jday
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 9,321
- Reaction score
- 13,284
In the week leading up to Zeke’s suspension, many an article and blog post pointed out that this Zekeless six game stretch would be Dak’s proving grounds. We’d finally be provided the answer to the question of whether Zeke make’s Dak or Dak make’s Zeke. It seemed a fair test, at the time, all things considered. We declared as a fan base that we are about to know beyond a shadow of a doubt if Dak’s for real for real. Three horrendous games later where the Cowboys were manhandled by the likes of the Falcon’s, Eagles, and Chargers respectively and that narrative was for many a closed book; Dak’s not who we think he is.
The problem with making sweeping assessment’s such as that is it ignores all the other factors that go into winning a game. It dismisses the impact that Sean Lee’s injury had on those same games. We’ve seen the numbers; it is no coincidence that the Cowboys as a collective look like a completely different team without the services of Sean Lee on defense. His absence has an impact not just on defense, but every unit.
How?
Think about it. Let’s say Sean Lee hadn’t played in the Giants game. Take away his 18 tackles, included the sweep he blew up for a 9 yard loss that changed the entire complexion of that game early in the fourth quarter and the interception that sealed the victory. Are you honestly going to try and convince me that the results would have been similar with or without him?
Then consider for a moment how his contribution impacted other units outside of the defense. Granted, he’s not blocking, running and catching balls on any of those other units but imagine how our offense changes the moment the game is no longer tied and the Cowboys are playing from behind. Of a sudden, slowly but surely the Cowboys offense, particularly in the fourth quarter, would have been forced to abandon the run game. Of a sudden, Dak has to win with his arm and his arm alone.
A mere month ago, I’d have said confidently and without hesitation, Dak is up to that challenge. Now, I’m not so sure. I’m not saying Dak is not a franchise QB. I’m merely pointing out that he’s not as polished and complete as I initially thought. The good news is he’s not all that far from ascending to that level either. Stepping up in the pocket and throwing receivers open looks like a few tricks Dak needs to add to is already extensive toolbox in the offseason, but those are by no means traits that will damn the season…particularly once Zeke gets added back in the fold.
After giving it much thought, the issue this “test” ignored was the lack of our ability to turn this coin on its reverse side. How do we think Zeke would fair without Dak? The plot thickens. Some might say that Coop may even be an improvement on Dak, in terms of pocket passing. After all, Cooper is a more traditional QB, in that sense. Coop’s never been asked to win games with his leg, so he very well may be more adept in that role. But beyond that, Coop simply can’t do what Dak does (on the same level, anyway) when the play breaks down. Therein lies the paramount difference between Dak and Coop.
So, with that said, what say you Zoners – do you think the Cowboys would have fared better without Dak for six weeks and Zeke in the back field, given the conditions of also having to weather games with a banged up offensive line, Sean Lee on the sideline, and Coop behind center? Honestly, I don’t know, but I suspect we would have yielded similar results, if not decidedly worse.
Recently I read a fictionalized work that introduced me to a very insightful explanation behind the nature of relationships between men and women. The question that encouraged this bit of wisdom was as follows: How can a man and woman, who have completely different interest, likes, wants, backgrounds have a good relationship? Does not a man and woman require some common ground to flourish?
The answer:
"At first glance, the key and the lock it fits may seem very different. Different in shape, different in function, different in design. The man who looks at them without knowledge of their true nature might think them opposites, for one is meant to open, and the other to keep closed. Yet, upon closer examination, he might see that without one, the other becomes useless. The wise man then sees that both lock and key were created for the same purpose."
I, myself, recently celebrated 10 years of marriage with my wife (December 9, 2007) and 12 years together (08/15/05). In that time, I have had plenty of time to reflect on the differences of my wife and me. We actually had more in common in the beginning, but even then the common grounds were few and far between. We had different upbringings; different hobbies and interest; different friend preferences; different most everything, to say nothing of our innate differences as man and woman.
And yet somehow, when faced with the decision of facing this life without each other, we wilt at the prospect because where I am weak, she is strong and visa versa. Because of our differences we make the perfect team. Each night beyond a brief conversation of how our perspective day went, we typically pursue are different interest and hobbies. Rare is the entertainment my wife and I enjoy together; each night she’ll watch her shows and I’ll dive into my own interest, which rarely involves watching television programming. It doesn’t matter. Some people think it does…but it really doesn’t.
What matters is how we have each other’s back no matter what in everything we do as a team. And I suspect a similar relationship could be found between various positions and position groups throughout a football team; none more important than the relationship that exist between a quarterbacks ability to move the ball down the field through the air and his accompanying ground game.
In the game of football, it really doesn’t matter if you have the best of anything at any position because in this league every team regardless of win / loss ratio, typically has the ability to take one player away on both sides of the ball. So imagine, if you will, a Coop led Cowboys with Zeke in the backfield: Zeke would likely have a similar stretch of games that McFadden had in 2015 with Romo on the sideline.
Zeke would get his share of yards and certainly be in the conversation for another Pro Bowl berth, but I suspect the bulk of his yards would come from those one-off situations where he finds a hole and takes it the distance. Otherwise, defenses would be keying on him and forcing Coop to win with his arm…and I’m not sure at this point in Coop’s career being a UFA this season, he would be prepared to carry this team on the merits of his pocket work alone.
