All The Wrong in Dallas

[casmith07]

You left out the fans.

 

[Bluestang]

Tony has back injury concerns because we went cheap on the OL? There is no evidence of this. He hurt his back last year on a play where a guy fell on his foot.

You may want to listen the "The Fan" Interview where Romo first spoke about how he got hurt in the GB game. The WAS game was the final straw after the numerous hits and then the pull at the foot that finally gave way.

Claiborne has been a guy that has been a disappointment. But draft picks are not sure things. You would take Brockers and Wagner now but based on most draft value charts the Claiborne deal was a decent value. Overall most objective studies that have been done say the Cowboys are actually one of the better drafting teams in the league.

Which DL are you taking instead of Escobar? I made a thread on this pick right after that draft:

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/the-escobar-pick-revisting-the-cowboys-draft-board.263659/

Hunt was the highest DE on the board he had a total of 3 tackles and 0.5 sacks last year

Bennie Logan was the highest rated DT but he was graded more then a round below Escobar.

First of all, Dallas had no business trading up for one player because they were not one player away from being SB contenders. Draft charts are inconsistent from team to team. There is no unified standard within the league because each team has their own charts they they go by. So yea according to Dallas' draft charts, the trade was good because it was "their" chart to begin with. I have feeling that St Louis also came on top of the trade as well based on their own charts too. Win, win!

Never had success since 2007? We have been one of the most prolific offenses in the league throughout Jason's tenure.

How was the offense was just as bad as the defense in 2010? Romo has a passer rating of 94.9 that year and would have finished seventh in the league.

Not only that but Kitna had basically the best year of his career under Garrett's system filling in.

Prolific? Seriously?

In sample size of six games, Romo had 11/7 TD/int ratio. Do you really want to interpolate that to a 16 game season? Considering that he only had 9 ints the year before....

Every team in the league restructures contracts and it is advantageous to do so. It is nothing like paying your debt with a credit card as has been explained numerous times. For one thing the credit card accrues interest while pushing money into later years does not. It is actually more efficient to pay later because the salary cap goes up and therefore each 2013 cap dollar is actually worth more then each 2016 cap dollar.

The Bengals paid less guaranteed for an inferior player. Which is what you would expect. But for the QB position the year to year salary is probably more important then the cap hit should they be cut.

If a team has to cut it's QB it's problem is not the cap hit but the fact that they no longer have a QB. By the time they find another one odds are that dead money is already off the books. Same goes for the Cowboys and Romo.

All teams have to do bargain shopping. That's not because Dallas does anything unique but because there is not enough salary cap to buy a pro bowler at every position. I would argue guys like Kosier and Berny were actually very efficient uses of salary cap given how many games they ended up playing. Seattle found a number of "bargain" guys who turned into very productive players.

If they managed the cap exactly like you wanted that would not prevent them from having to go "bargain" shopping. The Cowboys just need to start doing a better job of it particularly on defense.

32 team do not restructure their contracts. If you can provide the proof that all of them do, then please post it.

Yes some team do it as well to get under the cap, but again your pushing more money into the future and making the price to cut that player higher in the future. Dallas routinely does it because they are over the cap and have to get under it before the league year starts. That's the definition of cap hell.

Even though the cap goes up, pushing more money into the future negates that increase that the team will see because now they have less money available because it's tied into future years.

Austin could have been a about $3M cut this year, but the 2013 restructure turned it into a $7M cut instead.

 

[Alexander]

they haven't won anything, and their roster looks good because of the combination of their draft position and their fleecing of WAS. .

Or if we could fleece a team like you say they did Washington. We have not fleeced anyone since Jimmy Johnson left the building.

 

[CyberB0b]

I actually think Jerry's gotten worse since Garrett's taken over. And that's hard to do. I don't know if we can win with Jerry. I do think we need a coach with skins on the wall. Unfortunately he'll have to win fast because Jerry won't keep quiet for very long. You would think that just winning SB's would be enough for any owner.

He has, with the drunk "Romo is was a miracle" thing in the bar, the *********, the secret sauce, the latest photos. The guy has lost it.

 

[Alexander]

He has, with the drunk "Romo is was a miracle" thing in the bar, the *********, the secret sauce, the latest photos. The guy has lost it.

You have to have something to lose it.

 

[CoCo]

# 2 Above, broken down by point.

A - Despite what may be perceived on the recent drafting of this team, I've come to conclusion that this team still doesn't recognize how to build a team from the draft. Sure we have Tyron Smith and Dez Bryant but who else is there?

B - We trade away valuable picks to get one player when we should be staying put or trading down for value.

C - You can argue that we built a *projected top 5 OL but at what expense? We now have a franchise QB with back injury concerns because we tried to go cheap on the OL the first time around and had him running around for his life.

D - And don't even bring up Claiborne who has proved nothing for what we spent on him in that 2012 draft.

E - Murray is another good argument, but with this OL just about any running back should be able to get 1000+ yds and double digit TDs.

F - Which brings me to my final point about the defense. Where have we invested in the defense? Yea we had some probowl players in Ware, Spencer, Hatcher, and Ratliff but it's obvious that the front office didn't have any sort of plan if those guys got injured/cut/not-resigned. Good GMs build their rosters with that kind of thinking in mind, and Dallas kept think that these players would still produce at high levels or shake the injuries as they kept getting older. Why not a second rounder on DL instead of Gavin Escobar? Or stay put in 2012 and get Brockers and Wagner?

My response is not to suggest that our personnel moves could not be improved upon. There is always room for improvement and THAT more than anything IMO is the key to improving our front-line talent and roster depth. Still every club makes mistakes. Yet here it seems implied that they are all avoidable. The criticism of Claiborne is a good example IMO. Claiborne was an undisputed solid value where he was picked - just like Tyron Smith. None are guaranteed. You may have preferred Brockers/Wagner but its unfair to say Dallas talent eval is weak for picking Claiborne at #6. If no credit is due for picking Tyron, no blame is due for picking Claiborne.

Okay, point by point.

A - I'm not sure what the point of this statement is. No one else besides Tyron & Dez? Obviously not true. There have absolutely been failings, like every club. Are we disproportionately less effective in the draft. Name your time period - build a comparative case. Then we can talk.

B - Dez trade-up = BINGO! Claiborne trade-up = heartache. Frederick/Williams trade down = BINGO! Lawrence trade-up = ? I guess I don't see a compelling case that we are routinely blowing it on that front.

C - Is the point we should have done it sooner? This kind of logic doesn't make sense to me unless you can point out where we have talent gluts that should have been invested elsewhere. But we don't.

D - see opening paragraph - we picked him at the consensus slot representing his perceived value.

E - Now Murray gets dismissed because the O-line is getting all the yardage? Hmmm, seems a little disingenuous.

F - Again the primary point seems to be that we should have young talent waiting to take over at every position. Fine. But that point is really about talent evaluation. We HAVE to get better at that IMO. Otherwise I think we're chasing our tail. I just don't buy the point that we grossly neglect certain positions at the expense of others. Point to Escobar - but then it can be argued we're preparing for the decline of our 12 yr vet HOF TE. And lets not forget BAA as a factor in drafting.

To me the far and away most important point is you have to make draft picks and FA signings count (yours and other teams). THAT is about talent evaluation far more than anything else. But I don't buy tha we're compounding things significantly by wasting picks on positions that have no need.

 

[85Cowboy85]

First of all, Dallas had no business trading up for one player because they were not one player away from being SB contenders. Draft charts are inconsistent from team to team. There is no unified standard within the league because each team has their own charts they they go by. So yea according to Dallas' draft charts, the trade was good because it was "their" chart to begin with. I have feeling that St Louis also came on top of the trade as well based on their own charts too. Win, win!

Why stop there? We aren't two players away from a superbowl either. Maybe we should continue to trade down until we have only 4-7th round picks?

Should we have taken Tyron Smith at 9th overall? We weren't one LT away from a superbowl.

There's no GM that I know of that would say you should never trade up in the draft unless you are one player away from a superbowl. It's a risk/reward calculation. The advantage of the higher picks is that you can obtain elite players that are near impossible to come by in free agency while trading down gives you the opportunity for more cost-controlled games under rookie contracts.

Not only does the Cowboys internal board say we won but most of the boards that were available at the time seemed to suggest we got good value.

Prolific? Seriously?

In sample size of six games, Romo had 11/7 TD/int ratio. Do you really want to interpolate that to a 16 game season? Considering that he only had 9 ints the year before....

Under Garret we have finished in the top five in passing TDs four times and top ten six times.

I haven't cruched the numbers yet but we are probably a top 3 team in terms of passing TDs over that span.

Why not include Kitna's numbers with that? He went 16/12 TD/INT

That puts you at 27 TDs 19ints with Kitna and Romo. Drew Brees went for 33TDs and 22 ints that year while Manning went for 33tds and 17 ints. Consider Kitna is basically a career backup that's pretty good.

In 2010 we were 11th in offensive yards per drive and 11th in offensive points per drive. Defensively we were 24th in yards per drive allowed and 28th in points per drive allowed. Clear what the problem is there.

In part the reason why Garrett is not regarded that well as an offensive coordinator is due to the lack of rushing TDs which bog down our overall point totals. I tend to blame the OL more then Garrett however.

32 team do not restructure their contracts. If you can provide the proof that all of them do, then please post it.

Yes some team do it as well to get under the cap, but again your pushing more money into the future and making the price to cut that player higher in the future. Dallas routinely does it because they are over the cap and have to get under it before the league year starts. That's the definition of cap hell.

Even though the cap goes up, pushing more money into the future negates that increase that the team will see because now they have less money available because it's tied into future years.

Austin could have been a about $3M cut this year, but the 2013 restructure turned it into a $7M cut instead.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7597737/philadelphia-eagles-restructure-cullen-jenkins-contract
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ee-weatherford-restructure-contracts/6276293/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...contracts-of-stephen-bowen-and-adam-carriker/

http://www.canalstreetchronicles.co...nts-restructure-dt-brodrick-bunkleys-contract
http://www.catscratchreader.com/201...onathan-stewart-restructure-contract-panthers
http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/54853/dunta-robinson-gives-falcons-cap-space
http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/sto...ric-wright-restructured-dan-orlovsky-resigned

http://espn.go.com/blog/minnesota-vikings/post/_/id/5542/greenway-restructures-deal-with-vikings
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap10...hawks-green-bay-packers-contract-restructured
http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2012/03/detroit_lions_restructure_cont.html
http://espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/stor...s-restructure-jay-cutler-contract-reports-say
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/02/05/fitzgerald-restructures-contract-with-arizona-cardinals/
http://www.ninersnation.com/2014/7/29/5949893/49ers-salary-cap-ahmad-brooks-contract-restructured
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000162510/article/chris-long-st-louis-rams-restructure-des-contract

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/7721922/tom-brady-restructures-deal-creates-cap-room-new-england-patriots-source-says
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/13/report-jets-restructure-antonio-cromarties-contract/

http://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/titans_restructure_te_craig_stevens_contract/16214767
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/21/AR2007022101654.html
-peyton manning restructures
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2013/9/3/4691882/andre-johnson-contract-restructure-texans-brian-cushing-salary-cap

http://triblive.com/sports/steelers/3568268-74/cap-million-steelers#axzz39vjAeHh6
http://fansided.com/2013/02/07/balt...ture-contracts-to-keep-team-together/#!bz3dH4 :
"General manager Ozzie Newsome said that he’s open to restructuring a few deals for specific players but he’s not going to give everyone what they want."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap10...vers-restructures-san-diego-chargers-contract
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7...and-raiders-restructures-contract-source-says
http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2013/...structure-kansas-city-chiefs-salary-cap-space
http://www.milehighreport.com/2013/...-restructure-provides-cap-relief-in-2013-2014

That's 27/32 teams. I could not find recent restructures for:
seattle,buffalo,miami,cleveland,cincinnati, jacksonville

If you really went back and searched the archives you could probably find them. These are mostly non competitive teams so they have no need to restructure. Seattle will have to restructure some contracts down the road. Pretty much every competitive team restructures at least some contracts.

Regardless it is simply not the case that contract reshuffling is unique to Dallas. That extra 4 million you cite on the Austin contract while a mistake is not exactly crippling. You also have to take into account that you can probably make that up with some smart restructures that take advantage of cap inflation. While you do incur some risk you also gain immediate flexibility and even an overall cap advantage if it works out.

We are ten million under the cap right now after signing Tyron Smith to a 100 million dollar contract. That's with 24 million in dead money which will largely be coming off the books next year. We will probably have to take our lumps on defense this year but we will definitely be in a position to make some moves in the near future. Cap hell is an overstatement.

I would argue what has hurt the Cowboys most is not dead money but inefficient use of funds on the defensive side of the ball. The Cowboys actually had there cap space allocated 50/50 last year for offense/defense. The problem has been that although the Cowboys have had good individual performers on defense it has not translated into good overall team defense.

 

[Bluestang]

My response is not to suggest that our personnel moves could not be improved upon. There is always room for improvement and THAT more than anything IMO is the key to improving our front-line talent and roster depth. Still every club makes mistakes. Yet here it seems implied that they are all avoidable. The criticism of Claiborne is a good example IMO. Claiborne was an undisputed solid value where he was picked - just like Tyron Smith. None are guaranteed. You may have preferred Brockers/Wagner but its unfair to say Dallas talent eval is weak for picking Claiborne at #6. If no credit is due for picking Tyron, no blame is due for picking Claiborne.

Okay, point by point.

A - I'm not sure what the point of this statement is. No one else besides Tyron & Dez? Obviously not true. There have absolutely been failings, like every club. Are we disproportionately less effective in the draft. Name your time period - build a comparative case. Then we can talk.

B - Dez trade-up = BINGO! Claiborne trade-up = heartache. Frederick/Williams trade down = BINGO! Lawrence trade-up = ? I guess I don't see a compelling case that we are routinely blowing it on that front.

C - Is the point we should have done it sooner? This kind of logic doesn't make sense to me unless you can point out where we have talent gluts that should have been invested elsewhere. But we don't.

D - see opening paragraph - we picked him at the consensus slot representing his perceived value.

E - Now Murray gets dismissed because the O-line is getting all the yardage? Hmmm, seems a little disingenuous.

F - Again the primary point seems to be that we should have young talent waiting to take over at every position. Fine. But that point is really about talent evaluation. We HAVE to get better at that IMO. Otherwise I think we're chasing our tail. I just don't buy the point that we grossly neglect certain positions at the expense of others. Point to Escobar - but then it can be argued we're preparing for the decline of our 12 yr vet HOF TE. And lets not forget BAA as a factor in drafting.

To me the far and away most important point is you have to make draft picks and FA signings count (yours and other teams). THAT is about talent evaluation far more than anything else. But I don't buy tha we're compounding things significantly by wasting picks on positions that have no need.

And how are we supposed to be able to do that with Jerry taking advice from Lacewell on defensive coordinators and Jason just sitting back and smiling the whole time.

Or Stephen doling out contracts that require restructures the next year so that the team can get under the cap and then has to wait until the FA market settles a week later and get guys that nobody else wants.

This organization is poorly structured from the top, and guess what...it's trickled down all the way to the bottom.

 

[Alexander]

We are ten million under the cap right now after signing Tyron Smith to a 100 million dollar contract. That's with 24 million in dead money which will largely be coming off the books next year. We will probably have to take our lumps on defense this year but we will definitely be in a position to make some moves in the near future.

This is really good news. Perhaps we can blow it all on a ridiculous contract for another CB like Brandon Carr.

Cap hell is an overstatement.

We can do whatever we want in free agency. So, you are right.

 

[Idgit]

Or if we could fleece a team like you say they did Washington. We have not fleeced anyone since Jimmy Johnson left the building.

Yep. That's a lot easier to do when you've got the second pick overall in a draft and a team is desperate for a QB.

By the time half the teams in the league have passed on a guy, you look silly asking for the three #1s.

But I'm all for it if and when we can swing it. Even lower percentage middle round picks help you diversify draft risk.

 

[Bluestang]

Why stop there? We aren't two players away from a superbowl either. Maybe we should continue to trade down until we have only 4-7th round picks?

Should we have taken Tyron Smith at 9th overall? We weren't one LT away from a superbowl.

There's no GM that I know of that would say you should never trade up in the draft unless you are one player away from a superbowl. It's a risk/reward calculation. The advantage of the higher picks is that you can obtain elite players that are near impossible to come by in free agency while trading down gives you the opportunity for more cost-controlled games under rookie contracts.

Not only does the Cowboys internal board say we won but most of the boards that were available at the time seemed to suggest we got good value.

Now you've taken the argument into a ridiculous notion. Your better than that so don't try to twist my argument.

I'm probably right in the line of thinking that a top OT prospect is valued much higher than a top CB prospect.

Under Garret we have finished in the top five in passing TDs four times and top ten six times.

I haven't cruched the numbers yet but we are probably a top 3 team in terms of passing TDs over that span.

Why not include Kitna's numbers with that? He went 16/12 TD/INT

That puts you at 27 TDs 19ints with Kitna and Romo. Drew Brees went for 33TDs and 22 ints that year while Manning went for 33tds and 17 ints. Consider Kitna is basically a career backup that's pretty good.

In 2010 we were 11th in offensive yards per drive and 11th in offensive points per drive. Defensively we were 24th in yards per drive allowed and 28th in points per drive allowed. Clear what the problem is there.

In part the reason why Garrett is not regarded that well as an offensive coordinator is due to the lack of rushing TDs which bog down our overall point totals. I tend to blame the OL more then Garrett however.

And yet still Garrett has tendencies to disregard the run, even when it's working to the pass. Jason may be a good HC at some point in his career, but his track record right now isn't that great. He may need to get more experience from a veteran HC to learn the finer points of calling plays and managing a team.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7597737/philadelphia-eagles-restructure-cullen-jenkins-contract
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ee-weatherford-restructure-contracts/6276293/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...contracts-of-stephen-bowen-and-adam-carriker/

http://www.canalstreetchronicles.co...nts-restructure-dt-brodrick-bunkleys-contract
http://www.catscratchreader.com/201...onathan-stewart-restructure-contract-panthers
http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/54853/dunta-robinson-gives-falcons-cap-space
http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/sto...ric-wright-restructured-dan-orlovsky-resigned

http://espn.go.com/blog/minnesota-vikings/post/_/id/5542/greenway-restructures-deal-with-vikings
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap10...hawks-green-bay-packers-contract-restructured
http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2012/03/detroit_lions_restructure_cont.html
http://espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/stor...s-restructure-jay-cutler-contract-reports-say
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/02/05/fitzgerald-restructures-contract-with-arizona-cardinals/
http://www.ninersnation.com/2014/7/29/5949893/49ers-salary-cap-ahmad-brooks-contract-restructured
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000162510/article/chris-long-st-louis-rams-restructure-des-contract

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/7721922/tom-brady-restructures-deal-creates-cap-room-new-england-patriots-source-says
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/13/report-jets-restructure-antonio-cromarties-contract/

http://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/titans_restructure_te_craig_stevens_contract/16214767
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/21/AR2007022101654.html
-peyton manning restructures
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2013/9/3/4691882/andre-johnson-contract-restructure-texans-brian-cushing-salary-cap

http://triblive.com/sports/steelers/3568268-74/cap-million-steelers#axzz39vjAeHh6
http://fansided.com/2013/02/07/balt...ture-contracts-to-keep-team-together/#!bz3dH4 :
"General manager Ozzie Newsome said that he’s open to restructuring a few deals for specific players but he’s not going to give everyone what they want."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap10...vers-restructures-san-diego-chargers-contract
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7...and-raiders-restructures-contract-source-says
http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2013/...structure-kansas-city-chiefs-salary-cap-space
http://www.milehighreport.com/2013/...-restructure-provides-cap-relief-in-2013-2014

That's 27/32 teams. I could not find recent restructures for:
seattle,buffalo,miami,cleveland,cincinnati, jacksonville

If you really went back and searched the archives you could probably find them. These are mostly non competitive teams so they have no need to restructure. Seattle will have to restructure some contracts down the road. Pretty much every competitive team restructures at least some contracts.

Regardless it is simply not the case that contract reshuffling is unique to Dallas. That extra 4 million you cite on the Austin contract while a mistake is not exactly crippling. You also have to take into account that you can probably make that up with some smart restructures that take advantage of cap inflation. While you do incur some risk you also gain immediate flexibility and even an overall cap advantage if it works out.

We are ten million under the cap right now after signing Tyron Smith to a 100 million dollar contract. That's with 24 million in dead money which will largely be coming off the books next year. We will probably have to take our lumps on defense this year but we will definitely be in a position to make some moves in the near future. Cap hell is an overstatement.

I would argue what has hurt the Cowboys most is not dead money but inefficient use of funds on the defensive side of the ball. The Cowboys actually had there cap space allocated 50/50 last year for offense/defense. The problem has been that although the Cowboys have had good individual performers on defense it has not translated into good overall team defense.

Think of this way, if we had $24M available instead of it being dead money now, where would this defense be with a few quality FAs.

Factor in if Carr is cut after this year, that is more dead money that is going to get piled on in 2015 and 2016 (if a June 1 cut) - thats $12.151M

Do you see the cycle yet? Restructuring contracts is not a good idea, moreso if you keep doing it every year.

 

[85Cowboy85]

Now you've taken the argument into a ridiculous notion. Your better than that so don't try to twist my argument.

I'm probably right in the line of thinking that a top OT prospect is valued much higher than a top CB prospect.

Claiborne may very well gone above Smith if they were in the same draft. Patrick Peterson went above Smith and Claiborne was consider a better overall CB prospect with Peterson being the better overall athelete/returner.

Fans continue to stick to the 'win in the trenches' meme but clearly NFL GMs disagree about the value of corners. Otherwise they wouldn't make the kind of money they do.

And yet still Garrett has tendencies to disregard the run, even when it's working to the pass. Jason may be a good HC at some point in his career, but his track record right now isn't that great. He may need to get more experience from a veteran HC to learn the finer points of calling plays and managing a team.

What I would point out is that when we have had good OL play the rushing TDs have come. In 2007 it was the Barbarian and last year there was a big jump from the previous 3-4 years with Frederick coming into the pictures. We will see how they do with Martin.

Think of this way, if we had $24M available instead of it being dead money now, where would this defense be with a few quality FAs.

Factor in if Carr is cut after this year, that is more dead money that is going to get piled on in 2015 and 2016 (if a June 1 cut) - thats $12.151M

Do you see the cycle yet? Restructuring contracts is not a good idea, moreso if you keep doing it every year.

That 24 million is not mostly due to restructuring. It's due to guys sustaining injuries and natural decline.

It's part of the risk of FA. The amount of players that sign on the first few days of FA that actually play out their contracts are slim to none. It's much more likely then not that the player will be cut prior to ending the contract.

Even if we had the money and we signed Free Agents as you have suggested odds are that eventually we would be eating those contracts as well. Just like we will probably end up eating some of the Carr contract sooner or later. It doesn't matter who your GM is either. Free agency is really a tradeoff between how much I want help now and how much contract I am willing to eat 5 years from now.

The key is to know when to go all in and when to fold.

 

[85Cowboy85]

This is really good news. Perhaps we can blow it all on a ridiculous contract for another CB like Brandon Carr.

We can do whatever we want in free agency. So, you are right.

Well we will have flexibility next year. They do have a chance to reallocate some cap resources so hopefully they will do a better job then from 2010-2013.

I would much rather see them spread it out and sign 4-5 middle of the road types rather then invest a ton in one or two marquee players. We will see.

 

[Alexander]

I would much rather see them spread it out and sign 4-5 middle of the road types rather then invest a ton in one or two marquee players. We will see.

As long as we do not knee jerk like we did with Carr, I am all for it.

 

[Bluestang]

Claiborne may very well gone above Smith if they were in the same draft. Patrick Peterson went above Smith and Claiborne was consider a better overall CB prospect with Peterson being the better overall athelete/returner.

Fans continue to stick to the 'win in the trenches' meme but clearly NFL GMs disagree about the value of corners. Otherwise they wouldn't make the kind of money they do.

I had to re-read this a few times. The good GMs absolutely believe in "you win in the trenches". How are the Cardinals doing these days? Winning with Peterson? How are they competing against the likes of the Seahawks and 49ers these days?

The Seahawks had a dominant OL and DL, the Ravens did too, the Giants did too, so did the Packers, etc, etc. You don't build a winner without dominating the LOS. It's pretty clear cut.

What I would point out is that when we have had good OL play the rushing TDs have come. In 2007 it was the Barbarian and last year there was a big jump from the previous 3-4 years with Frederick coming into the pictures. We will see how they do with Martin.

That 24 million is not mostly due to restructuring. It's due to guys sustaining injuries and natural decline.

It's part of the risk of FA. The amount of players that sign on the first few days of FA that actually play out their contracts are slim to none. It's much more likely then not that the player will be cut prior to ending the contract.

Even if we had the money and we signed Free Agents as you have suggested odds are that eventually we would be eating those contracts as well. Just like we will probably end up eating some of the Carr contract sooner or later. It doesn't matter who your GM is either. Free agency is really a tradeoff between how much I want help now and how much contract I am willing to eat 5 years from now.

The key is to know when to go all in and when to fold.

All the big name cuts were restructured, with Ware doing the deed 3 times. Your not doing your research.

Lets look at who was cut:

Ware - http://espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/story/_/id/8996867/demarcus-ware-dallas-cowboy-restructures-contract

Ratliff - http://sportsblogs.star-telegram.co...restructuring-jay-ratliff-and-two-others.html

Austin - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap10...austin-deal-leads-cowboys-restructuring-spree

Just those three guys accounts for a little more than $18M in dead money now.

But Austin added $4M extra, Ratliff ate an extra $3M, and then Ware was restructured 3 different time which accounts for his $8.8M dead money hit.

I'm pretty good at math and that comes out to $15.8M in those three guys alone.

Subtract that from the approximate $24M in dead money and you would have had $8.2M in dead money instead of $24M.

An extra $15.8M to spend on FA or to roll into next year...but were not in cap hell. ROFLMAO.

 

[Risen Star]

GM

A legitimate general manager should be the most experienced personnel guy in the front office. Period. He is ultimately responsible for the roster every season, good or bad. It does go without saying, he does take input from the scouts and coaches but he is the decision maker on whether the players makes the roster or is sent packing. In an interview on the radio with Hostile, Ted Sundquist also confirmed some things that some people may or may not know. The Head Coach plays an important role within the team, building it the way he envisions with help from the GM. Don't get confused here by thinking that the HC is the ultimate architect of the roster, but more like the construction foreman telling the engineer that he needs certain materials in order to build the structure from the blueprints. Which leads to me the HC position.

HC

The head coach should have some legitimate experience coaching, and should have success doing it. There should be a natural progression of coaching experience that shows a track record of proven success as a means of substantiating why that coach is a candidate for the job. The GM should be hiring a coach that he feels will make the team a winner within the talents of the roster. Of course though, the GM must be able to help the HC accomplish the overall goals by giving him what he needs to make his offensive/defensive schemes successful. I believe this is the most single important relationship within the front office structure that determines the success of the ball club. Plenty of us have seen how these relationships can crumble and then lead to a "house cleaning" within the organization.

OC/DC

These positions should be filled with the recommendation of the HC, because ultimately it is the HC that wants these guys to run his schemes on both sides of the ball. Just like the HC position, these guys should have a natural coaching progression and success doing it.

Owner

This is probably the hardest position to write about because so little is known about it. The owner is the one guy that everyone within the front office answers to, because he signs the checks. The GM can't sign a highly, prized FA without getting approval from the owner because of the type of money that is involved with that kind of transaction. And there in lies the biggest conflict within the front office structure, how does a GM build a team with the owner's money if the owner is the guy that approves/disapproves the transaction?
Look at the marquee franchises and you'll see that the owners have an important relationship with their GMs and they give them as much leeway as they financially can to make their team a winner without putting themselves at the forefront. There is a special relationship there, and it has to be so that a GM can be successful. Handcuff the GM at every turn, and that trickles down all the way to the type of players that will be on the roster.


So why did I write this all out? Well, a few reasons:

1. I used to support JG when he first took the reins and up until last year. I thought we were headed in the right direction. Despite the evidence to the contrary, I believed he could do it. But after seeing him lose to every NFC East opponent 3 years straight, and still making game management blunders there isn't good reasons for me to rationalize his tenure here. I strongly said, give him 3 years and that time has come and gone and now we have a team that is heavily, scaled towards the offense with nothing on defense.

2. Despite what may be perceived on the recent drafting of this team, I've come to conclusion that this team still doesn't recognize how to build a team from the draft. Sure we have Tyron Smith and Dez Bryant but who else is there? We trade away valuable picks to get one player when we should be staying put or trading down for value. You can argue that we built a *projected top 5 OL but at what expense? We now have a franchise QB with back injury concerns because we tried to go cheap on the OL the first time around and had him running around for his life. And don't even bring up Claiborne who has proved nothing for what we spent on him in that 2012 draft. Murray is another good argument, but with this OL just about any running back should be able to get 1000+ yds and double digit TDs. Which brings me to my final point about the defense. Where have we invested in the defense? Yea we had some probowl players in Ware, Spencer, Hatcher, and Ratliff but it's obvious that the front office didn't have any sort of plan if those guys got injured/cut/not-resigned. Good GMs build their rosters with that kind of thinking in mind, and Dallas kept think that these players would still produce at high levels or shake the injuries as they kept getting older. Why not a second rounder on DL instead of Gavin Escobar? Or stay put in 2012 and get Brockers and Wagner?

3. This Owner/GM relationship here in Dallas is the worst kind. They are the same guy and he's a lunatic at that. However, there were 2 coaches that were able to keep Jerry from being Jerry. Jason, despite the arguments that he can, has not been able to keep the owner from saying those detrimental things. Jason has been called a trainee multiple times, has had to deal with Jerry's antics on the sideline, and also the War Room incompetence. The other aspect is that JG never had success in his offense outside of 2007 when he had help with it. There wasn't a natural progression with his coaching that warranted his promotion because his offense was just as bad as the defense in 2010 when Wade got fired. You can see that JG is working within the confines of his GM, but because of our unique situation in Dallas with the owner/GM we have to have a HC that doesn't put up with Jerry's nonsense.

