NFL ranks Dak 16 out of 32 QBs

CowboysFaninHouston said:

I was looking at 2019, 2020. but I find it amusing you selected a specific period to ditch dak.....its like I said only half jokingly in the past, some of you all use to say, he was bad from 12:03 mark of the 2nd quarter, to 1:06 mark third quarter in away games played at 4 time slot on grass to justify your anger towards him.....I mean literally some of you all said he sucks on grass and nit picked his passes and plays on grass....really funny....

so did the NFL start 17 games ago? and nothing prior matters? would Brady win a championship with Garrett and Moore as his offensive coaches? would Brady win anything with this defense?

and I have asked over and over and ovre and over and over....how does Dak's 40M stop us from building this team. we have already in the books 7 of the top 5 position contracts on the team. need 7 or 8 starters on defense. are you planning to build a defense through FA? are you planning to hand out another 2 or 3 large defensive contracts. where will that get this defense? and how do you compensate for the huge drop in QB and offensive play with the likes of Dink and dunk dalton?

Dak is the only reason this team has been competitive. it unfolded right in front of your eyes this year. plain and simple. where Dalton struggled to beat 3 4 win teams with their back up QBs, Dak with HISTORICALLY bad defense kept the team competitive against 3 playoff teams. s

Click to expand...

OmerV said:

If the team feels this is a problem I understand that, but there also has to be a consideration of who is going to play QB. Building on defense isn't going to do much good if the team sucks at QB.

Ultimately I think if the team were to let Dak walk it would have to draft a QB, and possibly use significant draft collateral to move up to get a better option. If the team were to keep Dak those picks could be used on defense. Which is the better option … ? The team will have to make that choice.

Click to expand...

DakPresgoat said:

Ranking him at 16 is a joke.

that’s the explanation.

btw I don’t know who “NFL” is and how that person came up with their ranking.

Click to expand...

DeStorm said:

Mahomes
Rodgers
Brady
Wilson
Allen
Watson
Jackson
Stafford
Tanneyhill
Dak
Herbert
Murray
Carr
Ryan
Goff

I'd say about 10ish. I think Herbert and Murray could pass him with maturity. This is also before a several top 10 QBs are drafted. He may be around 15 next year.

JJ needs to back away from the checkbook.

Click to expand...

basel90 said:

how did dak keep the team competetive this year when he started 1-4 ?
Dak's 6-11 record was a measure of his last 17 starts . which is a good indicative criteria. Unless you want to use the 1-4 start, which is also terrible.
To answer your question how i would fix the defense, i think that is the GM's job and if the cap money is not used wisely, none of this will matter. But this team needs to acuire some key defensive parts from the FA , and some may become availalbe with the new cap squeeze.

Click to expand...

Cowboy Lover said:

Probably more credible than YOU.

But since you disagree...well we'll take YOUR word for it instead right> Okay then.

Click to expand...

basel90 said:

how did dak keep the team competetive this year when he started 1-4 ?
Dak's 6-11 record was a measure of his last 17 starts . which is a good indicative criteria. Unless you want to use the 1-4 start, which is also terrible.
To answer your question how i would fix the defense, i think that is the GM's job and if the cap money is not used wisely, none of this will matter. But this team needs to acuire some key defensive parts from the FA , and some may become availalbe with the new cap squeeze.

Click to expand...

OmerV said:

The team started 2-3, not 1-4, and even so, this comment assumes wins and losses are entirely on the QB, and that's not a fair assumption.

As for being competitive, the offense actually scored almost 33 points per game in the games Dak played - and that's what made the games competitive. The problem was the defense that gave up 36 points per game. That's kind of hard to blame on Dak.

And lest we go down the popular road of saying the points were almost all scored in the 2nd half with a big deficit and against relaxed defenses, they scored 77 1st half points and 86 2nd half points in Dak's games, so the discrepancy is not that great. The Atlanta game was obviously one in which most of the scoring was in the 2nd half, but it seems people assume that represents all the games, and it doesn't. They were actually ahead at halftime in 2 of the 5 games, and only down by 1 point at halftime in another game.

Click to expand...

DakPresgoat said:

Lol read the rest of the thread. He wasn’t even ranked at 16.

Clearly im at least more credible than the OP because I don’t completely misquote articles, post about it and not even include a link to the article I’m lying about.


Oh and if you do think Dak is the 16th best QB in the NFL. Then yes, you have no credibility when it comes to knowledge about the NFL.

Click to expand...

OmerV said:

The team started 2-3, not 1-4, and even so, this comment assumes wins and losses are entirely on the QB, and that's not a fair assumption.

As for being competitive, the offense actually scored almost 33 points per game in the games Dak played - and that's what made the games competitive. The problem was the defense that gave up 36 points per game. That's kind of hard to blame on Dak.

