Don Otreply Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 41 minutes ago, PrimeTime101 said: so you saying he is not a top 5 QB is your opinion of him. He was putting up MVP numbers before his injury and it was not close. Prescot in first 5 games before injury here we go. Prescot----Comp. 68% Yards 1856 9 TD Mahomes--Comp. 64% Yards 1705 10 TD Rodgers ---Comp. 76.9% Yards 1199 15 TD Prescot was in the conversation near or at top before injury for MVP. Naming top 5 QB in this league is hard its best done in tiers. All this info I am giving is subjective and crystal ball stuff right now.. but what Prescot did those first 5 games? crazy Iirc, Dallas with Dak was 2-3 before he got injured..., individual stats no matter how good mean nothing when the team you’re on has a losing record, that on top of missing the playoffs altogether the previous season says negative trend. Dak if nothing else has been shown to fall short repeatedly. Frankly as I stated in a previous post, I hope Jurra locks up a ton of cap annually for the next decade in Daks contract, that would be sweet, as it will restrict them from having a really good team. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 38 minutes ago, Big Turk said: Earlier reports said Seattle was setting the initial asking price at 3 first round picks. Not sure if they moved off that or not. Bears apparently putting together a massive offer. If the price is three firsts I am not sure how much sense it makes for a team like Dallas who already have a lot of their dollars allocated on vet players. Would make them better instantly but how sustainable it would make them I am not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 52 minutes ago, Don Otreply said: Iirc, Dallas with Dak was 2-3 before he got injured..., individual stats no matter how good mean nothing when the team you’re on has a losing record, that on top of missing the playoffs altogether the previous season says negative trend. Dak if nothing else has been shown to fall short repeatedly. Frankly as I stated in a previous post, I hope Jurra locks up a ton of cap annually for the next decade in Daks contract, that would be sweet, as it will restrict them from having a really good team. People really think like this? Like if the Bills went 2-3 and Allen was passing for 371 yards per game, you think he was the problem? That’s insane. Dak is far from a perfect qb but he is right around 10 and hardly the reason Dallas loses (and again his record is 42-27). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Otreply Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 Just now, C.Biscuit97 said: People really think like this? Like if the Bills went 2-3 and Allen was passing for 371 yards per game, you think he was the problem? That’s insane. Dak is far from a perfect qb but he is right around 10 and hardly the reason Dallas loses (and again his record is 42-27). I never said he was the problem per say, you are adding on from your own narrative it would appear, Dak is talented, but he and his team fall short frequently, that and wins are a team stat, you know that, so what ya got next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted March 5, 2021 Author Share Posted March 5, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, GunnerBill said: If the price is three firsts I am not sure how much sense it makes for a team like Dallas who already have a lot of their dollars allocated on vet players. Would make them better instantly but how sustainable it would make them I am not sure. I dunno...the Rams don't seem to care about first round picks and they have done OK. Seattle did the same to a lesser degree during their Legion of Boom Super Bowl years as well and it worked out pretty OK for them. How valuable are first round picks? Is it possible they are actually overvalued and it has taken some innovative GMs with different thinking to challenge this groupthink notion? I think the biggest benefit is you have a guy on a rookie contract for multiple years versus a stud guy you are paying top dollar for. But can that be offset by drafting really well in the lower rounds, so you have starters making rookie minimum-900K versus 3 or 4 million or more? Edited March 5, 2021 by Big Turk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 17 hours ago, BillsShredder83 said: I mean i get that its not the be all end all... but bottom line if the formula isnt working, you dont think its time to move on? it hasnt worked on the contract hes on, is the team roster going to get better or worse if they tie him up with a fat contract? hes had plenty of years to show he can put the team on his back and win, and he hasnt If he hadn't gotten injured, I firmly believe Dallas would have won the NFC East this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 26 minutes ago, Don Otreply said: I never said he was the problem per say, you are adding on from your own narrative it would appear, Dak is talented, but he and his team fall short frequently, that and wins are a team stat, you know that, so what ya got next? Yep. As a result, I think the Ratface comparison doesn’t work at all. I do think he compares very favorably though to Deshaun Watson, very similar accomplishments in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 1 hour ago, Don Otreply said: Iirc, Dallas with Dak was 2-3 before he got injured..., individual stats no matter how good mean nothing when the team you’re on has a losing record, that on