BTB: Why The Cowboys Backup QB Situation Is Not As Bad As You Think

[Nightman]

Right, no coach wants to tank.
So the FO can force (intentionally?) the coach to tank by undercutting his contingency QB options.
If Romo goes down, we are essentially tanking because backups will lose (unless Dak really really surprises).

That is a good reason NOT to have a good backup QB because we need our next franchise QB.
If Dak really really surprises, then we already have our next QB with a late 4th!

What if Romo goes down right before the playoffs and after the trade deadline?

Early exit from playoffs and a late first draft pick

 

[Doomsday101]

Right, no coach wants to tank.
So the FO can force (intentionally?) the coach to tank by undercutting his contingency QB options.
If Romo goes down, we are essentially tanking because backups will lose (unless Dak really really surprises).

That is a good reason NOT to have a good backup QB because we need our next franchise QB.
If Dak really really surprises, then we already have our next QB with a late 4th!

how would we know if Dak could do the job when you already have them tanking the season. If Dallas is trying to get a QB and does not have a top 10 pick to work with then you package deals and move up to get a QB. As for the front office again good organizations are not out there tanking seasons. Late in the season teams may look to backups to get them playing time since it is evident that the current starters are not doing it and it allows younger players or backups the snaps so a team can see what they have in a player under real game circumstances.

If your not playing to win you got no business playing the sport to begin with.

 

[JoeKing]

Yeah...this thread really isn't about a heavy reliance on Zeke. Plenty of other Zeke threads out there for you to hate on star. This is about a change in offensive philosophy in case Romo goes down. But thank's for your contribution and I'll overlook your lack of reading comprehension.

What was that change in offensive philosophy that you are speaking of? I could have sworn I read something about a "full on run attack". If that's not a heavy reliance on Zeke then that wasn't explained. It hasn't anything to do with my reading comprehension, jackwagon! I don't care how much you cater the game toward Dak's skill set and Zeke and the O-line strength, it does make up for the elite game that Romo brings to the table. The rookies won't save the day. Just pray Romo doesn't go down and then we won't have to worry about it.

 

[Oh_Canada]

You're asking waaaay to much of this coaching staff.

 

[Reverend Conehead]

So how many years does it take to build a consistent winner? I shake my head at all the people who made fun of Chip Kelly. He certainly had his warts....but all I know is that he stepped in the NFL...used multiple QBs and STILL found a way to win 10 games his FIRST 2 years in the NFL. The year he did not have double digit wins...he was gone.

We have a coaching regime...that has been here 5 years...with ONE....ONE....winning season. And we are STILL talking about "we need to fill this hole"....and "we need to fill that hole". So how much time is enough time?

No way to know for sure what's in Jerry's head, but here's what I suspect. Another losing record and Garrett is gone. Another playoff win and he stays. In between that is a gray area. Just my guess.

 

[waldoputty]

how would we know if Dak could do the job when you already have them tanking the season. If Dallas is trying to get a QB and does not have a top 10 pick to work with then you package deals and move up to get a QB. As for the front office again good organizations are not out there tanking seasons. Late in the season teams may look to backups to get them playing time since it is evident that the current starters are not doing it and it allows younger players or backups the snaps so a team can see what they have in a player under real game circumstances.

If your not playing to win you got no business playing the sport to begin with.

I think most of us are 90% sure that playing Dak is essentially tanking.
He is most likely not ready, and some here argue that he never will be ready.

I would not be surprised that the Jones may have made this calculation and undercut the backup QB position on purpose.
If I am Jerry or Stephen, I would definitely structure the team this way.

If you want a chance to win if Romo goes down, you get a legit backup like New England or Green Bay would.

IMO we are so close to being a top team for a long time that it is not funny.
We need 2-3 more players - next QB, RDE and probably a MLB.
Jaylon may already be the MLB in waiting.

Of course you can package picks.
But starting higher gives you a better chance to make that trade.

We all want to win.
Who is to argue that playing to win it all for 8 years with an A-level roster players is not preferable to playing to win it all for 10 years with a A minus/B plus roster.

 

[waldoputty]

What was that change in offensive philosophy that you are speaking of? I could have sworn I read something about a "full on run attack". If that's not a heavy reliance on Zeke then that wasn't explained. It hasn't anything to do with my reading comprehension, jackwagon! I don't care how much you cater the game toward Dak's skill set and Zeke and the O-line strength, it does make up for the elite game that Romo brings to the table. The rookies won't save the day. Just pray Romo doesn't go down and then we won't have to worry about it.

It does not make up for Romo.
Playing in this adjusted approach would just keep things interesting for the fans.
A lot more things to argue over...

 

[waldoputty]

No way to know for sure what's in Jerry's head, but here's what I suspect. Another losing record and Garrett is gone. Another playoff win and he stays. In between that is a gray area. Just my guess.

I hope not. A new coach could set the team back a couple years if we go to a new system.

 

[Doomsday101]

I think most of us are 90% sure that playing Dak is essentially tanking.
He is most likely not ready, and some here argue that he never will be ready.

I would not be surprise that the Jones may have made this calculation and undercut the backup QB position on purpose.
If I am Jerry or Stephen, I would definitely structure the team this way.

If you want a chance to win if Romo goes down, you get a legit backup like New England or Green Bay would.

IMO we are so close to being a top team for a long time that it is not funny.
We need 2-3 more players - next QB, RDE and probably a MLB.
Jaylon may already be the MLB in waiting.

Of course you can package picks.
But starting higher gives you a better chance to make that trade.

We all want to win.
Who is to argue that playing to win it all for 8 years with an A-level roster players is not preferable to playing to win it all for 10 years with a A minus/B plus roster.