And lest we go down the popular road of saying the points were almost all scored in the 2nd half with a big deficit and against relaxed defenses, they scored 77 1st half points and 86 2nd half points in Dak's games, so the discrepancy is not that great. The Atlanta game was obviously one in which most of the scoring was in the 2nd half, but it seems people assume that represents all the games, and it doesn't. They were actually ahead at halftime in 2 of the 5 games, and only down by 1 point at halftime in another game.

Click to expand...

CowboysFaninHouston said:

we started 2-3.

and by keeping the teams in the game until the last couple of minutes of the game, when defense was historically...sorry, misspelled, HISTORICALLY bad. compare that to your boy Dalton, when he folded like a walmart cheap lawn chair against average competition like WFT, AZ or Ravens.

and like I said, you cherry picked...why 17? why not 12? why not 9? why not 18? why not 19? seems like you cherry picked the range you want to evaluate, without taking into evaluation any other factor.

like I said, your angle is that all wins and losses are on Dak...wait, no, all Losses are on Dak, all Wins is the team, the coaches, the special team, the other team sucking bad on that day. row 43, section 405, the wind, the sun's angle, the time of the game.....

and I asked a simple question, to your constant reponse if we pay Dak we can't fix the defense. if you say that, at least provide a reason, which you just punted...."its not my job, I have no idea, its the GM's job...but but but if we pay Dak 40M we can't fix the defense, I just don't know why..."......

using Cap wisely, would be not paying Zeke two years before his contract is due, for a position that you can easily find in the draft in any round, use them for 3 or 4 years and then dump them. spending money wisely would be to not pay Jaylon "club foot" one of the top 5 LB contracts in the league, knowing he is got health issues that kept him out of the league for two years. spending wisely would be not to pay Martin. love the guy. he is great. future HOFer, but you don't make it to the superbowl by making Martin the highest paid guard in the league.....I bet you can't even name the 8 guards who played in the championship game this year, or last year or the year before....without googling it...

when you find a top 10 QB, you pay him, because you will spend years, like many teams looking for one, developing him, then what? time to pay and you want to move on...to Dalton!!!!

you know the problem with this defense, this defense has 44 picks in the past 15 years, and found one impact player. of all the players they drafted one was worth it to give a large contract to....fix the defensive draft and you will fix the defense....not FA and overpaying for defensive FAs, or older ones or broken ones or head case ones.....

Click to expand...

Cowboy Lover said:

Why are you arguing something I never said or talked about?

I have to really chuckle when you respond as if I gave myself any "credibility when it comes to knowledge about the NFL". I suppose there's a few real gamers here, but in general it's a place people come to argue opinions. And when there's disagreement, well by god that person is stupid and has no "credibility when it comes to knowledge about the NFL"

I've never presented myself as one with any measurable amount of "credibility when it comes to knowledge about the NFL". For example...I have no clue if we can pay Dak what he wants/as many years as he wants and still build on the weaknesses of the team (I would say namely defense). But certainly everyone else has plenty of real credibility about it.

Credibility...without accountability...means squat to me.

Click to expand...

basel90 said:

I picked 17 games because it is the average full season body of work due to Dak’s injury . Many analysts mentioned this same record . And many see him as overrated by the way . And I disagree with you that he is a top tier QB . In fact I saw a report listing him at #16 . Which I think is too low . I think he is 12-14 territory.

I never blamed dak alone for the losses . We all know the defense is terrible . But he is not a factor in so many games , it makes you wonder what is the upside of paying him. 40 mil ?

Andy Dalton is not my preferred guy , and I still think the cowboys can find better options . Heck , we could have had Brady for 26 mil instead of paying Dak 31.6 mil , and made the playoffs or more probably .

I do agree with you that we cannot fix the defense if we keep over paying bums and descending overrated players . This is why I said the GM needs to make sure the cap is used optimally . Otherwise any savings will be wasted . This is why I don’t know . I don’t know which FAs will be available , what will Jerry do or cut . No one knows what will unfold . But I do know paying a QB 40 mil and not having cap money to fix the defense via FA will not yield any Super Bowls or playoff wins anytime soon . That should be the ultimate goal.
Having said that , I believe you are about to get your wish regarding Dak . Expect either a tag in March or a long term deal for Dak . Either way , you will get to see him play next season and we shall see hips this unfolds . Without a big fix on defense , Dak won’t be able to help much.

Click to expand...

Cowboy Lover said:

So how come Romo took a lot of heat and still does to this day?

I'm not saying you personally...but if you've come to his defense as well...I've not noted or remembered it.

As far as yoru stats go...doesn't really tell the whole story. Did we have one game where we scored a lot of points in the first half? and the rest a few? I dunno....what I do know is there are lies, dnam lies, and then there are stats. (if carelessly used).

Having said that....I also get your drift. I don't think he's as good as some people say...nor is he nearly as bad as others say. I also respect the opinion that some people would nto pay him on a big contract. I think they deserve some fairness rather than a hater label.

Click to expand...

CowboysFaninHouston said:

you picked 17 games over two seasons, part of one and part of the other.....so is it legit to take any 17 game span that fits your agenda? for any QB? any period?

many analysts mentioned this same record. who? names, articles, videos? and I can point to 10 times as many that say the exact opposite, so my number of analysts outnumber yours!!! is that a fair measure of legitimacy?

you can disagree with me, and I can disagree with you fine. the report you saw that had him listed at 16, if you actually read it, was for QB rankings for 2020.....which Dak played 5 games and if in fact you actually read it and not just the title, it said, its because he only played 5 games and if he played more, he would have ranked higher..... so based on 5 games, he was better than half the league....hmmmm

and this year alone we saw how he was a factor in the games, 3 playoff teams. first 5 games. historically bad...sorry misspelled again...HISTORICALLY BAD defense, he kept the team in the game until the last minute, only for defense to fold again.....subsequently we saw Dalton, fold in the first quarter against WFT, AZ, Ravens, etc..... same historically bad defense....

and the GM needs to make sure that we draft good defensive players, not sure why in 15 years, 44 picks and numerous more UDFA and FA we only have Lawrence to show for it as the one legit impact player and that ain't saying much, in the meantime in the same period we have drafted Tyron, Martin, Fredrick, Dak, Zeke, Gallup, CD, Schultz, Pollard, Collins, Jarwin, Cooper, Biadasz, Dez..... something is wrong with the scouting dept. how can any team miss that many defensive opportunities...

and on the defensive side, we signed the likes of Poe, Griffin, Worley, Hardy, etc....low, mid and highly paid and none worked out.....headcases older, injured and plain sucky....so its not like FA has been good on the defensive side. we let Hitchens walk, low to mid level LB, heck of a lot better than the craap we signed. we had Ward on the team and we let him walk and he is getting major playing time in KC. we are incapable of recognizing defensive talent.

and you cannot fix a defense through FA. all FA are going to be over paid. this defense is not one player away from being good. signing an over paid Defensive player ain't going to make much of a difference to this defense, you would need several highly paid and mid level players and there is not enough money on the cap, even if we didn't sign Dak and then we would ahve to account for the offensive incompetency that we saw with the likes of Dalton and having to over come that.

Click to expand...

basel90 said:

It will take a lot of expensive FAs and great draft pics over the next 2 years to remedy this defense . Paying for Dak via the tag or 40 mil a year , will be an expensive proposal given the fact he is not an elite QBs who can carry the team as we have seen . Heck , his injury may linger or make his running and scrambling even harder . Too many risks and little guarantee of rewards ,

Click to expand...

phong02 said:

Parr: Prescott was on pace to shatter the single-season passing yards record before a gruesome ankle injury robbed him of a chance to make history. The small sample size is probably the only thing keeping him from ending up higher on this list.

Click to expand...

CowboysFaninHouston said:

so lots of expensive FAs, meaning you are OK with over paying for several defensive FAs, lets just for the sake of argument say we sign three expensive FAs and over pay as you always do in free agency, by 3M per year each, so you are OK to over pay 9M per year and still need draft picks, which you may or may not hit on given past history of the team, and then go penny pinching on QB position and you think, that's going to make this team better. go bargain basement on QB, and over pay for defensive players....

so why are you willing to over pay for top FAs that their own teams weren't willing to sign, but not sign your own top 10 QB

and now, you are making excuses for your stance, that he may not recover from ankle injury and he can't scramble.....

sounds like you are running out of excuses and just being stubborn because you can't admit you may have been wrong.

Click to expand...

RonnieT24 said:

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. However merely typing it onto the screen over and over won't validate anyone's opinion. The proof will be in the pudding. Dak will either pick up his record setting pace from 2020 when he gets back in (I hope not) or he won't. I say I hope not because I don't want us to be this throw it 50 times a game team. It exposes our defense to much and it wastes our running back while forcing our linemen to be the hittees more often than the hitters. I don't think that's winning football. I want Dak back healthy and throwing it 30-35 times a game while managing us to wins. If people use the NOT record setting numbers to claim it "proves he's not worth the money" that's their problem. I want wins not records. Knowing that Dak can put up those numbers if need be is good enough. Defenses will know it when they play us so they will have to play the offense honest which will afford the running game opportunity to get busy. We know there will be games when teams sell out to stop the run and Dak should eat those defenses alive. If he can't, THEN he will not be worth the money..

Click to expand...