Gosselin (probably the most knowledgable Cowboys journalist around) said on The Ticket yesterday that the Dallas front office knows how much it needs a quarterback, but seems to be in denial about drafting one. In essence they have the "Minnesota - Herschel Walker" idea that they are just one player away from a championship. There seems to be a "now" mentality in the draft room and some are growing increasingly worried that this whole thing is going to crash and burn if Dallas doesn't start planning for the future. He said the next decade could look a lot like the post Aikman years if Dallas doesn't do something and quickly.
****Cowboys 2016 Offseason Thread***
214,411 Views |
2475 Replies |
Last: 8 yr ago by jr15aggie
Getting a QB to follow Romo is important. But its kinda dumb to say its the team's #1 need. This team is the definition of a "win now" team. Sure, they should keep an eye on the future by not overpaying for free agents. But panic drafting a QB because Romo might only play for another year or two is the wrong mindset IMO. Its better to get as much value as possible out of this pick.
If they really like a QB as a potential very good starter draft him. However if you aren't sure and really think you have a SB run in the next year or two fine go for broke and win now. However, I would hedge that strategy by not looking for a good backup for Romo. If he gets hurt and misses most of the season you want to not win many games and go into the next draft with a QB or trade opportunity. But to upgrade the backup, lose Romo and finish 8-8 would be a disaster.
quote:
Gosselin (probably the most knowledgable Cowboys journalist around) said on The Ticket yesterday that the Dallas front office knows how much it needs a quarterback, but seems to be in denial about drafting one. In essence they have the "Minnesota - Herschel Walker" idea that they are just one player away from a championship. There seems to be a "now" mentality in the draft room and some are growing increasingly worried that this whole thing is going to crash and burn if Dallas doesn't start planning for the future. He said the next decade could look a lot like the post Aikman years if Dallas doesn't do something and quickly.
I actually think Goose is full of sh*t most of the time. I do not think he is as much in the know as he thinks he is. When he was a draft guru, he was very good because he had great sources. He wasn't great because he really had knowledge; he was great because he had all the key people in the league feading him info.
I actually think he's wrong much more than he's right.
Having said that, I think they should take the QB. And I do not think that the 'win now' mentality and taking a QB in the first are mutually exclusive as most do. You will have a hard time convincing me that Romo will play 15 or 16 games next year. So, you've got to have a QB anyway. I think Goff is as NFL ready as anyone the last few years. I think he's polished enough to be your backup now and your future after Romo is done (prob 2018).
quote:
Getting a QB to follow Romo is important. But its kinda dumb to say its the team's #1 need. This team is the definition of a "win now" team. Sure, they should keep an eye on the future by not overpaying for free agents. But panic drafting a QB because Romo might only play for another year or two is the wrong mindset IMO. Its better to get as much value as possible out of this pick.
quote:I think you're exactly right. If Romo gets injured, the season is a wash. It doesn't matter who the backup is. Romo makes the train run down the tracks. With him the Cowboys are a Super Bowl contender. Without him, we ain't making the playoffs.
If they really like a QB as a potential very good starter draft him. However if you aren't sure and really think you have a SB run in the next year or two fine go for broke and win now. However, I would hedge that strategy by not looking for a good backup for Romo. If he gets hurt and misses most of the season you want to not win many games and go into the next draft with a QB or trade opportunity. But to upgrade the backup, lose Romo and finish 8-8 would be a disaster.
Draft a QB in the 3rd-4th round if you like one to develop and use the other picks to strengthen your team for both next year and the long term future.
quote:
Getting a QB to follow Romo is important. But its kinda dumb to say its the team's #1 need. This team is the definition of a "win now" team. Sure, they should keep an eye on the future by not overpaying for free agents. But panic drafting a QB because Romo might only play for another year or two is the wrong mindset IMO. Its better to get as much value as possible out of this pick.
I don't know why my comment wasn't posted, but Goff and Wentz are definitely NOT panic drafting. David Klingler is a panic pick. Christian Ponder is a panic pick. Will they pan out? Who knows, but their play and skill sets make them very attractive at the next level.
quote:quote:I think you're exactly right. If Romo gets injured, the season is a wash. It doesn't matter who the backup is. Romo makes the train run down the tracks. With him the Cowboys are a Super Bowl contender. Without him, we ain't making the playoffs.
If they really like a QB as a potential very good starter draft him. However if you aren't sure and really think you have a SB run in the next year or two fine go for broke and win now. However, I would hedge that strategy by not looking for a good backup for Romo. If he gets hurt and misses most of the season you want to not win many games and go into the next draft with a QB or trade opportunity. But to upgrade the backup, lose Romo and finish 8-8 would be a disaster.
Draft a QB in the 3rd-4th round if you like one to develop and use the other picks to strengthen your team for both next year and the long term future.
I think he was eluding to the fact that if you sign a good backup and go 8-8 due to injury to Tony, you will be in an awful position come next draft. Drafting the future starter will not make any difference THIS year: with Romo they will win the division, without him they won't, but it will make a big difference for the next 10-15 years. It's just a matter of where you wind up picking from that.
Dallas may not have this opportunity again for another 10-20 years and a future is a horrible thing to waste.
With that being said, you never try and lose. Ideally, the team's signs a backup that never plays to a one year deal and let the new kid ride the pine, so he isn't slaughtered in Year 1 ala Aaron Rogers/Tom Brady/Brett Favre/Phillip Rivers/Mike Vick/Tony Romo.
Exactly, Bass. Why does anyone think Goff would be a panic move?!
And I really get worn out on the 'draft a guy in the 3rd or 4th' to develop. Good grief that is just wasting a pick.
It's the opposite of a panic move IMO. A panic move is making the "win now" choice vs. doing something that is more likely to benefit your franchise for the next 10 years.
And couldn't agree more about the "just use a 3rd or 4th". That is an almost assured waste of a pick.
This is a simple matter of weighing risk-reward. Taking Wenz or Goff at #4 may carry marginally more risk, but I think the upside is a tremendous amount higher than the overall upside that a guy like Myles Jack would have on the franchise. When I weight them both, it tells me take one of those 2 QB's.
And couldn't agree more about the "just use a 3rd or 4th". That is an almost assured waste of a pick.
This is a simple matter of weighing risk-reward. Taking Wenz or Goff at #4 may carry marginally more risk, but I think the upside is a tremendous amount higher than the overall upside that a guy like Myles Jack would have on the franchise. When I weight them both, it tells me take one of those 2 QB's.
quote:I know what he was talking about. But it counts the same. We're in win now mode. We don't need QB help from the draft or from FA.quote:quote:I think you're exactly right. If Romo gets injured, the season is a wash. It doesn't matter who the backup is. Romo makes the train run down the tracks. With him the Cowboys are a Super Bowl contender. Without him, we ain't making the playoffs.
If they really like a QB as a potential very good starter draft him. However if you aren't sure and really think you have a SB run in the next year or two fine go for broke and win now. However, I would hedge that strategy by not looking for a good backup for Romo. If he gets hurt and misses most of the season you want to not win many games and go into the next draft with a QB or trade opportunity. But to upgrade the backup, lose Romo and finish 8-8 would be a disaster.
Draft a QB in the 3rd-4th round if you like one to develop and use the other picks to strengthen your team for both next year and the long term future.
I think he was eluding to the fact that if you sign a good backup and go 8-8 due to injury to Tony, you will be in an awful position come next draft. Drafting the future starter will not make any difference THIS year: with Romo they will win the division, without him they won't, but it will make a big difference for the next 10-15 years. It's just a matter of where you wind up picking from that.
Dallas may not have this opportunity again for another 10-20 years and a future is a horrible thing to waste.
With that being said, you never try and lose. Ideally, the team's signs a backup that never plays to a one year deal and let the new kid ride the pine, so he isn't slaughtered in Year 1 ala Aaron Rogers/Tom Brady/Brett Favre/Phillip Rivers/Mike Vick/Tony Romo.
quote:
It's the opposite of a panic move IMO. A panic move is making the "win now" choice vs. doing something that is more likely to benefit your franchise for the next 10 years.
And couldn't agree more about the "just use a 3rd or 4th". That is an almost assured waste of a pick.
And to be honest, it's not often that "the best available player" in the draft is what pushes a teetering 4-12 team to the Super Bowl. If you want a Super Bowl in 2016-17, that should have been cemented in the last five offseasons.
Right. This team is not winning a Super Bowl next year because they added a good linebacker with the #4 pick. Not happening.
quote:quote:I know what he was talking about. But it counts the same. We're in win now mode. We don't need QB help from the draft or from FA.quote:quote:I think you're exactly right. If Romo gets injured, the season is a wash. It doesn't matter who the backup is. Romo makes the train run down the tracks. With him the Cowboys are a Super Bowl contender. Without him, we ain't making the playoffs.
If they really like a QB as a potential very good starter draft him. However if you aren't sure and really think you have a SB run in the next year or two fine go for broke and win now. However, I would hedge that strategy by not looking for a good backup for Romo. If he gets hurt and misses most of the season you want to not win many games and go into the next draft with a QB or trade opportunity. But to upgrade the backup, lose Romo and finish 8-8 would be a disaster.
Draft a QB in the 3rd-4th round if you like one to develop and use the other picks to strengthen your team for both next year and the long term future.
I think he was eluding to the fact that if you sign a good backup and go 8-8 due to injury to Tony, you will be in an awful position come next draft. Drafting the future starter will not make any difference THIS year: with Romo they will win the division, without him they won't, but it will make a big difference for the next 10-15 years. It's just a matter of where you wind up picking from that.
Dallas may not have this opportunity again for another 10-20 years and a future is a horrible thing to waste.
With that being said, you never try and lose. Ideally, the team's signs a backup that never plays to a one year deal and let the new kid ride the pine, so he isn't slaughtered in Year 1 ala Aaron Rogers/Tom Brady/Brett Favre/Phillip Rivers/Mike Vick/Tony Romo.
We must be watching different teams. Nobody who watched the Cowboys last year would say that last sentence.
Incorrectly evaluating his team and thinking that he's one or two players away is one of the biggest problems this team's GM has had over the past 20 years.
The only way I'm talked out of taking Goff or Wentz at #4 is if some team is willing to give me a ****load of picks in return for it. I want several impact picks for it, not just some LB that might slide to #5.
The only way I'm talked out of taking Goff or Wentz at #4 is if some team is willing to give me a ****load of picks in return for it. I want several impact picks for it, not just some LB that might slide to #5.
quote:
Incorrectly evaluating his team and thinking that he's one or two players away is one of the biggest problems this team's GM has had over the past 20 years.
#JoeyGalloway
quote:Well you're going to stay worn out then. It's likely you waste a 1st round pick on them too.. Drafting and missing on a 1st round QB is a death sentence. We're not in the position to risk that kind of fate.
And I really get worn out on the 'draft a guy in the 3rd or 4th' to develop. Good grief that is just wasting a pick.
Off the top of my head, teams that were loaded at most other positions, and plugged a QB in and had success success:
49ers with Kaepernick
Seahawks with Russell
Green Bay with Favre
Ravens with Dilfer
Rams with Warner & Bulger
Tampa Bay with Johnson
I'm tired of thinking but I'm sure the list goes on...
This team isn't loaded anywhere.
quote:With Romo healthy we don't need a QB. I'd rather make a run at a Superbowl and if he gets injured turn it over to a project rookie. If we win with him enough to finish 8-8 then great. If we fall flat, great, we're a top10 pick with a chance at drafting a future QB again.quote:quote:I know what he was talking about. But it counts the same. We're in win now mode. We don't need QB help from the draft or from FA.quote:quote:I think you're exactly right. If Romo gets injured, the season is a wash. It doesn't matter who the backup is. Romo makes the train run down the tracks. With him the Cowboys are a Super Bowl contender. Without him, we ain't making the playoffs.
If they really like a QB as a potential very good starter draft him. However if you aren't sure and really think you have a SB run in the next year or two fine go for broke and win now. However, I would hedge that strategy by not looking for a good backup for Romo. If he gets hurt and misses most of the season you want to not win many games and go into the next draft with a QB or trade opportunity. But to upgrade the backup, lose Romo and finish 8-8 would be a disaster.
Draft a QB in the 3rd-4th round if you like one to develop and use the other picks to strengthen your team for both next year and the long term future.
I think he was eluding to the fact that if you sign a good backup and go 8-8 due to injury to Tony, you will be in an awful position come next draft. Drafting the future starter will not make any difference THIS year: with Romo they will win the division, without him they won't, but it will make a big difference for the next 10-15 years. It's just a matter of where you wind up picking from that.
Dallas may not have this opportunity again for another 10-20 years and a future is a horrible thing to waste.
