Dak wants deal right behind Mahomes..my question is based on what??

[C.Biscuit97]

22 hours ago, Rico said:

I agree on the age difference, only Wilson has won big in this league and Watson hasn’t. I think Watson and Prescott are very similar if you look at bottom-line results. Cowboys are probably best served  in the end by paying Zac and not giving away any other assets.

I think Wilson is better but you did realize Wilson won biggest when Seattle had the best defense in the NFL right? Again, it’s almost like football is a team game or something? 

21 hours ago, Don Otreply said:

That’s cute, but he is part of the team that lost, so..  no excuses he lost just like every other member of the team, feel free to go into your spin cycle... 😁

So when the Rams beat the Chiefs 54-51, Pat Mahomes is a loser correct? Like he should have scored more right?  Is Allen a “loser” because the Cardinals completed a Hail Mary pass? 
 

people actually think like this? 🤔

[C.Biscuit97]

On 3/5/2021 at 1:04 PM, 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.

McCarthy sucks. His whole career is Aaron Rodgers. 

[Rico]

12 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

I think Wilson is better but you did realize Wilson won biggest when Seattle had the best defense in the NFL right? Again, it’s almost like football is a team game or something? 

So when the Rams beat the Chiefs 54-51, Pat Mahomes is a loser correct? Like he should have scored more right?  Is Allen a “loser” because the Cardinals completed a Hail Mary pass? 
 

people actually think like this? 🤔

Playing what-if is always fun. If they don’t draft Wilson and Tarveras Jackson is still their QB, they probably don’t win a SB. If 2021 Prescott or Watson is the Seahawks QB in 2013, they might have still won a SB.

 

We do know what actually happened though. Seahawks won that SB, and Wilson played a major part. Maybe not THE major part, but a major part nonetheless. We also know that neither Prescott nor Watson have experienced that kind of success yet. If and when they do, I will give them the props they deserve.

[Don Otreply]

23 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

I think Wilson is better but you did realize Wilson won biggest when Seattle had the best defense in the NFL right? Again, it’s almost like football is a team game or something? 

So when the Rams beat the Chiefs 54-51, Pat Mahomes is a loser correct? Like he should have scored more right?  Is Allen a “loser” because the Cardinals completed a Hail Mary pass? 
 

people actually think like this? 🤔

Every member of a team that loses a game is indeed a loser for that game regardless of individual performance, ya lost the game you’re the loser, really very simple, ya just didn’t get a silver star for your forehead that day, folk need to get over this need that everyone is a winner even when they lose. 

[Doc Brown]

On 3/4/2021 at 2:40 PM, Big Turk said:

This dude is dreaming if he thinks he is deserving of that type of money and the Cowboys are flat out dumb if they even are thinking about paying it.

 

Based on what does Dak think he is even in the same league as Mahomes?

 

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-cowboys-prescott-seeking-deal-205754257.html

 

On 3/4/2021 at 2:55 PM, RichRiderBills said:

Dak cant put the team on shoulders. I would move on. He is a stat guy. Cowboys made him fair offers. 

 

On 3/4/2021 at 3:13 PM, Gene1973 said:

No wonder why the Cowboys could not make a deal with Dak, he's delusional...

 

On 3/4/2021 at 5:44 PM, Buffalo Barbarian said:

Lol, he better start looking for a new team

 

On 3/4/2021 at 7:14 PM, Mr. WEO said:

No team was going to pay him 40 million per...before the amputation.

 

He's delusional.

Jerry's people leaking this certainly seemed to turn the general public against Dak.  You wonder how accurate the reports are.

[Mr. WEO]

4 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

 

 

 

 

Jerry's people leaking this certainly seemed to turn the general public against Dak.  You wonder how accurate the reports are.

 

The general public doesn't write QB's checks.  

 

 

[FireChans]

36 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

McCarthy sucks. His whole career is Aaron Rodgers. 

I think Garrett is still worse lol

15 minutes ago, Don Otreply said:

Every member of a team that loses a game is indeed a loser for that game regardless of individual performance, ya lost the game you’re the loser, really very simple, ya just didn’t get a silver star for your forehead that day, folk need to get over this need that everyone is a winner even when they lose. 

This is a horrible post.

[Doc Brown]

 

32 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

The general public doesn't write QB's checks.  

We do indirectly.  This deal is obviously being negotiated through the public with these various leaks.

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, Rico said:

I never said it was 100% fair. It's not always fair.

