Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by SALADIN, Mar 18, 2006.
If you had a to chose one of the two, which one would it be and why?
I say Julian Peterson because he is more willing to learn than Lavar Arrington..
Arrington free lances too much with no instincts.. Lavar isn't no L.T.
I would rather have Arrington, but with a contract like TOs. If he won't stop freelancing Dallas could cut all ties without being tied down to a huge signing bonus. That contract would also ensure he sticks to his assigments. He and Ware would have great pass rush potential.
I'd take Peterson because of the versatility he brings, but if we got either I'd officaily homer out and start predicting SB victories and stuff.
Lavar is a slob
Julian Peterson all day, because he's not a head case like Lavar and would be open to playing in a Cowboys uniform.
Peterson can be a pretty good player in this defense.
Lavar can be a Hall of Famer.
Lavar's supposed freelancing is overblown. If it was really that much of a problem, why is Marv Lewis trying to bring him to Cincy? Julian Peterson is no rocket scientist either. Dude scored a 5 on his Wonderlic.
J. Peterson, 2 reasons, very good player and has NEVER been a redskin.
I tend to agree InmanR.
How long has it been since the Cowboys had that young, explosive, catalytic player.
I like Peterson a lot, but if B.P. can real Arrington in, the skys the limmit for him. He's never had a coach who knows more about the LB position than Parcells.
If he scored a -2 on that test, I wouldn't care, as long as he can smash QBs and RBs.
Ok I live in the DC area and Lavar is almost as bad as TO when it comes to his head games. He hides barbs in comments to the media about coaching, he doesn't take responsibility for his actions on the field. He still thinks he is in college ball where he can leap over the line and cream the quarterback, as much as I love RW our defense doesn't need another liability on the field.
Julian Peterson definately.
I dislike LaVar and he said he does not want to be a Cowboy. Plus Lavar would break the bank.
Irrelavant. Lavar does not want to play here.
I think that LaVar is a better all around LB but Peterson is probably a better fit. The main reason is because Peterson would play OLB while LaVar is an ILB. I would love to have both, but we just signed the J-Ville ILB and we are in need of someone to take over Singleton's OLB spot (especially is he is not healthy yet).
Anyways, I hope that we can keep Larry Allen, get 1-2 more decent to good LB's, a GOOD kicker (VERY important!) and a Saftey to compliment Roy Williams (again, VERY important). If we can get these things "fixed" ASAP and through the draft, then I truely think that the Cowboys will be a MAJOR factor in the NFC and will make a REAL run at the Super Bowl in 2006...
... of course there are still other factors to worry about like team chemenstry AND the ever-annoying injury bug
He's been an OLB his whole career, and his style of play would be perfect as an OLB in the 3-4.
That said, I don't want him.
Arrington and Peterson have two different styles of play. I have never thought Arrington was as good as his hype and think that Peterson would fit our defense better anyway. I remember watching a 49ers game (wife is a fan) and watched Peterson cover the slot receiver and pick the pass. The thing is, this wasn't a slant or anything, he actually had to turn and run with the receiver. Granted he didn't do much of that in his career, averaging 1 pick a year, but that play stuck out in my mind. Personally between Arrington and Peterson's injuries and issues, I say pass on both unless the contract is Cowboy friendly.
OOOPS, sorry about that... my fault.
In that case, I say TAKE ARRINGTON... he is a monster. If the Cowboys go with Peterson though, I wouldn't be too upset. Either way, if we can get 1 of these 2 guys, it would be better than what we have there now to play opposite of D.Ware. Singleton is still not 100% off his injury and he never really stood out in our 3-4 defense.