I have a good feeling about our O-line next year

[TheMarathonContinues]

First off, BPA works when all other rules are dysfunctional...the buck doesn't stop beyond. No matter how many excuses are drubbed up.

 

[CCBoy]

Google up a tutorial on drafting principles...and learn what BPA is.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Google up a tutorial on drafting principles...and learn what BPA is.

How about you goggle up on how smart or silly it is to use the #4 pick on a left tackle when you already have the best one in the league and you just invested a 3rd round pick on a right tackle last season lol.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I like our RB corp right now if Turbin keeps it up and Dunbar comes back healthy and McFadden stays healthy.

McFadden was extremely effective as the starter, especially when they got his carries to 15-20 a game with Turbine getting 5-10 carries.

With Turbin, he played the role well last year as he could get right into the game and get going instead of having to get some carries to get in a rhythm.

And Dunbar is a great receiving threat that can be inserted on 1st and 2nd down, get some mismatches and get 3-5 carries and be very effective.

Part of the reason why I want Lynch is that we can run some read option with him and that will make things even more difficult for opposing defenses and help the running game even more.






YR

Sorry but that reads too much like wishcasting. I liked our QB situation last year if Romo wouldve stayed healthy.

Dunbar is damaged goods, an undersized RB who has gotten hurt every year. Turbin is a FA. DMC is serviceable and an injury risk.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

He's been hurt, twice.

By that same token we should have gotten rid of Sean Lee, Tyrone Crawford, DeMarcus Lawrence, Romo and Dez a long time ago.

YR

Apples to apples please.

Sean Lee finished last year and went to Hawaii. Crawford and Lawrence finished the year. Dez is a gratuitous appeal to recency bias. Romo injury risk needs to be hedged and he is infinitely harder to replace.

When has Dunbar ever done that? He was on IR this year and the year before. He ended 2013 on IR as well.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Dunbar is damaged goods, an undersized RB who has gotten hurt every year. Turbin is a FA. DMC is serviceable and an injury risk.

Dunbar did not get hurt in 2014.

DMC was one of the best RB's in the league when he started.

I don't care if Turbin is a FA. He has value and if we pay him in accordance to that value, we're in good shape.

The running game wasn't our issue last year or the year before or even the year before that. We still have far bigger holes that need to be filled and drafting Ezekial Elliot at #4 is a bad move when you have Myles Jack, three QB's and Jalen Ramsey likely available that are going to have a bigger impact either now or in the future compared to what we have now...or in the future.

Not once did I ever come away thinking the Cowboys were losing because of the running game. Instead, they lost because they didn't have a QB after Romo got hurt and they are still questionable on defense with a lousy secondary. In fact, I often thought about how productive our running game was despite having no QB, no Dez and going thru 173 #2 tailbacks with no Dunbar until we found the right guy at the 2-spot in Turbin.





YR

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Dunbar did not get hurt in 2014.

DMC was one of the best RB's in the league when he started.

I don't care if Turbin is a FA. He has value and if we pay him in accordance to that value, we're in good shape.

The running game wasn't our issue last year or the year before or even the year before that. We still have far bigger holes that need to be filled and drafting Ezekial Elliot at #4 is a bad move when you have Myles Jack, three QB's and Jalen Ramsey likely available that are going to have a bigger impact either now or in the future compared to what we have now...or in the future.

Not once did I ever come away thinking the Cowboys were losing because of the running game. Instead, they lost because they didn't have a QB after Romo got hurt and they are still questionable on defense with a lousy secondary. In fact, I often thought about how productive our running game was despite having no QB, no Dez and going thru 173 #2 tailbacks with no Dunbar until we found the right guy at the 2-spot in Turbin.





YR

Youre right, in his 20 carries I missed him even being out there.

As compelling as your 'feelings' are I'll pass on it being persuasive. If you want to play reductio ad absurdum and try to find something to blame then go ahead. I personally think it all counts even the small stuff.

Our inability to run the ball has effected us in short yardage, in the red zone, and in our ability to close out games. Is it as important as the passing game? No but we don't play like the rest of the passing league.

If you think DMC, Dunbar, and a guy who is a FA is good stable then we are going to have to agree to disagree. I want to see an explosive RB behind this line. DMC lacks balance. Dunbar lacks power and gets hurt. Turbin is marginal.

 

[CCBoy]

How about you goggle up on how smart or silly it is to use the #4 pick on a left tackle when you already have the best one in the league and you just invested a 3rd round pick on a right tackle last season lol.

If you are going to play the role of a preppie, you haven't earned your side of a discussion.

First, BPA is taking the very best player on your board, irrespective of position. That has been the standard for all Dallas drafts for the past six seasons at least.

2nd, teams shoot for blue chippers first, and THEN starters in the first round.

As to offensive line position, without a doubt, right tackle is the weakest position projecting into the future. That doesn't mean that Doug Free and Chaz Green are without value. The drafting of Tunsil, not only BPA, would give early career contracts through the starters on the offensive line, and make cap management a lot easier with the quality that would be established. Byron Smith played right tackle starting out, and it would have to be seen who was the best left tackle between the two. Probably, with the salary already in place with Smith, Tunsil would be started at right tackle.

