Twitter: Wins Are All That Matters

[Sydla]

The thing that kills me about the ‘talent’ Dak has. Zeke for sure is a phenomenal talent. But all I hear about is how Garrett sucks, Witten was over the hill, Dez sucks and now I’m hearing Beasley sucks........it’s hard to see Dak even winning 5 games with all of that suckage.

Don't conflate all arguments to be coming from the same people. The criticisms of Dak and other players is mixed among many different posters.

 

[Sydla]

Again, there is no way to make a perfectly apples to apples comparison, and I'm not claiming Dak has suffered from a lack of talent, I'm only saying that if a person is going to argue that other QBs have also had a good winning %, that person also has to be willing to accept that Dak's winning % is notably better and that those QBs had talent around them too.

Fair point about Tomlinson - I thought Rivers had him longer than that. But Rivers really didn't suffer from a lack of talent after Tomlinson either. He had a strong RB combo of Tolbert, Mathews and Sproles, and now has Melvin Gordon, and he has had receivers like Keenan Allen, Vincent Jackson and Antonio Gates, who may be the best TE to ever play outside of Tony Gonzales.

I don't think anyone is trying to really make an apples to apples comparison here.

I think the point is trying to use wins and winning percentage as a big indicator of a QB's worth is a flawed analysis.

 

[OmerV]

I don't think anyone is trying to really make an apples to apples comparison here.

I think the point is trying to use wins and winning percentage as a big indicator of a QB's worth is a flawed analysis.

Go back and read my post - I added to it, and I think it explains more about this discussion. The OP was actually trying to make an apples to apples comparison of winning percentages between Dak and Rivers and Tebow to prove a point, and the argument he made actually worked against him. That was really the context.

 

[OmerV]

So let me ask this: Is Prescott a better quarterback than Rivers? According to won-loss numbers, he should be at least a notch better because "he" averages 1.5 to 1.6 more wins.

I posted Archie Manning's won-loss record in another thread (35-140, I believe) because it shows that that record has little to do with the quality of the quarterback. Generally, you can't have a bad one and win, but you can have a Trent Dilfer and win a Super Bowl if you have the right team around him.

I'd love to see the day when won-loss record is no longer used to judge quarterbacks, just like it isn't used to judge running backs, receivers, etc., because people understand with those positions that success is a team stat.

Did you read my post? I specifically said that I agree that winning % is not the only thing to look at when judging a QB. I merely said the way the OP tried to argue the point actually worked against him.

 

[Sydla]

Go back and read my post - I added to it, and I think it explains more about this discussion. The OP was actually trying to make an apples to apples comparison of winning percentages between Dak and Rivers and Tebow to prove a point, and the argument he made actually worked against him. That was really the context.

No, the OP was making the point that trying to use wins to judge a QBs worth is a flawed analysis. Because, as you yourself apparently are acknowledging with your apples to oranges argument, there are way more factors that go into why a team wins or loses.

You may disagree but there have been plenty of fans on this very board that have propped up Dak largely because he "wins" and that the stats are just secondary. That's a flawed way to look at a QB's worth.

 

[Rockport]

When you have to point to wins alone to defend a QB you know you have a fraud player because wins is a team stat and there should be aspects to that QB's play that lead to those wins. Otherwise he's just along for the ride.

Prescott is a fraud and the moment he signs that contract he will be the most overpaid player in the history of the NFL. He positively impacts nothing. He makes nobody around him better. He must be carried.

Yet when we were losing with Romo you put all the blame on him saying the QB is the most important position by far on the team so please give us a break from your trolling.

 

[eromeopolk]

"Win is the name of the Game"...Ask Jerry

Winning percentage All Time
Dallas Cowboys 57.3%
Green Bay Packers 56.5%
Chicago Bears 56.2%
Miami Dolphins 55.9%

 

[Diehardblues]

No, the OP was making the point that trying to use wins to judge a QBs worth is a flawed analysis. Because, as you yourself apparently are acknowledging with your apples to oranges argument, there are way more factors that go into why a team wins or loses.

You may disagree but there have been plenty of fans on this very board that have propped up Dak largely because he "wins" and that the stats are just secondary. That's a flawed way to look at a QB's worth.

Yep ... winning certainly helps but just for example some of the same fans who are using winning or team results last 3 years with Dak are also bashing Garrett for same record .

In the end the teams wins with Dak is simply spinning a fact to support their opinion and or narrative since there’s really nothing in his personal stats or team offense which are as supportive.

 

[Diehardblues]

"Win is the name of the Game"...Ask Jerry

Winning percentage All Time
Dallas Cowboys 57.3%
Green Bay Packers 56.5%
Chicago Bears 56.2%
Miami Dolphins 55.9%

Winning Percentages Since 2000

https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/aqe7j0/nfl_winning_percentages_since_2000/

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Don't conflate all arguments to be coming from the same people. The criticisms of Dak and other players is mixed among many different posters.

That is the consensus. Let's be honest.......people believed Dez and Witten's careers were behind them the past few years. Even the Cowboys agree with it. They let Beasley go and Dez go.

You believe the opposite? You believe Dak had a top 10 receiving core here?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Well, we had the same HC and coordinators all 3 years?

I don't follow?

 

[Sydla]

That is the consensus. Let's be honest.......people believed Dez and Witten's careers were behind them the past few years. Even the Cowboys agree with it. They let Beasley go and Dez go.

You believe the opposite? You believe Dak had a top 10 receiving core here?

I think for his 2016 season and then when they added Cooper in 2018, he had a pretty to really good receiving group. Great or one of the best in the league? Of course not. But let's not act like for three years he's been throwing to drek.

 

[Diehardblues]

I don't follow?

Responding to your post..

“Second most wins means nothing when you have new coaches every few years.”

Cowboys haven’t had new coaches every few years. At least not with Dak. Did I misinterpret your meaning?

 

[Diehardblues]

I think for his 2016 season and then when they added Cooper in 2018, he had a pretty to really good receiving group. Great or one of the best in the league? Of course not. But let's not act like for three years he's been throwing to drek.

It was a good enough receiving Corp for our previous QB to be top 10 in passing consistently and Dak his Rookie season.

 

[G2]

Yep ... winning certainly helps but just for example some of the same fans who are using winning or team results last 3 years with Dak are also bashing Garrett for same record .

In the end the teams wins with Dak is simply spinning a fact to support their opinion and or narrative since there’s really nothing in his personal stats or team offense which are as supportive.

Garrett should get blasted for not doing a better job solving our run defense issues in the post season.

 

[gimmesix]

Did you read my post? I specifically said that I agree that winning % is not the only thing to look at when judging a QB. I merely said the way the OP tried to argue the point actually worked against him.

I don't think it does. The tweet that was posted showed that Tim Tebow has a better winning percentage than Phillip Rivers. Hopefully, no one here would argue that Tebow is a better quarterback than Rivers, or even close.

So if Tebow has a better winning percentage and is a worse QB, then wouldn't it stand to reason that no matter what Prescott's winning percentage is, he could be a worse QB than others? The point defeats any post that uses winning percentage as an argument for the quality of the quarterback.

I believe the point of the OP is that winning percentage doesn't equate to good quarterbacking, so I can't see how the point works against the OP by pointing out Dak's winning percentage.

Maybe I'm missing something here in what you are saying. My belief stands, though: Winning percentage should not be used to judge quarterbacks. You say it's "not the only thing to look at." I say, don't use it at all because the quality of the team as a whole is going to determine winning percentage, not just the quarterback.

Would Dak have gone 13-3 if he had been drafted by the San Francisco 49ers? Absolutely not. Would the 49ers have finished better than 2-14 that year? Maybe. Does that mean that Prescott didn't play a part in Dallas going 13-3? Absolutely not, and he deserves credit for playing well.

 

[Diehardblues]

Garrett should get blasted for not doing a better job solving our run defense issues in the post season.

I’d agree assuming we didn’t address which we appeared to with 2nd round pick and FA on DL.

There’s probably more that could have been done . What else should we have done IYO?

 

[Diehardblues]

I don't think it does. The tweet that was posted showed that Tim Tebow has a better winning percentage than Phillip Rivers. Hopefully, no one here would argue that Tebow is a better quarterback than Rivers, or even close.

So if Tebow has a better winning percentage and is a worse QB, then wouldn't it stand to reason that no matter what Prescott's winning percentage is, he could be a worse QB than others? The point defeats any post that uses winning percentage as an argument for the quality of the quarterback.

I believe the point of the OP is that winning percentage doesn't equate to good quarterbacking, so I can't see how the point works against the OP by pointing out Dak's winning percentage.

Maybe I'm missing something here in what you are saying. My belief stands, though: Winning percentage should not be used to judge quarterbacks. You say it's "not the only thing to look at." I say, don't use it at all because the quality of the team as a whole is going to determine winning percentage, not just the quarterback.

Would Dak have gone 13-3 if he had been drafted by the San Francisco 49ers? Absolutely not. Would the 49ers have finished better than 2-14 that year? Maybe. Does that mean that Prescott didn't play a part in Dallas going 13-3? Absolutely not, and he deserves credit for playing well.

Well done..

 

[G2]

I’d agree assuming we didn’t address which we appeared to with 2nd round pick and FA on DL.

There’s probably more that could have been done . What else should we have done IYO?

I really don't know. Something. Bring in some help, show different looks. It would also help if we were able to draft higher for DL.

 

[Diehardblues]

I really don't know. Something. Bring in some help, show different looks. It would also help if we were able to draft higher for DL.

We’ll see what these additions bring. But yea, with not having a 1st round pick definitely limited an impact in draft . I still think we’re going to miss Irving and Gregory. DL is one of my biggest concerns.