Machota: Will McClay on Cowboys’ 2020 draft MVP and how an impressive class came together

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,085
By Jon Machota 13m ago

With the significant involvement the Cowboys’ coaching staff has in the organization’s draft process, it was important that vice president of player personnel Will McClay and new head coach Mike McCarthy hit it off early on.

McClay vividly remembers three words McCarthy said to him during one of their first interactions after the former Packers head coach was hired in January: “Players over system.”

“That rung a bell with me right away,” McClay said. “We just continued to talk, and we have a great relationship at this point because we talk all the time. We’ll pick up the phone and just talk about anything. We talk about our kids or about fishing or about whatever, and then it comes back to players.”

McClay, who has been running the Cowboys’ draft since 2014, had been used to scouting players that fit the system previous head coach Jason Garrett had in place. McCarthy has made it clear that he wants the best players and he’ll fit his offensive and defensive systems around the talent.

“I think it’s unique from the standpoint of, you’ve got 10 years and you form habits so your brain reserves energy,” McClay said of adapting to a new coaching staff. “Well, with a new situation, we all had to activate our stuff more and communicate more. ‘What did you mean by this? What did you mean by that? How do you do this? How do you do that?’ So we had to explain the process and then re-think the process to make sure that all those things matched.

“It was interesting because, typically when you have new coaches or a new staff and you explain the way you’re doing things from a grading standpoint, you usually have outliers. A coach is not going to like this guy, he doesn’t really understand the scale, or he really likes a guy and he’s going to put him too high or too low … The players, we gave them the grade, and the grades that came back (from the coaches), they were very close to where the scouting department, who’s been doing it forever, saw these guys. So there was a unique synergy within that process.”

The results were a seven-player draft class that has received rave reviews from those inside the building as well as critics and fans on the outside.

McClay is hesitant to get too excited. He’s been through too many drafts to know it’s hard to discern if one was successful this soon. Time will tell, but Cowboys executive vice president Stephen Jones said it’s the best he’s felt right after a draft since 2005, when Dallas had two first-round picks and landed six starting-caliber players, which included future Pro Football Hall of Famer DeMarcus Ware.

To break down the seven picks the Cowboys made last Thursday, Friday and Saturday, here’s a brief summary of some of the comments from McClay and McCarthy.

First-round pick, No. 17 overall: CeeDee Lamb, WR, Oklahoma.

McCarthy: “I think he is a natural fit for how we want to play offense. He is dynamic with the ball in his hands. I really enjoy the way he goes after the football.”

McClay: “There is position of need and there is best player available. You are always going into the draft thinking about your needs, but wanting to get the best player available. I think coming through the process, it kind of shows that that’s the case with CeeDee coming to us. He was the best available player.”

Second-round pick, No. 51 overall: Trevon Diggs, CB, Alabama.

McCarthy: “We are putting such an emphasis on turnover ratio, that will be a big part of our daily focus as a football team, and this young man goes and gets the football.”

McClay: “His ability to go get the ball. No. 1, it’s an extremely difficult feel to go get interceptions when you’re playing press coverage like he did in college, with your back to the ball. It’s a unique skill set that you have to have. And you have to see that repeatedly to feel like that’s something that’s normal that a guy can do just out of habit as opposed to do surprise thing. Both Diggs and Robinson did that at a high level in college.”

Third-round pick, No. 82 overall: Neville Gallimore, DT, Oklahoma.

McCarthy: “The first thing that jumps out to me on the film is sideline-to-sideline. He is active in his pursuit and his ability to penetrate. Very good fit for our defensive line room.”

McClay: “You’ve got to get after the quarterback. You’ve got to be able to play in space. So with Gallimore, when you have a 300-pounder that has the athleticism, that runs as fast as some quarterbacks, that makes your defense faster, that makes your defense more athletic.”

Fourth-round pick, No. 123 overall: Reggie Robinson II, CB, Tulsa.

McCarthy: “I remember the first time I watched tape on him at Tulsa, and you are wondering why he is not part of the conversation with the other [top cornerbacks] up there in the first two rounds.”