This would then push the depth at offensive line, to one of the very top in the NFL. Depth would then be provided by OT Free, OT/G Green, G Ronald Leary, and possibly the resigning of C/G Mackenzy Bernadeau. That would provide very quality depth, and good game day reserves.

It also would expand the ability to run to both sides of the ball, equally...and even better pass protection.

No, that would be a very smart move by Dallas...

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Youre right, in his 20 carries I missed him even being out there.

As compelling as your 'feelings' are I'll pass on it being persuasive. If you want to play reductio ad absurdum and try to find something to blame then go ahead. I personally think it all counts even the small stuff.

I don't think McFadden being a top-3 RB when he started this year is finding something to blame.

Our inability to run the ball has effected us in short yardage, in the red zone, and in our ability to close out games. Is it as important as the passing game? No but we don't play like the rest of the passing league.

We don't have an inability to run the ball. Running the ball wasn't a problem last year. Even in the short yardage, we had a problem with no threat of a pass and bad playcalling. And Ezekial Elliott wouldn't change that.

If you think DMC, Dunbar, and a guy who is a FA is good stable then we are going to have to agree to disagree. I want to see an explosive RB behind this line. DMC lacks balance. Dunbar lacks power and gets hurt. Turbin is marginal.

I want to look at our priorities and drafting Elliott at #4 would be flat-out stupid. Nobody said that they don't want to see an explosive RB. I would be more than happy with DMC's production this year as a starter (without a passing game as well) and the #3 RB isn't typically there to 'run with power.' I'd rather have a #3 RB that can be a factor in the passing game which Dunbar was last season. And your #2 RB better know how to play ST and better know how to get into a groove with no carries which Turbin did last year.

This isn't 1975 anymore. Your RB is only going to provide you with so much and you had better have a QB that can pass effectively and some WR's who can catch it.





YR

 

[Irvin88_4life]

I don't think McFadden being a top-3 RB when he started this year is finding something to blame.



We don't have an inability to run the ball. Running the ball wasn't a problem last year. Even in the short yardage, we had a problem with no threat of a pass and bad playcalling. And Ezekial Elliott wouldn't change that.



I want to look at our priorities and drafting Elliott at #4 would be flat-out stupid. Nobody said that they don't want to see an explosive RB. I would be more than happy with DMC's production this year as a starter (without a passing game as well) and the #3 RB isn't typically there to 'run with power.' I'd rather have a #3 RB that can be a factor in the passing game which Dunbar was last season. And your #2 RB better know how to play ST and better know how to get into a groove with no carries which Turbin did last year.

This isn't 1975 anymore. Your RB is only going to provide you with so much and you had better have a QB that can pass effectively and some WR's who can catch it.





YR

Denver's QB didn't provide anything and they won a superbowl. Both teams in the superbowl can run the ball and play defense. .....seems old school to me

 

[Oh_Canada]

Wow-what a reach this thread is.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

If you are going to play the role of a preppie, you haven't earned your side of a discussion.

First, BPA is taking the very best player on your board, irrespective of position. That has been the standard for all Dallas drafts for the past six seasons at least.

2nd, teams shoot for blue chippers first, and THEN starters in the first round.

As to offensive line position, without a doubt, right tackle is the weakest position projecting into the future. That doesn't mean that Doug Free and Chaz Green are without value. The drafting of Tunsil, not only BPA, would give early career contracts through the starters on the offensive line, and make cap management a lot easier with the quality that would be established. Byron Smith played right tackle starting out, and it would have to be seen who was the best left tackle between the two. Probably, with the salary already in place with Smith, Tunsil would be started at right tackle.

This would then push the depth at offensive line, to one of the very top in the NFL. Depth would then be provided by OT Free, OT/G Green, G Ronald Leary, and possibly the resigning of C/G Mackenzy Bernadeau. That would provide very quality depth, and good game day reserves.

It also would expand the ability to run to both sides of the ball, equally...and even better pass protection.

No, that would be a very smart move by Dallas...

First off, I wasn't take the "preppie role" or whatever you mean by that. You replied with a condescending tone and I replied back with one.
And if you're looking for depth you go and get depth in free agency. ESPECIALLY at right tackle. You don't do that with the the #4 overall pick in the draft.
What point is it having a great offensive line when the line on the other side of the ball sucks or the linebackers aren't good or the secondary isn't good? We had the best offensive line in the league two years ago.

I'm for BPA, but i'm not taking a tight end in the first round and i'm surely not taking a offensive linemen either. And the Cowboys had no choice but to take BPA in recent years because 1) they were a 8-8 middle of the pack team so their draft picks were just decent and 2) they had so many holes to fill they could pick anyone. But even then its been silly. Escobar should not have been our 2nd round pick. Whether you were doing BPA or not.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I don't think McFadden being a top-3 RB when he started this year is finding something to blame.



