The Argument For Drafting a QB With the 10 Pick

KeepinTime

Well-Known Member
Messages
890
Reaction score
822
It torqed Rodgers off so bad that he now wants to be the full-time host of the TV game show, Jeopardy.
Please for the love of God, don’t let this happen!! Jeopardy is my favorite show. Having that smug ***** step in for Trebek would be the worst.
 

plasticman

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,394
Reaction score
15,914
You know, when my forum account flags 2 likes and 23 quotes, it kind of makes me feel like there isn't a whole lot of agreement, which is fine. I didn't expect a whole lot of agreement. As a matter of fact, i don't agree with the move....about 98% of me.

The reasons are legitimate. The Cowboy have so many needs on defense. However, we seem to be having to talk ourselves into taking two, maybe three possible choices. That seems kind of weak to me. At #10 there should be at least a half dozen exciting choices. Where are the DT's. considering the run defense, a big blue chip DT should be there at #10 but I don't see one in this round, actually.

Also, according to the experts I'm reading, this draft is heavy in DB's in rounds 2-3. Is taking a CB with the #10 pick really that critical? Most believe the top defensive prospects will be gone.

There is definitely some talent in the top ten at OT and I believe the Cowboys will need some help at that position, I don't feel at all confident in the health of either starter. there is also some really good WR's, but been there, done that.

I would put as much as 70% confidence that the Cowboys are going to trade down, They may have already targeted someone that they can get at a lower position in the 1st round. However, what if they can't find a trade partner willing to meat Jerry's demands? Is there going to be an almost "can't miss" player out there?

The best argument for not taking the QB to me is the salary. If we are talking about 10 million a year for a rookie, then forget it. I didn't realize the rookie cap went that high after the top 5. I was figuring on about 3 mill a year and i think now i am wrong on that figure.

I haven't looked into your quotes yet, so this should be interesting although it's probably not going to increase my self confidence.
 

JD_KaPow

jimnabby
Messages
11,035
Reaction score
10,803
I absolutely get that. Then again, if they had a redo on the 2016 draft, where would they put Dak? Was he overvalued?
Obviously not. But one could certainly argue that Goff was. Many would argue that Wentz was, although I think what happened to him is more the fault of how the Eagles managed him than the draft evaluation of him. Lynch was overvalued. Hackenburg was. Kessler, Cook? Brissett didn't end up bringing much in trade.

If a QB drops down to 10 then his inflated value has become somewhat deflated, wouldn't you agree?
Depends on what you mean by "drops." We haven't been talking about the amazing 5-QB class of '21 for a long time. It's only recently that people are considering the possibility that 5 guys go in the top ten. So no, I don't think that only 4 QBs going in the top ten would mean that the 5th guy was some amazing talent and we're super-lucky to have him available at 10.

And if the 2016 draft proves anything, it's that drafting QBs is really risky. So I ask you again, why should we take on that amount of risk for a guy who we don't plan on starting, when we could instead pass that risk off on someone else who is willing to trade up to that spot?
 

jrumann59

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,948
Reaction score
8,733
If the player we want is nowhere near #10 and the QB in question is head and shoulders better than other talents. But I would say trade down and try and do to some one that jerry gets done to him on trades. In all honesty next year and the following year would be the time to seriously think about 1st round QB prospects.
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,412
Reaction score
12,148
Only happened twice. Last year, the OL and defense were the issue, not QB (except those 2 games with the backup backups).
 

BotchedLobotomy

Wide Right
Messages
14,815
Reaction score
22,032
I have an even worse one:

Now that we've drafted a QB #1 overall, let's take another QB in the 1st round of the supplemental draft, even though it looks as though that pick will cost us a top 5 overall in next year's draft.

That "idiotic, stupid, dumb, bird brained, absurd, asinine, crackpot, crazy, nutty, silly, hair brained, foolish, and wacky" idea contributed to three Super Bowls for the Cowboys in the 90's.
That team didn’t have one of the worst defenses in Cowboys history. We would all like to relive the 90s again, but it ain’t happening.
 

George

a legend in your own mind
Messages
1,163
Reaction score
541
I’m really shocked that there are people like you who actually want to draft a QB with the #10 pick this year. I just don’t get it.
I like Trask. Whenever we can get him. You are making a big deal. We could end up with another Taco.
 

Trajan

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,292
Reaction score
1,713
What are you people doing? There IS NO argument for drafting a QB at #10. Don’t show your ignorance in arguing that there is.

Well there is an argument for drafting a QB, just not a very good one. Now way would Jerry draft a QB after the huge deal he gave Dak. If anything I could see Jerry double down and go offense with the first pick to get Dak more weapons as poor play by Dak would make Jerry look the greater fool then he already is.
 

DandyDon52

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,207
Reaction score
15,282
Have the Cowboys ever traded up for a quarterback? Like, have they ever loved a quarterback in the first round so much that they moved heaven and earth to get that guy? In 30 years of quarterbacks, did they never come across one that they felt so strongly about that they decided they had to do it? That's sad.
Jerry likes big names, thats why he always goes for vet qb's, Romo would have never got a start with jerrys approval, parcells had to
put him in during a game.
Jerry might draft a guy like Trevor, but is never in a position to do so. like this year , Jags, are going to take him and they are not going to
trade down with anyone.
Jerry liked manziel, but only had a shot at him due to him falling, and only liked him cause he had a big name in college ball.
Jerry doesnt look past that name, and at skill set, or personal attributes etc, if they were a big name star in college, he wants them.
Thats why he jumped on lamb and gave him the 88 lol , it was based entirely on what he did in college, not what he might do in pros
 

DandyDon52

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,207
Reaction score
15,282
Well there is an argument for drafting a QB, just not a very good one. Now way would Jerry draft a QB after the huge deal he gave Dak. If anything I could see Jerry double down and go offense with the first pick to get Dak more weapons as poor play by Dak would make Jerry look the greater fool then he already is.
yeah most know jerry wont draft a qb high, and they need another good OL, either left tackle or left guard. and Jerry may like this pitts guy.
But I dont think he will trade up to get either one.
I know I would love to see the real dallas board, before or even after the draft, would be interesting.
 

