Switzer interview - staff wanted him to be a RB

[Beast_from_East]

As soon as the trade was completed I became more concerned over what we have rather than what we gave up. We may have made a mistake in how we handled Switzer and his role but Ward is the cow in the barn now. I'm looking forward to how much milk we can get rather than crying over what was presumably spilled.

Well the last owner of the cow got very little milk at all, that is why he sold you the cow for basically nothing.

 

[irving]

Dude is as quick as it comes. Top end speed is another discussion. I have 0 faith Austin will be as good at PR as Switzer. I hope he proves me wrong.

Your joking right? and don't mean any disrespect to you, but Tavon Austin is quite the NFL punt returner, as a matter of fact Switzer has never shown the ability Austin has. Most people myself included will tell you Switzer is not in the same class as Austin when it comes to returning punts. Now of course you could say Switzer has never been given the opportunity to showcase his ability while in Dallas.

 

[BigCatMonaco]

As a senior in high school he had 237 rushing yards per game and 6 total catches.

And the cowboys wanted donnell pumphrey who was stolen before they took switzer. Makes sense they wanted him to play some snaps at rb. But something about his attitude at times bugged me.

 

[Jumbo075]

Okay, so I read through 7 full pages hoping to find someone with some sanity about the Switzer/Ward trade that wasn't going off half-cocked, and running with a BS rumor created by taking things out of context.

Seriously, the Cowboys didn't trade away Switzer because they acquired Tavon Austin. Austin is on a one-year deal. Beasley's contract runs out at the end of 2018. The Cowboys plan to have Switzer as a replacement for Beasley didn't change because of the acquisition of Tavon Austin.

The reality is that the RAIDERS initiated a trade offer for Switzer because they liked him. In order to PRY HIM AWAY from the Cowboys, they had to offer up a former 2nd round pick at a position the Cowboys needed, and a player they liked in the draft a couple of years ago. The Cowboys weren't dumping Switzer. They had an unexpected opportunity to improve the team by giving up a player THEY VALUED, for another player of value. The Cowboys didn't so much "give up" on Switzer, as they seized an opportunity to improve the Defensive Line.

Certainly, Switzer is entitled to feel a little confused and rejected. That's just normal human reaction. But Switzer was trying to be positive about his new team overall in the interview. The Cowboys never said he did anything wrong. It was he reporter who posed the question. Then a third party Pro Football Talk (PFT) swooped in, took a quotation out of its context, and tried to create a negative story concerning the Cowboys - which was clearly not the intention of Switzer. Switzer wasn't trying to throw shade at the Cowboys, at all.

As for Tavon Austin converting to RB, last year with the Rams, he had 13 receptions, and 59 carries. Two seasons prior, he had 52 carries as a RB for 434 yards. If anyone "converted" Austin to a RB, it was the Rams, not the Cowboys. That doesn't mean the Cowboys were trying to convert Switzer to RB, or that Austin affected the status of Switzer on the team.

It came down to this.

• For the Raiders new coaching staff, the value of WR Switzer > the value of DT Ward, especially after just drafting DT Hall and DT Hurst. So they offered Ward to the Cowboys.
• For the Cowboys, the value of DT Ward > than the value of WR Switzer, especially after just drafting Gallup and Wilson, and signing Hurns and Thompson. So they accepted the Raiders offer.

It's not about Tavon Austin, or the Cowboys wanting to turn Switzer into a RB.

Right after the story broke, Ryan Switzer tweeted back at the PFT story

Ryan Switzer‏Verified account @Switz
Replying to @ProFootballTalk
Such a misleading and bad headliner. Out of everything said in a positive article, that’s what you make the title.

9:40 AM - 7 May 2018​

PFT defended their headline by quoting Switzer directly. And then there was this response on Twitter:

.‏ @VixtolR
Replying to @ProFootballTalk @Switz
He didn’t claim that he didn’t say that; he was stating that you took the negative and made it the headline to focus on

9:47 AM - 7 May 2018
​

PFT responded

ProFootballTalk‏Verified account @ProFootballTalk
Replying to @VixtolR @Switz
That's how it works. No one wants to read the flowery and predictable. They want to read the interesting stuff. Outlets that don't mine articles for the interesting content fail.

9:57 AM - 7 May 2018​

And this is the next response to PFT

Fitz‏ @Keenan_Fitz
Replying to @ProFootballTalk @VixtolR @Switz
So you mean falsely shaping a person’s character and dedication to the sport and their team and making it seem as though blame is being thrown around is the best way to write headlines ? Gotcha.

10:03 AM - 7 May 2018​

Finally, go read the actual interview: https://247sports.com/nfl/dallas-co...xamines-abrupt-divorce-from-Cowboys-118031958

Really, guys, it wasn't that hard to look up what was actually said, and the context in which it was said. Pro Football Talk purposely misrepresented the overall context by pulling a quotation out, and making it the focus of their reporting. In context, Switzer responded to a question about what he did wrong to get traded, and say "I don't know" several times, but offers a bit a speculation because while he had 6 receptions, he also had 4 carries in his rookie season. But in the same interview, he says that he did the best he could, and what the coaches asked him to do. He also says the Cowboys didn't take advantage of all his skills, which is certainly true. But it doesn't mean the Cowboys didn't have a plan to use his skills that would have been implemented if the opportunity to trade for Ward had not come along.

 

[Cmac]

Switzer was never meant to be a RB, nor is Austin. Stephen did a bit of misspeak when he used the generic term "RB". More aptly, he's talking about the same role Lucky Whitehead played. That's also the role they envision for Austin, but he also has the skill set to handle a lot of what Lance Dunbar's role entailed.

The most effective thing Lucky did was the jet sweep. He demonstrated on more than one occasion that he was a threat to break a big play, which forced defenses to honor and respect the look itself when the Cowboys faked the handoff to him (giving the ball to Zeke or as play action). Go back and watch 2016 video and see how defenses reacted when they got the jet sweep look (especially after the Green Bay game, when Lucky broke one for 30+ yards) - regardless of whether Lucky actually got the ball or not.

Then watch video from last year. Switzer never drew the same respect on that look. Austin, OTOH, is a bonafide threat to break one/ Defens es will have to respect the action, whether he gets the ball or not.

He's not a RB, but the position is more of a hybrid of RB and WR.

While being routinely outcoached or failing to adjust......Excuses are already in place and Next Man Up to toss under the bus.

 

[Hadenough]

I never understood why the Cowboys just didnt draft players that could fill the role. There are always a handful of shifty RBs that can catch the ball and return punts and kickoffs. Everything always seems to be a major conversion project.

 

[Bullflop]

Switzer wasn't going to be on the field as a receiver. Williams, Hurns, Beasley are all going to get snaps on offense over him because they're all better wide receivers.

Was he a solid punt returner? Yeah, he took one to the house which isn't easy. But he also fumbled away a punt against the Rams that was a huge factor in the momentum swing that led to them winning the game. He also fielded punts he should have fair caught and almost did it a bunch of other times.

He's a JAG who they traded for a DL project who has more potential to make a difference this year.

If I was a betting man, I'd wager you won't hear Switzer's name out of Oakland unless it's for fumbling away a punt there too.

It would be reasonable to say that the staff lost confidence in him to make rational decisions.

The frequency of the poor choices he made on a regular basis did nothing to help his cause.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

Okay, so I read through 7 full pages hoping to find someone with some sanity about the Switzer/Ward trade that wasn't going off half-cocked, and running with a BS rumor created by taking things out of context.

Seriously, the Cowboys didn't trade away Switzer because they acquired Tavon Austin. Austin is on a one-year deal. Beasley's contract runs out at the end of 2018. The Cowboys plan to have Switzer as a replacement for Beasley didn't change because of the acquisition of Tavon Austin.

The reality is that the RAIDERS initiated a trade offer for Switzer because they liked him. In order to PRY HIM AWAY from the Cowboys, they had to offer up a former 2nd round pick at a position the Cowboys needed, and a player they liked in the draft a couple of years ago. The Cowboys weren't dumping Switzer. They had an unexpected opportunity to improve the team by giving up a player THEY VALUED, for another player of value. The Cowboys didn't so much "give up" on Switzer, as they seized an opportunity to improve the Defensive Line.

Certainly, Switzer is entitled to feel a little confused and rejected. That's just normal human reaction. But Switzer was trying to be positive about his new team overall in the interview. The Cowboys never said he did anything wrong. It was he reporter who posed the question. Then a third party Pro Football Talk (PFT) swooped in, took a quotation out of its context, and tried to create a negative story concerning the Cowboys - which was clearly not the intention of Switzer. Switzer wasn't trying to throw shade at the Cowboys, at all.

As for Tavon Austin converting to RB, last year with the Rams, he had 13 receptions, and 59 carries. Two seasons prior, he had 52 carries as a RB for 434 yards. If anyone "converted" Austin to a RB, it was the Rams, not the Cowboys. That doesn't mean the Cowboys were trying to convert Switzer to RB, or that Austin affected the status of Switzer on the team.

It came down to this.

• For the Raiders new coaching staff, the value of WR Switzer > the value of DT Ward, especially after just drafting DT Hall and DT Hurst. So they offered Ward to the Cowboys.
• For the Cowboys, the value of DT Ward > than the value of WR Switzer, especially after just drafting Gallup and Wilson, and signing Hurns and Thompson. So they accepted the Raiders offer.

It's not about Tavon Austin, or the Cowboys wanting to turn Switzer into a RB.

Right after the story broke, Ryan Switzer tweeted back at the PFT story

Ryan Switzer‏Verified account @Switz
Replying to @ProFootballTalk
Such a misleading and bad headliner. Out of everything said in a positive article, that’s what you make the title.

9:40 AM - 7 May 2018​

PFT defended their headline by quoting Switzer directly. And then there was this response on Twitter:

.‏ @VixtolR
Replying to @ProFootballTalk @Switz
He didn’t claim that he didn’t say that; he was stating that you took the negative and made it the headline to focus on

9:47 AM - 7 May 2018
​

PFT responded

ProFootballTalk‏Verified account @ProFootballTalk
Replying to @VixtolR @Switz
That's how it works. No one wants to read the flowery and predictable. They want to read the interesting stuff. Outlets that don't mine articles for the interesting content fail.

9:57 AM - 7 May 2018​

And this is the next response to PFT

Fitz‏ @Keenan_Fitz
Replying to @ProFootballTalk @VixtolR @Switz
So you mean falsely shaping a person’s character and dedication to the sport and their team and making it seem as though blame is being thrown around is the best way to write headlines ? Gotcha.

10:03 AM - 7 May 2018​

Finally, go read the actual interview: https://247sports.com/nfl/dallas-co...xamines-abrupt-divorce-from-Cowboys-118031958

Really, guys, it wasn't that hard to look up what was actually said, and the context in which it was said. Pro Football Talk purposely misrepresented the overall context by pulling a quotation out, and making it the focus of their reporting. In context, Switzer responded to a question about what he did wrong to get traded, and say "I don't know" several times, but offers a bit a speculation because while he had 6 receptions, he also had 4 carries in his rookie season. But in the same interview, he says that he did the best he could, and what the coaches asked him to do. He also says the Cowboys didn't take advantage of all his skills, which is certainly true. But it doesn't mean the Cowboys didn't have a plan to use his skills that would have been implemented if the opportunity to trade for Ward had not come along.

It won't work. I have tried to explain what you just said but some can't seem to understand it. Now you went much farther into detail and posted direct quotes and I didn't. Some dislike Switzer so much they have no will to understand the facts

 

[Irvin88_4life]

Your joking right? and don't mean any disrespect to you, but Tavon Austin is quite the NFL punt returner, as a matter of fact Switzer has never shown the ability Austin has. Most people myself included will tell you Switzer is not in the same class as Austin when it comes to returning punts. Now of course you could say Switzer has never been given the opportunity to showcase his ability while in Dallas.

How do you figure? Austin hasn't scored a TD on punts in 2 years. Last year he had 53 yards returning punts...... Switzer had more then that on the punt he took to the house.

Did you even watch Austin the past couple of years or are you going off of name recognition

 

[Jumbo075]

How do you figure? Austin hasn't scored a TD on punts in 2 years. Last year he had 53 yards returning punts...... Switzer had more then that on the punt he took to the house.

Did you even watch Austin the past couple of years or are you going off of name recognition

I keep saying that Austin had nothing to do with the trade of Switzer for Ward. Austin, who was used mostly as a RB for the Rams last year, was brought in to replace Lance Dunbar. The Cowboys signed Deonte Thompson, who can replace Switzer as a returner. But the plan was to keep Switzer. The plan changed when the Raiders offered Ward, who the Cowboys really liked at DT a couple of years ago. Now, they have to come up with a new plan at the returner position. It remains to be seen what that plan is. Maybe Austin figures into Plan B, maybe he doesn't. But Plan A was Switzer, and now they have to come up with something to replace Switzer since they traded him for Ward.

The fallacy to a whole lot of thinking is that the Cowboys had a problem with Switzer. They didn't. But they had to give something of value to get something of value. It really is that simple.

 

[G2]

I keep saying that Austin had nothing to do with the trade of Switzer for Ward. Austin, who was used mostly as a RB for the Rams last year, was brought in to replace Lance Dunbar. The Cowboys signed Deonte Thompson, who can replace Switzer as a returner. But the plan was to keep Switzer. The plan changed when the Raiders offered Ward, who the Cowboys really liked at DT a couple of years ago. Now, they have to come up with a new plan at the returner position. It remains to be seen what that plan is. Maybe Austin figures into Plan B, maybe he doesn't. But Plan A was Switzer, and now they have to come up with something to replace Switzer since they traded him for Ward.

The fallacy to a whole lot of thinking is that the Cowboys had a problem with Switzer. They didn't. But they had to give something of value to get something of value. It really is that simple.

It was mentioned that Switzer caused a little drama wanting/demanding more looks. That's really not that unrealistic to imagine.

 

[Roadtrip635]

Your joking right? and don't mean any disrespect to you, but Tavon Austin is quite the NFL punt returner, as a matter of fact Switzer has never shown the ability Austin has. Most people myself included will tell you Switzer is not in the same class as Austin when it comes to returning punts. Now of course you could say Switzer has never been given the opportunity to showcase his ability while in Dallas.

You're right Switzer is not in the same class as Austin as a returner. Switzer only had 1 fumble to Austin's 5 last year. Austin averages about 4 fumbled punts a season, it's pretty impressive people let him field punts as long as they did. Let's hope that's not part of his job description in Dallas.

 

[rpntex]

While being routinely outcoached or failing to adjust......Excuses are already in place and Next Man Up to toss under the bus.

What excuses? They thought Switzer was a good fit for that role, and it turned out that he wasn’t after all.

 

[DeaconMoss]

Your joking right? and don't mean any disrespect to you, but Tavon Austin is quite the NFL punt returner, as a matter of fact Switzer has never shown the ability Austin has. Most people myself included will tell you Switzer is not in the same class as Austin when it comes to returning punts. Now of course you could say Switzer has never been given the opportunity to showcase his ability while in Dallas.

facepalm. First off its you're.



Austin is a horrible PR. He has fumbled the ball 17 times on punts. Are you kidding me right now? The one Switz dropped IMO was due to Woods crowding him for no reason and the defender dove at his feet, which could have been called interference. I've seen that dude return many many punts in person. He is dangerous. Punters know it and kick away from him. Coaches know it and do everything they can so he doesn't get a chance to return it. And FWIW I think he had more upside than Beasley as a WR. But Chucky stole one from us. I think he stole a good one that we may regret. Austin is the guy I want in a footrace, but in a football game, not so much. And Ward? We'll see. We have tons of DE/3t on the roster already. How many does one team need?

 

[xwalker]

Okay, so I read through 7 full pages hoping to find someone with some sanity about the Switzer/Ward trade that wasn't going off half-cocked, and running with a BS rumor created by taking things out of context.

Seriously, the Cowboys didn't trade away Switzer because they acquired Tavon Austin. Austin is on a one-year deal. Beasley's contract runs out at the end of 2018. The Cowboys plan to have Switzer as a replacement for Beasley didn't change because of the acquisition of Tavon Austin.

The reality is that the RAIDERS initiated a trade offer for Switzer because they liked him. In order to PRY HIM AWAY from the Cowboys, they had to offer up a former 2nd round pick at a position the Cowboys needed, and a player they liked in the draft a couple of years ago. The Cowboys weren't dumping Switzer. They had an unexpected opportunity to improve the team by giving up a player THEY VALUED, for another player of value. The Cowboys didn't so much "give up" on Switzer, as they seized an opportunity to improve the Defensive Line.

Certainly, Switzer is entitled to feel a little confused and rejected. That's just normal human reaction. But Switzer was trying to be positive about his new team overall in the interview. The Cowboys never said he did anything wrong. It was he reporter who posed the question. Then a third party Pro Football Talk (PFT) swooped in, took a quotation out of its context, and tried to create a negative story concerning the Cowboys - which was clearly not the intention of Switzer. Switzer wasn't trying to throw shade at the Cowboys, at all.

As for Tavon Austin converting to RB, last year with the Rams, he had 13 receptions, and 59 carries. Two seasons prior, he had 52 carries as a RB for 434 yards. If anyone "converted" Austin to a RB, it was the Rams, not the Cowboys. That doesn't mean the Cowboys were trying to convert Switzer to RB, or that Austin affected the status of Switzer on the team.

It came down to this.

• For the Raiders new coaching staff, the value of WR Switzer > the value of DT Ward, especially after just drafting DT Hall and DT Hurst. So they offered Ward to the Cowboys.
• For the Cowboys, the value of DT Ward > than the value of WR Switzer, especially after just drafting Gallup and Wilson, and signing Hurns and Thompson. So they accepted the Raiders offer.

It's not about Tavon Austin, or the Cowboys wanting to turn Switzer into a RB.

Right after the story broke, Ryan Switzer tweeted back at the PFT story

Ryan Switzer‏Verified account @Switz
Replying to @ProFootballTalk
Such a misleading and bad headliner. Out of everything said in a positive article, that’s what you make the title.

9:40 AM - 7 May 2018​

PFT defended their headline by quoting Switzer directly. And then there was this response on Twitter:

.‏ @VixtolR
Replying to @ProFootballTalk @Switz
He didn’t claim that he didn’t say that; he was stating that you took the negative and made it the headline to focus on

9:47 AM - 7 May 2018
​

PFT responded

ProFootballTalk‏Verified account @ProFootballTalk
Replying to @VixtolR @Switz
That's how it works. No one wants to read the flowery and predictable. They want to read the interesting stuff. Outlets that don't mine articles for the interesting content fail.

9:57 AM - 7 May 2018​

And this is the next response to PFT

Fitz‏ @Keenan_Fitz
Replying to @ProFootballTalk @VixtolR @Switz
So you mean falsely shaping a person’s character and dedication to the sport and their team and making it seem as though blame is being thrown around is the best way to write headlines ? Gotcha.

10:03 AM - 7 May 2018​

Finally, go read the actual interview: https://247sports.com/nfl/dallas-co...xamines-abrupt-divorce-from-Cowboys-118031958

Really, guys, it wasn't that hard to look up what was actually said, and the context in which it was said. Pro Football Talk purposely misrepresented the overall context by pulling a quotation out, and making it the focus of their reporting. In context, Switzer responded to a question about what he did wrong to get traded, and say "I don't know" several times, but offers a bit a speculation because while he had 6 receptions, he also had 4 carries in his rookie season. But in the same interview, he says that he did the best he could, and what the coaches asked him to do. He also says the Cowboys didn't take advantage of all his skills, which is certainly true. But it doesn't mean the Cowboys didn't have a plan to use his skills that would have been implemented if the opportunity to trade for Ward had not come along.

I agree that Austin was not part of the Switzer decision.

The WR list is long now even with Austin as a RB. The probability of Switzer making the team was low and the probability of Ward making the team seems better than for Switzer.

It was a strain on depth to carry 2 slot-only type WRs. They needed Switzer to function as a utility player to give him a place on offense as a rookie.

The long term value is likely higher for Ward if they both live up to their potential.
Switzer Upside
Beasley plus Punt Returner.

Ward Upside
David Irving

If Irving has a good year he could get 12M per or more from somebody.

If Beasley has a great year he'll likely get less than 5M per.

 

[Jumbo075]

It was mentioned that Switzer caused a little drama wanting/demanding more looks. That's really not that unrealistic to imagine.

That's not drama. If the Cowboys drafted a player who was satisfied staying on the bench, then THAT would be a problem. There is nothing wrong with a young player who wants to play more.

 

[G2]

That's not drama. If the Cowboys drafted a player who was satisfied staying on the bench, then THAT would be a problem. There is nothing wrong with a young player who wants to play more.

Agree to disagree. Obviously a team wants players who demand the ball. That doesn't mean it's not disruptive. There's a right way and a wrong way to go about it. Especially if the staff thinks they want to go in a certain direction. Which they did.

 

[conner01]

Switzer is highly overrated, I just don't understand where the hype came from in the beginning. He is too short and does not have great speed. The hype from fans make him get cute in punt returns and made key mistakes.

So we should cut Beasley
They are the same size
And Austin

 

[Jumbo075]

Agree to disagree. Obviously a team wants players who demand the ball. That doesn't mean it's not disruptive. There's a right way and a wrong way to go about it. Especially if the staff thinks they want to go in a certain direction. Which they did.

There is no evidence to support the claim that the Cowboys wanted to get rid of Switzer. They weren't shopping him. One of the former Dallas coaches likes him so much that he convinced his new team to trade for him. If he was a problem child, that wouldn't have happened.

I don't understand why fans need to find something negative about Switzer to justify the trade. From my POV, there were no negatives about Switzer. There was only an opportunity to get a DT they liked in the 2016 draft, but didn't get to pick at that time.

 

[Billyd]

Lets face it. DALLAS, reached for Switz and tried to make him something he wasnt. In no way was Switz a rb..Too slow, and really slow laterally..

Seemed like a splash pick last year we could have used for a better player of need like a lbr yada...Another example of the Cowboys getting cute on draft day!