General Itals Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 (edited) This comes a little late, but I just saw it while catching up on Mick's Mail at DallasCowboys.com. (Feb. 11, 2005) Henry Cardaropoli, Greenfield, Mass.: I just watched you on Totally Football. How can you say the Cowboys of the 90's would beat the 2004 Patriots? It would not even be a game. The score would have been, 48-0. Troy Aikman would have no answer for the Pats' 3-4 defense. Emmitt Smith would have rushed for 10 yards. All Dallas did in the 90's was buy three championship teams. But what do we expect from a bum-(ahem) Dallas Cowboys columnist? See you in Detroit. The Pats will be there. What about Dallas? Mickey: Well, in case you are deaf or have an attention deficit, let me say it again to you: The Cowboys would have beaten the Patriots. The Cowboys were a better team. No answer for a 3-4? You obviously are too young to remember or didn't pay attention, but the Cowboys carved up 3-4 defenses. Hey pal, you heard of Buffalo? Pittsburgh? Emmitt Smith would gain a marathon of yards against 3-4 defenses. By the way, that great, great Eagles team hung 21 on the Pats defense, and that's without a great running back and a healthy great receiver and missing their great tight end. Come on, give us a break. And I hope my DallasCowboys.com readers act more civil and with more class than you if they should email someone on the Patriots' site. But thanks for visiting just the same. There have been some threads comparing and contrasting past fooball dynasties, but no one I know has claimed that the current group of Patriots would dominate any of them. Compete maybe, but not dominate. So that just has to be Ugly Tuna's real identity. Either that, or I've been giving you Pat's fans too much credit. Edited February 25, 2005 by General Itals Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skrappy1 Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Can't be UT, the spelling is all correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfden1 Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Can't be UT, the spelling is all correct. 711511[/snapback] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Can't be UT, the spelling is all correct. 711511[/snapback] There's a curious lack of manlove as well. This cannot be the Tom Brady Swimsuit Calander worshiping UT - but rather a run-of-the-mill homer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gspot Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 711542[/snapback] Well, you may be right, but.... Considering he was sending a note to an "actual" newspaper or web site, its not a stretch to consider he may hav elicted some editing help from an elder or carefully reviewed the spelling prior to posting. No disrespect to the huddle, but dallascowboys.com gets a few more hits and UT might have been more discerning regarding spelling and "man love". I still think it might actually be him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigrocks Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Reason #67 to hate the Pasties.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Well if we're going to compare the current Pats to previous Superbowl participants from other decades, there is one definite Superbowl participant team, that I think they could've beaten. The Superbowl runner up from the 1985 season. I bet these Pats could've beaten that team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.