A reminder that Dak can play QB

[Tristan]

For most positions, I follow the 3 year rule as long as they don't suck the first 2 years and has shown some flashes. For RBs, you can tell immediately. For QBs, it could take little longer.

Well I agree with Landrys ol "if they havent shown it by year 3 then they probably wont" but I think theres certain players at most positions that show theyre here to stay in less than 2-3 years and usually within a handful of games.

Il never forget emmits rookie year one of the first games against tampa did some shake n bake that left guys on the turf and you knew he was going to be phenominal, Zeke very similar and I agree rbs show quickest.

Randy Moss is another example of a guy you knew right away was going to be a beast for loooong time!

To me the guys that usually bust after "flashing" have issues, either injuries, dumb, drugs, booze, fam/friends taking all ur $ making them crazy or were just to lazy for the work overall

 

[Gator88]

I wouldn't say Romo is better or worse than Eli. Eli has one advantage - his durability. Some of that durability is due to his ability to avoid the big hit. Tony's style of play invited that, but the style also contributed to whatever success he had.

I do believe and have said it numerous times, that if you switched Eli and Tony, Tony would've won a SB with the Giants and Eli probably not with the Cowboys.

Eli is clearly worse than Romo, durability doesn't make up for the fact that Romo was a better QB than Eli every year they both played, and the majority of the time, there was no contest in comparison.

 

[Diehardblues]

Hey, doesn't Bortles, Foles and Keenum prove anything to you guys? Who needs a top end QB? Of course they may get embarrassed by the GOAT and a HC with SB experience, who knows. Maybe it's all defense. Maybe it's the scheme. Maybe it's the HC, the WR's, the O-line,the game plan, the OC and the DC. Maybe it was on Romo. He just didn't have the lucky charm of Bortles, Foles and Keenum. Advice to Dak, eat your lucky charms

Those QB haven’t won anything yet .But Id give the ones with the best defense the greatest opportunity.

While Romo needed a better defense he had a couple opportunities. I don’t hold him responsible for any of the losses but he didn’t have his best games on the biggest stages.

Romo was probably good enough with a better team . We think..although he didn’t change our course in history in the playoffs for the better.

Great QB have those signature plays or games in the playoffs which change the course in history. Romo was unfortunately famous for a negative signature which he never totally overcame in the playoffs . He almost did in Green Bay. Almost..

He had a solid career. One of the best undrafted QB in NFL history. I never thought he was as bad as his critics nor as good as his homerish following . He kept us in contention for several years under poor mgmt. He always reminded me of Archie Manning.

 

[pete026]

When all you have is "we won 22 games" you know the player you're defending sucks..

I guess Byron Jones is better than Landon collins..

I guess Twill is better than Larry Fitzgerald..

I mean, we won with them right?!

People keep going back to 2016 when the league had no idea how to defend the guy and half of us didn't know who he was...
There's tape now. He's been figured out. He's a one trick pony. If random fans like me know that Dak is scared to go deep, you can bet that all defensive coordinators know this also..that's why we keep seeing stacked boxes and Beasley and Witten being doubled..

It all goes back to Prescott being a one trick pony..

If Dak can't learn to throw deep this off season, our season is over before it starts.

So let me get this straight....... we should draft a 4th round QB every year and it should be good for 13 wins, a division title and a run in the playoffs. He can suck but nobody will be able to defend him until his 2nd season????

With a GM like you in the NFL, we would no longer have the worst with Jerry.

 

[lk8701]

Huh? Haven't seen that comp anywhere so far about him. How do you even come to that conclusion? Paxton doesn't have anywhere near the physical traits that Allen displays. Mel Kiper has Allen going as his #1 QB in his latest mock to Cleveland. Now, don't get me wrong, I think that's a bit crazy. Rosen should at least go ahead of him at this point....Allen may technically have a higher ceiling but this isn't the NBA where you draft totally on potential.

Lynch had a slightly higher SPARQ score than Wentz. Lynch - 81.7 percentile. Wentz - 81.4 percentile.

https://3sigmaathlete.com/rankings2016/qb/

 

[Diehardblues]

So let me get this straight....... we should draft a 4th round QB every year and it should be good for 13 wins, a division title and a run in the playoffs. He can suck but nobody will be able to defend him until his 2nd season????

With a GM like you in the NFL, we would no longer have the worst with Jerry.

As bad as Jerry is and has been he’s not the worst GM. Cowboys are in top 10 in wins last 20 years.

The difference is those other teams have a better chance of overcoming because they’ll at least attempt to keep trying a new GM and HC to hopefully finally hit on someone.

It’s why Jerry said he’d of fired himself already but won’t because he’s not interesting in winning unless he’s involved and without a HC who could recieve more credit.

 

[northerncowboynation]

This thread is plucked, roasted and burnt to a crisp.

In the endless. pointless Prescott/Romo debate, ther are a few facts that should be remembered by all. Most do not hold Romo responsible for the 6-10 year, three 8-8 years, or 3-13 year, nor should we. 8-8 were rebuild the O-line years. 6-10 was broken clavicle #1, 3-13 was broken back #1. He's also not responsible for 13-3, 9-7, 11-5, 12-4, and 2 playoff wins either. It's a team game.

