Quincy. Fucking. Carter. That’s who Dak is.
I don't agree that he's Quincy Carter, but yeah, Dak went through a stretch this year where he was that bad. He had a similar rating through like a 3 or 4 game stretch or something where his rating was basically exactly Carter's, who played in an era where that rating was much better looking than it is today.
Dak has games like the Eagles last week or Atlanta yesterday where he looks "good enough" to be a long term starter, but even these last two weeks, come on, the eye test tells you that despite high completion percentages, low turnovers, and a scoring average of 24.5 points per game between the two matches, he is just not on the same tier as the best starters in this league. I don't care what his QBR is -- he's just not getting the production. He's not generating enough passing yards or enough passing scores. QBR, unfortunately, doesn't take into account "usage" (for lack of a better term) so his low exposure is not being dinged when it measures him. But just because he doesn't take many chances and doesn't throw tons of incompletes or turnovers, doesn't tell the whole story on him.
He's got 11 touchdowns, which maybe could be explained if Elliott was cannibalizing those numbers -- except he's not, because Elliott has 4 TDs rushing this year, which is kinda awful for a guy like him. We just aren't scoring, which means, we aren't getting the ball into the redzone enough, and given that Elliott is second in the league in rushing (despite some perceived struggles for him and the OL this year), that should tell that story.
Dak's 213 yards passing per game is the culprit. You can talk all you want about how passing yards don't "correlate" to wins, but again, the almost certain reason that they don't is because most teams these days trot out QBs capable of throwing for 250 every week. So when one QB throws for 240 and wins and the other QB throws for 250 and loses, that doesn't match up with correlation.
But I guaran-damn-tee that if you sort those stats to find if there was a correlation between winning (or losing) and throwing for less than 200 yards, yeah, you'd find a much different "correlation" than simple "more passing yards equals wins" correlation numbers.
And the problem is, Dak has way too many afternoons where he struggles to crack 200 yards passing. The days that he can get up into that 220-240 range, like, oh, I dunno, the last 2 weeks, the offense looks decently competent.
The weeks he can't, the offense looks like ass.
You can't explain this away. You can try. But simply saying "passing yards don't correlate to wins," just means you are burying your head in the sand.