Dak Prescott "Garbage time stats" Question

G2

Taco Engineer
Messages
24,928
Reaction score
26,517
I never claimed CLE “let us” do anything. Did CLE play defense the exact same way in the 4th quarter or not? If not, what did they do different?

Are you guys unwilling or unable to answer the question?
That's not an argument, I'm certain that all teams play differently throughout the game. You still didn't answer the question.
If anything the defense was gassed.
 

phildadon86

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,477
Reaction score
32,236
So I’m on the the record as saying l like Prescott and think the team can win games with him. I also haven’t said anything about the last INT because that was Cooper and the game was over by that point.

For me, the garbage time argument comes into play against people trying to say how perfectly incredible he was, the team is letting him, don’t be surprised if he walks (which he might) and takes his talent to a team that supports him because that’s the only reason he’s not winning.

I think it’s more fair if you view garbage time accumulation as a team stat instead of as a QB. That game was over at half time, and he contributed to that. I understand he had a great first quarter with a little over 150 yards. He also disappeared in the second and third quarter, totaling under 80 yards across the both of them. At least I think those numbers are right—I didn’t check before writing. If they are, that leaves over 250 yards in the 4th quarter while you’re down by 3 possessions, which is what many people would consider garbage time.

I know they came back to within one possession, but look at what happened when Cleveland realized they needed to play again—they scored in a single play. Imagine if they actually tried like that the entire second half instead of letting up.

Again, I see it as more of a team stat. There are reasons (and bigger ones that Prescott) as to why they were in that situation like a nonexistent defense, play calling that waits until they’re losing to open it up, and a special teams unit that puts the “special” in “special teams.”

But Prescott bears some responsibility for his disappearing act and some of the turnovers, including his poor pocket awareness and tendency to take really, really, really bad sacks (which is my biggest criticism of him). He’s not the biggest reason the team ended up with garbage time, not even close. But he was at least part of the reason.
You mean after our braintrust decided to go for the most ridiculous squib kick I have ever seen and gave them the ball at the 50?
 

75boyz

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,654
Reaction score
10,477
All this. It was the same with the Falcons game. They were happy to chew up the clock and play the % in the knowledge that in the end they would only need to recover an onside kick to win. They messed it up and lost.

The question is why has Prescott generally put up big numbers in second half of games chasing a huge deficit over the past 18 months? The only game we came back to win was versus the hapless and mistake riddled Falcons. We have lost every other game with the same formula.

Even if we have the worst defense ever (which we didn't last season) why is the offense not rolling in the first half or even first three quarters of games? That is a big concern whatever way you slice it up.

It never registers. The Offense that gets behind by 2 scores or more will, in fact be defended differently. Conceding or giving up yards and trying to prevent a one play touchdown. Such is the basics of a prevent.

Deep zone defense was played with safety help over the top to "prevent" one play bomb touchdowns was played. During the 41-14 deficit while the yards were being padded. There really is no argument just simple denial that people won't accept that he achieves a majority of passing yards while behind and facing deep zone coverage.
Simple.

Go Cowboys
 

InTheZone

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,520
Reaction score
7,122
The same people who claim Dak gets garbage time stats also claim "I never felt like we were out of the game" with Romo. It's just an agenda.
Back to back game ending picks with several others trying to be thrown. How's no one getting this? Oh well
 

75boyz

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,654
Reaction score
10,477
Dak threw for almost 300 yards in the fourth quarter against a prevent defense after being down 41-14. He almost threw 8 interceptions.

Sunday wasn't his fault by a long shot, but he padded his numbers massively.

Doesn't get to be any more basic understanding than this.
 

LACowboysFan1

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,640
Reaction score
7,578
It never registers. The Offense that gets behind by 2 scores or more will, in fact be defended differently. Conceding or giving up yards and trying to prevent a one play touchdown. Such is the basics of a prevent.

Deep zone defense was played with safety help over the top to "prevent" one play bomb touchdowns was played. During the 41-14 deficit while the yards were being padded. There really is no argument just simple denial that people won't accept that he achieves a majority of passing yards while behind and facing deep zone coverage.
Simple.

Go Cowboys

Question then becomes is Dak capable of putting up monster numbers if the team's not behind? Lots of people criticized Aikman because his stats were so weak, but since he had Emmitt and a power running game he didn't have to throw. But so many say he was an extremely accurate quarterback, in which case there's evidence that if he wanted to, or had to, he could have thrown the ball much more and had many more touchdowns and lots more yardage.

I think we may never find out...
 

Pessimist_cowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,898
Reaction score
15,264
Dak is a turnover machine so far. Can’t do that and expect to win. Let’s play 4 quarters of clean football. Shouldn’t be too much to ask for someone that wants an absurd amount of money.
 

phildadon86

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,477
Reaction score
32,236
Dak threw for almost 300 yards in the fourth quarter against a prevent defense after being down 41-14. He almost threw 8 interceptions.

Sunday wasn't his fault by a long shot, but he padded his numbers massively.
Oh we are doing the almost game? He almost threw for 6 touchdowns but 2 were too high.
 

phildadon86

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,477
Reaction score
32,236
Dak is a turnover machine so far. Can’t do that and expect to win. Let’s play 4 quarters of clean football.
Dak and turnover machine should never be used in the same sentence. One of his best attributes up until this year was protecting the football. Hes also never had a defense to put him in a position to throw 60 times a freaking game either.
 

Pessimist_cowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,898
Reaction score
15,264
Dak and turnover machine should never be used in the same sentence. One of his best attributes up until this year was protecting the football. Hes also never had a defense to put him in a position to throw 60 times a freaking game either.
Stop waiting till you’re behind 20 to start moving the offense and scoring points then!? He literally does nothing every single game in the 2nd and 3rd quarters. Have to play 4 good quarters. Let’s see some consistency from the QB.
 

Haimerej

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,083
Reaction score
6,776
The pick wasn't technically game ending. They were down 11 points. Even if they scored a TD they needed a 2 point conversion, onside kick and FG just to tie.
 

ClintDagger

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,302
Reaction score
1,918
Their narrative can't be justified so crickets. Explain how a team having large point leads correlate to playing simpler offense and softer zone coverages on defense and it's like a foreign language.

But oh well

I mean it is the Dallas Daksters

Not Dallas Cowboys I guess

Go Cowboys
Maybe it’s low football IQ or maybe willful ignorance like you said.
 

phildadon86

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,477
Reaction score
32,236
Stop waiting till you’re behind 20 to start moving the offense and scoring points then!? He literally does nothing every single game in the 2nd and 3rd quarters. Have to play 4 good quarters. Let’s see some consistency from the QB.
Lets see the defense get some stops. If we had an average defense we are 4-0 at worst 3-1 at this point.
 

LACowboysFan1

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,640
Reaction score
7,578
Back to back game ending picks with several others trying to be thrown. How's no one getting this? Oh well

"Game ending picks" are usually thrown because the quarterback is in desperation mode, they can't win with a field goal, need two scores quickly, etc. He throws passes that ordinarily he wouldn't, the chances of a pick are greatly increased because the defense knows that's what's going to happen. In the Cleveland game, even if he got the td and 2 pts, they still lose, barring another miracle onside recovery.

My point is that yes the game ended with the pick because Cleveland could then run the clock out, but any quarterback in the same position would do the same.

And spare me the "Rodgers wins games with last second throws" argument. In that situation the quarterback throws to an area, usually with many players in the area, both offensive and defensive, it's totally up to his receiver to get in the right position and make the catch, or the defender to get in the right spot for the pick. Why the quarterback gets all the praise for a "Hail Mary" pass completion is beyond me, once the ball leaves his hand it's out of his control completely.

So yes the pick ended the game, but it hardly was the reason they lost....
 

SpaceCowboy99

Well-Known Member
Messages
603
Reaction score
792
Can we just get 4 f00king quarters of clean, good Quarterbacking?! Ill take some check downs and and field management just stop turning the ball over. Stop disappearing for half the game.

I couldn't care less at this point that he is able to come roaring back against soft prevent. I want him to play consistently for 4 quarters.

Right now it's like waiting until the night before it's due, to do your research paper. Cramming an all nighter and receiving a B- or C and being happy with it.

It's not sustainable.
 
Top