DandyDon52

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,207
Reaction score
15,282
But Dak's still Dak regardless of how much he is paid.
that is what I have been telling people, dak wont be any better because he was paid so much, in fact we will be lucky
if he gets back to level he was when hurt.
 

plasticman

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,394
Reaction score
15,914
That team didn’t have one of the worst defenses in Cowboys history. We would all like to relive the 90s again, but it ain’t happening.
That team had one of the worse defenses in history.

Troy Aikman and Steve Walsh combined for a 1-15 record that season. The defense was 7th worse in Cowboy history for opponent points, 8th worse in history for opponent yardage, 9th worse in opponent passing rating.

The point was, if the Cowboys drafted a QB #1 overall, you would expect them to be committed to that quarterback much in the same way they are currently committed to Dak. In Aikman's case, it wasn't just a financial commitment, it was a draft investment of a #1 overall pick. And what do they do? They get another rookie QB. Some thought they were crazy but the Cowboys end up trading Walsh for two picks the following year followed by another pick the year after. In all, they received a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd pick. So they not only made Aikman a better QB through competition but it also paid off in trade value.
 

catiii

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,717
Reaction score
5,471
Playing devil's advocate, okay?

Please no insults and no references to my intelligence or lack thereof.....Nah, never mind!...Asking for mercy is just pouring gasoline on a fire.

Three times in the past 11 seasons the starting QB went down early in the season and it was all over, crash and burn. It would have been four seasons but a fourth round draft choice miraculously had one of the best rookie seasons in history, who expected that?

The Cowboys rolled out a slew of backups, mostly average quarterbacks when they were in their prime. Sometimes they were on one year contracts meaning that, even if they had a good showing, they were gone the following season.

Why not kill two birds with one stone? Draft a top tier QB, if the starter goes down, the rookie gets experience. He could be a legitimate starter the following season in which case the Cowboys trade one of them. Furthermore, when a player gets paid they seem to have the tendency to play soft that season. A legitimate talent backing him up could put a little fire to Dak's backside.

The rookie salary cap allows the Cowboys to draft a QB in the top ten, I think.

You could draft a productive non-QB player in the top ten but what difference would that make if Dak is injured again or if he performs poorly? Look at the value of good young quarterbacks these days. If the Cowboys cultivate a young QB while he serves as a quality backup, the Cowboys could end up with a trade reaping great value for their future.

Look at the history of the Cowboys successful seasons. Where there not two legitimate starters?....Lebaron/Meredith...Staubach/Morton....Staubach/White....Even Roger Staubach once revealed that a reason for his success was how hard he competed with Danny White, knowing how good his competition was. Jimmy Johnson drafted two QB's #1 overall in his first season, giving up the #1 overall pick in 1990 for taking Steve Walsh in the supplemental draft. Jimmy valued competition.

Ok....let 'er rip!
I'm not going to call you names. I think it's a brilliant idea.
 

atlantacowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
18,076
Reaction score
24,789
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
This debate was over the day we signed Dak to that huge contract. If there is a QB on the board at 10, we should be in good position to field tradeback offers.
 

Rockport

AmberBeer
Messages
41,077
Reaction score
41,060
That team had one of the worse defenses in history.

Troy Aikman and Steve Walsh combined for a 1-15 record that season. The defense was 7th worse in Cowboy history for opponent points, 8th worse in history for opponent yardage, 9th worse in opponent passing rating.

The point was, if the Cowboys drafted a QB #1 overall, you would expect them to be committed to that quarterback much in the same way they are currently committed to Dak. In Aikman's case, it wasn't just a financial commitment, it was a draft investment of a #1 overall pick. And what do they do? They get another rookie QB. Some thought they were crazy but the Cowboys end up trading Walsh for two picks the following year followed by another pick the year after. In all, they received a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd pick. So they not only made Aikman a better QB through competition but it also paid off in trade value.
They didn’t draft Walsh.
 

atlantacowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
18,076
Reaction score
24,789
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
That team had one of the worse defenses in history.

Troy Aikman and Steve Walsh combined for a 1-15 record that season. The defense was 7th worse in Cowboy history for opponent points, 8th worse in history for opponent yardage, 9th worse in opponent passing rating.

The point was, if the Cowboys drafted a QB #1 overall, you would expect them to be committed to that quarterback much in the same way they are currently committed to Dak. In Aikman's case, it wasn't just a financial commitment, it was a draft investment of a #1 overall pick. And what do they do? They get another rookie QB. Some thought they were crazy but the Cowboys end up trading Walsh for two picks the following year followed by another pick the year after. In all, they received a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd pick. So they not only made Aikman a better QB through competition but it also paid off in trade value.

That was an uncapped league and quite frankly we all thought Jimmy was nuts and accused him of nepotism when he used a first round pick on his former Miami U QB. But that was between 2 rookie QBs auditioning for a rookie coach. We have already committed to Dak and the Qb we would pick at #10 would get no shot. Thats a very different situation and doesn't even get into the fact that JJ was smarter than anyone else in the NFL at the time. He had a better eye for talent and that gave the Cowboys a real advantage.
 
Top