Campbell Gone? Cowboys May Get New Tight End
I've been wrong on a few things lately, but I think I got this one right.
TE Dan Campbells' agent tells the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram that Campbell will hit the market and puts the odds of his return to Dallas at five percent.
35 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
So did I.
Dallas is indeed searching for a TE that can catch and block.
And Jeb Putzier could be enough for Dallas to take their attention out of the Draft.
by Chandus on Mar 3, 2006 4:59 PM CST reply actions
While we may go FA to get a TE, heres the top 5 in the draft:
1. Vernon Davis
2. Leonard Pope
3. Anthony Fasano
4. Marcedes Lewis
5. Dominique Byrd
Joe Klopfenstien is a close 5, but his blocking isnt that great although being a great TD catching TE.
Darkhorses:
1. Charles Davis: Cowboys already were interested in him.
2. Anthony Mix: Kind of a WR. Boom or bust IMO.
3. Cooper Wallace: Solid TE who may not last until the 5th, but a 3rd may be too high. He should be a solid backup tho.
I also heard Gurode and Fujita will probably be gone, although I would have liked to see both back as backups.
by lou c on Mar 3, 2006 5:23 PM CST reply actions
I don’t know aboit anyone else, but I’m ready for something to happen with the Cowbays. I’ve been ready for March 3 for weeks, and now that it’s here it just feels like stuff should be happening. I’m really not liking this delay.
I mean… I have 2 housewarming shindigs this weekend, and I should have had all this Cowboys news to cover the dead air this weekend. Now, I should just drop off the gift certificates and leave.
by altercall on Mar 3, 2006 5:24 PM CST reply actions
altercall,
I hear you bro.. now need to wait till monday.
by Toast on Mar 3, 2006 5:33 PM CST reply actions
I’m not rich, but I would borrow and pay any amount just to sit in the valley ranch back room.
I hate waiting. I hate wondering if they’re working the phones or sitting back. Please don’t let them be complacent. We need improvement.
by madcowboy on Mar 3, 2006 5:49 PM CST reply actions
altercall,
there may not be moves, but I’m sure the rumors are going to get white hot in the next two days.
by Rafael Vela on Mar 3, 2006 5:50 PM CST reply actions
Of course if I was allowed in the back room, they would just have me removed by security anyway.
I could never keep from running my mouth about how great Bentley would fit in with this team. Oh well. I guess it’s better that I rant on the blogs.
by madcowboy on Mar 3, 2006 5:52 PM CST reply actions
i just read on dalascowboys.com that if a deal is made…dallas will have close to 25 mil to work with this offseason….they also said dallas should put up the $ for bentley….go check it out…its th eheadline….they said bently plays gaurd…..so give him the $…and if allen wont reconstruct…maybe pick up bentley…and sheilds…or another good gaurd…
by IRON MAN on Mar 3, 2006 8:28 PM CST reply actions
if a ypounge center comes up …puch bentley to allens spot ina few years…i think dallas has a legitamt shot at any top FA…JJ cant resist….im thinking….adam archaletta would be a good pcik up…if not demps…hope and chav. at fs…hes younge and parcells likes hitters oin the secondary….archaletta is a younger …lynch
by IRON MAN on Mar 3, 2006 8:30 PM CST reply actions
im not saying he is the calibor lynch is …yet….but i think he would be a great FA pick up …if hope stays and demps and chav. are untouchable…
by IRON MAN on Mar 3, 2006 8:31 PM CST reply actions
sorry for all the typoes…im on a laptop…and my fingures hit so many buttons at onces…and ill never go back and fix it all cuz i dont have a mouse…i have that stupid touch mouse…haha .i just didnt want you guys to think i was a 3rd grader…lol
by IRON MAN on Mar 3, 2006 8:34 PM CST reply actions
I’m encouraged when anyone thinks we still might have a shot at Bentely.
As for Archaletta, isn’t he just another strong safety playing out of position? I think the draft has a lot of depth at FS.
by madcowboy on Mar 3, 2006 9:47 PM CST reply actions
If a new CBA is signed, the Cowboys’ cap space will go up by about $10 million.
So will everybody else’s. If we have the 16th most cap space before a deal is signed, we will still be 16th after it.
The only advantage we might have is Jones’ willingness to actually spend the money. However, he is not the only owner who would do so.
by Mr. Bill on Mar 3, 2006 10:12 PM CST reply actions
Mr Bill,
Our cap space has gone up with the retirement of Dat and cutting Glover. We are presently at $9-10 mill in cap space. Tjere are also reports that we will restructure deals to get around $16 mill under the current cap. Even that would only put us up to 10th. What you have to realize, though is tht we really only have 2 guys that we might resign. Those two shouldn’t cost more than $3 mill. Most of the other teams with cap space either have big name guys to resign or or have alot of FAs that will take alot of money because of their volume. There are also alot of clubs up there that have a history of not using their cap space. All-in-all the Cowboys should be fine with $15 mill in cap room, if we can get that.
by altercall on Mar 3, 2006 10:37 PM CST reply actions
Rafael,
You indeed did call this correctly and I am not surprised. Parcell’s wants his TEs to block and catch. Campbell simply never posed a threat as a receiver. There could very well be a quality TE who drops to us in the 3rd round like Witten did. If so, I suspect we will nab him. Apparently Fasano did not impress at the Combine. That could be great news for the Cowboys.
by TL fan on Mar 3, 2006 11:54 PM CST reply actions
Hmmmm…we suddenly ‘need’ a new TE? How can this be?
What will we say if/when Gurode signs with another team?
Oh wait…we’ve got Al Johnson…just like we’ve got Jason Witten. Problem solved.
by Sterling on Mar 4, 2006 4:03 AM CST reply actions
Campbell is no threat as a pass catcher. He is virtually ignored by the D when it comes to passing. Plus he is usually there to block on a run so that tips the D as well. We need 2 good TE’s that BLOCK and CATCH.
by burmafrd on Mar 4, 2006 6:17 AM CST reply actions
altercall,
You are absolutely right. Any team’s current cap position is a mirage, subject to multiple changes and influences. There are ways to determine how much money a team will have available to spend in free agency, but I have never seen a comparison of those amounts for all 32 teams.
The only point to my post is that a new CBA agreement will raise every team’s level by the same amount. We won’t be able to take all that much advantage of the extra money we get there, especially since teams would be cutting fewer players.
by Mr. Bill on Mar 4, 2006 9:47 AM CST reply actions
Gentlemen,
I can understand the desire for Bentley, but re-read the article. It says “sources close to Bentley say HIS interest in signing with the team is so high….”
This could be one of those issues where he has a friend on the team or was lobbied good and hard at the Pro Bowl.
Whatever the case, it looks to me that this one may be out of Jerry’s hands. I hope not, but that’s the way it looks.
And you want to read something to spoil your breakfast? I saw a rumor on the Eagles site that they are very interested in Vernon Davis. They pick 14th. If they really want him…
by Rafael Vela on Mar 4, 2006 10:47 AM CST reply actions
Bentley seemed to be saying late yesterday that he is NOT close to signing with ANYONE. So there is still hope. That Philthy rag is well known to be something that birds would not even crap on.
by burmafrd on Mar 4, 2006 12:17 PM CST reply actions
Here’s the question no one has addressed — if Bentley really was ready to sign immediately, haven’t he and the Eagles been negotiating illegally?
I imagine teams are calling agents to express interest, but the original story made it seem like the Eagles had everything but Bentley’s signature.
by Rafael Vela on Mar 4, 2006 12:48 PM CST reply actions
Raf
This weekend has been bad enough without having to think about playing against Davis..twice
If we dont go after bently then it’s either status quo or Mangold. 18’s to high and 49 to low so we have to trade down, and for not much, considering how many other teams may be wanting to do the same.
So trade up with the Rams for Davis or down as far as 29 for Mangold.
by TM on Mar 4, 2006 12:55 PM CST reply actions
Now, hold on.
Johnson isn’t as good as Bentley but that doesn’t mean he’s dirt. I see no need to specifically target Mangold, who’s smaller than Johnson.
I do think Dallas could well trade down, though the players they could get moving from 18 to say 25 to 28 are Carpenter or Gabe Watson. BTW, moving down 8 to 10 spots is worth a mid to high 3rd rounder, points wise.
by Rafael Vela on Mar 4, 2006 1:09 PM CST reply actions
I wouldn’t want to trade up with the Rams for Davis. No doubt, he’s a freak athletically, but we have too many needs to trade up for a TE. If he drops to us, we have to take him, but I’d be against trading up for him. The only player I’d want to trade up for is Ngata and that’s only if he somehow slips enough to where it won’t cost us half our draft picks. And that is very unlikely. Stay put or trade down IMO. There is just too much talent in this years draft.
by Blitzkreig on Mar 4, 2006 1:35 PM CST reply actions
Blitzkreig,
I agree 100%, the only player I’m moving up for is Ngata, who COULD fall. Theres no way Davis will last until the Eagles pick, I think he could go as high as 6th and as low at 11th.
I think this is a great draft for us:
Trade down 8-10 spots like Rafael says, and get a mid 3rd rounder. Then take either Wimbley or Carpenter, or Watson and hope the other one falls (just like last year). Then with our 2 3rd’s we can get Anthony Smith and Anthony Fasano. That would be a dream 1st day. We get an OLB, NT, FS, and TE. Thats the perfect scenario IMO.
by lou c on Mar 4, 2006 1:52 PM CST reply actions
NO to Watson- I don’t want any more fat unmotivated types on this team.
The guy was BENCHED for part of his senior season!!! NO WAY!!
by burmafrd on Mar 4, 2006 4:04 PM CST reply actions
Point wise the teams we would be trading down with would have to offer a second, or a third and fourth which is too much in this draft so a low third may be a workable compromise. If the Colts or Seattle loses there RB they might trade up to 18 to get sombody like maroney.
If we do trade down it will be for O-line. I think Carpenter and Lawson will both be gone.
It seems to me that Parcells/JJ are building the team in Stages
2004 / emphasis on the secondary
2005/ emphasis on the front 7
(I know they changed defenses)
2006/emphasis on the O-Line ?
I dont know if this has anything to do with when the player contracts come up for renewal and they want them by position. This could just be parcells style, or circumstance with BPA.
This is the perfect draft to trade down in and focus on the core since there are so many good linemen.
My favorite is Spencer and I think his best position might be NT. There is no way I would spend a high draft choice on Watson when Oshiwino, Fifita, Stanley are all better and can be had in a later round or Spencer converted.
I also think Darryl Tapp is being over looked and is a better DE/OLB than Wimbley.
Another good 3rd round tight end H back prospect is David Thomas from UT.
by TM on Mar 4, 2006 5:57 PM CST reply actions
No way is Oshiwino, Fifta, and Stanley better than Watson, he takes plays off but when he wants to he can dominate. I don’t know much about college football, but I doubt Michigan ran a 3-4 defense. Watson would 1st off be a backup, and would just take double teams and stop the RB. He’s worth a 2nd round pick.
by lou c on Mar 4, 2006 7:31 PM CST reply actions
Rafael:
I’m not saying Al Johnson is dirt at all. I’m just saying the same thing I have for the last several months that Center is a position that demands attention on the O-Line. IMHO, it is the most in need of new personnel because the team does already have 4 OT’s going into training before they sign a FA or draft pick, and assuming they don’t re-sign Tucker.
Wasn’t it only 3 months ago that you were advocating not only drafting the Center from Fresno State and also getting Kevin Mawae in FA if Gurode leaves? That’s two new Centers, so from that I would have to assume that you don’t have total faith in AJ being the only Center on the roster…or necessarily being the starter for that matter. Going for two players in one offseason also sounds like you think it is a pretty high priority, to which I agree completely.
I am firmly behind getting Mangold unless a far better player is available. His size sure didn’t look like a factor when he absolutely abused Gabe Watson in the Senior Bowl practices, as well as every other DT there and throughout his college career. Additionally, Mangold is widely considered to be a 1st round pick now and his stock is rising, while Watson and Carpenter are either stagnant or dropping below other top players at their positions every mock I’ve seen. Bunkley at DT and Sims at LB have both seem their draft stock rise above both players. That tells me one or both of them could possibly still be available in the middle part of the 2nd round.
by Sterling on Mar 4, 2006 7:54 PM CST reply actions
Lou c
Agree watson has first round talent no doubt, and can dominate, and as a rotational NT and MAYBE he will, I just dont want to take the chance and use one our first two picks on him when one of the other three NT’s can rotate in as well.
What do you think about converting Spencer to a NT I know you like him at guard?
by TM on Mar 4, 2006 8:03 PM CST reply actions
Sterling,
There you go again! :)
You are arguing that center demands the most attention on the offensive line, because we only have one of them under contract. OK! But, you can’t just leap from there to, ‘We must sign Bentley.’ It doesn’t follow, logically. You need to fill in a helluva lot of blanks to get from here to there.
… That’s two new Centers, so from that I would have to assume you don’t have total faith in AJ being the only Center on the roster…
I seriously doubt if anyone on this blog (or the known universe), much less Rafael, has advocated going with only Johnson on the roster. That would be totally absurd.
And it still doesn’t provide you with an argument for signing Johnson. Please abandon the argument: ‘If we need A center, we must sign Bentley!’
Besides, if Gurode is re-signed, which is currently being worked, your entire argument collapses.
by Mr. Bill on Mar 5, 2006 3:26 AM CST reply actions
Mr. Bill:
When did I say that that Bentley must be signed as the only solution? You seem to not be understanding what I have been saying all along. I have called the position a top priority and have suggested any number of ways of filling it, most notably drafting a player like Mangold or signing a FA. The FA doesn’t have to be Bentley, but I have been in favor of getting the best possible option. If it isn’t Bentley or Mangold, then Mawae would likely work for a year or two, or possibly some other FA is out there. Besides…what’s wrong with wanting to fill a need with the best possible player? That seems like the wrong reason to reject my argument. I could understand your view if I suggested someone as mediocre as AJ would be a better choice.
Your point about Gurode is something I have been saying all along as well. That doesn’t mean that the position is less of a current priority…only that the priority would be dealt with by a less expensive option.
What’s this about leapfrogging and filling in blanks, BTW? I don’t even understand that one at all. A lot of us have been saying this should be a top priority for a very long time now. The fact that a few of us have been in favor of getting the best and most expensive option to fill a top priority doesn’t make anything a leap. It is simply an opinion of how best to address the problem. A lot of people who were formerly very much unconvinced about AJ seem to be much more sanguine about his prospects. Perhaps that is the crux of the issue.
by Sterling on Mar 5, 2006 4:00 AM CST reply actions
Johnson is only OK as a center. Nothing more. The only real upgrade is Bentley. Mangold- I don’t know. I would have to see a lot of game film of him handling bigger players (not just that lazy slob Watson).
by burmafrd on Mar 5, 2006 5:30 AM CST reply actions

by 






















