When you see "[/ QUOTE]" at the bottom of the message, cut and past it to the top. That way it won't be inside the quote box and when I hit reply it will keep the discussion and and I can cut/paste the QUOTE control sequence to the top also which allows you to easily reply.
You managed to hit on every possible sterotype of the point of view of average fans.
I don't know what a sterotype is.
It's sterotypical that I wonder if you're just joking around.
Again I don't know what sterotypical is.
Really?
From Google: A simplified and standardized conception or image invested with special meaning and held in common by members of a group.
Examples:
Football players are dumb jocks.
A specific race of people do a specific thing.
I looked up Sterotypical on google again. Still didn't find it.
Cowboys players are always worth more to fans in trades than than how any NFL team would value them.
Can you cite an example of where I overvalued a Cowboys player?
ET straight up for Byron Jones.
At the time I posted this it was being suggested Seattle may let him go for a 3rd rd pick. They just released two corners so they could be interested in a former 1st rd pick that just may have ended up being a good corner had we just left him there.
Fans always want to dump a player but somehow figure he must be valuable to another team.
I don't want to dump Byron Jones. I think the Seahawks have a need at CB especially after now cutting 3 of them and may like him.
Dez and his contract for anything.
If Dez was worth the contract the Cowboys wouldn't be contemplating a paycut or getting rid of him. If you think the cap is forcing them to dump him then you're not paying attention. The Cowboys issue with Dez is lack of production and being a distraction.
Dez is a potential Hall of Fame receiver. The Bears may believe his production has dropped just like the entire receiving corp for reasons other than his play. They very well could believe he is worth a 2nd rd pick.
What he did in the past is not relevant to the Bears. They could sign a free agent without giving up picks. It is highly unlikely any team would pay his salary even if they didn't have to give up a pick.
Dez is still only 29 years old and has a proven track record. The Bears may like him. I am talking about flipping 1st rd picks not giving away 2 first rounder like we did for Galloway. Don't kid yourself, if we cut Dez he will be signed by someone and it will be at a high salary.
Fans always get their favorite player in the first.
Guilty of finding a way to get the most impactful player as charged.
You wanted to draft James so you used an unrealistic trade to move up. Moving from 19 to 12 would cost 2nd round pick or more. Nobody is giving up a 2nd for Dez with his contract. The Bears could just sign Moncrief or a more expensive free agent WR without giving up draft capital.
See above and Moncrief has never had a season like Dez has many times in the past.
I said "or a more expensive free agent".
There are several teams looking for free agent receivers and few proven commodities.
The cap hit is only X when in reality what is important is how much the Cowboys save when ALL years are considered in regards to the cap.
Agreed, maybe you can cite an example of how I didn't consider future years.
The Cowboys save 3M by cutting Scandrick when all years are considered, not 1.4M. The Cowboys manage the cap based on considering all years, not the just the current year. The current year would only be relevant in this situation if they didn't have any contracts they could restructure. Scandrick is cheap at 3M but 3M is the number the Cowboys look at when considering whether or not to keep him.
Keeping Scandrick for another year would have very little impact on the cap. Replacing him will cost more than we gain by cutting him.
You're ignoring the point. Scandricks value is not relevant to the point. Your reference to 1.4M instead of 3M is the point.
I did in fact state 1.4 mil so it is true that I did not go into future years to describe the cap savings but If I were to trade Byron Jones, Scandrick would be more valuable then the small amount of cap savings this year and in the future.
Kickers are not that important.
There are more than 32 good kickers in the world so there is no need to pay one over 4 mil a year. Especially one who just had a bad year and may be on the downward slide.
Tell that to Bills fans.
Super Bowl XXV, which was played on January 27, 1991, would cement Norwood's name in football history when he missed a 47-yard field goal attempt at the end of the game, giving the New York Giants the victory, and started the string of the Bills' four consecutive Super Bowl losses. This kick was made famous by the "wide right" call by the TV announcers. It cost Jim Kelly the Super Bowl MVP which instead went to Ottis Anderson of the New York Giants.
Bailey is the most accurate kicker in History and he was injured last season. The 4M is cheap insurance.
Bailey was the most accurate kicker in history. He is showing signs of regression and if he were kicking a game winner in the superbowl in 2018 I would be less than confident.
The Cowboys don't need to cut good players. He was injured. They'll know in training cap if he has regressed. From a probability perspective, it is unlikely that he has regressed.
The Cowboys need to cut overpriced, underperforming players when it makes sense.
The Cowboys always get the fan concensus favorite player in a trade and the fact that player will require a big contract is not part of the thought process.
I never made a con argument against the 10 year census.
Dozens of posts recently to get ET that either give up way too much or next to nothing but all of them ignore the top issue which is ET's comtract issues.
I don't think you understand what I was doing here.
You're getting a player that you want for one that you don't want and you didn't consider the contract issue. He has 1 year remaining at 10M. The Cowboys likely wouldn't bother with a trade if they thought he would be gone next season.
This no longer even involves the original question. Not sure what happened here but you confused consensus with concensus originally.
There's always somebody to cut despite despite a trivial salary (Cole Beasley) and it can't wait until after training camp to see how the replacements are faring.
Cole Beasley's salary is not trivial and they had a year of practice and a training camp to see how the replacement was faring.
His salary is 3.25M. The backup to the backup OT made 2M last season. Kyle Wilber made 3.25M for 2 years combined as a special teams player, Jamrs Hanna averages 2.75M and had 4 catches and a 44% catch rate in 2017.
Beasley drew true double-coverage in 2017 which is something defenses normally only use against #1 WRs. His stats were down but he occupied 2 defenders which should have opened things up for Dez. Beasley's career stats 20TDs. 2600 yards and 254 catches and a catch rate average of 70%. Beasley played 54% of the offensive snaps in 2017.
Switzer has 6 career catches and Brown has 4 career catches.
Beasley is limited to being a slot WR but drawing double-coverage as a slot-only WR is an impressive feat; although part of that is due to Dez not drawing double-coverage.
Fans love to obsess about cutting players like Beasley because they're not All-Pro and get paid more than the minimum.
I just favor Moncrief over Beasley and would prefer to move on.
You traded Dez. Moncrief would replace Dez on the outside in 2018 and hopefully a draft pick would be ready by 2019. Switzer would need to really show up in the preseason before I considered cutting Beasley.
I drafted Anthony Miller to be the no 1 receiver. Moncrief would be my no 2 or at least compete with Twill for the status.
There's an awesome hidden gem mid/late that just needs to work though some character/other issue.
A 6th round pick when you have 10 picks can be used to take a gamble on a player with character issues.
I actually like the player at that pick (I have my own fan tendencies) but it's a theme in mock drafts more often than not which I find amuzing.
Doesn't sound like we have much to disagree on here.
Again, my initial reply was about you hitting all of the sterotypes.
I simply tried to get value out of a 6th rd pick taking a bit of a gamble on a questionable character player at a position of need.
There's often used quote about veteran being cut - This year it "Time to move on for Witten".
It is in fact time to move on from Witten.
People need new material. That exact punchline has already been used 1000 times around here.
Holding onto older players for sentimental reasons places your team at a competitive disadvantage.
Witten had 5 TDs and was thrown to 87 times.
Dez had 6 TDs and was thrown to 132 times.
You think Dez is worth a 2nd but Witten has no value. If you can say Dez sucks and the Bears wouldn't urinate on him if his hair was on fire, then I'll agree that Witten should go.
Dez is 29, Witten is 100 years old and slower than my grandma. Dak likes to look for the TE in the red zone. Could have just as easily been Rico or Hanna.
There is always a player to look at even though they'll only been a role player for many years (Hanna).
Hanna has never been given a chance to have a bigger role. Similar to Fasano and Bennet.
I'm not againt Hanna but MartyB had 85 catches in 4 years here. Hanna has less than half that amount in 5 years. Their roster plans at TE shouldn't be affected by James Hanna. He is OK in his role as a blocker and if he does something as a receiver when Witten is gone that's great, but the decision to cut/keep Witten and to acquire or not acquire another TE in the draft should not have dependencies on James Hanna.
Hanna, Rico and Swaim are better options than Witten at this point.
There is absolutely zero proof of that. It is what's called a stinky opinion because you pulled it out of your backside with no attempt to support your opinion with facts.
Rico missed an entire sesson with a concussion. Do you remember Laurent Robinson?
Swaim has 9 catches in 3 years. I already gave you the Hanna/MartyB numbers for comparison.
I'm not tied to Witten staying. I wouldn't keep a player out of respect but I would have already cut Witten if that is the plan. Any other player in his situation I would bring to camp and then see how the other options look at which point the team could move on from the veteran but I would want to avoid that with Witten.
Witten did have a 72% catch rate and a much better rate of TDs per total targets than Dez.
I would keep him 1 final year but cut his snaps from 98% to about 70% and possibly less if some other player.stepped up to the challenge.
We simply differ on opinion here. I think Witten is no longer valuable enough for the almost 7 mil he is costing against the cap and I think he is slow and unproductive even if I acknowledge that he was a fantastic player for a long time.
There is always a reference to only wanting to restructure a "safe" player when in reality all a restructure does is give the player a bonus in the spring that replaces most of the upcoming season's salary which would be guaranteed after game 1 anyway. There is a mythical belief that which player has dead-money if cut really makes a big difference when in reality it's just a convenience issue.
cared to answer to?
See my other reply(s).
