Dak Prescott thread

Moderator: bwgood77

Mariner
Rookie
Posts: 1,217
And1: 244
Joined: Jul 21, 2023

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#241 » by Mariner » Fri Dec 29, 2023 7:47 pm

bluejerseyjinx wrote:
Mariner wrote:
bluejerseyjinx wrote:What are the other areas of need in your honest opinion?

Draft and get you get younger at Oline.
Tyron is ancient. Not sure how much more we can squeeze out of him. Martin is getting older. Our Center is small and a free agent. We also need a RB that puts fear in the opponents.

I know we currently have 4 starts out on defense. Your thoughts on that side of the ball?

Defense secondary is fine with Bland and Diggs. We will need to draft another DB in the later rounds as we might lose Gilmore and Lewis.
Linebacker is difficult. Is Clark trending in the right direction? How will Overshown be after an injury and not playing?
Like our pass rush. Getting bigger on the front seven to stop the run might be a good idea.
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,823
And1: 1,824
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#242 » by Micah Prescott » Fri Dec 29, 2023 7:47 pm

last stand wrote:
bluejerseyjinx wrote:
last stand wrote:
If that’s the case why were the 49ers and bills games blowouts and not shootouts?

Funny how Micah avoided giving you an answer here. :lol:


I figured it wouldn’t tbh

It's too time consuming to reply to everything from everyone

I'm one of 3 active Dallas fans and the only Cowboy fan here to defend Dak. So it portrays me as Dak obsessed but the reality is that NFL fans are Dak obsessed. As seen here where it is two others demanding that I come in here to defend Dak.

Anyway I never said that the offense did great in those blowouts, just that the defense did worse. The main difference between the Ravens beating the 49ers and Dallas being killed by the 49ers was the 5 INTs that the Raven's defense produced.
last stand
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,621
And1: 327
Joined: Jul 24, 2008

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#243 » by last stand » Fri Dec 29, 2023 7:57 pm

Micah Prescott wrote:
last stand wrote:
bluejerseyjinx wrote:Funny how Micah avoided giving you an answer here. :lol:


I figured it wouldn’t tbh

It's too time consuming to reply to everything from everyone

I'm one of 3 active Dallas fans and the only Cowboy fan here to defend Dak. So it portrays me as Dak obsessed but the reality is that NFL fans are Dak obsessed. As seen here where it is two others demanding that I come in here to defend Dak.

Anyway I never said that the offense did great in those blowouts, just that the defense did worse. The main difference between the Ravens beating the 49ers and Dallas being killed by the 49ers was the 5 INTs that the Raven's defense produced.


So then defense does help offense? Therefore playing horrible offenses would help the defense therein helping the cowboys offense?

You can’t have it both ways lol
bluejerseyjinx
RealGM
Posts: 22,077
And1: 4,888
Joined: Oct 18, 2014
Location: Maine
       

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#244 » by bluejerseyjinx » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:03 pm

Micah Prescott wrote:
last stand wrote:
bluejerseyjinx wrote:Funny how Micah avoided giving you an answer here. :lol:


I figured it wouldn’t tbh

It's too time consuming to reply to everything from everyone

I'm one of 3 active Dallas fans and the only Cowboy fan here to defend Dak. So it portrays me as Dak obsessed but the reality is that NFL fans are Dak obsessed. As seen here where it is two others demanding that I come in here to defend Dak.

Anyway I never said that the offense did great in those blowouts, just that the defense did worse. The main difference between the Ravens beating the 49ers and Dallas being killed by the 49ers was the 5 INTs that the Raven's defense produced.

So how long is a defense suppose to hold up when the offense doesn't even get a 1st down in 9 straight possessions?
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,823
And1: 1,824
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#245 » by Micah Prescott » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:05 pm

last stand wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:
last stand wrote:
I figured it wouldn’t tbh

It's too time consuming to reply to everything from everyone

I'm one of 3 active Dallas fans and the only Cowboy fan here to defend Dak. So it portrays me as Dak obsessed but the reality is that NFL fans are Dak obsessed. As seen here where it is two others demanding that I come in here to defend Dak.

