According to our favorite source, WR Matt Jones may be looking for a home

[iceberg]

Sure it does but Jax does not have Witten and TO on the other side and forcing teams to single cover the other side. That is the only weakness in our offense IMO (consistency of the #2 WR to get open)

Would Matt Jones be able to do that? it is definitely worth a 6th or a 7th to find out.

You cannot even start to compare stats of Crayton to Jones because of the other weapons we have.

who was comparing crayton? i've only said we've got him and he's done well for us.

then stash wants to keep saying he's more than #4 cause we'd have to have 3 players better than him on the roster.

to
glenn
crayton

there. he's #4. you can't speculate glenn away till he actually goes. so at best jones would be fighting with another qb convert, a FA we love so far, and 2 3+ year vets who we've invested time in for that #3 IF glenn goes bye bye.

yet he'll again say no one has shown him 3 WRs ahead of jones. i have. several times.

you point to the other weapons we have, but great. so am i. here jones just wouldn't see adequate ball time. if he can't in jacksonville i don't know why he could here with MORE to compete against.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

That's a matter of opinion, or what % of blame you want to assign. It speaks loudly to me that Jacksonville as a franchise can't develop a solid receiver group despite its' best efforts.

there are busts at WR, alot of busts, some guys don't get it

And keep in mind that the other receivers actually played receiver in college - now compare that to a guy trying to make a complete position change in the same situation. I'm surprised he's done what he has.

done what exactly? get deactivated and about to be shipped out?

And think of what a receivers coach with Sherman's pedigree could do with a guy like Jones.

think of what he's doing w/ Sam, Austin and Stanback

I disagree. Jones has much better numbers than any healthy player on this team not named Owens or Crayton.

by default, because he was a 1st round pick

and still was deactivated

At the least, he could be this team's #3 receiver and bring an element of speed the team might otherwise lack. While he is still a bit of a project, unlike Austin, Hurd, or Stanback, he's shown he can play at the NFL level.

inconsistently, I still fail to see how adding Jones significantly betters our WR corp from where it is, we just add one more inconsistant, speed WR

It was stupid of them to deactivate him, yet they did.

how was it stupid? they didn't struggle on O w/o him

He led the team in receiving in 2006, but somehow, that didn't merit a starting role in '07? Figure that one out! I think I'd be a bit pissed too.

he only has himself to blame for that

I think there's a guy in a bad situation in Jacksonville, but I don't place the blame solely on him. I think he's a guy who still has talent, and I think a better coaching staff and better surrounding talent might help that talent shine.

And I think it's worth a late round draft pick to find out.

coaching can only do so much for a young WR

 

[Bob Sacamano]

who was comparing crayton? i've only said we've got him and he's done well for us.

then stash wants to keep saying he's more than #4 cause we'd have to have 3 players better than him on the roster.

to
glenn
crayton

there. he's #4. you can't speculate glenn away till he actually goes. so at best jones would be fighting with another qb convert, a FA we love so far, and 2 3+ year vets who we've invested time in for that #3 IF glenn goes bye bye.

yet he'll again say no one has shown him 3 WRs ahead of jones. i have. several times.

you point to the other weapons we have, but great. so am i. here jones just wouldn't see adequate ball time. if he can't in jacksonville i don't know why he could here with MORE to compete against.

he's #4 even if Glenn doesn't suit up for us

we still have Jason Witten

 

[iceberg]

Again, for Matt Jones to be this team's 4th receiver, you'd have to show me 3 viable candidates above him.

I don't see that.

he's #4 even if Glenn doesn't suit up for us

we still have Jason Witten

i'm going strictly WRs as he said. now even if glenn suits up, the best he can do is compete for #3. if he can't crack jacksonvilles great WR roster i'm not sure why people think he'd do well here.

i understand personal facination with players. but i don't understand it when someone says "i'm not biased about this!" and then gets hard headed in defense of the player.

nothing else i can say. i'll back out and let him continue the march to matt jones and i'll see what people paid to do this for a living do with their options.

like i've said, i don't doubt matt is one of the better options available (potentially that is) but i do doubt that makes him good, just means a serious lack of options. we need a legit #2, not a crapshoot 2nd/3rd tier WR. getting someone to compete for #3 and beyond i just don't get.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

It's not like Crayton is an 8 year vet. He's just completed his 4th year. Jones just completed his 3rd. And Crayton had a much larger learning curve in the NFL coming from such a tiny college, while Jones played in the SEC. The difference is Crayton has gotten incrementally and noticably better every single year. Matt Jones has either gotten worse or remained stagnant the longer he's been in the league.

Anyone who takes into account effiency per attempt will have Crayton well ahead of Jones (Football Outsiders currently has Crayton as their 27th rated WR based on their DPAR efficiency, Matt Jones 80th). Jones comes in behind TO, Crayton and perhaps Terry Glenn if he plays. So at best Jones is competing against Hurd, Stanback and Miles Austin for the #3 or #4 spot ... so you have to ask yourself whether it's worth it to future dilute the snaps and impede the progress of players who's arrow is pointing upward to bring in a guy who's arrow is pointing downward. Especially when this guy brings nothing to the table in special teams or the lockerroom. The issues that came up in Jacksonville are nothing new. It was widely reported in college that he prefered basketball to football.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

i'm going strictly WRs as he said.

which was stupid, cuz you have to take into account Witten everytime a receiver discussion pops up

 

[Stash]

Open your eyes, its the plain as the nose on your face

And thanks again for dodging the question. Way to contribute!

he is no better than whats here already, hence he'd be a waste of time

As are these baseless, unsubstantiated bash-fest posts.

Again, I've presented facts supporting my stance rather than going the mindless "Matt Jones sucks" route.

 

[Stash]

you said NO wr's were getting good stats. why is that then if not qb play OR the system focusing on RBs?

I'm thinking that a lack of quality coaching is to blame when none of their receivers are performing up to expectations.

i would not disagree matt jones could be the best option out there right now. but if i'm looking for a car and my best option is an 85 yugo, i'll wait and keep what i have.

If that's what you equate Jones with, I can't argue with your point.

But I see a guy with great physical skills, still at a young age, with NFL experience and with the potential to be more.

 

[Rampage]

Matt Jones sucks

 

[Stash]

this is in regard on how silly it is to compare numbers w/crayton cause of the # of weapons we have.

now you use that argument to your side because you need it too.

HOWEVER - i've also said jones won't sniff the ball much BECAUSE of the # of weapons we have, so it would be pointless.

and you ignore that part.

I'm not ignoring it. Sorry if it seemed that way. But if Crayton saw the ball as many times as he did, I think Jones could contribute as well. I think Jones brings some skills that Crayton lacks - namely speed and size. Not advocating replacing Crayton, just adding anothere element to the offense.

 

[iceberg]

which was stupid, cuz you have to take into account Witten everytime a receiver discussion pops up

hey - i've tried to say how many legit threats we now have that are in front of him. i just don't see the point in swapping one #4-#5 WR for another. if we ever get to that point where they're the #1 or #2, we've got enough problems to where it really doesn't matter.

m jones would have to wait for TO and witten to get their share. they will. then crayton will get his share. now we have jones out of the backfield. we also have bennett we've already invested a draft pick in who's said to be better than fasano by many who've seen both.

we have so many weapons that jones, stanback, hurd and the like regardless of who is here simply won't get meaningful stats to show their value. if jones is good and has something to show to prove it, he'd be better served playing for a team with less weapons. just how i feel.

i also don't feel jones is worth a 100 post thread, but hey - i was a part of it so i could be wrong there. : )

 

[Bob Sacamano]

hey - i've tried to say how many legit threats we now have that are in front of him. i just don't see the point in swapping one #4-#5 WR for another. if we ever get to that point where they're the #1 or #2, we've got enough problems to where it really doesn't matter.

m jones would have to wait for TO and witten to get their share. they will. then crayton will get his share. now we have jones out of the backfield. we also have bennett we've already invested a draft pick in who's said to be better than fasano by many who've seen both.

we have so many weapons that jones, stanback, hurd and the like regardless of who is here simply won't get meaningful stats to show their value. if jones is good and has something to show to prove it, he'd be better served playing for a team with less weapons. just how i feel.

i also don't feel jones is worth a 100 post thread, but hey - i was a part of it so i could be wrong there. : )

agreed on all counts

 

[dargonking999]

I'm not ignoring it. Sorry if it seemed that way. But if Crayton saw the ball as many times as he did, I think Jones could contribute as well. I think Jones brings some skills that Crayton lacks - namely speed and size. Not advocating replacing Crayton, just adding anothere element to the offense.

Stanback has speed and size, Austin has SPeend, Glenn has speed, TO has speed and size, Witten has size, i mean all your doing is bringing in what we already have. Matt Jones has not shown me that he can catch, and that is the one thing we're missing outside of our current crop of WR's (Sans Glenn, and Sans crayton in a non-playoff game)

 

[iceberg]

I'm not ignoring it. Sorry if it seemed that way. But if Crayton saw the ball as many times as he did, I think Jones could contribute as well. I think Jones brings some skills that Crayton lacks - namely speed and size. Not advocating replacing Crayton, just adding anothere element to the offense.

well, i've said several time to, glenn and crayton are our #1,2 and 3 now and you keep asking why jones would be #4 - that's why - to me.

the point i feel is we need to focus on bringing in a legit WR like roy williams, bolden, even chad johnson - to suppliment what crayton may be lacking and let crayton go back to being a damn good #3 and not just an OK #2.

the way you're going it's almost like making 2 players play up to the level of 1 good one and i don't think that would help us.

