Looking at proactive and reactive moves

[conner01]

It’s probably safe to say most of us would agree that being proactively ahead in anticipation of problems is better that waiting until a problem occurs then reacting to fix it.

That’s not to say that being reactive to problems is always bad either. Those moves are usually made while trying to fix problems that have cropped up you couldn’t foresee.

But I believe in pro sports, the more proactive you can be in planning ahead using your philosophy and vision for building a championship team, the better off you will be on the field. In other words, make a clear plan and follow it as best you can.

The premise of all this assumes the Cowboys FO has a guiding vision in place, which is debatable, but for the sake of this thread, let’s assume the vision is there, and it is built around having a top tier OL, top running game, and a defense that is built to BBNB,keeping opponents under 20. Clearly about 60% of cap space will go the offense.

So looking at that philosophy and the last few years, Is this team’s FO mostly making proactive or reactive moves?

Here are a couple of proactive moves that seem clear:
1. Drafting 3 OLinemen in the first round in the last 6 drafts.
2. Drafting a top RB with the 4th pick in 2016 supporting the philosophy of building a great running game.
Those are two examples of proactive moves the team has made.

Now reactive moves:
1. Drafting Ryan Switzer to fix the return game that hasn’t been same since 2014.
2. Trying to fix the pass rush issues this team had in 2014 by signing team cancer Greg Hardy in 2015.
Again not all reactive moves are bad, but you can’t build a winner that way.

So in closing, what are we doing this offseason that is proactive and what are doing that’s reactive?

You could argue Switzer was pro active
He does what Beasley does and Beasley is on a second contract

 

[Rockport]

Btw Rock, I guess I missed the whining on this thread. Where is it?

Yeah you missed it.

 

[Floatyworm]

Funny...reading this post...and the first thing I thought of was Jerry saying...we are going to let the draft come to us. Hate that!!!! That's like showing up late for Thanksgiving dinner @ the in-laws...and they invited the neighbors 3 hrs early...with their 20 kids.

 

[Bobhaze]

Yeah you missed it.

It’s good to know we have an expert riding herd on the subject. Thanks!

 

[Rockport]

It’s good to know we have an expert riding herd on the subject. Thanks!

Yes, you're very lucky.

 

[Bobhaze]

You could argue Switzer was pro active
He does what Beasley does and Beasley is on a second contract

Good point. Like most WR picks, I guess Switzer is a player we’ll have to judge down the road. I wasn’t too impressed in 2017 but it’s early.

 

[Bobhaze]

Yes, you're very lucky.

I see you’re very humble too, lol.

 

[Rockport]

I see you’re very humble too, lol.

Some day you'll understand.

 

[conner01]

Good point. Like most WR picks, I guess Switzer is a player we’ll have to judge down the road. I wasn’t too impressed in 2017 but it’s early.

He did a solid job as a returned
Now we need to see what he can do as a receiver
I think he can do what Beasley does and maybe a bit more in time

 

[Bobhaze]

He did a solid job as a returned
Now we need to see what he can do as a receiver
I think he can do what Beasley does and maybe a bit more in time

If I’m not mistaken, Beasley’s contract is up at the end of 2018. That certainly leaves a window of opportunity for Switzer to show he has something. It also raises the question what the team’s will do with Beas after 2018.

 

[CF74]

Reactive- Oh no Tyron has back issues, let’s trade up and get the best LT.

Proactive- Yes Tyron has back issues but unless Dr’s tell us he’s done, we might draft a tackle if one falls to us or we take one to groom a bit later.

 

[cern]

It’s probably safe to say most of us would agree that being proactively ahead in anticipation of problems is better that waiting until a problem occurs then reacting to fix it.

That’s not to say that being reactive to problems is always bad either. Those moves are usually made while trying to fix problems that have cropped up you couldn’t foresee.

But I believe in pro sports, the more proactive you can be in planning ahead using your philosophy and vision for building a championship team, the better off you will be on the field. In other words, make a clear plan and follow it as best you can.

The premise of all this assumes the Cowboys FO has a guiding vision in place, which is debatable, but for the sake of this thread, let’s assume the vision is there, and it is built around having a top tier OL, top running game, and a defense that is built to BBNB,keeping opponents under 20. Clearly about 60% of cap space will go the offense.

So looking at that philosophy and the last few years, Is this team’s FO mostly making proactive or reactive moves?

Here are a couple of proactive moves that seem clear:
1. Drafting 3 OLinemen in the first round in the last 6 drafts.
2. Drafting a top RB with the 4th pick in 2016 supporting the philosophy of building a great running game.
Those are two examples of proactive moves the team has made.

Now reactive moves:
1. Drafting Ryan Switzer to fix the return game that hasn’t been same since 2014.
2. Trying to fix the pass rush issues this team had in 2014 by signing team cancer Greg Hardy in 2015.
Again not all reactive moves are bad, but you can’t build a winner that way.

So in closing, what are we doing this offseason that is proactivetand what are doing that’s reactive?

good stuff as always, bob. chance favors the prepared mind. the cowboys all too often deal in crisis management mode. they really believed romo would play 5 more years until he went down in seattle. they still seem to have made no provision for the day witten no longer plays. unless they think rico is as good as rico seems to think he is. despite not having run a single down in an nfl game. now they've put themselves in a bad position regarding dez. they know he's overpaid, they know he's showing diminished skills. and they still don't seem to know what to do about it. they know they're probably going to lose hitch. they know sean lee will miss 4-6 games a year, and yet seem to have put all their eggs in one basket, Jaylon smith and his still unrecovered nerve.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It’s probably safe to say most of us would agree that being proactively ahead in anticipation of problems is better that waiting until a problem occurs then reacting to fix it.

That’s not to say that being reactive to problems is always bad either. Those moves are usually made while trying to fix problems that have cropped up you couldn’t foresee.

But I believe in pro sports, the more proactive you can be in planning ahead using your philosophy and vision for building a championship team, the better off you will be on the field. In other words, make a clear plan and follow it as best you can.

The premise of all this assumes the Cowboys FO has a guiding vision in place, which is debatable, but for the sake of this thread, let’s assume the vision is there, and it is built around having a top tier OL, top running game, and a defense that is built to BBNB,keeping opponents under 20. Clearly about 60% of cap space will go the offense.

So looking at that philosophy and the last few years, Is this team’s FO mostly making proactive or reactive moves?

Here are a couple of proactive moves that seem clear:
1. Drafting 3 OLinemen in the first round in the last 6 drafts.
2. Drafting a top RB with the 4th pick in 2016 supporting the philosophy of building a great running game.
Those are two examples of proactive moves the team has made.

Now reactive moves:
1. Drafting Ryan Switzer to fix the return game that hasn’t been same since 2014.
2. Trying to fix the pass rush issues this team had in 2014 by signing team cancer Greg Hardy in 2015.
Again not all reactive moves are bad, but you can’t build a winner that way.

So in closing, what are we doing this offseason that is proactive and what are doing that’s reactive?

The OL moves were a reaction to Flozell, Gurode, and Kosier falling off the cliff.
Zeke was drafted after Murray left and the trainwreck in 2015.

Proactive moves are drafting replacements before you need them; drafting Dak when Romo was still active is an example, drafting Smith when Lee, Hitchens, and Wilson are on the roster. We don't do much of that and seem to be chasing our own tail most of the time. Most teams are doing that given the scarcity of talent though.

We need to fill OG. It is reactive but it is a need nonetheless and not diminished on the impact that it can have because of it.
Last year replacing Mo and Carr worked out well as time moved on this past season.

The benefit to proactive decision making is lessening the number of decisions you have to make in the heat of the moment. Taking care of WR with Dez and TWill under contract would be a good idea IMO.

 

[Cowboys_22]

It’s probably safe to say most of us would agree that being proactively ahead in anticipation of problems is better that waiting until a problem occurs then reacting to fix it.

That’s not to say that being reactive to problems is always bad either. Those moves are usually made while trying to fix problems that have cropped up you couldn’t foresee.

But I believe in pro sports, the more proactive you can be in planning ahead using your philosophy and vision for building a championship team, the better off you will be on the field. In other words, make a clear plan and follow it as best you can.

The premise of all this assumes the Cowboys FO has a guiding vision in place, which is debatable, but for the sake of this thread, let’s assume the vision is there, and it is built around having a top tier OL, top running game, and a defense that is built to BBNB,keeping opponents under 20. Clearly about 60% of cap space will go the offense.

So looking at that philosophy and the last few years, Is this team’s FO mostly making proactive or reactive moves?

Here are a couple of proactive moves that seem clear:
1. Drafting 3 OLinemen in the first round in the last 6 drafts.
2. Drafting a top RB with the 4th pick in 2016 supporting the philosophy of building a great running game.
Those are two examples of proactive moves the team has made.

Now reactive moves:
1. Drafting Ryan Switzer to fix the return game that hasn’t been same since 2014.
2. Trying to fix the pass rush issues this team had in 2014 by signing team cancer Greg Hardy in 2015.
Again not all reactive moves are bad, but you can’t build a winner that way.

So in closing, what are we doing this offseason that is proactive and what are doing that’s reactive?

I believe the new look coaching staff is a proactive move, possibly looking for future replacements of our OC, DC & HC

 

[Alexander]

I see you’re very humble too, lol.

You have encountered the equivalent of the homer fan bulldog that is on a chain that is about five feet away from where you are walking.

No reason to be startled. There will never be any intellectual discussion.

Just keep walking. Then feel sorry for it.

 

[Diehardblues]

I would classify the OL picks as reactive to Romo's agent after Booger's comments about Romo being the only one to play behind that line. I would also classify taking the best all around back to come out in a long time as reactive to needing additional protection for Romo as Zeke was considered an excellent blocker and receiver.

In fact, I would classify almost everything the Cowboys do as reactive. I don't know if there is a more season to season team than the Cowboys and the only reason I know they are is because they talk so much. Booger talks more than all of the other 31 other GM's combined.

Look at these coaching changes. They didn't make that proactive, they reacted to the contracts expiring and actually waited for that.

And how many times did you hear the Cowboys say "taking what the defense gives them"? The ultimate definition of proactive.

Agreed. We’re mostly reactive. We don’t anticipate problems only reacting to them.

Except TE’s. We are always looking ahead for a good backup TE. Lol

 

[Verdict]

It’s probably safe to say most of us would agree that being proactively ahead in anticipation of problems is better that waiting until a problem occurs then reacting to fix it.

That’s not to say that being reactive to problems is always bad either. Those moves are usually made while trying to fix problems that have cropped up you couldn’t foresee.

But I believe in pro sports, the more proactive you can be in planning ahead using your philosophy and vision for building a championship team, the better off you will be on the field. In other words, make a clear plan and follow it as best you can.

The premise of all this assumes the Cowboys FO has a guiding vision in place, which is debatable, but for the sake of this thread, let’s assume the vision is there, and it is built around having a top tier OL, top running game, and a defense that is built to BBNB,keeping opponents under 20. Clearly about 60% of cap space will go the offense.

So looking at that philosophy and the last few years, Is this team’s FO mostly making proactive or reactive moves?

Here are a couple of proactive moves that seem clear:
1. Drafting 3 OLinemen in the first round in the last 6 drafts.
2. Drafting a top RB with the 4th pick in 2016 supporting the philosophy of building a great running game.
Those are two examples of proactive moves the team has made.

Now reactive moves:
1. Drafting Ryan Switzer to fix the return game that hasn’t been same since 2014.
2. Trying to fix the pass rush issues this team had in 2014 by signing team cancer Greg Hardy in 2015.
Again not all reactive moves are bad, but you can’t build a winner that way.

So in closing, what are we doing this offseason that is proactive and what are doing that’s reactive?

Being proactive would be to draftvan OT in the first round or General Lee's replacement.

 

[buybuydandavis]

Here are a couple of proactive moves that seem clear:
1. Drafting 3 OLinemen in the first round in the last 6 drafts.
2. Drafting a top RB with the 4th pick in 2016 supporting the philosophy of building a great running game.
Those are two examples of proactive moves the team has made.

Now reactive moves:
1. Drafting Ryan Switzer to fix the return game that hasn’t been same since 2014.
2. Trying to fix the pass rush issues this team had in 2014 by signing team cancer Greg Hardy in 2015.

I disagree with the classifications some. Martin was entirely reactive. He fell in our laps.

Drafting Zeke was reactive too, if you consider that a Romo window pick, which I do, and consider making a Romo window pick reactive, which is arguable.

If we already knew we had a new young QB, I wouldn't have taken him. You don't pick RB 4th to build your team, particularly with a suspension hanging over his head. (I believe that was known at the time.) I was for it for the Romo window. Arguably it was also reactive, as in we got caught with our pants down, without a developed young RB. That's what I'm really for. Churning mid round RBs.

As for Switzer, I think that was an attempt to proactively be ready to replace Beasley, who had just come off a huge season.

And Greg Hardy is wildcatter Jerry taking risks others wouldn't. That one didn't pan out. But those risks are to me one of the proactive things Jerry does. There was a reactive component too, in that we had squat at RDE at the time.

 

[Diehardblues]

good stuff as always, bob. chance favors the prepared mind. the cowboys all too often deal in crisis management mode. they really believed romo would play 5 more years until he went down in seattle. they still seem to have made no provision for the day witten no longer plays. unless they think rico is as good as rico seems to think he is. despite not having run a single down in an nfl game. now they've put themselves in a bad position regarding dez. they know he's overpaid, they know he's showing diminished skills. and they still don't seem to know what to do about it. they know they're probably going to lose hitch. they know sean lee will miss 4-6 games a year, and yet seem to have put all their eggs in one basket, Jaylon smith and his still unrecovered nerve.

Yep!!

Crisis mgmt best describes our front office.

 

[Bobhaze]

Agreed. We’re mostly reactive. We don’t anticipate problems only reacting to them.

Except TE’s. We are always looking ahead for a good backup TE. Lol

It always seems to me the FO is about a year or two behind in recognizing needs before they are a problem. Romo was a perfect example. They either were completely blind and stupid believing he had “4- 5 more years” after 2014 season which ended up being his last real season. They have apparently waited until Dez is washed up before addressing the #1 WR position and who knows if they will this year. Instead of waiting to address a position when someone is almost done, think ahead.

The more I’ve thought about it, the more I think the lack of foresight by this FO makes it an organization of chasers instead of leaders.