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

[Toruk_Makto]

Well, you're responding to something you haven't fully understood. It would make no sense to conclude that Prescott "must not be missing open receivers because it was the 1st quarter." I did point out that Prescott is very conservative -- until it's late in a close game. That may be what you're referring to. The 43 attempts that you mistook for Dak's "total" late & close attempts are probably just the 15+ yard late & close attempts I'd posted, and not his total of 233 late and close attempts of all distances on which he's averaging 8.6 YPA.

I don't think there's any doubt that he will intentionally throw a lot of intermediate-to-deep balls out of harm's way during the first three quarters (not just the 1st -- that wouldn't make sense), but then adjusts late in close games, and that's why we see such a disparity in completion rate on those 15+ yard throws (44.2% in late & close, and 29.8% otherwise). Quarterbacks know they're not obligated to try to complete every pass, especially when the receiver isn't as open as they'd like. This is not a revolutionary idea. On the Super Bowl V pre-game, Namath was praising Unitas for doing it in the 1970 AFC Championship against the Raiders. I'm sure it goes back even farther than that.

Maybe I could have explained the difference between the two stats more fully, and broken it down a little more.

I'd probably also argue 233 pass attempts is what 6 games worth and you can have a lot of noise.

Also for the record the plays we were discussing were not high risk throws. They were schemed players running open against the exact defensive coverage the plays were designed to beat. And Dak with protection never sees it. Or doesn't throw it. The first is a bad problem. The 2nd is also.

Sometimes when stats and the eye test don't match its the eyes that are lying. But just as often it's the stats being untruthful.

 

[percyhoward]

I'd probably also argue 233 pass attempts is what 6 games worth and you can have a lot of noise.

Also for the record the plays we were discussing were not high risk throws. They were schemed players running open against the exact defensive coverage the plays were designed to beat. And Dak with protection never sees it. Or doesn't throw it. The first is a bad problem. The 2nd is also.

Sometimes when stats and the eye test don't match its the eyes that are lying. But just as often it's the stats being untruthful.

233 attempts over just 6 games would be 39 attempts per game, so your math is off.

I don't think you get what I'm saying about throwaways, checkdowns, and conservative QB play in general. If the plays were anything but what you described, they wouldn't be examples of conservative play anyway. It comes down to "how open is open?" That can be answered differently not just by two different QB, but by the same QB depending on game situation. This is often referred to as situational awareness and it's not a radical concept.

Maybe I could make it more palatable to you by calling it "situational paranoia" or "conditional self-confidence." To me, that's just as misleading as calling it "clutch" when he changes out of that mode. But whatever we call it, all these checkdowns and sacks and throwaways and game-winning drives are happening -- and this data that you're calling "noise" is just a reflection of that.

 

[eromeopolk]

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.

This is non sense. Dak wants to win and does not put the team in losing positions especially on defense with costly turnovers or poor time of possessions.

Dak is not the gunslinger Romo was with the Cowboys. Thank goodness. Gunslingers eventually get shot.