Should the Cowboys feel forced to reach for a defender with the 10th pick?

AsthmaField

AsthmaField

Outta bounds
Messages
26,326
Reaction score
43,954
Cowboyny said:
Gallup with one year left on his contract won't get you a 2nd rd pick, but still could get a late day 2, early day 3. Interesting enough, although he is the team's best receiver, team could consider dealing Cooper and his big contract. Chase/Lamb are legitimate #1 receiver talents and you would have them on controllable contracts for the next several years.
Click to expand...
I think there might be a team willing to go with a second. Secure him for this year and there would be no guarantee you’d have a shot at him in free agency next year, but having him on your team would give you an advantage on him re-signing there. Certainly no later than a 3rd, IMO.

We’ll likely never know though.

You might be right about Cooper instead. That might even be my preference.
 
Cowboyny

Cowboyny

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,758
Reaction score
18,981
AsthmaField said:
I think there might be a team willing to go with a second. Secure him for this year and there would be no guarantee you’d have a shot at him in free agency next year, but having him on your team would give you an advantage on him re-signing there. Certainly no later than a 3rd, IMO.

We’ll likely never know though.

You might be right about Cooper instead. That might even be my preference.
Click to expand...

Cooper is a very underrated player for the fanbase. Since he has arrived, the passing offense has taken off. Only in a unique situation, like having multiple #1 receivers can you even discuss this.

I really don't think any team out there would give up a 2nd rounder, when they have the pay the player a year later.
 
Beaker42

Beaker42

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,096
Reaction score
7,406
RandyOh said:
Tell him!!! Maybe it will light a fire under him and he comes out dominating
Click to expand...
He was doing just as well as FredBeard did when he first started until he got hurt. He’s our starting C.
 
RandyOh

RandyOh

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,107
Reaction score
2,958
Beaker42 said:
He was doing just as well as FredBeard did when he first started until he got hurt. He’s our starting C.
Click to expand...
Well then. Hope he continues to have the same career projection as Fredbeard. After such a crap year and crap season, was hard for me to keep up with anything positive. Thanks for the correction. Now if only we can finally figure out LG and swing tackle
 

cnuball21

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,021
Reaction score
9,169
I’m warming up to Pitts...he’s one of the top 5 players in the class IMO so I’d take him at 10.

Similar to taking Chase, I think if you go that route it frees you up in extending Gallup because Pitts can line up anywhere. Dude is unbelievable. He’s the most natural receiving TE with the best catch radius I can remember.

I’m not sure what the contract implications are with Jarwin but hopefully we’d be able to get out of that contract?
 
CATCH17

CATCH17

1st Round Pick
Messages
66,952
Reaction score
84,351
No.

Force something in FA.

Don’t do it in the draft.

If someone like Kyle Pitts were available you don’t just take a defender because you need defense.
 
BourbonBalz

BourbonBalz

Star4Ever
Messages
12,207
Reaction score
8,178
I’ve posted this before but I’ll do it again. Every team considers need when drafting. Saying you draft the BPA sounds good but it’s not practical. If Smith or Chase are at the top of our board and are available when our pick comes around, does anyone think we will take them? Would you want us to take them? Hell no. Everyone would go ballistic. If a QB happened to be at the top of the Chief’s board when they pick, do you think they will or should take him? Again, hell no. The same would go for whoever ends up with Watson. Should we have drafted a RB in the first round 2017 had one been the BPA on our board? Obviously not after taking Zeke the year before. The point is you do have to consider need to some extent. It’s just common sense. There’s a difference in reaching and not taking the BPA on your draft board.
 
ElGatoGrande

ElGatoGrande

EGG
Messages
9,702
Reaction score
6,873
Top 10 pick has to be OL or DL unless they have a QB in mind. You always go with the BIGS early unless it's a QB.
 
cowboybish

cowboybish

Well-Known Member
Messages
744
Reaction score
1,533
reddyuta said:
Pitts and Slater are on my short list at 10,cant dismiss talent because they play Offense.Slater could solve a lot of OL problems because he can play multiple positions at a high level.
Click to expand...
Pitts is what we were trying to make Rico into but that never happened.
 
Vinnie2u

Vinnie2u

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,753
Reaction score
11,151
If the Dallas Cowboys take a WR or TE at #10 shows that the FO has not learned a thing in the last 25 years. If you can’t find a defensive star at #10 you have no place owning a franchise. Buying shiny new toys gets us nowhere. I rather take a Oline guy...
 
CouchCoach

CouchCoach

Staff member
Messages
41,122
Reaction score
74,901
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
What defines a reach? Can that be determined prior to actually seeing them play for at least a year with the team?

Most felt Yosemite was a reach when he was drafted, most were sure they could have taken him in the 2nd but those weren't rumors about BAL being very high on him. That's the other defining part of a reach, "we could have taken him later" which is a complete unknown and pure speculation.

The Cowboys have a real need, a real problem, a bad defense and specifically a bad run defense and they must fix that. There is no such thing as BPA for a 6-10 team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top