Fisher & Co.: Cowboys Sources: No Adrian Peterson Pursuit

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,745
Cowboys Sources: No Adrian Peterson Pursuit


Mar 20, 2015 | 10:38 pm

Cowboys Sources: No Adrian Peterson Pursuit



KD Drummond + Fish
CowboysHQ.com

The dream of Adrian Peterson in a Dallas uniform is financially viable. And the Vikings may be amenable to trading the best running back of his generation. But Cowboys sources tell us they will not be entering the 'AD Sweepstakes.' Inside, the scoop on why:

The Dallas Cowboys have decided they will not be making a bid to trade for Minnesota Vikings running back Adrian Peterson, two high-placed sources tell CowboysHQ.com.

This news comes even as the Vikings reach a reported crossroads with the unhappy superstar, who is apparently passing on an invitation to meet with team officials.

What's involved in Dallas' thinking here? The breakdown from inside Valley Ranch:


The Finances

No matter how many times ESPN erroneously writes this, the Cowboys' supposed inability to "afford AD under the cap'' is simply untrue. Here are four things this decision is NOT about:

1) Dallas' decision to pay or not pay Peterson (or anyone else) has nothing to do with having held firm with its $6-mil-a-year threshold on DeMarco Murray (gone when the Eagles bid closer to his desired $9 mil number).

2) It has nothing to do financially with the $13-million acquisition of Greg Hardy (which for now is actually a $3.2-million signing).

3) It has nothing to do with negotiations with Dez Bryant (for whom a long-term contract would actually save Cowboys cap room.

4) It has nothing to do with the idea that newly-signed Darren McFadden is a savior (or that Joseph Randle is trusted with the No. 1 job).

Rather, this is about COO Stephen Jones' strengthening commitment to avoiding spending monster sums on "name'' players at non-valued positions and/or at advanced ages -- in the case of the just-turned-30-years-old-today AD, salaries of $12.75 million, $14.75 million in 2016 and $17.75 million in 2017 -- in order to make a splash (a long-time franchise trademark of Jerry Jones). And the Cowboys are calculating that whatever new number Peterson might concede to in a trade/renegotiation scenario would be too near that $45 million to bother.

Does Jerry feel differently? Any thoughts he has on Peterson being a "Deion II'' -- an above-the-marquee transaction that actually transcends normal football management -- is being vetoed by Stephen, who within the corridors of Valley Ranch has made this clear with not only his actions but his words.


The Football Evaluation

Peterson is undoubtedly a unique talent. But CowboysHQ.com has noted the following Valley Ranch view as it applied to DeMarco: “The Cowboys are in possession of a study that shows when ‘standout’ runners turn 28, their yards-per-game production goes down 18 percent … at 29, down 30 percent … at 30, down 45 percent … at 31, down 46 percent … at 32, down 55 percent.”

The $45-mil-or-so decision has been made to not bother gambling that Peterson beats those odds -- even though we truly believe that AD in a Dallas uniform in 2015 would make him the odds-on favorite for NFC Offensive Player of the Year.


The Allocation Evaluation

Reports have circled for weeks that the Cowboys were either "too cheap to pay'' Peterson (that was ridiculous) or too disinterested to bother looking (that was premature). What's happened to cement the thinking now? They've retained right tackle Doug Free at the right price and they've acquired the sort of premier pass-rush help in Hardy that the personnel department demonstrated to Stephen wasn't going to be get-able at pick No. 27 in the upcoming Draft. Those two signings free Dallas to take the best-available guy in the premier rounds ...

And what is get-able in that range? The Cowboys are in a good position to select (or move to select) a running backs like Georgia’s Todd Gurley in the first round or Indiana’s Tevin Coleman in the second round. They are in a good position to spend one-fourth to one-sixth of the money it would take to get Peterson to instead pluck a running back from the draft-eligible pool.

Smile

We asked the question last week, of CowboysHQ.com readers and of Cowboys executives themselves: Would you rather ....

a) end up acquiring Peterson at $12 mil or so and then use the Cowboys' own first-round pick on a pass-rusher?

b) maybe end up spending less than $12 million on pass-rusher Greg Hardy and use the Cowboys' own first-round pick on someone like Gurley?

