Cowboys early 2000's teams defense of not moving on from Dak

Blitzen

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,201
Reaction score
2,396
Defense wins championships.
Some elite defenses win championships with okay QB play and efficient rushing offenses and a few opportune drives.

Those SB runs are rare and the elite defenses they built even more rare. The offense and QB must also never turn the ball over and still churn valuable clock and rest the defense. Those style of teams are not buildable with this franchise and owner. He likes offense way too much. Plus-why does a team such as that need a highly paid QB like Dak to run the offense?
 

Blitzen

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,201
Reaction score
2,396
I dont think so, they have major holes to fill in the run game, run defense and offensive line. You cant win in the playoffs if you cant run or stop the run and they were exposed. Dak and the passing game covered up the holes most of the year.
No-those teams have just as many holes as Dallas (just in different areas). You are overestimating Dak and the offense. The team is pretty well stocked and could compete (perhaps win) with Cooper Rush against all the listed teams.
 

chuck520

Active Member
Messages
318
Reaction score
133
No-those teams have just as many holes as Dallas (just in different areas). You are overestimating Dak and the offense. The team is pretty well stocked and could compete (perhaps win) with Cooper Rush against all the listed teams.
Thats an anyone but Dak emotional argument. They cant run and cant stop the run. Playoffs teams expose you if you cant do that especially not stopping the run.

Dak and the offense scored points to stop opposing offense from running the ball but in an even game our defense was in trouble.
We had 2 good receivers, Cee Dee and Cooks but not in every game. Gallup was a no-show and Ferguson was much better as the year went on. The run game non existent.
I believe he had the most TD passes and they scored the most points this year. Thats the strength of the team not the weakness.

In the playoff game vs Packers, with Dak not playing well it would have been nice to have the defense or run game bail us out but we had neither.

Think logically, do you remove the strength of the team or try to fill the holes? (run game, run defense, a third rec?)

If you think Cooper Rush could play as well then you have no credibility.
 

Blitzen

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,201
Reaction score
2,396
They had the same problem before Dak in the playoffs so the solution in another QB, which is unlikely you find someone better asap, you have the same result

This goes back 28 years, How many years has Dak been the QB of those?
I doubt that they do find someone better, but my base wish is an exit strategy from Dak ASAP because of the known playoff quantity. I’m okay with keeping Dak on the final year of his deal and drafting a QB to develop this upcoming draft.

Let the season play out, and see if the team can again make the playoffs (I would guess they would)-and what the team can do in the playoffs. The notion that fans are still in support of building with Prescott at this point is absurd to me based on playoff trends and almost a decade of performance.
 

Nav22

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,218
Reaction score
17,470
Some elite defenses win championships with okay QB play and efficient rushing offenses and a few opportune drives.

Those SB runs are rare and the elite defenses they built even more rare. The offense and QB must also never turn the ball over and still churn valuable clock and rest the defense. Those style of teams are not buildable with this franchise and owner. He likes offense way too much. Plus-why does a team such as that need a highly paid QB like Dak to run the offense?
Um, Peyton Manning and Aaron Rodgers needed elite defenses to win too.

Needing a great defense in the playoffs isn't some rare concept. You're trying to spin it that way because of your agenda.

Patrick Mahomes hasn't really lit it up this postseason. The Chiefs defense has been superb in 2 of their 3 playoff wins.

Are you suggesting those teams would've been better off with cheaper QBs?
:laugh::laugh::laugh:
 

Blitzen

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,201
Reaction score
2,396
Thats an anyone but Dak emotional argument. They cant run and cant stop the run. Playoffs teams expose you if you cant do that especially not stopping the run.

Dak and the offense scored points to stop opposing offense from running the ball but in an even game our defense was in trouble.
We had 2 good receivers, Cee Dee and Cooks but not in every game. Gallup was a no-show and Ferguson was much better as the year went on. The run game non existent.
I believe he had the most TD passes and they scored the most points this year. Thats the strength of the team not the weakness.

In the playoff game vs Packers, with Dak not playing well it would have been nice to have the defense or run game bail us out but we had neither.

Think logically, do you remove the strength of the team or try to fill the holes? (run game, run defense, a third rec?)

If you think Cooper Rush could play as well then you have no credibility.
The team was middle of the pack in defending the run and middle of the pack rushing the ball. Definitely need to improve on it. Houston had a terrible rushing attack and had to rely on Stroud for keeping the offense afloat (they also played in one of the weakest divisions and won it). Houston’s defense was just okay this season (pretty average as far as points against).

My general point is that the Cowboys played an offensive gamelan based on what they were most successful at. An offense that would feature Cooper Rush or a better journeyman QB would try to run the ball way more and would have generated more yardage as a result of more attempts and hopefully progress. The defense did not fold against every team when the score was close-that is emotional. The defense was built to take the ball away when leading and is the strength of the unit.

The team would have won probably 7-9 games this season with Rush and maybe would have qualified for the playoffs.
 

Blitzen

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,201
Reaction score
2,396
Um, Peyton Manning and Aaron Rodgers needed elite defenses to win too.

Needing a great defense in the playoffs isn't some rare concept. You're trying to spin it that way because of your agenda.

Patrick Mahomes hasn't really lit it up this postseason. The Chiefs defense has been superb in 2 of their 3 playoff wins.

Are you suggesting those teams would've been better off with cheaper QBs?
:laugh::laugh::laugh:
Are you suggesting that Dak and Peyton Manning or Mahomes or Rodgers are somehow comparable? I never said the defense does not play a big role in success. Wonder if you will answer my first question.
 

Ken

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,658
Reaction score
17,332
Peyton’s contract gave Denver the ability to have an elite defense.

If we want to draft and money to sign FA’s to get an elite defense somewhere else has to give.
I was referring to his Indy 2006 season. He had little to do with Denvers super bowls...agreed.
 

Nav22

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,218
Reaction score
17,470
Are you suggesting that Dak and Peyton Manning or Mahomes or Rodgers are somehow comparable? I never said the defense does not play a big role in success. Wonder if you will answer my first question.
No, Dak isn't as good as those all-time greats.

I brought them up to prove that even the VERY BEST QBs need a championship defense to win it all.

Again, sorry that the facts blow up your weak agenda. Nice try - you were 1000% trying to suggest that defense does NOT win championships as long as you have a stud QB.

"Some elite defenses..."
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
 

Nav22

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,218
Reaction score
17,470
It's so weird when fans are like, "Dak's not good enough! So the solution is to downgrade at the most important position on the field in order to save money!"
:lmao2: :lmao2: :lmao2:
 

Nav22

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,218
Reaction score
17,470
I doubt that they do find someone better, but my base wish is an exit strategy from Dak ASAP because of the known playoff quantity. I’m okay with keeping Dak on the final year of his deal and drafting a QB to develop this upcoming draft.

Let the season play out, and see if the team can again make the playoffs (I would guess they would)-and what the team can do in the playoffs. The notion that fans are still in support of building with Prescott at this point is absurd to me based on playoff trends and almost a decade of performance.
We already traded a pick for a former #3 overall pick.

Are we giving Trey Lance a shot to develop and prove himself or not?

If you've already given up on Lance, think about the logic in spending ANOTHER pick on a QB this April.
:laugh:
 

CowboyStar88

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,482
Reaction score
24,543
20 years later.
Not the same world regarding the availability of QBs
And not the same rules either. It’s been easier for these young guys to come in and be competitive. I remember it use to take 3-4 years for these guys. Definitely not the same world regarding QBs.
 

Blitzen

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,201
Reaction score
2,396
No, Dak isn't as good as those all-time greats.

I brought them up to prove that even the VERY BEST QBs need a championship defense to win it all.

Again, sorry that the facts blow up your weak agenda. Nice try - you were 1000% trying to suggest that defense does NOT win championships as long as you have a stud QB.

"Some elite defenses..."
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
No I was not. That’s called a straw man argument. My initial post was about my thoughts on moving on from QB’s such as Dak.

Someone made a post about how you have to get an elite defense and rushing offense to win in the playoffs. I made the point about those types of teams being very rare. Mahomes did not have an elite defense the 2019 playoffs where they advanced and won the games (including the SB) because of an elite offense. Rodgers won the only Super Bowl of this career by beating a Pittsburgh team that scored 25 points (not exactly elite defense). Brady had to beat a KC team by scoring touchdowns on every single drive that game-they then went on to beat LA by having an elite defensive game!

Maybe you should adopt the thought of-Super Bowl success can be had by a couple of different routes. Elite defense with good rushing attack and an offense that does not turn the ball over. Great coaching needed.

Consistent playoff winning takes an elite QB with an elite offense and an elite coach-mixed with good and sometimes great defense. You can also get some results with the elite QB, elite defense, elite coaching-pretty good offense.
 

Blitzen

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,201
Reaction score
2,396
We already traded a pick for a former #3 overall pick.

Are we giving Trey Lance a shot to develop and prove himself or not?