McClay: “In a league that’s throwing the ball 65 percent of the time and receivers are getting bigger and faster and stronger, we felt like with the new things that we’re going to be doing and what we were looking for, we needed some guys to be press corners, No. 1. Then the other thing was guys that could affect the ball. … We felt that this was a good draft at the top four rounds for those big long corners.”

Fourth-round pick, No. 146 overall: Tyler Biadasz, C, Wisconsin.

McCarthy: “As far as running the show, making the calls, [he can do both]. He plays with great power, you can see it in the angles. He is a natural center.”

McClay: “As we found out with Travis (Frederick) a couple years ago, you never know what’s going to happen. You want to be as best prepared for that as possible. What better way to do that than a guy that fits all the criteria that we’re looking for in an offensive lineman that can play center and guard, and at a value that we feel like we can get a high return on our investment.”

Fifth-round pick, No. 179 overall: Bradlee Anae, DE, Utah.

McCarthy: “Tough, hard-nosed. Plays the game the right way. He gives us flexibility on the defensive front. Excellent addition.”

McClay: “When you rush the passer and were on a great defense like he was, and you have the results he had and the stats he had in college, then you watch how he got those sacks and those pressures and affected the defense. … We felt like he played faster than his 40 time.”

Seventh round pick, No. 231 overall: Ben DiNucci, QB, James Madison.

McCarthy: “Very accurate. He reminds me of a young Marc Bulger, someone that just, as you look for comparables, he is a young man that has played the position his whole life.”

(McClay was not asked about DiNucci during a conference call with reporters on Wednesday.)

Immediately after the draft, Jones called McClay the MVP, specifically for the way he handled the team’s preparation during the unique circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic. All 32 NFL teams were forced to change their usual draft prep over the previous month, significantly decreasing the amount of time spent with individual players. The typical college pro days and individual workouts and visits to team headquarters were replaced by video-conferencing calls.

McClay, however, would not accept the MVP accolades. He shifted the focus to the work done by the team’s scouting staff.

“Very, very excited to get what we feel like are good players that fit us,” McClay said. “I was more impressed by the team effort from ownership, the GM, head coach, everybody jumping into this situation and pulling off something that people thought would be so difficult and may have had apprehensions about early. But being dedicated to a plan and having commitment from all. I can’t say enough about (the scouts). The MVP of the draft is the scouts, to me. It’s a thankless job to go out and do that. We have an all-inclusive process that allows — typically the scouts are in the meetings, they get to express their feelings about a player and do all that in front of ownership and that’s the way we’ve typically done that. Because of the conditions, we weren’t able to do that.

“They gave me and the college management staff all the information and trusted us to give that information to ownership. Ownership took that information, the coaches listened to all that. That’s what I was most proud of when we got off that call (at the end of the draft). With what our country’s going through right now and all the other things going on, our guys’ ability to focus in and do the job was just an incredible thing. That’s what I was most excited about after the draft, the work of other people.”
 

Simpleton

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
17,485
Definitely although McClay was more than happy to appease Marinelli and the Jones boys by slurping up the bullshit Hill pick.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,085
“Players over system.”

You don't have to look any farther than that to understand why this draft seemed better than in years.
Absolutely, and that's why the first time I saw that he would adjust scheme to players I did backflips. We haven't seen that mentality in 20+ years from our coaching staff. I don't think even Parcells held that mentality.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,526
Absolutely, and that's why the first time I saw that he would adjust scheme to players I did backflips. We haven't seen that mentality in 20+ years from our coaching staff. I don't think even Parcells held that mentality.
He didn't, which should tell you it's not the cure-all being bandied about.

A compromise is required. Again, if your logic is "forget scheme, just get good players and tweak the scheme," then it's equally as logical to say "But if the player is truly good, he'll fit my scheme, and if I think he won't fit my scheme it's because he's not really that good."

We obviously have seen an example in Marinelli of being way too devoted to scheme fit. The pendulum has to swing the other way.

But very good, Hall of Fame coaches have won big by getting the right players for their scheme, too. And plenty of coaches have failed saying "Just get me good players and I'll coach 'em up."

