Marcellus Wiley off his meds

[JoeKing]

Because it didn’t come with team success, why is that so hard to understand

Dak is one guy. Football is a team sport. When the rest of the team improves, the wins will come.

 

[RonnieT24]

Because it didn’t come with team success, why is that so hard to understand

It is hard to understand because with under 4 minutes left in the Seattle game Dak gave us a lead. He had us up 14-7 in the Cleveland Game.. 17-13 in the Rams game.. Came back and won the Falcons game and had a 24-23 lead in the Giants game and had driven inside the 20 yl before he was hurt. We watched the games.. We saw him lead the team all the way back numerous times.. then because he wasn't absolutely PERFECT the defense just handed the lead right back. I have zero doubt that if there had been 30 seconds left at the end of the ATL game the defense would have let them get into FG range on like 3 plays and kick the game winning FG. If you want to be mad about how those first 5 games turned out I'd say it's far more logical to be mad at the unit that was giving up points at a record pace than the one that was scoring at an almost equally record pace. I'm not breaking the later because of the failings of the former. That would be like putting more air in your front tires while running your back tires flat. Because the front tires should do a better job of getting me down the road.

 

[PAPPYDOG]

Dak is one guy. Football is a team sport. When the rest of the team improves, the wins will come.

Improve ehhhh?

Ok, Dak had 4 # 1 picks and 1 # 2 pick on the offline.
One of the best if not best HB in the NFL.
A stud WR.
A top ten defense.

End Results....
9-7
10-6
8-8

Man sell crazy elsewhere...thks

 

[JoeKing]

Improve ehhhh?

Ok, Dak had 4 # 1 picks and 1 # 2 pick on the offline.
One of the best if not best HB in the NFL.
A stud WR.
A top ten defense.

End Results....
9-7
10-6
8-8

Man sell crazy elsewhere...thks

Dak has not always had those o-line advantages you speak of. He certainly took advantage of them when he did... 13-3 his rookie year. The D has not always been top 10 either. Wins and loses is a team stat so those "results" are no reflection on Dak.

 

[PAPPYDOG]

Dak has not always had those o-line advantages you speak of. He certainly took advantage of them when he did... 13-3 his rookie year. The D has not always been top 10 either. Wins and loses is a team stat so those "results" are no reflection on Dak.

You can deny the facts but Jerry and Son ain't buying it and come the Spring get ready to move to Prescotts new team forum.
Guess you like beating the Giants and D.C. and losing hands down to teams with a winning record.
Sad really how you sell out the Star for such an inept average QB.....

 

[JoeKing]

You can deny the facts but Jerry and Son ain't buying it and come the Spring get ready to move to Prescotts new team forum.
Guess you like beating the Giants and D.C. and losing hands down to teams with a winning record.
Sad really how you sell out the Star for such an inept average QB.....

You're a well established Dak hater. I consider your Dak hating ways an embarrassment to everyone that calls themselves a "Cowboys" fan. You are never to be taken seriously. I love how you pretend to speak for the Jones boys. lol

 

[RonnieT24]

You're a well established Dak hater. I consider your Dak hating ways an embarrassment to everyone that calls themselves a "Cowboys" fan. You are never to be taken seriously. I love how you pretend to speak for the Jones boys. lol

LOL You got him pegged. Funny how when the team was good Dak had no trouble beating teams with winning records. It's weird how that works.. Good teams win more.. Bad teams lose more and only occasionally win when one player puts them on his back. Dak aint goin nowhere and these idiots know it. But they think if they wish it hard enough...

 

[CowboyoWales]

Winning as rookies is not the same as winning on a rookie deal. Those are two different arguments.

1) Garappolo was NOT on his rookie deal last year.. and he lost..
2) Cam was not on his rookie deal either. The Panthers extended him before the 2015 season.. and he also lost
3) Wentz watched the Super Bowl just like you and me. And after seeing him crumble when the lights shine brightest does anyone here honestly believe his getting injured and letting Foles take over wasn't the best thing that could have happened to the Eagles?
4) Russell Wilson would have been a better example.. He was on a rookie deal, and won the game.. big..
5) For every QB that gets the Super Bowl on his rookie deal I can show you five who were NOT. Other than using it to justify wanting to be rid of Dak I can't understand why people keep citing it as some sure fire magic formula for winning. Yes it HAS worked.. but so has keeping a good QB when you get one and building around him. It's an inarguable fact the latter has worked far more often than the former.



