Did "Air Force vs. Navy" mindset turn Dak into a timid quarterback?

[TheMarathonContinues]

But a lot of those guys throw the ball more than Dak. When you go by percentage of passes intercepted, Dak is 12th this year after being 26th last year. Not really all that good. Add in the 10 fumbles (he actually has 21 interceptions since the start of last year) and I would guess he is right near the top in turnovers... a far cry from 2016 and not what anyone is really looking for from a game manager.

A lot of them don’t though. Daks picks lately have come from a result of throwing the ball more.

 

[blumayne38]

And throw a pick.

Dak already has nearly 1000 yards rushing and 17 rushing TD's. What was that about moving? Romo held the ball more than anyone. Getting rid of the ball was part of his problem.

But still at this point, Dak dosent strike anyone to be a long term answer just a convenient option until another better younger talent comes along or someone on the roster is ready to replace him

 

[America's Cowboy]

Disclaimer: I've never served in the military. Neither have Romo or Dak, of course. But there is a stereotype that the Air Force is known to be a very strict organization in which "you are not allowed to do anything unless the book says you may," whereas the Navy is more easygoing and says "you are allowed to do things unless the book expressly forbids you from doing them."

Romo was a "Navy type," Dak was an "Air Force type." Romo was willing to take risks, Dak isn't.

During the Romo era, football fans applied a hyper-strict standard to Tony: It didn't matter how many great plays Romo made, all they focused on were the errors. Turnovers led to crucifixion. The game against the Peyton-led Broncos is a classic example. It didn't matter that Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs in that game; all people cared about was the ONE interception he threw near the end. It didn't matter if Romo did things 99% right; all people could focus on was the 1% wrong.

Dak himself knows that all too well - he was one of Romo's fans turned critics. In December 2012, Dak went into a Twitter meltdown after the Cowboys' season-ending loss to the Commanders, blasting that he was done defending Romo. Dak was still in college at the time, a freshman.

I think Dak very much took the "Romo lesson" to heart once he became Cowboys QB himself and decided that he ought to be the "anti-Romo" - that Cowboys fans would be OK with him being excessively cautious, always playing it safe, always taking sacks, always doing everything conservatively and timidly - as long as he didn't commit the "high-profile" errors such as interceptions. And for a while, Dallas fans and the media did indeed praise Dak's "better safe than sorry" approach. They lavished praise on him for going five consecutive games without an interception.

But before long, Cowboys fans learned the bitter truth: A quarterback who is excessively timid and risk-averse can kill his team's playoff hopes just as surely as a gunslinger who plays too aggressively. It's just that the death takes a subtler, different, form.

Dak became a QB terrified of taking risks. So much so that he'd rather throw a dinky three-yard checkdown on 4th and 13 that's guaranteed to fail, than a deeper pass beyond the sticks that might be picked off. Because Dak learned from the Romo experience that fans didn't mind losing so much as they minded losing a bad way. "Failure to convert on 4th down" didn't elicit the same foaming-at-the-mouth rage from fans as "game-sealing interception", even though both led to defeats all the same. Dak would rather take a sack than throw the ball away..........because throwing the ball away might lead to it being picked. He would rather dink and dunk than throw the ball deep, because throwing deep is.........risky. No matter what, he had to be the anti-Romo.

The hyper-criticism of Romo turned Dak into a timid and fearful QB. He would rather be anything than Romo.....even if it meant losing. Cowboys fans got what they wished for - a QB the opposite of Romo - and they got what they got.

Aww, another Dak bashing thread, and from a Romo apologist once again. You miss those gunslinging, game/season ending super risky "in coverage" passes? Aww...

 

[Bennie]

And throw a pick.

Dak already has nearly 1000 yards rushing and 17 rushing TD's. What was that about moving? Romo held the ball more than anyone. Getting rid of the ball was part of his problem.

You really should go in to comedy. Your post make me laugh!

 

[DFWJC]

Well you brought up gunslinger and gunslingers are prone to picks. In a league where passing is up...seems like 18 picks in 2 seasons isn't terrible. There's 20 players with over 10 picks this year ALONE.

This.
18 picks in two years...on average...is not bad at all.
I guess we need to compare that to passing yards and passing TDs for true context.
Obviously 2700 yards, 15 Tds and 9 picks would be terrible vs 3700/30/9
But yes, generally that number of picks is fine

 

[cowboyec]

I figured it was an Army mind-set...but what the hell do I know.

 

[CF74]

He’s cursed with the same dated scheme and coach, oh the irony...

 

[CWR]

Biggest difference I see is Dak is not improving as a QB whereas Romo got so good that if it weren't for injuries he'd be a certain HOFer

Everyone says Dak isn't improving and I understand where that comes from. But, Id like to point something out.

He is making many of the mistakes he made as a rookie, however he is also making many of the good plays he made as a rookie.

The difference now is that hes performing at that level without the benefit of a dominant oline and a rock at TE.

Please dont get me wrong he frustrates me as well, but I think his performance with our backup oline merits some form of overall improvement. Last week was bad for the entire team, DAK included, but the 5 weeks before last week my eyes saw a noticeably improved version of our qb.

 

[Zekeats]

And throw a pick.

Dak already has nearly 1000 yards rushing and 17 rushing TD's. What was that about moving? Romo held the ball more than anyone. Getting rid of the ball was part of his problem.

↑
Romo could throw a football, read the entire field and could move in the pocket. Dak can't.
Click to expand...
And throw a pick.

Dak already has nearly 1000 yards rushing and 17 rushing TD's. What was that about moving? Romo held the ball more than anyone. Getting rid of the ball was part of his problem.

Can you read? Move in the pocket not run the ball asap. Romo was sacked less than 2 times a game throughout his career. In his first two seasons less than 1.5 times a game. Romo had terrible offensive lines then. Dak is on pace for what? 60+ sacks, over 4 sacks a game. Romo getting rid of the ball is a joke. He was excellent at buying time surveying the field and getting rid of the football with one of the quickest releases ever at the QB position. Good job in taking him for granted.

 

[Cowboysfan917]

I think the actual problem is that over the last two seasons Dak has given you all of the turnovers of a gunslinger combined with the big plays of a game manager...

I totally agree. Holding the ball a long time, taking some sacks, or turning the ball over is never great but it’s easier to swallow when those risks sometimes net big rewards. In Dak’s case, the sacks and turnovers are so painful because he so frequently does not make a big play after holding the ball for 5 seconds

 

[BigCatMonaco]

I think the actual problem is that over the last two seasons Dak has given you all of the turnovers of a gunslinger combined with the big plays of a game manager...

79 tds
39 turnovers(ints and fumbles that dak didn’t directly recover himself)
30-16 record.
7 fourth quarter comebacks and 13 game winning drives.
In his career. 46 games.


Wentz.
The eagles MVP candidate and player most often compared to dak.

72 total TDS
44 ints and fumbles(not directly recovered by wentz)
23-17 record.
4 fourth quarter comebacks and 4 game winning drives.(dak has 4 of each vs just the eagles)
In 40 games.

 

[atlantacowboy]

Disclaimer: I've never served in the military. Neither have Romo or Dak, of course. But there is a stereotype that the Air Force is known to be a very strict organization in which "you are not allowed to do anything unless the book says you may," whereas the Navy is more easygoing and says "you are allowed to do things unless the book expressly forbids you from doing them."

Romo was a "Navy type," Dak was an "Air Force type." Romo was willing to take risks, Dak isn't.

During the Romo era, football fans applied a hyper-strict standard to Tony: It didn't matter how many great plays Romo made, all they focused on were the errors. Turnovers led to crucifixion. The game against the Peyton-led Broncos is a classic example. It didn't matter that Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs in that game; all people cared about was the ONE interception he threw near the end. It didn't matter if Romo did things 99% right; all people could focus on was the 1% wrong.

Dak himself knows that all too well - he was one of Romo's fans turned critics. In December 2012, Dak went into a Twitter meltdown after the Cowboys' season-ending loss to the Commanders, blasting that he was done defending Romo. Dak was still in college at the time, a freshman.

I think Dak very much took the "Romo lesson" to heart once he became Cowboys QB himself and decided that he ought to be the "anti-Romo" - that Cowboys fans would be OK with him being excessively cautious, always playing it safe, always taking sacks, always doing everything conservatively and timidly - as long as he didn't commit the "high-profile" errors such as interceptions. And for a while, Dallas fans and the media did indeed praise Dak's "better safe than sorry" approach. They lavished praise on him for going five consecutive games without an interception.

But before long, Cowboys fans learned the bitter truth: A quarterback who is excessively timid and risk-averse can kill his team's playoff hopes just as surely as a gunslinger who plays too aggressively. It's just that the death takes a subtler, different, form.

Dak became a QB terrified of taking risks. So much so that he'd rather throw a dinky three-yard checkdown on 4th and 13 that's guaranteed to fail, than a deeper pass beyond the sticks that might be picked off. Because Dak learned from the Romo experience that fans didn't mind losing so much as they minded losing a bad way. "Failure to convert on 4th down" didn't elicit the same foaming-at-the-mouth rage from fans as "game-sealing interception", even though both led to defeats all the same. Dak would rather take a sack than throw the ball away..........because throwing the ball away might lead to it being picked. He would rather dink and dunk than throw the ball deep, because throwing deep is.........risky. No matter what, he had to be the anti-Romo.

The hyper-criticism of Romo turned Dak into a timid and fearful QB. He would rather be anything than Romo.....even if it meant losing. Cowboys fans got what they wished for - a QB the opposite of Romo - and they got what they got.

Dak was the anti-Romo to great effect as a rookie. But, the NFL adapts and the the league figured out what he did well and took away those short safe throws and almost dared him to throw over the LBs in 2017. This year was more of the same until we added a top WR mid season who could give Dak bigger throwing windows. He simply doesn't have Romo's accuracy or touch on the ball, and certainly doesn't have Romo's pocket awareness.

 

[Roadtrip635]

As far as being conservative, it could also be a poor mix between coach and player. Romo was more aggressive which balanced Garrett's conservative nature. Conservative coach with a conservative QB, the expected results sound about what we're getting now. You know JG drilled, protect the ball, into Dak since his rookie year and just reinforced that conservative nature. A less conservative coach would probably be a better pairing.

 

[CowboyRoy]

But still at this point, Dak dosent strike anyone to be a long term answer just a convenient option until another better younger talent comes along or someone on the roster is ready to replace him

definitely a long term answer.

But feel free to explain how someone is just going to "come along" that is better. I am all for improving any position.

 

[CowboyRoy]

↑
Romo could throw a football, read the entire field and could move in the pocket. Dak can't.
Click to expand...
And throw a pick.

Dak already has nearly 1000 yards rushing and 17 rushing TD's. What was that about moving? Romo held the ball more than anyone. Getting rid of the ball was part of his problem.

Can you read? Move in the pocket not run the ball asap. Romo was sacked less than 2 times a game throughout his career. In his first two seasons less than 1.5 times a game. Romo had terrible offensive lines then. Dak is on pace for what? 60+ sacks, over 4 sacks a game. Romo getting rid of the ball is a joke. He was excellent at buying time surveying the field and getting rid of the football with one of the quickest releases ever at the QB position. Good job in taking him for granted.

Romo was riding the pine in his 3rd year.

Another fool that thinks sacks are the fault of the QB and not the Oline. LOL

So why in 2016 did Dak only get sacked 32 times all year? I guess he was great with less experience?

 

[Keithfansince5]

Aww, another Dak bashing thread, and from a Romo apologist once again. You miss those gunslinging, game/season ending super risky "in coverage" passes? Aww...

Actually no. We still are getting them. Like last weeks pick on 4th down by Dak. Good times........ Not.

 

[risco]

Disclaimer: I've never served in the military. Neither have Romo or Dak, of course. But there is a stereotype that the Air Force is known to be a very strict organization in which "you are not allowed to do anything unless the book says you may," whereas the Navy is more easygoing and says "you are allowed to do things unless the book expressly forbids you from doing them."

Romo was a "Navy type," Dak was an "Air Force type." Romo was willing to take risks, Dak isn't.

During the Romo era, football fans applied a hyper-strict standard to Tony: It didn't matter how many great plays Romo made, all they focused on were the errors. Turnovers led to crucifixion. The game against the Peyton-led Broncos is a classic example. It didn't matter that Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs in that game; all people cared about was the ONE interception he threw near the end. It didn't matter if Romo did things 99% right; all people could focus on was the 1% wrong.

Dak himself knows that all too well - he was one of Romo's fans turned critics. In December 2012, Dak went into a Twitter meltdown after the Cowboys' season-ending loss to the Commanders, blasting that he was done defending Romo. Dak was still in college at the time, a freshman.

I think Dak very much took the "Romo lesson" to heart once he became Cowboys QB himself and decided that he ought to be the "anti-Romo" - that Cowboys fans would be OK with him being excessively cautious, always playing it safe, always taking sacks, always doing everything conservatively and timidly - as long as he didn't commit the "high-profile" errors such as interceptions. And for a while, Dallas fans and the media did indeed praise Dak's "better safe than sorry" approach. They lavished praise on him for going five consecutive games without an interception.

But before long, Cowboys fans learned the bitter truth: A quarterback who is excessively timid and risk-averse can kill his team's playoff hopes just as surely as a gunslinger who plays too aggressively. It's just that the death takes a subtler, different, form.

Dak became a QB terrified of taking risks. So much so that he'd rather throw a dinky three-yard checkdown on 4th and 13 that's guaranteed to fail, than a deeper pass beyond the sticks that might be picked off. Because Dak learned from the Romo experience that fans didn't mind losing so much as they minded losing a bad way. "Failure to convert on 4th down" didn't elicit the same foaming-at-the-mouth rage from fans as "game-sealing interception", even though both led to defeats all the same. Dak would rather take a sack than throw the ball away..........because throwing the ball away might lead to it being picked. He would rather dink and dunk than throw the ball deep, because throwing deep is.........risky. No matter what, he had to be the anti-Romo.

The hyper-criticism of Romo turned Dak into a timid and fearful QB. He would rather be anything than Romo.....even if it meant losing. Cowboys fans got what they wished for - a QB the opposite of Romo - and they got what they got.

Good write up but the Cowboys QB's have been throwing passes shorter than the 1st down marker on 4th down for years. I think we all can look back and say- "we needed X amount of yards and the QB threw the ball for Y amount of yards." Y is less than the 1st down marker. This type of play happens often, now and before.

 

[Redball Express]

Disclaimer: I've never served in the military. Neither have Romo or Dak, of course. But there is a stereotype that the Air Force is known to be a very strict organization in which "you are not allowed to do anything unless the book says you may," whereas the Navy is more easygoing and says "you are allowed to do things unless the book expressly forbids you from doing them."

Romo was a "Navy type," Dak was an "Air Force type." Romo was willing to take risks, Dak isn't.

During the Romo era, football fans applied a hyper-strict standard to Tony: It didn't matter how many great plays Romo made, all they focused on were the errors. Turnovers led to crucifixion. The game against the Peyton-led Broncos is a classic example. It didn't matter that Romo threw for 500 yards and 5 TDs in that game; all people cared about was the ONE interception he threw near the end. It didn't matter if Romo did things 99% right; all people could focus on was the 1% wrong.

Dak himself knows that all too well - he was one of Romo's fans turned critics. In December 2012, Dak went into a Twitter meltdown after the Cowboys' season-ending loss to the Commanders, blasting that he was done defending Romo. Dak was still in college at the time, a freshman.

I think Dak very much took the "Romo lesson" to heart once he became Cowboys QB himself and decided that he ought to be the "anti-Romo" - that Cowboys fans would be OK with him being excessively cautious, always playing it safe, always taking sacks, always doing everything conservatively and timidly - as long as he didn't commit the "high-profile" errors such as interceptions. And for a while, Dallas fans and the media did indeed praise Dak's "better safe than sorry" approach. They lavished praise on him for going five consecutive games without an interception.

But before long, Cowboys fans learned the bitter truth: A quarterback who is excessively timid and risk-averse can kill his team's playoff hopes just as surely as a gunslinger who plays too aggressively. It's just that the death takes a subtler, different, form.

Dak became a QB terrified of taking risks. So much so that he'd rather throw a dinky three-yard checkdown on 4th and 13 that's guaranteed to fail, than a deeper pass beyond the sticks that might be picked off. Because Dak learned from the Romo experience that fans didn't mind losing so much as they minded losing a bad way. "Failure to convert on 4th down" didn't elicit the same foaming-at-the-mouth rage from fans as "game-sealing interception", even though both led to defeats all the same. Dak would rather take a sack than throw the ball away..........because throwing the ball away might lead to it being picked. He would rather dink and dunk than throw the ball deep, because throwing deep is.........risky. No matter what, he had to be the anti-Romo.

The hyper-criticism of Romo turned Dak into a timid and fearful QB. He would rather be anything than Romo.....even if it meant losing. Cowboys fans got what they wished for - a QB the opposite of Romo - and they got what they got.

The analogies fit

Where did you find DAKs posts on Romo in college?

Interesting if true.

Anyway..

when you talk about risk taking in DAK..

the game against Atlanta where he took 8 sacks..

began DAKs slide.

He has never been the same.

Maybe never will again.

His confidence in the OL and playcalling has been Rocky eversince.

 

[Keithfansince5]

Aww, another Dak bashing thread, and from a Romo apologist once again. You miss those gunslinging, game/season ending super risky "in coverage" passes? Aww...

We also miss those 300+ yard games. With Romo we had 46 regular season 300+ yard games. With Dak, just 4. He would need to play 40 more years to match Romo.

 

[LittleLexodus]

The analogies fit

Where did you find DAKs posts on Romo in college?

Interesting if true.

Anyway..

when you talk about risk taking in DAK..

the game against Atlanta where he took 8 sacks..

began DAKs slide.

He has never been the same.

Maybe never will again.

His confidence in the OL and playcalling has been Rocky eversince.

Dak still shows flashes of greatness in my opinion but he definitely lost some of his swagger and willingness to take risks.

I'm not sure if this link will work on CZ: http://www.espn.com/blog/dallas/cow...ll-make-for-awkward-introduction-to-tony-romo