N Zone
Footballguy
Honestly, I hate those guys. No thanks.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
2024 Cowboys Thread. “Dak doesn’t play for money”. Well then shut up and sign a league minimum deal (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Bankerguy
- Start date
Cowboysfan8
Footballguy
Now sign Dak to a huge extension in 3,2,1…
rockaction
Footballguy
NO WAY was that ever working. Like, you had to be smoking some copious hopium for that one. And I'm not talking about Dallas fans in this thread. I'm talking the oddsmakers, everyone in general. Jerry Jones's prostate can't fit in the same room with his ego, never mind Belichick fitting in that same room.
Jones: Cowboys to keep McCarthy as coach in '24
Mike McCarthy, who has one year left on his contract, will return as head coach of the Dallas Cowboys in 2024, owner and GM Jerry Jones announced.
I love McCarthy staying in Dallas. If they can keep Quinn that makes for one of the strongest 1-2 coaching tandems in the league.
This isn't like Philadelphia where the team looked to quit and the coaching staff looked lost and incompetent. They had a bad game at the end.
And yes, the soft division is a factor. But if you fire Mike McCarthy, 25 other coaches probably should be fired.
A phrase I'm using a lot lately that I think fits with this:
"Focus on the Movie. Not the Snapshot."
Obviously the last game was terrible.
But big picture, this was a strong team and performed well and fought hard. They looked prepared and importantly, their best players in Prescott and Parsons seemed totally bought in.
"Focus on the Movie. Not the Snapshot."
Obviously the last game was terrible.
But big picture, this was a strong team and performed well and fought hard. They looked prepared and importantly, their best players in Prescott and Parsons seemed totally bought in.
massraider
Footballguy
The other options:
1. keep him this year, with a $59 mill cap hit, and he hits free agency next year (has no-tag clause)
2. Post June 1 cap hit, and spread a $62 mill cap hit over this year and next.
I don't know where the 2025 cut talk means, he's a 2025 free agent.
rockaction
Footballguy
Do you really think he's a strong coach along with Quinn?
I don't know. Honestly asking. He's calling offensive plays, and he was seemingly effective with it, but that defense was a paper tiger, IMO, and it has to do partially with scheme.
I'm still having trouble with them not being able to stop the run while their best run defender lines up along the EDGE constantly. I don't blame them for having Parsons exclusively rush the passer, but it would seem they really need to focus on another MLB if Parsons is going to be strictly a defensive line guy now. (And I'm uniquely aware of Parsons' LB/EDGE distribution because I roster him in dynasty. He's completely an EDGE now that moves all over the line. He's Quinn's "Leo" in the defense he runs and that he ran in Seattle.)
It just . . . they got run on by a bunch of teams again and they don't seem like they're set to correct that. Now that might be a GM problem, but dang if they didn't have personnel that could easily stop the run with a flip of the switch and they decided against that (of course, you put the player in a bad position when you do that, especially when you asked him to bulk up for defensive line duties, so I guess it's a personnel thing more than a coaching thing).
Absolutely.
He took a good QB and had him playing at MVP level.
He's got a proven track record.
Last edited:
rockaction
Footballguy
Thanks. I have to admit I get a lot of information via consensus on this board, and if this board is down on a guy, I listen and then try to read other sources.
The board does not like this guy. Old Packers fans and now Dallas fans alike scratch their heads.
I was inclined to think he was good because the results were good both in Green Bay and Dallas, but even he admitted he needed time off to modernize his offense. I just don't really know. That's why I'm not in the business of judging coaches who judge players that I'm not in a position of knowledge to judge. I have to go by results or consenus. His results are good. The consensus isn't.
That's a long-winded way of saying I defer to consensus or results unless something is glaringly wrong, like Nathaniel Hackett's tenure as coach of Denver. That was obvious. But in this case, the results are good and the consensus isn't, so it sends me a bit haywire.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
I love it too as a Packer fan….Jones: Cowboys to keep McCarthy as coach in '24
Mike McCarthy, who has one year left on his contract, will return as head coach of the Dallas Cowboys in 2024, owner and GM Jerry Jones announced.www.espn.com
I love McCarthy staying in Dallas. If they can keep Quinn that makes for one of the strongest 1-2 coaching tandems in the league.
