The case for going for Lawrence

[jnday]

False, I do not. However, wins and losses isn't an argument because that's a team stat. We have a historically horrible defense. The fact that they allowed so many points shouldn't be ignored. And the vast majority of games Prescott has started in, we've been within reach. But believe what you want.

Oh! I see, so Dak’s record at QB means both and it is misleading to give him credit for the wins. I wish you would share this with the Dak slobbers. Have you ever considered that these games would be much closer if Dak and the offense didn’t turn the ball over and actually put some drives together in the first half ? Teams have built up large leads by the time that the 4th quarter has come. None of these games with Dak have been close until the defense goes into prevent and let’s the Cowboys burn up the clock. You are right, the defense is horrible, but Dak and the offense has done nothing to help during the first 2-3 quarters of the game.

 

[gjkoeppen]

You're the only person on here that wont accept we'll be in CAP difficulties if we sign Dak to a market leading contract ESPECIALLY if it's for 3 years.

Here's the problem with those that want to use the cap difficulties as the reason to not sign Prescott. So say Prescott is no longer with the Cowboys and they draft a big name college QB . Now in the next 4 years the Cowboys don't get to or win any Super Bowls and during those 4 years the cost of QB's has risen even higher. Then the same people who now are saying cap difficulties for signing Prescott will be saying the same thing about the next QB, so the cycle continues of drafting QB's every 4 years until the Cowboys luck out and win a Super Bowl. Oh in the mean time Prescott had gone off to another team and won a couple of Super Bowls. Now all of this is just saying what could happen not that it will happen just like those that think the Cowboys if they sign Prescott will automatically not find a way to work around his salary.
.
.

 

[Diehardblues]

Rothliesberger took his team to the SB as a rookie because of the team he went to and that's the same with Prescott. He didn't go as a top 10 pick which means they're usually going to bad teams like Mayfield, Murray, Burrow, Herbert and Tua did.

And that's nothing against Prescott but he had an established OL, receivers and top RB. The Cowboys spent that pick on the RB that team usually spends on QB's. But he has made the most out of his pro career and as a QB, he is very good. As a passer, he still leaves a little to be desired and these young guns are all better passers now than he is now.

Coach - Big Ben led Steelers to SB his sophomore season becoming the youngest QB to win a SB. IMO it doesn’t defuse your point. But there will be those who attempt to.

 

[Redball Express]

First off, let me say that I like Dak Prescott, I think he is a very good, not great, QB, and even the Dakaters have to notice the team with and without him which is exactly my point. The team needs someone better at that position unless you believe this team's management is capable of doing something they haven't done in decades, build a team around a QB.

They haven't done it with Prescott as well as his predecessor and even admitted that, failed to build around Romo. The fact that they lucked into both of these QB's should also be considered.

There are two questions regarding Trevor Lawrence, three if you consider why he doesn't become an English actor with that name. But the main two are is he better than what the Cowboys have now and what will it take to get him away from the two teams, JAX and NYJ, that have him in their sights?

Now, we must also consider the considerable team that Swinney has built around Lawrence, just as he did Watson. That must be taken into account when considering Fields as well.

But for the sake of argument and this thread, Lawrence is a better QB now than Prescott has developed into and he has nothing but upside. He is the first QB since P. Manning to deliver on being the most highly recruited QB in his class. If you don't agree with this, then this thread doesn't make sense to you but I have watched a lot of Lawrence play the position and consider him the real deal.

The second question is a tough one because if the Cowboys do not end up with the 1st pick, trading up for it will be very expensive in draft capital. If that can even be done. JAX ends up with that and they'd have a hard time passing on Lawrence since he's played in the neighborhood and if they're in that position, we'll see the same response as we saw from the CIN fans when the season became all about Burrow.

OK, you can let me have it now but I just don't think Prescott is good enough to lift this team beyond a mid level team. They ranked #1 in offense and we're 8-8 and what did they look like this season with Prescott at the helm? Is it a risk? Absolutely, but isn't giving Prescott a 4 or 5 X 35-40M a year even a bigger risk when you consider who the team builders are?

This is not about Dak Prescott, I think there are teams he could take to the Big Dance. This is about trying to overcome what's been holding this team back for two and half decades, management.

And if you want to consider something else, this HC had one of the best QB's in the history of the NFL and the most accurate one I have ever seen and he could only get one ring and ended up canned and that team doing better without him.

McC has this rep as a QB guru but who wouldn't with those QB's? The better the QB, the better the guru.

All comes down to one simple question. Do you want more of the same or do you want to take a chance? This is about change but what needs to be changed, management, will not so what's the next best thing?

The next best thing is just admit you like to be seen as a loser by following a team that once was great but is no longer.

For me after decades of loving to watch this team challenge and win against great coaches and players..

we now know who we really are now..

is a very hard habit to break.

It's like being addicted. You know the team will find a way to fail and it's one thing you can depend on.

It does not matter if it's Romo or its Dak.

It will end the same after 17 weeks.

One and done if you are really lucky.

Makes you want to watch sport fishing programs.

Which I just hate. And I do not mean to offend fishermen.

It's just it's just the same predictable ending every time.

The fisherman spends $80,000 on a truck to pull his $50,000 boat and his $100,000 RV..

to hook a poor fish worth $5 and then throw him back or mount him on a wall.

Every week it's the same. We know the ending before the program starts.

Please. Why bother?

 

[Diehardblues]

Dak hasn't been on the field when the defense and ST were playing like they have the past couple of weeks. With Dak, we know we have a better than average (probably top 5 - 7) QB, which is plenty good enough with a good defense. There have been far too many high draft QB failures to be sure that any one of the ones in this draft will be as good or better than Dak.
You can make the case that a rookie contract will be cheaper, but at the same time, that means we don't get a premium defender with that first pick. How is a rookie QB going to lead this team to a SB with the same below average defense we have now?

All good points and we really don’t have much hope this dysfunctional organization will ever build a good defense .

Which is basis of the argument from the OP. In that why we need super stardom prolific passer at QB in an attempt to overcome the lack of a better defense.

 

[Diehardblues]

The next best thing is just admit you like to be seen as a loser by following a team that once was great but is no longer.

For me after decades of loving to watch this team challenge and win against great coaches and players..

we now know who we really are now..

is a very hard habit to break.

It's like being addicted. You know the team will find a way to fail and it's one thing you can depend on.

It does not matter if it's Romo or its Dak.

It will end the same after 17 weeks.

One and done if you are really lucky.

Makes you want to watch fishing programs.

Which I just hate.

But the bigger point is how much different would it be if we had one of these top guns like a Mahomes or Wilson?

Prescott much like Romo was more than serviceable with all of the other parts in line including defense and coaching staff. But in a dysfunctional organization maybe we need a Mahomes type stud to take us further. And Trevor is attractive.

Never any guarantees but if you don’t believe Dak much like with Romo isn’t or wasn’t enough given the circumstances were stuck with it’s not such an unreasonable assertion because we shouldn’t continue looking at our situation like we would most teams . We must look beyond the norm.

Is this organization capable of building a championship team around Dak? That’s not on Dak. That’s on our dysfunctional franchise.

 

[RonnieT24]

Oh! I see, so Dak’s record at QB means both and it is misleading to give him credit for the wins. I wish you would share this with the Dak slobbers. Have you ever considered that these games would be much closer if Dak and the offense didn’t turn the ball over and actually put some drives together in the first half ? Teams have built up large leads by the time that the 4th quarter has come. None of these games with Dak have been close until the defense goes into prevent and let’s the Cowboys burn up the clock. You are right, the defense is horrible, but Dak and the offense has done nothing to help during the first 2-3 quarters of the game.

\

No matter how many time you guys repeat this lie it will never be true. Dak and the offense averaged 15.4 points per game in the first half. Unless they count quarters differently in your universe the first half is part of the first 2-3 quarters. The only reason it didn't matter was because the defense was giving up 20+ points per game in the first half. In fact in the last game he played the offense had put up 24? points in the first half? What was it 15 at Seattle.. 13 at L.A.? 10 against ATL and 14 against Cleveland. With a normal defense that's plenty of production in the first halves of these games. So yes the scores would be closer if the offense didn't commit turnovers.. but how about the defense maybe get a f---kin stop every once in a while.. Show me in the rule book where it says that if the offense commits a turnover the defense is allowed to just bend over and let the opposing offense march down the field and score a TD. And given that they weren't stopping teams from going 75-80 yards with any regularity the only thing the turnovers did was help the defense's yardage ranking.

 

[gjkoeppen]

There is no way of knowing if it will take more picks at this point in the season. Dallas may lose everything game and the Jets night win two or three.

Dak’s stats have not translated to wins. The better his stats, the less wins. So much of his stats have been in garbage time and meaningless. The salary cap is going to be less and Dak will want more. The track record for QBs reaching the Super Bowl after signing those big contracts is not good.

The jets are winless for 9 straight weeks and have been less competitive than the Cowboys and don't have any real chances of winning any game left on their schedule let alone winning 2 or 3 of them so the thought that the jets will lose the first pick is just dream world stuff.

The Prescott haters always want to call Prescott trying to come back and win games as garbage time. I could understand their hatred if all Prescott did was either throw incompletes or 2 or 3 yard passes that chew up the clock but he's driven the Cowboys on long drives in little time to pull the Cowboys within a score to tie or win the game but runs out of time or the defense doesn't make that one last stop so the offense gets the ball back. I hope that the Cowboys have a QB like Prescott that if the Cowboys are loosing a game he can move the team with little time and give them a chance to pull it out.
.
.

 

[Diehardblues]

Oh! I see, so Dak’s record at QB means both and it is misleading to give him credit for the wins. I wish you would share this with the Dak slobbers. Have you ever considered that these games would be much closer if Dak and the offense didn’t turn the ball over and actually put some drives together in the first half ? Teams have built up large leads by the time that the 4th quarter has come. None of these games with Dak have been close until the defense goes into prevent and let’s the Cowboys burn up the clock. You are right, the defense is horrible, but Dak and the offense has done nothing to help during the first 2-3 quarters of the game.

All good points . And even when our defense does hold the opponent down like in our opener at LA to only 20 points we could only muster 17.

And this is an continuation of last years #1 offense. We averaged about 17 points in our 8 losses last year while averaging 35 in our 8 wins.

 

[RonnieT24]

But the bigger point is how much different would it be if we had one of these top guns like a Mahomes or Wilson?

Prescott much like Romo was more than serviceable with all of the other parts in line including defense and coaching staff. But in a dysfunctional organization maybe we need a Mahomes type stud to take us further. And Trevor is attractive.

Never any guarantees but if you don’t believe Dak much like with Romo isn’t or wasn’t enough given the circumstances were stuck with it’s not such an unreasonable assertion because we shouldn’t continue looking at our situation like we would most teams . We must look beyond the norm.

Romo was good enough by the end of 2013... If he had not gotten hurt that team would have won the division. Then in 2014 he was the league passing champion and had the highest QBR in the league that year. All of that adds up to he was the best in the game that year.. and plenty good enough to win it all. I think this year Dak had probably climbed to that same level of QB play. So he had gotten at age 27 where Romo didn't get to until age 34. That bodes will for Cowboys fans. So because I believe Romo was good enough to win it all by 2014 and Dak is playing at a similar level.. Dak is also good enough. But neither of them can win anything with the 32nd ranked scoring defense.. and guess what.. Neither can Rodgers, Mahomes, Wilson, Manning, Brady, Staubach, Elway, Unitas put whatever QB you want in there with a defense giving up 36 points a game and they all go home losers. Period. To hold Dak to that ridiculous standard makes zero sense to me.

 

[gjkoeppen]

We need to be tanking for top picks on the defensive side of the ball...ALL DAY. (maybe a Olineman,but that's it on O)...

My answer to those that say tank it is when teams have tanked it for just the last game or two of the season they have lost their 1st round picks for tanking it. Now what are the chances if the Cowboys tank it for the entire 2nd half of the season that they lose their 1st round pick and because they tanked it for that long they could lose their 2nd round pick too. Tanking it is not worth the risk of losing EXTREMELY valuable draft picks.
.
.

 

[gjkoeppen]

\

No matter how many time you guys repeat this lie it will never be true. Dak and the offense averaged 15.4 points per game in the first half. Unless they count quarters differently in your universe the first half is part of the first 2-3 quarters. The only reason it didn't matter was because the defense was giving up 20+ points per game in the first half. In fact in the last game he played the offense had put up 24? points in the first half? What was it 15 at Seattle.. 13 at L.A.? 10 against ATL and 14 against Cleveland. With a normal defense that's plenty of production in the first halves of these games. So yes the scores would be closer if the offense didn't commit turnovers.. but how about the defense maybe get a f---kin stop every once in a while.. Show me in the rule book where it says that if the offense commits a turnover the defense is allowed to just bend over and let the opposing offense march down the field and score a TD. And given that they weren't stopping teams from going 75-80 yards with any regularity the only thing the turnovers did was help the defense's yardage ranking.

You found something that we both agree on.
.
.

