A Radically Different Plan for the Cowboys

[T-RO]

So glad fans dont have a say so. They think jerry is bad? Imaginr one of us running it. It would be ten tines worse.

I suspect there are at least a few dozen fans here with a higher IQ than Jerry. And at this point, with his age and alcohol addled brain...his functional IQ is eroding by the day. Can the guy even complete a coherent sentence?

But worse than his IQ...it's Jerry's multiple bad habits that make him a train-wreck of a GM: short term thinking, refusal to cut bait on his mistakes, moth-to-the-flame love of shiny draft picks....and of course the biggie: his unwillingness to step out of the way.

 

[Muhast]

Aside from the Skins there aren't many teams like Dallas that were faced with a $20 million dollar hole.

I agree that FA is no miracle cure. I'd prefer to invest in keeping our own (though in recent years we haven't drafted enough good players for this to be an issue.)

Pittsburgh Steelers, new york jets, and saints are all pretty far over too. But your point is correct, not to many others are as far over

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

Here is what I would do if I were GM. It is radically different than what we'll likely see from Valley Ranch.

1. I'd have absorbed the necessary big hit in salary cap and gotten my books in order so that the future is clean. What's happening now with all these renegotiations is going to bleed us for years to come. And indeed I'd go further, in clearing out aging and dead wood (Austin, Free, etc)

2. If I could get somebody's 1, 2 and 3 for Romo --slightly less than has been suggested--I'd do that.

3. I'd make everybody angry and unhappy about the '13 season, but the team would be far better in the longterm. Without Romo we would be a 3-13 team. That's perfect.

4. I'd be willing to stink in 2013. I'd WANT to stink in 2013. Then next March we snag the pick of the litter of the young QBs. We'd have a high 2, a high 3, etc.

Consider where my plan would seat us:
-We'd have 3 premium picks from our trading partner.
-We'd have a top 3 or top 4 pick in the 2014 draft to get our QB because of 2013 suckage.
-We'd have lots of money to spend in future free agency, or to extend our own stars before they whiffed free agency.

I would miss Romo but you don't want to give a MASSIVE contract to a guy of his age...esp. when the cap situation already sucks. And hey...I'm a Romo fan.

Pretty lame plan.

Maybe it sounds good in a fantasy world, but its only worth considering if it is a plan that has no chance at failure, and thats not the real world.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I know EXACTLY what I'm talking about at the Macro level. We are in cap hell RIGHT NOW...scrambling around with our credit card, pushing our due dates back. As has been widely stated...we have no meaningful money to be a player in this year's free agency.

uh huh.

What is our cap status next year between dead money and contracts on the books. What about next year?

Heck, what about this year?

A generalization is not macro. When economists talk about GDP they still have a specific number behind it.

Just stop. You don't know and that is okay.

 

[Risen Star]

That is funny.. you are so torn. You know we desperately need to beef up the lines before we will have a chance to go anywhere (Even with a franchise qb) yet you love Romo so much you can't stomach trading him. This is where your head has to make the decision and not your heart. Jerry makes decisions with his heart and that is why we have been pathetic for 17 years.

I don't know how you got that from my response. I said nothing about my heart. I don't love any of these players. I love the team.

My head is saying Romo is a legitimate franchise QB and it's really hard to find those kinds of guys. I probably wouldn't be against this kind of approach of flushing the roster, getting the cap fixed and loading up on as many picks as possible to build a new contender, but trading Romo would scare me. I don't take him for granted. He's a winner saddled with the worst owner/GM in sports.

 

[Cowboy_Ace]

I understand nd love the idea of it, (I'm a huge romo fan too), I always wondered why nfl teams never do this, nba teams "tank" for the future... I like the thought, for the future anyways.. I also think by tankin u may need to trade ware aswell...no point in keeping him?

 

[Ring Leader]

I try really hard not to criticize posters; however, it just seems like this thread was created as a look-at-me "I" would do something radical.

If only they could play O-line.

 

[Nation]

I understand nd love the idea of it, (I'm a huge romo fan too), I always wondered why nfl teams never do this, nba teams "tank" for the future... I like the thought, for the future anyways.. I also think by tankin u may need to trade ware aswell...no point in keeping him?

There isn't tangible evidence that tanking improves you over the long haul any better than being average or great. It's not like the NBA where one superstar can turn a terrible team around.

 

[jobberone]

NFL teams without a QB rarely win anything significant. There have been a few exceptions. Finding franchise QBs is difficult. When you find one you keep him and ride that horse as long as possible.

So any plan that divests the franchise QB when there are several years left AND does not have a QB on board that has a good chance of becoming a franchise QB is fatally flawed.

 

[sonnyboy]

Here is what I would do if I were GM. It is radically different than what we'll likely see from Valley Ranch.

1. I'd have absorbed the necessary big hit in salary cap and gotten my books in order so that the future is clean. What's happening now with all these renegotiations is going to bleed us for years to come. And indeed I'd go further, in clearing out aging and dead wood (Austin, Free, etc)

2. If I could get somebody's 1, 2 and 3 for Romo --slightly less than has been suggested--I'd do that.

3. I'd make everybody angry and unhappy about the '13 season, but the team would be far better in the longterm. Without Romo we would be a 3-13 team. That's perfect.

4. I'd be willing to stink in 2013. I'd WANT to stink in 2013. Then next March we snag the pick of the litter of the young QBs. We'd have a high 2, a high 3, etc.

Consider where my plan would seat us:
-We'd have 3 premium picks from our trading partner.
-We'd have a top 3 or top 4 pick in the 2014 draft to get our QB because of 2013 suckage.
-We'd have lots of money to spend in future free agency, or to extend our own stars before they whiffed free agency.

I would miss Romo but you don't want to give a MASSIVE contract to a guy of his age...esp. when the cap situation already sucks. And hey...I'm a Romo fan.

I have a better idea. How about we keep our frachise QB for the rest of his prime (2-4) years and do our best to build around him.

 

[KB1122]

The one assumption in this evergreen discussion that I wonder about: is signing Romo long term really a better box office move? It is if he wins. But what if Romo and the team continue to miss the playoffs in the coming years. Is it really better to have him locked in long term?

Compare that to trading Romo, having one losing season, and drafting Johnny Football.

 

[T-RO]

I have a better idea. How about we keep our frachise QB for the rest of his prime (2-4) years and do our best to build around him.

You want to maintain status quo. But there is no such thing. It's evaporating before your eyes.

Retaining Romo is going to require massive money. Todd Archer reported that a top prominent AFC offensive coordinator claimed Tony Romo would quickly and easily become the highest paid player in the NFL if Dallas released him to free agency.

I seriously don't see Romo looking at that and then giving Jerry a cap-friendly deal this offseason. If he's got good business sense he won't. And in the NFL...if a player becomes an unrestricted free agent...when does he ever stay in the same city? The reality? If Tony doesn't sign an extension with Dallas...he's won't stay a Cowboy.

And if we know he's gone after this season...why not try to recoup some picks for him now?

You really want a team that is already hijacked with the the cap to hand Romo the biggest NFL check in history? Really?

 

[speedkilz88]

You want to maintain status quo. But there is no such thing. It's evaporating before your eyes.

Retaining Romo is going to require massive money. Todd Archer reported that a top prominent AFC offensive coordinator claimed Tony Romo would quickly and easily become the highest paid player in the NFL if Dallas released him to free agency.

I seriously don't see Romo looking at that and then giving Jerry a cap-friendly deal this offseason. If he's got good business sense he won't. And in the NFL...if a player becomes an unrestricted free agent...when does he ever stay in the same city? The reality? If Tony doesn't sign an extension with Dallas...he's won't stay a Cowboy.

And if we know he's gone after this season...why not try to recoup some picks for him now?

You really want a team that is already hijacked with the the cap to hand Romo the biggest NFL check in history? Really?

Ever hear of the franchise tag? Not that it will ever come to it. Romo will sign an extension fairly soon.

 

[T-RO]

Ever hear of the franchise tag?

The franchise tag would require the Cowboys to pay Romo $20 million* in 2014. That would nearly double the $11 million he's getting in 2013. And I suspect that teams cannot amortize that amount in any way....it must be paid as base guaranteed salary.

If F-tagged again in 2015 the number would be 24.2 million.**

So to use the franchise tag would still represent a huge salary increase and hit relative to the team's cap.

*Franchise tags insure the player must be paid the average of the top five salaries in the league at their respective position.

**source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/21/report-cowboys-launch-romo-negotiations/

 

[T-RO]

...I always wondered why nfl teams never do this, nba teams "tank" for the future... I like the thought, for the future anyways.. I also think by tankin u may need to trade ware aswell...no point in keeping him?

When I hear the term tank...I think of a team willfully going into non-compete mode...holding out starters, fake injuries, etc. I'm not suggesting that.

But with Orton as our quarterback, our defense adjusting to a new scheme, and the existing holes on the roster...I could easily see us going 4-12 or some such.

 

[speedkilz88]

The franchise tag would require the Cowboys to pay Romo $20 million* in 2014. That would nearly double the $11 million he's getting in 2013. And I suspect that teams cannot amortize that amount in any way....it must be paid as base guaranteed salary.

If F-tagged again in 2015 the number would be 24.2 million.**

So to use the franchise tag would still represent a huge salary increase and hit relative to the team's cap.

*Franchise tags insure the player must be paid the average of the top five salaries in the league at their respective position.

**source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/21/report-cowboys-launch-romo-negotiations/

You still don't get it. They would not let him go.

 

[Cowboy_Ace]

There isn't tangible evidence that tanking improves you over the long haul any better than being average or great. It's not like the NBA where one superstar can turn a terrible team around.

Lets say you trade romo for high pick this nd next say 1st nd 4th this nd 2nd next, u trade ware for second this nd first next. This yr we have 2firsts nd 2 2nds, same next year. But with one of this years firsts we trade back to the second for second this yr nd next yrs first... With three 1st nd 2 seconds next yr we come out with bridgewater nd clowney? Due to us sucking nd amount of high picks. U don't think hypothetically we would be better off for future, players nd cap? This is just a hypothetical scenario, that I in no way advocate. Just playing devils advocate (romo nd ware are 2of my fave cowboys)

 

[T-RO]

You still don't get it. They would not let him go.

On the contrary...you don't get it. What was my opening sentence in this whole thread? To save you the effort I'll put it here for you:

"Here is what I would do if I were GM. It is radically different than what we'll likely see from Valley Ranch."

I am arguing a plan altogether different. As far as what we see from Rally Blanch? The Cowboys do seem intent on trying (coercing even) Romo into staying...once again saddling themselves with an absurd contract paid to an aging player.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You aren't arguing for a plan.

Part 1 is just some nebulous claptrap. No specifics just generalities that you have no idea how to accomplish.

Part 2 is not a plan but hope that someone will pay that much for Romo.

Part 3 is you saying you don't care what people think.

Part 4 is you saying you don't care if we suck.

You could have saved a whole lot of words by just saying that you want to rebuild now. That is a generalization too but you are proposing nothing more original than that.

 

[dadymat]

On the contrary...you don't get it. What was my opening sentence in this whole thread? To save you the effort I'll put it here for you:



I am arguing a plan altogether different. As far as what we see from Rally Blanch? The Cowboys do seem intent on trying (coercing even) Romo into staying...once again saddling themselves with an absurd contract paid to an aging player.

like every single other team would do in this exact case if it were their problem to solve......you dont let franchise QBs in their prime walk.....

to me your reasoning about this makes no sense.....you say its gonna put us in salary cap hell, well...if your not gonna spend on your QB who ya gonna spend on?...dont matter cause if you aint got a QB you aint got squat ......if you let him walk you are either gonna.. A) draft a guy and HOPE he that he is a franchise QB, or B) go sign a franchise QB.......except that there are NO franchise QBs on the market because few teams are dumb enough to let one walk unless they have a better one ready to go..and if there were you would spend just as much as Romo would have cost...or C) like in most cases you are gonna go 10 years sifting through spares till you find a guy...none of those are acceptable to me....