Jonesitis of the Offense Has Infected Cowboy Fans

[CouchCoach]

You would be hard pressed to find a franchise with a better history at QB.

Don Meredith, Craig Morton, Roger Staubach, Danny White, Troy Aikman, Steve Walsh, Tony Romo and Dak Prescott. Show me one team who can match that list, I don't believe there is one.

It always makes me chuckle just a little bit when I see fans freak out about being able to find a QB. We've pretty much always had one with the exception of a few years at the end of Danny's career and the drafting of Troy. That's really only like 2 or 3 seasons and the early 2000s between Troy and Tony. But the fans still freak out and lose their minds over having to go out and find another QB. It's kind of crazy to me.

Not crazy when you consider the last two QB1's were more luck than anything else. And what have they accomplished?

If Romo isn't the DC QB with all of the hoopla surrounding that, he's just another QB and his record is mediocre. How Prescott will fare is still unknown but the string of QB's after Aikman, the 1st pick in that draft, is unimpressive.

I have very serious doubt that this brain trust can find a QB even as good as Prescott. They wanted Lynch and Cook ahead of him. They're not good, they're lucky and you can't always depend on luck.

 

[atlantacowboy]

Yeah, Steve Walsh. I mean, we did trade him to New Orleans for a 1st and 3rd round pick. He did play in the NFL for 10 years. You don't see that as value? Really?

He cost us the #1 overall pick in the 1990 draft. Lets not forget that little bit. We could have had HOFer Cortez Kennedy who absolutely would have been our pick with Jimmy coaching him at Miami. Sure things worked out for the team as they tended to do with Jimmy Johnson running the show. But, even by Jimmy's own draft value chart, we never recouped the draft capitol we blew on Walsh.

 

[CouchCoach]

He cost us the #1 overall pick in the 1990 draft. Lets not forget that little bit. We could have had HOFer Cortez Kennedy who absolutely would have been our pick with Jimmy coaching him at Miami. Sure things worked out for the team as they tended to do with Jimmy Johnson running the show. But, even by Jimmy's own draft value chart, we never recouped the draft capitol we blew on Walsh.

And the irony of the Walsh pick was interesting.

When Aikman was injured at OU and Switzer was forced to revert back to his Wishbone style O, he called his bud Jimmy at Miami about taking Aikman as a transfer and he tried to but Aikman picked UCLA. I've always wondered if Walsh was a little payback to Aikman for not picking Miami and him? What happened had never happened nor will it ever happen again.

 

[atlantacowboy]

And the irony of the Walsh pick was interesting.

When Aikman was injured at OU and Switzer was forced to revert back to his Wishbone style O, he called his bud Jimmy at Miami about taking Aikman as a transfer and he tried to but Aikman picked UCLA. I've always wondered if Walsh was a little payback to Aikman for not picking Miami and him? What happened had never happened nor will it ever happen again.

I think as a new NFL coach, Jimmy preferred familiarity with talent being equal. But, it was clear from day 1 that the talent wasn't equal. Walsh never had a chance. Troy turned down jimmy out of high school too. 3rd time was the charm.

 

[Swanny]

Lower level players are playing for the glory that they can parlay into $$$$.

And watching them try to accomplish that is awesome.

 

[MarcusRock]

And watching them try to accomplish that is awesome.

Rookies and young players in the NFL do the same thing. Do you just not like the big production of the NFL?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Not crazy when you consider the last two QB1's were more luck than anything else. And what have they accomplished?

If Romo isn't the DC QB with all of the hoopla surrounding that, he's just another QB and his record is mediocre. How Prescott will fare is still unknown but the string of QB's after Aikman, the 1st pick in that draft, is unimpressive.

I have very serious doubt that this brain trust can find a QB even as good as Prescott. They wanted Lynch and Cook ahead of him. They're not good, they're lucky and you can't always depend on luck.

I think you can look at it from another perspective as well. I don't think the Romo situation was as cut and dried as you describe here. There were other teams that wanted to sign him as an UFA. Romo's situation has as much to do with the actual coaching situation as anything IMO. I mean, if we play the what if game, what if Romo goes to Sean Payton or Mike Shanahan in Denver? Both those guys were very interested in Romo and if that were to happen, maybe his story is very different. You can't know that, which is why you really can't play that what if game but after all is said and done, fact remains that he was still an UFA who was a multiple Pro Bowl starter for us for 11 seasons and our career passing leader. How is that a bad thing?

As for Prescott, he's a 4 year starter in the NFL and a 4th round pick. You can't just ignore that. Dak is not the all world QB that some believe him to be IMO but he's also not nearly as bad as some believe him to be either. Dak has some skills and I believe he is a good, not great, QB at this point in his career. That's also pretty good for a 4th rd pick IMO.

But again, show me a team that's done better at QB over the years. I think that the Cowboys have done pretty well for themselves.

 

[cern]

Not crazy when you consider the last two QB1's were more luck than anything else. And what have they accomplished?

If Romo isn't the DC QB with all of the hoopla surrounding that, he's just another QB and his record is mediocre. How Prescott will fare is still unknown but the string of QB's after Aikman, the 1st pick in that draft, is unimpressive.

I have very serious doubt that this brain trust can find a QB even as good as Prescott. They wanted Lynch and Cook ahead of him. They're not good, they're lucky and you can't always depend on luck.

in fairness, they wanted wentz first. they brought him into the star for practice sessions after he played some type of bowl game here. they thought he would be available to them when their pick came up. but philly leapfrogged us and got him. then they went on damage control, and thankfully failed when it came to lynch and cook.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

He cost us the #1 overall pick in the 1990 draft. Lets not forget that little bit. We could have had HOFer Cortez Kennedy who absolutely would have been our pick with Jimmy coaching him at Miami. Sure things worked out for the team as they tended to do with Jimmy Johnson running the show. But, even by Jimmy's own draft value chart, we never recouped the draft capitol we blew on Walsh.

When he was taken in the supplemental draft, the team didn't know that the pick they spent on him would be the number 1 overall pick so you have to consider that as well but what does that have to do with anything at all? The discussion is about QBs. The guy did spend 10 years in the NFL as a QB. Mostly as a backup, I admit but still in all, that's not a bad career IMO and we did get Russell Maryland out of that trade, who was also a #1 overall pick.

 

[cern]

And the irony of the Walsh pick was interesting.

When Aikman was injured at OU and Switzer was forced to revert back to his Wishbone style O, he called his bud Jimmy at Miami about taking Aikman as a transfer and he tried to but Aikman picked UCLA. I've always wondered if Walsh was a little payback to Aikman for not picking Miami and him? What happened had never happened nor will it ever happen again.

jimmy understood the value of "franchise" qb's in the nfl and he knew walsh was perceived as such. he took him always with the intention of trading him which he did, very successfully. i doubt there was ever any intention on jimmy's part to let walsh compete with aikman to be the cowboys qb. i know there are thoughts to the contrary, but i respectfully submit they are wrong.

 

[CouchCoach]

I think you can look at it from another perspective as well. I don't think the Romo situation was as cut and dried as you describe here. There were other teams that wanted to sign him as an UFA. Romo's situation has as much to do with the actual coaching situation as anything IMO. I mean, if we play the what if game, what if Romo goes to Sean Payton or Mike Shanahan in Denver? Both those guys were very interested in Romo and if that were to happen, maybe his story is very different. You can't know that, which is why you really can't play that what if game but after all is said and done, fact remains that he was still an UFA who was a multiple Pro Bowl starter for us for 11 seasons and our career passing leader. How is that a bad thing?

As for Prescott, he's a 4 year starter in the NFL and a 4th round pick. You can't just ignore that. Dak is not the all world QB that some believe him to be IMO but he's also not nearly as bad as some believe him to be either. Dak has some skills and I believe he is a good, not great, QB at this point in his career. That's also pretty good for a 4th rd pick IMO.

But again, show me a team that's done better at QB over the years. I think that the Cowboys have done pretty well for themselves.

One other team, the other team with an alumni from E. ILL, Shanahan, had interest in Romo. He wasn't even invited to the Combine except to work out the TE's.

Had Payton not been there, no Romo and we can wonder who might have taken his place. He was only a Cowboy because of Payton.

No question Romo milked it but he was always exactly what Parcells said he was and more than any QB the Cowboys ever had, he was a crap shoot.

Prescott was nothing but luck, they tried to get Lynch and would have taken Cook if he'd been there and then there's no Prescott. If you see these two QB's as the usual path to the position, I don't. Wasn't blind luck but damned close.

