Draft positioning

[NoShame]

Oh yes. Let's check with Jerry Jones on the right draft philosophy.

It has nothing to do with Jerry's draft philosophy. Or whether or not you agree with him.

It has everything to do with the fact that he's the owner of the team and makes the final decision.

Tim Cowlishaw, on the other hand, doesn't. Hence the reason his opinion means nothing.

 

[sbk92]

It has nothing to do with Jerry's draft philosophy. Or whether or not you agree with him.

It has everything to do with the fact that he's the owner of the team and makes the final decision.

Tim Cowlishaw, on the other hand, doesn't. Hence the reason his opinion means nothing.

The issue isn't what we will do. It's what we should do.

Making Jerry's opinion about as worthless as you'll find on the topic.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

From where we are poised to draft, we'll have a pick out of Colorado OT Nate Solder, Arkansas OT DeMarcus Love, Colorado CB Jimmy Smith, Ohio State DE Cameron Heyward and my personal favorite, Oregon State DT Stephen Paea. Paea has 15 sacks and 30.5 TFL in 3 years. We could really use that on the line. Damn, a future line of Paea, Ratliff and Josh Brent would be pretty sweet.

Damn, North Carolina OLB Bruce Carter would be a nice addy too. Kid can do it all, would be a nice pair with Sean Lee at ILB.

 

[Sheik]

I hope we draft someone that can hike the F'ing ball.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I hope we draft someone that can hike the F'ing ball.

Unless we draft Winewski in the 1st, I wouldn't bother about drafting a C this year.

 

[NoShame]

The issue isn't what we will do. It's what we should do.

Making Jerry's opinion about as worthless as you'll find on the topic.

You back your argument with Tim Cowlishaw's opinion but say Jerry Jones' would be worthless. lol

Like I said, everyone is gonna have their own way they think we should go about it. Clearly, you think we should draft a QB early in round 1, and it seems as if the majority of those who commented rules in favor of not drafting a QB in the first round.

So maybe the issue isn't what we will do. It's what you think we should do.

 

[sbk92]

You back your argument with Tim Cowlishaw's opinion but say Jerry Jones' would be worthless. lol

Exactly right.

When you preside over the draft classes of 1994-2002, then 2009....anything you have to say about draft philosophy is meaningless to me. You don't know what you're talking about.

Like I said, everyone is gonna have their own way they think we should go about it. Clearly, you think we should draft a QB early in round 1, and it seems as if the majority of those who commented rules in favor of not drafting a QB in the first round.

So maybe the issue isn't what we will do. It's what you think we should do.

Everyone's gonna have their own way. But there's a right way and a wrong way. Your way is the wrong way.

I realize we won't be drafting a QB early. That it won't even be on our radar screen. But that's because we have the worst GM in football.

 

[Midswat]

I realize we won't be drafting a QB early. That it won't even be on our radar screen. But that's because we have the worst GM in football.

Every team set at QB, and with glaring needs at other positions, won't be drafting a QB early.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

If I am Minnesota I am going after Luck no matter what it takes. They wouldn't be sticking with Favre if they thought either of their backups was any good.

That is the talk up here in MN. Either him or Mallett. I see at elast 9 teams needing a QB.

 

[Cr122]

That is the talk up here in MN. Either him or Mallett. I see at elast 9 teams needing a QB.

If they weren't in position to get Luck, which they aren't then Mallet would be a good option.

The thing is they might have to settle for Newton if Locker and Mallett are both gone.

It's obvious Luck won't be there.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

Ridiculous thought process.

What team doesn't need a legitimate franchise QB prospect?

You draft talent in the draft. Not need. Always.

You draft both: need and talent. I guess the concept of killing two birds with one stone is lost on you. I think it's a ridiculous notion of not draft for need because it comes across of being desparate. We NEED Oline, safety, CB, and possibly DT. People act like there is shame for having needs and then drafting in accordance.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

Agreed.

It does get a little hairy, because Romo is 30 and it's hard to say if the collarbone will be a problem in the future. From what I understand (and I'm no doctor), a collarbone is like a nose - if you break it once, it's not that hard to break again.

Still, like you say, it doesn't matter who we have taking snaps or running the ball if we can't block. And right now, we can't.

If Luck is there, which he won't be, but if he or one of the other high QB prospects (Locker, Mallet, etc), then I'd be all about trading the pick down, adding additional selections, and infusing youth along the lines and adding a potential stalwart in the secondary.

Either that, or stay put and take a can't miss blue chip OL/DL/Secondary/LB if they're sitting there on the board.

Actually, the collarbone is very hard to break the first time around and just as hard to break additionally.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

If they weren't in position to get Luck, which they aren't then Mallet would be a good option.

The thing is they might have to settle for Newton if Locker and Mallett are both gone.

It's obvious Luck won't be there.

