Dak beat GB in post-season, Dallas’s defense lost it

[Diehardblues]

Eli. Brees. Brady, Rodgers, Ryan, all of them got huge contracts at the time of the contract. biggest/largest in the NFL and won eventually. Ryan made it to the superbowl and if not for a coaching blunder, they would have/should have won. Brady proceeded to take lesser than market value after his first large contract, but his situation was also different, he had a wife that made more than he did so he could do so.

The bigger argument which needs to be made is these QB’s keep these franchise competitive and contenders most years.

Singling out whether they win a championship after signing a big contract is spinning a fact to support an argument.

These Elite QB’s keep these teams on top. Wanting to argue it’s their inflated contract preventing the team from winning another SB is simply spinning a fact to support an opinion.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I’m not sure it matters. I don’t believe this dysfunctional organization could build a championship team around Mahomes or any of the greats this era assuming they could even stumble onto a talent as such.

It is what it is . Remember “ relative and interesting” is the Bar.

Well, they surely won't if they go down the poor cap management road.

 

[kskboys]

Eli. Brees. Brady, Rodgers, Ryan, all of them got huge contracts at the time of the contract. biggest/largest in the NFL and won eventually. Ryan made it to the superbowl and if not for a coaching blunder, they would have/should have won. Brady proceeded to take lesser than market value after his first large contract, but his situation was also different, he had a wife that made more than he did so he could do so.

Not the question.

 

[Diehardblues]

Well, they surely won't if they go down the poor cap management road.

I’m not sure it matters. How much better has our results been since we allegedly begun managing our cap better?

 

[Diehardblues]

Who thinks our dysfunctional organization has the ability to field a “ relative and interesting “ team without a Franchise QB?

These idiots couldn’t do it without Romo. I have no faith they can without Dak either.

Unfortunately we have to throw out the norms with this franchise.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Well considering hate is a human emotion I am confused on how you first claim I hate Dak and yet now claim it's not about Dak the human being.

As for Dak the QB, no I do not approve of the job he has done so far in Dallas and no I do not support giving him a big new contract or $37M franchise tag but rather allowing him to find a deal elsewhere and recouping the draft picks so this team can rebuild. I also support moving on from Jaylon Smith, Ezekiel Elliott, and Demarcus Lawrence too as that is my right as a football fan and human being.

potato man you are confused. so lets educate you. yes, hate is a human emotion, so is love. you can easily say you love "something", because it makes you feel good. you can easily say you hate something because you don't like it.....its commonly used terminology in english language, although a "thing" doesn't have a life or personality....so you can say you love a team. or hate a team, because it evokes strong emotional senses in you..

as human beings we have a innate need to associate ourselves with groups, and often in these associations we thus ride emotional roller coaster without impact on real life. so you love the cowboys...nothing wrong with that.....some go far and further, show their passion and emotion with painting their cars, dedicating rooms in their house, etc.....and thus anything with that "team", becomes part of emotional response, thus you can Hate DAK the "Player" without knowing him, its not him, but its part of him that's the player as a cowboy....his QB persona..... perhaps you would respect him as a person if you met him, but a mature person can easily separate situations.

its no different than you hating the enemy without knowing them, they may have children, family, etc. but you hate them, kill them in battle but you don't even know the man. you may say, I am defending my cause, they hate my cause and they stand for something I don't believe in.....still yet, you may shoot enemy without knowing them, only because they stand for something your don't believe in....this perhaps more life death and serious but still yet, ts for a common cause that a group of people bond and relate and "fight" for.

its simple psychology, you can google it and read about it.....

so you are utterly confusing Dak the human being, with Dak the Player, which are two different persona's and separate emotionally. in fact, you could perhaps meet a player, hate them as a person, but love their play on the field because he helps your team win. being able to separate the two are signs of maturity as a person. something I would never accuse you of potato man

 

[Diehardblues]

I’ve only seen one fan in this forum claim they hate Dak. He did so on the previous page . The rest simply offer their criticism and opinions.

It looks more like these fans hate other fans emotions and opinions of Dak. Big difference.

 

[Diehardblues]

Wouldn’t we expect emotion coming in a thread from a fan with Daks name in his screen name. How much objectivity would we expect .

Members really need to be more selective in choosing the threads they participate in. Otherwise the opponents could come off as inciting their emotions for a response .Basically troll behavior.

This is a Cowboys forum . There’s going to be emotion for some of the players these fans love. Let them have their Kumbaya and circle jerks. There’s plenty of other threads to have civil discussions.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

The bigger argument which needs to be made is these QB’s keep these franchise competitive and contenders most years.

