!

Posted by JV @ 3:20 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

It's time to grow out of the "underoos" you're wearing, get off the teet, and become men you ignorant beantown wannabees.

The 93 Cowboys would have steamrolled your campy team with high-heel wearing Brady as QB.

Teddy Bruschi and Mike Vrabel would have had Moose helmet prints all over their faces.

Randy Moss, would have been cut in half after the first catch.

Welker would have been carried off the field by mid first quarter.

Just remember you Boston creampuffs. While you were having your Tea Party, we Texans were defending ourselves against Mexico, Spain, France, and countless agressive Indians.

You pansies wouldn't last 2 seconds in this here Republic. Snotty nose punks!

Posted by Stephen @ 3:21 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Bill B. the same coach who got busted for CHEATING. Why don't you New Englanders go dump some tea in the sea.

Posted by Tom Gaydee @ 3:23 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Easy there, Pats fans... memories are short. Charles Haley would have crushed Brady's skull, while Moose plows a hole for Emmett to run over Harrison in the backfield en route to 3 TDs.

Posted by TimJ @ 3:25 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Sounds to me like the Patriots have a little organization legacy envy! Knowing that no matter what they do they still will never be America's Team must leave them feeling pretty bitter. I understand, I feel sorry for you yanks.

Posted by Dallas1977 @ 3:26 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

This is a great argument "93 Cowboys vs. 07 Patriots". But you know we well never really know will we?

Since that is the case how about these 07 Cowboys meeting you Pansies in the desert and stripping you away of that perfect season.

Dallas 18-1
New England 18-1

Unfortunately your loss comes in Super Bowl XLII !!!!!!

Posted by Stephen @ 3:27 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Chances are, Bill Belicheat has footage being called in to the defense which allowed Haley to do what he did. No matter how many SBs the Pats win, they will always be known as the franchise that had to cheat. What a shame. Just about as shameful as John Kerry. Oh wait, you are from the same area. It is a shame Kerry didn't learn Bellicheat's cheatin' ways. If so, he could have won the presidency. muuwaahaa haa haaaaaaaa

Posted by Arron @ 3:31 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

The boys then were coked up all the time. The past are doing this with free agency and rashes of injuries. The boys were blessed for a few years. the pats were built to be a contender for 10 years. Those same boys were done the next year while these pats keep at the top year after year.

Posted by King D @ 3:33 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

QUARTERBACKS Edge Pats 2 Brady is having an all world year.
RUNNING BACKS Edge Boys 2 They are definitley better but Maroney, Faulk, and Evans aren't chopped liver folks.
RECEIVERS Edge Pats 2 Boys receivers are way overrated. Irvin is borderline HOF, but he is, and he saves this from being a 3 for Pats.
OFFENSIVE LINE Edge Boys 1 This one is almost a push because of what The pats O-Line is doing this year and if revisited in the future could be Pats edge as the O-Line gets older and more recognized. Boys Line was special though.
DEFENSIVE LINE Edge Pats 2 Are you kidding me here? The only reason its not a 3 is because its 4 against 3. The pats have four great lineman and only three spots for them and all would start for the Boys except "maybe" Green.
LINEBACKERS Edge Pats 3 This is so laughbale. You have got to be kidding me. You say two of the 4 linebackers you mention are pretty good. Pretty good at this postion for the Pats doesn't even enter the conversation. Greatness is a better word.
SECONDARY Edge Push This one you really show your ignorance in. Wilson is not even starting for the pats it is James Sanders. The CB's are not a wash seeing as Samuel is the best player in this bunch. Woodson may have a slight, very slight edge on Harrison.
SPECIAL TEAMS Edge Pats 2 Seriously? The only reason its not a 3 is because the Boys were respectable here but the Pats are better in every phase of the special teams.
COACHING Edge Pats 2 Ask Jimmy Johnson who is a better coach. Are you kidding me? BB will go down in history as the best of all time.

PATRIOTS 19-0 "BEST EVER"

Posted by King D @ 3:39 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Oh and the totals are Pats 13 Boys 3. Landslide, This isn't event the team to put the Pats against. Ridiculous article.

Posted by BillyB'smyHero @ 3:43 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

you guys just dont quit with the "cheatin" huh? its as much cheating as you beloved '93 Blowboys did and that is fact straight out Jimmy Johnsons mouth(and he doesnt even think hes better than Belichick for the record). for the millionth time the footage they had wasnt illegal it was where they filmed from....the sideline....the same sidlines your Blowboys filmed from.....i dont even know why us Pats fans waste our time tryin to explain simple fact and logic to you hicks cause its like explainin physics to a 2nd grader.

Posted by Z money @ 3:46 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Hahaha, the pats would run the table on them, the cowboys strengths were throwing it to a crackhead, the pats are playing int the salary cap era and are playing far better competition.

Posted by Daniel @ 3:49 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Patsies,

Let's look at this rationally -
1993- Cowboys ranked #4 total offense,#7 passing, #2 rushing.
2007- Patsies ranked #1 total offense,#2 passing, #7 rushing.

In 1993, San Fran had the #1 total offense, #2 passing and #3 rushing. Dallas blew out SanFran in the NFC championship, 38-21.

Belicheat will forever be remembered as a good coach who cheated to get 3 rings - which is not the most, morons - Chuck Noll has 4.

Don't worry, 16-0 is a pipe dream. Write it down, "WILL NEVER HAPPEN!"

Patsies - your negativity is appreciated - "there's love in those boos..." - but you're still a bunch of idiots.

Posted by Lurkercowboy @ 3:53 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

When Emmitt Smith carried the ball more than twice in 1993, Dallas only lost once. And that loss was one of the all-time fluke games. The Cowboys would win by double-digits. Look at the competition Dallas faced in the playoffs that season. Favre, Young, and Kelly. Talk about a murderers row! Dallas dominated each of them.

