David Arkin, anyone?

[CowboyMcCoy]

Originally Posted by TheCount

You make a strong argument.

My argument is pretty simple, honestly. I thought he showed good technique in the NFL early last year. We didn't sed much of him after that, but I liked what I saw early on. He has good awareness. You can see he has the head for the position. Physically, he appears to be a late bloomer to me. But he plays with a sense of experience. I agree that he needs to hit the weight room and probably some roids, I mean let's be real here, to come back and compete for a spot. But the player looked good. He had some good moments. And you have to consider he's young and can get better over time.

[CowboyMcCoy]

Originally Posted by J-DOG

Arkin will not be on this team next season. Free is adios as well.

He can play center and guard, so he makes for a good depth guy. That's a plus in his corner.

[burmafrd]

Originally Posted by CowboyMcCoy

My argument is pretty simple, honestly. I thought he showed good technique in the NFL early last year. We didn't sed much of him after that, but I liked what I saw early on. He has good awareness. You can see he has the head for the position. Physically, he appears to be a late bloomer to me. But he plays with a sense of experience. I agree that he needs to hit the weight room and probably some roids, I mean let's be real here, to come back and compete for a spot. But the player looked good. He had some good moments. And you have to consider he's young and can get better over time.

he has had two years to build his strength. And still nothing. and as has been pointed out NO one even on the team is talking about him. Handwriting is on the wall.

[CowboyMcCoy]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

he has had two years to build his strength. And still nothing. and as has been pointed out NO one even on the team is talking about him. Handwriting is on the wall.

Give the guy one more offseason to put his game together. He could be a late bloomer.

[Prossman]

I think they do bring arkin in and see what happens. He has had ( WHAT WILL BE) 3 offseasons to make his move. Im pulling for him, just not counting on him.

[Risen Star]

Originally Posted by Reality

To me, it really comes down to this. We need a massive improvement from the offensive line next season and keeping project offensive linemen with "maybe" potential on the roster is just not worth the gamble.

It is rare that a project offensive linemen ever develops into a dominant starter. At best, they will end up a solid starter, but the chances of that are rather slim. When you have a solid starting offensive line, you can afford to keep one or two project offensive linemen on the team, but we don't have that luxury. Now if Arkin can be put on the practice squad, then perhaps they can keep him around a little longer. Otherwise, I just don't see the Cowboys keeping him around.

/reality

Agreed. I'd rather see the Cowboys use that roster spot on another player. This is why Landry had his three year rule. You can't stick on the roster forever with potential.

[honyock]

Originally Posted by Prossman

I think they do bring arkin in and see what happens. He has had ( WHAT WILL BE) 3 offseasons to make his move. Im pulling for him, just not counting on him.

That's where I'm at with him. I had no problem with the draft pick (it wasn't a reach, he was picked about where he'd been projected to go in the draft) and have been rooting for him. But this is it for him, I can't see him being on the team if he can't make a real contribution this season.

[cowboysooner]

Originally Posted by Reality

To me, it really comes down to this. We need a massive improvement from the offensive line next season and keeping project offensive linemen with "maybe" potential on the roster is just not worth the gamble.

It is rare that a project offensive linemen ever develops into a dominant starter. At best, they will end up a solid starter, but the chances of that are rather slim. When you have a solid starting offensive line, you can afford to keep one or two project offensive linemen on the team, but we don't have that luxury. Now if Arkin can be put on the practice squad, then perhaps they can keep him around a little longer. Otherwise, I just don't see the Cowboys keeping him around.

/reality

I don't agree with that at all. No name linemen develop all the time around the league especially at the interior positions. We are just really bad at it but other places are taking fourth round and lower players who are becoming excellent players by their mid to late twenties.

[burmafrd]

Originally Posted by cowboysooner

I don't agree with that at all. No name linemen develop all the time around the league especially at the interior positions. We are just really bad at it but other places are taking fourth round and lower players who are becoming excellent players by their mid to late twenties.

it does not happen that often that lower round players become pro bowlers. Now and then but you look at the Pro Bowl Linemen over the last 10 years and you will find not many of them taken round 4 and later. Some of course but the majority- the large majority- are high round picks.