We agree that signing Dak to anything shorter than a 4 year deal would be cap suicide. For cap purposes the longer the better. I want Dak here because he is on a trajectory that has him being a top 5 QB in the league for the next decade. I have no interest in trying to trade my girlfriend who is a 9 but a 10 with make up for the hot chick who looks great from afar but when she gets close up I see the make up covering up her zits and then I notice her fake boobs, fake hair and veneers on her teeth. Frankly I trust this front office to build a defense more than I trust them to draft and develop a QB. The Joneses have built a defense that ranked #1 in points allowed three times in their 30 year tenure and have had a top 10 scoring defense 11 times. However they have not done so well at finding QBs. They have pretty much lucked into all three. Aikman was the no brainer #1 pick when they took over.. Romo only came to Dallas to work with Sean Payton and we know how they backed into Dak.. Maybe they're due to get one right again.. but history says they won't and as I keep saying, drafting a QB #1 does absolutely nothing to help the defense.

Rookie contract or not, the point was that none of them were in the top 10 QB's in the NFL.

We do agree on the 3 year CAP Suicide Scenario and I suppose my other concern is that Jerry will continue to make the same mistakes as he has always done by freeing up money by restructuring and that the overhaul in the defense is going to take too long to take advantage of Dak's productive years.

In any case lets just hope that French is nowhere near the negotiations.

 

[DCwarrior]

The operative word here is "seems." I am duty bound to remind you that with Dak the offense was scoring 15.4 points a game in the first half. Are defenses really letting up in the first half? I am likewise duty bound to remind you the defenses "let up" to the point that we had a lead in every game Dak started.. but the defense gave it back.. Or is your argument that the opposing defenses WANTED to let the Cowboys come back and take the lead so there could be some drama in the game?

Are you duty bound to remind me that Dallas leading 3 to nothing after 1st possession really means nothing? I’m skeptical of your duty boundness claiming that the offense scored 15 in first half. I’m duty bound to ask you is that a average, highest or lowest score? We had a losing record with him and we still have a losing record.

 

[DCwarrior]

The operative word here is "seems." I am duty bound to remind you that with Dak the offense was scoring 15.4 points a game in the first half. Are defenses really letting up in the first half? I am likewise duty bound to remind you the defenses "let up" to the point that we had a lead in every game Dak started.. but the defense gave it back.. Or is your argument that the opposing defenses WANTED to let the Cowboys come back and take the lead so there could be some drama in the game?

I just looked up stats thru the 1st half of games he played this year. Only 1 half was over 15 points and that’s the vagiants game when he went out. I’m duty bound to remind you that’s not worth the years and money he’s wanting.

 

[RonnieT24]

I just looked up stats thru the 1st half of games he played this year. Only 1 half was over 15 points and that’s the vagiants game when he went out. I’m duty bound to remind you that’s not worth the years and money he’s wanting.

I'm duty bound to remind you you don't get a vote..

 

[RonnieT24]

Are you duty bound to remind me that Dallas leading 3 to nothing after 1st possession really means nothing? I’m skeptical of your duty boundness claiming that the offense scored 15 in first half. I’m duty bound to ask you is that a average, highest or lowest score? We had a losing record with him and we still have a losing record.

If you have to ask what a 15.4 average means then there really is no way I can make you understand what it means. 14, 10, 15, 14, 24. Those were the first half scores .. You don't like my math go cipher it yourself. Then come back and tell me what you come up with for an average. Yes the team had a losing record.. but the #1 reason for that was the defense giving up 36 points a game. If they had NOT done that we very likely would have been 4-1 instead of 2-3. P.S. The only time all year the Cowboys led 3-0 with Dak was the Giants game. They did lead 31-30 with under 4 minutes left at Seattle though. Did that mean anything? What about 14-13 at the half at the Rams? Still no meaning? How about 14-7 in the second quarter against the Browns? I just need some help to understand at what point having a lead does actually have meaning.. aside from you know the obvious.. at the end of the game. What I CAN say unequivocally is that if the offense gave us a lead at any point in the game then by definition the defense surrendered that lead if we eventually lost said game. So one side of the ball did its job (getting the lead) and the other side didn't (holding the lead) in those games. Or are you one of those people that believes that the QB is supposed to somehow MAKE the defense play better?

 

[DCwarrior]

If you have to ask what a 15.4 average means then there really is no way I can make you understand what it means. 14, 10, 15, 14, 24. Those were the first half scores .. You don't like my math go cipher it yourself. Then come back and tell me what you come up with for an average. Yes the team had a losing record.. but the #1 reason for that was the defense giving up 36 points a game. If they had NOT done that we very likely would have been 4-1 instead of 2-3. P.S. The only time all year the Cowboys led 3-0 with Dak was the Giants game. They did lead 31-30 with under 4 minutes left at Seattle though. Did that mean anything? What about 14-13 at the half at the Rams? Still no meaning? How about 14-7 in the second quarter against the Browns? I just need some help to understand at what point having a lead does actually have meaning.. aside from you know the obvious.. at the end of the game. What I CAN say unequivocally is that if the offense gave us a lead at any point in the game then by definition the defense surrendered that lead if we eventually lost said game. So one side of the ball did its job (getting the lead) and the other side didn't (holding the lead) in those games. Or are you one of those people that believes that the QB is supposed to somehow MAKE the defense play better?

So you’re saying we suck with or without Dak. Thank you very much.

 

[SportsGuru80]

I cannot stand Lavar Arrington... OVERRATED

 

[RonnieT24]

So you’re saying we suck with or without Dak. Thank you very much.

What I am saying that with Dak we have a chance to compete and win despite the worst stretch of defense in franchise history and without him we have no chance unless the defense trims its points surrendered by 12-14 points a game. Up until Thursday they had held 4 straight opponents under 30. Had they done that over the first 5 weeks of the season Dak would have been 4-1 and sitting pretty. Failure to acknowledge that reveals your true colors. You have no interest in judging Dak fairly.. you want him gone as is your prerogative. But again.. you don't get a vote. It's gonna be up to Jerry and Sons whether he stays in Dallas or not. My money is on him staying..

 

[DCwarrior]

What I am saying that with Dak we have a chance to compete and win despite the worst stretch of defense in franchise history and without him we have no chance unless the defense trims its points surrendered by 12-14 points a game. Up until Thursday they had held 4 straight opponents under 30. Had they done that over the first 5 weeks of the season Dak would have been 4-1 and sitting pretty. Failure to acknowledge that reveals your true colors. You have no interest in judging Dak fairly.. you want him gone as is your prerogative. But again.. you don't get a vote. It's gonna be up to Jerry and Sons whether he stays in Dallas or not. My money is on him staying..

My vote counts same as yours. I get that you believe he is a difference maker and can take us where we want to go. I used to think that myself. I liked his swagger and resilience. The contract demands and his performance along with some supporters acting like he is TB12 have tempered my expectations. I just don’t think he moves the needle for us while allowing resources to be used to bolster our defense. It’s obvious that he can’t carry us.

 

[RonnieT24]

My vote counts same as yours. I get that you believe he is a difference maker and can take us where we want to go. I used to think that myself. I liked his swagger and resilience. The contract demands and his performance along with some supporters acting like he is TB12 have tempered my expectations. I just don’t think he moves the needle for us while allowing resources to be used to bolster our defense. It’s obvious that he can’t carry us.

Please list all the QBs who have won championships with defenses giving up more than 30 points a game..

I'll wait..

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

You sure? We were a watermelon kick from 0-4 I know that.

or couple of defensive stops on 3rd downs from 2-2 start.....you know that?

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

The Cowboys are a bad team it does not matter who the quarterback is. We lack talent everywhere but wide receivers. Signing Dak long term would be like Atlanta extending Ryan. We need to start over.

so the OL is not talented (yes injuries), the TEs seem to be climbing up. RB is decent, if there was a QB that could take pressure off. we have the QB so offense seems fine.

where we lack is defense.....Lawrence....oookkk, maybe LVE if he has some support around him........maybe Diggs, since he is a rookie, willing to give him another year...... but who else we got that's worth it...none of them are super stars or greats currently among the players in the league......we don't need to throw the baby out with the bath water. we just need to have a good defensive draft....top 5 picks should focus on defense.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

I didn’t blame Dak. Of course the defense is to blame.

But Dak wants money like he’s special.

You want to point to things that aren’t optimal.. Well Dalton can win with everything optimal.

The goal is to win a Super Bowl.. Its hard to pay a QB that much money that needs everything around him to be optimal as well and win it.

he wants money like top 10 QBs in the league are getting paid....Mahomes is special.

and its been proven paying him ain't stopping us from signing any one or two player we want for defense....so don't even try.

we have to draft better defensively and stop giving up 30+ points a game. Dak, Dalton, etc....if this defense doesn't shape up. even mahomes can't fix this....and mahomes had to deal with a similar defense (although it was way better than ours) and he couldn't get it done neither....so...fix the defense