Even as you acknowledge that old running backs usually break down and that rookie pass-rushers usually don't make an impact, both answers are exciting in their own way. But the Cowboys have decided that when it comes to the pursuit of Adrian Peterson, their right answer is b).
--------------

If this turns out like Hardy, we probably ARE pursuing Peterson.

The "insider" crap Fisher and his minions peddled leading up to the Hardy signing was embarrassing.

THEY ARE NO TO HARDY- NO WAIT, THEY ARE THINKING ABOUT IT- IT'S HAPPENING
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
Hardy is 3 years younger than Peterson, and pass rushers stay effective into their early 30's (especially when not forced to take every defensive snap).
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,745
Hardy is 3 years younger than Peterson, and pass rushers stay effective into their early 30's (especially when not forced to take every defensive snap).
Pass Rusher >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>RB
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
Pass Rusher >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>RB
True they are that much harder to get, yet not nearly as impactful as a great RB.

Dallas went 12-4 without any semblance of pass rush, and should have defeated Green Bay anyways. They did it because they had the #1 rusher in the league... a guy who could make plays when everything else didn't work.

A great pass rusher might personally negatively affect 10 out of 35 opposing pass plays and 10 out of 25 opposing run plays by tackling and blocking for LB's and DB's, while a great RB will positively affect 22 out of 32 Cowboy run plays by carrying the ball and 15 out of 30 Cowboy pass plays by blocking and receiving.

The great pass rusher might get one sack, a few hurries, and a few tackles while the great RB got 100 yards rushing another 25 receiving and a score. The impact isn't even close to being the same.

For 1 season give me Eric Dickerson in his prime >>> Reggie White in his prime. While I can run away from Reggie, the defense HAS to stop Eric. It's just the nature of the position.

I'd much rather have stout and talented defensive tackles than any overpriced and probably over-rated pass rusher.
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,745
True they are that much harder to get, yet not nearly as impactful as a great RB.

Dallas went 12-4 without any semblance of pass rush, and should have defeated Green Bay anyways. They did it because they had the #1 rusher in the league... a guy who could make plays when everything else didn't work.
We didn't beat Green Bay because we had no pass rush and our elite RB fumbled the game away.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
I feel like difficulty to find a franchise level player at the position goes QB, LT, DT, DE, WR, C, LBer, RT, RG/LG, RB, CB, S, K. Having a good running back is important, in the same way finding lightbulbs for your house is important, it's just not hard to find them.
 

fortsbest

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
3,733
When did NE have a premier RB in any of their SB victories? Did NO have one? Don't think so.
 

Texas Ace

Teh Acester
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,400
I still believe there is a strong mutual interest to get this done, but I don't think it gets done for 2 reasons:

AP will come down in salary demands, but not enough for us to get him.

The Vikings will want too much in return via trade. I don't believe they outright cut him.

It wouldn't surprise me one bit if AP was in a Cowboys uniform in training camp, but I just don't think it's going to happen.
 
Last edited:

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,745
When did NE have a premier RB in any of their SB victories? Did NO have one? Don't think so.
Neither team had an elite pass rusher either.

Great coach, great QB. Always.

But everyone else has to hope they can steal one every now and then.

Our thing is, is this coach and QB great?

If not, you try to offset.

But sorry, a laid off a year supposedly GOAT RB doesn't do it for me.

Tell me the Vikings release him and he comes to Dallas at a fair price for his age and wear, sure, I will listen.

If not, you are grasping at what was.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
I will say that Seattle won their SB with a franchise back (and lost one by snubbing him) 2013's SB was fought between two teams with franchise backs (Rice, Gore). Peterson's Vikings could have just a easily won the SB in 2010 if a couple bad calls hadn't given the NFCC to the saints.
 

VA Cowboy

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
4,710
The issue with RB's being devalued seems to be more about supply/demand than it is about RB's being less relevant to the game. Most teams that win or vie for a championship need a top quality RB, the Pats being one of the few exceptions. But with so many quality backs coming out each year it's not necessary to draft one early in the first or pay big $ on extensions.