Based on what? Sorry I don't base things on some majority rules BS on a message board. What others think does not really matter. Dak like any other player will have to go out and prove themselves critic do not determine anything they have views and opinions that are not worth much if it was then a 6th rd pick like Brady would never have made it or an UDFA like Romo so outside views truly are meaningless.

Who is GB backup? a 5th rd pick

Sorry I don't share your mindset that losing to get better picks is the way to go. If so Jacksonville and Cleveland would be competing for championships

 

[jday]

What was that change in offensive philosophy that you are speaking of? I could have sworn I read something about a "full on run attack". If that's not a heavy reliance on Zeke then that wasn't explained. It hasn't anything to do with my reading comprehension, jackwagon! I don't care how much you cater the game toward Dak's skill set and Zeke and the O-line strength, it does make up for the elite game that Romo brings to the table. The rookies won't save the day. Just pray Romo doesn't go down and then we won't have to worry about it.

Jackwagon?

The change of philosophy in question would be to use the option. But as it stand's, given the general belief that the Cowboys are attempting to return to their 2014 run heavy team, said philosophy would not be using Zeke any more than what they already plan to. Furthermore, I'm hoping they spread the ball around a little bit more than what they did in 2014. Alfred Morris, having played in the option with the Commanders, is more than capable of taking some carries from Zeke. Same could be said of Jackson, who also Hails from an option offense. So again, this is not about a heavy reliance on Zeke...this about changing how the Cowboys move the football, should Romo be injured. As we all saw last year, asking any QB to do what he does will lead right back to another high pick in 2017. My point is they should change the offense to better suit that back-ups ability. Granted, Moore may have first crack it, but 2 to 3 games of epic losing like last year, and I suspect a change will be made at QB that will either feature Dak or Showers. Either way, the option better suits their skillsets.

Jackwagon...smh...

 

[waldoputty]

Based on what? Sorry I don't base things on some majority rules BS on a message board. What others think does not really matter. Dak like any other player will have to go out and prove themselves critic do not determine anything they have views and opinions that are not worth much if it was then a 6th rd pick like Brady would never have made it or an UDFA like Romo so outside views truly are meaningless.

Who is GB backup? a 5th rd pick

Sorry I don't share your mindset that losing to get better picks is the way to go. If so Jacksonville and Cleveland would be competing for championships

Do you think playing Dak is essentially tanking compared to having an experienced backup?
I certainly do.

We did not play Romo for how many years?
NE did not play Brady in his rookie year.
There are always exceptions to the rule, but they are exceptions that someone would not bet a team on.

Gb backup looked good last year as a rookie but he was the 3rd string?
Their backup from last year went some where else.

We can certainly disagree on personal preferences lol
But Jacksonville and Cleveland have not put together a roster where they may place 8 offensive players in the probowl this year.

We are so close to being that dominant team - 2 to 3 more probowl level players.
With the rapidly rising cap, we can at least get 1-2 of those in free agency next year.

 

[Daillest88]

All I know is Dak looks way better than Quincy, who was a 2nd round pick, and couldn't throw a spiral in the NFL for crying out loud! Bill got him to 10-6 so Dak could at least be better than that.

Yeah but see we don't have bill parcells or Sean Payton we have Jason

 

[noshame]

This is a great point. Romo typically starts seasons slowly. Especially coming off injuries. We will be lucky to be 2-2 to start the season.

5 TD's and 2 victories in two games by Romo was more wins than we had in the entire other 14 games. And he might have thrown for more TD's also.

Yes and if the Giants hadn't of inexplicably figured out a way to lose the first game when they had it in the bag we would have started the season 0-1

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Deep thoughts with Cowboy Roy now on Cowboys Zone.

 

[Aven8]

Yeah but see we don't have bill parcells or Sean Payton we have Jason

I know, I know.........

 

[boyzjunkie]

All I know is Dak looks way better than Quincy, who was a 2nd round pick, and couldn't throw a spiral in the NFL for crying out loud! Bill got him to 10-6 so Dak could at least be better than that.

Bill is not here anymore.

 

[BigStar]

All I know is Dak looks way better than Quincy, who was a 2nd round pick, and couldn't throw a spiral in the NFL for crying out loud! Bill got him to 10-6 so Dak could at least be better than that.

We were the #1 ranked D too

 

[Vinnie2u]

I can't see this coaching staff putting a Tebow package for Dak. Adaptability is not their strong suit.

 

[waldoputty]

I can't see this coaching staff putting a Tebow package for Dak. Adaptability is not their strong suit.

I still remember Garrett with a 'space age' offense that he was trying to get the offense coordinator job?
Cannot remember how it was space age...

 

[Risen Star]

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2016...ackup-qb-situation-is-not-as-bad-as-you-think

This leads to my preferred method of dealing with a major injury to Tony Romo in 2016. Roll Dak Prescott out there and use a full-on running attack sprinkled in with a package of throws that suit his abilities. The Cowboys offensive line along with Ezekiel Elliott will be asked to do the heavy lifting. But with Prescott you can add in another element. Quarterback draws, sprint rollouts and bootlegs with run/pass options, even zone-reads out of the backfield. Add in short and intermediate throws and try to grind down the clock, turn the ball over as little as possible, and protect the defense sounds like a better recipe than what we saw last year. When things go bad on offense, instead of forcing a throw or taking a sack, Prescott can just use his legs to get what he can.

This is exactly why I lamented the Prescott pick. I don't want that kind of QB. They're garbage. They're fake. An athletic simpleton just running around with no rhyme nor reason. Dub him DP3. As in we're all hoping for a FG once in awhile. If you can't sustain a productive offense working entirely in the pocket if need be, and with a full playbook and route tree, I have no interest in you as a pro QB.

BTW, the answer to the question in the title of this nonsense is - "Because we're Cowboys fans."