Dak had best wake up and smell the roses

[Typhus]

If stats mattered, at all, that would make sense. But they don't, so.......

Dak struggled mightily last year in key moments. Continued red zone failure exposed his lack of confidence in his accuracy.

The continued struggles to score touchdowns against good defenses. Poor pocket presence. The inability to hit receivers in tight windows.

Dak is just terminally average.

True, but reality is there are no options.
Except maybe an Andy Dalton signing would be a decent BU.

 

[glimmerman]

I understand but I sense you’re trying to detach the importance and connection to the QB.

I agree it’s a team stat but like in baseball pitchers are assigned wins and losses. We see the same kind of stats accumulated for QB’s as well. Not in the same fashion but there is the attachment. Much like with coaches.

What would our record have been if we had Rush being our starting QB. Lol. It’s obvious that the QB is the important position..

 

[Dre11]

I understand but I sense you’re trying to detach the importance and connection to the QB.

I agree it’s a team stat but like in baseball pitchers are assigned wins and losses. We see the same kind of stats accumulated for QB’s as well. Not in the same fashion but there is the attachment. Much like with coaches.

How am I trying to detach the Qb? He's a "Part" of the team. But he don't win and lose games by himself, Baseball is the perfect example of this, glad you brought it up, pitchers rarely pitch complete games, yet if a starting pitcher pitches at least 5 innings and the team wins, he's credited the win even if he's pulled after 5. Or the pitcher on record that's in the game when his team takes the lead for good, even if he's he's pulled. Yet he's not the sole reason for the win, his team won whike he's on the bench.

 

[Diehardblues]

How am I trying to detach the Qb? He's a "Part" of the team. But he don't win and lose games by himself, Baseball is the perfect example of this, glad you brought it up, pitchers rarely pitch complete games, yet if a starting pitcher pitches at least 5 innings and the team wins, he's credited the win even if he's pulled after 5. Or the pitcher on record that's in the game when his team takes the lead for good, even if he's he's pulled. Yet he's not the sole reason for the win, his team won whike he's on the bench.

Yes but the pitchers are still associated with wins and losses.

It’s not necessarily about a responsibility of blame or credit. Just an association or attachment with the wins and losses.

 

[Diehardblues]

What would our record have been if we had Rush being our starting QB. Lol. It’s obvious that the QB is the important position..

We don’t know. Probably not as good. Wonder how it would have been with Mahommes. Maybe better?

 

[Dre11]

Yes but the pitchers are still associated with wins and losses.

It’s not necessarily about a responsibility of blame or credit. Just an association or attachment with the wins and losses.

responsibility is what's being talked about though, especially when it's Dak as an individual who's trying to get paid, just like Zeke and Lawerence who was a part of the same record.

 

[Diehardblues]

responsibility is what's being talked about though, especially when it's Dak as an individual who's trying to get paid, just like Zeke and Lawerence who was a part of the same record.

I understand but QB’s have always been more attached to the win/ loss record. Just the way it is. It doesn’t mean they’re directly responsible. It’s just another means to measure their impact.

 

[Dre11]

I understand but QB’s have always been more attached to the win/ loss record. Just the way it is. It doesn’t mean they’re directly responsible. It’s just another means to measure their impact.

just because it's been done that way, doesn't mean it's an accurate measure. do you you really think it's accurate. there's no way it can be accurate. perfect example, Tannehill completed 7 passes vs Ravens in the playoffs.
do you really believe he was the reason for the win? yet he gets a win in his win column, is that accurate.

 

[Dre11]

We don’t know. Probably not as good. Wonder how it would have been with Mahommes. Maybe better?

with our defense? not good

 

[Diehardblues]

just because it's been done that way, doesn't mean it's an accurate measure. do you you really think it's accurate. there's no way it can be accurate. perfect example, Tannehill completed 7 passes vs Ravens in the playoffs.
do you really believe he was the reason for the win? yet he gets a win in his win column, is that accurate.

It’s why it’s necessary to watch all of the games. Stats don’t always tell the story. If those passes were critical then they could have been a big part of why they won.

 

[Dre11]

It’s why it’s necessary to watch all of the games. Stats don’t always tell the story. If those passes were critical then they could have been a big part of why they won.

but not the reason. correct?

 

[Dre11]

It’s why it’s necessary to watch all of the games. Stats don’t always tell the story. If those passes were critical then they could have been a big part of why they won. Plus how he managed the game.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...g-after-teams-win-and-lose-quarterbacks-dont/

 

[Diehardblues]

but not the reason. correct?

It depends. I don’t think there’s always a straight line.

You’re using more of an exception to the rule with Tannehil. Which there always is exceptions.

But I’d say he played at a higher level in the playoffs and made some big throws. I wouldn’t consider him the MVP on that offense though. Henry was a beast.

 

[Diehardblues]

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...g-after-teams-win-and-lose-quarterbacks-dont/

Id agree with much of that article . Which makes me think you aren’t grasping my point.

There’s always exceptions to the rule but generally great QB’s are associated with teams with winning records.

 

[Dre11]

It depends. I don’t think there’s always a straight line.

You’re using more of an exception to the rule with Tannehil. Which there always is exceptions.

But I’d say he played at a higher level in the playoffs and made some big throws. I wouldn’t consider him the MVP on that offense though. Henry was a beast.

it's not an exception, there's oodles of these types situations throughout football because it's a team game and no 1 player can win or lose

 

[Diehardblues]

it's not an exception, there's oodles of these types situations throughout football because it's a team game and no 1 player can win or lose

Now I’m certain you are misunderstanding my point.

I haven’t said one player can win or lose.

I’m saying QB’s are associated with the win/loss record. Generally QB’s are more recognized if their team is successful.

 

[Diehardblues]

There’s been a few QB’s in NFL history who had great careers on lesser teams. Not many but a few.

But I wouldn’t define lesser teams as just those not winning a Super Bowl. I’d say more of a team that wasn’t a consistent contender never playing for a championship.

There’s been many great or HOF QB’s who never won a championship cause they weren’t on great enough teams but more commonly their teams were elevated by their performance and presence.

And there’s been lesser QB’s who have won championships because of the greater teams around them.

IMO based on what I’ve seen thus far Dak would fall in the latter category. Needing a greater team around him.

 

[Diehardblues]

Dak was more recognized with a 13-3 record than he was with his best passing season and #1 offense which led to 8-8. It’s about impact.

And how QB’s become associated with their teams won/loss record.

Now if you lead the league in passing every year and your team still suks then you’ll probably still be recognized. But that isn’t the norm. Eventually great QB’s are surrounded with enough support for them to elevate the team to a higher level.

 

[Jake]

If stats mattered, at all, that would make sense. But they don't, so.......

Dak struggled mightily last year in key moments. Continued red zone failure exposed his lack of confidence in his accuracy.

The continued struggles to score touchdowns against good defenses. Poor pocket presence. The inability to hit receivers in tight windows.

Dak is just terminally average.

"Ignore metrics and pay attention to my feelz." Yeah, sure.

For people who talk a lot about football some of you have no clue what you're watching. It really is remarkable.

 

[CCBoy]

The addition of Dalton does not affect the Cowboys' feelings toward Prescott, who was given the exclusive franchise tag in March at a cost of $31.4 million. The Cowboys have wanted to sign Prescott to a multiyear contract since last offseason but have not been able to come to terms on a deal that would make him one of the highest-paid -- if not the highest-paid -- quarterbacks in the NFL.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29127712/cowboys-signing-qb-andy-dalton-one-year-deal