Most durable players in Cowboys history

Stash · May 21, 2020

Vtwin said:
Yay Dak!!!

Thanks for being "on the field" to lead us to 8-8 and no playoffs. At least you were "on the field" to choke away the season and the playoffs against a division rival.

What kind of goof accepts stinking up the joint simple because the player was "on the field".

Now that is embarrassing.

Is it Dak's call to have him on the field or not? Is toughing it out and giving it his best a bad thing to you?

And I guess Dak is in charge of:

Personnel
Defense
Special teams
Assistant coaches

I mean according to you and that 8-8 record that you're trying and failing miserably to pin solely on him.

Bobhaze · May 21, 2020

Vtwin said:
Of course I appreciate durability. It is a necessary component of an effective career.

Durability alone isn't enough, though. Celebrating durability as a standalone quality is like being the only person at your birthday party.

Especially when the most recent season hinged on this player's lack of durability in a crucial game.

Durable players who aren’t very good don’t last anyway. Kind of a moot point in my opinion.

Vtwin · May 21, 2020

stasheroo said:
Is it Dak's call to have him on the field or not? Is toughing it out and giving it his best a bad thing to you?

And I guess Dak is in charge of:

Personnel

Defense

Special teams

Assistant coaches

I mean according to you and that 8-8 record that you're trying and failing miserably to pin solely on him.

How did he do in the crucial, must win game against a bad division rival?

I get it though.... Everybody but Dak. Dak was "on the field" so he gets the trophy.

You can't make this stuff up. Dak "toughs it out" to turn in a terrible performance leading the team to a loss and out of the playoffs then you give him credit for being "durable" and "on the field".

One would be hard pressed to find a better example of a symbolic participation trophy.

Let's go a layer deeper on this onion. I've read many times on this forum, including just yesterday, how the six sacks he took against Atlanta set him back. Almost ruined him. Took him the rest of the season and into the next to get over it.

Mr Durable.

Stash · May 21, 2020

Vtwin said:
How did he do in the crucial, must win game against a bad division rival?

I get it though.... Everybody but Dak. Dak was "on the field" so he gets the trophy.

You can't make this stuff up. Dak "toughs it out" to turn in a terrible performance leading the team to a loss and out of the playoffs then you give him credit for being "durable" and "on the field".

One would be hard pressed to find a better example of a symbolic participation trophy.

Or more hard pressed to find a fixation on one game while ignoring the other 63. But I guess that hasn't occurred to you either, has it?

Let's go a layer deeper on this onion. I've read many times on this forum, including just yesterday, how the six sacks he took against Atlanta set him back. Almost ruined him. Took him the rest of the season and into the next to get over it.

Mr Durable.

You know that was in reference to mentally, right?

Again, I guess that didn't occur to you either.

Let me know what else you've missed or are unclear about and I'd be glad to help.

DandyDon52 · May 21, 2020

stasheroo said:
He's simply next in line to get paid....True

I didn't see the torches and pitchforks out when Goff and Wentz were getting paid for far less accomplishments on the field. When, by the way, they've both been well paid since day one.

Goff and Wentz were mistakes, IMO only time will tell, but neither will get to or win a sb .
Goff did make it but could not score a td?
It isnt just the cowboys, other teams make the same mistake, pay the qb too much and then never get to a SB and if they do they usually lose.
So what good does it do to pay them the big paydays?? just to be in playoffs?
dak will get paid here most likely or somewhere else, but I doubt he ever makes it to a SB.

Vtwin · May 21, 2020

Bobhaze said:
Durable players who aren’t very good don’t last anyway. Kind of a moot point in my opinion.

Average ones can stick around for a long time though. In those cases availability can help compensate for just average talent.

You soon reach a point where talent overrides durability to an extent. That is why Tyron Smith is still starting at LG.

