Is there any question Dallas needs to keep Gallup?

CT Dal Fan said:

It's true. Sometimes teams end up developing players for somebody else. But it's great for the players in that they can choose where they want to play and can pursue opportunities elsewhere just like the rest of us, however.

Click to expand...

See, now that's always been my point of contention.

If I agree to go to work for a company, do I have the right to choose which division I want to work? They want to send me "here" but I want to go "there". Do I have a right to demand where to be placed? No. However, I do have the right to quit that job and go work for a different company if I don't like that company's decision.

If a player decides he want to be in the NFL, why should he be able to decide which team he wants to play for? If he doesn't like the team he has been assigned to then he is free to go play in some other league, Canada, perhaps. Why should we view it as a right to play in the NFL for any team after the initial contract?

I suppose the obvious answer has to do with the way the NFL is structured, 32 "franchises" with 32 different and separate "owners".

Still.......I hate free agency.

Oz-of-Cowboy-Country said:

It's basically Gallup vs Lawrence, Cooper or Zeke. In order to keep Gallup we will have to part ways with one of the following... Lawrence, Cooper or Zeke. So, you have to ask yourself, which of those guys is Gallup more important than?

Click to expand...

I love me some Coop, but in this game you gotta stay young. Ideally at Wide Out I would want Lamb and Gallup. Now contract wise, I don't know if that is what you can do.

Reid1boys said:

Brown is not Gallup though. Hes easily replaced. Gallup is not.

Click to expand...

What exactly does that have to do with cap implications? LOL. You mentioned Tampa’s receivers and I stated Brown is cheap. None of ours are going to come cheap. I’ll keep you in the game but I’m not going to throw it for you.

plasticman said:

I hate free agency.

Doesn't matter how talented your personnel department is, somebody is going to get the opportunity to steal those players.

You can't keep all your best players, you can't truly build a team, you are forced to rely on young inexperienced players and hope they contribute while developing. Then, when they are fully developed, you have to make a choice. That's just not right.

Click to expand...

Every team faces the same thing. It is what it is.

Y

TwoDeep3 said:

Is there any question in your mind that Dallas needs to do their dead level best to keep this guy?

I do not recall any WR for this team, or any other, that plays the edges with such skill.

There has never been as much toe tapping at the Grand Ole Opry.

Click to expand...

Yes. They can’t over pay. Let someone else do it.

TwoDeep3 said:

Is there any question in your mind that Dallas needs to do their dead level best to keep this guy?

I do not recall any WR for this team, or any other, that plays the edges with such skill.

There has never been as much toe tapping at the Grand Ole Opry.

Click to expand...

But can the Cowboys afford him...and does he want to stay?

Anyone who want to get rid of Cooper has not paid attention to the struggles of Ceedee and others without him. Dropping Cooper in order to keep Gallupis one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard on this site.

TwoDeep3 said:

Is there any question in your mind that Dallas needs to do their dead level best to keep this guy?

I do not recall any WR for this team, or any other, that plays the edges with such skill.

There has never been as much toe tapping at the Grand Ole Opry.

Click to expand...

I really like Gallup, but I don't think we'll pay him enough to keep him because he's really a third receiver here and he's going to want No. 1 receiver money. Perhaps missing games will keep him from getting that.

However, when Lamb and Cooper were healthy and Wilson was playing the third receiver role, we seemed to be doing pretty well offensively. We'll miss some of the things Gallup provides if he leaves, but the offense can be effective without him.