Right now, it actually doesnt matter who the QB is

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,886
Reaction score
12,670
If it doesn't matter who the QB is, then maybe we should keep the guy we're paying $500,000 and get rid of the $108,000,000 man and use the money elsewhere

You posted the same nonsense yesterday and still don't get it.

It some situations, both QB A and QB B will get you the win and do well. That doesn't mean there isn't a difference between QB A and QB B and that one doesn't give you the better chance to win.

Logic is a lost art.

I would argue that in these first 6 games the QB has mattered. I think we're 6-0 with Romo. But for the most part, the rest of the team is playing so well, that as long as the QB is fairly competent the team would have won these games.

The question right now is essentially:

Would you rather have a QB like Romo or a QB like Alex Smith?

If you answer is Alex Smith, then that's fair, and you'd go with Dak. I would disagree, strongly, and say I would rather have a QB like Romo.
 
Last edited:

Cowboysfan917

Well-Known Member
Messages
972
Reaction score
1,207
I saw an article where an unnamed afc gm was interviewed and said this offensive line is one of the best ever and 'any swinging d*** could play QB right now'
 

THEHEREAFTER

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,862
Reaction score
6,301
Valid thread but it completely ***** on Dak's intangibles and what he's actually bringing to the table. Completely inaccurate imo.
 

kevm3

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,826
Reaction score
12,862
I saw an article where an unnamed afc gm was interviewed and said this offensive line is one of the best ever and 'any swinging d*** could play QB right now'

If that's the case, why didn't the three qbs we played last year tear it up behind that same o-line? If it's all about the O-line and surrounding talent, then I guess we can't attribute that to Romo. We have to give credit to an O-line that was possibly even better given it was coached by Callahan and Romo had an 1800+ yard rusher in Demarco Murray in addition to a healthy Dez Bryant.
 

Yakuza Rich

Well-Known Member
Messages
18,043
Reaction score
12,385
Pump the brakes.

EE has been phenomenal the past 4 games. But, Dak has played a big role in that because of his bootleg passing and RPO skills. When you have a defender that has to account for the QB, that means 10 on 10 football.

The defense is playing well, but they have had some issues from time to time and have gotten bailed out by luck from time to time. And they've needed a high scoring, run focused offense to do it.

If you look at the statistics of teams with similar offenses that are more run focused, but score a lot of points...usually their defensive performances improve immensely.

That's what is getting lost in all of this. Dak's impact on the run game because he effectively stretches the defense horizontally.

I think too many people look at stretching the field vertically as the key to opening up the running game.. But, if you can stretch it horizontally it has a larger impact. And we can do that because we can run the ball to the left, run the ball right and bootleg left and right. Can't do that with Romo or Sanchez. And we are #1 on runs up the gut according to Football Outsiders.

This offense reminds me a little of Chip Kelley's first year with the Eagles where they ran the ball incredibly well. They stretched defense's horizontally because they had McCoy and Jackson involved with the running game and both were so fast and quick it was very difficult to stop.

That's why I was more than glad to see the Eagles trade McCoy and cut Jackson. I thought those were horrendous moves based on what they were able to do with that offense. The other issue was Kelly's scheme, especially from a passing perspective, is over-simplified. But the end effect on the running game was the same.

Now we have an offense that stretches defense's vertically and is less simplified in the passing game. And we also have Whitehead to help continue to stretch the defense horizontally. Essentially, defenses don't know which way to go and a large part of that has to do with Dak. With Romo and Sanchez we may be able to stretch defenses vertically although Dak hasn't had Dez which takes away the vertical threat.





YR
 

THEHEREAFTER

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,862
Reaction score
6,301
If that's the case, why didn't the three qbs we played last year tear it up behind that same o-line? If it's all about the O-line and surrounding talent, then I guess we can't attribute that to Romo. We have to give credit to an O-line that was possibly even better given it was coached by Callahan and Romo had an 1800+ yard rusher in Demarco Murray in addition to a healthy Dez Bryant.

Game Set Match...

Think about it this... some are MAD... that we drafted a kid that's setting the league on fire playing like a poised VET.
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,886
Reaction score
12,670
If that's the case, why didn't the three qbs we played last year tear it up behind that same o-line? If it's all about the O-line and surrounding talent, then I guess we can't attribute that to Romo. We have to give credit to an O-line that was possibly even better given it was coached by Callahan and Romo had an 1800+ yard rusher in Demarco Murray in addition to a healthy Dez Bryant.

It wasn't the same OL. It wasn't the same RBs. Even if the names of the other players are the same, they are also changed from who they were last year. The coaches have done things differently as well.

And yes, the QB is better as well. It's not that ANYONE can go back there and be a QB, it's that with everything considered (the way the OL is playing, the way Zeke is playing, the way the WRs - especially Beasely - are playing, the teams we have faced, the way the secondary has played, the decisions the coaches are making, etc.) that a QB above a certain competency level will have success and the team would be winning.
 

THEHEREAFTER

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,862
Reaction score
6,301
You don't get it.

No I get it. In your mind Dak Prescott is the equivalent to Alex Smith. The same "type" of QB. Romo is clearly a better player than Alex Smith. I don't think you'd even get a Chiefs homer to argue that point, certainly nobody here would. Therefore you've cleverly illustrated why Romo is the better choice for us at QB using Alex Smith as your example? Am I right? I just disagree with you and think the entire correlation is ASININE!!! :thumbdown:
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,886
Reaction score
12,670
No I get it. In your mind Dak Prescott is the equivalent to Alex Smith. The same "type" of QB. Romo is clearly a better player than Alex Smith. I don't think you'd even get a Chiefs homer to argue that point, certainly nobody here would. Therefore you've cleverly illustrated why Romo is the better choice for us at QB using Alex Smith as your example? Am I right? I just disagree with you and think the entire correlation is ASININE!!! :thumbdown:

This is the wrong thread for that, but yes, Dak is similar to Alex Smith. The same people who are worshipping (yes this is the right word for many) would not want to keep Romo on the bench for Alex Smith. It's not a correlation, it's a comparison and a check for logical consistency. Something that is sorely lacking on this forum, more so than usual.
 

THEHEREAFTER

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,862
Reaction score
6,301
This is the wrong thread for that, but yes, Dak is similar to Alex Smith. The same people who are worshipping (yes this is the right word for many) would not want to keep Romo on the bench for Alex Smith. It's not a correlation, it's a comparison and a check for logical consistency. Something that is sorely lacking on this forum, more so than usual.

So using this logic.. knowing exactly what we know now. In some alternate universe we could simply trade Prescott for Alex Smith and insert him in our line up. SAME THING.. correct? Your problem is that NOBODY HERE WOULD MAKE THAT TRADE and EVERYONE in KC would. I would not keep Romo on the bench for Alex Smith but I would keep him on the bench for Dak. So if Dak continues to play in your world, our coaches and FO prefer Alex Smith over Romo.. RIGHT? Make sense?
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,886
Reaction score
12,670
So using this logic.. knowing exactly what we know now. In some alternate universe we could simply trade Prescott for Alex Smith and insert him in our line up. SAME THING.. correct? Your problem is that NOBODY HERE WOULD MAKE THAT TRADE and EVERYONE in KC would. I would not keep Romo on the bench for Alex Smith but I would keep him on the bench for Dak. So if Dak continues to play in your world, our coaches and FO prefer Alex Smith over Romo.. RIGHT? Make sense?

What is it exactly that escalates Dak so clearly ahead of Alex Smith in your mind? Outside of any previous bias you may have had against Alex Smith? Pretty much everything Dak has done, I can point to Alex Smith doing at some point, and with far less talent around him.
 

THEHEREAFTER

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,862
Reaction score
6,301
What is it exactly that escalates Dak so clearly ahead of Alex Smith in your mind? Outside of any previous bias you may have had against Alex Smith? Pretty much everything Dak has done, I can point to Alex Smith doing at some point, and with far less talent around him.

Would you trade Dak straight up for Alex smith Right now to back up Romo since you would immediately start Romo?
 

Cowboysfan917

Well-Known Member
Messages
972
Reaction score
1,207
If that's the case, why didn't the three qbs we played last year tear it up behind that same o-line? If it's all about the O-line and surrounding talent, then I guess we can't attribute that to Romo. We have to give credit to an O-line that was possibly even better given it was coached by Callahan and Romo had an 1800+ yard rusher in Demarco Murray in addition to a healthy Dez Bryant.
Because they didn't have Elliot. He is a better player than Murray or McFadden.
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,886
Reaction score
12,670
Would you trade Dak straight up for Alex smith Right now to back up Romo since you would immediately start Romo?

No. Dak is on a cheap rookie contract and has a higher ceiling (assuming he hasn't peaked extremely early) than Alex.
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,886
Reaction score
12,670
Ok got it... So we plug Romo in vs Cleveland and name him the starter for the rest of the year? Romo plays for what.. another 3-4 years.. then we have Dak.. sound good?

That would work (might be 2-3 years).
 

haleyrules

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,060
Reaction score
42,877
lol. Tony Romo has until June 1st 2017. After that...it is completely Prescotts team IF he is truly capable of doing the job. Otherwise, its back to the drawing board. PRAY!!
 
Top