Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dallas Cowboys Discussion

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by EvilNixon View Post
    Are you guys actually interested in Lee Evans? News to me.
    I think it's aparent that we could use another deep threat. I haven't been in this discussion, but is it really a bad idea?

    Comment


    • Why spend the extra money on a FA to stretch the field...when you can get a rookie to do the same thing for cheaper with less tread....less investment...and probably some return abilities.

      Only guy I'd be interested in is Josh Cribbs....we haven't had an electric returner since Deion...I'd love to get those days back.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
        Nah. Next year is a completely different situation.

        It's more like... that should've been us. Why couldn't the Vikings have given up 6 Turnovers when they played us??? hah.
        lol I was thinking the same thing during that game.
        "If you have one finger pointing at somebody, you have three pointing towards yourself."
        ~Nigerian Proverb

        Da riddum is too much for you.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nKx27QrgO0

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Macarthur View Post
          Who says we don't need Evans?
          Could we use him? Sure. But it's not necessary. He isn't cheap you know that right? So explain how we would pay RW 9+ million a year, Miles is either franchised at 10 mil per year or given a huge long term deal around 9+ per year, so we want to pay a slot WR 8+ million dollars that he's owed in 2010?? Even if RW is cut in one more year it doesn't make sense.

          We don't always have to go spend a bunch of money whenever we need a position filled. How about just drafting a guy for once on a cheap salary, we use 2 TE sets so much that it be a waste to spend a bunch of money on Lee Evans that could go somewhere better used.



          Also, it's good to see the rumors are untrue about the Choice for Cromartie trade:

          Cowboys beat writer Todd Archer says there is "zero truth" to the Tashard Choice-for-Antonio Cromartie trade rumors.
          The rumor only makes sense for the Chargers, who need a lead tailback and are shopping their underachieving corner. Choice is seemingly "stuck" as a third-stringer, but the Cowboys need him with Marion Barber apparently breaking down. They are also not in immediate need of a defensive back that can't tackle. These rumors may persist because of Wade Phillips' San Diego ties with Cromartie, but look for the Cowboys to shop Barber first, if any of their backs truly go on the trade block. Feb. 10 - 9:56 am et
          Source: Dallas Morning News

          I'd be pissed if we did that. Barber for Cromartie I could live with at least, but dude sucks now, they would be ripping us off if we gave up Choice for him.





          Originally posted by Scott Wright
          I guarantee that if someone picks Cam Newton in the Top 5 they will regret it.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by LonghornsLegend View Post
            Could we use him? Sure. But it's not necessary. He isn't cheap you know that right? So explain how we would pay RW 9+ million a year, Miles is either franchised at 10 mil per year or given a huge long term deal around 9+ per year, so we want to pay a slot WR 8+ million dollars that he's owed in 2010?? Even if RW is cut in one more year it doesn't make sense.

            We don't always have to go spend a bunch of money whenever we need a position filled. How about just drafting a guy for once on a cheap salary, we use 2 TE sets so much that it be a waste to spend a bunch of money on Lee Evans that could go somewhere better used.
            I agree that if we could find someone to do that, that's great!

            While there has been a slight trend the other way recently, it generally takes WR's a couple of years to be effective in the pro game. I think it's pretty optimistic to think we could just draft a rookie with speed and voila, our deep threat problems are solved.

            I agree that signing Evans would be a ton of money tied up at WR, but I think the league proved that this is a passing league now. Having a good running game is a plus, but this is a passing league. And I just don't think we have enough weapons on the outside.
            In war, you win or lose, live or die - and the difference is just an eyelash.


            -Douglas MacArthur

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Macarthur View Post
              While there has been a slight trend the other way recently, it generally takes WR's a couple of years to be effective in the pro game. I think it's pretty optimistic to think we could just draft a rookie with speed and voila, our deep threat problems are solved.
              Funny that everyone used that reasoning for us trading for RW, and that caused us to miss out on Harvin, Nicks, Maclin, and alot of other WR's in that class who most of us would take over Roy.


              Our offense doesn't live and die with 5 WR's like the Saints for instance, we utilize 2 and 3 TE's, and 3 RB's, alot of sets only have 1 WR on the field a majority of the time so I just wouldn't see the need. Austin is our #1 for awhile, Roy is a solid #2 for at least another year, Ogletree who I fully expect to win the slot job is more then capable of handling that, and Crayton should still be in alot of slot formations.


              Drafting a guy would be fine this year for me to groom and see what we have when we cut Roy next season, and if the draft pick fails and/or Ogletree doesn't continue to grow then I'd be all for going to the well in FA. I would rather spend that money on a guy like Wilfork or Hampton if available, a DE, Safety or Corner if an upgrade is sitting out there.


              I'd have to look at the options of who could be there, but those positions I'd much rather go after a big name then WR.





              Originally posted by Scott Wright
              I guarantee that if someone picks Cam Newton in the Top 5 they will regret it.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by LonghornsLegend View Post
                Funny that everyone used that reasoning for us trading for RW, and that caused us to miss out on Harvin, Nicks, Maclin, and alot of other WR's in that class who most of us would take over Roy.


                Our offense doesn't live and die with 5 WR's like the Saints for instance, we utilize 2 and 3 TE's, and 3 RB's, alot of sets only have 1 WR on the field a majority of the time so I just wouldn't see the need. Austin is our #1 for awhile, Roy is a solid #2 for at least another year, Ogletree who I fully expect to win the slot job is more then capable of handling that, and Crayton should still be in alot of slot formations.


                Drafting a guy would be fine this year for me to groom and see what we have when we cut Roy next season, and if the draft pick fails and/or Ogletree doesn't continue to grow then I'd be all for going to the well in FA. I would rather spend that money on a guy like Wilfork or Hampton if available, a DE, Safety or Corner if an upgrade is sitting out there.


                I'd have to look at the options of who could be there, but those positions I'd much rather go after a big name then WR.
                I would not be heartbroken with Wilfork or Hampton.

                I just simply do not think we have the weapons on the outside. I agree with you on our sets and 2 TEs. However, when it comes to big plays on the outside, we have one guy that can do that. ONE.

                As for those guys you mentioned, that class does appear to be a good one, but you do have to admit that is the exception rather than the rule. I remember reading not too long ago that WR has the 2nd highest 1st round bust rate, behind only QB.

                I just know that this league has shown that when you have an opportunity, you have to be agressive. We think we should be good for a while because we have some good young players, but the league shows us every year that each year is its own entity. It would follow the trend for us to miss the playoffs next year....What are we saying this time next year if we miss the playoffs? I think the defense is in good shape; I just think the thing we are missing on offense is one more play maker and some depth on the OL. Give me those 2 things and I think we can make a run at this thing next year.
                In war, you win or lose, live or die - and the difference is just an eyelash.


                -Douglas MacArthur

                Comment


                • Beat writer Tim MacMahon believes WR Kevin Ogletree "ought to be ready to challenge" Roy Williams for a starting job with a good offseason.
                  All of the writers covering the team, as well as a good portion of the fans, are pushing for Ogletree to overtake Williams. The coaches (and certainly ownership) aren't ready to give up on Williams, however. Ogletree may begin eating into Williams' snaps next season, but he's a longshot to take the job outright.
                  Source: ESPNDallas.com

                  Well I said he would over take Crayton's job, there is already talk of him supplanting Roy so at this point I think it's safe to say Ogletree will have an increase role next season. This is another reason I don't expect to really go after a WR in FA.





                  Originally posted by Scott Wright
                  I guarantee that if someone picks Cam Newton in the Top 5 they will regret it.

                  Comment


                  • I am more down for Shaun Rogers.

                    Comment




                    • Say what you will about Wade as a HC, he's still one hell of a coordinator.

                      What do the vikings and marijuana have in common? Every time you put them in a bowl
                      they get smoked.

                      2010-2011 Super Bowl Champions
                      Hint:Not the Bears.

                      Comment


                      • Mock draft question: Who would you rather have in the 4-3 at DT, Wilfork or Ratliff? I'm leaning towards Ratliff.

                        Comment


                        • Completely different positions. Depending on which 4-3 scheme you are talking about. If the conventional UT vs NT is where you're going then they both play different positions.

                          Ratliff is sucessful as a NT in our scheme because we play a 1-gap scheme. He is a UT in a 4-3 scheme...you do not play him like a Pat Williams and expect him to explode and hold blockers. So I guess it's a question of what position you want.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by thule View Post
                            Completely different positions. Depending on which 4-3 scheme you are talking about. If the conventional UT vs NT is where you're going then they both play different positions.

                            Ratliff is sucessful as a NT in our scheme because we play a 1-gap scheme. He is a UT in a 4-3 scheme...you do not play him like a Pat Williams and expect him to explode and hold blockers. So I guess it's a question of what position you want.
                            Well it's only my second pick so I don't have a NT or an UT. As good as Ratliff is as a 1 gap NT I think he would make an ever better UT. But you're saying you would value them pretty much equally if you were starting from scratch and had to pick one?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cicero View Post
                              Well it's only my second pick so I don't have a NT or an UT. As good as Ratliff is as a 1 gap NT I think he would make an ever better UT. But you're saying you would value them pretty much equally if you were starting from scratch and had to pick one?
                              Depends on when you plan on drafting the other position I guess. Just evaluate the depth of the positions and decide which one has a steeper drop off. Ratliff is younger and an elite UT...so I don't think you could go wrong...but i also think there are more talented UT then there are NTs....so Wilfork gets some additional value from that.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by thule View Post
                                Depends on when you plan on drafting the other position I guess. Just evaluate the depth of the positions and decide which one has a steeper drop off. Ratliff is younger and an elite UT...so I don't think you could go wrong...but i also think there are more talented UT then there are NTs....so Wilfork gets some additional value from that.
                                Well I guess it doesn't matter because I got em both. :D

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information