Eisen: If you feel Ezekiel Elliott is the next La'Veon Bell....

[tyke1doe]

But behind this OL, it's also quite possibly you could find a non first round TB and have a good enough running game to win a SB too.

Shoot, the guy that some were upset we let go to Philly was a 3rd round pick.

And he fumbled like a 3rd round pick too.

 

[tyke1doe]

Mike Mayock stole my answer:


Mayock: I would disagree. I would tell you that they're not going to be drafting at No. 4 again in the future, and they've got a 36-year-old quarterback that has not fininshed a season in three years, and if they think there's a franchise quarterback out there at No. 4 and he's available? To me, that trumps everything.

I can get my next starting running back in free agency. I can sign Lamar Miller or Doug Martin on day one of free agency.

Where's my next starting quarterback?

Franchise being the operative word. I agree IF the Cowboys consider Goff/Wentz a franchise quarterback.

But if somehow, they're being overhyped, then Elliott is the pick if you think he can be a difference maker.

The interesting about this dynamic is we won't know until at least four years down the road, in the case of the quarterbacks. So everyone will argue back and forth until the final results are in. And those won't come until years later.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I agree trading back is the most favorable scenario but we may not have a ton of takers.

If Elliott is truly a special back, I would be a little nervous of the Giants snatching him. That offense would be scary if they added a special back to the mix.

Not with that Oline its not.

 

[Sydla]

Totally cool with Zeke at 4. Do you guys remember how good this offense was with an 1800 yard back?

Do you remember how many explosive plays we made on offense last year?

Do you remember in 2014 we also had one of the 5 best QBs in the league and didn't have that guy in 2015?

I simply don't understand the people trying to compare 2014 to 2015.

 

[Sydla]

Was Emmitt Smith a once-in-a-generation back?

Emmitt was picked in the second half of the first round at 17, not at 4. And that was in 1990 when the league was much more ground oriented and teams placed more value on TBs. In today's game, it's been shown over and over that you can get good to great production in the run game from guys that weren't picked with a Top 10 pick.

 

[tyke1doe]

You could probably find a scout or college coach that compared Jake Locker, Christian Ponder or Blaine Gabbert to Aaron Rodgers as well. I'm not saying don't take Goff but I don't want the team taking him "just because he's a QB" either. If Goff is your guy, take him. This post is more of a hypothetical post to see everyone's reaction if we thought Elliott was that best player, special back.

With all due respect, I doubt you could. There were SIGNIFICANT concerns about Locker, Ponder AND Gabbert when they came out. I think Locker was injured his final year in college or his productivity tailed off significantly - I can't remember which.
Ponder was a surprise pick. I don't remember hearing many good things about him as a first-round pick and Gabbert was not talked up as much as Goff or Wentz.

I don't know if Goff or Wentz will become the next Peyton, but they are better than Locker, Ponder and Gabbert were coming out of college.

 

[robjay04]

With all due respect, I doubt you could. There were SIGNIFICANT concerns about Locker, Ponder AND Gabbert when they came out. I think Locker was injured his final year in college or his productivity tailed off significantly - I can't remember which.
Ponder was a surprise pick. I don't remember hearing many good things about him as a first-round pick and Gabbert was not talked up as much as Goff or Wentz.

I don't know if Goff or Wentz will become the next Peyton, but they are better than Locker, Ponder and Gabbert were coming out of college.

I don't disagree. I was simply saying that all 3 of those players had their fans coming out of college that thought they were going to be the next big thing.

 

[tyke1doe]

Eisen must have forgot about how bad our defense is.

Our defense in 2014 was coming off the worst defensive output in Cowboys history. And look what happened when we started feeding DeMarco Murray the ball. I think our defense is significantly better than the defense of 2013 and 2014.

 

[Sydla]

So who is winning us a championship? Ramsey? Bosa? Romo?

Please explain your statement. Thank you.

First and foremost, I would go QB at 4. You can't win in this league with a crap QB and the Cowboys are staring down the barrel of a Romo-less future. So I would absolutely go QB without hesitation if I were Jerry and my scouts were saying Goff or Wentz have the potential to be a franchise guy.

Second, if the QB was a non starter, I'd try to trade that pick. I think this a fairly deep draft on defense and if I could slide down a few pegs and pick up an extra #2 or more.

Three, I'd go defense. You can't build a great defense without elite talent. So I'd look at Ramsey or Jack in that spot. Two uber athletes that bring flexibility.

Four, why I wouldn't go Elliott at #4? We've invested heavily in our OL and this league has shown that lower round picks and even re-treads can have great success in running the ball in this league and that you don't need to blow a Top 5 pick on a TB to have an elite running attack. I am not opposed to Elliott at all. Just not at 4. If you could get the Rams to give you their 15th and and 2 second rounders, I'd have no problem then taking Elliott at 15 because then you have three #2s to strengthen defense. But Elliott at 4, with the holes on defense and the lack of any contingency plan at QB would be insane IMO.

 

[tyke1doe]

Emmitt was picked in the second half of the first round at 17, not at 4. And that was in 1990 when the league was much more ground oriented and teams placed more value on TBs. In today's game, it's been shown over and over that you can get good to great production in the run game from guys that weren't picked with a Top 10 pick.

So do you think there would have been a difference in Emmitt's production had he been picked No. 1 vs. at No. 17?

Second, last time I checked, teams still use running backs and when last I checked, running backs touch the football more than anyone else on the field with the exception of the quarterback.

Third, you saw what Murray did for the Cowboys in 2014. Our defense was mediocre, but with a run-oriented offense, we were one game away from the NFC Championship.

I think EE could have a similar impact.

 

[Sydla]

So do you think there would have been a difference in Emmitt's production had he been picked No. 1 vs. at No. 17?

Second, last time I checked, teams still use running backs and when last I checked, running backs touch the football more than anyone else on the field with the exception of the quarterback.

Third, you saw what Murray did for the Cowboys in 2014. Our defense was mediocre, but with a run-oriented offense, we were one game away from the NFC Championship.

I think EE could have a similar impact.

You think the Cowboys would have taken Emmitt at #1 if they had the first pick instead of the Colts in 1990?

And, of course, you Elliott guys always seem to forget one little nugget of info when trying to bring up Murray, 2014 versus 2015. Actually two nuggets.

 

[tyke1doe]

First and foremost, I would go QB at 4. You can't win in this league with a crap QB and the Cowboys are staring down the barrel of a Romo-less future. So I would absolutely go QB without hesitation if I were Jerry and my scouts were saying Goff or Wentz have the potential to be a franchise guy.

Second, if the QB was a non starter, I'd try to trade that pick. I think this a fairly deep draft on defense and if I could slide down a few pegs and pick up an extra #2 or more.

Three, I'd go defense. You can't build a great defense without elite talent. So I'd look at Ramsey or Jack in that spot. Two uber athletes that bring flexibility.

Four, why I wouldn't go Elliott at #4? We've invested heavily in our OL and this league has shown that lower round picks and even re-treads can have great success in running the ball in this league and that you don't need to blow a Top 5 pick on a TB to have an elite running attack. I am not opposed to Elliott at all. Just not at 4. If you could get the Rams to give you their 15th and and 2 second rounders, I'd have no problem then taking Elliott at 15 because then you have three #2s to strengthen defense. But Elliott at 4, with the holes on defense and the lack of any contingency plan at QB would be insane IMO.

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you've said, but that still doesn't explain why you don't think the Cowboys can win a championship with Zeke.

 

[tyke1doe]

You think the Cowboys would have taken Emmitt at #1 if they had the first pick instead of the Colts?

No. But my point is regardless where Emmitt was taken, he would have done the same thing for the Cowboys.
The Cowboys were actually targeting Cortez Kennedy had they kept that pick. Kennedy went to the Seahawks, who didn't win a Super Bowl with him.

And, of course, you Elliott lovers always seem to forget one little nugget of info when trying to bring up Murray, 2014 versus 2015.

Which is what?

 

[Sydla]

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you've said, but that still doesn't explain why you don't think the Cowboys can win a championship with Zeke.

My fault then for not being clear, I wasn't trying to say that it's impossible to ever win with Elliott. I was just responding to the point made by Eisen where he seemed to be saying that drafting Elliott at 4 is the missing link to getting this team to a Super Bowl in the short window Romo has left.

 

[Sydla]

Which is what?

No Romo.

It's nearly impossible to gauge how effective our running game would have been last year when we played 12 games without Romo. So while people keep screaming that we have to replace Murray (who by the way was a third round pick) with Elliott, for all we know, with a healthy Romo, McFadden may have been more than adequate to get the Cowboys back to where they were in 2014.

 

[Stash]

Franchise being the operative word. I agree IF the Cowboys consider Goff/Wentz a franchise quarterback.

But if somehow, they're being overhyped, then Elliott is the pick if you think he can be a difference maker.

The interesting about this dynamic is we won't know until at least four years down the road, in the case of the quarterbacks. So everyone will argue back and forth until the final results are in. And those won't come until years later.

I don't see how one can look at Goff's body of work and still say he's "overhyped". Based on his body of work, I think his accolades are justified and, if anything, since his last game, he's being underrated.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Longevity is a huge reason why you don't go RB with a top 10 pick. I mean, there are exceptions to the rule, certainly. A guy like AP for example. However, the average length of a NFL RB is 2.57 years. To me, this more then any other reason is why you don't invest in a RB with that high a pick unless he is clearly something other then your average bear.

 

[QT]

Eisen must have forgot about how bad our defense is.

Elliott can probably help the defense by keeping drives alive therefore the defense can get more rest on the sidelines.

 

[jnday]

In my mind it's simple.

Ezekial Elliott isn't winning you a championship.

If the QBs are gone off the board or you only like one and can't get that guy, and you don't like Bosa or Jack or Ramsey or Stanley or whomever at 4.............. you trade back. You don't take a TB at 4.

It takes a partner to trade and sometimes a partner is not available.

 

[jnday]

So who is winning us a championship? Ramsey? Bosa? Romo?

Please explain your statement. Thank you.

Great point. I love these list that suggests that one player is all that is needed to reach the Super Bowl. I get tired of the draft an impact player with the 4th pick argument to. The percentage of rookies that come in and make an impact is very low. Gregory was considered a top ten talent, but even when healthy , he didn't make any waves.