Dustin Vaughn Future Starter, Backup or waste of a roster spot?

[Risen Star]

You can keep stating it, it doesn't make your opinion any better. You might have been too busy with the attention-seeking grandstanding to notice I'd answered your 'what do you think about the player' question with what little I think about the Vaughan back in post 64, but that doesn't change the fact that I also think it's that it's a good indication that he's showing well in practice because they're keeping a QB3 on the active roster at the expense of players who were getting snaps in base packages on game days. That's 'new' data for us since camp. It's something they've tried not to do in previous seasons, but they're doing it now. You don't think that's new data because, apparently, 'boo, Cowboys.' It really doesn't matter. It's so small a point that it's virtually insignificant. It was a throw-away post on a fairly obscure topic that didn't deserve this level of scrutiny.

As for 2012, other than simply shrugging off your ludicrous 'CBs don't matter' position for what it is, we whiffed on the top two picks because we whiffed on Claiborne. It sucks. It happens. Get over it. We hit on Crawford, even though you like to pretend that we did not. Hanna and Wilber are role players from that class. We added Dunbar, Beasley, and Leary in from college that year, which is part of the same college scouting process. It wasn't the disaster you pretend. It's not a great year, because we doubled down and then missed on the highest profile pick. There's nothing that can be done about it, and it's a fact of life that no team in the NFL hits on all picks, even some of their high profile picks. It doesn't mean that the organization hasn't done a good job recently with the draft or with high picks overall.

I'm not sure how to get you off the idea that I'm saying players are good just because Cowboys pick them. It's irrational, and it would be a silly thing to think. I've never said that. I keep telling you I don't think that. I don't know why you're struggling with it. I've said we haven't often carried three QBs in this regime. We use the roster spot instead to churn whatever position group we need to churn. The last two years, that's been DL. This season, we've cut two DL prospects we were using in rotation to keep from exposing the QB3. Even this late in the season when contending teams often let prospects go to shore up rosters for a playoff run. NFL teams don't do that unless they think the guy can at least develop into a QB2. That tells us what our coaches and scouts think of his development, beyond what we all were able to see in camp. It means nothing to you. Fine. We get it. You say that as if it's supposed to matter to me, but I have a hard time understanding why you'd spend the emotional energy to grandstand about it. I'm just adding it to the very long list of unsubstantiated things you choose to believe for very little reason, and moving on.

For the record, though, I don't think you're particularly brave for taking an anonymous stance on the lowest probability middle-and-low-round draft picks on our roster every season.

What a mess. You clearly are a lost cause. You don't even understand why the 2012 offseason was so awful. You think it was just the wrong players. You'd support doing it again. This is what I'm dealing with.

Allow me to try to clear things up for you.

You have said, and you stubbornly and laughably still say, that the fact that the Cowboys have chosen to hold on to Vaughn is somehow a good sign for the player. You so desperately want people to believe that. Go Cowboys and all. The problem here, and this is where I might lose you, in REALITY...these people you are rolling over and showing your belly to like a little trained puppy, are the same decision makers that retained Stephen McGee for years and/or believed Brandon Weeden was worthy of the #2 position this year. A decision that could very well cost the team a playoff berth. Decision makers that have consistently fielded teams that lacked talent for two decades, and currently have a defense that is in need of a major overhaul of personnel. The cupboard is almost bare.

So where, oh where....is the track record that would force anyone to check their own brain at the door and assume those people, in your words, "know more than I do."?

An honest look back at their resume says that it means nothing that Vaughn is still on the roster. The last time the Cowboys stashed a future gem QB the great Bill Parcells walked that sideline. This current cast has no track record of ever making the right decision in this regard. So for the life of me, I can't figure out why even you would actually believe this. Hey....wait a second....Jerry and Stephen are keeping this Vaughn guy around. They must know something. L.O. ~side cramp~ L.

But all of this is besides the point. This shouldn't be a debate about whether the team knows something. A debate I'm clearly winning in TKO fashion. It should be about what I actually asked you. You have an amazing ability to change the topic. Remember the question?

Why can't you just answer the question asked? What do you think of the player? That answer shouldn't have anything to do with what others think. Even flawless folks like Jerry and Stephen Jones.

