What would we have lost by with Dak?

[leicafan]

One of the things we really lost tonight is the hatred from Dak Haters in this forum.

 

[SackMaster]

With Dak we are not leaning on Zeke too much.

I know that is completely backwards from traditional football philosophy, but Zeke has killed us this year with his mistakes. If it is not his fumbling, it is the dropped passes. If it is not the dropped passes, it is the slipping for losses on runs.

With Dak, we probably still lose the game, but it would have been much, much closer than 38-17. Probably closer to 38-35.

JMHO

 

[irving]

Amazing how common sense magically appears when we lose with a QB other than Dak. LOL

You noticed that to? This is the same forum where many posters said the team wouldn't miss a beat playing Dalton. Some even said the backup would be an improvement.

 

[basel90]

However, I do think it's fair to say if we're going to play like this, it doesn't help not to have the best QB possible. We likely don't have two victories this season without a QB as good as Dak.

What we likely end up with in this one is more of a heartbreaker. Dak gets us close, within 10 points or whatever, and then the defense gives up the big pass play or big run.

A fair assessment. Dalton showed some rust and missed some throws . Not to say Dak is that accurate . But I would say Dak has an edge over dalton at this stage . Dalton may improve as the season progresses but it may be too late .

 

[CowboyRoy]

You dodged the point that we only scored 17 against the Rams with Dak. Of course, I'm not surprised by that.

But the point isn't whether we would have scored 17 or 21 or 31. The point is that it wouldn't have mattered. We can't turn the ball over like that, play defense like that and expect to win. The fact that we have two victories despite those things is only because we played the Giants, who are just as inept and got some bad breaks against us, and the watermelon kick.

Too many want to turn this into a quarterback thing. I started a quarterback thread to see how many realize that's not the problem or at least not our primary one(s).

That's why its called an average buddy. Rams are probably the best defense we played. Regardless, we were averaging 37 per week under Dak. 10 per week under your hero the Dead Rooster.

Isnt it amazing that when we lose under Dak, its Daks fault. Now all of a sudden when we lost with another QB it doesn't matter who the QB is.

 

[CowboyRoy]

You noticed that to? This is the same forum where many posters said the team wouldn't miss a beat playing Dalton. Some even said the backup would be an improvement.

Yep, and those posters will all be exposed tomorrow for their error.

 

[The Fonz]

Dak or no Dak this team is not going anywhere.... it is easy to blame a player or a coach but the real blame should be pointed at the 2 clowns running the show and as long as they are around the team we will never be successful.
..

 

[Pessimist_cowboy]

38-24

 

[gimmesix]

That's why its called an average buddy. Rams are probably the best defense we played. Regardless, we were averaging 37 per week under Dak. 10 per week under your hero the Dead Rooster.

Isnt it amazing that when we lose under Dak, its Daks fault. Now all of a sudden when we lost with another QB it doesn't matter who the QB is.

Are you really this dense? I am 100 percent in support of Dak being the quarterback and have never said losing is his fault. You've got some serious issues.

I actually dread anytime I see that you've responded to any of my posts because your posts are so infuriating. I enjoy having good discussions about the team I love to follow, but there are some members here that just make that so difficult.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Are you really this dense? I am 100 percent in support of Dak being the quarterback and have never said losing is his fault. You've got some serious issues.

I actually dread anytime I see that you've responded to any of my posts because your posts are so infuriating. I enjoy having good discussions about the team I love to follow, but there are some members here that just make that so difficult.

Did you not nit pick about the team NOT scoring 39 against the Rams? You do know what an average is right?

 

[OmerV]

I'm just curious (and wonder if anyone thinks we would have won).

I believe it would have been 38-17. Dak is worth a couple of touchdowns, but he probably would have at least thrown one of the interceptions Dalton did (the one where Kirkpatrick mugged Lamb), he couldn't have done anything to prevent Elliott's fumbles and our OL wouldn't have handled Arizona's pressure any better, although Dak might have escaped some of it.

The situation where Kirkpatrick mugged Lamb would likely never have occurred if we had a different QB. For better or worse (I think it would have been much better), having Dak at QB would have meant a different game with different situations and circumstances.

 

[gimmesix]

The situation where Kirkpatrick mugged Lamb would likely never have occurred if we had a different QB. For better or worse (I think it would have been much better), having Dak at QB would have meant a different game with different situations and circumstances.

Well, that's certainly possible because the game would have been different, but it's impossible to draw up different circumstances. We don't know if Dak would have had any turnovers or if an official had blown a different call that led to a turnover.

It's also impossible to know how much we would have scored with Dak. I was just interested in seeing different views on it. Some apparently see him as Superman who can carry the team. I see him as a very good quarterback (top 10 in the league) who would likely have made us more competitive than we were.

I went with 17 points because one player making a 14-point difference is outstanding. I also believe winning and losing is a team effort and we would have still lost because of a poor team effort, particularly the fumbles and defensive lapses.

 

[CowboysLegend365]

The way Murray and their offense was struggling to start, I find it hard to believe we wouldn’t have been up at least 10-0 with #4.

And once we went down 21-0, you could see our offense knew they had no chance without their leader.

 

[Kevinicus]

AZ is the #2 score defense in the league.

No offensive line, 2 fumbles, dropped passes, blatant missed PI calls, a defense who couldn't get off the field. There would be no difference. Might have been even worse.

Dak panics when there is constant pressure, and with his pocket presence, there's probably a few more sacks and maybe fumbles in there.

Honestly, I don't think Mahomes would have made much difference last night.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

If this defense gave Dak 3 straight punts like they gave Dalton? We would've won last night.

 

[Kevinicus]

The way Murray and their offense was struggling to start, I find it hard to believe we wouldn’t have been up at least 10-0 with #4.

And once we went down 21-0, you could see our offense knew they had no chance without their leader.

It's like some people think the offense scores every drive Dak plays and doesn't go long stretches of doing nothing at times...

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

The way Murray and their offense was struggling to start, I find it hard to believe we wouldn’t have been up at least 10-0 with #4.

And once we went down 21-0, you could see our offense knew they had no chance without their leader.

I haven't seen any team start that bad against us all year long.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

It's like some people think the offense scores every drive Dak plays and doesn't go long stretches of doing nothing at times...

We can sit here and say this but I haven't seen a game this year where Dak lost by 30 points.......

 

[nightrain]

less than 25

 

[Kevinicus]

We can sit here and say this but I haven't seen a game this year where Dak lost by 30 points.......

The Cowboys haven't lost by 30 points yet.

Again, you're trying to make this a QB game, and not a team game. All these years, and you still don't get it.