This isn't like Philadelphia where the team looked to quit and the coaching staff looked lost and incompetent. They had a bad game at the end.
And yes, the soft division is a factor. But if you fire Mike McCarthy, 25 other coaches probably should be fired.
Summer Wheat
Footballguy
We all have seen over the years that Dak is just not a "prime time playoff" QB. Cowboys have to figure out what they are going to do. No way can they extend him again at this point. Dak just makes the huge mistakes in the big games to put Cowboys behind the 8 ball. Dak spotted GB 14 right off the bat. Tough to recover.
Stat line meant nothing in that game.
In FF I always loved when my QB went down by 4 scores in the first half. That means soft defense and a bunch of garbage points that mean nothing in the end result. That is Daks MO.
For some reason Dak just makes the huge mistakes in the big games to put Cowboys behind the 8 ball.
Boston
Footballguy
I think many people grade people by either being great or bad...you see it with the QB discussions all the time (and it can be painful at times)...McCarthy is a solid HC with an impressive 271-167 regular season record which includes 11 out of 17 years with double-digit wins...you don't get a record like that by being a bad HC...unfortunately in those 17 years he only has 2 years where his team won more than 1 playoff game in a season...considering the fact his teams have usually been very talented and he has been extremely fortunate with the QB position that is not overly impressive...he is what he is...an HC that will get you to good but is probably not going to contribute to getting you to that next level when you are playing the legit contenders that usually have quality HC's on the other sideline...I don't think anyone will be surprised if the 2024 Cowboy season is pretty similar to the past 3 seasons because that is what you get with Mike McCarthy teams.
rockaction
Footballguy
Thanks. This is honestly what I was thinking. A lot of people have a "Super Bowl victory or bust" mentality in the NFL, and it's a fair mentality given how America treats its winners and losers. But it doesn't make a coach a bad coach if he's not a top-five guy. So perhaps the board is a little skewed towards disparagement when they should be more nuanced.
That said, what you said also makes a lot sense, and it doesn't mean the Cowboys should have retained McCarthy if he's a guy getting constantly outcoached in big moments. That's also a nuance we should acknowledge. We all know Jerry Jones wants the trophy, not merely to be competitive.
Judged against that backdrop, I'm not sure about the move.
Fix the run defense first, though, then worry about the coaches.
Boston
Footballguy
In these situations (be it HC or QB) you also need to have a viable plan B...getting rid of someone is the easy part (and the part many fans are very vocal about)...the difficult part is who do you replace them with...have you really thought this thru...it can always be worse...this situation seems to be magnified with BB on the market as he seemed like a legit plan B but that was all speculation based on people like us on a message board or the media and maybe that was not a viable option for whatever reason.
Last edited:
Doug B
Footballguy
All day. Fan bases, generally -- not 100% of the time, but generally -- are just wrong about this kind of stuff.
"But ... but ... we're MAD! And LET DOWN! Expectations! Doing the same things! Getting the same results! [Sam Kinison yelling Oh-AAAoh!]"
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
Very true.
Soulfly3
Footballguy
no kdding, you think guys like Vrabel or Bill have any interest in coming to a team that they won't actually be the coach of?
jerry ain't dumb... he knows who is/isnt within his grasp
I love it too as a Packer fan….Jones: Cowboys to keep McCarthy as coach in '24
Mike McCarthy, who has one year left on his contract, will return as head coach of the Dallas Cowboys in 2024, owner and GM Jerry Jones announced.
I love McCarthy staying in Dallas. If they can keep Quinn that makes for one of the strongest 1-2 coaching tandems in the league.
This isn't like Philadelphia where the team looked to quit and the coaching staff looked lost and incompetent. They had a bad game at the end.
And yes, the soft division is a factor. But if you fire Mike McCarthy, 25 other coaches probably should be fired.
I'm sure that'll be a common thought as Cowboys are hated by many.
But this is the worst Dallas news possible for NFC teams in my opinion.
rockaction
Footballguy
Understood.
