The_Slamman Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 22 hours ago, MaddHatter said: You know what all those teams outside of the 49ers had in common? Top 10 picks because they were garbage before they hit. And for every Mahomes, there are a dozen Trubisky’s. So how are we getting that rookie QB if we aren’t bottom feeders? We really think Rush is good? Why’d we drop a 4th and trade for Lance then? Clearly the coaches don’t believe in Cooper or we would have kept that pick and he’d be our guy. You’re also using a 5 game sample size with no pressure and comparing it to a MVP-caliber QB coming off an elite season who you admit is great in the regular season (same time Rush got to show his stuff) but bashing him because he hasn’t won much in the playoffs. How’s that logical? How is bashing Dak in the playoffs logical? Because he sucks in the playoffs. Did you watch the first half against GB. Or last year’s performance against SF? BTW, I don’t even think Dak is great during the regular season… I think he’s opportunistic. I’ve always said that Dak plays great against bad teams. Which is 100% true. But he’s not great against good teams. In fact, he’s usually pretty bad against good teams ( SF, Buffalo). This has been Dak’s entire career. Go back and read last years SF’s GDT. I completely predicted Dak’s performance. I did the same thing the year before. I would have done the exact same thing this year but Dak sucked even more than I expected against a 9-8 team AT HOME. Hell, I’m ashamed that I gave Dak too much credit… I should have predicted Dak’s bed shatting performance against GB because that’s what he always does. But even I can be duped a little. BTW, the trade for Lance is not about Rush. Cooper is what he is… a 30 year old career back up with limited athleticism but a serviceable game manager. But that’s why cooper played better than Dak last year and had a much better record… cooper understands that he’s a game manager. In all seriousness… we would have been better against GB with Rush this year. We would not have been down 27-0 with our qb gifting points away. He would have managed the game. The trade for Lance is about Dak. Dak will be 31 when the season starts and will make $60M. Dak already counts $37m against next years cap as a FA. Lance is 23 and highly athletic with upside. The trade gives Dallas 2 years to figure out if he can replace Dak… nothing to do with Rush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaddHatter Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 Let's bring the topic back here instead of the Around the NFL thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaddHatter Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 Quote Okay - so you're saying in close games where we lost, Dak stepped up late when it mattered most and balled out? We're not talking about "garbage time stats" like the GB game this year - those were close back and forth games where he played well, even in the first 3Q's. Even if he was throwing 50% for 6YPA, he protected the ball, didn't turn it over, and took what was coming his way. Which is exactly what you said made Brock so good... Then when we needed it late, he flipped the script and took over. But when your D gives up 30+ points despite you not turning the ball over once, there's only so much you could expect from him and still be able to place the blame at his feet. So he plays as well (at worst) or better than Brock, but because next season we are going to pay him Franchise QB money and Brock won't get Franchise QB money for another year, regardless of what happens this next season or the seasons to follow, Brock was better than Dak b/c he did less with better talent but was still making rookie minimum? So when Dak was on his rookie contract in 2016 and put up that 103.2 against GB that you said he played like a chump in, that was good because he was on a rookie minimum deal? Thus far we've gone from "don't pay Dak franchise QB Money because he's not as good as Brock in the playoffs" to "Dak has never played well in the playoffs" to "2 of the 4 games you listed he had good box scores but played like garbage the first 3Q's and only played out of his mind great in the 4Q which made the first 3Q's look good" to "well okay he's better than Brock, but Brock's not making $45m/yr" to "yeah, well Brock may get $50m/yr when he's eligible for a new contract, but he's playing well now so that's what matters" to "Okay sure Dak played well on his rookie contract in the playoffs as well... but he's still not "clutch" and lacks the "mental composure" to play well when it matters most" to "okay sure he has a ton of 4QC and GWD and great stats in January when it matters most, but he will still never take this team to a NFCC or Super Bowl" This is where we left off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atran35 Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 I believe the Dallas Cowboys will resign Dak to 4 years. So that is our window to win a SB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PincheJimmy Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 4 hours ago, atran35 