If the Cowboys are going to pay top dollar for a quarterback there are better options

gimmesix

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
Messages
37,333
Reaction score
34,463
Cam Newton is going to be available. He would be amazing in Dallas.
I'd rather see Dallas get Cam than pay big money for Dak.
  • Case Keenum is available. He led the Vikings to the NFC Championship game. He is a better deal than Dak.
  • Marcus Mariota will be available. He would be better.
  • Tom Brady will probably be available.
And more.
As I said, I will back Dak if they sign him.
But there are much better options.

I think some of you are misguided in how you look at Dak compared to other QBs.

Newton, for example, has never had a 100 QB rating in a season. His career QB rating is 86.1 and his career completion percentage is below 60 percent. His TD-to-int. ratio is not even 2-to-1 (182 to 108) That is not amazing numbers or even close to it.

Prescott in comparison is heads and shoulders better as a passer. His career QB rating is 97.0, his career completion percentage is 65.8 and his TD-to-int. is closer to 3-to-1 (97 to 36).

As a runner, Newton has averaged 5.1 YPC per carry and scored 58 times in nine years, but he's also fumbled 52 times and lost 20. Dak also averages 5.1 over four years, with 21 TDs, 31 fumbles and 15 fumbles lost.
 

OmerV

Well-Known Member
Messages
25,861
Reaction score
22,388
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
But if we draft one of those guys, it will be 5 years before we need to pay them serious money.

How many teams who have drafted 1st round QBs in the last 3 years would trade them for Dak? Would any?

Concerning Dak been underpaid the past four years - you dont pay extra in future years to make up for a perceived underpayment in the past. NFL is a business. If you pay over the odds, the team suffers. It's not "payback time".

And maybe 5 years of a lesser QB that hinders our chance to win. Odds are tremendously better that Dak will give us a chance to win than the 17th pick in the draft would, but it seems saving money is the key element for you.

As for your question, that's a nonsense question because how many teams ever trade any high 1st round pick after his 1st or 2nd season. Of course teams will give their young, cheap QB that they spent a high draft pick on a chance to develop. By investing a high 1st round pick on a player they are locked into having to do that. Hell, the Vikings wouldn't have trade Jake Locker in year one or two either, but hindsight tells us that would have been a smart move.

And, by the way, I see you are still ignoring that the Cowboys don't have the draft position to get one of the top QB's.
 

csirl

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
3,987
And maybe 5 years of a lesser QB that hinders our chance to win. Odds are tremendously better that Dak will give us a chance to win than the 17th pick in the draft would, but it seems saving money is the key element for you.

As for your question, that's a nonsense question because how many teams ever trade any high 1st round pick after his 1st or 2nd season. Of course teams will give their young, cheap QB that they spent a high draft pick on a chance to develop. By investing a high 1st round pick on a player they are locked into having to do that. Hell, the Vikings wouldn't have trade Jake Locker in year one or two either, but hindsight tells us that would have been a smart move.

And, by the way, I see you are still ignoring that the Cowboys don't have the draft position to get one of the top QB's.

Daks had 4 years and hasnt delivered.

I really love the optimism. Woe is us, we'll never draft a good QB, even in the first round......sure any player taken at #17 must be terrible. Why bother. Sure 8-8 isnt that bad.
 

Hennessy_King

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,623
Reaction score
25,418
Not sure what a post like that’s supposed to convey. But if you don’t care to follow site guidelines, you eventually get banned.

You like to both flaunt that you don’t care about the guidelines and imply you’re being treated unfairly when that gets you benched. It’s a ridiculous way to behave, even on the internet.

But we’re happy to accommodate you. It probably won’t be long.
You keep saying that yet I'm still here. And you know it's not that. I get banned for things here that most that do the same thing don't get banned.
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,412
Reaction score
12,146
Actually, that's not what's being argued. Keenum and Mariota are not capable, that's what's being argued. Cam has not been good for several years.
Keenum has proven he can be capable in the right situation.