I see you once again threw that lie in there about Tyrone Crawford. Hoping somebody believes it. I just want to see how far you'll go with this lie. You actually read me calling Crawford a bust? Why is this (complete lie) even relevant to this discussion? Why can't you stay on topic? Desperate for firm footing, perhaps?

 

[Idgit]

....But all of this is besides the point. This shouldn't be a debate about whether the team knows something. A debate I'm clearly winning in TKO fashion. It should be about what I actually asked you. You have an amazing ability to change the topic. Remember the question?

Why can't you just answer the question asked? What do you think of the player? That answer shouldn't have anything to do with what others think. Even flawless folks like Jerry and Stephen Jones.

I see you once again threw that lie in there about Tyrone Crawford. Hoping somebody believes it. I just want to see how far you'll go with this lie. You actually read me calling Crawford a bust? Why is this (complete lie) even relevant to this discussion? Why can't you stay on topic? Desperate for firm footing, perhaps?

Oh, my god, dude. How many times to have I have to say it? For the third time, here is what I posted re: what I thought about Dustin Vaughan...half the thread ago:

...You know me. Always so shy about offering my opinion. What I think hasn't changed since camp: big guy, good feet, can make the throws. Seems to have an even temperament. Has a lot to learn. But then, as I've said already, I assumed Vinnie was asking for more recent information than what we saw in camp with his OP.

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/dust...e-of-a-roster-spot.308436/page-4#post-5846546

That's it. That's all I got about the QB3, that, and the fact that the team likes him better than they've liked other players--like Tanney last season--at that position they've chosen not to carry on the roster at all. So much so that they're keeping him protected in favor of guys who've actually played like Bishop and Coleman. It has absolutely zero to do with the fact that they might, in fact be wrong about it. It has less than zero to do with the fact that they were in fact, wrong to carry Steven McGee as long as they did. The only point about his presence on the roster is that it's a spot-check on how he must be performing with his practice reps because they'd rather expose Pellerin or Coleman or Bishop than guys like Vaughan or Patmon. If you think that means nothing, that's perfectly fine by me. I think it means a little something. And by a little something, I actually mean a little something. If we were talking about a guy we'd picked up that, say, the Patriots or the Packers or the Eagles had similarly tried to protect but then let go late in the season when they needed the roster spot for whatever reason, I'd think the same thing: good teams protecting a luxury roster spot for a QB3 means that they think the guy might have a shot based off of what they're seeing in practice and in film sessions.

Re: your knockout punches...you can't knock a guy out throwing jabs, and you throw nothing but jabs until you learn to actually back up your points with facts and not just a windy emphatic opinion.

Re: Crawford, on the topic of explicitly backing up an opinion: am I wrong that you lumped him in the same group you used to deride the way you derode Ben Bass? Because I'll take that back if I'm wrong, but that's what I remember you saying about him. That, and most recently mocking him for his lack of sack production. Let me know if you didn't say these things, so I can take back my assertions. I certainly wouldn't want to be actually lying about the things you've actually said about a player when you were doing your song-and-dance. I don't think I'm wrong, though. I think you're just doing your typical back pedaling from the stuff you were shoveling during the off-season when you wanted some attention.

 

[Risen Star]

Oh, my god, dude. How many times to have I have to say it? For the third time, here is what I posted re: what I thought about Dustin Vaughan...half the thread ago:



That's it. That's all I got about the QB3,

Then you should have said that initially and not continued to hammer home what a failed front office seems to think of him. Nobody cares. Not everyone lets Jerry and Stephen do their thinking for them.

that, and the fact that the team likes him better than they've liked other players--like Tanney last season--at that position they've chosen not to carry on the roster at all. So much so that they're keeping him protected in favor of guys who've actually played like Bishop and Coleman. It has absolutely zero to do with the fact that they might, in fact be wrong about it. It has less than zero to do with the fact that they were in fact, wrong to carry Steven McGee as long as they did. The only point about his presence on the roster is that it's a spot-check on how he must be performing with his practice reps because they'd rather expose Pellerin or Coleman or Bishop than guys like Vaughan or Patmon. If you think that means nothing, that's perfectly fine by me. I think it means a little something. And by a little something, I actually mean a little something. If we were talking about a guy we'd picked up that, say, the Patriots or the Packers or the Eagles had similarly tried to protect but then let go late in the season when they needed the roster spot for whatever reason, I'd think the same thing: good teams protecting a luxury roster spot for a QB3 means that they think the guy might have a shot based off of what they're seeing in practice and in film sessions.