We don't have an inability to run the ball. Running the ball wasn't a problem last year. Even in the short yardage, we had a problem with no threat of a pass and bad playcalling. And Ezekial Elliott wouldn't change that.



I want to look at our priorities and drafting Elliott at #4 would be flat-out stupid. Nobody said that they don't want to see an explosive RB. I would be more than happy with DMC's production this year as a starter (without a passing game as well) and the #3 RB isn't typically there to 'run with power.' I'd rather have a #3 RB that can be a factor in the passing game which Dunbar was last season. And your #2 RB better know how to play ST and better know how to get into a groove with no carries which Turbin did last year.

This isn't 1975 anymore. Your RB is only going to provide you with so much and you had better have a QB that can pass effectively and some WR's who can catch it.





YR

Yeah Elliot is not going off that board top 10. The league is just too afraid to invest in these guys and Demarco Murray didn't make that any better last season after his year. If the Cowboys want Elliot it should come in a trade down or a trade up from the 2nd. But if it came at #4......that's terrible trade value and you've ruined your whole draft.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Denver's QB didn't provide anything and they won a superbowl. Both teams in the superbowl can run the ball and play defense. .....seems old school to me

And how many times has a team like Denver occurred in the past 15 years?




YR

 

[viman96]

I want defense and lots of it.

 

[Nightman]

I like our RB corp right now if Turbin keeps it up and Dunbar comes back healthy and McFadden stays healthy.

McFadden was extremely effective as the starter, especially when they got his carries to 15-20 a game with Turbine getting 5-10 carries.

With Turbin, he played the role well last year as he could get right into the game and get going instead of having to get some carries to get in a rhythm.

And Dunbar is a great receiving threat that can be inserted on 1st and 2nd down, get some mismatches and get 3-5 carries and be very effective.

Part of the reason why I want Lynch is that we can run some read option with him and that will make things even more difficult for opposing defenses and help the running game even more.

Dunbar and Turbin are FAs. The only RBs under contract are McFadden, Malena and RSmith.

Turbin is a JAG and Dunbar is a 3rd down pass catcher.

We desperately need some upgrades.

I will take a LMiller or DMartin and/or a Draft pick in the first 3-4 rounds.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Dunbar and Turbin are FAs. The only RBs under contract are McFadden, Malena and RSmith.

Turbin is a JAG and Dunbar is a 3rd down pass catcher.

We desperately need some upgrades.

I will take a LMiller or DMartin and/or a Draft pick in the first 3-4 rounds.

You can easily re-sign Dunbar and Turbin and for a cheaper cost.

Miller would have to be the #1 back at the price he's going to get paid and DMC isn't a #2 back. He needs some carries to get going. And Dunbar was an extremely effective pass receiver last season. Especially since he could now lineup as create bad mismatches. Those types of RB's just don't grow on trees.





YR

 

[Stash]

Here's a funny exericse:

Enter Lance Dunbar's name in Google and take a look at the very first word that comes up next.

Know what that word is?

Injury!

Can't make this stuff up!

 

[Nightman]

You can easily re-sign Dunbar and Turbin and for a cheaper cost.

Miller would have to be the #1 back at the price he's going to get paid and DMC isn't a #2 back. He needs some carries to get going. And Dunbar was an extremely effective pass receiver last season. Especially since he could now lineup as create bad mismatches. Those types of RB's just don't grow on trees.





YR

If you go 1.5m on Dunbar and 1m on Turbin that isn't peanuts.

I would rather go with LMiller, a draft pick and a street FA like Turbin and CMike last year.

 

[CCBoy]

First off, I wasn't take the "preppie role" or whatever you mean by that. You replied with a condescending tone and I replied back with one.
And if you're looking for depth you go and get depth in free agency. ESPECIALLY at right tackle. You don't do that with the the #4 overall pick in the draft.
What point is it having a great offensive line when the line on the other side of the ball sucks or the linebackers aren't good or the secondary isn't good? We had the best offensive line in the league two years ago.

I'm for BPA, but i'm not taking a tight end in the first round and i'm surely not taking a offensive linemen either. And the Cowboys had no choice but to take BPA in recent years because 1) they were a 8-8 middle of the pack team so their draft picks were just decent and 2) they had so many holes to fill they could pick anyone. But even then its been silly. Escobar should not have been our 2nd round pick. Whether you were doing BPA or not.

Straight ahead, guy...adelante. No I wasn't first condescending...just implying that listening skills or even opening up to what someone else was pointing out, meant little to you, when you ignored basic premise and building from there.

Preppie is a term of someone youthful who has channel vision.

There is very little listening to what is given you and you need to expand your own references.

One doesn't go to free agency to spend a lot of money as a way to just build depth. If great depth is a result of BPA, then great...but don't knee jerk to appear right and offer something that is much less than a credable choice.

You say that BPA is understood, and go right back to positional preference.

I'll just rest your case right here...good night.

Tight end in the top 5...(chuckling loudly to self)