Jump to content

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


WizardHawk

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

lol. Everything shows you need one. Ive pointed this out many many times. 

No no you don't. He'll the 49ers just proved it just recently that you don't need one to reach the SB. You only want to believe Dak is the answer Matts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Matts4313 said:

The purpose of controlling the line is to assist your QB and hurt the other teams QB. 

Controlling the line also helps the running game, which also assists the QB and hurts the other team's QB because it keeps him from getting on the field. You know, that silly thing called "clock management". That appears to be lost on whatever "analysts" provided your data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Calvert28 said:

No no you don't. He'll the 49ers just proved it just recently that you don't need one to reach the SB. You only want to believe Dak is the answer Matts. 

They consider Garrapolo a Franchise QB. Just like the Chiefs, who won, think that about Mahommes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, plan9misfit said:

Controlling the line also helps the running game, which also assists the QB and hurts the other team's QB because it keeps him from getting on the field. You know, that silly thing called "clock management". That appears to be lost on whatever "analysts" provided your data.

Back this up with any facts that are not your opinion. Ive been asking for 2 years and youve yet to do it. And please try to stick to this era of football (post rule changes).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Matts4313 said:

Back this up with any facts that are not your opinion. Ive been asking for 2 years and youve yet to do it. And please try to stick to this era of football (post rule changes).

I'll give you the same answer I always give: watch the games. If the running game and clock management didn't factor into success, then teams wouldn't have them on their rosters.

Edited by plan9misfit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Matts4313 said:

They consider Garrapolo a Franchise QB. Just like the Chiefs, who won, think that about Mahommes. 

Wow you will say anything to just stay afloat huh?

What they say doesn't matter, they also thought Colin Kaep was a franchise QB. Guess what? He wasn't. What matters to the argument is if he is a franchise QB. He hasn't shown it thus far. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Calvert28 said:

Wow you will say anything to just stay afloat huh?

What they say doesn't matter, they also thought Colin Kaep was a franchise QB. Guess what? He wasn't. What matters to the argument is if he is a franchise QB. He hasn't shown it thus far. 

He has started 1 full season and wasnt terrible. Mediocre? Sure. Very very average. But for his first season + working with his 3rd coach in like 4 years (i think)? Not terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Matts4313 said:

The purpose of controlling the line is to assist your QB and hurt the other teams QB. 

But if your QB doesnt have time to throw and is ineffective, was the root cause the poor oline or the poor QB play?

So if the purpose of controlling the line of scrimmage affects our team and the opponents team QB play, then the root cause/behaviour that you want is controlling the line of scrimmage. QB play is just the effect.

Therefore QB doesnt matter if you cant control the line of scrimmage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CAPJ said:

But if your QB doesnt have time to throw and is ineffective, was the root cause the poor oline or the poor QB play?

So if the purpose of controlling the line of scrimmage affects our team and the opponents team QB play, then the root cause/behaviour that you want is controlling the line of scrimmage. QB play is just the effect.

Therefore QB doesnt matter if you cant control the line of scrimmage.

There is a long list of QBs to make a conference champ/superbowl with a middle tier OL. Hell, QB play accounts for a solid portion of how good an OL is anyways (in terms of release and checks). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, CAPJ said:

But if your QB doesnt have time to throw and is ineffective, was the root cause the poor oline or the poor QB play?

So if the purpose of controlling the line of scrimmage affects our team and the opponents team QB play, then the root cause/behaviour that you want is controlling the line of scrimmage. QB play is just the effect.

Therefore QB doesnt matter if you cant control the line of scrimmage.

Unless your Patrick Mahomes. What he did in the super bowl with the 49ers dominating there o line was unbelievable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matts4313 said:

There is a long list of QBs to make a conference champ/superbowl with a middle tier OL. Hell, QB play accounts for a solid portion of how good an OL is anyways (in terms of release and checks). 

Yet you say Dak struggled in 2017 because of oline play?

Guess Dak should have played better during that time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, CAPJ said:

Yet you say Dak struggled in 2017 because of oline play?

Guess Dak should have played better during that time?

Dak was great the first 8 games of 2017. He was on pace for ~4000 yards, 40 TDs and 8 INTs.

The Falcons game screwed up Dak mentally. He admitted that. Obviously he could have played better. Our OL also went from a sub 6% to a +12% sack rate starting the Falcons game. They were literally one of the worst OL's in the NFL, not mediocre. But again, Dak had the yips and was holding the ball to long as well. 

Edited by Matts4313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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