Go get Andy Dalton

Bohuntr97

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,109
Reaction score
1,211
No one was going to trade draft capital for a backup/potential starter with his remaining salary this year. Every GM knows he is going to be a FA in a few months when they cut him. The Bungles are just playing poker hoping a potential contender has an injury.
 

GenoT

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,985
Reaction score
8,739
Andy Dalton isn’t gonna accept the kind of backup-QB money Jerry pays in order to play behind Dak Prescott.
 

Established1971

fiveandcounting
Messages
5,503
Reaction score
4,107
I wish we'd kept Matt Moore. Whomever decided to let that guy go needs to get their butt kicked over and over again IMO.
I remember him playing in the preseason for the Boys, reminds me of Jim Zorn a bit, though that guy had a good career as a starter
 

ABQCOWBOY

Regular Joe....
Messages
58,929
Reaction score
27,716
I don't care about a backup journeyman. I'm sorry. If that's what you want the Cowboys to have they could've easily went out and got Josh McCown or Ryan Fitzpatrick.

Yeah, or they just could have kept Moore, who was much cheaper and who was already there for us. I too am sorry, that you don't get that.
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
74,169
Reaction score
69,129
Yeah, or they just could have kept Moore, who was much cheaper and who was already there for us. I too am sorry, that you don't get that.
If Moore was here then what? He would’ve took Romo’s job? Like how would things have been different lol?
 

ABQCOWBOY

Regular Joe....
Messages
58,929
Reaction score
27,716
If Moore was here then what? He would’ve took Romo’s job? Like how would things have been different lol?

We would have had a decent Backup in place who was cheap, who could have stepped in and actually played, rather then paying for a litany of crappy QBs. Tony goes down and we don't have to go out and scrounge for a QB. You have a good backup who can give you starts if need be, a QB who has learned the system and can actually step in and win you games. Oh, I don't know, maybe like a guy like Garrett did years ago? Maybe you don't go 4-12 in a year where you were good enough to challenge for an NFC title.

You save all the wasted money and resources it cost to bring in a list of crappy backup QBs since.

But of course, lets give the guy away instead because that fits the narrative better apparently. I mean, come on, I should not have to explain this to you. It's really basic stuff we are talking about here. What is the point of this? Is there a reason you think it was better to simply give him away, in favor of keeping Isaiah Stanback, I believe it was?
 

DandyDon52

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,207
Reaction score
15,282
Dalton has a $17 million cap hit for next season, and you can't escape it by releasing him.

It would be foolish to trade for him to be a back up, unless people actually believe he'd lead Dallas somewhere if Dak got hurt. :muttley:

He's 0-4 in playoff games.
Well I would not want to pay him that much, no one will for him to be a bkup.
I think that can all be renegotiated, he would have to come down to a realistic price if he wants to play, or otherwise
just ride it out in cincy.
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
74,169
Reaction score
69,129
We would have had a decent Backup in place who was cheap, who could have stepped in and actually played, rather then paying for a litany of crappy QBs. Tony goes down and we don't have to go out and scrounge for a QB. You have a good backup who can give you starts if need be, a QB who has learned the system and can actually step in and win you games. Oh, I don't know, maybe like a guy like Garrett did years ago? Maybe you don't go 4-12 in a year where you were good enough to challenge for an NFC title.

You save all the wasted money and resources it cost to bring in a list of crappy backup QBs since.

But of course, lets give the guy away instead because that fits the narrative better apparently. I mean, come on, I should not have to explain this to you. It's really basic stuff we are talking about here. What is the point of this? Is there a reason you think it was better to simply give him away, in favor of keeping Isaiah Stanback, I believe it was?

Moore would’ve sucked just like the rest of the backups we had that looked good elsewhere but bad here. Moore would’ve faired no different.
 

mattjames2010

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,473
Reaction score
20,152
Moore would’ve sucked just like the rest of the backups we had that looked good elsewhere but bad here. Moore would’ve faired no different.