The point is I don't trust luck with this brain trust in picking another QB so I am good with whatever they pay Prescott.

 

[aikemirv]

Somebody has not done enough research into the Cowboys 1st round picks since Jerry became the owner - there is NO focus on offense - it is pretty heavily weighted to defense!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dallas_Cowboys_first-round_draft_picks

18 defensive players - 11 offensive players

 

[cern]

picking qb's in the first round is easy. even i knew joe burrow would be the first pick long before the draft. getting a great starter in the later rounds is more a matter of luck. anyone really think the pats knew brady would become the goat. or that the seahawks really thought 3rd rounder wilson would become the starter after they spent the bucks for matt flynn? so why are we criticized for being lucky by getting a good qb in the later rounds. makes no sense at all. the criticism should be for those teams who take qb's with high picks and those qb's become busts. manziel, ryan leaf, etc.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

One other team, the other team with an alumni from E. ILL, Shanahan, had interest in Romo. He wasn't even invited to the Combine except to work out the TE's.

Had Payton not been there, no Romo and we can wonder who might have taken his place. He was only a Cowboy because of Payton.

No question Romo milked it but he was always exactly what Parcells said he was and more than any QB the Cowboys ever had, he was a crap shoot.

Prescott was nothing but luck, they tried to get Lynch and would have taken Cook if he'd been there and then there's no Prescott. If you see these two QB's as the usual path to the position, I don't. Wasn't blind luck but damned close.

The point is I don't trust luck with this brain trust in picking another QB so I am good with whatever they pay Prescott.

No, not one other team. There were other teams interested in Romo but it's here nor there. Tony was pursued by both Denver and New Orleans as an FA. So he could have left to sign with either of those clubs but he didn't. The fact that he wasn't invited to the Combine is actually further proof that the Cowboys did a really good job of finding Romo, signing him and developing him. It's not proof that they don't know what they are doing or that they are lucky. They knew about Romo before he ever went to the combine to throw and they targeted him. That's proof to me that it was not luck but hard work on the parts of their coaching staff and personnel folks. He may only been a Cowboy because of Payton but Payton was only a Cowboy because of Parcells and Parcells was only a Cowboy because of Jerry so again, what does it matter? They were all Cowboys and Romo was a success story, no matter how you slice it.

Prescott was not all luck. The Cowboys personnel department scouted him, they drafted him and they put him in a position to be successful. That wasn't all luck. There were 31 other teams out there that could have drafted him sooner and none of them did. Young QBs entering the NFL are more about situations they get drafted into and less about talent then many fans realize IMO. If the Cowboys had taken Cook or Lynch, who's to say that they wouldn't have had a different start to their careers? Dak came into the perfect situation in Dallas. Much better situation then either Cook or Lynch. That's just a fact. Perhaps the story is different had it been one of those other QBs, IDK, but again, the Cowboys still drafted him in the 4th. The Cowboys still developed him and the success of Prescott is a direct result of both of those things.

I trust the Cowboys to take players much more then you do I suppose. I'm not afraid of moving on if we can't get a deal done.

 

[atlantacowboy]

When he was taken in the supplemental draft, the team didn't know that the pick they spent on him would be the number 1 overall pick so you have to consider that as well but what does that have to do with anything at all? The discussion is about QBs. The guy did spend 10 years in the NFL as a QB. Mostly as a backup, I admit but still in all, that's not a bad career IMO and we did get Russell Maryland out of that trade, who was also a #1 overall pick.

Maryland was not in the same ballpark as Cortez Kennedy. lol. You can't just imply it was an even tradeoff off #1 picks or even close. And the cowboys going into the 1989 season knew they were going to be bad with 2 rookie QBs on the field, and Jimmy basically auditioning the roster to see who he wanted to keep. JJ cared more about acquiring draft picks in 1989 than he did about winning which is why he cut or benched all of the MN players acquired in the hershel walker trade.

