Cowboys breaking the bank is a bad idea

[Verdict]

I know there is a lot of talk about the Cowboys freeing up room to sign free agents such as Spencer. Personally, I think it is a mistake to break the bank to sign any free agents, except Romo, and if we resign him, his cap hit should actually go down.

I have heard (and rightly so) that the Cowboys have been doing a much better job drafting lately. But it appears that the same people who are saying that don't think that Crawford can be penciled in as the starter at DT or DE? How can drafting him been a good thing if he can't start this year with the losses of Brent and maybe Ratliff and probably Spencer and Hatcher (isn't he a free agent)?

If he was such a great draft pick, why can't we save the massive cap hit resigning Spencer will cause?

I think we could probably sign one upper end free agent (Spencer or OL) without totally wrecking our cap, but I would rather us let Spencer walk and get a comp pick next year (probably a 3rd rounder). Personally, I would rather pay an offensive lineman if one that we deem worthy of paying is available rather than Spencer. You don't overpay for solid players, which is what Spencer is.

[jday]

Originally Posted by Verdict

I know there is a lot of talk about the Cowboys freeing up room to sign free agents such as Spencer. Personally, I think it is a mistake to break the bank to sign any free agents, except Romo, and if we resign him, his cap hit should actually go down.

I have heard (and rightly so) that the Cowboys have been doing a much better job drafting lately. But it appears that the same people who are saying that don't think that Crawford can be penciled in as the starter at DT or DE? How can drafting him been a good thing if he can't start this year with the losses of Brent and maybe Ratliff and probably Spencer and Hatcher (isn't he a free agent)?

If he was such a great draft pick, why can't we save the massive cap hit resigning Spencer will cause?

[View Full Quote]I think we could probably sign one upper end free agent (Spencer or OL) without totally wrecking our cap, but I would rather us let Spencer walk and get a comp pick next year (probably a 3rd rounder). Personally, I would rather pay an offensive lineman if one that we deem worthy of paying is available rather than Spencer. You don't overpay for solid players, which is what Spencer is.

What worries me the most about Spencer is his age and the question mark of the player he becomes after he get's the money.

[Idgit]

Resigning Spencer is almost entirely a matter of the price tag for me. He's a very good player, and he'll be very good for at least three more years. If they can get the deal done and stay within what they've slotted for the position group, that's fine with me. I think they probably won't be able to match the market for him, though, and I expect him to be gone.

I think Crawford can readily play DE in the 4-3 under base defense. I think the team believes so, too. Losing Spencer, though, pretty much means we have to go DT in round one, though, because we'll have lost a lot of depth to the defensive front (Spencer, Spears, Brent, Coleman). With Ratliff's injury concerns, we'll need to add value veteran FAs and a high pick to make the front work. In the face of that, it's hard to let a home-grown quality 4-3 DE just walk if you don't absolutely have to.

[DBOY3141]

I think regardless of Spencer, they will focus on DT. Kiffin needs that disruptive force in the middle.

I would not re-sign Spencer. I use the money to fix the OL and shore up some depth in other areas.

OL
Safety
LB

Between Ware, Hatcher, Lissemore, Crawford, Ratliff, Price, and a couple of draft picks we can have a decent DL.

Our OL is garbage regardless of what JJ thinks.

[Risen Star]

You just can't pay two over 30 DEs big money. Spencer will be 30 in the 2nd year of the new deal. It's a bad contract waiting to happen.

Quit getting caught up in the thinking that there isn't life after a semi-productive player like Spencer. There is and it doesn't involve cap hell.

[Risen Star]

Originally Posted by DBOY3141

I think regardless of Spencer, they will focus on DT. Kiffin needs that disruptive force in the middle.

I would not re-sign Spencer. I use the money to fix the OL and shore up some depth in other areas.

OL
Safety
LB

Between Ware, Hatcher, Lissemore, Crawford, Ratliff, Price, and a couple of draft picks we can have a decent DL.

Our OL is garbage regardless of what JJ thinks.

That's been the problem. Decent at best DL, pitiful OL. You can't win that way.

People try to cherry pick and say this team won with a not so great line, but they didn't win with both lines lacking talent.

[Dhragon]

Originally Posted by Idgit

I think Crawford can readily play DE in the 4-3 under base defense. I think the team believes so, too. Losing Spencer, though, pretty much means we have to go DT in round one, though, because we'll have lost a lot of depth to the defensive front (Spencer, Spears, Brent, Coleman). With Ratliff's injury concerns, we'll need to add value veteran FAs and a high pick to make the front work. In the face of that, it's hard to let a home-grown quality 4-3 DE just walk if you don't absolutely have to.

I disagree you HAVE to go DT in the first round if Spencer isn't resigned. Why is it a MUST to have a 1st round DT instead of a 2nd or 3rd rounder but okay to continually have O-line (which is worse than D-Line IMO even if no Spencer or Rat) not be the priority.

The Cowboys will indeed probably go DT over OL, I've come to grips with that. But I sure would be pleasantly surprised if they FINALLY gave the proper attention to the O-line and quit trying to fix it cheaply (which has been failing for years now).

[DFWJC]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

That's been the problem. Decent at best DL, pitiful OL. You can't win that way.

People try to cherry pick and say this team won with a not so great line, but they didn't win with both lines lacking talent.

They really have a great opportunity to finally address it (both lines) this offseason.
If they just play this right this franchise can finally get back on on track..and in a hurry.

I fear if they miss big this offseason, this thing is really going to be n trouble for many more years to come.
The opportunity is right there for them...can't ask for more.

[xwalker]

Originally Posted by Idgit

Resigning Spencer is almost entirely a matter of the price tag for me. He's a very good player, and he'll be very good for at least three more years. If they can get the deal done and stay within what they've slotted for the position group, that's fine with me. I think they probably won't be able to match the market for him, though, and I expect him to be gone.

I think Crawford can readily play DE in the 4-3 under base defense. I think the team believes so, too. Losing Spencer, though, pretty much means we have to go DT in round one, though, because we'll have lost a lot of depth to the defensive front (Spencer, Spears, Brent, Coleman). With Ratliff's injury concerns, we'll need to add value veteran FAs and a high pick to make the front work. In the face of that, it's hard to let a home-grown quality 4-3 DE just walk if you don't absolutely have to.

I would prefer Crawford at Strong-Side DE. There should be multiple options for a Nickel pass-rushing specialist to take snaps at SDE in the Nickel defense where playing the run is a minimal occurrence.

Nickel Pass Rusher at SDE:
Kyle Wilber
Victor Butler

How about a 33-year old Dwight Freeney to be a pass-rush specialist? How big of a contract can Freeney really expect to get at 33 years old? Maybe 3 Million?

[Verdict]

I think resigning Spencer means that we don't have a gaping hole at his position, but not an elite player. Will Crawford really be a downgrade, and if so how much? Is it possible that Crawford will actually be better than Spencer?

We have to trust these draft picks to play at some point. That is the nature of the beast in the NFL.

We should be able to fill four holes with our first four picks. We should get three guys who are capable of starting out of our first four picks. It would be very easy to get a starter at guard, safety and probably right tackle, center or both out of this draft.

[conner01]

Originally Posted by Dhragon

I disagree you HAVE to go DT in the first round if Spencer isn't resigned. Why is it a MUST to have a 1st round DT instead of a 2nd or 3rd rounder but okay to continually have O-line (which is worse than D-Line IMO even if no Spencer or Rat) not be the priority.

The Cowboys will indeed probably go DT over OL, I've come to grips with that. But I sure would be pleasantly surprised if they FINALLY gave the proper attention to the O-line and quit trying to fix it cheaply (which has been failing for years now).

i don't know that you have to have a dt if spencer is'nt signed, seems like you would need a de. but as for dline over oline the answer is simple. there are alot more 3rd rnd guards making an impact in the nfl than 3rd rnd dt's or de's for that mattter. this draft is full of oline guys and all the way down to the 3rd rnd you can get players capable of starting in the nfl. i don't think the same can be said for de or dt

[xwalker]

Originally Posted by conner01

i don't know that you have to have a dt if spencer is'nt signed, seems like you would need a de. but as for dline over oline the answer is simple. there are alot more 3rd rnd guards making an impact in the nfl than 3rd rnd dt's or de's for that mattter. this draft is full of oline guys and all the way down to the 3rd rnd you can get players capable of starting in the nfl. i don't think the same can be said for de or dt

DT Geno Atkins: round 4

DT Henry Melton: round 4

DT Brandon Mebane: round 3

[Beast_from_East]

Its hard to let a double digit sack guy just walk out the door, especially considering he is the only other pass rush threat we have besides Ware.

If the backup plan is to put Crawford there and "hope for the best", well that doesnt sound like much of a strategy to me. That sounds more like desperation that we really dont have any plan B and will just throw something out there and hope it is not a disaster.

Besides, if we had no plans to sign Spencer long term, why the hell didnt we let him walk last year and use his franchise tag money to get a quality free agent OL in free agency?

Make no sense the way we did it if we indeed let him walk, just total mismanagement by the front office.



My .02 for what it is worth.

[Wood]

Originally Posted by Verdict

I know there is a lot of talk about the Cowboys freeing up room to sign free agents such as Spencer. Personally, I think it is a mistake to break the bank to sign any free agents, except Romo, and if we resign him, his cap hit should actually go down.

I have heard (and rightly so) that the Cowboys have been doing a much better job drafting lately. But it appears that the same people who are saying that don't think that Crawford can be penciled in as the starter at DT or DE? How can drafting him been a good thing if he can't start this year with the losses of Brent and maybe Ratliff and probably Spencer and Hatcher (isn't he a free agent)?

If he was such a great draft pick, why can't we save the massive cap hit resigning Spencer will cause?

[View Full Quote]I think we could probably sign one upper end free agent (Spencer or OL) without totally wrecking our cap, but I would rather us let Spencer walk and get a comp pick next year (probably a 3rd rounder). Personally, I would rather pay an offensive lineman if one that we deem worthy of paying is available rather than Spencer. You don't overpay for solid players, which is what Spencer is.

of course its a mistake..but since when has that gotten in the way of Dallas making a decision. The biggest problem is not Spencers money...its all the other players contracts Dallas will need to restructure and lead to more massive dead money hits to cap in next 5 years when Salary Cap limits are not expected to rise. Its big problem going forward. But for some strange reason Dallas thinks they are close again.

[jobberone]

Originally Posted by Beast_from_East

Its hard to let a double digit sack guy just walk out the door, especially considering he is the only other pass rush threat we have besides Ware.

If the backup plan is to put Crawford there and "hope for the best", well that doesnt sound like much of a strategy to me. That sounds more like desperation that we really dont have any plan B and will just throw something out there and hope it is not a disaster.

Besides, if we had no plans to sign Spencer long term, why the hell didnt we let him walk last year and use his franchise tag money to get a quality free agent OL in free agency?

Make no sense the way we did it if we indeed let him walk, just total mismanagement by the front office.



My .02 for what it is worth.

Good points. Depends on what they think of a replacement for Spencer vs his cost and all the cap consequences that roll with it. If Crawford and another can play that position then they should let him go. His agent has made some noise that perhaps he's staying FWIW (not much).