I'm not saying Dak is better than Mahomes

[SteveTheCowboy]

Oh boy. It isn't hypocrisy. I pile on Zeke because he has been garbage since he signed (he was already slipping) his highest paid rb in the league deal.

I never wanted him bc his style of running is not conducive to a long career. He has been running on fumes for 2-3 seasons now.

He hasn't performed, he isn't among the best at his position and hasn't been for a few years.

Dak IS among the best at his position and is completed hated on because HE hasn't won a super bowl. It is RIDICULOUS.

That fact that you don't understand how hypocritical you are ...is what is ridiculous.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Of course stats can lie - one example: INT happening with a perfect pass thrown, but it's put on the QB despite it bouncing off the hands of a receiver that should have caught it, and it falling into the hands of a defender. That INT is misleading and gives no context or story of what happened.

There is a reason why sites like PFF and Football Outsiders exist now.

"lies, dman lies, and then there's stats"

 

[G2]

Of course stats can lie - one example: INT happening with a perfect pass thrown, but it's put on the QB despite it bouncing off the hands of a receiver that should have caught it, and it falling into the hands of a defender. That INT is misleading and gives no context or story of what happened.

There is a reason why sites like PFF and Football Outsiders exist now.

You would still blame Dak

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Well that settles it. I hate Zeke too now.... thanks for the 411!

LOL...sorry to ruin your RB fantasy

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

LOL...sorry to ruin your RB fantasy

I support all Cowboys, including Dak. It's how I have fanned for 50 years. I'm not gonna let a silly website full of strangers change that.

I admit I made an exception for Jaylon.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

But their 300 yard games comparison that you made was worthwhile?

Ok.

I was nice enough to do all that work for you and you're going to be ungrateful because you don't like what it shows? My advice would be to look this stuff up yourself before you ask someone else to do it for you, because then you'll know before hand if you like the data or not.

Not cool, dude. Not cool.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Sounds like you are taking it seriously given number of comments on this thread from u alone

I just corrected the data presented.

Low IQ people will take it as the gospel without fact checking, ya know, like you are doing...

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

It wasn't 100% false. What you are taking issue with is that it's not up-to-date (2022)..... But data can be tru for a specific period. Interpreted as per that period.

Regardless it's all meaningless. Statistical points .

You just get worked up and angry that not everyone thinks like u and has the same exact opinion. That's well documented

Again, you're making yourself look foolish by defending someone else foolishness.

If we lived, and based narratives, around out of date data we'd not have cures for anything. We'd never advance. We'd be living in caves still.

You're showing the deck you're working with might not exactly be full if you think this way.

 

[GINeric]

Of course stats can lie - one example: INT happening with a perfect pass thrown, but it's put on the QB despite it bouncing off the hands of a receiver that should have caught it, and it falling into the hands of a defender. That INT is misleading and gives no context or story of what happened.

There is a reason why sites like PFF and Football Outsiders exist now.

Ok cool, but why do they print the statistics in the record books and Hall of Fame??? Why don't they have columns with asterisks beside them that says, "this player threw for 45,000 yards over the course of his career but 4397 of these yards don't count because they happened against prevent defenses....

Or this player has 155 sacks, but 18 of the sacks happened when the quarterback slipped and fell and this player just touched him.

When these players get bonuses, max contracts, incentives, awards, and inducted into the Hall of Fame.... there is no menu for different colors and flavors of statistics or scenarios of how they got it. Players are judged by the stats they put up.

In 10 years, nobody remembers how they got the stats, they just see the end result of what's printed or typed and it is what it is.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

I just corrected the data presented.

Low IQ people will take it as the gospel without fact checking, ya know, like you are doing...

Super sensitive emotional people will blow a fuse, go over the top and start insulting people..

 

[Rockport]

Why don't you call out the OP for posting completely false and out of date data?

You’re obsessed with your hate. Get out of your Mom’s basement and get a life dude.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Again, you're making yourself look foolish by defending someone else foolishness.

If we lived, and based narratives, around out of date data we'd not have cures for anything. We'd never advance. We'd be living in caves still.

You're showing the deck you're working with might not exactly be full if you think this way.

Once again, I am not defending. Never did. What I did was correct you, which given your I, you took at as defending him... Clearly you have failed to distinguish between the two.

Unlike u who can only live in a black and white world of absolutes and extremes, me like most othes am capable of leaving my biases and emotions to the side, and understand the gray area and be able to discuss the different view without resorting to insults.
Unlike u I don't find the need to insult those who have differing opinions than myself and try to ban, delete and remove things that are neither important nor matter because it's not exactly the same as my opinion.

For a measure of low IQ take a look in the mirror, where you will find the best example loaded with hypocrisy.

