We Have Won Only 6 Games With Less Than 100 Yards Rushing With Dak As Starting QB Since 2016

phildadon86 said:

LOL here we go again.

Do you remember when you did this last time and I posted the numbers of other teams across the NFL?

You may want this post to seem like you aren't taking yet another shot at Dak. But you are. You just changed the words around.

I think the numbers we came to after I did all the research for you. (must have forgot we already went down this road) is that something like any TEAM that has 100 yard rusher wins games more than 85-90 percent of the time.

So this isnt a Dak vs Rush debate. This is a Dak vs the entire league debate.

With all of that being said.

The Cowboys NEED to stay balanced on offense. Not because Dak isnt capable. But because its a recipe to win football games.

Click to expand...

MountaineerCowboy said:

I just don't see how you can defend 6 wins in 6 plus years.

Dak NEEDS a great run.

Again, if Dak is your QB and you don't get 100 yards rushing you're going to lose the game. You don't think that about the actual top QBs in the NFL.

There's nothing wrong with seeing that Dak needs more help than others. The problem arise when you guys want to put him on the same level as the actual great QBs in the league.

Click to expand...

Pantone282C said:

Play action from under the center helps.

Click to expand...

MountaineerCowboy said:

Justin Herbert already has led his team to more wins having less than 100 rushing yards of support than Dak.

So has....

Mahomes, Josh Allen (Josh Allen lead his team to 7 wins in 2020 alone without 100 yards of rushing support), Joe Burrow (Did it 6 times last year and already once this season), Matt Stafford did it 3 straight games in a row in the playoffs from the divisional round to the Super Bowl.

Those are just a few that I decided to look up.

When you have an actual great QB you don't have to rely on your run game. It's a problem for the Cowboys right now.

Click to expand...

Ken said:

It has a lot to do with how the teams are built and their offensive philosophy.

Our is and has always been predicated on the run. This is why there are only 25 or so games you can point to that we didn't run for 100 in 7 years. As you said yourself, Herbert has 7 or whatever it is...but the Chargers have not gotten 100 20 times in the last two years and the first 3 games this year.

Looks to me like he needs the help because they are going to miss the playoffs AGAIN this year if they don't help him.

Click to expand...

MountaineerCowboy said:

I posted a few QBs that are younger than Dak that many of you believe Dak is on the same level as that have already led their teams to more wins without 100 yards of rushing support than Dak has in significantly less games played.

I understand that QBs aren't going to be great like this, but only SIX in 6+ season is embarrassing.

Click to expand...

Vtwin said:

@RustyBourneHorse you're up!

Click to expand...

phildadon86 said:

Notice how he brought up all of those QB's who "lead their teams to victory without 100 yards rushing"

Yet when Dak wins a game its "the team"

That tells you everything you need to know.

Click to expand...

VaqueroTD said:

Some QBs can start strong and just need the running game for short 1st downs and to close it out and wrap up the clock.

Some QBs need the running game to open strong, create the play action and keep the defense honest.

I think Dak is #2. Aikman was probably a good example of #1.

Click to expand...

Zman5 said:

So if the RBs run for 70 yards but Dak get 40yards running and win, it doesn't count as "a win while rushing for less than 100". This is why this stat is meaningless.

Click to expand...

MountaineerCowboy said:

"leading their team" is saying it's a team game.

Unless you're trying to remove the word "leader" from Dak? I'm okay with that.

Click to expand...

MountaineerCowboy said:

Dak's had 40 or more rushing yards 4 times in his entire career.

So, there goes that.

Click to expand...

phildadon86 said:

No. You are giving all the credit to the QB.

Which is funny because you give none to the QB of the team you apparently cheer for.

You should be a politician with all the spinning and twisting of words you do. You are very gifted at it.

Tell me. How does a QB lead the defense? Because let me tell you. Buffalo, Rams, Cincy, Tampa. All have pretty great defenses.

Click to expand...

Zman5 said:

I just made up that number. There could be other situations where he rushed for less and still would help the rushing to go over 100 yards.

We could also be blowing out a team before rushing got to 100 yards, yet we end up running more at the end to ice the game which will get the rushing over the 100yard mark.

Click to expand...

MountaineerCowboy said:

Okay.

I don't know if there's a stat out there for all of that, and if so then by all means, let's see it.

I can only go by what is easily found.

Click to expand...

Zman5 said:

So if the RBs run for 70 yards but Dak get 40yards running and win, it doesn't count as "a win while rushing for less than 100". This is why this stat is meaningless.

Click to expand...

MountaineerCowboy said:

No I'm not.

If that's how you want to take it then okay, but I didn't post this caring how you would take it.

I knew you and the other Dallas Prescott guys would chime in.

I posted this just to show everyone else how much a dominate run game is needed when Dak is your QB.

Click to expand...

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country said:

I disagree.
A stat showing what this team needs to do to win is not meaningless, to me. The 90's team had a similar stat. Every time Emmitt had 20 carries the winning percentage jumped up to like 96%. And guess what... every time Dallas won a Super Bowl in the 90's Emmitt had over 340 carries that year. 340 divided by 16 equals 21 carries a game. So, the stat of needed 100 yards on the ground, for this team to win, shows us we need the focus on running the ball.

Click to expand...