Archive - Random Cowboys Related Stuff Thread...

[NoDak]

He'd be starting by 2016 anyway.

And? I didn't say anything about playing time. I was commenting on the money aspect Schmitty was talking about.

 

[Smitty]

It's a fine balance trying to keep cap space available and allocating salary requirement to players who are starters and you want to retain. Obviously you can't afford to pay backups the same rate you pay starters. The qb spot has some exceptions if in fact they are in line as a starter but then you can't have veteran QBs on the roster at the same time as a general matter unless you are good on cap space. The qb in waiting essentially has to be prepared to play at anytime. Again that is the exceptional position because you can't have high draft picks as backups. They are generally selected to become starters right away.

No one is advocating paying backups the same rate you pay starters. I'm not talking about drafting TE after TE in the first round to sit on the bench and get paid millions each year.

However, it does make sense to draft a player that will not start right away because ultimately you are going to save by inserting him into the starting lineup instead of paying the guy he's replacing a huge contract. The new rookie salary scale never broke anyone's bank and it certainly wouldn't even break ours, as bad of shape as we're in.

We can afford to draft Romo's replacement and let him ride the pine, we just have to get by with less along the DL for the next season or two.

And you know what? We wouldn't even have to make that sacrifice if we had been smarter in how much we overinvested in our secondary.

So I don't buy that it's a debilitating problem at all.

 

[L.T. Fan]

No one is advocating paying backups the same rate you pay starters. I'm not talking about drafting TE after TE in the first round to sit on the bench and get paid millions each year.

However, it does make sense to draft a player that will not start right away because ultimately you are going to save by inserting him into the starting lineup instead of paying the guy he's replacing a huge contract. The new rookie salary scale never broke anyone's bank and it certainly wouldn't even break ours, as bad of shape as we're in.

We can afford to draft Romo's replacement and let him ride the pine, we just have to get by with less along the DL for the next season or two.

And you know what? We wouldn't even have to make that sacrifice if we had been smarter in how much we overinvested in our secondary.

So I don't buy that it's a debilitating problem at all.

Okay. Buy a team and manage it the way you want. I'm just relating the trends in the NFL irrespective of my preferences.

 

[Smitty]

Okay. Buy a team and manage it the way you want. I'm just relating the trends in the NFL irrespective of my preferences.

Don't really care what the "trends" are. The trends say pay CBs a lot of money; that is dead wrong as well.

The Packers drafted Aaron Rodgers when Favre still had tread on the tires. That was smart.

The Giants drafted DL after DL in the early rounds to give them excellent depth at the position. That was smart.

The Denver Broncos drafted Demaryus Thomas in 2010 and he didn't start for two seasons. That was smart.

I could go on, but.... obviously we've seen that it's not debilitating to a salary cap to draft a first round player and not start him right away, if he ends up being the best long term player you could have taken. Getting the best long term player is far, far more important than getting an immediate starter.

So..... myth debunked.

Maybe the point you were trying to make is "Many idiot owners insist on their first round picks playing immediately, like Jerry Jones, so that he can generate jersey sales."

But any argument that it is "debilitating" under the salary cap is false with the new rookie scale.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Don't really care what the "trends" are. The trends say pay CBs a lot of money; that is dead wrong as well.

The Packers drafted Aaron Rodgers when Favre still had tread on the tires. That was smart.

The Giants drafted DL after DL in the early rounds to give them excellent depth at the position. That was smart.

The Denver Broncos drafted Demaryus Thomas in 2010 and he didn't start for two seasons. That was smart.

I could go on, but.... obviously we've seen that it's not debilitating to a salary cap to draft a first round player and not start him right away, if he ends up being the best long term player you could have taken. Getting the best long term player is far, far more important than getting an immediate starter.

So..... myth debunked.

Maybe the point you were trying to make is "Many idiot owners insist on their first round picks playing immediately, like Jerry Jones, so that he can generate jersey sales."

But any argument that it is "debilitating" under the salary cap is false with the new rookie scale.

Whatever the reasons, that is the current trends.

 

[jsmith6919]

 

[boozeman]

Well duh. Red Pube wants to save his job.

 

[Deuce]

Well duh. Red Pube wants to save his job.

That, and he's been actively trying to steal the BFF title from Witten all offseason. He can't maintain that relationship if he advocates for a new QB.

 

[VA Cowboy]

He would be more of a target if they trade back, right? In the limited amount of stuff I've been hearing/reading about the draft it seems like he might be around later in the 1st?

Or even in the first part of the 2nd. I've seen him listed in the late 20 to early 40 range. Doubt he'd be available when we pick in the 2nd so we'd either have to trade down in the 1st or move up in the 2nd.

 

[jsmith6919]

 

[Smitty]

Yeah, the other reason why all you guys should want Manziel is that it signals Garrett is done most likely.

Jerry will have to overrule him to get Manziel, signaling Jerry's lack of trust in him, and the fact that it won't be any immediate help to the defense likely means we aren't good enough to get over 8-8.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Yeah, the other reason why all you guys should want Manziel is that it signals Garrett is done most likely.

Jerry will have to overrule him to get Manziel, signaling Jerry's lack of trust in him, and the fact that it won't be any immediate help to the defense likely means we aren't good enough to get over 8-8.

That's nice chat fodder but Jones has already shown his commitment to both Romo and express it about Garrett. If he goes for Manziel is will be for Cowboys promotion potential.

 

[Rev]

Garret doesn't need any help to be done. He can do that all by himself.

 

[jsmith6919]

Yeah, the other reason why all you guys should want Manziel is that it signals Garrett is done most likely.

Jerry will have to overrule him to get Manziel, signaling Jerry's lack of trust in him, and the fact that it won't be any immediate help to the defense likely means we aren't good enough to get over 8-8.

There may be something to this, Jerry removing ginger from the offense could be his master plan to keep him away from his new qb

 

[ravidubey]

Please let some stupid team take these guys top ten.

 

[boozeman]

 

[Smitty]

 

[Clay_Allison]

If he was coming for Spencer's contract I wouldn't give a shit if Austin comes back. I would think he could get an offer like that from Cleveland though, since their top WR will be on the couch sitting out a suspension.

 

[Rev]

I would bring him in and let Devin Street mentor him.

 

[Cotton]