Adrian Peterson Sweepstakes ***Officially reinstated (again) and merged***

[esloan]

Something else to consider, how many teams, since the start of the salary cap era, have won the Super Bowl with a QB, RB and WR all making elite money? The Cowboys did it before the salary cap but since? I can not think of one off-hand. Paying elite money for a WR, QB and RB simply does not allow enough money for the rest of the team. I just do not think it is worth it.

 

[cheftjpeck]

What I don't get is the same people who used history of running backs after having single season 380+ carries then tanking afterwards to denounce Murrays ability to be successful in upcoming seasons are the same people ignoring the same history of multiple backs and their noted decline after reaching the cliff of 30'?

By no means am I comparing a freak of nature like AD to Murray, yet history is history of running backs. I for one would love to have The AD who ran for 2,000 yards a couple years back... For the right price but still can"t help but be concerned that we are NOT getting that AD and have to be as concerned and cautious as to what AD we are actually getting.. Not a single one of us can sit here and say with 100% surety that AD gets here and just dominates .. History of HIM points to he should , HOWEVER history of many great HOF backs who hit 30' and went into decline suggests he could not as well...
Bottom line ... We are debating on opinions with a sprinkle of facts and history but no one can guarantee anything..
I for one would love to have AD to at least see if he can be successful and truly help our team.. But it would have to be at the right price... Prefer no draft picks and reduced contracts but realize that most likely wont happen .. So then I guess a 3rd or later draft pick and reduced salary .. But I'm not naive enough to believe that AD is guaranteed to do any better than any other RB we have had or currently have or even draft on to our roster.. Anything can happen ... But we shall see

 

[ufcrules1]

That and the fact that we had the RB in the league last year by 500 yards and didn't win.

AP is a better running back than Murray.
He has always played behind a sad line
in Minny and still produced big time. Put him behind our line and he tears it up. He also has home run ability, something Murray did not have. Give Peterson huge holes and look out.

Also, our defense has improved by getting Hardy who is an elite pass rusher as well as getting Lee back if he can stay healthy. Not to mention we should get more help through the draft.

When your team is this close to a super bowl, you go out and get that player that puts you over the top. You don't roll the dice on some rookie prospect that could bust.

 

[esloan]

AP is a better running back than Murray.
He has always played behind a sad line
in Minny and still produced big time. Put him behind our line and he tears it up. He also has home run ability, something Murray did not have. Give Peterson huge holes and look out.

Also, our defense has improved by getting Hardy who is an elite pass rusher as well as getting Lee back if he can stay healthy. Not to mention we should get more help through the draft.

When your team is this close to a super bowl, you go out and get that player that puts you over the top. You don't roll the dice on some rookie prospect that could bust.

I still want to know how you consider us an elite team with Romo as QB? Isn't Romo a spare? Doesn't he suck? Come on, UFC, enlighten us on this. How are the Cowboys going to win a Super Bowl with Romo at QB?

 

[Stash]

That mindset and approach has shown to fail repeatedly. The go all in now approach has been the thinking behind many failed moves by NFL teams over the years.

The Pats never take that approach.

Really? They just paid a boatload of money for Darrelle Revis on a one year rental. And that worked out pretty well for them this year.

He is a 30 year old RB that didn't play last season. The history of 30 year old RBs is not good.

The history for special running backs is just fine, as I've pointed out earlier in this thread.

Good teams in the modern NFL normally don't use both picks and a big amount of cap space on the same player. They either use the cap space on free agents or the picks on players on low cost rookie contracts.

Ask the Vikings how the Herschall Walker All-In trade worked out. Ask the Skins about going All-In on RG3 or previously going All-In on massive free agent spending.

Even some good teams tried the picks + caps space with poor results. The Seahawks got a minimal amount of production from Percy Harvin after trading for him and paying him.

If the Cowboys were desperate for top talent RB, then they should just trade up for Gurley. He is a 20 year old version of AP that will be on a low cost contract for 4 years with an optional 5th year.

That's a huge assumption. And this is coming from a huge fan of Gurley. You HOPE he's half the player that Peterson has already proven himself to be at the NFL level.

