Forget Dak, he's not the problem

[CouchCoach]

OK, I was feeling left out and haven't had a Dak thread so this is my only one. But I thought I would combine a Ranching thread with this so what are you eating while reading and responding?

Who lost that Green Bay playoff game and the one in LA? It is a trick question because it's like a Dr. Seuss book, it was a lot of who's, like an entire team of them.

Dak Prescott played well enough to win both of those games and brought them back in that Green Bay game very smartly for a rookie QB. The D in one gets 18 points down and in the other lets the opposing team run it up the gut and limit Dak's time with the ball and opportunities. Those were team losses.

Hey, I agree about the inconsistent accuracy being a challenge but I've also seen enough accuracy from him that I know he can play the position. And let's assume he and the coaching staff are aware of that issue as well and are working on that together.

What's the most important trait for a QB, any player? What do you think Eagles fans would say it is for a QB? Durability, doesn't matter how good a player is if he can't show up consistently and we've got a Tier 1 when it comes to that and he plays a little contact as well. Of all the teams, we can be the least concerned about the backup QB. And the Eagles?

It isn't about Prescott like it wasn't about Romo, it was about the teams they led and how their perceived their part in that. Romo was more risk because he felt he had to do something on every possession because he didn't have that first best friend, a D, but he proved how good he could be with that second best friend, a RB. Prescott has both best friends and they're better than Romo ever had.

And let's forget this "carrying the team" nonsense about these other QB's like Brady, Brees and Rodgers, do they really carry their teams or do they get the ball in the hands of the playmakers just like Aikman and Montana used to do? They do not carry the team, they execute the plays and it is the team that carries the team.

For whatever reason, fans take a liking to a player or not and the QB seems to catch most of that. No matter what the QB does, if someone doesn't like him, it's never going to be good enough and the weight of the load goes on his back.

This team will go as far as the team can take itself, not as far as the QB can take it. It's funny how Brady gets the GOAT tag, and he's pretty damned good, but ever notice every year he wins it, his run game and D are in the top 10, that's every year he's won it. Maybe Brees and Rodgers would have won more than that if their teams had done that and maybe Rivers could get to one.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

To be fair, Dak is pretty easy to forget.

 

[northerncowboynation]

To be fair, Dak is pretty easy to forget.

And to be fair you're an Eagles fan. We'll see how long wincer stays relevant

 

[CouchCoach]

To be fair, Dak is pretty easy to forget.

Point taken but you are prejudiced and it is easier to forget a QB on crutches on the sideline.

 

[SoupcanSam]

OK, I was feeling left out and haven't had a Dak thread so this is my only one. But I thought I would combine a Ranching thread with this so what are you eating while reading and responding?

Who lost that Green Bay playoff game and the one in LA? It is a trick question because it's like a Dr. Seuss book, it was a lot of who's, like an entire team of them.

Dak Prescott played well enough to win both of those games and brought them back in that Green Bay game very smartly for a rookie QB. The D in one gets 18 points down and in the other lets the opposing team run it up the gut and limit Dak's time with the ball and opportunities. Those were team losses.

Hey, I agree about the inconsistent accuracy being a challenge but I've also seen enough accuracy from him that I know he can play the position. And let's assume he and the coaching staff are aware of that issue as well and are working on that together.

What's the most important trait for a QB, any player? What do you think Eagles fans would say it is for a QB? Durability, doesn't matter how good a player is if he can't show up consistently and we've got a Tier 1 when it comes to that and he plays a little contact as well. Of all the teams, we can be the least concerned about the backup QB. And the Eagles?

It isn't about Prescott like it wasn't about Romo, it was about the teams they led and how their perceived their part in that. Romo was more risk because he felt he had to do something on every possession because he didn't have that first best friend, a D, but he proved how good he could be with that second best friend, a RB. Prescott has both best friends and they're better than Romo ever had.

And let's forget this "carrying the team" nonsense about these other QB's like Brady, Brees and Rodgers, do they really carry their teams or do they get the ball in the hands of the playmakers just like Aikman and Montana used to do? They do not carry the team, they execute the plays and it is the team that carries the team.

