Counter Point to "Spagnola: Let’s Not Assume Drafting A QB At No. 4 Is The Elixir To 4-12"

[yimyammer]

Take it to the appropriate zone with this crap.

Last warning to everyone on this site.

lol

 

[jobberone]

lol

You may think this is funny but this staff spends a lot of time policing this very issue. For everyone who cries foul at being told to not bash Jerry in the Fan Zone there is another who complains about the constant bashing and why can't we do something about it. I apologize for being short about it but after awhile this 'crap' does indeed get old.

How about I do a better job moderating and ask all of you to please stay on topic, post your threads in the proper zone, and stop cursing and insulting one another. That'd take about half the workload and make most everyone happier.

Can I count on everyone's support?

 

[Hoofbite]

..or...a Game Changer waiting to trump anything you've seen at the next level.

If Dallas has any sort of actual longterm plan they wouldn't take a RB. Not because taking a RB would be indicative of lacking a plan but because they've already demonstrated that they don't view the RB position as a real priority.

They wouldn't pay Murray $8M per year last year, but now all of a sudden they're going to pay $6M a year AND use a 1st round pick in the process?

Makes zero sense. Of course, it's hard to actually buy into the idea that they have a plan so they could take a RB.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

If Dallas has any sort of actual longterm plan they wouldn't take a RB. Not because taking a RB would be indicative of lacking a plan but because they've already demonstrated that they don't view the RB position as a real priority.

They wouldn't pay Murray $8M per year last year, but now all of a sudden they're going to pay $6M a year AND use a 1st round pick in the process?

Makes zero sense. Of course, it's hard to actually buy into the idea that they have a plan so they could take a RB.

Charguz' may take the Ramsey. Who made College Coaches go to the other side of the Defense i.e. Neon. There are still yards left on the field from 2014 that Zeke would feast.

 

[Mr Cowboy]

My point is dallas is a lot of players away so take the future qb. Granted I'm not impressed with goff or wentz. So I say take the bpa.

Doesn't matter who the backup qb is if Romo goes down dallas is done with ginger as the coach!

you're right, but if you have someone who will eventually take over ready. If it is a QB, you get a chance to find out rather quick what you have in him. I don't buy the people who say he will sit for 3-4 years. He will most likely be playing meaningful games his rookie year, and gaining experience

Charguz' may take the Ramsey. Who made College Coaches go to the other side of the Defense i.e. Neon. There are still yards left on the field from 2014 that Zeke would feast.

yeah, well Claiborne was the next Neon Deion.... CBs come to die in Dallas. So drafting a CB would be the dumbest thing to do.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

yeah, well Claiborne was the next Neon Deion.... CBs come to die in Dallas. So drafting a CB would be the dumbest thing to do.

Since Mo Claiborne wasn't Deon selecting a CB is the dumbest thing to do....and my extremely high IQ was just cheated out of 100,000 likes.

 

[Mr Cowboy]

Since Mo Claiborne wasn't Deon selecting a CB is the dumbest thing to do....and my extremely high IQ was just cheated out of 100,000 likes.

When was the last highly rated CB the Cowboys had, an all pro, pro bowler, best in the league, best in division, best in conference, heck best on paper? Newman and Pacman had their better years after they left Dallas. CBs come to Dallas to die.

 

[starcity214]

They've tried it and failed miserably before. If anyone should know that, it's the Cowboys.

They had no plan other than Aikman and when he suddenly retired, they were sunk. And we got the fondly remembered Campo years. 5-11, 5-11, 5-11.

If they want to go back to those days, just pass on the opportunity to get a quarterback.

People often forget the cowboys had no first round picks for a couple of years after aikman retired.
Also people forget that quincy carter was the quarter back for a couple of years. He had talent just couldn't keep his head right.
After that, bill parcells came and brought bledsoe with him.
During all those years there were plenty of good young quarterbacks the cowboys could have drafted but oviously they were developing quincy.
People also keep saying quarterbacks are hard to find.
Well if anything, that would be a cause for concern.
Why will the top three be any diferent?
They seem mediocre at best.
Might as well take a qb later on and try to develop them as it is well known that all but Goff need time to develop.

 

[visionary]

Fouts had three wins. Archie Manning never went to the playoffs. Fran Tarkenton won six playoff games but he also played on much better teams over that time span. Y A Tittle never won a postseason game. Neither did Sonny Jurgensen.

So yes there are elite QBs who didn't have postseason success including losing 4 SBs (Kelly and Tarkenton) or in Tittle's case never won a title losing 3 st8 NFL CC games. Or just didn't win or even get a chance.

When you have to start with a QB (Fouts) who won more playoff games than the question and then talk about YA Tittle to support your argument, everyone who reads your post will know , the response is laughable

When you talk about the elite QBs of the game, the ONLY one who hasn't won a title is Marino and he got to a SB. No amount of spin will change this.

The fact is that, as good as he is and his numbers are, unless Romo makes several more playoff appearances or at least 1 deep playoff trip (At least get to a SB) he will never be considered elite. He will be considered very good and maybe great by a few, but no elite

When people mention Marino, Elway, Aikman, Montana, Favre, from this era they will mention Brady, Peyton, Rodgers, even Big Ben but not Romo in that category

And that was the question

You know it but can't help arguing

 

[jobberone]

When you have to start with a QB (Fouts) who won more playoff games than the question and then talk about YA Tittle to support your argument, everyone who reads your post will know , the response is laughable

When you talk about the elite QBs of the game, the ONLY one who hasn't won a title is Marino and he got to a SB. No amount of spin will change this.

The fact is that, as good as he is and his numbers are, unless Romo makes several more playoff appearances or at least 1 deep playoff trip (At least get to a SB) he will never be considered elite. He will be considered very good and maybe great by a few, but no elite

When people mention Marino, Elway, Aikman, Montana, Favre, from this era they will mention Brady, Peyton, Rodgers, even Big Ben but not Romo in that category

And that was the question

You know it but can't help arguing

Resorting to demonizing (mocking) as a response or an ad hominem attack speaks for itself.

Fouts is a HOF QB (who won 3 not two playoff games). You may think him not elite but of all the modern QBs to play the game only 25 are in Canton. Fouts, Tittle, Moon, and Jurgensen are those mentioned and all are elite by definition as all are in the HOF. And Archie Manning is considered by many to be an elite QB. You can argue that one but surely not those in the HOF.

Shoots a huge hole in your theory you can't be elite without winning a lot of playoff games; or to others.....SBs.

 

[NumOneQB]

Who says the Cowboys won't be picking in the top 5 again?

 

[Zekeats]

Can't believe anyone would support a RB at #4.

I can't believe anyone wouldn't.

1. Not a lot of safe picks in this draft. If there is one, its Zeke.
2. It is the position that fueled this team 2 years ago. Who here didn't like that feeling of winning? Remember how good that win in Seattle felt.
3. Why draft a bust in Bosa, another LB coming of a major injury, a one tech DT, ect. Give me the player who will touch the rock 30+ times a game
4. The only other option is the QB. Wentz will be gone and then you might have to make a decision on Goff. Trust me, I have 9 inch hands and I can understand why teams are making such a big deal out of it. Now I know why Romo never pump fakes.

 

[Zekeats]

As someone who thinks we should find the future QB now, I'm not one who thinks there is only one way, my way, to go
A trade down and add Zeke is a way to go but two things I do think. Zeke or any other player is not going to fix this team, they can be a part of the fix but the fix includes romo staying healthy, the entire draft and free agency. Second I like Zeke but the value of Zeke is the possibility of trading down,adding a pick and getting him

Only trade I consider is the niners. Anything past 10 he won't be there. Giants need an impact player and he won't pass them.

 

[Stash]

People often forget the cowboys had no first round picks for a couple of years after aikman retired.

I'm not ken of them, I remember the failed Joey Galloway trade all too well.

Also people forget that quincy carter was the quarter back for a couple of years. He had talent just couldn't keep his head right.

First, people can look at what Quincy did and decide for themselves if your "talent" description applies.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CartQu00.htm

After that, bill parcells came and brought bledsoe with him.
During all those years there were plenty of good young quarterbacks the cowboys could have drafted but oviously they were developing quincy.

Your history here is just plain wrong. Quincy Carter was the quarterback when before Parcells arrived in 2003. Carter was given the job in 2001 by default because they had nothing else. Parcells gave him one year, dummying down the offense so he only had yo read one side of the field. When he saw that Carter wasn't good enough, he brought in Vinny Testaverde. That was before Carter was dumped for drugs.

Bledsoe didn't until until 2005, well after Carter was gone. He was yet another veteran option brought in by Parcells because the Cowboys had no other viable options. This team was messing around with Tony Banks, Ryan Leaf, Chad Hutchinson, Drew Henson and whatever scraps they could find before Parcells and Payton acquired better options.

People also keep saying quarterbacks are hard to find.
Well if anything, that would be a cause for concern.
Why will the top three be any diferent?
They seem mediocre at best.
Might as well take a qb later on and try to develop them as it is well known that all but Goff need time to develop.

Take a look at this link, it's a good read with a lot of research work behind it:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2014/nfl-draft-round-round-quarterback-data

It shows that while yes, quarterbacks are hard to find. They're much harder to find the later you start looking.

When guys like Bradford and Cousins will have bigger salaries than Tony Romo this year, it shows how desparate teams are to find and keep the ones that they even think can be capable.

 

[Craig]

Not so sure he has absolute power any more.

Did he sell the team?

 

[Echo9]

Spagnola sometime takes a point just to be _ _ _ and this is one of them. His argument brings only data that he chooses to bring up. Since this will be the last time we will be at #4 for a while with a couple of likely good QB to chose from. I support the idea of grabbing the best QB at #4. I think that Romo will get injured some time during the year (say after game 4 for 10 games) as we all know he holds on to the ball too long waiting for a receiver to come open. We now have to put in the new QB into the game. This is the year to do that with a weak schedule, a great OL that is getting better, an up scale running game, and a defense that WILL be better this year. If the coaches plan on this and put plays in that match the new QB we can still go at less 10-6 this year and get into the playoffs.

Here's where your argument falls flat.

Since this will be the last time we will be at #4 for a while with a couple of likely good QB to chose from.

Goff, Wentz and Lynch. None of them are worth the #4. We would be drafting the next Matt Stafford, Sam Bradford, Alex Smith, Marc Sanchez, Blaine Gabbert or Jake Locker.

 

[DFWJC]

If it's between taking a QB they don't absolution glove at 4 vs taking Elliott (at say, 7th -12th) plus an extra 2nd rounder....Ill take door #2 please.

Absolutely love, that is

 

[PJTHEDOORS]

Here's where your argument falls flat.

Goff, Wentz and Lynch. None of them are worth the #4. We would be drafting the next Matt Stafford, Sam Bradford, Alex Smith, Marc Sanchez, Blaine Gabbert or Jake Locker.

On your draft board, yes.

 

[Hoofbite]

I can't believe anyone wouldn't.

1. Not a lot of safe picks in this draft. If there is one, its Zeke.
2. It is the position that fueled this team 2 years ago. Who here didn't like that feeling of winning? Remember how good that win in Seattle felt.
3. Why draft a bust in Bosa, another LB coming of a major injury, a one tech DT, ect. Give me the player who will touch the rock 30+ times a game
4. The only other option is the QB. Wentz will be gone and then you might have to make a decision on Goff. Trust me, I have 9 inch hands and I can understand why teams are making such a big deal out of it. Now I know why Romo never pump fakes.

You could pay for the top free agent RB and only come out paying a little more than what the #4 pick costs.....and guess what, this player would have actually played in the NFL.

There is absolutely no value in taking a RB Top 5 unless he's more or less dominate for a decade.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

You could pay for the top free agent RB and only come out paying a little more than what the #4 pick costs.....and guess what, this player would have actually played in the NFL.

There is absolutely no value in taking a RB Top 5 unless he's more or less dominate for a decade.

Is Todd Gurley worth a top 5.