Free Agency and Maximizing Romo's Window

One of the biggest arguments swirling around our top 4-8 pick revolves around the idea of taking a QB for the future, and in turn foregoing the immediate impact of taking a LB, CB, DL, WR, etc., and whether or not we should plan for the future in terms of a QB or maximize Romo's remaining time by going for the immediate impact of another position. It's a valid argument for sure, but to me there is a simple way to maximize Romo's time left while also attempting to solidify our future by investing that high of a pick in a QB, and that is by more or less mortgaging the future to some extent by going all out in free agency this offseason and next.

First, you have to look at what our supposed window with Romo is, and to me it is 2016 and 2017, and some may say 2018, but I can't imagine any realistic person can argue that Romo will still be able to play at a high level by the 2019 season. So with a 2-3 year window in mind you have to then look at what large contracts we have on the roster right now, what those players statuses will be by about 2018 and then look at what potentially large contracts we will have to give out between now and then.

Right now the largest deals on the team are clearly Romo (can be released in the 2018 offseason, freeing up damn near 15% of the cap), Witten (who expires after the 2017 season), Tyron (reasonable long-term deal who will clearly be a cornerstone for nearly another decade), Carr (will clearly be gone this offseason or next), Dez, Lee, and Crawford, all of whom will only have 2 years remaining on their deals following the 2017 season and could reasonably be released at any time, although they could all still be playing at a high level. Then you have to assume that we will have to hand out somewhat large deals to Martin, Frederick and Collins sometime between the 2017 and 2019 offseasons.

Our cap situation has been cleaned up a bit and we seem to have a bit of room this offseason, so what this tells me is that if we can use some sleight of hand with the cap for 2016 and 2017 we should be able to splurge a bit on free agency to fill certain needs, while also retaining guys like Hardy if we so choose. Now, I'm not advocating that we hand out a combined 80 million guaranteed to Josh Norman and Muhammad Wilkerson, but I do think that we can make some shrewd moves in terms of a run-stuffing DT (Ngata, Damon Harrison, Terrance Knighton, Akiem Hicks), an athletic LB (Demario Davis, Danny Trevathan), a competent safety (Eric Weddle, Tashaun Gipson), versatile DL depth (Jason Jones, Kendall Reyes, Malik Jackson, Olivier Vernon, Vinny Curry) or a RB to pair with McFadden (Miller, Forte, Ivory, Murray if he is cut).

I'm not saying we need to go after one out of each of those groups of players that I listed, I'm just attempting to illustrate that there are guys out there who would fill holes for us and wouldn't break the bank in most cases.

In short, what I'm getting at is that I think we can plan for the future by taking a QB in the top 5 while also maximizing Romo's remaining 2-3 years by upgrading the roster through free agency with the plan being that we backload these contracts with the idea of resetting the roster once Romo is done (either following 2017 or 2018), and moving on from guys who currently have huge deals at the same time (Witten, Lee, possibly Dez and Crawford). We then reset the roster around what is hopefully a young franchise QB on a rookie contract who has sat behind Romo for 2-3 years, a dominant OL that will be in its prime (Smith, Frederick, Martin and Collins will all be around 26-28 by 2018), and whatever other talent we've hopefully drafted in between.

Would Jaylon Smith give us a better chance to win in 2016 and 2017 than Jared Goff assuming Romo generally stays healthy?

Obviously, but I think we can more or less have our cake and eat it too by upgrading the roster and also grooming what is hopefully a franchise QB that can take us to damn near 2030.

Having a top pick QB sit behind Romo for at least a year is smart.

There's more to the game than X's and O's, and hopefully Tony could lead the transition to the younger guy.

Simpleton said:

One of the biggest arguments swirling around our top 4-8 pick revolves around the idea of taking a QB for the future, and in turn foregoing the immediate impact of taking a LB, CB, DL, WR, etc., and whether or not we should plan for the future in terms of a QB or maximize Romo's remaining time by going for the immediate impact of another position. It's a valid argument for sure, but to me there is a simple way to maximize Romo's time left while also attempting to solidify our future by investing that high of a pick in a QB, and that is by more or less mortgaging the future to some extent by going all out in free agency this offseason and next.