For whatever reason, fans take a liking to a player or not and the QB seems to catch most of that. No matter what the QB does, if someone doesn't like him, it's never going to be good enough and the weight of the load goes on his back.

This team will go as far as the team can take itself, not as far as the QB can take it. It's funny how Brady gets the GOAT tag, and he's pretty damned good, but ever notice every year he wins it, his run game and D are in the top 10, that's every year he's won it. Maybe Brees and Rodgers would have won more than that if their teams had done that and maybe Rivers could get to one.

I'd like to forget Dak because he is a problem.

Dak is not a championship kind of player.

He is a keep the game interesting kind of player and after another 9-10 years of zero SB's we start back over again.

Sorta like Romo.

 

[ItzKelz]

Dak has yet to have a scratch your head moment in the playoffs. The moment has never seemed to big for him; even against the likes of Rodgers and Wilson. It's a team sport so any one player could have done one or more things to win any game regular of playoff to include Dak. However, IMO Dak did not do anything glaring that caused us to lose in any of his playoff games.

 

[northerncowboynation]

OK, I was feeling left out and haven't had a Dak thread so this is my only one. But I thought I would combine a Ranching thread with this so what are you eating while reading and responding?

Who lost that Green Bay playoff game and the one in LA? It is a trick question because it's like a Dr. Seuss book, it was a lot of who's, like an entire team of them.

Dak Prescott played well enough to win both of those games and brought them back in that Green Bay game very smartly for a rookie QB. The D in one gets 18 points down and in the other lets the opposing team run it up the gut and limit Dak's time with the ball and opportunities. Those were team losses.

Hey, I agree about the inconsistent accuracy being a challenge but I've also seen enough accuracy from him that I know he can play the position. And let's assume he and the coaching staff are aware of that issue as well and are working on that together.

What's the most important trait for a QB, any player? What do you think Eagles fans would say it is for a QB? Durability, doesn't matter how good a player is if he can't show up consistently and we've got a Tier 1 when it comes to that and he plays a little contact as well. Of all the teams, we can be the least concerned about the backup QB. And the Eagles?

It isn't about Prescott like it wasn't about Romo, it was about the teams they led and how their perceived their part in that. Romo was more risk because he felt he had to do something on every possession because he didn't have that first best friend, a D, but he proved how good he could be with that second best friend, a RB. Prescott has both best friends and they're better than Romo ever had.

And let's forget this "carrying the team" nonsense about these other QB's like Brady, Brees and Rodgers, do they really carry their teams or do they get the ball in the hands of the playmakers just like Aikman and Montana used to do? They do not carry the team, they execute the plays and it is the team that carries the team.

For whatever reason, fans take a liking to a player or not and the QB seems to catch most of that. No matter what the QB does, if someone doesn't like him, it's never going to be good enough and the weight of the load goes on his back.

This team will go as far as the team can take itself, not as far as the QB can take it. It's funny how Brady gets the GOAT tag, and he's pretty damned good, but ever notice every year he wins it, his run game and D are in the top 10, that's every year he's won it. Maybe Brees and Rodgers would have won more than that if their teams had done that and maybe Rivers could get to one.

Two cents Charlie says good post. Did Aikman carry the team, no. Did Staubach, no. Did Romo, no. They did their bit and I know that QB is the most important position on the offense but every team needs a D to keep the score down, an o-line to protect the QB, a RB to share the load and WR's who can catch the ball. Aikman, Staubach had great defenses and teams around them. Romo too at times. I believe we're getting back to that.

Now to Moore, he's the key I believe

 

[northerncowboynation]

Dak has yet to have a scratch your head moment in the playoffs. The moment has never seemed to big for him; even against the likes of Rodgers and Wilson. It's a team sport so any one player could have done one or more things to win any game regular of playoff to include Dak. However, IMO Dak did not do anything glaring that caused us to lose in any of his playoff games.

The glare against the Packers was a timeout called with the offense cooking. The glare against the Rams was off Heath when he made Goff look like Cameron Newt

 

[G2]

The number one goal is to win the division. I see this team accomplishing that. I only hope they can move further in the playoffs.

 

[ItzKelz]

The glare against the Packers was a timeout called with the offense cooking. The glare against the Rams was off Heath when he made Goff look like Cameron Newt

I blame the greatness of Aaron for the Packers game and Kris Richard for the Rams game.

