JJT/Archer: Should the Cowboys draft a QB?

Next year it is Petty, Hundley, and Mariotta.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
I don't think you understand the cap or the economics of a salary cap. You're either paying 28 mil plus the cost of backups in 2015 or you're taking a cap hit of far less then that if you cut/trade Romo and have Manziel start. Then in 2016 all of that 20 mil in dead cap space goes away. What you are proposing is far more harmful to our cap. Which one could justify if Romo's play is that much better then say Manziel.

No one is saying we have to get a QB this year. However if the right one is available there is absolutely no reason to pass on him either. You can't just assume that the right QB will be available and in next years draft. Hell some drafts don't even have a good QB in them at all.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand the cap or the economics of the salary cap. Cutting Romo after the 2014 season results in a cap hit of $9.635M. After the 2015 season, the hit is down to $1.5M. After the 2016 season, it finally moves into positive territory where it becomes an $11.5M cap savings.

You can see all the numbers here for yourself:

http://www.overthecap.com/cap.php?Name=Tony Romo&Position=QB&Team=Cowboys
 
hstour said:
I don't think you understand the cap or the economics of the salary cap. Cutting Romo after the 2014 season results in a cap hit of $9.635M. After the 2015 season, the hit is down to $1.5M. After the 2016 season, it finally moves into positive territory where it becomes an $11.5M cap savings.

You can see all the numbers here for yourself:

http://www.overthecap.com/cap.php?Name=Tony Romo&Position=QB&Team=Cowboys
Click to expand...

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/tony-romo/

Depends on the source
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/tony-romo/

Depends on the source
Click to expand...

OK, so you do understand cap economics. My mistake.

Spotrac states that it gets some of its data from overthecap, so that is why I started going there. That and on spotrac, you are supposed to be able to take the dead money and subtract the base salary and get the cap impact. But I couldn't get it to jive with what would get reported as the cap impact.
 
mschmidt64 said:
Right. No one knows if next year we'll be in a position to get one.

This year, we might have any one of three who could all be classically decent.
Click to expand...

Don't kid yourself. All are classically unimpressive. This BS QB class reminds me of 2011's first round of Locker, Gabbert, and Ponder MINUS the feature star in Cam Newton and "classically decent" Andy Dalton taken in the 2nd.

Johnny Manziel is a joke in the mold of Tim Tebow but amazingly with even more hype. No one even knew who Blake Bortles was before a few months ago.

Sorry, I'll pass on any of them in the 1st. Murray in the 4th would be fine, and only then because his value is more like a second rounder.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
I don't think you understand the cap or the economics of a salary cap. You're either paying 28 mil plus the cost of backups in 2015 or you're taking a cap hit of far less then that if you cut/trade Romo and have Manziel start. Then in 2016 all of that 20 mil in dead cap space goes away. What you are proposing is far more harmful to our cap. Which one could justify if Romo's play is that much better then say Manziel.

No one is saying we have to get a QB this year. However if the right one is available there is absolutely no reason to pass on him either. You can't just assume that the right QB will be available and in next years draft. Hell some drafts don't even have a good QB in them at all.
Click to expand...

You have to factor in Romo's contract and health when selecting a new QB. If you don't, you are screwing yourself out of value already on the team. Taking a massive cap hit so early in Romo's contract is just as outrageous as keeping a 1st rounder on the bench and unable to develop a year longer than needed. Like any position, you can't figure shit about QB's unless they play and they won't get playing time unless you're "lucky" and Romo gets hurt and the youngster plays well in his place.

On top of everything else, this year lacks anyone I'd consider an elite QB prospect, and I'd expect a Rodgers-like fall from one or maybe all of them. For some reason dipshats like Locker, Gabbert, and Ponder get overhyped every year. This is another of those years.
 
No way.

All three of these QBs are leaps and bounds better than the Ponders Lockers and Gabberts of the world.
 
ravidubey said:
On top of everything else, this year lacks anyone I'd consider an elite QB prospect, and I'd expect a Rodgers-like fall from one or maybe all of them. For some reason dipshats like Locker, Gabbert, and Ponder get overhyped every year. This is another of those years.
Click to expand...

If you just don't like the QBs in this draft that is a totally different argument. I disagree with your player evaluation when it comes to all the QBs in this class but I can at least understand that point of view.
 
mschmidt64 said:
No way.

All three of these QBs are leaps and bounds better than the Ponders Lockers and Gabberts of the world.
Click to expand...

You could probably go five-six-seven deep into this class and not see a Ponder, Locker, Gabbert or especially Weeden.

It is amazing how each draft is different, but this is not a bad QB class.

It is a microwaved, warmed over, picked apart and microwaved again class.

I like almost all of them if my team needs a QB.

But it is ass backwards. You see the good ones catching shit, then you see turds like Savage and Gilbert getting uberpropped.

It is insane.
 
ravidubey said:
Don't kid yourself. All are classically unimpressive. This BS QB class reminds me of 2011's first round of Locker, Gabbert, and Ponder MINUS the feature star in Cam Newton and "classically decent" Andy Dalton taken in the 2nd.

Johnny Manziel is a joke in the mold of Tim Tebow but amazingly with even more hype. No one even knew who Blake Bortles was before a few months ago.

Sorry, I'll pass on any of them in the 1st. Murray in the 4th would be fine, and only then because his value is more like a second rounder.
Click to expand...


I think that's basically what it comes down to. If you really like a QB that is sitting at our pick, then take one. A lot of people don't love this QB class though, and we shouldn't take one just to take one.
 
I am very skeptical of Carr and Bridgewater. I don't even know what to think about Manziel. I like Bortles a lot.
 
Cleveland paid 100k for a QB survey. It came back with Bridgewater as the best of the draft class.

I know he had some awful workouts, but go back and look at the tape of him at Louisville.
 
Bridgewater is better than Manziel. I think Bridgewater is a slightly taller Russell Wilson.
 
hstour said:
Cleveland paid 100k for a QB survey. It came back with Bridgewater as the best of the draft class.

I know he had some awful workouts, but go back and look at the tape of him at Louisville.
Click to expand...

Funny, cause Cleveland had the chance to draft Bridgewater and took Manziel instead.

If they obviously don't put a whole lot of stock in whatever that report is, why should I?
 
Funny thing I heard yesterday. Bridgewater always played wearing gloves. At his pro day he wasn't wearing them.

Who was the idiot that convinced him it was better to change the way he has always done things? His agent? If so, fire that guy.
 
Genghis Khan said:
Funny, cause Cleveland had the chance to draft Bridgewater and took Manziel instead.

If they obviously don't put a whole lot of stock in whatever that report is, why should I?
Click to expand...

They are a weak franchise that fell for the hype.
 
Manziel is going to bring a lot of excitement and he caused an immediate spike in season ticket sales. In a way I think that's going to bring some energy and excitement to the football team too, it's kind of an intangible benefit, but it can happen. It seemed like the OL blocked better and the team played harder in 2006 when we first started Romo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom