News: Dak Prescott may need more help for Super Bowl season

[CCBoy]

Dak Prescott may need more help for Super Bowl season
http://thelandryhat.com/2017/05/22/dak-prescott-more-help-super-bowl-season/



Past sophomore Super Bowl winning quarterbacks shared common pieces in their supporting casts that the Dallas Cowboys may be missing.
Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott is attempting to achieve something only four quarterbacks in NFL history have accomplished before him: win a Super Bowl in his sophomore year. Those quarterbacks include the following: Seattle Seahawks Russell Wilson, Pittsburgh Steelers Ben Roethlisberger, New England Patriots Tom Brady and St. Louis Rams Kurt Warner.

Interestingly, there are two similarities among each of those teams that won the Super Bowl aside from their quarterbacks’ experience. They each had a competent run game and a strong defense. Check out the numbers below:

2013 Seattle Seahawks: #1 defense points against, #4 rushing offense

2005 Pittsburgh Steelers: #3 defense points against, #5 rushing offense

2001 New England Patriots: #6 defense points against, #13 rushing offense

1999 St. Louis Rams: #4 defense points against, #5 rushing offense...

 

[Longboysfan]

We're getting there....

 

[ActualCowboysFan]

2016 Dallas Cowboys: #5 defense points against, #2 rushing offense

Doesn't seem too farfetched

 

[DFWJC]

Same story last 7 years or so. The defense has to be way better to consider a SB run.
For awhile it was both the oline and defense.
More recently, obviously, it's just the defense.
They're young and hungry, and the FO is putting more emphasis there. Maybe the D can make the jump soon.

 

[CCBoy]

Same story last 7 years or so. The defense has to be way better to consider a SB run.
For awhile it was both the oline and defense.
More recently, obviously, it's just the defense.
They're young and hungry, and the FO is putting more emphasis there. Maybe the D can make the jump soon.

If that is all one see's is a perpetual pendulum...why bother to stay around?

Better yet, keep a pendulum of negativity in your plain sight...not ours.

 

[DFWJC]

If that is all one see's is a perpetual pendulum...why bother to stay around?

Better yet, keep a pendulum of negativity in your plain sight...not ours.

What negativity?
I said this
"They're young and hungry, and the FO is putting more emphasis there. Maybe the D can make the jump soon."

 

[jwooten15]

At least we now have the potential to be good on defense. And if not this year, we can look forward to the future because investments and changes are finally being made.

For the past 5 years, we all knew what we had with the defense. There are many unknowns now - but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

I'd say we can POSSIBLY get the NFCCG or even SB in 2017, but, if health is on our side, 2018 may be the prime opportunity for a legit championship run.

 

[DFWJC]

At least we now have the potential to be good on defense. And if not this year, we can look forward to the future because investments and changes are finally being made.

For the past 5 years, we all knew what we had with the defense. There are many unknowns now - but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

I'd say we can POSSIBLY get the NFCCG or even SB in 2017, but, if health is on our side, 2018 may be the prime opportunity for a legit championship run.

Careful, you might be accused of being negative and asked to leave because you stated fact about defenses the last 5 years.
I agree with you that the future looks brighter now on D--at least hopeful--than it has in recent years. At least moving in the right direction.
That should be considered a positive.

 

[jwooten15]

Careful, you might be accused of being negative and asked to leave because you stated fact about defenses the last 5 years.
I agree with you that the future looks brighter now on D--at least hopeful--than it has in recent years. At least moving in the right direction.
That should be considered a positive.

What's ironic about your "pendulum of negativity" is that the article posted by the OP infers that the defense needs to improve if Dak hopes to have a magical sophomore season -- which is exactly what you said.

Can't please 'em all.

 

[jwooten15]

A couple stats I find interesting is that in 2016, we had the 5th ranked scoring defense in the league. And going off memory, I think we were the 2nd ranked rushing offense.

So if we can just keep up with that standard, I think we have a shot in 2017. Granted, who knows how all the young guys will perform on defense, but here's to hoping we'll be pleasantly surprised.

 

[CCBoy]

What's ironic about your "pendulum of negativity" is that the article posted by the OP infers that the defense needs to improve if Dak hopes to have a magical sophomore season -- which is exactly what you said.

Can't please 'em all.

Take a stance then, how good do you think this defense ends up by the end of regular season...without using an imaginary dart board for effect?

....oh, and don't throw out a worse than the past SEVEN years as a corner stone.

 

[DFWJC]

Take a stance then, how good do you think this defense ends up by the end of regular season...without using an imaginary dart board for effect?

....oh, and don't throw out a worse than the past SEVEN years as a corner stone.

Can't say I've seen anyone, anywhere say this defense will be worse than the last 7 years.
Maybe you should explain yourself, CC, instead of disrespecting people for no good reason.

Anyway, by definition, making a prediction IS reflecting uncertainty....well, because it IS uncertain.

It seems most of us hear are cautiously optimistic. If that's not enough for you, that's your problem, not ours.

You start a thread and proceed to jump on anyone that doesn't say exactly what you want and in the exact manner that you want it said...and even then it's because you only chose selective parts of their reply.

 

[Reverend Conehead]

Dak Prescott may need more help for Super Bowl season
http://thelandryhat.com/2017/05/22/dak-prescott-more-help-super-bowl-season/



Past sophomore Super Bowl winning quarterbacks shared common pieces in their supporting casts that the Dallas Cowboys may be missing.
Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott is attempting to achieve something only four quarterbacks in NFL history have accomplished before him: win a Super Bowl in his sophomore year. Those quarterbacks include the following: Seattle Seahawks Russell Wilson, Pittsburgh Steelers Ben Roethlisberger, New England Patriots Tom Brady and St. Louis Rams Kurt Warner.

Interestingly, there are two similarities among each of those teams that won the Super Bowl aside from their quarterbacks’ experience. They each had a competent run game and a strong defense. Check out the numbers below:

2013 Seattle Seahawks: #1 defense points against, #4 rushing offense

2005 Pittsburgh Steelers: #3 defense points against, #5 rushing offense

2001 New England Patriots: #6 defense points against, #13 rushing offense

1999 St. Louis Rams: #4 defense points against, #5 rushing offense...

Thanks, those are really telling stats.

 

[CCBoy]

Can't say I've seen anyone, anywhere say this defense will be worse than the last 7 years.
Maybe you should explain yourself, CC, instead of disrespecting people for no good reason.

Anyway, by definition, making a prediction IS reflecting uncertainty....well, because it IS uncertain.

It seems most of us hear are cautiously optimistic. If that's not enough for you, that's your problem, not ours.

My association is with the here and now...and if one throws out that another had better understand, then HE needs to comply with the same standard presented.

I disagreed with the references, even if justified by a core of doubt. I was attacking cause of doubt, but if that is too PERSONAL for someone, then stay out of the kitchen or use one's own purported standard!

The OP set a standard for meeting a projection for a Super Bowl visit in today's NFL. It has also been shown that Dallas is in that zip code on the defensive side of the ball.

One does NOT have to dust off the moth balls when looking at those exact measures for merit...even if it makes one feel personal and insulted. That part of the deal is YOURS. Not what I stated.

But if your conviction was truly in apprehension, stand to task and project...or YOU are the one playing a game. Maybe facts will come to light and with a handle if you attempted to explain further in a discussion than you insulted me and my brothers and dark dungeon secrets. If you are going to root for a team...then gosh damn it, root for it. If not a discussion matter, stay out of conversation. Or none will be offered and you will be the shallower for not taking upon some simple and realistic points. Your quarter although...

 

[DC Cowboy]

A couple stats I find interesting is that in 2016, we had the 5th ranked scoring defense in the league. And going off memory, I think we were the 2nd ranked rushing offense.

So if we can just keep up with that standard, I think we have a shot in 2017. Granted, who knows how all the young guys will perform on defense, but here's to hoping we'll be pleasantly surprised.

we are establishing a culture of winning. What we need to go alone with that is a competitive environment in practice. Continue to draft well and we will have a competitive team for years to come. We all know injuries can derail a team but 2 years ago we just wasn't competitive at all.

 

[DFWJC]

My association is with the here and now...and if one throws out that another had better understand, then HE needs to comply with the same standard presented.

I disagreed with the references, even if justified by a core of doubt. I was attacking cause of doubt, but if that is too PERSONAL for someone, then stay out of the kitchen or use one's own purported standard!

The OP set a standard for meeting a projection for a Super Bowl visit in today's NFL. It has also been shown that Dallas is in that zip code on the defensive side of the ball.

One does NOT have to dust off the moth balls when looking at those exact measures for merit...even if it makes one feel personal and insulted. That part of the deal is YOURS. Not what I stated.

But if your conviction was truly in apprehension, stand to task and project...or YOU are the one playing a game. Maybe facts will come to light and with a handle if you attempted to explain further in a discussion than you insulted me and my brothers and dark dungeon secrets. If you are going to root for a team...then gosh damn it, root for it. If not a discussion matter, stay out of conversation. Or none will be offered and you will be the shallower for not taking upon some simple and realistic points. Your quarter although...

Ok, CC

 

[CCBoy]

Ok, CC

Don't want real talk, just stay out of the conversation then. Once can't hide behind two sides of fear...even if a jerk.

So you don't have an excuse left to your own knowledge...fear then, and fear now, or state one's level of confidence backed by fact, not a burn barrel sense of agenda.

 

[DFWJC]

Don't want real talk, just stay out of the conversation then. Once can't hide behind two sides of fear...even if a jerk.

name calling now, I see.
If I'm cautiously optimistic about this defense...but clearly cautious based on recent real data...that would be your problem, not mine, in not being able to handle an honest opinion.

 

[CCBoy]

name calling now, I see.
If I'm cautiously optimistic about this defense...but clearly cautious based on recent real data...that would be your problem, not mine, in not being able to handle an honest opinion.

No, present real data...but sense of value was presented on values taken...learn the difference, present some real data for consideration...or just shut up.

You are on ignore, already...

 

[DFWJC]

No, present real data...but sense of value was presented on values taken...learn the difference, present some real data for consideration...or just shut up.

You are on ignore, already...

Sounds good CC.

pretty sure any sane person reading this thread would be wondering what on earth your beef was.
cheers anyway.