QB controversey

[Rtnldave]

26 minutes ago, TVScout said:

Video unavailable.

Yeah....i saw that. It basically has talking heads calling for Trey Lance.

[TVScout]

 

[Rtnldave]

50 minutes ago, TVScout said:

 

Did Sunday night's game look like a win to you?

[DaBoys]

Bottom line is, you can’t start a QB controversy. Only Trey Lance can, and Lance isn’t going to play this year unless we are eliminated from the playoffs. If Dak gets hurt and we are still a WC team, then Cooper Rush will play.

If we get eliminated from post season contention then you might see Lance for a game or two, and IF he plays lights out then the controversy begins. But even then, if we get eliminated from the playoffs before the last game of the season and Lance plays well after he comes in…. There is still No controversy. Dak would be toast at that point. He’d probably be toast if Lance played well or not. 

The only way a TRUE controversy would start is if we remain a playoff team and Dak AND Rush get hurt. Then Lance has to play well. THEN you may have a controversy when Dak is healthy again. Not unlike Romo and Moore getting hurt to give Dak a chance. The odds of that happening twice are EXTREMELY low.

No controversy 

Edited October 12, 2023 by DaBoys

[Tony7188]

On 10/11/2023 at 4:41 PM, Rtnldave said:

Why look for a new QB if Lance works out? Don't forget, he does of NFL game experience. Maybe the game was just too fast for him when he started. Remember Hurts? That was painful. But look at him now. 

I dont know why people are so quick to dismiss Lance based on his limited opportunities. He may come in and outclass Mehomes! (Not likely) but who can say with any certainty?

Have you seen enough from him to know? 

Tell you what, what little I did see looked a helluva lot better than what I'm seeing now.

Because if we get rid of Dak, we need "insurance" in case Lance doesn't work out. Hurts did not start right away when he got drafted and he isn't injury prone (like Lance is).  Either way, this team should draft a QB and stop relying on late round picks to do so. You can get lucky and strike gold (Romo, Dak, Brady, Purdy) but the chances are very slim.

[Tony7188]

20 hours ago, DaBoys said:

Bottom line is, you can’t start a QB controversy. Only Trey Lance can, and Lance isn’t going to play this year unless we are eliminated from the playoffs. If Dak gets hurt and we are still a WC team, then Cooper Rush will play.

If we get eliminated from post season contention then you might see Lance for a game or two, and IF he plays lights out then the controversy begins. But even then, if we get eliminated from the playoffs before the last game of the season and Lance plays well after he comes in…. There is still No controversy. Dak would be toast at that point. He’d probably be toast if Lance played well or not. 

The only way a TRUE controversy would start is if we remain a playoff team and Dak AND Rush get hurt. Then Lance has to play well. THEN you may have a controversy when Dak is healthy again. Not unlike Romo and Moore getting hurt to give Dak a chance. The odds of that happening twice are EXTREMELY low.

No controversy 

This time would be an even harder road to success, since there is no Zeke Elliott for Lance, like there was for Dak.

[Dallas94Ware]

On 10/10/2023 at 10:19 PM, Rtnldave said:

After reading the last 2 posts, you guys aren't doing much to convince me otherwise. You all agree Dak is struggling in a way watered down offense designed for rookies. I get it's predicated on a stout running game but c'mon!

From what im reading it really comes down to this:

Is staying with Dak, knowing this is his highmark and it only goes downhill from here, less damaging than chancing playing a guy that has more athletic ability, a better arm, better accuracy, and younger but may end up shellshocked from being thrown into the mix too soon?

Well, I remind you that Aikman was thrown into, what ended up being a 1-15 team?

Got injured 3 years in a row before he completed his 1st full season, which was a SB title.

Im not saying Trey Lance is Troy Aikman, but you learn more from playing than watching.

And if we know Dak isn't getting any better, im willing to take that chance.

 

So at only 29 years old, with all of the W-L stats, with all of these Cowboy records his or nearly his, we should bench him and put in a completely raw and unproven QB?

Ok, I disagree, but fine...

But you want to do it over one bad loss in a season that is only a month old? When we have a winning record? Because of one bad loss that was more on the defense than Dak? 

It's one game man.

But ok, say we do it. Lance now starts. He throws 3 picks in a loss, 2 in another. Has a completion % barely above 50. The defense is surrendering 24-30 points a game to boot. Now what? We pull Lance to put Dak back in, in hopes the vet can rally the team to the playoffs? That likely ruins Lance for good.

Or, we stick with Lance, his woes and the teams woes continue, we get a good draft pick, but Lance is ruined, Dak is pissed, Micah now wants out of Dallas instead of a new contract, Diggs asks for a trade. Now what? These guys want to win. Selecting a rookie passer in the top 10 is not a guarantee of anything. In fact, it's more of a guarantee your team has two to three more very low years. With guys like Diggs and Parsons and Lamb all in their prime. You've now wasted their prime years and they want to be traded.

You by extension ruin the best core group of stars this team has had since the last year of Parcells tenure and the first two years of Wades time here. All because Dak didn't play well in one bad loss against a team on the verge of a small dynasty with three or more back to back NFC title game appearances?

Not worth it 

Ride out Dak. When the team has no prayer, you can see what Lance is. Or try him next season. Without pissing off the team,without giving up two or more losing seasons, and without the risk of ruining a great prospect in Lance.

If this team was sitting at 2-6 or 3-7 I could get behind this. Not at 3-2 after playing such an amazing team. And even then I'd more inclined to pull the plug on MM and promote Quinn or even Fassel to HC, or Joe Whitt, even. And see what someone like Tolzien or Solari could do as playcaller. Or even see if Schottenheimer's experiences have taught him anything about calling a more balanced offense.

And you know, I think that is more the root of the problem too. The run game is inconsistent, and the passing game is a watered down sink and dunk mess. Is that not the same crap that plagued Wilson under Brian S? Except Wilson could pull magic out of his arse when the team was down 2 scores, by throwing those magical rainbow shots down field for quick scores to close the gap fast enough for the team to then ride Lynch to the win.

 

...you know, as an edit side note...I'm actually shocked rhere wasn't a ton of rage on this forum over Schottenheimer from the get goz even with MM calling plays. The fact that man has any way in coordinating, influencing, or installing the offense or plays, or assembling a gameplan, or putting together a call Sheet, ever again, is a travesty in and of itself. He is a good coach who many players have spoken up and credited him with their development, including Phillip Rivers and Drew Brees during his time as QB coach in San Diego. But as a coordinator, his offenses have always - Seahawks, Jets - looked uncoordinated and were a total mix of ultra successful and ultra abysmal. The fact he got another chance at OC, idk, perhaps he deserved it. Especially if not calling the plays himself. But I think his track record speaks for itself that he is best suited as an assistant. Not the man assembling call sheets, gameplans, and influencing play calling...certainly not calling the plays (thankfully MM took that role on). But one can certainly say these last 5 weeks of offense quite resemble every offense Schottenheimer has been coordinator of.

Edited October 13, 2023 by Dallas94Ware

[Rtnldave]

4 hours ago, Dallas94Ware said:

So at only 29 years old, with all of the W-L stats, with all of these Cowboy records his or nearly his, we should bench him and put in a completely raw and unproven QB?

Ok, I disagree, but fine...

But you want to do it over one bad loss in a season that is only a month old? When we have a winning record? Because of one bad loss that was more on the defense than Dak? 

It's one game man.

But ok, say we do it. Lance now starts. He throws 3 picks in a loss, 2 in another. Has a completion % barely above 50. The defense is surrendering 24-30 points a game to boot. Now what? We pull Lance to put Dak back in, in hopes the vet can rally the team to the playoffs? That likely ruins Lance for good.

Or, we stick with Lance, his woes and the teams woes continue, we get a good draft pick, but Lance is ruined, Dak is pissed, Micah now wants out of Dallas instead of a new contract, Diggs asks for a trade. Now what? These guys want to win. Selecting a rookie passer in the top 10 is not a guarantee of anything. In fact, it's more of a guarantee your team has two to three more very low years. With guys like Diggs and Parsons and Lamb all in their prime. You've now wasted their prime years and they want to be traded.

