You rightly mention the 49ers, Lions, and Eagles as examples of teams that shifted to Plan B at QB and found success. That’s true, they do have that in common.
But they also each have another thing in common, or had another thing in common: Kyle Shanahan, Ben Johnson, and Shane Steichen. Coordinators and coaches famous (or quickly becoming famous) around the league for how they give defenses fits and, in the process, help their QB by giving him better answers than to ask him to choose between 3 bad throws or run for it.
I say “had” because we know that Shane Steichen is now in INDY and doing great things, and already showing he can make the life of Anthony Richardson a lot easier despite considerable question marks about his accuracy and decision making.
But in the wake of Shane Steichen’s departure in PHI, we’re seeing underlying metrics about the Philadelphia offense that it’s not all it’s cracked up to be. It’s looking a lot more like late 2021 eagles offense (huge focus on the run game) than 2022 eagles offense.
That offense has a 27th ranked RZ offense compared to a 28th ranked RZ offense for the cowboys, for example.
I honestly believe the key to winning in the NFL isn't about finding the right QB...it's finding the right QB-coaching combination. Simply put, these coordinators make life easy for their QBs. Does anyone really think Jalen Hurst would be succeeding in Chicago under that regime? Similarly, it's not hard to envision Justin Fields having had a much more impactful career had he been in Philadelphia?
Dak may be the issue but he enjoyed pretty damn good success under Kellen Moore. But he and McCarthy together seem to have really put a ceiling on what the offense can accomplish.
It is. Goff is nothing special, and yet they are dropping buckets of points on defenses with Ben Johnson there.
Regardless of how you feel about Purdy and his 13 games in the NFL, I think we can all agree that Jimmy G is nothing special. And yet that offense was killer under him and they went to a bunch of NFC championship games and were a thorn in the side of back to back MVP Aaron Rodgers.
Now Stafford is a special thrower of the football. And yet the team was mediocre and seemingly cursed for his entire tenure there. During this tenure, they had such coaches as Rod Marinelli, Jim Schwartz, Jim Caldwell, and Matt Patricia.
-- Stafford gets traded and immediate wins a Super Bowl, validating his legacy.
— Goff, in his first year, mediocre and the team is bad. Then they bring in Ben Johnson in 2022 and he has a year on par with some of his best years under McVay.
Tua has some interesting traits, but I think we can all agree he’s no Patrick Mahomes, Josh Allen, and maybe not even Kirk Cousins. And yet with Miek McDaniel there, he’s doing things at a pace that looks like the Greatest Show on Turf.
Here’s how I’d want my team set up, in order.
1. Patrick Mahomes.
2. Good to great QB with a truly great offensive play caller, who understands the intricacies of good play design (route combinations, route depth, motion at the snap, putting defenders in conflict, play speed) while also understanding the macro stuff like play sequencing and 4th down decision making.
If the Cowboys did decide to move on (and I’m not ready to advocate for that yet) could they not cut him next year and designate him as a post-June 1 cut, spreading that $60 million over two years? That would avoid having to cut some other high-priced stars and letting other free agents walk without offering them a contract. I haven’t seen this possibility broached anywhere else yet.
This season is about him as much as Dak. The offense has taken a serious step back. It hasn’t looked good at all this season. I hope they can turn it around but it would take a major change imo. The litmus test was SF. They failed. Will they make major adjustments or just say execute better?
Like Tommy I'm curious about how you think he's doing. While the offense struggled down the stretch of every season of Kellen Moore's reign as OC, the offense overall was top-5 quality throughout. It also looked like a modern offense and there were a lot of plays with playmakers schemed open for easy, easy big plays.
None of that is evident in 2023 and it's hard not to look at Mike McCarthy and not think he's the reason.
I think Mike McCarthy has done a lot of good in his coaching time here including instilling a much higher floor. But, if you were hoping for offensive architecture that would be near the cutting edge of innovation, I had my doubts but was willing to give it a chance. That chance is expiring soon.
Pretty much my feelings as well. McCarthy is the rare bird...he's a quality HC but a poor coordinator. The NFL is littered with guys who are really good coordinators but prove incapable as head coaches.
Using a bad music analogy...he reminds me of Billy Corgan of Smashing Pumpkins fame. Corgan was/is an outrageously good songwriter, composer and very accomplished guitarist. He cannot, however, sing a lick but insists on doing so, to the detriment of the music.
McCarthy as a HC without OC duties seems better than McCarthy as a HC with OC duties. But it's just not natural for accomplished folks in any arena to willfully surrender responsibilities so here we are.
Good point. I guess my question is more about how you think he’s doing and if you think he’s “the guy”. I had higher hopes than many but after the way this season has started, I’m doubting.
Kinda surprised the comments so far are now turning on the coaching. The offense that is in place now is of Dak’s own doing. The offense has shown poorly but I can’t be mad at MM for trying to craft an offense to make things easier for the QB. People are chomping at the bit to wax poetic about Kellen Moore but he *at many times* struggled to get this offense going under this QB as well.
I don't think that he's made it "easier" for Dak. Half of his INTs last year were on the receiver - keep the same offense and you probably get a natural regression to his career mean. They came in to fix a problem that wasn't really a problem and in the meantime have neutered a formerly explosive offense.
The one and only problem that the change was supposed to fix was figuring out how to beat the Niners.
But until/unless Dak can recapture his rookie season mindset of no fear, and can get his body to trust his abilities and play freely, no systemic/schematic changes will be effective.
It’s possible the only answer is a change of scenery. Is there another similar QB who could benefit similarly? If so maybe the Cowboys should propose a trade.
The offense under Kellen Moore only struggled to get going some days as much as any offense struggles occasionally. The defenses get paid also.
The Kellen offense with Dak at the helm was the #1 scoring offense from 2019-2022 in the entire league. It’s hardly an offense that regularly struggled to play well.
And Kellen wasn’t perfect.
But you should ask yourself why EVERY part of the offense is worse off than it was: the protection, the running, the red zone, the 1st down conversion rates on early downs, the intermediate and deep passing game.
If the entire offense is down, you should ask yourself who could be responsible for that.
That’s fine to say, and the numbers were great under KM. But there were several breakdowns via Sturm, Kurt Warner, O’Sullivan that spoke to how the KM offense lacked details and precision in Dallas. And it showed against the better defenses.
All I’m saying is I’ve read all of the “what abouts” since Dak got here. All of it. Maybe you’re right but after this amount of time, maybe it does say something about the signal caller. Maybe it is plausible that NFL coaches actually are really smart so when playcalling seems conservative, maybe they’re scheming to get the most out of a QB with limitations. We’ve seen every single variable change around the QB and we’re still having the same conversations.
By the way, these “same conversations” are the same ones had about Romo every other, even when he played with hall of fame receivers.
In the 2013 game against the Broncos, Romo 48 points. The defense gave up 51. But Romo threw a pick at the very end of the game, and the discussion all week was how Romo sucked and let us down. If romo had enough to win it all for us. Little to no mention of the poor defensive effort to give up 51 points.
Stick around here long enough and you realize that these “same conversations” are simply “the team lost and now we must react emotionally and try to run our top 10 QB out of town” over and over and over, regardless of how much responsibility the QB actually had for the prior weeks loss.
It's complicated. Because I think the BIGGEST problem with this team is that the front office perpetually thinks we are in a super bowl window, and it affects their coaching hires.
They think we can win now, with just a couple of things breaking our way. So they want to hire safe coaches, coaches they're familiar with, or coaches that have been HCs before.
1. So they move on from Wade Phillips and promote Jason Garrett.
2. When Jason Garrett is struggling to get beyond an 8-8 type season, they remove his playcalling duties and promote an OC from within.
3. When that OC struggles, they promote their brainy backup QB to OC.
4. When that brain trust of Garrett/Kellen falters in 2019, they fire Garrett and go looking for a new HC. But they're limited in who they can hire because 1.) they want someone with HC experience since they're "close" and 2.) the new guy has to be willing to accept a job where Kellen is his OC as a prerequisite.
This has been going on for a decade and a half now.
You ask me what I would do, and I saw it depends on the options you give me:
1.) Release Mike McCarthy in Jan 2024, hire Ben Johnson, give Dak a market-rate extension.
— Sounds great. Wheels up.
2.) Keep Mike for the foreseeable future. If we move on from Mike, we hire a similarly safe coach, or promote our defensive coordinator.
— I guess you have to move on from Dak. If the coach isn't going to provide the QB with any answers, then I guess we better grab a guy who can make something out of nothing. Trey Lance, cmon up?
3.) Cut Dak and let it all crash and burn so that the front office will finally, after 15+ years of this, hire a legit offensive, modern offensive coach. And then try to figure out the QB.
— Well, I guess I would choose this option.
But as you said in another comment asking about the coaching off-ramp, the off-ramp is incredibly simple. Fire the current guy, be bold and hire the new guy with big ideas, big offensive success, but no HC experience. It costs you nothing against the cap. And at the end, you have your HC and QB pairing that's necessary to win big in the NFL these days.
The other two options are extremely painful.
And frankly, I'm not sure the anti-Dak segment of the fanbase is emotionally ready for Cowboys 2015 type seasons multiple years in a row. We're going to have to install nets on all the bridges in Dallas.
1. Prescott has regressed and looks like a mental and physical fidget in the pocket.
2. Micah Parsons is going to require at least $30 million per season from someone and as fantastic as he is I believe he will decline physically as a DE pretty quickly and not be worth the huge cap hit. I would however pay him if the team was at a championship level and contending for Super Bowls.
3. Our best receiver is a pouter and will be up for a contract extension. The remaining receivers are replaceable.
4. McCarthy is pretty good as a HC but not great and is at the end with the Cowboys. Jerry could easily afford to pay for great and/or get/find the next great innovators at HC/OC/DC.
None of the above will happen because Jerry so I just wasted 5 minutes of my life typing this out.
Bob, I will refer your statement right here over and over again: "The price of QBs is incredibly high and if you have a difference-making QB, you have to keep him. But, you also cannot pay someone for what they once were if a decline is happening." To my eyes Prescott looks so uncomfortable in the pocket it is painful to watch. Even on his good days.
Correct, the Kellen offense still had a lot of limitations. It had no answers for drop 7-8 in zone coverage.
The “same conversations” about Dak are just happening because the QB gets blamed for everything.
I mean, for god’s sake, the 49ers loss this week was as clear of a “total team loss” as any game I’ve seen in years. They destroyed us in every phase, including, and perhaps especially so, our pass defense.
The guy on the other side was Brock Purdy.
And yet all the podcasts have shows titles “The Dak Discussion”. Bob here is spending a week on the “Dak off ramp”.
If there’s ANY GAME that’s deserving of “okay maybe it was the whole team and not just Dak”, THIS is that game. And yet it’s Dak Dak Dak Dak Dak.
This should tell you all you need to know about these “same conversations” you reference.
Yeah, you got it Ross. You’re commenting on an article posted by an author who admittedly shows the QB’s in Dallas grace. So the idea that the QB gets blamed for everything + everywhere is not true. Have a good day sir!
I love Dak, I called my dog Dak and that's in no way disrespectful, but proof of how much I like this guy. He's a great leader, a better person, and a very good QB. However, it seems to have hit a ceiling called 49ers. More and more, he seems to have no answers and all that we can hope to get with him is a wildcard game and some lucky years a divisional one. It kills me, but this past L was too much and his limitations were more evident than ever before. I hope I'm wrong, but I think I'm not.
Now, hear me out. Bob, here's another "off ramp" just for fun. What if you convince Dak to be traded? To a team of his liking, with good chances next year. A team like this year Jets. Fully loaded, but without a seriour answer at QB. Not many of those, but maybe could you say the Raiders with Davante, Jacobs, Crosby, and a new fanbase and stadium? Maybe the Steelers or Titans (not fully loaded, I know)?
Get a 1st or two, and go get Kirk Cousins. Also a big contract, but a new start. I'm not saying Cousins is better, although stats say that they're very similar, but sometimes all you need is a change of scenery, as Stafford and Goff show... And you get a 1st or two for a player under contract for only one more year. Maybe it's just the disappointment of that terrible loss, but after all these years I'm willing to try something out-of-the-box for a change.
I liked everything you said until Cousins. Sorry, but he's Dak Lite and might cost as much as full strength Dak by the end.
If we manage to trade him, we need to start over with a Rookie QB contract. Whether in the '24 or '25 draft, that's when the clock resets. The only way we'll beat the 9ers is by out muscling them at their game.
The league is pretty well QB saturated, so there's less teams than ever that actually NEED to get a QB. Conversely, the road to a franchise QB is not paved in high first round selections anymore- it's the most likely way, sure, but ultimately there are enough examples around the league that it isn't a necessity.
I think one of the keys here is “sane management”. Can we seriously expect JJ, et al, to manage this with any forethought? I certainly don’t. There’s a lot of merit to the idea of QB/OC needing to be a great fit. I believe current day NFL offensive ideas have passed MM by. Do I think Dak is the answer? He could be, but everything around him needs to be just about perfect at this point in his career, so best to take the off ramp and roll into a new future.
Not to be the I told you so guy but a this was the very issue many were concerned about before the deal. Yes he was slowly improving I suppose but to me he’s always had a pretty clear ceiling. When the pressure is low, he normally does ok. When it gets turned up he routinely shrinks. Pretty consistently this has been his m.o. That’s fine if you aren’t paying him much but he’s just not worth this money.
If we cut him at the end of THIS season and make it a post June cut the cap hit would be about 30m in 2023 and 30m in 2024. If we keep him is 62m in 23 and 36m in 24. So we save 38m by cutting him before 2024 season. That would be my off ramp - could give Lance 2024 and if he is bad we get a high pick in 25 draft. And have money to spend on other players.
Isn’t it also worth noting that we’re asking Dak to run to earn his paycheck (an implicit acknowledgement that he must make something out of nothing) while giving flowers to SF and the 49ers, the very organization who swapped one of those running guys for one of those brainy guys? Purdy has ran for 20, 5, -1, 0, and 0 yards in weeks 1-5 of the season, including that big fat 0 yards rushing against the cowboys.
Goff, similarly, is not a runner.
It seems the 49ers are saying pretty clearly you don’t need a guy to win with his legs to win football games, and we are only demanding this of Dak because we know that is the only good choice available to him during large stretches of games this year.
Dak was never really about his legs though, and Bob never really equates him to Jalen Hurts or Lamar Jackson or something like that.
His legs were seasoning. They were just very valuable seasoning because they were being sprinkled over the top of the dry, overcooked, chicken breast of the Jason Garrett/Scott Linehan scheme.
But I’m telling you, it’s ultimately a lot easier to replace the chef in the kitchen than it is to replace the QB.
You just need to fire and hire. There are no salary cap implications. You don’t have to spend a pick or trade multiple picks to bring in the new chef.
You also don’t have to think very hard, there’s a superstar chef right over there in Detroit who Bob has now mentioned twice this week.
Restructuring doesn’t really save you all that much to go from 60 to the possible 50 average unless of course you want less in the near term and then an even bigger cap disaster later unless I am reading this wrong
Looks like a LOT of glossing over of other relevant personnel. SF certainly has multi-tool players that not many, if any at all, teams in the league have. That's a huge deal if fans insist on saying, "Well McCarthy is a bad coach because Shannihan..." Same thing with Hurts in Philthy.
Dallas has stacked the cupboard more than most with regard to talent but Dak seems to be regressing too fast and his peak window was too small. I don't see blaming a coach for that. The 2016 team was LOADED and had Dallas given the reigns back to Romo, likely wins a SB. I've said many times I will in fact die on that particular hill. But they let rookie Dak run with it and now, all these years later, fans are still waiting for him to get over the hump. The coaches have changed, the coordinators have changed, the offensive weaponry has changed and the defense has gotten markedly better. The only common denominator is and remains to be Dak Prescott.
The blinker is on, change lanes, down shift and let's hit that off ramp.
Welcome to disagree but Romo’s understanding of what the GB defense was doing was exponentially greater than Dak’s at that point. Proof? Against a rookie? C’mon, that’s crazy.
Love Romo as much as any, but this is rose colored glasses if I’ve ever seen them. Romo also hadn’t shown the ability to get the cowboys to the promised land. Not to mention he had glass bones by that point.
Would you like to talk about the woeful O-line, the lack of any semblance of a defense most years or the one that Patrick Crayton gave up on?
Romo carried the team to 8-8 most years. If it weren't for him they would have been a laughing stock. Nothing rose colored about it. His body let him down but that 2016 playoff run was there to be had. Dak was in over his head is all. It was absurd to let him stay at the helm once Romo was healthy. If nothing else, Romo gets healthy and you know Dak can perform if needs be. It was an egregious mistake to cave to the public swoon for Dak. He looked good but the playoffs are a different animal. It was dumb to not let the vet take back the reigns.
@Bob Loved the answer re: should there be an extension. It’s a results driven league and, yes, how you get there matters but not nearly the same amount as the results you generate.
Dak’s results are there for the world to see. Good but great, certainly not generational.
Let him play the year out, see how he handles the adversity, and only extend if the team can get to the conference championship game and play well enough to win.
If not, bite the bullet and move on. No way should they put in another 4 years of the insanity.
Now, one question I have is if Dallas has an opportunity to trade Dak THIS YEAR (of course with his blessing given his NTclause), and Dallas was able to pick up a 2nd rd pick or even a 1st, would you do it?
As always, you lay out a well reasoned argument for the considerations that must be evaluated. Unfortunately, I don’t think Jerry will approach it in the same manner. Combine his love of Dak with is eternal “we are ver close and only need a couple of things to break our way” outlook, I think he will rework that contract regardless of how this goes the rest of the year. And this is why the Cowboys will continue to wallow in mediocrity while making piles of money for Jerry.
You rightly mention the 49ers, Lions, and Eagles as examples of teams that shifted to Plan B at QB and found success. That’s true, they do have that in common.
But they also each have another thing in common, or had another thing in common: Kyle Shanahan, Ben Johnson, and Shane Steichen. Coordinators and coaches famous (or quickly becoming famous) around the league for how they give defenses fits and, in the process, help their QB by giving him better answers than to ask him to choose between 3 bad throws or run for it.
I say “had” because we know that Shane Steichen is now in INDY and doing great things, and already showing he can make the life of Anthony Richardson a lot easier despite considerable question marks about his accuracy and decision making.
But in the wake of Shane Steichen’s departure in PHI, we’re seeing underlying metrics about the Philadelphia offense that it’s not all it’s cracked up to be. It’s looking a lot more like late 2021 eagles offense (huge focus on the run game) than 2022 eagles offense.
That offense has a 27th ranked RZ offense compared to a 28th ranked RZ offense for the cowboys, for example.
This. Soooo much this.
I honestly believe the key to winning in the NFL isn't about finding the right QB...it's finding the right QB-coaching combination. Simply put, these coordinators make life easy for their QBs. Does anyone really think Jalen Hurst would be succeeding in Chicago under that regime? Similarly, it's not hard to envision Justin Fields having had a much more impactful career had he been in Philadelphia?
Dak may be the issue but he enjoyed pretty damn good success under Kellen Moore. But he and McCarthy together seem to have really put a ceiling on what the offense can accomplish.
It is. Goff is nothing special, and yet they are dropping buckets of points on defenses with Ben Johnson there.
Regardless of how you feel about Purdy and his 13 games in the NFL, I think we can all agree that Jimmy G is nothing special. And yet that offense was killer under him and they went to a bunch of NFC championship games and were a thorn in the side of back to back MVP Aaron Rodgers.
Now Stafford is a special thrower of the football. And yet the team was mediocre and seemingly cursed for his entire tenure there. During this tenure, they had such coaches as Rod Marinelli, Jim Schwartz, Jim Caldwell, and Matt Patricia.
-- Stafford gets traded and immediate wins a Super Bowl, validating his legacy.
— Goff, in his first year, mediocre and the team is bad. Then they bring in Ben Johnson in 2022 and he has a year on par with some of his best years under McVay.
Tua has some interesting traits, but I think we can all agree he’s no Patrick Mahomes, Josh Allen, and maybe not even Kirk Cousins. And yet with Miek McDaniel there, he’s doing things at a pace that looks like the Greatest Show on Turf.
Here’s how I’d want my team set up, in order.
1. Patrick Mahomes.
2. Good to great QB with a truly great offensive play caller, who understands the intricacies of good play design (route combinations, route depth, motion at the snap, putting defenders in conflict, play speed) while also understanding the macro stuff like play sequencing and 4th down decision making.
3. Elite QB.
4. Good to great QB with bad OC.
5. Bad QB
This seems on point to me.
If the Cowboys did decide to move on (and I’m not ready to advocate for that yet) could they not cut him next year and designate him as a post-June 1 cut, spreading that $60 million over two years? That would avoid having to cut some other high-priced stars and letting other free agents walk without offering them a contract. I haven’t seen this possibility broached anywhere else yet.
Now, about the off ramp for MM...
This season is about him as much as Dak. The offense has taken a serious step back. It hasn’t looked good at all this season. I hope they can turn it around but it would take a major change imo. The litmus test was SF. They failed. Will they make major adjustments or just say execute better?
The next 3 games will be very telling.
That’s easy. You can fire a coach in one morning. No complexities. No cap. Happens all the time in this league. That is simple.
Like Tommy I'm curious about how you think he's doing. While the offense struggled down the stretch of every season of Kellen Moore's reign as OC, the offense overall was top-5 quality throughout. It also looked like a modern offense and there were a lot of plays with playmakers schemed open for easy, easy big plays.
None of that is evident in 2023 and it's hard not to look at Mike McCarthy and not think he's the reason.
I think Mike McCarthy has done a lot of good in his coaching time here including instilling a much higher floor. But, if you were hoping for offensive architecture that would be near the cutting edge of innovation, I had my doubts but was willing to give it a chance. That chance is expiring soon.
Pretty much my feelings as well. McCarthy is the rare bird...he's a quality HC but a poor coordinator. The NFL is littered with guys who are really good coordinators but prove incapable as head coaches.
Using a bad music analogy...he reminds me of Billy Corgan of Smashing Pumpkins fame. Corgan was/is an outrageously good songwriter, composer and very accomplished guitarist. He cannot, however, sing a lick but insists on doing so, to the detriment of the music.
McCarthy as a HC without OC duties seems better than McCarthy as a HC with OC duties. But it's just not natural for accomplished folks in any arena to willfully surrender responsibilities so here we are.
Corgan can’t sing? Come on. He is annoying as heck but his leads are pretty great imo. Haha.
Good point. I guess my question is more about how you think he’s doing and if you think he’s “the guy”. I had higher hopes than many but after the way this season has started, I’m doubting.
Next question is what’s the answer???
Kinda surprised the comments so far are now turning on the coaching. The offense that is in place now is of Dak’s own doing. The offense has shown poorly but I can’t be mad at MM for trying to craft an offense to make things easier for the QB. People are chomping at the bit to wax poetic about Kellen Moore but he *at many times* struggled to get this offense going under this QB as well.
Maybe it’s not ALL on the coaching.
I don't think that he's made it "easier" for Dak. Half of his INTs last year were on the receiver - keep the same offense and you probably get a natural regression to his career mean. They came in to fix a problem that wasn't really a problem and in the meantime have neutered a formerly explosive offense.
The one and only problem that the change was supposed to fix was figuring out how to beat the Niners.
But until/unless Dak can recapture his rookie season mindset of no fear, and can get his body to trust his abilities and play freely, no systemic/schematic changes will be effective.
It’s possible the only answer is a change of scenery. Is there another similar QB who could benefit similarly? If so maybe the Cowboys should propose a trade.
The offense under Kellen Moore only struggled to get going some days as much as any offense struggles occasionally. The defenses get paid also.
The Kellen offense with Dak at the helm was the #1 scoring offense from 2019-2022 in the entire league. It’s hardly an offense that regularly struggled to play well.
And Kellen wasn’t perfect.
But you should ask yourself why EVERY part of the offense is worse off than it was: the protection, the running, the red zone, the 1st down conversion rates on early downs, the intermediate and deep passing game.
If the entire offense is down, you should ask yourself who could be responsible for that.
That’s fine to say, and the numbers were great under KM. But there were several breakdowns via Sturm, Kurt Warner, O’Sullivan that spoke to how the KM offense lacked details and precision in Dallas. And it showed against the better defenses.
All I’m saying is I’ve read all of the “what abouts” since Dak got here. All of it. Maybe you’re right but after this amount of time, maybe it does say something about the signal caller. Maybe it is plausible that NFL coaches actually are really smart so when playcalling seems conservative, maybe they’re scheming to get the most out of a QB with limitations. We’ve seen every single variable change around the QB and we’re still having the same conversations.
By the way, these “same conversations” are the same ones had about Romo every other, even when he played with hall of fame receivers.
In the 2013 game against the Broncos, Romo 48 points. The defense gave up 51. But Romo threw a pick at the very end of the game, and the discussion all week was how Romo sucked and let us down. If romo had enough to win it all for us. Little to no mention of the poor defensive effort to give up 51 points.
Stick around here long enough and you realize that these “same conversations” are simply “the team lost and now we must react emotionally and try to run our top 10 QB out of town” over and over and over, regardless of how much responsibility the QB actually had for the prior weeks loss.
Does this mean you would green light a big market rate extension? Because that is the only conversation I am having today. Not the rest of this.
It's complicated. Because I think the BIGGEST problem with this team is that the front office perpetually thinks we are in a super bowl window, and it affects their coaching hires.
They think we can win now, with just a couple of things breaking our way. So they want to hire safe coaches, coaches they're familiar with, or coaches that have been HCs before.
1. So they move on from Wade Phillips and promote Jason Garrett.
2. When Jason Garrett is struggling to get beyond an 8-8 type season, they remove his playcalling duties and promote an OC from within.
3. When that OC struggles, they promote their brainy backup QB to OC.
4. When that brain trust of Garrett/Kellen falters in 2019, they fire Garrett and go looking for a new HC. But they're limited in who they can hire because 1.) they want someone with HC experience since they're "close" and 2.) the new guy has to be willing to accept a job where Kellen is his OC as a prerequisite.
This has been going on for a decade and a half now.
You ask me what I would do, and I saw it depends on the options you give me:
1.) Release Mike McCarthy in Jan 2024, hire Ben Johnson, give Dak a market-rate extension.
— Sounds great. Wheels up.
2.) Keep Mike for the foreseeable future. If we move on from Mike, we hire a similarly safe coach, or promote our defensive coordinator.
— I guess you have to move on from Dak. If the coach isn't going to provide the QB with any answers, then I guess we better grab a guy who can make something out of nothing. Trey Lance, cmon up?
3.) Cut Dak and let it all crash and burn so that the front office will finally, after 15+ years of this, hire a legit offensive, modern offensive coach. And then try to figure out the QB.
— Well, I guess I would choose this option.
But as you said in another comment asking about the coaching off-ramp, the off-ramp is incredibly simple. Fire the current guy, be bold and hire the new guy with big ideas, big offensive success, but no HC experience. It costs you nothing against the cap. And at the end, you have your HC and QB pairing that's necessary to win big in the NFL these days.
The other two options are extremely painful.
And frankly, I'm not sure the anti-Dak segment of the fanbase is emotionally ready for Cowboys 2015 type seasons multiple years in a row. We're going to have to install nets on all the bridges in Dallas.
I'm ready to burn it down for these reasons:
1. Prescott has regressed and looks like a mental and physical fidget in the pocket.
2. Micah Parsons is going to require at least $30 million per season from someone and as fantastic as he is I believe he will decline physically as a DE pretty quickly and not be worth the huge cap hit. I would however pay him if the team was at a championship level and contending for Super Bowls.
3. Our best receiver is a pouter and will be up for a contract extension. The remaining receivers are replaceable.
4. McCarthy is pretty good as a HC but not great and is at the end with the Cowboys. Jerry could easily afford to pay for great and/or get/find the next great innovators at HC/OC/DC.
None of the above will happen because Jerry so I just wasted 5 minutes of my life typing this out.
Bob, I will refer your statement right here over and over again: "The price of QBs is incredibly high and if you have a difference-making QB, you have to keep him. But, you also cannot pay someone for what they once were if a decline is happening." To my eyes Prescott looks so uncomfortable in the pocket it is painful to watch. Even on his good days.
Correct, the Kellen offense still had a lot of limitations. It had no answers for drop 7-8 in zone coverage.
The “same conversations” about Dak are just happening because the QB gets blamed for everything.
I mean, for god’s sake, the 49ers loss this week was as clear of a “total team loss” as any game I’ve seen in years. They destroyed us in every phase, including, and perhaps especially so, our pass defense.
The guy on the other side was Brock Purdy.
And yet all the podcasts have shows titles “The Dak Discussion”. Bob here is spending a week on the “Dak off ramp”.
If there’s ANY GAME that’s deserving of “okay maybe it was the whole team and not just Dak”, THIS is that game. And yet it’s Dak Dak Dak Dak Dak.
This should tell you all you need to know about these “same conversations” you reference.
Yeah, you got it Ross. You’re commenting on an article posted by an author who admittedly shows the QB’s in Dallas grace. So the idea that the QB gets blamed for everything + everywhere is not true. Have a good day sir!
Which would you rather have?
1. A Brock Purdy led cowboys team
2. A Dak led 49ers team
3. A Purdy led 49ers team
Lets Go Rangers!
I love Dak, I called my dog Dak and that's in no way disrespectful, but proof of how much I like this guy. He's a great leader, a better person, and a very good QB. However, it seems to have hit a ceiling called 49ers. More and more, he seems to have no answers and all that we can hope to get with him is a wildcard game and some lucky years a divisional one. It kills me, but this past L was too much and his limitations were more evident than ever before. I hope I'm wrong, but I think I'm not.
Now, hear me out. Bob, here's another "off ramp" just for fun. What if you convince Dak to be traded? To a team of his liking, with good chances next year. A team like this year Jets. Fully loaded, but without a seriour answer at QB. Not many of those, but maybe could you say the Raiders with Davante, Jacobs, Crosby, and a new fanbase and stadium? Maybe the Steelers or Titans (not fully loaded, I know)?
Get a 1st or two, and go get Kirk Cousins. Also a big contract, but a new start. I'm not saying Cousins is better, although stats say that they're very similar, but sometimes all you need is a change of scenery, as Stafford and Goff show... And you get a 1st or two for a player under contract for only one more year. Maybe it's just the disappointment of that terrible loss, but after all these years I'm willing to try something out-of-the-box for a change.
I liked everything you said until Cousins. Sorry, but he's Dak Lite and might cost as much as full strength Dak by the end.
If we manage to trade him, we need to start over with a Rookie QB contract. Whether in the '24 or '25 draft, that's when the clock resets. The only way we'll beat the 9ers is by out muscling them at their game.
The league is pretty well QB saturated, so there's less teams than ever that actually NEED to get a QB. Conversely, the road to a franchise QB is not paved in high first round selections anymore- it's the most likely way, sure, but ultimately there are enough examples around the league that it isn't a necessity.
I think one of the keys here is “sane management”. Can we seriously expect JJ, et al, to manage this with any forethought? I certainly don’t. There’s a lot of merit to the idea of QB/OC needing to be a great fit. I believe current day NFL offensive ideas have passed MM by. Do I think Dak is the answer? He could be, but everything around him needs to be just about perfect at this point in his career, so best to take the off ramp and roll into a new future.
Not to be the I told you so guy but a this was the very issue many were concerned about before the deal. Yes he was slowly improving I suppose but to me he’s always had a pretty clear ceiling. When the pressure is low, he normally does ok. When it gets turned up he routinely shrinks. Pretty consistently this has been his m.o. That’s fine if you aren’t paying him much but he’s just not worth this money.
If we cut him at the end of THIS season and make it a post June cut the cap hit would be about 30m in 2023 and 30m in 2024. If we keep him is 62m in 23 and 36m in 24. So we save 38m by cutting him before 2024 season. That would be my off ramp - could give Lance 2024 and if he is bad we get a high pick in 25 draft. And have money to spend on other players.
