I rewatched the Rams game and Dak was not the issue

visionary

Well-Known Member
Messages
27,631
Reaction score
32,052
A big part of the problem was in a close game, Dak did what he should, taking what was given and not risking turnovers. Then when it became crunch time, time for a drive to tie or win the game, our last two possessions started on our own 12 and 9 yard lines....the final resulting in a first and 20 due to penalty.

My problem is that this is not just about this game for Dak. Percy had previously posted stars for Dak when pressured and they were pretty bad. In playoffs all teams are very very good and the winner has to overcome adversity for 4 straight weeks against the best teams and best coaching. I’m concerned that Dak is a good QB who can do well generally but push comes to shove and he can’t deliver. I hope to God we don’t pay him 35-40 million per year to become our franchise qb unless he shows this year that he can take us deep into the playoffs
 

Nav22

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,813
Reaction score
16,969
The defense wasn’t perfect. But they held the Rams to 20 points on the road.

They did their part.

The offense sputtered.
I love how you people completely dismiss time of possession. Ridiculous.

The Rams converted 9-17 on 3rd down but the defense “did their part”?
:laugh:
 

visionary

Well-Known Member
Messages
27,631
Reaction score
32,052
Obvious to anyone with half a brain and no clear bias against Dak.

Ranked 5th-best QB in Week 1 by PFF, 9th-best by Total QBR.

I’m sure you know everything about people with half a brain
 

Gangsta Spanksta

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,790
Reaction score
8,786
How old are you? I know what I know because I played through those football years. Dan Marino threw for over 5,000 yards in 1983. He went on to repeatedly throw for over 4,000+ yards per season many times until 1995, so don't give me your baloney how the QBs from those eras (80s and 90s) couldn't throw for as many yards as today's QBs. That's nothing but a bunch of bull.

Just because there were quarterbacks, like Marino, who threw for a lot of yards, doesn't mean that the rule changes since that time hasn't increased QBs yardages and completions. It just shows how good Marino was and if he played in the current era his numbers would be even higher. And here is where you Dak fans like to tune out, but it also shows how a good quarterback like Dak in this Era, who threw for 4902 last year, numbers are increased when you start comparing him to Hall of Famers like Marino. I know in a lot of your dak fan minds, Dak is already a Hall of Famer and you think he compares to the likes of Marino, is better than Aikman, and you don't want to acknowledge the fact that rules have been change in the NFL to 1) Protect the receivers and quarterbacks and 2) Increase the the scores and pace of the game. You'll neglect all the news articles and sports talk throughout the years that talked about these rule changes before they got implement, how the would effect the game in the future, and how they effected the game once implemented. It's not like these rules changes popped out of nowhere and nobody ever talked about them, and talk about them lots they did. No you won't acknowledge them because it doesn't fit your narrative and world view where Dak is a future hall of famer, not only better than Romo, but better than Aikman and the reason he has numbers that are getting close to Marino's is because he is elite and not just good, because you already have him in hall of famer levels in your mind.
 

Zeke-2K-Yards

Active Member
Messages
153
Reaction score
166
Must not have watched the last two and a half minutes. Dak was throwing 5 yard passes and ran off 2 minutes to gain like 15 yards. Absolutely unacceptable, and I haven’t heard many people mentioning that.
 

Nav22

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,813
Reaction score
16,969
I’m sure you know everything about people with half a brain
Thanks!

People with half a brain (like yourself) know nothing about their own handicap. They drool while watching football with zero ability to process what they’re seeing.

Good thing there’s smarter people around to help you out!
 

America's Cowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
33,437
Reaction score
46,882
Just because there were quarterbacks, like Marino, who threw for a lot of yards, doesn't mean that the rule changes since that time hasn't increased QBs yardages and completions. It just shows how good Marino was and if he played in the current era his numbers would be even higher. And here is where you Dak fans like to tune out, but it also shows how a good quarterback like Dak in this Era, who threw for 4902 last year, numbers are increased when you start comparing him to Hall of Famers like Marino. I know in a lot of your dak fan minds, Dak is already a Hall of Famer and you think he compares to the likes of Marino, is better than Aikman, and you don't want to acknowledge the fact that rules have been change in the NFL to 1) Protect the receivers and quarterbacks and 2) Increase the the scores and pace of the game. You'll neglect all the news articles and sports talk throughout the years that talked about these rule changes before they got implement, how the would effect the game in the future, and how they effected the game once implemented. It's not like these rules changes popped out of nowhere and nobody ever talked about them, and talk about them lots they did. No you won't acknowledge them because it doesn't fit your narrative and world view where Dak is a future hall of famer, not only better than Romo, but better than Aikman and the reason he has numbers that are getting close to Marino's is because he is elite and not just good, because you already have him in hall of famer levels in your mind.
Football is football. The only difference back then was how much harder the Defense could hit. But, overall, it was still the same. Granted, the offensive passing attack playbook was in its infancy, but since 1980, every year there was at least 1 or more QBs passing for 4,000+ yards. In several years throughout the 80s, there were 2 or more QBs passing for 4,000+ yards. Even Marino came in and threw for several 4,000+ yard seasons, including his second year 5,000+ passing season. This is not including the 1990s QBs. It's not much different than today. So let's stop with the nonsense.
 

Clove

Shrinkage
Messages
64,666
Reaction score
27,231
This is McCarthy's show not Moore's show. MM needs to take over play calling and play design, like right now. You can't run this game plan when your defense can't get guys off the field. If your defense is very stout, then you can run this run attack game plan. I also think they need to get help on this offensive line ASAP, otherwise, we might be done.
 

Clove

Shrinkage
Messages
64,666
Reaction score
27,231
Dak has had lots of game winning drives. Not defending him but that throw to Gallup was money. If no flag we likey win. Then would people be giving him credit for pulling it out or saying he should have been doing it all game long. I am not a lover or hater of him. This game was for sure a team failure. I saw a few passes that could be better. And apparently he is going to have to roll himself out. Moore can’t seem to call a designed roll out or notice that we were killing them using play action.
That play killed the come back. If it was a simple drop or a greatly defended pass, then it would've been a 3rd and 10 vs 2nd and 20. Those 20 yards killed our chances. Dak was not a difference maker, but not every game, your QB is the difference maker, if that were the case, teams would go undefeated, and they don't. We need, collectively, for our defense to STOP THE RUN. If they can at least do that, that would give us more chances on offense. If we're not going to have more chances on offense, then our coaches need to be aggressive and not play ball-control offense. Think Giants game last year. Attack attack attack. That's just my 2 cents.
 

DandyDon52

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,452
Reaction score
15,486
Dak didn't play good enough to win, or we would have won! Look, he wasn't bad, he was ok. He was not a difference maker. The pass on 4th down was not "perfect" it was low and behind him, just because it was catchable, doesn't mean ti was a good throw, let alone perfect. The ball to Shultz on 3rd down was not a perfect throw, it was catchable and it should have been caught but it was high and to the right I believe, he had to reach far to the right to catch it.
agree.
I watched the game again, and dak didnt play all that good or bad.
He isnt the reason we lost, I blame MM and kellen for that, the not kick tying FG, is on MM, and the sloppy vanilla and at times stupid and
not innovative offense is on those 2 clowns.
I thought this year we could judge dak more fairly with good coaches and new offense, but this game seemed like
everything is still the same as the garrett years.
No innovation , things that defy common sense, no adjustments etc etc.
 

johneric8

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,221
Reaction score
3,159
The defense wasn’t perfect. But they held the Rams to 20 points on the road.

They did their part.

The offense sputtered.
It's not about points as the end all be all! Did you look at the time of possession discrepancy? This was bad defensive game planning and putrid online protection. Dak wasn't perfect but he was solid. Online sucked, defense couldn't get off the field, clean that up and the offense puts up 30 easily. QBs all need help.
 

Gangsta Spanksta

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,790
Reaction score
8,786
Football is football. The only difference back then was how much harder the Defense could hit. But, overall, it was still the same. Granted, the offensive passing attack playbook was in its infancy, but since 1980, every year there was at least 1 or more QBs passing for 4,000+ yards. In several years throughout the 80s, there were 2 or more QBs passing for 4,000+ yards. Even Marino came in and threw for several 4,000+ yard seasons, including his second year 5,000+ passing season. This is not including the 1990s QBs. It's not much different than today. So let's stop with the nonsense.

The only difference... Here you have had many of the offensive players who had retired talk about this endlessly about how the game has changed, former receivers, quarterbacks, coaches... In here is the hypocrisy of it all: You claim to have more football knowledge than the rest of us because you played a bit of high school football, but then you discount that people who say otherwise from you who have played football in high school, college, pros and/or became coaches would have more football knowledge than you. the same people who have been talking for years about how the game has been changing. Like I said this isn't something that happened over night; this is something that has been talked about before the rule changes were even implemented. And then you want us to discount the fact that the points per game have went up since these rules changes have been implemented, where in the 90's you had lower scores at the end of the games compared to today, and now we have 400 yard thrown by quarterbacks all the time once the rule changes were implemented. Anyway, this conversation has revealed all I need to know about your football knowledge and rationality.
 

mperfection

Active Member
Messages
975
Reaction score
227
That is not the point

Every single team has issues of the kind you are bringing up

A great QB finds a way to overcome those issues and get his team past the finish line

Dak needs every other facet to be perfect for the team to win
That ain’t happening in the NFL against the best teams in the playoffs

We have to come to terms with the fact that Dak is not that QB. He will not be THE REASON we won despite other deficiencies
Simply wrong in your “analysis” of Dak. Dak was NOT the issue Sunday night. There may be, per chance, another game where your “analysis” may have merit, but it certainly wasn’t Sunday night’s game.
 

phildadon86

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,810
Reaction score
31,116
You are so wrong. Considering the lack of blocking Dak got, he played very well. Any objective football fan could see that!