4. A lot of people see hope in Stephen Jones, but he's still just as bad as Jerry. Some people will credit Stephen with his contracts but the reality is that he is as bad they come. The constant restructures are what have put this team in cap salary hell, despite what Stephen publicly says, they haven't been able to "do whatever they want" in FA. They bargain bin shopped for OL, the last few years and they kept adding more dead money to future years with restructures because they had to get under the cap. Folks this is the equivalent of paying your debt with a credit card and shuffling it around until you finally have to pay that original amount. These poor financial decisions are not any sort of resume that says Stephen is better than his daddy. The Bengals just handed Andy Dalton a new $96M contract with only $17M guaranteed. That means if they decided to cut him after this year, he would only count $9.6M against them in dead money next year. In that amount keeps going down $2.4M every year after that. That is a damn good contract that puts the onus on the player to keep producing. Yep, the Bengals are better contract negotiators than Dallas is.



Took a long, hard look at how Dallas is organized, or rightly so unorganized. There is a Owner, a GM, a HC, and OC/DCs but none of them have any type of hierarchy that follows each other. There is no offensive/defensive identity whatsoever and the GM, whoever that is - Jerry, Tom Ciscowski, or McClay - are not the most experienced personnel evaluators within the organization.

That's why one coach only had success in Jerry's tenure and another completely changed the landscape of a team in a mudslide.

I saw that familiar look in Jason's face in the preseason game in SD. It's the same one he had when the GB game got away from him, and the same one that Mike Smith had looking at his defense last night in preseason too.

It's the look of man that "hopes" things will turn out well, but they rarely do.

We'll see how this turns out but the defense can certainly get worse, and there are a lot of us that certainly believe that it will. The SD game didn't put those thoughts/confirmations to rest and quite frankly it shouldn't. The depth is lousy, and the scheme looks unorganized at best. I understand that 2 out of the four DL were not playing and Crawford was playing out of position, but in the limited action he was in...he did meh. The rest were over matched and got manhandled at the POA.

Again you have guys like Nick Hayden on this team because the front office can't afford a FA or draft a replacement because of the reasons I posted above.

This franchise will continue to wallow in mediocrity until we have head coach that can have Jerry "walking on eggshells" and keep him out of the personnel evaluation process.

Who will be the next Johnson or Parcells?

Outstanding.

But you are now a fake fan and a hater.

 

[Risen Star]

You are on a roll buddy
I hope we get back to championships in my lifetime

Well, for your sake, I hope you are a typing toddler.

 

[Bluestang]

Outstanding.

But you are now a fake fan and a hater.

That's fine by me, because I don't need anyone telling me what kind of fan I am.

 

[CoCo]

And how are we supposed to be able to do that with Jerry taking advice from Lacewell on defensive coordinators and Jason just sitting back and smiling the whole time.

Or Stephen doling out contracts that require restructures the next year so that the team can get under the cap and then has to wait until the FA market settles a week later and get guys that nobody else wants.

This organization is poorly structured from the top, and guess what...it's trickled down all the way to the bottom.

What does Lacewell's advice on DC's have to do with talent evaluation? And I'm not sure what Jason smiling the whole time is even referring to.

Regarding Stephen and the cap lets stop and think about that for a second. Restructures are really only a vehicle for moving cap hits from one year to another. And leftover cap room from one year can be rolled to the next. With those two facts as a premise restructures really aren't the problem are they? Rather, its spending beyond our current cap year means. Why would we need to do that? It suggests we are or have been overpaying our talent. And in particular since we are only producing 8-8 results but spending this year AND future years cap room to do so. Which brings us back once more to ... talent evaluation!

The rest of your points that I responded to (A-F) aren't really the issue. I'm not sure they're even issues at all.

Finding ALL the specific player roots of the problem are difficult. A complete washout on the 2009 draft would be a key piece. Add the Roy11 trade and contract. Barber's contract. Add in the 2008 draft that produced Felix, Jenkins, Bennett & Choice - Scandrick in Round 5 now looks like good value. Those are 3 major reasons why we end up having talent holes and future year cap borrowings.

Put all that at Jerry's feet. It belongs there.

But I think much of the rest that you are trying to call causes are really just inevitable outcomes of failed talent evaluations.

 

[junk]

Great, great thread, Bluestang. Too bad it got dumped to the Rant Zone for some reason. It is more relevant than anything in the Fan Zone right now. Until these issues are fixed, the team will continue to flounder. It is so apparent, it is amazing how many people can't see it.

The team has no team building philosophy. They hop from problem to problem, scheme to scheme and it is mainly because they don't have a strong, knowledgeable voice at the top.

Sturm summed it best when he described the team as desperately running from hole to hole in the dam sticking their finger in a hole only to see another pop up. They never build depth and, frankly, how can they when they are wasting valuable 2nd round picks on back up tight ends......not once, but three times in 8 years. Just one small example of their misguided team building philosophy.