Hardy maybe drawing some interest

[khiladi]

This is coming from a guy who said "Hardy only performs when he's on a good team and good coaches." Good luck winning games with him on this team with this coaching staff.

That's what YOU SAID. I was quoting you, meaning It's called SARCASM.. You downplayed Hardy's numbers his first two years and last year and said his season of 11 and 15 sacks was because of his team and coaches..

Do you get it now?

 

[khiladi]

There was a lot more to get out of Chandler Jones but they didn't trust him.

Opinion..

 

[khiladi]

I don't throw random things off the top of my head I do research. The reality is once they get what they want out of a player they move on. You mentioned them not re-signing Wilfork and allowing him to become a free agent but he was 33 years old and had been with NE for 11 years. The thugs they picked up were prior to the murder charges against Hernandez. After eating the $12M they had just given him in a contract extension it caused them to be hesitant about investing long-term in Chandler Jones.

Hernandez was a RISK during the draft, the Pats and Bellichek were well aware of, as I already stated. Learn your facts instead of throwing stuff at the wall..

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/...or-patriots/3HWjGvTSTOOOs5BtpvFDcJ/story.html

 

[khiladi]

You're still not answering the question would you take him for the next 5 years in place of DLaw? Would you invest big money long-term on Hardy? Let's see how you skirt around that one. LOL Why would you take Hardy any day of the week, every given Sunday if you think he only performs on good teams that have good coaching? Do you see a good team and good coaching with the Cowboys?

I definitely wouldn't give DLaw a 5 year, guaranteed contract..

I wouldn't sign 5 year guaranteed deal for any player, other than a franchise QB. Who signs players that long, guaranteed.. That's dumb.. It has nothing to do with talent of Hardy being heads above DLaw..

I'd definitely sign Hardy 3 years over DLaw and day of the week..

 

[conner01]

It's so disappointing that despite our glaring need for a pass rusher, we won't bring Hardy back.

We paid him knowing he hadn't had any real game experience in over a year. We paid him knowing he had baggage.

And now he's a year removed from all of that with a full season under his belt and we can't be bothered because he's late for meetings. Which is something we knew about him before we signed him.

if we expected him to completely change his habits we shouldn't have ever signed him. We could've just kept Ware. And we'd have him mentoring Gregory and we'd have more flexibility in this draft.

Too bad we have such a weak head coach.

They gave Hardy a chance to turn his career around and he thanked them by showing up late. And you think we should sign him and send a message to the rest of the team it's no big deal if you show up late for meetings and quit on the team

 

[Manwiththeplan]

2 were in the Super Bowl.. super bowl doesn't qualify as post season.. And if you include that 1.5 sacks, he had 4 sacks the whole regular season..

So basically you have no argument. He basically did nothing all year.

His sacks in the playoffs were primarily like I said, Phillips schemes and Von Miller and the whole defense playing in a different level.

When you're tired of being wrong, click the game logs, which I will provide again for you

http://www.nfl.com/player/demarcusware/2506349/gamelogs

You can certainly believe Hardy is more worthy of a deal than Lawrence, that's an opinion. But it's a fact that Ware had 7.5 regular season sacks.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

How about you check out type game logs and get back to me how 4 sacks and around 12 tackles and the context surrounding them refuted my point?

I wonder which will happen at this point.

A.) You'll continue to not click the game logs and make up your own stats
B.) You'll click the game logs and double down on your criticism of Ware only being productive in the SB
C.) You'll click on the game logs, realize your error but ignore this thread
D.) You'll click on the game logs and admit you were basing you're information on inaccurate information.

 

[BigStar]

Not if he's truly a cancer it's not. A head coach must command his own locker room. Ours is challenged enough in that regard. We don't need to add to it with players that want to rock the boat. If you're a member of the team you're going to fall in line and follow the lead of the head coach. If you're not going to do that get the hell out of here. We don't need you.

The problem here is Cowboys fans are so unfamiliar with how a team is supposed to operate.

The HC will always be castrated in DAL due to power structure and lack of say regarding players. That said, he's paid like a great HC so would think there is a balance to be met that allows him to have the ability to get the best out of the troubled players (even with the assistance of JJ). JG swallowed that dignity or pride a long time ago, why not just make it done behind the scenes if the "HC facade" must remain for some of the more naive or younger players? It's already established he doesn't have final say "unofficially", make the penalties (contract) worth it to Hardy to not resort to those tactics....

 

[khiladi]

I wonder which will happen at this point.

