Dallas Cowboys Rookie Suffers Big Setback, RoMac Still Absent, OTAs Continue

[CowboyRoy]

If you want a good laugh, put in the very minor work it requires to lookup this discussion from any of the other eleventy-billion times it's been had on this site. Or look up what the coach himself has to say about it. It's really not that hard to figure it out what the approach is. Knock yourself out.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm does McClain sound like the definition of RKG or WKG?

How about Gregory? Is Gregory trying to be the best he can be by failing multiple drug tests?




A little later, in his post-draft presser, Garrett expanded on the idea and explained what constitutes the "right kind of guy:

"Obviously they have to have the physical requirements to play this game. The measurables, the talent, the aptitude to play. Part of that is being "The Right Kind Of Guy."

He also explained what he considers to be a wrong kind of guy, or WKG:

"The guys who don't love to play football. Guys who don't love to work. The guys who don't love to be around their teammates. The guys who aren't trying to be the best they can be. All those things."

Garrett also gave a few pointers on some of the specific traits he's looking for in a RKG:

"You want guys who love to play football and show you that they love it each and every day. Passion, enthusiasm, emotion, all of those things come into it....It's one thing to talk that, but you need to see that."
​

 

[Idgit]

How about we just change it from "no other teams" to "very few teams". Would that make it a little more palatable for you to discuss?

At a one year deal for 2.5 million, surely its not a stretch to surmise that not many were interested at any kind of a contract. Surely you can deduce that there was not a big market out there for him offering multiple years at 5 to 8 million per season and he simply turned it down correct?

No, it doesn't make it palatable. It's likely to be more accurate, but you're still just guessing. You don't have any idea what level of interest there was in the player around the league. Let's just leave it at that instead of surmising poorly some more.

His reported deal was a $1.25M base, $750k signing bonus, $1.375M roster bonus, with $2M in per-game bonuses and a $1M bonus for playing 75% or more of the defensive snaps this season. Nobody's talking about giving the guy guaranteed money on a multiyear deal for all the obvious reasons we've all already mentioned in this thread. But it's also not the case that the guy doesn't have the ability to play and play well in this league. His issues are with his commitment to the game and his tendencies to get suspended.

 

[Idgit]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm does McClain sound like the definition of RKG or WKG?

How about Gregory? Is Gregory trying to be the best he can be by failing multiple drug tests?




A little later, in his post-draft presser, Garrett expanded on the idea and explained what constitutes the "right kind of guy:

"Obviously they have to have the physical requirements to play this game. The measurables, the talent, the aptitude to play. Part of that is being "The Right Kind Of Guy."

He also explained what he considers to be a wrong kind of guy, or WKG:

"The guys who don't love to play football. Guys who don't love to work. The guys who don't love to be around their teammates. The guys who aren't trying to be the best they can be. All those things."

Garrett also gave a few pointers on some of the specific traits he's looking for in a RKG:

"You want guys who love to play football and show you that they love it each and every day. Passion, enthusiasm, emotion, all of those things come into it....It's one thing to talk that, but you need to see that."
​

Not playing the cherry picking game with you. Read the full quotes. Garrett explicitly address how the team approaches troubled players and the risks they take on them, when, and why. This is old territory, not really all that germane to the topic at hand, and stuff you could answer for yourself if you were really interested in being honest about how the team approaches reclamation projects with talented and troubled players like McClain and, yes, Gregory.

 

[CowboyRoy]

No, it doesn't make it palatable. It's likely to be more accurate, but you're still just guessing. You don't have any idea what level of interest there was in the player around the league. Let's just leave it at that instead of surmising poorly some more.

His reported deal was a $1.25M base, $750k signing bonus, $1.375M roster bonus, with $2M in per-game bonuses and a $1M bonus for playing 75% or more of the defensive snaps this season. Nobody's talking about giving the guy guaranteed money on a multiyear deal for all the obvious reasons we've all already mentioned in this thread. But it's also not the case that the guy doesn't have the ability to play and play well in this league. His issues are with his commitment to the game and his tendencies to get suspended.

So you are saying that he took a one year, low guaranteed contract because he had lots of better offers?

If you cant deduce from the contract he signed that there wasnt much interest, then you just arent very good a deducing. And like you said, you dont like the guy so why would other teams.

Quite frankly, this is just another one of your attempts to defend the Cowboys by pointing out the fact that "no one can know for sure". Yah, like everything else we talk about on here.

As always...........GREAT POINT!!!

 

[CowboyRoy]

Not playing the cherry picking game with you. Read the full quotes. Garrett explicitly address how the team approaches troubled players and the risks they take on them, when, and why. This is old territory, not really all that germane to the topic at hand, and stuff you could answer for yourself if you were really interested in being honest about how the team approaches reclamation projects with talented and troubled players like McClain and, yes, Gregory.

