2022 Cowboys: The Mike McCarthy Experience continues

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
11,928
They are tied into millions on Zeke and Dak. Salary cap hell.
On the other hand, SF may have a free QB for the next two or three years.
I think Zeke only counts like 5.5 million if they cut him after June 1st.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
44,824
Dallas showed up today too which made it more infuriating. The defense did enough to win. Dak didn’t stop the playoff failure talk last week…just merely postponed it. He had the game for the taking today and couldn’t get it done. They didn’t need to score 30+.

And Mike McCarthy gets an assist for not even giving Dak the chance on that drive in the 3rd quarter tied at 9. You gotta go for it on 4th and 5 there. The defense was playing well and Dak probably could have used a confidence boost and that was a great opportunity. Instead, the predictable punt almost seemed to change the whole demeanor of the game. Despite the Cowboys being tied there, it felt like they had the upper hand most of the game. SF was dodging disaster with that Dak pick near end of half and then again earlier that 3rd quarter after the fumble the Cowboys recovered. Purdy had been under duress all game and looked flustered. Who knows how he reacts if Dallas goes for it and scores that drive and he gets the ball back trailing. Just spineless coaching.
Yup. I’m not even a Cowboys fan but I’d be so annoyed by that good if I were. It was right there. The defense showed up in a big way to start. Dak’s first half INTs and Pollard’s injury really doomed this team. McCarthy is just so consistently gutless when it counts. And Jerry is ok with that because…reasons.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
44,256
Hartford, CT
Yup. I’m not even a Cowboys fan but I’d be so annoyed by that good if I were. It was right there. The defense showed up in a big way to start. Dak’s first half INTs and Pollard’s injury really doomed this team. McCarthy is just so consistently gutless when it counts. And Jerry is ok with that because…reasons.
McCarthy runs a competent enough operation and doesn’t step on Jerry’s toes. If Jerry brought in Sean Payton, Jerry (and his son Stephen, for that matter) would have to cede some influence over football ops.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
McCarthy runs a competent operation and doesn’t step on Jerry’s toes. If Jerry brought in Sean Payton, Jerry (and his son Stephen, for that matter) would have to cede some influence over football ops.
Exactly. This is why the Payton "rumors" have always seemed misguided. Payton isn't taking a job without control. Jerry stopped giving up control a long time ago. It just doesn't fit. He'll just keep looking for the next Barry Switzer.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
44,824
McCarthy runs a competent operation and doesn’t step on Jerry’s toes. If Jerry brought in Sean Payton, Jerry (and his son Stephen, for that matter) would have to cede some influence over football ops.
Yup. And that’s the problem with this team. Competent coaching generally doesn’t win titles. The Cowboys are always playing a man down on that front.
 

Greg29fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
20,303
NC
Pretty obvious that Dak isn't the guy to get them over the hump and is just another player they've spent big money on to re-sign that's basically just stealing money, same with Fat Zeke.

Once Pollard went down that was it.

And I know McCarthy is a popular punching bag coach, and that's fine, but I thought the job he did navigating the games with Cooper Rush with only one loss and then Dak's own sometimes awful play this year was about as good as anybody could do. Yeah we all know his deficiencies with clock management et al., but I'm fine with him.

I assume Dan Quinn will be off to a HC job this time around but would be thrilled if he came back again. I would gladly can Kellen Moore, who runs the same blah Garrett/Linehan offense that seems to grind to a standstill in games like today's but Jerrah thinks he's the next boy genius.
 
Last edited:

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
58,511
Does Jones think he’s going to love forever? It’s odd the older he’s gotten the less urgency he seems to have to win. He doesn’t seem like a zen/Buddhist kinda dude, so I wonder what he’s thinking.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
44,824
Pretty obvious that Dak isn't the guy to get them over the hump and is just another player they've spent big money on to re-sign that's basically just stealing money, same with Fat Zeke.

Once Pollard went down that was it.

And I know McCarthy is a popular punching bag coach, and that's fine, but I thought the job he did navigating the games with Cooper Rush with only one loss and then Dak's own sometimes awful play this year was about as good as anybody could do. Yeah we all know his deficiencies with clock management et al., but I'm fine with him.

I assume Dan Quinn will be off to a HC job this time around but would be thrilled if he came back again. I would gladly can Kellen Moore, who runs the same blah Garrett/Linehan offense that seems to grind to a standstill in games like today's but Jerrah thinks he's the next boy genius.
I think McCarthy is a perfectly fine and even good regular season coach but something always seems to be missing in the playoffs. Punting on 4th and 5 at the the Niners’ 40 in a tie game is a good example to me. Up to that point, the defense was playing well so that was the perfect time to make an aggressive call. But he couldn’t do it. Now, maybe the decision looks a lot better if Diggs doesn’t choke that next drive but I just thought it was the perfect time to take a chance. Just feels like Dallas coaches rarely do that.

Agree on Kellen Moore. I know SF is a great defense but he didn’t have much once Pollard went down. Dan Quinn deserves a lot of credit. He was pretty great all year.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
11,357
Washington, DC
It always feels like McCarthy’s otherwise competent coaching would be improved with a dedicated guy to help him manage the clock and to make go for it decisions. Hell, let Jerry do it
 

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
11,928
I think McCarthy is a perfectly fine and even good regular season coach but something always seems to be missing in the playoffs. Punting on 4th and 5 at the the Niners’ 40 in a tie game is a good example to me. Up to that point, the defense was playing well so that was the perfect time to make an aggressive call. But he couldn’t do it. Now, maybe the decision looks a lot better if Diggs doesn’t choke that next drive but I just thought it was the perfect time to take a chance. Just feels like Dallas coaches rarely do that.

Agree on Kellen Moore. I know SF is a great defense but he didn’t have much once Pollard went down. Dan Quinn deserves a lot of credit. He was pretty great all year.
McCarthy is who he is and it's the reason most DAL fans didn't want him. He was brought in to win in the playoffs, but his playoff track record isn't good on decision-making. That 2014 NFCCG was utterly brutal and he had peak Aaron Rodgers. He wasn't all of the sudden going to grow a spine with Dak at QB.

OBviously yesterday wasn't all McCarthy's fault, but he didn't maximize their chances. Pollard going down was absolutely killer....he was forcing SF to respect the run. But you have to coach with what you have, and he still had a golden opportunity on that 4th and 5 in a tie game to make a statement. Classic "play to win" vs "play not to lose" moment and he chose the latter....and he will do the exact same thing again next year in the same spot. It's who McCarthy is.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
33,643
Hingham, MA
I'm honestly surprised McCarthy is taking so much heat for the 4th and 5. It's not like the Dallas offense was going up and down the field at that point. I'd have had no problem with Belichick making a similar call, especially given how the punt turned out. The problem was that Kittle made a great play, Diggs missed a chance at a pick, there was an unfortunate defensive holding (maybe/probably the right call, but Purdy was never going to get a throw off against the rush on that play). It took a lot of things going wrong for SF to end up scoring a TD on that drive. Obviously the decision still doesn't look good even if they hold SF to a FG, but without that holding call wasn't it going to be close to a 50 yard attempt?
 

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
11,928
I'm honestly surprised McCarthy is taking so much heat for the 4th and 5. It's not like the Dallas offense was going up and down the field at that point. I'd have had no problem with Belichick making a similar call, especially given how the punt turned out. The problem was that Kittle made a great play, Diggs missed a chance at a pick, there was an unfortunate defensive holding (maybe/probably the right call, but Purdy was never going to get a throw off against the rush on that play). It took a lot of things going wrong for SF to end up scoring a TD on that drive. Obviously the decision still doesn't look good even if they hold SF to a FG, but without that holding call wasn't it going to be close to a 50 yard attempt?
Dallas had driven from their own 11 or 12 I think on that drive, so they had been moving it there and with the defense playing well, I think it's more of an excuse to go for it on 4th and 5 there....it's a pretty classic "go for it" situation anyway unless your offense is really bad. I thought Dak had been throwing it well that drive (he BARELY missed CeeDee for a huge gain on the 3rd and 5 play before the punt under heavy pressure). I felt like it was a pivotal point in the game where if you score that drive and take the lead, you really turn up the pressure on Purdy who had been shaky to that point. I think SF is a fundamentally better team than Dallas, so you try and be more aggressive when you are on the road as a slight dog.

In the larger scheme of things, I agree the decision itself didn't cost them the game. But it's the classic McCarthy "playing not to lose" that we see so often in the playoffs. Shave a few winning pct points off here....a few there.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
44,824
I'm honestly surprised McCarthy is taking so much heat for the 4th and 5. It's not like the Dallas offense was going up and down the field at that point. I'd have had no problem with Belichick making a similar call, especially given how the punt turned out. The problem was that Kittle made a great play, Diggs missed a chance at a pick, there was an unfortunate defensive holding (maybe/probably the right call, but Purdy was never going to get a throw off against the rush on that play). It took a lot of things going wrong for SF to end up scoring a TD on that drive. Obviously the decision still doesn't look good even if they hold SF to a FG, but without that holding call wasn't it going to be close to a 50 yard attempt?
But that’s the thing. Shit happens. He gave the ball back to SF when he had a chance to put some real pressure on SF in a completely manageable situation. Dak was pretty awful so maybe that drove the decision but in a road game against a really good opponent, I always want my coach being aggressive.

To be clear, this wasn’t a McCarthy loss. I put the bulk on Dak. He gave SF their first points. He threw the killer INT when game was tied and Cowboys were driving and were due to receive the 2nd half kickoff.

But in a tight game, you can always count on a McCarthy team to blink first, which is why I rather he go out aggressive, if he’s going to go out.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
33,643
Hingham, MA
Dallas had driven from their own 11 or 12 I think on that drive, so they had been moving it there and with the defense playing well, I think it's more of an excuse to go for it on 4th and 5 there....it's a pretty classic "go for it" situation anyway unless your offense is really bad. I thought Dak had been throwing it well that drive (he BARELY missed CeeDee for a huge gain on the 3rd and 5 play before the punt under heavy pressure). I felt like it was a pivotal point in the game where if you score that drive and take the lead, you really turn up the pressure on Purdy who had been shaky to that point. I think SF is a fundamentally better team than Dallas, so you try and be more aggressive when you are on the road as a slight dog.

In the larger scheme of things, I agree the decision itself didn't cost them the game. But it's the classic McCarthy "playing not to lose" that we see so often in the playoffs. Shave a few winning pct points off here....a few there.
See I guess I look at it from the perspective of you're facing a very good D, you already drove it some 40 yards, it's really hard to drive it 80 or 90 yards against that team. So, you punt, pin, play D, and get it back. Plus it's not like it was the 4th quarter, it was mid-3rd. I really didn't think it was all that controversial or pivotal in real time but it seems like I'm in the minority. If you don't get it, then a struggling SF offense gets the ball at the 40 and close to a take the lead FG. It didn't work out but I don't think it was a clear cut bad decision.
But that’s the thing. Shit happens. He gave the ball back to SF when he had a chance to put some real pressure on SF in a completely manageable situation. Dak was pretty awful so maybe that drove the decision but in a road game against a really good opponent, I always want my coach being aggressive.

To be clear, this wasn’t a McCarthy loss. I put the bulk on Dak. He gave SF their first points. He threw the killer INT when game was tied and Cowboys were driving and were due to receive the 2nd half kickoff.

But in a tight game, you can always count on a McCarthy team to blink first, which is why I rather he go out aggressive, if he’s going to go out.
See above response.

I get where you guys are coming from. I think there's room for debate here though.

It's not exactly the same, in many ways, but I think back to the 2003 divisional Pats vs. Titans game. Pats drove to the Titans 39 with 10 mins to play in a tie game. Faced a 4th and 4. Punted and pinned them at the 7. Stopped the Titans and got it back at the Titans 40. Ended up kicking a FG to take the lead.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
44,824
See I guess I look at it from the perspective of you're facing a very good D, you already drove it some 40 yards, it's really hard to drive it 80 or 90 yards against that team. So, you punt, pin, play D, and get it back. Plus it's not like it was the 4th quarter, it was mid-3rd. I really didn't think it was all that controversial or pivotal in real time but it seems like I'm in the minority. If you don't get it, then a struggling SF offense gets the ball at the 40 and close to a take the lead FG. It didn't work out but I don't think it was a clear cut bad decision.

See above response.

I get where you guys are coming from. I think there's room for debate here though.

It's not exactly the same, in many ways, but I think back to the 2003 divisional Pats vs. Titans game. Pats drove to the Titans 39 with 10 mins to play in a tie game. Faced a 4th and 4. Punted and pinned them at the 7. Stopped the Titans and got it back at the Titans 40. Ended up kicking a FG to take the lead.
Yes, absolutely room for debate. Big difference with your Pats example though is that they had the kicking GOAT and the Cowboys had a guy who missed like 6 of 7 PATs. Thankfully, Maher rebounded but I would have been thinking TD, if I were MM. But there is absolutely another universe where he punts and Cowboys win that game. They just didn’t make any of the critical plays and had some bad luck mixed in.
 

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
11,928
See I guess I look at it from the perspective of you're facing a very good D, you already drove it some 40 yards, it's really hard to drive it 80 or 90 yards against that team. So, you punt, pin, play D, and get it back. Plus it's not like it was the 4th quarter, it was mid-3rd. I really didn't think it was all that controversial or pivotal in real time but it seems like I'm in the minority. If you don't get it, then a struggling SF offense gets the ball at the 40 and close to a take the lead FG. It didn't work out but I don't think it was a clear cut bad decision.

See above response.

I get where you guys are coming from. I think there's room for debate here though.

It's not exactly the same, in many ways, but I think back to the 2003 divisional Pats vs. Titans game. Pats drove to the Titans 39 with 10 mins to play in a tie game. Faced a 4th and 4. Punted and pinned them at the 7. Stopped the Titans and got it back at the Titans 40. Ended up kicking a FG to take the lead.
I think I also like going for it more on the road (esp as an underdog). If you’re at home, you have a little extra utility in pinning your opponent deep with the crowd noise on your side, etc down near the goalline where it will be hard on the offense. The offense doesnt have to worry about that as much when the crowd is on their side.

If Kittle doesn’t make that ridiculous catch or Diggs holds onto a gift-wrapped INT, then yeah, we’re not really debating that decision as much. But it was mostly an illustration of how McCarthy coaches in the playoffs more than claiming that decision was monumental in terms of winning the game. I think most win pct models had going for it as about 2 percentage points better than punting so it wasn’t egregious. But still….
 

trekfan55

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 29, 2004
10,073
Panama
I'm honestly surprised McCarthy is taking so much heat for the 4th and 5. It's not like the Dallas offense was going up and down the field at that point. I'd have had no problem with Belichick making a similar call, especially given how the punt turned out. The problem was that Kittle made a great play, Diggs missed a chance at a pick, there was an unfortunate defensive holding (maybe/probably the right call, but Purdy was never going to get a throw off against the rush on that play). It took a lot of things going wrong for SF to end up scoring a TD on that drive. Obviously the decision still doesn't look good even if they hold SF to a FG, but without that holding call wasn't it going to be close to a 50 yard attempt?
Holding calls work like that. And I think that hold on Kittle was blatant.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
33,643
Hingham, MA
Yes, absolutely room for debate. Big difference with your Pats example though is that they had the kicking GOAT and the Cowboys had a guy who missed like 6 of 7 PATs. Thankfully, Maher rebounded but I would have been thinking TD, if I were MM. But there is absolutely another universe where he punts and Cowboys win that game. They just didn’t make any of the critical plays and had some bad luck mixed in.
Yep totally agree all around.
I think I also like going for it more on the road (esp as an underdog). If you’re at home, you have a little extra utility in pinning your opponent deep with the crowd noise on your side, etc down near the goalline where it will be hard on the offense. The offense doesnt have to worry about that as much when the crowd is on their side.

If Kittle doesn’t make that ridiculous catch or Diggs holds onto a gift-wrapped INT, then yeah, we’re not really debating that decision as much. But it was mostly an illustration of how McCarthy coaches in the playoffs more than claiming that decision was monumental in terms of winning the game. I think most win pct models had going for it as about 2 percentage points better than punting so it wasn’t egregious. But still….
Good point about home vs road. And I get what you’re saying about it being a microcosm of the McCarthy experience.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
83,792
Oregon
I think it would work better if the cabinets weren't such a stark white. Also, storing the glass cooktop cleaner ON the glass cooktop is no bueno.
Skip's brother would look at that kitchen and be appalled
 

Greg29fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
20,303
NC
The play right before the punt you all are talking about was another huge, missed opportunity. They got Lamb on a LB out of the slot and he couldn't get any separation on him, forcing a tough throw/catch.

Hilton also came open on a slant but the 49ers safety got some good pressure late and Dak went for the mismatch that should've been there.
 
Last edited:

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
11,928
The play right before the punt you all are talking about was another huge, missed opportunity. They got Lamb on a LB out of the slot and he couldn't get any separation on him, forcing a tough throw/catch.