A.) You'll continue to not click the game logs and make up your own stats
B.) You'll click the game logs and double down on your criticism of Ware only being productive in the SB
C.) You'll click on the game logs, realize your error but ignore this thread
D.) You'll click on the game logs and admit you were basing you're information on inaccurate information.

How about D and still say Ware wasn't worthy of the salary..

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/W/WareDe99.htm?mobile=false

7.5 sacks - 3.5 sacks = 4
17 tackles - 5 = 11 tackles though I said 12 because I speaking off the top of my head

Being wrong is not the same thing as making stuff up. It doesn't take a genius to understand where my numbers came from. I took the 7.5 sacks as totals. And 17 TACKLES all of regular season.

He had more tackles in his last season in Dallas, even if you adjust for the two other games he played.

So basically your point is that Ware produced via his sacks, ignoring tackle totals even though I also made a mistake there.

But that's probably why you just snipped out ONE portion of my whole sentence of which STATED:

"Ware was judged by the fact he was old and he wasn't even bringing pressure anymore and suffering injuries. And Ware didn't really produce in Denver either until the SB and he had Miller who was playing on a different planet, who himself wasn't all world the year prior, and the best defensive coach in the game in Wade Phillips who was throwing disguised blitzes from everywhere. Ware wasn't even close to the best player on the Denver defense."

And TWO SENTENCES DOWN:

"And if you say sacks aren't the only measure of a defensive player and it's not accurate to measure then by it, then your contradicting your whole point when you measure him by 'sacks'."

 

[Manwiththeplan]

B.) You'll click the game logs and double down on your criticism of Ware only being productive in the SB

How about D and still say Ware wasn't worthy of the salary..

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/W/WareDe99.htm?mobile=false

7.5 sacks - 3.5 sacks = 4
17 tackles - 5 = 11 tackles though I said 12 because I speaking off the top of my head

Being wrong is not the same thing as making stuff up. It doesn't take a genius to understand where my numbers came from. I took the 7.5 sacks as totals. And 17 TACKLES all of regular season.

He had more tackles in his last season in Dallas, even if you adjust for the two other games he played.

So basically your point is that Ware produced via his sacks, ignoring tackle totals even though I also made a mistake there.

But that's probably why you just snipped out ONE portion of my whole sentence of which STATED:

"Ware was judged by the fact he was old and he wasn't even bringing pressure anymore and suffering injuries. And Ware didn't really produce in Denver either until the SB and he had Miller who was playing on a different planet, who himself wasn't all world the year prior, and the best defensive coach in the game in Wade Phillips who was throwing disguised blitzes from everywhere. Ware wasn't even close to the best player on the Denver defense."

And TWO SENTENCES DOWN:

"And if you say sacks aren't the only measure of a defensive player and it's not accurate to measure then by it, then your contradicting your whole point when you measure him by 'sacks'."

Looks like B

fwiw, I knew why you were wrong, which is why I posted the game logs. don't get mad at me that you chose to ignore the game logs.

7.5 sacks in the regular season isn't run of the mil production. If Ware was producing 4 or 5 sacks, playing opposite of Von Miller, then you'd have a point. But the 10 he had in 2014 and 7.5 he had in 2015, not to mention the ADDITIONAL 3.5 he had in the post season is not something you can say is only a product of Miller/Wade

 

[khiladi]

Looks like B

fwiw, I knew why you were wrong, which is why I posted the game logs. don't get mad at me that you chose to ignore the game logs.

7.5 sacks in the regular season isn't run of the mil production. If Ware was producing 4 or 5 sacks, playing opposite of Von Miller, then you'd have a point. But the 10 he had in 2014 and 7.5 he had in 2015, not to mention the ADDITIONAL 3.5 he had in the post season is not something you can say is only a product of Miller/Wade

FWIW, it's D, aka inaccurate information.

1. You inserted yourself into a conversation harping on a partial sentence, totally stripping it from the context, which included:

And if you say sacks aren't the only measure of a defensive player and it's not accurate to measure then by it, then your contradicting your whole point when you measure him by 'sacks'.

Thus, it's abundantly clear by actual performance, I'm not including just sacks which you continue to yap about intentionally ignoring tackles. The whole thing is comical considering I was discussing Hardy's performance not being accurately defined by sacks, which 'FWIW' I'm sure you knew, like the inaccuracy as reflected in the 'game logs'.

2. Saying Ware wasn't productive IN THE CONTEXT of his salary being too high and him get injured doesn't mean he was absolutely horrible.

