CFZ Breaking History

Aerolithe_Lion said:
how do you define aging at the QB position? Dak will be 30 this season, Matt Stafford was 32 when Detroit traded him, Russell Wilson 33 when Seattle traded him. I would say both are comparable situations to Dak in Dallas right now.
Click to expand...
Aging would be Philip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers, or any QB that’s in decline. You brought up a whole list of teams that had aging QBs or QBs that were in decline or simply weren’t getting it done. I’m not about to waste my time breaking down each QB from the teams you mentioned to try and satisfy you, but every one of those QBs either weren’t what they were or simply weren’t good enough, and those teams were looking to replace them…fact!
 
CCBoy said:
And....?

Just where are current quarterback talents for San Francisco and the Rams the past season and now? Top shelf with change?
Click to expand...
The change benefited LA greatly I would say. And SF potentially as well, it definitely didn’t hurt them
 
KJJ said:
Aging would be Philip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers, or any QB that’s in decline. You brought up a whole list of teams that had aging QBs or QBs that were in decline or simply weren’t getting it done. I’m not about to waste my time breaking down each QB from the teams you mentioned to try and satisfy you, but every one of those QBs either weren’t what they were or simply weren’t good enough, and those teams were looking to replace them…fact!
Click to expand...
It’s a matter of perspective to the team. If Dallas ever does trade Dak it would be because they perceived him as not good enough. That’s a self-fulfilling definition.
 
Aerolithe_Lion said:
It’s a matter of perspective to the team. If Dallas ever does trade Dak it would be because they perceived him as not good enough. That’s a self-fulfilling definition.
Click to expand...
The Cowboys aren’t going to trade Dak unless they have a better option in-house. The Joneses aren’t going to leave themselves scrambling to try and find another QB and watch season after season go down the drain in the process. If Dak continues to regress this season, and it leads to the Cowboys missing the playoffs, then he might start falling in the category of some of the QBs from the teams you listed.
 
KJJ said:
You’re wrong on all of them. Lol They were good reasons those teams moved on from those QBs. Several of those QBs were aging or in decline and practically none of those teams were making the playoffs consistently with any of those QBs. I’ve already pointed out why some of those teams moved on from those QBs. Try again.
Click to expand...
He is giving you actual examples. You are now just fitting stuff into your limited narrative. Dak is aging and had an up and down season with another clunker against a top tier defense.

Pair that with the win loss record without him on the field, and the argument can me made that this team does not rely on him much currently.

The Cowboys will not likely move on from a QB that gives them a playoff appearance. My stance is that an appearance is not that big of a deal anymore. And just because Alex Smith was getting replaced, does not mean the team was not getting into the playoffs. They wanted to go further and made a move. Other teams can do the same-it’s a risk. Jimmy G helped SF get to a SB and another conference title game. He suffered some injuries, but the team was looking for more. Other teams have been in similar spots and moved on. What is “consistently” making the playoffs to you? I’m not arguing what will happen-I’m arguing my opinion as to what should happen.
 
KJJ said:
The Cowboys aren’t going to trade Dak unless they have a better option in-house. The Joneses aren’t going to leave themselves scrambling to try and find another QB and watch season after season go down the drain in the process. If Dak continues to regress this season, and it leads to the Cowboys missing the playoffs, then he might start falling in the category of some of the QBs from the teams you listed.
Click to expand...
I don’t think they will either, but it wasn’t my hypothetical. I’m just responding to a previous question: absolutely teams have shown a willingness to trade playoff caliber QBs if they feel their title chances are becoming stagnant
 
Aerolithe_Lion said:
The change benefited LA greatly I would say. And SF potentially as well, it definitely didn’t hurt them
Click to expand...
You offered no contrasting proofs or referenced proof. Hey, I like the Cowboys currently above both references above!

I also offer comparative references of actual performances involved in thread.
 
Blitzen said:
He is giving you actual examples. You are now just fitting stuff into your limited narrative. Dak is aging and had an up and down season with another clunker against a top tier defense.
Click to expand...
He didn’t provide a single example. None of those QBs he mentioned were at the top of their games and making the playoffs consistently year after year. They were either aging or in decline and their teams were looking to move on from them. Dak doesn’t fall in the category of any of those QBs.
 
Blitzen said:
My general point is there are probably some good QB’s that are either on terrible teams OR they were already broken from being on that terrible team. They might be a backup or a struggling young player.

I’m a firm believer that the oline play is atrocious for like half the league. Which will make most QB’s look terrible. Who would have bet on Geno having that year prior to last season? Seattle stabilized the line and added some more runners. Geno is better equipped to just step in though.

I could see the Cowboys going all the way, but my view is that it will take a 2000 Ravens, 1985 Bears or another top defensive effort to get there.
Click to expand...
Eli has two rings and Nick Foles has a ring but you think we need the 85 Bears defense in 2023?
 
CCBoy said:
You offered no contrasting proofs or referenced proof. Hey, I like the Cowboys currently above both references above!

I also offer comparative references of actual performances involved in thread.
Click to expand...
The question was a contextless one of teams who would trade playoff QBs, I gave an appropriate answer to that question. You then went a step further and asked about conference championship QBs. I gave you two. What contrasting proofs do you want? I was just answering your question.
 
Aerolithe_Lion said:
I don’t think they will either, but it wasn’t my hypothetical. I’m just responding to a previous question: absolutely teams have shown a willingness to trade playoff caliber QBs if they feel their title chances are becoming stagnant
Click to expand...
Did both Montana and Young become headaches for other teams, before and after? Change isn't instant enrichment...and quarterback skills have transitioned more now, but Prescott has kept up with general trend elements and is current with the Cowboys. Disprove that fact as well!
 
KJJ said:
He didn’t provide a single example. None of those QBs he mentioned were at the top of their games and making the playoffs consistently year after year. They were either aging or in decline and their teams were looking to move on from them. Dak doesn’t fall in the category of any of those QBs.
Click to expand...
Jared Goff absolutely was. Unless you feel 26 is aging
 
Aerolithe_Lion said:
I don’t think they will either, but it wasn’t my hypothetical. I’m just responding to a previous question: absolutely teams have shown a willingness to trade playoff caliber QBs if they feel their title chances are becoming stagnant
Click to expand...
Teams only show a willingness to trade a playoff caliber QB if they’re in decline and are making too much money, as was the case with Russell Wilson. His numbers had declined, and Seattle missed the playoffs with him during his final season in Seattle. Denver was foolish enough to trade a bunch of premium draft picks for a declining QB and we all saw how that turned out for them last season.
 
KJJ said:
Teams only show a willingness to trade a playoff caliber QB if they’re in decline and are making too much money, as was the case with Russell Wilson. His numbers had declined, and Seattle missed the playoffs with him during his final season in Seattle. Denver was foolish enough to trade a bunch of premium draft picks for a declining QB and we all saw how that turned out for them last season.
Click to expand...
But now we’re getting into reasons in the hypothetical Dallas may one day consider trading Dak Prescott. He is due an extension, there’s no indication he’d sign for anything less than record breaking based on how the last negaotiation went, and the occasional wild card win ceiling hasn’t changed.

Jared Goff made a Super Bowl, was 42-20 in his last 4 years in LA, and had a season very similar to Dak’s his last year. Made the playoffs as a wildcard, beat a division winner round 1, lost to 13-3 GB round two. Traded that offseason. Why? Because the team had decided he was good but they wanted to try and do better. I don’t think Jerry is the type to make a decision like that, but there is precedent that teams do think that way
 
Aerolithe_Lion said:
Jared Goff absolutely was. Unless you feel 26 is aging
Click to expand...
Jared Goff had fallen off, which is why the Rams traded him for Matthew Stafford. His numbers had dropped off the previous season, and they didn’t see him as being the answer. He was terrible in the Super Bowl a couple of years earlier. The Rams could’ve easily won that game had Goff played well. He didn’t even lead them to a TD. Sean McVay saw no hope in him and moved on. Even polls on this board favored Dak over Goff. Try again!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 90 more.
Total: 4,929 (members: 190, guests: 4,739)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,667
Messages
13,825,267
Members
23,781
Latest member
Vloh10
Back
Top