Two veterans Dallas should consider bringing in to back up Dak

[Kwyn]

last year that worked out for the titans..we need a plan both for the backup and for Dak to be pushed or needed for a possible holdout etc..something better then Rush is needed..

I would have no issue with the team signing in a veteran backup like Matt Moore. They could cut rush if they want depending on how bad the cap it is. I haven’t checked his contract but it can’t be too bad

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

There is no team in the league they would have made that move.

The injury Dak suffered was reported to be one that is a matter of pain tolerance and the MRI showed no structural damage and no risk of further injury.

You may recall that the injury happened in the first quarter against the Rams and Dak went on to have a really good game. There was no reason to believe he couldn’t play, and play well, with the injury against Philadelphia

As I said, in a situation like that where your QB says he’s good to go and he’s medically cleared, you let your starter play 100 out of 100 times.

Every team in the league would have done the same exact thing.

Based on what? You can't say that there is no team that would have made a move because almost every team in the league would have had a better backup if they had the talent to be able to challenge for a championship and we did. That's just not accurate.

It's one of two things here. Either he was healthy and just terrible or he was injured and should have been benched. It can't be that he was injured and we just leave him in to eventually lose the game by a side margin to a terrible team. We can't accept that and I guess we didn't because Garrett is now gone.

No, every team in the league would not have done the same thing. I'm sorry, that's just wrong.

 

[Kwyn]

Based on what? You can't say that there is no team that would have made a move because almost every team in the league would have had a better backup if they had the talent to be able to challenge for a championship and we did. That's just not accurate.

It's one of two things here. Either he was healthy and just terrible or he was injured and should have been benched. It can't be that he was injured and we just leave him in to eventually lose the game by a side margin to a terrible team. We can't accept that and I guess we didn't because Garrett is now gone.

No, every team in the league would not have done the same thing. I'm sorry, that's just wrong.

If this were a poll, it would be a blowout.

teams do not bench their franchise QB in the biggest game of the season if the doctors and the player say he’s ok to play.

Without being the Head Coach of every team in the league, at the same time, of course we can’t offer definitive proof

I guess I appreciate your passion on this? But the idea itself is way off base.

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

Thanks. Glad I did not click the link for this info.

I hate it when someone is too lazy to post a few extra lines of comments or at least list the names of what it is about. Instead of just posting the link.
I Know, I could click on the link. But the courtesy of creating a link should be a little more informative. Just my opinion though.

Should be rule about this.

That's exactly why I did that so pecan know without clicking the link.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

If this were a poll, it would be a blowout.

teams do not bench their franchise QB in the biggest game of the season if the doctors and the player say he’s ok to play.

Without being the Head Coach of every team in the league, at the same time, of course we can’t offer definitive proof

I guess I appreciate your passion on this? But the idea itself is way off base.

Well, this will never be a poll because there are only 32 people who can actually be polled and they would never agree to it.

Teams bench franchise QBs who are clearly injured all the time. I don't know how you come to your conclusion that it never happens but it's not true. In fact, it does happen.
.

 

[csirl]

Are you talking about competition for backup?

if you’re talking about Dak, that’s obviously not happening

What’s the number of NFL teams who brought in competition at the QB position?

Just one to my knowledge and that’s Chicago with Trubisky and Foles

This thing you’re talking about?

It’s not a thing.

It isn’t going to be a thing here or anywhere else but Chicago

In this thread, yes, Im talking mainly about the backups.

I dont there been competition between Dak and anyone else simply because its hard to imagine a scenario where Dak is on the roster in 2021. Cap is going to nose dive in the current climate. Dallas already has a few high value contracts. Our only option is a QB on a rookie deal. Then throw in Daks contract expectations, the doubts about him and the risk that he wont flourish in a new system etc and the odds are stacked against Dak being here in 2021.

 

[DuncanIso]

My thoughts exactly.
I want to draft a QB that can not only be a solid backup but can potentially win the starting job.
Jalen Hurts in the third round is the idea scenario.

We should have Dak as the starter for 3-4 seasons.

Dallas should draft his replacement if he's available.

Think within a season or two.

 

[Kwyn]

In this thread, yes, Im talking mainly about the backups.

I dont there been competition between Dak and anyone else simply because its hard to imagine a scenario where Dak is on the roster in 2021. Cap is going to nose dive in the current climate. Dallas already has a few high value contracts. Our only option is a QB on a rookie deal. Then throw in Daks contract expectations, the doubts about him and the risk that he wont flourish in a new system etc and the odds are stacked against Dak being here in 2021.

I’ll take that bet. Franchise QB’s are hard to find. The only comparable situation in recent memory where a team had a QB in their prime and franchised them until they ran them off was Cousins.

Pretty sure the Commanders would liken a do-over on that

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I’ll take that bet. Franchise QB’s are hard to find. The only comparable situation in recent memory where a team had a QB in their prime and franchised them until they ran them off was Cousins.

Pretty sure the Commanders would liken a do-over on that

What is recent times to you?

 

[KJJ]

Don’t even need to scroll through the pages to know where this topic is headed.

 

[Kwyn]

What is recent times to you?

I don’t think you were serious but I’ll go ahead and provide the information in case someone else is legitimately interested.

“Recent”, in this case, would mean the last 13 years. Is that enough?

In that time only five QB’s have been franchised. Only Cousins was allowed to get away, as I described in my previous post.

