Personally I'd take him over Terrance Williams right now and I imagine that's exactly who he's replacing.
Struggling? Dak isn’t struggling, just read the posts about daks amazing accuracy.I'd say the fact that they currently employ at least one, possibly two quarterbacks who "suck" worse. And a starter that's struggling that they're still unsure about.
Other than all that? They're set!
Our receivers all suck, none get separation, and they all have several drops of amazing dak missiles every game.Both Williams and Hurns aren't doing much for us, but with the money sunk into Hurns, and another year on his contract, I expect they'll want to see if he can pan out.
Some of the same could kind of be said for Williams. There was noise that he improved under Lal as well.
The thing is, if Williams is suspended, that will free up a roster spot, and no one needs to be cut.
I wanted to use Butler more last year. With speed on the outside, teams can't press man without help over the top, as the Giants discovered.
Simple base offense. Lots of running with options between RB, QB, FB, "Web back", and legitimate deep threats on the outside to back off the safeties.
Thats what I think too. I just dont think they wanted to go into the home opener with Thomas wearing the Star. Stupid I know, but if their season starts 0-3. Heads are going to roll because its obvious they couldnt compete and kept Thomas against his will and got less than a 2 out of him .And I'll do you one better in the "rampant speculation" department:
What if any possible trade for Earl Thomas at this point is contingent on a Cowboys win this week?
Hear me out. If the Seahawks win, they may think they can turn their awful season around and decide to keep Thomas. I still disagree with them, but they obviously think more highly of their sorry team than I do.
Conversely, if Dallas loses and their offense continues to struggle, perhaps they simply say forget it. Our defense is good enough without Thomas and we're not winning anything with this offense and quarterback this year anyway. Why trade for another defensive player when that's not the problem?
But, if the offense does play well, perhaps the Cowboys think they do have a shot and would then pull the trigger on a deal?
It's not the best way to make long term decisions of course, but I can't help but to wonder if it could play a factor?
Just like in finance, high-risk / high-reward. We just bought ourselves some wonderful, low-yielding AAA-rated bonds in Butler.Looking at Gordon would be another monumental mistake. He is a drug overdose looking for a place to happen. We've had enough of those
the last few years.
Just like in finance, high-risk / high-reward. We just bought ourselves some wonderful, low-yielding AAA-rated bonds in Butler.
I hear you, but if the option is a pro bowl talent WR with baggage vs. a guy who caught a few deep balls for us in a couple games...I know which way I'm going. Also, Gordon is a guy who has a drug problem. He's not a violent criminal. We've shielded our eyes from those in the past so really, the baggage isn't really that heavy.Get where you're going ... but there's a LOT of baggage that comes with Gordon. We have enough of our own in Dallas without adding to it right now ...
But the team pats themselves on the back when they take other risks, on guys I'd say who have far worse character than Josh Gordon. Or when they want to "provide support" to guys like Gregory and currently David Irving.
I hear you, but if the option is a pro bowl talent WR with baggage vs. a guy who caught a few deep balls for us in a couple games...I know which way I'm going. Also, Gordon is a guy who has a drug problem. He's not a violent criminal. We've shielded our eyes from those in the past so really, the baggage isn't really that heavy.