 

[jnday]

AP is a better running back than Murray.
He has always played behind a sad line
in Minny and still produced big time. Put him behind our line and he tears it up. He also has home run ability, something Murray did not have. Give Peterson huge holes and look out.

Also, our defense has improved by getting Hardy who is an elite pass rusher as well as getting Lee back if he can stay healthy. Not to mention we should get more help through the draft.

When your team is this close to a super bowl, you go out and get that player that puts you over the top. You don't roll the dice on some rookie prospect that could bust.

Doing these things also ruins the chances of being contenders every year. I want to see s young, talented team that can compete well beyond the next three years. Big contracts to aging players has not been that smart in the past.

 

[BrassCowboy]

What I don't get is the same people who used history of running backs after having single season 380+ carries then tanking afterwards to denounce Murrays ability to be successful in upcoming seasons are the same people ignoring the same history of multiple backs and their noted decline after reaching the cliff of 30'?

By no means am I comparing a freak of nature like AD to Murray, yet history is history of running backs. I for one would love to have The AD who ran for 2,000 yards a couple years back... For the right price but still can"t help but be concerned that we are NOT getting that AD and have to be as concerned and cautious as to what AD we are actually getting.. Not a single one of us can sit here and say with 100% surety that AD gets here and just dominates .. History of HIM points to he should , HOWEVER history of many great HOF backs who hit 30' and went into decline suggests he could not as well...
Bottom line ... We are debating on opinions with a sprinkle of facts and history but no one can guarantee anything..
I for one would love to have AD to at least see if he can be successful and truly help our team.. But it would have to be at the right price... Prefer no draft picks and reduced contracts but realize that most likely wont happen .. So then I guess a 3rd or later draft pick and reduced salary .. But I'm not naive enough to believe that AD is guaranteed to do any better than any other RB we have had or currently have or even draft on to our roster.. Anything can happen ... But we shall see

good post, 3rd is absolute highest I would go.

 

[JoeKing]

I am not selling him short. As I said in my comment above, he will probably have a great season, for whatever team he plays for. But, he is not going to want a one year contract, even if we renegotiate. He is going to want a multi-year deal. There is no way I give him a four year contract for the money he is going to want. He may have a great season this year but next year? The year after that? I would not want to be tied to a 30 year old RB with a large multi-year contract. That is suicide.

I think you are making assumptions that may not be true. He is aware of is own age and how time is not on his side. I think he will be more amicable to less money and less years in a contract than what you give him credit for. Considering the fact that he wants to be a Cowboy is just further evidence he would agree to a more team friendly deal.

 

[esloan]

I think you are making assumptions that may not be true. He is aware of is own age and how time is not on his side. I think he will be more amicable to less money and less years in a contract than what you give him credit for. Considering the fact that he wants to be a Cowboy is just further evidence he would agree to a more team friendly deal.

I think you are making bigger assumptions than I. This will be his last contract. He may take less than what he is getting now but 40-60% less? I am just not seeing it unless he has to take that pay cut to play at all and that is not where he is at.

Taking a pay cut of a couple of million is simply not enough for me to want him here. For it to be viable for the Cowboys he would have to get near what the Cowboys offered Murray and probably for less years and less guaranteed. Why would you want a 30 year old RB under contract for 4 or 5 years, with a high guarantee? That just does not make financial sense.

I find it somewhat sad and telling that this fanbase has ridiculed Jerry Jones for the last twenty years for giving large contracts to older players yet are pushing hard for this move. That just makes no sense to me. In a perfect world, where we could get AP for a 3rd rounder or less and for a 3 year incentive based offer? Hell yeah, sign me up. I just do not see that happening and I am not willing to again mortgage the future for an aging RB, even if his name is Adrian Peterson.

 

[pansophy]

AP is a better running back than Murray.
He has always played behind a sad line
in Minny and still produced big time. Put him behind our line and he tears it up. He also has home run ability, something Murray did not have. Give Peterson huge holes and look out.

Also, our defense has improved by getting Hardy who is an elite pass rusher as well as getting Lee back if he can stay healthy. Not to mention we should get more help through the draft.

When your team is this close to a super bowl, you go out and get that player that puts you over the top. You don't roll the dice on some rookie prospect that could bust.

People keep saying that Peterson is a better back than Murray, but what does that really mean? Only Peterson's 2000 yard season was better than what Murray did last season. No back has ever had two 2000 yard seasons, let alone after 30. So I don't get what impact people think Peterson is going to have above last year.

My argument is less around Peterson and more about the fact that our defense is why we are losing. Every pick and dollar used on offense is less resources used for defense.

We had the top rated passer, with the WR with the most TDs, and the RB with the most yards and didn't even get to the championship game. We don't need record years by all of our offensive players to win. We need a balanced team.

I'll take my chances with a pair of cheap backs if that means we can spend more on defense. Let's take that OL for a spin.

 

[pansophy]

I think you are making bigger assumptions than I. This will be his last contract. He may take less than what he is getting now but 40-60% less? I am just not seeing it unless he has to take that pay cut to play at all and that is not where he is at.

Taking a pay cut of a couple of million is simply not enough for me to want him here. For it to be viable for the Cowboys he would have to get near what the Cowboys offered Murray and probably for less years and less guaranteed. Why would you want a 30 year old RB under contract for 4 or 5 years, with a high guarantee? That just does not make financial sense.

I find it somewhat sad and telling that this fanbase has ridiculed Jerry Jones for the last twenty years for giving large contracts to older players yet are pushing hard for this move. That just makes no sense to me. In a perfect world, where we could get AP for a 3rd rounder or less and for a 3 year incentive based offer? Hell yeah, sign me up. I just do not see that happening and I am not willing to again mortgage the future for an aging RB, even if his name is Adrian Peterson.

That's what I don't get either.

 

[xwalker]

.....

Really? They just paid a boatload of money for Darrelle Revis on a one year rental. And that worked out pretty well for them this year.
1-year, 12M, No draft picks required


The history for special running backs is just fine, as I've pointed out earlier in this thread.
They need to get 4 years from him if they are going to give up draft picks. They would get 5 years from a 1st round pick before he hits free agency.


That's a huge assumption. And this is coming from a huge fan of Gurley. You HOPE he's half the player that Peterson has already proven himself to be at the NFL level.
Murray proved to run 1800 yards in this scheme and they didn't keep him. It only required money and no draft picks to retain Murray.

 

[xwalker]

This is what you and others simply aren't getting. Jerry has made VERY dumb decisions in the past with teams that had no chance of going to the super bowl.
THIS team right now, has a VERY legit chance of making/winning a super bowl. When you are this close, you go out and get that player.

To recap.

1. In the past Jerry overpaid for players when we had a crappy team,
2. This team is completely different. It's only a a couple of players away from a LEGIT super bowl team.
3. Winning a super bowl trumps EVERYTHING.

When he traded for Galloway:
Aikman still going strong
Emmitt not yet 30
Larry Allen and Flozell still in their prime.

When he traded for Roy Williams:
That was 2008 and they had their best team in many years in 2007.

The problem is that trading for Peterson is not a guarantee of winning a Super Bowl. Many teams each year could convince themselves they are 1 player away, but chasing that 1 player away concept has proven not to work.

 

[Stash]

Really? They just paid a boatload of money for Darrelle Revis on a one year rental. And that worked out pretty well for them this year.
1-year, 12M, No draft picks required

$12 million for one season = boatload

The history for special running backs is just fine, as I've pointed out earlier in this thread.
They need to get 4 years from him if they are going to give up draft picks. They would get 5 years from a 1st round pick before he hits free agency.

In your opinion perhaps. If they get one championship from him, all of it is worth it. Just like it was for the Patriots this past season. And it's not like the 2016 or 2016 drafts will be without running backs.

That's a huge assumption. And this is coming from a huge fan of Gurley. You HOPE he's half the player that Peterson has already proven himself to be at the NFL level.
Murray proved to run 1800 yards in this scheme and they didn't keep him. It only required money and no draft picks to retain Murray.

And Peterson is markedly better. The only people who mention Murray and Peterson in the same sentence are Cowboys fans.

Peterson has proven to be better having an entirely and completely lesser team around him, in every way. If he could do what he did being a 'diamond among trash', it's not a stretch to think about what he could accomplish playing on a team that actually has talent around him.

 

[ufcrules1]

I still want to know how you consider us an elite team with Romo as QB? Isn't Romo a spare? Doesn't he suck? Come on, UFC, enlighten us on this. How are the Cowboys going to win a Super Bowl with Romo at QB?

They may not win one with him. However, I have never said Romo sucks. He is a good QB and I have said that a million times. I do not believe he is an elite QB though and he has choked plenty in the past. Let's not pretend he hasn't. Once he is gone there is no telling what we get. We could get a quality QB or a bad one. Right now we have one who is good enough. Especially when we have an outsanding offensive line that can protect him all day. Then the running game keeps the defense honest. This thread is not about Romo though, it's about Peterson.

No way the Cowboys let Murray walk lile they did unless they have a plan to bring another RB in that is as good ot better than Murray.

You don't have a successful season like that due to the running game and then put a rookie back there when your vet windows have almost closed.

 

[xwalker]

We were in the running because we had a 1800 yard back. Now we don't........

Was that really Murray or the the OLine?

2011 897
2012 663
2013 1,121
2014 1,845

 

[Stash]

When he traded for Galloway:
Aikman still going strong
Emmitt not yet 30
Larry Allen and Flozell still in their prime.

When he traded for Roy Williams:
That was 2008 and they had their best team in many years in 2007.

The problem is that trading for Peterson is not a guarantee of winning a Super Bowl. Many teams each year could convince themselves they are 1 player away, but chasing that 1 player away concept has proven not to work.

It worked for the Patriots in 2014 when they signed the 'one player' in Darrelle Revis.

 

[jnday]

People keep saying that Peterson is a better back than Murray, but what does that really mean? Only Peterson's 2000 yard season was better than what Murray did last season. No back has ever had two 2000 yard seasons, let alone after 30. So I don't get what impact people think Peterson is going to have above last year.

My argument is less around Peterson and more about the fact that our defense is why we are losing. Every pick and dollar used on offense is less resources used for defense.

We had the top rated passer, with the WR with the most TDs, and the RB with the most yards and didn't even get to the championship game. We don't need record years by all of our offensive players to win. We need a balanced team.

I'll take my chances with a pair of cheap backs if that means we can spend more on defense. Let's take that OL for a spin.

The defense will hurt more than the offense if there is not a very good RB to burn up the clock and keep the defense off the field.

 

[ufcrules1]

When he traded for Galloway:
Aikman still going strong
Emmitt not yet 30
Larry Allen and Flozell still in their prime.

When he traded for Roy Williams:
That was 2008 and they had their best team in many years in 2007.

The problem is that trading for Peterson is not a guarantee of winning a Super Bowl. Many teams each year could convince themselves they are 1 player away, but chasing that 1 player away concept has proven not to work.

Joey Galloway and Roy Williams werent even on the same planet as Adrian Peterson. You are talking about 2 scrub recievers, compared with one ot the greatest RB's in history.

Neither of those teams were a player or 2 away from winning a super bowl either. This team is.

 

[burmafrd]

They may not win one with him. However, I have never said Romo sucks. He is a good QB and I have said that a million times. I do not believe he is an elite QB though and he has choked plenty in the past. Let's not pretend he hasn't. Once he is gone there is no telling what we get. We could get a quality QB or a bad one. Right now we have one who is good enough. Especially when we have an outsanding offensive line that can protect him all day. Then the running game keeps the defense honest. This thread is not about Romo though, it's about Peterson.

No way the Cowboys let Murray walk lile they did unless they have a plan to bring another RB in that is as good ot better than Murray.

You don't have a successful season like that due to the running game and then put a rookie back there when your vet windows have almost closed.

haven't seen anyone so fast at backpeddling since Deion in his prime.