The case for going for Lawrence

gjkoeppen · Nov 12, 2020

CouchCoach said:
And do you think he is the one responsible for that? He was the GM in title, his HC was the real football operation GM unless you want to ignore the last 25 years?

Kraft and Rooney have 6 rings, what does that have to do with this?

If your best defense of Booger is 3 rings 25 years ago, that's not really a good defense. The only defense that works for him is he owns it and can do whatever the hell he wants with it.

Now more proof that you don't know what you're trying to talk about. The HC was Johnson and if you watched the pregame for Super Bowl XLV in Dallas you would have seen a round table with Aikman, Irvin, Emmitt, the Moose, Jones and Johnson and during this round table Johnson admitted that he didn't have the power and authority those outside of the organization thought he had. He said the only time he did anything as a GM was when Jones let Johnson negotiate the Walker trade because Johnson had a history with the vikings GM. Johnson went on to say that having to go to Jones for things he thought he could decide irked him his entire time in Dallas.

Now bringing up Jones' three rings is relevant because I'm guessing you played wannabe GM back then too so it's still Jones three rings, you ZERO. Yes you brought up other coaches who have rings but then they too have more rings than you. You think you're smarter than people that have actually done the work opposed to playing wannabe GM from the comfort of you couch. I'm guessing your user has something to do with where you practice your trade.
.
.

gjkoeppen · Nov 12, 2020

Diehardblues said:
Follow status quo all you want . It’s not working this era. And why results matter.

With fans like you the Cowboys would probably prefer eagles fans.
.
.

CATCH17 · Nov 12, 2020

TheRomoSexual said:
If the defense played for Dak like they did last game, we would have crushed opponents. Period.

That’s because you buy into the illusion created by our offense when we’re down by 3 scores against bad pass defenses with a lot of time left.

We would do what we always do.. If our opponent scores 20 we would score 19.. If they scored 50 would score 49.

We played a lot of good defense and kept point totals low in 2019 and the offense just underperformed.

jaythecowboy · Nov 12, 2020

It's not just about Trevor vs Dak though. It's also about the haul of draft capital you could get for trading the #1 pick.

TheRomoSexual · Nov 12, 2020

jaythecowboy said:
It's not just about Trevor vs Dak though. It's also about the haul of draft capital you could get for trading the #1 pick.

Exactly. The obvious weakness of this team is on defense. So, do you trade back and load up, or...pick a quarterback when are offense was dominating with Dak? Makes no sense.

Runwildboys · Nov 12, 2020

gjkoeppen said:
Now more proof that you don't know what you're trying to talk about. The HC was Johnson and if you watched the pregame for Super Bowl XLV in Dallas you would have seen a round table with Aikman, Irvin, Emmitt, the Moose, Jones and Johnson and during this round table Johnson admitted that he didn't have the power and authority those outside of the organization thought he had. He said the only time he did anything as a GM was when Jones let Johnson negotiate the Walker trade because Johnson had a history with the vikings GM. Johnson went on to say that having to go to Jones for things he thought he could decide irked him his entire time in Dallas.

Now bringing up Jones' three rings is relevant because I'm guessing you played wannabe GM back then too so it's still Jones three rings, you ZERO. Yes you brought up other coaches who have rings but then they too have more rings than you. You think you're smarter than people that have actually done the work opposed to playing wannabe GM from the comfort of you couch. I'm guessing your user has something to do with where you practice your trade.
.
.

Why do you have to be obnoxious with every person you talk to? It's like nobody is allowed to have an opinion that doesn't agree with yours. Even the most wonderful people on the planet aren't loved by everyone, and Jerry Jones is certainly not the most wonderful person on the planet. I don't dislike the man personally, but I understand that some people don't. It's human nature.

CouchCoach · Nov 12, 2020

RonnieT24 said:
First there is no guarantee that any QB you draft will be better.. Some fans may like they way he looks better.. or like his throwing motion better or his hair or hell let's call it what it is.. they will like his genealogy better. But there is ZERO guarantee it translates to the field. It's the toughest position in sports to transition from college to pro. We've seen guys come in and have decent success earlier now if the coaching staffs are creative enough and unstubborn enough to tailor their offense around what they saw the kid do well in college. But that only gets you so far. Every game you play is another page in the book on you in the NFL. If you are not constantly improving and evolving you hit a ceiling and teams figure you out. Lots of guys have come into the NFL far ahead of Dak as passers.. mostly because he was not asked to be a pure passer in college and they were. I can run you down a pretty good list of those guys and I suspect we would agree he has passed most of them.. AS A PASSER. Not just by the all powerful "eye test" but also looking at the numbers. Dak's passing numbers say he's better than a bunch of the more heralded guys. And as we watch him with a critical eye we can see that he still has things on which he can improve.. Having watched his progression since 2016 there is no reason to believe he won't.. But even if he stays exactly where he is as a passer, he is GOING to get smarter and more experienced as he plays. So his ability to manage and control the game is going to grow and thus he will become a better QB. He is just entering his prime physically but his mental development will continue until the day he retires. Right now he represents a strong bet to deliver high level QB play for at least another 10 years.. A draftee is almost certainly going to be a step backwards from where Dak is now with no assurance that he ever gets to that point. And let's say in 2-3 years he does.. or even exceeds where Dak was today. How do we know Dak won't have continued to improve and be that much better than the kid still? And how do we know we will have built a better team around that kid? Where is the evidence we can do that?

That's the point. We only have evidence to the contrary and actual admission of that by the son.

CouchCoach · Nov 12, 2020

TheRomoSexual said:
Exactly. The obvious weakness of this team is on defense. So, do you trade back and load up, or...pick a quarterback when are offense was dominating with Dak? Makes no sense.

17 points in LA is not dominating. Check the points scored against the good teams.

RonnieT24 · Nov 12, 2020

CouchCoach said:
17 points in LA is not dominating. Check the points scored against the good teams.

31 points against Seattle.. they're 6-2.. Seems like that might qualify as a good team.. 39 scored against 5-3 Cleveland.. they seem to be okay.. Dak led the offense to 17, 31, and 39 points against the best teams he faced. Those totals actually are not that different than what he put up against the Giants and Falcons. 31 and 40. You can almost discount the Rams game because it was a season opener on the road with no preseason and a new head coach. The team was bound to struggle in that situation and it did. The offense got it together from week 2 on.. It took the defense another 5 weeks to join them.. but by that time it's too late because the guy who drove the offense is gone. Now instead of a 35 ppg offense trying to carry a 36 ppg defense we have a 14 ppg offense trying to overcome a 24 ppg defense.. Better but still probably not going to work.

Whirlwin · Nov 12, 2020

jazzcat22 said:
Everyone should give up posting about getting Lawrence, Fields or Trask.
It will not happen. The backwoods boys in the FO already said so.

Come on we almost took Johnny football. There’s always a chance does it mean I would do it

Whirlwin · Nov 12, 2020

If people think a quarterback is going to make a difference. Not paying attention to who owns his team.

G2 · Nov 12, 2020

Hadenough said:
Wasnt Dallas a 10th ranked defense last year and they still struggled to win games.

The offense wasn't No. 1 and the special teams was the worst.

kumizi · Nov 12, 2020

RonnieT24 said:
31 points against Seattle.. they're 6-2.. Seems like that might qualify as a good team.. 39 scored against 5-3 Cleveland.. they seem to be okay.. Dak led the offense to 17, 31, and 39 points against the best teams he faced. Those totals actually are not that different than what he put up against the Giants and Falcons. 31 and 40. You can almost discount the Rams game because it was a season opener on the road with no preseason and a new head coach. The team was bound to struggle in that situation and it did. The offense got it together from week 2 on.. It took the defense another 5 weeks to join them.. but by that time it's too late because the guy who drove the offense is gone. Now instead of a 35 ppg offense trying to carry a 36 ppg defense we have a 14 ppg offense trying to overcome a 24 ppg defense.. Better but still probably not going to work.

Seattle has the worst defense in the NFL

Diehardblues · Nov 12, 2020

gjkoeppen said:
With fans like you the Cowboys would probably prefer eagles fans.
.
.

No entity likes critics. And ours obviously does little critical thinking. But they don’t get to choose their fans. They like it when I turn their game on and spend money on their product .

But I’m not surprised . This is always where fans like you end up at when they don’t agree or like the criticism , they begin attacking or insulting them personally or their fandom.

Diehardblues · Nov 12, 2020

RonnieT24 said:
31 points against Seattle.. they're 6-2.. Seems like that might qualify as a good team.. 39 scored against 5-3 Cleveland.. they seem to be okay.. Dak led the offense to 17, 31, and 39 points against the best teams he faced. Those totals actually are not that different than what he put up against the Giants and Falcons. 31 and 40. You can almost discount the Rams game because it was a season opener on the road with no preseason and a new head coach. The team was bound to struggle in that situation and it did. The offense got it together from week 2 on.. It took the defense another 5 weeks to join them.. but by that time it's too late because the guy who drove the offense is gone. Now instead of a 35 ppg offense trying to carry a 36 ppg defense we have a 14 ppg offense trying to overcome a 24 ppg defense.. Better but still probably not going to work.

Actually if you watched the entire games the offense didn’t get it going until they were down multiple scores after turnovers.

And speaking of turnovers , how can we claim an offense to be effective leading the league in give aways? That alone killed this season early on.

We all knew this offense had to carry the team. And there no excuse of new coaching on offense. Same OC, same offense , etc. And basically same faces.

No, this offense put our team in a hole in those early games and why we were 1-3. The fact they made it interesting in the end running up gawdy stats doesn’t interest anyone but Fantasy Fans gawking at the stats.

Biggest stat in NFL is turnovers. It’s not winning football.

Darkhound · Nov 12, 2020

why bother posting about this subject when our GLORIOUS OWNER/GM says we wont pic any QB in the 1st rounds

Diehardblues · Nov 12, 2020

Darkhound said:
why bother posting about this subject when our GLORIOUS OWNER/GM says we wont pic any QB in the 1st rounds

Because it’s what some of us do in a fan forum. We speculate in open discussion.

We realize it’s very unlikely even if we wanted Trevor we’ll get the opportunity to draft him.

If it’s not a subject of interest for you, move on. Surely there’s other threads you can waste your time in.

Or did you just drop by to bash those you don’t agree with . Lol

RonnieT24 · Nov 12, 2020

Diehardblues said:
Actually if you watched the entire games the offense didn’t get it going until they were down multiple scores after turnovers.

And speaking of turnovers , how can we claim an offense to be effective leading the league in give aways? That alone killed this season early on.

We all knew this offense had to carry the team. And there no excuse of new coaching on offense. Same OC, same offense , etc. And basically same faces.

No, this offense put our team in a hole in those early games and why we were 1-3. The fact they made it interesting in the end running up gawdy stats doesn’t interest anyone but Fantasy Fans gawking at the stats.

Biggest stat in NFL is turnovers. It’s not winning football.

I did watch the games.. thats how I know that despite "not getting going until down mutltiple scores" the offense averaged over 15 points in the first half with Dak at the helm and had the lead at halftime in against the Rams and Giants.. and put up 14 points in the first quarter against Cleveland. AND came back to take the lead in the second half against Seattle and the Falcons and overtook the Giants in the 2nd quarter. It's weird how nobody seems to remember these things.. By the way the Cowboys were not leading the league in giveaways... they just had the worst turnover differential. because the defense was refusing to force any.. So teams with turnover machine QBs like the Vikings and Eagles still have a better turnover ratio because their defense joins the party from time to time.

CouchCoach · Nov 12, 2020

RonnieT24 said:
31 points against Seattle.. they're 6-2.. Seems like that might qualify as a good team.. 39 scored against 5-3 Cleveland.. they seem to be okay.. Dak led the offense to 17, 31, and 39 points against the best teams he faced. Those totals actually are not that different than what he put up against the Giants and Falcons. 31 and 40. You can almost discount the Rams game because it was a season opener on the road with no preseason and a new head coach. The team was bound to struggle in that situation and it did. The offense got it together from week 2 on.. It took the defense another 5 weeks to join them.. but by that time it's too late because the guy who drove the offense is gone. Now instead of a 35 ppg offense trying to carry a 36 ppg defense we have a 14 ppg offense trying to overcome a 24 ppg defense.. Better but still probably not going to work.

But points at the end of the game can be a little misleading as to how that game unfolded. They got down and got out of strategy and that wasn't all on the D because the O failed to score early.

If I thought this brain trust was capable of building around Prescott, this thread would not exist. This team was 10-12 with him last season through his time on this one.

I also realize there is just so much any QB can overcome on any team.

CouchCoach · Nov 12, 2020

Darkhound said:
why bother posting about this subject when our GLORIOUS OWNER/GM says we wont pic any QB in the 1st rounds

Because we don't have to listen to or abide by anything that old ratchet jawed fool has to say. I don't take my lead from that person.

The case for going for Lawrence

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member

CATCH17

1st Round Pick

jaythecowboy

Well-Known Member

TheRomoSexual

Well-Known Member

Runwildboys

Confused about stuff

CouchCoach

CouchCoach

RonnieT24

Well-Known Member

Whirlwin

Cowboy , It’s a way of life.

Whirlwin

Cowboy , It’s a way of life.

G2

Taco Engineer

kumizi

Well-Known Member

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member

Darkhound

Well-Known Member

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member

RonnieT24

Well-Known Member

CouchCoach

CouchCoach