It's ridiculous that fans hold Romo in high esteem for the winning seasons (and let's be honest the team won 2 playoff games in that span) and talk about bad teams and coaching being the reason for the 5 losing seasons. 2 of the bad seasons were due to Romo injuries. So let's give Romo some due love for 13-3, 9-7. 11-5 12-4, and 2 playoff wins remembering that it is a team game.. Let's not make it more than Dak has done to this point in his career, 13-3 and 9-7 with a playoff bye for best record in the NFC, remembering it's a team game.

Just sayin, if you're gonna hold one up for winning seasons, hold up the other as well. Both had/have flaws. One won 2 playoff games in 9 years, the other has only played 2 years. Likewise if one get's a free pass for poor seasons (barring injuries) the other deserves the same respect

 

[northerncowboynation]

Those QB haven’t won anything yet .But Id give the ones with the best defense the greatest opportunity.

While Romo needed a better defense he had a couple opportunities. I don’t hold him responsible for any of the losses but he didn’t have his best games on the biggest stages.

Romo was probably good enough with a better team . We think..although he didn’t change our course in history in the playoffs for the better.

Great QB have those signature plays or games in the playoffs which change the course in history. Romo was unfortunately famous for a negative signature which he never totally overcame in the playoffs . He almost did in Green Bay. Almost..

He had a solid career. One of the best undrafted QB in NFL history. I never thought he was as bad as his critics nor as good as his homerish following . He kept us in contention for several years under poor mgmt. He always reminded me of Archie Manning.

I'd give the one with the best QB and most game experience the best chance. Not to mention coaching. My bet is on the GOAT and Bellichik much to my chagrin.

Yep the homerish got worse when he retired, many had him in a love hate relationship then when he retired the hate ended. He was great on paper. Heck if you're gonna say Romo almost did in GB, Dak almost did in GB. Aikman did it a few times.

 

[pete026]

As bad as Jerry is and has been he’s not the worst GM. Cowboys are in top 10 in wins last 20 years.

The difference is those other teams have a better chance of overcoming because they’ll at least attempt to keep trying a new GM and HC to hopefully finally hit on someone.

It’s why Jerry said he’d of fired himself already but won’t because he’s not interesting in winning unless he’s involved and without a HC who could recieve more credit.

Jerry wasn't the point I was trying to make. I was just using him to accentuate my real point.

 

[northerncowboynation]

His accuracy issues started once Zeke was suspended. Before that, he was playing really well. What's funny is Wentz is considered an MVP by his fanbase, yet only completed 60.2% of his passes.

Throw in a missing all-pro LT and you're there. We love to hate our own

 

[Alexander]

Well I agree with Landrys ol "if they havent shown it by year 3 then they probably wont" but I think theres certain players at most positions that show theyre here to stay in less than 2-3 years and usually within a handful of games.

Landry's little rule meant something back in the day when you could stash a developmental player and mess around.

In his day, you could make up and injury and put him away. And keep developing him as you went along.

Now, coaches have very little exposure to players. They can't work them out, they can't put them through drills. They cannot have them even watch film in an official capacity, otherwise it is called work.

So Landry's three year rule means zero now. It was a different game in a different era.

It has little to no translation to today's game of football.

 

[CowboyRoy]

I still have hope Dak can tweak his weaknesses. And I hope we can continue building up our defense to support him.

I think what became most alarming this year is Dak is going to need more support than originally thought not strong enough to carry us without all of our key pieces.

And while we thought our offense was our strength focusing in building up our defense it now looks like the offense needs retooling as well to cater to Daks skill sets.

So, does this set us back until we can retool our offense while continuing to build our defense?

I thought this was one of the upsides to choosing Dak to be our future is he presented immediate upswing being a surprise talent in 4th round taking us to the brink of a championship appearance . It appears he regressed quite a bit in one season?

Would we have made the same decisions after 2016 with the results we had in 2017? Seems like fair questions . I understand we’re locked in on Dak now. But I can be critical of that position by Jerry as well .It serves no purpose to rehash but that’s what we do as fans and in a forum is second guess and play Monday Morning QB.

I have some serious concerns with Dak moving forward. I’m not feeling the excitement I did after 2016. His progression , performance and results of the team can change those concerns.

We had some some concerns in 2016 but the winning wave was hard to knock. Without that winning the concerns become more visible and concerning.

We are lucky as hell to have Dak after Romo. Really couldnt ask for anything more. A 4th round pick turning out to be as good as he is a football miracle. If you want to focus on cutting up a 2nd year QB that has had one of the best starts in NFL history then by all means have at it. To me its a waste of time.

The QB will go as the Oline, RB, and receivers go. There is no getting around that football fact.

 

[Diehardblues]

We are lucky as hell to have Dak after Romo. Really couldnt ask for anything more. A 4th round pick turning out to be as good as he is a football miracle. If you want to focus on cutting up a 2nd year QB that has had one of the best starts in NFL history then by all means have at it. To me its a waste of time.

The QB will go as the Oline, RB, and receivers go. There is no getting around that football fact.

The problem is we have two different years, performance and results to evaluate .

2016 is everything you mentioned . 2017 isn’t. We’ll see what 2018 brings.

 

[Captain-Crash]

yeah no team could win with one player hurt on the offensive line. and one on defense.. no way..and the coaches forgot how to coach from the year before to this year.. yep everybody's fault but the one guy who touches the ball the most.. yep.. Fredrick it's all his fault.

 

[CowboyRoy]

The problem is we have two different years, performance and results to evaluate .

2016 is everything you mentioned . 2017 isn’t. We’ll see what 2018 brings.

I couldnt disagree more. Through all of 2016 and 8 games into 2017 Dak was great. He was on pace for 40 TD's and 9 picks in 2017 through the first 8 games. And is including the Denver debacle. So to say all of 2017 is wrong. Its not difficult to see what happened where things changed dramatically.

-Zeke got suspended, Tyrone Smith got hurt. The FIRST game was against the Falcons where Chaz Green gave up 8 sacks in place of Smith. You going to tell me that Dak just simply starting going backwards? So the Oline became a weak link and the running game went south and was no longer reliable. Up until THAT point, Dak was having another great season. So to me its all pretty clear what happened. Anyone that simply turns a blind eye to the changes and simply says Dak regressed either wasnt paying attention or doesnt understand how football works with the offense, the line, ect...ect....

The ONLY thing that happened in the first 8 games was that they were now taking away Beasley and what he liked to do best.

 

[Diehardblues]

I couldnt disagree more. Through all of 2016 and 8 games into 2017 Dak was great. He was on pace for 40 TD's and 9 picks in 2017 through the first 8 games. And is including the Denver debacle. So to say all of 2017 is wrong. Its not difficult to see what happened where things changed dramatically.

-Zeke got suspended, Tyrone Smith got hurt. The FIRST game was against the Falcons where Chaz Green gave up 8 sacks in place of Smith. You going to tell me that Dak just simply starting going backwards? So the Oline became a weak link and the running game went south and was no longer reliable. Up until THAT point, Dak was having another great season. So to me its all pretty clear what happened. Anyone that simply turns a blind eye to the changes and simply says Dak regressed either wasnt paying attention or doesnt understand how football works with the offense, the line, ect...ect....

The ONLY thing that happened in the first 8 games was that they were now taking away Beasley and what he liked to do best.

Dak’s weaknesses were beginning to be exposed towards the end of last year but we kept winning so it wasn’t as glaring.

Perhaps we all see what we want to see but there’s been enough who agreed with my thoughts to not waiver without at least further evidence. It doesn’t mean Dak didn’t still have some good games and there’s some potential there but no question remains some concerns. We’ll see how he develops . But I’m certainly not as excited or sold as last year.

 

[McKDaddy]

I am very aware of all the things that go into how a team game is perceived at the individual player level. Thus I don't write any player off until there has been significant proof that the player is truly at fault. So, yes, I still have hope\faith that Dak can be a legit starting QB in this league.

However, to recognize & be concerned about Dak's clear issues during this slump is a fair & honest assessment.

The simple truth is no one knows how this will play out. Either way, some folks are going to claim to be right.

 

[Tristan]

Landry's little rule meant something back in the day when you could stash a developmental player and mess around.

In his day, you could make up and injury and put him away. And keep developing him as you went along.

Now, coaches have very little exposure to players. They can't work them out, they can't put them through drills. They cannot have them even watch film in an official capacity, otherwise it is called work.

So Landry's three year rule means zero now. It was a different game in a different era.

It has little to no translation to today's game of football.

I could care less about all that. My point was that "IF" a player hasnt shown "IT" by year 3 he probsbly doesnt have "IT" That still holds true today even though nobody wants to draft a player theyre still wondering about in year 3 thats on the cusp of busthood and worse case scenario.
The league today doesnt have time to wait so players are definately needed to contribute right away like juju smith schuster, chidobe, kamara , watson etc.

 

[HungryLion]

Dak’s weaknesses were beginning to be exposed towards the end of last year but we kept winning so it wasn’t as glaring.

Perhaps we all see what we want to see but there’s been enough who agreed with my thoughts to not waiver without at least further evidence. It doesn’t mean Dak didn’t still have some good games and there’s some potential there but no question remains some concerns. We’ll see how he develops . But I’m certainly not as excited or sold as last year.

Dak was playing better toward the end of the season, in 2016 Than he was in the beginning of the 2016 season.

 

[condoin125]

Dak was playing better toward the end of the season, in 2016 Than he was in the beginning of the 2016 season.

I guess? If you wanna count the GB playoff game, literally the worst defense he's went up against in his two years playing in this league. He looked awful in the Eagles game before sitting down, he looked pedestrian vs the lions, he looked good vs TB and bad vs the Giants and Vikings. Didn't seem like he looked that great coming down the stretch to me.