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 D-Unit View Post
    Why you don't take Luck...

    1. QBs are HUGE gambles. I'm sure I don't have to outline history for you. Imagine the laughing stock we'd be if he didn't pan out. We really can't afford to draft one considering all of our other needs.

    2. Our team is not far away from bouncing right back into contention. New coaching changes, additions to the OL and secondary and we're right back in it. You also have to love our chances of getting right back to the playoffs where anything is possible considering next season's schedule should be very easy.

    3. Romo is not anywhere close to being washed up or too old to play the game effectively. QBs in this league last VERY long. It's not like RB where age 30 is the end of the line. Even if he has 5 years left in him like thule mentioned, that's still a heck of a lot of time left and it's too premature now to go into panic mode about addressing the position.

    4. By the time Romo is done, we'll know it because our team will be terrible. ...and we'll be right back picking at the top of the draft. We can draft a QB then. There's no reason to think we have to take a QB now because we don't know when we'll be picking this high again. We'll be picking this high again when Romo is done.

    5. Luck is not one of those once in a decade type QB prospects. He may be a Matt Ryan type, but he is not a Peyton Manning type. IMO, he looks more like a Carson Palmer type.

    6. This team is not ready to support a rookie QB. We need a strong supporting cast on both sides of the ball and we simply don't have that.

    7. What a waste it would be to hold Luck on the bench for years while we wait for Romo to decline. Meanwhile the rest of our weaknesses continue to get exposed.

    8. Romo as a valuable trade chip. Yes, of course he is. Doesn't mean he won't be later either. Look at the Eagles. Traded McNabb when it was clear he was done, but they still got a 2nd round pick for him. No time to panic now to trade Romo before his trade value goes down.

    9. The money Luck will make cannot be used as a back up player. The player we get at that pick must have an impact from Day 1.

    10. Lastly, what message does that send to our players? A BAD one! It tells the team that we're no longer interested in winning now. That there is no belief in this group to get the job done. It tells them that we're in total rebuilding mode. That they should all expect to be on the block no matter how good they are because we're supposedly looking for "value". If you believe TheFinisher... then Miles Austin is on the block too. Why stop there? You get rid of Romo, Austin, Witten... hell... start the entire fire sale... none of the good vets like Ratliff and Ware will want to be a part of this crap. A move like this will break up the lockerroom, cause the new coaching staff to get fired all over again.. but hey! We'll get 20 draft picks and a team of all rookies! Wooo hoo! Winner!

    ...yeah right. :/
    2010: Bradford
    2009: Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman
    2008: Ryan, Flacco

    Notice that since Russell went #1 overall in the draft and guys like Lienart and Quinn have set franchises back. Has anyone else noticed a change in scouting at the position. We haven't had a single QB bust in the first round in 3 years. Since Russell teams have caught on to something...way to much money is going to be invested to mess up at this stage. These top 3 prospects get torn down to the tiniest little blemish.

    I'm not saying Luck can't bust...I'm just saying it's a safe bet that he'll be a good player in this league. And the fact that he is 10 years younger gives us a bigger opportunity for victory.

    This reminds me of all those Raiders fans who said they weren't going to draft Russell...they had bigger needs and a rookie QB wasn't going to help things...but fact remained they were picking #1 in the draft and you almost have to go QB or LT or premier rusher there.

    Sure you can say..."well we won't have the first pick in the draft". Well I also would have told you at the beginning of the year "well we won't be 1-7 so why talk about it". We are playing like the worst team in football...we aren't even competitive anymore. Unless we put a good performance up against the Giants...and see the troops rise up and play for Garrett there is no reason we can't debate picking #1 overall. Buffalo and Detroit are bad...but they've been competitive and last I checked we don't have any give me's on our schedule to finish the year.

    Logically lets think about it like this.

    McNabb went for a 2nd thought of as an older and more washed up than Romo. That said Romo probably fetches atleast a 1st and 3rd. Cutler brought 2 1sts and a 3rd i believe.

    Now this is hypothetical of course. Lets say we get a 1st and 2nd for Romo.
    That turns our draft class into.
    1-Luck
    1-Heyward
    2-Pouncey
    2-Camiri

    So it's easy to say that drafting Luck makes no sense because we are a talented team and trading away our star QB would be dumb.

    But if you look at the big picture. You could potential get 2 early starters on the OL and a impact presence at 5-tech...plus a top signal caller.

    So just for argument purposes....picking Luck #1 does make some sense and could still fill positions for us...and give us a bigger window to win. Every single QB drafted in the past 3 years has proven they can win on the field...and while you can argue they had a better supporting cast...a big time FA OL and 2 top 50 OL in the draft with talent at the skill positions isn't a terrible look at it.

    Comment


    • #1 pick is certainly a real possibility.
      But not a probability, Carolina & Buffalo certainly, maybe even the 9ers or any 2-win team could drafting ahead of Dallas. I'm thinking 3-13 sounds about right with Romo out.

      Win over Detroit in the Patrick Peterson sweepstakes game, he could be the #2 or 3 pick, & sweeping the damn Eagles last yr. will be good for 1 win vs. Philly. You're right, Zona is a tossup, they are talent-depleted & Dallas has a lonnnnnng history of thrashing them.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by E-Man View Post
        Roy looks like a serial killer here. lol

        WARNING: Do NOT let this man near a schoolyard or children :--D

        (his pass dropping habits could be contagious)

        Comment


        • Originally posted by thule View Post
          2010: Bradford
          2009: Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman
          2008: Ryan, Flacco

          Notice that since Russell went #1 overall in the draft and guys like Lienart and Quinn have set franchises back. Has anyone else noticed a change in scouting at the position. We haven't had a single QB bust in the first round in 3 years. Since Russell teams have caught on to something...way to much money is going to be invested to mess up at this stage. These top 3 prospects get torn down to the tiniest little blemish.

          I'm not saying Luck can't bust...I'm just saying it's a safe bet that he'll be a good player in this league. And the fact that he is 10 years younger gives us a bigger opportunity for victory.

          This reminds me of all those Raiders fans who said they weren't going to draft Russell...they had bigger needs and a rookie QB wasn't going to help things...but fact remained they were picking #1 in the draft and you almost have to go QB or LT or premier rusher there.

          Sure you can say..."well we won't have the first pick in the draft". Well I also would have told you at the beginning of the year "well we won't be 1-7 so why talk about it". We are playing like the worst team in football...we aren't even competitive anymore. Unless we put a good performance up against the Giants...and see the troops rise up and play for Garrett there is no reason we can't debate picking #1 overall. Buffalo and Detroit are bad...but they've been competitive and last I checked we don't have any give me's on our schedule to finish the year.

          Logically lets think about it like this.

          McNabb went for a 2nd thought of as an older and more washed up than Romo. That said Romo probably fetches atleast a 1st and 3rd. Cutler brought 2 1sts and a 3rd i believe.

          Now this is hypothetical of course. Lets say we get a 1st and 2nd for Romo.
          That turns our draft class into.
          1-Luck
          1-Heyward
          2-Pouncey
          2-Camiri

          So it's easy to say that drafting Luck makes no sense because we are a talented team and trading away our star QB would be dumb.

          But if you look at the big picture. You could potential get 2 early starters on the OL and a impact presence at 5-tech...plus a top signal caller.

          So just for argument purposes....picking Luck #1 does make some sense and could still fill positions for us...and give us a bigger window to win. Every single QB drafted in the past 3 years has proven they can win on the field...and while you can argue they had a better supporting cast...a big time FA OL and 2 top 50 OL in the draft with talent at the skill positions isn't a terrible look at it.
          If I believed what you just said, I'd think there's no way NFL teams will ever draft another QB bust in the first round. lol. Oh no. I don't believe that for a second. Look how they loved Locker last year and this season he looks like crap.

          I don't think we'll be picking #1 overall, and I'll stick to that. I think this conversation will be funny at the end of the season. But ok. Let's say we are picking #1. If that's the case, then I would suggest trading down.

          There will be a time for us to address QB, and when that time comes, we'll use our first rounder then. It won't be for at least another 5 years. Even you agreed that Romo's window is that long.

          Comment


          • Thinking that there is even a single iota of a chance that we take Luck, is a hilarious notion.

            It's not happening gentlemen. You dont just give up on Qbs of Romo's caliber. Especially one that just entered the prime of his career. How soon people forget that he's coming off the best year of his career last season. And he did indeed, carry this team on his back many a time. Gah.