2. BUT 17 TACKLES IS RUN OF THE MILL PRODUCTION. So continue to harp on sacks all you want.

3. Spencer his last four years in in Dallas averaged over 50 tackles OPPOSITE OF WARE. And Spencer's last full year, he played two less games than Ware and had 11 sacks, while Ware had 1.5 sacks and close to twenty more tackles. And the three years before that, he averaged 5 and 6 sacks a game, 1.5 sacks less than Ware the whole regular season and was still putting up 50 plus tackles a season.

So basically, what you don't call run of the mill production for Ware is basically worse than how fans defined Spencer's production full time here. Ware OPPOSITE VON MILLER in Detroit didn't sniff anywhere near fifty tackles last season. And the year before that, he was basically where his last years production was.

By your logic, Spencer deserved Ware money.

Again, even with the wrong stats:

His last season, 2 of his 7.5 sacks were in the SB and 3 of his total of 17 tackles were in that game. He played 11 games.

Like I said, his production his last year, was pretty much defined in the SB. He played on the best defense in the league and he was nowhere near the best player.

And like I said, his other season was pretty much right where he was the last two years in Dallas

Ware hasn't broken 40 tackles for four years now and he's basically been in a constant slide.

And yeah, last year's playoff run pretty much had to do with Wade's schemes and Von Miller's play..

 

[KJJ]

That's what YOU SAID. I was quoting you, meaning It's called SARCASM.. You downplayed Hardy's numbers his first two years and last year and said his season of 11 and 15 sacks was because of his team and coaches..

Do you get it now?

Your attempt at sarcasm is no better than your attempt to break my comments down. Better up your game or move on!

 

[KJJ]

Hernandez was a RISK during the draft, the Pats and Bellichek were well aware of, as I already stated. Learn your facts instead of throwing stuff at the wall..

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/...or-patriots/3HWjGvTSTOOOs5BtpvFDcJ/story.html

Take your head out of the ground I SAID he was a risk during the draft and the Pats were aware of it which is why Hernandez fell to the 4th round. They saw him as a good value in the 4th round and took the gamble. If anyone needs to learn the facts it's you try following my posts!

 

[Manwiththeplan]

FWIW, it's D, aka inaccurate information.

1. You inserted yourself into a conversation harping on a partial sentence, totally stripping it from the context, which included:



Thus, it's abundantly clear by actual performance, I'm not including just sacks which you continue to yap about intentionally ignoring tackles. The whole thing is comical considering I was discussing Hardy's performance not being accurately defined by sacks, which 'FWIW' I'm sure you knew, like the inaccuracy as reflected in the 'game logs'.

2. Saying Ware wasn't productive IN THE CONTEXT of his salary being too high and him get injured doesn't mean he was absolutely horrible.

2. BUT 17 TACKLES IS RUN OF THE MILL PRODUCTION. So continue to harp on sacks all you want.

3. Spencer his last four years in in Dallas averaged over 50 tackles OPPOSITE OF WARE. And Spencer's last full year, he played two less games than Ware and had 11 sacks, while Ware had 1.5 sacks and close to twenty more tackles. And the three years before that, he averaged 5 and 6 sacks a game, 1.5 sacks less than Ware the whole regular season and was still putting up 50 plus tackles a season.

So basically, what you don't call run of the mill production for Ware is basically worse than how fans defined Spencer's production full time here. Ware OPPOSITE VON MILLER in Detroit didn't sniff anywhere near fifty tackles last season. And the year before that, he was basically where his last years production was.

tackles are over rated for 3-4 OLBs

case in point, Von Miller, on the same defense had 35 tackles. And that's with him playing all 16 games.

Yes 17 (fwiw, people usually used combined tackles as a measure and Ware had 25 to Miller's 35) is a low number, but the scheme seems to allow the OLBs to get more pass rushing opportunities while the d-line and ILBs rack up the tackle numbers.

By your logic, Spencer deserved Ware money.

Again, even with the wrong stats:



Ware hasn't broken 40 tackles for four years now and he's basically been in a constant slide.

And yeah, last year's playoff run pretty much had to do with Wade's schemes and Von Miller's play..

Using your logic, Von Miller isn't worth that much.

He's only broken 40 tackles once in the last three years

 

[KJJ]

I definitely wouldn't give DLaw a 5 year, guaranteed contract..

I wouldn't sign 5 year guaranteed deal for any player, other than a franchise QB. Who signs players that long, guaranteed.. That's dumb.. It has nothing to do with talent of Hardy being heads above DLaw..

I'd definitely sign Hardy 3 years over DLaw and day of the week..

You're still not answering the question stop dancing around like you have ants in your pants and answer it! I'm giving you a choice you can only pick one player and it has to be a 5 year deal. if you could only pick Hardy or DLaw for the next 5 years who would you pick? Which player do you trust the most? Take your FAN cap off for a second and put your GM cap on. If you sign Hardy for the next 5 years he's going to cost you a lot more money than DLaw especially guaranteed money. Have you considered that? Are going to trust that Hardy isn't going to cause problems that will force you to cut him making you eat a lot of that guaranteed money? The problem with you and a few others is you're ignoring the off the field issues he brings.

Did you see enough from Hardy on the field last season to convince you he's worth taking a huge gamble on for the next 5 years? If it was only about what he brings to the field everyone including me would sign him over DLaw but it's the ISSUES he brings off the field that got him cut in Carolina and currently has him looking for a team. Everyone is staying away from him because no one wants to pay him a lot of money. There's the real potential for big trouble with him can you not see that?

If I'm going to put money on a player for the next 5 years I'm going to put it on a player who I can trust isn't going to create problems that would force me to cut them. There isn't a team out there that's going to lockup Hardy for the next 5 years with a lucrative deal. DLaw may never end up being a great player but he showed enough potential last season that at worst he'll end up a serviceable player who won't be a distraction.

 

[KJJ]

Opinion..

It's an opinion that carries a lot of weight. Teams don't usually trade their best pass rusher in the prime of their career unless there's character/off the field concerns. It was the concerns SF had off the field with Charles Haley that enabled the Cowboys to trade for him.

 

[KJJ]

I wouldn't sign 5 year guaranteed deal for any player, other than a franchise QB. Who signs players that long, guaranteed.. That's dumb..

Didn't say it had to be a 5 year fully guaranteed contract but some guaranteed money is going to be involved. A lot of players sign 5 year deals with a lot of guaranteed money in free agency every year. Suh signed a 6 year deal with Miami last year with $60M guaranteed. Tyron Smith signed an 8 year extension with the Cowboys. Why would you be nervous about locking up Hardy who's only 27 for 5 years? lol

 

[khiladi]

tackles are over rated for 3-4 OLBs

case in point, Von Miller, on the same defense had 35 tackles. And that's with him playing all 16 games.

Yes 17 (fwiw, people usually used combined tackles as a measure and Ware had 25 to Miller's 35) is a low number, but the scheme seems to allow the OLBs to get more pass rushing opportunities while the d-line and ILBs rack up the tackle numbers.



Using your logic, Von Miller isn't worth that much.

He's only broken 40 tackles once in the last three years

Oh, you mean scheme has something to do with it? But you said his numbers had nothing to do with Wade?

Spencer played in a 3-4 in the same position in Wade's defense in Dallas and racked up over 50 tackles in 2009, not including combined.. In his second year, playing 12 games, he still had more tackles than Ware did this year.

When Ware racks up 17 total tackles, of which 7.5 are sacks, meaning 10 solo tackles the whole regular season, that's your definition of production, justifying all that money? Count it 25, his numbers are basically right there with any average DE in Wade's scheme.

He was basically a passing rushing specialist that got contained and the second half of the SB, he returned to old form. He was decent against the Pats in the fourth quarter.

Spin it any way you want, counting the 7.5 sacks, Ware only had 10 tackles all of regular season.

And BTW, you can be sure Von Miller was getting double-teamed more as well, so there's that.

And Ware's best seasons in his prime which were basically with Wade, while posting over 15 sacks on average, his solo tackle numbers were in the 60s. So yeah, Von Miller in his prime in Wade's scheme is nowhere as good as Ware was as of yet.

Ware was nothing special last year in terms of production. Any DE could basically post those numbers.

 

[Clarkson]

It's so disappointing that despite our glaring need for a pass rusher, we won't bring Hardy back.

We paid him knowing he hadn't had any real game experience in over a year. We paid him knowing he had baggage.

And now he's a year removed from all of that with a full season under his belt and we can't be bothered because he's late for meetings. Which is something we knew about him before we signed him.

if we expected him to completely change his habits we shouldn't have ever signed him. We could've just kept Ware. And we'd have him mentoring Gregory and we'd have more flexibility in this draft.

Too bad we have such a weak head coach.

I cannot believe all the people that agree with this nonsense post.

You have no idea how he affected the locker room or what was going on. How do you figure it's Garrett's fault? Where's your evidence?

 

[Clarkson]

"But the players play hard for him."

The battle cry of Garrett supporters. It's their last hope of being remotely close to correct about him.

Where is your evidence that players don't respect Garrett?