Blogging The Boys: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: The Boxing Bulletin for Boxing Fans!

Cowboys have plenty of draft picks but no 1st-rounder; will that change?

The Dallas Cowboys currently have nine picks in the NFL draft and will probably get two more compensatory picks down the line. So what will Jerry Jones and company do with all those picks? You could keep them all and use the shotgun approach to drafting, volume over accuracy; trying to up the odds of hitting on some stars later in the draft through shear numbers. It's doubtful Jerry Jones will do that. They won't pick 11 guys on that April weekend, that's just too many; around half wouldn't make the roster. The expectation is that Jerry will be dealing on draft day, packaging picks for strategic moves up or maybe to pick up a player or two through trades.

Considering the Cowboys moved their first-round pick of 2009 to Detroit in the Roy Williams deal, speculation as to whether the Cowboys would package picks/players to get back into the first round is legitimate. But Nick Eatman says it won't happen.

Let's be honest, the Cowboys probably don't have more than six or seven roster spots that a rookie could even take, especially since they don't have a first-round pick this year - nor do they want one, because of the difficulty it will be to sign first-round picks this year based on the rules of the uncapped season that looms in 2010.

It's rather complicated, but just don't expect the Cowboys to package any deals to move into the first round. Trader Jerry will probably wheel and deal all day and move around with these picks, but just don't anticipate them going into the first.

I admit, the uncapped 2010 season has me a little baffled in terms of what it exactly means for signing players. But Eatman seems pretty sure on this point so I'm going to accept his version unless someone can make a compelling case that the Cowboys might jump back into the first round.

The gist of Eatman's article isn't really about trading draft picks; it's about the need for speed. Besides Owens, Austin and F. Jones, we don't have a lot of burners at the skill-positions. More to the point, Owens and Austin are more straight-line speed guys, not crafty, shifty speed-demons that can spin a defense's head around.  Some suggestions from Eatman:

Penn State's Derrick Williams, Florida's Louis Murphy, Ole Miss' Mike Wallace, USC's Patrick Turner and North Carolina's Brandon Tate. Draft experts' opinions are welcome on this subject.

The Ravens have decided to franchise Terrell Suggs again. So where does this leave LB's Ray Lewis and Bart Scott? Our friends over at SBN's Baltimore Beatdown suggest that they will try to sign Lewis but that Scott may be on his way out. 

To me that means that Bart Scott's days as a Raven are more than likely history. As he said on Sirius' NFL Network yesterday, "don't let the doorknob hit you where the good Lord split you!"

 The Cowboys have a desperate need at ILB. Bradie James is about the only sure thing we got. Kevin Burnett is a FA and the Cowboys will probably let him test the market before deciding on matching any offers. Zach Thomas is in no-man's land with his declaration of leaving Dallas and not liking the 3-4 defense to only later sort of retract that stance. Bobby Carpenter is...well... he's Bobby Carpenter, ‘nuff said. Bart Scott, an experienced 3-4 LB who is still relatively young might be an attractive alternative. Besides, the other guy I was curious about, Karlos Dansby, has been franchised.

Would you go after Bart Scott?

SBN's Miami Dolphins' blog, The Phinsider, recently had an opportunity to ask DT Ron Brace a few questions by email. As Raf noted, if you want to talk about two teams on parallel tracks for free agents and the draft, the Cowboys and the Dolphins are it. Especially given the ties between the two organizations in front-office personnel. So it's no wonder the Dolphins are looking at Brace. Some choice excerpts from Matty's interview with Brace:

Do you have any experience playing in a 3-4 defensive scheme? And how would you feel transitioning to the nose after spending your college days playing in a defense at BC that used 4 down lineman?

"I would like to play for any team who believes in me, whether it's a 4-3 or 3-4. I know that I would have no problem taking up two gaps though. I could definitely see myself as a nose in a 3-4. But I also want to go out and prove that I'm more than just a bruiser. Albert Haynesworth was considered only that early in his career, and now he's not only a mauler, but a pass rusher at the line too."

What do you feel are some of your strengths as a player? And what do you feel you most need to work on?

"I'm quick off the snap. I've got a nasty bull-rush. I can occupy multiple linemen and collapse the pocket. I feel that you can always get better at anything, so I'm a guy who's going to keep working on my craft."

 

0 recs  |  Comment 255 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Patrick Turner

… is not a speed burner. Not even close. I’d be surprised if he ran a 4.5 at the combine/USC’s pro day. He’s another in a long line of lanky USC possession receivers. Some good (Keyshawn), some not so good (Mike Williams).

by DannyWhite on Feb 19, 2009 11:42 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Hey Grizz

in regards to your Nick Eatman portion of your post, today’s Lunch Break they go into a little more detail on that issue.

Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!

by cowboy78 on Feb 19, 2009 11:52 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

If Jerry

does nothing more than find a safety and a NT this year then I will watch the games with more interest. If he gets “cute” and tries to out do himself, then we will be looking at probably another 9-7 maybe make the playoffs maybe not.

When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.

by GunsUp on Feb 19, 2009 12:02 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

co-sign

Celebrity or Imposter?
YOU Decide...
http://www.xanga.com/metaltometal/689036052/celebrity-or-imposter/

by silverblue5 on Feb 19, 2009 2:30 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

with 11 picks

I feel we need them all, 2 safeties, olb, a dt to at least backup Ratliff, def end to replace Canty or at least provide depth , a wr to groom for the future, a qb to backup Romo, o-line could use 2 to replace Berger and Proctor, Pac is gone we could use a cb, by seasons end we were down to Choice at rb…not saying they would all make the team.

by ziggy19 on Feb 19, 2009 12:04 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Iagree

but what we need and what we can get may be two different things. As much as I hate to in defference to Raf, I have to hope that our offensive line, running backs, and recievers won’t get hit with the injuries like they did last season. I don’t believe we have strong enough picks to get good offensive players that are better than what we have already. I hate spending our top picks on Defense once again, but that is where I see our value level being set.

When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.

by GunsUp on Feb 19, 2009 12:18 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

We'll probably have more than 11 draft picks

Dallas the last two years has been real slick about about drafting players who can be used on the roster

by AustonianAggie on Feb 19, 2009 12:35 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'd go after Scott

However I wouldn’t break the bank to sign him either. The good thing about him is that he’s played with an elite defense which has to have some residual effects on our defensive players.

As for Jerry trading up in the first, I agree with Eatman that it definitely won’t happen. Not only would it be economically unsound, but it would cost us too much like our 2010 1st rd pick.

I think we can acquire what we need (S, OL, LB, DL) in Rd 2 through 7.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 19, 2009 12:31 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I think I would rather get a priority UFA so we can stick him on our practice squad

I don’t like wasting roster spots on 3 QBs. I think Brooks Bollinger can be a fine backup. He does everything ok, but nothing good, which is what a backup QB is.

by quincyyyyy on Feb 19, 2009 12:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Bolinger is A Dog

Holy Cow; we need two QBs; a veteran and a rookie; it is absolutely crazy to carry two QBs; and don’t give me Bolinger nonsense; he couldn’t even make the Vikings who have no quarterbacks worth spitting on.

by Iowacowboy on Feb 19, 2009 8:49 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1

This is a priority. We need to groom someone for the future. For those that don’t agree look at the Pats.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 12:49 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I was agreeing with McLovin

We need 3 QBs on the roster. Don’t like Bollinger. Bring in UFA and groom some young guy.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 12:50 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Bollinger is a fine backup

If you want a better QB to backup Romo, then he probably wouldn’t be a backup.

by quincyyyyy on Feb 19, 2009 1:12 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He's not awful

He can keep the offense moving if need be, but we would have to lean heavily on the run game though.

You guys want lobster and caviar for your backup QB and that ain’t going to happen, and I can promise you a rookie QB will be worse than Bollinger.

by quincyyyyy on Feb 19, 2009 1:40 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not talking about a rookie QB to back-up....

I’m saying bring in another FA QB for a back-up and groom a Rookie because like it or not we need to look to the future. Look at the Pats.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 1:43 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No, you wouldn't put him on the practic squad

because then you would have a repeat of the Matt Moore incident.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 2:05 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Well then look at Matt Moore...

Cowboys thought he was safe on the practice squad but it didn’t turn out that way did it?

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 2:21 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

this rookie would obviously

have to be as good as Moore which might not be the case. He might be just as good as Ricard Bartel in which case you could put him on the practice squad.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 19, 2009 2:24 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You draft someone in the first 4 rounds and ....

groom them. You definitely don’t put them on the practice squad. This is the most important position on the field, it’s called development. Do we really want to go into purgatory again….? like after the Aikman deal?…..I don’t think so.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 9:23 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Romo is 29

we’re a long way from purgatory for crying out loud

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 10:01 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Terry, I know he's only 29 but

there are no guarantees in the NFL. He could be hurt in the first game and wiped out for the season or worse forever? Do you really want to go thru those dark years again? Let’s see if I can put this on another level.. It’s like people that live for today and don’t save up for tomorrow thinking that they have a good 10 years until retirement. Well 10 years passes or worse yet, they get laid off. Guess what, they are not prepared and so they are forced to sell everything car, house etc. You are preparing for the future.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 10:21 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

first of all

if Romo gets hurt, thats what a quality veteran back up is for, not some rookie.

Second, I never said we shouldn’t draft a qb this year, only that we shoudn’t reach for one if the value doesn’t present itself, there is always next season.

The qb class this year is pretty weak in case you don’t know that.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 10:34 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Hey, don't talk down to me....

I know that it’s not the best qb class. We are not communicating dude. I’m saying you bring in both.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 10:41 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

nobody is saying reach for a QB....

selecting Freeman in the second is a value pick, or Davisin the third-early 4th is a value pick, Bomar in the 5th is a value pick, Harrell in the 6th is a value pick, McGee in the the 7th or URFA is a value pick….Harper, Cantwell, Pointer, Daniels all value picks if taken after the 6th round….

there are only 4 QB’s in this whole draft i’d actually use a draft pick on…and all 4 might go on the first day of the draft…….. after that, forget it…I’d rather shoot for Timmy Tebow anyhow

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 20, 2009 2:57 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I hate Tebow,

because I think he is a selfish clown, but he can throw and run. We could do worse, ala Quincy.

When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.

by GunsUp on Feb 20, 2009 2:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Numba1

IMO McGee is a much better QB than people are giving him credit for. He wasn’t used properly like M Bennett out of A&M. If McGee had not been forced to run Franchione’s goofy offense, he might have been a high draft pick. I mean the kid was really good coming out of high school with Jordan Shipley.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 3:10 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Now you're getting me excited about

him. He’s mobile,tough and a great leader. Now we’re talking. I forgot about him. A lot of people outside of Central Texas are not aware how good he was with Burnet High School.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 3:12 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

if you pick up an udfa QB...your picking up garbage..

this is a very weak QB draft, if we don’t draft one in the first 4 rounds….forget it…

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 19, 2009 8:40 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

So says you.

Let me tell you about a garbage draft for QB’s. 1997 when the first four off the board were: Jim Druckenmiller, Jake Plummer, Danny Weurffel, and Pat Barnes.

The undrafted QB’s of note that year: Jon Kitna; who was at least a good serviceable starter for a time and Jake Delhomme who was a Jon Kasay shanked kick-off away from taking the Patsies to overtime in the Super Bowl.

Another QB myth debunked.

by MadMick on Feb 19, 2009 9:03 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Jake Plummer was above average

Better than Kitna certainly.

But the point is, if you pick up any QB that impresses in camp like Moore did. You have to carry 3 QB’s to protect him. That’s the only way you can develop talent at the position these days.

Feb. 18-24 -- NFL Scouting Combine
Feb. 27 -- Veteran free agency signing period begins. Trading period begins.
April 25-26 -- NFL Draft

by APerfectStar on Feb 19, 2009 11:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Agree on Plummer.

I just listed him because he was the only good QB actually selected in that whole draft and to contrast him with the other three (of four) top guys whose NFL careers had no longevity at all.

by MadMick on Feb 19, 2009 11:40 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

i don't live in the past guy...

i made my assessment based on THIS years crop….IF you can pull a gem out of this pile of garbage….be my guest…but please let’s not use Jerry’s draft picks to debunk my opinion…

btw….the above mentioned crop actually sounds like it had better talent than this one….so let that be a lesson learned….If Kitna and Delhomme are the gems that await us…..i’ll bring in some camp fodder…..i was talking drafted QB’s…..you can bring in all the URFA you want…

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 20, 2009 4:25 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Boltus isn't garbage

He’ll more than likely end up a better pro than many qb who are drafted ahead of him.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 10:03 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Dude, buddy guy, I’ll quit living in the past when you quit living in the distant future…..and not even having the common courtesy to occasionally loan me your time machine on the weekend.

That being said, I feel like a few more trips to the wayback machine….

Let’s see; 1994: garbage for QB’s. Guys who went on to be good from that class: Kurt Warner and Jeff Garcia. Both undrafted. Although the whole league should probably get a mulligan on both these guys since they had to play in other leagues for a few years before they even got a real whiff in the NFL.

2000: Legendary junk. Chad Pennington was the only one chosen in the first two rounds and although he’s been solid the rest were all either journeymen or space aliens.

Giovanni Carmazzi? Who? Although he probably runs a nice pizzeria now or found work as an extra on the Sopranos.

Spergon Wynn? What?

In the 6th round, Tom Brady and Marc Bulger were both found. Three garbage drafts in a span of seven years where the best quality at QB was found in the 6th round or undrafted altogether. And it will happen again. UDFA versus late drafted is playing semantics. My point still remains that guys can be found very late in the draft or after it through UDFA.

Recently, there’s been Romo himself and Matt Cassel. Also, I don’t see how bringing up names like Warner and Delhomme qualifies as living in the past when both have started a Super Bowl in the last five years and the rest of the guys mentioned are still in the league.
Not two years ago, Jerry could’ve had a competent back-up through UDFA in Matt Moore.

If anybody’s more concerned with the immediate future, it’s me. I’m concerned about depth along the o-line and starters up the middle on defense or else the QB NEXT YEAR is either going to get killed or not be able to get on the field because a team like the Redskins will be able to churn out 8 minute drives by gutting the Cowboys D up the middle. You want to miss out on a possible contributer at any of those spots for a QB who won’t even be ready to start until 2011 or 2012 at the earliest; be my guest.

As for you bringing up the forward thinking Patriots, they’ve been the winningest team for a decade. If they have an instinct to take a QB with their 3rd, they should trust their instincts. The last time Jerry had the urge to take a QB high, it was Quincy stinkin’ Carter.

by MadMick on Feb 20, 2009 2:03 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

well...i appreciate your research into the archives...

but like i said….I look at current crops of QB’s…..I see 4 that are worthy of 1st-4th round consideration, that have a legit shot of becoming a starting NFL QB.

IF I was about to pick the next Warner, Garcia, Delhomme, Brady, Romo out of the rest of this pile of current garbage QB’s, don’t you think I’d be working for an NFL team right now ?

There is a difference between prospects that are hopeful future starters and have clear superiority over the other prospects, than the back log of wanna be’s that haven’t proven their worthiness over a 2-4 year period to consider drafting..

I never said we have to use a higher round pick on a QB, but i’m not resting the future at QB with the ole needle in a hay stack method of choosing our QB to groom.

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 20, 2009 3:12 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Good points.

However, some highly touted QB’s are nothing more than colossal busts who the scouts were simply wrong about. Guys like Heath Shuler, Jim Drunkenmiller, Cade McNown, Andre Ware and and Akili Smith either showed absolutely nothing or didn’t care nearly enough to stick around in the league after being initial busts. That’s the difference between them and guys like David Carr and Joey Harrington, who even though they’re busts, are at least still around.

Personally, I’d pick up Chris Simms and an UDFA and wait until next year to add the luxury of a future starter.

by MadMick on Feb 20, 2009 3:25 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 3:34 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I feel the same...

Regarding that last paragraph, Simms and a UDFA (I’m sure there will be a couple guys who go undrafted will end up playing in the NFL at some point)

Feb. 18-24 -- NFL Scouting Combine
Feb. 27 -- Veteran free agency signing period begins. Trading period begins.
April 25-26 -- NFL Draft

by APerfectStar on Feb 20, 2009 9:26 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Numba1

I didn’t mean UDFA QB. I meant FA QB….Big difference. I meant as I’ve said all along, get a good FA QB and get a young-un to groom. Man, I’ve been arguing so much with some people-wink wink )that I’m getting confused. I still stick with what I’ve been saying. BTW even NFL Network, has said that Losman wouldn’t be bad as a back-up for Dallas as well. Very similar style to Romo if he could just cut down on the mental errors like forced throws. Sounds a lot like Romo.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 9:36 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm all for aquiring a FA #2 QB.

I preferably would like to invest a 3rd-4th rounder on Nate Davis-Ball St, if available…..but if not….it’s no big deal….we have 10+ draft picks, and about 4-5 positions of needed upgrade…QB depth being one of them…

Everyone seems to think getting by with some late rounder or undrafted rookie QB is the way to go ….we’re not looking to fill a roster spot….we’re looking for an eventual starter, or at least a long term back up that has the upside to win a few games if called upon a year from now……

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 20, 2009 4:32 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1

to Nate Davis. You and I are on the same page. I think too many people are thinking because Romo wasn’t drafted we could find some gem. I don’t agree. I would draft someone to groom them and definitely not put them on the practice squad. At the risk of being redundant, look at Pats-3 deep. I don’t agree with others that think if Romo goes down we’re screwed because if you get a quality back-up it can be done. Again look at the Pats. IMO they should have made the playoffs.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 9:10 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Well, if you look back at the pedigree of QB's who have started Super Bowls for the past decade....

You’d see virtually every starter has either been a 1st round pick by their team or a free agent QB who started his career undrafted or as a 6th-rounder.

And while the number of QB’s who have been able to seriously shine in the first two years has risen, it’s still assuming a lot to think any young QB is going to be able to win games a year from now. You get a veteran back-up for that.

by MadMick on Feb 20, 2009 2:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

thats not true at all

there have been plenty of good qbs selected after rd 4.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 10:02 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

sure

Tom Brady
Tony Romo
Kurt Warner
Jake Delhomme
Jeff Garcia

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 10:39 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

keep going Einstien...

anyone could regurgitate the same 5 names….btw….Garcia and Warner were already professionally paid QB’s….so i’m not buying those two……..give me more than Romo and Brady….and spare me the Warren Moon antics..

Hurry up, and dive back into that hay stack Mr. Needle !!!

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 20, 2009 3:19 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

guess I should have included

Marc Bulger as well.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 3:36 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

But there aren't 5 names.......

…..you could give of mid-round (2nd-5th) QB’s who have started Super Bowls in the past ten years. Rich Gannon’s the only one and he was drafted to play safety.

It seems to me you either get your QB of the future in the 1st or you wait for the right free agent to come along at the right point in his career.

By the way, you know that Trent Green cat Kurt Warner replaced to start his whole fairy tale? Green himself was originally an 8th-round selection by the Chargers who couldn’t get on the field and had to stop over in the CFL before putting it all together. He certainly seemed to have a better career than Notre Dame megabust and 1993 2nd overall pick Ric Mirer who could only accurately make throws to one side of the field.

by MadMick on Feb 20, 2009 3:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Plus Bollinger did not move the offense

when he got his chance this past year.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 1:45 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's because he was recently picked up by us

he needs a little more time to learn the offense

by quincyyyyy on Feb 19, 2009 1:57 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1

You crack me up Ha Ha

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 2:06 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

thoughts on Kitna as backup?

He does know RW and he did throw for over 4000 yds a couple of years ago. Kinda intriquing?

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 5:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Well, he threw for over 4000 yds.

in 2007. He beat us in Dallas with Roy E. in 2006 and nearly beat us in 2007 which isn’t too shabby if you ask me? We’re not talking starter okay?

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 9:54 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Save the condescending talk for Terrence.

You’re bound to throw for 4,000 yards in an offense with a 65/35 pass/run ratio. Yes, he did nearly beat the Cowboys twice in a row which was an absolute disgrace. Newman probably had his worst game as a pro in the ’06 debacle as I believe even Mike Williams burnt him for a TD.

by MadMick on Feb 19, 2009 10:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I wasn't trying to be condescending...

that’s actually funny that you think that because I’m usually the one that gets talked down to. If you look up above, you’ll see that everyone that I bring up is shot down as QB.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 10:07 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

There's just not that much discernable difference between any back-up for me.

They’re all woulda been, coulda been, shoulda beens. Just because David Carr had a 144-rating in a single meaningless game doesn’t mean he’s been any less of a bust. Even Kyle Boller has had single game ratings that high. So I don’t think the Cowboys missed out by not offering a 5th-rounder or whatever (or pay-raise) for Carr.

All I ask for is that the backup isn’t another dead-armed wrinkly old wussy like BJ.

by MadMick on Feb 19, 2009 10:15 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed...

When Romo went down in the Giants game with the back, it really scared me. That’s why I keep bringing up getting a good back-up. I don’t agree with some on here that think if Romo goes down, the season’s over. It shouldn’t be that way with our offense.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 10:20 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't know how realistic an option Jeff Garcia is.

But for those very reasons, I’d take him because he seems a lot more capable of managing a game than some of the yoofs.

by MadMick on Feb 19, 2009 10:25 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

and he’s a smart player. Doesn’t have the strongest arm but he can move unlike Johnson.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 10:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'd like to know who really was responsible

for that major mistake last year in not bringing in another QB in training camp?

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 10:24 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Why is everyone so pig headed on getting

and grooming someone for the future? I don’t get it. Look at Miami. They had Marino for all those years but since then it’s been average QB play with average QB’s . They finally brought in Pennington last year but who knows how long he’ll last, plus they have Henne to groom. As much as people don’t like to give Philly credit, they are pretty smart. They had Garcia behind McNab and now they have a young-un in Kolb. If groomed correctly Kolb could be really good. They are doing it the right way by not throwing him to the wolves. Like I said earlier, too many really good QB’s have been thrown to the wolves too early, basically, ruining them.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 9:31 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

so true...

yet you’ll hear everyone glamoring over Matt Moore…If only we had Matt Moore…sure he was an URFA….but each year is different..He was actually graded out like a 4th rounder, and slipped…Where he was drafted is not the point. You have to focus in one one, and go for it, either it the 4th round 7th round or free agent….My beef isn’t about where to draft him..It’s the need to select one period…I can’t take Brad Johnson or Brook Bollinger being our back up QB….

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 20, 2009 3:31 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

as you all will notice in Raf's update to this post the Cowboys have requested a interview with my boy QB-Nate Davis...

I glad I’m not the only guy in Cowboys world that thinks Davis has great upside and should be seriously considered as a possible selection …Appearantly Me, Jerry, Wade, and his scout team feel the same way…

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 20, 2009 11:46 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, and the update also says

they interviewed Iglesius (WR). Kind of interesting huh?

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 11:54 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

yeah....I don't know what to think of that...

The receivers Williams and Inglesius are projected mid 2nd to 4th rounders…..Unless they are about to cut TO or Crayton…I can’t see any other reason to even bother talking to those players(often does as smoke screen to keep other teams guessing)…WR is probably the last position that needs upgrades…especially use of a top 3 round pick….neither receiver showed the speed needed to warrant early round consideration at the combine…..If either slip to the 4th…then they become interesting…

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 23, 2009 5:30 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

i would love Kitna as a back up....

put him on this team, with these weapons and he could get us to the playoffs…..if Romo was out for the season..of course…

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 19, 2009 8:42 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

At least he can throw a fade route.....

to of all people Roy Williams. In fact, quess who was the QB when Roy had his best season. You got it-Kitna. Hey, the more I think about it, this could work. BTW, maybe he could show Romo how to throw a good fade route and slant-ya think? And before everybody gets all worked up, this is as a backup to Romo but he could push Romo. He’s also, fiery too.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 9:46 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

57 turnovers in '06 and '07.

But I guess it’s all good since he also had 4,000 passing yards, too. Of course, most guys do that in Mike Martz’s throw-it-40-times-a-game acrobat show. Throw for 4,000 yards I mean, not have 30-turnover seasons.

Admittedly all back-up QB’s are going to have their warts or else they wouldn’t be backups in the first place. All I ask for is that the guy’s arm isn’t as dead as Sid Luckman’s. Garrett must have had a lot of confidence in his “system” to think he could get by with a back-up who couldn’t accurately metriculate the ball down the field any farther than six yards at a time.

by MadMick on Feb 19, 2009 10:00 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Well, not too good so who do you

like? I still like Losman if he had some good coaching and he’s young. Very mobile like Romo. Simms is intriguing especially because he’s a lefty. Do you realize his back side would be Columbo? Kinda interesting. I’m just trying to open the box for a backup because I really don’t like Bollinger.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 10:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, at least a young buck like Losman or Simms has potential.

You know already what an old dog like Kitna is and trusting an old man screwed them this past season.

Simms is a good choice. He’s a young guy who really didn’t start that many games(15) in Tampa Bay. He had a playoff appearance and then a horrible start to the following season. Even Losman’s started twice as many games as him.

I’m even fine with a guy like Boller. He’s had the odd stretch of good games here and there. Just no more gimpy old men.

by MadMick on Feb 19, 2009 10:10 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

The only bad thing I heard on Boller....

which I don’t know if it’s true is he’s good at long passes but not so good as underneath stuff. Everyone wants to give up on Losman but what they seem to have forgotten is he was on a really bad team in Buffalo when he was a starter. Apparently when Jauron came in, he wanted his own guy and so he got Edwards. If they could get someone to work with him to cut down on his errors, he could be pretty good.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 10:18 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't know.

There’s another case of a guy not being groomed correctly and thrown to the wolves. You know, that’s what made Aikman so unique. Not too many guys can get abused like he did the first two years and recover to win 3 Super Bowls.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 10:23 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Steve Young did take some hellacious beatings as a pastel-clad Buc.

And as fate would have it he was replaced by Vinny Testaverde who would also fare just as poorly and only realized success once he left Bucco Bruce’s motley crew.

Of course, Young’s circumstance is different than Aikman’s as he wouldn’t take over as the 9ers starter until his 7th season. However, over that span, he played excellently when filling in for Montana and there’s no doubt in my mind Young could’ve at least led the 9ers to one Super Bowl over that span (late-80’s). I’m sure Young would’ve had just as easy a time ripping apart the Broncos as Montana did.

by MadMick on Feb 19, 2009 10:34 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You're right and so when everyone

is raving about Joe Flacco I’m not that impressed because he had a pretty good team around him unlike Aikman’s or Young’s early years. I think that’s what happened to David Carr. The poor guy got sacked so many times that it got in his head.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 10:39 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Flacco is indeed the real deal....

he will only get better, much better..

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 20, 2009 4:39 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh I agree,

he’s going to be really good but my point was in Aikman’s early years he was killed. Not too many can or have recovered after such a terrible start. At least Flacco had a good supporting group around him which will help his career. Aikman didn’t have that luxury. That’s why you want to get a good yo;ung-un now when there’s a good group surrounding him.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 9:37 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

that's because Garrett had a rag arm himself

he figured if he can do it back in the day while riding the pine, anyone could…

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 20, 2009 4:38 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, that's sadly true.....

It’s pretty remarbable that when Aikman went down that we won with Kosar.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 9:38 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

They barely beat the awful Cardinals with Kosar.

So it’s not that remarkable. They just ran Emmitt to the limit including a 90-yard catch-and run where Emmitt made something like 30 Cardinals miss him.

Obviously not referring to you, but that’s why I don’t like it when Aikman’s critics act like Kosar and Peete actually filled in and beat a hand full of good teams.

Beurlein’s a different story as I feel he was a very good QB who got stuck in dumps after leaving Dallas.

by MadMick on Feb 20, 2009 2:21 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Who Kosar?

I was being sarcastic so calm down. The team with Kosar on it was stacked. He wasn’t the best QB at that time because he was on the down-side of his career but he was serviceable. Terry, I’m not necessarily saying that Losman is the best QB around, but there are some good things about him that I like and he’s a lot more similar to Romo than you think. He mobile and has a strong arm. He has been prone to making bad decisions like Romo but he’s only 27 years old. There are at least 3 NFL analysts that agree with me. I’m open to other QB’s as well with the exception of Bollinger.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 10:30 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

no, Kitna

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 10:41 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1

What happens if something worse happens to Romo this year like a torn ACL etc. Then we’re really screwed.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 2:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Then we are equally screwed with a rookie mid round QB

cuz he ain’t going to do any better than Bollinger, I promise you that.

by quincyyyyy on Feb 19, 2009 2:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Ok

then since he is not playing this year you might as well get a priority UFA and stick him on the PS to develop.

by quincyyyyy on Feb 19, 2009 2:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Not if the O-Line was above average

But that’s beside the point…

by hiafex on Feb 19, 2009 2:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

the OL would have to better than that

and our receivers would have to get open much better as well, but we still wouldn’t come close to making the playoffs without Romo, I don’t care who our back up was.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 19, 2009 2:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

If we had an above average O-line

And an average QB, our RBs and defense could take us to the playoffs.

by hiafex on Feb 19, 2009 2:51 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

no way

we wouldn’t even come close to being .500 under that scenario.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 19, 2009 3:22 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

our oline

would need to learn to run block. As it stands now, we’d have no chance with a backup qb. But if we can finally develop a better running game, wed be able to survive with the run game & defense.

by foyesboys on Feb 19, 2009 3:26 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's why I said an above average O-line

Above average run and pass blocking. I know not to take anything that Terry says at face-value when it comes to Romo.

by hiafex on Feb 19, 2009 3:40 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Procter was the weak link last year

with Holland and Kosier health we should be fine

by quincyyyyy on Feb 19, 2009 4:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Kosier is entering the last year of his deal

he’s a gritty player, but I’ve been told he’s a guy who starts the season at 305 and ends it at 285-290. He wears down.

Holland ate his way out of Denver and took 15 weeks to get in shape. He’s Joe Average, a career backup. Are you really confident he won’t show up in August at 400 lbs. again? He did it last year. This defines “being fine” in your book?

Keep aiming high, Quincyyyy. But don’t complain if the team stands pat and goes 9-7 again.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 5:53 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

So...

You’d suggest the Cowboys to take Robinson in the 2nd round, yes?

by hiafex on Feb 19, 2009 5:55 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

if he was there

or Tyronne Green at pick 69.

McQuistan’s time has run out. They need a young G who can develop and be ready by opening day ’10 if not sooner.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 6:31 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

lol....what a joke...

nobody buy Romo can ride the bus full of all star performers…nobody.

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 19, 2009 8:43 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's a pretty big statement and I don't buy that.

You actually think that no QB besides Romo could have taken us to the playoffs last year? If we had just had a serviceable QB we could have beaten the Rams.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 10:43 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

nobody that isn't already

starting on another NFL team, absolutely not.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 10:10 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

But, Terry I thought you were the one....

that said “you win as a team and not as an individual”. Are those not your words?

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 5:01 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

that is true

and I’ve said nothing to contradict that statement.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 10:11 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

bolinger may be fine but we need good.

Don't believe everything you think.

Your causes are cute!!!

by stoproyce on Feb 19, 2009 2:00 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1

We let a good rookie get away the other year

by Iowacowboy on Feb 19, 2009 8:50 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

but only if there is one available worth drafting

I wouldn’t reach for one just for the sake of drafting one as there is always next year. Romo isn’t even 30 yet, there isn plenty of time to groom a young qb for the future.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 19, 2009 12:54 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

and I agree, but my point is it's stupid to reach

at any position for that matter. Not understanding your nervous comment because I’d love to see the Cowboys draft a qb if there is good available in the mid rds.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 19, 2009 1:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1

at least someone’s logical-LOL

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 1:12 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Completely Disagree with Eatman

According to his comments, Eatman believes Jerry won’t look to package picks to move up into the first round. His rationale is the “difficulty of signing 1st round picks” with the 2010 uncapped year looming. He essentially is forecasting that with the uncapped year looming, the price of signing high draft picks will be much, much higher in 2009.

This is complicated, but I don’t agree. According to the CBA, the only meaningful change affecting the signing of highly touted rookies is the period during which the signing bonus can be pro-rated. For 2009, the maximum amount of years any signing bonus can be pro-rated is five years, as opposed to six years in the past. At first glance, this alone should place downward pressure on the 1st round picks, since teams can only pro-rate bonuses over a five year period.

Given this, one would assume that teams in the past have historically given high draft picks six year deals, so that they could take advantage of pro-rating the deals to lessen the effect upon the present year cap. However, in 2008, only four 1st rounders were given six year deals (Chris Long, Matt Ryan, Darren McFadden, and Keith Rivers). Everyone else in the first round received a five year deal.

So what does this mean? It means that a five year deal is usually the norm, and 2009 will follow that pattern. Past is Prologue. This alone does not forecast an explosion of the price of signing a high draft pick. It is true, of course, that 2010 is an uncapped year. But does this necessarily mean that high 1st round picks have additional leverage to sign huge contracts. Perhaps, but only for the few teams with significant cap room who can absorb the hit in 2009. I just don’t see it.

Finally, if there is to be a new CBA negotiated at some point, it is widely reported that the owners will demand some type of rookie salary cap like the NBA uses. This, I think, is why so many underclassman have declared for the draft this year. The long and the short of all of this is that we can probably expect first round monies to be comparable to those of last year. If this is true, there is no reason Jerry would be precluded from moving up.

Personally, I agree with Mike Lombardi that under the system that now exists, second round picks are gold. High quality at relatively low prices. If Jerry’s going to package a bunch of picks, I’d like to see him try to move up and improve our second round pick so that we can try and pick up one of the highly rated safeties which are projected to go at the top of that round.

by Boundforbeach on Feb 19, 2009 12:51 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

+1...i agree...I don't see us getting back into the 1st...BUT I sure do see us moving up into the top of round 2.

I can see us swapping 2nd rounders with Oakland, by throwing in our early 4th rounder to select at #40…if a guy like OC- Alex Mack, OG-Duke Robinson. DE-Jarron Gilbert, or ILB-Clint Sintim start falling from the end of round 1.

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 19, 2009 12:53 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

don't forget about Delmas

I’ve seen mocks already projecting him into rd one. I’m hoping he doesn’t have a great combine so he has a shot of sliding into rd 2.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 19, 2009 12:58 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Personally I wouldn't trade UP for any Safety none are THAT good, and Delmas may be a pubic hair better than Johnson, Moore, Hamlin, Chung etc....not worth giving up extra picks for..imo..

He may turn out not to be much at all…I have not been impressed by his scouting reports…he’s alright in areas, but not outstanding in any….He may be considered the best FS in this draft right now, but that’s not saying too much for me….His draft grade will not be equal to a high second rounder…If he came out next season, he’s probably go 3rd-4th round…If he’s rated higher than 40 on any draft boards, I think thats skewed and not his actual worth….IF we’re going Safety, we might as well wait at #51 for whichever ones there….or what till the 4th for the Chip Vaugns or Courtney Greens or Otis Wiley’s…who aren’t much worse than the top guys…might even turn out better..

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 19, 2009 1:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'd move up

I would hire Dr Frankenstein to build me a safety if I had too. I don’t care if it’s a LB converted, a WR, a CB, a QB, Safety is a huge priority on D, and they can’t hold off. A safety is the guy who stops all those big plays. Our D is a safety away from Ravens, Pittsburg level. Dallas just need good ones, not even HoFer’s

by AustonianAggie on Feb 19, 2009 1:12 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

We STILL have ROY and Hamlin......

UNTIL ROY is cut, I don’t think Safety is Dallas’s biggest NEED ….they are not going to keep ROY on the bench at 6-7 million next season..

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 19, 2009 1:26 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He is a liability

in pass coverage whether he is on the bench or not. If he is playing he gets toasted, if he isn’t then we have to use another player to cover for him. Either way we lose with him on the team.

When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.

by GunsUp on Feb 19, 2009 1:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe, I'm just a UT homer but....

I still would give Huff a chance if he’s cut from the Raiders.

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 1:38 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You've got the causal chain backwards

they’re not going to cut Roy until they have a replacement.

He’s on the roster by default. We all know what he can and can’t
do. And he’s a subpar player getting a star’s salary.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 3:24 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

So your response means that they will pursue a replacement for RW1 in this draft

so they can cut him from the team?

Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!

by cowboy78 on Feb 19, 2009 3:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Are you happy with him?

the Star-Telegram wrote a couple of weeks ago that the team was, “this close” to cutting him last year.

Did he suddenly get better?

He’s around because his replacement has not been acquired.