top of missing the playoffs altogether the previous season says negative trend. Dak if nothing else has been shown to fall short repeatedly. Frankly as I stated in a previous post, I hope Jurra locks up a ton of cap annually for the next decade in Daks contract, that would be sweet, as it will restrict them from having a really good team. 2-3? Sure. But they lost one of those games because they couldn't cover a freakin' onside kick and ended up losing in the most embarrassing of fashions. None of that loss had to do with Prescott, who had a huge game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsShredder83 Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 Just now, dave mcbride said: If he hadn't gotten injured, I firmly believe Dallas would have won the NFC East this year. I dont disagree but thats an extremely low bar to clear lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 1 minute ago, BillsShredder83 said: I dont disagree but thats an extremely low bar to clear lol No, I know, but anything can happen in the playoffs, and Dallas's offense with him in there was extremely explosive. I'd far prefer to play Wash/NYG/Philly than a Dak-led Dallas in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 (edited) I wonder if a 3 way trade happens: Wilson to Chicago for 3 1sts Dak to Seattle for 2 1sts Dallas gets 2 firsts for Dak Seattle gets Dak and a first for Wilson Chicago gets Wilson Then, Dallas turns to their friends across the state and send 4 1sts (2 of theirs, plus the 2 they got for Dak) to Houston for Watson. Houston ends up with 4 1st round picks from a variety of teams for Watson. Edited March 5, 2021 by TheFunPolice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 3 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said: I wonder if a 3 way trade happens: Wilson to Chicago for 3 1sts Dak to Seattle for 2 1sts Dallas gets 2 firsts for Dak Seattle gets Dak and a first for Wilson Chicago gets Wilson Then, Dallas turns to their friends across the state and send 4 1sts (2 of theirs, plus the 2 they got for Dak) to Houston for Watson. Cowboys would be better served by trading Dak and a first for Wilson. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 (edited) I want Mahomes money too. But I'd settle for vet minimum. When you start at $500 million over 10 years, the GM really thinks they won when they land on vet minimum. Its all about how you negotiate. Edited March 5, 2021 by Jauronimo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChans Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 1 hour ago, Don Otreply said: I never said he was the problem per say, you are adding on from your own narrative it would appear, Dak is talented, but he and his team fall short frequently, that and wins are a team stat, you know that, so what ya got next? IMO the Dallas Cowboys are a prime example of how much a baseline of decent coaching are required in the NFL. I thought McCarthy was going to right the ship a bit but Dak got hurt. And McCarthy isn’t even a really good coach, but that’s how just how horrific Garrett was in 2019. He could teach a Master Class on getting the least possible out of your players. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 44 minutes ago, FireChans said: IMO the Dallas Cowboys are a prime example of how much a baseline of decent coaching are required in the NFL. I thought McCarthy was going to right the ship a bit but Dak got hurt. And McCarthy isn’t even a really good coach, but that’s how just how horrific Garrett was in 2019. He could teach a Master Class on getting the least possible out of your players. Him and Ralph Kruger both! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSarcasm Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 1 hour ago, Rico said: Cowboys would be better served by trading Dak and a first for Wilson. So you want them to trade a high first and young QB with a large contract for an older QB with a large contract... Not seeing the benefit. Is Wilson really that much better than Dak, nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 1 hour ago, dave mcbride said: If he hadn't gotten injured, I firmly believe Dallas would have won the NFC East this year. If I hadn't gotten injured, I might have been able to win the NFC East this year.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 Just now, MrSarcasm said: So you want them to trade a high first and young QB with a large contract for an older QB with a large contract... Not seeing the benefit. Is Wilson really that much better than Dak, nope. Wilson is better than Watson though, and you save a 1st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSarcasm Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 Just now, Rico said: Wilson is better than Watson though, and you save a 1st. That is closer but still problematic. I think Seattle would have to throw in a 2nd or 1st. Age is everything in football. A 26 yearold QB vs a 32 years old is a big deal. Besides I personally think Watson is just as good as Wilson, if anything they are 1a and 1b Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 Dak is not worth the second largest QB contract. He is worth a big QB contract, at least moderately more than Wentz got or close to what Wilson got. But he should not be approaching the 20% of the cap type deal Mahomes is getting that will put him close to 50 million aav. No way in hell is Dak that type of QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts