You can believe that, but there's no way for us to know it. I mean, part of the reason for Hurts' success is because he was so good at running the ball. That, along with a good running game overall, kept defenses from being able to just focus on the passing game. His ability created problems for defenses that were specific to what he could do as a quarterback. Would Philly have used Dak in the same way, with the same amount of success?
Arguments like this remind me of all the endlessly ignorant debates about Emmitt Smith being the NFL's leading rusher. There's no doubt that Emmitt was in a good situation in Dallas, but that should not take away one bit from what he accomplished and how good he was. Would Barry Sanders have done just as well in Dallas? Possibly. Would other backs? Possibly. But at the end of the day, Smith is still the NFL's career leader.
At the end of last year, Hurts had a better season as a QB than Prescott. He was the better QB for that season. Doesn't mean anything beyond that, but it's still the unmitigated truth based on the evidence at hand. Speculation doesn't change that. Hopefully, it won't be the truth this year.
