News: Cowboys' Stephen Jones: Chris Johnson on team's 'short list'

[dallasdave]

Of course I would. I'd even give a conditional 1 and Carr. High price tag but Carr doesn't seem to be willing to take a pay cut and the 1 would be on an NFC championship appearance so around slot 30. Carr's contact would just be ported over to AP.

Madden type numbers with AP behind this line. The best back in this generation + a possible generational great line = PAIN for opponents.

And this could be the best OL in the history of the NFL think of what could be, I could dream about it.

 

[dallasdave]

If he comes on a reasonable deal and we don't pay him like he's going to be elite for 5 more years, yes.

Ok, so if we can get AP for 8 million a year for 2 years and give the Vikes our #2 pick in next years draft and or Leary your on board?

 

[dallasdave]

Hell to the no on Johnson...

Lance Dunbar can run behind this line.

Lane you seem like you don't want anything to do with Chris Johnson.

 

[coogrfan]

I wouldn't want 2010 Chris Johnson on our roster, never mind the 2015 version. Dude is done.

 

[mattjames2010]

Ok, so if we can get AP for 8 million a year for 2 years and give the Vikes our #2 pick in next years draft and or Leary your on board?

That's still a little steep. But our staff has backed us into a corner when it comes to RB. I'd much rather not be locked into having him 2 years and have the second year where we can cut him if things don't work out.

 

[dallasdave]

That's still a little steep. But our staff has backed us into a corner when it comes to RB. I'd much rather not be locked into having him 2 years and have the second year where we can cut him if things don't work out.

I don't think that's a steep price at all, we have a top RB for 8 million for only 2 years. He had the year off last year and I think most fair and reasonable people would agree that AP should have 2 years left in him. Also behind the Dallas OL which is better now, He=AP will be a super beast. When Dallas redid Romo's contract we have the money to give AP 8 million a year and 2 years is a short contract. So what's not to like?

 

[tyke1doe]

I feel like if Johnson had never said anything, we would never have heard Stephen mention it as a possibility. I.E.- its a response to what he said and not concrete interest.

That's my take too. I heard Stephen Jones on Cowherd (or was it Mike and Mike), and when asked the question, it sound more like a reactionary response than a proactive response.

 

[mattjames2010]

I don't think that's a steep price at all, we have a top RB for 8 million for only 2 years. He had the year off last year and I think most fair and reasonable people would agree that AP should have 2 years left in him. Also behind the Dallas OL which is better now, He=AP will be a super beast. When Dallas redid Romo's contract we have the money to give AP 8 million a year and 2 years is a short contract. So what's not to like?

Drop it down to about $5 million or $6 million, and that's tolerable. But it's all about what is written within the contract. Again, if we can find a way to not take a big cap hit his second year if things don't work out in his first, I'm okay with it.

This is what happens when you ignore a position with a glaring hole. You get discussions like this.

 

[dallasdave]

Drop it down to about $5 million or $6 million, and that's tolerable. But it's all about what is written within the contract. Again, if we can find a way to not take a big cap hit his second year if things don't work out in his first, I'm okay with it.

This is what happens when you ignore a position with a glaring hole. You get discussions like this.

Nothing wrong with discussions like this, if Dallas can get a lead RB then the chance to win the Super Bowl increases greatly. I hope everyone on this board wants to win the Super Bowl this year, I know I do.

 

[Silver N Blue]

No retort. You could have just not responded.

And you bring up Johnson being 30, you overlook the fact that every one of us "naysayers" said we'd want Peterson here on a cheap contract. The same with Johnson.

Poor fella I will use your own words. You just have to realize we all have opinions not just you. I don't want CJ he is a me first player. Here is your own words about 30 yr old rbs

A 30 year old RB is a 30 year old RB until proven otherwise. But yes, more of a risk. Giving up draft picks and taking on a big contract is always a bigger risk than drafting a player straight up. Giving a contract to a 30 year old RB is more of a risk than a small contract for a rookie RB. This goes for any position. If you think the risk is worth it is up to you.

I guess you have changed your mind.....

 

[dallasdave]

Poor fella I will use your own words. You just have to realize we all have opinions not just you. I don't want CJ he is a me first player. Here is your own words about 30 yr old rbs

A 30 year old RB is a 30 year old RB until proven otherwise. But yes, more of a risk. Giving up draft picks and taking on a big contract is always a bigger risk than drafting a player straight up. Giving a contract to a 30 year old RB is more of a risk than a small contract for a rookie RB. This goes for any position. If you think the risk is worth it is up to you.

I guess you have changed your mind.....

 

[mattjames2010]

Poor fella I will use your own words. You just have to realize we all have opinions not just you. I don't want CJ he is a me first player. Here is your own words about 30 yr old rbs

A 30 year old RB is a 30 year old RB until proven otherwise. But yes, more of a risk. Giving up draft picks and taking on a big contract is always a bigger risk than drafting a player straight up. Giving a contract to a 30 year old RB is more of a risk than a small contract for a rookie RB. This goes for any position. If you think the risk is worth it is up to you.

I guess you have changed your mind.....

GIVING A CONTRACT TO A 30 YEAR OLD RB OVER A ROOKIE RB!

Read what you just quoted. Then read it again. THE DRAFT IS OVER! We don't have a rookie RB, outside of an undrafted one. Now, read it one more time. Because you're not understanding. I was talking about taking a rookie instead of signing Peterson.

You are easily the biggest moron I've ever had a discussion with on this board. The way you cherry pick and ignore all else. Do not respond to me if you're going to be this dumb.

 

[mattjames2010]

I have ALWAYS said I'd sign Peterson to a small contract IF we didn't draft an RB. I would have preferred us to draft a good rookie prospect rather than signing AP, who is 30 years old.

Peterson, Chris Johnson, and whatever other veteran RB with some gas left in the tank are last resort signings!

Now, take your time with this, okay? Read it 5-6 times over. Sit and think about it, try to understand, and THEN respond. See how that works, because whatever else you are doing isn't.

 

[Silver N Blue]

GIVING A CONTRACT TO A 30 YEAR OLD RB OVER A ROOKIE RB!

Read what you just quoted. Then read it again. THE DRAFT IS OVER! We don't have a rookie RB, outside of an undrafted one. Now, read it one more time. Because you're not understanding. I was talking about taking a rookie instead of signing Peterson.

You are easily the biggest moron I've ever had a discussion with on this board. The way you cherry pick and ignore all else. Do not respond to me if you're going to be this dumb.

Poor fella you are name calling and such. Your own words come back to haunt. You must have read over where you said 30 yr old for any position. You also said 30 yr old rbs decline rapidly and stats prove that. It's ok man your just a angry little fella.

 

[mattjames2010]

Poor fella you are name calling and such. Your own words come back to haunt. You must have read over where you said 30 yr old for any position. You also said 30 yr old rbs decline rapidly and stats prove that. It's ok man your just a angry little fella.

Giving big contracts to players 30 and older a bad idea? That's extreme? I'd say most owners in the league agree with that.

And nothing came back to haunt me. You didn't even read my quote correctly. You're dead set on "proving me wrong", but you continue to fail.

 

[Silver N Blue]

Giving big contracts to players 30 and older a bad idea? That's extreme? I'd say most owners in the league agree with that.

And nothing came back to haunt me. You didn't even read my quote correctly. You're dead set on "proving me wrong", but you continue to fail.

Poor fella. All your predictions have gone wrong....Gurley/Gordon would last till 27, we would draft a RB, no reason to draft a cb at 27, 30 yr old rbs decline rapidly and don't need to be brought in. It is quite obvious why you want to change your thought pattern since none of these panned out. It's ok to be wrong stand up and admit it. I was wrong about Hardy coming in and admitted it. It's ok to be wrong.

 

[mattjames2010]

Poor fella. All your predictions have gone wrong....Gurley/Gordon would last till 27, we would draft a RB, no reason to draft a cb at 27, 30 yr old rbs decline rapidly and don't need to be brought in. It is quite obvious why you want to change your thought pattern since none of these panned out. It's ok to be wrong stand up and admit it. I was wrong about Hardy coming in and admitted it. It's ok to be wrong.

My "thought pattern" has never changed. You came in saying that I didn't want to sign a 30 year old RB, you then provided "proof", but that "proof" said that I'd rather sign a rookie over a 30 year old RB. Are you going to provide a quote to me saying I wouldn't sign Peterson to a reasonable, cheap contract? If not, drop it, because you have nothing.

As for your "30 year old players don't decline rapidly", uh, yes they do. You can pull out exceptions, but 30 year old players DO decline rapidly. Pulling two or three examples from the past doesn't make it the norm, "poor fella".

And what do you want me to say about Gurley? I had a prediction that he'd slip in the draft, EVERYONE makes predictions. It happens. It's the draft, a crapshoot, me being "wrong" about it means very little. I care about me being wrong about us not grabbing an RB in the draft far more than Gurley going early, which I'm happy about.

Then you bring up the CB thing. I said with having Carr, Scandrick, and Claiborne I didn't feel we needed to draft a CB at 27. That's called opinion, not stating a fact.

 

[big dog cowboy]

But our staff has backed us into a corner when it comes to RB.

How so? We could have gotten a RB at any point last weekend and choose not to. Additionally they have repeatedly said they like our current RB corp. I don't see how any of that equates to backing us into a corner.

 

[big dog cowboy]

I said with having Carr, Scandrick, and Claiborne I didn't feel we needed to draft a CB at 27.

Not only did we go CB at 27, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if we went CB in the first round next year. Given the Carr/Claiborne situation after this season especially.

 

[mattjames2010]

Not only did we go CB at 27, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if we went CB in the first round next year. Given the Carr/Claiborne situation after this season especially.

Next year, yes. Both Carr and Claiborne are most likely going to be gone.

I was never against going CB in the draft, I was against getting a CB in the first. I've actually come to like what I've seen from Jones, but I'm still skeptical with the bust rate of CBs in the first round.