If Dak was still playing would we be 3-9?

[Kingofholland]

...nope, I honestly think Dak would have us at least 7-5. There were a few games the defense played well to win them. Of course with Dak at the helm. Dalton is just a leg worth all of Dak.

But I suppose whatever was not right with the team, would eventually get exposed.

..thoughts? ..

Yes, we would have had a better record. D would still hold this team back but maybe some players make a better effort. I still don't see more than 2-3 wins on the schedule.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

The Dak-led Cowboys were 1 and 3 and the only win was a fluke win over the hapless Falcons which the Cowboys needed a miraculous onside kick.

Dak was not playing well the first 4 games. He got a lot of garbage stats. He started to play better against the Giants but broke his leg on his second run of the game in the 3rd quarter and he broke his ankle even before contact.

Dak would not run much and it was hurting the team along with Dak’s turnovers.

I would say Dak is Jameis Winston talent level or slightly better with good leadership skills. The talent and audible skill is lacking overall for a QB.

Can the Cowboys win with Dak? Yes.
Can the Cowboys rely on Dak to carry the team? No.
Can the Cowboys win paying Dak over $30M? No.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

So didn't the cowboys lose the lead twice while Dak was the Quarterback in that game? People are blaming Dalton for losing the lead when Dak himself was QB when the cowboys lost the lead in the same game. And then they just assume that he would win when we had a one point lead in the 3rd. This based on a 1-3 record from the previous 4 games?

but the point is that we had the lead, drove easily to the 19 and were going to score (as we did)....go up by 8.....the momentum was with dallas.

if a team is 0-1, does it mean they are a bad team? does it mean they will end up 1-15? or 2-14? at the time giants were 1-3, but its obvious they are better than cowboys now (without Dak)....they beat seattle and have had a 4 game win streak....

 

[Blitzen]

...nope, I honestly think Dak would have us at least 7-5. There were a few games the defense played well to win them. Of course with Dak at the helm. Dalton is just a leg worth all of Dak.

But I suppose whatever was not right with the team, would eventually get exposed.
..thoughts? ..

We would be hovering at .500 and in line to get drilled the first or second game of the playoffs. You won't need to watch games for at least 3-4 years after they sign Dak to an extension as this will be the season outcome as long as he stays healthy. But look at those jersey sales and passing yardage! Fap, fap, fap!

 

[ultron]

No, we would’ve completely discombobulated the Steelers by at least 3 TDs. We completely dominated that game with a QB in which I have forgot his name (and I’m not joking).

 

[OmerV]

You can give credit to the quarterback who drove the ball on the game winning drive. If your starting quarterback goes out with a one point lead, usually you expect to lose that game if there is enough time left on the clock. So you going from an expected lost game to an unexpected win.

So, by that standard if I team could win 50-48 with one QB in the game for 47 points and one being in for 3, but because the 3 was at the end of the game he gets full credit for the win and the QB that was part of 94% of the scoring gets no credit.

Sorry, but that's a ridiculous standard.

 

[Kevinicus]

We likely win against Philly/Pittsburg with Dalton or Dak, so no.

 

[cowboyec]

we would be winning this division...easily.

 

[basel90]

maybe one more win , but only maybe. Hard to see which game he would have won. People forget the many losses with dak and the intact OL . And now we have his serious injury and 40 million cost on the cap. Not sure the math works with this team . This team needs a defensive overhaul and OL help .

 

[Slick]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

The season before Dak comes the team is horrible suddenly Dak takes over and the team gets to 13 wins in 15 tries...That team never has a losing season...even in the season where supposedly our "entire offense, Zeke" is on the bench for 6 games...in 4 years.

Now the team is suddenly horrible again now that Dak is out.

Let me guess, Dak just magically appears only at the most opportune times, right? Dak makes little to no difference. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

It is similar to Cleveland and Lebron James. Lebron James just magically appears but only at the most opportune times for the Cavs. And Lebron leaves right when he magically knows that the team is not going to be good anymore.

So you're saying he's good for 5 wins just showing up on the field? Like I said, there's 52 other players......He doesn't play defense.....The O Line is "offensive"

Take out his first season as there was no scouting or game film on him......where does that sit? Kapernick had the same type of rookie season......ran lots, because he was unknown to those defenses year one. He's got more playoff wins than Dak.

Where's all Dak's playoff wins if he's all that? He's a part of the team, not the team. Is it slightly better with him on the field, sure I've never denied that anywhere.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

There was a little time there where the defense got better. They were actually getting some turnovers. Dak never had that pleasure early in the season. Then special teams had gotten better as well.

We also lost O-line through the stretch too.

A side note...it;s funny...the Tankers didn't want us to win another game, even if it meant division. Now here we are...hoping to be 8-8 and either drop the division in the last game like Dak did last year or get booted out.

Yes..I said "Dak" since that's who we're talking about...and had a poor game to LOSE the division last year. injury or no injury.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

So you're saying he's good for 5 wins just showing up on the field? Like I said, there's 52 other players......He doesn't play defense.....The O Line is "offensive"

Take out his first season as there was no scouting or game film on him......where does that sit? Kapernick had the same type of rookie season......ran lots, because he was unknown to those defenses year one. He's got more playoff wins than Dak.

Where's all Dak's playoff wins if he's all that? He's a part of the team, not the team. Is it slightly better with him on the field, sure I've never denied that anywhere.

At the end of the day...until we "fix" the team...we're at the same spot.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

We also lost O-line through the stretch too.

