Video: Film Study: Analyzing Dak Prescott's first game back

[WillieBeamen]

Honestly Star, you are wasting your time. He and I had a brief debate this morning regarding Dak. He wants Dak off the team at any cost. Even when I reminded him of Dak's $89M dead cap if he is not on the team next season, he didn't care. He words were, he would rather take the hit and draft a QB. Think about that......the impact but he doesn't care. He's actually a good poster when he does not post about Dak but reckless thinking when comes to Dak.

And that would be the smart thing to do

 

[Irvin88_4life]

Three of those six missed third down conversions were short, running downs. Poor execution in the running game cost us those. It was not Dak.

Oh I know, that's why I worded it that way

 

[khiladi]

Are you sure?

Dak is incredible at improvisation. The TD to Butler against Arizona, the incredible pass after escaping against Houston, the game winner against the Giants to Beasley.

Dak is a very good NFL QB. I can't understand why fans are so quick to dismiss him.

I'm thankful he's back.

Street ball QBs are a dime a dozen and the TD to Beasley was hardly any improvisation and just a toss up on a 4th down. Those type of plays are luck and don’t sustain anything for any stretch of imagination.

 

[khiladi]

So describing what Dak said and what's shown on film is making excuses for Dak? You work in Hollywood?

I farted and it smells like refried beans. Did I just make an excuse for Dak? LOL.

Yeah it’s actually making an excuse, because the TE, which was his FIRST READ, falling had ZERO impact on his horrible throw to his WIDE OPEN second read. Would you even care if the TE fell if Dak could actually hit the broad side of the barn and put it where Brown could catch it for a big gain?

 

[khiladi]

Three of those six missed third down conversions were short, running downs. Poor execution in the running game cost us those. It was not Dak.

No, it’s Dak making them completely predictable because he can’t throw consistently underneath center.

 

[khiladi]

So it was Romo, who Jerry publicly said needed to put in more time ("Peyton Manning-level time" to be exact) after signing his extension, that was the one who needed to force the issue to get more control, not the other way around? You sure about that?

It was Romo, who routinely checked out of run plays late to throw brutal interceptions that cost the team games (think: Detroit 2011, Green Bay 2013), who needed to force the issue to run the ball more - you sure about that?

LOL..

None of what you stated addresses the actual facts stated in my post. I’ve posted on this so many times as Dak chokes.

This is what the Garrett jock-sniffers and Dak-stans spin it as and it’s a constant re-writing if the narrative. Imagine somebody giving a analogy of Peyton Manning and thinking it’s a negative?

That’s where Jones was coming from when he started hinting in the statement announcing Romo’s contract extension that his 33-year-old quarterback would be something of a player-CEO when it comes to the Dallas offense. Jones showed he wasn’t kidding by seeking Romo’s input before Dallas drafted Wisconsin center/guard Travis Frederick late in the first round and grabbed a complement to tight end Jason Witten in Gavin Escobar of San Diego State in the second round. Neither player was projected as high as he was picked. “The more Tony can be involved in what we’re doing offensively, the more the product we have out there (that) complements his skills, the more we’re going to do it,” Jones said. The draft talk is more symbolic — Jones says a few minutes of input can’t outweigh a year’s worth of scouting work — but it was noteworthy that Romo called Frederick “the best player in this draft at his position” the day after he was taken.

Jerry was giving more power to the QB who finally held the cards with the new contract in play. It was Romo that led to Garrett being stripped of power.

https://www.timesargus.com/romo-com...cle_5dd168a8-5016-5033-9356-89a2af377b01.html

Yeah, that’s Dak-stans for you, the same guys saying he was better than Josh Allen last year. The actual talk of the town was Garrett being stripped of play calling duties

https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2013/01/jason-garrett-stripped-of-play-calling-duties/

“It is not a step back for the Cowboys or a step back for (Garrett) individually to change the way that we are basically putting our game plan together or calling the plays on the offensive side of the ball,” Jones said, according to USA Today. “I’m assessing the fact that two and a half seasons with Jason as the head coach, we need to do some things different.”

Even Garrett himself had to spin thr demotion;

https://fansided.com/2013/11/05/jason-garrett-realizes-giving-play-calling-duties-good-thing/amp/

“I think it’s been a good thing,” Garrett said, via Charean Williams of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. “It’s something that we’ve tried to do since I became the head coach, coming from the coordinator position. They’re two full-time jobs, and in order to do each of them well, you have to focus on really every aspect of them. They’re only so many hours in the day, so since I became the head coach, I was always trying to delegate some of the responsibilities I had within the coordinator position and within some of the head coaching responsibilities that I had. So now I can be more focused on some of the head coaching stuff.