Of course you think it means something. Even though the team has a far larger track record of personnel mistakes than they do hits over the years. Even though they've made some recent horrendous decisions with their QB depth and even though the guys you are naming as cuts are camp fodder types.

Whoa, they cut Micah Pellerin over Dustin Vaughn? This is big. Jerry must know something.

Re: your knockout punches...you can't knock a guy out throwing jabs, and you throw nothing but jabs until you learn to actually back up your points with facts and not just a windy emphatic opinion.

Re: Crawford, on the topic of explicitly backing up an opinion: am I wrong that you lumped him in the same group you used to deride the way you derode Ben Bass? Because I'll take that back if I'm wrong, but that's what I remember you saying about him. That, and most recently mocking him for his lack of sack production. Let me know if you didn't say these things, so I can take back my assertions. I certainly wouldn't want to be actually lying about the things you've actually said about a player when you were doing your song-and-dance. I don't think I'm wrong, though. I think you're just doing your typical back pedaling from the stuff you were shoveling during the off-season when you wanted some attention.

I'm not interested in you taking back your outright lie. I just won't let it go unchecked. It's a lie. You made it up. You didn't misunderstand anything.

Ben Bass sucks. Excuse me if I laughed at those who didn't know that and thought, does this sound familiar?, that his presence on the roster meant something. They kept him around. Our pro scouting department must know something.

Crawford's an okay prospect, but of course the face paint crew vastly overrate him since we're so desperate for any talent along the DL. He's decent. He might even end up being good. If I took over the team tomorrow I'd flush almost all of the players on defense but Crawford would be one I would keep.

 

[Idgit]

...I'm not interested in you taking back your outright lie. I just won't let it go unchecked. It's a lie. You made it up. You didn't misunderstand anything.

Ben Bass sucks. Excuse me if I laughed at those who didn't know that and thought, does this sound familiar?, that his presence on the roster meant something. They kept him around. Our pro scouting department must know something.

Crawford's an okay prospect, but of course the face paint crew vastly overrate him since we're so desperate for any talent along the DL. He's decent. He might even end up being good. If I took over the team tomorrow I'd flush almost all of the players on defense but Crawford would be one I would keep.

I'm not going to address again the first part of your post which was just you backtracking because you didn't read carefully the first two times.

I will address the 'outright lie' stuff. I think we went around about me lying about you saying Doug Free was garbage, too...until I pulled out your specific post where you called him 'slop.' At which point you vanished from the thread. Or about the 'Hatcher is a JAG' stuff, where Hatcher was 'just a guy' until he suddenly wasn't. And I think I was accused of fabricating those discussions, too, until I pulled up the posts. Because that is what you usually do whenever somebody calls you on your post history: You say they live in a fantasy world. That they lie outright. And then you disappear from the thread because you know it's a topic you're not going to be able to score any points with. Or else you try to deflect from the point by bringing up other arguments like you're doing with Ben Bass here and hope that they take the bait. We've all seen it. I'm just calling it out because I'm personally tired of it.

As for Crawford, I'm not lying. You know I'm not. You're deflecting from the question because you know that if you answer it directly I'm perfectly capable of producing a post or posts where you were mocking the player as part of one of your classic (and oh-so hilarious) Ben Bass rants. And I think you know I'm baiting you into that because I remember that it exists. You see, I don't have to lie, because I have your post history. I can just use that to make my point.

It's pretty simple, Risen. If you don't want to get called out on the outrageous things you say from time to time, then get out of the habit of saying outrageous things just to get attention. If the attention is that important to you, then keep up the posting style, but then you can't have such a thin skin when you're called on inconsistencies. You can't make a full-time habit of mocking most of the players and most of the moves the organization makes at every turn and then expect people to just forget about it when that mockery is proven to be misguided or an overreaction in retrospect.

 

[Risen Star]

I'm not going to address again the first part of your post which was just you backtracking because you didn't read carefully the first two times.

