Cowboys Cuts-**Official cuts out**

gimmesix

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
Messages
40,475
Reaction score
37,793
Operation Gardner Was Never That Good has commenced.

I had him on the 53 because I liked the way he has been playing in the past couple of games. The problem is (and it's a good one to have) we have too many linemen competing for spots.

I had us unrealistically keeping 11 (without counting Hardy) when I think 10 is the most we'll keep. Yes, that means I think we'll cut Edwards, too (although it could be Bishop).
 

Floatyworm

The Labeled One
Messages
23,251
Reaction score
21,423
I've been a member there for over 10 years.

I could write a series of books on what you guys are wrong on.

You haven't reached legendary status until you have been banned 10+ years......This year is my golden anniversary. Tell Monkster....She's still ugly and Art Monk still doesn't deserve to be in the hall. That will make her day.
 

SilverStarCowboy

The Actualist
Messages
10,337
Reaction score
1,998
I had him on the 53 because I liked the way he has been playing in the past couple of games. The problem is (and it's a good one to have) we have too many linemen competing for spots.

I had us unrealistically keeping 11 (without counting Hardy) when I think 10 is the most we'll keep. Yes, that means I think we'll cut Edwards, too (although it could be Bishop).

Lavar Edwards has played too good to cut. You'd cut Bishop, Coleman and McClain before him, the dude has been a BEAST and u can say the same for Russell. Plus versatility to move inside to become a difference maker made him more valuable than Gardner.


I hope Kieth Davis makes it as well. He and Lavar Edwards have a chance to start in the league.
 
Last edited:

FuzzyLumpkins

The Boognish
Messages
36,582
Reaction score
27,864
I thought he was having a good preseason?

It was up and down. Started off slow and then he came on. Problem is was the Edwards came on too and didn't start off slow. Gardner got caught in a numbers game but I believe he has a place in the league as a rotational lineman.
 

Risen Star

Likes Collector
Messages
90,245
Reaction score
215,387
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
I had him on the 53 because I liked the way he has been playing in the past couple of games. The problem is (and it's a good one to have) we have too many linemen competing for spots.

I had us unrealistically keeping 11 (without counting Hardy) when I think 10 is the most we'll keep. Yes, that means I think we'll cut Edwards, too (although it could be Bishop).

If the talent is so rich that we just can't possibly keep them all, why aren't we peddling a few of these guys for picks?
 

darthseinfeld

Groupthink Guru
Messages
33,883
Reaction score
38,500
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
Not trying to trade Gardner may have been a mistake. I think a 7th rounder from a team in need of versatile depth at the bottom of there DL depth chart would have ponied that up.

He is a good player IMO. But Edwards came on in preseason and Russell showed the ability to do what would have gotten Gardner on the roster, but with much more upside as a pass rusher and as a pure DE.

I think what hurt him in the end is that while he was possibly a solid rotational, in a 4-3 there isnt a position he could play full time

That being said they could have gotten a 7th from a team shallow on the DL who really needs someone who could log 300 snaps all across the line
 

Risen Star

Likes Collector
Messages
90,245
Reaction score
215,387
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Not trying to trade Gardner may have been a mistake. I think a 7th rounder from a team in need of versatile depth at the bottom of there DL depth chart would have ponied that up.

He is a good player IMO. But Edwards came on in preseason and Russell showed the ability to do what would have gotten Gardner on the roster, but with much more upside as a pass rusher and as a pure DE.

I think what hurt him in the end is that while he was possibly a solid rotational, in a 4-3 there isnt a position he could play full time

That being said they could have gotten a 7th from a team shallow on the DL who really needs someone who could log 300 snaps all across the line

If he's as good as the perception around here, he's definitely worth a pick. Look at the players that have been traded the last few days. Even a conditional pick is better than releasing him.
 

darthseinfeld

Groupthink Guru
Messages
33,883
Reaction score
38,500
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
If he's as good as the perception around here, he's definitely worth a pick. Look at the players that have been traded the last few days. Even a conditional pick is better than releasing him.

Personally I think he's good, maybe not as goid as some. I was disappointed they didnt swing a trade for him. If he clears waivers and lands on the PS he probably isnt as good as I thought.
 

JohnsKey19

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,766
Reaction score
18,829
If the talent is so rich that we just can't possibly keep them all, why aren't we peddling a few of these guys for picks?

It's possible. All that we really know now is Gardner and a few others won't be back. It is very possible he was moved for a pick....or not. We won't know for sure until the team makes its official news release.

The fact that Russell was drafted and had a decent training camp made it tough for Gardner. I still think he's a better fit as a 3-4 DE.
 

Stash

Staff member
Messages
78,860
Reaction score
103,643
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Word is that QB Showers has been released. We can only hope that Vaughan is soon to follow.

http://cowboysblog.***BANNED-URL***...-showers-as-part-of-final-cuts-saturday.html/
 
Top