With that being said, you never try and lose. Ideally, the team's signs a backup that never plays to a one year deal and let the new kid ride the pine, so he isn't slaughtered in Year 1 ala Aaron Rogers/Tom Brady/Brett Favre/Phillip Rivers/Mike Vick/Tony Romo.
We must be watching different teams. Nobody who watched the Cowboys last year would say that last sentence.
quote:- above average receivers.
This team isn't loaded anywhere.
- amazing offensive line
- the makings of a great, young, defensive line
- BJones as a solid safety
- 2 good linebackers
with the potential to add 2 more difference makers in this draft if we can hold off on a QB until later.
We've been comparing this situation to Green Bay's with Aaron Rodgers/Brett Favre. Do you think Green Bay would have drafted Aaron Rodgers had they been picking in the top 5?
Do you think drafting a good LB in 2005 would have kept Green Bay from being 4-12 that year?
I think Green Bay was very happy to have drafted Aaron Rodgers and in hindsight would have taken him wherever they were drafting - 1, 4, 10, or 24.
I think Green Bay was very happy to have drafted Aaron Rodgers and in hindsight would have taken him wherever they were drafting - 1, 4, 10, or 24.
Orlando Ayala Cant Read
Joined:
May 17, 2004
Posts:
69,801
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Guess I will buck the majority here and also agree with Cowboys brass that they are not that far away from a title.
To be clear, I do not believe the loss of Romo solely contributed to last year's collapse. There were other issues. But they are resolvable issues especially when you consider this team might have as much as $30M in cap space after a few restructures and moves.
The Romo window is at best 2 years. I believe they should sign the best cover Safety available, then follow that up by signing some RELIABLE help at CB, LB, and DT. Those 3 don't have to be studs, but they need to be guys that would start for most other teams in the league. That provides you the pieces to instantly make you better, but more importantly it lets you truly go after BPA in the draft and not chase guys. With picks that high in each round then you can really continue building a nice base for the future which will allow you to avoid those post Aikman years mentioned above.
Also, by doing that then if you truly truly LOVE one of those QBs at #4 then you can actually take him and not lose out on that kinda talent while filling your backup QB need, and while staying in contention for 2016.
To be clear, I do not believe the loss of Romo solely contributed to last year's collapse. There were other issues. But they are resolvable issues especially when you consider this team might have as much as $30M in cap space after a few restructures and moves.
The Romo window is at best 2 years. I believe they should sign the best cover Safety available, then follow that up by signing some RELIABLE help at CB, LB, and DT. Those 3 don't have to be studs, but they need to be guys that would start for most other teams in the league. That provides you the pieces to instantly make you better, but more importantly it lets you truly go after BPA in the draft and not chase guys. With picks that high in each round then you can really continue building a nice base for the future which will allow you to avoid those post Aikman years mentioned above.
Also, by doing that then if you truly truly LOVE one of those QBs at #4 then you can actually take him and not lose out on that kinda talent while filling your backup QB need, and while staying in contention for 2016.
quote:We're not playing in hindsight.
Do you think drafting a good LB in 2005 would have kept Green Bay from being 4-12 that year?
I think Green Bay was very happy to have drafted Aaron Rodgers and in hindsight would have taken him wherever they were drafting - 1, 4, 10, or 24.
Green Bay is on the clock at #4 with an aging Brett Favre who is a stud when he's healthy.
quote:
Right. This team is not winning a Super Bowl next year because they added a good linebacker with the #4 pick. Not happening.
Weird. I seem to remember Demarkus Lodge as a rookie almost giving the game back to Detroit then ending it himself.
A rookie can very well be the difference.
So they would have taken Cedric Benson at 4 and in a couple of years had value pick Matt Flynn as their QB. Brilliant. I hope this is not the Cowboys path.
quote:Flynn actually did well in Green Bay. I'm of the opinion it's more about the situation and surrounding pieces that make the majority of QBs. Aaron Rodgers stepped into a loaded offense.
So they would have taken Cedric Benson at 4 and in a couple of years had value pick Matt Flynn as their QB. Brilliant. I hope this is not the Cowboys path.
He may not have developed into who he is today without that situation. Same goes for Brady, and Russell Wilson. Those teams were stacked. The patriots not so much on offense, but on defense they were.
If we were picking in the 20s and Wentz/Goff were there, then I'd be good with it.
It's the same rotation of teams that pick at the top of the draft every year.. We say "that's because they don't hve a QB" but that's because they keep picking QBs with a ****ty roster and setting them up to fail. Build the team, then find a QB to run it.
To me their DL is undersized and can be bullied; pass rush is dependent on Gregory taking a step presuming Hardy isn't back.
LB's are thin and the success of the group currently hedges on Sean Lee's health and Rolando's desire to play the game.
Yeah that's not real solid.
Secondary has Jones and then what? Church and Wilcox are average to bad depending on the game and then you have Carr who is average and Scandrick coming off major injury.
Point being that while QB is a need, so is basically anything on defense. I would personally draft Wentz or Goff at 4 but just don't see Jerry doing it...and both will likely have the grade to justify being picked there. That's the definition of value.
If they get Ramsey or Bosa or Jack I am sure they will be good players and make the defense better so that's good. But with Romo being one hit away from being done, again, the smart move would be to take your next franchise guy but Jerry just doesn't seem to me to be the practical kind of guy.
LB's are thin and the success of the group currently hedges on Sean Lee's health and Rolando's desire to play the game.
Yeah that's not real solid.
Secondary has Jones and then what? Church and Wilcox are average to bad depending on the game and then you have Carr who is average and Scandrick coming off major injury.
Point being that while QB is a need, so is basically anything on defense. I would personally draft Wentz or Goff at 4 but just don't see Jerry doing it...and both will likely have the grade to justify being picked there. That's the definition of value.
If they get Ramsey or Bosa or Jack I am sure they will be good players and make the defense better so that's good. But with Romo being one hit away from being done, again, the smart move would be to take your next franchise guy but Jerry just doesn't seem to me to be the practical kind of guy.
quote:1. Favre was a 2nd Round Pick and would have been a first if not for worries about his being an alcoholic.quote:Well you're going to stay worn out then. It's likely you waste a 1st round pick on them too.. Drafting and missing on a 1st round QB is a death sentence. We're not in the position to risk that kind of fate.
And I really get worn out on the 'draft a guy in the 3rd or 4th' to develop. Good grief that is just wasting a pick.
Off the top of my head, teams that were loaded at most other positions, and plugged a QB in and had success success:
49ers with Kaepernick
Seahawks with Russell
Green Bay with Favre
Ravens with Dilfer
Rams with Warner & Bulger
Tampa Bay with Johnson
I'm tired of thinking but I'm sure the list goes on...
2.It's become clear that Kaepernick is beyond awful to the point where he was benched for Blaine Gabbert. His success was either flash-in-the-pan or should be credited to Harbaugh getting the most out of a guy who can't seem to hit the broadside of a barn.
3. Dilfer...did you ever see this guy play? He played a grand total of one season in Baltimore and won a Super Bowl on the back of the greatest defense in NFL history. Over the course of his career, he threw 0.5 more INTs per game than he did touchdowns. He even had a 4 touchdown, 18 interception season.
4. Warner was never supposed to see the field. He wasn't there to be a "developed guy". He was there to back up Trent Green.
5. Bulger had a decent career, but never managed more than a 24 TD season. Plus, he finished his career with a 41-54 record (all with the Rams).His career rating is a decent 84.4.
6. Johnson lost his starting job to 41 year old Randall Cunningham (who had been installing tile in Las Vegas before getting a call from the Vikings). Cunningham would go on to win MVP. He had two seasons where his rating was above 90.0. He won a Super Bowl on the back of that vicious defense led by Sapp and Brooks in 2002. He was basically a glorified game manager. For a 9th Round pick, he was obviously successful, but the kind of guy you want to build a team around.
7. Russell Wilson is very good.
quote:Every QB in the league is 1 hit away from being done.
To me their DL is undersized and can be bullied; pass rush is dependent on Gregory taking a step presuming Hardy isn't back.
LB's are thin and the success of the group currently hedges on Sean Lee's health and Rolando's desire to play the game.
Yeah that's not real solid.
Secondary has Jones and then what? Church and Wilcox are average to bad depending on the game and then you have Carr who is average and Scandrick coming off major injury.
Point being that while QB is a need, so is basically anything on defense. I would personally draft Wentz or Goff at 4 but just don't see Jerry doing it...and both will likely have the grade to justify being picked there. That's the definition of value.
If they get Ramsey or Bosa or Jack I am sure they will be good players and make the defense better so that's good. But with Romo being one hit away from being done, again, the smart move would be to take your next franchise guy but Jerry just doesn't seem to me to be the practical kind of guy.
Here's Romo's last 5 years:
Romo only played in 4 games last year, before that he played in every game but 2 the previous 4 years. He's had 2 seasons that he hasn't played at least 13 games. In 10 seasons as starter, only 3 seasons with fewer than 15 games.. The "he's injury prone" narritive is false. And people like to use the "it's the logical choice" or "it's the practical move" to justify their position. Making any other choice obviously wrong. Not drafting a QB #4 isn't impractical. The cowboys have REAL holes on defense that can be addressed with some of hte players at the top of this draft. Instead of drafting for a potential hole if our QB, who rarely gets hurt, goes down behind one of the best OLines in the game.
You're right, we need help everywhere on defense.
quote:Statistically, "hit & run" linebackers have a very short life span in this league. I'd stay away from a linebacker at #4.
To me their DL is undersized and can be bullied; pass rush is dependent on Gregory taking a step presuming Hardy isn't back.
LB's are thin and the success of the group currently hedges on Sean Lee's health and Rolando's desire to play the game.
Yeah that's not real solid.
Secondary has Jones and then what? Church and Wilcox are average to bad depending on the game and then you have Carr who is average and Scandrick coming off major injury.
Point being that while QB is a need, so is basically anything on defense. I would personally draft Wentz or Goff at 4 but just don't see Jerry doing it...and both will likely have the grade to justify being picked there. That's the definition of value.
If they get Ramsey or Bosa or Jack I am sure they will be good players and make the defense better so that's good. But with Romo being one hit away from being done, again, the smart move would be to take your next franchise guy but Jerry just doesn't seem to me to be the practical kind of guy.
Why you should be hesitant about 1st Round linebackers
Not to mention that both Smith and Jack are already coming off of serious injuries.
quote:Exactly.. Kaepernick sucks, Dilfer sucked, Bulger wasn't all taht great, Johnson wasn't great either... They played alongside great talent and managed the game and won alot.quote:1. Favre was a 2nd Round Pick and would have been a first if not for worries about his being an alcoholic.quote:Well you're going to stay worn out then. It's likely you waste a 1st round pick on them too.. Drafting and missing on a 1st round QB is a death sentence. We're not in the position to risk that kind of fate.
And I really get worn out on the 'draft a guy in the 3rd or 4th' to develop. Good grief that is just wasting a pick.
Off the top of my head, teams that were loaded at most other positions, and plugged a QB in and had success success:
49ers with Kaepernick
Seahawks with Russell
Green Bay with Favre
Ravens with Dilfer
Rams with Warner & Bulger
Tampa Bay with Johnson
I'm tired of thinking but I'm sure the list goes on...
2.It's become clear that Kaepernick is beyond awful to the point where he was benched for Blaine Gabbert. His success was either flash-in-the-pan or should be credited to Harbaugh getting the most out of a gy who can't seem to hit the broadside of a barn.
3. Dilfer...did you ever see this guy play? He played a grand total of one season in Baltimore and won a Super Bowl on the back of the greatest defense in NFL history.Over the course of his career, he threw 0.5 more INTs per game than he did touchdowns. He even had a 4 touchdown, 18 interception season.
4. Warner was never supposed to see the field. He wasn't there to be a "developed guy". He was there to back up Trent Green.
5. Bulger had a decent career, but never managed more than a 24 TD season. Plus, he finished his career with a 41-54 record (all with the Rams).His career rating is a decent 84.4.
6. Johnson lost his starting job to 41 year old Randall Cunningham (who had been installing tile in Las Vegas before getting a call from the Vikings). Cunningham would go on to win MVP. He had two seasons where his rating was above 90.0. He won a Super Bowl on the back of that vicious defense led by Sapp and Brooks in 2002. He was basically a glorified game manager. For a 9th Round pick, he was obviously successful, but the kind of guy you want to build a team around.
7. Russell Wilson is very good.
The others are great guys, but they also joined GREAT teams and GREAT coaching staffs that led to their success. Build the team, you'll find a QB to run things afterwards
Hell throw Romo in there. He was developed while Parcells built the team. He built a monster OLine and DLine, and had some recycle guys at WR that were good and then when Romo's gun slinging ass got a chance he had playmakers all around him to keep the heat off of him.
Manning
Brady
Palmer
Cam
Those were your final four guys and weren't three of them 1-1's?
Yes its true that Brady and Romo are rare finds, and so is Russ to an extent, but those are the exception not the rule. The large majority of quality guys are high draft picks. The fact that teams whiff more often than not shouldn't be used as an argument to just look mid round...the point is the good teams are generally getting a high pick guy and making something out of him.
Brady
Palmer
Cam
Those were your final four guys and weren't three of them 1-1's?
Yes its true that Brady and Romo are rare finds, and so is Russ to an extent, but those are the exception not the rule. The large majority of quality guys are high draft picks. The fact that teams whiff more often than not shouldn't be used as an argument to just look mid round...the point is the good teams are generally getting a high pick guy and making something out of him.
quote:I'm on board with Sturm 100%...Jack is flashy and seems like a Jerry kind of pick. I wouldn't take a ILB in the first round unless I had way fewer holes to fill.quote:Statistically, "hit & run" linebackers have a very short life span in this league. I'd stay away from a linebacker at #4.
To me their DL is undersized and can be bullied; pass rush is dependent on Gregory taking a step presuming Hardy isn't back.
LB's are thin and the success of the group currently hedges on Sean Lee's health and Rolando's desire to play the game.
Yeah that's not real solid.
Secondary has Jones and then what? Church and Wilcox are average to bad depending on the game and then you have Carr who is average and Scandrick coming off major injury.
Point being that while QB is a need, so is basically anything on defense. I would personally draft Wentz or Goff at 4 but just don't see Jerry doing it...and both will likely have the grade to justify being picked there. That's the definition of value.
If they get Ramsey or Bosa or Jack I am sure they will be good players and make the defense better so that's good. But with Romo being one hit away from being done, again, the smart move would be to take your next franchise guy but Jerry just doesn't seem to me to be the practical kind of guy.
Why you should be hesitant about 1st Round linebackers
Not to mention that both Smith and Jack are already coming off of serious injuries.
quote:Not every QB...see Cam take a whipping in the SB? He got up.quote:Every QB in the league is 1 hit away from being done.
To me their DL is undersized and can be bullied; pass rush is dependent on Gregory taking a step presuming Hardy isn't back.
LB's are thin and the success of the group currently hedges on Sean Lee's health and Rolando's desire to play the game.
Yeah that's not real solid.
Secondary has Jones and then what? Church and Wilcox are average to bad depending on the game and then you have Carr who is average and Scandrick coming off major injury.
Point being that while QB is a need, so is basically anything on defense. I would personally draft Wentz or Goff at 4 but just don't see Jerry doing it...and both will likely have the grade to justify being picked there. That's the definition of value.
If they get Ramsey or Bosa or Jack I am sure they will be good players and make the defense better so that's good. But with Romo being one hit away from being done, again, the smart move would be to take your next franchise guy but Jerry just doesn't seem to me to be the practical kind of guy.
Here's Romo's last 5 years:
Romo only played in 4 games last year, before that he played in every game but 2 the previous 4 years. He's had 2 seasons that he hasn't played at least 13 games. In 10 seasons as starter, only 3 seasons with fewer than 15 games.. The "he's injury prone" narritive is false. And people like to use the "it's the logical choice" or "it's the practical move" to justify their position. Making any other choice obviously wrong. Not drafting a QB #4 isn't impractical. The cowboys have REAL holes on defense that can be addressed with some of hte players at the top of this draft. Instead of drafting for a potential hole if our QB, who rarely gets hurt, goes down behind one of the best OLines in the game.
You're right, we need help everywhere on defense.
Brady took a beating in Denver in the AFC Championship. He got up.
Any number of those hits or sacks could have easily taken out Romo because of his specific injury history as it relates to his back and clavicle and his age. He's much more prone to a one and done hit because of it, as was proven this year, and that means its absolutely practical to take his successor before another season is wasted because he's out in week 2.
We can agree to disagree on that point, I guess.
Featured Stories
See All
Aggies, Longhorns renew storied series with 'everything' to play for
by Olin Buchanan
Stakes are raised in Vegas as Aggies participate in Players Era Festival
by Luke Evangelist
7:51
12h ago
1.4k
12:16
17h ago
2.8k