Who is winning championships without a Franchise QB?

[Diehardblues]

Dr. Seuss is coming out with a new book. The Greedy Gimp who killed a football team.

It will have to get in line with a celebrity egotistical narcissistic football idiot owner that killed a football franchise.

 

[DallasEast]

In my opinion, any franchise's management would define their player as a franchise quarterback if they (e.g. the management) is 100% commitment in the player as their starter at the position. Fans (and sometimes media as well) try twisting the definition to fit what the player has or has not done in their career or the player's perceived skill set or both but outside assumption does not replace what the player means to the people that employ him.

 

[Diehardblues]

Any QB that wins the job on his team is the Franchise QB. Goff was the franchise QB for the Rams until he wasn't and now Stafford is. Questionable at this point if Goff is the Lions franchise QB or if Hurts is for the Eagles or Darnold for the Jets.

There is no doubt that Prescott is the franchise QB for the Cowboys and gives this team the best chance this upcoming season. Dalton would be the franchise QB until a rookie takes over if they go that route but the offense will not be as effective.

The choice is get the most out of this offense with Prescott on a tag or contract this season or begin a new era with a new franchise QB. Prescott makes this a better team but he does not make it a true contender.

Those years between the franchise QBs Aikman and Romo are a shining example of a franchise in search of the franchise QB. To think it could not return to that swinging door is a large assumption.

You have to consider this brain trust's history with that position and ask yourself "do you trust them to find one even as good as Prescott"?

For that reason, I've always considered Dak better than he really is because I've seen bad and this team could have had Lynch or Cook. With the Cowboys, you can't get into vacuum thinking about that position, you have to consider everything.

Perhaps we need to define Franchise QB. We know it doesn’t have to be Elite which we often can’t agree on definition.

With Elite QB I’d use HOF caliber. That might be agreeable.

Franchise which is probably even more subjective , I’d argue a second contract after Rookie deal. But that could be iffy.

What do you think Coach. Your definition??

 

[Diehardblues]

In my opinion, any franchise's management would define their player as a franchise quarterback if they (e.g. the management) is 100% commitment in the player as their starter at the position. Fans (and sometimes media as well) try twisting the definition to fit what the player has or has not done in their career or the player's perceived skill set or both but outside assumption does not replace what the player means to the people that employ him.

That’s a pretty solid definition.

 

[USArmyVet]

The bum couldn’t even put down a snap for a FG. He was a loser. An over achieving loser so he teased you but an over achiever nonetheless. Nobody was winning anything with Rudy.

...and Dak is any better based on your logic?

 

[USArmyVet]

I haven't seen Mahomes limp at all. did something happen?

Yes something happened.....Mahomes led his team to back to back Super Bowl appearances.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Yes something happened.....Mahomes led his team to back to back Super Bowl appearances.

so why is he being mentioned as Dr. Seuss Greedy Gimpy?

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Who is winning championships with a franchise QB and a historically bad defense?

 

[Sheepherder]

Exactly...last time teams made it was Ravens...they had two HOFers in.Lewis and Reed plus Ngata, and few other top notch defenders. That ravens.defense was all time best perhaps....

I am.sure people will say if we don't sign Dak.then we can afford to make a defense.lime that.

My question.would be how.mcu does three players like Lewis, Reed, Nagata cost in today's market and where are they.

Don't you just wish Dallas could find a dominant defensive player like a Ray Lewis. Be like asking too much.

 

[USArmyVet]

so why is he being mentioned as Dr. Seuss Greedy Gimpy?

No clue as I would use that description for Dallas' QB but not Mahomes.

 

[CouchCoach]

In my opinion, any franchise's management would define their player as a franchise quarterback if they (e.g. the management) is 100% commitment in the player as their starter at the position. Fans (and sometimes media as well) try twisting the definition to fit what the player has or has not done in their career or the player's perceived skill set or both but outside assumption does not replace what the player means to the people that employ him.

If a team is not looking for a QB, they have a franchise QB. Those QB's that are questionable as franchise QB's are Goff, Hurts, Hill or Winston, Jones, Newton, Darnold, Lock, Tua, Trubisky and Garoppolo. Wentz was a questionable franchise QB and now he's not. Stafford went from being one team's franchise QB to being another's.

Wherever Prescott plays, he will be the franchise QB. In fact, if he plays for Dallas, he will be the only bona fide franchise QB in the division at this time. Unless they fix that problem with WFT, the Cowboys are the odds on favorite to win the division even with this defense.

 

[CATCH17]

Franchise QB is just a way to try and sneak Dak into a discussion about elite QB’s.

He’s not one and guys like him don’t win championships when paid like they are.

No need for this to be a 10 page thread.

 

[CouchCoach]

Franchise QB is just a way to try and sneak Dak into a discussion about elite QB’s.

He’s not one and guys like him don’t win championships when paid like they are.

No need for this to be a 10 page thread.

CATCH, you are helping drive it to 11.

 

[CWR]

The bum couldn’t even put down a snap for a FG. He was a loser. An over achieving loser so he teased you but an over achiever nonetheless. Nobody was winning anything with Rudy.

Ok, so the former. That's all I need to know about you.

 

[CouchCoach]

The bum couldn’t even put down a snap for a FG. He was a loser. An over achieving loser so he teased you but an over achiever nonetheless. Nobody was winning anything with Rudy.

Hootchie mama, that is harsh.

As far as that FG attempt is concerned, he shouldn't have been holding for that in the first place and that game was on one person and it wasn't Romo. Parcells, for all of his puffery, was a scared chicken in that game and played not to lose. SEA was starting 2 S's that hadn't even been in the game and Pete Hunter was one of them. That game never should have come down to a FGA and Parcells' adoration of Holmgren took his balls away and he lost that game.

Parcells had one huge problem, he thought he was the smartest guy in the room. He blew that game and let his QB take the fall and the heat. The arrogant coach had the audacity to say "wait until they get enough tape on him". Isn't that part of his job?

 

[Aviano90]

...and Dak is any better based on your logic?

Same QB, same results.

 

[CouchCoach]

Who is winning championships with a franchise QB? Brees 1, Rodgers 1, Wilson 1, Rothliesberger 2, Ryan 0, Cousins 0, Marino 0, Tarkenton 0, Kelly 0 and on and on it goes.

The QB is only one significant piece to the puzzle because E Manning has 2 because he played just good enough as McMahon, Dilfer and Johnson did. Their teams won the games and it is also significant to point out the 3 best defenses in the last 25 years only managed to win one ring each. They could not sustain it.

Elite or franchise doesn't really matter with Prescott because he has all the leverage and the agent to apply it and even has the owner saying that publicly. They are going to sign him, it's just a question of the amount.

Then we get all the threads blaming what they're paying Prescott for failure to achieve. Lost will be he came a lot closer to earning 40M last season than the DE, RB, WR or LB did earning their pay.

 

[CouchCoach]

Perhaps we need to define Franchise QB. We know it doesn’t have to be Elite which we often can’t agree on definition.

With Elite QB I’d use HOF caliber. That might be agreeable.

Franchise which is probably even more subjective , I’d argue a second contract after Rookie deal. But that could be iffy.

What do you think Coach. Your definition??

DE pretty much nailed it. Teams establish their franchise QB and it takes a while for some like CLE, JAX, NYJ and IND after Luck retired.

 

[khiladi]

Unlike Watson, Dak has not only had a top five OL, but top half defense as far as scoring. This idea he’s been playing with a bad hand at defense is ridiculously laughable, especially solely based on the ‘yardage’ argument, when Marinelli basically runs a “bend don’t break” defense.

 

[khiladi]

One of the biggest examples of this franchise being dysfunctional is when they benched Romo for this mediocrity, despite Zeke running like a mad dawg behind this OL and stacked boxes at top form. Teams were literally playing the run and couldn’t stop it.

I mean how many run and pass plays could Romo have checked into based on the looks the defense would have been giving.

Looking back at it, the Jones probably made the decision, because it was cheaper in the long run. You get a rookie, driving the bus, surrounded by talent, thinking 2016 could happen again with this much cheaper contract, who when they would extend would be grateful and give them a “hometown discount”. But here we are and Dak is, unlike Romo, completely trying to get paid a completely insane amount, after the Jones baby-sat him for years. Ironic..

The thing with Romo is he actually renegotiate when the Jones came to him, to restructure to make more room for the Cowboys to sign more players, despite carrying a mediocre franchise for years. Dak, on the other hand...