Broaddus: Too many teams covet OL for one to fall to the Cowboys w/audio

[xwalker]

If the quality linemen are not available Garrett and Jerry gets what they deserve for not fixing the problem in last year's draft. They had the potential to walk away from the draft with at least two starting linemen, but they wanted to trade up.

zzzzzzzzzzz

The old formula for winning football is having:

Quality Cornerbacks
A quality outside pass-rusher
A quality LT
A quality QB
A true #1 WR

 

[CF74]

The old formula for winning football is having:

Quality Cornerbacks
A quality outside pass-rusher
A quality LT
A quality QB
A true #1 WR

You forgot RB, LB, and
























































kicker

 

[Dhragon]

You can generally find good guard play later in the draft than you can find good defensive line play. At least most years the guard pool is less picked over than the defensive line pool by the middle of the second round.

Outside of a playmaking safety, the Cowboys have the hard stuff to find (2 outside pass rushers, 2 good cover corners, 2 3 down linebackers, LOT, quarterback, #1 receiver.

Maybe other teams can - but the Boys track record of picking good OL in later rounds is horrid.

 

[Dhragon]

You can't draft like that. You can't say Rogers and peterman did not work out so I'm not going to try anymore. I don't love the second round guards for a zbs but our whole draft strategy can't be cooper or bust. It will probably bust.

Whole draft strategy can't be Cooper or bust since he and Warmack both might be gone by the time we pick. But the draft strategy SHOULD be draft either one if they are there when we pick. If not, then sure, you got to go to plan B and hope we can get a good player in the later rounds even though we are really bad at identifying good OL that are not pretty much sure things.

 

[Idgit]

Yeah, would be nice if there were some better skill players this year. Then again, if there WERE better skill players, Jerry would probably pick one of them over OL anyway. So we lose either way.

How do we lose buy getting a better skill player again?

 

[burmafrd]

How do we lose buy getting a better skill player again?

well you cannot for instance get your maximum benefit from a TOP WR if your QB is flat on his back half the time or running for his life because the O line which you just ignored to get that shiny toy is stinking the place up.

 

[Fredd]

I still believe that we should not go Skill position with the #18 pick...we need to think BPA, but with blinders on...BPA in the first but BPA of all of the OL, DL, S

While Austin would get me excited to watch him wear the Star, I would be unhappy if we don't improve the OLine...besides, there is no guarantee that Spencer is a Cowboy in 2014, and thus, the DL MUST get an infusion of talent

 

[TheCount]

How do we lose buy getting a better skill player again?

Do you often find yourself avoiding the point of a statement just to ask questions you know the answer to?

I sometimes suffer from the same affliction.

 

[ElGatoGrande]

How do we lose buy getting a better skill player again?

It would be like buying snow tires for your car with a blown engine,,,

 

[Idgit]

well you cannot for instance get your maximum benefit from a TOP WR if your QB is flat on his back half the time or running for his life because the O line which you just ignored to get that shiny toy is stinking the place up.

I think we all want to upgrade the OL. That doesn't mean the team gets worse by adding a good player elsewhere. And it doesn't mean you're going to ignore your OL if you don't take a player their in the first.

Do you often find yourself avoiding the point of a statement just to ask questions you know the answer to?

I sometimes suffer from the same affliction.

No.

I've been known to question needlessly hopeless statements that don't make much sense from time to time, though.

It would be like buying snow tires for your car with a blown engine,,,

This, I agree with. Except OLs aren't really the engine of the 'car,' but your point is the same. We definitely need to address the OL. But a nice new set of tires doesn't necessarily hurt.

 

[TheCount]

I think we all want to upgrade the OL. That doesn't mean the team gets worse by adding a good player elsewhere. And it doesn't mean you're going to ignore your OL if you don't take a player their in the first.



No.

I've been known to question needlessly hopeless statements that don't make much sense from time to time, though.



This, I agree with. Except OLs aren't really the engine of the 'car,' but your point is the same. We definitely need to address the OL. But a nice new set of tires doesn't necessarily hurt.

Hopeless? :laugh2:

Far from it. Don't project your own concerns onto the statements of others.

 

[TwentyOne]

i have always thought we would go dt in the 1st. then guard or safety in the 2nd. i think a guard they would love in the 2nd would be frederick. if the 3rd maybe winters

I think so too. Of course if the draft pans out our way.

 

[Idgit]

Hopeless? :laugh2:

Far from it. Don't project your own concerns onto the statements of others.

I didn't. And I didn't say you were hopeless, overall. I said your statement was hopeless.

Perhaps I was wrong. Here's your statement which I referred to directly:

Yeah, would be nice if there were some better skill players this year. Then again, if there WERE better skill players, Jerry would probably pick one of them over OL anyway. So we lose either way.

Perhaps you could be so kind as to point out the hopeful part for me? Or even the not-hopeless part? If you can, then I'm happy to retract whatever concerns I've somehow mistakenly projected.

 

[jobberone]

Richardson would be a nice addition to a d-line that is a little long in the tooth. What worries me, though, is whether he would be given a legitimate shot at competing for a starting job or if he will start out as a rotational player.

I'd like to see some of youngsters get a fair shot at a starting job.

I like that but I suspect Ratliff will start depending on his health (assuming they are roughly equal). But I'll be very surprised if his snaps aren't really reduced this year. I'm sure they'll do that from game to game depending on health and needs at the position but I think they'll go into the draft thinking of reducing his snaps and getting a replacement who can even start if necessary.

 

[jobberone]

I still think there's at least a 50% chance that either Cooper or Warmack are there at 18.

Well, you'd have history on your side that it's better than 50/50. I don't want Warmack. But I'd take Cooper.

 

[Idgit]

I like that but I suspect Ratliff will start depending on his health (assuming they are roughly equal). But I'll be very surprised if his snaps aren't really reduced this year. I'm sure they'll do that from game to game depending on health and needs at the position but I think they'll go into the draft thinking of reducing his snaps and getting a replacement who can even start if necessary.

I think, when healthy, Ratliff is going to be a terror at the 3 tech. I also think we'll rotate him heavily to keep him fresh.

Apparently, Hatcher, too, prefers to come in off the bench. And Crawford and Lissemore are going to get plenty of snaps inside, too. If we don't add a guy in the first three rounds, we'll probably still take a flyer on a 1 tech somewhere at the bottom of the draft or in CFA. And there's always Amobi Okoye out there in VFA if we can free up some money.

Who knows...we might have Spencer's extension all worked out, and the framework for a deal with Brandon Moore and/or Okoye, as well, and just be waiting to see what combination of DE/DT/OG/OT we end up with from the draft before deciding whom to extend and whom to sign off the street. It could work out a couple of different ways for us depending how the draft breaks. But we've probably only got money for one decent VFA lineman on either side of the ball unless we also extend Anthony Spencer.

 

[jobberone]

I think, when healthy, Ratliff is going to be a terror at the 3 tech. I also think we'll rotate him heavily to keep him fresh.

Apparently, Hatcher, too, prefers to come in off the bench. And Crawford and Lissemore are going to get plenty of snaps inside, too. If we don't add a guy in the first three rounds, we'll probably still take a flyer on a 1 tech somewhere at the bottom of the draft or in CFA. And there's always Amobi Okoye out there in VFA if we can free up some money.

Who knows...we might have Spencer's extension all worked out, and the framework for a deal with Brandon Moore and/or Okoye, as well, and just be waiting to see what combination of DE/DT/OG/OT we end up with from the draft before deciding whom to extend and whom to sign off the street. It could work out a couple of different ways for us depending how the draft breaks. But we've probably only got money for one decent VFA lineman on either side of the ball unless we also extend Anthony Spencer.

I don't expect a fall off of his play this year but I'm concerned about his staying healthy. And I don't want him playing the 1 too often. The loss of Brent hurts the 1 IMO but you play the cards in your hand. Too early to tell much but I think they have plans for Crawford at the 3 and 5. Lissemore should be able to spell mostly inside and in a pinch SDE. I think Hatcher can play the 3 and 5 as well. So I like the DL with the exception of a true 1 although we'd all like to have another pass rushing whiz.

I guess I'm thinking they will take the BPA looking at OL, DL, and S first. I think the draft will sculpture the addition of any vet FAs later. I do admit I'm very keen now on adding at least one vet along the interior.

Not many are adding CB into the mix when I see mocks but they have to get another starting quality CB IMO somehow somewhere. Maybe Kiffin can get more out of Scandrick and Carr.

 

[Idgit]

...Not many are adding CB into the mix when I see mocks but they have to get another starting quality CB IMO somehow somewhere. Maybe Kiffin can get more out of Scandrick and Carr.

I think the team's pretty high on Stirling Moore, both at CB and maybe even playing some single-high S.

We might add a CB somewhere in the middle rounds if one we really like is there, but it's otherwise a position you probably try to fill with a couple of college FAs or add a younger guy with some NFL game experience who can also give you something on Teams after rosters start to pare down a bit going into the season.

I agree, too, that Rat's recent injury history is a concern. Nothing for it now, though, since we're hamstrung by the contract. He did play really well when he was healthy last year, though. If he's physically able to give you starting snaps, he's still a high-quality DL.

 

[TheCount]

I didn't. And I didn't say you were hopeless, overall. I said your statement was hopeless.

Perhaps I was wrong. Here's your statement which I referred to directly:



Perhaps you could be so kind as to point out the hopeful part for me? Or even the not-hopeless part? If you can, then I'm happy to retract whatever concerns I've somehow mistakenly projected.

I don't make a habit of explaining the obvious, but if you insist.

The point of the statement is that without the skill players the top offensive linemen go before Jerry has a chance to draft them and with more skill players Jerry takes a skill player over a top offensive linemen.

Clearly, the loss here is that we don't get a top offensive lineman in either scenario. It wasn't even that serious a statement, but of course you really can't help yourself, can you.

I don't think I've ever had someone stalk me on the forum before, I suppose I should be flattered it's a moderator.

 

[Idgit]

I don't make a habit of explaining the obvious, but if you insist.

The point of the statement is that without the skill players the top offensive linemen go before Jerry has a chance to draft them and with more skill players Jerry takes a skill player over a top offensive linemen.

Clearly, the loss here is that we don't get a top offensive lineman in either scenario. It wasn't even that serious a statement, but of course you really can't help yourself, can you.

I don't think I've ever had someone stalk me on the forum before, I suppose I should be flattered it's a moderator.

The Count, honestly, I engage so many illogical pessimistic posts that if yours seem like they're getting singled out, it says more about your arguments than it does about you personally. I wasn't aware that you and I go round and round all that often, frankly, compared to some other posters. Though it does seem to me that you spend a fair amount of time defending bad arguments instead of just making better ones.

If your statement wasn't serious, then I'm not sure why you're bothering to defend it. If you'd just replied with 'I wasn't being serious,' there wouldn't be any going back and forth on the topic. I think we both know there is more than one way to address the problems along the OL, and it's a good draft and still a good VFA period for doing so. We'd probably both also agree that we could use good players at almost any position group, and there are worse things than not going with an offensive guard in the first round of the draft.