Leave insults to the side. If you consider yourself a higher IQ person, which given your ego and evident from your posts you do then you don't need to resort to insults.

See insults are easy to throw out. And it escalates from there.

I am sure this was too long for you to read given your level of IQ

 

[atlantacowboy]

Point 1: Mahomes played in 73 games, Dak only 56 and Dak still has him beat in 400 yard games.

Point 2: Mahomes has a god-like receiving unit. Dak has a very good receiving unit but it doesn't compare to Mahomes'. Kelce + Hill > by far anyone we got. Cowboys are receivers by committee. Chiefs have a receiving unit that have been proven unstoppable by 31 teams.

Point 3: Wins are a team accomplishment, so Mahomes didn't win those games on his own.


Again, Mahomes > Dak overall because of his Super Bowl and his postseason accomplishments, but lots of his games are simply because Chiefs are good enough to jump ahead and beat teams without Mahomes needing to do much. Cowboys has a bad defense most of the times, 0 dominant D-linemen, a used up starting running back, and an O-Line that blew the SF playoff game badly. Mahomes O-Line was horrendous in the Super Bowl, but at least they chose the last game of the year to be bad in.


Thoughts?

Perfect example of how stats without context are meaningless.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

You’re obsessed with your hate. Get out of your Mom’s basement and get a life dude.

Why don't you quit again?

Remember your quit post? Nobody cared did they?

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Super sensitive emotional people will blow a fuse, go over the top and start insulting people..

I call em how I see em.

If it bothers you then it's probably true.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Once again, I am not defending. Never did. What I did was correct you, which given your I, you took at as defending him... Clearly you have failed to distinguish between the two.

Unlike u who can only live in a black and white world of absolutes and extremes, me like most othes am capable of leaving my biases and emotions to the side, and understand the gray area and be able to discuss the different view without resorting to insults.
Unlike u I don't find the need to insult those who have differing opinions than myself and try to ban, delete and remove things that are neither important nor matter because it's not exactly the same as my opinion.

For a measure of low IQ take a look in the mirror, where you will find the best example loaded with hypocrisy.

Leave insults to the side. If you consider yourself a higher IQ person, which given your ego and evident from your posts you do then you don't need to resort to insults.

See insults are easy to throw out. And it escalates from there.

I am sure this was too long for you to read given your level of IQ

Your foolishness is entertaining.

Thank you for sacrificing intelligence when it comes to football to make us laugh.

As a Cowboys fan there's not much to be happy about, but people like you, Rocky, and a few others ease the pain by just constant bad opinions that we get to make fun of you about.

 

[Calvin2Tony2Emmitt2Julius]

OP Good post

Dak Haterz BORING

 

[mattjames2010]

Ok cool, but why do they print the statistics in the record books and Hall of Fame??? Why don't they have columns with asterisks beside them that says, "this player threw for 45,000 yards over the course of his career but 4397 of these yards don't count because they happened against prevent defenses....

Or this player has 155 sacks, but 18 of the sacks happened when the quarterback slipped and fell and this player just touched him.

When these players get bonuses, max contracts, incentives, awards, and inducted into the Hall of Fame.... there is no menu for different colors and flavors of statistics or scenarios of how they got it. Players are judged by the stats they put up.

In 10 years, nobody remembers how they got the stats, they just see the end result of what's printed or typed and it is what it is.

I'm addressing the argument with you saying stats can't lie or be misleading. You're simply wrong - the mistake a receiver also hurts the rating of a QB even if a QB does everything right. That stat, at the very least, is misleading. I will repeat: There is a reason sites like PFF exist now. They give more context to a play rather than the barebones NFL.com stat.

Also, the HOF has kept out a lot of great lineman on both sides of the ball because what they do doesn't show up on a stat sheet. NFL is full of flawed and misleading stats.

 

[mattjames2010]

You would still blame Dak

If Dak learned to lead receivers better, I wouldn't and I am sure there were times that it was fully on the WR and not Dak - that's just part of the game of football.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

I'm addressing the argument with you saying stats can't lie or be misleading. You're simply wrong - the mistake a receiver also hurts the rating of a QB even if a QB does everything right. That stat, at the very least, is misleading. I will repeat: There is a reason sites like PFF exist now. They give more context to a play rather than the barebones NFL.com stat.

Also, the HOF has kept out a lot of great lineman on both sides of the ball because what they do doesn't show up on a stat sheet. NFL is full of flawed and misleading stats.

We have a lot of box score lookers here that clearly do not watch the games.

Stats can be very misleading, but some will use them as the gospel.

It's the same people that probably think Willie Keller is a better hitter than Barry Bonds because his career batting average is higher.

When your argument lives and dies by personal stats then you show your lack of knowledge on things.