Some pre-combine, pre-fa thoughts!

[Cowboyny]

I doubt you get that. You will probably get Odighizuwa/Replacement, top 70 pick, and Mazi as your main rotation guys. And Rodgers and/or someone else of of his ilk as a niche/depth/development guy

I want osa or his replacement and a Hankins type in fa. If they want to fix this area, need to spend

 

[Cowboyny]

I just think in that scenario you’re improving one weakness and then allowing allowing another weakness to get weaker.

We should be talking about trying to fix both but we know the Jones won’t spend that kind of money:

That is the issue. Fine with OSA in a rotation, but there is nothing behind him and my fear is if they sign him to a huge extension, they won’t make the position a draft priority cause of so many other holes

 

[gimmesix]

They both are solid, physical type backs, but neither is considered elite. I want either Hampton or Johnson the most, but there are some others later on that can fit this type of back as well

They can, but the problem is success rate. The longer you wait, the more likely you are to miss on a player. RB isn't a position where we can afford to miss. There may be great ones you can find throughout the draft, but there are also bad ones you can end up with as well. Sure that can happen earlier in the draft, but the chances are lower.

What I prefer is to draft a back early and draft another one late, increasing the chances that we find a back who can get the job done.

 

[gimmesix]

As I have previously said, we don’t need a blue chip rb to be successful in these new rushing scheme. Such a deep position this yr, but we cannot say that about wr. If we want an impactful one, probably going to have to plug the trigger in td 1

I think you may be giving too much credit to the scheme and not enough to the players. Any scheme is only as good as its players. A starting RB that defenses have to view as a threat is one of my main priorities this year. We need a player who pulls defenders into the box to stop him to open up the passing game. Sure, scheme and blockers can make a back better, but an inferior back is an inferior back no matter the scheme. Barkley wasn't great because of Philadelphia's scheme and blockers. Everyone already knew what he could do and getting in the right scheme with a quality line put it on full display. Same with Henry. We do not need to skimp at RB.

 

[Mr_437]

We do not need to skimp at RB.

You consider 3rd round too late?

 

[gimmesix]

You consider 3rd round too late?

For a bona fide starter? Yes. Doesn't mean you can't find one there or in the fourth round or in the fifth round, but too many of our fans count on it like it is a certainty.

I won't use last year's draft as an example because it's probably too soon. But 2023 in the third round, Kendre Miller was taken with the 71st pick and he has averaged 3.8 YPC and around 150 yards rushing both seasons. Tyjae Spears (81) has been a little better than that with 4.5 YPC his first year (although last year dipped to 3.7) but he's not had more than 100 carries and 453 yards, in either season. De'Von Achane (84) has been a bona fide hit, rushing for 907 yards (4.5) per carry last year. Tank Bigsby (88) had pretty good success this year too with 766 yards this year (4.6).

So that's 2 of 4 in the third round that year, also considered to be a good draft year for RBs. And honestly, Miller is probably the one we would have ended up with because most thought he was worthy of that selection. Maybe he'd be doing better if he wasn't behind Kamara, but we don't know that. And if we're looking at rookie success, only Achane really had that. Yes, Spears averaged 4.5, but it was in a part-time role as the change-up to Henry.

The 50-percent hit rate is normal for that round and maybe even a little high. You don't count on getting a starter with a 50-percent hit rate. You hope to get a starter.

Now, in the second round that year, the only back taken was Charbonnet, and it was with the 52nd pick, so the hit rate isn't much higher. He's averaged 4.2 or better both years, but has shared the snaps (135 for 569 last year).

We increase our chances of finding a starter if we take a back at 12 or at 44. Of the top 10 RBs in the NFL this year, six (Barkley, Gibbs, Robinson, Jacobs, Taylor) were taken in the first round and three in the second round (Henry at 45, Joe Mixon at 48, James Cook at 63). Only Kyren Williams (fifth round) and Aaron Jones (fifth) were taken after the second round. That doesn't mean you can't find starting-quality RBs after the second round, but the successess (Irving in 4th, Achane in 3rd, Conner in 3rd, Hubbard in 4th, Pollard in 4th, David Montgomery in 3rd, etc.) are remembered and the 100 other failures seem to get forgotten.

https://www.nfl.com/news/ranking-all-74-starting-running-backs-from-2024-nfl-season


Kamara,

 

[Cowboyny]

I think you may be giving too much credit to the scheme and not enough to the players. Any scheme is only as good as its players. A starting RB that defenses have to view as a threat is one of my main priorities this year. We need a player who pulls defenders into the box to stop him to open up the passing game. Sure, scheme and blockers can make a back better, but an inferior back is an inferior back no matter the scheme. Barkley wasn't great because of Philadelphia's scheme and blockers. Everyone already knew what he could do and getting in the right scheme with a quality line put it on full display. Same with Henry. We do not need to skimp at RB.

You still need a quality back, just don't need an elite back to be successful running the football. I would prioritize taking a back within the first three rounds, if not the top 2.

 

[Cowboyny]

They can, but the problem is success rate. The longer you wait, the more likely you are to miss on a player. RB isn't a position where we can afford to miss. There may be great ones you can find throughout the draft, but there are also bad ones you can end up with as well. Sure that can happen earlier in the draft, but the chances are lower.

What I prefer is to draft a back early and draft another one late, increasing the chances that we find a back who can get the job done.

I agree, cannot allow that Duece disaster to happen again, deep class where you wait until late to draft a RB. Have to make it a priority and I think they will.

 

[Cowboyny]

It is possible with the success of those teams that the Joneses will seek to emulate them by taking a receiver in the first round. I still think they will go after Stefon Diggs, but I could see the appeal of someone like Luther Burden instead. Frankly, if we did that, then went DT in the second and RB in the third I could live with that depending on whether we got a decent FA RB. We probably will just bring back Dowdle, though.

They may go the fa or trade route to land a veteran #2, but I think they want to lower their costs at the position and have a controllable salary for the duration of Lamb's contract.

 

[gimmesix]

You still need a quality back, just don't need an elite back to be successful running the football. I would prioritize taking a back within the first three rounds, if not the top 2.

I would prioritize the top two rounds, but it's hard to say how the draft will fall. I can't justify taking a back over a higher-rated player at a more valued position, but I'd certainly be looking. If Jeanty is there and his value is top 5 like it is with many of the draft gurus, then I'd have a hard time passing on him unless another top 10 player also was there when we picked. And then I would really have to weigh position/need to consider taking the top 10 player on my board over the top 5.

 

[gimmesix]

I agree, cannot allow that Duece disaster to happen again, deep class where you wait until late to draft a RB. Have to make it a priority and I think they will.

Even if he ultimately fails, I don't mind that we took Vaughn in the fifth round. That was his value. It just shows you can't count on hitting on a back at any time or them being effective immediately (although there's a better chance at that position than several others). All things being equal valuewise among players available, I'd probably take an RB in the first three rounds and another in the fifth to hedge my bets.

 

[Cowboyny]

I would prioritize the top two rounds, but it's hard to say how the draft will fall. I can't justify taking a back over a higher-rated player at a more valued position, but I'd certainly be looking. If Jeanty is there and his value is top 5 like it is with many of the draft gurus, then I'd have a hard time passing on him unless another top 10 player also was there when we picked. And then I would really have to weigh position/need to consider taking the top 10 player on my board over the top 5.

I have Jeanty apart of that blue chip group and have zero reservations taking him at 12, if all other blue chippers are off the board (Hunter, Carter, Graham, T-Mac). At 44, my hope is either Hampton or Johnson falls to our pick as they fit like a glove. Unless one of those top DT's falls, RB would be my target.

 

[gimmesix]

They may go the fa or trade route to land a veteran #2, but I think they want to lower their costs at the position and have a controllable salary for the duration of Lamb's contract.

I think we'll look for a Cooks-level FA or trade. We know we need a decent threat opposite Lamb, but we don't necessarily have to get a No. 1 receiver-quality player. That makes it a little easier costwise.

I still think Diggs makes the most sense for this front office. His cost will be down some because he's coming off injury and there will be some enticement to play with his brother since he has said before how he'd like to do that. It's definitely not a long-term fix but could punt the receiver need for a season.

 

[gimmesix]

I have Jeanty apart of that blue chip group and have zero reservations taking him at 12, if all other blue chippers are off the board (Hunter, Carter, Graham, T-Mac). At 44, my hope is either Hampton or Johnson falls to our pick as they fit like a glove. Unless one of those top DT's falls, RB would be my target.

That's pretty much where I stand. I'd have trouble passing on Nolen in the first because I just think he's going to be a stud DT, but I have no idea where Dallas will even have him rated and Jeanty clearly is going to be a top value.

If we do end up taking Jeanty, I'd be looking DT in the second (all things being equal) and probably DT in the third as well. I don't expect the Cowboys to have the same outlook as me, though. I won't be surprised by an OL in the first or a WR.

 

[Cowboyny]

That's pretty much where I stand. I'd have trouble passing on Nolen in the first because I just think he's going to be a stud DT, but I have no idea where Dallas will even have him rated and Jeanty clearly is going to be a top value.

If we do end up taking Jeanty, I'd be looking DT in the second (all things being equal) and probably DT in the third as well. I don't expect the Cowboys to have the same outlook as me, though. I won't be surprised by an OL in the first or a WR.

Nolen's value is all over the place, Dane Bruglar has him as a 2nd rd prospect, a lot can change since it's early, but 12 is too rich. Any DT at 12 not named Graham at 12 is a reach in my opinion. Really want to trade back, get at least that 4th back and draft either WR or DT. I even would consider Campbell if we moved into the 20's. If we cannot move back, I am fine with Burden.

 

[Cowboyny]

I think we'll look for a Cooks-level FA or trade. We know we need a decent threat opposite Lamb, but we don't necessarily have to get a No. 1 receiver-quality player. That makes it a little easier costwise.

I still think Diggs makes the most sense for this front office. His cost will be down some because he's coming off injury and there will be some enticement to play with his brother since he has said before how he'd like to do that. It's definitely not a long-term fix but could punt the receiver need for a season.

It's either Diggs or a reunion with Cooper if those bridges aren't burned. Both are very similar at this juncture, more high-end #2 route runners who have worked well with Dak in the past.

 

[gimmesix]

It's either Diggs or a reunion with Cooper if those bridges aren't burned. Both are very similar at this juncture, more high-end #2 route runners who have worked well with Dak in the past.

I think the issues with Cooper go beyond just his production not equaling what he was paid. But who knows? Maybe the move was just contract-related. If it wasn't, I could see the Joneses being comfortable bringing him back since they seem to favor their own, and he was one of their own.

 

[gimmesix]

Nolen's value is all over the place, Dane Bruglar has him as a 2nd rd prospect, a lot can change since it's early, but 12 is too rich. Any DT at 12 not named Graham at 12 is a reach in my opinion. Really want to trade back, get at least that 4th back and draft either WR or DT. I even would consider Campbell if we moved into the 20's. If we cannot move back, I am fine with Burden.

I've seen Nolen as high as 12 and that's where I see him. Like QB, DTs can rise up the board because it is so difficult finding game-changers at that position. I believe Nolen can be a game-changer, so I don't believe he's a reach. But if the Cowboys have him, let's say, 20th, and they have Jeanty 4th, I wouldn't want them to take Nolen over Jeanty. If they have Burden 15th and Nolen 20th, though, I'd be fine with that reach. All three of the "second-tier" DTs (Nolen, Grant and Harmon) intrigue me, so I wouldn't mind a slight trade-down if the top-10 rated prospects are all gone. I just like what Nolen has shown most. Grant would give us more of a Dexter Lawrence type, with a possible similar progression from mostly a run-stopper to a player who can get consistent pressure. Harmon may have a higher pass-rush potential. Nolen seems to be a good combination of both worlds, although Harmon appears to be good enough against the run. I think we'll sign Osa, though, and then not take any DT in the first round and possibly not in the second.

 

[Cowboyny]

I've seen Nolen as high as 12 and that's where I see him. Like QB, DTs can rise up the board because it is so difficult finding game-changers at that position. I believe Nolen can be a game-changer, so I don't believe he's a reach. But if the Cowboys have him, let's say, 20th, and they have Jeanty 4th, I wouldn't want them to take Nolen over Jeanty. If they have Burden 15th and Nolen 20th, though, I'd be fine with that reach. All three of the "second-tier" DTs (Nolen, Grant and Harmon) intrigue me, so I wouldn't mind a slight trade-down if the top-10 rated prospects are all gone. I just like what Nolen has shown most. Grant would give us more of a Dexter Lawrence type, with a possible similar progression from mostly a run-stopper to a player who can get consistent pressure. Harmon may have a higher pass-rush potential. Nolen seems to be a good combination of both worlds, although Harmon appears to be good enough against the run. I think we'll sign Osa, though, and then not take any DT in the first round and possibly not in the second.

Everyone is going to have their favorite flavor of ice cream, I have Grant the highest after Graham cause I think he helps our run defense right away.

 

[Cowboyny]

I think the issues with Cooper go beyond just his production not equaling what he was paid. But who knows? Maybe the move was just contract-related. If it wasn't, I could see the Joneses being comfortable bringing him back since they seem to favor their own, and he was one of their own.

We know he worked well with Dak, but as I said, bridges could have been burned.