My Concern with this team

[JW82]

My concern is the same front office steering the ship into the same ice berg for the 30th consecutive time.

Jerry is hoping that global warming will shrink it enough to not sink the ship again.

My concern which goes back to the nitwits running the show is their ability to evaluate their own talent. Hearing Broadduss talk about how the team sees their receiving corp. thinking they already have a big body guy in Mingo and the other guys are bigger aside from Turpin and how Golden adds something they don't already have.
In the real world they have a stud #1 in Lamb and a kick returner in turpin..PERIOD! The other guys are scrubs and maybe wr4's. Go into this draft and get the best receiver that can become a probowler and if Lamb misses time can be the 1 for a few weeks. McMillen dominates and produces. They could have Chase/Higgens with him and Lamb.

 

[thunderpimp91]

Neither. That's just fan blather. There is so incredibly much that goes into drafting that you cannot label it one single thing.

I admit, it's quite annoying to me to see fans scream BPA all the time when that's not how you draft. Hey, if you want to say quit reaching for need, I get it and I agree.

No telling how/why Jerry drafts players.

Again if we are going to take BPA 100% literal and go strictly by talent levels of each individual then yeah I would agree with you. Personally I don't think anyone actually believes that is what BPA means...drafting according to your board is probably the better wording, I think BPA just adjusts the formula a bit of putting that draft board together. Teams are absolutely going to weigh film, measurables, experience level, maturity, positional value, scheme fit etc. but that should already be in the rankings when putting together their teams draft board.

The BPA crowd is essentially saying lets put less emphasis on the positional value and scheme fit piece of that. It's really what Dallas did when they drafted Lamb. They had every intention of drafting an Edge guy going into that years draft, but they had a significantly higher grade on a lower value position that fell to them. Lamb was absolutely a BPA pick. On the flip side the Taco pick is an easy example of not going BPA. They picked Taco over Watt and the justification for that was that Taco was the better scheme fit at the time.

That's not BPA drafting. In Carter they saw a top 3 talent sliding due to off field stuff and so traded up to get him.

Hurts was considered a 4th round prospect. He was a reach, not close to BPA.

DB was far and away their biggest need. Pure needs drafting. Mitchell was rated as a late 1st, so they even overdrafted him a bit.

Cooper DeJean was rated in the 1st, guess you can call that BPA, but it was also a huge needs pick.

Honestly, no one drafts using one single weak strategy. Any GM would get fired doing that. Well, almost any.

The Carter example is 100% BPA....It was a position they did not really need to address at the time (Had Williams/Cox/Davis), but took the player the value his talent brought at that pick.

Same with Hurts...Its a little more of a grey area, but just because they took him earlier than expected doesnt mean that he wasn't the top player on the Eagles draft board at the time. I highly doubt Philly was set on taking a QB with that pick. Typically you're not going to draft a guy who would be instantly blocked on the roster unless you feel its a great value pick.

The DB example is a fair argument. I highlight that more so because they went back to back DBs, but you're not wrong that it was a need at the time so may not be the best example.

 

[thunderpimp91]

Considered a reach by who? I got $100 that the people in the Philly draft room didn’t think he was a reach. The draft guru’s and your opinion is irrelevant to them.

100%. It seems that some think BPA is just going off the consensus media rankings. Philly clearly had Hurts higher on their board than almost anyone else, and given they had just paid Wentz the year before makes me think that positional value isnt the reason he was ranked so high.

 

[StarLord]

What do you think was the purpose of this "before it's time" computer system? It ranked the players and was the tool the Cowboys used almost exclusively to make their picks. This took any emotionally charged opinions out of the formula.

If you disagree then how would you explain the pattern of picks I listed on my previous post?

I mean, they draft a RB in 1969 from Yale in the 1st round. He becomes the OROY. So they draft a RB in the 1st round in 1979, the following season?

They decide they could use another RB in the 1966 draft? So do you think it was a human decision to draft RBs in 6 of the next 8 picks including 4 in a row?

The only time i ever heard of the Cowboys not taking BPA was the 3rd round of the 1979 draft,

They determined that the BPA was a quarterback and they really needed a TE. They were satisfied with the quarterbacks they had which was Roger Staubach, Danny White, and their 1977 2nd round pick, Glen Carrano.

Ironically, Staubach would announce his surprise retirement after the season, citing a dangerous amount of concussions.

In the meantime, there was a falling out between Tex Schram and their 1978 2nd round draft pick, FB Todd Christiansen, who had refused to convert to TE and was waived.

Therefore, the Cowboys made the decision to bypass the BPA, a QB, and selected the next guy, TE Doug Cosbie.

Two selections later, Joe Montana went to the 49ers.

In some ways this is fascinating and informative... But why are we discussing a 50 year old situation?

 

[kskboys]

Considered a reach by who? I got $100 that the people in the Philly draft room didn’t think he was a reach. The draft guru’s and your opinion is irrelevant to them.

Dude. All our opinions are irrelevant. Duh. This entire site is based on irrelevant opinions. Silly response.

 

[kskboys]

100%. It seems that some think BPA is just going off the consensus media rankings. Philly clearly had Hurts higher on their board than almost anyone else, and given they had just paid Wentz the year before makes me think that positional value isnt the reason he was ranked so high.

Which is why there's no such thing as BPA. It's extremely subjective and largely based on opinions.

 

[thunderpimp91]

Which is why there's no such thing as BPA. It's extremely subjective and largely based on opinions.

Its absolutely subjective, but it's getting way blown out of proportion. BPA is simply not reaching for a lesser player based on need. It's avoiding going into a draft saying "We have to come away with a starting Tackle so we are taking one round 1 no matter what" and then pass on players who you may have a higher grade on. Its just about avoiding reaching for need which you alluded to in a previous post in this thread.

Honestly I think we are saying 80% the same thing just in different ways, and the BPA argument is more over semantics of the subject than anything. I think BPA is just an overused buzzword that rubs you wrong more than anything. The more we go back and forth the more I'm asking myself what we actually disagree on

 

[kskboys]

Its absolutely subjective, but it's getting way blown out of proportion. BPA is simply not reaching for a lesser player based on need. It's avoiding going into a draft saying "We have to come away with a starting Tackle so we are taking one round 1 no matter what" and then pass on players who you may have a higher grade on. Its just about avoiding reaching for need which you alluded to in a previous post in this thread.

Honestly I think we are saying 80% the same thing just in different ways, and the BPA argument is more over semantics of the subject than anything. I think BPA is just an overused buzzword that rubs you wrong more than anything. The more we go back and forth the more I'm asking myself what we actually disagree on

I admit it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's the people blathering on endlessly proclaiming BPA BPA incesantly, and yes, it's irritating.

Is that how people are defining it? As not reaching? But, that's not the definition of it.

OK, I accept your explanation and will try to ignore it!!!

 

[thunderpimp91]

I admit it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's the people blathering on endlessly proclaiming BPA BPA incesantly, and yes, it's irritating.

Is that how people are defining it? As not reaching? But, that's not the definition of it.

OK, I accept your explanation and will try to ignore it!!!

Haha fair enough. We all have our quirks that annoy us. And to be fair I guess if you ask 10 people what BPA means you'll probably get a few different definitions as it is a pretty open ended term.

 

[Flamma]

I am normally an optimist in my life. Totally. But when it comes to the Cowboys, a pessimist. Only the Cowboys.

Here is my concern. After 2023 we were just as good or better than the Eagles. They took steps to get over the top. We took steps backwards on purpose. Using the same tired process they use every year since 2014. One team won a SB, the other didn't even make the playoffs. I understand injuries played a huge role, but even without those injuries we weren't going anywhere for a lack of trying.

