2026 Cowboys Draft Chatter Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Simpleton said:
With all that said, I think the overarching point that 12 is kind of a dead spot for the top defensive players is valid. The organization can't just sit back and passively watch things unfold.

I could easily see scenarios where trading up, either to 6 or 8-10 would be the best move, and obviously if the defensive board is wiped out you'd hope they could move down. Going up to 3 is obviously ridiculous but could we get up to 6 while just sending Cleveland 92?

I bet we could, and obviously if Reese or Bailey drop to 6 you do it, but what if the top 5 is Mendoza/Reese/Bailey/Bain/Downs?

There's no chance Styles/Delane make it to 12 there, so do you move up for Styles? Downs in a different scenario?

Conversely, let's say the top 7 is Mendoza/Reese/Bailey/Bain/Love/Tate/Downs, and there are only 4 picks to go before our pick with both Styles and Delane on the board.

You can be a bit more patient there, but I'd argue that you should be laying the groundwork to move up to like 9 or 10 at a moment's notice.
Click to expand...


True that 12 could be a dead spot for defenders, but that means they should trade down not up.

I'd love to get an elite guy if one falls, but we need numbers more than top shelf prospects. If I have to choose one or the other I'm not giving up picks.
 
Genghis Khan said:
True that 12 could be a dead spot for defenders, but that means they should trade down not up.

I'd love to get an elite guy if one falls, but we need numbers more than top shelf prospects. If I have to choose one or the other I'm not giving up picks.
Click to expand...


This should be their philosophy every year since they are so reluctant to go big in FA. I would be calling everyone now setting up possible contingencies.
 
Genghis Khan said:
True that 12 could be a dead spot for defenders, but that means they should trade up not down.

I'd love to get an elite guy if one falls, but we need numbers more than top shelf prospects. If I have to choose one or the other I'm not giving up picks.
Click to expand...

I don't know that we badly need numbers anymore given that they did their usual scattershot FA approach (i.e. numbers instead of quality) plus the Thompson signing/Gary trade.

Gary and Thompson are locked in established starters, you could argue Durant is as well, but even if you only consider him a borderline starting type we have basically 5-6 DB's who are starting caliber depending on what you think of Revel.

We could use another edge rusher, sure, but it doesn't have to be a day 1 starter when you have a guy like Gary and a promising 2nd year guy in Ezeriaku. We could use another rotational interior DL but again, we don't need a starter and the depth between Ogbonnia and Bullard is decent enough.

ILB we obviously need a starter but nobody in their right mind is banking on 92 or a 4th rounder for that.

At this point I could easily argue that we need difference makers more so than numbers, but the bigger thing for me is that I want to follow the talent in this given class and if the board is thinning I'm not going to be worried about giving up some 4th rounder to move up 3 spots to get Styles or Downs.

And obviously I'd be fine trading down but in a time crunched situation that is more reliant on other teams wanting to come up based on what just played out in real time, whereas I feel like you can control your own destiny to an extent with a small trade up.
 
Simpleton said:
At this point I could easily argue that we need difference makers more so than numbers, but the bigger thing for me is that I want to follow the talent in this given class and if the board is thinning I'm not going to be worried about giving up some 4th rounder to move up 3 spots to get Styles or Downs.
Click to expand...
We only have to give up a 4th rounder to go up three spots in the first?

Well, fuck. Sign me up.
 
Simpleton said:
I don't know that we badly need numbers anymore given that they did their usual scattershot FA approach (i.e. numbers instead of quality) plus the Thompson signing/Gary trade.

Gary and Thompson are locked in established starters, you could argue Durant is as well, but even if you only consider him a borderline starting type we have basically 5-6 DB's who are starting caliber depending on what you think of Revel.

We could use another edge rusher, sure, but it doesn't have to be a day 1 starter when you have a guy like Gary and a promising 2nd year guy in Ezeriaku. We could use another rotational interior DL but again, we don't need a starter and the depth between Ogbonnia and Bullard is decent enough.

ILB we obviously need a starter but nobody in their right mind is banking on 92 or a 4th rounder for that.

At this point I could easily argue that we need difference makers more so than numbers, but the bigger thing for me is that I want to follow the talent in this given class and if the board is thinning I'm not going to be worried about giving up some 4th rounder to move up 3 spots to get Styles or Downs.

And obviously I'd be fine trading down but in a time crunched situation that is more reliant on other teams wanting to come up based on what just played out in real time, whereas I feel like you can control your own destiny to an extent with a small trade up.
Click to expand...

So you're saying we need to trade up for Styles at all costs. Biggest need meet best LBer prospect we have seen in a long time.
 
boozeman said:
Bullshit. You pay more attention now, dick.
Click to expand...
I would hope that "old Cotton" would refer to what I was like before the sickness got me. Only about 3 of the 22 years I have been on this board was I in the darkness. I would rather people remember the old Cotton more similarly to what I am now versus what I was for those horrible 3 years.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
So you're saying we need to trade up for Styles at all costs. Biggest need meet best LBer prospect we have seen in a long time.
Click to expand...