Isn’t it also worth noting that we’re asking Dak to run to earn his paycheck (an implicit acknowledgement that he must make something out of nothing) while giving flowers to SF and the 49ers, the very organization who swapped one of those running guys for one of those brainy guys? Purdy has ran for 20, 5, -1, 0, and 0 yards in weeks 1-5 of the season, including that big fat 0 yards rushing against the cowboys.
Goff, similarly, is not a runner.
It seems the 49ers are saying pretty clearly you don’t need a guy to win with his legs to win football games, and we are only demanding this of Dak because we know that is the only good choice available to him during large stretches of games this year.
It’s worth noting, yes, but for the very reason Bob pointed out: getting yards with his legs (and with the scheme) is what got him to where he was.
The other guys you mentioned never had that on their dance cards as what got them to the ball in the first place.
Take away a dimension of success and try to replace it with one that was never there is never a recipe for success.
Dak was never really about his legs though, and Bob never really equates him to Jalen Hurts or Lamar Jackson or something like that.
His legs were seasoning. They were just very valuable seasoning because they were being sprinkled over the top of the dry, overcooked, chicken breast of the Jason Garrett/Scott Linehan scheme.
But I’m telling you, it’s ultimately a lot easier to replace the chef in the kitchen than it is to replace the QB.
You just need to fire and hire. There are no salary cap implications. You don’t have to spend a pick or trade multiple picks to bring in the new chef.
You also don’t have to think very hard, there’s a superstar chef right over there in Detroit who Bob has now mentioned twice this week.
Restructuring doesn’t really save you all that much to go from 60 to the possible 50 average unless of course you want less in the near term and then an even bigger cap disaster later unless I am reading this wrong
Looks like a LOT of glossing over of other relevant personnel. SF certainly has multi-tool players that not many, if any at all, teams in the league have. That's a huge deal if fans insist on saying, "Well McCarthy is a bad coach because Shannihan..." Same thing with Hurts in Philthy.
Dallas has stacked the cupboard more than most with regard to talent but Dak seems to be regressing too fast and his peak window was too small. I don't see blaming a coach for that. The 2016 team was LOADED and had Dallas given the reigns back to Romo, likely wins a SB. I've said many times I will in fact die on that particular hill. But they let rookie Dak run with it and now, all these years later, fans are still waiting for him to get over the hump. The coaches have changed, the coordinators have changed, the offensive weaponry has changed and the defense has gotten markedly better. The only common denominator is and remains to be Dak Prescott.
The blinker is on, change lanes, down shift and let's hit that off ramp.
Dak was great in the Packers game lol what is this?
He was good. Not denying that. Romo would have been better.
Yeah we don’t see eye to eye on that and there's nowhere near enough prior proof to suggest Romo would've been.
Welcome to disagree but Romo’s understanding of what the GB defense was doing was exponentially greater than Dak’s at that point. Proof? Against a rookie? C’mon, that’s crazy.
Love Romo as much as any, but this is rose colored glasses if I’ve ever seen them. Romo also hadn’t shown the ability to get the cowboys to the promised land. Not to mention he had glass bones by that point.
Would you like to talk about the woeful O-line, the lack of any semblance of a defense most years or the one that Patrick Crayton gave up on?
Romo carried the team to 8-8 most years. If it weren't for him they would have been a laughing stock. Nothing rose colored about it. His body let him down but that 2016 playoff run was there to be had. Dak was in over his head is all. It was absurd to let him stay at the helm once Romo was healthy. If nothing else, Romo gets healthy and you know Dak can perform if needs be. It was an egregious mistake to cave to the public swoon for Dak. He looked good but the playoffs are a different animal. It was dumb to not let the vet take back the reigns.
@Bob Loved the answer re: should there be an extension. It’s a results driven league and, yes, how you get there matters but not nearly the same amount as the results you generate.
Dak’s results are there for the world to see. Good but great, certainly not generational.
Let him play the year out, see how he handles the adversity, and only extend if the team can get to the conference championship game and play well enough to win.
If not, bite the bullet and move on. No way should they put in another 4 years of the insanity.
Now, one question I have is if Dallas has an opportunity to trade Dak THIS YEAR (of course with his blessing given his NTclause), and Dallas was able to pick up a 2nd rd pick or even a 1st, would you do it?
Agreed on all counts. Well said, sir.
“Rangers in 7.”
You are correct, sir!
As always, you lay out a well reasoned argument for the considerations that must be evaluated. Unfortunately, I don’t think Jerry will approach it in the same manner. Combine his love of Dak with is eternal “we are ver close and only need a couple of things to break our way” outlook, I think he will rework that contract regardless of how this goes the rest of the year. And this is why the Cowboys will continue to wallow in mediocrity while making piles of money for Jerry.