I know the point you're making I just disagree. And then you bring up the Packers which goes against your own point.The point about Elliott is that Green Bay's rushing options were some fat waste of space more interested in eating pizzi's than running or James Starks who was like a role player every now and again and not a pure ground and pound runner. The Raiders had a 400 year old Marshawn Lynch in 2017. You know the point i'm making that having a very strong running game makes life much easier for the receivers.
What does that have to do with my post though?I said the exact same thing.....Andy Dalton is the backup QB. I really hope that relaxes you a little. Maybe...
That's because Tannenhill was considered damage goods. Mind you he was backing up Mariotta. They paid him 7-8 million to backup Mariotta. Dalton couldn't even get half of that which says what the league thought about him.I'm not claiming that he's Dan Marino at this stage in his career but he's a solid QB. Tannehill signed for the Titans for what an initial $7-8 million. We got an absolute bargain with Dalton and home town discount was a factor too. Unrelated to Prescott but I would love Dalton to just play a few games next season just to come in and show that he's a good QB.
I mean I'd put Zeke in that mix but its debatable. I can see people listing Zack as high as #2.Zach is the best at his position, but not the most valuable because of position value. I'd put him after Dak, Cooper, and maybe Tyron.
I'm not a ageist but comments like this is why I can't stand boomers. You're sitting here saying because Lamar is 0-2 in the playoffs that justifies or silly opinion that he's not good. Lamar is a great player. I don't care if he doesn't drop back and throw it 100 yards. You will boost up guys like Joe Namath and Terry Bradshaw bu twill tell me Lamar can't play. Nothing wrong with being a older fan. The boomer title are dedicated to the older fans who can't get with the time. The "older is better" crowd.what the heck with the ageist crap generation Z? Youre the people who think just because a qb can run a little that they are such great athletes and therefore better.
Lamar is 0-2 in the playoffs. Its still football sonny.
Dalton has been paid well over $100 million as a franchise QB. Going back home was obviously a consideration for him joining the Cowboys. $2 million at home or say $6-7 million somewhere he really doesn't want to be wouldn't be a difficult a decision for him.What does that have to do with my post though?I said the exact same thing.....
That's because Tannenhill was considered damage goods. Mind you he was backing up Mariotta. They paid him 7-8 million to backup Mariotta. Dalton couldn't even get half of that which says what the league thought about him.
I mean I'd put Zeke in that mix but its debatable. I can see people listing Zack as high as #2.
I'm not a ageist but comments like this is why I can't stand boomers. You're sitting here saying because Lamar is 0-2 in the playoffs that justifies or silly opinion that he's not good. Lamar is a great player. I don't care if he doesn't drop back and throw it 100 yards. You will boost up guys like Joe Namath and Terry Bradshaw bu twill tell me Lamar can't play. Nothing wrong with being a older fan. The boomer title are dedicated to the older fans who can't get with the time. The "older is better" crowd.
So you disagree that a team with a strong running game makes life easier for their receivers? So you do not think the receivers would have more space and more time to run their routes for more plays during a game as opposed to receivers playing for a team with a below average running game? Guess what was Randall Cobb's best year at Green Bay? Guess what was Green Bays' best year of rushing during his tenure there? Yep 2014. Weird.I know the point you're making I just disagree. And then you bring up the Packers which goes against your own point.
San fran had the 2nd best defense in the league last year. And a phenomenal run game. Jimmy G was a non factor. He was dilferesque last season.
Actually 19th in dvoa which is more accurate. And if you go by defense per drive they are below average across the board. Dont you gotta go tape body parts onto your players?And Dallas had the number 1 offense AND a top 10 defense and went 8-8. What kind of a factor was Dak?
I said this last year! And it's being said by one of the greatest WRs to play the game but what does Jerry know. Jimmy G throws for 4 TDs and hangs 40+ points on the Saints while Dak can't even manage one TD.
spot onThey're similar.
Dak's had better offensive talent around him that elevates him but poor coaching.
Jimmy G has had mediocre offensive talent around him but great coaching.
And Dallas had the number 1 offense AND a top 10 defense and went 8-8. What kind of a factor was Dak?
We are talking about beating the packers and you saying Jimmy G is better then Dak.Back in 2016...and then lost when it truly counted and hasn't been able to since. But that's besides the point...it was more of tounge in cheek kind of comment.
We are all entitled to their opinions and none on this matter are really all that outrageous. Jimmy didn't put up gawdy numbers but Dak laid plenty of eggs this season (NYJ, PHI, NE, BUF, NO, etc.)
We are talking about beating the packers and you saying Jimmy G is better then Dak.
Jimmy went 6-8 with 77 yards against the packers. Name one game Dak ever had that was that bad.
That would mean his team won had nothing to do with Jimmy G. The fact you guys are defending a QB that went 6-8 for 77 yards 0 TDs and saying that was better then a QB that went 300 yards and 3 TDs but was the reason they lost..... it's called hypocrisyYeah but they won... he didn't turn the ball over and managed the game terrifically. It was the NFC championship and they ran it down the Packers throat...
Also, earlier during the regular season, the 49ers beat the Packers and Jimmy G was 14/20 for 253 and 2 TDs. Very Aikman like numbers.
Dak has had some real bad games in just this past year alone... his games against the Jets. Patriots, and Philly (2nd game) were much worse. He was borderline inept in those games.
That would mean his team won had nothing to do with Jimmy G. The fact you guys are defending a QB that went 6-8 for 77 yards 0 TDs and saying that was better then a QB that went 300 yards and 3 TDs but was the reason they lost..... it's called hypocrisy
Dak had some bad games, I'm not arguing that. However, the ones that don't like Dak seem to point to 2019 because it's a year even the entire team quit on the coach. Dak played well against quality opponents last year too but you guys don't like talking about that. Like the first philly game or against Minnesota where Dak was surgical and played well against the Rams too.If you're referring to the 2019 game against GB, Dak actually had 463 yards and 2 TDs.
But he also had 3 interceptions and led the team to 0 first half points.
I'm defending Jimmy G because he's lost 5 games in his entire career. I watched every minute of every game last season (I'm sure you did too) and we whooped on the Giants, Commanders, Dolphins and Lions...all of which ended up with top 5 draft picks...Dak didn't show up against quality opponents last season.
I said from the start that I thought it was a wash between the two but I'm going with the guy that's simply won more.
Doesn’t excuse him from choking the SB away but he is the best QB to come out of Eastern Illinois.
Payton and Jimmy G have been to a conference championship and superbowl. Romo couldn't get out the divisional round even when he had the number 1 seed and home field advantage not to include 13 probowlers on the team that went the same year.......No that would be Sean Payton who holds most of Eastern Illinois records. But as far as where a QB started after joining the NFL to where he got it's Tony Romo who was undrafted and became the starting QB for the Cowboys.
.
.