Dak numbers without Zeke

Idgit said:
He did have a stinker v. PHI, and wasn't very good tonight, missing some early chances to take control of the game, but too much is getting made of the Zeke angle. It'll be great to have him back, though, and he also ought to give an emotional lift to this team.
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly. Dak is very far from faultless - he had his fair share of poor games. My whole point is that trying to shoulder that as "Dak without Zeke" without taking into account the other factors is biased.
 
I remember when Russell Wilson had games like this to start his career and everyone had doubts, now he’s an mvp candidate. Go back and look at the stats
 
I haven't been blown away that's for sure. He has done some good things but there have been injuries up front, Dez has sucked, the opposing D has taken some things away like Beasly. It hasn't been easy but I will say this, I don't see much quit in the guy. I don't see a guy saying "I am scare or I am lost". Definitely not perfect but also he has some really really good qualities, as a person and player. I will hang in there with him for awhile.....
 
Last edited:
kevm3 said:
real fans understand that we have a 2nd year qb who is playing with an offensive staff that doesn't adjust and is also playing without their elite running back and a beat up Tyron Smith. We understand that looking at the past, not even Romo could break out of 8 and 8 seasons until we solidified our O line and had a historic year from Demarco Murray. We realize that maybe an offense predicated on an elite running game is going to look like garbage without an elite runner. We sit back and we appreciate the victory and move on.
Click to expand...

You missed my point.

With Dak as our QB going forward, we have no real shot at winning anything of significance.

We faced a TERRIBLE Oakland pass defense and we still needed luck to save our season.

Wave your pom poms all you want but we should be worried going forward.

We Dak "haters" are misunderstood.

We are no different than Garrett "haters"...

At the end of the day, we win despite both Dak and Garret and not because of them..
 
Troy Aikman in 1993 without Emmitt Smith.........45 completions on 74 attempts for 564 Yards and 2 Touchdowns and 2 Interceptions.....only sacked twice and lost both games.
 
starcity214 said:
You missed my point.

With Dak as our QB going forward, we have no real shot at winning anything of significance.

We faced a TERRIBLE Oakland pass defense and we still needed luck to save our season.

Wave your pom poms all you want but we should be worried going forward.

We Dak "haters" are misunderstood.

We are no different than Garrett "haters"...

At the end of the day, we win despite both Dak and Garret and not because of them..
Click to expand...

Define anything of significance? Does that mean a playoff game? NFC Championship?
 
IheartRomo said:
There's nothing wrong with that. He was a borderline HoF QB. Amazing player.

I just don't think that justifies crucifying a second year QB who has played very well overall for two years and still has things to work on. There are very, VERY few second year QBs that don't need a good supporting cast (Wentz included as evidenced last year) to be effective.
Click to expand...

This is why we are upset...

If second year QBs need to sit and learn, why did we not bring Romo back?

Why?!
 
starcity214 said:
You missed my point.

With Dak as our QB going forward, we have no real shot at winning anything of significance.

We faced a TERRIBLE Oakland pass defense and we still needed luck to save our season.

Wave your pom poms all you want but we should be worried going forward.

We Dak "haters" are misunderstood.

We are no different than Garrett "haters"...

At the end of the day, we win despite both Dak and Garret and not because of them..
Click to expand...

How on earth are we winning games then lol? If its not because of Dak or Garrett lol.......
 
starcity214 said:
This is why we are upset...

If second year QBs need to sit and learn, why did we not bring Romo back?

Why?!
Click to expand...

Romo was/is under contract lol. He chose not to come back. He left you Romo fans to go and be in the booth. Rightfully so. The guy chose his family and health over you guys.
 
starcity214 said:
This is why we are upset...

If second year QBs need to sit and learn, why did we not bring Romo back?

Why?!
Click to expand...

Romos body was broken down. He hadn't finished two consecutive games without injury in 2 years.

The opportunity to move on while shedding cap space coming this March (our QB will count half a million against the cap!?!) is hard to pass up when Romo's body had decided it had had enough. Absolutely loved the guy - he was amazing but it was decent timing.
 
starcity214 said:
This is why we are upset...

If second year QBs need to sit and learn, why did we not bring Romo back?

Why?!
Click to expand...
Because Romo would have gotten injured again and we'd still be playing Dak. You really think Romo survives getting sacked 12 times over a 2 game span?
 
AtomicDog said:
I'm concerned about Dak's play. He was all world last year. There's plenty of excuses why he hasn't been as good this year. But he still manages to get victories. If we win either of the GB or LA games we are 9-5 and in the thick of things. He didn't cause us to lose both of those games.
Click to expand...

he actually did cost us the gb game. isnt that the one where he ran it in for a touchdown instead of falling at the 1? that was 100% on him.
 
kevm3 said:
Funny how Derek Carr

Because Romo would have gotten injured again and we'd still be playing Dak. You really think Romo survives getting sacked 12 times over a 2 game span?
Click to expand...

Sure. Though Romo wouldn't get sacked that much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 66 more.
Total: 17,950 (members: 166, guests: 17,784)
Robots: 892

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
474,041
Messages
14,508,646
Members
24,207
Latest member
TomGiantsfan
Back
Top