• Dak - 2020 - Exclusive Tag - TBD
• Cousins - 2016 - Non-Exclusive Tag - 2017 - Exclusive Tag - Left as an unrestricted free agent in 2018
• Brees - 2012 - Exclusive Tag - Signed 5 year deal a few months later
  
• Manning - 2011 - Exclusive Tag - Signed 5 year deal a few months later
  
• Vick - 2011 - Exclusive Tag - Signed 6 year deal a few months later
• Cassel - 2009 - Non-Exclusive Tag - Traded a few months later to KC

So, yeah, I’d say that every indication from the team, player, coaches and front office says he will stay. If you choose to ignore all that then, we’ll, there’s the real data I share in this post.

Teams don’t cut franchise QB’s, they don’t bring competition into camp for the starting job and they do everything they can to sign them long term if they are forced to tag them.

If you have anything to contribute to the discussion, I’m all ears.

 

[jazzcat22]

That's exactly why I did that so pecan know without clicking the link.

yes, appreciate that. I did this a few times myself on other threads.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don’t think you were serious but I’ll go ahead and provide the information in case someone else is legitimately interested.

“Recent”, in this case, would mean the last 13 years. Is that enough?

In that time only five QB’s have been franchised. Only Cousins was allowed to get away, as I described in my previous post.

• Dak - 2020 - Exclusive Tag - TBD
• Cousins - 2016 - Non-Exclusive Tag - 2017 - Exclusive Tag - Left as an unrestricted free agent in 2018
• Brees - 2012 - Exclusive Tag - Signed 5 year deal a few months later
  
• Manning - 2011 - Exclusive Tag - Signed 5 year deal a few months later
  
• Vick - 2011 - Exclusive Tag - Signed 6 year deal a few months later
• Cassel - 2009 - Non-Exclusive Tag - Traded a few months later to KC

So, yeah, I’d say that every indication from the team, player, coaches and front office says he will stay. If you choose to ignore all that then, we’ll, there’s the real data I share in this post.

Teams don’t cut franchise QB’s, they don’t bring competition into camp for the starting job and they do everything they can to sign them long term if they are forced to tag them.

If you have anything to contribute to the discussion, I’m all ears.

I'm 100% serious.

It's basically happened in Dallas in the last few years. Now, Tony wasn't Franchised in the process but I don't really see where that's relevant.

 

[Kwyn]

I'm 100% serious.

It's basically happened in Dallas in the last few years. Now, Tony wasn't Franchised in the process but I don't really see where that's relevant.

Hmm, ok? I guess?

you don’t have any basis for your position and despite a lot of information trying to explain it you can’t understand so I’ll leave you to it

 

[blueblood70]

I’m not sure I understand.

Are you saying the Cowboys should have benched Dak for the Eagles game and the only reason they didn’t is because they didn’t trust Cooper Rush and if they had another backup, we would have won that game, the NFC East, and made the playoffs?

yes thats what happened but its not the entire truth the reason we dont have a solid backup I because they dont want to hurt daks feelings , pressure him, or have a qb controversy,,they do that here a lot with starters...Im hoping MM changes this because the backup is there for just such a game, this game was for the division and watching Dak miss wide open WRs all game is the reason we lost and im thinking even rush hits afew if those he practiced all week as starter etc..

that game was lost on Daks arm, if he wasn't hurt we are back to Daks wildly inaccurate and inconsistent etc..you cant lose games you could have won because your backups inadequate or you are afraid to expose your starter by having the backup play better..

said but true..

 

[Ranched]

Is anyone comfortable with Rush to come in & take over should Dak go down? Do you think Dallas' FO is? They will end up with Rush for a week while they scramble to find some vet to come in taking a crash course on the playbook like they ALWAYS do.

I'd rather have a vet come in learn the playbook get some practice time & IF Dak gets hurt, can step in & play immediately.

 

[blueblood70]

Is anyone comfortable with Rush to come in & take over should Dak go down? Do you think Dallas' FO is? They will end up with Rush for a week while they scramble to find some vet to come in taking a crash course on the playbook like they ALWAYS do.

I'd rather have a vet come in learn the playbook get some practice time & IF Dak gets hurt can step in & play immediately.

thats not the issue that eagles game showed why we need one before then, not after.. thats was basically a win and you get the division and playoffs and they let Dak play injured and it was obvious , he basically handed the game to Philly in that second half missing open receivers play after play for huge plays..it was ugly..i would have started rush anyway but that was why the FO allowed Dak to play when he shouldnt have..

 

[Kwyn]

Is anyone comfortable with Rush to come in & take over should Dak go down? Do you think Dallas' FO is? They will end up with Rush for a week while they scramble to find some vet to come in taking a crash course on the playbook like they ALWAYS do.

I'd rather have a vet come in learn the playbook get some practice time & IF Dak gets hurt, can step in & play immediately.

I think they have a bit of a blind spot perhaps because Dak has been indestructible. He hasn’t missed a game in his four year career.

no one is immune to injury though.
And to answer your question, no, I’m not oui u

Is anyone comfortable with Rush to come in & take over should Dak go down? Do you think Dallas' FO is? They will end up with Rush for a week while they scramble to find some vet to come in taking a crash course on the playbook like they ALWAYS do.

I'd rather have a vet come in learn the playbook get some practice time & IF Dak gets hurt, can step in & play immediately.

im not comfortable.

I think Dak’s durability may be taken for granted at times. He hasn’t missed a game in his entire four year career.

No one is immune though. They need to look at a vet imo

 

[Cmac]

We know one thing......there's a laundry list of Backup QBs still in the league...….that shouldn't be. And some out the league, that can't get a fair shot.

 

[Silverstar]

I think Flacco and Moore would be good backups to take over the reins if needed.
Flacco has the edge on experience, accuracy and W/L record. He's also a year younger than Moore if that matters to anyone.
Moore has started for teams in both conferences though if that holds any weight.