Anyway I never said that the offense did great in those blowouts, just that the defense did worse. The main difference between the Ravens beating the 49ers and Dallas being killed by the 49ers was the 5 INTs that the Raven's defense produced.


So then defense does help offense? Therefore playing horrible offenses would help the defense therein helping the cowboys offense?

You can’t have it both ways lol

Both ways? I'm not going two different ways.

Playing horrible offenses helps defensive numbers much more than offensive numbers.
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,823
And1: 1,824
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#246 » by Micah Prescott » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:06 pm

bluejerseyjinx wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:
last stand wrote:
I figured it wouldn’t tbh

It's too time consuming to reply to everything from everyone

I'm one of 3 active Dallas fans and the only Cowboy fan here to defend Dak. So it portrays me as Dak obsessed but the reality is that NFL fans are Dak obsessed. As seen here where it is two others demanding that I come in here to defend Dak.

Anyway I never said that the offense did great in those blowouts, just that the defense did worse. The main difference between the Ravens beating the 49ers and Dallas being killed by the 49ers was the 5 INTs that the Raven's defense produced.

So how long is a defense suppose to hold up when the offense doesn't even get a 1st down in 9 straight possessions?


A true elite defense would hold the entire game. Teams have won SBs on defense before. And teams win games all the time without a QB throwing a single TD.
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,823
And1: 1,824
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak Prescott thread 

Post#247 » by Micah Prescott » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:08 pm

Hell the Broncos won a SB with Peyton throwing 0 TDs and 1 INT

The idea that a defense can't hold with a poor offense is BS
last stand
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,621
And1: 327
Joined: Jul 24, 2008

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#248 » by last stand » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:10 pm

Micah Prescott wrote:
last stand wrote:
bluejerseyjinx wrote:Funny how Micah avoided giving you an answer here. :lol:


I figured it wouldn’t tbh

It's too time consuming to reply to everything from everyone

I'm one of 3 active Dallas fans and the only Cowboy fan here to defend Dak. So it portrays me as Dak obsessed but the reality is that NFL fans are Dak obsessed. As seen here where it is two others demanding that I come in here to defend Dak.

Anyway I never said that the offense did great in those blowouts, just that the defense did worse. The main difference between the Ravens beating the 49ers and Dallas being killed by the 49ers was the 5 INTs that the Raven's defense produced.


Also speaking of the ravens producing 5 INTs the niners produced 3 against the cowboys. Dak threw 3

So by your metric how is the defense more to blame?

And dak threw for 134 yards and 1int vs the bills

By what metric is the defense more to blame.

Either the defense has no effect on the efficiency/success of an offense or it does

And if that’s the case then either dak is taking advantage of bad offenses and having the ball with good field position, more frequent possessions, and with little pressure of opponent scoring

Or

Dak and the offense are an isolated entity and therefore his performance against good teams on the road is on him and not the defense

You can’t have it both ways
last stand
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,621
And1: 327
Joined: Jul 24, 2008

Re: Dak Prescott thread 

Post#249 » by last stand » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:14 pm

Micah Prescott wrote:Hell the Broncos won a SB with Peyton throwing 0 TDs and 1 INT

The idea that a defense can't hold with a poor offense is BS


You mean a top 10 defense statistically in the entirety of nfl history

That’s your expectation? That’s what you’re demanding to protect dak? A top 10 defense all time?

So in order to feel as though dak has earned blame he has to have an all time defense and still lose

Then he’s to blame? Interesting
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,823
And1: 1,824
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#250 » by Micah Prescott » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:15 pm

last stand wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:
last stand wrote:
I figured it wouldn’t tbh

It's too time consuming to reply to everything from everyone

I'm one of 3 active Dallas fans and the only Cowboy fan here to defend Dak. So it portrays me as Dak obsessed but the reality is that NFL fans are Dak obsessed. As seen here where it is two others demanding that I come in here to defend Dak.

Anyway I never said that the offense did great in those blowouts, just that the defense did worse. The main difference between the Ravens beating the 49ers and Dallas being killed by the 49ers was the 5 INTs that the Raven's defense produced.


Also speaking of the ravens producing 5 INTs the niners produced 3 against the cowboys. Dak threw 3

So by your metric how is the defense more to blame?

And dak threw for 134 yards and 1int vs the bills

By what metric is the defense more to blame.

Either the defense has no effect on the efficiency/success of an offense or it does

And if that’s the case then either dak is taking advantage of bad offenses and having the ball with good field position, more frequent possessions, and with little pressure of opponent scoring

Or

Dak and the offense are an isolated entity and therefore his performance against good teams on the road is on him and not the defense

You can’t have it both ways

I'm not trying to have it both ways, because I am not declaring that Dak or the Dallas offense was great in those game. I'm just saying that defense was worse.

The Dallas offense ranks higher than the Dallas defense does.

Our defense is good vs the pass but vs the run we give up 115.7 YPG which ranks 20th in the NFL and running is what eats clock up and the reason the defense can't get off the field.
bluejerseyjinx
RealGM
Posts: 22,077
And1: 4,888
Joined: Oct 18, 2014
Location: Maine
       

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#251 » by bluejerseyjinx » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:16 pm

Micah Prescott wrote:
bluejerseyjinx wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:It's too time consuming to reply to everything from everyone

I'm one of 3 active Dallas fans and the only Cowboy fan here to defend Dak. So it portrays me as Dak obsessed but the reality is that NFL fans are Dak obsessed. As seen here where it is two others demanding that I come in here to defend Dak.

Anyway I never said that the offense did great in those blowouts, just that the defense did worse. The main difference between the Ravens beating the 49ers and Dallas being killed by the 49ers was the 5 INTs that the Raven's defense produced.

So how long is a defense suppose to hold up when the offense doesn't even get a 1st down in 9 straight possessions?


A true elite defense would hold the entire game. Teams have won SBs on defense before. And teams win games all the time without a QB throwing a single TD.

What about when defenses do hold up, play their guts out all game and then lose a playoff game all on your own by having QB throwing an int in your own end at the 30 yard line and then throw another int at the Niners 12 yard line when your about to score? Its called leaving 10 points off the board and a trip to the NFC Championship game. And its the defenses fault. O.K. :crazy:
last stand
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,621
And1: 327
Joined: Jul 24, 2008

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#252 » by last stand » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:17 pm

Micah Prescott wrote:
bluejerseyjinx wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:It's too time consuming to reply to everything from everyone

I'm one of 3 active Dallas fans and the only Cowboy fan here to defend Dak. So it portrays me as Dak obsessed but the reality is that NFL fans are Dak obsessed. As seen here where it is two others demanding that I come in here to defend Dak.

Anyway I never said that the offense did great in those blowouts, just that the defense did worse. The main difference between the Ravens beating the 49ers and Dallas being killed by the 49ers was the 5 INTs that the Raven's defense produced.

So how long is a defense suppose to hold up when the offense doesn't even get a 1st down in 9 straight possessions?


A true elite defense would hold the entire game. Teams have won SBs on defense before. And teams win games all the time without a QB throwing a single TD.


Ok so let me get this straight

Your issue is the cowboys don’t have a 2000 ravens, 2015 broncos, 2002 bucs, 2013 Seahawks.

So in your estimation dak is Trent dilfer, Brad Johnson, no neck Peyton manning. He needs an all time defense.

So it’s the cowboys defense fault for not being a top 10 defense all time?
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,823
And1: 1,824
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak Prescott thread 

Post#253 » by Micah Prescott » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:17 pm

last stand wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:Hell the Broncos won a SB with Peyton throwing 0 TDs and 1 INT

The idea that a defense can't hold with a poor offense is BS


You mean a top 10 defense statistically in the entirety of nfl history

That’s your expectation? That’s what you’re demanding to protect dak? A top 10 defense all time?