Mariota has skill, but he has not shown the ability to put it together, and his team is much better off without him. I would not want him.
Cam...could probably do very well with this group.
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,054
Reaction score
46,962
Keenum has proven he can be capable in the right situation.

Mariota has skill, but he has not shown the ability to put it together, and his team is much better off without him. I would not want him.
Cam...could probably do very well with this group.
Dak is better than Mariota, and is prolly better than Cam at this point. Cam has freaked out in general and has proven to be a sub par passer w/ his mobility is taken away. And his mobility is prolly gone for good.

Keenum is strictly a backup type. He's pretty much terrible as a starter.
 

OmerV

Well-Known Member
Messages
25,861
Reaction score
22,388
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Daks had 4 years and hasnt delivered.

I really love the optimism. Woe is us, we'll never draft a good QB, even in the first round......sure any player taken at #17 must be terrible. Why bother. Sure 8-8 isnt that bad.
So, every time 4 years go by without winning the Super Bowl we release our QB and roll the dice with a QB drafted with whatever 1st round pick the team has, no matter how far into the draft that is? That's a pretty terrible plan.

This isn't about optimism, it's about facts and odds. NFL teams can't afford to make these kinds of decisions based on blind optimism. They have to consider the facts and odds, and odds are signifacntly against drafting a better QB with the 17th pick than we already have, and they are actually better that we will draft a worse one.
 
Last edited:

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,054
Reaction score
46,962
I think some of you are misguided in how you look at Dak compared to other QBs.

Newton, for example, has never had a 100 QB rating in a season. His career QB rating is 86.1 and his career completion percentage is below 60 percent. His TD-to-int. ratio is not even 2-to-1 (182 to 108) That is not amazing numbers or even close to it.

Prescott in comparison is heads and shoulders better as a passer. His career QB rating is 97.0, his career completion percentage is 65.8 and his TD-to-int. is closer to 3-to-1 (97 to 36).

As a runner, Newton has averaged 5.1 YPC per carry and scored 58 times in nine years, but he's also fumbled 52 times and lost 20. Dak also averages 5.1 over four years, with 21 TDs, 31 fumbles and 15 fumbles lost.
Cam had one great year and has been subpar every other year. People still worship him from 2015.
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,412
Reaction score
12,146
Dak is better than Mariota, and is prolly better than Cam at this point. Cam has freaked out in general and has proven to be a sub par passer w/ his mobility is taken away. And his mobility is prolly gone for good.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not high on Cam either. I just think he's skilled enough to do very well with this team. He's a knucklehead, though. And probably not cheap (value) anyway.

I could definitely live with Keenum at 18 more than Dak at 35. That extra 17 can bring a lot to the team. A lot more than the supposed dropoff at QB would be.
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,054
Reaction score
46,962
Don't get me wrong. I'm not high on Cam either. I just think he's skilled enough to do very well with this team. He's a knucklehead, though. And probably not cheap (value) anyway.

I could definitely live with Keenum at 18 more than Dak at 35. That extra 17 can bring a lot to the team. A lot more than the supposed dropoff at QB would be.
I couldn't. You're simply not going to win a super bowl w/ Keenum. You'd have to have a 2000 Ravens/2015 Broncos type D to win w/ Keenum, and even then it's unlikely.
 

aikemirv

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,211
Reaction score
9,713
So, every time 4 years go by without winning the Super Bowl we release our QB and roll the dice with a QB drafted with whatever 1st round pick the team has, no matter how far into the draft that is? That's a pretty terrible plan.

This isn't about optimism, it's about facts and odds. NFL teams can't afford to make these kinds of decisions based on blind optimism. They have to consider the facts and odds, and odds are dramatically against drafting a better QB with the 17th pick than we already have, and they are actually better that we will draft a worse one.

This is really the crux of the whole matter. You either overpay for a QB you are not sure can get you there at the expense of the rest of your team or you don't pay, spend the money on the rest of the team and try to scrimp at QB.

I think the NFL is going to come to that point pretty soon with these QB salaries- they are not sustainable at the current Salary cap. You cannot justify 20% of your cap on 1 player unless he has proven that he can carry your team on his own. Rodgers is a guy who can do that. You saw it in the precise 3rd and long completions last weekend. He did it multiple times when the game was on the line - over and over. Mahomes completely took over the game form the second quarter on and made a ton of plays getting out of the pocket and getting his guys time to get open. Russell Wilson almost single handedly brought the Seahawks back last week with his ability to break containment and run over and over again. Those guys can overcome the deficiencies you cause by putting 20% of your cap to one guy.

Dak, while he has become a good QB, is not the player or difference maker those guys are. He is just not, but the Cowboys are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
 

LittleD

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,805
Reaction score
6,038
I didn’t compare them. I was commenting on Brady in a vacuum. I haven’t seen anything to confirm what Dak has ‘demanded’ tho, and I’m curious what you expect a non patriots discount, open market Brady to command.

Hard to say... But, if he wanted to play for Jerry they could work out a deal I'm sure.
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,412
Reaction score
12,146
I couldn't. You're simply not going to win a super bowl w/ Keenum. You'd have to have a 2000 Ravens/2015 Broncos type D to win w/ Keenum, and even then it's unlikely.
I don't agree. Keenum needs a good supporting cast, just like Dak does. Dak in Denver or Washington would be laughed at the same as Keenum. 17 extra gives you more the build around him with.
 

OmerV

Well-Known Member
Messages
25,861
Reaction score
22,388
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
This is really the crux of the whole matter. You either overpay for a QB you are not sure can get you there at the expense of the rest of your team or you don't pay, spend the money on the rest of the team and try to scrimp at QB.

I think the NFL is going to come to that point pretty soon with these QB salaries- they are not sustainable at the current Salary cap. You cannot justify 20% of your cap on 1 player unless he has proven that he can carry your team on his own. Rodgers is a guy who can do that. You saw it in the precise 3rd and long completions last weekend. He did it multiple times when the game was on the line - over and over. Mahomes completely took over the game form the second quarter on and made a ton of plays getting out of the pocket and getting his guys time to get open. Russell Wilson almost single handedly brought the Seahawks back last week with his ability to break containment and run over and over again. Those guys can overcome the deficiencies you cause by putting 20% of your cap to one guy.

Dak, while he has become a good QB, is not the player or difference maker those guys are. He is just not, but the Cowboys are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Tough decisions. But while it's true Dak isn't the same level as Rodgers, lesser QBs than Dak have won the Super Bowl. But, as you mentioned, it's hard to fill out the best possible team with QB salaries so high.

Still, how many QBs are Rodgers level, and how likely are we to get one at that level from the draft, especially not picking unitl 17? The reason Rogers (along with Brady and Brees) are still being prominently mentioned as the standards is that over the last 20 years so few new QBs haven't come along to replace them in people's eyes. Wilson and Mahomes may be at or near that level now, but those kinds of QBs are few and far between, and it's pretty risky to get rid of a high quality QB and take a flyer on getting one of those very rare ones. If you have a top 5 draft pick, the gamble might be worth it, but drafting at #17, the odds are very small.
 
Last edited:

Aviano90

Go Seahawks!!!
Messages
16,758
Reaction score
24,485
I couldn't. You're simply not going to win a super bowl w/ Keenum. You'd have to have a 2000 Ravens/2015 Broncos type D to win w/ Keenum, and even then it's unlikely.
Keenum could add $20 million to the salary cap and we still wouldn't win with that bum.
 

csirl

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
3,987
Dak = Steve Pelleur.

Would Jimmy have gotten to the SB with Pelleur at QB?
 
Top