 

[Diehardblues]

Romo was good enough by the end of 2013... If he had not gotten hurt that team would have won the division. Then in 2014 he was the league passing champion and had the highest QBR in the league that year. All of that adds up to he was the best in the game that year.. and plenty good enough to win it all. I think this year Dak had probably climbed to that same level of QB play. So he had gotten at age 27 where Romo didn't get to until age 34. That bodes will for Cowboys fans. So because I believe Romo was good enough to win it all by 2014 and Dak is playing at a similar level.. Dak is also good enough. But neither of them can win anything with the 32nd ranked scoring defense.. and guess what.. Neither can Rodgers, Mahomes, Wilson, Manning, Brady, Staubach, Elway, Unitas put whatever QB you want in there with a defense giving up 36 points a game and they all go home losers. Period. To hold Dak to that ridiculous standard makes zero sense to me.

Romo wasn’t the leagues leading passer in 2014. It was his most effective season and given the other supporting cast he could have been enough. But we can’t count on this dysfunctional organization to provide that support.

Would a closer to HOF caliber make a difference ? Who knows but I’m about ready to try. If nothing else maybe it get us closer. Only when you come to realize this dysfunctional organization may not be able to build it around Dak anymore than they were able to with Romo can you begin looking outside the norm. Especially when we see some of these young guns turn their teams around without the same supporting cast on offense or great defenses.

 

[gjkoeppen]

All good points and we really don’t have much hope this dysfunctional organization will ever build a good defense .

Which is basis of the argument from the OP. In that why we need super stardom prolific passer at QB in an attempt to overcome the lack of a better defense.

There has never been a Super Bowl winning team with a defense ranked 31st or 32nd in the league no matter how super stardom prolific passer the QB is and that is especially true when said QB has zero passes in the NFL.
.
.

 

[gjkoeppen]

Romo wasn’t the leagues leading passer in 2014. It was his most effective season and given the other supporting cast he could have been enough. But we can’t count on this dysfunctional organization to provide that support.

Would a closer to HOF caliber make a difference ? Who knows but I’m about ready to try. If nothing else maybe it get us closer. Only when you come to realize this dysfunctional organization may not be able to build it around Dak anymore than they were able to with Romo can you begin looking outside the norm. Especially when we see some of these young guns turn their teams around without the same supporting cast on offense or great defenses.

Here's what doesn't make sense with your idea. If as you say the Cowboys failed to build a team around Romo and now Prescott but now you think they could or would build one around Lawrence. Something there doesn't make sense.
.
.

 

[Diehardblues]

There has never been a Super Bowl winning team with a defense ranked 31st or 32nd in the league no matter how super stardom prolific passer the QB is and that is especially true when said QB has zero passes in the NFL.
.
.

But there has been teams that made it to championship games and Super Bowls .

This is about a great QB taking us further not necessarily winning it all.

Who doesn’t believe a Mahomes for example might could take this team further. Or a Rodgers might have taken one of Romo’s teams further ??

 

[Diehardblues]

Here's what doesn't make sense with your idea. If as you say the Cowboys failed to build a team around Romo and now Prescott but now you think they could or would build one around Lawrence. Something there doesn't make sense.
.
.

We aren’t necessarily saying they would build a team around Trevor. Just hoping his ability could take us further.

We think it would help if we had one of or the best QB’s instead of just a top 10 QB.

 

[Diehardblues]

Unless we think Dak is the only QB who can take us further? There’s no one else we think could do it?

 

[Diehardblues]

Do we think the Chiefs and Seahawks think they’d be having the same success with Dak?

Im not sure why Cowboy fans can’t appreciate what Daks done without realizing one of these bigger guns could have done more?

 

[PAPPYDOG]

Here's the problem with those that want to use the cap difficulties as the reason to not sign Prescott. So say Prescott is no longer with the Cowboys and they draft a big name college QB . Now in the next 4 years the Cowboys don't get to or win any Super Bowls and during those 4 years the cost of QB's has risen even higher. Then the same people who now are saying cap difficulties for signing Prescott will be saying the same thing about the next QB, so the cycle continues of drafting QB's every 4 years until the Cowboys luck out and win a Super Bowl. Oh in the mean time Prescott had gone off to another team and won a couple of Super Bowls. Now all of this is just saying what could happen not that it will happen just like those that think the Cowboys if they sign Prescott will automatically not find a way to work around his salary.
.
.

Only if a Ravens 2000 type defense wins it for him beyond that he will end up on some team bench in the near future!