Backup QB?

[The Quest for Six]

Pretty sure Jamal Showers will be our 3rd qb behind Moore. Kept on practice squad until we need him.

Showers is not a QB option, even Dallas sees that now since they changed him to safety........Showers days are numbered after the drafted options in the secondary

 

[_sturt_]

They came pretty close to signing QB Austin Davis last year, I wonder if they still have any interest?

That's a good question, imo.

 

[_sturt_]

Showers is not a QB option, even Dallas sees that now since they changed him to safety........Showers days are numbered after the drafted options in the secondary

Advance to about 23:50 mark.

You'll find that Red is asked directly about Showers. But he hedges away from that, and ultimately concludes with something like "we've got plenty of time for the third QB option to work itself out."

http://www.dallascowboys.com/video/2017/04/29/post-draft-press-conference-rounds-4-7

Showers is an option. I'll grant he's not necessarily the guy to beat. But he is an option.

 

[The Quest for Six]

Advance to about 23:50 mark.

You'll find that Red is asked directly about Showers. But he hedges away from that, and ultimately concludes with something like "we've got plenty of time for the third QB option to work itself out."

http://www.dallascowboys.com/video/2017/04/29/post-draft-press-conference-rounds-4-7

Showers is an option. I'll grant he's not necessarily the guy to beat. But he is an option.

Showers is not an option at QB, did you not hear the question about is there a "chance" of moving Showers back to the qb position, and then the follow up question and Garrett just went on about process and his general coach speak, otherwise not answering the question and therefore, NOT AN OPTION as a quarterback

 

[_sturt_]

Um. I not only heard it, I'm the one who posted it to begin with.

He was offered the opportunity to rule that option out. He didn't go there.

Empirically, all that can be concluded from the statement is that (a) it wasn't ruled out and (b) there are other options they're wanting to explore.

Of the two of us, while you appear to be anxious to embrace "b," I appear to be the only one acknowledging both conclusions. You're entitled to your opinion, but the evidence doesn't support it.

 

[AzorAhai]

True you hope to build a team who can help the backup QB and not a situation where you expect the QB to carry the team.

Pretty much. Teams who usually win with backups are already winning with what should be a backup or win in spite of that backup. The reality is if your QB goes down for an extended time, your season is wrecked. If he goes down for several games, you're fortunate if you win any. It seems rather useless to worry so much about getting the least sucky of sucky QBs to me.

 

[Blast From The Past]

our season is over if dak has a significant injury.

Yea the same thing was said last year about Romo going down. How'd that work out for all the naysayers?

 

[Doomsday101]

Pretty much. Teams who usually win with backups are already winning with what should be a backup or win in spite of that backup. The reality is if your QB goes down for an extended time, your season is wrecked. If he goes down for several games, you're fortunate if you win any. It seems rather useless to worry so much about getting the least sucky of sucky QBs to me.

I agree if the backup can hold 50% win say over 4 games that is a big win in my book but if your QB goes down for much of the season most teams will struggle to overcome it. Having a top defense who can keep you in the game becomes critical

 

[Doomsday101]

Yea the same thing was said last year about Romo going down. How'd that work out for all the naysayers?

Does not work out that way very often. Come on how many 4th rd rookies can step in day 1 and help lead his team to a 13 win season? Did not hurt that he was not asked to carry team on his own

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Other options will be available late August if necessary. For now, we fly with what we have.

Romo: Unofficial

 

[AzorAhai]

I agree if the backup can hold 50% win say over 4 games that is a big win in my book but if your QB goes down for much of the season most teams will struggle to overcome it. Having a top defense who can keep you in the game becomes critical

It's usually just worrying over what amounts to something you can't do much about. Unless people want to invest a high draft pick in a backup which brings up a whole different set of problems. If Dak goes down for the season, I would rather just tank with Moore and add more high rated players anyways. If he goes down for 4 games, Moore is 1 of 2 dozen backups who can win a game, maybe 2 if everything goes right. I just don't get the constant who's the backup threads every offseason.

 

[Doomsday101]

It's usually just worrying over what amounts to something you can't do much about. Unless people want to invest a high draft pick in a backup which brings up a whole different set of problems. If Dak goes down for the season, I would rather just tank with Moore and add more high rated players anyways. If he goes down for 4 games, Moore is 1 of 2 dozen backups who can win a game, maybe 2 if everything goes right. I just don't get the constant who's the backup threads every offseason.

True, I think a handful of games given the fact Dallas has the best RB in the league and what I feel is the best OL I think Moore can hold down the fort if we are talking a few games.

 

[AzorAhai]

True, I think a handful of games given the fact Dallas has the best RB in the league and what I feel is the best OL I think Moore can hold down the fort if we are talking a few games.

You can't realistically ask for more. I feel like people want the caliber of backup Romo was last year or Garrapolo is and that just couldn't be more unrealistic of an expectation. Just like you aren't going to have a Tyron Smith level backup or a Sean Lee level backup. It's just reality lol.

 

[Doomsday101]

You can't realistically ask for more. I feel like people want the caliber of backup Romo was last year or Garrapolo is and that just couldn't be more unrealistic of an expectation. Just like you aren't going to have a Tyron Smith level backup or a Sean Lee level backup. It's just reality lol.

Agreed, if you had the 85 Bears defense that would be different. lol

 

[_sturt_]

Not to re-hash the exponential re-hashing of paying Romo $14m to be back-up, but I'd like to think we could look back on all of that and see this one lesson for what it will ever matter again since that situation has been so rare... which is...

1) Back-ups are almost never worthy of very much pay because they almost never are able to win games, even the best of them.

2) If you ever found a back-up capable of winning games, you'd be smart to pay him well--as in, starter money--because it's so very common that Starter X is going to be down for some portion of the season, and because the difference between making the post-season and not making the post-season is often only a matter of one or a handful of games.

Hence, I'm not all that concerned, really, about who we get for #2 b/c as others have opined, it's not likely to matter ultimately to the outcome of games no matter who we have back there. And hence... however... it sure would be comforting to think that Tony and Jerry have a verbal pact in the case that Dak's year would end up suddenly like the otherwise healthy Derek Carr's 2016 ended up.

But we'll never know until that moment that we don't want to occur would, in fact, occur.