While I don't know how things would have turned out, but I do know we actually needed a quality backup in 2008. We went 1-2 with him (he was garbage against the Bucs, lucky to get a W), and those 2 losses factored in greatly at the end of the season. Moore would have been the better option, he went 3-1 down the stretch for the Panthers in 2009 when he got his shot.
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
74,169
Reaction score
69,129
While I don't know how things would have turned out, but I do know we actually needed a quality backup in 2008. We went 1-2 with him (he was garbage against the Bucs, lucky to get a W), and those 2 losses factored in greatly at the end of the season. Moore would have been the better option, he went 3-1 down the stretch for the Panthers in 2009 when he got his shot.
I see no reason to believe Moore would've did any better. That 2008 team.....that was arguably Romo's worst year as a pro if I remember correctly. Panthers did go 2-1 with Matt Moore but that wasn't because of him. 3 Touchdowns and 5 picks?
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,054
Reaction score
46,962
While I don't know how things would have turned out, but I do know we actually needed a quality backup in 2008. We went 1-2 with him (he was garbage against the Bucs, lucky to get a W), and those 2 losses factored in greatly at the end of the season. Moore would have been the better option, he went 3-1 down the stretch for the Panthers in 2009 when he got his shot.
I'm still in shock that we didn't even notice that Brad Johnson could no longer throw 20 yards. One of the signs that people on websites could actually evaluate better than the staff.
 

mattjames2010

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,473
Reaction score
20,152
I see no reason to believe Moore would've did any better. That 2008 team.....that was arguably Romo's worst year as a pro if I remember correctly. Panthers did go 2-1 with Matt Moore but that wasn't because of him. 3 Touchdowns and 5 picks?

That was 2007. I mentioned 2009, he had 8 TDs to 2 INTs that year. He played really well. But even in 2007, outside of the game against us (if I remember correctly, wasn't that game pretty close?), he completed over 60% of his passes and had over 7 yards a completion - compare that to how Brad Johnson played for us. He was done. He was finished.

Romo came back inconsistent after missing 3 weeks - in that period, we went 1-2. We lost to a divisional rival and the Rams (a game we should have won). It played a part in us missing the playoffs, this is the very reason to have a valuable backup - they don't have to light the field on fire, they need to be capable. Brad Johnson was not that, Matt Moore has shown to be a career backup and was young at the time and our staff simply missed on it and we faced the consequences.
 

ABQCOWBOY

Regular Joe....
Messages
58,929
Reaction score
27,716
Moore would’ve sucked just like the rest of the backups we had that looked good elsewhere but bad here. Moore would’ve faired no different.

Perhaps, but you don't no that. BTW, what backups did we sign here that looked good elsewhere?
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
74,169
Reaction score
69,129
That was 2007. I mentioned 2009, he had 8 TDs to 2 INTs that year. He played really well. But even in 2007, outside of the game against us (if I remember correctly, wasn't that game pretty close?), he completed over 60% of his passes and had over 7 yards a completion - compare that to how Brad Johnson played for us. He was done. He was finished.

Romo came back inconsistent after missing 3 weeks - in that period, we went 1-2. We lost to a divisional rival and the Rams (a game we should have won). It played a part in us missing the playoffs, this is the very reason to have a valuable backup - they don't have to light the field on fire, they need to be capable. Brad Johnson was not that, Matt Moore has shown to be a career backup and was young at the time and our staff simply missed on it and we faced the consequences.
What consequences lol? There’s no consequences to losing a backup. He left here and was still a backup. We will never know how good he would’ve been here....all I can do is look at what the rest of the backups we have had and they’ve all sucked. There were plenty of backups they could’ve gotten...they chose to settle for the Brad Johnson’s.....
 

ABQCOWBOY

Regular Joe....
Messages
58,929
Reaction score
27,716
Cassell and Kitna looked better at their previous destinations.....

Cassel sucked out loud IMO. I think he started 4 games for us, never threw for 300, we lost every game. Against Seattle, he was something like 13-25 for 97 yards and that's it. We spent a 5th and a 7th for that guy and paid him 1.75 Mil. Kitna, he was good, starter good some might say, but he also costed us 2.14 mil and we only had him for 2 seasons and that was three season after we let Moore go for nothing.

So I can agree with you that Kitna was decent but not Cassel and both were much more expensive then Moore would have been. JMO
 

darthseinfeld

Groupthink Guru
Messages
31,869
Reaction score
36,326
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
Andy Dalton isn’t gonna accept the kind of backup-QB money Jerry pays in order to play behind Dak Prescott.
He gave Orton solid backup money. Dont know if he will be willing to pay decent back up money again, or if Dalton will accept backup money. But we do alot worse than Dalton as a backup
 
Top