            To think Romo is the reason we dont succeed further, is also equally hilarious.

            Thanks BoneKrusher^

            http://youtube.com/watch?v=6_j52DziMy4 (the man)
            http://youtube.com/watch?v=2g6S3Anto7c
            KO KNOWS

            Comment


            • I can get why folks don't like the idea of trading Pro-Bowl skill players and taking an Andrew luck but I think this team has big holes in the trenches and in the middle of the D that won't get solved in a normal draft or FA. I would encourage folks to be creative in evaluating the chances.

              Sitting around on Pro-Bowlers as they get older and refusing to trade them for even what may be considered inferior talent works if you get real young guys with proven records who still have upside.

              Witten is what he is and if you could swap Witten for a young Pro Bowl type OG wouldn't you given MBennett is there? If you could swap, Austin for a Pro Bowl caliber ILB and a Safety wouldn't you?

              I think with the skill players on the field (Williams, Dez, etc) -- it would be great to swap that unnecessary excess talent for needed trench talent.

              But, I understand it has low popularity.

              Comment


              • You're talking about something that doesnt happen in the NFL.

                Trades arent even that prevelent in the league. Do you know how rare pro bowl for pro bowl type trades are? They dont happen, it's not Madden we're talking here. Why would anyone trade a healthy pro bowl offensive lineman? Unless there were contract problems, it aint happening.

                Thanks BoneKrusher^

                http://youtube.com/watch?v=6_j52DziMy4 (the man)
                http://youtube.com/watch?v=2g6S3Anto7c
                KO KNOWS

                Comment


                • Originally posted by M.O.T.H. View Post
                  Thinking that there is even a single iota of a chance that we take Luck, is a hilarious notion.

                  It's not happening gentlemen. You dont just give up on Qbs of Romo's caliber. Especially one that just entered the prime of his career. How soon people forget that he's coming off the best year of his career last season. And he did indeed, carry this team on his back many a time. Gah.

                  To think Romo is the reason we dont succeed further, is also equally hilarious.
                  I think the take Luck and trade Romo idea is not about puttin down Romo, bro.

                  I think it is about justifying using a #1 pick on a #1 talent and not just taking a guy who could as easily be had 5/15/25 and pay him #1 money.

                  Luck is a #1 talent. A few teams would kill to have him. If we get him, we have an enviable position b/c we can use that over flow of talent to fill other (multiple) holes.

                  And bottom line of Romo bro is he is frequently injured, is spotty in big games, and is turnover prone. So, I love him bro but I can also see why it makes sense if he can restock your OG or ILB positions.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by M.O.T.H. View Post
                    You're talking about something that doesnt happen in the NFL.

                    Trades arent even that prevelent in the league. Do you know how rare pro bowl for pro bowl type trades are? They dont happen, it's not Madden we're talking here. Why would anyone trade a healthy pro bowl offensive lineman? Unless there were contract problems, it aint happening.
                    How many Pro Bowlers has New Orleans picked up via trades?

                    I agree the currency of choice is draft pick. They are like money. Trading player for player is like trying to barter. Tough.

                    But you have to be open to trying in order to make big changes fast.

                    Comment


                    • Romo is not frequently injured...he had two freak injuries. One of which, came from piss poor blocking.

                      You dont see teams giving up on pro bowl caliber Qbs for rookies. Regardless of who that rookie may be. Dallas isnt ready to tear down the walls. You have the offensive skill players to compete for a championship now. The O-Line is the major culprit and needs to be addressed...drafting a QB is starting over and in turn, setting your franchise back. You wouldnt be maximizing all that offensive talent.

                      Thanks BoneKrusher^

                      http://youtube.com/watch?v=6_j52DziMy4 (the man)
                      http://youtube.com/watch?v=2g6S3Anto7c
                      KO KNOWS

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by M.O.T.H. View Post
                        You dont see teams giving up on pro bowl caliber Qbs for rookies. Regardless of who that rookie may be.
                        Really? Kurt Warner for Manning. Brees for Rivers.

                        Not the point I am making but these "rules" people point to for backing up their preferences are arbitrary.