Stash · May 21, 2020

DandyDon52 said:
Goff and Wentz were mistakes, IMO only time will tell, but neither will get to or win a sb .
Goff did make it but could not score a td?
It isnt just the cowboys, other teams make the same mistake, pay the qb too much and then never get to a SB and if they do they usually lose.
So what good does it do to pay them the big paydays?? just to be in playoffs?

That's called the NFL quarterback market.

dak will get paid here most likely or somewhere else, but I doubt he ever makes it to a SB.

Only time will tell on that.

jnday · May 21, 2020

PAPPYDOG said:
# 74 with no exceptions!!!!

They don’t make Cowboys like they used to.

Vtwin · May 21, 2020

stasheroo said:
Or more hard pressed to find a fixation on one game while ignoring the other 63. But I guess that hasn't occurred to you either, has it?

You know that was in reference to mentally, right?

Again, I guess that didn't occur to you either.

Let me know what else you've missed or are unclear about and I'd be glad to help.

It gets better and better.

You're happy with a physically durable (except for the one MUST WIN game) but mentally weak player with average talent? As long as he is "on the field" you're good with it? Mental strength/durability is much less important than physical durability?

The point is, durability is good but essentially pointless unless the other key factors are there also. Obviously that hasn't occurred to you.

I'll circle back to the beginning and reaffirm that critical thinking might not be your thing.

Hey! At least you're on the keyboard! Trophy for you!

Stash · May 21, 2020

Vtwin said:
It gets better and better.

You're happy with a physically durable (except for the one MUST WIN game) but mentally weak player with average talent? As long as he is "on the field" you're good with it? Mental strength/durability is much less important than physical durability?

The point is, durability is good but essentially pointless unless the other key factors are there also. Obviously that hasn't occurred to you.[/quote]

Check the point of the thread - durability. In your sad attempts to criticize, you try to twist and turn it in any other direction. It's noticeable.

I'll circle back to the beginning and reaffirm that critical thinking might not be your thing.

Hey! At least you're on the keyboard! Trophy for you!

You're hardly in position to lecture anyone else when you clearly can't even read the thread topic.

I'll spoon-feed you again - durable.

Fritsch_the_cat · May 21, 2020

Bobhaze said:
I may have missed a guy here and there. So feel free to add any that I missed.

You might want to take a look at Jethro Pugh's numbers.

Qcard · May 21, 2020

Vtwin said:
You realize this takes the "he was hurt" excuse for the Philly debacle off the table, don't you?

Can't have it both ways.

Lol.... Wentz's availability brings well cooked and horrible dishes to the table.

He looks nice in the Kitchen

DandyDon52 · May 21, 2020

stasheroo said:
That's called the NFL quarterback market.

that is true, I understand that, but I think it is flawed.
The owners, fans, and media have created that market, but it doesnt seem to work.
Rodgers has been a great qb, and has never even been back to a SB!
So that is a classic example that it doesnt work.

Not saying it is impossible , but clearly the odds are against a team that decides to pay a good qb
too much money. it will be interesting to see what happens with KC after they pay mahomes, will
they ever make it back?
Mahomes is the best, but he will also be paid more.

Dak is not as good as rodgers, and not as smart as brady, he is too me a little above avg on good days.
If your going to pay the qb a large amount it needs to be a true top qb, not just a guys who is pretty good
most of the time.

Stash · May 21, 2020

DandyDon52 said:
that is true, I understand that, but I think it is flawed.
The owners, fans, and media have created that market, but it doesnt seem to work.
Rodgers has been a great qb, and has never even been back to a SB!
So that is a classic example that it doesnt work.

Not saying it is impossible , but clearly the odds are against a team that decides to pay a good qb
too much money. it will be interesting to see what happens with KC after they pay mahomes, will
they ever make it back?
Mahomes is the best, but he will also be paid more.

Dak is not as good as rodgers, and not as smart as brady, he is too me a little above avg on good days.
If your going to pay the qb a large amount it needs to be a true top qb, not just a guys who is pretty good
most of the time.