“Certainly, I’m in all of the meetings on offense and many of the meetings on defense during the week. With the installations of the plays, I’m involved in all that. But you need to delegate and more importantly empower the people around you to do those jobs. We’ve done that. I think that structure has worked well for us. That doesn’t mean that because we’re in that structure, everything is going to be perfect. We need to keep working hard to make whatever structure we use the best it can be for our players to execute ball plays.”

Jerry called if Peyton-like responsibilities as a PRAISE of Romo. Peyton was the offense in Denver and any comparison to Peyton was in regards to Romo being given more power. Which also demonstrates how delusional Dak-Stans are in trying to compare Romo’s contract with Dak’s. The Cowboys CAME to Romo to rework the contract for more manageable cap space a year early. He signed the highest paid contract in franchise history, not that he was overpaid with relation to the rest of the league and it was because he was going to . Romo was literally running this offense on the fly with Garrett, who didn’t even have him in game planning meeting on Tuesday.

Now what is the REAL conclusion to this story?

Jerry have Jason Garrett an incredibly leash, as this was basically like his adopted son and this idea Jerry hamstrung Garrett is bogus. Garrett’s incompetence and Romo’s new contract actually forced Jerry’s hand to start stripping power from Garrett.

It was the 13-3 season that this goofballs in the FO thought they could get away with a much cheaper contract with Dak, with this loaded roster. Dak’s experience is nothing like Romo’s here. Dak is actually the Jason Garrett training experiment of QBs for Dallas, where after years of tailoring an offense to make it Dak-friendly, we got to dumb down the offense for this guy to be a ‘game manager’. They actually destroyed a SB primed roster for this mediocrity who can’t even throw consistently from a dropback under center.

 

[khiladi]

And that would be the smart thing to do

Basic economics tells you it’s a “sunk cost”. You can’t get anything of this money back by playing him. If you change offenses, it’s like starting over anyways. We are in year 7 and have dumbed down the offense once again for this QB. Draft a QB on a rookie contract. At least you generate excitement of the potential.

 

[DOUBLE WING]

LOL..

None of what you stated addresses the actual facts stated in my post. I’ve posted on this so many times as Dak chokes.

This is what the Garrett jock-sniffers and Dak-stans spin it as and it’s a constant re-writing if the narrative. Imagine somebody giving a analogy of Peyton Manning and thinking it’s a negative?

I directly addressed your points. You said Romo had to "force the issue" to get more power, and that Romo was the one who wanted to run more. Both are patently false, and I explained why, and will do so again.

Jerry called if Peyton-like responsibilities as a PRAISE of Romo. Peyton was the offense in Denver and any comparison to Peyton was in regards to Romo being given more power. Which also demonstrates how delusional Dak-Stans are in trying to compare Romo’s contract with Dak’s. The Cowboys CAME to Romo to rework the contract for more manageable cap space a year early. He signed the highest paid contract in franchise history, not that he was overpaid with relation to the rest of the league and it was because he was going to . Romo was literally running this offense on the fly with Garrett, who didn’t even have him in game planning meeting on Tuesday.

What? This is hilarious. It was actually the complete opposite of praising Romo; it was a public effort to prod Romo to be more involved.

Here is the part of the quote from Jerry that you are ignoring:

"“I can speak for Jason in this respect: Everything he is about wants more buy-in and more participation from the player,” Jones said. "So if Tony, for instance, would be here Monday through Saturday and be here from seven in the morning to six o’clock at night all over this place, then that’s better than the way it’s been. We’ll have more success, and Jason believes that. It’s certainly at quarterback but he believes it at the other positions, too."

Jerry is literally outright telling you here that Tony wasn't putting in as much time as they wanted and that they were requiring him to do more than he had been. You're attempting to spin this as Romo "forcing the issue" when it is the opposite, it is the team telling Romo they needed him to do more. Romo not being involved in game-planning meetings was on his own accord. Do you think if he had come to Jerry and Garrett in 2011 or 12 and said "hey guys, I really want to be involved in all the game prep meetings" they would have told him no? Because that's the rewrite of history you're attempting to make here. The team expected him to go beyond what he was doing and put in Peyton Manning-level time. That is not praise, that is a directive.

The idea that Romo was trying to force the issue to run the ball more is another idea you're pulling completely out of thin air. Anyone who followed the team at the time can recall that Garrett always sent in two plays and the media pressure on Romo for checking out of run plays to throw the ball:

Romo's increased influence in the offensive game-planning during the week and his ability to audible out of plays has some saying Romo is checking out of too many run calls.

