shabazz
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 16,746
- Reaction score
- 30,929
If Dak doesn't say it or show it, how does the coach know it to be true?
Typical media would assert the “anonymous sources tell us” , BS they always lie about having
If Dak doesn't say it or show it, how does the coach know it to be true?
I observe my right to compliment my fellow posters. With all due respect...I see what you did there...
Oh sir...I am not disputing anything you've stated.
Clearly, Broaddus is a Superbowl winning Scout, he is not and has never been a reporter or team beat reporter. His coach source is unnamed.
Broaddus expertise is scouting and content generation from OTAs, mini-camp, training camp and draft.
But Broaddus report even at best is lukewarm Garrett coaching failures...this just another result of the Garrett era.
Amari didn't like Sanjay
Secondary didn't like Richard
DLINE tuned out Marinelli
Yada yada
Click bait...
Broaddus would be telling us how the team look on field in a normal off-season.
Lots of people say this.Typical media would assert the “anonymous sources tell us” , BS they always lie about having
That has to be the a "Garretism"...what he does doesn't matter yikes that's a scary world to live in.what he does doesn't matter, he has people in the building he talks too, also nobody name their sources. the fact he's been in and around the team for years make him more credible than a lot of the reporters that report from the outside.
You post that but you have nothing to confirm or back up what you say.First off, how does "overpay" even get determined? Because the only people yelling about overpay is from "regular joe" fans who will never dabble in those types of figures. If you're talking about a player who doesn't live up to their contract after it's done, those are the risks associated with contracts in general but even they don't have much of an effect. As I told someone else, did Gurley's deal affect McCaffrey's richest deal ever? No, because there was also Zeke's to go on which hasn't even kicked in yet. That's just how it works. You compare the latest deals compared to the player's production and go from there.
The Cowboys are free to think Dak is NOT worth the recent deals but the way it's done is you compare the recent deals and Dak's rumored offers were not near those when you talk guarantees, which is probably the most important figure. No one can say Dak's play hasn't been close to or better than Wentz or Goff's so what's the hangup in offering guarantees commensurate to asking to lock him up for 5 years? If you're Dak and think you're on par with those guys, the guarantee offers should have reflected that. They didn't so he absolutely shouldn't have signed. So once again, no one can address that article which proves my point that the guarantee offers weren't in line which is why no one wants to address them and only talk AAV. Not fair offers from where I sit. Address the guarantees if you feel otherwise.