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

[America's Cowboy]

Dak wasn't forced to do anything, he could have thrown it away.

Thrown it where?

Even if Dak had thrown it into the ground, he would have been flagged and y'all would still be complaining today.

 

[America's Cowboy]

All those straw man records. LMAO!
Dak is trash! I'm gonna enjoy watching him crumble this year.

I'll enjoy watching you whine even more once Dak gets extended.

 

[Sydla]

Jeez Louise, it’s a figure of speech.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...card-playoff-score-live-updates/72196709007/#

Packers quarterback Jordan Love threw three touchdown passes and led Green Bay seven touchdown scoring drives with a near-perfect 157.2 passer rating in his first playoff game to dominate the Cowboys from start to finish with a 48-32 beatdown in Dallas.

Figure of speech. LOL.

And the main point is that the defense gave the ball back to Dak with a chance to tie and he promptly threw a bad pick that gave the Packers ridiculous field position, they scored and the route was on. So Dak had a major hand in that game getting out of hand in the first half.

 

[Sydla]

Figure of speech. LOL.

And the main point is that the defense gave the ball back to Dak with a chance to tie and he promptly threw a bad pick that gave the Packers ridiculous field position, they scored and the route was on. So Dak had a major hand in that game getting out of hand in the first half.

*** rout ***

 

[shabazz]

Take Mahomes out of the conversation , then who?

I know everyone wants to use Mahomes as their example but the rest of the league must build around someone not named Mahomes.

I put Burrow at #2 but he's had great receivers around him so not comparable

Josh Allen will be interesting to watch now that his talent has gone off to other teams.

Perhaps the most comparable Qb to Mahomes was Brady......the man put up numbers mostly with no- names (randy moss not withstanding) AND without a running game.

Very few truly elite qbs.....but teams have to pay them anyway

 

[Adreme]

I mean Dak played "well" for a half in part because the game was out of reach and the Packers were basically playing soft on defense trying to prevent any big plays and quick scores.

Only the Dak fans give him a pass because hey guys, he tore it up against soft zones and a prevent defense...........

Fact is Dak was DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE along with the defense, for that game being over when it got to 27-0. Anything after that point in the game is just stat stuffing. If that impresses you, great.

The game was only out of reach because the defense could not step up. 27-7 at halftime is not out of reach when we saw a team come back from 27-0 after playing FAR worse on offense in the first half just the previous year in the playoffs. I guess in your mind 2 years ago doesn't count. Or lets put it in more context, the last time we saw a team go up 27 points in the playoffs, prior to the Cowboys game, that team lost, so I bet that team (Chargers) REALLY wishes your version of reality was true.

Meanwhile the way the game actually played out after that showed why no team in the history of the playoffs has won when their defense gives up 6 TDs on the first 7 possessions. The offense was scoring and if the defense could have managed to actually get some stops we had a game. I also love the idea that somehow the GB defense was letting them score because they took the foot off the gas but they decided to let the offenses keep going full steam for... reasons.

Any honest assessment of the game is the offense was bad for all but the last drive in the first half and the defense was historically bad all game. When the defense plays in a way that the game is unwinnable I struggle to honestly understand how people can blame the offense for not doing something that has never been done, especially when we were told ALL year this was a team built on defense.

 

[Sydla]

The game was only out of reach because the defense could not step up. 27-7 at halftime is not out of reach when we saw a team come back from 27-0 after playing FAR worse on offense in the first half just the previous year in the playoffs. I guess in your mind 2 years ago doesn't count. Or lets put it in more context, the last time we saw a team go up 27 points in the playoffs, prior to the Cowboys game, that team lost, so I bet that team (Chargers) REALLY wishes your version of reality was true.

Meanwhile the way the game actually played out after that showed why no team in the history of the playoffs has won when their defense gives up 6 TDs on the first 7 possessions. The offense was scoring and if the defense could have managed to actually get some stops we had a game. I also love the idea that somehow the GB defense was letting them score because they took the foot off the gas but they decided to let the offenses keep going full steam for... reasons.

Any honest assessment of the game is the offense was bad for all but the last drive in the first half and the defense was historically bad all game. When the defense plays in a way that the game is unwinnable I struggle to honestly understand how people can blame the offense for not doing something that has never been done, especially when we were told ALL year this was a team built on defense.

27-7 at half is out of reach. In history, that would be have been a top ten of all time comeback and considering the sheer number of playoff games played, 27-7 would have been a historical comeback. So yeah, the game was largely out of reach. And yes, when teams get up big, sometimes they give up points because the play softer on D trying to make the other team use up clock to score instead of giving up quick scores. This isn't some foreign concept or logic here. The concept of garbage stats wasn't just created out of thin air to explain, in part, Dak's 2nd half here.

It shouldn't be a struggle at all to figure this out. When the offense and the QB play as poorly as they did, leading to a 27-7 halftime deficit, they deserve a lot of blame too. Just because the defense sucked more doesn't mean, "gee guys, they were worse so let's just give Dak a pass here........"

And then when you look at the overall context with Dak and his playoff struggles at times, it's bizarre to me that people are really trying to give him a pass here or try to figure out ways to not blame him, in part, for the Packers loss.

 

[Adreme]

No one said the defense was good. They were terrible. But that doesn't change the fact the QB wasn't all that good either.

To say that no QB could have won that game is missing the freaking point. If Dak went out there and tore it up from the start of that game and lost a 49-43 barn burner, that's one thing and might make your point more palatable. But that didn't happen. Dak was dreadful in the first half and was a major factor in why the Packers built a 27-0 lead in the first half (along with the defense as a cause). You can't change that reality. You can't just say, gee, I am not going to put any blame on Dak despite the fact he played terribly, especially in the first half, because the defense also played bad. It's bizarre that people would give a player, who played poorly, a pass simply because someone(s) also played poorly.

Yes, Dak playing poorly or inconsistently in another big/playoff game is a concern. How is it not?

Your point would be valid if and only if I could not point to the other 11 QBs in the playoffs and say "they also had at least one awful half". EVERY single one of them I can say that about. We watch all 12 QBs in the playoffs have awful halves (not sure what the correct plural is here) and in some cases multiple. The difference is not having a defense be historically bad.

I know you want some massively high scoring game but playoff games are typically not that. Just to demonstrate briefly what I mean by that: 4 wild card games, 4 divisional round games, 2 championship games, and a Super Bowl gives 11 total games and with 2 teams playing there are 22 teams who can score points in those 4 quarters (hoping I explained this well). Of those 22 the Cowboys loss was the 4th most points scored in the playoffs only passed by the Packers 48, Texans 45 (Browns were just horrid on all fronts), and 49ers 34 in NFC Championship game. This is not to say the offense was great but merely to show that playoff tend to be lower scoring and you do not typically see 40 point games like what you were saying was the "standard" for a not horrible game.

 

[SultanOfSix]

The game was only out of reach because the defense could not step up. 27-7 at halftime is not out of reach when we saw a team come back from 27-0 after playing FAR worse on offense in the first half just the previous year in the playoffs. I guess in your mind 2 years ago doesn't count. Or lets put it in more context, the last time we saw a team go up 27 points in the playoffs, prior to the Cowboys game, that team lost, so I bet that team (Chargers) REALLY wishes your version of reality was true.

Meanwhile the way the game actually played out after that showed why no team in the history of the playoffs has won when their defense gives up 6 TDs on the first 7 possessions. The offense was scoring and if the defense could have managed to actually get some stops we had a game. I also love the idea that somehow the GB defense was letting them score because they took the foot off the gas but they decided to let the offenses keep going full steam for... reasons.

Any honest assessment of the game is the offense was bad for all but the last drive in the first half and the defense was historically bad all game. When the defense plays in a way that the game is unwinnable I struggle to honestly understand how people can blame the offense for not doing something that has never been done, especially when we were told ALL year this was a team built on defense.

The defense was undermanned. They already had no Diggs for the entire year. Then Gilmore suffered a shoulder injury in the previous game that clearly impacted him. The team lost Vanderesch earlier in the year who was both the brains and the brawn of the LB corp. They’ve been a smaller team on the line for years, and had safeties playing LB. That’s why the defense stunk. You guys make it seem like this was the same healthy defense earlier in the year and to an extent in the previous years and playoff performances and just laid a turd. None of their play takes anything away from the fact that the offense couldn’t do anything in the first half.

 

[Rockport]

27-7 at half is out of reach. In history, that would be have been a top ten of all time comeback and considering the sheer number of playoff games played, 27-7 would have been a historical comeback. So yeah, the game was largely out of reach.

It shouldn't be a struggle at all. When the offense and the QB play as poorly as they did, leading to a 27-7 halftime deficit, they deserve a lot of blame too. Just because the defense sucked doens't mean, "gee guys, they were worse so let's just give Dak a pass here........"

And then when you look at the overall context with Dak and his playoff struggles at times, it's bizarre to me that people are really trying to give him a pass here.

What’s bizarre is your total lack of football awareness blaming everyone but the QB. But it is highly entertaining for comedic purposes so thanks.

 

[Sydla]

Your point would be valid if and only if I could not point to the other 11 QBs in the playoffs and say "they also had at least one awful half". EVERY single one of them I can say that about. We watch all 12 QBs in the playoffs have awful halves (not sure what the correct plural is here) and in some cases multiple. The difference is not having a defense be historically bad.

I know you want some massively high scoring game but playoff games are typically not that. Just to demonstrate briefly what I mean by that: 4 wild card games, 4 divisional round games, 2 championship games, and a Super Bowl gives 11 total games and with 2 teams playing there are 22 teams who can score points in those 4 quarters (hoping I explained this well). Of those 22 the Cowboys loss was the 4th most points scored in the playoffs only passed by the Packers 48, Texans 45 (Browns were just horrid on all fronts), and 49ers 34 in NFC Championship game. This is not to say the offense was great but merely to show that playoff tend to be lower scoring and you do not typically see 40 point games like what you were saying was the "standard" for a not horrible game.

Now you are just rambling and making points that aren't really applicable to the discussion.

I don't care about the other 11 QBs. I care about ours. These are the realities. He's struggled to be consistent in big games over his career. He's struggled in playoff games at times. Heading into that Packers game, there were A LOT of questions not from Cowboys fans but from media/analysts about what kind of Dak we'd get and would he take that next step.

He did not. He struggled in the first half (along with the defense). He had two interceptions that led to two TDs - one on a short field and one on a return for a TD. He was a major factor in that game being 27-0. with a couple minutes left on the clock in the first half.

It's not about me wanting it to be high scoring, whatever that means. The point was that if Dak went out there and played great and the defense just got roasted, you'd have a fair point about defending Dak. But Dak didn't have a great game. He had an inconsistent, at best, game and was so dreadful in the first half that the Cowboys were down by 27 points at one point. Again, that's just reality. It's not a spin, it's not made up, it's not inaccurate. It's the reality. Dak played poorly, the defense played poorly, Dallas was down 27-0.

And then with all this going on, you put this in the context of Dak and his overall playoff track record. It's not great. It's pretty inconsistent where he looks great one week - take TB two years ago - and then the next week looks like a different QB. He played like a MVP for much of 2023 and then the playoffs start and he looks like a backup for a half.

 

[Diehardblues]

I put Burrow at #2 but he's had great receivers around him so not comparable

Josh Allen will be interesting to watch now that his talent has gone off to other teams.

Perhaps the most comparable Qb to Mahomes was Brady......the man put up numbers mostly with no- names (randy moss not withstanding) AND without a running game.

Very few truly elite qbs.....but teams have to pay them anyway

At any given time there’s only a handful or less of Elite QB’s but the rest of the league has to attempt to build as good of contender as they can without one.

Using those teams with those QB’s isn’t the example most of the league can follow.

 

[Sydla]

The defense was undermanned. They already had no Diggs for the entire year. Then Gilmore suffered a shoulder injury in the previous game that clearly impacted him. The team lost Vanderesch earlier in the year who was both the brains and the brawn of the LB corp. They’ve been a smaller team on the line for years, and had safeties playing LB. That’s why the defense stunk. You guys make it seem like this was the same healthy defense earlier in the year and to an extent in the previous years and playoff performances and just laid a turd. None of their play takes anything away from the fact that the offense couldn’t do anything in the first half.

But let's be clear. The defense failed........... MAJORLY........... in that game. It was a pretty pathetic performance all around from them and the DC.

That being said, their suckiness shouldn't then be cover for the fact that our so called upper echelon QB also really struggled for half the game and was also directly responsible for the Cowboys being down by 27 points with a couple minutes left in the first half. It's mindnumbing to me that people are really trying to argue we shouldn't put much blame on the QB (or even the offense in general).

 

[Sydla]

What’s bizarre is your total lack of football awareness blaming everyone but the QB. But it is highly entertaining for comedic purposes so thanks.

I am pretty much blaming everyone including the QB.

If I had my druthers, McCarthy would have been sent packing after that debacle. The fact that our only major change - coaching staff, roster, etc - was because our DC got hired away by the Commanders is pretty depressing. For as much as Jerry complained about how this wasn't acceptable, his offseason said yeah, it was OK, let's basically run it back.

 

[Adreme]

The defense was undermanned. They already had no Diggs for the entire year. Then Gilmore suffered a shoulder injury in the previous game that clearly impacted him. The team lost Vanderesch earlier in the year who was both the brains and the brawn of the LB corp. They’ve been a smaller team on the line for years, and had safeties playing LB. That’s why the defense stunk. You guys make it seem like this was the same healthy defense earlier in the year and to an extent in the previous years and playoff performances and just laid a turd. None of their play takes anything away from the fact that the offense couldn’t do anything in the first half.

The loss of Diggs was largely mitigated by the massive rise of Bland. The bigger point though is that they were still being sold, and playing, like a defensive first team all throughout the year until it was time for them to prove it. If your defense is only good when everyone is healthy then your defense is not good because in the NFL you are not going to have everyone healthy come playoff time. That is just a fairy tale. With a 17 game grind you are going to be down multiple starters come playoff time. That is just how it goes in the NFL.

Meanwhile you are missing the overall point. The overall point is that a unit that is historically bad all game gets far more blame than the unit that was bad for a half. That does not mean the unit that was bad for a half gets no blame but only that when there is a defense that puts up such a bad performance that it would take an unprecedented offensive performance to win that defensive failure gets the overwhelming majority of the blame because it is thanks to them that nothing else matters.

 

[Sydla]

The loss of Diggs was largely mitigated by the massive rise of Bland. The bigger point though is that they were still being sold, and playing, like a defensive first team all throughout the year until it was time for them to prove it. If your defense is only good when everyone is healthy then your defense is not good because in the NFL you are not going to have everyone healthy come playoff time. That is just a fairy tale. With a 17 game grind you are going to be down multiple starters come playoff time. That is just how it goes in the NFL.

Meanwhile you are missing the overall point. The overall point is that a unit that is historically bad all game gets far more blame than the unit that was bad for a half. That does not mean the unit that was bad for a half gets no blame but only that when there is a defense that puts up such a bad performance that it would take an unprecedented offensive performance to win that defensive failure gets the overwhelming majority of the blame because it is thanks to them that nothing else matters.

Great but the issue here is that people are absolutely trying to find ways to give Dak a pass for that game. That's ridiculous. His play was a major factor in the fact this team got boat raced in 28 minutes. It would have taken a historical comeback to win that game so this attempt at pretending Dak COULD have won that game if the defense suddenly started playing better after the first 28 minutes isn't based in any reality but largely in wishful thinking.

The Cowboys lost to the Packers in a home playoff game:

• The defense sucked. Sucked royally. They provided little hope in any chance of a comeback
• The QB struggled, again, in a playoff game. His play in the first half pretty much helped put that game out of reach by half time.
• The coaches, especially the DC, didn't have their finest day

No one should have a problem with those three statements.

 

[Kwyn]

This sounds suspicious.

The Zone doesn’t tolerate any narrative that doesn’t revolve around the Cowboys QB being solely responsible not only for playoff wins but also Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness for all Zoners.

Try again Bucky.

 

[Rockport]

I am pretty much blaming everyone including the QB.

If I had my druthers, McCarthy would have been sent packing after that debacle. The fact that our only major change - coaching staff, roster, etc - was because our DC got hired away by the Commanders is pretty depressing. For as much as Jerry complained about how this wasn't acceptable, his offseason said yeah, it was OK, let's basically run it back.

Then quit coming here everyday crapping on Dak like it’s all his fault. It’s embarrassing for you although entertaining for most of us.

 

[Sydla]

Then quit coming here everyday crapping on Dak like it’s all his fault. It’s embarrassing for you although entertaining for most of us.

It was his fault as it was the fault of the defense.

I come here to push back on the notion that some of you push that we shouldn't hold Dak responsible for the debacle, instead give him a pass because the defense also really sucked that day. Dak was a major factor in that loss. His play led directly to a 27-0 hole that was largely impossible to get out of.

The only embarrassing thing here is the inability of people like yourself to just say, "Yeah, Dak was bad that game too and needed to be much, much better than he was.......... he helped put us in a major hole.........." Instead we get, "Gee guys, the defense was really awful so because of that, I think we should kind of stop criticizing Dak for his poor performance, because even if he played great, we would have lost........."

LOL

 

[GINeric]

He will be better than Dak after he gets up to NFL speed.

He definitely should be better than Dak. He was a top 5 pick, Dak was a 4th rounder. Now if he doesn't have a better rookie year than Dak then delete your account. Show us how much you believe in him.