Why the extreme points of view on Dak?

[Creeper]

'Dak is good enough'???....at what? When under pressure he capitulates (his fans will deflect by adding issues of defense and running game), but for three years running HE came up short in Play-Off Defeats, something you wouldnt/cant expect from one of your ELITE CAP recipients.

2023 was a good roster, what would it of taken to go ALL-IN to win the Super Bowl? Henry (for a 1st)....doesnt get us past the Packers.

The reason we arent spending, this pre-season, is that there's too many holes with the forthcoming elite contracts. Do I have confidence the FO can execute a strategy.....H@LL NO, but part of that is their continued 'LIKE OUR GUYS, OVERSPEND ON OUR GUYS' and that certainly includes Dak.

Let Dak play out his contract whilst we put a proper GM in place and let the new Exec make a decision on a strategy moving forward and: Dak, CeeDee and Micah.

Forget the QB idea, build the trenches FIRST and allow a lesser (say) 4th Rd QB get introduced into a secure line that'll help him out ....ALA 2016.

I think the problem is a lot of fans want to ignore the other 21 guys who take the field for Dallas. They just want to focus on Dak and Dak alone. Look at last year's team. Did the Cowboys have a good running game? No, that was Pollard's fault, right? The Cowboys couldn't run the football because the OL was not very good at opening holes for Pollard and Pollard lost a step. Can anyone of Dak's haters at least admit that?

Then look at the defense. We were loaded with exceptional linebackers right? We had the best DT rotation in football, right? On the contrary. We had no LBs, and our DT rotation could have been one of the worst in football. They couldn't stop the run or get any pressure from the middle of the defensive line. They had a 205 lb S playing LBs most of the time. The Packers exploited the Cowboys defensive weaknesses the way any playoff team would.

But Dak was supposed to take that team to the Super Bowl, because Dak blocks, runs the football, and tackles on defense. Why is it so hard for people to admit that the Cowboys last year were just not good enough to win in the playoffs. They beat up on weak teams and got stoned by the better teams in the league. The measuring stick of beating NFC East teams is the measuring stick of losers.

The offensive and defensive lines were not very good last year. In the end, it cost them in the playoffs. I am not saying Dak played great in the first half, but I think it is unfair and also inaccurate to put it all on Dak. Given a better team, I think Dak is good enough. Worse QBs than Dak have won the Super Bowl.

 

[Creeper]

This is exactly how I feel about the matter.

It is frustrating because we know we are in a no won situation.

 

[DanA]

I think the oversimplification is what gets to me. No matter what Dallas does, there will be consequences. If they give Dak $60 million there will be CAP consequences that will effect the rest of the team. It probably means they will never be any better than a little above average.

If they don't sign Dak, they have no QB. There will be consequences for that too. The "just go draft a QB in the first round" crowd amuse me with their belief that whoever Dallas drafts will automatically be as good as or better than Dak. Sure, I get it, a rookie making a few million gives the Cowboys a lot of CAP room to sign other players like CeeDee and Micah. But QB is a lot more important that those guys. Maybe they get lucky and get a Brock Purdy who just plays the system and let's the rest of the team win games for him. Maybe not.

The Big problem with the second option is we all know no matter how much CAP room Jerry has, Stephen will not let him sign top free agents to make the team good enough for the cheap QB they will put on the field. This is the frustration I think we all feel. Either we draft better than any team in history has year after year, or we will be also-rans.

I don't get the idea that we are somehow going to be more satisfied losing behind a young cheap QB than we are with Dak. Losing is losing.

Dak is a good enough QB. The problem is the owner will never go all in to field a Super Bowl team. This year he is doing bare minimum. So tell me, which QB do you foresee carrying a team built only on draft picks to the Super Bowl?

At the same time, I would never give Dak $60 million. If that is what he wants, it would force me to go in another direction. He is a good QB, but not $60 million good.

Obviously it’s pretty likely we will take a step back before moving forward but I don’t see a realistic scenario where we win with Dak on a big contract so I think we should roll the dice and trade him finding a QB in the draft. Even if it’s low probability we find immediate success at least there’s hope.

 

[CowboyoWales]

Given a better team, I think Dak is good enough. Worse QBs than Dak have won the Super Bowl.

Given a better team so would Rush. In a league that has a CAP it's not unreasonable for those accounting for the highest CAP% to take greater accountability.
Dak's issue's are that he can't step up, saying he's good enough (WITH A BETTER ROSTER) is equally pertinent to most every QB. The reality is he probably wants 20% of the CAP, but still needs help (as you concede with the 'better team' comment).

 

[Creeper]

So if they give Dak $50M we win the SB?

Seriously doubt that.

We have some very talented players. We do not have a functional complementary football team.

Is it Parson's fault he gets doubled and triple teamed? Did GM Jethro do anything to fix that this offseason?

What good is a pass rush and a dominate secodary, if you can not stop the run?

Come on people.

We went into the offseason knowing we were struggling to run the football and stop the run. We let Pollard walk and signed no one of substance.

We went into the offseason knowing we can't stop the run. We let Armstrong, Fowler, Gallimore, and Hankins leave. We signed noone on the defensive line. We signed Kendricks because we had 0 LBs and honestly, I wonder if they didn't hire Zimmer would we have even signed Kendricks. I suspect the answer is no.

We are worse off than we were going into last season and the draft is not going to fix that.

 

[CowboyoWales]

We went into the offseason knowing we were struggling to run the football and stop the run. We let Pollard walk and signed no one of substance.

We went into the offseason knowing we can't stop the run. We let Armstrong, Fowler, Gallimore, and Hankins leave. We signed noone on the defensive line. We signed Kendricks because we had 0 LBs and honestly, I wonder if they didn't hire Zimmer would we have even signed Kendricks. I suspect the answer is no.

We are worse off than we were going into last season and the draft is not going to fix that.

....and we went into the Offseason knowing that we weren't good enough both sides of the ball, with your 3 stars soon demanding mega extensions and CAP Hell over the 24 (into the 25 season).
Throwing bad money after good (well adequate, as most thought 2023 we had a chance) has to end at sometime. Soft resetting the CAP is one of the best FO decisions of the last decade.

 

[Verdict]

I agree. Opinions on Dak should not be so binary. He is a fine QB against average and weak defenses. He can be a world beater at times. He is prone to mistakes. Can get rattled. Absolutely sucks in big games. He is ok. Not terrible. Not great. I also don’t understand the hate. He seems like a good guy. Not a championship QB but that’s not his fault. He doesn’t have the emotional toughness to win it all.

Well said.

 

[Verdict]

The league needs to stand firm and not pay second tier QBs top tier prices. That is the reality now for the past 8 years or so. At that point it is not a point about giving a discount but the buyers of the market pulling their head out of their backsides and bringing sanity to the market.

Teams are making very poor management decisions by overpaying mediocre QB talent at or near the top QB money.

If QB A is only 75 percent as good as QB B then it is a competitive disadvantage to pay QB A more than QB B who is better than him. It’s really that simple.

There are those who will say but someone else will pay him. Then let them pay him and find another QB who doesn’t put you at a competitive disadvantage.

 

[CowboyoWales]

I agree. Opinions on Dak should not be so binary. He is a fine QB against average and weak defenses. He can be a world beater at times. He is prone to mistakes. Can get rattled. Absolutely sucks in big games. He is ok. Not terrible. Not great. I also don’t understand the hate. He seems like a good guy. Not a championship QB but that’s not his fault. He doesn’t have the emotional toughness to win it all.

Agree, but that IS his fault, his temperament comes up short.
Ability to perform under pressure is on him....and is the reason why 'money' isn't the issue, as he needs an All-Pro team, to ensure we never have to over rely upon him.

 

[Verdict]

Are you getting your answer? Same guys, same arguments. Most posters avoid Dak discussions as they are simply filled w/ silly spats.

I feel like I have thrown out some corn and the crows are descending on me. Lol.

 

[Verdict]

I think the problem is a lot of fans want to ignore the other 21 guys who take the field for Dallas. They just want to focus on Dak and Dak alone. Look at last year's team. Did the Cowboys have a good running game? No, that was Pollard's fault, right? The Cowboys couldn't run the football because the OL was not very good at opening holes for Pollard and Pollard lost a step. Can anyone of Dak's haters at least admit that?