Does Romo care about those opinions?

"I don't care," he said. "We won the football game. You can say whatever you want."

 

[khiladi]

I directly addressed your points. You said Romo had to "force the issue" to get more power, and that Romo was the one who wanted to run more. Both are patently false, and I explained why, and will do so again.




What? This is hilarious. It was actually the complete opposite of praising Romo; it was a public effort to prod Romo to be more involved.

Here is the part of the quote from Jerry that you are ignoring:

"“I can speak for Jason in this respect: Everything he is about wants more buy-in and more participation from the player,” Jones said. "So if Tony, for instance, would be here Monday through Saturday and be here from seven in the morning to six o’clock at night all over this place, then that’s better than the way it’s been. We’ll have more success, and Jason believes that. It’s certainly at quarterback but he believes it at the other positions, too."

Jerry is literally outright telling you here that Tony wasn't putting in as much time as they wanted and that they were requiring him to do more than he had been. You're attempting to spin this as Romo "forcing the issue" when it is the opposite, it is the team telling Romo they needed him to do more. Romo not being involved in game-planning meetings was on his own accord. Do you think if he had come to Jerry and Garrett in 2011 or 12 and said "hey guys, I really want to be involved in all the game prep meetings" they would have told him no? Because that's the rewrite of history you're attempting to make here. The team expected him to go beyond what he was doing and put in Peyton Manning-level time. That is not praise, that is a directive.

The idea that Romo was trying to force the issue to run the ball more is another idea you're pulling completely out of thin air. Anyone who followed the team at the time can recall that Garrett always sent in two plays and the media pressure on Romo for checking out of run plays to throw the ball:

Romo's increased influence in the offensive game-planning during the week and his ability to audible out of plays has some saying Romo is checking out of too many run calls.

Does Romo care about those opinions?

"I don't care," he said. "We won the football game. You can say whatever you want."

LOL.

Peyton Manning ran his own offense and he was the best QB in the game. Claiming that Peyton Manning
like responsibilities is a slight on Romo is only a claim a Dak jock-sniffer or Jason Garrett family member would claim, That statement you highlighted is Jerry saying that Romo being involved in everything is BETTER THAN ITS BEEN.

He then goes on to say we’ll have more success AND JASON BELIEVES THAT. He then goes on to telling us what JASON BELIEVES, not Romo, and that is it would not only help the QB position, but be better for the OVERALL TEAM. He’s not justifying Romo accepting it, he’s trying to justify his boy-wonder losing power to Romo.

These responsibilities were offered to Romo in the context of contract negotiations that Jerry and the FO came to ask him to rework. It was Romo that held all the cards.

What you are trying to rant about is exactly the opposite of the facts, which include Jason being stripped of play calling duties.

This is why Jerry was yapping about the relationship of Linehan and Romo, when the former was brought in:

"What I'm particularly privy to is the relationship between him and Scott Linehan, our offensive coordinator who came over from Detroit," Jones said Friday on 105.3 The Fan [KRLD-FM]. "They're really a great match. ... He and Scott hit it off beautifully."

Jones explained that he likes the way Romo's knowledge of the game and ability to improvise fit with Linehan's offensive style.

"Put simplistically," Jones said, "we're just going to be able to move the ball better than we would have."

And he attributes much of that to the way Linehan used players like Calvin Johnson and Reggie Bush while with the Lions. Jones says he envisions Linehan doing the same with players like Dez Bryant, Terrance Williams, Cole Beasley, Gavin Escobar and the team's running backs.

"He just takes those guys, individually and really uses their talents to call plays," Jones said. "We're doing lots of screens, and as a part of that, Tony has some ability to be pretty creative in how he runs those individual plays. That's the most exciting part of camp for me so far."

https://amp.foxsports.com/stories/other/jerry-jones-romo-linehan-were-most-exciting-part-of-camp

Heck, there were even reports in 2013 before the changes actually happened, that Jerry was telling Garrett to give up play calling duties and get rid of his brother. And all of this happened right after.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...shing-garrett-to-give-up-play-calling-duties/

 

[DOUBLE WING]

LOL.

Peyton Manning ran his own offense and he was the best QB in the game. Claiming that Peyton Manning
like responsibilities is a slight on Romo is only a claim a Dak jock-sniffer or Jason Garrett family member would claim, That statement you highlighted is Jerry saying that Romo being involved in everything is BETTER THAN ITS BEEN.

He then goes on to say we’ll have more success AND JASON BELIEVES THAT. He’s not justifying Romo accepting it, he’s trying to justify his boy-wonder losing power to Romo.

These responsibilities were offered to Romo in the ck text of contract negotiations that Jerry and the FO came to ask him to rework. It was Romo that held all the cards.

What you are trying to rant about is exactly the opposite of the facts, which include Jason being stripped of play calling duties.

Jerry in the quote, is literally saying Romo needs to be in the office 6 days a week, from morning until night, and that would be better than the way things have been. Meaning, that is not the time that Romo is currently putting in, but if he does that then things will be better.

What part of this is confusing you?

This extension came on the heels of a season-ending loss to Washington which caused them to miss the playoffs, where Romo threw 3 picks and there was a ton of heat on Garrett as a playcaller/coach and on Romo for his lack of preparation/checking out of runs. Jerry is telling you here as clear as day that Romo putting in more work is part of the deal. It's not "responsibilities offered" to him, it's a directive.

The mental gymnastics you're doing to try and flip "we need Romo to spend more time" into "Jerry is trying to justify Garrett losing power to Romo" is just absurd.

 

[khiladi]

Jerry in the quote, is literally saying Romo needs to be in the office 6 days a week, from morning until night, and that would be better than the way things have been. Meaning, that is not the time that Romo is currently putting in, but if he does that then things will be better.

What part of this is confusing you?

This extension came on the heels of a season-ending loss to Washington which caused them to miss the playoffs, where Romo threw 3 picks and there was a ton of heat on Garrett as a playcaller/coach and on Romo for his lack of preparation/checking out of runs. Jerry is telling you here as clear as day that Romo putting in more work is part of the deal. It's not "responsibilities offered" to him, it's a directive.

The mental gymnastics you're doing to try and flip "we need Romo to spend more time" into "Jerry is trying to justify Garrett losing power to Romo" is just absurd.

No, Jerry is literally saying Romo WILL BE HERE doing everything and Jason WILL LIKE IT.

And it came with the DEMOTION of Garrett and the PROMOTION of Romo..

But only in a Dak-Stan world is this considered a bad thing for the guy getting way more money and power, while the one who gets demoted is the one who made out.

Talk about a clown take.

 

[DOUBLE WING]

https://amp.foxsports.com/stories/other/jerry-jones-romo-linehan-were-most-exciting-part-of-camp

Heck, there were even reports in 2013 before the changes actually happened, that Jerry was telling Garrett to give up play calling duties and get rid of his brother. And all of this happened right after.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...shing-garrett-to-give-up-play-calling-duties/

What does this Linehan stuff have to do with any of your fantasy-land takes that Romo forced the Cowboys to give him power and take it away from Garrett?

You do realize Linehan was hired because he's Garrett's buddy, right? So Garrett, who according to you lost power, was able to hire his pal Linehan to call the plays in 2014? Where was the all-powerful Romo during this?

 

[DOUBLE WING]

No, Jerry is literally saying Romo WILL BE HERE doing everything and Jason WILL LIKE IT.

And it came with the DEMOTION of Garrett and the PROMOTION of Romo..

But only in a Dak-Stan world is this considered a bad thing for the guy getting way more money and power, while the one who gets demoted is the one who made out.

Talk about a clown take.

Bud, you need to re-read the quote. Maybe try very slowly.

"if Tony, for instance, would be here Monday through Saturday and be here from seven in the morning to six o’clock at night all over this place, then that’s better than the way it’s been. A part of what we agreed with was extra time on the job, beyond the norm."

What part of this sounds like praise for Romo? Please explain.

 

[khiladi]

What does this Linehan stuff have to do with any of your fantasy-land takes that Romo forced the Cowboys to give him power and take it away from Garrett?

You do realize Linehan was hired because he's Garrett's buddy, right? So Garrett, who according to you lost power, was able to hire his pal Linehan to call the plays in 2014? Where was the all-powerful Romo during this?

Jerry Jones got Linehan, because they weren’t changing the offense. He said it explicitly. He also says right there that Romo has more power of choice in the plays called. He also said he doesn’t want Garrett around the offense. And that Garrett handles ambiguity well.

facts are only in a Dak jock sniffers world, does being granted higher pay and more responsibilities be equated to a demotion. And that too with the HC whose MO is supposedly offense is being stripped of power,

Facts are Jerry was selling to the papers that JASON AGREES TO IT, not Romo.

 

[fansince68]

Prescott played well for being rusty. Not turning the ball over was huge for him.

Really?? Not turning the ball over is an accomplishment??? Such a low ceiling for our QB.

 

[khiladi]

Bud, you need to re-read the quote. Maybe try very slowly.

