Sabin: Why Cowboys are willing to invest resources in quarterbacks, just not draft...

L.T. Fan said:
If you pursue QB this draft you will have four on the roster. I don't see the urgency this year.
Click to expand...

Why would we have four? Weeden is easily cuttable. And frankly, I'm not even sure he'll make the final roster. He seems more like a needed camp arm to me. Wouldn't surprise me a bit if we went in to the season only carrying two.
 
Maybe Brandon weeden will be our Steve Young. Flop in a shitty franchise and HOFer in another.

:towel
 
L.T. Fan said:
I was under the impression he was signed. He hasn't been released so it seems to me he currently is on the roster.
Click to expand...

My point is, he hasn't made the gameday roster, so I'm not counting on him for anything.
 
Iamtdg said:
My point is, he hasn't made the gameday roster, so I'm not counting on him for anything.
Click to expand...

I understand but right or wrong he was put in place prior to the draft so it makes me think that the strategy is to delay a QB draft consideration this season.
 
L.T. Fan said:
I understand but right or wrong he was put in place prior to the draft so it makes me think that the strategy is to delay a QB draft consideration this season.
Click to expand...

Right, and it was stated that it's ridiculous to do so. To which I agreed.
 
Quarterback is the most valued position on any NFL roster. If you're not drafting/or signing multiple rookie free agent quarterbacks every year, you're doing it wrong. Jerry seems to think that drafting a QB and then developing them for 3 or 4 years is somehow "doing the work for some other team." That's asinine. Develop the QB and then either play him if he's the best you have, or trade him for picks. Or if he doesn't pan out, at least you are trying to acquire assets at the one position every team needs constantly. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to understand how this works.
 
Jerruh's reluctant to draft and develop a player to watch that player leave and succes with another team.

Weeden is the man to prove jerruh right!
 
Iamtdg said:
Right, and it was stated that it's ridiculous to do so. To which I agreed.
Click to expand...

It may be ridiculous but it was done. I'm not agreeing with the strategy I am just trying to understand what it means and my take is that Dallas doesn't feel the need to look for Romo' s replacement this draft.
 
I think we should look into drafting a QB because I think Romo is toast in a couple of years. Conceivably any QB we would draft could be playing by the end of his rookie deal.
 
Carp said:
Most of those teams mentioned had one success story though...you have to throw picks at the most important position on the field. Shit...even Sanchez got to the AFCC and Tebow has as many playoff wins as Romo.
Click to expand...

Except for Seattle, Dallas, and New England, everyone else failed until they used a top pick at the position.

So I'd argue you rarely succeed at QB by "throwing picks", unless they are top picks.

The way the NFL is set up, a Hall of Famer could be sitting there in the 6th round and may never be discovered. He can be drafted, make a fine impression in camp, and never get playing time and develop because he's playing behind a good QB who remains healthy.
 
Stars said:
Quarterback is the most valued position on any NFL roster. If you're not drafting/or signing multiple rookie free agent quarterbacks every year, you're doing it wrong. Jerry seems to think that drafting a QB and then developing them for 3 or 4 years is somehow "doing the work for some other team." That's asinine. Develop the QB and then either play him if he's the best you have, or trade him for picks. Or if he doesn't pan out, at least you are trying to acquire assets at the one position every team needs constantly. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to understand how this works.
Click to expand...

Show us some real cases where this approach has worked.

The formula has become clear: use a top pick or find a premier free agent. Everything else doesn't work except in rare cases.
 
ravidubey said:
Show us some real cases where this approach has worked.

The formula has become clear: use a top pick or find a premier free agent. Everything else doesn't work except in rare cases.
Click to expand...

But the rate cases are what you're shooting for with those mid to late round picks. And for the most important position on the field it's worth the risk of the low pick to try for one every year.
 
I am not a take a QB every year guy, but to only take 2 in 14 years seems odd to me.
 
ravidubey said:
Except for Seattle, Dallas, and New England, everyone else failed until they used a top pick at the position.

So I'd argue you rarely succeed at QB by "throwing picks", unless they are top picks.

The way the NFL is set up, a Hall of Famer could be sitting there in the 6th round and may never be discovered. He can be drafted, make a fine impression in camp, and never get playing time and develop because he's playing behind a good QB who remains healthy.
Click to expand...
Seattle and New England huh...pretty good teams.
 
ravidubey said:
Show us some real cases where this approach has worked.

The formula has become clear: use a top pick or find a premier free agent. Everything else doesn't work except in rare cases.
Click to expand...

I think you know the cases where it did work, and where qb's were flipped for picks, so I won't bother looking them up. What I'm saying is GM's should be drafting qb's every year. I don't even care if you wait til the 7th round to draft them. Just draft at least one. It's better than looking for special teams help late in the draft.
 
Stars said:
I think you know the cases where it did work, and where qb's were flipped for picks, so I won't bother looking them up. What I'm saying is GM's should be drafting qb's every year. I don't even care if you wait til the 7th round to draft them. Just draft at least one. It's better than looking for special teams help late in the draft.
Click to expand...
That's stupid. There's no point in drafting a guy who will never get enough snaps to develop or evaluate. Development in general just isn't something the NFL does any more. It's not the 1970s. You get guys in, they either catch on and get ready to play quick or they are on their way out the door.

I would take a QB in the draft if my starter was old or might become injury prone (like Dallas) or if I wanted to develop a guy into a cheap backup while he's on his rookie deal instead of spending cap dollars on an expensive vet. I wouldn't draft a QB just to be drafting one.
 
I don't agree with the idea that today's NFL doesn't developing players. If you have QBs on your board in the 4-7 round range and they are available, you take them, and hope that the low risk pick yields reward. You do everything you can to ensure that the most important position on the field is secured every year. Even if you just develop a backup, you have insurance behind your starter. This can obviously be done in FA, but if you believe in your coaches to be able to develop a young player, you want him on your team straight out of college, and not after 3 years of being on another team with other coaches that may have retarded his development.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom