Would you want to sign Dak if he wasn't a Cowboy?

[5Stars]

Would you want to sign Dak to a $60 million per year contract if he wasn't a Cowboy and was coming from another Team?
I have a hard time seeing a fanbase being stoked to get Dak on that pricetag and preventing your team from signing many FA's and players due to taking so much of the cap.
Dak is known throughout the league/fanbases as a good but unaccomplished QB who doesn't put a team on his back and can carry them.
He will face just as much if not more from the fans of any team he goes to than he does in Dallas. Like us, they will be brutal if he is paid all that money and nothing comes of it.

Would you fly to the Sun at night so you won't burn up?

 

[nate dizzle]

Would you fly to the Sun at night so you won't burn up?

I'm going to need Kurt Warner and Cole Beasley to weigh in on this

 

[5Stars]

I'm going to need Kurt Warner and Cole Beasley to weigh in on this

The Cowboys should try and bring in Kurt Warner to replace #4. lol

 

[rags747]

Baker Mayfield at $30m Please!

 

[leeblair]

Would you want to sign Dak to a $60 million per year contract if he wasn't a Cowboy and was coming from another Team?
I have a hard time seeing a fanbase being stoked to get Dak on that pricetag and preventing your team from signing many FA's and players due to taking so much of the cap.
Dak is known throughout the league/fanbases as a good but unaccomplished QB who doesn't put a team on his back and can carry them.
He will face just as much if not more from the fans of any team he goes to than he does in Dallas. Like us, they will be brutal if he is paid all that money and nothing comes of it.

If I hadn't watched Dak and seen his tendency to choke in tough games I would probably be interested, at least. He does put up impressive numbers, and not knowing how they were accumulated, it would certainly be tempting.
But these days we see a lot of quarterbacks simply from getting to watch more games than in the70's and 80's, so it would be hard not to know his history.

 

[FanofJerry]

Since the percentage of Cap for QBs has not skyrocketed, though inching up...20-22% has been baked into FO's calculations for top end QB's for a while now.

That being said...any Team/FO that feels they have great coaching on the offensive side of the ball and great scheming....would be stupid to not consider Dak, assuming they were lacking a QB.

Dak has flaws like every QB. Those flaws arent as bad as the doomers suggest. Anyway quality offensive coaching staff with good scheming and game planning would love a positive locker room leader and very good bus driver. And...they would pay market pricing for it.

I will go ahead and thwart the devil advocates that want to muddy this argument with "But if you have great offensive minds coaching, they can do that with a rook contract QB too...no need to pay a vet".......not if you are trying to win and have a window. Im 100% going with the vet good bus driver over a rook if I have a window.

 

[TexasBacon]

In other words you are afraid of becoming a weaker team yet even more resistant to potentially becoming a better team with a stronger chance of winning the Superbowl.

Ask yourself would those Cowboy teams you mention have gone 5-1 with a practice squad quarterback? Cooper has shown that Prescott isn't a difference maker.

I'm sorry but using that stretch with Rush as a basis to say they don't need Dak is the most disingenuous, insane argument I've ever heard. Those wins were primarily due to the defense and Rush doing just enough to squeak by. Anyone making that argument either has an agenda or lacks a fundamental understanding of the game of football. Blindly citing that streak is like saying Dak is the second best QB in the league after blindly citing his big stats without further context.

Regarding the OP's question, I don't know if Dak would be the same Dak if he were on a different roster, so I think envisioning Dak on another team is apples to oranges with Cowboys Dak. There is something "in the water" in Dallas that seems to make good players fall apart at the biggest moments since 1996. When have we had a super star who hasn't had a down game at the biggest moment? There are very few people paid to discuss and analyze football for a living who don't think Dak is a legit top 5-10 starter in this league, with some even putting him higher. That said, I think it would be like us getting Lamar, 2019 Stafford, or maybe Herbert at $60m per year. If we had been in QB purgatory I'm sure most of this board would be elated to be relevant again, despite the price tag. If we had Howie Roseman as a GM we'd be elated because we would know that paying a QB $60m per year still wouldn't keep us from fielding a team that could make a run. But we don't. We're stuck with a GM who will use that as an excuse to not spend any more money. It's sad, but it is where we are.

 

[CWR]

Would you want to sign Dak to a $60 million per year contract if he wasn't a Cowboy and was coming from another Team?
I have a hard time seeing a fanbase being stoked to get Dak on that pricetag and preventing your team from signing many FA's and players due to taking so much of the cap.
Dak is known throughout the league/fanbases as a good but unaccomplished QB who doesn't put a team on his back and can carry them.
He will face just as much if not more from the fans of any team he goes to than he does in Dallas. Like us, they will be brutal if he is paid all that money and nothing comes of it.

It depends on how qb starved your franchise is, and what other options are available.

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

After seeing him in the playoffs-that would be a big fat NO>

 

[Swagger]

I'm sorry but using that stretch with Rush as a basis to say they don't need Dak is the most disingenuous, insane argument I've ever heard. Those wins were primarily due to the defense and Rush doing just enough to squeak by. Anyone making that argument either has an agenda or lacks a fundamental understanding of the game of football. Blindly citing that streak is like saying Dak is the second best QB in the league after blindly citing his big stats without further context.

Regarding the OP's question, I don't know if Dak would be the same Dak if he were on a different roster, so I think envisioning Dak on another team is apples to oranges with Cowboys Dak. There is something "in the water" in Dallas that seems to make good players fall apart at the biggest moments since 1996. When have we had a super star who hasn't had a down game at the biggest moment? There are very few people paid to discuss and analyze football for a living who don't think Dak is a legit top 5-10 starter in this league, with some even putting him higher. That said, I think it would be like us getting Lamar, 2019 Stafford, or maybe Herbert at $60m per year. If we had been in QB purgatory I'm sure most of this board would be elated to be relevant again, despite the price tag. If we had Howie Roseman as a GM we'd be elated because we would know that paying a QB $60m per year still wouldn't keep us from fielding a team that could make a run. But we don't. We're stuck with a GM who will use that as an excuse to not spend any more money. It's sad, but it is where we are.

It's still 6 regular season games including 5 games in the same season. The Cowboys went 5-1 with Rush under centre. Do I consider Rush the answer? Of course not, but my point is relevant as it answers those who claim the coaching is poor and/or the roster is weak. How can that be the case when the team went 5-1 with a practice squad quarterback and beat a couple of good teams including the Bengals (with Burrow) who reached the SuperBowl just over 6 months beforehand?

So the reason why it's relevant to raise is well Prescott has a good winning record during the regular season (as does Rush with a far smaller sample size) yet falls flat on his face in the post season. In my view a top 5 QB wins both of the play off games against the 49ers and a top 10 paid QB has to win one of those games. Prescott had enough drives in both games to get it done at least once yet he was unable to execute in the clutch.

The loss against Green Bay was more on the defense but Prescott effectively handed them 14 points in the first half!

Why on earth would a team with Superbowl aspirations pay him elite money when he has clearly illustrated over the past 8 seasons that he is not an elite NFL quarterback?

 

[Swagger]

I'm sorry but using that stretch with Rush as a basis to say they don't need Dak is the most disingenuous, insane argument I've ever heard. Those wins were primarily due to the defense and Rush doing just enough to squeak by. Anyone making that argument either has an agenda or lacks a fundamental understanding of the game of football. Blindly citing that streak is like saying Dak is the second best QB in the league after blindly citing his big stats without further context.

Regarding the OP's question, I don't know if Dak would be the same Dak if he were on a different roster, so I think envisioning Dak on another team is apples to oranges with Cowboys Dak. There is something "in the water" in Dallas that seems to make good players fall apart at the biggest moments since 1996. When have we had a super star who hasn't had a down game at the biggest moment? There are very few people paid to discuss and analyze football for a living who don't think Dak is a legit top 5-10 starter in this league, with some even putting him higher. That said, I think it would be like us getting Lamar, 2019 Stafford, or maybe Herbert at $60m per year. If we had been in QB purgatory I'm sure most of this board would be elated to be relevant again, despite the price tag. If we had Howie Roseman as a GM we'd be elated because we would know that paying a QB $60m per year still wouldn't keep us from fielding a team that could make a run. But we don't. We're stuck with a GM who will use that as an excuse to not spend any more money. It's sad, but it is where we are.

Do people really have Prescott as a top 5 QB or possibly higher?

I think he's a borderline top 10 QB and that's only because the depth of quality isn't what it used to be.

Generally considered to be the three elite quarterbacks with Mahomes comfortably the best:

Mahomes
Allen
Burrow

Jackson - multiple MVP with playoff issues needing to be addressed.

Herbert - he has put the team on his back but really been held back by a poor o-line, awful head coach, leaky defense and playing in a hard division.

Rodgers - multiple MVP and future first ballot Hall of Famer in twilight of his career.

Hurts - played exceptionally well in a Superbowl. MVP fav two seasons back until an injury very late in the season.

Stroud - looked smart in his rookie season and one to follow.

Stafford - Superbowl winner. Consistently good/very good for mostly bad Lions teams.

Love - looked more impressive as the season wore on. Regardless of the defenses, he played far better than Prescott in the play offs last season.

Goff - Played in a Superbowl. Better quarterback in the post season than Prescott to date. Coming off an excellent season.

Rodgers could be washed and Stafford does seem to be picking up more injuries but either way would the majority of NFL Executives take Prescott over the above quarterbacks given his horrific play off record on a good team?

 

[JBS]

Why do people keep asking this question?

You tank. You suck as bad as possible. And get the highest pick you can get

 

[TwoDeep3]

Wouldn't the circumstances make a difference if you would sign him or not?

You had Aikman who went down to injury and Dak is on the market. You have the entire 1993 team that would surround Dak. All you need is a bus driver and let the offensive line and Emmitt get it done. And Dak is coming in at a reasonable price.
Of course you'd take him. Beuerline.

However, if the team needs Superman to win games post season, and Dak wants 50 million, your opinion of taking him would be completely different.

Circumstances matter. regardless of the jaded opinion of most of the people here.

 

[Hadenough]

If we’ve been struggling at QB for as long as Washington, I would. It comes down to how bad you need a QB. If Dak becomes a free agent, this will be a rare opportunity to get one of the best QBs in the league.

Cowboys fans ALWAYS over value their own . Every player can be replaced. I would much rather continue building the team than let players walk so they can sign Dak. And no I don't want to mortgage the future.

 

[BoyzBlaster]

Depends. To do what job?

 

[KJJ]

Cowboys fans ALWAYS over value their own . Every player can be replaced. I would much rather continue building the team than let players walk so they can sign Dak. And no I don't want to mortgage the future.

Some players are harder to replace than others. Dak would be very difficult to replace. If we end up with a bad QB situation, it won’t matter who we add to this team at other positions we’re not going to get very far.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Dak is the guy you'd want in your posse. A guy who'd be a good chap and neighbor. He's the guy least likely to get in a gunfight in a Motel 6 parking lot. He's probably a mum's dream son.

But here is the choice. We can continue to pay a king's ransom to Dakchoka and continue banging our heads against the wall
Or shed our regular season safety blanket and start anew.
Dak will never carry us to a Super Bowl win. Even if Dak has a career stats year, he still needs to be better than far superior teams in the NFC alone.

Pay for a caretaker QB while dak's money is diverted to the defence. Let our D carry the load this time.

 

[plymkr]

Dak is good enough to get you to the playoffs but he's not excellent enough to win you a championship. Doubt that will ever change

I am not a big fan of Dak but I truly believe if he had the right supporting cast we could win a championship with him. What I mean by right supporting cast is a defense that can stop the run and get TOs and an offense that can maul people in the run game. So let’s say we’re in the playoffs and Dak goes into brain freeze mode and gets the 1000 yard stare. If he can hand the ball off to a powerful running game and the offense gets some momentum then he can relax. Or if the defense gets some momentum for us like a 3 and out or a TO, then Dak can relax.

Dak is a top 7-4 QB when relaxed. Dak is a bottom 5 QB when he plays tight. If we have a team that allows Dak to play loose then we could win.

I would not sign Dak to a 60 million dollar contract if he was a FA from another team. Nor do I want to sign him to a 60 million contract now. If Dak signed for 25-30 million and we were able to allocate that other 30 million to the trenches then I’d be all for it. Dak, IMO, will not win here or anywhere else if he has to carry the team. If he gets paid 60+ with us or someone else he’ll be put in a spot to carry the team and it won’t work out. See Kirk Cousins and Russell Wilson as examples. Russell Wilson wins nothing without Beast mode and that defense. Kirk is well documented.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Yes! I know this isn't the popular narrative on this forum but I can assure you the 55% of the Cowboys fans calling for Dak to leave Dallas either wasn't a fan during the Quincy Carter, Anthony Wright, Ryan Leaf. Chad Hutchinson and Clint Stoerner days or have forgotten how the seasons without a capable QB were like. I watched everyone of these games and can tell you the agony of those seasons was NOTHING compared to 12+ win seasons with Dak.
I get tired of reading the same 5 people posting about Dak's skills or lack thereof but who in the world world you replace him with (and I am not referring to some dream or madden simulation you did) I have been a member of this site for 25+ years and the amount of "this guy needs to go or this guy is terrible is nauseating. Aren't we Cowboys fans?

You are correct, me lad, that the agony of past QBs should not be re-lived.
Better, then, to continue the false pride of 12-win seasons and never advance in the playoffs. Some are perfectly happy with tha, old boy.
I, too, am coming around. We should celebrate our 12-win seasons and let the rival suckers fight their way to the Super Bowl.

 

[FanofJerry]

I am not a big fan of Dak but I truly believe if he had the right supporting cast we could win a championship with him. What I mean by right supporting cast is a defense that can stop the run and get TOs and an offense that can maul people in the run game. So let’s say we’re in the playoffs and Dak goes into brain freeze mode and gets the 1000 yard stare. If he can hand the ball off to a powerful running game and the offense gets some momentum then he can relax. Or if the defense gets some momentum for us like a 3 and out or a TO, then Dak can relax.

Dak is a top 7-4 QB when relaxed. Dak is a bottom 5 QB when he plays tight. If we have a team that allows Dak to play loose then we could win.

I would not sign Dak to a 60 million dollar contract if he was a FA from another team. Nor do I want to sign him to a 60 million contract now. If Dak signed for 25-30 million and we were able to allocate that other 30 million to the trenches then I’d be all for it. Dak, IMO, will not win here or anywhere else if he has to carry the team. If he gets paid 60+ with us or someone else he’ll be put in a spot to carry the team and it won’t work out. See Kirk Cousins and Russell Wilson as examples. Russell Wilson wins nothing without Beast mode and that defense. Kirk is well documented.

You sound like Politics and TV Commercial Ads....just throwing out numbers to manipulate the masses.

Dak is not bottom 5 in the league in tough situations. His coaches game plans have sucked and his coaches schemes and play calling have sucked. He might not be able to make all the throws...but he isnt bottom barrel.

Brady had playoff games with double the amount of INT's Dak ever has.

Its a stupid excuse to hang a hat on. Its a team game. Dak has never been awful. Maybe never superstar level to propel....but never awful in playoffs.

Playoffs are tough...as they should be. Few have the processing and mental control and feel for the game to excel in tough situations.

Its a stupid subject to start a new thread about every other day.

I highly doubt Dak has very few takers wanting to pay him if he hits free agency. Maybe there is a Bill Belicheck situation...but I doubt it.

Real GM's lose their job for focusing on team stats when evaluation a player.