"if Tony, for instance, would be here Monday through Saturday and be here from seven in the morning to six o’clock at night all over this place, then that’s better than the way it’s been. A part of what we agreed with was extra time on the job, beyond the norm."

What part of this sounds like praise for Romo? Please explain.

You mean more responsibilities means extra time on the job? Wow, what an insight..

“Romo your getting way more power, more responsibilities and way more money, and we want you to be like Peyton Manning, because you are sucking up the joint.. and we are stripping Garrett of power because you are not listening to him..”

YEAH Buddy, that’s the very definition of what’s called a clown take. I thought I’d seen it all with Dak-stans

 

[DOUBLE WING]

Jerry Jones got Linehan, because they weren’t changing the offense. He said it explicitly. He also says right there that Romo has more power of choice in the plays called. He also said he doesn’t want Garrett around the offense. And that Garrett handles ambiguity well.

facts are only in a Dak jock sniffers world, does being granted higher pay and more responsibilities be equated to a demotion. And that too with the HC whose MO is supposedly offense is being stripped of power,

Facts are Jerry was selling to the papers that JASON AGREES TO IT, not Romo.

They "got" Linehan because he and Garrett had previously coached together.

Who said the word demotion? You are pulling talking points out of thin air.

Nobody is debating that Romo took on more responsibilities. The debate is whether it was something he demanded, or something that was demanded of him by the people paying him millions.

It's pretty clear that it was the latter.

 

[DOUBLE WING]

You mean more responsibilities means extra time on the job? Wow, what an insight..

“Romo your getting way more power, more responsibilities and way more money, and we want you to be like Peyton Manning, because you are sucking up the joint.. and we are stripping Garrett of power because you are not listening to him..”

YEAH Buddy, that’s the very definition of what’s called a clown take. I thought I’d seen it all with Dak-stans

Nobody is denying Romo took on more responsibility. The question we are debating here is whose decision that was. You initially said Romo had to FORCE THE ISSUE which is, obviously, not the case at all. Jerry wanted to see MORE from Romo, which is clear as day in his quotes. It was basically hey, you're a great player, and we're paying you a lot of money, but now we need you to step up and do more than you've been doing.

Again, I ask, what part of this is confusing you?

 

[Captain-Crash]

You Dak-stand harp on the most bogus analogies and re-write narratives. Dak inherited the PRIME team that supposed to be for Romo, which is why Jerry drafted Zeke after losing Murray. Romo wanted Murray signed.

In actuality, power was stripped from Garrett and Romo was given more power, the exact opposite of what you claimed. Romo wasn’t even part of game planning meetings with Garrett. Nothing was stripped from Romo, he FORCED the issue to be given more power during the contract, which is why Jerry credits him with prioritizing Frederick. It was Romo who wanted to run more and take pressure off the passing game with the incompetent Garrett no longer interfering.

The run game correlates with Garrett being relegated to a walk around HC and Romo being given more power, which is more than evident when Stephen McGee ended up throwing 38 times in 2011 in December and Kyle Orton ended up throwing 46 times against the Eagles in a playoff contention game. Garrett couldn’t field a RG to save his life, and all of this became clearly evident with the Giants. Romo was carrying straight garbage and it was only in 2014 when he was finally given a Garrett-free offense.

Romo threw for close to 80% in December that year and destroyed the Colts and Eagles, two winning teams and beat Detroit and was practically flawless in sub-zero temperature in Lambeau, where the Packers were undefeated and got robbed on the Dez catch, while one can argue Murray fumbled the game away. Dak can’t beat a winning team to save his life.

With Romo Dallas that year was using play action at half the rate that Linehan used with Dak, meaning the run was the FOCAl point of Dallas with Dak. They weren’t using the RG to “manage” the game like they were with Dak, they were using the RG to make the passing game explosive, which is why the Cowboys used more to routes than any team that year and both Dez and TWill were two of the top 3 WRs in terms of go route usage. And TWill had 8 TDs on 65 targets. Dak couldn’t find that man to save his life.

Romo had ONE YEAR in that offense, while Dak basically inherited the golden years of that OL and looked like complete garbage. And Linehan had to dumb down the offense and couldn’t even use Dez properly, because he was so inaccurate.

Cut the bogus analogies. they’ve been babysitting this mediocre QB ever since he’s been here, while this organization was basically counting on Romo to save their ineptitude.

 

[Whirlwin]

He didn't do anything more or less than Rush did the past 5 weeks. No turnovers was a good start, though.

Did you see the trough to tight end . Running down the field Prescott dropped in a dime while he was going up field. When is Rush ever done that. No the receiver is usually coming back from the rout . I didn’t ever seen him hit anybody in stride. Stop with this baloney