If the Cowboys lose to the Vikings and Giants, that should be enough

[ActualCowboysFan]

We should’ve won in a blowout but Dakota’s turnovers gave the Packers life. Green Bay would’ve laid down if we had gone up 10-0 or 17-0; you never want to give an inferior team hope, and that’s exactly what Dakota Rayne did

Aren’t you the guy who thinks the league is rigged so none of it matters?

 

[Cowfan75]

yes i know youll use time stamped things to create a narrative i already said you would do that. Our offense is better with Dak back in it..thats a fact that can be proven...unless you can show me where more points is not better...lower 3rd down convert rate is better, less TOP I mean what can you say that says the offense was better with Rush than Dak that can be proven? We literally move the ball better in every way with Dak back......can you show we dont?

Honestly, I don't care about stats. I care about wins, and we don't win with Dak...not against good teams. So if it's the defense that carries Rush, then fine, put Rush back in and let the defense win for him. The biggest FACT of all, is that we don't win with Dak, period. Not anything relevant, and not against good teams. We can debate how average Dak is all we want, but it doesn't change where we are.

 

[CowboyFrog]

Honestly, I don't care about stats. I care about wins, and we don't win with Dak...not against good teams. So if it's the defense that carries Rush, then fine, put Rush back in and let the defense win for him. The biggest FACT of all, is that we don't win with Dak, period. Not anything relevant, and not against good teams. We can debate how average Dak is all we want, but it doesn't change where we are.

Lol, right so as i said it wont be about facts. I get it you dont like Dak thats fine, just say "I dont like Dak because i dont like him" there is nothing to argue about at that point because thats a feeling and those are never logical. Saying Rush is better is an opinion not based on anything that can be proven with facts (stats you know the recorded record of what happened) but once again as long as you pass it as an opinion and not try and force it as fact to other posters there will be no argument from me as your opinion is yours to do with what you wish.

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

I think the problem is more on Moore than Dak.

 

[TheMightyVanHalen]

Okay, he's not making 40 million right now, this season. Now let's talk about every other criticism not related to money...his record, his inability to beat good teams, poor decisions, poor mechanics. You want to talk about all that, or should we just stick to money?

It's crazy how Romo's and Dak's careers are about the same. They both have an 18-24 record against winning teams. Romo has a playoff record of 2-4 and Dak has a 1-3. Romo has a 97.1 QB rating and as of right now Dak has a 97.3. It's almost identical. But Dak doesn't have a HOF receiver, a for sure ROH and possibly a HOF receiver and HOF TE to throw to like Romo had. So in my opinion Dak has done more with what he has to work with than Romo.

But like I supported Romo to the end, I'll support Dak too. I'm a Cowboys fan first and foremost, so I'll admit that Dak has to play better. I've made excuses for Romo and I'll make them for Dak. Dak's ankle is not right. It could be right but in his it is not. I think that's why he doesn't do the RPO's and bootlegs anymore, which he did so well early in his career. Judging by his QB sneak against the Bears, I think I can run faster than him. He looks very slow.

 

[CowboyFrog]

I think the problem is more on Moore than Dak.

Could be, again i fail to see why we keep going back to his shotgun scheme when clearly this current team does good things out of the under center ball control scheme he has ran.

 

[CowboyFrog]

It's crazy how Romo's and Dak's careers are about the same. They both have an 18-24 record against winning teams. Romo has a playoff record of 2-4 and Dak has a 1-3. Romo has a 97.1 QB rating and as of right now Dak has a 97.3. It's almost identical. But Dak doesn't have a HOF receiver, a for sure ROH and possibly a HOF receiver and HOF TE to throw to like Romo had. So in my opinion Dak has done more with what he has to work with than Romo.

But like I supported Romo to the end, I'll support Dak too. I'm a Cowboys fan first and foremost, so I'll admit that Dak has to play better. I've made excuses for Romo and I'll make them for Dak. Dak's ankle is not right. I think that's why he doesn't do the RPO's and bootlegs anymore, which he did so well early in his career. Judging by his QB sneak against the Bears, I think I can run faster than him. He looks very slow.

Great post! I am in the same boat killed me that Romo never got there because i thought he deserved too also, Same with Dak but yeah both have played a part in the reason they have not.

 

[TheSport78]

I don't know why I bother because Dak haters will always be haters regardless of the facts. I spent 30 minutes of my time, and I always say, "the richest man can't buy time so use it wisely," but I don't think I am. This will be my last comment to you because it won't change anything. Here are some more facts. After looking at all the stats from our 9 games. With the exception of the Bengal's game, the D was on the field longer with Rush's 5 games. With Dak's 4 games only the Bears game is where you see a big difference in TOP. The rest is about the same difference as the 5 games (minus the Bengal's game) with Cooper. We've only won the TOP in one game.

Have a good day.

Can you provide a source that shows the defense wasn’t on the field longer with Dakota starting? I love how because I have different viewpoint from you, I’m deemed a Dak hater.

 

[TheMightyVanHalen]

Great post! I am in the same boat killed me that Romo never got there because i thought he deserved too also, Same with Dak but yeah both have played a part in the reason they have not.

No doubt, brother. It's a team game. This isn't golf or tennis. Like I said here before, I got banned after we lost to the Giants by Quickdraw who was a mod at the old board. Most everyone was blaming Romo but Patrick Crayton played a role in that loss too. I was acting a fool and sticking up for Romo so I got banned. Dak haters here refuse to admit that CD has run some bad routes resulting in some INT's, and blame Dak for blowing a big lead. It's all Dak's fault they claim.

Did you see that "I Love Romo" thread before it was deleted? If you did then you know why we have Dak haters here. One wished death on him and another wished he would get hurt. For some reason those posters didn't get benched.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Lol, right so as i said it wont be about facts. I get it you dont like Dak thats fine, just say "I dont like Dak because i dont like him" there is nothing to argue about at that point because thats a feeling and those are never logical. Saying Rush is better is an opinion not based on anything that can be proven with facts (stats you know the recorded record of what happened) but once again as long as you pass it as an opinion and not try and force it as fact to other posters there will be no argument from me as your opinion is yours to do with what you wish.

Youd have to explain why the defense seemed to play better on rushs team.
Pure coincidence?

 

[CowboyFrog]

Youd have to explain why the defense seemed to play better on rushs team.
Pure coincidence?

what about them was better? the defense is not worse than it was, teams are running the ball now, the eagles ran it while Rush was in and it looked much the same..only diference would be we scored less points on offense. To be honest GB ran AND threw the ball well against them in the 4th which is something NY couldnt do..the eagles did also, So what about the defense was diferent with either QB in? Cincy had nothing working nor did the Rams ...Im not seeing a better or worse defense I'm seeing teams completley committed to running the ball on us and the ones who can hit PA passes are putting over 20 points on us.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

We should’ve won in a blowout but Dakota’s turnovers gave the Packers life. Green Bay would’ve laid down if we had gone up 10-0 or 17-0; you never want to give an inferior team hope, and that’s exactly what Dakota Rayne did

After the 2 picks, Dak led Dallas to 21 unanswered points with a 14 point lead in the 4th quarter.... So much for your theory about GB laying down

 

[CowboyFrog]

Look the mental gymnastics used to try and say Rush somehow makes the team better is crazy and defies logic at every level, again our offense is better with Dak back period end of story its in the recorded record of what has happened (stats) dismiss them if you want thats fine but it doesnt mean your correct. Dak nor Rush is the reason teams run the ball on the defense as we see now that no matter what the score these teams will not go away from it until we make them...now if you want to debate WTH is going on with trying to keep comming back to the air raid shotgun offense all the time..I'm all ears, because the offense with either QB in it runs much better out of the under center ball control scheme thats comes out after KM gets heat for going all air raid in a game..makes no sense why he will not just go to the ball control scheme from here on out.

 

[TheSport78]

After the 2 picks, Dak led Dallas to 21 unanswered points with a 14 point lead in the 4th quarter.... So much for your theory about GB laying down

The Dallas D forced a turnover inside the GB 10 yard line, and Dallas gets zero points out of it due to Dak's INT, and the Packers score on the next possession. 14 point swing. Next drive: Dakota throws the 2nd INT on a ball that should've never been thrown; the Packers score on that possession. Another possible 10-14 point swing as Dallas was near midfield. Prescott is EXPECTED to perform via throwing TDs, so that's great he came back against a terrible GB defense and put up 21 unanswered, but then he scores zero points in the 4th quarter and obviously in OT. The game was actually a microcosm of Dak's career. Starts off really strong, chokes, comes back, chokes again. He is INCONSISTENT and that's the main problem I have with the amount of money he's making.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

what about them was better? the defense is not worse than it was, teams are running the ball now, the eagles ran it while Rush was in and it looked much the same..only diference would be we scored less points on offense. To be honest GB ran AND threw the ball well against them in the 4th which is something NY couldnt do..the eagles did also, So what about the defense was diferent with either QB in? Cincy had nothing working nor did the Rams ...Im not seeing a better or worse defense I'm seeing teams completley committed to running the ball on us and the ones who can hit PA passes are putting over 20 points on us.

Him....seems like a slanted take. Our defense is obviously as good these other worse teams are just playing better?
[SHRUG]....Mkay.

 

[Cowfan75]

Lol, right so as i said it wont be about facts. I get it you dont like Dak thats fine, just say "I dont like Dak because i dont like him" there is nothing to argue about at that point because thats a feeling and those are never logical. Saying Rush is better is an opinion not based on anything that can be proven with facts (stats you know the recorded record of what happened) but once again as long as you pass it as an opinion and not try and force it as fact to other posters there will be no argument from me as your opinion is yours to do with what you wish.

The only fact that matters is that we don't win important games with Dak. That is the fact you can't argue. I get that you do like Dak, and you'll go to the ends of the earth to defend him with stats and claims that he's better than backups (despite the most important stat suggesting that you are wrong). And I have never said that Rush is better than Dak. I will suggest that the team plays better with Rush, be it because the team plays better for him, or we become more run based, whatever. I have more confidence in Rush Kerry Collins-ing us to a SB than I do Dak getting us there. Neither will happen.

 

[starfan1]

Just came here to tell you that this is a stupid thread. I didn't read the OP's post either. All I know is LeeBlair is a very well known Viking fan. So anything he said in his post take with a grain of salt.

Pretty much

 

[NotForLong]

We predicted you guys would start blaming the defense, the coaches, and officials when Dak took back over.
Why do you think it is that the defense suddenly became so bad when Dak came back in?
Do you think they liked Rush better? Do you think there is a scheme by the defense to make Dak look bad?
How many times has the defense simply decided not to play to their capability?
Or could it be that Dak puts a strain on the defense they didn’t have to deal with under Rush?

. . . damn . . . you murdahed that fool

 

[TheSport78]

Honestly, I don't care about stats. I care about wins, and we don't win with Dak...not against good teams. So if it's the defense that carries Rush, then fine, put Rush back in and let the defense win for him. The biggest FACT of all, is that we don't win with Dak, period. Not anything relevant, and not against good teams. We can debate how average Dak is all we want, but it doesn't change where we are.

When Dakota has 35 or more pass attempts, Dallas wins roughly 35% of the time.

 

[NotForLong]

You’re missing the point.

Not missing . . . Selectively ignoring . . There is a difference