Dak vs Justin Fields

[Hadenough]

counting your chickens before all the eggs hatch....y ou know how that goes... the problem with the likes of you is that you will make a 1000 prediction, never coming back when you are wrong, but will gloat and bang the drums when y ou guess one right...

and I find it funny you seemingly wanting Dak to fail so you prove yourself right, instead of wanting to see the team succeed.... are you even a fan?

#2 offense in 2019. had by far the best offense in 2020 where it took additional two weeks after his injury for any QB to match his passing numbers.. now go and spin it.

2019 Dak was scoring 9 points when the defense showed up. 2020 Dak didn't do anything until the team was down 3 or 4 scores. Yeah he is real good under pressure. No I'm not a fan of Dak Prescott. He isn't as good as he thinks he is and he isn't worth what he getting paid. He always comes up short when it matters most. But when the games outta hand oh wait he looks good. That's because the other team took their foot off his throat.

 

[Steve007]

I am not consider Dak elite...never said that......... I consider Mahomes, Wilson, Rodgers great QBs at this point in their careers. but perhaps based on your definition we should examine them too...Rogers hasn't won anything in 10 years and only 1 superbowl in his career when he had a top 5 defense and some great players around him. so is he great?....neither has wilson won anything, who is 1-3 in the playoffs since he lost lynch ad the great legion of boom defense. so perhps we need to examine him, given he has had some nice pieces around him and great head coach.........mahomes has some nice tools around him in kelce, hill, watkins, and a very good OL, perhaps top 5 and some very good RBs around h im.....and he couldn't win it this year when there was an injury to the OL man....so perhaps, he is not great neither.....

I am basing these on your definition of good vs. great.

Rogers and Wilson shouldn't be used in any argument for Dak They both won Superbowls. Wilson has to run for his life because of his O Line. Wilson won a Superbowl on a rookie contract. Very unlikely Dak will ever be in the Superbowl. Rogers was 13th on the pay scale when he won. Rogers has made it to the NFC championship game the last 2 years.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

2019 Dak was scoring 9 points when the defense showed up. 2020 Dak didn't do anything until the team was down 3 or 4 scores. Yeah he is real good under pressure. No I'm not a fan of Dak Prescott. He isn't as good as he thinks he is and he isn't worth what he getting paid. He always comes up short when it matters most. But when the games outta hand oh wait he looks good. That's because the other team took their foot off his throat.

this is how bullshiet propogates...

we had 3 games where the team scored 9,9, 10 points. the game against philly where he played with injured shoulder and hand and didn't practice all week because of it. same team we scored 37 points againt them the first meeting. The saints game, when we scored 10 and they scored 12. with zeke and witten fumbling in crucial parts of the game, costing us scores (tell me I am lying about the fumbles). the other game was against new england and they scored 13, in a rain soaked game in new england... saints and patriots were ranked top 13, with patriots being the top defense in the league, giving up 14 points a game.....

so you have a pre mature ejaculation and celebrate that you are right....
philly had a top 10 defense and the first game as mentioned we spanked them with 37 points (but I am sure you will write up a spin why that doesn't count).
jets had a top 10 defense and we scored 22 (I am sure you are going to say we lost the game, but I am responding to your false 9 pts per game spin)....
chicago had a top 10 defense and we scored 24.
rams had #13 defense and we scored 44

or are you choosing games that we lost, played at 1:00 PM, after october, on grass with wind at least 9 miles per hour, coming from northwest, and temperature drop of 7 degrees during the game, for games played north of mississipi line!!!! in that case, you maybe right!!!!!

so spin away

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Rogers and Wilson shouldn't be used in any argument for Dak They both won Superbowls. Wilson has to run for his life because of his O Line. Wilson won a Superbowl on a rookie contract. Very unlikely Dak will ever be in the Superbowl. Rogers was 13th on the pay scale when he won. Rogers has made it to the NFC championship game the last 2 years.

I am not comparing rodgers and wilson as Ithink both are better than Dak....never said anything otherwise.... but you said great QBs win and elevate the team...so I just stated some facts....Rodgers hasn't won anything in 10 years. and Wilson is 1-3 and hasn't won anything since lynch. neither of them has succeeded or won anything without a dominant top 5 defense.... so was it them? or was it all these other great things around them...so should we consider them great? or are they just good? again, they are better than Dak.

Rodgers made it to the championship. so is that the new bar we measure against? or is it winning superbowls? you seem to be changing the standard.....

and you sound like you are hoping Dak never makes it to the superbowl. and as I have said it before, if he doesn't you will gloat. and you have already wrote that if he wins, its not him, its those around him. that's called a lose-lose situation where no matter what you do, you are considered a loser.

 

[Steve007]

this is how bullshiet propogates...

we had 3 games where the team scored 9,9, 10 points. the game against philly where he played with injured shoulder and hand and didn't practice all week because of it. same team we scored 37 points againt them the first meeting. The saints game, when we scored 10 and they scored 12. with zeke and witten fumbling in crucial parts of the game, costing us scores (tell me I am lying about the fumbles). the other game was against new england and they scored 13, in a rain soaked game in new england... saints and patriots were ranked top 13, with patriots being the top defense in the league, giving up 14 points a game.....

so you have a pre mature ejaculation and celebrate that you are right....
philly had a top 10 defense and the first game as mentioned we spanked them with 37 points (but I am sure you will write up a spin why that doesn't count).
jets had a top 10 defense and we scored 22 (I am sure you are going to say we lost the game, but I am responding to your false 9 pts per game spin)....
chicago had a top 10 defense and we scored 24.
rams had #13 defense and we scored 44

or are you choosing games that we lost, played at 1:00 PM, after october, on grass with wind at least 9 miles per hour, coming from northwest, and temperature drop of 7 degrees during the game, for games played north of mississipi line!!!! in that case, you maybe right!!!!!

so spin away

Your getting emotional again. It's not about you. Dak is average and that's OK, but now they are paying him top dollar. That's not a good plan to win a Superbowl. If you just root for Dak it's a win for you. If you want to see the Cowboys win a Superbowl it's not good to overpay an average quarterback.

 

[Steve007]

I am not comparing rodgers and wilson as Ithink both are better than Dak....never said anything otherwise.... but you said great QBs win and elevate the team...so I just stated some facts....Rodgers hasn't won anything in 10 years. and Wilson is 1-3 and hasn't won anything since lynch. neither of them has succeeded or won anything without a dominant top 5 defense.... so was it them? or was it all these other great things around them...so should we consider them great? or are they just good? again, they are better than Dak.

Rodgers made it to the championship. so is that the new bar we measure against? or is it winning superbowls? you seem to be changing the standard.....

and you sound like you are hoping Dak never makes it to the superbowl. and as I have said it before, if he doesn't you will gloat. and you have already wrote that if he wins, its not him, its those around him. that's called a lose-lose situation where no matter what you do, you are considered a loser.

You could say paying too much for really good quarterbacks will make it very difficult to win a Superbowl. Almost impossible with an average quarterback. Still using two Superbowl winning quarterbacks is a bad argument for Dak. I'm not changing the standard I'm showing you Rogers has way more success in the playoffs. Dak is 1-2 in the playoffs. Dak shouldn't be in the same conversation as Dak. Rogers is also the MVP. Who would you take Dak or Rogers?

 

[DandyDon1722]

Your getting emotional again. It's not about you. Dak is average and that's OK, but now they are paying him top dollar. That's not a good plan to win a Superbowl. If you just root for Dak it's a win for you. If you want to see the Cowboys win a Superbowl it's not good to overpay an average quarterback.

Excellent post.

 

[RonnieT24]

Excellent post.

You bring your intelligence into question when you cosign the opinion that a guy who ranks in the top 10 in almost every meaningful QB category is "average." There are 64 starters and primary backups in the NFL.. "Average" would rank somewhere in the 30's. Dak may not be elite or upper echelon but he's squarely in the "very good and getting better" category. The only thing "average" about him is his hairline.. He is easily better than 20-25 starters depending on your "rating system" and better than all the backups.. The "average" nonsense is a canard which reveals the intellectual integrity (or lack thereof) of the poster.

 

[Steve007]

You bring your intelligence into question when you cosign the opinion that a guy who ranks in the top 10 in almost every meaningful QB category is "average." There are 64 starters and primary backups in the NFL.. "Average" would rank somewhere in the 30's. Dak may not be elite or upper echelon but he's squarely in the "very good and getting better" category. The only thing "average" about him is his hairline.. He is easily better than 20-25 starters depending on your "rating system" and better than all the backups.. The "average" nonsense is a canard which reveals the intellectual integrity (or lack thereof) of the poster.

He is paid at the top 2 so he better perform like one. He is coming off a major injury. You hope he wont be worse, he won't be better. They say is a great leader and you say is a top 10 quarterback then no excuse they should go to the Superbowl . My opinion is he is fools gold. He is a good not great quarterback and now he is paid like a great quarterback. In 2 years he will be a big hit on the cap even with the cap increase it will be hard on the roster.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Your getting emotional again. It's not about you. Dak is average and that's OK, but now they are paying him top dollar. That's not a good plan to win a Superbowl. If you just root for Dak it's a win for you. If you want to see the Cowboys win a Superbowl it's not good to overpay an average quarterback.

wow, so I told you I used reverse psychology and you go back to this is emotion stuff.....so I guess you are back to being stubborn again?

so how is paying Dak is going to stop this team from getting to the superbowl?...

and as mentioned I state facts. he is a proven top 10 QB in the NFL. I don't say it. 50 FO personnel said so....but I guess I should ignore them and listen to you and couple of other people like you because your years of NFL expertise surpasses them by a couple of miles...is that it?

I root for the cowboys....but you are rooting against the cowboys and Dak, because seemingly its important for you to be right and gloat (another piece to your mental puzzle)....

.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

You could say paying too much for really good quarterbacks will make it very difficult to win a Superbowl. Almost impossible with an average quarterback. Still using two Superbowl winning quarterbacks is a bad argument for Dak. I'm not changing the standard I'm showing you Rogers has way more success in the playoffs. Dak is 1-2 in the playoffs. Dak shouldn't be in the same conversation as Dak. Rogers is also the MVP. Who would you take Dak or Rogers?

so first you said Dak is good not great. now you say he is average.... is alziemers and issue now?

they say people who bullshiet too much have short memories given they make up so many things they tend to forget what they made up....

I never compared Dak to those guys...my response wasn't that at all. so read more carefully... you keep trying to make that connection and you fail...

as mentioned before. I like wilson and rodgers over Dak..... I never said I did otherwise.... so why are you trying so hard to make that connection....perhaps that's your only line of argument and you can't argue your point otherwise...

I asked a simple question about those QBs....not compared them to Dak..... and that based on the standards you put forth.... but now you are arguing against yourself, since I used your own logic to ask you a simple question.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

He is paid at the top 2 so he better perform like one. He is coming off a major injury. You hope he wont be worse, he won't be better. They say is a great leader and you say is a top 10 quarterback then no excuse they should go to the Superbowl . My opinion is he is fools gold. He is a good not great quarterback and now he is paid like a great quarterback. In 2 years he will be a big hit on the cap even with the cap increase it will be hard on the roster.

OMG, too funny. this is a circular argument that's been had before.

as mentioned, Stafford was top paid, until a couple of years after that when he wasn't.
Ryan was top paid, until a couple of years after that when he wasn't.
Rodgers was highest paid, until a couple of years after when he wasn't
Wilson was highest paid, until a couple of years after when he wasn't.
watson was 2nd highest paid, until he wasn't.....

so now you argue that Dak is top 2 paid...ok, so in a couple of years, he will be 5-10 or lower....will that change your opinion? does that matter? is where their salary ranks compared to the rest important? so if he is not worthy now at #2 paid. when he is #10 paid, will that make him worthy and better?

and I agree with you on one thing (see we do have something in common)....we should go to the superbowl...that's what I expect as well....however, in your opinion, he should have already gone to the superbowl (at least that's how you come across)...in my opinion,the book hasn't finished.

and btw, in this post you say he is a good not great QB. another post you say he is average not good.

seems like you write things in response to a post to win an argument, and change your logic and standards from post to post. don't forget that all your responses are visible on the message board. so why do you feel you have to win every argument. is it because you think its bad to be wrong? somehow that makes you lesser? your answer will help to further analyze your mental make up....

 

[Steve007]

OMG, too funny. this is a circular argument that's been had before.

as mentioned, Stafford was top paid, until a couple of years after that when he wasn't.
Ryan was top paid, until a couple of years after that when he wasn't.
Rodgers was highest paid, until a couple of years after when he wasn't
Wilson was highest paid, until a couple of years after when he wasn't.
watson was 2nd highest paid, until he wasn't.....

so now you argue that Dak is top 2 paid...ok, so in a couple of years, he will be 5-10 or lower....will that change your opinion? does that matter? is where their salary ranks compared to the rest important? so if he is not worthy now at #2 paid. when he is #10 paid, will that make him worthy and better?

and I agree with you on one thing (see we do have something in common)....we should go to the superbowl...that's what I expect as well....however, in your opinion, he should have already gone to the superbowl (at least that's how you come across)...in my opinion,the book hasn't finished.

and btw, in this post you say he is a good not great QB. another post you say he is average not good.

seems like you write things in response to a post to win an argument, and change your logic and standards from post to post. don't forget that all your responses are visible on the message board. so why do you feel you have to win every argument. is it because you think its bad to be wrong? somehow that makes you lesser? your answer will help to further analyze your mental make up....

Average is not bad. Dak wanted a shorter contract so he could come back to the table and get paid more. In a couple of years. In year 3 his cap hit will be $44 million. Even with the salary cap going up that's going to be a big hit on their cap. Your looking at it like other's who said pay the man. I look at the data that says top paid quarterbacks especially average players getting elite money do not win Superbowls. I'ts not a emotional thing. I didn't like Elliot's or Smiths contract.

 

[Hadenough]

You could say paying too much for really good quarterbacks will make it very difficult to win a Superbowl. Almost impossible with an average quarterback. Still using two Superbowl winning quarterbacks is a bad argument for Dak. I'm not changing the standard I'm showing you Rogers has way more success in the playoffs. Dak is 1-2 in the playoffs. Dak shouldn't be in the same conversation as Dak. Rogers is also the MVP. Who would you take Dak or Rogers?

Anyone in their right mind would say Rodgers.

 

[Steve007]

so first you said Dak is good not great. now you say he is average.... is alziemers and issue now?

they say people who bullshiet too much have short memories given they make up so many things they tend to forget what they made up....

I never compared Dak to those guys...my response wasn't that at all. so read more carefully... you keep trying to make that connection and you fail...

as mentioned before. I like wilson and rodgers over Dak..... I never said I did otherwise.... so why are you trying so hard to make that connection....perhaps that's your only line of argument and you can't argue your point otherwise...

I asked a simple question about those QBs....not compared them to Dak..... and that based on the standards you put forth.... but now you are arguing against yourself, since I used your own logic to ask you a simple question.

Your getting emotional again. Your planing with semantics. He is average. If someone says he is a good qb I wont disagree, but if someone says he is great I will disagree. We will see how he plays this year after that big contract. He is getting paid top 2 money and if he performs like a 15 quarterback....that is bad.

 

[ondaedg]

Rogers and Wilson shouldn't be used in any argument for Dak They both won Superbowls. Wilson has to run for his life because of his O Line. Wilson won a Superbowl on a rookie contract. Very unlikely Dak will ever be in the Superbowl. Rogers was 13th on the pay scale when he won. Rogers has made it to the NFC championship game the last 2 years.

Wilson had one of the best defenses in NFL history and a bruising running game. 2016 Dak would have won a Super Bowl with that team just as easily.

 

[Steve007]

Wilson had one of the best defenses in NFL history and a bruising running game. 2016 Dak would have won a Super Bowl with that team just as easily.

We will never know that.

 

[Steve007]

wow, so I told you I used reverse psychology and you go back to this is emotion stuff.....so I guess you are back to being stubborn again?

so how is paying Dak is going to stop this team from getting to the superbowl?...

and as mentioned I state facts. he is a proven top 10 QB in the NFL. I don't say it. 50 FO personnel said so....but I guess I should ignore them and listen to you and couple of other people like you because your years of NFL expertise surpasses them by a couple of miles...is that it?

I root for the cowboys....but you are rooting against the cowboys and Dak, because seemingly its important for you to be right and gloat (another piece to your mental puzzle)....

.

Your so smart. You are emotional about Dak. It's called the salary cap. Look at the history of top paid quartebacks they don't make it to the superbowl.
You should change you name to DakFaninHouston

 

[ondaedg]

We will never know that.

What we do know is Russell Wilson won a Super Bowl with a historically good defense that allowed 273yds and 14 pts per game while leading the league in takeaways. Neither Dak or Romo ever had a defense even close to that. This idea that Russell Wilson is some diety is laughable.

 

[Steve007]

What we do know is Russell Wilson won a Super Bowl with a historically good defense that allowed 273yds and 14 pts per game while leading the league in takeaways. Neither Dak or Romo ever had a defense even close to that. This idea that Russell Wilson is some diety is laughable.

Wilson is a better quarterback than Dak.