Jump to content

Dak Thread....still debating, beating a dead horse


WizardHawk

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Matts4313 said:

"Lets compare Romos years 9-13 to Daks years 1-4"

Do you understand how stupid the arguments you make are? 

Dak could be a franchise QB if he is surrounded by elite talent.  But you can’t surround him with elite talent if he’s making $35M a year.  We’ve seen Dak without Coop and the result was not good.  We’ve seen him with an average OL and the result was not good.  He wants to be paid like Russell Wilson but Wilson by himself makes up for the deficits around him.   That’s not Dak.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, The_Slamman said:

Dak could be a franchise QB if he is surrounded by elite talent.  But you can’t surround him with elite talent if he’s making $35M a year.  We’ve seen Dak without Coop and the result was not good.  We’ve seen him with an average OL and the result was not good.  He wants to be paid like Russell Wilson but Wilson by himself makes up for the deficits around him.   That’s not Dak.  

Bad argument is bad. Weve seen Dak be amazing most his career. Weve also seen him when his pressure rate was 9.72, the worst in the NFL, and he struggled. 

Get your facts right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

Bad argument is bad. Weve seen Dak be amazing most his career. Weve also seen him when his pressure rate was 9.72, the worst in the NFL, and he struggled. 

Get your facts right.

Get yours, show me when this year or years past Wilson has had the level of talent Dak has worked with.

I've come around to Dak being a franchise guy. I am even convinced the offense can run through him now. But I am still not willing to say he is a corner stone player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The_Slamman said:

Dak could be a franchise QB if he is surrounded by elite talent.  But you can’t surround him with elite talent if he’s making $35M a year.  We’ve seen Dak without Coop and the result was not good.  We’ve seen him with an average OL and the result was not good.  He wants to be paid like Russell Wilson but Wilson by himself makes up for the deficits around him.   That’s not Dak.  

Exactly. If you want Russell Wilson money, then you better be prepared to give up some talent.

Too many times we have heard, look he just needed someone like Amari, look at how well he is playing since Amari came over. Wilson doesnt have Amari or near the oline that we have.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DaBoys said:

Russell Wilson is better than Dak imo. He is faster and his baseball player arm is off the charts. Pretty good decision maker to. Never has a good OL or WRs

I am in the camp that thinks Russell is the top QB in the NFL.  His deep ball is absolutely unreal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, acowboys62 said:

I am in the camp that thinks Russell is the top QB in the NFL.  His deep ball is absolutely unreal. 

I would say he is Top 2, hard to unseat Mahomes, but Wilson definitely makes his team better, with lesser pieces around him.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Dak is a good QB who showed flashes of greatness throughout his career. He seemed to put it together last year and played really well for most of the season. There's promise he's only going to get better with maturity (see Romo). 

2. The cap is going to grow tremendously over the next few years. Dak being paid as the top player in the NFL this year is going to look like peanuts in two or three years. Paying him market value now is not going to prohibit us from fielding a competitive team. It only prevents us from doing so if the front office decides to play cheap. 

3. Franchise QBs don't grow on trees. Joe Burrow and the rest of the guys from this class may look promising, but one or two or maybe none will end up panning out. You know what you have in Dak, he's led you to the playoffs twice. You pay the guy. 

Why is this so hard and a continuing argument for multiple pages? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, D82 said:

1. Dak is a good QB who showed flashes of greatness throughout his career. He seemed to put it together last year and played really well for most of the season. There's promise he's only going to get better with maturity (see Romo). 

2. The cap is going to grow tremendously over the next few years. Dak being paid as the top player in the NFL this year is going to look like peanuts in two or three years. Paying him market value now is not going to prohibit us from fielding a competitive team. It only prevents us from doing so if the front office decides to play cheap. 

3. Franchise QBs don't grow on trees. Joe Burrow and the rest of the guys from this class may look promising, but one or two or maybe none will end up panning out. You know what you have in Dak, he's led you to the playoffs twice. You pay the guy

Why is this so hard and a continuing argument for multiple pages? 

This is such a ridiculous, tired statement

What if Dak was asking for 50 million per year?  - Do you "Pay The Guy"?

What about 45 million per year? - Do you "Pay The Guy?

40 Million?

He's showed "Flashes" of Brilliance..... How about he makes top dollar when we get more than just Flashes?....

"The caps going up in a few years"? - You think so? You sure there is going to be an NFL season this year? You sure Stadiums are going to be full of people? You think revenues are going to stay the same in a recession?

"The Caps going up in a few years" - And Dak only wants to sign for 4 years, So you overpay him this and next season, then get maybe 2 years of slight underpay, then you have to do this all over again... So his deal might look like "peanuts" for 1 season, maybe 1...

Reports given that the Cowboys have offered more than Goff, More than Wentz and slightly under Wilson and that is STILL not good enough doesn't fit the narrative that the Cowboys are screwing Dak. More like Dak is extorting the Cowboys. I would love to see them call his bluff and see if he can make that national endorsement money while playing for Jacksonville. Let them give him 35/36/37/40 and let him do the math and see if he comes out ahead in the end

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, D82 said:

1. Dak is a good QB who showed flashes of greatness throughout his career. He seemed to put it together last year and played really well for most of the season. There's promise he's only going to get better with maturity (see Romo). 

2. The cap is going to grow tremendously over the next few years. Dak being paid as the top player in the NFL this year is going to look like peanuts in two or three years. Paying him market value now is not going to prohibit us from fielding a competitive team. It only prevents us from doing so if the front office decides to play cheap. 

3. Franchise QBs don't grow on trees. Joe Burrow and the rest of the guys from this class may look promising, but one or two or maybe none will end up panning out. You know what you have in Dak, he's led you to the playoffs twice. You pay the guy. 

Why is this so hard and a continuing argument for multiple pages? 

I will agree that Dak showed improvement last year as a passer, but also hard to compare to Romo. Romo had significantly better arm talent than Dak and I dont think that is something you can just teach. Romo improved as he learned to make better decisions. 

Your point regarding the cap to me doesnt make sense. The same posters on here that say Daks deal will look great in a few years, didnt like the Zeke or Tank deal. So wouldnt the theory for them hold true as well?

Agree with your franchise comment. I would pay Dak but I wouldnt pay him more than Wilson. Wilson does more with less than Dak. When Dak had less and played poorly, the comment was he needs a better line and more playmakers. If youre asking for $35 million+ you better be able to do more with less. Something Dak hasnt shown he can do consistently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, CAPJ said:

I will agree that Dak showed improvement last year as a passer, but also hard to compare to Romo. Romo had significantly better arm talent than Dak and I dont think that is something you can just teach. Romo improved as he learned to make better decisions. 

Your point regarding the cap to me doesnt make sense. The same posters on here that say Daks deal will look great in a few years, didnt like the Zeke or Tank deal. So wouldnt the theory for them hold true as well?

Agree with your franchise comment. I would pay Dak but I wouldnt pay him more than Wilson. Wilson does more with less than Dak. When Dak had less and played poorly, the comment was he needs a better line and more playmakers. If youre asking for $35 million+ you better be able to do more with less. Something Dak hasnt shown he can do consistently.

Dak's issues stemmed from footwork. Moore and Kitna did a lot to help him there. He debunked the whole "can't throw the deep ball" thing last year. My comparison to Romo was to point out that Tony had issues with turnovers and some poor decision making trying to be too much of a "gunslinger" during the early parts of his career. Those were something he fixed as he matured as a QB. 

Show me examples of those same people making those statements regarding Zeke and Tank's deal. I know some were against Zeke's deal, but mainly because he's a RB and the position has greatly devalued as the league has changed over the years. A franchise QB is and is always going to be valuable. My point regarding the cap is with it increasing every year, the team will have the funds to keep the players it develops and add a few pieces in FA. Whether they elect to do so is on them, but it won't be because of a lack of space. 

Wilson is another QB who has gotten better with age. He had a tremendous defense during the early years of his career and now not so much, but he's able to make do without that because his skills have finessed. I honestly don't care if he gets more than Wilson even if he may not be better right now - why? Because 1) he very well could end up being better and 2) that's just the way the market works. QBs in that higher tier are going to make more than the previous guys once their contracts are up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have already lost talented players this offseason. So the the narrative that Daks contract will never be prohibitive to the roster has already gone down the drain. 

Edited by DaBoys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, DaBoys said:

We have already lost talented players this offseason. So the the narrative that Daks contract will never be prohibitive to the roster has already gone down the drain. 

Dallas could have re-signed them though. So this isn’t because of Dak’s contract.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, WizardHawk said:

Dallas could have re-signed them though. So this isn’t because of Dak’s contract.

Yup. There are moves that could have been made to bring back Quinn and Jones in addition to the moves already made and still fit in Dak's contract. The front office opted not to make them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WizardHawk said:

Dallas could have re-signed them though. So this isn’t because of Dak’s contract.

But we would be up against the cap if we did, and that has a ton to do with Dak. They knew this. YOU know that. To say that letting Byron walk had nothing to do with Dak and Amari lacks foresight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...