Posted by YOURABUMB @ 3:55 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

i dont recall anyone sayin that he had the most it was said that if Belichick gets 4 he would have 1 more than Johnson....also lets not forget that you guys are so sorry that you hafta rank your best team in franchise history against us...what about your '07 'Boys? o yea thats right they are a bunch of whinny snivelin bitches just like their new head coach Bum Phillips Jr. that guy is a JOKE! repeat J-O-K-E....JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!

Posted by Billy @ 3:57 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

There is no way you can compare the teams from the eighties and nineties to todays teams. You could take San Fran or Green Bay from that year and they would KILL todays Patriots. Buffalo or Houston from that year would run these Pats off the field. The salary cap has destroyed any teams chance to be a superpower like the teams from back then.

The Patriots are having fun today just because the rest of the NFL is so awful. Just look at the QB play today. You have maybe 2 great QBs, 3 good QBS, and the rest are horrible. Back then you had 10 really good QBs. The Patriots doing what they are doing is not because they are so good, its just everyone else is SOOOO bad.

I've always thought that all the Pats championship teams were among the worst champions to win the superbowl.

Posted by Mike @ 3:58 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

BillyB the Patriots are CHEATERS. Tried and CONVICTED. What reasonable doubt is there that they didn't cheat? NONE. Your team, coach, and legacy is a joke. And it always will be.

Your fan base and team will ever wear the scarlet letter "C" for "cheater" not "champion". This is your plight and where I first felt sorry for the Pats fan base, your rabid support of Belicheat and that organization's urinating on the greatness of this game makes you just as bad. You have the distinct honor of being the only "dynasty" with a big, fat, juicy ASTERISK by it and you can't change it. But at least you have each other.

The NFL and the media will do their best to minimize this so to protect the interests of a very lucrative brand name, but we all know this is right up there with the all time shameful acts in pro sports.

Told to quit filming signs and went ahead and did it anyway. What arrogance.

The Pats are going down. This is a certainty.

Posted by Barry "the real deal" Sanders @ 4:02 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Congrats Dallas but the Pats would dominate all 3 of those teams plus your Cowboys....plus all stats aside Emmitt Smith is the most overrated RB in the history of the league...you guys said so yourself that the o-line was somethin special and i do agree that o-line was the reason behind all their success...Emmitt had one move, hit the huge gapin whole and run...what is so impressive about that? anyone with any type of speed would have succeeded in that offense....now im not sayin he was terrible cause clearly he wasnt all im sayin is put any other top shelf RB on that team and then you would have really seen domination. you put Smith on the LIons or any team like that and we wouldnt even remember who he was today.

Posted by Star Power @ 4:04 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Did some of that big dig concrete hit you in the head? How many rings does Johnson have? 3? You're an idiot! repeat I-D-I-O-T... IDIOT!IDIOT!IDIOT!

But we appreciate the patronage! Every time you dumbass NEasterners hit this page, the $$$ keep rolling in for the DMN and the Boys!

Get the word out knuckleheads!!!

Posted by Stephen @ 4:13 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Mike, well said:

Your fan base and team will ever wear the scarlet letter "C" for "cheater" not "champion".

That is classic. They will never get rid of that label. They desire to be one of the NFL's elites (Cowboys, Steelers, 49ers), but they will always be the team that had to cheat (or more like dumb enough to get caught). That disqualifies them from NFL greatness, and they know it.

Posted by yall suck ya heard @ 4:15 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

o yea theres an asterisk there? where? i dont see it where is it? o yea it aint there and it wont ever be there....do you not listen to anything? the Commissioner himself said it was a minimal advantage and it was taken away in the 1st quarter so the minimal advantage fell to 0 advantage...we got fined cause we did have a camera yes but we did not cheat how could we? we didnt have any footage...and we clearly dont need to cheat...also you all keep sayin stuff about the memo and that is why you have a problem with the Pats yet you also say that all our Championships are tainted, this contradicts yourself, cause you think we were in the wrong for ignorin the NEW memo yet you try to blame us for OLD stuff that never happened and not only did it never happen nobody has any proof equalling defamation....you grasped at a straw to make yourselfs feel better and no matter how much logic is bein thrown your way you will not let go of that puny straw..this is blatantly your way of makin yourselfs feel better cause your team doesnt even compare....also you act like we want to be Americas Team (not that you were mad coke heads)but that couldnt be further from the truth we love to be hated its invigorating so say goodbye to the bad guy snitches

Posted by WAY 2 ILL @ 4:18 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

how do you figure that we are worse because of free agency? we are dominating a league in a time where they set up free agency to combat just that...every thing in todays game would make you think a Dynasty was a thing of the past yet the Pats have 3 and are headin for 4 if everythin goes as planned. so if you ask me that is at least twice as impressive cause not only do we have the talent we have the coachin the ownership the scouts the whole front office is the best in the business to match the best team ever assembled!

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:21 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

"how do you figure that we are worse because of free agency? we are dominating a league in a time where they set up free agency to combat just that"

Sure, but nobody figured that any team would be low enough to cheat to win...

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:22 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

"we got fined cause we did have a camera yes but we did not cheat how could we?"

You're kidding, right?

Posted by Tony @ 4:22 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

You people are delusional. Pats would crush your group of roid infested has-beens...

Here's another category: Fans who can read - Pats (+3)

Posted by Star Flower @ 4:23 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Star Power so you wanna call us idiots why? cause we over rated Johnson? i forgot Switzer got one of those rings so sorry for givin you pathetic rednecks more credit than you deserve how wrong of us

Posted by Billy @ 4:24 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Pats are not worse...They're just better than anything TODAY. The league is worse. Every team is just kinda mediocre. You are the best of mediocrity. Today's SB Champ wouldn't make the playoffs in the 90s. No offense. I know that even if the Cowboys beat the Patriots in the SB, they would also be considered a bad champion. The last 7-10 Champions would probably be the bottom 7 champs, if you were ranking all the teams.

Posted by joe subscriber @ 4:25 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

93 cowboys didn't dominate the way this year's pats have, so other than hometown enthusiasm, I don't see how you arrived at your prediction of a cowboys win. factor in the fact that the league in making it harder and harder to repeat greatness year after year, the pats truly are the one for the ages.

Posted by Asterisk @ 4:25 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Hey Bean (brain) Town. What's the matter got penis, I mean trophy envy... Why are you on our blog? Oh that's right it's just jealousy. Need to see how America's team does it. The Pat's the greatest team...? Is this the same team that was caught cheating so they could beat (drum roll please)... the JETS!?! Wow if they film the Jets to get an edge, image what they have done over the years to beat good teams. How stupid do you have to be to do the very thing your warned not to. Wow! Great job Pats(ies)...enjoy your asterisk. You will hold that record for sure...

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:25 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

It's obvious that the PatriNots cheating extended back to their Super Bowl wins, why else would Goodell have all evidence destroyed? HE was trying to protect the integrity of the NFL. The integrity that the PatriNots so callously tried to impugn. Don't be afraid to look that word up in a dictionary, Massholes. And please, please, stop electing crappy career politicians just because their name happens to be "Kennedy".

Posted by yall suck ya heard @ 4:26 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Vox Veritas im dead serious...how can you cheat with a film that you dont have? i'll wait.....

Posted by Bastoball @ 4:26 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

I think Tim MacMahon needs to consult with Bert Breer before he talks about the new America's Team.

First, the 1993 Cowboys were excellent. No doubt about that. Great players and great coaching. But it seems Tim does not even know the Patriots roster. He finally remembered 5 time pro bowler Richard Seymour. Does he know who Kevin Faulk is? What about Benjamin Watson? Eugene Wilson has not played in a month. James Sanders starts at safety.

Tim, you need to plug in. While you are at it, check Tom Brady's numbers from this year. I think he has a little more more than a slight edge over Troy Aikman.

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:28 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

"I know you think you are awesome, especially with the tone of your comment. However, a simple Google search of "Jimmy Johnson admits to cheating" shows clearly that Timmy Mac didn't make this story up."

OK. I googled it. What does NASCAR have to do with the NFL, Massholes?

Posted by moe @ 4:29 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Pats will prove you morons wrong...Brady is clearly the best qb, he and coach bill would beat the '93 cowboys team.

blog all u want, don't wish your team into the SB...the pats will crush them...

I think M Irving bought some of his candy from u meatheads...

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:30 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Dear "yall suck" (great name, that's what I call you, too),

You do it with the film that you do have. You know, the film that Goodell had destroyed. You don't seriously think that the Jets game was the first game in which the Pats cheated, do you? Wake up.

"What about Benjamin Watson?"

Isn't he the guy that the Cowboys broke?

Posted by joe subscriber @ 4:30 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

the way these things work, asterisk, is that anyone can log on with a comment. just because you support the cowboys, doesn't keep my comments of this web site. oh, well. by the way, you have me pegged as a new england patriots fan, which I am not. I was, at one time, a Boston Patriots fan. anyway, you've not much to brag about right now, as the pats have how many super bowl trophies in the recent past? and you have to go back to talking about the 93 cowboys. as to the Jets incident, you want to place a realistic wager that the pats need to do that to whip the boys with the year's teams?

Posted by poor lil dallas @ 4:31 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

well say what you want but the tape was taken durin the 1st quarter and no Pats officials/coaches/players ever saw it so how did they cheat? also Belichick loves to get the me against the world thing goin and he would know Mangini better than us i would not put it past him to set himself up...granted there is no way he thought he would lose a draft pick cause honestly that was completly rediculous but anyways whatever the reason was it worked cause we are undefeated and you are not and that is all that matters right now...not only are you not undefeated we beat you so.....your dumb...

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:33 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

"I think Tim MacMahon needs to consult with Bert Breer before he talks about the new America's Team."

There is no "new America's Team". "America's Team" is and always has been the Dallas Cowboys. Quit trying to leech the cool nickname and get your own. One that really reflects the team and it's following. Might I suggest "Effete Bandwagon Deluxe"?

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:34 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

"well say what you want but the tape was taken durin the 1st quarter and no Pats officials/coaches/players ever saw it so how did they cheat?"

Yeesh. Eat some fish. They say it's "brain food".

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:36 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

"as the pats have how many super bowl trophies in the recent past"

None. "Recent past" is only a year, for me. Would you like to try another convenient window, Masshole? The Cowboys and PatriNots have been around for the same length of time, why are you only interested in "the recent past"? What are you afraid of?

Posted by Joseph from Houston @ 4:40 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Cowboys are AMERICA'S TEAM. That is all.

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:40 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

The Massholes are clearly suffering from some sort of inferiority complex, coming to this here blog and all. Is it because even though the PatriNots are expected to go undefeated and win the Super Bowl, and nobody but the media and Massholes really care? Or is it because the PatriNots are characterized as cheaters in an era of parity, a team that could not beat another team from another time? Why does that bother you? (psst... it's the inferiority complex)

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:43 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

"blog all u want, don't wish your team into the SB...the pats will crush them..."

Oh my goodness, that's a scary threat! We should just give the PatriNots the trophy and rings now, to save the crushings later! Seriously, I'm scared!

Man, you'd think that the husband Massholes would be home to kick the wife Massholes off of the computer by now...

Posted by Steve @ 4:43 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

You know what's funny? These Patriots* fans probably weren't even old enough to watch the 90s Cowboys. It's obvious based on their lack of knowledge shown in their comments.

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:46 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

"the cowboys strengths were throwing it to a crackhead"

As opposed to what, the PatriNots strength of throwing it to a pothead with an authority figure problem?

Posted by Asterisk @ 4:48 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Joe, wow thanks for the enlightenment. I had no idea how blogs worked. You would have a point if this were a blog on espn or fox or a general site. If you scroll all the way to the top, what do you see. COWBOYS BLOG. Don't mind you coming to take a look, but if you want to talk Patsies smack, go to their site. Only reason you would be on our site is trophy (legitimate) envy.

Oh and as to your wager, is this with or without cameras...or should we just fax over our play calls before the game?

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:48 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

"you guys just dont quit with the "cheatin" huh?"

Nope. Sorry, but it happened. Blame Bill Belicheat, not us.

"its as much cheating as you beloved '93 Blowboys did and that is fact straight out Jimmy Johnsons mouth"

That's a lie. Jimmy Johnson never said he used videotape to steal signals. Try again.

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 4:55 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

"My top 2 reasons for thinking that the game would Dallas' way have more to do with the era than anything else:
a) as others have pointed out, there was no salary cap and free agency was only on the horizon. "

Some of this is true... however... the Cowboys' entire 1993 payroll was only about $30 million. The Pats probably have more money than that sitting on the bench. Also, 1993 was the beginning of free agency if I remember correctly. The season Reggie White won his lawsuit and signed with the Packers.

Posted by moe @ 4:58 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Vox...stay off the pipe...its ok.
Your team isnt that bad...

Go out and get a boyfriend that will understand you. You seem sad...and stupid...

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 5:02 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Thanks, Moe, I'll keep that under advisement. Got anything constructive to add or are you just here to be kicked around like a soccer ball?

Posted by Vox Veritas @ 5:04 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

This particular blog is old news, see you guys on the relevant blogs.

Posted by 5 Rings @ 5:04 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Win 5 championships before you start bagging on the storied franchises of the past and then you can come to the Grownup Table with the Cowboys, Steelers, and 49ers.

When you talk all this smack, you sound like a wannabe.

Posted by King D @ 5:24 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Billy "Pats are not worse...They're just better than anything TODAY. The league is worse. Every team is just kinda mediocre. You are the best of mediocrity. Today's SB Champ wouldn't make the playoffs in the 90s. No offense. I know that even if the Cowboys beat the Patriots in the SB, they would also be considered a bad champion. The last 7-10 Champions would probably be the bottom 7 champs, if you were ranking all the teams."

Come on man... Honestly think about this. The players right now are bigger stronger and faster today then they were in 93. So the rest of the league can't compare to the talent the Patriots have right now? So what... that proves nothing accept the fact that they are also smarter with better front office people and especially coaches. There isn't a single quarterback in 93 that was even close to Brady or Manning talent wise and I'd even throw Palmer into that mix. You get a time machine and bring these Patriots back to play those Cowboys in a dome? Patriots handle them easily... Do you really think the Cowboys secondary could handle Moss, Welker, Stallworth, Watson and Faulk? Ummmmm simple answer is NO. On the other hand Irvin is the only receiver on the team that is a threat to the Patriots and if Samuel can handle Marvin Harrison on a regular basis I think he can dothe same on Irvin. Novacek vs. Harrison and or Adelious Thomas is a mismatch physically in the Patriots favor big time. So BB would just have to figure out a scheme to stop Emmitt and we all know he is a genius and would. As for all of the ignorant and moronic talk of asteriks... All I have to say is this. Goodell says there will never be one so if you want to imagine one is there then be my guest but history will show no asterik so shut up about this over blown subject. Oh and I love the idiots complaining about being on "thier" blog...LMAO. Its a public forum and it happens all over the country idiots. One last thing...This is a sports blog not a political one so take those opinions to the appropriate forum.

Posted by King D @ 5:24 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Billy "Pats are not worse...They're just better than anything TODAY. The league is worse. Every team is just kinda mediocre. You are the best of mediocrity. Today's SB Champ wouldn't make the playoffs in the 90s. No offense. I know that even if the Cowboys beat the Patriots in the SB, they would also be considered a bad champion. The last 7-10 Champions would probably be the bottom 7 champs, if you were ranking all the teams."

Come on man... Honestly think about this. The players right now are bigger stronger and faster today then they were in 93. So the rest of the league can't compare to the talent the Patriots have right now? So what... that proves nothing accept the fact that they are also smarter with better front office people and especially coaches. There isn't a single quarterback in 93 that was even close to Brady or Manning talent wise and I'd even throw Palmer into that mix. You get a time machine and bring these Patriots back to play those Cowboys in a dome? Patriots handle them easily... Do you really think the Cowboys secondary could handle Moss, Welker, Stallworth, Watson and Faulk? Ummmmm simple answer is NO. On the other hand Irvin is the only receiver on the team that is a threat to the Patriots and if Samuel can handle Marvin Harrison on a regular basis I think he can dothe same on Irvin. Novacek vs. Harrison and or Adelious Thomas is a mismatch physically in the Patriots favor big time. So BB would just have to figure out a scheme to stop Emmitt and we all know he is a genius and would. As for all of the ignorant and moronic talk of asteriks... All I have to say is this. Goodell says there will never be one so if you want to imagine one is there then be my guest but history will show no asterik so shut up about this over blown subject. Oh and I love the idiots complaining about being on "thier" blog...LMAO. Its a public forum and it happens all over the country idiots. One last thing...This is a sports blog not a political one so take those opinions to the appropriate forum.

Posted by King D @ 5:24 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Billy "Pats are not worse...They're just better than anything TODAY. The league is worse. Every team is just kinda mediocre. You are the best of mediocrity. Today's SB Champ wouldn't make the playoffs in the 90s. No offense. I know that even if the Cowboys beat the Patriots in the SB, they would also be considered a bad champion. The last 7-10 Champions would probably be the bottom 7 champs, if you were ranking all the teams."

Come on man... Honestly think about this. The players right now are bigger stronger and faster today then they were in 93. So the rest of the league can't compare to the talent the Patriots have right now? So what... that proves nothing accept the fact that they are also smarter with better front office people and especially coaches. There isn't a single quarterback in 93 that was even close to Brady or Manning talent wise and I'd even throw Palmer into that mix. You get a time machine and bring these Patriots back to play those Cowboys in a dome? Patriots handle them easily... Do you really think the Cowboys secondary could handle Moss, Welker, Stallworth, Watson and Faulk? Ummmmm simple answer is NO. On the other hand Irvin is the only receiver on the team that is a threat to the Patriots and if Samuel can handle Marvin Harrison on a regular basis I think he can dothe same on Irvin. Novacek vs. Harrison and or Adelious Thomas is a mismatch physically in the Patriots favor big time. So BB would just have to figure out a scheme to stop Emmitt and we all know he is a genius and would. As for all of the ignorant and moronic talk of asteriks... All I have to say is this. Goodell says there will never be one so if you want to imagine one is there then be my guest but history will show no asterik so shut up about this over blown subject. Oh and I love the idiots complaining about being on "thier" blog...LMAO. Its a public forum and it happens all over the country idiots. One last thing...This is a sports blog not a political one so take those opinions to the appropriate forum.

Posted by John @ 5:26 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

These Pats fans are so new rich. Did anyone even know of these guys before 1996 beyond being known as the team that got destroyed by the '85 Bears? You guys are great this year no doubt, but you got a lot to prove before you are in our league from a historical greatness standpoint. Of course that never stopped you obnoxious Bean town morons from having dirrehea of the mouth before. You guys ought to give some respect to the Cowboys. You are about to pass us as the most hated team in the league due your success. We been dealing with it for about 30 years now.

Posted by King D @ 5:26 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Billy "Pats are not worse...They're just better than anything TODAY. The league is worse. Every team is just kinda mediocre. You are the best of mediocrity. Today's SB Champ wouldn't make the playoffs in the 90s. No offense. I know that even if the Cowboys beat the Patriots in the SB, they would also be considered a bad champion. The last 7-10 Champions would probably be the bottom 7 champs, if you were ranking all the teams."

Come on man... Honestly think about this. The players right now are bigger stronger and faster today then they were in 93. So the rest of the league can't compare to the talent the Patriots have right now? So what... that proves nothing accept the fact that they are also smarter with better front office people and especially coaches. There isn't a single quarterback in 93 that was even close to Brady or Manning talent wise and I'd even throw Palmer into that mix. You get a time machine and bring these Patriots back to play those Cowboys in a dome? Patriots handle them easily... Do you really think the Cowboys secondary could handle Moss, Welker, Stallworth, Watson and Faulk? Ummmmm simple answer is NO. On the other hand Irvin is the only receiver on the team that is a threat to the Patriots and if Samuel can handle Marvin Harrison on a regular basis I think he can dothe same on Irvin. Novacek vs. Harrison and or Adelious Thomas is a mismatch physically in the Patriots favor big time. So BB would just have to figure out a scheme to stop Emmitt and we all know he is a genius and would. As for all of the ignorant and moronic talk of asteriks... All I have to say is this. Goodell says there will never be one so if you want to imagine one is there then be my guest but history will show no asterik so shut up about this over blown subject. Oh and I love the idiots complaining about being on "thier" blog...LMAO. Its a public forum and it happens all over the country idiots. One last thing...This is a sports blog not a political one so take those opinions to the appropriate forum.

Posted by King D @ 5:26 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Billy "Pats are not worse...They're just better than anything TODAY. The league is worse. Every team is just kinda mediocre. You are the best of mediocrity. Today's SB Champ wouldn't make the playoffs in the 90s. No offense. I know that even if the Cowboys beat the Patriots in the SB, they would also be considered a bad champion. The last 7-10 Champions would probably be the bottom 7 champs, if you were ranking all the teams."

Come on man... Honestly think about this. The players right now are bigger stronger and faster today then they were in 93. So the rest of the league can't compare to the talent the Patriots have right now? So what... that proves nothing accept the fact that they are also smarter with better front office people and especially coaches. There isn't a single quarterback in 93 that was even close to Brady or Manning talent wise and I'd even throw Palmer into that mix. You get a time machine and bring these Patriots back to play those Cowboys in a dome? Patriots handle them easily... Do you really think the Cowboys secondary could handle Moss, Welker, Stallworth, Watson and Faulk? Ummmmm simple answer is NO. On the other hand Irvin is the only receiver on the team that is a threat to the Patriots and if Samuel can handle Marvin Harrison on a regular basis I think he can dothe same on Irvin. Novacek vs. Harrison and or Adelious Thomas is a mismatch physically in the Patriots favor big time. So BB would just have to figure out a scheme to stop Emmitt and we all know he is a genius and would. As for all of the ignorant and moronic talk of asteriks... All I have to say is this. Goodell says there will never be one so if you want to imagine one is there then be my guest but history will show no asterik so shut up about this over blown subject. Oh and I love the idiots complaining about being on "thier" blog...LMAO. Its a public forum and it happens all over the country idiots. One last thing...This is a sports blog not a political one so take those opinions to the appropriate forum.

Posted by 5 SBs @ 5:35 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Yo little king. Dude, do you not know how to post on a blog? 5 times for the same lame comments? Let me LMAO. I think I hear your mom calling...time for bed!

Posted by John @ 5:43 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Aikman vs. Brady? Even up, 3 SBs each
Emmitt vs. ? Edge - The NFL's leading all time rusher who could take over a game in the 2nd half
Receivers? Edge - New England
Offensive Line? A crushing, young offensive line from Dallas rules the middle of the field
Defensive Line? Could anyone block Charles Haley? Dallas was so quick and difficult to run on.
Linebackers? Even up, Dallas was faster, but NE's linebackers are smart football guys
Secondary? Edge - Dallas was younger, faster

The Patriots are the league's best at 9 games into the 2007 season, but I believe there are 4-5 SB teams that would have beat them, they're too pass heavy in their attack and their defense is not historically top shelf. Remember one thing, Dallas had to beat San Francisco when S.F. was at that the top of their game and Dallas did it convincingly. All that being said, the Patriots are an excellent football team and they deserve respect for the way they manage their game. The ultimate would be for the Cowboys to get to the SB and beat them... if Dallas' defense continues to improve and stay healthy, they have the ability to do just that.

Posted by aptriot? @ 5:45 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

haha the pats fans have some warped sense of reality. "the pats have a stronger schedule.." haha yeah because the 07jets,bills, and dolphins are SOOOO much better than the early 90's 'skins, eagles and giants. haha. going by numbers is ridiculous. if you face those teams twice a year each your GONNA put up some good numbers. the 93 boys beat favre, young, and kelly to win their sb. the pats can barely get by manning(they need for manning to have a brain fart and throw the ball away, to win)bilicheat's running up the score aside, they had trouble with the 07boys this year. and you guys SERIOUSLY believe that they coulda gotten by the '93 cowboys. please whatever it is you guys are on. please share.....

Posted by Brian @ 5:46 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

King D - reposting the same thing over and over again does not make it any more true. It just makes you more annoying.

The '93 Cowboys win simply due to the fact that they would dominate the line of scrimmage on both sides. The simple truth is that Dallas, as the last great pre-salary cap/unfetter free agency dynasty, had depth far superior to what teams can afford now. As a result, they would wear any current team down by the middle of the 3rd quarter. And to those of you who think "The Genius" (by the way, where was that genius-ness when he was coaching the Browns?) would have devised a game plan to stop the Cowboys O - newflash, *everyone* knew the plays that Dallas was going to run, but they still couldn't stop them because Dallas simply out-executed them. You can't scheme against a group that out-executes you. Dallas made you decide what you were going to do, and then made you pay. If you didn't stack 8 in the box, Emmitt was going to run for 150. Even if you did, he would still hit 100, but it would take him longer to do so. And when you did stack the line, Aikman picked you apart.

And don't kid yourselves, the Patriots D this year is far from dominant. It's good, no doubt, but when their offense holds the ball nearly 40 minutes a game, the defense looks better than it really is. They can be run on, and that secondary is nothing special. Hell, *this year's* Cowboys team put up 27 points in less than 20 minutes TOP. Against the 93 'Boys, which was ball control offense to end all ball control offenses, the Pats D would be on the field for 35+ minutes, and they would fall apart.

Posted by Asterisk @ 5:49 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

King D.

"...take those opinions to the appropriate forum."

That's exactly what I said? You come to The Cowboys forum to talk trash and then want to complain someone is on the wrong forum...? How does it feel to call yourself an idiot...?

Posted by LL from Austin @ 6:07 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Bill Belicheat is a fraud!!!

Posted by AZPat @ 6:17 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Wow. Dallas is Homer Central. You all must be 'Tull fans too. "Oh, we won't give in, let's go living in the past."

"We played them pretty good"? You got smoked! Your living in a dream world.

As for '93...I like Aikman. Stand up guy. But Emmit 'Surrounded by trash' Smith and Michael 'holdin it for a friend' Irvin are two losers with no character. The rest? They probably would be working construction today.

Posted by Jacob @ 6:44 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Wow talk about a homer AZPat. Let me guess. Patriot fan in Arizona? Is that bandwagon getting crowded yet...

Posted by adi @ 7:20 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

One point to consider when thinking about coaching comparison is that Belichick has won the superbowl without the 'best team ever' teams. Three times.

Posted by vacowboysfan @ 7:22 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

Pats Fans - nice job on your super bowl victories (*)

* - Note: The Patriots were proven to be a bunch of cheaters

Posted by Big Mike @ 7:51 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

just wanted to let everyone know that there is only one "King" Mike. That's this herr, King Big Mike. Other Mike, you are cool so you can be a prince or something. P.S. Cowboys > Pats any day of the week.

Posted by You're funny @ 9:21 PM Thu, Nov 15, 2007

I find it comical that you rednecks think you have a snowball's chance in hell to beat the Patriots. We beat you once. We'll do it again. You can't stop it.

Posted by Joe @ 1:11 AM Fri, Nov 16, 2007

The 1993 certainly are the better team. Remember back when there was no free agency, these teams were stacked. Dallas had second teamers that could start on several other teams (that doesn't happen today). The teams Dallas had to beat were also stacked -- those San Francisco teams could also beat NE. Why are the Pats able to possibly go undefeated this year -- it's a watered down league due to free agency. There isn't that set of dominant teams at the top like there used to be. While the Pats receivers could do some damage, Brady would be hard pressed get passes off. Haley would be in his face on every play. The Cowboys offensive line would push the Pats defensive line around the field.

Emmitt would get his yards and TDs, Aikman's precision passes to Irvin could not be stopped against Deion, the Pats have no Deion. Dallas defense would also win the turnover battle. It would be a good game, but Dallas wins by no less than ten.

As for coaching, yes, Jimmy was a better coach. He took Dallas from worst team to the head and shoulders best team in four years. Had he not retired, Dallas would have won four straight and maybe more. That Jimmy's team was able to win another Super Bowl with Barry Switzer coaching should tell you just how much talent those Cowboy teams had.

Posted by David @ 3:12 AM Fri, Nov 16, 2007

You're funny...what this "we" stuff? You're on the team? Shut up spectator.

Posted by Javi garcia @ 8:23 AM Fri, Nov 16, 2007

What did Belichick ever do before he started cheating? Did he ever make the playoff when he was the browns headcoach? It's like a baseball player that hits a couple of homers a year and then all of a sudden starts hitting 40-50 a year. Once a loser always a loser, unless you find a way to beat the system (CHEAT).

Posted by Stephen @ 9:15 AM Fri, Nov 16, 2007

Why are we comparing Jimmy Johnson, who had impeccable hair, and Bill Belicheat, who still wears a gay looking head band? Please. Belicheat is a weirdo.

Posted by Tony in NY @ 10:09 AM Fri, Nov 16, 2007

The Pats have had a nice run, and are looking good so far this year but comparing them to the Cowboy's championship teams of the 90's is a joke.
Puhleez. Time will bear this out. In fact I think even the 90's Niners with Steve Young would have had a great shot at taking down these Pats. I believe that the level of competition in the "pre free agency era" and the "birth of the free agency era" that encompassed the Cowboy's time of dominance far exceeds the levels of competition that the Pat's have had to face over the last 6 years.

Posted by browns fan @ 12:47 PM Fri, Nov 16, 2007

Bill Belicheck did take the Browns to the playoffs(Dave)idiot. And if it wasn't for the New Englanders you idiots would still be considered Mexicans. Does anyone in Texas have any football intelligence?? I guess I would have to go to Oklahoma for that !!!

Posted by Max @ 1:25 PM Fri, Nov 16, 2007

Help me out here: what the #$%! is the point of comparing any pre-salary cap team to the '07 Patriots? The '92 Cowboys and other great Dallas teams didn't have to worry about fitting salaries under a cap--they could sign and keep anyone and everyone.

You're comparing apples and oranges. At the very least, your column should make adjustments for the restrictions faced by modern teams.

Posted by pats who? @ 2:01 PM Fri, Nov 16, 2007

uhhh "browns fan". you failed to make anything somewhat resembling a "point" in that idiotic rant of yours. stay on your meds dude. as for comparing the 07 pats against any team of the early nineties (including the 4time sb loser bills), especially the team that dominated those years(the cowboys) is just a joke. any one of those teams including the bills could handle the 07 pats. there is a difference between having the greatest season ever (which the pats will have if the go undefeated) and having the best team ever. as has been stated before: even with bilicheat running up the score, the 07 pats could barely put up 40+ points and gave up 20something against this years cowboys. who in their right mind believes that they could get anything NEAR 30 points against the 93 boys d-line and keep the triplets and novaceck and moose under 40? its just ridiculous. its one thing to be a pats fan, but a completely different thing to be an ignorant moron. come on pats fans, dont mix the 2. its not worth it. just enjoy your season.

Posted by Rod @ 4:46 PM Fri, Nov 16, 2007

The '93 Boys should win this one handily. The Pats aren't invulnerable; their weaknesses would be magnified against the Triplets, a dominating O-line and a defense that might have coverage problems but would get to Brady. The only reason I say 'should' is because the '93 squad got beat by a 4-12 Redskins team and the 6-10 Falcons. One thing about this year's Pats is that they are absolutely ruthless.

Posted by pats who? @ 6:48 PM Fri, Nov 16, 2007

well "rod" since you wanna get all specific. why dont you go ahead and mention that the lose to the "4-12 redskins" was the first game of the season and if memory serves correctly they lost the first 2 games while e.smith had his contract holdout.(the second lose was against the bills who they later beat in the sb) and that aikman was out in their second 2 game loosing streak of the season against the falcons and dolphins(that was a9-7 dolphins NOT the 0-16? team the pats fans get off on beating). bottom line all the "pats are dominating their weak schedule now so that means that they could beat the best of the early 90s teams also..." is just plain and simply i-d-i-o-t-i-c! you cant in your right mind compare beating up on the winless dolphins and cheating to beat the 1-win jets twice a year to playing against and beating brett favre and steve young in their prime than finishing off HOF jim kelly in the sb. its just downright borderline retarded...

Posted by J Gordon @ 8:28 PM Fri, Nov 16, 2007

Jimmy Johnson better than Belichick? Belichick is the Rain Man of football. He is a football savant. There has never been a coach as good as Belichick in the NFL, EVER! Jimmy Johnson is better than Belichick in one aspect of sports: he sure can drive that #48 NASCAR Chevy!

Posted by alex @ 2:10 PM Sat, Nov 17, 2007

how is darren woodson better than rodney harrison?

asante samuel is the best corner on either team

no way dallas d line gets the edge over the pats. if u want to call it even i can live with that. but no way are they better than the pats d line.

and how are the pats "a bunch of no names with no hall of famers besides brady and moss"? richard seymour has been arguably the best d lineman in football for the past 6 years. rodney harrison has been arguably the best strong safety in football for over a decade. vrabel and colvin have been one of the better outside lb tandems in football for awhile now. adalius thomas was the most sought after linebacker in free agency this year. the entire pats d line are number 1 picks. this isnt the 01 pats who nobody knew. this is a superstar team.

Posted by alex @ 2:19 PM Sat, Nov 17, 2007

by the way, the pats d didnt give up 20 something to the cowboys this year. they gave up 20. 7 came off of a fumble return by your defense. 3 of the 20 points the pats gave up was off of a 70 yard kickoff return. u failed to go anywhere and had to settle for a fg set up entirely by the kickoff return. so, really your offense scored 17 on us. i wouldnt be bragging too much about scoring 17 on us in your stadium, in a 21 point blowout loss. your team avges about 30 ppg. i doubt that the 93 cowboys offense avged much more than that. so if your current cowboys team with future hall of famer terrell owens, that avges 30 ppg, can only score 17 on us in midseason, in dallas, how would u expect the 93 cowboys to score much more than that, given that they didnt avg much more than 30 ppg themselves?

Posted by alex @ 2:39 PM Sat, Nov 17, 2007

yeah. i just looked it up. the 93 cowboys avged 23 ppg on offense. i realize they were a ball control team, that ran alot and kept the other team from having many possessions. but still. don't tell me how the pats would have struggled to hold the 93 cowboys points down to a reasonable margin. if anyone would struggle to keep the points down, it would be the 93 cowboys against the 39 ppg pats offense.

and enough with the rediculous talk that the pats are "weak against the run". based on what? the pats are like 5th in the nfl against the run, they let up like 80 yards per game. yeah addai had like 80 yards rushing in the first half against the pats with the pats playing 5 dbs all game long and daring the colts to run. second half, addai had 30 yards rushing.

the cowboys o line was dominant, but so is the pats front 3. warren, wilfork and seymour are among the best at their positions. there arent too many 3-4 de's as good as seymour and warren. and there may not be a nose tackle in football as good as wilfork. all are big, strong, and dominant. the pats are consistently able to keep the run in check with 6 guys, and have done it most of the season. not only did the pats commit few guys to the run against the colts, they playe the entire game with 5 or more dbs as i mentioned earlier. and it all starts up front, with the dominating d line.

Posted by Rick @ 3:12 PM Sat, Nov 17, 2007

Frankly, I don’t compare the 2007 Patriots to the 1993 Cowboys. I think this Pats team is much more akin to the 1994 49ers team in terms of objective: build the team to beat the defending Super Bowl champions. Even Deion Sanders said recently that the Patriots this year reminds him of the ‘94 49ers team that he was on.

Posted by alex @ 3:53 PM Sat, Nov 17, 2007

star- todays superbowl champs wouldnt even make the playoffs in the 90s? lol. thats the dumbest thing ive ever heard. based on what? there are some bad teams in the nfl this year, but when have there ever not been bad teams in the nfl? the colts and pats could compete in any era. dumb comment. tell me, aside from the niners, who the great teams were in the 93 season?

Posted by DaBoys @ 10:54 PM Sun, Feb 03, 2008

Ha! Ha! What a laugh, all you NE Patsies fans talking all that smack, just for the wind to change direction and watch all of you CHOKE! You are now HISTORIC CHOKERS! You are now a GIGANTIC 18-1! All that talk just to get your fannies spanked by Eli and Co. Who's got the gap now? 13-3 don't look that bad after all! Go Cowboys!

Posted by mcallen007 @ 8:24 AM Mon, Feb 04, 2008

what's that sound?? Is Brady crying? Way to go Belicheat, way to stay out on the field and take your loss like a man...

Posted by Mr Rogers @ 2:19 PM Mon, Feb 04, 2008

Thanks to the can of whupass the Giants opened, rational people won't have to debate the current media hype ignoramii spurred by Mrs. Godelle and all Patsy homers about who the greatest team was.

The greatest team ever is somewhere between the '84 & '94 Niners, '85 Bears, '86 Giants, '91 Skins, '92 & '93 Boys, '96 Packers, maybe even the '98 Broncos. All those teams had dominant regular seasons, many of them losing just 1 or 2 games, and then CRUSHED good to great teams in the playoffs.
The 18-1 Patsies are not even in the conversation. They CRUSHED the Dolphins, Jets, Bills and Skins, barely beat the Colts, Eagles, Ravens, Giants with a TON of help from the officials, beat an injury filled Charger team by just 9 points, and then got man-handled by a wild card team. It's very likely that these Patsies would get beat by the 90's Bills. Those Bills also had an unstopabble regular season offense, but those Bills had better defenders-Bruce Smith, Bennet, Talley, all in their prime.

After the Giants beat up on the Greatest Team Ever, ESPN said they became the 8th franchise with at least 3 SB wins. Let's see- Cowboys, Niners, Steelers, Packers, Raiders, Redskins, now Giants. That's only seven. I guess if we count asterisk wins, the Patsies would make it eight.

Posted by Mr Rogers @ 2:20 PM Mon, Feb 04, 2008

Thanks to the can of whupass the Giants opened, rational people won't have to debate the current media hype ignoramii spurred by Mrs. Godelle and all Patsy homers about who the greatest team was.

The greatest team ever is somewhere between the '84 & '94 Niners, '85 Bears, '86 Giants, '91 Skins, '92 & '93 Boys, '96 Packers, maybe even the '98 Broncos. All those teams had dominant regular seasons, many of them losing just 1 or 2 games, and then CRUSHED good to great teams in the playoffs.
The 18-1 Patsies are not even in the conversation. They CRUSHED the Dolphins, Jets, Bills and Skins, barely beat the Colts, Eagles, Ravens, Giants with a TON of help from the officials, beat an injury filled Charger team by just 9 points, and then got man-handled by a wild card team. It's very likely that these Patsies would get beat by the 90's Bills. Those Bills also had an unstopabble regular season offense, but those Bills had better defenders-Bruce Smith, Bennet, Talley, all in their prime.

After the Giants beat up on the Greatest Team Ever, ESPN said they became the 8th franchise with at least 3 SB wins. Let's see- Cowboys, Niners, Steelers, Packers, Raiders, Redskins, now Giants. That's only seven. I guess if we count asterisk wins, the Patsies would make it eight.