As the Dallas Cowboys navigate the shifting sands of roster construction, salary cap management, and Super Bowl aspirations, one opinion has reverberated loudly from within The Star in Frisco: Mickey Spagnola, the veteran Cowboys insider and team columnist, is adamant — do not reduce Dak Prescott’s availability.
While the quarterback position across the NFL evolves with systems leaning on mobility, situational packages, and even shared duties, Spagnola is making a compelling case for why Dallas must not flirt with any strategy that lessens Prescott’s on-field role. From his view, keeping Prescott upright, prepared, and involved is not a luxury — it’s a non-negotiable necessity if the Cowboys are serious about contending in 2025.
Let’s unpack Spagnola’s stance, and why reducing Dak’s role in any form — even in the name of preservation or change — could be not only a tactical mistake but also a philosophical misfire.
Dak Prescott: The Iron Man of Dallas
First, consider availability in its most literal sense: presence on the field. Dak Prescott has been one of the NFL’s toughest and most reliable quarterbacks since entering the league in 2016. With the exception of the freak ankle fracture in 2020 and a thumb injury in 2022, Dak has played through pain, pressure, and endless scrutiny.
In an era when some teams are cycling through quarterbacks like depth chart lottery tickets, the Cowboys have enjoyed the kind of stability that franchises dream of. Spagnola emphasizes that this availability is foundational to Dallas’ offensive rhythm.
Spagnola often notes that continuity at quarterback is a precious commodity — and one the Cowboys have benefitted from immensely. Every rep Dak takes, every snap he commands, and every audible he makes is one more moment where Dallas is maximizing its talent under center. And make no mistake: Dak’s command of the offense is elite.
Leadership Can’t Be Substituted
One of the intangibles Spagnola frequently highlights about Dak is his leadership. It’s not just about stats or wins; it’s about being the nucleus of a locker room. When Spagnola warns against lessening Dak’s availability, he’s not just talking about gameday. He’s referencing the daily presence — in film sessions, walkthroughs, two-minute drills, and late-night texts with wideouts.
Dak isn’t just the quarterback; he’s the emotional center of gravity for the Dallas Cowboys. Reducing his availability, even theoretically in a “quarterback rotation” idea or “snap-share management” concept, could create ripples far beyond Xs and Os.
Leadership in the NFL is earned, not appointed. And Dak’s leadership has been earned through eight seasons of unwavering commitment. To sideline that, even temporarily, in favor of another quarterback package or snap reduction would send the wrong message — to both the locker room and the fan base.
Preservation vs. Preparation: A False Dichotomy
There’s been some quiet buzz that the Cowboys might consider lightening Dak’s load to preserve him physically — particularly with his age (31 in July) and contract status looming. Spagnola scoffs at the notion.
To him, availability doesn’t equal wear and tear. Dak keeps himself in elite shape, is disciplined in recovery, and isn’t reckless with his body. Plus, his style has matured — he doesn’t take unnecessary hits, and the offensive line (when healthy) provides solid protection.
In fact, Spagnola argues that removing Dak from the field could hurt his preparation more than it helps his preservation. Quarterbacks need rhythm, timing, and chemistry. Pulling him in certain situations, or reducing his exposure in low-risk scenarios, could negatively impact the flow of the offense. He’s a rhythm passer. Interrupting that rhythm could cascade into performance issues.
The 2025 Window Is Open — Don’t Overthink It
There’s also the matter of urgency. With CeeDee Lamb ascending, Micah Parsons in his prime, and a defense coordinated by Mike Zimmer that could be elite, the Cowboys are in a win-now mode.
Spagnola’s message is simple: if you have a top-10 quarterback who is durable, mentally sharp, and capable of leading game-winning drives — why would you voluntarily lessen his role?
This isn’t a rebuild. It’s not a “see what we have in the backup” scenario. It’s not even a “preserve him for the playoffs” idea, because Dallas hasn’t consistently gotten over the divisional round hump. Every week counts. Every quarter matters.
Spagnola believes that trimming Dak’s involvement is like putting a governor on a Ferrari. You might feel like you’re being cautious — but you’re also not maximizing potential.
Backups Are for Emergencies — Not Experimentation
Much of the NFL’s new quarterback fascination stems from teams like the Saints (Taysom Hill) and 49ers (Trey Lance-era packages). But Spagnola pushes back on that template for the Cowboys.
In his view, Cooper Rush is a backup — not a package weapon. Trey Lance, while a talented reclamation project, is not a 2025 impact player unless Dak gets hurt. This idea that the Cowboys should “sprinkle in” Lance to justify the trade compensation spent is misguided, Spagnola argues.
The NFL isn’t college football. You don’t rotate quarterbacks to “see what sticks.” When you have a franchise quarterback, you ride with him. And the best way to develop Lance, ironically, might be keeping Dak fully available. Let Lance learn from a true professional — in meetings, not in red zone packages that disrupt the offensive flow.
Contract Noise Shouldn’t Muffle Commitment
Prescott’s looming contract situation has created some strange discourse about whether Dallas might “limit exposure” if the two sides don’t reach a deal before training camp. Again, Spagnola calls that notion short-sighted and reactionary.
The Cowboys are contenders. Whether Dak’s deal is done or not, the franchise is better with him under center for every meaningful snap. Letting contract concerns bleed into gameday decisions would be organizational malpractice.
In fact, Dak playing at a high level increases leverage — for both parties. If Dallas wants to extend him, great. If they’re unsure, then 2025 becomes a proving ground. Either way, reducing his on-field availability for business reasons would signal a lack of commitment that could backfire.
Dak’s 2024 Performance Demands More, Not Less
Let’s not forget what Dak Prescott did in 2024. He led the NFL in touchdown passes (36), was a top MVP candidate, and elevated an offense that had its share of inconsistencies elsewhere — notably at running back and offensive line.
He made Jake Ferguson a household name. He turned Brandin Cooks into a viable WR2 down the stretch. And, in several games, carried the offense in ways that only elite quarterbacks can.
So again, Spagnola insists — why would you reduce that? Why would you scale down a quarterback coming off one of his best seasons, particularly when the margin for error in the NFC is razor-thin?
The Locker Room Believes in 4
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Spagnola points to Dak’s credibility with his teammates. Players play for Dak. Coaches trust him. He’s earned the respect of the locker room, and he’s the guy they want in the huddle when the game is on the line.
Tampering with that dynamic — even with good intentions — can backfire. There’s a reason teams like the Chiefs, Bills, Bengals, and Eagles do not reduce their QB’s availability unless injury demands it. They know that full commitment breeds full buy-in.
If the Cowboys are going to reach their ceiling in 2025, Dak Prescott has to be the guy — not just the starter, but the constant. No pitch counts. No shared packages. No preservation-mode substitutions.
