Why the Giants Did Not Beat the Cowboys As One Would Think
Before anyone decides to angrily post on my comment board about my intelligence, sexual preference, or the appearance of my mother; I want to state that the title of this article was meant to draw you into the article.
The Giants did beat the Cowboys. The scoreboard says so with a 33-31 score. What I am saying is that the Giants didn’t really dominate as much as one would think. The core reason for this loss is attributed to a bunch of Cowboy blunders.
The Cowboys had more things go wrong for them than Laurel and Hardy do in a movie. Except there was no happy ending for the Cowboys.
Four turnovers led to 24 points. 24 points! That means that only 9 points were made on Giant drives. The Cowboys defensively were great in some areas, and intermediate at others, but they shouldn’t have to be in those situations.
But, I will swear on a stack that the Cowboys shot their own selves in the BLEEP to be very blunt. Tony Romo threw three interceptions, and Felix Jones fumbled a kickoff return. Every single one of those turnovers led to points that defeated the Cowboys.
The Giants, if you look at a stat sheet, were great offensively, but if you watched that game, they shouldn’t have even been on the field to make those plays. That’s how dominant Dallas was at controlling the ball before the turnovers happened.
One interception was taken back for a touchdown by Bruce Johnson, so there is seven points there. Take that out, and Boys win game probably. The second interception was just plain weird. I’ve seen strange interceptions, but this one was WEIRD.
Tony Romo throws out to Jason Witten, and it is a little behind him and it is going to be incomplete except Witten got a hand on it and tipped it. Now, a tipped interception happens every week in the NFL, but this is where it becomes a TV spot on Ripley’s Believe It Or Not.
Want more? Check here: http://www.nfltouchdown.com/why-the-giants-did-not-beat-the-cowboys-as-one-would-think/
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?