This is my concern. The Cowboys do not actively try to improve from the previous season. They just keep repeating the process. It doesn't matter what our record was or how close we were, the Cowboys do not deviate from their ignorant process.

 

[Chasing6]

Taco was BPA. Mazi was BPA. Now what?

More like biggest need available.

 

[Spottswoode]

Its absolutely subjective, but it's getting way blown out of proportion. BPA is simply not reaching for a lesser player based on need. It's avoiding going into a draft saying "We have to come away with a starting Tackle so we are taking one round 1 no matter what" and then pass on players who you may have a higher grade on. Its just about avoiding reaching for need which you alluded to in a previous post in this thread.

Honestly I think we are saying 80% the same thing just in different ways, and the BPA argument is more over semantics of the subject than anything. I think BPA is just an overused buzzword that rubs you wrong more than anything. The more we go back and forth the more I'm asking myself what we actually disagree on

100%…I think BPA is just a shorthand (and maybe lazy) way describe exactly what you suggested. As a general rule, teams follow their boards and the creation of those boards include many variables.

 

[Spottswoode]

Dude. All our opinions are irrelevant. Duh. This entire site is based on irrelevant opinions. Silly response.

Dude. I think you missed the crux of my response.

While you may think it was a silly response, you continue to insist that certain players are a reach. How exactly did you come to that conclusion? I assume no one had access to Philly’s draft board and their board is the only one that matters. And without that info, there is really no way to determine whether it was a reach in the eyes of the team making the pick. Others are welcome to their opinions as to whether it was a reach but that is far from fact. That was my point.

This discussion started about the overuse of BPA. I would suggest that “reach” is also overused on fan forums and draft sites. On the one hand, people claim that player analysis is complex (I agree). It’s the teams that are spending 100’s of hours doing analysis, interviews, competitive intelligence, etc., etc. Most teams probably know if the drafted player hangs left or right. Yet we somehow want to discount the drafting team’s judgement and use some other source or our opinion to grade the picks.

IMO, there is nothing wrong with using the terms BPA or “reach” if given the proper context and weight. It’s when the terms are used to make absolute judgements that people jump the shark.

 

[plasticman]

In some ways this is fascinating and informative... But why are we discussing a 50 year old situation?

The discussion started as a debate between drafting for need and drafting BPA.

The reason we were discussing a 59 year old situation is nothing that the Cowboys drafted BPA back then (some respectfully disagreed). I then linked it to the fact that they had 20 consecutive winning seasons as a result of that philosohy.

 

[charron]

Too early to say we missed on Guyton

1st rounder who got benched ain't hittin either. I get your point he has time to not be a bust. I also think they did him a disservice moving him to LT right away.

 

[Chasing6]

1st rounder who got benched ain't hittin either. I get your point he has time to not be a bust. I also think they did him a disservice moving him to LT right away.

100% they did.

Just like what they did to Mazi, trying to make him into something he is not.

Both times we were desperate and reached, because of gapping holes that we refuse to address in FA.

First round picks need to be a lock, with a high floor. Someone you can live with their bottom.

 

[conner01]

1st rounder who got benched ain't hittin either. I get your point he has time to not be a bust. I also think they did him a disservice moving him to LT right away.

I agree

 

[kskboys]

They are living in the past with buzzwords
Not one single team uses true bpa early in the draft and hasn’t since the 70s

Now you definitely don’t want to get locked into a single positional need and reach in the draft … which we have arguably done before with picks like Taco Charlton

Taco wasn't a reach. We took him where he was rated. Many had him rated over Watt. He could be considered BPA.

 

[gtb1943]

Taco wasn't a reach. We took him where he was rated. Many had him rated over Watt. He could be considered BPA.

Just shows how experts and scouts and so on can be wrong

 

[kskboys]

More like biggest need available.

Nope. Now, I'll backtrack and say Mazi was not BPA. I have no idea what that was.

Taco was definitely BPA.

What this shows is that using either BPA or needs to draft by itself is dumber'n dirt.