I will address the 'outright lie' stuff. I think we went around about me lying about you saying Doug Free was garbage, too...until I pulled out your specific post where you called him 'slop.' At which point you vanished from the thread. Or about the 'Hatcher is a JAG' stuff, where Hatcher was 'just a guy' until he suddenly wasn't. And I think I was accused of fabricating those discussions, too, until I pulled up the posts. Because that is what you usually do whenever somebody calls you on your post history: You say they live in a fantasy world. That they lie outright. And then you disappear from the thread because you know it's a topic you're not going to be able to score any points with. Or else you try to deflect from the point by bringing up other arguments like you're doing with Ben Bass here and hope that they take the bait. We've all seen it. I'm just calling it out because I'm personally tired of it.

As for Crawford, I'm not lying. You know I'm not. You're deflecting from the question because you know that if you answer it directly I'm perfectly capable of producing a post or posts where you were mocking the player as part of one of your classic (and oh-so hilarious) Ben Bass rants. And I think you know I'm baiting you into that because I remember that it exists. You see, I don't have to lie, because I have your post history. I can just use that to make my point.

It's pretty simple, Risen. If you don't want to get called out on the outrageous things you say from time to time, then get out of the habit of saying outrageous things just to get attention. If the attention is that important to you, then keep up the posting style, but then you can't have such a thin skin when you're called on inconsistencies. You can't make a full-time habit of mocking most of the players and most of the moves the organization makes at every turn and then expect people to just forget about it when that mockery is proven to be misguided or an overreaction in retrospect.

I'd love for you to dig up a post from me where I'm calling Crawford a JAG or a Ben Bass, which is the same thing. Feel free to use my post history to back your lies up.

The only thing you'll find is me making fun of his lack of sacks yet being treated like he's John Randle from this fan base.

This is a lie you created because when you really have nothing on me. I have no problem telling you who I think is a bum. If I thought it, I would tell you. Crawford hasn't done anything yet to prove he's a really good player or even a good player, but I do think he's capable of being solid.

BTW, I'm sorry you're so sensitive (and why you answered the initial question the way you did, as the worthless read you are) that you see me as making a "mockery" of your beloved team. What you call a mockery, I call honest evaluations. If, in retrospect, I had put much faith in their personnel decisions over the last couple of decades (same GM, same VP of Personnel) I'd have looked like a real melvin.

I never said Doug Free was garbage either. I'm actually amused at how desperate you are. What I have said is Free is a JAG. Some will say he's been better than a JAG this year and I think that's fair. But overall, JAGish career. Very overrated by the fan base. Never said he was garbage. A lie. Find the comment.

As for Hatcher, I started a thread on here a year or so ago maybe about the strange trajectory of Hatcher's career. Yes, I considered him a JAG early on. But he improved into a real impact defender in his 30's and I admitted as much. Not many players have ever done that. Maybe you can raise your hand in a mirror or something. This is a sorta, quasi victory for you. You actually told a half truth about my stances.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand. Tell me again why you're not capable of telling us what you think of a player without mentioning what the team thinks of him. I still don't understand (I do) why.

 

[Idgit]

This is way off topic and very tedious, but I suppose I have to reply since I invited it and you took me up on the invitation.

Let's go:

I'd love for you to dig up a post from me where I'm calling Crawford a JAG or a Ben Bass, which is the same thing. Feel free to use my post history to back your lies up....This is a lie you created because when you really have nothing on me.

Yes you did. Apart from making fun of his sack totals all season--despite his playing really well....here is the quote I was thinking of:

Yes. It's the cornerbacks that make it all go. Get them up in their face so Tyrone Crawford and Ben Bass can ball.

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/seattle-d-line.282526/#post-5437422

That's you calling him a 'Ben Bass.' I wasn't lying. Given all the ish you've made us all endure re: Ben Bass the last two offseason, there's no backing away from what you meant by this quote, Risen.

What's next? Oh, yeah. Doug Free:

I never said Doug Free was garbage either. I'm actually amused at how desperate you are. What I have said is Free is a JAG. Some will say he's been better than a JAG this year and I think that's fair. But overall, JAGish career. Very overrated by the fan base. Never said he was garbage. A lie. Find the comment.

Yes. You did. Well, you said he was slop. Maybe you can explain to us how slop differs from garbage in your world:

I just can't sit here and praise Nate Livings for being better than slop like Bernadeau, Costa and Free.

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/thoughts-on-livings-and-bernadeau-so-far.245510/page-3#post-4792421

They need to add at least one veteran OL. You can not go into the draft with this slop as your starting line.

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/espn-possible-cowboys-fa-targets.249178/page-3#post-4898232

This one's pretty clear, too. Slop. Doug Free. I wasn't lying. What's next? Hatcher? Ok.

As for Hatcher, I started a thread on here a year or so ago maybe about the strange trajectory of Hatcher's career. Yes, I considered him a JAG early on. But he improved into a real impact defender in his 30's and I admitted as much. Not many players have ever done that. Maybe you can raise your hand in a mirror or something. This is a sorta, quasi victory for you. You actually told a half truth about my stances.

Well, here's one from way back when Crawford was drafted, where Winicki was comparing Crawford's potential to Hatchers. Where MW said:

Hatcher's big problem has been injuries. When healthy he's been a better than average player.

To which you replied:

Better than average? You must be watching a lot of bad players.

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/crawford-versus-hatcher.236267/#post-4553293

And here's where it dawned on you that Hatcher was actually a pretty good player:

I don't agree. He's a far better player today than he was in his mid 20's. From JAG to pro bowler.

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/the-odd-odd-career-of-jason-hatcher.271226/#post-5256653

That was in October of last year. Good catch! It's so great to get such takes from somebody not afraid to 'put it out there.'

You don't get credit for recognizing in October of last year that Jason Hatcher 'improved into an impact defender' in week 8 of last season, Risen. But this post is about as close as you come to admitting you're wrong, so I suppose we should take that in for what it's worth.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand. Tell me again why you're not capable of telling us what you think of a player without mentioning what the team thinks of him. I still don't understand (I do) why.

As for this, I am capable of telling you what I think of a player without mentioning what the team thinks of him. In this single case, I did not start with that. Because, as I've said four times now, I assumed Eddie was asking for how our opinions had changed since training camp because that's how he worded his OP. I used the team's actions as means of guessing at how Vaughan has been doing, since that's all we really have to go on from camp till now.

 

[Risen Star]

This is way off topic and very tedious, but I suppose I have to reply since I invited it and you took me up on the invitation.

You're the king of way off topic. Rather than answer a simple basic question, you lacked the maturity and it has led to this nonsense.

But I'm not about to let some fan boy who doesn't know his bleep from his elbow tell me about me.

Let's go:

Okay. If you don't mind. I'll walk, while you peddle your big wheel.

Yes you did. Apart from making fun of his sack totals all season--despite his playing really well....here is the quote I was thinking of:

​

That's you calling him a 'Ben Bass.' I wasn't lying. Given all the ish you've made us all endure re: Ben Bass the last two offseason, there's no backing away from what you meant by this quote, Risen.

That's a severe reach. Which is what I expected I'd get. Crawford and Bass were the fan hopes to get pressure inside. Melton too, but he actually had production.

What that comment was telling you is we needed strength up front. Not strength in the backend to create a strong front. Which is what I replied to.

BTW, I still find his sack total funny considering the John Randle type treatment he gets around here. How about we actually see dominant play before we consider him dominant?

What's next? Oh, yeah. Doug Free:



Yes. You did. Well, you said he was slop. Maybe you can explain to us how slop differs from garbage in your world:

Collectively. Bernadeau, Costa (a guy you thought could play, because...like...he was on the roster and stuff) and Free is slop. Collectively.

The Cowboys could replace Free tomorrow with an average talent and not miss a beat. I have never wavered from that stance one iota. Even while fan boys were celebrating his abortion contract extension as if he was a franchise OT.

​

​

This one's pretty clear, too. Slop. Doug Free. I wasn't lying. What's next? Hatcher? Ok.



Well, here's one from way back when Crawford was drafted, where Winicki was comparing Crawford's potential to Hatchers. Where MW said:

To which you replied:​

I stand by that comment. Up to that point, 2012....Hatcher's career review isn't one that was better than average. But the last two years in Dallas were at a high level. Absolutely. I don't know what point you're trying to make here. I already told you about this and why I posted the thread I did at that time.

