The end of Dak is coming

Rockport

AmberBeer
Messages
42,205
Reaction score
41,950
Weak is someone who cannot back up their accusations.

Like you and your Jerry loving ilk
Jerry’s too much of a meddler. I don’t think there are any who love that from an owner. For that reason alone, he’s a bad owner.
 

CowboyoWales

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,096
Reaction score
4,434
You continue to put all the blame on the QB while claiming differently. Again, Mahomes couldn’t lead that deficient team last year to a Super Bowl. No QB could.
No, Rucky, there's a subtly that you continually miss. You see THERE ARE MANY FAULTS WITHIN THE ROSTER, as was highlighted in the GB game. Indeed, ive mentioned in a number of threads that I think Jerry's intention was to extend, however, the capitulation has made him anxious about paying a player that's NOT THE ONLY PROBLEM, BUT HE ISNT THE SOLUTION EITHER.......ESPECIALLY AT $60M.

When I say he isnt the solution, it's based on 3 of the last 4 of his play-off games. SF (X2) Yep there were: the penalties, lack of run defense and running game.....but despite that he still had 4 drives late in the 4th Q to win/tie both games.....but could execute. GB game - yes the Defense all but gave up, but Dak's pick 6 and inability to play in a shoot out (but started playing well, as soon as the game was lost and pressure off ) highlights another limitation. Yes it can be overcome, but if we look at those three games it just confirms he needs : a good O-Line, receiving corp, Running game, Defense.....whilst receiving 20%+ of the CAP. That's just not happening.

For the record I have said that if Dak were to accept a long term contract i'd grin and bear it, go ALL-IN building that Defense, but i'm not sure that Dak could stand the added pressure that would put on him.


.
 

Rockport

AmberBeer
Messages
42,205
Reaction score
41,950
No, Rucky, there's a subtly that you continually miss. You see THERE ARE MANY FAULTS WITHIN THE ROSTER, as was highlighted in the GB game. Indeed, ive mentioned in a number of threads that I think Jerry's intention was to extend, however, the capitulation has made him anxious about paying a player that's NOT THE ONLY PROBLEM, BUT HE ISNT THE SOLUTION EITHER.......ESPECIALLY AT $60M.

When I say he isnt the solution, it's based on 3 of the last 4 of his play-off games. SF (X2) Yep there were: the penalties, lack of run defense and running game.....but despite that he still had 4 drives late in the 4th Q to win/tie both games.....but could execute. GB game - yes the Defense all but gave up, but Dak's pick 6 and inability to play in a shoot out (but started playing well, as soon as the game was lost and pressure off ) highlights another limitation. Yes it can be overcome, but if we look at those three games it just confirms he needs : a good O-Line, receiving corp, Running game, Defense.....whilst receiving 20%+ of the CAP. That's just not happening.

For the record I have said that if Dak were to accept a long term contract i'd grin and bear it, go ALL-IN building that Defense, but i'm not sure that Dak could stand the added pressure that would put on him.


.
You continue to ignore the defense that couldn’t stop a high school running game and and offense that had no running game and thus putting all the blame on Dak. It’s hard moving the offense when the defense knows you’re going to pass. I mean it’s not rocket science. Just go back to the SB and watch KC’s last drive to win the game. Pacheco ran the ball 3 times in that drive.
 

SteveTheCowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,350
Reaction score
13,782
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
You continue to ignore the defense that couldn’t stop a high school running game and and offense that had no running game and thus putting all the blame on Dak. It’s hard moving the offense when the defense knows you’re going to pass. I mean it’s not rocket science. Just go back to the SB and watch KC’s last drive to win the game. Pacheco ran the ball 3 times in that drive.
Did you even read what wrote? Obviously not. I think you owe it to him to read all the way through, if you can...read.
 

Mactin

Well-Known Member
Messages
457
Reaction score
281
When you consider that most NFL teams are quarterback-needy and would be grateful to have a good quarterback we got lucky with Dak as our QB. Of course, I wouldn't say I like how he played in the postseason but we could have had worse quarterbacks like <insert back QB here> playing under center in our games.
 

CowboyoWales

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,096
Reaction score
4,434
You continue to ignore the defense that couldn’t stop a high school running game and and offense that had no running game and thus putting all the blame on Dak.
You're accusing me of putting ALL the blame on Dak. Ive acknowledged the Defense (as I also acknowledged the penalties and running games vrs SF).

It’s hard moving the offense when the defense knows you’re going to pass. I mean it’s not rocket science. Just go back to the SB and watch KC’s last drive to win the game. Pacheco ran the ball 3 times in that drive.
Well go look at what Jimmie Ward said (2022)......"“We went in there and did what we needed to do: Stop the run and force them to be one-dimensional. See if Prescott could win the game for them,”. Add that to what he said 12 months later "Dak isn’t good against zone [coverage].”.....DAK's going to repeatedly face this Defense that takes away his running game BECAUSE THEY DONT RESPECT HIS ABILITIES. Indeed in those two games (I repeat) he had 4 opportunities to win/tie the game. Now difficult opportunities and it was at a time in the game that you forego running anyway.....AND WE CAME UP SHORT.....and you want to give him proportionately more of the CAP.

You also missed the nuance in the Pacheco example......as he's allowed the ability to run, BECAUSE THEY'RE SCARED STIFF OF THE QB's ARM...... It's not one dimensional, the QB's abilities reflects or more accurately determines how the Defense plays against them.
 

CowboyoWales

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,096
Reaction score
4,434
You're accusing me of putting ALL the blame on Dak. Ive acknowledged the Defense (as I also acknowledged the penalties and running games vrs SF).


Well go look at what Jimmie Ward said (2022)......"“We went in there and did what we needed to do: Stop the run and force them to be one-dimensional. See if Prescott could win the game for them,”. Add that to what he said 12 months later "Dak isn’t good against zone [coverage].”.....DAK's going to repeatedly face this Defense that takes away his running game BECAUSE THEY DONT RESPECT HIS ABILITIES. Indeed in those two games (I repeat) he had 4 opportunities to win/tie the game. Now difficult opportunities and it was at a time in the game that you forego running anyway.....AND WE CAME UP SHORT.....and you want to give him proportionately more of the CAP.

You also missed the nuance in the Pacheco example......as he's allowed the ability to run, BECAUSE THEY'RE SCARED STIFF OF THE QB's ARM...... It's not one dimensional, the QB's abilities reflects or more accurately determines how the Defense plays against them.
@Rockport .....As for the Defense I totally agree, we need to overhaul, but that's going to be difficult paying Dak the 20+% of the CAP.....and even then with a lockdown Defense (if it we're possible), Dak would still need to raise his game (when we're trailing against good teams i.e Play-offs).....the evidence of the SF (x2) and GB suggests he cant do that (as there were slightly differing circumstances.... indeed the improvement in his game vrs GB once we'd lost just emphasis' the issue of how he struggles under pressure).

As I say, sure give him a short window with resources thrown at renewing the Defense....but he'll need to accept a longer contract, to facilitate a one/two year window. If Dak doesnt accept the longer term, move on and build: the Offense Line, running game and Defense and aid a QB (ala Dak 2016 or Purdy).
 

CowboyoWales

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,096
Reaction score
4,434
When you consider that most NFL teams are quarterback-needy and would be grateful to have a good quarterback we got lucky with Dak as our QB. Of course, I wouldn't say I like how he played in the postseason but we could have had worse quarterbacks like <insert back QB here> playing under center in our games.
That depends if you adhere to the strategy of building around a QB. If that QB isnt able to step up and take responsibility commensurate to his CAP%, then the alternative is to build a roster first and aid the QB as Dak was in 2016.
One of the issues pertaining to why so many top drafted QB's fail, is because they're drafted into poor teams, lacking in weapons and O-Lines to protect them.
Having a great QB who shows he cant perform at the highest level under pressure, then you're going to a great 12 win team and then base your post season strategy on hope. There arent many QB's that have gone and won a SB without having to orchestrate at least one one comeback......and (for me) that's what will repeatedly let Dak down.
 

Rockport

AmberBeer
Messages
42,205
Reaction score
41,950
You're accusing me of putting ALL the blame on Dak. Ive acknowledged the Defense (as I also acknowledged the penalties and running games vrs SF).


Well go look at what Jimmie Ward said (2022)......"“We went in there and did what we needed to do: Stop the run and force them to be one-dimensional. See if Prescott could win the game for them,”. Add that to what he said 12 months later "Dak isn’t good against zone [coverage].”.....DAK's going to repeatedly face this Defense that takes away his running game BECAUSE THEY DONT RESPECT HIS ABILITIES. Indeed in those two games (I repeat) he had 4 opportunities to win/tie the game. Now difficult opportunities and it was at a time in the game that you forego running anyway.....AND WE CAME UP SHORT.....and you want to give him proportionately more of the CAP.

You also missed the nuance in the Pacheco example......as he's allowed the ability to run, BECAUSE THEY'RE SCARED STIFF OF THE QB's ARM...... It's not one dimensional, the QB's abilities reflects or more accurately determines how the Defense plays against them.
Your entitled to your hate filled opinions.
 

CowboyoWales

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,096
Reaction score
4,434
I’ve learned you can’t argue with a hater. They’re just too full of hate and cannot be objective. So you’re entitled to your hate filled agenda. Freedom of speech and all.
It's not arguing, it's discussing, though you can't discuss as all you've got it name calling.
 
Top