I think we are in a good spot right now, but if the analysis is "you don't have to look any farther than 'players over scheme' as to why our draft was good," -- no, I don't agree.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,085
He didn't, which should tell you it's not the cure-all being bandied about.

A compromise is required. Again, if your logic is "forget scheme, just get good players and tweak the scheme," then it's equally as logical to say "But if the player is truly good, he'll fit my scheme, and if I think he won't fit my scheme it's because he's not really that good."

We obviously have seen an example in Marinelli of being way too devoted to scheme fit. The pendulum has to swing the other way.

But very good, Hall of Fame coaches have won big by getting the right players for their scheme, too. And plenty of coaches have failed saying "Just get me good players and I'll coach 'em up."

I think we are in a good spot right now, but if the analysis is "you don't have to look any farther than 'players over scheme' as to why our draft was good," -- no, I don't agree.
We took BPA in the first round at a position that was not even in the top 5 in needs. That is the epitome of player over scheme.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,526
We took BPA in the first round at a position that was not even in the top 5 in needs. That is the epitome of player over scheme.
I don't see how one has anything to do with the other.

BPA is not a player over scheme debate. Player over scheme is Rod Marinelli telling the team to pass on first round talent DTs because they aren't "quick twitch" for his scheme. Or Parcells saying "I need my DL to be big bodied." What did he call it? Planet theory?

I think Lamb fits our scheme just fine. I don't think this is an example of player over scheme at all.

The Lamb selection is a BPA vs. Need debate. Having said that... also.... I would completely disagree that WR wasn't a top 5 need, when you think about it. I think it absolutely was.

I don't even think CB was truly a bigger need than WR. WR was Cooper, Gallup, and then Cedric Wilson, Noah Brown, etc, scrubs.

CB was Awuzie, Lewis, Brown, Canady. Four players who are more proven than even the third WR we had. And since WR is the offensive mirror of CB, well, yes, WR was a damn big need for us.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,085
I don't see how one has anything to do with the other.

BPA is not a player over scheme debate. Player over scheme is Rod Marinelli telling the team to pass on first round talent DTs because they aren't "quick twitch" for his scheme. Or Parcells saying "I need my DL to be big bodied." What did he call it? Planet theory?

I think Lamb fits our scheme just fine. I don't think this is an example of player over scheme at all.

The Lamb selection is a BPA vs. Need debate. Having said that... also.... I would completely disagree that WR wasn't a top 5 need. I think it absolutely was.

I don't even think CB was truly a bigger need than WR. WR was Cooper, Gallup, and then Cedric Wilson, Noah Brown, etc, scrubs.

CB was Awuzie, Lewis, Brown, Canady. Four players who are more proven than even the third WR we had. And since WR is the offensive mirror of CB, well, yes, WR was a damn big need for us.
It was just one example, but going BPA has direct correlation to player over scheme which was my point, and we went BPA at almost every single pick in the draft. It just so happened that the BPA fit needs at most picks, which is why our draft was graded so high.

Needs: (These are what I viewed as our top 5)

S
CB
DT
LB
DE
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,526
It was just one example, but going BPA has direct correlation to player over scheme which was my point, and we went BPA at almost every single pick in the draft. It just so happened that the BPA fit needs at most picks, which is why our draft was graded so high.

Needs: (These are what I viewed as our top 5)

S
CB
DT
LB
DE
No way was LB more a need than WR, come on Cotton. LVE, Smith, Lee and Joe Thomas all here.

I still don't see how going BPA over need is the same as player over scheme. Maybe I'm missing something.
 

p1_

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
26,569
We were out a WR3 actually.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,526
I agree WR was a bigger need than LBer. But we needed a slot reciever but weren't stuck on a Beasley type to do it.
But it’s not like McCarthy’s “scheme” calls for a Beasley player and he went outside his comfort zone to draft a player with a different physical toolbox in Lamb.

I think Lamb fits just fine with pre existing schemes. So does Diggs and Gallimore. I wouldn’t really say there are any apparent non-scheme fits that were just too good talent wise to pass up.

They were not NEED fits... but that’s an entirely different philosophical disparity.
 

jsmith6919

Honored Member - RIP
Joined
Aug 26, 2013
Messages
28,407
But it’s not like McCarthy’s “scheme” calls for a Beasley player and he went outside his comfort zone to draft a player with a different physical toolbox in Lamb.