[stasheroo]

Originally Posted by Ultimategamer5567

My hope is that they draft Barrett Jones. When was the last time Dallas had a good center again? Yeah.

Second!

[stasheroo]

Originally Posted by Prossman

I think they do bring arkin in and see what happens. He has had ( WHAT WILL BE) 3 offseasons to make his move. Im pulling for him, just not counting on him.

I have no problem letting him stick around for the offseason and compete.

I just don't want his presence to affect decision-making in any way on the subject of the offensive line, including the eternally-optimistic and ever-mistaken owner's appraisal of the situation.

[cowboysooner]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

it does not happen that often that lower round players become pro bowlers. Now and then but you look at the Pro Bowl Linemen over the last 10 years and you will find not many of them taken round 4 and later. Some of course but the majority- the large majority- are high round picks.

There were eight last year and seven this year. It is about 40% of the group and some of the pro bowl is self fulfilling draft profesy. Ie pouncey is good because that is the only center fans have heard of.


Especially at the interior spots it is math. There are 156 opening day starters and about 3-5 top two round picks per year.

[burmafrd]

Originally Posted by cowboysooner

There were eight last year and seven this year. It is about 40% of the group and some of the pro bowl is self fulfilling draft profesy. Ie pouncey is good because that is the only center fans have heard of.


Especially at the interior spots it is math. There are 156 opening day starters and about 3-5 top two round picks per year.

and some of them that were low round picks are also there on inertia.

and I did point out to look at the last 10 years not the last couple

[xwalker]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

it does not happen that often that lower round players become pro bowlers. Now and then but you look at the Pro Bowl Linemen over the last 10 years and you will find not many of them taken round 4 and later. Some of course but the majority- the large majority- are high round picks.

I reviewed the Pro Bowl rosters over the past 10 years. There are 6 selections at OG per year including the alternates.

The average number of R4 and lower OGs in the Pro Bowl over the past 10 years is 20%. That is slightly more than 1 of the 6 Pro Bowl spots per year on average. There have been 3 in some years and zero in other years.

The average number of OGs selected in R1-R3 over the past 10 years is ~8 per year. This includes players listed as OT and OC that moved to OG in the NFL. If you conservatively estimate that good players should play at least 5 years, then there would be 5x8=40 OGs in the league in any given year that were originally drafted in rounds 1-3. Note, this is an estimate. Some will get cut before 5 years, but many will play longer than 5 years.

If 5 R1-R3 OGs make the Pro Bowl, then that is 5 of 40 or 12.5%.

Summary:
20% of Pro Bowl Guards were drafted in R4 or later.

12.5% of available R1-R3 Guards are selected to the Pro Bowl.

Other:
The Pro Bowl is probably not the best method of determining the success of players in general. If a team gets a multi-year starter in R4 or later, I would consider that a successful draft pick.

.

[burmafrd]

Originally Posted by xwalker

I reviewed the Pro Bowl rosters over the past 10 years. There are 6 selections at OG per year including the alternates.

The average number of R4 and lower OGs in the Pro Bowl over the past 10 years is 20%. That is slightly more than 1 of the 6 Pro Bowl spots per year on average. There have been 3 in some years and zero in other years.

The average number of OGs selected in R1-R3 over the past 10 years is ~8 per year. This includes players listed as OT and OC that moved to OG in the NFL. If you conservatively estimate that good players should play at least 5 years, then there would be 5x8=40 OGs in the league in any given year that were originally drafted in rounds 1-3. Note, this is an estimate. Some will get cut before 5 years, but many will play longer than 5 years.

If 5 R1-R3 OGs make the Pro Bowl, then that is 5 of 40 or 12.5%.

Summary:
20% of Pro Bowl Guards were drafted in R4 or later.

[View Full Quote]12.5% of available R1-R3 Guards are selected to the Pro Bowl.

Other:
The Pro Bowl is probably not the best method of determining the success of players in general. If a team gets a multi-year starter in R4 or later, I would consider that a successful draft pick.

.

someone like Kosier is fine with me. So by that measure yes.