Then look at the defense. We were loaded with exceptional linebackers right? We had the best DT rotation in football, right? On the contrary. We had no LBs, and our DT rotation could have been one of the worst in football. They couldn't stop the run or get any pressure from the middle of the defensive line. They had a 205 lb S playing LBs most of the time. The Packers exploited the Cowboys defensive weaknesses the way any playoff team would.

But Dak was supposed to take that team to the Super Bowl, because Dak blocks, runs the football, and tackles on defense. Why is it so hard for people to admit that the Cowboys last year were just not good enough to win in the playoffs. They beat up on weak teams and got stoned by the better teams in the league. The measuring stick of beating NFC East teams is the measuring stick of losers.

The offensive and defensive lines were not very good last year. In the end, it cost them in the playoffs. I am not saying Dak played great in the first half, but I think it is unfair and also inaccurate to put it all on Dak. Given a better team, I think Dak is good enough. Worse QBs than Dak have won the Super Bowl.

I am not bashing this post. In fact I am going to embrace it, but maybe for a different reason than you might expect.

The rubber meeting the road with this team is the overpaying of home grown talent. Martin is a good guard (at one point great). He may still be above average. But at his cap number you would expect Martin to make this OL a world beater.

We did a fantastic job of drafting Martin. But at some point he should have been shipped out for picks. He should have been replaced with a cheaper/acceptable alternative.

When we drafted Martin he gave the team a competitive advantage, but now, with his contract that script has flipped and he is a bit of an albatross.

Pollard was a good, cheap, effective backup. But when we put him on the tag, his competitive advantage flipped.

The same was also true of Dak. He was once an advantage. Now his cap hit is an albatross.

Some players are worth paying the mega deals. But in the long run a team must be very selective about who they “pay”. Smart teams often trade away a player for premium picks instead of paying them. The Patriots did it for years.

 

[Whyjerry]

Agree, but that IS his fault, his temperament comes up short.
Ability to perform under pressure is on him....and is the reason why 'money' isn't the issue, as he needs an All-Pro team, to ensure we never have to over rely upon him.

It’s not up to him. You either have that or you don’t.

 

[plasticman]

We live in a world of extremes where everything is either the best or the worse. The color grey is obsolete.

This binary perception of life can be seen in almost every aspect of our daily living.

 

[starfan1]

We live in a world of extremes where everything is either the best or the worse. The color grey is obsolete.

This binary perception of life can be seen in almost every aspect of our daily living.

you sir are not wrong

 

[Mr_437]

Because you have Dak fans vs Cowboys fans in many instances.

 

[Whyjerry]

We live in a world of extremes where everything is either the best or the worse. The color grey is obsolete.

This binary perception of life can be seen in almost every aspect of our daily living.

Facts^^^

 

[McKDaddy]

The rubber meeting the road with this team is the overpaying of home grown talent. Martin is a good guard (at one point great). He may still be above average. But at his cap number you would expect Martin to make this OL a world beater.

We did a fantastic job of drafting Martin. But at some point he should have been shipped out for picks. He should have been replaced with a cheaper/acceptable alternative.

When we drafted Martin he gave the team a competitive advantage, but now, with his contract that script has flipped and he is a bit of an albatross.

Some players are worth paying the mega deals. But in the long run a team must be very selective about who they “pay”. Smart teams often trade away a player for premium picks instead of paying them. The Patriots did it for years.

Nailed it @Verdict. There is no formula that guarantees you'll always make the correct decision but this team does not seem to ask the question "Will the player give us a competitive advantage at salary X over the course of Y years?"

 

[McKDaddy]

We live in a world of extremes where everything is either the best or the worse. The color grey is obsolete.

This binary perception of life can be seen in almost every aspect of our daily living.

I hear what you are saying & agree in general. However, as regards Dak, the view should be binary. The larger the sample size the firmer the conclusions drawn from it. He has repeatedly failed to be a competitive advantage and more accurately has put us in a disadvantaged position.

 

[starfan1]

because we have a board full of entitled whiners that dont understand the difficulties of championship runs in the salary cap era. That said Dak at 60 is bad business.

 

[CowboyoWales]

It’s not up to him. You either have that or you don’t.

Well I bet he doesnt choose to get rattled (as you put it), but that's part of his temperament, of course it's on him, it's part of who he is. The league doesnt give discounts for anxiety, or excuses for those that cant perform under pressure.

You can call it a reason for why he struggles, but it's still on him.