Not at all costs but I'd definitely consider it in the 8-10 range.

I think I'd only move up to 6 for Reese or Bailey.
 
Cotton said:
I would hope that "old Cotton" would refer to what I was like before the sickness got me. Only about 3 of the 22 years I have been on this board was I in the darkness. I would rather people remember the old Cotton more similarly to what I am now versus what I was for those horrible 3 years.
Click to expand...
I didn't really see a difference.

Other than that completely moronic, braindead, gay, awful, retarded let the bullshit continue crap. Or whatever it was.

That booze really melted your brain. Glad to see you get it back.
 
Simpleton said:
With all that said, I think the overarching point that 12 is kind of a dead spot for the top defensive players is valid. The organization can't just sit back and passively watch things unfold.

I could easily see scenarios where trading up, either to 6 or 8-10 would be the best move, and obviously if the defensive board is wiped out you'd hope they could move down. Going up to 3 is obviously ridiculous but could we get up to 6 while just sending Cleveland 92?

I bet we could, and obviously if Reese or Bailey drop to 6 you do it, but what if the top 5 is Mendoza/Reese/Bailey/Bain/Downs?

There's no chance Styles/Delane make it to 12 there, so do you move up for Styles? Downs in a different scenario?

Conversely, let's say the top 7 is Mendoza/Reese/Bailey/Bain/Love/Tate/Downs, and there are only 4 picks to go before our pick with both Styles and Delane on the board.

You can be a bit more patient there, but I'd argue that you should be laying the groundwork to move up to like 9 or 10 at a moment's notice.
Click to expand...
Regarding top defensive prospects, I could see the quicker and more opportunistic McCoy being considered at or even above Delane by many of the CB whores of which there are endless plenty around the league.

I think he will fall to us, and either we take him or trade down to someone who wants him.

In any regard, the real defensive value in this draft is in the 2nd-4th rounds. You can’t convince me one Sonny Styles is worth BOTH Jacob Rodriguez and Deangelo Ponds. One supposedly great player is not worth two really good ones.

What matters most is,

1). Can we play situational defense— that is not act like bitches and lose key plays in the game.
2). Can we stop the run?
3). Can we rudimentarily defend the pass?
4.). Can we pressure the QB?

The first is answered by coaching and character and we’ve failed at it for years. The next two are easier, but each is critically important and Dallas was unable to do either in 2020 or 2025. Especially 2025. Question 4 is important after you’ve secured the first three, but believe it or not it’s not anywhere near as important as the first three.

5). Can we shut down the pass

Is the last question and unrealistic but we strive for it nonetheless

So as much as I’d love to have Bailey or Reese to help answer 4, it’s going to be a waste of resources (and their careers) if we can’t do 1-3, which is where we’ve fucking been lately.

That’s why I’d much rather get four really good players and three more depth guys from this draft rather than 2 guys who are “special” but can’t be everywhere at once.

TRADE DOWN

Why won’t we? Not because we can’t (as @NoDak would suggest)— Hell we’ve done that time and again for extra picks (2002, 2004, 2007, 2013, 2021, 2024 off the top of my head). (Almost certainly more, 2009?)

We won’t because the Dallas front orifiice wants STARs they can pimp to the public. This is the essence of the issue. They want to ride stars to the Superbowl, but mainly want to be seen in the star circle.

Meanwhile Seattle rides their two drafts full of defensive depth and one star in JSN to the Super Bowl. With a retard QB nonetheless.

I think Jerry wants glitz and glamor as much or more than a trophy.
 
NoDak said:
I didn't really see a difference.
Click to expand...
The main thing that was probably the most noticeable was how little I was actually talking football during that time. I pretty much holed up in the political forums.
 
ravidubey said:
Why won’t we? Not because we can’t (as @NoDak would suggest)— Hell we’ve done that time and again for extra picks (2002, 2004, 2007, 2013, 2021, 2024 off the top of my head). (Almost certainly more, 2009?)
Click to expand...
Never once have I said we can't. I've only said it's not as easy and automatic a thing to do as people like to portray.

But nice way to twist words to fit your narrative, I guess.
 
NoDak said:
We only have to give up a 4th rounder to go up three spots in the first?

Well, fuck. Sign me up.
Click to expand...
We got a 3rd from the Eagles for them to move up from 12 to 10 and then picked Parsons at 12. Just a recent example showing it would most likely take more than a 4th.
 
Cotton said:
We got a 3rd from the Eagles for them to move up from 12 to 10 and then picked Parsons at 12. Just a recent example showing it would most likely take more than a 4th.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think it takes our third just to move up unfortunately. And I'm not sure I'm prepared to do it. My hope is maybe 2 corners go before 12 now and it causes one of the other guys to fall to us. Probably Bain but I run that card up in a heart beat unless he has real issues like drugs or beating women.
 
Would I give up a 3 to move up to 9 to get Styles if he's the last of the top 6 available?

Yes I would.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom