Cowboys plan to take QB at 4?

[Risen Star]

This talk of the Rams making the move up for Koresh instead of Carsus has restored my faith.

I'm thinking about putting together a candlelight vigil sometime next week. I'll keep you guys posted. Don't flood my inbox.

 

[ConceptCoop]

That might be true the new structure for Rookies might offset the trend some however. We also understand human psychology. Romo is a competitor he wants his SB's and he wants HOF. Are we commited to the same ? Historically over last decade 1st round top five QB's do not sit longer than a year. That sends Romo the message we are not all in on getting him his SB's HOF etc. This knowledge changes a persons loyalty. Romo wants to win now so draft defense 1# priority or trade him. Send him the message " we are all in to win with Romo now"

And not just Romo - the entire team. You think Jason Witten or Dez Bryant want to hinder their current chances at a ring, to groom a replacement for Tony? You think Jason Garrett wants to?

 

[ConceptCoop]

I don't think that Tony would view this that way. Tony is the starter for as long as he can play at a high level. If the day comes where he can't do that then the game takes care of that itself and Tony does not strike me as a guy who doesn't understand this.

I think I agree. I do think Tony would want any available resources to be invested in his window, however.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

It's hard to say. I do think building the core around the QB is taxing, resource wise. The cap likely paid a part, but only over the first 5 seasons. Random variance.

And I honestly don't point the stat out to suggest it's a bad practice to draft a QB top 5. I just wanted to point out that it's not the only route to a Super Bowl.

It's not the only route, to be sure. The problem here is that you never know when your opportunity to get a Franchise QB (assuming the Cowboys believe these QBs are) will come. Timing is also key here and it should be factored into this decision. Tony has way more seasons behind him then in front of him. We simply can not get caught flat footed again. You have to consider that. I would be all for waiting till Tony is done if I knew that I could get Franchise QB at that point but you don't know that. You have to plan for it when the opportunity is there.

 

[ConceptCoop]

Technically Rodgers sat for Favre less than a decade ago.

True, but he missed the draft slot criteria.

 

[Romotil45]

Technically Rodgers sat for Favre less than a decade ago.

Rogers was selected 24th overall not a top 5 pick.

 

[ConceptCoop]

It's not the only route, to be sure. The problem here is that you never know when your opportunity to get a Franchise QB (assuming the Cowboys believe these QBs are) will come. Timing is also key here and it should be factored into this decision. Tony has way more seasons behind him then in front of him. We simply can not get caught flat footed again. You have to consider that. I would be all for waiting till Tony is done if I knew that I could get Franchise QB at that point but you don't know that. You have to plan for it when the opportunity is there.

I agree. If they see a franchise guy, they need to take him. If it's borderline, the conversation gets interesting. If it's Lynch, as I view and value Lynch, you pass. If the guy needs to be developed, he's not a franchise guy (as a prospect).

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

And not just Romo - the entire team. You think Jason Witten or Dez Bryant want to hinder their current chances at a ring, to groom a replacement for Tony? You think Jason Garrett wants to?

I think the team should realize that after last season, the real threat to winning a Championship is not having another QB who is capable of winning. We won one game without Tony last year. Think about that.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I agree. If they see a franchise guy, they need to take him. If it's borderline, the conversation gets interesting. If it's Lynch, as I view and value Lynch, you pass. If the guy needs to be developed, he's not a franchise guy (as a prospect).

I think all QBs need to be developed, regardless of how talented they are. I've never seen a QB come into the NFL and be ready to win a championship.

 

[ConceptCoop]

I think the team should realize that after last season, the real threat to winning a Championship is not having another QB who is capable of winning. We won one game without Tony last year. Think about that.

Right; we need a backup QB. But you don't need to invest a top 5 pick to grealty improve on Cassel/Moore/Weeden. Plus, I'd argue that Dez's injury and the defense played a big part in our sans-Romo record as well.

 

[ConceptCoop]

I think all QBs need to be developed, regardless of how talented they are. I've never seen a QB come into the NFL and be ready to win a championship.

They all need to improve and mature - and call it develop, even - sure. But if a player is under developed relative to others at that point in the process - he's a developmental project. Lynch, for example, has work to do to be average in some areas, relative to his draftmates. Hackenberg is another example. If we just assume "all guys improve and develop" then Hackenberg is a top 10 pick. But there are fundamental apsects of the game that, if not developed at this point, are far from a given.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Right; we need a backup QB. But you don't need to invest a top 5 pick to grealty improve on Cassel/Moore/Weeden. Plus, I'd argue that Dez's injury and the defense played a big part in our sans-Romo record as well.

We need more then just a backup because Tony's time is very limited IMO. We need a backup for this season and you draft a guy who you think can be the Franchise. In a year, that QB might be at a point where he is ready to be the backup and then he pushes Tony and hopefully learns. Competition always improves the team and I just don't see Tony as a fragile competitor. He has never been that player. He's the guy who came in undrafted and beat everybody out. Tony, of all QBs, I think, understands the value of competition. Without that, Tony probably never gets his shot in the NFL.

 

[Romotil45]

I don't think that Tony would view this that way. Tony is the starter for as long as he can play at a high level. If the day comes where he can't do that then the game takes care of that itself and Tony does not strike me as a guy who doesn't understand this.

Are you going to tell the QB that you draft top five that Romo is going to be the started for 1-2 or 2-3 or how long exactly ? Because he wants to know. He doesn't want to sit. Remember what happened in Denver. You want both Romo and said savior playing for another team ?

 

[ConceptCoop]

We need more then just a backup because Tony's time is very limited IMO. We need a backup for this season and you draft a guy who you think can be the Franchise. In a year, that QB might be at a point where he is ready to be the backup and then he pushes Tony and hopefully learns. Competition always improves the team and I just don't see Tony as a fragile competitor. He has never been that player. He's the guy who came in undrafted and beat everybody out. Tony, of all QBs, I think, understands the value of competition. Without that, Tony probably never gets his shot in the NFL.

Our best case scenario might not be enough to win a ring. I see logic in improving our best case before we invest our biggest available asset on our plan B.

If Tony Romo is not healthy 10+ games during the season and healthy in the playoffs - we're not winning a SB in the next 3 years. I'd much rather go for bust and go 4-12 if he goes down, then invest in plan B and go 8-8 if he goes down.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

They all need to improve and mature - and call it develop, even - sure. But if a player is under developed relative to others at that point in the process - he's a developmental project. Lynch, for example, has work to do to be average in some areas, relative to his draftmates. Hackenberg is another example. If we just assume "all guys improve and develop" then Hackenberg is a top 10 pick. But there are fundamental apsects of the game that, if not developed at this point, are far from a given.

This is where the Scouting Department comes in. This is why you pay them. If there is a QB that the team feels can be a Franchise guy, then you Draft him. The developmental aspects of the game are on the coaching staff. It all has to work together but you don't walk away from a QB if you think he has what it takes to be the leader of the team.

To be clear, I am not advocating taking a QB at for, just for the sake of taking a guy. I am advocating taking a QB at 4 if the team believes they can be that Roger or Troy or Tony. I am not in favor of taking Lynch at 4 at all. I am in favor of moving down and taking him if the team sees that opportunity and we can't get either of the top 2. All of this is predicated on what the team believes they offer.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Are you going to tell the QB that you draft top five that Romo is going to be the started for 1-2 or 2-3 or how long exactly ? Because he wants to know. He doesn't want to sit. Remember what happened in Denver. You want both Romo and said savior playing for another team ?

Yep. That's exactly what I'm going to tell them.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Our best case scenario might not be enough to win a ring. I see logic in improving our best case before we invest our biggest available asset on our plan B.

If Tony Romo is not healthy 10+ games during the season and healthy in the playoffs - we're not winning a SB in the next 3 years. I'd much rather go for bust and go 4-12 if he goes down, then invest in plan B and go 8-8 if he goes down.

Not me. There is no guarantee that there will be a Franchise QB available for us, even if we go 4-12 again. You have to take your shot when the opportunity presents itself.

 

[ConceptCoop]

Not me. There is no guarantee that there will be a Franchise QB available for us, even if we go 4-12 again. You have to take your shot when the opportunity presents itself.

*If* there's a franchise guy, I'm with you. Lynch at 7-15 doesn't meet that criteria for me. That said, of course I trust them over my own opinion. If he is that to them, I hope they pull the trigger.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

*If* there's a franchise guy, I'm with you. Lynch at 7-15 doesn't meet that criteria for me. That said, of course I trust them over my own opinion. If he is that to them, I hope they pull the trigger.

As I said, I don't see Lynch as the #4 pick. I would not take him at 4 but I would take him later in the 1st if the opportunity presented itself and if I thought he could be the guy who would eventually be a good QB for us.

 

[Romotil45]

*If* there's a franchise guy, I'm with you. Lynch at 7-15 doesn't meet that criteria for me. That said, of course I trust them over my own opinion. If he is that to them, I hope they pull the trigger.

IMO none of the guys are a lock. If Wentz/Goff/Lynch had the rating Andrew Luck had I would consider it. But they don't so take best defensive player available or trade back.