More proof : Dak thread

[America's Cowboy]

Keep doubting him. He's coming...

 

[CouchCoach]

There is an intangible with QB's with the ability to lift their team. It is not as much a dependency on the QB position as it is the desire of the team to help the QB lift them up.

That drive that Montana made to win the SB, that wasn't as much him as his ability to lift his team to help lift him up. If those guys believe, they can do some pretty impressive things.

Of all the 33 games Dak has played, the one that stands out the most to me was his lone playoff loss. They were damned near dead and buried and he helped with a critical pick when they needed a score and he brought them back to almost win that game.

There is a quality to the young man that shows up when the chips are down and that does not speak to talent as much as it does to heart. There is no quit in him and that usually transfers to a team very well. They will fight for him.

Roger wasn't Captain Comeback because of him but because of how he affected and infected his teammates. Belief is a most powerful force to lift people up.

 

[Blackspider214]

I wasn't hot on Wentz or Goff so I am far from a QB guy.

I knew more about Dak because I am a SEC hound and watched him play. The reason he fell out of Heisman contention and his draft stock fell was because when the SEC D's most like the NFL, AU, AL and LSU put him in the box, he struggled. His legs got him on the Heisman list but those teams game planned against him for that and made him more one dimensional.

I think they got him as a backup prospect and maybe a developmental project but when they pressed him into service, they got the same surprise his high school HC and his college HC got when they started him because of injury to the QB1, he gets that job, he doesn't give it up.

What I do think he is going to have to do this season is revert back to that dual threat QB and he's built like RB so he can take a hit as long as it's not too low or high. And he's got getting down in a slide really well.

And I don't have an idea of QB1. Staubach, Aikman and Romo were all different just like Wilson and Brees are different that from what is expected. I just want that guy to be one that seizes the opportunities when they're there and doesn't blow the easy throws. He has not proven that to me yet.

Seizing the opportunity? You mean like when the QB1 does down and he gets thrown into the starter role with no experience, he leads Dallas to 13 wins and wins rookie of the year and was an MVP candidate. And goes toe to toe with Rodgers in the playoffs and led a comeback down 18? Yeah, he definitely has not proven that yet.

Romo was different from Staubach and Aikman because those 2 were actually winners. Romo was not even close.

 

[CouchCoach]

Seizing the opportunity? You mean like when the QB1 does down and he gets thrown into the starter role with no experience, he leads Dallas to 13 wins and wins rookie of the year and was an MVP candidate. And goes toe to toe with Rodgers in the playoffs and led a comeback down 18? Yeah, he definitely has not proven that yet.

Romo was different from Staubach and Aikman because those 2 were actually winners. Romo was not even close.

LMAO, you would actually compare the teams that Staubach and Aikman had to what Romo had?

Evaluate teams first before you evaluate players.

 

[QuincyCarterEra]

There is no context here for the numbers. Is everyone in the league around 81 or 82? You can't simply look at a set of five numbers and take any meaning out of it without an understanding of the variability of the entire set.

You can absolutely take meaning from the list. You dont take only rhe list as a ranking of performance, but if you think critically you can take meaning from it.

 

[pansophy]

You can absolutely take meaning from the list. You dont take only rhe list as a ranking of performance, but if you think critically you can take meaning from it.

Which means that you can only determine meaning of the numbers from the context by which they were derived. You are making the point for the person you are trying to rebuke.

 

[AbeBeta]

You can absolutely take meaning from the list. You dont take only rhe list as a ranking of performance, but if you think critically you can take meaning from it.

Ranking is meaningless when the slices are so small on a crap metric.

Cute that you think you are thinking critically with about 2%of the stats in your face. By cute, I mean sad.

 

[pansophy]

For example including both the 2016 and 2017 seasons when it was 3rd down and 8 to 10 yards to go:
QB: Passer Rating
Brees: 107.6
Rodgers: 98.5
Brady: 83.8
Prescott: 44.5

In case you want to say last year wasn't on Prescott, if we take their best year of 2016 or 2017 it tells the same story.
Brady: 129.4
Brees: 109.3
Rodgers: 107.4
Prescott: 69.3

Prescott's favorite targets have been the TE and slot WR, and last year when defenses simply clogged the middle of the field Prescott's QB rating on 3rd and 8-10 yards was 22.9. People should let that number sink in.