As for AP, I never thought we'd go after him. He's 3 years older than the league rushing leader we just let walk.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
We didn't beat Green Bay because we had no pass rush and our elite RB fumbled the game away.
Yep, but more because of the second thing because Murray should have scored on that play. The Cowboy pass rush, weak as it is, still had two sacks and a forced fumble that stopped a drive.

Worst of all on 3rd and 1 Dallas went empty backfield to blow the ending of the first half, failing to use even the threat of Murray. Huge mistake. The best defense is a balanced offense.

If not, you are grasping at what was.
Agreed completely, Dallas is not going to get Adrian Peterson. I was only discussing the impact a great RB makes.

The ball is in their hands too much for them not to be one of the most important positions on the field.

And though it's easier to find good RBs than good pass rushers, it's just as hard to find great ones.
 
Last edited:

E_D_Guapo

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
3,158
I just listened to today's The Break on dallascowboys.com. It sounds like there really is something is going on with Peterson. The subject was kind of teased and eventually Nick Eatman was asked directly "If you had to bet something significant that Adrian Peterson will be in Dallas next season would you do it?". He said yes, and they discussed it for the rest of the show. He later sort of half-assed downplayed it as a "hunch" but I've been listening to that show/Eatman for 10 years and he definitely knows something. It is more than a hunch. Whether they get anything done (and what it costs) remains to be seen, but based on what I heard on that show I would say they are going to make a play to acquire Peterson in trade.

That surprises me because at this point I assumed any potential deal would be dead. Hell, maybe it is and there is nothing to this but they wouldn't have given it nearly that much time on the show at this point if somebody around there didn't feel like it is still a strong possibility.
 
Last edited:

Texas Ace

Teh Acester
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,400
I just listened to today's The Break on dallascowboys.com. It sounds like there really is something is going on with Peterson. The subject was kind of teased and eventually Nick Eatman was asked directly "If you had to bet something significant that Adrian Peterson will be in Dallas next season would you do it?". He said yes, and they discussed it for the rest of the show. He later sort of half-assed downplayed it as a "hunch" but I've been listening to that show/Eatman for 10 years and he definitely knows something. It is more than a hunch. Whether they get something done (and what it costs) remains to be seen, but based on what I heard on that show I would say they are going to make a play to acquire Peterson in trade.

That surprises me because at this point I assumed any potential deal would be dead. Hell, maybe it is and there is nothing to this but they wouldn't have given it nearly that much time on the show at this point if somebody around there didn't feel like it is a strong possibility.
It doesn't surprise me at all.

I've said all along that I fully believe there is interest on both sides - AP's and the Cowboys' - to make this happen. I think each side has discussed this possibility and both of them are pretty clear on what it's going to take from each of them to come to an agreement.

However, I don't think it will get done because the Vikings are not going to cut him, and I think they're going to ask for too much in return. I also believe Peterson will take significantly less to play here, but I don't think he's playing for peanuts either.

I'm thinking he'll go from 12 mill a year to 8 mill, but I don't know if we can or even want to afford that.
 

E_D_Guapo

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
3,158
It doesn't surprise me at all.

I've said all along that I fully believe there is interest on both sides - AP's and the Cowboys' - to make this happen. I think each side has discussed this possibility and both of them are pretty clear on what it's going to take from each of them to come to an agreement.

However, I don't think it will get done because the Vikings are not going to cut him, and I think they're going to ask for too much in return. I also believe Peterson will take significantly less to play here, but I don't think he's playing for peanuts either.

I'm thinking he'll go from 12 mill a year to 8 mill, but I don't know if we can or even want to afford that.
I'm sure there has been mutual interest all along. I just assumed that since the Vikings are not cutting him that it was a dead issue. Dallas is far better off drafting a guy and moving on, IMO. I'm sure it won't be cheap in draft picks/salary to bring Peterson into the fold. It really sounds like they might be working toward it though. Again, could be off base but it was very heavily implied and was not at all framed as pure speculation.
 

Texas Ace

Teh Acester
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,400
So out of curiosity, what would you all be willing to give the Vikings in term of compensation for him?

I'd give them a 3rd round pick at most. I'm not giving them a 2nd....hell no.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,705
God, please don't get raped, Jerry. We have more holes to fill than just RB.
 
Top Bottom