They are definitely going for QB.

 

[Cr122]

They are definitely going for QB.

I agree they are going QB, but they might have to settle for a guy like Newton.

It's possible Luck, Mallett, and Locker are all gone when they pick.

But who knows you never know. Buffalo and Carolina will definitely take QB's. IMO

 

[sbk92]

You draft both: need and talent. I guess the concept of killing two birds with one stone is lost on you. I think it's a ridiculous notion of not draft for need because it comes across of being desparate. We NEED Oline, safety, CB, and possibly DT. People act like there is shame for having needs and then drafting in accordance.

I won't pretend that your response makes any sense.

What you do is scout the talent, rank your board accordingly, and then draft the best talent available when you're on the clock.

What you don't do, ever, if you want to have quality draft classes, is bypass a superior player because of the current state of your roster.

If the Cowboys pick, say, 8th overall, and they have a QB prospect as the clear cut top guy, you take him.

Free agency is for needs. The NFL draft is for improving your talent base. If need matches that talent, bonus.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

I agree they are going QB, but they might have to settle for a guy like Newton.

It's possible Luck, Mallett, and Locker are all gone when they pick.

But who knows you never know. Buffalo and Carolina will definitely take QB's. IMO

If the draft were held today, the Redskins might be in a position to get Mallett.


As it stands these are the teams either in need and/or likely to go QB in ranking order.


1.) Panthers
2.) Bengals
3.) Bills
4.) Cardinals
5.) 49ers.
6.) Vikings
7.) Redskins
8.) Titans
9.) Seahawks
10.) Dolphins---Henne doesn't look to be it.
11.) Jaguars.

But basically, if the draft were held today, I don't see any of the big 3: Luck, Locker, and Mallett making it pass the Vikings. Which would leave Cam Newton for the Redskins possibly, but I'm not sure they would want another Black Auburn QB, seeing how the last one didn't pan out.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

I won't pretend that your response makes any sense.

What you do is scout the talent, rank your board accordingly, and then draft the best talent available when you're on the clock.

What you don't do, ever, if you want to have quality draft classes, is bypass a superior player because of the current state of your roster.

If the Cowboys pick, say, 8th overall, and they have a QB prospect as the clear cut top guy, you take him.

Free agency is for needs. The NFL draft is for improving your talent base. If need matches that talent, bonus.

Good. Now I know I'm on the right track. There is no one way to do it. And the Cowboys DON'T take them just because you say so. Here is how stupid you and your mindset is. What if we do take a QB this year at #8, and then next year the Cowboys are in the top 10 once more and once again there is a QB that is a clear cut top guy... you advocate taking that guy the, right? Of course. So then now we would have taken two QBs in consecutive drafts because according to you they were "clear cut top guys".unce

 

[sbk92]

Good. Now I know I'm on the right track. There is no one way to do it.

There are many ways to draft. There is only one correct way. The way the best drafting teams like the Pats and Ravens do it.

Scout the talent.

Stack your board.

Draft accordingly.

It's all about acquiring talent. Dipshats like you focus on need, reach on players and just become more and more needy as the failed classes stack up. Constantly chasing your tail trying to jam up one leak, while two more appear.

If you have good scouts and stick to the board, you'll contend on a regular basis and never be so needy.

This is what the greatest of all time, Bill Parcells, meant when he talked about opportunity. He knew what he needed, but would the opportunity be there to fill his needs? He wasn't going to get a guy just to get a guy. If the quality isn't there, you don't make the pick.

What if we do take a QB this year at #8, and then next year the Cowboys are in the top 10 once more and once again there is a QB that is a clear cut top guy... you advocate taking that guy the, right? Of course. So then now we would have taken two QBs in consecutive drafts because according to you they were "clear cut top guys".unce

In the very, very, very unlikely event of that happening, I answer the phone and take the best deal for that QB.

 

[sbk92]

If the draft were held today, the Redskins might be in a position to get Mallett.


As it stands these are the teams either in need and/or likely to go QB in ranking order.


1.) Panthers
2.) Bengals
3.) Bills
4.) Cardinals
5.) 49ers.
6.) Vikings
7.) Redskins
8.) Titans
9.) Seahawks
10.) Dolphins---Henne doesn't look to be it.
11.) Jaguars.

But basically, if the draft were held today, I don't see any of the big 3: Luck, Locker, and Mallett making it pass the Vikings. Which would leave Cam Newton for the Redskins possibly, but I'm not sure they would want another Black Auburn QB, seeing how the last one didn't pan out.

You don't know what you're talking about.

 

[NoShame]

Every team set at QB, and with glaring needs at other positions, won't be drafting a QB early.

Exactly. I'm not sure what's so hard for him to understand about this one. Nobody drafts a QB early in the first round when they already have a franchise player at the position for easily the next few years. It just doesn't happen.