 

[Stash]

Anyone who takes into account effiency per attempt will have Crayton well ahead of Jones (Football Outsiders currently has Crayton as their 27th rated WR based on their DPAR efficiency, Matt Jones 80th). Jones comes in behind TO, Crayton and perhaps Terry Glenn if he plays. So at best Jones is competing against Hurd, Stanback and Miles Austin for the #3 or #4 spot ... so you have to ask yourself whether it's worth it to furthur dilute the snaps and impede the progress of players who's arrow is pointing upward to bring in a guy who's arrow is pointing downward. Especially when this guy brings nothing to the table in special teams or the lockerroom. The issues that came up in Jacksonville are nothing new.

Yes, Jones would be competing with Hurd, Austin, and Stanback for the #3 spot - unless you're one who chooses to depend on Terry Glenn. I'm not.

Miles Austin's arrow is pointing upward? Why? The 5 career catches he has?

And Sam Hurd is a decent posession receiver, but hardly irreplacable.

Stanback is a complete unknown with very little experience at the positon due to injury.

Hardly overwhelming competition.

It was widely reported since college that he much preferred basketball to football. The guy is just a workout warrior. He was rated a 4th round prospect before the combine, he runs a 4.37 at the Combine and *poof* .. he's suddenly The White Randy Moss overnight.

Terrell Owens prefers basketball as well. Just saying.

That's just my point - he was a 4th round prospect who was overdrafted in Round 1.

If he was taken where he should have been and put up the same numbers, nobody would be criticizing him.

It's Jacksonville's fault he was a 1st round pick, not his.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

what I find most funny is that a receiver-starved club, which traded for one of the most inconsistent WRs in the game (Troy Williamson), is willing to give up on Matt Jones

yet he's our insurance??

c'mon, that doesn't make any sense

 

[iceberg]

what I find most funny is that a receiver-starved club, which traded for one of the most inconsistent WRs in the game (Troy Williamson), is willing to give up on Matt Jones

yet he's our insurance??

c'mon, that doesn't make any sense

it's infatuated driven tunnel vision.

 

[iceberg]

It's Jacksonville's fault he was a 1st round pick, not his.

and pretty convenient that it's jacksonvilles fault (to you it would seem, you did say bad coaching) that he's not gotten any better but they're a team on the rise and to watch out for next year.

coaching failed one player but built a team?

your "objectivity" falls too hard to one side, stash.

 

[Stash]

there are busts at WR, alot of busts, some guys don't get it

That's true.

But what exactly are the Cowboys risking to find out?

A 6th or 7th round pick. Not much if you ask me.

done what exactly? get deactivated and about to be shipped out?

Put up better numbers than 3 of Dallas' receivers, despite being deactivated.

think of what he's doing w/ Sam, Austin and Stanback

I like Hurd, and I'm hopeful for Stanback, but I've seen nothing to make me believe that Austin will ever be an NFL receiver.

by default, because he was a 1st round pick

and still was deactivated

So, he only played because he was a first round pick, but despite that fact it was OK to deactivate him? Seems a contradiction to me.

inconsistently, I still fail to see how adding Jones significantly betters our WR corp from where it is, we just add one more inconsistant, speed WR

Again, his numbers are better than Austin, Hurd ort Stanback. That says improvement to me.

how was it stupid? they didn't struggle on O w/o him

Did they excel?

None of the receivers in Jacksonville have done well. That's not coincidence, that's a pattern.

he only has himself to blame for that

That's where we disagree. I think there's blame to go around.

coaching can only do so much for a young WR

That's certainly true, and if Jones is unreceptive to a change of scenery and a fresh opportunity then he should be cut.

But the cost would still only be a 6th or 7th round pick to find out.

 

[Stash]

well, i've said several time to, glenn and crayton are our #1,2 and 3 now and you keep asking why jones would be #4 - that's why - to me.

Fair enough. That's where we differ. You choose to count on Glenn, I don't. I don't want to see a possible repeat of 2007 so I am moving on and I hope the team is too.

the point i feel is we need to focus on bringing in a legit WR like roy williams, bolden, even chad johnson - to suppliment what crayton may be lacking and let crayton go back to being a damn good #3 and not just an OK #2.

And I would have no problem with that. None at all. I just don't see how taking a chance on Matt Jones would prevent that.

the way you're going it's almost like making 2 players play up to the level of 1 good one and i don't think that would help us.

Not sure I understand you here?