Twitter: Cowboys turned down trade offer for McGovern?

[Hawkeye0202]

Sorry if repost......I'm guessing he gets 2022 starting LG job.......... CW isn't coming back.




https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/connor-mcgovern-29126/

 

[TwoCentPlain]

Well, what was the trade offer? I wouldn’t even listen if it were not a 2nd or 1st round pick.

 

[DogFace]

Some details from BB? I’d guess many teams might’ve offered a mid late to late? Or was there an appealing offer?

 

[The Realist]

Sorry if repost......I'm guessing he gets 2022 starting LG job.......... CW isn't coming back.




https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/connor-mcgovern-29126/

Your starting LG is La’el Collins who said he’s a natural on the left side. LC is not only better than McGovern, but McGovern struggles on the left side.

 

[fivetwos]

I would have done it for a 1st, nothing less....and I can't see why any team would value him that highly.

The cost on him was a 3rd, so what sense would it make to hurt your depth for this year, but also put yourself in a spot to need to give Williams a big second deal next year, and/or remove the flexibility of moving on from Collins?

My guess is someone offered what would be a low second....which would be roughly 20 or so players ahead of where McGovern was selected, so...Dallas would be hoping to what, replace him with that pick at best? No thanks.

If this FO knows what they are doing, and lately they very much seem to, McGovern is a starting guard here next year and the Collins/Williams savings is spent on the one year guys that are playing well...etc.

 

[Hawkeye19]

Quality OL play is valuable. Gotta know what was offered but McG is highly valued on this roster. No sense creating depth issues unless the offer was too good to pass up— and I doubt that was the case

 

[baltcowboy]

I have watched other teams offensive lines and we have the best by far when everyone is healthy. Tampa and Cleveland have great lines as well. The Colts are good too. You have to keep the depth because at any second one or two of our linemen can go down. With Steele, Ty and McGovern no team has close to the depth we have. We are so deep at four positions (Offensive line, Safeties, Wide Receivers, and tight end) that if we are missing one or two guys we don’t miss a beat. So unless you are offering a stud 1 tech the answer is no!!!!!

 

[Hawkeye0202]

I would have done it for a 1st, nothing less....and I can't see why any team would value him that highly.

The cost on him was a 3rd, so what sense would it make to hurt your depth for this year, but also put yourself in a spot to need to give Williams a big second deal next year, and/or remove the flexibility of moving on from Collins?

My guess is someone offered what would be a low second....which would be roughly 20 or so players ahead of where McGovern was selected, so...Dallas would be hoping to what, replace him with that pick at best? No thanks.

If this FO knows what they are doing, and lately they very much seem to, McGovern is a starting guard here next year and the Collins/Williams savings is spent on the one year guys that are playing well...etc.

IF this is their thinking, why wait to get him in the starting line-up. I mean if they have no intention of bringing CW back, are we not wasting value snaps that can be used to evaluate whether to sign McG long-term. Honestly, with Steele the new starting RT, that leaves Collins, CW, and McG competing for LG. Just me, but I'm ranking them Collins, McG, and CW in that order. In other words, barring injuries, no way CW should be starting coz Collins and McG are better, and more importantly, he's a free agent after the season.

 

[McKDaddy]

McGovern struggles on the left side.

Struggles or just isn't as natural?

 

[Sydla]

I would have done it for a 1st, nothing less....and I can't see why any team would value him that highly.

The cost on him was a 3rd, so what sense would it make to hurt your depth for this year, but also put yourself in a spot to need to give Williams a big second deal next year, and/or remove the flexibility of moving on from Collins?

My guess is someone offered what would be a low second....which would be roughly 20 or so players ahead of where McGovern was selected, so...Dallas would be hoping to what, replace him with that pick at best? No thanks.

If this FO knows what they are doing, and lately they very much seem to, McGovern is a starting guard here next year and the Collins/Williams savings is spent on the one year guys that are playing well...etc.

LOL.

My guess is someone offered a late round pick. No one is offering a 2nd round pick for a guy that isn’t even a starter.

 

[BotchedLobotomy]

That tweet is worthless without context

 

[Rayman70]

I expect it was for a mid to late rd pick. They did good turning it down. We are in a strong position of strength at oline. Lets keep it that way. Makes 0 sense trading away quality depth.

 

[Carson]

I expect it was for a mid to late rd pick. They did good turning it down. We are in a strong position of strength at oline. Lets keep it that way. Makes 0 sense trading away quality depth.

Agreed. Almost an absolute certainty it wasn’t worth the pick

 

[blueblood70]

That tweet is worthless without context

 

[blueblood70]

its going to be hilarious when they trot out Cwill at LG tomorrow. and by next week Collins ahs his RT spot back..

those reading all the vague posts about practice and game on whos starting and fully believe it may get fooled..

TRICK not treat )

 

[Risen Star]

I would have taken the two 1st round picks.

 

[G2]

So, a mid round pick offered in exchange for a backup? Cool.

 

[Risen Star]

I expect it was for a mid to late rd pick. They did good turning it down. We are in a strong position of strength at oline. Lets keep it that way. Makes 0 sense trading away quality depth.

That's kind of ridiculous to say when you don't know what was offered.

I'll trade away quality depth today if the return looks better than the depth.

 

[Hardline]

That Tweet meant absolutely nothing.

 

[CowboyStar88]

I wouldn’t trade McGov.