Brandon Weeden was cut because he couldn't hit outside WR's even though his passer rating was solid. Obviously Prescott adds other dimensions over Weeden, but we aren't going to have a lot of consistent offensive success until Prescott can hit WRs on the outside beyond 5 yards.

 

[Captain-Crash]

Prescott: 44.5

oh dang you are going to get the dak babies making up some pretty good excuses for that one.. "everybody was hurt, the WR forgot how to run routes on 3rd down"

 

[Number1]

He proved only that he requires the best OL, can't have any dip in performance and a 1600 yard rushing running back to make his job very easy. Now once teams took away the short routes and made running harder dak's accuracy issues which you noted from college, surfaced to show he is not ready to carry a team if needed. .

there's a reason the Boys went Dak friendly - to win.

That "best OL" you speak of is the best run blocking OL. But It near crippled Tony. Then in 2015 behind "best OL"t average QBs produced a 4-12 record, but nice run stats. Then a good QB produced 13-3 behind the "best OL". When the best of the LT in the game got hurt last year, the "best OL" allowed 14 sacks in 11 days.

It's a wonder they didn't cripple Dak too. In 2017 the "best OL" allowed the 2nd worst avg time to sack in the NFL, 2.1". All too often Dak was hit before his 2nd read or threw the ball away in the direction of his first read.

I've seen every pro snap Dak's played and his accuracy did not drop in 2017 - it got better, so did his reads
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...matthew-stafford-among-top-10-tightwindow-qbs

Baseless stuff like "accuracy issues" only influence those who don't know what they are looking at. Such rhetoric ... ignores fact, and even irrefutable visible proof, so I'll make it simple: Consider this, in the 30 reg season games started and finished, Dak's sacks vs win-loss:

8x 0-1
4x 1-2
3x 2-1
2x 6-3
1x 8-1
0x 4-1

All but 1 of the of the 4/+ sack games happened in 2017 (ATL, PHL, SEA) with Tyrone off the field. 0 TDs, 5 INTs, 0-3 record. LTs get paid for a reason.

The Boys are 20-6, .769, when Dak's sacked less than 4x per game. In those games 44 TDs and 12 INTs.

In the 14 games with 1 or no sack, 28 TDs, 1 INT, 12-2 record.

the no pressure stats that started this thread are very telling - with time to throw, he'd deadly

 

[erod]

there's a reason the Boys went Dak friendly - to win.

That "best OL" you speak of is the best run blocking OL. But It near crippled Tony. Then in 2015 behind "best OL"t average QBs produced a 4-12 record, but nice run stats. Then a good QB produced 13-3 behind the "best OL". When the best of the LT in the game got hurt last year, the "best OL" allowed 14 sacks in 11 days.

It's a wonder they didn't cripple Dak too. In 2017 the "best OL" allowed the 2nd worst avg time to sack in the NFL, 2.1". All too often Dak was hit before his 2nd read or threw the ball away in the direction of his first read.

I've seen every pro snap Dak's played and his accuracy did not drop in 2017 - it got better, so did his reads
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...matthew-stafford-among-top-10-tightwindow-qbs

Baseless stuff like "accuracy issues" only influence those who don't know what they are looking at. Such rhetoric ... ignores fact, and even irrefutable visible proof, so I'll make it simple: Consider this, in the 30 reg season games started and finished, Dak's sacks vs win-loss:

8x 0-1
4x 1-2
3x 2-1
2x 6-3
1x 8-1
0x 4-1

All but 1 of the of the 4/+ sack games happened in 2017 (ATL, PHL, SEA) with Tyrone off the field. 0 TDs, 5 INTs, 0-3 record. LTs get paid for a reason.

The Boys are 20-6, .769, when Dak's sacked less than 4x per game. In those games 44 TDs and 12 INTs.

