Trivia flashback: from 1994-1996, Dallas' O-line allowed the fewest sacks in the league

Flamma

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,168
Reaction score
18,937
I think weve heard that term thrown around in pro sports quite a bit.

What it essentially means is that a player is so good they can overcome others around them that aren't.

There's a very select few that have or had that type of ability. The very best of the very best.

I'm fine with Prescott because finding someone better isn't anywhere near easy, but he also does not belong on that list, and counting on him to be that type is foolish.

A common problem of this FO is thinking our players are better than they actually are, and Prescott probably tops that list.

Jerry is just never going to learn that just because you PAY someone to be something doesn't mean they are going to become that.

The idea that he can win games on his own as a pocket passer is way off. If he doesn't get his legs back into his game I'm not sure if he can get to another level as a winner.

It's shameful because with a pretty good defense and strong running game (and commitment to winning games instead of justifying contracts) this team could be pretty good.

Here's the thing. Owners and GMs pay quarterbacks that are good the same as QBs that are great because of a lack of a better choice. That's why QBs like Kyler Murray and Dak get paid. To keep the team competitive. Not necessarily to win a championship. What boggles my mind is that some fans actually think this is a good idea too.

Some teams like the Rams don't settle for that. Mainly because ownership wants to win. That's a priority for them.
 
Top