Prescott's stats refute that.

And his numbers since he entered the league are in fact better than Aaron Rodgers' and Tom Brady's.

Take a look at this statistical comparison of the three players since Dak entered the league in 2016:

https://www.pro-football-reference....r_3=2019&player_id3=RodgAa00&idx=pfr__players

And make note that Brady has been in the league 20 years, Rodgers for 15 years, and Dak for just 4 years.

These are some 'inconvenient truths' that those attempting to minimize Prescott do not want to read.

Vtwin · May 21, 2020

Qcard said:
Lol.... Wentz's availability brings well cooked and horrible dishes to the table.

He looks nice in the Kitchen

Dak is the topic here. I couldn't care less about Wentz.

When somebody brings up Wentz in a topic like this it is a sure sign they don't have a counter argument.

That's great you find him attractive though.

Stash · May 21, 2020

Vtwin said:
Dak is the topic here. I couldn't care less about Wentz.

When somebody brings up Wentz in a topic like this it is a sure sign they don't have a counter argument.

That's great you find him attractive though.

Durability is the topic here.

Funny how you now want to try to narrow it down...
:lmao:

Vtwin · May 21, 2020

stasheroo said:
The point is, durability is good but essentially pointless unless the other key factors are there also. Obviously that hasn't occurred to you.

Check the point of the thread - durability. In your sad attempts to criticize, you try to twist and turn it in any other direction. It's noticeable.

You're hardly in position to lecture anyone else when you clearly can't even read the thread topic.

I'll spoon-feed you again - durable.[/QUOTE]
Yes. That is the topic. I understand that very well. In your myopic effort to obfuscate you afte completely missing my point on the topic of the thread.

One last time; cut up into small pieces to help you get it down.....Durability alone is like having a top quality cut of beef but no grill to cook it on. It's an awesome steak but it's not going to satisfy the hunger without the other things necessary to make it ready too eat.

Hopefully you can get that down. If not maybe I'll get the blender out for you.

Vtwin · May 21, 2020

stasheroo said:
Durability is the topic here.

Funny how you now want to try to narrow it down...

Really? Now you're just being a troll.

Big_D · May 21, 2020

* Durable until you suck in the biggest game of the year? He was injured, he wasn't injured. lol Let the excuses flow. He looked amazing in that Eagle game and super durable. Is this another stat that makes him better than Aikman? lol

Qcard · May 21, 2020

Vtwin said:
Dak is the topic here. I couldn't care less about Wentz.

When somebody brings up Wentz in a topic like this it is a sure sign they don't have a counter argument.

That's great you find him attractive though.

If Dak is the topic of which I agree then what the hell...... this your twin bring @Vtwin "Philly".....

Hey dummy did you forget what you posted

Vtwin said:
You realize this takes the "he was hurt" excuse for the Philly debacle off the table, don't you?

Can't have it both ways.

So, since we've established YOU brought "Philly" into the discussion we can ALL deduce that "YOU" did not have a counter argument to durability and availability being trophy worthy.

You tried to slide the "both ways" card using "Philly"....When I put Wentz name to your diatribe you realized your counter point or argument was garbage...because Nick Foles held the trophy because the Non-combatants...yep non available and non durable durable had on sweats...like I said Wentz looked nice

Go play lost in a 5 page thread with another feeble minded Dak Hater...

Most durable players in Cowboys history

Stash

Bobhaze

Vtwin

Safety third

Stash

DandyDon52

Well-Known Member

Vtwin

Safety third

Stash

jnday

Well-Known Member

Vtwin

Safety third

Stash

Fritsch_the_cat

Well-Known Member

Qcard

Well-Known Member

DandyDon52

Well-Known Member

Stash

Vtwin

Safety third

Stash

Vtwin

Safety third

Vtwin

Safety third

Big_D

Well-Known Member

Qcard

Well-Known Member