In the 14 games with 1 or no sack, 28 TDs, 1 INT, 12-2 record.

the no pressure stats that started this thread are very telling - with time to throw, he'd deadly

Most of Dak's sacks are on him because he reads defenses so slowly and doesn't understand where pressure is coming from.

Plus, he has so little confidence in himself downfield. He runs from the pocket way too early, trying to play on the run.

Teams figured him out. If he can't learn to play this game from the pocket, he's toast. The Cowboys are trying to implement nomo one-read college stuff for him, but that will be toyed with by good defenses.

 

[AbeBeta]

You can absolutely take meaning from the list. You dont take only rhe list as a ranking of performance, but if you think critically you can take meaning from it.

Only if you have no understanding of critical thinking but instead fool yourself into believing you are thinking critically

 

[G2]

What was the "vast difference"? Why are you quoting me with a nonsense question?

We had the same players in 2016 as we did in 2017. So again, DID EVERYONE ELSE OTHER THAN DAK GET WORSE? It's one thing if a single player declined, it's another when ACROSS THE BOARD there was a pattern of them all having a down year.

So, who is the odd man out here? Or maybe we can all just blame it on the coaching staff and think all these players will do better if we have a revolving door at OC.

As I have mentioned before, Dak is going to be our Jay Cutler. We'll go through multiple offensive schemes and playcallers before this place will ever put blame on him.

I never once excused Prescott of any blame. Typical response, but it's taxing repeating all of the differences between 2016 & 2017. And no, we didn't have the same players.
So here's what I witnessed as some of the issues the 2017 team had:
Offense:
LT. Smith is not going to be replaced easily, but we didn't have sufficient depth. When he played injured and missed games the team was significantly different.
LG. Do we need to even mention the hot garbage mess? Again, insufficient depth as well.
RT. The first year, so it's understandable there would be ups and downs.
QB. Without blaming the O line for added breakdowns in pass protection Prescott had footwork problems, which effected the list of mechanic symptoms.
RB. Elliott and his suspension distraction played a role. Same with him missing 6 games. Much like the O line, there were clear continuity issues.
DT. Irving being suspended.
LB. When Lee was out from injury the team was like night and day.
WR. We can put blame on Prescott, I'm fine with that. But if we're going to be fair he had no real No. 1 WR that threatened any defense. He connected better with Butler than he did Bryant. Bryant was a mess and even admitted to being distracted. I'm sure there's more than what we know. No need rehashing another Dez thread.
K. Bailey hurt us when he was out. There were times we could have put things away but he was injured.
"All or Nothing." - Huge distraction no one talks about. Remember the last time they had a reality show with cameras in their face? Yeah, huge distraction. If I were the owner I would refuse that nonsense.

If Prescott was poor to average his first season I would suggest maybe he's not the franchise QB type. But that's not the case. All of the above mentioned were factors.
INCLUDING PRESCOTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So stop your BS assuming I'm leaving Prescott out. I'm not at all.

 

[Sarek]

Keep doubting him. He's coming...

I'll be looking for improvement and or finesse in the accuracy department. I don't care about the stats. If i see he wants the ball to go somewhere specific and it's constantly not getting to the right spot i will then jump off the bandwagon by the end of the season. Time has come to see it working properly.

 

[charron]

there's a reason the Boys went Dak friendly - to win.

That "best OL" you speak of is the best run blocking OL. But It near crippled Tony. Then in 2015 behind "best OL"t average QBs produced a 4-12 record, but nice run stats. Then a good QB produced 13-3 behind the "best OL". When the best of the LT in the game got hurt last year, the "best OL" allowed 14 sacks in 11 days.

It's a wonder they didn't cripple Dak too. In 2017 the "best OL" allowed the 2nd worst avg time to sack in the NFL, 2.1". All too often Dak was hit before his 2nd read or threw the ball away in the direction of his first read.

