I'm thinking about carrying 4 quarterbacks

[Stash]

A recent mailbag question from Bob Sturm:

Q: There's a lot of talk about Manziel and RG3, but isn't Colt McCoy really the perfect back up for Romo? Intelligent, prepared, and can run the same offense as Tony. JAllen

I dont hate this idea. He is also unrestricted and would sort of be a more capable version of Kellen Moore if he needed to play. He made $1.5 million last year, but I assume is more than welcome back in Washington to backup Kirk Cousins if he should want to remain. I am cautious to entertain every single former Big 12 South player because they are all quite popular in these parts, but the 29-year old McCoy certainly knows his role and also has proven capable in small doses to play QB. In fact, a few times in Arlington, to be fair.

Hopefully he's on the team's radar and some momentum is growing!

 

[TheDude]

McCoy attempted 11 passes this season. How does that give anyone the impression he is coming into his own?

They were all against dallas and included a 71yd TD against that top 2 secondary

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I understand the interest in carrying 4 QB's, I just don't see it happening. Even going from 2 to 3 QBs on the 53 is a huge step for this club.

 

[NumOneQB]

What's with everyone's infatuation with old Texas & aTm qb's? Did any of you guys watch college football games that didn't include teams from Austin or College Station?

 

[robjay04]

Not even a remote possibility we will even consider carrying four QBs. This season we were placing defensive linemen on the IR for minor injuries just to open up a roster spot.

I could see 3...a rookie, a veteran and Romo. I am sure the team would prefer to only carry 2 but after the disaster of this season, 3 would be necessity.

 

[Stash]

Not even a remote possibility we will even consider carrying four QBs. This season we were placing defensive linemen on the IR for minor injuries just to open up a roster spot.

I could see 3...a rookie, a veteran and Romo. I am sure the team would prefer to only carry 2 but after the disaster of this season, 3 would be necessity.

And yet, it was more than a "remote possibility" that the team kept not only 4 running backs, but 4 tight ends last year?

If they can dedicate that amount of roster spots to those positions, why couldn't they keep 4 at the league's most valuable position? And why wouldn't you do everything in your power to ensure that you never see the lack of preparation at quarterback that you had in 2015?

 

[robjay04]

And yet, it was more than a "remote possibility" that the team kept not only 4 running backs, but 4 tight ends last year?

If they can dedicate that amount of roster spots to those positions, why couldn't they keep 4 at the league's most valuable position? And why wouldn't you do everything in your power to ensure that you never see the lack of preparation at quarterback that you had in 2015?

Well tight ends and running backs play special teams, they can also rotate in and out in the same game and see the field at the same time.

I would bet no team in the history of the league has ever carried four quarterbacks. It's a waste of a roster spot and unnecessary. We need a starter, a veteran with upside and a prospect. Maybe hold an extra player on our practice squad but that's it.

 

[Stash]

Well tight ends and running backs play special teams, they can also rotate in and out in the same game and see the field at the same time.

Or they can be inactive for half of the season or even virtually all of it?

I would bet no team in the history of the league has ever carried four quarterbacks. It's a waste of a roster spot and unnecessary. We need a starter, a veteran with upside and a prospect. Maybe hold an extra player on our practice squad but that's it.

You would be 0-2. The Jets just did it in 2013.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/08/31/jets-trim-roster-to-53-keep-four-quarterbacks/

 

[robjay04]

Or they can be inactive for half of the season or even virtually all of it?

3 out of 4 of our RBs/TEs seen playing time. All of the running backs eventually seen the field. At the time, I believe one of our TEs were injured which forced us to keep 4. Also, RB is one of the most injury prone positions in the league so it makes more sense to keep 4.

Making that point further invalidates your argument. You complain about RBs/TEs not being active or playing but you want to keep 4 QBs where if everything goes right...2 of the players will be inactive every week of the season and nobody will play but Romo.

You would be 0-2. The Jets just did it in 2013.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/08/31/jets-trim-roster-to-53-keep-four-quarterbacks/

Okay, we should copy the Jets QB plans. The Jets also did not have a starting caliber QB that season so they were trying to see what sticks. I am also betting the Jets played around with that 4th QB position. Your original post is saying we should get Colt McCoy and JF...if we go that route, we get one or the other. If we don't trust Manziel enough to be a backup then he shouldn't be on the team. If we are spending a first or a second QB and we don't trust him enough to be higher than 4th on the depth chart...he shouldn't be on the team.

No offense to your post but maybe I should reclarify myself...No team, that I know of, has ever kept 4 QBs when they had an established franchise QB with a 100 million dollar contract on their roster. Sure Romo has injury concerns but the facts are...he has had one season out of the past five where he has missed more than one game. His contract also guarantees he will be on the roster for two more seasons unless he retires.

We don't need to keep 4 assuming he will get hurt. We don't need to keep 4 QBs hoping one can take over in 2-4 seasons. We do double up with a veteran with upside and a rookie though.

 

[Stash]

3 out of 4 of our RBs/TEs seen playing time. All of the running backs eventually seen the field. At the time, I believe one of our TEs were injured which forced us to keep 4. Also, RB is one of the most injury prone positions in the league so it makes more sense to keep 4.

Making that point further invalidates your argument. You complain about RBs/TEs not being active or playing but you want to keep 4 QBs where if everything goes right...2 of the players will be inactive every week of the season and nobody will play but Romo.

And if that's the case? Great! That would mean that the team has its' best player on the field, unlike 2015. But, if not, they're not in the same mess they were during this 4-12 nightmare.

Okay, we should copy the Jets QB plans. The Jets also did not have a starting caliber QB that season so they were trying to see what sticks. I am also betting the Jets played around with that 4th QB position. Your original post is saying we should get Colt McCoy and JF...if we go that route, we get one or the other. If we don't trust Manziel enough to be a backup then he shouldn't be on the team. If we are spending a first or a second QB and we don't trust him enough to be higher than 4th on the depth chart...he shouldn't be on the team.

It has zero to do wth the Jets, but I think you already know that. You "bet" that no team has ever kept four quarterbacks. And you lost that "bet". My thinking is that if they (Jerry) were insistent on getting Manziel, that they need to protect themselves in case he screws up and they have to cut bait. If they don't do that, low risk then becomes high risk, because you don't have an alternative. As for a rookie? I think the best case scenario for the team long term is to teach him and bring him along slowly, making sure he's prepared when his time comes.

No offense to your post but maybe I should reclarify myself...No team, that I know of, has ever kept 4 QBs when they had an established franchise QB with a 100 million dollar contract on their roster. Sure Romo has injury concerns but the facts are...he has had one season out of the past five where he has missed more than one game. His contract also guarantees he will be on the roster for two more seasons unless he retires.

Looks like you now want to change the conditions of your "bet" to me, having it shown to be wrong. But it's not worth continuing that conversation. Teams have obviously done it before.

We don't need to keep 4 assuming he will get hurt. We don't need to keep 4 QBs hoping one can take over in 2-4 seasons. We do double up with a veteran with upside and a rookie though.

My point is that if Jerry Jones is insistent on acquiring Manziel, the team needs a fourth option. If they don't, a reliable backup like McCoy is just fine in my book, as is drafting a QB at #4 overall, if they feel that quarterback has what it takes to lead this franchise in the future.

 

[robjay04]

And if that's the case? Great! That would mean that the team has its' best player on the field, unlike 2015. But, if not, they're not in the same mess they were during this 4-12 nightmare.




It has zero to do wth the Jets, but I think you already know that. You "bet" that no team has ever kept four quarterbacks. And you lost that "bet". My thinking is that if they (Jerry) were insistent on getting Manziel, that they need to protect themselves in case he screws up and they have to cut bait. If they don't do that, low risk then becomes high risk, because you don't have an alternative. As for a rookie? I think the best case scenario for the team long term is to teach him and bring him along slowly, making sure he's prepared when his time comes.



Looks like you now want to change the conditions of your "bet" to me, having it shown to be wrong. But it's not worth continuing that conversation. Teams have obviously done it before.



My point is that if Jerry Jones is insistent on acquiring Manziel, the team needs a fourth option. If they don't, a reliable backup like McCoy is just fine in my book, as is drafting a QB at #4 overall, if they feel that quarterback has what it takes to lead this franchise in the future.

The Jets did not carry 4 QBs that season BTW.

Sure----maybe 4 made the final cut but that was because Mark Sanchez was hurt and he was shut down for the season on September 14th.

So yes, I did win the bet.

 

[Stash]

The Jets did not carry 4 QBs that season BTW.

Sure----maybe 4 made the final cut but that was because Mark Sanchez was hurt and he was shut down for the season on September 14th.

So yes, I did win the bet.

You keep telling yourself that.

 

[robjay04]

You keep telling yourself that.

Okay...

You got me...the Jets carried 4 QBs for one week of the 2013 season.

 

[Stash]

Okay...

You got me...the Jets carried 4 QBs for one week of the 2013 season.

Either way, as I said, it's not a big deal in our conversation, is it?

I think this team should be looking to do what is in their own best interests and not so much what anyone else is doing or has done. What I want most of all is to avoid the debacle we had this year and ensuring we have a future quarterback in place for the long term.

 

[casmith07]

Romo
Griffin
Rookie

That's how it should be.

 

[robjay04]

Either way, as I said, it's not a big deal in our conversation, is it?

I think this team should be looking to do what is in their own best interests and not so much what anyone else is doing or has done. What I want most of all is to avoid the debacle we had this year and ensuring we have a future quarterback in place for the long term.

I don't disagree, I just don't think 4 quarterbacks is a neccessity. We have an entire offseason and essentially two open roster spots, if they can't fix our backup situation then shame on the front office.

 

[Stash]

I don't disagree, I just don't think 4 quarterbacks is a neccessity. We have an entire offseason and essentially two open roster spots, if they can't fix our backup situation then shame on the front office.

I agree on that one. They have no excuses not to correct it, no matter how many quarterbacks they keep.

And I respect your opinion on carrying 3 or 4 quarterbacks, I expected that it would be a position that many would disagree with.

 

[csirl]

1/2: Romo/1st pick.
3:Newly signed vet

We also need a QB on practice squad - undrafted FA development project - who can be shunted up to the 53 as emergency cover when Romo is out long term if one of the other 2 is carrying an injury.

 

[cowboyschmps3]

Wentz ain't making it passed 2

 

[cowboyschmps3]

1/2: Romo/1st pick.
3:Newly signed vet

We also need a QB on practice squad - undrafted FA development project - who can be shunted up to the 53 as emergency cover when Romo is out long term if one of the other 2 is carrying an injury.

Showers