Hilton also came open on a slant but the 49ers safety got some good pressure late and Dak went for the mismatch that should've been there.
Lamb almost made a sensational catch on that play. Dak was under pressure though when he threw it so that may have saved the 49ers on that play. He prob lays it in there if he had another half second.
 

Attachments

NYCSox

chris hansen of goats
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2004
10,199
Some fancy town in CT
Pretty obvious that Dak isn't the guy to get them over the hump and is just another player they've spent big money on to re-sign that's basically just stealing money, same with Fat Zeke.

Once Pollard went down that was it.

And I know McCarthy is a popular punching bag coach, and that's fine, but I thought the job he did navigating the games with Cooper Rush with only one loss and then Dak's own sometimes awful play this year was about as good as anybody could do. Yeah we all know his deficiencies with clock management et al., but I'm fine with him.

I assume Dan Quinn will be off to a HC job this time around but would be thrilled if he came back again. I would gladly can Kellen Moore, who runs the same blah Garrett/Linehan offense that seems to grind to a standstill in games like today's but Jerrah thinks he's the next boy genius.
I mean Trent Dilfer, Joe Flacco, Brad Johnson and Jeff Hostetler are SB winning QBs. So it’s not like you need Brady or Montana though it obviously helps.
 

Rudy's Curve

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2006
2,260
I mean Trent Dilfer, Joe Flacco, Brad Johnson and Jeff Hostetler are SB winning QBs. So it’s not like you need Brady or Montana though it obviously helps.
All those guys except Flacco had the best defense in the league by a mile those years, plus it was just a different era. And as we know unfortunately, Flacco went on an all-time run which still required Rahim Moore being on the take. If I may poke my eyeballs out, last year's Rams are probably the best example of how to win in this era without an elite QB. You still need an above average one, a bunch of HOFers elsewhere and the bounces to go your way.
 
Aug 9, 2015
1,129
All those guys except Flacco had the best defense in the league by a mile those years, plus it was just a different era. And as we know unfortunately, Flacco went on an all-time run which still required Rahim Moore being on the take. If I may poke my eyeballs out, last year's Rams are probably the best example of how to win in this era without an elite QB. You still need an above average one, a bunch of HOFers elsewhere and the bounces to go your way.
I think the 9ers this year are a pretty good example too. Incredible defense and lots of playmakers on offense. Good but not elite QB play. Excellent coaching staff. (Although Shanny has his own demons.)
 

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
11,928
I think Dak is good enough to win, but he isn't going to carry a team like a Mahomes or Brady did. If he has a really good supporting cast (think Stafford/Rams last year), then he could do it. He's one of those top 10ish type QBs in the league but not a top 5. Can he peak as a top 5? I dunno...we've seen flashes, like before his calf injury in the overtime Patriots game in 2021 he was arguably playing like a top 3 QB for the first 2 months of that season. But he's never quite been able to sustain that type of play over a full season whether its because of injuries or something else. So until then, I think he's like a 8-10ish type QB. I do feel bad for him that he had a bad game against SF when a pretty average Dak performance probably wins that game....but that's life in the playoffs and life as an NFL QB. He's gonna hear about it until he proves the doubters wrong.

I think the Cowboys are a WR short right now on offense. Maybe Gallup is that guy when he's fully back from the ACL...it often takes a season to get back to previous form. But I think they should have another option behind him. The defense was good enough this year and who knows how that 49ers game finishes if Pollard doesn't get injured. The Cowboys are a good team and will be in the hunt again next year barring injuries....but they need that extra piece it feels like to put them into the elite tier of teams.

I don't like McCarthy as HC, but it sounds like he isn't going anywhere...and I'll be honest as a critic of him, he had his guys ready to play this year in the playoffs in both games. Not a lot of penalties which has plagued his teams in the past and they didn't look listless/confused/ill-prepared. So while we debated his in-game coaching to death earlier in the thread, he wasn't detrimental at all in the other stuff. His guys were ready.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
58,173
New York City
I think Dak is good enough to win, but he isn't going to carry a team like a Mahomes or Brady did. If he has a really good supporting cast (think Stafford/Rams last year), then he could do it. He's one of those top 10ish type QBs in the league but not a top 5. Can he peak as a top 5? I dunno...we've seen flashes, like before his calf injury in the overtime Patriots game in 2021 he was arguably playing like a top 3 QB for the first 2 months of that season. But he's never quite been able to sustain that type of play over a full season whether its because of injuries or something else. So until then, I think he's like a 8-10ish type QB. I do feel bad for him that he had a bad game against SF when a pretty average Dak performance probably wins that game....but that's life in the playoffs and life as an NFL QB. He's gonna hear about it until he proves the doubters wrong.

I think the Cowboys are a WR short right now on offense. Maybe Gallup is that guy when he's fully back from the ACL...it often takes a season to get back to previous form. But I think they should have another option behind him. The defense was good enough this year and who knows how that 49ers game finishes if Pollard doesn't get injured. The Cowboys are a good team and will be in the hunt again next year barring injuries....but they need that extra piece it feels like to put them into the elite tier of teams.

I don't like McCarthy as HC, but it sounds like he isn't going anywhere...and I'll be honest as a critic of him, he had his guys ready to play this year in the playoffs in both games. Not a lot of penalties which has plagued his teams in the past and they didn't look listless/confused/ill-prepared. So while we debated his in-game coaching to death earlier in the thread, he wasn't detrimental at all in the other stuff. His guys were ready.
Point of order. Dak on the Rams last year and they don't get past the Divisional round. Dak isn't great. Dak is mid.

Stafford is great.
 

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
11,928
Point of order. Dak on the Rams last year and they don't get past the Divisional round. Dak isn't great. Dak is mid.

Stafford is great.
Dak's advanced metrics numbers have typically been superior to Stafford's, though in 2021 Stafford was better than Dak. But the caveat is that 2021 was Stafford's best supporting cast ever. Has Dak ever had a cast like that? Hard to measure that type of interdependence.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
58,173
New York City
Dak's advanced metrics numbers have typically been superior to Stafford's, though in 2021 Stafford was better than Dak. But the caveat is that 2021 was Stafford's best supporting cast ever. Has Dak ever had a cast like that? Hard to measure that type of interdependence.
How great was Stafford's cast last year? Kupp and. . . . .um, nobody. I guess Odell a tiny little bit but Odell was solid because of Kupp. He's not great.

Outside of that, literally not a usable RB on the entire roster for nearly the entirety of 2021, to the point where they brought back Akers from an achilles 4 months after he tore it. Dak has CD Lamb, who is elite. He's got a phenomenal TE, although Schultz did give up at the end. And, obviously, he's got two excellent RBs to hand off and throw passes too.

Dak's supporting cast is better. The coaching is worse.
 

Oil Can Dan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2003
7,628
0-3 to 4-3
Daks' cap number goes from $19.7M this season to $49M next season (and then $51M in 2024). It'll be interesting to see if Dallas extends him now or lives with those figures then decide year-by-year on whether he's their guy.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
39,532
How great was Stafford's cast last year? Kupp and. . . . .um, nobody. I guess Odell a tiny little bit but Odell was solid because of Kupp. He's not great.

Outside of that, literally not a usable RB on the entire roster for nearly the entirety of 2021, to the point where they brought back Akers from an achilles 4 months after he tore it. Dak has CD Lamb, who is elite. He's got a phenomenal TE, although Schultz did give up at the end. And, obviously, he's got two excellent RBs to hand off and throw passes too.

Dak's supporting cast is better. The coaching is worse.
You're underselling Stafford's help this year, mostly because Kupp is that good. Dude had 145 catches, almost 2,000 yards and 16td's (IMO, the greatest season in history for a WR). But what he also does is free up the rest of them. Robert Woods was on pace for about 85 catches, 1,000 yards and 8 td's when he got hurt in week 9. Jefferson then stepped up. Even with Woods going down, he and Van combined for 95 catches, 1,358 yards and 10td's. Higbee got 61 catches.

Jefferson got hurt this season, and missed the first half of the year, and then they brought in the washed up Allen Robinson to replace Woods, which didn't work. Then he got hurt right around the time that Stafford and Kupp got hurt and Jefferson was out there by himself. But even before that, their defense was a mess early in the season, and it was over for them.

I agree Dak's cast is better.

If we're talking about the casts around Stafford in 2021, and Dak in 2022, to give them some benefit of the doubt, Mac deserves about 5 helpings given the cast he was playing with (and coaching staff and offensive line).
 

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
11,928
Daks' cap number goes from $19.7M this season to $49M next season (and then $51M in 2024). It'll be interesting to see if Dallas extends him now or lives with those figures then decide year-by-year on whether he's their guy.
My guess would be they at least play out 2023 season as is….there were some rumors of concern in the FO about Dak’s turnovers this year. He hasn’t typically/historically been turnover-prone but if that becomes a regular thing, it’s not something they’d want to invest a new lucrative contract in.
 

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
11,928
Wow, that's crazy good news for Dallas. The defense has been a different beast under Quinn. Almost everyone assumed he was gone, though before last season, Jerry signed him to a multi-year extension that was reportedly very good money, so I guess Quinn is happy there.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
33,643
Hingham, MA
Wow, that's crazy good news for Dallas. The defense has been a different beast under Quinn. Almost everyone assumed he was gone, though before last season, Jerry signed him to a multi-year extension that was reportedly very good money, so I guess Quinn is happy there.
Kind of reminds me of when McDaniels stayed in NE after 2017. Worked out well for the Pats. Hope it works out for your Cowboys.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
25,039
Newton
Kind of reminds me of when McDaniels stayed in NE after 2017. Worked out well for the Pats. Hope it works out for your Cowboys.
Possibly the most underrated recent-ish development for the Pats, given how tumultuous 2017 was for Brady, Gronk and the like with the whole Guerrero/Jimmy kerfuffle.

I’ve always wondered what McDaniels’ terms were for coming back beyond the obvious financial ones. At the time, kind of like we are doing with Mayo now, there was a lot of buzz that Josh was promised Bill’s job when he retired. Obviously that didn’t come to pass.

But I actually wonder whether the coaching exodus this past off-season was part of it something along the lines of “I’ll come back and be the heir apparent for a good chunk of change, but if I get an offer and decide to leave, you won’t stop me from bringing whoever I want from my offensive coaching staff along.” Some sort of arrangement like that certainly would explain a lot – and given how 2018 worked out, completely worth it IMO.

To bring this back to Quinn and the Cowboys, I do wonder what the terms are beyond money when these guys decide to stay.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
33,643
Hingham, MA
Possibly the most underrated recent-ish development for the Pats, given how tumultuous 2017 was for Brady, Gronk and the like with the whole Guerrero/Jimmy kerfuffle.

I’ve always wondered what McDaniels’ terms were for coming back beyond the obvious financial ones. At the time, kind of like we are doing with Mayo now, there was a lot of buzz that Josh was promised Bill’s job when he retired. Obviously that didn’t come to pass.

But I actually wonder whether the coaching exodus this past off-season was part of it something along the lines of “I’ll come back and be the heir apparent for a good chunk of change, but if I get an offer and decide to leave, you won’t stop me from bringing whoever I want from my offensive coaching staff along.” Some sort of arrangement like that certainly would explain a lot – and given how 2018 worked out, completely worth it IMO.

To bring this back to Quinn and the Cowboys, I do wonder what the terms are beyond money when these guys decide to stay.
Agreed all around. Especially on 2017. I went from being upset over the SB loss to thrilled Josh was back within a week or so.
 

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
11,928
Possibly the most underrated recent-ish development for the Pats, given how tumultuous 2017 was for Brady, Gronk and the like with the whole Guerrero/Jimmy kerfuffle.

I’ve always wondered what McDaniels’ terms were for coming back beyond the obvious financial ones. At the time, kind of like we are doing with Mayo now, there was a lot of buzz that Josh was promised Bill’s job when he retired. Obviously that didn’t come to pass.

But I actually wonder whether the coaching exodus this past off-season was part of it something along the lines of “I’ll come back and be the heir apparent for a good chunk of change, but if I get an offer and decide to leave, you won’t stop me from bringing whoever I want from my offensive coaching staff along.” Some sort of arrangement like that certainly would explain a lot – and given how 2018 worked out, completely worth it IMO.

To bring this back to Quinn and the Cowboys, I do wonder what the terms are beyond money when these guys decide to stay
.
I wouldn't be surprised if Quinn ends up as HC of Dallas within a few years. He's not all that old (52 years), and seems to love it in Dallas. Obviously a lot of that depends on what happens with McCarthy....hard to say on that front. Jerrah seems to love him, but we know that he can change his mind on HCs quickly.

Quinn also may have some significant input elsewhere too as part of his "Good deal"....maybe assistant coaches and even some input on personnel?