Fisher & Co.: Cowboys Sources: No Adrian Peterson Pursuit

NoDak said:
Exaggerate much? :art
Click to expand...

For all of the good Stephen has done, if they give a 2nd for AP, they are right back where they were 3-4 years ago as far as decision-making goes.
 
Iamtdg said:
For all of the good Stephen has done, if they give a 2nd for AP, they are right back where they were 3-4 years ago as far as decision-making goes.
Click to expand...

I don't want to give up a pick for Peterson either, but I don't really see how that would negate rebuilding the Oline with bluechippers, giving out smart contracts, etc... But, whatever peels your banana, I guess.
 
I think Stephen is probably doing his best not to kill his deddy.
 
I don't want to give up a 2nd for Peterson, but I don't think it's that it's such an overly stupid thing to do that it erases everything they've done.

Peterson is an all time talent at the position, a position that we need to address at that. We're very close to being a SB team and his acquisition could help put this team over the top. For those reasons, giving up a 2nd would still be understandable.

With that said, I would hope that this team would have enough restraint to not do that and to take a chance on one of the top backs in the draft and keep that 2nd rounder for a promising young RB or defensive player that could start this year and still be around 4 years from now.

As I said all along, a 3rd is as high as I go.
 
I'm 80% sure that 100% of the time I wouldn't give up any draft pick for Peterson.
 
BipolarFan said:
I'm 80% sure that 100% of the time I wouldn't give up any draft pick for Peterson.
Click to expand...

I'm 100% that this is retarded.

I'd absolutely give up a mid round pick for 2 years of Adrian Peterson than spend a 2nd on the Tevin Coleman's of the world.
 
Deuce said:
I'm 100% that this is retarded.

I'd absolutely give up a mid round pick for 2 years of Adrian Peterson than spend a 2nd on the Tevin Coleman's of the world.
Click to expand...

I'd go as high as a 4th, and that's it.
 
4th rounder sounds about right. If you're inclined to use a pick in the first place.
 
Iamtdg said:
I'd go as high as a 4th, and that's it.
Click to expand...

Sure if he had a cheap contract. But I'm not paying a 30 year old RB more money then any other RB in the NFL and then throwing in a draft pick for the privilege.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Sure if he had a cheap contract. But I'm not paying a 30 year old RB more money then any other RB in the NFL and then throwing in a draft pick for the privilege.
Click to expand...

Yeah, my statement was based on the assumption that he would restructure. I'm not taking on that contract period.
 
If acquiring Peterson cost us a chance of drafting the RB for the next several years I'd be pretty pissed. We keep hearing about how Romo only has a few years left, but that's a self fulfilling prophesy if we don't make moves to enforce a run first offense. If the last 5 years hadn't been us counting on Romo to make miracles happen every single game, his longevity probably wouldn't be such a concern.
 
Adrian Peterson only makes sense if Dallas is going for it all this year and damn the consequences. Even then Murray was a better option.

No, I definitely prefer a franchise built for the long haul and not one that's constantly in cap jail and stuck releasing aging talent every June.
 
ravidubey said:
Adrian Peterson only makes sense if Dallas is going for it all this year and damn the consequences. Even then Murray was a better option.

No, I definitely prefer a franchise built for the long haul and not one that's constantly in cap jail and stuck releasing aging talent every June.
Click to expand...

There is too much luck involved in the NFL. If you build for one year odds are you won't win it all and your team will be torn apart. On the other hand if you build for 5 years you are likely to get some lucky breaks over that period of time.
 
ravidubey said:
Adrian Peterson only makes sense if Dallas is going for it all this year and damn the consequences.
Click to expand...

And that is foolish thinking.

It is not like if we acquired Peterson the rest of the league would just lay down.

Overall team improvement should be the goal, not being "all in". I can't remember any team that loaded up and actually made it pay off in the salary cap era.
 
And thus the whole conversation reeks of elder Jones' retard philosophy.
 
boozeman said:
And that is foolish thinking.

It is not like if we acquired Peterson the rest of the league would just lay down.

Overall team improvement should be the goal, not being "all in". I can't remember any team that loaded up and actually made it pay off in the salary cap era.
Click to expand...
2007 Pats were the closest example. But they're also what proves why loading up doesn't make sense. They were a perfect team that got upset by a bunch of assholes who shouldn't have even made it that far.
 
townsend said:
2007 Pats were the closest example. But they're also what proves why loading up doesn't make sense. They were a perfect team that got upset by a bunch of assholes who shouldn't have even made it that far.
Click to expand...

It's a perfect example of how there is too much luck involved in winning the superbowl. You can't put all your eggs in the basket of one season because even the most talented team in the NFL has far less then 50/50 odds of winning it all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom