Brian Waters

[Stash]

perfectly fine. You act like the guy is having a hall of fame year, he isnt.

No, he's having a Pro Bowl level year. It's his career that will be Hall of Fame, but carry on...

Have you not seen the strides Bill Nagy has made. I would much rather have Nagy starting and learning.

No issues with him learning, but it wasn't necessary that it be on-the-job training.

Nagy has done a nice job so far, but I think we'd have a much better running game with Waters out there and Nagy learning and getting stronger for the future.

 

[CCBoy]

It has everything to do with it. Either clueless or too cheap to signe Waters so they settle for Dockery - and the results speak for themselves. But you keep the broom out.



That's always the easy alternative to thinking for yourself - "They're the Cowboys, they get paid to do this, they know better than us".

Frees up a lot of time and energy which would be otherwise used on thinking for oneself.



What 'facts' does anyone here have that I don't?

I'll answer it for ya - none!

The fact is that the Cowboys could have signed Brian Waters - a multi-time Pro Bowl player.

For whatever reasons folks would like to insert here ____________ they passed on that opportunity.

And the latest fact is that he's playing great in New England, they couldn't be any happoer with him, and now we'll have to deal with him on Sunday.

Those are the facts.

It's everything else that's baseless speculation.

But then again, if everyone stuck to beer, then there wouldn't be the need to decide up the selections of wine, or even of scotch whiskey, bourbon, brandy, or even a tequila, gin, or vodka. Yea, that's some clarity there. Then there is Gin Ro, Saki, or even quality Meade.

Yep, leave it all there...

 

[Stash]

For starters, that's a ton cheaper than BOTH Holland or Waters. As to injuries, unless someone passed through a complete vacuum process, hamstring and leg injuries are very prevalent throughout the NFL following the lockout this off season.

So $800,000 for nothing looks better to you than $3.5 million for Pro Bowl play?

Maybe you should be a Bengals fan?

They never pay anybody and you'd be in your glory.

 

[alancdc]

I like that we went young. Will be some bumps, but ya had to get that line turned over. How good was Wisconsin's line that Nagy didn't even start? At least that is what his college coach said last week.

 

[CCBoy]

No, he's having a Pro Bowl level year. It's his career that will be Hall of Fame, but carry on...



No issues with him learning, but it wasn't necessary that it be on-the-job training.

Nagy has done a nice job so far, but I think we'd have a much better running game with Waters out there and Nagy learning and getting stronger for the future.

Yea, when time on the turf is necessary to develop any progression in a player. He has to come under fire, no matter how high faluting the measurements are to a group of sure fire world beaters.

Remember back about three seasons on the Cowboys, as well as the Super Team in Philadelphia right now? To become steel, one still has to be forged by fire. You don't do that by being behind someone else, except at quarterback. There knowledge is the functional element that seperates skill levels.

 

[kmd24]

More like the difference between Waters and the guy who's not playing guard for us.

How do you figure? Waters can only have an impact above and beyond someone who is playing. Dockery's injury is a non-issue with respect to Waters.

Disagree here.

I can both praise the good and criticize the bad. They're not mutually exclusive for me.

You can do whatever you want, but you're just being results-oriented. Just like you can't tell whether it's a good strategy to switch doors in the Monty Hall problem by examining the outcome of a given trial, you can't tell if a player personnel strategy is good by examining the outcome of a given move (or non-move in this case).

A more interesting question than whether the move is simply good or bad (at least to me) is whether the FO's information gathering process was flawed in this case. Perhaps they only looked at film from last year. Perhaps they didn't really evaluate Waters. Perhaps he is unable to do well some of the things we want OL to do. Perhaps they were sold on the young guys and weren't willing to pay $3MM or whatever the offer would have been for just a backup. That's really the place to focus, on the decision-making process, not on the result.

 

[CCBoy]

So $800,000 for nothing looks better to you than $3.5 million for Pro Bowl play?

Maybe you should be a Bengals fan?

They never pay anybody and you'd be in your glory.

Maybe you should shut up, or listen to what is stated. Prove that Dockery isn't a better part for the present team of Cowboys. Prove it. As to Pro Bowl, Dockery has been there himself. And you NEVER approached the issue that Waters had an extended 'developmental' life before the arriving with a lineman job in the NFL. His legs and body wear are much closer to terminal in any picture going beyond here and today. And no....I would much prefer to have Dockery and the expiration date not showing on that commodity.

As to product on the field, you still run from proclaiming, with conviction, just how well even Waters will do against the Dallas player, Jay Ratcliff. And NO, I'm not conceding overall value of Phil Costa as he projects on the offensive team. Just for the record here, Pittsburgh started out with three rookies when it evolved on the road to a Dynasty and a Super Bowl. I'll just wait and observe the entire season before I had out red slips and deficiency ratings here. No way Costa can meek his way through both Wilfork and Haynesworth. But that has to be seen first...before any statement you are presenting even has some kind of metal to it.

 

[shockandroll]

Actually, I think CowboyMike is right. What's absurd about what he said?

And to what someone else said... MacMahon claims that Nagy got hurt in practice, and Dockery was going out with the ones that day before the injury occurred.

This thread is just what that other thread was talking about: A reasonable discussion is brought up, prompted by our opponent this week, and most people play the "You're just a whiner and complainer!!!" card before even considering the question.

lol, I knew I should have typed end sarcasm!

 

[Stash]

How do you figure? Waters can only have an impact above and beyond someone who is playing. Dockery's injury is a non-issue with respect to Waters.

And I feel that he'd be better right now than Nagy is, whereas Dockery - the guy we signed instead - is contributing nothing and played poorly even when he did play. So if we had signed Waters instead, we'd not only have a higher-quality starter, but a role model that the young players can look to to learn how to be a pro's pro. I honestly think that if folks read up on Waters they'd be impressed with not only the player on the field, but the player and person off of it as well.

You can do whatever you want, but you're just being results-oriented. Just like you can't tell whether it's a good strategy to switch doors in the Monty Hall problem by examining the outcome of a given trial, you can't tell if a player personnel strategy is good by examining the outcome of a given move (or non-move in this case).

I can when I saw it before the fact as well as after. I didn;t just come out and say we should have signed him after we didn't. I was openly campaigning for it as soon as he was released in Kansas City. That stance hasn't changed.

A more interesting question than whether the move is simply good or bad (at least to me) is whether the FO's information gathering process was flawed in this case. Perhaps they only looked at film from last year. Perhaps they didn't really evaluate Waters. Perhaps he is unable to do well some of the things we want OL to do. Perhaps they were sold on the young guys and weren't willing to pay $3MM or whatever the offer would have been for just a backup. That's really the place to focus, on the decision-making process, not on the result.

That's certainly a part of it. And something that I hope the folks inside Valley Ranch are doing.

Every mistake I criticize them for, I am hopeful that they'll learn from it and be that much better tomorrow.

 

[kmd24]

Nagy has done a nice job so far, but I think we'd have a much better running game with Waters out there and Nagy learning and getting stronger for the future.

Hmm. I wonder how much you really know about Waters based on this quote. He was up and down, but mostly fairly awful as a run blocker last year. The only part of his play that was consistent was his pass blocking.

If you wanted improvement in the running game, especially if you wanted a guard who could get out on the edge, Brian Waters is not the guy you would sign. I'm not saying Dockery is either, btw.

 

[cbow44]

No, he's having a Pro Bowl level year. It's his career that will be Hall of Fame, but carry on...



No issues with him learning, but it wasn't necessary that it be on-the-job training.

Nagy has done a nice job so far, but I think we'd have a much better running game with Waters out there and Nagy learning and getting stronger for the future.

I would be willing to wager you. Waters does not go to the pro bowl????

 

[Stash]

Maybe you should shut up, or listen to what is stated. Prove that Dockery isn't a better part for the present team of Cowboys. Prove it. As to Pro Bowl, Dockery has been there himself. And you NEVER approached the issue that Waters had an extended 'developmental' life before the arriving with a lineman job in the NFL. His legs and body wear are much closer to terminal in any picture going beyond here and today. And no....I would much prefer to have Dockery and the expiration date not showing on that commodity.

Please. This is pathetic. The one-legged man enters the butt-kickin' contest.

Dockery's contribution? Nothing. Zip. Zero. Nada. Nothing.

While Waters is playing at a high level for the best offense in the league.

Let me know the next time you'd like to be completely, totally, and utterly embarrassed and I'll be happy to oblige.

:eyepoke:

As to product on the field, you still run from proclaiming, with conviction, just how well even Waters will do against the Dallas player, Jay Ratcliff. And NO, I'm not conceding overall value of Phil Costa as he projects on the offensive team. Just for the record here, Pittsburgh started out with three rookies when it evolved on the road to a Dynasty and a Super Bowl. I'll just wait and observe the entire season before I had out red slips and deficiency ratings here. No way Costa can meek his way through both Wilfork and Haynesworth. But that has to be seen first...before any statement you are presenting even has some kind of metal to it.

