Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by DonaldM, Jul 3, 2022.
I heard 46
sorry i dont agree to disagree.
PFF reports 6 at 280 million . Ridiculous. They have not signed him yet that’s the projection . At the end that won’t be far from actual numbers . They are projecting 155 guaranteed . When your off the rookie deal and your not smelling playoff success why not franchise the guy like Dallas did with # 4. In other words at the end teams might be better off letting the rookie deal plus a franchise tag yr and if not in the hunt for the trophy good bye
Well.......... you have to evaluate if its because of your QB whether they are making the playoffs or not. Whats the point of throwing a way a good QB because he rest of your team sucks?
Cowboys franchising Dak they probably wind up overpaying.
I didnt say he was better than Roger or Montana.. and Ill agree with you though, Young was GREAT.
Dak is not great.
The Ravens with Trent Dilpher, 49ers with Kaepernick, the Eagles with Foles, the Bears with McMahon, the Giants with Phil Simms, etc, etc were great teams without great quarterbacks. There are many more teams who were great without great quarterbacks.
I didnt mention stats at all and Young would have been good in the system also...but if you think those 2 TEAMS were equal...well im not the one who is deluded.
bahahahhahhhahah... thats pretty much the respose I always have when people use your examples.... only you added a new one thats actually laughable, laughable and thats Kaeps 49ers as they were so great they didnt even win the SB.
Each team you mentioned, lets see.... Diler had possibly the greatest defense in the history of the NFL, 85 Bears is either 1 or 2 in that Raven argument, Giants had a GREAT defense with a top 3 all time individual defensive player..... see the trend here? The Eagles with Foles were not great and if Foles was the QB the entire season they do not win a SB.
Etc, etc???? keep going with that list now that you only have a few more great defenses to chose from.
Eagles had the 4th ranked D in the NFL in 17. That and running the ball profusely is why they got to and won the super bowl. Yes, Foles had a great super bowl, but the Eagles D hold the Hawks to 10 and completely squushing the Vikes in the playoffs are the reasons they got there.
No. Not running or passing.
Dak isn't nearly the runner some seem to think he is. That's not to say he can't be or isn't effective running the ball. He can do well running by taking advantage of what the defense gives him. But he is neither fast nor elusive. Just not the pure athlete Young was.
In what sport?
You said teams can rarely be great without great quarterbacks. I showed you why that statement wasn't accurate.
But here's a couple more quarterbacks who weren't great that played on great teams.... Brad Johnson, Mark Rypien, Joe Theismann, Randall Cunningham, Jeff Hostetler, Donovan McNabb, Jim Plunkett, Boomer Esiason..... ETC... ETC....
if you want more quarterbacks, I encourage you to do your own research from here on out. Please feel free to put more spins into it, but the bottom line is, teams can be great without great quarterbacks. There aren't a plethora of GREAT quarterbacks to begin with.
If there are that many GREAT teams, they can't be "Great." Every team that wins a SB isn't great. I can name a team better than almost everyone on your list that didn't win a SB.
RANDAL Cunningham never played fir a GREAT team. Subjective is a good word.
Cunningham played on some great Eagles and Vikings teams.
Teams have to play GREAT together to get to and win superbowls. A GREAT quarterback can't get their alone. But a GREAT team can get there and win it without a GREAT quarterback.
Thats why I disagreed with your original statement.
The idea is to be a threat and we saw the offense without the threat of him having the ability to get rushing yards. I agree, he's not a running QB like Young. Which still boggles my mind why they didn't scheme in more play action under center.
Exactly. I think when people hear they are going to have him run more they think of of it as becoming a significant part of the offense, and that will not be the case. It likely will just mean a couple more designed plays per game where Dak keeps the ball on a QB draw or keeper around end, and maybe him being a little quicker to tuck and take off when the pass rush gets too heavy.
I agree on the play action from under center. On the rare occasion the team does that it seems like Dak has performed well. I think sometimes in the shotgun he takes too long to survey they field before deciding where to throw the ball (I think that happened to Romo as well the older he got), but with the play action starting from center he expects it to freeze the defense for a second and makes a decisive throw.
I agree, that's a fact. Also, in shotgun the QB has to take his eyes off from downfield to see the snap coming. It's a split second, but it doesn't help. I'm just not a fan unless you at the very least run an occasional draw out of shotgun. In most game situations of course. There's a time for shotgun and it's usually when there's no other option but to pass.
Not even close when comes to running with the ball.
I saw he was going for the Watson deal and I would be surprised if he/agent goes for a 6 at 280 when Watson got 5 at 230M, all guaranteed. What has Watson proven more than Murray?