Arkin revisited (again) - Page 2 - Dallas Cowboys Forum

burmafrd · 03-03-2013

Arkin is I guess an example of the idea that small school players sometimes remain small school players.

I had hoped that since his school had no W/T program that he would be able to get strong enough to become a good starter.

However it looks like he is only good for making OTHER small school players look bad.

speedkilz88 · 03-03-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by xwalker

The guarantee really makes no difference at this point. They paid him less than it would cost to keep a rookie 7th round draft pick on the roster.

If they drafted an OLineman in the 7th round and kept his on the roster all year, he would probably have had the exact same contribution as Leary, yet nobody would complain about it.

Caleb McSurdy 2012:
390K base salary
59K signing bonus

Ron Leary 2012:
390K base salary
9K signing bonus

And if some other team would have signed him to their roster when the cowboys moved him to the pratice squad anything the other team paid him would have lowered the guaranteed money by that amount I believe. It was a pretty shrewd move imo.

jjktkk · 03-03-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCount

You can add Arkin to the long list of guys we've pinned out hopes and dreams to. I suspect Leary will soon join that list as well. Good thing we made him the highest paid UDFA in NFL history.

Yea, the Leary signing probably will set the franchise back for years.

jjktkk · 03-03-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCount

Glad Robert Brewster still has some supporters in the house.

You misspelled Arkin. How do you get "Robert Brewster" out of Arkin, unless your trying to make a point for your agenda?

jjktkk · 03-03-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelWinicki

This is the year for Arkin, one way or another.

Exactly. The 3 year, evaulation rule for players.

burmafrd · 03-03-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjktkk

You misspelled Arkin. How do you get "Robert Brewster" out of Arkin, unless your trying to make a point for your agenda?

Arkin is Brewster part deux

Though from some that been said here Brewster's problem was apparently more mental

Erik_H · 03-03-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by burmafrd

Arkin is Brewster part deux

Though from some that been said here Brewster's problem was apparently more mental

Actually, Arkin may be James Marten part tré. However, when we drafted Arkin, we know he'd be a redshirt and need to develop. THe lockout kinda messed with that his first year. It would have been nice to see something out of him after the first off season but there's still a chance he can make the leap this year. He won't get a pass this year if he doesn't show something significant though.

I always keep an open mind through 3 years. This is his third year, so it's fish or cut bait time.

Verdict · 03-03-2013

I hope Arkin becomes the next Miles Austin. He didn"t see the field for a couple of years either. Arkin is an interesting case study. We spent a 4th rounder on him, and I am sure we believed he would be somewhat of a project player. I am ok with that thought process. However, you would think that he would have contributed last year since our line play was pretty bad. Yet he didn't get a whiff of the field.

You would think that if he was a 4th round player he would at least get some decent playing time in year two with the need at offensive guard and center was as dire as it was. You would also think that if he couldn't play last year with such bad line play that he would be gone.

The fact that Arkin is still around under those circumstances suggests that:

1. They must see some serious potential in Arkin to be a major contributor and starter at some point.
2. Alternatively, they don"t want to admit that they made a mistake drafting him in the 4th round.
3. Another possibility is that they just didn't value his roster spot last year and felt like that they couldn't put it to better use.

I would think option 1 or 2 is the most likely since option 3 would be prett hard to believe.

. I find it very hard to believe that it was our intention to draft him in the 4th round and not expect him to get a whiff of the field until the third year. You could probably get a guy that has great upside and can play at a high level (like Romo and Austin) that wont see the field until year three as UDFA"s.

Eskimo · 03-03-2013

There's no point in cutting him now.

For whatever reason, the staff believed in him enough to give him a second redshirt year where they put him on the roster with almost no intention of ever letting him see the field.

If he can't make it on the club as a legitimate backup at Center/Guard we can't afford to give him another redshirt year and we need to move on. 3 years in the NFL working with world class trainers/nutritionists/coaches is long enough to at least become a competent backup.

TheCount · 03-03-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjktkk

You misspelled Arkin. How do you get "Robert Brewster" out of Arkin, unless your trying to make a point for your agenda?

I actually was going to write a real response to this till I saw the agenda nonsense. Grow up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eskimo

There's no point in cutting him now.

You're right. I really don't see the point in cutting him at this point, we're desperate for OL help. I wouldn't cut any of the OL currently under contract.

**jobberone** · 03-03-2013

All u can do is try to provide enough competition at a position and hope someone emerges. I wouldn't get hung up about draft status or money. It's not unusual for an OL to take time to develop. He needs to make a move this year.

TheRat · 03-03-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verdict

I haven't heard anything about Arkin in this offseason but we have kept him around for some reason. He hasn't played at all. Could he be like Austin who seemed to come out of nowhere to contribute, or will he be cut prior to the start of the season like I expect him to be?

If they don't expect him to be a major contributor this year why keep him on the roster?

Why would you cut a player that costs you next to nothing?

Eskimo · 03-03-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verdict

I hope Arkin becomes the next Miles Austin. He didn"t see the field for a couple of years either. Arkin is an interesting case study. We spent a 4th rounder on him, and I am sure we believed he would be somewhat of a project player. I am ok with that thought process. However, you would think that he would have contributed last year since our line play was pretty bad. Yet he didn't get a whiff of the field.

You would think that if he was a 4th round player he would at least get some decent playing time in year two with the need at offensive guard and center was as dire as it was. You would also think that if he couldn't play last year with such bad line play that he would be gone.

The fact that Arkin is still around under those circumstances suggests that:

1. They must see some serious potential in Arkin to be a major contributor and starter at some point.
[View Full Quote]

They really must have had a pretty bad feeling about Arkin's play last year since they chose to put Dockery and Cook out there over him.

I think they like his feet and tenacity. He just can't seem to anchor at all against the big uglies. I hope he has added the needed strength this offseason but I am skeptical due to the lack of gain after his first offseason which is where most guys make the quantum leap in strength.

Erik_H · 03-03-2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eskimo

They really must have had a pretty bad feeling about Arkin's play last year since they chose to put Dockery and Cook out there over him.

I think they like his feet and tenacity. He just can't seem to anchor at all against the big uglies. I hope he has added the needed strength this offseason but I am skeptical due to the lack of gain after his first offseason which is where most guys make the quantum leap in strength.

I expected a little more after the offseason as well, but it is possible that the total lack of an initial rookie offseason played a part.

Everyone knew he'd be a developmental guy and we wouldn't get much return until year 3 (that's kinda what developmental means). So even though he really seems behind right now, he can still be on schedule if we get something out of him next year.

If he doesn't show something significant by the end of training camp, he'll be gone and it will have been a bust of a pick. But if the timeframe was 3 years, then I'm willing to give 3 years and withhold judgement until then.

burmafrd · 03-03-2013

in a way it might be a good sign no one on the staff is talking about Arkin.

Everyone they have loved have frankly stank up the place.