2025 Random Cowboys Stuff Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Genghis Khan said:
To be fair I doubt the Packers make the Superbowl. It wouldn't shock me but I doubt it.

Nevertheless this is why I didn't think they got enough for Parsons. The odds that both these picks are late in the round are very high.
Click to expand...

And top that off with Clark not really doing anything for our run defense.
 
Genghis Khan said:
I don't think so. The argument is that if you don't plan on resigning him you should get value for him by trading him.

But I would resign him. They're not going to otherwise spend that money anyway.
Click to expand...

I agree unless you're telling me the trade value is a first and third or something. But I doubt it's that high. Then I have to think about it. Love the player though and our offense can be elite for years with him.
 
Genghis Khan said:
I don't think so. The argument is that if you don't plan on resigning him you should get value for him by trading him.

But I would resign him. They're not going to otherwise spend that money anyway.
Click to expand...


Yeah, plus wouldn't we be looking to acquire a 20-something year old dynamic playmaker in the draft?

Might as well just sign the one that's already on the team and is a proven NFL commodity.
 
Texas Ace said:
Yeah, plus wouldn't we be looking to acquire a 20-something year old dynamic playmaker in the draft?

Might as well just sign the one that's already on the team and is a proven NFL commodity.
Click to expand...

If you were willing to spend money in free agency I'd say getting a young guys on a rookie deal and being able to spend the money somewhere else has an advantage. But when your spending money consists of extending so/so TE's an FB's you might as well use the money on Pickens and save your picks for other positions of need. Because you're not filling those needs anywhere but the draft anyway.
 


I think this is sort of accurate, but I also think you're hearing Eberflus' obsession with LB's come through in this statement.

And you have to think Eberflus and Borgonzi were heavily involved in bringing in Murray and Sanborn, so what are we even doing here?

I also think if we make a trade it'll be for a LB, unless one of these elite DE's somehow become available in the next few days.

My hope is that it's Quincy Williams and maybe we could somehow finagle the Jets to add in his brother if he dangle a 1.
 
Simpleton said:


I think this is sort of accurate, but I also think you're hearing Eberflus' obsession with LB's come through in this statement.

And you have to think Eberflus and Borgonzi were heavily involved in bringing in Murray and Sanborn, so what are we even doing here?

I also think if we make a trade it'll be for a LB, unless one of these elite DE's somehow become available in the next few days.

My hope is that it's Quincy Williams and maybe we could somehow finagle the Jets to add in his brother if he dangle a 1.
Click to expand...


I mean Murray has had moments of good but he has a lot of moments of bad. Both coverage and run defense. Just out of position a lot. Dlineman doing dumb stuff isn't helping. Guys falling down or abandoning their gaps are a problem. Sam Williams is the worst a this. But Fowler was doing it too against the Broncos. It's weird but it almost looks like Fowler and Sam have said screw the scheme we are doing what we did under Quinn. Because I don't see the same problems with EZ for example who never played under Quinn. Undersize but he isn't abandoning responsibility to try and make the big play. Under Quinn we basically had guys playing to make the big play at all times. But that's clearly not the design here and yet the guys who played under Quinn are doing it anyway.

And the rookie LBer James can run but he just isn't great at defeating blocks right now. He gets stuck too easily. And so when the D-line isn't doing their job, he is kind of useless in run defense. And Murray has already put himself out of position because he doesn't really have the instincts or head for what he is doing.

Anyway I just don't think the guys are buying into the scheme at all. So you have half the guys playing the scheme and the other half saying fuck it, I'm going to do what made me successful in the past. And we are getting torched as a result. And the secondary is just confused as fuck and relying on undrafted players to start at this point.
 
Last edited:
Genghis Khan said:
I don't think so. The argument is that if you don't plan on resigning him you should get value for him by trading him.

But I would resign him. They're not going to otherwise spend that money anyway.
Click to expand...

They need to make a decision for sure.

Either sign him and commit to paying two WRs... which they've always tried to imply that since they have Dak they don't need two elite WRs, yet then they are constantly putting themselves into a position where their WR talent isn't good enough so they need to trade for WRs....

... or yeah, they should flip him for a mega haul.

They cannot let him walk in the offseason.
 
Smitty said:
They cannot let him walk in the offseason.
Click to expand...
At the very least you have to tag and trade him, right? No way you can let him go for just a comp third when you could get so much more.

I may be in the minority, but if they flip him for good picks I'll be more than happy with that. Still not sold on paying two top salaries to WRs when the defense is such a wreck. Plus I think he's on best behavior now and doubt that lasts.

And it's not that they'd use the salary elsewhere, it's the draft picks you'd get for him.
 
Chocolate Lab said:
paying two top salaries to WRs
Click to expand...

You still need two top receivers in the NFL. You either pay two guys or you actually have to use a premium resource to draft them. Maybe if we weren't so busy drafting Olineman and Dline busts we could have a good receiver on the cheap. But this thought that you can just have one good receiver is silly. That guy gets dinged up and you have no offense.
 
Chocolate Lab said:
At the very least you have to tag and trade him, right? No way you can let him go for just a comp third when you could get so much more.

I may be in the minority, but if they flip him for good picks I'll be more than happy with that. Still not sold on paying two top salaries to WRs when the defense is such a wreck. Plus I think he's on best behavior now and doubt that lasts.

And it's not that they'd use the salary elsewhere, it's the draft picks you'd get for him.
Click to expand...


The issue is I kind of doubt they'd get more than 1 pick for him. I'm not sure they'd get a first for him even.
 
Smitty said:
They need to make a decision for sure.

Either sign him and commit to paying two WRs... which they've always tried to imply that since they have Dak they don't need two elite WRs, yet then they are constantly putting themselves into a position where their WR talent isn't good enough so they need to trade for WRs....

... or yeah, they should flip him for a mega haul.

They cannot let him walk in the offseason.
Click to expand...


Definitely and that's the biggest issue. They should have a plan in place for any contingency but they won't.
 
Genghis Khan said:
The issue is I kind of doubt they'd get more than 1 pick for him. I'm not sure they'd get a first for him even.
Click to expand...

I agree and if you're getting a second or third round pick what's the point? Guy is playing at an elite level and is 24 years old. If all you're getting in return is a second or third round pick than you have made a seriously bad choice. Your comp pick will be a third anyway. You just get it a year sooner.

Now if someone is out there willing to pay a first and third I kind of have to listen. I love Pickens but on the open market he may get WR1 money. Because he is a legit WR1 in the NFL. There are not 32 NFL receivers better than him. Not even close. But it's not like we will shift the money to the defense in a meaningful way. So who cares, spend the money at WR than. We don't have guys on defense worth resigning right now. And we won't go out and get legit guys in free agency. Might be different if we were willing to sign a 20+ mil free agent on defense. But we won't. We will sign Fowler's at best.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
I agree and if you're getting a second or third round pick what's the point? Guy is playing at an elite level and is 24 years old. If all you're getting in return is a second or third round pick than you have made a seriously bad choice. Your comp pick will be a third anyway. You just get it a year sooner.

Now if someone is out there willing to pay a first and third I kind of have to listen. I love Pickens but on the open market he may get WR1 money. Because he is a legit WR1 in the NFL. There are not 32 NFL receivers better than him. Not even close. But it's not like we will shift the money to the defense in a meaningful way. So who cares, spend the money at WR than. We don't have guys on defense worth resigning right now. And we won't go out and get legit guys in free agency. Might be different if we were willing to sign a 20+ mil free agent on defense. But we won't. We will sign Fowler's at best.
Click to expand...


Exactly how I feel.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
You still need two top receivers in the NFL. You either pay two guys or you actually have to use a premium resource to draft them. Maybe if we weren't so busy drafting Olineman and Dline busts we could have a good receiver on the cheap. But this thought that you can just have one good receiver is silly. That guy gets dinged up and you have no offense.
Click to expand...
Right, that's why you don't draft guards at 12.

But anyway... You need two "good" WRs, yes. A Tolbert or washed up Cooks won't work. But I don't know that you need two top-5 type WRs.

Also, to @Genghis Khan also... You don't think someone would give a one for him? Especially a team in the lower first that he could put over the top? Having to pay him knocks him down some, but I don't think it does two rounds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom