One thing that sticks out to me is that the defense plays NOTABLY worse when he throws that much. Probably some correlation to time spent on the field. Seemed like Dallas started to find a winning formula down the stretch last year with Andy Dalton that didn't involve throwing the ball 40 times. If Dak throwing for a lot of yards doesn't lead to team success, then what good is it?
So go back to the Bill Parcells philosophy of "trying to pound a square peg into a round hole just because running is good" then? If so, cool.
As far as time spent on the field, Dallas easily won TOP last night 34:27 vs 25:33.
And your suggestion is to force run the ball against possibly the best run defense in the league and probably have the Cowboys to possess the ball even less than they did? I bet you think TB was smart for not forcing the run when it wasn't working for them. And Dallas has been HORRIBLE in run defense the past two years. Seems a little double-standardish to me.
Also, are you suggesting that the Cowboys win if Andy Dalton is the QB last night? Interesting if true. I completely disagree, but still interesting.
You say that the Cowboys won without Dak because they did not throw as often, yet I think it had to do more with playing against teams that picked 3rd, 5th, 10th and 14th in the NFL Draft. You know, the "not good teams" that Dak typically beats anyways? So I think I'm going to have to disagree with you there too.
But that's me. I look at the situations, circumstances, opponent and outcome and try to draw some conclusion. Some just outcome and miss quite a bit. Not saying outcome is not important, it is the most important single aspect, but it is hard to say that Dak throwing is a reason for losing when he may have been the biggest reason we were even semi-close to winning.
Sure, we still lost. But at least we had a chance due to Dak's passing. Hard to say we would have had a chance with our running game last night. Just sayin'.