Singling out whether they win a championship after signing a big contract is spinning a fact to support an argument.

These Elite QB’s keep these teams on top. Wanting to argue it’s their inflated contract preventing the team from winning another SB is simply spinning a fact to support an opinion.

This is inaccurate. You can't speak for fans you don't know. I agree that it's a business decision for a lot of teams but for many fans, it's different. Fans are interested in winning championships I think. Fans have no financial gain attached. All they have is the performance of the team.

There is no spinning involved here. There is a cap, which we all know. That limits the things you can do. If all of this were spin, then NFL teams would not care what percentage of cap is spent on the QB position. As a rule, the NFL tries not to spend more then something like 14/15% of the overall cap. It does matter, and more then that, look at the relationship between the top 3 players salaries as percentage of cap on winning teams. It's a hard cap, there is only so much to spend so if you spend more at the top, then there is less to spend along the way. It's just numbers.

 

[phildadon86]

I see so this is the new and improved version being trotted out to defend Dak. Dak won the game but the defense lost it. wow. Like Dak plays in some vacuum and nothing he does adds or takes away from the game. Turnover the ball naw it’s fine it’s the defense that should have stepped up. Hold onto the ball too long naw the defense and special teams should have gotten the ball back for Saint Dak. I’m almost curious as to what the next excuse will be?

Well I mean in regards to this particular game. Byron Jones cost us the game, Dak led us back and tied it up. Its just facts. He lost Jared Cook and Rodgers made a throw that really only Rodgers can make. It is what it is. But football is a team sport. Dak didnt cost us the game nor did he lose it. It was a culmination of a horrible gameplan (Linehan) and the defense not stepping up when it was needed.

Lets also not forget some really weird penalties (the huddle) that negated huge plays.

I am more mad at the coaching for that game to be honest. We ran them off the field in the regular season and decided to get cute in the playoffs and came out throwing. It was ridiculous.

 

[Diehardblues]

This is inaccurate. You can't speak for fans you don't know. I agree that it's a business decision for a lot of teams but for many fans, it's different. Fans are interested in winning championships I think. Fans have no financial gain attached. All they have is the performance of the team.

There is no spinning involved here. There is a cap, which we all know. That limits the things you can do. If all of this were spin, then NFL teams would not care what percentage of cap is spent on the QB position. As a rule, the NFL tries not to spend more then something like 14/15% of the overall cap. It does matter, and more then that, look at the relationship between the top 3 players salaries as percentage of cap on winning teams. It's a hard cap, there is only so much to spend so if you spend more at the top, then there is less to spend along the way. It's just numbers.

I said it didn’t probably matter with our franchise. Sarcasm

And I said signing these QB’s kept these teams in contention as contenders most years. The fact after signing them doesn’t result in as many championships is the spin.

Surely you’re not suggesting these teams begin releasing all of these franchise QB’s that they’ll be contending for and or winning more championships?

And I’d argue that contending more consistently for championships is the goal rather than just winning one every few decades if at all. That’s afterall the criticism on this franchise the last 25 years. Not as much winning one as not playing for one.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I’m not sure it matters. How much better has our results been since we allegedly begun managing our cap better?

Well, when we start doing that, I will be in a much better position to provide an answer to that question. However, continuing to sign bad deals is not going to solve that particular problem.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

The bigger argument which needs to be made is these QB’s keep these franchise competitive and contenders most years.

Singling out whether they win a championship after signing a big contract is spinning a fact to support an argument.

These Elite QB’s keep these teams on top. Wanting to argue it’s their inflated contract preventing the team from winning another SB is simply spinning a fact to support an opinion.

exactly.....listening to these guys, their approach is to draft a QB in the first round, give it 5 years, and then if you don't win, start over again...every 5 years.....their baseless argument is that we can't sign FA, yet they can't name the FAs they want signed for how much and they can't point to any team that build through FA and succeeded.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I said it didn’t probably matter with our franchise. Sarcasm

And I said signing these QB’s kept these teams in contention as contenders most years. The fact after signing them doesn’t result in as many championships is the spin.

Surely you’re not suggesting these teams begin releasing all of these franchise QB’s that they’ll be contending for and or winning more championships?

And I’d argue that contending more consistently for championships is the goal rather than just winning one every few decades if at all. That’s afterall the criticism on this franchise the last 25 years. Not as much winning one as not playing for one.

I read what you said. I just don't agree with that spin.

I would make this point, signing QBs to give yourself a chance to contend is acceptable and even wise, to the point that what you are paying is not self defeating. If that becomes too big a problem, then move on and find another QB. I don't believe in the whole idea of not being able to find another QB. This franchise, of all teams in the NFL has probably had more success with that then any other and that goes for Jerry's teams as well. He found Troy, all be it because of the work Coach Landry and the scouting department did. He found Tony and he found Dak, all above average to great QBs. See, the part of your statement that throws shade over this proposed idea is the part where you say, "contending more consistently". At what point does that start happening for Dak and the Dallas Cowboys? We haven't really seen that materialize with Dak as QB. I don't feel as if paying Dak an overpriced contract is going to help us with that either. You can't use "contending" as a given because it's not. We aren't contending. We are losing.

 

[Zekeats]

You think awfully high of yourself if you think you can say something to hurt my feelings. I haven’t seen one post from you that would warrant an iota of my respect.

Cute

 

[Diehardblues]

I read what you said. I just don't agree with that spin.

I would make this point, signing QBs to give yourself a chance to contend is acceptable and even wise, to the point that what you are paying is not self defeating. If that becomes too big a problem, then move on and find another QB. I don't believe in the whole idea of not being able to find another QB. This franchise, of all teams in the NFL has probably had more success with that then any other and that goes for Jerry's teams as well. He found Troy, all be it because of the work Coach Landry and the scouting department did. He found Tony and he found Dak, all above average to great QBs. See, the part of your statement that throws shade over this proposed idea is the part where you say, "contending more consistently". At what point does that start happening for Dak and the Dallas Cowboys? We haven't really seen that materialize with Dak as QB. I don't feel as if paying Dak an overpriced contract is going to help us with that either. You can't use "contending" as a given because it's not. We aren't contending. We are losing.

Perhaps we need to define “ contending more consistently “.

Cause I’d define it as one possession away on 2 different occasions from a championship appearance as Dak was in 2016 and 2018.

And look at all of these teams that have paid their QB’s. They are contending consistently too as well on the most part.

I understand the argument of managing the cap, etc, and it’s a sound argument but obviously paying your QB is the more proven tract to remain a consistent contender than continually looking for another franchise QB.

What you probably don’t agree with IMO is that Dak is a franchise QB.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Perhaps we need to define “ contending more consistently “.

Cause I’d define it as one possession away on 2 different occasions from a championship appearance as Dak was in 2016 and 2018.

And look at all of these teams that have paid their QB’s. They are contending consistently too as well on the most part.

I understand the argument of managing the cap, etc, and it’s a sound argument but obviously paying your QB is the more proven tract to remain a consistent contender than continually looking for another franchise QB.

What you probably don’t agree with IMO is that Dak is a franchise QB.

So we are clear, contending is specific to a championship. It's about contending for championships, nothing else matters to me.

For owners, it's probably different and really has nothing to do with championships. If they get one, that's fine but it's really about market share, TV ratings etc.

I don't count one play away or whatever else. Wins and losses are rarely just one play. You lose games on more then just one play or series. That, to me, is just excuses because you have opportunities throughout games to win games. It's almost never just one thing. It's always a lot of little things then turn into big things.

Paying QBs is fine but as I said previously, overpaying them is the problem. Also, paying guys like they are the best in the league, when in reality, they are not, is bad business. Dak is not one of the 5 best QBs in the League and yet, we are offering him a contract that suggests he is. Hell, he is apparently asking for the top contract and he's certainly not that. Now, I realize that there are those who do believe that he is among the top 5 but he's simply not. This is not my opinion, this is just the truth, it's not personal or anything else. So yeah, teams who have truly top QBs do compete consistently but that's because they judged the talent right, they structured the deal right and they are managing their teams responsibly.

I think every QB is a little different and each QB needs very specific circumstances to succeed. I think the difference between a Franchise QB and a failed QB is based on how you bring them along, how you manage the talent required for that QB to be successful. It's the Coaching you bring in, the scheme you devise, the drafting of talent and the way you use him. I don't think it's as simple as paying a guy record money simply because the owner sees him as good for the bottom line or throwing for lots of yards etc. I think there is more too it then that. Dak could easily be a Franchise QB but in order to do that, he needs more help then the contract he's asking for will allow.

That's how I see it.

 

[Diehardblues]

So we are clear, contending is specific to a championship. It's about contending for championships, nothing else matters to me.

For owners, it's probably different and really has nothing to do with championships. If they get one, that's fine but it's really about market share, TV ratings etc.

I don't count one play away or whatever else. Wins and losses are rarely just one play. You lose games on more then just one play or series. That, to me, is just excuses because you have opportunities throughout games to win games. It's almost never just one thing. It's always a lot of little things then turn into big things.

Paying QBs is fine but as I said previously, overpaying them is the problem. Also, paying guys like they are the best in the league, when in reality, they are not, is bad business. Dak is not one of the 5 best QBs in the League and yet, we are offering him a contract that suggests he is. Hell, he is apparently asking for the top contract and he's certainly not that. Now, I realize that there are those who do believe that he is among the top 5 but he's simply not. This is not my opinion, this is just the truth, it's not personal or anything else. So yeah, teams who have truly top QBs do compete consistently but that's because they judged the talent right, they structured the deal right and they are managing their teams responsibly.

I think every QB is a little different and each QB needs very specific circumstances to succeed. I think the difference between a Franchise QB and a failed QB is based on how you bring them along, how you manage the talent required for that QB to be successful. It's the Coaching you bring in, the scheme you devise, the drafting of talent and the way you use him. I don't think it's as simple as paying a guy record money simply because the owner sees him as good for the bottom line or throwing for lots of yards etc. I think there is more too it then that. Dak could easily be a Franchise QB but in order to do that, he needs more help then the contract he's asking for will allow.

That's how I see it.

Top 5 paid QB this year just represents market price. In a couple years his salary will be more commensurate to his ability . That’s how it works in the league for most QB’s.

Again , if your not sold Dak is a franchise QB, that’s fine .

And my hunch is the Cowboys will be more consistent contenders with Dak even if we over pay him than depending on our organization to find another franchise caliber QB . In the meantime we waste the talent we have accumulated surrounding him.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

This is inaccurate. You can't speak for fans you don't know. I agree that it's a business decision for a lot of teams but for many fans, it's different. Fans are interested in winning championships I think. Fans have no financial gain attached. All they have is the performance of the team.

There is no spinning involved here. There is a cap, which we all know. That limits the things you can do. If all of this were spin, then NFL teams would not care what percentage of cap is spent on the QB position. As a rule, the NFL tries not to spend more then something like 14/15% of the overall cap. It does matter, and more then that, look at the relationship between the top 3 players salaries as percentage of cap on winning teams. It's a hard cap, there is only so much to spend so if you spend more at the top, then there is less to spend along the way. It's just numbers.

there is no single formula and you forget one critical fact you ignored. the cap moves up, while the "AVERAGE" salary you used to calculate that percentage doesn't change....all those QBs that you called successful had large contracts, but they were competitive and they got to the superbowl and some won it...Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Roth, ...and if KC wins it this year, then that should dismiss your assumption...since Mahomes average salary is almost 50M, then that would make his salary almost 25% of the cap this year.....but we know his actual salary and money and how he counts against the cap in each single year is different.....

so you can't use average salary to calculate a percentage of salary cap in the first year of the contract and not look at it in the future and you also have to look at the actual salary for the year vs. the total cap.....you simply can't have it both ways.....

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

So we are clear, contending is specific to a championship. It's about contending for championships, nothing else matters to me.

For owners, it's probably different and really has nothing to do with championships. If they get one, that's fine but it's really about market share, TV ratings etc.

I don't count one play away or whatever else. Wins and losses are rarely just one play. You lose games on more then just one play or series. That, to me, is just excuses because you have opportunities throughout games to win games. It's almost never just one thing. It's always a lot of little things then turn into big things.

Paying QBs is fine but as I said previously, overpaying them is the problem. Also, paying guys like they are the best in the league, when in reality, they are not, is bad business. Dak is not one of the 5 best QBs in the League and yet, we are offering him a contract that suggests he is. Hell, he is apparently asking for the top contract and he's certainly not that. Now, I realize that there are those who do believe that he is among the top 5 but he's simply not. This is not my opinion, this is just the truth, it's not personal or anything else. So yeah, teams who have truly top QBs do compete consistently but that's because they judged the talent right, they structured the deal right and they are managing their teams responsibly.

I think every QB is a little different and each QB needs very specific circumstances to succeed. I think the difference between a Franchise QB and a failed QB is based on how you bring them along, how you manage the talent required for that QB to be successful. It's the Coaching you bring in, the scheme you devise, the drafting of talent and the way you use him. I don't think it's as simple as paying a guy record money simply because the owner sees him as good for the bottom line or throwing for lots of yards etc. I think there is more too it then that. Dak could easily be a Franchise QB but in order to do that, he needs more help then the contract he's asking for will allow.

That's how I see it.

the QB salaries are a moving target. what's top 5 today become 10-15 range in a few years. that's how it works....is watson a top 5 QB? but he got paid like one, in about 3 or 4 years it won't matter. and this is a QB driven league, there is only so many and QB salaries are out of control, so perhaps next CBA they may discuss some QB salary cap provisions...who knows.