I think Lamb fits just fine with pre existing schemes. So does Diggs and Gallimore. I wouldn’t really say there are any apparent non-scheme fits that were just too good talent wise to pass up.

They were not NEED fits... but that’s an entirely different philosophical disparity.
Umm...pretty much every damn report says McCarthy had little to no input on the draft and he had to make work whoever Thompson drafted
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,526
Umm...pretty much every damn report says McCarthy had little to no input on the draft and he had to make work whoever Thompson drafted
I don’t understand the point you are making. We are talking about this draft.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,659
But it’s not like McCarthy’s “scheme” calls for a Beasley player and he went outside his comfort zone to draft a player with a different physical toolbox in Lamb.

I think Lamb fits just fine with pre existing schemes. So does Diggs and Gallimore. I wouldn’t really say there are any apparent non-scheme fits that were just too good talent wise to pass up.

They were not NEED fits... but that’s an entirely different philosophical disparity.
Those guys could fit any scheme. But again in the past McCarthy used a Cobb like slot guy.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,526
Those guys could fit any scheme. But again in the past McCarthy used a Cobb like slot guy.
Yeah, but because Lamb, Diggs, and Gallimore could fit any scheme, they are not examples of "players over scheme." They fit the scheme already.

"Players over scheme" would be taking a player who decidedly does not fit what McCarthy has done in the past, and then McCarthy saying, "I'm gonna introduce something new to my offense (or defense) to make this player work."

Lamb fits what McCarthy has always done. He's way better than Cobb at everything, so of course he fits McCarthy's scheme.

An example of "players over scheme" under Marinelli would have been, "Hey, this Carl Davis guy isn't 'quick twitch', but he's so good, we can't pass him up here in the fourth round, let's take him and I'll find a spot for him." We never did that.

Lamb, Diggs, and Gallimore are all examples of talented players who fit our current schemes falling to us. Lamb is an eventual #1 WR, he fits McCarthy's schemes like a Devante Adams does, and he can also play the slot for now. Diggs fits the mold of the "large, long arm CB" we apparently want for Nolan, like Chris McAlister or Ahmad Plummer in previous stops for him. Gallimore can either be a run plugger but is also a penetrator, he's well rounded and can fit any scheme.

I think maybe the best example of player over scheme is Anae. At that point he was just too good to pass up despite maybe not having the ideal size profile for our 4-3 that Tomsula and Nolan will run, he might have been better as a 3-4 OLB. But that didn't stop us and we made the pick because Anae is too good.

Still, that pick didn't make or break our draft.
 
Last edited:

Stasheroo

DCC 4Life
Joined
Jan 17, 2020
Messages
1,536
“Players over system.”

You don't have to look any farther than that to understand why this draft seemed better than in years.
Nor do you have to look for why we're suddenly back on the right track in the draft.

It's because Garrett and Marinelli are gone.

If not for the interference of those two buffoons, this team has TJ Watt vs Taco Charlton. If not for those two buffoons, this team has Juan Thornhill at safety vs worrying about Trysten Hill turning his career around.

We got better when they were rightfully sent packing, both on the field and during the draft.
 

Bill Shatner

Lock phasers on target
Joined
Mar 17, 2020
Messages
5,171
Nor do you have to look for why we're suddenly back on the right track in the draft.

It's because Garrett and Marinelli are gone.

If not for the interference of those two buffoons, this team has TJ Watt vs Taco Charlton. If not for those two buffoons, this team has Juan Thornhill at safety vs worrying about Trysten Hill turning his career around.

We got better when they were rightfully sent packing, both on the field and during the draft.
Absolutely, While Watt is maybe small for a 4-3 DE, at the very least you have a terror on passing downs instead of an already cut mediocrity. And I just want to cry when I think about Thornhill/Hill.
 

Bill Shatner

Lock phasers on target
Joined
Mar 17, 2020
Messages
5,171
Somehow the coaches in the Garrett era wormed their way into way too much say in the drafting process.
 
Top Bottom