Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by Gryphon, Dec 6, 2012.
Worst article I've read this year.
As someone mentioned most would be shocked at what you'd get for him.
Three solid offensive linemen for him as someone said?? Are you serious? Think about that for a minute as the trading team.
What was the last multi player trade involving a star of wares status anyway? A 2nd and a 4th is maybe what you'd get.
That said its not going to happen so why even discuss it.
yeah just how much the Patriots D was rebuilt after trading seymour- NOT
pathetic. and supposedly posted by a fan of the Cowboys. Even more pathetic.
Cap hit makes it impossible, but there is recent precedant. As mentioned, Pats traded Seymour in his prime to Oakland. Unfortunately in addition to direct salary cap implications, I don't think you'll ever get fair value in the cap era for a player like Ware.
Are you freakin kidding me????
I hope these guys don't get paid for writing this nonsense
Yes for the $7M/yr. I might even up the budget to $8M/yr but I still would not give him $10+/yr. You can't given non-elite players elite type contracts if you want to win.
If we had less superstar player salaries we'd probably be able to have more depth and build a deeper roster.
Well they have started to add some pieces with Chandler Jones and Donte Hightower.
I guess the other question would be how much better might they be with a declining Seymour who is no longer a dominant player in Oakland and still making around $14M/yr at around age 35.
Or another question; would they have won another Super bowl if they had waited another couple of years before trading Seymour when they did?
I live in Boston, the reason they traded Seymour for a 1 was because Vince Wilfork's deal was coming up and they didn't have the salary cap space to sign them both.
I agree in principle (on the elite salary part). Signing Spencer and trading Ware would make some heads explode, which would be amusing.
Generally, though, I think we've made a few mistakes on extensions for older players (eg, Ratliff), but think our bigger problem with talent comes from the donut hole after the RW trade and from spending premium picks on non premium positions like RB and TE. Had we drafted safer, we'd probably be a contending team right now.
Though, you're right that we'd be juggling more potentially big contracts, too.
a) Ware is hands down one of my 2-3 favorite Cowboys right now b) he is a stud and c) great guy and someone I like on the team
So with that said, I'm sure this will be unpopular but Ware hasn't shown up in some big games...strike that...many 4th quarters. We've had many 4th quarter let downs the last 2-3 years and he has disappeared in many of them. So the argument is..do we need more, well rounded guys vs having the stud and having him get doubled and the the D wilts down the stretch. If a deal was available and we could get good worth I'd listen. Alot of it depends on our system.
I think Romo is fully capable of leading us to a Super Bowl, I think DeMarcus Ware shows up in big games and in big moments, and I would take a bullet for Jason Witten. But if there was some sort of ridiculous opportunity to trade those guys without destroying the salary cap and get back a massive haul I could stomach it. We'd have to be talking about 4-5 first round picks and it isn't realistic that we could land what they are truly worth, but my biggest fear is that we remain consistently average. No team is ever going to be perfect but we need to get to a point where we have one major need in an offseason and can fill that with smart free agent moves while still drafting the best available player for maximum value.
Have you not seen this argument that Ware doesn't produce when it matters absolutely demolished on this very site every time it's mistakenly brought up?
I stopped when he gave Butler props for his play.
Sarcasm? I must have missed that. I'm not saying he has never shown up...i know about the NO game and some others. I'm saying when people are absolving Romo, Garrett and anyone else...they usually say that despite the turnovers, the D couldn't stop them in the 4th. Thus Ware being a part of that.
This place cracks me up. If its not Romo, its his O-line and if its not Romo or the O-line, then its the D who gave up the lead despite the turnovers from Romo. If the D did well for 3 quarters, then they should have done well for the 4th because that is when the O woke up and played after sitting dormant. It is one big circle of mediocrity where someone always has a scapegoat.
We could miss the playoffs every year just as easily without him.
I dont think teams would be willing to give up what it would take to make the trade worth doing.
It wasn't sarcasm. This is a point that gets brought up from time to time, and almost however it's sliced, Ware's an impact player who also makes his impact when it counts.
Here's the most recent exchange, and the one I was thinking of when I read your post.
I agree with the rest of your point, though, that there's a lot of misguided blame thrown around when we lose games.
Giving Jerry added premium draft picks is kinda like giving a chimpanzee a violin. :