About that 2009 draft...

[Risen Star]

To make matters worse, we stockpiled choices in that draft to get even more special teams players---who typically are only about three or four of an entire 53 man roster.

The bar was set so low for that draft. I just can't imagine sitting in meetings in March and this was the grand plan.

One of the single biggest flaws our GM has is he consistently overrates his own talent. Probably because he has no ability whatsoever to evaluate it.

 

[Mash]

Is this supposed to make us feel better? That somehow, if another team fails that it's OK for us to fail? Is that what we've reverted to? I don't know, but I expect better from a storied franchise that's Americas Team.

Great logic and my kids even use it when they don't do well on a test..."hey, there were a lot of other students that didn't do well either." Great, I feel better.

But didnt you say in another thread that its a cop out that I thought a season without a SB is a disappointment? Just saying

So here we should have higher expectations then other teams in drafting...but its ok to win a few playoff games and never win a championship?

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

The bar was set so low for that draft. I just can't imagine sitting in meetings in March and this was the grand plan.

One of the single biggest flaws our GM has is he consistently overrates his own talent. Probably because he has no ability whatsoever to evaluate it.

I think it's because he cares so much he assumes the players and him are all in it together. That's why he rarely goes after former NFC east players. They're the bad guys

 

[JonJon]

That draft was a complete over-reaction to a horrible year on special teams. Bruce Read was fired first then there was the mistaken idea that had we just had better special teams players, we could have won an extra game here or there and make the playoffs.

To make matters worse, we stockpiled choices in that draft to get even more special teams players---who typically are only about three or four of an entire 53 man roster.

Which is exactly why I am against trading down. If anything, I would rather the team trade up and come away with 3-4 good picks instead of 12 tuurrible ones.

 

[SWG9]

Forget the draft; the Patriots only have six PLAYERS remaining from their 2007 18-1 team.

If you consider the Pats to be the gold standard (as I do), then you have to like the Jason Garrett approach of continually bringing fresh and hungry players in.

 

[AKATheRake]

The Pats and Colts have been tougher rosters for draft picks to make.

They also have been picking in the bottom 5 of each round in that time period.

Also do a stat on how many un-drafted rookies make their teams and I'll assure you, we've got more un-drafted players on our 1 team than both of them put together throughout those years.

 

[Oh_Canada]

One thing seperates the Pats and Colts from the Cowboys (and pretty much everyone else) and that the two best qb's of the last decade. I'd love to see the Colts record without Manning...and the Pats missed the playoffs with what was apparently a stacked team without Brady. The Patriots don't draft nearly as well as purported and the Colts can only seem to draft wr's who just so happen to look a whole lot better when Manning is throwing to them.

 

[AKATheRake]

One thing seperates the Pats and Colts from the Cowboys (and pretty much everyone else) and that the two best qb's of the last decade. I'd love to see the Colts record without Manning...and the Pats missed the playoffs with what was apparently a stacked team without Brady. The Patriots don't draft nearly as well as purported and the Colts can only seem to draft wr's who just so happen to look a whole lot better when Manning is throwing to them.

Another thing that separated both those teams from the others, up until Dungy retired, was the tenure of their head coach and their years of service being a head coach in this league.

Other than McNabb falling off the last 3 seasons, you could almost say the same for the Eagles. Just that McNabb was consider top 5-8 for most of their good playoff run.

Green Bay will most likely be in the same category in both regards as the Pats and Colts.

 

[Dodger12]

But didnt you say in another thread that its a cop out that I thought a season without a SB is a disappointment? Just saying

So here we should have higher expectations then other teams in drafting...but its ok to win a few playoff games and never win a championship?

That's a huge reach Mash and you know it; one has nothing to do with the other. Teams are built through the draft in today's NFL, especially with the salary cap and FA. And I didn't say it's OK to win some playoff games and never win a championship. As a matter of fact, I think you know exactly what I was saying but you've cornered yourself so now you're reaching.

By your logic, 1989 to 1991 is/was the same as 2000 to 2002. We didn't win the SB so the end result of each of those seasons is the same, ie: they were failures because we didn't win the SB. Is that what you're saying? That three straight 5 and 11 seasons with no franchise QB to groom and a poor
infusion of talent because of bad drafts is the same as the seasons spent rebuilding the franchise? Come on......

 

[baj1dallas]

Don't be mistaken. Merriweather was a good player for the Patriots for about 3 years. They could still re-sign him if they needed to at some point.

This is totally different from drafting guys who are KP from day one.

 

[baj1dallas]

That's a huge reach Mash and you know it; one has nothing to do with the other. Teams are built through the draft in today's NFL, especially with the salary cap and FA. .

Keeping a guy that was drafted 3 years ago isn't building through the draft, unless he's a core player. Cutting him and replacing him with UDFAs and more recent picks is building through the draft.

 

[Dodger12]

One thing seperates the Pats and Colts from the Cowboys (and pretty much everyone else) and that the two best qb's of the last decade. I'd love to see the Colts record without Manning...and the Pats missed the playoffs with what was apparently a stacked team without Brady. The Patriots don't draft nearly as well as purported and the Colts can only seem to draft wr's who just so happen to look a whole lot better when Manning is throwing to them.

Come on man. The Pats went 11 and 5 without Brady for a whole season and with Matt Cassel as their QB. They didn't make the playoffs but you conveniently make it sound like they flopped without Brady that year. Matt FREAKING Cassel. The guy hadn't even started a football game since high school.

Does anyone think that McGee, who has the same amount of time in the NFL as Cassel did when he took over for Brady, could lead this team to an 11 and 5 record if Romo goes down? Please.

 

[Dodger12]

Keeping a guy that was drafted 3 years ago isn't building through the draft, unless he's a core player. Cutting him and replacing him with UDFAs and more recent picks is building through the draft.

I'm not sure what you're getting at. Are teams not built through the draft?

A player should be hitting his stride in year 3. Not everyone drafted is going to be a core player or even starter but he most certainly may be a crucial part of the team.

 

[Beast_from_East]

This thread has proved 2 things:



First, the draft is not as easy as it looks and even very good teams can blow an entire draft, not just Dallas.

Second, if you have one of the two best QBs on the planet, then the draft really doesnt mean that much.

 

[Mash]

That's a huge reach Mash and you know it; one has nothing to do with the other. Teams are built through the draft in today's NFL, especially with the salary cap and FA. And I didn't say it's OK to win some playoff games and never win a championship. As a matter of fact, I think you know exactly what I was saying but you've cornered yourself so now you're reaching.

By your logic, 1989 to 1991 is/was the same as 2000 to 2002. We didn't win the SB so the end result of each of those seasons is the same, ie: they were failures because we didn't win the SB. Is that what you're saying? That three straight 5 and 11 seasons with no franchise QB to groom and a poor
infusion of talent because of bad drafts is the same as the seasons spent rebuilding the franchise? Come on......

Im saying its a disappointment.....every year without one is......You can spend decades rebuilding and never get your championships. I understand what your saying about progress....but I still view those seasons as disappointments......you do not....

You want better drafts...you expect better....right? We shouldnt compare with other teams...we should strive for better?...... I do to....I expect Championships every year...realistic or not......

For me I see no difference in a decade of losing or a decade of progress if the end result every year is no SB. I still love the game tho....and enjoying watching every game.



I dont want my team to strive for anything less....I dont want them to be content with improved season because it showed progress.

 

[Mash]

This thread has proved 2 things:



First, the draft is not as easy as it looks and even very good teams can blow an entire draft, not just Dallas.

Second, if you have one of the two best QBs on the planet, then the draft really doesnt mean that much.

Picking up the right players via...draft...FA....UDFA....is the core of building a Championship team......but you sure hope one of them is a Franchise QB

 

[TD-33]

This thread has proved 2 things:



First, the draft is not as easy as it looks and even very good teams can blow an entire draft, not just Dallas.

Second, if you have one of the two best QBs on the planet, then the draft really doesnt mean that much.

^^^^^^

Thanks for breaking it down. :laugh2:

 

[Dodger12]

Second, if you have one of the two best QBs on the planet, then the draft really doesnt mean that much.

Tell that to Dan Marino and John Elway......

 

[realtick]

Tell that to Dan Marino and John Elway......

Exactly, oh by the way, let's penalize New England and Indy for drafting Tom Brady and Manning by the way.

 

[Dodger12]

Exactly, oh by the way, let's penalize New England and Indy for drafting Tom Brady and Manning by the way.

No kidding. Lets minimize the very avenue used to acquire these players.

You can also throw Fran Tarketon and Archie Manning into the mix as well and I'm sure that there are others. Have you ever seen a fan base so excuse any of our ineptitude at drafting by saying, in essence, that it's not important anyway? Then some of these same fans will minimize a QB like Aikman because he had Irvin, Emmitt, a great OL, etc.