Mad Dog - "You can't tell me he (Prescott) is a Top 10 QB". Booger McFarland disagrees

DonaldM

DonaldM

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,064
Reaction score
708
MountaineerCowboy said:
I predict by around week 10 or so this season you will agree with me and have Dak closer to 15 than 5 in your own personal rankings.

I just see a big drop from him without Cooper and without Gallup for the 1st 6 or so weeks of the season. I think more and more people will see that Dak is more of a product of the talent that's around him than anything else.

Maybe I'm wrong and Dak will make a fool of me. We shall see.
Click to expand...
This is crazy talk. Dak will be great this year. He won't be Brady, Rogers, Maholmes but solid. And enough to win playoff games with a good team.
 
DandyDon52

DandyDon52

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,437
Reaction score
15,475
TwentyOne said:
The guy is an bad NFL QB. Why lose time with discussions where he actually belongs ? Does that make him play better or change our QB situation ?

Use the time to find a franchise QB.
Click to expand...
That is what I think as well. dak isnt bad , he just isnt real good.
there are 32 starting qb's and most are like dak or a little worse.

I think the upper tier is probably only about 7 qb's that stand above all the others.
As for daks pay, he had jerry convinced he is the guy, so jerry paid what he had to , to keep him.
all the qb's are overpaid, including the true top 7.

market price thing, just keeps driving it up.
 
Dre11

Dre11

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,686
Reaction score
11,450
Flamma said:
Sometimes people lie. You see it all the time when it comes to friends and family. Like when aunt Hester brings over that rum cake and everyone eats it with a smile. She thinks they love it. No, they love her.
Click to expand...

You say they lie, how many people do you know here personally to say they LIED?
 
Dre11

Dre11

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,686
Reaction score
11,450
Captain-Crash said:
nice try. you compare dak to Rodgers, Mahomes, Troy, and Brady just to name a few to try to say he's as good as them. It's not hard to see. Don't see why you don't admit it. oh well, it's easy to see from all your posts.
Click to expand...

I just smashed all your rhetoric. Again you can't find 1 quote. You grasping at straws because your bs stink
 
TheMarathonContinues

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
75,438
Reaction score
69,862
plasticman said:
You have a point there. He was a rookie and the Cowboys thrived that season by keeping Dak conservative and letting the running game dominate.

Yes, he was supposed to have the kind of game where he supplemented the running game with safe passes for the most part. Ball safety was paramount and I'm not saying he wasn't entitled to a mistake. I mean, of course I've considered that he had already exceeded expectations.....as a 4th round pick.

But we aren't talking about exceeding expectations as a rookie 4th round pick. We aren't even talking about him meeting expectations as a starting quarterback in the NFL. We are talking about what makes him a valid choice as a top ten QB in this league.
Click to expand...
You think he played like a top 10 QB in that first Packers game? Even with the pick I'd have to say he did. Made some great timely throws. Especially once he got that first pick out of the way.
 

GINeric

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,230
Reaction score
3,584
MountaineerCowboy said:
A 4th round pick that wasn't never supposed to be much became better than the #1 overall pick in 2007.

I think that's a great accomplishment.
Click to expand...

Actually Dak became better than alot of 1st and 2nd rounders, but it still amazes me how Dak is held to higher standards than quarterbacks drafted in higher rounds than he was drafted.

As a matter of fact, isn't he pretty much the best QB in his draft class?? If im wrong, I stand to be corrected, but who from his draft class had better production than Dak?
 
KJJ

KJJ

You Have an Axe to Grind
Messages
57,054
Reaction score
35,144
erod

erod

Well-Known Member
Messages
37,880
Reaction score
58,464
GINeric said:
Do you think this book mean anything when players, agents and GMs go into contract negotiations and they pull out the statistics/production sheet to justify how a player is going to be paid???
Click to expand...
If you've followed this game as you claim, then you'd think you would have figured this out by now.

Just about every big free agent signing ends up being regretted by the team that did it. Almost every time. Always based on garbage stats and measurables that don't equate to performing when it matters most. Ever notice that the team with the best "stats" lose the game more than half time time? That's because they're useless when it comes to winning. That's why bad franchises do it routinely.

NFL talent evaluators are horribly inept and wrong far more than they're right. They work in the buddy system and the "my dad was an NFL guy so I am, too" world of logic. Owners are solely built for making money, and the salary cap ensures them hundreds of millions as long as they pretend to try by spending money to the cap. Winning is a cute little bonus in a passionate hobby for them, but nothing more. The cap ensures massive profits and a built-in excuse for not spending into that gaudy margin.

NFL teams are some of the worst-run businesses imaginable, but it doesn't matter. Owners are safe with the TV contracts, so their NFL team is their personal fantasy football team. Just a fun hobby that makes money out of thin air.

Actual winning happens when rosters perform when it matters most, not because the left defensive end racked up 12 sacks against sub-.500 teams in September. Or when Dak throws for 300 yards in the 4th quarter to turn a 30-point loss into a 10-point loss. Winning is a construct of a like-minded and well-fitted roster. That's why in the 70s and 80s, it was the same teams over and over for a decade at a time. Now with unbridled free agency, it's like pick-up football in the cornfield on the weekends. Less quality, but quicker opportunity to find the magic formula.

All that is to say football is far more complicated than meaningless statistics. Teams like Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and New England understand this. They let go of most of their big stats guys who want to get paid. They know what consistently wins, and stats aren't it.

Numbers are like dancing monkeys. You can make them do whatever you want, but that doesn't make them intend to mean anything.
 
shabazz

shabazz

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,799
Reaction score
31,010
Vtwin

Vtwin

Safety third
Messages
8,122
Reaction score
11,051
TheMarathonContinues said:
I think you’re missing the point. I’m not saying they should’ve won a SB when Romo got hurt. What I’m saying is if they were as stacked as you claim they were they should’ve won more than one game. Stacked teams don’t go winless when their quarterback goes down. They just don’t. You’ve been following this team for too long….do you remember what would happen when Aikman would miss a game? They were still able to compete at least.

Jerry has brainwashed y’all into thinking you can’t win a game when your starter goes down. Stacked teams can. This team was not stacked. They were exactly what their record said they were.
Click to expand...
Come on man. You are ignoring a few other significant factors.

The rushing game fell off significantly with the loss of Murray.
Dez was hurt much of the year.
Romo was at the top of his game so expecting a new to the system backup to run the offense at anywhere near the same level as the vet QB for who the offense was built for is ludicrous.

In 2014 the running game fed off Romo just as much as Romo fed off the running game. You can't remove key parts of the running game and passing game and expect a journeyman backup to come in and not suffer a drop off.

You also are ignoring the bad defense that Romo and the running game were able to protect in 2014.

2016 had an even better o-line, a healthy receiving group and a rookie phenom at RB. The overall 2016 team was better than the 2014 team everywhere but QB and MUCH better than the 2015 team.

It's like you're not even trying to be objective.
 
KJJ

KJJ

You Have an Axe to Grind
Messages
57,054
Reaction score
35,144
shabazz said:
……there’s a ton of buyers remorse going on all around us. I never bought in on either of them
Click to expand...

Had we not re-signed Dak we would have an awful QB situation right now and 99.9% of the fans would be miserable! We would be going through the same hell we went through from 2000 to 2005 trying to find a QB. I can assure you the majority of the Dak haters weren’t following the team in the early 2000s. No long time Cowboys fan would want to go through the Steve Pulleur/Gary Hogeboom/Quincy Carter years again. Not to mention all the duds we tried replacing those QBs with.
 
Last edited:
basel90

basel90

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,928
Reaction score
4,304
erod said:
If you've followed this game as you claim, then you'd think you would have figured this out by now.

Just about every big free agent signing ends up being regretted by the team that did it. Almost every time. Always based on garbage stats and measurables that don't equate to performing when it matters most. Ever notice that the team with the best "stats" lose the game more than half time time? That's because they're useless when it comes to winning. That's why bad franchises do it routinely.

NFL talent evaluators are horribly inept and wrong far more than they're right. They work in the buddy system and the "my dad was an NFL guy so I am, too" world of logic. Owners are solely built for making money, and the salary cap ensures them hundreds of millions as long as they pretend to try by spending money to the cap. Winning is a cute little bonus in a passionate hobby for them, but nothing more. The cap ensures massive profits and a built-in excuse for not spending into that gaudy margin.

NFL teams are some of the worst-run businesses imaginable, but it doesn't matter. Owners are safe with the TV contracts, so their NFL team is their personal fantasy football team. Just a fun hobby that makes money out of thin air.

Actual winning happens when rosters perform when it matters most, not because the left defensive end racked up 12 sacks against sub-.500 teams in September. Or when Dak throws for 300 yards in the 4th quarter to turn a 30-point loss into a 10-point loss. Winning is a construct of a like-minded and well-fitted roster. That's why in the 70s and 80s, it was the same teams over and over for a decade at a time. Now with unbridled free agency, it's like pick-up football in the cornfield on the weekends. Less quality, but quicker opportunity to find the magic formula.

All that is to say football is far more complicated than meaningless statistics. Teams like Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and New England understand this. They let go of most of their big stats guys who want to get paid. They know what consistently wins, and stats aren't it.

Numbers are like dancing monkeys. You can make them do whatever you want, but that doesn't make them intend to mean anything.
Click to expand...
very true . cowboy fans are quick to point to Dak stats and overlooking the crucial bad throws or lack of throws and his inability to read defenses which don't show up in the stat sheet.
For example, for those who remember, the year Elway won his first super bowl , he had very mediocre stats in the SB , but he made the crucial throws when needed and the defenses had to respect his arm and decision making which opened up the running game. With dak , no defense respects him to burn them or make such throws so they shut down the offense pretty quickly , it is a reapeted pattern and a fatal flow with his game , but most fans don't want to admit it.
 
TheMarathonContinues

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
75,438
Reaction score
69,862
Vtwin said:
Come on man. You are ignoring a few other significant factors.

The rushing game fell off significantly with the loss of Murray.
Dez was hurt much of the year.
Romo was at the top of his game so expecting a new to the system backup to run the offense at anywhere near the same level as the vet QB for who the offense was built for is ludicrous.

In 2014 the running game fed off Romo just as much as Romo fed off the running game. You can't remove key parts of the running game and passing game and expect a journeyman backup to come in and not suffer a drop off.

You also are ignoring the bad defense that Romo and the running game were able to protect in 2014.

2016 had an even better o-line, a healthy receiving group and a rookie phenom at RB. The overall 2016 team was better than the 2014 team everywhere but QB and MUCH better than the 2015 team.

It's like you're not even trying to be objective.
Click to expand...

Yet....the Cowboys were 3-0 WITH Romo in 2015...but were 1-12 without him.

So you telling me they missed Murray, Dez was hurt and all this other stuff.....its irrelevant because they were 3-0.

All of this is irrelevant honestly.

The question I asked was if they were SO STACKED why did they only win 1 game when Romo went down.

Then you proceed to give me reasons why they weren't stacked lol. So if you don't feel they were stacked then we aren't disagreeing here. The other poster I was replying to though said the Cowboys were stacked in 2015. They were not. Far from it.
 
erod

erod

Well-Known Member
Messages
37,880
Reaction score
58,464
basel90 said:
very true . cowboy fans are quick to point to Dak stats and overlooking the crucial bad throws or lack of throws and his inability to read defenses which don't show up in the stat sheet.
For example, for those who remember, the year Elway won his first super bowl , he had very mediocre stats in the SB , but he made the crucial throws when needed and the defenses had to respect his arm and decision making which opened up the running game. With dak , no defense respects him to burn them or make such throws so they shut down the offense pretty quickly , it is a reapeted pattern and a fatal flow with his game , but most fans don't want to admit it.
Click to expand...
Good defenses toy with Dak. He's no threat to them whatsoever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top