​

As for this, I am capable of telling you what I think of a player without mentioning what the team thinks of him. In this single case, I did not start with that. Because, as I've said four times now, I assumed Eddie was asking for how our opinions had changed since training camp because that's how he worded his OP. I used the team's actions as means of guessing at how Vaughan has been doing, since that's all we really have to go on from camp till now.

You didn't start with that because you're a mark for the team. A fan boy. You just didn't count on someone like me calling you out for it. Only then did you begrudgingly state your own opinion and actually answer the question. Sort of.

I don't care what you thought the team's actions meant. You're still not getting it. I could write it 100 times and it won't sink in. What the team thinks is irrelevant. The team makes a living out of making mistakes. If the OP subscribed to relying on the team to think for him, as you do, he wouldn't have asked the question. This was clearly an inquiry of do you think he's worth keeping on the roster? Is this one of the good decisions or one of the bad ones? That's what the guy is asking. It was a very fair question. But you, like a fair and balanced 5 year old, couldn't handle the stinging criticism that this might be another waste of time for the Cowboys (Go Cowboys!).So let's pretend the guys who kept Stephen McGee around for years, must now see something in Dustin Vaughn. This means something. Recognize.

It's kind of like the other guy talking about other teams in the Bell/Escobar thread. Anything to deflect from that criticism. I lack the maturity to accept it.

You say a lot of things without saying anything. You can put Winicki in that category too. The truth is I don't have to read a single post of yours to know what you think. I merely have to keep up to date on the Cowboys transaction wire.

 

[Idgit]

You're the king of way off topic. Rather than answer a simple basic question, you lacked the maturity and it has led to this nonsense.

But I'm not about to let some fan boy who doesn't know his bleep from his elbow tell me about me.




Okay. If you don't mind. I'll walk, while you peddle your big wheel.





That's a severe reach. Which is what I expected I'd get. Crawford and Bass were the fan hopes to get pressure inside. Melton too, but he actually had production.

What that comment was telling you is we needed strength up front. Not strength in the backend to create a strong front. Which is what I replied to.

BTW, I still find his sack total funny considering the John Randle type treatment he gets around here. How about we actually see dominant play before we consider him dominant?




Collectively. Bernadeau, Costa (a guy you thought could play, because...like...he was on the roster and stuff) and Free is slop. Collectively.

The Cowboys could replace Free tomorrow with an average talent and not miss a beat. I have never wavered from that stance one iota. Even while fan boys were celebrating his abortion contract extension as if he was a franchise OT.

​

​

I stand by that comment. Up to that point, 2012....Hatcher's career review isn't one that was better than average. But the last two years in Dallas were at a high level. Absolutely. I don't know what point you're trying to make here. I already told you about this and why I posted the thread I did at that time.

​

You didn't start with that because you're a mark for the team. A fan boy. You just didn't count on someone like me calling you out for it. Only then did you begrudgingly state your own opinion and actually answer the question. Sort of.

I don't care what you thought the team's actions meant. You're still not getting it. I could write it 100 times and it won't sink in. What the team thinks is irrelevant. The team makes a living out of making mistakes. If the OP subscribed to relying on the team to think for him, as you do, he wouldn't have asked the question. This was clearly an inquiry of do you think he's worth keeping on the roster? Is this one of the good decisions or one of the bad ones? That's what the guy is asking. It was a very fair question. But you, like a fair and balanced 5 year old, couldn't handle the stinging criticism that this might be another waste of time for the Cowboys (Go Cowboys!).So let's pretend the guys who kept Stephen McGee around for years, must now see something in Dustin Vaughn. This means something. Recognize.

It's kind of like the other guy talking about other teams in the Bell/Escobar thread. Anything to deflect from that criticism. I lack the maturity to accept it.

You say a lot of things without saying anything. You can put Winicki in that category too. The truth is I don't have to read a single post of yours to know what you think. I merely have to keep up to date on the Cowboys transaction wire.

Just what I thought. Backpedaling and diversion.

Actually, I was 50/50 on whether you'd return with diversion, or just not reply to the thread at all when it was obvious there was nothing more for you to gain from it, so...props?

Anyway. What each of us thinks is pretty clear at this point. I don't see much use in letting this continue to be about you or me. It's reached the point where it's barely even connected with Dustin Vaughan, which is probably a good point to just let the exchange drop.

To tie it up, I don't care much what happens with any particular backup QB on the roster at this point. We need to be carrying three and aggressively looking to upgrade that position using all avenues, including our highest draft picks, until we find a guy with concrete potential to develop into a top starter at that position. If the remote chance that that's Dustin Vaughan pans out, great. If he doesn't make the step to win the backup position outright after his next camp, he wouldn't be on my roster.

 

[Risen Star]

Just what I thought. Backpedaling and diversion.

Actually, I was 50/50 on whether you'd return with diversion, or just not reply to the thread at all when it was obvious there was nothing more for you to gain from it, so...props?

Anyway. What each of us thinks is pretty clear at this point. I don't see much use in letting this continue to be about you or me. It's reached the point where it's barely even connected with Dustin Vaughan, which is probably a good point to just let the exchange drop.

To tie it up, I don't care much what happens with any particular backup QB on the roster at this point. We need to be carrying three and aggressively looking to upgrade that position using all avenues, including our highest draft picks, until we find a guy with concrete potential to develop into a top starter at that position. If the remote chance that that's Dustin Vaughan pans out, great. If he doesn't make the step to win the backup position outright after his next camp, he wouldn't be on my roster.

Well I would never get rid of Vaughn. Because Jerry and Stephen Jones must see something in him. I just can't shake that from my own evaluation. Plus we have a pro personnel department.

As for aggressively addressing the issue, we need to take that same approach with the DT position and not just assume Tyrone Crawford will reach his potential as a good player. Or until he gets his 2nd sack. Whichever comes first.

 

[Idgit]

Well I would never get rid of Vaughn. Because Jerry and Stephen Jones must see something in him. I just can't shake that from my own evaluation. Plus we have a pro personnel department.

As for aggressively addressing the issue, we need to take that same approach with the DT position and not just assume Tyrone Crawford will reach his potential as a good player. Or until he gets his 2nd sack. Whichever comes first.

You keep trying to hammer that point that I never made. I can't help it if you want to believe in a delusion. And it doesn't matter to me whether your agree or not that how any NFL team handles the bottoms of its roster gives fans an indication of what the coaches and scouts believe they're seeing in practice. Anybody who believes that group knows nothing more than Mel Kiper does will probably agree with you.

I'm with you on the DL. That's a position I've wanted to see us address in the first rounds of each of the last two drafts. Those positions are some of the hardest to fill in the league, and you have to spend some premium picks there if you're going to be sure to get it right. Crawford is already a good player, but you keep digging that hole, too, if you really want to.

 

[Risen Star]

You keep trying to hammer that point that I never made. I can't help it if you want to believe in a delusion. And it doesn't matter to me whether your agree or not that how any NFL team handles the bottoms of its roster gives fans an indication of what the coaches and scouts believe they're seeing in practice. Anybody who believes that group knows nothing more than Mel Kiper does will probably agree with you.

I'm with you on the DL. That's a position I've wanted to see us address in the first rounds of each of the last two drafts. Those positions are some of the hardest to fill in the league, and you have to spend some premium picks there if you're going to be sure to get it right. Crawford is already a good player, but you keep digging that hole, too, if you really want to.

Interesting thing about Mel Kiper. He's been far more right than Frick and Frack over the years. He's been telling you ahead of time the Cowboys were drafting poorly. He's also the one guy I can say praised an unknown Tony Romo before his draft. Miles Austin too.

I'd say he's a slightly more enlightening read than you're giving him credit for. Would it change your opinion if I told you he had crap grades for Phil Costa, Bill Nagy and Matt Johnson? This man sees the future.

Yeah, I have no problem with the way roster spots are being used pertaining to what a team thinks of the players. It's just has nothing to do with the question of what you think of the player.

Hey, Risen Star. What do you think of Devin Street?

Well, my cousin likes him.

See?

 

[big dog cowboy]

Please give the rest of us a chance to breathe.

 

[Idgit]

Interesting thing about Mel Kiper. He's been far more right than Frick and Frack over the years. He's been telling you ahead of time the Cowboys were drafting poorly. He's also the one guy I can say praised an unknown Tony Romo before his draft. Miles Austin too.