But I think many fans lose sight that only 1 team wins each year. 31 teams will "fail" at the goal of a Super Bowl. Only 8 make to the second round of playoffs.
Just the fact many see this season as a failure or "that's what you get" is a great illustration. I don't think there's a fan base in the country that wouldn't jump out of their seat if you could guarantee them a 12-5 record and their chances as a heavy favorite in a playoff game at home in the first week.
Yet plenty wanted to fire the coach over that.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
I wasn’t overwhelmed by McCarthy as a coach in Green Bay. He wasn’t consistently creative — though he had some amazing moments — as an offensive play caller. He struggled to field a competitive defense at times. He had massive gaffes in clock management. And his high-seed teams failed to win year after year in the playoffs (apart from a single season when he had possibly the most stacked roster in team history).I love it too as a Packer fan….Jones: Cowboys to keep McCarthy as coach in '24
Mike McCarthy, who has one year left on his contract, will return as head coach of the Dallas Cowboys in 2024, owner and GM Jerry Jones announced.
I love McCarthy staying in Dallas. If they can keep Quinn that makes for one of the strongest 1-2 coaching tandems in the league.
This isn't like Philadelphia where the team looked to quit and the coaching staff looked lost and incompetent. They had a bad game at the end.
And yes, the soft division is a factor. But if you fire Mike McCarthy, 25 other coaches probably should be fired.
I'm sure that'll be a common thought as Cowboys are hated by many.
But this is the worst Dallas news possible for NFC teams in my opinion.
Everything Cowboys fans are seeing, Packer fans have already seen. He’s the same guy. Same flaws. Same strengths. I expect his teams to contend for a division title each year and lose early in the playoffs, typically in some visibly painful way.
Boston
Footballguy
Big picture I agree…but with McCarhy you have a legit MO…his teams underachieve in the playoffs…they just don’t lose to better teams but they underachieve and I think that is the issue here…he has/had a very talented team and right now has shown nothing to make you think he can do anything other then having a good regular season…and to be honest with you I would be far more impressed with that if he was doing it with a lesser talented team which he is not.
Doug B
Footballguy
That kind of ties in, though -- why are Mike McCarthy and Dennis Allen getting similar reactions from their teams' respective fan bases? One has a lot of skins on the wall (yeah, yeah ... "but muh playoffs!") and the other, um, has a lot less skins.
Isn't playoff success kind of chancy, anyway? Is playoff success more "doing some specific, identifiable, and repeatable thing correctly to ensure wins", or more "having a better/healthier roster; or getting the ball bounces that day, etc.".
rockaction
Footballguy
It is to a degree, but
it's more this than your subsequent predicate. At least, in my opinion.
Baseball is easier to say it's more chancy due to the sample sizes in baseball and the isolation of pitcher and batter. Billy Beane being able to claim probability problems rather than structural ones holds more weight in baseball. Football is all about adjustments and planning in the first place. Yes, roster luck and ball bounces are huge, but I'd argue football playoff winners seem more actualized and concrete as the best teams because of the nature of the game.
I can't think of too many stunning upsets in the SB where you really thought that one team was still better than the other after the game. The closest one I can think of is the Giants-Bills tilt back in '90. The Bills were probably a better team seven out of ten times.
Absolutely. We see it every game and people seem like they don't notice it. Tons of games are decided by a VERY small difference. A throw is 2 inches different and the Win turns to a Loss.
That's not coaching. That's how a game breaks sometimes.
I never cease to be amazed at the narrative of how a coach or player is great or terrible and if one thing had gone .0001% differently, the narrative would be the opposite.
I think you have to focus big picture.
Again, every fan in the country would kill to have "yet another" 12-5 season and host a first round playoff game as a heavy favorite. That's a home run.
rockaction
Footballguy
Isn't that performance and skill, though? And you're paying for performance or how to coax performance out of these guys.
It's not luck. Baseball is a game of inches. Football is also a game of inches. But those inches are earned and determined by performance. Baseball is determined whether a pitch is an inch one way or the other. That's skill. Football throws are similar.
You can call the recovery of a fumble luck if you want, though I'd argue there's a real skill in recovering fumbles and it's why they have a hands team for onsides kicks, but not a throw that's off. That's not a mere bounce of the ball.
And applied to coaching, those inches really matter. They're not happenstance. Take the Eagles game the other night when Goedert ran a route that Devonta was essentially running. That's either a missed duty (showing a lack of "coaching" as received by the player) or an error in play design (another lack of coaching). Again, guys were only feet off from their assignment, and it made all the difference in the world. But it was poor coaching or poor transmission of the coaching that led to that.
I'm not so sure these things are as chancy as you guys are making them out to be. Belichick's greatest accomplishment in the Super Bowls, in my opinion, was having Malcolm Butler know which play Seattle was going to run at the goal line and Butler listening to that and acting on it. That wasn't chance. It looked chaotic, but it was all coaching.
Doug B
Footballguy
... I'd disagree that they knew what play Seattle was going to run. The positive outcome for New England makes it look like "C'mon ... of course they knew!" But that's all hindsight.
Regarding luck: If Butler's cleat slips on the turf that play, or if a Patriots teammate accidentally impeded Butler's movement just so ... the interception never happens.
Cowboysfan8
Footballguy
FWIW, (nothing really) I have no problem with MM right now. I mean, what’s the alternative? Idk
Quinn…..not so much
rockaction
Footballguy
Oh no. It came out after that Belichick had coached his guys to do exactly what Butler did at the goal line in that very situation. (Not the end of the game, per se . . . but they'd gone over it in practice.) This is the coach who would tell punt returners which shoulder to look over in instances where the punter was in a certain position or whatnot. Ask Edelman about that. Or Butler, even. It was heavily documented that Belichick had coached them during the week that they were going to possibly run a pick play.
The Malcolm Butler Interception | Do Your Job: Bill Belichick & the 2014 Patriots | NFL Network
Get the inside scoop and analysis from Bill Belichick and the New England Patriots players and coaches on one of the most discussed plays in recent history a...
www.youtube.com
"What’s more impressive is that Butler was prepared to be out there in the first place. As wonderfully documented, New England expected Seattle to run a pick play if they made it down to the goal line. The Patriots truly leave no stone unturned, as even the fifth-string cornerback was practicing that route."
Looking Back on the Malcolm Butler Interception
Four years ago today, New England Patriots Malcolm Butler made perhaps the biggest play in the history professional football.
lastwordonsports.com
Last edited:
Doug B
Footballguy
Oh no. It came out after that Belichick had coached his guys to do exactly what Butler did at the goal line in that very situation. (Not the end of the game, per se . . . but they'd gone over it in practice.) This is the coach who would tell punt returns which should to look over in instances where the punter was in a certain position or whatnot. Ask Edelman about that. Or Butler, even.
The Malcolm Butler Interception | Do Your Job: Bill Belichick & the 2014 Patriots | NFL Network
Get the inside scoop and analysis from Bill Belichick and the New England Patriots players and coaches on one of the most discussed plays in recent history a...
Still hindsight IMHO. They had no way of knowing Seattle wouldn't show one thing and do another. I'll grant they had good information on tendencies, but having certainty was a patent impossibility.
This might all come down to different general worldview perspectives between you and I (or any two people who disagree on this topic).
EDIT: Something I feel I should add in fairness is that had Russell Wilson gotten a spidey-sense about the play and then audibled into a run -- or even changed his mind post-snap and threw to someone else, ran a bootleg, etc. ... that would've been luck on Seattle's part, too. Because Wilson would have had no idea in advance that his actions would, with certainty, have worked.
Last edited:
rockaction
Footballguy
Not particularly. Nothing could ever be said to be certain, but to have been prepared for almost all of the previous contingencies out of that formation is "good" coaching. It's not luck. Perhaps it is a worldview. If you're like me, the Boy Scout motto "Be Prepared" is an excellent motto. It can mitigate things that go wrong and can be instrumental in them going right.
I'm not arguing that things are certain, but I am arguing that within the limits of human behavior, one can be ostensibly prepared for things that may come one's way.
There are the known knowns
That is, the things we know we know
Then there are the known unknowns,
That is, the things we know we do not know
Then there are the unknown unknowns
That is, the things we didn't know that we didn't know
I think you're thinking a bit too much about life existing in the last two lines of that little interlude and not enough how life really is on a football field, which is generally operating along the first four lines. And your job is to get your players prepared for how to react to the known unknowns.
eta* Wow, just pulled this from a Bobby Layne post. Look at Ryans tell Christian Harris what play is coming and what to do about it here before his pick-six. That's knowing with certainty.
Last edited:
BassNBrew
Footballguy
They beat up on Cupcakes this year. Outside of Detroit who they needed the officials help and a coaching blinder to win at home, they beat no one playing well. The SF game showed you who this team was/is.
Doug B
Footballguy
Still hindsight IMHO (on Ari Meirov's part, to be clear).
Ryans wasn't right until everything played out. Before that pass, Flacco had opportunities to do something different (audible, read Harris' movement or eyes or something and go elsewhere, etc.). The Browns' receiver also could've read Harris and broken off his route.
Ryans was prepared, he understood the Browns' tendencies, and he gave Harris a solid plan for that moment. But that still wasn't predetermination, IMHO.
Had Harris missed the INT, tipped the ball to the Browns' receiver, and the Browns score a TD on that play ... Ryans' coaching job is still as good. But he wouldn't get credited for it. And if Ryans' seat were warm (and it's not, obviously) ... angry fans would be completely unaware that he did a great job as coach on that play. All because Harris would've missed the INT an inch.
Last edited:
rockaction
Footballguy
Yeah, I think that you think you're dealing in shades of gray and I'm dealing in faulty absolutes. I think that's our problem. I'm really not. I'm arguing you can only be prepared to a point, but there are a ton of numbers on the sliding scale between absolute and nothing.
I'm giving you a concrete example of somebody acting with a great degree of certainty that absolutely happened because they acted in a way that anticipated another's behavior.
There was no hindsight involved. Ryans told him where to be. He was there. The play happened. Could it in some alternate universe have happened differently if Joe Flacco looked a different way? Sure. But we'll never know.
Execution I get as a distinction. That's not too hard to wrap one's head around.
But I think you're getting hung up on abstractions to prove a point that nothing is absolutely certain. I already know that and am asking you to consider that there is a vast, vast grey area that lies in between zero and infinity and to consider where along the scale a coach sits.
I'm giving you a concrete example of somebody acting with a great degree of certainty that absolutely happened because they acted in a way that anticipated another's behavior.
There was no hindsight involved. Ryans told him where to be. He was there. The play happened. Could it in some alternate universe have happened differently if Joe Flacco looked a different way? Sure. But we'll never know.
Execution I get as a distinction. That's not too hard to wrap one's head around.
But I think you're getting hung up on abstractions to prove a point that nothing is absolutely certain. I already know that and am asking you to consider that there is a vast, vast grey area that lies in between zero and infinity and to consider where along the scale a coach sits.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Don’t think it matters whether McCarthy or someone else is the coach, at least for next year. Dak Prescott isn’t going to win a Super Bowl. That’s the problem the Cowboys need to solve.
Can you elaborate on how Prescott is the problem?
What would you suggest they do?
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
Strange quote from Mike today, but his pressers have often been a bit strange.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Prescott has repeatedly flamed out in big spots. He's 2-5 lifetime in the playoffs, and now it's a stink that won't wash off him. You can see it's in his head. It's not like he's one of these young guys who can shake it off as a bad beat and turn it around, at a certain point it's just who he is. He's in his 30s, if he hasn't figured it out yet he's not going to - and in fact the longer it goes the worse it gets. No lack of talent around him to blame. He's an above average regular season QB who is missing that thing that all the greats have when it comes to playoff time. Who knows how differently last week game goes if he doesn't throw those two disastrous first half INTs?
I have no real suggestions for the Cowboys, sounds like they're stuck with Dak for at least another year. I don't know the details of his contract and whatnot, but if Jerry wants another ring before he gives up the ghost, I'm certain he's going to have to do it with a different QB.
1. Let him play out the last year.
2. Baring a 7-1 or 8-0 start, play Lance.
3. Draft a QB in round 1 or 2- Ewers, McCarthy, Shedur Sanders.
4. Do not resign him to an extension.
5. He’s 30. An extension will be at a minimum of Burrow’s AAV of $55 million. Don’t see any way he gets better, in fact, it’s likely he gets worse as he ages.
6. The value of a good QB on a rookie contract is incredibly valuable- it gives you a massive edge in free agency.
7. There is inherent risk with this, it might not work, but this team is further away from a title than most people think- it’s not like they’ve gotten close.
I know you didn’t ask me, but the alternative to doing the same thing yet again has to be said.
Cap hit of $59M, second highest in the league.
That does not account for the $36m that will count against the cap for the two voidable years they added.
He has a no trade clause as well a clause that he can't be tagged. I'd also add my commentary he appears to have a very good agent.
Dallas as of right now is $17M over the cap.
Some of you want them to just move on after one year and not touch his contract. It may be possible but would be painful and for that one year he's going to count $95 million against the cap, spread out over a few seasons, and when he walks in FA you won't get more then a comp pick back and probably in cap hell to sign a QB and drafting late. It's a tough road.
Dak holds all the cards.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
Chargers: 20-17 at home. Close game the whole way. Chargers were 2-3 at the time. If you grade that win, it's a D+, barely passing.
Rams: Rams were 3-5 at the time. Williams was out. Cowboys at home coming off a bye. Nice win, but still against a team struggling.
Seahawks: 6-6 at the time. Cowboys at home. AT 8:49 in the 4th Seattle had a 79% chance of winning before collapsing. Not impressive at all
Philly: Been beat to death. We know Philly wasn't a signature win
Det: Between the refs gift wrapping this and Dan Campbell's brain fart this was a late Christmas present that should have been an L.
I coined Dallas as the muffins when discussing the Eagles schedule back after the Eagles beat Dallas. Eagles fans were pointing to this as a great win. While I conceded Dallas wasn't the typical cupcake Philly feasts on, they were at least a muffin because Dallas hadn't proven they were able to beat anyone decent in a healthy way. Dak wasn't playing at an MVP level, he was beating up on the Giants, the Jets, the Panthers, the Commanders, etc. That 42-10 loss at SF exposed who they were.
Pip's Invitation
Footballguy
Patriots first SB win over Rams. Greatest Show on Turf vs. a team that was really in the middle of its rebuild process. Belichick vastly outcoached Martz.
Also the first Broncos' SB win, mainly because the AFC had lost 14 straight or something like that, most of them in blowouts, so no one was respecting the AFC representative by the mid-90s.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
I'm sure Jerry wants another ring, but staying relevant is more important, and keeping both McCarthy and Prescott means the team will still be good enough to win 10 games or so and be a playoff team and be talked about a lot. Changing either or both and having to restart a bit could result in a season or two of stepping back and he could not handle his team not being in the playoff mix for even a season or two. Plus, as his dismissal of Jimmy Johnson showed, he is obsessed with credit, and if he fires McCarthy and brings in a new coach, and the new coach leads them to a Super Bowl right away, the coach will get the credit, not Jerry, and Jerry's ego cannot handle that. Cowboys fans are basically stuck with him like Raiders fans were stuck with Al Davis for as long as he is still with us.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
I appreciate your broader points here Joe. A lot of the time fans see the actual outcomes and treat them as “fixed” or “absolute.” When in reality much of the world contains significant variance or randomness.
On the flip side, Dak didn’t throw glitchy INTs in the last few playoff games I’ve seen him lose. (Though my memory is imperfect!). He made bad throws. Bad reads. Poor decisions. He has not played well against Green Bay generally. Is that bad luck? Random? Doesn’t seem like it — the nature of the losses has a similar pattern.
Similarly, when Mike McCarthy makes poor late game decisions or does a crappy job of clock management….that isn’t just random, bad luck — that’s who McCarthy is IMO. He doesn’t get the basics of clock mgmt. Most hard core Packer fans know it — we had to watch it over and over and over…..
And back to one of your other main points, I agree that most fans would love to have their team finish 12-5 and make the playoffs each year. (But they would also get frustrated if the losses appeared to follow a pattern each year…..)