This is what you are NOT getting. If RKG means players like Kraken, Randle, Gregory, McClain, ect....ect.... Then the definition is meaningless. Maybe that is too complicated for you to understand.

 

[Idgit]

So you are saying that he took a one year, low guaranteed contract because he had lots of better offers?

If you cant deduce from the contract he signed that there wasnt much interest, then you just arent very smart. And like you said, you dont like the guy so why would other teams.

Quite frankly, this is just another one of your attempts to defend the Cowboys by pointing out the fact that "no one can no for sure". Yah, like everything else we talk about on here.

As always...........GREAT POINT!!!

Ok, this is what happens when I take you seriously, so, I'll reply here and we're done again. No, you cannot deduce from McClain's one year deal at the outset of FA that other teams did not have interest in the player. Yes, any team would give him an incentive-laden one year contract because of his history of substance use, suspensions, and early retirements. No, that doesn't mean that he hasn't proven that he can be an effective player on a year-by-year basis, and yes, NFL teams have proven over and over again that they will take chances on those types of players if they are good enough.

This is what you are NOT getting. If RKG means players like Kraken, Randle, Gregory, McClain, ect....ect.... Then the definition is meaningless. Maybe that is too complicated for you to understand.

Hardy and Randle are not on the team. One was let go because one has serious and deteriorating mental issues and the other was given a one-year trial and proved to not be the kind of player we want in Dallas. Gregory and McClain both fall into the category of player the team is willing to experiment with. The quotes regarding that approach are among the ones you omitted up above.

If you find no meaning in the definition of what a right kind of guy is, that's fine. I don't have any vested interest in the phrase being meaningful. I'm just telling you you're ignoring what the team has said on the topic in your attempt to suggest they're ignoring it.

And of course this is me defending the Cowboys again. That's what I frequently do when people make thoughtless criticisms of the team without evidence to support the criticisms. That ought to be expected behavior on a Dallas Cowboys fan site. Welcome to CowboysZone.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Ok, this is what happens when I take you seriously, so, I'll reply here and we're done again. No, you cannot deduce from McClain's one year deal at the outset of FA that other teams did not have interest in the player. Yes, any team would give him an incentive-laden one year contract because of his history of substance use, suspensions, and early retirements. No, that doesn't mean that he hasn't proven that he can be an effective player on a year-by-year basis, and yes, NFL teams have proven over and over again that they will take chances on those types of players if they are good enough.



Hardy and Randle are not on the team. One was let go because one has serious and deteriorating mental issues and the other was given a one-year trial and proved to not be the kind of player we want in Dallas. Gregory and McClain both fall into the category of player the team is willing to experiment with. The quotes regarding that approach are among the ones you omitted up above.

If you find no meaning in the definition of what a right kind of guy is, that's fine. I don't have any vested interest in the phrase being meaningful. I'm just telling you you're ignoring what the team has said on the topic in your attempt to suggest they're ignoring it.

And of course this is me defending the Cowboys again. That's what I frequently do when people make thoughtless criticisms of the team without evidence to support the criticisms. That ought to be expected behavior on a Dallas Cowboys fan site. Welcome to CowboysZone.

LOL.....you really are a funny guy. Bow out again like you always do. The evidence is all there to see. If you cant see it, or refuse to admit it, then by all means squirm away like a little child.

 

[TheRomoSexual]

LOL.....you really are a funny guy. Bow out again like you always do. The evidence is all there to see. If you cant see it, or refuse to admit it, then by all means squirm away like a little child.

Only seeing extremes is a sign of lack of intelligence. Never once did JG said he ONLY wants "RKGs;" rather, he has consistently said his approach is to fill the roster with RKGs. And, by and large, they have -- there recent drafts are filled with team captains, etc. The idea that this notion is incompatible with taking risks on players like Kraken is so silly it's almost comical. But, it's the same type of posters, with the same mindset, who consistently misread the situation and exacerbate the JG's to provided a basis for unnecessary whining.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Only seeing extremes is a sign of lack of intelligence. Never once did JG said he ONLY wants "RKGs;" rather, he has consistently said his approach is to fill the roster with RKGs. And, by and large, they have -- there recent drafts are filled with team captains, etc. The idea that this notion is incompatible with taking risks on players like Kraken is so silly it's almost comical. But, it's the same type of posters, with the same mindset, who consistently misread the situation and exacerbate the JG's to provided a basis for unnecessary whining.

Sadly for all of us its been guys like me that dont like Garrett who have been dead right about him since he has been with the Cowboys as a coach. Its only low standard apologists like you that cant find the stomach to complain about losing or ineptitude. Or maybe you enjoy being the laughing stock of the NFL. If losing doesnt bother you enough, I dont know what to tell you. And how you can possibly defend a player, coach, or GM that keeps screwing up time after time is beyond me. I guess you like losing half your games. Sorry, I dont.

The whole premise of RKG is absolutely a complete joke. EVERY coach wants RKG's. The Cowboys have been pointed out as a team that, more than any other, seems to take risks on guys that are obviously not any kind of RKG's. So why even say it if you're Garrett? He looks and sounds stupid. And that is EXACTLY why the media and the fans have questioned him so hard on the subject. Because it is completely laughable why Garrett the moron keep saying it.

On one breath he keeps talking about RKG's, then the next week they will announce that they just signed the Kraken. If you cant see the irony in that transaction than the lack of intelligence falls squarely on you.

 

[Doomsday101]

I hope Hitchens grabs this opportunity to take over the MLB spot.

 

[Idgit]

Only seeing extremes is a sign of lack of intelligence. Never once did JG said he ONLY wants "RKGs;" rather, he has consistently said his approach is to fill the roster with RKGs. And, by and large, they have -- there recent drafts are filled with team captains, etc. The idea that this notion is incompatible with taking risks on players like Kraken is so silly it's almost comical. But, it's the same type of posters, with the same mindset, who consistently misread the situation and exacerbate the JG's to provided a basis for unnecessary whining.

Thank you. Nicely put.

 

[Idgit]

I hope Hitchens grabs this opportunity to take over the MLB spot.

I do, too. I'm perfectly happy with him inside. He'll show up in shape, and he knows what to do.

 

[TheCount]

I hope Hitchens grabs this opportunity to take over the MLB spot.

Hitch is a weird case for me. I've always thought that when given the opportunity, he's played pretty well at MLB. The team, on the other hand, doesn't seem to think he can play the position.

 

[Doomsday101]

Hitch is a weird case for me. I've always thought that when given the opportunity, he's played pretty well at MLB. The team, on the other hand, doesn't seem to think he can play the position.

I think ideally Dallas would like the bigger player in McClain at MLB and that may end up being how it will be during the season, however Dallas may have little choice depending on when or if McClain comes back and what kind of shape he is in. I think it is Hitchens job to use this opportunity while McClain is missing time

 

[CowboyRoy]

Hitch is a weird case for me. I've always thought that when given the opportunity, he's played pretty well at MLB. The team, on the other hand, doesn't seem to think he can play the position.

He is not great in coverage.

 

[TheCount]

He is not great in coverage.

Maybe not but I wouldn't say Rolando is "great" in coverage either.

I think ideally Dallas would like the bigger player in McClain at MLB and that may end up being how it will be during the season, however Dallas may have little choice depending on when or if McClain comes back and what kind of shape he is in. I think it is Hitchens job to use this opportunity while McClain is missing time

Rolando is certainly a huge LB. That said, there are plenty of team's in the league with good LB's that aren't 6'4 260.

I'm not saying Hitchen's is great or anything, just surprised the team hasn't given him extended time there.

 

[Idgit]

Maybe not but I wouldn't say Rolando is "great" in coverage either.



Rolando is certainly a huge LB. That said, there are plenty of team's in the league with good LB's that aren't 6'4 260.

I'm not saying Hitchen's is great or anything, just surprised the team hasn't given him extended time there.

He's just not cut out for the SAM position, and has better players in front of him at MIKE an WIL. You have to think at some point he pushes McClain if McClain doesn't come into camp ready to play. I'd hope so, at least.

 

[Doomsday101]

Maybe not but I wouldn't say Rolando is "great" in coverage either.



Rolando is certainly a huge LB. That said, there are plenty of team's in the league with good LB's that aren't 6'4 260.

I'm not saying Hitchen's is great or anything, just surprised the team hasn't given him extended time there.

I agree not all MLB are in the 250 to 260 range. Ideally I would like to have the bigger guy up the middle but in the end I'm more concerned about the play on the field. I think Hitchens is a very capable player who is entering his 3rd season and has a big opportunity in front of him. I hope he can take advantage of that, if so it makes McClain a lot more dispensable instead of having to rely on him.

I think when McClain has his head in the game he is a very good player but once again is showing he can't be counted on. To me that is a big issue in team sports can the team count on you week in and week out to be out there playing hard.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Maybe not but I wouldn't say Rolando is "great" in coverage either.



Rolando is certainly a huge LB. That said, there are plenty of team's in the league with good LB's that aren't 6'4 260.

I'm not saying Hitchen's is great or anything, just surprised the team hasn't given him extended time there.

They drafted Jaylon Smith to be the MLB of the future.

 

[erod]

Jerry and Garrett made a deal.

Garrett gets 50 RKGs, and Jerry gets to fill in the rest.