 

[G2]

Prescott has clearly played at a high enough level when it matters the most. No pouting or head-hanging when he blows a play for an INT etc, he bounces back and is a good leader. And, defenses have to respect his legs.

 

[TexasHillbilly]

To be fair, Dak is pretty easy to forget.

So would that mean Rivers is pretty easy to forget? He hasn't won crap either and isn't too flashy. Rivers D helped keep him in many games.

Dak just gets the job done. We'll see if he does any better this year. Man, I hope so.

 

[Mr_437]

Dak has yet to have a scratch your head moment in the playoffs. The moment has never seemed to big for him; even against the likes of Rodgers and Wilson. It's a team sport so any one player could have done one or more things to win any game regular of playoff to include Dak. However, IMO Dak did not do anything glaring that caused us to lose in any of his playoff games.

Pick 6 vs GB, on the screen to Bease...was a scratch your head moment.

Thanks Couch, for naming an attribute Dak has (durability) besides "he's a winner" cause we know it's a team sport as you've stated.

Let's not forget Aikman was on fire in the '92 SB his accuracy n decision making was HOF ish. Give Troy more credit, Staubach too even tho he was before me...cause he won it all. In fairness, Dak hasn't made a conference championship game, even though he's played well in the playoffs.

 

[CouchCoach]

I'd like to forget Dak because he is a problem.

Dak is not a championship kind of player.

He is a keep the game interesting kind of player and after another 9-10 years of zero SB's we start back over again.

Sorta like Romo.

You can project the next 9-10 years? Are Brees, Rodgers and Rivers championship kinds of players? They've got 2 between them. How about E. Manning and Flacco, championship kinds of players? 4 between them.

You could be right but I don't know how anyone can project 9-10 years out, I am struggling with just 1.

 

[CouchCoach]

Pick 6 vs GB, on the screen to Bease...was a scratch your head moment.

Thanks Couch, for naming an attribute Dak has (durability) besides "he's a winner" cause we know it's a team sport as you've stated.

Let's not forget Aikman was on fire in the '92 SB his accuracy n decision making was HOF ish. Give Troy more credit, Staubach too even tho he was before me...cause he won it all. In fairness, Dak hasn't made a conference championship game, even though he's played well in the playoffs.

True but look at the talent on both Aikman and Staubach's teams. Both had HOF RB's and one a HOF WR and the D's were peppered with great players and HOFers. And let's not forget coaching as well.

 

[Mr_437]

True but look at the talent on both Aikman and Staubach's teams. Both had HOF RB's and one a HOF WR and the D's were peppered with great players and HOFers. And let's not forget coaching as well.

Haha yeah... I'm firmly in the give Dak this year to get it done camp. I think he has everything (HOF TE, RB, LT, RG) around him to do some damage. Can't do anything about JG, but if Moore is on point Dak is golden.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

So would that mean Rivers is pretty easy to forget? He hasn't won crap either and isn't too flashy. Rivers D helped keep him in many games.

Dak just gets the job done. We'll see if he does any better this year. Man, I hope so.

Kinda, yeah

 

[CowboyRoy]

OK, I was feeling left out and haven't had a Dak thread so this is my only one. But I thought I would combine a Ranching thread with this so what are you eating while reading and responding?

Who lost that Green Bay playoff game and the one in LA? It is a trick question because it's like a Dr. Seuss book, it was a lot of who's, like an entire team of them.

Dak Prescott played well enough to win both of those games and brought them back in that Green Bay game very smartly for a rookie QB. The D in one gets 18 points down and in the other lets the opposing team run it up the gut and limit Dak's time with the ball and opportunities. Those were team losses.

Hey, I agree about the inconsistent accuracy being a challenge but I've also seen enough accuracy from him that I know he can play the position. And let's assume he and the coaching staff are aware of that issue as well and are working on that together.

What's the most important trait for a QB, any player? What do you think Eagles fans would say it is for a QB? Durability, doesn't matter how good a player is if he can't show up consistently and we've got a Tier 1 when it comes to that and he plays a little contact as well. Of all the teams, we can be the least concerned about the backup QB. And the Eagles?

