2026 Cowboys Draft Chatter Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
They don't trust him long-term, and they shouldn't. Better to keep him playing for his supper.
 
ravidubey said:
This was always the plan. Prolly a repeat tagging in 2027 and then letting him go in 2028
Click to expand...


I think they're looking at it like:

He's asking for 35-40 million a year.

For the next 2 years that comes to 70-80 million.

The tag this year is 28, next year it's something like 32.

So for the next two years under the tag it'll be about 60 million.

So why pay an extra 10-20 million in the next two years when we don't have to?

I think that's myopic but I think that's how they think.

Conveniently it also means they can't restructure, or give out signing bonuses and so forth, which means they don't have to push money to future years and spend more elsewhere now, and as an added bonus they don't have to give out a huge up front signing bonus like he'd certainly get.

Win win for them when it comes to their top priority (money).
 
Genghis Khan said:
I think they're looking at it like:

He's asking for 35-40 million a year.

For the next 2 years that comes to 70-80 million.

The tag this year is 28, next year it's something like 32.

So for the next two years under the tag it'll be about 60 million.

So why pay an extra 10-20 million in the next two years when we don't have to?

I think that's myopic but I think that's how they think.

Conveniently it also means they can't restructure, or give out signing bonuses and so forth, which means they don't have to push money to future years and spend more elsewhere now, and as an added bonus they don't have to give out a huge up front signing bonus like he'd certainly get.

Win win for them when it comes to their top priority (money).
Click to expand...
I think they were convinced of this scenario once Pickens proved how good he was in 2025.

George has to threaten to sit out 10 games in 2026 or whatever it is for them to come to the table for real, and he should be up front and public about what he’s decided and why.

He wants a multi-year deal, and the Cowboys feel they are already in year two of a three year deal— 1.1m, 27.3m, 32.76m. Three years, 61.16 for a true #1 caliber NFL WR is a 14-15m annual discount.
 
Now there are rumors that we are trying to use Pickens as a trade chip. I am quite dubious.
 
God damn, 6 pages talking about Pickens? You all knew it was going to happen. Should have been no surprise to anyone.
 
boozeman said:
Now there are rumors that we are trying to use Pickens as a trade chip. I am quite dubious.
Click to expand...
You better show proof of said rumor or I swear I will fpickering your ass without hesitation.
 
Cotton said:
God damn, 6 pages talking about Pickens? You all knew it was going to happen. Should have been no surprise to anyone.
Click to expand...
The only thing that was surprising was the method it was communicated. Normally Goof Son would dig in his ear, use air quotes and tap dance around that. It is a far firmer stance than we have taken in the past.
 
boozeman said:
The only thing that was surprising was the method it was communicated. Normally Goof Son would dig in his ear, use air quotes and tap dance around that. It is a far firmer stance than we have taken in the past.
Click to expand...
I told you all months ago they weren't going to keep him long term. Too many reports of him missing meetings, being late, coaches letting him get away with shit, etc. They will use him for two years and discard him.
 
Cotton said:
I told you all months ago they weren't going to keep him long term. Too many reports of him missing meetings, being late, coaches letting him get away with shit, etc. They will use him for two years and discard him.
Click to expand...
The whole concept is that if they have already decided that it is one more and done regardless, then maybe move him now and draft Tyson.
 
Cujo said:
Having picks 4, 12, and 35 would feel pretty damn good. Especially, if we could trade down a few spots at 12 and add another pick next year.
Click to expand...


It would feel pretty good, except we'd pretty much have to draft a WR high.

So it's something like for example:

Reese, Tyson, Cisse

Vs

Delane, Pickens, Lawrence

Not sure I wouldn't just rather have the known dominant WR in that scenario plus two very good prospects.
 
Genghis Khan said:
It would feel pretty good, except we'd pretty much have to draft a WR high.

So it's something like for example:

Reese, Tyson, Cisse

Vs

Delane, Pickens, Lawrence

Not sure I wouldn't just rather have the known dominant WR in that scenario plus two very good prospects.
Click to expand...
Why couldn't it be the scenario I mentioned above? Or if the top two WRs are gone at 12, then look to trade down like we've already been doing. Grab one of the WRs later in the first. And still get a good CB at 92/112. Or whatever we get if we trade down from 12. I see no reason why we'd be forced into Cisse or Delane.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom