If no Superbowl then what are thoughts of Williams deal?

[RainMan]

IMO I think Torry Holt would have been better if we wanted to win the super bowl this year, he seems like a number 2 type. But, Roy still greatly improves our chances still and we have a number 1 for when TO retires. Hes much better longterm. I also feel a lot safer if TO goes down now

Trading away big picks for Holt, a 30-year old CLEARLY on the decline, would have definitely reeked more of the "desperation" and "panic" some people want to throw on this move.

 

[RainMan]

Juke, as usual, you're on the money with your points.

And to add, since you accurately stated we just upgraded a position of need, I find it curious how I've seen some national media outlets state that we weren't even in need of receivers.

Funny, no one thought so highly of Crayton before this move.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

depends strickly on his individual play and team support.

 

[alancdc]

This isn't like a baseball trade at the deadline where the player is in the final year of a contract and you are renting him for 2 months. Why do we HAVE to win the SB this year for this to be a great move? He is 27 not 37. Don't see it so desparate. We have a young nucleus that should be great for 5 years. Let's try to win a freakin' playoff game first.

 

[DT101]

Trading away big picks for Holt, a 30-year old CLEARLY on the decline, would have definitely reeked more of the "desperation" and "panic" some people want to throw on this move.

3 picks? I think he would have come cheaper than that.

I like that we got Williams more since it will help us in the long run, I was just saying I personally think Holt would have helped us more to making the superbowl THIS season.

 

[Chuck 54]

Going to the SB, let alone winning it, is always a long shot regardless of your talent level.

I don't care whether we finish in the SB or miss the playoffs altogether...either way it's still a great deal.

First, we have no one on this team that can legitimately be called a starting #2 WR...we keep hoping, but there's no one.

Second, T.O., our #1, is 34 years old...Let's suppose he has another two years at the top of his game...what then? You don't just pull a top #1 WR out of your butt.

Right now, Roy Williams is only 27 and is a #1 WR type who already has made it as a starting caliber WR (whether he is a legitimate star or not is open to debate). The bottom line is we are a better team with TO and ROY at #1 and #2, along with Crayton at #3 where he excelled enough to get that extended contract.

T.O. is in great shape, but no one really knows how much longer he'll be at the top of his game...in another year or two, he'll still be better than many WRs in the NFL, but like Jerry Rice, he may become more of a possession receiver if he keeps playing. Either way, we now have a guy on the roster who can not only be our future #1 WR, but we also have a guy who can keep our offense from going totally in the tank if T.O. as much as pulls a hamstring or worse.

We now have a nucleus of Romo, Witten, and RoyW., all 27 and under contract...that's a foundation for the next 4-5 years that we can continue to build around.

We didn't bring in Roy Williams just for this year's SB run...if we'd done that, I would have objected to giving anything more than a 2nd round pick. He's here for the long haul, and in another year or two, that contract won't even be among the highest. Plus, Roy Williams is a top character guy...you never have enough talented players who warrant that adjective.

Let's also remember than we could use a #1 and possibly the #3 to position ourselves for one of the top WRs in the upcoming draft...however, that doesn't help us this year, and there's never a guarantee with first round WRs.

I am very happy with this move, and it has nothing to do with the SB.

 

[tyke1doe]

On ESPN's 1st and 10, Skip Bayless supported the move and said that if Dallas won the Superbowl, they(Dallas) didn't overpay for Roy Williams. Skip also said Roy Williams improves Dallas chances of getting to the Superbowl and is a tougher defensive assignment than TO. Skip didn't really comment if the trade was worth it if we didn't appear in the Superbowl so let me ask you then:

If Dallas fails to appear in the Superbowl, does your opinion change about the trade? Why or Why not

This year? No.

If the Cowboys don't get to the Super Bowl with Roy Williams as a Cowboy? Yes.

But that could be said about any player we picked or traded for. I don't understand why there's this different standard for the Cowboys.

The same can be said for ...

Chris Chambers
Randy Moss
Jeremy Shockey
Jason Taylor
Jared Allen

 

[big dog cowboy]

Unless Williams can play defense, Bayless (as usual) is off base.

 

[Disturbed]

Going to the SB, let alone winning it, is always a long shot regardless of your talent level.

I don't care whether we finish in the SB or miss the playoffs altogether...either way it's still a great deal.

First, we have no one on this team that can legitimately be called a starting #2 WR...we keep hoping, but there's no one.

Second, T.O., our #1, is 34 years old...Let's suppose he has another two years at the top of his game...what then? You don't just pull a top #1 WR out of your butt.

Right now, Roy Williams is only 27 and is a #1 WR type who already has made it as a starting caliber WR (whether he is a legitimate star or not is open to debate). The bottom line is we are a better team with TO and ROY at #1 and #2, along with Crayton at #3 where he excelled enough to get that extended contract.

T.O. is in great shape, but no one really knows how much longer he'll be at the top of his game...in another year or two, he'll still be better than many WRs in the NFL, but like Jerry Rice, he may become more of a possession receiver if he keeps playing. Either way, we now have a guy on the roster who can not only be our future #1 WR, but we also have a guy who can keep our offense from going totally in the tank if T.O. as much as pulls a hamstring or worse.

We now have a nucleus of Romo, Witten, and RoyW., all 27 and under contract...that's a foundation for the next 4-5 years that we can continue to build around.

We didn't bring in Roy Williams just for this year's SB run...if we'd done that, I would have objected to giving anything more than a 2nd round pick. He's here for the long haul, and in another year or two, that contract won't even be among the highest. Plus, Roy Williams is a top character guy...you never have enough talented players who warrant that adjective.

Let's also remember than we could use a #1 and possibly the #3 to position ourselves for one of the top WRs in the upcoming draft...however, that doesn't help us this year, and there's never a guarantee with first round WRs.

I am very happy with this move, and it has nothing to do with the SB.

There have been a lot of posts on this subject, but this is the best summary I have read. Great Post.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

On ESPN's 1st and 10, Skip Bayless supported the move and said that if Dallas won the Superbowl, they(Dallas) didn't overpay for Roy Williams. Skip also said Roy Williams improves Dallas chances of getting to the Superbowl and is a tougher defensive assignment than TO. Skip didn't really comment if the trade was worth it if we didn't appear in the Superbowl so let me ask you then:

If Dallas fails to appear in the Superbowl, does your opinion change about the trade? Why or Why not

Still a good deal cause he's an upgrade over what we had for the #2 spot and he can be a #1 option at WR should TO get injuried or when he eventually retires.

The move is good for us for more than just this year.