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 Sniper View Post
    Marvin Austin is terrible.
    You know... when I hear people say that, I keep thinking... good. Think that way. I want to nab him as late in the draft as possible, because he's going to prove a lot of doubters wrong in the NFL.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Go Cowboys View Post
      Ok, so I had a thought while reading all this talk about 5 Techs......

      Does anyone have a list of teams in college (Even just FBS) that run the 3-4?

      How about we take a guy that has been playing that position for 4 years instead of converting somebody that is going to take at least a year to learn the basics of the position.


      Ok so basically I would like to se a list as I have looked and can't find one myself.
      It doesn't matter which teams run the 3-4. What you're looking for is basically body type/skill set. The benefit in experience is marginal.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Go Cowboys View Post
        Ok, so I had a thought while reading all this talk about 5 Techs......

        Does anyone have a list of teams in college (Even just FBS) that run the 3-4?

        How about we take a guy that has been playing that position for 4 years instead of converting somebody that is going to take at least a year to learn the basics of the position.


        Ok so basically I would like to se a list as I have looked and can't find one myself.
        Cal and Michigan I know off the top of my head to add to Virginia and Alabama.

        Cameron Jordan from Cal is neck and neck with Marcell Dareus from Alabama as far as guys who have a ton of experience playing the 5-tech. I like Dareus more...but it's probably just because I like his body more. He just looks like a NFL player. That said I haven't watched enough of Jordan up to this point....but his hype is intriguing.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by LonghornsLegend View Post
          Virginia and Alabama off the top of my head, I would have to look around to find others. I think SCAR may be one of the others.
          Not SCAR...they run varying 4-2-5 and 4-3 bases.

          Our DEs are undersized.

          I sure wish we did run a 34 back in the day. We had outstanding personel for it...when he had Clifton Geathers, Kenrick Ellis, the Brinkley Brothers, Eric Norwood, Cliff Matthews, Ladi Ajyiboye, Nate Pepper, Travian Robertson, Melvin Ingram was a giant LB at the time, opposed to a DT. This is also when we had one of the best secondaries in the nation.

          But of course, our would be NT Kenrick Ellis was a moron.
          Last edited by M.O.T.H.; 11-16-2010, 07:05 PM.

          Thanks BoneKrusher^

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

          Comment


          • Originally posted by thule View Post
            Cal and Michigan I know off the top of my head to add to Virginia and Alabama.
            Michigan is a weird scheme that doesn't work. It's a 3-3.5-4.5. It's definitely not a traditional 3-4, though I wish it were. It doesn't work because of personnel, though.

            You guys should want Mike Martin whenever he decides to come out. I fap nightly to Mike Martin highlights.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
              You know... when I hear people say that, I keep thinking... good. Think that way. I want to nab him as late in the draft as possible, because he's going to prove a lot of doubters wrong in the NFL.
              Nab him whenever you want. It would be a mistake. He's just not a good player.

              Comment


              • I don't think that taking a DE high would be a necessity unless there is just an absolute stud there. To be honest I'd be fine with moving Ratliff out there and having Bowen start if he keeps impressing with everyone else hurt. I want a guy who can cause some havoc there besides what they have, but I think that there are other positions that need some attention with a high pick. Namely OL and secondary. If Peterson and Amukamara are gone I'd just.......*gasp* trade down. Nothing wrong with trading down if you are in a good spot to get a player.

                Trading out of the top 10 isn't as bad as 2009. Chances are you'd get some good deals there, and you can keep from having to pay a guy big money. I really don't think that they should force themselves to like a DE just to get a guy high. Now if they fell in love with someone and thought he was worth it, then that's cool. Other than that I'm fine with trading down and getting more picks. Having two second rounders would really help because linemen that were fringe first rounders usually fall there. They can get a guy like Gurode or Blaylock in the second, and get a pretty decent DE that slipped there too.
                "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 E-Man View Post
                  I don't think that taking a DE high would be a necessity unless there is just an absolute stud there. To be honest I'd be fine with moving Ratliff out there and having Bowen start if he keeps impressing with everyone else hurt. I want a guy who can cause some havoc there besides what they have, but I think that there are other positions that need some attention with a high pick. Namely OL and secondary. If Peterson and Amukamara are gone I'd just.......*gasp* trade down. Nothing wrong with trading down if you are in a good spot to get a player.

                  Trading out of the top 10 isn't as bad as 2009. Chances are you'd get some good deals there, and you can keep from having to pay a guy big money. I really don't think that they should force themselves to like a DE just to get a guy high. Now if they fell in love with someone and thought he was worth it, then that's cool. Other than that I'm fine with trading down and getting more picks. Having two second rounders would really help because linemen that were fringe first rounders usually fall there. They can get a guy like Gurode or Blaylock in the second, and get a pretty decent DE that slipped there too.
                  Yeah, if we can pick up a future 1st in 2012 and get an additional 2nd in 2011, then I'm all over that. Hopefully a good QB gets to us and a desperate team moves up for him. The higher we are picking, the better for us. I'd way rather have a 2-3 win season than a 5-6 win season. 5-6 wins does absolutely nothing. Just damage to our rebuilding process.

                  Comment


                  • A future first would be pretty damn awesome. Maybe they could lull someone in like the Patriots do every year. Of course, Jerry tried that with some teams that were slam dunks to have early first rounders. Too bad Buffalo and Cleveland decided not to suck those years like they usually do. :(
                    "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


                    • Alright D-Unit, this post is directed at you. I'm going to play out possible scenerio's, then I want your thoughts on what you would do.. (Anyone else can share their thoughts as well, please)

                      1. We win another 3+ games, have around the 7th to 10th pick, and lose out on Peterson and Prince. What do you do?

                      2. We completely ball out and maximize our talent, winning 6 of the next 7, or win out, and we are around pick 15. The offensive line has protcted kitna, Jerry and the FO make a ******** decision, and all but leonard davis is kept.. What do you do?

                      3. We only win another game or two, but Peterson is off the board because detroit picks ahead of us, and I don't know if prince is worth #4 or #5 overall.. What do you do?

                      Disclaimer: We have signed a starter quality offensive lineman (mankins, etc.) in FA, and Garrett is our real head coach.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by CDCB14 View Post
                        Alright D-Unit, this post is directed at you. I'm going to play out possible scenerio's, then I want your thoughts on what you would do.. (Anyone else can share their thoughts as well, please)

                        1. We win another 3+ games, have around the 7th to 10th pick, and lose out on Peterson and Prince. What do you do?

                        2. We completely ball out and maximize our talent, winning 6 of the next 7, or win out, and we are around pick 15. The offensive line has protcted kitna, Jerry and the FO make a ******** decision, and all but leonard davis is kept.. What do you do?

                        3. We only win another game or two, but Peterson is off the board because detroit picks ahead of us, and I don't know if prince is worth #4 or #5 overall.. What do you do?

                        Disclaimer: We have signed a starter quality offensive lineman (mankins, etc.) in FA, and Garrett is our real head coach.
                        1. We look for a trade down. If we are forced to make the pick between 7-10, then I'm looking at:

                        Marcel Dareus or Brandon Harris

                        You might say... Oh but I thought you don't want to draft a DE that high. Yeah, well the way I look at it is that Dareus has a lot of versatility. 3-4 DE is one option, but I would try him at NT first. I don't know why more people aren't talking about him as a NT... he has the natural body type for it. Plus, if we move to the 4-3, he would be an easy fit there as well, and I strongly believe in drafting 4-3 DTs that high in the draft if worthy value is found.



                        As for Harris, he's no slouch. He's a ballhawk with smooth hips (I know thule likes that very non-scoutish talk. lol.). No but really, I'm a big fan and the dude is a sure tackler who also excels in run support. If we're looking at CBs like Peterson and Amakumara, then I don't know why we wouldn't look at Harris.

                        2. No matter who is kept on the OL, we can't change our priorities about rehauling the talent level there. It must be addressed with full force via FA/trade/draft/whatever/whereever. If we're picking at 15, I'm looking at Riley Reiff, Tyron Smith, Anthony Castonzo, Derrick Sherrod...maybe even Marcus Cannon.

                        3. Same answer as #1. Take Dareus with the intent on trying to plug him in at NT. If it doesn't work, I'm fine with him at DE.

                        Comment


                        • I really like Cannon. I think we could get him in the 2nd, possibly 3rd. I think he may rise to the 2nd as more people get a look at him. He could start immediately at guard and then move out and take Columbo's spot in 2012. I wouldn't even mind us taking someone like Wisnewski and moving Geroude to guard for the next year or two.

                          I also agree that moving down may be the best route. We really could use multiple 2nd's and 3rd's. We may need to draft as many as 3 OL.
                          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
                            I really like Cannon. I think we could get him in the 2nd, possibly 3rd. I think he may rise to the 2nd as more people get a look at him. He could start immediately at guard and then move out and take Columbo's spot in 2012. I wouldn't even mind us taking someone like Wisnewski and moving Geroude to guard for the next year or two.

                            I also agree that moving down may be the best route. We really could use multiple 2nd's and 3rd's. We may need to draft as many as 3 OL.
                            Not sure about the 3rd. The reason you really like is the same reason a lot of people like him. He's looking like the Top OG in the draft.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
                              Not sure about the 3rd. The reason you really like is the same reason a lot of people like him. He's looking like the Top OG in the draft.
                              Yeah, most think of him as a guard, but I think he would be a great RT.
                              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
                                Yeah, most think of him as a guard, but I think he would be a great RT.
                                Yep, he could be that too. It's even more reason to doubt that he'll be there in the 3rd. A lot of people have him solidly in the 1st.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information