2022 Random Cowboys Stuff Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chocolate Lab

Free Phil Mafah!
Joined
Oct 2, 2014
Messages
29,429
I think it's just coach speak from MM. He's not going to trash a player in public whether they're staying or going.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
60,327
I agree with what you’re saying…just was pointing out or asking why your HC would say that and then suddenly the guy looks like a goner.
Maybe he is being somewhat smart and not telegraphing that we have to trade the guy. And frankly we don't have to trade him. Watkins can come or go. No one will fight us for his services. Golston is sort of a DE too still so you could move a guy like Basham instead. I personally like Gallimore and wouldn't trade him unless I'm getting decent value. But I'm not in the locker room either. I'm just prepping for a Gallimore for a seventh round pick trade. Plus Gallimore has more time on his rookie deal than say Hill who is legit playing for a contract this year and probably becomes fat and lazy next year.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
46,152
Maybe he is being somewhat smart and not telegraphing that we have to trade the guy. And frankly we don't have to trade him. Watkins can come or go. No one will fight us for his services. Golston is sort of a DE too still so you could move a guy like Basham instead. I personally like Gallimore and wouldn't trade him unless I'm getting decent value. But I'm not in the locker room either. I'm just prepping for a Gallimore for a seventh round pick trade. Plus Gallimore has more time on his rookie deal than say Hill who is legit playing for a contract this year and probably becomes fat and lazy next year.

Yeah, if they do trade Gallimore the surprising thing would be that they essentially chose Hill over him.
 

Chocolate Lab

Free Phil Mafah!
Joined
Oct 2, 2014
Messages
29,429
Plus Gallimore has more time on his rookie deal than say Hill who is legit playing for a contract this year and probably becomes fat and lazy next year.
Right, I don't think they even plan on having Hill back. I think Stephen is banking on that comp pick... Which is fine because he probably will turn back into a pumpkin. But that would have us down two DTs from this group.

But maybe Gallimore is just too much of a tweener. Not laterally quick enough for 3T, not big enough for 1T.
 

shoop

Semi-contributing member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
4,832
I mean how many Dlineman can you really have on your roster? Something sort of has to give despite what the coach said. You have 4 Dlineman on the field most plays. Do you keep around 6 or 7 DTs for that? I don't think Gallimore is a bad player but they must not like what he is doing on the field as much as the other guys. And Hill has sort of just been a better pass rusher.

Osa, Hill, Golston, Bohanna, Hankins and Watkins. Gallimore makes it 7 dudes. You don't get unlimited guys on the roster.
Especially considering they run packages with multiple DE or DE/hybrid players. It’s a little overkill
 

Texas Ace

I'll Never Dream Again
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
27,099
I'd be fine with it as long as he can keep his shit together.

Those are the type of under the radar high ceiling/low risk signings that can push teams over the top.
Yeah, I'd be all for it.

He showed last year that he still has big time playmaking ability and he was on his best behavior.

I think he was humbled a bit by how far his star fell.

I'd sign him.
 

mcnuttz

Senior Junior Mod
Staff member
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
16,974
He taking fashion tips from Iamtdg and data, highlighting the truly sad state of the franchise.
 

Chocolate Lab

Free Phil Mafah!
Joined
Oct 2, 2014
Messages
29,429
Must've had a skin cancer scare.
 

p1_

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
27,424

Um Patrick, Hankins is here because of a talent deficit in the interior of this line, mainly at 1T. So...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom