If we do sell the farm for Wentz...

[canters]

We aren't trading up for anyone.

I agree. If anything we trade down a few spots, pick up a late 2 or early 3, take QB Lynch or a pass rusher in round 1. Then with 3 picks in rounds 2 and 3, we get 3 starters hopefully- a RB, a CB and a LB.

 

[CATCH17]

They sell out for Wentz and that's the final nail in the coffin for romo getting a ring in dallas. Most likely wasn't happening anyway but this would make it for sure.

This draft will never be the difference between us getting a superbowl or not in the Romo era.

 

[ElGatoGrande]

I don't disagree that this might be our best and last chance to address the QB position before Romo retires. But we can easily stay put or even trade back and get one of the top 3 QBs. My point was more about the people who think there's only one QB worth drafting and that we should do whatever it takes to get him. My two questions are 1) is he really that much better than the other two QBs, and 2) how are we gonna build a quality team around him and Romo if we don't have any draft picks or money for free agents?

Whats the cost of moving up 3 picks? Our first, a second and a fourth? I dont see the Cowboys moving up for Wentz but it wouldnt be all that crippling would it?

 

[jnday]

I think this is the first post I've seen where someone's given up on more than one season at once. I mean, not counting the threads where people are giving up on the Cowboys forever.

I am being realistic by saying that Romo's injuries and age will make it all but impossible to get him s Super Bowl. I certainly don't want the team to sacrifice the future just to get Romo a Super Bowl. Moves like that would hurt the team and I totally disagree with hurting the team to make one player happy.

 

[jnday]

I don't see what Wentz has accomplished for us to sell the farm for him. If Romo goes out, we'll likely be right in another position to draft a qb high, so there's no reason to go crazy and give up all of these picks to get a qb this time around.

It all depends on the scouts and coaches and their opinion of Wentz. There are no Andrew Luck types coming down the pipes, so why wait if you think Wentz is the future franchise QB for this team. By the way, picking a QB is going to be cheaper now than any time in the future . I don't expect to draft this high again for several years.

 

[tyke1doe]

I would not opposed to taking Wentz at #4, seeing how he is the consensus best quarterback in this draft. But I would be opposed to jumping up to get him. Why?

I don't see the same pedigree with him compared to other No. 1 quarterbacks. Most, if not all, of the No. 1 quarterbacks picked at the very top of the draft have come from big-time schools. Cam Newton (Auburn), Jameis Winston (Florida State), Peyton Manning (Tennessee), Troy Aikman (UCLA), John Elway (Stanford), Andrew Luck (Stanford), Carson Palmer (USC), etc.

I think Wentz can be very good, but it's going to take him a while to adjust. And for that reason, I'm hesitate to jump up to take him.

And, really, the more I think about it, the less confident I am the Cowboys will take a quarterback at #4. We're committed to Romo, and the last thing Jerry wants is a quarterback controversy. And if we pick a quarterback at #4, there's pressure to play him early. And woe to the Cowboys and Romo if we start of shaky, start to resemble the Cowboys of 2015 and the front office and coaches feel pressured - by the fans - to start a green-as-grass quarterback who needs to sit on the bench for at least two years.

 

[DFWJC]

The bigger question is what will it cost in the future to get the top QB? The cost is high from 4 but would be much higher from the middle of the round. At some point very soon we have to get a QB and the cost, while high, may never be cheaper

It's a legit question, and the honest answer is that nobody in this forum knows if it'll more expensive or not.

Pre-draft, Wentz and Goff are rated about where guys normally taken in the mid to late 1st round are ranked. Maybe they'll be better than that, maybe worse.
And then there's the scenario where we get Lynch late in the 1st this year and ends up better than both of them.
We really just don't know.

I wouldn't let unknown paralyze me from making the move though....if they feel strongly enough about it.

 

[LandryFan]

I agree that you do whatever it takes to get a franchise QB. I won't get into whether or not I think Wentz is supremely better than Goff or Lynch to justify mortgaging the short-term to get him. For the sake of this thread, let's just assume we did trade away a lot to move up to get Wentz. The asking price will probably be similar to what the Skins gave up to get RG3. Let's just say we trade away multiple early picks from multiple future years.

Then the question is, now that we've found our future franchise QB, how do we build a quality team around him? We've seen with Romo that a QB can't do it all by himself. Our best chance at a Super Bowl is still with Romo, but if we don't have any draft picks or money to sign free agents for the remainder of Romo's career, how do we give him a chance to compete for a Super Bowl before he retires? And how do we build a quality team around Wentz for time when he takes over?

So, we won't have any high draft picks for the remainder of Romo's career and possibly the beginning of Wentz's career. We also won't have any money to sign any quality free agents since 1) we've been wary ever since signing guys to bad deals (see Carr), and 2) we need to save all the money we can to resign a bunch of young guys who play expensive positions like OL Frederick, OL Martin, OL Collins, DE Lawrence, DB Jones, and QB Wentz (he'll be needing a new contract around the time he takes over).

And that's assuming Wentz is worth it. I'm not even considering if he's a bust. You need an elite QB in today's NFL, but you also need to build a quality team around them. How do we build a quality team around Romo and Wentz with no draft picks for the next few years and no money for free agents?

A couple of things I disagree with here...One, we wouldn't give up RG3-type compensation for a shot at Wentz. That's once-in-a-generation type of stupidity right there and Washington has fulfilled the generational quota. Two, I don't get why, even if the team "gave up the farm" to get Wentz, that they would have no money to spend elsewhere. For one thing, Wentz would cost in the ball park of $6M/year which, if he's works out to be a franchise QB, is a steal. $6M is not a lot of money in the NFL these days. For another, if we gave up the farm to the extent that you stated it would take to trade up for him (three firsts and a second), we won't have to worry about signing future first round picks for at least a couple of years...that's money not spent that can be spent elsewhere. Bottom line, he would have no negative impact on the team's salary cap in the short run (first 5 years) and the team would have plenty of money to spend in free agency (or wherever they desire).
Having said all of that, if this team selects Wentz (or Goff), it'll be at the fourth slot in the first round of the draft. The way this team is run now, the big trade up deals are pretty much a thing of the past. Of course, I don't know any more about anything than anybody else, so this is all just my amateur opinion.

 

[DFWJC]

Just a few current NFL starters

Rodgers was drafted 24th
Brees was drafted 31st
Wilson was drafted 75th
Roethlisberger was drafted 11th
Brady was drafted 199th
Romo was undrafted
Flacco was drafted 18th
Carr was drafted 36th
Bridgewater was drafted 32nd
Dalton was drafted 35th

and so on

Now there there are plenty of early (top 5) 1st rounders starting (Palmer, Eli, Luck, etc) but there are several (the majority?) of very good to great ones that were taken much later.

Any argument that they must be in the top 5 and that this is our only or best chance to get one is uninformed.

 

[garyv]

I say we remain at pick 4 and let the cards fall in place. If we want a QB then one of either Wentz or Goff will be there for us. I still think Jerry wants Ramsey and is hoping someone else trades up to #1 to take the QB. San Diego would be all over Tunsel if he falls to them.

Totally Agree with you.....you don't need to trade up your already sitting at #4 and two of four players are Wentz and Goff. It would
be stupid to give up picks. I think we all are pretty sure Tunsil is going #1 so in retrospect that leaves 3 picks with Wentz and Goff
as two of them. If something crazy happens and a team trades up and your picking 4th and both QB's are gone than no biggie.
Write the name Jalen Ramsey down and turn in the card many Draft Experts say hes the top prospect in this Draft. You can always
take Paxton Lynch with a move up from #34 if necessary.

 

[Richmond Cowboy]

Why don't we build around Romo and once he retires/declines and we suck again we can get a QB with that high pick?

 

[garyv]

Whats the cost of moving up 3 picks? Our first, a second and a fourth? I dont see the Cowboys moving up for Wentz but it wouldnt be all that crippling would it?

We need to keep that 2nd Rounder in this Draft that's a Starter on the DL or Secondary. There's no way in hell
I would give anybody my #34 picks. Its almost like having 2 1st Rounders this year we really need to 2 to 3 new
Starters to plug and play.

 

[StarBoyz83]

This draft will never be the difference between us getting a superbowl or not in the Romo era.

The draft is never the difference until down the road but when Dallas doesn't fill holes via fa that's all your left with.

 

[KB1122]

A couple of things I disagree with here...One, we wouldn't give up RG3-type compensation for a shot at Wentz. That's once-in-a-generation type of stupidity there and Washington has fulfilled the generational quota in that area.

I think we need to get over the idea that the RGIII trade was stupid. It didn't work out. But look at the quarterbacks that the Skins have had over the past 20 years. They had been in a cycle of signing other people's castoffs or failing with mid-to-late-first-rounders. They had a bad habit of going 5-11 or 6-10 with veteran has-beens and missing the top 5. It was aggressive. It didn't work in the end. But I wouldn't call it stupid.

Two, I don't get why, even if the team "gave up the farm" to get Wentz, that they would have no money to spend elsewhere. For one thing, Wentz would cost in the ball park of $6M/year which, if he's works out to be a franchise QB, is a steal. $6M is not a lot of money in the NFL these days. For another, if we gave up the farm to the extent that you stated it would take to trade up for him (three firsts and a second), we won't have to worry about signing future first round picks for at least a couple of years...that's money not spent. Bottom line, he would have no negative impact on the team's salary cap in the short run (first 5 years) and the team would have plenty of money to spend elsewhere.
Having said all of that, if this team selects Wentz (or Goff), it'll be at the fourth slot in the first round of the draft. The way this team is run now, the big trade up deals are pretty much a thing of the past. Of course, I don't know any more about anything than anybody else, so this is all just my amateur opinion.

Agree.

 

[KB1122]

Why don't we build around Romo and once he retires/declines and we suck again we can get a QB with that high pick?

1) I don't want to suck again if we don't need to.
2) That could well be this coming season.

 

[Idgit]

The draft is never the difference until down the road but when Dallas doesn't fill holes via fa that's all your left with.

How is the draft never a difference until down the road again now? Who decided this, and why does it keep getting repeated?

 

[LandryFan]

I think we need to get over the idea that the RGIII trade was stupid. It didn't work out. But look at the quarterbacks that the Skins have had over the past 20 years. They had been in a cycle of signing other people's castoffs or failing with mid-to-late-first-rounders. They had a bad habit of going 5-11 or 6-10 with veteran has-beens and missing the top 5. It was aggressive. It didn't work in the end. But I wouldn't call it stupid.



Agree.

You're certainly entitled to get over the idea that the RG3 trade was stupid (or to think that it was not stupid to begin with), but that deal will go down as one of the all time worst trades in NFL history, IMO. If you don't think giving up three firsts and a second to move up four spots in the draft for a player that had never played a down in the NFL was stupid, then that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. I just strongly disagree. And actually, there's nothing to "get over" from. It wasn't my team that made that deal. I'm actually thrilled that it took place.

 

[Denim Chicken]

How is the draft never a difference until down the road again now? Who decided this, and why does it keep getting repeated?

What rookie (or rookies) pushed a team to the championship? An impact rookie can help, but if you do not have a fundamentally sound team one good draft is not going to make the difference.

 

[StarBoyz83]

How is the draft never a difference until down the road again now? Who decided this, and why does it keep getting repeated?

How many rookies come in and have a big impact? Dallas will take a DE at 4 since there is a huge hole there. He'll get 2 sacks if he's lucky. Rbs and wrs and ol we can have huge impacts but not usually defensive players.

 

[DFWJC]

Whats the cost of moving up 3 picks? Our first, a second and a fourth? I dont see the Cowboys moving up for Wentz but it wouldnt be all that crippling would it?

The draft charts aren't perfect but they are about 95% accurate on average
so

3000 for 1st overall

1800 = our 1st
560 = our 2nd
245 = our 3rd
420 = next year's 1st (usually valued at mid 2nd rounder for present year)

that equals 3025...so maybe we get them to throw in a 6th