The Cost of Meaningless Close Wins

[CATCH17]

I disagree but either way if its not his fault then why is that poster giving him credit for 8-8 if he doesn't make a difference either way? He's not the reason for them 8-8.

Agree..

I’ll say this though.. If we go 8-8 now he will be part of the problem because of the amount of cap space required to keep a solid at best player.

 

[fivetwos]

It's not just that. GMs blow it all up to get a high pick and extra draft picks. The Jags are not the #1 pick by accident.

I have no problem with it at all if it's a strategy to break it all down to build it back up. In fact that's the right way. Thats a conscious decision before a season and the team has to live with not being able to sell contention for that time.

Asking a late season team to lose by not playing the best players because they lost their qb or underacheived so they can cheat the draft a few slots is something different....and very dangerous in a few ways.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Agree..

I’ll say this though.. If we go 8-8 now he will be part of the problem because of the amount of cap space required to keep a solid at best player.

I mean it depends on how it goes.

Because to me 2019's 8-8 was about Garrett's failure as head coach. If McCarthy coaches like he did last season I just don't know how this team can win on either side of the football with the worst defense and the offense looking like it looked early in the season.

 

[CATCH17]

I mean it depends on how it goes.

Because to me 2019's 8-8 was about Garrett's failure as head coach. If McCarthy coaches like he did last season I just don't know how this team can win on either side of the football with the worst defense and the offense looking like it looked early in the season.

I see it as the more we ask Dak to do the more he pads his numbers and the worse the team gets.

We were better when this was Zeke’s team.

 

[AbeBeta]

The Cowboys should have lost their games against Atlanta (week 2), the Giants (week 5), and the Vikings (week 11). The Cowboys could of had the 3rd overall pick. They could have received the same haul the Dolphins did for the 3rd pick. In this scenario Surtain or Horn would likely be available at 12. Plus they would have 2 extra 1st round picks + an extra 3rd round pick in the future. They could have also selected a QB at 3 and trade Dak. A ridiculous botched onside kick + signing Andy Dalton cost this franchise for years to come.

Yeah. Because intentionally losing really gets players motivated.

Dumb post, bro

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

This is what I argue about with people all the time. Winning games when you know you don't have a chance to win a championship is useless. Many argue that it builds a winning attitude. Well, it doesn't. What happens this year will have little to no effect on next year. Each year is totally different, not like it was back before free agency. Teams have huge turnover every year. Just look at the years when we had success and then the subsequent year - no bearing on each other. Go no further than 2016 and 2017.

then might as well go 0-16 every year (now 0-17)

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I see it as the more we ask Dak to do the more he pads his numbers and the worse the team gets.

We were better when this was Zeke’s team.

I don't think we necessarily asked Dak to do more I think we forced him to do more. This offensive line and Zeke just isn't the same as it was in 2016........I think the gameplan was always for Zeke to keep the defense off the field. Starting games off slow though you gotta air it out.

 

[CATCH17]

Yeah. Because intentionally losing really gets players motivated.

Dumb post, bro

Those games hold 0 meaning headed into this season.. The wins and the losses mean squat.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

It's not just that. GMs blow it all up to get a high pick and extra draft picks. The Jags are not the #1 pick by accident.

blow it up (trades, cuts, etc.) vs. losing on purpose are two different things. I don't think any coach, makes a game plan to lose.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Those games hold 0 meaning headed into this season.. The wins and the losses mean squat.

but we didn't know at the time that winning game 2 and 5 would be meaningless.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Stop spending money on the product.

The same way you hold anything accountable. Stop lining their pockets while they put out an inferior product year after year.

that is the key. Jerry will continue to do what he has done, as long as the money keeps coming in. he only responds when there is a perceived threat to his source of revenue. Jerry is the ultimate salesman and ultimate businessman.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Sure, let me lay it out for you because you admit you dont understand:

Door A: You beat the Niners and Bengals 3rd string QB's to go 6-10 instead of 4-10. Get the 10th pick

Door B: Lose both games, go 4-10 and have the 4th pick.

Which would you rather have?

And FYI.................with EVERY loss once Dak went down I was not only happy, but probably gave it a nice "YES"!!!

Knowing this was a QB heavy draft where 5 QB's could go in the top picks this was even more of an important draft. Especially for a guy like you that wanted a new young QB.

the games were there for us to lose, but as you said, they had their 3rd string QBs. we barely won the SF game and the special team TD helped a lot to put the score where it ended up.

regardless, 4 out of 5 first round QBs fail in the NFL. this draft is no different. we probably have to wait 3 years to see it. so wasting a pick on a QB, when your needs, desparate needs are on the defense would not have helped this team.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

So, I went back and read your original response to my post. I still don't agree. What kind of game would we have if all teams that were out of title contention decided to tank? I may be from old school, but I'm good with that. You play to win, no matter what level.
BTW, what is a yoda?

that's a great point. Bengals for example, SF, philly, etc. perhaps they were trying to tank as well. then they did a better job of tanking than us....excellent point.

 

[OmerV]

I'm not talking about week 2. I don't care about that lucky win that was given to us because a team was more incompetent than us for once. I said once Dak was injured.

We was 1-3 when Dak was injured. Dalton lead us to the Giants win (unfortunately). Then Dalton was injured. I don't care if we was never out of it because the division was on of the worst of all time. Making the playoffs at 6-10 is embarrassing and only hurts your future.

What does overcoming obstacles with our back up QB that everyone knew was only going to be here for 1 year do for anybody? The team was done. The only reason we won the games we did was because we were playing teams that was more injured then us (Bengals) or was just flat out in disarray (Eagles). There was no positives from last year, so the idea of us playing to "overcoming obstacles" didn't work out for anybody except the teams ahead of us in the draft that.

Like I said, Romo being praised for taking "bad teams" to 8-8 records was embarrassing when in reality it did nothing but hurt the team going forward. A bad team going 8-8 guarantees that we draft in the middle of the pack, and they stay in the middle of the pack. That's why we had 3 straight 8-8 seasons.

Your response to the OP was that you agreed with him 100%, and he was talking about starting with the Atlanta game in Week 2. Your response to the OP did not indicate you only agreed with him for the time period that started after Dak got hurt.

In any case, technically you are right that the team was 1-3 at the very moment Dak got injured ..... BUT they were ahead in that game ..... AND they were only 18 yards away from another TD to go up even more ….. AND they won that game ..... SO they were 2-3 at the start of the first game without Dak.
-
But maybe you are saying that at the very moment Dak got hurt that they should have given up on the team even though 69% of the season was left to play ….that at the very moment Dak got hurt, with 6-7 minutes left in a game they were winning, and 69% of the season left to play … that the management and coaching of the team should have immediately outed themselves as quitters who had no confidence in any player on the team except Dak.

Do you really think that's the formula for building a winning team with a winning attitude?

Your comment about it not doing anything to overcome obstacles with a QB who is there for only one year kind of highlights your faulty thinking. Hell, the team winning games with a backup would show toughness and fortitude and build huge confidence. That's what you want to develop in a team. How you think proving yourself to be a quitter is preferable to building fortitude and toughness is unbelievable.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

So its Dak's fault that they went 8-8? Had nothing to do with the incompetence of the front office and Jason Garrett?

oh come on...by now you know all losses are on Dak. wins are team effort because of all the other players on the team. coach bares no responsibility, except when its supporting an argument for a player they like. if you don't know the dak detractor's routine by now, then you haven't been paying any attention. so let me repeat. the team/coaches/FO/Defense bare zero responsibility (or little) in any loss. its all Dak or mostly Dak. Wins are because the rest of the team helped him, because he is unable to win games. got it?

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Only way I see to do it, is shutting down starters that are injured. They only shut Zeke down for 1 game.

I feel the real issue was we got a weak gauntlet of facing Brandon Allen, Nick Mullen & rookie Jalen Hurts in a row. Those QBs and their turnovers really gave us the wins.

I have argued this very point. we won three games, with the help of defense gettign 9 turnovers and a score in those three games against 3 back up QBs. the games would have been much different if not for that.

 

[Blitzen]

So, I went back and read your original response to my post. I still don't agree. What kind of game would we have if all teams that were out of title contention decided to tank? I may be from old school, but I'm good with that. You play to win, no matter what level.
BTW, what is a yoda?

We would have pretty much the same league we have as now. The GM of each team decides on the future of the core players on the squad each year. In my opinion, each team has a fairly good idea as to what their championship chances are before the season begins.

They can make moves to either drastically change major pieces (players). Keep the majority of the core and add a few key pieces via draft and free agency. Stay away from free agency and make major moves within the draft to alter the core makeup of the team.

Call it what you want (tanking, rebuilding, planning, etc), but plenty of squads part ways with enough pieces to dismantle a team. They do it with full knowledge that in the interim they might be worse for it. They play other players more snaps even with the knowledge that the team might be a smidge better playing another player. They do it with their eyes on the future trying to improve their base and future talent knowing that the championship is not likely that particular year.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

but we didn't know at the time that winning game 2 and 5 would be meaningless.

great point. 2018 we were 3-5 mid season and went 7-1. and one a playoff game...you don't make a season from the first 3 or 4 games. team also had no idea Dak would have gotten injured. so "we should have just lost the atlanta game" is hindsight 20/20

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

No.. It’s not his fault. It’s just that he doesn’t make a difference either way and he’s being paid like he is some type of difference making player when he is clearly not.

You don’t pay QBs like Dak and expect championships..

on the contrary, with Dak we made it to 8-8, without him probably 5-11. you can't expect championships with this FO and defense.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Your response to the OP was that you agreed with him 100%, and he was talking about starting with the Atlanta game in Week 2. Your response to the OP did not indicate you only agreed with him for the time period that started after Dak got hurt.

In any case, technically you are right that the team was 1-3 at the very moment Dak got injured ..... BUT they were ahead in that game ..... AND they were only 18 yards away from another TD to go up even more ….. AND they won that game ..... SO they were 2-3 at the start of the first game without Dak.
-
But maybe you are saying that at the very moment Dak got hurt that they should have given up on the team even though 69% of the season was left to play ….that at the very moment Dak got hurt, with 6-7 minutes left in a game they were winning, and 69% of the season left to play … that the management and coaching of the team should have immediately outed themselves as quitters who had no confidence in any player on the team except Dak.

Do you really think that's the formula for building a winning team with a winning attitude?

Your comment about it not doing anything to overcome obstacles with a QB who is there for only one year kind of highlights your faulty thinking. Hell, the team winning games with a backup would show toughness and fortitude and build huge confidence. That's what you want to develop in a team. How you think proving yourself to be a quitter is preferable to building fortitude and toughness is unbelievable.

btw, according to NFL rules. Dak is credited with the Giants win, given he handed the game to Dalton with a lead and btw, on the 19th yard line well on the way to drive in for another TD....Dalton proceeded to lose the lead and only because of an incredible acrobatic catch by Gallup was he saved. regardless Dak was 2-3. I don't make the rules. NFL does. its different than baseball.