Nobody had Dallas coming off a 3-13 campaign winning any more than the 3 games they won the previous year. In fact, climbing out of the cellar was exponentially more difficult in 1988-89 b/c there was no free agency. It was far more difficult to acquire talent. Were it not for the Walker trade and all those draft picks, it would have taken Jimmy a lot longer.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Maryland was not in the same ballpark as Cortez Kennedy. lol. You can't just imply it was an even tradeoff off #1 picks or even close. And the cowboys going into the 1989 season knew they were going to be bad with 2 rookie QBs on the field, and Jimmy basically auditioning the roster to see who he wanted to keep. JJ cared more about acquiring draft picks in 1989 than he did about winning which is why he cut or benched all of the MN players acquired in the hershel walker trade.

Nobody had Dallas coming off a 3-13 campaign winning any more than the 3 games they won the previous year. In fact, climbing out of the cellar was exponentially more difficult in 1988-89 b/c there was no free agency. It was far more difficult to acquire talent. Were it not for the Walker trade and all those draft picks, it would have taken Jimmy a lot longer.

What does that have to do with QBs? I implied nothing. I didn't even bring up this ridiculous angle. You did that.

If you are a bad team, what's the first thing you do? You make sure you have your QB. That's what Jimmy did. Steve Walsh was insurance, in terms of how Jimmy thought. The guy couldn't beat out Troy but lets face it, nobody could in those days. He got traded to the Saints for a 1st and a 3rd and he went on to play in the NFL for 10 years. Again I ask, how do you not see that as value?

The problem here is that you want to see it as such. That's fine with me, there are plenty of other QBs on my list. You can compare them and leave out Walsh if you like. What other team has produced as many decent QBs in the NFL?

 

[DandyDon52]

I'm the captain of The Improve the Defense Movement, but you absolutely draft CeeDee Lamb at 17 in the scenario that played out.

They made the right move. They also drafted defense with 4 of their next 5 picks.

Plus, adding three defensive starters (Poe, McCoy, Clinton-Dix), possibly a fourth (Worley) in free agency.

The defense's biggest problem was Marinelli's dinosaur scheme and his complete inability to adjust to what modern day offenses do.

That depends on how good Lamb will be in the nfl. He will be playing with guys who are way better than college defenders.
I know little about him, but watched some hl and part of one game, and to be honest, I did not see where he has special skills, size, or speed.

 

[DeaconBlues]

You would be hard pressed to find a franchise with a better history at QB.

Don Meredith, Craig Morton, Roger Staubach, Danny White, Troy Aikman, Steve Walsh, Tony Romo and Dak Prescott. Show me one team who can match that list, I don't believe there is one.

It always makes me chuckle just a little bit when I see fans freak out about being able to find a QB. We've pretty much always had one with the exception of a few years at the end of Danny's career and the drafting of Troy. That's really only like 2 or 3 seasons and the early 2000s between Troy and Tony. But the fans still freak out and lose their minds over having to go out and find another QB. It's kind of crazy to me.

Try 6 seasons between Troy retiring and Tony starting. Makes me chuckle that folks throw out easily fact checked info.

 

[75boyz]

Great defense...


KC's defense was fine, but it more benefitted from the fact that the 9ers can't throw the ball downfield. Building a prolific and consistent passing offense is the best way to be a Super Bowl contender in the modern NFL. That's why KC won, not because of their defense.

This. 70s Steelers, 85 Bears, 2000 Ravens and 2002 Bucs are my historical mainstay defensive SB representatives. More recently Hawks and Broncos as an honorable mention for their one defensive SB year as well.

Those defenses and way they won games could be a thing of the past.

I think the game is more about being "just good enough" on defense these days.

If defense wins championships, SF should have won in my opinion.

Just another opinion.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Try 6 seasons between Troy retiring and Tony starting. Makes me chuckle that folks throw out easily fact checked info.

Troy retired after the 2000 season. Tony was signed in 2004, started 10 games in 2006 so really, it was less then 5 seasons but I gave the benefit of when Tony actually became a starter for us. So it was actually only 3 years between Troy and Tony but whose counting? But more to the point, the 2 or 3 seasons I referenced in my earlier post was the time between Danny and Troy. Danny White retired after 1988 season but he never started a game in 1988 and in 86 and 87, he was off and on. I guess technically, there was no gap between Troy and Danny but really, there was because of injury. So if you want to say you always chuckle when people post stuff that is easily fact checked because there was no gap, I suppose I could live with that. Of course, then you would have to come to grips that I didn't really check dates before I posted, I just posted what I remembered. But you fact checked and still, the dates are inaccurate.

OK then.........