To answer your question — yes.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 4:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Raf I was not second guessing you comment, in fact I agree

and I know you also put up a post talking about how a safety makes a difference. When I wrote that I did not remember your take on how a direct replacement could be found for RW1 this year, what I remembered was that we wanted a safety or two to take RW1 job and leave him there for depth purposes because I thought we were a little thin on dependable safties.

Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!

by cowboy78 on Feb 19, 2009 6:29 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

with the conversion concept. There has to be a corner who is maybe a little slow due to size or a really fast light LB that can be taught to play safety. I mean if it was my shot at the show I’d be all over that if I was one of those tweener guys.

When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.

by GunsUp on Feb 19, 2009 1:26 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Great Cowboy lineage...Wisconsin's - Jonathan Casillas LB- 6'2" 226lbs...4.50 40....

excellent canidate for conversion to SS, and nickle LB…If he runs under 4.50 40…..look for him to fill that roll….

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 19, 2009 1:30 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

sounds like a cover 2 LB to me

he’ll probably be drafted by Colts or TB.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 19, 2009 1:32 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He's one pound lighter than Kevin Burnett

who’s already proven he can cover NFL backs and TEs.

If that’s their logic, I’d just re-sign Burnett and move him to SS.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 4:12 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Personally, I'm

with you on this safety thing. The idea that any of the so called “top college safties” are going to come in and take Hamlin or Roy’s job is highly doubtful. Frankly, I don’t think Jerry sees the safety issue the same way many others do because he paid both of the ones we currently have.

by jevans1729 on Feb 19, 2009 2:31 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

lower the shoulder into your own teammates

do the aw, shucks! handclap after being late to the tackle.

(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud

by I_miss_Switzer on Feb 19, 2009 4:55 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Roy's 2007

stats were 92 tackles, seven passes defensed and 2 ints. Only 6 safties had more tackles. I’m not saying the guy is great. The point is who are you realistically going to get that’s better? Check the other stats of the strong safties in the league. It’s not a pretty picture.

by jevans1729 on Feb 19, 2009 6:57 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

How many of those tackles were after he had given up receptions for 1st downs?

In that case, the least he could do is bother to make the tackle after he’d gifted another 1st down to the opposing tight end.

by MadMick on Feb 19, 2009 8:00 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, the first round will tap out around pick 25

that means the meat of the 2nd round will come in the 35-42 range.

Look at the names which could fall there:
OL — Mack, Robinson, maybe one of the last OTs;
DEs — there will still be some here;
LBs — you could see a really good rated prospect fall here as well.
S — It depends on where they are rated, but if they’re fairly high, you can guarantee yourself
one here.

I can easily see Dallas moving up 8-10 spots. I expect Jerry to try, quite hard to do so.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 12:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't buy Eatman's speed argument

What was Felix Jones for? To add speed to WR.
And Martellus Bennett? To create matchup problems at TE;
And what’s this “straight-linish” nonsense about Austin?

So a speedly slot receiver is suddenly a bigger issue than a quality guard, safety or nose tackle?

This team has a cracked foundation and Eatman is arguing about whether the patio grill should be gas or charcoal.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 12:56 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

In defense of Eatman

you can never have too much speed, and while we did get faster last season, it can’t hurt to add more speed..

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 19, 2009 1:01 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

sure, speed is vital

but you need to have priorities. What happens if you snag a nifty WR and neglect the OL another year? How valuable is that speed?

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 1:03 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree that our main priorites

should be addressed, but since we have a lot of picks, there will be some available we could use on a speed demon later in the draft.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 19, 2009 1:05 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

yes, with LATER being the operative word

An Az-Hakim type guy in the 4th, which is where he was drafted, makes sense.

But not any earlier.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 1:06 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1....Terry

I’ve listened to Eatman many times on this topic and many are in agreement that outside of TO, Austin is the only other WR that can stretch the field. I think one has to be drafted this year to get us ready the following year if TO is gone. I would go after one in the second round.

by Boyzfan94 on Feb 19, 2009 3:20 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

our first pick on a WR, when we already have 4 signed, and will more than likely tender Austin...

so our first overall pick comes in and is inactive for 16 games, and 6th on the WR depth chart….BRILLIANT !!!

no thanks…

I can name 10 WR’s available in rounds 6-7 that run under 4.5 and can play the slot…

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 19, 2009 8:54 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Can you tell me why these guys

want to stack up wide receivers but don’t want to get a good back-up QB and groom another one? I just don’t get it? Do they not remember last year or all the diiferent QB’s we went thru after Aikman? What’s the deal?

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 9:50 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

nobdoy is saying

we shouldn’t get a good back up, I know I never said it. As far as drafting a young QB, I’m all for that too, but it has to be a value pick, not a reach.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 10:14 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Why a value pick when it's the most

important position on the field? Do you not remember the beating that Romo took last year? It can happen again. I mean the poor guy hurt his back pretty bad last year.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 10:33 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

now, you're making no sense at all

what does reaching for a draft pick have to do with Romo getting beat up?

No matter who we draft, they’re not playing this year any way.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 10:43 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You are partially correct.....

What I meant to say is…heaven forbid… Romo goes down. You have a good FA QB come in. You’re right the rookie probably never sees the field the first year. However, you are grooming him to be the eventual backup/starter for down the road. You don’t want some scrub QB. You want a legitimate back-up Look at Philly 2 years ago-Mcnab,don’t remember the back-up and Kolb(who was a 2nd round pick.) They are grooming him to be the starter. At the time McNab was only 29 yrs. old.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 10:49 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

yeah, and Philly drafted him

because they thought he was a great value pick in the 2nd rd. If there is qb in the draft this year that slides into a rd that would make him a value pick, then draft him.

All I’m saying is we shouldn’t just draft a qb for the sake of drafting one, thats called a reach and we shouldn’t do it regardless of position.

There will be plenty of time to draft and groom Romo’s eventual replacement as he’s going to play for at least 6-7 more years minimum.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 1:00 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I never said just pick up somebody for the sake

of drafting one. I wouldn’t just call 2nd round a value pick either. That’s pretty high for a 2nd round “value pick”. They are grooming him to hopefully take McNab’s place. Not as just a value pick.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 1:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Well then, Terry, I hope you won't be real

disappointed if Romo doesn’t last another 6 or 7 years because there’s never a guarantee that anyone lasts that long in the NFL. My favorite player, Staubach, only lasted from 1971-1979.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 1:12 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I know too well that Staubach was forced

to retire because of concussions. Same with Aikman. My point is you never know what can happen. Romo’s fine today but there’s never a guarantee that he will last. I hope for your sake alone, that he lasts that long but I wouldn’t count on it. I know you will be devestated but all it takes is one good lick and your career’s over. Remember, this is a business, and you have to be prepared.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 1:43 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not disagreeing with you

but like I said before, this year’s qb crop sucks, I really wouldn’t care if we passed on a qb in this draft and waited for better prospects in upcoming drafts.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 1:49 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I have to agree Terry,

but we still need a back up. Who is that going to be? I

When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.

by GunsUp on Feb 20, 2009 1:51 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's a great question.

I just know that I don’t like Bollinger. IMO, he’s too short and he couldn’t even make the Minnesota team. What may be slanting my opinion though, is the fact that Johnson recommended him. Since I’m so down on Johnson, it may be clouding my opinion. Terry, doesn’t like Losman but believe it or not, he has a very similar style to Romo-very mobile but needs to cut down on his mistakes. Look how many QB’s have left their original teams and were successful with other teams like Leftwch,Batch etc. My opinion was a first round draft pick, so someone saw something in the guy. My belief is he just got thrown to the wolves too early because of Bledsoe.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 2:07 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

FYI

a value pick is any player a team has rated higher than the rd they’re picked. So if the Cowboys have a certain qb rated as the 100th best prospect, but he slides down to the bottom of rd 4 or into rd 5, then thats a value pick.

Same could be said of Kolb if they had him rated as a first rd value.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 1:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I know what a value pick is but you're missing

my point. Philly didn’t just draft Kolb because he’s a "VALUE PICK’. They are drafted him for the future. If you can remember he was the 3rd QB behind Feely that year. Last year, they moved him up to back-up to eventually take over for McNab. McNab was about the same age as Romo, when they decided to draft Kolb.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 1:46 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

yes, but the point you're missing

is that they also like Kolb. If the Cowboys scouts like a qb that would be available this year, then by all means draft him.

However, this years crop looks weak and I wouldn’t mind waiting for better prospects.

I say draft that Boltus kid from Hardwick in the 7th or sign him as a FA, he looks as promising as any mid rounder we could select this year.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Feb 20, 2009 1:52 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Another option on the young QB front

Some of the guys from the past year, or even 2 years ago who ran scout teams on the PS. (I still like the kid that came out of Tulsa last year, Paul Smith). But there are other guys who fit the profile. Guys that might not fit what their current team is looking for, and might get cut after TC.

Feb. 18-24 -- NFL Scouting Combine
Feb. 27 -- Veteran free agency signing period begins. Trading period begins.
April 25-26 -- NFL Draft

by APerfectStar on Feb 20, 2009 9:39 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Last year I would of agreed more

Last years draft, to me, was all about getting real speed

by AustonianAggie on Feb 19, 2009 1:05 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

lol....Eatman makes me scratch my head all the time....

He was saying today how he doesn’t like Phillip Rivers….and said he’s take Eli Manning over him , because he just doesn’t like Rivers….yet when pressed as to why, he had no clue…Rivers led the league in QB rating, up there in TD’s, and had a great season….but Eatman was there with his head in the sand…..wake up….i said.

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 19, 2009 1:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Sheesh

I thank the football Gods that the Giants didn’t just keep Rivers and scrap the Eli deal. They would be a much more dangerous team with Rivers at the controls.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 1:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, the Cowboys LOVED him

and his stock was in their reach, and then, poof! he was in the top five. They were trying to poor mouth his odd delivery, hoping he would stay in the 15-20 range so a trade up could be worked out.

Too bad. He might be the best young QB in the game right now. And Eatman doesn’t like him? LOL.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 1:22 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Actually, it was

Rivers and Merriman that they took with the Giants picks. There was some other stuff thrown in too. Almost a Herschel Walker deal for SD. Not quite, but big enough that I really wonder how NY recovered from it as well as they did.

by Ridgelake on Feb 19, 2009 2:56 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, SD selected LT & Brees in the same draft that sent their top pick to Atl, who drafted Vick

Celebrity or Imposter?
YOU Decide...
http://www.xanga.com/metaltometal/689036052/celebrity-or-imposter/

by silverblue5 on Feb 19, 2009 3:20 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

lol and they'd have all those draft picks

Rivers completed 65% of his passes as a true freshman in college, that’s impressive

by AustonianAggie on Feb 19, 2009 1:18 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He's usually good about getting out a lot of facts

I like Rivers, and Norv’s done a lot with him

by AustonianAggie on Feb 19, 2009 1:18 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He does have a purpose

Eatman and Archer get the facts out.

But you’re going to make yourself crosseyed if you ever trust somebody at the team site or the Metroplex on talent evaluation. Nobody there has eyes worth a damn.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 1:24 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

WR won't be a priority in the top 3, probably 4 rounds

unless a WR Dallas had rated in the late 1st, early 2nd drops a full round, they’re not going to chase speed that high.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 1:03 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

if we draft a wr in top 4 rounds,

Thats gotta mean somebodys gone right?

TO, Roy, Crayton & Austin will likely beat out every other wr. STanback is third year this year, who knows how he’ll do.

by foyesboys on Feb 19, 2009 3:31 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Crayton

No need for Crayton if Austin is the slot receiver.

by hiafex on Feb 19, 2009 3:41 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Agree. As unreliable as Crayton is when it gets to be nutcutting time....

You just don’t cut a proven productive player for a guy who’s as much of a variable as Stanback.

by MadMick on Feb 19, 2009 9:11 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I disagree

But it’s a matter of what you prize more and I prize Stanback’s skills more than Crayton’s. He’s a lot faster than Crayton from what I’ve seen and it’s not like we’re talking about starting WRs here. Stanback has only been a receiver for 2 years, give him a break and see what he can do this year.

by hiafex on Feb 19, 2009 10:30 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

If T.O.'s not back, I'll definitely take reliability over potential.

Also, let’s remember Austin got on the field some in his 2nd year, got open but dropped some passes, then when it all came together for him he finally started to contribute last season but then he got injured.

I still wouldn’t cut Crayton for Stanback but if T.O. is back and Austin’s the 3rd then you might have a point. Personally, Stanback’s just too unproven and too injury-prone so far for me.

If I was going to get rid of a guy to make sure there was a spot for Stanback, it would be Hurd.

by MadMick on Feb 19, 2009 10:43 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

My entire statement is based around the fact that I believe TO will be back

If TO is cut, then I agree with keeping Crayton but I don’t see the need to cut Stanback since there would be an extra roster spot available.

by hiafex on Feb 19, 2009 11:01 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1 cutting Stanback would be as bad as getting rid of Jimmy Smith..

don’t listen to the one misinformed blogger on this site..senseless. Stanback will be pushing for that 3rd WR spot this season…He will be the starting KO returner, and has shown me more than enough to show me he’s the WR of the future here..

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 20, 2009 4:51 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Here we go with the Stanback, Jimmy Smith comparsions...lol

Where you get this from I have no idea….The only thing Stanback will be pushing is pen to paper on the sideline because he will be inactive most of the time. He has ZERO chance of being the #3 on this team. He is not beating out Austin or Crayton…please……lol. Stanback will be the #5 and inactive most of the time, like he was last season, if he isn’t injured.

by Boyzfan94 on Feb 20, 2009 11:58 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's a pretty big statement because

if memory serves me, I believe we were saying the same thing about Austin last year about how he couldn’t catch, bad routes etc.

by texstar on Feb 20, 2009 12:25 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's what I was saying too

My thoughts were he needed to stand in front of a throwing machine aimed at his head for about 6 hours a day until he could catch a ball. Now he can catch, so I feel vindicated. ; )

When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.

by GunsUp on Feb 20, 2009 12:27 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Stanback

He needs to stay healthy and show that he’s progressed to the point of challenging for the #3 or #4 spot this season.

There is no way the Cowboys would cut him this season. He’s earned the right to compete. Just my opinion but, if he hadn’t struggled with injuries, he’d already be a serious contender for #3 spot. If he doesn’t prove it this year, he’ll probably have to go.

Feb. 18-24 -- NFL Scouting Combine
Feb. 27 -- Veteran free agency signing period begins. Trading period begins.
April 25-26 -- NFL Draft

by APerfectStar on Feb 20, 2009 9:50 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+100000

I see Stanback making Crayton expendable by seasons end….

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 20, 2009 11:49 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

holy #^@%# that's insane

15 mil a year is more than some elite QBs

by AustonianAggie on Feb 19, 2009 1:06 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1

Thank God he was signed last year.

Feb. 18-24 -- NFL Scouting Combine
Feb. 27 -- Veteran free agency signing period begins. Trading period begins.
April 25-26 -- NFL Draft

by APerfectStar on Feb 19, 2009 11:31 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1

and if we’re not careful Jerry will follow suit because AL is his mentor-Just joking!

by texstar on Feb 19, 2009 1:11 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He'd probably be better than any of that crap the Raiders throw out at QB

In reference to how good the Steelers have been in their history: "No one is even close to them."- Steal Home

by hinduplaya on Feb 19, 2009 1:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

that's the price he pays for not giving Asomugha a long-term deal

Have the Cowboys ever wasted a year on a franchise tag? I don’t believe they’ve ever used it.
It creates problems. If you like a guy, sign him long term.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 1:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

ya

there going to have some big time problems coming up with contracts like those to Asomugha and Walker

In reference to how good the Steelers have been in their history: "No one is even close to them."- Steal Home

by hinduplaya on Feb 19, 2009 1:18 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Asomugha's deal is huge

but at least he’s a proven blue-chipper.

It’s handing out $100M in bonuses to guys like D’Angelo Hall and Javon Walker, who are cut three months later, that’s nuts.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 1:19 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

these players seem to know Al likes raw talent

but use the Raiders-are-a-mess to raise their contract prices

by AustonianAggie on Feb 19, 2009 1:20 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

It's worse than that, now that I think about it

they franchised Asomugha, and gave D’Angelo Hall the $10M a year deal — after trading
a 2nd rounder to Atlanta for him.

If they could just have given Asomugha the money this.

In medicine they call this malpractice. Decertify Al Davis!

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 4:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

hey Raf

i thought the boys used the tag on Flozell before Parcells got here – didn’t they?? i think it was 2002 and then he had an awful year

and they were going to let him go in 2003 but Parcells talked them into re-signing him

by McLovin9 on Feb 19, 2009 3:49 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Not sure

but Dallas doesn’t use the tag. Some teams use it every year.

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 4:18 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

But the difference was

The Cowboys only used it as protection until they got Hamlin’s new deal worked out. The Raiders went ahead and paid their CB the franchise and then came back to sign him to this mega deal. It’s a waste of money to do it that way.

Feb. 18-24 -- NFL Scouting Combine
Feb. 27 -- Veteran free agency signing period begins. Trading period begins.
April 25-26 -- NFL Draft

by APerfectStar on Feb 19, 2009 11:35 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

good

put an end to that crazy rumor.

Besides, Carolina and Dallas are the only teams without 1st rounders. How are they going to pull off a deal?

by Rafael Vela on Feb 19, 2009 1:05 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Someone was asking why Dallas might avoid the 1st round

and also, new large contracts this offseason

NEW RULE – 30% RULE: For any new contract signed after the Owner’s opted out in May of 2008, a player’s salary (excluding signing bonus proration), may not increase from one year to the next by more than 30% of the first year salary. This rule also applies to all contracts that are renegotiated in 2009.

OLD RULE: There was no such limitation.
RAMIFICATIONS: This rule was put in place to keep teams from structuring a contract that contained a huge salary in the "uncapped year". So, if a player has a base salary of $1M in 2009, his 2010 salary can only be $1.3M – a 30% increase. All subsequent salaries can also only increase by $300K, so his 2011 salary can be no more than $1.6M.
This rule, along with the reduction in bonus proration to 5 years is going to make it very difficult for teams to fit big new contracts under the Salary Cap in 2009, since the normal practice of backloading contracts ran afoul of the 30% rule.

From a Raven’s fan site

by AustonianAggie on Feb 19, 2009 1:48 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

yes....any rookie signed prior to training camp, his entire bonus goes to the 2009 cap if he's cut

so if you sign a 2nd rounder to a 5 year deal, with a bonus, the ‘09 base and the entire signing bonus will go towards the ’09 cap if he doesn’t make your squad……something like that…..that’s why i believe we should look to sign 11 rookies knowing barely half have a chance to make the roster..

by CowboysRnumba1 on Feb 19, 2009 1:57 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Wow

This is a great site. Just found it…I’ve been a fan for years without knowing about this!

by DaxLovestheBoys on Feb 19, 2009 4:49 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Being a Tarheel myself..........

I might be biased, but i would love to see them get Brandon Tate. I think he could be around in the 3rd round too. For those that don’t know him, he is a WR at UNC. And this guy was a play making machine. He was having a huge year before he tore his ACL. Not only did he make plays on offense but he was a great punt returner. He was there number one threat before he got hurt. Then Hakeem Nicks took over.

by TARHEEL PAUL on Feb 19, 2009 6:06 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Draft picks

We all have our wish lists. With salary cap and no first round we may have to scale those back. I would like to group the picks in the 2nd to 4th rounds maybe 6picks total. Adress our needs with the best values available at those picks. NT , ILB, SS, OL,QB and WR. The WR pick is a quick small guy to beat the press coverage that our larger recievers seem to have a problem with. We may even be able to fill this list and trade for picks next year. There is usually a few veteran lineman available later plug in if needed for Kosier or Holland. That is why only one is drafted. If good value is there in another linebacker that wouldn’t break my heart to take a second . I like the idea of a tweener LB to be used at safety. Of course , if they really intend to go to a power running game , they can skip the WR and take a FB. I really don’t have a read on values there.

by oldboysfan on Feb 19, 2009 7:13 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Draft Central

Owner Jerry is going the cheapest route. Ain’t that what he told Jimmie Johnson he could a high school coach and do just as well. Here you are 16 years later and Jerry is still shooting himself in the foot. It just some people longer than others to realize when things don’t work.

Draft day is going to be like thr rest Jerry at thr helm making boneheaded decisions that dont work. Looking for numbers instead of talent and hoping to get lucky.

Robert Ste.....

by robbo24 on Feb 19, 2009 8:32 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Dallas Cowboys blog for the SB Nation network. We talk Cowboys 24/7/365. Join the discussion but follow the community guidelines.
Start posting about the Cowboys »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Captain_small
NFL Power Rankins - Week 12 - Final Edition
Blue-koolaid_small
We've Got A Bully...It's Time To "Go Ralphie"
09_bar-refaeli_08_small
Why a Win is Not a Win
Captain_small
Seven Statistical Nuggets As December Looms
Mom_s_camera_081_small
A Special 'Thank You' to Grizz.

Recent FanPosts

Cowboy_small
"6 more games" or "Are we really the worst 7-3 team?"
Lil-00007305-sm_small
Oakland @ Dallas - A Trap Game if I ever saw one
Darren_woodson-the_real_hammer_2_small
What weaknesses do you see in this Pass Offense of ours?
Small
Remember...The only thing that matters is how we're playing heading into January.
Small
Two Questions for Vela and Grizz
Small
New Captain Comeback?
Tom-landry-at_small
Is Cowboys' Close Victory Over Redskins Reason To Worry?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Latest NFL Headlines from SB Nation

Pride Of Detroit
Lions vs. Packers - Overflow Thread #2
The Falcoholic
Let the Great WhatIfSports/Falcoholic SimLeague Raffle Begin
Pride Of Detroit
Lions vs. Packers - Overflow Thread #1

SPONSORS


Editor

Head_shot1_small Dave Halprin

Lead Writer

Small Rafael Vela

Contributing Writers

Villaronga_small Raul Villaronga

Hotdoglu_small Aaron Novinger

Landry_and_fish_small Mike Fisher