Who Would Win - Godzilla vs. the Ranch Hands?
If you have kids you have heard the inevitable, unanswerable questions. Who would win a fight between Wolverine and Batman and Robin? Could Godzilla's flame breath burn up all other monsters? These are the questions that try men's souls.
I was thinking about how the Cowboys have been retooling themselves with fewer flashy stars and more solid role players. It made me think of one of those unanswerable but thought-provoking questions - Would you rather have a team loaded with stars and all the baggage that comes with those egos, or would you rather have a team with less talent, but competent team players?
Lat year, in the preseason, we were picked to go to the Super Bowl. We were a strong team in 2007 and got stronger in the following draft with two first round picks, plus a group of solid players throughout the draft. We picked up some big-name stars in the offseason (Zach and Pac). They joined a team full of big-name stars. 13 Pro Bowlers. We were touted by many to be the ‘most talented' team in the NFL. In 2008, we were Godzilla. We would stomp the NFL beneath our feet. At least that was the plan.
Along with all that talent also came the baggage - big egos, self-promoters, media magnets who thought like stars, but struggled with the team team concept. When injuries sapped the team of some of its stars, some backups shined, others weren't always ready for their close-up. Special teams, the land where the un-star is supposed to shine, were terrible. The Cowboys seemed like a collection of players who had the following philosophy - "I'm a superstar, when I do well, the team does well. Therefore, it's imperative that I do well."
The team we put on the field this year should have a significantly different personality. The draft was less about "name" players and more about filling supporting roles. Guys who will get in there and do the dirty work on special teams. Do we have less talent? Probably. Will we have a team that is greater than the sum of its parts? The answer could be yes. The object for the 2009 team is to become a group of solid ranch hands who each do their own job, thereby making the whole ranch run efficiently. Hopefully this team has the following philosophy - "If the team wins, I win. Therefore, winning is imperative."
So who would win - Godzilla vs. The Ranch Hands? Will the 2009 team be better than 2008?
69 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I vote yes.
This year is already shaping up to be almost diametrically opposite from last year. We’re already getting poo-poo’d in the press for the draft, Jerry jettisoned much baggage, we even let go a few coaches, special teams might actually be special now,and for Christ sakes the “Our Lady of Perpetual Injury” bus has to leave our parking lot this year.
Talent, no doubt
Had Romo not been injured last year, we win at least two more games and make the playoffs. From there anything could have happened (see Cardinals, Arizona). Talent wins championships, chemistry is just a bonus, and more often than not simply the by product of success
Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Congrats boys first time in team history over .500
right... but TO couldn't get open, Pacman could only cover marginally
he certainly couldn’t return a punt. Why was he the PR? was he entitled? did he inherit it? he clearly sucked but still was the PR.
Tank Johnson just didn’t show up in 14 games
by AustonianAggie on May 12, 2009 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, Owens could only get open for
235 catches 3587 yards and 38 TDs in his three years with the team. And btw if you beleive Pacman was as bad as you describe here, than he for the purpose of the argument, he isnt talented, and therefore isnt soeone I would want. I said I would prefer talent to chemistry, not that i want disruptive players.
Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Congrats boys first time in team history over .500
by aussie_cowboy on May 13, 2009 1:51 AM CDT up reply actions
TO had 2 100 yard games last year
If TO was very good, he’d of had 6 or 7 at least. PacMan wasn’t any better than Scandrick
by AustonianAggie on May 13, 2009 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm going to go with ranch hands
and a better 2009 than 2008. I think more positional battles can bring the best out of more players.
On a different note, I am impressed with Roy Williams and the other receivers started working with Romo not too long after the season ended. Practice does make perfect. I’m glad Williams sees the value in it. Owens couldn’t bother with it unless it was mandatory. How many times were Owens and Romo on a different page during the season? Hopefully, Williams and Romo won’t have near as many misfires.
Awesome post
I don’t know if we technically have a better team, or even a better team spirit now, but I do know we now have a lot of players who are one year wiser, having learned several valuable lessons from the ’08 fiasco. The guys we drafted should hopefully be coming into a more cohesive and positive locker room than years prior. That sounds promising to me.
Epic Fail since 1985
we tried it that way last year
i’m ready to try it this way this year. i think it might just work. it’s not like other teams haven’t had success with it (e.g. last year’s champs), but it’s kind of against jerry’s nature. It’s The COWBOYS! The greatest sports franchise in the world. And moving into the biggest stadium ever no less! It’s supposed to be glamour and personality and entertainment! lol. Who knows Jerry’s mind, but I think he really realized that he needs to take a different approach, that all that other stuff only works if the football part is actually working. Not like he didn’t know that before but last year he got stung by it. So he’s focused on basics, role players, team players, smart players, hungry hard working players, coachable athletes, high character guys. We still have a huuuge amount of talent on this team, but perhaps now it will be truly be in service to the team first.
I agree with aussie...
Key injuries in 2009 as in 2008 would probably result in an encore of last year irrespective of the state of the teams chemistry. I’ll take talented and well coached overachievers along with a few D Wares.
Team players
win, and the more talent they have, the more they win.
I think it is a false choice between team players versus talented players. To quote Deion, “How about both?”
Prima donas who suck up all the energy and demand all the attention make it hard for the group to pull together, so you end up with less talent as a team.
We need star players who work like ranch hands, and team players who shine like superstars.
Keep doing what you been doing, keep getting what you been getting.
"Will the 2009 team be better than 2008" ??
Your post suggests that last year’s team was “probably” more talented. That’s quite an admission. (Outside of WR, I don’t know that I agree). But if the team has less talent this year, then expectations must be lowered. Plain and simple. I don’t believe in some ecclesiastical debate of chemistry vs talent, or a magical combination of both. Talent is King. But like Parcells said, you can’t have steak at every position.
At the end of the day, injuries, more than anything, derailed us last year. If the 09 version can keep its playmakers on the field, I like our chances.
+1
Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Congrats boys first time in team history over .500
by aussie_cowboy on May 12, 2009 7:27 AM CDT up reply actions
Injured talent
sinks the team unless you have a solid bench of Ranch Hands to step up and fill the breach.
When Romo went down, we didn’t have a solid backup to step in. With Felix out and MB3 dinged up, we didn’t adjust and put Choice in soon enough. Kosier comes out and … nuff said.
If you rely on a few superstars to carry your team, you are more likely to be flattened by a few key injuries. If you have a roster loaded with gung-ho, get-er-done, nothing-fancy football players with some team-oriented stars sprinkled in, you have what it takes to go the distance.
Keep doing what you been doing, keep getting what you been getting.
I think that the Pats, Giants and Steelers
have already answered that question. If you look at their SB rosters, you will obviously see some talented superstars, but the majority of their players are just solid, unselfish, hard working team players who do the dirty work and receive none of the accolades.
I think if you look at our off season moves, Jerry is finally realizing thats the way you have to win championships.
In Romo we Trust
I remember our Superbowl Teams
had less all around talent. We had the “triplets” and a bunch of players that played their overachieving butts off. Also, we had a dominant offensive line. If one thing will turn this team from an also ran to a Champ is a dominant offensive line. A really good defensive line would help too.
When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.
the OL is actually a great example
If you actually look at the talent on the OL during the Cowboys dynasty days, you’ll see more overachievers than guys with just pure talent. I mean Mark Tuinei was an undrafted, converted DL and probably handled Bruce Smith better than any OL he ever played against in his career.
Nate Newton was also an undrafted, free agent who was a classic overachiever. The only OL who were really talented on those SB teams were Larry Allen, Mark Stepnoski and Erik Williams.
In Romo we Trust
Mark Stepnoski was a huge over-achiever
size is part of your talent in the NFL and he was small. His career success was remarkable given his small stature (for the position)
by AustonianAggie on May 12, 2009 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions
I disagree
Size has nothing to do with talent. Some of the smallest athletes have the greatest talent.
Stepnoski has a very talented player because he was super strong with flawless technique and was a super smart guy. He was an All-American at Pitt and righfully so.
In Romo we Trust
Size doesn't matter?
I would like to see a 150lb guard…
No matter how talented he may be, physics will eventually catch up.
McGruber!
I didn't say size didn't matter
I said it had nothing to do with talent, big difference.
In Romo we Trust
when you weight about 260lbs and play on an offensive line, you are an over achiever
yeah he had talent but he was a massive over achiever, he earned his talent through hard work, he was not blessed with it
by AustonianAggie on May 12, 2009 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions
Plus
he was wise in the ways of medicinal herbs.
Keep doing what you been doing, keep getting what you been getting.
Some of it was overachieving.
Certainly some on the O-line, but there were some other talented players besides the triplets.
Charles Haley, Jay Novacheck, Darren Woodson were all key pieces too and as far as talent they are up there.
You win Superbowls on a mixture of talent and team I think.
They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.
I can't argue with you on that Bat.
The one thing they didn’t have is recognition, and by that I mean a lot of self recognition. They recieved their due, but not always the way that they wanted. I remember the no name defense, where the number one defense in the league had no Pro-Bowlers. I don’t remember anyone publicly coming out and saying “What about us?”. They went to work and destroyed other teams and let the Wins speak for them. That is what I would like from this team. Even Irvin was mild mannered in the media compared to some of the loudmouths we let go. Deion was a loud mouth but on game day, you could depend on him to take away half the field in coverage, so that, I’ll let slide.
When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.
Wow - great post, young man
One of the best posts of the year – yes, this question will surely be answered in nine months…re: “what could have been”, after reviewing the season over and over, special teams cost us two games and Romo being out cost us at least one – so there you go…last year we very easily could have been 12-4 and after reviewing the previous 13 – 3 season, we probably won two that we should have lost so that should/could have been 11-5 season. And that’s the story, fellas…the King’s game is the Game of kings.
"The Most Dangerous Man in the world is the one with nothing to lose"
I think I see some new posters!!
along with the old gang. This is the time to make your first post if you haven’t before. It’s easy…are you a Godzilla or a Ranch Hand?
"He has a peculiar felicity of expression." John Adams
I "was"
I was one of T.O.’s biggest fans – note the word "was". I am glad he is gone.
Dion – he “was” worth his mouth. T.O. "was" but isn’t anymore and the same for A. Jones and T. Johnson. Let them go and be distractions elsewhere. I am happy with our WR’s, DB, and DL.
I am not sure about the over achiever comments. The players mentioned just seemed to grow into their rolls. I think you can over achieve for a few games – maybe a season – but not for a career.
Let’s go with the steady Ranch Hands and a great Trail Boss and a couple great Ramrods.
I live and die with the Dallas Cowboys
Nobody ever gives Godzilla credit for doing all the dirty work
and he’s a team player like when he teamed up with Mothra. The only fight I want to know about is Wolverine vs the Hulk
I too had to give up my fandom of TO. His interview with Deion was the end. After that I knew he had to go, that he was a prima donna, and what other teams had said about TO was true. Combine him with a bunch of other flashy but under performing players, talkative Tank Johnson, Pacman Jones… I hope it was enough to lift that dark cloud from off the Cowboys
by AustonianAggie on May 12, 2009 10:19 AM CDT reply actions
The argument we always got in the shop about was...
Hulk vs. Superman.
Which should be obviously painful that Superman would win.
They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.
by AirforceBat on May 12, 2009 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions
But Hulk can always get stronger
eventually he’d rip Supes in half… Hulk once ripped Wolverine in half, and that should be unthinkable… of course, Wolverine heals, gets angry, and angers the Hulk further. Thats why I dig those guys in a duel. In fact, Wolverine made his first appearance in Hulk.

by AustonianAggie on May 12, 2009 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions
Unless
Superman just picks him up carries him into space and throws him into the sun.
They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.
if I wrote a Hulk/Supes cross over
Hulk would survive that and grow very very large… the Hulk I like has no limit to his strength, getting larger and larger as he gets more angry… perhaps even planetoid. What I like about Hulk is that he takes human passion and elevates it to the point where he could fight deities.
Depends on the writer though, the last Hulk movie Hulk had a very distinct cap on his strength.
Hulks green… Kryptonite is green… coincidence? Also, Superman’s not a murderer assuming the sun would kill Hulk
by AustonianAggie on May 12, 2009 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions
I didn't know that.
How the hell did the Hulk break his Admantium bones?? That is what’s really impossible.
You can do a lot of things in life. You can't stab a teammate with a pair of scissors. - Kevin Smith
Wolverine v Hulk
This wouldn’t be a good fight at all, the Hulk would simply man handle Wolverine like a rag doll.
If bullets from a machine gun can’t penetrate the Hulk, neither could Wolverine’s antimantium claws.
In Romo we Trust
Well...
God and this sounds dorky.
But adamantium supposed to be able to cut through anything. The thing is, that the Hulk has a healing factor as well… and he’s the Hulk.
Only three superheros off the top of my head probably could beat him, Superman, Thor, and Silver Surfer.
God I’m a geek.
They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.
by AirforceBat on May 12, 2009 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Chuck Norris
whups ’em all.
Keep doing what you been doing, keep getting what you been getting.
Nah,
Captain Kirk would build a cannon out of stuff laying on the ground, and blow Chuck away with diamonds. You aren’t the only one Bat.
When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.
That sounds more like MacGyver to me than James T ...
and that’s one of 3 movies I’ll be seeing this weekend.