And there he goes, careening off the road yet again...

 

[Randy White]

Who believes that Brian Waters would have been the player that would have propel the Cowboys to the Superbowl ?

 

[kmd24]

I can when I saw it before the fact as well as after. I didn;t just come out and say we should have signed him after we didn't. I was openly campaigning for it as soon as he was released in Kansas City. That stance hasn't changed.

That's fine, but the empirical evidence suggests that many teams did not agree with your stance by virtue of the fact that he went unsigned for several weeks. That suggests to me that most teams thought it unlikely that Waters would be worth the signing. That doesn't mean that they were right (obviously they weren't), but it does give you some sort of guess at the a priori estimate teams had of Waters' chances of a successful 2011 campaign.

If I said I knew a coin flip was going to turn up heads prior to the flip, the fact that it turns up heads afterwards doesn't make me some sort of coin-flip prognosticator.

 

[Stash]

Hmm. I wonder how much you really know about Waters based on this quote. He was up and down, but mostly fairly awful as a run blocker last year. The only part of his play that was consistent was his pass blocking.

Check yourself. He had one bad game against Oakland that some used to assess his entire season.

And yet, somehow the Chiefs were able to overcome his abysmal play and still run for more yards per game than any team in 2010?

Shocking that once they unloaded the waste known as Brian Waters that their effectiveness running the football has plummeted rather than improved?

Peculiar.

If you wanted improvement in the running game, especially if you wanted a guard who could get out on the edge, Brian Waters is not the guy you would sign. I'm not saying Dockery is either, btw.

And yet reality somehow tells us differently....

 

[Stash]

Who believes that Brian Waters would have been the player that would have propel the Cowboys to the Superbowl ?

Who ever intimated any such thing?

Any other ridiculous extremes you'd like to go to?

How about a poll:

Who would you rather have at guard right now, Brian Waters or Bill Nagy?

That at least qualifies as relevant.

Until we chase off 'Bad Tony', we shouldn't mention Super Bowl.

 

[Stash]

That's fine, but the empirical evidence suggests that many teams did not agree with your stance by virtue of the fact that he went unsigned for several weeks. That suggests to me that most teams thought it unlikely that Waters would be worth the signing. That doesn't mean that they were right (obviously they weren't), but it does give you some sort of guess at the a priori estimate teams had of Waters' chances of a successful 2011 campaign.

And I would criticize them if I wer a fan of any of those teams too. But one key advantage only one other team (Houston) had - location, location, location.

If I said I knew a coin flip was going to turn up heads prior to the flip, the fact that it turns up heads afterwards doesn't make me some sort of coin-flip prognosticator.

Well, if that's all it takes, let's fire the coaches and scouts and get us a big 'ol coin!

After the initial investment, it would save us tons of money!

 

[cbow44]

Who ever intimated any such thing?

Any other ridiculous extremes you'd like to go to?

How about a poll:

Who would you rather have at guard right now, Brian Waters or Bill Nagy?

That at least qualifies as relevant.

Until we chase off 'Bad Tony', we shouldn't mention Super Bowl.

You remind of a child. when he dosn't get his way just sticks his fingers in his ears and shouts nananananana. people have kicked your butt with facts and figures and you just shout nanananana. too dumb to argue with.

 

[kmd24]

Check yourself. He had one bad game against Oakland that some used to assess his entire season.

And yet, somehow the Chiefs were able to overcome his abysmal play and still run for more yards per game than any team in 2010?

Shocking that once they unloaded the waste known as Brian Waters that their effectiveness running the football has plummeted rather than improved?

Peculiar.

The game against Oakland was in the middle of a 5 game stretch in which Waters really struggled in the run game. He also had a bad game in the season opener against SD and later in the season against Tennessee.

The reason that the Cheifs have struggled running the football in 2011 is that Barry Richardson and Ryan Lilja have fallen off the map. Jon Asomoah, who replaced Waters, hasn't been any better than Waters was.

 

[kmd24]

Well, if that's all it takes, let's fire the coaches and scouts and get us a big 'ol coin!

After the initial investment, it would save us tons of money!

Wow. You are completely missing the point or purposefully being argumentative. It's been a fun conversation.

Cheers!