Blocking matters to a QB! Don’t you understand that?
The oline only matters here when people use it to defend Daks predecessor
 

DogFace

Carharris2
Messages
13,139
Reaction score
15,602
That is not the point

Every single team has issues of the kind you are bringing up

A great QB finds a way to overcome those issues and get his team past the finish line

Dak needs every other facet to be perfect for the team to win
That ain’t happening in the NFL against the best teams in the playoffs

We have to come to terms with the fact that Dak is not that QB. He will not be THE REASON we won despite other deficiencies
And great QBs are easily found. I’m not sure why every team doesn’t get one.
 

mperfection

Active Member
Messages
975
Reaction score
227
Dak wasnt the issue

he also wasnt a solution

it is what it is......whole team gets a D- for me
Simply wrong. Dak did indeed put us in position to win. Did you watch the way he orchestrated the 2-minute drill before half...you know, the one where he drove us 80 yards for a touchdown that actually put us ahead for the first time in the game? Or the critical run of his on 3rd and long late in the game that sustained the drive? Or the absolute DIME he dropped in Gallup’s hands late in the game that would have at least put us in position to tie the game with a field goal or, better yet, put us in position to win the game, but was negated by wrongly-called PI on Gallup? Oh and by the way, if “Greg the leg” Zeurlein had made his earlier FG then we might have been in position to win the game 23-20 instead of losing 17-20.

But don’t let a few facts get in the way of your logic...
 

mperfection

Active Member
Messages
975
Reaction score
227
People nobody is saying dak played bad. However is it not unreasonable to expect more out of him. People we were leading at halftime 14-13. The much maligned defense only gave up 7 points second half. Dak's offense only gave us 3. How is that not his fault?

You can't sit here and make excuse after excuse for the guy. He played good, we needed great. When a guy is asking for mahomes or russel wilson money i don't think thats too much to ask i'm sorry.

He can't just beat up on inferior teams like last year and expect us to all be ok with that. He has great players around him, a coach that isn't garret. In a weak division. If he can't win this year how will he in the future?

Btw i'm not a dak hater. I was one who wanted to give him the money. Now i'm glad we franchised him. Anything short of an NFC championship this year is no good.
Maybe two of the reasons we only scored 3 points in the second half had NOTHING to do with the QB play? Do you think calling a run on a critical 3rd and 6 in Rams territory could have been part of the reason? Or that our prized rookie WR subsequently ran a route incorrectly on a critical 4 and 3 could be a second reason? Contrary to your “logic”, it was PRECISELY the QB play that put us in Ram’s territory for what could have been a go-ahead TD.
 

mperfection

Active Member
Messages
975
Reaction score
227
I went through the game again last night and I have to say that after I was finished I actually found myself disappointed in many dak haters on this board.

First and foremost, The defense allowed some incredibly ridiculous long drives and owned the time of possession that left very little room for error.

Dak protected the ball and made some very nice throws and a run even though the offensive line afforded him zero time. Obviously our line was rated as one of the worst in the league from a pressure standpoint.

Dak was given a lackluster gameplan that gave us no real advantage. Mcvay knew we were going to bring a ton of pressure so he attacked us with short dump offs and nice blocking to take advantage of our pressure. We really did nothing to stop this most of the game and this is what ate up the clock. Why wouldn't the cowboys use more motion and mix play calling up better than what they did?

This leads me to the pandemic and how it messed with us being able to implement a new system. What we are seeing is similar to what we had last year and much of this can be blamed on not having more time to change things up and implement all the new designs and formations..

Dak played more than good enough to win this game, but once again, no coaching and scheme advantage, mixed with horrible offensive line play. If you look at a couple crucial drives where we didn't covert that would of put us in front, you will find Cooper dropping a perfectly thrown ball after a big hit, and you will also see Shultz drop a very important pass that he should of caught. This was a very good pass as well... Lets not forget Ceedee lamb making a rookie mistake and not running his route to the sticks on the 4th down play where Dak threw a perfect ball..

Dak also protected the football and throw an absolute beautiful ball to gallup that in most cases would of been called a completion. I watched this play over and over! Ramsey did indeed have his armed pinned before the ball arrived and Gallup reached into his chest to get away, but it wasn't a blatant push at all and the call should of never been made. This throw was pure clutch and perfectly executed and a crucial part of the game. If Gallup catches this ball we most likely win, or at least have a great chance..

After watching the game again, I came to the conclusion that Dak was one of the best players on that field on Sunday not named Zeke or Aaron Donald...

Quit getting sucked in by the media looking for ratings, or the guys on this forum that Hate Dak.. Any objective person that understands football can see the comedy of events that are happening that contributing to frustration with QB position. Dak gave us a great chance to win this game, I even dare say he played pretty darn good.. You don't believe me? Go back and watch the entire game again. Was he perfect? No, but the guy played pretty darn good.. I feel good about Dak, it's everyone else I worry about.. I think the Cowboys are just cursed if you want to be honest, I think the deal with the devil that Jerry made has run out.
Fantastic analysis and on point on every point!
 
Top