Did you even read the article you linked to? The "dinosaur" was five inches long. The mammal was the size of a cat.
Yes. And did you not get the memo that mammals were supposed to be no more than 5 inches and herbivores?
Supposed to be by what standard? Forum rules prevent me from writing what I want at this point. I have in front of me right now the book:
Mesozoic Mammals - The First Two-Thirds of Mammalian History, eds Lilligraven JA, Kielan-Jaworowka Z, and Clemens WA. Berkeley, University of California Press 1979.
In this are described 130 genera of Mesozoic mammals, spanning the Triassic to the end of the Cretaceous. I am going to bet that the diversity of Mesozoic mammals hasn't decreased in the last 25 years.
I cannot find a reference to a single herbivore in that entire book. So NJ, where do we undermine this paradigm? Where were mammals only 5 inches long and herbivores? Several of the Jurassic triconodonts were 2-3 kg (read cat-sized). It has been shown to you over and over that this 'dog-sized' predator wasn't and even if so means nothing. Mammals are known to have evolved pretty much around the same time as dinosaurs. There is no 'time line' problem.
Doctor Bashir: "Of all the stories you told me, which were true and which weren't?"
Elim Garak: "My dear Doctor, they're all true"
Doctor Bashir: "Even the lies?"
Elim Garak: "Especially the lies"
™ Version 4.2