Captain-Crash
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 21,542
- Reaction score
- 33,800
their way isn't flawed, or you guys wouldn't be here. they know what they are doing
They do not evaluate players they do not have relationships with in keeping with employing family members. It all fits.I don't think they look at player personnel, at least when it comes to FA, through the prism of position needs or overall team needs. They just look at players. They just want to grab bodies, especially their own, in FA.
Randy Gregory is a good DE. He's not a great DE. He was offered $70 million which is a pretty large contract for a DE. That kind of contract would give you the impression that the Cowboys realize they have a big need at DE opposite Lawrence. And yet, when Gregory bolts, they make no moves to land an equally talented or better DE. That $70 million "budgeted" for DE vaporizes. Because it wasn't budgeted for a high level DE. It was just budgeted for Gregory. They signed a couple of cheapies and move onto the draft. They didn't slot $70 million to get better (or at least not regress) at DE. They just slotted the money for Gregory, only.
Take Elliott. They paid him a massive contract. One would think that it's because they view the importance of a TB to this offense, hence why they paid a talented TB all that money. But if Elliott could retire tomorrow with no cap implications for the Cowboys and Henry or Kamara or Cook were free agents, would the Cowboys spend that kind of money on talented TBs to replace him? Nope.
What we are seeing is a disconnect between what they are willing to pay their own players that they like and what they are willing to pay to fill the position if "their" player left or wasn't here.
I don't think they look at player personnel, at least when it comes to FA, through the prism of position needs or overall team needs. They just look at players. They just want to grab bodies, especially their own, in FA.
Randy Gregory is a good DE. He's not a great DE. He was offered $70 million which is a pretty large contract for a DE. That kind of contract would give you the impression that the Cowboys realize they have a big need at DE opposite Lawrence. And yet, when Gregory bolts, they make no moves to land an equally talented or better DE. That $70 million "budgeted" for DE vaporizes. Because it wasn't budgeted for a high level DE. It was just budgeted for Gregory. They signed a couple of cheapies and move onto the draft. They didn't slot $70 million to get better (or at least not regress) at DE. They just slotted the money for Gregory, only.
Take Elliott. They paid him a massive contract. One would think that it's because they view the importance of a TB to this offense, hence why they paid a talented TB all that money. But if Elliott could retire tomorrow with no cap implications for the Cowboys and Henry or Kamara or Cook were free agents, would the Cowboys spend that kind of money on talented TBs to replace him? Nope.
What we are seeing is a disconnect between what they are willing to pay their own players that they like and what they are willing to pay to fill the position if "their" player left or wasn't here.
I think the build through the draft mantra extends to FA. They want to draft and then keep what they draft. I believe you are right in that they dont see outsiders who are as or better in the same light.I don't think they look at player personnel, at least when it comes to FA, through the prism of position needs or overall team needs. They just look at players. They just want to grab bodies, especially their own, in FA.
Randy Gregory is a good DE. He's not a great DE. He was offered $70 million which is a pretty large contract for a DE. That kind of contract would give you the impression that the Cowboys realize they have a big need at DE opposite Lawrence. And yet, when Gregory bolts, they make no moves to land an equally talented or better DE. That $70 million "budgeted" for DE vaporizes. Because it wasn't budgeted for a high level DE. It was just budgeted for Gregory. They signed a couple of cheapies and move onto the draft. They didn't slot $70 million to get better (or at least not regress) at DE. They just slotted the money for Gregory, only.
Take Elliott. They paid him a massive contract. One would think that it's because they view the importance of a TB to this offense, hence why they paid a talented TB all that money. But if Elliott could retire tomorrow with no cap implications for the Cowboys and Henry or Kamara or Cook were free agents, would the Cowboys spend that kind of money on talented TBs to replace him? Nope.
What we are seeing is a disconnect between what they are willing to pay their own players that they like and what they are willing to pay to fill the position if "their" player left or wasn't here.
I don't think they look at player personnel, at least when it comes to FA, through the prism of position needs or overall team needs. They just look at players. They just want to grab bodies, especially their own, in FA.
Randy Gregory is a good DE. He's not a great DE. He was offered $70 million which is a pretty large contract for a DE. That kind of contract would give you the impression that the Cowboys realize they have a big need at DE opposite Lawrence. And yet, when Gregory bolts, they make no moves to land an equally talented or better DE. That $70 million "budgeted" for DE vaporizes. Because it wasn't budgeted for a high level DE. It was just budgeted for Gregory. They signed a couple of cheapies and move onto the draft. They didn't slot $70 million to get better (or at least not regress) at DE. They just slotted the money for Gregory, only.
Take Elliott. They paid him a massive contract. One would think that it's because they view the importance of a TB to this offense, hence why they paid a talented TB all that money. But if Elliott could retire tomorrow with no cap implications for the Cowboys and Henry or Kamara or Cook were free agents, would the Cowboys spend that kind of money on talented TBs to replace him? Nope.
What we are seeing is a disconnect between what they are willing to pay their own players that they like and what they are willing to pay to fill the position if "their" player left or wasn't here.
I don't think they look at player personnel, at least when it comes to FA, through the prism of position needs or overall team needs. They just look at players. They just want to grab bodies, especially their own, in FA.
Randy Gregory is a good DE. He's not a great DE. He was offered $70 million which is a pretty large contract for a DE. That kind of contract would give you the impression that the Cowboys realize they have a big need at DE opposite Lawrence. And yet, when Gregory bolts, they make no moves to land an equally talented or better DE. That $70 million "budgeted" for DE vaporizes. Because it wasn't budgeted for a high level DE. It was just budgeted for Gregory. They signed a couple of cheapies and move onto the draft. They didn't slot $70 million to get better (or at least not regress) at DE. They just slotted the money for Gregory, only.
Take Elliott. They paid him a massive contract. One would think that it's because they view the importance of a TB to this offense, hence why they paid a talented TB all that money. But if Elliott could retire tomorrow with no cap implications for the Cowboys and Henry or Kamara or Cook were free agents, would the Cowboys spend that kind of money on talented TBs to replace him? Nope.
What we are seeing is a disconnect between what they are willing to pay their own players that they like and what they are willing to pay to fill the position if "their" player left or wasn't here.
The fatal flaw in their roster building comes down to one simple fact: They do not know how to evaluate football talent. And that includes both players and coaches. That’s why they end up overvaluing and overpaying average talent. It’s why we always get bad or retread coaches instead of rising stars. And it’s why they eliminated free agency as a way to help build a team: they’ve signed some bad free agents in the past because they can’t evaluate talent, but they conveniently concluded that free agency is bad. Jerry knows marketing and oil, not football. Stephen just knows how to be cheap.
I expect him to play very well initially.
I also expect him cut after year two.
The problem is they can't evaluate talent. They run scared that they are going to give big money to a guy that doesn't fit -- like they have before. Fact is, they can't evaluate their own talent because they become "friends/family" with them, and they can't judge outside talent because they got burned more than once.I don't think they look at player personnel, at least when it comes to FA, through the prism of position needs or overall team needs. They just look at players. They just want to grab bodies, especially their own, in FA.
Randy Gregory is a good DE. He's not a great DE. He was offered $70 million which is a pretty large contract for a DE. That kind of contract would give you the impression that the Cowboys realize they have a big need at DE opposite Lawrence. And yet, when Gregory bolts, they make no moves to land an equally talented or better DE. That $70 million "budgeted" for DE vaporizes. Because it wasn't budgeted for a high level DE. It was just budgeted for Gregory. They signed a couple of cheapies and move onto the draft. They didn't slot $70 million to get better (or at least not regress) at DE. They just slotted the money for Gregory, only.
Take Elliott. They paid him a massive contract. One would think that it's because they view the importance of a TB to this offense, hence why they paid a talented TB all that money. But if Elliott could retire tomorrow with no cap implications for the Cowboys and Henry or Kamara or Cook were free agents, would the Cowboys spend that kind of money on talented TBs to replace him? Nope.
What we are seeing is a disconnect between what they are willing to pay their own players that they like and what they are willing to pay to fill the position if "their" player left or wasn't here.
my apologies for my above post because you said it better than I did.The fatal flaw in their roster building comes down to one simple fact: They do not know how to evaluate football talent. And that includes both players and coaches. That’s why they end up overvaluing and overpaying average talent. It’s why we always get bad or retread coaches instead of rising stars. And it’s why they eliminated free agency as a way to help build a team: they’ve signed some bad free agents in the past because they can’t evaluate talent, but they conveniently concluded that free agency is bad. Jerry knows marketing and oil, not football. Stephen just knows how to be cheap.
And they'd still win a SB before us......
The problem is they can't evaluate talent. They run scared that they are going to give big money to a guy that doesn't fit -- like they have before. Fact is, they can't evaluate their own talent because they become "friends/family" with them, and they can't judge outside talent because they got burned more than once.
So they blow smoke, drink the JWB, and pocket the $$$ instead.............what a life.
You pull no punches these days, do you even wrap the knuckles at least?hum and the awakening begins.
slow fans.
I don't think they look at player personnel, at least when it comes to FA, through the prism of position needs or overall team needs. They just look at players. They just want to grab bodies, especially their own, in FA.
Randy Gregory is a good DE. He's not a great DE. He was offered $70 million which is a pretty large contract for a DE. That kind of contract would give you the impression that the Cowboys realize they have a big need at DE opposite Lawrence. And yet, when Gregory bolts, they make no moves to land an equally talented or better DE. That $70 million "budgeted" for DE vaporizes. Because it wasn't budgeted for a high level DE. It was just budgeted for Gregory. They signed a couple of cheapies and move onto the draft. They didn't slot $70 million to get better (or at least not regress) at DE. They just slotted the money for Gregory, only.
Take Elliott. They paid him a massive contract. One would think that it's because they view the importance of a TB to this offense, hence why they paid a talented TB all that money. But if Elliott could retire tomorrow with no cap implications for the Cowboys and Henry or Kamara or Cook were free agents, would the Cowboys spend that kind of money on talented TBs to replace him? Nope.
What we are seeing is a disconnect between what they are willing to pay their own players that they like and what they are willing to pay to fill the position if "their" player left or wasn't here.
its because they don't know how to assess talent and the don't have a philosophy or plan,
its because they don't know how to assess talent and the don't have a philosophy or plan,
You pull no punches these days, do you even wrap the knuckles at least?
Players come to Dallas to Vanish.but I doubt if we would still be a superbowl team....players come to Dallas to vanish.
PM me for pricing structure, I too have a cap, and the cap is a real thing.typhus---how much would it cost for you to get the brother of that prize winning catfish to sick on Stephen Jones????
PM me for pricing structure, I too have a cap, and the cap is a real thing.
That gets you invited to the conversation.10K...opener?