Trey Lance can develop into the next Jordan Love

[phildadon86]

1. Start Lance every game
2. Don't pay 65 million a year to #4

Either you get the next franchise Qb or you get top 8 draft position to pick the next franchise Qb.

We win Either way and Jerry keeps raking in greenback.

It's pragmatic and completely logical when you also realize that this roster isn't "all in" for the 2024 season

Problem is this years draft class at QB is freaking terrible. If drafting a QB was a plan it should have been this past draft.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

There's no such thing as a starting-calibre backup quarterback.

Rodgers was a backup. Romo, dak was supposed to be. Just off the top of my head.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

Rodgers was a backup. Romo, dak was supposed to be. Just off the top of my head.

Ok I don't care what they did with Rodgers and Romo 20 years ago. It's not relevant.

You're also noting exceptions that just prove the rule. Rodgers wasn't drafted to be a backup. Dak and Romo were drafted as projects.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Let me make it simple for you, we don't want a 60 million dollar a year bi-polar QB for 4 more years.

Ww can use that money for a DT and RB and more consistent QB play.

The WE aspect is curious since you seem to be speaking for a group, yet don't truly identify them. But your premise has a serious flaw when you imply the Dak money can be used to get a DT and a RB. When? Where? The two RB's on the market are spares at this moment, so acquiring the money will not change much immediately.

Fact is, you might have a better chance using Parsons as a running back than this folly you seem to have offered up, because this is late in the day to go grocery shopping for a ball carrier. Same with a defensive tackle. Those pieces are best acquired in the draft, or in the free agency window which has closed for this season with anything meaningful on the shelf waiting to be purchased.

But what truly is hysterical is your comment about more consistent QB play. As if you can magically supplant Dak at this time of year, or even waiting until next season, to find this consistency at that position.

Lance is not the answer. Your theory is wishful thinking. You might ought to check with WE to see if all of YOU agree with this idea of cutting Dak, that has one year left on his contract.

So what does it cost to cut Dak at this point?

What cap ramifications come into play because you cut him?

How does his money accelerate this season?

How does that affect the Lamb contract negotiations?

How will it affect the Parson's contract coming this next year?

And how much will you need to pay Lance, who couldn't carry Dak's jock at this moment?

The emotional outbursts, almost tantrum-like, have no solid solutions. They are simply grousing to be heard.

I have yet to see anyone of the WE to offer a solution to this issue - and perhaps falsely generated issue - that doesn't screw this teams nuggs to the wall for the next few years to reload on what you label as consistent QB play. And while you do that, you have some skillful players that might just take it as an insult as you rebuild during the prime time of their careers, forcing the possibility of losing results, which causes a mass exodus when rookie contracts expires.

The grass is always greener. Even the grass some of you are smoking when you come up with this cockamamie notion of dumping a player in his last year, at his most expensive, to satisfy your angst.

If this was Wheel of Fortune, I'd suggest WE buy a clue.

 

[shabazz]

Problem is this years draft class at QB is freaking terrible. If drafting a QB was a plan it should have been this past draft.

I've heard that but the FO shouldn't let that be the reason they make Dak the highest player in the history of the NFL if they don't believe in him.

They've been mishandling and negligent in not drafting qbs BEFORE they need them.

For example a qb like Penix might be available for draft capitol if another team really wanted him

It can be done in a variety of ways

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Ok I don't care what they did with Rodgers and Romo 20 years ago. It's not relevant.

You're also noting exceptions that just prove the rule. Rodgers wasn't drafted to be a backup. Dak and Romo were drafted as projects.

Again you hate facts. Rodgers sat on the bench....making him the backup, regardless of any future plans.

It's true....more and more rookie qbs are starting.....but not all of them.

We're straying off my original point....suddenly just dont care to go back and forth like this. It's nuts.

Pretty obstinate today kiddo.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

Again you hate facts. Rodgers sat on the bench....making him the backup, regardless of any future plans.

It's true....more and more rookie qbs are starting.....but not all of them.

We're straying off my original point....suddenly just dont care to go back and forth like this. It's nuts.

Pretty obstinate today kiddo.

Rodgers was not drafted as a backup lol. He does not make your point. If you're good enough to be a starter, a team will have you as a starter. There's like 16 quality NFL quarterbacks, teams don't have guys sitting on the bench.

I'm happy to change my mind, you just can't build a credible argument.

 

[conner01]

I don’t know if Lance can be a solid QB. But he did look better this week than last. He’s still very raw. The problem with developing him is he needs reps and he’s gonna struggle. But he can only get better with reps and with his contract being already up for a second you have to pay a lot to see if he can develop

 

[phildadon86]

I've heard that but the FO shouldn't let that be the reason they make Dak the highest player in the history of the NFL if they don't believe in him.

They've been mishandling and negligent in not drafting qbs BEFORE they need them.

For example a qb like Penix might be available for draft capitol if another team really wanted him

It can be done in a variety of ways

Not disagreeing but there isn’t even a Penix in 2025 lol. It’s slim pickings.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Rodgers was not drafted as a backup lol. He does not make your point. If you're good enough to be a starter, a team will have you as a starter. There's like 16 quality NFL quarterbacks, teams don't have guys sitting on the bench.

I'm happy to change my mind, you just can't build a credible argument.

I'm not interested in doing that.

I never said everyone does it...only that it's been done. "next guy up" turns into a starter. If you want teams and years and players and such...I'm not interested and that kind of deep dive.

You win...there...you good now?

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

I'm not interested in doing that.

I never said everyone does it...only that it's been done. "next guy up" turns into a starter. If you want teams and years and players and such...I'm not interested and that kind of deep dive.

You win...there...you good now?

"I'm not interested in substantiating what I said because then I would have to hold myself accountable" is what I just read.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

"I'm not interested in substantiating what I said because then I would have to hold myself accountable" is what I just read.

That's correct. Not for you, anyway.
You aren't interested in conversation...
Just fighting with people.

Already said you win, that's not good enough. Gotta come back and kick some more dirt.
Not interested.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

That correct. Not for you, anyway.
You aren't interested in conversation...
Just fighting with people.

Already said you win, that's not good enough. Gotta come back and kick some more dirt.
Not interested.

You're not having conversation. Just saying things and telling me I'm stubborn for not agreeing lol

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

You're not having conversation. Just saying things and telling me I'm stubborn for not agreeing lol

I never asked you to agree.

 

[Jarv]

The WE aspect is curious since you seem to be speaking for a group, yet don't truly identify them. But your premise has a serious flaw when you imply the Dak money can be used to get a DT and a RB. When? Where? The two RB's on the market are spares at this moment, so acquiring the money will not change much immediately.

Fact is, you might have a better chance using Parsons as a running back than this folly you seem to have offered up, because this is late in the day to go grocery shopping for a ball carrier. Same with a defensive tackle. Those pieces are best acquired in the draft, or in the free agency window which has closed for this season with anything meaningful on the shelf waiting to be purchased.

But what truly is hysterical is your comment about more consistent QB play. As if you can magically supplant Dak at this time of year, or even waiting until next season, to find this consistency at that position.

Lance is not the answer. Your theory is wishful thinking. You might ought to check with WE to see if all of YOU agree with this idea of cutting Dak, that has one year left on his contract.

So what does it cost to cut Dak at this point?

What cap ramifications come into play because you cut him?

How does his money accelerate this season?

How does that affect the Lamb contract negotiations?

How will it affect the Parson's contract coming this next year?

And how much will you need to pay Lance, who couldn't carry Dak's jock at this moment?

The emotional outbursts, almost tantrum-like, have no solid solutions. They are simply grousing to be heard.

I have yet to see anyone of the WE to offer a solution to this issue - and perhaps falsely generated issue - that doesn't screw this teams nuggs to the wall for the next few years to reload on what you label as consistent QB play. And while you do that, you have some skillful players that might just take it as an insult as you rebuild during the prime time of their careers, forcing the possibility of losing results, which causes a mass exodus when rookie contracts expires.

The grass is always greener. Even the grass some of you are smoking when you come up with this cockamamie notion of dumping a player in his last year, at his most expensive, to satisfy your angst.

If this was Wheel of Fortune, I'd suggest WE buy a clue.

Nice write up, bravo...lol

Having said that, a bunch of people (We) on here are sick of bi-polar dak and seeing the wide eye deer in the headlights whenever we play a big game (see playoffs). Personally (not we) I would have cut him in March, saving the 40-50 million hit we...err the Cowboys will take next year if he is not on the roster.

As to the DT and RB comments, you are correct, it is too late this year to really address that.

Hopefully that cleared up the we portion of this program.

Have a nice day, by the way, I do enjoy your comments on this forum.

 

[kskboys]

They have similar physical/athletic traits and arm talent. Lance really just needs reps. I'm not sure if winning 9 - 10 games and losing in the wild card round with Dak is the way to go.

Signs don't point that way.