So in order to feel as though dak has earned blame he has to have an all time defense and still lose

Then he’s to blame? Interesting

I never said that is my expectation. That is one example of a defense winning it all without a good offense. Showing that great defenses can do it.
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,823
And1: 1,824
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#254 » by Micah Prescott » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:18 pm

last stand wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:
bluejerseyjinx wrote:So how long is a defense suppose to hold up when the offense doesn't even get a 1st down in 9 straight possessions?


A true elite defense would hold the entire game. Teams have won SBs on defense before. And teams win games all the time without a QB throwing a single TD.


Ok so let me get this straight

Your issue is the cowboys don’t have a 2000 ravens, 2015 broncos, 2002 bucs, 2013 Seahawks.

So in your estimation dak is Trent dilfer, Brad Johnson, no neck Peyton manning. He needs an all time defense.

So it’s the cowboys defense fault for not being a top 10 defense all time?

This is a strawman...I never said that Dallas should have the greatest defense in the history of defenses. :lol:

I'm saying our defense is worse than our offense.

and it is
last stand
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,621
And1: 327
Joined: Jul 24, 2008

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#255 » by last stand » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:20 pm

Micah Prescott wrote:
last stand wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:It's too time consuming to reply to everything from everyone

I'm one of 3 active Dallas fans and the only Cowboy fan here to defend Dak. So it portrays me as Dak obsessed but the reality is that NFL fans are Dak obsessed. As seen here where it is two others demanding that I come in here to defend Dak.

Anyway I never said that the offense did great in those blowouts, just that the defense did worse. The main difference between the Ravens beating the 49ers and Dallas being killed by the 49ers was the 5 INTs that the Raven's defense produced.


Also speaking of the ravens producing 5 INTs the niners produced 3 against the cowboys. Dak threw 3

So by your metric how is the defense more to blame?

And dak threw for 134 yards and 1int vs the bills

By what metric is the defense more to blame.

Either the defense has no effect on the efficiency/success of an offense or it does

And if that’s the case then either dak is taking advantage of bad offenses and having the ball with good field position, more frequent possessions, and with little pressure of opponent scoring

Or

Dak and the offense are an isolated entity and therefore his performance against good teams on the road is on him and not the defense

You can’t have it both ways

I'm not trying to have it both ways, because I am not declaring that Dak or the Dallas offense was great in those game. I'm just saying that defense was worse.

The Dallas offense ranks higher than the Dallas defense does.

Our defense is good vs the pass but vs the run we give up 115.7 YPG which ranks 20th in the NFL and running is what eats clock up and the reason the defense can't get off the field.


So playing bad offenses and getting off the field giving the Dallas offense more opportunities does play a factor in the offensive ranking of the Dallas cowboys

So playing bad teams, bad offenses does in fact aid in the scoring and other various statistical rankings of the dak and the offense

Just checking we’re on the same page
last stand
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,621
And1: 327
Joined: Jul 24, 2008

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#256 » by last stand » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:21 pm

Micah Prescott wrote:
last stand wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:
A true elite defense would hold the entire game. Teams have won SBs on defense before. And teams win games all the time without a QB throwing a single TD.


Ok so let me get this straight

Your issue is the cowboys don’t have a 2000 ravens, 2015 broncos, 2002 bucs, 2013 Seahawks.

So in your estimation dak is Trent dilfer, Brad Johnson, no neck Peyton manning. He needs an all time defense.

So it’s the cowboys defense fault for not being a top 10 defense all time?

This is a strawman...I never said that Dallas should have the greatest defense in the history of defenses. :lol:

I'm saying our defense is worse than our offense.

and it is


It’s not a strawman when you specifically used the 2015 broncos as your argument as to a defense not needing its offense to be successful

You brought the broncos into this not me lol
last stand
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,621
And1: 327
Joined: Jul 24, 2008

Re: Dak Prescott thread 

Post#257 » by last stand » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:23 pm

Micah Prescott wrote:
last stand wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:Hell the Broncos won a SB with Peyton throwing 0 TDs and 1 INT

The idea that a defense can't hold with a poor offense is BS


You mean a top 10 defense statistically in the entirety of nfl history

That’s your expectation? That’s what you’re demanding to protect dak? A top 10 defense all time?

So in order to feel as though dak has earned blame he has to have an all time defense and still lose

Then he’s to blame? Interesting

I never said that is my expectation. That is one example of a defense winning it all without a good offense. Showing that great defenses can do it.


So assuming the cowboys defense is a normally good defense and not an all time defense then we can safely say the offense has a reasonable expectation to hold their end of the bargain in games like the bills and niners. So when they put up 10 points in both games and dak throws 3 INTs and for 134 yards with 1int in the other it can be reasonable to assume that dak is hurting the defense?
bluejerseyjinx
RealGM
Posts: 22,077
And1: 4,888
Joined: Oct 18, 2014
Location: Maine
       

Re: Dak Prescott thread 

Post#258 » by bluejerseyjinx » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:25 pm

Micah Prescott wrote:Hell the Broncos won a SB with Peyton throwing 0 TDs and 1 INT

The idea that a defense can't hold with a poor offense is BS

So then you admit that we need a 1986 Bears defense to win a Super bowl as long a dumb Dak is our QB? I mean its not like Manning had to do much in this game except not lose it. Cam Newton only had 64 yards passing in that game, also had 1 int and got sacked 6 times. :lol: :lol:
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,823
And1: 1,824
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#259 » by Micah Prescott » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:26 pm

last stand wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:
last stand wrote:
Ok so let me get this straight

Your issue is the cowboys don’t have a 2000 ravens, 2015 broncos, 2002 bucs, 2013 Seahawks.

So in your estimation dak is Trent dilfer, Brad Johnson, no neck Peyton manning. He needs an all time defense.

So it’s the cowboys defense fault for not being a top 10 defense all time?

This is a strawman...I never said that Dallas should have the greatest defense in the history of defenses. :lol:

I'm saying our defense is worse than our offense.

and it is


It’s not a strawman when you specifically used the 2015 broncos as your argument as to a defense not needing its offense to be successful

You brought the broncos into this not me lol

And to you that means I think Dallas should have the 2015 Broncos defense? :lol:

All you're doing is creating one strawman after another.

"OH....SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU LOST BECAUSE LAWRENCE TAYLOR AND CHARLES WOODSON AREN'T ON THE DEFENSE!!!???"
bluejerseyjinx
RealGM
Posts: 22,077
And1: 4,888
Joined: Oct 18, 2014
Location: Maine
       

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#260 » by bluejerseyjinx » Fri Dec 29, 2023 8:26 pm

last stand wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:
last stand wrote:
I figured it wouldn’t tbh

It's too time consuming to reply to everything from everyone

I'm one of 3 active Dallas fans and the only Cowboy fan here to defend Dak. So it portrays me as Dak obsessed but the reality is that NFL fans are Dak obsessed. As seen here where it is two others demanding that I come in here to defend Dak.

Anyway I never said that the offense did great in those blowouts, just that the defense did worse. The main difference between the Ravens beating the 49ers and Dallas being killed by the 49ers was the 5 INTs that the Raven's defense produced.


Also speaking of the ravens producing 5 INTs the niners produced 3 against the cowboys. Dak threw 3

So by your metric how is the defense more to blame?

And dak threw for 134 yards and 1int vs the bills

By what metric is the defense more to blame.

Either the defense has no effect on the efficiency/success of an offense or it does

And if that’s the case then either dak is taking advantage of bad offenses and having the ball with good field position, more frequent possessions, and with little pressure of opponent scoring

Or

Dak and the offense are an isolated entity and therefore his performance against good teams on the road is on him and not the defense

You can’t have it both ways

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Return to The General NFL Board