I'd say he's a slightly more enlightening read than you're giving him credit for. Would it change your opinion if I told you he had crap grades for Phil Costa, Bill Nagy and Matt Johnson? This man sees the future.

Yeah, I have no problem with the way roster spots are being used pertaining to what a team thinks of the players. It's just has nothing to do with the question of what you think of the player.

Hey, Risen Star. What do you think of Devin Street?

Well, my cousin likes him.

See?

Not too interested in the cherry picking about Mel Kiper's record, if he did actually even make those calls.

And we've already covered exactly why my first comment in this thread referenced something that I'd surmised because there wasn't otherwise any new information about that player since the roster was actually set. So it was more like: 'Hey, Idgit, what do you think of Devin Street now?' And, "Well, since camp ended? I haven't seen much to change my opinion, either way. The team's gone out of it's way to keep that 6th active roster spot available for him, even when they really needed CB depth earlier this season. That's unusual for them, so I'd have to assume from that he's probably performing ok in all the areas we don't get to see during the season like in practice and in his position group work.'

Again, not an earth shaking revelation, but I never said it was. You're the one who went on a crusade to try to make it sound like I like the player because of Jerry Jones or whatever. I liked Tanney better last season, honestly, and I think I wanted another player instead of using a roster spot on QB3 back in camp, if I remember correctly. Vaughan was always going to be borderline, I thought. It looks like I might have been wrong, though, and that they regard that third QB spot higher than I thought they did when the roster was put together.

 

[Risen Star]

Not too interested in the cherry picking about Mel Kiper's record, if he did actually even make those calls.

And we've already covered exactly why my first comment in this thread referenced something that I'd surmised because there wasn't otherwise any new information about that player since the roster was actually set. So it was more like: 'Hey, Idgit, what do you think of Devin Street now?' And, "Well, since camp ended? I haven't seen much to change my opinion, either way. The team's gone out of it's way to keep that 6th active roster spot available for him, even when they really needed CB depth earlier this season. That's unusual for them, so I'd have to assume from that he's probably performing ok in all the areas we don't get to see during the season like in practice and in his position group work.'

Again, not an earth shaking revelation, but I never said it was. You're the one who went on a crusade to try to make it sound like I like the player because of Jerry Jones or whatever. I liked Tanney better last season, honestly, and I think I wanted another player instead of using a roster spot on QB3 back in camp, if I remember correctly. Vaughan was always going to be borderline, I thought. It looks like I might have been wrong, though, and that they regard that third QB spot higher than I thought they did when the roster was put together.

Right, you would use the team, as if they are somehow flawless talent evaluators....~snicker~....~snicker~....to do your thinking for you on Street.

That is the problem. That's the disconnect. You have so many layers of face paint on that you can't see how completely irrelevant that is with a quick check on their history.

 

[Cowboyz88]

Holy crap…are you guys going to sabotage every thread with your pissing contest?

I'm all for a good debate, but geez.

 

[Idgit]

Right, you would use the team, as if they are somehow flawless talent evaluators....~snicker~....~snicker~....to do your thinking for you on Street.

That is the problem. That's the disconnect. You have so many layers of face paint on that you can't see how completely irrelevant that is with a quick check on their history.

They don't have to be flawless talent evaluators. They just have to be professionals who have access to information you do not. And not just our professionals. They same holds true for any professionals for any team in the league. The fact that you can't accept that is precisely what leads you to making so many pop-gun declarations about players you simply don't have enough information about. You're so worried about face paint that you don't realize that all that scrubbing is what leaves your face looking so red when you're wrong yet again about a guy you popped off about prematurely. Hitchens.

 

[CowboyChris]

Holy crap…are you guys going to sabotage every thread with your pissing contest?

I'm all for a good debate, but geez.

can you imagine 7 pages of information on Dustin Vaughn?

 

[Idgit]

Holy crap…are you guys going to sabotage every thread with your pissing contest?

I'm all for a good debate, but geez.

The pissing contest is just in this Dustin Vaughan thread, where nobody has anything new to share, anyway, since we haven't seen the guy play in months. And I'm all for talking Vaughan if there's anything to talk about. I think the team likes him, anyway, judging by how they've kept him on the active roster all this time....

 

[TrailBlazer]

Backup or off the roster completely as soon as next year.