Click to expand...

My only concern is whether Lynch or Goff can potentially be franchise QB's and are worth top 5 picks. As for immediate impact player vs QB that may sit for a year, I'd go QB in an instant if he looks to be the real deal. But the last thing we can afford is to draft a QB regardless of if he sits or plays immediately and he turns out to be another Blaine Gabbert, Christian Ponder, Jake Locker, etc. But obviously there is no way of knowing if any player will ultimately pan out or be a bust. Fortunately there's still a lot of time for evaluation between now and April.

That decision could be even easier since even though there are several safer picks in the top 10, there aren't any real 'must have' franchise caliber position players. Jaylon Smith and Myles Jack look to be solid but neither are edge rushers or the type of franchise cornerstone player you'd probably rue not taking 5 years down the road.

Tonight I'm going to have a lot of interest watching Jared Goff and then Lynch tomorrow vs Auburn.

VA Cowboy said:

My only concern is whether Lynch or Goff can potentially be franchise QB's and are worth top 5 picks. As for immediate impact player vs QB that may sit for a year, I'd go QB in an instant if he looks to be the real deal. But the last thing we can afford is to draft a QB regardless of if he sits or plays immediately and he turns out to be another Blaine Gabbert, Christian Ponder, Jake Locker, etc. But obviously there is no way of knowing if any player will ultimately pan out or be a bust. Fortunately there's still a lot of time for evaluation between now and April.

That decision could be even easier since even though there are several safer picks in the top 10, there aren't any real 'must have' franchise caliber position players. Jaylon Smith and Myles Jack look to be solid but neither are edge rushers or the type of franchise cornerstone player you'd probably rue not taking 5 years down the road.

Tonight I'm going to have a lot of interest watching Jared Goff and then Lynch tomorrow vs Auburn.

Click to expand...

It's funny. When we talk about drafting a backup QB, we talk about a guy not having an immediate impact. But what if we are in the same situation next year as we were this year? Meaning Romo gets hurt and needs to sit for 8 games. Are you telling me that having a guy like Lynch maybe win us 4 or 5 of those isn't an immediate impact? Hell that's probably a bigger impact then any other position player will have immediately out of the draft. A backup QB has the potential to keep the season alive when no other position does. So arguably, a rookie QB could have a much bigger impact on our team then any other position right out of the gate.

Besides, can anyone name a rookie that is causing his team to win multiple games because of his dominance this year? Todd Gurley for example. Great looking RB season, and the Rams are one win better for it.

I guess you could argue Amari Cooper although I think the development of Carr has a little something to do with that team improving.

VA Cowboy said:

My only concern is whether Lynch or Goff can potentially be franchise QB's and are worth top 5 picks. As for immediate impact player vs QB that may sit for a year, I'd go QB in an instant if he looks to be the real deal. But the last thing we can afford is to draft a QB regardless of if he sits or plays immediately and he turns out to be another Blaine Gabbert, Christian Ponder, Jake Locker, etc. But obviously there is no way of knowing if any player will ultimately pan out or be a bust. Fortunately there's still a lot of time for evaluation between now and April.

That decision could be even easier since even though there are several safer picks in the top 10, there aren't any real 'must have' franchise caliber position players. Jaylon Smith and Myles Jack look to be solid but neither are edge rushers or the type of franchise cornerstone player you'd probably rue not taking 5 years down the road.

Tonight I'm going to have a lot of interest watching Jared Goff and then Lynch tomorrow vs Auburn.

Click to expand...

I agree with this all the way around although I think Lynch and Goff are almost definitely better prospects than Gabbert, Ponder and Locker. Just doing a shallow, statistical analysis of those three vs. Lynch and Goff you can see that Lynch and Goff have been way more productive.

To use a standard sample size I looked at each of their final 2 years in college:

Ponder: 65.3% completion, 7.66 YPA, 34 TD's to 15 INT's, 4761 yards. Only 629 attempts though, indicates that he was a managed QB that wasn't asked to do much.
Gabbert: 61.1% completion, 7.37 YPA, 40 TD's to 18 INT's, 6781 yards. He was below 60% completion as a sophomore, which is a red flag to me though.
Locker: 57% completion, 6.97 YPA, 38 TD's to 20 INT's, 5065 yards. This guys statistical production was a huge red flag to me and I really did not like him coming out, extraordinarily low completion %, YPA and only 726 attempts.

Goff: 63.1% completion, 8.2 YPA, 72 TD's to 20 INT's, 8220 yards.
Lynch: 65.8% completion, 8.18 YPA, 50 TD's to 12 INT's, 6701 yards. Main concern that I have here, statistically at least, is that 25% of his senior season TD's came from one game against a pretty shit team.

At any rate, you can see that Goff and Lynch are way more productive and their college stats are more in line with guys like Roethlisberger and Phillip Rivers. There aren't many college QB's in the last 10-15 years who put up similar YPA, TD:INT ratios and completion % on a high volume of attempts as Goff and Lynch that were taken in the first and straight up busted like Locker, Ponder, etc. The only two I can really think off the top of my head are Matt Leinart and Brady Quinn, Bradford is something of a bust but I wouldn't put him in the same class as those other guys at all, he's an average NFL QB, not a guy who is out of the league 5 years after being drafted.

Guys like Vince Young, RGIII, Tebow and Manziel busted but they were clearly guys who relied heavily on their legs in college, almost as much as their arm, and clearly Lynch and Goff aren't in that category. A guy like Sanchez only had one year of experience and was surrounded by one of the best rosters in college.

Further, who knows how guys like Leinart, Sanchez, Quinn and so forth would've turned out had they been given a year or two behind a guy like Romo before being thrown to the wolves. Would Ryan Fitzpatrick be in the league, playing well and leading a team to the playoffs if he had the pressure of being taken top 5 and thrown to the wolves immediately? Kirk Cousins? Tyrod Taylor?

I'm not saying that I want our next QB to be the caliber of Fitzpatrick or Cousins, I'm hoping for more for sure, but my point is that there could definitely have been untapped potential in guys like Leinart or Quinn had they not been thrown to the wolves immediately on poor teams, because I'm almost certain that guys like Fitzpatrick and Cousins would be out of the league in similar situations instead of where they are.

Simpleton said:

Further, who knows how guys like Leinart, Sanchez, Quinn and so forth would've turned out had they been given a year or two behind a guy like Romo before being thrown to the wolves.

Click to expand...

I don't think any of those guys have the physical ability of Lynch for example. Just in terms of size, arm strength and running ability. I mean that guy really is the complete package in terms of physical tools. The only thing you can't measure is what is in his head and I have no idea about that. His system and level of competition just can't answer that question for me.

I'm not as sure about Goff.

If they're taking a QB high, they also need to find a QB coach.

Cowboysrock55 said:

I don't think any of those guys have the physical ability of Lynch for example. Just in terms of size, arm strength and running ability. I mean that guy really is the complete package in terms of physical tools. The only thing you can't measure is what is in his head and I have no idea about that. His system and level of competition just can't answer that question for me.

I'm not as sure about Goff.

Click to expand...

I agree, there are question marks around both. Lynch with the level of competition and the system, and for Goff it's also the system and the fact that he throws so many short passes. The questions around Wentz are the level of competition, the injury and the somewhat small sample size of games that you have to evaluate.

All have question marks, although all have clear tools/traits that indicate their ability to succeed in the NFL. It's the front office's responsibility to take all that into account and decide whether or not those question marks can be mitigated with a proper plan of action/succession in terms of grooming whoever the guy is behind Romo, and then what we plan on doing to tailor the offense to fit the strengths of whoever we may have drafted so that they are in a position to succeed. The mental part of it is huge also, we just have no clue as to any of that.

Would Cam Newton be doing what he's doing now if they asked him to run an offense like Drew Brees as soon as he was drafted?

Obviously not, and that's what I mean by we have to have a plan to tailor the offense/team to what the guy can do.

Good breakdown Simp. I threw out those three busts because they were the ones off the top of my head that weren't running / read-option QB's. The other thing with Ponder and Locker were they weren't even top 10 projections. They only went in the first due to desperate teams reaching.

I think all of us would be more than fine if we took Lynch or Goff and they were the quality of Roethlisberger or Rivers. Even though Rivers has had limited postseason success I think it's more a team issue than a QB problem. That draft also was the last really good QB draft with Eli also going in the top 10.

It's still a concern if we end up with a Leinart, Bradford, Sanchez, Gabbert, Quinn. But with QB's sometimes that's just the way it goes. Some just don't pan out even if rated highly and projected as a can't miss quality starter.

Right now, if I'd have no problem taking Lynch or Goff if they prove to grade out on par or better historically compared to high first round QB prospects. One thing for sure is we'll never get a franchise QB if we don't pull the trigger.

VA Cowboy said:

It's still a concern if we end up with a Leinart, Bradford, Sanchez, Gabbert, Quinn. But with QB's sometimes that's just the way it goes. Some just don't pan out even if rated highly and projected as a can't miss quality starter.

Right now, if I'd have no problem taking Lynch or Goff if they prove to grade out on par or better historically compared to high first round QB prospects. One thing for sure is we'll never get a franchise QB if we don't pull the trigger.

Click to expand...

Did anyone really think Gabbert was good though for example? I mean I remember watching him in college and thinking he was terrible. Never thought Sanchez was worth a shit either. Bradford is probably the most surprising of that group but he is also a guy who I think if he would have gone into the right system from the start might have developed into something. Leinart and Quinn are just your typical hyped up high school QBs who go to big programs surrounded by great talent and look good. Can't really say why they didn't succeed other then they just couldn't process things fast enough at the NFL level.

VA Cowboy said:

It's still a concern if we end up with a Leinart, Bradford, Sanchez, Gabbert, Quinn. But with QB's sometimes that's just the way it goes. Some just don't pan out even if rated highly and projected as a can't miss quality starter.

Right now, if I'd have no problem taking Lynch or Goff if they prove to grade out on par or better historically compared to high first round QB prospects. One thing for sure is we'll never get a franchise QB if we don't pull the trigger.

Click to expand...

This is where I'm at, it's not a great draft at the top and sometimes you just need the roll the dice. I could see Goff and Lynch busting, ending up as Pro Bowlers or somewhere in the middle, the hope is that with time behind Romo they get closer to the middle/Pro Bowl than busting.

I also don't want us to blow a 2nd or 3rd rounder on a schlub prospect just because we decide we want to groom Romo's successor. Is taking a guy like Goff at 4 who isn't a bona fide can't miss top 3 prospect but still generally considered a solid top 10 prospect more risky than taking someone like Jacoby Brissett in the 3rd?

Is the 70th or so pick still not a premium pick where we should expect to get a starter?

In an ideal world I'd take Jaylon Smith at 4 or 6 or where ever and get Carson Wentz in the 2nd or after a trade up of about 10 spots, but is that any less risky than taking Goff or Lynch and then a guy like Jonathan Bullard or Derrick Henry with our 2nd?

Simpleton said:

In an ideal world I'd take Jaylon Smith at 4 or 6 or where ever and get Carson Wentz in the 2nd or after a trade up of about 10 spots, but is that any less risky than taking Goff or Lynch and then a guy like Jonathan Bullard or Derrick Henry with our 2nd?

Click to expand...

Jaylon Smith looks like a very solid talent but I guess I don't see the top 5 type play making ability. I will say though, I think he could have a very Derrick Johnson type career. Someone who doesn't light the world on fire but who will be a very good starter for a long time. It's why I wouldn't hate him but I wouldn't exactly be thrilled either. I really wish we would put some effort into getting a bad ass stout DT to protect our LBers a little.

Otherwise I'm totally ok going all offense too. QB high in the draft and follow it up with WR/RB in the second. Make the transition as smooth as possible for the young QB by getting young talent in here for him to grow with.

Cowboysrock55 said:

It's funny. When we talk about drafting a backup QB, we talk about a guy not having an immediate impact. But what if we are in the same situation next year as we were this year? Meaning Romo gets hurt and needs to sit for 8 games. Are you telling me that having a guy like Lynch maybe win us 4 or 5 of those isn't an immediate impact? Hell that's probably a bigger impact then any other position player will have immediately out of the draft. A backup QB has the potential to keep the season alive when no other position does. So arguably, a rookie QB could have a much bigger impact on our team than any other position right out of the gate.