 

But there are 3 indisputable facts:

1. Nothing is more important in the NFL than winning the Super Bowl.

2. You can't win a Super Bowl if you can't win in the playoffs.

3. It's impossible to win a Super Bowl if you do not make the playoffs.

 

There is also a 4th 'fact' which has been almost always true with the exception of a few outliers:

4. The QB is very important and a major factor for any team that has won a Super Bowl.

 

With that have been said,

I choose to ultimately judge QBs based on look test and bottom-line results in the biggest of games. I find that to be more valid than look test accompanied by the sometimes frantic spinning and twisting of stats to justify what is believed to be seen.

YMMV.

 

 

So by your logic every Quarterback who doesn't win a Superbowl is worthless. It is a nonsensical way of thinking. The world is far more nuanced than that.

[Don Otreply]

51 minutes ago, FireChans said:

I think Garrett is still worse lol

This is a horrible post.

But true none the less, if you lose the game you are the loser, regardless of any individual performance by a member of the losing team. What kind of sissy mind set do some folk employ to deflect that the team that lost are the losers, from the water boy to the owner ya lost, that makes you the loser. 

[Rico]

26 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

So by your logic every Quarterback who doesn't win a Superbowl is worthless. It is a nonsensical way of thinking. The world is far more nuanced than that.

Biggest of games =

1. Super Bowl

2. Playoff Games

 

Eyeball test is still important. Remember though, this is the NFL, where (as Bill Belichick once said), stats are for losers.

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, Rico said:

Biggest of games =

1. Super Bowl

2. Playoff Games

 

Eyeball test is still important. Remember though, this is the NFL, where (as Bill Belichick once said), stats are for losers.

 

You said yourself you can't get to the Superbowl if you are not in the playoffs. You have to win regular season games. Dak has played 4 full seasons and won 2 division titles. That means he is giving his team a shot every other year. 

[Rico]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

You said yourself you can't get to the Superbowl if you are not in the playoffs. You have to win regular season games. Dak has played 4 full seasons and won 2 division titles. That means he is giving his team a shot every other year. 

No doubt it is better to be 1-2 in the playoffs than never get there at all. Good thing is he's still very young and has the potential to exceed that record... we will see.

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, Rico said:

No doubt it is better to be 1-2 in the playoffs than never get there at all. Good thing is he's still very young and has the potential to exceed that record... we will see.

 

And that is the point. There are 3 or 4 special guys. But if you can't have a special guy you are better with Dak than a lot of other guys. At this stage I'd take him in a heartbeat over the guys who went 1&2 in his draft for example.

[Rico]

10 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And that is the point. There are 3 or 4 special guys. But if you can't have a special guy you are better with Dak than a lot of other guys. At this stage I'd take him in a heartbeat over the guys who went 1&2 in his draft for example.

Not really slamming him, not really slamming Watson (maybe a little in other threads just for goofs cause of his current status with the Texans). Right now though, I would take Wilson over either of them if I wanted to win now. Wilson has been a big-game winner and passes the eyeball test. The other 2 may look good, but 1-2 doesn't cut it for me if I can have a proven Wilson. Just for comparison's sake, Big Ben has been a big-game winner, but he doesn't pass the eyeball test now, not at all.

Edited March 6, 2021 by Rico

[C.Biscuit97]

1 hour ago, Don Otreply said:

Every member of a team that loses a game is indeed a loser for that game regardless of individual performance, ya lost the game you’re the loser, really very simple, ya just didn’t get a silver star for your forehead that day, folk need to get over this need that everyone is a winner even when they lose. 

Be honest. You were the last guy to play on the team but celebrated like you were the star when you won. 😉

Just now, Rico said:

Not really slamming him, not really slamming Watson (maybe a little in other threads just for goofs cause of his current status with the Texans). Right now though, I would take Wilson over either of them if I wanted to win now. Wilson has been a big-game winner and passes the eye test. The other 2 may look good, but 1-2 doesn't cut it for me if I can have a proven Wilson. Just for comparison's sake, Big Ben has been a big-game winner, but he doesn't pass the eye test now, not at all.

Would take Watson with number 1 defense like Wilson had early in his career?  I think Wilson and Watson are top 5 qbs with Dak top 10. But there are so many factors that go into winning in the nfl. I can’t believe some fans don’t understand this. 

[Mr. WEO]

57 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

 

We do indirectly.  This deal is obviously being negotiated through the public with these various leaks.

 

We don't at all.  We may pay for tickets, buy merchandise, pay for TV viewing....but we have no say in who gets what.   Love or hate Dak/Jones,  there's no effect.

[C.Biscuit97]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

We don't at all.  We may pay for tickets, buy merchandise, pay for TV viewing....but we have no say in who gets what.   Love or hate Dak/Jones,  there's no effect.

Strongly disagree. My emails to the team threatening not to buy tickets has a major impact. 
 

😏

[Rico]

12 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Be honest. You were the last guy to play on the team but celebrated like you were the star when you won. 😉

Would take Watson with number 1 defense like Wilson had early in his career?  I think Wilson and Watson are top 5 qbs with Dak top 10. But there are so many factors that go into winning in the nfl. I can’t believe some fans don’t understand this. 

And that's why you can't really use stats when evaluating QBs. For instance, take a look at the numbers from one of Dan Marino's playoff losses with Miami to the Bills during the SB years. If you did not see those games, you would think he played pretty well. Only he looked like a deer in headlights until the game was out of hand, then put up all his yards/points in garbage time. W-L record isn't perfect, but it is absolute. You either got it done, or you did not.

Edited March 6, 2021 by Rico

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, Rico said:

Not really slamming him, not really slamming Watson (maybe a little in other threads just for goofs cause of his current status with the Texans). Right now though, I would take Wilson over either of them if I wanted to win now. Wilson has been a big-game winner and passes the eyeball test. The other 2 may look good, but 1-2 doesn't cut it for me if I can have a proven Wilson. Just for comparison's sake, Big Ben has been a big-game winner, but he doesn't pass the eyeball test now, not at all.

 

I can make an argument for Watson over Wilson. The way Wilson has faded down the stretch the last two seasons after being presumptive MVP through 8 weeks does concern me. But those two are close enough to me that I am not fighting strongly either way. And I'd 100% take Wilson over Prescott. That is a different altogether tier to me. There are 6 guys I think are special and I have Watson and Wilson in that, Dak is in the best of the rest conversation with the Tannehills and the Staffords and Jacksons.

[FireChans]

50 minutes ago, Don Otreply said:

But true none the less, if you lose the game you are the loser, regardless of any individual performance by a member of the losing team. What kind of sissy mind set do some folk employ to deflect that the team that lost are the losers, from the water boy to the owner ya lost, that makes you the loser. 

What’s worse is your pretension that it’s profound.

[Doc Brown]

30 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

We don't at all.  We may pay for tickets, buy merchandise, pay for TV viewing....but we have no say in who gets what.   Love or hate Dak/Jones,  there's no effect.

But besides that....

[HOUSE]

I bid 14m per season

[Mr. WEO]

14 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

But besides that....

where in that list did you find “we decide which players make what salary”?

[Don Otreply]

2 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Be honest. You were the last guy to play on the team but celebrated like you were the star when you won. 😉

Would take Watson with number 1 defense like Wilson had early in his career?  I think Wilson and Watson are top 5 qbs with Dak top 10. But there are so many factors that go into winning in the nfl. I can’t believe some fans don’t understand this. 

It works in either direction 😁👍

2 hours ago, FireChans said:

What’s worse is your pretension that it’s profound.

Wow, “profound” and “pretension”  that’s rather pretentiously profound, 😂 

[dave mcbride]

On 3/5/2021 at 7:23 PM, Rico said:

Well, I'm a Josh Allen homer and I never liked Sanchez, so I would have to say no.

 

Nevertheless, neither Dak at 1-2 nor Deshaun at 1-2 have experienced as much bottom-line success in the playoffs as either of them TO DATE. Do they have the potential to do better? Sure. Have they shown it yet? No.

This is where you lose me: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201701150dal.htm.  GB won that game because of a ridiculous catch late in the game. Prescott was phenomenal in that game and did what he had to do to. This is one of those examples is where qb won-loss records loses its shine; look at what actually happened before opining. It’s like Pat Mahomes 5-7 “won-loss” record in his final year in college: his team lost two games in which his offense put up 55 points and 3 other games where they put up 44, 38, and 37 points. That team record has literally nothing to do with the qb.

Edited March 7, 2021 by dave mcbride

[Rico]

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

This is where you lose me: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201701150dal.htm.  GB won that game because of a ridiculous catch late in the game. Prescott was phenomenal in that game and did what he had to do to. This is one of those examples is where qb won-loss records loses its shine; look at what actually happened before opining. It’s like Pat Mahomes 5-7 “won-loss” record in his final year in college: his team lost two games in which his offense put up 55 points and 3 other games where they put up 44, 38, and 37 points. That team record has literally nothing to do with the qb.

There are a lot of numbers next to Dak’s name in that link, mostly good. Also 1 interception and 2 sacks. Were any of those 3 plays critical mistakes on his part that made a big difference in a close game? Can’t tell by looking at that link, not without doing a deeper dive, preferably by watching the game. What I do know by looking at that link is that he was the QB and his team did not win the game. L.

[Norcalbillsfan]

I think its the same topic as Allen. Is Dak mahomes? No. Is josh mahomes? Close but not yet. Getting close to mahomes money isn't graded by if your on mahomes level anymore. The nfl is a passing league, you don't win without an elite passer. Contracts aren't based on if your as good as mahomes, its "where would you be without me" Can the cowboys find another Dak in FA? No. Can you get Dak production in the draft if your not top 5 pick? Rarely. Imagine if you don't pay Allen the contract he wants and he walks. Where do you even start? Hope for that once in a decade watson trade? Dak will get paid by someone and so will josh.

[Doc Brown]

7 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

where in that list did you find “we decide which players make what salary”?

Next to the definition of “indirectly”

[Chicken Boo]

They should trade him for Russ.

On 3/4/2021 at 2:54 PM, GunnerBill said:

The Cowboys could have had him at $32m per two years ago and blew it. He isn't worth the 2nd highest contract but he is a top 10 Quarterback and he has a lot of leverage because the Cowboys have ballsed this up. 

 

Same thing happened with Cousins in Washington.

[Mike in Horseheads]

Dak did make it to Pro Bowls and thats why Tyrod was great. I read it here.

[JaCrispy]

7 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

Dak did make it to Pro Bowls and thats why Tyrod was great. I read it here.

Go with God, Crispy...😎🍻

[Nihilarian]

Some guys play and put up big stats and yet don't win in big games...it isn't in their DNA to have that determination to win a game no matter what. Dak doesn't look like he has that IMO. 

 

With that offense he has been in with Zek, Cooper, Beasley and one of the very best offensive lines in the league. Prescott, Elliott, Cooper all-pros.

 

2014 13-3 and lost in the divisional round. 2018 10-6 beat the Seahawks in a WC round and lost to the Rams in divisional round. One playoff win in five years and the Cowboys used to have a top defense too. 

 

He isn't worth Mahomes money. I'd trade him for Wilson or better yet trade Dak away and move up in the draft for a QB. 

[GunnerBill]

4 hours ago, Chicken Boo said:

They should trade him for Russ.

 

Same thing happened with Cousins in Washington.

 

Exactly. I think Dak is better than Kirk but even if you just take the view he is a younger Kirk Cousins then since Kirk left Washington the Football Team are 24-40 with 4 consecutive losing seasons. If we start from the premise that in order to win you have to make the playoffs you are better with Quarterbacks who consistently lead teams that make them than those who don't. Here are Washington four years later and with no plan at QB.

55 minutes ago, Nihilarian said:

Some guys play and put up big stats and yet don't win in big games...it isn't in their DNA to have that determination to win a game no matter what. Dak doesn't look like he has that IMO. 

 

With that offense he has been in with Zek, Cooper, Beasley and one of the very best offensive lines in the league. Prescott, Elliott, Cooper all-pros.

 

2014 13-3 and lost in the divisional round. 2018 10-6 beat the Seahawks in a WC round and lost to the Rams in divisional round. One playoff win in five years and the Cowboys used to have a top defense too. 

 

He isn't worth Mahomes money. I'd trade him for Wilson or better yet trade Dak away and move up in the draft for a QB. 

 

Four seasons. He was 2-3 in his 5th playing with a defense that at the time was on pace to be historically bad and nick some of Rob Ryan's Saints records. If Dak had stayed healthy and played with the Dallas D that stabilised to a sort of just below average one down the stretch the Cowboys would have won that awful division I am all but certain. But regardless I think we should write last year off. Four seasons he has won two divisions and a playoff game. That is not at all bad for a first four years in the league. 

 

He doesn't deserve Mahomes money, agreed. But the Cowboys have ballsed it up and he has all the leverage.

[Thurman#1]

13 hours ago, Rico said:

And that's why you can't really use stats when evaluating QBs. For instance, take a look at the numbers from one of Dan Marino's playoff losses with Miami to the Bills during the SB years. If you did not see those games, you would think he played pretty well. Only he looked like a deer in headlights until the game was out of hand, then put up all his yards/points in garbage time. W-L record isn't perfect, but it is absolute. You either got it done, or you did not.

 

 

It is indeed absolute.

 

But wins are absolutely NOT a QB stat.

 

They are a team stat. They tell you how well the team played.

 

QB effectiveness can simply not be judged based on whether the field goal kicker misses a 30 yard kick or whether an LB on his team makes a brilliant INT and runs it back for a pick six. That's the kind of thing that has huge impact on wins and losses. And says absolutely nothing about how good your QB is.

 

And as for Marino's playoff losses to the Bills, which one had stats that would make you think he played pretty well?

 

The loss in 1990? 23 for 49, 46.94% completions, 323 yards, 3 TDs, 2 INTs, passer rating of 72.1

The loss in 1992? 22 for 45, 48.89% completions, 268 yards, 1 TD, 2 INTs, passer rating of 56.5

 

Those were the only two times during the Bills Super Bowl years that they played Miami in the playoffs. Yeah, QB stats were quite a bit lower in those days, but even by those standards, neither of those Marino games looks any better in the stats than he actually played.

 

Marino played the Bills in the playoffs two more times. And had one solidly decent statistical game out of all four.

 

The loss in 1995? 33 for 64, 51.56% completions, 422 yards, 2 TDs, 3 INTs, passer rating of 63.4

The win in 1998? 23 for 34, 67.65% completions, 235 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT, passer rating of 84.8

 

 

Edited March 7, 2021 by Thurman#1

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

It is indeed absolute.

 

And life is not absolute. There is nuance all around us. Football is no different.

[Thurman#1]

17 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And life is not absolute. There is nuance all around us. Football is no different.

 

 

Win - loss record is not absolute as far as telling how successful a football team is?

 

I guess I stand corrected.

 

I'm with you in nuance being all around us.

 

I'd argue there are some absolutes too. Absolute zero, for instance. Pi. Granted, these can be disproven with one experiment according to scientific method principles, but they are effectively absolutes. There are more.

 

And while it's not an absolute scientific fact that, for example, Tom Brady is better than JP Losman, it'd be difficult to find anyone who thinks otherwise.

Edited March 7, 2021 by Thurman#1

[GunnerBill]

53 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Win - loss record is not absolute as far as telling how successful a football team is?

 

I guess I stand corrected.

 

I'm with you in nuance being all around us.

 

I'd argue there are some absolutes too. Absolute zero, for instance. Pi. Granted, these can be disproven with one experiment according to scientific method principles, but they are effectively absolutes. There are more.

 

And while it's not an absolute scientific fact that, for example, Tom Brady is better than JP Losman, it'd be difficult to find anyone who thinks otherwise.

 

No it is. I was agreeing with you. W-L is absolute. Absolutes are not generally great ways of evaluating things in life or football.

[Rico]

3 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

It is indeed absolute.

 

But wins are absolutely NOT a QB stat.

 

They are a team stat. They tell you how well the team played.

 

QB effectiveness can simply not be judged based on whether the field goal kicker misses a 30 yard kick or whether an LB on his team makes a brilliant INT and runs it back for a pick six. That's the kind of thing that has huge impact on wins and losses. And says absolutely nothing about how good your QB is.

 

And as for Marino's playoff losses to the Bills, which one had stats that would make you think he played pretty well?

 

The loss in 1990? 23 for 49, 46.94% completions, 323 yards, 3 TDs, 2 INTs, passer rating of 72.1

The loss in 1992? 22 for 45, 48.89% completions, 268 yards, 1 TD, 2 INTs, passer rating of 56.5

 

Those were the only two times during the Bills Super Bowl years that they played Miami in the playoffs. Yeah, QB stats were quite a bit lower in those days, but even by those standards, neither of those Marino games looks any better in the stats than he actually played.

 

Marino played the Bills in the playoffs two more times. And had one solidly decent statistical game out of all four.

 

The loss in 1995? 33 for 64, 51.56% completions, 422 yards, 2 TDs, 3 INTs, passer rating of 63.4

The win in 1998? 23 for 34, 67.65% completions, 235 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT, passer rating of 84.8

 

 

Marino’s numbers looked dramatically worse going into the 4th quarter of those losses. How much worse? I would have to dig in deeper, which I do not care to do because stats are for losers.
 

As for you or anyone else who dismisses W-L records for a QB, we can just agree to disagree, whatever works for you.

Edited March 7, 2021 by Rico

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, Rico said:

 

As for you or anyone else who dismisses W-L records for a QB, we can just agree to disagree, whatever works for you.

 

It isn't dismissing them. They absolutely matter. But they are not everything. They are too blunt of a measure.