SiCk_DiAbLo
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,376
- Reaction score
- 1,074
More winning, what exactly is the winning??Do you really think that they would keep him 10 years if they weren't winning?
More winning, what exactly is the winning??Do you really think that they would keep him 10 years if they weren't winning?
I'm tired of all this winning.Winning!!!!!!!!!!
Cooper Rush is 5-1 over the past two seasons and it's widely accepted that he's a practice squad quarterback. So if anyone is equating that the team wins games because of Dak Prescott then they are mistaken - the play off games against the 49ers from the previous two seasons clearly show this.Do you really think that they would keep him 10 years if they weren't winning?
The offense was ranked 29th without Dak.Cooper Rush is 5-1 over the past two seasons and it's widely accepted that he's a practice squad quarterback. So if anyone is equating that the team wins games because of Dak Prescott then they are mistaken - the play off games against the 49ers from the previous two seasons clearly show this.
Yes, the Cooper Rush underperforming offense that went 4-1 while he was at the helm versus the Dak-led offense that went 9-5 while setting the league lead in INT's in spite of missing 5 games.The offense was ranked 29th without Dak.
Just stop your obsession with anything anti-Dak.
And there’s no follow up questions. It’s like they either aren’t allowed or the media is intimidated by them.Stephen loves to assert bold comments about his future intentions, even if he knows he won't likely be able to stick with Dak another decade. It's more than irritating to listen to his "in your face" comments, knowing that it won't likely appeal to most of this team's fans. It's almost like he's saying, "I'm in charge around here, like or not, and there's nothing you can do about it." Only a jerk is willing to assert himself to such a degree.
So, now you're suggesting wins and losses are on one player? That's convenient.Yes, the Cooper Rush underperforming offense that went 4-1 while he was at the helm versus the Dak-led offense that went 9-5 while setting the league lead in INT's in spite of missing 5 games.
So how was that Dak elevated offense against Washington in the last game of the season....or how was that Dak led offense against SF in the divisional playoff game?So, now you're suggesting wins and losses are on one player? That's convenient.
Because only a moron would ignore the vast significance between Rush in 5 games (which some dorks include last season) with a healthy team and the actual better offense with Prescott.
The offense was clearly elevated with Dak and you deny it. Even though its a fact.
But yeah, whatever is in your heart.
You're not willing to accept anything but your cherry picked takes.So how was that Dak elevated offense against Washington in the last game of the season....or how was that Dak led offense against SF in the divisional playoff game?
37 of 74 for a 50% comp % with 334 yards 2 td's and 3 int's
The only manufacturing is ways for Dak to throw better passes to defenders than to his receivers.....now that is a talent.You're not willing to accept anything but your cherry picked takes.
If you're serious and only think Dak was the only culprit for tanking big games, there's no point.
Have a good day manufacturing ways to blame Dak.
Maybe it's time for you to become less gullible. Stephen and Jerry aren't exactly renowned as truthful guys.Wow, maybe it's time to quit following the NFL or if you can stomach it switch to another team