Click to expand...

Immediate impact was referring to starting from day one. But if we have a chance to get a future quality starting QB I would be fine with him sitting and learning most of his rookie year. Not often a rookie QB will start and if he does he'll have limited success early.

VA Cowboy said:

Immediate impact was referring to starting from day one.

Click to expand...

I guess I look at immediate impact as who will have the biggest impact on a team as a rookie? Certainly the odds are Romo will get hurt next year. And having a talented rookie backup certainly beats having Cassell losing every game back there.

Simpleton said:

In an ideal world I'd take Jaylon Smith at 4 or 6 or where ever and get Carson Wentz in the 2nd or after a trade up of about 10 spots, but is that any less risky than taking Goff or Lynch and then a guy like Jonathan Bullard or Derrick Henry with our 2nd?

Click to expand...

I'd rather take Lynch/Goff and then Henry or best available defender or WR in 2nd than Jaylon/Jack + Wentz.

The "good news" is that if you go QB with a high first, and he busts, you'll be in position to try again in short order. You won't be sitting in the middle/late part of round 1 hoping someone falls.

The best thing we can do for that future QB (and Romo), is build a dominant defense, and dominant running game. Because if you pretend he's Brady and ask him to throw 50 times a game, like Garrett loves to do with Romo, he'll be broken in 2 years or less.

GShock said:

The best thing we can do for that future QB (and Romo), is build a dominant defense, and dominant running game. Because if you pretend he's Brady and ask him to throw 50 times a game, like Garrett loves to do with Romo, he'll be broken in 2 years or less.

Click to expand...

I think getting the weapons around a young QB and then protecting him are the most important things. Set him up for success. It's why I would love to go Lynch in the first and then Fuller in the second. Let some of our young talent on defense develop. Guys like Randy Gregory, Byron Jones and Wilson will take the next step in my opinion. Sort of like we are finally seeing Lawrence do (8 sacks now this season). Although I really think we could benefit from a legit physical presence at DT. Someone to pair inside who can be a real stud. Like you see with the Panthers at DT. The reason their LBers look so good are because they have 2 DTs inside who dominate and set the line of scrimmage in the backfield.

Cowboysrock55 said:

I think getting the weapons around a young QB and then protecting him are the most important things. Set him up for success. It's why I would love to go Lynch in the first and then Fuller in the second. Let some of our young talent on defense develop. Guys like Randy Gregory, Byron Jones and Wilson will take the next step in my opinion. Sort of like we are finally seeing Lawrence do (8 sacks now this season). Although I really think we could benefit from a legit physical presence at DT. Someone to pair inside who can be a real stud. Like you see with the Panthers at DT. The reason their LBers look so good are because they have 2 DTs inside who dominate and set the line of scrimmage in the backfield.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I cannot rationally discuss our criminal neglect of the DT position. We will draft 1st round CBs and trade up to do it. But DT, or NT when we were a 3-4? Never. The massive disruption that is caused by an up the middle pass rush is consistently ignored.

I like Goff.

In terms of the offseason, I would make signing Lamar Miller a priority. The RB market can't be that firm, especially with whos hitting the market - plus no one will get paid like Murray.

Id also re-sign Hardy to another incentive laden, short term contract. Id complement it with adding a starting DT.

I also want to see us draft another WR with speed. I like Butler but his hammy worries me. We badly need someone who can stretch the field for Dez and Witten.

GShock said:

Sorry, I cannot rationally discuss our criminal neglect of the DT position. We will draft 1st round CBs and trade up to do it. But DT, or NT when we were a 3-4? Never. The massive disruption that is caused by an up the middle pass rush is consistently ignored.

Click to expand...

Kawann Short was a DT out of Purdue I wanted badly in that draft. Big and physical guy who is also disruptive. 11 sacks now this season. Star doesn't put up the stats for them but he is just so stout and impossible to move.