Possible 10-15 years of .500 football when Dak's gone

[Mk2_Cowboys]

what’s the difference ? Dak is never going to get it done .

 

[CT Dal Fan]

When your QB is part of the problem then he is the problem.

He is the most important and highest paid player on the team.

You can have a problem at QB for much less money that will bring you just as much success.

Just as much success? Is this what we want? That's no Super Bowl, not even an NFC Title Game appearance in 29 years. This goes back to when Dak was a toddler. This goes back to the last five years of Troy Aikman's career.

My point is this. The anti-Dak agenda has merit. But some people are so obsessed with getting rid of Dak they think that's the one and only solution. Guess what? Get rid of Dak and we're just back where we were from 1996-2015. And if not, maybe even worse than that.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Just as much success? Is this what we want? That's no Super Bowl, not even an NFC Title Game appearance in 29 years. This goes back to when Dak was a toddler. This goes back to the last five years of Troy Aikman's career.

My point is this. The anti-Dak agenda has merit. But some people are so obsessed with getting rid of Dak they think that's the one and only solution. Guess what? Get rid of Dak and we're just back where we were from 1996-2015. And if not, maybe even worse than that.

So getting rid of Dak might lead to us not winning just like we do with Dak?

This "If Dak can't do it nobody can" think when he's never been a winner at any level, but is treated as if he's some kind of savior that we don't appreciate is downright strange.

You, like a couple others here, would've been the same voices preaching "Why would we trade up for QB? He might suck! We have Alex Smith and he wins games! We should draft a Center or RB instead to help him more".

 

[CT Dal Fan]

So getting rid of Dak might lead to us not winning just like we do with Dak?

This "If Dak can't do it nobody can" think when he's never been a winner at any level, but is treated as if he's some kind of savior that we don't appreciate is downright strange.

You, like a couple others here, would've been the same voices preaching "Why would we trade up for QB? He might suck! We have Alex Smith and he wins games! We should draft a Center or RB instead to help him more".

You're missing my point. The problem here runs so much deeper than Dak. These problems existed before he got here, they exist now, and they're going to be here once he's no longer here, be that 2025 or 2030 or anywhere in between.

There's a group of people here that think getting rid of Dak is the magic cure, the fix-everything move that suddenly turns this team into the next dynasty. It's not. It's curing a symptom while leaving the disease alone.

 

[Gangsta Spanksta]

Just as much success? Is this what we want? That's no Super Bowl, not even an NFC Title Game appearance in 29 years. This goes back to when Dak was a toddler. This goes back to the last five years of Troy Aikman's career.

My point is this. The anti-Dak agenda has merit. But some people are so obsessed with getting rid of Dak they think that's the one and only solution. Guess what? Get rid of Dak and we're just back where we were from 1996-2015. And if not, maybe even worse than that.

Many here think we seeing Dak's ceiling which is 2-5 in the playoffs. The argument of the of some rough times ahead if we get rid of Dak is countered with the belief that if you keep him you are just extending mediocrity and postponing the inevitable. Do we really want more season where we are one and done in the playoffs and then the team might be worse off afterwards because we created a greater cap hell with an extension? Explain to me how We are going to do better in the playoffs, if Dak has hit his ceiling, since he isn't getting any better and is getting older with his skills declining. Explain how we are going to do this if the talent level around him will drop because Dak won't take a team friendly deal and the Joneses are bad negotiators.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

You're missing my point. The problem here runs so much deeper than Dak. These problems existed before he got here, they exist now, and they're going to be here once he's no longer here, be that 2025 or 2030 or anywhere in between.

There's a group of people here that think getting rid of Dak is the magic cure, the fix-everything move that suddenly turns this team into the next dynasty. It's not. It's curing a symptom while leaving the disease alone.

The problem of not having a QB good enough because we've not tried since Aikman? I agree.

That's been the problem the past 30 years. The FO has not taken the QB position seriously.

We've had teams plenty good enough to make it further than we have, but we've have losers at QB that could only be carried so far.

 

[Gangsta Spanksta]

You're missing my point. The problem here runs so much deeper than Dak. These problems existed before he got here, they exist now, and they're going to be here once he's no longer here, be that 2025 or 2030 or anywhere in between.

There's a group of people here that think getting rid of Dak is the magic cure, the fix-everything move that suddenly turns this team into the next dynasty. It's not. It's curing a symptom while leaving the disease alone.

How's he missing the point, when just about everyone here already knows the problem here runs deeper than Dak. It is the same problem that will probably extend him and make things worse. Explain how extending Dak with less talent around him and him hitting his ceiling and being in decline is a formula to winning.

 

[Wangchung83]

Just as much success? Is this what we want? That's no Super Bowl, not even an NFC Title Game appearance in 29 years. This goes back to when Dak was a toddler. This goes back to the last five years of Troy Aikman's career.

My point is this. The anti-Dak agenda has merit. But some people are so obsessed with getting rid of Dak they think that's the one and only solution. Guess what? Get rid of Dak and we're just back where we were from 1996-2015. And if not, maybe even worse than that.

How do you support this? We are back to 1996 through 2005-2006 bc that when Roko came on board. We had the same problem there as we have no paying players for no proof of success. It was clear when we paid Dak that he didn’t have what it takes by himself and not elite enough to elevate the players that need to be paid less to absorb his contract. The other problem we’ve had with both is putting all our money on offensive side of the ball. Go look up salary by offense vs defense for any year before last year and you will see we we always were near top on offensive spending vs bottom of league on defensive spending. Tony needed the likes of Dez, Whitten, and then out a lot into the line which was at very end of his tenure. Dak has had time with line, overpriced RB, and elite WR(Coop, Cede, etc). Both were paid without going and doing anything in the playoffs. Point is we say we have to draft our QB no we could have gotten another lower priced mediocre QB to give us time to find a better replacement. Still relevant with another bus driver and maybe we get lucky and if not we should be developing younger franchise behind them. We could’ve have gotten Baker, Goff(he’s worth Dak like salary hit), and many others Over the last 4-5 years but we will continue to expect different result from same busdriver. The good news is Rocky, ken, kjj, American Cowboy are going to be wrong again for ninth year now.lol

 

[TequilaCowboy]

Don't agree with your opinion, but just to go along with it.....what's the difference between that and 9-8, 10-7 or even 12-5 and bounced out of the playoffs in the WC game.?.... don't need a $60m dollar QB for that. We all know Dak ain't getting this team anywhere past that.

 

[stiletto]

The problem of not having a QB good enough because we've not tried since Aikman? I agree.

That's been the problem the past 30 years. The FO has not taken the QB position seriously.

We've had teams plenty good enough to make it further than we have, but we've have losers at QB that could only be carried so far.

I think they've TRIED to take it seriously but they have in the past over-valued guys like ex college QB's turned baseball players and kept guys in the role too long when it was clear they weren't good enough. Parcells was the key guy that undervalued the QB position bringing in retreads and rolling with Quinthy/Testeverticles. He lucked into Romo and walked after one year. He might've actually helped Romo unlike the Clapper.

 

[kwcool619]

I'm ready to take a chance on the next guy too. That deer in the headlights look vs GB AT home IN the playoffs did it for me.

That plus GB's opening 7 minute drive.

 

[Buzzbait]

I believe this front office is crap. Yes Dak has to go but still no confidence in management building a championship team. None at all. A 5-1 stretch in the regular season is nice, having to win 4 in a row in the postseason against the best in the league is another story. Dak has also gone 5-1 at some point!

Agreed Big _D. Yeah we keep hearing about Cooper Rush and his 5-1 stretch again and again, but who actually believes he'd have went 4 or even 3 in a row or even 2 in a row against playoff caliber teams??? Hmmm? Not a chance in Hades.

 

[Buzzbait]

The Dak leaving us nareative doesn't worry me in the least. If staus quo gets you one and done at best annually we need to try something else. The Dak era has proven fruitless for winning big in the playoffs. While Dak doesn't suck he is not the franchise QB we hoped he would become
Why continue paying him hoping the narrative will change?

Good question. I think an even better question might be: Why continue OVERpaying him hoping the narrative will change?

 

[Cowboys5217]

I think they've TRIED to take it seriously but they have in the past over-valued guys like ex college QB's turned baseball players and kept guys in the role too long when it was clear they weren't good enough. Parcells was the key guy that undervalued the QB position bringing in retreads and rolling with Quinthy/Testeverticles. He lucked into Romo and walked after one year. He might've actually helped Romo unlike the Clapper.

Haven't drafted a QB in the first round since 1989. That QB won 3 SBs in 4 years. The vast majority of SB winning QBs were first rounders. You are supposed to learn from history including your own, not buck it because your ego deludes you into thinking you are the smartest guy in the room. Jerry has most certainly not taken QB seriously in 30 years.

 

[TheCritic]

Welcome to the 2024 CZ, where personal attacks will get you banned. So the next best thing is clickbaiting one another. This thread nails it!!

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

QB’s don’t grow on trees. No matter what you think of Dak, he‘s not the reason for not having much playoff success. He was 2nd in NFL MVP race for a reason. He’s that good. Once he’s gone, it could possibly be years before they break .500. This is no Chicago Bears defense in the making not with massive holes at DT and LB. Mahomes and Brady are generational type players. Picking a QB in the draft is a 50/50 crap shoot AT BEST. So many 1st round busts at that position. Casual fans don’t understand that and want Dak gone NOW. But ask them who’s going to be the QB? They think anyone they draft will be the answer right away. Not likely to happen.

I hope Dak gets extended because I know he gives the team the best chance of winning the Super Bowl. I just hope it’s a team friendly extension. Fix the running game and get a defense that can stop the run and he can easily lead this team to the Super Bowl.

Yeah, it will be a regular bloodbath when Dak and Tad are shown the door.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Well, that settles it then. JJ must keep Dak for 10 or 15 more years. Yeah, that's the ticket.

Is it just me or is talk of the apocalypse akin to cultists?

 

[CT Dal Fan]

How's he missing the point, when just about everyone here already knows the problem here runs deeper than Dak. It is the same problem that will probably extend him and make things worse. Explain how extending Dak with less talent around him and him hitting his ceiling and being in decline is a formula to winning.

It's not the formula for winning. I'm just restating what everyone here is saying. The Cowboys' problem are the Jones boys. Get rid of Dak or any other player. It won't fix anything.

 

[Creeper]

Wow. 21 pages of replies. Who would have figured!

I agree that is was not just Dak's fault they lost to GB the way they did. But Dak played a role. At the same time, I have yet to here an explanation for why Dan Quinn does not deserve as much criticism for the way he defense played. All day GB WRs were wide open downfield for big plays. How did that happen in the 18th game of the season, and why didn't Quinn do anything to adjust?

 

[big dog cowboy]

The problem of not having a QB good enough because we've not tried since Aikman? I agree.

That's been the problem the past 30 years. The FO has not taken the QB position seriously.

I think they've TRIED to take it seriously

When?