You by extension ruin the best core group of stars this team has had since the last year of Parcells tenure and the first two years of Wades time here. All because Dak didn't play well in one bad loss against a team on the verge of a small dynasty with three or more back to back NFC title game appearances?

Not worth it 

Ride out Dak. When the team has no prayer, you can see what Lance is. Or try him next season. Without pissing off the team,without giving up two or more losing seasons, and without the risk of ruining a great prospect in Lance.

If this team was sitting at 2-6 or 3-7 I could get behind this. Not at 3-2 after playing such an amazing team. And even then I'd more inclined to pull the plug on MM and promote Quinn or even Fassel to HC, or Joe Whitt, even. And see what someone like Tolzien or Solari could do as playcaller. Or even see if Schottenheimer's experiences have taught him anything about calling a more balanced offense.

And you know, I think that is more the root of the problem too. The run game is inconsistent, and the passing game is a watered down sink and dunk mess. Is that not the same crap that plagued Wilson under Brian S? Except Wilson could pull magic out of his arse when the team was down 2 scores, by throwing those magical rainbow shots down field for quick scores to close the gap fast enough for the team to then ride Lynch to the win.

 

...you know, as an edit side note...I'm actually shocked rhere wasn't a ton of rage on this forum over Schottenheimer from the get goz even with MM calling plays. The fact that man has any way in coordinating, influencing, or installing the offense or plays, or assembling a gameplan, or putting together a call Sheet, ever again, is a travesty in and of itself. He is a good coach who many players have spoken up and credited him with their development, including Phillip Rivers and Drew Brees during his time as QB coach in San Diego. But as a coordinator, his offenses have always - Seahawks, Jets - looked uncoordinated and were a total mix of ultra successful and ultra abysmal. The fact he got another chance at OC, idk, perhaps he deserved it. Especially if not calling the plays himself. But I think his track record speaks for itself that he is best suited as an assistant. Not the man assembling call sheets, gameplans, and influencing play calling...certainly not calling the plays (thankfully MM took that role on). But one can certainly say these last 5 weeks of offense quite resemble every offense Schottenheimer has been coordinator of.

I appreciate how much effort you put into this post. But I will address one point that makes everything else mute.

It isn't "One bad loss." This is the same team that ended our season 2 years in a row. And from what I saw, we haven't come close to solving them. 

Not only that, but the idea that we have to change our offense to protect our QB is only inviting defenses to come after us. 

And it isn't "One bad loss," it's our 2nd in 3 games.

Even our number 1 WR is starting to grumble publicly. 

What Cee Dee and others are saying is Dak Prescott is holding this team back.

If you can't see that, then I believe that you either have an inhuman amount of patience, or you are stubborn as the dumbest jackass.

[quiller]

15 hours ago, Rtnldave said:

I appreciate how much effort you put into this post. But I will address one point that makes everything else mute.

It isn't "One bad loss." This is the same team that ended our season 2 years in a row. And from what I saw, we haven't come close to solving them. 

Not only that, but the idea that we have to change our offense to protect our QB is only inviting defenses to come after us. 

And it isn't "One bad loss," it's our 2nd in 3 games.

Even our number 1 WR is starting to grumble publicly. 

What Cee Dee and others are saying is Dak Prescott is holding this team back.

If you can't see that, then I believe that you either have an inhuman amount of patience, or you are stubborn as the dumbest jackass.

You see you think I am saying Dak is not part of the problem.  What I was saying was Dak was clearly PRODUCING at a much higher level than we have seen this season in the RECENT past.  And yes we can’t have Dak regularly repeating games like the AZ loss.   I have my own thoughts on the SF game.   What does the organization need to do to get back to that.   People say replace the QB sure but unless you pried Mahomes from the chiefs will that solve the problem.  We have a QB who has proved he can throw for 5000 yards a season and do it with out leading in interceptions and at a high completion rate.  Why drop that like a hot potato for a QB who either hasnt come close to those numbers or played more then a handful of downs in NFL and expect them to suddenly turn into the second coming in the same offense we currently have. 
 

