2020 Random Cowboys Stuff Thread...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cujo said:
We won 8 games solely because of Cooper?
That's debatable. Maybe I wouldn't make a good gm, but I wouldn't be throwing out big deals willy nilly on guys I wasn't 100% on.
Click to expand...

No but he is your best offensive weapon on a pretty dynamic offense. You don't just let those guys go and assume that things will go on the same as always.
 
Simpleton said:
Just franchise him and see what happens under a new staff, easy.
Click to expand...

That makes sense too. You're starting a new scheme. Make sure that he will work well with the new scheme and coaches. I assume he will work great again though. He is an extremely talented WR when healthy.
 
Let Dak go, sign Brady for two years, collect rings. :mj
 
bbgun said:
Let Dak go, sign Brady for two years, collect rings.
Click to expand...

I'm very open to this idea.

Unfortunately, Tom Brady has gone on record saying he hates Dallas from when he was a kid, so I doubt he ever would entertain coming here.
 
Iamtdg said:
I would use the franchise tag on Dak and the transition tag on Amari.
Click to expand...

Yeah I don't like leaving my franchise QB in limbo like that. It's the one position that I think the franchise tag is a bad idea.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Yeah I don't like leaving my franchise QB in limbo like that. It's the one position that I think the franchise tag is a bad idea.
Click to expand...
I normally would agree, but with a new staff coming online, I think it's the best play. Gives him a year with the new staff and if he doesn't perform then it's easy to cut bait.
 
mschmidt64 said:
Unfortunately, Tom Brady has gone on record saying he hates Dallas from when he was a kid, so I doubt he ever would entertain coming here.
Click to expand...
Plus, he'd have to wear a different number.
 
What I'm really curious to see is how the new staff shapes our defensive personnel. Offensively we're pretty much set in stone aside from possibly a new TE and tweaking depth here and there. Defensively we could be a clean slate more or less with only Lawrence/Smith as the lone big contracts and plenty of cap space.

They could reshape literally the entire DL this offseason if they wanted to with Woods, Collins, Quinn, Covington and Hyder all being UFA's, and Crawford being a no-brainer cut for cap space. That leaves just Lawrence, Dorance Armstrong, Joe Jackson and Trysten Hill (lol).

I assume the new staff will want some interior DL with more lead in their ass so I'd look at guys like Michael Pierce, DJ Reader, Javon Hargrave and Jordan Phillips if we really want to get crazy. I think Phillips is the only guy who will command 10+ so we should be able to afford a guy like Pierce who would be a great 2-gap run stuffer.

David Onyemata is more of a pass-rushing DT that I assume Nolan would be interested in based on their time in New Orleans together and he should be relatively cheap, so if we can get a run-stuffer plus Onyemata on an affordable deal I'd be stoked.

DE will be very interesting as well since Nolan seems to prefer 3-4/4-3 hybrids with edge rushers often in 2-point stances. With that in mind will he want to re-sign Quinn or maybe go after a guy like Vic Beasley, Matt Judon, Dante Fowler or Shaq Lawson?

Tomsula was the HC the year the Niners drafted Arik Armstead in the 1st, he's a UFA this year, maybe we're interested in him.

Then you have guys like Vonn Bell and AJ Klein from the Saints who are free agents who should be relatively affordable and capable of starting, how interested will we be in them?

I think we'll be way more involved in free agency this year with the new staff wanting to shape the roster in their own image so it should be interesting.
 


This past draft is looking shittier and shittier.
 
Interesting sign to have after the Jimmy/Jerry debacle.


 
Rev said:
Interesting sign to have after the Jimmy/Jerry debacle.


Click to expand...


Is that a run on sentence? Sometimes I have difficulty understanding him.
 
Genghis Khan said:
Again, the home/road thing didn't happen to Cooper in Oakland.

Wouldn't logic dictate it was less to do with Cooper here and more to do with our ass coaching staff that as a philosophy coached ultra conservative on the road?
Click to expand...
This is the only logical answer, but for some reason, most are ignoring this. Garrett obviously coached a different, more conservative, chickenshit style on the road.
 
Worst case scenario in my opinion would be to tag him for the year and see how he does with a new coaching staff. We are fortunate that this decision comes the one year we can use both tags.
 
shoop said:
Worst case scenario in my opinion would be to tag him for the year and see how he does with a new coaching staff. We are fortunate that this decision comes the one year we can use both tags.
Click to expand...

The problem is one of the tags isn't particularly useful. A team can offer him a contract still and we would have to either match it or lose the player for nothing. The transition tag has always seemed pretty weak and useless.
 
Barry Switzer used to keep a sign on his desk that said something to the effect, a lot of good things can happen if you don't care who gets the credit.
 
NoDak said:
This is the only logical answer, but for some reason, most are ignoring this. Garrett obviously coached a different, more conservative, chickenshit style on the road.
Click to expand...

I think that's probably too easy an answer. The Romo teams were road warriors but constantly dropped games at Jerry-world. I wonder if it's a turf/grass thing. Easier to run razor-sharp routes on turf. But that would take a different analysis.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom