Bucky Brooks: "It's a myth that elite QBs single-handedly carry their teams to wins"

Sydla

Well-Known Member
Messages
61,491
Reaction score
94,766
GB owned them the entire first half. If you can’t acknowledge that, then you’ve got serious issues.
I never said they didn’t. But Dak was a major problem in that first hand and actually was given a chance by the defense to mount a drive and tie the game but Dak promptly threw a terrible interception deep in our own territory.

And let’s all note you STILL CANNOT admit you were wrong. It’s almost comical now.
 

Rockport

AmberBeer
Messages
46,580
Reaction score
46,004
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
I never said they didn’t. But Dak was a major problem in that first hand and actually was given a chance by the defense to mount a drive and tie the game but Dak promptly threw a terrible interception deep in our own territory.

And let’s all note you STILL CANNOT admit you were wrong. It’s almost comical now.
Wrong about what? You moving the goal posts nit picking every word? GTHOH.
 

Flamma

Well-Known Member
Messages
24,116
Reaction score
20,690
That's what people just don't see to understand. Dak and Romo were fools gold. Just good enough to make you believe. But not good enough to compete with the high caliber teams.
This is one thing I don't agree with. Garoppolo, Purdy, Goff, Wentz/Foles, they're all good enough to compete, but not Dak or Romo? Or were they just all on really good teams? If we go to just reaching a championship game, we can get into some really average QBs. Tannehill, Bortles, Case Keenum.

A perfect example should be Matt Stafford. The second he left Detroit he's wearing a ring. A very good team can make up for a lot. The QB just can't be reckless. That's why Rodgers couldn't get past the 49ers and Garoppolo despite being ten times better.
 

Rockport

AmberBeer
Messages
46,580
Reaction score
46,004
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
This is one thing I don't agree with. Garoppolo, Purdy, Goff, Wentz/Foles, they're all good enough to compete, but not Dak or Romo? Or were they just all on really good teams? If we go to just reaching a championship game, we can get into some really average QBs. Tannehill, Bortles, Case Keenum.

A perfect example should be Matt Stafford. The second he left Detroit he's wearing a ring. A very good team can make up for a lot. The QB just can't be reckless. That's why Rodgers couldn't get past the 49ers and Garoppolo despite being ten times better.
He’s only here for one reason.
 

Chasing6

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,503
Reaction score
6,437
1. No one has stated that a QB regardless of caliber should single handedly carry a team.
2. Elite QB's do however step up in big moments and make the most of the opportunities they are given - that's what makes them ELITE
Mahomes played like crap in the first half of the SB. Defense kept them in the game.

A muffed punt inside the Niners 15 yard line and a missed extra point allowed the game to go into OT.

However, people can keep claiming Mahomes won the game. It is laughable.
 

Flamma

Well-Known Member
Messages
24,116
Reaction score
20,690
Mahomes played like crap in the first half of the SB. Defense kept them in the game.

A muffed punt inside the Niners 15 yard line and a missed extra point allowed the game to go into OT.

However, people can keep claiming Mahomes won the game. It is laughable.
It's not one game that defines a QB, it's an entire body of work. People are going to give him more credit because of what he's already done. He was drafted in 2017 and has already been in 4 SBs. That's not luck. The last two years they have a pretty good team, but I don't see the greatest show on turf, or the 90s 49ers. Just getting to the SB the last two years had a lot to do with him.
 

CowboyoWales

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,512
Reaction score
4,751
This is one thing I don't agree with. Garoppolo, Purdy, Goff, Wentz/Foles, they're all good enough to compete, but not Dak or Romo?
It's because the former (whilst having holes in their game), can be schemed around. As mentioned ad nauseam Dak's weakness is his composure (when trailing) which appears to permeate throughout the team, when your Talisman is having a 'Composure Moment'.

How do we build a Defense that's good enough to keep us in the game, whilst Dak finds himself (especially as some may argue in the 2 x SF loses, even with manageable deficits, he still comes up short ....in the biggest games)?......probably need Dak to concede on the length of contract to allow severe restructuring opportunities.
Mahomes played like crap in the first half of the SB. Defense kept them in the game.

A muffed punt inside the Niners 15 yard line and a missed extra point allowed the game to go into OT.

However, people can keep claiming Mahomes won the game. It is laughable.
So do the Chief's win that game with Dak? The optics (AT PRESENT), are that at 10-0 down Dak would of progressively: worried/panicked, composure issues would of started creeping in and possibly abandoned the running game (as Dak did vrs GB) because he knows the anxiety is rising as the time ticks down and he needs to expedite the deficit asap.
 

Chasing6

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,503
Reaction score
6,437
It's because the former (whilst having holes in their game), can be schemed around. As mentioned ad nauseam Dak's weakness is his composure (when trailing) which appears to permeate throughout the team, when your Talisman is having a 'Composure Moment'.

How do we build a Defense that's good enough to keep us in the game, whilst Dak finds himself (especially as some may argue in the 2 x SF loses, even with manageable deficits, he still comes up short ....in the biggest games)?......probably need Dak to concede on the length of contract to allow severe restructuring opportunities.

So do the Chief's win that game with Dak? The optics (AT PRESENT), are that at 10-0 down Dak would of progressively: worried/panicked, composure issues would of started creeping in and possibly abandoned the running game (as Dak did vrs GB) because he knows the anxiety is rising as the time ticks down and he needs to expedite the deficit asap.
Regardless of what or what not Dak would have done the Cheifs defense kept them in the game.

That did not happen in Dallas.
 

SultanOfSix

Star Power
Messages
12,893
Reaction score
8,063
But it was not simple man because of the bracket and the blitz. I don't have the time to get you to understand
I just explained the coverage on the play and what the defenders can do and did and you’re just saying it’s too complicated to explain. The only person who blitzed on the play was the LB and that left Cooks open for enough time to get the ball to him before Savage moved up. Dak didn’t see it because he was too busy staring down CeeDee the entire time. I think you’re just trying to make it seem like it takes a rocket scientist to dissect the defense to make Dak look less incompetent than he has been in such situations.
 

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member
Messages
58,149
Reaction score
38,758
The best teams with generally the best QB’s. It usually goes hand in hand.

But I’d agree they don’t actually single handily carry their teams.
 

Hadenough

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,998
Reaction score
13,455
This is one thing I don't agree with. Garoppolo, Purdy, Goff, Wentz/Foles, they're all good enough to compete, but not Dak or Romo? Or were they just all on really good teams? If we go to just reaching a championship game, we can get into some really average QBs. Tannehill, Bortles, Case Keenum.

A perfect example should be Matt Stafford. The second he left Detroit he's wearing a ring. A very good team can make up for a lot. The QB just can't be reckless. That's why Rodgers couldn't get past the 49ers and Garoppolo despite being ten times better.
Stafford was a first round QB. So was Tannehill, Goff, Wentz. Jimmy G was a 2nd rounder. Yes I agree a QB needs a team around him. Purdy is fortunate he is in a rare unique situation. The 49ers are a team that is stacked everywhere and they can do plug and play with QBs. But as we both saw last year, the 49ers great defense didn't really shut down Goff or Jordon Love like it does Dak. Dak completely shuts down for 3 quarters until the opponents defense gets a little tired and starts sitting on a lead rotating players.
Romo would keep swinging but always made that critical mistake. Romo should of been in an NFC championship on the Dez catch. Out of all those QBs mentioned above the only one I believe has a true chance at a future SB is Goff. I remember when people were saying Goff was a product of Sean McVay. I always knew that was BS. Goff also has always been a better big game QB than Dak but that's because of his pedigree.
 

America's Cowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
36,694
Reaction score
50,177
Stafford was a first round QB. So was Tannehill, Goff, Wentz. Jimmy G was a 2nd rounder. Yes I agree a QB needs a team around him. Purdy is fortunate he is in a rare unique situation. The 49ers are a team that is stacked everywhere and they can do plug and play with QBs. But as we both saw last year, the 49ers great defense didn't really shut down Goff or Jordon Love like it does Dak. Dak completely shuts down for 3 quarters until the opponents defense gets a little tired and starts sitting on a lead rotating players.
Romo would keep swinging but always made that critical mistake. Romo should of been in an NFC championship on the Dez catch. Out of all those QBs mentioned above the only one I believe has a true chance at a future SB is Goff. I remember when people were saying Goff was a product of Sean McVay. I always knew that was BS. Goff also has always been a better big game QB than Dak but that's because of his pedigree.
Loool. Poppycock.

Romo-infatuation to the rescue as usual.
 

shabazz

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,478
Reaction score
35,586
The best teams with generally the best QB’s. It usually goes hand in hand.

But I’d agree they don’t actually single handily carry their teams.
They don't carry their teams but they can carry an offense.

Mahomes proved that last season with the worst pass dropping Corp of no- name receivers the NFL has ever seen
 
Top