Thunder God
with a wicked hammer
Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Congrats boys first time in team history over .500
by aussie_cowboy on May 13, 2009 1:58 AM CDT up reply actions
Looking for Doomsday again
IMHO getting rid of Stewart turned the team around.We subtracted Roy Williams, Canty, Zach Thomas,Henry and Tank Johnson.The Ranch hands we brought in should make us one of the dominant Ds in the NFL.
If the special teams problems are also solved we should win the field position battle in most of our games.
by TCB Orange Dino on May 12, 2009 11:13 AM CDT reply actions
we were ready to crown them Doomsday II 3 years ago and it failed
we won’t know the time, the hour or the day, we won’t see doomsday coming, we’ll only know when it’s here
by AustonianAggie on May 12, 2009 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions
I think it's more of a matter of "Rhinestone Cowboy vs Real Cowboy"
Rhinestone Cowboy is very flashy, demands attention, and always has something to say; when he does well he makes sure everyone knows it, and when things don’t go well then there is some other reason, but its not his fault.
Real Cowboy is the guy that’s is no name, not because he doesn’t have one, its because all he does is show up everyday and does his job. He’s not fancy, but he has pride in what he does and he wants it to be the best. He does not demand attention, but the work he does commands attention, but he is the first to say he is but a small part of a bigger team.
Larry Cole
Robert Newhouse, John Dutton …
Keep doing what you been doing, keep getting what you been getting.
Your openion on NFL Package on Direct TV?
For the last three years I’ve been paying $250 for the NFL package to watch the Cowboys… This year is up to $280. It seemed like most of the Boys game was on national TV, and sometime, I felt I just threw my money away.. How does this year looks like. II am thinking if it worth it for me to sign up again. Does anyone know how many games will be televised this year? Thanks.
depends on where you live
I live in western Pa and a lot of the Cowboys games are on our local FOX affiliate because the Steelers are an AFC team ,however, I like watching other games other than the Cowboys, especially for fantasy purposes.
Plus, with the NFL Sunday Ticket, you’re guaranteed to see every single Cowboys game…well worth it IMO.
In Romo we Trust
if you live in Hawaii
I’d definitely get the Ticket since there are about 3-4 Cowboys games that aren’t televised nationally.
In Romo we Trust
ranch hands
All this team needs to do is “cowboy-up”!
There is nothing wrong
with a team having its stars. Troy and Emmit were examples of stars with their heads screwed on right. Even Michael with his problems knew that he had to walk the walk. It seems that with the money thrown around now, it’s easier for the prima donnas to give less than full effort. A talent with the ranch hand mentally is the player you want. If you have to choose take hard work and heart over talent every time.
I'll take the talent.
But that’s assuming that it is real talent, and not just guys with a lot of hype. I think the two often get confused. For instance, Brett Farve was not a good QB last year. Chad Pennington was better than him. Now, some people would say the “talent team” would have Farve because he is the “star” but that is not really the case.
by Brendan Scolari on May 13, 2009 3:17 AM CDT reply actions
Farve was very good last year
until he tore a muscle in his throwing arm. His late season collapse was due to injury rather than a lakc of talent
Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Congrats boys first time in team history over .500
by aussie_cowboy on May 13, 2009 4:10 AM CDT up reply actions
He was good
But nothing special. He’s definitely not on a top talent team though. Think Peyton Manning or Drew Brees.
by Brendan Scolari on May 13, 2009 2:18 PM CDT up reply actions
But Tank is not a good player.
Being a loudmouth doesn’t make you good. If this is a team of “superstars”, then Tank definitely doen’t make the cut. Pacman was good last year, so I could see him being used.
by Brendan Scolari on May 13, 2009 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions
He wasn't that good.
He played hard, but freelanced waaaaaaaay to much.
They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.
I actually thought he took a lot of plays off
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
Our team lost more starter or key contributor games to injury last year than any other NFL team
I’m all for the chemistry fixes we’ve tried to implement this offseason, but we’re kidding ourselves if we don’t think last year’s team underachieved at least in part due to a lot of very significant injuries.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
I agree.
I mean injuries AREN’T and excuse, but Dallas got hammered with them last year.
The fact that they are in the toughest division in football and still had a 9-7 record despite all the injuries says something.
They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.
by AirforceBat on May 14, 2009 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions
+1
I’m convinced that if Romo and the Cat aren’t injured last season, we easily make the playoffs and possibly play the Steelers in the SB.
It just wasn’t our year, teams have those, if we stay healthy, there is much to be optimistic about in ’09.
In Romo we Trust

by 




