Therein, my friends, is the rub. I have certainly had to take a step back in my estimation of Dak as the future of the Cowboys franchise QB, but to judge him on the work he has done in this stretch of games without Zeke and on the merits of his work in those games alone, I believe to be folly. We can’t dismiss it and yet we can’t as a fan base allow it to define Dak either.
Thoughts?
The problem with making sweeping assessment’s such as that is it ignores all the other factors that go into winning a game. It dismisses the impact that Sean Lee’s injury had on those same games. We’ve seen the numbers; it is no coincidence that the Cowboys as a collective look like a completely different team without the services of Sean Lee on defense. His absence has an impact not just on defense, but every unit.
How?
Think about it. Let’s say Sean Lee hadn’t played in the Giants game. Take away his 18 tackles, included the sweep he blew up for a 9 yard loss that changed the entire complexion of that game early in the fourth quarter and the interception that sealed the victory. Are you honestly going to try and convince me that the results would have been similar with or without him?
Then consider for a moment how his contribution impacted other units outside of the defense. Granted, he’s not blocking, running and catching balls on any of those other units but imagine how our offense changes the moment the game is no longer tied and the Cowboys are playing from behind. Of a sudden, slowly but surely the Cowboys offense, particularly in the fourth quarter, would have been forced to abandon the run game. Of a sudden, Dak has to win with his arm and his arm alone.
A mere month ago, I’d have said confidently and without hesitation, Dak is up to that challenge. Now, I’m not so sure. I’m not saying Dak is not a franchise QB. I’m merely pointing out that he’s not as polished and complete as I initially thought. The good news is he’s not all that far from ascending to that level either. Stepping up in the pocket and throwing receivers open looks like a few tricks Dak needs to add to is already extensive toolbox in the offseason, but those are by no means traits that will damn the season…particularly once Zeke gets added back in the fold.
After giving it much thought, the issue this “test” ignored was the lack of our ability to turn this coin on its reverse side. How do we think Zeke would fair without Dak? The plot thickens. Some might say that Coop may even be an improvement on Dak, in terms of pocket passing. After all, Cooper is a more traditional QB, in that sense. Coop’s never been asked to win games with his leg, so he very well may be more adept in that role. But beyond that, Coop simply can’t do what Dak does (on the same level, anyway) when the play breaks down. Therein lies the paramount difference between Dak and Coop.
So, with that said, what say you Zoners – do you think the Cowboys would have fared better without Dak for six weeks and Zeke in the back field, given the conditions of also having to weather games with a banged up offensive line, Sean Lee on the sideline, and Coop behind center? Honestly, I don’t know, but I suspect we would have yielded similar results, if not decidedly worse.
Recently I read a fictionalized work that introduced me to a very insightful explanation behind the nature of relationships between men and women. The question that encouraged this bit of wisdom was as follows: How can a man and woman, who have completely different interest, likes, wants, backgrounds have a good relationship? Does not a man and woman require some common ground to flourish?
The answer:
"At first glance, the key and the lock it fits may seem very different. Different in shape, different in function, different in design. The man who looks at them without knowledge of their true nature might think them opposites, for one is meant to open, and the other to keep closed. Yet, upon closer examination, he might see that without one, the other becomes useless. The wise man then sees that both lock and key were created for the same purpose."
I, myself, recently celebrated 10 years of marriage with my wife (December 9, 2007) and 12 years together (08/15/05). In that time, I have had plenty of time to reflect on the differences of my wife and me. We actually had more in common in the beginning, but even then the common grounds were few and far between. We had different upbringings; different hobbies and interest; different friend preferences; different most everything, to say nothing of our innate differences as man and woman.
And yet somehow, when faced with the decision of facing this life without each other, we wilt at the prospect because where I am weak, she is strong and visa versa. Because of our differences we make the perfect team. Each night beyond a brief conversation of how our perspective day went, we typically pursue are different interest and hobbies. Rare is the entertainment my wife and I enjoy together; each night she’ll watch her shows and I’ll dive into my own interest, which rarely involves watching television programming. It doesn’t matter. Some people think it does…but it really doesn’t.
What matters is how we have each other’s back no matter what in everything we do as a team. And I suspect a similar relationship could be found between various positions and position groups throughout a football team; none more important than the relationship that exist between a quarterbacks ability to move the ball down the field through the air and his accompanying ground game.
In the game of football, it really doesn’t matter if you have the best of anything at any position because in this league every team regardless of win / loss ratio, typically has the ability to take one player away on both sides of the ball. So imagine, if you will, a Coop led Cowboys with Zeke in the backfield: Zeke would likely have a similar stretch of games that McFadden had in 2015 with Romo on the sideline.
Zeke would get his share of yards and certainly be in the conversation for another Pro Bowl berth, but I suspect the bulk of his yards would come from those one-off situations where he finds a hole and takes it the distance. Otherwise, defenses would be keying on him and forcing Coop to win with his arm…and I’m not sure at this point in Coop’s career being a UFA this season, he would be prepared to carry this team on the merits of his pocket work alone.
Therein, my friends, is the rub. I have certainly had to take a step back in my estimation of Dak as the future of the Cowboys franchise QB, but to judge him on the work he has done in this stretch of games without Zeke and on the merits of his work in those games alone, I believe to be folly. We can’t dismiss it and yet we can’t as a fan base allow it to define Dak either.
Thoughts?