It isn't about Prescott like it wasn't about Romo, it was about the teams they led and how their perceived their part in that. Romo was more risk because he felt he had to do something on every possession because he didn't have that first best friend, a D, but he proved how good he could be with that second best friend, a RB. Prescott has both best friends and they're better than Romo ever had.

And let's forget this "carrying the team" nonsense about these other QB's like Brady, Brees and Rodgers, do they really carry their teams or do they get the ball in the hands of the playmakers just like Aikman and Montana used to do? They do not carry the team, they execute the plays and it is the team that carries the team.

For whatever reason, fans take a liking to a player or not and the QB seems to catch most of that. No matter what the QB does, if someone doesn't like him, it's never going to be good enough and the weight of the load goes on his back.

This team will go as far as the team can take itself, not as far as the QB can take it. It's funny how Brady gets the GOAT tag, and he's pretty damned good, but ever notice every year he wins it, his run game and D are in the top 10, that's every year he's won it. Maybe Brees and Rodgers would have won more than that if their teams had done that and maybe Rivers could get to one.

Dak had no accuracy problems when his receivers were quality and his line wasn't giving up 56 sacks a year. He does have to work on his pocket awareness and getting rid of the ball, but again, that will diminish naturally with a better Oline. Although he does need to learn to deal with it when there is lots of pressure. Wont always be a clean pocket.

 

[PhillySpecial]

OK, I was feeling left out and haven't had a Dak thread so this is my only one. But I thought I would combine a Ranching thread with this so what are you eating while reading and responding?

Who lost that Green Bay playoff game and the one in LA? It is a trick question because it's like a Dr. Seuss book, it was a lot of who's, like an entire team of them.

Dak Prescott played well enough to win both of those games and brought them back in that Green Bay game very smartly for a rookie QB. The D in one gets 18 points down and in the other lets the opposing team run it up the gut and limit Dak's time with the ball and opportunities. Those were team losses.

Hey, I agree about the inconsistent accuracy being a challenge but I've also seen enough accuracy from him that I know he can play the position. And let's assume he and the coaching staff are aware of that issue as well and are working on that together.

What's the most important trait for a QB, any player? What do you think Eagles fans would say it is for a QB? Durability, doesn't matter how good a player is if he can't show up consistently and we've got a Tier 1 when it comes to that and he plays a little contact as well. Of all the teams, we can be the least concerned about the backup QB. And the Eagles?

It isn't about Prescott like it wasn't about Romo, it was about the teams they led and how their perceived their part in that. Romo was more risk because he felt he had to do something on every possession because he didn't have that first best friend, a D, but he proved how good he could be with that second best friend, a RB. Prescott has both best friends and they're better than Romo ever had.

And let's forget this "carrying the team" nonsense about these other QB's like Brady, Brees and Rodgers, do they really carry their teams or do they get the ball in the hands of the playmakers just like Aikman and Montana used to do? They do not carry the team, they execute the plays and it is the team that carries the team.

For whatever reason, fans take a liking to a player or not and the QB seems to catch most of that. No matter what the QB does, if someone doesn't like him, it's never going to be good enough and the weight of the load goes on his back.

This team will go as far as the team can take itself, not as far as the QB can take it. It's funny how Brady gets the GOAT tag, and he's pretty damned good, but ever notice every year he wins it, his run game and D are in the top 10, that's every year he's won it. Maybe Brees and Rodgers would have won more than that if their teams had done that and maybe Rivers could get to one.

Whatever happened to "we win as a team, we lose as a team"?

A lot of times there's 1 or 2 plays that stick out as to why a team won or lost. But there's many plays during a game that are there to be made, and for one reason or another, they aren't. A missed block. A miscommunication between QB and WR. A dropped pass. A DB falls down. Miscommunication on D. There's also plays that are made when everything happening during that play are breaking down, and it's successful anyway.

Until there's a stat of plays that weren't made but were there to be made, and a stat that shows passes not thrown that should've been thrown, I think there will never be a consensus of whether or not some players are good or not so good.

 

[visionary]

And to be fair you're an Eagles fan. We'll see how long wincer stays relevant

'Stays relevant ' assumes he's been relevant
The guy has been MIA in December and playoffs every single year