Twitter: Cowboys Tweets 5/15

[Stash]

I can certainly see a situation where Crawford gets cut or traded, but you would have to have A) everyone stay healthy and B) the tryout guys like Jackson, Hyder and Jelks all perform above expectations. IF that happened, I could certainly see them moving on from Crawford in the preseason. But the chances of A & B both happening are close to zero.

Then what are we arguing about?

If injury occurs, the roster numbers will work themselves out.

In terms of expectations, again, Hyder has had an 8-sack season in a 4-3. Let me know when Crawford does. Maybe this is that year, huh?

Jackson and Jelks are unknowns with upside, do you think Crawford still has upside? But even if you sent Jelks packing, you still don't have enough roster spaces to keep everybody.

And you're conceding yourself that you can see the situation I'm referring to, so why such a staunch argument otherwise?

 

[Manwiththeplan]

Joseph S, McCoy DT and Lee LB
Those guys would improve this team ten fold.
No way on gods green earth Ramsey will be cut. And Treadwell is a wil card on a crap team

I still don't see why you think Darron Lee would make this team better. McCoy yes, Joseph slightly, he just is okay. But Lee would be overly expensive for a guy who would play 30% off the snaps.

 

[817Gill]

As long as you continue to make foolish and inaccurate claims. "Homie".


Weren't you that idiot claiming that Dak would be signing a contract weeks ago?

Nah I was the one saying he’d make 25+, the timing was based off the report, doesn’t have anything whatsoever to do with the $$ which was the main point. I bet you’re one of those “No Daks gonna get paid 18M like he deserves!” guys lol.

You think I’ll be wrong about Dak getting paid?

 

[Stash]

Nah I was the one saying he’d make 25+, the timing was based off the report, doesn’t have anything whatsoever to do with the $$ which was the main point. I bet you’re one of those “No Daks gonna get paid 18M like he deserves!” guys lol.

You think I’ll be wrong about Dak getting paid?

I think you've already been proven wrong.

But I guess you're not bright enough to realize that.

 

[Kaiser]

But again, they grossly overpaid for Thornton. They got Covington for next to nothing.

The point is risk though, most of us are assuming he is above Crawford on the depth chart at 1T but there is still risk in him moving from a 3-4 to a 4-3. Thornton was a much better player than Covington, and he tanked in making that switch.

 

[817Gill]

I would hate to open this site multiple times days just to have 20 alerts telling me I’m getting crapped on haha that prolly sucks

 

[Kaiser]

It wasn't a "depth chart", it was simply a numerical list of the names on the roster. That's a Strawman.

Troy Hambrick called, he said "What do Somethings Gotta Give mean"?

You listed cutting those guys as the downside to keeping Crawford, when this whole point is that Crawford's roster spot isn't in danger.

 

[817Gill]

I think you've already been proven wrong.

But I guess you're not bright enough to realize that.

So Dak’s not getting paid lol? I knew you were one of those guys haha

And please respond to that so you can open this thread having to argue with 4 people about multiple things, that should be enjoyable lol

 

[817Gill]

Troy Hambrick called, he said "What do Somethings Gotta Give mean"?

You listed cutting those guys as the downside to keeping Crawford, when this whole point is that Crawford's roster spot isn't in danger.

The man just struggles with basic logic lol. The immediate response he posted to me laughing at his “starter” argument was that Crawford wasn’t a starter... that should tell you all you have to know lol

 

[Stash]

The point is risk though, most of us are assuming he is above Crawford on the depth chart at 1T but there is still risk in him moving from a 3-4 to a 4-3. Thornton was a much better player than Covington, and he tanked in making that switch.

I guess I see things differently. Specifically from the point of Crawford not being a 1T in any way shape or form. It's the one position on the line he can't play. So it's not as though he and Covington would be competing for the role there.

Not sure if you've seen this on Covington but it's some food for thought:

9. CHRISTIAN COVINGTON


The former sixth rounder has only played 1,115 snaps over his four seasons, either due to strictly being a rotational piece or because of injuries.

Surrounded by the likes of J.J. Watt and Jadeveon Clowney, Covington had opportunities to take advantage of many one-on-ones, and he has demonstrated the ability to do so in his relatively small sample size, earning a pass-rush productivity of 8.1 in 2018, 19th-best among defensive tackles in 2018. The 25-year-old could be a prime candidate for a breakout in 2019 with the right fit and opportunity.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/ne...sive-linemen-set-to-enter-free-agency-in-2019

 

[Stash]

So Dak’s not getting paid lol? I knew you were one of those guys haha

And please respond to that so you can open this thread having to argue with 4 people about multiple things, that should be enjoyable lol

Nobody ever claimed Dak wouldn't get paid. But you claimed you knew something and you didn't. And you ended up looking like a fool.

 

[Stash]

Troy Hambrick called, he said "What do Somethings Gotta Give mean"?

You listed cutting those guys as the downside to keeping Crawford, when this whole point is that Crawford's roster spot isn't in danger.

"Something's gotta give" means you have 10 roster spots - at most - for your defensive linemen. I thought you would have realized that by now. But I see you're more focused on snark than relevant debate.

 

[Corso]

So great...

 

[Stash]

The man just struggles with basic logic lol. The immediate response he posted to me laughing at his “starter” argument was that Crawford wasn’t a starter... that should tell you all you have to know lol

Again, where are you "starting" him? What spot do you want Crawford as your starter?

You want to put him at RDE? Where he has 0 sacks for all of 2018? Or maybe inside at tackle where all of his sacks came from being unblocked on stunts?

Either way, you look bad.

 

[817Gill]

Nobody ever claimed Dak wouldn't get paid. But you claimed you knew something and you didn't. And you ended up looking like a fool.

Go to the thread and tell me nobody claimed he wouldn’t get paid lmao it was maybe 70% of the posters who thought he wouldn’t get that.

Now because of threads like that, we’ve had maybe 30 threads after on the pay Dak topic and I’ve actually seen a decent amount of ppl on here look at the facts and realize he is getting paid. Still a few people who think he won’t but they are much like you, completely wrong lol.

Get stuck on the timing if you want lol it was maybe 5% of the point of that thread lol whatever keeps you afloat big guy, it don’t bother me lol

 

[Stash]

Go to the thread and tell me nobody claimed he wouldn’t get paid lmao it was maybe 70% of the posters who thought he wouldn’t get that.

Now because of threads like that, we’ve had maybe 30 threads after on the pay Dak topic and I’ve actually seen a decent amount of ppl on here look at the facts and realize he is getting paid. Still a few people who think he won’t but they are much like you, completely wrong lol.

Get stuck on the timing if you want lol it was maybe 5% of the point of that thread lol whatever keeps you afloat big guy, it don’t bother me lol

Of course it doesn't. Like I said, you don't have the sense to realize how truly dumb you look. But then have the nerve to try to jump on anybody else?

Laughable.

 

[Kaiser]

"Something's gotta give" means you have 10 roster spots - at most - for your defensive linemen. I thought you would have realized that by now. But I see you're more focused on snark than relevant debate.

I'm focused on math, the snark is just a byproduct.

You said you have 10 roster spots and that with Jackson, Jelks, and Hyder competing with Crawford - therefore "somethings gotta give".

It doesn't. Crawfords on the roster and those three are trying to compete for what is likely one remaining roster spot. Something's gotta give - and its the long shot 7th round pick going to the practice squad like most 7th round picks do - if they earn it.

 

[Corso]

I'm focused on math, the snark is just a byproduct.

You said you have 10 roster spots and that with Jackson, Jelks, and Hyder competing with Crawford - therefore "somethings gotta give".

It doesn't. Crawfords on the roster and those three are trying to compete for what is likely one remaining roster spot. Something's gotta give - and its the long shot 7th round pick going to the practice squad like most 7th round picks do - if they earn it.

I enjoy snark byproducts...

 

[817Gill]

Of course it doesn't. Like I said, you don't have the sense to realize how truly dumb you look. But then have the nerve to try to jump on anybody else?

Laughable.

I’m dumb for saying Dak will get paid over 28M? lol keep em comin bud we’re having a field day over here lmao

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

The "issue" has never changed, despite your best wishes. A non-starter is costing this team $10 million in cap hit this year, unless that is changed. And is also taking up a valuable roster spot in an overstocked group with an abundance of young players.

You don't like that so now you want to change the conditions.

Crawford played in 15 regular season games last season. Crawford started all 15 games. How does that make him a non-starter again?