Notice how good QB throw ball DEEP

ultron

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,925
Reaction score
8,992
thats “roughly equal” in @ultron world

:muttley::lmao2:
Everyone loves to find anomalies and use them as ‘the norm’ when trying to boost their argument; example, they put down our head coach and call him stupid and all kinds crap because he isn’t Bill Belicheck, or they like to use Tom Brady and Aaron Rodger’s numbers. We’re talking about the greatest ever at their craft - of course not everyone is going to compare to those guys. Aaron Rodgers is fantastic at protecting the football; he’s historically great at it. I didn’t look at Dak’s fumble numbers when I responded to the guy that asked about turnovers, I looked at ints not fumbles - 6 ints in 14 games is not drastically different. 4 and 10 isn’t a huge difference especially when 1/2 of Dak’s picks aren’t even his fault.

The topic of the thread and the OP’s narrative was dead wrong. He said Dak isn’t a good Qb because Dak doesn’t throw the ball deep; so I eloquently pointed out that Dak has more yards than Aaron Rodgers so his post had zero merit and he’s a moron. Which he is.

Go read this before you proceed: https://www.bloggingtheboys.com/202...s-dak-prescott-slump-kellen-moore-ceedee-lamb
 
Last edited:

NotForLong

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,520
Reaction score
9,559
Rodgers has 2 more rushing, 6 less INTs, and 7 less fumbles....

So, no, they're not "roughly equal".
giphy.webp
 

NotForLong

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,520
Reaction score
9,559
Dak isn't Aaron Rodgers. Okay? How many QBs are? How many have been readily available for Dallas to acquire the last decade?
Thats not the point the point is Dak is paid a alot lot more.

Now if the whole point of the NFL is being desperate and holding on to a broken mediocre QB . . and then being so pathetic as to think he is the only QB in the world to justify your stupidity in paying the fraud 40 million a year when you can sign 3-4 star players at other positions to build that team

And this QB does Nothning to elevate the team . . YOU JUST MAY BE A MOMO
 

NotForLong

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,520
Reaction score
9,559
Everyone loves to find anomalies and use them as ‘the norm’ when trying to boost their argument; example, they put down our head coach and call him stupid and all kinds crap because he isn’t Bill Belicheck, or they like to use Tom Brady and Aaron Rodger’s numbers. We’re talking about the greatest ever at their craft - of course not everyone is going to compare to those guys. Aaron Rodgers is fantastic at protecting the football; he’s historically great at it. I didn’t look at Dak’s fumble numbers when I responded to the guy that asked about turnovers, I looked at ints not fumbles - 6 ints in 14 games is not drastically different. 4 and 10 isn’t a huge difference especially when 1/2 of Dak’s picks aren’t even his fault.

The topic of the thread and the OP’s narrative was dead wrong. He said Dak isn’t a good Qb because Dak doesn’t throw the ball deep; so I eloquently pointed out that Dak has more yards than Aaron Rodgers so his post had zero merit and he’s a moron. Which he is.

Go read this before you proceed: https://www.bloggingtheboys.com/202...s-dak-prescott-slump-kellen-moore-ceedee-lamb
The topic of the thread is the deep ball
 

joseephuss

Well-Known Member
Messages
27,896
Reaction score
6,803
Thats not the point the point is Dak is paid a alot lot more.

Now if the whole point of the NFL is being desperate and holding on to a broken mediocre QB . . and then being so pathetic as to think he is the only QB in the world to justify your stupidity in paying the fraud 40 million a year when you can sign 3-4 star players at other positions to build that team

And this QB does Nothning to elevate the team . . YOU JUST MAY BE A MOMO

Actually it was the point of the initial post. Salary was not brought up. They said good QBs throw downfield and used Rodgers as their example. There aren't 10 Aaron Rodgers in the league easily available for teams to nab. Also, Rodgers isn't playing for free. He still has a high salary.

All good QBs cost something. You either have to pay them a high salary or use a high draft pick to get them or multiple high draft picks to trade up to get them. There is a cost. If Dallas didn't pay Dak, they were going to have to pay someone else or use multiple draft picks to acquire someone. You don't build a team around the Andy Daltons or Garrett Gilberts of the world. I wish Dallas could have signed Dak for less money, but that is the NFL right now. veteran QBs cost money and young QBs cost draft picks. Teams like the Rams and Colts traded away lots of premium draft picks and are also paying a lot of cash for their current QBs.
 

NotForLong

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,520
Reaction score
9,559
Actually it was the point of the initial post. Salary was not brought up. They said good QBs throw downfield and used Rodgers as their example. There aren't 10 Aaron Rodgers in the league easily available for teams to nab. Also, Rodgers isn't playing for free. He still has a high salary.

All good QBs cost something. You either have to pay them a high salary or use a high draft pick to get them or multiple high draft picks to trade up to get them. There is a cost. If Dallas didn't pay Dak, they were going to have to pay someone else or use multiple draft picks to acquire someone. You don't build a team around the Andy Daltons or Garrett Gilberts of the world. I wish Dallas could have signed Dak for less money, but that is the NFL right now. veteran QBs cost money and young QBs cost draft picks. Teams like the Rams and Colts traded away lots of premium draft picks and are also paying a lot of cash for their current QBs.
The point of the original post was for us to take notice of How a QB (In this instance Aaron Rodgers) throws a beautiful Pass down field

Up until recent modern RPO fraud QB's coming into the league. . . . having the ability to accurately throw a ball down the field was a preequiste . . now Inaccurate QB's with over exaggerated "leadership" qualities are given $40 million . . . just because
 

DFWJC

Well-Known Member
Messages
59,330
Reaction score
48,172
Everything is roughly equal, even their passer ratings. Any other questions?
:huh:

I don't want to pile on Dak, but come on.

Passer Rating
Rodgers is 1st (110.4)
Dak is 10th (98.1)

Total Tds- Total Turnovers
Rodgers is 1st (+29)
Dak is tied for 12th (+11)

And although I'm not a fan of it, if you want to use
ESPN QBR
Rodgers is 1st
Dak is 19th

They are not remotely close this year.


The player that is playing almost at Rodgers level this year...on average,
is Stafford
2nd in PR
2nd in TD-Turnover
 
Last edited:

RonnieT24

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,504
Reaction score
21,566
:huh:

I don't want to pile on Dak, but come on.

Passer Rating
Rodgers is 1st (110.4)
Dak is 10th (98.1)

Total Tds- Total Turnovers
Rodgers is 1st (+29)
Dak is tied for 12th (+11)

And although I'm not a fan of it, if you want to use
ESPN QBR
Rodgers is 1st
Dak is 19th

They are not remotely close this year.


The player that is playing almost at Rodgers level this year...on average,
is Stafford
2nd in PR
2nd in TD-Turnover

I think it's fair to say Rodgers is having a better season that Dak is .. but that was absolutely not the case before Dak got hurt. Injuries are a part of the game but should not be ignored when evaluating player performance. Nor should the fact that Dak's receivers have I believe taken over the league lead in drops over these past 6-7 weeks. They are dropping 5 a game .. FIVE!!! How many more yards would Dak have if they catch even half of those. They have dropped 35 passes in the last 7 games.. If they catch say 18 of those with Dak's yards per completion sitting at roughly 11 yards that's another 200 yards passing.. And probably more than that because many of the drops have come on 3rd down and would have extended drives and thus allowed Dak and the offense to accumulate more yards and point.. And how have those drops impacted Dak's completion percentage.. In the last game he was 28 for 37.. but of the 9 incomplete passes 6 were drops.. So he could conceivably have been 34 for 37. What would the narrative be around how he is playing if that had been the case?

None of this is to say Dak hasn't had his struggles of late.. It's just to say that if you fail to look at the larger picture you miss a lot. Dak is not playing as well as he was in the first 6 games.. but he absolutely is not playing as poorly as some would have you believe..
 
Top