If you've already given up on Lance, think about the logic in spending ANOTHER pick on a QB this April.
:laugh:
Maybe the thought is not to just rely on Lance to develop more options (plus it’s not as though a 4th round pick on a QB is some enormous investment). You could go to camp with him and a rookie QB to see how they look in practices.
 

Blitzen

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,201
Reaction score
2,396
It's so weird when fans are like, "Dak's not good enough! So the solution is to downgrade at the most important position on the field in order to save money!"
:lmao2: :lmao2: :lmao2:
Or to try unknown quantities (could be an upgrade or downgrade). Teams must try to find out eventually anyway.
 

CTcowboy203

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,463
Reaction score
4,385
I have consistently opposed Dak getting his last contract for $40 million over 4 years with a no trade clause. I would not have done it and I would have let Dak walk in 2021 before I would give him that deal. Jerry franchised him then and should have sought a trade rather than make that deal. I have been firm in my objections. Not only was he not worth the $40 million then, but for only 4 years it guaranteed Dak would be back at the table demanding even more money as we expect he will this year. IMO opinion, as I expressed then, Dak never proved he was worth that kind of money, and the 2019 December Eagles game was a big red flag for me. If Jerry was going to give Dak $40 million, he should have held out for an 8 year agreement so he would not be facing what he is facing now. At least then the $40 million over 8 years would not put the Cowboys in a CAP nightmare. And he never should have agree to a no trade clause.

However, that was then. This is now. Dak got his deal. Jerry restructured it a couple of times pushing $36 MM into voidable years and there is no way around taking a huge CAP hit(dead money) unless Dak gets an extension. Jerry has the same decision now he had in 2021 except he can't trade Dak, he can't put a franchise tag on him, he really can't restructure his deal anymore, and he has no real backup plan. In 2021 if Jerry had traded Dak for a couple of first round picks, I think we would all have been okay. Today, we can cut Dak and get nothing for him, eat $62 MM in dead money while we are $20 MM over the CAP,or we can play him one more year with the same CAP implications, or restructure him pushing more of his salary into the voidable years which we will eat in 2025 if we move on from him, or we extend him and get a huge CAP save in 2024 so we can get under the CAP and begin to sign new players - going all in.

Without extending Dak and CeeDee there will be no going all in. If we don't extend Dak, we may as well cut him now because they really can't play him with him knowing he is gone after this year. And, btw, I am not sure CeeDee will agree to an extension either. If that happens, we are forced to pay him $17MM this year against the CAP, and he becomes a free agent at the end of the year. Without CeeDee's extension, making any all-in moves becomes more unlikely.

And if they do cut him loose and go with another QB, what are the options? Trey Lance who lost his job in SF to Brock Purdy and Sam Darnold? a rookie we draft at 24 in the first round? sign a free agent? Who? Josh Dobbs? Kirk Cousins? Sam Darnold? Moving on from Dak means losing seasons for at least the next couple of years, maybe a lot longer. Look at all the teams who drafted QBs and got nowhere. bu,bu,but CJ Stroud?

I just do not understand the logic of people who say they would rather lose constantly as long as Dak is not on the team, than have winning seasons with Dak and at least have a chance to win in the playoffs. I am not crazy about Dak, but I do not want to go through another period of losing seasons because we can't find a QB.
It’s because they think we can just pluck a qb off the qb tree and be better, they’ll reference mahomes, stroud or whomever but forget the dark years here and organizations like the jets, lions, and countless others who have for years been looking for franchise quarterbacks.
 

HanD

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,443
Reaction score
3,564
I dont think so, they have major holes to fill in the run game, run defense and offensive line. You cant win in the playoffs if you cant run or stop the run and they were exposed. Dak and the passing game covered up the holes most of the year.
Those teams have holes they worked around too. Very few teams don't have holes. That's today's salary cap era.
 

MikeyJones214

Well-Known Member
Messages
155
Reaction score
347
The guy that keeps saying the Cowboys need an elite all time defense to win the SB doesn't realize that those teams he's referencing had Dilfer and Brad Johnson as their starting QBs and this proves that if we somehow managed to build an elite defense, we don't need Dak and his salary, Rush could win with an elite defense...

In other words, either way, Dak is useless here because he "needs" and all time defense and if we had that, then Dak becomes useless in that scenario because our defense could make Rush a SB winning QB

Also, the 49ers have won 2 playoff games that were shootouts so defense isn't really what it used to be. The Packers beat us with a mediocre defense and their strength is offense.
 
Top