- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 120,029
I remember Reggie Cobb though....VOLS RB who teamed up with Chuck Webb to form the Cobb-Webb backfield. Good times...
Nice.
I remember Reggie Cobb though....VOLS RB who teamed up with Chuck Webb to form the Cobb-Webb backfield. Good times...
That is so great to see and very encouraging.
You can't have both. Choose one.There's the potential to replace any one of them with someone worse, and that could be a very bad thing.
But I do like that this team seems to be getting out of that awful rut of overpaying and over-valuing JAGs who never make plays.
I would agree on everyone except Carr.You can't have both. Choose one.
I for one, am pretty damn happy that the team chose the latter. Get rid of the dead weight. And Carr, Claiborne, Church, and Wilcox were just that. Mediocre dead weight. Just good enough to keep us thinking they might put it together. But they never did. And were never going to. Like I said earlier, we're better off without them. Taking a step back in the short term so in the long term we can take three forward. With them we were only standing in place.
I'm tired of just getting by. Accept mediocrity and it becomes the norm.My point is, you can get by with a Brandon Carr.
I feel the same. I don't hate losing those three at all, and in a vacuum I probably wouldn't care about losing Carr either. But losing all of them at once when we already had huge holes up front hurts. I feel like we will have to get very lucky in the draft just to tread water on defense.I don't think you'd hear any complaining at all if we had let go all the same guys except given Carr the exact deal he got from the Jets, which is essentially a series of one year deals with very little guaranteed money, no?
Carr-Scandrick-Brown as your top 3 corners feels like you at least don't have any glaring deficiencies. It's keeping you from having to reach in the draft.
Scandrick-Brown-Carroll seems like a potential for disaster.
But it's not like anyone is bemoaning the loss of Claiborne or Wilcox, really, and for the money he got, I'm not sad about Church either.
And I agree with you, but what I am saying is, you can't have a steak on every plate. And Carr was one of those guys I viewed as a solid starter that a defense has to have.I'm tired of just getting by. Accept mediocrity and it becomes the norm.
I don't think you'd hear any complaining at all if we had let go all the same guys except given Carr the exact deal he got from the Jets, which is essentially a series of one year deals with very little guaranteed money, no?
Carr-Scandrick-Brown as your top 3 corners feels like you at least don't have any glaring deficiencies. It's keeping you from having to reach in the draft.
Scandrick-Brown-Carroll seems like a potential for disaster.
But it's not like anyone is bemoaning the loss of Claiborne or Wilcox, really, and for the money he got, I'm not sad about Church either.
I feel the same. I don't hate losing those three at all, and in a vacuum I probably wouldn't care about losing Carr either. But losing all of them at once when we already had huge holes up front hurts. I feel like we will have to get very lucky in the draft just to tread water on defense.
So what made them decide they suck after a 13 and 3 season versus bringing them all back in previous years?I'm tired of just getting by. Accept mediocrity and it becomes the norm.
And that's a very good point.So what made them decide they suck after a 13 and 3 season versus bringing them all back in previous years?
They didn't just suddenly decide, "wait a second, these guys really do suck!". The lack of cap space was just as much of a deal. None of them got "a lot of money" like Jones is pretending.
This just sounds a lot better when at the end of the day, they don't know how to evaluate their own talent. Therefore, the cap does it for them.
Then just be honest and say you had a threshold. I would appreciate that more than having my intelligence insulted after they paid Carr millions, extended Church and gave Claiborne an extra year.Seems pretty logical that they would've been happy to bring back certain guys (Carr/Church) at a predetermined price, and once they exceeded that it was no longer deemed "efficient" due to the lack of turnovers and generally average play.
I thought Stephen basically said that they would've brought back a few guys if the price was right, I assumed they meant Church, either Carr or Claiborne, and perhaps McClain.Then just be honest and say you had a threshold. I would appreciate that more than having my intelligence insulted after they paid Carr millions, extended Church and gave Claiborne an extra year.
Isn't that basically what he said?Then just be honest and say you had a threshold. I would appreciate that more than having my intelligence insulted after they paid Carr millions, extended Church and gave Claiborne an extra year.
He talked out of both sides of his ass.Isn't that basically what he said?
I'd say it's a little different when you are talking about handing a guy a new contract than when just simply not cutting him.He talked out of both sides of his ass.
And you can't fucking tell me any of them were any worse last year than they were in any other previous year when he and his stupid father were paying them. So don't try and tell me that they were making changes because they were dissatisfied.
The good news is its not difficult to replace the production-at least on paper- Dallas got out of Carr/Claiborne/Wilcox/Church. Even if its thru the draft, the growing pains will go away quickly.I wanted to keep Carr and then one of Church/Wilcox if the money was right, but there is no way I wanted to give Church almost 7 a year or Carr 6+ a year. Wilcox signed a reasonable 2 year, 8 or so million deal with Tampa that I would've been fine with giving him but I keep going back to how most of us wanted him gone last year and then the coaching staff found a way to integrate him as a useful piece to a decent enough defense, so if they were fine letting him go then I'm willing to see how it turns out.
Church had 5 picks in 7 years in Dallas, Carr had 7 picks in 5 years, Claiborne had 4 in 5 years, and Wilcox had 5 in 4 years. That's 21 interceptions in 21 combined seasons, and since Marinelli took over as DC in 2014 these four combined for just 12 picks over those three seasons.
That's an average of one interception per season per player, which is clearly pathetic.
I would've liked to bring one or two of them back simply so we don't have as many glaring holes but I can't blame the front office's logic that they want more play-making from the secondary and that they weren't willing to go above a certain price point to bring some of these guys back.
To me it's that type of logic and thinking that we've all wanted out of our front office for years.
Just another area where the Jones routinely get too far up their own asses. They want notoriety as geniuses far more than they can tolerate a sure and steady or dare I say simple draft.The good news is its not difficult to replace the production-at least on paper- Dallas got out of Carr/Claiborne/Wilcox/Church. Even if its thru the draft, the growing pains will go away quickly.
The thing that worries me is the tendency to get cute in the 3rd, 4th etc rounds of the draft instead of simply going with solid productive players from big programs.
They have definitely gotten better, but that small school, only productive for 1 year BS has reared its head at the wrong time far too many times with the Jones clan in charge.