Bob Sturm: Cowboys needs match with draft strengths

[WoodysGirl]

February 25, 2013

If you fancy yourself a nerd/student of the NFL Draft, this qualifies as a fun time in the process as the NFL Combine is in full swing in Indianapolis. For those of us who have been doing this for a long time, it is amazing how the entire combine is now televised from front to back on the NFL Network, as less than a decade ago, there was nothing on TV from this once-secret event.

Now, though, we can lay our eyes on each of these players for just about every drill that they run in the so-called "underwear olympics" and when you combine this with looking at readily available college footage, you can actually get a pretty good profile of each of these players without working for your local NFL team.

As we enter the 2013 Draft season, just know that for once, the Dallas Cowboys have a unique opportunity that puts them in a rather odd spot. That is, they have their full allotment of picks (aside from their 7th rounder) and more importantly, are taking part in a draft where their primary needs match up wonderfully with the primary strengths in this draft class.

The 2013 draft - as any draft that has taken place in decades - is loaded with NFL talent that should populate the league for years to come. But, what makes it slightly different than the last few is that there is no real lock-down on who the top 5 picks are so far. It seems that this one might be a more evenly laid out draft in that beauty will be in the eye of the beholder instead of there being a no-brainer best player or players at the very top that teams are pondering a trade to go get.

Read the rest: http://www.foxsportssouthwest.com/02...69&feedID=3799

[Randy White]

I have with this article, which is pretty accurate otherwise, is this:

The trouble is that we are not going to assume that the Cowboys recognize that they have offensive line problems since they clearly have not gone out of their way to fix it on draft day for years and years. Tyron Smith is merely one pick in dozens, and given that there are 5 spots on the line, it has been horribly ignored in the last several off-seasons.

The Cowboys HAVE gone out of the way to fix the O-line. In fact, offensive line and LB have been the two positions where the most picks have been invested since perhaps the 2001 draft.

Now, that most of the decisions made in terms of personnel haven't worked out is without a doubt a fair and accurate criticism.

It's not the resources that's the problem, it's the evaluation.

[Idgit]

Originally Posted by Randy White

I have with this article, which is pretty accurate otherwise, is this:

The trouble is that we are not going to assume that the Cowboys recognize that they have offensive line problems since they clearly have not gone out of their way to fix it on draft day for years and years. Tyron Smith is merely one pick in dozens, and given that there are 5 spots on the line, it has been horribly ignored in the last several off-seasons.

The Cowboys HAVE gone out of the way to fix the O-line. In fact, offensive line and LB have been the two positions where the most picks have been invested since perhaps the 2001 draft.

Now, that most of the decisions made in terms of personnel haven't worked out is without a doubt a fair and accurate criticism.

It's not the resources that's the problem, it's the evaluation.

I have the same nit to pick with it, but, really, at the end of the day, the point's the same (I'm sure you'd agree). Whatever we've done, it's the most obvious weakness on the team, and we should do more to make sure it's address properly this offseason.

[Randy White]

Originally Posted by Idgit

I have the same nit to pick with it, but, really, at the end of the day, the point's the same (I'm sure you'd agree). Whatever we've done, it's the most obvious weakness on the team, and we should do more to make sure it's address properly this offseason.

Without a doubt.

I don't know if it's the O-line's coach who's input is heavily considered, or scouts just missing on their evaluation, but something has to change.

Now, keep in mind, it's not as if the Cowboys back in the glory days of the early 90's where masters at it either. Most of the O-linemen that became " stars " in those days were actually castoffs or near busts before ( Nate, Tui, Gogan, Donalson, Gesek ) and out of the drafts choices spent only 3 worked out ( Step, Big E, and LA ). The BIG 3 made alot of people look good.

This is not necessarily a new problem.

[dart]

nothing new here

at least earth shattering

I guess I ought to become a writer

[Chuck 54]

First 3 picks, based on draft depth and our needs, should produce one starter or contributor at each of the following positions. Any order will do, depending on whether one of the top guys slips in round one.

DL - OL - S

Any thought of taking multiple OL early is foolish. You need some continuity for success. I'd be okay taking a second OL player in rounds 4-6, but this draft looks to me like we could get starters at DL, OL, and S with our first three picks.

[CoCo]

Originally Posted by Chuck 54

First 3 picks, based on draft depth and our needs, should produce one starter or contributor at each of the following positions. Any order will do, depending on whether one of the top guys slips in round one.

DL - OL - S

Any thought of taking multiple OL early is foolish. You need some continuity for success. I'd be okay taking a second OL player in rounds 4-6, but this draft looks to me like we could get starters at DL, OL, and S with our first three picks.

When cooler heads prevail (agendas absent) the bold is a pretty commonly held belief. Yet it's rarely discussed in the Cowboys recent year struggles. The 2012 O-line had exactly ZERO continuity with its predominant starters (Tyron, Livings, Cook, Bernadeau, Free) from the previous year. The interior players weren't on the team in 2011. The tackles, flipped sides.

Somewhere I suspect that this made the group less effective than they'd otherwise have been in 2012. Not suggesting it was the primary factor at all - but it likely was a factor.

[JeffInDC]

Originally Posted by Randy White

I have with this article, which is pretty accurate otherwise, is this:

The trouble is that we are not going to assume that the Cowboys recognize that they have offensive line problems since they clearly have not gone out of their way to fix it on draft day for years and years. Tyron Smith is merely one pick in dozens, and given that there are 5 spots on the line, it has been horribly ignored in the last several off-seasons.

The Cowboys HAVE gone out of the way to fix the O-line. In fact, offensive line and LB have been the two positions where the most picks have been invested since perhaps the 2001 draft.

Now, that most of the decisions made in terms of personnel haven't worked out is without a doubt a fair and accurate criticism.

It's not the resources that's the problem, it's the evaluation.

Agreed. This is all about Jerry trying to go cheap. As you may have noticed, MOST OF THOSE PICKS came from the 3rd Round and later. San Fran has maybe the best O-line in the league (they can run and pass block). They have 3 1st Rounders. Go figure.

[Alexander]

Originally Posted by Randy White

In fact, offensive line and LB have been the two positions where the most picks have been invested since perhaps the 2001 draft.

This is debateable.

Since the 2001 draft, here is what we have drafted by position.

CB - 17 choices
OLB - 9
WR - 8
OT - 8
OG - 7
ILB - 6
C - 3

We have spent almost as many choices at cornerback alone than the offensive line. In fact, if you add in safeties, we have 22 choices in the defensive backfield.

Now, that most of the decisions made in terms of personnel haven't worked out is without a doubt a fair and accurate criticism.

It's not the resources that's the problem, it's the evaluation.

It is a compounded problem. We have been drafting poorly on the offensive line and it has made us spend more in free agency to compensate for the weakness.

[Idgit]

Originally Posted by CoCo

When cooler heads prevail (agendas absent) the bold is a pretty commonly held belief. Yet it's rarely discussed in the Cowboys recent year struggles. The 2012 O-line had exactly ZERO continuity with its predominant starters (Tyron, Livings, Cook, Bernadeau, Free) from the previous year. The interior players weren't on the team in 2011. The tackles, flipped sides.

Somewhere I suspect that this made the group less effective than they'd otherwise have been in 2012. Not suggesting it was the primary factor at all - but it likely was a factor.

Yep. I think it was a *huge* issue for the OL. Especially because the problems at C exacerbated all of the miscommunication. Early on, it was the cause of the false starts and a lot of the blown protections. It's also the reason why Mack looked so bad early--his surgery and limited reps right before being elevated into the starter's role. I think the team's counting on at least having continuity with most of its starters at least competing for snaps. We should cut Free and pickup a VFA RT (not sure we're going to do that, but we should). Then draft an OG relatively high, move Mack to C to compete directly with Costa for the starting job. Let Leary push Livings and the VFA fight Parnell for that job. That way, if we end up changing personnel, it'll be because we think it represents a legitimate upgrade. In all likelihood, we'll just end up with Costa back in the lineup (I consider that continuity, of sorts), Parnell at RT, and one new player starting at OG. If that new player is, say, Jonathan Cooper, I think that's an OL that can be effective for us almost immediately. And there'd be depth across the board. On game days, you'd have the option of only activating 7 OLs if you wanted/needed to.

[DanteEXT]

Originally Posted by JeffInDC

Agreed. This is all about Jerry trying to go cheap. As you may have noticed, MOST OF THOSE PICKS came from the 3rd Round and later. San Fran has maybe the best O-line in the league (they can run and pass block). They have 3 1st Rounders. Go figure.

Helps when you have 15 draft picks in the 1st round since 2001. Tell me again how many 1st round picks were manning the OL in '92?

[jrumann59]

Originally Posted by Alexander

This is debateable.

Since the 2001 draft, here is what we have drafted by position.

CB - 17 choices
OLB - 9
WR - 8
OT - 8
OG - 7
ILB - 6
C - 3

We have spent almost as many choices at cornerback alone than the offensive line. In fact, if you add in safeties, we have 22 choices in the defensive backfield.



It is a compounded problem. We have been drafting poorly on the offensive line and it has made us spend more in free agency to compensate for the weakness.

Since 2001 we had stalwarts, Flozell, LA, Gurode and Kosier to a degree, we had FA fill ins for a few years like Bigg and Colombo we only have had a OL need the last 4 years. We only recently had to fill multiple holes at the saem time on the OL.

Since 2001 we had a revolving door at all CB positions until T-New, then much later Jenkins, O-Scan

[DFWJC]

Originally Posted by Randy White

I have with this article, which is pretty accurate otherwise, is this:

The trouble is that we are not going to assume that the Cowboys recognize that they have offensive line problems since they clearly have not gone out of their way to fix it on draft day for years and years. Tyron Smith is merely one pick in dozens, and given that there are 5 spots on the line, it has been horribly ignored in the last several off-seasons.

The Cowboys HAVE gone out of the way to fix the O-line. In fact, offensive line and LB have been the two positions where the most picks have been invested since perhaps the 2001 draft.

Now, that most of the decisions made in terms of personnel haven't worked out is without a doubt a fair and accurate criticism.

It's not the resources that's the problem, it's the evaluation.

I agree that evaluation has been horrid over the past 10-12 years on oline.

But has someone broken this down by draft picks and position? That would interesting to see.

I assume, since there are 5 oline positions out of 22 starters, we should be picking an olineman every 4th pick or so to be keeping up with the other positions.
I guess adding weight to where player was picked would be a good idea too.

[DanteEXT]

Originally Posted by DFWJC

I agree that evaluation has been horrid over the past 10-12 years on oline.

But has someone broken this down by draft picks and position? That would interesting to see.

I assume, since there are 5 oline positions out of 22 starters, we should be picking an olineman every 4th pick or so to be keeping up with the other positions.
I guess adding weight to where player was picked would be a good idea too.

I wrote this down earlier, no positions though:

5th in 2001
2nd in 2003
2nd and 3rd in 2004
6th in 2005
7th in 2006
3rd in 2007
3rd in 2009
6th in 2010
1st-4th-7th in 2011.

Think there was like 96 picks since 2001. 62 of the picks have been after the 3rd. That would be 65% of their picks. Don't know if that number is much different from any other team in the league though.