Dak on his legacy - I want to win a championship

As I get older, I could care less what people say, it is all about what they do, actions speak, words are worthless.

If Dak cared one bit about winning, he wouldn't have taken the dummy bros to the woodshed on every contract. The tool is the highest paid player in the league, that yells he doesn't care about winning, it is only about team Dak.

The main issue in not winning are the Jones Bros, but Dak doesn't help.
 
GINeric said:
And that last statement you typed is the sole reason why you can't compare quarterback to quarterback in most situations.

So when people say dumb **** like "Dak will never win a big game like a superbowl because he is a bum".

According to what they're saying, Jim Kelly and Dan are bums and Nick Foles and Trent Dilfer are better than they are because Dilfer and Foles won Superbowls.

You see how that works? This isn't boxing or golf. So for the people who place it all on Dak, im fine with that as LONG as we keep that same "placing it all on the quarterback" energy on every other NFL quarterback without the excuses and goalpost moving for them.

Then that's where the divide happens. Because once I start hearing excuses for other quarterbacks who fizzle in the playoffs, im like NOPE!!! We can't use those excuses under the "it's all on the quarterback" law that was established here.
Click to expand...
Quarterbacks are not all in the same situation.

Anyone with a brain would not compare Dak Prescott's performance on a team with its resources pumped into the offense with a very good offensive line for the most part in a division that has had two bad teams for the majority of the last 10 years with a quarterback in a far worse situation by way of an equal comparison!?

It's like comparing two racing drivers in two completely different performing cars.

I massively disagree if people think Dak has never played on good teams. E.g., The 2023 was a Superbowl calibre roster in my opinion. You may disagree fair enough.

In my view the 2016 team completely bottled it due to not being used to actually realising they were a good team for so long and had they beaten the Packers I think the defense would have stepped up in any subsequent playoff games. The fault lay with starting a rookie QB over an All Pro vet as the latter would have calmly led the offense, exposed the worst pass defense in the play offs from the start not from the end of the 2nd quarter and arguably helped produce less penalties from the offense.
 
Swagger said:
Quarterbacks are not all in the same situation.

Anyone with a brain would not compare Dak Prescott's performance on a team with its resources pumped into the offense with a very good offensive line for the most part in a division that has had two bad teams for the majority of the last 10 years with a quarterback in a far worse situation by way of an equal comparison!?

It's like comparing two racing drivers in two completely different performing cars.

I massively disagree if people think Dak has never played on good teams. E.g., The 2023 was a Superbowl calibre roster in my opinion. You may disagree fair enough.

In my view the 2016 team completely bottled it due to not being used to actually realising they were a good team for so long and had they beaten the Packers I think the defense would have stepped up in any subsequent playoff games. The fault lay with starting a rookie QB over an All Pro vet as the latter would have calmly led the offense, exposed the worst pass defense in the play offs from the start not from the end of the 2nd quarter and arguably helped produce less penalties from the offense.
Click to expand...

This is a great post. You're actually saying what I've always been saying, but in a different way. The bottom line is, it takes a TEAM and great coaching to win a Superbowl.

Sometimes even great teams dont win a Superbowl. Just ask the Buffalo Bills and many others throughout history.

But again, you're absolutely right, we can't compare quarterback vs quarterback when it comes to wins and losses. There are too many other pieces to this that affect the outcomes of games. Unfortunately our quarterbacks Romo and Dak always get compared to what other quarterbacks have done as if this is boxing or golf.

You spoke on the Dak having great offensive lines and a great running back. I agree with you. But guess who recently had a great offensive line and great running back..... the Indianapolis Colts. Have they even reached the playoffs the last few years?

It takes more than great players sometimes. They call it a team game for a reason. With that said, I like your post.
 
If people need examples that you can't judge one quarterback on exactly the same level as other quarterbacks in the league then please refer to Geno Smith, Sam Darnold and even Baker Mayfield. Many people initially laughed at them, called them busts and awful quarterbacks....what those people didn't take into account was that they played on horrible teams especially Smith and Darnold whilst Mayfield played on a loser franchise.

However, they all moved on and became Pro Bowlers on respectable teams.

Mayfield
41TDs
16 Interceptions

Smith
30 TDs
11 Interceptions

Darnold
35 TDs
12 Interceptions

Those are classic Dak Prescott type numbers in his best seasons.

Those three quarterbacks all earn circa $30 million a season - half compared with Dak.

The point is three fold

1. You can get Dak's production at half the price.

2. Dak has largely played on good teams (especially on offense) and I think that's what goes above a lot of people's heads due to their negative thoughts towards Jerry.

3. If Dak played for those really bad Jets and Panthers teams he would have stunk up the joint like Darnold and Smith. We saw examples in a few rare games where the Dallas o line was bad and he was absolutely hopeless (the infamous Falcons game when he was sacked on what seemed like 10 occasions by the same player). Guys like Darnold and Smith had that type of o line in pretty much EVERY game on those bad teams. Dak been been VERY fortunate to have had it so good with the Dallas offense and schedule in playing 2 bad teams twice a season for the best part of ten years. As a result he's overrated.

If people don't understand and take on board the above comments then we will just have to all move on with our lives!
 
Swagger said:
If people need examples that you can't judge one quarterback on exactly the same level as other quarterbacks in the league then please refer to Geno Smith, Sam Darnold and even Baker Mayfield. Many people initially laughed at them, called them busts and awful quarterbacks....what those people didn't take into account was that they played on horrible teams especially Smith and Darnold whilst Mayfield played on a loser franchise.

However, they all moved on and became Pro Bowlers on respectable teams.

Mayfield
41TDs
16 Interceptions

Smith
30 TDs
11 Interceptions

Darnold
35 TDs
12 Interceptions

Those are classic Dak Prescott type numbers in his best seasons.

Those three quarterbacks all earn circa $30 million a season - half compared with Dak.

The point is three fold

1. You can get Dak's production at half the price.

2. Dak has largely played on good teams (especially on offense) and I think that's what goes above a lot of people's heads due to their negative thoughts towards Jerry.

3. If Dak played for those really bad Jets and Panthers teams he would have stunk up the joint like Darnold and Smith. We saw examples in a few rare games where the Dallas o line was bad and he was absolutely hopeless (the infamous Falcons game when he was sacked on what seemed like 10 occasions by the same player). Guys like Darnold and Smith had that type of o line in pretty much EVERY game on those bad teams. Dak been been VERY fortunate to have had it so good with the Dallas offense and schedule in playing 2 bad teams twice a season for the best part of ten years. As a result he's overrated.

If people don't understand and take on board the above comments then we will just have to all move on with our lives!
Click to expand...
We were very surprised by Mayfield here in Tampa. The 41 TDs went largely under the national radar. Glad to have him...he plays with few mistakes, his pendulum swing isn't quite as wide as daks...just very level...a good quality in a QB.

Tampa just added Egbuka, They have WR1 3 deep! The way Tampa operates the offense...straight up nightmare. Solid run game to go with it.
 
SteveTheCowboy said:
We were very surprised by Mayfield here in Tampa. The 41 TDs went largely under the national radar. Glad to have him...he plays with few mistakes, his pendulum swing isn't quite as wide as daks...just very level...a good quality in a QB.

Tampa just added Egbuka, They have WR1 3 deep! The way Tampa operates the offense...straight up nightmare. Solid run game to go with it.
Click to expand...
I agree. He was unfortunate Allen and Jackson had such strong seasons as in a lot of seasons he is probably rewarded with an All Pro
 
SteveTheCowboy said:
You should do the same. Find the real facts of what people post.
Click to expand...

I've already posted real facts but your punk *** got mad for mentioning all the other reasons we didn't succeed in the playoffs including the quarterback position.

Your weak *** like to leave out details of other players. You just want to mention one player. This isn't boxing or golf lil boy.
 
DallasEast said:
vJshcgp.gif
Click to expand...
Now there's a man that got things done. Maybe he can talk to Dak.
 
GINeric said:
You said, "the quarterback is supposed to elevate the play of the players around him", correct? That's fair.

Well according to this statement you made.....


2. This means that we must place more respect on Trent Dilfer and Nick Foles names, more than Jim Kelly and Dan Marino because Kelly and Marino COULD NOT elevate the play of the players around them to have achieved a Superbowl victory like Foles and Dilfer achieved. Again, this falls under the umbrella of quarterbacks elevating the play of the other players around them.




(Insert excuses and goalpost moving for other QBs here)
Click to expand...
Interestingly, Jim Kelly, in his four Super Bowls, was average to poor. He does fit the description of a QB that couldn't get it done when the lights were brightest. Hell, he was damn near putrid in the game against Washington, with four picks and a passer rating under 45. He failed with very good teams. Jim Kelly may have done less with more than any QB in league history.

Dan Marino didn't perform well in his only Super Bowl, but that's a small sample size and his team was not as good as those Buffalo teams.

Dilfer was very average in his Super Bowl, but he had a GOAT-level defense to bail him out. All he had to do was not make mistakes, and he didn't.

Foles had to shoot it out and had a better Super Bowl than any Jim Kelly performance. Foles and Brady had two of the best SB games for a QB that year.

Do I think Nick Foles is a better QB that Jim Kelly? Not at all. But for the second half of that season and through the playoffs to the Super Bowl, for that sliver of time, he was better than Jim Kelly ever was in the post-season.

Now I'd love for Dak to pull a Foles and be the man that has a God-like stretch and wins us a Super Bowl. It's just that most posters here don't believe he can be that player.
 
Last edited:
GINeric said:
I've already posted real facts but your punk *** got mad for mentioning all the other reasons we didn't succeed in the playoffs including the quarterback position.

Your weak *** like to leave out details of other players. You just want to mention one player. This isn't boxing or golf lil boy.
Click to expand...
So you're are going to order other people to search YOUR history to "get the facts". But won't do the same yourself.

I do not need to prove to the likes of you what I have clearly stated many times.

Probably should go easy on the personal insults.
 
Sam Darnold
StarOfGlory said:
Interestingly, Jim Kelly, in his four Super Bowls, was average to poor. He does fit the description of a QB that couldn't get it done when the lights were brightest. Hell, he was damn near putrid in the game against Washington, with four picks and a passer rating under 45. He failed with very good teams. Jim Kelly may have done less with more than any QB in league history.

Dan Marino didn't perform well in his only Super Bowl, but that's a small sample size and his team was not as good as those Buffalo teams.

Dilfer was very average in his Super Bowl, but he had a GOAT-level defense to bail him out. All he had to do was not make mistakes, and he didn't.

Foles had to shoot it out and had a better Super Bowl than any Jim Kelly performance. Foles and Brady had two of the best SB games for a QB that year.

Do I think Nick Foles is a better QB that Jim Kelly? Not at all. But for the second half of that season and through the playoffs to the Super Bowl, for that sliver of time, he was better than Jim Kelly ever was in the post-season.

Now I'd love for Dak to pull a Foles and be the man that has a God-like stretch and wins us a Super Bowl. It's just that most posters here don't believe he can be that player.
Click to expand...
Foles is an interesting case. He was excellent in the Superbowl and played well in the NFC Championship game.

But there was an indication that he could have that type of performance in him. He went 8-2 with the Eagles in 2013 and had an extraordinary 27 touchdowns with only 2 interceptions and a rating of 119!

He is very much an anomaly than the norm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 29 more.
Total: 3,187 (members: 129, guests: 3,058)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
465,970
Messages
13,907,905
Members
23,793
Latest member
Roger33
Back
Top