                        I got nothing bad about Romo bro but he ain;t all that either. And if you could tell me we get Luck, trade Romo and have a top1-2-3 OL in the process sign me up. Or a top 1-2-3 D.

                        We need 2 guys on each side of the ball in the trenches to be very good. 4 players total. Romo, WItten and Austin will get you that to spare. 2 of the 3 will.
                        Last edited by baghdadbob; 11-12-2010, 04:16 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by baghdadbob View Post
                          How many Pro Bowlers has New Orleans picked up via trades?

                          I agree the currency of choice is draft pick. They are like money. Trading player for player is like trying to barter. Tough.

                          But you have to be open to trying in order to make big changes fast.
                          The Saints? Like who?

                          They never had any pro bowler for pro bowler deals, that I cant think of.

                          Vilma/Shockey were both in bad situations on their respective teams. Vilma was garbage in the 34 and well, Shockey was a dick, who kept getting injured.

                          It's a rare thing to see a team trade an established star away...especially for another good player in return.

                          Thanks BoneKrusher^

                          http://youtube.com/watch?v=6_j52DziMy4 (the man)
                          http://youtube.com/watch?v=2g6S3Anto7c
                          KO KNOWS

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by baghdadbob View Post
                            Really? Kurt Warner for Manning. Brees for Rivers.

                            Not the point I am making but these "rules" people point to for backing up their preferences are arbitrary.

                            I got nothing bad about Romo bro but he ain;t all that either. And if you could tell me we get Luck, trade Romo and have a top1-2-3 OL in the process sign me up. Or a top 1-2-3 D.

                            We need 2 guys on each side of the ball in the trenches to be very good. 4 players total. Romo, WItten and Austin will get you that to spare. 2 of the 3 will.
                            What? Kurt Warner for Manning?

                            Warner's only year with the Giants, was also Eli's first year. He was a stop-gap, and it didnt work out. And Warner wasnt even the starter for the Rams, his previous year in St. Louis. They moved on to Bulger. Warner's career took a turn for the worse, right before he even got to the Giants. A lot of people thought he was done. That situation is in no way the same.

                            As for Brees/Rivers. Brees was hardly the pro bowl talent he is today when they drafted Rivers. His breakout year came the season they selected him. No one really expected Brees to break out like he did, while Rivers sat on the bench for a year.

                            Ugh. You're living in a fantasy world if you think we're trading any of those guys.

                            Thanks BoneKrusher^

                            http://youtube.com/watch?v=6_j52DziMy4 (the man)
                            http://youtube.com/watch?v=2g6S3Anto7c
                            KO KNOWS

                            Comment


                            • I'm am truly amazed that folks are wanting to get rid of Romo.
                              In war, you win or lose, live or die - and the difference is just an eyelash.


                              -Douglas MacArthur

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by M.O.T.H. View Post
                                What? Kurt Warner for Manning?

                                Warner's only year with the Giants, was also Eli's first year. He was a stop-gap, and it didnt work out. And Warner wasnt even the starter for the Rams, his previous year in St. Louis. They moved on to Bulger. Warner's career took a turn for the worse, right before he even got to the Giants. A lot of people thought he was done. That situation is in no way the same.

                                As for Brees/Rivers. Brees was hardly the pro bowl talent he is today when they drafted Rivers. His breakout year came the season they selected him. No one really expected Brees to break out like he did, while Rivers sat on the bench for a year.

                                Ugh. You're living in a fantasy world if you think we're trading any of those guys.
                                Warner and Brees were All Pros. New Orleans picked up Vilma and Shockey. You are dismissing my points without really re-evaluating yours.

                                With respect to if "we are thinking about it"... probably not b/c that is not the way the GM thinks and it reflects in the direction this team has gone under his control -- which is over pay for older guys.

                                By the way, if you told me trading the #1 for some serious OG or ILB help plus some later picks would be fine too.

                                My point is bro that we are not filling these holes in the team without taking some moves/risks. We have 4-5 big holes that will be hard to fill via FA or Draft.

                                FA is expensive and word out is Jones is a bit broke right now. Draft is, as you point out, high risk. So your other alternative is counting on your DEPTH and trading away a few front line guys for other starters.
                                Last edited by baghdadbob; 11-12-2010, 05:48 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information