GloryDaysRBack
Quality Starter
- Messages
- 5,080
- Reaction score
- 1
Vaccaro is the best safety in this class..it's not even close
Preliminary contract talks begin with Spencer
- Thread starter Bob Sacamano
- Start date
Slatemosphere
Practice Squad
- Messages
- 308
- Reaction score
- 0
Hahahaha
cmd34(work)
Draft Pick
- Messages
- 4,342
- Reaction score
- 1
I dunno. Elam is really growing on me. Reid's 2011 film is better than Vacarro's 2011 film IMO as well. I still think Reid played too tight this year.
GloryDaysRBack
Quality Starter
- Messages
- 5,080
- Reaction score
- 1
Lets put a bet on which safety gets drafted first
cmd34(work)
Draft Pick
- Messages
- 4,342
- Reaction score
- 1
Ok, what are the stakes?
Loser picks a fight with Hostile until he gets banned from the Zone?
Yes I know this is public.
Slatemosphere
Practice Squad
- Messages
- 308
- Reaction score
- 0
Thats easy... Besides im banned for life there
Slatemosphere
Practice Squad
- Messages
- 308
- Reaction score
- 0
Who cares? Just because hes drafted first doesnt mean anything.
Bob Sacamano
All-Pro
- Messages
- 26,436
- Reaction score
- 8
Does Reid still closely resemble Barron, or does that distinction go to Elam?
cmd34(work)
Draft Pick
- Messages
- 4,342
- Reaction score
- 1
Slatemosphere
Practice Squad
- Messages
- 308
- Reaction score
- 0
I called idgit a ****** or something. I honestly cant remember. I know i called out hostile multiple times
cmd34(work)
Draft Pick
- Messages
- 4,342
- Reaction score
- 1
I wish your Mom would have been barren.
Slatemosphere
Practice Squad
- Messages
- 308
- Reaction score
- 0
Haha very true.
Bob Sacamano
All-Pro
- Messages
- 26,436
- Reaction score
- 8
Serious question.
cmd34(work)
Draft Pick
- Messages
- 4,342
- Reaction score
- 1
I would say Reid is similar in size and Elam is more similar in style.
IMO Barron is a SS only. Reid is a FS. Elam can play both.
IMO Barron is a SS only. Reid is a FS. Elam can play both.
Hoofbite
Draft Pick
- Messages
- 4,231
- Reaction score
- 0
Not a fan of it.
Find 1-2 good starters for that price for 2-3 solid upgrades at one of the numerous shitty positions.
Safety, OG, OT, C,
It's not like the money just cannot be used elsewhere cause the team is so stacked.
Not signing him would mean that they could address more deficiencies, even if they create one in doing so.
Find 1-2 good starters for that price for 2-3 solid upgrades at one of the numerous shitty positions.
Safety, OG, OT, C,
It's not like the money just cannot be used elsewhere cause the team is so stacked.
Not signing him would mean that they could address more deficiencies, even if they create one in doing so.
Hoofbite
Draft Pick
- Messages
- 4,231
- Reaction score
- 0
Posted this at CZ, thought I'd bring it here.
One more point of contention......Dallas currently has a "hole" at whatever position you would want Spencer to play. He isn't under contract so the "hole" is there already. People say the "hole" would be created if he weren't brought back but in reality it exists right now (if there is one, who knows what the plan is) and the situation is no different than if Spencer did not play in Dallas last year and was a FA.
The "hole" is there, just as there are holes on the OL and in the secondary and likely across other spots on the DL.
Looking at it from that perspective, how come there is little advocating for signing one of the better OTs that are available on the pretense of "not creating a hole"? How come targeting one of the best safeties available isn't mentioned under the pretense of "not creating a hole"?
The fact that he played for Dallas last year is entirely irrelevant when evaluating whether or not you actually "create" a hole because he isn't under contract. If he were under contract and Dallas was looking to cut him, then you're talking about creating a "hole". Cutting Doug Free actually creates a "hole"......only distinguishing part being that having Doug Free on the roster is little different than having a hole on the roster so it doesn't matter if he's cut or not.
Spencer is not under contract and team does not create some mythical "hole" by choosing not to, or being unable to, sign him.
Nobody said a "hole" was created last offseason when the team decided not to pursue Carl Nicks or Ben Grubbs. Nobody said that because the hole was there to begin with, just as it is in a situation in which a player is no longer under contract.
Now, you have holes at DE, RT, RG/LG (whichever), C, S, and DL. Rather than getting 2-3 upgrades at various positions, who is advocating that Dallas blow their wad on 1?
One more point of contention......Dallas currently has a "hole" at whatever position you would want Spencer to play. He isn't under contract so the "hole" is there already. People say the "hole" would be created if he weren't brought back but in reality it exists right now (if there is one, who knows what the plan is) and the situation is no different than if Spencer did not play in Dallas last year and was a FA.
The "hole" is there, just as there are holes on the OL and in the secondary and likely across other spots on the DL.
Looking at it from that perspective, how come there is little advocating for signing one of the better OTs that are available on the pretense of "not creating a hole"? How come targeting one of the best safeties available isn't mentioned under the pretense of "not creating a hole"?
The fact that he played for Dallas last year is entirely irrelevant when evaluating whether or not you actually "create" a hole because he isn't under contract. If he were under contract and Dallas was looking to cut him, then you're talking about creating a "hole". Cutting Doug Free actually creates a "hole"......only distinguishing part being that having Doug Free on the roster is little different than having a hole on the roster so it doesn't matter if he's cut or not.
Spencer is not under contract and team does not create some mythical "hole" by choosing not to, or being unable to, sign him.
Nobody said a "hole" was created last offseason when the team decided not to pursue Carl Nicks or Ben Grubbs. Nobody said that because the hole was there to begin with, just as it is in a situation in which a player is no longer under contract.
Now, you have holes at DE, RT, RG/LG (whichever), C, S, and DL. Rather than getting 2-3 upgrades at various positions, who is advocating that Dallas blow their wad on 1?
FuzzyLumpkins
In the Rotation
- Messages
- 663
- Reaction score
- 0
How much are they over the cap? about $20m right? You can backload contracts if need be but we can also trigger clauses in Ware and Carrs contract as well as give Romo an extension and we will have a good chunk freed up.
Losing spencer is more than a hole. I remember 1997 to 2001 where the best the braintrust could do out of 5 first day DE picks was greg ellis.
Losing spencer is more than a hole. I remember 1997 to 2001 where the best the braintrust could do out of 5 first day DE picks was greg ellis.