ravidubey
DCC 4Life
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 20,226
That would be very interesting to see. Dude has a node for the ball.On Talkin' Cowboys they were saying Sterling Moore may play some FS now that Scandrick is back. That's interesting.
That would be very interesting to see. Dude has a node for the ball.On Talkin' Cowboys they were saying Sterling Moore may play some FS now that Scandrick is back. That's interesting.
If you think we had a need at CB at the time such that they were justified in trading away an extra premium pick to get Claiborne, I don't know what to tell you. Other than you are just as retarded as they are.
And this is not revisionist history; I hated that trade immediately.
He's right though.I feel like I have read a variation of that exact same post about 100 times. Props for consistency.
Claiborne was in a draft seriously light at the top. No DL was worth taking that high either. Dontari Poe and Fletcher Cox fell out of the top 10, though of course either would have been better choices than Claiborne in hindsight.He's right though.
And no, all of our top 10 picks haven't been DB's although the vast majority of them have been between Roy, Newman and Claiborne. I believe Smith is the only top 10 pick we've made since 2000 that isn't a DB, luckily he's a potential HOF LT.
I remember the draft very well and I definitely thought Claiborne was the best defensive player in that draft, I still wouldn't have traded up for him though. I would've sat tight at 14 (I believe) and taken DeCastro or Cox.Claiborne was in a draft seriously light at the top. No DL was worth taking that high either. Dontari Poe and Fletcher Cox fell out of the top 10, though of course either would have been better choices than Claiborne in hindsight.
At the time though Claiborne looked like a difference maker, while Cox and Poe looked like the best of an average lot of DT's. Kuechley was smallish, and Dallas already had two small young LBs. At the time the Dallas DL had outperformed the DB's by far, as each DB had proven himself a liability at one time or another.
In hindsight and on paper, Kuechley is the star of the draft, though he didn't truly come into his own until the Panthers upgraded their DL. Poe has proven he's the best IMO, but he had character questions at the time.
Claiborne had that ridiculous Wonderlic score, but there were no other red flags. This is a case where the risky one turned out good and the supposed stud turned out average.
It happens.
Two things:The top of the first round is for difference makers independent of position, so it wasn't the position they were trading for, but the fact that he was considered the best defensive player in the draft.
Also the team had a strong need at every defensive position with Newman aging and Scandrick and Jenkins inconstent. People are conveniently forgetting just how poorly the defensive backfield performed in 2011, especially vs the Giants.
Had Claiborne been like Patrick Peterson, no one would be bitching. Instead he's been so weak and stupid his talent has barely had a chance to assert itself.
Tyron Smith 9th overall.In fact, has it been ALL of them?
Cox has done nothing to say we should have taken him at 6 he had fewer sacks than Selvie last year and you are ready to run him off.Ravi, it's not hindsight for some of us. Maybe for you, but when we made that trade I was screaming for Fletcher Cox (cause it was obvious we weren't taking DeCastro that high).
You can't pretend like only now is it obvious that Claiborne wasn't the right pick. Cox falling to the teens doesn't mean that no one could have foreseen him as a good pick at 6.
No dog in this fight, but fact is, you are comparing a 3-4 end to a 4-3 end.Cox has done nothing to say we should have taken him at 6 he had fewer sacks than Selvie last year and you are ready to run him off.
At least have some consistency to your arguments.
No I'm going off his argument that you only draft impact players at that point in the draft and Cox has not been that.No dog in this fight, but fact is, you are comparing a 3-4 end to a 4-3 end.
There is more to DL production than sacks.
At least have some relevancy to your arguments.
It's ridiculous and a little bit laughable that they kept marching that tool out onto the field. He got smoked repeatedly. His little INT at the end doesn't even come close to making up for how bad he played, or how bad he has been his whole career.I love how Claiborne sucked dick all day and still played most snaps over a guy in Sterling Moore who has been making plays while completely outplaying Claisuck.
Funny how the asshole who could never stay healthy is find a way to stay on the field now that there's someone who can make a case for his job.
Exactly.It's ridiculous and a little bit laughable that they kept marching that tool out onto the field. He got smoked repeatedly. His little INT at the end doesn't even come close to making up for how bad he played, or how bad he has been his whole career.
The onnly reason he was behind that receiver is because I guarantee you the edict was "Do not let anyone get behind you no matter what", so he's basically in a prevent and gets lucky the ball was overthrown. I guess you can say that he has taken a step because he actually caught the ball.Exactly.
That INT is gonna go a long way in Garrett's book, but what they should be thinking this morning is how they're going to give both Scandrick and Moore more opportunities because Claiborne is a total liability.
He can't cover anything short, he can't cover anything long, he can't tackle, and he gets penalized. That's a combination that would get him benched just about everywhere except Dallas where how you play isn't the determining factor for who starts - status is what matters most.
I hope he pulls his groin or something because it's the only way he's going to be replaced.