Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
That's the difference between the 6th ranked offense for the 'Boys last year and the 16th ranked.
I mean...that's not nothing.
The Chiefs were ranked 7th in scoring defense last year. That was fueled almost entirely by the 11.5 ppg they gave up over their last 6 games.
Through the first 11 games of the season they gave up 22 PPG. At that pace they'd have ended up ranked 15th in the league in scoring defense.
And I know it's a bit of a twisted logic because it's comparing offense to defense, but defensive improvement has been our focus for a couple years so it's what we feel the most. Had the Chiefs stayed at the same level, we'd have shrugged at the end of the year and would've thought "okay - the defense is alright but it's not gonna win us anything - Mahomes will have to do it for us..."
You let Dak continue to run the Cowboys offense at a top 20% of the league level and they have a puncher's chance. But if they hove around the middle with Dalton - that's gone. They essentially have a .500 ceiling.
Someone will give Dak that money and if the Cowboys have to roll with Dalton, they won't be anything more than a fringe playoff team. So when you have a market set (rightly or wrongly) at a certain level and a team chooses not to pay market prices to remain relevant, that should be seen as an indictment of that organization.
|
Okay, I can see all of that.
But is that all worth $40 million/year? Give him $40 million/year, and they can kiss having that ensemble of OL, Zeke, Cooper good-bye. And we know that Dak can't carry a team based on his performance thus far. So you pay him, and he loses some of his OL, or some defensive players, or the ability to shore up that receiving corp. And then DAL is back to being a 8-8 team. Again.
Which was my point really. Without a great top-tier team surrounding Dak, he's a little better than Andy. Pay him and they can't afford his supporting cast.