Dallas Cowboys QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by thl408:
"but with that comes responsibility"
lol

Originally posted by NYniner85:
imagine being so thickheaded and unwilling to think you might be wrong on something....that you actually believe Lance wouldn't have played any better week 5 vs AZ if he got all the starting reps and playing time since June lol.

Fields has really improved since he's started the last several games.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by thl408:
"but with that comes responsibility"
lol

It's because of the implication.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by evil:
Agreed.

If there was only one way to develop a QB, by getting him reps and making them play early on, whether they are ready or not, then why doesn't every coach develop their rookies as such?

Why have we seen some of the best and brightest minds to coach in this league sit their rookie and tell the media explicitly that the kid isn't ready yet? Why would these coaches waste valuable time they could be giving their rookie reps by sitting them?

If sitting a player for a year was the key to success...then not one single rookie QB would play year 1. Period.

Why have we seen some of the best QBs in the league play year 1 and are now successful? Yeah good question why would coaches waste valuable time/snaps by sitting them? You think Mahomes would suck if he played year 1? I don't. You had coaches in LA hell bent on starting Taylor over Herbert because he wasn't ready...they were forced to play him and here we are.

Kyle can't say It's hard to get good at football, by not playing football THEN say getting a rookie playing time just because isn't the way to do it. It's a b******t excuse at this point. Play the kid and let him learn. We're not winning with s**tty pants Jimmy anyway.

I am not arguing this though and you know it. You are deflecting from what I am stating and trying to alter the point being argued. Some QBs come more pro ready than others, not all QBs are equal and as prepared as others are coming out for different reasons.

The reality is the time a QB sits is still valuable because they have much to learn about the game from the mental standpoint. Most of this game for QBs is above the shoulders.

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by Afrikan:
Why? The ball hit the defender's arm. Why do you choose to ignore that?

As far as issues with you, I'm not the only one Jonny..there are others here who question your intentions. Which is sad really.

I said it years ago, I appreciate what you bring to the forum... but with that comes responsibility no? Even before Jonnydel, we had other posters breaking down games in threads (Oldman, who later changed his name to Mr.Mcgibblets...God knows who he is now). He showed his bias for Alex and would blame everyone but him in his breakdowns.

I don't think that's right. I don't like politicians, Religious leaders, Influencers, etc who take advantage of the trust they build up from a group...to sway what they think, what they see with their eyes.

So no, it ain't only you Jonny.... there will be someone else after you, and I'll call that person out if I notice they are not being consistent.

"Sad really"? LMAO. If I'm just being a politician to build trust to sway a couple hundred people on an internet forum I'm one if the saddest individuals alive. Dude, you're putting wayyyy too much stock in what people will feel about how people on an internet forum think of them.

I'm not changing the way I do things to satisfy a small group of people in the webzone. Mods on reddit have reached out and make sure my stuff gets tagged, "quality content" because, in their words, I have the fairest content they've seen.

But, in the WZ, "YOU'RE JUST BIASED".

There are only 3 or 4 people on here that post knowledgeable content. Jonny for film breakdown. Maddog for draft coverage, and Ab for salary cap.

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Ah, I see that we're still doing the weekly post-loss "Jimmy is actually playing perfectly, it's everyone else that sucks" thing.

My issue is that Johnny acknowledges his videos are based on proving or disproving narratives not actually grading players and yet he gets defensive when you say his videos are biased. In my opinion there is implicit bias anytime you don't show the full game film and select certain plays to review. Has nothing to do with the content creator but all his videos are technically biased on purpose.

Also from my understanding, Johnny doesn't get into grading players on the forum either… just disproving narratives with his videos once again. So when people ask him about Jimmy… he just points to everything else that's going wrong on the team because he's made a video for it and kinda dodges answering that question in great detail since it's his videos so he does what he wants, and that's everything but grade Jimmy G.

LOL, how much time do y'all think I got to go game by game and grade players? Screw that. I have time to post when I don't have a ton else going on or killing a few minutes here or there. Why don't you guys go through and grade players extensively post every game?

I find it quite fascinating. I have almost 770k view on my youtube and haven't really ever been called, "biased" except by opposing fanbases when I've done scouting videos. But, a handful of guys in the WZ throw that term around all the time.

I literally never get called that in any other social media outlet/network/forum.

I don't have time to make videos myself. Ironically I've made videos in the past and when I posted them here I was harrassed by posters so I kinda know how it feels. I stopped posting on this forum for years after that btw.

So I'm not saying I don't appreciate your content… I do. I've always said I appreciate the work you do but I'm never going to stop playing devils advocate and challenge your narratives.

I'm just saying a narrative based video is a biased video. There's no way you can claim it's not.

You can continue to point to your view counts or who's sharing/watching your videos but that doesn't change the fact that they are biased. Just like anyone else's video would be.

It's your content you can make whatever the f**k you want to make. Just don't act surprised when people say your videos are biased. If they're saying you're biased and they are not… then they're incorrect.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Ah, I see that we're still doing the weekly post-loss "Jimmy is actually playing perfectly, it's everyone else that sucks" thing.

My issue is that Johnny acknowledges his videos are based on proving or disproving narratives not actually grading players and yet he gets defensive when you say his videos are biased. In my opinion there is implicit bias anytime you don't show the full game film and select certain plays to review. Has nothing to do with the content creator but all his videos are technically biased on purpose.

Also from my understanding, Johnny doesn't get into grading players on the forum either… just disproving narratives with his videos once again. So when people ask him about Jimmy… he just points to everything else that's going wrong on the team because he's made a video for it and kinda dodges answering that question in great detail since it's his videos so he does what he wants, and that's everything but grade Jimmy G.

LOL, how much time do y'all think I got to go game by game and grade players? Screw that. I have time to post when I don't have a ton else going on or killing a few minutes here or there. Why don't you guys go through and grade players extensively post every game?

I find it quite fascinating. I have almost 770k view on my youtube and haven't really ever been called, "biased" except by opposing fanbases when I've done scouting videos. But, a handful of guys in the WZ throw that term around all the time.

I literally never get called that in any other social media outlet/network/forum.

I don't have time to make videos myself. Ironically I've made videos in the past and when I posted them here I was harrassed by posters so I kinda know how it feels. I stopped posting on this forum for years after that btw.

So I'm not saying I don't appreciate your content… I do. I've always said I appreciate the work you do but I'm never going to stop playing devils advocate and challenge your narratives.

I'm just saying a narrative based video is a biased video. There's no way you can claim it's not.

You can continue to point to your view counts or who's sharing/watching your videos but that doesn't change the fact that they are biased. Just like anyone else's video would be.

It's your content you can make whatever the f**k you want to make. Just don't act surprised when people say your videos are biased. If they're saying you're biased and they are not… then they're incorrect.

What are these narratives?

Originally posted by a49erfan77:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Ah, I see that we're still doing the weekly post-loss "Jimmy is actually playing perfectly, it's everyone else that sucks" thing.

My issue is that Johnny acknowledges his videos are based on proving or disproving narratives not actually grading players and yet he gets defensive when you say his videos are biased. In my opinion there is implicit bias anytime you don't show the full game film and select certain plays to review. Has nothing to do with the content creator but all his videos are technically biased on purpose.

Also from my understanding, Johnny doesn't get into grading players on the forum either… just disproving narratives with his videos once again. So when people ask him about Jimmy… he just points to everything else that's going wrong on the team because he's made a video for it and kinda dodges answering that question in great detail since it's his videos so he does what he wants, and that's everything but grade Jimmy G.

LOL, how much time do y'all think I got to go game by game and grade players? Screw that. I have time to post when I don't have a ton else going on or killing a few minutes here or there. Why don't you guys go through and grade players extensively post every game?

I find it quite fascinating. I have almost 770k view on my youtube and haven't really ever been called, "biased" except by opposing fanbases when I've done scouting videos. But, a handful of guys in the WZ throw that term around all the time.

I literally never get called that in any other social media outlet/network/forum.

I don't have time to make videos myself. Ironically I've made videos in the past and when I posted them here I was harrassed by posters so I kinda know how it feels. I stopped posting on this forum for years after that btw.

So I'm not saying I don't appreciate your content… I do. I've always said I appreciate the work you do but I'm never going to stop playing devils advocate and challenge your narratives.

I'm just saying a narrative based video is a biased video. There's no way you can claim it's not.

You can continue to point to your view counts or who's sharing/watching your videos but that doesn't change the fact that they are biased. Just like anyone else's video would be.

It's your content you can make whatever the f**k you want to make. Just don't act surprised when people say your videos are biased. If they're saying you're biased and they are not… then they're incorrect.

What are these narratives?

Literally every video he's made he's proving or disproving a narrative. Have you watched his videos?

Originally posted by JoseCortez:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
imagine being so thickheaded and unwilling to think you might be wrong on something....that you actually believe Lance wouldn't have played any better week 5 vs AZ if he got all the starting reps and playing time since June lol.

Fields has really improved since he's started the last several games.

Not really. He has a 57% completion percentage which is way below the league average.He has 2TDs and 6INTs. Worse he is leading the league with 22 sacks. Many of those sacks are because he holds the ball too long like a lot of young QBs because he doesn't know where to throw it.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by a49erfan77:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Ah, I see that we're still doing the weekly post-loss "Jimmy is actually playing perfectly, it's everyone else that sucks" thing.

My issue is that Johnny acknowledges his videos are based on proving or disproving narratives not actually grading players and yet he gets defensive when you say his videos are biased. In my opinion there is implicit bias anytime you don't show the full game film and select certain plays to review. Has nothing to do with the content creator but all his videos are technically biased on purpose.

Also from my understanding, Johnny doesn't get into grading players on the forum either… just disproving narratives with his videos once again. So when people ask him about Jimmy… he just points to everything else that's going wrong on the team because he's made a video for it and kinda dodges answering that question in great detail since it's his videos so he does what he wants, and that's everything but grade Jimmy G.

LOL, how much time do y'all think I got to go game by game and grade players? Screw that. I have time to post when I don't have a ton else going on or killing a few minutes here or there. Why don't you guys go through and grade players extensively post every game?

I find it quite fascinating. I have almost 770k view on my youtube and haven't really ever been called, "biased" except by opposing fanbases when I've done scouting videos. But, a handful of guys in the WZ throw that term around all the time.

I literally never get called that in any other social media outlet/network/forum.

I don't have time to make videos myself. Ironically I've made videos in the past and when I posted them here I was harrassed by posters so I kinda know how it feels. I stopped posting on this forum for years after that btw.

So I'm not saying I don't appreciate your content… I do. I've always said I appreciate the work you do but I'm never going to stop playing devils advocate and challenge your narratives.

I'm just saying a narrative based video is a biased video. There's no way you can claim it's not.

You can continue to point to your view counts or who's sharing/watching your videos but that doesn't change the fact that they are biased. Just like anyone else's video would be.

It's your content you can make whatever the f**k you want to make. Just don't act surprised when people say your videos are biased. If they're saying you're biased and they are not… then they're incorrect.

What are these narratives?

Literally every video he's made he's proving or disproving a narrative. Have you watched his videos?

I've watched all of his videos and most of them aren't aimed at proving or disproving a narrative.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by JoseCortez:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
imagine being so thickheaded and unwilling to think you might be wrong on something....that you actually believe Lance wouldn't have played any better week 5 vs AZ if he got all the starting reps and playing time since June lol.

Fields has really improved since he's started the last several games.

Not really. He has a 57% completion percentage which is way below the league average.He has 2TDs and 6INTs. Worse he is leading the league with 22 sacks. Many of those sacks are because he holds the ball too long like a lot of young QBs because he doesn't know where to throw it.

Think you missed Jose's sarcasm

Justin Fields playing behind that trash OL doesn't mean Trey Lance is equally terrible behind ours.

I mean people seem to forget how well our offense moved the ball against Arizona. Yes we failed to score points on many drives and had our lowest point total of the season but not by a large margin.

Kyle also dialed up some questionable playcalls IMO in that game. He needs to be more trusting that Lance can run the plays that are called...if he cannot then he will learn from them. Can't just use the kid as a running back.

I certainly feel that if we had Kittle for that game and Mitchell was healthy enough for a bigger workload then we would've been able to finish our drives much better.

I thought Jimmy would use Lance being drafted as a way to play better but he's just not getting it done. We're 2-4...what exactly are we holding out for?

I imagine we go to Chicago and with them being beat up we may be able to win that game and then get a look at Garoppolo vs Arizona. To me that will be the deciding game for him. We'll have an evaluation against the same team even though Jimmy will likely have Kittle back and hopefully a healthy Mitchell to work with in a home game(not that it means much for us these days).

Originally posted by bzborow1:
Unless the coaching staff thinks Lance is so bad it would be embarrassing to put him out there, adding to the questionable decisions this regime has made.

i dont think you understand severity of trey's knee injury, they dodged a huge bullet that it wasn't worse. they're gonna take it easy on him.

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:

Originally posted by bzborow1:
Unless the coaching staff thinks Lance is so bad it would be embarrassing to put him out there, adding to the questionable decisions this regime has made.

i dont think you understand severity of trey's knee injury, they dodged a huge bullet that it wasn't worse. they're gonna take it easy on him.

Do you understand the severity of Trey's knee injury? Do you have access to information about his diagnosis that no one else does?

Originally posted by NYniner85:
lol oh I am...explain then. So if Lance didn't get all the reps for the past 5+ months and played live football he would actually be WORSE is week 5 then getting a weeks worth of starting reps?



For real you can't be objective...it's legit impossible for you.

You, commenting on literally anyone else's objectivity?

You're the Joe Shasky of this forum.