If 4902 yards 30 TD 11 int 37 attempts per game 8.4 ay/a 12.6 y/c 99.7 qb rating is somehow “protecting” the QB them I guess I will accept that label

CeeDee I doubt really believes DAK is holding them my back remember Dak has been his main QB. He earned his rep with DAK throwing him the ball

[Rtnldave]

11 minutes ago, quiller said:

You see you think I am saying Dak is not part of the problem.  What I was saying was Dak was clearly PRODUCING at a much higher level than we have seen this season in the RECENT past.  And yes we can’t have Dak regularly repeating games like the AZ loss.   I have my own thoughts on the SF game.   What does the organization need to do to get back to that.   People say replace the QB sure but unless you pried Mahomes from the chiefs will that solve the problem.  We have a QB who has proved he can throw for 5000 yards a season and do it with out leading in interceptions and at a high completion rate.  Why drop that like a hot potato for a QB who either hasnt come close to those numbers or played more then a handful of downs in NFL and expect them to suddenly turn into the second coming in the same offense we currently have. 
 

If 4902 yards 30 TD 11 int 37 attempts per game 8.4 ay/a 12.6 y/c 99.7 qb rating is somehow “protecting” the QB them I guess I will accept that label

CeeDee I doubt really believes DAK is holding them my back remember Dak has been his main QB. He earned his rep with DAK throwing him the ball

Chris Collinsworth said it on SNF that McCarthy designed an offense to protect Prescott from committing turnovers. It does NOT push the ball up the field, 

Now, if your HC has to design an offense to protect your starting QB, what does that tell the opposing DC?

Stats aside, Prescott does NOT see the field, he misses wide open WRs, his accuracy is questionable, he hesitates-which leads to turnovers, and he has lost a step when running. 

He has underachieved so far this year and the schedule only gets harder.

You know what, forget all of that. Try this, imagine Dak Prescott in any game coming up. Can you really hear the announcer say these words, "Dak is really slinging it around tonight. He's hit 5 different recievers, The defense is on its heels, etc,etc,etc." Or something to that effect.

All I keep hearing is about how he is trying to clean up the turnovers, get the ball to Cee Dee, score TDs in the red zone, etc.

These ARE NOT the types of comments you would like to hear about you starting QB in a game.

So yay stats! But our QB scares only 1 team, his own fan base, present company excluded. So with that said, im willing to forego the obligatory 10-12 win season, only to got stomped on in the playoffs because or QB cannot win in those situations.

All we have then is another mid round pick and we will take another Mazi Smith and Schoonmaker.

No thanks. I want to see what Lance has.

[DaBoys]

12 minutes ago, quiller said:

CeeDee I doubt really believes DAK is holding them my back remember Dak has been his main QB. He earned his rep with DAK throwing him the ball

They definitely had issues last week.

Lamb wasn’t mad at coaching and he damn sure wasn’t mad that “WRs don’t create enough separation.” Lol

Prescott telling Lamb "If you have a problem with anything, just come up to me and we'll talk about it."

 

Lamb said he had a conversation with Prescott on Monday.

"He came up to me, he's like, 'If you have a problem with anything, just come up to me and we'll talk about it. I don't care how it necessarily looks in the media, right,'" Lamb said. "But the media is going to do what the media does anyway. If I stand by myself, it's a problem. If I go talk to him and I flare my hands a little bit, it's a problem. Right?

 

 

[DaBoys]

CD Lamb is 5th in the league in separation and 17th in targets. That’s not coaching or WR separation holding him back. It’s the guy who is supposed to throw it to him. 

Edited October 14, 2023 by DaBoys

[TVScout]

20 hours ago, DaBoys said:

CD Lamb is 5th in the league in separation and 17th in targets. That’s not coaching or WR separation holding him back. It’s the guy who is supposed to throw it to him. 

I already posted about Mac using Lamb as a decoy.

[Rtnldave]

Anyone watching SF vs Cleveland?

10 to 10 SF. 

Browns are driving. Running the ball, hitting deep passes to ex-Cowboy Cooper.

3rd quarter, 11:00. 

A guy named Walker QBing for Cleveland.

Never heard of him. 

So just how invicible is SF?

 

[textaz03]

PJ Walker and Van Pelt was better than Dak and McCarthy against 9ers 😂😂😂