said: I believe the Dallas Cowboys will resign Dak to 4 years. So that is our window to win a SB. I wonder if Dak gonna to want to be highest paid or will he give the Cowboys a discount 🤔 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaddHatter Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 (edited) 6 minutes ago, PincheJimmy said: I wonder if Dak gonna to want to be highest paid or will he give the Cowboys a discount 🤔 He's likely going to get a 4yr $210-220m deal with with $150-160m guaranteed - add on a couple "void" years to spread out the cap hit and that's likely where he ends up. Considering that's Joe Burrow, Justin Herbert, Lamar Jackson and Jalen Hurts territory, I'd say he's right there with them. It's above Russell Wilson, Deshaun Watson and Kyler Murray who he's drastically outplayed these last few years. Josh Allen is the other option for a "home town discount" as he signed a 6yr $260m deal at the same time Dak signed his last contract, which would equate to a 4yr $170m deal for Dak when he took 4yr $160m. Patrick Mahomes who signed a 10yr $450m deal a year before Dak's last contract, would have set the bar at a 4yr 180m deal for Dak, which is probably why he took the 4yr deal instead of pushing for a 6-8yr deal, to lock in one more contract during his prime. Considering his last contract was a 4yr $160m deal signed around the same times as those two, I think it's safe to expect it to be closer to the $200m than the $180m Edited February 15 by MaddHatter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plan9misfit Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 On 2/15/2024 at 2:38 AM, atran35 said: I believe the Dallas Cowboys will resign Dak to 4 years. So that is our window to win a SB. I would let him walk. We’ll never sniff a Super Bowl with him as the starting QB. He doesn’t have the head for it. He can’t handle pressure situations in big games. He’s melted down literally every time. You don’t pay a mediocre QB who can’t put a team on his back $60M a year. Ever. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quiller Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 2 hours ago, plan9misfit said: I would let him walk. We’ll never sniff a Super Bowl with him as the starting QB. He doesn’t have the head for it. He can’t handle pressure situations in big games. He’s melted down literally every time. You don’t pay a mediocre QB who can’t put a team on his back $60M a year. Ever. Well right now by your standards there are a ton of mediocre QB’s who got paid so it is what it is Personally I see it closer to 55 or even 50 then 60. And if you want to “sniff” the superbowl in the next 3-4 you better hope we resign Dak as that is our only hope as no way we can trade for Mahomes actually IMO the main reason I feel we’ve not sniffed Super Bowl is coaching more then players… 1st loss GB. Swap QB’s duh we win swap coaches probably we win 2nd loss LA…. Uh maybe swap D or coaches. QB had zero to do with final score 3rd 4th loss SF. Swap coaches or D and we win… 5th loss swap coaches we win…. And for the record Dak handles the pressure just fine game 1 against GB and the Seattle Playoff game and the TB play off game but what ever personally right now I understand the Dak hate and don’t disagree with a lot of the complaints against him. What I don’t agree with is this thought that just swapping out Dak for a untested QB or one who also hasn’t done it (Mahomes and Rogers are the only active who done it) is the answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plan9misfit Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 39 minutes ago, quiller said: Well right now by your standards there are a ton of mediocre QB’s who got paid so it is what it is Personally I see it closer to 55 or even 50 then 60. And if you want to “sniff” the superbowl in the next 3-4 you better hope we resign Dak as that is our only hope as no way we can trade for Mahomes actually IMO the main reason I feel we’ve not sniffed Super Bowl is coaching more then players… 1st loss GB. Swap QB’s duh we win swap coaches probably we win 2nd loss LA…. Uh maybe swap D or coaches. QB had zero to do with final score 3rd 4th loss SF. Swap coaches or D and we win… 5th loss swap coaches we win…. And for the record Dak handles the pressure just fine game 1 against GB and the Seattle Playoff game and the TB play off game but what ever personally right now I understand the Dak hate and don’t disagree with a lot of the complaints against him. What I don’t agree with is this thought that just swapping out Dak for a untested QB or one who also hasn’t done it (Mahomes and Rogers are the only active who done it) is the answer. Dak was trash in every one of those games. It can’t always fall on the coach. Yes, they have culpability, but literally doing nothing early in the games and playing like pure trash is on him. Like I said, I’d let him walk. He’s fool’s gold. Paying him keeps the team in football purgatory. No, thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaddHatter Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 9 hours ago, plan9misfit said: Dak was trash in every one of those games. It can’t always fall on the coach. Yes, they have culpability, but literally doing nothing early in the games and playing like pure trash is on him. Like I said, I’d let him walk. He’s fool’s gold. Paying him keeps the team in football purgatory. No, thanks. Okay - so you're saying in close games where we lost, Dak stepped up late when it mattered most and balled out? We're not talking about "garbage time stats" like the GB game this year - those were close back and forth games where he played well, even in the first 3Q's. Even if he was throwing 50% for 6YPA, he protected the ball, didn't turn it over, and took what was coming his way. Which is exactly what you said made Brock so good... Then when we needed it late, he flipped the script and took over. But when your D gives up 30+ points despite you not turning the ball over once, there's only so much you could expect from him and still be able to place the blame at his feet. So he plays as well (at worst) or better than Brock, but because next season we are going to pay him Franchise QB money and Brock won't get Franchise QB money for another year, regardless of what happens this next season or the seasons to follow, Brock was better than Dak b/c he did less with better talent but was still making rookie minimum? So when Dak was on his rookie contract in 2016 and put up that "trash" 103.2 against GB, that was good because he was on a rookie minimum deal? Thus far we've gone from "don't pay Dak franchise QB Money because he's not as good as Brock in the playoffs" to "Dak has never played well in the playoffs" to "2 of the 4 games you listed he had good box scores but played like garbage the first 3Q's and only played out of his mind great in the 4Q which made the first 3Q's look good" to "well okay he's better than Brock, but Brock's not making $45m/yr" to "yeah, well Brock may get $50m/yr when he's eligible for a new contract, but he's playing well now so that's what matters" to "Okay sure Dak played well on his rookie contract in the playoffs as well... but he's still not "clutch" and lacks the "mental composure" to play well when it matters most" to "okay sure he has a ton of 4QC and GWD and great stats in January when it matters most, but he will still never take this team to a NFCC or Super Bowl" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TVScout Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 11 hours ago, plan9misfit said: Dak was trash in every one of those games. Maybe because the coaches called the wrong plays? Or the receivers ran the wrong routes? Or have not yet realized Mac is a dullard who can't read a defense and takes forever to adjust the play calling? If Dak walks who plays QB? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PincheJimmy Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 2 hours ago, MaddHatter said: Okay - so you're saying in close games where we lost, Dak stepped up late when it mattered most and balled out? We're not talking about "garbage time stats" like the GB game this year - those were close back and forth games where he played well, even in the first 3Q's. Even if he was throwing 50% for 6YPA, he protected the ball, didn't turn it over, and took what was coming his way. Which is exactly what you said made Brock so good... Then when we needed it late, he flipped the script and took over. But when your D gives up 30+ points despite you not turning the ball over once, there's only so much you could expect from him and still be able to place the blame at his feet. So he plays as well (at worst) or better than Brock, but because next season we are going to pay him Franchise QB money and Brock won't get Franchise QB money for another year, regardless of what happens this next season or the seasons to follow, Brock was better than Dak b/c he did less with better talent but was still making rookie minimum? So when Dak was on his rookie contract in 2016 and put up that "trash" 103.2 against GB, that was good because he was on a rookie minimum deal? Thus far we've gone from "don't pay Dak franchise QB Money because he's not as good as Brock in the playoffs" to "Dak has never played well in the playoffs" to "2 of the 4 games you listed he had good box scores but played like garbage the first 3Q's and only played out of his mind great in the 4Q which made the first 3Q's look good" to "well okay he's better than Brock, but Brock's not making $45m/yr" to "yeah, well Brock may get $50m/yr when he's eligible for a new contract, but he's playing well now so that's what matters" to "Okay sure Dak played well on his rookie contract in the playoffs as well... but he's still not "clutch" and lacks the "mental composure" to play well when it matters most" to "okay sure he has a ton of 4QC and GWD and great stats in January when it matters most, but he will still never take this team to a NFCC or Super Bowl" None of it matters because Jerry is still owner and Jerry is the reason why we will never win a superbowl again 🤷♂️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PincheJimmy Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 22 minutes ago, TVScout said: Maybe because the coaches called the wrong plays? Or the receivers ran the wrong routes? Or have not yet realized Mac is a dullard who can't read a defense and takes forever to adjust the play calling? If Dak walks who plays QB? Cooper Rush of course 🙄, or we can trade for Josh Dobbs, heard on here he’s just as good as Dak, if not better 🤷♂️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plan9misfit Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) 3 hours ago, MaddHatter said: Okay - so you're saying in close games where we lost, Dak stepped up late when it mattered most and balled out? We're not talking about "garbage time stats" like the GB game this year - those were close back and forth games where he played well, even in the first 3Q's. Even if he was throwing 50% for 6YPA, he protected the ball, didn't turn it over, and took what was coming his way. Which is exactly what you said made Brock so good... Then when we needed it late, he flipped the script and took over. But when your D gives up 30+ points despite you not turning the ball over once, there's only so much you could expect from him and still be able to place the blame at his feet. So he plays as well (at worst) or better than Brock, but because next season we are going to pay him Franchise QB money and Brock won't get Franchise QB money for another year, regardless of what happens this next season or the seasons to follow, Brock was better than Dak b/c he did less with better talent but was still making rookie minimum? So when Dak was on his rookie contract in 2016 and put up that "trash" 103.2 against GB, that was good because he was on a rookie minimum deal? Thus far we've gone from "don't pay Dak franchise QB Money because he's not as good as Brock in the playoffs" to "Dak has never played well in the playoffs" to "2 of the 4 games you listed he had good box scores but played like garbage the first 3Q's and only played out of his mind great in the 4Q which made the first 3Q's look good" to "well okay he's better than Brock, but Brock's not making $45m/yr" to "yeah, well Brock may get $50m/yr when he's eligible for a new contract, but he's playing well now so that's what matters" to "Okay sure Dak played well on his rookie contract in the playoffs as well... but he's still not "clutch" and lacks the "mental composure" to play well when it matters most" to "okay sure he has a ton of 4QC and GWD and great stats in January when it matters most, but he will still never take this team to a NFCC or Super Bowl" What I’m saying is that those are excuses for him crapping the bed in the first three quarters of games and then putting up numbers against soft defenses late. When a team is down like we were so many times, a smart coach will put the opposing offense in a position which extends drives, but limits possessions. And that’s what we saw every time. Dak “balled out” (which he didn’t), but the offense didn’t have enough time to ensure that there were enough possessions for them to come back and win. Smart coaches know how to use a clock well enough to make that work. And, it happened to us multiple times in the playoffs over the last many years. Why? Because when you play like hot garbage in the first three quarters, the odds of coming back and winning are incredibly remote. Again, Dak shrinks mentally in big games against quality teams. We see if every year. Why do people keep apologizing for this? It’s happened with different players and different coaches. At some point, he needs to shoulder accountability just like everyone else. He shouldn’t keep getting a pass. Yet, too many people give them to him. The facts are the facts. He isn’t good enough to win big games. Edited February 19 by plan9misfit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plan9misfit Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) 1 hour ago, TVScout said: Maybe because the coaches called the wrong plays? Or the receivers ran the wrong routes? Or have not yet realized Mac is a dullard who can't read a defense and takes forever to adjust the play calling? If Dak walks who plays QB? It’s literally impossible to have 8 years of evidence and have it rest on everyone else but the QB. Yes, the coaches failed at times. Yes, the defenses failed at times. Yes, the players around him may have missed a route. But when it happens EVERY time, it’s impossible for much of this not to fall on Dak’s shoulders. As the QB, it’s his responsibility to overcome challenges and lead the team….which is incapable of doing when it matters. As far as the QB goes, you let Dak go and see if Trey Lance can play. It’s why we traded for him. That was a message to Dak. If Lance isn’t the guy, then you draft one, and keep doing so until you find one. But having a mediocre guy who can’t get the job done is not a reason not to keep looking forward for a franchise QB. The team is being held back by keeping him. Because, when you know that you can win in the playoffs with him, keeping him prevents the team from finding someone who may be able to. Edited February 19 by plan9misfit 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.