A side note...it;s funny...the Tankers didn't want us to win another game, even if it meant division. Now here we are...hoping to be 8-8 and either drop the division in the last game like Dak did last year or get booted out.

Yes..I said "Dak" since that's who we're talking about...and had a poor game to LOSE the division last year. injury or no injury.

The offensive line is bad regardless of how many guys they lost. It was bad with Martin and was bad without it. Not a valid excuse especially since last game the offensive line did their job.

I don't even know what your point of bringing up or Dak or what you're trying to say...are you saying he sucks?

 

[cowboyec]

The Dak-led Cowboys were 1 and 3 and the only win was a fluke win over the hapless Falcons which the Cowboys needed a miraculous onside kick.

Dak was not playing well the first 4 games. He got a lot of garbage stats. He started to play better against the Giants but broke his leg on his second run of the game in the 3rd quarter and he broke his ankle even before contact.

Dak would not run much and it was hurting the team along with Dak’s turnovers.

I would say Dak is Jameis Winston talent level or slightly better with good leadership skills. The talent and audible skill is lacking overall for a QB.

Can the Cowboys win with Dak? Yes.
Can the Cowboys rely on Dak to carry the team? No.
Can the Cowboys win paying Dak over $30M? No.

he broke his leg?

 

[Typhus]

we would have a strangle hold on the division.

We would have a strange hold on the division.

 

[Gangsta Spanksta]

So, by that standard if I team could win 50-48 with one QB in the game for 47 points and one being in for 3, but because the 3 was at the end of the game he gets full credit for the win and the QB that was part of 94% of the scoring gets no credit.

Sorry, but that's a ridiculous standard.

Sure if the starting quarterback gets injured with 50-48, and there was enough time on the clock that everyone would assume the game is a loss, I would credit the quarterback who had the game winning drive with the game, because the starting quarterback going out would have insured a loss in most cases and the backup came in and delivered an unexpected win. I mean you can keep coming up with examples of a quarterback doing less that dalton did, but I think you'll miss the point that when Dak went down and was unable to comeback, at that point we effectively have an expected loss. Dak was unable to add anything to the score to increase that 1 point lead and our defense wasn't going to not allow the other team to score with over a quarter left to play.

 

[OmerV]

Sure if the starting quarterback gets injured with 50-48, and there was enough time on the clock that everyone would assume the game is a loss, I would credit the quarterback who had the game winning drive with the game, because the starting quarterback going out would have insured a loss in most cases and the backup came in and delivered an unexpected win. I mean you can keep coming up with examples of a quarterback doing less that dalton did, but I think you'll miss the point that when Dak went down and was unable to comeback, at that point we effectively have an expected loss. Dak was unable to add anything to the score to increase that 1 point lead and our defense wasn't going to not allow the other team to score with over a quarter left to play.

You just undermined your own standard. Dalton didn't inherit what seemed to be a sure loss, he inherited a lead and possession of the football within the red zone where the expectation was that the lead would be expanded further.

As for Dak being unable to add anything to the score that increased the lead, I would say being the QB for the majority of the drive did add something. What did Dalton add on that drive - a spectacular hand off to Zeke?

But hell, if you insist on Dalton's handoff to Zeke being enough to give him full credit for that drive, it still leaves 24 points with Dak at QB, and 13 with Dalton.

The reality is it was a combined effort. I would give the nod to the QB in place for most of the scoring drives, but Dalton played a part as well. It certainly doesn't make sense to give Dak no credit at all. That's nonsensical. The reality is, getting in range for a game winning FG isn't all that contributed to the win. There would have been no opportunity for that without all the points leading up to it.

 

[Rockport]

...nope, I honestly think Dak would have us at least 7-5. There were a few games the defense played well to win them. Of course with Dak at the helm. Dalton is just a leg worth all of Dak.

But I suppose whatever was not right with the team, would eventually get exposed.

..thoughts? ..

With this defense who knows. Even Brady can’t overcome a bad defense and he’s got a decent one in TB.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

he broke his leg?

Yeah, he broke his leg or more specifically his ankle. Why?
There was a video of a doctor here and he analyzed the video and showed that the ankle was breaking before contact if that is what you are getting at.

 

[Gangsta Spanksta]

You just undermined your own standard. Dalton didn't inherit what seemed to be a sure loss, he inherited a lead and possession of the football within the red zone where the expectation was that the lead would be expanded further.

As for Dak being unable to add anything to the score that increased the lead, I would say being the QB for the majority of the drive did add something. What did Dalton add on that drive - a spectacular hand off to Zeke?

But hell, if you insist on Dalton's handoff to Zeke being enough to give him full credit for that drive, it still leaves 24 points with Dak at QB, and 13 with Dalton.

The reality is it was a combined effort. I would give the nod to the QB in place for most of the scoring drives, but Dalton played a part as well. It certainly doesn't make sense to give Dak no credit at all. That's nonsensical. The reality is, getting in range for a game winning FG isn't all that contributed to the win. There would have been no opportunity for that without all the points leading up to it.

I said when the starting quarterback goes out and there and the score is the way it was and there is way over a quarter of play left. That is an expected loss. Dalton did the unexpected and won. And again, Dak had a 1 point lead. That is an almost tie. something the other team can negate by going for two against our defense. You are making it sound like Dak left Dalton with a big lead to expand upon. You also make it sound like all Dalton did was hand it off to Zeke that there was no game winning drive in which he contributed in. Are you sure you are arguing in good faith here?