Staubach: There’s accuracy issues but Dak’s gonna continue to be a great quarterback **merged**

[ABQCOWBOY]

Incorrect. Roger is best QB this franchise ever had and I consider Aikman great. Staubach top 50 NFL player and made a lot of people rich.

Yes. Roger is the best QB I ever saw play and that's not just because I'm a Cowboy Fan. I truly believe he was the best. He just played at a time when the game was not geared towards the Offense, like it is today.

That's just my opinion.

 

[OmerV]

'Suggestion' would be an understatement. Additionally, it is that no rookie quarterback-led team has competed in (e.g. runner-ups) and/or won (e.g. winning) 34 pre-Super Bowl era NFL championships and 6 AFL championships along with 53 Super Bowls.
I will not argue fairness but I would accurately emphasize that particular circumstance neither applies to any rookie quarterback-led team in NFL playoff history nor the 2016 Dallas Cowboys team.
There is no denying the rarity of the circumstance. It is also undeniable the circumstance surrounding the 2016 season ran counter to the possibility of the 2016 team either appearing in Super Bowl LI or winning it from the historical perspective.

History has some measure of relevancy in all things in life. Sports is not an exception.

I’m not denying there is value in looking at history, but you also have to understanding what you are looking at rather than making the easy, face value assumption. Looking at history means nothing if you only look at the end result and have no knowledge of the causes and circumstances that led to it.

Here are facts that give a more in depth view...

1. In any given year there may only be 1-3 starting QBs that are rookies, so that factor alone limits rookies to a 3-9% chance, and has nothing to do with the ability to handle the job and win as a rookie.

2. Of those 1-3 rookies that do start in a given year, most are on bad teams. Most of the time rookie QBs that start are top draft picks, and usually the team that picked them had a top draft pick because they were a bad team the year before. So that further limits the odds based on something that has nothing to do with the rookie QBs ability to handle winning.

3. In the earlier Super Bowl year’s (60,s, 70’s and even into the 80’s) even the best rookie QB often didn’t get a chance to play because it was common practice for QBs to sit a few years and learn before starting. So, again, a further limiting factor that has nothing to do with whether the rookie QB can handle the job and win.

So what does that leave? Maybe only a 1-2% chance of a rookie winning the Super Bowl based on things that are about lack of opportunity and not lack of ability as a rookie.

Dak ended up in a fortunate situation that bucked a lot of those odds, injuries to 2 QBs allowed him, as a 4th round pick, to step into a good situation as a rookie - a situation very few rookie QBs ever get. And he performed well given that rare chance.

 

[Blackrain]

You missed my point. I meant his criticism presents balance to the homeristic rhetoric in the forum.

This would be a boring place if we all spun it the same direction.

I agree it would be a bore if we all had the same opinion but this guy spins in the same direction all the time and its a constant downward spiral of negativity

Hey Im no day at the beach all the time but heck , Dak may not be the best passer but he didn't end a bunch of games throwing the game losing INT , We didn't end up 8-8 . Yea Jerry is still the owner and Garrett the coach but we have had much worse yrs .

We traded for Cooper got the Oline back on track made a run and actually won a playoff game . Only the people with the dimmest view cant admit we have made some progress . Tired of people that predicted total failure not being able to admit they were wrong and we actually have some hope to get deeper in the playoffs next yr

 

[DallasEast]

I’m not denying there is value in looking at history, but you also have to understanding what you are looking at rather than making the easy, face value assumption. Looking at history means nothing if you only look at the end result and have no knowledge of the causes and circumstances that led to it.

Here are facts that give a more in depth view...

1. In any given year there may only be 1-3 starting QBs that are rookies, so that factor alone limits rookies to a 3-9% chance, and has nothing to do with the ability to handle the job and win as a rookie.

2. Of those 1-3 rookies that do start in a given year, most are on bad teams. Most of the time rookie QBs that start are top draft picks, and usually the team that picked them had a top draft pick because they were a bad team the year before. So that further limits the odds based on something that has nothing to do with the rookie QBs ability to handle winning.

3. In the earlier Super Bowl year’s (60,s, 70’s and even into the 80’s) even the best rookie QB often didn’t get a chance to play because it was common practice for QBs to sit a few years and learn before starting. So, again, a further limiting factor that has nothing to do with whether the rookie QB can handle the job and win.

So what does that leave? Maybe only a 1-2% chance of a rookie winning the Super Bowl based on things that are about lack of opportunity and not lack of ability as a rookie.

Dak ended up in a fortunate situation that bucked a lot of those odds, injuries to 2 QBs allowed him, as a 4th round pick, to step into a good situation as a rookie - a situation very few rookie QBs ever get. And he performed well given that rare chance.

I have understood your viewpoint from the beginning. It is an intelligent viewpoint stating rookie quarterbacks have had few opportunities to compete or win championships in NFL playoff history. Clarification is unnecessary. However, the circumstance of rookie quarterback-led teams reaching and netting championships remains relevant regardless of any additional counterpoints I could but will no longer contribute for discussion because, quite frankly, I wish to move on to other threads, enjoying my off day, etc. Here is a final question:

In your personal opinion, would you consider, hypothetically, any circumstance of any rookie quarterback with the abilities of, say, Pro Football Hall of Fame Joe Montana, would have equal or superior odds of helping his team either appear in and/or win a Super Bowl over all other playoff teams vying for the championship in any given season? I will only reply with a thanks no matter how you answer the question. I am only seeking clearer insight into your own perspective on the subject.

 

[Vtwin]

I have been a member of the site since 2004. Conversed with hundreds. if not thousands, of fellow members over that span. Read a lot of nonsense mixed in with tons of good stuff along the way.

I can honestly say that I have encountered only one individual whose communicative 'point-of-view' prompted me to self-ignore him or her. No replies. No off-handed references. Nada. Just went cold turkey with him or her.

It has been many years since I made that choice. Never thought I would ever feel compelled to do it again. Well. Never is a long time.

2006 myself and to this date I have not used the ignore feature on anyone. This guy has tested my resolve more than anyone else and there certainly have been some tests along the way.

(Posted hoping you can see it and I'm not the one you ignore. lol)

 

[DallasEast]

2006 myself and to this date I have not used the ignore feature on anyone. This guy has tested my resolve more than anyone else and there certainly have been some tests along the way.

(Posted hoping you can see it and I'm not the one you ignore. lol)

Nah. Not you. That particular poster joined the site several months before you.

At least you have the option of the ignore feature. Moderators do not. So, in my best Charlton Heston impression, I will only add, "Dang you @Reality! Dang you to heck!!!"

 

[Gangsta Spanksta]

The team we had around Romo dictated the risk taking. We lived and died by the sword but we basically had no chance most years without that sword.

We had a base of fans who bashed Romo since the choke in Seattle and many of those are the ones who are Daks more ardent supporters. It’s a divide unfortunately in our fans.

I was often a critic of Romo and I am also of Dak. But when comparing their passing skills there are sharp contrast. That said Dak has some assets Romo didn’t have.

It was a big play offense. And as the saying goes: you live by the big play, you die by the big play.

 

[Gangsta Spanksta]

Please Tom Brady and Dak should never be used together in the same sentence.

you have to win at least three superbowls before people should even think of mentioning those two names together.

 

[kskboys]

Great? No. Next.

 

[Gangsta Spanksta]

I agree. He had the amazing start in 2016. Then took a turn back for most of 2017 following with another poor start this year but finished strong with some key signature games.

The inconsistency as Staubach eluded to is a concern and it appears fairly obvious Dak needs more supporting cast to excel.

Will we be able to consistently provide that support? That’s something I’m not hopeful of with our organization.

True. Which is why I cringe when people keep shifting their blame to the Offensive line, because the offensive line has too many players on it to always be elite or even average, and I expect them to decline eventually for the lifetime of any long term quarterback with the team. We have drafted well in recent years, and the team is very talented right now, IMO. And I can agree with Roger about Dak having other traits besides accuracy that make him interesting, but ultimately I want my QB to be able to pass, and while I think we can win in the regular season, unless coaching and quarterback ability to pass consistently accurately changes, I don't think we'll progress any further from where we were at this season. The Rams game planned against us both on Defense (coaches fault) and Offense (Dak's inability to be accurate past 15 yards consistently)

 

[Gangsta Spanksta]

Yes. Roger is the best QB I ever saw play and that's not just because I'm a Cowboy Fan. I truly believe he was the best. He just played at a time when the game was not geared towards the Offense, like it is today.

That's just my opinion.

Based on some fact. Heck hearing some of the people here comparing the decades lets you know how old they are, since they don't remember wideouts taking punishing hits when catching the ball.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Based on some fact. Heck hearing some of the people here comparing the decades lets you know how old they are, since they don't remember wideouts taking punishing hits when catching the ball.

Heck, I remember when there really was no illegal contact. Before like 75, you could just lean on guys all the way down the field. Was a very different game back then, much harder to throw the ball down field and play pitch and catch. QBs, players aren't better today then they were then. The game was harder and that's why you never had Offenses that put up 5 or 6 thousand yards in a season. It was damn hard to put up 4 thousand total yards in a season and 20 passing TDs was considered a career year. The game was just different in those days.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

he was born amore natural passer then Dak, stop the madness..sure he got better late in his career..but Romo was always guy trying to light up the skys more then dink and dunking it..Normal passing QB look deep int and then short as a natural system.. Dak has to learn it.. yes higher risk but that our complaint with this offense a lot of dump downs when we saw guy open deep and Dak never looked up..he did get better at times but no way Dak puts up passing numbers like Romo..

This isn't true at all.

In Romo's last 9 years he has a better air yards than Dak in only 4 years which means this season Dak, dink and dunk, had a better air yards than Romo 5 times. And in his entire career Romo had only 6 years better than Dak...... That's including the one game he played against the Eagles when he had only 1 drive all year in which he averaged 12 air yards per attempt.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

im not digging on Dak while you are downplaying Romo, right now if we had to assume had any chance at a HOF selection ,its Romo..thats the debate..Romo has career stats that at the very least qualify for a shot at the HOF even though we all know it wont happen because of lack of SBs

I'm not downplaying Romo at all. The problem is you guys are over rating Romo. How many times did Romo win MVP? How many times did he led the league in yards or TDs? How many times was he all-pro? He doesn't have Hall of Fame numbers.

 

[RS12]

Yes. Roger is the best QB I ever saw play and that's not just because I'm a Cowboy Fan. I truly believe he was the best. He just played at a time when the game was not geared towards the Offense, like it is today.

That's just my opinion.

Take a bow. You hit it on the screws.

 

[CF74]

https://www.instagram.com/dcinterclub/p/BtXJ7tbgyRv/?utm_source=ig_share_sheet&igshid=tqdwh4r8wmbt

 

[mattjames2010]

Would be great if Staubach would bring up how much easier it is now for QBs in this league opposed to nearly 20 years ago when Brady first got his start. Even Brady mentioned how much easier it is to dissect defenses now.

Mahomes wouldn't be throwing for 50 TDs in 2000. The majority of QBs in the league wouldn't have had 65% completion rating 20 years ago (which was near that average this year)

Dak not topping over 24 TD passes in this era really isn't all that impressive - and it's not like Zeke is scoring a ton either.

 

[blueblood70]

I'm not downplaying Romo at all. The problem is you guys are over rating Romo. How many times did Romo win MVP? How many times did he led the league in yards or TDs? How many times was he all-pro? He doesn't have Hall of Fame numbers.

missing the point jeez someone mentioned Dak had more of shot then Romo at the HOF and I said if you had to choose one you take the Cowboys all time leader in most passing categorys..IMO Dak will never get there as he doesnt put up even stats regardless of other accolades..

BTW it would be tough in any age for great QB to get any of those when you have to play in the same era as Peyton manning, Tom Brady, and Aaron rogers..those elite guys will get all the awards..

this argument was Dak vs Romo who gets it, its Romo hands down..

 

[Bullflop]

Much depends upon Dak's improvement, imho. Any QB can have the best attitude and work ethic in the world but the accuracy must match it before big success is realistically attained. Here's hoping Moore and Kitna manage helping him to improve significantly this year. That would help a lot.

 

[Tangle_Foot]

We are all disappointed we haven't seen the whole Dak but Roger has to understand we're not all looking through the eyes of an experienced NFL quarterback. Although our opinions vary I think we are all looking for improvement in Dak's play.... even Roger.