I've seen every pro snap Dak's played and his accuracy did not drop in 2017 - it got better, so did his reads
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...matthew-stafford-among-top-10-tightwindow-qbs

Baseless stuff like "accuracy issues" only influence those who don't know what they are looking at. Such rhetoric ... ignores fact, and even irrefutable visible proof, so I'll make it simple: Consider this, in the 30 reg season games started and finished, Dak's sacks vs win-loss:

8x 0-1
4x 1-2
3x 2-1
2x 6-3
1x 8-1
0x 4-1

All but 1 of the of the 4/+ sack games happened in 2017 (ATL, PHL, SEA) with Tyrone off the field. 0 TDs, 5 INTs, 0-3 record. LTs get paid for a reason.

The Boys are 20-6, .769, when Dak's sacked less than 4x per game. In those games 44 TDs and 12 INTs.

In the 14 games with 1 or no sack, 28 TDs, 1 INT, 12-2 record.

the no pressure stats that started this thread are very telling - with time to throw, he'd deadly

How are his documented accuracy issues and concerns baseless. Pro scouts all documented these issues. He wouldn't have been a 4th rounder, late comp pick at that if he had better accuracy. couldn't read more of your jibberish since the basis of your argument is 100% wrong.

 

[kskboys]

Seizing the opportunity? You mean like when the QB1 does down and he gets thrown into the starter role with no experience, he leads Dallas to 13 wins and wins rookie of the year and was an MVP candidate. And goes toe to toe with Rodgers in the playoffs and led a comeback down 18? Yeah, he definitely has not proven that yet.

Romo was different from Staubach and Aikman because those 2 were actually winners. Romo was not even close.

I could soooo agree w/ you until you used the "winners" argument!!!!!! It's really weak. Staubach and Aikman both had complete teams w/ great D's. That had everything to do w/ their super bowl wins, combined w/ both being great QB's of course.

 

[Kevinicus]

Brady usually doesn’t have great WRs so maybe they’re trying to mimic that lol.

Brady has consistently had quality receiving options.

Moss, Welker, Edelman, Cooks, Gronkowski, Amendola.

His numbers when he doesn't have at least 2 of the first 5 (Amendola is more of a solid complimentary guy than a top guy) on the field are much different.

His stats without Edelman (since he has been a starter) were pretty poor until last year when they had added Cooks.

 

[CouchCoach]

Most of Dak's sacks are on him because he reads defenses so slowly and doesn't understand where pressure is coming from.

Plus, he has so little confidence in himself downfield. He runs from the pocket way too early, trying to play on the run.

Teams figured him out. If he can't learn to play this game from the pocket, he's toast. The Cowboys are trying to implement nomo one-read college stuff for him, but that will be toyed with by good defenses.

All comes back to one thing that hasn't changed yet, imo. Dak was rated no higher than the 4th round by any team, including the one that drafted him, for a reason. QB is one position that all teams take a look at whether they're in the market or not and they saw what pansophy and you are saying.

I would love to believe a player could prove them all wrong, as Polian said, but there is one word that I cannot use to describe Dak's play in college or the pros and it is a critical word, consistency.

Posters can have all the stats they want but nothing surpasses the eyeball test. Can a QB make the play when he has to on a consistent basis? Dak has not passed that test yet. Not saying he won't but I agree with Aikman, accuracy doesn't get fixed at the next level.

 

[CouchCoach]

Brady has consistently had quality receiving options.

Moss, Welker, Edelman, Cooks, Gronkowski, Amendola.

His numbers when he doesn't have at least 2 of the first 5 (Amendola is more of a solid complimentary guy than a top guy) on the field are much different.

His stats without Edelman (since he has been a starter) were pretty poor until last year when they had added Cooks.

I don't know where this "Brady had a bunch of waiters as receivers" comes from, he has had a lot of good receivers and playmakers.

What separates him from all of the other QBs is the distribution of passes and it is the norm that by the end of the 1Q, he has already hit 6-7 receivers. He has also sent the message to his receiving corps "get open fast if you want the ball" because he isn't waiting for any receiver to clear.

 

[StarOfGlory]

Quite a list. We struck gold in the 4th.

How about QBR under pressure? Last time I checked, the NFL didn't make rushing the QB against the rules.