Jump to content

TheStarStillShines

Veteran Members
  • Content Count

    9,087
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

51 Starter

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yay, the team recycling ex-coaches once again!
  2. The NFL should give Aaron Donald the Defensive Player of the Year already. No one is close. Some people may say that T.J. Watt should consideration, but he plays a less demanding position than Donald, who is often double or triple teamed. He's the best defensive player of his generation (better than J.J. Watt IMO) and already a top-10 lineman of all-time.
  3. Agreed. When we look at all the dead cap space on the team, how some of the FA signings on defence have worked out (or not worked out) this year, and how so many players have underperformed plus injuries, maybe the issues go beyond Dak's contract. Every team has experienced injuries, but some are better equipped to handle them. The Chiefs, for instance, have lost 3 starting OL for the year but they continue to chug along.
  4. I don't think having a top-16 offence (17th if using just the last 3 weeks) means a whole lot when the gap between KC (#1) and the Boys is 150 yards per game. Even between 10th-place Indianapolis, the gap is 40 yards per game. That's a big margin to overcome. At the end of the day, the team needs to put points on the board, which they haven't been doing very well. This isn't all QB play, as people have rightfully noted. The team has a lot of issues across the board. The best teams, though, overcome mistakes. KC, for instance, has the 2nd-most drops in the NFL, but they still lead the league in
  5. Indeed. Maybe some team will be desperate to take the 3rd-best QB, whether that is Zach Wilson, Trey Lance, Kyle Trask, Mac Jones, or someone who rockets up the charts during the off-season workouts. There could be a lot of QBs available in this year's draft, assuming most of them declare. One issue working against the Boys is that not many teams have multiple first-round picks in this year's draft. Two that do are likely picking first and second (the Jets and Jaguars, respectively) while a third (Miami) has its QB of the present and future. The second issue is not many team immediately
  6. If the goal is to stay mediocre, then continue to get QBs of Dalton's caliber. The likelihood of winning the SB is pretty low, though, if history tells us anything. Another way to look at things is if the team didn't have over $23M in dead cap space, maybe the defence would have been better this year. The team has a projected $28.5M in cap space for next year, but they'll free up more space by restructuring the contracts of Cooper ($20M base salary for next year), Lawrence ($17M base salary), and likely Zeke (wouldn't be surprised if he's asked to take a pay cut). Additional saving
  7. Until the front office changes, the team's fortunes likely won't change a whole lot whether they have a $35M-$40M quarterback or a $5M QB and a bunch of defenders making $10M (which in today's NFL amounts to a slightly above-average player). The team could be actually a lot worse in the latter situation, especially if the QB is another Chad Hutchinson or Quincy Carter. Heck, the team lucked into Prescott and before him Tony Romo (thinking about it the two are roughly similar). .
  8. Fair enough. I'm all for dealing Dak if the Boys can draft Lawrence or Fields. I'm also of the opinion that replacing Dak won't be as easy as some people think should the Boys not have a top-2 or -3 pick. A team can only go so far with the Andy Daltons of the world.
  9. Here is an example of you using W-L record as an indictment of Dak's ability. This is just one example. BTW, I'm not saying this is your only argument.
  10. I don't think anyone is winning or losing this debate. We're having a discussion. And yeah, you've used the won-loss record as a reason why the team should move from Dak and then you said that a team's record is not a QB stat. So what is it? You can't throw out stats when they suit your argument. You have to be consistent. I used five previous drafts, excluding 2020. I think we all agreed that it's too early to draw any conclusions from this year's draft class, but three of them are looking really good. Finally, as I stated above, I'm not adverse to dealing Dak. And if you read more
  11. I'm actually not against the idea of trading Dak if the team: a) can get a sizeable return (I don't think 2 first-round picks is likely but maybe a 1st and a 3rd); and b) are in a position to draft either Lawrence or Fields (doesn't look likely right now). My point is that narrowly focusing on Dak's contract ignores much larger issues. There's no guarantee that your position would work for the Boys. The team can upgrade the roster around Dak being paid $37M, but it would take smart cap management (not something the Joneses are always successful at doing). And I wouldn't say it's easier to
  12. How the heck do you say, "wins aren't a QB stat", yet still use it when discussing Dak? You even used won-loss record to justify Sam Darnold "working out" for the Jets (BTW, he was actually 7-6 last year and has a career 11-23 record). Talk about hypocritical.
  13. Martin's contract is fine. Smith's contract, and the subsequent restructures, is problematic given his poor health. Cooper and Lawrence are paid like top-5 guys at their position, but they haven't delivered. Can you be any more patronizing? And yes, today's NFL is more pass happy. The comment about Leinart had nothing to do with how the NFL game has evolved. It was a comment that even highly-regarded QBs can become busts. You completely misread the comment and offered an observation that even the most casual football fan would know. Congratulations for being bloody patronizing and stan
  14. Using the statistic you like to quote so often - Prescott was 22-10 in his first two years. Murray is just 11-16-1. Dak had better numbers in terms of YPC, YPA, TDs, fewer INTs, higher QBR and rating over those two years. Dak did, however, have a down sophomore year while Murray has gotten better (needs to cut down on the turnovers, though). But the point isn't about comparing QBs or when to take a QB since QBs are extremely volatile no matter when they are selected (e.g., Plan, Slam, myself, and others were really high on Matt Leinart and boy do we look wrong). My point and others has lo
  15. Slam just said pick a QB in the draft. He didn't say which round. Given this, Jacksonville has selected a QB in the last 3 consecutive drafts and 5 out of 7. Chicago has just taken Trubinsky in the past 7 years, but the Bears offer a case study on what happens in thinking you can nab a great QB in the first round - or #2 overall. Arizona hasn't drafted a great QB since Neil Lomax in 1981, and Lomax was more good than great. That's almost 40 years ago! If someone wants to argue Jake Plummer was great, well, ok, but that was 1997. They've whiffed on Rosen and Leinart. And it's too ear
×
×
  • Create New...